CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 97Environmental Impact and SustainabilityMunicipal Solid Waste ManagementAgricultural and Food Sciences

Analysis of environmental impact of activated carbon production from wood waste

Open access
Kim, Mi Hyung, Jeong, In Tae, Park, Sang Bum, Kim, Jung Wk·2018·Environmental Engineering Research
DOI 10.4491/eer.2018.104
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Activated carbon is carbon produced from carbonaceous source materials, such as coconut shells, coals, and woods.In this study, an activated carbon production system was analyzed by carbonization and activation in terms of environmental impact and human health.The feedstock of wood wastes for the system reduced fossil fuel consumption and disposal costs.Life cycle assessment methodology was used to analyze the environmental impacts of the system, and the functional unit was one tonne of wood wastes.The boundary expansion method was applied to analyze the wood waste recycling process for activated carbon production.An environmental credit was quantified by avoided impact analysis.Specifically, greenhouse gases discharged from 1 kg of activated carbon production system by feeding wood wastes were evaluated.We found that this system reduced global warming potential of approximately 9.69E+00 kg CO2-eq.compared to the process using coals.The environmental benefits for activated carbon production from wood wastes were analyzed in contrast to other disposal methods.The results showed that the activated carbon system using one tonne of wood wastes has an environmental benefit of 163 kg CO2-eq.for reducing global warming potential in comparison with the same amount of wood wastes disposal by landfilling.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4491/eer.2018.104

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Recycling, reusing, and engineered wood products from recycled materials in particleboard, glue-laminated timber, and activated carbon production research are seen in the literature.

    “Therefore, recycling, reusing, and engineered wood products from recycled materials in particleboard, glue-laminated timber, and activated carbon production research are seen in the literature [44][45][46][47].”

    From Circular Economy of Construction and Demolition Wood Waste—A Theoretical Framework Approach (2022) · cites this paper as [44]

  • It is necessary to enhance wood waste utilisation to develop valuable products that will mitigate climate change by reducing the consumption of natural resources.

    “Some other studies also concluded with a similar concept and observed that it is necessary to enhance wood waste utilisation to develop valuable products that will mitigate climate change by reducing the consumption of natural resources [44,45].”

    From Circular Economy of Construction and Demolition Wood Waste—A Theoretical Framework Approach (2022) · cites this paper as [44]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 41

