Waste Management 29 (2009) 2071–2077

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Waste Management
journal homepage: [Link]/locate/wasman

Environmental assessment of incinerator residue utilisation

S. Toller a,b,*, E. Kärrman a, J.P. Gustafsson b, Y. Magnusson a
a
Ecoloop AB, Mosebacke Torg 4, 116 46 Stockholm, Sweden
b
Department of Land and Water Resources Engineering, KTH (Royal Institute of Technology), SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Incineration ashes may be treated either as a waste to be dumped in landfill, or as a resource that is suit-
Accepted 3 March 2009 able for re-use. In order to choose the best management scenario, knowledge is needed on the potential
Available online 10 April 2009 environmental impact that may be expected, including not only local, but also regional and global impact.
In this study, A life cycle assessment (LCA) based approach was outlined for environmental assessment of
incinerator residue utilisation, in which leaching of trace elements as well as other emissions to air and
water and the use of resources were regarded as constituting the potential environmental impact from
the system studied. Case studies were performed for two selected ash types, bottom ash from municipal
solid waste incineration (MSWI) and wood fly ash. The MSWI bottom ash was assumed to be suitable for
road construction or as drainage material in landfill, whereas the wood fly ash was assumed to be suitable
for road construction or as a nutrient resource to be recycled on forest land after biofuel harvesting. Dif-
ferent types of potential environmental impact predominated in the activities of the system and the use
of natural resources and the trace element leaching were identified as being relatively important for the
scenarios compared. The scenarios differed in use of resources and energy, whereas there is a potential
for trace element leaching regardless of how the material is managed. Utilising MSWI bottom ash in road
construction and recycling of wood ash on forest land saved more natural resources and energy than
when these materials were managed according to the other scenarios investigated, including dumping
in landfill.
Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction for road and ground constructions and concluded that widening
the system boundaries can improve the basis for decision making.
Incineration for energy production of biofuel, peat and different For MSWI bottom ash utilisation, research on environmental im-
types of waste in Sweden generates approximately 1 million ton- pact associated with utilisation has mostly been focused on the
nes of ashes yearly (Ribbing, 2007). These ashes are of varying chemical properties of the material and the possible leaching of
chemical and technical properties, depending on the type of fuel, contaminants in different applications (Olsson, 2005). Knowledge
the incineration process and the type of furnace (Rendek et al., of the chemical properties of a material is necessary when assess-
2007). Some of the ashes may be considered as usable for ground ing the risk for local toxic effects. However, it is not sufficient if a
constructions or as a source of nutrients while others need to be wider range of aspects are to be covered, such as climate change,
put under controlled leaching conditions due to their contents of acidification, eutrophication and depletion of natural resources. A
contaminants. For some ashes, such as bottom ash from municipal broader approach is needed to receive qualitative or quantitative
solid waste incineration (MSWI) or fly ash from wood incineration, information on the potential for environmental impact on a regio-
there are different relevant management options, including differ- nal or global scale, and impact that is not directly associated with
ent utilisation possibilities as well as disposal of the material in the chemical properties of the material.
landfill. In Olsson et al. (2006), a life cycle assessment (LCA) approach
In order to choose the best management scenario, knowledge is was outlined and used to study the potential environmental im-
needed on the potential environmental impacts that can be ex- pact from substituting crushed rock with MSWI bottom ash in a
pected from the possible management options. When assessing road construction. It was concluded that a life cycle perspective
the potential environmental impacts, the system boundaries cho- was necessary if other types of environmental impact than only
sen are critical for the result. Roth and Eklund (2003) discussed dif- leaching from the material was to be captured. A few similar ap-
ferent approaches to the environmental evaluation of by-products proaches for environmental assessment of secondary material in
earth constructions can be found (Mroueh et al., 2001; Birgisdottir
* Corresponding author. Address: Ecoloop AB, Mosebacke Torg 4, 116 46
et al., 2007; Carpenter et al., 2007). In these studies, potential
Stockholm, Sweden. Tel.: +46 8 4427760; fax: +46 8 4427769. leaching from the re-used materials is related to other emissions
E-mail address: [Link]@[Link] (S. Toller). to air or water and to the natural resources that are needed by

0956-053X/$ - see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/[Link].2009.03.006
2072 S. Toller et al. / Waste Management 29 (2009) 2071–2077

the system. These previous studies, however, have focused mainly

on the choice of material for a certain construction and little atten- Extraction of Extraction and Extraction and
Refinement Refinement
tion has been given to the fact that the same material may be suit- raw materials refinement of refinement of
of ash of ash
raw materials raw materials
able for different purposes, with different environmental impact as
the result. Although a secondary material seems to be favourable Landfill
over a conventional material in a road structure, there might be covering Production of Production of
even better ways of utilising the material from an environmental service A service B
point of view. Wood fly ash is a suitable material for road construc- Disposal of
tion but it is at the same time a nutrient resource that may be re- ash on Use of Use of
landfill service A service B
turned to forest land as ash recycling in order to sustain the
nutrient status of the soil and decrease acidification problems.
MSWI bottom ash is a useful substitute for crushed rock or natural
gravel, not only in road constructions but also in other types of
Functional unit:
constructions, such as the drainage layer in the final covering of • Management the material
a landfill. For decisions on how to manage potential useful inciner- • Service A
ation residues, information is needed on the differences in environ- • Service B

