NewEnergyNews: TODAY’S STUDY: IS WASTE-TO-ENERGY A GOOD IDEA?/

NewEnergyNews

Gleanings from the web and the world, condensed for convenience, illustrated for enlightenment, arranged for impact...

The challenge now: To make every day Earth Day.

YESTERDAY

THINGS-TO-THINK-ABOUT WEDNESDAY, August 23:

  • TTTA Wednesday-ORIGINAL REPORTING: The IRA And The New Energy Boom
  • TTTA Wednesday-ORIGINAL REPORTING: The IRA And the EV Revolution
  • THE DAY BEFORE

  • Weekend Video: Coming Ocean Current Collapse Could Up Climate Crisis
  • Weekend Video: Impacts Of The Atlantic Meridional Overturning Current Collapse
  • Weekend Video: More Facts On The AMOC
  • THE DAY BEFORE THE DAY BEFORE

    WEEKEND VIDEOS, July 15-16:

  • Weekend Video: The Truth About China And The Climate Crisis
  • Weekend Video: Florida Insurance At The Climate Crisis Storm’s Eye
  • Weekend Video: The 9-1-1 On Rooftop Solar
  • THE DAY BEFORE THAT

    WEEKEND VIDEOS, July 8-9:

  • Weekend Video: Bill Nye Science Guy On The Climate Crisis
  • Weekend Video: The Changes Causing The Crisis
  • Weekend Video: A “Massive Global Solar Boom” Now
  • THE LAST DAY UP HERE

    WEEKEND VIDEOS, July 1-2:

  • The Global New Energy Boom Accelerates
  • Ukraine Faces The Climate Crisis While Fighting To Survive
  • Texas Heat And Politics Of Denial
  • --------------------------

    --------------------------

    Founding Editor Herman K. Trabish

    --------------------------

    --------------------------

    WEEKEND VIDEOS, June 17-18

  • Fixing The Power System
  • The Energy Storage Solution
  • New Energy Equity With Community Solar
  • Weekend Video: The Way Wind Can Help Win Wars
  • Weekend Video: New Support For Hydropower
  • Some details about NewEnergyNews and the man behind the curtain: Herman K. Trabish, Agua Dulce, CA., Doctor with my hands, Writer with my head, Student of New Energy and Human Experience with my heart

    email: herman@NewEnergyNews.net

    -------------------

    -------------------

      A tip of the NewEnergyNews cap to Phillip Garcia for crucial assistance in the design implementation of this site. Thanks, Phillip.

    -------------------

    Pay a visit to the HARRY BOYKOFF page at Basketball Reference, sponsored by NewEnergyNews and Oil In Their Blood.

  • ---------------
  • WEEKEND VIDEOS, August 24-26:
  • Happy One-Year Birthday, Inflation Reduction Act
  • The Virtual Power Plant Boom, Part 1
  • The Virtual Power Plant Boom, Part 2

    Wednesday, April 10, 2013

    TODAY’S STUDY: IS WASTE-TO-ENERGY A GOOD IDEA?

    Waste Not, Want Not: Analyzing the Economic and Environmental Viability of Waste-to-Energy (WTE) Technology for Site-Specific Optimization of Renewable Energy Options

    Kip Funk, Jana Milford, Travis Simpkins, February 2013 (National Renewable Energy Laboratory)

    Executive Summary

    Waste-to-energy (WTE) technology burns municipal solid waste (MSW) in an environmentally safe combustion system to generate electricity, provide district heat, and reduce the need for landfill disposal. While this technology has gained acceptance in Europe, it has yet to be commonly recognized as an option in the United States.

    Section 1 of this report provides an overview of WTE as a renewable energy (RE) technology and describes a high-level model developed to assess the feasibility of WTE at a site. The model uses simple user inputs, geographic information system (GIS)-based waste resource data, available incentives, and financial parameters to estimate implementation cost, operations costs, and life-cycle cost, along with the recommended quantities of WTE to consider. The development of this model and integration in the National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s (NREL) Renewable Energy Optimization (REO) tool allows WTE to be considered alongside other RE options and helps to introduce the technology to a broad audience.

    Section 2 of this report reviews results from previous life cycle assessment (LCA)studies of WTE that have been published in the literature, and then uses an existing LCA inventory tool to perform a screening-level analysis of cost, net energy production, greenhouse gas(GHG) emissions, and conventional air pollution impacts of WTE for residual MSW in Boulder, Colorado. We find that MSW combustion is a better alternative than landfill disposal in terms of net energy impacts and carbon dioxide (CO2)-equivalent GHG emissions. In this report, WTE leads to greater GHG reductions per kWh of electricity generated compared to landfill gas-toenergy. The screening indicates WTE would be a relatively expensive way to treat Boulder’s residual MSW, at an estimated cost of about $58 per ton (higher than typical landfill costs for this region).

    Section 3 of this report describes the federal regulations that govern the permitting, monitoring, and operating practices of MSW combustors and provides emissions limits for WTE projects.

    Waste-to-Energy Model for NREL’s Renewable Energy Optimization Tool: Introduction

    This section provides an overview of waste-to-energy (WTE) as a renewable energy (RE) technology and describes how the Renewable Energy Optimization (REO) tool utilizes available data to identify at a high level WTE feasibility in a user-defined location. The model estimates the energy generation and costs, and recommends a system size that minimizes life-cycle cost of energy for the site. Thermal, electric, and combined heat and power (CHP) production can all be analyzed with this module.

