1 / 48

Topics for this session

Integrated waste management of MSW across Europe Waste to Energy as a professional route to treat residual waste. Jan Manders Deputy President CEWEP Energy from Waste Consult Kosice, 18 th October 2012. Topics for this session. How did Waste Management develop in Europe

calebd
Download Presentation

Topics for this session

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. Integrated waste management of MSW across EuropeWaste to Energy as a professional route to treat residual waste.Jan MandersDeputy President CEWEPEnergy from Waste ConsultKosice, 18th October 2012

  2. Topics for this session • How did Waste Management develop in Europe • EU Directives and legislation • Best Practice in Europe for integrated waste management and alternative approaches • Waste to Energy: current practice and outlook • Emission and health aspects • Renewable Energy and Climate Change aspects • Communication to stakeholders

  3. CEWEP Confederation of European Waste-to-Energy Plants CEWEP represents 371 of 452 Waste-to-Energy plants across Europe.(62 mt of EU capacity of 73 mt in 2010) They thermally treat household and comparable waste, which is not other- wise reused or recycled, and generate energy from it. In 2010 across Europe they supplied: 30 TWh electricity (6 m hholds) 72 TWh of heat. (5 m hholds)

  4. Waste Management across Europedivided into 3 groups • Leading countries DE, NL, SE, BE, AT, CH, DK • Sophisticated legislation and enforcement • Extensive SS collection and treatment infrastructure • No Landfill of MSW anymore • Group making steady progress but long way to go e.g. FR, UK, IT, ES, PT, FI, NO, IE • Landfill diversion slow, less WtE • Compromises, political complications, NGO’s • Countries which are way behind : new entrants, GR

  5. How did leading countries in Europe develop in the past? Initiatives go back to the 1970’s in DE, NL, CH, Nordic • Growing awareness on environment, concern on soil pollution, scandals, land scarcity • Set up source separation, recycling and incineration • Instruments to discourage landfill: taxation, bans • Comprehensive legislation and waste hierarchy (NL) • Visionary energy strategy and important role for WtE plants (SE and DK) • Eventually have become model for overall EU approach

  6. Current EU Framework on Legislation :Set of EU Directives to be implemented into national legislation. Relevant examples: • Landfill Directive : binding landfill diversion targets • Waste Framework Directive • Waste hierarchy, Energy Recovery status • End of Waste criteria • Recycling targets for MSW • Waste Incineration Directive (-> IED) : emission limits • Renewable Energy Directive: binding targets for utilisation of Renewable Energy by 2020 • ETS directive (CO2 Emission Trading)

  7. EU Landfill Directive Derogations: For countries that had 80% landfilling in 1995: 50% Until 2013 Greece, Poland United Kingdom New Member states: 2014Bulgaria 2017Romania According to the Landfill Directive (1999/31/EC) biodegradable municipal waste going to landfills must be reduced(base year 1995): to 50 % by 2009 and to 35% of the total amount by 2016. • Poor landfills are a threat to the environment: • - Contamination of water and soil • - Methane emissions (GHG) • - Loss of materials

  8. Diversion of biodegradable waste from landfills - the EU targets and country status in 2006source: Eur Commission

  9. Waste Hierarchy adopted by EU within the Waste Framework Directive The 5 step waste hierarchy in the Waste Framework Directive helps to achieve sustainable waste management, placing prevention at the top and disposal (such as landfilling) as the least favoured option. Prevention Reuse Recycling Other recovery e.g. energy recovery Disposal

  10. Amount of MSW per capita in EU countries(total amount of waste leaving the household) Waste composition varies across Europe

  11. Treatment of MSW in Europe EU27, 260 m tpa in 2009 A large part of the EU27 waste is still wasted by putting it on landfills with negative effects on the environment. But waste is a precious resource which should be utilised! Treatment of Municipal Solid Waste in the EU 27 in 2009 Source: EUROSTAT

