{"title":"为零碳城市确定具有成本效益的食物垃圾资源循环战略的方法学:将增值技术与副产品再利用途径联系起来","authors":"Jinjin Chen , Zhiyong Jason Ren , Anu Ramaswami","doi":"10.1016/j.resconrec.2025.108273","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Many cities seek to understand the intersection between food waste (FW) resource circularity and urban zero-carbon goals. However, currently available FW analytic tools focus only on FW valorization technologies in the current energy system, and do not analyze various byproducts reutilization pathways towards urban decarbonization. Our paper contributes by combing: a) <u>Life cycle assessment</u> of six advanced carbon valorization technologies in a future zero-carbon grid, with: b) <u>Cost-effectiveness analysis</u> of alternative byproducts reutilization pathways that contribute to urban decarbonization, including heating transitions through biogas reutilization in residential furnaces, neighborhood-scale district energy systems (DES), and regional-scale power generation to support heat pumps, as well as transportation fuel transitions and farm-application of digestate and biochar. Among six advanced technologies (beyond composting), anaerobic digestion (AD) with and without biochar amendment delivered maximum carbon mitigation (∼230–270 kg CO<sub>2</sub>-eq/tonne FW), while AD-only has the most energy savings (∼24 therms/tonne FW). Among reutilization pathways, direct use of biogas in existing neighborhood DES yielded the lowest decarbonization cost-effectiveness (-$1000/tonne CO<sub>2</sub>-eq), much lower and cost saving than the next option of biomethane as transportation fuel ($40/tonne CO<sub>2</sub>-eq). The methodology, applied to a cold climate city of St Paul, MN, can be generalized elsewhere and to different resources/byproducts, quantifying for the first time cost-effectiveness of the combined valorization-reutilization resource circularity cycle toward urban decarbonization.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":21153,"journal":{"name":"Resources Conservation and Recycling","volume":"219 ","pages":"Article 108273"},"PeriodicalIF":10.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Methodology for identifying cost-effective food waste-resource circulatory strategies toward zero-carbon cities: Linking valorization technologies with byproduct reutilization pathways\",\"authors\":\"Jinjin Chen , Zhiyong Jason Ren , Anu Ramaswami\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.resconrec.2025.108273\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Many cities seek to understand the intersection between food waste (FW) resource circularity and urban zero-carbon goals. However, currently available FW analytic tools focus only on FW valorization technologies in the current energy system, and do not analyze various byproducts reutilization pathways towards urban decarbonization. Our paper contributes by combing: a) <u>Life cycle assessment</u> of six advanced carbon valorization technologies in a future zero-carbon grid, with: b) <u>Cost-effectiveness analysis</u> of alternative byproducts reutilization pathways that contribute to urban decarbonization, including heating transitions through biogas reutilization in residential furnaces, neighborhood-scale district energy systems (DES), and regional-scale power generation to support heat pumps, as well as transportation fuel transitions and farm-application of digestate and biochar. Among six advanced technologies (beyond composting), anaerobic digestion (AD) with and without biochar amendment delivered maximum carbon mitigation (∼230–270 kg CO<sub>2</sub>-eq/tonne FW), while AD-only has the most energy savings (∼24 therms/tonne FW). Among reutilization pathways, direct use of biogas in existing neighborhood DES yielded the lowest decarbonization cost-effectiveness (-$1000/tonne CO<sub>2</sub>-eq), much lower and cost saving than the next option of biomethane as transportation fuel ($40/tonne CO<sub>2</sub>-eq). The methodology, applied to a cold climate city of St Paul, MN, can be generalized elsewhere and to different resources/byproducts, quantifying for the first time cost-effectiveness of the combined valorization-reutilization resource circularity cycle toward urban decarbonization.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21153,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Resources Conservation and Recycling\",\"volume\":\"219 \",\"pages\":\"Article 108273\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":10.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Resources Conservation and Recycling\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344925001521\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Resources Conservation and Recycling","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344925001521","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
许多城市试图理解食物垃圾资源循环和城市零碳目标之间的交集。然而,目前可用的FW分析工具只关注当前能源系统中的FW增值技术,而没有分析各种副产品再利用途径对城市脱碳的影响。本文通过梳理:a)未来零碳电网中六种先进碳增值技术的生命周期评估,以及:b)有助于城市脱碳的替代副产品再利用途径的成本效益分析,包括通过住宅炉的沼气再利用进行供暖转换、社区规模的区域能源系统(DES)和区域规模的发电来支持热泵,以及运输燃料转换和消化物和生物炭的农业应用。在六种先进技术(除堆肥之外)中,有无生物炭改性的厌氧消化(AD)提供了最大的碳减排(~ 230-270 kg co2当量/吨FW),而AD仅具有最多的节能(~ 24热/吨FW)。在再利用途径中,在现有的社区DES中直接使用沼气产生的脱碳成本效益最低(- 1000美元/吨二氧化碳当量),比生物甲烷作为运输燃料的下一个选择(40美元/吨二氧化碳当量)低得多,而且成本节省。该方法应用于明尼苏达州圣保罗的寒冷气候城市,可以推广到其他地方和不同的资源/副产品,首次量化了城市脱碳的组合增值-再利用资源循环循环的成本效益。
Methodology for identifying cost-effective food waste-resource circulatory strategies toward zero-carbon cities: Linking valorization technologies with byproduct reutilization pathways
Many cities seek to understand the intersection between food waste (FW) resource circularity and urban zero-carbon goals. However, currently available FW analytic tools focus only on FW valorization technologies in the current energy system, and do not analyze various byproducts reutilization pathways towards urban decarbonization. Our paper contributes by combing: a) Life cycle assessment of six advanced carbon valorization technologies in a future zero-carbon grid, with: b) Cost-effectiveness analysis of alternative byproducts reutilization pathways that contribute to urban decarbonization, including heating transitions through biogas reutilization in residential furnaces, neighborhood-scale district energy systems (DES), and regional-scale power generation to support heat pumps, as well as transportation fuel transitions and farm-application of digestate and biochar. Among six advanced technologies (beyond composting), anaerobic digestion (AD) with and without biochar amendment delivered maximum carbon mitigation (∼230–270 kg CO2-eq/tonne FW), while AD-only has the most energy savings (∼24 therms/tonne FW). Among reutilization pathways, direct use of biogas in existing neighborhood DES yielded the lowest decarbonization cost-effectiveness (-$1000/tonne CO2-eq), much lower and cost saving than the next option of biomethane as transportation fuel ($40/tonne CO2-eq). The methodology, applied to a cold climate city of St Paul, MN, can be generalized elsewhere and to different resources/byproducts, quantifying for the first time cost-effectiveness of the combined valorization-reutilization resource circularity cycle toward urban decarbonization.
期刊介绍:
The journal Resources, Conservation & Recycling welcomes contributions from research, which consider sustainable management and conservation of resources. The journal prioritizes understanding the transformation processes crucial for transitioning toward more sustainable production and consumption systems. It highlights technological, economic, institutional, and policy aspects related to specific resource management practices such as conservation, recycling, and resource substitution, as well as broader strategies like improving resource productivity and restructuring production and consumption patterns.
Contributions may address regional, national, or international scales and can range from individual resources or technologies to entire sectors or systems. Authors are encouraged to explore scientific and methodological issues alongside practical, environmental, and economic implications. However, manuscripts focusing solely on laboratory experiments without discussing their broader implications will not be considered for publication in the journal.