Journal of Cleaner Production 152 (2017) 369e378

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Water reclamation and sludge recycling scenarios for sustainable

resource management in a wastewater treatment plant in Kinmen
islands, Taiwan
Huan-Yu Shiu, Mengshan Lee, Pei-Te Chiueh*
Graduate Institute of Environmental Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taipei, 10617, Taiwan

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Sustainable resource management in small islands is very challenging. To address the challenges, four
Received 23 December 2016 water and waste management strategies were proposed for a wastewater treatment plant in the Kinmen
Received in revised form islands, Taiwan. Life cycle assessment was employed for evaluation of the environmental impacts and
16 March 2017
benefits (i.e., avoidance of impacts) associated with the resource management strategies at the plant. The
Accepted 16 March 2017
results showed that the energy requirements (mainly electricity consumption) for water and sludge
Available online 27 March 2017
treatments in the wastewater treatment plant had the most remarkable impact as high as 98.6%. Sig-
nificant environmental advantages could be achieved by reusing the reclaimed wastewater for agricul-
Keywords:
Wastewater
tural applications (27.8% reduction in eutrophication potential), reusing the sludge for land applications
Life cycle assessment (157% reduction in global warming potential), and generating energy from incineration of recycled sludge
Agricultural application (impacts were neutralized). Impacts from addition of tertiary treatment for wastewater reclamation
Fertilizer could be offset by preventing discharge of nutrients (i.e. N and P) into the environment. The reclamation
Energy recovery also reduced the demand from groundwater pumping and associated impacts. Reuse of sludge for energy
Incineration generation was more favorable than for land applications. This was mainly because eutrophication
impact could not be avoided when the sludge was applied to soil (excess in nutrients), and, relatively
higher reduction in global warming potential was observed for energy generation (
197 kg CO2 eq/m3)
than for land applications (
18.8 kg CO2 eq/m3).
© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction islands is usually poorly managed by inappropriate disposal (UNEP,

Small islands are vulnerable to natural disasters and human
activities (Kurniawan et al., 2016). Development expansion, such as
population growth, increased tourism and poor infrastructure
management, makes sustainable management in small islands very
challenging from water resource and solid waste management
perspectives. The challenges of freshwater and waste management
generally come from its limited land size, resource availability and
physical characteristics (Mohee et al., 2015). For instance, water
sources in small islands are extremely vulnerable, as most of the
surface water flows quickly into the sea instead of into catchment
areas (Ma
n~ ez et al., 2012). Contamination of the freshwater by
seawater intrusion is also a major concern for water management
(Polido et al., 2014a,b). On the other hand, the solid waste in small
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: ptchueh@ntu.edu.tw (P.-T. Chiueh).
2012). Despite the fact that the challenges are obvious and well-
recognized, solutions or strategies (e.g., sustainable management
practices) to address these challenges were seldom investigated in
small islands.
Domestic wastewater is now being seen as a resource than as a
waste. It offers opportunities to recover water, energy and fertil-
izing nutrients in a wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) (McCarty
et al., 2011). An Amsterdam based study quantified the organic
matter and phosphorus in wastewater using material flow analysis
and sketched out strategies for recovering the resources (van der
Hoek et al., 2016). Reclamation of wastewater is also regarded as
an important and attractive approach for effective and sustainable
management of water resource (Chang et al., 2017). Opher and
Friedler (2016) further compared four urban wastewater manage-
ment approaches and pointed out that decentralized systems (i.e.
onsite treatment systems) are generally perferrabler than central-
ized ones.
Through wastewater reuse, energy can be indirectly conserved

