Advertisement

Mitigation of Global Warming Potential for Cleaner Composting

  • Mukesh Kumar Awasthi
  • Surendra Sarsaiya
  • Quan Wang
  • Meijing Wang
  • Hongyu Chen
  • Xiuna Ren
  • Sunil Kumar
  • Zengqiang Zhang
Chapter
Part of the Energy, Environment, and Sustainability book series (ENENSU)

Abstract

With the rapidly growing human population, urbanization, and the uplifting living standards in all over the world, huge amount of solid waste was generated. It is expected that the entire amount of word solid waste production would climb from more ~3.5 million to >6 million tons/day from 2010 to 2025, and the rate would continue to increase and reach a peak to over 11 million tons/day about by the year 2100. Thus, how to manage those increasing solid waste generation was becoming a great issue for the sustainable civil infrastructure. Organic waste, which includes food scraps, yard wastes, agricultural wastes, and process residues, took the largest proportion of the overall generated solid waste by 46%. But ~90% of the solid waste is directly disposed into the landfill that can produce a considerable proportion of flue gases (generally the CH4 and N2O gases) due to the anaerobic mineralization of bio-available organic matter. Composting is an eco-friendly alternative “Old & Gold” technology to landfilling for the management of organic waste. Its principal interest lies in its potential to recycle the organic nutrients through compost application. The life cycle measurement has been extensively used as a mean of evaluation for impact assessment, such as overall warming potential, along with different waste management technologies. The typical methods assumed for composting comprise transportation of organic waste, viable machinery, greenhouse gases (GHGs) emissions during the curing phase, as well as the end-product application. There is a divergence in the adopted operational methodology to determine its environmental effect. This chapter deliberates on the variations of life cycle computation of solid waste management that involved different global warming potentials of composting. It is also based on the GHGs mitigation approaches to minimize the global warming impact by aerobic composting. The element of the study is to examine the difference in the inventory investigation for composting, and its fundamental mechanism and the significant inventory for an additional assessment. This study establishes that the GHGs emissions which emit directly during the composting process supply additional global warming prospective rather than further emissions. The bulking agent is used for the mitigation of overall warming potential. The measurement of the composting and its impact on global warming prospective is widely dependent on many defined efficient components. The environmental impact should be examined based on the operational approach and the input feedstock to generate a basis with minimized discrepancies among studies. Consecutive exercise is compulsory to evaluate the everlasting assistance of composting on environment, health, and soil properties to further identify its effect as a cleaner technology. Demonstration of mitigation method of field-research is an essential step toward the acquiescence of organic farming with global GHGs emissions moderation object through composting. Therefore, in this chapter, provides a detailed account of the technological advancement and composting approaches in global prospects for mitigation of GHGs emission, environmental safety, and human health protection.

Keywords

Inventory analysis Cleaner composting Greenhouse gas mitigation Global warming potential 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Authors are extremely grateful to the “The National Key Research and Development Program of China” and China Postdoctoral Science Foundation for financial support as “Major Research Project” (2016YFD0800606) and “Minor research Project” (No. 2016M602865) for this work and the Northwest A&F University, Yangling, China fellowship received by Dr. Mukesh Kumar Awasthi (No. 154433) are also duly acknowledged.

References

  1. Abeliotis K, Lasaridi K, Costarelli V, Chroni C (2015) The implications of food waste generation on climate change: the case of Greece. Sustain Prod Consum 3:8–14Google Scholar
  2. Ahn HK, Mulbry W, White JW, Kondrad SL (2011) Pile mixing increases greenhouse gas emissions during composting of dairy manure. Bioresour Technol 102:2904–2909Google Scholar
  3. Amlinger F, Peyr S, Cuhls C (2008) Green house gas emissions from composting and mechanical biological treatment. Waste Manage Res J Int Solid Wastes Public Clean Assoc Iswa 26(1):47–60Google Scholar
  4. Andersen JK, Boldrin A, Christensen TH, Scheutz C (2010a) Mass balances and life-cycle inventory for a garden waste windrow composting plant (Aarhus, Denmark). Waste Manage Res 28:1010–1020Google Scholar
  5. Andersen JK, Christensen TH, Scheutz C (2010b) Substitution of peat, fertiliser and manure by compost in hobby gardening: user surveys and case studies. Waste Manage 30:2483–2489Google Scholar
  6. Andersen JK, Boldrin A, Christensen TH, Scheutz C (2011) Mass balances and life cycle inventory of home composting of organic waste. Waste Manage 31:1934–1942Google Scholar
  7. Andersen JK, Boldrin A, Christensen TH, Scheutz C (2012) Home composting as an alternative treatment option for organic household waste in Denmark: an environmental assessment using life cycle assessment-modelling. Waste Manage 32:31–40Google Scholar
  8. Astrup T (2009) Incineration and co-combustion of waste: accounting of greenhouse gases and global warming contributions. Waste Manage Res J Int Solid Wastes Public Clean Assoc ISWA 27(8):789Google Scholar
  9. Awasthi MK, Wang Q, Huang H, Li R, Shen F, Lahori AH, Wang P, Guo D, Guo Z, Jiang S, Zhang Z (2016) Effect of biochar amendment on greenhouse gas emission and bio-availability of heavy metals during sewage sludge co-composting. J Clean Prod 135:829–835Google Scholar
  10. Awasthi MK, Wang M, Chen H, Wang Q, Zhao J, Rena X, Li DS, Awasthi SK, Shen F, Li R, Zhang Z (2017) Heterogeneity of biochar amendment to improve the carbon and nitrogen sequestration through reduce the greenhouse gases emissions during sewage sludge composting. Bioresour Technol 224:428–438Google Scholar
  11. Bernstein L, Bosch P, Canziani O, Chen Z, Christ R, Riahi K (2008) IPCC, 2007: climate change 2007: synthesis report. IPCC, Geneva. ISBN 2-9169-122-4Google Scholar
  12. Bingemer HG, Crutzen PJ (1987) The production of CH4 from solid wastes. J Geophys Res 92:2182–2187Google Scholar
  13. Bo Z, Li ZL, Bo XJ, Ping KL, Shanghai (2003) Current situation and development on anaerobic digestion for municipal solid wastes. China Biogas 21(4)17–21Google Scholar
  14. Bogner J, Matthews E (2003) Global methane emissions from landfills: new methodology and annual estimates 1980–1996. Global Biogeochem Cycles 17:34-1–34-18Google Scholar
  15. Bogner J, Pipatti R, Hashimoto S, Diaz C, Mareckova K (2008) Mitigation of global greenhouse gas emissions from waste: conclusions and strategies from the intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC) fourth assessment report. Working group III (mitigation). Waste Manage Res J Int Solid Wastes Public Clean Assoc ISWA 26(1):11–32Google Scholar
  16. Boldrin A, Hartling KR, Laugen M, Christensen TH (2010) Environmental inventory modeling of the use of compost and peat in growth media preparation. Resour Conserv Recycl 54:1250–1260Google Scholar
  17. Bong CCP, Lim LY, Ho WS, Lim JS, Klemeš JJ, Towprayoon S, Ho CS, Lee CT (2016) A review on the global warming potential of cleaner composting and mitigation strategies. J Clean Prod. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.07.066
  18. Bueno G, Latasa I, Lozano PJ (2015) Comparative LCA of two approaches with different emphasis on energy or material recovery for a municipal solid waste management system in Gipizkoa. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 51:449–459Google Scholar
