LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT (LCA) OF THE

MANAGEMENT PHASE OF A MBT PLANT IN

THE CAMPANIA REGION OF SOUTHERN OF
ITALY

C. FERRARA*, C. CHECHILE* AND G. DE FEO*

* DIIN, Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Salerno, via Giovanni Paolo

II 132, 84084 Fisciano (Sa), Italy

SUMMARY: The main aim of this study was to perform a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) study of
the management phase of a MBT plant treating unsorted urban residual waste, in order to
identify the system’s hotspots as well as to evaluate alternative improvement opportunities. The
MBT plant is located in Battipaglia, in the Campania region of Southern Italy. The functional unit
of the study was defined as “the treatment of all the unsorted urban residual waste in input to
the plant in the year 2015”, corresponding to 378,000 tons. The plant modelling was realized
with the SimaPro v. 8.0 software tool. The inventory analysis was carried out on primary data,
while for the background data; the Ecoinvent v.3 database was used. The environmental
impacts were calculated with the ReCiPe 2008 H evaluation method (both at the midpoint and
endpoint levels). Waste selection and RDF production were the most impacting phases. A
significant consumption of electric energy occurring in all management phases was the main
cause of impacts. However, if the MBT plant were supplied by electricity from photovoltaic
panels, the total impacts would decrease by 38%. The exhausted air treatment system provided
high contribution to total environmental impacts of MBT. This was due to both operation and
maintenance of the bio-filters and scrubbers, i.e. energetic consumption of detecting systems
and replacement of worn bio-filtering material. For some impact categories (Climate change and
Human toxicity), the adoption of scrubbers and bio-filters could cause higher impacts of direct
emissions in atmosphere of exhausted air without treatment.

1. INTRODUCTION

In a sustainable perspective of waste management, mechanical biological treatment (MBT)

systems are a useful and valuable alternative (Ragazzi et al., 2014). In fact, they allow to
respect the waste hierarchy, as defined in the EU Waste Framework Directive 2008/98/EC
(European Commission, 2008), due to the recovery opportunities for additional resources as
well as to the wider range of possibilities for waste energy recovery (Cimpan and Wenzel,
2013).
Furthermore, the treatments performed in these plants are aimed at reducing the
environmental impacts and risks to human health related to waste landfilling (Di Lonardo et al.,
2016).

Proceedings Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium/ 2 - 6 October 2017
S. Margherita di Pula, Cagliari, Italy / © 2017 by CISA Publisher, Italy
Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

Nevertheless, MBT plants, similarly to other industrial systems, consume resources and
energy during their operation as well as emit pollutants in the environment. It is, therefore,
worthwhile to carry out environmental evaluation of the operational phases of these plants in
order to identify the operating conditions assuring the most environmentally sound
performances.
The most used tool for sustainability evaluation is the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
methodology that allows to evaluate the environmental performance of alternative systems
considering their entire life cycle (Curran, 2008).
LCA compares different systems considering the consumption of resources as well as the
emission of pollutants that may occur during their life cycle, which may include the extraction of
raw materials, the production and processing of materials, the transport, the phase of use and,
finally, the end of life (ISO 14040 2006; ISO 14044 2006).
Although it is important to carry out environmental assessments of the MBT management
phases, it should be noted that these plants are probably the best alternative to treat unsorted
waste. Indeed, several LCA studies, such as Hong et al. (2006), Valerio (2010), Pires et al.
(2011) and Panepinto et al., 2015, that applied the LCA to the comparison among MBT and
other waste management alternatives, have emphasized that environmental performance of
MBT plants are globally better than the performance of the other options.
In this context, this study presents an evaluation of the environmental performances of the
management phase of a MBT plant treating unsorted urban residual waste, through the
application of the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology.
The main aim of the study was to identify the system’s hotspots as well as to evaluate
alternative improvement opportunities of the environmental sustainability of the MBT plant.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1 MSW management in the Campania region

