ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2022
Environmental impact assessment of the current, emerging, and alternative waste management systems using life cycle assessment tools: a case study of Johannesburg, South Africa.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Waste management in disease prevention: A public health overview.Bioinformation · 2025Article
- A Review of the Impact That Healthcare Risk Waste Treatment Technologies Have on the Environment.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Proper information regarding the performance of waste management systems from an environmental perspective is significant to sustainable waste management decisions and planning toward the selection of the least impactful treatment options. However, little is known about the environmental impacts of the different waste management options in South Africa. This study is therefore aimed at using the life cycle assessment tool to assess the environmental impact of the current, emerging, and alternative waste management systems in South Africa, using the city of Johannesburg as a case study. This assessment involves a comparative analysis of the unit processes of waste management and the different waste management scenarios comprising two or more unit processes from an environmental view. The lifecycle boundary consists of unit processes: waste collection and transportation (WC&T), material recycling facilities (MRF), composting, incineration, and landfilling. Four scenarios developed for the assessment are S1 (WC&T, MRF, and landfilling without energy recovery), S2 (WC&T, MRF, composting, and landfilling with energy recovery), S3 (WC&T and incineration), and S4 (WC&T, MRF, composting, and incineration). Based on the result of this study, MRF is the most environmentally beneficial unit operation while landfill without energy recovery is the most impactful unit operation. The result further revealed that no scenario had the best performance across all the impact categories. However, S3 can be considered as the most environmentally friendly option owing to its lowest impact in most of the impact categories. S3 has the lowest global warming potential (GWP) of 33.19 × 10
Indexed as
Identifiers
34476692What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.