Journal of Water Sustainability, Volume 1, Issue 1, June 2011, 113–125

© University of Technology Sydney & Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology

Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions from Urban Wastewater

System: Future Assessment Framework and Methodology
A. Listowski1, H. H. Ngo1*, W. S. Guo1, S. Vigneswaran1, H. S. Shin2 and H. Moon3
1
Centre for Technology in Water and Wastewater, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of
Technology Sydney, Broadway, Australia
2
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Dae-
jeon, Korea
3
Department of Applied Chemical Engineering, Chonnam National University, Gwangju, Korea

ABSTRACT
Over the last two decades much scientific effort has been expended on the radiative gaseous emissions in the atmos-
phere. Although there are no regulatory requirements for managing gaseous emissions at present, the long term
indications are, that impact relater to air pollution must embrace the broad diversity and challenges associated with
urban wastewater cycle management. This study has been considered as a precursor to development of a compre-
hensive impact assessment of gaseous emission from urban wastewater infrastructure and treatment facilities. It has
been carried out in consideration of the future climate change scientific projections, including socio-economic and
environmental impacts. Major progress could be gained from systemic approaches in relation to factors influencing
emission and the collected data demonstrates correlation between wastewater quality, treatment and energy used
with the level of emission. An early attempt was made to attribute environmental impact and costs on per capita
basis, as the weight of responsibility to take action is shifting to the community and individuals. The presented
framework and methodology offers reliable evaluation of gaseous emissions is an integrated context comprising
technology, environment, social and economic factors.

Key words: GHG emissions, urban wastewater system, assessment framework and methodology

1.0 INTRODUCTION discharges, (ii) sewage collection and

transportation, (iii) wastewater treatment
The study of gaseous emission, climate plants (WWTPs) and (iv) associated activi-
change and air pollution is committed to ties.The level of uncertainty in the wastewater
physico-chemical identification, inventories, industry’s “carbon profile” is unacceptable in
measurement and assessment methods as well the emerging business environment of carbon
as on quantitative study of the actual anthro- pricing, and managerial commitments to “zero
pogenic sources and its direct contributions. carbon emission”. Methane and nitrous oxide
The causes brought on by human activities emissions in particular have much higher
include: (i) emissions from wastewater global warming potentials than carbon dioxide
(Foley et al., 2007).
  A team of scientists from Columbia
University found evidence that emissions
* Corresponding to: [email protected]  of nitrous oxide from wastewater treatment
114 A. Listowski et al. / Journal of Water Sustainability 1 (2011) 113-125

may be significantly higher than previous tainability issues including reporting, emis-
estimates. Nitrous oxide is a powerful sion reductions, and emission trading.
greenhouse gas that is almost 300 times
stronger than carbon dioxide (Casey, 2010). 2.0 ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK
The emission of these gases has also been
linked to health effects in humans and domes- The definition of assessment framework for
tic animals. gaseous emissions from urban wastewater
Increasingly the attention, necessities and system appears necessary to the development
expectations to reduce emissions are rising of future adaptation strategies and knowledge
and turning to businesses or individual’s to manage emissions from wastewater cycle.
obligations and at least in part on a per capita It should be developed to interact with the
principle. Serious consideration of these is- adaptive responses that could address emis-
sues can be possible only on the basis of good sion sources, infrastructure, the pathways for
information. However, there is generally a gaseous emissions and its concentrations,
lack of information related to emission from mitigation capabilities and technologies. The
wastewater system including various treat- main tasks in this framework incorporate sev-
ment processes. The main reasons include the eral areas including:
absence of regulatory requirements for man- y Understanding emission generation proc-
aging gaseous emissions, complex and expen- esses (spatial, temporal, physical, bio-chemi-
sive fugitive emission monitoring and lack of cal) with the key motivation issues including
reporting and compliance standards. the pathways for gaseous emissions and
Water authorities in many parts of the concentrations;
world are adopting “carbon neutrality” objec- y Identification of appropriate and reliable pa-
tives aimed at reduction of the GHG rameters as a basis for the adaptation of the
emissions predominantly, by using electricity strongly variable combined wastewater flow
from renewable sources. Current methodolo- to the actual treatment capacity;
gies and estimates of greenhouse gas emis- y Establishment of credible methods of ob-
sions for the wastewater sector have focused taining data and information from defined
on energy use for and wastewater manage- emission sources;
ment (e.g. electricity and fuel consumption). y Quantification and predictions of gaseous
On the local, regional and global scales, emissions.
there is growing concern about the negative Amongst the broad diversity of wastewater
environmental impacts of air pollution and its sector the analysis of gaseous emissions could
adverse impact on human health, fauna and be assessed in two essential emission catego-
flora. The main advantage of this study is in ries:
the accounting of gaseous emissions that is y Direct emission related to wastewater
transparent and verifiable. This is especially sources and activities that promote fugitive
helpful, as it is particularly challenging to gaseous emission related to physical and bio-
provide gaseous emission estimates on waste- chemical processes that are characteristic to
water cycle including sewage infrastructure wastewater and its by-products during the
and treatment facilities. The inventory pro- wastewater cycle;
vides further ability to utility operators to de- y Indirect emission - energy use associated
velop its long term strategy and comply with with the wastewater transportation, pumping,
a broad range of any future emission and sus- various treatment processes, effluent disposal,
residuals management, etc.
 A. Listowski et al. / Journal of Water Sustainability 1 (2011) 113-125 115