  19. Butler J, Hooper P (2010) Down to Earth: an illustration of life cycle inventory good practice with reference to the production of soil conditioning compost. Resour Conserv Recycl 55:135–147Google Scholar
  20. Cadena E, Colón J, Artola A, Sánchez A, Font X (2009) Environmental impact of two aerobic composting technologies using life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 14:401–410Google Scholar
  21. Calster GV, Vandenberhe W, Rein L (2015). Research handbook on climate change mitigation law. Springer, New York, p 409Google Scholar
  22. Chadwick D, Sommer S, Thorman R, Fangueiro D, Cardenas L, Amon B, Misselbrook T (2011) Manure management: implications for GHG emissions. Anim Feed Sci Technol 166:514–531.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2011.04.036 Google Scholar
  23. Charles W, Walker L, Cord-Ruwisch R (2009) Effect of preaeration and inoculum on the start-up of batch thermophilic anaerobic digestion of municipal solid waste. Biores Technol 100(8):2329–2335Google Scholar
  24. Chen TC, Lin CF (2008) Greenhouse gases emissions from waste management practices using life cycle inventory model. J Hazard Mater 155:23–31Google Scholar
  25. Colón J, Martínez-Blanco J, Gabarrell X, Artola A, Sánchez A, Rieradevall J, Font X (2010) Environmental assessment of home composting. Resour Conserv Recycl 54:893–904Google Scholar
  26. Couth R, Trois C (2011) Waste management activities and carbon emissions in Africa. Waste Manage 31(1):131–137Google Scholar
  27. Davidson G (2011) Waste management practices: literature review. Dalhousie University, Office of Sustainability, pp 1–59Google Scholar
  28. Dong K (2008) Review of acid gas purification process in flue gas in municipal solid waste incineration. Refrig Air-Cond 03(22):73–75Google Scholar
  29. EEA (2005) European environment outlook. EU Report 4/2005, ISSN 1725-9177, Luxembourg, published by the European Environment Agency (EEA), CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  30. Eggleston HS (2006) IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories, prepared by the national greenhouse gas inventories programme. Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, JapanGoogle Scholar
  31. Eriksson M, Strid I, Hansson PA (2015) Carbon footprint of food waste management options in the waste hierarchy—a Swedish case study. J Clean Prod 93:115–125Google Scholar
  32. European Commission (2008) EU waste framework directive 2008/98/ECGoogle Scholar
  33. Fan YV, Lee CT, Klemeš JJ, Bong CPC, Ho WS (2016) Economic assessment system towards sustainable composting quality in the developing countries. Clean Technol Environ Policy. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-016-1209-9
  34. Fukumoto Y, Osada T, Hanajima D, Haga K (2003) Patterns and quantities of NH3, N2O and CH4 emissions during swine manure composting without forced aeration—effect of compost pile scale. Bioresour Technol 89:109–114.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524(03)00060-9 Google Scholar
  35. Giegrich J, Vogt R (2005) The contribution of waste management to sustainable development in Germany. Umweltbundesamt Report FKZ 203 92 309, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  36. Global Forest Resources Assessment (2010) (FRA 2010) Forestry Department Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, 2010Google Scholar
  37. Government of India (2013) Twelfth five year plan (2012–2017). Available at http://12thplan.gov.in
  38. Han SK, Shin HS (2002) Enhanced acidogenic fermentation of food waste in a continuous-flow reactor. Waste Manage Res 20(2):110–118Google Scholar
  39. Hansen TL, Bhander GS, Christensen TH, Brunn S, Jensen LS (2006) Life cycle modelling of environmental impacts from applications of processed organic municipal solid waste on agricultural land (EASEWASTE). Waste Manage Res 24:153–166Google Scholar
  40. Hao X, Chang C, Larney FJ (2004) Carbon, nitrogen balances and GHG emission during cattle feedlot manure composting. J Environ Qual 33:37–44. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/jeq2004.3700; PMid:14964356
