Paper Goula Thessaloniki Final

POTENTIAL OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY PRODUCTION AND REDUCTION OF GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS IN THESSALONIKI, GREECE

N.D. CHARISIOU*,**, M.A. GOULA*

* Laboratory of Alternative Fuels and Environmental Catalysis (LAFEC), Department of Environmental Engineering, Technological Educational Institute of Western Macedonia (TEIWM), Koila, Kozani, 50100, Greece** Department of Environmental & Natural Resources Management, University of Western Greece, Agrinio, Greece

SUMMARY: Municipal solid waste (MSW) management in Greece lags behind the practices adopted by most of the EU-17 countries. The predominant method for managing MSW remains land disposal, with 92% of the total being disposed without prior treatment in both controlled landfills and open dumps, and only approximately 8% recycled at source. Thessaloniki is the second largest city in Greece, with a population that exceeds one million inhabitands (in the greater metropolitan area) and it can be considered as a typical, large Mediterranean city. The average rate of solid waste generation rate per capita per day has been estimated at 1.5 kg/cap.d, based on records of populations and weight of refuse accepted. It should be noted that the MSW produced in the prefecture, correspond to approximately 9% of the total MSW produced in Greece. The present study investigates the difference that the implementation of Directive 1999/31/EC will have on LFG production and the possible energy exploitation of Thessaloniki’s landfill sites.

1. INTRODUCTION

The Sixth Environmental Action Programme (2002-2012) sets out key environmental objectives to be attained. One of the overall aims is to decouple the use of resources and the generation of waste from the rate of economic growth (Article 2). The Thematic Strategy on Prevention and Recycling of Waste stated that ‘The long-term goal is for the EU to become a recycling society that seeks to avoid waste and uses waste as a resource. With high environmental reference standards in place the internal market will facilitate recycling and recovery activities.’ (European Commission, 2005a; 2005b). The amended Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/EC) includes new recycling targets on waste from households and construction and demolition waste and says

Proceedings Sardinia 2013, Fourteenth International Waste Management and Landfill SymposiumS. Margherita di Pula, Cagliari, Italy; 30 September – 4 October 2013 2013 by CISA Publisher, Italy

Sardinia 2013, Fourteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium

in its preamble 28 that the Directive should help move the EU closer to a ‘recycling society’, seeking to avoid waste generation and to use waste as a resource. Before 2008, the Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive of 1994 and 2004 created incentives for recycling MSW as well since a great part of packaging waste can be found in the municipal waste stream. Further, the Landfill Directive (99/31/EC) has set targets for the level of biodegradable MSW that is allowed to be landfilled according to a specific timetable.

Landfill of municipal solid waste has been the predominant option in the EU-27 + Norway and Switzerland on aggregated level for several years but this is changing. In 1995 the average landfill rate was 68% but in 2007 this had fallen to 40%. The diversion of MSW away from landfill is expected to continue, so that only 28% of MSW would be landfilled in 2020. Recycling of municipal waste is assumed to reach a level of 49% and incineration of waste with energy recovery 23% in 2020. This future distribution of landfill, incineration with energy recovery and recycling represents a business-as-usual scenario that is based on an assessment taking into account previous developments in municipal waste management and the imple-mentation of planned policy measures. Still, the projection shows that due to the considerable increase in waste amounts, a slight increase in the absolute amount of landfilled waste is seen from 2017 (ETC/SCP working paper 4/2011).

Electricity generation from landfill gas is a well established and proven technology in the EU. In most schemes the gas is burned in a reciprocating engine which turns a generating set, although a dual fuel or gas turbine can be used. Reciprocating engines tend to have a lower cost and are available in smaller unit sizes; they suffer from corrosion caused by acidic species in the landfill gas, although the lubricating oils used in spark-ignited engines do provide some protection against acidic combustion products. Gas turbines have less corrosion problems, but are more expensive and need a consistent gas quality; they also need a much higher gas delivery pressure, so that installation and operation of the gas compressors is also more expensive. There is generally no use for the power generated on the landfill site itself so that a connection to the electricity distribution network is necessary. Electricity generation plant for landfill gas is available in modular units that are installed as turnkey packages (Bates et al, 2001)

Landfill gas has too low a calorific value to enable it to be fed directly into the natural gas network, but it is possible to produce a synthetic natural gas from it. A number of techniques are available that can achieve this by removing non-combustible components such as carbon dioxide, and trace gases such as hydrogen sulphide. The main cleaning techniques include: (i) water scrubbing, (ii) solvent extraction, (iii) membrane separation, (iv) pressure swing absorption, (v) iron oxide beds, (vi) activated carbon adsorption. The gas must then be pressurised before being fed into the gas distribution network. This option is only feasible if there is an extensive natural gas distribution system, so that the gas does not have to be transported long distances from the landfill site. Thus while this option is relatively cost-effective in terms of methane abatement and would be profitable for a landfill owner, it is only feasible at landfill sites located close to a gas pipeline. This limits the applicability of this option.

