An integrated appraisal of energy recovery options in the United Kingdom using solid recovered fuel derived from municipal solid waste. Waste Manage (Oxford)

Sustainable Systems Department, School of Applied Sciences, Cranfield University, Cranfield, Bedfordshire MK43 0AL, UK.
Waste Management (Impact Factor: 3.22). 06/2009; 29(8):2289-97. DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2009.03.031
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This paper reports an integrated appraisal of options for utilising solid recovered fuels (SRF) (derived from municipal solid waste, MSW) in energy intensive industries within the United Kingdom (UK). Four potential co-combustion scenarios have been identified following discussions with industry stakeholders. These scenarios have been evaluated using (a) an existing energy and mass flow framework model, (b) a semi-quantitative risk analysis, (c) an environmental assessment and (d) a financial assessment. A summary of results from these evaluations for the four different scenarios is presented. For the given ranges of assumptions; SRF co-combustion with coal in cement kilns was found to be the optimal scenario followed by co-combustion of SRF in coal-fired power plants. The biogenic fraction in SRF (ca. 70%) reduces greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions significantly ( approximately 2500 g CO(2) eqvt./kg DS SRF in co-fired cement kilns and approximately 1500 g CO(2) eqvt./kg DS SRF in co-fired power plants). Potential reductions in electricity or heat production occurred through using a lower calorific value (CV) fuel. This could be compensated for by savings in fuel costs (from SRF having a gate fee) and grants aimed at reducing GHG emission to encourage the use of fuels with high biomass fractions. Total revenues generated from coal-fired power plants appear to be the highest ( 95 pounds/t SRF) from the four scenarios. However overall, cement kilns appear to be the best option due to the low technological risks, environmental emissions and fuel cost. Additionally, cement kiln operators have good experience of handling waste derived fuels. The scenarios involving co-combustion of SRF with MSW and biomass were less favourable due to higher environmental risks and technical issues.

Download full-text


Available from: Phil Longhurst, Nov 19, 2014
1 Follower
108 Reads
  • Source
    • "MBM is used as fuel in cement industry to ensure that any living organism is thermally destroyed and its energy potential is utilized [9]. The chemical breakdown of coal and selected alternative fuels has been collected from the literature [10] [11] [12] "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cement manufacturing is an energy intensive and heavy pollutant emissions process. It is accountable for CO2, NOX, SO2 emissions and some heavy metal discharge from the manufacturing process which causes severe greenhouse effects. Waste derived alternative fuels are widely used for substituting the thermal energy requirement from fossil fuels and reducing the pollutant emission. In the current study, a process model of the preheater tower is developed using Aspen Plus simulation software based on the combustion mechanism. Preheater tower is part of the modern energy efficient cement plant which is responsible for most of the CO2 release as the calcination of the raw material occurs at high temperature in this section. The model is verified against measured data from industry and data available in the literature. This paper presents the effects of the flow rate of waste derived fuels on the energy efficiency and emission from the preheater tower. Three different waste derived fuels, namely tyre derived fuel, meat and bone meal and refuse derived fuel are considered for this study. Fixed substitution rate of conventional fuel by the alternative one has been considered to identify the differences among the selected alternative fuels. Results show that maximum 3% increase of energy efficiency and 2.5% reduction of CO2 can be achieved by using tyre for about 25% of thermal energy requirement. Simulation results presented in this paper offer a guideline for implementing selected waste derived fuels in cement industry.
    Energy Procedia 12/2014; 61:922-927. DOI:10.1016/j.egypro.2014.11.996
  • Source
    • "The mass fraction of plastic (soft), plastic (hard) and textile in this SRF stream was 24.0%, 16% and 8.5% respectively. SRF is a high calorific value material (containing paper, plastic, textile and wood) (Garg et al., 2009).The reject stream was found to be heterogeneous in terms of its composition. The reject stream was mainly consisted of non-combustibles/inert material (such as stone, glass particles and fines) along with noticeable mass fraction of plastic (PVC-plastic), rubber material, paper and cardboard and wood. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper presents the mass, energy and material balances of a solid recovered fuel (SRF) production process. The SRF is produced from commercial and industrial waste (C&IW) through mechanical treatment (MT). In this work various streams of material produced in SRF production process are analyzed for their proximate and ultimate analysis. Based on this analysis and composition of process streams their mass, energy and material balances are established for SRF production process. Here mass balance describes the overall mass flow of input waste material in the various output streams, whereas material balance describes the mass flow of components of input waste stream (such as paper and cardboard, wood, plastic (soft), plastic (hard), textile and rubber) in the various output streams of SRF production process. A commercial scale experimental campaign was conducted on an MT waste sorting plant to produce SRF from C&IW. All the process streams (input and output) produced in this MT plant were sampled and treated according to the CEN standard methods for SRF: EN 15442 and EN 15443. The results from the mass balance of SRF production process showed that of the total input C&IW material to MT waste sorting plant, 62% was recovered in the form of SRF, 4% as ferrous metal, 1% as non-ferrous metal and 21% was sorted out as reject material, 11.6% as fine fraction, and 0.4% as heavy fraction. The energy flow balance in various process streams of this SRF production process showed that of the total input energy content of C&IW to MT plant, 75% energy was recovered in the form of SRF, 20% belonged to the reject material stream and rest 5% belonged with the streams of fine fraction and heavy fraction. In the material balances, mass fractions of plastic (soft), plastic (hard), paper and cardboard and wood recovered in the SRF stream were 88%, 70%, 72% and 60% respectively of their input masses to MT plant. A high mass fraction of plastic (PVC), rubber material and non-combustibles (such as stone/rock and glass particles), was found in the reject material stream.
    Waste Management 04/2014; 34(8). DOI:10.1016/j.wasman.2014.03.011 · 3.22 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Meanwhile, partial substitution of coal by alternative fuels like biomass has gained relevance, as these are CO 2 neutral. Biomass solid fuels under use can be divided in two main groups: a first generation biomass fuels, consisting mainly of purpose-grown energy crops like woody or agricultural crops and a second generation biomass fuels composed of wastes arising from human activities like wood and forestry residues, crop residues and refuse derived fuels (RDF) produced from municipal or industrial solid waste [5] [6]. The interest on the latter fuels is because they are energetically attractive as their raw materials need no input and they are available local and permanently at little or no cost. "
    Fuel 01/2014; · 3.52 Impact Factor
Show more