检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:时义磊 周律[1] 许阳宇 SHI Yi-lei;ZHOU Lyu;XU Yang-yu(School of Environment, Tsinghua University, Beifing 100084, China)
机构地区:[1]清华大学环境学院,北京100084
出 处:《中国给水排水》2018年第14期14-18,22,共6页China Water & Wastewater
基 金:比尔和梅琳达.盖茨基金会Reinvent the Toilet Challenge项目的支持
摘 要:从建设成本、运行维护费用及附加经济效益三方面,对以正渗透技术为核心的资源型公厕系统和传统公厕系统进行费用-效益分析,并利用经济净现值评价经济可行性。结果表明,相对于传统公厕,资源型公厕的固定建设成本较高,但可以通过获得液态肥产生附加经济效益,并且节约大量的运行成本,其经济可行性远大于传统厕所。The resource-type toilet system and the traditional toilet system were compared from the three aspects including fixed construction cost, operating cost and additional economic benefit with the cost-benefit analysis. The economic net present value method was used to evaluate the economic feasibili- ty of the two kinds of toilet. The results showed that the fixed construction cost of the resource-type toilet was higher than that of the traditional toilet. While, it could obtain the additional economic benefit from the liquid fertilizer and save a lot of the operating cost. The economic feasibility of the resource-type toilet is much larger than that of the traditional toilet.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:3.128.24.183