1 / 34

WORKPACKAGE 3 Economic aspects

AWAST. WP 3. WORKPACKAGE 3 Economic aspects. AWAST. WP 3. Participants Cemagref (France) Water and environmental engineering department Research Unit : Livestock and municipal wastes Management – Rennes Universitaet Stuttgart (Germany)

ayala
Download Presentation

WORKPACKAGE 3 Economic aspects

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. AWAST WP 3 • WORKPACKAGE 3 • Economic aspects

  2. AWAST WP 3 • Participants • Cemagref (France)Water and environmental engineering departmentResearch Unit : Livestock and municipal wastes Management – Rennes • Universitaet Stuttgart (Germany) • Institute for Sanitary Engineering, Water Quality and Waste Management : ISWA

  3. AWAST WP 3 • Objectives •  Providing the economic aspects of the decision support system which will help decision makers to know which kind of system should be developed, respective of the local conditions. •  A more accurate undestanding and control of municipal waste management service costs will be available and proposed to decision-makers. •  Help waste management authorities maximize long term efficiency of MSW management system by minimizing its costs.

  4. AWAST WP 3 • Work description •  Task 1 : state of the art and data acquisition(Month 3 to 24) •  Task 2 : definition of production cost models(Month 6 to 14) •  Task 3 : calibration and validation of the models(Month 13 to 19)

  5. Thematic approach by facility - MSW Operations WP 4 WP 5 WP 6 Collection Sorting Landfill BiologicalTreatment ThermalTreatment Data acquisition (production factors : Quantity, Unit costs) Production costs by facility

  6. Economic modelling Inputs Outputs FacilityDirect costs Revenues(compost, energy, sale materials) MSW • Production factors • Operating : - Labour - Energy - Supplies • Maintenance Residustreatment Diagram of economics models

  7. Definition of components costs • Bibliography • Cases studies • Questionnairesurvey • Mathematical modelling (writing) • Mathematical equations estimated Methodology of modelling costs Phase 1 Phase 1 Phase 1

  8. Flowsheet of economic evaluation Capital cost CK Product sales revenue : S Q : Flow waste 1 Treatment plant CN Nominal capacity(tph, tpd, tpy) Operating costs Co 3 2 - Labour : L- Energy : E- Reagents : R- Maintenance : M 4 5 6 Residues disposal : D

  9. Estimation of capital costs •  Direct plant costs (DPC)  Indirect plant costs (IPC) • (Equipment costs) (Land, start- up, supervision) • (Building and civil works costs) • Total capital cost = CI = DPC + IPC • CI = Fonction (CN, process) • Existing models costs Model cost Data acquisition on plants • and actualisation • Annual capital cost = Ck = CI /T T : life plant • /

  10. Capital cost of incineration plant CI = 275,7 x CN + 18 277 000 CN : tpy CI : in euros h t Source data : France : 15 plants Norway : Trondheim Austria : Vienna

  11. Estimation of operating costs • Factor method : relation between component costs and basic variables • Co = fonction (CN, Q, process) • Co = aL + bE + cR + d.IE • L : direct labour costs L, E, R, IE : basic variables • E : energy costs • R : reagent costs • IE : equipment costs a, b, c, d, : processing factors are summed • d. IE : maintenance costs

  12. Incineration : decomposition of the operating costs(Dry scrubber) Operating cost model Co = F + P + M – Sor Co = (1,36 x L + 0,005 x IE) + 1,10 x R + (0,023 x IE + 20 x Q) – 620 x PU x Q

  13. Incineration : symbols explanation

  14. Standards et variables locales

  15. TYPES OF MRFs • (1) Design capacity is determined for 3 000 hours per year running • (2) Type 4 is particular to american regions Trondheim - 20/21 June 2002 - Cemagref - ISWA

  16. MRFCAPITAL COSTS • Methods for fixed-capital cost estimation • 1st method : • CFC = k. IEC • 2nd method : • CFC = h. CN, , h is a cost in € / 1000 t/y IEC, the installed equipment cost, can be: • calculated as a sum of equipment items costs, IEC = ΣiIECi • estimated as IEC = f. CN , f is a cost in € / 1000 t CN is the design capacity. Trondheim - 20/21 June 2002 - Cemagref - ISWA