The MBT plant under study is located in Battipaglia, in the Campania region of Southern
Italy. The Campania region has suffered many problems with municipal solid waste (MSW)
management since the mid 1990’s because the region did not have enough waste management
facilities (De Feo and De Gisi, 2010; De Feo and Williams, 2013).
As shown in Figure 1, the MSW management system in the Campania region is based on
two main flows of waste: on the one hand, source separated putrescibles and recyclable
materials, mainly packaging waste (paper and cardboard, plastic, glass, aluminium, steel, wood,
etc.), and, on the other hand, unsorted residual MSW for the production of RDF.
Due to the absence of enough treatment and disposal plants, a significant part of the MSW
produced are sent out of the region and even abroad (De Feo et al., 2016). For instance, in
2014, 41% of MSW was sent out of the region (87% was putrescibles).
With regarding to the recovery of energy, there are seven MBT plants for the production of
RDF: three in Province of Naples and one for each of the other four Provinces (Avellino,
Benevento, Caserta and Salerno). The RDF produced is burnt in the incinerator of Acerra that is
the unique in the entire region. It is one of the largest facilities in Europe, with a capacity of
600,000 t/year and a production of 600 million kilowatt hours per year of electricity.
The MBT plants were constructed during the period 2001-2003, while the incinerator went
into operation only on March 26th, 2009. As consequence, there has been the necessity to store
Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

an enormous quantity of RDF pressed bales (the so called “eco-bales”): 5,600 million tons
stored in different regional sites.

Recovery of Waste Production Recovery of

Energy Material

Unsorted residual MSW Sorted MSW

MSW
Out of the
stabilized
region
organic fraction Out of the recovered
region materials putrescibles
ferrous materials Out of the
RDF region
Production plants discards
discards Recycling of
Composting plants
RDF Materials
ashes and
Acerra Thermal discards discards
Treatment plant
recycled products compost

discards
Out of the Landfills
electric power
region

Figure 1. Flow chart of the MSW management system of the Campania region of Southern Italy.

2.2 Description of the MBT plant under study

The plant covers a surface of about 78,000 m2, of which about 19,000 m2 are covered, while
the remaining part is paved. The unsorted urban waste are transported to the MBT plant with
waste compactor trucks.
Waste are discharged into a temporary storage pit useful to equalize the flow to be treated in
the subsequent units. Two are the main products obtained: the RDF that is sent to incinerator
plant of Acerra (92 km far from), and a Stabilized Organic Fraction (SOF) that is used for landfill
cover inside the same region.
The RDF is obtained with the following treatments (Belgiorno et al., 2003):
§ preliminary shredding of the unsorted urban waste;
§ selection of the shredded flow in a first trommel screen obtaining a primary oversieve
and a primary undersieve;
§ the primary oversieve is treated by means of magnetic separation and hand sorting,
and then it is sent to the RDF production line;
§ the primary undersieve is treated in a second trommel screen obtaining a secondary
oversieve and a secondary undersieve;
§ the secondary oversieve is treated by means of a magnetic separation and then by a
ballistic classification obtaining three fractions sent to the RDF production line,
organic stabilization line and landfill disposal respectively;
§ the secondary undersieve, after a magnetic separation, is sent with the fine fraction
coming from the ballistic classifier to the organic stabiization line;
§ the organic bio-stabilization is carried out with an aerated static pile composting
system;
Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

§ the stabilized organic fraction is further refined for the recover of plastic and cellulosic
materials.
Exhausted air produced inside the closed sheds are treated in scrubber and biofilter
systems. The MBT plant is also equipped with a chemical-physical wastewater treatment plant.

2.3 The LCA approach adopted

2.3.1 Goal and scope definition

This study proposes an environmental evaluation, through LCA analysis, of the management
phase of the MBT plant of Battipaglia. The main aim of the study is to identify the system
hotspots as well as to evaluate alternative improvement opportunities of the environmental
sustainability of the MBT plant.
The main function of a MBT plant is the treatment of unsorted urban waste and the recovery
of recoverable materials. The functional unit (i.e. the quantified performance of the system to
use as a reference unit) was defined as “the treatment of all the unsorted urban residual waste
in input to the plant in the year 2015”, corresponding to 378,000 tons.
In this study was conducted a “from gate to gate” LCA analysis; in other word, the start of life
cycle was when the unsorted waste entered in the plant gates and the end of life cycle was
when the output materials came out of the plant gates.
The LCA analysis took into account all the treatment phases (detailed shown in Figure 2):
weighing and outdoor storage; selection and RDF production; organic fraction bio-stabilization;
exhausted air treatment with bio-filters and scrubbers; direct emissions; wastewater treatment;
transport (e.g. waste handling within the plant).
Ferrous Air
Materials emissions Sludge

Unsorted Reception Bio-filters and

Urban Waste scrubbers Wastewater Wastewater
treatment effluent
Shredder Internal transport
Electricity
Primary trommel
screen Magnetic separator
Raw
materials Secondary trommel
screen Magnetic separator Hand sorting

Water Magnetic separator

Ballistic classifier
Diesel
Bio-stabilization Hydraulic press

Stabilized organic Losses Discards RDF

fraction

Figure 2. System boundaries of the study.

