Reduction
Many problems in the cities of the global South are often associated with a weak or inadequate SWM system, which leads to severe direct and indirect environmental and public health issues at every stage of waste collection, handling, treatment, and disposal [ 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 ]. Inadequate and weak SWM results in indiscriminate dumping of waste on the streets, open spaces, and water bodies. Such practices were observed in, for example, Pakistan [ 35 , 36 ], India [ 37 ], Nepal [ 38 ], Peru [ 39 ], Guatemala [ 40 ], Brazil [ 41 ], Kenya [ 42 ], Rwanda [ 43 ], South Africa [ 44 , 45 ], Nigeria [ 46 ], Zimbabwe [ 47 ], etc.
The problems associated with such practices are GHG emissions [ 37 , 48 ], leachates [ 40 , 44 , 49 ], the spread of diseases such as malaria and dengue [ 36 ], odor [ 35 , 38 , 50 , 51 ], blocking of drains and sewers and subsequent flooding [ 52 ], suffocation of animals in plastic bags [ 52 ], and indiscriminate littering [ 38 , 39 , 53 ].
Uncollected and untreated waste has socioeconomic and environmental costs extending beyond city boundaries. Environmental sustainability impacts of this practice include methane (CH 4 ) emissions, foul odor, air pollution, land and water contamination, and the breeding of rodents, insects, and flies that transmit diseases to humans. Decomposition of biodegradable waste under anaerobic conditions contributes to about 18% and 2.9% of global methane and GHG emissions, respectively [ 54 ], with the global warming effect of about 25 times higher than carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions [ 55 ]. Methane also causes fires and explosions [ 56 ]. Emissions from SWM in developing countries are increasing due to rapid economic growth and improved living standards [ 57 ].
Irregular waste collection also contributes to marine pollution. In 2010, 192 coastal countries generated 275 million metric tons of plastic waste out of which up to 12.7 million metric tons (4.4%) entered ocean ecosystems [ 58 ]. Moreover, plastic waste collects and stagnates water, proving a mosquito breeding habitat and raising the risks of dengue, malaria, and West Nile fever [ 56 ]. In addition, uncollected waste creates serious safety, health, and environmental consequences such as promoting urban violence and supporting breeding and feeding grounds for flies, mosquitoes, rodents, dogs, and cats, which carry diseases to nearby homesteads [ 4 , 19 , 59 , 60 ].
In the global South, scavengers often throw the remaining unwanted garbage on the street. Waste collectors are rarely protected from direct contact and injury, thereby facing serious health threats. Because garbage trucks are often derelict and uncovered, exhaust fumes and dust stemming from waste collection and transportation contribute to environmental pollution and widespread health problems [ 61 ]. In India’s megacities, for example, irregular MSW management is one of the major problems affecting air and marine quality [ 62 ]. Thus, irregular waste collection and handling contribute to public health hazards and environmental degradation [ 63 ].
Most municipal solid waste in the Global South goes into unsanitary landfills or open dumps. Even during the economic downturn during the COVID-19 pandemic, the amount of waste heading to landfill sites in Brazil, for example, increased due to lower recycling rates [ 64 ]. In Johor, Malaysia, landfilling destroys natural habitats and depletes the flora and fauna [ 65 ]. Moreover, landfilling with untreated, unsorted waste led to severe public health issues in South America [ 66 ]. Based on a study on 30 Brazilian cities, Urban and Nakada [ 64 ] report that 35% of medical waste was not properly treated before disposal, which poses a threat to public health, including the spread of COVID-19. Landfills and open dumps are also associated with high emissions of methane (CH 4 ), a major GHG [ 67 , 68 ]. Landfills and wastewater release 17% of the global methane emission [ 25 ]. About 29 metric tons of methane are emitted annually from landfills globally, accounting for about 8% of estimated global emissions, with 1.3 metric tons released from landfills in Africa [ 7 ]. The rate of landfill gas production steadily rises while MSW accumulates in the landfill emissions. Released methane and ammonia gases can cause health hazards such as respiratory diseases [ 37 , 69 , 70 , 71 ]. Since methane is highly combustible, it can cause fire and explosion hazards [ 72 ].
Open dumping sites with organic waste create the environment for the breeding of disease-carrying vectors, including rodents, flies, and mosquitoes [ 40 , 45 , 51 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 ]. Associated vector-borne diseases include zika virus, dengue, and malaria fever [ 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 ]. In addition, there are risks of water-borne illnesses such as leptospirosis, intestinal worms, diarrhea, and hepatitis A [ 80 , 81 ].
Odors from landfill sites, and their physical appearance, affect the lives of nearby residents by threatening their health and undermining their livelihoods, lowering their property values [ 37 , 38 , 68 , 82 , 83 , 84 ]. Moreover, the emission of ammonia (NH 3 ) from landfill sites can damage species’ composition and plant leaves [ 85 ]. In addition, the pollutants from landfill sites damage soil quality [ 73 , 84 ]. Landfill sites also generate dust and are sources of noise pollution [ 86 ].
Air and water pollution are intense in the hot and rainy seasons due to the emission of offensive odor, disease-carrying leachates, and runoff. Considerable amounts of methane and CO 2 from landfill sites produce adverse health effects such as skin, eyes, nose, and respiratory diseases [ 69 , 87 , 88 ]. The emission of ammonia can lead to similar problems and even blindness [ 85 , 89 ]. Other toxic gaseous pollutants from landfill sites include Sulphur oxides [ 89 ]. While less than 20% of methane is recovered from landfills in China, Western nations recover up to 60% [ 90 ].
Several studies report leachate from landfill sites contaminating water sources used for drinking and other household applications, which pose significant risks to public health [ 36 , 43 , 53 , 72 , 75 , 83 , 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 , 95 ]. For example, Hong et al. [ 95 ] estimated that, in 2006, the amount of leachates escaping from landfill sites in Pudong (China) was 160–180 m 3 per day. On the other hand, a properly engineered facility for waste disposal can protect public health, preserve important environmental resources, prevent clogging of drainages, and prevent the migration of leachates to contaminate ground and surface water, farmlands, animals, and air from which they enter the human body [ 61 , 96 ]. Moreover, heat in summer can speed up the rate of bacterial action on biodegradable organic material and produce a pungent odor [ 60 , 97 , 98 ]. In China, for example, leachates were not treated in 47% of landfills [ 99 ].
Co-mingled disposal of industrial and medical waste alongside municipal waste endangers people with chemical and radioactive hazards, Hepatitis B and C, tetanus, human immune deficiency, HIV infections, and other related diseases [ 59 , 60 , 100 ]. Moreover, indiscriminate disposal of solid waste can cause infectious diseases such as gastrointestinal, dermatological, respiratory, and genetic diseases, chest pains, diarrhea, cholera, psychological disorders, skin, eyes, and nose irritations, and allergies [ 10 , 36 , 60 , 61 ].
Open burning of MSW is a main cause of smog and respiratory diseases, including nose, throat, chest infections and inflammation, breathing difficulty, anemia, low immunity, allergies, and asthma. Similar health effects were reported from Nepal [ 101 ], India [ 87 ], Mexico, [ 69 ], Pakistan [ 52 , 73 , 84 ], Indonesia [ 88 ], Liberia [ 50 ], and Chile [ 102 ]. In Mumbai, for example, open incineration emits about 22,000 tons of pollutants annually [ 56 ]. Mongkolchaiarunya [ 103 ] reported air pollution and odors from burning waste in Thailand. In addition, plastic waste incineration produces hydrochloric acid and dioxins in quantities that are detrimental to human health and may cause allergies, hemoglobin deficiency, and cancer [ 95 , 104 ]. In addition, smoke from open incineration and dumpsites is a significant contributor to air pollution even for persons staying far from dumpsites.
Composting is a biological method of waste disposal that entails the decomposing or breaking down of organic wastes into simpler forms by naturally occurring microorganisms, such as bacteria and fungi. However, despite its advantage of reducing organic waste by at least half and using compost in agriculture, the composting method has much higher CO 2 emissions than other disposal approaches. In Korea, for example, composting has the highest environmental impact than incineration and anaerobic digestion methods [ 105 ]. The authors found that the environmental impact of composting was found to be 2.4 times higher than that of incineration [ 105 ]. Some reviews linked composting with several health issues, including congested nose, sore throat and dry cough, bronchial asthma, allergic rhinitis, and extrinsic allergic alveolitis [ 36 , 106 ].
As discussed in the section above, there are many negative impacts of unsustainable SWM practices on the people and the environment. Although all waste treatment methods have their respective negative impacts, some have fewer debilitating impacts on people and the environment than others. The following is the summary of key implications of such unsustainable SWM practices.