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.110
0959-6526/© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
370 H.-Y. Shiu et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 152 (2017) 369e378
from production of potable water and treatment of wastewater.
Moreover, it reduces the need for exploring energy-intensive water
sources, such as desalination, and the impacts associated with
freshwater use (Lyons et al., 2009). Reducing of freshwater
abstraction by pumping was found to be the key contributor to the
reduction in Freshwater Ecosystem impact for water reclamation
(Amores et al., 2013). Addition of tertiary treatment in existing
wastewater treatment system for wastewater reclamation showed
little increment in most of the environmental impacts but a notable
net saving of freshwater (Meneses et al., 2010). Reuse of the
reclaimed water for agricultural applications was viewed as the
most environmentally friendly approach (Meneses et al., 2010), and
its environmental benefit (avoidance of the acidification and
eutrophication impacts) was proportional to the amount of treated
wastewater (Renzoni and Germain, 2007).
Similarly, reuse of waste sludge is proposed for advanced
management of sludge. Combining the applications of sludge as
fertilizer, fuel and raw material replacements was found to be the
most environmental option for the final destination of the sludge
(Pasqualino et al., 2009). Productive use of sludge such as agricul-
tural application (i.e., serves as fertilizers) was reported to improve
the environmental performance and offered the greatest environ-
mental offsets in eutrophication and acidification impacts of
WWTPs (Murray et al., 2008). The impact from presence of
emerging micropollutants such as pharmaceuticals and personal
care products in the sludge was found to be minimal (Hospido et al.,
2010). Economic benefits from recycling of sludge for agricultural
applications also made it an attractive option for sludge manage-
ment (Kleemann and Morse, 2015).
Moreover, recycling of sludge for electricity or heat generation
could potentially reduce use of natural resources, occupation of
land, energy consumption and generation of end products, and
consequently avoid environment impacts associated with sludge
treatment. Thermal processes such as incineration or pyrolysis
presented opportunities for energy recovery with little nutrient
loss (Hospido et al., 2005). Bravo and Ferrer (2011) suggested that
increase in biogas production through anaerobic digestion of
sewage sludge could enhance the environment performance of the
WWTPs due to the recovery of energy and nutrient. The sludge
could be potentially utilized as substitution for fossil fuels in co-
incineration in power plants or cement kilns (Remy et al., 2013),
or acted as an alternative fuel in industrial processes (Valderrama
et al., 2013). A considerably low carbon footprint (
11.6 kg CO2
equivalent per population equivalent chemical oxygen demand)
was reported in a study of co-incineration of sludge in cement kilns
(Remy et al., 2013). The co-incineration also presented high eco-
nomic benefits than environmental benefits (Hong et al., 2013). All
of these management strategies were seldom reported for devel-
oping areas such as small islands.
Kinmen islands is one of the small islands in Taiwan that faces
difficulties in sustainable management of their resources. As the
government in the islands are putting efforts to find sustainable
solutions in addressing the issues, their associated environmental
benefits is therefore need to be quantified, particularly for policy
making purpose. This study aims to evaluate the environmental
performances of four sustainable resource management scenarios
for Jincheng WWTP, the largest WWTP in Kinmen islands,
including reclamation of wastewater for agricultural and urban
uses and recycling of waste sludge for agricultural use and energy
production from incineration. The studied scenarios are specially
designed for the islands, considering the economic activities and
geographical constraints in the area. Improvements in future
electricity mix of the islands is also considered in this study.
Environmental performances for the studied scenarios are quanti-
fied using life cycle assessment approach. This study could provide
a useful demonstration for making of more environmentally sus-
tainable wastewater treatment plant for developing areas.
2. Study site description
Kinmen is a group of islands that governed by Taiwan with area
only 153.1 km2. Kinmen has population of approximately 132,800
in 2015 and a relatively high person-times of tourists as many as 1.5
million people as recorded in 2014. The full-year average annual
rainfall of the islands is 1047 mm, whereas the average rainfall in
the world in 2013 was 1,064 mm (NOAA, 2014). The extremely
uneven distribution of rainfall resulted in water shortage in the
Kinmen islands.
Water sources for the Kinmen islands mainly come from
groundwater (79%), followed by surface water from catchments
(19%) and desalinated seawater (2%), in which the agricultural
sector uses up to 43% of the water, residential sector uses about 29%,
tourism uses as much as 3%, and the remainder goes to industrial
and military uses. Kaoliang (sorghum) wine making is the main
industry in Kinmen, therefore, its quality requirement for source
water is high and does not accept reclaimed wastewater.
Kinmen Jincheng WWTP, the largest WWTP plant in Kinmen,
was chosen for this case study. The design capacity of the WWTP is
3000 m3, and the real processing capacity is 4500 m3. Oxidation
ditch is the main method for biological treatment of wastewater.
The wastewater treatment processes in the WWTP include
screening, settling, oxidation, final settling and disinfection. Sludge
from the WWTP was treated with thickening and dehydration,
before to be landfilled. According to “The Planning and Demon-
stration Project for Reclaimed Water in Kinmen islands”, Jincheng
WWTP will upgrade its existing secondary treatment to tertiary
treatment. The tertiary wastewater treatment involves sand filtra-
tion, ozone disinfection, and micro-membrane filtration in its sys-
tem (WRA, 2009). The electricity mix in Kinmen contains 67% from
heavy fuel oil, 27.7% from light diesel oil, 4.2% from wind power and
0.6% from solar power (ITRI, 2011).
3. Material and methods
3.1. Life cycle assessment
Life cycle assessment was applied to quantify overall environ-
mental impacts associated to proposed sustainable management of
water or waste resources, by following the international standard
methodology ISO14040 (ISO, 2006). SimaPro 8.0.5, the leading
software tool for LCA (Herrmann and Moltesen, 2015) equipped
with Ecoinvent v3.1 life cycle inventory database and impact
assessment methods, was used in this study. The CML 2 baseline
2000 (V2.05) method was used to quantify the environmental
impacts. This impact assessment method was widely used by the
LCA of wastewater treatment plants (Renou et al., 2008).
World 1995 values were selected as normalization factors for all
impact categories. The global normalization factors are recom-
mended for regional assessment of undefined systems (Huijbregts
et al., 2003). Normalization method translates impact value into
relative contribution to a reference dimensionless value (Sleeswijk
et al., 2008), hence, allowing direct comparison between impact
categories.
3.1.1. System boundary and functional unit
Fig. 1 displays the system boundaries considered in this study.
This study focused on the operational stage of the Jincheng WWTP,
including pre-treatment, primary treatment, secondary treatment,
tertiary treatment and water reclamation for water line, and, sludge
treatment, sludge final disposal and recycling for waste line.
 H.-Y. Shiu et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 152 (2017) 369e378 371

Fig. 1. System boundaries for sustainable resource management scenarios (water reclamation and sludge recycling) for Jincheng WWTP in Kinmen islands. In water reclamation
scenarios, the reclaimed water was targeted to be use for (1) agriculture sectors or (2) urban use, and the sludge was landfilled; in sludge recycling scenarios, the recycled sludge
was used for (3) agricultural application or (4) energy generation after proper treatments, and the secondary effluents were discharged into the sea.

Transport of the chemical, materials and sludge was also consid-
ered. Input and output flows of energy and resources were incor-
porated into the inventory data. The reclaimed water was targeted
to be used for agricultural irrigation (line 1) or urban uses such as
watering flowers and landscapes (line 2). Sludge was intended to be
reused in agricultural applications (line 3), and energy can be
recovered from incineration (line 4).
The functional unit in this study was defined as 1 m3 of treated
water, a common functional unit for water systems (Corominas
et al., 2013). All material, energy consumption, wastewater emis-
sions and resources recovery were based on this functional unit.
3.1.2. Life cycle inventory (LCI) and data collection
Table 1 and Table 2 present the inventory data for the operation
of Jincheng WWTP for baseline and water or waste management
scenarios. The LCI in this study included mainly chemicals, mate-
rials, energy consumption and wastewater discharge at operation
phases. The inventory was categorized as several groups based on
their material flows and emission routes within the studied system
boundary. Consumption of energy was mainly attributed to treat-
ment of wastewater or sludge. Energy requirements for sludge
treatment was found to be greater than that for wastewater
treatment (Xu et al., 2014).
Data for the inventory was mostly retrieved from either internal
reports or personal interviews at the plant. For instance, the values
of flow rates (influent and effluent), water quality parameters (e.g.
BOD, COD, SS, total phosphorus and total nitrogen) and sludge
analysis (e.g., heavy metals) were empirical measurements. Inputs
of sand and oxygen for operation of tertiary treatment were
accessed from Barrios et al. (2008) and Mun ~ oz et al. (2009),
respectively. The sludge sample was tested for eight different heavy
metals, including mercury, chromium, selenium, chromium (VI),
lead, arsenic, copper and barium. But, only chromium (VI) and
barium were detected in the sludge sample (Table 2). Electricity
consumption was recorded from its electricity bills. Kinmen's
electricity grid mix was employed for the evaluation of environ-
mental impacts of energy inputs. Other inventory data like energy
uses for sludge treatment (concentration, dehydration and incin-
eration) was collected from literature (Hong et al., 2009). Approx-
imately 51% of the electricity generated from incineration of sludge
was assumed to be used for supporting process-related energy uses
(Hong et al., 2009).
3.1.3. Assumptions and limitations
This study assumed that the environmental impacts from con-
struction of the infrastructures were small, mainly due to its long
372 H.-Y. Shiu et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 152 (2017) 369e378

Table 1
Life cycle inventory data for basic scenario and water reclamation scenarios.

