Burn or Bury? Analyzing Waste Management Options in Detail

Written by Moritz Bühner   // November 5, 2012    3 Comments

Reduce, Reuse, Recycle – the waste imperative is as clear as it can get. What’s less clear, however, is what we should we do with the remaining stuff. Even the greenest society is, at a certain point, confronted with the unusable leftovers of consumption. What should happen to these? Treatment of the leftovers is a well discussed question and the answer relies on three big alternatives: incineration, dumping and composting. All three have pros and cons, some of which are apparent, others rather surprising.

In this article, let me introduce you to a life cycle assessment (LCA) that analyzes the main waste management options for municipal solid waste in detail. I have to tell you right away: none of the options is 100% environmentally friendly. Waste always has a negative impact on the environment. It can only be managed, never reduced to zero – unless you reduce the waste itself to zero. However, by modeling all material flows and their related environmental impacts, the life cycle assessment method gives us a clear picture of how the different options perform in many different categories.

Different Waste Management Inventories in Different Parts of the World

To begin with, I have to make a big distinction since the options discussed in this article are limited to industrialized countries. Yes, the developing world and especially the most dynamic emerging economies have enormous growth in the amount of waste to be dealt with – however, their means to cope with the problem are different. This is the reason today’s article deals with options available only to industrialized countries. But never mind. With a little patience, we’ll get the complete picture – next week’s blog will focus on waste management in the developing countries.

The LCA of interest was conducted by Gomes Maria do Rosario and Matos Manuel Arlindo from the University of Aveiro in Portugal. The two researchers compared three alternative waste management options (PDF) in central Portugal, an area where 1,8 million inhabitants generate 700,000 tons of municipal solid waste (MSW) every year (figures from 2006). At the moment, more than 90% of the waste is dumped in landfills. Only a small potion gets recycled (8.7%) or composted (1.2%).

Landfill vs. Refuse-derived Fuel vs. Incineration

The disadvantages of landfill dumping are quite apparent – it requires large areas, can contaminate soil and water, and emits climate-relevant methane, carbon dioxide and odors. In order to minimize the environmental damage, modern landfills are equipped with a waterproof ground layer and the means to capture leachate and monitor its quality. Leachate is the liquid that drips out of the waste. Moreover, aeration is provided in an attempt to minimize methane emissions (methane results from the anaerobic breakdown of carbon rich matter, which is organic material rotting with no available oxygen) – you pump fresh air into the dump to ventilate the waste. Alternatively, once the dump is full, the waste can be compressed and covered to capture the gas. This method is called landfill gas extraction and it actually promotes the production of methane. The gas can either be flared on the spot, used to generate heat and electricity (waste-to-energy), or processed to natural gas-like fuels.

Because of the disadvantages of landfills, the researchers, apart from the business-as-usual approach, analyzed two other scenarios. Scenario number two follows the PERSU II program goals which state that, by 2016, 36% of waste will be recycled (18% materials and 18% organic), mechanical-biological treatment will be used to recycle the organic components of the remainder, refuse derived fuel gets produced (18%) and a minor share of the waste goes to landfill (10%).

In scenario three, dumping plays only a minor role. Here, 20% of the material would be recycled and 25% of the organic waste recovered (7% household composting and 18% municipal composting). The biggest share of the waste goes to the incinerator (55%). Only the leftovers resulting from previous incineration and composting processes are dumped in landfills.

So which option performs best? Well, what makes LCAs better than any other environmental comparisons is their precision. A whole stack of impact categories are analyzed, and, as you can imagine, every category has a different winner. There is no final score. Too bad? Actually, the more detailed you analyze a phenomenon, the harder it will be to find a simple answer. If you are seriously investigating environmental effects, there is no universal answer most of the time. Much more, it all depends on your goals. You can find a more appropriate solution and you can drop a less appropriate one, depending on what you want to optimize. In this article, I look at five exemplary results: three impact categories and two figures measuring the overall energy consumption of the three waste management scenarios.