  41. Hao X, Benke M, Larney FJ, McAllister TA (2011) Greenhouse gas emissions when composting manure from cattle fed wheat dried distillers’ grains with solubles. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst 89:105–114.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10705-010-9380-6 Google Scholar
  42. He P (2011) GHG emissions from Chinese MSW incineration and their influencing factors—case study of one MSW incineration plant in Shanghai. China Environ Sci 31(3):402–407Google Scholar
  43. Hermann BG, Debeer L, De Wilde B, Blok K, Patel MK (2011) To compost or not to compost: carbon and energy footprints of biodegradable materials’ waste treatment. Polym Degrad Stab 96:1159–1171. https://www.dal.ca/content/dam/dalhousie/pdf/dept/sustainability/Waste%20Management%20Literature%20Review%20Final%20June%202011%20%281.49%20MB%29
  44. Huang J, Zheng Y Wu X Zhao H (2015) Advanced progress of greenhouse gases and vocs from municipal solid waste landfill. Environ Eng 33(8):70–73Google Scholar
  45. IPCC (2000) Emissions scenarios. In: Nakicenovic N, Swart R (eds) Special report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC). Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  46. IPCC (2006) Guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories, prepared by the national greenhouse gas inventories programme. In: Eggleston HS, Buendia L, Miwa K, Ngara T and Tanabe K (eds). Published: IGES, JapanGoogle Scholar
  47. IPCC AR5 WG2 A (2014) The role of adaptation and alternative development pathways. In: Chapter 19: Emergent risks and key vulnerabilities (archived 20 Oct 2014), pp 1072–1073Google Scholar
  48. Jiang G, Sun X, Keller J, Bond PL (2015) Identification of controlling factors for the initiation of corrosion of fresh concrete sewers. Water Res 80:30–40Google Scholar
  49. Ji-Qing L, Xiao-Jing YU (2004) Introduction on application of pyrolysis in dealing with solid refuse. Shandong Chem Ind 4(33):40–43Google Scholar
  50. Kaneko S, Kawanishi M (2016) Climate change policies and challenges in Indonesia. Springer, Berlin, pp 56–57. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-55994-8-2
  51. Kapoor K, Ambrosi P (2007) The World Bank State and trends of the carbon market 2007. CarbonGoogle Scholar
  52. Karagiannidis A, Karkanias C, Papageorgiou A, Barton JR, Kalogirou E (2010) Assessment of the climate change impact of municipal solid waste management scenarios in greater Athens area. In: 7th international conference on organic resources in the carbon economy (ORBIT 2010), At Heraklion, Crete, GreeceGoogle Scholar
  53. Kim MH, Kim JW (2010) Comparison through a LCA evaluation analysis of food waste disposal options from the perspective of global warming and resource recovery. Sci Total Environ 408:3998–4006Google Scholar
  54. Kollah B, Dubey G, Saha JK, Mohanty SR (2014) Composting: an opportunity in a carbon conscious world for combating climate change. Sci Res Essays 9(13):598–606Google Scholar
  55. Komakech AJ, Sundberg C, Jönsson H, Vinneràs B (2015) Life cycle assessment of biodegradable waste treatment systems for sub-Saharan African cities. Resour Conserv Recycl 99:100–110Google Scholar
  56. Kong D, Shan J, Iacobini M, Maguin SR (2012) Evaluating greenhouse gas impacts of organic waste management options using life cycle assessment. Waste Manage Res 30(8):800–812Google Scholar
  57. Ling L (2010) Research progress and prospect of disposal and management of solid waste. Guangdong Chem Ind 5:155–158Google Scholar
  58. Lopez-Real JM, Baptista M (1996) A preliminary comparative study of three manure composting systems and their influence on process parameters and methane emissions. Compost Sci Util 4:71–82.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1065657X.1996.10701842 Google Scholar
  59. Luo Y, Li G, Luo W, Schuchardt F, Jiang T, Xu D (2013) Effect of phosphogypsum and dicyandiamide as additives on NH3, N2O and CH4 emissions during composting. J Environ Sci 25:1338–1345Google Scholar
