Research Article

A Quantitative Study on the Benefit of Various Waste Classifications

Table 3

Summary of major MSW management LCA studies.

No.CountryParameter impact assessmentContent and results

1China [36](1) GWMSW (55% moisture content) was studied to compare the differences in GHG emissions in landfill, compost, anaerobic, and incineration treatments. The results demonstrated that the four treatments emitted 197.5, 37.7, 33.6, and 124.3 kg CO2 eq./t, respectively. Composting can avoid the large amount of GHG emissions caused by landfilling primary domestic waste and can form a carbon sink. Energy recovery and replacement of grid emissions during anaerobic digestion can significantly reduce GHGs

2India [37](1) GW
(2) AP
(3) HTP
GHG emissions from wastes subjected and not subjected to resource recovery were 3.43E3 and 4.92E3 kgCO2 eq, respectively. Studies have also found that open storage and landfill disposal of waste emit more GHGs (CH4)

3China [38](1) GW
(2) EC
(3) ER
MSW is the least effective source of direct landfilling for the waste reduction indicators (stability, resource recovery, energy recycling, and GHG reduction)

4China [39](1) ER
(2) GW
Paper incineration can produce the most energy (4,426.04E9 kWh/a) followed by plastic (2,117.95E kWh/a). Additionally, the GHGs released by incineration reached 874.66 Gg CO2 eq./a, followed by paper waste incineration (53.92 Gg CO2 eq./a). Plastic produces 1/2 the recycled energy of paper, and the GHG emissions from plastic incineration are 16 times that of paper

5China [40](1) GW
(2) AP
(3) EC
There is a correlation between the cost of treatment and environmental emissions, and the environmental consequences can be minimised by measuring the environmental factors in the MSW management system

6Japan [41](1) GWThis study simulates and evaluates an innovative waste management initiative in Kawasaki using a scenario simulation model based on the LCA approach
The results demonstrate that recycling mixed paper, mixed plastics, and organic wastes and utilising the recycled materials in industrial production in Kawasaki can potentially reduce emissions by approximately 69 kt CO2 and 8 kt incineration ashes from landfill

7Turkey [42](1) GWFour scenarios were developed as alternatives to the existing waste management system and were evaluated for the optimal environmental solution. The scenario with 75% landfilling and 25% composting provided the optimal results in terms of human health and environmental impact. Current emissions from the present MSW facility were estimated for CH4 and CO2 emissions. Annual emissions in 2017 were 8,674 t/a and 3,161 t/a for CO2 and CH4, respectively. The estimated ground-level concentrations of these emissions were 30 μg m−3 and 50 μg m−3 for CO2 and CH4, respectively

8Sweden [43](1) ERThe study illustrates that reduced landfilling in favour of increased energy and material recycling leads to lower environmental impacts, consumption of energy resources, and economic costs
Landfilling energy-rich waste should be avoided to the extent possible, partly because of the negative environmental impacts from landfilling, but primarily because of the low recovery of resources when landfilling. Differences between materials recycling and incineration are small; but in general, plastic recycling is superior to incineration, and biological treatment is worse

9Germany [44](1) GW
(2) ER
The impact of heating systems on the overall result was significant. The efficiency of heat production was extremely high for all incinerators, and the utilisation was 100%. Meanwhile, the combined biogas and composting plant only utilised 21% of the heat produced due to a lack of capacity (supply) in the current heating system. Recommendations for the systems include a reduction in ammonia emissions from biogas plants, which can improve the overall environmental performance of the German system

Note: AP: Acidification Potential, EC: Energy Consumption, ER: Energy Recovery, HTP: Human Toxicity Potentials, and GW: Global Warming.