I NOTEBOOK PAPER ISSN 1047-3289 I. Air 6.Waste Manage. Assoc.

56244-254
I
I Copyright 2006 Air & Waste Management Association

Impact Assessment of Waste Management Options in

I Singapore
Reginald B.H. Tan and Hsien H. Khoo
Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, National University of Singapore,
Singapore

ABSTRACT wastes that must be recovered or disposed off. Environ-

This paper describes the application of life cycle assess- mental burdens of solid waste management systems, such
ment for evaluating various waste management options as pollution of air, land, and water and degradation of
in Singapore, a small-island city state. The impact assess- natural habitat have become increasingly important is-
ment method by SimaPro is carried out for comparing the sues to private citizens, businesses, and the government.
potential environmental impacts of waste treatment op- A waste management system includes waste collection
tions including landfilling, incineration, recycling, and and sorting, followed by one or more of the following
composting. The inventory data include gases and options: recovery and recycling of secondary materials,
leachate from landfills, air emissions and energy recovery biological treatment of organic materials, thermal treat-
from incinerators, energy (and emission) savings from ment, and landfill.1
recycling, composting gases, and transport pollution. The Different waste strategies will impose, directly or in-
impact assessment results for climate change, acidifica- directly, different impacts on the environment. The
tion, and ecotoxicity show that the incineration of mate- "waste management hierarchy" (minimization, recovery
rials imposes considerable harm to both human health and transformation, and disposal) has been adopted by
and the environment, especially for the burning of plas- most industrialized nations as the bedrock of strategy
tics, paper/cardboard, and ferrous metals. The results also development for achieving sustainable waste manage-
show that, although some amount of energy can be de- ment systems.2 The waste strategies that are adopted by
rived from the incineration of wastes, these benefits are various countries are influenced by a number of factors,
outweighed by the air pollution (heavy metals and diox- such as geographical area, population density, transpor-
ins/furans) that incinerators produce. For Singapore, tation infrastructure, and environmental regulations.3
landfill gases and leachate generate minimal environmen-
tal damage because of the nation's policy to landfill only Study Area: Singapore
10%of the total disposed wastes. Land transportation and This paper investigates the present solid waste manage-
separation of waste materials also pose minimal environ- ment situation in Singapore and compares it with other
mental damage. However, sea transportation to the land- waste options. Modern urban integrated waste manage-
fill could contribute significantly to acidification because ment practices are fundamentally reliant on two core
of the emissions of sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides from technologies: landfilling and incineration. Solid waste
barges. The composting of horticultural wastes hardly management in Singapore is administered by the Na-
imposes any environmental damage. Out of all the waste tional Environmental Agency (NEA).4 With limited terri-
strategies, the recycling of wastes offers the best solution tory available for the landfilling of disposed wastes, the
for environmental protection and improved human NEA policy for waste disposal gives top priority to the
health for the nation. Significant emission savings can be incineration of all incinerable wastes that are not recov-
realized through recycling. ered, reused, or recycled. There are presently four incin-
eration plants and one sanitary landfill in Singapore.
INTRODUCTION
Economic development and industrialization are often Incineration
accompanied by the generation of large amounts of Excessive burning of wastes can generate pollutants such
as sulfur oxides (SO,) and nitrogen oxides (NO,), cad-
IMPLICATIONS mium (Cdj, copper (Cu), lead (Pbj, mercury (Hg), and
The environmental burdens of waste management have dioxins/furans, which potentially could contribute to en-
become a major concern in many countries. The life cycle vironmental problems, like acidification, human toxicity,
assessment method was used to compare the waste dis- and ecotoxicity.5 That is why modern incinerators must
posal options in Singapore. This system-side approach, be equipped with pollution control systems to minimize
which includes life cycle impact assessment for incinera- these harmful emissions. These pollution control technol-
tion, landfilling, recycling, and composting, provided an ogies are capable of removing up to 90% of NO, emissions
overview of the environmental burdens and benefits of the and 99% of the toxic metals and acid gases.6 All of the
nation's waste management strategy.
incinerators in Singapore are also equipped with the same
type of pollution control technologies.4 In the country,

244 Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association Volume 56 March 2006
 Tan and Khoo

