DOCSLIB.ORG

A Life Cycle Assessment to Compare Composting Schemes for the Treatment of Municipal Solid Waste in Mumbai, India

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Life Cycle Assessment to Compare Composting Schemes for the Treatment of Municipal Solid Waste in Mumbai, India A LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT TO COMPARE COMPOSTING SCHEMES FOR THE TREATMENT OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE IN MUMBAI, INDIA BHUPENDRA K. SHARMA, MUNISH K. CHANDEL* Centre for Environmental Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai, INDIA. *Corresponding author: [email protected] SUMMARY: Most of the municipal solid waste (MSW) in India is disposed in uncontrolled dumpsites, posing a serious challenge to environment and sustainable development. Mumbai, which generates over 9000 tonnes of MSW daily and having largely the organic fraction (~40%) in its MSW composition, dispose of most of its waste in open dumps. Composting could be the one option to treat organic fraction of MSW in Mumbai. The aim of this study is to evaluate emissions from windrow composting and in-vessel composting of organic fraction of MSW using life cycle assessment (LCA) approach. The LCA was done using GaBi v6.0 Sustainability software with 1 tonne of organic waste as a functional unit and both direct and indirect emissions were evaluated. The results are presented based on the Centre for Environmental Studies of the University of Leiden method (CML-ULM, 2015) characterization method. The direct emissions from both the composting systems were calculated based on the carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) balance present in the MSW composition of Mumbai city. The environmental impact categories considered for this study were global warming, acidification, eutrophication and human toxicity. For the treatment of 1 tonne of organic waste, these environmental impacts for windrow composting were obtained as 137 kg CO2 eq/tonne, 0.198 kg SO2 eq/tonne, 0.087 -3 kg PO4 eq/tonne and 0.451 kg 1,4-DB eq/tonne while for in-vessel composting the impacts -3 were obtained as 219 kg CO2 eq/tonne, 0.621 kg SO2 eq/tonne, 0.089 kg PO4 eq/tonne and 17.3 kg 1,4-DB eq/tonne. The LCA results show that the windrow composting system poses a lesser burden in all the environment impact categories considered and found to be the preferable composting system. Keywords: Life cycle assessment, Municipal solid waste, Composting, Impact categories 1. INTRODUCTION MSW management has become one of the major environmental problems in Indian megacities (Bundela et al., 2010). In India, due to the rapid industrialization and population increment, people are migrating from villages to cities which generates thousands of tons of MSW daily. Uncontrolled dumping of MSW is the most common disposal method in most cities Proceedings Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium/ 2 - 6 October 2017 S. Margherita di Pula, Cagliari, Italy / © 2017 by CISA Publisher, Italy Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017 of India. Mumbai, which generates over 9000 tonnes of MSW daily and having largely the organic fraction (~40%) in its MSW composition (Table 1), dispose of most of its waste in open dumps (Deonar and Mulund) resulting in the degradation of the environmental quality. The scientific management of MSW includes segregation of MSW into bio-degradable and non- biodegradable fractions at the source. Organic waste can be treated biologically (aerobic and anaerobic process) to give compost or energy, the combustible fraction can be treated thermally for energy recovery and inorganic residual can be landfilled and recovered. Composting is a one of the best-suited, low cost treatment method to degrade biodegradable fraction of MSW. Composting is a biological process in which readily biodegradable organic fraction of MSW is decomposed by microbes under controlled aerobic conditions. This process stabilizes the organic matter, after a period of weeks or months to a product is which is called compost (de Bertoldi et al., 1983). The decomposition occurs naturally, however it can be accelerated and improved by human intervention. There are different types of composting technologies available: windrow composting, aerated static pile composting and in-vessel composting. In windrow composting, the biodegradable waste placed in a long narrow piles or rows. These rows are generally turned through a turner to mix the composting material and to improve the porosity and moisture on a regular basis. The turner simply lifts the material from the windrow and spills them down again, mixing the material and reform the mixture into a loose windrow. As the turner moves through the windrow, releases trapped heat, gases, mixes the materials, breaks up the large particles and allow entry of fresh air injected into the compost (Ruggieri et al., 2008). The aerated static pile composting takes the piped aeration system. The pipe is connected to a blower which provides aeration either by forcing or sucking of air through the compost pile. The piles are covered with a layer of bulking agent, such as finished compost or wood chips. The layer of finished compost protects the surface of pile from drying and prevents the releasing of odorous compound to the atmosphere generated within the pile (Mousty et al., 1984). In this composting, continuous oxygen supply eliminates formation of anaerobic conditions and thereby potential odour problems. In in-vessel composting, compostable material is enclosed in a drum, bin, container or vessel. This method relies on a variety of forced aeration and mechanical agitation to control conditions and to speed up the composting process. Mechanical systems are designed to minimize odour and to reduce the process time by controlling environmental conditions such as airflow, temperature, and oxygen concentration, thereby eliminates the odour problems (Cabaraban et al., 2008). Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is an environmental management tool which can be used to assess the potential environmental burdens from the waste management (Ekvall et al., 2007). LCA has been used, more so in the last decade, to assess the performance of MSW management systems (Chaya and Gheewala, 2007; Mendes et al., 2003). Mendes et al. (2003) studied the management of biodegradable fraction of MSW in Sao Paulo, Brazil: composting, biogasification and landfilling. It was concluded that both composting and biogasification can reduce considerably the environmental impacts compared to the landfilling of waste. Abduli et al. (2011) compared the landfill and combination of composting and landfill in Tehran, Iran. The study shows that combination of composting and landfill has a larger environmental impacts compared to the landfilling. Chaya and Gheewala (2007) examined incineration and anaerobic digestion as the MSW-to-energy schemes in Thailand and found anaerobic digestion superior to the incineration. The goal of this LCA study is to assess the direct and indirect burdens resulting from two different types of composting of organic waste of MSW: windrow composting and in-vessel composting for Mumbai’s waste. The impact categories analyzed are: global warming (GW), Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017 acidification, eutrophication and human toxicity (HT). Table 1. MSW composition of Mumbai (Sharholy et al., 2008) MSW Components characteristics (% by weight) Biodegradable 40 Paper 10 Plastic 2 Metals - Glass 0.2 Textile 3.6 Leather 0.2 Ash, fine earth and 44 others 2. METHODOLOGY 2.1 Life cycle assessment We use International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14040:2006 methodology for LCA. The methodology comprises of four major phases termed as, goal and scope definition, life cycle inventory, life cycle impact analysis and interpretation of the results (Guinee et al., 2001). The goal of this study is to assess two different types of composting systems using LCA methodology and identify the suitable composting system. One tonne of MSW is selected as the functional unit for comparison of both the composting systems. All the relevant processes within the system boundary are included for the assessment (Figure 1). Within the system boundary, inputs such as energy and mass, and outputs like air and water emission from the treatment process are considered. Direct emissions are the emissions from the foreground system while the indirect emissions are the emissions from the background system. The background system includes the supply of electricity and diesel. (Table 2) required to the foreground system whereas the foreground system includes emissions associated with different composting systems considered in this study. Biogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emission from the process is not included in the inventory because it is considered carbon neutral and do not contribute towards global warming (Chandel et al., 2012; Zhao et al., 2009). Sardinia 2017 / Sixteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium / 2 - 6 October 2017 Environment OFMSW System boundary Windrow/ In-vessel Energy Composting Emissions Materials Figure 1. System boundary for composting systems for this study Table 2. Inventory of resource use in foreground system Unit WC IVC Process inputs Waste treated tonne of OW 1 1 Resources consumed Electricity kWh/tonne 0.88a 37a Fuel litre/tonne 0.47b 1.6a aBoldrin et al. 2009 bKolhapur Composting Plant, 2015 2.1.1 Emissions estimation The emission calculation from composting process are based on the carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) balance as described in the literature (Sharma and Chandel, 2016; Boldrin et al. 2010; Boldrin et al., 2009; Amlinger et al., 2008; Fisher, 2006; Ham and Komilis, 2003). The systems assessed in these studies is similar to the systems assessed in the present study. For windrow composting system, we assume that 70% of total carbon is released into the air. The CO2 and methane (CH4) emissions were calculated as 66% and 2.5% of the carbon released into the air. We assume that 50% of total nitrogen is released into the air in the form of nitrogen (N2), nitrous oxide (N2O), and ammonia (NH3). N2O emission and NH3 emission were calculated as 1.4% and 2.4% of the total nitrogen released into the air. For the in-vessel composting system, we assume that 70% of total carbon is released into the air.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Processing (Composting) Facility Guidance and Checklists for Tier II and Tier III Processing Facilities
