Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report Sources and suitability of waste for RDF
___________________________________________________
Report for Re.Group and EnergyAustralia
ED 12947 26/11/2019
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential i
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
Customer: Contact:
Re.Group and EnergyAustralia Gavin Hull Ricardo Australia Pty 37 Merivale Street 4101 South Brisbane
t: +61 (0) 476 618064
Ricardo is certificated to ISO9001, ISO14001 and OHSAS18001
Confidentiality, copyright & reproduction
This RDF Feedstock Report is submitted by Ricardo Australia Pty Ltd. It may not be used for any other purposes, reproduced in whole or in part, nor passed to any organisation or person without the specific permission in writing of the Commercial Manager, Ricardo. Ricardo Australia Pty Ltd is a wholly owned subsidiary of Ricardo Investments Ltd (UK), the ultimate parent is Ricardo Plc. Ricardo Australia Pty Ltd was incorporated in April 2018.
Author:
David Woolford, Gavin Hull
Approved By:
David Woolford
Date:
26 November 2019
Ricardo Energy & Environment reference:
Ref: ED12947- Issue Number 3
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 2
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
Table of contents 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 6
2 Waste Origins ............................................................................................................. 7 2.1 New South Wales Waste Policy ........................................................................................ 7
Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2005 ...................... 8 NSW Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act 2001 ..................................... 8 NSW Energy from Waste Policy Statement 2015 .................................................... 9 Waste Classification Guidelines 2014 .................................................................... 10
2.2 Accessing Sources of Waste ........................................................................................... 11 2.3 Summary of constraints ................................................................................................... 11
3 Waste tonnages ....................................................................................................... 12 3.1 MSW Estimates ............................................................................................................... 12
Advanced Waste Treatment ................................................................................... 12 Waste by Local Government Areas ....................................................................... 12
3.2 C&I Waste Estimates ...................................................................................................... 16
4 Waste composition and RDF specification ............................................................ 18 4.1 MSW Composition ........................................................................................................... 18 4.2 C&I Waste Composition .................................................................................................. 19
Landfilled C&I waste ............................................................................................... 19 4.3 Conversion of Waste to RDF ........................................................................................... 21
RDF Specification ................................................................................................... 21 Comparator results ................................................................................................. 22 Process overview ................................................................................................... 23 Economic considerations ....................................................................................... 24
5 Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 25
Appendix 1 Waste to Energy Policy Statement Requirements ...................................... 26
Figure 1 Summary of MSW Waste Tonnages as a proportion of RDF requirements........................... 15 Figure 2 Summary of estimated C&I Waste Tonnages as a proportion of RDF requirements ............. 17 Figure 3 Typical composition of New South Wales Municipal Solid Waste stream .............................. 18 Figure 4 Suggested composition of MSW waste suitable for RDF production based on AWT residues
and RDF processing ............................................................................................................................. 19 Figure 5 Composition of C&I waste disposed, by weight .................................................................. 20 Figure 6 Composition of C&I eligible waste based on RDF processing ............................................... 20
Table 1 Resource recovery criteria for energy recovery facilities 10 Table 2 Eligible waste in Western Sydney Region for potential RDF production 13 Table 3 Eligible waste in Illawarra and Shoalhaven Region for potential RDF production 14 Table 4 Eligible waste in Southern Sydney Region for potential RDF production 14 Table 5 Eligible waste in Hunter Region for potential RDF production 15 Table 6 RDF characteristics by waste stream 21
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 3
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
Acronym Meaning
ARRT Advanced Resource Recovery Technology (SUEZ facilities only)
AWT Advanced Waste Treatment
C&I Commercial and Industrial
CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
EA Energy Australia
EfW Energy from Waste
EPA New South Wales Environment Protection Authority
ERP Energy Recovery Process
FOGO Food Organics and Garden Organics
GO Garden Organics only
LHV Lower Heating Value
MBT Mechanical Biological Treatment
MLA Metro Levy Area
MSW Municipal Solid Waste
MWOO Mixed Waste Organic Output
NCV Net Calorific Value
NSW New South Wales
POEO Protection of the Environment Operations
RDF Refuse derived fuel
RG Re.Group
SEARs Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements
SSROC Southern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils
tpa Tonnes per annum
WaRR Waste and Resource Recovery
WLRM Waste Less recycle More
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 4
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
Executive Summary Energy Australia (EA) and Re.Group (RG) are jointly investigating the feasibility of using Refuse Derived
Fuel (RDF) at the Mt Piper Power Station. The proposed concept involves firing RDF in a dedicated
boiler and integrating the produced steam into the existing plant’s steam system.
It is proposed that the RDF is produced by processing Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) and some
Commercial and Industrial waste (C&I) that would otherwise be disposed to landfill. The RDF is formed
through mechanical processing that removes unwanted items such as metals, glass and entrained
organic material.
Overall RDF throughput is between 150,000 – 250,000 tonnes per year at the thermal design range.
The NSW EfW policy requires that specific collection and processing systems are in place for any
source waste that specifically targets the removal of organics and prioritises recycling prior to any
energy recovery activity.
This study has identified in excess of 470,000 tonnes per annum of MSW and at least 865,000 tonnes
per annum of C&I suitable for RDF processing. A summary of the estimated waste available from MSW
and C&I sources is provided below and indicates the relative market scale of the RDF demand based
on the area analysed.
The policy and operational model for EfW in NSW favours the production of RDF for the following
reasons:
• Restrictions on the availability of waste, based on separate collections for organics,1 provides
waste with lower moisture content and a higher calorific value.
• RDF production provides flexibility across the market with suppliers able to develop
infrastructure to meet local demand, stimulate additional energy opportunities and potentially
exploit export market opportunities.
• Reduce waste to landfill.
1 Only LGA’s with food collections can send 100% of their waste for processing
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 5
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
There is a huge number of global reference facilities, using equipment from a large number of different
suppliers, that are configured to produce RDF to various specifications. It is our opinion that this
experience and equipment is readily transferable into this project.
Revenue is provided by a gate fee at the RDF processing facility. Processing costs for RDF production
are fixed by factors such as electricity, transportation and operational and maintenance requirements.
Disposal costs are fixed by gate fees at the thermal treatment plant. Any processing rejects that require
disposal to landfill will also attract a cost.
RDF suppliers are faced with financial drivers associated with the costs of processing MSW into RDF
or disposing the MSW to landfill. Therefore, any landfill levy will be integral to moving material away
from landfill and up the waste hierarchy into a different disposal facility. This report does not look to
forecast, or look at the advocacy of the landfill levy, however this will remain an important factor in the
cost benefit analysis for suppliers.
This report has not examined the financial models associated with the project to examine the flexibility
to offer a range of disposal gate fees to suppliers. There are however, a growing number of reference
facilities producing a range of feedstock (RDF/Solid Recovered Fuel (SRF)/Processed Engineered Fuel
(PEF)) that prove the concept of viability of engineering, procuring and operating a facility capable of
economically producing feedstock to specification.
The processing design used to produce RDF will vary from facility to facility. However, Quality Assurance and Quality Control processes, which have been developed, will need to be consistently applied to ensure fuel specifications is consistently met.
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 6
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
1 Introduction RG and EA are jointly investigating into the feasibility of using RDF for the Mt Piper Power Station
situated in the Central West of New South Wales (NSW). The facility is proposing to use steam from a
boiler in a dedicated plant, rather than blending the RDF with coal in the existing power station.
