Abstract
Purpose
To help educators increase the extent and effectiveness of integrating sustainability into undergraduate education, a case study in life cycle assessment (LCA) is developed and presented using the context of disinfection of wastewater.
Methods
Design and operating parameters are presented for three alternatives: chlorine/sulfur dioxide, ultraviolet (UV) light, and sodium hypochlorite/sodium sulfite. The case study includes student learning objectives, design assumptions, system boundaries, supporting calculation files, descriptions of LCA simulation scenarios, expected simulation results, and interpretation. LCA simulations, using the ISO methodology approach, are performed with varying assumptions about design flows, study duration, electricity fuel mixes, an alternative LCIA methodology, and weighting scenarios. Results are presented primarily at the midpoint level, and the effects of weighting are illustrated using a ternary plot. Life cycle costing is performed by calculating net present worth cost of construction materials and selected ongoing operation and maintenance costs.
Results and discussion
After interpreting simulation results, students should be able understand and apply several LCA skills including identifying significant impact categories, describing tradeoffs between different life stages, identifying “hot-spots” in the life cycles, illustrating the impacts and limitations of weighting, and observing differences across LCIA methodologies. Using the assumptions herein, chlorine disinfection results in larger initial impacts due to the larger basin required for hydraulic retention time (HRT), but operating impacts associated with electricity consumption cause the UV impacts to overtake those of the chlorine alternative. The results are sensitive to the LCIA method, the electricity grid’s fuel mix, and the electricity consumed per unit of wastewater disinfected. Finally, consideration of non-environmental and non-cost factors (risk, safety) provide students with an opportunity to reflect on broader societal impacts.
Conclusions
Adaptable for various audiences and to provide differing levels of technical rigor, the case study should aid students in understanding and becoming proficient in performing LCA to facilitate life cycle thinking. It is the author’s hope that by providing a transparent, comprehensive LCA case study comparing engineering alternatives, educators can better integrate life cycle thinking and systems thinking into engineering curricula.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bare J (2011) TRACI 2.0: the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts 2.0. Clean Technol Environ Policy 13(5):687–696
Bare JC, Norris GA, Pennington DW, McKone T (2003) TRACI—the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts. J Ind Ecol 6(3):49–78
Boyle C (2004) Considerations on educating engineers in sustainability. Intl J Sustain Higher Ed 5(2):147–155
Classen M, Althaus H-J, Blaser S, Tuchschmid M, Jungblugh N, Doka G, Faist Emmenegger M, Scharnhorst W (2009) Life cycle inventories of metals. Final report Ecoinvent data v2.1, No. 10, EPMA Dübendorf, Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories, Dübendorf, CH, Online-Version under: www.ecoinvent.ch
Dabkowski B (2012) Reducing energy consumption of UV disinfection by measuring % UVT. Application Note, Hach Company, http://www.hach.com/asset-get.download.jsa?id=15383263504. Accessed March, 2015
Das TK (2002) Evaluating the life cycle environmental performance of chlorine disinfection and ultraviolet technologies. Clean Technol Environ Policy 4:32–43
Downey G (2005) Are engineers losing control of technology? From ‘problem solving’ to ‘problem definition and solution’. Trans IChemE, Part A, Chemical Engin Research Design 83(A6):583–595
EIA (U. S. Energy Information Administration). (2015) Table 5.6.B. Average retail price of electricity to ultimate customers by end-use sector. “All sectors” average. US Department of Energy, Washington, DC. http://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.cfm?t=epmt_5_6_b. Accessed April 4, 2015
Forster P, Ramaswamy V, Artaxo P, Berntsen T, Betts R, Fahey D, Haywood J, Lean J, Lowe DC, Myhre G, Nganga J, Prinn R, Raga G, Schulz M, Van Dorland R (2007) Changes in atmospheric constituents and in radiative forcing. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, p 996
Great Lakes—Upper Mississippi River Board (GLUMRB) (2014) Recommended standards for wastewater facilities (“Ten States Standards”). Health Research, Inc, Albany, NY
Hawkins GS (2011) Preventing chemical terrorism. Testimony before the U.S. House Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security Technologies. https://www.dcwater.com/news/testimony/chemical_terrorism.cfm. Accessed May 3, 2016
