Energy from WasteAs An
Energy and Environmental Management System
2
Reduce GHGs,PM 2.5 and airtoxics.
Solid WasteDisposal
RenewableEnergy
EfW
Energy – from – Waste IS Sustainable Development
Modern Energy - from - Waste (EfW) Provides Three Functions:
3
Presentation Outline
International Activity Increased use of Energy-from-Waste Regulations that are driving this behavior
Pennsylvania’s Solid Waste Balance Solid waste management and renewable energy Greenhouse gas reduction Other sustainable attributes
Message EfW is growing in Europe, Asia and the USA The European Union Landfill Directive is smart “pollution prevention”
policy – by avoiding landfilling of MSW - they are avoiding GHG and air toxic emissions while maximizing energy recovery.
Lifecycle analysis is recommended for sustainability analysis
4
I. International – The use of EfW is increasing due to focus on energy and climate change.
Location Existing Facilities New Facilities(a)
RFPs/Expansions (b)
Plans(c)
Europe 388 (2003) 44 56 ---
USA 89 (2006) --- 3/5
China 67 (2005) TBD --- 400
(a)In construction or operation.
(b)USA expansions include Florida (Lee and Hillsborough), Minnesota (PERM, Olmstead, Poke Douglas). Others are also in motion.
(c) The 67 facilities manage 1.5 % of MSW. The 400 larger facilities are to manage 30 % of MSW by 2030.
5
I. International – The European Thematic Strategy
Four Priorities Climate Change Biodiversity Health Resource Use
Seven Strategies Air Quality Marine Environment Sustainable use of resources Waste prevention and
recycling Pesticides Soil Quality Urban Environment
The European Commission and European Union have adopted an integrated program for a healthy local and international environment
6
I. International Activity – Specific EU Legislation“EfW and Landfills are subject to stringent regulations”
EfW (2000/76/EC) Creates emission limits and operating standards for
energy-from-waste facilities These standards can be credited for large reductions in
emissions from EfW facilitiesLandfills (99/31/EC) EU Landfill Directive requires a reduction in
landfilling of biodegradable waste Specific goal is to reduce emissions (CH4) that
contribute to greenhouse effect and to reduce impact on human health
7
I. International – Worldwide Experience“EfW is compatible with Recycling”
Energy-from-Waste is used extensively worldwide 780 EfW facilities; 140 million tons per year (TPY)
U.S
.
De
nm
ark
Sw
ed
en
Ge
rma
ny
Av
era
ge
Ita
ly
U.K
.
Ire
lan
d
Ja
pa
n
Ta
iwa
n
Sin
ga
po
re
Ch
ina
U.S.89 EfW facilities 29 million TPY
Western Europe388 EfW facilities
62 million TPY
Asia301 EfW facilities
48 million TPY
EfW
Recycling/Composting
Landfill
8
I. The EU Integrated System is in Lancaster County
Recyclables186,400 tons
37%
Waste-to-EnergyFacility266,200
52%
Frey Farm Landfill57,000
11%
Refuse
Recycled
9
I. Lancaster County’s Integrated System “Evidence that WTE and Recycling are Compatible”
14
25
29
35
39
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
'91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06
WTE has supported recycling efforts, not competed with them.
Ferrous recovery contributes 3% to the overall County
recycling rate.
% M
ater
ials
Rec
ycle
d
WTE began operating
10
II. Pennsylvania’s MSW Balance –“2005 data shows that 88.3 % of non-recycled MSW is landfilled with 38.5 % being from out-of-state”
Management
Option
Million Tons MSW
Percent
Landfill 21.6 88.3
EfW 2.9 11.7
Total 24.5 100
Origin Million Tons MSW
Percent
In-State 15.1 61.5
Out-of-State
9.4 38.5
Total 24.5 100
• Does not identify waste shipped out of state
• NJ is about 55 % and NY is 40 % of out-of state waste
• 22 of 45 landfills have LFGTE
11
II. Pennsylvania’s MSW Balance and Energy WTE generates clean renewable energy and promotes independence from fossil fuels
• Increased EfW and decreased landfilling generates significant extra renewable energy
• Each Ton of MSW managed by EfW avoids 1 barrel of oil or 0.25 ton of coal on an electrical energy generating basis
EfW generates more power than any landfill option by processing each tonin about 1-hour using controlled combustion. The anaerobic breakdown ofMSW in a landfill is not controlled and occurs in a 50 to 100 year period.
