A Carbon Footprint Comparative Analysis of Anaerobic Digestion vs. Landfill Gas Recovery in Brazil

This study compares the carbon footprints of two municipal solid waste treatment technologies—anaerobic digestion and a gas recovery system—with the aim of evaluating their potential for biogas recovery and greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation. The analysis applies the 2006 IPCC model to real operational data from the Paracambi Waste Treatment Complex (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil), integrating carbon footprint estimation and environmental compensation modeling through tree planting. From a different perspective, this work evaluates the replacement of biogas recovery with a biologically controlled system based on material segregation. Within the limits and parameters defined for the system, anaerobic digestion achieved net emissions of 0.0029 tCO2eq per ton of organic waste, compared to 1.14 tCO2eq per ton for the biogas recovery system. This represents a potential 393-fold reduction in GHG emissions. However, this result is specific to the modeled conditions and does not consider the full life cycle impacts of non-organic waste fractions. The results suggest that anaerobic digestion, when integrated into an efficient selective collection system, can significantly improve energy recovery and mitigate the carbon footprint of waste management systems.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Recycling
Published
2025-12-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/recycling11010005
Primary Topic
Municipal Solid Waste Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Carbon Footprint Comparative Analysis of Anaerobic Digestion vs. Landfill Gas Recovery in Brazil

Josimar da Silva Freitas, Francisco Santos Sabbadini, Marco Antônio Conejero, Ana Paula Martinazzo et al.
Recycling
Municipal Solid Waste Management
article

A Carbon Footprint Comparative Analysis of Anaerobic Digestion vs. Landfill Gas Recovery in Brazil

Josimar da Silva Freitas, Francisco Santos Sabbadini, Marco Antônio Conejero, Ana Paula Martinazzo, Kelly Alonso Costa, Welington Kiffer de Freitas, Juaneza Barroso Falcão, Juliene Maria da Silva Amancio, Paulo Miguel de Bodas Terassi, Givanildo de Gois
article en

Abstract

This study compares the carbon footprints of two municipal solid waste treatment technologies—anaerobic digestion and a gas recovery system—with the aim of evaluating their potential for biogas recovery and greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation. The analysis applies the 2006 IPCC model to real operational data from the Paracambi Waste Treatment Complex (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil), integrating carbon footprint estimation and environmental compensation modeling through tree planting. From a different perspective, this work evaluates the replacement of biogas recovery with a biologically controlled system based on material segregation. Within the limits and parameters defined for the system, anaerobic digestion achieved net emissions of 0.0029 tCO2eq per ton of organic waste, compared to 1.14 tCO2eq per ton for the biogas recovery system. This represents a potential 393-fold reduction in GHG emissions. However, this result is specific to the modeled conditions and does not consider the full life cycle impacts of non-organic waste fractions. The results suggest that anaerobic digestion, when integrated into an efficient selective collection system, can significantly improve energy recovery and mitigate the carbon footprint of waste management systems.

RecyclingVol. 11(1)
Universidade Federal Fluminense (BR), Universidade Federal da Integração Latino-Americana (BR), Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia (BR), Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (BR), Universidade Cruzeiro do Sul (BR), Universidade Federal de Alagoas (BR)
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
Responsible consumption and production
Openalex Percentile: Top 37%
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.