环境卫生工程 ›› 2024, Vol. 32 ›› Issue (5): 11-16.doi: 10.19841/j.cnki.hjwsgc.2024.05.002

• 固体废物各类处理设施规划与政策法规 • 上一篇    下一篇

国内外生活垃圾焚烧厂的水排放与监管标准比较分析

甘 洁,刘 豪,李建辉   

  1. 光大环保(中国)有限公司
  • 出版日期:2024-11-01 发布日期:2024-11-01

Comparative Analysis of Discharge and Regulatory Standards on Effluents from Waste Incineration Plants in China and Developed Countries

GAN Jie, LIU Hao, LI Jianhui   

  1. Everbright Environmental Protection (China) Co. Ltd.
  • Online:2024-11-01 Published:2024-11-01

摘要: 受生活垃圾成分、热值、烟气净化工艺差异影响,欧盟、美国、日本和我国生活垃圾焚烧厂的水排放管控对象、要素具有明显差异。本研究基于国内外相关水排放标准规定及监管要求,从管控对象、排放限值、执行尺度角度探讨了国内外标准的差异和原因。分析表明:欧盟和日本生活垃圾焚烧厂的废水处理对象是湿法烟气工艺废水,重点管控因子是二[口][恶]英;美国生活垃圾焚烧厂没有废水需要处理,不配置污水处理设施;我国生活垃圾焚烧厂的废水处理对象主要是渗滤液,重点管控因子是有机污染物、重金属。在湿法烟气工艺废水管控方面,欧盟管控的因子比日本多,但二[口][恶]英类排放浓度限值相对宽松;日本仅管控生活垃圾焚烧厂排入自然水体的二[口][恶]英类浓度,但限值相对严格。在向自然水体排入废水水质的达标判定方面,美国和欧盟标准允许污染物排放浓度在一定范围内短时合理波动。日本和中国标准则更强调无差别的环境监管,以体现公正、平等原则,浓度超过限值即认为超标排放。最后,针对我国生活垃圾焚烧行业水排放管理,提出合理确定管控因子和排放要求、进一步优化和拓展更具弹性的排放限值和监管措施等建议。

关键词: 垃圾焚烧, 水排放管理, 管控因子, 排放限值, 环境监管

Abstract: Influenced by the differences in domestic waste composition, calorific value and flue gas purification process, the water emission control objects and elements of waste incineration plants in European Union, United States, Japan and China are significantly different. Based on the relevant water discharge standards and regulatory requirements in domestic and foreign, the differences and reasons of domestic and foreign standards were discussed from the perspectives of control objects, discharge limits and implementation standards. The analysis showed that the wastewater treatment object of domestic waste incineration plants in European Union and Japan was wet flue gas process wastewater, and the key control factor was dioxins. In United States, there was no waste water to be treated in domestic waste incineration plants, so no sewage treatment facilities were equipped. The wastewater treatment object of domestic waste incineration plant in China was mainly leachate, and the key control factors were organic pollutants and heavy metals. In the control of wet flue gas process wastewater, European Union controlled more factors than Japan, but the concentration limit of dioxin emission was relatively relaxed. Japan only controlled the concentration of dioxins discharged into natural water from domestic waste incineration plants, but the limits were relatively strict. In terms of the standard determination of the quality of wastewater discharged into natural water, United States and European Union standards allow the emission concentration of pollutants to fluctuate reasonably within a certain range for a short time. Standards in Japan and China are more emphasis on non-discriminatory environmental regulation to reflect the principle of justice and equality, and once the concentration exceed the limit value, it is considered to exceed the emission. Finally, in view of the water emission management of domestic waste incineration industry in China, suggestions were put forward to reasonably determine the control factors and emission requirements, further optimize and expand more flexible emission limits and regulatory measures.

