Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy

, Volume 16, Issue 7, pp 1275–1286 | Cite as

Logistic model-based tool for policy-making towards sustainable waste management

  • Radovan Šomplák
  • Martin Pavlas
  • Jiří Kropáč
  • Ondřej Putna
  • Vít Procházka
Original Paper


The aim of this paper is to introduce a novel approach which supports facility planning in the field of waste management. Only 23 % of municipal solid waste (MSW) was thermally treated in the EU 27 in 2011. The increased exploitation of its potential for energy recovery must be accompanied by massive investments into highly efficient and reliable incineration technologies. Therefore, the challenge is to be efficient and use the technology to its optimal level. Feasibility studies of all plants providing a service for a region create a large and complex task. Gate fee (the charge for waste processing in the facility) represents one of the most crucial input parameters for the assessment. The gate fee is driven by configuration of the technology, competition, market development, environmental taxation and costs of waste transport to satisfy the plant’s capacity. Valid prediction of the gate fee thus presents a demanding task. In this paper, first, an advanced tool called NERUDA is introduced, which addresses logistic optimization and capacity sizing. The key idea is to focus on the problem of competition modelling among waste-to-energy plants, landfill sites, and mechanical–biological treatment plants producing refuse-derived fuel. Then, the main theoretical concepts are discussed, followed by the development of a suitable mathematical model. The goal is to obtain a minimized cost of MSW treatment for waste producers (municipalities). The application of the developed tool is demonstrated through a case study, where uncertain parameters entering the calculation are handled by a repetitive Monte Carlo simulation based on real-world data.


Supply chain Optimization Waste-to-energy Monte Carlo Gate fee Waste management Waste management plan 

List of symbols


Central and Eastern Europe


Czech Republic


District heating


European Union


Internal rate of return


Life-cycle assessment


Mechanical and biological treatment


Municipal solid waste


Energy efficiency, R1 factor


Refuse-derived fuel


Waste management


Waste management plan


Waste-to-energy (plant)



The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support provided by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports within the projects No. CZ.1.07/2.3.00/20.0020 ‘Science for practice’, CZ.1.05/2.1.00/01.0002 ‘NETME Centre – New Technologies for Mechanical Engineering’, and NETME Centre PLUS (LO1202) within the support programme—National Sustainability Programme I.