2.3.2 Life Cycle Inventory

The foreground inventory data used in the study, relating to the management phase of the
MBT plant, are specific data extrapolated from official documents such as the Integrated
Environmental Authorization (IEA) related to the Council Directive 96/61/EC concerning
Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

integrated pollution prevention and control (IPPC) (Regione Campania, 2015).

The modelization was realized with SimaPro 8.3 and Ecoinvent v3 database.
Table 1 shows the main inventory data related to consumption of electricity and resources for
the treatment phases of considered MBT plant. While, Table 2 shows the values of air emission
flowrates from the MBT plant under study.

Table 1. Inventory data of the MBT plant treatment phases (Regione Campania, 2015).
Item Units Weighing and Selection and RDF Organic Exhausted air
Outdoor production fraction bio- treatment with
storage stabilization Bio-filters and
Scrubbers
Waste in input ton 378000 378000 162192 378000
Electricity kWh 517860 4048380 2256902 3092040
Steel ton 0.9828 7.56 3.61 -
Lubricant Oil l 3669.2 30.24 44.60 -
Steel wirea ton - 808.92 - -
PE film* ton - 359.1 - -
Rubber ton - 0.2646 0.1419 -
Water m3 - - - 5000
Wood chips ton - - - 10
a
Steel wire and PE film are used in the RDF production (for the package of RDF)

Table 2. Air emission flowrates from the MBT plant under study (Regione Campania, 2015).
Pollutants Units Values
CH4 kg/year 70
NH3 kg/year 1399
H 2S kg/year 1233
Mercaptans kg/year 1256
Amines kg/year 105
Organic sulphides kg/year 42
Powders kg/year 224
Toluene kg/year 21
Xylene kg/year 21
Tetrachlorethylene kg/year 42

The wastewater treatment plant, serving the MBT plant, requires electricity (41,580
kWh/year) and chemical agents (NaOH= 11,592 l/year; FeCl3= 16,932 l/year and activated
carbon= 97,200 kg/year) during the operational phases.
Internal waste transport (as waste movement within the MBT plant) during the management
phase was considered in terms of a diesel consumption of 0.2 l/ton of waste.

2.3.3 Impact Assessment

The impacts evaluation method adopted is ReCiPe 2008 H. This method combines a
midpoint level approach (problem-oriented) containing 18 impact categories with an endpoint
approach (damage-oriented) considering 17 categories grouped into three macrocategories:
damage to human health, damage to ecosystems and resource consumption.
Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

Damage to human health takes into consideration the following categories: climate change
human health, ozone depletion, human toxicity, photochemical oxidant formation, particulate
matter formation, ionising radiation. While, damage to ecosystems considers the following
categories: climate change ecosystems, terrestrial acidification, freshwater eutrophication,
terrestrial ecotoxicity, freshwater ecotoxicity, marine ecotoxicity, agricultural land occupation,
urban land occupation, natural land transformation. Finally, resource consumption takes into
consideration the following categories: metal depletion, fossil depletion
The hierarchist perspective (H) is based on the most common policy principles concerning
the time frame and other issues (Goedkoop et al., 2008).

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Figure 3 shows the contribution analysis to the total impacts of all MBT management phases
for midpoint impact categories of ReCiPe 2008H.
Only six midpoint categories were considered because they are those that, at the endpoint
level, provided a contribution to the total impact greater than 1%. This is an example of how the
endpoint and the midpoint approaches can be combined. In the literature, in fact, the major part
of researchers working in the field of LCA try to avoid the endpoint approach stating that it adds
more uncertainty to the results obtained. This is sure, but as a screening tool for the midpoint
impact categories it offers and effective help. Moreover, after a contributional analysis at the
midpoint level, an endpoint evaluation can be useful in order to understand roughly, in what
direction goes the combination of the single effects of all the midpoint impact categories.

