CONSTRUCTION OF A COMPREHENSIVE IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHOD OF SEWAGE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY BASED ON LCA-AHP MODEL
-
摘要: 针对甘肃省某市污水处理的实际需求,结合生命周期评价(LCA)与层次分析法(AHP),构建了1个污水处理综合技术评估模型。首先,利用LCA方法系统量化评估了6种实际应用的污水处理工艺(AAO、AAO+MBR、AAO+SBR、MSBR、CAST+BAF及SBR)在运行周期内的环境足迹,重点关注其对全球变暖潜力、淡水及海洋生态系统富营养化风险、化石资源消耗等关键环境维度的影响。随后,基于LCA的显著环境影响评估结果,结合经济效益及技术性能两大维度,通过AHP框架进行权重分配与综合排序。LCA特征化分析显示,MSBR与AAO+MBR工艺在减少环境影响指标方面表现优异。标准化结果进一步指出,所有评估工艺均对全球气候变暖有显著贡献,并伴随生态富营养化及潜在人体健康风险。AHP综合评估模型则明确揭示了AAO+MBR与MSBR工艺在综合考量下(包括环境影响、经济效益及技术性能)具有最高权重值,分别为0.2255和0.2229,表明其具有更高的低碳效益与技术效率。此外,AHP指标层分析强调了在技术选择时应优先关注性能指标(如EQI、COD去除率)及对人体健康和水体富营养化的潜在影响控制。该研究为甘肃省某市提供了针对性的污水处理技术选择方案,还为黄河流域上游及其他类似水环境区域的污水处理技术优化升级提供了科学的决策依据。通过综合评估框架的应用,有助于推动污水处理行业向更加环保、高效的方向发展,实现经济与环境效益的双赢。
-
关键词:
- 城镇废水处理工艺 /
- LCA /
- AHP /
- 黄河流域水环境综合治理 /
- 减污降碳
Abstract: This study addresses the practical need for wastewater treatment in a city of Gansu Province, aiming to scientifically evaluate and identify the efficient, low-carbon wastewater treatment technologies. It innovatively integrated lifecycle assessment (LCA) with the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to establish a comprehensive technical evaluation model for wastewater treatment. Initially, LCA was employed to systematically quantify the environmental footprint of six practically applied wastewater treatment processes (AAO, AAO+MBR, AAO+SBR, MSBR, CAST+BAF, and SBR) over their operational cycles, with a focus on their impacts on key environmental dimensions such as global warming potential, eutrophication risks in freshwater and marine ecosystems, and fossil resource consumption. Subsequently, based on the salient environmental impact findings from LCA, the AHP framework was applied to assign weights and rank the processes comprehensively, incorporating economic benefits and technical performance. LCA characterization analysis revealed that MSBR and AAO+MBR process excelled in mitigating environmental impact indicators. Normalization results further indicated that all evaluated processes significantly contribute to global climate warming, accompanied by ecological eutrophication and potential human health risks. The AHP comprehensive evaluation model explicitly demonstrated that AAO+MBR and MSBR processes held the highest weight values of 0.2255 and 0.2229, respectively, indicating their superior low-carbon benefits and technical efficiency under a comprehensive assessment framework. Additionally, the AHP indicator-level analysis emphasized the priority of performance indicators (e.g., EQI, COD removal rate) and the control of potential impacts on human health and water eutrophication during technology selection. This study not only provides a tailored solution for wastewater treatment technology selection in the targeted city of Gansu Province, but also offers scientific decision-making support for the optimization and upgrade of wastewater treatment technologies in the upstream Yellow River Basin and other similar aquatic environments. The application of this evaluation framework contributes to advancing the wastewater treatment industry in a more environmentally friendly and efficient direction, achieving a win-win scenario between economic and environmental benefits. -
[1] Guidelines for Life-Cycle Assessment: A 'Code of Practice' from the workshop held at Sesimbra, Portugal, 31 March-3 April 1993 Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC)[J]. Environmental science and pollution research international, 1994, 1(1): 55. [2] ANDERSEN C E, HOXHA E, RASMUSSEN F N, et al. Temporal considerations in life cycle assessments of wooden buildings: implications for design incentives[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2024, 445:141260. [3] CHEN Z H, CHEN L, ZHOU X Y, et al. Recent technological advancements in BIM and LCA integration for sustainable construction: a review[J]. Sustainability, 2024, 16(3):1340. [4] SUBAL L, BRAUNSCHWEIG A, HELLWEG S. The Relevance of life cycle assessment to decision-making in companies and public authorities[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2024, 435:140520. [5] 沈耀良. 城市污水处理工艺:生命周期评价[J]. 苏州科技大学学报(工程技术版), 2019, 32(1): 1-9. [6] GARFI M, FLORES L, FERRER I. Life cycle assessment of wastewater treatment systems for small communities: activated sludge, constructed wetlands and high rate algal ponds[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017, 161: 211-219. [7] RASHID S S, HARUN S N, HANAFIAH M M, et al. Life cycle assessment and its application in wastewater treatment: a brief overview[J]. Processes, 2023, 11(1):208. [8] 崔晗, 王玉亭, 李华杰, 等. 城镇污水处理过程的多角度综合评价研究进展[J]. 过程工程学报,2024,24(1): 1-16. [9] CHEN Y, ZHOU B, YUAN R, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of the main technology for new sewage treatment plants in small towns along the Duliujian river basin[C]. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Energy Engineering and Environmental Protection (EEEP), Sanya, PEOPLES R CHINA, F 2018Nov 20-22, 2017. [10] 李广英, 魏晓燕, 景明霞, 等. 基于层次分析法的污水处理技术性能评价:以环青海湖地区城镇污水处理厂为例[J]. 粉煤灰综合利用, 2021, 35(4): 127-131. [11] SASIKUMAR G, SUDHAKAR U, JODHI C, et al. Evaluation of wastewater treatment technologies by combined analytical hierarchy process and grey relational analysis[J]. Global Nest Journal, 2022, 24(4): 607-612. [12] CETKOVIC J, KNEZEVIC M, VUJADINOVIC R, et al. Selection of wastewater treatment technology: AHP method in multi-criteria decision making[J]. Water, 2023, 15(9). DOI: 10.3390/W15091645. [13] ABDELAAL M A, SEIF S M, EL-TAFESH M M, et al. Sustainable assessment of concrete structures using BIM-LCA-AHP integrated approach[J]. Environment Development and Sustainability, 2023,26:25669-25688. [14] CHIU M C, TAI P Y, CHU C Y. Developing a smart green supplier risk assessment system integrating natural language processing and life cycle assessment based on AHP framework: an empirical study[J]. Resources Conservation and Recycling, 2024, 207:107671. [15] SAFARPOUR H, TABESH M, SHAHANGIAN S A, et al. Life cycle sustainability assessment of wastewater systems under applying water demand management policies[J]. Sustainability, 2022, 14(13):7736. [16] GUVEN D, KAYALICA M O. Environmental and economic assessment of hydrogen-powered ferries for inland transportation[J]. Ocean Engineering, 2024, 301. [17] 敖红光. 大庆王家围子地区燃油和燃煤供暖的生命周期评价[D]. 哈尔滨:哈尔滨工业大学,2006. [18] 吕航. 吉林省辽河流域污水处理工艺生命周期影响评价及工艺优选研究[D]. 长春:吉林大学,2022.
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数: 35
- HTML全文浏览量: 3
- PDF下载量: 1
- 被引次数: 0