Environmental Assessment of Municipal Waste Management Scenarios: Part II Detailed Life Cycle Assessments

The European Commission’s Strategy on the Prevention and Recycling of Waste outlines why life cycle thinking is essential in the move towards more sustainable consumption and production. The importance of life cycle thinking is further highlighted in the Commission’s complimentary Strategy on the Sustainable Use of Natural Resources, in its Integrated Product Policy, as well as in the proposed revisions to the European Waste Framework Directive and the up-coming Sustainable Consumption and Production Action Plan. In 2004, following its international workshop and conference on life cycle assessment and waste management, the Institute for Environment and Sustainability (IES) of the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) launched a series of regional pilot case studies in collaboration with representatives of the European Union’s new member states, acceding countries, and associated countries. The representatives selected, and provided, statistical data for nine waste management regions. The life cycle assessments took into account the situation around 2003 in each region and example management scenarios that achieve Directive compliance and beyond (ref. Koneczny K., Dragusanu V., Bersani R., Pennington D.W. Environmental Assessment of Municipal Waste Management Scenarios: Part I – Data collection and preliminary environmental assessments for life cycle thinking pilot studies, European Commission, JRC-IES, 2007). This report, based on a study carried out on behalf of the JRC by 2.-0 LCA Consultants, considers in further detail the waste management options for the island nation of Malta and the central European city of Krakow, Poland. The life cycle assessments use more robust data, apply cutting edge methodologies, and take into account the waste management costs. The resultant life cycle impact indicators provide a basis to compare the emissions and resources consumed attributable to each waste management option in terms of their contributions to e.g. different environment and human health burdens. One of the methods furthermore highlights how some of the trade-offs between environment, health, and the waste management costs might be partially considered in a single life cycle based cost-benefit framework, as a support to other decision- making information. The mission of the JRC is to provide customer-driven scientific and technical support for the conception, development, implementation and monitoring of EU policies. As a service of the European Commission, the JRC functions as a reference centre o L B -N B -2 3 0 2 1 E N -C f science and technology for the Union. Close to the policy-making process, it serves the common interest of the Member States, while being independent of special interests, whether private or national.

[1]  Markus Amann,et al.  Integrated assessment of emission control scenarios, including the impact of tropospheric ozone , 1995 .

[2]  O. Phillips,et al.  Biodiversity conservation: Uncertainty in predictions of extinction risk/Effects of changes in climate and land use/Climate change and extinction risk (reply) , 2004, Nature.

[3]  Gerald Rebitzer,et al.  The LCIA midpoint-damage framework of the UNEP/SETAC life cycle initiative , 2004 .

[4]  Gerald Rebitzer,et al.  IMPACT 2002+: A new life cycle impact assessment methodology , 2003 .

[5]  N. Humphrey,et al.  U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. , 1990, Journal of pediatric health care : official publication of National Association of Pediatric Nurse Associates & Practitioners.

[6]  Mark Goedkoop,et al.  Life-Cycle Impact Assessment: Striving towards Best Practice , 2002 .

[7]  M. Hauschild,et al.  Background for spatial differentiation in life cycle impact assessment. The EDIP2003 methodology , 2004 .

[8]  Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) , 1996 .

[9]  G. Dóka Life Cycle Inventories of Waste Treatment Services , 2003 .

[10]  O. Hjelmar,et al.  Municipal Solid Waste Incinerator Residues , 1997 .

[11]  Rolf Frischknecht,et al.  Human health damages due to ionising radiation in life cycle impact assessment , 2000 .

[12]  T. Nemecek,et al.  Life Cycle Inventories of Agricultural Production Systems , 2007 .

[13]  Joanna Isobel House,et al.  Climate change 2001 : synthesis report , 2001 .

[14]  G Finnveden,et al.  Life cycle assessment part 2: current impact assessment practice. , 2004, Environment international.

[15]  Alan D. Lopez,et al.  The global burden of disease: a comprehensive assessment of mortality and disability from diseases injuries and risk factors in 1990 and projected to 2020. , 1996 .

[16]  Manfred Lenzen,et al.  Errors in Conventional and Input‐Output—based Life—Cycle Inventories , 2000 .

[17]  Reinout Heijungs,et al.  The computational structure of life cycle assessment , 2002 .

[18]  O. Phillips,et al.  Extinction risk from climate change , 2004, Nature.

[19]  Bo Pedersen Weidema A reply to the aluminium industry: Each market has its own marginal , 1999 .

