Waste to Energy in the 21st Century: Getting New Projects/Expansions off the Ground — Key Ingredients to a Successful Action Plan (Abstract)

2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shawn Worster
Keyword(s):  
21St Century ◽  
Solid Waste Management ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Waste To Energy ◽  
Integrated Solid Waste Management ◽  
Energy Technologies ◽  
Contractual Relationships ◽  
The Us

These are critical times for users and vendors of waste-to energy technologies in the US. Many of the existing long term contracts entered into during the early to mid 80’s are nearing their end. Communities are facing the need to decide what to do with that portion of their waste stream remaining after they reduce, reuse and recycle. That effort includes determining the role that waste-to-energy will play in their 21st Century integrated solid waste management program and the nature of the contractual relationships that will define how it is managed.

There Is Light at the End of the Tunnel! Key Ingredients to a Successful End of Term Action Plan

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shawn Worster ◽  
Alan Cohen ◽  
Susan Raila
Keyword(s):  
Solid Waste ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
Waste To Energy ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
Energy Technologies ◽  
North East ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Status ◽  
Privately Owned

These are critical times for customers, operators, and owners of waste-to-energy technologies in the US. Many of the existing long term contracts entered into during the early to mid 80’s are at or nearing their end. Communities are facing the need to decide what to do with that portion of their waste stream remaining after they reduce, reuse, and recycle. This presentation addresses the status of several waste-to-energy facilities (e.g. North East Solid Waste Committee (NESWC), Bridgeport, Pinellas, Hempstead) projects that have reached, or are nearing, the end of their initial terms, comparing and contrasting the issues between publicly and privately owned facilities. The presentation draws on the authors’ direct involvement in these projects — in some cases from the project’s inception to the present. Drawing on their collective seventy+ years of experience in the solid waste industry representing public sector clients, Dr. Cohen, Ms. Raila and Mr. Worster will present an overview of the factors affecting existing contracts reaching end of term, key elements to be considered by participants in identifying what their options are, typical terms and conditions and key ingredients of and how to put in place an effective action plan.

Integrated Solid Waste Management in Northwest Minnesota

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Willard Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Waste Management ◽  
Solid Waste ◽  
Electrostatic Precipitator ◽  
Solid Waste Management ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Waste To Energy ◽  
Saturated Steam ◽  
Air Pollution Control ◽  
Integrated Solid Waste Management ◽  
Polk County

In the early 1980’s Polk County and four other partner counties in rural Northwest Minnesota made the decision to incorporate a waste to energy (WTE) plant into their solid waste management program. This decision was made to comply with the Minnesota hierarchy for solid waste management, to extend the life of the Polk County landfill, and to recover valuable energy from the waste. The plant was constructed in 1987 and began burning MSW in 1988. The processing technology consisted of two starved air mass burn municipal solid waste combustors each with a combustion capacity of 40 tons of MSW per day, and produced energy in the form of saturated steam for customers in the adjacent industrial park. Initially each train utilized a two field electrostatic precipitator (ESP) as the air pollution control (APC) device. In 1996, a materials recovery system (MRF) was constructed in front of the waste combustors to remove problem/objectionable items most of which are recyclable. This facility has been a tremendous success providing many benefits including reduced stack emissions, lower O & M costs for the WTE units, and revenues from the sales of extracted recyclables. In 1998 Polk began injecting powdered activated carbon (PAC) into the flue gas of each unit upstream of the ESP to attain compliance with new State limits for dioxin/furans and mercury. Then in 2000 Polk County proceeded with an APC retrofit project designed to meet revised EPA emission guidelines which set more stringent limits for pollutants currently regulated and added limits for several other pollutants previously unregulated. In 2001 and 2004 Polk County performed research demonstration projects substituting screened WTE combined ash for a portion of natural aggregate in two asphalt road construction projects. Both projects passed stringent environmental testing and demonstrated superior strength and flexibility performance compared to conventional asphalt. Polk County is now proceeding with the installation of a turbine/generator to produce renewable electricity with excess steam. The electricity produced will be used to reduce the demand for incoming power from the local utility. Initially this may be only a twenty-five percent reduction but has the potential to be more in the event one or more of the steam customers reduces their dependence on steam from the WTE plant. All of these projects received funding assistance from the State of Minnesota in the form of Capital Assistance Grants. In 2003 the WTE plant and MRF became debt free and Polk County lowered the tip fee resulting in a disposal rate that is fairly competitive with that of most out of state landfills. This paper will discuss the development, success, and benefits of this completely integrated solid waste management system for these five counties located in Northwest Minnesota.