  1. Hwang I, Kobayashi J, Kawamoto K. Characterization of prod- ucts obtained from pyrolysis and steam gasification of wood waste, RDF, and RPF. Waste Manage. 2014;34:402-410.
  2. Bansal RC, Goyal M. Activated carbon adsorption. CRC Press: Taylor & Francis; 2005. p. 46-51.
  3. Kadirvelu K, Thamaraiselvi K, Namasivayam C. Removal of heavy metals from industrial wastewaters by adsorption onto activated carbon prepared from an agricultural solid waste. Bioresour. Technol. 2001;76:63-65.
  4. Olufemi BA, Otolorin F. Comparative adsorption of crude oil using mango (Mangnifera indica) shell and mango shell acti- vated carbon. Environ. Eng. Res. 2017;22:384-392.
  5. Yahya MA, Al-Qodah Z, Ngah CWZ. Agricultural bio-waste materials as potential sustainable precursors used for activated carbon production: A review. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2015a;46: 218-235.
  6. Malik R, Ramteke DS, Wate SR. Physico-chemical and surface characterization of adsorbent prepared from groundnut shell by ZnCl 2 activation and its ability to adsorb colour. Indian J. Chem. Technol. 2006;13:319-328.
  7. McDougall GJ. The physical nature and manufacture of acti- vated carbon. J. South. Afr. Inst. Min. Metall. 1991;91:109-120.
  8. Hjaila K, Baccar R, Sarrà M, Gasol CM, Blànquez P. Environmental impact associated with activated carbon prepa- ration from olive-waste cake via life cycle assessment. J. Environ. Manage. 2013;130:242-247.
  9. Chen R, Li L, Liu Z, et al. Preparation and characterization of activated carbon from tobacco stem by chemical activation. J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 2017;67:713-724.
  10. Yahya MA, Al-Qodah Z, Ngah CWZ, Hashim MA. Preparation and characterization of activated carbon from desiccated coco- nut residue by potassium hydroxide. Asian J. Chem. 2015b;27:2331-2336.
  11. Ioannidou O, Zabaniotou A. Agricultural residues as precursors for activated carbon production -A review. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2007;11:1966-2005.
  12. Kim J, Chung C, Min B. A study on development of activated carbons from waste timbers. J. Korean Inst. Resour. Recycl. 2008;17:68-78 (in Korean).
  13. Seppälä J, Hämäläinen RP. On the meaning of the dis- tance-to-target weighting method and normalisation in life cy- cle impact assessment. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2001;6:211-218.
  14. Finnveden G. Valuation methods within LCA -Where are the values? Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 1997;2:163-169.
  15. Powell JC, Pearce DW, Craighill AL. Approaches to valuation in LCA impact assessment. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 1997;2:11-15.
  16. Park PJ, Tahara K, Jeong IT, Lee KM. Comparison of four meth- ods for integrating environmental and economic aspects in the end-of-life stage of a washing machine. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2006;48:71-85.
  17. Kim H, Kim K, Park H. Life cycle assessment of the environ- mental infrastructures in operation phase: Case of an industrial waste incineration plant. Environ. Eng. Res. 2017;22:266-276.
  18. Piao W, Kim Y. Evaluation of monthly environmental loads from municipal wastewater treatment plants operation using life cycle assessment. Environ. Eng. Res. 2016;21:284-290.
  19. Fei F, Wen Z, Huang S, Clercq DD. Mechanical biological treatment of municipal solid waste: Energy efficiency, environ- mental impact and economic feasibility analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 2018;178:731-739.
  20. Merrild H, Damgaard A, Christensen TH. Life cycle assessment of waste paper management: The importance of technology data and system boundaries in assessing recycling and incineration. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2008;52:1391-1398.
  21. M'hamdi AI, Gusca J, Blumberga D, Zerouale A, Kandri NI. Comparative analysis of processed wood waste reuse possibil- ities after chemical delignification treatment. Energy Procedia 2017;113:289-296.
  22. Nuss P, Gardner KH, Jambeck JR. Comparative life cycle assess- ment (LCA) of construction and demolition (C&D) derived bio- mass and U.S. Northeast forest residuals gasification for elec- tricity production. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2013;47:3463-3471.
  23. Ripa M, Fiorentino G, Vacca V, Ulgiati S. The relevance of site-specific data in life cycle assessment (LCA). The case of the municipal solid waste management in the metropolitan city of Naples (Italy). J. Clean. Prod. 2017;142:445-460.
  24. Rocha MH, Capaz RS, Lora EES, et al. Life cycle assessment (LCA) for biofuels in Brazilian conditions: A meta-analysis. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2014;37:435-459.
  25. Alhashimi HA, Aktas CB. Life cycle environmental and econom- ic performance of biochar compared with activated carbon: A meta-analysis. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2017;118:13-26.
  26. Bayer P, Heuer E, Karl U, Finkel M. Economical and ecological comparison of granular activated carbon (GAC) adsorber refill strategies. Water Res. 2005;39:1719-1728.
  27. Kim MH, Song HB, Song Y, Jeong IT, Kim JW. Evaluation of food waste disposal options in terms of global warming and energy recovery: Korea. Int. J. Energ. Environ. Eng. 2013; 4:1-12.
  28. Zeng L, Zhu H, Ma Y, Huang J, Li G. Greenhouse gases emissions from solid waste: An analysis of Expo 2010 Shanghai, China. J. Mater. Cycles Waste Manage. 2014;16:616-622.
  29. Schmidt JH, Holm P, Merrild A, Christensen P. Life cycle assess- ment of the waste hierarchy -A Danish case study on waste paper. Waste Manage. 2007;27:1519-1530.
  30. Lee KM. A weighting method for the Korean Eco-Indicator. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 1999;4:161-165.
  31. Seo S, Asce M, Aramaki T, Hwang Y, Hanaki K. Environmental impact of solid waste treatment methods in Korea. J. Environ. Eng. 2004;130:1-9.
  32. Lopes E, Dias A, Arroja L, Capela I. Pereira F. Application of life cycle assessment to the Portuguese pulp and paper industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2003;11:51-59.
  33. Ekvall T, Finnveden G. Allocation in ISO 14041 -A critical review. J. Clean. Prod. 2001;9:197-208.
  34. Gabarrell X, Font M, Vicent T, Caminal G, Sarrà M, Blánquez P. A comparative life cycle assessment of two treatment tech- nologies for the Grey Lanaset G textile dye: Biodegradation by Trametes versicolor and granular activated carbon adsorption. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2012;17:613-624.
  35. Lee KM, Park PJ. Estimation of the environmental credit for the recycling of granulated blast furnace slag based on LCA. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2005;44:139-151.
  36. Lee DW, Lee JK, Rhee BS, Ryu SK. Increase of specific surface area of carbon fiber. Korean Chem. Eng. Res. 1989;27:777-783 (in Korean).
  37. Rigamonti L, Grosso M, Giugliano M. Life cycle assessment of sub-units composing a MSW management system. J. Clean. Prod. 2010;18:1652-1662.
  38. De Marco I, Iannone R. Production, packaging and preservation of semi-finished apricots: A comparative life cycle assessment study. J. Food Eng. 2017;206:106-117.
  39. Ingwersen WI, Gausman M, Weisbrod A, et al. Detailed life cycle assessment of Bounty® paper towel operations in the United States. J. Clean. Prod. 2016;131:509-522.
  40. Coelho LMG, Lange LC. Applying life cycle assessment to sup- port environmentally sustainable waste management strategies in Brazil. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2018;128:438-450.
  41. Guinée JB, Heijungs R. A proposal for the definition of resource equivalency factors for use in product life-cycle assessment. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 1995;14:917-925.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kim, M. H., Jeong, I. T., Park, S. B., & Kim, J. W.
Affiliations
  • Korea Environmental Industry and Technology Institute (KR)
  • National Institute of Forestry Science (KR)
  • Seoul National University (KR)
Venue
Environmental Engineering Research
Publisher
Korean Society of Environmental Engineering
Published
2018-06-27
Volume
24
Issue
1
Pages
117-126
ISSN
  • 1226-1025 (ISSN-L)
  • 2005-968X
DOI
10.4491/eer.2018.104
OpenAlex
W2810280970
Cited by
97
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 3
FWCI
2.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
Environmental Engineering Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental Impact and Sustainability
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Municipal Solid Waste Management
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Forestry › Agricultural and Food Sciences
Keywords
activated carbon production, wood waste, carbonization, chemical activation, life cycle assessment, global warming potential, greenhouse gas emissions, wood waste recycling, environmental credits, human health effects, fossil fuel substitution

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review