A Review on the Challenges and Choices for Food Waste Valorization: Environmental and Economic Impacts

Abstract

Valorization of food waste (FW) is instrumental for reducing the environmental and economic burden of FW and transitioning to a circular economy. The FW valorization process has widely been studied to produce various end-use products and summarize them; however, their economic, environmental, and social aspects are limited. This study synthesizes some of the valorization methods used for FW management and produces value-added products for various applications, and also discusses the technological advances and their environmental, economic, and social aspects. Globally, 1.3 billion tonnes of edible food is lost or wasted each year, during which about 3.3 billion tonnes of greenhouse gas is emitted. The environmental (−347 to 2969 kg CO2 equiv/tonne FW) and economic (−100 to $138/tonne FW) impacts of FW depend on the multiple parameters of food chains and waste management systems. Although enormous efforts are underway to reduce FW as well as valorize unavoidable FW to reduce environmental and economic loss, it seems the transdisciplinary approach/initiative would be essential to minimize FW as well as abate the environmental impacts of FW. A joint effort from stakeholders is the key to reducing FW and the efficient and effective valorization of FW to improve its sustainability. However, any initiative in reducing food waste should consider a broader sustainability check to avoid risks to investment and the environment.

Integrating Arid Areas in the Global Bioeconomy: Opportunities and Challenges toward Sustainable Biomass Generation and Management

“…An innovation-driven bioeconomy in MENA countries can also help to create jobs to the youth entering the job market, achieve Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), and progress toward the Agenda 2063 by the African Union. Food-associated coproducts postimport can also contribute to the rising bioeconomy and integrate the positive feedback loops suggested prior by acting as a feedstock for the emerging biomass generation strategies and toward advanced bioproducts through nearly all streams highlighted in Table . − The valorization of food coproducts has been largely explored thus far and offers clear upcycling opportunities …”

Management Food Waste in Municipality Schools: An Analysis from a Circular Economy Perspective

“…As such, communication is needed, not only for policymakers, but also for other stakeholders, such as schools, business and NGOs who are looking to implement new educational campaigns regarding food waste, providing consumers with a realistic perception of the problem. There is a trend towards upstream actions and policies to prevent food waste [47] and, in this context, it is evident what they indicate [46] that collaboration between the government, private sector, researchers and educational institutions is fundamental to promoting adherence to circularity aimed at waste management, in a multidisciplinary perspective [47], with joint efforts of entities [48]. Furthermore, this is in line with the statements of [26], who mention that the lack of information, misinformation and disbelief about food waste and waste recovery are among the main factors preventing supply chain constituents from connecting with each other to save edible food from landfills.…”

A Review of Natural Polysaccharides-Based Flocculants Derived from Waste: Application Efficiency, Function Mechanism, and Development Prospects

“…Taking a WWTP in the state of Nevada in the United States, as an example, the energy consumption generated by the industrial water treatment process is shown in Table S4 in the Supporting Information. 137,139 Various types of urban waste can be recycled through recycling channels, resulting in 173 million tons or more of materials being reused annually. Organic wastes accounts for 32%−56% of urban wastes at different income levels, and reasonable utilization can save 51 kg of raw materials, 219 kW•h of electricity, 48 kg of CO 2 emissions, 38 L of water, and $60 for one person.…”

“…Traditional coagulants contribute ∼35% of carbon emissions in wastewater treatment processes, while the use of WPs as flocculants/flocculant aids can significantly reduce the demand for reagents and sludge volume, which directly decreases the carbon emissions in the water treatment process. Taking a WWTP in the state of Nevada in the United States, as an example, the energy consumption generated by the industrial water treatment process is shown in Table S4 in the Supporting Information. , Various types of urban waste can be recycled through recycling channels, resulting in 173 million tons or more of materials being reused annually. Organic wastes accounts for 32%–56% of urban wastes at different income levels, and reasonable utilization can save 51 kg of raw materials, 219 kW·h of electricity, 48 kg of CO 2 emissions, 38 L of water, and $60 for one person. , In addition, some secondary waste (residue after polysaccharide extraction) with high water content and low calorific value (such as plant leaves, fruit and vegetable residues) can also be used as high value-added raw materials for biomass refining, animal feed, and soil composting. , …”