Food waste treatment methods have been typically analysed using current energy generation conditions.
Future research could also broaden scope to compare other waste treatment methods under existing and potential decarbonisation scenarios.
In terms of waste treatment methods, landfill generates the smallest direct and indirect waste tonnages, but it also provides the least amount of economic activity per tonne treated, producing $US2.53 in total of economic production per tonne treated.
The vectors (mathbf{x}_{3} in mathbb{R}^{N_{3} times 1}) and (mathbf{x}_{2} in mathbb{R}^{N_{2} times 1}) are the total output of (N_{3}) waste types and (N_{2}) waste treatment methods for the economy, respectively.
The waste produced by (N_{2}) waste treatment sectors is represented by (mathbf{W}_{32} in mathbb{R}^{N_{3} times N_{2}}) represent and the waste treated by the (N_{2}) waste treatment methods is contained in (mathbf{W}_{23} in mathbb{R}^{N_{2} times N_{3}}).
This method assumes that each sector produces waste relative to its economic size and employment capacity: i.e. we distributed the total amount of waste among the waste treatment methods with the larger the economic size and employment level, the greater the volume of waste was assumed to have been treated.
However, landfill operations generate less waste per tonne of waste treated than other waste treatments methods.
Since PCBs cannot be broken down by conventional waste-treatment methods and are degraded by natural processes very slowly, scientists fear that these compounds will continue to pose a serious hazard for decades to come.
This result was also good when compared with a study in Hawassa city (2008) which indicated 89% of the HCFs use low combustion incinerators and 11% of the HCFs uses open burning of the waste as a treatment method [ 2].
