XVIII Summer School "Francesco Turco" - Industrial Mechanical Plants

LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) in Disaster Waste Management: Emilia-Romagna Earthquake, an Italian case study

Battini Daria*, Peretti Umberto*, Persona Alessandro*, Sgarbossa Fabio*

* Department of Management and Engineering (DTG), University of Padua, Stradella S. Nicola, 3, I-36100 Vicenza - ([email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected])

Abstract:

Purpose

As recently discussed in the literature, an overwhelming amount of waste is normally left after a disaster (Brown C. O., 2012). Earthquakes, in particular, generate shock waves and displace the ground along fault lines. These seismic forces can bring down buildings and bridges in a localized area and damage buildings and other structures in a far wider area. The aim of this research is to study a real Italian case that is occurring nowadays. The purpose is to evaluate the reverse network performances in terms of LCA in accordance with different waste management strategies by computing the total waste management cost.

Design/methodology/approach

This work is mainly based on the data coming from the Earthquake occurred in Northern Italy on May 2012, when two major earthquakes occurred, causing 26 deaths and widespread damage. The Regional officials are currently collecting and managing debris flows and the data reflects the incredible amount of waste generated. Several months have been and will be necessary to manage the debris removal process. This work investigates the management of the most important waste material: the construction and demolition materials. We evaluate by a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) point of view a set of optional strategies based on different options.

Originality/value Disaster waste management is a well-recognized problem belonging to the humanitarian logistics research area. Experience shows that disaster waste can’t be managed by standard disposal options but often requires an ad hoc manner. However, by a logistic flow management point of view, a substantial improvement can be made in future response efforts. Moreover reducing and recycling these materials permit to conserve landfill space, reduce the environmental impact of producing new materials, create jobs, and can reduce overall building project expenses through avoiding purchase/disposal costs. Based on our knowledge this approach has never been faced before in the literature in order to evaluate different solutions in a post disaster situation. LCA approach usually does not consider a sudden-high level of flow materials, typically post disaster issue; moreover the study presents an Italian case in order to fix the research with a real example.

Keywords: LCA, earthquake, real case

1. Introduction jobs, and can reduce overall building project expenses through avoiding purchase/disposal costs. Earthquake waste includes construction and demolition materials consisting of the debris generated during the The proposed work investigates the management of the construction, renovation, and demolition of buildings, most important waste materials: the construction and roads, and bridges. This kind of waste often contains demolition material. We evaluate by a Life Cycle bulky, heavy materials, such as concrete, wood, metals, Assessment (LCA) point of view a set of optional glass, and salvaged building components. Moreover, it’s strategies starting from the one used by the authorities. always necessary to clean and separate different waste Life cycle assessment (LCA) is the methodology used to materials coming from the same point and manage the compare these scenarios for debris waste management in mixed waste not separable. Reducing and recycling these some municipalities in Emilia Romagna, Italy after the materials permit to conserve landfill space, reduce the earthquake that hit the region on May 2012. The model environmental impact of producing new materials, creates considers the following input data as a) the collection vehicles and waste containers applied in the area