Incineration has Biggest GWP

One important impact category is the global warming potential (GWP). The GWP shows how much greenhouse gas will be emitted into the atmosphere in the medium run. As you can see in the diagram to the right, all the waste in Portugal’s Centre region causes roughly 150,000 – 480,000 tons of carbon dioxide equivalent greenhouse gas per year, depending on the way it is managed. And, in terms of global warming potential, scenario 2 performs best at only 150,000 t CO2eq/y. Scenario 2? Yes, mechanical-biological treatment, refuse-derived fuel, recycling and organic composting with a remainder of 10% to be dumped. At the other end of the scale is scenario 3, incineration, which will set free an enormous 480,000 t CO2eq every year, more than three times more.

Global warming potential (GWP) of the three scenarios

Recycling + Refuse-Derived Fuel (Scenario 2) Consumes the Most Truck Fuel

However, in order to recycle it, the waste has to be collected and distributed, which consumes energy. Looking at the fuel consumption for waste transporters, it is the GWP winner, scenario 2, that scores worst. Roughly 5700 tons of fuel are needed, whereas scenario 3 only needs 3000, and scenario 1 even less at 2500 tons. If you compare the two diagrams, they give a contradictory impression. How can that be? Well, unlike consumer goods or food, transport is really just a small part of the GHG emissions for waste.

Material flow analysis result: overall fuel consumption for each of the 3 scenarios

Another result that may seem a paradox at first sight is the toxicity. As I wrote earlier, waste disposal can harm soil and water. A standard impact category of life cycle assessment is human and ecotoxicity. Exactly these two categories show diverging results.

LCA results for aquatic eco-toxicity

Biggest Water Polluter: Landfill (Scenario 1)

In terms of water pollution or aquatic ecotoxicity, the landfill option performs a lot worse than the other two options, as we would expect. Scenario 1 pollutes almost 500,000 m³ of water in one year. Scenario 3 generates one ninth of scenario 1’s water pollution, scenario 2 less than a third.

Human Toxicity LCA results

Most Toxic for Humans: Incineration (Sc. 3)

In contrast to this, the human toxicity category has a clear bad boy. Scenario 3 emits the most – more than double the emissions of scenario 1, almost three times more than scenario 2.

Summing things up, a sub-conclusion could be that the landfill option is not as bad we thought. What’s more, it is certain that the only sustainable option is waste prevention – through ecodesign, household composting, multi-use containers and little or no packaging. Once more, a life cycle assessment has proven that everything has its pros and cons.

In-Depth Efficiency-Analysis: Refuse-derived Fuel Plant vs. Incinerator

If you are dealing with waste management professionally, you may be interested in a presentation by Jasmin Kornau. This researcher from the Institute for Environmental and Biotechnology at the University of Applied Sciences Bremen compared the material and energy efficiency of two alternatives: a refuse-derived fuel plant with mechanical pre-treatment on the one hand, and an incineration plant on the other. Her slideshow (PDF download after registration) features detailed process maps and efficiency calculations.

Further Reading

  • Seitz, Matthias: Life Cycle Assessment of Hazardous Waste Treatment in Bavaria – Modeling hazardous waste incineration processes using “ecoinvent Tools‟, bifa Environmental Institute, 16th Umberto User Workshop, 2011 (download PDF after registration here)
  • Kornau, Jasmin: Comparison of various treatment options for municipal solid waste – Assessment of the material- and energy efficiency 15th Umberto User Workshop, 2010 (PDF download after registration)
  • MARIA DO ROSÁRIO, Gomes and MANUEL ARLINDO, Matos: Waste-To-Energy Assessment of Solid Waste in the Centre Region of Portugal; Environment and Planning Department, University of Aveiro

Article image CC by knowtheflow.com, composed of images by llamnuds (CC 2.0 BY SA), meaduva (CC 2.0 BY) and Redwin Law (CC 2.0 BY)


