Circular economy life cycle cost for kerbside waste material looping process
Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
| Veröffentlicht in: | Waste management (New York, N.Y.). - 1999. - 186(2024) vom: 15. Sept., Seite 307-317 |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Weitere Verfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Online-Aufsatz |
| Sprache: | English |
| Veröffentlicht: |
2024
|
| Zugriff auf das übergeordnete Werk: | Waste management (New York, N.Y.) |
| Schlagworte: | Journal Article Circular economy Closed-loop recycling Life cycle cost Municipal solid waste Open-looped recycling Solid Waste asphalt 8052-42-4 Hydrocarbons |
| Zusammenfassung: | Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved. Rapid expansion in urban areas has engendered a superfluity of municipal solid waste (MSW) stemming from contemporary civilization, encompassing commercial sectors and human undertakings. Kerbside waste, a type of MSW, has the potential for recycling and reuse at the end of its first life cycle, but is often limited to a linear cycle. This study aimed to assess the life cycle costs of different separation and recycling methods for handling kerbside waste. A new life cycle cost model, drawing from the circular economy's value retention process (VRP) model, has been created and applied to assess the continuous recycling of kerbside glass. The study investigates two key separation techniques, kerbside recycling mixed bin recycling (KRMB) kerbside glass recycling separate bin (KGRSB) and analyses their impact on the life cycle cost of the recycling process. Additionally, the research explores two approaches of recycling and downcycling: closed-loop recycling, which pertains to the recycling of glass containers, and open-looped recycling, which involves the use of recycled glass in asphalt. The results showed when use annually collected waste as the functional unit, the KRMB model incurred lower costs compared to the KGRSB model due to its lower production output. However, when evaluated over a 1-ton production of glass container and asphalt, the KGRSB method demonstrated superior cost performance with a 40-50% reduction compared to the KRMB method. The open-loop recycling method (asphalt) incurred a higher cost compared to the closed-loop recycling method due to its larger production volume over a 21-year period |
|---|---|
| Beschreibung: | Date Completed 10.07.2024 Date Revised 10.07.2024 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
| ISSN: | 1879-2456 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.wasman.2024.06.023 |