effective landfill degradation -...
TRANSCRIPT
INTERNATIONAL SOLID WASTE ASSOCIATION
Promoting sustainable waste management worldwide
Danish biowaste
success
Lessons from
WEEE in the UK
Effective landfill degradationWMW Special
Collection & Transport
MA
Y–JU
NE
20
10
WMW
WA
ST
E M
AN
AG
EM
EN
T W
OR
LD
INC
LU
DIN
G C
OLLE
CT
ION
& T
RA
NSP
OR
T S
PE
CIA
LM
AY
–JU
NE
2010
Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out Search Issue | Next PageFor navigation instructions please click here
Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out Search Issue | Next PageFor navigation instructions please click here
PROFIT FROM WASTE One man’s trash is another man’s treasure – Caterpillar’s complete range of waste management machines have been specially developed to stay up, running and profitable in the demanding conditions of waste sites. They come equipped with ACERTTM Tech-nology for fuel efficiency and emission compliance, easier maintenance to keep them working longer and harder, plus a ruggedness in design and manufacturing so that they continue to deliver, day in, day out. Factor in the unique combination of Cat® machines and work tools, the support from our worldclass dealer network and you’ve got all you need to keep up with this non-stop industry. So if you’re looking to make a profit from waste, then look no further than Caterpillar.
www.cat.com/waste
© 2009 Caterpillar Inc. All rights reserved. CAT, CATERPILLAR, their respective logos, “Caterpillar Yellow“ and the “Power Edge” trade dress as well as product identity used herein, are trademarks of Caterpillar and may not be used without permission.
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
P.O. Box 32
FI-26101 Rauma, FinlandPhone: +358 20 486 6800Telefax: +358 20 486 6990www.bmh.fi
BMH Enviro
.
The TYRANNOSAURUS® shredder
turns used tyres to high-calorific TDF
to replace fossil fuels for example in
cement kilns.
• Capacity for example 25 t/h of 80 mm
tyre chips in a single pass. Other
capacities and chip sizes are also
available.
• Tyres are fed in bulk, for example with
a front loader, with no laborious
singularization needed.
• No damage due to tramp metal and
occasional rims.
• The same shredder can be used for
processing other combustible raw
materials, too.
The TYRANNOSAURUS® process
produces high-quality standardized
solid recovered fuel (SRF) from virtually
any of your combustible waste:
SRF produced in the TYRANNOSAURUS®
process is clean, reliable, eco-friendly
fuel. It is ideal for burning in power
boilers and cement kilns.
An investment in a TYRANNOSAURUS®
process pays for itself, in some cases
within a matter of months.
• Commercial & industrial waste
• Municipal solid waste (MSW)
• Construction & demolition waste
• Bulk waste
• Scrap tyres
Further information: [email protected]
BMH Technology - Enviro & Energy for the Future
Turnkey Solutions for Turning Waste to Profitable Fuel
TYRANNOSAURUS® Scrap Tyre Processing Systems
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
ContentsMAY–JUNE 2010
WMW
29
32
COVER PHOTOGRAPH:
Courtesy of SCS Engineers.
4
6
8
12
53
55
56
REGULARS
FROM THE PUBLISHER
ISWA COMMENT
NEWS
WASTE LEADERS
ISWA INFORMATION
DIARY
ADVERTISERS’ INDEX
COLLECTION
& TRANSPORT
SPECIAL
COLLECTION & TRANSPORT PRODUCT NEWS
JOINING THE UNDERGROUND – PART 1 The KTZ system is a fully integrated approach
requiring specialized equipment but, as Malcolm
Bates discovers during a visit to Antwerp, it
removes the dangers associated with lifting loaded
waste containers by hydraulic crane and can be
used with ground level container installations (not
just containers in silos).
JOINING THE UNDERGROUND – PART 2 Portugal might not have a reputation as a major
manufacturing centre, but as Malcolm Bates
reports from the Algarve, it’s where the Sotkon
underground waste container storage system
is produced. Designed to meet the demands of
waste disposal in Mediterranean climates, he is
convinced it could have a wider global market.
TEAM EFFORTDespite several attempts over the years, Volvo
Truck & Bus has never produced a really good
easy entry ‘crew cab’ for waste applications.
But now one of the largest truck manufacturers
on the planet has teamed up with a specialist
manufacturer in Belgium to produce a low entry
cab refuse collection chassis/cab. Malcolm Bates
brings you the lowdown ...
SMALL WONDER Last time Waste Management World’s Malcolm
Bates was at the Bucher plant in Switzerland, it
was to try the then newly announced ‘City Spider’
sub-compact vacuum sweeper – a good attempt
but it lacked power. Now, working with group
member, Johnston Sweepers, Bucher is back with
a brand new ‘baby’ ride-on. Malcolm Bates was
the first journalist to drive it.
13
14
21
26
33
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
41
22
48
FEATURES
MATERIAL SOLUTIONS IN WTE SYSTEMS Explains how a unique coating composition
developed by ArcMelt™ Company can protect the
low alloy steels used for heat transfer surfaces in
waste-to-energy systems from high temperature
chloridation, oxidation and corrosion.
By Juan Carlos Nava
DANES SET THE EXAMPLE FOR ENERGY FROM WASTE Jon McAteer, Technical Manager at Veolia Water
Solutions & Technologies, talks about the success
of a Danish plant that co-digests household waste,
sewage sludge, food waste and organic industrial
wastewater to produce biogas for electricity
generation.
By Jon McAteer
THE ‘SUSTAINABLE LANDFILL’ BECOMES A REALITYAdding air and moisture to a landfill to form an
aerobic rather than an anaerobic environment
speeds up waste degradation and paves the way
for the recovery of valuable resources through
landfill mining.
by Mark Hudgins, James Law,
David Ross and Jun Su
WEEE’VE COME A LONG WAY Dr Philip Morton, chief executive of producer
compliance scheme, REPIC, explains the merits
and limitations of the UK’s system for waste
electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) and
how the lessons learnt have been put to good use
in drawing up the UK’s Battery Regulations.
by Philip Morton
35
39
43
48
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
ISSN 1476-1394
The magazine for ISWA members
EDITOR: Claudine CapelISWA EDITOR: Hermann KollerGROUP PUBLISHER: Lyle HoytCOLLECTION & TRANSPORT CORRESPONDENT: Malcolm BatesLAYOUT: Jason BlairPRODUCTION EDITOR: Ben MessengerSALES MANAGERS: Terry Ash, James WaldenMARKETING MANAGER: Dorothee Petereit
ADVERTISING: for information on advertising, please contact Terry Ash on +44 1992 656 653or James Walden on +44 1992 656 657or [email protected]
EDITORIAL/NEWS CONTACT:e-mail: [email protected]
Published for the International Solid Waste Association, 123 Mariahilfer Strasse, 3rd floor, 1060 Vienna, Austria.Tel: +43 1 59 999 8038Fax: +43 1 59 999 700E-mail: [email protected]: www.iswa.org
Published by PennWell International Publications Ltd, Warlies Park House, Horseshoe Hill, Upshire, Essex, EN9 3SR, UK.Tel: +44 1992 656 600Fax: +44 1992 656 700e-mail: [email protected]: www.waste-management-world.com
EDITORIAL CORRESPONDENCE/PRESS RELEASES:Please send to Waste Management World at [email protected]
© 2009 International Solid Waste Association. All rights
reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in
any form or by any means, whether electronic, mechanical or
otherwise including photocopying, recording or any information
storage or retrieval system without the prior written consent
of the Publishers. While every attempt is made to ensure the
accuracy of the information contained in this magazine, neither
the Publishers, Editors nor the authors accept any liability for
errors or omissions. Opinions expressed in this publication are
not necessarily those of the Publishers or Editor.
Subscriptions: Waste Management World is circulated free
to professionals in the waste management industry. To
start a free subscription visit www.wmw-subscribe.com.
Professionals outside the waste management industry may
start a paid subscription. For pricing information visit www.
omeda.com/wmw or call +1 847-559-7330.
Waste Management World is published 6 times a year by
PennWell Publications Ltd, Warlies Park House, Horseshoe
Hill, Upshire, Essex, EN9 3SR, UK, and distributed in the
USA SPP at 75 Aberdeen Road, Emigsville, PA 17318-0437.
Periodicals postage paid at Emigsville, PA. POSTMASTER:
send address changes to Waste Management World, c/o P.O.
Box 437, Emigsville, PA 17318.
REPRINTS: High-quality reprints of any article from this
publication are available. These can be tailored to your
requirements to include a printed cover, logo, advertising or
other messages. Minimum quantity 50. Please contact the
Publishers for details.
Printed in the UK by Williams Press Ltd on elemental
chlorine-free paper from sustainable forests.
Member, BPA Worldwide
WMWFROM OUR COLLECTION &
TRANSPORT CORRESPONDENT
Alook back to 12 months ago reminded me of the concerns expressed by
manufacturers that serve our industry. Obviously, while many were just
concerned about falling profits and how that might affect their shareholders,
the wider worry was that a lack of investment in research and development
– combined with a lack of lending by the bankers and financiers who caused the
economic crisis in the first place – might undermine the development of new products
at the very time when our environment needed them most. So how do things look now?
The answer is that things look a lot better than predicted. While there have been
some casualties among manufacturers, it was also the case that, in certain sectors,
there were (and still are) too many manufacturers for the size of the global market.
So where does that take us? As the world exclusive cover story on the Caterpillar
corporation in our March/April issue explained, the recent turmoil has got some of
the smartest engineering and marketing minds in the manufacturing sector looking
for new markets. The Cat product line has had the word ‘construction’ at its heart
(alongside mining) for the last 60 years. Sales of machines into the scrap, waste
and recycling sectors tended to happen, if not by accident, then certainly without
any specific marketing effort. While human beings continue to multiply at an
unsustainable rate, it could be argued that ‘construction’ will always be needed but
that without funding or market confidence (still in short supply judging by recent
events in Greece) it won’t happen and then new machines are not required.
In contrast, new equipment to handle waste and recyclable materials is essential
if we’re not to drown under the mountain of waste we’ve created. Now, just two
years after a major restructuring programme, Cat engineers have shown what can
be achieved with some ‘refocusing’ with the launch of the diesel-electric ‘D7E’. It’s
early days yet, but fuel savings of 20% seem possible compared with hydrostatic
transmissions.
In the 2009 Transport and Collection special, WMW had a world exclusive story
about the Volvo/Geesink Norba diesel electric ‘hybrid’ drive refuse collection vehicle
(RCV) working for Renova AB in Gothenburg, Sweden. Twelve months on, several
hybrids are now in service elsewhere. As you can read in this issue, Volvo has now
also got an easy-entry low floor cab designed specifically for waste collection
operations. And, we have several other ‘exclusives’ lined up in the next few issues too.
So the bottom line? That well-worn phrase, ‘when the going gets tough, the
tough get going,’ sets the tone for the year ahead in my view. Or as the father of
evolutionary science, Charles Darwin, might have put it, ‘the fittest will survive’.
So if you are still in need of some direction? Based on our current performance,
your own personal copy of Waste Management World has got to be a good place to
start, surely?
Malcolm Bates
Collection & Transport correspondent
P.S. Subscribe to the e-newsletter at www.waste-management-world.com
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
____________
turning...your waste into your energy.
BioWayste Systems Ltd
Summer Farm, West Haddon Road, Crick, Northampton
Tel: 01788 824744 Fax: 01788 823009
www.biowayste.com
The UK’s fastest anaerobicwaste to energy specialists
Let’s face it, we all produce waste, but now more than ever, we
need to stop and consider the environmental implications of
dealing with such waste. BioWayste.com is here to help companies
comply with Government Legislation and improve their Corporate
Social Responsibility.
BioWayste.com specialise in anaerobic digestion of food waste,
providing a safe and green form of organic waste management and
sustainable energy.
The unique BioWayste.com process offers an economically sound,
������������� �������� ������� � ������ ����� �� ������
electricity and water from organic food waste which is then returned
to the UK’s National Grid and Waterways.
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
May–June 2010 WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD6
There are many kinds of waste, and many waste awards. But there
are only two International Solid Waste Association awards – and they
are now open for submission, says Hermann Koller...
ISWA Comments
The Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) recently held its 12th annual ‘Teddy Waste
Awards’ ceremony to recognize the best of the worst government waste.
The Teddy award ceremony is named after Ted Weatherill, a former federal bureaucrat
who was fired for outrageous expenses in 1999. Each year the CTF holds the ceremony
to recognize a government group, public office holder, civil servant, department or agency
that epitomizes senseless waste.
‘We hold the ceremony each year to educate the public about government waste and highlight fat
that needs to be trimmed,’ said a CTF representative. ‘The event also helps hold bureaucrats
and politicians accountable for their decisions.’
The 2010 Teddy winners and nominees included:
• C$1.5 million spent on unused hotel rooms at the Francophone Summit in
Quebec.
• Staff who accidentally sold Queen’s silver for C$4000 and then spent nearly
C$100,000 getting it back.
• C$1.4 million spent trying to locate C$20 million worth of ‘missing gold’
which was not actually missing.
• One public office holder who expensed C$30,000 in annual cell phone bills.
• A C$1.4 million ‘promo website’ which only attracted 53,000 visitors –
costing C$26 per web visitor.
Here in Austria, home of ISWA’s headquarters, we would have no difficulty
finding nominees for this kind of waste award either: from the CEO of an ailing
national bank getting €4.5 million for six month’s work and spending €32 million on
external consultants during that period ... to the 35,000-seater football stadium which has an
average attendance of 500 spectators per game.
It’s probably a bit more difficult to find nominees for an award designed to honour excellent
waste communication campaigns … Or for an award which has been designed to honour a
publication, article or book deemed to be exceptional in its contribution to solid waste management.
But ISWA likes this kind of challenge!
Every year we invite members and non-members to send us their nominations for the ISWA
Communication Award and the ISWA Publication Award. Have a look at our website www.iswa.org
to find out more. Deadlines for submission are 15 June for the Communication Award and 15 July
for the Publication Award.
We look forward to receiving your nominations!
Hermann Koller
e-mail: [email protected]
Here in Austria,
home of the ISWA
headquarters, we
would have no
difficulty finding
nominees for this
kind of waste award
‘‘
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
______________________
_________
____________
Send your news to WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD
e-mail: [email protected]
News
in briefA 10-year contract has been signed by
Waste Management Inc. and Georgia
Power to supply electricity from the
WM Savannah landfill. The contract will
need to be approved by the Georgia
Public Service Commission. The landfill
gas-to-energy facility is capable
of producing 6.4 MW of electricity;
one MW is enough to power 250
homes. ‘By tapping into the landfill
gas to produce electricity, Georgia
Power is both continuing to diversify
its expanding renewable portfolio
throughout the state, and doing what’s
good for the environment,’ said Jeff
Burleson, director of resource policy
and planning for Georgia Power, in a
press release.
It has been reported that the amount
of food and drink wasted in the UK
annually is costing the country £17
billion (US $26 billion) every year. The
environmental cost is said to
be equivalent to 12.4 million extra
cars on the road. This report was
published by WRAP.
A leading provider of
environmental, energy and
industrial services in North
America, Clean Harbors, has
announced that it is branching
out into the removal and
disposal of medical waste for
hospitals and other healthcare
facilities.
The system combines frontline
collection, waste removal,
sorting and disposal programs
that support each organization’s
procedures, using practices
that conform to operational
structure and meet regulatory
requirements.
Clean Harbors pharmaceutical
waste management offering
is available either as a
comprehensive on-site service
that eliminates the need for
in-house waste management
staff or as a menu of services to
address specific needs.
Services include:
• Rx Waste Characterization
• Rx Program Design
• Medical Floor Rx Collection
Services
• Main Accumulation Area
Management
• Transportation & Disposal
at Clean Harbors company
owned and operated facilities
Clean Harbors Vice President
Healthcare, John Kelsey, says,
‘Every health facility has a
slightly different approach
to pharmaceutical waste
management. It may be based
on historic practices or it may be
the result of organization-specific
job descriptions and functions.
Regardless, each must effectively
address pharmaceutical waste
management in order to meet
current regulations. Clean
Harbors starts by learning
our customers’ processes and
then designing our services
to fit into and improve on the
model, while removing the
waste management burden
from management and staff.
Our program allows the most
seamless execution with Nursing,
Pharmacy, EVS [Environmental
Services] and other departments
that results in the most efficient
and compliant pharmaceutical
program required by acute care
facilities.’
Clean Harbors offers
medical waste disposal
8 May–June 2010 WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD
NEWS
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
____________
in briefA new report commissioned by
environmental services company, Veolia
has stated that the world market for
waste, from collection to recycling, is worth
around € 300 billion (US$410 billion). The
report author Philippe Chalmin, professor
of economic history at Paris-Dauphine
University, said that four billion tonnes
of municipal, industrial and hazardous
waste are produced every year and that
these figures are just a ‘guesstimate,
nothing more’ as data is difficult to gather,
particularly in developing countries. The
report titled ‘From Waste to Resource’ is
the second report of this type from Veolia.
Waste production is closely correlated with
GDP, Chalmin said, but collection, recovery
and recycling rates vary enormously
between countries. Poland sends about
90% of its municipal waste to landfill sites,
but the Netherlands disposes just 1.7%
of its waste this way. Japan incinerates
the most municipal waste (74%), while
South Korea has the best recycling rate
for municipal waste (49%). Availability of
land and the suitability of soils are a major
factor in deciding whether to landfill waste,
Chalmin said, but ecological awareness,
legal constraints, degree of economic
development and climatic factors also
determine the choice of disposal or
recovery route.
The latest National Post-Consumer
Recycled Plastic Bags and Film report
for 2008 shows that more plastic
bags and film are being recycled
than ever before in the United States.
This situation is having a knock-on
effect on the demand for plastic
scrap which is also increasing.
An estimated 378,000 tonnes of
post-consumer film, which includes
plastic bags and product wraps,
were recovered in 2008. This is a 28%
increase since 2005 and continues
the growing national trend for
recycling.
The boost in these figures is being
attributed to greater consumer
access to collection programmes,
mainly in large grocery and retail
stores, as well as by the new markets
and companies emerging for
processing the recycled materials.
The recycling report was
conducted by Moore Recycling
Associates, Inc. of Sonoma, California,
based on information obtained from
79 domestic processors, end-users
of film material and exporters. The
recycling numbers reported are
likely to understate actual bag and
film recycling because export data
is more difficult to obtain than data
on domestic recycling, and in 2008
there was a shift toward export
markets, according to the report.
Data collection was also affected
by the rapid spike in the number
of collection programmes as many
stores launched new programs
to recover post-consumer plastic
bags and product wraps from their
customers. There are now retail store
collection programs in all 50 states.
According to US Environmental
Protection Agency data, about
13% of plastic bags and film are
recycled annually. While composite
lumber continues to be the major
market for recycled plastic bags and
film, 2008 saw a notable increase
in international demand for scrap
plastic film.
US plastic bag recycling
reaches all time high
According to a study by Eurostat –
the statistical office of the European
Union – 524 kg of municipal waste
was generated per person in 2008
across the EU27 countries. This
figure was similar to the 2007 figure
of 525 kg per person.