100%
90%
Transport
80%
70% Wastewater

60%
Bio-filters;
50% Scrubbers
40% Biostabilisation

30%
RDF production
20%
10% Weighing and
outdoor storage
0%
C.C. H.T. P.M.F. A.L.O. M.D. F.D.
Impact Categories
Figure 3. Contribution analysis of all MBT management phases for the ReCiPe 2008 H midpoint
impact categories (C.C.: Climate Change; H.F.: Human Toxicity; P.M.F.: Particulate matter
Formation; A.L.O.: Agricultural Land Occupation; M.D.: Metal Depletion; F.D.: Fossil Depletion).
Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

Waste selection and RDF production contributed to the total impacts the most. The
contribution of this treatment step was always higher than 50% for all the midpoint impact
categories considered (Figure 3). The significant consumption of electrical energy occurring in
this phase was the main responsible factor in accordance with the results obtained by Abeliotis
et al. (2012).
Coherently with the findings of further studies (Beylot et al., 2015), the other phases that
provided high contributions to the total impacts were those relating to the exhausted air
treatment systems (with bio-filters and scrubbers) followed by the organic fraction treatment.
All the other MBT management phases provided a negligible contribution to the total impacts
for all the midpoint impact categories.
Based on the obtained results, the major contribution to the environmental impacts of the
exhausted air treatment system (indicated as “bio-filter; scrubber” in Figure 3) were not
produced by the polluting emissions. Indeed, they were mainly due both to operation and
maintenance of the bio-filters and scrubbers, i.e. energetic consumption of detecting systems
(compressors and filters necessary to the exhausted air aspiration and to powder treatment),
and replacement of worn bio-filtering material.
Analogously, the impacts of the organic fraction treatment phase were mainly due to the
energy consumption for the operation of mechanical equipment as well as to the waste aeration.
The influence of electricity consumption on the potential impacts of the MBT phases was
shown also in Figure 4a where the percentage contribution of all the MBT management phases
to the total electricity consumption of the plant are reported.
Comparing Figure 3 and Figure 4a, it is worth nothing that the environmental impacts of each
MBT management phase is directly proportional to its electricity consumption.
Given the high incidence of the electric energy consumption on the total impacts, it was
evaluated the improvement of the environmental performance of the plant that would be
obtained if the energy supply came from renewable sources (Figure 4b). If the MBT plant were
supplied by electricity from photovoltaic panels, the total impacts would decrease by 38%.

Wastewater Weighing and 1200

0.4% Outdoor storage
5.2%
1000
Bio-filters and
ReCiPe 2008 H (kPt)

Scrubbers 800
31.1% 593
600 Resources
Ecosystems
RDF production Human Health
400 386
40.7%
158

200 73
263
155
0
Biostabilisation MBT with Italian Energy Mix MBT with Photovoltaic
22.7% Use Energy Use

(a) (b)
Figure 4. Percentage contribution of each MBT phases to the total electricity consumption of
MBT plant (a). Environmental impacts of the MBT plant considering two kinds of electric energy
supply: Italian energy mix and photovoltaic energy (b).

As already pointed out, the MBT air treatment systems (bio-filters and scrubbers) was the
second most impacting phase after the RDF production phase and this was mainly due to
electrical consumption of this phase. For this reason, it was interesting to compare the impacts
of the exhausted air treatment system and those that would arise from direct emissions of
Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

pollutants into the atmosphere if there were no treatment systems. The purpose was to verify
whether, for all the impact categories considered, it was always environmentally suitable the
treatment system as it was realized compared to the direct emission in the atmosphere of
exhausted air without treatment.
The LCA methodology, thanks to his holistic approach, can be very useful because it avoids
the “problem shifting”, i.e. the risk of acting by using an approach that solves a problem by
creating others (Larsen e Hauschild, 2008).
The pollutant concentrations in the exhausted air entering into the treatment system
(scrubbers and bio-filters) were not known; only the outlet mass flowrate were known (Table 2).
Therefore, some values of percentage yield of pollutants removal of the treatment system were
hypothesized, and from this, indirectly, the inlet mass flowrate of pollutants in the exhausted air
before treatment in function of the variation of the percentage removal were estimated. Such
calculations were realized assuming that all pollutants undergo the same removal rate, i.e. the
percentage removal values were considered as average value to apply to all pollutants in the
same way.
A variation range of 50% - 99% was hypothesized for the values of percentage pollutants
removal with scrubbers and bio-filters. The higher the values of percentage pollutants removal
is, the higher the inlet pollutants mass flowrate is. Table 3 shows the environmental impacts due
to direct emissions in atmosphere of exhausted air without treatment in function of the variation
of pollutants removal percentage of the treatment system (scrubbers and bio-filters). Table 3
also reports the values of environmental impacts due to the operation of the treatment system,
in order to make a comparison.

