Waste and resource management in Germanyprotegeer.gov.br/images/documents/522/5. Waste management...

teach4waste I Waste management in Germany I Slide 1

Waste and resource management in

Germany


Waste and resource management

- Over all challenges

Present and future challenges

• Climate change

• Marine litter and pollution of aquatic systems

• Species extinction and human health

• Resource shortage

…. all of these areas interact with waste management


• GHG mitigation by emissions: 38 mill. t GHG CO2 eq/a• GHG mitigation by recycling and energy recovery: 30 mill. t GHG CO2 eq/a

• GHG - Total mitigation potential by circular economy?

Overall challenges- GHG emissions from waste sector in Germany


Relevance of GHG emissions

- Subareas of waste management

(Source: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change, Contribution of Working Groups

III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Chapter 10 - Industry, 2014)

Up to 12 % of total

GHG emissions in

developing

countries and

emerging markets

originate from the

waste sector

Global waste GHG emissions

Mt CO2eq per year, per GDP and per capita referred to 1970’s values


GHG emissions Germany

Δ= 344 Mt CO2eq 68 Mt CO2eq of

reduction are

achieved

through waste

management

measures

Development GHG emissions in Germany 1990 - 2018

Mil

lio

n t

on

s o

f C

O2

eq

uiv

ale

nt

(Source: UBA, 2019)


Overall challenges

- Marine litter

Source. Eunomia (2016)

Drivers and estimated quantities of the ocean plastic

waste (in mill. t)


• Macro and micro plastics

• nutrients

• organic and inorganic pollutants

• endocrine substances

• …

Overall challenges

- Pollution of aquatic systems


Time (years)

24

26

29

50

66

68

94

141

182

320

160

240

150

168

473

162

109

270

469

441

1669

Indium

Zinc

Chrome

Copper

Zircon

Cobalt

Tantalum

Titanium

Platinum group

Phosphorus

Oil

Gas

Reserve

Ressource

2018

Availability of selected resources

Overall challenges

- Waste represents resources


Substitutability index

Overall challenges



Global recycling rates

Overall challenges



Need for sustainable waste management

- Driving forces and strategies

Driving forces:

• Resource protection: Positive trends for secondary

resources due to increasing costs of primary

resources

• Environment protection: Measures against climate

change, marine litter and species extinction will

influence waste management in terms of

sustainability

Strategies:

• Avoidance, reuse and recycling

• Energy recovery from waste of non-material-

recycling

• Minimizing/prohibition of landfilling of non pre-treated

waste

• Minimizing transport effort by decentralization

measures


Guarantee resource supply - what can we do?

According to World Bank (2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018….):

One approach to solve the increasing future resources demand is

>>> 90 % avoidance and recycling

Challenges

- Need for sustainable waste management

Vision


Recycling

Energy recovery

Disposal

Avoidance

Re-use

Waste hierarchy EU and Brazil

- Today

Incre

asin

g G

HG

em

issio

ns

Inc

rea

sin

g G

HG

cre

dit

s

Inc

rea

sin

g R

es

ou

rce

eff

icie

nc

y


Recycling

Energy recovery only renewables

Disposal

Avoidance

Re-use

Waste hierarchy EU and Brazil

- Medium and long term view

Incre

asin

g G

HG

em

issio

ns

Inc

rea

sin

g G

HG

cre

dit

s

Inc

rea

sin

g R

es

ou

rce

eff

icie

nc

y


Trend determining influences

• Overall challenges

• Legal framework

• Waste composition

• Management and technologies


Bans: From 2021 on, disposable, non-returnable plastic products for which

alternatives are available, will be banned. These include cotton swabs, plastic

cutlery and plates, drinking straws, stirring sticks and balloon holders, as well as

cups and food containers made of polystyrene.

Products made of oxo-degradable plastics are completely banned.

(Source: Picture, Verbraucherzentrale NRW)

The EU has identified 10

plastic products that

together make up 70 % of

Marine Litter ?!