    Processing (Composting) Facility Guidance and Checklists for Tier II and Tier III Processing Facilities State of Idaho Department of Environmental Quality July 2013 Printed on recycled paper, DEQ June 2013, PID 9170, CA 87067. Costs associated with this publication are available from the State of Idaho Department of Environmental Quality in accordance with Section 60-202, Idaho Code. Processing Facility Guidance and Checklists Contents 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 2 Composting Process................................................................................................................. 1 2.1 Windrow Composting ...................................................................................................... 1 2.2 Aerated Static Piles ........................................................................................................... 2 2.3 In-Vessel Composting ...................................................................................................... 3 3 Applicable Regulations ............................................................................................................ 3 3.1 Idaho’s Solid Waste Management Rules and Facility Classifications ............................. 4 Below Regulatory Concern ...................................................................................................... 4 Tier I Composting Facility ......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Review on the Current Composting Practices and the Potential Of
    1051 A publication of CHEMICAL ENGINEERING TRANSACTIONS VOL. 61, 2017 The Italian Association of Chemical Engineering Online at www.aidic.it/cet Guest Editors: Petar S Varbanov, Rongxin Su, Hon Loong Lam, Xia Liu, Jiří J Klemeš Copyright © 2017, AIDIC Servizi S.r.l. ISBN 978-88-95608-51-8; ISSN 2283-9216 DOI: 10.3303/CET1761173 Review on the Current Composting Practices and the Potential of Improvement using Two-Stage Composting Li Yee Lima, Cassendra Phun Chien Bonga, Chew Tin Leea,*, Jiří Jaromír Klemešb, c a Mohamad Roji Sarmidi , Jeng Shiun Lim aFaculty of Chemical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), 81310 UTM, Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia. bSustainable Process Integration Laboratory – SPIL, NETME Centre, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Brno University of Technology, - VUT Brno, Tachnická 2896/2, 616 00 Brno, Czech Republic. cInnovation Centre in Agritechnology for Advanced Bioprocessing, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), 81310 UTM, Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia. [email protected] Composting is one of the applicable technologies to recycle organic waste into a value-added product. It allows the transformation and stabilisation of the organic waste into bio-fertiliser that can be applied to land and crops safely. The composting systems come in different modes but the three commonly used are windrow, aerated static pile and in-vessel composting. The three practices vary in cost, manpower, energy, greenhouse gases emission and composting time. It is well-known that among the three, windrow is the least expensive but most time consuming where in-vessel offers short composting period but at the high expense of energy and cost. Composting is conventionally carried out by either one of the methods.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Impact Assessment of Food Waste Management Using Two Composting Techniques
    sustainability Article Environmental Impact Assessment of Food Waste Management Using Two Composting Techniques Aisha Al-Rumaihi 1, Gordon McKay 1, Hamish R. Mackey 1 and Tareq Al-Ansari 1,2,* 1 Division of Sustainable Development, College of Science and Engineering, Hamad Bin Khalifa University, Doha P.O. Box 34110, Qatar; [email protected] (A.A.-R.); [email protected] (C.M.); [email protected] (H.R.M.) 2 Division of Engineering Management and Decision Sciences, College of Science and Engineering, Hamad Bin Khalifa University, Doha P.O. Box 34110, Qatar * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 18 December 2019; Accepted: 27 January 2020; Published: 20 February 2020 Abstract: Food waste is a significant contributor to greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) and therefore global warming. As such, the management of food waste can play a fundamental role in the reduction of preventable emissions associated with food waste. In this study, life cycle assessment (LCA) has been used to evaluate and compare the environmental impact associated with two composting techniques for treating food waste using SimaPro software; windrow composting and the hybrid anaerobic digestion (AD) method. The study, based on a 1 tonne of food waste as a functional unit for a case study in the State of Qatar, concludes that anaerobic digestion combined composting presents a smaller environmental burden than windrow composting. The majority of the emissions generated are due to the use of fossil fuels during transportation, which correspond to approximately 60% of the total impact, followed by the impact of composting with 40% of the impact especially in terms of global warming potential.