incineration still takes top priority for waste disposal be- Toward Zero Landfill. The excessive generation of wastes
cause of a lack of available land for landfills. and the overuse of land for landfills pose an increasing
environmental burden for the society. When developing
Incinerator Ash. A portion of the bottom ash and fly ash the Semakau landfill, care was taken to protect the marine
from the incineration is landfilled. With complete com- ecosystem as much as possible. With a growing popula-
bustion, the ash is assumed to contain no organic carbon tion and expanding economy, waste generation and dis-
and will not generate any landfill gases.6 The rest of the posal is likely to increase.
bottom ash is being tested to be used as road pavements. Singapore’s challenge is to make more optimal use of
The chief benefit of using ash for roads is not just for land and strive for more intensive development without
economical reasons but also for reducing the amount of compromising on human health and the environment.
material sent to landfills. This is the same practice used in Singapore’s policy toward waste management covers the
countries such as Japan7 and Norway.* entire spectrum from generation to recycling to disposal.
Because of limited space, Singapore aims for “zero land-
fill” by minimizing the amount of waste generated and
Landfill recycling as much as is feasible.
Presently, Semakau Landfill is Singapore’s only landfill for
waste disposal. Nonincinerable wastes are transferred into Biological Treatment
barges at this station and transported to Pulau Semakau. Biological treatment involves using naturally occurring mi-
Commissioned in the year 1999, the life span of the croorganisms to decompose biodegradable wastes. In Singa-
landfill is expected to last until the year 2040. pore, the only form of biological treatment of wastes is the
In general, municipal solid waste (MSW) landfills are composting of horticultural wastes, which is the simplest
not considered environmentally sustainable because of form of biological treatment. Pruned tree trunks and leaves
the potential hazard of organic releases.9 As waste decom- are sent to various companies at Sarimbun Park to be trans-
poses, the combination of chemical, thermal, and micro- formed into garden compost, including soil fertilizers and
bial reactions release gases. However, in Singapore, very biochips. Emissions to air from composting are available
minimal or zero traces of these gases exist at the landfill. from measurements performed at composting plants. The
The first reason is because organic wastes are not land- detailed process of producing compost and fertilizers for soil
filled. The second is because of the NEA scheme to landfill use can be found in Bjarnadbttir et al.9
a very minimal portion (at most, 10%) of the total solid
waste generated. Life Cycle Assessment
Evaluating the environmental performance of solid waste
Recycling management options is a complex task. Different waste
Wasteful consumption patterns exploit and diminish nat- management options will result in different environmen-
ural resources. To preserve the natural environment and tal impacts for the country. The evaluation of these po-
conserve natural resources, there is an obligation for the tential impacts is extremely important for the purpose of
community to minimize waste output and to recycle as protecting the community at large, as well as preserving
much waste as possible. In Singapore, several recycling the natural environmental settings of a small island. To
companies are located at an industrial area called Sarim- perform this complex task, the application of a life cycle
bun Recycling Park. Waste materials, such as construction assessment (LCA) for waste management is introduced.
and demolition waste, horticultural wastes, and tires, are Initially, LCA was developed as a tool for investigat-
sent there by trucks for additional reprocessing. ing the environmental impacts of products. However,
Recycling saves energy and helps mitigate carbon di- more recently, considerable interest has been shown in
oxide (CO,) emissions.10 Singapore recycled -48% of its applying the technique to waste management sys-
waste in the year 2004.4 Most of the materials recovered tems. 1j5,9~12This is largely because the comparative envi-
came from the industrial and commercial sectors. Recy- ronmental performance of waste management options is
cling activities in Singapore include the following: (1) unclear, particularly when indirect effects, such as trans-
port, infrastructure, and the benefits of recovered materi-
local recycling of tires, ferrous metals (steel), plastics, and
als and energy are taken into account for materials or
wood; (2) conversion of construction wastes (mixtures of
products during their end-of-life stages. Another example
cement, aluminum, steel, sand, and wood) into aggre-
of the use of LCA to compare the overall environmental
gates; (3) recovery of steel slag and Cu slag; and (4) con- burdens of the end-of-life scenarios of products can be
version of food (soya) wastes into animal feed. Other found from Tan and Kh00.l~
waste materials, such as paper and cardboards, are baled
and sent overseas for processing. Glass, textiles, and non-
ferrous metals are also sent overseas for recycling. Functional Unit and System Boundary. Typically, a waste
management system would be described in terms of the
disposal of a quantity of waste, which allows the compar-
Singapore Green Plan 2012 ison of alternative systems that might perform this service
The Singapore Green Plan (SGP) 2012 marks a new mile- in different ways.13 For the present case, the system
stone in Singapore’s journey toward environmental sus- boundary is illustrated in Figure 1. It starts with the an-
tainability for the next few decades.11 The target is to raise nual amount of solid waste generated in Singapore, waste
the overall current recycling rate from 48% (in year 2004) collection, and transportation. Subsequently, some of the
to 60% by the year 2012. wastes are sent by trucks to the incinerators and recycling

Volume 56 March 2006 Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association 245
 Tan and Khoo
.-------------_-*__----------*---------------------------------------.-----------
Ta
-
! All
i
-
Recovered
Energy cc
Solid Wastes c cc
me,llO Coiistruction Generated i sc
Material. Wood (One year) N(
f Skag. Tires I ! H(
DI
P!
Ar
Ct
CI
, CI
4
+Tested for H
use on N
Road Ll
! Pavements
2
I
-
1
I

Sent
Oversees
Animal
Feed
I l q y
i
ctrical i
1
j
1 1
Air Emissions Wa~teworer
I
:
.* _""I [Leachare)
1

Figure I . LCA system boundary for waste management in Singapore.

,

centers by trucks or to Semakau landfill by truck and waste management system, in contrast, deals with the
barge. Approximately 90% of disposed wastes are inciner- amount of waste generated in a given area6 or the total
ated, except for construction materials, glass, and slag, waste of a defined geographical region in a given time
which are all presently sent to the landfill.4 At the incin- (e.g., 1 yr).15 The functional unit for the LCA study is
erator, air pollution is generated and at the same time defined as the total waste generated in Singapore geo-
energy is recovered for use. Gases and leachate are gener- graphic area per year (2004).
ated from Semakau landfill. The composting of horticul-
tural wastes also generates gases.
Energy is required for the sorting and baling pro- Life Cycle Inventory
cesses. After the sorting of mixed wastes, the materials In the LCA technique, the inputs and outputs of a system
that are recycled locally are ferrous metals, slag, plastics, are systematically identified and quantified. These input-
construction material, and tires. Paper and cardboard are output flows are then assessed in terms of their potential to
baled and sent overseas. Other waste materials, such as contribute to specific environmental impacts.12 As a start in
glass, nonferrous metals, and textiles, are also sent over- identifymg the comprehensive environmental burdens as-
seas for processing. The emission savings from the over- sociated with the waste management strategies, the inven-
seas processing of recycled wastes will not be included in tories for the unit operations included in the system bound-
the system boundary. ary (Figure 1)must be listed. The simple method used is as
Within the LCA waste system, the following waste follows: (model LCI waste data [pollutants in kg/t for specific
management strategies are compared: (1) present waste material, for example, plastics] from various references) x
scheme (for year 2004): recycling rate of 44%, and waste (amount of waste material [plastics] in tons generated in
disposed will be 90% incinerated and the rest (10%) land- Singapore for selected year [2004]) = total emissions (kg)
filled; (2) SGP 2012: recycling rate of 60%, all waste disposed because of disposed material in the country. In the method,
will be incinerated (loo%), and zero landfill; (3) 100% land- the "model LCI waste data" are sourced from various refer-
fill; (4) 100%incineration; and (5) 100% recycling. ences, but the "amount of waste material" is according to
To be able to compare the LCA results in an objective the country's situation.
fashion, it is important that a functional unit is identified
to provide a point of reference for obtaining the system Incineration and Landfll. With the help of the waste man-
inputs and outputs.14 This allows for meaningful compar- agement department in NEA, an inventory analysis for
isons between alternative scenarios and identifies the en- the total amount (tons) of various types of wastes (e.g.,
vironmental elements that should be included in the plastics, paper, wood, etc.) sent to landfills, incineration,
study. In most LCA studies, the functional unit has been and recycling is compiled. Specific emissions to air from
related to the service (function) of a product and ex- waste incineration and landfills applied in a n LCA of
pressed in terms of a system output. The function of a waste should be given as weight of pollutant emitted per

