IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jresou/v7y2018i4p85-d189339.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk Assessment in a Materials Recycling Facility: Perspectives for Reducing Operational Issues

Author

Listed:
  • Lucian Ionel Cioca

    (Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu; 550024 Sibiu, Romania
    Academy of Romanian Scientists, 010071 Bucharest, Romania)

  • Navarro Ferronato

    (Department of Theoretical and Applied Sciences, Insubria University, 21100 Varese, Italy)

  • Paolo Viotti

    (Department of Civil Engineering, La Sapienza University, 00184 Roma, Italy)

  • Elena Magaril

    (Department of Environmental Economics, Ural Federal University, 620002 Ekaterinburg, Russia)

  • Marco Ragazzi

    (Department of Civil Environmental and Mechanical Engineering, University of Trento, 38123 Trento, Italy)

  • Vincenzo Torretta

    (Department of Theoretical and Applied Sciences, Insubria University, 21100 Varese, Italy)

  • Elena Cristina Rada

    (Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu; 550024 Sibiu, Romania
    Department of Theoretical and Applied Sciences, Insubria University, 21100 Varese, Italy)

Abstract

Mechanical separation of light packaging waste is a useful practice for improving the quality of the recyclable waste flows and its exploitation in a frame of the circular economy. Materials Recovery Facilities can treat from 3000 to 5000 tons per year of light packaging waste. Concerning the plastic content, this is divided in four flows: PET, HDPE, other plastics, and waste rejects. The last two are generally used for energy recovery. For improving the quality of the recyclable plastic waste, a manual separation is required for reducing the impurities detectable in the final products. However, this practice could enhance the risk at work of the operators, which should be constantly monitored. This article explores the main differences of a manual separation and of a mechanical separation, assessing the costs and the health risk for the workers. The analysis started from the situation in an Italian Materials Recovery Facility, generalizing the context; a future scenario with the application of a mechanical separation is theoretically introduced. The main results obtained suggest that the manual separation plant improves the quality of the material, though increasing the risk of the operators due to the possible contact with sharp waste, sanitary danger, and risk of injuries for the mismanagement of machines, among others. The mechanical separation can be considered a real advantage from an economic point of view, since the operating costs are lower and the investment could be recovered in around 10 years, in an Italian-like context. On balance, on the one hand, the article provides indications for the private sector for improving the management of a Materials Recovery Facility, while, on the other hand, it detects the main pros and cons of both methodologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Lucian Ionel Cioca & Navarro Ferronato & Paolo Viotti & Elena Magaril & Marco Ragazzi & Vincenzo Torretta & Elena Cristina Rada, 2018. "Risk Assessment in a Materials Recycling Facility: Perspectives for Reducing Operational Issues," Resources, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-10, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:7:y:2018:i:4:p:85-:d:189339
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/7/4/85/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/7/4/85/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2017. "An EU Recycling Target: What Does the Dutch Evidence Tell Us?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(3), pages 501-526, November.
    2. Elena Cristina Rada & Claudio Zatelli & Lucian Ionel Cioca & Vincenzo Torretta, 2018. "Selective Collection Quality Index for Municipal Solid Waste Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-17, January.
    3. Elena Simina Lakatos & Lucian-Ionel Cioca & Viorel Dan & Alina Oana Ciomos & Oana Adriana Crisan & Ghita Barsan, 2018. "Studies and Investigation about the Attitude towards Sustainable Production, Consumption and Waste Generation in Line with Circular Economy in Romania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-25, March.
    4. Adrian Dumitru Tantau & Maria Alexandra Maassen & Laurentiu Fratila, 2018. "Models for Analyzing the Dependencies between Indicators for a Circular Economy in the European Union," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-13, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Elena R. Magaril & Leonid D. Gitelman & Anzhelika P. Karaeva & Andrey V. Kiselev & Mikhail V. Kozhevnikov, 2022. "Methodological Approach to the Environmental and Economic Assessment of Biogas Energy Projects," Journal of Applied Economic Research, Graduate School of Economics and Management, Ural Federal University, vol. 21(2), pages 217-256.
    2. Lazar Gitelman & Elena Magaril & Mikhail Kozhevnikov & Elena Cristina Rada, 2019. "Rational Behavior of an Enterprise in the Energy Market in a Circular Economy," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-19, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mihail Busu & Carmen Lenuta Trica, 2019. "Sustainability of Circular Economy Indicators and Their Impact on Economic Growth of the European Union," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-13, October.