The GHG direct emissions from municipal waste management consist mainly of methane emissions from landfill and energy-related GHG emissions from the collection and management of waste. There are also avoided GHG emissions from energy consumption due to recycling of secondary materials compared to the production of virgin materials, incineration or the use of collected landfill gas for energy recovery. Life-cycle information allows a calculation to be made of these avoided emissions that represent the benefit of recycling for manufacturing materials and for incineration or landfilling producing energy instead of using fossil fuels and virgin materials. At least 50 to 60 % of MSW consists of materials of biogenic origin (like food and


garden waste, wood, paper and cardboard and partly textiles). Because of the assumption that biogenic CO2 emissions are climate neutral, CO2 emissions from waste incineration plants, measured per produced energy unit, are much lower than from a fossil fuel-fired power plant (ETC/SCP working paper 4/2011).

Municipal solid waste (MSW) management in Greece lags behind the practices adopted by most of the EU-17 countries. The predominant method for managing MSW remains land disposal, with 92% of the total being disposed without prior treatment in both controlled landfills and open dumps, and only approximately 8% recycled at source. Thessaloniki is the second largest city in Greece, with a population that exceeds one million inhabitands (in the greater metropolitan area) and it can be considered as a typical, large Mediterranean city. The average rate of solid waste generation rate per capita per day has been estimated at 1.5 kg/cap.d, based on records of populations and weight of refuse accepted. It should be noted that the MSW produced in the prefecture, correspond to approximately 9% of the total MSW produced in Greece. The present study investigates the difference that the implementation of Directive 1999/31/EC will have on LFG production and the possible energy exploitation of Thessaloniki’s landfill sites.

2. PRODUCTION AND CHARACTERIZATION OF MSW

2.1 Estimation of MSW generation

For the estimation of the future municipal solid waste generation, a major factor is the population growth. Population growth is affected by both local and national conditions. It’s widely accepted that as a population increases and/or standards of living improve, waste generation increases too. In this study the compound interest method (exponential curve) is used to predict the growth of the population over the next 38 years in the Prefecture of Thessaloniki. It was estimated that the mean population’s growth rate would be equal to 7x10-3 for the period 2001-2037, which can be characterized as a slow rate. Therefore, this study predicts that the population in Thessaloniki County will increase from 1.12 million in 2012 to 1.24 million in 2037 (estimation).

For the estimation of the quantity of municipal solid wastes that will be produced, it is essential to determine the solid waste generation rate per capita per day (kg/cap.d). This figure depends on various economic and social parameters and the type of area characterization (urban, rural and tourist). The average rate of solid waste generation rate per capita per day for the Tagarades landfill was estimated at 0.8 kg/cap.d in 1987 and 1.25 kg/cap.d in 1998 (Papachristou et al., 2002). For 2005, the average rate of solid waste generation rate per capita per day was determined at 1.5 kg/cap.d, based on records of populations and weight of refuse accepted, according to the Department of Sanitary Landfill & Equipment Services, Association of Local Municipal Authorities in Thessaloniki (2005). Arguably, the production rate increases over time, as the population's living conditions improve and their consumption patterns change. Thus, the trend in the per capita generation rate can be supposed to be a linear dependence of time. Therefore, the waste generation rate per capita per day in 2037 is expected to reach 2.75 kg/cap.d, assuming that the linear dependence will continue up to that year. Interestingly, this rate is expected to reach 2.06 kg/cap.d in 2019, equalling that of the USA in 2005 (EPA, 2005).

When the generation rate per capita per day and population projections are known, the projected total MSW generation can be calculated. In 2005, the annual MSW generation was about 610 Ktn/y, while this number will be expected to be doubled in 2037. For the purpose of this study, it is assumed that the amount of total MSW generation is the same to the total MSW


landfilling.

