Search

Background There has been growing interest in the development of waste-specific decay factors for estimation of greenhouse gas emissions from landfills in national greenhouse gas inventories. Although engineered wood products (EWPs) and paper represent a substantial component of the solid waste stream, there is limited information available on their carbon dynamics in landfills. The objective of this study was to determine the extent of carbon loss for EWPs and paper products commonly used in Australia. Experiments were conducted under laboratory conditions designed to simulate optimal anaerobic biodegradation in a landfill. Results Methane generation rates over incubations of 307–677 days ranged from zero for medium-density fibreboard (MDF) to 326 mL CH4 g−1 for copy paper. Carbon losses for particleboard and MDF ranged from 0.7 to 1.6%, consistent with previous estimates. Carbon loss for the exterior wall panel product (2.8%) was consistent with the expected value for blackbutt, the main wood type used in its manufacture. Carbon loss for bamboo (11.4%) was significantly higher than for EWPs. Carbon losses for the three types of copy paper tested ranged from 72.4 to 82.5%, and were significantly higher than for cardboard (27.3–43.8%). Cardboard that had been buried in landfill for 20 years had a carbon loss of 27.3%—indicating that environmental conditions in the landfill did not support complete decomposition of the available carbon. Thus carbon losses for paper products as measured in bioreactors clearly overestimate those in actual landfills. Carbon losses, as estimated by gas generation, were on average lower than those derived by mass balance. The low carbon loss for particleboard and MDF is consistent with carbon loss for Australian wood types described in previous studies. A factor for carbon loss for combined EWPs and wood in landfills in Australia of 1.3% and for paper of 48% is proposed. Conclusions The new suggested combined decay factor for wood and EWPs represents a significant reduction from the current factor used in the Australian greenhouse gas inventory; whereas the suggested decay factor for paper is similar to the current decay factor. Our results improve current understanding of the carbon dynamics of harvested wood products, and allow more refined estimates of methane emissions from landfills. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13021-018-0115-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Pulp-and-paper mills produce various types of contaminants and a significant amount of wastewater depending on the type of processes used in the plant. Since the generated wastewaters can be potentially polluting and very dangerous, they should be treated in wastewater treatment plants before being released to the environment. This paper reviews different wastewater treatment processes used in the pulp-and-paper industry and compares them with respect to their contaminant removal efficiencies and the extent of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission. It also evaluates the impact of operating parameters on the performance of different treatment processes. Two mathematical models were used to estimate GHG emission in common biological treatment processes used in the pulp-and-paper industry. Nutrient removal processes and sludge treatment are discussed and their associated GHG emissions are calculated. Although both aerobic and anaerobic biological processes are appropriate for wastewater treatment, their combination known as hybrid processes showed a better contaminant removal capacity at higher efficiencies under optimized operating conditions with reduced GHG emission and energy costs.

Large areas of mine tailings are reclaimed by applying organic amendments such as paper mill sludge (PMS). Although mining industries can use PMS freshly generated by paper mills, operational constraints on paper industries make temporary landfilling of this material an unavoidable alternative for the paper industries, creating the most prominent PMS source for mining industries. This study aimed to quantify soil greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (N2O, CO2, and CH4) after application of landfilled PMS (LPMS; i.e., excavated from a landfill site at a paper mill) and LPMS combined with a seeding treatment of white clover (Trifolium repens L.) on nonacidic mine tailings site prior to reforestation. Soil N2O, CO2, and CH4 fluxes were measured after applications of 50 and 100 Mg dry LPMS ha−1 during two consecutive snowfree seasons on two adjacent sites; LPMS was applied once in the first season. The LPMS application increased N2O emissions (7.6 to 34.7 kg N2O-N ha−1, comprising 1.04 to 2.43% of applied N) compared with the unamended control during the first season; these emissions were negligible during the second season. The LPMS application increased CO2 emissions (~5800 to 11,400 kg CO2–C ha−1, comprising 7 to 27% of applied C) compared with the unamended control on both sites and in both seasons. Fluxes of CH4 were negligible. White clover combined with LPMS treatments did not affect soil GHG emissions. These new GHG emission factors should be integrated into life-cycle analyses to evaluate the C footprint of potential symbioses between the mining and paper industries. Future research should focus on the effect of PMS applications on soil GHG emissions from a variety of mine tailings under various management practices and climatic conditions to plan responsible and sustainable land reclamation.