mental impact between possible management scenarios. Such

Fig. 1. System boundaries for ash management. In scenario 1, the ash is used in
information might be used as decision-support in specific cases, service A, in scenario 2 it is used in service B and in scenario 3 it is dumped in
or serve as base for more strategic decisions on policies and pro- landfill. Dashed boxes indicate that this activity is not present in all scenarios. Some
grammes concerning the management of waste materials on a re- of the activities include transports.
gional or national level.
The aim of this study was to outline an LCA based approach for vided by the system, the system boundaries were expanded in
environmental assessment of ash utilisation that compares differ- order to include all relevant products or services associated with
ent management strategies. The approach was demonstrated the identified management scenarios. Thus, the functional unit of
through two case studies, in which the potential environmental the system includes the two different services (A and B) that the
impact from different management scenarios for two selected ash may contribute to in the chosen management scenarios as well
ash types, MSWI bottom ash and wood fly ash, were assessed. as the function of managing the ash material. This implies that if
the ash is used to produce service A, other resources have to be
2. Method used for service B in order to fulfill the function of the system.
The reverse is true if the ash is used to produce service B. If the
2.1. Environmental assessment approach ash is dumped in landfill without utilisation, other resources are
needed to produce both service A and B. This approach enables a
LCA is a tool for describing environmental aspects and potential broad evaluation of the system’s environmental performance at
impacts throughout a product’s life, from raw material acquisition each scenario alternative, including both the use of natural re-
through production, use and disposal (ISO, 1997). Central issues sources and aspects regarding landfilling.
are the use of a life cycle perspective, the definition of a system Focus was put on the differences between different possible
and the quantification of flows in to and out of the system (re- scenarios rather than on the total environmental impact caused
sources and emissions) as a base for an impact assessment. by each scenario. Unit processes that were similar for all studied
Although LCA was traditionally developed for environmental scenarios were excluded and the results should therefore be re-
assessment of products there are examples where LCA has been ferred to as the relative potential environmental impact of the sys-
used for other more complex functions, such as for evaluating tem. For example the production of ash was not considered, since
strategies for treatment of solid waste (Finnveden et al., 2005) or the inflow of ash to the system is the same regardless of the man-
various waste water systems (Tillman et al., 1998; Weiss et al., agement scenario. The scenarios for utilisation of ash were defined,
2008). The LCA framework includes several possible methodologi- e.g. by adjusting the dimensions of the construction, so that the
cal choices, for example the definition of system boundaries, which substitution of natural material could be done without any de-
influences the outcome of the assessment. Each such choice should crease in the quality of the product. Hence, the use and mainte-
be based on the aim of the LCA (Tillman, 2000). nance, as well as the possible destruction, of the constructions in
In this study, the methodology and concepts developed for LCA the different scenarios were assumed to be the same and the unit
were used to compare different strategies for ash management. processes for these activities were not included.
The approach outlined differs from previous studies (Mroueh
et al., 2001; Olsson et al., 2006; Birgisdottir et al., 2007; Carpenter 2.3. Inventory, impact assessment and interpretation
et al., 2007) by using a wider scope with more services included in
the functional unit of the system. The approach was used in a case During the inventory analysis, the use of resources (including
study of wood fly ash utilisation and a case study of MSWI bottom energy) by the system and the emissions from the system were
ash utilisation. In general, the work followed the established meth- quantified for all unit processes. Those flows of resources and
ods and practices for an LCA (ISO, 1997), including the principles emissions will be further referred to as elementary flows (EFs).
for defining system boundaries and for conducting the inventory, The EFs should include all material or energy that enters the sys-
the impact assessment and the interpretation. tem from the environment without previous human transforma-
tion, and material or energy that is discarded from the system
2.2. Definition of system boundaries and functional unit into the environment without subsequent human transformation
(ISO, 1997).
For each case study, three possible management scenarios were EFs associated with the life cycle of products used in the unit
compared. These included utilisation possibilities A and B and dis- processes, such as fuel, electricity and chemical products, were in-
posal of the ash in landfill (Fig. 1). For the scenarios in which the cluded in the inventory. Thus, raw materials, energy and emissions
ash was utilised, the ash was assumed to substitute other re- from producing, utilising or disposing of these products were in-
sources. To avoid allocation problems for the different services pro- cluded. For example, the emissions from the combustion of diesel
 S. Toller et al. / Waste Management 29 (2009) 2071–2077 2073

