STUDY TOUR OF SELECTED GERMAN WASTE PROCESSING PLANTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Thirteen councillors and officers from Suffolk undertook visits to four German waste processing plants on the 1 st and 2 nd March 2006. These visits were organised by Enviros on behalf of the Defra Waste Implementation Programme. A party from Northamptonshire also accompanied the Suffolk people. 1.2 The objectives of the visits were to:- Understand how the plants operate and perform. Form an impression of their environmental impacts. Understand the economics of the processes within the German context. Assess their potential use in Suffolk. 1.2 The four plants use different technologies to treat the residual MSW. These are:- MBT (bio-drying) (Osnabrück). MBT (with dry anaerobic digestion) (Pohlsche Heide). MBT (with wet anaerobic digestion) (Lübeck). Conventional energy from waste (Hamburg). 1.3 The first three plants visited were built in response to the change in German waste regulations introduced in June 2005 that banned the landfilling of biodegradable waste. Compliance with the German landfill acceptance criteria now requires biodegradable waste to be pre-treated until made inert. 2. OSNABRÜCK MBT (85,000 TONNES/YR) Similar Herhof plant at Rennerod (75,000 tpa) Facility constructed in 18 months by Herhof. Capital cost 18 million. Operated by Herhof via a 17-year contract with the local authority. Plant operates 5 days per week with 12 staff working over 2 shifts. High degree of automation and medium degree of mechanical complexity. Gate fee 79 per tonne (low by recent standards due to the plant being purchased from administrators after the previous Herhof company entered voluntary receivership in 2005).
Facility located in a general industrial area - a freight distribution centre adjoins one side of the site. Buildings occupy 6,000 m 2 on a site of 20,000 m 2. All waste processing enclosed within the 20 metre high main building. High temperature air cleaning system housed outside. No apparent odours or excessive noise in the outside environment during the visit. Bio-drying process used to dry and separate waste into RDF (refuse derived fuel) (53%), heavy fraction - glass / inerts (12%) and metals (5%). 2.1 Burning of the RDF produces cleaner emissions than traditional incineration because the MBT process removes heavy metals and other contaminants. The RDF is acceptable to industrial users because it no longer behaves like MSW, if kept dry. The RDF is used in a nearby cement works to substitute fossil fuels. 2.2 The plant operator has to pay the cement works 60 per tonne to take the material. The market for the RDF has been disturbed by the change in the German landfill regulations, causing the disposal price to increase. This situation is expected to reverse in the next three years as new fuel-using capacity comes onto the market and increases demand. 2.3 The heavy fraction is taken to landfill and used as engineering material. Metals have readily available secondary markets and receive income. 2.4 In the UK this process will need to be contractually linked with a facility that can use the produced fuel the current market for this type of fuel is a limited to cement kilns and a couple of power plants. The fuel, if landfilled, would not contribute to a significant reduction in BMW landfilled as minimal reduction in biodegradability is achieved through the production of fuel using this particular MBT process. 3. POHLSCHE HEIDE MBT (100,000 TONNES/YR) Jointly owned by the local authority waste company of Minden-Lübbecke and the private operator Tönsmeier. Located at a major landfill site that has vast void capacity remaining. Plant built in 13 months by a consortium of engineering companies at a cost of 26 million. Operational costs (excluding RDF disposal) stated as 60 per tonne and gate fee of 125-145 per tonne. Plant commenced operation in June 2005.
Process buildings cover an area of 11,500 m 2, and the traffic area 14,500 m 2. Construction of an additional 7 composting tunnels is planned. Plant uses a dry anaerobic digestion process to convert waste into RDF, metals and a stabilised material. The digestion process produces 0.5 MW of electricity and heat for use on site the latter for space heating of the offices. Stabilised waste is landfilled on the adjoining landfill site. 3.1 The RDF produced by this process is of lower quality than that produced by the Herhof process. Consequently, the plant is penalised by having to pay higher gate fees in the current market conditions to dispose of the RDF. 3.2 The visual impact of the process is of a large industrial operation. Compared to the Herhof process it uses more land due to the need to retain the waste on site for 10 weeks. The process diverts less from landfill but will have a BMW diversion that is similar if all material is fully stabilised and the RDF fraction is fully utilised. 4. LÜBECK MBT (150,000 TONNES/YR) Plant constructed in 12 months by Haase for the local authority owned waste company of Lübeck. Finance life of 15 years. Plant occupies a land area of 4.5 hectares (11 acres). Comprises two sets of buildings plus external process plant. Plant located on the landfill belonging to the local authority. Capital cost quoted as 30 million (excludes land purchase). UK construction costs are higher than those in Germany. Gate fee to the local authority as 90 per tonne including the RDF gate fee and landfill disposal. Five-year agreement with the city of Neumünster is to supply RDF to the Combined Heat & Power plant. Plant exports 50% of the 2 MW of the electrical power it creates and uses the waste heat for drying the wet sludge prior to landfilling. 4.1 The plant is in the final stage of commissioning by Haase and the final process steps were not operating at full capacity at the time of the visit. Haase is hoping to operate the plant when it is commissioned. In the UK, Haase is represented by Clarke Energy.