  1. BiPRO (2012) Screening of waste management performance of EU Member States. European Commission, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  2. Birge JR, Louveaux F (2011) Introduction to stochastic programming, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. CEWEP—Confederation of European Waste-to-Energy Plants (2013) Energising waste—a win–win situation. Accessed 14 November 2013
  4. Consonni S, Giugliano M, Grosso M (2005) Alternative strategies for energy recovery from municipal solid waste: part B: emission and cost estimates. Waste Manag 25:137–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dehoust G, Schüler D, Vogt R, Giegrich J (2010) Klimaschutzpotenziale der abfallwirtschaft: am beispiel von siedlungsabfällen und altholz. Öko-Inst. eV, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  6. Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (2013) Mechanical biological treatment of municipal solid waste. Accessed 12 Oct 2013
  7. Eunomia Research and Consulting (2013) Residual waste infrastructure review: high-level analysis: issue 5. Eunomia, BristolGoogle Scholar
  8. European Commission (2012) Use of economic instruments and waste management performances: final report. Accessed 27 November 2013
  9. Eurostat (2012) Key Indicators on EU Policy—Structural indicators—environment—municipal waste (generated, landfilled and incinerated). Accessed 22 November 2013
  10. Ghiani G, Laporte G, Musmanno R (2004) Introduction to logistics systems planning and control. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  11. Ghiani G, Lagana D, Manni E, Musmanno R, Vigo D (2014) Operations research in -solid waste management: a survey of strategic and tactical issues, 27. 11. 2013. Comput Oper Res 44:22–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Grosso M, Motta A, Rigamonti L (2010) Efficiency of energy recovery from waste incineration, in the light of the new waste framework directive. Waste Manage 30:1238–1243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Huang GH, Sae-Lim N, Liu L, Chen Z (2001) An interval-parameter fuzzy-stochastic programming approach for municipal solid waste management and planning. In: environmental modeling and assessment 6. Accessed 1 December 2013
  14. Kettl KH, Eder M, Narodoslawsky M, Niemetz N (2012) RegiOpt conceptual planner: identifying possible energy network solutions for regions. Chem Eng Trans 29:517–522Google Scholar
  15. Lang D, Binder CR, Stäubli B, Schleiss K, Scholz RW (2003) Optimization of waste management systems by integrating material fluxes agents and regulatory mechanisms: the case of bio-waste. Conference Environment 2010: situation and perspectives for the European Union 6–10 May 2003, PortoGoogle Scholar
  16. Ma W, Hoffmann G, Schirmer M, Chen G, Rotter VS (2010) Chlorine characterization and thermal behavior in MSW and RDF. J Hazard Mater 178:489–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Münster M, Finnveden G, Wenzel H (2013) Future waste treatment and energy systems: examples of joint scenarios. Waste Manag 33:2457–2464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pavlas M, Touš M (2009) Efficient waste-to-energy system as a contribution to clean technologies. Clean Technol Environ Policy 11:19–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pavlas M, Touš M, Bébar L, Stehlík P (2010) Waste to energy: an evaluation of the environmental impact. Appl Therm Eng 30:2326–2332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pavlas M, Mareš M, Ucekaj V, Oral J, Stehlík P (2012) Optimum waste-based electricity generation support scheme and its impact on power prices for end-users: final report of the project EFEKT 2012. EVECO Brno Ltd. and Brno University of Technology, BrnoGoogle Scholar
  21. Reimann DO (2012) CEWEP energy report III (Status 2007–2010) Results of specific data for energy, efficiency rates and coefficients, plant efficiency factors and NCV of 314 european waste-to-energy plants. Accessed 29 November 2013
  22. Šomplák R, Touš M, Ferdan T, Pavlas M, Popela P (2012a) Waste-to-energy facility planning supported by stochastic programming: part II introduction. Chem Eng Trans 29:739–744Google Scholar
  23. Šomplák R, Pavlas M, Ucekaj V, Popela P (2012b) Waste-to-energy facility planning supported by stochastic programming: part I introduction. Chem Eng Trans 29:649–654Google Scholar
  24. Süle Z, Bertók B, Friedler F, Fan LT (2011) Optimal design of supply chains by P-graph-framework regarding uncertainties of utilizing renewable raw materials. Chem Eng Trans 25:453–458Google Scholar
  25. The Chartered Institution of Wastes Management (CHIWM) (2013) Research into SRF and RDF exports to other EU countries. Accessed 13 Oct 2013
  26. The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union (2008) Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives. Off J Eur Communities L312:3–30Google Scholar
  27. Thiel S (2011) Mechanical-Biological Treatment (MBT) and incineration in a waste management system. RECUWATT Conference: recycling and energy 25 March 2011, BarcelonaGoogle Scholar
  28. Van de Wiel H (2010) Incineration tax unpopular with European Industry. Reward good behaviour, punish bad behaviour. Accessed 2 December 2013
  29. Varbanov PS, Klemeš JJ, Kravanja Z, Čuček L (2012) Reducing the dimensionality of criteria in multi-objective optimisation of biomass energy supply-chains. Chem Eng Trans 29:1231–1236Google Scholar
  30. Velis CA, Brunner PH (2013) Recycling and resource efficiency: it is time for a change from quantity to quality. Waste Manag Res 31:539–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Williams PH (2009) Logic and integer programming. Springer, LondonGoogle Scholar
  32. Young D, Hawkins T, Ingwersen W, Smith R (2012) Designing sustainable supply chains. Chem Eng Trans 29:253–258Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Radovan Šomplák
    • 1
  • Martin Pavlas
    • 1
  • Jiří Kropáč
    • 1
  • Ondřej Putna
    • 1
  • Vít Procházka
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of Process and Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Mechanical EngineeringBrno University of Technology (UPEI VUT)BrnoCzech Republic
  2. 2.Institute of Mathematics, Faculty of Mechanical EngineeringBrno University of TechnologyBrnoCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations