4.7 Article

Implementation of the semi-aerobic landfill system (Fukuoka method) in developing countries: A Malaysia cost analysis

期刊

WASTE MANAGEMENT
卷 25, 期 7, 页码 702-711

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2005.01.008

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Most of the existing solid waste landfill sites in developing countries are practicing either open dumping or controlled dumping. Proper sanitary landfill concepts are not fully implemented due to technological and financial constraints. Implementation of a fully engineered sanitary landfill is necessary and a more economically feasible landfill design is crucial, particularly for developing countries. This study was carried out by focusing on the economics from the development of a new landfill site within a natural clay area with no cost of synthetic liner up to 10 years after its closure by using the Fukuoka method semi-aerobic landfill system. The findings 3 of the study show that for the development of a 15-ha landfill site in Malaysia with an estimated volume of 2,000,000 m, the capital investment required was about US$1,312,895, or about US$0.84/tonne of waste. Assuming that the lifespan of the landfill is 20 years, the total cost of operation was about US$11,132,536 or US$7.15/tonne of waste. The closure cost of the landfill was estimated to be US$1,385,526 or US$0.89/tonne of waste. Therefore, the total cost required to dispose of a tonne of waste at the semi-aerobic landfill was estimated to be US$8.89. By considering an average tipping fee of about US$7.89/tonne of waste in Malaysia in the first year, and an annual increase of 3% to about US$13.84 in year-20, the overall system recorded a positive revenue of US$1,734,749. This is important information for the effort of privatisation of landfill sites in Malaysia, as well as in other developing countries, in order to secure efficient and effective landfill development and management. (C) 2005 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

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