The Cleveland Recycling and Energy Generation Center

Transcription

1 Early Stage Project Development Case Study: The Cleveland Recycling and Energy Generation Center Waste Conversion Congress East Coast June 13,

2 Agenda Introduction History of Project Development Project Development a. Request for Information (RFI) b. Supplemental Request for Information and Qualification c. Refuse Derived Fuel Production d. Air Permit Strategy e. Co-generation opportunity Complexities of Project Development Road Map for Project Development 2

3 Introduction History of Cleveland Public Power Cleveland Public Power was founded in 1907 by Mayor Tom L. Johnson. Largest municipally owned electric utility in the state of Ohio The only municipality that competes door to door for its customers Serves nearly 80,000 residential, commercial and industrial customers 300 mega-watt system Currently implementing a 65 million expansion project. 3

4 Introduction In 2006, CPP completed the development of a five year strategic business plan that among other things identified CPP s over dependence on power supply contracts and the power grid. CPP purchased nearly 100% of its electric power needs from the market in the form of long and short term contracts. CPP owned less than 1% generation capacity and the strategic plan recommended steps to decrease its market dependence and its reliance on the transmission grid for 100% of its needs. 4

5 Introduction The City of Cleveland Department of Public Works operates the Division of Waste Collection and Disposal (DWC). The Division provides weekly collection of waste from 155,000 Cleveland homes, the City of Cleveland s West Side Market, Fire and Police Stations, the Justice Center, City Hall and other City buildings and public areas. 5

6 Curbside Recycling In 2007, a Curbside Recycling Pilot and Automated trash collection system was launched to 15,000 households. Through this program, residents receive sturdy garbage carts for trash and recycling which can be wheeled to the curb. The program will eventually be city-wide and currently residents will receive postcards and brochures regarding the program prior to receiving new carts. 6

7 Curbside Recycling This year, the City of Cleveland will provide Automated Waste Collection and Curbside Recycling service to an additional 30,000 households this summer, increasing the total number of served households to 70,000. Adding 30,000 households allows over 46% of Cleveland residents the convenience of recycling curbside and enables the City to gain additional revenue from the increased recyclables Upon receiving carts, residents will be required to place glass, plastic, metal cans, cardboard and mixed paper items into their blue recycle bins all remaining waste materials must go into the black bins. 7

8 Ridge Road Transfer Station DWC operates the Ridge Road Transfer Station, a municipal solid waste facility located at 3727 Ridge Road, Cleveland, Ohio Municipal solid waste is brought to the transfer station via waste collection vehicles. The waste is gathered and loaded into transport trucks and then taken to landfills. 8

9 History of Project Development In 2007, Cleveland Public Power created a special project team to investigate the production of electric power using municipal solid waste as the feedstock. 9

10 History of Project Development CPP obtained the services of RNR Consulting, URS Corp., DLZ Ohio Inc. and Cloud & Associates to assess the feasibility of a Municipal Solid Waste Facility at the Cleveland s Ridge Road Transfer Station. RNR assembled a team experienced in technical analyses of gasification technologies, environmental permitting and regulations, traffic studies, financial analysis and community assessments. 10

11 Composition of MSWE Steering Team CPP created the MSW Steering Team in March 2009 The team consisted of 10 members varying in background expertise Mission statement To position Cleveland as a global leader in advanced energy by developing an innovative resource recovery system that will employ efficient, safe and responsible technology and create a sustainable and transformative asset for the entire region. 11

12 History of Project Development In 2008, the RNR consultant team found that gasification and steam compression technologies were scientifically sound, presented numerous opportunities for economic growth and development, and recommended site inspections to see gasification facilities in operation. 12

13 History of Project Development In August of 2009, a delegation comprised of City officials and MSWE Steering Team members visited waste-to-energy facilities in Japan and China. The objectives of the trip were to observe the technologies in operation, assess environmental/community impacts at operating facilities and interview personnel. The delegation visited Kinsei Sangyo headquarters in Takaski Japan and saw their demonstration plant and also two large customer installations. Both customer facilities were located in environmentally or residentially sensitive areas. In addition the group visited an MSW incineration power plant in China. 13

14 History of Project Development In 2010, the City entered into a preliminary Facility Design Agreement for the MSWE project. The Facility Design agreement was to provide services for the submission of an air permit and preliminary, non-construction, facility designs for a gasification facility. CPP has an electric substation on the transfer station property which connects to the grid at 69KV and the generator at the gasification facility would connect to the grid at that location. 14

