These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Life cycle impact assessment of various waste conversion technologies.
    Author: Khoo HH.
    Journal: Waste Manag; 2009 Jun; 29(6):1892-900. PubMed ID: 19157835.
    Abstract:
    Advanced thermal treatment technologies utilizing pyrolysis or gasification, as well as a combined approach, are introduced as sustainable methods to treat wastes in Singapore. Eight different technologies are evaluated: pyrolysis-gasification of MSW; pyrolysis of MSW; thermal cracking gasification of granulated MSW; combined pyrolysis, gasification and oxidation of MSW; steam gasification of wood; circulating fluidized bed (CFB) gasification of organic wastes; gasification of RDF; and the gasification of tyres. Life cycle assessment is carried out to determine the environmental impacts of the various waste conversion systems including global warming potential, acidification potential, terrestrial eutrophication and ozone photochemical formation. The normalization and weighting results, calculated according to Singapore national emission inventories, showed that the two highest impacts are from thermal cracking gasification of granulated MSW and the gasification of RDF; and the least are from the steam gasification of wood and the pyrolysis-gasification of MSW. A simplified life cycle cost comparison showed that the two most costs-effective waste conversion systems are the CFB gasification of organic waste and the combined pyrolysis, gasification and oxidation of MSW. The least favorable - highest environmental impact as well as highest costs - are the thermal cracking gasification of granulated MSW and the gasification of tyres.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]