IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/inecol/v5y2001i3p49-63.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of Plastic Packaging Waste Management Options: Feedstock Recycling versus Energy Recovery in Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Volrad Wollny
  • Günter Dehoust
  • Uwe R. Fritsche
  • Peter Weinem

Abstract

Plastics recycling, especially as prescribed by the German Ordinance on Packaging Waste (Verpackungsverordnung), is a conspicuous example of closing material loops on a large scale. In Germany, an industry‐financed system (Duales System Deutschland) was established in 1991 to collect and recycle packaging waste from households. To cope with mixed plastics, various “feedstock‐recycling” processes were developed. We discuss the environmental benefits and the cost‐benefit ratio of the system relative to municipal solid waste (MSW) incineration, based on previously published life‐cycle assessment (LCA) studies. Included is a first‐time investigation of energy recovery in all German incinerators, the optimization opportunities, the impact on energy production and substitution processes, an estimation of the costs, and a cost‐benefit assessment. In an LCA, the total environmental impact of MSW incineration is mainly determined by the energy recovery ratio, which was found on average to reach 39% in current German incineration plants. Due to low revenues from additional energy generation, it is not cost‐effective to optimize the plants energetically. Energy from plastic incineration substitutes for a specific mixture of electric base‐load power, district heating, and process steam generation. Any additional energy from waste incineration will replace, in the long term, mainly natural gas, rather than coal. Incineration of plastic is compared with feedstock recycling methods in different scenarios. In all scenarios, the incineration of plastic leads to an increase of CO2 emissions compared to landfill, whereas feedstock recycling reduces CO2 emissions and saves energy resources. The costs of waste incineration are assumed to decrease by about 30% in the medium term. Today, the calculated costs of CO2 reduction in feedstock recycling are very high, but are ex‐pected to decline in the near future. Relative to incineration, the costs for conserving energy via feedstock recycling are 50% higher, but this gap will close in the near future if automatic sorting and processing are implemented in Germany.

Suggested Citation

  • Volrad Wollny & Günter Dehoust & Uwe R. Fritsche & Peter Weinem, 2001. "Comparison of Plastic Packaging Waste Management Options: Feedstock Recycling versus Energy Recovery in Germany," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 5(3), pages 49-63, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:5:y:2001:i:3:p:49-63
    DOI: 10.1162/108819801760049468
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1162/108819801760049468
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1162/108819801760049468?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ricardo Marques Sastre & Istefani Carísio de Paula & Marcia Elisa Soares Echeveste, 2022. "A Systematic Literature Review on Packaging Sustainability: Contents, Opportunities, and Guidelines," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-31, May.
    2. Alba Bala & Marco Raugei & Carlos Afonso Teixeira & Alberto Fernández & Francisco Pan-Montojo & Pere Fullana-i-Palmer, 2021. "Assessing the Environmental Performance of Municipal Solid Waste Collection: A New Predictive LCA Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-17, May.
    3. Bassey, Uduak & Sarquah, Khadija & Hartmann, Michael & Tom, Abasi-ofon & Beck, Gesa & Antwi, Edward & Narra, Satyanarayana & Nelles, Michael, 2023. "Thermal treatment options for single-use, multilayered and composite waste plastics in Africa," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 270(C).
    4. Seyedehfarzaneh Nojabaei & Omid Nematshahi & Matthew Franchetti, 2015. "An Economic and Environmental Evaluation of the Em-Ferro Plastic Sorting Technology," American Journal of Economics and Business Administration, Science Publications, vol. 7(1), pages 33-47, May.
    5. Raoul Voss & Roh Pin Lee & Magnus Fröhling, 2023. "A consequential approach to life cycle sustainability assessment with an agent‐based model to determine the potential contribution of chemical recycling to UN Sustainable Development Goals," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 27(3), pages 726-745, June.
    6. Piya Kerdlap & Aloisius Rabata Purnama & Jonathan Sze Choong Low & Daren Zong Loong Tan & Claire Y. Barlow & Seeram Ramakrishna, 2022. "Comparing the environmental performance of distributed versus centralized plastic recycling systems: Applying hybrid simulation modeling to life cycle assessment," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(1), pages 252-271, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:5:y:2001:i:3:p:49-63. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1088-1980 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.