deploy China-made equipment: grate incinerators feature among these, as do "circular fluidised-bed" models (which, for more efficient combustion, turn China’s soggy solid waste into something resembling a fluid). Though small, the latter generate relatively large amounts of electricity and can use different sorts of feedstock, meaning coal can be added for easier ignition. This type of incinerator now accounts for almost half of China’s waste-to-energy capacity. "In China, the calorific value of waste is very low, they claim about 5000 kJ/kg, and the operators have to add coal to the input mix. At the incinerator I visited when I was in Hangzhou, which was one of the best managed, they claim a 5% coal added, but actually in other plants it's far more than this, and this is bas also because it appears that the total generated electricity is subsidized as renewable. Also air emission limits are looser than ours. They have 1 ng limit for dioxins, compared to our 0.1". (Mario Grosso, Politecnico di Milano) Juicy incentives have attracted investors. Incineration is treated as a renewable energy form in China, so plant owners receive a feed-in tariff. It is hard to overstate the importance of this. Elsewhere, other revenue streams play a bigger role: incineration plants in Europe charge rubbish haulers "tipping fees" that may reach above €100/t (US$132/t) of waste; in China, tipping fees rarely top Rmb100/t (US$16/t) and usually hover around Rmb50/t. Only about one-fifth of revenue comes from tipping fees in many cases; the rest flows from selling electricity. China’s incinerators, though presented in a shimmering green light, have a dirty underbelly. It does not help that China’s incinerators often lace waste with coal. Waste-to-energy plant operators concede in interviews that they often use equal weights of coal and rubbish in the feedstock mix, versus an official limit of 20%. Coal’s share is sometimes as high as 70%. Such plants operate practically as small coalfired power stations—exactly the kind of facility that Beijing wants to eliminate on public health grounds. On top of this, treatment of other highly toxic by-products (wastewater removed before incineration and fly ash created during burning) tends to be either poor or non-existent.80. Boundary conditions for China: • • • • • •
Pragmatic emission limits Waste caloric value 4 - 7 MJ/kg Installation sizes varying No requirements regarding ash treatment Gate fees for waste conversion low Investment amounts for EfW EUR 80 - EUR 200 / yearly tonne of throughput
India (Extracted from: Sustainable Solid Waste Management in India, by Ranjith Kharvel Annepu, 2012)
In India all attempts to recover materials and energy from MSW have encountered initial failures. Ten aerobic composting (MBT) projects in 1970s, a WTE project in 1980s, a large scale biomethanation project, and two RDF projects in 2003 have failed. Anaerobic digestion of MSW on a large scale does not work in India due to the absence of source separated organic waste stream. The large scale biomethanation plant built in Lucknow to generate 6 MW of electricity, failed to run because of this. Anaerobic digestion has however been successful at smaller scales, for vegetable and meat markets, restaurants or hotels and at the household level. India has a total of five RDF processing plants, located near Hyderabad, Vijayawada, Jaipur, Chandigarh and Rajkot. The first two plants burn the RDF produced in WTE boilers, whereas the next two burn the RDF in cement kilns. Details about the Rajkot facility are not available. All these facilities have encountered severe problems during operation. Problems were majorly due to lack of proper financial and logistical planning and not due to the technology.
80
China Economy: Rubbish Plans? Economist Intelligence Unit, 2012
Coolsweep is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme 58
2 - Current status of the WTE field
Deliverable 1.2 - Global analysis of the WtE field