The project is believed to bring many benefits to the community by providing additional baseload power
and improving NSW waste management infrastructure for MSW and C&I waste that would otherwise
be disposed of to landfill.
This report presents a situational scan of the availability and suitability of waste feedstock for the project
and a high-level commentary on the technical and financial suitability of the processing technology. A
review of policy and operational constraints is included.
Whilst this paper seeks to addresses the Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements
(SEARs)2 in context of the waste feedstock, it does not provide any comment on the waste types of
quantities generated during the construction or operation of the Mt Piper energy recovery process
(ERP).
Given the requirements of the NSW Energy from Waste Policy Statement (that defines waste eligibility
criteria, technical criteria, thermal criteria and resource recovery criteria), this report provides the initial
evidence base to confirm that the proposed project will comply with the designated requirements.
Waste to energy projects are a sensitive issue as highlighted by the 2018 senate inquiry3 and the
recommendations from the Legislative Council Energy from Waste Technology Inquiry established in
20174. Whilst the policy may be updated in the future, there is currently strict requirements regarding
the need for reference facilities and eligibility criteria which are dealt with in a separate Best Available
Technology report.5
The Project’s dedicated boiler has a nominal design capacity of 200,000 tonnes of RDF per year and
power generation of 30MW. In practice, it is the thermal capacity of the boiler that is fixed, rather than
the mass throughput. If the fuel is at the lower end of the design range for calorific value, then the
tonnage of fuel must increase to offset this, with a maximum tonnage of 250,400 tonnes per year, or
31.3 tonnes per hour. At the highest calorific value, the maximum tonnage reduces to 150,000 tonnes
per year, or 18.8 tonnes per hour. However, the design tonnage remains 200,000 tonnes per year, or
25 tonnes per hour. For the purposes of this RDF Feedstock Report the design figure has been used
as a best estimate to assess the impacts.
2 https://www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/major-projects/project/11541
3
https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Environment_and_Communications/WasteandRecycling/
Report
4 https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/committees/inquiries/Pages/inquiry-details.aspx?pk=2436#tab-
reportsandgovernmentresponses
5 Ricardo ED13034_BAT Assessment
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 7
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
2 Waste Origins The Mt Piper ERP will source waste in the form of pre-processed RDF from a combination of the MSW
and C&I sources. The RDF feedstock will be sourced from a number of suppliers, as most waste transfer
and processing facilities do not operate at the required annual tonnages. Using RDF from a mixed
supply base will require some blending of feedstocks introducing a potential risk to the consistency of
the RDF specification. To manage this, it will be necessary to provide a legal framework for delivery to
specification through a system of Fuel Supply Agreements with third parties to ensure a tight level of
control (see Section 4). There might be scope for consolidating RDF production into one large
processing plant to facilitate tighter control on RDF specification if feedstocks are too varied.
Ricardo recommends that RDF production will be most practical to implement at existing waste
management facilities, where the waste streams, tonnages and compositions are known and
understood. While not currently active, there are several facilities that have either already obtained
Development Consent or have assessed the viability to include RDF production as an ancillary process
to their existing operations (see Section 4.2). The project will rely on third parties constructing suitable
facilities and sufficient time to develop the skills and knowledge required to process waste streams into
an RDF specification. The developer would have to agree and monitor RDF specification and waste
sourcing as part of a fuel supply agreement, and also as part of the Quality Control process structured
to meet or exceed all policy and operation requirements. Ricardo have experience in the design,
construction, commissioning and operation of a number of different types of MRF facilities and our
experience and knowledge leads us to encourage the close management of this type of development
in order to ensure that facilities will be successfully constructed. Because the RDF producing facilities
are not yet constructed, it presents a compelling opportunity to influence the design and construction of
any facilities to meet the fuel supply agreements. Projects under development in the EU that require
RDF to specification now conduct due diligence deep into the supply chain to ensure fuel can be
supplied to specification and that existing infrastructure is capable of production for the duration of any
fuel supply agreement.
Mt Piper ERP will look to source waste from a wide catchment area, which will primarily be defined by
the Metro Levy Area (MLA) as this provides a comparable baseline disposal costs per tonne (based on
the Waste Levy at $143.20 per tonne (for the MLA in 2019/20 and subject to an annual CPI rise) for
landfill waste. Waste sources will also be constrained by travel time and the associated transport costs
however, this is influenced by the willingness of waste management companies to pay a premium for
landfill diversion and what existing capacity there is for back-hauling or for bulk transport. An example
is through the Veolia Clyde Transfer Terminal which handles up to 500,000 tonnes of MSW and C&I
waste per year and transporting this to the Woodlawn Bioreactor Landfill (20% of Sydney’s Putrescible
waste6) in Goulburn, approximately 200km by train. This presents significant backhaul capacity for
processed waste (from the MBT facility) and a potential RDF supply.
2.1 New South Wales Waste Policy
In NSW, there are key policy objectives outlined in the State’s waste legislation. The Protection of the
Environment Operations Act 1997 (POEO Act) sets the framework to ensure that human health and the
environment are protected from the inappropriate use of waste. Effectively, alongside the POEO Act is
the NSW Waste Classification Guidelines which provide details and guidance in the classification of
waste into groups that pose similar risks to human health and the environment according to classes of
waste defined in the POEO Act.
The Protection of the Environment Regulation 2014 was developed after a review of the State’s waste
management framework and was delivered in 2014. This set out to improve the NSW EPA’s ability to
6 https://www.veolia.com/anz/our-services/our-facilities/transfer-stations/clyde-transfer-station
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 8
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
protect human health and the environment through key changes and amendments to thresholds for
environment protection licences and reforms to the waste levy system.
The Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act 2001 (WaRR Act) is another key piece of legislation
which aims to ensure that waste management is undertaken in accordance with the waste hierarchy in
that resource management options occur in the following priority order:
1. avoidance of unnecessary resource consumption.
2. resource recovery (including reuse, reprocessing, recycling and energy recovery).
3. disposal.
Where waste cannot be avoided or products reused, various recovery technologies are available to
maximise resource efficiencies and increase the sustainability of our communities, businesses and
industries. The NSW Energy from Waste Policy Statement sets out the policy framework and
overarching criteria that apply to facilities in NSW proposing to thermally treat either, or both, waste or
waste-derived materials for the recovery of energy and in doing so provides regulatory clarity to industry
and the community.
Overall, these legislative and policy tools guide waste management and resource recovery practices
across the state and outline requirements for waste infrastructure development, processing and
disposal.
Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2005
While the POEO Act outlines the framework to protect human health and the environment from the
misuse of waste the Waste Regulation outlines requirements of waste tracking, transportation and
exemption of waste classifications. Regarding EfW facility development, the application of the
Regulation includes specifications for resource recovery exemptions on certain waste materials
produced. Under Clause 51A of the regulation if it can be demonstrated that any waste material
produced from preparation of RDF for land application i.e. organics, (a list of current exemptions is
available on the NSW EPA’s website7) is fit-for-purpose and poses minimal risk of harm to the
environment then it may be considered for a resource recovery exemption.
The Regulation sets out the requirements for the transportation and receiving of waste and details how
waste would be treated, stored, used, disposed and handled on site. It also addressed the potential
impacts associated with these issues, including current and future offsite waste disposal methods to
address environmental impacts of waste.
NSW Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act 2001
The WaRR Act promotes waste reduction and best use of resources in NSW as a priority, promoting
waste avoidance and resource recovery to achieve a continual reduction in waste generation. The
WaRR Act includes provisions for the development of a State-wide strategy and programs, promotes
extended producer responsibility for the lifecycle of a product and for industry actions to reduce waste.
