A review of how decision support tools address resource recovery in sanitation systems

Globally, there is increasing interest in recovering resources from sanitation systems. However, the process of planning and implementing circular sanitation is complex and can necessitate software-based tools to support decision-making. In this paper, we review 24 decision support software tools used for sanitation planning, to generate insights into how they address resource recovery across the sanitation chain. The findings reveal that the tools can address many planning issues around resource recovery in sanitation including analysis of material flows, integrating resource recovery technologies and products in the design of sanitation systems, and assessing the sustainability implications of resource recovery. The results and recommendations presented here can guide users in the choice of different tools depending on, for example, what kind of tool features and functions the user is interested in as well as the elements of the planning process and the sanitation service chain that are in focus. However, some issues are not adequately covered and need improvements in the available tools including quantifying the demand for and value of resource recovery products, addressing retrofitting of existing sanitation infrastructure for resource recovery and assessing social impacts of resource recovery from a life cycle perspective. While there is scope to develop new tools or to modify existing ones to cover these gaps, communication efforts are needed to create awareness about existing tools, their functions and how they address resource recovery. It is also important to further integrate the available tools into infrastructure planning and programming processes by e.g. customizing to relevant planning regimes and procedures, to move them beyond research and pilots into practice, and hopefully contribute towards more circular sanitation systems.

Analyzing the relationship between product waste footprints and environmental damage - A life cycle analysis of 1,400+ products

A major problem for the circular economy is monitoring improvements in environmental sustainability. Measuring how much waste reduction efforts contribute to the decrease of environmental impact is difficult, because knowledge on whether life cycle waste amounts correlate with environmental damage is limited. In this article, product waste footprints are used to explore structural similarities and differences in associations with environmental damage. Using the waste flows linked to the production system of 1487 reference products from the Ecoinvent database, we found significant regression equations with R² of 0.75-0.89 between product waste footprints and potential impact on ecosystem diversity, human health and resource availability using log-transformed variables. For each 1 % increase in solid waste, potential impact on the environment increased by 0.75-0.84 %. This strong association between pre-consumer waste and environmental damage is particularly important for advocating for circular economy efforts at the point of consumption, where life cycle waste is invisible to consumers.

Handling climate change education at universities: an overview

BACKGROUND

Climate change is a problem which is global in nature, and whose effects go across a wide range of disciplines. It is therefore important that this theme is taken into account as part of universities´ teaching and research programs.

METHODS

A three-tiered approach was used, consisting of a bibliometric analysis, an online survey and a set of case studies, which allow a profile to be built, as to how a sample of universities from 45 countries handle climate change as part of their teaching programs.

RESULTS

This paper reports on a study which aimed at identifying the extent to which matters related to climate change are addressed within the teaching and research practices at universities, with a focus on the training needs of teaching staff. It consists of a bibliometric analysis, combined with an online worldwide survey aimed at ascertaining the degree of involvement from universities in reducing their own carbon footprint, and the ways they offer training provisions on the topic. This is complemented by a set of 12 case studies from universities round the world, illustrating current trends on how universities handle climate change. Apart from reporting on the outcomes of the study, the paper highlights what some universities are doing to handle climate issues, and discusses the implications of the research.

CONCLUSIONS

The paper lists some items via which universities may better educate and train their students on how to handle the many challenges posed by climate change.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12302-021-00552-5.

Future waste treatment and energy systems--examples of joint scenarios

Development and use of scenarios for large interdisciplinary projects is a complicated task. This article provides practical examples of how it has been carried out in two projects addressing waste management and energy issues respectively. Based on experiences from the two projects, recommendations are made for an approach concerning development of scenarios in projects dealing with both waste management and energy issues. Recommendations are given to develop and use overall scenarios for the project and leave room for sub-scenarios in parts of the project. Combining different types of scenarios is recommended, too, in order to adapt to the methods and tools of different disciplines, such as developing predictive scenarios with general equilibrium tools and analysing explorative scenarios with energy system analysis tools. Furthermore, as marginals identified in differing future background systems determine the outcomes of consequential life cycle assessments (LCAs), it is considered advisable to develop and use explorative external scenarios based on possible marginals as a framework for consequential LCAs. This approach is illustrated using an on-going Danish research project.

