4.7 Article

Environmental impacts of residual Municipal Solid Waste incineration: A comparison of 110 French incinerators using a life cycle approach

Journal

WASTE MANAGEMENT
Volume 33, Issue 12, Pages 2781-2788

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2013.07.003

Keywords

Life Cycle Assessment; Environmental impacts; Incineration; Waste management; Residual Municipal Solid Waste

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Incineration is the main option for residual Municipal Solid Waste treatment in France. This study compares the environmental performances of 110 French incinerators (i.e. 85% of the total number of plants currently in activity in France) in a Life Cycle Assessment perspective, considering 5 non-toxic impact categories: climate change, photochemical oxidant formation, particulate matter formation, terrestrial acidification and marine eutrophication. Mean, median and lower/upper impact potentials are determined considering the incineration of 1 tonne of French residual Municipal Solid Waste. The results highlight the relatively large variability of the impact potentials as a function of the plant technical performances. In particular, the climate change impact potential of the incineration of 1 tonne of waste ranges from a benefit of 58 kg CO2-eq to a relatively large burden of 408 kg CO2-eq, with 294 kg CO2-eq as the average impact. Two main plant-specific parameters drive the impact potentials regarding the 5 non-toxic impact categories under study: the energy recovery and delivery rate and the NO process-specific emissions. The variability of the impact potentials as a function of incinerator characteristics therefore calls for the use of site-specific data when required by the LCA goal and scope definition phase, in particular when the study focuses on a specific incinerator or on a local waste management plan, and when these data are available. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available