Therefore, measures toward more sustainable SWM that can mitigate such impacts must be worked out and followed. The growing complexity, costs, and coordination of SWM require multi-stakeholder involvement at each process stage [ 7 ]. Earmarking resources, providing technical assistance, good governance, and collaboration, and protecting environmental and human health are SWM critical success factors [ 47 , 79 ]. As such, local governments, the private sector, donor agencies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), the residents, and informal garbage collectors and scavengers have their respective roles to play collaboratively in effective and sustainable SWM [ 40 , 103 , 107 , 108 ]. The following are key practical recommendations for mitigating the negative impacts of unsustainable SWM practices enumerated above.
First, cities should plan and implement an integrated SWM approach that emphasizes improving the operation of municipalities to manage all stages of SWM sustainably: generation, separation, transportation, transfer/sorting, treatment, and disposal [ 36 , 46 , 71 , 77 , 86 ]. The success of this approach requires the involvement of all stakeholders listed above [ 109 ] while recognizing the environmental, financial, legal, institutional, and technical aspects appropriate to each local setting [ 77 , 86 ]. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) can likewise aid in selecting the method and preparing the waste management plan [ 88 , 110 ]. Thus, the SWM approach should be carefully selected to spare residents from negative health and environmental impacts [ 36 , 39 , 83 , 98 , 111 ].
Second, local governments should strictly enforce environmental regulations and better monitor civic responsibilities for sustainable waste storage, collection, and disposal, as well as health hazards of poor SWM, reflected in garbage littering observable throughout most cities of the Global South [ 64 , 84 ]. In addition, violations of waste regulations should be punished to discourage unsustainable behaviors [ 112 ]. Moreover, local governments must ensure that waste collection services have adequate geographical coverage, including poor and minority communities [ 113 ]. Local governments should also devise better SWM policies focusing on waste reduction, reuse, and recycling to achieve a circular economy and sustainable development [ 114 , 115 ].
Third, effective SWM requires promoting positive public attitudes toward sustainable waste management [ 97 , 116 , 117 , 118 ]. Therefore, public awareness campaigns through print, electronic, and social media are required to encourage people to desist from littering and follow proper waste dropping and sorting practices [ 36 , 64 , 77 , 79 , 80 , 82 , 91 , 92 , 119 ]. There is also the need for a particular focus on providing sorting bins and public awareness about waste sorting at the source, which can streamline and optimize subsequent SWM processes and mitigate their negative impacts [ 35 , 45 , 46 , 64 , 69 , 89 , 93 ]. Similarly, non-governmental and community-based organizations can help promote waste reduction, separation, and sorting at the source, and material reuse/recycling [ 103 , 120 , 121 , 122 ]. In Vietnam, for example, Tsai et al. [ 123 ] found that coordination among stakeholders and appropriate legal and policy frameworks are crucial in achieving sustainable SWM.
Fourth, there is the need to use environmentally friendly technologies or upgrade existing facilities. Some researchers prefer incineration over other methods, particularly for non-recyclable waste [ 44 , 65 ]. For example, Xin et al. [ 124 ] found that incineration, recycling, and composting resulted in a 70.82% reduction in GHG emissions from solid waste in Beijing. In Tehran city, Iran, Maghmoumi et al. [ 125 ] revealed that the best scenario for reducing GHG emissions is incinerating 50% of the waste, landfilling 30%, and recycling 20%. For organic waste, several studies indicate a preference for composting [ 45 , 51 , 75 ] and biogas generation [ 15 , 42 , 68 ]. Although some researchers have advocated a complete ban on landfilling [ 13 , 42 ], it should be controlled with improved techniques for leak detection and leachate and biogas collection [ 126 , 127 ]. Many researchers also suggested an integrated biological and mechanical treatment (BMT) of solid waste [ 66 , 74 , 95 , 119 ]. In Kenya, the waste-to-biogas scheme and ban on landfill and open burning initiatives are estimated to reduce the emissions of over 1.1 million tons of GHG and PM2.5 emissions from the waste by more than 30% by 2035 [ 42 ]. An appropriately designed waste disposal facility helps protect vital environmental resources, including flora, fauna, surface and underground water, air, and soil [ 128 , 129 ].
Fifth, extraction and reuse of materials, energy, and nutrients are essential to effective SWM, which provides livelihoods for many people, improves their health, and protects the environment [ 130 , 131 , 132 , 133 , 134 , 135 , 136 ]. For example, recycling 24% of MSW in Thailand lessened negative health, social, environmental, and economic impacts from landfill sites [ 89 ]. Waste pickers play a key role in waste circularity and should be integrated into the SWM system [ 65 , 89 , 101 , 137 ], even to the extent of taking part in decision-making [ 138 ]. In addition, workers involved in waste collection should be better trained and equipped to handle hazardous waste [ 87 , 128 ]. Moreover, green consumption, using bioplastics, can help reduce the negative impacts of solid waste on the environment [ 139 ].
Lastly, for effective SWM, local authorities should comprehensively address SWM challenges, such as lack of strategic SWM plans, inefficient waste collection/segregation and recycling, insufficient budgets, shortage of qualified waste management professionals, and weak governance, and then form a financial regulatory framework in an integrated manner [ 140 , 141 , 142 ]. Effective SWM system also depends on other factors such as the waste generation rate, population density, economic status, level of commercial activity, culture, and city/region [ 37 , 143 ]. A sustainable SWM strives to protect public health and the environment [ 144 , 145 ].
As global solid waste generation rates increase faster than urbanization, coupled with inadequate SWM systems, local governments and urban residents often resort to unsustainable SWM practices. These practices include mixing household and commercial garbage with hazardous waste during storage and handling, storing garbage in old or poorly managed facilities, deficient transportation practices, open-air incinerators, informal/uncontrolled dumping, and non-engineered landfills. The implications of such practices include air and water pollution, land degradation, climate change, and methane and hazardous leachate emissions. In addition, these impacts impose significant environmental and public health costs on residents with marginalized social groups affected mostly.
Inadequate SWM is associated with poor public health, and it is one of the major problems affecting environmental quality and cities’ sustainable development. Effective community involvement in the SWM requires promoting positive public attitudes. Public awareness campaigns through print, electronic, and social media are required to encourage people to desist from littering and follow proper waste-dropping practices. Improper SWM also resulted in water pollution and unhealthy air in cities. Future research is needed to investigate how the peculiarity of each Global South country can influence selecting the SWM approach, elements, aspects, technology, and legal/institutional frameworks appropriate to each locality.
Reviewed literature on the impacts of SWM practices in Asia (compiled by authors).
Author | Study Area | Study Aim | Impacts on Humans | Impacts on the Environment | Recommendations/Implications |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Akmal & Jamil [ ] | Rawalpindi and Islamabad, Pakistan | Examines the relationship between residents’ health and dumpsite exposure. | |||
Hong et al. [ ] | Pudong, China | Assesses the environmental impacts of five SW treatment options | and acidification from NOx and SO | ||
Gunamantha [ ] | Kartamantul region, Yogyakarta, Indonesia | Compares five energetic valorization alternative scenarios and existing SW treatment. | and CO emissions from landfill sites produce adverse health effects such as skin, eyes, nose, and respiratory diseases. | and CO gases from landfill sites aggravated global warming challenges. | |
Abba et al. [ ] | Johor Bahru, Malaysia | Assesses stakeholder opinion on the existing and future environmental impacts of household solid waste disposal. | , N O, and NH increase climate change challenges. | ||
Fang et al. (2012) [ ] | Shanghai, China | Identifies different sources of MSW odor compounds generated by landfill sites. | cause harm to the respiratory tract, eyes, nose, lungs, etc. | damage species composition, plant leaves, etc. | |
Menikpura et al. [ ] | Nonthaburi municipality, Bangkok, Thailand | Explores recycling activities’ effects on the sustainability of SWM practices. | , NH , and NOx are associated with human toxicity and ailments. | ||
Mongkolnchaiarunya [ ] | Yala Manucipality, Thailand | Investigates the possibilities of integrating alternative SW solutions with local practices. | |||
De & Debnath [ ] | Kolkata, India | Investigates the health effects of solid waste disposal practices. | |||
Suthar & Sajwan [ ] | Dehradun city, India | Proposes a new solid waste disposal site | |||
Phillips & Mondal [ ] | Varanasi, India | Evaluates the sustainability of solid waste disposal options | and CO | ||
Ramachandra et al. [ ] | Bangalore, India | Assesses the composition of waste for its management and treatment | and CH cause likely adverse health effects. | ||
Pokhrel & Viraraghavan [ ] | Kathmandu Valley, Nepal | Evaluates SWM practices in Nepal. | |||
Dangi et al. [ ] | Tulsipur, Nepal | Investigates household SWM options. | |||
Islam (2016) [ ] | Dhaka, Bangladesh | Develops an effective SWM and recycling process for Dhaka city | and CH emissions pollute the environment. | ||
Das et al. [ ] | Kathmandu valley, Nepal | Estimates the amount of MSW burnt in five municipalities. | and CH emissions | ||
Usman et al. [ ] | Faisalabad, Pakistan | Investigates the impacts of open dumping on groundwater quality | and CH emissions from open-air burning. | ||
Nisar et al. (2008) [ ] | Bahawalpur City, Pakistan | Explores the sources and impacts of SWM practices | |||
Ejaz et al. (2010) [ ] | Rawalpindi city, Pakistan | Identifies the causes of illegal dumping of SWM. | |||
Batool & Chaudhry [ ] | Lahore, Pakistan | Evaluates the effect of MSW management practices on GHG emissions. | and CH emissions are causing associated health risks. | and CH emissions. | |
Hoang & Fogarassy [ ] | Hanoi, Vietnam | Explores the most sustainable MSW management options using MCDA. | |||
Ansari [ ] | Bahrain | Proposes an integrated and all-inclusive SWM system | |||
Clarke et al. [ ] | Qatar | To collect data about residents’ specific opinions concerning SW strategies. | |||
Ossama et al. [ ] | Saudi Arabia | Reviews municipal SWM practices in Saudi Arabia | causes infection in humans. | ||
Brahimi et al. [ ] | India | Explores the potential of waste-to-energy in India |
Reviewed literature on the impacts of SWM practices in South America (compiled by authors).
