J. Appl. Sci. Environ. Manage.

December, 2014
JJASEM
OURNAL
All
ISSN 1119-8362
rights reserved
Full-text Available Online at
OF APPLIED SCIENCE ANDand
www.ajol.info
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT.
Vol. 18 (4) 559-565
www.bioline.org.br/ja

Life Cycle Assessment of Municipal Waste Management System

(Case Study: Karaj, Iran)

*1S. SHAHRAM NAGHIBZADEH1, NEMATOLAH KHORASANI2, JAVAD

YOUSEFI3, B. SOMAYEH MOUSAVI4, ZIAEDIN BADEHIAN5

1,3
Department of Environment, Velayat University, Iranshahr, Iran
2
Department of Environment, Collage of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran
4
Department of Electrical Engineering, Hatef Higher Education Institute, Zahedan, Iran
5
Department of Forestry, Lorestan University, Khoram abad, Iran
Email: bbmoosavi@gmail.com

KEY WORDS: Waste Management system, LCA, Karaj

ABSTRACT: LCA has been defined as a tool for evaluating the environmental burdens and
potential impacts that can be applied to municipal solid waste management systems for
determine the optimum municipal solid waste (MSW) management strategy.To investigate the
Waste Management system strategyof Karaj City we used LCA method. Three scenarios were
defined and compared based on environmental burden include water pollution, air pollution,
consumed energy and waste residues.. For each of these scenarios, an ecological indicator was
achieved from checklist values. From the environmental point of view, results show that
recycling is one of the best alternatives for Waste Management. Furthermore, composting has
an important role in alleviating the load of pollutants and energy usage in the Waste
Management system. ©JASEM
http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/jasem.v18i4.1

Introduction Municipal solid Waste Management. In Ankara, LCA

Waste Management is a basic need of any society. was used for the comparison of the different methods
Regarding the rate of waste production and the of Waste Management. In that study, five scenarios,
composition of the waste, different alternatives which were applied in Waste Management, were
might be used for Waste Management systems. defined and considered. Afterward, the
Analyzing and comparison of the environmental environmental load of each scenario was inventoried
and technological efficiency of Waste Management and presented. Impact assessment of life cycled was
systems can be performed using environmental not conducted and by comparison the results of the
assessment tools. LCA, which is the technique of life cycle inventory, suitable alternatives were chosen
investigating the environmental aspects relevant to and presented. Finally, distance reduction from the
one production or one process in all, over the life source had the least environmental impact and was
period (from birth to burial) of which, is one of the presented as the best method of solid Waste
important decision making tools. The approach Management ( Ozeler et al, 2005). Compared with
dominating this study is from cradle to tomb the different alternatives of Waste Management that
In this concept, different stages of (SETAC, 1998). was done on the basis of energy economizing and
conducting a process or services are studied lesser environmental impacts in the City of Rome, it
In LCA of the waste, the point of .(Powell, 2000) showed that recycling the energy by Waste
birth, which is known as the cradle, is the door of Management could supply the 15% of required
the house and the burial is known as the tomb. In electrical energy for the City (Cherubini et al, 2007).
each stage, consumed resources and outputs are
considered. Such processes are considered as a MATERIAL AND METHODS
system. Inputs (resources) and outputs (pollutants) Waste condition in Karaj: On the basis of the last
are inventoried and finally are assessed and statistics of Karaj Municipal, at the end of 2008, the
interpreted. rate of waste which had been gathered is 1389
ton/day, 969 ton (70%) of which are corruptible
One of the applications of LCA is the comparison of materials, sludge, and gathered sediments of the city.
the alternatives and scenarios of the Waste Figure 1, Shows the graph of produced waste of the
Management and the assessment of consequences of City (Organization of Recycle and Transformation –
different settled structures in the process of Karaj, 2008).

:*ahraa gnrpnopserroCr Email: bbmoosavi@gmail.com

Life Cycle Assessment of Municipal Waste Management System 560

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) LCA of the solid Waste Management

system of Karaj is done on the basis of ISO 14040 in four steps
(Figure 2).

