Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, 32610 Seri Iskandar, Perak Darul Ridzuan, Malaysia.
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Waste Manag. 2017 Dec;70:282-292. doi: 10.1016/j.wasman.2017.08.044. Epub 2017 Sep 19.
Malaysian authorities has planned to minimize and stop when applicable unsanitary dumping of waste as it puts human health and the environment at elevated risk. Cost, energy and revenue are mostly adopted to draw the blueprint of upgrading municipal solid waste management system, while the carbon footprint emissions criterion rarely acts asa crucial factor. This study aims to alert Malaysian stakeholders on the uneven danger of carbon footprint emissions of waste technologies. Hence, three scenarios have been proposed and assessed mainly on the carbon footprint emissions using the 2006 IPCC methodology. The first scenario is waste dumping in sanitary landfills equipped with gas recovery system, while the second scenario includes anaerobic digestion of organics and recycling of recyclable wastes such as plastic, glass and textile wastes. The third scenario is waste incineration. Besides the carbon footprint emissions criterion, other environmental concerns were also examined. The results showed that the second scenario recorded the lowest carbon footprint emissions of 0.251t CO eq./t MSW while the third scenario had the highest emissions of 0.646t CO eq./t MSW. Additionally, the integration between anaerobic digestion and recycling techniques caused the highest avoided CO eq. emissions of 0.74t CO eq./t MSW. The net CO eq. emissions of the second scenario equaled -0.489t CO eq./t MSW due to energy recovery from the biogas and because of recycled plastic, glass and textile wastes that could replace usage of raw material. The outcomes also showed that the first scenario generates huge amount of leachate and hazardous air constituents. The study estimated that a ton of dumped waste inside the landfills generates approximately 0.88m of trace risky compounds and 0.188m of leachate. As for energy production, the results showed that the third scenario is capable of generating 639kWh/t MSW followed by the second scenario with 387.59kWh/t MSW. The first scenario produced 296.79kWh/t MSW. In conclusion, the outcomes of this study recommend an integrated scenario of anaerobic digestion and recycling techniques to be employed in Malaysia.
马来西亚当局已计划尽量减少并在适用情况下停止不卫生的废物倾倒,因为这会使人类健康和环境面临更高的风险。成本、能源和收入大多被用来规划升级城市固体废物管理系统,而碳足迹排放标准很少作为一个关键因素。本研究旨在提醒马来西亚利益相关者注意废物技术的碳足迹排放的不均衡危险。因此,提出并评估了三个方案,主要使用 2006 年气专委方法评估碳足迹排放。第一个方案是将废物倾倒在配备气体回收系统的卫生垃圾填埋场,第二个方案包括有机物质的厌氧消化和可回收废物(如塑料、玻璃和纺织废物)的回收。第三个方案是废物焚烧。除了碳足迹排放标准外,还研究了其他环境问题。结果表明,第二个方案的碳足迹排放量最低,为 0.251t CO eq./t MSW,而第三个方案的碳足迹排放量最高,为 0.646t CO eq./t MSW。此外,厌氧消化和回收技术的结合导致了 0.74t CO eq./t MSW 的最高避免 CO eq.排放量。由于沼气的能源回收和可回收塑料、玻璃和纺织废物代替了原材料的使用,第二个方案的净 CO eq.排放量为 -0.489t CO eq./t MSW。结果还表明,第一个方案会产生大量渗滤液和危险空气成分。研究估计,每在垃圾填埋场倾倒一吨废物,大约会产生 0.88 立方米的痕量高风险化合物和 0.188 立方米的渗滤液。至于能源生产,结果表明,第三个方案能够产生 639kWh/t MSW 的电量,其次是第二个方案,产生 387.59kWh/t MSW 的电量,第一个方案产生 296.79kWh/t MSW 的电量。总之,本研究的结果建议在马来西亚采用厌氧消化和回收技术的综合方案。