With the prioritisation of waste avoidance, and the use of the strategy by Councils and Industry to set
waste management efforts and targets, there are restrictions on the sources of MSW and C&I waste for
feedstock. The Act gives rise to the WaRR Strategy which outlines the following targets:
• By 2021–22, reduce the rate of waste generation per capita.
• By 2021–22, increase recycling rates for:
o municipal solid waste from 52% (in 2010–11) to 70%.
o commercial and industrial waste from 57% (in 2010–11) to 70%.
7 https://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/your-environment/recycling-and-reuse/resource-recovery-framework/current-orders-and-
exemption
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 9
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
• By 2021–22, increase the waste diverted from landfill from 63% (in 2010–11) to 75%.
The aims of the Act encourage and drive councils and industry to increase resource recovery, diversion
of waste from landfill and seek to minimise waste disposal via landfill. The Mt Piper ERP option is able
to contribute to the third target above - 75% diversion from landfill target for 2020-21.
An implication for any RDF supply options are that all activities should be undertaken consistently with
aims, objectives and guidance in the WaRR Act. All measures implemented to ensure consistency with
the Act are to be identified and documented and reported in the Environmental Impact Assessment.
NSW Energy from Waste Policy Statement 2015
The NSW Energy from Waste Policy Statement (EfW Policy Statement) outlines the policy framework
and technical criteria that apply to facilities proposing to recover energy from waste in NSW. The scope
of the policy statement covers all facilities undertaking the thermal treatment of any waste, or waste-
derived materials, where thermal treatment means the processing of wastes by combustion, thermal
oxidation, thermal or plasma gasification, pyrolysis and torrefaction. The statement is a two-tiered risk-
based framework where waste or waste-derived materials that pose a minimal risk of harm to human
health and the environment due to their origin, low levels of contaminants and consistency over time
will be categorised as eligible waste fuels.
The accompanying Eligible Waste Fuels Guideline 2016 should be read in conjunction with the NSW
Energy from Waste Policy Statement which lists the following segregated waste streams that are eligible
waste fuels:
• biomass from agriculture.
• forestry and sawmilling residues.
• uncontaminated wood waste.
• recovered waste oil.
• organic residues from virgin paper pulp activities.
• landfill gas and biogas.
• source-separated green waste (used only in processes to produce char).
• tyres (used only in approved cement kilns).
The Eligible Waste Fuels guideline details the definitions of eligible waste fuels including any additional
conditions of each eligible fuel source, characterisation and testing requirements and guidance on
resource recovery order or exemption conditions and applications.
For Mt Piper ERP it is proposed that RDF production will comprise of general mixed waste from MSW
and C&I sources. As such under the EfW Policy Statement any facilities proposing to thermally treat
any waste or waste-derived materials that are not listed as an eligible waste fuel must meet the
requirements of an energy recovery facility8 (a summary of these requirements can be found in
Appendix 1, under technical and thermal efficiencies).
Key elements of the EfW Policy statement are to:
• Ensure minimal risk of harm to human health and the environment, which is primarily
achieved through standards applied at the EfW facility, specifying combustion conditions and
requiring ‘best available technology’ is used for emissions control;
• Ensure ‘higher order’ waste management options are not undermined, which is primarily
achieved through the introduction of Resource Recovery Criteria that restrict the maximum
8 Detailed in Section 4 of the EfW Policy Statement
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 10
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
percentage of the waste stream that can be directed to energy recovery, based on the type of
waste and style of collection system used.
The EfW Policy Statement recognises that the thermal treatment of waste provides an opportunity to
recover the embodied energy within waste, offset the use of non-renewable energy sources and avoid
methane emissions from landfill. However, these outcomes are contingent on ensuring that any energy
recovery proposals represent the most efficient use of the resource and are achieved with no increase
in the risk of harm to human health or the environment. The statement outlines the criteria for source
separation and types of waste streams considered in sourcing feedstock for EfW facilities as outlined
in Table 1.
There is also scope for sourcing waste residues from:
• MRF processing of up to a maximum of 10% by input weight.
• Organics processing facilities, up to a maximum of 5% by weight for garden organics and 10%
by weight for food only or food and garden organics.
The EfW Policy Statement further details the requirement to outline procedures to control inputs
including contingency measures if inappropriate or contaminated materials are identified which apply
to the Mt Piper proposed development (see Section 4.3.3).
Table 1 Resource recovery criteria for energy recovery facilities9
Mixed Wastes
Waste Stream Processing facility % residual waste allowed for energy
recovery
Mixed municipal waste
(MSW)
Facility processing mixed MSW where a
council has separate collection systems
for dry recyclables and food and garden
waste
No limit by weight of the waste stream
received at a processing facility
Facility processing mixed MSW where a
council has separate collection systems
for dry recyclables and garden waste
Up to 40% by weight of the waste stream
received at a processing facility
Facility processing mixed MSW where a
council has a separate collection system
for dry recyclables
Up to 25% by weight of the waste stream
received at a processing facility
Mixed Commercial and
industrial waste (C&I)
Facility processing mixed C&I waste Up to 50% by weight of the waste stream
received at a processing facility
Facility processing mixed C&I waste
where a business has separate collection
systems for all relevant waste streams
No limit by weight of the waste stream
received at processing facility
Mixed Construction and
demolition waste (C&D) Facility processing mixed C&D waste
Up to 25% by weight of the waste stream
received at a processing facility
Waste Classification Guidelines 2014
Waste Classification Guidelines provide direction on identifying and categorising waste according to
assigning material into groups that pose similar risks to the environment and human health. The
guidelines outline classification groups and enable waste to be managed according to that classification.
These guidelines provide information to assist in the description of the classes and quantities of the
waste that is identified to be thermally treated at the facility. This requirement will need to be addressed
in any supplier agreements and embedded in the Quality Assurance process.
9 Adapted from the NSW Energy from Waste Policy Statement 2015
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 11
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
2.2 Accessing Sources of Waste
Available waste feedstock suitable for RDF production are defined in the EfW Policy Statement (see
Section 2.1.3) however to access these sources operators of RDF producing facilities will also have to
evaluate their relative ‘social licence’ to operate. Existing facilities will have to balance a new RDF
offtake with current operations whereas new facilities will have to integrate the EfW benefits from
scratch. As project proposals progress from feasibility to detailed development assessment, genuine
engagement and dialogue with the community and stakeholders should be entered into to make certain
any such planning consent and other approval authorities are provided with accurate and reliable
information. Community consultation and the ‘good neighbour principle’ extends to aspects of operation
including waste deliveries and operating hours as well as emissions and resource recovery outcomes.
The approach taken for the Mt Piper ERP specifically targets supply options that have already sought
high resource recovery outcomes, such as:
• Pre-sorted municipal solid waste with organic components removed.
• Pre-sorted Commercial and Industrial Waste.
Where such waste streams are currently landfilled the recovery of energy has both environmental
benefits and a greater opportunity for social license. It is important that these benefits are communicated
across the supply chain and the industry partners that will be producing and supplying RDF.