by the transporting lorry were inventoried as EFs, as was the raw recycling on forest land, utilisation as a road construction material
material and the emissions from the production of the diesel. The in a small forest road covered with gravel, or disposal of the ash in
EFs included were those that have the potential, based on current landfill (Table 1). Ash recycling practice was based on experiences
knowledge, to contribute to any type of environmental impact de- from Borås, where wood ash is transformed into granules and
scribed by SETAC-Europe (1999) or defined in the Swedish envi- spread on forest land by a specially designed tractor. For the sce-
ronmental quality objectives (Swedish Environmental Objectives narios in which the ash was utilised in a road construction or
Council, 2007). Other criteria were data availability and the signif- dumped on landfill, an alternative nutrient compensation, with
icance for the result of the study. dolomite as the main component, was assumed to be spread on
Generally, information used for calculating the EFs were ob- forest land in order to provide the same amount of Ca, Mg, K, P
tained from literature (Davis and Haglund, 1999; Stripple, 2001; and Zn as the wood ash. The road construction used in the case
Svingby and Båtelsson, 1999) or estimated by researchers, project study was based on experiences from the road Ehnsjövägen, situ-
owners or entrepreneurs. Road transports were assumed to be ated northeast of Stockholm (Mácsik and Svedberg, 2006). The
done with a lorry, carrying 35 tonnes and returning empty and ash was assumed to be mixed with crushed rock (30 Wt.% of ash)
with the average fuel consumption of 0.45 l/km. The transport dis- and used in a 0.2 m sub-base and base course layer. For the scenar-
tance was assumed to be 30 km for all materials except the geotex- ios in which the ash was dumped in landfill or recycled on forest
tile and the components for alternative nutrient compensation, for land, the road construction was assumed to be built with crushed
which longer transports with boat or train were calculated accord- rock only. The landfill scenario included the disposal and compac-
ing to Baumann and Tillman (2004). The landfill was assumed to be tion of the ash, as well as the final covering of the landfill, but no
15 m thick and covered with a precovering layer of sand (0.2 m), a cleaning of the landfill leachate. More detailed information on
barrier layer of geosynthetic clay liner (bentonite and geofabric, the different scenarios and the inventory in the case study on wood
0.006 m), a drainage layer of sand (0.2 m), a surface layer of exca- ash can be found in Olsson et al. (2008).
vated soil (0.5 m) and a vegetation layer with soil on the top
(1.35 m). Based on a sensitivity analysis of preliminary results, 2.5. Case study on MSWI bottom ash
the production of geosynthetic clay liner was neglected.
Leaching estimates of contaminants from the crushed rock and The residues from waste incineration are generally more con-
the ashes were based on results from laboratory scale experiments taminated than the wood ash, and its content of base-cations is
together with infiltration estimates over a 100 years period, lower. It is therefore not suitable as a nutrient resource. However,
according to Avfall Sverige (2008). Information on average trace the technical properties of MSWI bottom ash make it suitable as a
element leaching from the materials were obtained for the MSWI substitute for natural material such as gravel or crushed rock in
bottom ash (RVF, 2002), for crushed rock (Ekvall and Weidema, constructions. The yearly production in Sweden of MSWI bottom
2004 ) and for wood ash leaching (Avfall Sverige, 2008). The leach- ash is around 450,000 tonnes (Avfall Sverige, 2008).
ing from the constructions (road and drainage layer) and the land- The potential environmental impact from management of
fill was approximated by results from batch tests using a liquid to MSWI bottom ash produced in the Uppsala region in Sweden
solid (L/S) ratio of 10 or 2, respectively, whereas the leaching from was studied in the second case study. The possible management
ash recycled on forest land was approximated by results from options included utilisation as a drainage layer material on a land-
availability tests. Due to a limited amount of available data, only fill, utilisation as a sub-base material in an asphalt covered road, or
As, Cd and Pb were included in the case study of wood ash, disposal in landfill (Table 2). The drainage layer construction was
whereas As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn were included in the case based on experiences from the landfill Dragmossen in Älvkarleby
study of MSWI bottom ash. Leaching from uncrushed natural (Mácsik et al., 2006). The MSWI bottom ash was assumed to substi-
materials, such as sand, was not included. tute sand in a 0.2 m drainage layer and geotextile was then as-
In the impact assessment, the EFs quantified through the inven- sumed to be added on the top and at the bottom of the MSWI
tory were regarded as the potential environmental impact from the bottom ash layer, in order to separate the materials. Inventory data
system. The relative importance of each EF was estimated by nor- for the road construction was based on experiences from the test
malising the results against the resource use and the emissions on road Törringevägen southern Sweden (Hartlén et al., 1999) and
a national basis (Avfall Sverige, 2008). Thus, the use of energy was the previous inventory in Olsson et al. (2006). The bottom ash
divided by total national energy use whereas for example emis- was assumed to substitute crushed rock in a 0.4 m sub-base layer,
sions of greenhouse gases were divided with total national emis- with a somewhat increased base course of crushed rock (0.15 m in-
sions of greenhouse gases. Due to lack of data the use of crude stead of 0.08 m) in order to maintain the technical properties. The
oil, rock phosphate and potassium and the emissions of phenol chemical treatment of landfill leachate was included for the time
and oil to water were not included in the normalisation. Sensitivity period from disposal until the covering of the landfill (20 years).
analyses were continuously carried out. More detailed information on the different scenarios and the
inventory in the case study on MSWI bottom ash is available in Av-
2.4. Case study of wood ash fall Sverige (2008).