When looking at how this
waste was dealt with the figures
show that 40% was landfilled, 20%
incinerated, 23% recycled and 17%
composted.
The amount generated per
person varies greatly across the
different countries in the EU, from
306 kg in the Czech Republic to
802 kg in Denmark. This reflects
the different consumption patterns
and the ways each country
calculates their totals. Some, for
instance, include waste from small
businesses and public institutions.
Austria, Germany and
the Netherlands recycled or
composted between 60 and 70%
of their municipal waste, but in
ten Member States recycling and
composting was used to treat less
than 10% of the waste.
Member States with the highest
rates of landfill were Bulgaria
(100%), Romania (98%), Malta (97%),
Lithuania (96%) and Lativia (93%).
The highest numbers for
incineration were Denmark (54%),
Sweden (49%), the Netherlands
(39%), Belgium and Luxemburg
(36%), Germany (35%) and France
(32%). Ten countries have rates of
less than 1% incineration.
The importance of these
two treatment categories varies
considerably between Member
States. The Member States with
the highest recycling rates for
municipal waste were Germany
(48% of waste treated), Belgium
and Sweden (both 35%), Ireland
and the Netherlands (both 32%)
and Slovenia (31%). Composting
of municipal waste was most
common in Austria (40%), Italy
(34%), the Netherlands (27%),
Belgium (25%), Spain and
Luxembourg (both 20%).
EU 2008 figures show 40%
MSW recycled or composted
Totals for countries:
More than 700kg
per personDenmark, Ireland, Cyprus and Luxembourg.
600-700 kg Malta, the Netherlands and Austria.
500-600 kgGermany, Estonia, Spain, France, Italy, Finland, Sweden and the
United Kingdom
400-500 kg Belgium, Bulgaria, Greece, Lithuania, Hungary, Portugal and Slovenia
Below 400kg Czech Republic, Latvia, Poland, Romania and Slovakia
WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD May–June 2010 9
NEWS
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
New South Wales councils ramp up waste effortsLocal councils in New South
Wales, Australia, have increased
efforts to reduce waste
and recycle since concerns
have been raised about the
government’s lack of spending
in this area.
‘This is a case of the
politicians lagging behind the
public and, in this case, the
local councils that are already
recycling our rubbish,’ Greens
MP Ian Cohen said.
Measures taken include
microchipping bins, reducing
bin sizes, putting up fees and
cutting collections in the hope
that residents will dramatically
reduce the amount of waste
they throw away.
Mosman Council has
introduced smaller general
waste bins with a cheaper
annual fee to encourage
householders to recycle more
and dump less. The 80-litre
bin costs AUS$262 per year
compared with AUS$843 for a
240-litre bin.
‘We are seeing a revolution
in rubbish. Councils are
changing the way they collect
rubbish and it is making a big
improvement,’ said Rebecca
Gilling, a spokeswoman for
the environmental charity
Planet Ark, who is expecting
greater improvements with
the introduction of the federal
government’s national waste
policy next year. ‘That will
start with electronic waste,
things like old televisions and
computers, which are filling
up landfills and contaminating
them with heavy metals that
could be recycled.’
Penrith City Council has
introduced a three-bin system
and cut the amount of waste
collections, which has reportedly
increased waste diverted from
landfill to recycling from 20% to
58%. The system gives residents
a green organics bin for garden
waste and food scraps which is
collected weekly, plus a recycling
bin and a smaller 140-litre bin for
residual waste which are both
collected fortnightly. Residents
who require a bigger bin or more
frequent collection can pay a
AUS$50 surcharge. The organic
waste is turned into compost.
Newcastle City Council will be
following suit and introducing
the same system next year,
since an audit revealed that
23% of waste in its general bins
was recyclable and 24% was
green waste. City presentation
manager Lisa Scully said: ‘The
real benefit to [the] community
will be reducing the amount of
waste to landfill.’
The NSW government has a
system to discourage councils
dumping in landfills which
charges them per tonne, but
this has not been as successful
as a similar scheme in Victoria.
NSW aims to reduce waste to
landfill by 66% in 2014.
Other councils including
Blue Mountains, Randwick and
Ryde have put microchips on
bins. A Randwick spokeswoman
said the tags helped locate lost
bins and allowed the council
to monitor if people were
recycling correctly.
Cameron Murphy, president
of the NSW Council for
Civil Liberties, warned that
microchipping bins was an
invasion of privacy that could
lead to individuals being
penalized. ‘I worry that it will
lead to councils identifying
people who put out a certain
type or amount of garbage
and then billing them extra
for it. Effectively it means the
council is sifting through your
garbage. Do you want them
knowing how many condoms
or pregnancy testing kits are in
there? It is going too far.’
10 May–June 2010 WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD
NEWS
ONE WORLD. ONE SOURCE. ONE HUNDRED YEARS.
PUBLICATIONS • EVENTS • DIGITAL MEDIA
www.pennwell.com
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
Western Australia waste strategy calls for action
London Olympics waste report
The Commission for a Sustainable
London 2012 – the independent
organization monitoring the
sustainability of the London
Olympic Games project – has
published a report on the approach
taken to waste management and
infrastructure, which shows that the
London Organising Committee of
the Olympic Games (LOCOG) and the
Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) are
on course to achieve construction
waste goals.
Shaun McCarthy, Chair of the
Commission, said: ‘The good news
is that the ODA and LOCOG are
both working towards ambitious
targets. If achieved, this ambition
and dedication will make the 2012
Games an exemplar of how to run
a sustainable event and will set
brand-new green standards for
future Games. Our concerns are that
while all this good work is going
on inside the venues, waste in the
areas immediately surrounding the
venues could be forgotten about.
There needs to be a consistently
high standard and this means more
collaboration between stakeholders
and organizers.’
The ODA is exceeding targets to
reuse or recycle 90% of demolition
waste and meeting its 90% landfill
diversion target for construction
waste, using 34% recycled materials
which is above its target of 20%.
The Commission is concerned by
the need for careful co-ordination
and management of the post-Games
dismantling and transformation
process to ensure that sustainability
standards are maintained and nothing
is lost between different areas of
responsibility. The Commission
recommends that a target is set for
the reuse of materials.
A future challenge is for these
standards to be maintained at the
venues outside LOCOG’s control such
as the ‘live sites’ where the public will
gather to watch the Games.
The state of Western Australia
has identified a need for increased
public education regarding waste
management, and for producers of
goods to take more responsibility
for waste arising from their own
products. The Waste Authority has
reviewed 1440 public comments
received on the Draft State Waste
Strategy released last year.
Waste Authority Acting Chair Jan
Grimoldby said the Authority has
responded to major themes from
the public submissions around
the need for information and
education campaigns on wise waste
management. ‘More education and
awareness needs to be provided
to industry, governments and the
general community,’ Grimoldby
said. ‘There is also significant public
support for schemes of extended
producer responsibility such as take-
back programs for electronic goods,
through to action on packaging and
hazardous wastes.’
The establishment of markets for
recyclables, such as construction
and demolition waste, was noted as
a priority.
Two community schemes
focusing on waste avoidance will
be set up, and a recommendation
to the State Government to take
responsibility for 50% of C&D waste
made. The Waste Authority will
propose regulations to empower
local government require and
implement waste disposal plans
before authorizing demolition.
WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD May–June 2010 11
NEWS
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
________
May–June 2010 WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD12
WASTE LEADERSH IP SER IES • GUNNEL KLINGBERG
Helena Bergman of ISWA speaks to Gunnel Klingberg, Secretary General of Municipal
Waste Europe – the European association representing municipalities responsible for
waste management and their publicly-owned waste management companies.
Which way forward?
In 2009 an EU association for public sector waste
management was established. Why?
The European Union is leading the development of environmental
and waste policies. Ever since the first Waste Directive in 1975,
waste has been high on the EU political agenda. Over the years the
EU has expanded both with regard to the number of member states
but also the scope of waste legislation. There are many different
representatives in Brussels for the waste sector. What has become
obvious over the years is the need to gather those concerned with
waste and look at legal responsibilities. That is why an association
for the public sector has been created to take into consideration the
specific rights and obligations that go with the provision of waste
management as a service.
So what do you see in the future for the waste sector
in the European Union?
To look at the future, it is normally easier to start by looking at the
past. In the past waste was simple, it was not a personal involvement
and it was the career path only for fanatics. It was handled by
engineers, environmentalists and local authorities.
Today, waste is handled through complex infrastructure and
service systems; waste is a resource with profit possibilities and a
part of the environmental sector. We got here through a growing
environmental concern and a conscious development of the sector
based on the risks for our survival.
Looking 10-15 years in the future, the waste sector will be asked
to provide even more technically advanced solutions and specific
services. We will be asked to ‘complexify’ our waste services, not
to simplify them. There will be pressure to expand the economic
turnover but at lower prices. Waste generators – the people and
businesses – will be asked to do more of the work themselves
under our instructions. Costs for providing waste services will be
recovered through other means than today. Primarily, when and
where waste is a resource in a market we will see new and different
ways of recovering costs.
The value of the service as a commodity will be further
discussed. We may come to define a good lifestyle based on the
number of sorted waste streams being collected within walking
distance.
Do you think the ‘Zero Waste’ objective is realistic?
In an even longer timeframe than 10-15 years, there will still
be waste. It may however be called something else, and be
reused, recycled, recovered or handled in another environmentally
sustainable way. All treatments will still leave a certain amount
which has no sustainable treatment and has to be handled through
disposal methods. The environmental effects of these methods
can be reduced and almost eliminated with great dedication. But
as long as we as people and businesses insist on producing and
using products and services generating waste without sustainable
treatment, these methods will always be needed.
To reach any goal, two things are needed: actions and a goal.
The future goal for waste is still being debated and will probably
never be the same in all regions. Each region or country must
set targets, needs and resources. Waste must be looked at in its
specifics, as there is where the solutions and possibilities lie.
Another topic in the past has been the privatization
of waste management and the competition between
public and private sector?
The provision of waste management is a service that citizens
expect to be carried out in a way which protects human health
and the environment. There are two ways to ensure this – the
political vision and ambition on one side, and the practice on the
other. To me the key is the vision and the ambitions to decide the
goal. After that comes the discussion on how to get there and who
should carry out the services. How and who needs to be based on
technical developments, long-term security and the competence of
the operator. Waste management is not optional, and is therefore
not suitable for an uncontrolled market based solely on financial
calculations. The private sector operates waste management by
choice, the public sector’s involvement is based more on obligation.
But when it comes to the practice of waste management
services in a market situation, we need as many good, competent
operators as possible, regardless of ownership.
What will be the role for public sector waste
management?
Municipal Waste Europe is a political organization with a very
clear objective – to promote public responsibilities for waste
management as a service of general interest towards the European
institutions. We have already seen the growing importance of
responsibility for waste management planning in preventing health
and environmental risks. We also see growing diversity of the waste
sector. All this will have the result that the need for governance at a
local, national and global level will be greater than ever.
Municipal Waste Europe can be contacted through www.
municipalwasteeurope.eu
Interviewer for the International Solid Waste Association,
Helena Bergman, ISWA Project Manager
e-mail: [email protected]
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
___
________________
SPECIAL
Collection and trnasportCollection and transport
MAY–JUNE 2010
underground collection systems ● vacuum sweepers
● low entry cab refuse collection chassis
● product news
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
14 May–June 2010 WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD
COLLECT ION AND TRANSPORT SPEC IAL • PRODUCT NEWS
Collection & Transport
product news
ENLARGED RANGE SIX APPEAL
UK-based JCB now has a single range
of machines dedicated to meeting
the rehandling requirements of
the waste collection and recycling
industry. To reflect the growing and
increasingly specialized requirements
of its customers, JCB has expanded the
range of machines equipped to cope
with the rigours of work in the waste
management environment.
The line-up comprises JCB
Wastemaster specification wheeled
loading shovels, telescopic handlers,
telemasters, wheeled excavators,
tracked excavators, telescopic forklifts,
skid steer loaders, rough terrain forklifts,
articulated dump trucks, tracked
excavators and on-site generators.
All are designed for the harsh
environments and high utilization
demanded by the sector. All are built
to deliver ongoing reliability in order to
minimize down time.
Each machine can be specified
to meet the unique demands of
the industry, and the breadth of
the range ensures suitability for all
typical sector applications including
kerbside collection, MRF operations,
civic amenity sites, waste transfer
stations, waste-to-energy plants,
end-of-vehicle (ELV) stations, waste
electrical and electronic equipment
(WEEE) recycling, demolition recycling,
green waste and landfill sites. Specialist
configurations, protection guarding
and attachments give the capability
to handle all common materials such
as glass, metals, batteries, tyres, plastics,
wood, compost and aggregates.
Light guards, lower door guards
and fenders are designed to protect
from potential physical impact damage.
Wastemaster underbelly guards
protect transmission components
from material contamination. ‘X-mine’
or solid tyre options ensure maximum
protection against punctures for
applications such as metals recycling
and municipal waste rehandling.
Protection for the operator
is ensured with the fitment of cab
roof and screen guards. The positive
pressure cab environments can be
additionally filtered too, with finer
filter elements reducing dust ingress
and protecting against potentially
hazardous working environments.
Reversing alarms, reversing
cameras, convex mirrors, rotating
beacons and additional work lights
to meet national and/or international
regulations also ensure bystander
safety – especially important in busy
applications where staff may be
working on the ground.
Finally, engine protection in
these often dust-laden environments
is achieved though the fitment of
additional engine pre-cleaners, wide
core radiators and reversing fan
systems (designed to maintain cooling
whatever the application).
The flagship model is the JCB
456eZX Wastemaster wheeled
loading shovel (pictured). The model
features the traditional JCB qualities
of high breakout forces and robust
construction with the added benefits
of sophisticated operation, a larger
field of operator vision, increased
comfort, improved performance and
serviceability. This model is proving
highly successful in waste transfer,
MRF, waste-to energy and compost
operations.
Another machine proving its worth
in the waste collection and materials
handling environment is the JCB
TLT35D. This is the 3.5-tonne capacity
JCB Teletruk complete with new slim
line boom for improved visibility. It is
ideal for kerbside container handling.
With a telescopic boom instead of a
mast, the JCB Teletruk offers significant
advantages over conventional forklifts.
Loads can be lifted and placed quickly
and easily using a wide range of quick-
hitch compatible attachments such
as buckets, grabs and fork rotators.
These strengths make the model an
indispensable materials handler in the
recycling industry.
* For further information e-mail nigel.
[email protected] or visit jcb.com
Hakowerke launched a new version of
its widely used Multicar M-30 ‘Fumo’
multi-purpose truck at the recent
Bauma event in Munich, Germany.
The new 6x4 chassis provides a
unique combination of very narrow
access capability (under two metres
wide) with a three-metre long body
platform. Already available with
bodies suitable for waste handling
and recycling applications – including
compaction rear end loading refuse
collection units (RCVs) and ground
level demountable hooklift trucks
to take waste containers and other
special bodies – the M-30 can also be
configured for liquid waste collection
and transport, for winter maintenance
(snow plough gritting), or as a oil spill
recovery tanker and treatment tanker.
The fitting of the third, trailing
axle to a normal 4x4 short wheelbase
chassis also has the advantage of
providing for a much more stable
platform for heavier loads. Thus the
new 6x4 model operates at a gross
weight of 7.49 tonnes – considerably
up on the 3.5–5.0 tonne rating of the
two-axle models.
Power unit specification (power is
by an Iveco turbo diesel) and tilt cab
format is the same as the two-axle
models and the range of power take-off
(PTO) options and attachment mounting
systems help ensure that this ‘high spec’
little chassis offers much increased
versatility over existing competitive light
and medium truck ranges.
* Further information from hako.com
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
www.cargotec.com
Responsible for tomorrow Cargotec improves the efficiency of global cargo flows by offering solutions for loading and unloading goods –
on land, in ports and at sea. With our three market-leading daughter brands Hiab, Kalmar and MacGregor, we
provide our customers with solutions that are energy-efficient and environmentally sound, both of which are
essential to our success in serving the cargo handling industry.
Cargotec’s Pro Future™ as a mark of environmental excellence qualifies our ‘greenest’ solutions against five
ecological decision-making drivers. Our recently launched EcoService – a range of economical and ecological
service solutions have been awarded with the mark. MacGregor electric-drive portfolio improves overall
efficiencies as well as lowers power consumption, and its bulk handling systems provides dust-free handling
of dry bulk cargo. Hiab environmental waste management solutions optimize performance and costs. For
future generations, we are doing our part today.
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
16 May–June 2010 WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD
COLLECT ION AND TRANSPORT SPEC IAL • PRODUCT NEWS
MOVING FORWARD
NEW TRACTOR UNIT
Kenworth (a subsidiary of PACCAR
Inc.) has announced that its new
T440 tractor unit will be available
for delivery from this month.
Offering excellent visibility, good
aerodynamics and versatility
for regional and short haul
applications, the T440 is available in
both day and ‘Aerocab’ sleeper cab
configurations. An extended day
cab – some six inches longer and
five inches higher – is also available.
Fitted with the PX-8 Paccar
diesel as standard, with ratings
up to 350hp, a Cummins ISL unit
is also offered as an option. But
of special interest to operators in
waste and recycling operations is
the availability of manual (with 6, 9,
10, 11 and 13-speed options) and
five or six-speed automatic gearbox
options as standard line fitting.
Kenworth claims to be a leader
in fuel-saving technology designed
to reduce consumption while
offering class-leading low exhaust
emissions. Kenworth is the holder
of a clean air excellence award from
the US Environmental Protection
Agency in recognition of research
into liquefied natural gas (LNG)
truck engineering.
* For more information contact:
NTM-GB Ltd is the UK-based subsidiary
of Finnish waste handling body and
equipment manufacturer, NTM. The
parent company was founded in
1950 and today specializes in truck
bodywork and the manufacture of
closed and insulated bodies, trailers
and refuse collection vehicles (RCVs).
As a result, NTM customers benefit
from decades of industry experience
and expertise.
The group’s success is evident
from its wide range of clients across
not only the UK and Finland, but also
the rest of Scandinavia, the Baltic States
and Russia, with additional subsidiaries
in both Sweden and Estonia to
service these areas. NTM attributes its
strong market position to three major
strengths – customer orientation,
know-how and quality.
The company ensures that
every product meets the operational
requirements and special wishes of
the customer. NTM pinpoints this as
the fundamental principle of all its
activities, with product development
and control being carried out in
co-operation with the customer.
Paul Westley, managing director
of NTM-GB Ltd, explains how the
company differs from many of its
competitors: ‘We produce a complete
range of refuse and recycling collection
vehicles including split-body RCVs
where the body is divided into two,
three or four separate compartments.
These are purposely designed to be
lo-tech, but with a strong focus upon
reliability, which is a very important
factor for the customers in the niche
vehicle market which we serve.’
NTM’s ability to provide the best
possible solutions for its customers
stems from the combination of the
professional skills, business knowledge
and individual commitment of its
staff. The company emphasizes the
importance of such skills through
providing its staff with continuous
personal development programmes.
Nurturing a strong sense of team
spirit and ensuring that all employees
are working towards the common
goal of developing and producing
high-quality products are key to the
company’s business
strategy.