246 Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association Volume 56 March 2006
 Tan and Khoo

Table 1. Total air emissions attributable to the amount of waste incinerated in Singapore for the year 2004.

Food Pa er/ Mlxed Construction Wood/ Horticultural Ferrous Non-ferrous Glass Textile/
All in kg Wastes Cardgoard Plastics Debrls Timber Waste Metals Metals Wastes leather Tires Slag

co 4.02E + 04 1.04E + 05 1.55E + 05 0 3.07E + 04 2.37E + 04 0 0 0 1.53E+04 1.39E+03 0

co* +
3.02E 08 +
7.91 E 08 1.46E + 09 0 2.21E + 08 1.73E + 08 0 0 0 7.16E+O8 1.05E + 0 7 0
so2
+
2.83E 04 7.05E + 04 1.50E + 05 0 2.09E + 04 1.63E + 04 0 0 0 +
5.35E 02 3.08E + 01 0
NOx 2.2% t 04 5.86E t 04 1.25E + 05 0 1.73E + 04 1.34E + 04 0 0 0 8.58E + 04 7.38E + 03 0
HCI 1.80E + 04 4.45E + 04 1.OOE + 05 0 1.32E t 04 1.03E + 04 0 0 0 6.80E + 02 6.15E + 01 0
Dioxins/furans N.A. 4.02E - 02 8.92E - 02 0 1.19E - 02 6.38E- 03 0 0 0 6.12E - 03 5.54E-04 0
PM 4.64E + 03 1 2 4 E + 04 5.68E + 04 0 3.66E + 03 2.80E + 03 0 0 0 1.90E+03 1.64E + 02 0
Arsenic 5.9% - 03 1.02E - 02 5.76E - 03 0 3.02E - 03 2.10E - 03 3.78E 00 + 2.39E - 01 0 +
1.17E 00 1.06E - 01 0
Cadmium 1.47E - 01 2.52E - 01 +
2.43E 00 0 7.46f - 02 5.19E - 02 2.07E + 00 4.54E - 01 0 2.83E + 00 2.56E - 01 0
Chromium 3.39E - 01 5.81E - 01 4.54E - 01 0 1.72E - 01 1.20E - 01 7.62E - 01 4.00E - 01 0 +
1.17E 00 1.06E - 01 0
Copper 1.78E - 02 3.05E - 02 3.06E - 02 0 9.02E - 03 6.27E - 03 3.61E + 00 2.21E - 02 0 +
1.08E 00 9.76E - 01 0
Hg 9.20E - 01 1.58E 00 5.33E - 01 0 4.67E - 01 3.24E - 01 1.85E 00 + 4.09E - 02 0 6.89E - 01 6.23E - 02 0
-
+

Ni 5.77E - 01 9.90E - 01 6.81E - 01 0 2.93E - 01 2.04E - 01 1.06E + 00 7.80E - 02 0 4.53E - 01 4.09E 02 0

Lead +
956E 00 1.64E + 01 1.73E + 01 0 +
4.85E 00 +
3.37E 00 1.37E 01 + 4.40E - 01 0 1.72E + 01 1.56E 00+ 0
Zinc +
5.41E 00 9.28E + 00 1.59E + 01 0 +
2.74E 00 1.91E + 00 7.15E + 01 3.89E - 01 0 +
3.02E 01 2.73E 00+ 0

weight of waste incinerated (e.g., g CO,/t waste). Because tires, which was obtained from Cornel1 Cooperative Ex-
most of the specific pollutant levels were unavailable from tension18 and Dunlop Tires.19 The energy required for the
NEA, calculations for these emissions were taken from central sorting of mixed wastes (of paper/cardboard, glass,
several LCI models.6~~,16 ferrous metals, and nonferrous metals), based on a hori-
The total air emissions because of the tons of various zontal conventional moving conveyor machine equipped
waste types incinerated in Singapore (for the year 2004) with magnetic separator, is estimated to be 0.2 kWh/t.
are displayed in Table 1. The LCI data required for the The energy estimated for the baling of papedcardboard is
type of grid electricity used to power (start up) the incin- 16.5 kWh/t of waste material.
erators is available from a local national LCI database.17 Details of energy consumed or conserved for the re-
The emissions from incineration of waste can be deter- cycling of food into animal feed is unavailable and is left
mined by using the LCI model from other countries be- out of the LCA. The total air and water emissions because
cause of the same type of technology that is adopted by of composting of horticultural wastes in Singapore is dis-
Singapore.6 The total landfill gases for the country is dis- played in Table 5 . The data are calculated based on the
played in Table 2. The landfill emissions are calculated
LCI models from Bjarnaddttir et al.9 and Hassan et al.15
using the LCI model provided by White et a1.16 and Bjar-
nad6ttir et al.9 As with landfill gas, it is not easy to predict
the exact values for leachate generation from all sorts of Transportation. Presently, diesel-driven vehicles in Singa-
wastes. For this case, it is assumed that each waste mate- pore are regulated according to the EURO 2 standards.
rial generates 0.15 m3/t of leachate, with the leachate Therefore the EURO 2 standards are used for generating
composition extracted from White et a1.16 They are dis- truck emissions.20 The transportation data for both barges
played in Table 3. (marine transportation) are adopted from the Organiza-
tion for Economic Cooperation and Development and
Recycling. Details of the specific amounts of energy con- Hetch.21 Both types of transportation emissions are
served because of recycling are not available in the coun- shown in Table 6. For the disposal of waste in landfill,
try. Energy conserved because of recycling is shown in waste is transferred by truck for a distance of 28 km to
Table 4. For performing impact assessment, the reduction Tuas Marine Transfer Station and then delivered to Se-
of energy use is directly associated with less air emissions makau landfill by barge. The estimated distance traveled
from fossil fuel power plants. All of the data were ex- by the barge from the shore to the island is 25 km. The
tracted from McDougall et a1.,6 except for the recycling of distance to the incinerators and Sarimbun Park (recycling

