Cost Benefit Analysis Of Three Sewage Treatment Technologies In Delhi

IJEP 41(12): 1399-1404 : Vol. 41 Issue. 12 (December 2021)

Prerna Sharma1, Sudipta K. Mishra2* and Smita Sood1

1. G.D. Goenka University, Department of Basic and Applied Sciences, School of Engineering, Gurgaon – 122 103, Haryana, India
2. G.D. Goenka University, Department of Civil Engineering, School of Engineering, Gurgaon-122 103, Haryana, India


This study focussed on the cost assessment and the footprint requirements of different sewage treatment technologies used in the sewage treatment plants (STPs) in Delhi NCR, India. Comparison among sequencing batch reactor (SBR), densadeck and activated sludge process (ASP) technologies was done using life cycle costing (LCC) approach for cost benefit analysis. Results revealed that densadeck technology outstands the two in most of the parameters, but not much variation was observed between ASP and SBR in terms of removal efficiency (%). ASP is the most viable and economically cheap technology as compared to densadeck and SBR as it has the lowest values for total annual cost (TAC), life cycle cost (F) and footprint area, that is 0.1501, 1,167.59 and 0.633 crores/MLD, respectively. Hence, the order of the cost benefit analysis for the three selected technologies is ASP, SBR and densadeck, respectively indicating that densadeck is the most expensive and ASP is least expensive technology. Further, multiple attribute decision making (MADM) tool for LCC is highly recommended for getting more effective results.


Cost benefit analysis, Life cycle costing, Life cycle assessment, Sequencing batch reactor, Densadeck technology, Activated sludge process, Sewage treatment technologies, Removal efficiency


  1. Ko, J. Y., et al. 2004. A comparative evaluation of money-based and energy-based cost benefit analyses of tertiary municipal wastewater treatment using forested wetlands vs sand filtration in Louisiana. Ecol. Eco., 49(3):331-337.
  2. Gautam, S., et al. 2017. Cost effective treatment technology for small size sewage treatment plants in India. J. Sci. Ind. Res., 76: 249-254.
  3. Piao, W., et al. 2016. Evaluation of monthly environmental loads from municipal wastewater treatment plants operation using life cycle assessment. Env. Eng. Res., 21(3):284-290.
  4. Kim, H.W., K.H. Kim and H.S. park. 2017. Life cycle impact assessment of the environmental infrastructures in operation phase: case of an industrial waste incineration plant. Env. Eng. Res., 22: 266-276.
  5. Guo, J. and S. Ma. 2017. Environmental impact assessment for city logistics distribution systems. Env. Eng. Res., 22: 363-368.
  6. Kalbar, P.P., S. Karmakar and S.R. Asolekar. 2016. Assessment of wastewater treatment technologies: Life cycle approach. Water Env. J., 27: 261-268.
  7. Senante, M. M., F. H. Sancho and R. S. Garrido. 2011. Cost benefit analysis of water reuse projects for environmental purposes: A case study for Spanish wastewater treatment plants. J. Env. Manage., 92: 3091-3097.
  8. Bhoye, V.Y., A.B. Saner and P.D. Aher. 2016. Life cycle cost analysis of sewage treatment plants. Int. J. Modern Trends Eng., 3: 426-429.
  9. Koul, A. and S. John. 2015. A life cycle cost approach for evaluation of sewage treatment plants. Int. J. Innovative Res. Adv. Eng., 2: 15-20.
  10. Kalbar, P.P., S. Karmakar and S.R. Asolekar. 2012. Technology assessment for wastewater treatment using multiple-attribute decision making. Tech. Society. 3: 295-302.
  11. Singh, P., C. C. Marquet and A. Kansal. 2012. Energy pattern analysis of a wastewater treatment plant. Appl. Water Sci., 2: 221-226.
  12. MoEF. 2018. Government of India database for compendium of sewage treatment technologies. Ministry of Environment and Forest, New Delhi. Available at :
  13. DJB. 2018. Wastewater treatment technologies adopted at sewerage treatment plants. Delhi Jal Board, New Delhi. Available at: https://elibrarywcl.files.
  14. APHA. 1998. Standard methods for the examination of waters and wastewaters (20th edn). American public health association, Washington DC, USA.