中美典型污泥处理处置工程能耗和碳排放比较分析

赵刚; 唐建国; 徐竟成; 罗景阳; 蒋明; 苑贤臣; 周传庭

doi:10.13205/j.hjgc.202212002

中美典型污泥处理处置工程能耗和碳排放比较分析

doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202212002

1. 上海市城市建设设计研究总院(集团)有限公司, 上海 200125;
2. 同济大学环境科学与工程学院, 上海 200092;
3. 河海大学环境学院, 南京 210098;
4. 香港都会大学科技学院, 香港 999077

基金项目:

上海市扬帆人才计划项目(22YF1432100)

国家公派留学基金委项目(CSC 201706260099)

上海市城市建设设计研究总院(集团)有限公司科研项目(科CK2020056A)

详细信息

作者简介:
赵刚(1990-),男,博士,主要研究方向为水污染控制工程。zg13409222@163.com

通讯作者:
蒋明(1979-),男,高级工程师,主要研究方向为水污染控制与海绵城市建设。jiangming@sucdri.com

计量
- 文章访问数: 174
- HTML全文浏览量: 47
- PDF下载量: 29
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2022-08-26
- 网络出版日期: 2023-03-23

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ON ENERGY AND CARBON EMISSION OF TYPICAL SLUDGE TREATMENT PROJECTS IN CHINA AND THE UNITED STATES

1. Shanghai Urban Construction Design & Research Institute Groups Co., Ltd, Shanghai 200125, China;
2. College of Environmental Science & Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China;
3. College of Environment, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China;
4. College of Science and Technology, Hong Kong Metropolitan University, Hong Kong 999077, China

摘要

摘要: 中美两国污水处理规模大、碳排放基数高,污泥的处理与处置是污水处理厂碳排放的重要组成部分,合理的污泥管理策略是未来污水厂碳减排的关键。实地调研了中美6个大型典型污水处理厂的污泥处理设施和污泥处置路径,分析了中美两国不同典型的污泥处理处置工艺能量回收和碳排放的表现特征。结果表明:在不考虑碳补偿的情况下,中美6个污水处理厂中,华东A(中温厌氧消化+脱水+填埋/土地利用)、华东B(脱水+填埋/焚烧)、华东C(脱水+焚烧)、Hyperion(高温厌氧消化+脱水+农用)、OCSD(中温厌氧消化+脱水+农用)和Blue plains(热水解+中温厌氧消化+脱水+农用)的污泥处理处置路线的碳足迹分别为1410,1881,1914,471,402,405 kgCO₂/t DS。考虑能源回收和资源化利用产生的碳补偿效果,中美6厂污泥处理处置的净碳排放分别为984,1681,1941,-183,-240,-315 kgCO₂/t DS。中美6个污水厂碳补偿率分别为30.2%、10.6%、0%、138.9%、159.7%和177.9%。污泥厌氧消化和产物土地资源化利用是碳减排的关键,提升污泥有机质含量能够强化碳补偿效应,该研究结果可为我国污水处理厂低碳转型、污泥处理处置的无害化、减量化和低碳化提供参考。
- 污泥处理处置 /
- 能耗 /
- 碳排放 /
- 厌氧消化 /
- 碳补偿
Abstract: China and the United States have large wastewater treatment and high carbon emission scale. The carbon emission from sludge treatment and disposal is an important part of the total carbon emission of sewage treatment plants. A reasonable sludge management strategy is the key to future carbon emission reduction of sewage treatment plants. In this paper, the sludge treatment facilities and paths of six typical wastewater treatment plants in China and the United States were investigated on-site, and the performance characteristics of energy recovery and carbon emission of different typical sludge treatment processes in China and the United States were analyzed. The results showed that, without considering carbon offset, among the six wastewater treatment plants in China and the US, the carbon emission of East China A (mesophilic anaerobic digestion+dewatering+landfill/land use), East China B (dewatering+landfill/incineration), East China C (dewatering+incineration), Hyperion (thermophilic anaerobic digestion+dewatering+agricultural end-use), OCSD (mesophilic anaerobic digestion+dewatering+agriculture end-use) and Blue plains (thermo hydrolysis+mesophilic anaerobic digestion+dewatering+agricultural end-use) were 1410, 1881, 1914, 471, 402, 405 kg CO₂/t DS, respectively. Considering the carbon offset effect caused by energy recovery and resource utilization, the net carbon emission from sludge treatment and disposal in the six WWTPs were 984, 1681, 1941, -183, -240, -315 kg CO₂/t DS, respectively. The carbon emission offset efficiency of six WWTPs in China and the United States was 30.2%, 10.6%, 0%, 138.9%, 159.7% and 177.9%, respectively. Sludge anaerobic digestion and land utilization of its product were the keys to carbon emission reduction, and increasing the organic matter content of sludge could enhance the carbon offset effect. The research results could provide basis and reference for the low-carbon transformation of WWTPs in China and the harmless, reduced and low-carbon treatment of sludge.
- sludge treatment and disposal /
- energy consumption /
- carbon emission /
- anaerobic digestion /
- carbon offset