Models for waste life cycle assessment: review of technical assumptions

A number of waste life cycle assessment (LCA) models have been gradually developed since the early 1990 s, in a number of countries, usually independently from each other. Large discrepancies in results have been observed among different waste LCA models, although it has also been shown that results from different LCA studies can be consistent. This paper is an attempt to identify, review and analyse methodologies and technical assumptions used in various parts of selected waste LCA models. Several criteria were identified, which could have significant impacts on the results, such as the functional unit, system boundaries, waste composition and energy modelling. The modelling assumptions of waste management processes, ranging from collection, transportation, intermediate facilities, recycling, thermal treatment, biological treatment, and landfilling, are obviously critical when comparing waste LCA models. This review infers that some of the differences in waste LCA models are inherent to the time they were developed. It is expected that models developed later, benefit from past modelling assumptions and knowledge and issues. Models developed in different countries furthermore rely on geographic specificities that have an impact on the results of waste LCA models. The review concludes that more effort should be employed to harmonise and validate non-geographic assumptions to strengthen waste LCA modelling.

Models for waste life cycle assessment: review of technical assumptions

A number of waste life cycle assessment (LCA) models have been gradually developed since the early 1990 s, in a number of countries, usually independently from each other. Large discrepancies in results have been observed among different waste LCA models, although it has also been shown that results from different LCA studies can be consistent. This paper is an attempt to identify, review and analyse methodologies and technical assumptions used in various parts of selected waste LCA models. Several criteria were identified, which could have significant impacts on the results, such as the functional unit, system boundaries, waste composition and energy modelling. The modelling assumptions of waste management processes, ranging from collection, transportation, intermediate facilities, recycling, thermal treatment, biological treatment, and landfilling, are obviously critical when comparing waste LCA models. This review infers that some of the differences in waste LCA models are inherent to the time they were developed. It is expected that models developed later, benefit from past modelling assumptions and knowledge and issues. Models developed in different countries furthermore rely on geographic specificities that have an impact on the results of waste LCA models. The review concludes that more effort should be employed to harmonise and validate non-geographic assumptions to strengthen waste LCA modelling.

A life cycle assessment of destruction of ammunition

The Swedish Armed Forces have large stocks of ammunition that were produced at a time when decommissioning was not considered. This ammunition will eventually become obsolete and must be destroyed, preferably with minimal impact on the environment and in a safe way for personnel. The aim of this paper is to make a comparison of the environmental impacts in a life cycle perspective of three different methods of decommissioning/destruction of ammunition, and to identify the environmental advantages and disadvantages of each of these destruction methods: open detonation; static kiln incineration with air pollution control combined with metal recycling, and a combination of incineration with air pollution control, open burning, recovery of some energetic material and metal recycling. Data used are for the specific processes and from established LCA databases. Recycling the materials in the ammunition and minimising the spread of airborne pollutants during incineration were found to be the most important factors affecting the life cycle environmental performance of the compared destruction methods. Open detonation with or without metal recycling proved to be the overall worst alternative from a life cycle perspective. The results for the static kiln and combination treatment indicate that the kind of ammunition and location of the destruction plant might determine the choice of method, since the environmental impacts from these methods are of little difference in the case of this specific grenade. Different methods for destruction of ammunition have previously been discussed from a risk and safety perspective. This is however to our knowledge the first study looking specifically on environmentally aspect in a life cycle perspective.

Recent developments in Life Cycle Assessment

Life Cycle Assessment is a tool to assess the environmental impacts and resources used throughout a product's life cycle, i.e., from raw material acquisition, via production and use phases, to waste management. The methodological development in LCA has been strong, and LCA is broadly applied in practice. The aim of this paper is to provide a review of recent developments of LCA methods. The focus is on some areas where there has been an intense methodological development during the last years. We also highlight some of the emerging issues. In relation to the Goal and Scope definition we especially discuss the distinction between attributional and consequential LCA. For the Inventory Analysis, this distinction is relevant when discussing system boundaries, data collection, and allocation. Also highlighted are developments concerning databases and Input-Output and hybrid LCA. In the sections on Life Cycle Impact Assessment we discuss the characteristics of the modelling as well as some recent developments for specific impact categories and weighting. In relation to the Interpretation the focus is on uncertainty analysis. Finally, we discuss recent developments in relation to some of the strengths and weaknesses of LCA.

