Association КЕ&B - UV&P VAT.Nr.: BG Preki pat str., Sofia 1618 Bulgaria Tel./fax:(+359 2)

Transcription

1 OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME ENVIRONMENT Association КЕ&B - UV&P VAT.Nr.: BG Preki pat str., Sofia 1618 Bulgaria Tel./fax:(+359 2) Biowaste.BG12@gmail.com EUROPEAN UNION EUROPEAN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT FUND WE INVEST IN YOUR FUTURE Project No TA-2011-KPOS-PP-78 Technical assistance on waste management Development of legal framework on bio-waste management and establishment of Quality Assurance System for Compost and National Organization of Quality Assurance for the Compost Development of legal framework on bio-waste management and establishment of Quality Assurance System for Compost and National Organization of Quality Assurance for the Compost STAGE I Analysis of the EU Acquis and Bulgarian Legislation on the Biowaste Management and the Residual Fraction of Household Waste Part III Residual Waste Management Strategy Final Report 10 September 2012 I-III_ResWaste_EN

2 Main Authors: Franz Neubacher, Gerald Kurz UV&P, Vienna 2

3 Table of Content LIST OF FIGURES... 6 LIST OF TABLES Introduction Background General Aspects of Residual Waste Management (RWM) and Residual Waste (RW) in general Example for historic development of waste disposal the example of Austria Policy Context of residual waste management EU Policy on residual waste management The EU s waste management policy 12 Necessary objectives and principles in residual waste management 13 Strategies and trends of municipal waste treatment in the EU 14 Municipal waste treatment by individual countries within the EU EU Directives and guidelines related to RW EU targets 17 Energy efficiency 17 Renewable Energy Directive 18 EU - Directive 2000/76/EC on Waste Incineration 18 IPPC - Directive and Directive on Industrial Emissions Review of technology of RW treatment with emphasis on MBT and Waste Incineration MBT technology General features Main goals of RW treatment with MBT Technical requiurements for MBT - examples from Austria and Germany Environmental and output standards in Austria 24 Environmental and output standards in Germany Incineration technology The incineration process: Energy recovery in thermal waste treatment Emissions

4 2.3. Some considerations on MBT performance as residual waste treatment option Energy and climate balance 30 Landfill Gas emissions from disposed stabilised MBT output 31 Leachate from disposed stabilised MBT output 31 Requirement of landfill volume 31 Flexibility a key aspect for future waste management by integrated MBT 32 Demand for incineration capacities in addition to industrial co-incineration ofenergy Potential through utilisation of RDF Bibliographic review of exemplary policies and practices in EU member states in the management of RW fractions Policy and situation on RW management in Portugal The development of environmental protection and the introduction of integrated and sustainable waste management in Austria Residual Waste treatment by Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) in Austria as an example: Policy and situation on RW management in Italy Situation on RW management in Germany Steps towards a sustainable RW strategy in Bulgaria Bulgaria s waste policy and legislation regarding residual waste treatment projects under the Operational Plan (Operational Plan Environment) for an integrated system for RW treatment 44 Waste Management Act, July National Waste Management Programme (NWMP) Residual waste in Bulgaria Conclusions and recommendations based on quantitative and qualitative residual waste assessment to set the right framework conditions with the aim to phase out landfilling of non-pre treated residual waste Landfill tax Legal framework, distribution of competences and law enforcement Phasing out residual wastes Development of long term and sustainable model for management of residual waste fractions in Bulgaria General aspects Flexibility of the system Steps regarding short-term improvement Scalability and interregional cooperation (proximity) Average/typical time required for tendering, construction and start-up

5 5.6. Socio-economic and environmental impact assessment of the selected option Conclusions and recommendations for an integrated implementation of RW treatment (MBT / WTE) and disposal strategy and practice on national, regional and local scale Steps towards project realization resulting in a RW waste treatment facility Preliminary conclusions and recommendations for strategy implementation Institutional Framework for successful long-term operation of RW treatment facilities LITERATURE

6 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Separate collection of municipal waste, White Book Waste to Energy in Austria, Figure 2: Municipal waste treatment, EU-27 (kg per capita) Figure 3: Municipal waste treated in 2009 by country and treatment category, sorted by percentage of direct landfilling without pre-treatent or stabilisation by means of incineration or biolgical stabilisation in a MBT plant * (% of municipal waste treated) Figure 4: Basic process flow chart MBT, Figure 5: Process FLOW MBT Erbenschwang / Germany, Figure 6: Control of cleaned flue-gas from waste incineration (Example: RVL Lenzing, operation since 1998), White Book Waste to Energy in Austria, Figure 7: Development of Emissions from Waste Incineration according to State-ofthe-Art in Austria and Switzerland, Source: Vogg (values for ); RVL (values for 2000) Figure 8: Average Material balance of 15 MBT facilities examined in Germany 2001/2010 (Ketelsen, 2012) Figure 9: Urban Waste Operation Units in Portugal (excl. Islands), Source: Resíduos Urbanos em 2010 Agência Portuguesa do Ambiente (Portuguese Environmental Agency) October Figure 10: Final destination from the Urban Waste Solid Fraction Processed in MBT / Anaerobic Digestion / Composting Plants, Source: Resíduos Urbanos em 2010 Agência Portuguesa do Ambiente (Portuguese Environmental Agency) October Figure 11: Technical alternatives for the proper treatment of residual waste in Austria, Neubacher F., Figure 12: Average mass flow of Mechanical Biological Treatment plants as an example in Austria is shown below Figure 13: Integrative concept for municipal waste treatment by mechanicalbiological treatment (MBT) and WtE incineration Figure 14: Development of the utilization of waste fuels in the Austrian cement clinker industry Figure 15: Development of MSW management in Italy from 2000 to 2004 (APT and ONR, 2005) (Note: the categories compost from selected fraction and dry fraction, bio-stabilised, RDF indicate the input into and not the output from biological treatment) Figure 16: Distribution of MSW treatment in Italy in 2004 (APAT and ONR, 2005) (Note: the categories compost from selected fraction and dry fraction, biostabilised, RDF indicate the input into and not the output from biological treatment) Figure 17: Expected development of MBT in Europe Source: TBU Environmental Engineering Consultants Figure 18: MBT plants in Germany, German Environmental Agency, Figure 19: Emission concentrations and after-care for waste disposal plants, UV&P Figure 20: Development of landfill tax and total sum of landfill taxes per year since Figure 21: Waste splitting for the transition from land filling of untreated waste to its ban Figure 22: Activities and time schedule for project implementation of large waste to energy treatment projects

7 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Federal Waste Management Plan 2011, Austrian Ministry of Environment Table 2: Municipal waste generation and treatment in 2010 in EU27 [Source: EUROSTAT, Press release, March 2012] Table 3: Emission limits for MBT [Austrian MBT guideline 2002] Table 4: Stability criteria of residues MBT guideline Table 5: German classification criteria for MBT material sent to landfill Table 6: Comparison of incineration technologies for thermal waste treatment Table 7: Allocation of specific wastes to incineration technologies Table 8: Net primary efficiency and climate credit for MBT facilities examined compared with MSW incineration / WtE plants, 2009 (Ketelsen, 2012) Table 9: Quantities of residues for incineration in Austria, UV&P Table 10: Comparisons of Bulgaria and Central European countries of similar size and largest cities regarding management of RW

8 0. General Remarks by UV&P It should be noted that waste management is an extremely complex issue including regional and seasonal variations throughout the different phases in the development towards sustainable waste management. Residual waste treatment is also strongly influenced by local factors such as availability of landfill capacity and the demand for environmentally friendly recovery of energy from waste, e.g. by urgently needed new boiler capacities with highly efficient co-generation of electricity and heat (either at industrial production sites such as the example Lenzing, Austria or at large municipal district heating / cooling networks). In the following elaborations various perspectives have been presented by different experts with different professional focus and background. However, successful reference examples with significant achievements towards the EU goals in 2020 should be considered for the requested future treatment of Residual Wastes (see for example Dolezal 2010, UV&P, 2012, Neubacher 2013). 8

9 1. Introduction 1.1. Background This document should serve as a basis for developing an integrated, energy and resource efficient RW (residual waste) management strategy. Together with the two guidelines: Technical Requirements for Mechanical-Biological Treatment of Residual Waste; and Technical Requirements for Incineration of Residual Waste it intends to support the implementation of integrated projects for residual waste treatment as an absolutely vital part of development of environmental infrastructure in Bulgaria. This study should guide the way to development as well as project implementation on regional and national level by taking into consideration all the important aspects related to RW treatment based on best practice methods according to proven state-of-the-art and BAT (best available technology) as required by EU regulation. However, the purpose of this study is not to determine the engineering details or the exact locations where the necessary treatment facilities should be installed. Every specific treatment facility requires tailor-made design and planning by an interdisciplinary team of engineers. This team must be independent of equipment supplier or waste disposal interests to allow for optimum economical and ecological benefits for society and the environment as well as sustainable success for investors and plant operators. Therefore environmentalists as well as all levels of decision makers must be involved in an open dialogue based on experiences and facts General Aspects of Residual Waste Management (RWM) and Residual Waste (RW) in general Residual Waste Management is a very complex issue. Therefore, one single answer is not sufficient, meaning, that successful solutions are in principle based on an interdisciplinary approach, covering legal, macro-economical and financial but also and mainly as a prerequisite for long term success technical requirements. The EU s understanding of Municipal Solid Waste is: Municipal waste consists of waste collected by or on behalf of municipal authorities. The bulk of the waste stream originates from households, though similar wastes from sources such as commerce, offices, public institutions and selected municipal services are also included. It also includes bulky waste but excludes waste from municipal sewage networks and municipal construction and demolition waste. It is important to understand that the term municipal is used in different ways reflecting different waste management practices. Differences between countries are to some extent the result of differences in the coverage of these similar wastes. Waste generation figures and management rates for municipal waste will therefore be influenced by the proportion of commercial waste, for example, which falls under the definition. It is not clear which countries are following which approach from the data available here, so caution is advised when making comparisons across the EU. (Source: EUROSTAT, EUROPEAN COMMISSION) 9

