State of the Planet

News from the Columbia Climate School

, ,

The U.S. Should Phase Out Landfilling, as China and the E.U. Are Doing

Around the world, economic development has been accompanied by the generation of about 2 billion tons of urban waste each year. The developed nations have put a lot of effort into sorting out recyclable materials, but there are practical and economic limits as to how much of the waste can be recycled. According to EPA and other reports, the U.S. recycling plus composting rate has leveled out at about 32%. In the European Union, the rate is closer to 46%.

chart showing how the EU manages its waste
In 2015, the E.U. recycled or composted 46% of its municipal solid waste. The corresponding numbers for the U.S.: recycling plus composting: 32%; waste-to-energy: 8%; landfilling: 60%. Image: Earth Engineering Center; data from Eurostat

What remains after the recycling of urban wastes is a major problem and budget concern for all cities of the world. Cities typically have two options for getting rid of these non-recyclable leftovers: landfilling in traditional landfills or regulated “sanitary” landfills, or using post-recycling wastes as the fuel of waste-to-energy power plants that produce electricity or heat and recover metals and minerals.

Globally, an estimated 50% of collected urban wastes are landfilled and 20% are combusted in waste-to-energy power plants. How much waste is discarded on land and water is not known, but it has resulted in a major environmental problem, exemplified by the so-called “garbage patch” in the Pacific Ocean which is estimated to cover an area larger than Texas.

Studies from the Earth Engineering Center of Columbia University, which was the first to concentrate on waste-to-energy technology, have shown conclusively that using post-recycling urban waste as a fuel and harnessing the energy from that process is environmentally far superior to landfilling. There are three main reasons why:

  • Landfilling produces 0.5-1 ton more greenhouse gas emissions than combustion with energy recovery.
  • Landfilling requires the permanent transformation of “virgin” land to landfills.
  • There is potential for future contamination of surface and groundwater by closed landfills.

The research work of the Earth Engineering Center led to the formation, in 2003, of the Waste to Energy Research and Technology Council (WtERT); this organization has by now grown to the Global WtERT Council (GWC) with sister organizations in several other countries, including China, India, Brazil, Germany, Italy, and Brazil. Studies from the Earth Engineering Center and GWC range from process engineering to air pollution control systems, increased metal recovery, and beneficial use of the ash residues of combustion. They have included national surveys of waste generation and disposal in the U.S., U.K., Greece, and other nations. The results are available to the public through our publications and the WTE Guidebook, funded by the International Development Bank and translated into four languages.

We are especially proud of the tremendous growth of waste-to-energy in China: Expanding from a capacity of 10 million tons in 2005, the Chinese waste-to-energy industry transformed 170 million tons of urban waste into energy in 2019. The growth of waste-to-energy technology in China has paralleled the country’s advances in rapid rail transport and has been achieved by:

  • Including waste-to-energy in the national plan for energy;
  • Encouraging municipalities to build waste-to-energy plants;
  • Providing a $30/MWh credit for waste-to-energy electricity, an incentive over coal-fired electricity; and
  • Funding academic research on waste-to-energy (a major player is Zhejiang University, host of our WtERT-China organization).
A waste-to-energy power plant in Ningbo, China
A waste-to-energy power plant in Ningbo, China, combusts 2,250 tons of waste per day. Photo: Nickolas Themelis

Functionally and environmentally, the Chinese waste-to-energy power plants are as good as those in the E.U. and U.S. A very recent Earth Engineering Center study of 1,164 operating landfills in the U.S. showed that in 2018, the landfills emitted 292 million metric tons of carbon dioxide — i.e., 5.5% of the U.S. energy-related emissions. For comparison, the carbon emissions of global aviation are estimated at 2.5% of global emissions.

Cities in developing countries can follow the Chinese example of moving from traditional landfills to waste-to-energy plants, thus skipping the intermediate step of sanitary landfilling. Some cities are already doing this — for example in Azerbaijan, Belarus, Ethiopia, Turkey and Vietnam.

The U.S. transforms about 30 million square meters of the Earth, each year and forever, into landfills. Hopefully, the waste-to-energy progress made in China will compel developed nations of the West, such as the U.S., Canada, and Australia, to take similar measures and reduce landfilling.

Nickolas J. Themelis is a senior scientist at the Earth Engineering Center and a member of the National Academy of Engineering. 