15 History of Project Development In September of 2011, the City of Cleveland issued a Request for Information and Qualification (RFI) from thermal conversion technology providers, waste handling equipment suppliers, project developers, consultants and financial services companies. The RFI explained that the proposed MSWE facility would use thermal and physical conversion technologies to process municipal solid waste from the City of Cleveland and neighboring communities to generate electricity and a number of marketable by-products, such as recyclables, refuse derived fuel (RDF) pellets, steam, and possibly decorative bricks. 15

16 Project Design Objectives The City will utilize MSW as a fuel source and assist CPP in meeting the City of Cleveland s Advanced Energy Portfolio Standard (AEPS). The AEPS requires CPP to purchase at least 15% of its base load power from advanced and renewable sources by 2015, 20% by 2020 and 25% by Cleveland Advanced Energy Portfolio % % % 16

17 Project Design Objectives The CREG Center Project will expand the City s curb-side recycling program which currently covers over 46% of the City. Once fully implemented, all residents will be able to recover recyclables from their household waste and be allowed to comingle them in a designated bin. With the addition of a MRF, onsite-sorting is expected to further increase the material diversion rate. 17

18 Project Design Objectives Items in the recyclable container may be commingled and will be sorted at the Transfer Station. The City s normal MSW setout procedures, routing and collection processes will apply. 18

19 Project Design Objectives Recycled Materials Curbside recyclable items and sorted recyclables from the MRF may include: o newspaper, o pop and beer cans, o magazines, o catalogs, o corrugated cardboard, o mixed mail, o boxboard, o phone books, o steel and tin cans, o aluminum foil, o aluminum cans, o glass food/beverage containers o plastic bottles (with a neck), o other recyclables. Heating inert materials in the gasification process would waste energy and reduce the efficiency of the gasifier. 19

20 Project Design Objectives The CREG Center would also include technology that mechanically packages the sorted recyclable materials to maximize revenues from the sale of recycled goods. The CREG Center will also help the City meet its Sustainability goals. Connecting the project to the City s other goals like the AEPS and Sustainability goals has helped gain broader range of support for the project. Electricity generated at the facility will reduce Green House Gas (GHG) emissions from the City s current waste management and energy generation sources. 20

21 Project Design Objectives The CREG Center will help the City align with other sustainability related objectives including the US EPA Waste Hierarchy and Food Waste Hierarchy guidelines. 21

22 Project Design Objectives Economic Benefits In addition to the use of Cleveland s MSW, interested municipalities in the region will have opportunity to reduce their tipping fees by 10-15% by tipping their MSW at the Facility. They may also benefit from increased recycling revenues. 22

23 Project Development A. Request for Information The RFI directed toward waste-to-energy thermal conversion processes including pyrolysis and conventional gasification technologies, MSW recycling, sorting, refused derived fuel production, gasification, and other waste recovery technologies, processes and consulting and financial services. The City received approximately 25 responses in regard to the RFI. 23

24 Request for Information Proposed technologies must have a proven commercial track record and history of successful installations for a minimum of five (5) years. Technologies and processes had to be scalable and suitable for the range and volume of MSW received and processed at the Cleveland Ridge Road Transfer Station. The output of the conversion process had to be the production of synthetic gas that would be used for electric generation production. The residuals after the thermal conversion process was required to be a usable, marketable by-product. 24

25 Request for Information The proposed waste-to-energy project would be designed to gasify the equivalent of 560 tons of MSW per day. After the completion of the bid process, the winning gasification technology would be required to process the same amount of MSW as the technology provided in the City s air permit application. 25

26 Request for Information The RFI requested information from gasification and pyrolysis technology suppliers, material recovery facilities and refuse derived fuel production technology providers. This group was encouraged to provide a list of operating facilities, the size of such facilities, description of whether they were commercial or demonstration facilities, date placed in operation, and their current status. Thermal conversion suppliers were asked to discuss the environmental impacts of their technologies and issues that require permits of any type. 26

27 Thermal Conversion Technology In addition to thermal conversion companies, waste receiving and processing, recycling, drying, pelletizing, syngas/fuel processing and air emissions controls system providers were asked to provide a range of information. Professional services companies, consulting firms, developers, financers and related companies were asked to provide a history of their experience working on Municipal Solid Waste related projects. 27

28 RFI Responses The City received nearly 25 responses to the RFIQ. This group includes a number of gasification technology providers, waste sorting and handling equipment providers, various consultants, project developers and financial service providers. 28

