Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Building Trust. Engineering Success.
Comparison of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Waste-to-Energy vs. Landfilling
Federation of New York Solid Waste Association’s Solid Waste & Recycling Conference with Trade Show
May 19-22, 2019
Lisa Damiano, P.E. Sanborn, Head and Associates, Inc., 20 Foundry Street, Concord, NH 03301
Stephen Zemba, Ph.D., P.E.
Sanborn, Head and Associates, Inc., 187 Saint Paul Street, Burlington, VT 05401
Presentation Overview Introduction Motivation Life Cycle Assessment Tools MSW-DST Model Overview WARM Model Overview
WARM vs. MSW-DST Models Emission Factor Assessment
Final Thoughts
2
Introduction - Greenhouse Gases
3
Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere
Global Warming Potential CO2 = 1 CH4 = 25
N2O = 298
Introduction Which solid waste disposal method has lower
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions ?
Landfilling or Waste-to-Energy (WTE)
4 https://www.como.gov/utilities/solidwaste/bioreactor-landfill/
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/?page=biomass_waste_to_energy
MSW Management in USA
5 https://www.epa.gov/facts-and-figures-about-materials-waste-and-recycling/national-overview-facts-and-figures-materials
MSW Management in USA
6 https://www.epa.gov/facts-and-figures-about-materials-waste-and-recycling/national-overview-facts-and-figures-materials
MSW Management in USA
7 https://www.epa.gov/facts-and-figures-about-materials-waste-and-recycling/national-overview-facts-and-figures-materials
Where does the Carbon go?
8 Amended by Sanborn Head, http://www.sustainabilityroadmap.org/topics/wasteepa.shtml#.XKtYAZhKhaQ
Introduction Which solid waste disposal method has lower
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions ?
Landfilling or Waste-to-Energy (WTE)
9 https://www.como.gov/utilities/solidwaste/bioreactor-landfill/
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/?page=biomass_waste_to_energy
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
10 https://www.ncasi.org/technical-studies/sustainable-manufacturing/life-cycle-assessment/
Landfill or Waste-to-Energy LCA starts when the products become waste
Analysis that assesses the environmental impacts associated with all stages of a product’s life from raw material extraction through materials processing, manufacture, distribution, use, repair and maintenance, and disposal or recycling.
Life Cycle Assessment Tools Municipal Solid Waste Decision Support Tool
(MSW-DST) Waste Reduction Model (WARM) Solid Waste Optimization Life-cycle Framework
(SWOLF) Environmental Assessment System for
Environmental Technologies (EASETECH) Waste and Resources Assessment Tool for the
Environment (WRATE) And others
11
Motivation Results of a Comparative GHG Emission Assessment
by HDR Engineering on behalf of Oregon Metro
12 https://www.oregonmetro.gov/health-impact-assessment-waste-energy
MSW-DST
Development began in 1994 and became publicly available in 2013
Collaboration between USEPA and RTI International and its partners
Designed to help materials planners evaluate the economic and environmental aspects of integrated MSW management operations. Provides an estimate of the construction and operating costs of
material-management facilities. Calculates energy consumption, GHG emissions, and other
emissions, including criteria air pollutants and releases to water.
13
MSW-DST - System Boundaries
Transfer
Waste- to-energy
Collection
Ash Landfill
Materials recovery for recycling and composting
S. Thornloe, Municipal Solid Waste – Sustainable Materials Management, U.S. EPA Office of Research & Development, 9/13/2013, modified by Sanborn Head
Landfill
WARM WARM was first released in
1998 by the USEPA Developed for materials
managers to track the energy use and greenhouse gas emissions of alternative materials-management practices.
