Systematic Approach to Identifying Economically Feasible and Environmentally Benign Methods of Recycling Ash on a Regional Scale

I. Deviatkin, J. Havukainen, M. Horttanainen
{"title":"Systematic Approach to Identifying Economically Feasible and Environmentally Benign Methods of Recycling Ash on a Regional Scale","authors":"I. Deviatkin, J. Havukainen, M. Horttanainen","doi":"10.12783/ISSN.1544-8053/13/3/2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study systematically assessed and compared four ash recycling possibilities, namely forest fertilization, landfill construction, road construction, and road stabilization through the use of cost-benefit analysis and life cycle assessment methods. The results indicated that forest fertilization with ash was the most economically attractive method with a 60% increase in the net present value compared to ash landfilling, while reducing the environmental impact by 0.3%. On the contrary, road construction with ash resulted in a 13% reduction in the environmental impact and an increase in net present value of 25%. Landfill construction with ash was overall the least attractive proposition.","PeriodicalId":17101,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Residuals Science & Technology","volume":"54 1","pages":"185-196"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Residuals Science & Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12783/ISSN.1544-8053/13/3/2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

This study systematically assessed and compared four ash recycling possibilities, namely forest fertilization, landfill construction, road construction, and road stabilization through the use of cost-benefit analysis and life cycle assessment methods. The results indicated that forest fertilization with ash was the most economically attractive method with a 60% increase in the net present value compared to ash landfilling, while reducing the environmental impact by 0.3%. On the contrary, road construction with ash resulted in a 13% reduction in the environmental impact and an increase in net present value of 25%. Landfill construction with ash was overall the least attractive proposition.
在区域范围内确定经济可行和环境友好的灰回收方法的系统方法
本研究采用成本效益分析和生命周期评价方法,系统评价和比较了森林施肥、填埋、筑路和筑路4种灰资源化可能性。结果表明,森林灰施肥是最具经济吸引力的方法,与灰填埋相比,净现值增加60%,同时减少0.3%的环境影响。相反,使用灰的道路建设对环境的影响减少了13%,净现值增加了25%。总的来说,用灰建造垃圾填埋场是最不吸引人的提议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Residuals Science & Technology
Journal of Residuals Science & Technology 环境科学-工程:环境
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>36 weeks
期刊介绍: The international Journal of Residuals Science & Technology (JRST) is a blind-refereed quarterly devoted to conscientious analysis and commentary regarding significant environmental sciences-oriented research and technical management of residuals in the environment. The journal provides a forum for scientific investigations addressing contamination within environmental media of air, water, soil, and biota and also offers studies exploring source, fate, transport, and ecological effects of environmental contamination.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信