تعهد نامه
مجله پژوهش در بهداشت محیط

مجله پژوهش در بهداشت محیط

ارزیابی امرژی در شاخص‌های عملکرد بازده زیست‌محیطی و امرژی خالص در پسماندهای شهری (مطالعه موردی: شهر کرج)

نوع مقاله : مقالات پژوهشی

نویسندگان
غزل مهری 1
سید مسعود منوری 2
شهرام بیک پور 3
1 دانشجوی کارشناسی‌ارشد آلودگی‌های محیط‌زیست، دانشکده موضوعی کشاورزی، آب، غذا و فراسودمندها، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران.
2 استاد گروه محیط‌زیست، دانشکده موضوعی کشاورزی، آب، غذا و فراسودمندها، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران
3 استادیار گروه محیط‌زیست، دانشکده موضوعی کشاورزی، آب، غذا و فراسودمندها، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران.
10.22038/jreh.2025.26107
چکیده
زمینه و هدف: تغییرات در شرایط اجتماعی و اقتصادی منجر به افزایش تولید زباله‌های جامد در دهه‌های اخیر شده است. سناریوهای مختلف مدیریت پسماند جامد شهری با هدف کاهش اثرات زیست محیطی و ارزیابی امرژی پیش‌بینی شده اند. هدف از این مطالعه ارزیابی امرژی شاخص بازده زیست‌محیطی و امرژی خالص در روش‌های مدیریت پسماند است.

مواد و روش‌ها: این تحقیق پیمایشی توصیفی و تحلیل است. به‌منظور محاسبه‌ی مقادیر امرژی در مدیریت پسماندهای شهری، ابتدا مقادیر کمی هر منبع بر اساس واحد مربوطه (جرم، انرژی، پول و غیره) به‌دست آمده و سپس در ضریب تبدیل مربوطه‌اش ضرب شد و همه به واحد امرژی تبدیل شدند. امرژی ذخیره محاسبه شد. در نهایت شاخص‌های مورد بررسی در روش‌های مختلف مدیریت پسماند جهت سرمایه‌گذاری و بازیافت امرژی محاسبه گردید.

یافته‌ها: نتایج ارزیابی نشان می‌دهد که کمپوست‌سازی زباله در کرج بالاترین بهره‌وری زیست‌محیطی را در رابطه با امرژی خالص است. نتایج نشان می‌دهد کل سرمایه‌گذاری امرژی به ازای هر گرم پسماند جمع‌آوری شده به‌ترتیب در روش دفن بهداشتی (106×51/6sej/g MSW)، در سوزاندن (106×61/4sej/g MSW ) در روش زباله‌سوز و در روش کمپوست (105×06/8sej/g MSW ) محاسبه شد. نتایج بازده زیست‌محیطی و امرژی خالص شهر کرج نشان داد روش کمپوست مناسب‌ترین بازده زیست‌محیطی (EYR) است. 

نتیجه‌گیری: نتایج ارزیابی امرژی نشان می‌دهد که با افزایش شاخص نسبت بازده زیست‌محیطی، امرژی خالص افزایش می‌یابد. روش کمپوست در مقایسه با روش دفن بهداشتی بهترین بازده زیست‌محیطی (EYR) دارد. 
کلیدواژه‌ها
سرمایه گذاری امرژی
بازیابی
بازده زیست‌محیطی (EYR)
امرژی خالص (NET)
پسماندهای شهری

عنوان مقاله English

Emergy Assessment of Environmental Yield Ratio and Net Emergy Performance Indicators in Urban Waste Management: A Case Study of Karaj City

نویسندگان English

Ghazal Mehri 1
Seyed Masoud Monavari 2
Shahram Baikpour 3
1 Master's student in Environmental Pollution, Faculty of Agricultural, Water, Food, and Functional Products, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
2 Professor, Department of Environmental Science, Faculty of Agricultural, Water, Food, and Functional Products, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
3 Assistant Professor, Department of Environmental Science, Faculty of Agricultural, Water, Food, and Functional Products, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده English

Background and Objective: Rapid socio-economic development has significantly increased municipal solid waste (MSW) generation. Several urban waste management strategies have been analyzed to address environmental impacts and evaluate energy-based sustainability. This study evaluates emergy-derived Environmental Yield Ratio (EYR) and net emergy across different waste treatment methods.

