Municipal solid waste incineration is widely adopted as a complementary treatment route for non-recyclable fractions. Among its residues, fly ash is classified as hazardous waste by the European Union due to the presence of soluble salts and potentially toxic elements. Its proper management is necessary to ensure the continuous operation of Waste-to-Energy plants and to prevent environmental impacts associated with final disposal. This study applies a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology to compare three alternative fly ash treatment pathways: two industrial disposal-oriented processes currently adopted by A2A, involving landfill disposal and underground backfilling in exhausted salt mines, and an innovative recovery-based process developed by the Italian startup Resilco. The modelling follows an attributional approach, using 1 tonne of treated fly ash as the functional unit. Inventory data are based on aggregated 2024 industrial data from an A2A plant and pilot-scale data provided by Resilco. Environmental impacts are quantified using the Environmental Footprint 3.1 method across 16 impact categories. The results show that the Resilco recovery pathway achieves the most favourable overall environmental performance, ranking as the lowest impact option in 11 out of 16 categories and presenting net environmental benefits in 6 categories. These outcomes are mainly driven by the recovery of soluble salts and the production of a carbonatic filler suitable for asphalt applications, enabling the substitution of virgin materials. In contrast, the disposal scenarios are primarily dominated by transport and end-of-life management practices. Overall, the findings highlight the structural environmental differences between disposal-oriented and recovery-based strategies, supporting the evaluation of circular alternatives for industrial fly ash management.
L’incenerimento dei rifiuti solidi urbani è adottato come trattamento complementare per le frazioni non riciclabili. Tra i residui generati, le ceneri volanti sono classificate come rifiuto pericoloso dall’Unione Europea per la presenza di sali solubili ed elementi potenzialmente tossici. La loro gestione è fondamentale per garantire la continuità operativa dei termovalorizzatori e prevenire impatti ambientali legati allo smaltimento finale. Il presente studio applica la metodologia Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) per confrontare tre percorsi alternativi di trattamento delle ceneri volanti: due processi industriali orientati allo smaltimento adottati da A2A, che prevedono il conferimento in discarica e il riempimento di miniere di salgemma esauste, e un processo innovativo orientato al recupero sviluppato dalla startup Resilco. La modellazione segue un approccio attribuzionale, considerando come unità funzionale 1 tonnellata di ceneri volanti trattata. I dati di inventario si basano su dati industriali aggregati del 2024 di un impianto A2A e su dati di scala pilota forniti da Resilco. Gli impatti ambientali sono quantificati mediante il metodo Environmental Footprint 3.1 su 16 categorie d’impatto. I risultati mostrano che il processo di Resilco presenta il migliore profilo ambientale complessivo, risultando l’opzione a minore impatto in 11 delle 16 categorie e registrando benefici ambientali netti in 6. Tali risultati sono legati al recupero dei sali solubili e alla produzione di un materiale riempitivo carbonatico per applicazioni asfaltiche, che consentono la sostituzione di materiali vergini. Gli scenari convenzionali risultano invece dominati dai trasporti e dalle operazioni di conferimento e gestione finale del rifiuto. Lo studio evidenzia le differenze strutturali tra strategie di smaltimento e di recupero, supportando la valutazione di alternative circolari nella gestione industriale delle ceneri volanti.
Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of disposal and recovery pathways for MSWI fly ash
Stillo, Marco
2024/2025
Abstract
Municipal solid waste incineration is widely adopted as a complementary treatment route for non-recyclable fractions. Among its residues, fly ash is classified as hazardous waste by the European Union due to the presence of soluble salts and potentially toxic elements. Its proper management is necessary to ensure the continuous operation of Waste-to-Energy plants and to prevent environmental impacts associated with final disposal. This study applies a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology to compare three alternative fly ash treatment pathways: two industrial disposal-oriented processes currently adopted by A2A, involving landfill disposal and underground backfilling in exhausted salt mines, and an innovative recovery-based process developed by the Italian startup Resilco. The modelling follows an attributional approach, using 1 tonne of treated fly ash as the functional unit. Inventory data are based on aggregated 2024 industrial data from an A2A plant and pilot-scale data provided by Resilco. Environmental impacts are quantified using the Environmental Footprint 3.1 method across 16 impact categories. The results show that the Resilco recovery pathway achieves the most favourable overall environmental performance, ranking as the lowest impact option in 11 out of 16 categories and presenting net environmental benefits in 6 categories. These outcomes are mainly driven by the recovery of soluble salts and the production of a carbonatic filler suitable for asphalt applications, enabling the substitution of virgin materials. In contrast, the disposal scenarios are primarily dominated by transport and end-of-life management practices. Overall, the findings highlight the structural environmental differences between disposal-oriented and recovery-based strategies, supporting the evaluation of circular alternatives for industrial fly ash management.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
2026_3_Stillo_Tesi.pdf
non accessibile
Descrizione: testo della tesi
Dimensione
3.01 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
3.01 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
|
2026_3_Stillo_ExecutiveSummary.pdf
non accessibile
Descrizione: executive summary
Dimensione
805.48 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
805.48 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in POLITesi sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
https://hdl.handle.net/10589/253474