Carbon Footprint

DEVELOPMENT OF THE TECHNICAL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR WASTEWATER SYSTEM,
SEWAGE PUMP STATIONS, FORCE (PRESSURE MAINS), TSE NETWORK AND DESIGN MANUAL
PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
8.3 CARBON FOOT PRINT

Introduction
A carbon footprint study has been conducted for the Secondary Treatment
technologies of Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTP). The objective of this
study is to identify and evaluate greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) associated
with various secondary biological treatments to be used in WWTP’s Direct and
indirect emissions generated from the plant are studied with reference to
International Standards such as but not limited to ISO 14064, GHG Protocol, PAS
2080 etc. The study provides a detailed comparison report on the following
secondary treatment technologies which were evaluated during the carbon foot-
print study.
 Activated Sludge Process (ASP)

 Sequential Batch Reactor (SBR)
 Membrane Bio Reactor (MBR)
 Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR)
 Integrated Fixed Film Activated Sludge
 Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB)
 Constructed Wetland
 Rotating Biological Contactors (RBC)
 Trickling Filter
 Stabilisation Ponds
The Operational Carbon Footprint Study was done for a medium sized (40 MLD)
STP on the basis of influent data, effluent data, equipment list and power
consumption. Apart from the input data, Consultant used emission factors to
perform the carbon footprint for different technologies. This report includes the
carbon footprint baseline for treatment technologies used in WWTP’s.
The objective of this study is to estimate the emission of the greenhouse gases of
different secondary wastewater treatment systems and compare the carbon
footprint of secondary wastewater treatment plant in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
(KSA) geography.
Legal Frame Work and Standards
This section provides details of all applicable international conventions and

protocol and applicable standards for the GHG emission and carbon emission.
8.3.2.1 International Convention and Protocol
The KSA is signatory to, and has ratified, several international conventions and
protocols. Table 8-1 presents those conventions and protocols that are relevant to
the present study.
10084-ILF-NWC-GEN-0001.docx | Revision 00 | © Page 63/362

PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
# Name of International Protocol/Convention Signed/ Ratified

1 Kyoto Protocol, 1997 2005
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
2 1993
Change (UNFCCC), 1992
3 GHG Protocol (Green House Gas Protocol) 2007
Table 8-1: Relevant International Conventions/Protocol
1. Kyoto Protocol
The Kyoto Protocol was adopted in Kyoto, Japan, on 11 December 1997 and
entered into force on 16 February 2005. The Kyoto Protocol is an international
treaty which extends the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC) that commits state parties to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions, based on the scientific consensus that (part one) global
warming is occurring and (part two) it is extremely likely that human-made CO2
emissions have predominantly caused it. The Kyoto Protocol applies to the six
greenhouse gases listed in Annex A: Carbon dioxide (CO2), Methane (CH4),
Nitrous oxide (N2O), Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), Perfluorocarbons (PFCs),
and Sulphur hexafluoride (SF6).
2. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC),

1992
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is

an international environmental treaty adopted on 9 May 1992 and opened for
signature at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro from 3 to 14 June 1992. It
then entered into force on 21 March 1994, after a sufficient number of
countries had ratified it. The UNFCCC objective is to "stabilize greenhouse
gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous
anthropogenic interference with the climate system".
One of the first tasks set by the UNFCCC was for signatory nations to establish
national greenhouse gas inventories of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and
removals, which were used to create the 1990 benchmark levels for accession
of Annex I countries to the Kyoto Protocol and for the commitment of those
countries to GHG reductions.
8.3.2.2 Relevant Standards and Guidelines
8.3.2.2.1 GHG Protocol
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol (GHG Protocol) is the most widely used
international accounting tool for government and business leaders to understand,
quantify, and manage greenhouse gas emissions. The GHG Protocol, a decade-
plus partnership between the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the World
Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), is working with
businesses, governments, and environmental groups around the world to build a
new generation of credible and effective programs for tackling climate change.
It provides the accounting framework for nearly every GHG standard and program
in the world - from the International Standards Organization to The Climate

PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
Registry - as well as hundreds of GHG inventories prepared by individual

companies.
The GHG Protocol offers an internationally accepted management tool to help

businesses to compete in the global marketplace and governments to make
informed decisions about climate change.
GHG Protocol supplies the world's most widely used greenhouse gas accounting
standards. The Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard provides the
accounting platform for virtually every corporate GHG reporting program in the
world. Most of these GHG standards have been considered for the present study.
It provides standard guideline Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions and provides

country-specific calculation tools for estimating GHG emission. GHG protocol was
providing calculation for the Purchased Electricity emissions for the different
countries. However, Consultant used Institute for Global Environmental
Strategies’ (2020) emission factors for estimation GHG emission for the
purchased electricity use.
8.3.2.2.2 1996 IPCC Guidelines
1996 IPCC for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (1996 Guidelines, IPCC,
1997) and the Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty Management in National
Greenhouse Gas Inventories (GPG2000, IPCC, 2000).
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the United Nations

body for assessing the science related to climate change.
The IPCC provides regular assessments of the scientific basis of climate change,
its impacts and future risks, and options for adaptation and mitigation.
Created in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United
Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the objective of the IPCC is to provide
governments at all levels with scientific information that they can use to develop
climate policies. IPCC reports are also a key input into international climate
change negotiations.
The 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (2006 IPCC
Guidelines) which were published in 2006 provide methodologies for estimating
national inventories of anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks
of greenhouse gases. This IPCC Methodology Report titled the 2019 Refinement
to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (2019
Refinement) was published in 2019 to refine the 2006 IPCC Guidelines with the
aim to provide an updated and sound scientific basis for supporting the
preparation and continuous improvement of national greenhouse gas inventories.
In order to achieve this overall aim, the 2019 Refinement:
 Provides supplementary methodologies for sources and sinks of greenhouse

gases only where currently there are gaps or where new technologies and
production processes have emerged requiring elaborated methodologies or
for sources and sinks that were not well covered by the 2006 IPCC Guidelines;

PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
 Provides updated default values of emission factors and other parameters

based on the latest available scientific information only where significant
differences from the default values presented in the 2006 IPCC Guidelines are
identified;
 Provides additional or alternative up-to-date information and guidance, where
possible, as clarification or elaboration of existing guidance in the 2006 IPCC
Guidelines;
The 2019 Refinement does not revise the 2006 IPCC Guidelines, but updates,
supplements and/or elaborates the 2006 IPCC Guidelines where gaps or out-of-
date science have been identified. It does not replace the 2006 IPCC Guidelines,
but should be used in conjunction with the 2006 IPCC Guidelines and, where
indicated, with the 2013.
Supplement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas

Inventories: Wetlands (Wetlands Supplement).
IPCC provided guideline for estimating emission from wastewater treatment

technologies in its Volume 5, Chapter 6. This guideline emission factors
wastewater treatment and discharges especially methane (CH4) and Nitrous
Oxide (N2O).
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change guidelines say explicitly that carbon

dioxide emissions are not included in the panel’s tabulations for wastewater
treatment plant emissions because they are thought to be derived from natural
biological sources and are carbon neutral. The IPCC accounts only for methane
and nitrous oxide emissions coming from decomposing human and other waste
in water treatment facilities.
IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report amended Global Warming Potential (GWP)

factors for GHGs which are provided in the below Table 8-2.
Chemical Lifetime Global Warming Potential for Given Time

GHGs
Formula in Years Horizon (100 yrs)
Second Fourth Fifth
Assessment Assessment Assessment
Report Report Report
(SAR) (AR4) (AR5)
Carbon
CO2 100 1 1 1
Dioxide
Methane CH4 12 21 25 28
Nitrous Oxide N2O 114 310 298 265
Table 8-2: GWP Values relevant to CO2
8.3.2.2.3 ISO 14064 – International Standard for Environmental Management
The current study is based on ISO 14064 1:2018 – Green House Gases – Part
1: Specification with guidance at the organization level for quantification and
reporting of greenhouse gas emissions and removals. ISO14064-1:2018 specifies
principles and requirements at the organization level for quantification and
reporting of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and removals. It includes

PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
requirements for the design, development, management, reporting and

verification of an organization's GHG inventory. Quantification & Reporting in the
present study has been carried out as per this standard.
8.3.2.2.4 PAS 2080 – Carbon Management in Infrastructure
This Publicly Available Specification (PAS) was commissioned by the Green

Construction Board (GCB). Its development was facilitated by BSI Standards
Limited and is published under the license from the British Standards Institution
and came into effect on 4 May 2016. The use of the PAS will promote reduced
carbon, reduced cost infrastructure delivery, more collaborative ways of working
and a culture of challenge in the infrastructure value chain through which
innovation can be fostered. “Guidance Document for PAS2080” is a supplement
to the PAS as PAS 2080 covers the below provided scope.
 Carbon Management (as part of wider climate change mitigation).

 Consistency in the use of data, reporting, quantification, benchmarking, target
setting, continuous improvement, leadership, etc.
 Management of capital and operational carbon under direct control of the
value chain, and user carbon over which the value chain has influence.
Methodology
8.3.3.1 Carbon Footprint Study
Definition of Carbon Footprint Study
The carbon footprint in this study was defined as direct and indirect GHG
emissions caused by wastewater and sludge treatment within a defined system
boundary. The accounted GHG emissions included carbon dioxide (CO2), CH4
and N2O and were all converted into carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2) by global
warming potentials (GWPs) over 100 years (Table 8-3).
Even though CO2 emissions from biological wastewater treatment are not
normally considered, some studies have pointed out that about 20% of the carbon
present in the wastewaters can be of fossil origin and the emissions of fossil CO2
from wastewater treatment were underestimated. The sources of GHG may be
either natural or anthropogenic. Further, the identification and quantification of all
sources are essential for developing the strategy to control and reduce the rate of
increase of the emissions of GHG. The wastewater treatment plants (WWTP) are
considered as source of GHG emissions because of the generation of CO2, CH4
and N2O during the process of treatment and energy demand.
In a defined system boundary, the emissions of GHG from different scenarios can
be estimated and evaluated. The GHG emissions include: 1) direct emission of
GHG from wastewater treatment comprising emission of CO2 due to degradation
of organic matters, emission of N2O during the process of nitrification and
denitrification and emissions of CH4 and N2O from anaerobic digestion during
sludge treatment and 2) indirect emissions from usage of electrical power.

PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
8.3.3.2 Present Study Scenario
The present study is conducted on a medium sized WWTP (40 MLD) in the
geography of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. In this study, ten different secondary
wastewater treatment technologies are considered.
1. Activated Sludge Process

2. Sequential Batch Reactor
3. Membrane Bio Reactor
4. Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor
5. Integrated Fixed Film Activated Sludge
6. Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket
7. Constructed Wetland
8. Rotating Biological Contactors
9. Trickling Filter
10. Stabilisation Ponds
The above are considered for scenario analyses in terms of treatment capacity.
The application of these types of technologies with low carbon footprint in medium
sized WWTPs (40 MLD) need to be investigated in this study as sludge disposal
not only concerns environmental pollution problems, but also plays a critical role
in reducing the carbon footprint of the whole process. Simply put, the energy
content in organic substances in the wastewater is either converted to CO2 (or
CH4) or becomes wasted sludge through the biological process. The process flow
chart and input data for Carbon Footprint analysis is provided in the below Figure
8:4.

PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
Figure 8:4: Process Flow Diagram of Present Study
Input Data
As mentioned earlier, the carbon footprint study for 40 MLD medium sized WWTP
is carried out. Input data like chemical parameters of wastewater, power
consumption, name of Chemicals and Sludge production considered for this study
is provided in the below Table 8-3.
Parameters Value Unit

Flow 40,000 m3/day
Inlet BOD 250 mg/l
Inlet TKN 50 mg/l
Inlet TSS 290 mg/l
Outlet BOD 10 mg/l
Outlet TKN 2 mg/l
Outlet TSS 10 mg/l
Outlet Nitrate Nitrogen 10 mg/l
MLVSS 4000 g/m3
Table 8-3: Input Data – Waste Water Characteristics

PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
Typical screening produced for each plant is 10.5 gm/m3. Other input data like
Power consumption, chemical used and sludge produced for 40 MLD WWTP for
various technologies are given in the below Table 8-4.
Secondary Treatment
Sludge Produced kg/kg BOD
Technology Power Consumption,
removed
kwh/m3
ASP 0.87 0.85
MBBR 1.05 0.75
MBR 1.75 0.80
IFAS 1.12 0.80
SBR 0.90 0.85
UASB 0.70 0.60
CW 0.00 0.10
TF 0.84 0.75
SP 0.00 0.30
RBC 0.87 0.80
Table 8-4: Input Data - Power Consumption and Sludge
8.3.3.3 GHG Emissions
Both aerobic and anaerobic wastewater treatment processes remove BOD5 and
the bacteria in both processes also generate CO2, CH4 and N2O. The methodology
used to estimate GHG emissions is based on the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC, 1996) Revised Guidelines for National Greenhouse
Gases Inventory and the IPCC Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty
Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories.
During aerobic treatment, ammonia (NH4+) or organic nitrogen is biologically

oxidized to nitrites (NO2−) and nitrates (NO3−) by autotrophic bacteria through a
process called nitrification. NO2− and NO3− can then be converted to nitrogen gas
(N2) under anoxic conditions (i.e., where dissolved oxygen is absent) by
heterotrophic bacteria through a process called denitrification. N2O is a by-product
of the nitrification process and an intermediate product of the denitrification
process.
Nitrification: NH4+ → NH2OH → NO2− → NO3−

Denitrification: NO3− → NO2− → NO→ N2
During anaerobic digestion the acid- and CH4 - forming (methanogenic) bacteria
convert organic matter into a biogas consisting of approximately 60% - 70% CH4,
30% - 40% CO2, and trace amounts of N2, hydrogen (H2), hydrogen sulphide
(H2S), and O2.

PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
8.3.3.3.1 Direct & Indirect GHG Emissions from Secondary Waste Water Treatment
8.3.3.3.1.1 Scope 1: Direct GHG Emissions:
In scope 1 three gases i.e. CO2, CH4 and N2O are calculated for WWTP. CO2
emissions from WWTP are not considered in the IPCC Guidelines because these
are of biogenic origin and should not be included in national total emissions.
Biogenic origin means short cycle or natural sources of atmospheric CO 2 which
cycles from plants to animals to humans as part of the natural carbon cycle and
food chain do not contribute to global warming. Photosynthesis produced short-
cycle CO2, removes an equal mass of CO2 from the atmosphere that returns
during respiration or wastewater treatment.
Direct GHG Emissions include emissions from Waste Water Treatment and
Waste Water Discharge in Water Bodies. These are:
1. CO2 Emission:
 CO2 is produced through breakdown of organic matter during the aerobic

phases of the activated sludge process.
 During anaerobic process the organic matter is converted into biomass and
again into CO2 through endogenous respiration.
 CO2 emission from sludge digestion and combustion of digester combustion
gas
2. CH4 emissions:
 During anaerobic process the organic matter is converted into biomass and
again into CH4 through endogenous respiration. Therefore, the main source
of CH4 generation is anaerobic treatment of wastewater as well as from its
sludge.
 CH4 emission from activated sludge process are primary clarifiers
 The other source is aeration basins in small quantities or if improperly
managed.
The extent of emission of CH4 depends on the quantity of degradable organic
material in the wastewater, the temperature, and the type of treatment system.
The rate of CH4 emission increases with the increase in temperature. When
the temperature is below 15˚C the methanogens are not active and there is
almost no production of CH4.
3. N2O emissions
The main source of N2O is from the degradation of nitrogen components in

the wastewater. Direct emissions of N2O may be generated during both
nitrification and denitrification process. Nitrification is an aerobic process
during which the ammonia (NH3) and other nitrogen compounds are converted
into nitrates (NO3) and. Denitrification is the process which occurs under
anoxic conditions in which the nitrate is converted into nitrites NO2 and again
in to nitrogen gas N2. Both processes can occur in the plant and in the water

PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
body that is receiving the effluent. Other sources include discharge of the
effluent into the receiving environment.
8.3.3.3.1.2 Scope 2: Indirect GHG Emissions:
Main Indirect GHG emission sources are:
 Electricity Supply
Indirect GHG emissions resulting from the off-site generation of electric power
consumed at WWTP. The expected power use on site was calculated based
on the electricity consumption from the following components:
1. C-Tech basins
 Return activated sludge pumps (RAS)

 Surplus activated sludge pumps (SAS)
2. Blower room for C-Tech
 Blower for C-Tech

 Service water pumps for after cooler
Figure 8:5 GHG Emissions at (a) WWTP – Anaerobic Digestion (b) Simultaneous
Aerobic Sludge Stabilization
8.3.3.4 Global Warming Potential (GWP) Values of GHGs
The (GWP) of a GHG is the ratio of heat trapped by one-unit mass of the gas
compared to one-unit mass of CO2 over a specified time period (typically 100
years). The GWP varies significantly based on the type of constituent GHG. A
small quantity of gas emitted with a high GWP will have the same heat trapping
potential as that of large quantity of gas emitted with low GWP.

PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
The GWP varies significantly, depending on the type of gas. Therefore, a small
quantity of gas emitted with a high GWP has a greater effect on the atmosphere
than a gas with low GWP. For example, one kilogram (kg) of N2O emitted will have
the same heat trapping potential as 265 kg of CO2. The Global Warming Potential
of GHGs by Green House Gas Protocol is provided in Table 8-2.
8.3.3.5 Estimation of CFP
8.3.3.5.1 Estimation of GHG Emissions from Wastewater
GHG Emissions for the wastewater secondary treatment technologies is

assessed by following the 2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for
National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, Volume 5 Chapter 6. This chapter provides
guideline for GHG emission estimation equation for various treatment
technologies. This equation provides a general means of estimating the CH4 and
N2O emissions directly from any type of wastewater treatment process assuming
all organic carbon removed from the wastewater is converted to either CO2, CH4,
N2O or new biomass.
8.3.3.5.1.1 Estimation of CH4 and CO2 Emissions from Wastewater Treatment Units
Aerobic wastewater treatment systems produce primarily CO2, whereas

anaerobic systems produce a mixture of CH4 and CO2. Equations 1 and 2 below
provide a general means of estimating the CO2 and CH4 emissions directly from
any type of wastewater treatment process assuming all organic carbon removed
from the wastewater is converted to either CO2, CH4, or new biomass. Consultant
have focused only on CH4 emissions as IPCC considered that Carbon dioxide
(CO2) emissions from wastewater are generally derived from modern (biogenic)
organic matter in human excreta or food waste and should not be included in
national total emissions.
Equation 1 CO2 = 10-6 × (TOW-TORW) × [(1-EF)-R)]
Equation 2 CH4 = 10-6 × (TOW-TORW) × (EF-R)
Where:
CO2 = CO2 emission rate (Mg CO2/year)
CH4 = CH4 emission rate (Mg CH4/year)
10-6 = Units conversion factor (Mg/g)
TOW = Total organics in wastewater (kg in one year)
TORW= Total organics removed from wastewater after treatment (kg)
EF = Emission factor for treatment/discharge pathway or system,
R= Amount of CH4 recovered or flared from treatment/discharge pathway or
system (CH4 recovery for UASB is considered as 75% and other treatment system
considered as 0)

PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
TOW = Qi × OD × EffOD × 0.001 × 365
Where:
Qi = Wastewater influent flow rate (m3/day) = 40,000 m3/day
OD = Oxygen demand of influent wastewater to the biological treatment unit
determined as either BOD5 (mg/L = g/m3) = 250 mg/L
EffOD = Oxygen demand removal efficiency of the biological treatment unit = 0.96
(Effluent BOD given as 10 mg/L and removal efficiency = [1- (10/250)].
0.001=conversion from grams BOD to kg BOD
365 = days in a year
TORW = TOR – TOR × λ
Where:
λ = Sludge Produced kg/ kg BOD removed (refer Table 8-5)
EF = MCF× BGCH4
Where:
MCF = methane correction factor for wastewater treatment unit, indicating the
fraction of the influent oxygen demand that is converted anaerobically in the
wastewater treatment unit (refer Table 8-5).
BGCH4 = Fraction of carbon as CH4 in generated biogas (default is 0.6 as per
IPCC).
Treatment System MCFa λb

Aerated Treatment Processes
Activated Sludge Process 0.03 0.85
Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor 0.03 0.75
Membrane Bio Reactor 0.03 0.80
Integrated Fixed Film Activated Sludge 0.03 0.80
Trickling Filter 0.03 0.75
Rotating Biological Contactors 0.03 0.80
Aerated treatment Process, Overloaded (Anoxic Areas)
Sequential Batch Reactor 0.03 0.85
Anaerobic Treatment Processes

