Department of Environmental Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Miljoevej, Building 113, DK-2800 Kongens Lyngby, Denmark.
Waste Manag. 2012 May;32(5):1009-18. doi: 10.1016/j.wasman.2011.12.025. Epub 2012 Jan 20.
Recycling of materials from municipal solid waste is commonly considered to be superior to any other waste treatment alternative. For the material fractions with a significant energy content this might not be the case if the treatment alternative is a waste-to-energy plant with high energy recovery rates. The environmental impacts from recycling and from incineration of six material fractions in household waste have been compared through life cycle assessment assuming high-performance technologies for material recycling as well as for waste incineration. The results showed that there are environmental benefits when recycling paper, glass, steel and aluminium instead of incinerating it. For cardboard and plastic the results were more unclear, depending on the level of energy recovery at the incineration plant, the system boundaries chosen and which impact category was in focus. Further, the environmental impact potentials from collection, pre-treatment and transport was compared to the environmental benefit from recycling and this showed that with the right means of transport, recyclables can in most cases be transported long distances. However, the results also showed that recycling of some of the material fractions can only contribute marginally in improving the overall waste management system taking into consideration their limited content in average Danish household waste.
从城市固体废物中回收材料通常被认为优于任何其他废物处理方法。如果处理方法是具有高热回收效率的垃圾焚烧厂，则对于具有显著能量含量的材料部分，情况可能并非如此。通过生命周期评估比较了家庭废物中六种材料部分的回收和焚烧的环境影响，假设材料回收和废物焚烧都采用高性能技术。结果表明，回收纸张、玻璃、钢和铝而不是焚烧它们具有环境效益。对于纸板和塑料，结果则更加不确定，这取决于焚烧厂的能源回收水平、所选择的系统边界以及关注的是哪个影响类别。此外，还比较了收集、预处理和运输的环境影响潜力与回收的环境效益，结果表明，在大多数情况下，只要使用正确的运输方式，可回收物就可以长途运输。然而，结果还表明，考虑到丹麦普通家庭废物中这些材料部分的含量有限，回收其中一些材料部分只能对改善整体废物管理系统做出微不足道的贡献。