Environmental and economic assessment methods for waste management decision-support: possibilities and limitations

A large number of methods and approaches that can be used for supporting waste management decisions at different levels in society have been developed. In this paper an overview of methods is provided and preliminary guidelines for the choice of methods are presented. The methods introduced include: Environmental Impact Assessment, Strategic Environmental Assessment, Life Cycle Assessment, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Cost-effectiveness Analysis, Life-cycle Costing, Risk Assessment, Material Flow Accounting, Substance Flow Analysis, Energy Analysis, Exergy Analysis, Entropy Analysis, Environmental Management Systems, and Environmental Auditing. The characteristics used are the types of impacts included, the objects under study and whether the method is procedural or analytical. The different methods can be described as systems analysis methods. Waste management systems thinking is receiving increasing attention. This is, for example, evidenced by the suggested thematic strategy on waste by the European Commission where life-cycle analysis and life-cycle thinking get prominent positions. Indeed, life-cycle analyses have been shown to provide policy-relevant and consistent results. However, it is also clear that the studies will always be open to criticism since they are simplifications of reality and include uncertainties. This is something all systems analysis methods have in common. Assumptions can be challenged and it may be difficult to generalize from case studies to policies. This suggests that if decisions are going to be made, they are likely to be made on a less than perfect basis.

What life-cycle assessment does and does not do in assessments of waste management

In assessments of the environmental impacts of waste management, life-cycle assessment (LCA) helps expanding the perspective beyond the waste management system. This is important, since the indirect environmental impacts caused by surrounding systems, such as energy and material production, often override the direct impacts of the waste management system itself. However, the applicability of LCA for waste management planning and policy-making is restricted by certain limitations, some of which are characteristics inherent to LCA methodology as such, and some of which are relevant specifically in the context of waste management. Several of them are relevant also for other types of systems analysis. We have identified and discussed such characteristics with regard to how they may restrict the applicability of LCA in the context of waste management. Efforts to improve LCA with regard to these aspects are also described. We also identify what other tools are available for investigating issues that cannot be adequately dealt with by traditional LCA models, and discuss whether LCA methodology should be expanded rather than complemented by other tools to increase its scope and applicability.

Life cycle assessment of a national policy proposal - the case of a Swedish waste incineration tax

At the core of EU and Swedish waste policy is the so-called waste hierarchy, according to which waste should first be prevented, but should otherwise be treated in the following order of prioritisation: reuse, recycling when environmentally motivated, energy recovery, and last landfilling. Some recent policy decisions in Sweden aim to influence waste management in the direction of the waste hierarchy. In 2001 a governmental commission assessed the economic and environmental impacts of introducing a weight-based tax on waste incineration, the purpose of which would be to encourage waste reduction and increase materials recycling and biological treatment. This paper presents the results of a life cycle assessment (LCA) of the waste incineration tax proposal. It was done in the context of a larger research project concerning the development and testing of a framework for Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). The aim of this paper is to assess the life cycle environmental impacts of the waste incineration tax proposal, and to investigate whether there are any possibilities of more optimal design of such a tax. The proposed design of the waste incineration tax results in increased recycling, but only in small environmental improvements. A more elaborate tax design is suggested, in which the tax level would partly be related to the fossil carbon content of the waste.

Flexible and robust strategies for waste management in Sweden

Treatment of solid waste continues to be on the political agenda. Waste disposal issues are often viewed from an environmental perspective, but economic and social aspects also need to be considered when deciding on waste strategies and policy instruments. The aim of this paper is to suggest flexible and robust strategies for waste management in Sweden, and to discuss different policy instruments. Emphasis is on environmental aspects, but social and economic aspects are also considered. The results show that most waste treatment methods have a role to play in a robust and flexible integrated waste management system, and that the waste hierarchy is valid as a rule of thumb from an environmental perspective. A review of social aspects shows that there is a general willingness among people to source separate wastes. A package of policy instruments can include landfill tax, an incineration tax which is differentiated with respect to the content of fossil fuels and a weight based incineration tax, as well as support to the use of biogas and recycled materials.

Life cycle assessment part 2: current impact assessment practice

Providing our society with goods and services contributes to a wide range of environmental impacts. Waste generation, emissions and the consumption of resources occur at many stages in a product's life cycle-from raw material extraction, energy acquisition, production and manufacturing, use, reuse, recycling, through to ultimate disposal. These all contribute to impacts such as climate change, stratospheric ozone depletion, photooxidant formation (smog), eutrophication, acidification, toxicological stress on human health and ecosystems, the depletion of resources and noise-among others. The need exists to address these product-related contributions more holistically and in an integrated manner, providing complimentary insights to those of regulatory/process-oriented methodologies. A previous article (Part 1, Rebitzer et al., 2004) outlined how to define and model a product's life cycle in current practice, as well as the methods and tools that are available for compiling the associated waste, emissions and resource consumption data into a life cycle inventory. This article highlights how practitioners and researchers from many domains have come together to provide indicators for the different impacts attributable to products in the life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) phase of life cycle assessment (LCA).