Abstract
A life cycle assessment (LCA) was conducted to evaluate the total environmental impact of state-of-the-art waste-to-energy (WtE) in Belgium with respect to recovered energy utilization and addition of carbon capture and storage (CCS). Four energy output scenarios were modeled on Umberto LCA software using primary data of mass and energy flows surrounding the six incinerators at the considered WtE plant and predefined processes from the Ecoinvent 3.6 database. The normalized LCA results suggest that by utilizing all the recovered energy as high-pressure steam, the WtE plant can avoid an equivalent annual environmental impact value of approximately 21200, 36800, 6700, 15800, 37000, and 6900 average European citizens in the impact categories ‘climate change,’ ‘freshwater and terrestrial acidification,’ ‘freshwater eutrophication,’ ‘photochemical ozone creation,’ ‘respiratory effects, inorganics,’ and ‘terrestrial eutrophication,’ respectively. The ‘Electricity and Steam with CCS’ scenario resulted in the most avoided environmental impact in the impact category ‘climate change.’ However, in all other impact categories, it resulted in less avoided environmental impact compared to the ‘Steam’ scenario. The comparative analysis showed that 19 out of the 24 LCA results varied by more than 50% between a region-specific and a region- and fuel-specific model, thus quantifying the influence of scenario uncertainty, introduced by the normative choice of substituted processes in LCA modeling. This study exemplifies the environmental benefit WtE technology can realize by substituting conventional energy production processes that are reliant on fossil resources, while performing its primary function that is reducing the volume of non-recyclable waste, destroying hazardous organic components it contains, and recovering useful materials from it.
Graphical abstract
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
Enquiries about data availability should be directed to the authors.
References
Arena U, Ardolino F, Di Gregorio F (2015) A life cycle assessment of environmental performances of two combustion- and gasification-based waste-to-energy technologies. Waste Manag 41:60–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2015.03.041
Bamber N, Turner I, Arulnathan V, Li Y, Ershadi SZ, Smart A, Pelletier N (2020) Comparing sources and analysis of uncertainty in consequential and attributional life cycle assessment: review of current practice and recommendations. Int J Life Cycle Assess 25:168–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01663-1
Belboom S, Digneffe JM, Renzoni R, Germain A, Léonard A (2013) Comparing technologies for municipal solid waste management using life cycle assessment methodology: a Belgian case study. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1513–1523. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-013-0603-3
Boesch ME, Vadenbo C, Saner D, Huter C, Hellweg S (2014) An LCA model for waste incineration enhanced with new technologies for metal recovery and application to the case of Switzerland. Waste Manag 34(2):378–389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2013.10.019
Brunner PH, Rechberger H (2015) Waste to energy—key element for sustainable waste management. Waste Manag 37:3–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2014.02.003
Burnley S, Coleman T, Peirce A (2015) Factors influencing the life cycle burdens of the recovery of energy from residual municipal waste. Waste Manag 39:295–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2015.02.022
Chatterjee R, Sharma V, Mukherjee S (2015) The environmental impacts and allocation methods used in LCA studies of vegetable oil-based bio-diesels. Waste Biomass Valor 6:579–603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-015-9375-2
Christensen TH, Bisinella V (2021) Climate change impacts of introducing carbon capture and utilisation (CCU) in waste incineration. Waste Manag 126:754–770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2021.03.046
European Commission (2015) Closing the loop - An EU action plan for the Circular Economy. COM(2015) 614 final. Brussels
European Commission (2019) The European Green Deal. COM(2019) 640 final. Brussels https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
European Commission (2020) A new Circular Economy Action Plan For a cleaner and more competitive Europe. COM(2020) 98 final. Brussels
Dastjerdi B, Strezov V, Rajaeifar MA, Kumar R, Behnia M (2021) A systematic review on life cycle assessment of different waste to energy valorization technologies. J Clean Prod. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125747
De Greef J, Verbinnen B, Van Caneghem J (2018) Waste-to-energy: coupling waste treatment to highly efficient CHP. Int J Chem React Eng 16(10):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijcre-2017-0248
Demetrious A, Verghese K, Stasinopoulos P, Crossin E (2018) Comparison of alternative methods for managing the residual of material recovery facilities using life cycle assessment. Resour Conserv Recycl 136:33–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.03.024
Ecoinvent (2016) Electricity Mix Model. https://www.ecoinvent.org/support/faqs/methodology-of-ecoinvent-3/how-are-electricity-market-mixes-modelled.html Accessed 21 October 2020
Eurostat (2021) Production of electricity and derived heat by type of fuel https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-datasets/-/nrg_bal_peh. Accessed 18 February 2022
Frischknecht R, Pfister S, Bunsen J, Haas A, Kanzig J, Kilga M, Lansche J, Margni M, Mutel C, Reinhard J, Stolz P, van Zelm R, Vieira M (2019) Regionalization in LCA: current status in concepts, software and databases—69th LCA forum, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich, 13 September, 2018. Int J Life Cycle Assess 24(2):364–369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-018-1559-0
Gautier D (2003) Carboniferous-Rotliegend Total Petroleum System Description and Assessment Results Summary. USGS Science for a changing world. https://pubs.usgs.gov/bul/b2211/b2211.html. Accessed 12 October 2020