WARM calculates emissions across a wide range of material types commonly found in municipal solid waste
15
Material Types Recognized by WARM Aluminum Cans Food Waste (non-meat) Mixed Recyclables Aluminum Ingot Food Waste (meat only) Newspaper Asphalt Concrete Fruits and Vegetables Office Paper Asphalt Shingles Glass Personal Computers Beef Grains Mixed Plastics
Branches Grass PET (polyethylene terephthalate)
Bread HDPE (high-density polyethylene) Phonebooks
Carpet LDPE (low-density polyethylene) PLA (polylactic acid)
Clay Bricks Leaves Poultry
Concrete LLDPE (linear low-density polyethylene) PP (polypropylene)
Copper Wire Magazines/Third-Class Mail PS (polystyrene)
Corrugated Cardboard Medium Density Fiberboard PVC (polyvinyl chloride)
Dairy Products Mixed Metals Steel Cans
Dimensional Lumber Mixed MSW (municipal solid waste) Textbooks
Drywall Mixed Organics Tires Fiberglass Insulation Mixed Paper (general) Vinyl Flooring
Fly Ash Mixed Paper (primarily from offices) Wood Flooring
Food Waste Mixed Paper (primarily residential) Yard Trimmings
WARM Life Cycle Approach
16 U.S. EPA (2016). Documentation for Greenhouse Gas Emission and Energy Factors Used in the Waste Reduction Model (WARM)
Fate of Carbon in Landfills
Landfilled organic carbon can: Degrade to CO2
Degrade to CH4
Remain in the landfill Plastics do not degrade Cellulose degrades Lignin does not degrade
17 https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-03/documents/landfill-carbon-storage-in-warm10-28-10.pdf
Carbon Storage/Sequestration
18
WARM model includes biogenic carbon storage as anthropogenic credit MSW-DST model does not, but allows user to
adjust results to include credit Oregon Metro analysis included the credit
in both models, yet the models still predicted different results
WARM vs. MSW-DST Why are the results so different?
19
MSW-DST Evaluation: LFTGE v. WTE
20 Kaplan, P. O.; DeCarolis, J.; Thorneloe, S. (2009) Is It Better to Burn or Bury Waste For Clean Electricity Generation? Environmental Science and Technology,
43, (6), 1711-1717
WTE is 6 to 11 times more efficient at recovering
energy than LFTGE
WARM GHG Emissions: LFTGE v. WTE
Based on disposal of
1 ton of each
material
21
Wastes with WTE > LFGTEMTCO2e per ton Wastes with LFTGE > WTE
MTCO2e per ton
PS -1.6 Office Paper 1.7LDPE -1.2 Textbooks 1.7LLDPE -1.2 Steel Cans 1.6PP -1.2 Mixed Metals 1.0HDPE -1.2 Corrugated Containers 0.74Mixed Plastics -1.2 Food Waste (non-meat) 0.68PET -1.2 Food Waste (meat only) 0.68Carpet -1.1 Beef 0.68PLA -1.0 Poultry 0.68PVC -0.62 Grains 0.68Tires -0.49 Bread 0.68Dimensional Lumber -0.40 Fruits and Vegetables 0.68Leaves -0.34 Dairy Products 0.68Branches -0.33 Food Waste 0.68Medium-density Fiberboard -0.28 Mixed Paper (general) 0.64Newspaper -0.24 Mixed Paper (primarily from offices) 0.63Phonebooks -0.24 Mixed Paper (primarily residential) 0.57Wood Flooring -0.087 Mixed Recyclables 0.49Magazines/third-class mail -0.025 Mixed MSW 0.41Aluminum Cans -0.015 Asphalt Shingles 0.37Aluminum Ingot -0.015 Mixed Organics 0.36Copper Wire -0.010 Vinyl Flooring 0.35Glass -0.0073 Grass 0.31Yard Trimmings -0.0048 Personal Computers 0.21
Emission Factor Assessment Compared the MSW-DST and WARM
models for similar waste categories Assumed landfill had a landfill gas to energy
(LFGTE) facility Assumed carbon sequestration in landfill Assume default values for all other inputs Estimated the emissions from waste
categories that were comparable between the two models in carbon equivalents (C-eq) per ton of waste type.
