STATUS AND TRENDS OF ANAEROBIC DIGESTION IN EUROPE

Similar documents
an overview of trends and approaches

Country specific notes on municipal waste data

Technologies and trends for anaerobic digestion across Europe: : a survey

Range of Biogas Plants designed by Krieg & Fischer Ingenieure GmbH

Biogas production in Germany: Status quo and future trends M.Sc. Georg Friedl, German Biogas Association

Trends from the use of biogas technology in Germany

Evaluation of Municipal Solid Waste Conversion Technologies

Waste Management in Vienna

Post-Consumer Plastic Waste Management in European Countries EU Countries -

Status and Quo of MSM. Policy Frameworks and Plans. Examples of MSM Projects in Thailand

Renewable Energy Certificate systems in Europe (the path to international trade)

Power Generation from Biogas Energy Provider Perspective

Regenerative Energy from Industrial and Municipal Organic Waste

Recycling and Waste-to-Energy in an era of implementation of the circular economy

relating to household s disposable income. A Gini Coefficient of zero indicates

Biogas as transportation fuel

Foreign Taxes Paid and Foreign Source Income INTECH Global Income Managed Volatility Fund

THE SUSTAINABLE WASTE MANAGEMENT IN THE CITY OF RIO DE JANEIRO

The Hart report: The Economics of aeuropean Hydrogen Infrastructure for Automotive

STATISTICS FOR THE FURNITURE INDUSTRY AND TRADE

Energy from digester gas. Optimised biogas utilisation

Waste-to-Energy in Europe

Biogas in the Nordic countries

BIO4GAS: EVALUATION AND ANALYSIS OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES IN THE SCOPE OF BIOGAS PRODUCTION MAXIMIZATION AND ENERGY PRODUCTION OPTIMIZATION

How does a venture capitalist appraise investment opportunities?

Waste a source of energy. Regional Solid Waste Management Plan Review: Engaging solutions for tomorrow. Incineration. Incineration

PUBLIC VS. PRIVATE HEALTH CARE IN CANADA. Norma Kozhaya, Ph.D Economist, Montreal economic Institute CPBI, Winnipeg June 15, 2007

Factors influencing the development of Small Scale Energy from Waste

Municipal Authorities Best Practice in Engaging. Packaging and Food Waste. March 2014

41 T Korea, Rep T Netherlands T Japan E Bulgaria T Argentina T Czech Republic T Greece 50.

Thermal & Biogas Production In Egypt. By Prof. Dr. Ahmed Abd El-Ati Ahmed Egypt - GBEP Focal Point

TOWARDS PUBLIC PROCUREMENT KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS. Paulo Magina Public Sector Integrity Division

Examples for financing of biogas projects in Italy

Technologies for small scale Biomass CHP-Plants an actual survey

NAWARO BioEnergie AG: a short introduction into our business for BiG>East: Biogas for Eastern Europe

Updated development of global greenhouse gas emissions 2013

Managing municipal solid waste

Environmentally sound technologies in Poland market overview and business opportunities for SMEs

Greenlane Technology. Greenlane RIMU

Finland Biogas Update of the Global Methane Initiative (GMI) Tri-Subcommittee Meeting, Florianópolis Brazil

ANEROBIC DIGESTION and BIOGAS

Experience report on livestock waste in Russia Krieg & Fischer Ingenieure GmbH

Waste. Copenhagen, 3 rd September Almut Reichel Project Manager Sustainable consumption and production & waste, European Environment Agency

Preventing Accidents in Biogas Plants - Experience of an Expert Witness for Biogas Plants -

GfK PURCHASING POWER INTERNATIONAL

Outline. Intro Methodology Background energy system Foreground system Conclusion. DTU Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark

PUBLIC & PRIVATE HEALTH CARE IN CANADA

Expenditure and Outputs in the Irish Health System: A Cross Country Comparison

Renewable Energy Sources (RES) Support Levels, 2009

What if BAU would come true?