  60. Luo WH, Yuan J, Luo YM, Li GX, Nghiem LD, Price WE (2014) Effects of mixing and covering with mature compost on gaseous emissions during composting. Chemosphere 117:14–19Google Scholar
  61. Martínez-Blanco J, Muñoz P, Antón A, Rieradevall J (2009) Life cycle assessment of the use of compost from municipal organic waste for fertilization of tomato crops. Resour Conserv Recycl 53:340–351Google Scholar
  62. Maulini-Duran C, Puyuelo B, Artola A, Font X, Sánchez A, Gea T (2014) VOC emissions from the composting of the organic fraction of municipal solid waste using standard and advanced aeration strategies. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 89:579–586Google Scholar
  63. Mertins L, Vinolas C, Bargallo A, Sommer G, Renau J (1999) Development and application of waste factors—an overview. Technical Report No. 37, European Environment Agency, Copenhagen. Mitigation policies in emerging economies. Center for Climate and Energy Solutions. https://www.c2es.org/docUploads/market-based-climate-mitigation-policies-emerging-economies
  64. Moarif S, Rastogi NP (2012) Market-based climate mitigation policies emerging economies. Center for Climate Energy SolutionsGoogle Scholar
  65. Møller HB, Sommer SG, Andersen BH (2000) Nitrogen mass balance in deep litter during the pig fattening cycle and during composting. J Agric Sci 135:287–296.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859699008242 Google Scholar
  66. National Research Council (NRC) (2006) Surface temperature reconstructions for the last 2,000 years. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  67. OECD (2003) OECD environmental data compendium 2002. Paris (Accessed 25 June 2007)Google Scholar
  68. OECD (2004) Towards waste prevention performance indicators. OECD Environment Directorate. Working group on waste prevention and recycling and working group on environmental information and outlooks, 197 ppGoogle Scholar
  69. Onwudili JA, Williams PT (2007) Hydrothermal catalytic gasification of municipal solid waste. Energy Fuels 21(6):3676–3683Google Scholar
  70. Oreskes N (2004) The scientific consensus on climate change. Science 306(5702), 1686. doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1103618
  71. Pardo G, Moral R, Aguilera E, Prado AD (2015) Gaseous emissions from management of solid waste: a systematic review. Glob Change Biol 21(3):1313Google Scholar
  72. Pattey E, Trzcinski MK, Desjardins RL (2005) Quantifying the reduction of GHG emissions as a result of composting dairy and beef cattle manure. Nutr Cycl Agroecosystems 72:173–187.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10705-005-1268-5 Google Scholar
  73. Pipatti R, Wihersaari M (1997) Cost-effectiveness of alternative strategies in mitigating the greenhouse impact of waste management in three communities of different size. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 2(4):337–358Google Scholar
  74. Quirós R, Villalba G, Muñoz P, Colón J, Font X, Gabarrell X (2014) Environmental assessment of two home composts with high and low gaseous emissions of the composting process. Resour Conserv Recycl 90:9–14Google Scholar
  75. Rajaeifar MA, Tbatabaei M, Ghanavati J, Khohnevisan B, Rafiee S (2015) Comparative life cycle assessment of different municipal solid waste management scenarios in Iran. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 51:886–898Google Scholar
  76. Rathje WL, Hughes WW, Wilson DC, Tani MK, Archer GH, Hunt RG, Jones TW (1992) The archaeology of contemporary landfills. Am Antiq 57:437–447Google Scholar
  77. Rathmann Challenge Guidelines (2017) Mitigating climate change by expanding the use of compost. http://www.rathmanninnovation.org/2017-Guidelines.pdf
  78. Richards K (1989) Landfill gas: working with Gaia. Biodeterior Abstr 3:317–331Google Scholar
