首页> 外文OA文献 >Options for management of municipal solid waste in New York City: A preliminary comparison of health risks and policy implications
【2h】

Options for management of municipal solid waste in New York City: A preliminary comparison of health risks and policy implications

机译:纽约市城市固体废物管理的选择:健康风险和政策影响的初步比较

摘要

Landfill disposal and waste-to-energy (WTE) incineration remain the two principal options for managing municipal solid waste (MSW). One critical determinant of the acceptability of these options is the different health risks associated with each. In this analysis relying on published data and exposure modeling, we have performed health risk assessments for landfill disposal versus WTE treatment options for the management of New York City’s MSW. These are based on the realistic scenario of using a waste transfer station (WTS) in Brooklyn and then transporting the untreated MSW by truck to a landfill in Pennsylvania or using a WTE facility in Brooklyn and then transporting the resultant ash by truck to a landfill in Pennsylvania. The overall results indicate that the individual cancer risks for both options would be considered generally acceptable, although the risk from landfilling is approximately 5 times greater than from WTE treatment; the individual non-cancer health risks for both options would be considered generally unacceptable, although once again the risk from landfilling is approximately 5 times greater than from WTE treatment. If one considers only the population in Brooklyn that would be directly affected by the siting of either a WTS or a WTE facility in their immediate neighborhood, individual cancer and non-cancer health risks for both options would be considered generally acceptable, but risks for the former remain considerably higher than for the latter. These results should be considered preliminary due to several limitations of this study such as: consideration of risks only from inhalation exposures; assumption that only volume and not composition of the waste stream is altered by WTE treatment; reliance on data from the literature rather than actual measurements of the sites considered, assuming comparability of the sites. However, the results of studies such as this, in conjunction with ecological, socioeconomic and equity considerations, should prove useful to environmental managers, regulators, policy makers, community representatives and other stakeholders in making sound and acceptable decisions regarding the optimal handling of MSW.
机译:垃圾掩埋处置和废物能源转化(WTE)焚烧仍然是管理城市固体废物(MSW)的两个主要选择。这些选择的可接受性的一个关键决定因素是与每个选择有关的不同健康风险。在此分析中,我们依靠已发布的数据和暴露模型,对垃圾掩埋处理进行了健康风险评估,对纽约市MSW的管理则采用了WTE处理方案。这些是基于以下实际情况:在布鲁克林使用废物转运站(WTS),然后通过卡车将未经处理的城市固体废弃物运至宾夕法尼亚州的垃圾填埋场,或使用布鲁克林的WTE设施,然后通过卡车将所得灰分运至垃圾处理场。宾夕法尼亚州。总体结果表明,尽管填埋的风险大约比WTE治疗高5倍,但两种选择的个体癌症风险通常被认为是可以接受的。两种方法各自的非癌症健康风险通常被认为是不可接受的,尽管再次填埋的风险大约比WTE处理高出5倍。如果仅考虑布鲁克林的居民将直接受到其邻近地区的WTS或WTE设施的选址的影响,则这两种选择的个人癌症和非癌症健康风险通常被认为是可以接受的,但是前者仍然比后者高得多。由于该研究的一些局限性,这些结果应被认为是初步的,例如:仅考虑吸入接触的风险;假设仅废物的体积而不是废物的成分被WTE处理改变了;假设站点具有可比性,则依赖文献数据而不是所考虑站点的实际测量。但是,这样的研究结果,结合生态,社会经济和公平考虑,对于环境管理者,监管者,政策制定者,社区代表和其他利益相关者而言,在就合理处理城市固体废弃物做出合理和可接受的决定时,应该被证明是有用的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

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