Materials and Methods: A descriptive-analytical approach was applied. Emergy values for each input were calculated by converting physical quantities (mass, energy, monetary units) into standard emergy units using appropriate transformity factors. Stored emergy was also estimated. Emergy-based indicators were then derived to assess resource investment efficiency and potential for emergy recovery among waste management options.

Results: Composting demonstrated Karaj's highest net emergy efficiency among the evaluated strategies. Emergy investment per gram of MSW was calculated as follows: sanitary landfill (6.51 × 10⁶ sej/g), incineration (4.61 × 10⁶ sej/g), and composting (8.06 × 10⁵ sej/g). EYR and net emergy values confirm composting as the most environmentally favorable alternative.

Conclusion: Emergy analysis indicates a direct relationship between higher EYR and increased net emergy. Composting outperforms sanitary landfilling in environmental performance, offering the most sustainable urban waste management solution for Karaj.
 
Open Access Policy: This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. To view a copy of this licence, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Emergy Investment
Recovery
Environmental Yield Ratio (EYR)
Net eMergy (NET)
Urban Waste
  1. UN. World Population Prospects. Retrieved 10.10.2020 from https:// population. un. org/ wpp/ Publications/ Files/WPP2019_Highlights.pdf.
  2. Gwarda K. Analysis of Selected Problems of the Modern World in the Context of Municipal Waste Management. Economic and Social Development: Book of Proceedings. 2020; 11:143-50.
  3. Taweesan A, Kanabkaew T, Surinkul N, Polprasert C. Integrating clustering algorithms and machine learning to optimize regional snapshot municipal solid waste management for achieving sustainable development goals. Environmental Advances. 2025; 1; 19:100607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envadv.2024.100607
  4. Wani MD, Dada ZA, Shah SA. What factors influence consumers' intention and food waste reduction perceptions in Indian restaurants? British Food Journal. 2025; 14; 127(2):569-87. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-07-2024-0710
  5. Ogundipe FO, Jimoh OD. Life cycle assessment of municipal solid waste management in Minna, Niger State, Nigeria. International Journal of Environmental Research. 2015; 1; 9 (4): 1305-14. 10.22059/ijer.2015.1022
  6. Esmaeilian B, Wang B, Lewis K, Duarte F, Ratti C, Behdad S. The future of waste management in smart and sustainable cities: A review and concept paper. Waste management. 2018; 1; 81:177-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2018.09.047 PMid: 30527034
  7. Etim E, Choedron KT, Ajai O. Municipal solid waste management in Lagos State: Expansion diffusion of awareness. Waste Management. 2024; 15; 190:261-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2024.09.032 PMid: 39362020
  8. Ye Z, Yang J, Zhong N, Tu X, Jia J, Wang J. Tackling environmental challenges in pollution controls using artificial intelligence: A review. Science of the Total Environment. 2020; 10; 699: 134279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.134279 PMid: 33736193
  9. De Bercegol R, Cavé J, Nguyen Thai Huyen A. Waste municipal service and informal recycling sector in fast-growing Asian cities: Co-existence, opposition or integration? Resources. 2017; 11; 6 (4):70. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources6040070
  10. Taweesan A, Koottatep T, Polprasert C. Effective measures for municipal solid waste management for cities in some Asian Countries. Exposure and Health. 2017; 9:125-33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12403-016-0227-5
  11. Zhang Z, Chen Z, Zhang J, Liu Y, Chen L, Yang M, Osman AI, Farghali M, Liu E, Hassan D, Ihara I. Municipal solid waste management challenges in developing regions: A comprehensive review and future perspectives for Asia and Africa. Science of the Total Environment. 2024; 25:172794. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.172794 PMid: 38677421.
  12. Guo HN, Wu SB, Tian YJ, Zhang J, Liu HT. Application of machine learning methods for the prediction of organic solid waste treatment and recycling processes: A review. Bioresource technology. 2021; 1; 319:124114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2020.124114 PMid: 32942236
  13. Kumari T, Raghubanshi AS. Waste management practices in the developing nations: challenges and opportunities. Waste Management and Resource Recycling in the Developing World. 2023; 1:773-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-90463-6.00017-8 PMid:37881551 PMCid:PMC10593884