Table 2. Total air emissions due to the amount of waste landfilled in Singapore for the year 2004.

All Food Pa er/ Mixed Construction Wood/ Horticultural Ferrous Non-ferrous Glass Textile/
In kg Wastes Cardgoard Plastics Debrls Timber Wastes Metals Metals Wastes leather Tires Slag

0 +
1.70E 03 2.06E - 01 3.12E + 03 1.57E + 03 1.04E - 01 3.02E - 01 3.78E - 01 0 N.A. 1.70E - 01
0 +
2.12E 06 +
1.46E 04 +
3.84E 06 2.62E + 06 +
2.08E 05 +
2.13E 04 5.34E + 05 0 N.A. 9.62E + 04
0 5.91E + 05 +
6.48E 03 +
1.31 E 06 9.12E + 05 7.53E + 04 9.48E + 03 1.96E + 05 0 N.A. +
3.56E 04
0 +
3.94E 03 4.1 2E - 01 +
2.64E 03 +
1.34E 03 2.08E - 01 6.03E - 01 7.56E - 01 0 N.A. 3.41E - 01
0 1.66E + 03 1.&E + 00 +
5.19E 03 2.66E + 03 8.30E - 01 2.41E + 00 3.02E + 00 0 N.A. +
1.36E 00
0 +
2.81 E 00 1.07E + 00 2.90E - 01 4.23E + 01 5.40E - 01 1.57E + 00 1.97E + 00 0 N A, 8.86E - 01
0 5.61E - 01 2.14E - 01 5.80E - 02 +
8.46E 00 1.08E - 01 3.14E - 01 3.93E - 01 0 N.A. 1.77E - 01
0 3.94E + 03 +
3.30E 00 +
3.03E 02 +
2.81E 02 +
1.66E 00 4.83E + 00 6.05E + 00 0 N.A. 2.73E t 00

Volume 56 March 2006 Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association 247
 Tan and Khoo

Table 3. Leachate composition for landfills.16

leachate Composition in Landfill in g/m3 (for all waste types)

-~ ~

Dioxins/furans Phenol Ammonium Arsenic Cadmium Chromium Copper Lead Mercury Nickel Zinc Chloride Fluoride
~

3.20E - 07 0 38 21 0 0.014 0.014 0.06 0.054 0.063 0.0006 0.17 0.68 590 0.39

facilities) are estimated to be 25 km and 30 km, respec- Waste Disposal

tively, by the use of truck transportation. The results for the present waste management strategy for
the waste disposed (landfill and incineration) in Singa-
pore, for year 2004, are displayed in Figures 2 (climate
Impact Assessment change), 3 (acidification), and 4 (ecotoxicity).
The impact assessment method by SimaPro22 includes the
three main environmental damage categories described below.
Climate Change. Waste treatment and management has
been studied together with the intention of reducing green-
Human Health. This is measured in disability-adjusted life house gases in many countries. This is because global warm-
years, that is, the different disabilities caused by diseases ing or climate change has become a worldwide concern.12
are weighted. Climate change, which is an international Moreover, Singapore, as a small island, is vulnerable to any
concern, is categorized under this damage category. sudden changes in sea levels.11 In Figure 2, the largest
amounts of greenhouse gases are generated from the incin-
Ecosystem Quality or Ecotoxicity. This is measured in PDF X eration of plastics and, next, from paper/cardboards. The
m2 year, which is the potentially disappeared fraction of explanation for the results shown is because of, first and
plant species. The impact category of acidification is listed foremost, the chemical properties of the material. Plastics
under this environmental category. In terms of ecotoxic- are made from oil, and although the material has a high-
ity, the measured aspect is the percentage of all species energy content, burning plastics contributes to climate
present in the environment living under toxic stress (po- change through CO, release. Oil is a fossil fuel, and so
tentially affected fraction or PAF X m2 year). incineration of plastic releases carbon previously held in
long-term storage in oil deposits.23 Paper or cardboard, on
the other hand, originates from wood, which contain ele-
Resources. The last category measures the additional en- ments of carbon that are released as CO, when burned.13
ergy requirement to compensate lower future ore grade, Another explanation for the peaks shown in Figure 2 is the
and the unit of measurement is in megajoule (MJ) surplus. large volumes of paper/cardboard and plastics that are sent
The following four categories are selected: climate for incineration. Paper/cardboards and plastics each make
change, acidification, ecotoxicity, and resource use. The up 25% and 24%, respectively, of the total waste disposed in
four types of impact categories selected were based on Singapore. With increased recycling rates and less incinera-
their environmental relevance to Singapore, as well as the tion of plastics and paper/paperboard in the near future, the
types of emissions presented in the LCI results. For exam- levels of CO, from incinerators will also be expected to
ple, the impact category of eutrophication is not relevant, decrease. This trend is similar to the waste treatment study
because there are no sizable freshwater systems of river- performed in S ~ e d e n . The
~ 4 incineration of food, horticul-
ways and lakes in Singapore. Similarly, radiation is not an tural wastes, wood, and textiles also contributes to climate
issue for any of the wastes considered. Therefore, the four change. The transportation of wastes to incinerators hardly
impact categories were chosen to be representative of the causes any environmental impact.
potential environmental impact of solid waste manage- Figure 2 shows that the landfilling of wastes creates
ment in the Singapore context. minimum harm to the environment. Although other
countries report that, in general, large amounts of green-
house gases are found in most landfills,gJz this is not the
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION case for Singapore. The reason is because organic wastes,
The results for climate change, acidification, ecotoxicity, such as food waste, are not sent to the Semakau landfill.4
and resource use are presented below. Plastics, glass, construction materials, metals, and slag are