  17. MRF OPERATING COSTS • Methods for operating costs estimation: • 1st method : CO= k (α. L + β. CFC) • 2nd method : CO=λ L k is > 1, it accounts for overhead expenses α. L represents Direct Cost, that includes Labour, utilities and repairs β. CFC represents Maintenance This method is used when no sufficient data are available (types 3,4) L is labour cost, it depends on type of MRF and number of shifts per day. L= Σk wklk where k= sorters, conductors, foreman, etc. l = number of k workers w = unit cost of a k worker Trondheim - 20/21 June 2002 - Cemagref - ISWA

  18. AWAST Flowsheet to calculate the collection cost WP3 WASTE STREAM TECHNICAL ANALYSIS LOCAL AUTHORITIES COST ANALYSIS Residual waste Dry recyclables Biowaste Collection data France / Germany Waste collection on area Collection data by collection system Crew efficiency Rc = f (CL) Waste quantity Qs Components costs by data processing Vehicle efficiency Requirements : vehicles crews containers Collection cost model Cp = Cc + Co TOTAL PRODUCTION COST UNIT PRODUCTION COST (per waste stream) Trondheim - 20/21 June 2002 - Cemagref - ISWA 1

  19. AWAST Cost determining factors WP3 Trondheim - 20/21 June 2002 - Cemagref - ISWA 2

  20. AWAST Work time and number of trips to facility assessments WP3 • 1. Definition of the work time per day : • Tc : collection available time • Tj = Tc + (Nt x Th) + Tb Th : haul time • Tb : break time • 2. Definition of the work per week and per year : • T =  Tj = j x Tj(France : T = 5 x 7 = 35) • 3. Number of trips per day determination : • Nt = Tc / TvTv : vehicle loading time Trondheim - 20/21 June 2002 - Cemagref - ISWA 3

  21. AWAST The different collection systems WP3 Trondheim - 20/21 June 2002 - Cemagref - ISWA 4

  22. Crew efficiency graphs AWAST WP3 KERBSIDE COLLECTION BRING COLLECTION Emptying rate : t = emptying time / container (2 - 6 min) Qj = Re x Tc Rc = f (CL) Trondheim - 20/21 June 2002 - Cemagref - ISWA 5

  23. AWAST Model of waste collection cost WP3 • Capital cost : CC = Iv / d • Operating cost : CO • Production cost : • CP = CC + CO • Wages :L = Σ lk wk • Energy : E = Ce  Dy Collection follow-ups : determination of , ,  Trondheim - 20-21 June 2002 - Cemagref - ISWA 6

  24. AWAST PRODUCTION COSTS WP3 • COLLECTION :CP= 1.7572  L + 1.287  E + (0.0805+1/d)  Iv • Take into account the utilization rates for : • - the vehicle : d = (35  7) / (Tj  j) • - the crew : full-time : L • share-time : L1, L2 L1 + L2 = L • under-time : L  [ T / (Tj  j)] • PRECOLLECTION : C’P = Nw  I’r (2’+ 1/n’) • required containers / week / crew: Nw = (Nj  j) / f = (Nr  Nt  j) / f Trondheim - 20/21 June 2002 - Cemagref - ISWA 7

  25. AWAST Example of collection costs calculation WP3 • Hypothesis : - vehicle : Vv ; n = 7 ; Nt = 1 • - crew : full-time work ; Rc • - one waste stream of annual quantity : Qs • - number of vehicles = number of crews = Ns • Collection data : • Equipment / crews required : - collection time : Ts = Qs / (52 x j x Rc) • - number of crews : Ns >= Ts / Tc • Annual production cost :Cp = .Ns.L + .Ce.Dy + .Ns.Iv Trondheim - 20/21 June 2002 - Cemagref - ISWA 8

  26. AWAST WP 3 Global approach – Integrated MSW management Local Authority Collections SortingComposting Incineration Landfill General administrationExecutive oversight + Direct costs Indirect costs Full cost of MSW Service

