农村资源化公共厕所技术和实施的效益分析  

Rural toilet systems implementing resource recovery:Available techniques and benefit analysis

作　　者：时义磊 曹智 周律[1] SHI Yi-lei;CAO Zhi;ZHOU Lü(School of Environment,Tsinghua University,Beijing 100084,China)

机构地区：[1]清华大学环境学院,北京100084

出　　处：《农业资源与环境学报》2021年第4期677-685,共9页Journal of Agricultural Resources and Environment

基　　金：国家重点研发计划项目(2019YFC0408700)。

摘　　要：为更好地指导农村地区因地制宜地实现生活污水资源化,在对资源化厕所技术研究现状进行综述的基础上,通过费用效益分析和生命周期评价分别研究了7种情景下资源化厕所系统的经济与环境效益(A:完整下水道式水冲厕所;B1~B2:仅对尿液进行资源化处理;C1~C4:对厕所污水(即黑水)同时进行资源化处理)。结果表明:情景B1、情景B2与情景A的经济效益接近,而情景C1~C4的经济净现值相对情景A的经济净现值分别提高了72.96万元(增幅81.74%)、49.65万元(增幅55.62%)、52.28万元(增幅58.57%)、24.05万元(增幅26.94%);相对于情景A,情景C1~C4在除土壤生态毒性之外的所有环境影响类型上均具有更优的环境效益。研究表明,对粪尿同时进行资源化处理的资源回收型厕所系统比传统水冲厕所以及仅对尿液进行资源化处理的厕所系统具有更高的经济和环境效益。To provide systematic guidance on resource recovery from domestic wastewater in rural areas,our study reviewed the techniques of resource-oriented toilet use and conducted a cost-benefit analysis combined with life cycle assessment to reveal the economic and environmental benefit of toilet systems under seven different scenarios(A:traditional water closed latrine;B1~B2:resource-oriented toilet,recovery from urine only;C1~C4:resource-oriented toilet,recovery from both urine and feces,i.e.black water).The result showed that scenario B1~B2 were similar to scenario A considering the economic benefit whereas economic net present value of scenario C1~C4 were higher than that of scenario A(CNY 7.296×105;CNY 4.965×105;CNY 5.228×105;CNY 2.405×105 separately).Moreover,the environmental benefits of scenario C1~C4 were higher than those of scenario A considering all studied impact categories except terrestrial ecotoxicity potential.The conclusion indicates that the toilet system resource recovery in both urine and feces has more economical and environmental benefits than the toilet system of only recovering resource in urine and the traditional water closed latrine.

关 键 词：厕所 厕所污水 资源回收 费用效益分析 生命周期评价 

分 类 号：R127[医药卫生—环境卫生学] X799.3[医药卫生—公共卫生与预防医学]