the development of waste-to-energy technologies around the world waste to energy workshop - qcat...

The Development of Waste-to-Energy Technologies around the WorldWaste to Energy Workshop - QCAT

ENERGY TECHNOLOGY

San Shwe Hla| Senior Research Scientist

23rd June 2014

About today presentation

The Development of Waste-to-Energy Technologies around the World| San Shwe Hla |

Current Status for MSW Generation/Management around the World

Development of Waste-to-Energy Technologies

Brief History of Waste-to-Energy Process and Environmental impacts

Conventional and Advanced Incineration Technologies

Novel Gasification-based WtE Technologies

Comparison between Conventional and Novel WtE Technologies

Main Drivers for Practices of WtE

Summary and Conclusions

(Notes: Economic of WtE is not included)

What a Waste!

The Development of Waste-to-Energy Technologies around the World | San Shwe Hla |

Waste is an unavoidable by-product of our modern days living.

Waste generation increases as GDP increases.

MSW generated continues to increase.

Current global MSW generation levels are approximately 1.3 billion tonnes per year.

Reference: Tanaka, M. 2009; Hoornweg & Bhada-Taka, 2012; US EPA, 2013:

1995 2000 2005 2010 20150

10

20

30

40

50

60

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

Total solid waste generation Per capita generation

Tota

l sol

id w

aste

(mill

ion

tonn

es)

Per c

apit

a so

lid w

aste

gen

erati

on

(ton

/per

son/

year

)

Australia

MSW generation per capita, selected countries

Reference: National Waste Report, 2010:


What is Municipal Solid Waste (MSW)?• This is domestic waste that is generated by household kerbside-

collected material and local government street sweeping, maintaining

litter bins and public parks and gardens. It includes- food wastes- containers (product packaging)- yard wastes - other miscellaneous inorganic wastes. Such as

o applianceso newspaperso clothingo boxeso office and classroom papero furnitureo wood palletso rubber tires o cafeteria wastes

Food and garden

Paper

Plastics

Glass

Metals

Concrete

Timber

Other

Typical MSW composition (Australia)

Reference: Australian Bureau of Statistics: Australia’s Environment: Issues & Trends, 2006


The functional elements of MSW

Recycling/ Reused/

Composting

Landfilling/ Dumping

Thermo-chemical Treatment

Incineration Some Novel Technologies

Landfill gas capture – Some of methane released in Landfill sites are captured in the modern sanitary landfills that are provided with a gas collection network


The Management of MSW in Europe

Belg

ium

, th

e N

e...

Aus

tia &

Sw

izer

...

Ger

man

y

Scan

dina

via

Fran

ce

Ital

y

UK

& Ir

elan

d

Spai

n &

Por

tuga

l

Pola

nd

Cent

ral a

nd E

ast.

..

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

LanfilledCompostingRecycling WTE

Func

tiona

l Ele

men

ts o

f MSW

(%)

Reference: European Waste to Energy Plant Market, 2013


The Management of MSW in Selected countries

Reference: MSW Management in Asia & the Pacific Islands, 2014 TEPA, http://www.epa.gov.tw/en/statistics/c4010.pdf. McCrea et al, 2008 US EPA 2013 National Waste Report 2010 (Environment Protection and Heritage Council (EPHC), 2010) Victorian Local Government Annual Survey (2010-2011)- Published by Sustainable Victoria NSW Local Government Waste and Resource Recovery Data Report 2011-12 State of Waste and Recycling in Queensland 2012 (Department of environment and Heritage Protection)

Japa

n

Tiaw

an

Sing

apor

e

Kore

a

Chin

a

US

Aus

tral

ia

Vict

oria

New

Sou

th W

ales

Que

ensl

and

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

LanfilledCompostingRecycling WTE

Func

tiona

l Ele

men

ts o

f MSW

(%)


Incineration of MSW

1. Reducing the amount waste (about

70% - 80% in mass) and (80% -90% in

volume), if compress (90-95%).

2. Significant reduction of landfill space-

30 times less (incineration does not

completely replace landfilling).

Major Benefits

1. High investment and operating

cost

2. Emission in flue gas & fly ash

3. Amount of mass residues and

impurities in bottom ash

4. Public’s view on WTE

Major Drawbacks

• The first incinerators for MSW were built in England in 1874, in New York in 1885.

• Large scale MSW incinerator was mounted in Hamburg in 1895.


