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. Sign in to save

Environmental Performance of Chlorella sp.-Based Phytoremediation Across Multiple Wastewater Scenarios: A Comparative Life Cycle Assessment

Environments 2026 Score: 50 ? 0–100 AI score estimating relevance to the microplastics field. Papers below 30 are filtered from public browse.
Antonio Zuorro, Antonio Zuorro, Janet B. García-Martínez, Antonio Zuorro, Laura T. Ríos Niño, Lizeth N. Saavedra Gómez, Crisóstomo Barajas-Ferreira, Janet B. García-Martínez, Andrés F. Barajas-Solano Antonio Zuorro, Andrés F. Barajas-Solano

Summary

Scientists compared three different ways to clean dirty water, including two methods that use tiny algae called Chlorella. All three methods had similar impacts on climate change, but the algae-based system for homes was better at preventing harmful chemicals from building up in freshwater. This matters because finding cleaner, more sustainable ways to treat wastewater could help protect our drinking water sources and reduce pollution in rivers and lakes.

This study assesses the environmental performance of three wastewater treatment setups through an attributional, gate-to-gate life cycle assessment (functional unit: 1 m3 of treated wastewater): (Sc1) a traditional municipal wastewater treatment plant, (Sc2) an aquaculture recirculation system using microalgae, and (Sc3) a domestic system combining UASB pretreatment with microalgae polishing. Inventory data were analyzed in SimaPro with ReCiPe 2016 Midpoint (Hierarchist) across seven effect categories. Robustness was tested through sensitivity analyses (±20%) of power consumption and influent characteristics, as well as an additional scenario exploring the offset of methane-recovery electricity. The global warming impact remained consistent across scenarios, ranging from 60.5 to 65.1 kg CO2-eq·m−3, indicating no significant difference within the operational parameters. In most categories, power consumption and influent-related burdens were the main contributors, while the impacts from flocculants and microalgae inoculum were minimal. Sc3 showed a lower freshwater eutrophication potential compared to Sc1 and Sc2 (0.028 vs. approximately 0.049 kg P-eq·m−3). Normalization highlighted human carcinogenic toxicity and aquatic ecotoxicity as key impact categories. The methane-offset scenario caused only slight changes at low CH4 outputs, suggesting that energy recovery depends on context.

Sign in to start a discussion.

Share this paper