The main factor in this regard is the use of and centralised wastewater treatment plant
biological wastewater treatment, aerobic or discharging effluent to rivers or ocean outfalls.
anaerobic treatment technology, sludge proc- Wastewater originates from a variety of
essing and also the electricity used. While as- residential, commercial and industrial sources
sessment of emission related to energy con- and it is a primary source of gaseous produc-
sumption (CO2 equivalent) is relatively tion. The gases found in sewer drains are oxy-
straight forward, quantifying direct fugitive gen, nitrogen, carbonic dioxide, carbonic ox-
emissions from wastewater systems is an area ide, ammonia, carbonate of ammonia, sul-
of uncertainty for the industry, with less de- phide of ammonium, sulphuretted hydrogen
veloped and less reliable methodologies. The and marsh gas. This mixture is continually
diffused emissions include substances such as: changing, according to the degree of putrefac-
CH4, CO2, VOCs, NOx, CO, PM10, Mercury, tion of the foul matters, which form sediment
Cadmium and Lead, hydrogen sulphide (H2S), and a slimy coating of the inner surfaces in
ammonia (NH3), and sulphur dioxide (SO2), sewer pipes (Commonwealth of Australia,
which have adverse affect on air quality, envi- 2008). During collection process, sewage is
ronment and public health. subjected also to combination of anaerobic or
At a practical level, the proposed frame- aerobic conditions including mixing, infiltra-
work is about setting a standardised model tion, dilution, stagnation, heating, cooling,
that can be applied for the development of bubble and surface volatilisation, etc. under
complete emission inventory by using emis- which the initial decomposition takes place.
sion factors, spatial and temporal scales, emis- Raw sewage contains urea and faecal materi-
sion modelling, calibration, verification and als that contain high level of nitrogen. During
reporting. transportation of wastewater through pipes the
In this sense, the future research should re- majority of nitrogen is converted from organic
fer to creating awareness by combining the nitrogen to ammonia in the process called am-
assumptions taken by existing research, the- monification or hydrolysis.
ory as well as practical knowledge, data and Municipal sewage treatment plants play an
practices across multiple disciplines, to enable important role in the abatement of water pol-
integration in a trans-disciplinary way. A key lution, but they also produce a large amount
prerequisite for a comprehensive inventory of of gaseous emissions to atmosphere. The dis-
emissions from sewers and wastewater treat- charge of large volumes of fugitive gases that
ment plant (WWTP) requires reliable infor- contains low levels of chemical constituents
mation about the treatment process operation may still lead to an excessive contribution to
and its behaviour on varying spatial, temporal, air pollution. Most centralised wastewater
hydraulic, COD and nutrient loads. treatment methods consist of combination of
biological processes (activated sludge reactors,
3.0 CHARACTERISATION OF GHG trickling filters, anaerobic digesters, etc) that
EMISSIONS FROM WASTEWATER promote biodegradation of organic matters by
micro-organism and production of anthropo-
Wastewater pathways often differ from rural, genic CH4, and N2O gaseous emissions.
urban, developed and underdeveloped coun- Methane (CH4) production is directly re-
tries. The most common urban system in de- sulting from anaerobic decomposition of the
veloped countries consists of the network of organic matter present in sewers. The
underground sewer pipelines (gravity or pres- methanogenesis or CH4 production rate de-
sure), holding tanks and pumping stations; pends primarily on the concentration of the
116 A. Listowski et al. / Journal of Water Sustainability 1 (2011) 113-125

