Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Jan;25(1):838-854.
doi: 10.1007/s11356-017-0439-7. Epub 2017 Oct 23.

Environmental impact assessment of municipal solid waste management options using life cycle assessment: a case study

Affiliations

Environmental impact assessment of municipal solid waste management options using life cycle assessment: a case study

Pooja Yadav et al. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2018 Jan.

Abstract

The goal of this study is to use life cycle assessment (LCA) tool to assess possible environmental impacts of different municipal solid waste management (MSWM) scenarios on various impact categories for the study area Dhanbad City, India. The scenarios included in the present study are collection and transportation (denoted as S1); baseline scenario consisting of recycling, open burning, open dumping, and finally unsanitary landfilling without energy recovery (denoted by S2); composting and landfilling (denoted by S3); and recycling and composting followed by landfilling of inert waste without energy recovery (denoted by S4). One ton of municipal solid waste (MSW) was selected as the functional unit. The primary data were collected through sampling, surveys, and literatures. Background data were obtained from Eco-invent data of SimaPro 8.1 libraries. The scenarios were compared using the CML 2 baseline 2000 method, and the results indicated that the scenario S1 had the highest impact on marine aquatic ecotoxicity (1.86E + 04 kg 1,4-DB eq.) and abiotic depletion (2.09E + 02 kg Sb eq.). S2 had the highest impact on global warming potential (9.42E + 03 kg CO2 eq.), acidification (1.15E + 01 kg SO2 eq.), eutrophication (2.63E + 00 kg PO43- eq.), photochemical oxidation (2.12E + 00 kg C2H4 eq.), and human toxicity (2.25E + 01 kg 1,4-DB eq.). However, S3 had the highest impact on abiotic depletion (fossil fuels) (2.71E + 02 MJ), fresh water aquatic ecotoxicity (6.54E + 00 kg 1,4-DB eq.), terrestrial ecotoxicity (3.36E - 02 kg 1,4-DB eq.), and ozone layer depletion (2.73E - 06 kg CFC-11 eq.). But S4 did not have the highest impact on any of the environmental impact categories due to recycling of packaging waste and landfilling of inert waste. Landfilling without energy recovery of mixed solid waste was found as the worst disposal alternative. The scenario S4 was found as the most environmentally suitable technology for the study area and recommended that S4 should be considered for strategic planning of MSWM for the study area.

Keywords: Collection; Composting; Landfilling; Life cycle assessment; Open burning; Open dumping; Recycling; Transportation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Waste Manag. 2009 Jan;29(1):54-62 - PubMed
    1. Waste Manag. 2008 Dec;28(12):2552-64 - PubMed
    1. Waste Manag. 2010 Nov;30(11):2362-9 - PubMed
    1. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2005 Apr 1;52(2):175-84 - PubMed
    1. Waste Manag Res. 2009 Jun;27(4):399-406 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources