Environmental and socio-economic evaluation of a groundwater bioremediation technology using social Cost-Benefit Analysis: Application to an in-situ metal(loid) precipitation case study

Bioremediation can be an alternative or complementary approach to conventional soil and water treatment technologies. Determining the environmental and socio-economic impacts of bioremediation is important but rarely addressed. This work presents a comprehensive sustainability assessment for a specific groundwater bioremediation case study based on In-situ Metal(loid) Precipitation (ISMP) by conducting a social Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) using two different approaches: environmental Life Cycle Costing (eLCC) and Impact Pathway Approach (IPA). Externalities are calculated in two ways: i) using Environmental Prices (EP) to monetize Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) results and metal(loid)s removed at field scale, and ii) following the IPA steps to determine the social costs avoided by removing arsenic contamination at full scale. The results show that, in the baseline scenario, the project is not socio-economically viable in both cases as the Net Present Value (NPV) is -129,512.61 € and - 415,185,140 € respectively. Sensitivity and scenario analyses are performed to identify the key parameters and actions needed to reach a positive NPV. For instance, increasing the amount of water treated per year to 90 m<sup>3</sup> and assuming a 20 % increase in operation costs and a 60 % increase in construction costs can make the project socio-economically viable at the field scale, while a reduction in the social discount rate from a 4 % to a 2 % can lead to a positive NPV at the full scale. The approaches proposed in this work may be useful for practitioners and policymakers when evaluating the environmental and socio-economic impacts of bioremediation technologies at different scales and regions, as well as human health impacts caused by contaminants at the current legal limits.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Science of The Total Environment
Published
2024-10-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.176720
Citations
11
Primary Topic
Wastewater Treatment and Reuse
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.23

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Environmental and socio-economic evaluation of a groundwater bioremediation technology using social Cost-Benefit Analysis: Application to an in-situ metal(loid) precipitation case study

Mario Santiago-Herrera, Sonia Martel-Martín, Alfredo Pérez‐de‐Mora, Jesús Ibáñez et al.
11 citations
The Science of The Total Environment
Wastewater Treatment and Reuse
3.23
article

Environmental and socio-economic evaluation of a groundwater bioremediation technology using social Cost-Benefit Analysis: Application to an in-situ metal(loid) precipitation case study

Mario Santiago-Herrera, Sonia Martel-Martín, Alfredo Pérez‐de‐Mora, Jesús Ibáñez, Rocío Barros, Benjamine Belloncle, Herwig de Wilde, David Blanco-Alcántara
article en
11 citations

Abstract

Bioremediation can be an alternative or complementary approach to conventional soil and water treatment technologies. Determining the environmental and socio-economic impacts of bioremediation is important but rarely addressed. This work presents a comprehensive sustainability assessment for a specific groundwater bioremediation case study based on In-situ Metal(loid) Precipitation (ISMP) by conducting a social Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) using two different approaches: environmental Life Cycle Costing (eLCC) and Impact Pathway Approach (IPA). Externalities are calculated in two ways: i) using Environmental Prices (EP) to monetize Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) results and metal(loid)s removed at field scale, and ii) following the IPA steps to determine the social costs avoided by removing arsenic contamination at full scale. The results show that, in the baseline scenario, the project is not socio-economically viable in both cases as the Net Present Value (NPV) is -129,512.61 € and - 415,185,140 € respectively. Sensitivity and scenario analyses are performed to identify the key parameters and actions needed to reach a positive NPV. For instance, increasing the amount of water treated per year to 90 m<sup>3</sup> and assuming a 20 % increase in operation costs and a 60 % increase in construction costs can make the project socio-economically viable at the field scale, while a reduction in the social discount rate from a 4 % to a 2 % can lead to a positive NPV at the full scale. The approaches proposed in this work may be useful for practitioners and policymakers when evaluating the environmental and socio-economic impacts of bioremediation technologies at different scales and regions, as well as human health impacts caused by contaminants at the current legal limits.

The Science of The Total EnvironmentVol. 954
Materia Nova (BE), Universidad de Burgos (ES)
European Commission, European Research Council
Clean water and sanitation
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Wastewater Treatment and Reuse
3.23
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.