A very brief history of WTECombustion chamber

with fix grate

Development of moving

grate/ Stoker grate

Fluidized bed

technology Introduced

Slagging operating started

1900

1920

1930

1950

2000

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

1950Public still satisfied as long

as the flue gas is invisible

TA-LuftAwareness of toxic

effects of dioxins &

furansEU- 89/369

BImSchV

1980

1990

Advanced WTEs (moving grate)

with complex cleaning systems

EC 2000/76

Melting in WTE is mandatory in Japan

CAA

USEPA- MACT

First rotary kiln in US

Incinerators’ smoke & odors were

accepted as a necessary evil

1900


Fixed grate incinerators• Simple technology with a fixed metal grate over an ash pit below.

• Brick-lined cell ovens, opening in the top or sides for loading, another opening in

the side for removing the solid residues.

• Low efficiency , high emissions.


Moving grate incinerators (Stokers)• Traveling grates support the fuel, while conveying it from the front feeding to the

ash-discharging side.

• Primary airs under the grate for primary reactions distributed differently

• Secondary airs above the grate for post-combustion.

• The most common, the most proven technology

• 84% of Japanese WTE (33 mtons/year)

• 91% of European WTE , almost all of US WTE


Fluidized bed Incinerators• Waste mixed with inert materials are fluidized by

air.

• High thermal efficiency up to 90%, suitable for

wide range of fuel and mixtures of fuel (sludge &

solid waste)

• Pre-treatment of waste always required

• Suitable for RDF.

• 6% of European WTE

• 80 plants in Japan

(Ebara)


Rotary Kiln Incinerators• A slight inclined shaft-furnace operating (generally) in a co-

current mode.

• The waste are transported through the furnace by rotations.

• Long retention, good thermal isolation, and high excess air.

• Applicable for hazardous waste, chemical waste and dry

sewage sludge incinerations.

• The capacity 2.4 t/day 480 t/ day.

Hitachi Zosen- Kiln Incinerator


Advanced Moving Grate MSWI system

Reference: http://www.khi.co.jp/english/kplant/business/environment/g_waste/heat.html


Mass balance of MSW Incineration

Moving Grate Incineration System

1 ton of MSW

6.2 – 7.8 ton of Air

7 – 8.6 ton of flue gas (Need cleaning before stack)

20 – 40 kg of fly ash (highly toxic)

250 – 350 kg of bottom ash (contains heavy metals, salts,

chloride & organic pollutants)

5 – 15 kg boiler slag

5 – 15 kg neutralization salts

Reference: Incineration Technologies, 2012


About Dioxin/Furan• Polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDS) DIOXINS

• Polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs) FURANS

• Small amounts of PCDD/Fs are formed whenever carbon, oxygen and

chlorine are available at certain operating temperatures

• Dioxins are highly toxic and can cause reproductive and developmental

problems, damage the immune system, interfere with hormones and

also cause cancer.

• Sources of Dioxin Industrial processes

• Waste incineration

• Smelting

• Chlorine bleaching of paper pulp

• The manufacturing of some herbicides and pesticides

2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin

Other sources

• Volcanic eruptions

• Forest fires

• Backyard trash burning


Flue gas cleaning• Because of the very heavy (public and political) pressures, MSW incineration

(at present) is the most regulated and best controlled form of combustion.

Reference: Incineration Technologies, 2012


Dioxin/Furan in MSW incinerations• Dioxins were discovered on MSW incinerator fly ashes and flue gases in 1977. (Olie

et al. 1977).

• MSW incinerators were major sources of dioxins emissions in 80s. The dioxins

became an extremely large problem in Japan, US, Europe form around the mid

1990s. Emissions amount reduced 99% since then.

Reference: Deriziotis 2004; Kawamoto, Yokohama National University The Development of Waste-to-Energy Technologies around the World | San Shwe Hla |

Required reduction of emission levels

Reference: Achternbosch & Richers (2002); Quina, et al. 2011


Pollutant Concentration in raw gas

from boiler(mg/Nm³, dry)

Maximum admissible

at exhaust

(mg/Nm³, dry)

Removal

efficiency

required (%)

Dust 2,000 – 10,000 (Stokers)

10,000 – 50,000 (FB)

10 99.9

Fly Ash 1,500 – 2,000 10 99.9

HCl 300 – 2,000 10 >99

SO2 200 – 1,000 5 99.5

NOx 200 – 500 70 86

HF 2 – 25 1 96

Hg 0.2 – 0.8 0.01 99

Cd , Tl + other metals 2 – 15 0.05 >99.5

Dioxins and furnas (ng

I-TEQ/Nm³)

0.5 – 5 0.1 98

Modern MSWI with advanced cleaning system

B – Quick cooling of gas prevents the dioxin reformation

C – Fine particulates, dust, Fly ash, SOx, HCI (absorbed) are eliminated

D – HCl, SOx, Hg are removed

E– Discharge heavy metal and the dioxin in the flue gas absorbed in activated carbon.