EU Circular Economy Package 2018- Plastics Directive 12.2018


Binding recycling rates

EU Circular Economy Package 2018

- Key elements of recycling

Type of waste 2025

[%]

2030

[%]

2035

[%]

MSW 55 60 65

Packaging 65 70

Plastic 50 55

Wood 25 30

Ferrous metals 70 80

Aluminium 50 60

Glass 70 75

Paper and cardboard 75



- Key elements of recycling

Binding separate collection obligations are strengthened and extended to:

• Hazardous household waste (by end 2022)

• Biowaste (by end 2023)

• Textiles (by end 2025)

(Source: Nomad_Soul, Fotolia.com)(Source: Copyright by Andreas Caspari)


2022 2035* 2040*

Reduce disposal on landfills to 10 % 10 %*

Prohibition on disposal of untreated waste X


- Key elements of landfill

Binding recycling targets

*Exceptions for certain countries

MBT Landfill


Concrete specifications for specific products may be determined by laws or

ordinances, such as:

• Packaging law (1991, last amendment 2018)

• End-of-life Vehicle Ordinance (1997, last amendment 2016)

• Battery law (2009, last amendment 2017)

• Electrical and Electronic Equipment law (2009, last amendment 2017)

Avoidance- Regulations to promote product responsibility (KrWG)


Packaging law (GER)

- Labelling requirement

The most reliable indication is the returnable character?

So far, there has been no statutory clear labelling

for reusable beverage packaging that makes it

easier for consumers to identify.

The Packaging law requires obligatory labelling introduced since

01.01.2019:

• In addition to the price, the consumer is informed with the words

“disposable" and “returnable" about the corresponding beverage system.


Packaging law (GER)

- Deposit regulation, valid since 01.2019

Beverage bottle Deposit

Returnable beer bottles from glass (all sizes) 8 Cent

Returnable beer bottles with clip lock 15 Cent

Returnable mineral water blottle (Glass or PET) 15 Cent*

Returnable bottle for juice or soft drinks 15 Cent

Some 1,0-Liter-Wine bottles 2 or 3 Cent

All disposable bottles or cans 25 Cent

* in exception also 25 Cent

(Source: Foto Eco woman)(Source Foto: BCME)(Source Foto: UBA)


Deposits

- Return rates and deposit amounts

The return rates are in average over 80 %, in some countries over 95 %

Ret

urn

rat

es

Deposit (Quelle: Grytli, 2012)


Return rates

- Deposit for returnable and disposable bottles

(Quelle: Foto Ecowoman)

(Quelle: Foto UBA) 74%95%

99%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Separate collection system Disposables plus separatecollection system

Returnables

Return rates of different Systems


Development of returnable and disposable

packagings

The market share of returnables (blue line) has reduced from 93 % in 1991 to almost 39 % in

2016 towards disposables (red line) (UBA, 2018) Packaging law requires a returnables’ share

of at least 70 % from 2019 on

Disposal packagingReturnale pack.

(Source: UBA, 2018)


Recovery of plastics waste

- EU-status 2014

)Source: Plastic Europe, https://committee.iso.org/files/live/sites/tc61/files/The%20Plastic%20Industry%20Berlin%20Aug%202016%20-

%20Copy.pd)

https://committee.iso.org/files/live/sites/tc61/files/The Plastic Industry Berlin Aug 2016 - Copy.pd


Plastics collected by Dualem System in 2014

- Recycling

Plastics

Mass Plastic

collection

[t]

Type of

plastics

[%]

Mass for

Recycling

[Mg]

Material

recycling

[%]

Foils 152.664 13,5 150.334 98,5

Plastic (single polymers)193.001

17,1 185.016 95,9

MPO 37.881 3,3 37.166 98,1

Mixed plastics 733.249 64,8 39.044 5,3

Dimensionally stable

plastics14.328 1,3 13.155 91,8

Plastics total 1.131.123 100 424.71537,5

*0320 bis 0340 without MPO (mixed polyolephines)

(Source: UBA, 2018)


German plastic export in 2018

(Source: EUWID 2019)

Total export

1.1 mill. t 2018


Trend determining influences

• Overall challenges

• Legal framework

• Waste composition

• Management and technologies


Waste fractionGermany

[%]

China

[%]

Brazil

[%]

Thailand

[%]

India

[%]

Java

[%]

Paper/cardboard 15,7 15,0 13,1 7,7 1,5 3,5

Glass 6,4 2,0 2,4 2,0 0,2 1,7

Organic 46,9 63,9 51,4 62,0 75,2 78,5

Plastic 9,8 16,9 13,5 12,0 0,9 2,6

Textiles 4,0 1,4 3,1 1,0

Metals 4,6 0,7 2,9 0,5 0,1

Rests 16,8 3,2 16,7 16,0 19,0 13,7

Water content [%]