HTML全文

参考文献(20)

[1]	LU J Y, WANG X M, LIU H Q, et al. Optimizing operation of municipal wastewater treatment plants in China:the remaining barriers and future implications[J]. Environment International,2019,129:273-278.
[2]	住房与城乡建设部.中国城乡建设统计年鉴-2020[M].北京:中国统计出版社,2021.
[3]	常纪文,井媛媛,耿瑜,等.推进市政污水处理行业低碳转型,助力碳达峰、碳中和[J].中国环保产业,2021(6):9-17.
[4]	SHEN Y, LINVILLE J L, URGUN-DEMIRTAS M, et al. An overview of biogas production and utilization at full-scale wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) in the United States:challenges and opportunities towards energy-neutral WWTPs[J]. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,2015, 50:346-362.
[5]	戴晓虎,张辰,章林伟,等.碳中和背景下污泥处理处置与资源化发展方向思考[J].给水排水,2021,57(3):1-5.
[6]	宋新新,刘杰,林甲,等.碳中和时代下我国能量自给型污水处理厂发展方向及工程实践[J].环境科学学报,2022,42(4):53-63.
[7]	戴晓虎.城镇污水处理厂污泥稳定化处理的必要性和迫切性的思考[J].给水排水,2017,53(12):1-5.
[8]	YANG G, ZHANG G, WANG H. Current state of sludge production, management, treatment and disposal in China[J]. Water Research,2015, 78:60-73.
[9]	US EPA. Types of anaerobic digesters[EB/OL]. https://www.epa.gov/anaerobic-digestion/types-anaerobic-digesters.
[10]	赵刚,唐建国,徐竟成.污泥高温厌氧消化工程运行及碳足迹特点案例分析[J].净水技术,2022,41(7):83-89.
[11]	陶亚强,李军,CHANG C C. Blue Plains污水处理厂提标改造:后置反硝化、污泥热水解和深层隧道[J].净水技术,2016,35(1):11-15.
[12]	ZHAO G, LIU W, XU J, et al. Greenhouse gas emission mitigation of large-scale wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs):optimization of sludge treatment and disposal[J]. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies,2020, 30(1):955-964.
[13]	林文聪,赵刚,刘伟,等.污水厂污泥典型处理处置工艺碳排放核算研究[J].环境工程,2017,35(7):175-179.
[14]	张岳,葛铜岗,孙永利,等.基于城镇污水处理全流程环节的碳排放模型研究[J].中国给水排水,2021,37(9):65-74.
[15]	ZHAO G, GARRIDO M, REIFSNYDER S, et al. Comparative energy and carbon footprint analysis of biosolids management strategies in water resource recovery facilities[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2019, 665:762-773.
[16]	中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局. 城镇污水处理厂污泥处置混合填埋用泥质:GB/T 23485-2009[S].北京:中国标准出版社,2019.
[17]	廖足良,冉小珊,刘长青,等.热水解和超声波预处理对污泥厌氧消化效能的影响研究[J].环境工程,2014,32(6):52-56.
[18]	王磊,谭学军,王逸贤,等.热水解预处理剩余污泥的有机物分布及厌氧消化特性[J].环境工程,2019,37(3):35-39.
[19]	GARRIDO-BASERBA M, MOLINOS-SENANTE M, ABELLEIRA-PEREIRA J M, et al. Selecting sewage sludge treatment alternatives in modern wastewater treatment plants using environmental decision support systems[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production,2015, 107:410-419.
[20]	MATASSA S, BATSTONE D J, HUELSEN T, et al. Can direct conversion of used nitrogen to new feed and protein help feed the world?[J]. Environmental Science & Technology,2015, 49(9):5247-5254.