Table 4. Energy savings because of recycling of selected materials.6 l a 19

Estimated Energy Savings (GJ/t) from the Recycling of Selected Waste Materials

Ferrous Ferrous Nonferrous Nonferrous

Mixed Metal Metal Metal Metal Construction Slag (Steel/
PaperlCardboard Plastics Woodflimber (Iron) (Steel) (Aluminium) (Copper) Material Copper) Tires

5.6 20.5 6.6 223.0 12.6 174.0 7.9 19.5 10.2 9.8

248 Journal of the A / r & Waste Management Association Volume 56 March 2006
 Tan and Khoo

Table 5. Total air and water emissions attributable to the compostlng of marine transport systems. These gases may be a threat to
horticultural waste in Singapore for the year 2004 the continued existence of various species of vegetation
and aquatic life forms, which can be found around the
Emissions Attributable to Composting island’s coastal areas.25
Parameter Total kg
Ecotoxicity. MSW incinerators are found to be one of main
COZ 4 84E t 06 sources of airborne metal pollution, including Cd, Cr, Cu,
CH, 1 04E + 05 Pb, and zinc (Zn) in Singapore.26 Incinerator emissions
co 3 11E + 04 also contain dioxins and furans, which can be transported
NH3 1 84E + 04 for considerable distances downwind from the incinera-
NZ0 1 96E 04 tor facilities and have become major environmental and
NO, 2 52E + 04 social concerns.27 Stringent laws and regulations have
voc 1 96E + 05
Water emissions Totalg
been imposed in many countries to minimize the harm
BOD 1 86E + 07 caused by such emission^.^
COD 3 15E + 07 The results displayed in Figure 4 are generated after
Ammonium 3 22E + 06 the removal of 99% of heavy metals from the incinerator
gases, which is the removal efficiency found in new in-
c i n e r a t o r ~ . Although
~,~~ ferrous metals make up only a
practically inert in landfills. Compared with incineration, small proportion of the total waste disposed (-2%), these
the landfilling of wastes does not pose much environmen- materials generate large amounts of toxic metals when
tal threat. This is because of the nation’s policy to incin- incinerated.6 According to the same study, materials such
erate most of the disposed wastes (up to 90%). The trans- as paper, wood, textiles, and plastics also produce a sig-
portation of waste by truck and barge to the Semakau nificant amount of harmful gases, including dioxins and
landfill also creates minimal environmental damage. furans, when incinerated. These are known to be very
toxic compounds that can adversely affect human health
Acidification. SO, and NO, are significant pollutants by entering the food chain after being emitted into the
that can cause acidification and nutrient forcing of air.28 This makes the strategy of minimizing waste and
terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems. Figure 3 shows maximizing recycling even more pertinent in the context
that the incineration of plastics contributes signifi- of Singapore. With increased recycling of wastes, future
cantly to this impact category. The second highest con- environmental burdens from incinerators, as well as harm
tribution comes from the incineration of paper/card- caused to human health and nature, can be expected to
board. Next comes food, wood, horticultural wastes, lessen.
and textiles. For many years, incineration or heat treat- Landfill leachate can hardly be noticed in the re-
ment technologies equipped with waste-to-energy sys- sults shown and has minimal contribution to ecotoxic-
tems have been used by many countries for the disposal ity. Moreover, the perimeter bund around the Semakau
of wastes; however, pollution control devices are re- landfill is lined with an impermeable membrane, as
quired to monitor and reduce the release of harmful well as a layer of marine clay, to ensure that the
gases from incinerators. These pollution prevention leachate generated is contained within the landfill area.
measures include the control of the amount of NO, After passing through a leachate treatment plant, the
gases that are generated.5 The environmental impacts treated effluent is discharged into the sea. It was re-
of truck transportation to the incineration plants are ported that the quality of the treated affluent complies
highly insignificant. with watercourse standards.29
Figure 3 also shows that, compared with incineration,
the landfilling of wastes hardly causes any environmental
damage. However, the contribution of acidic gases from Resources. Singapore lacks natural resources and relies
the transportation of wastes by barge from Tuas Marine on the import of fossil fuels from other countries for
Station to Semakau landfill is quite significant for nearly energy.11 The advantage of the incineration plant in
all materials, except for metals and tires. In this case, the the country is its ability to generate electricity from the
pollution comes from the volumes and weights of the burning of wastes. Of this electricity generated, 80% is
material that needs to be ferried across the sea to the made available for the public. The energy result from
landfill site, as well as the release of acidic gases from the incineration of wastes is displayed in Figure 5. The
negative peaks illustrate the potential net savings of
Table 6. Transport po11UtiOn.20~21 fossil fuels that are required to produce energy or elec-
tricity, that is, the total amount of energy consumed
Pollutants CO COZ HC SOP NOx PM VOC minus the amount generated. In terms of resource sav-
ings, plastics have 60% higher thermal values than
Truck Emissions paper/cardboard,l3 thus making them more environ-
Class Iil (gikm) 0.27 47.0 0.075 N.A. 0.48 0.17 N.A. mentally beneficial to incinerate. Other types of com-
Marine Emissions bustible wastes (wood, food, horticultural wastes, and
g/(tkm) 109 35000 60 35 420 30 75 textiles) can also provide a considerable amount of
energy savings from incineration.

