IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2022i1p90-d1010307.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Life Cycle Assessment of Integrated Municipal Organic Waste Management Systems in Thailand

Author

Listed:
  • Maneechotiros Rotthong

    (Graduate Program in Environmental and Water Resources Engineering, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Mahidol University, Nakhon Pathom 73170, Thailand)

  • Masaki Takaoka

    (Department of Environmental Engineering, Graduate School of Engineering, Kyoto University, Kyoto 615-8540, Japan)

  • Kazuyuki Oshita

    (Department of Environmental Engineering, Graduate School of Engineering, Kyoto University, Kyoto 615-8540, Japan)

  • Pichaya Rachdawong

    (Department of Environmental Engineering, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 10330, Thailand)

  • Shabbir H. Gheewala

    (The Joint Graduate School of Energy and Environment (JGSEE), King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, Bangkok 10140, Thailand
    Centre of Excellence on Energy Technology and Environment, Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation, Bangkok 10400, Thailand)

  • Trakarn Prapaspongsa

    (Graduate Program in Environmental and Water Resources Engineering, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Mahidol University, Nakhon Pathom 73170, Thailand)

Abstract

The majority of municipal solid waste in Thailand is organic waste including food and garden waste. Improper waste management has caused negative impacts on the environment. This study aimed to find a hypothetical municipal organic waste management scenario with the lowest environmental impacts using life cycle assessment (LCA). The system boundary of organic waste management includes collection and transportation; treatment, including centralized and on-site treatment technologies; and by-product utilization. The two main waste management systems considered in this study were centralized and on-site waste management systems. The first two scenarios take into account all the amount of the municipal organic waste collected and transported and then treated by centralized waste treatment technologies (composting, anaerobic digestion, and landfill). The remaining three scenarios are integrated between 10% on-site (home composting, food waste processor, and composting bin) and 90% centralized (composting, anaerobic digestion, and incineration) waste treatment technologies; the scenario combining centralized (food waste anaerobic digestion, garden waste composting, and incineration) and on-site (home composting) systems yielded the lowest environmental impacts (except short-term climate change, freshwater, and marine eutrophication). On-site systems can help reduce collection, transportation, and treatment impacts, particularly photochemical oxidant formation, which was proportional to the amount of waste or distance reduced. Benefits from the by-product utilization can offset all impacts in terms of fossil and nuclear energy use and freshwater acidification, and result in a negative impact score or impact reduction. This research can be used as guidance for developing countries with conditions and waste composition similar to Thailand for making initial decisions on environmentally sustainable municipal organic waste management.