Author | Study Area | Aim | Impacts on Humans | Impacts on the Environment | Recommendations/Implications |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
McAllister [ ] | Peru, South America | To conduct a comprehensive review on the impact of inadequate SWM practices on natural and human environments | |||
Bezama et al. [ ] | Concepción (Chile) province and the city of Estrela (Brazil) | To analyze the suitability of mechanical biological treatment of municipal solid waste in South America. | |||
Ansari [ ] | Guyana (South America) | To develop effective and low-cost technologies for organic waste recycling | |||
Hoornweg & Giannelli [ ] | Latin America and the Caribbean | To integrate the private sector to harness incentives in managing MS.W. in Latin America and the Caribbean. | gas released from landfills is detrimental to public health. | emissions from landfills | |
Olay-Romero et al. [ ] | Sixty-six Mexican municipalities, Mexico | To propose a basic set of indicators to analyze technical aspects of street cleaning, collection, and disposal. | |||
Urban & Nakada [ ] | Thirty Brazilian cities | Assess environmental impacts caused by shifts in solid waste production and management due to the COVID-19 pandemic. | |||
Gavilanes-Terán et al. [ ] | Ecuadorian province of Chimborazo, Ecuador. | Categorize organic wastes from the agroindustry and evaluate their potential use as soil amendments. | |||
Pérez et al. [ ] | City of Valdivia (Chile) | Holistic environmental assessment perspective for municipal SWM. | |||
Yousif & Scott [ ] | Mazatenango, Guatemala | Examines the problems of SWM concerning administration, collection, handling, and disposal | |||
Azevedo et al. [ ] | Rocinha, Brazil | To develop a SWM framework from the sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) perspective. | |||
Penteado & de Castro [ ] | Brazil | Reviews the main SWM recommendations during the pandemic. | |||
Pereira & Fernandino [ ] | Mata de São João, Brazil | Evaluates waste management quality and tests the applicability of a system of indicators | |||
Buenrostro & Bocco [ ] | Mexico | Explores the causes and implications of MSW generation patterns | |||
Juárez-Hernández [ ] | Mexico City, Mexico | Evaluates MSW practices in the megacity. | |||
de Morais Lima & Paulo [ ] | Quilombola communities, Brazil | Proposes a new approach for SWM using risk analysis and complementary sustainability criteria | |||
Coelho & Lange [ ] | Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. | Investigates sustainable SWM solutions | |||
Aldana-Espitia et al. [ ] | City of Celaya, Guanajuato, Mexico. | Analyzes the existing municipal SWM process | |||
Silva & Morais [ ] | Craft brewery, the northeastern Brazilian city | Develops a collaborative approach to SWM. | |||
Morero et al. [ ] | Cities in Argentina | Proposes a mathematical model for optimal selection of municipal SWM alternatives | |||
Bräutigam et al. [ ] | Metropolitan Region of Santiago de Chile | Identifies the technical options for SWM to improve the sustainability of the system. | |||
Vazquez et al. [ ] | Bahia Blanca, Argentina. | Assesses the type and amount of MSW generated in the city | |||
Zarate et al. [ ] | San Mateo Ixtatán, Guatemala | Implements SWM program to address one of the public health needs | |||
Rodic-Wiersma & Bethancourt [ ] | Guatemala City, Guatemala | Evaluates the present situation of the SWM system | |||
Burneo et al. [ ] | Cuenca (Ecuador) | Evaluates the role of waste pickers and the conditions of their activities |
Reviewed literature on the impacts of SWM practices in Africa (compiled by authors).
Author | Study Area | Study Aim | Impacts on Humans | Environment Impacts | Recommendations/Implications |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Dianati et al. [ ] | Kisumu, Kenya | Explores the impact on PM and GHG emissions of the waste-to-biogas scheme | |||
Kabera et al. [ ] | Kigali, Rwanda, and Major cities of East Africa | Benchmarks and compares the performance of SWM and recycling systems | |||
Kadama [ ] | The North West Province of South Africa | Formulates a new approach to SWM based on the business process re-engineering principle. | |||
Owojori et al. [ ] | Limpopo Province, South Africa | Determines the differences among waste components. | |||
Ayeleru et al. [ ] | Soweto, South Africa | Evaluates the cost-benefit analysis of setting up a recycling facility. | |||
Friedrich & Trois [ ] | eThekwiniMunicipality, South Africa | Estimates the current and future GHG emissions from garbage. | |||
Nahmana & Godfreyb [ ] | South Africa | Explores the opportunities and constraints to implementing economic instruments for SWM | |||
Filimonau & Tochukwu [ ] | Lagos, Nigeria | Explores SWM practices in selected hotels in Lagos. | |||
Trois & Vaughan-Jones [ ] | Africa | Proposes a plan for sustainable SWM | |||
Parrot & Dia [ ] | Yaoundé, Cameroon | Assesses the state of MSW management and suggests possible solutions | |||
Dlamini et al. [ ] | Johannesburg, South Africa | Reviews waste-to-energy technologies and their consequence on sustainable SWM | |||
Serge Kubanza & Simatele [ ] | Johannesburg, South Africa | Evaluates solid waste governance in the city | |||
Kabera & Nishimwe [ ] | Kigali city, Rwanda | Analyzes the current state of MSWM. | |||
Muheirwe & Kihila [ ] | Sub-Saharan Africa | Examines the current SWM regulation by exploring the global and national agendas. | |||
Almazán-Casali & Sikra [ ] | Liberia | Proposes an effective SWM system. | |||
Imam et al. [ ] | Abuja, Nigeria | Develops an integrated and sustainable system for SWM in Abuja. | |||
Mapira [ ] | Masvingo, Zimbabwe | Assesses the current environmental challenges associated with SWM and disposal | |||
Adeleke et al. [ ] | South Africa | Evaluates the trend, shortcomings, progress, and likely improvement areas for each sustainable waste management component | |||
Muiruri & Karatu [ ] | Eastleigh Nairobi County, Kenya | Assesses the household level solid waste disposal methods |
This research received no external funding.
Conceptualization, I.R.A. and K.M.M.; methodology, I.R.A., K.M.M. and U.L.D.; validation, I.R.A., K.M.M. and U.L.D.; formal analysis, I.R.A. and K.M.M.; investigation, I.R.A., K.M.M., U.L.D., F.S.A., M.S.A., S.M.S.A. and W.A.G.A.-G.; resources, I.R.A., K.M.M., U.L.D., F.S.A., M.S.A., S.M.S.A., W.A.G.A.-G. and T.I.A.; data curation, U.L.D., F.S.A., M.S.A., S.M.S.A. and W.A.G.A.-G.; writing—original draft preparation, I.R.A., K.M.M., U.L.D., F.S.A., M.S.A., S.M.S.A. and W.A.G.A.-G.; writing—review and editing, I.R.A., K.M.M. and U.L.D.; supervision, F.S.A. and T.I.A.; project administration, I.R.A.; funding acquisition, I.R.A., K.M.M., U.L.D., F.S.A., M.S.A., S.M.S.A., W.A.G.A.-G. and T.I.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Not applicable.
Data availability statement, conflicts of interest.
The authors declare no conflict of interest in conducting this study.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
By savannah bertrand.
December 17, 2021
See also our . |
The use of fossil fuels—coal, oil, and natural gas—results in significant climate, environmental, and health costs that are not reflected in market prices. These costs are known as externalities. Each stage of the fossil fuel supply chain, from extraction and transportation to refining and burning, generates externalities. This fact sheet provides a survey of some of the externalities associated with fossil fuels.
