Subsequent scenarios (III-V) used WW after secondary treatment for nutrient recovery (Chemical precipitation, ion-exchange, and microalgae). The net GWP of Scenarios III-V were 329, 262, and 1154 g CO2 Eq./m 3 . When compared with conventional WW treatment (Scenario-I), chemical precipitation and ion-exchange offers 20 and 36% reduction in GWP respectively. However, microalgae consumed energy in its race-way pond (550 kWh/m 3 ) and subsequent unit operations (pumping, aeration, recirculation and harvesting) resulted in higher GWP (85% higher than Scenario-I). Other literature reported similar GWP of 1100 -2160 gCO2 Eq./m 3 using microalgae as a nutrient recovery option post to WW treatment (Arashiro et al., 2022; Schneider et al., 2018) (Figure ). However, when compared with Schneider et al, this work reports a 53% reduction in GWP.