Suggested Citation

  • Maneechotiros Rotthong & Masaki Takaoka & Kazuyuki Oshita & Pichaya Rachdawong & Shabbir H. Gheewala & Trakarn Prapaspongsa, 2022. "Life Cycle Assessment of Integrated Municipal Organic Waste Management Systems in Thailand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-31, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2022:i:1:p:90-:d:1010307
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/90/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/90/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zaid M. Aldhafeeri & Hatem Alhazmi, 2022. "Sustainability Assessment of Municipal Solid Waste in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, in the Framework of Circular Economy Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-18, April.
    2. Giovanni Mondello & Roberta Salomone & Giuseppe Ioppolo & Giuseppe Saija & Sergio Sparacia & Maria Claudia Lucchetti, 2017. "Comparative LCA of Alternative Scenarios for Waste Treatment: The Case of Food Waste Production by the Mass-Retail Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-18, May.
    3. Tian, Hailin & Wang, Xiaonan & Lim, Ee Yang & Lee, Jonathan T.E. & Ee, Alvin W.L. & Zhang, Jingxin & Tong, Yen Wah, 2021. "Life cycle assessment of food waste to energy and resources: Centralized and decentralized anaerobic digestion with different downstream biogas utilization," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    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. Abdulmajeed Almadhi & Abdelhakim Abdelhadi & Rakan Alyamani, 2023. "Moving from Linear to Circular Economy in Saudi Arabia: Life-Cycle Assessment on Plastic Waste Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-22, July.
    2. Zhou, Hewen & Yang, Qing & Gul, Eid & Shi, Mengmeng & Li, Jiashuo & Yang, Minjiao & Yang, Haiping & Chen, Bin & Zhao, Haibo & Yan, Yunjun & Erdoğan, Güneş & Bartocci, Pietro & Fantozzi, Francesco, 2021. "Decarbonizing university campuses through the production of biogas from food waste: An LCA analysis," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 565-578.
    3. Deng, Yawen & Ng Tsan Sheng, Adam & Xu, Jiuping, 2023. "Authority-enterprise equilibrium based mixed subsidy mechanism for the value-added treatment of food waste," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 282(C).
    4. Amina Mohamed Ali & Md Alam Zahangir & Fatouma Mohamed Abdoul-Latif & Mohammed Saedi Jami & Jalludin Mohamed & Tarik Ainane, 2023. "Hydrolysis of Food Waste with Immobilized Biofilm as a Pretreatment Method for the Enhancement of Biogas Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-17, February.
    5. Carlo Ingrao & Claudia Arcidiacono & Valentina Siracusa & Monia Niero & Marzia Traverso, 2021. "Life Cycle Sustainability Analysis of Resource Recovery from Waste Management Systems in a Circular Economy Perspective Key Findings from This Special Issue," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-9, April.
    6. Benedetta Esposito & Maria Rosaria Sessa & Daniela Sica & Ornella Malandrino, 2020. "Towards Circular Economy in the Agri-Food Sector. A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-21, September.
    7. Zakariya Kaneesamkandi & Abdul Sayeed, 2023. "Evaluation of Multi-Utility Models with Municipal Solid Waste Combustion as the Primary Source under Specific Geographical and Operating Conditions," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(15), pages 1-17, July.
    8. Katia Hueso-Kortekaas & José C. Romero & Raquel González-Felipe, 2021. "Energy-Environmental Impact Assessment of Greenhouse Grown Tomato: A Case Study in Almeria (Spain)," World, MDPI, vol. 2(3), pages 1-17, September.
    9. Balint Horvath & Edmund Mallinguh & Csaba Fogarassy, 2018. "Designing Business Solutions for Plastic Waste Management to Enhance Circular Transitions in Kenya," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-20, May.
    10. Roshni Paul & Alla Silkina & Lynsey Melville & Sri Suhartini & Michael Sulu, 2023. "Optimisation of Ultrasound Pretreatment of Microalgal Biomass for Effective Biogas Production through Anaerobic Digestion Process," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-13, January.
    11. David Fernández-Gutiérrez & Alejandra Argüelles & Gemma Castejón Martínez & José M. Soriano Disla & Andrés J. Lara-Guillén, 2022. "Unlocking New Value from Urban Biowaste: LCA of the VALUEWASTE Biobased Products," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-23, November.
    12. Jones, R.E. & Speight, R.E. & Blinco, J.L. & O'Hara, I.M., 2022. "Biorefining within food loss and waste frameworks: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    13. Tsui, To-Hung & Zhang, Le & Zhang, Jingxin & Dai, Yanjun & Tong, Yen Wah, 2022. "Engineering interface between bioenergy recovery and biogas desulfurization: Sustainability interplays of biochar application," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    14. Kofi Armah Boakye-Yiadom & Alessio Ilari & Daniele Duca, 2022. "Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Life Cycle Assessment on the Black Soldier Fly ( Hermetia illucens L.)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-29, August.
    15. Ombretta Paladino, 2022. "Data Driven Modelling and Control Strategies to Improve Biogas Quality and Production from High Solids Anaerobic Digestion: A Mini Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-21, December.
    16. Laís Fabiana Serafini & Manuel Feliciano & Manuel Angelo Rodrigues & Artur Gonçalves, 2023. "Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Use of LCA to Assess the Environmental Impacts of the Composting Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-33, January.
    17. Ziyao Fan & Huijuan Dong & Yong Geng & Minoru Fujii, 2023. "Life cycle cost–benefit efficiency of food waste treatment technologies in China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(6), pages 4935-4956, June.
    18. Izabela Samson-Bręk & Marlena Owczuk & Anna Matuszewska & Krzysztof Biernat, 2022. "Environmental Assessment of the Life Cycle of Electricity Generation from Biogas in Polish Conditions," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-22, August.
    19. Eftychia Ntostoglou & Dilip Khatiwada & Viktoria Martin, 2021. "The Potential Contribution of Decentralized Anaerobic Digestion towards Urban Biowaste Recovery Systems: A Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-21, December.
    20. Spyridoula Gerassimidou & Manoj Dora & Eleni Iacovidou, 2022. "A Tool for the Selection of Food Waste Management Approaches for the Hospitality and Food Service Sector in the UK," Resources, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-27, September.

    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:15:y:2022:i:1:p:90-:d:1010307. 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.