  12. Treatment of MSW across Europe in 2009Source: EUROSTAT Graph created by CEWEP Recycling „Bio-Recyling“ Thermal Treatment Landfilling

  13. Screening report by BIPRO for EU ComJuly 2012: implementations gaps across MS? • Which are implementations gaps with individual member states on key elements of EU directives, notably Landfill Directive and Waste Framework Directive • Core elements are: implementation of WFD, financial and legal instruments, infrastructure, planning, target setting and applying infringement procedures. • Semi quantitative analysis after desk exercise of performance of all 27 member states

  14. Summary of major findings of screening report by BIPRO(max 42 points to be received) green max score; red min score

  15. Summary of results BIPRO report:EU divided into 3 groups based on performance • First group 10 MS: 39 – 31 points in descending order AT, NL, DK, DE, SE, BE, LU, GB, FI, FR • Second group 5 average MS (25 to 19 points) SL, ES, PT, HU, IE • Third group: 12 MS scoring 18 down to 3 IE, CZ, PL, EE, SK (17), IT, LV, CY, RO, LT, MT, BG, GR(3)

  16. Successful Strategy for Integrated Waste management in various West- European countries Domestic and Comparable Waste textiles glass r e c y c l i n g paper Separation at source packaging Organic Residual Waste Bulky Dom. Waste AD +Compost. WtE Separation Compost Energy Wood  Biomass Energy Plants Rubble  R RDF  pellets  cement kilns etc.  R landfill * backup Bottom ashes R Residue material* Metals  R

  17. Promoting recycling by targets set in the Waste Framework Directive Targets in Art 11(2) WFD to be achieved by 2020 preparation for re-use and recycling of materials “such as at least” paper, metal, plastic, glass from households + option for similar wastes to be increased to “a minimum of overall”50% preparation for re-use, recycling and backfilling of 70% construction & demolition waste Various options for assessing the performance

  18. Alternative processing routes : variants of MBT ,especially for situations with little / no source separation Paper, metals, plastics, etc Recycling Fuelpreparation RDF SRF Incineration Heat / Electricity Separation & Sorting M S W combustible Biological Drying Landfill Residue Organics Anaerobic Digestion Biogas Energy Composting Compost ? Meeting specs ? If not  landfill

  19. Why were/are sorting & MBT variants for Residual Waste being considered ? (DE, AT, IT, ES, UK ) • Hope to avoid the investment of incineration plants. • Hope that RDF/ SRF would become « end of waste » general purpose fuel finding many applications The Reality is however: • MBT is only a pre-treatment • RDF is and will be waste, continuing to fall within EU waste emission legislation (WID, IED) • RDF fuel is finding application in cement kilns; potential for co-incineration in power plants is very limited • Majority of RDF is finding its way into dedicated incineration plants ( = WtE plant for residual MSW)

  20. Landfill bans in Europe 10 countries: AT (requires pre-treatment; TOC must not exceed 5%) BE (unsorted waste) CH (combustible waste) DE (requires pre-treatment) DK (combustible waste) EE (unsorted MSW) Fl (household waste without sorting biodegr. mun. waste) NL (combustible waste) NO (> 10% TOC) SE (combustible & organic waste)

  21. Landfill taxes in Europe 18 countries: AT, BE, CH, CZ, DK, EE, ES, Fl, FR, IE, IT, LT, NL, NO, PL, SE, Sl, SK, UK Range: 3.5 €/t in Portugal – 107 €/t for combustible waste in NL More details about landfill bans and taxes: http://www.cewep.eu/information/data/landfill/index.html

  22. Typical composition of RESIDUAL MSW

  23. Waste to Energy in Europe(Incineration with Energy Recovery of MSW and comparable waste) • dominant route for the treatment of residual waste • (and of RDF or sorting residues) • Fully proven and environmentally safe thanks to FGC • About 71 million tonnes of capacity in operation in 2009 • supplying about 30 TWh of electricity (6 million hh) • and about 55 TWh of heat (5 million hh) • about 50 % of this energy is classified as renewable • represents a net CO2 saving and avoids the use of • fossil fuels elsewhere for energy production

