2. 6 APRIL 2013
WASTE-TO-ENERGY2
› 1. General introduction to the waste-to-energy technology
› Historic development of the WtE technology, key components etc.
› 2. Environmental performance of WtE facilities
› Atmospheric emissions
› Solid residues
› Other environmental impacts
› 3. Responses to the ill-informed myths about WtE
› Recycling or incineration?
› Air pollution?
› Problematic residues?
› Neighbourhood impacts?
Outline of my presentation on WtE:
3. 6 APRIL 2013
WASTE-TO-ENERGY3
› Waste-to-energy was first used more than 100 years ago, and has evolved
significantly over these years
› WtE is a highly developed, environmentally clean, and energy efficient way to
manage residual waste that isn't recycled or put to other good use
› There are almost 1000 well-functioning WtE plants world-wide today and there
are more and more plants being built in Europe, US, Middle East and the Far
East
› Apart from waste avoidance and recycling, WtE is the only technology that
delivers a 95% volume reduction whilst efficiently producing valuable energy
› Countries such as Denmark, Switzerland, Netherlands, Sweden etc. are now
landfilling only 3-7% of general waste because of WtE, recycling and other
treatment technologies
› WtE is complementary to recycling. International statistics show that the
countries that recycle the most are also the ones that use WtE the most and
landfill the least waste
1. General introduction to the waste-to-energy
technology
7. › Atmospheric emissions will comply with SA standards and strictest global
standards (EU Waste Incineration Directive)
› After combustion, only 5% of the original mass remains, mostly as bottom ash
that can be utilised or landfilled, and secondly, there is an air pollution control
residue that requires landfill at a permitted site
› WtE plants do not produce waste water other than that from toilets and
general cleaning and maintenance activities
› There are no odours, as the plant is under negative pressure produced by
drawing all air required for the combustion process from the tipping hall and
plant hall
› The main potential neighbourhood impacts are normally due to traffic and the
visual impact of the large plant
2. Environmental impacts
6 APRIL 2013
WASTE-TO-ENERGY7
8. › Concern 1: Dioxin and furan emissions are a problem?
› Concern 2: WtE discourages recycling?
› Concern 3: WtE causes emission of greenhouse gases causing global
warming?
› Concern 4: WtE is not suitable for South Africa ?
› Concern 5: Other countries are moving away from WtE due to political
and public concerns?
3. Responses to commonly held concerns:
6 APRIL 2013
WASTE-TO-ENERGY8
9. 9
05.06.2013
3.1. Concern 1: Dioxins and furans are a problem?
› In the pre-1990s dioxins were a problem: WtE caused 33% of the German
dioxin emissions, which at that time totalled 1200g TU Dioxin
› Now, using the current flue gas treatment, WtE accounts for less than 0,7%
of the total German dioxin emission, which today is only 6% of what it was
in the pre-1990’s!
› Actually, there is much more dioxin emission from diffuse sources such as
informal fires, open waste burning in underserviced areas, fireworks and
industrial processes such as metal extraction and processing than well
managed modern facilities
› Conclusion: Dioxin was a problem in the past, but today is not seen as such
› Source: German Federal Environmental Agency Study, Sept. 2005: Waste
Incineration — A Potential Danger? Bidding Farewell to Dioxin Spouting
11. 11
Source: COWI calculations and international references:
Based on marginal coal substitution
9 JUNE 2011 Northern European success towards zero landfill. Torben Kristiansen
3.3. Concern 3: WtE emits greenhouse gases and
causes global warming?
› Direct landfilling results in emission of 330 kg CO2eq /tonne or more
› WtE with electricity only results in 5 kg CO2eq /tonne
› WtE with electricity and process heat results in -270 kg CO2eq /tonne
› Hence: As compared to landfilling, WtE has a neutral impact compared to
landfilling if producing electricity only; and a net positive impact if process
heat can be utilised
12. › WtE fits very well with all of South Africa's overall policies:
› Improves the energy generation capacity of South Africa
› Diverts energy supply towards greener energy sources
› Reduces dependency on landfilling of waste:
› Makes better use of the generated waste
› Reduces traffic congestion and long-distance haulage of waste. WtE facilities can be
located where the waste is generated
› Creates new industries and skilled and unskilled jobs in a greener economy
› WtE is attractive when including the opportunity costs and the real costs of
landfills, particularly in Metros where landfill capacity is critically low, new
landfills difficult to locate and are therefore likely to be further away from the
Metros
3.4. Concern 4: WtE is not suitable for South Africa ?
6 APRIL 2013
WASTE-TO-ENERGY12
13. › South Africa has no experience with modern WtE. Only experience with poorly
designed and badly operated medical waste incinerators based on designs
from the 1970s. There can be no comparison with modern WtE technology!
› In countries with long-term successful experience with WtE, such as
Denmark, Sweden, Austria, Switzerland, Germany, Netherlands etc., there is
practically no political or even public opposition to WtE. On the contrary, WtE
is seen as an important way to reduce climate impact, secure cheap and
greener energy and to avoid undesirable landfills
› There are many (500+) instances in Europe where WtE facilities treating
200,000 - 700,000 tonnes of waste per year are located within literally 50-200
meters of residences, commercial offices and business districts without
causing any major concerns
› There is a global growth in the number of WtE facilities, both in Europe and in
particular in the growth economies in Asia.
› Most countries' government policies include WtE as a way to reduce landfilling
and make better use of resources that cannot be recycled.
› Very few countries have banned or made moratorium for WtE
3.5. Concern 5: Political and public concerns about
WtE in other countries?
6 APRIL 2013
WASTE-TO-ENERGY13
14. › WtE is a very well proven technology that can work hand-in-hand with
recycling and other waste management approaches
› WtE is the only technology that delivers a 95% mass reduction of landfill
volume whilst producing much needed electricity and possible process energy
for nearby industries
› WtE supports South African government policies
› The environmental impact from WtE facilities is extremely limited and very
attractive compared to the alternative of landfilling residual waste
› Combined global experience with WtE technology is based on more than 100
years of using and refining the technology, and from the continuous 24/7
operation of lots of plants throughout the world.
› There are almost 1000 well functioning WtE facilities globally and the numbers
are increasing, especially in Asia but also in Europe, the US and the Middle
East.
4. Conclusion
6 APRIL 2013
WASTE-TO-ENERGY14
15. - Thank you!
Torben Kristiansen
Vice President Solid Waste Management
COWI A/S
tokh@cowi.com
www.cowi.com/waste
15
COWI is a leading independent European and global consulting group providing
state-of-the-art services within engineering, environmental science and economics.
COWI has more than 6,500 employees worldwide including Denmark, Sweden,
Norway, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria, Serbia, Spain, Belgium, UK,
Greenland, Turkey, Mozambique, Zambia, Tanzania, Oman, Bahrain, UAE, Qatar,
India, South Korea, China, USA, & Canada.
COWI 's majority owner is the COWI foundation that returns profits into the
development of COWI and its employees' skills and tools while maintaining COWI as
an unbiased and independent knowledge and engineering consultancy.
9 JUNE 2011 Northern European success towards zero landfill. Torben Kristiansen