    [Show full text]
  • Agricultural Composting and Water Quality L
    Agricultural Composting and Water Quality L. Brewer, N. Andrews, D. Sullivan, and W. Gehr EM 9053 • June 2013 omposting, a controlled process for stabilization of organic matter, can turn waste into a valuable soil amendment. Creating compost from waste materials Cprovides an opportunity to return nutrients and organic matter to the soil, a proven practice for soil quality enhancement. Compost can improve crop growth and provide environmental benefits by improving soil tilth and its capacity to absorb and hold water and plant nutrients. A properly managed composting process can destroy weed seeds, plant pathogens, and human pathogens. This publication is designed to assist farmers in conducting efficient, cost-effective, on-farm composting that presents reduced risk to surface and groundwater quality. It was written for operators of small to medium-size on-farm composting enterprises who handle about 100 to 5,000 tons of raw organic material per year. Most on-farm com- posting enterprises are now required to operate under some form of permit. The type of permit, and the details specified in it, vary depending upon the situation. Before you begin composting, understand the regula- tions that apply to your activities. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) revised its com- posting regulations in 2009. This publication is intended to assist University State © Oregon Dan Sullivan, by Photo farmers who are regu- Compost can improve soil quality and plant growth. Sunflowers in compost-amended soil (right) vs. no compost (left). lated by DEQ rules to Linda Brewer, Nick Andrews, Dan Sullivan, all of Oregon State University; and Will Gehr, Organic Recycling Systems, Portland, OR.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Document on Municipal Solid Waste Organics Processing Technical Document on Municipal Solid Waste Organics Processing
    Technical Document on Municipal Solid Waste Organics Processing Technical Document on Municipal Solid Waste Organics Processing. Cat. No.: En14-83/2013E ISBN: 978-1-100-21707-9 Information contained in this publication or product may be reproduced, in part or in whole, and by any means, for personal or public non-commercial purposes, without charge or further permission, unless otherwise specified. You are asked to: Exercise due diligence in ensuring the accuracy of the materials reproduced; Indicate both the complete title of the materials reproduced, as well as the author organization; and Indicate that the reproduction is a copy of an official work that is published by the Government of Canada and that the reproduction has not been produced in affiliation with or with the endorsement of the Government of Canada. Commercial reproduction and distribution is prohibited except with written permission from the Government of Canada’s copyright administrator, Public Works and Government Services of Canada (PWGSC). For more information, please contact PWGSC at 613-996-6886 or at [email protected]. © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, represented by the Minister of the Environment, 2013 Aussi disponible en français sous le titre : Document technique sur la gestion des matières organiques municipales Preface Solid waste management is unquestionably an essential service that local governments provide their citizens. They have an important responsibility to make decisions regarding collection services, disposal infrastructure, waste diversion and recycling programs that are cost-effective and respond to their communities’ needs. Even in communities with long-established programs and infrastructure, the management of waste continues to evolve and require informed decisions that take into consideration a complex set of environmental, social, technological, and financial factors.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Air Windrow Composting
    Breaking it down Open Air Windrow Composting Freephone Helpline 0808 100 2040 zerowastescotland.org.uk Overview Open Air Windrow Composting (OAW) uses naturally occurring microbes which feed on organic material (garden waste) and require oxygen. By feeding on the garden waste, the microbes break down the material and turn it into compost. Garden waste is often collected by Councils through kerbside collections (sometimes for part of the year only, between March & November) or at recycling centres. OAW is not suitable for food waste. This is because the process needed to deal with food waste has to be performed in an enclosed vessel and not in the open air. The Animal By-products regulations control this and were brought in to protect animal and human health. As a result any food waste, even vegetable scrapings from households, cannot be put through OAW. What goes in? Garden waste Organic garden waste materials such as twigs, leaves, grass clippings and prunings are suitable for OAW. Larger items such as branches, tree stumps etc. are too large to fully break down in OAW and should be shredded or cut into smaller pieces first. What happens? Material is delivered, sorted to remove incorrect materials (contamination) and shredded. The shredded materials are piled into long rows known as windrows, in the open air. Naturally occurring microbes feed on the materials. This creates heat and windrows will often give off steam. Rows are regularly turned to make sure there is enough oxygen for the microbes to work. At the end of the process, usually 12-16 weeks, the compost is checked to make sure it meets the necessary quality standard.