Recommitting to a Long Term Waste to Energy Future Through a Comprehensive Refurbishment Program

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raymond H. Schauer ◽  
Joseph Krupa
Keyword(s):  
Waste Management ◽  
Solid Waste ◽  
Management System ◽  
Solid Waste Management ◽  
Resource Recovery ◽  
Waste To Energy ◽  
Palm Beach County ◽  
Integrated Solid Waste Management ◽  
Processing Facility ◽  
Solid Waste Management System

Created in 1978, the Solid Waste Authority of Palm Beach County (Authority) has developed an “award winning” solid waste management system that includes franchised solid waste collections and the following facilities to service the residents and businesses in Palm Beach County, Florida: • North County Resource Recovery Facility (NCRRF); • Residential and Commercial Recovered Materials Processing Facility; • Five Transfer Stations; • Class I Landfill; • Class III Landfill; • Biosolids Pelletization Facility; • Ferrous Processing Facility; • Woody Waste Recycling Facility; • Composting Facility; and • Household Hazardous Waste Facility. The Authority has proactively planned and implemented its current integrated solid waste management program to ensure disposal capacity through 2021. However, like many communities, the Authority anticipates continued population growth and associated new development patterns that will significantly increase demands on its solid waste system, requiring it to reevaluate and update its planning to accommodate future growth. The NCRRF, the Authority’s refuse derived fuel waste-to-energy facility, has performed very well since its start up in 1989 processing over 13 million tons of MSW, saving valuable landfill space and efficiently producing clean, renewable energy. As the NCRRF approached the end of its first 20 year operating term, it became necessary to complete a comprehensive refurbishment to ensure its continued reliable service for a second 20 year term and beyond providing for continued disposal capacity and energy production for the Authority’s customers. The Authority renegotiated and extended its operating agreement with the Palm Beach Resource Recovery Corporation (PBRRC), a Babcock & Wilcox Company, for an additional 20-year term. The Authority selected BE&K Construction Company (BE&K) and entered into an Engineering, Procurement, and Construction contract (EPC Contract) to perform the refurbishment. The Authority, with assistance from its Consulting Engineer, Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., developed the minimum technical requirements and negotiated the EPC Contract with BE&K. The design and procurement efforts were completed in early 2009 and on-site construction refurbishment activities commenced in November 2009. The refurbishment has a total estimated cost of $205 million. The refurbishment work is sequenced with the intent that one boiler train will remain operational to reduce the impact to the Authority’s landfill and maximize electrical production and revenues during the refurbishment period. This presentation will focus on the improvements to operations as a result of the refurbishment and its positive effects on the Authority’s integrated solid waste management system.

Palm Beach County WTE Expansion Model

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas M. Henderson ◽  
Leah K. Richter
Keyword(s):  
Solid Waste ◽  
Solid Waste Management ◽  
Waste To Energy ◽  
Outreach Program ◽  
Air Pollution Control ◽  
Palm Beach County ◽  
Integrated Solid Waste Management ◽  
Processing Facility ◽  
Composting Facility ◽  
Facility Expansion

Palm Beach County (Florida) Solid Waste Authority built an integrated solid waste management system in the 1980s and 1990s around an 1,800 tpd Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) Waste-to-Energy (WTE) facility. The system included a network of five regional transfer stations, Subtitle D sanitary landfill, recovered materials processing facility, composting facility, metals processing facility and household hazardous waste collection program. The WTE, which became operational in 1989, was built with two 900 tpd RDF combustion units. Space was provided for the addition of a third combustion unit, a second turbine-generator and an extra flue was installed in the facility’s stack. By 2004, the WTE was fifteen years old. It had been running at over 125% availability and well above its nominal capacity for almost a decade. Landfill capacity was being consumed at a rate which would see it filled in less than 20 years. The County had been hit with repeated hurricanes in recent years and the County’s population was continuing to grow making landfill capacity projections far from certain. The Authority began an assessment of its long term capacity options which included renovation of its existing WTE facility, expansion of that facility, development of a new WTE facility, development of a new Subtitle D Landfill and several out-of-county options. This paper will focus on the results of this assessment with emphasis on the current efforts to develop a new Mass Burn WTE facility with a capacity of 3,000 tpd and a commercial operations date of 2015. It will be the largest new WTE built in North America in more than 20 years. The choice of Mass Burn technology, facility and combustion module sizing, air pollution control technology, facility site selection, environmental permitting, public outreach program, project financing and procurement and contracting approach will be discussed.

