Air Emissions from Municipal Solid Waste Management: Comparing Landfilling, Incineration, and Composting

Background: Municipal solid waste management is a relevant component of climate and air quality policy, yet published life cycle assessments report inconsistent conclusions on whether sanitary landfilling, waste-to-energy incineration, composting, or anaerobic digestion yields the lowest greenhouse gas and co-pollutant impacts because results depend strongly on methodological choices and local context. Objective: To synthesize and critically evaluate how key life cycle assessment assumptions and boundary decisions influence reported emissions across major waste management pathways, with primary emphasis on the United States and selected comparison to European Union policy frameworks. Methods: Peer-reviewed life cycle assessment studies and supporting technical and regulatory sources were reviewed and compared, focusing on functional unit definition, system boundaries, time horizon, energy substitution and crediting methods, and treatment of methane, nitrous oxide, and air pollutant controls; drivers of variability were identified through structured cross study comparison and sensitivity-focused interpretation. Results: Reported pathway rankings vary primarily with landfill gas collection and utilization assumptions, the carbon intensity of displaced electricity or heat for waste-to-energy systems, and the representation of biological process emissions across active and curing stages; harmonized comparisons reduce variability but do not yield a single consistently superior pathway across all plausible settings. Conclusions: Comparative conclusions are context-dependent and policy-relevant interpretation requires transparent reporting and sensitivity analysis for capturing efficiency, substitution factors, and biological emission controls, along with clear alignment between modeled scenarios and real-world operating conditions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Sustainability
Published
2025-12-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/su18010108
Primary Topic
Municipal Solid Waste Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Air Emissions from Municipal Solid Waste Management: Comparing Landfilling, Incineration, and Composting

Madjid Delkash
Sustainability
Municipal Solid Waste Management
article

Air Emissions from Municipal Solid Waste Management: Comparing Landfilling, Incineration, and Composting

Madjid Delkash
article en

Abstract

Background: Municipal solid waste management is a relevant component of climate and air quality policy, yet published life cycle assessments report inconsistent conclusions on whether sanitary landfilling, waste-to-energy incineration, composting, or anaerobic digestion yields the lowest greenhouse gas and co-pollutant impacts because results depend strongly on methodological choices and local context. Objective: To synthesize and critically evaluate how key life cycle assessment assumptions and boundary decisions influence reported emissions across major waste management pathways, with primary emphasis on the United States and selected comparison to European Union policy frameworks. Methods: Peer-reviewed life cycle assessment studies and supporting technical and regulatory sources were reviewed and compared, focusing on functional unit definition, system boundaries, time horizon, energy substitution and crediting methods, and treatment of methane, nitrous oxide, and air pollutant controls; drivers of variability were identified through structured cross study comparison and sensitivity-focused interpretation. Results: Reported pathway rankings vary primarily with landfill gas collection and utilization assumptions, the carbon intensity of displaced electricity or heat for waste-to-energy systems, and the representation of biological process emissions across active and curing stages; harmonized comparisons reduce variability but do not yield a single consistently superior pathway across all plausible settings. Conclusions: Comparative conclusions are context-dependent and policy-relevant interpretation requires transparent reporting and sensitivity analysis for capturing efficiency, substitution factors, and biological emission controls, along with clear alignment between modeled scenarios and real-world operating conditions.

SustainabilityVol. 18(1)
Texas A&M University – San Antonio (US)
Responsible consumption and production
Openalex Percentile: Top 38%
Municipal Solid Waste Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.