Key words: waste incineration, wastewater discharge management, control factors, emission limit values, environmental supervision

[1] 田 伟, 陈 琮, 彭 莉, 陈玉成. 垃圾焚烧飞灰及其固化/稳定化产物的重金属污染特征及环境风险评估[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2024, 32(4): 9-16.
[2] 陈 璐, 杨德坤, 龙吉生. 一体化烟气净化工艺对生活垃圾焚烧厂多污染物协同脱除特性的研究[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2024, 32(4): 51-57.
[3] 王延涛, 龙吉生, 秦 峰. 生活垃圾焚烧发电厂设计参数与焚烧负荷变化的统计分析[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2024, 32(4): 58-62,71.
[4] 黄 华, 黄正鹏, 沈元鹏, 李 浓. 生活垃圾焚烧厂渗滤液全量化处理技术研究[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2024, 32(4): 78-82.
[5] 邹 昕. 中国垃圾焚烧标准回顾与分析(封底文章))[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2024, 32(4): 97-104,111.
[6] 段盼巧, 刘晶昊, 白良成. 生活垃圾焚烧项目可靠性评价分析[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2024, 32(4): 112-116.
[7] 李俊成, 毛梦梅, 龙吉生. 掺烧污泥对垃圾焚烧发电厂烟气净化系统的影响——以某污泥协同焚烧项目为例[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2024, 32(3): 54-58.
[8] 陈海军, 许 睿, 赵景才, 龙吉生. 垃圾焚烧发电厂变频给水泵运行改造节能分析[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2024, 32(3): 59-63.
[9] 邓飞飞, 张栋棚, 郑仁栋, 周纬南, 吴迪迪, 吕媛媛. 杭州市生活垃圾焚烧厂渗滤液季节性变化特征研究[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2024, 32(3): 90-93.
[10] 王天娇, 李 敏, 王 乾, 苗宪宝, 徐 林, 李义华. 生活垃圾焚烧、填埋及污水处理中长时间碳排放水平研究[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2024, 32(2): 75-84.
[11] 陆广博, 罗院生, 艾 扬, 李 松. 北京市某生活垃圾焚烧厂应急处置涉疫生活垃圾案例分析[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2024, 32(1): 45-49.
[12] 李唯实, 文卓钰, 李 丽, 闫大海, 黄启飞. 热处理法降解生活垃圾焚烧飞灰中二噁英的技术现状[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2024, 32(1): 128-128.
[13] 侯霞丽, 沈宏伟, 王丽霞, 胡利华. 生活垃圾焚烧湿法脱酸工艺技术经济分析[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2023, 31(6): 22-27.
[14] 栗 博, 高 蕾, 茹春云, 韩志明, 刘玉坤. 垃圾焚烧飞灰水洗过程模拟及洗失率计算[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2023, 31(6): 80-84.
[15] 金 飞, 郭孝武, 龙吉生, 赵翠玲. 垃圾焚烧余热锅炉投运初期过热器吸热量特性研究[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2023, 31(5): 40-44.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 张福泉. 通辽市某垃圾填埋场地下水水质现状评价[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2018, 26(3): 36 -38 .
[2] 袁 松 黄丹丹 段怡彤. 生活垃圾转运站臭气属性特征及不同除臭工艺效果分析[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2018, 26(3): 56 -58 .
[3] 刘 霄. 垃圾焚烧发电厂汽水管道应力分析和支吊架设计的优化[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2018, 26(3): 59 -62 .
[4] 白贤祥 张玉刚. 生活垃圾焚烧厂余热锅炉水冷壁高温腐蚀治理研究[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2018, 26(3): 68 -70 .
[5] 王晓燕胡昌夏孙晨阳徐利奇. CJ/T 280—2008塑料垃圾桶通用技术条件标准实施情况解析[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2018, 26(1): 63 -65 .
[6] 朱志军刘文涛. 北京市餐厨垃圾现状调查及减量化路径研究[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2018, 26(1): 66 -69 .
[7] 梁永宽李逸民. 填埋气掺烧天然气发电收益估算——以荣昌填埋气发电厂为例[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2018, 26(1): 80 -83 .
[8] 杨磊锋杨非邢家乐李加文. 垃圾气力输送管路特性参数试验与数值模拟研究[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2018, 26(1): 90 -94 .
[9] 胡涛钱萌孙国芬简思平周吉利. 城市生活垃圾产生量预测研究——以南方某市为例[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2018, 26(2): 36 -38 .
[10] 刘 静 祁洪刚. 3种典型污泥处理工艺环境影响分析[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2018, 26(4): 12 -14 .
版权所有 © 天津市城市管理研究中心
津ICP备2022007900号-1   津公网安备 12010302000952号   中央网信办违法和不良信息举报中心
地址:天津市河西区围堤道107号    邮政编码: 300201
电话: 022-28365069 传真: 022-28365080 E-mail: csglwyjs10@tj.gov.cn
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发