|
| 农村资源化厕所技术和实施的效益分析 |
| Rural toilets combined with resource recovery: available techniques and benefit analysis |
| 投稿时间：2020-06-28 修订日期：2020-09-08 |
| DOI： |
| 中文关键词: 厕所 农村污水 资源回收 经济效益 环境效益 |
| 英文关键词: toilet rural sewage resource recovery economic benefit environmental benefit |
| 基金项目:国家重点研发计划 |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 612 |
| 全文下载次数: 0 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 为更好地指导农村地区因地制宜地实现生活污水资源化,本文首先对资源化厕所技术研究现状进行了综述,并通过费用效益分析和生命周期评价分别研究了7种情景下资源化厕所系统的经济与环境效益(A：传统水冲式厕所；B1~B2：仅对尿液进行资源化处理；C1~C4：对粪尿同时进行资源化处理)。结果表明：情景B1、情景B2与完整下水道水冲式厕所系统的经济效益接近,而情景C1~C4的ENPV相对情景A的ENPV分别提高了72.96万元(提高81.74%)、49.65万元(提高55.62%)、52.28万元(提高58.57%)、24.05万元(提高26.94%)；相对于情景A,情景C1~C4在除TETP之外的所有环境影响类型上均具有更优的环境效益。研究表明,对粪尿同时进行资源化处理的资源回收型厕所系统比传统水冲厕所以及仅对尿液进行资源化处理的厕所系统具有更高的经济和环境效益。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| To provide systematic guidance on resource recovery from the sanitary sewage in the rural area, this paper review the techniques of resource-oriented toilet, followed by a cost-benefit analysis combined with life cycle assessment to reveal the economic and environmental benefit of toilet systems under 7 different scenarios (A: traditional water closed latrine; B1~B2: resource-oriented toilet (only urine); C1~C4: resource-oriented toilet (both urine and feces)). The result shows that scenario B1~B2 are similar to scenario A considering the economic benefit while ENPV of scenario C1~C4 is higher than that of scenario A (CNY 7.296×105; CNY 4.965×105 CNY; 5.228×105; CNY 2.405×105 separately). Besides, environmental benefit of scenario C1~C4 is higher than that of scenario A considering all the studied impact category except TETP. The conclusion shows that the toilet system recover resource in both urine and feces has more economical and environmental benefits than the toilet system only recovering resource in urine and the traditional water closed latrine. |
| HTML
View Fulltext
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