Tags:

composting

incineration

LCA

mechanical-biological treatment

municipal solid waste

refuse-derived fuel plant

Umberto

waste management


3 COMMENTS

  1. By Moritz Buehner, March 3, 2013

    Just found a big Swedish study in the actual MDPI Sustainability Journal on “Policy Instruments towards a Sustainable Waste Management”, finding “Compulsory recycling of recyclable materials [to be] the policy instrument that has the largest potential for decreasing the environmental impacts”
    See MDPI Sustainability 2013, 5(3), 841-881;
    PDF download at http://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/5/3/841

    Reply
  2. By Sixto M. de Omana Jr, April 26, 2015

    Dear Sir, the waste problem is every one’s concern. We at the new form Vener Green Tech.Corp. discovered other way of eliminating garbage and we like it to start in our own country. This is not incineration but simply burn. We will apply EAST emissions absorption and stench tech.This apparatus eliminates smoke as it burns,arresting particulates inside smoke chamber.Very cheap to operate and uses only very little electricity. A big difference to incinerator.Uses no motor,filter,fan etc. We recomnend to burn end cycle only. Eliminating smoke is eliminating pollution. We have developed a prototype that works well.
    We also now researching ways to solve water pollution.We have also found options but i cannot divulge detail as of this time.
    If you want details about EAST we can answer your querries.You view our other invention at youtube and google+ just type sixto jr.de omana or Sixto de Omana Jr thank you very much.

    Reply
  3. By Stefan Todoroski, July 10, 2017

    When considering environmental concerns I believe it is best to bury our trash, rather than burn it. It will eventually pollute us because of the possible toxic chemicals it may spread in the atmosphere. Burning may sound a simple solution but this won’t help.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Similar posts

