지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 연구보고서
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2016.7
- 수록면
- 1 - 137 (137page)
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The improved standard of living has increased awareness of odor emission, with a resultant rise in the number of civil complaints about the odor. Public environmental facilities directly related to citizen life are no exceptions. The number of civil complaints should be reduced in order to achieve the original goals of establishing public environmental facilities, healthy life-styles, and consistency. In this study, we determined measures to strengthen odor management in public environmental facilities in Seoul
The study results indicated 2 common associated problems, despite facility-dependent differences in characteristics and substances of the odor. First, with regard to kind of facility/process, heaps of sludge and facilities with septic tanks were main sources of odor of sewage treatment facilities; processes of crushing/sorting waste and drying facilities were main sources of odor of food waste disposal facilities; and spaces for crushing/sorting and piling were main sources of odor of waste transfer stations. Moreover, most main sources had conditions that facilitated easy spread of odor due to exposure to open spaces.
Secondly, for operational management related reasons, reduction devices were employed under un-hygienic washing conditions and low odor efficiency.
Analyses of 215 odor emission evaluations from public environmental facilities in Seoul over the past 5 years indicated that 6.51% of all cases (14 cases) were in violation of the acceptable limit. In most cases, odor emission was maintained at approximately 50~60% of the limit.Based on these results, 8 strategies for strengthening management of the odor were suggested.
Moreover, a survey on waste transfer station facilities indicated that 50% were found in residential areas; and 7 crushing/sorting facilities that cause a massive amount of the odor were also found in residential areas. Since most facilities operated during the day when local citizens’activity was high, and the operation hours were prolonged, civil complaints about the odor were expected.
Of 24 facilities, 42% were operated in open spaces and 67% of the facilities did not use checklists for self-diagnosis. In addition, the cleaning was conducted less than once a week in 38% of the facilities.Based on the study results, 9 strategies for strengthening management of the odor were suggested, as follows.
ⅰ) Strengthening the odor emission standards under local ordinance for multiple odor standards of site boundaries to public environmental facilities from the current 15 to 12 times of the amount.
ⅱ) Expanding application of the strengthened standards to all odor emission facilities within 5 years.
ⅲ) Strengthening obturation management of outdoor storage sites for the intermediate and final products and by-products (sludge, solid wastes to be released) from the facilities.
ⅳ) Flexible application of operation hours considering weather, climate and prime time for local citizens’ activity.
ⅴ) Establishing detailed management measures regarding main sources of the odor.
ⅵ) Regular cleaning of contaminable devices and their parts and maintaining hygienic conditions of the facilities.
ⅶ) Regular monitoring.
ⅷ) Developing/managing odor control manuals and checklists considering the features of the facilities.
ⅸ) Establishing and practicing odor prevention measures through citizen participation and opinion.
The study results indicated 2 common associated problems, despite facility-dependent differences in characteristics and substances of the odor. First, with regard to kind of facility/process, heaps of sludge and facilities with septic tanks were main sources of odor of sewage treatment facilities; processes of crushing/sorting waste and drying facilities were main sources of odor of food waste disposal facilities; and spaces for crushing/sorting and piling were main sources of odor of waste transfer stations. Moreover, most main sources had conditions that facilitated easy spread of odor due to exposure to open spaces.
Secondly, for operational management related reasons, reduction devices were employed under un-hygienic washing conditions and low odor efficiency.
Analyses of 215 odor emission evaluations from public environmental facilities in Seoul over the past 5 years indicated that 6.51% of all cases (14 cases) were in violation of the acceptable limit. In most cases, odor emission was maintained at approximately 50~60% of the limit.Based on these results, 8 strategies for strengthening management of the odor were suggested.
Moreover, a survey on waste transfer station facilities indicated that 50% were found in residential areas; and 7 crushing/sorting facilities that cause a massive amount of the odor were also found in residential areas. Since most facilities operated during the day when local citizens’activity was high, and the operation hours were prolonged, civil complaints about the odor were expected.
Of 24 facilities, 42% were operated in open spaces and 67% of the facilities did not use checklists for self-diagnosis. In addition, the cleaning was conducted less than once a week in 38% of the facilities.Based on the study results, 9 strategies for strengthening management of the odor were suggested, as follows.
ⅰ) Strengthening the odor emission standards under local ordinance for multiple odor standards of site boundaries to public environmental facilities from the current 15 to 12 times of the amount.
