A study on small-scale municipal solid waste management practices and its impact on carbon emission and mitigation cost

Faisal Sajjad, Gurleen Singh Chhoker, G. Thirunavukkarasu, E. Jamei, M. Seyedmahmoudian, B. Horan, A. Stojcevski
{"title":"A study on small-scale municipal solid waste management practices and its impact on carbon emission and mitigation cost","authors":"Faisal Sajjad, Gurleen Singh Chhoker, G. Thirunavukkarasu, E. Jamei, M. Seyedmahmoudian, B. Horan, A. Stojcevski","doi":"10.12720/SGCE.8.6.670-679","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Municipal solid waste management (MSWM) is arguably one of the most vital and challenging municipal services offered by the city councils around the world. Proper and efficient management of municipal solid waste (MSW) is vital for achieving sustainable development as the dilemmas associated with energy management, greenhouse gas (GHG) emission, waste-to-energy (WTE) cycle, climate change and economy are addressed. Ineffective waste management technique leads to adverse impacts on the environment, public health and lifestyle of future generations. Motivating governmental organizations across the world to take proactive measures to mitigate waste management techniques with less environmental impact and high financial return. A comparison study of five different MSWM techniques based on cost-benefit analysis and mitigation cost breakdown is presented in this paper to identify the most effective and efficient small-scale MSWM systems. The mitigation analysis utilizes the data obtained from the literature to calculate the greenhouse gas reductions, current net and the carbon mitigation cost of each method considering basic landfill technique as the baseline reference. Hybrid techniques like mechanical biological treatment (MBT) in combination with WTE outperforms the other techniques with lowest carbon mitigation cost ($27.3/metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) without carbon emanation rate (CER) and $43.4/ MTCO2e with CER) and reduced GHG emission. Whereas the conventional WTE is ranked second with mitigation costs of $26.5/ MTCO2e without CER and $42.5/ MTCO2e with CER but this technique also offers the largest reductions in terms of greenhouse gases (1.06 million tons/tons of municipal solid waste) which make it stand out from others. Based on the results obtained from the study the economic and environmental impact caused by the usage of WTE or the hybrid MBT in small-scale MSWM system is proven to be highly beneficial and the introduction of carbon credit schemes reduces the carbon mitigation cost of each technique to a greater extent.","PeriodicalId":247617,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Smart Grid and Clean Energy","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Smart Grid and Clean Energy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12720/SGCE.8.6.670-679","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Municipal solid waste management (MSWM) is arguably one of the most vital and challenging municipal services offered by the city councils around the world. Proper and efficient management of municipal solid waste (MSW) is vital for achieving sustainable development as the dilemmas associated with energy management, greenhouse gas (GHG) emission, waste-to-energy (WTE) cycle, climate change and economy are addressed. Ineffective waste management technique leads to adverse impacts on the environment, public health and lifestyle of future generations. Motivating governmental organizations across the world to take proactive measures to mitigate waste management techniques with less environmental impact and high financial return. A comparison study of five different MSWM techniques based on cost-benefit analysis and mitigation cost breakdown is presented in this paper to identify the most effective and efficient small-scale MSWM systems. The mitigation analysis utilizes the data obtained from the literature to calculate the greenhouse gas reductions, current net and the carbon mitigation cost of each method considering basic landfill technique as the baseline reference. Hybrid techniques like mechanical biological treatment (MBT) in combination with WTE outperforms the other techniques with lowest carbon mitigation cost ($27.3/metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) without carbon emanation rate (CER) and $43.4/ MTCO2e with CER) and reduced GHG emission. Whereas the conventional WTE is ranked second with mitigation costs of $26.5/ MTCO2e without CER and $42.5/ MTCO2e with CER but this technique also offers the largest reductions in terms of greenhouse gases (1.06 million tons/tons of municipal solid waste) which make it stand out from others. Based on the results obtained from the study the economic and environmental impact caused by the usage of WTE or the hybrid MBT in small-scale MSWM system is proven to be highly beneficial and the introduction of carbon credit schemes reduces the carbon mitigation cost of each technique to a greater extent.
小型城市固体废物管理做法及其对碳排放和减缓成本的影响研究
城市固体废物管理(MSWM)可以说是世界各地市议会提供的最重要和最具挑战性的市政服务之一。随着能源管理、温室气体(GHG)排放、废物转化为能源(WTE)循环、气候变化和经济等方面的困境得到解决,城市固体废物(MSW)的适当和有效管理对于实现可持续发展至关重要。无效的废物管理技术会对环境、公众健康和后代的生活方式产生不利影响。激励世界各地的政府机构采取积极主动的措施,减少对环境的影响和高经济回报的废物管理技术。基于成本效益分析和缓解成本分解,本文对五种不同的MSWM技术进行了比较研究,以确定最有效和最高效的小规模MSWM系统。缓解分析利用从文献中获得的数据,以基本填埋技术为基准,计算每种方法的温室气体减量、当前净排放量和碳缓解成本。机械生物处理(MBT)与垃圾焚烧相结合等混合技术优于其他碳缓解成本最低的技术(无碳排放率每公吨二氧化碳当量(MTCO2e) 27.3美元,有碳排放率每公吨二氧化碳当量(MTCO2e) 43.4美元),并减少了温室气体排放。虽然传统的垃圾焚烧技术排名第二,无CER的缓解成本为26.5美元/ MTCO2e,有CER的缓解成本为42.5美元/ MTCO2e,但这种技术也提供了最大的温室气体减排(106万吨/吨城市固体废物),使其脱颖而出。研究结果表明,在小型城市固体废物管理系统中使用垃圾焚烧或混合MBT所产生的经济和环境影响是非常有益的,并且碳信用计划的引入在更大程度上降低了每种技术的碳缓解成本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信