Goals and Scope Definition

Interpretation
Life Cycle Inventory

Life cycle Impact Assessment

Fig: 2 The two-way relationship between interpretation

Fig 1 Different kind of waste (O.R.T, Karaj, 2008) and the first three steps means that interpretation can be
done at each stage to correct the procedure (ISO 14040, 1997)

Definition of the goals and scope; The object of this alternatives considered in this study are for
study is to assess the life cycle of the current Waste understanding the role of reducing the produced
Management System in Karaj of the environmental Municipal solid waste (reduction from origin and
viewpoint, and determining the preference in therefore making the culture and enhancing the
decisions in order to improve the Waste quality of the consumed material) and consequently
Management. The borders of the object system begin reducing the need for the number of vehicles in the
from the waste gathering in front of the door and imposed load on the environment .Scenario 2
ends in the landfilling or composting in factory and Transport System Optimizing: On the basis of this
studied time framework is one year. On the basis of scenario two alternatives were considered and
waste production rate (year 2008) three scenarios, compared. Environmental load caused by current
and in each scenario relevant management waste rate regarding the distance to the landfill (the
alternatives in the process of the waste production, same as scenario 1 alternative a) Environmental load
were developed. Therefore, management alternatives caused by current waste rate, regarding the 10%
for each scenario were compared on the basis of their reduction in distance to the landfill due to the use of
environmental load. Environmental loads are transfer stations. Management alternatives considered
assessed on the basis of criteria comprising: water in this scenario are for understanding the role of
pollution, air pollution, energy consumption and transfer stations – reduce or increase – in the imposed
residual waste. load on the environment.

Scenario 1) Collection System Optimizing: On the Scenario 3 Waste Processing System Optimizing: On
basis of this scenario, these three alternatives were the basis of this scenario, three alternatives were:
considered and compared. considered and compared.

Environmental load caused by landfilling of current Environmental load caused by landfilling of current
produced waste. produced waste. (the same as scenario 1 alternative a)
Environmental load coming from landfilling of waste Environmental load caused by 10% reduction of
which is dropped by 10 percent due to a reduction in waste due to composting. Environmental load caused
the origin, without considering the reduction of need by 10% reduction of waste due to recycling.
to transport by 10 percent in distancec) Management alternatives considered in this scenario
are for understanding the role of the process of
Environmental load coming from landfilling of waste composting, recycling and landfilling of the
which is dropped by 10 percent due to a reduction in Municipal Solid Waste in imposed loads on the
the origin, with considering the reduction of need to environment. Now in Karaj, alternatives to
transport by 10 percent in distance. Management

*1S. Shahram Naghibzadeh1, Nematolah Khorasani2, Javad Yousefi3, B. Somayeh Mousavi4, Ziaedin Badehian5
Life Cycle Assessment of Municipal Waste Management System 561

composting and landfilling of solid waste are used and the incineration is not prevalent.

Fig 3 MSW management on the basis of landfiling the all of current produced waste (a). MSW management in
Collection System Optimizing (b). MSW management in Transport System Optimizing (c). MSW management
in Waste Processing System Optimizing (d).

Life Cycle Invento: Life Cycle Inventory, presented temporal) in order that life cycle impact assessment
in the three mentioned scenarios, has been offered by might be done, does not exist (Hertwich & others,
Haight et al (2004) using the IWM_1 model. This 2000) and scientific methods for long time
model is composed of two sub models, economical assessment, is not provided. (Seppälä, 2003).
and environmental (Stypka, 2001). In present study Practically, the only approach used since the 1990s
only the environmental sub model was used. has been "lesser is better. In this approach it is
assumed that all values from one type of tension
Life Cycle Impacts Assessment: In Life Cycle gathered due to their initial dangerous traits - without
Impacts Assessment result of inventory a life cycle, considering the place and time of tension and that the
converts to objective units and consequently achieved values of tension are higher or lower than
managerial form would be achieved. So far, to threshold- cause harmful changes in the environment
perform life cycle impact assessment, a unique (White et al, 1997). Overall, life cycle impact
methodology and standardization having global assessment is done according to the standard of ISO
acceptance, is not presented (Hofstetter, 2000b). This 14043, Through the four steps shown in figure 4 .
is due to that necessary information (spatial and