In addition to
its strong customer
orientation and vast
industry expertise,
NTM also pursues
a rigorous research
and development
initiative that targets
quality from order
process to delivery.
Products are
subjected to various
tests at every stage
of manufacture, before undergoing
final testing prior to dispatch. This is
further supplemented by a thorough
after sales service.
NTM has several new projects
underway which are likely to increase
market share in a highly competitive
market. A recent project involved
working with FOCSA Services
Limited – a commercial waste and
environmental management operator
in the UK – to supply vehicles as part of
a recycling contract for Herefordshire
Council. Paul Westley elaborates:
‘This is a key contract that involves
a combination of different vehicles
including a number of 7.5-tonne
refuse collection vehicles, 15-tonne
standard rear-loading refuse vehicles
and 15-tonne split body recycling
collection vehicles consisting of a 70
to 30 split.’
Among the company’s wide
range of rear loading RCVs is the NTM
K-Series. Starting from 7.5-tonne gross
vehicle weight (GVW), all K-Series
models can be equipped with a bin
lift to handle bins from between 120
and 1280 litres. The K-Series is also
fitted as standard with the unique NTM
dual circuit compaction system – a
single valve block assembly with dual
functions operated both electrically
and hydraulically. This feature gives the
true benefit of the override manual
control levers, enabling operation to
continue should the electrical system
develop a fault.
On-board weighing equipment is
available on request, as are a number
of other enhancements such as a
semi-automatic bin lift and kits for
the collection of biowaste. The diverse
choice of chassis on which the body
can be mounted enables this model to
offer a variety of refuse collection and
street cleaning operations.
NTM produces other rear
loading refuse collection vehicles
such as the KG-Series, with a highly
durable tensile steel body designed
specifically for long life, reliability and
low-cost maintenance requirements.
This model is manufactured for both
two-and three-axle chassis between
14 to 26 tonnes. These come with
similar features to the K-Series model,
although they can also be equipped
with a fully automatic split bin lift ideal
for domestic refuse and recycling
collections.
The NTM range has also seen
the introduction of recent additions
as Paul Westley explains: ‘Four years
ago, the company unveiled a new
four compartment recycling collection
vehicle, which is currently being sold
across Scandinavia. Such is the success
of this that we will now be releasing it
into other markets such as the UK as
well.’ The NTM Quatro is designed to
achieve maximum collection efficiency
in separation at source collections. It
operates with specially designed
four compartment bins and utilizes
the unique space efficient pendulum
principle. This means that compaction
is achieved, in all compartments
with a cycle time allowing for all
bin compartments to be emptied
simultaneously within 20 seconds.
* For further information contact
Above: the NTM K2K 70-30
split body FOCSA 15t. Left:
the NTM K-Series BATH 7.5t.
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD May–June 2010 17
PRODUCT NEWS • COLLECT ION AND TRANSPORT SPEC IAL
The newly launched Sennebogen
818 has been designed specifically
to suit the arduous conditions
found in waste and recycling. A key
advantage, claims the manufacturer,
is that the design of this new 19.5-
tonne operating weight recycling
machine is the result of direct input
from operators, and as such, it should
set new standards in its class.
Taking into account safety
concerns, it’s interesting to note that
the 818 has a rear end swing radius
of just 2.3 metres and an overall total
width of 2.5 metres, making it agile
and easy to use in often cramped
material recovery facilities (MRFs)
and recycling sites.
Boom length in standard form
is 9.2 metres and, when fitted with
an attachment such as a five-tine
‘orange peel’ grab, the hydraulics are
capable of providing the operator
with fine and sensitive control
movements that can increase
productivity in sorting and picking
operations, while reducing driver
fatigue. A choice of outrigger and/or
dozer blade configurations increases
that versatility, tailoring the machine
exactly to the type of operation.
A key feature of the new 818 is
that the boom and stick are controlled
by a single hydraulic cylinder. This
provides for improved protection of
these components, while fewer parts
help reduce downtime and whole
life costs. Additionally, the boom
cylinder is ‘reverse assembled’ so that
no dirt is deposited on the front of
the cylinder, while at the same time,
providing for a better pipe run for the
hydraulics.
Underlining the ‘built for the job’
philosophy, the 97 kW 818 features a
new ‘encapsulated ventilation space’
which directs the cooling air to the
outside and not through the engine
compartment. This allows for an
inclined – and very large – radiator
which, when coupled with a large
core design, reduces the chance
of dust sticking to the cooling
fins. Unlike the current trend in
construction machines, Sennebogen
is keen to report that ‘no unnecessary
electronics’ are included in the design
of this waste handler – worth stating
in conditions where electronics are
known to fail. In contrast, however,
there will soon be ‘an electric motor
equipped’ Sennebogen waste
handler for operations where zero
emissions are of prime consideration.
* For info visit sennebogen.com.
BENEFITING FROM CUSTOMER INPUT
The Sennebogen 818
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
18 May–June 2010 WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD
COLLECT ION AND TRANSPORT SPEC IAL • PRODUCT NEWS
Many facilities are now turning to
alternative fuels for heat and power
generation. Such materials tend to
be bulky and difficult to handle, and
while considerable attention is paid
to the generation process, it is not
unusual for reception and handling
to be an afterthought.
The design of the reception of
materials into the plant can make
or break a successful project. Just
how do you get tonnes of material
from the road transport and into
your plant reliably? The answer used
to be ‘not easily’. But now the new
‘Toploader’ (EU Patent 882390) from
Dutch company, Spiro, takes the
headache out of solid fuel reception.
The Toploader enables the
delivery truck to back in and discharge
its load into the bunker. When the
delivery is complete and the truck
has gone, a carriage automatically
moves over the material. An arm is
lowered at the front of the pile which
is equipped with a small bucket. This
then drags a small load of material
to the back of the bunker, where it
can be discharged onto a conveyor
which takes the material to the
generator. The process repeats itself
when the generator calls for more
material. It can handle all manner of
bulky products such as wood chip,
solid recovered fuel (SRF), sawdust,
compost and animal waste – to
name but a few. Such materials are
famously difficult to convey. The
Toploader resolves this by delivering
small amounts when required. This
allows the process to keep the
material moving and eliminates
many of the handling problems that
can often otherwise be encountered.
Large volumes of material can
be stored even if the discharge rate
is small. This means that savings
can be made by ensuring that a
full truckload is delivered rather than
having to pay a premium for a part
load. As the truck can discharge its
load and go, there are no additional
costs resulting from the driver waiting
on-site. Furthermore, the need to
own a front loader vehicle and pay
for the operator is eliminated, helping
to keep operating costs down.
When compared to other
types of alternative fuel reception
technologies, the Toploader has
competitive capital costs. It has
the added advantage that it
can often be constructed on an
existing flat concrete floor. There
is no requirement to dig a pit for
the actuators as these are all fitted
overhead. The discharge point is well
above ground level, allowing plenty
of height to mount the onward
conveyor.
The Toploader only draws power
when it is moving material. For a
microgeneration heat and power
project, this is crucial as it increases
the amount of energy available for
export and therefore increases the
scheme’s profitability.
Where a heat or power project
needs to receive large volumes of
alternative fuels, the Toploader is
ideal. It is simple to operate and
simple to maintain. With a low
purchase cost and low running costs,
it is the key to a successful project.
* For more information contact sales@
spiro.nl or visit www.spiro-floor.com
COST-EFFECTIVE MATERIALS HANDLING
MORE UNDERGROUND DEVELOPMENTS
Well-known German waste container
systems manufacturer, Bauer
GmbH, has extended its product
range with the introduction of
a new underground container
system, Model GTR. Ideal for both
upgrading existing city downtown
areas and new developments, the
GTR meets the highest standards of
environmental engineering together
with the economy needed in these
difficult financial times.
Above ground, all the general
public sees is a stylish stainless
‘receptor’ column mounted on an
anti-skid pavement panel, which
hinges for access to the underground
container. A key feature of this new
design is that, in addition to crucial
requirements such as reduced
noise levels and anti-odour/rodent
capability, the receptor can be used
by children and wheelchair users.
Underground, the concrete outer
lining installation (the bunker) and
the removable galvanized metal inner
container for the waste or recyclable
materials are to a patented design,
with a self-closing platform that
guarantees operator safety at all times
– even when the container is in the
process of being lifted.
Underground storage and
retrieval systems are now seen as
offering major advantages in that
different waste factions can be pre-
sorted and kept separate during the
entire collection and disposal process.
This avoids cross-contamination,
while ensuring the best possible price
is obtained for those factions with a
recyclable value.
Underground systems also offer
greater versatility in terms of collection
as larger capacity containers can be
stored completely out of sight from
the public and without the risk of
vandalism or unsightly appearance in
busy downtown areas where space
is at a premium. This has the added
bonus that collection trucks can be
programmed to call less often in order
to pick up the same volume of waste
(than existing smaller containers) and
therefore reduce noise levels and
disruption to residents and visitors
during busy periods. In warm climates,
the use of underground containers
has the added benefit of keeping all
the waste material out of the reach
of the Sun’s rays, thus reducing odour
levels and fly infestation.
* For more information email info@
bauer-suedlohn.de
The GTR underground collection system.
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD May–June 2010 19
PLANT AND WASTE RECYCLING SHOW8th, 9th & 10th June 2010
Paignton’s Seaside Venue Hosts
the 25th Annual Show Booking Now!!
20% discount
on all stands
for early bookings!!
Government Business National Awards - Presented to local authority plant and waste recycling teams - taking place in the show’s main pavilion2010 National Skip Hire & Waste Transfer Station Awards - Recognising excellence in staff performance - nominated by their peers and Managers.
South West Recycling Forum Conference - Show attended by over 350 Local Authority Offi cersQuality and relevant show visitors guaranteed over the 3 days of PAWRS
For further information please call: 01962 870355 or email [email protected] fi nd out more about the location and the business benefi ts of exhibiting please visit www.PAWRS.co.uk
• FREE FORKLIFT SERVICES • FREE CAR PARK & SHUTTLE BUS TO AND FROM THE SHOW • FREE HOLDING BAYS • PAVILLION PRICES INCLUDE A SHELL SCHEME, ELECTRIC POINTS & LIGHTING
PRODUCT NEWS • COLLECT ION AND TRANSPORT SPEC IAL
INCREASED PROTECTION
The Caterpillar Corporation offers
one of the widest ranges of ‘industry
specific’ machines that are designed
and built to meet waste and recycling
sector applications. The
CAT ‘Waste Handler’
range is factory built to
incorporate machine
protection, pre-cleaner
filtration for air intakes, and
reverse flow, wide core
cooling systems to avoid
engine overheating in the
dust-laden environments
found in waste and
recycling applications.
One such example
of this approach is the
930H waste handler –
a 14-tonne machine
weight wheeled loader.
The 930H waste handler
incorporates the ‘Versalink’
front linkage – available in
both standard and ‘high
lift’ configurations (the latter primarily
to aid the fast and safe loading of
refuse bulker trailers) which, with a
CAT high dump bucket achieves load-
over heights of up to 5.05 metres.
Advanced traction-aiding technology
enables the 100% full locking front
axle to be engaged ‘on the fly’ (when
moving at up to 10 kph), while a
limited slip differential (LSD) is
optional on the rear axle for especially
slippery surfaces.
While the 930H can be fitted with
either standard or puncture-resistant
20.5-R25 L5 tyres, the recently available
CAT ‘Flexport’ tyre can be specified as
an option. These solid rubber tyres
have a longer life in arduous conditions
and can offer major improvements in
downtime.
The 930H comes with factory-
fitted guards to protect the
driver, the drivetrain, the power
unit and radiator, while load-
sensing hydraulics help provide
the operator with a safer and
more comfortable working
environment. Single joystick
control together with ‘dual
mode’ (quick steer) steering
also help to reduce fatigue on
long shifts; with this unique
system, the number of steering
wheel turns from lock-to-lock
are reduced from 2.5 to 0.5.
Maintenance times are
also reduced thanks to the
wide-space radiator cooling
cores and auto-reversing fan,
while a turbo pre-cleaner is
designed to increase the life of
the air cleaner.
* For more information visit www.cat.
com/requestcatinfo
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
Contact the SSAB office near you,
go to www.hardox.com under Contacts.
T: +46 155 25 40 00
www.hardox.com
Because you ask a lot of your equipment, get the wear plate preferred around the world
- Hardox, the number one choice in abrasion resistant steels. Its hardness, strength and
toughness make it unlike any other steel on earth.
It’s the highest industry standard for applications such as excavators, tipper bodies, con-
veyors, crushers, mixers, barges, refuse collection vehicles and more. Hardox boosts your
performance and maximizes the uptime of your tools and machines. And it’s available in the
quantities you need, with outstanding local service and support where you need it.
Sure the world is hard, but one choice is easy:
Hardox. A Part of Your Success
THE WORLD IS HARD.
HARDOX IS HARDER.
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
COLLECTION AND TRANSPORT SPECIAL • JOINING THE UNDERGROUND (PART 1)
Joining the underground (Part 1)
The Kliko Terberg Zijlader (sideloader) system
The KTZ system is a fully integrated underground waste collection
system requiring specialized equipment but, as Malcolm Bates
discovers during a visit to Antwerp, it removes the dangers associated
with lifting loaded waste containers by hydraulic crane and can be
used with ground level container installations…
Already in operation in a number of European cities,
the KTZ system has several major advantages
over existing waste collection systems and one big
disadvantage – it doesn’t come cheap.
Let’s explore that ‘disadvantage’ first and get it
out of the way, because what we should be looking at here are
the advantages. The disadvantage is that, as the KTZ system was
designed to incorporate several big advances in waste
and recyclable materials collection technology, it
requires a ‘fully integrated’ plan to install it.
In other words, the key card technology
used in the ‘receptors’, the GPS-linked
container sites, the containers themselves
and even the automatic sequence side-
loading collection trucks have all been
designed to work together. And as
such they are unique to the KTZ
system. Nothing else currently at
work in your city’s waste collection
fleet will be of any use. So existing
fleets will need to be replaced in order
to gain the most in terms of efficiency.
And however you cut it, that’s going to
be expensive.
Making the decision to install the
KTZ system is one that will be taken at
the highest level, as it will involve considerable
planning, investment and a not insignificant amount
of disruption while being installed. Is it worth it? To judge
that, it’s essential to put aside everything you currently know
about the waste business and approach the KTZ system with a
fresh pair of eyes and an open mind. It theory, it sounds complex,
but following an extensive briefing by technical staff at Dutch
equipment manufacturer Terberg and those working for Kliko,
the waste container manufacturer partner in the project, I’m now
in the Belgian city of Antwerp to see how the KTZ system works
in ‘real life’.
Let’s start by looking at the various elements that go to
make up ‘the system’. One of the main reasons for considering
it in the first place is that it offers underground waste container
storage and handling capability. In other words, all the unpleasant
elements that residents currently have to look at everyday
are taken away and buried in purpose-built sealed concrete
‘silos’. These silos each contain one 3 m3 container and feature
a hydraulic ram-operated hinged metal lid. On that
is mounted the receptor, into which residents
place their waste or recyclable materials. These
receptors are available in different designs
and can be colour-coded (or labelled) to
indicate what materials can be deposited
in them.
Collection ‘on demand’
The key point here is that each
container – several are normally
sited together in a ‘nest’ – has a
specifically designated waste stream.
In effect this means that residents
are segregating each waste stream at
source, making collection and disposal
much easier as no further sorting of each
waste stream should be required. Typically,
there will be four or five containers located
together – with one each for residual household
waste, packaging materials and/or paper, cardboard,
glass and plastics. Because the containers are well-sealed, the
KTZ installation could include a food waste container as well.
In addition, because the container installations are ‘intelligent’
and can be ‘interrogated’ to ascertain how full they are without
the silo lid having to be lifted, the normal problem of estimating
collection periods between each visit from the collection vehicle
can be made ‘on demand’.
As a result, considerable time can be saved by cutting out
visits to containers that are not yet full. It is the ‘intelligent data
Harry
Achterberg
of Kliko
WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD May–June 2010 21
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
COLLECTION AND TRANSPORT SPECIAL • JOINING THE UNDERGROUND (PART 1)
22 May–June 2010 WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD
collection’ aspect of the KTZ system that, while adding to the
initial purchase and installation costs, should play a major role in
saving money once in service. And because an ‘historical’ map
can be made of each container loading pattern (through the data
from each resident’s personal key card, the total number of visits,
the weight of waste deposited in each receptor and the weight of
each full container as recorded on the collection truck), it should
be possible to not only plan the optimum collection frequency
(so only full containers are lifted), but also to use the collected
data to plot waste volumes in each district, to calculate recycling
percentage ratios and, ultimately, to determine the capacity of
any new waste handling facility required in future.
‘Pay-per-visit’ technology
These benefits are vital in helping to plan for the future, but the
technology developed by Terberg and its partner in the KTZ project,
Kliko, was actually developed for a more controversial purpose – to
facilitate a faster, easier collection system that could be operated
by one person, i.e. the collection truck driver. Yes, in cities with a
high unemployment level, replacing a large crew of loaders with
automatic machinery is controversial. But even more of an issue is
that the data collection capability was designed to make it possible to
charge residents for each visit they make to a waste receptor.
‘Pay-by-weight’ (or ‘pay-as-you-throw’) technology has been
seized on by some in our industry as the only way forward
because it enables city authorities to charge families who choose
not to reduce their total output by recycling. While installing chips
on each conventional waste container gives a reasonable picture,
the KTZ system has the advantage of knowing exactly which
residents in any community are recycling and which ones are not.
But as Harry Achterberg of Kliko explains, the data collection
capability of the KTZ system can be a vital management tool
even in cities where collection costs are met out of local taxes. ‘In
The Terberg side-loading collection vehicle is lined up beside the
KTZ silo ready for the hydraulic-electric silo lid to be raised. Note
the safety bars to prevent pedestrians getting too close
LEFT: Loader arms lift the special container vertically to avoid spillage. Unlike the
bottom-dump containers used in some systems, KTZ containers are leak-proof
RIGHT: The loader arms tip the container directly into the loading hopper. There is
a ‘sideshift’ facility to ensure the arms engage squarely onto the container so as to
avoid the need to reposition the truck if it is not parked squarely onto the silo
addition to providing a detailed picture of the tonnages deposited
in each container, the individual key card helps prevent vandalism
and by presenting a clean, modern image, we’re convinced it will
make it easier to keep the surrounding areas free from fly-tipped
material, as well as reducing infestation of flies and rodents in
residential areas,’ he explained.
That’s the container installation explained, so how about the
mechanics of the system? To find out more, I was invited to go
out with the installation team from Kliko and Terberg as they put
the final touches to the installation in the historic Belgian port of
Antwerp. By the time you read this, the system will have gone ‘live’
following initial trials in selected districts. It was worth the visit.
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
A Product of Hard Work
JCB offers the widest range of specialist machinery, purpose designed and built for the waste
and recycling industry. As well as providing you with incredible productivity, reliability and
durability, these machines include cab filtration, air conditioning, light-guards, additional machine
protection, purpose built materials handling rigs and hydraulic or fixed high rise cabs as well as
offering a full range of JCB attachments to suit any Waste and Recycling application. To learn
more, talk to your local waste and recycling specialist (there’s one in every JCB dealership).