F – NOx revmoved and, dioxin decomposed and removed.

Reference: http://www.khi.co.jp/english/kplant/business/environment/g_waste/heat.html


Main Drivers for Adapting Novel/ Gasification Technologies for WTE

• 1995 UN Environmental Program published that 4 kg out of 10kg TEQ of dioxin

came from Japan.

• New regulations and policies between 1995 -2005 in Japan were main drivers

for the development and installation of new gasification and melting systems.

• E.g. new dioxin regulation in 2003 limited 1 ng TEQ/Nm³ (for existing plants)

and 0.1 ng TEQ/Nm³ (for new plants) [up until the end of 2002, 80 ng TEQ/Nm³

was still acceptable] & melting process in WTE becomes mandatory in Japan.

• There are currently over 120 gasification based (ash melting) WTE plants

operating in Japan with a total capacity of 6.9 million tonnes / year.

• Main purposes are to reduce dioxin emissions (and other harmful substances)

and to produce glassy slag (to improve ash quality).


Routes for Ash Melting System

Incineration

100%

(a) Incineration + Melting

Reference: http://www.kobelco-eco.co.jp/english/product/haikibutushori/ryudo_q2.html#a1

Waste Bottom ash, fly ash

Power generation, Heat utilization

With ash melting

Without ash melting Landfill (>20%)

SlagMelting

Fly ash

Recycled in construction work

Landfill (~2%)

Gasification & Melting

100%

Waste Slag

Fly ash Landfill (~2%)

Recycled in construction work

Power generation, Heat utilization(b) Gasification & Melting


Installation of ash melting process in MSW-to-Energy plants in Japan

Reference: Professor Yoshikawa, Tokyo Institute of Technology

Incineration Gasification & melting


Type of gasification based WtE Plants

Fixed beds(Direct Melting System) Fluidised Bed

Gasification and Ash Melting

• There are over 120 WtE plants using novel/gasification technologies in Japan & 13 plants in Europe.

Pyrolysis/ Gasification &

Melting Moving Grate

GasificationPlasma

Gasification


Nippon Steel• The Largest supplier of gasification based WTE plants in Japan

• 33 in Japan 2 in South Korea.

• Fixed bed, updraft gasifier, Co gasification.

• 23% overall efficiency

Oxygen enriched air

Reference: Nippon Steel & Sumikin Engineering Co., Ltd, 2013


Process Flow – Nippon Steel



Shin Moji Plant – NS largest gasification plant



JFE- Fixed Beds WTE• Merger of Kawasaki steel and NKK.

• Fixed bed types under JFE is similar to

Nippon Steel

• Currently 10 operational plants using

MSW, RDF as feed stocks



EBARA- Fluidized bed gasification and Ash-melting Process• Shredded MSW is first gasified

inside fluidized bed gasifier operated under a low air ratio.

• Combustion of syngas in second reactor for ash melting.

• No oxygen enrichment. Fuel preparation required.

• Currently 11 plants in Japan & 4 in Korea (mostly for MSW and some for industrial wastes)

• Similar WTE process has also being supplied be Kobelco (15 plants) & Hitachi Zosen (8 Plants)



Reference: http://www.eep.ebara.com/en/products/melting.html

EBARA Fluidized bed gasification (TIFG) & Ash melting system


Reference: http://www.eep.ebara.com/en/products/gas.html

EBARA Pressurized twin internally circulating Fluidized bed gasification system (PTIFG)


• Two gasifiers, with O2 and Steam as gasifying medium under high pressure.• Relatively H2 riched syngas for NH3 systhesis

JFE- ThermoSelect

Reference: Frank Campbell, IWT, 2008

30.7% H2, 32.5% CO, 33.8% CO2, 2.3%N2

8.5 MJ/Nm³


JFE- ThermoSelect.. Cont.

• Develop in Switzerland between (1985-1992).

• Demonstration facility in Fondotoche, northern Italy (100t/d) (1992-1999).

• Commercial scale in Germany (1999-2002, test phase), (2002-2004) full

operational. Shut down due to litigation between the supplier Thermoselect

S. A. & The owner EnBW (or) due to emissions issue.

• Currently, 7 ThermoSelect facilities are being operated in Japan by JFE

treating MSW and IW. (5 plants powered by gas engine, 2 plants by steam

turbines)

• JFE have stated that they no longer offer the technology as it is too

expensive.