Basic scenario Scenario 1 ereuse for agricultural irrigation Scenario 2 - reuse for urban applications

Input/Output flows Unita Value Input/Output flows Unita Value Input/Output flows Unita Value

Water line Water line Water line

Energyb MJ 1.4 Energyb MJ 1.4 Energyb MJ 1.4
Chlorine tabletsb g 1.1 Chlorine tabletsb g 1.1 Chlorine tabletsb g 1.1
Polymerb g 0.5 Polymerb g 0.5 Polymer b
g 0.5
Tertiary treatment Tertiary treatment Tertiary treatment
Energyc MJ 1.6
Sandc,d g 20
Oxygenc,e g 140
Avoided potable water treatment Avoided potable water treatment Avoided potable water treatment
b
Energy MJ
1.9
Chlorine dioxideb mg
2.4
b
Sodium hypochlorite mg
5.2
Sludge treatment Sludge treatment Sludge treatment
Energy (landfill)b,f MJ 102.3 Energy (landfill)b,f MJ 102.3 Energy (landfill)b,f MJ 102.3
Outputs to ocean Outputs to ocean Outputs to ocean
BODb g 9.9 Total Phosphorusb g
3.5
SSb g 10.7
CODb g 29.6
Total Phosphorusb g 3.5
Outputs to soil Outputs to soil Outputs to soil
Chromium VIb g 0.01 BODb g 9.9 Chromium VIb g 0.01
Bariumb g 0.8 SSb g 10.7 Bariumb g 0.8
CODb g 29.6
Chromium VIb g 0.01
Bariumb g 0.8
a
1 kJ ¼ 2.78*10
4 kWh.
b
KWP (2012).
c
WRA (2009).
d
Barrios et al. (2008).
e
Mun~ oz et al. (2009).
f
Hong et al. (2009).

