Energy, exergy, environmental and economic analysis of hybrid waste-to-energy plants

2019 ◽  
Vol 179 ◽  
pp. 397-417 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Luisa N.M. Carneiro ◽  
Marcos Sebastião P. Gomes
Keyword(s):  
Economic Analysis ◽  
Waste To Energy ◽  
Energy Plants

scholarly journals Alkali-Activated Binders Using Bottom Ash from Waste-to-Energy Plants and Aluminium Recycling Waste

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. 3840 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Maldonado-Alameda ◽  
Jofre Mañosa ◽  
Jessica Giro-Paloma ◽  
Joan Formosa ◽  
Josep Maria Chimenos
Keyword(s):  
Bottom Ash ◽  
Physicochemical Characterization ◽  
Waste To Energy ◽  
Promising Alternative ◽  
Leaching Potential ◽  
Aluminium Recycling ◽  
Alkaline Activator ◽  
Alkali Activated Binders ◽  
Energy Plants ◽  
Alkali Activated

Alkali-activated binders (AABs) stand out as a promising alternative to replace ordinary Portland cement (OPC) due to the possibility of using by-products and wastes in their manufacturing. This paper assessed the potential of weathered bottom ash (WBA) from waste-to-energy plants and PAVAL® (PV), a secondary aluminium recycling process by-product, as precursors of AABs. WBA and PV were mixed at weight ratios of 98/2, 95/5, and 90/10. A mixture of waterglass (WG) and NaOH at different concentrations (4 and 6 M) was used as the alkaline activator solution. The effects of increasing NaOH concentration and PV content were evaluated. Alkali-activated WBA/PV (AA-WBA/PV) binders were obtained. Selective chemical extractions and physicochemical characterization revealed the formation of C-S-H, C-A-S-H, and (N,C)-A-S-H gels. Increasing the NaOH concentration and PV content increased porosity and reduced compressive strength (25.63 to 12.07 MPa). The leaching potential of As and Sb from AA-WBA/PV exceeded the threshold for acceptance in landfills for non-hazardous waste.

Energy-ecologic efficiency of waste-to-energy plants

2019 ◽  
Vol 195 ◽  
pp. 1359-1370 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Luisa N.M. Carneiro ◽  
Marcos Sebastião P. Gomes
Keyword(s):  
Waste To Energy ◽  
Energy Plants

Analysis of Foreign Experience in Using Flue Gas Purification Systems at Waste-to-Energy Plants

Vestnik MEI ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 11-19
Author(s):  
Anton N. Efremov ◽  
◽  
Aleksey A. Dudolin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Flue Gas ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Waste To Energy ◽  
Gas Purification ◽  
Acid Gases ◽  
Purification System ◽  
Flue Gas Purification ◽  
Property Assessment ◽  
Application Fields ◽  
Energy Plants

The existing method for selecting the structure of a power plant for thermally recycling municipal solid waste (MSW) in the Russian Federation does not address the matter of selecting all components of an energy complex operating on MSW, but places focus on determining the best accessible waste thermal neutralization technology. This generates the need to search for new methods and to select criteria of choosing the structure for each particular project. A comparative analysis of various structural schemes of waste-to-energy plants widely used outside of Russia will make it possible to reveal their main advantages and drawbacks, and to determine their application fields. The article describes the statistical indicators characterizing the operation of the flue gas purification system from acid gases, which can be applied in performing a feasibility study, intellectual property assessment, and in carrying out front-end engineering. For waste-to-energy plants constructed in an urban environment and aimed to operate with keeping to a minimum the gross emissions of acid gases into the atmospheric air, the use of a wet reactor system is recommended, which will ensure low emissions of HF, HCl, and SOx. The system with a wet reactor will make it possible to reduce gross emissions of harmful substances during the operation of large capacity waste-to-energy power plants and will be a justified choice in such case. In constructing medium capacity waste-to-energy plants (with a throughput of up to 350 000 t of MSW per annum), semi-dry and dry reactors can be used; for such plants, the technology involving the use of a semi-dry reactor is the most preferred one.