Up-flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB) 0.80 0.60
Facultative Lagoon:
Constructed Wetland - Subsurface flow (SF) 0.40 0.10
Constructed Wetland - Horizontal subsurface
0.10 0.10
flow (HSSF)

PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
Treatment System MCFa λb

Constructed Wetland - Vertical subsurface
0.01 0.10
flow (VSSF)
Stabilisation Ponds - Shallow (< 2 m deep) 0.20 0.30
Stabilisation Ponds - Deep (≥ 2 m deep) 0.80 0.30
Table 8-5: Default Values for Methane Correction Factor and Biomass Yield
a
Source: IPCC (2019).
b
Data provided based on the previous WWTPs projects, renowned publications
and literature
8.3.3.5.1.2 Estimating N2O Emission
WWTPs are also a source of N2O emissions. The amount of nitrogen present in
the influent wastewater will determine the N2O generation potential. The treatment
process (whether aerobic, anaerobic, or a combination of aerobic and anaerobic)
will also affect the magnitude of the N2O emissions. During aerobic treatment,
ammonia (NH3+) or organic nitrogen is biologically oxidized to nitrites (NO2–) and
nitrates (NO3–) by autotrophic bacteria through a process called nitrification. NO2–
and NO3– can then be converted to nitrogen gas (N2) under anoxic conditions (i.e.,
where dissolved oxygen is absent) by heterotrophic bacteria through a process
called denitrification. N2O is a by-product of the nitrification process and an
intermediate product of the denitrification process. The below equation presents
simplified reaction pathways and illustrates the formation of N2O during the
nitrification and denitrification processes.
Nitrification: NH4+ → NH2OH → NO2− → NO3−

Denitrification: NO3− → NO2− → NO→ N2
The amount of nitrogen in the wastewater influent is the principal factor in

determining the extent of the N2O generation potential in wastewater treatment
plants (WWTPs). Two commonly monitored parameters include Total Kjeldahl
Nitrogen (TKN) and Total Nitrogen (TN). TKN is the sum of organic nitrogen and
free ammonia (NH4+ and NH3) in the waste or wastewater. The N2O emissions
were estimated using the following equation developed by IPCC.
Equation 3 N2OWWTP = Qi x TKNi x EFN2O x (44/28) x10-6
Where:
N2OWWTP = N2O emissions generated from WWTP process (Mg N2O/hr)
Qi = Wastewater influent flow rate (m3/day) = 40,000 m3/day
TKNi = Amount of TKN in the influent (mg/L = g/m3)
EFN2O = N2O emission factor (g N emitted as N2O per g TKN in influent) = 50 mg/L
44/28 = Molecular weight conversion, g N2O per g N emitted as N2O
10-6 = Units conversion factor (Mg/g).

PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
Treatment System EFN2O a

Aerated Treatment Processes
Activated Sludge Process 0.016
Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor 0.016
Membrane Bio Reactor 0.016
Integrated Fixed film Activated Sludge 0.016
Trickling Filter 0.016
Rotating Biological Contactors 0.016
Aerated treatment Process, Overloaded (Anoxic Areas)
Sequential Batch Reactor 0.16
Anaerobic Treatment Processes
Up-flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket 0
Facultative Lagoon:
Constructed Wetland - Subsurface flow (SF) 0.0013
Constructed Wetland - Horizontal subsurface flow
0.0079
(HSSF)
Constructed Wetland - Vertical subsurface flow
0.00023
(VSSF)
Stabilisation Ponds - Shallow (< 2 m deep) 0
Stabilisation Ponds - Deep (≥ 2 m deep) 0
a
Source: IPCC (2019).
Table 8-6: Default Values for N2O Emission Factor
8.3.3.5.2 Indirect Emissions
Estimating CO2 Emissions from Electricity
Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES) List of Grid Emission Factors
provides information to perform GHG emissions calculation. Grid Emission Factor
refers to CO2 emission factor (tCO2/MWh) which will be associated with each unit
of electricity provided by an electricity system. The Grid Emission Factors, version
10.8. available at: https://pub.iges.or.jp/pub/iges-list-grid-emission-factors was
used to estimate the GHG of electricity utilized. IGES provides a country specific
calculation tool for estimating GHG emission.
Equation 4 ECO2 = EF x EC x 1/1,000
Where,
ECO2 = CO2 emission from use of electricity from national grid
EF= Emission Factor tCO2/MWh = 0.654 (Saudi Arabia grid emission factor)
EC= Energy Consumption in kWh (refer Table 8-7)

PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
Technology Power Consumption, kWh/m3

Activated Sludge Process 0.87
Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor 1.05
Membrane Bio Reactor 1.75
Integrated Fixed Film Activated Sludge 1.12
Sequential Batch Reactor 0.90
Up-flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket 0.70
Constructed Wetland 0.00
Trickling Filter 0.84
Stabilization Ponds 0.00
Rotating Biological Contactors 0.87
Table 8-7: Assumed Power Consumptions
8.3.3.6 Limitations
Although this study estimated the carbon footprints for various secondary
wastewater treatment technologies for WWTP in Riyadh, KSA geography, several
limitations exist. The limitations of the present study include the following:
 Present study is limited to operation of a secondary wastewater treatment.

 GHG emissions estimated based on research conducted by the Consultant.
 The operational condition is a dynamic process, and any change will influence
the emission factors and energy consumption.

PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
Carbon Footprint Results
A carbon assessment was conducted to evaluate the carbon footprint for various
technologies used in WWTPs for a capacity of 40,000 m3/day. The study was
specifically focused to estimate the carbon footprint in above mentioned
secondary treatment technologies. Emission of CH4, N2O and CO2 was estimated
and compared among various secondary treatment technologies in order to select
appropriate low carbon and energy efficient technology in the wastewater
treatment field.
8.3.4.1 CH4 Equivalent CO2 Emissions
CH4 equivalent CO2 emissions were calculated based on research conducted by

Consultant. The highest CH4 emission was estimated 1,177.3 tons/year for
Stabilization Ponds (more than 2 m depth) treatment technology. Constructed
Wetland Surface flow (SF), Constructed Wetland HSSF and Up flow Anaerobic
Sludge Blanket treatment system was also observed higher methane emissions
of 756.9 tons/year 189.2 tons/year and 168.2 tons/year respectively. IPCC’s
Global warming potential factor (28) was used to calculate CH4 equivalent CO2
emissions. Activated Sludge Process (ASP) and Sequential Batch Reactor were
the lowest Methane and CH4 equivalent CO2 generating process which was
estimated 9.5 tons/year of Methane and 264.9 tons/year CH4 equivalent CO2.
Comparative analysis for CH4 and CH4 equivalent CO2 emissions are presented
in Table 8-8, Figure 8-6 and Figure 8-7.
CH4 Emission CH4 Equivalent CO2

Technology
(Tons/Year) Emission (Tons/Year)
Activated Sludge Process (ASP) 9.5 264.9
Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) 15.8 441.5
Membrane Bio Reactor (MBR) 12.6 353.2
Integrated Fixed Film Activated Sludge
12.6 353.2
(IFAS)
Sequential Batch Reactor 9.5 264.9
Up-flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket with
168.2 4,709.4
75% CH4 Recovery
Constructed Wetland SF 756.9 21,192.2
Constructed Wetland HSSF 189.2 5,298.0
Constructed Wetland VSSF 18.9 529.8
Trickling Filter 15.8 441.5
Stabilisation Ponds (less than 2 m
294.3 8,241.4
depth)
Stabilisation Ponds (more than 2 m
1,177.3 32,965.6
depth)
Rotating Biological Contactors 12.6 353.2
Table 8-8: Calculated CH4 and Equivalent CO2 Emission from Various Secondary
Wastewater Technologies

PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
Figure 8:6: Calculated CH4 Emissions in Various Secondary Wastewater

Technologies
Figure 8:7: Calculated CH4 Equivalent CO2 Emission in Various Secondary Wastewater
Technologies
8.3.4.2 N2O Equivalent CO2 Emissions
N2O equivalent CO2 emissions were calculated as per IPCC guideline. The
highest N2O emission was estimated 18.354 tons/year for all aerobic treatment
technology. N2O emission was not calculated for the anaerobic process as this
process produces non-significant quantity of N2O (as per IPCC guideline). IPCC
5th assessment stipulated global warming potential factor for N2O as 256
equivalent CO2 emissions. All aerobic process produced 4,863.9 tons/year of N2O

PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
Equivalent CO2. Comparative analysis for N2O and N2O equivalent CO2 emissions
are presented in Table 8-9, Figure 8:8 and Figure 8-9.
N2O Equivalent CO2

N2O Emission
Technology Emission
(Tons/Year)
(Tons/Year)
Activated Sludge Process (ASP) 18.354 4,863.9
Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) 18.354 4,863.9
Membrane Bio Reactor (MBR) 18.354 4,863.9
Integrated Fixed Film Activated
18.354 4,863.9
Sludge (IFAS)
Sequential Batch Reactor 18.354 4,863.9
Up-flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket
0.000 0.0
with 75% CH4 Recovery
Constructed Wetland SF 1.491 395.2
Constructed Wetland HSSF 9.062 2,401.5
Constructed Wetland VSSF 0.264 69.9
Trickling Filter 18.354 4,863.9
Stabilisation Ponds (less than 2 m
0.000 0.0
depth)
Stabilisation Ponds (more than 2 m
0.000 0.0
depth)
Rotating Biological Contactors 18.354 4,863.9
Table 8-9: Calculated N2O and Equivalent CO2 Emission from Various Secondary
Wastewater Technology
Figure 8:8 Calculated N2O Emissions in Various Secondary Wastewater Technologies

PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
Figure 8:9 Calculated N2O Equivalent CO2 Emission level in Various Secondary Treatment
Technologies
8.3.4.3 Energy Consumption Equivalent CO2 Emissions
GHCs emissions from energy consumption of the wastewater treatment systems

are calculated by quantity of energy used by each WWTP secondary treatment
process. The GHG emissions from use of energy depends on the geographic and
type of power generation. Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (2020),
published an equivalent CO2 emissions factor 0.654 for Saudi Arabia. Membrane
Bio Reactor (MBR), an aerobic treatment process tops in power consumption and
emits 10694.2 tons CO2 per year. No GHG emission estimated for Constructed
Wetland and Stabilisation Ponds as these processes operated without power.
Comparative analysis of energy intake GHG emissions for each secondary
treatment technologies are presented in Table 8-10, Figure 8:6 and Figure 8:10.
Power
Power Consumption
Consumption
Technology Equivalent CO2e (Tonnes
Equivalent CO2e
/Year)
(Tonnes /hr)
Activated Sludge Process
0.9483 8,307.1
(ASP)
Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor
1.1445 10,025.8
(MBBR)
Membrane Bio Reactor (MBR) 1.9075 16,709.7
Integrated Fixed Film Activated
1.2208 10,694.2
Sludge (IFAS)
Sequential Batch Reactor 0.981 8,593.6
Up-flow Anaerobic Sludge
0.763 6,683.9
Blanket with 75% CH4 Recovery
Constructed Wetland SF 0 0.0
Constructed Wetland HSSF 0 0.0

PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
Power
Power Consumption
Consumption
Technology Equivalent CO2e (Tonnes
Equivalent CO2e
/Year)
(Tonnes /hr)
Constructed Wetland VSSF 0 0.0
Trickling Filter 0.9156 8,020.7
Stabilisation Ponds (less than 2
0 0.0
m depth)
Stabilisation Ponds (more than
0 0.0
2 m depth)
Rotating Biological Contactors 0.9483 8,307.1
Table 8-10: Power Consumption related GHG Emissions in Various Secondary Wastewater
Technology
Figure 8:10 Calculated CO2 Emission for Consumption of Electricity in Secondary

Treatment Operation
8.3.4.4 Baseline of Carbon Footprint
Table 8-11 and Figure 8:12 presents the baseline carbon footprint for Various
Secondary Wastewater Treatment Technologies for the treatment of 40,000 m3
/day. Stabilisation Ponds (more than 2m depth) treatment technology shown
highest GHG emissions (32,965.6 tons CO2 /year) than other secondary treatment
technology which is due to high methane generation. Methane emission is
dependent on sludge treatment efficiency of the treatment technology. As per the
input data (Table 8-4) Sludge Produced kg/kg BOD removed for UASB is higher
0.60 than the SP i.e. 0.30. Methane emission will be high if less sludge is
generated in the anaerobic process. Anaerobic process without methane recovery
emits high GHG emissions than the aerobic process while with Methane recovery
(for UASB) emits less GHGs than aerobic process. Constructed Wetland Vertical
Subsurface Flow (VSSF) treatment produces lowest amount of GHG 599.7 tons
CO2 /year which is 55 times lower than the Stabilisation Ponds (more than 2 m
depth). Activated Sludge Process produces lowest GHG emission among all other
aerobic process and also consumes less energy than other aerobic treatment
system. Membrane Bio Reactor (MBR) process produces more GHG than other
aerobic treatment process which is due to high energy consumption.

PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
Electricity
CH4 N2O Total
Equivalent
Equivalent Equivalent Equivalent
Technology CO2e
CO2e CO2e Tons CO2
(Tons
Tons/Year /Year Emission
/Year)
Activated Sludge Process
264.9 4,863.9 8,307.1 13,435.9
(ASP)
Moving Bed Biofilm
441.5 4,863.9 10,025.8 15,331.2
Reactor (MBBR)
Membrane Bio Reactor
353.2 4,863.9 16,709.7 21,926.8
(MBR)
Integrated Fixed Film
353.2 4,863.9 10,694.2 15,911.3
Activated Sludge (IFAS)
Sequential Batch Reactor 264.9 4,863.9 8,593.6 13,722.3
Upflow Anaerobic Sludge
Blanket with 75% CH4 4,709.4 0.0 6,683.9 11,393.3
Recovery
Constructed Wetland SF 21,192.2 395.2 0.0 21,587.4
Constructed Wetland
5,298.0 2,401.5 0.0 7,699.6
HSSF
Constructed Wetland
529.8 69.9 0.0 599.7
VSSF
Trickling Filter 441.5 4,863.9 8,020.7 13,326.0
Stabilisation Ponds (less
8,241.4 0.0 0.0 8,241.4
than 2 m depth)
Stabilisation Ponds (more
32,965.6 0.0 0.0 32,965.6
than 2 m depth)
Rotating Biological
353.2 4,863.9 8,307.1 13,524.2
Contactors
Table 8-11: Baseline Carbon Footprint of Various Secondary Wastewater Treatment
Technologies
Figure 8:11: Comparison of Estimated GHG Emission by Different Secondary Wastewater

Treatment Technology

PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
Figure 8:12 Total Equivalent CO2 Emission from Various Secondary Wastewater
Technology
Conclusions
The emissions of CO2, CH4 and N2O from various secondary treatment plants
were estimated based on the IPCC guidelines and the total equivalent CO2 was
computed and analysed.
1. The higher CO2 equivalent GHG emissions were predominately emitted by

Anaerobic process without methane recovery while with Methane recovery (for
UASB) emits less GHGs than aerobic process.
2. Power consumption related GHG emissions were observed high in aerobic
treatment process which shares more than 50% of calculated GHG emissions.