20-20-20 Objectives

2012

3 scopes

3D printing

academia

ACHEMA

acidification

agriculture

air quality

aluminum

Ankara

antarctic ozone hole

apocalypse

assessment

atmospheric carbon measurement

B2B

Bachelor program

background database

BASF

battery change station

Bauwesen

best practice

bike sharing

bio capacity

bio-economy

biocapacity

biodiversity

biological gas treatment

biomass

blogs

BMBF

books

Brazil

BREEAM

building sector

building standards

business opportunity

carbon

carbon accouting

carbon assessment

carbon emissions

carbon footprint

carbon footprinting

carbon free city

carbon intensity

carbon leakage

carbon management

carbon neutral

carbon neutrality

carbon reduction

carbon relocation

carbon tax

carbon-neutral travel

cargo shipping

carton

central america

central asia

certification

CFC

change

chemical engineering

chemical industry

China

circular economy

circular flow economy

city

climate change

climate control

climate impact

climate neutral

climate protection

club of rome

CO2 balance

CO2 reduction

co2-equivalent

CO2-Fußabdruck

cogeneration

collaborative consumption

combined reporting

commercial sector

commons

comparative life cycle assessment

Competence Center

composite indicator

compost

composting

consistency

construction

construction industry

Consumer goods

consumption

container ship

cooperation along product life cycle

copenhagen

corporate carbon footprint

corporate culture

corporate material flow modeling

Corporate Social Responsibility

cost accounting

cost reduction

cost savings

cost-effective measures

Country Attractiveness

CPF

cradle to cradle

creative destruction

Creative Sustainability

Critique of the Green Economy

cross-collaboration

CSR

CSR report

customer-driven sustainability

cycling

dairy

Dashboard of Sustainability

database

Davos

de-growth economy

decarbonization

dematerialization

denmark

design

developing countries

developing world

development cooperation

Dienstleistungen

distributed manufacturing

divestment

domestic fuel consumption

domestic sector

double decoupling

e-car

e-mobility

e-sankey

e!Sankey

earth overshoot day

Earth Sciences

Earth summit

eCarUs

eco city

eco design

eco label

ecodesign

ecoinvent

Ecolabelling

ecologic footprint

ecological footprint

ecological resilience

ecological tax reform

economic indicators

ecosystem disturbance

ecovillage

education

efficiency

efficiency factory

efficiency investment

efficiency measures

efficient construction

Effizienzfabrik

EHS

eLCAr

electric car

emerging economies

emission gap

emission relocation

emissions

EMS

Energieeffizienz

energiewende

energy

energy contracting

energy efficiency

Energy Efficiency Directive

energy efficiency in production

energy efficient production

Energy Intensity by Sector

energy management

energy performance

energy reduction

energy sources

energy transition

engineering excellence

Enhipro

enms

environment

Environment Ministry

environmental accounting

environmental awareness

environmental balance

environmental capital

Environmental Contracting

environmental control

environmental cost accounting

Environmental Engineering

Environmental Goods and Services Sector

Environmental Governance

environmental impact

environmental impact data

environmental labeling

environmental LCA

environmental management

Environmental management accounting

environmental management system

environmental performance

environmental performance indicator

environmental policy

environmental product declaration

environmental product declarations

environmental profit and loss statement

environmental regulation

environmental standard

Environmental Sustainability Index

environmental technology verification

Environmentally Extend Input Output modelling

environmentally friendly raw materials

Environmentally Harmful Subsidy

Environmentally Weighed Material Consumption

EPD

EU

Europe

European Comission

european commission

European Green Cars Initiative

European Sustainable Development Strategy

eutrophication

EVALEAU

events

external effects

fashion

FIFA

fish

fishery

flow sheet simulation

food footprint

food industry

food loss

food production

food sector

food waste

footprinting

forest ecosystems

forestry

fouling

FPC

free trade

freighter travel

full cost accounting

gate-to-gate

gate-to-gate approach

geopolymer cement

Germany

Ghana

GHG emissions

GHG mitigation

GHG reduction

GHG reduction goals

glass

Global Compact

global justice

Global Supply Chains

global warming

global warming potential

GMO

governance

green building

green buildings

green business

green business models

green Christmas

green construction

green consumers

green economy

green growth

green investment

green jobs

green living

green new deal

green paradox

green production

greenhouse gas emissions

greenhouse gas inventory

greenhouse gas protocol

greenhouse gas reduction

greenhouse gases

greenwash

GRI

handprinting

Happy Life Years

harmonization

Harze

HDPE

heat integration

Herman Daly

HFC

holistic approach

holistic sustainability

human development index

HVAC

IEA

IFEU

ifu hamburg

ILCD Handbook

impact assessment

impact category

incentive

Incentive-based pay

incineration

India

industrial ecology

industrial location choice

industrial production

industrial sector

information design

innovation

input output

input-output databases

input-output economics

InReff

insulation

Integrated Reporting

integrated resource efficiency

integrative approach

intellectual property

internalization of externalities

international standards

interplant collaboration

IPCC

ISO

ISO 14000

ISO 14001

ISO 14008

ISO 14015

ISO 14025

ISO 14031

ISO 14040

ISO 14046

ISO 14051

ISO 14064

ISO 14067

ISO 50001

Jevon’s Paradox.

