Life cycle assessment to evaluate the integral water cycle in industrial supply: A real case study.

Wastewater recycling technologies are developed in areas where the necessity of water resources cannot be satisfied by natural sources. Nevertheless, nowadays trends and European Union Plans show an increasing interest on using these technologies to reduce environmental impacts. This manuscript aims to address the question of the real environmental results of using these technologies and the differences between each specific case using the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology. A real case study is analyzed to answer this question: the integral water cycle of a northern of Spain, comparing a traditional water supply system (system I), and an alternative wastewater regeneration plant (system II). System II presents a higher impact for all categories (between 1.2 and 37 times higher), except for land use, where it is reduced by 53 %. These results show a larger impact produced by the alternative system due to higher energy and chemical product consumption. Energy consumption is the main factor causing the highest impact in most of the impact categories for both studied systems, including the one associated to the water resource consumption. It accounts for at least 50 % of the total impact for each system in 7 of the 16 evaluated impact categories. In terms of climate change, energy consumption is not particularly significant in system I, but it is for system II, where it represents around 50 % of that impact. In the categories where the impact is not determined by energy consumption, chemical product consumption and waste and discharge treatment are the most relevant factors. In this sense, this paper highlights the importance of analysing each case specifically and underscores the usefulness of using LCA methodology as a tool to improve decision-making in resource management, with water resources emerging as a crucial focal point.
Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
(Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)