4.2 The plant uses mechanical separation to produce RDF. The remaining organic fraction is digested using a two-stage anaerobic digestion process that produces electricity and heat. The resulting solid material is landfilled once it has been fully stabilised. This process requires a greater land area than the Pohlsche Heide plant. Landfill diversion of BMW will be high (>95%) if the RDF has an outlet. 5. MVR HAMBURG (325,000 TONNES/YR) Plant is a mass-burn incinerator, one of three in Hamburg. Constructed in the period 1996-1999 to replace a landfill. Capital cost of the plant in 1995 was 230 million. Gate fee is 130 per tonne, 70% of which is fixed for 15 years. Serves the city of Hamburg and the surrounding counties. Owned by the city utility company, Vattenfall the Swedish power utility, and EWE the fifth largest German utility company. Plant located on a 6.3 ha site in a heavily industrialised area in Hamburg harbour. Plant provides steam to an oil refinery and hot water to neighbouring offices, houses and industry up to a distance of 8 km away. 95 staff employed, of which 45 are on shift. 5.1 Emissions to atmosphere are controlled to levels beyond the German federal and European standards through the addition of sulphur and chlorine removal processes. 5.2 The plant can produce up to 30 MW of electrical power or 70 MW of heat. Normal operation is to export <5 MW of electricity and 50 MW of heat. The plant recovers ferrous and non-ferrous metals from the bottom ash, the bottom ash is stored in the large angular roofed building prior to being used as an aggregate substitute, for which MVR receives 4 per tonne, but has to pay transport. Additionally hydrochloric acid and gypsum are recovered from the flue gas cleaning system. There are markets for these products. The city benefits from all the income streams generated by the plant for the sale of power, heat and materials. The operational and maintenance costs were quoted as 8 million/yr.
5.3 The plant is a technical triumph, but appears to be struggling to deliver an acceptable financial performance for its new major shareholder, Vattenfall. The gate fee of 130 per tonne is typical of many waste contracts in Germany, but it is clear that the plant is foregoing income on the heat supply part of its operations and is incurring higher operating costs by operating to higher emission standards than most other waste incinerators. The high capital cost is also probably contributing to the apparent financial under-performance. 6. SUMMARY 6.1 The processes illustrate a spectrum of technologies that are available to Suffolk. Each technology has a different cost and risk profile. All MBT processes require landfill for some of the output material and all require a combustion plant to use the RDF in order to achieve high levels of BMW diversion. The gate fees are a function of the market conditions in Germany and only give an indication of the UK pricing. Authors: Cllr Eddy Alcock Cllr Jeremy Farthing Cllr Clive Arthey 16 th March 2006 T:\ENV\WDA\Waste Programme\07_Reference Study\Germany Study Tour Mar-06\Notes of German Visit_(Member_Director)_FINAL.doc
Table 1. Summary description of the four sites visited. Osnabrück Pohlsche Heide Lübeck MVR Hamburg Input tonnage 85,000 100,000 150,000 325,000 Feedstock MSW MSW Sewage sludge Process sludges MSW Sewage sludge MSW RDF Outputs (materials) Fuel (53%) Metals (5%) Inerts (12%) Stabilised MSW to landfill (33%) Fuel (33%) Metals (2.5%) Outputs (energy None None (energy from AD exported) used on site) Inputs (exc. start-up) Electricity Electricity Emissions Ventilation air from Ventilation air via thermal drying process and air cleaner. Gas engine thermal air cleaner exhaust. Stabilised MSW (36%) Fuel (40%) Metals (2%) Electricity 1MW Ventilation air via thermal air cleaner. Gas engine exhaust. Metals (2.5%) Gypsum (0.3%) Hydrochloric acid (1%) Bottom ash (22%) Air pollution control residues (2%) Electricity 5MW Heat 50MW Flue gases from combustion Capital cost 17m 26m 30m 230m Gate fee ( /te) 79 125-145 90 130 Land area (Ha) 2 2.6 4.5 6.3 Principal risks Market for fuel Market for fuel Market for fuel Planning Technical complexity Medium Medium Medium/High Medium/High No of similar plants in operation ~15 <10 <10 400+