Name of the case study
Where is it located?
What type of activity is it?
Short description of the case study
The analysis was made on a national level, based on experiences (costs) of different waste treatment methods from a number of municipalities. This is a break with the commonly accepted waste strategy, based on a priority of :
The existing prioritisation has been criticised for being unscientific, as it does not systematically take all environmental and economic consequences into account. The analysis also breaks with traditional ways of choosing between different waste strategies, which typically would consist of a comparative analysis of operational cost, supplied with analysis of environmental consequences (from interview with the Danish Environmental Protection Agency representative.
The Cost Benefit Analysis shows that when all phases of waste treatment are included it is more expensive for society to recycle organic household waste by anaerobic digestion or central composting than by incineration. Incineration is the cheapest solution for society, while central composting is the most expensive.
The environmental Life Cycle Analysis has shown that there are only small environmental benefits connected with anaerobic digestion of organic household waste compared with the incineration of the waste. The conclusions will form the guidelines for the Danish EPA recommendations on municipalities waste policy, and therefore might have a large influence on the waste policy in general.
What tools were used to assess sustainability?