Table 3. Environmental impacts of direct air emission of exhausted air without treatment in
function of pollutants percentage removal (η) of treatment system (scrubbers and bio-filters) and
environmental impacts of Scrubbers and Bio-filters operation, for the ReCiPe 2008 H midpoint
categories considered (C.C.: Climate Change; H.F.: Human Toxicity; P.M.F.: Particulate matter
Formation).
C.C. (t CO2 eq) H.T. (t 1,4-DB eq) P.M.F. (t PM10 eq)
Air Air
Air emissions Scrubbers Scrubbers
η (%) Scrubbers and emissions emissions
without and Bio- and Bio-
Bio-filters without without
treatment filters filters
treatment treatment
50 3.510 119.823 1.344
75 7.019 239.645 2.687
80 8.774 299.557 3.359
84 10.967 374.446 4.199
1594.504 305.373 2.184
90 17.548 599.113 6.719
95 35.095 1198.227 13.437
98 87.738 2995.567 33.593
99 175.475 5991.134 67.187

For the category Climate Change, the impacts due to the scrubbers and bio-filters operation
were always higher than those due to the direct emission into the atmosphere of exhausted air
without treatment were. Even assuming the highest concentration of pollutants in the exhausted
air before treatment (corresponding to assuming a pollutants percentage removal of 99%).
About such impact category, the adoption of scrubbers and bio-filters, as they were realized,
could be a case of “problem shifting”.
Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

Different results were obtained for the categories of Human Toxicity and Particulate Matter
Formation, for which the adoption of the air treatment system, as it was realized, resulted
environmentally suitable for the considered value of percentage pollutants removal.
Figure 5 shows the impacts trend (in terms of Human Toxicity and Particulate Matter
Formation) due to direct emission in the atmosphere of exhausted air without treatment in
function of percentage pollutants removal (blue line). The figure also reports the environmental
impacts due to operation of air treatment system (scrubbers and bio-filters) (red line).

6000 80

70

Particulate Matter Formation (g PM10 eq.)

5000
Human Toxicity (g 1,4 DB eq)

60
4000
50

3000 40

30
2000
20
1000
10

0 0
50 60 70 80 90 100 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percentage pollutant removal of treatment system (%) Percentage pollutant removal of treatment system (%)

(a) (b)
Figure 5.Trend of environmental impacts of direct air emission of exhausted air without
treatment in function of percentage pollutants removal of treatment system.

For Human Toxicity, the adoption of the air treatment system was more suitable, in
environmental terms, only assuming a percentage efficiency removal of the system higher than
80%. While, for Particulate Matter Formation, it was environmentally preferable the adoption of
the air treatment system already considering a removal rate of 65%.
The percentage composition of waste entering into an MBT facility can influence the
environmental performance of the plant (Montejo et al., 2013). In fact, the organic fraction
amount within waste was a key factor that influenced the impacts of the MBT plant. For an
identical amount of waste treated, a 13% reduction of the organic fraction allowed to reduce the
environmental impacts of about 8% (Figure 4b).

4. CONCLUSIONS

The study presents an environmental evaluation, through LCA analysis, of the management
phase of a MBT plant in Battipaglia, in the Campania region of Southern Italy.
Waste selection and the RDF production contributed to the total impacts the most. The other
phases that provided high contributions to the total impacts were those relating to the exhausted
air treatment systems (with bio-filters and scrubbers) followed by the organic fraction treatment.
The key factor that most influenced the environmental performance of the MBT plant was the
electricity consumption. Given the high incidence of the electric energy consumption on the total
impacts, it was evaluated the improvement of the environmental performance of the plant that
would be obtained if the energy supply came from renewable sources. If the MBT plant were
supplied by electricity from photovoltaic panels, the total impacts would decrease by 38%.
The exhausted air treatment system provided high contribution to total environmental impacts
of MBT. This was due to both operation and maintenance of bio-filters and scrubbers, i.e.
Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

energetic consumption of detecting systems and replacement of worn bio-filtering material. For
some impact categories, namely Climate change and Human toxicity, scrubber and bio-filter
systems could cause higher impacts rather than direct emissions in atmosphere of exhausted
air without treatment.

