4.7 Article

Environmental and economic modelling: A case study of municipal solid waste management scenarios in Wales

Journal

RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND RECYCLING
Volume 49, Issue 3, Pages 244-263

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2006.03.016

Keywords

life cycle assessment; economic model; municipal solid waste; waste management

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In recent years the burdens that waste puts on the environment has been widely publicised. To address the earth's dwindling resources and the growing mountains of waste many countries have introduced statutory waste minimisation and recovery targets. The general public are generally more concerned with the effects that waste has on the environment. Whereas waste managers and planners need to consider the financial costs of collection, processing and disposal. This paper investigates and reports on the findings for both of these areas of concern. A case study area in a typical South Wales valley location was selected to model the environmental and economic impacts of a number of waste disposal scenarios. The environmental impacts of a number of waste management scenarios were compared using a life cycle assessment (LCA) computer model. An interactive microsoft excel spreadsheet model was also developed to examine the costs, employment and recovery rates achieved using various waste recovery methods including kerbside recycling and incineration. The LCA analysis showed the incineration option to be more favourable than the landfill and recycling/composting options. However, the economic modelling results showed higher running costs and lower associated jobs when compared to the other options such as recycling. The paper concludes by suggesting that integrated waste management will ultimately be the most efficient approach in terms of both economics and also environment benefits. (c) 2006 Elsevier B.V. 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