Life cycle assessment of mGO-NH2 nano-adsorbent disposal methods used for the removal of mercury ions from aqueous solutions

Document Type : Research/Original/Regular Article

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Department of Natural Ecosystems, Hamoun International Wetland Research Institute, Research Institute of Zabol, Zabol, Sistan and Baluchestan, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Fisheries and Environmental Sciences, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Gorgan, Iran

3 Assistant Professor, Department of Environment, Faculty of Natural Resources, University of Zabol, Zabol, Sistan and Baluchestan, Iran

Abstract

Introduction
Heavy metals have posed significant threats to aquatic organisms and human health globally. Mercury (Hg (II)) is of particular concern due to its persistence and harmful environmental properties. Different physical and chemical separation approaches have been proposed to remove Hg (II) ions from water and wastewater. Regarding the available adsorbents for the adsorption of toxic metal ions, nano-adsorbents are preferred due to their high adsorption capacity, low waste production, and simplicity in design and operation. Among nano-adsorbents, functionalized graphene oxide (GO) is the most applicable and widely used adsorbent for removing metal ions from aqueous solutions. Meanwhile, the use of GO is an emerging technology and is in the early stages of development and the environmental assessment of its application and disposal requires focused attention. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is an effective method for estimating the environmental impacts associated with the life cycle of a product or process from the early stage of production to its final disposal. Hence, the LCA of mGO-NH2 disposal, utilized for Hg (II) removal, was investigated in two scenarios including: desorption and landfill.
 
Materials and Methods
The LCA of mGO-NH2 disposal was evaluated based on ISO 14040:2006 standard, considering a functional unit of one kg of mGO-NH2 nano-adsorbent for mercury removal. The system boundary was based on two disposal scenarios including desorption and landfill from gate to grave. HCl, HNO3, and H2SO4 were utilized for the mercury desorption using mGO-NH2 nano-adsorbent to determine the efficient one. On the other hand, the ReCiPe (H) 2016 midpoint and endpoint methods were applied to assess the environmental impacts of mGO-NH2 nano-adsorbent disposal using SimaPro 9.5.5.0 and the Ecoinvent 3.4 datasets. The 18 midpoint impact categories were summarized into endpoint indicators such as damage to human health, ecosystem, and resources categories. Meanwhile, the life cycle inventory was provided from experimental studies, and SimaPro databases. Moreover, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions during the disposal process were evaluated by greenhouse gas protocol (GGP). The GHG release was monitored from fossil fuel, biogenic, and land transformation. The energy flow was assessed in six impact categories including non-renewable fossil fuel, nuclear, biomass as well as renewable biomass, wind solar, and water resources using cumulative energy demand (CED). In addition, the ecological footprint (EF) of the disposal process was appraised in CO2, nuclear, and land occupation categories.
 
Results and discussion
Comparing the two disposal scenarios, the environmental impacts of the desorption scenario were significantly higher than the landfill scenario whereas the landfill scenario showed higher non-carcinogenic toxicity (9.29 kg 1, 4-DCB) than the desorption process with a value of 6.29 kg 1,4-DCB. Evaluation of contributed parameters and processes in the environmental impact categories for the desorption scenario illustrated the significant role of electricity consumption. Since electricity is produced from diesel and oil fuel in Iran, it intensifies the environmental burdens, especially global warming. Due to the substantial electricity required for nano-adsorbent synthesis and desorption, it increased the considered impacts compared to the landfill scenario. Therefore, the electricity consumption during desorption process can be optimized by reducing the reaction time without altering the nano-adsorbent characteristics and its performance. The utilization of renewable energy sources in electricity generation can also reduce pollutant emissions. The assessment of endpoint impacts of nano-adsorbent disposal revealed notable effects of the desorption scenario on human health, ecosystems, and resources. The results of CED also indicated the highest share of fossil fuels with 94.29% and 90.50% contributions to desorption and landfill scenarios, respectively. Meanwhile, the GGP index demonstrated a higher contribution of the desorption scenario to global warming potential, which was attributed to fossil fuel combustion. The amount of CO2 release, land occupation, and nuclear energy derived from the ecological footprint analysis elucidated a much lower ecological footprint of the landfill scenario compared to the desorption scenario.
 
