从经济角度考虑LID-economic-aspects-(translated)课件.pptx

1、Commercial and residential economic case studies for LID Practices商业和住宅的LID经济案例研究Boulder Hills,Pelham,New HampshireInstallation of 1200 feet of first pervious asphalt private residential road in Northeast US美国东北部第一个铺设透水沥青的住宅区，全长1200英尺Site is nearly zero discharge铺设后场地几乎实现零排放Large sand deposit大粒径沙土分解

2、Cost of per ton pavement 25%more expensive传统铺面造价高于本项目25%Conventional Design传传统设计统设计LID DesignLID设计设计Avoided use of 1616 feet of curbing,785 feet of pipe,8 catch-basins,2 detention basins,2 outlet control structures节约1616英尺路牙、785英尺管道、8个集水井、2个滞留池、2个出水控制设施Built on 9%grade1.3 acres less of land clearing

3、场地坡度9%1.3英亩缺少必要清理4Comparison of costs(2009 dollars)成本对比6%savings on total cost of stormwater infrastructure for a zero-discharge site雨水设施总投入减少6%且实现场地内零排放场地清理临时侵蚀控制传统传统差价差价项目项目排水道路小型道路路牙永久侵蚀控制其他建筑项目总投入Greenland Meadows Commercial site Greenland,New HampshireGreenland Meadows 商商业用地业用地Site discharges t

4、o environmentally sensitive stream场地径流直接排向敏感的河流Saved$900,000 in stormwater management节省90万美元的雨水管理投入6Greenland Meadows砾石湿地排水设施透水铺面及砾石储水设施边界透水铺面及砾石储水设施边界8Comparison of costs成本对比拆除/移除场地准备传统选项传统选项成成本差别本差别LID选项选项Co-benefits of LIDLID带来的其他好处Case Study-City of New York纽约市案例研究Triple-Bottom Line(TBL)analysis

5、 of green infrastructure(LID)针对绿色雨水设施（LID）进行的三重底线（TBL）分析Economic,social,environmental经济、社会、环境Hybrid green-gray approach 绿色-灰色措施相结合 Case Study-City of New York纽约市案例研究Green infrastructure(LID)绿色雨水设施（LID）Cost-effectiveness性价比$0.45/gallon vs.$0.62/gallon每加仑0.45美元 vs每加仑0.62美元 Green infrastructure 绿色雨水设施

6、Soils 土壤 Tree pit vs.bioretention树窠 vs 生态滞留“Mini-ecosystems”“迷你生态系统”Case Study-City of New York纽约市案例研究Case Study City of Philadelphia费城案例研究Triple-Bottom Line(TBL)analysis三重底线（TBL）分析Greenworks 绿色工程Case Study City of Philadelphia费城案例研究LID is part of the Long-Term Control Plan to eliminate combined sew

7、er overflowsLID作为长期控制规划的一部分，削减CSO排放 Case Study Chicago芝加哥案例研究Green Alleys 绿色小巷Permeable pavement 透水铺面High-albedo pavers高反射率铺面Sustainable streets 可持续街道$50 million to be invested in LID over 5 years 5年内对LID的投入达到5千万美元 Whole life cost model使用寿命内全部成本投入模型NttttrC0)1001(Present Value PV=Cumulative present v

8、alue(PV)累计体现价值8000090000100000110000120000130000140000150000160000170000180000051015202530Cumulative PV($)Time(years)Scheme 1Scheme 2Swales and strips生态草沟和绿带20$-$20,000$40,000$60,000$80,000$100,000$120,000$140,000$160,000$180,000$200,000 0102030405060Cumulative Net Present Value($)YearsHigh Maintena

9、nceMedium MaintenanceLow Maintenance0.8-ha drainage area 4%discount rate0.8公顷排水面积内4%降低率Wetlands湿地218-ha drainage area 4%discount rate0.8公顷排水面积内4%减低率Bioretention生态滞留系统220.8-ha drainage area 4%discount rate0.8公顷排水面积内4%减低率$-$50,000$100,000$150,000$200,000$250,000$300,000$350,000$400,000$450,000 0102030

10、405060Cumulative Net Present Value($)YearsHigh MaintenanceMedium MaintenanceLow MaintenanceInfiltration trench渗滤沟23$-$50,000$100,000$150,000$200,000$250,000 0102030405060Cumulative Net Present Value($)YearsHigh MaintenanceMedium MaintenanceLow Maintenance0.8-ha drainage area 4%discount rate0.8公顷排水面积

11、内4%减低率Infiltration basin渗滤池248-ha drainage area 4%discount rate8公顷排水面积内4%减低率Permeable pavement透水铺面25Permeable asphalt0.8-ha drainage area 4%discount rate0.8公顷排水面积内透水沥青4%减低率$-$20,000$40,000$60,000$80,000$100,000$120,000 0102030405060Cumulative Net Present Value($)YearsHigh MaintenanceMedium Maintenan

12、ceLow MaintenanceCost comparison 成本对比Stormwater control雨水管理措施雨水管理措施Whole life cost($/m3 of runoff treated)使用寿命内投入成本（使用寿命内投入成本（$/m3径流处理）径流处理）Low maintenance低维护低维护Medium maintenance中等维护中等维护High maintenance高维护高维护Swales/strips 草沟草沟/绿带绿带5006602200Wetlands 湿地湿地520600925Dry basins 干沟干沟330375575Sand filter 砂石过滤砂石过滤450520670Bioretention 生态滞留生态滞留190022005100Infiltration trench 渗滤沟渗滤沟120016002700Infiltration basin 渗滤池渗滤池330400700Permeable asphalt 透水沥青透水沥青5706401400