Volume 56 March 2006 Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association 249
 Tan and Khoo

2.1E+04
1.8E+04
1.5E+04

I; 1.2E+04
a
n 9.OE+03
6.OEt03
3.OEt03
O.OEtO0

Landfill greenhouse gases Landfill transport (truck & barge)

incinerationgreenhouse gases Incineration transport (trucks only)

Figure 2. Climate change results for total waste disposed.

Recycling and Composting wastes and 422,900 t of construction debris, where as

The results of waste recycling/composting are displayed much as 93% and 94% were recycled, respectively. Con-
in Figures 6 (climate change), 7 (acidification), and 8 struction materials consist of a mixture of cement, wood,
(ecotoxicity). aluminum, steel, and cardboard, which can be turned
into aggregates. The number of recycling companies in
Climate Change. It can be observed from Figure 6 that the Singapore has been increasing and will be expected to
recycling of materials provides the best environmentally additionally increase in future.4
sound solution for the management of wastes. The nega- The waste materials that require sorting activities
tive values show the potential amount of climate change include ferrous and nonferrous metals, plastics, glass,
that can be avoided, which is the amount of emissions papedcardboard, and textiles. After the sorting process,
saved by producing the same products from secondary paper and cardboard are baled and sent overseas. Com-
materials. Also, recycling saves more energy (from manu- pared with the benefits of emission savings from recy-
facturing) than incinerators produce,30 and helps mitigate cling, the contribution to climate change from the
climate change.12 Recent studies by U.S. Environmental waste separation and baling processes, as well as trans-
Protection Agency confirmed that for every ton of mixed portation, are minimal.
material recycled, 0.8 million t of carbon equivalent are The environmental impact of climate change from
saved, which is four times as much as by incineration.31 the composting of horticultural wastes is rather insignif-
Figure 6 shows that the largest benefit comes first of icant. Presently, -40% of horticultural wastes, which con-
all from the recycling of ferrous metals (steelhron). The sist of pruned branches, trunks, and leaves, are sent di-
recycling of construction materials is also widely assumed rectly to composting facilities. From the waste material,
to be environmentally b e n e f i ~ i a l In
. ~ ~the present year, only 1.5-2% of the biologically available carbon is emit-
Singapore's industry generated 856,700 t of ferrous metal ted as methane during composting.9

2.7502
2.4502
2.1Et02

N
% 1.8502
E 1.5Ec02
tf 1.2502
a 9.0501
6.0EcOl
3.0Ho1
0.0500

ILandfill acidic gases D Landfill transport (truck & barge)

Incineration acidic gases IIncineration transport ( t N C k S only)

Figure 3. Acidification results for total waste disposed.

250 Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association Volume 56 March 2006
 Tan and Khoo

3.5Et02 ,
3.OEt02
2 5Et02
k 2.OEt02
N
*E 1SEt02
LL
2 1 OEt02
5.OEt01
0 OE+OO

Landfill leachate Incineration gases (heavy metals and dioxins)

Figure 4. Ecotoxicity results for total waste disposed.

Acidification and Ecotoxicity. The results shown in Figures Transportation contributes insignificantly to acidifi-
7 (acidification) and 8 (ecotoxicity) follow the exact same cation. These results are consistent with a local case study
trends as those displayed in Figure 6. The emission-saving performed for plastics and paperboard wastes in Singa-
patterns exhibit the same inverted peaks for each recycled pore.13 Also for acidification results (Figure 7), slightly
material; the highest comes from ferrous metals, next, higher peaks from composting gases can be noticed. In
construction material, then slag, plastics, and so forth. the present year, a total of 119,300 t of horticultural
This is because the same proportions of emission savings wastes was sent for composting. The composting process
are generated for each material recycled. generates NH, and NO, gases that contribute to this en-
Many types of air pollution have important nega- vironmental impact category.
tive health and environmental effects. Therefore, the
reduced amounts of NO,, SO,, and toxic metals will
place the country in a better position for achieving Final Comparisons
environmental protection and health.11 Although it A comparison between the present waste strategy for Sin-
may be argued that environmental management and gapore in the year 2004 (landfill, incineration, and recy-
technology in Singapore has already been actively pur- cling rates) and SGP 2012 is given in Figure 9. It can be
sued, this was predominantly concerned with cleaning seen that the environmental burdens from landfilling and
up pollution and the huge amount of solid wastes cre- transportation of wastes are the least significant issues in
ated.25 The recycling of materials offers a more proac- the overall waste management scheme. It can also be
tive approach to environmental sustainability, which confirmed that any gains in energy from the incineration
recognizes well in advance the damaging effects that of wastes are outweighed by the production of harmful
pollution from waste can cause to the natural ecosys- emissions. This fact is also true with state-of-the-art incin-
tem, and minimizes and mitigates their consequences. erators. However, because Singapore is faced with the

Net Energy Generated for Use ~

Figure 5. Fossil fuel results for energy generation because of incineration of wastes.

Volume 56 March 2006 Journal of the A / r & Wasfe Management Association 251
 Tan and Khoo

1,0503
-2.OEt03

-5.0503
-8.0503
5 -1.1504

-1.4EW
-1.7Et04
-2.0504

-2.3504
-2.6504

Transport to Recycler/Cospost IComposting

SortinglBaling H Recycling I

Figure 6. Climate change results because of recycling/composting.