degradable organic material in wastewater the hydraulic retention time. The observed
measured by Biochemical Oxygen Demand common factors also include:
(BOD5) and Chemical Oxygen Demand y Sulphide and methane gasses are generated
(COD). The main environmental factors as a result of bacterial metabolism therefore
which influence methane production include; the time factor plays decisive role
retention time, pH, temperature, presence of y Production rate is positively correlated with
sulphate reducing bacteria and methanogens the hydraulic retention time and the longer the
(Guisasola et al. 2008). detention time, the higher the gas production
Nitrous Oxide (N2O) and nitric oxide (NO) rate
production is associated with breakdown of y Production rate of methane in sewers could
nitrogen components that are common in be correlated with the similar emission
wastewater eg protein, urea. Biological nutri- corresponding with CO2 emission from energy
ent removal (BNR) processes have the ability usage in the wastewater treatment plant.
to transform the ammonia and organic nitro- Carbon Dioxide (CO2) production is
attributed to two main factors; treatment
gen compounds into nitrogen gas, which can
process and electricity consumption. During
be released to the earth's atmosphere. The
anaerobic process the BOD5 of wastewater is
two-phase process involves nitrifying bacteria
either incorporated into biomass or it is con-
(Nitrosomonas), that oxidize ammonia to cre-
verted to CO2 and CH4. A fraction of biomass
ate nitrate (aerobic phase) while denitrifying
is further converted to CO2 and CH4 via en-
bacteria reduce nitrate, turning it into nitrogen
dogenous respiration. Short-cycle or natural
gas, which is then released to the atmosphere sources of atmospheric CO2 which cycles
(anoxic phase). N2O and NO can be released from plants to animals to humans as part of
during both of these processes; however it is the natural carbon cycle and food chain do not
mainly associated with denitrification. Aero- contribute to global warming. Photosynthesis-
bic treatment process produces relatively produced short-cycle CO2, removes an equal
small emissions, whereas anaerobic processes mass of CO2 from the atmosphere that returns
emission can increase by 50-80% (Ki Young during respiration or wastewater treatment.
Park et al. 2000). Digestion processes, either aerobic or anaero-
The hydrogen sulphide (H2S) gas evolves bic, also only emit short-cycle CO2.
from the anaerobic decomposition of organic Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
matter or from the reduction of mineral sul- emission occurs during entire wastewater
phites and sulphates. H2S gas mixed with the cycle. A significant fraction of VOCs is
sewage gases (CH4, + CO2) is highly corro- released to atmosphere by gas-liquid mass
sive to sewer pipelines, manholes, concrete transfer. VOCs production during wastewater
junction chambers, mechanical and electrical transportation in sewers occurs during
equipment. Unless air or oxygen are deliber- turbulent flow and air exchange between
ately injected to control sulphade concentra- ambient atmosphere and wastewater. The
tion, the anaerobic conditions will be created transfer rate of emission is affected by
to provide optimal conditions for gas forma- physicochemical properties of chemicals,
tion. The experimental study carried out on fluid and flow characteristics. There is a
the full scale sewage system (Guisasola et al. growing concern that several VOCs that are
2008) confirmed a strong correlation between present in wastewaters, especially industrial
formation of sulphide and methane gases and effluents, find their way to the atmosphere. In
particular VOCs such as benzene, chloroform,
 A. Listowski et al. / Journal of Water Sustainability 1 (2011) 113-125 117