Table 2 lifespan (more than 50 years) (Lyons et al., 2009). This assumption
Life cycle inventory data for sludge recycling scenarios. was considered acceptable, as the environmental impacts from
Scenario 3 - reuse for agricultural Scenario 4 e reuse for energy constructing and dismantling the infrastructure were negligible
applications (works as fertilizer) generation by incineration when compared to that in the operation phase (Rodriguez-Garcia
Input/Output flows Unita Value Input/Output flows Unita Value
et al., 2011).
This study also assumed that the inflows to the WWTP remained
Water line Water line
stable and showed little variation during dry and wet season. Dif-
Energyb MJ 1.4 Energyb kJ 1.4
Chlorine tabletsb g 1.1 Chlorine tabletsb g 1.1 ferences in impacts between humid and dry seasons were not
Polymerb g 0.5 Polymerb g 0.5 required as the results were practically equal for both situations
Outputs to ocean Outputs to ocean (Hospido et al., 2004). Results of the impact assessment were
BODb g 9.9 BODb g 9.9
shown on average. Dynamic change of the impacts was not
SSb g 10.7 SSb g 10.7
CODb g 29.6 CODb g 29.6
considered in this study.
b
Total Phosphorus g 3.5 Total Phosphorusb g 3.5
Sludge line Sludge line
3.2. Scenario analysis
Energy (Thinkening)c MJ 313.1 Energy (Thinkening)c MJ 313.1
Energy (Dewatering)c MJ 122.4 Energy (Dewatering) c MJ 122.4
Flocculantc kg 3.1 Flocculantc kg 3.1 In the basic scenario of Jincheng WWTP without any reuse, the
Energy (Compost)c MJ 122.4 treated wastewater is discharged into sea after secondary treat-
Sludge application as fertilizer Sludge incineration ment, and the final disposal of waste sludge is landfilled. To assess
c 3
Natural gas m 6.3 Energy (Incineration)c MJ 533.1
Nitrogen oxidesc g 339.3 Natural gasc m3 22.6
possible environmental benefits from implementations of different
Ammoniac kg 0.9 Recovered Energyc MJ
1624 water or waste management strategies, four scenarios (two for
Carbon dioxidec kg 8.4 water and two for sludge), as shown in Fig. 1, are proposed in this
Oil kg 13.4 study. Detailed descriptions for the proposed scenarios are as
Outputs to soil
follows:
Chromium VIc g 0.01
Bariumc g 0.8
Avoided outputs to air (agricultural 3.2.1. Scenario 1: Reuse of reclaimed water for agricultural
efficiency)
irrigation
Methanec kg
9.2
Nitrous oxidec g
92.3 The water quality of secondary effluent from Jincheng WWTP is
Sulfur oxidesc g
411.2 in line with the water quality standards for irrigation (Table A1),
a
1 kJ ¼ 2.78*10
4 kWh therefore, the reclaimed water can be directly sent for agricultural
b
KWP (2012). irrigation. Reuse of the reclaimed water is expected to provide
c
Hong et al. (2009). alternative water source for the existing groundwater supply.
Direct reuse of secondary effluent for irrigation could potentially
 H.-Y. Shiu et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 152 (2017) 369e378
reduce the use of fertilizer.
3.2.2. Scenario 2: Reuse of reclaimed water for urban applications
Tertiary treatment, in addition to the existing secondary treat-
ment, is applied for advanced treatment of reclaimed wastewater
for water security purpose (Meneses et al., 2010; Pasqualino et al.,
2011; Zhang et al., 2010). The reclaimed water is aimed to be used
for urban applications such as landscape irrigation, recreational
impoundments, as well as for non-potable in-building uses
(flushing toilets or cooling water for air conditioning). As wine
making is the main industry in Kinmen, reuse of the reclaimed
water is preferable for urban applications than for industrial uses.
This scenario includes additional use of resources (energy and
chemicals) from tertiary treatment but avoids those from potable
water treatment.
3.2.3. Scenario 3: Reuse of recycled sludge for agricultural
applications (works as fertilizers)
This scenario assumes that the sludge could be reused as fer-
tilizers for local agricultural applications after proper treatments
such as thickening, dewatering, and composting. Local reuse of
recycled sludge reduces the impacts associated to transportation of
the sludge. Given the fact that the sludge is enriched in phospho-
rous and nitrogen, use of recycled sludge for soil conditioner can
return the nutrients back to the soil (Hong et al., 2009). In addition,
gaseous emissions such as methane, nitrous oxides and sulfur ox-
ides from anaerobic digestion can be avoided.
3.2.4. Scenario 4: Reuse of recycled sludge for energy generation by
incineration
While use of recycled sludge for agricultural application was
considered as an insecure approach (Lundie et al., 2004), inciner-
ation of the sludge could provide a means for simultaneous sludge
treatment and energy generation (Naamane et al., 2016). Inciner-
ation also posed advantages of elimination of pathogenic organ-
isms and volatile contents (Naamane et al., 2016). Incineration of
sludge is popular in countries like Japan (Hong et al., 2009),
Singapore (You et al., 2016) and Hong Kong (Lam et al., 2016), where
have relatively limited resources (e.g. land area). Sludge handling
was reported in decrease by approximately 18% for landfilling and
in increase by about 10% for incineration (Kelessidis and Stasinakis,
2012). In this scenario, the sludge was assumed to be applied for
electricity generation by incineration, therefore, significant portion
of the energy requirements could be met by the recovered energy
from the incineration.
3.3. Comparative analysis for improvement in future electricity mix
Electricity generation by diesel and heavy fuel oil is in wide-
spread use in developing areas such in small islands (Dornan and
Jotzo, 2015). This implies that any variation in oil price would
strongly influence the energy policy or structure in a region. Elec-
tricity generated by renewable energy sources such as wind or
solar, on the other hand, is less affected by the variation in oil price
and can potentially reduce energy associated environmental im-
pacts (Aguirre and Ibikunle, 2014).
Therefore, this study further investigates the potential benefits
from future improvements on energy policy, particularly for the
increase in renewable energy sources. Wind power and solar power
are potential renewable energy sources in the Kinmen islands. To
maintain a stable power supply system in the islands, the portion of
the renewable energy (including wind power and solar power) was
suggested to be as high as 20% (ITRI, 2011). This could be achieved
by either solar or wind power, especially during winter.
373
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Characterization and contribution analysis for the basic
scenario
Operation of the Jincheng WWTP uses significant amount of
electricity, accounting for approximately 0.24% of the islands’ total
electricity usages. The WWTP currently has an average electricity
consumption of approximately 0.38 kWh (1.36 MJ) for production
of 1 m3 of treated water. This value is comparable with the value
reported by Gallego et al. (2008) with similar operation capacity of
less than 20,000 population equivalent and wastewater treatment
process.
Use of oxidation deep ditch for biological treatment of the
wastewater contributed to majority of the electricity consumption
in the wastewater treatment procedures, and it could account for
up to 70% of the total energy consumption of a typical WWTP (Yang
et al., 2011). Higher electricity consumption was reported for the
facilities used extended aeration (Gallego et al., 2008). The energy-
use-efficiency in this WWTP was considered high, as the quality
and quantity of the inflow wastewater were relatively stable as
compared to other urban areas, and its electricity consumption was
at the lower end of the reported value in literature. The energy
intensity of WWTPs was reported to be between 0.08 and 1.5 kWh/
m3 in a comparative analysis for the USA, Germany, China and
South Africa (Wang et al., 2016), while a typical range of
0.58e2.11 kWh/m3 with an average of 1.17 kWh/m3 was mentioned
in the review study by Loubet et al. (2014).
Table 3 summarizes the environmental profiles by character-
ization and normalization methods for all the studied scenarios for
the Jincheng WWTP. The global warming potential was estimated
at about 0.426 kg CO2 equivalent for production of 1 m3 of treated
water (at wastewater line only). A relatively higher value was found
in the impacts of global warming and marine aquatic ecotoxicity,
which could be attributed to its high electricity consumption. Re-
searches on evaluation of environmental profiles of WWTPs usually
showed that electricity consumption for operation of the plants has
the largest contribution on the overall environmental impacts
(Gallego et al., 2008). The electricity mix in Kinmen led to a rela-
tively higher contribution of electricity-related environmental im-
pacts in this study than in a Spain based study. The electricity mix
in Spain is made of 57.6% of fossil fuels, 23% of nuclear energy, and
19.4% of renewable energy (Gallego et al., 2008).
Moreover, the electricity grid in the Kinmen islands relies
mainly on heavy oil burning power plants, which emits not only
carbon dioxide (contribute to global warming) but also trace heavy
metals including cobalt, thallium and selenium that potentially
contaminated the marine environment. Similar results were found
in Santoyo-Castelazo et al. (2011) that heavy oil contained metals
such as nickel, vanadium, magnesium and copper which could be
released from electricity generation in Mexico. Heavy oil power
plants also contributed to atmospheric acidification and heavy
metal contamination (NTN, 2009), a significant risk to marine and
coastal environments due to oil contamination of cooling water
discharge.
Wastewater discharge from WWTPs contributed remarkable
environmental impacts in eutrophication (38.29%) and terrestrial
ecotoxicity (20.38%), as illustrated in Fig. 2. Discharge of nutrients
of nitrogen and phosphorous was the largest sharer to the impacts
of eutrophication and ecotoxicity (Venkatesh and Brattebo, 2011),
even after secondary treatment. Renzoni and Germain (2007) re-
ported that acidification, in addition to eutrophication, could also
be an important environmental impact from the discharge. All of
these findings are indicative of proper treatment of wastewater for
reducing overall environmental impacts in the urban water
374 H.-Y. Shiu et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 152 (2017) 369e378

Table 3
Environmental impact characteristics for studied scenarios in Jincheng WWTP.

