两种典型城市雨水LID技术生命周期评价研究

发布时间：2018-01-08 13:40

本文关键词：两种典型城市雨水LID技术生命周期评价研究　出处：《北京建筑大学》2013年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：随着城市化进程不断推进，城市不透水面积逐年增加，地表径流系数较开发前显著增大，降雨时地表产汇流时间缩短，峰值流量增大，峰值时间提前，，给传统城市雨水排水设施带来了极大的压力。基于此背景，低影响开发（Low Impact Development，LID）技术应运而生。生命周期评价（Life CycleAssessment，LCA）是一种对全过程资源消耗和环境影响进行分析与评价的方法，经过半个多世纪的发展，LCA方法在国外已经日益成为政府和企业主要的环境管理工具。美国在实施了大量LID工程之后，已开始对已建LID设施进行全过程生命周期评价，而我国在这方面的研究还处于空白状态。本论文进行了LCA方法学基本原理应用于LID措施的评价研究，以期通过评价结果，为决策者科学选择LID措施提供支持。本研究在LCA理论基础上，首先构建了城市雨水LID技术LCA评价模式，然后利用该模式对两种典型城市雨水LID技术进行了案例分析。通过研究得出以下结论：（1）本文对LID技术生命周期评价方法进行了研究，构建了城市雨水LID技术生命周期评价模式，该模式主要包括两部分——生命周期影响评价（Life Cycle ImpactAssessment，LCIA），主要指环境影响评价，与生命周期成本-效益分析（Life CycleCost-benefits Analysis，LCCA）。（2）由两种LID措施全过程生命周期污染物排放结果可知，雨水花园与渗透铺装+渗透管/井系统全过程生命周期排放量最大的污染物均为CO2，排放量分别为44899.44kg与260341.30kg。此外，渗透铺装+渗透管/井系统由于大量采用透水砖与透水混凝土等材料，造成的废弃物填埋的质量为1617790.00kg。（3）全过程生命周期雨水花园的CO2排放量仅占渗透铺装+渗透管/井系统的17.25%，环保优势较为明显。（4）全过程生命周期雨水花园COD减排量为渗透铺装+渗透管/井系统的505.09%，雨水花园TN减排量为渗透铺装+渗透管/井系统的34.55%，雨水花园TP减排量为渗透铺装+渗透管/井系统的129.87%。雨水花园的水体污染物减排效应较为显著。（5）本文将雨水花园与渗透铺装+渗透管井系统全过程生命周期成本-效益与传统雨水排水系统进行对比分析，结果表明，就全过程生命周期成本而言，雨水花园＞渗透铺装+渗透管/井系统＞传统雨水排水系统。考虑到全过程生命周期的经济效益、环境效益与社会效益等综合效益，雨水花园与渗透铺装+渗透管/井系统比传统雨水排水系统具有明显优势。（6）就投资回收期而言，雨水花园的成本投资回收期为19.75-29.45年，渗透铺装+渗透管/井系统的成本投资回收期为14.49-18.28年。由于某些基础数据无法获取，可能会导致评价结果存在一定偏差。（7）从环境影响的角度而言，雨水花园好于渗透铺装，从投资回收期而言，渗透铺装较好，最终选择哪一种LID措施，需根据当地实际情况再做决定。（8）单独某一项绿色基础设施的实施并不能满足所有环境效益、经济效益及社会效益的综合目标，在具体运用时，应根据实际情况，选择某几种绿色基础设施进行组合运用，兼顾环境效益、经济效益及社会效益，以期取得良好的综合效益。
[Abstract]:Along with the continuous development of city urbanization, city water area increased year by year, the surface runoff coefficient is developed significantly increased rainfall, surface runoff time, peak flow rate increases, the peak time in advance, brings great pressure to the traditional city drainage facilities. Based on this background, low impact development (Low Impact Development, LID) technology came into being.
Life cycle assessment (Life CycleAssessment LCA) is a kind of method to analyze and evaluate the environmental impact and resource consumption in the whole process, after more than half a century of development, the LCA method in foreign countries has become the government and enterprises the main tool for environmental management. In the United States after the implementation of a large number of LID project, has started during the whole life cycle assessment has been built on the LID infrastructure, and our research in this area is still in the blank state. Evaluation of this paper the basic principle of LCA method applied to LID measures, through the evaluation results, the scientific selection of LID measures for decision makers to provide support.
Based on the LCA theory, we first built the LCA evaluation mode of urban rainwater LID technology. Then we used the model to analyze two typical urban rainwater LID technologies.
Through the study, the following conclusions are drawn.
(1) this paper studied the LID method of life cycle assessment, construction of city rainwater LID technology life cycle assessment model, this model mainly includes two parts: the life cycle impact assessment (Life Cycle, ImpactAssessment, LCIA), mainly refers to the environmental impact assessment, analysis and life cycle cost benefit (Life CycleCost-benefits Analysis, LCCA).
(2) the two LID measures the whole life cycle of the pollutant emission results, and infiltration of rainwater garden pavement + permeation tube / pollutants well system life cycle maximum emissions were CO2, 44899.44kg and 260341.30kg. emissions respectively. In addition, permeability pavement permeation tube wells / + system due to material uses a lot of water permeable brick with the pervious concrete, the quality of waste landfill caused by 1617790.00kg.
(3) the CO2 emission of the whole process life cycle rainwater garden is only 17.25% of the permeable paving + permeable pipe / well system, and the advantage of environmental protection is more obvious.
(4) the life cycle of rain garden COD emission reduction of the whole process of + 505.09% well penetration penetration pavement system / pipe, rainwater garden TN emission reduction for + 34.55% well penetration penetration pavement system / pipe, rainwater garden TP emission reduction for pavement permeability + permeation tube / water pollutant emission reduction effect wells system 129.87%. rain garden is more significant.
(5) the rain garden and well penetration pavement + infiltration system for the whole process of life cycle cost benefit and traditional drainage system were analyzed. The results show that in terms of life cycle cost, rain garden, pavement permeability + - permeable tube / well system, the traditional rainwater drainage system. Considering the life cycle of the whole process the comprehensive benefit of economic benefits, social benefits and environmental benefits, and infiltration of rainwater garden pavement + permeation tube / wells system than the traditional rainwater drainage system has obvious advantages.
(6) in terms of the investment recovery period, the cost recovery period of the rain garden is 19.75-29.45 years, and the cost recovery period of the permeable pavement + penetration pipe / well system is 14.49-18.28 years. Because some basic data can not be acquired, it may lead to a certain deviation in the evaluation result.
(7) from the point of view of environmental impact, rainwater garden is better than permeable pavement. In terms of investment recovery period, it is better to infiltrate pavement and choose which LID measure ultimately. We need to make decisions based on local actual conditions.
(8) a single green infrastructure implementation can not meet all environmental benefits, comprehensive goal of economic and social benefits, in the specific application, should be based on the actual situation, the use of combination of choice for certain types of green infrastructure, taking into account the environmental benefits, economic benefits and social benefits, achieve good comprehensive benefits by the time.

【学位授予单位】：北京建筑大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：TU992;TV213.9

【参考文献】