Calorific value [kJ/kg]

* Average before separate collection

Waste composition

- Relevance for waste management


Waste fractionGermany

[%]

China

[%]

Brazil

[%]

Thailand

[%]

India

[%]

Java

[%]

Paper/cardboard 15,7 15,0 13,1 7,7 1,5 3,5

Glass 6,4 2,0 2,4 2,0 0,2 1,7

Organic 46,9 63,9 51,4 62,0 75,2 78,5

Plastic 9,8 16,9 13,5 12,0 0,9 2,6

Textiles 4,0 1,4 3,1 1,0

Metals 4,6 0,7 2,9 0,5 0,1

Rests 16,8 3,2 16,7 16,0 19,0 13,7

Water content [%] 35 - 45 42 - 60 42 - 55 41 - 53 42 - 60 49 - 63

Calorific value [kJ/kg] 8 - 9.000 4 - 7.300 6 - 8.200 4 - 7.500 < 4.000 < 4.000

* Average before separate collection

Waste with a calorific value lower 3;500 - 4;000 kJ/kg needs additional fuel for combustion – theoretically

Minimum 6;000 kJ/kg - practically

Waste composition

- Relevance for waste management


Future effects due to measures taken against marine litter?

Waste composition

- Developments in Germany

Waste componentsDevelopment in the past 10 years

(UBA, 2018)

Future developments

(own data)

Paper

Cardboard packaging

Plastic packaging – fossil basis

Plastic packaging – biolog. basis ?

Tinplate packaging

Aluminum packaging

Glass packaging

Biowaste

Diapers


Collection systems

- Packaging Law

German Packaging Ordinance

- Dual System

• Manufacturers and companies use

„the Green Dot“ on their packaging

• Indicates: licence fee for collection,

sorting and recycling has been paid

• Consumers place empty packaging

in DSD GmbH‘s collecting

containers after use

• Waste management companies

collect and sort the material and

forward it to recycling plants


Residual

waste

Organics

Anaerobic

digestion and

composting

facility

MBT or

Incineration

Collection systems

- Germany

+ Paper Packaging+ + + Glass

Sorting

facilityGlass

manufacturing

Paper mill


100 %

MSW 44 Mio t

In 2016

66 % Separate collection

60 % Recycling (29 Mill.t)

30 % (IC, MBT, Co-processing)

Lost CO2 and Water, energy production

8 % Recycling

< 10 % landfill

Recycling

Treatment before landfill

Paper and Cardboard 7.8 Mill. t

Light packages 5.8 Mill. t

Bio-/ greenwaste 10.4 Mill. t

Glass 2.6 Mill. t

Other 2.8.Mill. t

Mass flow MSW Germany

- Separate collection


Development of recycling rates of packaging

Development of recycling rates of packagings in % 1991 - 2016

Metas

Paper and cardboard

Miscellaneous

Glass

Plastics

Wood

Total consumption


Separate collection in Germany

- Development of implementation and rates

2016:

• 66 % Collection rate

• 60 % Recycling rate

34% 66%

20

16

(Source: Based on Data of Statistisches Bundesamt,

Germany)


2,1

2,9

5,1

5,9

6,77,1

7,68,1 8,1

8,68,3 8,3 8,4 8,6 8,8 8,8

9,1 8,9 9,1 9,1 9,06

9,810,1 10,4

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

1990 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Development of composting of greenwaste andbiowaste - status 2016 (GER)

• 4,62 mill. t composting capacity of greenwaste

• 4,83 mill. t composting capacity of biowaste

• 1,98 mill. t fermentation capacity of biowaste

(Mio. t/a) Separately collected green and biowaste in GER

(Source: Based on Data of Statistisches Bundesamt, Germany)

Started in 1983


Heavy metal concentrations in waste compost with

limiting values in GER and Brazil

[mg/kg DM]

Compost

from mixed

waste

(SCT, 2014)

Compost

from separate

collection of

biowaste(BGK 2017)

Sewage

sludge (UBA, 2013)

German

Biowaste

Ordinance

Brazil

MAPA, Instr.