Changing Waste-to-Energy in Nashville, Tennessee

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harvey W. Gershman ◽  
David L. Seader
Keyword(s):  
Waste Management ◽  
Solid Waste ◽  
Planning Process ◽  
Solid Waste Management ◽  
Energy System ◽  
Primary Energy ◽  
Waste To Energy ◽  
Energy Supply System ◽  
District Energy ◽  
Integrated Solid Waste Management

For almost 30 years, the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County has been relying on one of the more innovative approaches to waste management. Since the early 1970s, the now 1,000 tons per day WTE facility has been the primary energy source for supplying steam and chilled water for a downtown district energy system serving some 39 buildings. A recent review of alternatives has resulted in Metro deciding to close the facility and replace it with a more traditional district energy supply system and at the same time re-engineer its solid waste management programs to include more efficient collection and recycling programs. This paper will present the planning process and analysis that were done; describe the key factors that led to Metro Nashville’s decisions; detail the procurement and development process that has been initiated; and outline the timetable for implementing the decided upon changes. The authors believe this case study will provide insights for other WTE projects that from time to time struggle with peaceful co-existence with other elements of integrated solid waste management. The authors have been serving as advisors to Metro throughout this process. Mr. Gershman has recently been designated by Metro as its overall Project Manager for its District Energy System.

scholarly journals Solid waste management in rural areas nearby river Ganga at Haridwar in Uttarakhand, India

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 592-598
Author(s):  
Ankur Rajpal ◽  
Absar Ahmad Kazmi ◽  
Vinay Kumar Tyagi
Keyword(s):  
Waste Management ◽  
Solid Waste ◽  
Bulk Density ◽  
Rural Areas ◽  
Solid Waste Management ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Waste To Energy ◽  
Household Waste ◽  
Municipal Solid Waste Management ◽  
River Ganga

The solid waste found in rural areas can be used as a soil conditioner providing essential nutrients to crops and enhancing agricultural productivity. It is an eco-friendly and economic preference for Municipal Solid Waste Management (MSW). This study investigates the solid waste management scenario in rural areas along the river Ganga and proposes a sustainable waste management solution. Waste quantification and composition were determined in the five villages (rural areas) viz. Sajanpur, Shyampur, Kangri, Bhogpur and Dummanpuri of district Haridwar in Uttarakhand and their waste management and disposal systems were evaluated. Findings revealed that the average daily waste generation was 0.665 kg/day and per capita generation of household waste was around 0.16 kg/person/day. Major fraction of household waste was bio-degradable (74.14%) and remaining fraction comprised of paper (6.62%), polythene (2.82%), textile (2.52%), plastic (1.15%), glass (0.61%), metal (0.60%), rubber (0.35%), and inert (5.01%). The average bulk density of household waste was 460 kg/m3, whereas cattle waste bulk density was 834 kg/m3. Other waste characteristics included moisture content (60%), organic carbon (40%), nitrogen (1.7%), phosphorus (0.9%) and ash (31%). The calorific value of household waste (biodegradable) was 937.6 kcal/kg (dry basis). Since most of the waste was biodegradable, hence co-composting with cattle waste is recommended. The dry waste can be separated and stored for further processing and transported to nearby waste to energy-producing plants. The main hurdle to the program of waste recycling was the unsegregated collection of waste in rural areas. Hence, separation at the source comprised biodegradable waste, dried waste (paper, plastic, and metal) and other components are essential for the future solid waste management program.

Obstacles Facing U.S. Companies Marketing Waste-to-Energy Overseas

2001 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack A. Ristau
Keyword(s):  
Global Economy ◽  
Solid Waste Management ◽  
Waste To Energy ◽  
Time Zone ◽  
Integrated Solid Waste Management ◽  
Development Costs ◽  
Management Plans ◽  
New Business ◽  
Energy Companies ◽  
Energy Plants

Abstract Many countries overseas, for the first time, are beginning to explore the use of waste-to-energy plants as part of their integrated solid waste management plans. They are doing this for a number of reasons, which include geopolitical and economic pressures, as well as environmental. Overseas markets are actively seeking out, and wanting to apply the advancements made by U.S. waste-to-energy companies in the last three decades. U.S. companies have made U.S. waste-to-energy plants the least costly and most efficient plants in the world. U.S. waste-to-energy companies may be poised for new business opportunity for their systems in overseas markets. However, there are many obstacles to overcome in marketing technology and waste disposal services overseas. Where are those markets of opportunity? There are three criteria which can be used to screen for potential waste-to-energy markets: 1. Living standards; 2. Limitation on land use; and, 3. Rule of law. What are the cultural, geographic and competitive obstacles in marketing overseas? Can obstacles such as language, development costs, time zone differences, institutional experience with privatization, local and foreign competitive advantages be managed or medicated? An understanding of how a global economy impacts the marketing of U.S. waste-to-energy services is essential to formulating an overseas marketing plan.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document