Design and Control of Bypass Condensers

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ranga Nadig ◽  
Michael Phipps
Keyword(s):  
Thermal Design ◽  
Waste To Energy ◽  
Inlet Temperature ◽  
Circulating Water ◽  
Large Shell ◽  
Small Tube ◽  
And Performance ◽  
And Control ◽  
Proper Performance ◽  
Energy Plants

In waste to energy plants and certain genre of cogeneration plants, it is mandatory to condense the steam from the boiler or HRSG in a separate bypass condenser when the steam turbine is out of service. The steam from the boiler or HRSG is attemperated in a pressure reducing desuperheating valve and then condensed in a bypass condenser. To avoid flashing of condensate in downstream piping it is customary to subcool the condensate in the bypass condenser. Circulating water from the steam surface condenser is used to condense the steam in the bypass condenser. Some of the challenges involved in the design of the bypass condenser are: • High shellside design pressure and temperature • Condensate subcooling • Large circulating water (tubeside) flow rate • Relatively low circulating water (tubeside) inlet temperature • Large Log Mean Temperature Difference (LMTD) • Large shell diameters • Small tube lengths The diverse requirements complicate the mechanical and thermal design of the bypass condenser. This paper highlights the complexities in the design and performance of the bypass condenser. Similarities with the design and operation of steam surface condensers and feedwater heater are reviewed. The uniqueness of the bypass condenser’s design and operation are discussed and appropriate solutions to ensure proper performance are suggested.

scholarly journals High-temperature Corrosion Characteristics of SUS310J1 in Waste to Energy Plants

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (0) ◽  
pp. 92-105
Author(s):  
Koya Takeda ◽  
Masahiro Sugata ◽  
Isamu Maekawa ◽  
Ikuo Shimomura
Keyword(s):  
High Temperature ◽  
High Temperature Corrosion ◽  
Waste To Energy ◽  
Energy Plants

Operations scheduling of waste-to-energy plants under uncertainty

2020 ◽  
Vol 253 ◽  
pp. 119953 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chenlian Hu ◽  
Xiao Liu ◽  
Jie Lu ◽  
Chi-Hwa Wang
Keyword(s):  
Waste To Energy ◽  
Operations Scheduling ◽  
Energy Plants

Ash Recycling: Just a Dream?

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heiner Zwahr
Keyword(s):  
Fly Ash ◽  
Waste Management ◽  
Road Construction ◽  
Waste Incineration ◽  
Waste To Energy ◽  
Incineration Plant ◽  
Material Recovery ◽  
Concrete Production ◽  
Scrap Iron ◽  
Energy Plants

Waste to energy is only one way of handling waste, material recovery is another aspect of sustainable waste management. This is actually nothing new and has always been part of the operation of WTE (Waste to Energy) plants in Hamburg. In descriptions of the first waste incineration plant in Hamburg, which started operation in 1896, it was stated that “the fly ash” collected in the ash chambers was used as filler material for the insulation of ceiling cavities. Its use in the sandwich walls of money safes was expressly recommended by the members of the urban refuse collection authority. Another lucrative trade was the sorting of scrap iron. It was separated from the incineration slag with magnets. The slag itself was said to be as sterile as lava, as hard as glass, as useful as bricks, and it was a profitable side product of waste incineration. The crushed incinerator slag was evidently so much in demand in road construction and as an aggregate in concrete production that demand could often not be met in the building season, even though it was stored through the winter, [1,2,3].

Characteristics and Environmental Fate of Mercury in Municipal Waste Combustor Ash Before and After Implementation of the “Maximum Achievable Control Technology” Air Standards

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey L. Hahn
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Fate ◽  
Waste To Energy ◽  
Anthropogenic Sources ◽  
Air Emissions ◽  
Control Technology ◽  
Source Reduction ◽  
Mercury Emissions ◽  
Alkaline Batteries ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Energy Plants

Mercury emissions from waste-to-energy facilities have been a source of public concern for more than ten years following release in the early 1990s of the EPA’s inventory of anthropogenic sources of mercury that listed MWCs as a significant source of mercury air emissions. Since 1990, source reduction, product reformulation, and increasingly effective battery recycling programs reduced mercury in trash by about 90%, according to the EPA. Pollution control equipment on waste-to-energy plants thereafter remove greater than 90% of the remaining mercury in the waste stream that is used as a fuel to generate power. The use of mercury by U.S. manufacturers will decline even further due to the virtual elimination of mercury from alkaline batteries and aggressive recycling and product substitution at hospitals, homes, and businesses. The Clean Air Act regulations promulgated in 1995 under the Maximum Available Control Technology standards have ensured that mercury emissions from waste-to-energy plants nationwide represent less than 3% of the U.S. inventory of man-made mercury sources, according to EPA, (or less than 1% of mercury emissions from all sources). Furthermore, health risk assessments completed over the past several years for new and existing waste-to-energy plants consistently reveal that the levels of mercury emissions result in exposures which are 100 times less than the threshold health effects standard established by federal and state regulatory agencies. Nonetheless, certain environmentalists and critics claim that the significant reduction in mercury air emissions has resulted in a transformation of the metal into the ash. In other words, the questions posed is whether what is not now going up the stack is instead finding its way into the ash. This paper answers that question with a resounding “no.” Based on an analysis of test data, mercury in MWC ash has not increased despite a greater than 90% reduction in mercury emissions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document