Ranjani B Theregowda1, Alejandra M González-Mejía2, Xin Cissy Ma3, Jay Garland4. 1. National Research Council (NRC) Post Doctoral Research, National Risk Management Research Laboratory, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio. 2. Sêr Cymru National Research Network for Low Carbon, Energy and Environment, School of Environment, Natural Resources and Geography, Bangor, United Kingdom. 3. National Risk Management Research Laboratory, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio. 4. National Exposure Research Laboratory, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Abstract
Traditional wastewater management uses end-of-pipe approaches to remove pollutants in wastewater before discharge. Although effective in human health protection for decades, this approach of removal and disposal requires a high investment of energy and materials and overlooks the values of the key nutrients in wastewater such as phosphorus (P). Phosphorus in wastewater comes from the human metabolites of food, resulted from crop uptakes of fertilizer that ultimately derived from phosphate rock (PR). PR, however, could be depleted in this century, which would lead to a global food crisis. To address the question whether nutrient recovery is indeed a more efficient strategy from a system perspective and provides more benefits to society, this research compares fertilizer production from struvite to the traditional commercial fertilizers (e.g., diammonium phosphate, DAP). Emergy defined as the available energy required directly and indirectly through all transformations to make a product, process, or service is the tool used for system analysis in this study. Emergy accounting provides system analysis of total resource use and whole system efficiency. The results show that struvite production uses one order of magnitude less emergy than DAP production to produce one unit of fertilizer, indicating that struvite production is a more efficient process. This research sheds light on alternative nutrient management through nutrient recovery, which may achieve economic and environmental benefits and overall higher system efficiency.
Traditional wastepan class="Chemical">water management uses end-of-pipn>e apn>proaches to remove pollutants in wastewater before discharge. Although effective in human health protection for decades, this approach of removal and disposal requires a high investment of energy and materials and overlooks the values of the key nutrients in wastewater such as phosphorus (P). Phosphorus in wastewater comes from the human metabolites of food, resulted from crop uptakes of fertilizer that ultimately derived from phosphate rock (PR). PR, however, could be depleted in this century, which would lead to a global food crisis. To address the question whether nutrient recovery is indeed a more efficient strategy from a system perspective and provides more benefits to society, this research compares fertilizer production from struvite to the traditional commercial fertilizers (e.g., diammonium phosphate, DAP). Emergy defined as the available energy required directly and indirectly through all transformations to make a product, process, or service is the tool used for system analysis in this study. Emergy accounting provides system analysis of total resource use and whole system efficiency. The results show that struviteproduction uses one order of magnitude less emergy than DAPproduction to produce one unit of fertilizer, indicating that struviteproduction is a more efficient process. This research sheds light on alternative nutrient management through nutrient recovery, which may achieve economic and environmental benefits and overall higher system efficiency.
Entities:
Keywords:
diammonium phosphate (DAP) fertilizer; emergy; nutrient recovery; struvite fertilizer; system analysis; system efficiency
Authors: Setyo Budi Kurniawan; Siti Rozaimah Sheikh Abdullah; Muhammad Fauzul Imron; Nor Sakinah Mohd Said; Nur 'Izzati Ismail; Hassimi Abu Hasan; Ahmad Razi Othman; Ipung Fitri Purwanti Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-12-12 Impact factor: 3.390