Raw data Inventory Classifying and Weighing Indicator

Fig 4 stages of Life Cycle Impact Assessment Characterizing

Interpretation: Interpretation is the last stage of LCA to be done, besides the three previous stages. In this stage
data is analyzed. Interpretation of the LCA includes reviewing all the stages of LCA.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The next stage, achieved indicators in each class,
The model of IWM is run for each of the above were multiplied by the proportional weight of that
mentioned scenarios. In order to perform the class to put the additive indictors together. Based on
quantitative comparison of the scenarios and relevant the equivalent unit or ecological indicator,
alternatives, inventoried value allocated to impact environmental load of each class was calculated.
classes considered for this purpose. Therefore each Calculated values are shown in tables 1, 2 and 3,
impact class in inventoried values, were normalized without dimension and for comparing the scenarios
based on the rate of managed waste in each scenario and different alternatives. Ecological indicators as
and alternative. These values were multiplied by the quantitative criteria are used for comparing the
characterizing factors to calculate the inventoried environmental load for each of the scenarios. Each
values in each achieved impact class as per the unit. scenario acquired lower point has a lesser load.

Table 1: Environmental load of the scenario (1) on the basis of Ecological Indicators
Scenario 1-A Scenario 1-B Scenario 1-C
19.821 20.020 19.796

*1S. Shahram Naghibzadeh1, Nematolah Khorasani2, Javad Yousefi3, B. Somayeh Mousavi4, Ziaedin Badehian5
Life Cycle Assessment of Municipal Waste Management System 562

Table 2: Environmental load of the scenario Table 3: Environmental load of the scenario
(2) on the basis of ecological indicators (3) on the basis of ecological indicator
Scenario 2-A Scenario 2-B
19.821 19.618 19.821 17.911 17.666

Results are shown in figures 5 to 10 of which the witness alternative of the scenario 2 and 3 has been omitted to
have better presentation of the changes in each impact class applying the management in different sections of
collecting, transportation and processing.

Fig 5:Changes of energy use of impact classes, applying the management in

different phases of collecting, transportation and processing

Figure 6 shows that the most economical use of energy is achieved from recycling (scenario3-C) and besides
the economizing in energy use, considers the waste as an invaluable source.

Fig 6: Changes of impact classes of greenhouse gases, applying the management in different phases of
collecting, transportation and processing

As it is clear in figure 6, composting emits the least matter, has 21 times more potential of greenhouse
amount of greenhouse gas (scenario3-B) so that if effect than CO2 (IPPC, 1996). Furthermore,
this process is properly done, methane will not be composting leads to a reduction of input volume of
produced. Methane, which is produced from the waste to landfills (Haight, 2004). Scenario 3-C has
anaerobic decomposition process of the organic reduced the emission of greenhouse gases by 12%

*1S. Shahram Naghibzadeh1, Nematolah Khorasani2, Javad Yousefi3, B. Somayeh Mousavi4, Ziaedin Badehian5
Life Cycle Assessment of Municipal Waste Management System 563

per ton of managed waste showing the effective role of recycling in reduction of greenhouse gases.

Fig 7 Changes of impact class of acidic gases applying the management in different phases of collecting,
transportation and processing

Figure 7 shows that composting (scenario3-B), has also because of the reduction of energy used for the
reduced the production of acidic gases by 11% per waste treatment. The highest rate of reduction of
ton of managed waste showing the effective role of acidic gases refers to the recycling scenario
composting in reduction of acidic gases. This (scenario3-C) near to the rate of reduction for
reduction is due to the reduction of H2S from scenario 3-B.
anaerobic decomposition of corruptible material and

Fig 8 Changes of impact classes of photochemical smog, applying management in different phases of
collecting, transportation and processing

Figure 8 shows the role of transmission stations in described above (scenario3-B). Recycling has
Waste Management along with a little reduction in reduced the production of photochemical smog
the photochemical smog production in comparison through the reduction of the waste transported into
with distance shortened from the source (scenario 2- the landfill (scenario3-C) by (more than) 10% per ton
B) and toward the current state, it shows the showing the positive role of the recycling process in
reductive trend. Composting shows the least rate of reducing the of photochemical smog.
photochemical production due to the reasons

*1S. Shahram Naghibzadeh1, Nematolah Khorasani2, Javad Yousefi3, B. Somayeh Mousavi4, Ziaedin Badehian5
Life Cycle Assessment of Municipal Waste Management System 564

Fig 9 Changes of impact classes of toxic output of water and air applying management in different phases of
collecting, transportation and processing

