Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Municipal Solid

8/14/2019 Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Municipal Solid

1/41

Solid Wastes Treatment of BangkokusingSolid Wastes Treatment of Bangkokusing

Environmental Management Lab

Environmental Management Lab

a ona e a an a er a s ec no ogy en erNationa l Sc ience a nd Tec hnology Develop ment Agency (NSTDA)

Tha iland

a ona e a an a er a s ec no ogy en erNationa l Sc ience a nd Tec hnology Develop ment Agency (NSTDA)

Tha iland

1


2/41

OutlineIntroductionIntroduction

ObjectiveObjective

e o o ogye o o ogy

Improvement AnalysisImprovement Analysis

ConclusionConclusion

2


3/41

Introduction

Munic ipal areasincluding Pattaya

14,766 ton, 35.99 %

Bangkok

8,780 ton, 21.40 %

Non-munic ipal areas

17,477 ton, 42.60 %

Source: Thailand state of p ollution report 2008, PCD.

3


4/41

Introduction

The management of Thailand waste in 2008

Open dumping

Non-sanitary

. m on ons

15.03 million tonsWaste generated

100%

38%

3.45 million tonsWaste utilization

23% 4.40 million tons

Source: Thailand state of p ollution report 2008, PCD.

4


5/41

Waste dis osal in Thailand

Introduction

Sanitary Landfill 101 sites

- pera e s es

- Not-operated 11 sites

Incineration 3 sites

- Phuket (250 tons/day)-

- Lumpon (10 tons/day)

Integ rated system ~3 sites

- Phang (150 tons/day)

- Rayong (80 tons/day)

- Chonburi (300-400 tons/day)

Source: Pollution Control Department, PCD.6


6/41

The management of BMA waste in 2008Introduction

The amount of waste collected,

Onnuch wastetransfer station

3,336.4 tons/day

Nong Kham wastetransfer station

3,336.4 tons/day

Tha Rang wastetransfer station

2,107.2 tons/day

Panonsarakham Landfill, ,Kampang San distric,

Nakhon Pathom Province5,443.6 tons/day (62%)

ChachoengsaoProvince

2,282.8 tons/day (26%)

Source: Thailand state of pollution rep ort 2008, PCD.

5


7/41

Outline

ObjectiveObjective

MethodologyMethodology

Results & Disc ussionResults & Disc ussion



7


8/41

Objective

To evaluate the life cycle inventory

analysis of municipal solid waste bylandfill technology of Bangkok

The analysis covered 6

phases:-

-sorting-baler-wrapping--landfill-wastewater trea tment

8


9/41


ObjectiveObjective


Procedural of Life Cyc le AssessmentProcedural of Life Cyc le Assessment

Result & Disc ussionResult & Disc ussion

Im rovement ana l sisIm rovement ana l sis

onc us ononc us on

9


10/41

Methodology

Procedural Framework of LCA

oa c opeoa cope

DefinitionDefinition

Direc t applications:Direc t applications:

Inventory Analysis(LCI) Interpretation

Produc t developmentand improvement

Strateg ic p lanning

Public po lic y mak ing

Marketing

Impac t Assessment ers

The m ethodology used in this study was based on the life c yc le

approac h ac c ording to the ISO 14040 series requirement.

The m ethodology used in this study was based on the life c yc le

approac h ac c ording to the ISO 14040 series requirement.10


11/41

MethodologySystem boundary

MSW collection

Onnuc h waste transfer station

-

Phanomsarakham sanitary land fill

Wastewater treatment Landfill11


12/41

MethodologySystem boundary

MSW collec tionMSW, DieselEmission to

air

MSW sortingElectricityFuel, etc .

Emission toair, water

Baler-wrappingElectricityWire, PlasticEmission toair, water

Transportation

LandfillMSW, Diesel,water

Emission toair, water, soil

Wastewater trea tmentWastewaterEmission toair, water

Func tiona l unit (FU) is 1 ton of MSW trea tedFunc tiona l unit (FU) is 1 ton of MSW trea ted12


13/41

Methodology

Data collection Onnud transferstation

Onnud transferstationAnnua l report of BMA

-

- Transportation distance

Waste from householdWaste from household Calculation, IPCC

Onsite d ata

-Emission to air

-Water- Electricity

- Wire, plastic

Phanomsarakham Sanitary landfillPhanomsarakham Sanitary landfill13

- Diesel

-Emission to water


14/41


ObjectiveObjective




15


15/41

Result & Discussion

energy

resources, 665 MJ

,

kg CO2

carcinogens, 1.98E-7

ozone layer, 8.11E-6

summer smog, 0.37

winter smog, 0.09

heavy metals, 1.71E-4

acidification, 0.43 eutrophication, 0.07

16


16/41

Result & DiscussionGreenhouse Gas Emission

se a ra t on

Transportation

0.49%

Baler-wrapping

0.94%

0.05%MSW coll ec ting

2.76%

landf i l l

95.76%

17


17/41

Result & DiscussionGreenhouse Gas Emission

Degradation oforganic waste

500

600

700

659.34

100

200

300

400

g

CO2eq.