  79. Rogner HH, Zhou D, Bradley R, Crabbé P, Edenhofer O, Hare B, Kuijpers L, Yamaguchi M (2007a) 1.3.2 Future outlook. In: Metz B, Davidson OR, Bosch PR, Dave R, Meyer LA (eds) Introduction. Climate change 2007: mitigation. Contribution of working group III to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-88011-4Google Scholar
  80. Rogner HH, Zhou D, Bradley R, Crabbé P, Edenhofer O, Hare B, Kuijpers L, Yamaguchi M (2007b) Executive summary. In: Metz B, Davidson OR, Bosch PR, Dave R, Meyer LA (eds) Introduction. Climate change 2007: mitigation. Contribution of working group III to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-88011-4Google Scholar
  81. Rogner HH, Zhou D, Bradley R, Crabbé P, Edenhofer O, Hare B, Kuijpers L, Yamaguchi M (2007c) 1.3.2.4 Total GHG emissions. In: Metz B, Davidson OR, Bosch PR, Dave R, Meyer LA (eds) Introduction. Climate change 2007: mitigation. Contribution of working group III to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-88011-4Google Scholar
  82. Saer A, Lansing S, Davitt N (2013) Life cycle assessment of a food waste composting system: environmental impact hotpots. J Clean Prod 52:234–244Google Scholar
  83. Sánchez A, Artola A, Font X, Gea T, Barrena R, Gabriel D (2015) Greenhouse gas from organic waste composting: emissions and measurement. CO2 sequestration. Biofuels Depollut 33–70Google Scholar
  84. Santos A, Bustamante MA, Moral R, Bernal MP (2014) Carbon conservation strategy for the management of pig slurry by composting: initial study of the bulking agent influence. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11027-014-9593-0
  85. Santuccia L, Puhlb I, Sinhac M, Enayetullahc I, Agyemang-Bonsu WK (2014) Valuing the sustainable development co-benefits of climate change mitigation actions: the case of the waste sector and recommendations for the design of nationally appropriate mitigation actions (NAMAs), vol 1. http://www.unescap.org/sites/default/files/Paper_Valuing%20co-benefits.pdf
  86. Sutter JD, Berlinger J (2015) Final draft of climate deal formally accepted in Paris. CNN. Cable News Network, Turner Broadcasting System, IncGoogle Scholar
  87. UNICEF (2017) United Nations Statistics Division—environment statistic. Statistics Division United NationsGoogle Scholar
  88. UNFCCC (2009) Framework convention on climate change. Report of the conference of the parties on its fifteenth session, held in Copenhagen from 7 to 19 December 2009Google Scholar
  89. United Nations Environment Programme (2010) Waste and climate change: global trends and strategy frameworkGoogle Scholar
  90. USEPA (1999) national source reduction characterization report for municipal solid waste in the United States. EPA 530R-99-034, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  91. Van Harren R, Themelis NJ, Barlaz M (2010) LCA comparison of windrow composting of yard waste with use as alternative daily cover (ADC). Waste Manage 30:2649–2656Google Scholar
  92. Visvanthan C, Yin NH, Karthikeyan OP (2010) Co-disposal of electronic waste with municipal solid waste in bioreactor landfills. Waste Manage 30(12):2608Google Scholar
  93. Waldron K (2005) Producing high-quality horticultural growing media through the retention of plant structure in composted food processing waste. Compos News 9:45–46Google Scholar
  94. Wang XY, Fei L, Xiao-Xiao LV (2010) Current municipal solid waste treatment technology and future development. J Xinxiang Univ 6(27):37–40Google Scholar
  95. Wang B, Zha TS, Jia X, Wu B, Zhang YQ, Qin SG (2014a) Soil moisture modifies the response of soil respiration to temperature in a desert shrub ecosystem. Biogeoscience 11:259–268Google Scholar
  96. Wang J, Hu Z, Xu X, Jiang X, Zheng B, Liu X, Pan X, Kardol P (2014b) Emissions of ammonia and greenhouse gases during combined pre-composting and vermicomposting of duck manure. Waste Manage 34:1546–1552Google Scholar
  97. Wang Q, Wang Z, Awasthi MK, Jiang Y, L, R, Ren X, Zhao J, Shen F, Wang M, Zhang Z (2016) Evaluation of medical stone amendment for the reduction of nitrogen loss and bioavailability of heavy metals during pig manure composting. Bioresour Technol 297–304Google Scholar
