{"title":"Anaerobic digestion or composting? Small-scale plants design and holistic evaluations in a Sub-Saharan African context","authors":"Pietro Castellani , Navarro Ferronato , Jacopo Barbieri , Vincenzo Torretta","doi":"10.1016/j.envdev.2024.101008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In small developing settings, is it worth building anaerobic digestion (AD) or composting plants? This study explores the economic, management, and environmental dimensions of two small-scale alternatives for organic fraction municipal solid waste (OFMSW) treatment within the context of Lacor Hospital (Uganda): aerated static pile composting (S1) and AD with digestate composting (S2), both designed to manage approximately 347.5 t<sub>OFMSW</sub> annually. In the optimistic scenario, S1 achieves a cost savings of about −2.9 USD t<sub>OFMSW</sub><sup>−1</sup>, while S2 incurs costs of 2.1 USD t<sub>OFMSW</sub><sup>−1</sup>. In the pessimistic scenario, S1's costs rise to 3.9 USD t<sub>OFMSW</sub><sup>−1</sup>, while S2 becomes more expensive at 9.5 USD t<sub>OFMSW</sub><sup>−1</sup>. Management analysis underlines S2's complexity due to AD operations and digestate drying. Total normalized environmental impacts of S1 can be quantified with about 0.125 mPt t<sub>OFMSW</sub><sup>−1</sup>, whereas S2 is equal to about −6.163 mPt t<sub>OFMSW</sub><sup>−1</sup>. However, in an optimistic scenario, climate change endpoint category results are similar. On balance, the LCA analysis indicates that AD can be better than standalone composting. However, in developing settings serving approximately 3000 inhabitants, it is crucial to prioritize economic and management sustainability that can be obtained only by small-scale composting plants. These findings provide definite insights for small-scale waste management projects in low-income regions, offering valuable data and references for plant design and their replicability. The study sets the ultimate definition of the most feasible option to treat OFMSW in low-income settings: community composting. Unfortunately, economic barriers remain the main challenge: citizens should pay for the service and landfill management fees should be set by local governments.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54269,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Development","volume":"51 ","pages":"Article 101008"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211464524000460/pdfft?md5=ea83c82c346affa08eb365c7b918810f&pid=1-s2.0-S2211464524000460-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Development","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211464524000460","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In small developing settings, is it worth building anaerobic digestion (AD) or composting plants? This study explores the economic, management, and environmental dimensions of two small-scale alternatives for organic fraction municipal solid waste (OFMSW) treatment within the context of Lacor Hospital (Uganda): aerated static pile composting (S1) and AD with digestate composting (S2), both designed to manage approximately 347.5 tOFMSW annually. In the optimistic scenario, S1 achieves a cost savings of about −2.9 USD tOFMSW−1, while S2 incurs costs of 2.1 USD tOFMSW−1. In the pessimistic scenario, S1's costs rise to 3.9 USD tOFMSW−1, while S2 becomes more expensive at 9.5 USD tOFMSW−1. Management analysis underlines S2's complexity due to AD operations and digestate drying. Total normalized environmental impacts of S1 can be quantified with about 0.125 mPt tOFMSW−1, whereas S2 is equal to about −6.163 mPt tOFMSW−1. However, in an optimistic scenario, climate change endpoint category results are similar. On balance, the LCA analysis indicates that AD can be better than standalone composting. However, in developing settings serving approximately 3000 inhabitants, it is crucial to prioritize economic and management sustainability that can be obtained only by small-scale composting plants. These findings provide definite insights for small-scale waste management projects in low-income regions, offering valuable data and references for plant design and their replicability. The study sets the ultimate definition of the most feasible option to treat OFMSW in low-income settings: community composting. Unfortunately, economic barriers remain the main challenge: citizens should pay for the service and landfill management fees should be set by local governments.
期刊介绍:
Environmental Development provides a future oriented, pro-active, authoritative source of information and learning for researchers, postgraduate students, policymakers, and managers, and bridges the gap between fundamental research and the application in management and policy practices. It stimulates the exchange and coupling of traditional scientific knowledge on the environment, with the experiential knowledge among decision makers and other stakeholders and also connects natural sciences and social and behavioral sciences. Environmental Development includes and promotes scientific work from the non-western world, and also strengthens the collaboration between the developed and developing world. Further it links environmental research to broader issues of economic and social-cultural developments, and is intended to shorten the delays between research and publication, while ensuring thorough peer review. Environmental Development also creates a forum for transnational communication, discussion and global action.
Environmental Development is open to a broad range of disciplines and authors. The journal welcomes, in particular, contributions from a younger generation of researchers, and papers expanding the frontiers of environmental sciences, pointing at new directions and innovative answers.
All submissions to Environmental Development are reviewed using the general criteria of quality, originality, precision, importance of topic and insights, clarity of exposition, which are in keeping with the journal''s aims and scope.