Presentation on theme: "4th-generation Waste Incineration"— Presentation transcript:
1 4th-generation Waste Incineration Dr. K. D. van der LindeAmsterdam Waste & Energy EnterpriseECOTECH, AmsterdamMay 14, 2003IntroductionAim of this presentation is to present a first introduction into a new generation of waste incineration.Current status and overview of the possible impact in Europe will be given.It is presented to you by the waste treatment of the city of Amsterdam.1
2 INTRODUCTION 1. Introduction 2. Europe 3. The Netherlands 4. Amsterdam 5. Concept of Installation6. New generation of waste incineration7. Conclusion2
3 Society Society Exhaust Air Waste Water Water Raw materials Waste This sheet is presenting society as an input-output system.When considering reuse or recovery we create internal loops in society.However the physical Conservation of mass implies automatically that everything we take from nature will sometime, somehow, sooner or later be returned to nature.Waste
4 Society Closing the loop Exhaust gas Air Waste Water Water Energy Raw materialsGenerally the order of preference in waste management is: Prevention, reuse, recycling, recovery, incineration, land fillingThe function of a Waste-Incineration is often seen as an end-treatment of waste, nearly comparable with land filling.As shown in the sheet it is however NOT an end-treatment which brings material back to nature. It is really a form of recovery-process aimed at extracting as much as possible “value” out of the waste. Energy as well as material are recovered.As for other recycling processes it is the amount and quality of material and energy that is saved that determines the ranking of the process.In current regulation it is tried to make a distinction between recycling, recovery or disposal without judging the “graded differences” between them. Of course the battle over where to draw the line will be endless. It would be best if the grade of recycling or grade of recovery would be used to rank processes.WTEWaste
5 Waste is a RENEWABLE ! Organic Sustainable Waste = ENERGY Richer than most RAW MATERIALSWasteFiredPowerPlantWaste is a RAW MATERIAL !Richer than most ORES.The organic components in normal household waste contribute to about 50% of the energy content of the waste.So 50% of the recovered energy is of biological origin and is GREEN ENERGY.The other 50% is recovered energy from fossil origin.Inert Material in waste is now only limitedly seen as a valuable resource. With new processes it can be separated to many high quality products.OrganicSustainableWaste=ENERGY
6 2. The Waste Market in Europe Total waste in EU: million ton/yearMunicipal Solid Waste: 182 million ton/year (14%)MSW per capita: 490 kg/yearNumerical overview of the waste production:Waste production per person in Europe varies from about 450 to 650 kg per person per year.Even with optimal separation at the source this will lead to about 250 to 500 kg mixed-residual waste per person per year.From 370 million people this results in 95 to 180 million ton per year only from households.Including similar waste streams from trade, offices and alike, current figures show 182 million ton per year identified as Municipal Solid Waste.**European Commission: "Waste prevention and Recycling Thematic Strategy”: Total waste generation in EU = 1.3 billion t/year, equals 3.5 ton/year per capita. (excluding agricultural waste).Of this MSW is about 14% (182 MTon/year), equals 500 kg/year per capita.3
7 Classification of household-waste mixed in bag or container 242Green-rests, Garden 120big items, re-building materials 72Paper 68Glass 22Metals, electrical 6,3Small Chemical Waste 1,7Total collected 532 (in kg/j per person)Overview of Dutch waste production per person per year.This is quite comparable with the EU average: The annual MSW generation currently stands at ca. 550 kg per capita (=average across the EU). The OECD estimates that MSW generation will reach 640 kg/capita/in So, according to the OECD, MSW generation in the OECD region will increase by 43% from reaching 640 kg per capita. Less recent figures - under the 5th EAP - show a target of an annual MSW generation of 300 kg/capita (= which was the EU average for 1985).12
8 Market forces Market liberalisation Under-capacity for incineration Changing regulation:Classification of treatmentClassification of wasteResiduesCO2-ReductionEuropePublic awareness12
9 3. Dutch scenario's 2012 Combustible Waste Total Waste Production MTon/yearThis slide is based on the Dutch National Waste Management Plan (LAP).This is a very comprehensive work based on many Life-Cycle-Analyses, and is the basis for the new legislation.The left graph shows the policy-prognoses for 2012 waste production.It is an optimistic estimate for the case that all planned measures are fully realised.It shows that from 66 MTon/year total waste generated by far the greater part is reused. This includes streams like paper, glass, metals, building demolishing materials, road reworking and many industrial waste streams.This is much similar to the existing 2002 situation because it assumes that all measures to compensate for economic growth are effective.Still it leads to an increase from the current 10,8 to 12 Million ton per year combustible waste.The right graph shows the existing incineration capacity, the optimistic and the pessimistic scenario for 2012It can be seen that the existing capacity of 5 MTon/year is far less than the amount of combustible waste. Even with the capacities for sludge and hazardous waste added it leaves 4 MTon that go to landfill. In the optimistic scenario it is assumed that no land filling of combustible waste will be allowed and that there will be an extra capacity for 4 MTon/year to treat the combustible waste by co incineration and other R1 technologies.These are for example co-incineration in coal fired power plants or cement kilns.
