Waste is one of the major urban challenges faced globally today, and the severity of the challenge is further exacerbated by rapid urbanisation, growing populations and increasing per capita waste generation. As one of the largest urban agglomerations in the world, Delhi collects 11,352 t of waste every day. Without adequate segregation, most of this waste is sent to dumpsites and waste-to-energy plants, often associated with significant capital costs and environmental externalities. This paper conducts a life cycle assessment of the current waste management system and a comparative analysis with a suggested alternative scenario, where the share of recyclables and compostables going to landfills and waste-to-energy plants is reduced through adequate segregation. Our results revealed that landfills and waste-to-energy plants are associated with significant adverse environmental impacts such as climate change, soil and water acidification, freshwater eutrophication, human toxicity, and respiratory health. In comparison, compost plants showed negligible emissions per tonne of waste. The alternative scenario (i.e. reduce waste to landfill through adequate segregation) can help reduce the negative impact on all environmental indicators by an average of 23 %. We posit that the prevailing narrative of addressing the waste issue through waste-to-energy plants in Delhi goes against the country's climate neutrality targets. Instead, the circular economy approach offers simpler, faster, and more cost-effective solutions that policymakers should consider to reduce the financial and environmental load of the current and future waste management issue.

Extensive surfaces of land are currently under-utilized, marginal and/or contaminated (MUC) in many EU and neighbouring countries. In the past few years, scientific research has demonstrated that bioenergy crops can potentially render this land profitable, generating income for the local populations and, at the same time, reaching the goals of the new Renewable Energy Directive (REDII) without interfering with food production. The main purpose of this paper is to measure net economic returns by computing benefits and costs of low indirect Land Use Change (iLUC) biofuel production on MUC land from the perspective of both the private investors and social welfare. A standard cost-benefit technique was applied to analyse and compare net returns of different advanced bioenergy value-chains in monetary terms. Productivity, economic feasibility and green-house gas (GHG) emissions impact were assessed and considered for the economic analysis. The considered pathways were cellulosic or second generation (2G) ethanol from Giant reed (Arundo donax) in Italy, electricity from miscanthus, biochemicals from spontaneous grass and cultivated Lucerne (Alpha-alfae) with sorghum for biomethane in Germany, and 2G ethanol from Willow (Salix viminalis) in Ukraine. For the risk assessment, Monte Carlo simulation was applied. The results indicated that in Italy and Ukraine, although the production of 2G ethanol would allow positive net yearly margins, the investments will not be profitable compared to the baseline scenarios. In Germany, the work showed good profitability for combined heat and power (CHP) and biochemicals. On the other hand, investments in biomethane showed negative results compared with the baseline scenarios. Finally, the Monte Carlo simulation enabled us to identify the range of possible economic results that could be attained once volatility is factored in. While for Italy the likelihood of yielding positive results remains lower than 20 percent, case studies in Ukraine and Germany showed higher certainty levels, ranging from 49 to 91 percent.