22
23
WtE-WARM
WtE-MSW-DST
Landfill-WARM
Landfill-MSW-DST
Landfill-MSW-DST-Sequestration
-0.2
-0.15
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
Emiss
ion
Fact
or:
Tons
C-e
q / T
on W
aste
Waste: Leaves
24
WtE-WARM
WtE-MSW-DST
Landfill-WARM
Landfill-MSW-DST
Landfill-MSW-DST-Sequestration
-0.25
-0.2
-0.15
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
Emiss
ion
Fact
or:
Tons
C-e
q / T
on W
aste
Waste: Branches
25
WtE-WARM
WtE-MSW-DST
Landfill-WARM
Landfill-MSW-DST
Landfill-MSW-DST-Sequestration-0.3
-0.25
-0.2
-0.15
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
Emiss
ion
Fact
or:
Tons
C-e
q / T
on W
aste
Waste: Newspaper
26
WtE-WARM
WtE-MSW-DST
Landfill-WARM
Landfill-MSW-DST
Landfill-MSW-DST-Sequestration
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
Emiss
ion
Fact
or:
Tons
C-e
q / T
on W
aste
Waste: Grass
27
WtE-WARMWtE-MSW-DST
Landfill-WARM
Landfill-MSW-DSTLandfill-MSW-DST-
Sequestration
-0.3
-0.25
-0.2
-0.15
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
Emiss
ion
Fact
or:
Tons
C-e
q / T
on W
aste
Waste: Phone Books
28
WtE-WARMWtE-MSW-DST
Landfill-WARM
Landfill-MSW-DSTLandfill-MSW-DST-Sequestration
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Emiss
ion
Fact
or:
Tons
C-e
q / T
on W
aste
Waste: Office Paper
29
WtE-WARMWtE-MSW-DST
Landfill-WARM Landfill-MSW-DSTLandfill-MSW-DST-
Sequestration
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
Emiss
ion
Fact
or:
Tons
C-e
q / T
on W
aste
Waste: Food waste
30
WtE-WARM
WtE-MSW-DST
Landfill-WARM Landfill-MSW-DSTLandfill-MSW-DST-
Sequestration
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
Emiss
ion
Fact
or:
Tons
C-e
q / T
on W
aste
Waste: PET
31
WtE-WARM
WtE-MSW-DST
Landfill-WARM Landfill-MSW-DSTLandfill-MSW-DST-
Sequestration0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
Emiss
ion
Fact
or:
Tons
C-e
q / T
on W
aste
Waste: HDPE
So….. Which solid waste disposal method has lower
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions ?
Landfilling or Waste-to-Energy (WTE)
32 https://www.como.gov/utilities/solidwaste/bioreactor-landfill/
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/?page=biomass_waste_to_energy
Final thoughts and Next Steps There are significant differences in some of the
emission factors used in the MSW-DST versus WARM models
Additional investigation is needed into the underlying factors and assumptions of both models
Should non-degraded biogenic carbon in a landfill be treated as an anthropogenic carbon sink that can be deducted from a landfill’s potential methane emissions in calculating its net GHG impact?
33
Final Thoughts
34
35
Contact Information
Thank you for your attention!
Lisa Damiano, P.E. Project Manager
[email protected] T 603.415.6126
Stephen Zemba, Ph.D, P.E.
Project Director [email protected]
T 802.431.0539
36
WtE-WARM
WtE-MSW-DST
Landfill-WARM
Landfill-MSW-DST
Landfill-MSW-DST-Sequestration
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Emiss
ion
Fact
or:
Tons
C-e
q / T
on W
aste
Waste: Corrugated Cardboard
37
WtE-WARMWtE-MSW-DST
Landfill-WARM
Landfill-MSW-DSTLandfill-MSW-DST-
Sequestration
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Emiss
ion
Fact
or:
Tons
C-e
q / T
on W
aste
Waste: Books
38
WtE-WARM
WtE-MSW-DSTLandfill-WARM
Landfill-MSW-DSTLandfill-MSW-DST-
Sequestration
0
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.01
0.012
Emiss
ion
Fact
or:
Tons
C-e
q / T
on W
aste
Waste: Aluminum
39
WtE-WARM
WtE-MSW-DST
Landfill-WARM
Landfill-MSW-DSTLandfill-MSW-DST-
Sequestration
0
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.006
0.007
0.008
0.009
Emiss
ion
Fact
or:
Tons
C-e
q / T
on W
aste
Waste: Glass
40
1. Which Greenhouse Gas is most important in waste-to-energy plant emissions?
____ (a) Carbon monoxide (CO)
____ (b) Carbon dioxide (CO2)
____ (c) Methane (CH4)
____ (d) Formaldehyde (HCHO)
____ (e) Sulfur dioxide (SO2)
2. Which Greenhouse Gas is most important in landfill emissions?
____ (a) Carbon monoxide (CO)
____ (b) Carbon dioxide (CO2)
____ (c) Methane (CH4)
____ (d) Formaldehyde (HCHO)
____ (e) Sulfur dioxide (SO2) 3. What factor(s) influence on Greenhouse Gas emission estimates from landfills?
____ (a) Waste composition
____ (b) Treating collected landfill gas by a flare vs. an energy recovery engine
____ (c) Landfill gas collection efficiency
____ (d) Fraction of carbon in waste that does not degrade
____ (e) All of the above factors