166 XVIII Summer School "Francesco Turco" - Industrial Mechanical Plants

(excavators, trucks), b) the landfill number, location and waste, and to identify critical factors in the systems” capacity, c) the amount of waste generated (in tons) and (Finnveden G. et al., 2000). In this area the authors decide the waste generation points geographical location, d) the to apply the LCA on waste management associate to a recycling plant number, e) landfill capacity and disaster since in the last decades the disaster waste is a geographical location. well-recognized problem belonging to the humanitarian logistics research area. For example according to Reinhart 2. Literature Review and McCreanor (1999) and Brown C. (2012) the debris Our literature review is focused on three main areas that volumes from a single event can be the equivalent of five are faced in the article. These areas are the waste to fifteen times the annual waste generation rates of the management, the life cycle assessment (LCA) and the affected community. This situation leads to consider the application of these two areas situations associated to flow of waste in Post Disaster state as a complicated issue disasters, in situations where “when a disaster strikes, to process. This leads us to consider LCA in waste especially in densely populated areas, huge amounts of manage in order to consider a good solution in terms of construction waste and other kinds of wastes are suddenly environmental impact for the debris management after a produced, demanding immediate attention” (Lauritzen, E. disaster. K. 1998). This research is motivated by Kovacs and Spens (2011) The waste management is a topic broadly dealt with in the because they present the future gaps associated to the literature (Pires, A. et al., 2011, Wilson, D.C. 2007). It Humanitarian Supply Chain, where the environmental considers the management associated to a high range of sustainability is one of the most important. Moreover refuses such as solid waste (Metin, E. et al., 2003, Manaf, Barrett et al. (2007) underline how could be important L.A. et al., 2009) with focus on radioactive waste integrate the environmental dimension into humanitarian (Holdren, J.P., 1992) or toxic waste (Derrington, J.A., programmes and operations. As has been suggested by 1988) or construction demolition debris waste (Lee, S. et Carrasco-Gallego et al. (2013), since the researches on this al., 2006). All these typologies of waste streams generated issue applied to humanitarian contests are few this by a disaster have been classified recently by Brown C. O. research wants to cover this gap introducing the LCA of et al. (2011). Moreover the authors propose a classification an humanitarian issue and studying different solutions for that is focused on three main areas: Planning, Waste disaster responses finding the different environmental Characterization and Treating Waste. The planning impacts in function of the different processes. The considers the difference between the waste management innovation associated to this study concerns the in developed (Boyle C.A., 2000) and in developing integration of the environmental dimension in post countries (Wilson, D.C. et al. 2006, Manga, V.E. et al. disaster operations, studying a real Italian case and 2008, Karunasena et al, 2012, Guerrero, L.A. et al., 2013), proposing the best solution in terms of environmental the waste characterization, which considers the features impact. associated to scarp, in particular composition (as introduced above) and quantities. The waste treating is 3. Research methodologies categorized in the different options such as recycling, This work investigates the management of the most temporary staging sites and disposal. Brown C. O. et al. important waste materials in post disaster area: the (2011) present a qualitative specification of Waste construction and demolition materials. We evaluate by a management activities without facing the environmental Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) point of view a set of impact of different strategies. optional strategies based on different options; all the In order to evaluate different options of Waste options concern the utilization of the waste as landfill management, following the rules presented by Brown C. materials, in order to cover open landfills. The landfill O. et al. (2011), and their application to different scenarios covering has been found out as an important issue and, the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) has been used as since the high presence of the construction and evaluation tool. LCA is a tool used “to assess the demolition material, its solution takes a primary environmental impacts and resources used throughout a importance in order to solve both the problem: high wave product's life cycle, i.e., from raw material acquisition, via of debris and landfill covering problem (Bonomo and production and use phases, to waste management” Casazza, 2013). The features of the flow can change in (Finnveden, G., et al., 2009), and makes possible to terms of distances or materials density, but the flow compare the potential environmental impacts of these considered is always the one proposed in figure 1. In this options. According to Cherubini et al. (2009) this tool paper just the utilization for landfill covering is considered provides an overview of the environmental aspects of while the other possibilities are resumed in future different waste management strategies. According to research. Clavreul, J. et al. (2012) waste management has been The first step of the study is the understanding of the during the last decade subjected to a range of researches material flows and the phases associated to the process. based on LCA (Clift, R. et al. 2000, Consonni, S. et al. The process considered for the LCA is presented in figure 2005, Finnveden, G., et al., 2009) with a particular focus 1 and has been built using the information received from on real application study cases (Zhang, Z., 2000, Özeler, the municipal organizations that have been involved in D. et al., 2006). The LCA in waste management is waste management after the Emilia Romagna earthquake. important in order to “identify advantages and The phases 1 to 9 concern the main flow and end with the disadvantages of different methods for treatment of

