Implementing a Biowaste Strategy in Bulgaria Walter HAUER Technisches Bür o H A U ER Umweltwirtschaft GmbH A-210 0 Korneuburg, Brückenstraße 6 + 4 3 226 2/ 6 2 223 w w w. tbha uer. at Biowaste Study Tour Austria 2 April 2013 Sanitary Landfill: The Multi-Barrier-System Safeguard 1: Site selection (hydrogeology) objective based targets Safeguard 2: Top sealing (capping) Safeguard 3: Leachate control (mineral liner, mineral + HDPE liner) Safeguard 4: Leachate collection and treatment Safeguard 5: Reduction of landfilling biodegradable waste 2 About the European approach... prescriptive described Technical Standard 1
Waste Management Targets MSW required by the EC Landfill Directive Treatment for disposal stabilisation 50% 20-30% Landfilling 100% Separate Collection for: Recycling Composting Recovering Quantity and composition of residual MSW in Austria, 1991 and 1998 1.000 t/yr 2.250 255 kg/inh.a 2.000 1.750 1.500 1.250 1.000 750 500 250 0 140 kg/inh.a 160 kg/inh.a 54 kg/inh.a 1991 1998 Biowaste Paper Other waste Textiles Hazardous waste Metals Other plastics Plastic and compound packagings Glass packagings biodegradable Separate collection of Paper/Cardboard and Biowaste can deliver the highest contribution to the reduction of residual MSW-quantity 2
MSW Quantities and Consumption of private Households 3.600 3.400 3.200 3.000 2.800 2.600 2.400 2.200 2.000 1.800 1.600 1.400 1.200 1.000 800 600 400 200 0 1.000 t of MSW Biowaste 2010: 0,75 Mio. tons 92 kg/inh.a Recyclables collected separately 2010: 1,2 Mio. tons 148 kg/inh.a Residual MSW 2010: 1,41 Mio. tons 175 kg/inh.a 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Quantity MSW without Biowaste Consumption of private Households real Index durable Consumption Not durable Consumption Typical Collection Infrastructure Kerbside Collection Decentral Collection Sites Plastic Packaging Residual MSW Biowaste Paper Glass Metals 3
Separation at Source of MSW Reducing the landfill of biodegradables is the most important contribution for avoiding emissions from landfills! Recycling needs high quality material The highest quality can be achieved by means of separate collection Separate collection of selected fractions / products is an effective method for Reducing residual MSW to be disposed Saving money for waste disposal Sometimes a requirement for getting burnable waste to be incinerated Economic advantage of separate collection of biodegradable MSW Separate collection and recycling of biodegradable MSW (Paper, cardboard, biowaste) saves money even the separate collection has higher specific costs than MSW disposal 4
Key Driver for Avoiding Landfilling Ban for Landfilling Waste with an ignition loss of more than 5% Ban for landfilling biological treated waste with a gross calorific value of more than 6.000 kj/kg Accompanied with a Landfilling Tax of EUR/t 84,- Competition with Landfilling The current prices for landfilling MSW in the Bulgaria are very low. With these prices no stabilisation technologies are competitive. The challenge of new facilities is to become competitive with landfilling. Otherwise the facility cannot survive in a free market. Making facilities which represent the state of the art competitive is a challenge Subsidies Landfill Tax 5
Waste Composition, Waste Characteristics and its measurement Each Waste Management Step requires a stable data basis No collections system and no treatment facility can be planned without a definition of the material to be handled Quantity Composition Products Materials Particle size (small particles or bulky pieces, homogenous or mixed, ) Calorific value Water content Variation of characteristics 6
Causes of wrong Waste Damaged grid of a waste incineration facility because of too many Aluminium products in the treated waste Fire-power Diagram schematic Thermal Output Upper limit of Calorific Value Possible short-time overboost Designed calorific value Lower limit of Calorific Value Designed Throughput Throughput of Waste 7
2009/1 2009/27 2010/1 2010/27 2011/1 2011/27 2012/1 2012/27 Earnings Example: 10% instead of 6,7% plastic packaging in MSW 80% 82% 84% 86% 88% 90% 92% 94% 96% 98% 100% Mean calorific value [kj/kg] 5.000 6.000 7.000 8.000 9.000 10.000 11.000 12.000 13.000 Earnings: 94% to 96% 9.700 Mean Share of Plastic Packaging in MSW Grid Circulating bed Capacity and Delivery of Waste Normal Operation need for a buffer MA 48 - Mengen (625.000 t/a) + externe Kapazität (zw. 70.000 und 125.000 t/a) vs. Behandlungskapazitäten 2009 bis 2012 50.000 t 45.000 t 40.000 t 35.000 t Verbrennungskapazität MVA I - III + WSO4 (Prognose) Müllaufkommen 1,66% Steigerung p.a. (Basis 2005) Ballenlager Kapazität für andere Abfälle aus Wien, geglättet 30.000 t 25.000 t 20.000 t 15.000 t 10.000 t 5.000 t 0 t KW 8
Composition: Waste is varying, even residual MSW Calorific value 12000 11000 10000 9000 > 9000 kj/kg 8000 7000 < 6000 kj/kg Source: Asian Institute of Technology: MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN ASIA, 2004, p. 26 Europe 9
