Evaluation of food waste disposal options by LCC analysis from the perspective of global warming: Jungnang case, South Korea

• Published in: Waste management (Elmsford) Vol. 31; no. 9; pp. 2112 - 2120
• Main Authors: Kim, Mi-Hyung, Song, Yul-Eum, Song, Han-Byul, Kim, Jung-Wk, Hwang, Sun-Jin
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Kidlington Elsevier Ltd 01-09-2011; Elsevier
• Subjects: AIR POLLUTION ABATEMENT; ANAEROBIC DIGESTION; ANIMAL FEEDS; Applied sciences; ASIA; BIOCONVERSION; BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS; BIOLOGICAL WASTES; BY-PRODUCTS; CARBON; CARBON COMPOUNDS; CARBON DIOXIDE; CARBON OXIDES; CHALCOGENIDES; CHEMICAL REACTIONS; CLIMATIC CHANGE; COMBUSTION; COMPARATIVE EVALUATIONS; COMPOST; COMPOSTING; COST; DEVELOPING COUNTRIES; DIGESTION; ELECTRICITY; ELEMENTS; ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY AND ECONOMY; ENERGY RECOVERY; Environmental impact; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS; EVALUATION; Exact sciences and technology; FOOD; Food waste; Garbage; General treatment and storage processes; Global Warming; GREENHOUSE EFFECT; LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT; LIFE-CYCLE COST; MANAGEMENT; MATERIALS; Models, Economic; NONMETALS; ORGANIC WASTES; Other industrial wastes. Sewage sludge; Other wastes and particular components of wastes; OXIDATION; OXIDES; OXYGEN COMPOUNDS; Pollution; POLLUTION ABATEMENT; PRICES; PROCESSING; REPUBLIC OF KOREA; SEWAGE; SEWAGE SLUDGE; SLUDGES; THERMOCHEMICAL PROCESSES; WASTE DISPOSAL; WASTE MANAGEMENT; WASTE PROCESSING; WASTES; Republic of Korea; Korea, Rep; Food waste; Energy recovery; Global warming; Environmental impact; Life cycle cost; Waste management; Warming; Compost; Composting; Incineration; Reaction product; Carbon dioxide; Sewage sludge; Waste disposal; Anaerobic digestion
• ISSN: 0956-053X; 1879-2456
• DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2011.04.019

► Various food waste disposal options were evaluated from the perspective of global warming. ► Costs of the options were compared by the methodology of life cycle assessment and life cycle cost analysis. ► Carbon price and valuable by-products were used for analyzing environmental credits. ► The benefit–cost ratio of wet feeding scenario was the highest.
The costs associated with eight food waste disposal options, dry feeding, wet feeding, composting, anaerobic digestion, co-digestion with sewage sludge, food waste disposer, incineration, and landfilling, were evaluated in the perspective of global warming and energy and/or resource recovery. An expanded system boundary was employed to compare by-products. Life cycle cost was analyzed through the entire disposal process, which included discharge, separate collection, transportation, treatment, and final disposal stages, all of which were included in the system boundary. Costs and benefits were estimated by an avoided impact. Environmental benefits of each system per 1
tonne of food waste management were estimated using carbon prices resulting from CO
2 reduction by avoided impact, as well as the prices of by-products such as animal feed, compost, and electricity. We found that the cost of landfilling was the lowest, followed by co-digestion. The benefits of wet feeding systems were the highest and landfilling the lowest.