Normativa, N. 7

(2016)

Average Average Average20 t/3a

application

Cd 1.4 0.35 1.0 1.5 3

Cr 111 44 61 100 n.v.

Cu 158 55 380 100 n.v.

Hg 0.3 0.3 0.6 1 1

Ni 29 20 32 50 70

Pb 97 40 62 150 150

Zn 351 165 714 400 n.v.


Biotechnological processes

- Applied processes

Biotechnology

Anaerobic process Aerobic process

+


Availability of low and high technologies, as well as small and big facilities -

aerobic

SutcoSCT

Eggersmann

Small scale garden composting Drawn triangle windrow turner Motorized triangle windrow turner

Table windrow Table windrow turner Tunnel composting


- Specific properties


Eggersmann KompogasVACB

Hose/tube fermentation

(Micro fermentation plant)

Dis-continuously dry

fermentation plantContinuously dry

fermentation plant

Availability of low and high technologies, as well as small and big facilities -

anaerobic






Wide variability in investment and operating costs


Biotechnological processes in waste management

- Application fields

• High and low tech process and plant designs are available

• Large range of plant sizes – applicable for centralised and de-centralised plant

design e.g. home composting

• Great variability in staff intensity and in investment and operating costs

Specific properties

Applicable for Brazil


Development of fermentation in the field of waste management in Germany

(Source: Fachverband Biogas, 2018, 2018 data based on forecasts)

Nu

mb

er o

f p

lan

ts

Push effects:

• Renewable Energy Act (2000) and further amendments, funding instrument of renewable

energies

• KrWG (2012): Mandatory separate collection of biowaste since 01.2014

1 1 1 1 2 25 7

13 1417 19 20 21

2428 29 31

37

4347 49

59

6871

7477

80

90

100

0

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,5

3

3,5

4

4,5

5

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

mill

. t

Number of PlantFermentation Capacity


(Source: BGK 2017)

Around 5 Mill. t compost per y

Compost application in Germany

Agriculture

59 %

Hobby gardening

7 %

Substrate industry

18 %Landscaping

8 %

Divers

8 %


(Quelle: VHE, 2016)

Market price for compost products

(Price from plant)

low mid high

agricultureprivate


100 %

MSW 44 Mio t

66 % Separate collection

60 % Recycling (29 Million t)

30 % (IC, MBT, Co-processing)

Lost CO2 and Water, energy production

8 % Recycling

< 10 % landfill

Recycling


Mass flow MSW

- Germany 2016


Waste measures hierarchy in EU and Germany

- Position of MBT

Re-Use

Recycling

Energy Recovery


MBT and Incineration

Controlled Landfill with

Methane Collection and Energy Use


Methane Collection and Methane Flared

Uncontrolled Landfills / Dumps

Avoidance


General aspects - Processes for utilization of alternative fuels (AF)

Equipment and processes for utilization of fuels derived from waste

Waste incineration

(untreated waste)

Pyrolysis

(untreated/pre-

treated)

Power plants

(pretreated)

Production facilities

(pretreated)

• Grate

technologies

• Gasification

technologies

• Lignite coal

power stations• Rotary kiln(cement and lime)

• Fluidized

technologies

• Degasification

technologies

• Hard coal

power stations

• Blast furnace

(used as reducing

agent)

• Biomass

power stations

• Brick production

(used for pore

formation)


General aspects

- Average thermal substitution rate by AF

(Source: VDZ 2017 and own data)

Average thermal substitution rate by AF in the

German cement industry

• Legal enforcement of the ban for disposal of untreated waste (2005)

• High level of energy price (benchmark WTI oil)

• Technological development of the MBT

Pushing effects:

65 % in 2017


General aspects

- Use of AF in German cement production

Total mass of solid AF used in German cement production

(status quo) 2.2 mill t/a (65 % of TSR*)

Max. possible amount 3.4 mill t/a (100 % of TSR**)

Proportion of total German waste mass potential: 5.5 %, status quo

8.5 %, max. (theoretical)**

Plant in Schelking (GER) Plant in Lengfurt (GER)

*Thermal substitution rate. The thermal substitution rate is not a fixed rate. TSR is related to the current

operational production capacity (load factor)

**Max. technically feasible today approx. 90%


Fuel for combustion

chamber at calciner is

typically:• Size < 1,500 mm

• Requires minutes for

burnout

• Difficult to handle

Examples:

• HCF consisting of paper,

textiles, plastic etc. from

pre-processing MSW

• Roughly shredded, as tires,

windblades, tar paper etc.

