Avrupa Ülkelerinde Çamur Bertaraf Stratejilerine Etki Eden Faktörler

Year 2024, Volume: 12 Issue: 3, 1447 - 1460, 31.07.2024

Ayşe Elif Ateş , Sinan Ateş , Muhammed İberia Aydın , Hüseyin Selçuk , Serdar Aydın

https://doi.org/10.29130/dubited.1246644

Abstract

Bu çalışmada Avrupa ülkelerinde üretilen toplam arıtma çamuru miktarları ve çeşitli faktörlere göre çamur bertaraf stratejilerinin tercih nedenleri araştırılmıştır. Çalışmada Avrupa İstatistik Kurumu ve literatürden alınan veriler seçilirken küresel şartlar göz önünde bulundurulmuştur ve en doğru veri setleri seçilerek değerlendirme yapılmıştır. Avrupa ülkelerinde birincil, ikincil ve üçüncül arıtmadan kaynaklanan arıtma çamuru üretimi kişi başına kuru ağırlık ortalama 42 g/kişi.gün ya da 15,26 kg/kişi.yıl olarak hesaplanmıştır. Arıtma çamuru bertaraf yöntemlerinin maliyetleri, ülkelerin yüzey alanları, milli gelirleri ve enerji ihtiyaçlarına göre karşılaştırma yapılmıştır. Yüzey alanı düşük olan ve çamur miktarı yüksek olan ülkelerin arıtma çamuru bertaraf yöntemi olarak yakmayı tercih ettikleri görülmesine rağmen bertaraf seçiminde ülkenin milli geliri ve enerji ihtiyacının da yöntem seçiminde oldukça etkili olduğu belirlenmiştir. Çalışma bütünüyle incelendiğinde arıtma çamurunun bertaraf yöntemi seçiminde faktörlerin tek başına önemli oranda benzer sonuç verdiği bulunmuştur ancak daha doğru bağlantılar kurulabilmesi için bütün olarak hepsinin ele alınması gerektiği görülmüştür.

Keywords

Arıtma çamuru , Avrupa ülkeleri , Bertaraf stratejileri

Factors Affecting Sludge Disposal Strategies in European Countries

Abstract

In this study, the total amount of sewage sludge produced in European countries and the reasons for choosing sludge disposal strategies according to various factors were investigated. In the study, global conditions were taken into consideration while selecting the data taken from the European Statistical Institute and the literature, and the most accurate data sets were selected and evaluated. Sewage sludge production from primary, secondary and tertiary treatment in European countries is calculated as an average of 42 g/person.day per capita dry weight or 15.26 kg/person.year. The disposal methods were compared according to the costs, surface areas, national incomes and energy needs of the countries. Although it is seen that countries with low surface area and high amount of sludge prefer incineration as treatment sludge disposal method, it has been determined that the national income and energy needs of the country are also very effective in the selection of the method. When the study was examined in its entirety, it was found that the factors in the selection of the treatment sludge disposal method alone gave significantly similar results, but it was seen that all of them should be considered as a whole in order to establish more accurate connections.