Conclusion
The environmental impacts of the mGO-NH2 nano-adsorbent disposal used for the removal of Hg (II) ions were investigated to choose the appropriate method within desorption and landfill scenarios using LCA. The comparison of two mGO-NH2 disposal scenarios indicated that the landfill scenario incurred lower environmental impacts compared to the desorption scenario. Evaluation of the midpoint and endpoint impacts, CED, GGP, and EF highlighted the high environmental burdens of the desorption scenario concerning electricity consumption. Moreover, the application of the landfill process can be restricted due to the lack of available land. On the other hand, due to the high cost of mGO-NH2 synthesis and also its suitable potential in Hg (II) ions removal, the possibility of mGO-NH2 desorption and reuse can reduce the environmental burdens compared to re-synthesis. Furthermore, for desorption of mGO-NH2 nano-adsorbent on an industrial scale, electricity consumption should be optimized and supplied by renewable energy sources.

Keywords

Main Subjects


Abyar, H. (2022). Life cycle assessment of wastewater treatment systems: Challenges and approaches. Environmental Resources Research, 10(1), 41-50. doi:10.22069/IJERR.2022.6030
Ahmad, T., & Thaheem, M.J. (2022). LCIA parameters and the role of BIM towards sustainability. Regional and Temporal Trends Buildings, 12(5), 700. doi:10.3390/buildings12050700
Akhter, F., Zoppas, F.M., Soomro, M., Jatoi, A.S., Noureen, F., Akhtar, M.N., & Mehreen, F. (2023). Carbon-based sorbets for heavy metal removal from aqueous solution, discrepancies, and future prospects: A state-of-the-art review. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery, 13(12), 10343-10359. doi:10.1007/s13399-021-01866-3
Awad, F.S., AbouZied, K.M., Abou El-Maaty, WM., El-Wakil, A.M., & El-Shall, M.S. (2020). Effective removal of mercury (II) from aqueous solutions by chemically modified graphene oxide nanosheets. Arabian Journal of Chemistry, 13(1), 2659-70. doi:10.1016/j.arabjc.2018.06.018
Bychko, I., Abakumov, A., Didenko, O., Chen, M., Tang, J., & Strizhak, P. (2022). Differences in the structure and functionalities of graphene oxide and reduced graphene oxide obtained from graphite with various degrees of graphitization. Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids, 164, 110614. doi:10.1016/j.jpcs.2022.110614
Cossutta, M., Vretenar, V., Centeno, T.A., Kotrusz, P., McKechnie, J., & Pickering, S.J. (2020). A comparative life cycle assessment of graphene and activated carbon in a supercapacitor application. Journal of Cleaner Production, 242, 118468. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118468
Dias, M., Pinto, J., Henriques, B., Figueira, P., Fabre, E., Tavares, D., & Pereira, E. (2021). Nutshells as efficient biosorbents to remove cadmium, lead, and mercury from contaminated solutions. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(4), 1580. doi:10.3390/ijerph18041580
Dos Santos, C.R., Lebron, Y.A.R., Moreira, V.R., Koch, K., & Amaral, M.C.S. (2022). Biodegradability, environmental risk assessment and ecological footprint in wastewater technologies for pharmaceutically active compounds removal. Bioresource Technology, 343, 126150. doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2021.126150
Dubsok, A., Khamdahsag, P., & Kittipongvises, S. (2022). Life cycle environmental impact assessment of cyanate removal in mine tailing’s wastewater by nano-TiO2/FeCl3 photocatalysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 366, 132928. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132928
Einollahipeer, F., Bahramifar, N., & Younesi, H. (2018). Removal of Cd (II), Pb (II) and Cu (II) ions from aqueous solution by polyamidoamine dendrimer grafted magnetic graphene oxide nanosheets. Journal of Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers, 87, 225-240. doi:10.1016/j.jtice.2018.03.039
Emenike, E.C., Adeniyi, A.G., Iwuozor, K.O., Okorie, C.J., Egbemhenghe, A.U., Omuku, P. E., & Saliu, O.D. (2023). A critical review on the removal of mercury (Hg2+) from aqueous solution using nanoadsorbents. Environmental Nanotechnology, Monitoring & Management, 20, 100806. doi:10.1016/j.enmm.2023.100816