When fossil fuels are burned, they emit greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide that trap heat in the earth’s atmosphere and contribute to climate change. In 2019, fossil fuels accounted for 74 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. Nearly 25 percent of emissions in the United States come from fossil fuels extracted from public lands. Some of the climate externalities of fossil fuels include:
Fossil fuels have significant environmental externalities including:
Air pollution from burning fossil fuels can cause multiple health issues , including asthma, cancer, heart disease, and premature death. Combusting the additives found in gasoline—benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene—produces cancer-causing ultra-fine particles and aromatic hydrocarbons. Globally, fossil fuel pollution is responsible for one in five deaths. In the United States, 350,000 premature deaths in 2018 were attributed to fossil fuel-related pollution, with the highest number of deaths per capita in states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia. The annual cost of the health impacts of fossil fuel-generated electricity in the United States is estimated to be up to $886.5 billion .
The environmental and health impacts of fossil fuels disproportionately harm communities of color and low-income communities. Black and Hispanic Americans are exposed to 56 and 63 percent more particulate matter pollution, respectively, than they produce. In a predominantly Black and low-income area of Louisiana known as “Cancer Alley,” the cancer risk is nearly 50 times higher than the national average due to 150 nearby chemical plants and oil refineries.
Several policy mechanisms have been proposed to reduce fossil fuel externalities, including:
Author: Savannah Bertrand
Editor: Anna McGinn
Graphic: Emma Johnson
For the endnotes, please download the PDF version of this issue brief .
94 Accesses
Explore all metrics
Paper mill sludge (PMS) is featured with a high content of cellulose and hemicellulose, and using its characteristics to make paperboard can achieve a high-value utilization of PMS, which has attracted growing interest. In this study, currently prevalent landfill, incineration technologies (generating heat and electricity by incineration), and three paperboard technologies (medium density fiberboard, pulp board, and corrugated paper) were evaluated and compared via life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle costing (LCC) methods. LCA results show that the PMS-to-pulp board outperforms others with an energy conservation and emission reduction (ECER) value of − 2.86 × 10 −8 , while the landfill exhibits the highest overall environmental impact with an ECER value of 4.80 × 10 −9 . LCC results reveal that the PMS-to-pulp board delivers the highest economic profit with $257.357, while the landfill is the lowest with $ − 35.63. The PMS paperboard technologies are more economically friendly than the incineration technologies due to additional electricity/steam consumption during the PMS pre-drying process in incineration. In addition, different scenarios were set up to explore national GHG emission reduction potential by increasing paperboard technologies application rate and reducing the proportion of landfill and incineration. The scenario analysis suggests that replacing 90% of landfill and incineration ratio with PMS paperboard technologies could tremendously improve the overall emission reduction performance with − 9.08 × 10 10 kg CO 2 eq. This result indicates that the PMS treatment technology transformation has a significant favorable impact on the achievement of the “carbon neutrality” target.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Rent this article via DeepDyve
Institutional subscriptions
Data availability.
The data that supports the findings of this study are available in the Supplementary Information.
Medium density fiberboard
Life cycle inventory
Chinese life cycle database
Energy conservation and emission reduction
Greenhouse gas
Bergamo J, Rossi E, Maffi JM et al (2020) Preparation and characterization of nanoencapsulated synthetic soybean oil derivative-an abundant and environmentally friendly phase change material-heat transfer analysis and applications. Sustain Energy Technol Assess 41:100794. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2020.100794
Article Google Scholar
Chen G, Wang X, Li J et al (2019) Environmental, energy, and economic analysis of integrated treatment of municipal solid waste and sewage sludge: a case study in China. Sci Total Environ 647:1433–1443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.08.104
Article CAS Google Scholar
Cheng S, Long J, Evans B et al (2022) Non-negligible greenhouse gas emissions from non-sewered sanitation systems: a meta-analysis. Environ Res 212:113468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2022.113468
China Statistical Yearbook 2021. https://www.stats.gov.cn/sj/ndsj/2021/indexeh.htm . Accessed 7 Apr 2024a
Cui RY, Hultman N, Cui D et al (2021) A plant-by-plant strategy for high-ambition coal power phaseout in China. Nat Commun 12:1468. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-21786-0
De Azevedo ARG, Alexandre J, Xavier GDC, Pedroti LG (2018) Recycling paper industry effluent sludge for use in mortars: a sustainability perspective. J Clean Prod 192:335–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.011
De Azevedo ARG, Alexandre J, Marvila MT et al (2020) Technological and environmental comparative of the processing of primary sludge waste from paper industry for mortar. J Clean Prod 249:119336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119336
Faubert P, Barnabé S, Bouchard S et al (2016) Pulp and paper mill sludge management practices: what are the challenges to assess the impacts on greenhouse gas emissions? Resour Conserv Recycl 108:107–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.01.007
Furlani E, Maschio S (2018) Glazed tiles produced using paper sludge, glass cullet and a natural red clay: an experimental study. Int J Environ Stud 75:903–912. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207233.2018.1470404
Gievers F, Walz M, Loewe K et al (2022) Anaerobic co-digestion of paper sludge: feasibility of additional methane generation in mechanical–biological treatment plants. Waste Manage 144:502–512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2022.04.016
Goel G, Kalamdhad AS (2017) An investigation on use of paper mill sludge in brick manufacturing. Constr Build Mater 148:334–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.05.087
Gong Y, Liu F, Liu H et al (2022) Environment–energy–economy analysis and related technical transition strategies for spent activated carbon regeneration in China. ACS Sustainable Chem Eng 10:11512–11523. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.2c02855
Guo X, Yao Y, Zhao H et al (2021) Environmental impacts of functional fillers in polylactide (PLA)-based bottles using life cycle assessment methodology. Sci Total Environ 788:147852. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147852
Guo X, Yao S, Wang Q et al (2022) The impact of packaging recyclable ability on environment: case and scenario analysis of polypropylene express boxes and corrugated cartons. Sci Total Environ 822:153650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153650
Han Q, Zhao H, Wei G et al (2024) Sustainable papermaking in China: assessing provincial economic and environmental performance of pulping technologies. ACS Sustainable Chem Eng 12:4517–4529. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c07611
Havukainen J, Saud A, Astrup TF et al (2022) Environmental performance of dewatered sewage sludge digestate utilization based on life cycle assessment. Waste Manage 137:210–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2021.11.005
Hong J, Xu C, Hong J et al (2013) Life cycle assessment of sewage sludge co-incineration in a coal-based power station. Waste Manage 33:1843–1852. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2013.05.007
Jadlovec M, Výtisk J, Honus S et al (2023) Pollutants production, energy recovery and environmental impact of sewage sludge co-incineration with biomass pellets. Environ Technol Innov 32:103400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eti.2023.103400
Jiang H, Zhang Y, Bian K et al (2022) Is it possible to efficiently and sustainably remove microplastics from sediments using froth flotation? Chem Eng J 448:137692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2022.137692
Knapp S, Güldemund A, Weyand S, Schebek L (2019) Evaluation of co-firing as a cost-effective short-term sustainable CO2 mitigation strategy in Germany. Energ Sustain Soc 9:32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13705-019-0214-3
Li H, Jiang H-D, Dong K-Y et al (2020a) A comparative analysis of the life cycle environmental emissions from wind and coal power: evidence from China. J Clean Prod 248:119192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119192
Li J, Mei M, Han Y et al (2020b) Life cycle cost assessment of recycled paper manufacture in China. J Clean Prod 252:119868. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119868
Li T, Wei G, Liu H et al (2023) Comparative study of electroplating sludge reutilization in China: environmental and economic performances. Environ Sci Pollut Res 30:106598–106610. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-29849-z
Liu Y, Lin R, Ren J (2021) Developing a life cycle composite footprint index for sustainability prioritization of sludge-to-energy alternatives. J Clean Prod 281:124885. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124885
Liu B, Han Z, Li J, Yan B (2022a) Comprehensive evaluation of municipal solid waste power generation and carbon emission potential in Tianjin based on grey relation analysis and long short term memory. Process Saf Environ Prot 168:918–927. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2022.10.065
Liu H, Liu T, Wei G et al (2022b) Environmental and economic assessment of rural domestic waste gasification models in China. Waste Manage 154:160–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2022.10.001
Liu H, Qiao H, Liu S et al (2023) Energy, environment and economy assessment of sewage sludge incineration technologies in China. Energy 264:126294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.126294
Maheswaran R, Marichelvam MK, Asok SP (2023) Development of value-added sustainable products from paper mill sludge: an experimental approach. Heliyon 9:e17517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e17517
Mohammadi A, Sandberg M, Venkatesh G et al (2019) Environmental performance of end-of-life handling alternatives for paper-and-pulp-mill sludge: using digestate as a source of energy or for biochar production. Energy 182:594–605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.06.065
Pasciucco F, Francini G, Pecorini I et al (2023) Valorization of biogas from the anaerobic co-treatment of sewage sludge and organic waste: life cycle assessment and life cycle costing of different recovery strategies. J Clean Prod 401:136762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136762
Shao J, Yuan X, Leng L et al (2015) The comparison of the migration and transformation behavior of heavy metals during pyrolysis and liquefaction of municipal sewage sludge, paper mill sludge, and slaughterhouse sludge. Biores Technol 198:16–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.08.147
van Hijfte L, Geurts M, Vallentgoed WR et al (2023) Alternative normalization and analysis pipeline to address systematic bias in NanoString GeoMx Digital Spatial Profiling data. iScience 26:105760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2022.105760
Wang Y, Zhou S, Huo H (2014) Cost and CO 2 reductions of solar photovoltaic power generation in China: perspectives for 2020. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 39:370–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.027
Wang Q, Liu W, Yuan X et al (2018) Environmental impact analysis and process optimization of batteries based on life cycle assessment. J Clean Prod 174:1262–1273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.059
Yang H, Guo Y, Fang N, Dong B (2023) Life cycle assessment of greenhouse gas emissions of typical sewage sludge incineration treatment route based on two case studies in China. Environ Res 231:115959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2023.115959
Zambare VP, Christopher LP (2020) Integrated biorefinery approach to utilization of pulp and paper mill sludge for value-added products. J Clean Prod 274:122791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122791
Zhao H, Liu H, Wei G et al (2021a) Comparative life cycle assessment of emergency disposal scenarios for medical waste during the COVID-19 pandemic in China. Waste Manage 126:388–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2021.03.034
Zhao H-L, Wang L, Liu F et al (2021b) Energy, environment and economy assessment of medical waste disposal technologies in China. Sci Total Environ 796:148964. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148964
Zhao H, Liu H, Wei G et al (2022) A review on emergency disposal and management of medical waste during the COVID-19 pandemic in China. Sci Total Environ 810:152302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.152302
Download references
The authors would like to acknowledge the foundation of Tianjin Research Innovation Projects for Postgraduate Students (Grant no. 2022SKYZ208 and Grant no. 2022SKYZ180).