JCB Sales Ltd, Rocester, Staffordshire ST14 5JP Tel: 0800 581761 www.jcb.com
The Competitive Edge in
Waste and Recycling
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
COLLECTION AND TRANSPORT SPECIAL • JOINING THE UNDERGROUND (PART 1)
24 May–June 2010 WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD
Obviously, the number (or frequency) of container ‘nests’
depends on the density of housing, but one of the toughest
neighbourhoods in which to collect domestic waste has to be
high-rise apartment blocks where normal containers are subject
to vandalism. But equally difficult is getting a waste collection
vehicle into narrow ‘old quarter’ city centre streets where
apartments, shops and small businesses are all mixed together
without causing disruption to residents or tourists.
Live in Antwerp
It’s in both these scenarios where the KTZ system performs
well. I visited a typical 1960s housing development close to
the port area that is now home to the poorer elements of
Antwerp residents (many of whom are elderly) and more recent
waves of immigrants. As such developments tend to house a
disproportionate number of unemployed, they’re often doubly
difficult to keep clean and tidy. So it was interesting to note
the KTZ containers were being used as intended, the area was
clean and tidy, and as Harry Achterberg explained, even though
a ‘pay-by-visit’ regime was used in Antwerp, those who were
unemployed or on low incomes were not excluded as special
‘credits’ could be loaded onto their key cards as part of benefit
payments. Equally, of course, ‘rewards’ or discounts on local
property taxes could be devised to incentivize greater recycling.
A key aspect of the KTZ system is that each container is used
for a specific designated waste stream. I note that today we’re
collecting residual household waste with the 26-tonne three axle
side-loading collection truck. Based on a Paccar DAF chassis
with a steering non-driven rearmost axle, it’s still a big truck in
the narrow roads in this neighbourhood. But as all the driver
has to do is get alongside the hinged silo lid in each installation,
it’s an easier job that reversing into numerous courtyards where
traditional 1100-litre wheeled containers would typically be
found.
Terberg claims that each container cab be accessed, lifted,
emptied and returned back into its silo within 3–3.5 minutes.
That might not sound especially fast, but as I was to discover,
it is a semi-automated process. And as the kerbside silos can be
protected by ‘no parking’ signs, it should make the collection
round (route) much easier to plan. So let’s run through the
procedure...
The KTZ system is designed for pay-by-weight regimes, but key
card controlled receptors can be used free of charge by poor or
elderly residents by adding credits to the card. Kliko technology
also measures the weight of waste deposited at each visit.
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
_____________
____________
JOINING THE UNDERGROUND (PART 1) • COLLECTION AND TRANSPORT SPECIAL
WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD May–June 2010 25
All the controls on the electronic panel in the truck cab are
‘sequential’ in that each one has to be completed before the next
can be activated. The first job is to drop three jackleg stabilizers that
in effect ‘lock’ the truck chassis to the highway. This seems to take
quite a while and needs doing for each separate ‘lift’, but as each
fully-loaded container can weigh up to two tonnes – to which has
to be added the considerable extra weight of the twin loading arms
– the stabilizers are essential for stability. With the legs down, the
extendable safety barriers fitted onto the truck (to prevent residents
falling into the open silo) are dropped down and the loader arms
lowered from the transit position. After that, a telescopic ‘probe’ is
activated to provide the electrical power via the truck’s own 24-volt
supply to lift the silo lid. With the silo lid raised, the twin loader arms
are positioned above two slots in the top edge of each container and
once located – thanks to a bank of CCTV cameras outside and high
resolution screens in the truck cab – the ISO twistlocks are activated.
So, what happens if the locks haven’t engaged correctly?
Nothing – load sensing built into the arms prevents them being
lifted. With the green light showing on the control panel, I can
move onto the next operation which is to lift the loaded container
up into the hopper mounted behind the cab. Expecting this to be
the hard part, I was impressed to find that not only is the entire
process automatic from here on in, but the system remembers the
return path, so the container pops straight back into the silo without
the need to ‘jiggle’, crash, or bang it against the side of the silo.
Incidentally, if the technology does go wrong, a manual step-by-step
control panel enables the driver to over-ride the automatic safety
interlocks. With the container back in its silo, all that’s needed is to
close the lid, fold the arms into transit mode, close the hinged lid
over the loading hopper, retract the jacks and drive to the next ‘nest’.
Conclusions
The KTZ system needs its own special containers and, while
it uses a side-loading collection vehicle that at first glance looks
like any other, in practice those special ISO twistlock-equipped
loader arms are also unique. But underground ‘silos’ are not
essential. In locations where excavation isn’t possible, a ground
level – but still secure – alternative can be specified using the
same container design. This might sound like a contradiction, but
it does at least enable a city-wide switchover to be made without
incurring the entire cost of installation in the first year.
Why might your city want to ‘go underground’? The ability
to gather data and provide an anti-vandal environment is ideal in
residential areas, while the advantages of hiding waste containers
out-of-sight in downtown areas where business people and
tourists don’t have to see them could have considerable financial
benefits in attracting more visitors to any ‘old quarter’ – and
ensuring they return. The containers also offer considerable
improvement to waste collection in markets and other large civic
venues.
In addition to the new installation in Antwerp, KTZ
installations are also working in the Belgian city of Mechelen,
Winterswijk in Holland, Dublin in Ireland and Ljubljana in
Slovenia. It seems the underground movement is growing...
Malcolm Bates is collection & transport correspondent for
Waste Management World.
e-mail: [email protected]
■ This article is on-line. Please visit www.waste-management-world.com
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
_____________________
COLLECTION AND TRANSPORT SPECIAL • JOINING THE UNDERGROUND (PART 2)
Joining the underground (Part 2)
Sotkon’s system promotes crane-based collection
Portugal might not have a reputation as a major manufacturing
centre, but as Malcolm Bates reports from the Algarve, it’s where the
Sotkon underground waste container storage system is produced.
Designed to meet the demands of waste disposal in Mediterranean
climates, he is convinced it could have a wider global market.
26 May–June 2010 WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD
We don’t need to debate this issue in too much
detail but a combination of hot sun, enough
tourists to increase the population of a resort
town by a factor of three and heaps of waste do
not go well together!
Tourists visit coastal holiday resorts to enjoy themselves. On
that ‘to do’ list might be ‘play golf ’, ‘visit a night club or casino’
or just simply ‘sit on the beach all day with a cool beer’. What is
unlikely to be on that list is ‘get woken up at 4am by refuse truck
crew dropping metal containers in the alley beside hotel’, or
‘choke on the smell of rotting food waste containers while visiting
the local market in the old quarter of the city’.
On the face of it, issues such as having to send refuse truck
crews out very early in the morning to get the work done before
the sun gets too hot, or finding ways to prevent paying guests
being woken (when most of them have only just gone to bed)
could be seen as a odd starting point for the design of a new
waste container storage and handling system. But that’s very
much what we have in the Sotkon underground waste container
storage system.
The original design brief was to enable busy (but not
especially financially well-off) municipalities with large numbers
of tourists to remove refuse containers from view, while at the
same time reducing infestation from rodents and flies – and of
course the odour associated with conventional waste containers
in public places. It would be nice to suggest that all municipalities
throughout the world would want to do this for the benefit of its
residents, but the fact remains, it’s often tourist dollars that drive
inner city infrastructure developments.
A few years ago, the Portimao municipality on the Algarve
in Portugal had considered a move over to wheeled containers
– either individual 240-litre units or larger 1100-litre communal
containers. However, there are a number of problems associated
with their widespread adoption in busy, congested old parts of
towns of which easy access by collection crews was just one
issue. There was also another factor to consider – the need to
continually improve recycling ratios; for if there were already
problems accommodating one waste container for each shop or
cafe, it was likely to prove impossible to accommodate three, five
or more individual recycling ‘fraction’ containers in the same
space.
Luis Barbosa Fernandes, director
of EMARP, the municipally owned
company that looks after waste
collection and disposal in the
Portimao area (right) with Joao
Martins, marketing director of Sotkon
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD May–June 2010 27
No more nasty smells
The solution? More regular collection of smaller containers was
an option, but any added costs would have to be paid for out of
taxes levied on the all-year-round residents.
The alternative? All the waste containers
could be made bigger if they were buried
underground, increasing waste capacity
which, in turn, helps promote greater
flexibility in collection frequency.
Going underground also had the
advantage of putting the waste
containers out of sight.
The Algarve attracts
traditional sun-seeking tourists
in the summer months as well
as large numbers of golfers at
either end of the season when
temperatures are a bit more in
tune with some physical effort!
From an economic viewpoint
that’s a good thing for Portimao.
From a waste handling perspective,
however, the influx of visitors increases
the population of the town from its
normal 44,000 to three times that figure.
‘This placed a serious strain on resources,’
explains Luis Barbosa Fernandes who is head of the
municipally owned waste, recycling, street cleansing and grounds
maintenance organization, EMARP (Empresa Municipal de Água
e Resíduos de Portimão). The tonnages of waste collected also
increase dramatically at the very time of year when the summer heat
makes the task more stressful for the crews.
But which underground system to go for? Narrow congested
streets ruled out larger collection trucks and the
headroom needed for systems requiring a side-
loader, while crane handling systems (those
that lift containers up directly into the
loading hoppers of compaction-type
refuse collection vehicles) were
ruled out by the large numbers
of overhead cables, signs and
overhanging balconies in the
town. ‘Ideally we required
a system that enabled us to
use conventional rear loading
collection vehicles with
container lifters, while storing
suitable containers out of sight
underground,’ Luis explained.
And essentially, that is the beauty
of the Sotkon system – it allows
existing designs of refuse collection
vehicle (RCV) to be used.
How is this possible? Essentially,
the Sotkon 3 m3 capacity underground
storage containers have the same length and
width as a current 1100-litre wheeled container. This
enables existing twin-arm binlifters (as used on 1100-litre type
containers) to also pick up Sotkon units. The Sotkon container
doesn’t, however, have wheels so it can’t run away down a steep
JOINING THE UNDERGROUND (PART 2) • COLLECTION AND TRANSPORT SPECIAL
Typical Sotkon underground
container ‘nest’ site with a
separate container for each
waste/recyclable material
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
_______________________
__
______
COLLECTION AND TRANSPORT SPECIAL • JOINING THE UNDERGROUND (PART 2)
28 May–June 2010 WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD
slope. And in line with the original design brief to reduce noise,
Sotkon containers are not made of metal or injection-moulded
hard plastic, but of rubberized plastic. So they are safer in use
and make very little noise when being handled – it is claimed.
So how are these containers ‘lifted’ out of their underground
silos and moved to the rear of the collection vehicle hopper if
they can’t be wheeled? The answer, as the picture illustrates, is by
a small crane. Unlike other crane-based underground systems,
however, the crane used by the Sotkon system differs in that it
isn’t used to both lift and empty the container into the hopper of
the truck. Its only function is to lift the Sotkon container out of
the precast concrete silo up to ground level, slewing it from the
side of the collection vehicle to the rear of the hopper (Sotkon
silos are normally arranged in ‘nests’ of several units located
by the kerbside). The crane hook is then unhitched before the
binlifter empties the container. When this has been done, the
crane hook is hitched on again and the container swung back
into its silo. The only ‘special’ modification is the fitting of
the loader crane onto existing
collection vehicles or new units.
Significantly during a time of
global recession, ‘retrofitting’
cuts out the need to pay for a
whole new collection fleet and
the installation of the silos in
one budget year.
A key advantage
Is splitting the process into
two distinct operations an
unnecessary waste of time
and effort? That was my initial
reaction when I first saw the
Sotkon system at the 2009
Entsorga event in Cologne,
Germany. But having observed
both a day and night shift with
EMARP crews in Portimao, I
have to say that at just over three
minutes for each container lift,
the Sotkon system compares well
with any other alternative while
having the added advantage of
enabling otherwise standard
designs of RCV to be used. EMARP uses an all Volvo/Haller fleet of
two-axle 19-tonne gross units; the 1.8-tonne lift capacity telescopic
crane is mounted directly onto the roof of each compaction body via
a steel plate containing the slew ring.
According to Joao Martins, marketing director at Sotkon,
part of the reason why the crane can be smaller and lighter is
because it only has to lift from below ground up to ground level,
and not the entire container to a height where it can discharge
directly into the RCV hopper. ‘This means we can use a lighter
construction, smaller cylinders and less oil. But it’s also safer
in operation, I would suggest,’ he explains. ‘Also important in
urban situations is that unlike other competitive systems, our
customers don’t need to increase the wheelbase of the collection
truck chassis in order for the crane to be mounted on the chassis
behind the cab, or alternatively reduce body capacity by having
to shorten the body to make space for the crane,’ he adds. He’s
right – that’s a key advantage. Also, a conventional open-topped
tipping body with chassis-mounted lorry loader crane can also
be used for recyclable materials such as paper and cardboard if
required – which helps reduce costs further.
So how well does the Sotkon system perform in real life?
Thanks to the co-operation of Luis Barbosa Fernandes and the
municipality of Portimao, I can confirm it performs really well.
The ‘nests’ of underground storage containers are normally
located by the kerbside and are used by residents of apartment
blocks, small business premises and in more modern ‘retail parks’.
The hinged 1850 x 1850 mm Sotkon silo covers can be located
on verges or under pedestrian areas; being secure, they do not
have to be tucked away out of sight as conventional containers do.
This saves collection time. EMARP statistics gathered over
a two-year period suggest each vehicle working on Sotkon
containers will ‘pack’ in 10 extra hours per week (that is actually
working rather than waiting) with one less crew member (from
three down to two). On a city-wide fleet that adds up to a much
greater collection rate per vehicle, taking into account the fact
that each Sotkon container is
located by the kerbside and
takes a 3 m3 load per tip.
One of the other
key advantages of using
underground containers is that
existing courtyards currently
used to store wheeled
containers can be freed up.
The space available enables
commercial waste companies
to offer their clients a solution
to the restricted car parking
in downtown areas. With the
value of each individual car
parking slot worth hundreds
of dollars a year in potential
rent in some cities that could
help make the installation of
an underground system far
more cost-effective than you
might otherwise expect.
Certainly, the Portimao
authorities are convinced of
the savings that come from
installing an underground
system and Luis Barbosa Fernandes is keen to welcome ISWA
members to see the Sotkon system in action. Although there is a
certain amount of disruption while each silo pit is excavated (Joao
Martins suggests this only takes two days from start to finish per
container ‘nest’), it is reported that residents currently not on
underground containers are keen to be part of the ‘underground
movement’. The installation costs will obviously vary in different
parts of the world, but EMARP’s figures suggest that installing an
underground system as part of an inner city refurbishment could
help bring in enough extra tourist dollars to pay back the costs.
Malcolm Bates is collection and transport correspondent for
Waste Management World.
e-mail: [email protected]
■ This article is on-line. Please visit www.waste-management-world.com
With lid raised, the crane mounted on the
RCV is used to raise the waste container out
of the silo, placing it in front of the binlifter
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
COLLECTION AND TRANSPORT SPECIAL • TEAM EFFORT
Team effortThe story behind the new low entry cab from Volvo
Despite several attempts over the years, Volvo Truck & Bus Ltd has never
produced a really good easy entry ‘crew cab’ for waste applications. But
now one of the largest truck manufacturers on the planet has teamed
up with a specialist manufacturer in Belgium to produce a low-entry cab
refuse collection chassis/cab. Malcolm Bates gives you the lowdown.
Over the years, several major truck manufacturers
have tried to produce a ‘municipal’ chassis for refuse
collection operations. At one time, this involved an
extra heavy duty chassis, larger diameter clutch
and a low ratio gearbox – not to mention axles and
springs that would survive life on a rough landfill haul road. But
above all, it required a cab to take up to six crew.
Today? The priorities are different. For a start, apart from
the developing world markets and more sparsely populated rural
areas, fewer refuse collection vehicles (RCVs) have to venture
off-highway twice a day to tip these days. Waste transfer sites are
now a feature of most urban areas so it’s traffic congestion, the
demands of recycling and the costs associated with legal action
by staff, injured while working, that are the priorities.
The need for ‘a crew cab’ is also much reduced for the simple
reason that a refuse collection crew – which during my early
career as ‘a waste collection operative’ was typically the driver
and five loaders – is now more likely to be the driver and two
loaders, or increasingly, just the driver and one loader in urban
areas. And just the driver in rural areas or on automatic side
loading systems like the Terberg ‘KTZ system’ featured in the
article on page 21.
So does that mean there’s no need for a special chassis and
cab configuration for waste and recycling collections? Far from
it. In fact, a look at how most developed nations collect waste
today will show that the need for a specialist ‘low cab’ chassis
(with the engine behind the cab rather than under it) and the
right combination of axles, suspension and exhaust system is
increasingly necessary.
A growing demand
When the politically motivated trend for ‘privatization’ started to
spread from the USA to Europe during the 1980s, many predicted
the end of the specialized manufacturers as commercial waste
operators ‘made do’ with cheaper-to-buy standard truck chassis.
Although some specialist manufacturers sadly went down, there
is now a growing demand for special low entry cab options.
One of the first Volvo ‘FEC’ low cab 6x2 rear steer
chassis for waste collection operations was a UK-spec
machine with right-hand steering, but a left-hand
steering version will be available shortly. Current use
of a flat roof panel will be changed to a higher sleeper
cab version to improve headroom inside the cab
Why? In a word – health and safety legislation (OK, make
that four words!). As crews have got fewer in number, so the
workload of those remaining has become more stressful. At
one time, in many markets, it was forbidden on safety grounds
for the driver to get out of the cab while the truck engine and
power take-off (PTO) were running. This meant the crew did all
the loading. Today, the advent of full air brakes and the almost
universal adoption of automatic transmissions with a ‘park’ lock
allow the driver to leave the cab with the truck engine running.
But smaller crew numbers also means that driver and crew have
to enter and exit the cab hundreds of times a day – especially
where crews riding on rear steps is forbidden.
WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD May–June 2010 29
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
COLLECTION AND TRANSPORT SPECIAL • TEAM EFFORT
30 May–June 2010 WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD
TEAM EFFORT • COLLECTION AND TRANSPORT SPECIAL
Unfortunately, even reducing the height of the cab door step
is a major problem. On most standard haulage (line-haul) truck
chassis, the cab floor level is a compromise of competing factors
– of which ground clearance and the need to get cool air into the
radiator are just the most obvious. At the same time, lowering the
cab is of little practical value on waste collection duties if the low
step height it creates continues to be matched to a narrow door
step width. Why? Whereas most regular truck drivers climb in
and out facing the actual truck cab, the key feature of a low entry
cab RCV is that the crew should be able to exit facing outwards
without having to duck their heads, or involve any other move
that might promote a fall – or a claim for repetitive strain injury
compensation.
A good attempt
If that all sounds rather obvious, then I have to tell you it is
something that even some of the world’s largest brands have
failed to get right. What do I know? Having worked on the design
of a low cab RCV way back in 1971, I know enough to spot a
good attempt when I see one. And I’ve recently spent the day
looking over just such a ‘good attempt’ – the recently introduced
Volvo LEC (low entry cab).
