Integrated Policy making for Sustainable Municipal Waste Treatment in the City of Antwerp

Transcription

1 Integrated Policy making for Sustainable Municipal Waste Treatment in the City of Antwerp Philip Heylen, vice-mayor Antwerp and chairman ISVAG ISWA CONFERENCE HAMBURG 17 november 2010

2 ISVAG, facts and figures (1) 1975: municipal co-operation of 6 Antwerps cities Incinerator operational in 1980, completely renovated in 90 s Late 90 s: public debate, dioxin crisis, law suit against ISVAG Municipal co-operation extended in 2005 (new member/period) Today ISVAG = end-treatment of residual waste of 1 million citizens in Antwerp region

3 ISVAG, facts and figures (2) 55 fte s Electricity: sustainable energy for 20,000 households Environmental permit ends on 1 september 2011, apply for extension to guarantee continuity of service Condition: BAT at all times!

4 ,500 T delivered to ISVAG, of which 142,200 T processed on site and T at Indaver = full load all year round Emissions largely under limit values (online on Average value 09 Limit value Flanders Dust 0,58 10 mg/nm³ CO 10,41 50 mg/nm³ HCl 0,62 10 mg/nm³ SO 2 0,75 50 mg/nm³ NO 2 134, mg/nm³ C n H m 0,14 10 mg/nm³ Dioxins 0,007 0,1 ng/nm³ TEQ Electricity in 2009: 88,866,387 KWh = more than households. Green certificates.

5 Financially 2000: huge debts ( 12,5 mio) after new investments and 2 years shut down Today: financially healthy and in 2012 free of debts Margin to finance optimizations and/or future alternatives

6 What after 2011? Technical versus political question, difficult historical background Challenge: scientific black-white debate, emotional aspects, nimby ISVAG board: identified and studied alternatives of all kinds, in Belgium and abroad

7 Flemish legislation Untill 2008 Flemish Waste directive: moratorium on new incinerators 2008 New Flemish Waste directive: Grid incinerator with energyproduction is BAT No concentration. Waste should be processed where it is produced Shut down existing plant only when alternative provided

8 Studies Normal environmental permit period in Flanders: 20 years For new environmental permit: only environmental impact assessment needed Allready in 2007: extend scope of research and commission extra studies Research for alternatives Alternative locations Alternative technologies Alternative co-operation structures

9 3 studies 1. Environmental Impact Assessment: Haskoning Only study that is obliged by law First preparations already end of 2007 Independent experts evaluate impact of current plant on region EIA declared complete and conform by Flemish Authorities on 2 July Future for ISVAG?: consortium ECOBEL Framework developed in 2008, execution in 2009 Alternatives? (location, technics, structure) Research of all aspects: environment, transport, financial, technical, legal Report presented in June BAT assessment: Technical University Berlin First contacts university Berlin date from 2005 BAT on European level and how ISVAG relates to this? Report presented in May 2010

10 EIA

11 Main research areas Independent experts, certified by the authorities, evaluate the impact of the installation on air, noise, soil, water, fauna and flora and on health and well-being (human) All impact evaluated in significance framework Example of SIGNIFICANCE FRAMEWORK for AIR X < 1% of the environmental quality norm or value : Negigeable contribution 1 X < 3% of the environmental quality norm or value : Limited contribution 3 X < 5% of the environmental quality norm or value : Relevant contribution X 5% of the environmental quality norm or value : Important contribution

12 General conclusion EIA ISVAG Area Air Impact assessment 0 negligeable Noise 0 negligeable (*) Water 0 negligeable Soil 0 negligeable Fauna & flora 0 negligeable Human 0 negligeable (*) -1 = limited at one point in the area during night time, but still largely under legal limit

13 Future for ISVAG?

14 Future for ISVAG Question How can ISVAG fulfill its public assignment, i.e. treatment of residual waste of its communities, after 1 September 2011? Condition! ISVAG insist to remain state-of-the-art at all times Challenge Avoid black-white debate. Create public and political support for study by being completely transparant in all phases, before-during-after the study an by involving all stakeholders.

15 Phased approach Phase 1: identify all possible options Fase 2: in depth evaluation and research on all identified options (1) Continue at current site for normal permit period (20y) (2) Stop operation at current site after a certain period of time and use time in between to develop sustainable new option

16 Report Phase 2 1. Evaluation and description of feasible alternatives - Possible optimisations at current site - Alternative technologies - Alternative locations, linked to logistic optimisation - New built versus existing plant - Decisive arguments to determine period for temporary extension - Possible structures 2. Future options for ISVAG 3. Detailed analysis of selected alternatives 4. Conclusions and recommendations (SWOT)

17 Optimisations at current site NOx emissions At current site (SNCR): 100 mg NOx/Nm 3 Replace DeNox by SCR: further downto 60 mg NOx/Nm 3, but negative impact on energy efficiency Dioxine-emissions: objective 0,005 tot 0,008 ng/nm³ (already realised) Optimisation of energy efficiency: potentially 10 to 20% Optimisation pre-treatment bulk waste: sorting out inert fraction (recycling potential 5 to ton per year) ISVAG remains among 5% best installations in Europe

18 Alternative technology? Pyrolysis and gasification: not proven technology at large scale yet Mechanich-biological (pre-)treatment Output towards co-incineration or mono-combustion Ecologically only positive if RDF can be treated in nearby coincineration plant No market today in Flanders Future for new technologies today uncertain in Flanders. Remain open for new developments.

19 Alternative locations Dense population in Flanders, nimby is everywhere 10 potential locations identified, 6 nearby, 4 further away After evaluation of possible alternative locations and alternative means of transport, it can be concluded that as well from logistic as from ecological angle (emissions), no improvement can be reached, compared to the current transport to the current site.

20 New built installation Huge investments, no clear ecological benefit New built is only an option if new developments in BAT, scale benefits or logistic optimisations can be realised Flemish Waste directive!

21 Timing for extension 2023: most logical moment in time to take decision about possible alternatives: 2023: decision to extend municipal co-operation structure Leaves sufficient time to realise all optimisations Leaves sufficient time to build financial stability Remains in line with Flemish waste directive We recommend ISVAG to apply for a new permit, for a normal period of 20 years in order to allow sufficient space for negotiations if ISVAG would decide to put its waste on the private market.

22 Main conclusion study Future for Preferred option: ISVAG Continue at current site until at least 2023, and execute all suggested optimisations. Apply for 20 years permit, with new evaluation moments before 2023 (eg. 2018).

23 University Berlin

24 Results study University Berlin Berlin Flanders Landfill ban since Large sample of established and new alternative technologies. Second opinion Conclusions: Professor Vera Susanne Rotter

25 Decision board ISVAG Three studies: there is no valid alternative in Flanders for our plant, after the end of our environmental permit in 2011 Technically, ecologically and economically, there is no reason why we should not apply for a 20 years permit However, because of politics and social responsability, the board of ISVAG voluntarily applies for a limited period of 10 years Intermediate evaluations in 2014, 2016 and 2018 If meanwhile, we identify a better and feasible alternative, we will apply it immediately.

26 Conclusion Politics = compromises Whatever we do, we always want to be (among) the best! Indisputable partners, open communications, complete transparancy are of utmost importance Politicians need to dare to take decisions