**3. Circular economy—contemporary economics of sustainable development**

Circular economy (CE) is a concept that has forced its way into the dictionary of European business, at the same time increasingly displacing the term 'sustainable development', well-known for many years. CE is to be a response to the multiple challenges of the modern world, economic, environmental and social ones.

This new economic model is based on the assumption that the value of products, materials and resources in the economy is to be maintained for as long as possible to ultimately minimalize waste generation. Efficient use of resources is the priority of the circular economy. In this concept, raw materials are repeatedly recycled, often passing from one branch of industry to another. Therefore, it is about closing the product life cycle and transition from the linear economy model (raw material acquisition-production-use-waste use as raw material) to the closed circuit model (production-use-use of waste as raw material in the next production cycle).

Preventing and reducing food waste in households should be a key priority for both scientists and politicians. To achieve the goal of reducing global food wastage, a campaign should be implemented raising awareness on the gravity of food waste problem and the need for prevention. In Europe, the reduction of food waste is a key area of the circular economy [8, 9]. A huge challenge in this context is recycling of plastics. Equally important is the social acceptance of new products made of recycled plastic [10]. The concept of circular economy is now widely discussed within the

**17**

*Life Cycle Assessment as a Tool to Implement Sustainable Development in the Bioeconomy…*

European Union (EU); however, the implementation of its assumptions in the Member Countries faces difficulties due to market and political barriers. The main legal barriers to the circular economy include regulatory provisions that hinder the implementation of the concept and the lack of global consequences. The main market barriers comprise low prices of primary materials on the market, limited standardization and high initial investment costs [11]. Companies do not tend to engage in activities for environmental protection as the latter have not been identified with increasing the company's profit and competitiveness [12]. Technological progress in the field of digitization may accelerate the transformation towards a more sustainable circular economy [13].

The response to the legislative needs of the above mentioned new management model was the set of proposals, announced by the European Commission (EC) in 2015, as the circular economy package. The proposals included in the package aimed at reconciling environmental and business interests. The package was a clear signal for business entities that using all available tools to fully implement the new ecological and raw materials policy was one of the European Union's priorities.

The package includes a strategy to make plastics and plastic products easier to recycle and biodegrade, as well as to reduce the presence of hazardous substances in

The CE package includes also proposals to set new waste management targets

The potential contained in waste is not only a great opportunity but also a challenge for attaining the vision of the European economy—sustainable, low emission and resource efficient, where raw materials are returned to circulation and waste generation is minimized. Unfortunately, still more than half of the waste generated

The EU waste legislation already provides a good foundation for building a circular economy model. The waste management hierarchy, which has been binding the EU countries for years, was formally defined by the Waste Framework Directive of November 19, 2008 (2008/98/EC). The directive instructs the order of implementing priorities, set in legal regulations and strategies, highlighting the importance of waste prevention and management. Only further priorities are assigned to waste recycling and recovery (including energy recovery) and finally neutralization, i.e., storage or thermal disposal (combustion without energy recovery) [14]. According to EU Directive 2018/851 of 30 May 2018 [15], Member Countries should introduce measures to promote the prevention and reduction of food waste. They should seek to achieve an indicative Union-wide target for reducing food waste by 30% by 2025 and by 50% by 2030. Those Member Countries that prepared for reuse and recycled less than 20% of municipal waste in 2013, or submitted landfill of more than 60% of municipal waste, should be able to decide whether to extend the periods to achieve targets for preparing for waste reuse and recycling set for 2025, 2030 and 2035. In the EU Directive of 2018, new targets were set for municipal waste preparation for reuse and recycling, a minimum of 55% by 2025, a minimum of 60% by 2030 and a minimum of 65% by 2035. Member Countries will implement a selective collection of

to be achieved by 2030, aiming at a significant increase of the levels of waste recovery and recycling as well as a significant reduction of municipal waste landfill. Packaging waste, in addition to, among others, food waste, construction and demolition waste, biomass and bioproducts have been included in the priority areas

The package proposes also new rules on fertilizers to encourage nutrient recycling, while ensuring the protection of human health and the environment. A number of actions have also been foreseen for water reuse, as well as the review of legislation concerning ecolabelling (Ecolabel) and Eco-Management and Audit

plastics and to significantly reduce the amount of marine waste.

in EU households ends in landfills or in waste incineration plants.

at least paper, metal, plastics and glass, and from 1 January 2025—textiles.

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.84664*

Scheme (EMAS).

requiring special attention of the EC.

