TY - JOUR
T1 - Environmental performance and energy recovery potential of five processes for municipal solid waste treatment
AU - Arafat, Hassan A.
AU - Jijakli, Kenan
AU - Ahsan, Amimul
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
PY - 2015/10/15
Y1 - 2015/10/15
N2 - In this study, the environmental impacts were assessed for five municipal solid waste (MSW) treatment processes with energy recovery potential. The life cycle assessment (LCA) tool was used to quantify the environmental impacts. The five processes considered are incineration, gasification, anaerobic digestion, bio-landfills, and composting. In addition, these processes were compared to recycling where applicable. In addition to environmental impacts quantification, the energy production potentials for the five processes were compared to provide a thorough assessment. To maximize the future applicability of our findings, the analyses were based on the waste treatment technologies as they apply to individual waste streams, but not for a specific MSW mixture at a particular location. Six MSW streams were considered; food, yard, plastic, paper, wood and textile wastes. From an energy recovery viewpoint, it was found that it is best to recycle paper, wood and plastics; to anaerobically digest food and yard wastes; and to incinerate textile waste. On the other hand, the level of environmental impact for each process depends on the considered impact category. Generally, anaerobic digestion and gasification were found to perform better environmentally than the other processes, while composting had the least environmental benefit.
AB - In this study, the environmental impacts were assessed for five municipal solid waste (MSW) treatment processes with energy recovery potential. The life cycle assessment (LCA) tool was used to quantify the environmental impacts. The five processes considered are incineration, gasification, anaerobic digestion, bio-landfills, and composting. In addition, these processes were compared to recycling where applicable. In addition to environmental impacts quantification, the energy production potentials for the five processes were compared to provide a thorough assessment. To maximize the future applicability of our findings, the analyses were based on the waste treatment technologies as they apply to individual waste streams, but not for a specific MSW mixture at a particular location. Six MSW streams were considered; food, yard, plastic, paper, wood and textile wastes. From an energy recovery viewpoint, it was found that it is best to recycle paper, wood and plastics; to anaerobically digest food and yard wastes; and to incinerate textile waste. On the other hand, the level of environmental impact for each process depends on the considered impact category. Generally, anaerobic digestion and gasification were found to perform better environmentally than the other processes, while composting had the least environmental benefit.
KW - Energy
KW - Environmental impact
KW - Life cycle assessment
KW - Modeling
KW - Municipal solid waste
KW - Sustainability
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84938197155&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.071
DO - 10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.071
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84938197155
SN - 0959-6526
VL - 105
SP - 233
EP - 240
JO - Journal of Cleaner Production
JF - Journal of Cleaner Production
ER -