IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/recore/v57y2011icp87-97.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Boundaries matter: Greenhouse gas emission reductions from alternative waste treatment strategies for California's municipal solid waste

Author

Listed:
  • Vergara, Sintana E.
  • Damgaard, Anders
  • Horvath, Arpad

Abstract

How waste is managed – whether as a nuisance to be disposed of, or as a resource to be reused – directly affects local and global environmental quality. This analysis explores the GHG benefits of five treatment options for residual municipal solid waste (MSW) in California: Business As Usual (landfilling), Anaerobic Digestion, Incineration, 40% Reduction, and MaxEnergy (both incineration and anaerobic digestion). Because recycling efforts in California are already strong, this analysis focuses on non-recyclables and asks what else can be done with the material fractions that are currently reaching landfills. Using two different waste LCA models, EASEWASTE (a Danish model) and WARM (a U.S. model), we find that improved biogenic waste management through anaerobic digestion and waste reduction can lead to life-cycle GHG savings when compared to Business As Usual. The magnitude of the benefits depends strongly on a number of model assumptions: the type of electricity displaced by waste-derived energy, how biogenic carbon is counted as a contributor to atmospheric carbon stocks, and the landfill gas collection rate. Assuming that natural gas is displaced by waste-derived energy, that 64% of landfill gas is collected, and that our system boundary begins when waste is thrown away and ends with disposal or conversion to air emissions, reducing California's residual waste by 40% can lead to a savings of 6Mt (million metric tonnes) of CO2-e per year, and digesting California's biogenic waste could save 0.6Mt CO2-e per year. Source reduction is the most robust means to mitigate GHG emissions from waste, though either increasing landfill gas capture rates within the current management plan or digesting biogenic waste (and designing landfills to maximize carbon sequestration) provide two other important means for greenhouse gas mitigation from waste management.

Suggested Citation

  • Vergara, Sintana E. & Damgaard, Anders & Horvath, Arpad, 2011. "Boundaries matter: Greenhouse gas emission reductions from alternative waste treatment strategies for California's municipal solid waste," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 87-97.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:recore:v:57:y:2011:i:c:p:87-97
    DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2011.09.011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344911001820
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.resconrec.2011.09.011?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Themelis, Nickolas J. & Ulloa, Priscilla A., 2007. "Methane generation in landfills," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1243-1257.
    2. Brent A. Gloy & Jonathan B. Dressler, 2010. "Financial barriers to the adoption of anaerobic digestion on US livestock operations," Agricultural Finance Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 70(2), pages 157-168, August.
    3. Michael Hanemann, 2008. "California's New Greenhouse Gas Laws," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(1), pages 114-129, Winter.
    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. Diyamandoglu, Vasil & Fortuna, Lorena M., 2015. "Deconstruction of wood-framed houses: Material recovery and environmental impact," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 21-30.

    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. Matthew J. Holian & Matthew E. Kahn, 2014. "Household Demand for Low Carbon Public Policies: Evidence from California," NBER Working Papers 19965, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Diyamandoglu, Vasil & Fortuna, Lorena M., 2015. "Deconstruction of wood-framed houses: Material recovery and environmental impact," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 21-30.
    3. Reijnders, L., 2009. "Are forestation, bio-char and landfilled biomass adequate offsets for the climate effects of burning fossil fuels?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 2839-2841, August.
    4. Hao, Xiaoli & Yang, Hongxing & Zhang, Guoqiang, 2008. "Trigeneration: A new way for landfill gas utilization and its feasibility in Hong Kong," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 3662-3673, October.
    5. Ogunjuyigbe, A.S.O. & Ayodele, T.R. & Alao, M.A., 2017. "Electricity generation from municipal solid waste in some selected cities of Nigeria: An assessment of feasibility, potential and technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 149-162.
    6. Agostinho, Feni & Almeida, Cecília M.V.B. & Bonilla, Silvia H. & Sacomano, José B. & Giannetti, Biagio F., 2013. "Urban solid waste plant treatment in Brazil: Is there a net emergy yield on the recovered materials?," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 143-155.
    7. Edwards, Joel & Othman, Maazuza & Burn, Stewart, 2015. "A review of policy drivers and barriers for the use of anaerobic digestion in Europe, the United States and Australia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 815-828.
    8. Uddin, Md Mosleh & Simson, Amanda & Wright, Mark Mba, 2020. "Techno-economic and greenhouse gas emission analysis of dimethyl ether production via the bi-reforming pathway for transportation fuel," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    9. Gómez, Antonio & Zubizarreta, Javier & Rodrigues, Marcos & Dopazo, César & Fueyo, Norberto, 2010. "Potential and cost of electricity generation from human and animal waste in Spain," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 498-505.
    10. Scarlat, N. & Motola, V. & Dallemand, J.F. & Monforti-Ferrario, F. & Mofor, Linus, 2015. "Evaluation of energy potential of Municipal Solid Waste from African urban areas," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 1269-1286.
    11. El Hanandeh, Ali & El Zein, Abbas, 2011. "Are the aims of increasing the share of green electricity generation and reducing GHG emissions always compatible?," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(11), pages 3031-3036.
    12. Halder, P.K. & Paul, N. & Joardder, M.U.H. & Khan, M.Z.H. & Sarker, M., 2016. "Feasibility analysis of implementing anaerobic digestion as a potential energy source in Bangladesh," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 124-134.
    13. Luigi Ranieri & Giorgio Mossa & Roberta Pellegrino & Salvatore Digiesi, 2018. "Energy Recovery from the Organic Fraction of Municipal Solid Waste: A Real Options-Based Facility Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-15, January.
    14. Ayodele, T.R. & Ogunjuyigbe, A.S.O. & Alao, M.A., 2017. "Life cycle assessment of waste-to-energy (WtE) technologies for electricity generation using municipal solid waste in Nigeria," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 201(C), pages 200-218.
    15. Mastrandrea, Michael D. & Inman, Mason & Cullenward, Danny, 2020. "Assessing California's progress toward its 2020 greenhouse gas emissions limit," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    16. Lino, F.A.M. & Ismail, K.A.R., 2013. "Alternative treatments for the municipal solid waste and domestic sewage in Campinas, Brazil," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 24-30.
    17. Małgorzata Wilk & Marcin Gajek & Maciej Śliz & Klaudia Czerwińska & Lidia Lombardi, 2022. "Hydrothermal Carbonization Process of Digestate from Sewage Sludge: Chemical and Physical Properties of Hydrochar in Terms of Energy Application," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-17, September.
    18. Sunil Prasad Lohani & Martina Keitsch & Siddhartha Shakya & David Fulford, 2021. "Waste to energy in Kathmandu Nepal—A way toward achieving sustainable development goals," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(5), pages 906-914, September.
    19. T. Chen & M. Liu & Y. Takahashi & J.D. Mullen & G.C.W. Ames, 2016. "Carbon emission reduction and cost--benefit of methane digester systems on hog farms in China," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(6), pages 948-966, June.
    20. Mindaugas Staniunas & Marija Burinskiene & Vida Maliene, 2012. "Ecology in Urban Planning: Mitigating the Environmental Damage of Municipal Solid Waste," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(9), pages 1-18, August.

    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:eee:recore:v:57:y:2011:i:c:p:87-97. 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: Kai Meng (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/resources-conservation-and-recycling .

    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.