167 XVIII Summer School "Francesco Turco" - Industrial Mechanical Plants

Figure 1: Debris management process in Emilia Romagna Earthquake final phases that change in function of the considered shipped to different landfills in order to split the huge waste management option. In particular the differences amount of debris, because some landfills are already concern the mean distance between the waste treatment overstuffed or almost overstuffed. In this situation the points and the landfills that need to be covered, the municipalities have done a cost analysis in order to different vehicle used, the different debris density. The understand which can be the best alternatives in terms of secondary waste flows present in the process are the flows deposits but they didn’t consider the further step: the associated to the less important materials; they are scraps movement from the storage to the final landfill. such as wood, metals, electric cables, residual waste and effluent water. Wood, electric cables and residual waste flows are useless and they are directly moved to the landfills. On the other hands metals are recycled and effluent water is purified. These flows regard a low percentage of the total processed materials. The second step concerns the study of the application in the real situation. In particular the context analysis regards the study of the post disaster situation in the damaged area. This phase has been focused on finding the data of the waste management in Emilia Romagna, in particular on the status of the buildings, and on finding the flows of materials from the points of origin to the landfills. Using data from the municipalities the distribution of “E” and “F” class buildings (the ones that need to be wiped out) have been located and, with the support of Microsoft Map Point software, the demolition points have been found. The figure 2 resumes an example of the software utilization in Carpi’s situation; the yellow point is the landfill, using real data. Moreover the volumes, in terms of Tons and cubic meters, are considered.

The data come from organizations that are processing the Figure 2: example of demolition points in Carpi. material in the disaster Area. The table 1 (below) (Bonomo and Casazza, 2013) shows the material flows in The process ends in the landfill, but it is not always the the study case from the point of origin (centre of mass of last phase of the process. Indeed the huge flow of material the buildings that belong to a certain municipality) to the leads the municipalities to split the entire flow in some end point (landfills associated to the origin point). In other landfills. This part of the process has not already some cases the construction and demolition materials are gone. Therefore in the simulation the last value related to

168 XVIII Summer School "Francesco Turco" - Industrial Mechanical Plants

the transport is associated to the sensitivity analysis excavators (phase 2), than they go back, full of debris concerning the mean distance between the processing (phase 3) to the landfill where they are processed. This points (intermediate landfills) and the landfill where the landfill may not be the final place where the materials are materials will be used in order to cover the space. used for landfill covering. Once the trucks arrive the debris are sorted (phase 4), stocked (phase 5), handled The process and the real data associated to the flow are (phase 6) and processed (the process of washing and developed using SimaPro software. In the software the grinding is the phase 7). The procedure ends with the outputs, in terms of air emissions, are compared, in transportation to the final landfill (phase 8) and its particular the systems comparison regards (e.g. the covering (phase 9). carcinogens, fossil fuels and climate change categories). The method used in order to evaluate the impacts is the The processed materials are debris from private and eco-indicator 99 (H). industrial buildings. The total amount of this flow is the product originated by the earthquake. The distribution of Table 1: construction and demolition materials flow, from the destroyed building (class “E” and “F”) and the total municipality of origin to the landfill quantity of materials are known. The quantities in the

