IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jresou/v9y2020i11p131-d440992.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment of Valuable and Critical Elements Recovery Potential in Ashes from Processes of Solid Municipal Waste and Sewage Sludge Thermal Treatment

Author

Listed:
  • Monika Kasina

    (Institute of Geological Sciences, Jagiellonian University, Gronostajowa 3a, 30-387 Kraków, Poland)

  • Piotr Rafał Kowalski

    (INŻ-GEO Sp. z o.o. Sp.k., Zatorska 46, 51-215 Wrocław, Poland)

  • Bartłomiej Kajdas

    (Centre for Environmental Education, Jagiellonian University, Gronostajowa 5, 30-387 Kraków, Poland)

  • Marek Michalik

    (Institute of Geological Sciences, Jagiellonian University, Gronostajowa 3a, 30-387 Kraków, Poland)

Abstract

Due to the increasing amount of produced and accumulated wastes, a potential source of elements might be the global waste stream coming from the waste incineration process. As a result of this process, bottom ash, fly ash and air pollution control residues are produced. The goal of this study was to evaluate the raw material potential of the anthropogenic materials which are fly ashes from municipal waste incineration and municipal sewage sludge incineration, and the possibility for the recovery of metallic or other economically valuable elements by comparison of their chemical composition with the chemical composition of Earth materials (ultramafic, mafic and felsic igneous rocks, various sedimentary rocks), and with their lowest content in currently exploited ores. Fly ashes contain more valuable and critical elements when compared to Earth materials; however, they are less concentrated in comparison to the content in currently exploited ores. Since natural resources are becoming depleted, the costs of exploitation, mineral processing and related operations are increasing and the fly ashes are easily accessible. Cheap materials do not demand complicated treatment which might be considered as a future source of P, Zn, Sn, Cr, Pb, Au and Ag, and thus fulfilling the assumptions of close-loop economy and to maximize natural resources protection.

Suggested Citation

  • Monika Kasina & Piotr Rafał Kowalski & Bartłomiej Kajdas & Marek Michalik, 2020. "Assessment of Valuable and Critical Elements Recovery Potential in Ashes from Processes of Solid Municipal Waste and Sewage Sludge Thermal Treatment," Resources, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-20, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:9:y:2020:i:11:p:131-:d:440992
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/9/11/131/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/9/11/131/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Glöser, Simon & Tercero Espinoza, Luis & Gandenberger, Carsten & Faulstich, Martin, 2015. "Raw material criticality in the context of classical risk assessment," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 35-46.
    2. Helbig, Christoph & Wietschel, Lars & Thorenz, Andrea & Tuma, Axel, 2016. "How to evaluate raw material vulnerability - An overview," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 13-24.
    3. Paul H. Brunner, 2011. "Urban Mining A Contribution to Reindustrializing the City," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 15(3), pages 339-341, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Masoudi, S.M. & Ezzati, E. & Rashidnejad-Omran, N. & Moradzadeh, Ali, 2017. "Geoeconomics of fluorspar as strategic and critical mineral in Iran," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 100-106.
    2. Marie K. Schellens & Johanna Gisladottir, 2018. "Critical Natural Resources: Challenging the Current Discourse and Proposal for a Holistic Definition," Resources, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-28, December.
    3. Bach, Vanessa & Finogenova, Natalia & Berger, Markus & Winter, Lisa & Finkbeiner, Matthias, 2017. "Enhancing the assessment of critical resource use at the country level with the SCARCE method – Case study of Germany," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 283-299.
    4. Jasiński, Dominik & Cinelli, Marco & Dias, Luis C. & Meredith, James & Kirwan, Kerry, 2018. "Assessing supply risks for non-fossil mineral resources via multi-criteria decision analysis," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 150-158.
    5. Pell, Robert S. & Wall, Frances & Yan, Xiaoyu & Bailey, Gwendolyn, 2019. "Applying and advancing the economic resource scarcity potential (ESP) method for rare earth elements," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 472-481.
    6. Yu, Shiwei & Duan, Haoran & Cheng, Jinhua, 2021. "An evaluation of the supply risk for China's strategic metallic mineral resources," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    7. Hatayama, Hiroki & Tahara, Kiyotaka, 2018. "Adopting an objective approach to criticality assessment: Learning from the past," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 96-102.
    8. Kim, Juhan & Lee, Jungbae & Kim, BumChoong & Kim, Jinsoo, 2019. "Raw material criticality assessment with weighted indicators: An application of fuzzy analytic hierarchy process," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 225-233.
    9. Aiman Fadil & Paul Davis & John Geraghty, 2023. "A Mixed-Method Approach to Determine the Successful Factors Affecting the Criticality Level of Intermediate and Final Products on National Basis: A Case Study from Saudi Arabia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-29, March.
    10. Simon Glöser-Chahoud & Luis Tercero Espinoza & Rainer Walz & Martin Faulstich, 2016. "Taking the Step towards a More Dynamic View on Raw Material Criticality: An Indicator Based Analysis for Germany and Japan," Resources, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-16, December.
    11. Helbig, Christoph & Bradshaw, Alex M. & Kolotzek, Christoph & Thorenz, Andrea & Tuma, Axel, 2016. "Supply risks associated with CdTe and CIGS thin-film photovoltaics," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 422-433.
    12. Hayes, Sarah M. & McCullough, Erin A., 2018. "Critical minerals: A review of elemental trends in comprehensive criticality studies," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 192-199.
    13. Keisuke Nansai & Kenichi Nakajima & Sangwon Suh & Shigemi Kagawa & Yasushi Kondo & Wataru Takayanagi & Yosuke Shigetomi, 2017. "The role of primary processing in the supply risks of critical metals," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(3), pages 335-356, July.
    14. Luca Ciacci & Philip Nuss & Barbara K. Reck & T. T. Werner & T. E. Graedel, 2016. "Metal Criticality Determination for Australia, the US, and the Planet—Comparing 2008 and 2012 Results," Resources, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-8, September.
    15. Clement Bonnet & Samuel Carcanague & Emmanuel Hache & Gondia Seck & Marine Simoën, 2019. "Vers une Géopolitique de l'énergie plus complexe ? Une analyse prospective tridimensionnelle de la transition énergétique," Working Papers hal-02971706, HAL.
    16. Wu, Yufeng & Yin, Xiaofei & Zhang, Qijun & Wang, Wei & Mu, Xianzhong, 2014. "The recycling of rare earths from waste tricolor phosphors in fluorescent lamps: A review of processes and technologies," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 21-31.
    17. Stephan, André & Stephan, Laurent, 2020. "Achieving net zero life cycle primary energy and greenhouse gas emissions apartment buildings in a Mediterranean climate," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 280(C).
    18. Arendt, Rosalie & Muhl, Marco & Bach, Vanessa & Finkbeiner, Matthias, 2020. "Criticality assessment of abiotic resource use for Europe– application of the SCARCE method," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    19. Rabe, Wiebke & Kostka, Genia & Smith Stegen, Karen, 2017. "China's supply of critical raw materials: Risks for Europe's solar and wind industries?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 692-699.
    20. He, Rui-fang & Zhong, Mei-rui & Huang, Jian-bai, 2021. "The dynamic effects of renewable-energy and fossil-fuel technological progress on metal consumption in the electric power industry," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).

    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:9:y:2020:i:11:p:131-:d:440992. 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.