Life cycle impact assessment of various waste conversion technologies.

Advanced thermal treatment technologies utilizing pyrolysis or gasification, as well as a combined approach, are introduced as sustainable methods to treat wastes in Singapore. Eight different technologies are evaluated: pyrolysis-gasification of MSW; pyrolysis of MSW; thermal cracking gasification of granulated MSW; combined pyrolysis, gasification and oxidation of MSW; steam gasification of wood; circulating fluidized bed (CFB) gasification of organic wastes; gasification of RDF; and the gasification of tyres. Life cycle assessment is carried out to determine the environmental impacts of the various waste conversion systems including global warming potential, acidification potential, terrestrial eutrophication and ozone photochemical formation. The normalization and weighting results, calculated according to Singapore national emission inventories, showed that the two highest impacts are from thermal cracking gasification of granulated MSW and the gasification of RDF; and the least are from the steam gasification of wood and the pyrolysis-gasification of MSW. A simplified life cycle cost comparison showed that the two most costs-effective waste conversion systems are the CFB gasification of organic waste and the combined pyrolysis, gasification and oxidation of MSW. The least favorable - highest environmental impact as well as highest costs - are the thermal cracking gasification of granulated MSW and the gasification of tyres.

[1]  Jane C. Bare,et al.  Environmental impact assessment taxonomy providing comprehensive coverage of midpoints, endpoints, damages, and areas of protection , 2008 .

[2]  G De Feo,et al.  Energy from gasification of solid wastes. , 2003, Waste management.

[3]  Thomas Malkow,et al.  Novel and innovative pyrolysis and gasification technologies for energy efficient and environmentally sound MSW disposal. , 2004, Waste management.

[4]  P Buttol,et al.  LCA of integrated MSW management systems: case study of the Bologna District. , 2007, Waste management.

[5]  Hsien Hui Khoo,et al.  Impact Assessment of Waste Management Options in Singapore , 2006, Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association.

[6]  Magnus Bengtsson,et al.  Weighting in LCA – approaches and applications , 2000 .

[7]  Peter Holm,et al.  Life cycle assessment of the waste hierarchy--a Danish case study on waste paper. , 2007, Waste management.

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

[9]  Christian Riber,et al.  Experience with the use of LCA-modelling (EASEWASTE) in waste management , 2007, Waste management & research : the journal of the International Solid Wastes and Public Cleansing Association, ISWA.

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

[11]  H. Akimoto,et al.  An Asian emission inventory of anthropogenic emission sources for the period 1980-2020 , 2007 .

[12]  C. H. Marks,et al.  Evaluation of gasification and novel thermal processes for the treatment of municipal solid waste , 1996 .

[13]  Jerry D. Murphy,et al.  Technical, economic and environmental analysis of energy production from municipal solid waste , 2004 .