In Sweden, around 150,000 tonnes of ash is produced annually 3. Results and discussion
from incineration of biofuels that have not been mixed with con-
taminated fuels (Avfall Sverige, 2008). This ash, which is here re- 3.1. Wood fly ash management
ferred to as wood ash, may be seen as a nutrient resource and
the recommendation from the Swedish Forest Agency is to use it The use of natural resources and energy and the emissions to air
for ash recycling on forest land from which the biofuels have been and water included in the case study on wood fly ash are reviewed
harvested (Samuelsson, 2001). However, the ash is also a useful as the system’s EFs for the studied scenarios in Table 3. According
construction material, with technical properties suitable for small to the normalisation results, the use of natural materials and the
forest roads (Mácsik and Svedberg, 2006). emissions of Cd can be considered the system’s most important
In the case study, potential environmental impact from the EFs.
management of wood ash produced in Borås in south western Swe- Recycling of the ash on forest land was the scenario that saved
den was studied. The possible management options included ash most natural resources except for crushed rock. In scenario 2 or 3,
2074 S. Toller et al. / Waste Management 29 (2009) 2071–2077

Table 1
Studied scenarios for wood ash management.

Service provided by the system Material used in scenario 1 Material used in scenario 2 Material used in scenario 3
a
Nutrient source Wood ash Alternative nutrient source Alternative nutrient sourcea
Road construction Crushed rock Wood ash Crushed rock
Management of the material through landfilling Landfilling is not needed Landfilling is not needed Wood ash and material for landfill final covering
a
The alternative nutrient source was assumed to be composed with dolomite as the main component and with the same amount of Ca, Mg, K, P and Zn as in 1 tonne of
wood ash.

Table 2
Studied scenarios for MSWI bottom ash management.

Service provided by the system Material used in scenario 1 Material used in scenario 2 Material used in scenario 3
Drainage material MSWI bottom ash Sand Sand
Road construction Crushed rock MSWI bottom ash Crushed rock
Management of the material through landfilling Landfilling is not needed Landfilling is not needed MSWI bottom ash and material for landfill final covering

Table 3
dolomite in Sweden, if alternative nutrient compensation were to
The system’s elementary flows (EFs) for the scenarios compared for managing 1 tonne
of wood ash. The results for each scenario should be interpreted as relative to the substitute the total national wood ash production.
other scenarios, since only those activities in which there are differences between the The estimated leaching of As, Cd and Pb from crushed rock and
scenarios are included and not the total system. In scenario 1, the wood ash is wood ash were larger in scenario 1 than in scenario 2 or 3 (Table 3),
recycled on forest land, in scenario 2 it is used for road construction and in scenario 3
due to the relatively large amount of water that was assumed to
it is dumped in landfill.
reach the wood ash in this scenario. Assuming that the total annual
Elementary flow Unit Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 production of wood ash is recycled on forest land, the release of As
Resource use and Pb would be relatively small (<1%) compared to the yearly na-
Energya GJ 0.52 2.72 2.89 tional release from goods and product used in the society whereas
Sand Tonnes 0 0 0.04 the release of Cd from the wood ash would be much more signifi-
Other natural aggregatesb Tonnes 3.92 2.33 4.10
Zn kg 0 0.50 0.50
cant. The amount of available Cd in the ash contributed to about
P kg 0 15 15 the same amount as the total yearly release from goods and prod-
Dolomite kg 0 780 780 ucts in Sweden. Ash recycling, however, implies a return of sub-
K kg 0 70 70 stances that were once removed from the forest area through
Emissions to air biomass harvesting and if biomass harvesting had been included
CO g 29 106 114 within the system boundaries, the amount of As, Cd and Pb in
CO2 g 24536 95846 102946
the recycled ash would not have constituted an emission. The road
CH4 g CO2-ekv 0.6 2.9 3.1
F2 g 0 11 11 construction as well as the landfill alternatives would then result
HC g 13 58 62 in a net-removal of the As, Cd and Pb from the forests in a 100-year
NOx g 198 826 884 perspective, provided that the alternative nutrient compensation
N2O g CO2-ekv 163 660 708 in scenario 2 and 3 is not contaminated.
Particles g 5.3 29.5 31.2
SO2 g 12 549 552
Recycling of ash on forest land was found to be the most energy
SO3 g 0 63 63 efficient way to manage the ash. The differences in energy con-
VOC g 0.09 0.60 0.64 sumption between the scenarios were mainly due to the produc-
Emissions to water tion of alternative nutrient compensation in scenario 2 and 3
COD g 0.37 1.43 1.54 which was found to be a highly energy consuming activity
N-tot g 0.06 0.23 0.24 (Fig. 2, left). Still, the amount of energy to be saved by using the to-
Oil g 0.12 0.48 0.51
tal amount of wood ash produced instead of alternative nutrient
Phenol g 0.18 0.68 0.73
As g 0.38 0.017 0.056 compensation would only correspond to about 0.01% of the total
Cd g 4.3 0.006 0.023 annual energy use in Sweden. The emissions to air, and the emis-
Pb g 23 0.20 0.127 sions to water of COD, nitrogen, oil and phenol, were strongly
a
Energy includes the different types of fuel used within the system and pre- dependent on the use of energy. Hence, recycling of ash on forest
combustion for fuel production. land (scenario 1) was also the scenario with the smallest amount
b
Natural aggregates include excavated materials such as crushed rock and soil, of of air emissions. According to a sensitivity analysis for transport
which the crushed rock constitutes the dominant fraction (>95%). distances, the ash recycling on forest land was the most energy
efficient scenario even if the transport distance for the wood ash
would exceed 200 km.
natural materials were needed to produce the alternative nutrient However, it can be discussed whether it is realistic to assume an
compensation and in scenario 3, additional natural materials were alternative nutrient compensation to be used in scenario 2 or 3. If
needed for landfill covering. To save crushed rock, on the other no nutrient compensation is used in these scenarios, the produc-
hand, it was most beneficial to use the ash for road construction. tion of crushed rock and the transports would cause the system’s
The amount of crushed rock and sand to be saved if all wood ash major use of energy (Fig. 2, right).
would be managed according to scenario 1 or 2 was, however, only It can also be discussed if it is realistic to assume similar tech-
<1% of the annual use of these materials. The use of natural re- nical properties of the wood ash road as of a conventional road
sources for production of alternative nutrient compensation in sce- with crushed rock. Previous experiences indicate that the long
nario 2 and 3 was more significant. The use of dolomite would, for term technical sustainability can be improved when using fly ash
example, correspond to almost half of the annual extraction of in the sub-base and base course layers of a road construction, even
 S. Toller et al. / Waste Management 29 (2009) 2071–2077 2075

