Life Cycle Assessment of Industrial Wastewater Treatment Trains

Abstract Alternative technologies to granular activated carbon (GAC) are of interest to improve the sustainability and reduce the cost of munitions wastewater treatment. Research efforts have highlighted GAC alternatives, yet few reports of environmental and economic impacts associated with these technologies are available. Herein, a life cycle assessment (LCA) aids in assessment of environmental impacts associated with six munitions wastewater treatment configurations—specifically GAC, compared to five configurations that include combinations of ion exchange (IX), reverse osmosis (RO), aerobic granular reactors (AGR), UV/H 2 O 2 , and ozone technologies. The LCA compares environmental impacts generated by treating 1 m 3 of munitions wastewater, impacts by life cycle stage, and effects of IX, RO, and GAC replacement frequency. Results show that IX resin pairs with AGR (for flow‐through treatment) and ozone (for IX regenerant treatment) generated 22 ± 18% less impact than GAC in nine of ten environmental impact categories during production, transportation, and disposal. Treatment trains with ozone or AGR produce 35% less environmental impact than those with UV/H 2 O 2 . Production and use stages generate more environmental impacts than transportation and disposal stages for most treatment technologies. This LCA provides insights into the sustainability of six munition wastewater treatment technologies and identifies areas where treatment sustainability can be improved.