-100

0

colle

cting

sepa

ration

r-wrap

ping

sport

ation

landfill

rtreatm

ent

.

-0.35

. . .

MS ba tr

wastewa

t

19

Total = 687.80 kg CO2eq. / ton of MSW treatedTotal = 687.80 kg CO2eq. / ton of MSW treated


18/41

Result & DiscussionEnergy Resources

Wastewater

treatment

0.00%

landfi l l

MSW collectin

37.20%30.62%

Tra nsporta tion

6.07%

4.43%Baler-wrapping21.68%

18


19/41

Result & DiscussionEnergy Resources

Diesel,electricity

250

300 271.27223.27

50

100

150MJ

-

158.05

44.26

-50

0

colle

cting

sepa

ratio

n

r-wrap

ping

nspo

rtatio

nlan

dfill

rtreatm

ent

. .

MS ba

tr

wastewa

20

Total = 664.52 MJ / ton of MSW treatedTotal = 664.52 MJ / ton of MSW treated


20/41

Outline

ObjectiveObjective


esu s sc uss onesu s sc uss on

Im rovement Ana l sisIm rovement Ana l sis


21


21/41

Improvement analysis

Objective

To reduce the environmental Impac t

SC1: LFG was collec ted and used to produce e lec tricity for

.

SC2: The percentage o f recyc ling ratio wa s raised to 15%.

SC3: The use o f landfill gas to p roduc e e lec tric ity and 15%rec yc le ratio were both assumed.

22Rec yc le ratio (15%) com e from draft master p lan of BMA.


22/41

Improvement analysis

GHG emissions

(kg CO2 eq.)

Present case

Alternative scenarios

SC1 SC2 SC3

687.80 259.67 601.97 212.45

Red uc tion of GHG emissions

(kg CO2 eq.)

428.13

(62.24%)

85.83

(12.47%)

475.35

(69.11%)

SC1:Present

case

o2eq.)

SC2:500

600

700

SC2

15%

(kgC

SC3: +100

200

300 SC1 SC3

24

1 15%


23/41

Outline

ObjectiveObjective


esu scuss onesu scuss on

Im rovement Ana l sisIm rovement Ana l sis


23


24/41

Conclusion

The overall GHG emission was 687.80 kg CO2 equivalent per

ton of MSW trea ted. The lar est amount of GHG wasgenerated from the landfill proc ess

e energy n orm o e ec r c y an ese requ re y aproc esses rela ted with the landfill tec hnology was 664.52 MJLHV per ton of MSW treated which mostly resulted from MSW

c ollec tion (271.27 MJ/ ton MSW treated )

Combining the use o f landfill gas to produce e lec tric ity and

terms of GHG reduc tion, resulting in 69.11% reduc tion inGHG emissions as com pared to the present c ase.

22


25/41

AcknowledgementsAcknowledgements

This presentation is a part of projec t Life Cyc le Assessment(LCA) of Munic ipa l Solid Wastes Treatment of Bangkok using

Center (MTEC) under Nationa l Sc ienc e and TechnologyDevelopment Agency (NSTDA), Ministry of Sc ienc e and

Tec hnolo MOST .

The authors would like to thank all contributions for data used inthis study.

25


26/41

Thank you for.Thank you for.

your attention.your attention.

26


27/41

r. om ong a a ur. om ong a a u

Mrs. Pechda WenununMrs. Pechda Wenunun

Environmental management Lab,Environmental management Lab,

The National Metal and MaterialsThe National Metal and Materials,,

Tel. (Tel. (6666))2 564 65002 564 6500 ext.ext.47704770--47764776

..EE--mail:mail: [email protected]@chula.ac.th

pec a m ec.or.pec a m ec.or.

