Identification of an Appropriate Alternative Waste Technology for Energy Recovery from Waste through Multi-Criteria Analysis

Waste management is now a global concern due to its high environmental impact on climate change. Because of generating huge amount of waste through our daily activities, managing waste in an efficient way has become more important than ever. Alternative Waste Technology (AWT), a new category of waste treatment technology has been developed for energy recovery in recent years to address this issue. AWT describes a technology that redirects waste away from landfill, recovers more useable resources from the waste flow and reduces the impact on the surroundings. Australia is one of the largest producers of waste per-capita. A number of AWTs are using in Australia to produce energy from waste. Presently, it is vital to identify an appropriate AWT to establish a sustainable waste management system in Australia. Identification of an appropriate AWT through Multi-criteria analysis (MCA) of four AWTs by using five key decision making criteria is presented and discussed in this paper.

Authors:

• Sharmina Begum
• M. G. Rasul
• Delwar Akbar

Keywords:

• Alternative waste technology (AWT)
• Energy fromwaste
• Gasification
• Multi-criteria Analysis (MCA)

References:

[1] Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), 2006. Australian and New
Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations (ANZSCO), First
Edition, Catalogue No. 1220.0, ABS, Canberra.
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Lookup/by%20Subject/1370.0
~2010~Chapter~Waste%20per%20person%20 (6.6.3)
[2] Hajkowicz, S. and Kerry, C. (2007). A Review of Multiple Criteria
Analysis fpr Water Resource Planning and Management. Water
Resource management, (21), 1553-1566.
[3] Sobral, M. M., Hipel, K. W. and Farquhar, G. J. (1981). A Multicriteria
Model for Solid Waste Management. Journal of Environmental
Management, 12, 97-l 10.
[4] Maimone, M., (1985). An Application of Multicriteria Evlauation in
Assessing Municipal Solid Waste Treatment and Disposal Systems.
Waste Management & Research, 3, 217-231.
[5] Diakoulaki, D. and Koumoutsos, N. K. (1990). Comparative Evaluation
of Alternative Beverage Containers with Multiple Environmental
Criteria in Greece Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 3, 241-252.
[6] Powell, J. C. (1992). The Evaluation of Waste Management Options.
CSERGE Working paper WM 92-06, University of East Anglia.
[7] Figueira, J., Salvatore, G., Ehrgott M. (2005). Multiple criteria decision
analysis: state of the art surveys. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York,
p 1045.
[8] Saaty, T. L. (2000). Fundamentals of decision making and priority
theory with the analytic hierarchy process. Pittsburg (PA): RWS. p 477.
[9] Ramanathan, R. (2001). A note on the use of the analytic hierarchy
process for environmental impact assessment. Journal of Environmental
Management, 63, 27−35.
[10] Resource Assessment Commission. (1992). Multi-Criteria Analysis as a
Resource Assessment Tool, Research Paper No. 6, March, Canberra,
Australia.
[11] Howard, A. F. (1991). A critical look at multiple criteria decision
making techniques with reference to forestry applications. Can J For
Res, (21), 1649-1659.
[12] Keeney, R. L. and Raiffa, H. (1993). Decisions with multiple objectives:
preferences and value tradeoffs, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press,
London, UK.
[13] Saaty, T. L. (2005). The analytic hierarchy and analytic network process
for the measurement of intangible criteria and for decision making. In:
Figueira J, Salvatore G, Ehrgott M (eds) Multiple criteria decision
analysis: state of the art surveys. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York,
pp345-407.