3000 3000

2500 2500
Energy use (MJ)

Energy use (MJ)

2000 2000

1500 1500

1000 1000

500 500

0 0
Production Transport Use of Landfilling Total Production Transport Use of Landfilling Total
of material material in of material material in
a function a function

Fig. 2. Use of energy by the different activities in the system, assuming nutrient compensation to be needed in all scenarios (left) or only in scenario 1 (right). In scenario 1
(white bars), the wood ash is recycled on forest land, in scenario 2 (grey bars) it is used for road construction and in scenario 3 (black bars) it is dumped in landfill. Transports
of material for landfill covering are included in the landfilling.

if the layer thickness is decreased (Lahtinen, 2001; Mácsik and construction was included. At the same time, the leaching from
Svedberg, 2006; Avfall Sverige, 2008). A sensitivity analysis was the bottom ash was smaller in scenario 3 than in the other scenar-
therefore conducted in which the maintenance was included. The ios due to a lower expected amount of infiltrating water. It should
ash road was assumed to need half the amount of maintenance be noted, however, that although the average values indicated
activities as the conventional road for the same period of time some difference between the scenarios, the variance in data was
and the thickness of the sub-base and base course layer was de- large and the dataset was too small to allow for any general conclu-
creased to 0.2 m. However, due to the large amount of energy sions regarding differences in trace element leaching. The results
needed for producing alternative nutrient compensation, these from the laboratory experiments showed similar average leaching
new assumptions did not lead to any new results. Although the from the MSWI bottom ash as from the crushed rock (within one
system would use somewhat more natural materials and energy, order of magnitude) at L/S 10 for all trace elements except Cu.
the differences between the studied scenarios remained. If, on Due to the large contribution from the crushed rock to the total
the other hand, these assumptions were combined with the leaching from the scenarios, different assumptions regarding the
assumption that the alternative nutrient compensation in scenario
2 or 3 is not needed, the results would change. The maintenance
Table 4
would then constitute the most important activity for the use of
The system’s elementary flows (EFs) for the scenarios compared for managing 1 tonne
energy and scenario 2 would be the most energy efficient scenario. of MSWI bottom ash. The results for each scenario should be interpreted as relative to
the other scenarios, since only those activities in which there are differences between
3.2. MSWI bottom ash management the scenarios are included and not the total system. In scenario 1, the bottom ash is
used as drainage material, in scenario 2 it is used for road construction and in scenario
3 it is dumped in landfill.
The use of natural resources and energy and the emissions to air
and water included in the case study on MSWI bottom ash are re- Elementary flow Unit Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
viewed as the system’s EFs for the studied scenarios in Table 4. Resource use
According to the normalisation results, the use of natural materials Energya MJ 168 89 172
and the emissions of trace elements can be considered the system’s Sand Tonnes 0.0 0.9 1.0
Other natural aggregatesb Tonnes 1.2 0.4 1.4
most important EFs.
Crude oilc kg 0.94 0 0
The scenarios compared used different types of natural materi-
Emissions to air
als. Crushed rock was used for road construction in scenario 1 and
CO g 7.3 6.3 10.2
3, and sand was used for the drainage layer in scenario 2 and 3, CO2 g 6144 5059 8332
whereas other excavated natural materials were used for landfill CH4 g CO2-ekv 0.17 0.09 0.19
covering in scenario 3. If the total production of MSWI bottom HC g 3.3 2.5 4.3
NOx g 49 40 67
ash in Sweden is utilised in drainage layers according to scenario
N2O g CO2-ekv 42 33 55
1, the amount of sand that would be saved corresponds to almost Particles g 1.3 0.9 1.6
one third of the total amounts used annually. For the other exca- SO2 g 3.1 2.3 3.9
vated materials, the annual production is larger and the amounts VOC g 0.03 0.01 0.03
to be saved by using all MSWI bottom ash in road constructions Emissions to water
only constitute a minor fraction (<1%). COD g 0.096 0.061 0.108
Trace element leaching, particularly of Cu, was identified as one N-tot g 0.015 0.010 0.017
Oil g 0.032 0.020 0.036
of the most important EFs from the system. If utilising the annual
Phenol g 0.046 0.029 0.051
Swedish production of MSWI bottom ash in drainage layers or road As g 0.023 0.009 0.020
constructions according to scenario 1 or 2, the estimated leaching Cd g 0.008 0.003 0.007
of Cu during 100 years would correspond to about 0.7% of the an- Cr g 0.13 0.03 0.11
Cu g 3.0 2.9 2.0
nual release of Cu from other sources. The estimated leaching of
Ni g 0.12 0.05 0.09
trace elements from crushed rock and MSWI bottom ash was larg- Pb g 0.04 0.02 0.02
est in scenario 1 (Table 4), where the ash was used in the drainage Zn g 0.19 0.12 0.12
layer and crushed rock was used in the road. The reason for the low a
Energy includes the different types of fuel used within the system and pre-
leaching in scenario 2, where the bottom ash was used in the road combustion for fuel production.
construction, is that in this scenario there was no use of crushed b
Other natural aggregates include excavated materials such as crushed rock and
rock and, thus, no leaching from this material was included. In soil, of which the crushed rock constitutes the dominant fraction (>80%).
c
the landfill scenario, leaching from crushed rock in the road Crude oil used as a raw material for geotextile production.
2076 S. Toller et al. / Waste Management 29 (2009) 2071–2077

