IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i9p5277-d803565.html

The Potential of the Co-Recycling of Secondary Biodegradable Household Resources Including Wild Plants to Close Nutrient and Carbon Cycles in Agriculture in Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Veronika Fendel

    (Institute of Sanitary Engineering, Water Quality and Solid Waste Management, University of Stuttgart, Bandtäle 2, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany)

  • Claudia Maurer

    (Institute of Sanitary Engineering, Water Quality and Solid Waste Management, University of Stuttgart, Bandtäle 2, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany)

  • Martin Kranert

    (Institute of Sanitary Engineering, Water Quality and Solid Waste Management, University of Stuttgart, Bandtäle 2, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany)

  • Jingjing Huang

    (Institute of Sanitary Engineering, Water Quality and Solid Waste Management, University of Stuttgart, Bandtäle 2, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany)

  • Benjamin Schäffner

    (Institute of Sanitary Engineering, Water Quality and Solid Waste Management, University of Stuttgart, Bandtäle 2, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany)

Abstract

The aim of this study is to evaluate the potential for conserving natural resources (fossil resources, mineral fertilizer, fertile soil and biodiversity) with alternative circular concepts in order to contribute to the achievement of global sustainability goals. This study examines the potential contribution of substituting conventional products for three alternative circular economy concepts. This includes the household resources black water, kitchen and green waste for the production of design fertilizer, plant charcoal, biopolymers (concept 1) and biogas (concept 2), as well as the combination of household kitchen waste with wild plants for the production of biogas (concept 3). For evaluation, literature values were combined with analyzed parameters of input streams and biogas tests. The production and consumption values determined all relate to the functional unit of a person and year in Germany. Concept 1 has the highest potential for substitution in terms of the amount of recycled products. Co-recycling of organic household waste can account for 20% of NPK (nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium) mineral fertilizer, 19% of plastic consumption and 11% as a soil improving measure in soils in agriculture that are at risk of degradation. Concept 2 has the potential to contribute 12% of the final energy consumption in private households, which is an alternative solution regarding energy recovery due to the extensive practical experience. The joint recycling generates 141 kWh without, and 174 kWh with, fermentable green waste. If 75%, by weight, of fresh wild plants are added to the kitchen waste in concept 3, a wild plant area of 5 m 2 is required, which could replace 41% of the biogas corn area, which is concept 3. This mix generates 193 kWh with the potential to reach 78% of corn energy production. The share of wild plants in kitchen waste of 50 or 25% by weight has the potential to achieve 115 or 104% of the corn energy yield, which is a promising concept for rural areas regarding energy recovery from an ecological point of view. The results show a considerable contribution potential of household resources in alternative cycle concepts to increase resource efficiency, and indirectly to diversify the agricultural landscape.