    [Show full text]
  • Collection and Composting Economics for Open Windrow Operations
    Collection and Composting Economics for Open Windrow Operations Carla Castagnero AgRecycle, Inc. NERC April 2014 Why Understanding The Economics of Composting Is Essential • Approximately 87% of all composting operations in the U.S., that do not receive government subsidies fail after 5 years. EPA 2012 • Composting is the only type of recycling that creates a new virgin product and it is the success of this product in the market that will allow composting to become sustainable. • The beneficial results of well made compost are irrefutable. • Diverting organic waste from landfills is a worthwhile endeavor, but doing so without any intention of making finished products out of the materials makes organic diversion just another exercise in good citizenry with a limited and finite future. Begin with the end in mind • The details of this presentation are based on the premise that every compost facility has the purpose of making a marketable product - whether the level of product is of a coarse nature to fill an erosion deterrent sleeve, for brownfield reclamation use, the backyard gardener, or the golf course superintendent • Grinding leaves and letting them sit in a pile to decompose is not making compost. • The materials in this presentation address open air windrow composting systems. • Under cover, in vessel, and in building systems are not part of this economic modeling. • Bio-solids composting operations are not included. Cost Accounting • The imprecisions and deviations among feedstocks that are an inherent part of composting operations
    [Show full text]
  • Potential of Producing Compost from Source-Separated Municipal Organic Waste (A Case Study in Shiraz, Iran)
    sustainability Article Potential of Producing Compost from Source-Separated Municipal Organic Waste (A Case Study in Shiraz, Iran) Haniyeh Jalalipour 1,* , Neematollah Jaafarzadeh 2, Gert Morscheck 1, Satyanarayana Narra 1,3 and Michael Nelles 1,3 1 Department of Waste and Resource Management, Rostock University, 18051 Rostock, Germany; [email protected] (G.M.); [email protected] (S.N.); [email protected] (M.N.) 2 Toxicology Research Center, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran; [email protected] 3 The German Centre for Biomass Research, 04347 Leipzig, Germany * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 30 September 2020; Accepted: 18 November 2020; Published: 20 November 2020 Abstract: Developing countries face serious environmental, social and economic challenges in managing different types of organic waste. Proper treatment strategies should be adopted by solid waste management systems in order to address these concerns. Among all of the treatment options for organic waste, composting is the most approved method as an effective strategy to divert solid waste from landfills. This experimental research aimed to examine the potential of producing compost from source-separated municipal organic waste in Shiraz, Iran. Market waste (fruits and vegetables) and garden waste (plant residues) were used as the raw input materials. They were subjected to the windrow pile composting method in an open site area. The process was monitored against several physical, chemical and biological parameters. In-situ measurements (temperature and moisture content) were carried out on a daily basis. Sampling and lab analyses were conducted over the period of the biological treatment.
    [Show full text]
  • Turned Windrow Composting Sizing Your Composting Pad
    Turned Windrow Composting Sizing Your Composting Pad Planning a windrow composting operation is a multistep process, which involves careful thought and consid- 5. Calculating the Number of Windrows on the eration. The following guide has been created as part Active Pad of a set of resources to help composters in Vermont 6. Determining Active Pad Work Space Needs effectively plan, develop, and manage local composting 7. Calculating Active Pad Footprint operations. The focus of this resource is to support you 8. Calculating Curing and Storage Area in determining the size of your windrow composting site. 9. Calculating Feedstock Storage Operations composting food scraps (source-separated 10. Calculating Receiving and Blending Area organics or SSO) in Vermont are the main focus of this 11. Additional Infrastructure to Consider guide, although most of the guide will apply to com- 12. Calculating Total Site Footprint posters of farm wastes and other materials as well. Each phase is explained along with the necessary cal- The guide will walk you through the following calcula- culations and an example. Cumulatively, these steps tions and considerations: will help you determine the total footprint required for your windrow composting activities. You will likely need 1. Gathering Basic Information for Sizing a Windrow to adjust the dimensions of specific features within the Composting Facility site, based on realities of the plot you are dealing with. If 2. Two Approaches to Identifying Target Scale you are familiar with using spreadsheet software such as 3. Determining Total Volume of Feedstock on Microsoft Excel or Google Sheets, these tools can Active Composting Pad be very helpful in setting up a template calcula- 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Composting Manure and Sludge