  98. Wei N, Xiao-Chun L, Wang Y, Zhi-Meng G (2009) Resources quantity and utilization prospect of methane in municipal solid waste landfills. Rock Soil Mech 30(6):1687–1692Google Scholar
  99. Yang Y (2002) To realize agriculture sustainable development by utilization of organic wastes. Territ Nat Resour Study 11(2):32–33Google Scholar
  100. Yang F, Li G, Jiang T, Zhang B (2012) Vermicomposting treatment of vegetable waste and its greenhouse gas emissions. Trans Chin Soc Agric 28(16):190–196Google Scholar
  101. Yang F, Li GX, Yang QY, Luo WH (2013) Effect of bulking agents on maturity and gaseous emissions during kitchen waste composting. Chemosphere 93:1393–1399Google Scholar
  102. Yang F, Li G, Shim H, Wang Y (2015) Effects of phosphogypsum and superphosphate on compost maturity and gaseous emissions during kitchen waste composting. Waste Manag 36:70–76Google Scholar
  103. Yay ASE (2015) Application of life cycle assessment (LCA) for municipal solid waste management: a case study of Sakarya. J Clean Prod 94:284–293Google Scholar
  104. Youngchul B, Won N, Moohyun C, Jaewoo C, Youngsuk K, Jinho L (2010) Demonstration of thermal plasma gasification/vitrification for municipal solid waste treatment. Environ Technol 44(17):6680Google Scholar
  105. Zhanyun MA, Hailing LI, Yue BO, Gao FB, Qingxian DL (2014) Study on emission characteristics and correlation of GHGs CH4 and CO2 in MSW landfill cover layer. J Environ Eng Technol 4(5):399–405Google Scholar
  106. Zhang W, Lau A (2007) Reducing ammonia emission from poultry manure composting via struvite formation. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 82:598–602Google Scholar
  107. Zhang Y, Zhang Z, Tang C (2006) Characterization of pollution: bottom slag, fly ash and flue gas of municipal solid waste incineration in jiaozuo. Environ Sanit Eng 06:7–10Google Scholar
  108. Zhang DQ, Tan SK, Gersberg RM (2010) Municipal solid waste management in China: status, problems and challenges. J Environ Manage 91(8):1623–1633Google Scholar
  109. Zhang C, Tian H, Chen G, Chappelka A, Xu X, Ren W, Hui D, Liu M, Lu C, Pan S, Lockaby G (2012) Impacts of urbanization on carbon balance in terrestrial ecosystems of the southern United States. Environ Pollut 164:89–101Google Scholar
  110. Zhang H, Li C, Li G, Zang B, Yang Q (2012b) Effect of spent air reusing (SAR) on maturity and greenhouse gas emissions during municipal solid waste (MSW) composting-with different pile height. Procedia Environ Sci 16:59–69Google Scholar
  111. Zhao W, van der Voet E, Zhang Y, Huppes G (2009) Life cycle assessment of municipal solid waste management with regard to greenhouse gas emission: case study of Tianjin China. Sci Total Environ 407:1517–1526Google Scholar
  112. Zhao Y, Lu W, Damgaard A, Zhang Y, Wang H (2015) Assessment of co-composting of sludge and woodchips in the perspective of environmental impacts (EASETECH). Waste Manage 42:55–60Google Scholar
  113. Zheng JX, Wei YS, Wu XF, Zeng XL, Han SH (2011) Nutrients conservation of N&P and greenhouse gas reduction of N2O emission during swine manure composting. Environ Sci 32(7):2047–2055Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mukesh Kumar Awasthi
    • 1
    • 2
  • Surendra Sarsaiya
    • 3
    • 4
  • Quan Wang
    • 1
  • Meijing Wang
    • 1
  • Hongyu Chen
    • 1
  • Xiuna Ren
    • 1
  • Sunil Kumar
    • 5
  • Zengqiang Zhang
    • 1
  1. 1.College of Natural Resources and EnvironmentNorthwest A&F UniversityYanglingChina
  2. 2.Department of BiotechnologyAmicable Knowledge Solution UniversitySatnaIndia
  3. 3.Department of MicrobiologySri Satya Sai University of Technology and Medical SciencesSehoreIndia
  4. 4.Key Laboratory of Basic Pharmacology of Ministry of EducationZunyi Medical UniversityZunyiChina
  5. 5.Solid and Hazardous Waste Management DivisionCSIR-National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (CSIR-NEERI)NagpurIndia

Personalised recommendations