Waste Treatment and Assessment of Long-Term Emissions (8pp)

Doka, Gabor; Hischier, Roland

doi:10.1065/lca2004.12.181.9

Cited by 73 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results suggest that the selection of such a short time horizon would result in a significant proportion of emissions being unaccounted, which supports the findings of previous researchers (e.g. Doka and Hischier, 2004;Hauschild et al, 2008). If LCA is to be used to provide useful information on the long term impacts of landfilling then a time horizon of 100 years is insufficient.…”

Section: The Use Of Life Cycle Assessmentsupporting

confidence: 78%

Evaluating landfill aftercare strategies: A life cycle assessment approach

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This study investigates the potential impacts caused by the loss of active environmental control measures during the aftercare period of landfill management. A combined mechanistic solute flow model and life cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used to evaluate the potential impacts of leachate emissions over a 10,000 year time horizon. A continuum of control loss possibilities occurring at different times and for different durations were investigated for four different basic aftercare scenarios, including a typical aftercare scenario involving a low permeability cap and three accelerated aftercare scenarios involving higher initial infiltration rates. Assuming a 'best case' where control is never lost, the largest potential impacts resulted from the typical aftercare scenario. The maximum difference between potential impacts from the 'best case' and the 'worst case', where control fails at the earliest possible point and is never reinstated, was only a fourfold increase. This highlights potential deficiencies in standard life cycle impact assessment practice, which are discussed. Nevertheless, the results show how the influence of active control loss on the potential impacts of landfilling varies considerably depending on the aftercare strategy used and highlight the importance that leachate treatment efficiencies have upon impacts.

show abstract

Section: The Use Of Life Cycle Assessmentsupporting

confidence: 78%

Evaluating landfill aftercare strategies: A life cycle assessment approach

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, waste treatment processes show a relatively high uncertainty for global warming and toxicity. This is caused by nonenergy related emissions, such as methane air emissions and longterm heavy metal leaching from land fills (38).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Cumulative Fossil Energy Demand a Useful Indicator for the Environmental Performance of Products?

Huijbregts

Rombouts

Hellweg

et al. 2005

Environ. Sci. Technol.

391

219

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The appropriateness of the fossil Cumulative Energy Demand (CED) as an indicator for the environmental performance of products and processes is explored with a regression analysis between the environmental life-cycle impacts and fossil CEDs of 1218 products, divided into the product categories "energy production", "material production", "transport", and "waste treatment". Our results show that, for all product groups but waste treatment, the fossil CED correlates well with most impact categories, such as global warming, resource depletion, acidification, eutrophication, tropospheric ozone formation, ozone depletion, and human toxicity (explained variance between 46% and 100%). We conclude that the use of fossil fuels is an important driver of several environmental impacts and thereby indicative for many environmental problems. It may therefore serve as a screening indicator for environmental performance. However, the usefulness of fossil CED as a stand-alone indicator for environmental impact is limited by the large uncertainty in the product-specific fossil CEDbased impact scores (larger than a factor of 10 for the majority of the impact categories; 95% confidence interval). A major reason for this high uncertainty is nonfossil energy related emissions and land use, such as landfill leachates, radionuclide emissions, and land use in agriculture and forestry.

show abstract

“…However, while it is well-recognised that the release of metals from ashes may potentially continue over many thousands of years (e.g. Astrup et al, 2006;Doka and Hischier, 2005), no consensus methodology has yet been found (Laner, 2009). Thus, in this study, long-term emissions (beyond the initial 100-year period) were excluded and the focus was placed on assessing the more immediate environmental consequences.…”

Section: Release Of Toxic Substances During Mswi Ba Utilisationmentioning

confidence: 99%