Reference: Frank Campbell, IWT, 2008


Takuma-Waste pyrolysis gasification and melting system• Wastes are first pyrolysed using a pyrolysis drum and using a verticaldownflow-type rotary melting furnace, conversion of ash to molten slag.


ENERGOS• A leading European WTE system.

• Norway (6 plants), Germany (1), UK (1)

• Waste are pre-treated prior to use

• Gasification took place on moving grate

• High temperature oxidation in a

secondary chamber

• End used: Thermal (mostly)

Reference: http://www.energ-group.com/energy-from-waste/energos-technology/

7

8


Plasma gasification• The use of plasma torches is not new.

• The use of Plasma torch in gasification of solid waste is new.

• Plasma is simply a high-temperature ionized gas created within a plasma torch that is both thermally and electrically conductive.

• AlterNRG/WPC design the temperature of the plasma plume would be between 5,000 °C and 7,000°C.

• In plasma gasification process, ash melting occurs in the absence or near absence of O2, prohibiting combustion.

• Two types of plasma gasification:

• Plasma assisted gasification

• Plasma assisted gas cleaning & melting

• MSW ash (from incineration plants)

melting using Plasma torch are not

considered as plasma gasification.- Westinghouse Plasma Corp Plasma Torch (Willis et al 2010)


Plasma assisted gasification• Gasification and melting occur inside a single rector.

• Operating temperature are hot enough to drive the gasification reactions and brake down tars and higher MW compounds into CO and H2.

• Updraft type fixed bed gasification

• Torch temperature ≈ 5,000°C – 7,000°C

• Bulk bed temperature at base ≈ 2,000°C

• Molten slag temperature ≈ 1,650°C

• The syngas temperature ≈ 890°C – 1,100°C

• Utashinai Plant MSW (50%) + ASR (50%)

165 tpd 2003

• Mihama-Mikata Dried sewage sludge (20%) +

MSW (80%) 22 tpd, 2003

Reference: Willis et al 2010; Wood et al 2013

- ALTER NRG Plasma Gasification Reactor (Ref: Alter NRG)


Plasco Plant• Plasma assisted gas cleaning and ash melting to treat MSW in Ottawa (100

tpd) by Plasco Energy Group.

• Gasification and plasma ash melting occur separately

Reference: http://www.plascoenergygroup.com/our-technology/the-plasco-process/ The Development of Waste-to-Energy Technologies around the World | San Shwe Hla |

CHO Power WtE Plant• CHO-Power (& Europlasma) process consists of a primary gasifier (a moving

grate system) with plasma assisted syngas cracking reactor and ash melting unit.

• First commercial plant in Morcenx, near Lyon, France.

• 37,000 tpa (IW) +

15,000 tpa (WC)

Reference: http://www.cho-power.com/en/cho-power-in-morcenx-france-a-first-in-europe.html


Utilisation of Slag and metal



Slag recycling



List of proven gasification based WTE plantsCompany Type of WTE No of

plantsEnd Uses

Remarks

Nippon Steel Fixed bed-Direct Melting 33 (2) ST Enriched O2, 5% Coke

JFE (NKK) Fixed bed-Direct Melting 10 (1) ST Enriched O2, Coke

Kawasaki Giken Fixed bed-Direct Melting 5 ST High Concentration O2

JFE (ThermoSelect) Kiln Pyrolysis-Gasification-Melting 7 GT-E, ST 95% O2, Waste Compression

Mitsui Kiln Pyrolysis-Gasification-Melting 7 (2) ST Waste are shredded first.

Takuma Co. Ltd Kiln Pyrolysis-Gasification-Melting 2 ST Waste are shredded first.

Ebara Co. C-Fluidised gasification- Melting 11 (4) ST Waste are shredded first.

Kobelco Co. Ltd B-Fluidised gasification- Melting 13 (2) ST Waste are shredded first.

Hitachi Zosen B-Fluidised gasification- Melting 8 ST Waste are shredded first.

Ebara & Show Denko PTIFG & Ash melting 1 NH3 Pressurized, O2+H2O

AlterNRG-Hitachi-M Plasma Assisted Gasification 2 ST Plasma, MSW-ASR-SS

Plasco Energy Plasma assisted cleaning/melting 1 GT-Eng Plasma, MSW

CHO-Power-Europlasma Plasma assisted cleaning/melting 1 GT-Eng Plasma, MSW

ENERGOS Stoker-gasification - Combustion 8 Steam Waste pretreated. No melting.


