Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Water Disinfection Processes Applicable in Low-Income Settings

Access to safe, sufficient water for health and sanitation is a human right, and the reliable disinfection of water plays a critical role in addressing this need. The environmental impact and sustainability of water disinfection methods will also play a role in overall public health. This study pres...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Environmental science & technology 2022-11, Vol.56 (22), p.16336-16346
Main Authors: Busse, Margaret M., Hawes, Jason K., Blatchley, Ernest R.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Animals
Chlorine
Chlorine - chemistry
Disinfection
Disinfection - methods
Drinking Water
Environmental impact
Humans
Income
Inspection
Life cycle analysis
Life cycle assessment
Life Cycle Stages
Life cycles
Low income groups
Low pressure
Mercury
Mercury lamps
Public health
Sanitation
Solar radiation
Sustainable Systems
Ultraviolet Rays
Water delivery
Water Purification - methods
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Access to safe, sufficient water for health and sanitation is a human right, and the reliable disinfection of water plays a critical role in addressing this need. The environmental impact and sustainability of water disinfection methods will also play a role in overall public health. This study presents an investigation of the environmental life cycle impacts of four ultraviolet disinfection systems utilizing ambient solar radiation directly and indirectly for water disinfection in comparison to chlorination and water delivery for application in low-income settings. Product inspection and existing literature were used to define a life cycle functional unit of 1 m3 of water for each system, which allowed quantification of material use, infrastructure requirements, and life cycle of the original components of each system and those needed to keep them operational for the studied lifespans (1, 5, 10, and 20 years) and scales (30, 100, 500, and 1000 L per day). For all studied cases, chlorine had the lowest impact in all impact categories, but end-user acceptance of chlorine in some settings is low, driving interest in low-impact alternatives. Disinfection based on low-pressure mercury lamps had the next lowest normalized impact in most categories and may represent a viable alternative, particularly for long-term (10+ years), high production (500+ liters per day) scenarios.
ISSN:0013-936X
1520-5851
DOI:10.1021/acs.est.2c02393