IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i23p16281-d1287213.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainability Assessment of Coffee Silverskin Waste Management in the Metropolitan City of Naples (Italy): A Life Cycle Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Giuliana Ansanelli

    (ENEA, Division Resource Efficiency, Department for Sustainability, Research Centre of Portici, 80055 Portici, Italy)

  • Gabriella Fiorentino

    (ENEA, Division Resource Efficiency, Department for Sustainability, Research Centre of Portici, 80055 Portici, Italy)

  • Rosaria Chifari

    (Fundacion ENT, c/Josep Llanza, 1-7, 2n 3a, 08800 Vilanova i la Geltrú, Spain)

  • Karin Meisterl

    (Fundacion ENT, c/Josep Llanza, 1-7, 2n 3a, 08800 Vilanova i la Geltrú, Spain)

  • Enrica Leccisi

    (Metropolitan City of Naples, 80133 Naples, Italy)

  • Amalia Zucaro

    (ENEA, Division Resource Efficiency, Department for Sustainability, Research Centre of Portici, 80055 Portici, Italy)

Abstract

The use of renewable biological resources, including biowaste, within a circular framework, is crucial for the transition to more sustainable production and consumption patterns. By means of life cycle assessment and life cycle costing methodologies, this study compares the environmental and economic performances of two disposal scenarios for coffee silverskin, the major waste from coffee roasting. The business-as-usual (BaU) scenario, currently applied in the Metropolitan City of Naples (Italy), involves silverskin composting, while the proposed alternative scenario explores the valorization of silverskin as a functional ingredient in bakery products. The alternative scenario results are more advantageous since replacing flour with silverskin in bakery products reduces environmental impact by 96% more than replacing synthetic fertilizers with compost in the BaU scenario. Furthermore, in the alternative scenario, coffee roasters halve their silverskin disposal costs, compared to the BaU scenario (447.55 € versus 190.09 €, for 1 ton). Finally, the major environmental burdens are resource use for equipment construction (37% for BaU, 62% for alternative, on average) and electricity consumption (30% for BaU, 67% for alternative, on average), while the highest economic cost is due to personnel (58% for BaU, 88% for alternative, on average).