2.3 Summary of constraints
Policy, resource recovery and technical constraints have been reviewed for the development and
operation of the proposed Mt Piper facility. Identified risks and opportunities include:
Policy
Conforming to NSW Energy from Waste Policy Statement
2015
Risks
Unexpected policy changes and regulatory updates impacting future markets
Opportunities
Separate collections improve environmental benefits of RDF supplyImprove market confidence
Improved social license
Clarity for stakeholders (waste suppliers)
Resource Recovery
Resource recovery priorities in accordance
with WaRR Act 2001, prioritising higher order
recovery
Risks
Reducing total amount of waste available
Introduction of competing treatment technologies
Opportunities
Higher quality supply
More favourable disposal option comparative to landfill
Technical
Processing requirements to achieve facility
specification
Risks
Processing becomes inefficient or redundant
May require additional investment to meet future specification
Lead to an RDF product with CV values outside operational limits
Opportunities
Additional recovery through removal of recoverable material i.e. metals and entrained organics
Improved capture and controlled disposal of unaccepted materials such as hazardous or radioctive materials and explosives etc.
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 12
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
3 Waste tonnages The estimated input tonnages for the Mt Piper ERP are 200,000 tonnes per year at a Net Calorific Value
(NCV) of 15MJ/kg for the RDF supplied. The supply of RDF can be increased to a maximum of 250,000
tonnes per year to meet the plants energy demands if the NCV is lower than 15 MJ/kg.
The anticipated mix of eligible waste will be 50% MSW and 50% C&I waste by tonnes, this will be
sourced from a number of aggregation points or waste management facilities, the exact blend of waste
will be dependent on the quality of supply from any or all of these sources.
All RDF waste sources identified in Sections 3.1 and 3.2 are eligible waste fuels as set out in the EfW
Policy Statement (see Section 2.1.3).
To estimate the potential supply of waste for RDF production Re.Group will prioritise locations in the
Greater Sydney area, but this can extend northwards to the Hunter, to the Illawarra south of Sydney
and the Central Tablelands.
3.1 MSW Estimates To capitalise on sources of eligible waste fuels, Re.Group will prioritise lower order waste fractions,
those where resource recovery has already been maximised, such as the reject stream from existing
Advance Waste Treatment facilities such as MBT. This will be supplemented with new fuel processing
and preparation facilities able to access MSW waste from collections that utilise source segregation
and is managed through existing transfer facilities. Whilst discussion have been had with various parties
none of the processors or LGA’s below have committed to the project.
Advanced Waste Treatment
There are two Advanced Waste Treatment facilities in the Western Sydney Region.
• Global Renewables, UR-3R facility, Eastern Creek (MBT) operated under contract to SUEZ as
an ARRT facility,
• SUEZ, SAWT facility, Kemps Creek (MBT)
And from outside the region, servicing Sydney Metro, Illawarra and Hunter Councils:
• Veolia, Woodlawn MBT facility, Woodlawn
• SUEZ ARRT facility, Spring Farm (Mechanical pre-treatment area for removal of Non-organics,
organics sent to Kemps Creek)
• SUEZ ARRT facility, Raymond Terrace (MBT)
Based on commercial in confidence discussions with operators of existing AWTs in the western Sydney
region, we understand there was at least 150,000 tonnes of AWT reject material available for RDF
production that currently goes to landfill in the western Sydney region in 2018/19. Changes to the
exemption process associated with mixed waste derived organic outputs (MWOO), which took effect
from October 2018, are likely to have increased the residual from existing AWTs that could potentially
be considered for production into RDF.
Waste by Local Government Areas Sydney Metro councils are divided into a series of Regional Organisation of Councils (ROC). Ricardo
has previously modelled waste projections for three of the four ROC’s listed below and has estimates
of the eligible MSW from 2020/21 for the member councils. The total annual waste tonnages are based
on data submitted by each LGA to the EPA as part of the WARR survey. Future forecasts for 2020/21
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 13
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
waste tonnages have been calculated from projected household growth10 and a rolling average of the
waste generated per household. These are detailed in the following tables. The proportion of total waste
considered suitable for RDF is based on the applicable collection system used by each council and the
associated Resource Recovery Criteria in the NSW EfW Policy.
Western Sydney Region
Western Sydney is the nearest area for sourcing waste for RDF supply with a rapidly growing
population, diminishing landfill capacity and significant existing waste infrastructure. Based on existing
data sources11, an assessment of the available waste across the Western Sydney ROC has been
conducted and summarised in Table 2. All councils included are in the MLA.
Table 2 Waste in Western Sydney Region suitable for potential RDF production12
Councils
Applicable
Collection /
treatment
Services
2020/21 Total
Waste (tonnes
per year)
RDF
Suitable
Waste
(tonnes per
year)
Blacktown
Blue Mountains
Cumberland
Fairfield
Hawkesbury
Liverpool
Parramatta
Penrith
The Hills
AWT
GO
GO & AWT
AWT
GO
GO
GO
FOGO & AWT
GO
Kerbside
General Waste
collection (MSW)
415,500 160,000
Council owned landfills are in operation in the Blue Mountains and Hawkesbury, there is one privately
operated putrescible landfill operated by Suez at Lucas Heights accepting waste from The Hills.
Cumberland sends waste to Woodlawn Bioreactor Landfill via Clyde Transfer Station and Penrith send
their organics depleted waste to SUEZ Kemps Creek Landfill (non-putrescible).
Illawarra and Shoalhaven Region
The councils in the Illawarra and Shoalhaven region have three landfills at Shellharbour, Shoalhaven
and Wollongong. These landfills have between less than 15 years capacity at current disposal rates
and are operated to conserve future capacity, as such the introduction of FOGO service in Shellharbour
and Kiama and the push for AWT in Shoalhaven are to extend their operational life. Further diversion
for energy recovery, if economical, may be a desirable option for this region. All councils are in the MLA.
10 Future household projects sources from the Australia Bureau of Statistics
11 WSROC Options Study 2014-15 Jacobs 2016
12 Ricardo data model based on NSW EPA WARR data
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 14
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
Table 3 Waste in Illawarra and Shoalhaven Region suitable for RDF production13
Councils Applicable Collection / treatment
Services 2020/21 Total Waste (tonnes per year)
RDF Suitable Waste (tonnes per year)
Kiama FOGO
Kerbside General Waste collection (MSW)
109,300 51,500
Shellharbour FOGO
Shoalhaven AWT
Wollongong GO
Wingecarribee GO
Southern Sydney Region
The Councils in Southern Sydney currently manage 20% of all NSW waste. The following summary
provided in Table 4 is based on 2020/21 waste projections report in the Southern Sydney Regional
Organisation of Councils (SSROC) Regional Waste and Resource Recovery Strategy. All councils are
in the MLA.
Table 4 Waste in Southern Sydney Region suitable for RDF production14
Councils
Applicable
Collection /
treatment
Services
2020/21 Total
Waste (tonnes
per year)
RDF
Suitable
Waste
(tonnes per
year)
Bayside
Burwood
Canterbury Bankstown
Canada Bay
City of Sydney
Georges River
Inner West
Randwick City
Sutherland Shire
Waverley
Woollahra
Most
councils
operate a
GO
collection
Kerbside General
Waste collection
(MSW)
399,600 159,000
The SSROC WARR Strategy identified only two disposal options for the region, Suez, Lucas Heights
Landfill which is expected to be operational until 2037 or Veolia’s Woodlawn15 Bioreactor landfill
adjacent to the MBT facility which could take waste until 2047 and beyond. Avoidance of operational
and commercial risks with such a duopoly presents an opportunity for RDF production as an alternative
disposal route for eligible waste.
Hunter Region
The councils in the Hunter Region operate a total of 6 landfill sites likely to be operational in 2020/21.