10 Residual waste refers exclusively to that part of waste from private households and other establishments which is collected as "residual waste" in standardised waste containers by municipal waste collection services (in many developed countries this is the mixed waste fraction after separation of recyclable waste streams at the source). This is a heterogeneous mix of various types of materials which may vary strongly in composition and volume depending on regional and seasonal factors (rural or urban settlement structure, average size of households and consumption behaviour, proportion of commercial enterprises, seasonal tourism, etc.). In some areas, local heating systems have a non-negligible effect on waste volume and composition because some wastes may be incinerated in small home stoves (home heating systems). The link-up to a district heating network, as well as the use of natural-gas and heating-oil boilers, will prevent the environmentally unsafe burning of waste wood (specifically if not properly dried or coated with colours or impregnates) and other highcalorific wastes (e.g. cardboard, paper, laminated or composite materials such as Tetrapack ) in household burners. The following illustration indicates the different categories of typical waste materials for separate collection from private households according to advanced international experience: Figure 1: Separate collection of municipal waste, White Book Waste to Energy in Austria, 2010 Some 60 to 70% of the residual waste is biologically degradable (including humidity). Approximately 10 to 20% consists of plastics and approximately 10% consists of inert materials, including glass. About 3 to 4% consists of metals (if not collected separately or removed by scavengers) and 2% is hazardous waste in chemical terms. One ton of residual waste typically contains 1-3 g of mercury, approximately 10 g of cadmium and some 3 kg to 5 kg of sulphur, as well as 6 kg to 12 kg of chlorine. These substances are found in practically all fractions of residual waste in a variety of chemical compounds. For this reason, the requirements for technical systems ensuring safe residual waste treatment are highly complex (with special emphasis on flue gas treatment in waste incineration). (Source: Federal Ministry of Environment of Austria, White Book Waste to Energy in Austria, 2010) 10

11 Table 1: Federal Waste Management Plan 2011, Austrian Ministry of Environment Taking the above mentioned facts into consideration, when choosing the best treatment option it is a prerequisite to consider the worst case scenario regarding chemical composition and the probability of heavily contaminated waste streams and their potential environmental impact Example for historic development of waste disposal the example of Austria For understanding the present challenges and necessities for a proper RW Management, it is advantageous to learn from past experiences both positive as well as negative - for a better understanding of the options for sustainable development. By size of population and area, Bulgaria is comparable with Austria. According to international statistics, Austria is currently among the 20 wealthiest countries in the world. Due to impressive economic growth and the development of new materials and products (e.g. disposable packaging and other products with a short lifetime, etc.) throughout the last decades, increasing amounts of municipal wastes are generated per year. About 40 years ago it became obvious that waste disposal would become a major threat to the environment and to the economy in Austria (as well as it was the case in Switzerland and Germany). Contamination of ground water by waste disposal has been recognized as a major environmental threat 1. In 1977 the first guidelines on landfill requirements for waste disposal were issued by the Federal Ministry for Agriculture and Forestry in Austria. 1 e.g. see study of Zwittnig, L., 1963 "Adverse effects of waste disposal on ground water" 11

12 In 1983 the first Federal Act on "Hazardous Waste Disposal" was issued and the Environmental Protection Fund ("Umweltfonds") was established in order to promote necessary investments for waste treatment and new technologies. At that time about 1,800 landfills for mixed wastes were legally recognized by various government authorities. However, literally all of these landfills became known as an environmental and public nuisance. Thus, due to public opinion and environmental activists, it became politically almost impossible to establish necessary additional - or even better - waste disposal sites. Nevertheless, at that time the major political and administrative efforts were still focused on finding new sites for hazardous waste dumps as well as sites for municipal waste disposal. In summary the discussions on the correct approach to Residual Waste Management had revolved around the following main conflicts: Laissez-faire vs. eco-logically and economically sustainable solutions objective facts vs. private opinions (including fear of the unknown, profit-driven interests, etc) 1.4. Policy Context of residual waste management EU Policy on residual waste management The EU s waste management policy EU waste policy has evolved over the last 30 years through a series of environmental action plans and a framework of legislation that aims to reduce negative environmental and health impacts and to create an energy and resource-efficient economy. The EU s Sixth Environment Action Programme ( ) identified waste prevention and management as one of four top priorities. Its primary objective is to ensure that economic growth does not encourage more waste. This led to the development of a long-term strategy on waste. The 2005 Thematic Strategy on Waste Prevention and Recycling resulted in the revision of the Waste Framework Directive 2, the cornerstone of EU waste policy. The treatment of municipal waste is, to some extent, driven by landfill diversion targets of biodegradable municipal waste (BMW) set out in the EU Landfill Directive. However, the recent revision of the Waste Framework Directive includes the following target for household and similar waste (which comprises the majority of Municipal Waste): By 2020, the preparing for re-use and the recycling of waste materials such as paper, metal, plastic and glass from households and possibly from other origins as far as these waste streams are similar to waste from households, shall be increased to a minimum of overall 50 % by weight. The revision brings a modernised approach to waste management, marking a shift away from thinking about waste as an unwanted burden to seeing it as a valued resource. The Directive focuses on waste prevention and puts in place new targets which will help the EU move towards its goal of becoming a recycling society. It includes targets for EU Member States to recycle 50% of their municipal waste and 70% of construction waste by Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on Waste of 19 November

13 The Directive introduces a five-step waste hierarchy where prevention is the best option, followed by re-use, recycling and other forms of recovery, with disposal such as landfill as the last resort. EU waste legislation aims to move waste management up the waste hierarchy. (European Commission, Being wise with waste ) Necessary objectives and principles in residual waste management Waste management affects all areas of economic business and human life, because waste is already caused in production, trade and shipment of goods and provision of services, as well as in consumption and disposal thereafter. The Waste Framework Directive stipulates that waste prevention ought to be given top priority in waste management and, if and to the extent that these are the best options available based on environmental considerations, that re-use and recycling of materials should take preference over energy recovery from waste. Prevention measures should take into account the entire life-cycle of products and services rather than just their waste phase 3. The generation of waste is increasing within the European Union. It has therefore become of prime importance to specify basic notions such as recovery and disposal, so as to better organise waste management activities. It is also essential to reinforce measures to be taken with regard to prevention as well as the reduction of the impacts of waste generation and waste management on the environment. Finally, the recovery of waste should be encouraged so as to preserve natural resources. One key element is the obligation for waste treatment prior to landfilling of treated residues in order to prevent potential hazards for future generations (precautionary principle) An important prerequisite for the best possible use and treatment of waste is that the different types of (reusable/recoverable/recyclable) waste are (i) (ii) collected separately at the source of origin; or appropriately sorted subsequent to collection if feasible by the overall system design. In order to achieve the objectives, e.g. in Austria, the Landfill Ordinance from 1996 (with a latest update in 2008) issued stringent quality requirements for waste intended for landfill and for residues from waste treatment. This also includes the strict limitation of total organic carbon (TOC) which is an indicator for biochemical and chemical reactivity and therefore also for formation of landfill gases (and even possible fire hazards including oxygen starved oxidation processes inside the waste dump causing significant pollution) and organically contaminated leachate from landfills. Exceptions on this limitation of 5% TOC for stabilized residues from MBT-processes do exist in Austria 4. Since 1 January 2009, the law only permits appropriately treated and low-reactivity residues from waste treatment to be landfilled in Austria. Appropriate intermediate storage, up to a maximum of 3 years for specific wastes intended for further treatment with recovery, and intermediate storage up to a maximum of 1 year of wastes intended for disposal, is legally (in accordance with EU regulation) not classified as a landfill operation. 3 See further details: Analysis of the EU acquis and Bulgarian legislation on the biowaste management and the residual fraction of household waste. Part I: EU & Bulgarian Framework for Biowaste 4 See Report, STAGE IV: Development of national technical requirements for in-stallations treating residual waste fraction (mechanical-biological treatment (MBT) and incineration) - Guidance on techniques and technologies to treat residual frac-tion (best practices). Part I: Technical Requirements for Mechanical- Biological Treatment of Residual Waste 13

14 Strategies and trends of municipal waste treatment in the EU Countries follow different strategies to divert waste away from landfills. These strategies are characterised either by a combination of material and energy recovery or by focusing mainly on material recovery and less on incineration as shown in the figure below. However, if material recovery is complemented by Waste-to-Energy, a lower level of landfilling may be achieved. In addition, Waste-to-Energy also diverts organic material of lower calorific value from landfills, even after pre-treatment such as stabilisation and/or drying by mechanical-biological or mechanical-physical processes. Figure 2: Municipal waste treatment, EU-27 (kg per capita) 14

15 Municipal waste treatment by individual countries within the EU The figures below illustrate the dramatic differences between individual countries with respect to municipal waste management. The figure presents the amounts of municipal waste generated (actually being collected and reported) and its percentage being landfilled, incinerated, recycled and composted in Table 2: Municipal waste generation and treatment in 2010 in EU27 [Source: EUROSTAT, Press release, March 2012] Several countries are very advanced in diverting municipal waste from landfills. Switzerland, Germany, Austria, Netherlands and Sweden have reported direct landfilling without pre-treatment (MBT or incineration) close to zero (below 2 %). Among the old EU - Member States, landfill rates in 2010 were highest in Greece (82 %), Portugal (62 %), Spain (58%), Ireland (57 %), Italy (51%), and UK (49%). The highest rates for recycling were reported by Germany (48 %, 274 kg per capita), Austria (40 %, 235 kg per capita), Belgium (36 %, 175 kg per capita), Sweden (36%, 171 kg per 15

16 capita) and the Netherlands (28 %, 144 kg per capita). It should be noted these countries also have the highest incineration rates as well. Countries with a highly developed range of waste-to-energy plants like Belgium, Germany, Netherlands, Austria, Sweden and Switzerland account for a > 50% composting/recycling rate (Sweden 50%). Figure 3: Municipal waste treated in 2009 by country and treatment category, sorted by percentage of direct landfilling without pre-treatent or stabilisation by means of incineration or biolgical stabilisation in a MBT plant * (% of municipal waste treated) (Source: EUROSTAT, Generation and treatment of municipal waste, Department Environment and Energy Statistics in focus, 31/2011, June 2011) * Thjs graph does not take into account slag and ashes from Waste incineration (~ 25%) as well as stabilised organic fraction from mixed (residual) waste treatment in mechanical-biological treatment (MBT) that usually still needs to be landfilled! EU Directives and guidelines related to RW There are several Directives and guidelines on the EU-level with relevance for RW management and treatment. The most important aspects are summarised below. Further details see also the report on the EU Acquis 3. 16