Authors and affiliations.
College of Energy and Safety Engineering, Tianjin Chengjian University, Tianjin, 300384, China
Yanfei Lin, Hanqiao Liu, Kai Li, Yuwen Zhu, Qianlong Han & Yunzhen Yang
College of Science, Tianjin Chengjian University, Tianjin, 300384, China
Tianjin Urban Planning and Design Institute Co, Ltd, Tianjin, 300000, China
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Yanfei Lin: conceptualization, methodology, data curation, writing—original draft. Guoxia Wei: writing—review and editing. Hanqiao Liu: conceptualization, methodology, writing—review and editing. Kai Li: methodology and editing. Yuwen Zhu: conceptualization, writing—review and editing. Qianlong Han: conceptualization, methodology, writing—review and editing. Yunzhen Yang: writing—review and editing. Yi Lian: writing—review and editing.
Correspondence to Yuwen Zhu .
Ethical approval.
Not applicable.
Consent for publication, competing interests.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Responsible Editor: Kelvin Tsun Wai Ng
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Supplementary file2 (doc 838 kb), rights and permissions.
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
Reprints and permissions
Lin, Y., Wei, G., Liu, H. et al. Environmental and economic analysis of the transformation of paper mill sludge treatment technologies in China. Environ Sci Pollut Res (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-024-33708-w
Download citation
Received : 07 January 2024
Accepted : 13 May 2024
Published : 27 May 2024
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-024-33708-w
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
The Baltic nation of Estonia is No. 1 in the 2024 rankings, while Denmark, one of the top ranked countries in the 2022 EPI dropped to 10 th place, highlighting the challenges of reducing emissions in hard-to-decarbonize industries. Meanwhile, “paper parks” are proving a global challenge to international biodiversity commitments.
Listen to Article
In 2022, at the UN Biodiversity Conference, COP 15, in Montreal over 190 countries made what has been called “the biggest conservation commitment the world has ever seen.” The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework called for the effective protection and management of 30% of the world’s terrestrial, inland water, and coastal and marine areas by the year 2030 — commonly known as the 30x30 target. While there has been progress toward reaching this ambitious goal of protecting 30% of land and seas on paper, just ahead of World Environment Day, the 2024 Environmental Performance Index (EPI) , an analysis by Yale researchers that provides a data-driven summary of the state of sustainability around the world, shows that in many cases such protections have failed to halt ecosystem loss or curtail environmentally destructive practices.
A new metric that assesses how well countries are protecting important ecosystems indicated that while nations have made progress in protecting land and seas, many of these areas are “paper parks” where commercial activities such as mining and trawling continue to occur — sometimes at a higher rate than in non-protected areas. The EPI analyses show that in 23 countries, more than 10% of the land protected is covered by croplands and buildings, and in 35 countries there is more fishing activity inside marine protected areas than outside.
“Protected areas are failing to achieve their goals in different ways,” said Sebastián Block Munguía, a postdoctoral associate with the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy (YCELP) and the lead author of the report. “In Europe, destructive fishing is allowed inside marine protected areas, and a large fraction of the area protected in land is covered by croplands, not natural ecosystems. In many developing countries, even when destructive activities are not allowed in protected areas, shortages of funding and personnel make it difficult to enforce rules.”
The 2024 EPI, published by the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy and Columbia University’s Center for International Earth Science Information Network ranks 180 countries based on 58 performance indicators to track progress on mitigating climate change, promoting environmental health, and safeguarding ecosystem vitality. The data evaluates efforts by the nations to reach U.N. sustainability goals, the 2015 Paris Climate Change Agreement, as well as the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. The data for the index underlying different indicators come from a variety of academic institutions and international organizations and cover different periods. Protected area coverage indicators are based on data from March 2024, while greenhouse emissions data are from 2022.
Estonia has decreased its GHG emissions by 59% compared to 1990. The energy sector will be the biggest contributor in reducing emissions in the coming years as we have an aim to produce 100% of our electricity consumption from renewables by 2030.”
The index found that many countries that were leading in sustainability goals have fallen behind or stalled, illustrating the challenges of reducing emissions in hard-to-decarbonize industries and resistant sectors such as agriculture. In several countries, recent drops in agricultural greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) have been the result of external circumstances, not policy. For example, in Albania, supply chain disruptions led to more expensive animal feed that resulted in a sharp reduction in cows and, consequentially, nitrous oxide and methane emissions.
Estonia leads this year’s rankings with a 40% drop in GHG emissions over the last decade, largely attributed to replacing dirty oil shale power plants with cleaner energy sources. The country is drafting a proposal to achieve by 2040 a CO2 neutral energy sector and a CO2 neutral public transport network in bigger cities.
“Estonia has decreased its GHG emissions by 59% compared to 1990. The energy sector will be the biggest contributor in reducing emissions in the coming years as we have an aim to produce 100% of our electricity consumption from renewables by 2030,” said Kristi Klaas, Estonia’s vice-minister for Green Transition. Klaas discussed some of the policies that led to the country's success as well as ongoing challenges, such as reducing emissions in the agriculture sector, at a webinar hosted by YCELP on June 3. Dr. Abdullah Ali Abdullah Al-Amri, chairman of the Environment Authority of Oman, also joined the webinar to discuss efforts aimed at protecting the county's multiple ecosystems with rare biodiversity and endangered species, such as the Arabian oryx, and subspecies, such as the Arabian leopard.
Biweekly, we highlight three news and research stories about the work we’re doing at Yale School of the Environment.
Denmark, the top ranked country in the 2022 EPI dropped to 10th place, as its pace of decarbonization slowed, highlighting that those early gains from implementing “low-hanging-fruit policies, such as switching to electricity generation from coal to natural gas and expanding renewable power generation are themselves insufficient,” the index notes. Emissions in the world’s largest economies such as the U.S. (which is ranked 34th) are falling too slowly or still rising — such as in China, Russia, and India, which is ranked 176th.
Over the last decade only five countries — Estonia, Finland, Greece, Timor-Leste, and the United Kingdom — have cut their GHG emissions over the last decade at the rate needed to reach net zero by 2050. Vietnam and other developing countries in Southeast and Southern Asia — such as Pakistan, Laos, Myanmar, and Bangladesh — are ranked the lowest, indicating the urgency of international cooperation to help provide a path for struggling nations to achieve sustainability.
“The 2024 Environmental Performance Index highlights a range of critical sustainability challenges from climate change to biodiversity loss and beyond — and reveals trends suggesting that countries across the world need to redouble their efforts to protect critical ecosystems and the vitality of our planet,” said Daniel Esty, Hillhouse Professor of Environmental Law and Policy and director of YCELP.
Associate Director of Communications
Connect with us.
Disclosures.
The devastating consequences of divestment, like deteriorating infrastructure, vacant lots, and vast expanses of food and green space deserts, are glaringly obvious in low-income areas of Philadelphia. These inequalities in resources and opportunities have created a vicious cycle of poverty and made upward mobility very difficult. For the Philadelphia region, relying solely on traditional philanthropic models is insufficient to address these entrenched disparities and complex challenges. Poverty, inequality, and environmental degradation cannot be solved by simply chasing profit margins and depending on philanthropy.
In response to these types of challenges and opportunities across the region and the globe, impact investing has emerged as an increasingly popular approach to provide needed capital to address many of the systemic social and environmental challenges. This approach has gained momentum nationally and globally. The Global Impact Investor Network (GIIN) estimates that the size of the worldwide impact investing market is USD 1.164 trillion. This marks the first time the organization’s widely cited estimate surpassed the USD 1 trillion mark.