ⅱ) Expanding application of the strengthened standards to all odor emission facilities within 5 years.
ⅲ) Strengthening obturation management of outdoor storage sites for the intermediate and final products and by-products (sludge, solid wastes to be released) from the facilities.
ⅳ) Flexible application of operation hours considering weather, climate and prime time for local citizens’ activity.
ⅴ) Establishing detailed management measures regarding main sources of the odor.
ⅵ) Regular cleaning of contaminable devices and their parts and maintaining hygienic conditions of the facilities.
ⅶ) Regular monitoring.
ⅷ) Developing/managing odor control manuals and checklists considering the features of the facilities.
ⅸ) Establishing and practicing odor prevention measures through citizen participation and opinion.
목차
[표지]
[요약]
[목차]
표
그림
[01 연구개요]
1_연구배경 및 목적
2_연구범위 및 방법
[02 서울시 공공환경시설 악취발생 현황]
1_악취의 정의와 측정방법
2_악취관련 규정 조사
3_선행연구 조사
4_시설 및 민원현황
5_현황조사 소결
[03 공공환경시설의 악취발생특성 분석]
1_악취배출 농도분석
2_복합악취 배출기준 강화를 위한 현행 제도 분석
[04 국내·외 사례조사]
1_국내사례조사
2_국외사례조사
[05 공공환경시설의 악취관리 방향]
1_공공환경시설의 생활악취 관리를 위한 기본방향
2_기본전략
3_세부전략
[06 결론 및 정책건의]
1_결론
2_정책제언
[참고문헌]
[부록]
[Abstract]
[Contents]
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
교정보호시설의 입지갈등과 대응방안 연구
형사정책연구원 연구총서
2018 .12
-
대학 시설경영관리 능률향상을 위한 FM 항목분석
한국퍼실리티매니지먼트학회지
2018 .01
-
대학 시설경영관리 능률향상을 위한 FM 항목분석
한국퍼실리티매니지먼트학회지
2018 .12
-
경기도 사업장 미세먼지 배출시설 인허가 제도 개선방안 연구
정책연구
2021 .03
-
주거지 주변 커뮤니티 시설의 비교분석과 사용자 수요조사
한국퍼실리티매니지먼트학회지
2020 .01
-
광주시 공공시설(문화 및 체육)의 효율적 관리운영 방안 연구
정책연구
2022 .11
-
그린케어(Green Care) 도입을 위한 시설과 프로그램 유형분류 및 중요도 분석
농촌계획
2019 .01
-
AHP를 이용한 복합리조트 선택속성 우선순위도출에 관한 연구 : 아웃바운드 관광객을 중심으로
관광레저연구
2017 .11
-
시설관리 측면에서 바라본 국내 교정시설의 설계 시 고려사항에 대한 자료 도출 목적 연구
한국퍼실리티매니지먼트학회지
2019 .01
-
서울시 지하시설물 안전관리 개선방안
서울연구원 정책과제연구보고서
2020 .04
-
도농공존거점공간으로의 폐교 활용방안 및 활성화 요인 분석
농촌계획
2022 .08
-
사회변화 대응형 공공시설관리(P-FM)서비스 수립을 위한 국내외 시설관리기준 비교분석 연구
한국퍼실리티매니지먼트학회지
2017 .06
-
농촌지역 공동시설 저활용 원인에 대한 이해관계자별 인식비교 연구
농촌계획
2023 .02
-
공공체육시설 관리자가 인식하는 운영실태의 문제점 및 개선방향: FGI(Focus Group Interview)를 중심으로
관광레저연구
2022 .10
-
폐기물 소각시설의 공간적 영향범위에 관한 연구: 서울시 자원회수시설 사례를 중심으로
한국지역개발학회지
2023 .06
-
공공도서관 시설성능 평가지표 개발
한국퍼실리티매니지먼트학회지
2021 .12
-
경기도 장기미집행 도시계획시설 해소를 위한중장기적 정책방향
정책연구
2017 .06
-
주거환경 생활편의시설의 접근성 및 중요도에 관한 연구
주거환경
2020 .03
-
철도시설이전사업의 효율적 개선 방안에 관한 연구 : 한국철도공사 사례를 중심으로
주거환경
2017 .09
-
도시유형별 체육시설 접근성 변화 연구 : 국민생활체육조사(2013, 2019)를 중심으로
도시정책연구
2023 .06
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2017-359-002248901