17 EU targets The EU-2020 targets have been set by Member States in their National Reform Programmes in April The targets are: 1. Employment 2. R&D / innovation 3. Climate change / energy 20% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions throughout the EU (or even 30%, if the conditions are right) compared to % of energy from renewables (National target for Bulgaria: 16%) 20% increase in energy efficiency (National target for Bulgaria: 3.2 Mtoe (=Million Tonnes of Oil Equivalent, reduction of energy consumption) 4. Education 5. Poverty / social exclusion Energy efficiency The Energy Efficiency Plan forms part of the European Union s (EU) 20 % target (aimed at reducing primary energy consumption) and the 2020 Energy strategy. It aims at: promoting an economy that respects the planet s resources implementing a low carbon system improving the EU s energy independence strengthening security of energy supply In order to meet these objectives, the European Commission proposes to act at different levels. Chapter 4 Energy efficiency for competitive European industry includes: Efficient generation of heat and electricity Greater use of (high-efficiency) cogeneration, including from municipal waste treatment plants, and district heating and cooling can make an important contribution to energy efficiency. The Commission will therefore propose that, where there is a sufficient potential demand, for example where there is an appropriate concentration of buildings or industry nearby, authorisation for new thermal power generation should be conditional on its being combined with systems allowing the heat to be used combined heat and power (CHP) 6 and that district heating systems are combined with electricity generation wherever possible. To improve the energy-saving performance of CHP systems, the Commission also proposes that electricity distribution system operators provide priority access for electricity from CHP, and will propose reinforcing the obligations on transmission system operators concerning access and dispatching of this electricity.(source: EU-Commision, Energy Efficiency Plan 2011) 5 COM(2011) 109 final. Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - Energy Efficiency Plan Directive 2004/8/EC on the promotion of cogeneration based on a useful heat demand in the internal energy market and amending Directive 92/42/EEC. 17

18 Renewable Energy Directive The Renewable Energy Directive 7 establishes a common framework for the use of energy from renewable sources in order to limit greenhouse gas emissions and to promote cleaner transport. To this end, national action plans are defined, as are procedure for the use of biofuels. The Directive is part of a package of energy and climate change legislation which provides a legislative framework for Community targets for greenhouse gas emission savings. It encourages energy efficiency, energy consumption from renewable sources, the improvement of energy supply and the economic stimulation of a dynamic sector in which Europe is setting an example. Definition of Biomass according to the EU Directive 2009/28/EC (Art. 2, letter e): biomass means the biodegradable fraction of products, waste and residues from biological origin from agriculture (including vegetal and animal substances), forestry and related industries including fisheries and aquaculture, as well as the biodegradable fraction of industrial and municipal waste; According to overall national targets (see scheme below) for renewable energy sources, Bulgaria has to almost double the share of renewables by the year Table 3: Share of renewable energy production Bulgaria has achieve until [Annex I of EU-Directive 2009/28/EC] Share of energy from renewable sources in Target for share of energy from renewable gross final consumption of energy, 2005 sources in gross final consumption of energy, (S2005) 2020 (S2020) 9,4 % 16 % EU - Directive 2000/76/EC on Waste Incineration The legal framework for incineration and co-incineration of waste is the EU 2000/76/EC on Waste Incineration 8. Directive Incineration of hazardous as well as non-hazardous wastes may cause emissions which pollute the air, water and soil and have harmful effects on human health. In order to limit these risks, the European Union imposes strict operating conditions and technical requirements on waste incineration plants and waste co-incineration plants. This Directive aims to integrate into existing legislation technical progress in terms of monitoring emissions from incineration processes and to ensure compliance with the international commitments made by the Community with regard to reducing pollution, specifically concerning the setting of emissions limit values for dioxins, mercury and dust produced by waste incineration. The Directive is based on an integrated approach: limits relating to water discharges have been introduced alongside value limits set for emissions into air. 7 Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC. 8 Directive 2000/76/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 December 2000 on the incineration of waste (and the amending act Regulation (EC) No 1137/2008 ). 18

19 IPPC - Directive and Directive on Industrial Emissions The DIRECTIVE 2008/1/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 15 January 2008 concerning integrated pollution prevention and control ( the IPPC Directive ) requires industrial and agricultural activities with a high pollution potential to have a permit. This permit can only be issued if certain environmental conditions are met, so that the companies themselves bear responsibility for preventing and reducing any pollution they may cause. Integrated pollution prevention and control concerns new or existing industrial and agricultural activities with a high pollution potential, as defined in Annex I to the Directive (energy industries, production and processing of metals, mineral industry, chemical industry, waste management, livestock farming, etc.). The Directive 2008/1/EC is replaced by Directive 2010/75/EU on Industrial Emissions. However, its provisions remain applicable until 6 January The DIRECTIVE 2010/75/EU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 24 November 2010 on Industrial Emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control) brings together Directive 2008/1/EC (the IPPC Directive ) and six other Directives in a single Directive on industrial emissions. This Directive shall cover industrial activities with a major pollution potential, defined in Annex I to the Directive (energy industries, production and processing of metals, mineral industry, chemical industry, waste management, rearing of animals, etc.). The Directive shall contain special provisions for the following installations: combustion plants ( 50 MW) waste incineration or co-incineration plants certain installations and activities using organic solvents installations producing titanium dioxide This Directive is of importance for residual waste incineration plants. 19

20 2. Review of technology of RW treatment with emphasis on MBT and Waste Incineration 2.1. MBT technology General features Mechanical biological treatment (MBT) of solid waste is now being widely implemented in Germany, Austria, Italy and other EU countries. In 2004, there were 15 facilities in Austria, 60 in Germany and more than 90 in Italy; the total throughput was approximately 13 million tonnes with larger plants having a capacity of tonnes/day (Diaz et al., 2006). Mixed waste is subjected to a series of mechanical and biological operations to reduce volume and achieve partial stabilization of the organic carbon. Typically, mechanical operations (sorting, shredding, crushing) first produce a series of waste fractions for subsequent treatment (including combustion or secondary biological processes). The biological steps consist of either aerobic composting or anaerobic digestion. Composting can occur either in open windrows or in closed buildings with gas collection and treatment. Invessel anaerobic digestion of selected organic fractions produces biogas for energy use. Compost like products and digestion residuals could have potential horticultural or agricultural applications (if several quality criteria are fulfilled); some MBT residuals are landfilled. Under landfill conditions, residual materials retain some potential for CH4 generation (Bockreis and Steinberg, 2005). Reductions of as much as 40 60% of the original organic carbon are possible with MBT (Kaartinen, 2004). Compared with landfilling, MBT can theoretically reduce CH 4 generation by as much as 90% (Kuehle-Weidemeier and Doedens, 2003). In practice, reductions are smaller and dependent on the specific MBT processes employed (see Binner, 2002). (IPCC, 2012) A mechanical biological treatment is a waste processing that combines mechanical sorting with biological treatment such as composting or anaerobic digestion. MBT plants are designed to process mixed household waste as well as commercial and industrial wastes. The terms 'mechanical biological treatment' or 'mechanical biological pre-treatment' relate to a group of solid waste treatment systems. These systems enable the recovery of materials contained within the mixed waste and facilitate the stabilisation of the biodegradable Figure 4: Basic process flow chart MBT, The sorting component of the plants typically resembles a materials recovery facility. This component is either configured to recover the individual elements of the waste or produce a refuse-derived fuel that can be used for the generation of power. The components of the mixed waste stream that can be recovered include: Ferrous scrap Metal Non-ferrous scrap metal 20

21 Plastic Glass The "mechanical" element is usually an automated mechanical sorting stage. This either removes recyclable elements from a mixed waste stream (such as metals, plastics, glass and paper) or processes them. It typically involves factory style conveyors, industrial magnets, eddy current separators, drums, shredders and other tailor made systems, or the sorting is done manually at hand picking stations. The mechanical element has a number of similarities to a materials recovery facility (MRF). MBT can alternatively process the waste to produce a high calorific fuel termed refuse derived fuel (RDF). RDF can be used in cement kilns or thermal combustion power plants and is generally made up from plastics and biodegradable organic waste. It is a common misconception that all MBT processes produce RDF. This is not the case and depends strictly on system configuration and suitable local markets for MBT outputs. As example a scheme of such a MBT facility here MBT Erbenschwang/Bavaria, which is quite complex, is shown: Figure 5: Process FLOW MBT Erbenschwang / Germany,

22 The "biological" element refers to: Anaerobic digestion; Aerobic rotting / composting; or Bio-drying Anaerobic digestion harnesses anaerobic microorganisms to break down the biodegradable component of the waste to produce biogas and to reduce the extent of biological reactivity of the digestion residue. The biogas can be used to generate electricity and heat. More often, biological refers to a composting stage which can be applied to the digestion residues after anaerobic fermentation or directly to the organic rich fraction of mixed (residual waste. Here the organic fraction is decomposed into carbon dioxide and humified compost-like output of low quality. This compost-like BT output is either landfilled if certain stability criteria are met or in some countries is used for land reclamation on closed landfills, brown fields and similar restricted, non agricultural applications. It is an exothermal process but the energy produced by the microorganism can typically not be utilized. In case of bio-drying, the waste material undergoes a period of rapid heating through the action of aerobic microbes. During this partial composting stage the heat generated by the microbes result in rapid drying of the waste. The dried waste is then mechanically treated to produce a refuse-derived fuel with higher calorific value then from undried waste. Such material can also easier be stored before utilized in a combustion process. Some systems incorporate both anaerobic digestion and composting. This may either take the form of a full anaerobic digestion phase, followed by the maturation (composting) of the digestate. Alternatively a partial anaerobic digestion phase can be induced on water that is percolated through the raw waste, dissolving the readily available and easily degradable organc compounds, with the remaining material being sent to a windrow composting facility. By processing the biodegradable waste either by anaerobic digestion or by composting MBT technologies reduce the the greenhouse gases potential of untreated residual waste substantially. Usually European MBT uses Aerated Static Pile (ASP) technology with more or less frequent mechanical turnings during the primary decomposition phase. The blended waste mix is usually placed on perforated piping, providing forced air circulation for controlled aeration. It is performed as open, covered or housed windrows, or in closed boxes or tunnels. In this way depending of used technology, scaling may range from very small, simple systems to very large, capital intensive, industrial installations. The aeration system uses fans to press and/or suck air through the composting mass. The pipes are typically installed in channels in the floor. Usually, forced aeration is accompanied with a computerized monitoring system responsible for controlling the rate and schedule of aeration of the rotting mass, although meters and manual monitoring techniques may also be used in smaller scale operations. Advantages of this composting method include the ability to maintain the proper moisture and oxygen levels for the microbial populations to operate at peak efficiency to reduce pathogens, while preventing excess heat, which may lead to system failures. Aerated systems also facilitate the use of biofilters to treat process air to remove particulates and mitigate odors prior to venting. However, aerated systems can dry out quickly and must be monitored closely to maintain desired moisture levels. In Europe, MBT integrates off-gas treatment. The raw waste air is cleaned by bio filters, bio scrubbers and partly also by waste gas combustion (Regenerative Thermal Oxidizer, RTO). 22