Waste composition differs by seasons Weather, growth of plants Tourism Food industry 160% Other seasonal industry DG1 180% 140% 120% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Seasonal quantity of different wastes in the town of Vienna DG2 DG3 DG4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Month Residual MSW Paper Biowaste Glass Plastics Metals Important Factors for getting Correct Results Detailed definition of the desired information Selection of fractions in which the waste will be split Number of samples and size of samples, concerning Standard deviation variations of composition of samples Size of pieces Share of fractions looked for Degree of accuracy of the results wanted / needed Sampling Plan Taking Waste from different regions Taking Waste from different seasons Taking all types of Waste planned to be treated in the facility Municipal Solid Waste original pretreated Bulky Waste Commercial Waste Use of suitable sorting methods Detailed sorting and weighing Watching different deliveries and determining the volume of fractions Calculating the results by using suitable or appropriate mathematic / statistic methods Checking the plausibility of results 10
Substitution of primary Energy Sources how much? Converting rate 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% *) Electric Energy 58% 60% Heat Well operating industrial facilities Comparing number of EC-Directive New facility is counted as recovery facility Old facility is counted as recovery facility Conclusion: A new waste incineration facility is counted as recovery facility if with 1.0 energy-unit from waste 0.6 energy-units from primary energy sources are substituted within the facility. *) E-control 2009: Average Austria 42% Basic technical Alternatives for residual waste treatment prior to Landfill Thermal Treatment Residual Waste Mechanical / Biological / Thermal Treatment Residual Waste (Mechanical Treatment) Mechanical Treatment Heavy Fraction Light Fraction Thermal Treatment Landfill Biological Inerting Landfill (+ some utilization for landscaping etc.) Thermal Treatment Landfill 11
Simple Biological Treatment Composting Drums Simple Biological Treatment Composting Drums Light Fraction Heavy Fraction Residual MSW NFe-Scrap II Rotting Rotting residues Fe-Scrap I Fe-Scrap II Basic treatment Optional further treatment 12
Simple Biological Treatment Composting Drums Possibility for adding sewage sludge Good reduction of biodegradability with affordable effort Mechanical-Biological-Thermal Treatment Residual MSW 100% Possibility for adding bulky waste Shredding Sieving magn. Sep. Heavy fraction 47% Light fraction 50% Metals 3% rotting losses 25% Biologic degradation Recycling Incineration Landfill 0,47*0,75=35% Possibility for adding sewage sludge 13
Exemplary cost comparison of alternatives /t 80 Competition Operational costs Investment costs 60 40 Earnings from selling 20 0 Incineration MBTh Simple biological treatment Landfill Separate collection and recycling (paper) Combinations of Separate collection of biodegradable MSW, Biological treatment of residual MSW and landfilling of not biodegradable parts of MSW is advantagous Planning Process Time schedule finance planning PR Activities needed Renewing existing plants new plants organisational structure Strategic environmental assessment Regional WMP Regional targets Vision Political decision Waste amount / composition forecast Legislative values basis Regional and Legal Frame NWMP Infrastructural basis Current WM-figures 28 14
Creating Options Assessing and Choosing Options Collection normal separate collection intensified separate collection Treatment of remaining MSW Mechanical treatment Disposal of remaining MSW Incineration RDF-Incineration Biological treatment Landfilling All options have to concern the same system boundaries Network Mechanical treatment Plant Biological treatment Plant Landfill decentral/regional Light fraction- Incineration Plant Catchment area for landfilling 15
Comparison of Options Share of Incineration and Heat Recovery 100% 80% MSW-Incineration incinerated mass [%] utilized energy [%] Flue gas quantity [%] 60% 40% 20% 0% Combined MBTh incinerated mass [%] utilized energy [%] Flue gas quantity [%] Solid Waste Management Plan Technical and Operational Framework Data collection and analyses Structure and planning Collection and transport (re-establish saom basic form of collection and disposal) Disposal, recycling and re-use Social community education It is important that the public understands, accepts and appreciates that a new structured approach to strategic solid waste management is crucial in the ongoing development of their country Economics and finance Funds and loans Charges pay as you throw No too quick steps of privatization Regional authorities and all people are responsible for a complete, functioning waste management service 16
Conclusions Separation at Source of biowaste and recyclables is an essential part of an integrated, effective and sustainable Waste Management System - for high recycling rates - for getting well suited inputs for Waste to Energy facilities Mechanical (pre)treatment of residual MSW helps to separate recyclables and to get a homogeneous fuel Local/regional biological pre-treatment helps drying waste and to reduce transport The effectiveness of energy recovery can be raised with the use of different incineration technologies for different wastes or part of wastes 17