2.2 Composition of MSW

Several composition studies have been conducted in Greece in the past years. Unfortunately, they were not carried out using the same methodology or under organized regional solid waste management planning (Alexaki and Agapitidis, 1995). Studies on MSW composition results, referring to the urban area of the Prefecture of Thessaloniki, are shown in Table 1.

According to the figures presented in table 1, the OFMSW fraction was found to be over at approximately 30% (Poulios and Papachristou, 2005). It should also be noted that the quantities of paper send for landfilling equals to 37%, despite the recycling efforts of the local and regional authorities. Therefore, biodegradables (organics and paper) account for over 50% of the total MSW, according to the latest available studies.

Table 1: MSW composition (%)

Year Organic

s

Paper Plastic Glass Metals Inert Other L.W.T.R.

2005-2006 (1) 28.8 23.2 19.2 3.6 3.5 7.1 5.8 8.82007 (2) 30.0 37.0 19.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 4.5 2.5* LWTR, leather-wood-textile-rubber (1) Adapted from Association of Local Municipal Authorities on Thessaloniki (2) Adapted from Hellenic Ministry for the Environment, Physical Planning and public Work

It would be safe enough to assume that the percentage of digestives in MSW will continue to increase in the future, despite the intensification of recycling efforts. For the purposes of the present study, the authors have used 54% as the maximum biodegradable percentage in MSW for the time period 2008-2037. Thus, the maximum biodegradable generation rate per capita per day for the Thessaloniki Prefecture and for the time period 2008-37 is estimated at 1.15 kg/cap.d while the total quantity of biodegradables for this 30 year period will expected to be 15.5 Mtn

2.3 Composition of biomass in MSW and methane generation

Table 2 shows the elemental analysis of the OFMSW in the Prefecture of Thessaloniki. The molecular type of the organic fraction was derived by using the atomic weights of these elements and was found to be C24.32 H40.6 O15.98 N. The moisture and ash content of the biodegradable wastes has an average value of 29.20% and 31.25% respectively (Association of Local Municipal Authorities in Thessaloniki, 2006). Thus the total dry weight of the organic fraction in MSW is approximately 214 kg (C24.32 H40.6 O15.98 N) / tn. Using the stoichiometry it can be concluded that the biogas produced will contain 53% of methane and 47% of carbon dioxide.

Table 2: Elemental analysis of the organic fraction

Element Atomic Weight Percentage (%) Weight (g) Moles Atomic percentage (N=1)Carbon 12.0 42.9 429 35.7 24.3Hydrogen 1.01 6.03 60.3 59.7 40.6Oxygen (1) 16.0 37.6 376 23.5 15.9


Nitrogen 14.0 2.06 20.6 1.47 1.00(1) Adapted from Tchobanoglous et al., 1993

3. DIVERSION OF THE ORGANIC FRACTION FROM THE LANDFILL

As has been mentioned above, the Directive 1999/31/EC demands that a portion of the biodegradable fraction of MSW should be diverted from land filling. The Directive envisages that this diversion will take place gradually and that the base year will be 1995. The authors of this study have determined that the MSW generation in 1995 in the Prefecture of Thessaloniki was about 405 Ktn, while 58.5 % (264 Ktn) of that figure consisted of biodegradable materials. Figure 1 shows the tn/year of the OFMSW that will be disposed of in landfills up to 2038 with and without diversion.

Figure1 Estimation of OFMSW disposed of in landfills with and without diversion (2008 – 2037)

3.1 Estimation of landfill gas production

For the estimation of the produced biogas, the authors used the Landfill Gas Emissions Model (LandGEM), which has been developed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in the USA. Τhe model is based on a first-order decomposition rate equation which estimates annual emissions from the decomposition of landfilled wastes in MSW landfills over a time period, and is expressed as seen in:

0

100.000

200.000

300.000

400.000

500.000

600.000

700.000

800.000

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Year

Bio

deg

rad

able

MS

W (

tn/y

)

after diversion

w ithout diversion

-

25%

-

25%

-

15%

jiktn

i

i

joCH e

MkLQ ,

41

1

1,0 10


where QCH4 = annual methane emission rate (m3/year); n = the number of years of waste placement; i =1 year time increment; j = 0.1 year time increment; k = methane generation rate constant, (year-1); Lo = methane generation potential; (m3/Mg), Mi = mass of solid waste placed in year, (Mg); ti,j = the age of the jth section of waste mass Mi in the ith year

