首页> 外文OA文献 >Comparison of the co-gasification of sewage sludge and food wastes and cost-benefit analysis of gasification- and incineration-based waste treatment schemes
【2h】

Comparison of the co-gasification of sewage sludge and food wastes and cost-benefit analysis of gasification- and incineration-based waste treatment schemes

机译:污水污泥与食物废物共气化的比较以及基于气化和焚烧的废物处理方案的成本效益分析

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

The compositions of food wastes and their co-gasification producer gas were compared with the existing data of sewage sludge. Results showed that food wastes are more favorable than sewage sludge for co-gasification based on residue generation and energy output. Two decentralized gasification-based schemes were proposed to dispose of the sewage sludge and food wastes in Singapore. Monte Carlo simulation-based cost-benefit analysis was conducted to compare the proposed schemes with the existing incineration-based scheme. It was found that the gasification-based schemes are financially superior to the incineration-based scheme based on the data of net present value (NPV), benefit-cost ratio (BCR), and internal rate of return (IRR). Sensitivity analysis was conducted to suggest effective measures to improve the economics of the schemes.
机译:将食物垃圾及其共气化生产气的成分与污水污泥的现有数据进行了比较。结果表明,基于残渣的产生和能量输出,食物垃圾比污水污泥更有利于共气化。提出了两种基于分散气化的方案来处理新加坡的污水污泥和食物垃圾。进行了基于蒙特卡洛模拟的成本效益分析,以将提议的方案与现有的基于焚化的方案进行比较。基于净现值(NPV),收益成本比(BCR)和内部收益率(IRR)的数据,发现基于气化的方案在财务上优于基于焚化的方案。进行了敏感性分析,以提出有效的措施来改善该方案的经济性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

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