• Biomass etc.

Fuel for kiln inlet

is typically:• Size < 800 mm

Examples:

• Whole tires

• Biomass

Fuel for calciner is

typically:• Size < 100 mm

• Requires 5 - 8s

retention time

Examples:

• Shredded tires (TDF)

• RDF mix of paper,

textiles, plastic, card

board etc.

Fuel for main burner is typically:• Comminuted or sprayable to a small

particle size

• Obligatorily free of 3D impurities, which

effect the clinker burning process

(reductive burning)

• Easy and fast to ignite

• Size < 15 - 30 mm

Examples:

• Liquid fuel, like solvents or used oil,

• Impregnated saw dust

• SRF: fine treated, 2D fraction mix of

paper, textiles, plastic, card board etc.

• Ground dry sewage sludge (DSS)

cement clinker

Quality requirements on AF for burning clinker

- Differentiated by feeding points

raw meal


Fuel

for combustion

chamber at

calciner

Fuel

for calciner

Fuel

for main burner

Grain size < 1,500 mm < 100 mm < 15 - 30 mm

LCV ~ 12 - 16 MJ/kg ~ 15 - 19 MJ/kg > 20 MJ/kg

Bulk density 0.3 - 0.5 t/m3 0.2 - 0.4 t/m3 0.1 - 0.25 t/m3

Water content < 20 - 25 % FM* < 20 - 25 % FM < 15 % FM

Ash content < 15 % DM** < 15 % DM** < 15 % DM**

2D components n.r.*** n.r. very high

3D components n.r. n.r.

Zero, when

sufficiently pre-

processed

Quality requirements on AF for clinker burning

- Main process parameters

* Fresh matter, **dry matter ***no requirements


Fuel

for pre-

combustion

chamber

Fuel

for calciner

Fuel

for main

burner

Hg* < 1.8 ppm (max.)

Cd* < 50 ppm (max.)

Tl* < 45 ppm (max.)

Cl** < 1 %**

S** Ratio S to Cl = 1 : 2

Sb, As, Pb, Cr, Co, Cu,

Mn, Ni, V, Sn***< 20,000 ppm

* Relevant for air pollution

** Depending on natural load and kiln system

*** Relevant for product quality (The elements are dust bounded, medium volatile and non-volatile)

Quality requirements on AF for clinker burning

- Main product and emission reduction parameters


Pre-processing / waste treatment

- Input analysis

Design of a proper pre-treating process: Determination of waste composition,

amount of valuables, recyclables, impurities and thermal potential.

Portion of organics

Portion of other impurities Portion of glass

Portion of metals

Packagings

Paper, cardboard

Composites

Textiles

Rubber

Portion ofhigh calorific

fraction

Source: TU Braunschweig, 2016

Exemplary MSW composition for thermal fuel potential


Biological treatment

Anaerobic / aerobic

Municipal solid waste

Fe

Landfill

35 - 45%

HCF

5 – 8%

LVC > 11 MJ/kg

Screening

100 mm Fe

> 100 mm

Reduction of oDM and H2O,

25 - 30%

> 30 - 40 mmScreening

20 – 40 mm

Sorting (optional) e.g.

• Plastic

• Paper/cardboard

• Glass

• Wood

• Textiles

< 100 mm

Filter material

MOL

Shredding

Biogas

9 – 12%

Ferrous metals

2 – 3%

HCF

20 – 38%

LVC > 11 MJ/kg


- Production of HCF, example, simplified

< 30 - 40 mm

Optional if anaerobic

digestion is integrated


Brasilia MBT

Variant 1 without compost production

Fraction (2D)

Fraction (3D)

Light Fraction (2D)