scarcity of space for landfills, the remaining option for the by the 100% landfilling of waste would have been over-
treatment of disposable wastes has been incinerators. whelming. This hypothetical scenario would have re-
The previous results have shown that air pollution sulted if all solid waste mixtures (including organics and
from the incineration of wastes has contributed signifi- foods waste) were dumped at the landfill. Fortunately,
cantly to climate change, acidification, and ecotoxicity. this is not permitted in Singapore. It is also shown on the
Because Singapore is a small island country with high graphs that the benefits of incinerating 100% of wastes
population density, high humidity, and low-lying coastal would be very much outweighed by the pollution it cre-
areas, the nation is especially vulnerable to unfavorable ates. From the present waste management strategy (44%
health effects from pollution, as well as climate change recycling, 90% incineration, and 10% landfill) to the im-
and sea level rise.13 To prevent the detrimental effect of plementation of the SGP 2012 (60% recycling, 100% in-
incinerator emissions on human health and the environ- cineration, and zero landfill), -45% environmental im-
ment, the country has to either reduce the amount of provement can be appreciated. The benefits will
waste generated or increase recycling rates. additionally improve by 70% if all waste materials were to
Recycling of wastes offers the best solution for envi- be recycled.
ronmental protection and improved human health. In
fact, it was reported that recycling plastic saves 3.7-5.2 CONCLUSIONS
times more energy, recycling paper saves 2.7-4.3 times The sustainability of any country, especially a small is-
more energy, and recycling metal saves 30-888 times land-state like Singapore, begins with ensuring that phys-
more energy than is gained through incineration.33 ical land resources, and air are not overwhelmed by pol-
Finally, an overall comparison of five waste manage- lution from wastes. The investigation of the
ment options is displayed in Figure 10. From the results, it environmental burdens and benefits of a waste manage-
can be highlighted that the environmental impact caused ment is a complex task and, hence, requires the use of a

4 0502
-2 O H 2
-8 0 5 0 2
-1 4 5 0 3
-20503
(y" -2 5503
,E - 3 2 H 3
0" -38503
a -44503
-5 0503
-5 5B03
-5 2503
-6 8503
-7 4B03
-8 OD03

Recycling I
Transport to RecyclerlCospost I Composting

Figure 7. Acidification results because of recycltngicomposting.

252 Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association Volume 56 March 2006
 Tan and Khoo

2.0E42
-8.OEtO2
-1.8EtO3
-2.8EtO3
-38Et03
&‘ -4.8EtO3
E -5.8Et03
-6.8EtO3
a -7.8E+03
-8.8EtO3
-9.8EtO3
-1.lB04
-1.2EtO4
-1 3 k 0 4

SortinglBaling Recycling I Composting

Figure 8. Ecotoxicity results because of recycling/composting.

scientifically sound environmental assessment tool. For ferrous metals, construction materials, and slag (con-
this case study, LCA was applied to perform an envi- taining Cu and steel) when recycled, all three materials
ronmental impact assessment of the entire waste man- exhibit huge amounts of potential emission savings, which
agement system and eventually to help select suitable mitigate climate change, acidification, and ecotoxicity; (7)
options for dealing with solid wastes. In summary, the in the overall waste management scenario, the transporta-
LCA results for the waste management strategy in Sin- tion of trucks to incinerators and recycling centers causes
gapore concluded the following: (1) the incineration of minimal damage to environment.
plastics and paperlcardboard both contribute signifi- The final results also concluded that from the
cantly to climate change and acidification; (2) apart present state of Singapore’s waste management strategy
from organic wastes, most materials are practically inert (for year 2004) to implementing SGP 2012, as much as
in landfills and hardly contribute to climate change or 45% environmental improvement can be achieved. Be-
acidification; (3) transportation to Semakau landfill cause part of SGP 2012 is also to “strive for the Pollutant
hardly contributes to climate change; however, sea Standards Index to be within the ‘good’ range for 85%
transportation to the landfill contributes quite signifi- of the year, and within the ‘moderate’ range for the
cantly to acidification because of NO, and SO, emis- remaining 15%,”11 the nation’s quest to maximize re-
sions from barges; (4) the incineration of materials gen- cycling while minimizing waste has become even more
erates large amounts of heavy metals and dioxin/ important.
furans,(especially from ferrous metals, plastics, textiles,
and paperboard), which contribute significantly to eco-
toxicity; ( 5 ) the energy gained from the incineration of ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
waste materials is outweighed by the air pollution gen- The authors thank Ong Chong Peng and Vaneeta
erated from the incinerators; (6) recycling proves to be Bhojwani of the National Environment Agency, Singa-
the best solution to “get rid” of wastes, especially for pore, for their helpful discussions and support.

Transport Landfill Incineration Energy from Recycling

Pollution Pollution Pollution Incineration Komposting
2.OEt07
u)

$
0
1.OE+07
O.OE+OO
e!
5
.- -1.OE+07

-m -2.OEt07
-3.OE+07
-4.OE+07
-5.OEt07 1 1
IB~Year 2004.48% Recycling rate; 90-10% incineration-landfill rate
~

~
ISGP2012: 60% recycling rate: 100% incineration &zero landfill

Figure 9. Comparison of present waste strategy (year 2004) and SGP 2012.

Volume 56 March 2006 Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association 253
 Tan and Khoo

1.1E+08 I 1

9.OE+07

7.OE+07

5.OE+07
3.OE+07

1.OE+07
-1 .OE+07 100% 100% t S 2
Landfill Incineration Case R g
-3.OE+07
IC0 ing

Figure I O . Overall Comparison of waste management options.