REFERENCES

Abeliotis K., Kalogeropoulos A. and Lasaridi K. (2012). Life Cycle Assessment of the MBT plant
in Ano Liossia, Athens, Greece, Waste Manage., vol. 32, 213-219.
Belgiorno V., De Feo G., Napoli R.M.A. and Panza D. (2003). An ‘‘alternative’’ disposal for
refuse derived fuel. Proceedings Sardinia 2003, Ninth International Waste Management and
Landfill Symposium, 6–10 October 2003, S. Margherita di Pula (Cagliari), Sardinia, Italy.
Beylot A., Vaxelaire S., Zdanevitch I., Auvinet N. and Villenueve J. (2015). Life Cycle
Assessment of mechanical biological pre-treatment of Municipal Solid Waste: A case study,
Waste Manage., vol. 39, 287-294.
Cimpan C. and Wenzel H. (2013). Energy implications of mechanical and mechanical-biological
treatment compared to direct waste-to-energy, Waste Manage., vol. 33, 1648-1658.
Curran M.A. (2008). Life-cycle assessment. Encycl. Ecol., vol. 3, 2168–2174.
De Feo G. and De Gisi S. (2010). Public opinion and awareness towards MSW and separate
collection programmes: A sociological procedure for selecting areas and citizens with a low level
of knowledge, Waste Manage., vol. 30(6), 958-976.
De Feo G. and Williams I.D. (2013). Siting landfills and incinerators in areas of historic
unpopularity: Surveying the views of the next generation, Waste Manage., vol. 33(12), 2798-
2810.
De Feo G., Ferrara C., Iuliano C., Grosso A. (2016). LCA of the Collection, Transportation,
Treatment and Disposal of Source Separated MunicipalWaste: A Southern Italy Case Study,
Sustain., vol. 8(1084), 1-13.
Di Lonardo M.C., Franzese M., Costa G., Gavasci R. and Lombardi F. (2016). The application of
SRF vs. RDF classification and specifications to the material flows of two mechanical-biological
treatment plants of Rome: Comparison and implications, Waste Manage., vol. 47, 195-205.
European Waste Framework Directive (WFD) (2008). Directive 2008/98/Ec of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives,
Available on-line at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/framework (accessed on 14th July,
2017).
Goedkoop M., Heijungs R., Huijbregts M., De Schryver A., Struijs J. and van Zelm R. (2013).
ReCiPe 2008 - A life cycle impact assessment method which comprises harmonised category
indicators at the midpoint and the endpoint level First edition (version 1.08), Report I:
Characterisation, Available on-line at: http://www.lcia-recipe.net/file-
cabinet/ReCiPe_main_report_MAY_2013.pdf?attredirects=0 (accessed on 14.08.2015).
Hong R.J., Wang G.F., Guo R.Z., Cheng X., Liu Q., Zhang P.J. and Qian G.R. (2006). Life cycle
assessment of BMT-based integrated Municipal Solid Waste management: case study in
Pudong, China, Resour. Conserv. Recy., 49 (2), 129–146.
International Standard Organization (2006). ISO 14040. Environmental management – life cycle
assessment – principles and framework.
International Standard Organization (2006). ISO 14044. Environmental management – life cycle
assessment – requirements and guidelines.
Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017

Larsen H F and Hauschild M (2008). Review of existing LCA studies on wastewater treatment
technologies, In SETAC-Europe annual meeting, 18th. Warsaw, 25-29 May. Brussels: SETAC
Europe.
Montejo C., Tonini D., Màrquez M.dC. and Astrup T.F. (2013). Mechanical-Biological treatment:
Performance and potentials. An LCA of 8 plants including waste characterization, J. Environ.
Manage., vol. 128, 661-673.
Panepinto A., Blengini G.A. and Genon G. (2015). Economic and environmental comparison
between two scenarios ofwaste management: MBT vs thermal treatment. Resour. Conserv.
Recy., vol. 97, 16-23.
Pires A., Chang N.B. and Martinho G. (2011). Reliability-based life cycle assessment for future
solid waste management alternatives in Portugal, Int. J. Life Cycle Assessment, vol. 16, 316–
337.
Ragazzi M., Tosi P., Rada E.C., Torretta V. and Schiavon M. (2014). Effluents from MBT plants:
Plasma techniques for the treatment of VOCs, Waste Manage., vol. 34, 2400-2406.
Regione Campania (2015). Decreto Dirigenziale n. 190 del 11/08/2015. D.Lgs. 152/2006,
Riesame con valenza di rinnovo, rilasciata con OPCM n. 300 del 31/12/2009 e Modifica
Sostanziale, attivita' IPPC 5.3 lettera b) – EcoAmbienteSalerno spa (In italian), Available on-line
at:
http://burc.regione.campania.it/eBurcWeb/directServlet?DOCUMENT_ID=83825&ATTACH_ID=
119728 (accessed on 13th July, 2017).
Valerio F. (2010). Environmental impacts of post-consumer material managements: recycling,
biological treatments, incineration. Waste Manage., vol. 30(11), 2354–2361.