  24. Feedstock for WtE plants in Europe • Mostly a combination of Residual MSW and Commercial Waste (collected by private business) e.g. in NL ratio 70: 30 calorific value in range 9 – 10 MJ/ kg • Some new plants are designed for dedicated incineration of RDF or sorting fractions (DE and UK) Calorific value up to 14 MJ/kg

  25. WtE producing local energy making Europe less dependant on fossil fuels importsEnergy content of waste Assuming that the calorific value of municipal waste = 10 MJ/kg, brown coal = 9 MJ/kg, hard coal = 30 MJ/kg, oil = 42 MJ/kg 1 tonne brown coal 1 tonne Municipal Waste or =ca. 0.330 tonnes hard coal or 250 litres oil

  26. Typical Waste-to-Energy Plant Incineration/ Energy recovery Flue-gas cleaning Waste delivery

  27. supplying 13 million inhabitants 72 million tonnes of remaining waste in Europe 29 billion kWh electricity 72 billion kWh heat Metals from bottom ash Year 2010 7 – 40 million tonnes of fossil fuels

  28. Application of Power and Heat in Europe • Production of Electricity is obligatory; Older plants have modest electrical efficiency; Newer plants designed for optimum electrical efficiency (steam conditions, turbine type) • Supply of electricity to the grid, or local customer • Supply of high pressure steam to industrial customer nearby e.g. paper company, chemicals plant, water desalination • Supply of hot water/ low pressure steam to district heating system e.g. in Nordic, NL DE, CR • Maximum Energy Efficiency can be achieved by combination of supply of Power and Heat

  29. Bottom Ash from Waste to Energy Plants • Extensive application of bottom ash in civil works in e.g. NL, DE, BE, FR, DK, IT • Active development of other applications in building materials: bricks, concrete • Major process optimisation in recovery of more non-ferrous material from bottom ash : Al and Cu • Some countries do not permit application of bottom ash other than as cover for landfill. e.g. CH • Development of dry extraction route (CH): dry bottom ash with high levels of recovery of Al and Cu

  30. EU Waste Incineration Directive: Emission Limit Values (ELV) for WtE incineration

  31. Waste-to-Energy Dioxin emissions have been minimised ! Dioxin emissions dropped to approx. 1/1000 In 1990 400g In 2000 0,5g “in 1990 one third of all dioxin emissions in Germany came from waste incineration plants; during the year 2000 the figure was less than 1% ” Source: German Federal Environment Ministry (BMU), July 2005.

  32. Health studies The Scientific Advisory Council of the Federal Medical Association (Germany) investigated potential health risks caused by emissions of Waste-to-Energy Plants, concluding: “The evaluation conducted shows that currently operating Waste-to-Energy Plants, which conform to the technical standards, cause very marginal health risks, which can therefore be classified as negligible health risks for the population living in the vicinity of Waste-to-Energy Plants” Source: German Medical Journal 90, edition 1 / 2, 11th of January 1993, p. 45-53, Publications

  33. Waste-to-Energy in Europe in 2010 Finland 3 0.3 Norway 17 1.2 • Waste-to-Energy Plants operating in Europe (not including hazardous waste incineration plants) • Waste thermally treated in Waste-to-Energy plants • in million tonnes Sweden 32 5.1 Estonia Latvia Denmark 29 3.5 Lithuania Ireland United Kingdom 24 4.2 Poland* 1 0.04 Netherlands 11 6.5 Germany 70 20.0 Belgium 16 3.0 Czech Republic 3 0.5 Luxembourg* 1 0.1 Slovakia* 2 0.2 Austria 13 2.1 France 129 13.7 Hungary 1 0.4 Data supplied by CEWEP members unless specified otherwise * From Eurostat ** Includes plant in Andorra Switzerland 30 3.7 Romania Slovenia* 1 0.01 Bulgaria Italy 53 5.7 Portugal 3 1.1 Spain** 11 2.0 Greece info@cewep.eu www.cewep.eu