The draw of impact investing goes beyond just providing immediate benefits. Impact investing promotes a sense of shared responsibility among stakeholders. When stakeholders engage with local place-based investments that prioritize community engagement and collaboration, investment decisions can align better with the needs and aspirations of those most affected. This participatory approach helps build trust and empower residents, transforming them from passive recipients to active change agents.
These investment decisions have a far-reaching impact beyond the numbers on a balance sheet. Each dollar is intentionally directed towards a struggling neighborhood, an eco-friendly business, or a community-driven enterprise, creating a ripple effect that generates social and environmental impact, touching the lives of countless individuals.
From our Partners
This high-impact approach that has caught the attention of so many throughout the world is also creating systemic growth and change here in the Philadelphia region. Place-based impact investing is a powerful approach to addressing the complex vulnerabilities of the Philadelphia region. It acknowledges the need for targeted and community-specific solutions. Place-based impact investors collaborate with local organizations, residents, and institutions to inject capital into enterprises that drive sustainable development, economic empowerment, and social justice. By intentionally investing in the region’s communities, place-based impact investments can help transform challenges into stepping stones towards a brighter future for the region, both financially and for the well-being of its people.
Philadelphia is home to pioneering investors and enterprises creating a regional impact investing infrastructure weaving a tapestry of change. These community-driven efforts are building an ecosystem that is transforming neighborhoods, businesses, and public spaces in Philadelphia, planting seeds of change that will bear fruit for generations to come.
Let’s look at some pioneering organizations equipped to tackle the challenges different communities face and explore their success stories.
The Kensington Corridor Trust (KCT) in Kensington, Philadelphia, is an innovative example of community transformation. Instead of imposing solutions from the top down, KCT empowers residents by giving them ownership and control of real estate. The organization acquires properties in a perpetual trust, ensuring long-term affordability and local decision-making. Their innovative model uses grants and mission-aligned investments to acquire properties, which are then leased at affordable rates to community-based entrepreneurs. This generates revenue that is reinvested in the neighborhood, creating a self-sustaining cycle of wealth creation and empowerment. KCT prioritizes community engagement, ensuring residents have a say in their future. This builds trust, fosters ownership, and sparks a sense of responsibility for the neighborhood’s success.
Ben Franklin Technology Partners of Southeastern PA (BFTP-SEP) fuels innovation across diverse industries, from healthcare to clean energy, by investing in early-stage technology companies and fostering a thriving ecosystem. They provide capital, expertise, and connections that empower entrepreneurs to navigate the challenging journey from concept to impact. Their success lies in their holistic approach. They partner with universities, research institutions, and other organizations to create a fertile ground for innovation and collaboration. They also champion diversity and inclusion, ensuring that all voices are heard and all communities have a chance to thrive.
The Enterprise Center’s Innovate Capital takes an equity and opportunity-focused approach to empowering minority and women-owned businesses. Innovate Capital provides growth capital to these often-overlooked entrepreneurs, unlocking generational wealth. This licensed Small Business Investment Company (SBIC) invests not just in dollars but also in the belief of the untapped potential of these diverse founders. They provide resources and mentorship to help these entrepreneurs build sustainable ventures. The key to their success is their collaborative approach – connecting businesses with the right resources, from procurement opportunities to strategic partnerships, and empowering them to build thriving ventures.
Investors Circle is a network of passionate investors who support early-stage businesses that tackle critical social and environmental challenges. The organization’s members, including angel investors, venture capitalists, and foundations, share a common vision of driving positive change through their investments. They seek ventures that generate competitive returns while addressing climate change, education, inequality, and healthcare access. Investors Circle goes beyond individual investments, creating impact. They foster collaboration and knowledge-sharing within their network, connecting entrepreneurs with valuable resources and expertise. This creates a fertile ground for innovation and amplifies the impact of their collective capital.
Philadelphia’s impact investing ecosystem has thrived, with various organizations contributing to positive change through their unique focus and collaborative spirit. This has led to revitalized neighborhoods, empowered communities, and a more equitable and sustainable future for some.
The impact investing landscape in Philadelphia is growing, but some obstacles remain to overcome. To successfully work with diverse perspectives, it’s necessary to establish long-term partnerships and agree on a common goal. Innovation and scalability are crucial to expanding the capital available for place-based initiatives. Additionally, it’s essential to gather and analyze robust data to make informed investment decisions. Building trust and attracting more investors will require leveraging technology and establishing data-driven frameworks. These challenges are not unique to Philadelphia; most regions with growing impact economies face them. However, the Philadelphia region is intentionally working to address the hurdles that create an efficient and effective regional impact economy.
… learn more about opportunities to scale your positive impact in the region.
ImpactPHL Perspectives is a multi-part content series that explores the many facets of the impact economy in Greater Philadelphia from the perspectives of its doers, movers, shakers, and agents of change. Each volume is written directly by a leader in this space to discuss best practices and share lessons learned while challenging our assumptions about financial and impact returns. For more thought leadership like this, check out the full catalog of ImpactPHL Perspectives.
Advertisement
Supported by
The country’s south received three months’ rain in two weeks. Global warming has made such deluges twice as likely as before, scientists said.
By Raymond Zhong and Manuela Andreoni
Human-caused warming has doubled the chances that southern Brazil will experience extreme, multiday downpours like the ones that recently caused disastrous flooding there, a team of scientists said on Monday. The deluges have killed at least 172 people and displaced more than half a million residents from their homes.
Three months’ rain fell in a two-week span of April and May in the southern state of Rio Grande do Sul. After analyzing weather records, the scientists estimated that the region had a 1 percent chance each year of receiving so much rain in so little time. In the cooler climate of the 19th century, before large-scale emissions of greenhouse gases, such colossal downpours were far rarer, the researchers said.
Brazil’s south is one of the country’s rainiest regions. As the world gets warmer, the areas of high atmospheric pressure that occasionally form over the Atlantic coast of South America are becoming larger and longer lasting. That pushes more warm, moist air toward the south, where it can fall as rain.
When the latest rains hit, Rio Grande do Sul was still recovering from floods that killed at least 54 people late last year . Three of the four largest floods ever recorded in the state’s capital, Porto Alegre, have now occurred in the past nine months, said Regina Rodrigues, a professor of physical oceanography at the Federal University of Santa Catarina and one of the scientists who worked on the new analysis.
“While significant floods have occurred in the state of Rio Grande do Sul in the past, they are becoming increasingly strong and widespread,” Dr. Rodrigues said at a news conference.
We are having trouble retrieving the article content.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access.
Already a subscriber? Log in .
Want all of The Times? Subscribe .
We’re driving measurable progress towards sustainable and inclusive growth in the societies where we operate. Our 2023 ESG report details how we are making an impact through our client work, insights, actions, and giving. Bob Sternfels Global managing partner
Become the largest private sector catalyst for decarbonization
Jump to sustainability impact
Build inclusive economies, institutions and workforces that reflect our communities
Jump to inclusive growth impact
Lead with integrity and set the standard for accountability and compliance in our profession
Jump to responsible practices impact
We’re helping build inclusive economies, institutions, and workforces..
Responsible practices, our ambition is to lead with integrity and maintain the trust of our clients, colleagues, and society..
Additional resources, keep exploring.
Global Bitcoin mining is highly dependent on fossil fuels, with worrying impacts on water and land in addition to a significant carbon footprint.
Hamilton, Canada, 24 October 2023 — The extraordinary rise in cryptocurrency prices over the previous decade has prompted huge investments in the cryptocurrency sector. Undeniably, digital currencies have won the faith of the world's top investors, ranging from large corporations and tech millionaires to criminals, money launderers, and sanction busters.
Thanks to blockchain and other technological breakthroughs, digital currencies now constitute an advanced element of the world’s modern financial system. They are said to even have the potential to crush the world’s strongest currencies.
The surge in the crypto market is comparable to the gold rush. Yet, this exciting market has a hidden dark side. Mining cryptocurrencies can have major environmental impacts on climate, water, and land, according to new research by United Nations scientists.
Bitcoin is the most renowned and popular cryptocurrency. This motivated the UN scientists to evaluate the environmental impacts of Bitcoin across the world by looking at the activities of 76 Bitcoin mining nations during the 2020–2021 period. The results are shocking. In addition to a substantial carbon footprint, global Bitcoin mining activities have significant water and land footprints.
“Technological innovations are often associated with unintended consequences and Bitcoin is no exception,” said Professor Kaveh Madani , the Director of the United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment and Health (UNU-INWEH), who led this study. “Our findings should not discourage the use of digital currencies. Instead, they should encourage us to invest in regulatory interventions and technological advancements that improve the efficiency of the global financial system without harming the environment.”