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emission in wastewater treatment plants of the pulp-and-paper industry was estimated by using a dynamic mathematical model. Significant variations were shown in the magnitude of GHG generation in response to variations in operating parameters, demonstrating the limited capacity of steady-state models in predicting the time-dependent emissions of these harmful gases. The examined treatment systems used aerobic, anaerobic, and hybrid-anaerobic/aerobic-biological processes along with chemical coagulation/flocculation, anaerobic digester, nitrification and denitrification processes, and biogas recovery. The pertinent operating parameters included the influent substrate concentration, influent flow rate, and temperature. Although the average predictions by the dynamic model were only 10 % different from those of steady-state model during 140 days of operation of the examined systems, the daily variations of GHG emissions were different up to ± 30, ± 19, and ± 17 % in the aerobic, anaerobic, and hybrid systems, respectively. The variations of process variables caused fluctuations in energy generation from biogas recovery by ± 6, ± 7, and ± 4 % in the three examined systems, respectively. The lowest variations were observed in the hybrid system, showing the stability of this particular process design.

In recent years thermal utilization of mixed wastes and solid recovered fuels has become of increasing importance in European waste management. Since wastes or solid recovered fuels are generally composed of fossil and biogenic materials, only part of the CO(2) emissions is accounted for in greenhouse gas inventories or emission trading schemes. A promising approach for determining this fraction is the so-called radiocarbon method. It is based on different ratios of the carbon isotopes (14)C and (12)C in fossil and biogenic fuels. Fossil fuels have zero radiocarbon, whereas biogenic materials are enriched in (14)C and reflect the (14)CO(2) abundance of the ambient atmosphere. Due to nuclear weapons tests in the past century, the radiocarbon content in the atmosphere has not been constant, which has resulted in a varying (14)C content of biogenic matter, depending on the period of growth. In the present paper (14)C contents of different biogenic waste fractions (e.g., kitchen waste, paper, wood), as well as mixtures of different wastes (household, bulky waste, and commercial waste), and solid recovered fuels are determined. The calculated (14)C content of the materials investigated ranges between 98 and 135pMC.

Changes in material use, energy use and emissions profiles of industry are the result of complex interrelationships among a multitude of technological and economic drivers. To better understand and guide such changes requires that attention is paid to the time-varying consequences that technology and economic influences have on an industry's choice of inputs and its associated (desired and undesired) outputs. This paper lays out an approach to improving our understanding of the dynamics of large industrial systems. The approach combines engineering and econometric analysis with a detailed representation of an industry's capital stock structure. A transparent dynamic computer modeling approach is chosen to integrate information from these analyses in ways that foster participation of stakeholders from industry and government agencies in all stages of the modeling process-from problem definition and determination of system boundaries to generation of scenarios and interpretation of results. Three case studies of industrial energy use in the USA are presented-one each for the iron and steel, pulp and paper, and ethylene industry. Dynamic models of these industries are described and then used to investigate alternative carbon emissions and investment-led policies. A comparison of results clearly points towards two key issues: the need for industry specific policy approaches in order to effectively influence industrial energy use, fuel mix and carbon emissions, and the need for longer time horizons than have typically been chosen for the analysis of industrial responses to climate change policies.

Some Parties (Countries) to the UNFCCC decided to include the carbon uptake by harvested wood products (HWP) in a new general accounting framework after 2012 (post Kyoto). The analysis aims to make a comparison between the cascaded use of HWP and the use of wood for energy. We combine the new HWP framework with an assumed increased 50 million m3harvest level in Canada and evaluate the impact of the GHG emissions over a 100-year period. Our reference case assumes all harvested wood is an immediate CO2emission (IPCC default) and no substitution effects, i.e. annual GHG emissions of 41 million tonnes CO2eq. In our wood utilization scenario's, harvested trees are allocated (in varying shares) to three end-products: construction wood, paper products and pellets for power production. In comparison with our base case, a combination of fossil fuel substitution, material substitution and temporary carbon uptake by HWP leads to significant decreases in GHG emissions. All scenario's show annual GHG emission between 18 and 21 million tonnes CO2eqexcept for triple use without recycling (at least 24 million tonnes CO2eq). We conclude that GHG emissions of our scenarios are substantially lower than IPCC default. However, it is difficult to incorporate one single method to account for GHG uptake and emissions by HWP, due to end use efficiency and recycling options. Further GHG allocation over individual countries is not straightforward and needs further research. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd.

This study uses Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) to assess the environmental profiles and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for bioethanol production from waste papers and to compare them with the alternative waste management options of recycling or incineration with energy recovery. Bioethanol production scenarios both with and without pre-treatments were conducted. It was found that an oxidative lime pre-treatment reduced GHG emissions and overall environmental burdens for a newspaper-to-bioethanol process whereas a dilute acid pre-treatment raised GHG emissions and overall environmental impacts for an office paper-to-bioethanol process. In the comparison of bioethanol production systems with alternative management of waste papers by different technologies, it was found that the environmental profiles of each system vary significantly and this variation affects the outcomes of the specific comparisons made. Overall, a number of configurations of bioethanol production from waste papers offer environmentally favourable or neutral profiles when compared with recycling or incineration.