infiltration rate were of minor importance for the outcome, except For environmental impact that prevails over a long period of
for the Cu leaching. time, such as leaching of contaminants, the choice of time perspec-
As in the wood ash case study, the emissions to air and the tive may be crucial for the outcome of an LCA. Finnveden et al.
emissions to water of COD, nitrogen, oil and phenol were strongly (1995) suggested three different time perspective to be used in
linked to the use of energy and if energy was saved, a decreased LCAs of landfills, a surveyable time period of 100 years, a critical
amount of these emissions were released. The most energy effi- time period and a hypothetical infinite time period. In this study,
cient way to manage the MSWI bottom ash in this case study a time perspective of 100 years was used for the environmental
was to use it in the road construction (scenario 2). The production assessment. This temporal cut-off presumes that there will be no
of crushed rock was found to be an energy consuming process, impact from future emissions, which is most likely not the case.
which constituted a large part of the total energy use in scenario Regarding the focus of the study, which was on the differences be-
1 and 3 (Fig. 3). However, transporting the material was also rela- tween different management possibilities rather than on the total
tively important for the system’s use of energy. According to a sen- impact from the system, however, this temporal cut-off was con-
sitivity analysis for transport distances, scenario 2 may include a sidered as relevant. Leaching from the ashes will occur to some de-
transport distance for the MSWI bottom ash that is up to 80 km gree regardless if the material is re-used or if it is dumped in
longer than in scenario 1 or 3, and still be the more energy saving landfill. In a very long time perspective, the differences in leaching
scenario. from the constructions with ash and from the ash in landfill will
A sensitivity analysis was also performed for differences in decrease. In addition, the relative importance of leaching from
maintenance of the road built with crushed rock and the road built the crushed rock will decrease, due to a lower amount of available
with MSWI bottom ash. Based on Stripple (2001), the maintenance trace elements.
of the road was included and a 20% difference in maintenance The leaching estimates during this time period was calculated
activity was assumed. The total use of energy increased signifi- by combining results from laboratory scale leaching tests with an
cantly as a result of the included maintenance, but the relation be- assumption of the future infiltration rate. It should be noted that
tween the scenarios remained, regardless of which material that there might be significant differences between specific ashes and
was assumed to imply less road maintenance. specific types of rock material, and that the average values used
here may therefore not be valid in other cases. Further, the leach-
3.3. Applying a life cycle perspective on ash management ing estimates are based on several assumptions. It may, for exam-
ple, be argued that laboratory scale experiments do not sufficiently
Most commonly in LCAs, the EFs for a system are aggregated by represent the future field conditions since the amount of water in
classification and characterisation, and sometimes the different contact with the material and the physical impact on the particles
impact categories are weighted against each other. In this study, may be significantly different. The equilibrium conditions may also
the EFs were used directly for the impact assessment, together be questioned. Therefore, the estimates presented here should be
with normalisation results. Since the normalisation was used for interpreted as an indication of what might be expected, rather than
prioritising the most important EFs, it can here be considered as a detailed prediction.
a weighting method. There were three reasons for the methodolog- Furthermore, to predict toxic effects, information on the distri-
ical choice to not use classification and characterisation. Firstly, bution and the peaks in concentrations at certain occasions may be
after talking to different stakeholders and entrepreneurs it was more relevant than information on the accumulated leaching in a
found that aggregating the information by classification and char- 100 years perspective. Since trace element leaching was found to
acterisation was of limited interest to the decision-makers associ- be relatively important in the environmental assessment of ash
ated with ash management in Sweden. Secondly, the methods for utilisation, case specific risk assessments such as provided by Car-
consistently and accurately calculating the contribution of each penter et al. (2007) are recommended as a complement in order to
inventory data to different types of potential environmental im- cover this issue more in detail.
pact can be questioned. Finally, data gaps can limit the inclusion
or coverage of a number of impact categories, thus limiting the 3.4. General findings and their implementation
possibilities to draw conclusions from the results (Finnveden,
1998). For example, human and eco-toxicological impact catego- In both case studies, the investigated EFs can be divided into
ries would suffer from severe data gaps due to insufficient knowl- three different categories, (i) the use of natural resources, (ii) the
edge about many ash substances. use of energy and the associated emissions to air and water, and
(iii) the direct emissions from the material. General findings were
that the utilisation of both wood fly ash and MSWI bottom ash
saves natural resources and energy, whereas the consequences
200
180
on the trace element leaching are more uncertain and may depend
160 on the specific materials. Thus, there is a potential for toxic effects,
regardless how the ashes are disposed of, but the dumping of the
Energy use (MJ)