REFERENCES 20. DieselNet. EU Emission Standards for Light Commercial Vehicles

1. McDougall, F.R.; Hruska, J.P. Report: The Use of Life Cycle Inventory available on the DieselNet web site, http://www.dieselnet.com/
Tools to Support an Integrated Approach t o Solid Waste Management; standards/eu/ld.html (accessed May 2005).
Waste Manage. 2000, 18, 590-594. 21. Hetch, J. The Environmental Effects of Freight; Organization for Eco-
2. Barton, J.R.; Dalley, D.; Patel, V.S. Life Cycle Assessment for Waste nomic Cooperation and Development: Paris, France, 1997.
Management; Waste Manage. 1996, 16, 35-50. 22. SimaPro. Impact Assessment Methods; available o n the web site,
3. Bai, R.; Sutanto, M. The Practice and Challenges of Solid Waste Man- http://www.pre.nl/simapro/impact-assessment-methods.htm (accessed
agement in Singapore; Waste Manage. 2002, 22, 557-567. December 2004).
4. Solid Waste Management; Available on the National Environmental 23. Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases: A Life Cycle Assess-
Agency web site, http:/lapp,nea.gov.sg (accessed December 2004). ment of Emissions and Sinks; EPA530-R-02-006; Office of Solid Waste,
5. Hellweg, S.; Hofstetter, T.B.; Hungerbiihler, K. Modeling Waste Incin- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, DC, 2002.
eration for Life-Cycle Inventory Analysis in Switzerland; Environ. 24. Ljunggren, M. The MSW Model: A Systems Engineering Approach to
Model. Assess. 2001, 6, 219-235. National Waste Management. Presented at Systems Engineering Mod-
6. McDougall, F.R.; White, P.; Franke, M.; Hindle. P. IntegratedSolid Waste els for Waste Management, Goteborg, Sweden, February 25-26, 1998.
Management: A Life Cycle Inventory, 2nd ed.; Blackwell Pub.: Cornwall, 25. The State of the Natural Environment in Singapore; Briffet, C; Ho, H.C.,
UK, 2004. Eds.; Nature Society: Singapore, 1999.
7. Nishida, K.; Nagayoshi, Y.; Ota, H.; Nagasawa. H. Melting and Stone 26. Balasubramanian, R.; Qian, W.B. Characterization and Source Identi-
Production Using MSW Incinerated Ash; Waste Manage. 2001, 21, fication of Airborne Trace Metals in Singapore; I. Environ. Monit. 2004,
443-449. 6, 813-818.
8. Petkovic, G.; Engelsen, C.J.; Haoya, A.O.; Breedveld, G. Environmental 27. Connett, P.; Connett, E. Municipal Waste Incineration; The Ecologist
Impact From the Use of Recycled Materials in Road Construction: 1994, 24, 14-19.
Method for Decision Making in Norway; Res. Conserv. Rec. 2004, 42, 28. Olie, K.; Addink, R.; Schoonenboom, M. Metals as Catalysts During
249-264. the Formation and Decomposition of Chlorinated Dioxins and Furans
9. Bjamadbttir, H.J.; Friariksson, G.B.; Johnsen, T.; Sletsen. H. Guidelines in Incineration Processes; J. Air & Waste Manage Assoc. 1998, 48,
for the Use o f L C A in the Waste Management Sector; Nordtest Rep. 517; 101-106.
Nordtest: Espoo, FN, 2002. 29. Radio Singapore International. Semakau Landfill-Waste Disposal in
10. Pimenteira, C.A.P., Pereira, A.S.; Oliveira, L.B.; Rosa, L.P.; Reis, M.M.; Singapore; available on the web site, http://rsi.com.sg/english/main/
Henriques, R.M. Energy Conservation and Cot Emission Reductions index/.html (accessed December 2004).
due to Recycling in Brazil; Waste Manage. 2004, 24, 889-897. 30. Denison, R.A;. Environmental Life Cycle Comparisons of Recycling,
11. Beyond Clean and Green, Toward Environmental Sustainability; Na- Landfilling, and Incineration; Annu. Rev. Energy Environ. 1996, 21,
tional Assessment Report for the International Meeting On The 10 191-237.
Year Review Of The Barbados Program of Action; Singapore’s Ministry 31. Murray, R. Creating Wealth from Waste; Demos Pub.: London, UK,
of the Environment: Singapore, 2004. 1999;171.
12. Weitz, K.A.; Thorneleo, S.A.; Nishtala, S.R.; Yarkosky, S.; Zannes, M. 32. Gao, W.; Ariyama, T.; Ojima, T.; Meier, A. Energy Impacts of Recycling
The Impact of Municipal Solid Waste Management on Greenhouse Disassembly Material in Residential Buildings; Energy Buildings 2000,
Gas Emissions in the United States; 1.Air & Waste Manage. Assoc. 2002, 1296, 1-10,
52, 1000-1011. 33. Davis, P. Report on Municipal Waste Incineration; Friends of the Earth:
13. Tan, R.B.H.; Khoo, H.H. Life Cycle Assessment of EPS and CPB Inserts: Birmingham, UK, 1994.
Design Considerations and End of Life Scenarios; J. Environ. Manage.
2005, 74, 195-205.
14. Streamlined Life Cycle Assessment: A Final Report from the SETAC North
America Streamlined LCA Workgroup; Todd, J.A.; Curran, M.A., Eds.;
Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC):
Pensacola, FL, 1999.
15. Hassan, M.N.; Aziz, A.N.A.; Awang, N. In: Life Cycle Assessment for
Green Productivity: A n Asian Perspective; Tan, R.B.H., Ed. Asian Produc-
tivity Organization: Singapore, 2003; 161-186. About the Authors
16. White, P.R.; Franke, M.; Hindle, P. Integrated Solid Waste Management: Reginald B.H. Tan is an associate professor and Hsien H.
A life Cycle Inventory; Blackie Academic and Professional: London, UK, Khoo is a Research scholar at the Department of Chemical
1994.
17. Wong, C.K. Development of LCI Database for Singapore Electricity Pro- and Biomoiecular Engineering, National University of Sin-
duction; Final Year Report; Department of Chemical and Enbqronmental gapore. Address correspondence to: Hsien H. Khoo De-
Engineering, National University of Singapore: Singapore, 2002. partment of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Na-
18. Cornell Cooperative Extension. Cornell University. Recycling and Solid tional University of Singapore, Blk E5 02-09,4 Engineering
Waste Coordination; available on the Cornell University web site, http://
www.cce.cornell.edu/schuyler/recycle/(accessed December 2004). Drive 4, Singapore 117576; phone: +65-6874-6360;fax:
19. Dunlop Tires. Tire Manufacturing; available on the web site, http:// i-65-6779-1936; e-mail: chekhhQnus.edu.sg.
www.driveradviser.com/envir/manufacturing.shtml (accessed Decem-
ber 2004).

254 Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association Volume 56 March 2006