If you follow such things, you’ll already know that Volvo’s
main Scandinavian rival, Scania, already has a low cab option
available. And if you like to weave some ‘history’ into your
current job, you’ll probably also know that Volvo has tried to
engineer a ‘municipal crew cab’ several times over the years
without any major success in sales terms.
It’s not an easy job to do, as in today’s safety conscious
(and cost conscious) world, it’s essential that as many ‘standard’
pressed steel panels and other components from mainstream
production cabs as possible are used. Unfortunately, any special
parts that are needed tend to cost far more in proportion and can,
if fitted ‘off-line’, have serious warranty issues should they fail in
later life. In contrast to engineering pressures to compromise, it’s
always much easier to start with a ‘clean slate’ when it comes to a
new ‘concept’ such as a low entry cab. The secret to success is to
balance the two. And again, looking at the cab and chassis design
of the Volvo LEC, I have to say, ‘the balance’ looks pretty good.
So how has it been done? Obviously a standard Volvo (and
shared with Renault) FE cab was the starting point. And equally
obviously, like rivals Scania, in order to drop the cab down in
height, there has been a corresponding need to mount it further
forward – increasing the front overhang. This whole issue of
‘balance’ is central to the success (or failure) of such a project and
at the heart of it is the shape of a standard production cab door
and frame. Luckily, the shape of the Volvo FE cab door seems
to lend itself well to its new configuration and, interestingly, this
has been well-matched to the next difficult compromise – how
to re-engineer the cab floor while utilizing the standard haulage
(line-haul) truck dash panel and instruments.
Mainstream truck cabs don’t need large areas of flat floor, but
waste collection trucks do as the loaders have to be able to stand
inside the cab to put on (and take off) wet weather gear and still
be able to walk out forward-facing in complete safety without
slipping. Again, this is the area where some manufacturers keen
to win a slice of the market have failed. Indeed, on the first few
Volvo LECs completed – like the unit I was able to try at the
Warwick HQ of Volvo Truck & Bus UK – the ‘stand-up’ issue
wasn’t fully achieved because a basic day cab flat roof design was
used. But I understand this issue has now been addressed and a
taller cab roof pressing from a sleeper cab will be used in future
to give increased headroom. This will also have the advantage of
improving the overall look of the vehicle as a higher cab roof will
mould into the front of the waste compaction body to produce a
more streamlined shape.
Automatically lowered step
That’s the concept then. So how does the LEC look in detail?
Inside, the cab floor is quite flat around the kerbside step and the
whole design does enable the crew of up to three loaders to enter
in one movement and exit facing forwards. Here Volvo’s expertise
as a major bus and coach manufacturer comes into play as, when
the truck stops by the kerb, the air suspension ‘dumps’ to lower
the bottom step height by 110 mm. This brings the first step to
within 440 mm of the ground – and much less against a kerb. Is
it a gimmick? No, it’s a useful safety feature and it does work.
The cab is an interesting mix of a standard Volvo FE
cab with a flat floor and without engine intrusion, so as
to make way for up to three crew plus driver
Using bus industry proven ‘kneeling’ air suspension, the driver can drop the
chassis over 100 mm from normal ride-height to facilitate improved crew ease of
entry. It does make a major difference
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
TEAM EFFORT • COLLECTION AND TRANSPORT SPECIAL
WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD May–June 2010 31
The other ‘odd’ feature of the LEC cab is ... it’s ‘odd’! Or
asymmetric to be more precise. The floor on the driver’s side
has to contain the pedals (obviously), but at the same time
dropping the driver’s eyeline too low is not a good idea as it
increases the blind spot in front of the front screen. The LEC
uses the same basic door design as that used on the kerbside,
but it has a higher lip and exposed step so as to allow for a flat
footboard inside. The other ‘odd’ feature is that there is no side
window aft of the B-post on the driver’s side, but there is on the
kerbside. Again this is a good idea as it gives a storage space for
wet weather gear behind the driver’s seat.
Chassis-wise, there are numerous changes to the standard
models, but as Volvo is already a major supplier to the waste
and recycling sectors, many of these are already listed options.
Obviously, the lowered, more forward-mounted LEC cab
has involved changes to the front of the chassis, however the
engine/transmission position hasn’t changed from the standard
FE. This should enable the adoption of diesel electric hybrid
drive, ‘Bio-DME’, biofuel engine options and/or the recently
announced ‘tri-axle’ rear bogie to be specified without added
cost.
If this story doesn’t sound especially high-tech or dramatic
well that’s because it isn’t. But perhaps the most amazing part of
the whole project is that the LEC did not originate from Volvo
Truck & Bus Corporate HQ at Gothenburg in Sweden at all.
The initial demand for an alternative low entry cab option came
from commercial waste companies in the UK already operating
Volvo trucks. But as no such model was listed by Volvo – and the
UK no longer has the specialized industry needed to undertake
such a conversion to OEM standards – the idea was put on
hold.
Meanwhile, Volvo engineers in Gothenburg were unable to
sanction a factory design as the actual numbers required – even
on a global level – would be too small for a line build option.
Again, the story takes an interesting twist. With orders for the
LEC concept already promised, Volvo engineers at Volvo in the
UK remembered that specialist manufacturer, Estepe (based in
Belgium) already had considerable expertise and a proven track
record in producing specialized crew cabs for Volvo fire fighter
chassis. While the demands were different, the need for a high
quality factory-warranted product that was suitable for a long
service life was similar. More to the point, smaller specialist
manufacturers can often act more quickly and ...
Well, the fairy tale ending to this story is that while, at
present, only right-hand drive LEC chassis/cabs have been
produced for the UK market, the end product is so ‘right’ it
looks like being available in other European and global markets
soon. Already, several large multinational waste sector PLCs
such as Veolia have placed orders and, of course, the same cab
configuration could offer benefits in urban distribution or other
applications.
Malcolm Bates is collection and transport correspondent for
Waste Management World.
e-mail: [email protected]
■ This article is on-line. Please visit www.waste-management-world.com
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
COLLECTION AND TRANSPORT SPECIAL • SMALL WONDER
Small wonderJohnston and Bucher launch ‘dual branded’ sub-compact sweeper
Last time Waste Management World’s Malcolm Bates was at the
Bucher plant in Switzerland, it was to try the then newly announced
‘City Spider’ sub-compact vacuum sweeper – a good attempt
but it lacked power. Now, working with group member, Johnston
Sweepers, Bucher is back with a brand new ‘baby’ ride-on. Malcolm
Bates was the first journalist to drive it.
32 May–June 2010 WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD
Let’s get the complicated corporate stuff out the way first.
It should be quite clear to any observer that there are
too many small independent suppliers of equipment to
the scrap, waste, recycling and street cleansing markets
nationally and globally.
On one hand, it’s what makes our jobs challenging. Just
keeping up with new developments is a full-time job for me! But
on the other hand it’s clear that in the mainstream automotive
sector, our industry is in an era of consolidation and merger.
This has already thrown-up some strange ‘partnerships’ – Norba
ended up as a division of Geesink when, from a technical
viewpoint, it should have been the other way around. How both
ended up as part of US manufacturer Oshkosh is another story.
The coming together of bin lifter manufacturer Otto,
compaction body manufacturer HN Logistics and several other
suppliers of bins and containers seemed an excellent idea, but
‘common sense’ doesn’t always work, and design-lead HN
Schorling is now owned by the Spanish Ros Roca Group.
So, how the sale of UK-based manufacturer Johnston
Sweepers to Swiss-based Bucher works out remains to be seen.
Bucher already owned German sweeper manufacturer Schorling
and the Johnston sale included specialist manufacturer Johnston-
Beam. This meant two major previously competing suppliers of
airport sweeping equipment under the same corporate ownership.
Likewise, Johnston and Schorling were often competing against
each other in global markets for municipal street cleansing orders
and, in such circumstances, there is a corporate temptation
to badge the cheapest product in the group portfolio with
whichever brand logo has the greatest chance of sales. Examples
from the car and truck world suggest this is not always the best
way to go, and that even the launch of a genuine jointly produced
new product sold under a ‘dual branding’ policy is much harder
than a room full of Swiss accountants might think.
So, basically, the new Bucher Citycat 1000 and the Johnston
CN101 are the same product – but with numerous detail
differences. Both will be sold in world markets under whichever
brand has the strongest market presence, but it’s quite possible
both versions will be available in markets where large ‘turnkey’
contracts are bid for. In the Pacific Rim where traditionally
Johnston has been a major player, the CN101 will be the main
contender, while in others such as the wider Germanic markets,
the Citycat 1000 will be the strongest contender.
So the big question is – will this little one cubic metre capacity
vacuum sweeper be up to the job? Producing such a physically
small machine (it’s just 600 mm wide and under 2 m high) that
has the capacity to work all shift long without overheating either
the engine or the driver is a tough mission. Creating a sub-
compact design that has enough suction capacity and brushing
power to keep on working in an urban environment without
excessive downtime day-in, day-out for several years is even
harder. In spite of some manufacturers’ claims, many machines
in this capacity class do not tend to last very long.
Transverse power unit
So the news that the Johnston CN101/Bucher Citycat 1000 has
been designed specifically to work a typical northern European-
style week with minimal meal breaks – yet still only needs a 1000-
hour service schedule is a great starting point. Making a major
contribution to higher standards of reliability is the adoption of
a three-cylinder Deutz Diesel oil-cooled engine. And hopefully
adding further to its reliability is the decision to place the power
unit transversally across the chassis frame behind the cab, rather
than towards the rear of the machine.
While the transverse engine location has resulted in a widely
splayed chassis frame, it should help contribute to cooler running.
But I’m convinced that another major benefit of this transverse
location is that it places the mass of the engine and transmission
components nicely between the wheelbase, which helps provide
excellent handling characteristics.
There are several machines in this size class that don’t handle
well on windy days. There are several more that offer clever
design features in theory, but don’t translate into a friendly
environment for the driver – who has to spend hours cooped
up in a confined space. And we’ve already established that from
a service engineer’s viewpoint, there are several more that just
aren’t reliable enough to make the deployment of a fleet of sub-
compact precinct sweepers economical – especially when manual
sweeping and ‘street orderly’ carts are enjoying a revival in city
centres because they offer a highly visual image that the job is
actually being done, together with zero carbon emissions.
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
HOW CAN WE MOVE YOUR WORLD? Hydratech horizontal Loading and unloading equipment
Hallco Live Floor trailer conveyor systems
Safe and simple
Guaranteed performance and powerful.
Toploader Storage and discharging
equipment,
patent nr. 0882390
Space and energy saving
Spiro static two-way loading and unloading equipment
Solid and reliable
For further info please contact:
HydraTech Material Handling & Services BV, Compagniestraat 14, NL-7826 TB Emmen
Tel. +31-(0)591-624889 - Fax. +31-(0)591-622183 - Mail [email protected] - Web www.hydratech.nl - www.toploader.nl - www.spiro.nl - www.hallcomfg.com
SMALL WONDER • COLLECTION AND TRANSPORT SPECIAL
WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD May–June 2010 33
Sweepers boost tourism
So the fact that after several hours of working with a Johnston-
branded machine, the CN101/Citycat 1000 package offers
significant advances in all three areas – service schedules,
operational safety and driver comfort – should come as welcome
news to any city authority looking to encourage tourism for the
local economy.
What impressed me was that, with only
minimal familiarization, I could work
the machine. Everything was close
to hand and logical (the controls
are similar to the current
Johnston CX200), vision
was excellent and although
there is never going to
be too much space in
the cab of such a small
machine, the provision
of a proper truck-
style suspension
seat made the whole
‘driver experience’
a positive one. But
wait, it gets better ...
What really
impressed me was the
way in which the four-
wheel steering was able
to tackle kerbs. Some
competitive machines
have gone the ‘articulated’
route to help promote stability.
Sometimes this works (the Hako
‘Citymaster’ can be bounced up
high kerbs in enthusiastic style), but
some designs are too lightweight, or unstable
to survive harsh treatment. It is pointless suggesting
operatives shouldn’t hit kerbs at speed – it happens. It’s the
designer’s job to help ensure it doesn’t risk damage to life or
machinery when it does.
So it’s my job to take a brand new machine and find out what
it takes to flip it over, or get it hopelessly ‘grounded’ on a high
kerb. The answer is that it will take a great deal more abuse than
even I would meter out in the name of ‘testing’. The CN-101 I
drove would climb up a steep kerb square on – illustrating that
there was plenty of power available. Or it could be driven up at
an oblique angle without wagging a wheel helplessly in the air, or
catching the wheel-mounted collector box underneath.
Conclusions
There are just a couple of factors that could do with more thought.
First, there is not much room in the cab for driver’s things, such as
a waterproof jacket or anything which might need to go
in a ‘glove’ compartment. The only other ‘issue’
was when sweeping on a steep downgrade
from which I had to then reverse. I was
expecting the (single speed range)
hydrostatic transmission to ‘hold’
the machine while I switched
from forward to reverse
without the parking brake
being required. It didn’t.
As a result, I smashed the
brushes into some cast
iron gates!
The gates were
undamaged. But
amazingly, the sweep
gear of the CN101
survived as well. I’m
told that a stronger
‘hold’ position can
be set as standard and
this will be looked at on
production machines.
Sweeping performance and
water spray control are really well
up to ‘compact’ sweeper standards
with standard litter items like burger
wrappings and drinks cans disappearing up
the suction hose.
So will this single speed sweeper make big inroads
into the global market in both its branded guises? I think it might.
Malcolm Bates is collection and transport correspondent for
Waste Management World.
e-mail: [email protected]
■ This article is on-line. Please visit www.waste-management-world.com
In
its element
– footpaths,
shopping precincts
and other tight areas
are what this new
sweeper was designed
for. Suction is comparable
with larger machines,
while the brushes
are independently
controlled
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
F a l k e v e j 2 Te l : + 4 5 7614 3 4 0 0 b w v @ v o l u n d . d k
D K - 6 7 0 5 E s b j e r g Ø F a x : + 4 5 7614 3 6 0 0 w w w . v o l u n d . d k
BURNED TO A CRISP? IN OUR BUSINESS, THAT’S NOT GOOD ENOUGH.
When it comes to waste-to-energy, the grate is really where
it all happens. From drying to ignition. From combustion to
energy release. And if your grate isn’t effective, there’s
more ash to deal with and less energy to sell.
With several key patents for our combustion-grate tech-
nology, it’s no surprise that our solutions rank among the
most effective and robust units on the market today. We
provide both air-cooled and water-cooled versions. And
with two well-known technologies to choose from – BS and
Vølund – we can help improve your performance and in-
crease your availability. Find out how at www.volund.dk
Our patented grate technology ensures maximum energy release and complete burn-out
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
____________
MATERIAL SOLUTIONS IN WTE SYSTEMS • WASTE TO ENERGY
35WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD May–June 2010
Here we look at how a unique coating composition developed by
ArcMeltTM Company can protect the low alloy steels used for heat
transfer surfaces in waste-to-energy systems from high-temperature
chloridation, oxidation and corrosion.
by Dr Juan Carlos Nava
The widespread implementation of waste-to-energy (WTE)
systems has been limited in principle by the lower efficiency
of current system designs.1 Higher efficiencies can be
achieved by operating at higher temperatures, which in
turn translates into lower emissions and a more effective
combustion of municipal solid waste (MSW). However, the major
limitation to higher operating temperatures is the corrosion rates
experienced by the heat transfer surfaces in the furnace cavity and in
recovery convective paths.1
High-temperature chloridation and hot corrosion are the
primary modes of component degradation in WTE systems.1–4
Chlorine-containing compounds in chlorinated plastics and in
paper, cardboard and wood products generate flue gases with a
relatively high HCl(g) content. The poor combustion characteristics
of the MSW fuel result in incomplete combustion, leading to the
condensation on heat transfer surfaces of aggressive deposits rich
in alkali metals (Na, K) and heavy metals such as lead, tin and zinc.
The alkali and heavy metals are condensed primarily in the form of
sulphates and chlorides which melt at relatively low temperatures
causing hot corrosion attack.
Low alloy steels are the preferred choice for heat transfer
components in WTE boilers because of their affordability, excellent
heat transfer capabilities, and adequate mechanical properties within
the operating temperature range of the steam generating unit. However,
these iron-based alloys are highly susceptible to high-temperature
chloridation by flue gases containing HCl(g), resulting in the formation
of low vapour pressure chlorides of iron (i.e. FeCl2 and FeCl
3), with
vapour pressures in the order of 1 x 10-4 torr at temperatures as low
as 300ºC (578ºF), resulting in turn in the volatilization of the reaction
product. The iron chloride vapour is then oxidized to iron oxide; free
chlorine is pushed back to the metal surface due to thermophoresis, a
transport mechanism by which gases are delivered to the metal surface
under heat flux conditions, i.e. a hot gas and a cooler heat transfer
surface. This oxidation mechanism is known as ‘active oxidation’,3 a
self-supported oxidation process where the iron-based low alloy steel
is rapidly wasted away due to the continuous reaction of chlorine with
the metal surface.
Combating high-temperature chloridation
Surface modification technologies including thermal spray coatings,
weld overlays and diffusion layers represent an option to plant
operators to manage the accelerated wastage of low alloy steels due
to high-temperature chloridation attack. In particular, thermal spray
coatings represent a reliable and cost-effective approach to upgrade
the metal component surface by adding effective alloying elements
such as chromium at concentrations not practical in wrought or
cast alloys.
Of these surface technologies, twin wire arc spray (TWAS)
is the fastest application method and, under well-defined quality
controls, can generate protective surface layers with reasonable
life spans. Through its patent pending consumable manufacturing
process, ArcMeltTM Company is capable of producing any possible
alloy composition by the use of powder core wire technology.
ArcMeltTM core wire consumables can be sprayed significantly
faster when using a slightly modified spray gun and wire delivery
system. This results in well-adhered coated layers with porosity
levels below 5% and finely distributed oxides that impart lower
build-up stresses. Improved surface coverage translates into shorter
application times, meeting the most stringent outage schedules.
ArcMeltTM produces a composition marketed as AMC 3201
with 42% Cr- 8% Fe- Ni-balance. This chemical composition
is similar to alloy type 45CT. To understand the merits of this
composition in waste-to-energy applications we need to understand
the fundamental process of alloy protection in high-temperature
chloridating environments. Figure 1 shows the relative stability of
metal chlorides in the temperature range 200–550ºC (400–1000ºF).
This Ellingham diagram reveals that the most stable chlorides are
those of chromium.
Material solutions
in WTE systems
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
WASTE TO ENERGY • MATERIAL SOLUTIONS IN WTE SYSTEMS
May–June 2010 WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD36
But in high-temperature chloridation, what matters is the
volatility of the metal chlorides, and in this scenario, the important
parameter is the vapour pressure of the chloride phase as a function
of temperature. High vapour pressure compounds are usually those
with low melting points. Iron chlorides are metal chlorides with the
lowest melting points, i.e. 282ºC (539ºF) and 350ºC (662ºF) for
FeCl2 and FeCl
3, respectively. The stable chlorides of chromium and
nickel, CrCl2 and NiCl
2, have higher melting points, 540ºC (1000ºF)
and 728ºC (1342ºF), respectively, with vapour pressures in excess
of 1 x 10-4 torr at temperatures above 450ºC (842ºF), conferring a
tremendous advantage compared with iron-based alloys.
