Questioning the Excessive Use of Advanced Treatment to Remove Organic Micropollutants from Wastewater

Pollution from endocrine disrupting compounds and related micropollutants is widely regarded as a major environmental issue on both a regional and a global scale, largely due to concerns over risks to human and ecological health. Between 2005 and 2010, the United Kingdom is conducting a demonstratio...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Environmental science & technology 2007-07, Vol.41 (14), p.5085-5089
Hauptverfasser: Jones, Oliver A. H, Green, Pat G, Voulvoulis, Nikolaos, Lester, John N
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 5089
container_issue 14
container_start_page 5085
container_title Environmental science & technology
container_volume 41
creator Jones, Oliver A. H
Green, Pat G
Voulvoulis, Nikolaos
Lester, John N
description Pollution from endocrine disrupting compounds and related micropollutants is widely regarded as a major environmental issue on both a regional and a global scale, largely due to concerns over risks to human and ecological health. Between 2005 and 2010, the United Kingdom is conducting a demonstration program, costing ∼40 million (∼$80 million at the time of writing), to evaluate technologies to remove these compounds from wastewater. However, while such advanced treatment techniques will undoubtedly reduce the discharges of micropollutants, they will also inevitably result in large financial costs, as well as environmentally undesirable increases in energy consumption and CO2 emissions. Here we calculate the price of treating urban sewage with two of the major options specifically proposed in the U.K. demonstration program:  (i) granular activated carbon and ozone and (ii) membrane filtration and reverse osmosis. Economic analysis indicates that treating wastewater with these advanced technologies may be economically and environmentally undesirable due to the increased energy consumption and associated economic costs and CO2 emissions. Since the costs of advanced treatment of sewage would most likely have to be passed on to customers (both domestic and industrial), we propose that national demonstration programs should not only compare and contrast the most advanced treatment methods but also consider alternative techniques, such as increased sludge ages and hydraulic retention times in conjunction with nutrient removal stages and the varying redox conditions associated with them, which potentially may be almost as effective but with much lower environmental and financial costs.
doi_str_mv 10.1021/es0628248
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_20677611</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>14818521</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a470t-a887e950ffb11d0d6d7f0febeea27ba7b8d4b73aad40b6b9794ebe4c23b99a7d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqF0U1v1DAQBmALgehSOPAHkIUEEoeA7Tj-OLar8iEKpbAV3KxJMikpSbzYTin_Hq921ZXgwMmHefTK8w4hjzl7yZngrzAyJYyQ5g5Z8EqwojIVv0sWjPGysKX6dkAexHjFGBMlM_fJAdeacyH0guD5jDH1fuqnS5q-Iz25aTDG_hrpRUTqO3rUXsPUYEtXASGNOCWaPP2Mo8_mLFzC1Df0Q98Ev_bDMCeYUqRd8CP9CjHhL0gYHpJ7HQwRH-3eQ3Lx-mS1fFucnr15tzw6LUBqlgowRqOtWNfVnLesVa3uWIc1Ighdg65NK2tdArSS1aq22so8lI0oa2tBt-Uheb7NXQf_c7OYG_vY4DDAhH6OTjClteL8v5BLw00lNvDpX_DKz2HKS7jcJS-tVSqjF1uUS4gxYOfWoR8h_Hacuc2F3O2Fsn2yC5zrEdu93J0kg2c7ALGBoQu5_T7unbGytEpmV2xdn1u-uZ1D-OGULnXlVp--uPP35uOSyWN3vM-FJu6X-PeDfwA0JbQ8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>230139966</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Questioning the Excessive Use of Advanced Treatment to Remove Organic Micropollutants from Wastewater</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ACS Publications</source><creator>Jones, Oliver A. H ; Green, Pat G ; Voulvoulis, Nikolaos ; Lester, John N</creator><creatorcontrib>Jones, Oliver A. H ; Green, Pat G ; Voulvoulis, Nikolaos ; Lester, John N</creatorcontrib><description>Pollution from endocrine disrupting compounds and related micropollutants is widely regarded as a major environmental issue on both a regional and a global scale, largely due to concerns over risks to human and ecological health. Between 2005 and 2010, the United Kingdom is conducting a demonstration program, costing ∼40 million (∼$80 million at the time of writing), to evaluate technologies to remove these compounds from wastewater. However, while such advanced treatment techniques will undoubtedly reduce the discharges of micropollutants, they will also inevitably result in large financial costs, as well as environmentally undesirable increases in energy consumption and CO2 emissions. Here we calculate the price of treating urban sewage with two of the major options specifically proposed in the U.K. demonstration program:  (i) granular activated carbon and ozone and (ii) membrane filtration and reverse osmosis. Economic analysis indicates that treating wastewater with these advanced technologies may be economically and environmentally undesirable due to the increased energy consumption and associated economic costs and CO2 emissions. Since the costs of advanced treatment of sewage would most likely have to be passed on to customers (both domestic and industrial), we propose that national demonstration programs should not only compare and contrast the most advanced treatment methods but also consider alternative techniques, such as increased sludge ages and hydraulic retention times in conjunction with nutrient removal stages and the varying redox conditions associated with them, which potentially may be almost as effective but with much lower environmental and financial costs.