knowledge economy

Konsumgüter

Kooperation entlang des Produktlebenszyklus

Kuznets curve

Kyoto protocol

LCA

LCA data from suppliers

LCA database

LCA Databases

LCA inventory analysis

LCA recommendations

LCA software

LCM Berlin

lean manufacturing

Lebenszyklusperspektive

LEED

life cycle

life cycle analysis

life cycle assessment

life cycle engineering

life cycle inventory

life cycle management

life cycle perspective

life cycle thinking

life style

lifecycle

limits to growth

LinkedIn

living planet report

Long-Term Pay

low carbon economy

low-carbon transport

low-energy house

management models

manufacturing industry

masdar city

master program

material consumption

material efficiency

material flow

material flow accounting

Material Flow Accounts

material flow analysis

material flow balance

material flow cost accounting

material flow cost analysis

Material Flow Management

material flow modeling

material flow networks

material flowcosts

material flows

material footprint

material losses

materialeffizienz

meat

mechanical-biological treatment

media

metal industry

methodology

Mexico

MFA

MFCA

milk

modeling

Monetize external costs

Montreal Protocol

municipal solid waste

Natural Cost Accounting

nature conservation

Nepal

NIMBY

nitrate pollution

nuclear phase out

nutrients balance

nutrients cycle

OECD

OECD Environment Policy Committee

Ökobilanz

Ökobilanzdaten

Ökobilanzdaten vom Zulieferer

Ökobilanzdatenbanken

Ökobilanzierung

Ökolabelling

Ökologischer Fußabdruck

oligolopoly

Online Resource Efficiency Platform OREP

operational efficiency

optimization

organic agriculture

outsourcing

ozone layer recovery

packaging

PAS

passive house

patents

PET

philippines

phosphorus

photovoltaics

pilot program

pinch analysis

plastic industry

policy

policy instruments

politics

pollution haven hypothesis

post growth economy

post oil age

PR

process engineering

process heat

process improvement

process modeling

process modelling

Process Optimization

process system engineering

product carbon footprint

product environmental footprint

Product life time

product stewardship

production

production circle

production planning

production system

Production-based CO2 Productivity

productivity

Produktlebensdauer

protection proprietary data

PUMA

PVC

qatar

quality

quality journalism

quantified self

Rapid prototyping

rebound effect

recycling

refuse-derived fuel plant

remuneration

remuneration of environmental performance

renewable energy

renewable energy in manufacturing

renewable heat

renewable hydrogen

renewable methane

renewable process heat

renewable raw material

Renewable Resources

renewable thermal energy

resilience

resource conflicts

resource efficiency

Resource Efficiency Framework

resource flows

resource politics

resource productivity

resources

ressource efficiency analysis

ressourceneffizienz

retailer

reuse

RFID

Rio+20 summit

rising material demand

risk management

Rolf Dobelli

sankey diagram

saving potentials

savings

Schutz vertraulicher Daten

scope 3

seafood

season's greetings

seattle

services industry

shopping rage

smart grid

smart meter

SMB

social cost accounting

social LCA

social media

social metabolism

Social-Ecological Resilience

software

solar energy

solar heat

solar thermal energy

South Africa

South America

South Korea

soy milk

stakeholder management

standards

statistics

steady state economy

steel

stranded assets

strong sustainability

studies

sufficiency

supermarket chain

sustainability

sustainability consulting

sustainability control

sustainability indicators

sustainability innovation

sustainability management

sustainability performance

sustainability projects

sustainability reporting

Sustainability Science

sustainability strategy

sustainability triangle

sustainable agriculture

sustainable architecture

sustainable business

sustainable construction

sustainable development

sustainable housing

sustainable lifestyle

Sustainable Living

Sustainable Process Index

sustainable resins

Sustainable Resource Management

sustainable transport

sydney

system analysis

tajikistan

telecommunications

Telekommunikation

Tesco

textile industry

textile refinement

Tobias Viere

total material consumption

trade

transparency

transport

transport emissions

transport sector

Treibhauspotenzial

trends

triple bottom line principles

Turkey

Umberto

umberto for carbon footprint

umberto user workshop

Umweltbilanz

Umweltbundesamt

umweltfreundliche Rohmaterialien

university

upcycling

urban carbon emissions

VDMA

Vélib’

vernon curve

vertical cooperation

Vertragsnaturschutz

virtual water

waste air treatment

waste cycle

waste disposal

waste hierarchy

waste management

waste prevention

wastewater

wastewater treatment

water abstraction rate

Water Consumption by Sector

water extraction

water filter

water footprint

Water Management

water stress

web 2.0

Wellbeing Index

wind gas

wind power

wine

with both eyes open

working conditions

world cup

world statistics day

world vegan day

YET

zero carbon

zero carbon city

zero emission mobility

zero growth

zero growth economy