IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/recore/v57y2011icp67-77.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scenarios for the implementation of EU waste legislation at national level and their consequences for emissions from municipal waste incineration

Author

Listed:
  • Saner, Dominik
  • Blumer, Yann B.
  • Lang, Daniel J.
  • Koehler, Annette

Abstract

Incineration plays a significant role in modern municipal solid waste (MSW) management of European countries. There are 405 treatment facilities in the European Union (EU) and another 43 plants are planned to be built in the coming years. The number of municipal solid waste incineration (MSWI) plants is not only increasing due to rising waste amounts but also as a consequence of EU waste-concerned directives issued over the last two decades. This study analyses the potential influence of diverse national implementations of EU waste policies on the future emission loads to air from MSWI in different European countries. This is exemplified by constructing waste policy implementation scenarios using an adapted formative scenario analysis approach, coupled with a probabilistic MSWI emission model employing microsimulation, which enables us to model changing incinerated waste amounts and waste compositions for each country over time. This allows us to describe possible future emission levels of MSWI in the year 2020 in 33 European countries, and in detail for Switzerland, Poland and the United Kingdom. Uncertain future emission levels are calculated and compared with the emission levels determined by the scenarios’ implications.

Suggested Citation

  • Saner, Dominik & Blumer, Yann B. & Lang, Daniel J. & Koehler, Annette, 2011. "Scenarios for the implementation of EU waste legislation at national level and their consequences for emissions from municipal waste incineration," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 67-77.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:recore:v:57:y:2011:i:c:p:67-77
    DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2011.09.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092134491100173X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.resconrec.2011.09.002?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. Tietje, Olaf, 2005. "Identification of a small reliable and efficient set of consistent scenarios," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 162(2), pages 418-432, April.
    2. Spoerri, Andy & Lang, Daniel J. & Binder, Claudia R. & Scholz, Roland W., 2009. "Expert-based scenarios for strategic waste and resource management planning—C&D waste recycling in the Canton of Zurich, Switzerland," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 53(10), pages 592-600.
    3. Asan, Umut & Erhan Bozdag, Cafer & Polat, Seçkin, 2004. "A fuzzy approach to qualitative cross impact analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 443-458, December.
    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. Meylan, Grégoire & Seidl, Roman & Spoerri, Andy, 2013. "Transitions of municipal solid waste management. Part I: Scenarios of Swiss waste glass-packaging disposal," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 8-19.
    2. Meylan, Grégoire & Ami, Helen & Spoerri, Andy, 2014. "Transitions of municipal solid waste management. Part II: Hybrid life cycle assessment of Swiss glass-packaging disposal," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 16-27.

    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. Kadaifci, Cigdem & Asan, Umut & Bozdag, Erhan, 2020. "A new 2-additive Choquet integral based approach to qualitative cross-impact analysis considering interaction effects," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    2. Nazemi, Neda & Foley, Rider W. & Louis, Garrick & Keeler, Lauren Withycombe, 2020. "Divergent agricultural water governance scenarios: The case of Zayanderud basin, Iran," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    3. Leitner, Johannes & Leopold-Wildburger, Ulrike, 2011. "Experiments on forecasting behavior with several sources of information - A review of the literature," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 213(3), pages 459-469, September.
    4. Trutnevyte, Evelina & Stauffacher, Michael & Scholz, Roland W., 2012. "Linking stakeholder visions with resource allocation scenarios and multi-criteria assessment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 219(3), pages 762-772.
    5. Borgonovo, Emanuele & Gatti, Stefano, 2013. "Risk analysis with contractual default. Does covenant breach matter?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 230(2), pages 431-443.
    6. Evelina Trutnevyte & Céline Guivarch & Robert Lempert & Neil Strachan, 2016. "Reinvigorating the scenario technique to expand uncertainty consideration," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 135(3), pages 373-379, April.
    7. Jodlbauer, Herbert & Tripathi, Shailesh & Brunner, Manuel & Bachmann, Nadine, 2022. "Stability of cross impact matrices," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    8. Scholz, Roland W. & Czichos, Reiner & Parycek, Peter & Lampoltshammer, Thomas J., 2020. "Organizational vulnerability of digital threats: A first validation of an assessment method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 282(2), pages 627-643.
    9. Lanndon A. Ocampo, 2019. "Decision Modeling for Manufacturing Sustainability with Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 20(1), pages 25-41, February.
    10. Mike Hewitt & Janosch Ortmann & Walter Rei, 2022. "Decision-based scenario clustering for decision-making under uncertainty," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 315(2), pages 747-771, August.
    11. Wong, Man Hong, 2013. "Investment models based on clustered scenario trees," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 227(2), pages 314-324.
    12. Parker, Andrew M. & Srinivasan, Sinduja V. & Lempert, Robert J. & Berry, Sandra H., 2015. "Evaluating simulation-derived scenarios for effective decision support," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 64-77.
    13. Ülengin, Füsun & Işık, Mine & Ekici, Şule Önsel & Özaydın, Özay & Kabak, Özgür & Topçu, Y. İlker, 2018. "Policy developments for the reduction of climate change impacts by the transportation sector," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 36-50.
    14. Borgonovo, E. & Cappelli, V. & Maccheroni, F. & Marinacci, M., 2018. "Risk analysis and decision theory: A bridge," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(1), pages 280-293.
    15. Meylan, Grégoire & Seidl, Roman & Spoerri, Andy, 2013. "Transitions of municipal solid waste management. Part I: Scenarios of Swiss waste glass-packaging disposal," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 8-19.
    16. Knoeri, Christof & Binder, Claudia R. & Althaus, Hans-Joerg, 2011. "Decisions on recycling: Construction stakeholders’ decisions regarding recycled mineral construction materials," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 55(11), pages 1039-1050.
    17. Borgonovo, Emanuele & Plischke, Elmar, 2016. "Sensitivity analysis: A review of recent advances," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(3), pages 869-887.
    18. C Ram & G Montibeller & A Morton, 2011. "Extending the use of scenario planning and MCDA for the evaluation of strategic options," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(5), pages 817-829, May.
    19. Weimer-Jehle, Wolfgang, 2008. "Cross-impact balances," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 387(14), pages 3689-3700.
    20. Baur, Ivo & Binder, Claudia R., 2015. "Modeling and assessing scenarios of common property pastures management in Switzerland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 292-305.

    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:57:y:2011:i:c:p:67-77. 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.