ethyl benzene, toluene, m-xylene and o-xylene and gaseous emissions is a complex one. Any
are found in refinery and petrochemical attempts in emission quantitative and qualita-
wastewaters in significant amounts as well as tive assessment are challenged by availability
in many municipal wastewaters (Bhattacharya, of accurate and relevant inventory and agree-
1989) and (Al-Muzaini et al. 1991). ment on framework and methodology. Opera-
tional electricity consumption can be rela-
4.0 EMISSSION GENERATION FROM tively easily metered therefore calculation and
ELECTRICITY USE conversion to equivalent units of emission
(kgCO2/kWh) could be relatively straight
Electricity consumption in the operation and forward. In some cases energy balance may be
management of the wastewater treatment more complicated by use of various sources of
plants, pipelines and pumping stations is di- energy (heat, renewable) or substantial energy
rectly related to the quantity of transported is recovered and reused. The assessment of
and treated wastewater, as well as an extent fugitive emissions remains unresolved, due to
and type of infrastructure, degree of treatment lack of consensus and definitive input in the
that is required by the environment and cus- following areas:
tomers. A great deal of energy is consumed in y Accurate inventory and methodology
all stages of water cycle involving water sup- including spatial and temporal characterisa-
ply and wastewater production (residential, tion (gases types, quantity, quality, timeframe,
commercial, industrial) as well as managing boundary, concentration, load, etc) of gaseous
wastewater and its by-products products, substances
transporting materials and products from one y Understanding of physical and biochemical
life-cycle stage to another. processes, triggers, activities at various stages
Emission assessment (increase or of the wastewater cycle, metabolic and
abatement) from renewable and non-renew- operational changes
able energy sources is calculated based on y Embodied energy or energy used over the
consumption data and application of emission life-cycle of wastewater assets, materials, im-
factor expressed as kgCO2/kWh that takes into portant due to the focus on reducing the use of
account the type of fossil fuel combustion non-renewable energy sources (Randolph et al.
used in energy generation. Emission from 2007).
fossil fuels is dominating and the level of y No mandatory requirements to manage
emissions has significant environmental as gasses generation (liquid phase) and emission
well as economic implications now and more (gas-phase) targets
in the future. Electricity consumption varies The future of sustainable emission assess-
depending on the treatment technology used ment lies in the adoption of a systemic ap-
such as sludge thickening, anaerobic digestion, proach that promotes a shift from the individ-
dewatering, incineration and the consumption ual economic, social and environmental com-
intensities could be expressed as functions of ponents of sustainability to one which recog-
biomass loading on each unit process. nises the inter-relationships between the com-
ponents (Davidson et al. 2009) within the de-
5.0 GHG EMISSIONS LIFE CYCLE cision making framework.
FRAMEWORK Energy recovery potential exists in the form
of methane gas that is generated during an-
The relationship and interactions between aerobic treatment of wastewater, but utiliza-
wastewater generation, treatment, energy use tion of methane is not attractive while treating
118 A. Listowski et al. / Journal of Water Sustainability 1 (2011) 113-125

small quantity of low strength wastewater and tended to promote convergence among proc-
it is usually vented or flared. Due to global esses, technology and sustainability require-
energy insecurity, there is emergent interest in ments and it builds upon a number of long-
using clean energy source (wind, solar) and standing procedures and activities that de-
minimal or zero use of hydrocarbons. The scribe wastewater cycle, environmental com-
framework for emission assessment is shown pliance, technological process characteristics,
in Figure 1. It responds to requirement for regulatory policies, social and community ex-
more consistency in the gaseous generation pectations.
and emission practices. The framework is in-

ATMOSPHERIC ENVI-
RONMENT

WATER ENVI- URBAN ENVIRON-

RONMENT MENT
EMISSION SOURCES
-water supply system -organic waste types
& PRODUCTION
- Direct (process & products) -wastewater generation
- Indirect (electricity, gas)
- Fugitive and controlled
WASTEWATER TREATMENT WASTEWATER INFRA-
- Bio-degradation processes STRUCTURE
- Chemicals -Wastewater collection
- Effluent reuse or disposal -Sewers, Pumps, Transport

LAND / SOIL
ENVIRONMENT
- Biosolids degradation
- Landfill disposal
- Incineration

Figure 1 GHG emission assessment framework from wastewater cycle

Based on the above framework, a full emis- ous releases throughout the entire production
sion assessment related to wastewater cycle cycle;
can be developed and it should consist of the y Impact assessment that examines potential
following four parts: and actual effects related to the use of re-
y Definition of the scope, goals and objectives sources and atmospheric releases;
involving specific references related to input / y An assessment of the changes and imple-
mentation of necessary improvements
output within defined assessment boundary;
Such an exercise would require extensive
y Inventory of the materials and energy used resources and it would still result in a signifi-
during all stages in the wastewater processing cant dilemma due to inconsistencies with pro-
with the main focus on an inventory of gase- tocols and a lack of quantitative information.
These are mainly related to environmental
 A. Listowski et al. / Journal of Water Sustainability 1 (2011) 113-125 119

