Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
MBT/MRF state of art and possible development in Norway
24. May 2011
Hannover
Frode Syversen
Mepex Consult
www-mepex.no
Today menu
Starter
– Background
– Project
Main course
– Norwegian waste management with focus on MBT potential
Dessert
– Project presentations
– Future perspectives
National MBT-project Norway
Project phases:
1. Survey about international experience connected to Norwegian condition
2. Practical MBT test-program in full scale and test reactors for biological stabilization
Project owners;
Waste Norway (NGO)
10 Municipal waste companies
Private WtE company
Project goals
Document potential to optimize utilizations of resources from residual waste in Norway with MBT
– Supplementary to source segregation
Document need for changes in landfill ban regulation and better incentives
– Stabilization of residuals
– Incentives towards increased recycling
Preliminary conclusions
MBT gives a potential for environmental improvements
Represent the waste hierarchy
Need better incentives and probably changes in landfill ban
Challenges;
Cost/benefit – market situation
Quality of CLO for soil
improver or landfilling
MBT drawback from 1980’s
Solutions based on mixed waste failed;
Organic compost was contaminated with heavy metals
Quality of paper and plastic achieved was poor – bad economy
REO-plant 1985
Sorting line for recycling140.000 tons
7
Norway – a green country ?
5 mill citizens430 kg/inhabitant100 waste facilities
Residual waste to energy recovery
50 – 70 % could have been recycled
– Plastic
– Paper/cardboard
– Food
– Wood
– Textiles
– Hazardous waste
– Gypsum
7,89
7,79
29,56
2,31
7,90
1,56
42,99
paper/cardboard
Plastic packaging
Bio-waste
Glass/metal packaging
Clothes/textiles
WEE/harzardous
Elements in Norwegian solutions
Biological treatment
Optical bag-sorting
Incineration
Source sep. packaging
Landfill regulation – too much?
1998 – restriction on landfilling residual waste without source segregation food waste
1999 – landfill tax – 60 EUR/tonn in 2009
2009 – final landfill ban for waste more than 10% TOC and 20% LOI with no expectation for CLO
04.03.2010 MEF - Avfallsdagene 14
One result is sub-optimalization
Residuals from sorting plants are mixed into other residual waste and sent to incineration• Fine fraction (sand/gravel, so.)with 20-30 % TOC• Heavy fraction with concrete, bricks, porcelen
Project plans sorting lines for MSW
«Material loop Follo»
MBT plant
– Dry biogas
– Fertilizer
– RDF
– Plastic material
ROAF -Sorting plant based on sensor technology
Output:Organic waste in green bagsPlastic – PE, PP, PET
Input:50.000 mixed waste
IVAR sorting plant – focus on plastic
Results from international survey
Other countries have regulation that opens up for MBT
Landfill ban – 10 %
Landfill tax
Optimal MBT structure in Norway ?
Mechanical pre-treatment
plant
RDF-plant at WtE plant
MRF sorting for plastic
Local solution biostabilization
Mechanical pretreatment test
Different configurations will be tested HHR
– Shredder 250 mm
– Drum siever 65 mm
– Fine shredder 100 mm
Veolia
– Shredder 250 mm
– Drum siever 100 mm
– Air swifter
Ødegård
– Shredder 250 mm
– Vibrosiever 0-20-40 mm
– Fine shredder
Biological treatment tests
About 100 tons per test
In vessel composting Bioplan– 60-90 days
Ag-Bag treatment Lindum– Aerobic step 1 and then anaerobic
Possible reactor biocell treatment
Incineration test BioEl
CFB plant 10 tons/hour
– Eddy current separation
– 12-24 hours
– 100 mm fuel
Registrations
– Bottom ash
– Emissions
Overview plan tests – 3 places
Parameter Oslo-area In countryside West-coastResidual waste source
Household, Bærum50% food
Household HIAS
25% food
Household, IHM and SIMAS
Waste morphology
2009/2011 2010 New analysis
Mechanical shredding and sorting
NG at Tønsberg,
Ødegard, Fredrikstad
HRR, pretreatment plant Hamar
Temporary mobile shredding and drumsorting
Fuel fractions size 0-100 mm(Hafslund Bio-El)
65-100 mm(Hafslund Bio-El)
80-250 mm(Hafslund BWtE)
Residual fraction for stabilization
Heavy fraction0-100 mm
Fine fraction0-65mm
Fraction 0-75 mm
Biological stabilization
AgBag anaerobic(Lindum)
Not finally decided(Lindum)
Closed in vessel composting (Bioplan Florø)
Stabilization test and biological parametres
Biological methane potential BMP100
– Before and after stabilization
Final remarks
MBT is on agenda
Have a significant potential in Norway
Solutions according to waste hierarcy
Market situation for WtE make it less profitable
Need for changes in landfill ban
Better incentives for recycling
Thank you for your attention !
Frode Syversen
Mepex Consult AS