Suggested Citation

  • Veronika Fendel & Claudia Maurer & Martin Kranert & Jingjing Huang & Benjamin Schäffner, 2022. "The Potential of the Co-Recycling of Secondary Biodegradable Household Resources Including Wild Plants to Close Nutrient and Carbon Cycles in Agriculture in Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-18, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:5277-:d:803565
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/5277/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/5277/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Patrick Schroeder & Kartika Anggraeni & Uwe Weber, 2019. "The Relevance of Circular Economy Practices to the Sustainable Development Goals," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 23(1), pages 77-95, February.
    2. Tasnim, Farzana & Iqbal, Salma A. & Chowdhury, Aminur Rashid, 2017. "Biogas production from anaerobic co-digestion of cow manure with kitchen waste and Water Hyacinth," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 434-439.
    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. Pina Puntillo, 2023. "Circular economy business models: Towards achieving sustainable development goals in the waste management sector—Empirical evidence and theoretical implications," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(2), pages 941-954, March.
    2. Wei, Aiping & Zakari, Abdulrasheed & Tawiah, Vincent & Aleesa, Noha, 2024. "Cultivating resilient economies through responsible mineral resource trade: Does eco-resourcing rebate matter?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    3. Durán-Romero, Gemma & López, Ana M. & Beliaeva, Tatiana & Ferasso, Marcos & Garonne, Christophe & Jones, Paul, 2020. "Bridging the gap between circular economy and climate change mitigation policies through eco-innovations and Quintuple Helix Model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    4. Obianuju Patience Ilo & Mulala Danny Simatele & S’phumelele Lucky Nkomo & Ntandoyenkosi Malusi Mkhize & Nagendra Gopinath Prabhu, 2021. "Methodological Approaches to Optimising Anaerobic Digestion of Water Hyacinth for Energy Efficiency in South Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-17, June.
    5. Benedetta Cotta, 0. "What goes around, comes around? Access and allocation problems in Global North–South waste trade," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-15.
    6. Carmen Ruiz-Puente & Daniel Jato-Espino, 2020. "Systemic Analysis of the Contributions of Co-Located Industrial Symbiosis to Achieve Sustainable Development in an Industrial Park in Northern Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-28, July.
    7. Tobias Wulfert & Robert Woroch & Gero Strobel & Thorsten Schoormann & Leonardo Banh, 2024. "E-commerce ecosystems as catalysts for sustainability: A multi-case analysis," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 34(1), pages 1-21, December.
    8. Shogofa Rezaie & Fedra Vanhuyse, 2025. "Urban Circularity in Latin America and the Caribbean: A Comparative Case Study of Bogotá and Mexico City," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 5(7), pages 6275-6303, December.
    9. Chiara Civera & Gabriele Santoro & Valentina Chiaudano, 2025. "Do Not Stop the Loop: Driving Circular Textiles With Technology and Stakeholder Engagement," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(5), pages 5317-5335, July.
    10. Alisha Ralph & Akarsh Arora, 2024. "Mapping the literature on decent work: A bibliometric analysis of sustainable development goal 8," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(4), pages 3937-3952, August.
    11. Woon Leong Lin, 2026. "The Influence of Circular Economy on Firm Orientation Toward Sustainable Development Goals: The Moderating Role of Technological Innovation in the Automotive Industry," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(2), pages 1596-1621, April.
    12. Andrea Cecchin & Roberta Salomone & Pauline Deutz & Andrea Raggi & Laura Cutaia, 2021. "What Is in a Name? The Rising Star of the Circular Economy as a Resource-Related Concept for Sustainable Development," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 83-97, June.
    13. Chembessi Chedrak & Gohoungodji Paulin & Juste Rajaonson, 2023. "“A fine wine, better with age”: Circular economy historical roots and influential publications: A bibliometric analysis using Reference Publication Year Spectroscopy (RPYS)," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 27(6), pages 1593-1612, December.
    14. Le Thanh Ha, 2025. "Does Circularity Transformation Hinder Climate Risk? A New Insight from European Countries," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 2873-2899, August.
    15. Yasanur Kayikci & Yigit Kazancoglu & Nazlican Gozacan‐Chase & Cisem Lafci, 2022. "Analyzing the drivers of smart sustainable circular supply chain for sustainable development goals through stakeholder theory," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(7), pages 3335-3353, November.
    16. Pamučar, Dragan & Durán-Romero, Gemma & Yazdani, Morteza & López, Ana M., 2023. "A decision analysis model for smart mobility system development under circular economy approach," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    17. Gabi Försterling & Ronald Orth & Benjamin Gellert, 2023. "Transition to a Circular Economy in Europe through New Business Models: Barriers, Drivers, and Policy Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-40, May.
    18. Mahwish Rani & Fong Woon Lai & Muhammad Kashif Shad & Ahmad Ali Jan & Tanweer Hussain, 2025. "Mapping the Research Landscape of Circular Economy towards Sustainable Development Goals: A Bibliometric and Content Analysis," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 16(6), pages 18950-18989, December.
    19. Jawaher Binsuwadan & Ghadda Yousif & Hiyam Abdulrahim & Hind Alofaysan, 2023. "The Role of the Circular Economy in Fostering Sustainable Economic Growth in the GCC," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-17, November.
    20. Mónica Duque-Acevedo & Luis Jesús Belmonte-Ureña & Natalia Yakovleva & Francisco Camacho-Ferre, 2020. "Analysis of the Circular Economic Production Models and Their Approach in Agriculture and Agricultural Waste Biomass Management," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-32, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:5277-:d:803565. 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.