The Earth Engineering Center of Columbia University, formed in 1995, was the first engineering unit of the Earth Institute. It has concentrated on the study of sustainable waste management and produced hundreds of theses, technical papers, and presentations, and books on waste management.

Views and opinions expressed here are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the Columbia Climate School, Earth Institute or Columbia University.

Science for the Planet: In these short video explainers, discover how scientists and scholars across the Columbia Climate School are working to understand the effects of climate change and help solve the crisis.
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

7 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Dan Knapp
2 years ago

“Zero Waste to Landfill” masks the fact that burning is destructive disposal. We need conserving disposal, not destructive disposal. No one knows what mass burn plants are “transforming.” All sorts of toxic compounds like dioxins and dibenzofurans are produced when the feedstock is dirty garbage. If they get captured by pollution control equipment, they get landfilled as usual. Same with the ash. We need more sociology applied to recycling. Engineering has its place, but social science can help a lot when the task is to change peoples’ behavior. I’m a sociologist who has run a reuse/recycle business for over forty years. We’re still growing; last year was our best.

Prof. Nickolas Themelis
Reply to  Dan Knapp
2 years ago

Possibly, the writer did not notice that “WTE is environmentally much preferable to landfilling for post-recycling wastes”. Therefore, it does not interfere with the writer’s reuse/recycle business. The U.S, recycling plus composting rate has leveled to about 32% and can be increased, with public education and discipline. One of the highest recycling rates has been reached in Denmark (52%R+C, 48% WTE, 0% landfilling), an example that recycling and WTE go hand-in-hand. The writer is referred to the new WTE plant in Copenhagen (https://www.copenhill.dk/en/), one of the most beautiful and environmentally-minded cities of the world. This WTE serves a dual purpose: Sustainable disposal/use of post-recycling wastes and a first class skiing and surfboarding center. The ash of the Copenhil WTE is processed and used beneficially in civil construction. Engineers send spaceships to Mars. They can also help to conserve land on Earth.

Gerald Ramirez
Gerald Ramirez
2 years ago

Hello Nickolas: as a nature-loving citizen and energy business developer in San Juan, Puerto Rico, I am absolutely convinced that here on our island, WtE technology is not only inevitable but the best solution to the waste management crisis. I have been studying and analyzing this solution for 3 years and after reading your writings and the recent report by Dr. Marco Castaldi all my doubts disappeared. Recently, the MDGS company granted us the exclusive representation for Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic to develop the business and implement several plants with patented RST (Recycling Solutions Technology) gasification technology. Could you support us in any way to establish our vision and initiative in the Caribbean area?

N.J. Themelis
N.J. Themelis
Reply to  Gerald Ramirez
2 years ago

Gerald, a few years back I was asked by the EPA Region 3 Administrator to make a presentation in Puerto Rico on the benefits of WTE for the Island. We also had a Columbia thesis on this subject that you can find on the web. I visited landfills in PR so I know the need.
Nearly all WTE is based on combustion. You mention “gasification” which requires much higher heating value than the US MSW, so be careful. You can email me brief description of process you have in mind. NJT
Theses – Page 7 – WTERT – Waste-to-Energy Research and …https://gwcouncil.org › Publications

M.S. Thesis: Life Cycle Assessment and Comparison of the Environmental Impacts of Thermal Treatment and Landfilling in Puerto Rico. By Giselle Balaguer …Earth and Env’l Eng., Columbia

Gerald Ramirez
Gerald Ramirez
Reply to  N.J. Themelis
2 years ago

Hi Nickolas: Thanks for the thesis info. In what year were you visiting the landfills in Puerto Rico? Were you able to give some presentation and to whom? The landfills situation here is worse and at chaos point because of the passage of time and the Hurricane’s María impact in 2017. From 69 landfills operating in 1990, now only 29 are still in operation and only 11 of them comply with the basic EPA regulations. Please send me your email to gramirez@clean-powergen.com to share with you the gasification technology details.

Sarah Fecht
Reply to  Gerald Ramirez
2 years ago

Hi Gerald, Dr. Themelis’s email is posted here: https://www.eee.columbia.edu/faculty/nickolas-themelis

Brandon
Brandon
1 year ago

The statement that landfilling has greater GHG emissions than incineration is absurd, particularly when landfill gas is being captured. But many compounds, including especially plastics, don’t break down in landfills and their carbon remains sequestered., There is no universe where burning that plastic results in lower emissions.