23 In biofilters aerobic microbes eat the odours to some extend. In the bio scrubbers the polluted air is forced through a water curtain and contaminations are washed out. RTO is an industrial process for the treatment of exhaust air. The system uses a bed of ceramic material to absorb heat from the exhaust gas and use the captured heat to pre-heat the incoming process gas stream and destroy potential gaseous pollutants emitted from process exhaust streams at temperatures ranging from 815 C to 980 C. These gas streams are usually produced by processes requiring ventilation. In contrast to Germany, the incorporation of RTO as part of MBT is not required by law e.g. in Italy. Further information on emission control are provided in the Technical Requirements for Mechanical-Biological Treatment of Residual Waste Main goals of RW treatment with MBT Possible output-materials of the MBT system: Renewable fuel (biogas) leading to renewable power Recovered recyclable materials such as metals, plastics, glass etc. Digestate - an organic fertiliser and soil improver High calorific fraction refuse derived fuel - renewable fuel content dependent upon biological component. Limitations on RDF as a substitute fuel for cement clinker production do exist, e.g. mercury, chlorine and minimum calorific value Residual unusable materials prepared for their final safe treatment (e.g. incineration) and/or landfill Further advantages are: Small fraction of inert residual waste Reduction of the waste volume to be deposited to at least a half (density > 1.3 t/m³), thus the lifetime of the landfill is at least twice as long as usually Especially in Germany and Austria MBT plants have been built when there is a landfill in the backyard. That means that the main issue to operate a MBT is to produce biologically stabilised material for being landfilled. About 30% of the input can after treatment brought to the landfill, about 40% goes to incineration and recycling and finally 30% is loss of humidity. For example in Italy, the MBT process has increased considerably between 1996 and In fact, in 2004 it is reported to manage about 9 million tonnes of MSW, nearly three times as much as WTE. About 20% of the mechanical-biological treatment is dedicated to the production of compost from selected fraction, whereas the other 80% produce a large variety of materials such as bio-stabilized, dry fraction and RDF (Refuse Derived Fuel). Often the bio-stabilized and dry fractions (which do not have the characteristics of RDF), are disposed in landfills. 23

24 Technical requirements for MBT - examples from Austria and Germany Environmental and output standards in Austria The Austrian Waste Management Act and the MBT Guideline from , in which the standard for the treatment, the output quality, and the emissions are defined, constitute the regulatory framework for the operation of MBT plants. The emission limits are a follows: Table 3: Emission limits for MBT [Austrian MBT guideline 2002] 1. Organic substances indicated as total carbon - half-hourly average - daily mean - mass ratio 2. Nitrogen oxides indicated as nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ) - half-hourly average - daily mean 40 mg/m³ 20 mg/m³ 100 g/t Waste 150 mg/m³ 100 mg/m³ 3. Ammonia 20 mg/m³ 4. Dioxins/furans 0,1 ng/m³ 5. Total dust 10 mg/m³ 6. Odour 500 Odour Units/m³ According to the requirements in the Austrian Landfill Ordinance, mechanically-biologically pre-treated waste can be disposed off only in a separate area within a mass waste landfill if the calorific value (upper calorific value) is <6,600 kj/kg dry matter and if the waste fulfills the requirements indicated in Table 4. Key rationale for the establishment of the gross calorific value was to encourage the production of a segregated energy rich fraction to be used as a fuel in WtE plants. Table 4: Stability criteria of residues MBT guideline 2002 Parameter Limit Unit Respiration activity after 4 days 7 Mg O 2 /g TS Gas generation by incubation test after 21 days (GS 21 ) or alternatively Gas generation by fermentation test after 21 days (GB 21 ) Nl/kg DS Nl/kg DS 24

25 Environmental and output standards in Germany In Germany, the ordinance on the environmentally sound disposal of municipal waste and on biological waste treatment plants (BGBl. I S. 305, published in Bonn on 27 February, 2001, latest amendment by Art. 1 of the ordinance from 13 December 2006 (BGBl. I S. 2860)) applies for the waste treatment in an MBT plant. The regulation states that the following must be documented: Mechanically-biologically treated waste have to comply with the appropriate classification criteria in Appendix 2 for the parameters organic fraction of dry residues from original substance defined as TOC (Nr. 2) or maximum calorific value Ho (nr. 6), TOC in leachate (Nr. 4.03) and biodegradability of dry residues from original substance defined as respiration index AT4 (Nr. 5) or defined as ratio of gas generation by fermentation test GB21 (Nr. 5). Table 5: German classification criteria for MBT material sent to landfill No. For the assignment of waste to landfills the following classification values must be complied with: Parameter Classification values Class of landfill 1 Class of landfill 2 2 Organic share of the dry residue of the original substance 2.01 Defined by loss of ignition 3 mass-% 5 mass-% 2.02 Defined by TOC 1 mass-% 3 mass-% 6 Gross calorific value (H 0 ) kj/kg 4.03 TOC 300 mg/l 5 Biological degradability of the dry residue of the original substance Defined by respiration index Or defined by the ratio of gas generation by fermentation test 5 mg/g 20 l/kg 2.2. Incineration technology During incineration, hydro and carbon compounds (organic substances) are oxidized at temperatures of above 850 degrees Celsius under high heat, converting them into carbon dioxide and water vapour. They are subsequently released into the atmosphere through the stack as part of the cleaned flue-gas. Waste incineration allows the destruction of organic pollutants and substances. It is used to treat suited waste streams, on the one hand, and to generate energy from waste (electricity generation and usable heat and cooling energy) on the other hand. Waste incineration considerably reduces the amount of landfill space used. The remaining solid residues are either recycled or deposited in safe landfills in their controllable, lowreactivity form. 25

26 The incineration process: The incineration process consists of four consecutive and sometimes simultaneous stages, which take place adjacent to each other: Drying: First water (H 2 O) is evaporated to turn the humid fuel into a "dry substance". Degasification: As further heat is added, volatile organic substances (low-temperature carbonization gas) escape. The solid residue is then referred to as pyrolytic coke or coke. Gasification: Solid carbon is then converted into combustible carbon monoxide (CO) utilizing a gasification agent (e.g. H 2 O, CO 2, O 2 ). The solid residue left over once gasification is complete is referred to as ash (or slag, bed material, fly ash). Oxidation: The combustion of the (combustible) gases CO and hydrogen (H 2 ) to convert them into CO 2 and H 2 O. This is accompanied by high release of heat. Oxidation requires oxygen or air. For complete incineration, excess air is required, which presents itself as residual oxygen in the off gas from incineration. The completeness of incineration essentially depends on the temperature; the available reaction time; and good turbulence in the gaseous phase, with sufficient availability of oxygen. These criteria temperature, time and turbulence are often referred to as the 3 T of complete incineration. Waste incineration using current state of the art technology usually requires a minimum temperature of 850 C at a residence time of 2 seconds and good turbulence, with a systemspecific minimum oxygen content. Waste incineration plants are not just the incinerator for generation of energy; they must also include Reception; Intermediate storage; Pre-treatment of waste; Treatment of flue gases; and Treatment of liquid and solid residues Energy recovery in thermal waste treatment New thermal waste treatment plants should only be constructed either at sites connected to industrial production facilities with continuous demand for yearround heat supply; or at sites which are connected to a sufficiently powerful regional district heating network (or district cooling network in hot season if needed). 26

27 New thermal waste treatment plants should only be constructed either at sites connected to industrial production facilities which require year-round heat supply, or at sites which are connected to a sufficiently powerful regional district heating network (or district cooling network, if needed). Waste incineration plants with cogeneration of heat and electricity can achieve an optimum energy efficiency of some 80% in total, depending on the plant design. By comparison, plants that solely generate electricity (no heat usage) only achieve an efficiency of approximately 20%. The electricity consumed by the thermal waste treatment plant itself amounts to approx. 3% to 6% of the thermal energy input (total amount of fuel which goes into a plant). In other words, 6% of thermal energy input means that up to 23% of the generated electrical energy is consumed for the own plant operation. The following waste incineration technologies differ in the way the air and fuel are fed into the incinerator: Grate firing systems (air flows from underneath through the solid particulate fuel placed on top of the grate), Fluidized-bed incineration (intense gas turbulence keep the suspended, small-piece fuel particles in hot sand and incineration gas in a fluidized, dynamic state of movement), Dust firing systems (the finely ground fuel is transported pneumatically in the gas flow with simultaneous incineration), Rotary kiln with afterburner (various types of solid, pasty and liquid wastes can be treated in the slowly rotating kiln. The flue gas is subsequently burned with auxiliary fuel in the connected afterburning zone). Decades of experience have shown that the simplest way to incinerate mixed residual waste is in a grate firing system. Alternatively, residual waste can be used in fluidized-bed incineration following mechanical sorting and processing. Separately collected plastics, rejects from waste paper recycling, mechanically de-watered sewage sludge, and mechanically processed waste fractions (e.g. shredder light fractions, etc.) with a low or exceptionally high calorific value can be used efficiently in the fluidized bed system. To do so the waste fuels must be pre-treated, easily measurable for exact dosing and particles must be limited in size (e.g. 80 mm mesh). Parameter Table 6: Comparison of incineration technologies for thermal waste treatment Maximum thermal fuel capacity per line Incineration technology Grate Fluidized-bed Rotary kiln approx. 90 MW approx. 160 MW approx. 40 MW Excess air ratio (specific quantity of flue-gas) medium low high Acceptable range of calorific value for fuel low high medium Fuel processing requirements low high medium Controllability of incineration and shut-down operation medium high low Source: UV&P,

28 Table 7: Allocation of specific wastes to incineration technologies Source: UV&P, Emissions Effective gaseous emission cleaning is necessary because of the unavoidable formation of dust and gaseous air pollutants in the emission from waste incineration. This is the case even if incineration is complete (i.e. when the residual concentrations of organic carbon compounds and carbon monoxide in the flue gas are at an absolute minimum). Gaseous pollutants can be divided into organic substances (i.e. unburned or organic carbon) and inorganic substances (e.g. carbon monoxide, sulphur oxide, hydrochloric acid, nitrogen oxide, and gaseous mercury). According to the legal requirements, the composition of cleaned off-gases is constantly monitored and recorded by continuously measuring their key parameters. These parameters are: particulates, total organic carbon (TOC), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ), hydrogen chloride (HCl), hydrogen fluoride (HF), nitrogen oxide (NOx or NO + NO 2 ) and mercury (Hg). Additionally, the other heavy metals and dioxin emissions as well as ammonia are monitored in off-gas at regular intervals. The following example of RVL Lenzing provides a comparison between the emission standards requested by EU Directive 2000/76, the Austrian law, the project planning by UV&P in 1994, and the continuously measured values e.g in