#### *Life Cycle Assessment as a Tool to Implement Sustainable Development in the Bioeconomy… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.84664*

European Union (EU); however, the implementation of its assumptions in the Member Countries faces difficulties due to market and political barriers. The main legal barriers to the circular economy include regulatory provisions that hinder the implementation of the concept and the lack of global consequences. The main market barriers comprise low prices of primary materials on the market, limited standardization and high initial investment costs [11]. Companies do not tend to engage in activities for environmental protection as the latter have not been identified with increasing the company's profit and competitiveness [12]. Technological progress in the field of digitization may accelerate the transformation towards a more sustainable circular economy [13].

The response to the legislative needs of the above mentioned new management model was the set of proposals, announced by the European Commission (EC) in 2015, as the circular economy package. The proposals included in the package aimed at reconciling environmental and business interests. The package was a clear signal for business entities that using all available tools to fully implement the new ecological and raw materials policy was one of the European Union's priorities.

The package includes a strategy to make plastics and plastic products easier to recycle and biodegrade, as well as to reduce the presence of hazardous substances in plastics and to significantly reduce the amount of marine waste.

The package proposes also new rules on fertilizers to encourage nutrient recycling, while ensuring the protection of human health and the environment. A number of actions have also been foreseen for water reuse, as well as the review of legislation concerning ecolabelling (Ecolabel) and Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS).

The CE package includes also proposals to set new waste management targets to be achieved by 2030, aiming at a significant increase of the levels of waste recovery and recycling as well as a significant reduction of municipal waste landfill. Packaging waste, in addition to, among others, food waste, construction and demolition waste, biomass and bioproducts have been included in the priority areas requiring special attention of the EC.

The potential contained in waste is not only a great opportunity but also a challenge for attaining the vision of the European economy—sustainable, low emission and resource efficient, where raw materials are returned to circulation and waste generation is minimized. Unfortunately, still more than half of the waste generated in EU households ends in landfills or in waste incineration plants.

The EU waste legislation already provides a good foundation for building a circular economy model. The waste management hierarchy, which has been binding the EU countries for years, was formally defined by the Waste Framework Directive of November 19, 2008 (2008/98/EC). The directive instructs the order of implementing priorities, set in legal regulations and strategies, highlighting the importance of waste prevention and management. Only further priorities are assigned to waste recycling and recovery (including energy recovery) and finally neutralization, i.e., storage or thermal disposal (combustion without energy recovery) [14].

According to EU Directive 2018/851 of 30 May 2018 [15], Member Countries should introduce measures to promote the prevention and reduction of food waste. They should seek to achieve an indicative Union-wide target for reducing food waste by 30% by 2025 and by 50% by 2030. Those Member Countries that prepared for reuse and recycled less than 20% of municipal waste in 2013, or submitted landfill of more than 60% of municipal waste, should be able to decide whether to extend the periods to achieve targets for preparing for waste reuse and recycling set for 2025, 2030 and 2035. In the EU Directive of 2018, new targets were set for municipal waste preparation for reuse and recycling, a minimum of 55% by 2025, a minimum of 60% by 2030 and a minimum of 65% by 2035. Member Countries will implement a selective collection of at least paper, metal, plastics and glass, and from 1 January 2025—textiles.

*Elements of Bioeconomy*

environmental standards.

**development**

Another important determinant is the exponential increase rate of economic development and of related consumerism. Continual growth of needs of modern society translates into unimaginable resource exploitation and environmental burden. Developed countries are at the cutting edge of certain styles and trends that strongly affect developing countries. However, the desire to possess seems overwhelming at the moment, while demand and supply will continue to grow.

The so-called psychological barriers [1] constitute an interesting social phenomenon. This is a relatively new aspect, since the interest in the environment and its condition has also a short ancestry. People are reluctant to change their routines and habits, and fear of the unknown is often a limiting factor when introducing changes. Only a small percentage of people are willing to engage in new activities. A good example is entrepreneurs who, under the Environmental Protection Act, are obliged to incur the so-called fees for economic use of the environment (introduc-

In most cases, the entrepreneurs consider this obligation to be another legislator's invention, which was created to make their life more complicated. They are unaware that they are obliged by the statutory 'polluter pays' principle [7], while the environment is a public good, which does not mean that it is no one's good. It should be clearly emphasized that the damage to the environment in the twenty-first century consists primarily in the predatory economy of fossil raw materials. This is due to the socioeconomic and economic factors mentioned above. One of the goals of the economics of sustainable development is to identify the most important economic and economic problems, define their causes and propose socially acceptable or necessary solutions. It is also important to undertake attempts at monetary evaluation of the environment and its resources as well as the goods produced. Thanks to the introduction of economic aspects into the idea of sustainable development, it is possible to lay new foundations of economic thinking, and to define economic conditions that will ensure appropriate economic, social and

tion of dust and gases into the air, water intake, waste generation, etc.).