World’s first waste-to-biofuels facility• Enerkem waste to biofuels and

chemical facility at Edmonton

• Opened on 4th June, 2014

• 60% of waste into biofuels and

chemicals

• 100,000 tonnes/year to MSW

into 38 million liter of biofuels

• 70$/ton landfill, 75$/ton WtF

Waste Gasification SyngasManual &

mechanicalSeparating

Shredded Organic waste

Inert

Clean syngas

Reference: Edmonton Journal , 5 June, 2014; http://www.edmonton.ca/for_residents/garbage_recycling/biofuels-facility.aspx

Biofuel facilityMethanol

Ethanol


Chemical intermediates

What are the main drivers of WTEs?• Government regulations

• Public Health

• Environmental issues

• Emission controls

• Reducing land fill areas

• Cost of WTE Vs tipping fees

• Electricity generation from MSW is not a main driver.

• It is one of the products while reducing amount of wastes.

• Let’s see an outermost case.

• Japan with 800 Plants (310 WtE Electricity) plants utilising 40 million

tons MSW annually (80% of total MSW generation).

• Total install capacity ≈ 1673 MWe (in 2009) ≈ 0.6% of country’s

electricity generation


Tipping fees Vs WTE plants in US

$0.00

$10.00

$20.00

$30.00

$40.00

$50.00

$60.00

$70.00

$80.00

$90.00

$100.00

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

20,000

Avg tipping fees

MSW-TPD

Ave

rage

Tip

ping

Fee

s (U

S$/t

on)

MSW

to E

nerg

y (T

ons/

day)

Reference: http://www.cleanenergyprojects.com/Landfill-Tipping-Fees-in-USA-2013.htmlThe 2010 ERC Directory of Waste-to-Energy Plants


WTE Reduces GHG Emissions• Nearly one ton of CO2 equivalent emissions are avoided for every ton of MSW

handled by WTE (US EPA) due to

• Avoided CH4 emissions from land fills.

• Avoided CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion.

• Avoided CO2 emission from metals production.

Reference: Thorneloe et al, 2006


Feasibility Study: Requirements for a Successful WTE Project• Research on Technical Feasibility

• Survey of waste characteristics, LCV and amount of waste

• Selecting suitable WTE system

• Estimation of electricity output

• Plant Location

• Evaluation of Environmental and Social Impacts

• GHG Emission/Reduction Effect

• Plant Emissions

• Research of legal system and procedure related to environmental

assessment

• Financial and Economic Feasibility


Road Map to commercial scale WtE plant Fuel (MSW)

characterization

Lab scale reactor

Pilot/Commercial scale WtE plant

- Composition - Energy content - Reaction rates

Fuel (MSW) preparation

methods

Cost Analysis

- Steam Turbine - Gas Turbine - Combined Cycle - Chemicals - Liquid fuels

Process Modelling

Fuel (MSW), Availability

Selection of type of WtE

plant

- Data collection from local councils

- Choice of plant size & End use

Emissions Vs regulations

Meet the budget, regulations & WTE performance setno

yes


Summary of WTE technologies

• Moving grate technology is the most commonly used for WTE (84%

Japan, 91% European, almost all of US WTE.

• Fluidised bed incineration provide higher efficiency with lower emission

level.

• Gasification technology has smaller capacity than incineration but its

integration with melting systems significantly amount of reduces WTE

wastes (bottom ash).

Source: Frost & Sullivan analysis


Current status of gasification of MSW

• Technical reliability

o Limited number of gasification based (melting) plants (~120) are able to

offer a proven gasification process for different kinds of solid wastes.

• Environmental sustainability

o Gasification is considered as a sound response to the increasingly

restrictive emission regulations and towards zero wastes.

• Economic convenience

o Usually more expensive in operating and capital costs higher than

conventional combustion-based WtE.

o Recent evidences indicate a convenience of gasification plants for size

smaller than about 120 kt/y.


Conclusions & some thoughts• Driving force for WTE options over landfill

o Tipping fees (Landfill tax, landfill levy)

o Government regulation regarding with landfilling

• Driving force for gasification based WTE over incineration WTE

o Government regulations on specific design of WTE plant (e.g. melting)

o Tipping fees for WTE bottom ash

o Emission control and regulations

• Important factors for establishing WTE plants in Australia

o Government regulations and policies

o Tipping fees (Landfill tax, landfill levy)

o Public acceptance


Thank you

CSIRO Energy TechnologySan Shwe HlaThe Development of Waste-to-Energy Technologies around the Worldt +61 7 3327 4125e [email protected] www.csiro.au/Energy

the development of waste-to-energy technologies around the world waste to energy workshop - qcat...

Documents

world development of

waste generation

european waste

domestic waste

municipal solid waste

management of msw

msw management

national waste report