IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v6y2013i10p5486-5506d29764.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Emergy Evaluation of the Urban Solid Waste Handling in Liaoning Province, China

Author

Listed:
  • Gengyuan Liu

    (State Key Joint Laboratory of Environment Simulation and Pollution Control, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Zhifeng Yang

    (State Key Joint Laboratory of Environment Simulation and Pollution Control, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Bin Chen

    (State Key Joint Laboratory of Environment Simulation and Pollution Control, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Yan Zhang

    (State Key Joint Laboratory of Environment Simulation and Pollution Control, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Meirong Su

    (State Key Joint Laboratory of Environment Simulation and Pollution Control, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Lixiao Zhang

    (State Key Joint Laboratory of Environment Simulation and Pollution Control, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

Abstract

Waste management is a distinct practice aimed at reducing its effects on health and the environment and increasing energy and material recovery. The urban waste management industry has been slow to adopt new technologies, such as sanitary landfills and incineration, which enable better treatment results. The aim of a thorough ecological-economic evaluation of different treatment technologies is to extract the maximum practical benefits from investments and to ensure the minimum environmental impacts of wastes. This paper compares four garbage treatment systems, including sanitary landfills systems, fluidized bed incineration system, grate type incineration system and the current landfills system in Liaoning Province, China. By considering the economic and environmental impacts of waste treatment and disposal, impact of emissions, and contribution of wastes input, this paper constructed an emergy-based urban solid waste model for evaluating the sustainability of the holistic systems. The results in Liaoning indicate that the human health losses caused by the harmful air emissions are ranked in this order: fluidized bed incineration > grate type incineration > current landfills > sanitary landfills, while the ecosystem losses are ranked: grate type incineration > fluidized bed incineration > sanitary landfills > current landfills. The electricity yield ratios are ranked: grate type incineration > fluidized bed incineration > sanitary landfills > current landfills. Taken together this suggests that in considering the incineration option, decision makers must weigh the benefits of incineration against the significant operating costs, potential environmental impacts, and technical difficulties of operating. Emergy analysis of the urban solid treatment systems can provide a set of useful tools which can be used to compare the comprehensive performances of different waste treatment processes for decision-making and optimizing the whole process.

