4.6 Article

Developing Decision-Making Tools for Food Waste Management via Spatially Explicit Integration of Experimental Hydrothermal Carbonization Data and Computational Models Using New York as a Case Study

Journal

ACS SUSTAINABLE CHEMISTRY & ENGINEERING
Volume 10, Issue 50, Pages 16578-16587

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.2c04188

Keywords

food waste; biorefinery; GIS model; techno-economic analysis; hydrothermal carbonization; GHG emissions; policy

Funding

  1. USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture [1021398]
  2. National Science Foundation [CBET-2031916]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study developed a model to evaluate the feasibility of implementing hydrothermal carbonization technology in New York State. The model considers the interplay between plant location, feedstock availability, policies, and economic viability, providing a decision-making tool for policy makers and entrepreneurs.
Food systems account for one third of all global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, and food waste (FW) produces one third of landfill emissions in the U.S. To combat global warming, we must upcycle FW by developing closed-loop supply chains -key features of a circular economy -that harmonize technology and policies. New York State (NYS) recently enacted a law requiring generators of >1.8 t/week to redirect FW from landfills to processing centers within 40.2 km of the waste generation. Hydrothermal carbonization could transform FW into a coal-like solid fuel, but there is scant information on the feasibility of implementing this approach under current policy conditions. We developed a model informed by experimental results to evaluate the interplay between HTC plant location, feedstock availability, policies, and economic viability within NYS. Broadly, this is a case study of a new decision-making tool enabling policy makers and entrepreneurs alike to plan effective resource valorization.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available