Resistance to oxidation
The environments generated during the incineration of waste are not
only potentially chloridating but also oxidizing. Table 1 lists the typical
flue gas composition in WTE units as reported in the literature.
The flue gases generated during the combustion of MWS are also
oxidizing with SO2(g) concentrations varying from 300 to 600 ppm
in the presence of excess air (in the order of 7 v%). Thermodynamic
calculations using the chlorine and oxygen indicators, log PCl2 and
log PO2, respectively, for the gas compositions listed in Table 1
indicate that the formation of protective chromium-rich oxides.
The thermodynamic tendency to form this stable chromium
oxide is what provides the resistance of this high-temperature resistant
AMC 3201 alloy against most of the high-temperature oxidation
phenomena, including high-temperature chloridation attack.
Upon exposure to the flue gases typical of WTE environments,
the relatively low porosity of the coating structure will most likely
be sealed by the formation of chromium-rich oxides as indicated by
thermodynamic analyses and demonstrated in the scanning electron
micrograph shown in Figure 2.
TABLE 1. Flue gas compositions in WTE steam generators1,4
Gas constituent Concentration
CO2
7.5–10 v%
H2O 13–20 v%
O2
7–10 v%
HCl 1000–1500 ppm
SO2
300–500 ppm
N2
balance
–30000.00
–40000.00
–50000.00
–60000.00
–70000.00
–80000.00
–90000.00Fre
e e
ne
rg
y o
f fo
rm
atio
n (
ca
l/K
mo
l o
f C
l 2)
400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850
Temperature (K)
MoCl2
NiCl2
FeCl2
CrCl3
CrCl2
Figure 1. Ellingham diagram: free energy of formation of metal chlorides
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
P.O. Box 3495
3003 AL Rotterdam
The Netherlands
P: +31 (0)10 240 26 20
F: +31 (0)10 240 26 29
E: [email protected] www.inashco.com
• Effective recycling of
small metal particles
from incinerator ash
• Maximize Economic and
Environmental benefits
INASHCO stands for incinerator ash
company. We offer a unique bottom
ash recycling service to the munici-
pal waste incineration industry,
based on best available technology.
Our technology is able to recover
metal particles down to 1 mm from
bottom ash.
Through optimal removal of conta-
minants in incinerator ash, mineral
products with improved characteris-
tics are produced for broader usage
in the construction sector.
FUTURE SOURCE 15 - 17 JUNE
STAND F58, GREEN ZONE
MATERIAL SOLUTIONS IN WTE SYSTEMS • WASTE TO ENERGY
37WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD May–June 2010
Sulphur dioxide poses
a further problem
Additionally, the presence of SO2(g) in the
flue gas can also react with sodium/potassium
chlorides leading to the formation of the
respective sulphate. The formation of alkali
sulphates exacerbates wastage rates due of their
tendency to react with residual alkali and heavy
metals chlorides to form a low melting eutectic
phase. This eutectic phase is highly ionic
and it dissolves most of the protective oxides
including chromia. However, the dissolution of
chromia in sulphatic melts neutralizes the ionic
character of the flux through the formation of
alkali chromates arresting the wastage process.
Conclusion
Any material designed for long-term resistance
to all possible scenarios of high-temperature
oxidation in waste-to-energy applications needs
to be such that long-term protection relies on the
formation of protective chromium-rich oxides.
Alloy formulation AMC 3201 has been designed
with this purpose based on an understanding of
all plausible environments generated during the
incineration of municipal waste.
This article was prepared by Dr Juan Carlos
Nava, DBA ME Technical Services, San
Diego CA, on behalf of ArcMeltTM Company
L.C. a subsidiary of CIC Group, Inc.
email: [email protected]
web: www.arcmelt.com
■ This article is on-line. Please visit www.waste-
management-world.com
References
1. B.A. Baker, G.D. Smith, L.E. Shoemaker, Performance of commercial alloys in
simulated waste incineration environments.
2. Yuuzou Kawahara, Application of high temperature corrosion-resistant materials
and coatings under severe corrosive environment in waste-to-energy boilers, Journal of
Thermal Spray Technology, Volume 6, Number 2, 2007, pp. 202–213.
3. Shang-Hsiu Lee, Nickolas J. Themelis, Marco J. Castaldi, High-temperature
corrosion in waste-to-energy boilers, Journal of Thermal Spray Technology, Volume 16,
Number 1, 2007, pp. 104–110.
4. D.O. Albina, K. Millrath, N.J. Themelis, ‘Effects of feed composition on boiler
corrosion in waste-to-energy plants’, 12th North American Waste to Energy
Conference (NAWTEC 12).
Figure 2. Oxidation
resistance of ACM
3201 in still air at
816ºC (1500ºF)
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
_______
_____________
������������������� ��������������
���������������������������������������������
���� � � � ��� ��� ����������� ��������� ������ ��������� � ���������� �� !"�#
$���� �� �%��&��'#&()�*&+�*� %,�-����� $� ����%��&��.�����
������������
������������������� ��������������� ���������������
������
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
________________________________
Jon McAteer, Technical Manager at Veolia Water Solutions &
Technologies, talks about the success of a Danish plant that
co-digests household waste, sewage sludge, food waste and organic
industrial wastewater to produce biogas for electricity generation.
by Jon McAteer
Disposal of sewage sludge is probably the biggest
problem currently facing the water industry. The most
widely used technology is anaerobic digestion. In the
UK, although the same process is used to generate
landfill gas from organic household waste, it is unusual
for both types of waste to be treated together. This is mainly due to a
lack of commonality between the organizations involved. In contrast,
Denmark has demonstrated ‘joined up thinking’ by developing a
major programme for biogas production using anaerobic digestion
technology. The Danish government’s ‘Energi 21’ plan sets out
integrated solutions for energy, waste management and nutrient
redistribution, and provides support for biogas development as
part of its policy target to meet 35% of the country’s energy needs
from renewable sources. With Germany now the leading EU user
of biogas, it is perhaps time for the UK to learn from Denmark’s
experience and adopt a joined-up approach to maximize energy
from waste and sewage sludge.
Veolia Environnment’s four business divisions (water, waste
management, energy and transport) make it well-placed to provide
complete solutions. Krüger A/S is part of Veolia Water Solutions &
Technology (VWS) (a subsidiary of Veolia Environnment’s water
division) and was responsible for developing much of the anaerobic
digestion technology currently being used in Denmark. Anaerobic
digestion requires a digestible feed and this often involves source
segregation. The availability of suitable industrial waste streams
can often be an advantage, adding to the capacity for biogas
generation and providing a cost-effective means for factories to
treat their waste. There also needs to be a viable disposal route for
sludge and for treated liquid digestate and, of course, the necessary
infrastructure for energy distribution.
A typical anaerobic digestion plant provides collection, storage
and blending of the waste to provide a consistent feed which is then
pasteurized prior to mesophilic digestion at 35°C. The dewatered
sludge is spread on land while the biogas produced by anaerobic
digestion is collected and burned in a combined heat and power
(CHP) plant to generate electricity.
The anaerobic digestion plant at Grindsted Kommune is one
such scheme. Designed by Krüger A/S, it produces almost 7000
Nm3/day of biogas which is used to generate electricity and provide
district heating. Grindsted Kommune is a mainly agricultural area
with local food processing industries. The anaerobic digestion plant
was designed in 1996 to co-digest organic household waste, sewage
sludge, food wastes from supermarkets and restaurants, and food
industry wastewater. Table 1 summarizes the composition of the
waste received and the amounts treated.
The greatest challenge to the engineers responsible for the
scheme was not a technical one, but having to arrange for household
waste to be sorted prior to collection. They considered the power
consumption required for mechanical sorting of the waste to be
too high in the context of plant sustainability, and undertook a
major programme to raise public awareness about the scheme.
The result was the introduction of a waste collection regime which
allows the organic fraction of household, restaurant and canteen
waste to be collected with minimum inconvenience to the public.
Each household is provided with a rack to hold a special degradable
paper bag for digestible organic material (but not garden waste) and
a plastic bag for the remainder. The bags are collected on alternate
weeks. The refuse collection team is specially trained and samples of
the separated waste are taken twice a year for quality testing.
Danes lead the way in
biowaste to energy
Table 1. Waste treated at Grindsted Kommune
Type of waste
1997 design
(tonnes/year)
2006 actual
(tonnes/year)
Organic fraction of household waste 1200 1150
Sewage primary and secondary sludge 40,000 39,000
Organic industrial wastewater 8,700 12,200
Waste from food stores and supermarkets 0 250
Total to biogas 49,900 52,600
DANES LEAD THE WAY IN BIOWASTE TO ENERGY • BIOWASTE
39WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD May–June 2010
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
Industrial waste is delivered into a 25-tonne capacity
underground blending tank before being comminuted and mixed
with liquid wastes in a 20 m3 slurry hopper. The bagged household
waste is added and the mixed solids conditioned in a strain press
before being transferred to the anaerobic digestion plant.
Pre-treatment consists of pasteurization of all the feed to ensure
that the final product can be used as a high quality soil improver.
The technology used is Veolia Water Solutions & Technology’s
BioPasteur®, which consists of two 20 m3 tanks operating on a
staggered fill–pasteurize–empty cycle so as to provide a semi-
continuous feed to the digester. Once filled, the tank’s contents
are heated to 70°C and held there for an hour. At the heart of
the BioPasteur process is the SWS (sludge–water–sludge) heat
exchanger, which is designed to recover as much heat as possible.
The pasteurized waste slurry is pumped through the SWS heat
exchanger where it is cooled to 35°C before entering the digester,
which has a hydraulic residence time of 14 days. Most of the heat
from the pasteurized waste slurry is recovered through its use to
pre-heat the raw waste slurry prior to pasteurization and to pre-heat
boiler make-up water.
The digester currently produces about 2.5 million m3 per year
of biogas. This is delivered, via a 500 m3 gas buffer storage bag, to
a gas engine that generates 250 kW of electricity and 340 kW of
heat. A gas boiler produces a further 700 kW of heat, with potential
to supply a district heating system. The odourless digested sludge is
dewatered to 22% dry solids (ds) on a belt press and then spread
on agricultural land. In the winter, when the ground is frozen or too
wet for spreading, it is held in store for use in the spring. Overall, the
plant achieves 60% degradation of the waste and reduces its mass
by a similar percentage.
The anaerobic digestion plant, together with suitable refuse bins
and collection vehicles, cost about €8.5 million in 1996. Table 2
summarizes the annual income and operating costs.
The success of the Grindsted Kommune anaerobic digestion
plant is in no small way due to the co-operation of the local public
and the policy of good communications which has provided
motivation to sort their waste at source – supported by a fines system
for households that fail to sort. Future plans include increasing the
throughput to over 6400 tonnes ds per year with biogas production
in excess of 26 million m3 per year, engine efficiency more than
30% to electric power, and the export of heat to district heating as a
benefit to the public.
The Danish model clearly works and has demonstrated the
ability of current anaerobic digester technology to co-digest
Table 2. Annual income and operating costs (2006 values)
Type Income (€ million) Cost (€ million)
Finance 0 0.54
Labour 0 0.05
Maintenance 0 0.09
Chemicals — 0.03
Electricity 0.15 0.11
Heat 0 0
Charges 0.47 0.09
Total 0.62 0.91
BIOWASTE • DANES LEAD THE WAY IN BIOWASTE TO ENERGY
May–June 2010 WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD40
More business, brighter future
More business, series 17.
What we can learn from Mister Messi.
Kühau 37, A-8130 Frohnleiten | T +43-3126 505 0 | [email protected]
up to 120 tons per hour
In the past, you could survive either as left or right footed in football. But if you
are not able to use both legs today, you will not have a chance in the Champions League.
The shredding business is very similar: Those who want to earn more money, must be able to handle universal applications while bringing the best performance possible; that means constant throughput. The Crambo – the ideal center forward for all professional teams.Transfer possible at any time.
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
to develop and, along with the latest high efficiency CHP systems,
it is possible to maximize the economic benefits of waste to energy.
And, with double Renewables Obligation Certificates (ROCs)
currently available for biogas-produced electricity to help support
this development, the future is definitely bright – the future is biogas.
Jon McAteer is Technical Manager at Veolia Water Solutions &
Technologies, Birmingham, UK.
e-mail: [email protected]
■ This article is on-line. Please visit www.waste-management-world.com
household waste, industrial waste and both primary and secondary
sewage sludge. There is a valuable lesson to be learned by countries
such as the UK. The UK already has a culture of sorting and
recycling waste, so the Danish approach could be easily adopted
here – with the political will. The reduction in the quantity of waste
going to landfill is significant and there are clear environmental
benefits to be gained. Anaerobic digestion technology is continuing
Above: Grindsted Kommune – mainly an agricultural area. Below: Anaerobic
digestion plant located near the sewage treatment works.
Figure 1. Anaerobic digester Stakeholders
DANES LEAD THE WAY IN BIOWASTE TO ENERGY • BIOWASTE
41WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD May–June 2010
You may compact, wrap and handle your waste and biomass – profitably !
MP 2000 COMPACTOR
Orkel MP 2000, proven technology. Pleased customers
are baling world wide.
�Compacting most materials 3:1.�Profitable for storage and transport.�Bales, convenient to handle for anybody.�Dense, waterproof , clean units to handle.�Mobile machine, easy to operate.
����� Compaction AS,
N - 7320 Fannrem, NorwayTel.: +4772488000, Fax: +4772488011,
www.orkel.noE-mail: [email protected]
Efficient compacting of waste,for transport and storage.
Please contact us:
Citizens
Farmer
Electric
grid
Biogasplant
Cityhall
Dustman
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
_____________________________________________________
THE ‘SUSTAINABLE LANDFILL’ BECOMES A REALITY • LANDFILL
43WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD May–June 2010
Adding air and moisture to a landfill to form an aerobic rather than an
anaerobic environment speeds up waste degradation and paves the
way for the recovery of valuable resources through landfill mining.
by Mark Hudgins, James Law, David Ross & Jun Su
Bioreactor landfills – also called ‘wet landfills’ – are
an emerging trend in waste management worldwide.
Adding moisture to the waste in a suitably designed
and operated landfill should increase its degradation,
leading to less risk and a move towards sustainability.
Adding air along with moisture in a bioreactor system holds
further promise as various laboratory, pilot- and field-scale
projects have demonstrated. Aerobic conditions can lead to lower
leachate treatment costs, reduced methane gas and less odour.
A landfill cell can be viewed as a ‘treatment system’ rather
than just a long-term waste containment structure. When the
‘treatment’ is complete, the conditioned waste, soil cover and
sacrificial plastic wells (used to inject air and water) can be mined
and excavated so that ‘new’ cell airspace can be created. From a
life-cycle perspective, the bioreactor landfill could be the basis for
a cost-effective sustainable solution to solid waste.
International aerobic bioreactor projects
Depending on site-specific parameters, landfill bioreactor
systems can be anaerobic, aerobic or semi-aerobic. There are
also hybrid designs that first use an aerobic process and then
switch to an anaerobic process to create early onset of landfill gas
(LFG) production.
The aerobic landfill process involves the growth and control
of aerobic and facultative bacteria within the waste instead
of anaerobic micro-organisms; an ‘underground cousin’ to
composting, the rate of decay in aerobic landfills matches closely
rates observed in composting.
Proper aeration, moisture addition and gas extraction are
needed to control the environment required for aerobic processes
to thrive with optimum efficiency. Air is typically injected via
vertical injection wells installed through the landfill cover to
maximize air delivery and to help control the heat generated.
Because over two-thirds of the original water content in the waste
mass may be lost during decomposition, water or other liquids
are often added to maintain aerobic activity.
Carbon dioxide, trace amounts of non-methane organic
compounds (NMOCs), water and salts (typically the by-products
of aeration) are removed via a second set of vertical wells
connected to a gas vacuum and header system. This helps
transfer heat from the waste to minimize fires and is used for LFG
‘polishing’ (if needed). Atmospheric oxygen is made available
to microbes in sufficient quantities to promote vitality of the
aerobic types and to minimize odours, but not in concentrations
that promote explosions (methane is present during the aerobic
system start-up at 45–50% v/v and trace amounts can remain
during operation).
There are now over a dozen aerobic projects worldwide,1 with
many different versions reporting similar performance results.2
For example, the Fukuoka method, an anaerobic approach
practised in Japan is simple to construct and operate, while
the ‘Bio-Puster Method’ (a patented landfill aeration system)
has been used in Austria since 1991. In 2000, a Dutch study
of selected methane gas control technologies ranked landfill
aeration of waste as the highest and most economical.3 In the
USA, aerobic projects have been conducted in over 10 states.
Aerobic landfill projects set the stage for
landfill mining
These projects showed that using the aerobic process as a
remediation tool lowered the hazards and risks typically found
in anaerobic waste environments (high pathogen mortality,
reduced methane). Thus where waste excavation may have been
dangerous in the past, aerobic landfill projects can be conducted
to allow waste mining after the waste has been degraded.
For example, at the 6.5 ha Baker Place Road landfill in
Columbia County, Georgia (USA), air and leachate were
injected into the waste via vertical wells for 18 months. The
biodegradation rate reportedly increased by 50%, leachate
BOD fell by 65%, methane production decreased by 90%
and NMOC levels declined by 75%. A 1 ha aerobic test cell
was operated at a lined facility in Atlanta, Georgia, for nine
The ‘sustainable landfill’
becomes a reality
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
LANDFILL • THE ‘SUSTAINABLE LANDFILL’ BECOMES A REALITY
May–June 2010 WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD44
months. Both tests demonstrated that solid waste degrades at a
significantly faster rate under aerobic than anaerobic conditions,
the volume and strength of the leachate are reduced and the
amount of methane generated falls.4 In another study, post-
aeration samples collected from waste excavations indicated
that the largest fraction (over 50%) appeared ‘as a suitable soil/
compost material with sufficient moisture content’ (30%).5 The
composted material was biologically stable, with little odour.
Plastic products, metals and glass made up over 30% of the
remaining materials, with inert materials as the balance. Lignin-
containing materials (e.g. wood and paper) degraded slightly.
Laboratory analysis showed that soluble salts, metals and pH
were within safe ranges, and no pathogens were detected in the
materials.6
Based on projects such as these, other aerobic projects
are moving forward. For example, the two-year project at the
closed 16 ha Heishitou landfill near Beijing began in 2007 to
stabilize the waste mass and lower risks as part of a possible site
redevelopment. Tsinghua Unisplendour Taihetong EnviroTech
Ltd (THUNIST), a subsidiary Jun Su of Tsinghua Group, was
contracted to design, construct and operate this first aerobic
bioreactor remediation system in China.
New mining projects advance landfill
sustainability
With a rapid, in-place waste decay process available, operators
can now recover airspace, reduce risks, lower post-closure care
and realize many other benefits in less time than nature can
achieve. For example, the Perdido MSW landfill in Escambia
County, Florida, recently undertook an innovative on-site mining
project. As a result of waste mining and materials recovery, the
landfill will be able to operate for an additional 26 years. The
expected benefits at these type of sites include:
• Enabling previously non-compliant sites to meet waste
management regulations.
• ‘Recovery’ of landfill airspace.
