Department of Environmental Planning, Graduate School of Environmental Studies, Seoul National University, San 56-1, Sillim-Dong, Gwanak-Gu, Seoul 151-742, Republic of Korea.
Waste Manag. 2011 Sep-Oct;31(9-10):2112-20. doi: 10.1016/j.wasman.2011.04.019. Epub 2011 May 25.
The costs associated with eight food waste disposal options, dry feeding, wet feeding, composting, anaerobic digestion, co-digestion with sewage sludge, food waste disposer, incineration, and landfilling, were evaluated in the perspective of global warming and energy and/or resource recovery. An expanded system boundary was employed to compare by-products. Life cycle cost was analyzed through the entire disposal process, which included discharge, separate collection, transportation, treatment, and final disposal stages, all of which were included in the system boundary. Costs and benefits were estimated by an avoided impact. Environmental benefits of each system per 1 tonne of food waste management were estimated using carbon prices resulting from CO(2) reduction by avoided impact, as well as the prices of by-products such as animal feed, compost, and electricity. We found that the cost of landfilling was the lowest, followed by co-digestion. The benefits of wet feeding systems were the highest and landfilling the lowest.
从全球变暖以及能源和（或）资源回收的角度，评估了 8 种食物垃圾处理方法（干喂、湿喂、堆肥、厌氧消化、与污水污泥共消化、食物垃圾处理机、焚烧和填埋）的相关成本。采用扩展的系统边界来比较副产品。通过整个处理过程（包括排放、分类收集、运输、处理和最终处置阶段）的生命周期成本分析，所有这些都包含在系统边界内。通过避免影响来估计成本和收益。使用因避免影响而减少的 CO(2)所产生的碳价格，以及动物饲料、堆肥和电力等副产品的价格，估算了每吨食物废物管理的每个系统的环境效益。我们发现，填埋的成本最低，其次是共消化。湿喂系统的效益最高，而填埋的效益最低。