29 B. Supplemental Request for Information and Qualification In April of 2012, Cleveland City Council passed legislation extending an opportunity for a broader range of interested MSW recovery and conversion technology providers to file responses to an addendum to the request for information and qualifications of September That lead to the issuance of the Supplemental Request for Information and Qualification (SRIQ) on May 18, In the SRIQ, the City sought information from other interested parties to ensure consideration of all practical options before determining its next steps. Reponses to the SRIQ are due July 31,

30 Supplemental Request for Information and Qualification The supplemental request targets the range of waste conversion technology suppliers that were not provided opportunity to respond to the City s initial request. On May 18, 2012, the City issued the Supplement Request for Information and Qualification. The SRIQ expanded the City s review of waste-to-energy and waste management technology options. Similar to the City s initial request, the criteria the SRIQ applied to each new option was that it demonstrate a proper application for the City s waste stream, demonstrate it had proven reliability, show that it could obtain an air permit, if applicable, demonstrate commercial viability, and demonstrate successful operation for no less than five years. 30

31 Respondents to the SRIQ Respondents to the SRIQ were asked to discuss integrated municipal solid waste management processes including but not limited to: recycling, composting, pre-processing, conversion, post-processing and management of MSW products and residue, refuse derived fuel production and electricity generation. 31

32 Supplemental Request for Information and Qualification For each reference facility and technology identified by the respondent, the SRIQ asked for the following Facility name/location; Description, owner/operator, dates in operation; Process flow diagram; Demonstration or commercial facility; Designed capacity tons per day (tpd); Current operating capacity (tpd); Number of units and unit capacity (tpd); Annual availability; Byproducts and outputs (designated in units MW, Btu, tpd, etc.); Type & quantity of waste processed; GHG emissions data that demonstrates how the proposed technology would help achieve the City of Cleveland s GHG reduction goals and more. 32

33 Supplemental Request for Information and Qualification For waste management, composting, recycling and other related companies, the SRIQ asked for answers to the following: a) name and location of reference facilities; b) the owner/operator; c) type of technology; d) feedstock; e) capital and operation and maintenance cost; f) raw MSW and feedstock throughput; g) types/quantities of products and by-products; h) amount of residual sent to landfill; i) history of operations; j) start-up date; k) time in service; and l) a discussion of operating and maintenance challenges. 33

34 Supplemental Request for Qualification These companies were asked to discuss the environmental impacts of their technology including permit requirements, air emissions, odors and more. They were also asked to provide a description of any pre-processing system required to prepare the feedstock for processing and include equipment used to pre-sort, separate, shred, size, screen, dry, or otherwise process the feedstock material. 34

35 Supplemental Request for Information In April of 2012, Cleveland City Council passed legislation extending an opportunity for a broader group of interested MSW recovery and conversion technology providers to file responses The legislation also authorized the hiring of a new consultant 35

36 New Request for Consulting Services The responses to the RFI of September 2011 and the responses to the SRIQ of May 2012 will be provided to the consultant selected through this Request for Proposal process. The information and steps the City undertook in its air permit application to develop the CREG Center as a gasification, waste-to-energy facility. will also be permitted to the consultant. The information CPP has on the development of a cogeneration project will also be provided. The consultant will evaluate all of the above. The consultant will develop recommendations after reviewing each of these activities. 36

37 Cleveland Recycling & Energy Generation Center The City moved away from the generic MSWE label and focused on branding to better position the facility with the community and surrounding neighborhoods and renamed the project. The City s recycling and waste-to-energy facility is now referred to as the Cleveland Recycling & Energy Generation (CREG) Center. 37

38 C. Refuse Derived Fuel Production Fuel Pellet Production In addition to power production, the CREG Center will use yard waste, food, paper residuals and other non-hazardous and non-recyclable materials to produce an environmentally friendly, refuse derived fuel pellet. The fuel pellet can be marketed as an alternative or supplement to coal and can be blended with coal to produce electricity. The CREG Center s RDF pellet could serve as the primary feedstock for the thermal conversion technology selected. Among the requirements of the RDF pellet is that it must be environmentally friendly. Excess pellets would be sold to a local company that is currently using coal for steam production. Under the gasification model, only the RDF pellet would be feed into the gasifier. 38