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0013-936X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1520-5851</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1021/es0628248</identifier><identifier>PMID: 17711227</identifier><identifier>CODEN: ESTHAG</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington, DC: American Chemical Society</publisher><subject>Applied sciences ; Costs ; Emissions ; Energy consumption ; Environmental monitoring ; Exact sciences and technology ; Human exposure ; Membrane filters ; Neutrons ; Organic Chemicals - isolation &amp; purification ; Organic contaminants ; Other wastewaters ; Pollutants ; Pollution ; Wastewaters ; Water filtration ; Water Pollutants, Chemical - isolation &amp; purification ; Water treatment ; Water treatment and pollution</subject><ispartof>Environmental science &amp; technology, 2007-07, Vol.41 (14), p.5085-5089</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2007 American Chemical Society</rights><rights>2007 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright American Chemical Society Jul 15, 2007</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a470t-a887e950ffb11d0d6d7f0febeea27ba7b8d4b73aad40b6b9794ebe4c23b99a7d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a470t-a887e950ffb11d0d6d7f0febeea27ba7b8d4b73aad40b6b9794ebe4c23b99a7d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/es0628248$$EPDF$$P50$$Gacs$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/es0628248$$EHTML$$P50$$Gacs$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,2754,27059,27907,27908,56721,56771</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=18943964$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17711227$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jones, Oliver A. H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Green, Pat G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Voulvoulis, Nikolaos</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lester, John N</creatorcontrib><title>Questioning the Excessive Use of Advanced Treatment to Remove Organic Micropollutants from Wastewater</title><title>Environmental science &amp; technology</title><addtitle>Environ. Sci. Technol</addtitle><description>Pollution from endocrine disrupting compounds and related micropollutants is widely regarded as a major environmental issue on both a regional and a global scale, largely due to concerns over risks to human and ecological health. Between 2005 and 2010, the United Kingdom is conducting a demonstration program, costing ∼40 million (∼$80 million at the time of writing), to evaluate technologies to remove these compounds from wastewater. However, while such advanced treatment techniques will undoubtedly reduce the discharges of micropollutants, they will also inevitably result in large financial costs, as well as environmentally undesirable increases in energy consumption and CO2 emissions. Here we calculate the price of treating urban sewage with two of the major options specifically proposed in the U.K. demonstration program:  (i) granular activated carbon and ozone and (ii) membrane filtration and reverse osmosis. Economic analysis indicates that treating wastewater with these advanced technologies may be economically and environmentally undesirable due to the increased energy consumption and associated economic costs and CO2 emissions. Since the costs of advanced treatment of sewage would most likely have to be passed on to customers (both domestic and industrial), we propose that national demonstration programs should not only compare and contrast the most advanced treatment methods but also consider alternative techniques, such as increased sludge ages and hydraulic retention times in conjunction with nutrient removal stages and the varying redox conditions associated with them, which potentially may be almost as effective but with much lower environmental and financial costs.</description><subject>Applied sciences</subject><subject>Costs</subject><subject>Emissions</subject><subject>Energy consumption</subject><subject>Environmental monitoring</subject><subject>Exact sciences and technology</subject><subject>Human exposure</subject><subject>Membrane filters</subject><subject>Neutrons</subject><subject>Organic Chemicals - isolation &amp; purification</subject><subject>Organic contaminants</subject><subject>Other wastewaters</subject><subject>Pollutants</subject><subject>Pollution</subject><subject>Wastewaters</subject><subject>Water filtration</subject><subject>Water Pollutants, Chemical - isolation &amp; purification</subject><subject>Water treatment</subject><subject>Water treatment and pollution</subject><issn>0013-936X</issn><issn>1520-5851</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2007</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqF0U1v1DAQBmALgehSOPAHkIUEEoeA7Tj-OLar8iEKpbAV3KxJMikpSbzYTin_Hq921ZXgwMmHefTK8w4hjzl7yZngrzAyJYyQ5g5Z8EqwojIVv0sWjPGysKX6dkAexHjFGBMlM_fJAdeacyH0guD5jDH1fuqnS5q-Iz25aTDG_hrpRUTqO3rUXsPUYEtXASGNOCWaPP2Mo8_mLFzC1Df0Q98Ev_bDMCeYUqRd8CP9CjHhL0gYHpJ7HQwRH-3eQ3Lx-mS1fFucnr15tzw6LUBqlgowRqOtWNfVnLesVa3uWIc1Ighdg65NK2tdArSS1aq22so8lI0oa2tBt-Uheb7NXQf_c7OYG_vY4DDAhH6OTjClteL8v5BLw00lNvDpX_DKz2HKS7jcJS-tVSqjF1uUS4gxYOfWoR8h_Hacuc2F3O2Fsn2yC5zrEdu93J0kg2c7ALGBoQu5_T7unbGytEpmV2xdn1u-uZ1D-OGULnXlVp--uPP35uOSyWN3vM-FJu6X-PeDfwA0JbQ8</recordid><startdate>20070715</startdate><enddate>20070715</enddate><creator>Jones, Oliver A. H</creator><creator>Green, Pat