Transcript Burning Issues in Waste Disposal

Gasification, Plasma Arc
and Pyrolysis:
Renewable Energy & Recycling
– or Incinerators in Disguise?
August 2012
“New” Technologies for
Waste “Treatment” & “Energy”
• Plasma Arc
• Gasification
• Pyrolysis
Typical Industry Claims
About These Technologies
• “Pollution-free”
• “Zero Emissions”
• “Proven To Be Safe”
• “A New Way to Recycle”
• “Waste is Renewable Energy”
• “Closed Loop”
• “No Stacks”
• “Not Incineration”
• “Alternative to Landfills
Traditional Incinerators compalred to
Gasification, Plamsa Arc & Pyrolysis
Differences:
Traditional mass burn incinerators
directly burn the waste material and
have ash residual
Most gasification technologies heat the
waste first, then in a second stage of the
process syngas is combusted/incinerated.
Vitrified slag residue instead of ash.
Traditional Incinerators versus
Gasification Technologies
Similarities:
Combustion process
Toxic emissions – air and water quality concerns
Dioxin emitted from combustion of syngas
No continuous emissions monitoring of air toxics
Disincentive to Zero Waste, Recycling and
Real Renewable Energy
Plasma Arc –
Two Staged Incineration
Two Step Process:
1) Materials are heated with a plasma arc (6,000º to
10,000º Celsius) to separate gases from feedstock
2) Gases are typically combusted in secondary
process
Fugitive Gases
Syn Gas
Vitrified Slag
Combustion
Inentec
Integrated Environmental
Technologies &
InEnTec
Plasma Arc technology
for medical, hazardous and
radioactive contaminated wastes
Is it safe?
Are the claims true?
IET & InEnTec Claimed:
• “Pollution Free” - not true
• “Commercially Proven With No
Emissions” – not true
• “Closed Loop System” – not true
• Five Facilities are “already successfully
operating at customer sites” – not true
InEnTec Diagram
Richland, Washington
From InEnTec website
The Truth about ATG Facility
• ATG plasma arc facility had chronic
operational problems
• Repeated problems including with
emissions equipment
• ATG filed for bankruptcy
• ATG closed plasma arc facility in 2001
• Left stockpiles of
hazardous/radioactive wastes
Honolulu, Hawaii
from InEnTec website
Truth about
Hawaii Medical Vitrification Facility
• Shut down August 2004 to April 2005
due to damage to refractory of plasma
arc equipment
• State of Hawaii Department of Health
took serious enforcement action due to
illegally stockpiling medical waste
when plasma arc equipment broke
• IET sued HMV yet claimed it was
successfully operating
• Permanently Shut down in 2007
Truth about Biopure Systems,
Malaysia
• Had not been built at the time
that IET/Inentec claimed that
the facility was already
successfully operating
• Still has not been built
Plasco - Ottawa, Canada
• Opened plasma arc pilot plant in 2008
• Was plagued with operational, pollution
and energy generation problems
• Dozens of pollution exceedences
• Designed for 85 tons per day garbage
• Averaged about 4 tons per day 1st year
• Extended shut down due to excessive
emissions
• Was unable to operate when City of Los
Angeles staff visited plant
Plasco Energy Salinas Valley Project
• Proposed in Gonzales, California, heavily Spanishspeaking, low-income, Latino farming community
• Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority’s claimed Plasco
would have no stacks and claimed Plasco generates 2x
as much energy as competitor that was considered –
these totally false statements used to win approval
• CalRecycle upholds law and rescinds initial decision
that Plasco would quality as “gasification” for RPS
(Renewable Portfolio Standard)
• Plasco & SVSWA “share information on vocal
opponents”
• In face of strong community opposition, Plasco secretly
puts EIR on hold for one year
Westinghouse Plasma Corporation
and Alter NRG
• The largest commercial operating model
WPC/Alter NRG plant has capacity to process
only 165-190 tons per day of a mixture of auto
shredder residue and municipal solid waste,
claims to generate just 3.9 megawatts of
electricity. (Hitachi Metals, Utashinai, Japan)
• City of Sacramento, CA staff visited Utashinai
plant and reported that NO POWER AT ALL
put into the grid
Westinghouse Plasma
Where is the stack?
Hitachi Metals Plasma Arc
plant in Utashinai, Japan
• Promotional photo submitted to City
of Sacramento by USST
• No Stack?
Here is Hitachi Metals’ stack
Hitachi Metals “Reports” No E-321
:
Sacramento, CA City Council
rejects Plasma Arc December 2008
• Sacramento City Council rejected
plasma arc project that would have
used AlterNRG/Westinghouse Plasma
technology
• City’s research found claims of energy
generation at Utashinai, Japan plant
not to be true
• Confirmed that Hitachi plant had stack
for emissions despite company pictures
that failed to show stack
Sun Energy Group LLC
• Wants to build a 2500 tons per day plasma arc
facility at 3900 Jourdan Road, New Orleans
• Would use Westinghouse Plasma/Alter NRG’s
technology
• Claims this is “renewable energy” facility that
can generate 114 megawatts of electricity to
provide power to tens of thousands of homes
• Claimed all operations would be in an
enclosed facility
Sun Energy Group – New Orleans
Sun Energy’s Claims
• Claims “The system is closed so there are no emissions
while the waste is being destroyed.”
• Claims “The garbage is transformed ….so no harmful
materials are allowed to leach into the environment.
The synthetic fuel, or syngas, is cleaned and burned like
natural gas to create electricity.”
• “Not Incineration” -- waste is “destroyed in an oxygen
starved environment so there is no burning.”
But Sun Energy’s proposal says:
“The product gases can be combusted in conventional
boiler systems….or can be combusted in a gas turbine.”
Thermoselect
MSW Gasification Incinerator
Operated 1998-2004, Karlsruhe, Germany
Thermoselect
Karlsruhe, Germany
• Was promoted as a model facility
worldwide
• Closed in November 2004 due to
operational problems
• Facility has been demolished
Wollongong,
Australia
Brightstar
MSW Gasification
Incinerator
(2001-2004, Wollongong, Australia)
Brightstar’s Wollongong
Facility
• Closed in April 2004 because of
financial and technical problems
• Facility no longer exists
Ebara
Ebara Gasification
Plant, Nagareyama,
Chiba Prefecture,
Japan
Ebara Brochure excerpt
Truth about Ebara’s Gasification
Facility in Chiba Prefecture, Japan
Manager of Ebara’s Plant in Nagareyama,
Chiba Prefecture, Japan admitted:
• claim of Zero Emissions not true
• claim that no supplementary fuel needed not
true
• use of large amounts of kerosene is not
environmentally friendly
• claim in public relations DVD that 3000 kw of
energy generated is false
• claim of no secondary pollution not true
• it is best NOT TO INCINERATE!
APRIL 23, 2007 TOUR OF FACILITY BY GREENACTION & JAPANESE CITIZENS
Our communities & planet need
safe, healthy and just solutions
• Pollution Prevention and Zero Waste,
not incineration
• Expanded recycling & zero waste
programs that provide green jobs
• Green, truly renewable energy
• Safe technologies such as anaerobic
digestion, not incinerators in disguise
• Truth in advertising!
Red Bluff, California says NO to
InEnTec Plasma Arc facility
For more information:
Greenaction for Health and
Environmental Justice
www.greenaction.org
Global Alliance
for Incinerator Alternatives
www.no-burn.org