Keywords

Arıtma çamuru , Avrupa ülkeleri , Bertaraf stratejileri

References

• [1] A. Grosser, E. Neczaj, B. R. Singh, R. Almås, H. Brattebø, and M. Kacprzak, “Anaerobic digestion of sewage sludge with grease trap sludge and municipal solid waste as co-substrates,” Environ Res, vol. 155, pp. 249–260, May 2017, doi: 10.1016/J.ENVRES.2017.02.007.
• [2] M. Kacprzak et al., “Sewage sludge disposal strategies for sustainable development,” Environ Res, vol. 156, pp. 39–46, Jul. 2017, doi: 10.1016/J.ENVRES.2017.03.010.
• [3] A. Khakbaz, D. Goi, M. De Nobili, and E. Aneggi, “Environmental and Energy Engineering Sciences,” 2020, Accessed: Mar. 20, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://air.uniud.it/retrieve/handle/11390/1185610/482715/PhD%20thesis-Ali%20Khakbaz.pdf
• [4] L. Metcalf, H. P. Eddy, and G. Tchobanoglous, “Wastewater energy: treatment and reuse,” McGraw-Hill, p. 1819, 2004.
• [5] P. Manara and A. Zabaniotou, “Towards sewage sludge based biofuels via thermochemical conversion – A review,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 2566–2582, 2012.
• [6] M. C. Samolada and A. A. Zabaniotou, “Comparative assessment of municipal sewage sludge incineration, gasification and pyrolysis for a sustainable sludge-to-energy management in Greece,” Waste Management, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 411–420, 2014.
• [7] A. Kijo-kleczkowska, H. Otwinowski, and K. Środa, “Properties and production of sewage sludge in Poland with reference to the methods of neutralizing,” Archiwum Gospodarki Odpadami i Ochrony Środowiska, vol. 14, no.4, pp. 59–78, 2012.
• [8] L. Spinosa et al., “Sustainable and Innovative Solutions for Sewage Sludge Management,” vol. 3, pp. 702–717, 2011.
• [9] M. Pradel, L. Aissani, J. Villot, J. C. Baudez, and V. Laforest, “From waste to added value product: towards a paradigm shift in life cycle assessment applied to wastewater sludge – a review,” J Clean Prod, vol. 131, pp. 60–75, 2016.
• [10] P. Arroyo and M. Molinos-Senante, “Selecting appropriate wastewater treatment technologies using a choosing-by-advantages approach,” Science of The Total Environment, vol. 625, pp. 819–827, 2018.
• [11] D. R. Marlow, M. Moglia, S. Cook, and D. J. Beale, “Towards sustainable urban water management: A critical reassessment,” Water Res, vol. 47, no. 20, pp. 7150–7161, 2013.
• [12] H. Ødegaard, B. Paulsrud, and I. Karlsson, “Wastewater sludge as a resource: sludge disposal strategies and corresponding treatment technologies aimed at sustainable handling of wastewater sludge,” Water Science and Technology, vol. 46, no. 10, pp. 295–303, 2002.
• [13] R. P. Singh and M. Agrawal, “Potential benefits and risks of land application of sewage sludge,” Waste Management, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 347–358, 2008..
• [14] D. Fytili and A. Zabaniotou, “Utilization of sewage sludge in EU application of old and new methods—A review,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 116–140, 2008.
• [15] E. Neczaj and A. Grosser, “Circular Economy in Wastewater Treatment Plant–Challenges and Barriers,” Proceedings 2018, Vol. 2, Page 614, vol. 2, no. 11, p. 614, 2018.
• [16] R. Cáceres, K. Malińska, and O. Marfà, “Nitrification within composting: A review,” Waste Management, vol. 72, pp. 119–137, 2018.
• [17] M. Kacprzak, K. Fijalkowski, A. Grobelak, … K. R.-Pol. J., and undefined 2015, “Escherichia coli and Salmonella spp. Early diagnosis and seasonal monitoring in the sewage treatment process by EMA-qPCR method,” pjmonline.org, vol. 64, no. 2, pp. 143–148, 2015.
• [18] Bien, J., Neczaj, E., & Milczarek, M. ‘’Co-composting of meat packing wastewater sludge and organic fraction of municipal solid waste’’, Global Nest J, vol.1, no.4, 513-521, 2013. [19] A. Abuşoğlu, E. Özahi, A. İ. Kutlar, and S. Demir, “Exergy analyses of green hydrogen production methods from biogas-based electricity and sewage sludge,” Int J Hydrogen Energy, vol. 42, no. 16, pp. 10986–10996, 2017.
• [20] A. Abuşoğlu, E. Özahi, A. İhsan Kutlar, and H. Al-jaf, “Life cycle assessment (LCA) of digested sewage sludge incineration for heat and power production,” J Clean Prod, vol. 142, pp. 1684–1692, 2017.
• [21] “Statistics | Eurostat.” https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/nama_10_pe/default/table?lang=en (accessed Mar. 20, 2023).
• [22] “Statistics | Eurostat.” https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/env_ww_spd/default/table?lang=en (accessed Mar. 20, 2023).
• [23] V. K. Tyagi and S. L. Lo, “Sludge: A waste or renewable source for energy and resources recovery?,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 25, pp. 708–728, Sep. 2013, doi: 10.1016/J.RSER.2013.05.029.
• [24] Wójtowicz, A., Jędrzejewski, C., Bieniowski, M., & Darul, H. Modelowe rozwiązania w gospodarce osadowej. Izba Gospodarcza Wodociągi Polskie, 2013.
• [25] “Statistics | Eurostat.” https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/TEC00001/default/table?lang=en&category=na10.nama10.nama_10_aux (accessed Mar. 20, 2023).
• [26] S. Braungardt, V. Bürger, J. Zieger, and L. Bosselaar, “How to include cooling in the EU Renewable Energy Directive? Strategies and policy implications,” Energy Policy, vol. 129, pp. 260–267, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.1016/J.ENPOL.2019.02.027.
• [27] “Statistics | Eurostat.” https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/TEN00123/default/table?lang=en&category=nrg.nrg_quant.nrg_quanta.nrg_bal (accessed Mar. 20, 2023).
• [28] “Statistics | Eurostat.” https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/NRG_CB_RW/default/table?lang=en&category=nrg.nrg_quant.nrg_quanta.nrg_cb (accessed Mar. 20, 2023).
• [29] Council of the European Communities. Council Directive of 12 June 1986 on the protection of the environment, and in particular of the soil, when sewage sludge is used in agriculture (86/278/EEC). Official Journal of the European Communities, 181, 6-12, 1986.
• [30] E. D.-J. Eur. Commun and undefined 1991, “Council Directive of 21. May 1991 concerning urban waste water treatment (91/271/EEC),” tarimorman.gov.tr, Accessed: Mar. 20, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.tarimorman.gov.tr/SYGM/Belgeler/ab%20mevzuat%C4%B1/91-271-EEC.pdf
• [31] “EUR-Lex - 31999L0031 - EN - EUR-Lex.” https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A31999L0031 (accessed Mar. 20, 2023).
• [32] H. Unnerstall, “The Principle of Full Cost Recovery in the EU-Water Framework Directive—Genesis and Content,” Journal of Environmental Law, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 29–42, 2007.
• [33] “EUR-Lex - 32008L0098 - EN - EUR-Lex.” https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32008L0098 (accessed Mar. 20, 2023).
• [34] “EUR-Lex - 32009L0028 - EN - EUR-Lex.” https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32009L0028 (accessed Mar. 20, 2023).
• [35] S. Hans and E. Peter, “End-of-waste criteria for biodegradable waste subjected to biological treatment (compost & digestate): Technical proposals,” 2013, doi: 10.2791/6295.