Hybrid life-cycle assessment (LCA) of CO2 emission with management alternatives for household food wastes in Japan

Abstract

In this study, we conducted a hybrid life-cycle assessment (LCA) to evaluate reductions in CO(2) emissions by food waste biogasification of household food wastes in Japan. Two alternative scenarios were examined. In one alternative (Ref), all combustible municipal solid wastes (MSWs), including food waste, are incinerated. In the other (Bio), food waste is biogasified, while the other combustible wastes are incinerated. An inventory analysis of energy and material flow in the MSW management system was conducted. Subsequently, the inventory data were summarized into an input-output format, and a make-use input-output framework was applied. Furthermore, a production equilibrium model was established using a matrix representing the input- output relationship of energy and materials among the processes and sectors. Several levels of power generation efficiency from incineration were applied as a sensitivity analysis. The hybrid LCA indicated that the difference between the Bio and Ref scenarios, from the perspective of CO( 2) emissions, is relatively small. However, a 13-14% reduction of CO(2) emissions of the total waste management sector in Japan may be achieved by improving the efficiency of power generation from incineration from 10% to 25%.

Life-cycle greenhouse gas inventory analysis of household waste management and food waste reduction activities in Kyoto, Japan

“…Eriksson et al (2005) compared the environmental impacts of several waste management scenarios using ORWARE and concluded that anaerobic digestion reduces more GHG emissions than other treatment methods such as incineration and controlled landfilling. These findings are consistent with the results of other studies (European Commission 2010;Fukushima et al 2008;Sakai et al 2005;Inaba et al 2010).…”

“…Eriksson et al (2005) demonstrated that the GHG emissions from the incineration of municipal solid waste were 855 kg CO 2 -eq/t waste, while those from anaerobic digestion were 793 kg CO 2 -eq/t waste. Inaba et al (2010) reported that 331 kg CO 2 -eq/t waste were emitted in the incineration scenario, while 325 kg CO 2 -eq/t waste were 0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8% 9% 10% Net GHG(Gg CO 2 eq/yr) Household waste reduction rate(%)…”

“…In Japan, 220 out of 1800 Japanese local governments implement separate collection of household food waste, although incineration is still a common practice for food waste disposal (MOE, Japan 2008). Several studies have included life-cycle assessment and cost-benefit analysis of biodegradable waste recycling schemes (Eriksson et al 2005;European Commission 2010;Fukushima et al 2008;Sonesson et al 2000;Sakai et al 2005;Inaba et al 2010). Sonesson et al (2000) developed the ORWARE software to evaluate the environmental burdens associated with waste treatment processes such as incineration, composting, and anaerobic digestion.…”

A multi-criteria sustainability assessment framework: development and application in comparing two food waste management options using a UK region as a case study

“…Although a number of alternatives such as, incineration (Inaba et al 2010;Khoo et al 2010), composting (Cerda et al 2018;Li et al 2013), and anaerobic digestion (Andreottola et al 2012;Capson-Tojo et al 2016;Ragazzi et al 2017), are currently available for the treatment of food waste; incineration and composting are considered to be the least desirable from a sustainability perspective (Paritosh et al 2017) as the high moisture content and variability in the type and amount of municipal food waste arisings can be a hindrance to its successful and efficient performance (Iacovidou et al 2012b). Anaerobic digestion, despite its prominent place in policy making as a sustainable energy alternative, is considered to be a challenging option, too largely because of the variability of food waste.…”

Potential of energy and nutrient recovery from biodegradable waste by co-treatment in Lithuania

“…The unburned methane from biogas combustion caused the emission of 8.2 kg CO2,eq GJ -1 biogas. The GHG emissions from the collection and transportation were excluded because they do not produce much GHG emissions compared to GHG reductions by replacing fossil energy (Møller et al 2009, Inaba et al 2010, Zhao et al 2009 …”