    E-479 06-08 Composting Manure and Sludge John M. Sweeten and Brent W. Auvermann* omposting is a controlled, isms typically do not tolerate such Cmicrobial process that converts high temperatures; as a result, the biodegradable, organic materials temperature of an anaerobic pile will into a stable, humus-like product. usually be 130 degrees F or less. The The microorganisms that do most of end products, or metabolites, of anaer- the work are thermophilic microbes obes include organic fatty acids, (bacteria, actinomycetes and fungi), aldehydes, alcohols, hydrogen which thrive in relatively high sulfide, and many other compounds temperatures (greater than 131 responsible for obnoxious odors. degrees F). This publication addresses only Composting is generally done under aerobic, thermophilic composting. aerobic conditions, in which atmos- pheric oxygen is present at 5 percent Advantages and Disadvantages or more by volume. (At sea level, Composting is an important treat- oxygen is normally present in air at ment process for many organic about 20 percent by volume.) wastes and residues, including Aerobic decomposition converts animal manure, municipal and biodegradable organic matter in industrial sludge, and solid or semi- manure or sludge to oxidized end solid crop residues. products, prima- I Anaerobic (very low rily carbon Major Advantages of Composting oxygen) conditions dioxide (CO2) occur in a compost and water. The • It produces a biochemically pile when excess mois- thermophilic stable product that has low odor and ture, fine particle size, good physical properties, and it or compaction reduce temperature range, from 131 attracts few flies. the flow of oxygen into • It significantly reduces the the pile.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Waste Treatment – Organic Waste Composting
    BIOLOGICAL WASTE TREATMENT – ORGANIC WASTE COMPOSTING APPLICATION - Recovery of useful organic and inorganic substances from the biodegradable waste fraction for OBJECTIVE the generation of a usable humus by biological processes and in conjunction therewith - a significant reduction of biodegradable waste that otherwise would have to be landfilled or become subject of other forms of waste treatment or - the reduction of the reaction potential of organic rich waste or of the residues from biological treatment processes such as anaerobic digestion (see factsheet on “Anaerobic digestion”) OUTLINE ON APPLICATION FRAMEWORK PARTICULARLY APPLICABLE FOR WASTE TYPES Glass Light-weight packaging Biowaste X Paper / paperboard X1 Mixed household waste Bulky waste Lamps Textiles Electrical and electronic waste Scrap metal Waste wood X2 C&D waste Waste oil Old paint & lacquer Waste tyres Hazardous waste Kitchen and food residues, green waste, waste and residues from forestry, agricul- Branch specific waste X ture including manure and from wood, crop and/or food processing Other waste material X any source separated biodegradable material with non-hazardous content SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS AND REQUIREMENTS OF THE APPLICATION Pre-treatment of the input material: The input material should come from a separate collection, it has to be examined for components which may re- lease hazardous substances (e.g. batteries) and must be freed from them and other disturbing materials such as large foils. Large components usually contained in forest residues, pruning and garden waste must be chopped. Options for the utilisation of the generated output: The compost is particularly suited for agricultural applications, the use in gardening and landscaping, for fruit and special cultures, re-cultivation works and home gardening.
    [Show full text]
  • Breaking It Down In-Vessel Composting
    Breaking it down In-Vessel Composting Freephone Helpline 0808 100 2040 zerowastescotland.org.uk Overview In-vessel composting (IVC) uses naturally occurring microbes which feed on organic material and require oxygen. The microbes break down organic material such as garden waste and food waste and turn it into compost. There are several differences between IVC and open air windrow composting: 1. IVC can accept food waste as well as garden waste. The higher temperatures reached in IVCs kills potentially harmful bacteria found in meat or other food waste which may have come in contact with meat. 2. IVC takes place in a sealed unit rather than in the open. This means materials can reach and consistently maintain high temperatures for the required minimum period of time and keeps the material away from outside influences such as weather and wildlife. Garden waste Organic garden waste materials such as twigs, leaves, grass clippings and prunings are suitable for IVC. Larger items such as branches, tree stumps etc. are too large to fully break down and should be shredded or cut into smaller pieces first. Food waste: The types of food waste which can be put through IVC include: bones, cooked and uncooked food, meat and vegetable peelings. There are strict guidelines under the Animal By- Products Regulations for processing food waste. What happens? Material is delivered, sorted to remove incorrect materials (contamination) and shredded. The material is put inside an enclosed chamber and air is forced through it, which increases the temperature. The material quickly reaches a high temperature to kill any potential harmful bacteria.
    [Show full text]