volume 324 pages 116356

Comparative life cycle assessment of activated carbon production from various raw materials

Anna Vilén 1
Panu Laurell 1, 2
Riku Vahala 1
Publication typeJournal Article
Publication date2022-12-01
scimago Q1
wos Q1
SJR1.994
CiteScore14.4
Impact factor8.4
ISSN03014797, 10958630
General Medicine
Environmental Engineering
Waste Management and Disposal
Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
Abstract
Activated carbon (AC) is an effective adsorbent in water treatment but its production method has significant emissions to the environment. This study aims to quantify the environmental impacts of various AC types and determine whether raw material selection could reduce the footprint of AC. A cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment (LCA) was conducted on coal, coconut shell, wood, peat, and reactivated coal ACs. The different types of raw materials were selected to reflect typical global and local availability in the selected location. Life cycle data was collected from the Ecoinvent database, scientific literature, and an industrial producer. Using CML 2001 as a characterization method, potential environmental impacts were calculated for 12 categories. The direct emissions of AC production and electricity production were the largest contributors to environmental impacts. Coal AC had the highest impact in ten out of the twelve categories. On the other hand, reactivated coal and coconut AC had the lowest impacts in three and five categories, respectively. The comparison in carbon footprints between the AC types were found to be dependent on inclusion or exclusion of biogenic emissions: When including biogenic carbon emissions, the Global Warming Potential (GWP) of reactivated coal AC was 72-80% lower than for the virgin ACs. When biogenic carbon emissions were excluded, the GWPs of the residual biomass ACs (coconut shell and wood) were found to be about 50% lower than that of reactivated coal AC. The results demonstrate that raw material choice and production method significantly affect the environmental impact of AC. To minimize site-specific impacts of AC application, technical feasibility of AC and use phase emissions need to be assessed.
Found 
Found 

Top-30

Journals

1
2
3
4
5
Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering
5 publications, 5.15%
Journal of Cleaner Production
5 publications, 5.15%
Green Chemistry
4 publications, 4.12%
Science of the Total Environment
3 publications, 3.09%
C – Journal of Carbon Research
2 publications, 2.06%
Energy
2 publications, 2.06%
Journal of Water Process Engineering
2 publications, 2.06%
Bioresource Technology
2 publications, 2.06%
ACS Sustainable Chemistry and Engineering
2 publications, 2.06%
Sustainable Chemistry and Pharmacy
2 publications, 2.06%
ACS ES&T Water
2 publications, 2.06%
Scientific Reports
2 publications, 2.06%
Process Safety and Environmental Protection
2 publications, 2.06%
Separation and Purification Technology
2 publications, 2.06%
Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers
2 publications, 2.06%
Environmental Science & Technology
2 publications, 2.06%
Chemical Engineering Research and Design
1 publication, 1.03%
Bioresource Technology Reports
1 publication, 1.03%
Chemical Engineering Journal
1 publication, 1.03%
Water (Switzerland)
1 publication, 1.03%
IEEE Access
1 publication, 1.03%
Applied Nanoscience (Switzerland)
1 publication, 1.03%
GCB Bioenergy
1 publication, 1.03%
Groundwater for Sustainable Development
1 publication, 1.03%
Molecules
1 publication, 1.03%
ChemCatChem
1 publication, 1.03%
ACS Applied Engineering Materials
1 publication, 1.03%
Operations Management Research
1 publication, 1.03%
Buildings
1 publication, 1.03%
Environments - MDPI
1 publication, 1.03%
1
2
3
4
5

Publishers

10
20
30
40
50
Elsevier
50 publications, 51.55%
Springer Nature
11 publications, 11.34%
MDPI
8 publications, 8.25%
American Chemical Society (ACS)
8 publications, 8.25%
Wiley
7 publications, 7.22%
Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
6 publications, 6.19%
Taylor & Francis
2 publications, 2.06%
IOP Publishing
2 publications, 2.06%
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
1 publication, 1.03%
IWA Publishing
1 publication, 1.03%
Hindawi Limited
1 publication, 1.03%
10
20
30
40
50
  • We do not take into account publications without a DOI.
  • Statistics recalculated weekly.

Are you a researcher?

Create a profile to get free access to personal recommendations for colleagues and new articles.
Metrics
99
Share
Cite this
GOST |
Cite this
GOST Copy
Vilén A. et al. Comparative life cycle assessment of activated carbon production from various raw materials // Journal of Environmental Management. 2022. Vol. 324. p. 116356.
GOST all authors (up to 50) Copy
Vilén A., Laurell P., Vahala R. Comparative life cycle assessment of activated carbon production from various raw materials // Journal of Environmental Management. 2022. Vol. 324. p. 116356.
RIS |
Cite this
RIS Copy
TY - JOUR
DO - 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116356
UR - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116356
TI - Comparative life cycle assessment of activated carbon production from various raw materials
T2 - Journal of Environmental Management
AU - Vilén, Anna
AU - Laurell, Panu
AU - Vahala, Riku
PY - 2022
DA - 2022/12/01
PB - Elsevier
SP - 116356
VL - 324
PMID - 36208520
SN - 0301-4797
SN - 1095-8630
ER -
BibTex
Cite this
BibTex (up to 50 authors) Copy
@article{2022_Vilén,
author = {Anna Vilén and Panu Laurell and Riku Vahala},
title = {Comparative life cycle assessment of activated carbon production from various raw materials},
journal = {Journal of Environmental Management},
year = {2022},
volume = {324},
publisher = {Elsevier},
month = {dec},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116356},
pages = {116356},
doi = {10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116356}
}