    The tool utilizes user inputs and geographical information system (GIS) data on WTE resources at particular sites and analyzesthe potential for WTE technologies to be utilized, along with other RE technologies. Determining whether WTE is cost effective requires modeling the integrated system based on the details of the site, the different WTE technologies and their application, available incentives, and financial parameters. The model yields estimated implementation costs, operations costs, and life-cycle cost, along with the recommended quantities of WTE to consider.

    REO determines the scale of a project through consideration of both small, distributed building measures (kW scale) and central plant measures on the scale a campus or community (MW scale). The optimal size of each measure is estimated using optimization software. Note that the capital and operating costs calculated are based on national averages for large projects and are not specific to any particularlocations1

    Background

    Renewable Energy Optimization

    The REO tool, developed by NREL, identifies the combination of RE technologies that minimize life-cycle cost of energy for a particular site and set of constraints. The optimization problem is couched in three terms: an objective, the variables, and the constraints. Typically the objective is to minimize life-cycle cost of energy. The variables are the size of each RE project on each site. Constraints, such as percent energy from renewable, available land area, available capital expenditure, etc., can be included in the analysis. The objective of the REO analysis is to quantitatively evaluate multiple scenarios leading to the recommendation of a specific project for more detailed engineering analysis.

    Waste-to-Energy History

    The first U.S. WTE facility was built in New York in 1898. The Clean Air Act of 1970 and the rise in oil prices led to a growth in WTE facilitiesthrough the 1970s. Since then, however, WTE has slowed in the United States. No new facilities have been built in over 10 years, although the technology is prevalent in Europe and Asia.2

    Compared to WTE facilities of the 1970s and 80s, WTE is now a refined, clean, well-managed application for energy production. The Clean Air Act of 1990 defined and regulated the emissions from a WTE facility to be the most stringent in the world. Public perception, based on the poor emission controls of WTE facilitiesthrough the 1980s, has been that WTE facilities are “dirty,” and the common theme has been to stop the development of WTE facilities. Success of WTE plants today is highly dependent on local costs of waste disposal, electricity value, heat value, and the public’s acceptance.

    Waste Management Practices

    Waste management practices have also changed since the early 1970s. Many communities as well as local and state governments have implemented zero-waste strategies, where they utilize the reduce, reuse, recycle, and compost (or 3RC) strategy, WTE, and landfill as a path to minimize the potential for pollution of air and ground water. See Figure 1-1 for EPA’s Recycling/Energy Recover Solid Waste Management Hierarchy.

    Many communities and government organizations have concluded that zero waste is currently unattainable. A major effort to minimize packaging of marketed items is being made through changing policy. Recycling efforts are also being implemented successfully by many organizations. Currently California has a goal of 50% waste reduction, which the state is meeting, and some communities are exceeding substantially.

    Reduction of greenhouse gasses (GHGs) is another consideration during the life-cycle evaluations of waste management practices. Some communities are far enough away from the recycle markets that some of the recyclable materials are not economically and environmentally justified to include as part of their near-term recycle goals. The carbon footprint can potentially increase due to shipping materials to the market, compared to utilizing the recyclable material as a feedstock for a WTE facility or to continue sending the material to a landfill.

    Waste-to-Energy Overview

    Waste-to-energy technologies consist of various methods for extracting energy from waste materials. These methods include thermochemical and biological methods. Figure 1-2 provides an illustration of the various energy pathwaysfor WTE. Of these pathways, most are in early developmental stages. Currently the WTE technologiesthat are commercially proven in the United States using MSW feedstock are combustion and anaerobic digestion. All other processes hold high potential for utilizing MSW feedstock but must overcome various technical, institutional, economic, environmental, and/or procedural challenges to become commercially viable. The primary challenge facing these technologies is the heterogeneous nature of MSW, which creates a widely varying chemical constituency of the energy products generated from these processes. This variance affects the ability to efficiently extract energy. Solutions are actively being pursued from two angles.

    1. Cleanup and conditioning of synthetic gas (syngas) products of thermochemical conversion and biogas products of biological conversion. These efforts are directed at making the gases more usable as a direct fuel in internal combustion engines or gas turbines, and for pipeline injection.

    2. Feedstock preparation, shredding, and/or mixing MSW to make the feedstock more homogeneous. This homogeneity will be reflected in the energy product(s) and help improve its utility.

    Permitting of MSW conversion technologies is also a major challenge. Permitting is arduous and complex, especially in California. Technologies utilized as part of the criteria for recycling and energy generation include anaerobic digestion, combustion, gasification, and pyrolysis. These technologies can be combined, and are used with emission control equipment and monitoring systems to substantially reduce emissions to meet the stringent air emission limits established through the permitting process with the specific Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) air district and local air management district in each state.

    The scope of this task includes the development of a characterization of waste resources to be utilized for the evaluation and optimization of WTE technologies as a component of the REO portfolio. The WTE technologies considered include anaerobic digestion (AD), combustion, gasification, and pyrolysis for heat, electricity, and CHP…

    0 Comments:

    Post a Comment

    << Home