The mean, annual rainfall for the area where the landfill of Mavrorahi site (western sector) is located is 619 mm, according to the Association of Local Municipal Authorities in Thessaloniki, Main Planning Study - Total Management of Western-Eastern Sector (2000), so it should be considered as semi arid. The values of the parameters that have been used in order to calculate the biogas production are K = 0.03 year-1, Lo = 102.3 m3/Mg, CH4 = 53 %

3.2 Evaluation of the Energy Potential

It is assumed that all MSW for the period 2008-2037 will be disposed of at Mavrorahi site. Figure 2 shows the total biogas production as calculated using the LandGEM method with (as provided by 1999/31/EC) and without diversion. In the former case, the reduction in the production of methane (and thus of biogas), is approximately 59.6%. Therefore, the energy potential that remains is approaching 40.84% of the total theoretical potential that would be achieved without the diversion of the organic fraction. The maximum values for methane production are reached in 2038 (24.6 and 60.7 Mm3 with and without diversion respectively), the year that the landfill will seize operating.


0,0E+00

1,0E+07

2,0E+07

3,0E+07

4,0E+07

5,0E+07

6,0E+07

7,0E+07

2000 2050 2100 2150 2200

Year

CH

4 E

mis

sion

(m3 /y

) w ithoutdivers ion

afte r diversion

Figure 2. Estimation of the rate for methane produced with and without diversion (2008 – 2037)

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Capture of landfill gas

Several practical factors influence the possibility of capturing the total volume of LFG generated. The most important are: a) LFG losses to the atmosphere through the surface, b) losses through lateral gas migration, c) pre-closure loss due to the decomposition of organic material under aerobic conditions, d) internally stored in the landfill volume and e) other losses such as wash out of organic carbon via leachate (Spokas and Bogner, 1993; Johanessen, 1999). Even with well-designed cover, few landfills are thought to recover more than 60% of the available LFG. Normally recovery rates are considered to be in the range of 40-50% by volume (Johanessen, 1999). Gas recovery efficiencies have been estimated to be in the range of 50-75%, based on measured gas extraction rates divided by modelled gas generation rates (IPCC Guidelines, 2006). There have been various attempts to measure efficiencies at gas recovery projects. However, the results vary enormously as the efficiencies reported range between 10 and 85%. A more conservative approach is to estimate total recovery at 35% of the installed capacities. Based on Dutch and US studies recovered amounts varied from 35 to 70 percent of capacity rates (IPCC Guidelines, 2006). Experience suggests that these values are closer to Greek practice and therefore have been adopted in this study. Figure 3 presents the estimated volume of methane to be captured with and without diversion.

Even though the present study is concerned with the development of biogas production for a period of 20 years, it should be mentioned that biogas generation will continue beyond this time period. It can be proven that if the landfill was to be operational from 2008 to 2037 the optimum period for biogas production would be from 2030 to 2049. In the case that the use of biogas began at the beginning of the landfill's operation, lasting for a period of 20 years (2010-2029, project 1), then the total biogas to be utilised would be 55.12% less, in comparison with the best 20 year period (2030-2049).

0,0E+00

5,0E+08

1,0E+09

1,5E+09

2,0E+09

2,5E+09

3,0E+09

3,5E+09

1970 2000 2030 2060 2090 2120 2150 2180

YEAR

Tota

l CH

4 p

roduction (m

3)

35%

70%

100%

35%

70%


Figure 3: Capture of CH4 without diversion and after diversion

It has been estimated that only 52% of the available biogas in the landfill's reservoir would be utilised in the aforementioned 40 year period. If the utilisation period was to be extended by a further 20 years (2049-2068), then this percentage would reach 76%. The biogas low heating value (LHV) containing 53% of methane has been calculated at 18 MJ/m3. The energy content of the total biogas produced in the landfill for each different scenario is presented on table 3.

Table 3 shows that the difference in the energy content with and without diversion of the OFMSW in the best and worst LFG recovery efficiencies cases respectively, is 12% for the 1st

twenty-year period και 17% for the 2nd twenty-year period, regardless of the scenario under investigation.

Table 3 Energy content of LFG that can be utilized

Without diversion After diversionCapture efficiency Worst case Best case Worst case Best caseEnergy content 1st twenty-year

period (GWh x 10-3/20y)11.8 23.5 5.17 10.3

Energy content 2nd twenty-

year period (GWh x 10-3/20y)67.0 134 55.4 55.4

4.2 Power generation potential

For the landfill under investigation, the possibility to utilise the energy produced for heating purposes cannot be considered, as the sites are located at considerable distance from possible users. Therefore, the only viable alternative scenario is electricity production.

