Hyppää sisältöön
    • Suomeksi
    • På svenska
    • In English
  • Suomeksi
  • In English
  • Kirjaudu
Näytä aineisto 
  •   Etusivu
  • LUTPub
  • Tieteelliset julkaisut
  • Näytä aineisto
  •   Etusivu
  • LUTPub
  • Tieteelliset julkaisut
  • Näytä aineisto
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Carbon footprint of different recovery options for the repulping reject from liquid packaging board waste treatment process

Khan, Md.Musharof Hussain; Laitinen, Vilma; Havukainen, Jouni; Horttanainen, Mika (2021-10-13)

Katso/Avaa
khan_et_al_carbon_footprint_publishers_version.pdf (2.035Mb)
Lataukset: 


Publishers version

Khan, Md.Musharof Hussain
Laitinen, Vilma
Havukainen, Jouni
Horttanainen, Mika
13.10.2021

Waste Management

136

93-103

Elsevier

School of Energy Systems

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2021.10.003
Näytä kaikki kuvailutiedot
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe2021101851388

Tiivistelmä

Liquid packaging board (LPB) is an integral part of storing and transporting liquid food. In addition to its significant advantages, LPB has been challenging the existing waste management sector since its introduction into the market. In most European countries, LPB waste is either incinerated or recycled in the recycling facilities where fibre is recycled, and the repulping reject is separated for incineration. Mechanical recycling and chemical recycling processes are other options for repulping reject treatment. This study used life cycle assessment (LCA) to compare the environmental impacts of three treatment processes, incineration, mechanical recycling and chemical recycling; each was considered with the functional unit of 1 tonne of repulping reject. Furthermore, two sub-scenarios based on the substituted heat produced by energy from the treatment processes were considered. In substituting biomass-based heat sources, chemical recycling generated the lowest greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, about 560 kg CO2 eq. tonne-1 repulping rejects, followed by the mechanical recycling process (approximately 740 kg CO2 eq. tonne-1 repulping reject). The maximum amount of GHG was emitted from the incineration scenario, which was about 1900 kg CO2 eq. tonne-1 repulping rejects. By substituting natural gas-based
heat sources, chemical recycling generated about 290 kg CO2 eq. tonne-1 repulping rejects. On the contrary, the mechanical recycling process generated about 430 kg CO2 eq. tonne-1 repulping rejects and incineration process generated 960 kg CO2 eq. tonne-1 repulping rejects. Uncertainty analysis showed that some assumptions significantly impact the results; however, the chemical recycling process had the lowest environmental impact in almost all uncertainty analysis.

Lähdeviite

Khan, M., Laitinen, V., Havukainen, J., Horttanainen, M. (2021.) Carbon footprint of different recovery options for the repulping reject from liquid packaging board waste treatment process. Waste Management, vol. 136, pp. 93-103. DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2021.10.003

Alkuperäinen verkko-osoite

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0956053X21005328
Kokoelmat
  • Tieteelliset julkaisut [1100]
LUT-yliopisto
PL 20
53851 Lappeenranta
Ota yhteyttä | Tietosuoja | Saavutettavuusseloste
 

 

Tämä kokoelma

JulkaisuajatTekijätNimekkeetKoulutusohjelmaAvainsanatSyöttöajatYhteisöt ja kokoelmat

Omat tiedot

Kirjaudu sisäänRekisteröidy
LUT-yliopisto
PL 20
53851 Lappeenranta
Ota yhteyttä | Tietosuoja | Saavutettavuusseloste