Bag Opener/ Shredder

Screening 150 & 50 mm Fe Separator Manual Separation

< 50 mm

> 150 mm50 – 150 mm

Stabilising

Fe Separator

Drying

Fe Separator

Wind Shifting

Wind Shifting

NIR Separator

Shreding < 40 mm

Alternative fuel

Calcinator

Alternative fuel Main

BurnerLandfill/ MOLRecycables

Refining for Transport

Heavy Fraction

Water and CO2

55.360 t/a31%

54.400 t/a30%

33.556 t/a19%

14.327 t/a8%

22.354 t/a12%

PVC


Brasilia BMT

Variant 2 with compost production

Composting

Screening 15 mm

15 - 50 mm

Wind Shifting

Ballistic Separator

Fe Separator

Bag Opener/ Shredder

Screening 150 & 50 mm Fe Separator Manual Separation> 150 mm

Shreding < 40 mm

NIR Separator

Drying

Fe Separator

50 – 150 mm

< 50 mm

Wind Shifting

RecycablesAlternative fuel

CalcinatorLandfillCompost

Alternative fuel Main

Burner

Leight Fraction (2D)

Leight Fraction (2D)

Heavy Fractions (3D)

Refining for Transport

Heavy Fraction

> 15 mmWater and CO2PVC

48.375 t/a27%

33.556 t/a18%

14.327 t/a8%

17.733 t/a10%

10.650 t/a6%

55.360 t/a31%


Sorting and refining

- NIR and manual sorting options available

Applications: Identification of the

materials‘ characteristics by

reflection

• Throughput: 0.75 t/h...1.5 t/h,

• Output > 80 %,

• Purities > 95 %,

• Availabilities > 95 %

NIR (=Near Infra-red spectroscopy) Manual sorting

Example sorting capacity per person

and hour

• Paper: 100 - 400 kg

• Plastic bottles: 50 - 70 kg

• Plastic foils: < 60 kg

• …



- Moisture content and combustion

0

5.000

10.000

15.000

20.000

25.000

30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

DM-Content

LCV (%)

Ho Paper 15.500 16.500 17.500

Ho Cardb. 17.500 19.000 20.500

Ho Diapers 23.000 27.300 31.000


Air temperature 30 °C

30 g H2O/m3 air

Air temperature 50 °C

82 g H2O/m3 air


- Aerobic dryer


Potencial Consumo CDR pela Indústria de

Cimento no Brasil

Base Capacidade

Instalada 2018

SU1 - Bagé

SU2 - Blumenau

SU3 - Curitiba

SE2 - JacupirangaSE1 – Grande São Paulo/Sorocaba

SE3 – Nova Friburgo

SE4 – Cachoeira ItapemirimSE5 - Barbacena

SE9 - LavrasSE7 - Uberaba SE6 – Belo Horizonte

SE10 – Montes Claros

CO1 - Goiânia

CO3 – Distr. Federal

CO2 - Cuiabá

N1 - Belém

N2 - Marabá

NE1 – Petrolina/Juazeiro NE2 - Aracaju

NE3 – Vitória da Conquista

NE5 - Mossoró

NE4 - João Pessoa

NE6 - Sobral

NE7 - Crato

50% dos 25

Clusters com

Potencial de

Reaproveitamento

Energético via CDR

para Cimenteiras

estão localizados

em Regiões de

Lixão e Aterro

Controlado


75

Aspectos legais do Co-processamento

- Brazil


Sector Electricity

[GWh]

Heat

[GWh]

Landfill gas 2,500 2,500

Waste incineration 7,000 14,000

Alternative fuels 3,800 3,110

Alternative fuels, cement industry in 2017 - 11,500

Hazardous waste incineration 460 1,360

Biomass power plant, wood bulky waste 6,000 3,700

Biogas from biowaste fermentation 752 437

Sewage sludge incineration/fermentation 200 530

Total 20,712 37,137

Energy demand Germany per year (2016) 516,000 1,361,100

Proportion energy from waste (net)* 3,1 % 2.0 %

Waste to Energy in Germany

- Gross energy production - net energy output

* 40 % own use electr., 25 % own use heat


Waste measures hierarchy in EU and Germany

- Position of MBT

Re-Use

Recycling

Energy Recovery


MBT and Incineration


Methane Collection and Energy Use


Methane Collection and Methane Flared

Uncontrolled Landfills / Dumps

Avoidance

Inc

rea

sin

g G

HG

em

iss

ion

s


• 66 Waste incineration plants * - 20,0 Mill. t cap.

• 46 MBT plants - 4,8 Mill. t cap.

• 32 RDF plants** - 6,3 Mill. t cap.