To convert the gas flow rates into power potential it is necessary to estimate the Gross Power Generation Potential (GPGP). This is the installed power generation capacity that the gas flow can support. It does not account for parasitic loads from auxiliary systems and equipment, or for system down time. The GPGP is estimated using the following formula:

GPGP = QLFG x ECbiogas x nef

where GPGP is the gross power generation potential (MW), QLFG is the net quantity of landfill


gas (m3/s) that is captured by the collection system, processed, and delivered to the power generation equipment, ECbiogas is the biogas energy content which is approximately 18 MJ/m3 and nef is the system electrical efficiency (%), which for reciprocating IC engines the typically value is 35%. Generally, electrical efficiency increases as engine size becomes larger.

The Net Power Generation Potential (NPGP) is the Gross Power Generation Potential less the parasitic loads from compressors and other auxiliary equipment. Parasitic loads are estimated at about 2% for reciprocating IC engines, which are the most widely used technology for generating electricity at landfills. More than two-thirds of the operational landfills where electricity is generated, use this type of equipment (IPCC Guidelines, 2006).

Annual Capacity Factor (ACF) is the share of hours in a year that the power generating equipment is producing electricity at its rated capacity. Typical, ACFs for landfill gas projects range between 80% and 95% and are based upon generator outage rates (4% to 10% of annual hours), landfill gas availability, and plant design. For the purposes of this study it is assumed that the ACF is 90%.

The Annual Electricity Generated (AEG) is the amount of potential electricity generated per year, measured in MWh taking into account likely energy recovery equipment downtime and is calculated using the following formula :

AEG(MWh) = NPGP(MW) x 24 hr/day x 365 days/yr x ACF

The yearly variation of GPGP is presented at figure 4. In the case where OFMSW is diverted the maximum gross power value (for 70% recovery) can reach 6.52 MW, while if diversion does not occur, it can reach 16.07 MW. As biogas production increases over time, it becomes possible to install additional electricity generating turbines in order to achieve optimal system efficiency.

0

5

10

15

20

25

2000 2050 2100 2150

Years

Gro

ss P

ower

Gen

erat

ion

Pot

enti

al (

MW

)

(1a)

(1b)

(1)

(2a)

(2b)

Figure 4: Variation of gross power generation potential by year. (1) All wastes are disposed of at Mavrorahi without diversion, LFG recovery rate is 100%; (1a, 1b) All wastes are disposed of at Mavrorahi without diversion, LFG recovery rate is at 70% and 35 % respectively; (2a, 2b) All wastes are disposed of at Mavrorahi, with OFMSW diversion, LFG recovery rate is at 70% and 35 % respectively

For 90% annual factor capacity and 2% parasitic loads about, the total electrical energy produced that is uploaded to the grid for the scenarios under investigation is presented in table 4. The possible mean electricity production increases by 14.2% when the landfill of the western sector is the only one in operation, regardless of whether diversion takes place or not and regardless of LFG recovery rate.


Table 4: Total electricity generated under various scenarios

Without diversion After diversionCapture efficiency Worst case Best case Worst case Best caseElectricity generated 1st twenty-

year period (MWh x 10-6/20y)0.47 0.95 0.20 0.40

Electricity generated 2nd twenty-

year period (MWh x 10-6/20y)1.07 2.12 0.43 0.86

Total Electricity generated

(MWh x 10-6/40y)1.53 3.06 0.63 1.26

4.3 Energy recovery system

Determining the optimum size for a landfill gas power system requires a careful balance between maximizing electricity production and landfill gas use. Gas generation increases at an open landfill and decreases at a closed landfill. For the purposes of this study, the optimum sizing power system based on full power capacity output for whole period of each project, maximizing the total actual energy recovery without auxiliary fuel requirements. Based on the optimum scenario, figure 5 shows both the energy production per year and the energy that will be needed by the turbines for each project.

0

10.000

20.000

30.000

40.000

50.000

60.000

2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100 2120 2140 2160

Years

An

nu

al e

lect

rici

ty g

ener

ated

(M

Wh

) Potential

Project 2 required

Project 1 required

Figure 5: Annual electricity production based on optimum scenario and annual electricity needed by the turbines (both projects).