PRELIMINARY REPORT
13.09.2020
CO2 equivalent emission from activated sludge process were observed lowest
in terms of aerobic treatment process.
3. Constructed Wetland (VSSF) Vertical subsurface flow was observed more
efficient in terms of reduction of GHG emissions when compared to all other
Secondary treatment process.
8.4 ENERGY RECOVERY
Sustainable energy production takes on increasing importance in the light of

dwindling resources and the world’s increasing energy consumption. As important
consumers and producers of energy, WWTPs are one of the numerous players
influencing the development towards energy sustainability. The potential and
review of energy recovery from WWTPs using various technologies are described
in the following sections.
WWTPs involve chemical, physical and biological processes for treating raw
municipal sewage and separates the incoming sewage into a liquid effluent
stream (TSE) and a solid-liquid stream of sludge. Significant quantities of sludge
usually in the range of 1-3% of the total incoming flow are generated from the
plants. In order to reduce the quantity of sludge generated, the sewage sludge is
dewatered and filtrate from the dewatering process is pumped back to waste water
treatment system.
The disposal of sewage sludge poses severe environmental hazards due to the
high concentration of organic, inorganic and toxic pollutants. However, as an
alternative, the sludge generated from WWTPs can be utilised for sustainable
energy recovery. Furthermore, dried sewage sludge due to the presence of
volatile organic contents has energy content in the range between 11-21 MJ/Kg
which indicates comparable or higher calorific values , in comparison to lignite and
various other sources. This heating value is one of the key parameter considered
for the suitability of the sludge as solid fuel as well as the need to effectively
eliminate the high organic matter from sludge before disposal.
Most of the energy recovery technologies discussed are not new as they have
been developed commercially for other fuel types. However, the differences in the
physical and chemical properties of the sludge possesses unique challenges to
these energy recovery technologies. The following technologies are discussed for
the energy recovery from sewage sludge.
 Anaerobic Digestion
 Combustion
 Pyrolysis
 Gasification
Anaerobic digestion and combustion are traditionally adopted technologies for

energy recovery from sewage sludge. Recent development have instigated
advanced treatment methods involving thermochemical technologies for
optimising energy efficiency. However, only a few WWTPs employ the advanced
energy recovery technologies for the sewage sludge worldwide.

Carbon Footprint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Carbon Footprint

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Carbon Footprint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DEVELOPMENT OF THE TECHNICAL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR WASTEWATER SYSTEM,

8.3 CARBON FOOT PRINT

 Activated Sludge Process (ASP)

Legal Frame Work and Standards

This section provides details of all applicable international conventions and

10084-ILF-NWC-GEN-0001.docx | Revision 00 | © Page 63/362

# Name of International Protocol/Convention Signed/ Ratified

Table 8-1: Relevant International Conventions/Protocol

2. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC),

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is

8.3.2.2 Relevant Standards and Guidelines

8.3.2.2.1 GHG Protocol

10084-ILF-NWC-GEN-0001.docx | Revision 00 | © Page 64/362

Registry - as well as hundreds of GHG inventories prepared by individual

The GHG Protocol offers an internationally accepted management tool to help

It provides standard guideline Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions and provides

8.3.2.2.2 1996 IPCC Guidelines

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the United Nations

In order to achieve this overall aim, the 2019 Refinement:

 Provides supplementary methodologies for sources and sinks of greenhouse

10084-ILF-NWC-GEN-0001.docx | Revision 00 | © Page 65/362

 Provides updated default values of emission factors and other parameters

Supplement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas

IPCC provided guideline for estimating emission from wastewater treatment

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change guidelines say explicitly that carbon

IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report amended Global Warming Potential (GWP)

Chemical Lifetime Global Warming Potential for Given Time

Nitrous Oxide N2O 114 310 298 265

Table 8-2: GWP Values relevant to CO2

8.3.2.2.3 ISO 14064 – International Standard for Environmental Management

10084-ILF-NWC-GEN-0001.docx | Revision 00 | © Page 66/362

requirements for the design, development, management, reporting and

8.3.2.2.4 PAS 2080 – Carbon Management in Infrastructure

This Publicly Available Specification (PAS) was commissioned by the Green

 Carbon Management (as part of wider climate change mitigation).

Definition of Carbon Footprint Study

10084-ILF-NWC-GEN-0001.docx | Revision 00 | © Page 67/362

8.3.3.2 Present Study Scenario

1. Activated Sludge Process

10084-ILF-NWC-GEN-0001.docx | Revision 00 | © Page 68/362

Figure 8:4: Process Flow Diagram of Present Study

Parameters Value Unit

Table 8-3: Input Data – Waste Water Characteristics

10084-ILF-NWC-GEN-0001.docx | Revision 00 | © Page 69/362

Table 8-4: Input Data - Power Consumption and Sludge

8.3.3.3 GHG Emissions

During aerobic treatment, ammonia (NH4+) or organic nitrogen is biologically

Nitrification: NH4+ → NH2OH → NO2− → NO3−

10084-ILF-NWC-GEN-0001.docx | Revision 00 | © Page 70/362

8.3.3.3.1.1 Scope 1: Direct GHG Emissions:

 CO2 is produced through breakdown of organic matter during the aerobic

The main source of N2O is from the degradation of nitrogen components in

10084-ILF-NWC-GEN-0001.docx | Revision 00 | © Page 71/362

Main Indirect GHG emission sources are:

 Return activated sludge pumps (RAS)

 Blower for C-Tech

8.3.3.4 Global Warming Potential (GWP) Values of GHGs

10084-ILF-NWC-GEN-0001.docx | Revision 00 | © Page 72/362

8.3.3.5 Estimation of CFP

8.3.3.5.1 Estimation of GHG Emissions from Wastewater