Plastic Waste Management in the context of a European recycling society

David Lazarevic (), Emmanuelle Aoustin, Nicolas Buclet () and Nils Brandt
Additional contact information
David Lazarevic: CREIDD - Centre de Recherches et d'Etudes Interdisciplinaires sur le Développement Durable - ICD - Institut Charles Delaunay - UTT - Université de Technologie de Troyes - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
Nicolas Buclet: PACTE - Pacte, Laboratoire de sciences sociales - UPMF - Université Pierre Mendès France - Grenoble 2 - UJF - Université Joseph Fourier - Grenoble 1 - IEPG - Sciences Po Grenoble - Institut d'études politiques de Grenoble - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, CREIDD - Centre de Recherches et d'Etudes Interdisciplinaires sur le Développement Durable - ICD - Institut Charles Delaunay - UTT - Université de Technologie de Troyes - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
Nils Brandt: KTH - Department of Industrial Ecology, - KTH - KTH Royal Institute of Technology [Stockholm]

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: A number of life cycle assessment (LCA) studies have been undertaken within the last 15 years comparing end-of-life treatment options for post-consumer plastic waste, including techniques such as: mechanical recycling, feedstock recycling, incineration with energy recovery and landfilling. These have attempted to support decisions in the formulation of waste management strategies and policies. In light of the introduction of life cycle thinking into European waste policies, specifically in relation to the waste hierarchy, a literature review of publically available LCA studies evaluating alternative end-of-life treatment options for plastic waste has been conducted. This has been done in order to: establish if a consensus exists as to the environmentally preferable treatment option for plastic waste; identify the methodological consid- erations and assumptions that have led to these conclusions; and determine the legitimacy of applying the waste hierarchy to the plastic wastestream. The majority of the LCA studies concluded that, when single polymer plastic waste fractions with little organic contamination are recycled and replace virgin plastic at a ratio of close to1:1, recycling is generally the environmentally preferred treatment option when compared to municipal solid waste incineration. It has been found that assumptions relating to the virgin material substitution ratio and level of organic contamination can have a significant influence upon the results of these studies. Although a limited number of studies addressed feedstock recycling, feedstock recycling and the use of plastic waste as a solid recovered fuel in cement kilns were preferred to municipal solid waste incineration. Landfilling of plastic waste compared to municipal solid waste incineration proved to be the least preferred option for all impact categories except for global warming potential. Due to the uncertainty surrounding some assumptions in the studies, it cannot be said with confidence that the waste hierarchy should be applied to plastic waste management as a general rule.

Keywords: Life-cycle Assessment; Plastic Waste; Waste Hierarchy; Recycling; Environmental Impacts (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2010
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (36)

Published in Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 2010, 55 (4), pp.246-259. ⟨10.1016/j.resconrec.2010.09.014⟩

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

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:hal:journl:halshs-00584531

DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2010.09.014

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().