Can thermal intensification be considered a sustainable way for greening Fenton processes?

Abstract

Life cycle assessment and kinetic modeling were used to elucidate the impact of thermal intensification (TI) on resource consumption and the techno-economic feasibility of a Fenton process at laboratory scale. Increasing temperature from 25 to 55 °C lowers treatment time (96.5%) and electricity use (67.8%) due to the positive impact of temperature on the reaction rate; however, beyond 50 °C no significant diminution in energy use, emissions, and operating cost was observed. The environmental footprint of the process is linked with energy use, operating pH, and the electricity share of the country; nevertheless, the impact of transport and infrastructure materials was lower. At 55 °C and pH of 2.8, emissions of precursors of freshwater and marine eutrophication, particulate matter formation, and ionizing radiation were reduced more than half; besides, in most of the midpoint categories, pondered by the ReCiPe-2016 method, emissions were lowered ca. 43.3%. The endpoint categories human health, ecosystem quality, and resource availability had a significant decline in disability-adjusted life years (46.0%), time-integrated species loss (42.0%), and surplus cost (33.1%). Harnessing the energy present in the wastewater itself decreased 41.9% global warming potential (GWP), but the use of steam for heating raised it 718.8%. In countries where electricity generation is dependent on fossil fuels, GWP could increase (2.0–20.0%) whereas GWP would decrease (8.8–9.4%) when renewable energy sources dominate. Operating at 55 °C and pH of 5.5 rose the reaction time (1835.5%), GWP (29.3%), particulate matter formation (44.3%), terrestrial acidification (21.8%), marine (48.9%), and freshwater eutrophication (66.7%). TI of Fenton processes could increase their treatment capacity with a small reduction in the quality of the effluent; furthermore, they can be made affordable for low-to-medium scale industries in emerging economies due to decreased resources consumption and emissions, leading to a lower treatment cost (US$0.49/m3).