  27. AWAST WP3 Materials flow’s synoptic : the case of Orléans OM 93 568,07 Déchetteries 51 252,61 Eaux traitées 495,41 Tout venant 14 961,65 OM tri 5 001,24 OMR 79 347,4 DEM 1 500,53 JM 7 718,9 Verre 6 083,89 DAS 2 161,98 DIB 3 942,72 Graisse 669,28 Gravats 16 186,49 ? 40 79 347,4 Papiers 874,56 Compostage 5 001,24 Refus = 1 899,66 Incinération 2 161,98 + 3 942,72 +133,87 = 7 238,57 Centre de tri sélectif ? 1 300,21 Cartons 1 313,6 Refus = 261,45 Evaporation 1 101,08 Verre 6 083,89 Végétaux 14 175,01 4 356,44 val. Papier 4 628,48 Verre 849,379 Acier 2 824,82 2 824 val. 272,04 stocks Ferrailles 2 503,46 Al 47,82 Carton et Tetra-pack 2 168,1 1 908,93 val. 47,82 val. Compost 2 000,5 259,16 stocks Plastiques 23,8 Energie 35 254 MWh 28 944 à EDF 6 310 MWh auto-consommation Flaconnages plastics 578,76 477,75 val. Huiles 120,07 101,01 stocks REFIOM 1 414,08 Mâchefers 20 289,52 Pneus 55,6 494,04 val. Acier 526,42 -3 192,48stocks 32,38 stocks CET1 Maturation 20 289,52 Batteries 34,66 23 482 val. Al 17,46 14,24 val. 3,52 stocks D.M.S 154,33 Trondheim -20/21 June 2002 - Cemagref

  28. AWAST WP3 Method of knowledge costs Illustration with the thermal path Waste collection Q1 Activity Other authorities Q2 Incineration plant Q1+Q2 A Local authority B C Stream Level Boundaries Costs A Plant Production cost by activity B Stream Production cost by stream C Local authority Providing cost of local authority Fly Ash Landfill 1 Bottom Ash Landfill 2 Trondheim -20/21 June 2002 - Cemagref

  29. AWAST WP3 Production cost per activity (Level A) : the case of Orléans, year 2000 Trondheim -20/21 June 2002 - Cemagref

  30. AWAST WP3 Cost per path or stream (level B) : the case of Orléans (France), year 2000 Trondheim -20/21 June 2002 - Cemagref

  31. AWAST WP3 Full cost providing for local authority (level C) : the case of Orléans, year 2000 Trondheim -20/21 June 2002 - Cemagref

  32. AWAST SCIENTIFIC ACHIEVEMENTS WP3 Trondheim - 20 - 21 June 2002 - Cemagref

  33. AWAST PROBLEMS ENCOUTERED WP3 • Requirements : availableactual data, updated data, updatable data • Modelling waste collection : limited to main waste stream(residual, packaging, biowaste) • Sorting, composting : necessary to define a typology of the technologies • Landfill, anaerobic digestion : available data from only litterature review • Full cost : identification of indirect costs components on case studies • Difficulty to obtain data : in spite of the achievement of questionnaire of collection data ( operating plant by private firms ) • Deliverable D6 ( Methodology ) : we have a delay on the deliverable D6 (provisional draft) • Full cost of the service : will be achieved in year 3 (with the analysis of case studies) Trondheim - 20 - 21 June 2002 - Cemagref 7

  34. AWAST ECONOMIC ASPECTS - FOR THE NEXT 6 MONTHS WP3 • Collection : validation of the model of waste collection with data of Stuttgart ( urban area) • Composting : data costs collection in France, Portugal, Germany ( in waiting) • : Modelling production cost • Landfill and transfer station : modelling production cost( with litterature review ) • Deliverable D6 : achievement the writing «  Methodology of production cost models and the full cost providing by local authority » • Beginning the transfer of models for WP7 ( integration simulator) • Beginning the determination of the full cost on case studies : • ( Orleans with BRGM, Lisbon with LQARS, Stuttgart with USTUTT ) Trondheim - 20 - 21 June 2002 - Cemagref 7

More Related