基于生命周期评价的两种城市生活垃圾处理模式对比

操家顺; 赵嘉楠; 操乾; 吴瑒; 罗景阳; 钱唐健; 柏才华

doi:10.16803/j.cnki.issn.1004-6216.2019.06.016

环境保护科学

, , , , , ,

操家顺, 赵嘉楠, 操乾, 吴瑒, 罗景阳, 钱唐健, 柏才华. 基于生命周期评价的两种城市生活垃圾处理模式对比[J]. 环境保护科学, 2019, (6): 92-100. doi: 10.16803/j.cnki.issn.1004-6216.2019.06.016

引用本文:

CAO Jiashun, ZHAO Jianan, CAO Qian, WU Yang, LUO Jingyang, QIAN Tangjian, BO Caihua. Comparison of Two Disposal Modes of Municipal Solid Waste Based on Life Cycle Assessment[J]. Environmental Protection Science, 2019, (6): 92-100. doi: 10.16803/j.cnki.issn.1004-6216.2019.06.016

Citation:

CAO Jiashun, ZHAO Jianan, CAO Qian, WU Yang, LUO Jingyang, QIAN Tangjian, BO Caihua. Comparison of Two Disposal Modes of Municipal Solid Waste Based on Life Cycle Assessment[J]. Environmental Protection Science, 2019, (6): 92-100. doi: 10.16803/j.cnki.issn.1004-6216.2019.06.016

基于生命周期评价的两种城市生活垃圾处理模式对比

1. 河海大学浅水湖泊综合治理与资源开发教育部重点实验室, 江苏南京 210098;
2. 河海大学环境学院, 江苏南京 210098;
3. 水资源高效利用与工程安全国家工程研究中心, 江苏南京 210098

作者简介: 操家顺(1964-),男,博士、教授。研究方向:水污染控制、水环境修复理论与技术研究。E-mail:caojiashun@163.com

中图分类号: X705

Comparison of Two Disposal Modes of Municipal Solid Waste Based on Life Cycle Assessment

1. Key Laboratory of Integrated Regulation and Resource Development on Shallow Lakes, Ministry of Education, College of Environment, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China;
2. College of Environment, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China;
3. National Research Center of Hydrology and Water Resources Utilization and Engineering Safety, Nanjing 210098, China

摘要: 应用Gabi软件,分析比较了使用厨余垃圾处理器和传统分类处理方法对城市生活垃圾处理处置全过程的生命周期评价(LCA)。研究表明,两种垃圾处理模式环境影响潜值分别为1.44×10^-2和1.39×10^-2,两者的主要环境影响潜力贡献者均为全球变暖,垃圾焚烧为主要环境影响环节;厨余垃圾厌氧发酵技术主要环境影响为酸化,对全球变暖的改善效果明显;厨余垃圾粉碎直排较厌氧发酵技术对酸化的改善效果明显,但对富营养化影响增加了4×10^-2,增加比例为22.5%,污水处理厂尾水收纳水体存在富营养化的风险。
- 城市生活垃圾 /
- 生命周期评价 /
- 厨余垃圾处理器 /
- 环境影响潜值
Abstract: In this study, life cycle assessment (LCA) is applied to compare the environmental impacts of two food waste treatment strategies:traditional food waste treatment and food waste disposer (FWD). The results from Gabi show that the environmental impact potential (EIP) values of these two different municipal solid waste (MSW) treatment modes are 1.44 × 10^-2 and 1.39 × 10^-2. Global warming is the major contributor of EIP for the two treatment modes, and waste incineration is the dominant factor. The major environmental impact of anaerobic digestion of food waste is acidification. It improves the global warming significantly. Food waste crushing and discharging directly has lower acidification impact potential compared with the anaerobic digestion. While its impact on eutrophication potential increases by 4 × 10^-2, with an increase rate of 22.5%. The nutrients concentration in the effluent of wastewater treatment plant may increase, resulting in the eutrophication risk.
- MSW /
- LCA /
- FWD /
- Environmental Impact Potential

点击查看大图

计量

文章访问数: 2099
HTML全文浏览数: 2099
PDF下载数: 23
施引文献: 0

引用本文:

Citation:

CAO Jiashun, ZHAO Jianan, CAO Qian, WU Yang, LUO Jingyang, QIAN Tangjian, BO Caihua. Comparison of Two Disposal Modes of Municipal Solid Waste Based on Life Cycle Assessment[J]. Environmental Protection Science, 2019, (6): 92-100. doi: 10.16803/j.cnki.issn.1004-6216.2019.06.016

基于生命周期评价的两种城市生活垃圾处理模式对比

作者简介: 操家顺(1964-),男,博士、教授。研究方向:水污染控制、水环境修复理论与技术研究。E-mail:caojiashun@163.com
1. 河海大学浅水湖泊综合治理与资源开发教育部重点实验室, 江苏南京 210098;

2. 河海大学环境学院, 江苏南京 210098;

3. 水资源高效利用与工程安全国家工程研究中心, 江苏南京 210098

收稿日期: 2019-08-05

关键词:

摘要: 应用Gabi软件,分析比较了使用厨余垃圾处理器和传统分类处理方法对城市生活垃圾处理处置全过程的生命周期评价(LCA)。研究表明,两种垃圾处理模式环境影响潜值分别为1.44×10^-2和1.39×10^-2,两者的主要环境影响潜力贡献者均为全球变暖,垃圾焚烧为主要环境影响环节;厨余垃圾厌氧发酵技术主要环境影响为酸化,对全球变暖的改善效果明显;厨余垃圾粉碎直排较厌氧发酵技术对酸化的改善效果明显,但对富营养化影响增加了4×10^-2,增加比例为22.5%,污水处理厂尾水收纳水体存在富营养化的风险。

English Abstract

Comparison of Two Disposal Modes of Municipal Solid Waste Based on Life Cycle Assessment

1. Key Laboratory of Integrated Regulation and Resource Development on Shallow Lakes, Ministry of Education, College of Environment, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China;
2. College of Environment, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China;
3. National Research Center of Hydrology and Water Resources Utilization and Engineering Safety, Nanjing 210098, China

Received Date: 2019-08-05

Keywords:

MSW /
LCA /
FWD /
Environmental Impact Potential

Abstract: In this study, life cycle assessment (LCA) is applied to compare the environmental impacts of two food waste treatment strategies:traditional food waste treatment and food waste disposer (FWD). The results from Gabi show that the environmental impact potential (EIP) values of these two different municipal solid waste (MSW) treatment modes are 1.44 × 10^-2 and 1.39 × 10^-2. Global warming is the major contributor of EIP for the two treatment modes, and waste incineration is the dominant factor. The major environmental impact of anaerobic digestion of food waste is acidification. It improves the global warming significantly. Food waste crushing and discharging directly has lower acidification impact potential compared with the anaerobic digestion. While its impact on eutrophication potential increases by 4 × 10^-2, with an increase rate of 22.5%. The nutrients concentration in the effluent of wastewater treatment plant may increase, resulting in the eutrophication risk.