29 Control of Cleaned Flue-Gas from Waste Incineration (Example: RVL Lenzing, operation since 1998) Waste-to-energy: 110 MW fuel capacity for approx. 300,000 t / a of waste Figure 6: Control of cleaned flue-gas from waste incineration (Example: RVL Lenzing, operation since 1998), White Book Waste to Energy in Austria, 2010 Novi Sad WASTE-TO-ENERGY in Austria, November, UV&P _2011_ISWA_Novi-Sad_LIVE_ A number of different processes and plant designs are available for flue gas cleaning. Depending on the task at hand (the spectrum of flue gas composition, the possibility for discharging water containing mineral salts, etc.), the plant design can be tailored to the specific needs of every scenario concerning chemical efficiency, consumption of energy and chemicals, as well as the volume and composition of resulting residues for recycling and recovery or disposal. Multistage flue gas cleaning is useful for the safe adherence to low emission limit values, even if the flue gas figures are temporarily elevated or technical malfunctions occasionally occur. Particulate pollutants (dust) are usually removed using a fabric filter or electrostatic precipitator. Organic pollutants are reduced to a minimum by incineration, which should be as complete as possible, and they can be further reduced through downstream off-gas cleaning. Adsorption processes (e.g. entrained flow process, fixed bed filtration) and catalytic oxidations are available for this purpose. The formation of inorganic air pollutants depends largely on the chemical composition of waste and other fuels. They include Sulphur oxides (from combustible sulphur); Hydrogen chloride or hydrochloric acid from the incineration of PVC etc; Hydrogen fluoride or hydrofluoric acid from the incineration of Teflon; and possibly Hydrogen bromide and hydrogen iodine), all of which must be treated. These highly acidic gases can be efficiently separated in gas scrubbers. Recyclable substances such as gypsum can be recovered in two separate stages using different process technologies. In special cases of waste water-free flue gas cleaning processes a spray drier can be used to evaporate the removed scrubber fluid. Alternatively, a waste-water-free sorption process can be employed. 29

30 When incinerating nitrogen containing compounds or during the thermal oxidation of atmospheric nitrogen, nitrogen oxides (NOx, i.e. the NO and NO 2 compounds) are formed. These compounds can be reduced to less than 10% by using selective catalytic reduction (SCR) with a reduction agent (e.g. ammonia). Selective non-catalytic nitrogen oxide reduction (SNCR) is an alternative in cases where the requirements for reducing pollutants are less stringent. SNCR reduces the nitrogen oxides to approximately 50%, but this process works with a larger amount of the reduction agent (exceeding stochiometry by about factor 2) and may result in the formation of laughing gas (N 2 O). Separation of vaporous mercury 9 is achieved through adsorption. In this case, the abovementioned adsorption of organic compounds of a higher molecular weight (e.g. the entrained flow process) also separates any vaporous mercury there may be. Auxiliary chemicals should be selected according to ecological criteria, particularly taking into consideration energy efficiency and by-products within the production process, as well as the environmental impact of residue disposal. The table below indicates the historical development of atmospheric emissions from operation of Waste Incineration plants in Austria and Switzerland. Figure 7: Development of Emissions from Waste Incineration according to State-of-the-Art in Austria and Switzerland, Source: Vogg (values for ); RVL (values for 2000) 2.3. Some considerations on MBT performance as residual waste treatment option Energy and climate balance The main criteria for the extent MBT is contributing to the target of energy/climate efficiency depend on the specific configuration and operating conditions of the facility. Ketelsen (2012) investigated 15 MBT of different configuration in Germany. The main criteria for the overall performance are: Integration of anaerobic digestion with the utilisation of electricity and heat; The production of RDF. This refers to the mechanical sorting of the light energy rich fraction as well as the use of the e.g. bio-dried organic fraction that can be used in WtE plants. The sorting of recyclables (e.g. ferrous and non-ferrous metals), by this substituting primary resources. 9 Mercury is the only metal that can exist in gaseous form in the atmospheric emissions flow at low temperatures due to its physio-chemical properties. 30

31 The study concludes that mechanical-biological waste treatment demonstrates high energy efficiency and significant carbon emission savings in all facilities. Extrapolating the results to all MBT/MBS/MPS facilities in Germany with an estimated throughput of 4.8 million tons in 2009, the energy and climate relevant performance data were: approx. 2.0 million MWh electricity production, approx. 15 million MWh heat and process steam production, approx ,000 Mg of metals production production of further materials such as plastics, wood and ammonium sulphate solution for material recovery. Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions amounted between 1.1 and 1.4 million Mg CO2 eq. Table 8 summarises the results for energy and climate efficiency of the investigated 15 MBT in comparison with waste incineration. Table 8: Net primary efficiency and climate credit for MBT facilities examined compared with MSW incineration / WtE plants, 2009 (Ketelsen, 2012) Mean Range MSW WtE * Calorific value / Input MJ/kg 8,2 6,9 9,8 10,1 Net primary efficiency Electrical % Thermal % Total % Climate Credit (-) kg/co2 eq*ton waste * MSW incineration 2009, ITAD; Treder (2011) On average, approx. 32 % of the energy content of the waste treated at the 15 MBT facilities examined was routed to external use. Landfill Gas emissions from disposed stabilised MBT output Properly designed and operated biological treatment processes in MBT achieve a 50 to 75% decomposition rate of the organic matter during AD and rotting. However, there is a residual potential of releasing low rates of methane when landfilled. Therefore additional measures should be taken into account for state of the art landfill design and operation, such as the cover of the landfill age with a Methane Oxidation Layers, where methanophilice bacteria populations oxidise the diffusing methane. Leachate from disposed stabilised MBT output Biological treatment leads to reduction of leachate generation due to higher compaction of the disposed waste and subsequently decreased permeability. Nonetheless some leachate from MBT-residues in landfill might be produced depending on the overall design of the landfill. The quality of the leachate improves considerably, reducing the amount of Total Organic Carbon (TOC), Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) and Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD) by up to 90%.. Requirement of landfill volume Depending on the applied technology (RDF after bio-drying, compost-like output for land reclamation) between 20 and 30% of the biologically treated input waste has to be landfilled, 31

32 plus the residues from the utilisation of the high calorific fractions. Therefore landfill capacities with treatment of organic leachate and landfill gas extraction or methane oxidation layers are still necessary in proximity to MBT plants. Flexibility a key aspect for future waste management by integrated MBT Depending on location, throughput and role of separate collection for organic waste and other recyclables, MBT design must be adjusted to the composition of waste and the possible outlets. Here MBT provides high flexibility, mainly because the biological treatment technology can be easily adapted to each of the 3 types of outputs (RDF, compost-like output for land reclamation and stabilised landfill fraction). Modern automated technologies like optical sorting), may increase the recycling fraction from 2 to 3 % in the past up to 10 to 15%. This is particularly the case when organic waste is separated already at the source and with the application of bio drying Defined quality criteria of recyclables and recycling markets (in favourable distance for transport) for generation of income are needed. Business models for MBT plants would have to be adapted and adjusted accordingly. Figure 8: Average Material balance of 15 MBT facilities examined in Germany 2001/2010 (Ketelsen, 2012) Demand for incineration capacities in addition to industrial co-incineration of Energy Potential through utilisation of RDF There are various options to utilize RDF. The major options are purpose-built combustion facilities, cement kiln and coal power plants. For each of the options different requirements on the properties apply. The lowest quality is required for combustion facilities using standard grate firing systems. In fact this is equivalent to waste incineration plants. In this case the calorific value (CV) is the limiting factor since the temperature might become to high for the grate systems. To enable the combustion of RDF with higher CV s water cooled grate systems can be used. More often for RDF fluidised bed combustion systems are used. Such systems can accept also higher CV s. But the RDF has to meet certain requirements for the process: maximum particle sizes, metals and inerts content. For the utilisation in cement kiln higher quality requirements apply: particle size has to be approx. smaller than mm. Furthermore the CV should be as high as possible and the chlorine content should be as low as possible, typically at least smaller than 0.7 %. The chlorine content is typically the limiting factor for the percentage of RDF that can be fed in 32

33 combination with the standard fuel. It is also possible to install a chlorine by-pass in the cement kiln to increase the proportion of RDF. In Germany the percentage of secondary fuels in cement kiln is more then 65 %, but most of these kiln have a chlorine by-pass. For coal power plant the RDF percentage to the process is typically fairly low but the total fuel in such plant is huge and hence the absolute RDF contribution can be significant figures. As RDF is qualified as waste the waste incineration directive applies to all this processes and the relevant requirements on the exhaust air treatment apply. As such air treatment is according to the waste incineration directive is quite costly the revenues from the energy from RDF might not be sufficient to pay for the extra efforts required.this means that the RDF producers has to pay a gate fee to the plant operator to take the RDF. More recently cement kiln accept RDF for no payment. In some cases even small revenues for the RDF have been reported. 33

34 3. Bibliographic review of exemplary policies and practices in EU member states in the management of RW fractions 3.1. Policy and situation on RW management in Portugal In Portugal the Urban Waste Management is, in general, done by the Government and Municipalities. Most part of public waste management companies are multi-municipal companies, held by a joint of municipalities and the state company responsible for the waste management activities (EGF Major shareholder). Concerning the business model, the above stated companies have a concession supplied by the Government for a limited time, conceded for urban waste management for each region of intervention. The municipalities deliver the urban waste to the Integrated Waste Management Facilities owned by this companies and the gate-fee to be paid for the urban waste delivery is revised annually, and based on the future investments and Net Present Value of the activity of each company. In order to comply with the European Directive 2006/12/EC on waste (replaced by 2008/98/EC), Portugal developed a strategy plan from 2007 to 2016 for urban waste (PERSUII). Therefore, the multi-municipal companies were obliged to comply with this plan and develop facilities, mainly MBT, in order to increase recycling, composting and reduce landfilling. The MBT plants to be developed are generally dimensioned for the reception of mixed municipal waste, mainly combining anaerobic digestion and aerobic stabilisation. The figure below shows the facilities by type, in operation or construction in 2010 and also predicted for the forthcoming years (excluding Portuguese Islands Madeira and Azores). Figure 9: Urban Waste Operation Units in Portugal (excl. Islands), Source: Resíduos Urbanos em 2010 Agência Portuguesa do Ambiente (Portuguese Environmental Agency) October 2011 The figure bellow shows the urban waste delivered by type of facility from 2005 to Despite of the efforts for developing MBT, Anaerobic Digestion or Composting Plants, the scenario is still dominated by landfilling. 34