Suggested Citation

  • Giuliana Ansanelli & Gabriella Fiorentino & Rosaria Chifari & Karin Meisterl & Enrica Leccisi & Amalia Zucaro, 2023. "Sustainability Assessment of Coffee Silverskin Waste Management in the Metropolitan City of Naples (Italy): A Life Cycle Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-27, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:23:p:16281-:d:1287213
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/23/16281/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/23/16281/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mussatto, Solange I. & Machado, Ercília M.S. & Carneiro, Lívia M. & Teixeira, José A., 2012. "Sugars metabolism and ethanol production by different yeast strains from coffee industry wastes hydrolysates," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 763-768.
    2. Emily Overturf & Simon Pezzutto & Martina Boschiero & Nicoletta Ravasio & Achille Monegato, 2021. "The CirCo (Circular Coffee) Project: A Case Study on Valorization of Coffee Silverskin in the Context of Circular Economy in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-17, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Luz, Fábio Codignole & Cordiner, Stefano & Manni, Alessandro & Mulone, Vincenzo & Rocco, Vittorio, 2017. "Anaerobic digestion of coffee grounds soluble fraction at laboratory scale: Evaluation of the biomethane potential," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 207(C), pages 166-175.
    2. Irena Wojnowska-Baryła & Katarzyna Bernat & Magdalena Zaborowska, 2022. "Strategies of Recovery and Organic Recycling Used in Textile Waste Management," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-18, May.
    3. Adrianna Kamińska & Joanna Sreńscek-Nazzal & Karolina Kiełbasa & Jadwiga Grzeszczak & Jarosław Serafin & Agnieszka Wróblewska, 2023. "Carbon-Supported Nickel Catalysts—Comparison in Alpha-Pinene Oxidation Activity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-23, March.
    4. Favaro, Lorenzo & Basaglia, Marina & van Zyl, Willem H. & Casella, Sergio, 2013. "Using an efficient fermenting yeast enhances ethanol production from unfiltered wheat bran hydrolysates," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 170-178.
    5. Nikolaj Kaae Kirk & Clara Navarrete & Jakob Ellegaard Juhl & José Luis Martínez & Alessandra Procentese, 2021. "The “Zero Miles Product” Concept Applied to Biofuel Production: A Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-19, January.
    6. Piotr Sołowiej & Patrycja Pochwatka & Agnieszka Wawrzyniak & Krzysztof Łapiński & Andrzej Lewicki & Jacek Dach, 2021. "The Effect of Heat Removal during Thermophilic Phase on Energetic Aspects of Biowaste Composting Process," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-14, February.
    7. Ben Atitallah, Imen & Ntaikou, Ioanna & Antonopoulou, Georgia & Alexandropoulou, Maria & Brysch-Herzberg, Michael & Nasri, Moncef & Lyberatos, Gerasimos & Mechichi, Tahar, 2020. "Evaluation of the non-conventional yeast strain Wickerhamomyces anomalus (Pichia anomala) X19 for enhanced bioethanol production using date palm sap as renewable feedstock," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 71-81.
    8. Edilson León Moreno Cárdenas & Arley David Zapata-Zapata & Daehwan Kim, 2020. "Modeling Dark Fermentation of Coffee Mucilage Wastes for Hydrogen Production: Artificial Neural Network Model vs. Fuzzy Logic Model," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-13, April.
    9. Sayed, Walaa & Cabrol, Audrey & Abdallah, Rawa & Taha, Samir & Amrane, Abdeltif & Djelal, Hayet, 2018. "Enhancement of ethanol production from synthetic medium model of hydrolysate of macroalgae," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 3-10.
    10. David Orrego & Arley David Zapata-Zapata & Daehwan Kim, 2018. "Optimization and Scale-Up of Coffee Mucilage Fermentation for Ethanol Production," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-12, March.
    11. Małgorzata Smuga-Kogut & Bartosz Walendzik & Katarzyna Lewicka-Rataj & Tomasz Kogut & Leszek Bychto & Piotr Jachimowicz & Agnieszka Cydzik-Kwiatkowska, 2024. "Application of Proton Ionic Liquid in the Process of Obtaining Bioethanol from Hemp Stalks," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-15, February.
    12. Rojas-Chamorro, José A. & Romero, Inmaculada & López-Linares, Juan C. & Castro, Eulogio, 2020. "Brewer’s spent grain as a source of renewable fuel through optimized dilute acid pretreatment," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 81-90.
    13. Domínguez, Elena & Romaní, Aloia & Domingues, Lucília & Garrote, Gil, 2017. "Evaluation of strategies for second generation bioethanol production from fast growing biomass Paulownia within a biorefinery scheme," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 777-789.
    14. Zhang, Xinghua & Wang, Tiejun & Ma, Longlong & Zhang, Qi & Huang, Xiaoming & Yu, Yuxiao, 2013. "Production of cyclohexane from lignin degradation compounds over Ni/ZrO2–SiO2 catalysts," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 533-538.
    15. Edilson León Moreno Cárdenas & Arley David Zapata-Zapata & Daehwan Kim, 2018. "Hydrogen Production from Coffee Mucilage in Dark Fermentation with Organic Wastes," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-12, December.
    16. Mendoza Martinez, Clara Lisseth & Saari, Jussi & Melo, Yara & Cardoso, Marcelo & de Almeida, Gustavo Matheus & Vakkilainen, Esa, 2021. "Evaluation of thermochemical routes for the valorization of solid coffee residues to produce biofuels: A Brazilian case," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).

    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:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:23:p:16281-:d:1287213. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.