Chapter 19 - Footprint assessment of solid waste management systems

Abstract

This chapter proposes the assessment of different solid waste management systems (SWMS) by using the carbon footprint indicator. The SWMS include the organisation and operation of waste collection, treatment, material and energy recovery, and final disposal. The main waste categories under investigation are municipal solid waste (MSW), waste of electric and electronic equipment (WEEE), packaging waste (PW), and biowaste. These waste categories are under stringent monitoring and reporting requirements at the European level, being also named key waste streams, while biowaste is the predominant fraction of the MSW, thus playing an important role in the waste management operations. The main objective of this chapter is to analyse the environmental impact in terms of climate change of various SWMs by using a carbon footprint methodology, based on 4 aggregated models and presenting case studies organised in sub-chapters on MSW-15.1, WEEE-15.2, PW-15.3, and biowaste-15.4. Each case study must be treated independently since comparisons between them are not intended. The MSW system case study presents the results in terms of GHG emissions at regional level, under a 3-year period, in a system in which landfilling is the most common used treatment method. The main contributor to the total carbon footprint calculated is the biggest city in the region (Iasi, NE Region, Romania), while in the last year of the study slight reduction in GHG emissions is observed. The WEEE system case study presents a comparison between 2 EU member states (Italy and Romania) under 2007–2013 covering a full European cycle of waste management planning. The total carbon footprint display reductions in GHG emissions for both states, while in terms of GHG efficiency indicator in 2007 the Italian system was more performant, but in 2013, Romania obtained better results. In the case of PW management system, a comparison between 4 countries (Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, and Romania) under 2007–2013 was presented. The total carbon footprints fluctuated in time due to PW generation rates so a general trend in time could not be observed, while the GHG efficiency indicator values are within the same range for all countries. The Biowaste management system case study shows a comparison between the current situation and over a 5-year situation (2020 versus 2025) in Romania. Three scenarios have been evaluated in terms of GHG emissions and GHG efficiency indicator. The implementation of mechanical–biological treatment with biodrying and anaerobic digestion is expected to give by 2025 the best results in GHG emission reductions.