35 Figure 10: Final destination from the Urban Waste Solid Fraction Processed in MBT / Anaerobic Digestion / Composting Plants, Source: Resíduos Urbanos em 2010 Agência Portuguesa do Ambiente (Portuguese Environmental Agency) October 2011 The experience in Portugal can be summarised as follows : The performance of MBT without integrated separate collection like AMTRES and AMARSUL is very low. This refers to sorting of recyclables as well as the output of composted waste that could be used in land reclamation projects. The main reason for this is the fact that Portugal has not understood that modern and efficiently performing MBT is designed for the treatment of Residual Waste after having introduced separate collection above all for organic, compostable biowaste. This misconception of MBT is the main reason why the waste fraction landfilled is still between 50 and 85%. In modern MBT as part of an integrated waste management system (intensive source separation of biowaste and dry recyclables, modern sorting techniques for gaining recyclables fro residual waste) and in case no RDF is produced, the landfilled fraction today is the range of 25 to 30%. LIPOR operates a closed composting system for source separated commercial biowaste and green waste and a WtE plant for residual waste which still includes high amounts of organic household waste! A similar situation we find in VALORSUL, where the separately collected commercial biowaste is fermented in a thermophile anaerobic digestion plant. In both cases the reduction of landfilled waste is highest. However, also the capacity needed for the WtE plants includes the non separated organic fraction from households and also this scheme, without a separate collection scheme for organic household waste does therefore not comply with a modern and integrated waste management concept as regards cost efficiency and environmental performance. 35

36 Also due to disfunctioning separate collection schemes for recyclables, the compostlike stabilised output represent in average about 9% of the total urban waste delivered; In case of the compost, the companies that produce compost from green fractions are able to produce with a reasonable quality. Compost produced from undifferentiated waste collection presents low quality, with identification of fine fractions (plastics and other materials) hard to separate. Some companies, due to the low success in selling the compost provide it for free to the municipalities in order to apply on public facilities The development of environmental protection and the introduction of integrated and sustainable waste management in Austria Due to a future oriented strategy developed and applied within the Austrian Environmental Protection Fund in 1984, environmental policy was gradually redirected towards prevention and environmentally safe treatment of any "reactive" (e.g. hazardous, biodegradable or leachable) wastes prior to any controlled disposal of adequately treated residues (Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control - IPPC) first guidelines for sustainable waste management were published by the Ministry of Environment. One of the most effective measures was the introduction of a tailor-made "landfill tax". The tax was differentiated with respect to The quality of wastes (reactivity, recyclability); and The technical standards of the specific types of landfill. The subsequent legal development in Austria included a ban on new landfills for materials exceeding 5 % TOC (Total Organic Carbon) by the beginning of 1997 with a transition period for existing landfills until the end of 2003 (with some limited exceptions until 2008). In Austria, there is an exemption for residues from MBT the criteria as given in Table 4 (upper calorific value, respirometric activity during a 4 days incubation test) besides various other parameter for disposal on mass-waste landfills are complied with. Since July 16, 2001, the disposal of hazardous wastes in landfills has been banned (exceptions for specific inorganic wastes to be disposed of in encapsulated form in safe underground caverns such as salt mines in Germany). Waste incineration in the recent years has grown significantly in treatment of residual waste.. In Austria, since the enforcement of the ban on landfilling untreated wastes, the following options for treatment of RW legally allowed: 36

37 Figure 11: Technical alternatives for the proper treatment of residual waste in Austria, Neubacher F., approximately 3.9 Mio tons of municipal waste from households and similar entities have been generated in Austria. Separate collection for recycling is extensively applied, therefore residual waste (incl. bulky waste) accounts for approx. 1.7 Mio. tons only. Approx. 1.3 Mio tons thereof have been incinerated and approx. 400,000 tons have been pre-treated in MBT plants. Mechanical treatment (R4) in combination with recovery of recyclables (e.g. metals) with the option of intermediate storage for recovery of energy (storage up to 3 years) and energy recovery in Waste-to-Energy plants (R1) has been increasingly applied throughout the last years in Austria 10. Residual Waste treatment by Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) in Austria as an example: The Average mass flow throughput all Mechanical Biological Treatment plants as an example in Austria is shown below (Source: White book, Waste to Energy in Austria, Lebensministerium (Ministry of Environment) 10 Federal Waste Management Plan Austrian Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Envirnment and Water Management.,

38 Figure 12: Average mass flow of Mechanical Biological Treatment plants as an example in Austria is shown below Main Objectives for the treatment of wastes with MBT-technology have been defined in the Austrian MBT-guideline (MBT-guideline in Austria, Ministry of Environment, 2002): Production of pre-treated and stabilised wastes for disposal in so called Mass waste landfill fulfilling certain acceptance criteria including maximum calorific value, respiratory activity and DOC (=dissolved organic carbon) Recovery of waste fraction for thermal treatment in waste to energy plants (e.g. fluidised bed systems) Recovery of RDF (e.g. cement clinker production) Production of waste-compost (for restricted use only!) Production of soil materials (for restricted use only!) The market for produced stabilised compost-like output (Mixed Waste Compost) (this is legally restricted for reclamation of closed landfill sites) and thus the chance of generating revenues for compost is extremely limited. 38

39 Treatment Methods for Residual Municipal Solid Waste, development 1980 to 2013 in Austria: Discussion on Mechanical - Biological Treatment (MBT) vs. Mechanical Processing (MP) and Recovery (Austria, 2007) Fig 12: Generation and treatment of residual municipal solid waste from 1980 to 2013, Mauschitz G. Novi Sad WASTE-TO-ENERGY Figure 13: in Austria, Integrative concept for municipal UV&P waste treatment by mechanical-biological November, 2011 treatment (MBT) and WtE incineration 999_2011_ISWA_Novi-Sad_PRINT_ As said, in recent years WtE incineration plants have been increasingly integrated in the residual waste treatment scheme in Austria (see scheme below). 39

40 Source: Association of Austrian Cement Industry, Vienna 2013 More than a dozen fluidized-bed incineration plants are used for waste incineration or coincineration in Austria: 4 fluidized-bed incinerators in Vienna (Simmering) 1 industrial fluidized-bed incinerator in Lower Austria (Pitten) 4 industrial fluidized-bed incinerators in Upper Austria (EEVG Steyrermühl, WRHV and RVL Lenzing, Timelkam) 3 industrial fluidized-bed incinerators in Styria (Gratkorn, Bruck/Mur, Niklasdorf) 4 industrial fluidized-bed incinerators in Carinthia (Frantschach, Arnoldstein, St. Veit/Glan, Fürnitz) Requirements and framework conditions for the thermal treatment of the various wastes in accordance with the waste catalogue can be found in ÖNORM S Thermal Treatment of Waste". Despite the well-established practice in Austria in total only 7% of total amount (see figure below) of waste incinerated is co-incineration of alternative fuels in cement clinker production (in 2012: approx. 456,000 tons). The experience in Austrian MBT-plants shows an increased amount sent to fluidized bed incineration systems. Grate firing has a very limited influence. From 2004 to 2005 amounts for incineration (pre-treated output material from MBT) increased from 202,374 tons to 242,696 tons. In 2009 approx. 290,000 tons per year of out-put material of all Austrian MBT plants had to be incinerated, mainly in fluidized bed systems. Rather small amounts of higher quality are recovered for substitute Utilization fuel of for Alternative cement clinker Fuels production (e.g. in 2005 only 4%, i.e. 9,100 tons). (Austrian Environmental Agency (UBA), Report 2006 and Federal Waste Management Plan, 2011). in the Austrian Cement Industry since 1988 Alternative - waste - fuels 2012: approx. 456,259 t Substitution of primary fuels 2010: 68.4 % GJ / a 8,000,000 Animal fat 7,000,000 Animal meal 6,000,000 Others *) 5,000,000 Plastic Paper sludges 4,000,000 Solvents 3,000,000 Used tires 2,000,000 Waste oil 1,000, *) Others: saw dust, waste wood, rubber, processed fractions, agricultural waste Less than 7% of total waste incineration for cement clinker production in Austria Figure UV&P 2013 ISWA 14: Seminar Development and Technical Tour WASTE-TO-ENERGY of the utilization 2013 of waste 12 fuels in the Austrian cement clinker industry 999_2012_ISWA_ppt-presentation_

41 3.3. Policy and situation on RW management in Italy In Italy, the MBT process has increased considerably between 1996 and In fact, in 2004 it is reported to manage about 9 million tonnes of MSW, nearly three times as much as WTE. About 20% of the mechanical-biological treatment is dedicated to the production of compost from selected fraction, whereas the other 80% produce a large variety of materials such as bio-stabilized, dry fraction and RDF (Refuse Derived Fuel). Often these products, especially the bio-stabilized and dry fractions (which do not have the characteristics of RDF), are disposed in landfills. Also, APAT and ONR have had difficulty in determining the final destination of MBT products (i.e. landfilling or WTE). This explains why in figures 9 and 10, that show the different ways of MSW management, the MBT products are grouped together as Dry fraction, bio-stabilized and RDF. Figure 15: Development of MSW management in Italy from 2000 to 2004 (APT and ONR, ) (Note: the categories compost from selected fraction and dry fraction, bio-stabilised, RDF indicate the input into and not the output from biological treatment) Figure 16: Distribution of MSW treatment in Italy in 2004 (APAT and ONR, 2005) (Note: the categories compost from selected fraction and dry fraction, bio-stabilised, RDF indicate the input into and not the output from biological treatment) 11 APAT (Agenzia per la Protezione dell Ambiente e per i Servizi Tecnici) and ONR (Osservatorio Nazionale sui Rifiuti), Rapporto rifiuti (MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN ITALY, L. Rigamonti, DIIAR Environmental Section - Politecnico of Milan (Italy), 2006) 41