Waste treatment

- Treatment before landfill

*Exclusively grate technologies

**Exclusively grate technologies and fluidized bed technologies


Gas collection rates in Germany: about 45 % only!!!

GHG emissions from landfill


Backgrund information

- GHG emissions from landfills

8 - 15 % of GHG emissions in developing and emerging countries

originate from landfills!!!


Legal background landfill

- Europe

• Landfill ban for untreated waste since 06/2005 in Germany, Switzerland and

Austria

• From 2022 on, landfilling of untreated waste will be banned all over Europe!?

• Reduce disposal on landfills to 10 % in 2035


Emission parameter:

- respiration rate (AT4) ≤ 5 mg/g DM or

- gas formation rate (GB21) ≤ 20 l/kg DM

- TOCEluate ≤ 300 mg/l

Utilisation parameter:

- upper calorific value: ≤ 6,000 kJ/kg or

- TOCsolid: ≤ 18 % DM

• low gas emissions

• low concentrations of organics in leachate

• low concentrations of plastics, textiles and paper/cardboard

Targets of limiting values of MBT waste in Germany:

Legal background landfill

- Germany


Waste management objectives:

• Minimizing volume and mass of waste delivered to landfill

• Inactivation of biological processes → preventing landfill gas production and

settlement

• Immobilizing contaminants in the waste in order to reduce leachate emissions

• Separation of recyclable materials, Fe- and non-Fe-metals, plastics

• Production of alternative fuels e.g. RDF

Overall objectives:

Protection of

• Climate, ground water, soil

• Resources

Objectives of treatment before landfill


MBT

- Overview of MBT technologies and products

Concepts and technologies for MBT Products

MBT prior to landfill

- aerobic and anaerobic

• Biologically stabilised waste for landfilling

• Alternative fuels like RDF

• Recyclables like metals, paper/cardboard

MBT to produce alternative fuels by aerobic and

physical drying technologies

• Alternative fuels with high amount of organics

(biomass)

• Recyclables

MBT with pyrolysis (not state of the art)• Gas, oil, char

• Recyclables

• Sorting recyclables

• Alternative fuels

• Stabilised waste for

landfill

• Mass reduction



• Mass reduction



• Mass reduction



Anaerobic / aerobic


Fe

Landfill

15 - 40%

HCF

5 – 8%

LVC >11 MJ/kg

Screening

100 mm Fe

> 100 mm


25 - 30%


30 – 40 mm


• Plastic

• Paper/cardboard

• Glass

• Wood

• Textiles

< 100 mm

Filter material

MOL**

Shredding

Biogas

9 – 12%

Ferrous metals

2 – 3%

HCF*

20 – 35%

LVC >11 MJ/kg


- Flow chart, simplified

< 30 - 40 mm



*High Calorific Fraction

**Methane Oxidation Layer


Appropriate technologies are

available:

- Low and high tech


- Aerobic biological treatment step



- Anaerobic biological treatment step

Eggersmann

Appropriate Technologies are available

- Low and high tech


Mass reduction by:

• Sorting out recyclables

• Loss of biological degradation (H2O, CO2, Biogas)

MBT performance

- Mass reduction

0,0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1,0

MBT MBT + removal of recyclables

[t]

Mass prior to Treatment Post Treatment Mass


Higher installation density by

• Reduction of grain size through shredding and microbiological downsizing

• Separation of coarse grain fraction

• Separation of elastic waste components like plastics

Installation density on landfill – t/m3

00

00

00

01

01

01

01

01

installation with caterpillar installation with compactor(thin layer) lowly compacted

MBT material; installationwith compactor; thin layer;

highly compacted

[t/m³]

1,3

0,7

0,9

MBT performance

- Volume reduction on landfill due to increasing density


MBT performance

- Need of landfill volume

0,0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1,0

1,2

Untreated MBT (40% mass reduktion) MBT + removal ofrecyclables (70% mass

reduction)

[m³/t]

Required landfill volume per t waste

Compared to untreated waste, the demand for landfill capacity is

between 58 up to 79 % lower

1,1

0,23

0,46


MBT performance

- Microbiological degradation of organic matter

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

oD

M-

de

gra

da

tio

n [

%]

Time (weeks)

Degradation of organic matter (oDM)


MBT performance

- Reduction of gas potential

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

Duration of treatment (weeks)

GB

21

(l/k

g d

m)

lower area

upper area

Limit value 20

Reduction of gas potential by aerobic treatment


0

50

100

150

200

250

MSW untreated MBT material MBT material + methaneoxidation

[Nl/

t]

4

200

40

MBT performance

- Reduction of landfill gas emission

Gas reduction rate > 80 %!!!!