10 Price differences EURO Landfill: 30,- to 50,- plus new “green-Tax” Compost: 50,- to 70,-Incineration: 70,- to 120,-Recycling:Land filling is of course by far the cheapest solution to get rid of waste.Composting is generally cheaper than incineration although the difference has decreased last years.For recycling costs vary very much according to what stream from what origin because of the great influence of composition and quality of the stream.Also logistical costs have great variation.11
11 Dutch landfill costs Operating costs 30 - 50 €/ton Environmental tax € /tonTax combustible waste € /tonTotal € /tonDutch landfill costs are heavily taxed in order to promote other, better, technologies.Currently the interaction with German regulation allows for a huge “leak” of waste to German separation and landfills. This will automatically be finished in July 2005 when the transition period from will end. Than a stop on land filling of combustable waste will be active.For the time being this frustrates the basis of the Dutch waste management philosophy as it leads to an export of 2 to 3 million tons of waste.
12 “Integral chain efficiency” Energy30%WFPPHouseholdEnergy30%WTEHouseholdMaterialHouseholdSeparation(mechanical)Overall efficiency30%25%Percent of Mass20%Conversion efficiencyDigestion5%RDF 40%LandfillrecoveryEnergy 28%Energy 2%In waste management it is not the efficiency of the process-step that counts, but it is the efficiency of the entire chain that counts.It is obvious that for the stream with the highest quality an efficiency far above the average can be achieved. Good quality RDF can be burnt in a Coal-Fired Power Plant which should achieve easily 40% nowadays.But the other streams from separation that arrive can hardly be processed in an energy-efficient way.So processes that require pre-processing have to be assessed as an integral part of the chain, including all other streams coming from the separation process.The recovery should be judged according to the quantities (in percent) of the recovery, but also to the quality of the materials and the quality of the final use.Material
13 Maximise use out of waste 4. AmsterdamMission of the AEBMaximise use out of wasteStrategic aimsLowest tariff for the civilianOptimal environmental performanceTechnological innovations
14 Waste & Energy Enterprise Amsterdam Generations:1917 : ton/year, no flue-gas cleaning 19691969 : ton/year, de-dusting1993 : ton/year, chemical cleaning2006 : ton/year, RECOVERYLocal government owned, “commercial” operationLong term contractsIndustrial scale78,- Euro per tonDesign in 1990 for € 90,- per tonStrict cost and time management: completed on time and in budget.Start in 1993 with € 75,- per tonLowest price : € 65,- per tonCurrent 2003 price: € 78,- per ton3
24 6. New generation in Waste incineration Historical waste incineration “generations”:0 Open air incineration1st oven2nd dust removal from flue gas3rd chemical cleaning of flue gasIn this presentation we outline a new step:4th recovery of energy and materials
25 Why new generation ? Historical development of public awareness: newly identified needs lead toa new technical concept.So now recovery is the “next logical step”.
26 Energy-potential in Waste Waste in EU: MTon/year x 10 MJ/kg x 30%Electricity: = PJ / year= TWh / year= MW-continuous= 8 % of total EU-productionAvoided CO2 = 60 million Tons per yearThe present available technologies can generate electricity with an efficiency of net >30%.When this is applied to all combustable waste nearly 8% of all electricity from power plants can be generated from waste.A Waste Fired Power Plant (>30%) achieves this efficiency using a conventional grate to incinerate the waste, and uses high steam parameters and intermediate steam reheating.2
27 4th-generation Incineration: HE-WTE Cost must go downReliable, proven technologyEnergy Optimisation to the max !! Leap from 22% to >30%Material reuse to the max !! Fe, Al, Cu, Gypsum, CaCl2, Washed bottom ash = N1 quality building material Washed fly ash = inert44
28 HR-AVI project Systematic approach to optimise recovery Using proven technologies in new combinationEnergy efficiency from 22% to >30%Now in contracting phase
29 135 bar335°C130 bar480°C14 bar190°C13 bar320°Cx21Superheater0,03 bar25°CReheaterSketch steam reheating Superheated steam °C Steam pressure bar Steam reheating after HP-turbine Extra economiser
30 3e2e1eEvaporatorSuperheaterEconomiser234tertisecuPrim1st2nd850°C3rd650°CSSH1180°C4thaKetelas 1Ketelas 2BodemasECOSketch Boiler design - Large 1st draw: Height >20m, Flue-gas velocity < 3m/s - Large 2nd and 3rd-draw - Super-heater: Flue-gas velocity < 2,5 m/s - Second Economiser after fabric filter - Flue-gas recirculation (primary and secondary air)The boiler design has been really optimised to minimise the problems encountered in conventional waste incinerators.
31 Investments AVI + HR-AVI YearCapacity (Ton/Year)Investment: (Million €)IncinerationFlue-gas CleaningEnergy production+TotalTotal project costs (including civil, engineering etc.) split over main parts of the installation.9