...
首页> 外文期刊>Ecological Economics >Burn or bury? A social cost comparison of final waste disposal methods
【24h】

Burn or bury? A social cost comparison of final waste disposal methods

机译:烧还是埋?最终废物处理方法的社会成本比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

This paper evaluates the two well-known final waste disposal methods, incineration and landfilling. In particular we compare the social cost of two best-available technologies using a point estimate based on private and environmental cost data for the Netherlands. Not only does our comparison allow for Waste-to-Energy incineration plants but for landfills as well. The data provide support for the widespread policy preference for incineration over landfilling only if the analysis is restricted to environmental costs alone and includes savings of both energy and material recovery. Gross private costs, however, are so much higher for incineration, that landfilling is the social cost minimizing option at the margin even in a densely populated country such as the Netherlands. Furthermore, we show that our result generalizes to other European countries and probably to the USA. Implications for waste policy are discussed as well. Proper treatment of and energy recovery from landfills seem to be the most important targets for waste policy. Finally, WTE plants are a very expensive way to save on climate change emissions.
机译:本文评估了两种众所周知的最终废物处理方法,即焚化和填埋。特别是,我们根据荷兰的私人和环境成本数据,使用点估计来比较两种最佳技术的社会成本。我们的比较不仅允许将废物转化为能源的焚化厂,还可以将垃圾填埋场。仅当分析仅限于环境成本并且包括节省能源和材料回收时,数据才为焚烧而不是填埋的广泛政策偏好提供支持。但是,焚化的私人总成本要高得多,即使在人口稠密的国家(例如荷兰),垃圾填埋也是将社会成本降至最低的选择。此外,我们证明我们的结果可以推广到其他欧洲国家,甚至可以推广到美国。还讨论了废物政策的含义。正确处理垃圾掩埋场并从中回收能量似乎是废物政策的最重要目标。最后,垃圾焚烧发电厂是节省气候变化排放的非常昂贵的方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号