140
120 ashes in landfill is likely to cause additional types of environmental
100 impact such as climatic change, acidification, and depletion of re-
80 sources. Whereas toxic effects may be considered as a local impact,
60 the other types of environmental impact occur on a regional or glo-
40 bal scale. It should be noted, however, that there are also types of
20 potential environmental impact that were not investigated in the
0
Production of Transport Use of Landfilling Total
case studies, such as noise, dust emissions during production,
material material in a occupation of land area and emissions from the ashes and the
function crushed rock of other potentially toxic substances than the ones in-
cluded here.
Fig. 3. Use of energy by the different activities in the system. In scenario 1 (white
bars), the bottom ash is used as drainage material, in scenario 2 (grey bars) it is used
Further, in both case studies it was found that different types of
for road construction and in scenario 3 (black bars) it is dumped in landfill. potential environmental impact were dominating in the different
Transports of material for landfill covering are included in landfilling. stages of the system’s life cycle. Whereas the differences in the
 S. Toller et al. / Waste Management 29 (2009) 2071–2077 2077

use of natural resources and energy were largest during the extrac- Finnveden, G., Albertsson, A.-C., Berendson, J., Eriksson, E., Höglund, L.O., Karlsson,
S., Sundqvist, J.-O., 1995. Solid waste treatment within the framework of life-
tion and refinement of raw materials, the leaching of trace ele-
cycle assessment. Journal of Cleaner Production 3, 189–199.
ments occurred when using the services of the system. Hence, Finnveden, G., Johansson, J., Lind, P., Moberg, Å., 2005. Life cycle assessment of
the case studies confirm the importance of using a life cycle per- energy from solid waste – part 1: general methodology and results. Journal of
spective in order to cover a wide range of potential environmental Cleaner Production 13, 213–229.
Hartlén, J., Grönholm, R., Nyström, T., Schultz, J., 1999. Återanvändning av
impact. sekundära material inom anläggningsområdet. AFR Report 275.
The outlined approach had a relatively broad scope. In order to Naturvårdsverket, Stockholm, Sweden.
include different alternatives for ash utilisation, the system bound- Hung, M.-L., Ma, H.-W., Yang, W.-F., 2006. A nobel sustainable decision making
model for municipal solid waste management. Waste Management 27, 209–
aries were expanded compared to previous LCAs of ash utilisation 219.
(Birgisdottir et al., 2007; Olsson et al., 2006; Carpenter et al., 2007) ISO, 1997. ISO 14040: Environmental Management – Life Cycle Assessment –
in which the choice of material for a certain construction was the Principles and Framework. International Organization for Standardization,
Geneva, Switzerland.
focus for the analysis. Such a focus is relevant if the aim is to im- Lahtinen, P., 2001. Fly ash mixtures as flexible structural materials for low-volume
prove the environmental performance of the construction. How- roads. Doctoral Thesis at the Department of Civil and Environmental
ever, if the aim is to create a decision-support for how to manage Engineering, Helsinki University of Technology, Helsinki, Finland.
Mácsik, J., Svedberg, B., 2006. Skogsbilvägsrenovering av Ehnsjövägen, Hallstavik.
a certain material, the increased scope presented here is necessary. Report No. Q4-285. Värmeforsk, Stockholm, Sweden.
In strategic planning of regional material supply, for example, sev- Mácsik, J., Maurice, C., Mossakowska, A., Eklund, C., 2006. Pilotförsök med
eral possibilities needs to be considered for how to manage both flygaskastabiliserat avloppsslam (FSA) som tätskikt. VA-forsk Report No.
2006-01. Svenskt Vatten AB, Stockholm, Sweden.
virgin and re-used materials efficiently to meet the demand for
Mroueh, U.-M., Eskola, P., Laine-Ylijoki, J., 2001. Life-cycle impacts of the use of
construction materials in a certain region. In the case studies pre- industrial by-products in road and earth construction. Waste Management 21,
sented here, only two utilisation possibilities were included, but 271–277.
the outlined approach may be expanded further. Olsson, S., 2005. Environmental assessment of municipal solid waste incinerator
bottom ash in road constructions. Licentiate Thesis at the Department of Land