• Removing a source of leachate and landfill gas production.
• Reclaiming soils from excavated areas for on-site reuse and
recycling materials previously discarded.
The aerobic landfill bioreactor process moves from being
a remediation tool to a waste treatment method that is part of
an integrated landfill management strategy. Referred to as the
‘sustainable landfill’ (Figure 1), the aerobic bioreactor could
be the basis for a revolutionary new approach to solid waste
management and generally consists of the following steps:
1. Representative samples of incoming MSW are analysed
to determine the percentages of household waste, organic
matter, glass, metal, plastic and other inorganic solids present.
This helps the operator with waste placement, and the
designer in the layout and operation of the bioreactor cell.
2. Using traditional waste placement methods and conventional
equipment, the first cell is built atop a leachate drainage
collection and bottom liner system. After filling and reaching
its designed height, the waste is covered with an intermediate
soil cover.
3. The aerobic bioreactor system is installed into the landfill cell
and ‘energized’ (via air and liquid injection). Over a period
of about three to four years, the waste degrades aerobically, is
monitored closely and is treated to the point where it is safe
to excavate.
4. Using traditional earthmoving equipment, the waste is
excavated and separated (using rotating trammels) into at
least four waste streams for recycling or energy use:
a) High calorific value, or high Btu materials.
b) Recyclable materials (metals and glass).
c) Compost (soil and degraded organics).
d) C&D waste.
The high Btu materials are tested for use as refuse-derived
fuel (RDF). The metals and glass are characterized.
5. The composted materials and soils (generally over 50% by
volume) are tested for use as either daily cover material or as
a marketable agricultural product. The high Btu materials are
sent off-site to an RDF facility or a waste-to-energy (WTE)
plant. The metals and glass are added to similar recycling
streams. C&D and other landfilled materials that cannot be
recycled are shipped to another facility.
6. The cell floor is rehabilitated and the cell refilled with
incoming MSW. Alternatively the mined cell can be closed
and the land redeveloped.
The unique nature of every landfill can make development
of a sustainable landfill strategy a challenge. Successful strategies
also require a multi-discipline approach that addresses the many
environmental, political and social issues surrounding landfills.
Aerobic landfills, economics and carbon offsets
There are many financial incentives in developed countries to
consider aerobic landfills. For example, about $2 million has
been invested since 2000 in the development and operation
of an aerobic landfill in Williamson County, Tennessee, to
process 68,000 tons of MSW at a unit cost of about $29 per
ton (including electricity costs). Yet the landfill owner has saved
over $2 million in leachate treatment costs, does not require
LFG or odour control or a flaring system, stands to save over $1
million in closure capping and post-closure monitoring (due to
reduced risk), and potentially will avoid millions more that might
otherwise be spent on groundwater remediation.
Overall the costs, savings and additional revenues could
together be worth well over $10 million, making the unit ‘benefit
per ton’ of waste handled approximately $150 (a five-to-one
ratio). Furthermore, these benefits could be realized much sooner
than with other approaches. If desired, landfill mining performed
after degradation could increase the landfill’s capacity to receive
more waste. If the landfill is redeveloped, this could not only
generate additional revenues from the sale of the remediated
property but also increase property tax revenues.
In developing countries, however, it may be difficult to
finance such projects. Yet, new financial drivers in some countries
could help provide funding from the sale of emission reduction
credits. Provided a project follows the Clean Development
Mechanism Executive Board’s approved Baseline and Monitoring
Methodology AM0083, ‘Avoidance of landfill gas emissions by
in situ aeration of landfills’, MSW landfill owners who treat or
remediate their landfills aerobically by means of air venting or
low pressure aeration can generate carbon offsets, or credits.7
Now recognized as a technology that ‘avoids’ methane
generation and release to the atmosphere, governments have
enacted new legislation and protocols based on aerobic landfill
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
THE ‘SUSTAINABLE LANDFILL’ BECOMES A REALITY • LANDFILL
45WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD May–June 2010
ARJES Raptor
„BIOMASTER“
Ingenious Biomass Processing
Shredding and screening in just one step
» for ideal heating fuel with an
exact particle size
» inbuilt screen deck for
direct screening
» mobile operation:
off-road on tracks
ARJES GmbH | Werksplatz 1 | D-36433 Leimbach / Germany
www.arjes.de | phone +49 (0) 36 95 / 85 855-0ARJES
… always one step ahead!
Your all-purpose specialist in shredding
» wood » root stocks » trunks » loppings
exact particle size
inbuilt screen deck for
direct screening
mobile operation:
off-road on tracks
3
2
4
1
5
Schedule of operations
Site redevelopment
cell mining
Site redevelopment
cell mining
Degraded
landfill
Degraded
landfill
Aerobic system
installed and
operating
Aerobic system
installed and
operating
Cell under
construction
Cell under
construction
Leachate
collection
system
Leachate
storage
Collected leachate
Air blower
units
Repeat filling
Injected leachate
Injected air
Construct cell/ Complete construction
Install & operate Aerobic system
Rapidly stabilize waste
Redevelop cell or landfill mining
Repeat as necessary the cycle
can be completed in less
than two years.
Waste
Sand
Gravel
Pipe
1
2
3
4
5
Figure 1. The sustainable landfill (courtesy LG Aerobic Solutions)
technology. For example, the ‘Quantification Protocol for Aerobic
Landfill Bioreactor Projects’ published by the Alberta Offset
System in Canada recognizes the opportunity to generate carbon
offsets by directly avoiding methane emissions from materials
anaerobically decomposing in landfills; instead, wells are drilled
to allow aeration and the addition and/or recirculation of leachate.
The Alberta protocol also offers a unique economic driver.
Although GHG offsets can be realized using methodologies such
as flaring or LFG-to-energy, the protocol allows all the estimated
Voluntary Carbon Units (VCUs) to be obtained in less than five
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
LANDFILL • THE ‘SUSTAINABLE LANDFILL’ BECOMES A REALITY
May–June 2010 WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD46
We make youbreathe again!
mobile systems & stationary plants | economical & reliable | service worldwide
Leimbacher Straße 103 Tel.: +49 (0) 36 95 / 69 91-0 D-36433 Bad Salzungen Fax: +49 (0) 36 95 / 69 91-23
RED GIANTThe world’s strongest primary shredder!Do you drown in wood and waste?
We shred EVERYTHING!
This is significant in terms of net present value (NPV) as
it improves the economics of a GHG reduction project and,
through ‘forward trading’ of VCUs, aerobic landfill/sustainable
landfill projects can obtain upfront capital generation. Taking
into account the reduction of LFG collection and destruction
efficiencies over time, the aerobic approach compares even more
favourably since it converts much of the organic mass to carbon
dioxide, water and salts in a relatively few years.
For example, an economic analysis of various closure/LFG
control approaches was conducted in 2009 for a 6.3 ha unlined
landfill in northern Alberta that accepts MSW and varying
amounts of C&D waste. Its projected capacity on closure in
2010 is approximately 1.4 million tons. It has no leachate or LFG
collection system. The options evaluated were: capping-only,
LFG flaring, LFG-to-energy (LFGTE), aerobic degradation,
and methane oxidization.
Under the flaring and LFGTE options, modelling suggested
approximately 113,000 carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e) per
year, or VCUs, could be captured each year. A LFG recovery
potential of approximately 160 standard cubic feet per minute
(scfm) was estimated assuming 70% system coverage, beginning
in 2010 and declining thereafter following closure. Capital and
operating costs were assumed for 13 years, and environmental
monitoring for 25 years thereafter. The value of a VCU was
estimated at $8.
The VCUs for the GHG reductions at this site were estimated
over three reporting periods of eight years each (24 years total)
(Figure 2). VCUs could be obtained annually for the flaring
and LFGTE options. However, the aerobic degradation option
years rather than say 30 years. It recognizes that, since aerobic
systems can ‘avoid’ the conversion of organic matter to methane,
such actions should be credited based on their ability to reduce
the potential for methane generation over the timeframe of this
reduction.
Economic analysis of landfi ll closure options
Option description Revenues minus expenses
Base case — capping only $(4,250,000)
1 – Flaring $(5,951,000)
2 – Landfi ll gas to energy $(5,480,000)
3 – Aerobic degradation $2,215,000
4 – Methane oxidation $(6,872,000)
Table 1. Operating period – 13 years; Monitoring period – 25 years
3500
20052012
20192026
20332040
20472054
20612068
20752082
20892096
21032110
21172124
21312138
Mg
CH
4/M
g w
ast
e
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
Year
Emission
reductions
Not counted
3rd period
2nd period
1st period
500
0
Figure 2. Estimated methane offsets due to aerobic treatment
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
THE ‘SUSTAINABLE LANDFILL’ BECOMES A REALITY • LANDFILL
47WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD May–June 2010
The best ofThe best of
web: www.scsengineers.com
■ This article is on-line. Please visit www.waste-management-world.com
References
1. N. Berge, D. Reinhart, M. Hudgins, ‘The status of aerobic landfills in
the United States’, Annual Spring Technical Conference, Solid Waste
Association of North America, May 2006.
2. Examples (a) ‘A method and system for treating bio-degradable waste
material through aerobic degradation’, US Patent 5,888,022; (b) ‘The
aerobic landfill bioreactor’, US Patent 6,024,513.
3. L. Luning, A.A. Boerboom, M.J.J. Scheepers, J. Oonk, R.A. Mathlener,
‘Evaluation of effectiveness of methane emission reduction’, Proceedings
Sardinia 2001, 8th International Waste Management and Landfill
Symposium, Cagliari, Italy, October 2001.
4. M. Hudgins, S. Harper, ‘Operational characteristics of two aerobic
landfill systems’, Proceedings Sardinia 1999, 7th International Waste
Management and Landfill Symposium, Cagliari, Italy, October 1999.
5. M.C. Smith, D.K. Gattie, D.D. Boothe, K.C. Das, Enhancing aerobic
bioreduction under controlled conditions in a municipal solid waste
landfill through the use of air injection and water recirculation’, Advances
in Environmental Research, 2000, 3(4), 459–471.
6. R. Cossu, R. Raga, D. Rossetti, ‘Full scale application of in situ
aerobic stabilization of old landfills’, Proceedings Sardinia 2009, 12th
International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium, Cagliari,
Italy, October 2009.
7. SCS Engineers Technical Bulletin, www.scsengineers.com/Pubs-News/
SCS%20Technical%20Bulletin%20In%20Situ%20Aeration%20of%20
Landfills%20Nov09.pdf
would allow most to be captured in less than five years as it
would degrade the organic waste in much less time. Under these
conditions, capital costs were estimated to be within 25% of each
other with the exception of aerobic degradation. However, this
option offers the prospect of significantly more revenue from
VCU sales. Furthermore, its operating costs were lower due to
less operating time (four versus 25 years) and a less frequent
monitoring schedule (seven versus 25 years). Table 1 presents a
summary of the economic comparisons.
Conclusion
Whether as a remediation tool or as the basis for improved
landfill operations, the aerobic landfill bioreactor approach can
be valuable. Research and projects to date support the use of this
approach as a promising strategy that could be applied to many
landfills worldwide. Such an approach would help to:
• Address many public concerns.
• Lower post-closure care costs.
• Recover landfill airspace.
• Serve as the foundation for developing landfills into more
useful real estate in land-short countries such as China.
Mark Hudgins is a Project Manager, James Law is Project
Director and David Ross is Senior Vice-President at SCS
Engineers.
Jun Su is Assistant General Manager at Tsinghua
Unisplendour Taihetong EnviroTech Ltd (THUNIST), Beijing,
China.
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
_______________________________________
_____________
_____________
RECYCLING • WEEE’VE COME A LONG WAY
May–June 2010 WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD48
A look at the merits and limitations of the UK’s system for waste
electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) and how the lessons
learnt have been put to good use in creating the Battery Regulations.
by Philip Morton
Since the introduction of the UK WEEE Regulations
in 2007, there have naturally been some teething
problems. Intentional over-collection by compliance
schemes, low public awareness of WEEE recycling,
illegal exporting and excessive evidence trading
threatened to blight the progress of the WEEE Regulations.
However, these growing pains have actually proved valuable
lessons that only served to improve the UK system.
In July 2009, the long-waited outcome of a judicial review
confirmed that a practice fairly common in the UK WEEE
system, the intentional over-collection of WEEE by compliance
schemes, was unlawful. Over-collection does not mean more
WEEE is collected (there is only ever the same amount of
WEEE), it simply means that if a compliance scheme collects
more than its percentage share (i.e. what it needs to cover
its members’ obligations), other schemes are forced
to buy evidence of collection from it.
As a result of a judicial review’s findings,
the UK system is experiencing tangible
benefits as all compliance schemes are
now required to agree mutually acceptable
collection and balancing arrangements in
advance. Schemes deliberately collecting more
(or less) WEEE than detailed in their plans, without
a prior arrangement, will be in breach of their ongoing conditions
of approval and guilty of a criminal offence. The practice of
over-collection has undermined the UK WEEE system since its
inception, so REPIC (a compliance scheme) welcomes the clarity
and positive changes that more proactive enforcement of the
legislation will bring.
Proposed changes to WEEE Directive
Benefits are also anticipated from the recast of the WEEE
Directive announced by the European Commission in December
2008. REPIC is pleased that the report on the recast proposals
from the European Parliament’s environment committee
published in February this year takes into consideration input
from stakeholder groups and deals with a number of issues which
will definitely help to make the recycling of WEEE more efficient
and more secure. If the key proposals outlined in the recast are
adopted, it will give the UK Government real scope to improve
the current system.
For REPIC, the most important outcomes of the recast are
the proposed revisions to the directive which clarify producer
responsibility and give consumers positive involvement in
ensuring that end-of-life electronic or electrical equipment
(EEE) is taken to collection facilities, thereby engaging the public
and improving collection rates. It’s clear that, combined with the
outcome of the judicial review, the wheels are already in motion
to make the UK WEEE system more robust.
In addition, the recast’s proposal to count WEEE from all
stakeholders, rather than just the WEEE
handed to producer schemes, should plug
more gaps and impede the illegal export
of WEEE. Properly implemented, this
will help the environment, reduce the
cost burden and raise the amount of
reported WEEE. The increased focus on
procedures to protect the environment during
this process by harmonizing standards for the collection,
treatment and recycling of WEEE is a significant move towards
a level playing field in all EU member states.
The proposal to tighten export requirements is sensible too,
as it will encourage more direct relationships between those
collecting WEEE and funding producer compliance schemes,
thereby shortening the audit trail and enhancing the security of
the recycling process. A short chain from collection to treatment
and a direct relationship with the funding producer compliance
scheme makes it easier to know where WEEE comes from, where
it goes to and who pays for it.
These changes all help reinforce REPIC’s operational goal.
REPIC has always sought to nurture direct relationships with its
partner designated collection facilities (DCFs) rather than deal
through intermediate third parties in order to:
• maximize the separate, efficient collection and treatment of
WEEE
• minimize the opportunities for the illegal export of WEEE or
the need to engage in evidence trading.
WEEE’ve come a long way
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
_________________
RECYCLING • WEEE’VE COME A LONG WAY
WEEE after collection
Change is afoot
Three years on since the introduction of the WEEE Regulations,
more and more local authorities and those operating their sites
are reaping the benefits of nurturing direct relationships with
producer compliance schemes. Evidence trading is on the
decline, and visibility of where WEEE comes from and goes to is
increasing as middlemen are cut out from the chain, giving much
greater comfort to those collecting WEEE. A short chain means
the payment process is speeded up and the available money
doesn’t leak from the system.
The lessons learned are particularly evident in the younger,
more streamlined UK Battery Regulations. This system is
developing a robust infrastructure for battery collection, has
a definitive collection target that is directly proportional to
production (and so eliminates over- or under-collection and the
subsequent necessity for evidence trading), and which requires
producers to finance the net costs of collection, treatment and
recovery. The inclusion of this simple word ‘net’ gives a world
of clarity.
The Battery Regulations bring the UK into line with a
number of other EU countries that already legislate to minimize
the proportion of batteries being sent to landfill by increasing the
level of recycling in this market. In February 2010, additional
legislation was brought in which requires all retailers that sell
more than 32 kg of batteries a year to provide in-store take-back
facilities for consumers to return their waste batteries.
The UK recycling targets call for stepwise increases in the
proportion of batteries that need to be recycled from around
3% cent in 2009 to 45% by 2016. The figures may look steep,
but they are achievable. Belgium, for example, claims to recycle
over half of its batteries. How quickly the UK can reach this level
of activity remains to be seen, however, and as with the WEEE
system, it is likely to be a challenging journey.
In many ways, the UK’s experience of the WEEE Regulations
has helped shape a more workable set of Battery Regulations.
There are many obvious similarities between the two systems,
but it is their differences that demonstrate the progress that has
been made. The first difference between the WEEE and Battery
Regulations is that the latter have a definitive collection target,
with each producer responsible for recycling a finite tonnage of
batteries directly proportional to the weight of batteries it has
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
________
We shred everything. Nearly everything. Everything but our Know-How. Only Lindner provides LindnerINNOVATIONS. Innovative rotor system, rotor widths up to 3200 mm, diverse cutting systems, safety clutch directly mounted on the rotor shaft, double sided drive system with centrifugal mass over double belt drive, maintenance and foreign part flap, removal of foreign parts without material discharge and sickle shaped pusher systems are just some of the arguments for Lindner. JUPITER state-of-the-LindnerART.
„Our intelligence belongs to us … and to our customers.“
www.l-rt.com
Global Fuels Conference & Exhibition | 26.-27.5.2010 | The Westin Grand | Washington D.C. | USAREW | 10.-13.6.2010 | Tüyap Fair and Congress Center | Istanbul | TurkeyFuturesource | 15.-17.6.2010 | ExCeL | London | GB
WEEE’VE COME A LONG WAY • RECYCLING
51WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD May–June 2010
released onto the market in any given year. This means that, in
the UK battery recycling industry, the concept of over-collection
does not exist and forced evidence trading is not necessary.
Another difference comes in the form of batteries being
routinely recycled without any additional cost burden. This is
because some items, such as car batteries, have a value that
is high enough to cover the cost of recovering them. So for
batteries, economic operators just carry on pretty much as
before, with producers there to provide a safety net if the process
ever becomes a cost. Perhaps this approach ought to be adopted
by the UK WEEE system too?
Safety nets
The UK Battery Regulations also state that producers are
required to finance the net costs of collection, treatment and
recovery. The word ‘net’ is a crucial inclusion; it means that any
value created from collection, treatment and recycling should
be deducted from the costs paid and thereby minimize the
speculative element of the market. This was certainly intended
for the WEEE Regulations too, but the key word ‘net’ is
unfortunately absent.
The lack of an opt-out clause for battery retailers is another
interesting differentiator. Within the WEEE system, retailers
wishing to opt out of in-store take-back have a second option,
i.e. to join the UK’s WEEE distributor take-back scheme (DTS),
which allows retailers to direct their customers to one of a
number of DCFs where they can take their WEEE for recycling.
When this was introduced in 2007, a number of retailers
opted out of the in-store take-back scheme and instead were
required to contribute to a central fund, which allowed a country-
wide network of civic amenity sites (Household Waste Recycling
Centres) to be upgraded to DCFs. With batteries, consumers will
still be able to take their batteries to their local civic amenity site,
but retailers do not have the option specifically to request this.
