Yi Yanqing, Fei Xunchang, Fedele Andrea, Lavagnolo Maria Cristina, Manzardo Alessandro
DICEA, Department of Civil, Environmental and Architecture Engineering, University of Padua, Via Marzolo 9, 35131 Padova, Italy; CESQA, Department of Civil, Environmental and Architecture Engineering, University of Padua, Via Marzolo 9, 35131 Padova, Italy; School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 50 Nanyang Avenue, Singapore, 639798, Singapore.
School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 50 Nanyang Avenue, Singapore, 639798, Singapore.
Sci Total Environ. 2024 Nov 15;951:175408. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.175408. Epub 2024 Aug 9.
Construction and demolition waste (C&DW) represents a pressing concern within the European Union, underscoring the urgent need for effective waste management strategies. The selection of these solutions constitutes a complex task, entailing the identification of efficient C&DW management strategies that balance appropriate practices, regulatory compliance, resource conservation, economic feasibility, and environmental considerations. LCA is widely utilized to assess environmental impact, yet the economic aspect has not been adequately incorporated into the LCA process in the field of C&DW management. The life cycle costing (LCC) methodology has been tailored to assess economic performance in conjunction with LCA. The selection of an appropriate multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) method is vital for the C&DW system. This study proposes a novel framework for C&DW management by integrating LCA and LCC outcomes into MCDM, using AHP for weight determination, and applying TOPSIS to identify the favorable alternative. Four waste management alternatives were examined in the Lombardy region of Italy, namely (i) landfill; (ii) recycling for concrete production and road construction, incineration with energy recovery; (iii) recycling for road construction; (iv) recycling for concrete production and road construction. We determine that, with the implementation of various scenarios, the most suitable scenario emerges to be recycled for concrete production and road construction, with a score of 0.711/1; recycling for road construction with final score 0.291/1, ranks second; recycling for concrete production and road construction, incineration with energy recovery scores 0.002/1, ranks third; and landfill (scores: 0/1) is the worst choice, signifying it has the highest environmental impacts and the least economic benefits. Lastly, recommendations were formulated to enhance the environmental performance of the system.
建筑与拆除废物（C&DW）是欧盟内部一个紧迫的问题，凸显了有效废物管理策略的迫切需求。选择这些解决方案是一项复杂的任务，需要确定有效的C&DW管理策略，以平衡适当的做法、法规遵从性、资源保护、经济可行性和环境考量。生命周期评估（LCA）被广泛用于评估环境影响，但在C&DW管理领域，经济方面尚未充分纳入LCA过程。生命周期成本核算（LCC）方法已被调整用于结合LCA评估经济绩效。选择合适的多标准决策（MCDM）方法对C&DW系统至关重要。本研究提出了一个用于C&DW管理的新颖框架，即将LCA和LCC结果整合到MCDM中，使用层次分析法（AHP）确定权重，并应用理想解排序法（TOPSIS）来识别有利的替代方案。在意大利伦巴第地区考察了四种废物管理替代方案，即（i）填埋；（ii）回收用于混凝土生产和道路建设、焚烧并回收能源；（iii）回收用于道路建设；（iv）回收用于混凝土生产和道路建设。我们确定，在实施各种情景后，最合适的情景是回收用于混凝土生产和道路建设，得分为0.711/1；回收用于道路建设最终得分为0.291/1，排名第二；回收用于混凝土生产和道路建设、焚烧并回收能源得分为0.002/1，排名第三；而填埋（得分：0/1）是最差的选择，这表明它具有最高的环境影响和最低的经济效益。最后，制定了建议以提高系统的环境绩效。
Zotero 插件