IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/recore/v52y2008i8p1101-1111.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainable management of combustible household waste—Expanding the integrated evaluation model

Author

Listed:
  • Klang, Anders Brandén
  • Vikman, Per-Åke
  • Brattebø, Helge

Abstract

A previously described model for the evaluation of sustainability in waste management has been expanded and applied to biodegradable and other combustible household waste. The model was applied to a case-study focusing on the special conditions in a municipality in the sparsely populated region of northern Sweden. In this region it is usual that the collection distances are long, the volume of waste is low and treatment facilities are remote. Four scenarios for the management of municipal household waste were compared: incineration, anaerobic digestion, composting and landfilling. A system analysis was performed to ensure that each scenario fulfil all the functions that the waste could provide (heat, electricity, fuel, and soil with a high nutrient content) and a sensitivity analysis was carried out to test the reliability of the results. The results show that the evaluation model can be used to assess the sustainability aspects of different treatment scenarios for combustible household waste. The model also allows for an individual interpretation of the results presented, depending on the choice of priorities. The effects of varying the time horizons and the difference in impact depending on what fuels are ultimately replaced in energy production are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Klang, Anders Brandén & Vikman, Per-Åke & Brattebø, Helge, 2008. "Sustainable management of combustible household waste—Expanding the integrated evaluation model," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 52(8), pages 1101-1111.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:recore:v:52:y:2008:i:8:p:1101-1111
    DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2008.05.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344908000797
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.resconrec.2008.05.004?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Annegrete Bruvoll & Karine Nyborg, 2002. "On the value of households' recycling efforts," Discussion Papers 316, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    2. Gustavsson, Leif & Karjalainen, Timo & Marland, Gregg & Savolainen, Ilkka & Schlamadinger, Bernard & Apps, Mike, 2000. "Project-based greenhouse-gas accounting: guiding principles with a focus on baselines and additionality," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(13), pages 935-946, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Marconsin, Adauto Fernandes & Rosa, Derval dos Santos, 2013. "A comparison of two models for dealing with urban solid waste: Management by contract and management by public–private partnership," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 115-123.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Charles Ayoubi & Boris Thurm, 2023. "Knowledge diffusion and morality: Why do we freely share valuable information with Strangers?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 75-99, January.
    2. Hua Zhang & Zong-Guo Wen, 2014. "Residents’ Household Solid Waste (HSW) Source Separation Activity: A Case Study of Suzhou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(9), pages 1-21, September.
    3. Anna Christy & Marwa Elnahass & Jaime Amezaga & Anthony Browne & Oliver Heidrich, 2024. "A dynamic framework to align company climate reporting and action with global climate targets," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(4), pages 3103-3128, May.
    4. Sahlin, Jenny & Ekvall, Tomas & Bisaillon, Mattias & Sundberg, Johan, 2007. "Introduction of a waste incineration tax: Effects on the Swedish waste flows," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 51(4), pages 827-846.
    5. Pettersson, Malin & Olofsson, Johanna & Börjesson, Pål & Björnsson, Lovisa, 2022. "Reductions in greenhouse gas emissions through innovative co-production of bio-oil in combined heat and power plants," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    6. Marcinkowski, Andrzej & Kowalski, Arkadiusz Michał, 2012. "The problem of preparation the food packaging waste for recycling in Poland," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 10-16.
    7. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Kądziela, Tadeusz & Hanley, Nick, 2014. "We want to sort! Assessing households’ preferences for sorting waste," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 290-306.
    8. Hage, Olle & Söderholm, Patrik & Berglund, Christer, 2009. "Norms and economic motivation in household recycling: Empirical evidence from Sweden," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 155-165.
    9. W. Fichtner & S. Graehl & O. Rentz, 2001. "Baseline Setting Using Optimising Energy Models," Energy & Environment, , vol. 12(5-6), pages 463-473, November.
    10. Leif Gustavsson & Åsa Karlsson, 2006. "CO 2 Mitigation: On Methods and Parameters for Comparison of Fossil-Fuel and Biofuel Systems," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 11(5), pages 935-959, September.
    11. Piera Cascioli & Dario D’Ingiullo & Donatella Furia & Iacopo Odoardi & Davide Quaglione, 2024. "Towards Greener Futures: Investigating the Nexus of Social, Human, and Institutional Capital in Sustainable Waste Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-15, June.
    12. Heller, Marit H. & Vatn, Arild, 2017. "The divisive and disruptive effect of a weight-based waste fee," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 275-285.
    13. Mikolaj Czajkowski & Katarzyna Zagórska & Nick Hanley, 2018. "Social Norms and Pro-Environment Behaviours: Heterogeneous Response to Signals," Discussion Papers in Environment and Development Economics 2018-02, University of St. Andrews, School of Geography and Sustainable Development.
    14. Jun Rentschler & Florian Flachenecker & Martin Kornejew, 2020. "Assessing carbon emission savings from corporate resource efficiency investments: an estimation indicator in theory and practice," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 835-861, February.
    15. L. Gustavsson & R. Madlener & H.-F. Hoen & G. Jungmeier & T. Karjalainen & S. KlÖhn & K. Mahapatra & J. Pohjola & B. Solberg & H. Spelter, 2006. "The Role of Wood Material for Greenhouse Gas Mitigation," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 11(5), pages 1097-1127, September.
    16. Ahmad, Jamil & EL-Dessouky, Hisham, 2008. "Design of a modified low cost treatment system for the recycling and reuse of laundry waste water," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 52(7), pages 973-978.
    17. Lee, Misuk & Choi, Hyunhong & Koo, Yoonmo, 2017. "Inconvenience cost of waste disposal behavior in South Korea," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 58-65.
    18. Ek, Claes, 2018. "Prosocial behavior and policy spillovers: A multi-activity approach," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 356-371.
    19. Berglund, Christer, 2006. "The assessment of households' recycling costs: The role of personal motives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(4), pages 560-569, April.
    20. Woodward, Richard T. & Newburn, David A. & Mezzatesta, Mariano, 2016. "Additionality and reverse crowding out for pollution offsets in water quality trading," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 224-231.

    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:eee:recore:v:52:y:2008:i:8:p:1101-1111. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Kai Meng (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/resources-conservation-and-recycling .

    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.