Figure 9 generally shows the similar trend shown in of waste transmitted into the landfill and reduction of
figure 5 with the difference being that the negative distance) and 2-B (using the transmitting stations) has
slope of toxic outputs from scenarios 1-B, 1-C and 2- lesser effect towards the composting and recycling.
B has the slower trend so that scenario 1-C (reduction

Fig 10 Changes of ecological indicators applying management in different phases of collecting, transportation
and processing

The ecological indicator of the environmental load in composting in reduction of environmental impact.
each of the scenarios and alternatives considered is The least value of ecological indicators refers to the
the overall consequence of actions and interactions of scenario of recycling processes (scenario3-C).
life cycle of solid waste. Results of this indicator
explain the arrangement of the environmental Conclusion: Regarding to the results recycling is one
preference of each phase and waste managerial of the best alternatives for Waste Management.
processes. As it clear, in figure 10, the effect of Furthermore, composting has an important role in
applying the management for waste is as follows: alleviating the load of pollutants and energy usage in
the Waste Management system.
By reducing the waste transmitted to the landfills
with constant distance (scenario2-B), due to the using REFERENCE
of transmission stations for each managed waste per Haight,, Murray. 2004Technical Report: Integrated
ton (normal value), ecological indicators have been Solid Waste Management Model. School of
decreased. It means that the ecological indicator Planning. University of Waterloo. Canada.
justifies the positive role of transport stations in
reducing the imposed load on the environment.
Composting has decreased the ecological indicator
(scenario3-B) showing the effective role of

*1S. Shahram Naghibzadeh1, Nematolah Khorasani2, Javad Yousefi3, B. Somayeh Mousavi4, Ziaedin Badehian5
Life Cycle Assessment of Municipal Waste Management System 565

International Standard, ISO 14040,1997 SimaPro 6, Pre´ Consultants BV, Amersfoort, The
Environmental management—life cycle Netherlands, 2004. Avialble from :
assessment, Principles and Framework. www.pre.nl.html

International Standard, ISO 14041, 1998. Stypka, T,. 2001 Adopting the Integrated Waste
Environmental management—life cycle Management Model(IWM-1) Into The Decision
assessment, Goal and Scope Definition and Process, Institute of Heat Engineering and Air
Inventory Analysis. Protection, Cracow University of Technology.
Warszawska 24, 31-155 Cracow, Poland
International Standard, ISO 14042,2000.
Environmental management—life cycle Francesco Cherubini,, Silvia Bargigli , Sergio
assessment, Life Cycle Interpretation. Ulgiati.,2007. Life cycle assessment of urban
waste management: Energy performances and
International Standard, ISO 14043, 2000. environmental impacts. Waste Management xxx
Environmental management—life cycle (2007) xxx–xxx
assessment, Life Cycle Impact Assessment.
Hertwich, E.G., Hammitt, J.K. & Pease, W.S. 2000.
IPCC, 1996: Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas A theoretical foundation for life-cycle
Inventories Workbook. International Panel on assessment.Journal of Industrial Ecology 4(1):
Climate Change. 13-28.

Ozeler. D., U. Yetis., G.N. Demirer. 2005. Life Cycle Hofstetter, P., Braunschweig, A., Mettier, T., Müller-
Assessment of MSW Management Methods: Wenk, R. & Tietje, O. 2000b. The mixing
Ankara Case Study. Environmental International. triangle:correlation and graphical decision
405-411 support for LCA-based comparisons. Journal of
IndustrialEcology 3(4): 97-115.
Powell, J., 2000. The potential for using life cycle
inventory analysis inlocal authority waste White P.R., Franke M., Hindle P. (1997). Integrated
management decision making. Journal of Solid Waste Management - a Lifecycle Inventory
Environmental Planning and Management 43, Blackie Academic & Professional. Blackie
351–367. Academic & Professional, London.

Seppälä, J,.2003. Life Cycle Impact Assessment

Based on Decision Analysis. PhD thesis,
Helsinki University of Technology.71pp

SETAC, 1998. LCA News. Vigon B. (Ed.), V.18(6).

www.setac.org.

*1S. Shahram Naghibzadeh1, Nematolah Khorasani2, Javad Yousefi3, B. Somayeh Mousavi4, Ziaedin Badehian5