Grantee Research Project Results
Final Report: Prevention of Pharmaceutical Water Pollution by Urine Source Separation and Treatment
EPA Grant Number: SU835719Title: Prevention of Pharmaceutical Water Pollution by Urine Source Separation and Treatment
Investigators: Boyer, Treavor H. , Landry, Kelly , Ishii, Stephanie , Saetta, Daniella , Pandorf, Madelyn , Solanki, Avni
Institution: University of Florida
EPA Project Officer: Hahn, Intaek
Phase: I
Project Period: August 15, 2014 through August 14, 2015
Project Amount: $15,000
RFA: P3 Awards: A National Student Design Competition for Sustainability Focusing on People, Prosperity and the Planet (2014) RFA Text | Recipients Lists
Research Category: Pollution Prevention/Sustainable Development , P3 Challenge Area - Sustainable and Healthy Communities , P3 Challenge Area - Safe and Sustainable Water Resources , P3 Awards , Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Objective:
To ensure the safety of using urine as a fertilizer, it must be free of contaminants such as pharmaceuticals; therefore, the goal of this project was to investigate the use of low cost materials, biochar, for pharmaceutical removal, P recovery, and N recovery from source-separated urine. The project consisted of three objectives: (1) evaluate different sources of biochar for pharmaceutical separation and nutrient recovery from urine; (2) identify the life cycle impacts of using nutrients recovered from urine as fertilizer; and (3) evaluate innovative learning approaches for generating excitement and improving understanding of sustainable wastewater management. Research Objective 1 was focused on conducting batch equilibrium experiments for diclofenac and naproxen removal from urine using bamboo, coconut, southern yellow pine, and northern hardwood biochars. Research Objective 2 followed life cycle assessment methodology. Research Objective 3 included education and outreach activities, such as college classes and high impact social media.
Summary/Accomplishments (Outputs/Outcomes):
New knowledge of pharmaceutical, P, and N adsorption onto biochar from urine was attained through batch experiments. Batch equilibrium studies were conducted using five different sources of biochar at two doses. The batch experiments confirmed that biochar can remove pharmaceuticals from urine with minimal co-removal of nutrients. For example, it was found that high removal of pharmaceuticals (>95%) can be achieved in synthetic urine, thus producing a contaminant-free, nutrient-rich solution. The biochars were compared to an activated biochar in order to distinguish between the different production methods. All anticipated outputs from Objective 1 were met.
All anticipated outputs for Objectives 2 and 3 were attained. New knowledge was generated for life cycle impacts of urine treatment considering nutrient recovery and commercial fertilizer production. Objective 3 was addressed through the education and participation of college school students and through the use of multiple social media tools such as Twitter and Instagram. This allowed for a broad audience to better understand and appreciate novel approaches to wastewater management.
Conclusions:
Urine source separation has implications for both developing and developed countries. Batch equilibrium studies with biochar as the adsorbent acted as the treatment framework for urine diversion infrastructure. In the context of developed countries, the proposed treatment system was based on the implementation of urine source separation and treatment in residence halls at the University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. Collecting urine using urine-diverting toilets was the main method as these toilets would minimize dilution of urine and have significant potable water savings due to a decreased flush water volume relative to conventional toilets. A streamlined life cycle cost analysis was developed taking into account new urine-diverting toilet infrastructure, biochar for pharmaceutical removal, and nutrient reuse as a fertilizer. The total net cost associated with the new urine source separation system is $5,260/y. Using the new urine diverting toilets, 83,828 L/y of potable-quality water could be conserved and $39,892 is offset as a result of conserved flush water. Moreover, due to the nutrient-rich composition of urine, the fertilizer value associated with P and N in urine is $1,247 and $6,487, respectively. By treating the urine from the University of Florida residence halls separately from the conventional wastewater treatment plant, less energy is used at the wastewater treatment plant (an economic and environmental benefit) and the wastewater treatment plant capacity is increased (an economic benefit). Also, nutrient and pharmaceutical loadings into the environment with treated wastewater effluent are reduced (a social and environmental benefit).
The implementation of source-separated urine in developing countries can yield substantial benefits in terms of the fertilizer product formed and resulting increase in crop yields. As in many developing countries, there is lack of access to commercial fertilizer which has both economic and social ramifications. A cost analysis on installing 100 urine-diverting toilets in South Africa was developed from a previous case study. The capital costs for this system would be $30,710, however, 1,612 kg of nitrogen could be recovered annually. As most crops have a high demand for nitrogen, collected urine could be applied for up to 49 hectares of land per year, depending on the crop. An inherent benefit of using urine as a fertilizer is the marked increase in crop yield (up to 25× higher yield) as opposed to crops grown with no fertilizer. Using urine as a fertilizer for agriculture would allow members of the community to have a steady source of income. The economic break point for the new urine diversion infrastructure and pay back associated to crop yield could occur in as little as 2 months. Treating urine in a small developing country community could result in increased sanitation, increased crop yield, and reduction in nutrient and pharmaceutical loading to the environment which has health, environmental, economic, and social benefits.
Fig. ES1 – Conventional wastewater treatment vs. urine source-separation and treatment: Impacts on people, prosperity, and planet.
Journal Articles on this Report : 1 Displayed | Download in RIS Format
| Other project views: | All 1 publications | 1 publications in selected types | All 1 journal articles |
|---|
| Type | Citation | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Boyer T, Saetta D. Opportunities for Building-Scale Urine Diversion and Challenges for Implementation. ACCOUNTS OF CHEMICAL RESEARCH 2019;52(4):886-895. |
SU835719 (Final) SU835326 (Final) |
Exit |
Supplemental Keywords:
fertilizer, biochar, nitrogen, phosphorus, pharmaceuticals, wastewater treatment.Relevant Websites:
Dr. Boyer's Water Research Group Twitter Exit
Dr. Boyer's Water Research Group Instagram Exit
Rich Earth Institute Website Exit
The perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.