490
60
550
150
700
220
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Landfill Gas WTETechnology Option
Net E
lectri
cal O
utpu
t (kw
-hr/t
on M
SW)
12
II. Pennsylvania’s MSW Balance and Energy Renewable energy from EfW reduces fossil fuel use
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Coal Oil Barrels 650 MW Coal Pow er Plant
Energy or Power Equivalent of 10.5 million tons of MSW Managed by EfW
Co
al (m
illio
n t
on
s),
Oil (
millio
n b
arr
els
), P
ow
er
Pla
nt
(1 U
nit
)
13
II. Pennsylvania’s MSW Balance and GHG’s “ Pennsylvania’s MSW mass balance is yielding positive CO2 emissions”
Option Million tons MSW
Ton CO2E / ton MSW Million tons CO2E/Year
EfW 3.0 - 0.78 - 2.34
Landfill 21.5 + 0.62 + 13.39
Total 24.5 --- + 11.05
Basis of calculations
• The ~ 3 million tons of MSW going to EfW is not going to a landfill in PA with energy generation – avoids ~ 2.34 Million tons CO2E (conservative, assumes all landfills have LFGTE)
• Remaining 21.5 million tons of MSW is going to landfills - all with LFG collection - 50 % with LFGTE and 50 % with flares. No vents only.
• EPA Lo of 100 M3 CH4 per megagram MSW and 45 % LFG % based on a lifecycle analysis.
14
II. Pennsylvania’s MSW Balance and GHG’s “ Increased Use of EfW will reduce GHG emissions”
Estimated breakeven point is about 10.5 million tons going to EfW and 13.5 million tons going to landfills
11.05
6.85
2.65
-1.55
-5.75
-8.00
-6.00
-4.00
-2.00
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
3.0 Mtons 6.0 Mtons 9.0 Mtons 12.0 Mtons 15.0 Mtons
Mllion Tons of MSW Managed by EfW
Net
GH
G R
esu
lt a
s M
illio
n T
on
s C
O2E
Estimated breakeven point of ~ 10.5 million tons of MSW to EfW is about 44 % of the MSW being disposed of according to 2005 MSW inventory.
15
II. Background on GHG Emission Factors“ Each ton of MSW managed by modern EfW avoids about 0.78 Tons of CO2when using conservative assumptions (45 % LFG collection with LFGTE)”
45 % LFG Collection
Lifecycle Parameter EfW Landfill EfW vs. LFGTE
Nonbiogenic 0.38 0.00 0.38
Avoided Fossil Fuel CO2 -0.56 -0.16 -0.40
Avoided Methane -0.70 0.00 -0.70
Avoided Ferrous CO2 -0.06 0.00 -0.06
Long Haul Mobile Source 0.00 0.00 0.00
Process Total -0.94 -0.16 -0.78
Emission factors as Ton CO2E per Ton MSW for EfW and LFGTE
Avoided CO2E with a landfill with flare is 0.94 ton CO2E/Ton MSW
16
II. Background on GHG Emission Factors“Avoided fossil fuel CO2 information for Pennsylvania”
FossilFuel
CO2 factor Energy Factors CO2 Factor
PowerSupply(EIA)
Lb CO2 per
Value Units Value Thermal %
(lb CO2/MW
As % Fossil
Coal 1000 lb 2161 Btu/lb 10402 32 2214 88.5
Oil 1000 lb 3139 Btu/lb 18300 32 1828 3.6
Gas 1000 lb 137 Btu/scf 1022 32 1425 7.9
• The weighted average for avoided CO2 from fossil fuel combustion for electric power is: 2137 lbs CO2 / MW.