Basic scenariob Scenario 1c Scenario 2d Scenario 3e Scenario 4f

Abiotic depletion, ADP (kg Sb eq) 2.15E-01 2.15E-01 2.15E-01 1.66Eþ00
8.93E-01
Acidification, AP (kg SO2 eq) 2.77E-01 2.77E-01 2.76E-01 1.58Eþ00
1.72Eþ00
Eutrophication, EP (kg PO
4 eq) 2.98E-02 8.29E-03 1.87E-02 1.33E-01
1.02E-01
Global warming, GWP (kg CO2 eq) 3.24Eþ01 3.24Eþ01 3.23Eþ01
1.88Eþ01
1.97Eþ02
Ozone layer depletion, ODP (kg CFC-11 eq) 5.90E-06 5.90E-06 5.89E-06 1.01E-04
3.68E-05
Human toxicity, HTP (kg 1,4-DB eq) 1.07Eþ01 1.05Eþ01 1.07Eþ01 7.70Eþ01
6.28Eþ01
Fresh water aquatic ecotoxicity, FAETP (kg 1,4-DB eq) 1.56Eþ00 1.48Eþ00 1.58Eþ00 1.23Eþ01
8.14Eþ00
Marine aquatic ecotoxicity, MAETP (kg 1,4-DB eq) 6.87Eþ03 6.56Eþ03 6.91Eþ03 4.82Eþ04
3.73Eþ04
Terrestrial ecotoxicity, TETP (kg 1,4-DB eq) 3.46E-01 3.38E-01 3.45E-01 1.62Eþ00
1.73Eþ00
Photochemical oxidation, CED (kg C2H4 eq) 1.07E-02 1.07E-02 1.07E-02 9.45E-03
6.48E-02
Total (Normalized value)a 1.90E-11 1.82E-11 1.90E-11 1.24E-10
1.02E-10
Impacta e 1.82E-11 1.93E-11 1.29 E-10 1.80 E-10
Benefita e
7.65E-14
3.25E-13
5.65 E-12
2.82 E-10
a
Normalized value was based on World 1995 value.
b
Basic scenario: include impacts from treatments of wastewater and sludge.
c
Scenario 1:reuse of reclaimed water for agricultural uses.
d
Scenario 2: reuse of reclaimed water for urban uses.
e
Scenario 3: reuse of recycled sludge for agricultural application.
f
Scenario 4: reuse of recycled sludge for energy generation.

systems. were also observed (Table 1).

4.2. Comparative analysis for enhanced resource management
scenarios
Figs. 2 and 3 present the results of contribution analysis for all
studied scenarios in the Jincheng WWTP. The results showed that
electricity consumption has the largest impact in all scenarios. The
environmental impact caused by electricity comprises 98.6%, 94.4%,
75.0%, and 93.4% of the overall environmental impact in scenario 1,
2, 3 and 4 (without consideration of energy recovery), respectively.
This is true for most of the WWTP studies since its treatment
procedures were generally powered by electricity, and those pro-
cedures were usually energy-intensive. Energy consumption in
operation phase of a WWTP accounted for the largest share of its
total energy demand (Xu et al., 2014) up to nearly 70% (Singh and
Kansal, 2016). Lemos et al. (2013) reported that the electricity
consumption was the largest contributor to the environmental
impacts. The total impacts from transportation of chemicals and
materials were negligible.
4.2.1. Wastewater reclamation scenarios
Reuse of reclaimed water provided flexibility to the water sup-
ply system, and consequently avoided the impacts from potable
water treatment. In reclaimed water scenarios, both scenario 1 and
scenario 2 demonstrated environmental benefits (Table 3 and
Fig. 3) as compared to the impacts from the basic scenario.
Scenario 1 has approximately 4.48% of the reduction in total
environmental impact (Table 3). As groundwater is the main source
for agricultural water uses, little benefits was received from
replacing potable water with reclaimed wastewater. The energy
requirements at a global level are 0.0002e1.74 kWh/m3 for surface
water supply and 0.37e1.44 kWh/m3 for groundwater pumping
(Wakeel et al., 2016). Direct reuse of reclaimed secondary effluent
for irrigation avoided additional treatment of the wastewater and
discharge of nutrients (N-fertilizer and P-fertilize) to water body.
Impacts from production of fertilizers and its associated energy
consumption were also reduced (Meneses et al., 2010). These all
made a remarkable decrement (27.8%, Fig. 2) in the eutrophication
impact, one of the major direct impacts generated by urban water
systems (Loubet et al., 2014). Relatively small reductions in impacts
of human toxicity (1.9%), fresh water aquatic ecotoxicity (5.1%),
marine aquatic ecotoxicity (4.5%) and terrestrial ecotoxicity (2.3%)
There was only little environmental benefits from reuse of
reclaimed wastewater for urban uses (scenario 2). Even though the
reclaimed water is not intended for potable use, a tertiary treat-
ment is required for the reclamation. Addition of tertiary treatment
made the reuse showed very little (approximately 0.02%) envi-
ronmental benefits from reduced electricity consumption from
switching potable water treatment to tertiary treatment (Fig. 2).
The environmental impacts from tertiary treatment have the same
order of magnitude as the impacts from potable water treatment
(Amores et al., 2013). Additionally, discharge of nutrients (i.e. N and
P) that contributed to eutrophication could be avoided from the
reclamation, but it was much less as compared to the benefits from
Scenario 1 (direct reuse for agricultural irrigation). This result is
similar to the findings in Meneses et al. (2010) that the impacts
from tertiary treatment could be traded off by reusing the
reclaimed water for agricultural or urban uses. The trade-off was
more significant for agricultural reuse than for urban uses.
4.2.2. Sludge recycling scenarios
The electricity consumption in a WWTP is typically proportional
to the amount of sludge and the complexity of sludge treatment
procedures. Thus, sludge treatment plays an important role for its
recycling, and the treatment usually accounts for significant
amount of environmental impacts from its energy requirements. In
the sludge reuse scenarios, the environmental impacts caused by
electricity comprised 74.99% and 93.42% of the overall environ-
mental impacts in scenario 3 and scenario 4, respectively (Fig. 3),
without consideration of energy recovery.
When the recycled sludge was targeted for agricultural appli-
cations (Scenario 3), the overall environmental impact was 6.53
times more than that in basic scenario (Table 3). The increase in
total environmental impact was mainly due to intensive electricity
usages from sludge thickening, dewatering and composting.
Application of nutrient rich sewage sludge in soils also had notable
eutrophication impacts (Table 3) from release of excessive amount
of nutrients (Amores et al., 2013). When the sludge is applied to
soil, eutrophication could not be avoided. However, as the sludge
was used as replacements of fertilizers, significant amount of global
warming impact (from 32.4 to
18.8 kg CO2 eq) as well as photo-
chemical oxidation impact could be reduced. It also lowered the
emissions of methane, nitrous oxide and sulfur oxides to air, which
consequently reduced the two impacts (Hong et al., 2009). Fine and
Fig. 2. Relative contribution of environmental impacts for studied scenarios. S1: reuse of reclaimed water for agricultural uses; S2: reuse of reclaimed water for urban uses; S3:
reuse of recycled sludge for agricultural application; S4: reuse of recycled sludge for energy generation. ADP: abiotic depletion; AP: acidification; EP: eutrophication; GWP: global
warming; ODP: ozone layer depletion; HTTP: human toxicity; FAERP: fresh water aquatic ecotoxicity; MAETP: marine aquatic ecotoxicity; TETP: terrestrial ecotoxicity; POCP:
photochemical oxidation.
376 H.-Y. Shiu et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 152 (2017) 369e378

