评估减少废物和转移废物以取代堆填区处置

K. Lai, Linda Li, Sammy Mutti, R. Staring, M. Taylor, Jun Umali, S. Pagsuyoin
{"title":"评估减少废物和转移废物以取代堆填区处置","authors":"K. Lai, Linda Li, Sammy Mutti, R. Staring, M. Taylor, Jun Umali, S. Pagsuyoin","doi":"10.1109/SIEDS.2014.6829877","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although the Region of Waterloo implements a waste recycling program as part of its compliance with the 2004 Ontario Waste Diversion Goal a large fraction of its municipal solid waste ends up in the landfill. Landfill waste disposal adversely impacts the environment through the release of air pollutants and greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, and through the generation of leachate that may contaminate water sources. Landfills also require large land areas, which limit their long-term sustainability. This paper presents a quantitative comparison of the environmental, economic, and social impacts of the current waste disposal program in the Region of Waterloo and of three waste management alternatives: (i) expansion of the organics collection program with biogas recovery, (ii) expansion of the recycling program, and (iii) incineration with energy recovery. Environmental impacts were evaluated by performing a life cycle analysis using the US EPA's Waste Reduction Model. Economic impacts were quantified using cost-benefit analysis; social impacts were evaluated using a previously developed scoring scheme. Finally, the overall impacts were ranked and analyzed using the Saaty's Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to determine an optimal alternative to landfill disposal. Results indicate that incineration with energy recovery is ranked the highest overall in all three evaluation criteria categories. Incineration results in the greatest gas reductions (86%) and the lowest cost to implement. Incineration also ranks the highest in the social impacts ranking due to reductions in foul odors, potential for attracting disease vectors, and land requirements. Expanding the recycling collection improves greenhouse gas emissions by 41% of the current method; it also reduces disposal costs. Overall, all three alternatives are better than the current waste disposal method, and incineration is deemed the optimal waste management option for the Region of Waterloo.","PeriodicalId":441073,"journal":{"name":"2014 Systems and Information Engineering Design Symposium (SIEDS)","volume":"96 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of waste reduction and diversion as alternatives to landfill disposal\",\"authors\":\"K. Lai, Linda Li, Sammy Mutti, R. Staring, M. Taylor, Jun Umali, S. Pagsuyoin\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/SIEDS.2014.6829877\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Although the Region of Waterloo implements a waste recycling program as part of its compliance with the 2004 Ontario Waste Diversion Goal a large fraction of its municipal solid waste ends up in the landfill. Landfill waste disposal adversely impacts the environment through the release of air pollutants and greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, and through the generation of leachate that may contaminate water sources. Landfills also require large land areas, which limit their long-term sustainability. This paper presents a quantitative comparison of the environmental, economic, and social impacts of the current waste disposal program in the Region of Waterloo and of three waste management alternatives: (i) expansion of the organics collection program with biogas recovery, (ii) expansion of the recycling program, and (iii) incineration with energy recovery. Environmental impacts were evaluated by performing a life cycle analysis using the US EPA's Waste Reduction Model. Economic impacts were quantified using cost-benefit analysis; social impacts were evaluated using a previously developed scoring scheme. Finally, the overall impacts were ranked and analyzed using the Saaty's Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to determine an optimal alternative to landfill disposal. Results indicate that incineration with energy recovery is ranked the highest overall in all three evaluation criteria categories. Incineration results in the greatest gas reductions (86%) and the lowest cost to implement. Incineration also ranks the highest in the social impacts ranking due to reductions in foul odors, potential for attracting disease vectors, and land requirements. Expanding the recycling collection improves greenhouse gas emissions by 41% of the current method; it also reduces disposal costs. Overall, all three alternatives are better than the current waste disposal method, and incineration is deemed the optimal waste management option for the Region of Waterloo.\",\"PeriodicalId\":441073,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2014 Systems and Information Engineering Design Symposium (SIEDS)\",\"volume\":\"96 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-04-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2014 Systems and Information Engineering Design Symposium (SIEDS)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/SIEDS.2014.6829877\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2014 Systems and Information Engineering Design Symposium (SIEDS)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SIEDS.2014.6829877","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

摘要

尽管滑铁卢地区实施了废物回收计划,作为其遵守2004年安大略省废物转移目标的一部分,但其大部分城市固体废物最终被填埋。堆填区的废物处置会向大气释放空气污染物和温室气体,并产生可能污染水源的渗滤液,从而对环境产生不利影响。垃圾填埋场还需要大片土地,这限制了它们的长期可持续性。本文对滑铁卢地区目前的废物处理计划和三种废物管理替代方案的环境、经济和社会影响进行了定量比较:(i)扩大有机收集计划与沼气回收,(ii)扩大回收计划,(iii)焚烧与能源回收。通过使用美国环保署的废物减少模型进行生命周期分析,评估了环境影响。采用成本效益分析量化经济影响;社会影响使用先前开发的评分方案进行评估。最后,使用Saaty的层次分析法(AHP)对总体影响进行排名和分析,以确定填埋场处置的最佳替代方案。结果表明,在所有三个评价标准类别中,焚烧能源回收的总体排名最高。焚烧可以最大限度地减少气体排放(86%),并降低实施成本。焚烧在社会影响排名中也排名最高,因为它减少了恶臭,吸引了疾病媒介的可能性,并且占用了土地。扩大回收收集使温室气体排放量比现有方法减少41%;它还降低了处理成本。总的来说,这三种替代方案都比目前的废物处理方法更好,焚烧被认为是滑铁卢地区的最佳废物管理方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of waste reduction and diversion as alternatives to landfill disposal
Although the Region of Waterloo implements a waste recycling program as part of its compliance with the 2004 Ontario Waste Diversion Goal a large fraction of its municipal solid waste ends up in the landfill. Landfill waste disposal adversely impacts the environment through the release of air pollutants and greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, and through the generation of leachate that may contaminate water sources. Landfills also require large land areas, which limit their long-term sustainability. This paper presents a quantitative comparison of the environmental, economic, and social impacts of the current waste disposal program in the Region of Waterloo and of three waste management alternatives: (i) expansion of the organics collection program with biogas recovery, (ii) expansion of the recycling program, and (iii) incineration with energy recovery. Environmental impacts were evaluated by performing a life cycle analysis using the US EPA's Waste Reduction Model. Economic impacts were quantified using cost-benefit analysis; social impacts were evaluated using a previously developed scoring scheme. Finally, the overall impacts were ranked and analyzed using the Saaty's Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to determine an optimal alternative to landfill disposal. Results indicate that incineration with energy recovery is ranked the highest overall in all three evaluation criteria categories. Incineration results in the greatest gas reductions (86%) and the lowest cost to implement. Incineration also ranks the highest in the social impacts ranking due to reductions in foul odors, potential for attracting disease vectors, and land requirements. Expanding the recycling collection improves greenhouse gas emissions by 41% of the current method; it also reduces disposal costs. Overall, all three alternatives are better than the current waste disposal method, and incineration is deemed the optimal waste management option for the Region of Waterloo.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信