Gao, C., Zhu, S., An, N., Na, H., You, H., & Gao, C. (2021). Comprehensive comparison of multiple renewable power generation methods: A combination analysis of life cycle assessment and ecological footprint. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 147, 111255. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2021.111255
Gonzalez, M.N.G., Quiroga-Flores, R., & Börjesson, P. (2022). Life cycle assessment of a nanomaterial-based adsorbent developed on lab scale for cadmium removal: Comparison of the impacts of production, use and recycling. Cleaner Environmental Systems, 4, 100071. doi:10.1016/j.cesys.2022.100071
Ijuin, H., Yamada, S., Yamada, T., Takanokura, M., & Matsui, M. (2022). Solar energy demand-to-supply management by the on-demand cumulative-control method: Case of a childcare facility in Tokyo. Energies, 15(13), 4608. doi:10.3390/en15134608
Iran Statistical Year Book, Statistical Center of Iran, Tehran, Iran 583 (2013) 19.
Kalkal, A., Pradhan, R., & Packirisamy, G. (2023). Gold nanoparticles modified reduced graphene oxide nanosheets based dual-quencher for highly sensitive detection of carcinoembryonic antigen. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 125157. doi:10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2023.125157
Kazemi, A., Bahramifar, N., Heydari, A., & Olsen, S.I. (2019). Synthesis and sustainable assessment of thiol-functionalization of magnetic graphene oxide and superparamagnetic Fe3O4@ SiO2 for Hg (II) removal from aqueous solution and petrochemical wastewater. Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers, 95, 78-93. doi:10.1016/j.jtice.2018.10.002
Lamnatou, C., Ezcurra-Ciaurriz, X., Chemisana, D., & Plà-Aragonés, L.M. (2022). Life cycle assessment (LCA) of a food-production system in Spain: Iberian ham based on an extensive system. Science of The Total Environment, 808, 151900. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.151900
Liang, X., Dang, W., Yang, G., & Zhang, Y. (2023). Environmental feasibility evaluation of cement co-production using classified domestic waste as alternative raw material and fuel: A life cycle perspective. Journal of Environmental Management, 326, 116726. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116726
Marashli, A., Gasaymeh, A., & Shalby, M. (2022). Comparing the global warming impact from wind, solar energy and other electricity generating systems through life cycle assessment methods (a survey). International Journal of Renewable Energy Research, 12(2), 899-920.
Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pörtner, H.O., Roberts, D., Skea, J., & Shukla, P.R. (2022). Global Warming of 1.5 C: IPCC special report on impacts of global warming of 1.5 C above pre-industrial levels in context of strengthening response to climate change. Sustainable Development, and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty. Cambridge University Press. 632 pages. doi:10.1017/9781009157940
Meng, Z., Bai, X., & Tang, X. (2022). Short-term assessment of heavy metals in surface water from xiaohe river irrigation area, China: levels, sources and distribution. Water, 14(8), 1273. doi:10.3390/w14081273
Middlemas, S., Fang, Z.Z., & Fan, P. (2015). Life cycle assessment comparison of emerging and traditional Titanium dioxide manufacturing processes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 89, 137147. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.019
Nowrouzi, M., Abyar, H., Younesi, H., & Khaki, E. (2019). Life cycle environmental and economic assessment of highly efficient carbon-based CO2 adsorbents: A comparative study. Journal of CO2 Utilization, 47, 101491. doi:10.1016/j.jcou.2021.101491
Oblitas-Romero, A.M., Pérez-Diaz, A.N., & Ocaña-Zúñiga, C.L. (2023). Application of the Greenhouse Gas Protocol (GHG Protocol) and the ISO 14064-1: 2006 standard for the estimation of the carbon footprint at the National University of Jaen in 2021. Dyna, 90(226), 90-97. doi:10.15446/dyna.v90n226.106038
Paraschiv, S., & Paraschiv, L.S. (2020). Trends of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from fossil fuels combustion (coal, gas and oil) in the EU member states from 1960 to 2018. Energy Reports, 6, 237-242. doi:10.1016/j.egyr.2020.11.116