For the second project, the mean annual electricity production for the 20 year period 2030 to 2049 that can be delivered to the grid is 37x103 MWh, while for the first project is 19.5x103

MWh. It should be pointed out that for the latter project and according to the best case scenario the utilisation of the energy potential of LFG is 53%, while for the former project the figure is 86%, as shown on table 5. In total, the authors believe that it is possible to utilise 75% of the


LFG energy potential for the first 40 years while the remaining 25% would have to be burned.

Table 5: Total energy potential for the best case scenarios

Project 1 Project 2 TotalOperating years Reciprocating ICE 11 20 31LFG fuel potential (x 10-6) 0.402 0.856 1.258Electricity exported to grid (MWh x 10-6) 0.214 0.734 0.949LFG flared (MWh x 10-6) 0.187 0.122 0.309Maximum utilisation of the LFG energy potential 53% 86% 75%Reciprocating ICE sizing / power capacity 2 x 1.3MW

= 2.6 MW

4 x 1.3MW

= 5.2 MW

The reciprocating internal combustion engine represents the most commonly used technology for electric energy generation from LFG. The reason is mainly due to the compatibility of the power with the economic feasibility of the system. In fact, a suitable system size for acceptable economic revenue is between one to three MW, and the investment cost of the ICE for that size is generally reasonable. Moreover, ICEs are a consolidated technology, and the related economic risks are very low compared to the other technologies. (Bove and Lunghi, 2006).

The study for the best case scenario showed that two engines of 1,300 kW each would be viable in 1st project and four engines of 1,300 kW each would be viable in the 2nd project. These engines have a lifetime between 25 and 50 years when properly managed. Therefore, for a period of 31 years (which stretches over both projects) it is feasible to use four reciprocating engines with an installed capacity of 1.3MW each and a further two for the rest of the time period (20 years), as shown at table 5.

5. CONCLUSIONS

The gradual diversion of the organic fraction in MSW from landfill disposal that Directive 1999/31/EC provides for, will undoubtedly have an impact on the biogas energy potential of such sites. This study has investigated these impacts for an urban landfill site located in Thessaloniki Prefecture that has yet to begin operating. After quantitative and qualitative analysis of the organic fraction of MSW for the aforementioned area, it has been calculated that the biogas to be produced will contain 53% of methane and 47% of carbon dioxide, while the rate of methane generation has been calculated at about 102.3 m3 per Mg of MSW landfilled. The landfill gas to be produced has been calculated with the use of the theoretical design model LandGEM (version 3.02), which has been developed by EPA, of the USA government. It has been found that compliance with the Directive would lead to a total reduction of 59.16% in biogas production. This percentage is not affected by the different scenarios that have been under investigation. It has been calculated that for the first 42 years of the landfill's operation, the total electrical energy that will be uploaded on to the grid could reach 950x103 Mwh.

AKNOWLEDGEMENTS (unnumbered list)

The authors of this study are grateful to the Association of Local Municipal Authorities in Thessaloniki for making available data, without which this study would not have been possible.


REFERENCES (unnumbered list)

Alexaki, M., Agapitidis, I., 1995. Guide for Local Authorities: Solid Waste Management in Greek Region, Third edition, Hellenic Agency for Local Development and Local Government - E.E.T.A.A S.A.

Association of Local Municipal Authorities in Thessaloniki, 2006. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of Municipal solid wastes, second intermediate report (unpublished data).

Association of Local Municipal Authorities in Thessaloniki. Main planning study – Total management of western sector, 2000-in Greek.

Association of Local Municipal Authorities in Thessaloniki. Total management of eastern sector, 2000 - in Greek.

Bates, J., Haworth, A., Economic Evaluation of Emission Reductions of Methane in the Waste Sector in the EU Bottom-up Analysis, Final Report (Updated version), March 2001, Contribution to a Study for DG Environment, European Commission by Ecofys Energy and Environment, AEA Technology Environment and National Technical University of Athens

Bogner, J., Spokas, K., 1993. Landfill CH4: rates, fates and role in global carbon cycle, Chemosphere 26, 366-386

Bove, R., Lunghi, P., 2006. Electric power generation from landfill gas using traditional and innovative technologies, Energy Conversion and Management 47, 1391-1401.

