Plastic Waste Recycling and Greenhouse Gas Reduction - Taking Copenhagen as an example from life cycle assessment perspective
Author
Ren, Hong
Term
4. Term
Publication year
2012
Abstract
Plastproduktion nærmer sig 300 millioner ton årligt, og de tilhørende ressourceforbrug, sundhedsproblemer og miljøpåvirkninger gør genanvendelse central. I EU ender 57,9 % af plasten i genanvendelse eller energiudnyttelse, og Danmark nåede i 2010 en samlet nyttiggørelse på 95 %, hvoraf ca. 25 % var genanvendelse og omkring 70 % energiudnyttelse. Husholdningsplast i dagrenovationen er dog fortsat underudnyttet. Københavns Kommune vil reducere mængden af plast i affald til forbrænding (40.000 ton) med 15.000 ton. Denne afhandling undersøger derfor, hvilke behandlingsvalg for blandet husholdningsplast der bedst reducerer drivhusgasudledninger ud fra en livscyklusvurdering. Studiet anvender en konsekvens-LCA i SimaPro 7.3 og sammenligner sorteringsveje (REnescience-sortering versus kantstensindsamling) samt behandlingsteknologier (forbrænding med energiudnyttelse, mekanisk genanvendelse og kemisk/ feedstock-genanvendelse). Vurderingen peger på, at mekanisk genanvendelse kombineret med kantstensindsamling kan sænke klimaaftrykket sammenlignet med forbrænding og feedstock-genanvendelse og dermed understøtte et skifte fra “affald til energi” til “affald til materialer”. Kvantitative resultater fremgår ikke af dette uddrag.
Global plastic production approaches 300 million tons per year, and concerns about resource use, health, and end-of-life impacts make recycling a priority. In the EU, 57.9% of plastic is recovered through recycling or energy recovery, and Denmark reached a 95% total recovery rate in 2010, with roughly 25% recycling and about 70% energy recovery. Household plastics in municipal waste, however, remain largely unrecycled. Copenhagen aims to cut the 40,000 tonnes of plastic sent to incineration by 15,000 tonnes. This thesis evaluates which treatment options for mixed household plastics best reduce greenhouse gas emissions using a life cycle assessment. A consequential LCA in SimaPro 7.3 compares sorting routes (REnescience sorting versus kerbside collection) and treatment technologies (incineration with energy recovery, mechanical recycling, and chemical/feedstock recycling). The assessment indicates that mechanical recycling combined with kerbside sorting can lower global warming impacts compared with incineration and feedstock recycling, supporting a shift from waste-to-energy to material recovery. Quantitative results are not provided in this excerpt.
[This summary has been generated with the help of AI directly from the project (PDF)]
Documents