The Battery Regulations are generally viewed in the UK as
a solid piece of legislation, but their introduction has not passed
without some concerns. The responsibility for meeting battery
collection and recycling targets lies with battery manufacturers
but they, in turn, rely on the retailers and consumers to deliver
the results and actually take action to recycle their waste batteries.
Dumped computer monitors
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
RECYCLING • WEEE’VE COME A LONG WAY
May–June 2010 WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD52
UNIVERSAL QUERSTROMZERSPANER UNI-CUT® QZ
There's a hurricaneraging in here
»
One machine. Many Tasks. The MeWa QZ.Refrigerators. Electrical Scrap. Metal compounds: Perfectdismantling. Perfect results.
M A C H I N E S P L A N T S P R O C E S S S O L U T I O N S www.mewa-recycling.com
MeWa Recycling Maschinen und Anlagenbau GmbH · D-75391 Gechingen · Tel.+49 (0)7056925-0 · [email protected]
UK: (+44) 1473 745769 or (+44) 7961 915478
Spread the word
The subject of creating a national WEEE awareness campaign has
been raised regularly since the Regulations were introduced and I
hope the same will be considered for batteries because a number
of organizations have shown that education campaigns can have a
significant effect on recycling levels.
A recent survey found that 72% of industry experts believe low
public awareness of recycling of waste electrical goods is one of the
biggest challenges faced by the sector. The same will undoubtedly be
true for batteries, so cohesive and consistent awareness campaigns
are important to encourage households to think more carefully
about how they dispose of their WEEE and their waste batteries.
We know that awareness campaigns work on a regional scale, so
it makes sense to engage the public on a national level.
When REPIC set up a regional recycling fund, Leicestershire
County Council was one of the first local authorities to apply for a
grant to support its county-wide publicity campaign to boost small
WEEE recycling. Part of this initiative included a simple competition
whereby every Leicestershire resident taking a small electrical item
to one of the County Council’s 14 recycling and household waste
sites was given a scratchcard with a 1-in-16 chance of winning a
range of prizes, including holiday vouchers worth £200.
By the end of the campaign, Leicestershire County Council had
generated a 45% increase in the level of small WEEE items collected
for recycling – a phenomenal result which demonstrates the power
of public awareness in encouraging households to recycle.
As well as collecting a larger proportion of the county’s WEEE,
the project demonstrated unequivocally that engaging the public is
a really effective way of enhancing the proportion of WEEE and
batteries collected by councils. REPIC is now keen to hear from
other councils planning to run their own recycling campaigns so that
we can replicate these results across the country.
Final thoughts
It is absolutely vital that all stakeholders work together in making
a concerted effort to raise awareness among the public, ensuring
that WEEE and battery recycling becomes second nature in our
households. An essential part of the success of meeting WEEE and
battery recycling targets is a well-run, robust national network of
DCFs and battery collection points.
For batteries this would ideally include retailers providing
in-store take back as well as a number of other high-traffic locations
such as schools, libraries and shopping centres offering collection
facilities.
In some ways, some of the problems encountered with the UK
WEEE system could have been avoided if it had come after the
Battery Regulations, which for some reason feel more manageable.
In any case, both sets of regulations are likely to undergo further
amendments as technology and market influences change or the
respective directives are revisited. Let’s hope that any adjustments
serve only to enhance the systems and make them more effective in
achieving the initial aims of reducing waste sent to landfill.
Philip Morton is chief executive of REPIC Limited, Bury, UK.
e-mail: [email protected]
■ This article is on-line. Please visit www.waste-management-world.com
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
information
Visit www.iswa.org, for more information
www.iswa.org
WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD May–June 2010 ISWA INFORMATION 53
sw
a.o
rgw
ww
.isw
a.o
rgw
ww
.isw
a.o
rgw
ww
.isw
a.o
rgw
ww
.isw
a.o
rgw
ww
.isw
a.o
rgw
ww
.isw
a.o
rgw
ww
.isw
a.o
rgw
ww
.isw
a.o
rgw
ww
.isw
a.o
rgw
ww
.isw
a.o
rgw
ww
.is
STAFF CHANGES AT ISWA GENERAL SECRETARIAT
Helena Bergman left ISWA GS at the end of April to move to new professional activities. ISWA thanks Helena for her work in ISWA over the years!
Maie Knoebl, ISWA membership manager, has also left her position to take up a new role. ISWA thanks Maie for her work and especially for her
efforts in connection with the two moves of the ISWA office!
Gerfried Habenicht joined the ISWA GS team in April 2010. With several years of experience in the waste management business, both in the fields
of PR /communications and as a legal advisor, he now acts as Communications Manager for ISWA. Welcome on board!
ISWA WHITE PAPER ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND WASTE
ISWA is very pleased to introduce its updated White Paper on Climate Change and Waste Management. The White Paper was issued at the
Copenhagen Conference on Waste and Climate Change in December 2009, where more than 250 participants discussed this issue. The results of the
White Paper show that sustainable and efficient waste management can lead to net saving of greenhouse gases.
The White Paper has been reprinted with some amendments and updates. You can download the actual version from the ISWA homepage.
ISWA PARTICIPATES AT THE UN COMMISSION ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
The UN Commission on Sustainable Development works with multi-year programmes and cycles. Each cycle focuses on selected thematic clusters
and one of the four thematic clusters for 2010/2011 is waste management. In each cycle, the thematic clusters of issues are addressed in an
integrated manner, taking into account the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development.
In preparation of the next major meeting CSD-18, ISWA President, Dr Atilio Savino, has been participating and speaking at an Intersessional
Meeting: International Consultative Meeting on Expanding Waste Management Services in Developing Countries. The meeting took place in Tokyo,
Japan, on 18-19 March 2010. President Savino spoke about 'best cases from the view of private operating companies'.
CSD-18 took place in New York on 3-14 May 2010. It provided a timely and valuable opportunity to review and analyse the challenges and con-
straints impeding the implementation of the sustainable development agenda in the area of waste management and the ten-year framework of pro-
grammes on sustainable consumption and production patterns. This review will serve as the basis for mobilizing political will for identifying concrete
policy actions and measures, as well as partnerships to accelerate the implementation.
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
_____________
ISWA CALENDAR 2010
54 ISWA INFORMATION May–June 2010 WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD
www.iswa.org
sw
a.o
rgw
ww
.is
wa
.org
ww
w.i
sw
a.o
rgw
ww
.is
wa
.org
ww
w.i
sw
a.o
rgw
ww
.is
wa
.org
ww
w.i
sw
a.o
rgw
ww
.is
wa
.org
ww
w.i
sw
a.o
rgw
ww
.is
wa
.org
ww
w.i
sw
a.o
rgw
ww
.is
w
May
20-21 ISWA Beacon Conference on
Prevention, Reduction and Recycling
Leeuwarden, The Netherlands
21 Working Group on Recycling and
Waste Minimisation meeting
Leeuwarden, The Netherlands
22 STC meeting
Leeuwarden,The Netherlands
31-1 Jun ISWA Beacon Conference on
Engineered Landfills
Buenos Aires, Argentina
June
3-5 Save Energy, Save Water, Save the
Planet Conference, Sofia, Bulgaria
17-18 Working Group Landfill meeting
London, UK, [email protected]
28-30 NEA/WMRAS/ISWA World Cities Summit
Singapore, Singapore
July
29 Jun-3 Orbit/ISWA International Conference:
Organic Resources in Carbon
Economy, Crete, Greece
3-4 Board Meeting, Vienna, Austria
September
17 STC meeting, Crete, Greece
18-19 Board Meeting
Chania, Greece
23-24 Working Group Collection and
Transport Technology meeting
Copenhagen, Denmark
October
14-15 Working Group Energy Recovery
meeting, Lyon, France, [email protected]
November
12 STC meeting, Hamburg, Germany
14 ISWA General Assembly, Hamburg,
Germany, [email protected]
15-18 ISWA Annual Congress Hamburg,
Germany, [email protected]
15-18 Working Group Communications
meeting, Hamburg, Germany,
15-18 Working Group Landfill meeting,
Hamburg, Germany,
December
4-9 ARCPE/ISWA International Conference:
Sustainable Solid Waste Management,
Hong Kong, [email protected]
May 20-21 ISWA Beacon Conference on Prevention, Reduction and Recycling in Nijmegen, The Netherlands
June 1-3 ISWA Beacon Conference on Engineered Landfills, Buenos Aires, Argentina
June 28 – July 1 World Cities Summit, Singapore
SPRING 2010 BEACON CONFERENCES
You can find more information on all ISWA activities at the ISWA webpage www.iswa.org
We would like to flag our next Beacon Conferences coming up in the spring
ISWA
Auerspergstrasse 15, Top. 41, 1080 Vienna, Austria
Tel: +43 1 253 6001 Fax: +43 1 253 600199
SPRING 2010 Beacon Conferences
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
DIARY
55WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD May–June 2010
2010BIR Spring Convention
Istanbul, Turkey
30 May– 2 June 2010
Bureau of International Recycling,
24 Avenue Franklin Roosevelt,
1050 Brussels, Belgium
Tel: +32 2 627 57 70
Fax: +32 2 627 57 73
e-mail: [email protected]
web: www.bir.org
POWER-GEN Europe 2010
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
8–10 June 2010
Crispin Coulson, PennWell
Corporation, Horseshoe Hill,
Upshire,
Essex EN9 3SR, UK
Tel: +44 1992 656 646
Fax: +44 1992 656 700
e-mail: [email protected]
web: www.powergeneurope.com
Paper Recycling Conference and
Trade Show
Chicago, Illinois, USA
13–15 June 2010
Paper Recycling Conference &
Trade Show, Maria Miller, 4020
Kinross Lakes Parkway, Suite 201,
Richfi eld, OH 44286, USA
Tel: +1 330 523 5400
Fax: +1 330 659 0823
e-mail: [email protected]
www.paperrecyclingconference.
com
Futuresource
London, UK
15–17 June 2010
The Chartered Institution of Waste
Management, 9 Saxon Court, St
Peter’s Gardens, Northampton,
NN1 1SX, UK
Tel: + 44 1604 620426
Fax: + 44 1604 604467
e-mail: [email protected]
web: www.futuresourceuk.com
POWER-GEN Asia
Bangkok, Thailand
2–4 November 2010
Neil Walker, PennWell Corporation,
Horseshoe Hill, Upshire, Essex EN9
3SR, UK
Tel: +44 1992 656 643
Fax: +44 1992 656 700
e-mail: attendingpga@pennwell.
com
web: www.powergenasia.com
Canadian Waste & Recycling
Expo 2010
Toronto, Canada
3–4 November 2010
Arnie Gess, Messe Frankfurt, Inc.,
1600 Parkwood Circle, Ste. 615,
Atlanta, GA 30339, USA
Tel: +1 770 984 8016
Fax: +1 770 984 8023
e-mail: cwreinfo
@usa.messefrankfurt.com
web: www.cwre.ca
Ecomondo 2010
Rimini, Italy
3–6 November 2010
Rimini Fiera S.p.A., Via Emilia, 155,
47900 Rimini, Italy
Tel: +39 0541 744632
Fax: +39 0541 744751
e-mail: r.masini@riminifi era.it
web: www.ecomondo.com
ISWA World Congress 2010
Hamburg, Germany
15–18 November 2010
ISWA General Secretariat,
Mariahilfer Strasse 123, 3rd fl oor,
1060 Vienna, Austria
Tel: +43 159 999 8038
Fax: +43 159 999 700
e-mail: [email protected]
web: www.iswa2010.org
RWM - Recycling and Waste
Management Exhibition 2010
Birmingham, UK
14–16 September 2010
Emap Connect, Greater London
House, Hampstead Road, London,
NW1 7EJ, UK
Tel: +44 20 7728 3898
Fax: +44 20 7728 4200
e-mail: [email protected]
web: www.rwmexhibition.com
2010 Global Waste Management
Symposium
San Antonio, Texas, USA
3–6 October 2010
Florence Torres, Penton Business
Media Inc., 11 River Bend South,
Stamford, CT 06907, USA
Tel: +1 203 358 9900
Fax: +1 203 358 5816
e-mail: fl [email protected]
web: www.wastesymposium.com
POWER-GEN Middle East
Doha, Qatar
4–6 October 2010
Neil Walker, PennWell Corporation,
Horseshoe Hill, Upshire,
Essex EN9 3SR, UK
Tel: +44 1992 656 643
Fax: +44 1992 656 700
e-mail: [email protected]
web: www.power-gen-middleeast.
com
BIR Autumn Convention
Brussels, Belgium
24–26 October 2010
Bureau of International Recycling,
24 Avenue Franklin Roosevelt,
1050 Brussels, Belgium
Tel: +32 2 627 57 70
Fax: +32 2 627 57 73
e-mail: [email protected]
web: www.bir.org
Enviro 2010
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
21–23 July 2010
Waste Management Association of
Australia, Veronica Dullens, Suite
4D, 5 Belmore Street, Burwood,
NSW 2134, Australia
Tel: +61 2 8746 5055
Fax: +61 2 9701 0199
e-mail: [email protected]
web: www.enviro2010.com.au
WASTECON 2010
Boston, Massachusetts, USA
14–18 August 2010
SWANA, Solid Waste Association
of North America, 1100 Wayne
Avenue, Suite 700, Silver Spring,
Maryland 20910, USA
Tel: +1 800 467 9262
Fax: +1 301 589 7068
e-mail: [email protected]
web: www.swana.org
21st World Energy Congress
Montréal, Québec, Canada
12–16 September 2010
World Energy Congress, Marie
Cloutier, 740 Notre-Dame Street
West, 8th Floor, Montréal, Québec,
Canada, H3C 3X6
Tel: +1 514 397 1474
Fax: +1 514 397 9114
web: www.wecmontreal2010.ca
IFAT ENTSORGA
Munich, Germany
13–17 September 2010
Messe München GmbH,
Messegelände, 81823 München,
Germany
Tel: +49 89 9 49 1 1358
Fax: +49 89 9 49 1 1359
e-mail: [email protected]
web: www.ifat.de
Diary of events
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
___
___
DIARY
May–June 2010 WASTE MANAGEMENT WORLD56
ARJES GMBH 45
BABCOCK & WILCOX VOLUND 34
BIOWAYSTE.COM 5
BMH TECHNOLOGY OY 1
CARGOTEC SWEDEN AB 15
CATERPILLAR S.A.R.L. IFC
DOPPSTADT CALBE GMBH 38
ELDAN RECYCLING A/S 47
GICOM B.V. 11
HAKO WERKE 17
HAMMEL RECYLINGTECHNIK GMBH 46
HYDRATECH MATERIAL HANDLING & SERVICES BV 33
INASHCO B.V. 37
ISWA 53-54
JCB SALES LTD 23
KOMPTECH GMBH 40
LINDNER RECYCLINGTECH 51
MAGNAPOWER EQUIPMENT LTD 8
MASIAS RECYCLING SL 49
MATTIUSSI ECOLOGIA SPA 27
MESSE MUNCHEN GMBH 36
METSO DENMARK A/S OBC
MEWA RECYCLING 52
NTM AB 31
ORKEL COMPACTION AS 41
PENNWELL 10
PLANT AND WASTE RECYCLING SHOW 19
ECOMONDO 2010 7
SID SA 9
SITI - B & T GROUP IBC
SOTKON UK LIMITED 24
SSAB OXELÖSUND AB 20
WASTECON 2010 42
TANA OY 50
TERBERG MACHINES BV 25
WMW ADVERTISERS’ INDEX
5th World Recycling Forum
Hong Kong, China
17–19 November 2010
ICM AG, Schwaderhof 524,
5708 Birrwil, Switzerland
Tel: +41 62 785 1000
Fax: +41 62 785 1005
e-mail: [email protected]
web: www.icm.ch
Poleko 2010
Poznań, Poland
23–26 November 2010
Poznań International Fair Ltd,
Glogowska Street 14, 60734
Poznań, Poland
Tel: +48 61 869 2000
Fax: +48 61 869 2999
e-mail: [email protected]
web. www.poleko.mtp.pl
Pollutec 2010
Lyon, France
30 November –3 December 2010
Reed Expositions France, 52-54 quai
de Dion-Bouton, CS 80001, 92806
Puteaux Cedex, France
Tel: +33 1 47 56 50 97
Fax : +33 1 47 56 21 10
e-mail: antoinette.viellard@
reedexpo.fr
web: www.pollutec.com
2011
10th International Electronics
Recycling Congress
Salzburg, Austria
19–21 January 2011
ICM AG, Schwaderhof 524,
5708 Birrwil, Switzerland
Tel: +41 62 785 1000
Fax: +41 62 785 1005
e-mail: [email protected]
web: www.icm.ch
Waste Expo 2011
Dallas, Texas, USA
10–12 May 2011
Kimberly Stolfi , Penton Business
Media Inc., 11 River Bend South,
Stamford, CT 06907, USA
Tel: +1 203 358 4252
Fax: +1 203 358 5816
e-mail: kimberly.stolfi @penton.com
web: www.wasteexpo.com
Metalriciclo 2011
Montichiari, Brescia, Italy
19–21 May 2011
Edimet Spa, Roberta Bordiga, Via
Brescia 117, 25018 Montichiari,
Brescia, Italy
Tel: +39 030 998 1045
Fax: +39 030 998 1055
e-mail: roberta.bordiga@edimet.
com
web: www.metalriciclo.com
2011 World Recycling Convention
& Exhibition
Singapore
22–25 May 2011
Bureau of International Recycling,
24 Avenue Franklin Roosevelt, 1050
Brussels, Belgium
Tel: +32 2 627 57 70
Fax: +32 2 627 57 73
e-mail: [email protected]
web: www.bir.org
WasteTech 2011
Moscow, Russian Federation
31 May –3 June 2011
SIBICO International Ltd., POB 105,
105062, Moscow, Russia
Tel: +7 495225 5986
Fax: +7 495 225 5986
e-mail: [email protected]
web: www.waste-tech.ru
POWER-GEN Europe
Milan, Italy
7–9 June 2011
PennWell Corporation, Crispin Coul-
son, Warlies Park House, Horseshoe
Hill, Upshire, Essex EN9 3SR, UK
Tel: +44 1992 656 646
Fax: +44 1992 656 700
e-mail: [email protected]
web: www.powergeneurope.com
BIR Autumn Convention
Munich, Germany
23–25 October 2011
Bureau of International Recycling,
24 Avenue Franklin Roosevelt,
1050 Brussels, Belgium
Tel: +32 2 627 57 70
Fax: +32 2 627 57 73
e-mail: [email protected]
web: www.bir.org
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF
__________________
Shredding power
Metso Denmark A/S · Tel: +45 7626 6400 · www.metso.com/recycling
Metso is one of the world´s leading manufacturers of heavy-duty
shredder equipment, capable of effectively and reliably shredding
even the most difficult materials. To benefit from the most advanced
shredding technology and the best know-how available, backed by
24/7/365 service, get in touch with us.
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
BA
M SaGEFmanagement worldWASTE
management worldWASTE B
A
M SaGEF