impact and the extent to which these emission EFi - is the emission factor for electricity con-
sources have on the global warming. For ob- sumed in NSW in year (i) (current factor = 1kWh
vious and practical reasons it would be rea- = 0.967 kg of CO2-e
sonable to apply a streamlined or simplified During the wastewater treatment process
version that can be limited to items (2) and (4), major energy reductions can be gained by ap-
that include quantitative emission inventory plying primarily anaerobic processes to con-
and consideration of necessary improvements vert the energy of the incoming wastewater
that could result in reduction of gases genera- pollutants to methane, which could be used to
tion and emissions. For the purpose of this generate electricity, potentially eliminating
analysis, priority consideration should be any net energy input to the process. In aera-
given to the following gases: methane (CH4), tion basins, air is bubbled through wastewater
nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrogen sulphide (H2S) using submerged diffusers to deliver oxygen
and carbon dioxide (CO2). to aerobic bacteria that degrade organics and
oxidize nitrogen species. Volatile organics,
6.0 GHG EMISSION FLUXES FROM many of which cause foul odours, are stripped
WASTEWATER TREATMENT OP- from the water during aeration. While most of
ERATIONS the research focuses on the emission sources,
it is important to consider distribution paths as
Flux rates of gaseous emissions can be calcu- well as an ultimate destination and cumulative
lated by subtracting gas concentration at the effect on air, water and soils. Key constituents
beginning of the accumulation period from the responsible for gaseous emission in wastewa-
concentration at the end of the accumulation ter treatment process are: BOD5, SS, N & P.
period that are relative to the time elapsed. Direct emission estimation (Eair) takes into
Wastewater treatment is also considered a account the following elements:
global warming mitigation factor. Without y Eair - air release rate, (kg/day)
proper treatment, the carbon in discharged y A - wastewater surface area, (m2)
wastewater will eventually enter the ecosys- y Cair concentration of substances in air
tem as CH4 (or CO2), without the potentials (g/m3)
for offset associated with biomass segregation y Vair gas flux rate i.e., volume flow per
and biogas energy recovery. The methodology unit of wastewater surface area. (m3/m2) and it
used to estimate indirect greenhouse gas emis- can be calculated using the following formula:
sions form electricity use is based on Techni-
cal Guidelines (DCCEE, 2010) and the fol- Cair × Vair × A
Eair = (2)
lowing formula: 1000

EFi Emission factors for wastewater treatment

Yi = Qi × (1) process are applied to estimate emissions and
1000
it relates to the quantity of substances emitted
where, from a source, to activity associated with
Yi - the total indirect greenhouse gas emis- those emissions. Emission factors are usually
sions in year (i) (CO2-e) expressed as the weight of a substance emitted,
Qi - the quantity of electricity purchased by divided by the unit weight or volume of
the desalination plant from the electricity grid wastewater discharged from the whole proc-
in year (i) (kilowatt-hours) ess, or from an individual unit operation.
Emission rates (Commonwealth of Australia,
120 A. Listowski et al. / Journal of Water Sustainability 1 (2011) 113-125