According to study results, published by the United Nations University and Earth’s Future journal, during the 2020–2021 period, the global Bitcoin mining network consumed 173.42 Terawatt hours of electricity. This means that if Bitcoin were a country, its energy consumption would have ranked 27th in the world, ahead of a country like Pakistan, with a population of over 230 million people. The resulting carbon footprint was equivalent to that of burning 84 billion pounds of coal or operating 190 natural gas-fired power plants. To offset this footprint, 3.9 billion trees should be planted, covering an area almost equal to the area of the Netherlands, Switzerland, or Denmark or 7% of the Amazon rainforest.
During this time period, Bitcoin's water footprint was similar to the amount of water required to fill over 660,000 Olympic-sized swimming pools, enough to meet the current domestic water needs of more than 300 million people in rural sub-Saharan Africa. The land footprint of worldwide Bitcoin mining activities during this period was 1.4 times the area of Los Angeles.
The UN scientists report that Bitcoin mining heavily relies on fossil energy sources, with coal accounting for 45% of Bitcoin's energy supply mix, followed by natural gas (21%). Hydropower, a renewable energy source with significant water and environmental impacts, is the most important renewable source of energy of the Bitcoin mining network, satisfying 16% of its electricity demand. Nuclear energy has a considerable share of 9% in Bitcoin’s energy supply mix, whereas renewables such as solar and wind only provide 2% and 5% of the total electricity used by Bitcoin.
China, by a large margin, has been the biggest Bitcoin mining nation. To offset the carbon emissions from China's coal-intensive Bitcoin mining operations in 2021–2022, about 2 billion trees should be planted, covering an area equivalent to the sum of Portugal and Ireland or 45,000 times the area of Central Park in New York City. Aside from China, the world’s top 10 Bitcoin mining nations in 2020–2021 included the United States, Kazakhstan, Russia, Malaysia, Canada, Germany, Iran, Ireland, and Singapore.
“Because countries use different sources of energy to generate electricity, their electricity production impacts on climate, water, and land are not the same,” said Dr. Sanaz Chamanara , the lead author of the study and an Environmental, Social and Governance (EGS) Research Fellow at UNU-INWEH. “The rankings of countries in terms of the environmental impacts of their Bitcoin operations change depending on which environmental footprint is considered.”
Norway, Sweden, Thailand, and the United Kingdom are among the countries that make it to the top 10 list when the water or land footprint of their Bitcoin mining activities is taken into account. Together, the top 10 Bitcoin mining countries in terms of environmental footprint are responsible for 92–94% of Bitcoin’s global carbon, water, and land footprints.
The UN scientists make a range of recommendations regarding possible interventions by the governments to monitor and mitigate the environmental impacts of cryptocurrencies. They also suggest investment in other types of digital currencies that are more efficient in terms of energy use and less harmful to the environment. The investigation also calls for attention to the transboundary and transgenerational impacts of mining cryptocurrencies. “When you note which groups are currently benefiting from mining Bitcoin and which nations and generations will suffer the most from its environmental consequences, you can’t stop thinking about the inequity and injustice implications of the unregulated digital currency sector,” said Madani.
Read the paper, summarizing the main findings of the study : Chamanara, S., Ghaffarizadeh, S. A., & Madani, K. (2023). The environmental footprint of Bitcoin mining across the globe: Call for urgent action. Earth's Future, 11, e2023EF003871. https://doi.org/10.1029/2023EF003871
Read the full report : Chamanara, S. & Madani, K. (2023). The Hidden Environmental Cost of Cryptocurrency: How Bitcoin Mining Impacts Climate, Water and Land, United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment and Health (UNU-INWEH), Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, https://inweh.unu.edu/
Kyra Bowman , UNU Head of Communications, [email protected] Maryam Mottalebi , UNU-INWEH Digital Communications Associate, [email protected]
The UNU-INWEH team is available for interviews:
Prof. Kaveh Madani Director United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment and Health [email protected]
Dr. Sanaz Chamanara Research Fellow, Environmental, Social and Governance (EGS) United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment and Health [email protected]
12 Jun 2024, 10:00 - 11:00
Announcement
07 Jun 2024
06 Jun 2024
31 Dec 2023
A conservation group says it intends to sue two U.S. agencies, saying they failed to properly assess the environmental impacts of the sprawling electric vehicle plant Hyundai is building in Georgia
SAVANNAH, Ga. -- A Georgia conservation group Monday filed notice of its intent to sue two U.S. government agencies, saying they failed to properly assess the environmental impacts of the $7.6 billion electric vehicle and battery plant Hyundai is building outside Savannah.
The Ogeechee Riverkeeper accuses the Army Corps of Engineers of issuing a permit to fill or dredge wetlands on the plant site using outdated data that failed to consider the project's final scale. And it says the agency wrongly assumed the project would have a negligible impact on the region's groundwater supply.
The environmental group also says the U.S. Treasury Department dispersed millions of dollars in infrastructure funding that benefitted the project without performing required environmental reviews.
“Any activities related to this project should be immediately halted until these crucial steps are properly completed,” said a letter addressed to the agencies' leaders by Donald D.J. Stack, an attorney representing the conservation group.
Hyundai Motor Group broke ground in 2022 on its first U.S. factory devoted to building electric vehicles and the batteries that power them. The South Korean automaker has said it hopes to begin production before the end of this year in Bryan County west of Savannah.
Ultimately, Hyundai plans to have 8,000 workers producing 300,000 EVs per year at the Georgia site, making it the largest economic development project the state has ever tackled. The plant site sprawls across more than 2,900 acres (1,170 hectares).
Spokespersons for Hyundai and the two federal agencies named in the environmental group's letter did not immediately respond to email messages seeking comment Monday evening.
The letter says the group plans to file suit after 60 days if construction of the Hyundai plant isn't halted while the Army Corps and Treasury Department perform updated environmental reviews.
“When we find out that permit applicants withhold important information in an application and the permitting agency hasn’t done their due diligence, we will call them out and use the law to hold them accountable,” Damon Mullis, the riverkeeper group's executive director, said in a statement.
The group's letter says the Army Corps granted the project's permit in 2022 largely using information from a 2019 application submitted by a local agency before there was a deal with Hyundai to build in Georgia. It says the project grew by more than 500 acres (202 hectares) in that period.
The riverkeeper group's letter also says the Army Corps “severely underestimated” impacts to the area's water supply. It says agency granted a permit without information on how much water the plant would use, wrongly assuming a “negligible” impact that Bryan County's local water system could accommodate.
However, Georgia environmental regulators are now considering permit applications for four wells in a neighboring county that would allow the Hyundai plant to withdraw a combined 6.5 million gallons of water per day. They would come from the groundwater aquifer that’s the region’s main source of drinking water.
The riverkeeper group says the Treasury Department violated the National Environmental Policy Act by failing to perform an environmental review before dispersing an estimated $240 million to help pay for water and wastewaters infrastructure improvements benefitting the Hyundai plant. It says the funding came from a $1.9 trillion pandemic relief package Congress approved in 2021.
24/7 coverage of breaking news and live events
FILE - A person puts their ballot in a drop box on Oct. 27, 2020, at a library in Seattle. A Washington state judge on Friday, June 7, 2024, turned back an attempt by GOP backers of three initiatives to keep the fiscal impact of the measures off the November ballot. (AP Photo/Ted S. Warren, File)
Information about how much money three GOP-backed initiatives would cost the state of Washington must appear on the November ballot where voters can see it, a judge on Friday ruled.
The measures to repeal the state’s landmark Climate Commitment Act and the tax on the sale of stocks and bonds as well as one that could threaten a long-term care insurance program require financial disclosures, Thurston County Superior Court Judge Allyson Zipp said in a ruling from the bench. The decision is based on a recent law that requires the state attorney general to spell out how funding would be affected by initiatives that repeal, impose or change any tax or fee.
Opponents of the measures, who said they would have massive impacts on the state’s ability to provide critical services, praised the judge’s decision.
“Their lawsuit had one inexcusable purpose: to hide the truth about the impacts of these initiatives from voters,” Aaron Ostrom, executive director of the progressive advocacy organization FUSE Washington, said in a statement. “They know they will lose if voters understand what these destructive, deceptive initiatives actually do.”
Initiative author Jim Walsh, who along with Deanna Martinez sued to keep the fiscal impact off the ballot , said in an email to The Associated Press that they were concerned the “warning label” would be “weaponized.”
“We don’t mind the idea of more information, said Walsh, chair of the state Republican Party and a state representative from Aberdeen. ”What we’re concerned about is it won’t be impartial information. It will be partisan rhetoric, weaponized to make the initiatives sound bad. The fight isn’t over. We are going to continue to make the point that we want unbiased non-political information.”
Martinez is the chair of Mainstream Republicans of Washington and is on the Moses Lake City Council.
The initiatives are just a few of the ones certified after the group Let’s Go Washington, which is primarily bankrolled by hedge fund executive Brian Heywood, submitted hundreds of thousands of signatures in support of them. Initiatives that would give police greater ability to pursue people in vehicles, declare a series of rights for parents of public-school students and bar an income tax were approved by lawmakers. Heywood did not immediately respond to a voicemail seeking comment.