Piotrowska, K., Kruszelinka, W., Baldowska, P., Kansner, P., Rudeniski, J., Tomporowski, A., Filzikowski, J., & Opielak, M. (2019). Assessment of the environmentl impact of a car tire throughout its lifecycle using the LCA method. Materials, 12 (24), 4177. doi:10.3390/ma12244177
Piscopo, M., Notariale, R., Tortora, F., Lettieri, G., Palumbo, G., & Manna, C. (2020). Novel insights into mercury effects on hemoglobin and membrane proteins in human erythrocytes. Molecules, 25(14), 3278. doi:10.3390/molecules25143278
Rizk, R., Juzsakova, T., Ali, M.B., Rawash, M.A., Domokos, E., Hedfi, A., & Rédey, Á. (2022). Comprehensive environmental assessment of heavy metal contamination of surface water, sediments and Nile Tilapia in Lake Nasser, Egypt. Journal of King Saud University-Science, 34(1), 101748. doi:10.1016/j.jksus.2021.101748
Rosa, R., Paradisi, E., Lassinantti Gualtieri, M., Mugoni, C., Cappucci, G.M., Ruini, C., Paolo, N., & Ferrari, A.M. (2023). Life cycle impact assessment of solution combustion synthesis of titanium dioxide nanoparticles and its comparison with more conventional strategies. Chemistry Sustainability Chemistry, 16(8), e202202196. doi:10.1002/cssc.202202196
Samani, P. (2023). Synergies and gaps between circularity assessment and life cycle assessment (LCA). Science of the Total Environment, 166611. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.166611
Sanyé-Mengual, E., Valente, A., Biganzoli, F., Dorber, M., Verones, F., Marques, A., & Sala, S. (2022). Linking inventories and impact assessment models for addressing biodiversity impacts: mapping rules and challenges. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 27(6), 813-833. doi:10.1007/s11367-022-02049-6
Shahraki, H., Einollahipeer, F., Abyar, H., & Erfani, M. (2023). Assessing environmental impacts of copper cathode production based on life cycle assessment. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 20(4), 1180-1190. doi:10.1002/ieam.4857
Tahoon, M.A., Siddeeg, S.M., Salem Alsaiari, N., Mnif, W., & Ben Rebah, F. (2020). Effective heavy metals removal from water using nanomaterials: A review. Processes, 8(6), 645. doi:10.3390/pr8060645
Vieira, D.R., Calmon, J.L., & Coelho, F.Z. (2016). Life cycle assessment (LCA) applied to the manufacturing of common and ecological concrete: A review. Construction and Building Materials, 124, 656-666. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.07.125
Volodya, E., Yeo, M.J., & Kim, Y.P. (2018). Trends of ecological footprints and policy direction for sustainable development in Mongolia: a case study. Sustainability, 10(11), 4026. doi:10.3390/su10114026
Wang, Y., Zhou, R., Wang, C., Zhou, G., Hua, C., Cao, Y., & Song, Z. (2020). Novel environmental-friendly nano-composite magnetic attapulgite functionalized by chitosan and EDTA for cadmium (II) removal. Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 817, 153286. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2019.153286
Wenlong, Z., Nawaz, M.A., Sibghatullah, A., Ullah, S.E., Chupradit, S., & Minh Hieu, V. (2023). Impact of coal rents, transportation, electricity consumption, and economic globalization on ecological footprint in the USA. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(15), 43040-43055. doi:10.1007/s11356-022-20431-7
Zahmatkesh, S., Hajiaghaei-Keshteli, M., Bokhari, A., Sundaramurthy, S., Panneerselvam, B., & Rezakhani, Y. (2023). Wastewater treatment with nanomaterials for the future: A state-of-the-art review. Environmental Research, 216(3), 114652. doi:10.1016/j.envres.2022.114652
Zhang, L., Shen, Q., Pang, C.H., Chao, W., Tong, S., Kow, K.W., & Wei, W. (2023). Life cycle assessment of bio-fermentation ethanol production and its influence in China's steeling industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 397, 136492. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136492
Zhao, H., Zhang, D., Sun, H., Zhao, Y., & Xie, M. (2022). Adsorption and detection of heavy metals from aqueous water by PVDF/ATP-CDs composite membrane. Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects, 641, 128573. doi:10.1016/j.colsurfa.2022.128573