Innovation in Greece. the area of Waste Management in Greece. Chief Executive Officer

Waste-to-Energy. Ella Stengler Managing Director CEWEP. presentation of the Third Report on WtE plants in Italy by Federambiente and ENEA

Biomass Issues. John Christopher Madole Associates, Inc. presentation to the Minnesota Department of Commerce September 12, 2007

Biomethane production and its use in captive fleets. Lille Metropole Experience

Insurance corporations and pension funds in OECD countries

UTX Europe V2 - Enhancements

Thank you for being here today

ERMInE Database. Presentation by Nils Flatabø SINTEF Energy Research. ERMInE Workshop 2 - Northern Europe Oslo, 1. November 2006

Sustainable production of biogas and bioethanol from waste

Reporting practices for domestic and total debt securities

BT Premium Event Call and Web Rate Card

Canada GO 2535 TM World Traveller's edition Maps of North America (Canada, US, Mexico), Western and Central Europe (including Russia) CAD 349,95

Waste-to-Energy s contribution to Resource & Energy Efficiency

Mechanical-Biological Treatment (MBT) in EU strategies for MSW management. Scientific aspects and research needs

Jenbacher gas engines. Barbara Marschik

TRENDS 2015 IN PHOTOVOLTAIC APPLICATIONS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Business Plan Calls Tariff The Choice for Business Telecoms

How many students study abroad and where do they go?

A case study from Thailand. Dr. Alice SHARP Sirindhorn International Institute of Technology Thammasat Univeristy

IWR Integrated Waste Recycling. Integrated System for treatment and recycling of Municipal Solid Waste

ANAEROBIC TREATMENT OF THE ORGANIC FRACTION OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE IN DENMARK

IGW S.r.l. Sofia 9 giugno 2015 PIÙ MODERNI, PIÙ COMPETITIVI, PIÙ FORTI AMBIENTE ED EFFICIENZA ENERGETICA IN BULGARIA. Organizzazione a cura di

Measurements and indicators for healthcare IT. Leif Panduro Jensen, MD, MHM Director of Centre, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, DK

Steady increase of global market value

ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT

Delegation in human resource management

INVESTING IN A TRANSITIONING SECTOR

Green Energy in Europe - Potentials and Prospects

Renewable energy incentive program

PERMANENT AND TEMPORARY WORKERS

Improving Sustainability of Municipal Solid Waste Management in China by Source Separated Collection and Biological Treatment of the Organic Fraction

Preventing fraud and corruption in public procurement

FAKULTÄT LIFE SCIENCES. Waste to Energy. University of Applied Sciences HAW Hamburg

CURRICULUM VITAE: BURAK DEMIREL

RENEWABLE ENERGY IN AUSTRALIA

With data up to: May Monthly Electricity Statistics

Management of Residual Waste as a Part of Integrated Biological Waste Treatment

BMEI BMEI CO., LTD. Environmental Total Solution Vender.

International comparisons of obesity prevalence

Higher education institutions as places to integrate individual lifelong learning strategies

Biogas and landfill gas utilization in Helsinki region waste management. Aino Kainulainen Project Manager Helsinki Region Environmental Services HSY

How To Help The European People

Mapping Global Value Chains

Waste-to-Energy in Europe. Ella Stengler

INTERNATIONAL TRACKED POSTAGE SERVICE

Size and Development of the Shadow Economy of 31 European and 5 other OECD Countries from 2003 to 2015: Different Developments

ISO/TC 255 N 16. ISO TC 255 Business Plan-3.0. Replaces: N 13. Date of document: Expected action: Background:

Technological developments for biogas production and use

Municipal waste management in Austria

The value of accredited certification

Transcription:

STATUS AND TRENDS OF ANAEROBIC DIGESTION IN EUROPE WINFRIED SIX ORGANIC WASTE SYSTEMS ISWA Beacon Conference on Biological Treatment Perugia, Italy, MAY 10-12, 2006

WHAT IS THE STATE-OF-THE-ART OF ANAEROBIC DIGESTION OF THE ORGANIC FRACTION OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE IN EUROPE?