Port Stephens is the only council that sends waste for treatment at the SUEZ ARRT facility in Raymond
13 Ricardo data model based on NSW EPA WARR data
14 SSROC WARR Strategy 2014-2017-2021
15 Woodlawn in Approximately 250km from central Sydney and is service by rail
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 15
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
Terrace. Cessnock, Lake Macquarie, Newcastle and Port Stephens are in the MLA, Dungog, Maitland,
Muswellbrook, Singleton and Upper Hunter are in the Regional Levy Area (RLA).
Table 5 Waste in Hunter Region suitable for RDF production
Councils Applicable Collection / treatment
Services
Total Waste (2020/21) tonnes per year
Eligible Waste fuels (tonnes per year)
Cessnock GO
Kerbside General Waste collection (MSW) MLA
170,900 97,100
Lake Macquarie FOGO
Maitland GO
Newcastle GO
Port Stephens AWT
Dungog No organics
Muswellbrook GO Kerbside General Waste collection (MSW) RLA
17,000 5,700 Singleton GO
Upper Hunter Shire No organics
Summary of MSW Estimates
Based on the estimates of wastes suitable for RDF production across the four regions set out in Table
2-5 there is potentially 470,00016 projected tonnes per year in 2020/21. There is an additional 104,80017
tonnes of clean-up waste projected for 2020/21, in Western Sydney alone, that can also be sent for
processing and RDF production.
To source 50% of the ERP’s RDF from MSW sources would require securing 21% of the available
waste feedstock in the areas analysed. In reality this could be achievable by working with 3 to 4 specific
sources. The likelihood of additional councils wishing to divert a proportion of waste to achieve better
recovery rates is also highly likely as experienced with the capacity demand across the AWT sector.
Figure 1 Summary of MSW Waste Tonnages as a proportion of RDF requirements
16 Ricardo Model from NSW EPA WARR data and the SSROC WARR Strategy 2014-2017-2021
17 Ricardo Model for WSROC
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 16
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
3.2 C&I Waste Estimates
C&I tonnage data exists at a State level, however there is very little data available at a more granular
level as this isn’t regularly reported by the EPA and waste management sector operates across LGA
boundaries.
It is estimated that 1.53 million tonnes of C&I waste were disposed of to landfills in the regulated areas
of NSW in 2017-1818 and has seen a decline since 201519. Of this amount, 77% was disposed in the
Metropolitan Levy Area (formerly Sydney Metropolitan Area and Extended Regulated Area) 6% in the
Regional Levy Area (formerly Regional Regulated Area) and 18% in the Non-Regulated Area. This
indicates that there is minimum of 865,000 tonnes of C&I derived eligible waste in the MLA.
The most current estimate of the NSW C&I recycling rate (2012/13) is 61%20. This gives an estimated
total C&I annual generation of 4.7million tonnes. Other estimates of 2015 C&I generation have been
calculated at 5.7million tonnes per year21. The introduction of the Queensland waste levy in 2019/20
Queensland is also set to stabilise the NSW C&I market with less waste exported to Queensland for
disposal.
Several major C&I resource recovery facilities were proposed and have been granted funding through
the Waste Less Recycle More (WLRM) program, including three very large C&I processing facilities
proposed for the Western Sydney (Veolia, Dial-a-Dump and Resource Co). The WLRM funded facilities
have the potential to divert over 390,00022 tonnes per year of C&I waste from landfill, from a total of 1.6
million of throughput capacity. Of the projects proposed the materials diverted to RDF supply comprised
88,000 tonnes per year.
In a study commissioned by the NSW EPA and completed by KMH Environmental in 201523, it was
estimated an additional 494,000 tonnes per year of energy recovery capacity would be need in 2020/21.
Independent investigations and discussion with the major C&I waste contractors have indicated that
approximately 800,000 tonnes per year of eligible C&I waste are available for RDF production, see
Figure 2.
18 NSW EPA Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Strategy Progress Report 2017-18 EPAhttps://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/-
/media/epa/corporate-site/resources/recycling/19p1690-warr-strategy-progress-report-2017-
18.pdf?la=en&hash=89CD40E994CC383F6A1E23512714FD3FF5C69C6C
19 NSW EPA (2016). Data Unit Waste Contribution Monthly Reports. Unpublished data
20 NSW EPA (2016) NSW Generation Summary 2012-13 v0.3 (unpublished)
21 KMH (2015). NSW Resource Recovery Infrastructure Needs Analysis. Unpublished data.
22 Source: NSW EPA WLRM Infrastructure Data for Major Resource Recovery, Organics, Resource Recovery Facility Expansion
and Enhancement and Priority Waste grantees
23 Source: KMH Environmental (2015) NSW Resource Recovery Infrastructure Needs Analysis
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 17
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
Figure 2 Summary of estimated C&I Waste Tonnages as a proportion of RDF requirements
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 18
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
4 Waste composition and RDF specification
4.1 MSW Composition
Typically, the overall composition of MSW generated by residents does not vary significantly however,
with the introduction of alternative collection schemes designed to reduce both the recyclable and
organic content there could be some significant differences between LGA’s. A reduced organic content
can help produce a higher specification RDF as there is a natural reduction in the moisture content that
can have the effect of increasing CV. Conversely, the removal of recyclate such as card and plastic
will reduce CV. The production of RDF to a specification can be complex, however the net effect of
both policies outlined above is to reduce the overall volumes of MSW to process into RDF, which
provides suppliers a narrower window of tolerance within the original waste stream from which to
produce fuel.
A typical NSW MSW waste stream is outlined in Figure 2. This has between 35-45%24 food organics
and 7-15% garden organics by weight. This can be reduced to between 20-30% by weight with the
introduction of a FOGO collection.
Figure 3 Typical composition25 of New South Wales Municipal Solid Waste stream
Waste rejects from the AWT processes are altered further with significant removal of recyclable
materials, organics and moisture. For the purposes of this feedstock evaluation the composition is
24 But can be in excess of 50%
25 NSW EPA WARR survey data from 2014-15. Based on audit data from all council submission in the Metro Levy Area (a audit
of 8806 bins)
Total Paper and Paper
Products, 21%
Food Organics, 38%
Garden & Other Organics,
15%
Total Glass, 3%
Total Plastics, 10%
Total Ferrous, 2%
Total Non-Ferrous, 1%
Total Hazardous,
1%
Total Building Waste, 2% Total Earth
Based, 3%
Total E-waste, 1% Total
Miscellaneous, 3%
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 19
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
summarised in Figure 4. The following elements will need to be removed from this stream to minimise
ash levels:
Removal of entrained organics (a reduction of compostable organics to approximately 16%)
• Removal of glass
• Removal of ferrous and non-ferrous metals
• Removal of fines and inert materials
• Removal of Waste Electrical and Hazardous materials
Figure 4 Suggested composition of MSW waste suitable for RDF production based on AWT residues and
RDF processing26
Processing plants will need to understand the composition and characterisation of the input waste
stream to ensure plants are designed with a mass balance removal that meets the end specification
required by the Mt Piper ERP. Any bulking from multiple processing plants will be inherently challenging
as feedstock requires a control point before thermal treatment to ensure quality control.
4.2 C&I Waste Composition
General C&I compositional data exists at a state level however there is very little data available at a
more granular level as the market operates across LGA boundaries.
Landfilled C&I waste
Figure 4 shows an estimate of the overall composition of the C&I waste disposed in NSW. The main
components are garbage bags, other material (mainly residual from waste processing and MRF
residual), wood and masonry. Most of the wood is treated timber and most of the plastic is plastic film.