**3. Circular economy—contemporary economics of sustainable** 

Circular economy (CE) is a concept that has forced its way into the dictionary of European business, at the same time increasingly displacing the term 'sustainable development', well-known for many years. CE is to be a response to the multiple challenges of the modern world, economic, environmental and social ones.

This new economic model is based on the assumption that the value of products, materials and resources in the economy is to be maintained for as long as possible to ultimately minimalize waste generation. Efficient use of resources is the priority of the circular economy. In this concept, raw materials are repeatedly recycled, often passing from one branch of industry to another. Therefore, it is about closing the product life cycle and transition from the linear economy model (raw material acquisition-production-use-waste use as raw material) to the closed circuit model (production-use-use of waste as raw material in the next production cycle). Preventing and reducing food waste in households should be a key priority for both scientists and politicians. To achieve the goal of reducing global food wastage, a campaign should be implemented raising awareness on the gravity of food waste problem and the need for prevention. In Europe, the reduction of food waste is a key area of the circular economy [8, 9]. A huge challenge in this context is recycling of plastics. Equally important is the social acceptance of new products made of recycled plastic [10]. The concept of circular economy is now widely discussed within the

**16**

#### *Elements of Bioeconomy*

According to official EU statistics, the aggregated amount of waste generated in the EU countries by all sectors of the economy as well as households amounted to 2.5 billion tonnes in 2014. It was the largest amount recorded in the years 2004–2014. Nearly 35% of the above was generated by the construction sector. The mining sector and mining activities are responsible for the next 28% of waste, while industrial production and wastewater treatment are responsible for 10% and 9% of waste mass, respectively. Household waste is only in the fifth position—with 8.3% of the total weight of waste generated in Europe.

One of the EC's priorities will be finding effective options to manage municipal waste. Unfortunately, as many as 54% of municipal waste in the EU is subject to landfilling or thermal transformation. Only about 28% is recycled and another 16% composted.

How the amount of waste generated in the EU countries has changed is shown in **Figure 1**.

Growing population numbers and increasing production of consumer goods make the life span of products shorter, thus causing an increasing problem with emerging waste. It can be assumed that the amount of waste generated

#### **Figure 1.**

*Per capita waste generation by country, comparison between years 2007 and 2016 (data from Eurostat [16]). In the case of Ireland, data are for 2007 and 2016.*

**19**

**Figure 2.**

*Life Cycle Assessment as a Tool to Implement Sustainable Development in the Bioeconomy…*

approximates, to certain extent, the gross national income per capita in a given country. In Poland, the per capita amount of waste in 2007 was 322 kg, while in 2016—307 kg, whereas in Denmark these amounts were by half higher, 790 and 777 kg, respectively (**Figure 1**) [16]. The lowest per capita amounts of waste, in 2007–2016, were recorded for Romania, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Latvia and Estonia (**Figure 1**). The group of countries where waste generation is highest embraces the more developed countries, such as Denmark, Norway,

countries, a reduction in the amount of waste generated per one inhabitant was observed, including in Belgium, Bulgaria, Poland and Ireland. In the same period, in other countries, there was an increase in the amount of waste generated (Norway,

The indicator (illustrated in **Figure 2**) measures man-made emissions of greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, nitrogen trifluoride (NF3) and

*Greenhouse gas emission from the waste management sector expressed in CO2 equivalent (Source: Eurostat [16]).*

Switzerland and Iceland. At the turn of 2007–2016, in most European

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.84664*

Iceland, Greece and Germany) [16].

*Life Cycle Assessment as a Tool to Implement Sustainable Development in the Bioeconomy… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.84664*

approximates, to certain extent, the gross national income per capita in a given country. In Poland, the per capita amount of waste in 2007 was 322 kg, while in 2016—307 kg, whereas in Denmark these amounts were by half higher, 790 and 777 kg, respectively (**Figure 1**) [16]. The lowest per capita amounts of waste, in 2007–2016, were recorded for Romania, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Latvia and Estonia (**Figure 1**). The group of countries where waste generation is highest embraces the more developed countries, such as Denmark, Norway, Switzerland and Iceland. At the turn of 2007–2016, in most European countries, a reduction in the amount of waste generated per one inhabitant was observed, including in Belgium, Bulgaria, Poland and Ireland. In the same period, in other countries, there was an increase in the amount of waste generated (Norway, Iceland, Greece and Germany) [16].

