Technology assessment of thermal treatment technologies using ORWARE

Abstract

A technology assessment of thermal treatment technologies for wastes was performed in the form of scenarios of chains of technologies. The Swedish assessment tool, ORWARE, was used for the assessment. The scenarios of chains of thermal technologies assessed were gasification with catalytic combustion, gasification with flame combustion, incineration and landfilling. The landfilling scenario was used as a reference for comparison. The technologies were assessed from ecological and economic points of view.The results are presented in terms of global warming potential, acidification potential, eutrophication potential, consumption of primary energy carriers and welfare costs. From the simulations, gasification followed by catalytic combustion with energy recovery in a combined cycle appeared to be the most competitive technology from an ecological point of view. On the other hand, this alternative was more expensive than incineration. A sensitivity analysis was done regarding electricity prices to show which technology wins at what value of the unit price of electricity (SEK/kW h).Within this study, it was possible to make a comparison both between a combined cycle and a Rankine cycle (a system pair) and at the same time between flame combustion and catalytic combustion (a technology pair). To use gasification just as a treatment technology is not more appealing than incineration, but the possibility of combining gasification with a combined cycle is attractive in terms of electricity production.This research was done in connection with an empirical R&D work on both gasification of waste and catalytic combustion of the gasified waste at the Division of Chemical Technology, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Sweden.

Comparative life cycle assessment of different municipal solid waste management scenarios in Iran

“…Abeliotis et al [13] Andersen et al [14] Assefa et al [15] Banar et al [16] Beccali et al [17] Bernstad and la Cour Jansen [18] Blengini et al [19] Cabaraban et al [20] Key matters are either conventionally landfilled to produce compost or are transferred into the AD tanks to produce biogas and anaerobic compost. The biogas is combusted to generate electricity in the electricity plant.…”

Safe disposal of toxic chrome buffing dust generated from leather industries

“…The investment cost for gasification is higher than thermal incineration and land co-disposal methods. But, cost of the thermal incineration process is only about 1/6th of the total cost for the landfilling scenario [6]. And also the available landfill sites rapidly reach their total capacity and the authorization for new sites becomes difficult [7].…”

What life-cycle assessment does and does not do in assessments of waste management

“…A study that includes financial costs as well as monetised environmental burdens, described through an LCA, is often called a cost-benefit analysis (Leach et al, 1997;Radetzki, 1999;Ekvall and Bäckman, 2001;Strö mberg and Ringströ m, 2004). It has also been denoted as life cycle costing (Carlson Reich, 2005) or technology assessment (Assefa et al, 2005). These studies can also include other aspects such as the time required for source separation in households, the space required for the multiple dustbins used for the source separation, etc.…”