    2. Elena Aurelia Botezat & Anca Otilia Dodescu & Sebastian Văduva & Silvia Liana Fotea, 2018. "An Exploration of Circular Economy Practices and Performance Among Romanian Producers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-17, September.
    3. Adrian Dumitru Tantau & Maria Alexandra Maassen & Laurentiu Fratila, 2018. "Models for Analyzing the Dependencies between Indicators for a Circular Economy in the European Union," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-13, June.
    4. Madalina-Ioana BADILA & Ghita BARSAN & Danut-Eugeniu MOSTEANU & Benoni SFARLOG & Ruxandra MOSTEANU, 2018. "The Place Of Wics Model In The Governance Of An Automotive Systems Corporation," Proceedings of the INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 12(1), pages 733-740, November.
    5. Ionica Oncioiu & Sorinel Căpuşneanu & Dan Ioan Topor & Marius Petrescu & Anca-Gabriela Petrescu & Monica Ioana Toader, 2020. "The Effective Management of Organic Waste Policy in Albania," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-16, August.
    6. Ramona Giurea & Ilaria Precazzini & Marco Ragazzi & Moise Ioan Achim & Lucian-Ionel Cioca & Fabio Conti & Vincenzo Torretta & Elena Cristina Rada, 2018. "Good Practices and Actions for Sustainable Municipal Solid Waste Management in the Tourist Sector," Resources, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-12, August.
    7. Marzena Smol, 2023. "Inventory and Comparison of Performance Indicators in Circular Economy Roadmaps of the European Countries," Circular Economy and Sustainability,, Springer.
    8. Raymond (R.H.J.M.) Gradus & Elbert (E.) Dijkgraaf, 2017. "Dutch Municipalities are Becoming Greener: Some Political and Institutional Explanations," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 17-086/VIII, Tinbergen Institute.
    9. Julio César Puche-Regaliza & Santiago Porras-Alfonso & Alfredo Jiménez & Santiago Aparicio-Castillo & Pablo Arranz-Val, 2021. "Exploring determinants of public satisfaction with urban solid waste collection services quality," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(7), pages 9927-9948, July.
    10. Tharaka Gunaratne & Joakim Krook & Hans Andersson, 2020. "Current Practice of Managing the Waste of the Waste: Policy, Market, and Organisational Factors Influencing Shredder Fines Management in Sweden," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-18, November.
    11. Camila Kolling & José Luis Duarte Ribeiro & Donato Morea & Gianpaolo Iazzolino, 2023. "Corporate social responsibility and circular economy from the perspective of consumers: A cross‐cultural analysis in the cosmetic industry," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3), pages 1226-1243, May.
    12. Andrea Szilagyi & Lucian-Ionel Cioca & Laura Bacali & Elena-Simina Lakatos & Andreea-Loredana Birgovan, 2022. "Consumers in the Circular Economy: A Path Analysis of the Underlying Factors of Purchasing Behaviour," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-12, September.
    13. Elena Simina Lakatos & Lucian Ionel Cioca & Andrea Szilagyi & Andreea Loredana Bîrgovan & Elena Cristina Rada, 2023. "Smokers’ Attitude and Behavior towards Cigarette Littering in Romania: A Survey-Based Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-10, August.
    14. Elena Cristina Rada & Elena Romenovna Magaril & Marco Schiavon & Anzhelika Karaeva & Maxim Chashchin & Vincenzo Torretta, 2020. "MSW Management in Universities: Sharing Best Practices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-15, June.
    15. Şanta Ana-Maria Iulia, 2019. "The energy union - Perspectives for consolidating the European Union through a common energy market," Management & Marketing, Sciendo, vol. 14(2), pages 232-239, June.
    16. Valentin Grecu & Radu-Ilie-Gabriel Ciobotea & Adrian Florea, 2020. "Software Application for Organizational Sustainability Performance Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-28, May.
    17. Mathivathanan, Deepak & Mathiyazhagan, K. & Khorana, Sangeeta & Rana, Nripendra P. & Arora, Bimal, 2022. "Drivers of circular economy for small and medium enterprises: Case study on the Indian state of Tamil Nadu," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 997-1015.
    18. Giulia Costa & Alessio Lieto & Francesco Lombardi, 2019. "LCA of a Consortium-Based MSW Management System to Quantify the Decrease in Environmental Impacts Achieved for Increasing Separate Collection Rates and Other Modifications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-20, May.
    19. Ewa Mazur-Wierzbicka, 2021. "Towards Circular Economy—A Comparative Analysis of the Countries of the European Union," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-25, May.
    20. Mendoza, Leidy Milena Nieves & Cely, William Alonso Morales, 2022. "Una mirada a la brecha entre actitud y comportamiento del consumidor en la economía circular," Revista Tendencias, Universidad de Narino, vol. 23(1), pages 372-394, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:7:y:2018:i:4:p:85-:d:189339. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.