• A modern EFW facility generates 0.55 MW/ton which is equivalent to an avoided factor of 0.59 Ton CO2E per ton MSW.
17
II. Background on Emission Factors“Avoided methane information for Pennsylvania”
Parameter Value Units
EPA Inventory Lo 100 M3 CH4 per Megagram MSW
CH4 content 55 % volume
CH4 Potential 1.4 Ton CO2E per ton MSW
CH4 Recovery via LFG 45 % of total CH4 generated
CH4 Oxidation 15 % of uncollected CH4
Emission Factor-Flare 0.70 Ton CO2E per ton MSW
Avoided Fossil CO2 (a) 0.15 Ton CO2E per ton MSW
Emission Factor - LFGTE 0.54 Ton CO2E per ton MSW
Average Flare/ICE 0.62 Ton CO2E per ton MSW
(a) Based on same avoided fossil factor as EfW and use of an internal combustion engine for electrical energy production.
18
III. Environmental Aspects of WTE Nationwide WTE facility emissions have been dramatically reduced
Dioxin (g/yr, TEQ)CadmiumLeadMercuryPMHClSO2
Pollutant Total Emissions2000 Actual Percent Reduction
1990 to 200012.0 g/yr
0.333 tons/yr4.76 tons/yr2.20 tons/yr797 tons/yr
2,672 tons/yr4,076 tons/yr
99+93
90.995.189.894.386.7
Source: Environmental Protection Agency, 2002
19
III. Environmental Aspects of WTE - DioxinWTE emissions now represent less than 1% of known dioxin inventory
7915
1100
120
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
1987 1995 2000
Reporting Year
Gra
ms o
r P
CD
D/F
as T
EQ
per
year
Year Total Sites # with data % of total1987 113 11 101995 130 27 212000 89 89 100
20
IV. Environmental Aspects of WTE - MercuryWTE now represents less than 3% of U.S. man-made mercury emissions
USA MWC Mercury Emissions 1990-2000
05000
100001500020000250003000035000400004500050000
1990 1993 1996 1999 2000
Year
Emis
sion
s (k
g/ye
ar)
21
III. Environmental Aspects of WTE - GHGsWTE reduces PM 2.5 Precursors and Air Toxics
Fine Particulate EfW avoids SO2 and NOX emissions from fossil fuel
combustion – these are precursors to ambient ammonium sulfate and nitrate, respectively.
Landfill Emissions Avoids a variety of air toxics from landfills including ;
- 46 constituents in EPAs AP42 - 25 of which are air toxics- nonmethane organic compounds (NMOC)- methane – a potent greenhouse gas (23 time more potent that CO2)
22
III. Environmental Aspects of WTE – Land UseWTE reduces waste volume by 90% and reduces biological byproducts including LFG, organic leachate and pathogens.
Land Use
•10 cubic yards of MSW is reduced by 90 % to 1 cubic yard, thereby maximizing land committed to a landfill.
•An EfW facility uses significantly less land than a landfill over any time period. As an example – the EfW industry saves 25,000 acre-feet per year when comparing landfill area required for MSW versus combined ash.
Combined Ash Disposal
• Stable and inert due to low pozzolanic properties & low carbon content.
• RCRA nonhazardous with very low metals leaching from landfills.
• Can be reused as landfill cover and other potential civil applications.
23
IV. Conclusion“EfW promotes a sustainable environment thru maximum recovery of electrical power and maximum avoidance of GHGs”
Reduced use of landfilling reduces GHG emissions The EU Landfill Directive GROCC Lifecycle analysis using EPA’s model
Energy-from-Waste maximizes renewable energy Avoids dependence on fossil fuels Promotes energy independence
Energy-from-waste provides clean energy Controlled combustion and air pollution control processes Highly regulated industry with testing, continuous monitoring and
reporting