IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i17p7445-d1466207.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainability Indicators to MSW Treatment Assessment: The Rio de Janeiro Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • Júlia P. Oliveira

    (Programa de Pós-Graduação em Engenharia de Processos Químicos e Bioquímicos (EPQB), Escola de Química, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro 21941-909, Brazil)

  • Fernando L. P. Pessoa

    (Chemical Engineering, University Center SENAI CIMATEC, Salvador 41650-010, Brazil)

  • Ana Mehl

    (Escola de Química, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro 21941-909, Brazil)

  • Flávia C. Alves

    (Programa de Pós-Graduação em Engenharia de Processos Químicos e Bioquímicos (EPQB), Escola de Química, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro 21941-909, Brazil)

  • Argimiro R. Secchi

    (Programa de Pós-Graduação em Engenharia de Processos Químicos e Bioquímicos (EPQB), Escola de Química, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro 21941-909, Brazil
    Chemical Engineering Program, Instituto Alberto Luiz Coimbra de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa de Engenharia (COPPE), Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro 21941-972, Brazil)

Abstract

The Brazilian Policy foresees the waste management hierarchy, according to which energy reuse from waste is preferred to final disposal. However, less than 0.2% of the country’s waste goes to energy production. This paper proposes sustainability indicators to support the decision to choose the best process to treat municipal solid waste (MSW) through bioenergy generation technologies. Then, we conduct a case study for Rio de Janeiro. Incineration and gasification were not economically feasible—despite TRL 9 and 8. However, the projects presented a null net present value by increasing the gate fee to 94.69 and 255.39 USD/ton of MSW, respectively. The social indicators (job creation, salary increase with the absorption of waste pickers, population served, reduction in MSW sent to landfill) did not indicate the best technology. The results of the environmental indicators for incineration and gasification were, respectively, 0.45 and 0.37 t CO 2eq /t MSW for GWP, 1.49 and 1.23 MWh/t MSW for energy intensity, 1.24 and 6.14 m 3 /t MSW for water intensity, 39.3 and 27.9 m 2 /t MSW for land use and 0.135 and 0.088 t SO 2eq /t MSW for acidification. Gasification presented better results on 60% of the environmental indicators. However, incineration scored better in the important ones, water and energy intensities, in addition to the technical–economic aspect.

Suggested Citation

  • Júlia P. Oliveira & Fernando L. P. Pessoa & Ana Mehl & Flávia C. Alves & Argimiro R. Secchi, 2024. "Sustainability Indicators to MSW Treatment Assessment: The Rio de Janeiro Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-16, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:17:p:7445-:d:1466207
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/17/7445/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/17/7445/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. PINASSEAU Antoine & ZERGER Benoît & ROTH Joze & CANOVA Michele & ROUDIER Serge, 2018. "Best Available Techniques (BAT) Reference Document for Waste treatment Industrial Emissions Directive 2010/75/EU (Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control)," JRC Research Reports JRC113018, Joint Research Centre.
    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. Vesna Mislej & Barbara Novosel, 2022. "Specification and Classification of Pelletised Dried Sewage Sludge: Identifying Its Key Properties as a Renewable Material for Enabling Environmentally Non-Harmful Energy Utilisation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-24, November.
    2. Ann Colles & Dries Coertjens & Bert Morrens & Elly Den Hond & Melissa Paulussen & Liesbeth Bruckers & Eva Govarts & Adrian Covaci & Gudrun Koppen & Kim Croes & Vera Nelen & Nicolas Van Larebeke & Stef, 2021. "Human Biomonitoring Data Enables Evidence-Informed Policy to Reduce Internal Exposure to Persistent Organic Compounds: A Case Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(11), pages 1-21, May.
    3. Karolina Sobieraj & Sylwia Stegenta-Dąbrowska & Jacek A. Koziel & Andrzej Białowiec, 2021. "Modeling of CO Accumulation in the Headspace of the Bioreactor during Organic Waste Composting," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-17, March.
    4. Riccardo Tinivella & Riccardo Bargiggia & Giampiero Zanoni & Arianna Callegari & Andrea G. Capodaglio, 2023. "High-Strength, Chemical Industry Wastewater Treatment Feasibility Study for Energy Recovery," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-23, November.
    5. Aleksandra Leśniańska & Beata Janowska & Robert Sidełko, 2022. "Immobilization of Zn and Cu in Conditions of Reduced C/N Ratio during Sewage Sludge Composting Process," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-19, June.
    6. Stefano Castelluccio & Claudio Comoglio & Silvia Fiore, 2022. "Environmental Performance Reporting and Assessment of the Biodegradable Waste Treatment Plants Registered to EMAS in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-14, June.
    7. Istrate, Ioan-Robert & Medina-Martos, Enrique & Galvez-Martos, Jose-Luis & Dufour, Javier, 2021. "Assessment of the energy recovery potential of municipal solid waste under future scenarios," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 293(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:16:y:2024:i:17:p:7445-:d:1466207. 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.