27


28/41

Bac k up slideBac k up slide

26


29/41

Introduction

e managemen o a an was e n

15.03 million tonsWaste generated

100%

Open dumping

9.32 million tons

12.62 million tonsCollection

Non-sanitary62%

Sanitary landfill38%

3.45 million tonsWaste utilization

23% 5.71 million tons

Source: Thailand state of pollution rep ort 2008, PCD.4


30/41

Life Cycle Impact Assessment

Classification NormalizationCharacterization

an atory ements

CO2 Global Warming

[Inventory] [Impact Category]

Grouping

CFCs Ozone LayerDepletion

Weighting

x

NOx

Acidification Integrated

Indicator

Photo Oxidants

Toxicity for Human

Health


31/41

ADP : abiotic depletion : r y

GWP : global warming potential HCA : Human toxicity emission to air HCW : Human toxicity emission to water HCS : Human toxicity emission to soil

AP : acidification potential HT : human toxicity potential

, ECT : ecotoxicity, terrestrial NP : nutrification potential ODP : Ozone depletion potential


32/41

GWP(100years) AP

(CO2 equiv. kg)

CO2 1CH4 21

(SO2 equiv. kg)

NH3 1.88HCl 0.88

2

HFC-23 11700

HFC-41 150

HF 1.6

NO 1.07

SF6 23900

IPCC,1995

2 .

SO2 1

Heijungs et al., CML 1992


33/41

GWPCategory

CH4 1.49E-1

21 3.13

CO2 6.88E+3 1 6.88E+3

-

HFC-134a

.

3.60E-1 1300

.

4.68E+2

N2O 1.99E-1 310 6.17E+1

Total 8.28E+3


34/41

APCategory

NOx 0.70 3.19

SO2

6.09 1 6.09

SOx 2.78E-2 1 2.78E-2

Total 9.31


35/41

1. 18.

2. 19.

3. 20.

4. 1 21.

5. 22.

. .

7. 24.

8. 25.

. .

10. 27.

11. 28.

.

13. 30.

14. 31. .

. .

16. 33. 1

17. 34


36/41

/

60.41 61.00 49.32 49.25 54.51 50.53 51.06

46.88 46.92 34.16 30.59 34.74 44.32 44.99

. . . . . . .

6.76 6.56 8.57 10.13 13.60 1.10 0.00

6.38 5.85 15.08 10.62 8.13 9.69 10.44

(Recycle) 0.00 0.00 2.44 1.86 0.89 0.72 1.96

(Recycle) 1.73 1.49 4.37 3.53 2.42 2.22 3.77

0.59 0.42 1.02 1.35 0.98 1.20 1.44

, . 49.94 0.33 /

2.57 2.30 5.07 2.55 2.97 3.16 1.65

1.49 1.64 2.18 1.33 0.87 2.16 1.62

33.21 33.15 35.60 40.13 37.36 39.78 38.50

(Non Recycle) 8.66 8.58 11.14 11.55 9.51 8.93 9.83

(Non Recycle) 17.15 17.50 15.37 18.30 21.68 24.46 21.26

0.11 0.78 2.19 0.58 0.22 0.83 1.03

: ( 2548)

. . . . . . .

0.51 1.00 0.58 0.68 0.34 0.53 0.26

0.35 1.29 1.74 0.92 0.84 0.45 0.92 100 100 100 100 100 100 100


37/41

0.54

1.03

0.39

0.45

.

2.88

CH4 52.80

CO2 44.10

2 .

N2

2.0


38/41

(Green house) COCO

22 11

SimaPro Paper A[1] Paper B[2]

Estimated saving form Recycling Estimated saving form Recycling Virgin Recycled

-CO

2(kg-CO

2/t )

-

10,596 N/A 2,900 4.36

. .

-CO2

(kg-CO2/t )

-Energy (GJ)

+ 2,762.67

29.00

N/A

5.6

1,304

36.85

1,752

26.21

-CO2

(kg-CO2/t )

-Energy (GJ)

1,833.17

69.81

N/A

20.5

1,459.35

60.38

221.17

22.90

-CO2 (kg-CO2/t )

-Energy (GJ)

709.57

3.985

N/A

N/A

632

14.10

278

9.23

-CO2

(kg-CO2/t )

-Energy (GJ)

10,595.9

192.05

N/A

12.6

1,820

25.20

595

9.43

[1]Impact Assessment of Waste management option in Singapore

[2]Life-cycle assessment of municipal solid wastes : Development of the WASTED model


39/41


40/41

(kg CO2 eq. / )

. , . .

664.52 -269.77 152.72MJ LHV

- 656.89Kg CO2 eq.- 466.60 kg CO2 eq.


41/41

50%

1 220 kWh

..

1 kWh 0.6 kg CO2 eq.

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Municipal Solid

Documents