The garbage bags contain primarily food, plastic and paper.
26 Source: Suggested composition based on Ricardo waste characterisation feedstock data model
Paper, 35%
Plastic, 30%Glass, 0%
Ferrous, 0%
Non-Ferrous, 0%
Organic (Compostables),
17%
Other Organic, 10%
Earth Based, 0%
Miscellaneous, 8%
Waste Electronic, 0%
Hazardous, 0%
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 20
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
Figure 5 Composition of C&I waste disposed, by weight27
For the purposes of this feedstock evaluation the composition summarised in Figure 6 has been
adapted based on previously modelled C&I waste profiles that Ricardo has developed for other clients
based on economic profiles and NSW C&I Waste generation factors. This is also aligned to that
observed from confidential client data and varied from the above profile by the following factors:
• Removal of entrained organics (a reduction of compostable organics to approximately 7%)28.
• Removal of inert material and fines.
• Opening of garbage bags and reallocation of waste to materials categories
Figure 6 Composition of C&I eligible waste based on RDF processing29
27 Source: NSW EPA (2014) Disposal based audit of the commercial and industrial waste
28 The shredding of bagged waste liberates materials for removal and processing, thus significantly changing the baseline
composition
29 Source: Ricardo C&I data model base 2017/18 economic profiles and 2014/15 NSW C&I Waste generation factors
Paper, 38%
Plastic, 27%Glass, 2%
Ferrous, 1%
Non-Ferrous, 1%
Organic (Compostables),
7%
Other Organic, 4%
Earth Based, 3% Miscellaneous, 14%
Waste Electronic, 0%
Hazardous, 0%
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 21
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
4.3 Conversion of Waste to RDF
RDF Specification
It is proposed by the proponents that the RDF is recovered by processing municipal solid waste and
commercial waste that would otherwise be disposed to landfill to the specification with characteristics
shown in the following table:
Table 6 RDF characteristics by waste stream MSW RDF (50%) Commercial RDF (50%) Range Units
Moisture 32% 25% 10 - 35 %w as received
Ash 12.5% 12.5% 10 - 20 %w dry basis
Volatile Matter 80.0% 80.0% 75 - 90 %w dry basis
CV (net or LHV) 14 16 10 - 18 GJ/t as received
The process used to create the RDF may vary from facility to facility, however the broad approach will
be to remove unwanted small organic, inert fractions and metals. RDF production through mechanical
treatment has the natural effect of drying the RDF and reducing moisture. Depending upon moisture
levels, further drying of the fuel can be undertaken, however this can increase cost of production and
therefore requires careful technical and economic assessment. Regional variance also exists when
considering the removal of recyclate30 during collection and again will require technical assessment to
ensure that removal of high CV recyclate (such as cardboard or plastics) from the fuel will not have a
diminishing effect on the combustion characteristics. It is completely routine to then have a final sizing
phase for the RDF to ensure it is plant compliant and this can involve either single, or a series of multiple
shredders.
The estimated RDF compositions given in Figure 4 and Figure 6 have been used to calculate the
Moisture, Ash and Net Calorific Value by waste materials as set out in the RDF specification. Ricardo
has compared a range of analyses31, the 2015 Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research
Organisation (CSIRO) data was selected given that they strike an appropriate compromise between
geographical location of study, based on collected samples and being most recent.
Based on the assumed compositional range given in Figure 4 and Figure 6 it is Ricardo’s opinion that
an RDF produced would meet the specification with the following criteria:
• Moisture – c. 28 % by weight
• Ash – c. 10 % by weight
• NCV – c. 14 MJ/kg
This analysis is based on assumed materials composition32 and an independent materials
characterisation analysis and provides an indication of the expected characteristics of the feedstock at
this early stage of project development and definition. This is no substitution for sampling and testing
of specific and identified eligible waste sources. This analysis should come in the form of detailed
compositional analysis and in-depth characteristics analysis, which will underpin the sizing basis
previously mentioned in this report. Compositional analysis will allow for more detailed engineering
30 Recyclate describes recyclable materials that are both accessible and entrained i.e. not accessible in the waste mix.
31 Several are client confidential but also, a 2015 CSIRO study based on waste auditing undertaken in Brisbane, QLD.
32 This composition is similar to that sighted in client confidential data for the post treatment AWT reject stream.
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 22
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
around likely mass balance flows within any processing plant, whilst characterisation of feedstock will
allow alignment with detailed engineering of combustion and clean-up systems.
Ricardo has reviewed other commercial in confidence analysis, which indicates a consistent NCV of
between 14-18 MJ/kg. But again, this information requires further technical due diligence to provide
reassurance.
Comparator results
In addition to the modelled results, Ricardo also reviewed a range of other MSW NCVs from previous
Australian and Global studies. However, these are based on total MSW i.e. without the removal of
entrain organics, and typically have an NCV of between 8-10 MJ/kg, which is in line with our
expectations.
It is important to note that NCVs are very closely linked to waste composition, so taking analogies from
other countries or geographies needs to be undertaken carefully and introduces uncertainty to the
estimate.
Other CVs included:
• 7.9 MJ/kg (CSIRO study for Brisbane MSW, undertaken in Wet season, approx. 31% food and
garden organics);
• Japan (8.2–9.0 MJ/kg), 2012 – CSIRO study reference
• Korea (8.16–11.92 MJ/kg), 2013 – CSIRO study reference
• UK (9.22 MJ/kg), 2008 – CSIRO study reference
• USA (9.2 ± 0.96 MJ/kg),1980) – CSIRO study reference
The Brisbane figure is quite low, but by the author’s admission this study was undertaken in the wet
season, and as such the composition (and calorific values used) may be unusually low due to high
moisture content and a higher proportion of garden waste that might be expected in Brisbane in that
season.
Comparator results are indicative however are not suitable substitutions from actual composition and
characterisation data from waste streams targeted. It is therefore appropriate to select a combustion
process which is capable of safely operating across a range of fuel characteristics, and to ensure
appropriate testing and monitoring regimes are applied at the source of the RDF to ensure the total fuel
supply is within design parameters. These will need to be confirmed via sampling of specific fuel
production facilities, which the proponent has committed to undertake (see Section 4.3.3)
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 23
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
Process overview
The process used to create RDF may vary from facility to facility however the broad approach (with
initial QA/QC procedures provided in italics below) from creation to use will be guided by the following
process:
Supplier Quality Control, Assurance and Testing should be undertaken at all facilities where RDF is
sourced. It is expected that RDF will be sourced from numerous existing facilities in Greater Sydney,
although other sources may be used if these are developed and meet required quality and control
mechanisms. Aligned with global good practice we would expect supplier QA/QC procedures to be
discussed and developed and be included within any fuel supplier agreements. We would also expect
independent auditing of facilities to ensure compliance with the law and commercial agreements that
are in place. This would include testing and sampling methodology, storage and transportation
arrangements and also any other third-party reliance such as feedstock contracts that supply waste into
the RDF production facility.
Supplier feed stock compliance with the NSW EfW Policy will also be reviewed prior to any supply of
material. This includes compliance with waste sources and collection systems that comply with the
waste stream and source separation criteria outlined in the statement. Various sourcing of RDF input
will not impact operations due to the requirement that all input materials meet quality control and testing
and be derived from sources consistent with the NSW EfW Policy.