Suggested Citation

  • Gengyuan Liu & Zhifeng Yang & Bin Chen & Yan Zhang & Meirong Su & Lixiao Zhang, 2013. "Emergy Evaluation of the Urban Solid Waste Handling in Liaoning Province, China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 6(10), pages 1-21, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:6:y:2013:i:10:p:5486-5506:d:29764
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/6/10/5486/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/6/10/5486/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sciubba, Enrico & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2005. "Emergy and exergy analyses: Complementary methods or irreducible ideological options?," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 30(10), pages 1953-1988.
    2. Lei, Kampeng & Wang, Zhishi, 2008. "Emergy synthesis and simulation for Macao," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 613-625.
    3. Sciubba, Enrico, 2003. "Cost analysis of energy conversion systems via a novel resource-based quantifier," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 28(5), pages 457-477.
    4. Cherubini, Francesco & Bargigli, Silvia & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2009. "Life cycle assessment (LCA) of waste management strategies: Landfilling, sorting plant and incineration," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(12), pages 2116-2123.
    5. Ukidwe, Nandan U. & Bakshi, Bhavik R., 2007. "Industrial and ecological cumulative exergy consumption of the United States via the 1997 input–output benchmark model," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(9), pages 1560-1592.
    6. Brown, Mark T. & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2010. "Updated evaluation of exergy and emergy driving the geobiosphere: A review and refinement of the emergy baseline," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(20), pages 2501-2508.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fengjiao Ma & A. Egrinya Eneji & Yanbin Wu, 2018. "An Evaluation of Input–Output Value for Sustainability in a Chinese Steel Production System Based on Emergy Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-19, December.
    2. Dongliang Zhang & Guangqing Huang & Yimin Xu & Qinghua Gong, 2015. "Waste-to-Energy in China: Key Challenges and Opportunities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-15, December.
    3. Xiang, Qing & Pan, Hengyu & Ma, Xiaohan & Yang, Mingdong & Lyu, Yanfeng & Zhang, Xiaohong & Shui, Wei & Liao, Wenjie & Xiao, Yinlong & Wu, Jun & Zhang, Yanzong & Xu, Min, 2024. "Impacts of energy-saving and emission-reduction on sustainability of cement production," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    4. Chen, Yuhong & Lyu, Yanfeng & Yang, Xiangdong & Zhang, Xiaohong & Pan, Hengyu & Wu, Jun & Lei, Yongjia & Zhang, Yanzong & Wang, Guiyin & Xu, Min & Luo, Hongbin, 2022. "Performance comparison of urea production using one set of integrated indicators considering energy use, economic cost and emissions’ impacts: A case from China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 254(PC).
    5. Xingpeng Chen & Jiaxing Pang & Zilong Zhang & Hengji Li, 2014. "Sustainability Assessment of Solid Waste Management in China: A Decoupling and Decomposition Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-14, December.
    6. Gala, Alba Bala & Raugei, Marco & Ripa, Maddalena & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2015. "Dealing with waste products and flows in life cycle assessment and emergy accounting: Methodological overview and synergies," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 315(C), pages 69-76.
    7. Ana Ramos & Carlos Afonso Teixeira & Abel Rouboa, 2018. "Environmental Analysis of Waste-to-Energy—A Portuguese Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-26, March.
    8. Liu, Lingchi & Zhang, Xiaohong & Lyu, Yanfeng, 2022. "Performance comparison of sewage treatment plants before and after their upgradation using emergy evaluation combined with economic analysis: A case from Southwest China," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 472(C).
    9. Zhang, XiaoHong & Wei, Ye & Li, Min & Deng, ShiHuai & Wu, Jun & Zhang, YanZong & Xiao, Hong, 2014. "Emergy evaluation of an integrated livestock wastewater treatment system," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 95-107.
    10. Chen, Qiuwen & Ma, Xiaohan & Hu, Jiayu & Zhang, Xiaohong, 2023. "Comparison of comprehensive performance of kiwifruit production in China, Iran, and Italy based on emergy and carbon emissions," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 483(C).
    11. Jing Zhao & Zirui Zhang & Bo Li & Xiaolin Wei, 2021. "Formation and Growth Behavior Analysis of Slagging Rings in Rotary Kiln-Type Hazardous Waste Incineration Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-14, November.
    12. Pan, Hengyu & Geng, Yong & Jiang, Ping & Dong, Huijuan & Sun, Lu & Wu, Rui, 2018. "An emergy based sustainability evaluation on a combined landfill and LFG power generation system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 310-322.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Liu, Gengyuan & Yang, Zhifeng & Chen, Bin & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2014. "Emergy-based dynamic mechanisms of urban development, resource consumption and environmental impacts," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 271(C), pages 90-102.
    2. Liao, Wenjie & Heijungs, Reinout & Huppes, Gjalt, 2012. "Thermodynamic analysis of human–environment systems: A review focused on industrial ecology," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 76-88.
    3. Liu, Gengyuan & Hao, Yan & Dong, Liang & Yang, Zhifeng & Zhang, Yan & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2017. "An emergy-LCA analysis of municipal solid waste management," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 131-143.
    4. Nielsen, S.N. & Müller, F., 2009. "Understanding the functional principles of nature—Proposing another type of ecosystem services," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(16), pages 1913-1925.
    5. Liu, Gengyuan & Yang, Zhifeng & Chen, Bin & Zhang, Lixiao, 2013. "Modelling a thermodynamic-based comparative framework for urban sustainability: Incorporating economic and ecological losses into emergy analysis," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 252(C), pages 280-287.
    6. Baral, Anil & Bakshi, Bhavik R., 2010. "Emergy analysis using US economic input–output models with applications to life cycles of gasoline and corn ethanol," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(15), pages 1807-1818.
    7. Gasparatos, Alexandros & El-Haram, Mohamed & Horner, Malcolm, 2009. "The argument against a reductionist approach for measuring sustainable development performance and the need for methodological pluralism," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 245-256.
    8. Pan, Hengyu & Geng, Yong & Jiang, Ping & Dong, Huijuan & Sun, Lu & Wu, Rui, 2018. "An emergy based sustainability evaluation on a combined landfill and LFG power generation system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 310-322.
    9. Ulgiati, Sergio & Zucaro, Amalia & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2011. "Shared wealth or nobody's land? The worth of natural capital and ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 778-787, February.
    10. Simpson, Adam P. & Edwards, Chris F., 2013. "The utility of environmental exergy analysis for decision making in energy," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 742-751.
    11. Torío, H. & Schmidt, D., 2010. "Framework for analysis of solar energy systems in the built environment from an exergy perspective," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 2689-2697.
    12. Ukidwe, Nandan U. & Bakshi, Bhavik R., 2007. "Industrial and ecological cumulative exergy consumption of the United States via the 1997 input–output benchmark model," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(9), pages 1560-1592.
    13. Naim Hamdia Afgan, 2010. "Sustainability Paradigm: Intelligent Energy System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(12), pages 1-19, December.
    14. Qingsong Wang & Hongkun Xiao & Qiao Ma & Xueliang Yuan & Jian Zuo & Jian Zhang & Shuguang Wang & Mansen Wang, 2020. "Review of Emergy Analysis and Life Cycle Assessment: Coupling Development Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, January.
    15. Chen, G.Q. & Ji, Xi, 2007. "Chemical exergy based evaluation of water quality," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 200(1), pages 259-268.
    16. Grande, U. & Piernik, A. & Nienartowicz, A. & Buonocore, E. & Franzese, P.P., 2023. "Measuring natural capital value and ecological complexity of lake ecosystems," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 482(C).
    17. Jiang, M.M. & Chen, B., 2011. "Integrated urban ecosystem evaluation and modeling based on embodied cosmic exergy," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(13), pages 2149-2165.
    18. Smith, Nicola J. & McDonald, Garry W. & Patterson, Murray G., 2014. "Is there overshoot of planetary limits? New indicators of human appropriation of the global biogeochemical cycles relative to their regenerative capacity based on ‘ecotime’ analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 80-92.
    19. Chen, Wei & Liu, Wenjing & Geng, Yong & Brown, Mark T. & Gao, Cuixia & Wu, Rui, 2017. "Recent progress on emergy research: A bibliometric analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 1051-1060.
    20. Simpson, Adam P. & Edwards, Chris F., 2011. "An exergy-based framework for evaluating environmental impact," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 1442-1459.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:6:y:2013:i:10:p:5486-5506:d:29764. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.