Hendrickson C, Horvath A, Joshi S, Lave L (1998) Economic input-output models for environmental life-cycle assessment. Environ Sci Technol 32(7):184A–191A
Jolliet O, Margni M, Charles R, Humbert S, Payet J, Rebitzer G, Rosenbaum R (2003) IMPACT 2002+: a new life cycle impact assessment methodology. Int Life Cycle Assess 8(6):324–330
Lee K-M, Yu S, Choi Y-H, Lee M (2012) Environmental assessment of sewage effluent disinfection system: electron beam, ultraviolet, and ozone using life cycle assessment. Int Life Cycle Assess 17:565–579
Ligthart TN, Ansems AMM (2007) Single use cups or reusable (coffee) drinking systems: an environmental comparison. Report 2006-A-R0246(E)/B of the TNO Built Environment and Geosciences to Benelux Disposables Foundation. TNO, Apeldoorn, Netherlands
Metcalf & Eddy, Inc (2003) In: Tchobanoglous G, Burton FL, Stensel HD (eds) Wastewater engineering: treatment and reuse. McGraw-Hill Companies, New York
Mihelcic JR, Crittenden JC, Small MJ, Shonnard DR, Hokanson DR, Zhang Q, Chen H, Sorby SA, James VU, Sutherland JW, Schnoor JL (2003) Sustainability science and engineering: the emergence of a new metadiscipline. Environ Sci Technol 37:5314–5324
Murphy CF, Allen D, Allenby B, Crittenden J, Davidson CI, Hendrickson C, Matthews HS (2009) Sustainability in engineering education and research at U.S. universities. Environ Sci Technol 43:5558–5564
Myhre G, Shindell D, Bréon F-M, Collins W, Fuglestvedt J, Huang J, Koch D, Lamarque J-F, Lee D, Mendoza B, Nakajima T, Robock A, Stephens G, Takemura T, Zhang H (2013) Anthropogenic and natural radiative forcing. In: Stocker TF, Qin D, Plattner G-K, Tignor M, Allen SK, Boschung J, Nauels A, Xia Y, Bex V, Midgley PM (eds) Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp 659–740. doi:10.1017/CBO9781107415324.018
National Academy of Engineering (NAE) (2008) Grand challenges for engineering. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC, Accessed 29 March, 2015: http://www.engineeringchallenges.org/8996.aspx
RSMeans (2013) In: Waier PR (ed) Green building cost data, 3rd edn. Construction Publishers & Consultants, Norwell, MA
Sills DL, Paramita V, Franke MJ, Johnson MC, Akabas TM, Greene CH, Tester JW (2013) Quantitative uncertainty analysis of life cycle assessment for algal biofuel production. Environ Sci Technol 47(2):687–694
Smith Cooper J, Fava J (2000) Teaching life-cycle assessment at universities in North America, part II. J Indust Ecol 4(4):7–11
Suh S, Lenzen M, Treloar GJ, Hondo H, Horvath A, Huppes G, Jolliet O, Klann U, Krewitt W, Moriguchi Y, Munksgaard J, Norris G (2004) System boundary selection in life-cycle inventories using hybrid approaches. Environ Sci Technol 38(3):657–664
Wastewater Treatment Works Security Act of 2006 (2006) S.2781, 109th U.S. Congress (2005-2006)
Wood G (2012) Sustainability studies: a systems literacy approach. In, Sustainability: a comprehensive foundation. Tom Theis and Jonathan Tomkin, Ed. OpenStax CNX. Jan 5, 2015 http://cnx.org/contents/1741effd-9cda-4b2b-a91e-003e6f587263@43.5@43.5. Accessed March 29, 2015
Young JS (2008) Energy management & alternative energy use in the water sector. Presentation to the US Mayors Water Summit, Nov., 2008. http://www.usmayors.org/urbanwater/summit08/default.asp
Acknowledgments
The author would like to acknowledge the contributions of numerous colleagues at Bucknell University: Thomas D. DiStefano, Matthew J. Higgins, Deborah L. Sills, and Donald Duke (primary affiliation: Florida Gulf Coast University) for their contributions to development and implementation of the course in which this case study is taught; and Eric J. Martin, Jamie Hendry, and Matthew Bailey in the Bucknell School of Management for allowing the author to present LCA case studies in their management courses and providing valuable feedback. The author also thanks Jeremy Guest at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and Sherri Cook at the University of Colorado Boulder for insightful discussions on teaching sustainability to undergraduate engineering students. Finally, the author would like to acknowledge a priori the extra effort of future students who find this paper and can make use of it while performing their assignments (check with your instructor for permission first).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Responsible editor: Greg Thoma
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gilmore, K.R. Teaching life cycle assessment in environmental engineering: a disinfection case study for students. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21, 1706–1718 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1138-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1138-1