Schmidt Jannick H, Holm Peter, Merrild Anne, Christensen Per
Department of Development and Planning, Aalborg University, Fibigerstraede 13, 9220 Aalborg East, Denmark.
Waste Manag. 2007;27(11):1519-30. doi: 10.1016/j.wasman.2006.09.004. Epub 2006 Nov 16.
The waste hierarchy is being widely discussed these days, not only by cost-benefit analysts, but a growing number of life cycle assessments (LCA) have also begun to question it. In this article, we investigate the handling of waste paper in Denmark and compare the present situation with scenarios of more waste being recycled, incinerated or consigned to landfill. The investigations are made in accordance with ISO 14040-43 and based on the newly launched methodology of consequential LCA and following the recent guidelines of the European Centre on Waste and Material Flows. The LCA concerns the Danish consumption of paper in 1999, totalling 1.2 million tons. The results of the investigation indicate that the waste hierarchy is reliable; from an environmental point of view recycling of paper is better than incineration and landfilling. For incineration, the reason for the advantage of landfilling mainly comes from the substitution of fossil fuels, when incinerators provide heat and electricity. For recycling, the advantage is related to the saved wood resources, which can be used for generating energy from wood, i.e., from renewable fuel which does not contribute to global warming.
如今，废物管理层次体系不仅受到成本效益分析人士的广泛讨论，越来越多的生命周期评估（LCA）也开始对其提出质疑。在本文中，我们研究了丹麦废纸的处理情况，并将当前情况与更多废纸被回收利用、焚烧或填埋的情景进行了比较。这些调查是按照ISO 14040 - 43进行的，基于新推出的后果性生命周期评估方法，并遵循欧洲废物与物质流中心的最新指南。该生命周期评估涉及1999年丹麦的纸张消费量，总计120万吨。调查结果表明，废物管理层次体系是可靠的；从环境角度来看，纸张回收优于焚烧和填埋。对于焚烧而言，填埋具有优势的原因主要来自化石燃料的替代，即焚烧炉提供热能和电能时。对于回收利用，其优势与节省的木材资源有关，这些木材资源可用于从木材中获取能源，也就是从不会导致全球变暖的可再生燃料中获取能源。