COLLECTING POINTS software are in Tons or Cubic Meters. Since the LANDFILL LANDFILL LANDFILL LANDFILL LANDFILL uniformity of the materials does not allow having a clear 1 2 3 4 5 TOTAL density of the debris, the authors propose different CAMPOSANTO 0 10,612 0 3,169 0 13,781 CARPI 880 7 0 0 3,603 4,489 simulation with different material densities. In particular 0 39,171 0 674 8,470 48,316 the results consider: 1000, 1300 and 1700 Kg per cubic CONCORDIA 0 20,478 14,403 176 1,822 36,878 meter, in order to have a sensitivity analysis on this 0 13,685 0 11,853 19,263 44,801 variable. The main phases of the processes are: 0 23,994 26,405 2,029 836 53,264 - Waste Transportation: the covered distances are NOVI 1,972 43,476 0 783 777 47,008 SAN FELICE 0 7,972 9,016 18,840 4,844 40,672 taken using Microsoft Map Point software. In MUNICIPALITIES SAN 0 22,753 9,611 0 200 32,564 the landfill are taken by the literature (Bonomo POSSIDONIO and Casazza, 2013). The impact of these phases SAN 0 838 1,245 0 164 2,247 PROSEPRO is in ton per km [tkm]. A from/to chart shows 0 338 0 0 546 884 the distances that the materials have covered in 0 0 0 30000 5000 35,000 the transportation phase. TOTAL 2,852 183,324 60,680 67,525 45,524 2,852 - Waste handling: this phase of the process concerns the movement of the construction and 4. Case Study demolition materials between different phases of The research considers the earthquakes occurred in the same process inside the landfill. The impact Northern Italy on May 2012. The two main disasters of these phases is in ton per km [tkm] happened on 20th and 29th of May 2012. The first - Waste load: the hydraulic excavators are the earthquake, magnitude 5.9, had its epicenter about 36 km vehicles associated to this process. In the north of the city of , between Finale Emilia and software they process cubic meters of materials San Felice sul , while the second one, magnitude [m3]. 5.8, had its epicenter in Medolla. The considered earthquakes caused 27 fatalities and a high level of damage - Waste selection: the materials that can be in terms of homeless (estimated 450000) and unlivable selected and taken off quickly (wood, metals) are buildings. One of the main problems faced by the Italian sorted from the residual materials that go on in authorities is the debris management associated to the the main process. destroyed buildings. Indeed the quantity of materials - Waste treatment (washing and grinding): the (237648 tons picked up until March 2013) present in the materials have to be treated in order to have a cities, doesn’t make them safety and it doesn’t allow to cleaner and more homogenous material to cover restart normal citizen lives (Bonomo and Casazza, 2013). the landfill. For this region the research has considered the debris management. - Intermediate Landfills (deposits): the considered landfill are 5 (Fossoli-Carpi aimag, Medolla, The process considered in this research is the waste Mirandola, Finale Emilia, herambiente) management process utilizes for the post disaster debris in and are situated in the disaster area. These are Emilia Romagna, in particular in the municipalities of not the final locations for the debris indeed the Camposanto, Carpi, Cavezzo, Concordia, Medolla, materials will be finally handled to the final Mirandola, Novi, , , landfills that need to be covered, one the San Prosepro, Soliera. These municipalities are located authorities have chosen the places. close to the earthquake epicenters and are the ones with the highest level of damage. In particular the process is - Landfills: the final debris locations. These will be presented in the figure above (figure 1). The first phase chosen by the authorities and are the landfills concerns the coming of empty trucks in the point where that need covering. the debris are. Here the trucks are loaded by the

169 XVIII Summer School "Francesco Turco" - Industrial Mechanical Plants

5. Results and Discussion of Results of the landfills that have to be covered is internal of an area, the solution can be good in terms of emissions,. On The study of the environmental impacts regards the the other hand if the final landfills are far from the present situation, as it is, and considers some evolutions in damaged area the solution starts to be critical. This terms of what will be done. In the present situation the response is interesting because the concentration of the materials are stocked in the deposits (five intermediate landfills to be covered is not close to the earthquake area landfills presented in the table 2) while the future steps (Bonomo and Casazza, 2013). The problem in terms of will regard the transportation to the final landfills and the transportation to the final locations has not been taken in covering of them. The distance of final landfill is put as a consideration by the organizations and it could have a variable, and changes in function of the case. In the figure higher impact than if it was considered before. There is a below (figure 3) is summarized the impact of each step of different situation in the Abruzzo earthquake where the the process in a situation where the final landfill region is full of open landfills that need a covering considered is 1 km far from the intermediate landfill. (Bonomo and Casazza, 2013). The high distance between the intermediate landfill and the final ones has to be considered even seeing all the other external costs associated to it, for example traffic and incidents, in order to minimize the total social impact, humanitarian goal. (Tatham & Houghton, 2011, Holguín-Veras et al., 2012, )

