0
Article ? AI-assigned paper type based on the abstract. Classification may not be perfect — flag errors using the feedback button. Tier 2 ? Original research — experimental, observational, or case-control study. Direct primary evidence. Environmental Sources Policy & Risk Sign in to save

The role of grey water footprint in urban wastewater management: from pollution to reuse

Environmental Science and Pollution Research 2025 2 citations ? Citation count from OpenAlex, updated daily. May differ slightly from the publisher's own count.
Andrea Zanolla, Alessandro Moretti, Daniele Goi

Summary

This study evaluated grey water footprint as a qualitative indicator of wastewater impact using eight years of real data from a municipal treatment plant and its receiving water body, demonstrating its utility for tracking wastewater management effectiveness over time.

Study Type Environmental

The grey water footprint (WF), defined as the volume of freshwater required to dilute pollutants below ambient water quality standards, has gained increasing relevance as a qualitative indicator of wastewater impact on receiving water bodies (RWB). This study evaluates the WF using real data from a municipal wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) and its associated RWB over an eight-year period (2016-2023). A wide range of pollutants were considered, including organic compounds, solids, nutrients, and heavy metals. The analysis considered three scenarios: (a) untreated wastewater discharge, (b) treated effluent discharge, and (c) treated wastewater reuse for agricultural purposes. Results indicate that the WWTP significantly reduces pollutant loads, with scenario (b) showing an average 8-fold decrease in WF compared to scenario (a). Ammonium (in scenario (a)) and phosphorus (in scenario (b)) emerged as the primary contributors to WF, highlighting the limited phosphorus removal due to the absence of dedicated chemical or biological treatments. Lead was found to be the most impactful heavy metal in several instances, underlining the importance of monitoring low-concentrated contaminants. Ammonium and total nitrogen showed the highest removal efficiency, whereas phosphorus removal was relatively inefficient, reinforcing the need for future plant upgrades. Furthermore, the reuse scenario (c) demonstrated the potential of nutrient-rich treated effluent for irrigation, particularly during dry summer months, offering dual benefits of pollution reduction and resource recovery. Overall, WF proved to be a robust and accessible indicator for evaluating WWTP performance, identifying critical pollutants, guiding plant optimization, and supporting sustainable discharge and reuse strategies. Future developments should expand monitoring to emerging contaminants such as pharmaceuticals, pesticides, microplastics, and additional heavy metals to ensure comprehensive environmental protection.

Share this paper