Reduction of landfill gas emission


Aftercare

- Period of time and costs

MBT Landfill MBT Landfill

• Gas collection not necessary

• Shorter period of time for leachate collection and treatment

Period of aftercare of untreated waste >>> 30 years

Period of aftercare of MBT pre-treated waste <<< 30 years

Lower costs of aftercare



Anaerobic / aerobic


Fe

Landfill

15 - 40%

HCF

5 – 8%

LVC < 11 MJ/kg

Screening

100 mm Fe

> 100 mm


25 - 30%


30 – 40 mm


• Plastic

• Paper/cardboard

• Glass

• Wood

• Textiles

< 100 mm

Filter material

MOL*

Shredding

Biogas

9 – 12%

Ferrous metals

2 – 3%

HCF

20 – 38%

LVC < 11 MJ/kg


- Flow chart, simplified

< 30 - 40 mm



* Methane oxidation layer


MBT output

- Use of fine grain fraction as MOL


Methane oxidation layer

(Source: Scheutz et al., 2009)

Me

than

e oxid

ation

layer > 1

20

cm

Gas diffusion

layer

Landfill body top

layer preferably

uncompressed

MBT output

- Methane oxidation layer (MOL)


Efficiency of MBT treatment and methane oxidation layer

Landfill gas - Reduction rates

0

50

100

150

200

250

MSW untreated MBT material MBT material + methaneoxidation

[Nl/

kg D

M] 200

40 4


Key Advantages of MBT

• MBT is based on existing and well known technology, like mechanical treatment

stages, composting, aerobic drying, fermentation

• MBT is a fairly flexible system approach which can be adjusted to local

conditions and treatment targets

• Because of the dynamic development of waste amount, waste composition and

the recycling markets, the recycling and treatment technology has to be highly

adaptable. This flexibility can be achieved by MBT due to:

- Its ability for modular construction, therefore easily adaptable in size

- High flexibility of treatment goals, therefore adjustments resulting from

changes in markets and demand are possible


Key Advantages of MBT

• MBT can be adjusted in order to optimise the energy yield from waste, including

the production of renewable energy via AD and heat and power via RDF

combustion

• Recyclable materials like plastics, paper or glass can be separated with

automatic and/or manual sorting systems

• MBT reduces the waste volume - this minimizes the demand for landfill capacity

which maximises the landfill’s resource and lifespan

• GHG mitigation in a very large scope is possible. Compared to other GHG

mitigation options, its costs are relatively low


Reasons for Success

• Legal requirements

• Monitoring the statutory requirements

• Economic benefits through recycling and waste treatment

• Efficient management and technologies

• Subsidy of new and sustainable technologies e.g. renewable energy generated

from waste (EEG)

• Environmental education and high acceptance in the population

• Time for development and implementation


Global tendencies

• Increasing of waste amount

• Changing waste composition

• Shortage of resources - increasing revenues for secondary resources

• Deposits e.g. for different recyclables and toxic waste like batteries

• Increasing material recycling

• Reduction of calorific value due to increasing material recycling

• Separate collection or sorting!?

• Decline in conventional incineration in favor of AF (RDF) use

• Increasing of anaerobic digestion

• Decline in MBT bevor landfill in favor to produce RDF and fuels

• Competition between material recycling and energy recovery

• Landfill ban for untreated waste

• Landfill mining

• Several new technologies


German Federal Environmental Foundation

(Deutsche Bundesstiftung Umwelt)

Acknowledgements


Prof. Dr.-Ing. Klaus Fricke

Dipl. Reg. Wiss. Cora Buchenberger

Dipl. Ing., RA Christiane Pereira

B.Sc. Bruno Aucar

Technische Universität Braunschweig

Editing

Waste and resource management in Germanyprotegeer.gov.br/images/documents/522/5. Waste management...

Documents

Transcript of Waste and resource management in Germanyprotegeer.gov.br/images/documents/522/5. Waste management...