Fig. 3. Comparison of normalized total impacts between scenarios. S1: reuse of reclaimed water for agricultural uses; S2: reuse of reclaimed water for urban uses; S3: reuse of
recycled sludge for agricultural applications; S4: reuse of recycled sludge for energy generation.

Hadas (2012) also reported a potential reduction of approximately
5e24% in GHG emissions could be achieved by fertilizers preser-
vation using recycled sludge.
Given the fact that treatment of sludge has a great energy de-
mand, Scenario 4 further considered energy recovery from incin-
eration of recycled sludge. This resulted in 1.02  10
10
(2.82  10
10 of benefits out of 1.80  10
10 impacts) of benefits for
normalized environmental impacts (Table 3 and Fig. 2). In fact, the
electricity consumption in this case was still large, but the energy
generated from sludge incineration was about 67% greater than the
energy requirement, thus, significantly reduced the overall envi-
ronmental impact in the Scenario 4. Specifically, a great amount of
global warming emissions were avoided from the incineration to
energy (Hong et al., 2009). Moreover, owing the fact that little
heavy metals were presented in the sludge from the WWTP, its
human toxicity impact from incinerated ash in the melting unit
process was less. All of these findings confirmed that reuse of
sludge for energy recovery was the best option over land applica-
tions (Mo and Zhang, 2013), from both energy and environmental
perspectives.
4.3. Comparative analysis for future electricity mix
This study further investigates the potential benefits from future
improvements on energy policies. Analysis of environmental ben-
efits from switching current electricity mix to projected ones with
increased portion of renewable energy source was conducted.
Results from the analysis with current and future electricity
mixes are summarized in Table 4. In the case that the amount of
renewable energy in the electricity mix was controlled at 20%, its
environmental performance was not greatly varied with the
changes in renewable energy (Fig. A1). However, when the future
electricity mix was applied to all studied scenarios, reduction in
overall environmental impacts were observed at 15.36% on average.
Although this result was not dependent on the energy management
of the wastewater system but rather on national energy policies
and strategies, it still showed great benefits from reducing most of
the energy-related environmental impacts (Lemos et al., 2013). In
particular, the impacts associated with air emissions (e.g. heavy
metals) could be avoided from reducing the use of heavy oil for
electricity generation.
5. Conclusions
The Jincheng WWTP in Kinmen, Taiwan is currently powered by
heavy oil based electricity mix, which generated significant adverse
environmental impacts of global warming, eutrophication and
ecotoxicity. Environmental impacts of proposed water and waste
management strategies for the plant was conducted in this study,
using life cycle assessment approach. Electricity consumption is the
key element in overall environmental performance of the WWTP,
which contributed the most significant environmental impact as
high as 98.6%.
Reclaimed wastewater for agricultural or urban uses had sub-
stantial benefits. When reclaimed water was targeted for agricul-
tural applications (direct use from secondary effluent), its nutrient
contents (i.e. N and P fertilizers) could be recovered, thus,
decreased the impact of eutrophication (27.8%). Addition of tertiary

Table 4
Variation of overall environmental impacts (normalized) for increased percentage of renewable energy for electricity generation. Note that the total amount of renewable
energy sources (i.e. wind and solar) was controlled at 20%.

Electricity mix Basic scenario Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4