The pre-processing and sorting of waste would vary from facility to facility and according to waste
stream, however all material would be required to meet output specification. Pre-sorting and sorting of
waste processes are diverse and can be informed by a range of variables and ensuring that pre-
processing requirements meet required specifications and are informed by mass balance analysis,
equipment selection, understanding reference plants and the influence and specifications of supplier
equipment. An example of the pre-sorting process is currently undertaken at Global Renewables UR-
3R facility where municipal waste is sorted using the inherent properties of the material such as size,
shape and density into three main categories through the use of shredders, trommels and screens, the
categories are recyclables, organics, and non-recyclable inorganic materials. The recyclables go
through sorting and cleaning processes to be ready to be sold as recyclables. The remaining fraction is
classed as suitable for RDF production. The UR-3R technology is consistent with the waste hierarchy
philosophy towards achieving a waste less society as it allows waste that would otherwise be disposed
to be recycled or recovered. This process also supports waste reduction and reuse initiatives run by
councils and community groups.
Supplier quality control, assurance and
testing
Supplier compliance
with NSW EfW Policy and contract
development
Pre processing and sorting of
waste according to
fuel specification
Compaction and
transportation of RDF
Transportation of RDF
including tracking and checking of
waste deliveries
Receipt and storage of RDF
Additional sampling,
testing and use
Monitoring and reporting
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 24
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
The proposed processing will be suitable for the Steinműller Babcock Environment (SBE) system
providing quality control procedures are in place for material size and CV. Fuel specification and CV
range of the preferred SBE system include:
• The lump size and weight of any single pieces are assumed as follows:
o Non massive pieces below 1000 * 500 * 500 mm.
o Massive pieces below 500 * 200 * 200 mm
o Weight < 50 kg of individual item (MSW, Biomass).
• Design is a feedstock of RDF with an average heating value of 9 to 18 MJ/kg
• Must be thoroughly mixed and homogenised.
This is a complex area and will need to be developed to ensure agreed processes and procedures are
adopted and followed, segregation and retention of sampling batches is carefully controlled and
recorded, and enough space is provided for this to take place. It is invariable that reject loads will also
arrive at the plant and therefore technical and commercial arrangements are put in place to manages
such loads, as is common practice globally.
Pre-processing and testing by the supplier normally takes place at their premises and should be in
accordance with industry norms. It is expected that these costs will be reflected within the supply price.
It is not normal for suppliers to allow third-party reliance upon their own testing and sampling, which is
generally configured to their own requirements to assist in producing fuel to specification.
It is recommended that all fuel supply agreements include specific testing and sampling requirements
consistent with the nature of the feedstock, the type of processing, and the technical risks of the RDF
preparation and combustion.
If 100% of feedstock is not contracted, then additional arrangements will need to be arranged for ‘spot
tonnage’ that is supplied on short term contracts.
Compaction and Transportation
Loads of RDF are to be compacted and transported via road. While there will be some capacity at the
Mt Piper facility to accept baled RDF material this is outlined as a non-preferred option and will be
accepted only as a reserve feedstock line. It is intended that there is an auditable chain of custody in
the transportation of RDF from the supplier’s facility to the Mt Piper Power Station Site.
Receipt and Storage
Only deliveries received from approved RDF suppliers should be permitted to be received and
discharged into the storage and handling system at the Mt Piper site. The storage of RDF on site to be
in approved conditions reflective of approved location, amount and capacity of the site.
Economic considerations
Economic considerations to be given to the viability of the facility include:
Capacity including the overall proposed capacity of the facility. It has been determined on initial
calculations that the facility would become economically viable at the processing capacity of 200,000
tonnes per year of fuel and 30 MWe.
How RDF is handled and transported is guided by the following working assumptions: the proposed
scale of the facility and capacity of RDF, that the facility can accept material from more than 4 suppliers
(from within the Greater Sydney Region) and that compacting the material for transport is a more
commercially viable option than baling the material. Compacting material can alter supply and delivery
techniques into the combustion chamber and therefore consideration needs to be given to bulk density
allowances. We would expect daily delivery limits for each supplier, agreed methods of transportation
and delivery times that are strictly adhered to as normally set out in planning conditions.
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 25
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
Projected Gate Fees will need to be competitive with current landfill and levy costs33 and take into
consideration capital repayment costs of waste processing facilities constructed to produce RDF,
processing costs, sampling and testing, auditing and transportation. There is an active RDF and Solid
Recovered Fuels (SRF) market developing and costs associated with both will need consideration as
this facility requires an RDF with higher NCV than traditional MSW. SRF is typically a processed fuel
with a higher NCV than RDF and subsequently has a different value supply chain. MSW is not easily
processed into a higher NCV RDF (if ever on its own without C&I mixing) and therefore will not be of
interest to those producing SRF, which is generally produced from C&I streams. However, C&I streams
may need to be targeted to increase the level of NCV of the MSW derived RDF to ensure an NCV at
commensurate levels. However, the design range of the ERP also allows for the processing of RDF at
the lower end of the NCV range.
Contamination of feedstock is a commercial, economic and technical consideration of project viability.
Contamination of the feedstock can greatly impact the project and potentially impact and/or damage
infrastructure. Maintaining delivered fuel to specification is normally dealt with via contractual
mechanisms such as fuel supply agreements. These agreements generally set out supply tonnages,
daily delivery allowance, input specification, period of supply, testing and sampling methodology and
rates and process for remediation on supply of fuel out of specification which can result in financial
penalties and possible termination of supply. While less handling of feedstock would generally
correspond to a cheaper processing cost per tonne for a supplier the potential negative economic
impact of contamination is managed by ensuring a quality and consistent feedstock through contracts
and sound sampling and testing controls. These procedures are not unique to the Mt Piper project and
are well used globally.
5 Conclusion This study has identified in excess of 470,000 tonnes per annum of MSW and at least 800,000 tonnes
per annum of C&I suitable for RDF processing.
The policy and operational model for EfW in NSW favours the production of RDF for the following
reasons:
• Restrictions on the availability of waste, based on separate collections for organics, provides
waste with lower moisture content and a higher calorific value.
• RDF production provides flexibility across the market with suppliers able to develop
infrastructure to meet local demand, stimulate additional energy opportunities and potentially
exploit export market opportunities.
• Reduce waste to landfill.
There is a huge number of global reference facilities, using equipment from many different suppliers,
that are configured to produce RDF to various specifications. It is our opinion that this experience and
equipment is readily transferable into this project.
A growing number of reference facilities producing a range of feedstock (RDF/Solid Recovered Fuel
(SRF)/Processed Engineered Fuel (PEF)) that demonstrate the concept of viability of engineering,
procuring and operating a facility capable of economically producing feedstock to specification.
33 Currently levy set at $143.60 per tonne in the Metropolitan Levy Area
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 26
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
Appendix 1 Waste to Energy Policy Statement Requirements
An energy recovery facility processing wastes other than ‘eligible waste fuels’ must satisfy all of the below requirements, regardless of whether the facility is an
existing or purpose-built facility and the waste input is the sole feedstock or a fuel for co-firing.
NSW Waste to Energy Statement
Requirement
Compliance Opportunities
Ge
ne
ral C
rite
ria
Social license to operate- public consultation and the good neighbour principle
• Demonstration of effective information and public consultation about energy from waste proposal. • Demonstration of genuine dialogue with the community and ensure that planning consent and other approval authorities are provided with accurate and reliable information. • Demonstration of operation under the ‘good neighbour’ principle in application to waste deliveries and operating hours but most importantly with respect to readily available information about emissions and resource recovery outcomes.