[20]  Toni Gladding,et al.  Review of Environmental and Health Effects of Waste Management: Municipal Solid Waste and Similar Wastes , 2004 .

[21]  M. Goedkoop,et al.  The Eco-indicator 99, A damage oriented method for Life Cycle Impact Assessment , 1999 .

[22]  Patrick Hofstetter,et al.  Why and how should we assess occupational health impacts in integrated product policy? , 2003, Environmental science & technology.

[23]  Stefanie Hellweg,et al.  Time- and site-dependent life cycle assessment of thermal waste treatment processes , 2001 .

[24]  Patrick Hofstetter,et al.  Perspectives in life cycle impact assessment , 1998 .

[25]  O. Klepper,et al.  Modelling the flow of nitrogen and phosphorus in Europe: From loads to coastal seas , 1995 .

[26]  T. Miller,et al.  The cost of childhood unintentional injuries and the value of prevention. , 2000, The Future of children.

[27]  R. Tol Estimates of the Damage Costs of Climate Change. Part 1: Benchmark Estimates , 2002 .

[28]  O. Jolliet,et al.  Multimedia fate and human intake modeling: spatial versus nonspatial insights for chemical emissions in Western Europe. , 2005, Environmental science & technology.

[29]  H. Belevi,et al.  Factors Determining the Element Behavior in Municipal Solid Waste Incinerators. 1. Field Studies , 2000 .

[30]  Naeem,et al.  Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Biodiversity Synthesis , 2005 .

[31]  M Fabbricino An integrated programme for municipal solid waste management , 2001, Waste management & research : the journal of the International Solid Wastes and Public Cleansing Association, ISWA.

[32]  M. Goedkoop,et al.  A damage oriented method for Life Cycle Impact Assessment , 1999 .

[33]  James E. Larkin,et al.  Iron and steel scrap , 1943 .

[34]  K. W. Palmer Iron and steel scrap , 1979 .

[35]  Michael E. Chernew,et al.  Willingness to Pay for a Quality-adjusted Life Year , 2000, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[36]  B. Green In search of a standard , 1986 .

[37]  Michael Zwicky Hauschild,et al.  Spatial differentiation in life cycle impact assessment - the EDIP-2003 methodology. Guidelines from the Danish EPA , 2004 .

[38]  Stephen S. Golub,et al.  International Productivity Differences, Infrastructure, and Comparative Advantage , 2007 .

[39]  B. Weidema Market information in life cycle assessment , 2003 .

[40]  O. Jolliet,et al.  Assessing Human Health Response in Life Cycle Assessment Using ED10s and DALYs: Part 1—Cancer Effects , 2002, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[41]  J. Houghton,et al.  Climate change 2001 : the scientific basis , 2001 .

[42]  N. Hanley,et al.  Choice modelling approaches: a superior alternative for environmental valuation? , 2002 .

[43]  Olivier Jolliet,et al.  Risk and Regulatory Hazard-Based Toxicological Effect Indicators in Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) , 2006 .

[44]  J. Lodge Air quality guidelines for Europe: WHO regional publications, European series, No. 23, World Health Organization, 1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland; WHO publications center USA, 49 Sheridan Avenue, Albany, NY 12210, 1987, xiii + 426 pp. price: Sw. fr. 60 , 1988 .

[45]  Bo Pedersen Weidema,et al.  The Integration of Economic and Social Aspects in Life Cycle Impact Assessment , 2006 .

[46]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[47]  C. James,et al.  The effects of artificial sources of water on rangeland biodiversity: Final report to the Biodiversity Convention and Strategy Section of the Biodiversity Group, Environment Australia , 1997 .

[48]  Henrik Wenzel,et al.  Review of existing LCA studies on the recycling and disposal of paper and cardboard , 2004 .

[49]  D. Pennington,et al.  Life Cycle Impact Assessment Workshop Summary Midpoints versus Endpoints: The Sacrifices and Benefits , 2000 .

[50]  R Vidal,et al.  Integrated analysis for pre-sorting and waste collection schemes implemented in Spanish cities , 2001, Waste management & research : the journal of the International Solid Wastes and Public Cleansing Association, ISWA.

[51]  Mathis Wackernagel,et al.  Natural capital accounting with the ecological footprint concept , 1999 .

[52]  Costs for Municipal Waste Management in the EU Final Report to Directorate General Environment , European Commission , 2002 .

[53]  R. Barro,et al.  International Data on Educational Attainment Updates and Implications , 2000 .

[54]  Banco Mundial,et al.  Global economic prospects and the developing countries , 1992 .