文摘
Purpose The oft-cited waste hierarchy is considered an important rule of thumb to identify preferential waste management options and places waste prevention at the top. Nevertheless, it has been claimed that waste prevention can sometimes be less favorable than recycling because (1) recycling decreases only the primary production of materials, whereas waste prevention may reduce a combination of both primary and low-impact secondary production, and (2) waste prevention decreases the quantity of material recycled downstream and the avoided impacts associated with recycling. In response to this claim, this study evaluates the life cycle effects of waste prevention activities (WPAs) on a residential waste management system. Methods This life cycle assessment (LCA) contrasts the net impacts of a large residential solid waste management system (including sanitary landfilling, anaerobic digestion, composting, and recycling) with a system that incorporates five WPAs, implemented at plausible levels (preventing a total of 3.6?% of waste generation tonnage) without diminishing product service consumption. WPAs addressed in this LCA reduce the collected tonnage of addressed advertising mail, disposable plastic shopping bags, newspapers, wine and spirit packaging, and yard waste (grass). Results and discussion In all cases, the WPAs reduce the net midpoint and endpoint level impacts of the residential waste management system. If WPAs are incorporated, the lower impacts from waste collection, transportation, sorting, and disposal as well as from the avoided upstream production of goods, more than compensate for the diminished net benefits associated with recycling and the displaced electricity from landfill gas utilization. Conclusions The results substantiate the uppermost placement of waste prevention within the waste hierarchy. Moreover, further environmental benefits from waste prevention can be realized by targeting WPAs at goods that will be landfilled and at those with low recycled content.