Tim O’Neal, an analyst with the Washington Community Alliance, said in response to the decision that when voters don’t have all the facts, they are less likely to vote and have their voice heard.
“The Public Investment Impact Disclosure law is important to building the transparency we need to increase voter trust and participation in our constitutional democracy,” he said in a statement.
Initiative 2117 would repeal the state’s Climate Commitment Act, which works to cap and reduce pollution while creating revenue for investments that address climate change. It raised $1.8 billion in 2023 through quarterly auctions in which emission allowances are sold to businesses covered under the act.
Initiative 2109 would repeal the tax imposed on the sale or exchange of stocks, bonds and other high-end assets, with exemptions for the first $262,000. Initiative 2124 will decide whether state residents must pay into Washington Cares, the state’s public long-term care insurance program.
Washington legislators passed a law in 2022 that requires descriptions of how much money initiatives would cost Washington to be printed on the ballot.
Walsh and Martinez claimed the law doesn’t apply to the three measures and asked the court to bar Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson from preparing statements on their fiscal impact and bar the secretary of state from certifying those statements.
But lawyers for the state said under the law, the public has a right to know an initiative’s financial impact.
Dr. Stephan Blanford, executive director of the Children’s Alliance, a nonpartisan child advocacy organization, said initiatives would give tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires while cutting funding for education. He also said the initiative to repeal the capital gains tax would push the state’s education system further into the red.
“By jeopardizing $8.1 billion in long-term care funding, I-2124 will put more tax pressure on Millennials and Gen Z to pay for a tidal wave of state Medicaid costs for aging Washingtonians, and increase the cost of care for millions of middle-income families,” he said.
The initiative to repeal the state’s carbon market “would allow more pollution across Washington, devastate funding air, water, and land protection, and cut funding to prevent wildfires and investments in transportation,” he said.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
About the journal. Environmental Impact Assessment Review (EIA Review) is a refereed, interdisciplinary journal serving a global audience of practitioners, policy-makers, regulators, academics and others with an interest in the field of (IA) and management. Impact assessment is defined by the International Association for Impact Assessment ...
The emergence of environmental impact assessment (EIA) as a key component of environmental management over the last 40 years has coincided with the increasing recognition of the nature, scale and implications of environmental change brought about by human actions. During that time, EIA has developed and changed, influenced by the changing needs ...
1. Introduction. The environmental impact assessment (EIA) community comprises a range of professionals engaged in all aspects of impact assessment practice (including but not limited to EIA, strategic environmental assessment, social and health impact assessment), and which might involve development of policies and procedures for EIA as well as teaching, training, and research in the field.
Climate dictates the critical aspects of human environmental conditions. The frequency and intensity of extreme weather conditions due to human-induced climate change have alarmingly increased ...
The environmental impact (GHG emissions) of declared professional expenses (transportation, accommodation and meals) is estimated based on their nature and economic value. From the diagnosis we derive a set of recommendations and action plans to support the transition towards sustainable research practices.
Introduction. Environmental impact assessment (EIA), typically understood as project level assessment of a broad set of environmental impacts, has a long-term success history since its first statutory introduction in 1969 [].Since then, most countries introduced EIA into their legislation and made it a central tool to improve developmental processes and inform of their impact on environment [].
Impact assessment is embedded in many national and international research rating systems. Most applications use the Research Impact Pathway to track inputs, activities, outputs and outcomes of an ...
Explore the latest research and news on environmental impact from Nature Portfolio, covering topics such as climate change, energy, pollution and sustainability.
In 2019, the Royal Society of Chemistry published 180, 196 and 293 papers in Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts, Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology, and Environmental Science: Nano, respectively. These papers covered a wide range of topics in environmental science, from biogeochemical cycling to water reuse to ...
Abstract. Purpose: This review aims to critically analyze and summarize the existing literature on urbanization's effects on environmental sustainability. It delves deep into the nexus between ...
In terms of environmental economics, there is a need to understand the costs and benefits of any intervention, ... Contribution of plastic and microplastic to global climate change and their conjoining impacts on the environment - A review, Science of The Total Environment, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.162627, ...
Other environmental impact categories considered in biofuel LCA studies include acidification, eutrophication, photochemical smog, human toxicity and eco-toxicity. However, the number of studies that have assessed a wider set of impact categories is still limited: of the 179 (primary) LCA studies reviewed, only 40% of such studies were found in ...
Razza et al. (Citation 2009) presented a similar study and used life cycle assessment (LCA) to assess the environmental impact of compostable cutlery in fast-food restaurants, finding that their use is better than the current single-use cutlery. This study opens up opportunities for future studies to evaluate other non-food wastes as well as ...
Environmental Impact of Air Pollution. Air pollution is harming not only human health but also the environment in which we live. The most important environmental effects are as follows. Acid rain is wet (rain, fog, snow) or dry (particulates and gas) precipitation containing toxic amounts of nitric and sulfuric acids. They are able to acidify ...
Environmental Impact of Air Pollution. Air pollution is harming not only human health but also the environment in which we live. The most important environmental effects are as follows. Acid rain is wet (rain, fog, snow) or dry (particulates and gas) precipitation containing toxic amounts of nitric and sulfuric acids. They are able to acidify ...
Environmental pollution has inherently been associated with health issues including the spread of diseases, i.e., typhoid and cholera, some of which are largely seen as waterborne diseases (Zhao et al. 2015).There are also non-communicable diseases (NCDs) that are brought about due to environmental pollution, such as cancer and asthma, or several defects evident at birth among infants ...
Solid Waste Management Practices in the Global South. Global municipal solid waste (MSW) generation rose from 1.3 billion tons in 2012 to 2.1 billion tons (0.74 kg/capita/day) as of 2016, which by 2050 is expected to increase by 70% to reach a total of 3.40 billion tons or 1.42 kg/capita/day [ 19 ].
Increasing demands on ecosystems, decreasing biodiversity, and climate change are among the most pressing environmental issues of our time. As changing weather conditions are leading to increased vector-borne diseases and heat- and flood-related deaths, it is entering collective consciousness: environmental issues are human health issues. In public health, the field addressing these issues is ...
The annual cost of the health impacts of fossil fuel-generated electricity in the United States is estimated to be up to $886.5 billion. The environmental and health impacts of fossil fuels disproportionately harm communities of color and low-income communities. Black and Hispanic Americans are exposed to 56 and 63 percent more particulate ...
Steam is supplied by coal-fired boilers, and the mining and incineration of coal have a detrimental effect on GWP, WU, RI, and IWU. For PMS-to-corrugated paper, waste paper is the second largest contributor to environmental impacts, which has a significant positive impact on the environment because of the rational use of waste paper.
for estimating the environmental impact of festivals. It responds to calls for more rigorous methods to assess the environmental impacts of festivals, and contributes towards providing festival organisers and policy-makers with a more balanced evaluation of their outcomes. This paper focuses on the 2012
203-436-4842. The Baltic nation of Estonia is No. 1 in the 2024 rankings, while Denmark, one of the top ranked countries in the 2022 EPI dropped to 10th place, highlighting the challenges of reducing emissions in hard-to-decarbonize industries. Meanwhile, "paper parks" are proving a global challenge to international biodiversity commitments.
These investment decisions have a far-reaching impact beyond the numbers on a balance sheet. Each dollar is intentionally directed towards a struggling neighborhood, an eco-friendly business, or a community-driven enterprise, creating a ripple effect that generates social and environmental impact, touching the lives of countless individuals.
Deadly Floods in Brazil Were Worsened by Climate Change, Study Finds. The country's south received three months' rain in two weeks. Global warming has made such deluges twice as likely as ...
Accelerating sustainable and inclusive growth for all. Download ESG report Download executive summary. We're driving measurable progress towards sustainable and inclusive growth in the societies where we operate. Our 2023 ESG report details how we are making an impact through our client work, insights, actions, and giving.
7.2 Impact Factor. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability (COSUST) builds on Elsevier's reputation for excellence in scientific publishing and long-standing commitment to communicating high quality reproducible research. Established in 2010 as part of the Current Opinion and Research (CO+RE) suite of …. View full aims & scope.
This motivated the UN scientists to evaluate the environmental impacts of Bitcoin across the world by looking at the activities of 76 Bitcoin mining nations during the 2020-2021 period. The results are shocking. In addition to a substantial carbon footprint, global Bitcoin mining activities have significant water and land footprints. ...
SAVANNAH, Ga. -- A Georgia conservation group Monday filed notice of its intent to sue two U.S. government agencies, saying they failed to properly assess the environmental impacts of the $7.6 ...
FILE - A person puts their ballot in a drop box on Oct. 27, 2020, at a library in Seattle. A Washington state judge on Friday, June 7, 2024, turned back an attempt by GOP backers of three initiatives to keep the fiscal impact of the measures off the November ballot. (AP Photo/Ted S. Warren, File)