ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2019
A survey of municipal solid waste landfills in Beijing during 2009-2011.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- An overview of the municipal solid waste management modes and innovations in Shanghai, China.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The investigation of municipal solid waste (MSW) treatment in China is rare due to its sensitivity and difficulty in terms of access. We chose Beijing, the capital of China, as an example to identify the characteristics of MSW landfill treatments using a 2-month investigation with 20 participants. MSW landfill treatments account for nearly 70% of the annual MSW disposal in Beijing; the landfill processes are equipped with many kinds of technologies and consume a large amount of energy and produce a variety of contaminants. The cover method (the most obvious difference in landfill tamping) mainly includes high-density polyethylene (HDPE) geomembranes with loess and soil alone (i.e., loess or sandy soil). We investigated the actual conditions of landfills and collected data on leachate and landfill gas (LFG) emissions and energy consumption during 2009-2011. The results indicated that the cover method employed by landfills was related to treatment quantity, operation, and especially landfill location. Early large-scale landfills located in plains were covered with HDPE geomembranes, and newly built landfills covered with soil tended to be equipped with HDPE covers. Using HDPE cover also contributed greatly to LFG production due to its impermeability but had no remarkable effect on leachate yield reduction due to the dry climate in Beijing. The potential was reinforced by the potentials of decrement and reuse. The disposal method of LFG can be optimized, and the power generated by the LFG process can meet the landfill demand. The gray water recycled from the leachate could be used in the landfill process.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31098912What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.