Published May 2021 | Version v1
Journal article

Comparative life cycle assessment of system solution scenarios for residual municipal solid waste management in NSW, Australia

  • 1. Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science & Engineering, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109 (Australia)
  • 2. Macquarie Graduate School of Management, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109 (Australia)

Description

Highlights: • Life cycle assessment of municipal solid waste management was carried out in this work. • Impact of WtE technologies on energy recovery and environmental burdens was examined. • Energy conversion and recycling rates are important for efficient waste management. • Sustainable waste management requires a range of WtE technologies. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a promising tool to evaluate the environmental impacts of different technologies for sustainable waste management. This study employs LCA to assess environmental impacts of alternative scenarios for residual municipal solid waste (MSW) management in New South Wales (NSW) based on current conditions and policies. Six different scenarios including a baseline scenario (landfilling) were applied for NSW waste management for energy production and their impacts on environment. The initial results showed that the scenario 3 that employed anaerobic digestion for food waste, incineration for combustible waste and plastic waste, and landfilling for non-combustible waste produced electricity of 625 kWh/t, which was maximum compared to the other scenarios. LCA results further suggested that among all scenarios, scenario 5 (similar to scenario 3 except combustible waste was treated through gasification and plastic waste was recycled) has the lowest level of environmental burdens in global warming, freshwater and marine ecotoxicity, and human non-carcinogenic toxicity. The sensitivity analysis for energy conversion rates (23–30%) for incineration and plastic recycling rate (66–91.3%) for MSW was further conducted and the results showed that energy conversion rate of 30% makes scenario 3 more valuable for electricity generation and less impactful for ecosystems damage category compared to scenario 5. On the other hand, plastic recycling rate of 91.3% has the lowest environmental burdens and by decreasing recycling rate to 66% the environmental impacts increase; however, it was noticed that reduction in recycling rate does not make any change in the order of scenarios. Overall, the study suggests that each waste type in NSW should be treated with a specific technology to achieve the highest resource recovery and lowest environmental impacts where energy conversion and plastic recycling rates have significant impacts.

Availability note (English)

Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144355

Additional details

Identifiers

DOI
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144355;
PII
S0048969720378864;

Publishing Information

Journal Title
Science of the Total Environment
Journal Volume
767
Journal Page Range
vp.
ISSN
0048-9697
CODEN
STENDL

Optional Information

Copyright
Copyright (c) 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.