Due to the broad range of environmental aspects covered, it and Water Resources Engineering, KTH, Stockholm, Sweden.
may be argued that the life cycle perspective improves the possi- Olsson, S., Kärrman, E., Gustafsson, J.P., 2006. Environmental systems analysis of the
bilities for sustainable development. Still, because ash manage- use of bottom ash from incineration of municipal waste for road construction.
Resources Conservation and Recycling 48, 26–40.
ment is associated with conflicting types of environmental Olsson, S., Kärrman, E., Rönnblom, T., Erlandsson, Å., 2008. Skogsbränsleaska som
impact, prioritising between environmental objectives may be näringsresurs eller konstruktionsmaterial – Miljöeffekter av olika
unavoidable in a decision situation. Generally acceptable method- handlingsalternativ. Final Report from Värmeforsk Project Q6-610.
Värmeforsk, Stockholm, Sweden.
ologies for this are needed, such as multicriteria analysis ap- Rendek, E., Ducom, G., Germain, P., 2007. Influence of waste input and combustion
proaches (e.g. Hung et al., 2006). Further, the outlined approach technology on MSWI bottom ash quality. Waste Management 27, 1403–
might need to be combined with other tools in order to receive a 1407.
Ribbing, C., 2007. Environmentally friendly use of non-coal ashes in Sweden. Waste
multi-dimensional and relevant base for decisions on ash Management 27, 1428–1435.
management. Roth, L., Eklund, M., 2003. Environmental evaluation of reuse of by-products as road
construction materials in Sweden. Waste Management 23, 107–116.
RVF, 2002. Kvalitetssäkring av slaggrus från förbränning av avfall. 02:10, Svenska
References
Renhållningsverksföreningen, Malmö, Sweden.
Samuelsson, H., 2001. Rekommendationer vid uttag av skogsbränsle och
Avfall Sverige, 2008. Miljökonsekvensanalys av Naturvårdsverkets förslag till kompensationsgödsling. Meddelande 2, Skogsstyrelsens förlag, Jönköping,
kriterier för återvinning av avfall i anläggningsarbeten. Report No. F2008:04. Sweden.
Avfall Sverige Utveckling, Malmö, Sweden (in Swedish). SETAC-Europe, 1999. Best available practice regarding impact categories and
Baumann, H., Tillman, A., 2004. The Hitch Hiker’s Guide to LCA. An Orientation in category indicators in life cycle impact assessment. International Journal of
the Life Cycle Assessment Methodology and Application. Studentlitteratur, Life Cycle Assessment 4, 167–174.
Lund, Sweden, ISBN 91-44-02364-2. Stripple, H., 2001. Life Cycle Assessment of Road, A Pilot Study for Inventory
Birgisdottir, H., Bhander, G., Hauschild, M.Z., Christensen, T.H., 2007. Life cycle Analysis. Second revised edition, B1210E. IVL Svenska Miljöinstitutet AB,
assessment of disposal of residues from municipal solid waste incineration: Göteborg, Sweden.
recycling of bottom ash in road construction or landfilling in Denmark Svingby, M., Båtelsson, O., 1999. LCA av lättfyllnadsmaterial för vägbankar.
evaluated in the ROAD-RES model. Waste Management 27, S75–S84. Detaljerad rapport. Vägverket, Borlänge, Sweden.
Carpenter, A.C., Gardner, K.H., Fopiano, J., Benson, C.H., Edil, T.B., 2007. Life cycle Swedish Environmental Objectives Council, 2007. Sweden’s Environmental
based risk assessment of recycled materials in roadway construction. Waste Objectives – in An Interdependent World, de Facto 2007, ISBN: 91-620-1260-6.
Management 27, 1458–1464. Tillman, A.-M., 2000. Significance of decision-making for LCA methodology.
Davis, J., Haglund C., 1999. Life cycle inventory (LCI) of fertiliser production. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 20, 113–123.
Fertiliser products used in Sweden and Western Europé. SIK-Report No. 654. Tillman, A.M., Svingby, M., Lundström, H., 1998. Life cycle assessment of municipal
Kemisk miljövetenskap, Chalmers, Göteborg, Sweden. waste water systems. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 3,
Ekvall, T., Weidema, B.P., 2004. System boundaries and input data in consequential 145–157.
life cycle inventory analysis. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 9, Weiss, P., Eveborn, D., Kärrman, E., Gustafsson, J.P., 2008. Environmental Systems
161–171. Analysis of four on-site wastewater treatment options. Resources Conservation
Finnveden, G., 1998. On the possibilities of life-cycle assessment – development of and Recycling. doi:10.1016/[Link].2008.06.004.
methodology and review of case studies. Doctoral Thesis at the Department of
Systems Ecology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.