Current 1.90E-11 1.82E-11 1.90E-11 1.24E-10
1.02E-10

20% of renewable 1.61E-11 1.53E-11 1.62E-11 1.08E-10
8.30E-11

Reduction (%) 15.25% 15.96% 14.97% 12.64% 17.99%

 H.-Y. Shiu et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 152 (2017) 369e378
treatment for reclamation of wastewater for urban uses alleviated
the stress on potable water supply and further reduced the impacts
associated with energy uses. The reclamation demonstrated as a
preferable approach to increase the existing water supply for areas
mainly rely on groundwater pumping.
Recycling of sludge from WWTP for energy generation also
showed significant environmental benefits, which was mainly from
the trade-off between generated power and energy consumption
(2.82  10
10 of benefits out of 1.80  10
10 impacts). Recycling of
sludge for land applications as fertilizer substitutes, on the other
hand, was not a favorable strategy in this case study, as the overall
environmental impacts was approximately 6.5 time more than that
in basic scenario and impacts of eutrophication could not be avoi-
ded (excess of nutrients in sludge). Future improvements in elec-
tricity mix in studied scenarios showed reduction in overall
environmental impacts at 15.36% on average.
The experiences from this study may not directly transferred to
other places, but the proposed sustainable resource management
strategies and the impact assessment framework could provide
useful insights for future policy making in developing areas such as
small islands.
Acknowledgements
This study was supported from the Ministry of Science and
Technology, Executive Yuan (MOST 104-2119-M-002-001).
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data related to this article can be found at http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.110.
References
Aguirre, M., Ibikunle, G., 2014. Determinants of renewable energy growth: a global
sample analysis. Energy Policy 69, 374e384.
Amores, M.J., Meneses, M., Pasqualino, J., Anto
n, A., Castells, F., 2013. Environmental
assessment of urban water cycle on Mediterranean conditions by LCA approach.
J. Clean. Prod. 43, 84e92.
Barrios, R., Siebel, M., van der Helm, A., Bosklopper, K., Gijzen, H., 2008. Environ-
mental and financial life cycle impact assessment of drinking water production
at Waternet. J. Clean. Prod. 16, 471e476.
Bravo, L., Ferrer, I., 2011. Life cycle assessment of an intensive sewage treatment
plant in Barcelona (Spain) with focus on energy aspects. Water Sci. Technol. 64,
440e447.
Chang, J., Lee, W., Yoon, S., 2017. Energy consumptions and associated greenhouse
gas emissions in operation phases of urban water reuse systems in Korea.
J. Clean. Prod. 141, 728e736.
Corominas, L., Foley, J., Guest, J.S., Hospido, A., Larsen, H.F., Morera, S., et al., 2013.
Life cycle assessment applied to wastewater treatment: State of the art. Water
Res. 47, 5480e5492.
Dornan, M., Jotzo, F., 2015. Renewable technologies and risk mitigation in small
island developing states: Fiji's electricity sector. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 48,
35e48.
Fine, P., Hadas, E., 2012. Options to reduce greenhouse gas emissions during
wastewater treatment for agricultural use. Sci. Total Environ. 416, 289e299.
Gallego, A., Hospido, A., Moreira, M.T., Feijoo, G., 2008. Environmental performance
of wastewater treatment plants for small populations. Resour. Conserv. Recy. 52,
931e940.
Herrmann, I.T., Moltesen, A., 2015. Does it matter which life cycle assessment (LCA)
tool you choose? e a comparative assessment of SimaPro and GaBi. J. Clean.
Prod. 86, 163e169.
Hong, J., Hong, J., Otaki, M., Jolliet, O., 2009. Environmental and economic life cycle
assessment for sewage sludge treatment processes in Japan. Waste Manage 29,
696e703.
Hong, J., Xu, C., Hong, J., Tan, X., Chen, W., 2013. Life cycle assessment of sewage
sludge co-incineration in a coal-based power station. Waste Manage 33,
1843e1852.
Hospido, A., Carballa, M., Moreira, M., Omil, F., Lema, J.M., Feijoo, G., 2010. Envi-
ronmental assessment of anaerobically digested sludge reuse in agriculture:
potential impacts of emerging micropollutants. Water Res. 44, 3225e3233.
Hospido, A., Moreira, M., Fern
andez-Couto, M., Feijoo, G., 2004. Environmental
performance of a municipal wastewater treatment plant. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess.
9, 261e271.
377
Hospido, A., Moreira, T., Martín, M., Rigola, M., Feijoo, G., 2005. Environmental
evaluation of different treatment processes for sludge from urban wastewater
treatments: anaerobic digestion versus thermal processes. Int. J. Life Cycle
Assess. 10, 336e345.
Huijbregts, M.A.J., Breedveld, L., Huppes, G., De Koning, A., Van Oers, L., Suh, S.,
2003. Normalisation figures for environmental lifecycle assessment: The
Netherlands (1997/1998), Western Europe (1995) and the World (1990 and
1995). J. Clean. Prod. 11, 737e748.
ISO, 2006. Environmental Management d Life Cycle Assessment d Principles and
Framework.
ITRI, Industrial Technology Research Institute, 2011. The Development Plan of
Kinmen Low-carbon Island. Hsinchu, Taiwan.
Kelessidis, A., Stasinakis, A.S., 2012. Comparative study of the methods used for
treatment and final disposal of sewage sludge in European countries. Waste
Manage 32, 1186e1195.
Kleemann, R., Morse, S., 2015. Sustainable phosphorus management d a global
transdisciplinary roadmap. In: Scholz, R.W., Roy, A.H., Brand, F.S., Hellums, D.,
Ulrich, A.E. (Eds.), Ecological Economics, vol. 114, ISBN 978-94-007-7249-6,
pp. 245e246.
Kurniawan, F., Adrianto, L., Bengen, D.G., Prasetyo, L.B., 2016. Vulnerability assess-
ment of small islands to tourism: the case of the marine tourism Park of the Gili
Matra islands, Indonesia. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 6, 308e326.
KWP, Kinmen Water Plant, 2012. Statistical Annual Report. Kinmen, Taiwan.
Lam, C.M., Lee, P.H., Hsu, S.C., 2016. Eco-efficiency analysis of sludge treatment
scenarios in urban cities: the case of Hong Kong. J. Clean. Prod. 112, 3028e3039.
Lemos, D., Dias, A.C., Gabarrell, X., Arroja, L., 2013. Environmental assessment of an
urban water system. J. Clean. Prod. 54, 157e165.
Lyons, E., Zhang, P., Benn, T., Sharif, F., Li, K., Crittenden, J., Costanza, M., Chen, Y.S.,
2009. Life cycle assessment of three water supply systems: importation,
reclamation and desalination. Water Sci. Technol. 9, 439e448.
Loubet, P., Roux, P., Loiseau, E., Bellon-Maurel, V., 2014. Life cycle assessments of
urban water systems: a comparative analysis of selected peer-reviewed litera-
ture. Water Res. 67, 187e202.
Lundie, S., Peters, G.M., Beavis, P.C., 2004. Life cycle assessment for sustainable
metropolitan water systems planning. Environ. Sci. Technol. 38, 3465e3473.
Ma
n
~ ez, K.S., Husain, S., Ferse, S.C.A., Costa, M.M., 2012. Water scarcity in the
Spermonde Archipelago, Sulawesi, Indonesia: past, present and future. Environ.
Sci. Policy 23, 74e84.
McCarty, P.L., Bae, J., Kim, J., 2011. Domestic wastewater treatment as a net energy
producerecan this be achieved? Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, 7100e7106.
Meneses, M., Pasqualino, J.C., Castells, F., 2010. Environmental assessment of urban
wastewater reuse: treatment alternatives and applications. Chemosphere 81,
266e272.
Mo, W., Zhang, Q., 2013. Energyenutrientsewater nexus: integrated resource re-
covery in municipal wastewater treatment plants. J. Environ. Manage 127,
255e267.
Mohee, R., Mauthoor, S., Bundhoo, Z.M.A., Somaroo, G., Soobhany, N., Gunasee, S.,
2015. Current status of solid waste management in small island developing
states: a review. Waste Manage 43, 539e549.
Mun ~ oz, I., Rodríguez, A., Rosal, R., Fern

