Effects of pre-treatment technologies on quantity and quality of source-sorted municipal organic waste for biogas recovery.

Source-sorted municipal organic waste collected from different dwelling types in five Danish cities and pre-treated at three different plants was sampled and characterized several times during one year to investigate the origin of any differences in composition of the pre-treated waste introduced by city, pre-treatment technology, dwelling type or annual season. The investigated pre-treatment technologies were screw press, disc screen and shredder+magnet. The average quantity of pre-treated organic waste (biomass) produced from the incoming waste varied between the investigated pre-treatment technologies: 59%, 66% and 98% wet weight, respectively (41%, 34% and 2% reject, respectively). The pre-treatment technologies showed differences with respect to distribution of the chemical components in the waste between the biomass and the rejected material (reject), especially for dry matter, ash, collection bag material (plastic or paper) and easily degradable organic matter. Furthermore, the particle size of the biomass was related to the pre-treatment technology. The content of plastic in the biomass depended both on the actual collection bag material used in the system and the pre-treatment technology. The sampled reject consisted mostly of organic matter. For cities using plastic bags for the source-separated organic waste, the expected content of plastic in the reject was up to 10% wet weight (in some cases up to 20%). Batch tests for methane potential of the biomass samples showed only minor variations caused by the factors city, pre-treatment technology, dwelling type and season when based on the VS content of the waste (overall average 459STPm(3)/tVS). The amount of methane generated from 1t of collected waste was therefore mainly determined by the efficiency of the chosen pre-treatment technology described by the mass distribution of the incoming waste between biomass and reject.

Environmental modelling of use of treated organic waste on agricultural land: a comparison of existing models for life cycle assessment of waste systems.

Modelling of environmental impacts from the application of treated organic municipal solid waste (MSW) in agriculture differs widely between different models for environmental assessment of waste systems. In this comparative study five models were examined concerning quantification and impact assessment of environmental effects from land application of treated organic MSW: DST (Decision Support Tool, USA), IWM (Integrated Waste Management, U.K.), THE IFEU PROJECT (Germany), ORWARE (ORganic WAste REsearch, Sweden) and EASEWASTE (Environmental Assessment of Solid Waste Systems and Technologies, Denmark). DST and IWM are life cycle inventory (LCI) models, thus not performing actual impact assessment. The DST model includes only one water emission (biological oxygen demand) from compost leaching in the results and IWM considers only air emissions from avoided production of commercial fertilizers. THE IFEU PROJECT, ORWARE and EASEWASTE are life cycle assessment (LCA) models containing more detailed land application modules. A case study estimating the environmental impacts from land application of 1 ton of composted source sorted organic household waste was performed to compare the results from the different models and investigate the origin of any difference in type or magnitude of the results. The contributions from the LCI models were limited and did not depend on waste composition or local agricultural conditions. The three LCA models use the same overall approach for quantifying the impacts of the system. However, due to slightly different assumptions, quantification methods and environmental impact assessment, the obtained results varied clearly between the models. Furthermore, local conditions (e.g. soil type, farm type, climate and legal regulation) and waste composition strongly influenced the results of the environmental assessment.

Life cycle modelling of environmental impacts of application of processed organic municipal solid waste on agricultural land (EASEWASTE).

A model capable of quantifying the potential environmental impacts of agricultural application of composted or anaerobically digested source-separated organic municipal solid waste (MSW) is presented. In addition to the direct impacts, the model accounts for savings by avoiding the production and use of commercial fertilizers. The model is part of a larger model, Environmental Assessment of Solid Waste Systems and Technology (EASEWASTE), developed as a decision-support model, focusing on assessment of alternative waste management options. The environmental impacts of the land application of processed organic waste are quantified by emission coefficients referring to the composition of the processed waste and related to specific crop rotation as well as soil type. The model contains several default parameters based on literature data, field experiments and modelling by the agro-ecosystem model, Daisy. All data can be modified by the user allowing application of the model to other situations. A case study including four scenarios was performed to illustrate the use of the model. One tonne of nitrogen in composted and anaerobically digested MSW was applied as fertilizer to loamy and sandy soil at a plant farm in western Denmark. Application of the processed organic waste mainly affected the environmental impact categories global warming (0.4-0.7 PE), acidification (-0.06 (saving)-1.6 PE), nutrient enrichment (-1.0 (saving)-3.1 PE), and toxicity. The main contributors to these categories were nitrous oxide formation (global warming), ammonia volatilization (acidification and nutrient enrichment), nitrate losses (nutrient enrichment and groundwater contamination), and heavy metal input to soil (toxicity potentials). The local agricultural conditions as well as the composition of the processed MSW showed large influence on the environmental impacts. A range of benefits, mainly related to improved soil quality from long-term application of the processed organic waste, could not be generally quantified with respect to the chosen life cycle assessment impact categories and were therefore not included in the model. These effects should be considered in conjunction with the results of the life cycle assessment.