The indicator (illustrated in **Figure 2**) measures man-made emissions of greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, nitrogen trifluoride (NF3) and

**Figure 2.** *Greenhouse gas emission from the waste management sector expressed in CO2 equivalent (Source: Eurostat [16]).*

*Elements of Bioeconomy*

**Figure 1**.

According to official EU statistics, the aggregated amount of waste generated in the EU countries by all sectors of the economy as well as households amounted to 2.5 billion tonnes in 2014. It was the largest amount recorded in the years

2004–2014. Nearly 35% of the above was generated by the construction sector. The mining sector and mining activities are responsible for the next 28% of waste, while industrial production and wastewater treatment are responsible for 10% and 9% of waste mass, respectively. Household waste is only in the fifth position—with 8.3%

One of the EC's priorities will be finding effective options to manage municipal waste. Unfortunately, as many as 54% of municipal waste in the EU is subject to landfilling or thermal transformation. Only about 28% is recycled and another 16% composted.

How the amount of waste generated in the EU countries has changed is shown in

Growing population numbers and increasing production of consumer goods

*Per capita waste generation by country, comparison between years 2007 and 2016 (data from Eurostat [16]). In* 

make the life span of products shorter, thus causing an increasing problem with emerging waste. It can be assumed that the amount of waste generated

of the total weight of waste generated in Europe.

**18**

**Figure 1.**

*the case of Ireland, data are for 2007 and 2016.*

**Figure 3.** *Price changes of recyclates: plastic, paper and glass (data from Eurostat [17]).*

sulphur hexafluoride (SF6). The global warming potential (GWP) is for each gas individually integrated into a single indicator expressed in CO2 equivalent units. This also indicates that, when there is a proper waste management, the greenhouse gas emission might be lower in the countries generating large amounts of waste, as compared to those producing low waste amounts, e.g., Denmark and Spain.

In the USA, the US Environmental Protection Agency noted that greenhouse gas emissions from waste landfills amounted to 115.7 Mt of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2015 [18].

The way to reduce greenhouse gas emission and to efficiently use raw materials is the closed circuit waste management. One of the waste management methods is recycling. Apart from being beneficial to the environment, recycling delivers financial profits to waste management companies. In **Figure 3,** the trends are shown for prices per ton of paper, plastic and glass over the past 15 years. Despite a significant drop in prices in 2009, one can notice an upward price trend per ton of recycled waste.

### **4. Environmental life cycle assessment in the circular economy**

Environmental life cycle assessment (environmental LCA) is defined as a methodology to identify and assess potential environmental impacts associated with all the stages of a product's (good's) life. The life cycle should be holistically understood: from extraction of raw materials necessary for the production of a given good through the production process, transportation and distribution to the final management of the waste generated [19–23].

One of the most frequent definitions of environmental LCA, encountered in the subject literature, is the definition proposed by Fava et al. [24]; consistent with this definition, the environmental LCA is a method designed to assess environmental risks associated with the product system or activity, either directly, by identifying and quantifying the energy and materials used and the waste introduced into the environment, or indirectly, by evaluating the environmental impacts of such materials, energy and waste. The assessment embraces the whole lifespan of the product or activity, from the mining and mineral material processing, product manufacturing process, distribution, use, reuse, maintenance and recycling up to the final disposal and transportation. LCA directs the study of environmental impact of the product system to the area of the ecosystem, human health and the resources used [24].

**21**

recovery.

*Life Cycle Assessment as a Tool to Implement Sustainable Development in the Bioeconomy…*

The basic advantage of the above method is its versatility. LCA has typically been used to evaluate environmental technologies or production processes within boundaries of the 'from cradle to gate' or 'from cradle to grave' systems. The life cycle analyses within the framework of the circular economy concept shall embrace

