Food waste management is currently attracting both regulatory and public attention due to new greenhouse gas emission targets, targets relating to waste reuse, recycling and the diversion of waste from landfill, as well as other policies related to sustainability. The research presented in this thesis addressed two of the management options currently available namely the use of food waste disposal units (FWDs) and the anaerobic co-digestion of food waste with sewage sludge, because of their relevance to the water industry. The use of FWDs was studied and results demonstrated that they can bring substantial benefits to local authorities through reductions in cost from waste collection, but can also present challenges to the water industry due to the need to treat additional wastewater. Policy implications were identified, and given the prospect of FWDs application, the incorporation of anaerobic treatment processes into municipal wastewater treatment operations was investigated as a viable technology which could be implemented to give environmental and economic benefits independent of the prevailing climatic conditions. The anaerobic co-digestion of food waste with sewage sludge, well-established in other European countries but still in its infancy in the UK, was investigated as an alternative food waste management option. With sustainability becoming a driver for change in waste management practices, this option was found to have considerable potential, but significant capital investment and operational expenditure could be required to create new assets or upgrade existing ones. A multi-criteria framework was developed to support decision-making aim to select the appropriate food waste management option based on sustainability. It was concluded that diverting food waste from landfill is not only a challenge, but an opportunity that can lead to more sustainable solutions. Balancing the relationship between water, food and energy is the real means to viable solutions and the ultimate approach to deliver overall benefits.

The earnest warnings of an impending "solid waste crisis" that permeated the 1980s provided the impetus for the widespread adoption of municipal recycling programs. Since that time America has witnessed a remarkable rise in public participation in recycling activities, including curbside collection, drop-off centers, and commercial and office programs. Recently, however, a backlash against these programs has developed. A vocal group of "anti-recyclers" has appeared, arguing that recycling is not an economically efficient strategy for addressing waste management problems. In Why Do We Recycle? Frank Ackerman examines the arguments for and against recycling, focusing on the debate surrounding the use of economic mechanisms to determine the value of recycling. Based on previously unpublished research conducted by the Tellus Institute, a nonprofit environmental research group in Boston, Massachusetts, Ackerman presents an alternative view of the theory of market incentives, challenging the notion that setting appropriate prices and allowing unfettered competition will result in the most efficient level of recycling. Among the topics he considers are: externality issues -- unit pricing for waste disposal, effluent taxes, virgin materials subsidies, advance disposal fees the landfill crisis and disposal facility siting container deposit ("bottle bill") legislation environmental issues that fall outside of market theory calculating costs and benefits of municipal recycling programs life-cycle analysis and packaging policy -- Germany's "Green Dot" packaging system and producer responsibility the impacts of production in extractive and manufacturing industries composting and organic waste management economics of conservation, and material use and long-term sustainability Ackerman explains why purely economic approaches to recycling are incomplete and argues for a different kind of decisionmaking, one that addresses social issues, future as well as present resource needs, and non-economic values that cannot be translated into dollars and cents. Backed by empirical data and replete with specific examples, the book offers valuable guidance for municipal planners, environmental managers, and policymakers responsible for establishing and implementing recycling programs. It is also an accessible introduction to the subject for faculty, students, and concerned citizens interested in the social, economic, and ethical underpinnings of recycling efforts.

Construction and Demolition (C&D) waste is one of the major components of the solid waste and is defined as a waste stream resulting from the construction, renovation and demolition of structures such as buildings, roads, and bridges. The amount of C&D waste has been in an upsurge with rapid growth in construction works and is expected to grow even more. As such, the effective waste management for C&D disposal has been a global issue owing to the increasing construction works worldwide. Although landfill disposal of C&D waste is not the preferred method of the C&D waste management, a significant portion of C&D waste is disposed in the landfills. Apart from the environmental and health risks, the landfill disposal of C&D waste also consumes considerable amount of landfill volume. Due to the high construction cost and scarcity of land, it is important to take possible measures to save landfill volumes. Hence, diversion of C&D waste from the main waste stream can substantially help in gaining more landfill volume. However, to estimate the possible volume gain from the diversion of the C&D waste, it is important to understand the properties of the C&D waste. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate the properties of the C&D waste and estimate the possible landfill volume gain from the diversion of C&D waste. For the current study, five construction and five demolition waste samples were collected from the City of Denton landfill in October 2015. Based on the manual sorting of the samples, the average composition for the C&D waste with equal proportion of construction waste and demolition waste (50% Construction and 50% demolition waste) was found to consist of 36.6% wood products, 18.3% Portland cement concrete, 10% asphalt concrete, 12% brick and tiles, 1.3% metals, 11% drywall & plaster, 5% cardboard, and 6% C&D debris fine. The unit weights of the collected samples were determined using the standard proctor method. For C&D waste with equal proportion of construction waste and demolition waste (50% Construction and 50% demolition waste), the unit weight was found to be 62.13 pcf (0.84 tons per cubic yard). The average moisture content of construction waste was determined to be 5.93% and 6.33% on wet weight and dry weight basis respectively. Whereas, the average moisture content for demolition waste was found to be 2.73 % and 2.81% on wet weight and dry weight basis respectively. The volatile solids content of construction waste was found to be 82.7% in average. The landfill volume gain was estimated based on the average annual tonnage and unit weight from the current study. Based on the results, for a landfill with 20 acres area, 100 feet design height and 3H:1V side slope, approximately 1.25% of total landfill volume which is approximately equal to 0.61% of total lift height can be obtained per year by diverting 90% of the C&D waste from the landfill.