Selecting transfer station locations for large solid waste systems

Kirca, Ömer; Erkip, Nesim

doi:10.1016/0377-2217(88)90224-x

Cited by 95 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Processing cost for silicon-based modules (S1eS2), based on a bench scale process described by Frisson et al (2000), include utilities, consumables, waste treatment, and labor. We assume a large commercial recovery facility will be able to improve costs over bench scale by 70% based on energy technology learning research (Kirca and Erkip, 1988;Kobos et al, 2006). In addition to the process specific equipment, we assume a forklift and conveyor belts are required for transporting materials throughout the plant.…”

Section: Recovery Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other work has integrated key stakeholders in MSW management such as Hokkanen and Salminen (1997) (Bah and Tsiko, 2011;Hokkanen and Salminen, 1997;Kontos et al, 2003) developed a method for optimization irrespective of the number of decision makers and given imprecise data. Several works demonstrate the advantage of dynamic models for policy analysis for example Kirca and Erkip (1988) (Kirca and Erkip, 1988;Siddiqui et al, 1996) interprets a dynamic problem as static using a multi-period model and Hu et al (2002) (Hu et al, 2002;Sharifi et al, 2009) explores sensitivity to waste treatment requirements. These models lack the nuances of real-life MSW systems in that they do not link facility technology with material recovery rate nor explicitly integrate geographic information in decision-making beyond transport distances.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

System tradeoffs in siting a solar photovoltaic material recovery infrastructure

Goe

Gaustad

Tomaszewski

2015

Journal of Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The consumption and disposal of rare and hazardous metals contained in electronics and emerging technologies such as photovoltaics increases the material complexity of the municipal waste stream. Developing effective waste policies and material recovery systems is required to inhibit landfilling of valuable and finite resources. This work developed a siting and waste infrastructure configuration model to inform the management and recovery of end-of-life photovoltaics. This model solves the siting and waste location-allocation problem for a New York State case study by combining multi-criteria decision methods with spatial tools, however this methodology is generalizable to any geographic area. For the case study, the results indicate that PV installations are spatially statistically significant (i.e., clustered). At least 9 sites, which are co-located with landfills and current MRFs, were 'highly' suitable for siting according to our criteria. After combining criteria in an average weighted sum, 86% of the study area was deemed unsuitable for siting while less than 5% is characterized as highly suitable. This method implicitly prioritized social and environmental concerns and therefore, these concerns accounted for the majority of siting decisions. As we increased the priority of economic criteria, the likelihood of siting near ecologically sensitive areas such as coastline or socially vulnerable areas such as urban centers increased. The sensitivity of infrastructure configurations to land use and waste policy are analyzed. The location allocation model results suggest current tip fees are insufficient to avoid landfilling of photovoltaics. Scenarios where tip fees were increased showed model results where facilities decide to adopt limited recycling technologies that bypass compositionally complex materials; a result with strong implications for global PV installations as well as other waste streams. We suggest a multi-pronged approach that lowers technology cost, imposes a minimum collection rate, and implements higher tip fees would encourage exhaustive material recovery for solar photovoltaic modules at end-of-life, beyond New York State. These results have important implications for policy makers and waste managers especially in locations where there is rapid adoption of renewable energy technologies.

show abstract

Section: Recovery Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

System tradeoffs in siting a solar photovoltaic material recovery infrastructure

Goe

Gaustad

Tomaszewski

2015

Journal of Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The addition of these facilities has become particularly important given increasing environmental ("green") concerns and the advancement of reverse waste logistics management concepts and practices (Das and Matthew 1999;Fleischmann et al 2001;Klaussner and Hendrickson 2000;Klaussner et al 1999). Several studies have assessed the ambient air quality at landfills and incineration sites (Abad et al 2006;Boudet et al 1999;Eickman 1993;Macleod et al 2006;Manca et al 1997;Meneses et al 2004;Ruokojarvi et al 1997;Wang et al 2003) as well as the economics of MSW TSs (Chang and Lin 1997; Kirca and Erkip 1988;Rahman and Kuby 1995;Tzipi et al 2007). However, very little research has examined the existing environmental quality of MSW CSs and TSs.…”

Section: Conclusion: Recommendations and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Ambient air monitoring of Beijing MSW logistics facilities in 2006

Luo

et al. 2007

Environ Monit Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In China, "green" integrated waste management methods are being implemented in response to environmental concerns. We measured the air quality at several municipal solid waste (MSW) sites to provide information for the incorporation of logistics facilities within the current integrated waste management system. We monitored ambient air quality at eight MSW collecting stations, five transfer stations, one composting plant, and five disposal sites in Beijing during April 2006. Composite air samples were collected and analyzed for levels of odor, ammonia (NH3), hydrogen sulfide (H2S), total suspended particles (TSPs), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). The results of our atmospheric monitoring demonstrated that although CO and SO2 were within acceptable emission levels according to ambient standards, levels of H2S, TSP, and NO2 in the ambient air at most MSW logistics facilities far exceeded ambient limits established for China. The primary pollutants in the ambient air at Beijing MSW logistics facilities were H2S, TSPs, NO2, and odor. To improve current environmental conditions at MSW logistics facilities, the Chinese government encourages the separation of biogenic waste from MSW at the source.

show abstract

“…These approaches include linear programming (Huang et al, 1992(Huang et al, , 1993Hsieh and Ho, 1993;Lund et al, 1994), mixed integer programming (Anderson, 1968;Mark et al, 1970;Fuertes et al, 1974;Helms and Clark, 1974;Walker et al, 1974;Kü hner and Harrington, 1975;Hasit and Warner, 1981;Jenkins, 1982;Gottinger, 1986;Kirca and Erkip, 1988;Zhu and ReVelle, 1990), non-linear programming , and dynamic programming (Baetz, 1990;Huang et al, 1994). Although the techniques of single-objective mathematical programming have long been used in analysing regional solid waste management issues, the inherent characteristics of environmental impacts, the rate of generation, the incorporation of recycling effects and the consideration of equity, generates additional complications that make the multi-objective and multipurpose modelling more attractive.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…In recent years, the financial, recycling, and environmental impacts in a municipal solid waste management system were formally integrated within either single-objective or multi-objective programming models (Perlack and Willis, 1985;Chang et al, 1993a, 1996c. In particular, Kirca and Erkip (1988), Highfill et al (1994), and Chang andLin (1996, 1997) discussed the recycling impact on waste generation and the siting issues of transfer stations or recycling centres from a short-term perspective to aid in an effective and efficient solid waste management program. However, the possible appraisal of economic impacts through a regionalization program (for solid waste management), in which the removal of administrative barriers is taken into account, has not yet been fully explored.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 98%