42 Italy has, contrary to most expectations, a long tradition of MBT and is currently the country with the largest MBT capacities worldwide. In the past three decades, some 20 MSW composting plants (mostly with integrated RDF production) have been constructed throughout the country. Figure 17: Expected development of MBT in Europe Source: TBU Environmental Engineering Consultants A key concept for the second generation of plants in Italy was not recovery but volume reduction, accompanied by an improvement of the landfill features of waste (such as the quantity of leachate produced). Much attention was given to a scheme in Milan ( Ex- Maserati ), which served to bridge a waste treatment bottleneck However, this plant - always intended as an intermediate solution - was shut down after five years of operation as extended incineration capacities had meanwhile become available. RDF (Refuse Derived Fuel) today in Italy is an established term with specific quality standards and ample market opportunities. In 1999, a special type of MBT for the production of a dry stabilate (HerHof system) started operation near Venice. An Italian supplier (EcoDeco) with a similar concept erected several facilities in the country s north, and is now also seeking to gain a share internationally. Italy is one of less than a dozen European countries exporting MBT technology; recent examples (Sorain Cecchini SCT) can be found in Australia (Sydney) and the Arabian Gulf (Abu Dhabi). At present, more than 100 plants with a throughput of about 10 million tonnes per year are in operation in Italy. Venice, Florence, Rome and Naples are the most prominent cities using MBT systems. In the last two cities, new large-scale facilities have been constructed. In all, some 25% of MSW is handled via MBT in Italy Situation on RW management in Germany The German Environmental Agency states: According to data collected (April 2007) for the environmental research planning project (UFOPLAN) MBT plants for the treatment of residual waste around 4,4 million tons residual waste were treated in MBT plants or plants for mechanical-biological stabilisation (MBS). Additionally, 2,3 million tons of residual waste 12 Steiner, M., MBT in Europe, There s life in the old dog yet 42

43 were treated by mechanical processing and 0,5 million tons by mechanically-physically operated plants with thermal drying / stabilisation (MPS), so that cold treatment in 78 plants reached a total capacity of over 7,2 million tons.s After the publication from the joint venture on mass flow specific waste treatment (ASA) the theoretical treatment capacity reached approximately 6 million tons in 48 plant with MBT technology (MBT, MBS, MPS, and MP with direct transport connection for one these plants) in According to ASA, an estimated 5,2 million tons were treated in these plants in The information from ASA, though, cannot be compared with those of the UFOPLAN project, since ASA stated a higher number of mechanical processing plants (also MP without direct transport connection to an MBT). Figure 18: MBT plants in Germany, German Environmental Agency,

44 4. Steps towards a sustainable RW strategy in Bulgaria 4.1. Bulgaria s waste policy and legislation regarding residual waste treatment 25 projects under the Operational Plan (Operational Plan Environment) for an integrated system for RW treatment In Bulgaria there are namely 25 projects financed by the OP Operational program Environment. The received list of these 25 installations/locations shows only information on locations and same basic data. Details like technological criteria, treatment processes, feasibility, emissions, treatment costs and energy efficiency and mass/materials and input-output balances are not accessible. It seems that there are mainly composting plants and several MBT plants planned. Existing and planned industrial and municipal boilers all over the country also with their demand on fuel have to be shown on an infrastructure map with technical characteristics. In this case it has to be checked the technical status of the existing boilers and whether a rebuilding has to be made in the near future. So it could be changed the fuel for example from natural gas to waste or RDF. This is necessary to get an overview where in Bulgaria the energy is needed but also where it makes sense to think about a development of industrial sites in combination with a WTE plant also in a mid- and long-term perspective. This also has to be seen in connection with a general plan of developing the Bulgarian economy. Waste Management Act, July 2012 There is currently no legal ban or requirement for maximum organic content in waste for disposal in landfills in Bulgaria. Therefore, practically all RW is disposed in landfills, without any significant recovery of materials and energy from waste. Therefore a further driver in addition of the landfill diversion targets for biodegradable waste as it could be found in AT, CH and Germany is missing. National Waste Management Programme (NWMP) In the present waste NWMP ( ) is stated that the implementation of the NWMA (National Waste Management Act) shall be assisted and supplemented by the following plans and program (Chapter ): Directive 1999/31/EC on waste disposal Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste Following the Waste hierarchy, after full exploitation of prevention, reuse and recycling options, for a sustainable strategy on RW treatment in Bulgaria it is very important to include and consider furthermore the respective Directives on: 44

45 Renewable energy Energy efficiency EU-2020 targets (national targets for combating global warming and energy efficiency) Incineration of waste End of waste 4.2. Residual waste in Bulgaria An absolutely necessary prerequisite for project design is the definition of RW and the best available treatment option under consideration of available regional industrial infrastructure. It is recommended that a thorough study has to be carried out by an experienced entity in order to forecast the different quantities and qualities of waste, as well as technical design and economic feasibility calculations of RW treatment plants, based on extensive experience from various projects successfully implemented in EU countries. Such a study has to include at least the following minimum requirements: Determination of the existing quantity and composition of the wastes in respectively determined districts / regions and an evaluation of these parameters in the long term, taking into account the life time of the project and considering also various factors that affect the quantity and the composition of the wastes. The results of this study are adjusted based on assumptions and evaluations which will take into account the effects of seasonal variations as well as the tourist nature of the district over a representative time frame of one year. Based on the experience of the experts, the characteristics of the region will be assessed in a first step. This will be done based on available statistic data concerning, e.g. number of inhabitants, type and number of industrial, commercial and tourist enterprises, number of homes and households, etc. Available data will be used for defining areas which are similar. This step is called cluster analysis (methodology support tool ensuring quality). It will be done by statistical methods in order to define statistically different regions. The regions, which will be individually sampled, will be part of the cluster analyses and will be complemented by waste management data available for different specific areas. In order to generate preliminary data, all data available for the region will be used. Data needed, but not available, will be taken from similar regions and from the experience of the expert. The results of preliminary study will be given in ranges which give information regarding the precision of the data. Plausible data within the range will be given as well. The separate collection / recyclable material collection survey will be done by data available by the regional authorities and the responsible companies. Data which are not available will be completed on the basis of an expert estimation based on regional / local situation and observation. Implementation of the waste quantity and composition study also includes representative sampling and sorting based on know-how from similar project executions in other regions of the EU. The waste to be sorted will be sampled by a special sample collection tour. Therefore a truck from a local company will be used. The sampling has to be accompanied and headed by a responsible expert. The samples of the different areas will be sieved and after that the waste will be sorted manually into the different fractions. The different fractions will be weighed. The results of the weighing will be documented, which is the basis for statistical calculation. The sampling and sorting will be 45

46 done in four significantly different seasons of the year. Additionally, one sample will be prepared for chemical analysis. For sampling waste and for sorting itself staff will be taken from local partners. These persons will be instructed by the expert. The separate collection of specific materials for specific treatment and recycling will always have some high-calorific residues, which can be further used for waste-to-energy and with certain strict limitations in cement clinker production by using high quality RDF. Typical quantities of residues as an example for incineration in Austria from recycling activities are presented in the following table: Table 9: Quantities of residues for incineration in Austria, UV&P The higher or lower amounts of rejects out of recycling plants depend on: Chosen machinery Way of running the sorting plant Standard of maintenance Qualification of staff Sort of collection the waste Amount of extra collected waste Source of the waste regions, cities, population etc. Sate of development of the region the waste coming from 4.3. Conclusions and recommendations based on quantitative and qualitative residual waste assessment to set the right 46

47 framework conditions with the aim to phase out landfilling of non-pre treated residual waste Landfill tax In Bulgaria, the Decree 207 of September 16, 2010 on the determination of the amount and procedure for allocation under Article 71f of the Waste Management Act (WMA) set the following concerning landfill tax for residual waste: a lev/t; ( 1.94 ) b lev/t; ( 4.62 ) c lev/t; ( 7.69 ) d lev/t; ( ) and for landfills under Art. 2, item 3 (municipal landfills for inert waste - construction and demolition waste): a lev/t; ( 0.26 ) b lev/t; ( 0.77 ) c lev/t; ( 7.69 ) d lev/t ( ) The landfill tax should be set according to the following factors: technical conditions of the landfill type of waste (e.g. reactivity and hazardous potential for environmental impact) It has to be noted that the environmental impact is by far higher from untreated RW than from inert waste such as construction waste (e.g. bricks) and residues from waste to energy processes or stabilised MBT output when minimum stability criteria are met. The following graphs illustrate the development over time for emission of pollutants from RW management witn state-of-the-art pre-treatment and from reactor dumps (landfilling without any pre-treatment of the mixed waste streams), including the after-care and post closure phase, until acceptable exposure threshold values for pollution of water, soil and air have been achieved without further technical precautions or measures. 47

48 Figure 19: Emission concentrations and after-care for waste disposal plants, UV&P 2009 Taking above mentioned facts into consideration a proper pre-treatment (e.g. recycling/material recovery in combination with residual waste pre-treatment) prior to final disposal has to be implemented. For accelerating this development a landfill-tax is an effective and important tool: The decisive impetus for decreasing the amounts sent to landfills is a competitive landfill tax. This tax encourages Development initiatives of thefor Special waste Landfill minimisation Tax in and Austria the implementation of RW treatment projects according state of the art. The The development model implemented of waste management in Austria should in Austria serve towards as an reduction example of landfilled for a step-by-step waste as adjustment well as recycling terms and of recovery tax increase. has been very effectively supported by a special landfill tax. Landfill tax in / ton of waste (e. g. municipal waste) Revenue from landfill tax in Mio. / a (total revenue per year) / ton Mio / a 87 (= US $ 120) + 29 Euro/ton, if no collection and treatment of landfill gas + 29 Euro/ton, if no encapsulation or base lining with collection and treatment of leachate 3 criteria: Figure 20: Development of landfill tax and total Environmental sum of landfill standard taxes per of year the since landfill 1990 Foreseeable for at least 10 years Quality of waste to be landfilled Waste-to-Energy in Austria: Conclusions and Recommendations based on 50 years of Experience 4 UV&P _2012_viaEXPO-Sofia_Neubacher

49 The tax has been increased step-by-step over the course of ten years. The generated revenues have been collected in a special fund. This money is used solely for remediation and sanitation measures of soil and groundwater. In Bulgaria this generated revenue could serve additionally as a fund for environmentally sound RW treatment projects. There are 3 decisive factors (criteria) for the success of a landfill tax: 1. Foreseeable for at least 10 years (in order to guide planning for economically sound decisions towards sustainable waste management) 2. Environmental standard of the landfill (qualitative built-in installations and operation) 3. Quality criteria of accepted waste to be land filled, incl. some financial reimbursement in case of future recovery from wastes stored in controlled mono-material landfills) Legal framework, distribution of competences and law enforcement The experience made in countries like Switzerland, Germany and Austria shows that the balance between (profit-oriented) waste management at lowest costs, necessary environmental protection and protection of human health can only be maintained within a stringent legal framework for emission control and environmental protection (civil law and civil conduct), with the necessary control and strict enforcement of law supported by economic incentives. A vital prerequisite for success is a suitable and balanced legal framework which can be understood by the trained staff and executed under real conditions by the respective competent authorities. The following requirements are to be considered: Clear, simple and understandable conditions for all involved parties Possibility of quick decision-making in the execution of controls by the enforcement authorities Reduction of unnecessary administration and bureaucracy Political measures and legal framework for efficient recycling and recovery of resources under consideration of the environmental impact thereof Paradigm change of insufficient or non-existing measures, awareness-raising and public relations Creation of incentives (e.g. for recycling of end of life vehicles and WEEW against export to African or Asian countries without adequate provisions for recycling and treatment, etc.) Strict law enforcement and deterrent punishments by readily executed fines 49