2008) are estimated for individual steps in a y BOD5 concentration in wastewater

treatment process by the application of equa- ranges from ~110-350mg/L
tion; Average daily BOD5 load can be calculated
EF × Q × Top × (1 − 0 ) as follows:
Eair = (3)
10 6 BOD5/y = 200mg/L × 210 L ×365 days =
where, ~15.3kg/p/y
Eair = annual air emission of ammonia, Wastewater quality has direct relation to
tonne/yr emission loading. Table 1 illustrates typical
EF = uncontrolled emission factor, g/m3 concentration of pollutants, production and
Q = daily volume of wastewater treated, load of various substances based on per
m3/d equivalent population factor (EP) per day. EP
Top = Time of operation (days during the basis are defined as units (people) represent-
calculation period; say a year), ing combined daily wastewater flow from an
f = emission control equipment efficiency average customer and it is defined as follows:
According to (WSAA, 2009) continued im-
provement standards from primary to tertiary EP = EPresidential + EPcommercial + EPindustry +
wastewater treatment resulted in fourfold in- EPother (5)
crease in energy consumption. Calculation of where:
emissions can be done using theoretical or ex-
EPresidential = Residential Equivalent Popula-
perimental emission factors by using BOD5
tion
that represents the amount of organic fraction
in the wastewater stream. The calculations of EPcommercial = Commercial Equivalent Popu-
CH4 emission can be expressed in kilograms lation
of CO2-e per capita per year, using the fol- EPindustry = Industrial Equivalent Population
lowing formula: EPother = Other Activities Equivalent
GHG = BOD5 × (1-Fsl) × Fan × EFw × 21 Population
Table 2 presents information for Australian
(kg CO2-e) (4) emission estimation based on average residen-
where, tial sewage quality. Emission Analysis from
Fsl—Default fraction of BOD5 removed as Energy Use at Wastewater Treatment & Wa-
sludge. Should be readily available from inter- ter Reclamation Plant of Sydney Olympic
nal records of wastewater treatment plants Park Authority was conducted (Table 3). This
(default value of 0.54) factor defines the infrared radiation trapping
Fan — Default CH4 emission factor for potential of these substances relative to that of
wastewater with value of 0.65 kg CH4/kg CO2 and establishes these ratios as a number
BOD5 to estimate the global warming potential of
EFw—Fraction of BOD5 anaerobically that substance. This ratio times the quantity
treated. This value varies according to waste- emitted results in the CO2 equivalency of
water treatment type (Commonwealth of Aus- those emissions. Due to different heat-absorb-
tralia, 2010). ing and the decay rate characteristics, each
The BOD5 calculation is done by allowing GHG generally has a different global warming
the following parameters: potential (GWP) as shown in Table 4. Be-
y Average volume /person/ day = 210 L cause of this variation, the emission factors
(EP= equivalent population) used to calculate greenhouse gas emissions
 A. Listowski et al. / Journal of Water Sustainability 1 (2011) 113-125 121

are stated in terms of carbon dioxide equiva- ing the needs and expectations. One of the pri-
lents (CO2-e). mary tasks is to explain the role of Environ-
mental Performance Indicators (EPI), how
they have been applied to assess performance
7.0 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FOR of the water reclamation scheme performance.
GHG EMISSION ASSESSMENT Table 5 defines the most relevant indicators
that have been selected to address sufficient
In the attempt to quantify emission it is impor- flexibility and adaptability to range of waste-
tant to define standards and indicators as a water treatment processes.
measure of how well the technology is meet-

Table 1 Emission calculations based on typical wastewater (list constituents and concentrations
are adapted from Tchobanoglous et al.2003)
Load / EP Load based on 5000
Constituent Unit Range Typical
(kg/EP/day) EP/d (kg/day)
Influent flow rate
l/p/day 190-270 210 – –
(EP)
BOD5 mg/L 110-350 190 0.0399 199.5
TOC mg/L 80-260 140 0.0294 147
COD mg/L 250-800 430 0.0903 451.5
Total Nitrogen (TN)
mg/L 20-70 40 0.0084 42
as N
Ammonia (NH4-N) mg/L 12-45 25 0.00525 26.15
Nitrite (NO2-N) mg/L 0-trace 0 0 0
Nitrite (NO3-N) mg/L 0-trace 0 0 0
Total Phosphorous
mg/L 4-12 7 0.00147 7.35
(TP)
Organic mg/L 1-4 2 0.00042 2.1
Inorganic (PO4-P) mg/L 3-10 5 0.00105 5.25
Chlorides mg/L 30-90 50 0.0105 52.5
Sulfate mg/L 20-50 30 0.0063 31.5
VOCs mg/L 100 - 400 100-400 – –

Table 2 Air emission factors for wastewater treatment (de Haas & Lant, 2009)
Potential Potential Annual Cost
Air Process
Substance Emission Emission of CO2-e
Unit Emission Capacity
(GHG) Load Load emission
Factor (EP)
(ton/day) (ton/year) (1 ton=$40)
Carbon dioxide kg CO2-
0.26 8,000 2.11 769 $30,777
(CO2) e/day/EP
kg CO2-
Methane (CH4) 0.80 8,000 6.40 2,336 $93,440
e/day/EP
Nitrous Oxide kg CO2-
0.30 8,000 2.40 876 $35,040
(N2O) e/day/EP
122 A. Listowski et al. / Journal of Water Sustainability 1 (2011) 113-125

