| 我国厨余垃圾资源化技术的多维绩效评价 |
| 摘要点击 1778 全文点击 1216 投稿时间：2022-06-30 修订日期：2022-08-15 |
| 查看HTML全文
查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 中文关键词 厨余垃圾 技术 多维绩效评价 厌氧消化 好氧生物处理 昆虫饲料转化 |
| 英文关键词 food waste technology multidimensional performance assessment anaerobic digestion aerobic biological treatment insect feed conversion |
|
| 中文摘要 |
| 随着我国大力推动生活垃圾分类管理工作,厨余垃圾的资源化利用受到越来越多关注.厨余垃圾资源化技术已有包括厌氧消化处理、好氧生物处理和昆虫饲料转化等类型,但在已有应用案例中存在资源化程度低、环境影响显著和经济效益差等诸多问题,缺乏技术绩效的系统化分析和综合性评价.为此,研究面向厨余垃圾资源化技术应用的全生命周期过程,构建了资源效率、环境影响、经济可行和社会效应的多维绩效评价指标体系(包括21项指标),以我国的14项典型技术应用项目为案例开展定量化综合评价研究.结果表明,厌氧消化和昆虫饲料转化处理技术的得分分别为58.39分和59.65分,高于好氧生物处理(49.16分);按细分技术类型,集中式黑水虻转化和中温湿式厌氧工艺得分较高,分别为67.14分和60.82分.按技术的处理规模和设施分布方式,集中式处理技术在资源效率和经济效益维度上分别比分散式技术高出13%和62%;分散式处理技术在环境影响和社会效应维度上比集中式高出8%和34%.在厨余垃圾资源化实践中,应结合当地的厨余垃圾理化性质、生活垃圾分类收集工作推进情况、财政承担能力和收运距离等多因素综合考量,因地制宜的选择适宜技术路线. |
| 英文摘要 |
| In recent years, China has made great efforts to carry out source-separation in municipal solid waste management; in particular, the utilization of food waste has received increasing attention. Food waste-utilizing technologies, including anaerobic digestion, aerobic biological treatment, and insect feed conversion, are currently applied in China. However, in the existing cases, there were several disadvantages, such as a low rate of utilization, significant environmental impacts, poor economic benefits, etc., as well as a lack of systematic analysis and comprehensive assessment of the performances of food waste utilization technologies. In this study, a four-dimensional performance assessment method (resource efficiency, environmental impact, economic feasibility, and social effect, with 21 indicators) was established for assessing the life cycle process of food waste utilization technologies. We collected detailed information of 14 typical food waste utilization cases in China, and the results showed that the average scores of anaerobic digestion and insect feed conversion were 58.39 and 59.65, higher than those of the aerobic biological treatment (49.16). The highest scores among all subdivision technologies were centralized black soldier fly conversion and mesophilic wet anaerobic digestion, which were 67.14 and 60.82, respectively. With respect to the technologies of different treatment capacities and distribution modes, i.e., centralized and decentralized technologies, the resource efficiency and economic benefit scores of the former were 13% and 62% higher than those of the latter, whereas the environmental impacts and social effect scores of the latter were 8% and 34% greater than those of the former, respectively. In practice, the utilization technology of food waste should be chosen according to local conditions, such as the physical and chemical properties of food waste, the classification of municipal solid waste, financial affordability, collection and transportation distance, etc. |
|
|
|
