August 2012

1. Gasification, Plasma Arc and Pyrolysis: Renewable Energy & Recycling – or Incinerators in Disguise? August 2012

2. “New” Technologies for Waste “Treatment” & “Energy” • Plasma Arc • Gasification • Pyrolysis

3. Typical Industry Claims About These Technologies • “Pollution-free” • “Zero Emissions” • “Proven To Be Safe” • “A New Way to Recycle” • “Waste is Renewable Energy” • “Closed Loop” • “No Stacks” • “Not Incineration” • “Alternative to Landfills

4. Traditional Incinerators compalred to Gasification, Plamsa Arc & Pyrolysis Differences: Traditional mass burn incinerators directly burn the waste material and have ash residual Most gasification technologies heat the waste first, then in a second stage of the process syngas is combusted/incinerated. Vitrified slag residue instead of ash.

5. Traditional Incinerators versus Gasification Technologies Similarities: Combustion process Toxic emissions – air and water quality concerns Dioxin emitted from combustion of syngas No continuous emissions monitoring of air toxics Disincentive to Zero Waste, Recycling and Real Renewable Energy

6. Fugitive Gases Syn Gas Vitrified Slag Combustion Plasma Arc – Two Staged Incineration • Two Step Process: • Materials are heated with a plasma arc (6,000º to 10,000º Celsius) to separate gases from feedstock • Gases are typically combusted in secondary process

7. Inentec Integrated Environmental Technologies & InEnTec Plasma Arc technology for medical, hazardous and radioactive contaminated wastes Is it safe? Are the claims true?

8. IET & InEnTec Claimed: • “Pollution Free” - not true • “Commercially Proven With No Emissions” – not true • “Closed Loop System” – not true • Five Facilities are “already successfully operating at customer sites” – not true

9. InEnTec Diagram

10. Richland, WashingtonFrom InEnTec website

11. The Truth about ATG Facility • ATG plasma arc facility had chronic operational problems • Repeated problems including with emissions equipment • ATG filed for bankruptcy • ATG closed plasma arc facility in 2001 • Left stockpiles of hazardous/radioactive wastes

12. Honolulu, Hawaiifrom InEnTec website

13. Truth about Hawaii Medical Vitrification Facility • Shut down August 2004 to April 2005 due to damage to refractory of plasma arc equipment • State of Hawaii Department of Health took serious enforcement action due to illegally stockpiling medical waste when plasma arc equipment broke • IET sued HMV yet claimed it was successfully operating • Permanently Shut down in 2007

14. Truth about Biopure Systems, Malaysia • Had not been built at the time that IET/Inentec claimed that the facility was already successfully operating • Still has not been built

15. Plasco - Ottawa, Canada • Opened plasma arc pilot plant in 2008 • Was plagued with operational, pollution and energy generation problems • Dozens of pollution exceedences • Designed for 85 tons per day garbage • Averaged about 4 tons per day 1st year • Extended shut down due to excessive emissions • Was unable to operate when City of Los Angeles staff visited plant

16. Plasco Energy Salinas Valley Project • Proposed in Gonzales, California, heavily Spanish-speaking, low-income, Latino farming community • Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority’s claimed Plasco would have no stacks and claimed Plasco generates 2x as much energy as competitor that was considered – these totally false statements used to win approval • CalRecycle upholds law and rescinds initial decision that Plasco would quality as “gasification” for RPS (Renewable Portfolio Standard) • Plasco & SVSWA “share information on vocal opponents” • In face of strong community opposition, Plasco secretly puts EIR on hold for one year

17. Westinghouse Plasma Corporation and Alter NRG • The largest commercial operating model WPC/Alter NRG plant has capacity to process only 165-190 tons per day of a mixture of auto shredder residue and municipal solid waste, claims to generate just 3.9 megawatts of electricity. (Hitachi Metals, Utashinai, Japan) • City of Sacramento, CA staff visited Utashinai plant and reported that NO POWER AT ALL put into the grid

18. Westinghouse PlasmaWhere is the stack?

19. Hitachi Metals Plasma Arc plant in Utashinai, Japan • Promotional photo submitted to City of Sacramento by USST • No Stack?

20. Here is Hitachi Metals’ stack : Hitachi Metals “Reports” No E-321

21. Sacramento, CA City Council rejects Plasma Arc December 2008 • Sacramento City Council rejected plasma arc project that would have used AlterNRG/Westinghouse Plasma technology • City’s research found claims of energy generation at Utashinai, Japan plant not to be true • Confirmed that Hitachi plant had stack for emissions despite company pictures that failed to show stack

22. Sun Energy Group LLC • Wants to build a 2500 tons per day plasma arc facility at 3900 Jourdan Road, New Orleans • Would use Westinghouse Plasma/Alter NRG’s technology • Claims this is “renewable energy” facility that can generate 114 megawatts of electricity to provide power to tens of thousands of homes • Claimed all operations would be in an enclosed facility

23. Sun Energy Group – New Orleans

24. Sun Energy’s Claims • Claims “The system is closed so there are no emissions while the waste is being destroyed.” • Claims “The garbage is transformed ….so no harmful materials are allowed to leach into the environment. The synthetic fuel, or syngas, is cleaned and burned like natural gas to create electricity.” • “Not Incineration” -- waste is “destroyed in an oxygen starved environment so there is no burning.” But Sun Energy’s proposal says: “The product gases can be combusted in conventional boiler systems….or can be combusted in a gas turbine.”

25. Thermoselect MSW Gasification Incinerator Operated 1998-2004, Karlsruhe, Germany

26. Thermoselect Karlsruhe, Germany • Was promoted as a model facility worldwide • Closed in November 2004 due to operational problems • Facility has been demolished

27. Wollongong, Australia Brightstar MSW Gasification Incinerator (2001-2004, Wollongong, Australia)

28. Brightstar’s Wollongong Facility • Closed in April 2004 because of financial and technical problems • Facility no longer exists

29. Ebara

30. Ebara Gasification Plant, Nagareyama, Chiba Prefecture, Japan

31. Ebara Brochure excerpt

33. Truth about Ebara’s Gasification Facility in Chiba Prefecture, Japan Manager of Ebara’s Plant in Nagareyama, Chiba Prefecture, Japan admitted: • claim of Zero Emissions not true • claim that no supplementary fuel needed not true • use of large amounts of kerosene is not environmentally friendly • claim in public relations DVD that 3000 kw of energy generated is false • claim of no secondary pollution not true • it is best NOT TO INCINERATE! APRIL 23, 2007 TOUR OF FACILITY BY GREENACTION & JAPANESE CITIZENS

34. Our communities & planet need safe, healthy and just solutions • Pollution Prevention and Zero Waste, not incineration • Expanded recycling & zero waste programs that provide green jobs • Green, truly renewable energy • Safe technologies such as anaerobic digestion, not incinerators in disguise • Truth in advertising!

35. Red Bluff, California says NO to InEnTec Plasma Arc facility

36. For more information: Greenaction for Health and Environmental Justice www.greenaction.org Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives www.no-burn.org