  14. Harfadli MM, Ramadan BS, Rachman I, Matsumoto T. Challenges and characteristics of the informal waste sector in developing countries: an overview. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management. 2024; 26 (3):1294-309. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-024-01929-3
  15. Ameen M, Anwar-Ul-Haq M, Sohail MI, Akmal F, Siddiqui A. Mismanagement of Waste in Developing Countries. InWaste Problems and Management in Developing Countries 2023; (pp. 31-72). Apple Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003283621-3
  16. Noor T, Javid A, Hussain A, Bukhari SM, Ali W, Akmal M, Hussain SM. Types, sources and management of urban wastes. InUrban ecology 2020; 1 (pp. 239-263). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-820730-7.00014-8
  17. Roy H, Islam MR, Tasnim N, Roy BN, Islam MS. Opportunities and Challenges for Establishing Sustainable Waste Management. Trash or Treasure: Entrepreneurial Opportunities in Waste Management. 2024; 27:79-123. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-55131-4_4 PMCid: PMC11627306
  18. Zurbrügg C, Caniato M, Vaccari M. How assessment methods can support solid waste management in developing countries-a critical review. Sustainability. 2014; 27;6 (2):545-70. https://doi.org/10.3390/su6020545
  19. Nakamura S, Kondo Y. Input‐output analysis of waste management. Journal of industrial ecology. 2002; 6 (1): 39-63. https://doi.org/10.1162/108819802320971632
  20. Ghinea C, Petraru M, Bressers HT, Gavrilescu M. Environmental evaluation of waste management scenarios-significance of the boundaries. Journal of Environmental Engineering and Landscape Management. 2012; 1; 20(1):76-85. https://doi.org/10.3846/16486897.2011.644665
  21. Yadav P, Samadder SR. Life cycle assessment of solid waste management options: A Review. Recent research in Science and Technology. 2014; 4; 6(1).
  22. Brancoli P, Bolton K. Life cycle assessment of waste management systems. InSustainable resource recovery and zero waste approaches 2019; 1 (pp. 23-33). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-64200-4.00002-5
  23. Yang H, Chen L, Yan Z, Wang H. Emergy analysis of cassava-based fuel ethanol in China. Biomass and Bioenergy. 2011; 1;35(1):581-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2010.10.027
  24. Ali M, Marvuglia A, Geng Y, Chaudhry N, Khokhar S. Emergy based carbon footprinting of household solid waste management scenarios in Pakistan. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 2018; 1;131:283-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.10.011
  25. Üstün Odabaşı S, Laratte B. Life cycle assessment of municipal solid waste management in Samsun, Turkey: different scenarios with emphasis on energy and material recovery. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management. 2024; 26(5):2814-29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-024-02004-7
  26. Wang Z, Lv J, Gu F, Yang J, Guo J. Environmental and economic performance of an integrated municipal solid waste treatment: A Chinese case study. Science of the Total Environment. 2020; 20;709: 136096. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.136096 PMid: 31887493
  27. Liu G, Yang Z, Chen B, Zhang Y, Su M, Zhang L. Emergy evaluation of the urban solid waste handling in liaoning province, China. Energies. 2013; 22; 6(10):5486-506. https://doi.org/10.3390/en6105486
  28. Liu G, Hao Y, Dong L, Yang Z, Zhang Y, Ulgiati S. An emergy-LCA analysis of municipal solid waste management. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 2017; 1; 120:131-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.12.003
  29. Ashraf AI, Mohareb E, Vahdati M. Life cycle cost (LCC) for waste to compost process: Evaluation of life cycle cost for the comparison of decentralized waste to compost and landfill facility in Dhaka North City Corporation (DNCC).2025; 1-15. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4191665/v1.
  30. Jiang Y, Leng B, Xi J. Assessing the social cost of municipal solid waste management in Beijing: A systematic life cycle analysis. Waste Management. 2024; 1; 173:62-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2023.11.004 PMid: 37972515
  31. Brown MT, Ulgiati S. Emergy, transformity and ecosystem health. Handbook of ecological indicators for assessment of ecosystem health. 2004. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780203490181.ch14
  32. Tan ST, Ho WS, Hashim H, Lee CT, Taib MR, Ho CS. Energy, economic and environmental (3E) analysis of waste-to-energy (WTE) strategies for municipal solid waste (MSW) management in Malaysia. Energy Conversion and Management. 2015; 15; 102:111-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2015.02.010