  34. Incinerated MSW in EU27+CH+NO 2001-2010, in tonnes 450 447 430 430 425 369 361 415 357 414 403 343 390 390 325 328 328 187

  35. Number of WtE plants in EU27+CH+NO, 2001-2010

  36. WtE Capacity Europe by end of 2008 is 71 m tonnes. Arial Arial

  37. Average size of WtE plants varies from country to country

  38. WtE capacity growth in steps(includes MSW & comparable & dedicated RDF/SRF incin plants)

  39. Waste to Energy Capacity Development within Europe

  40. Climate Change Aspects • CO2 accounting systems available • Consensus on CO2 impact from Waste to Energy, although some NGO disagreement • Emission Trading Scheme ETS; until 2013 WtE is not in, we are lobbying to stay out • Renewable Energy major topic in EU; Contribution from Waste, WtE is being recognized

  41. Net CO2 emissions from modern WtE plants A state-of- the art WtE plant saves CO2 in the range of 100 to 350 kg CO2 eq per tonne of waste processed *, depending on: • Waste composition (% biogenic) • Amount of heat and electricity supplied • Country Energy substitution mix If WtE replaces (poor) landfilling, then there would be additional savings of 200 to 800 kg CO2 /tonne waste * The more energy can be supplied as heat the higher the CO2 savings

  42. Energy from Waste as a source of Renewable Energy • EU binding targets on RE : 20 % by 2020, differentiated by country • Major gap of 1500 TWh of RE to be filled by solar, wind, hydroelectric, biomass, waste • Renewable Energy from waste is « low hanging fruit  » : easy-to-achieve, reliable and relatively cheap • CEWEP study shows that EfW might contribute 95 TWh, of which the largest contribution is through WtE, followed at a distance by SRF/RDF and LFG

  43. Communication with stakeholders on Waste-to-Energy Communication with stakeholders is often the most important issue when considering investment in WtE: • Who are our stakeholders ? • Local community, neighbours • Politicians • Media • NGO’s and pressure groups • Authorities

  44. Communication with stakeholders on Waste to Energy Communication is generally effective when: • Taking stakeholders seriously: attitude • Being honest, transparent and consistent • Not reactive but proactive • Making use of various media and instruments: leaflets, newspaper, website, guided tours… • Third Party Advocates have a role to play

  45. Thank you for your attention ! CEWEP Confederation of European Waste-to-Energy Plants Office in Brussels: Boulevard Clovis 12A B-1000 Brussels BELGIUM Tel.: +32 (0)2 770 63 11 Fax: +32 (0)2 770 68 14 e-mail: info@cewep.eu www.cewep.eu Jan.manders@efwc.nl

  46. EU 27 have ambitious targets for Renewable Energy overall 20 % of consumption by 2020 The gap to close is about 1500 TWh of Renewable Energy (at a flat – zero growth - EU energy consumption level of 13700 TWh)

  47. Agreed formulae within the WFD for the R1 Efficiency criterion Treatment of waste in a WtE plant is recovery if: An existing plant meets efficiency factor > 0,6 New plant (from 2009) meets efficiency factor > 0,65 Energy efficiency formulae: Energy produced – (Energy in added fuel + Energy import) 0,97* x (Energy in the waste + Energy in added fuel) Equivalency factor electricity production x 2,6 Equivalency factor heat exported x 1,1 * factor accounting for energy losses due to bottom ash and radiation

  48. Heat vs Power production by WtE plants across EU relative to EU R1 Criterion Maximisation of supply of heat R1=0,8 Mix of heat and power Less efficient plants Power only 0,6 Based on data from majority of CEWEP WtE plants

More Related