Council Directive 1999/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the Landfill of waste (OJ L 182, 16.7.99)

Department of Sanitary Landfill & Equipment Service - Association of Local Municipal Authorities in Thessaloniki, 2005. Annual Report

Decision No 1600/2002/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 July 2002 laying down the Sixth Community Environment Action Programme, OJ 10 September 2002, L 242/1.

Energy Information Administration. Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the United States, 2003. Comparison of global warming potentials from the IPCC’s second and third assessment reports http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/ggrpt /global.html

Energy Information Administration. US Department of Energy. Growth of the landfill gas industry,1996 http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/solar.renewables/renewable.energy.annual/chap10.html

EPA, Municipal Solid Waste Generation, Recycling, and Disposal in the United States: Facts and Figures for 2005. http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/ conserve/resources/msw-2005.pdf

ETC/SCP working paper 4/2011, I. Bakas, M. Sieck, T. Hermann, F. M. Andersen, H.Larsen, Projections of Municipal Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases, August 2011, European Environment Agency

European Commission (2005a). Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the National Strategies for the Reduction of Biodegradable Waste Going to Landfills Pursuant to Article 5(1) of Directive 1999/31/EC on the Landfill of Waste. Brussels, 30.03.2005. COM(2005) 105 final.

European Commission (2005b). Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Taking sustainable use of resources forward: A Thematic Strategy on the prevention and recycling of waste, Brussels, 21 December 2005, COM(2005) 666 final.

Gidarakos, E., Havas, G., Ntzamilis, P., 2006. Municipal solid waste composition determination

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/solar.renewables/renewable.energy.annual/chap10.html

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/ggrpt%20/global.html


supporting the integrated solid waste management system in the island of Crete, Waste Management 26, 668–679

Hellenic Ministry for the Environment, Physical Planning and Public Work. http://www.minenv.gr/anakyklosi/general/general.html

IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, 2006.Volume 5: Waste, Chapter 3, Solid waste disposal.

Johannessen Lars Mikkel, 1999. Guidance note on recuperation of landfill gas from municipal solid waste landfills, Urban Waste Management, World Bank.

Joint Ministerial Decision (JMD) 50910/2727/2003 (Official Journal of the Government. OJG 1909 B/22-12-2003).

Joint Ministerial Decision (JMD) 29407/3508/02 (Official Journal of the Government. OJG 1572 B/16-2-2002).

Mor Suman, Khaiwal Ravindra, Alex De Visscher, Dahiya, R.P., Chandra, A., 2006. Municipal solid waste characterization and its assessment for potential methane generation: A case study. Science of the Total Environment 371, 1–10.

National Statistics Service of Greece http://www.statistics.gr

Papachristou, E., Darakas, E., Bellou, A., Ioannidou, D., Alivanis, K., Petridis, G., Savidis., J., 2002. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of Municipal solid wastes in Thessaloniki, Proceedings of the First Congress in Solid Waste Management for Sustainable Development in 21th Century, Hellenic Solid Waste Management Association, Athens, Greece.

Poulios, K., Papachristou, E., 2005. Qualitative and quantitative evaluation of municipal solid wastes of Thessaloniki – Economic implications, Proceedings of the Fifth International Exhibition and Congress for Environmental Technology, Heleco ’05, Technical Chamber of Greece, Athens, Greece.

Qin, W., Egolfopoulos, F.N., Tsotsis, T.T., 2001. Fundamental and environmental aspects of landfill gas utilization for power generation. Chem Eng J. 82, 157–72.

Spokas, K., Bogner, J.,Chanton, J.P., Morcet, M., Aran, C., Graff, C., Moreau-Le Golvan, Y., Hebe, I., 2006. Methane mass balance at three landfills sites: What is the efficiency of capture by gas collection systems? Waste Management 26, 516-525.

Themelis, J. Nickolas., Ulloa, A. Priscilla., 2007. Methane generation in landfills, Renewable Energy 32, 1243–1257.

Tchobanoglous, G., Theisen, H., Vigil, S., 1993. Integrated solid waste management, Chapter 4. New York: McGraw-Hill.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2002. “Technology Characterization: Reciprocating Engines”, Climate Protection Partnership Division

Zamorano M., Perez Perez J.I., Paves I.A., Ridao A.R., 2007. Study of the energy potential of the biogas produced by an urban waste landfill in Southern Spain. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 11, 909-9.

http://www.statistics.gr/

http://www.minenv.gr/anakyklosi/general/general.html

Documents

Paper Goula Thessaloniki Final