  33. Odum HT, Accounting E. Emergy and environmental decision making. Enviromental accounting. 1996.
  34. Winfrey BK, Tilley DR. An emergy-based treatment sustainability index for evaluating waste treatment systems. Journal of cleaner production. 2016; 20; 112:4485-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.05.074
  35. Naghibzadeh SSh, Moeinaddini M, Zafaranieh M. Comprehensive economic evaluation of municipal waste management and its sensitivity analysis: a case study in Karaj. Iranian Journal of Health and Environment. 2023; 16(3):593-606
  36. Ghaley BB, Kehli N, Mentler A. Emergy synthesis of conventional fodder maize (Zea mays L.) production in Denmark. Ecological Indicators. 2018; 1; 87:144-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.12.027
  37. Houshyar E, Wu XF, Chen GQ. Sustainability of wheat and maize production in the warm climate of southwestern Iran: An emergy analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2018; 20; 172:2246-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.187
  38. Marchettini N, Ridolfi R, Rustici M. An environmental analysis for comparing waste management options and strategies. Waste Management. 2007; 1; 27(4):562-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2006.04.007 PMid: 16765586
  39. Campbell DE, Brandt-Williams SL, Meisch ME. Environmental accounting using emergy: Evaluation of the state of West Virginia. Narragansett, RI, USA: US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Atlantic Ecology Division; 2005. P. 1-130.
  40. Bastianoni S, Campbell DE, Ridolfi R, Pulselli FM. The solar transformity of petroleum fuels. Ecological modelling. 2009; 10; 220(1):40-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2008.09.003
  41. Asgharipour MR, Mondani F, Riahinia S. Energy use efficiency and economic analysis of sugar beet production system in Iran: A case study in Khorasan Razavi province. Energy. 2012; 1; 44(1):1078-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2012.04.023
  42. Di Maria F, Micale C. Life cycle analysis of incineration compared to anaerobic digestion followed by composting for managing organic waste: the influence of system components for an Italian district. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. 2015; 20:377-88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-014-0833-z
  43. Riva A, Tiezzi E. I rifiuti come risorsa sostenibile. Gea Speciale, Rimini, Italy. 1997:11-8.
  44. Zhang J, Asutosh AT. LCA-emergy and carbon footprint analysis in a steel industry reporting system: A case study of a Chinese steel company. Science of the Total Environment. 2025; 1; 958:177901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.177901 PMid: 39675282
  45. Han J, Han K, Wang Y, Han Y, Ye Z, Lin J. Multi-objective planning and sustainability assessment for integrated energy systems combining ORC and multi-energy storage: 4E (economic, environmental, exergy and emergy) analysis. Case Studies in Thermal Engineering. 2025; 1; 65:105674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2024.105674
  46. Kalmykova, Y.; Sadagopan, M.; Rosado, L. Circular economy from review of theories and practices to development of implementation tools. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2018; 135, 190-201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.10.034
  47. Grzesik, K.; Kossakowska, K.; Bieda, B.; Kozakiewicz, R. Screening Life Cycle Assessment of beneficiation processes for Rare Earth Elements recovery from secondary sources. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2019; 214, 012068. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/214/1/012068
  48. Sondh, S.; Upadhyay, D.S.; Patel, S.; Patel, R.N. Strategic approach towards sustainability by promoting circular economy-based municipal solid waste management system A review. Sustain. Chem. Pharm.2024; 37, 101337 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scp.2023.101337
  49. Tomić, T.; Schneider, D.R. Circular economy in waste management Socio-economic effect of changes in waste management system structure. J. Environ. Manag. 2020; 267, 110564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110564 PMid: 32421664
  50. Cadena E, Colón J, Artola A, Sánchez A, Font X. Environmental impact of two aerobic composting technologies using life cycle assessment. The international journal of life cycle assessment. 2009; 14:401-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-009-0107-3
  51. Pan H, Zheng X, Tian X, Geng Y, Zhang X, Xiao S, Gao Z, Yang Y, Liu X, Li L, Huang C. Toward sustainable crop production in China: A co-benefits evaluation. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2022; 10; 361:132285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132285