1 State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China; moc.621@6121_gnauhsil (S.L.); nc.ude.tpib@9800258102 (L.H.); nc.ca.seecr@obgnahz (B.Z.); nc.ca.seecr@nayy (Y.Y.); nc.ca.seecr@oaijtw (W.J.)
2 College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 101408, China
Find articles by Shuang Li1 State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China; moc.621@6121_gnauhsil (S.L.); nc.ude.tpib@9800258102 (L.H.); nc.ca.seecr@obgnahz (B.Z.); nc.ca.seecr@nayy (Y.Y.); nc.ca.seecr@oaijtw (W.J.)
Find articles by Liao He1 State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China; moc.621@6121_gnauhsil (S.L.); nc.ude.tpib@9800258102 (L.H.); nc.ca.seecr@obgnahz (B.Z.); nc.ca.seecr@nayy (Y.Y.); nc.ca.seecr@oaijtw (W.J.)
Find articles by Bo Zhang1 State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China; moc.621@6121_gnauhsil (S.L.); nc.ude.tpib@9800258102 (L.H.); nc.ca.seecr@obgnahz (B.Z.); nc.ca.seecr@nayy (Y.Y.); nc.ca.seecr@oaijtw (W.J.)
2 College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 101408, China
Find articles by Yan Yan1 State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China; moc.621@6121_gnauhsil (S.L.); nc.ude.tpib@9800258102 (L.H.); nc.ca.seecr@obgnahz (B.Z.); nc.ca.seecr@nayy (Y.Y.); nc.ca.seecr@oaijtw (W.J.)
Find articles by Wentao Jiao1 State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China; moc.621@6121_gnauhsil (S.L.); nc.ude.tpib@9800258102 (L.H.); nc.ca.seecr@obgnahz (B.Z.); nc.ca.seecr@nayy (Y.Y.); nc.ca.seecr@oaijtw (W.J.)
Find articles by Ning DingFayuan Wang, Academic Editor , Liping Li, Academic Editor , Lanfang Han, Academic Editor , and Aiju Liu, Academic Editor
1 State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China; moc.621@6121_gnauhsil (S.L.); nc.ude.tpib@9800258102 (L.H.); nc.ca.seecr@obgnahz (B.Z.); nc.ca.seecr@nayy (Y.Y.); nc.ca.seecr@oaijtw (W.J.)
2 College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 101408, China
* Correspondence: nc.ca.seecr@gnidgnin Received 2022 Jan 17; Accepted 2022 Mar 3. Copyright © 2022 by the authors.Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Quantitative evaluation of different contaminated soil remediation technologies in multiple dimensions is beneficial for the optimization and comparative selection of technology. Ex situ thermal desorption is widely used in remediation of organic contaminated soil due to its excellent removal effect and short engineering period. In this study, a comprehensive evaluation method of soil remediation technology, covering 20 indicators in five dimensions, was developed. It includes the steps of constructing an indicator system, accounting for the indicator, normalization, determining weights by analytic hierarchy process, and comprehensive evaluation. Three ex situ thermal desorption technology—direct thermal desorption, indirect thermal desorption, and indirect thermal heap—in China were selected for the model validation. The results showed that the direct thermal desorption had the highest economic and social indicator scores of 0.068 and 0.028, respectively. The indirect thermal desorption had the highest technical and environmental indicator scores of 0.118 and 0.427, respectively. The indirect thermal heap had the highest resource indicator score of 0.175. With balanced performance in five dimensions, the indirect thermal desorption had the highest comprehensive score of 0.707, which is 1.6 and 1.4 times higher than the direct thermal desorption and indirect thermal heap, respectively. The comprehensive evaluation method analyzed and compared the characteristics of the ex situ thermal desorption technology from different perspectives, such as specific indicators, multiple dimensions, and single comprehensive values. It provided a novel evaluation approach for the sustainable development and application of soil remediation technology.
Keywords: comprehensive evaluation method, contaminated soil, ex situ thermal desorption, environmental impact, resource utilization
Establishing a comprehensive and practical evaluation system is of critical importance to the sustainable development of technologies. Comprehensive evaluation refers to the use of a systematic and standardized method that includes simultaneous multiple indicators for evaluation. Comprehensive evaluation can analyze the whole process of technology implementation, and provide information for process optimization in terms of technological, economical, and social aspects [1,2,3]. Therefore, comprehensive evaluation is very important for process optimization of technology, and the comparison and selection among different technologies.
Contaminated soil remediation is an important issue in the environmental field [4]. In past decades, a variety of soil remediation technologies have been developed [5]. To evaluate different soil remediation technologies, one first needs to focus on the characteristic indicators such as efficiency, stability, and applicability. The technology consumes raw and auxiliary materials, and energy during implementation, resulting in the consumption of natural resources. At the same time, emissions from energy consumption or process physicochemical reactions can result in environmental impacts. The economic cost, benefit, and technical value of the technology are also important factors of concern to investors and decision makers. In addition, the implementation of such pollutant removal technologies can have certain social impacts, such as job opportunities for local residents, but also negative social effects, such as concerns from adjacent residents and potential impact on workers’ health. A comprehensive evaluation can avoid the transfer of technological loads between different dimensions.
Ex situ thermal desorption has become one of the most effective remediation technologies for organic contaminated soil [6,7,8,9]. Ex situ soil remediation usually is the second choice after in situ technology, which are more sustainable and less costly; thus, the effort to analyze the impact of the ex situ remediation processes is necessary. Since the 1980s, scholars from the United States, France, Canada, Argentina, South Korea, and other countries have carried out thermal desorption remediation research on a variety of organic contaminated soils [10]. In Europe, thermal desorption has also been widely used in engineering practice [6,11,12,13,14]. In America, among the 571 ex situ soil remediation projects carried out during 1982 to 2014, 77 used ex situ thermal desorption remediation technology, accounting for 13.5% of the total number of projects [14]. The independent research, and the development and application of the equipment for ex situ thermal desorption technology in China started late. The first patent on thermal desorption remediation technology was granted in 2009, and the first related article was published in 2011 [15,16]. As of 2017, a total of 23 ex situ thermal desorption remediation projects for contaminated sites have been carried out [15].
At present, the evaluation of carbon emission and environmental impact of ex situ thermal desorption technology has been carried out [17,18,19,20], but there are few literature reports on its quantitative evaluation at the levels of different dimensions, such as technical characteristics, resources, environment, economy, and society. A comprehensive study can provide a theoretical basis for the directional selection of ex situ thermal desorption technology in terms of specific indicators, and further provide scientific support for the overall development of ex situ thermal desorption technology. In this paper, multilevel comprehensive evaluation is carried out for direct and indirect ex situ thermal desorption technology, and its key influencing factors and advantageous indicators are determined through comparative analysis, which further reflects the importance of technology evaluation methods in selecting appropriate technology. The establishment of a comprehensive evaluation model is conducive to the optimization, improvement, and comparative selection of technology, and can provide a new analytical method for the quantitative comparison between different ex situ thermal desorption technologies.
A comprehensive evaluation method for ex situ thermal desorption technology was constructed in this study, and its framework is shown in Figure 1 . The main steps of technology evaluation include: (1) determining the evaluation object and the technology involved in the evaluation; (2) describing the remediation technology; (3) determining the evaluation indicator set and collecting the evaluation indicator parameters; (4) determining the weight and quantification method of the evaluation indicator; (5) comprehensively analyzing and weighting each indicator, and calculating the score of each evaluated dimension; and (6) obtaining the comprehensive evaluation result.