Suppr超能文献

渗滤液回灌对垃圾填埋场环境影响的评估:蒸发和排放(EASEWASTE)的比较。

Environmental impact assessment of leachate recirculation in landfill of municipal solid waste by comparing with evaporation and discharge (EASEWASTE).

机构信息

School of Environment, Tsinghua University, 100084 Beijing, China.

出版信息

Waste Manag. 2013 Feb;33(2):382-9. doi: 10.1016/j.wasman.2012.10.017. Epub 2012 Nov 22.

Abstract

In some arid regions where landfill produces minimal amount of leachate, leachate recirculation is suggested as a cost-effective option. However, its long-term impacts to environment remain disputed. For the purpose of revealing the environmental impacts of leachate recirculation in landfill, four scenarios were modeled using EASEWASTE, comparing the strategies of leachate recirculation (with or without gas management), evaporation and discharge. In the current situation (Scenario A), a total of 280 t of waste was generated and then transported to a conventional landfill for disposal. A number of contaminants derived from waste can be stored in the landfill for long periods, with 11.69 person equivalent (PE) for stored ecotoxicity in water and 29.62 PE for stored ecotoxicity in soil, considered as potential risks of releasing to the environment someday. Meanwhile, impacts to ecotoxicity and human toxicity in surface water, and those to groundwater, present relatively low levels. In Scenario B, leachate evaporation in a collecting pool has minimal impacts on surface water. However, this strategy significantly impacts groundwater (1055.16 PE) because of the potential infiltration of leachate, with major contaminants of As, ammonia, and Cd. A number of ions, such as Cl(-), Mg(2+), and Ca(2+), may also contaminate groundwater. In Scenario C, the direct discharge of leachate to surface water may result in acidification (2.71 PE) and nutrient enrichment (2.88 PE), primarily attributed to soluble ammonia in leachate and the depositional ammonia from biogas. Moreover, the direct discharge of leachate may also result in ecotoxicity and human toxicity via water contaminated by heavy metals in leachate, with 3.96 PE and 11.64 PE respectively. The results also show that landfill gas is the main contributor to global warming and photochemical ozone formation due to methane emission. In Scenario D, landfill gas flaring was thus be modeled and proven to be efficient for reducing impacts by approximately 90% in most categories, like global warming, photochemical ozone formation, acidification, nutrient enrichment, ecotoxicity, and human toxicity. Therefore, leachate recirculation is considered a cost-effective and environmentally viable solution for the current situation, and landfill gas treatment is urgently required. These results can provide important evidence for leachate and gas management of landfill in arid regions.

摘要

在一些垃圾填埋场产生的渗滤液很少的干旱地区,建议采用渗滤液回灌作为一种具有成本效益的选择。然而,其对环境的长期影响仍存在争议。为了揭示垃圾填埋场渗滤液回灌对环境的影响,采用 EASEWASTE 模型模拟了四种情景,比较了渗滤液回灌(有或无气体管理)、蒸发和排放的策略。在当前情况下(情景 A),总共产生了 280 吨废物,然后运往传统的垃圾填埋场进行处理。废物中产生的许多污染物可以在垃圾填埋场中储存很长时间,水中储存的生态毒性为 11.69 人当量(PE),土壤中储存的生态毒性为 29.62PE,被认为是将来有释放到环境中的潜在风险。同时,地表水的生态毒性和人类毒性以及地下水的影响水平相对较低。在情景 B 中,集水池中的渗滤液蒸发对地表水的影响最小。然而,由于渗滤液的潜在渗透,这种策略会对地下水造成重大影响(1055.16PE),主要污染物为砷、氨和镉。一些离子,如 Cl(-)、Mg(2+)和 Ca(2+),也可能污染地下水。在情景 C 中,渗滤液直接排入地表水可能导致酸化(2.71PE)和营养物富积(2.88PE),主要归因于渗滤液中的可溶性氨和沼气中的沉积氨。此外,渗滤液的直接排放还可能通过渗滤液中的重金属污染的水导致生态毒性和人类毒性,分别为 3.96PE 和 11.64PE。结果还表明,由于甲烷排放,垃圾填埋气是全球变暖和光化学臭氧形成的主要贡献者。在情景 D 中,因此对垃圾填埋气燃烧进行了建模,并证明在大多数类别(如全球变暖、光化学臭氧形成、酸化、营养物富积、生态毒性和人类毒性)中,该方法可有效减少约 90%的影响。因此,渗滤液回灌被认为是当前情况下具有成本效益和环境可行性的解决方案,迫切需要对垃圾填埋气进行处理。这些结果可为干旱地区垃圾填埋场渗滤液和气体管理提供重要依据。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验