Evidence that the facility meets current international best practice techniques in the following areas: • process design and control • emission control equipment design and control • emission monitoring with real-time feedback to the controls of the process • arrangements for the receipt of waste • management of residues from the energy recovery process
• Demonstration of how facility will be operated and perform at best practice standards including how waste will be received, stored and processed (as a material input and outputs) through plans, procedures, diagrams and other documents: • Quality assurance and quality criteria protocols for managing contamination and risks • Provide clear and accurate information on the aMt (tonnes) of wastes received onsite, including unprocessed, processed and output materials • Specifically address contingency procedures for contaminated waste, rejected loads and supply failures
Facility information to demonstrate that the technologies chosen are: • proven • well understood; and • capable of handling the expected variability and type of waste feedstock Must have reference to fully operational plants using the same technologies and treating like waste streams in other similar jurisdictions.
• Reference to fully operational plants using the same technologies and treating like waste streams in other similar jurisdictions.
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 27
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
Te
ch
nic
al C
rite
ria
The temperature of the gas raised, after the last injection of combustion air, in a controlled and homogenous fashion and even under the most unfavourable conditions to a minimum temperature of 850°C for at least two seconds (as measured near the inner wall or at another representative point of the combustion chamber).
Demonstrate compliance with time and temperature requirements through process descriptions, diagrams, technical details to demonstrate compliance NOTE: torrefaction and pyrolysis processing temperatures are lower than other thermal processes. In these situations the emissions to air from the facility must meet these temperatures to manage risks to the environment and human health.
If a waste has a content of more than 1% of halogenated organic substances, expressed as chlorine, the temperature should be raised to 1100°C for at least 2 seconds after the last injection of air.
Demonstrate compliance with time and temperature requirements through process descriptions, diagrams, technical details to demonstrate compliance NOTE: torrefaction and pyrolysis processing temperatures are lower than other thermal processes. In these situations the emissions to air from the facility must meet these temperatures to manage risks to the environment and human health.
Satisfy at a minimum the requirements of the Group 6 emission standards within the Protection of the Environment Operations (Clean Air) Regulation 2010
Air quality impact assessment (AQIS) addressing emission points and fugitive emissions
Evidence of continuous measurements of NOx, CO, particles (total), total organic compounds, HCl, HF and SO2 Continuous measurement data (as seen above) made available to the EPA in real-time graphical publication and a weekly summary of continuous monitoring data and compliance with emissions limits published on the internet
• Demonstrate how continuous measurement will be undertaken • Diagrams, drawings, equipment specifications, technical details, outline how data will be collated and accessed • Demonstrate how data will be made available in real time • Demonstrate how weekly summaries will be published on the internet for public access
Continuous measurements of the following operational parameters: • temperature at a representative point in the combustion chamber; • concentration of oxygen • pressure and temperature in the stack • water vapour content of the exhaust gas
• Demonstrate how continuous measurement will be undertaken • Diagrams, drawings, equipment specifications, technical specifications and details or equipment and to be used, outline how data will be collated and accessed
Monitoring and reporting to be conducted and held by the proponent for a period of three years
• Demonstrate through procedures, processes and record keeping tools
Proof of performance (POP) trials to demonstrate compliance with air emissions standards
• Details of POP trials including a plan, timelines, processes, management, monitoring, responsibilities and reporting • Detailed information on the commissioning period of the facility, including but not limited to equipment testing, start-up fuel and operating conditions.
Requirement (following successful POP trials) for at least two measurements per year of heavy metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and chlorinated dioxins and furans
• Demonstrate how the six monthly and three-monthly measurements will be undertaken
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 28
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
One measurement at least every three months shall be carried out for the first 12 months of operation. If and when appropriate measurement techniques are available, continuous monitoring of these pollutants will be required.
• Diagrams, drawings, equipment specifications, technical specifications and details or equipment and to be used, outline how results will be
The total organic carbon (TOC) or loss on ignition (LOI) content of the
slag and bottom ashes must not be greater than 3% or 5%, respectively,
of the dry weight of the material.
• Demonstrate expected TOC or LOI of slag and bottom ashes through data, tests results and reference facility or facilities
The facility includes waste feed interlocks as required to prevent waste from being fed to the facility when the required temperature has not been reached either at start-up or during operation.
• Provide technical details and diagrams of the proposed waste interlock for the facility • Provide procedures, documents or plans for management of interlock
Air Quality Impact Assessment in accordance with the Approved Methods for the Modelling and Assessment of Air Pollutants in NSW
Demonstrate approved methods applied to AQIS and completed by suitable qualified
professional
Th
erm
al
eff
icie
nc
y
The net energy produced must be positive
• Demonstrate net energy is positive
The facility demonstrates that at least 25 per cent of the energy generated will be captured as electricity (or an equivalent level of recovery for facilities generating heat alone)?
• Demonstrate at least 25% will be captured as electricity or heat
The facility demonstrates that any heat generated by the thermal processing of waste is recovered as far as practicable. Including use of waste heat for steam or electricity generation or for process heating of combined heat and power schemes.
• Details of heat use on site, equipment and specifications
Re
so
urc
e
Re
co
very
Cri
teri
a The facility may only receive feedstock from waste processing facilities
or collection systems that meet the criteria outlined in Table 1 of the Waste to Energy Statement . Note; Proponents wishing to use waste or waste-derived materials for energy recovery that are not defined in Table 1 must contact the EPA to discuss their proposal. The EPA will consider any such proposals on a case-by-case basis in accordance with the energy from waste considerations outlined in this policy statement and the principles set out in the POEO Act and WaRR Act
• Provide contract or supply agreements, draft agreements • Information of the specific sources of wastes, processes waste has been subject too, and bin system/s details if MSW • If propose to use C&I no limit, prior approval from the EPA is required • Demonstrate with descriptions, diagrams, waste classification, descriptions photos, tests results etc.
The EPA may give consideration to increases to the maximum allowable percentage of residuals from facilities receiving mixed municipal and commercial and industrial waste where a facility intends
• Contact EPA is considering increasing maximum allowable percentage
Mt Piper Energy Recovery Project: RDF Feedstock Report
Ricardo Confidential 29
Ricardo Australia PTY Ltd
to use the biomass component from that process for energy recovery, rather than land application and the facility can demonstrate they are using best available technologies for material recovery of that stream
Waste streams proposed for energy recovery should not contain contaminants such as batteries, light bulbs or other electrical or hazardous wastes
• Develop management plan or procedure plan for the receipt and processing of waste that includes standard operating procedures that ensure hazardous materials do not enter waste stream for energy recovery e.g. batteries, asbestos.
The C&I no limit category is likely to apply only to mixed waste collected from single generators of large volumes of waste (e.g. supermarkets) or precinct-based businesses (e.g. shopping centers).
• If using the C&I no limit category it needs to be demonstrated that each entity generating waste has effective and operating collection systems for all waste streams, they generate that have reuse or recycling opportunities (e.g. paper/cardboard collection; organic collection; and residual waste collection). Proponents wishing to use the C&I no limit category will need to contact the EPA to determine the eligibility of each entity
Bio-char or char materials produced from facilities using mixed waste streams will not be able to be considered for land application as a soil amendment or improvement agent
• Resource Recovery Order and Exemption Application
Source: Adapted from https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/-/media/OEH/Corporate-Site/Documents/Funding-and-support/Environmental-Trust/Recycling-
innovation/recycling-innovation-energy-from-waste-compliance-160208.pdf