Figure 3: the impact of the different phases of the process in a hypothesis of 1 km far final landfills. The process in the figure above considers the process as it is now with the assumption that the debris will remain in Figure 5: debris management the intermediate landfill forever. In this situation the main impact is due by the inert material landfill facility while The figure above (figure 5) summarizes the whole process, secondary importance is given to treatments plants and the debris transportation from the origin points to the transportation. If we use the distance of final landfill as a final landfills going from the intermediate points where variable, the results change completely. The figure 4 the debris is processed. This figure shows the part of assumes the presence of the landfill at a medium distance process that has been considered. of 100 km. The huge flow of material associated to the distance, in this example, leads to have a high impact in 6. Conclusions and Future Researches terms of transportation. In the Emilia Romagna earthquake the sorting has been done after the debris collecting, differently from the Abruzzo earthquake (Bonomo and Casazza, 2013) where the leadtime in terms of collection were higher. This appriach has led to an improvement in terms of presence of the debris in the area hit by the disaster. The problem arised in the post Emilia Romagna earthquake situation, is that the transportation of the processed debris from the intermediate landfills to the final covering have not been done yet. This is due by the uncertainity associated to the final use of the materials. The impact of this final stage is high and it is important for the evaluation of the whole process. This aspect has to be considered before the collecting of the debris from the area to have a better

impact in terms of transportation issue. In order to Figure 4: the processes impact in an average of 100 km of improve the whole debris collection operation the final distance to the final landfill landfills position has to be know a priori. The final impact of the transportation can vary if we It is important to underline that the data considered are assume that the distance from the final landfill changes. not complete, indeed according to the organizations that This is the most variable datum and it has to be taken in are managing the debris process, almost the 80/90% of consideration, when the decision of what will be the final the total amount of the debris have been already taken. In use of the debris will be taken. Indeed if the distribution