39 Refuse Derived Fuel Production Although most gasifiers do not require pelletization of feedstock, the City intends to weigh the benefits of pelletizing against the benefits of using less extensively prepared feedstock in the gasifier. Chief of all concerns is the environmental impact followed closely by the economic impact of such an investment and the impact on system efficiency. The targeted materials for pelletization may include items such as residual paper, light plastics, food, yard and wood waste and these items would be shredded and converted to a biomass fiber. 39

40 Refuse Derived Fuel Production Depending on the pelletization technology selected, the biomass fuel fiber would exit the system with a low moisture content and a heat value around 10,000 BTU. This biomass pellet would contain minimal sulfur and would be much cleaner burning than fossil fuel. The end product would be a high value fuel pellet that is 90% cleaner than coal. 40

41 D. Air Permit Application In March of 2011, CPP applied for an air permit for a MSWE facility at the City of Cleveland s Ridge Road Transfer Station. The Ohio EPA issued a draft of the permit in November of 2011 and is currently reviewing comments filed on the draft permit. 41

42 Air Permit Strategy Consistent with Ohio EPA s air pollution control rules, CPP identified three objectives for the CREG Center air permit application: Control air pollutant emissions with the use of the best available air pollution control technology to minimize the discharge of air pollutants to the environment; Restrict annual air pollutant emissions (tons per year or TPY) consistent with classification as a minor source or synthetic minor source ; and Design the facility and site layout to ensure the air pollutant emissions result in off-site air quality impacts that are well under acceptable levels. 42

43 Air Permit Strategy The types of air contaminants (or air pollutants) that will be emitted by the proposed CREG Center fall into three general categories: 1. Air contaminants for which the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) has adopted National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The NAAQS pollutants include: Ozone (the precursor pollutants for ozone formation in the ambient air are volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NOx)); Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) (approximately 75% of the total NOx is NO2); Sulfur dioxide (SO2); Particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter (PM10); Particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5) (the precursor pollutants for PM2.5 formation in the ambient air are NOx and SO2); Lead (Pb); and Carbon monoxide (CO). 43

44 Air Permit Strategy 2. Air contaminants that are: (a) listed as a Hazardous Air Pollutant (HAP) by the US EPA, including hydrogen chloride (HCl), hydrogen fluoride (HF), cadmium (Cd), mercury (Hg) and dioxin; and/or (b) identified as a toxic air pollutant by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA), including ammonia (NH3) and sulfuric acid (H2SO4); and 3. The Greenhouse Gas air pollutants designated by US EPA, including carbon dioxide (CO2) nitrous oxide and methane, expressed as CO2 equivalents or CO2e. 44

45 Air Permit Strategy The CREG Center s air emissions are expected to be below all required air quality standards for the following reasons: 1. CREG Center will feature the best available, state-of-the-art air pollution control equipment that will capture harmful pollutants and cut emissions; 2. The City will invest millions of dollars in a state-of-the-art material recovery facility (MRF) at CREG that will help remove items that have mercury and lead at the beginning of the process, so these items will never be gasified and the related pollutants will be significantly reduced from the start; 3. The selected gasification technology will have a proven track record for pollutants such as NOx, mercury and lead. 4. CREG reduces the number of trucks in and out of Ridge Road Transfer Station and also reduces the number of trucks dumping waste at the landfill and thereby cuts Greenhouse gases by millions of tons a year; and 45

46 Air Permit Strategy Gasifier Max Operation Schedule: 12 hours per day per gasifier (365 days per year) Feedstock: 70 tons of MSW/batch. Cycle: One batch of MSW will be processed each day in each gasifier 46

47 Public Meeting A public meeting was conducted by Ohio EPA on January 9, 2011, A number of elected officials and representatives of neighborhood organizations expressed concern about the original January 13, 2012 deadline. As a result, Mayor Jackson formally requested that the deadline be extended by thirty days The Ohio EPA extended the public comment period through February

48 Public Meetings Although CPP had conducted a number of public meetings prior to the issuance of the draft permit, the City added a number of additional meetings to inform and educate the public. February 23, 2011 April 4, 2011 January 11, 2012 January 19, 2012 January 26, 2012 February 8, 2012 February 9, 2011 February 15, 2012 Meeting with residents and business stakeholders Meeting with local environmental groups Meeting with Cleveland City Council Public Meeting at the Estabrook Recreation Center Public Meeting at the Zelma George Rec. Center Public Meeting at the Cudell Recreation Center Public Meeting at the Harvard Com. Services Center Public Meeting at the West Side Ecumenical Ministry 48

