4.7 Article

Multi-sectorial assessment of phosphorus in Ontario, Canada: Mapping flows and analysis of the potential for recovery and reuse

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2023.107108

关键词

Phosphorus recovery; Circular economy; Nutrient pollution; Eutrophication; Food sovereignty

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study uses material flow analysis and open data sources to map annual phosphorus flows across Ontario's economic sectors, identifying potential opportunities for phosphorus recovery and assessing their economic feasibility. The findings show that up to 86% of phosphorus imports for food production could be covered by recycling, with an average recovery cost of 49 CAD/kg of phosphorus. The cost is lower than the economic losses caused by phosphorus releases but higher than fossil-based phosphorus products, indicating the need for cooperative approaches for effective phosphorus recovery at a regional scale.
Phosphorus is a key non-renewable element used in multiple economic activities, and notably for food production. It is therefore a critical material whose recovery is gaining interest. This work maps the annual phosphorus flows across Ontario's economic sectors through material flow analysis using open data sources. This information is used to identify potential opportunities for phosphorus recovery and recycling, all while performing an economic assessment to determine the feasibility of phosphorus recovery from different sectors. Up to 86% of phosphorus imports for food production could be covered by recycled phosphorus, with an average recovery cost of 49 CAD/kg of phosphorus. This cost is lower than the estimated economic losses caused by phosphorus releases into the environment, although it is significantly higher than the cost of fossil-based phosphorus products. However, phosphorus recovery costs vary widely for different waste streams, suggesting the need of exploring cooperative approaches for effective phosphorus recovery at regional scale.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据