Table 3 Emission Analysis – Energy Use at Wastewater Treatment & Water Reclamation Plant
Energy Energy Cost of
Input Emission
Energy Usage Area Usage Usage CO2-e
Parameter (kg O2/Y)
(kWh/kL) (kWh/y) emission
Wastewater treatment 1 ton
800,000 GHG coef.
input (kL/y) CO2-e
Treatment efficiency rate (%) 85 0.967 $40
Actual wastewater
680,000 0.60 408,000 394,536 $15,781
effluent Production (kL/Y)
Stormwater input 550,000 0.15 82,500 79,778 $3,191
Microfiltration input (kL/Y)
1,230,000
(effluent+stormwater)
MF Efficiency Rate (%) 70
Actual CMF filtrate
861,000 0.23 198,030 191,495 $7,660
production (kL/Y)
Reverse osmosis input (kL/Y) 700,000
RO efficiency rate (%) 75
Actual RO permeate
525,000 1.10 577,500 558,443 $22,338
production (kL/Y)
Recycled water
198,030 0.01 1,980 1,915 $77
disinfection
By-products (biosolids, CMF
664,000 0.05 33,200 32,104 $1,284
backwash, retentate)
Recycled water supply (kWh/Y) 198,030 0.28 55,448 53,619 $2,145
Total annual impact 1,356,659 1,311,889 $52,476

Wide selection and variability of pollutant tion limits, volumes and time into a single
in wastewater create additional complexity combined unit - a Pollution Factor (PF). For
associated with addressing each pollutant of consistency of measurement and application
concern and its environmental impact. Al- in wastewater cycle, the following PF formula
though this might be important in specific has been adopted:
situations such as industrial trade wastes pro- PF = ∑ Ci × ∑ V (%) (6)
duction, when it comes to urban wastewater
such impact is usually related to a group of where,
pollutants and their aggregated impact. To PF = emission factor used for estimation of
carry out detailed assessment on such scale emissions to water or air
might be impractical, costly and might not Ci = emission concentrations, in units of
necessary deliver desired outcome in the long pollutant per unit of time
run. This challenge can be successfully re- V = loading, unit of weight, volume, or du-
solved by integrating pollutants, its concentra- ration of pollutants per unit of time.
 A. Listowski et al. / Journal of Water Sustainability 1 (2011) 113-125 123

Table 4 Characterisation factors used for GHG potential calculation (AARC, 2010)
Atmospheric
Acidification Eutrophication
Substance GWP Lifetime
(SO2 equiv) equiv. PO43-
(years)
Carbon dioxide (CO2) x1 50-200 − −
Methane (CH4) x 21 12 − −
Nitrous Oxide (N2O) x 310 150 − −
Hydrofluorocarbons
x 140-11700 264 − −
(HFC’s)
Perfluorocarbons (PFC’s) x6,500-9,200 10,000 − −
Sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) x 23900 3,200 − −
SO2 − − 1.20 −
NOX − − 0.50 0.13
NH3 − − 1.60 0.35
H2S − − 1.88 −
COD − − − 0.02
N − − − 0.42
P − − − 3.06

Table 5 Performance Indicators for emission assessment

Item EPI - Environmental Performance Indicator Relevance to Emission Assessment
1 Population Resources demand
2 Wastewater generation per capita / per day Contamination
3 Wastewater treatment / per day Pollution reduction
4 Volume treated per capita / per day Pollution reduction
5 Loads of BOD5, P and N Pollution reduction
6 Removal of BOD5, P and N Pollution reduction
7 Energy used / kL of wastewater treated GHG, Use of resources
8 Energy used / kL of product water GHG, Use of resources
9 Amount of nutrients TP & TN recycled Pollution reduction
10 Biosolids production per kL of wastewater Pollution reduction
11 Energy recovered , heat, electricity GHG, Pollution reduction
12 Ratio of energy from renewable source GHG, Pollution reduction

The science of the 'greenhouse effect' that assumptions, input parameters, spatial and
leads to the warming is generally well under- temporal boundaries adopted during assess-
stood, however substantial uncertainties re- ment process. The performance indicators rep-
main in knowledge of some of the affects and resent standard interface between the waste-
the overall magnitude of changes. This selec- water sources, treatment technologies and its
tion was developed to ensure consistency of products. The integral characterisation means
124 A. Listowski et al. / Journal of Water Sustainability 1 (2011) 113-125

a shift between mass flows that are exchanged ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

during the transformation process (raw
wastewater, products, treatment technology This study was supported by Australia Korea
and emissions). Meaningful aggregation is Foundation Grant and the University of Tech-
necessary to reveal which changes in a proc- nology, Sydney. The participation of Sydney
ess will lead to overall reduction or increase Olympic Park Authority (SOPA) in this work
of emissions. is also appreciated.

