Economic, Environmental, and Sociopolitical Aspects of Waste Incineration: A Scoping Review

Peter W. Tait (), Joe Salmona, Mahakaran Sandhu, Thomas Guscott, Jonathon King and Victoria Williamson
Additional contact information
Peter W. Tait: School of Medicine and Psychology, College of Science and Medicine, Australian National University, Acton, ACT 2601, Australia
Joe Salmona: School of Medicine and Psychology, College of Science and Medicine, Australian National University, Acton, ACT 2601, Australia
Mahakaran Sandhu: School of Medicine and Psychology, College of Science and Medicine, Australian National University, Acton, ACT 2601, Australia
Thomas Guscott: School of Medicine and Psychology, College of Science and Medicine, Australian National University, Acton, ACT 2601, Australia
Jonathon King: School of Medicine and Psychology, College of Science and Medicine, Australian National University, Acton, ACT 2601, Australia
Victoria Williamson: School of Medicine and Psychology, College of Science and Medicine, Australian National University, Acton, ACT 2601, Australia

Sustainability, 2025, vol. 17, issue 12, 1-14

Abstract: Objective: To examine the economic, environmental, and sociopolitical aspects of waste-to-energy incineration (WtE-I) and to provide recommendations for the Australian context. Methods: A scoping review of the literature published from 2016 to 2024 was conducted, adhering to the PRISMA guidelines. Results: This review identifies WtE-I as a dual-purpose tool for energy production and waste management. However, its environmental profile is unclear, with potential significant environmental and health risks due to the emission of toxins and heavy metals and diminished air quality. The economic feasibility of WtE-I varies, with high initial costs and operational expenses offset by subsidies, revenue from energy, and material recovery. Public opposition to WtE-I is prevalent, driven by health concerns, and this raises important environmental justice issues, especially for marginalised communities. Conclusions: The present study provides economic, environmental, and sociopolitical recommendations against WtE-I. When compared to landfill, WtE-I demonstrates economic and environmental benefits. The transition to a circular economy with renewables-derived electricity attenuates the benefits of WtE-I. This, combined with grassroots opposition to WtE-I and its violations of social justice, renders future WtE-I projects unjustifiable. Public health practitioners need to promote primary waste reduction, recycling/composting, and other non-incinerator waste management practices in Australia.

Keywords: waste-to-energy incineration (WtE-I); waste; incineration; economic analysis; environmental impacts; social justice; policy; circular economy (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/12/5528/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/12/5528/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:12:p:5528-:d:1679968

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().