Pulp and paper industry is facing challenges such as resource scarcity and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The objective of this research is to investigate whether the use of new coatings (micro or nano TiO(2)) and different pulp types could bring savings in wood, energy, GHG emissions and other environmental impacts in comparison with conventional printing and writing paper. We studied three types of pulp, namely i) unbleached virgin kraft pulp, ii) recovered fiber, and iii) high yield virgin chemithermo-mechanical pulp (CTMP). A life cycle assessment (LCA) was conducted from cradle to grave. Applying attributional modeling, we found that wood savings amount to 60% for the nanoparticle coated recovered fiber paper and 35% for the micro TiO(2) coated CTMP paper. According to the ReCiPe single score impact assessment method, the new product configurations allow the reduction of the environmental impacts by 10-35% compared to conventional kraft paper. Applying consequential modeling, we found larger energy and GHG emission savings compared to attributional modeling because the saved wood is used for producing energy, thereby replacing fossil fuels. The nanoparticle coated recovered fiber paper offered savings of non-renewable energy use (NREU) by 100% (13GJ/ton paper) and GHG emission reduction by 75% (0.6 tonCO(2)eq./ton paper). Micro TiO(2) coated CTMP paper offered NREU savings by 25% (3GJ/ton paper) and savings of GHG emissions by 10% (0.1 tonCO(2)eq./ton paper). The taking into account of all environmental impacts with the ReCiPe single score method leads to comparable results as that of attributional modeling. We conclude that the nanoparticle coated recovered fiber paper offered the highest savings and lowest environmental impacts. However, human toxicity and ecotoxicity impacts of the nanoparticles were not included in this analysis and need further research. If this leads to the conclusion that the toxicity impacts of the nanoparticles are serious, then the CTMP paper with micro TiO(2) coating is the preferred option.

In order to reduce the ecological impact of resource exploitation, the EU calls for sustainable options to increase the efficiency and productivity of the utilization of natural resources. This target can only be achieved by considering resource recovery from waste comprehensively. However, waste management measures have to be investigated critically and all aspects of substance-related recycling and energy recovery have to be carefully balanced. This article compares recovery methods for selected waste fractions with regard to their energy efficiency. Whether material recycling or energy recovery is the most energy efficient solution, is a question of particular relevance with regard to the following waste fractions: paper and cardboard, plastics and biowaste and also indirectly metals. For the described material categories material recycling has advantages compared to energy recovery. In accordance with the improved energy efficiency of substance opposed to energy recovery, substance-related recycling causes lower emissions of green house gases. For the fractions paper and cardboard, plastics, biowaste and metals it becomes apparent, that intensification of the separate collection systems in combination with a more intensive use of sorting technologies can increase the extent of material recycling. Collection and sorting systems must be coordinated. The objective of the overall system must be to achieve an optimum of the highest possible recovery rates in combination with a high quality of recyclables. The energy efficiency of substance related recycling of biowaste can be increased by intensifying the use of anaerobic technologies. In order to increase the energy efficiency of the overall system, the energy efficiencies of energy recovery plants must be increased so that the waste unsuitable for substance recycling is recycled or treated with the highest possible energy yield.

The production of newspaper corresponds to 37 kg per person per annum in Ireland. Newspaper becomes a waste product in a short period of time; only 13% of domestic waste paper is recycled (data on newspaper is not available). Four scenarios, which generate energy from newspaper, are analysed. These scenarios may be summarised as follows: lignocellulosic biomass conversion to ethanol (transport fuel); co-digestion with the organic fraction of municipal solid waste and production of CH4-enriched biogas (transport fuel); co-firing with the residue of municipal solid waste in an incinerator; and gasification of newspaper as a sole fuel. Two of the scenarios involve transport fuel production; two involve the production of electricity and heat. Two of the scenarios involve newspaper as the sole ingredient; two involve co- utilisation of newspaper with another waste stream. Assuming no economic market for heat, then only the transport scenarios have the potential to be economic; indeed the biogas scenario is shown to be extremely competitive generating a potential profit of euro 227/t newspaper. A greenhouse-gas analysis indicates that the biogas scenario generated the best net greenhouse-gas savings. However when a market for heat is available, gasification was shown to be most advantageous.

The impetus for this paper is Canada’s commitment under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to reduce national greenhouse gas emissions as well as reducing our dependency on fossil fuels. Wood-based ethanol offers an excellent opportunity for greenhouse gas mitigation due to market potential, an ability to offset significant emissions from the transportation sector, a reduction of emissions from CO2-intensive waste-management systems, and carbon sequestration in afforested plantations. While there are technological and economic barriers to overcome, using wood-biomass as a source of ethanol can be an economically viable tool for reducing greenhouse gas levels in the atmosphere. This paper examines the costs and mitigation potential of the production of ethanol from biomass supplied from industrial wood waste as well as from trees harvested from afforested land.