Depending on the adopted degree of detail of the analysis, it is possible to link all of the unit processes and to assess their impact on the environment, which is particularly important in the case of closing the circuits [26]. It is also possible to quantitatively identify all materials and energy used to produce the product, along with the release of dust and gas emission, noise and radiation emission, as well as the resulting waste, which allows for effective management of the production process and minimizing economic and environmental costs. The life cycle assessment allows for identifying the processes, which generate the largest environmental

burden, and consequently, for modifying these processes in order to reduce environmental impacts. Moreover, LCA allows for reducing the economic costs by optimizing the consumption of raw materials (the so-called life cycle cost (LCC)) [27–29]. That is exactly why such a comprehensive and systematic approach to the production process as the LCA has gained wide attention and become a broadly

In Poland, LCA remains a rather novel method in the environmental management. It is used mainly for R&D purposes and has been developed by R&D centres. Considering the requirements imposed by the EU legislation, as regards minimization of adverse environmental impacts of the fuel industry, LCA seems to be a useful tool for meeting these requirements. The LCA may encompass the whole life cycle of fuel, from raw material mining, all the way through its manufacturing, use,

In Turkey, the LCA analysis was used, for example, to demonstrate which waste management strategy is better from the viewpoint of environmental protection. The results obtained provided evidence that landfilling and incineration were the worst alternatives of waste disposal, while composting and material recovery showed a better performance [30]. Based on the LCA study carried out in Denmark, it was found that the assessment was a good tool for evaluating the household organic waste management system at the Danish-German border, where waste management systems were entirely different [31]. Helene Slagstad and Helge Brattebø demonstrated that waste composition constitutes an important uncertainty in the waste management LCA [23]. Waste composition can affect the total environmental impact of the system, taking into account, especially, the global warming, nutrient enrichment and human toxicity via water impact categories [32].

**5. Bulky waste management in the circular economy—LCA results**

Considering the constantly growing consumption, and hence the mass of postconsumer waste, there arises a significant problem of waste management. This chapter focuses on bulky waste considering the significant problem of its management. Bulky waste is a term to describe waste that is too large to fit in ordinary containers. This includes, among other things, furniture, carpets and mattresses. Improper management of bulky waste can pose a large environmental and logistic problem. The waste is atypical since it is largely made of a variety of materials, which have different composition, and thus each may have different effect on the environment and should be treated differently. Considering the above, the main and preferred options for bulky waste management include recycling and energy

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.84664*

used management method.

to the processes involved in fuel handling [22].

boundaries of the 'from cradle to cradle' system [25].

#### *Life Cycle Assessment as a Tool to Implement Sustainable Development in the Bioeconomy… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.84664*

The basic advantage of the above method is its versatility. LCA has typically been used to evaluate environmental technologies or production processes within boundaries of the 'from cradle to gate' or 'from cradle to grave' systems. The life cycle analyses within the framework of the circular economy concept shall embrace boundaries of the 'from cradle to cradle' system [25].

Depending on the adopted degree of detail of the analysis, it is possible to link all of the unit processes and to assess their impact on the environment, which is particularly important in the case of closing the circuits [26]. It is also possible to quantitatively identify all materials and energy used to produce the product, along with the release of dust and gas emission, noise and radiation emission, as well as the resulting waste, which allows for effective management of the production process and minimizing economic and environmental costs. The life cycle assessment allows for identifying the processes, which generate the largest environmental burden, and consequently, for modifying these processes in order to reduce environmental impacts. Moreover, LCA allows for reducing the economic costs by optimizing the consumption of raw materials (the so-called life cycle cost (LCC)) [27–29]. That is exactly why such a comprehensive and systematic approach to the production process as the LCA has gained wide attention and become a broadly used management method.

In Poland, LCA remains a rather novel method in the environmental management. It is used mainly for R&D purposes and has been developed by R&D centres. Considering the requirements imposed by the EU legislation, as regards minimization of adverse environmental impacts of the fuel industry, LCA seems to be a useful tool for meeting these requirements. The LCA may encompass the whole life cycle of fuel, from raw material mining, all the way through its manufacturing, use, to the processes involved in fuel handling [22].

In Turkey, the LCA analysis was used, for example, to demonstrate which waste management strategy is better from the viewpoint of environmental protection. The results obtained provided evidence that landfilling and incineration were the worst alternatives of waste disposal, while composting and material recovery showed a better performance [30]. Based on the LCA study carried out in Denmark, it was found that the assessment was a good tool for evaluating the household organic waste management system at the Danish-German border, where waste management systems were entirely different [31]. Helene Slagstad and Helge Brattebø demonstrated that waste composition constitutes an important uncertainty in the waste management LCA [23]. Waste composition can affect the total environmental impact of the system, taking into account, especially, the global warming, nutrient enrichment and human toxicity via water impact categories [32].