49 E. Co-Generation Opportunity Cleveland Public Power is in discussions with a local steam heat and cooling company about a cogeneration project. This company is a CPP customer that would modify one of its air permits and use the CREG fuel pellet along with coal to produce steam and electricity. This configuration would be a co-generation operation with steam used for both CPP s electric generation and Cleveland Thermal s steam heat requirements. The offsite location for co-generation may resolve neighborhood concerns about CREG Center s waste-to-energy air emissions. 49

50 Co-Generation Opportunity Plant Operation The co-generation facility would install two fluidized bed, multi-fuel fired boilers and one 42 MW steam turbine generator. The facility could purchase all or some of the CREG Center s pellet product. Gasification of CREG s fuel pellet alone would not be adequate for power output greater than 20 MW, so additional feedstock or fuel would be needed for 42 MW capacity. The remaining feedstock could be coal and/or additional renewable feedstock. 50

51 Co-Generation Opportunity Ridge Road CREG Center Activities Under the co-generation approach, the City-wide recycling, the recycling center, the material recovery facility, the fuel pellet production facility and decorate bricks would all remain and could be located at the Ridge Road CREG Center campus. The steam production and electric generation facility would be located at the co-generation site. Composting could be located at Ridge Road or a suitable located elsewhere, if found to be a viable, self supporting option. 51

52 Complexities of Project Development Political Realities Local concerns and influence will either propel a project forward or provide additional impediments Timing is everything (expect a lengthy development period) so knowing when and who is important A well developed Public Relations campaign is critical 52

53 Complexities of Project Development The driving forces behind coalitions To form a coalition one needs to demonstrate: that the goals of each of the prospective members are similar and compatible; that working together will enhance each groups' ability to reach their goals; that the benefits of coalescing will be greater than the costs of proceeding alone; that it is risky to consider alternatives to the coalition; and that the activities of the coalition are likely to receive more media attention than those of any individual organization. 53

54 Complexities of Project Development Unique Nature of Coalitions Not all coalition members buy into the joint effort equally Some members may be less committed to the goals of the coalition than others Some members of a coalition may take positions that are counter to the respective member s traditional positions Members may move away from their traditional views for the sake of joining or supporting a coalition 54

55 Complexities of Project Development Identify the differences in the core messages or objectives of the members To keep a coalition together, it is often necessary for a coalition to cater to one side more than another--especially when negotiating External influences and relationships are important 55

56 Complexities of Project Development Settlement strategies may be effective to respond to members that: are not committed to extreme opposition positions may be receptive to concessions that align with their core missions find the coalition is not meeting their expectation believe the other coalition members are not taking that respective member s concerns seriously 56

57 Road Map for Project Development Strategy development (outline how the project will be developed) Rigorously analyze the technical, economic and environmental feasibility of the technology/project Work with the local interest groups an leaders for community buy-in Include a broad group of stakeholders Form a Steering Committee (include public leaders, waste management personnel, local environmental groups, sustainability representatives if possible) Develop air permitting strategies Demonstrate reductions in harmful emissions Map emissions of key pollutants Meet with regulators before, during and after you file 57

58 Road Map for Project Development Secure legislative support Meet with community groups Identify groups more likely to support the project Meet with groups likely to oppose the project to understand their concerns Seek credible environmental and sustainability stakeholders to gain support for the components/benefits that support their agendas Understand the technology Seek independent validation of technology options Check references and ask for documentation 58

59 Road Map for Project Development Determine how much risk will be taken with new technology verses mature technology Are full scale commercial projects required or are successful smaller scale demo projects acceptable Visit/ inspect technologies that provide the most promise Verify technology claims Document environmental impacts Seek feedback from residents in the community where the technology is used Confirm successful commercial operation Visit technology user customers locations 59

60 Road Map for Project Development Economic Impacts Emphasize the regional/community benefits of the project to gain the support of contractors/labor in the area Job creation Environmental Impacts Work to achieve the community s recycling and sustain ability goals Highlight reduction of landfill cost and environmental impacts like avoidance of GHG Marketing and branding is key emphasizing Green Energy, environmentally friendly energy and sustainability objectives 60

61 Road Map for Project Development Public Education Public hearings and public meetings Brief community groups (community outreach) Connect the project to other successful and related beneficial community programs Target all age groups Advertise your message 61

62 QUESTIONS? Commissioner Ivan Henderson Cleveland Public Power 62