Keywords
Landfill gas
Anaerobic digestion
Waste incinerator
Gasification
How to Cite
Abstract
In this research costs and revenues of each technology in economic and environmental scenarios are studied and in order to compare technologies economically, present net value method (the ratio of present net benefits to costs) in six scenarios are used. As a result, the highest revenues (by avoiding environmental cost related to electricity production of 115.72 dollar on tone and without avoided environmental cost related to electricity production 86.87) are related to anaerobic digestion technology and the highest present net value of benefits to costs in first scenario is related to the anaerobic digestion of 1.10 dollars on tone (without environmental costs, electricity revenues, fertilizer and CDM) and in the second scenario it is related to anaerobic digestion of 1.15 dollar on tone (without environmental cost and revenues from electricity, fertilizer and CDM sale) and in the third scenario it is related to anaerobic technology (with environmental cost and revenues from electricity sale). Municipal wastes are byproduct of social life which its correct management is one of the main concerns of urban and national authorities. On the other hand environmental problems caused by such practices such as greenhouse gas emission and production of pollutants have attracted the attention of International organizations and countries’ authorities to waste management. Energy production from wastes is one of the selected solutions of urban managers in the area of sustainable management of wastes. In the fourth scenario it is related to anaerobic digestion of 1.4 dollars on tone with environmental costs and revenues from electricity, fertilizer and CDM and in the fifth scenario it is related to anaerobic digestion of 1.45 dollars on tone with environmental costs and revenues from electricity, fertilizer and CDM. Therefore the most economical technology of anaerobic digestion and gasification technology is type 1 and 2 of waste burning and waste landfill. With respect to environmental comparison of technologies using AHP method and expert choice software the most environmental technology is gasification. In order to combine economic and environmental factors we used the ratio of present net benefits to costs in six scenarios. The most economic and environmental technology is anaerobic digestion technology.
References
Berlin BC. 2004. Tehran solid waste management project: landfill preparation study, final report. Organization for Waste Recycling and Composting (OWRC).
Chan Park S, Kim G and Choi S. 2007. Fundamentals of engineering economics. 3rd ed. Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey. 594 p.
Daniel Hoornweg and Perinaz Bhada-Tata. 2012. What a waste: a global review of solid waste management. Urban development series; knowledge papers. No. 15. World Bank, Washington, DC.
Giti Taleghani and Akbar Shabani Kia. 2005. Technical–economic analysis of the Saveh biogas power plant. Renewable Energy, 30(3): 441–446.
Jacob AB and William JS. 2006. Internet-based data collection: promises and realiti. Journal of Research Practice, 2(2): 1-15.
Jouhara H, Czajczyńska D, Ghazal H, Krzyżyńska R, Anguilano L, Reynolds AJ and Spencer C. 2017. Municipal waste management systems for domestic use. Energy, 139: 485-506.
Kaushik NLSC. Panwar and Surendra Kothari. 2011. Role of renewable energy sources in environmental protection: a review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15(3), 1513-1524.
Peter Hall. 2014. Cities of tomorrow: an intellectual history of urban planning and design since 1880, 4th ed. Blackwell Publishers. 640 p.
Pradyot Patnaik. 2010. Handbook of environmental analysis: chemical pollutants in air, water, soil, and solid wastes. 2nd ed. CRC Press. 41-53 p.
Sunggyu L, James G. Speight and Sudarshan K. Loyalka. 2014. Handbook of alternative fuel technologies. 2nd ed., CRC Press. 125-139 p.
Thabet MT, Roger BG, Gary RH, Morton AB, Paul Black, Doug Bronson and Jon Powell. 2010. Evaluation of landfill gas decay constant for municipal solid waste landfills operated as bioreactors. Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association, 60(1): 91-97.
Vinay Kumar Tyagi and Shang-Lien Lo. 2013. Sludge: a waste or renewable source for energy and resources recovery?. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 25: 708-728.
Copyright license for the research articles published in Journal of Research in Biology are as per the license given below
Creative Commons License
Journal of Research in Ecology is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). (www.creativecommons.org)
Based on a work at www.jresearchbiology.com
What this License explains us?
You are free to:
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material
for any purpose, even commercially.
This license is acceptable for Free Cultural Works. The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
[As given in the www.creativecommons.org website]
Under the following terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.