andez-Alba, A.R., 2009. Life cycle assessment
of urban wastewater reuse with ozonation as tertiary treatment: a focus on
toxicity-related impacts. Sci. Total Environ. 407, 1245e1256.
Murray, A., Horvath, A., Nelson, K.L., 2008. Hybrid life-cycle environmental and cost
inventory of sewage sludge treatment and end-use scenarios: a case study from
China. Environ. Sci. Technol. 42, 3163e3169.
Naamane, S., Rais, Z., Taleb, M., 2016. The effectiveness of the incineration of sewage
sludge on the evolution of physicochemical and mechanical properties of
Portland cement. Constr. Build. Mater. 112, 783e789.
NOAA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2014. National Centers
for Environmental Information. Asheville, North Carolina, Unites States. Avail-
able at: www.ncei.noaa.gov/ (Accessed 10 December 2016).
NTN, National Toxics Network Inc, 2009. The Heavy Oil Power Deal a Dark Cloud
over East Timor's Bright Future. Bangalow, Australian. Available at: www.
laohamutuk.org/Oil/Power/NTNHeavyOilMar09.pdf (Accessed 10 December
2016).
Opher, T., Friedler, E., 2016. Comparative LCA of decentralized wastewater treatment
alternatives for non-potable urban reuse. J. Environ. Manage 182, 464e476.
Pasqualino, J.C., Meneses, M., Abella, M., Castells, F., 2009. LCA as a decision support
tool for the environmental improvement of the operation of a municipal
wastewater treatment plant. Environ. Sci. Technol. 43, 3300e3307.
Pasqualino, J.C., Meneses, M., Castells, F., 2011. Life cycle assessment of urban
wastewater reclamation and reuse alternatives. J. Ind. Ecol. 15, 49e63.
Polido, A., Joa ~o, E., Ramos, T.B., 2014a. Sustainability approaches and strategic
environmental assessment in small islands: an integrative review. Ocean. Coast
Manage. 96, 138e148.
Polido, A., Jo~ ao, E., Ramos, T.B., 2014b. Sustainability approaches and strategic
environmental assessment in small islands: an integrative review. Ocean. Coast.
Manage 96, 138e148.
Remy, C., Lesjean, B., Waschnewski, J., 2013. Identifying energy and carbon footprint
optimization potentials of a sludge treatment line with Life Cycle Assessment.
Water Sci. Technol. 67, 63e73.
Renou, S., Thomas, J.S., Aoustin, E., Pons, M.N., 2008. Influence of impact assessment
methods in wastewater treatment LCA. J. Clean. Prod. 16, 1098e1105.
Renzoni, R., Germain, A., 2007. Life cycle assessment of water: from the pumping
station to the wastewater treatment plant (9 pp). Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 12,
378 H.-Y. Shiu et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 152 (2017) 369e378
118e126.
Rodriguez-Garcia, G., Molinos-Senante, M., Hospido, A., Herna
ndez-Sancho, F.,
Moreira, M.T., Feijoo, G., 2011. Environmental and economic profile of six ty-
pologies of wastewater treatment plants. Water Res. 45, 5997e6010.
Santoyo-Castelazo, E., Gujba, H., Azapagic, A., 2011. Life cycle assessment of elec-
tricity generation in Mexico. Energy 36, 1488e1499.
Singh, P., Kansal, A., 2016. Energy and GHG accounting for wastewater infrastruc-
ture. Resour. Conserv. Recy. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.07.014 (in
press).
Sleeswijk, A.W., van Oers, L.F.C.M., Guine
e, J.B., Struijs, J., Huijbregts, M.A.J., 2008.
Normalisation in product life cycle assessment: an LCA of the global and eu-
ropean economic systems in the year 2000. Sci. Total Environ. 390, 227e240.
UNEP, United Nations Environment Programme, 2012. Integrated Water Resources
Management Planning Approach for Small Island Developing States. UNEP,
Nairobi, Kenya. Available at: apps.unep.org/redirect.php?file¼/publications/
pmtdocuments//pdf/sids.pdf (Accessed 10 December 2016).
Valderrama, C., Granados, R., Cortina, J.L., Gasol, C.M., Guillem, M., Josa, A., 2013.
Comparative LCA of sewage sludge valorisation as both fuel and raw material
substitutes in clinker production. J. Clean. Prod. 51, 205e213.
van der Hoek, J.P., de Fooij, H., Struker, A., 2016. Wastewater as a resource: strategies
to recover resources from Amsterdam's wastewater. Resour. Conserv. Recy 113,
53e64.
Venkatesh, G., Brattebo, H., 2011. Environmental impact analysis of chemicals and
energy consumption in wastewater treatment plants: case study of Oslo. Nor.
Water Sci. Technol. 63, 1018e1031.
Wakeel, M., Chen, B., Hayat, T., Alsaedi, A., Ahmad, B., 2016. Energy consumption for
water use cycles in different countries: a review. Appl. Energ 178, 868e885.
Wang, H., Yang, Y., Keller, A.A., Li, X., Feng, S., Dong, Y.N., et al., 2016. Comparative
analysis of energy intensity and carbon emissions in wastewater treatment in
USA, Germany. China South Afr. Appl. Energ 184, 873e881.
WRA, Water Resources Agency, 2009. The Planning and Demonstration Project for
Reclaimed Water in Kinmen. Taipei, Taiwan.
Xu, C., Chen, W., Hong, J., 2014. Life-cycle environmental and economic assessment
of sewage sludge treatment in China. J. Clean. Prod. 67, 79e87.
Yang, Y., Yang, J., Zuo, J., Li, Y., He, S., Yang, X., et al., 2011. Study on two operating
conditions of a full-scale oxidation ditch for optimization of energy consump-
tion and effluent quality by using CFD model. Water Res. 45, 3439e3452.
You, S., Wang, W., Dai, Y., Tong, Y.W., Wang, C.H., 2016. Comparison of the co-
gasification of sewage sludge and food wastes and cost-benefit analysis of
gasification- and incineration-based waste treatment schemes. Bioresour.
Technol. 218, 595e605.
Zhang, Q.H., Wang, X.C., Xiong, J.Q., Chen, R., Cao, B., 2010. Application of life cycle
assessment for an evaluation of wastewater treatment and reuse project e case
study of Xi’an, China. Bioresour. Technol. 101, 1421e1425.