G</creator><creator>Voulvoulis, Nikolaos</creator><creator>Lester, John N</creator><general>American Chemical Society</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7TV</scope><scope>7UA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20070715</creationdate><title>Questioning the Excessive Use of Advanced Treatment to Remove Organic Micropollutants from Wastewater</title><author>Jones, Oliver A. H ; Green, Pat G ; Voulvoulis, Nikolaos ; Lester, John N</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a470t-a887e950ffb11d0d6d7f0febeea27ba7b8d4b73aad40b6b9794ebe4c23b99a7d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2007</creationdate><topic>Applied sciences</topic><topic>Costs</topic><topic>Emissions</topic><topic>Energy consumption</topic><topic>Environmental monitoring</topic><topic>Exact sciences and technology</topic><topic>Human exposure</topic><topic>Membrane filters</topic><topic>Neutrons</topic><topic>Organic Chemicals - isolation &amp; purification</topic><topic>Organic contaminants</topic><topic>Other wastewaters</topic><topic>Pollutants</topic><topic>Pollution</topic><topic>Wastewaters</topic><topic>Water filtration</topic><topic>Water Pollutants, Chemical - isolation &amp; purification</topic><topic>Water treatment</topic><topic>Water treatment and pollution</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jones, Oliver A. H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Green, Pat G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Voulvoulis, Nikolaos</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lester, John N</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Pollution Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Environmental science &amp; technology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jones, Oliver A. H</au><au>Green, Pat G</au><au>Voulvoulis, Nikolaos</au><au>Lester, John N</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Questioning the Excessive Use of Advanced Treatment to Remove Organic Micropollutants from Wastewater</atitle><jtitle>Environmental science &amp; technology</jtitle><addtitle>Environ. Sci. Technol</addtitle><date>2007-07-15</date><risdate>2007</risdate><volume>41</volume><issue>14</issue><spage>5085</spage><epage>5089</epage><pages>5085-5089</pages><issn>0013-936X</issn><eissn>1520-5851</eissn><coden>ESTHAG</coden><abstract>Pollution from endocrine disrupting compounds and related micropollutants is widely regarded as a major environmental issue on both a regional and a global scale, largely due to concerns over risks to human and ecological health. Between 2005 and 2010, the United Kingdom is conducting a demonstration program, costing ∼40 million (∼$80 million at the time of writing), to evaluate technologies to remove these compounds from wastewater. However, while such advanced treatment techniques will undoubtedly reduce the discharges of micropollutants, they will also inevitably result in large financial costs, as well as environmentally undesirable increases in energy consumption and CO2 emissions. Here we calculate the price of treating urban sewage with two of the major options specifically proposed in the U.K. demonstration program:  (i) granular activated carbon and ozone and (ii) membrane filtration and reverse osmosis. Economic analysis indicates that treating wastewater with these advanced technologies may be economically and environmentally undesirable due to the increased energy consumption and associated economic costs and CO2 emissions. Since the costs of advanced treatment of sewage would most likely have to be passed on to customers (both domestic and industrial), we propose that national demonstration programs should not only compare and contrast the most advanced treatment methods but also consider alternative techniques, such as increased sludge ages and hydraulic retention times in conjunction with nutrient removal stages and the varying redox conditions associated with them, which potentially may be almost as effective but with much lower environmental and financial costs.</abstract><cop>Washington, DC</cop><pub>American Chemical Society</pub><pmid>17711227</pmid><doi>10.1021/es0628248</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0013-936X
ispartof Environmental science & technology, 2007-07, Vol.41 (14), p.5085-5089
issn 0013-936X
1520-5851
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_20677611
source MEDLINE; ACS Publications
subjects Applied sciences
Costs
Emissions
Energy consumption
Environmental monitoring
Exact sciences and technology
Human exposure
Membrane filters
Neutrons
Organic Chemicals - isolation & purification
Organic contaminants
Other wastewaters
Pollutants
Pollution
Wastewaters
Water filtration
Water Pollutants, Chemical - isolation & purification
Water treatment
Water treatment and pollution
title Questioning the Excessive Use of Advanced Treatment to Remove Organic Micropollutants from Wastewater
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T21%3A22%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Questioning%20the%20Excessive%20Use%20of%20Advanced%20Treatment%20to%20Remove%20Organic%20Micropollutants%20from%20Wastewater&rft.jtitle=Environmental%20science%20&%20technology&rft.au=Jones,%20Oliver%20A.%20H&rft.date=2007-07-15&rft.volume=41&rft.issue=14&rft.spage=5085&rft.epage=5089&rft.pages=5085-5089&rft.issn=0013-936X&rft.eissn=1520-5851&rft.coden=ESTHAG&rft_id=info:doi/10.1021/es0628248&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E14818521%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=230139966&rft_id=info:pmid/17711227&rfr_iscdi=true