Huijbregts M (1998) Application of uncertainty and variability in LCA. Int J LCA 3(5):273–280. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02979835
Indaver (2018) Your partner in the circular economy - Indaver’s Sustainability Report. https://www.indaver.de/fileadmin/indaver.de/pdf/sustainability-report/indaver-sustainability-report-2018-key-figures-en.pdf Accessed 20 October 2020
Jakobsen J, Roussanaly S, Anantharaman R (2016) A techno-economic case study of CO2 capture, transport and storage chain from a cement plant in Norway. J Clean Prod 144:523–539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.120
Jeswani HK, Azapagic A (2016) Assessing the environmental sustainability of energy recovery from municipal solid waste in the UK. Waste Manag 50:346–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2016.02.010
Khandelwal H, Dhar H, Kumar Thalla A, Kumar S (2019) Application of life cycle assessment in municipal solid waste management: a worldwide critical review. J Clean Prod 209:630–654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.233
Next Kraftwerke (2019) Merit Order: How Ancillary Services Get Their Price. https://www.next-kraftwerke.com/knowledge/what-does-merit-order-mean. Accessed 12 October 2020
Laurent A, Clavreul J, Bernstad A, Bakas I, Niero M, Gentil E, Christensen TH, Hauschild MZ (2014) Review of LCA studies of solid waste management systems—part II: methodological guidance for a better practice. Waste Manag 34:589–606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2013.12.004
Lausselet C, Cherubini F, Oreggioni GD, del Alamo SG, Becidan M, Hu X, Rørstad PK, Strømman AH (2017) Norwegian waste-to-energy: Climate change, circular economy and carbon capture and storage. Resour Conserv Recycl 126:50–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.07.025
Margallo M, Aldaco R, Bala A, Fullana P, Irabien A (2018) Contribution to closing the loop on waste materials: valorization of bottom ash from waste-to-energy plants under a life cycle approach. J Mater Cycles Waste Manag 20(3):1507–1515. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-018-0709-6
Neptune energy Announces feasibility study into CCS plan for Netherlands (2020) https://www.neptuneenergy.com/media/press-releases/year/2020/neptune-energy-announces-feasibility-study-ccs-plan-netherlands. Accessed 12 October 2021
Pauer E, Wohner B, Tacker M (2020) The influence of database selection on environmental impact results. Life cycle assessment of packaging using gabi, ecoinvent 3.6, and the environmental footprint database. Sustainability 12(23):1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12239948
Rao AB, Rubin ES (2002) A technical, economic, and environmental assessment of amine-based CO2 capture technology for power plant greenhouse gas control. Environ Sci Technol 36(20):4467–4475. https://doi.org/10.1021/es0158861
Reinert C, Deurtz S, Minten H, Dorpinghaus L, von Pfingsten S, Baumgartner N, Barbow A (2020) Environmental impacts of the future German energy system for integrated energy systems optimization and life cycle assessment. In: ESCAPE30 conference proceeding, May 24–27, 2020, Milano Italy. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-823377-1.50041-0
European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Schau E, Castellani V, Fazio S, et al (2018) Supporting information to the characterisation factors of recommended EF Life Cycle Impact Assessment methods : new methods and differences with ILCD. Publications Office. https://doi.org/10.2760/671368
Schneider DR, Ragossnig AM (2015) Recycling and incineration, contradiction or coexistence? Waste Manag Res 33(8):693–695. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X15593421
Tang Y, You F (2018) Multicriteria environmental and economic analysis of municipal solid waste incineration power plant with carbon capture and separation from the life-cycle perspective. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 6(1):937–956. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.7b03283
Vadenbo C, Hellweg S, Fruergaard Astrup T (2016) Let’s Be Clear(er) about substitution: a reporting framework to account for product displacement in life cycle assessment. J Ind Ecol 21(5):1078–1089. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12519
Van Caneghem J, Block C, Van Brecht A, Van Royen P, Jaspers M, Wauters G, Vandecasteele C (2010) Mass balance for POPs in a real scale fluidised bed combustor co-incinerating automotive shredder residue. J Hazard Mater 181:827–835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.05.088
Van Caneghem J, De Greef J, Block C, Vandecasteele C (2016) NOx reduction in waste incinerators by selective catalytic reduction ( SCR ) instead of selective non catalytic reduction ( SNCR ) compared from a life cycle perspective: a case study. J Clean Prod 112:4452–4460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.08.068
Van Caneghem J, Van Acker K, De Greef J, Wauters G, Vandecasteele C (2019) Waste-to-energy is compatible and complementary with recycling in the circular economy. Clean Technol Environ Policy 21:925–939. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-019-01686-0
Vandecasteele C, Wauters G, Arickx S, Jaspers M, Van Gerven T (2007) Integrated municipal solid waste treatment using a grate furnace incinerator: the Indaver case. Waste Manag 27:1366–1375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2006.08.005
Zhou Z, Tang Y, Dong J, Chi Y, Ni M, Li N, Zhang Y (2018) Environmental performance evolution of municipal solid waste management by life cycle assessment in Hangzhou, China. J Environ Manag 227:23–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.08.083
Funding
The authors have not disclosed any funding.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have not disclosed any competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Boakes, E., De Voogd, JK., Wauters, G. et al. The influence of energy output and substitution on the environmental impact of waste-to-energy operation: quantification by means of a case study. Clean Techn Environ Policy 25, 253–267 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-022-02297-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-022-02297-y