50 5. Phasing out residual wastes Development of long term and sustainable model for management of residual waste fractions in Bulgaria 5.1. General aspects For the development of a long-term and sustainable model for management of residual waste fractions in Bulgaria, taking experiences in the EU and the local situation in Bulgaria with more than 20 projects accepted and approved OPE (Operational Program Environment) composting and MBT plants into account, the following combination of RW treatment systems can be proposed: These approved OPE waste treatment facilities have to be assessed according to their specific design based on input-and output analyses for a successful long-term integration into an overall RW treatment system for Bulgaria. These technical analyses have to take as well into account residues and by-products produced and emissions (gaseous, liquid, solid particles). Based on these elaborations financial evaluations can be made in a business model for generation of actual specific costs according specific Bulgarian situation. Investment costs, operational costs and costs for residue disposal and income from sale of energy (if available) and income from selling quality compost and quality recyclables if there is market for sale. An overall system should comprise a network of feasible and technological sound pretreatment facilities (up to now specified as separation facility ) out of approved projects. These plants must have a sufficient capacity to serve to population s RW, besides other waste streams which may increase heavily (also in rural areas). Other waste streams are bulky and certain hazardous waste streams. All these plants must have the technical ability to treat such waste streams as well in an environmental and cost-efficient sound way. Transport distances have to be kept low. Therefore material, metal and energy recovery from mixed municipal solid wastes (including RW) can be reached with such plants in the transient phase towards the erection of certain waste-to-energy facilities with energy recovery for the treatment of the residual waste fraction after prevention, recycling and production of high-quality RDF. Depending on the specific region and available infrastructure for the RW treatment facilities a waste splitting or separation process should be in general included. This process includes the separation of recyclables and the production of a fraction with a high calorific value for energy recovery. Features of MBT see chapter 2.1 and The Report: Technical. Requirements of MBT 50

51 Short-term Alternatives for Energy and Metal Recovery from Mixed Municipal Waste in the Transient Phase Separation of mixed municipal waste into: Metal scrap for recycling + Fine fraction for landfill / bio-reactor with recovery of gas + Refuse-derived fuel for waste-to-energy plants (Option: Intermediate Storage) Figure 21: Waste splitting for the transition from land filling of untreated waste to its ban Novi Sad WASTE-TO-ENERGY in Austria, November, UV&P _2011_ISWA_Novi-Sad_LIVE_ This option requires no additional implementation time and relatively small additional investment to the 25 approved OPE projects. Implementation of additional technical measures (landfill gas recovery and landfill gas and leachate catchment ca be done in parallel to erection of the 25 approved OPE waste separation and treatment projects. Regional landfills can still be fully utilised. The landfill operation must include the recovery and treatment of landfill gas and leachate according to legislation. For cost effectiveness and minimization of environmental impact resulting from transport, several transfer stations have to be erected. Transfer stations have to be constructed at strategic locations according to RW mass-flows and transport distances. Transport by the small waste collection trucks beyond approx. 50 km is economical not feasible. Overall transportation costs can be reduced significantly by using large-volume press-containers. Sorting of dry waste could be done manually in sorting lines (well equipped to European technical standards), allowing for high sorting efficiency and providing for local jobs. Thus the currently operating scavengers at some landfills in Bulgaria could enjoy improved working conditions. Investments into modern and energy efficient collection trucks and containers have to be made not only for improved public acceptance, but also in terms of cost-efficiency. Intermediate storage of high calorific fractions has to be done in an environmentally sound way avoiding fire hazards risks and environmental pollution (e.g. leachate, odour, etc.). Specific know-how and experience (including failures) is available from senior experts. Intermediate storage has to be carried out nearby the sorting stations installed at landfillsites or at the planned sites of future waste-to-energy facilities. Material recovery is performed according to already existing or foreseeable demand on the recycling market. If waste is pre-treated in an environmental sound way, according to their output material and output characteristics, the demand for RW (pre-)treatment capacities can be assessed. Residues from recycling processes, low quality RDF, rejects and digestates have to be 51

52 recovered according to their specific properties and quality requirements of the chosen final treatment option (WtE, MBT, Recycling, landfill). There are several other waste streams, e.g. screening from waste water treatment plants and non-hazardous waste fractions from hospitals which needs to be treated in specific recovery or treatment facilities. This includes e.g. WtE, composting of quality certified sewage sludge. Therefore the overall demand for waste-to-energy capacities may be not limited to residual waste fractions only. In parallel, the energy demand of a chosen location for a energy recovery facilities plant determines the needed quantity and type of waste materials. Regarding the RW the needed catchemt area (radius in km) is to be assessed Flexibility of the system Taking into account increasing EU material recovery targets and growing emphasis on waste prevention (which has in reality limitations, according to various examples in nations with growing GDP) and the possibility to adapt to changing waste amounts and separate collection rates, the RW management approach needs to provide a high level of flexibility... Further the pre-treatment costs depending on the different incineration and WtE technologies have to be taken into consideration. E.g. fluidised bed technology is widely used in Germany, Austria and Scandinavic countries delivering good energy and cost efficiency in industrial plants. Due to the indicated mechanical pre-treatment steps for RW in most of the existing 25 OPE projects no further pre-treatment for the feedstock destined for energy recovery before the energy recovery process is necessary. This reduces electrical energy consumption and give flexibility to the system also in terms of the incineration technology for RW (grate firing and / or fluidised bed systems with multistage flue gas cleaning). A combination of different residual waste treatment options (Waste-to-Energy, MBT and mechanical pre-treatment should be considered for all RW treatments projects. It should be targeted to serve the whole country with the same standards of RW treatment. Of course the waste treatment system would have to be adapted to the local conditions Steps regarding short-term improvement An immediate start of design and planning (technical, legal and financial engineering) of waste- treatment both for MBT and WtE facilities could be started to gain experience with the implementation of waste treatment plants. This should be limited to a quantity of waste which is expected in the long term when a full-scale, modern waste management system has been established in Bulgaria. This avoids the creation of over-capacity of residual waste treatment which might hinder the full development of modern prevention, reuse and recycling schemes as specified by the EU waste framework directive. In Bulgaria, there are several potentially suitable locations with continuous demand for heat (e.g. by large district heating networks, industrial production processes with continuous demand of heat such as chemical, wood, pulp and paper industry, and refineries). These locations should be considered for energy recovery from MSW derived fuels. Since energy recovery facilities might require large quantities of RDF/SRF the transportation requirements and associated environmental burdens have to be balanced with the benefits from such plants. The technologies used have to be flexible in terms of varying waste quantities and physical and chemical properties. E.g. for Energy recovery fluidised bed systems might be favoured since they are able to operate with calorific values ranging from 4 to 30 MJ/kg according to reference facilities in Central Europe. 52

53 5.4. Scalability and interregional cooperation (proximity) There is a general tendency of decreasing costs of waste treatment with increasing capacity. This so-called economy of scale is different for different technologies. Waste to Energy facilities typically require higher capacities (preferably more than 200,000 t/a) to be economical viable whereas MBT system can be far smaller (more than ~25,000 t/a). According to the Waste Framework Directive EC No. 98/2008/98 it might be advisable to consider interregional cooperation for successful and cost-efficient RW treatment. For such considerations the transport of waste on comparatively longer distances to waste treatment plants distributed over the country has to be cost-, and energy effective.. This would furthermore require a network of transfer stations and and the use of efficient presscontainers for heavy loads. These additional efforts have to be balanced with the benefits from such an enterprise. Small scale MBT facilities might serve as a solution for rural areas where the waste arisings are low. Such plants could separate recyclables and RDF/SRF for longer transports to centralised facilities whereas the remaining organic fines could be treated locally by means of biological stabilisation Average/typical time required for tendering, construction and start-up For the successful implementation of RW treatment installations according state-of-the-art based on European Experience - Waste treatment plants - a typical implementation plan looks as follows: 1. Feasibility phase: Pre-feasibility study Political decision Feasibility study 2. Project preparation phase Establishment of an organisation (task force) Tender and financial engineering Preparation of tender documents 3. Investment decision 4. Project implementation phase Negotiations and contract award Construction including supervision Commissioning and start-up Optimization during initial years of operation 53

54 5. Operation and maintenance, including periodic environmental monitoring Independent consultancy work from the very beginning ensures an optimum implementation in terms of time frame, budget and technical performance necessary for generation of revenues (strongly depending on overall plant availability) and ensuring proper and reliable RW treatment. The figure below shows the steps and average time frame for the implementation of waste to energy treatment projects till operation These are average values, and might be different in Bulgaria due to e.g. permitting processes. Smaller plants and less complex plants such as composting plants for separately collected wastes could be in operation much faster and should Activities be included and in time the development scheduleof for the project waste management implementation of Bulgaria. This is essential of large to meet waste the EU treatment waste treatment projects targets in compliance with the waste hierarchy. Necessary time from project start until start-up of operation: min. 4 to approx. 6 years Concepts - Evaluation and Re-View Phase Feasibility Study Planning / Environmnetal Impact Assessment 2 6 Months Tender Documents / Evaluation of bids / Placing of orders Plant erection/ Start-up of operation Supervision of Test Operation 4-6 Months Months 9-12 Months Months Months 1 st year 2 nd year 3 rd year 4 th year 5 th year 6 th year 7 th year 8 th year * based on experience made in Austria Figure Belgrade, 22: March Activities 16, 2011 and time schedule for project 30 implementation of large waste Franzto Neubacher energy treatment projects 5.6. Socio-economic and environmental impact assessment of the selected option Waste treatment in general typically faces resistance of the local population where such plants are to be implemented. There are certainly differences for different technologies with more resistance for larger plants and also where waste incineration or MBT is involved. This oposition of citizens can be reduced by accompanying public informations and educational activities as well as the involvement of the local residents in the design process. Such campaigns should take the concerns seriously and explain the technologies proposed with all benefits and environmental burdens. Compensation measures at the sites of the plant (e.g. improvement of the local infrastructure) might also help to increase the acceptance of such plants. 54