Models for waste life cycle assessment: Review of technical assumptions |
| |
| Authors: | Emmanuel C Gentil Anders Damgaard Michael Hauschild Göran Finnveden Ola Eriksson Susan Thorneloe Pervin Ozge Kaplan Morton Barlaz Olivier Muller Yasuhiro Matsui Ryota Ii Thomas H Christensen |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Department of Environmental Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, DK-2800 Kongens Lyngby, Denmark;2. DTU Management, Innovation and Sustainability Group, Technical University of Denmark, DK-2800 Kongens Lyngby, Denmark;3. Environmental Strategies Research – fms, Royal Institute of Technology, (KTH) 100 44 Stockholm, Sweden;4. Department of Technology and Built Environment, University of Gävle, S-801 76 Gävle, Sweden;5. US EPA, Office of Research and Development, National Risk Management Research Laboratory, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park NC 27711, USA;6. Department of Civil, Construction, and Environmental Engineering, NC State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7908, USA;7. PricewaterhouseCoopers, 63, rue de Villiers, 92208 Neuilly-sur-Seine, France;8. Graduate School of Environmental Science, Okayama University, Okayama, Japan;9. Pacific Consultants Co. Ltd., 1-7-5, Sekito, Tama-shi, Tokyo, Japan;1. Center for Industrial Ecology, Department of Chemical Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China;2. School of Agriculture and Food, Faculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, 3010, Australia;3. Baiyunshan Pharmaceutical Factory, Guangzhou Baiyunshan Pharmaceutical Holdings Co., Guangzhou, 510515, China;1. Department of Sciences and Technologies, Parthenope University of Naples, Italy;2. School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, China;1. Federal University of Minas Gerais, School of Engineering, Department of Sanitary and Environmental Engineering, Bloco 2, Sala 4628, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627, Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais CEP 31270-901, Brazil;2. Federal University of Viçosa, Rodovia MG-230, Km 7, Rio Paranaíba, Minas Gerais CEP: 38810-000, Brazil;1. Aveny GmbH, Schwandenholzstr. 212, CH-8046 Zürich, Switzerland;2. ETH Zurich, Institute of Environmental Engineering, Schafmattstrasse 6, CH-8093 Zurich, Switzerland;3. Swiss Post, Communications, Politics and Social Responsibility, Viktoriastrasse 21, P.O. Box, CH-3030 Berne, Switzerland;4. City of Zürich, ERZ Entsorgung + Recycling Zürich, Hagenholzstrasse 110, P.O. Box, CH-8050 Zürich, Switzerland |
| |
| Abstract: | A number of waste life cycle assessment (LCA) models have been gradually developed since the early 1990s, in a number of countries, usually independently from each other. Large discrepancies in results have been observed among different waste LCA models, although it has also been shown that results from different LCA studies can be consistent. This paper is an attempt to identify, review and analyse methodologies and technical assumptions used in various parts of selected waste LCA models. Several criteria were identified, which could have significant impacts on the results, such as the functional unit, system boundaries, waste composition and energy modelling. The modelling assumptions of waste management processes, ranging from collection, transportation, intermediate facilities, recycling, thermal treatment, biological treatment, and landfilling, are obviously critical when comparing waste LCA models.This review infers that some of the differences in waste LCA models are inherent to the time they were developed. It is expected that models developed later, benefit from past modelling assumptions and knowledge and issues. Models developed in different countries furthermore rely on geographic specificities that have an impact on the results of waste LCA models. The review concludes that more effort should be employed to harmonise and validate non-geographic assumptions to strengthen waste LCA modelling. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
