首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Environmental Management >Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of possible methods for the treatment of contaminated soil at an environmentally degraded site
【24h】

Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of possible methods for the treatment of contaminated soil at an environmentally degraded site

机译:比较生命周期评估在环境退化地点处理污染土壤的可能方法

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

This study reports on the assessment of the environmental sustainability of different management practices for an environmentally degraded site in Slovenia: the Old Zinc-Works in the town of Celje. Life Cycle Assessments (LCAs) were applied in order to evaluate possible trade-offs by comparing a proposed in situ remediation scenario with two other reclamation scenarios (scenario 2: incineration, metal extraction, underground disposal and reclamation of the site by refilling it with replacement material, and scenario 3: underground disposal and reclamation of the site by refilling it with replacement material) and with a no-action scenario. The results of the comparisons performed show that in the case of the in situ remediation scenario, the consumption of resources is smaller by a factor of 51 compared to that in the second scenario and by a factor of 7 compared to that in the third scenario. The impacts on human health and ecosystem quality are approximately 30 and 3.5 times less in the first scenario than in the second and third scenarios, respectively. Compared to the impact of the no-action scenario, the impact on human health of the in situ soil remediation scenario is approximately 6 times less, whereas its impact on the ecosystem is approximately 4 times less. The results confirmed that the in situ soil remediation scenario is the most sustainable practice from an environmental point of view. Its main advantage lies in the achieved conservation of natural resources. Despite the recovery of valuable metals (Zn, Pb, Cu, and Ni) from the bottom ash, the second scenario is significantly more environmentally burdensome compared to both the first and third scenarios. This outcome is due to the significantly high impacts related to the consumption of fuels needed to support the incineration of low-calorific contaminated soil and to electricity consumption. The present study demonstrates that the results of LCA studies, in addition to technological, economic and social indicators, yield important information about the sustainability of different management practices and therefore should be an important part of decision-making when approaching the reclamation of environmentally degraded sites.
机译:这项研究报告了对斯洛文尼亚一个环境退化场所的不同管理实践在环境可持续性方面的评估:斯利耶镇的旧锌厂。应用生命周期评估(LCA)是为了通过比较拟议的现场修复方案与其他两个填海方案(方案2:焚化,金属提取,地下处置和通过用替换物重新填满场地进行填海)来评估可能的权衡物料和方案3:通过替换材料重新填充现场进行地下处置和填埋,并采取不采取行动的方案。比较结果表明,在原位修复方案中,与第二种方案相比,资源消耗减少了51倍,与第三种方案相比,资源消耗减少了7倍。在第一种情况下,对人类健康和生态系统质量的影响分别比第二种情况和第三种情况低约30倍和3.5倍。与无行动方案的影响相比,原位土壤修复方案对人类健康的影响大约要少6倍,而对生态系统的影响则要少大约4倍。结果证实,就环境而言,原位土壤修复方案是最可持续的做法。它的主要优势在于对自然资源的保护。尽管从底灰中回收了有价值的金属(Zn,Pb,Cu和Ni),但与第一种和第三种情况相比,第二种情况在环境方面的负担要大得多。该结果归因于与支持焚烧低热量污染土壤所需的燃料消耗以及电力消耗相关的巨大影响。本研究表明,LCA研究的结果,除技术,经济和社会指标外,还提供了有关不同管理实践的可持续性的重要信息,因此,在进行环境退化场地的围垦时,应成为决策的重要组成部分。 。

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