8.0 CONCLUSION REFERENCES

y The proposed future framework and meth- Al-Muzaini, S., Khordagui, H.; Hamoda, M. F.
odology could help in evaluating gaseous (1991) Assessment and Treatability of
emissions from aerobic, anaerobic wastewater Volatile Organic Compound Emissions in
treatment systems as well as impact related to Proposed Shuaiba Industrial Wastewater
energy use. It also could determine the contri- Treatment Facility; Kuwait Institute for
bution of individual processes to air emissions. Scientific Research (KISR), Report No.
y The opportunity exists for more effective KISR 4000, Kuwait, 1991.
implementation of emission mitigation strate- AARC. (2010) Austral-Asian Resource Con-
gies based on minimizing the consumption of sultant. Cannington Mine Project – Case
energy, the recovery and use of biogas for en- 79. Appendix T. Greenhouse Gas As-
ergy generation to replace fossil fuel combus- sessment. www.askse.com.
tion. Other options could involve conversion Bhattacharya, S.K.(1989) Removal and Fate
of carbon to methane via anaerobic processes of RCRA and CERCLA Toxic Organics
and used as a source of energy for on-site con- Pollutants in Wastewater Treatment; U.S.
sumption. The debate over the costs of GHG Environment Protection Agency, Report
emission reduction is inconclusive and has EPA-440/1- 82/303, U.S. EPA, Washing-
become more complex as disagreements over ton, DC, 1989.
the existence global warming and the scale of Casey, T. (2010) Greenhouse Gas Emissions
impact leading to decisions for determining from Wastewater Treatment Plants Get
the costs. Closer Scrutiny. Scientific American.
y Many organisations face a complex mix of http://www.scientificamerican.com/article
challenges from a range of stakeholders to .cfm?id=greenhouse-gas-emissions-from-
demonstrate effective actions aimed at waste-2010-05 (accessed 10 February
emissions reduction. A holistic change 2011)
management and a comprehensive behaviour Commonwealth of Australia, (2008) Emission
change programs should provide a strong estimation technique manual for Sewage
platform to launch a successful gaseous and wastewater treatment Version 2.0,
emissions reduction agenda. A truly integrated August 2008
assessment of climate policy would include Davidson, K., Venning, J. (2009) Applying
both the costs and benefits of mitigation in the integrated decision making frameworks
analysis. for sustainability: An urban context, Aus-
tralian New Zealand Society of Ecological
Economics, Darwin 27th October 2009.
DCCEE, (2010) Department of Climate
Change and Energy Efficiency. Technical
 A. Listowski et al. / Journal of Water Sustainability 1 (2011) 113-125 125

Guidelines for the estimation of green- and Control of Nitrous Oxide from a Bio-
house gas emissions by facilities in Aus- logical Wastewater Treatment System
tralia, 2010. with Intermittent Aeration. Journal of Bio-
De Haas, D., Lant, P., (2009) Energy and science and Bioengineering, Vol. 90, No.
greenhouse footprints of wastewater treat- 3, 247-252. 2OCQ
ment plants in South-East Queensland. Randolph, B, Holloway D, Pullen S, Troy P.
www.urbanwateralliance.org.au. (2007) The Environmental Impacts of
Foley, J., de Haas, D., Hartley, K., Lant, P. Residential Development: Case Studies of
(2010) Comprehensive life cycle invento- 12 Estates in Sydney, Final Report of
ries of alternative wastewater treatment ARC Linkage Project LP 0348770.
systems. Water Research No 44, pp 1654 Tchobanoglous, G., Burton, F.L, Stensel, H.D.
– 1666. (2003) Wastewater Engineering Treat-
Foley, J., Lant PA and P Donlon. (2008) Fugi- ment and Reuse, 4th edition. McGraw-Hill,
tive Greenhouse Gas Emissions from New York. 2003.
Wastewater Systems. WATER, March, pp. WSAA, (2009) Water Services Association of
18-23. Australia and NWC, National Water
Guisasola, A., de Hass D., Keller, J., Yuan Z., Commission. National Performance Re-
(2008) Methane formation in sewer sys- port 2007-08: Urban water utilities. Pub-
tems. Water Research 42, (2008), 1421, lished by NWC, Canberra, ACT.
1430.
Ki Young Park, Yuhei Inamori, Motoyuki Mi-
zuochi, Kyu Hong Ahn, (2000). Emission