170 XVIII Summer School "Francesco Turco" - Industrial Mechanical Plants

the study the data coming from Sant’Agostino and Reggio Finnveden, G., Johansson, J., Lind, P., Moberg, Å. (2000). “Life Emilia minicipalities are not present. Cycle Assessments of Energy from Solid Waste”. fms 137 FOA-B--00-00622-222—SE. In this research the LCA is applied into the post disaster Finnveden, G., Hauschild, M.Z., Ekvall, T., Guinée, J., Heijungs, waste management treatments in order to improve the R., Hellweg, S., Koehler, A., Pennington, D. , Suh, S. (2009), quality of life of the final choice. This kind of application “Recent developments in Life Cycle Assessment”, Journal of is suggested by the literature (Barrett et al., 2007, Environmental Management 91 (1) , pp. 1-21 Carrasco-Gallego et al., 2013). The goal of this approach Guerrero, L.A., Maas, G., Hogland, W. (2013), “Solid waste is to understand how the minimization of the effects in management challenges for cities in developing countries”, Waste Management 33 (1) , pp. 220-32. terms of environmental impact, and so for the population, Holdren, J.P. (1992), “Radioactive-waste management in the can be achieved. United States: evolving policy prospects and dilemmas”, For the reutilizations of the debris for covering landfill Annual review of energy and the environment. Vol. 17 , pp. other possibilities are proposed for final waste utilization: 235-259 Holguín-Veras, J., Jaller, M., Wassenhove L. N. V., Pérez N and - The re-utilization of the debris as building Wachtendorf T. (2012). "On the Unique Features of Post- materials Disaster Humanitarian Logistics." Journal of Operations Management. Volume 30, Issues 7–8, November 2012, - Materials for building the “Cispadania” highway Pages 494–506. in the area hit by the earthquake. Karunasena, G., Amaratunga, D., Haigh, R. (2012), “Post- disaster construction & demolition debris management: A These proposals will be studied in future researches and Sri Lanka case study”, Journal of Civil Engineering and they will be evaluated in terms of environmental impact. Management, Volume 18, Issue 4, 2012. Moreover the impacts of further disasters could be faced Kovács, G. and Spens, M. (2011), “Trends and developments in in order to propose general guidelines in terms of debris humanitarian logistics – a gap analysis”, International Journal management that could be used in future disasters. of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 41 (1), pp.32-45. Lauritzen, E. K. (1998), “Emergency construction waste References: management”, Safety Science, Volume 30, Issues 1–2, Barrett, E., Murfitt, S. and Venton, P. (2007), Mainstreaming the October–December 1998, Pages 45–53 Environment into Humanitarian Response. An Exploration Lee, S., Xu, Q., Booth, M., Townsend, T.G., Chadik, P., Bitton, of Opportunities and Issues. G. (2006), “Reduced sulfur compounds in gas from Boyle, C.A. (2000) “Solid waste management in New Zealand”, construction and demolition debris landfills”, Waste Waste Management 20 (7) , pp. 517-526 Management 26 (5) , pp. 526-533 Bnomi, F., and Casazza, L. (2013). “ Riciclaggio delle macerie dei Manaf, L.A., Samah, M.A.A., Zukki, N.I.M. (2009), “Municipal terremoti”. Recycling demolizioni & riciclaggio. Anno 17, solid waste management in Malaysia: Practices and marzo 2013, N°2. challenges”, Waste Management 29 (11) , pp. 2902-2906 Brown C., Milke M., Seville E. (2011), “Disaster waste Manga, V.E., Forton, O.T., Read, A.D. (2008), “Waste management: A review article”, Waste Management 31 management in Cameroon: A new policy perspective?”, (2011) 1085–1098 Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52 (4) , pp. 592-600 Brown C. (2012), “Disaster Waste Management: a systems Metin, E., Eröztürk, A., Neyim, C. (2003), “Solid waste approach”, Ph.D. thesis Civil Engineering Department of management practices and review of recovery and recycling Civil and Natural Resources Engineering University of operations in Turkey” ( Conference Paper ) Waste Canterbury Management Volume 23, Issue 5, 2003, Pages 425-432 Carrasco-Gallego Ruth, Balaisyte Jurgita and Van Wassenhove Özeler, D., Yetiş, Ü., Demirer, G.N. (2006), “Life cycle Luk (2013), “Environmental sustainability in humanitarian assesment of municipal solid waste management methods: supply chains: carbon auditing of relief operations”. Ankara case study”. Environment International 32 (3) , pp. Presented at EurOMA Conference, Dublin, 2013. 405-411 Clavreul, J., Guyonnet, D., Christensen, T. H.(2012), Pires, A., Martinho, G., Chang, N.B. (2011) “Solid waste “Quantifying uncertainty in LCA-modelling of waste management in European countries: A review of systems management systems”, Waste Management 32 (2012) 2482– analysis techniques”, Journal of Environmental Management 2495 92 (4) , pp. 1033-1050 Clift, R., Doig, A., Finnveden, G.(2000), “The application of Life Reinhart D.R., McCreanor, P.T., (1999), “Disaster Debris Cycle Assessment to Integrated Solid Waste Management. Management – Planning Tools” Part 1 - Methodology”, Process Safety and Environmental Tatham, P., Houghton, L., (2011),"The wicked problem of Protection 78 (4) , pp. 279-287. humanitarian logistics and disaster relief aid", Journal of Consonni, S., Giugliano, M., Grosso, M. (2005), “Alternative Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, Vol. strategies for energy recovery from municipal solid waste: 1 Iss: 1 pp. 15 – 31. Part B: Emission and cost estimates”, Waste Management 25 Wilson, D.C., Velis, C., Cheeseman, C. (2006), “Role of informal (2 SPEC. ISS.) , pp. 137-148 sector recycling in waste management in developing Derrington, J.A. (1988), “Toxic and radioactive waste countries”, Habitat International 30 (4) , pp. 797-808 management”, Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Wilson, D.C. (2007) “Development drivers for waste 114 (4) , pp. 463-467. management” Waste Management and Research 25 (3) , pp. Ekvall, T., Assefa, G., Björklund, A., Eriksson, O., Finnveden, 198-207 G.(2007), “What life-cycle assessment does and does not do Zhang, Z., Wilson, F. (2000), “Life-cycle assessment of a in assessments of waste management”, Waste Management sewage-treatment plant in South-East Asia”. Journal of the 27 (8) , pp. 989-996 Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management 14 (1), pp. 51-56

171