DETERMINATION OF CAPACITY CRITERIA HOUSEHOLD ORGANIC WASTE OR EQUIVALENT MORE THAN 10% HOUSEHOLD ORGANIC SOLID WASTE > 3000 T PER YEAR MINIMUM SIZE DESIGN CAPACITY USED UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE TOTAL CAPACITY FOR BIOWASTE, BUT ONLY DIGESTION CAPACITY FOR RESIDUAL WASTE PLANTS NOT ELIMINATED IF OPERATION STOPPED PLANTS AT LEAST UNDER CONSTRUCTION (ONLY PROGNOSIS FOR YEAR 2006)

CAPACITY IN EUROPE 124 PLANTS IDENTIFIED IN 13 COUNTRIES 3.905.000 T/YEAR CAPACITY IN 2006 CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT PERIOD INCREASE AVERAGE SIZE PLANTS/YEAR 91-95 33 KT/Y 13 KT/Y 2.6 96-00 186 KT/Y 21 KT/Y 8.8 01-05 428 KT/Y 43 KT/Y 10.4

2005 2006 2004 2003 4000000 3500000 3000000 2500000 2000000 1500000 1000000 500000 0 CUMULATIVE CAPACITY 94 95 96 97 98 99 2000 2001 2002 ANNUAL CUMULATIVE 93 92 91 <1990 CAPACITY (TON/YEAR).

AVERAGE SIZE OF PLANTS. 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 ANNUAL SIZE AND NUMBER OF PLANTS IN EUROPE 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 0 <1990 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 # OF PLANTS INSTALLED ANNUALLY AVERAGE CAPACITY INSTALLED ANNUALLY NUMBER OF PLANTS.

80000 70000 60000 AVERAGE CAPACITY 50000 40000 30000 POLAND UK ITALY 1300000 1200000 1100000 1000000 900000 800000 700000 600000 500000 400000 300000 200000 100000 0 CAPACITY PER COUNTRY GERMANY PORTUGAL FRANCE AUSTRIA DENMARK SWEDEN FINLAND TOTAL CAPACITY AVERAGE CAPACITY 20000 10000 0 SWITZERLAND NETHERLANDS BELGIUM SPAIN TOTAL CAPACITY

CAPACITY PER MILLION INHABITANTS AND PERCENTAGE OF POTENTIAL THEORETICAL CAPACITY 10,00 30000 9,00 25000 8,00 7,00 20000 PERCENTAGE. 6,00 5,00 4,00 3,00 15000 10000 CAPACITY, 2,00 5000 1,00 0 0,00 POLAND UK ITALY FINLAND SWEDEN DENMARK AUSTRIA FRANCE PORTUGAL GERMANY SWITZERLAND NETHERLANDS BELGIUM SPAIN Capacity per million inhabitants % of potential

ANALYSIS OF INSTALLED CAPACITY MESOPHILIC (35-40 C) VERSUS THERMOPHILIC (50-55 C) DRY (> 15 % DS) VERSUS WET (< 15 % DS) TWO PHASE (ACIDIFICATION + METHANIZATION) VERSUS SINGLE PHASE (COMBINED) CODIGESTION (SOLID WASTE + OTHER SUBSTRATE) VERSUS SOLID WASTE DIGESTION (ONLY WASTE) MIXED OR RESIDUAL WASTE (NO SEPARATE COLLECTION) VERSUS BIOWASTE (SEPARATE COLLECTION OF ORGANICS)

MESOPHILIC VERSUS THERMOPHILIC 3000000 100 CUMULATIVE (TON/YEAR). 2500000 2000000 1500000 1000000 500000 % THERMO % MESO 80 60 40 20 % OF TOTAL 0 till 1990 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 0 MESO THERMO % MESO % THERMO

MESOPHILIC VERSUS THERMOPHILIC 65% MESOPHILIC VS 35% THERMOPHILIC IN 2006 LAST 2 YEARS: 44% THERMOPHILIC 96% OF THERMOPHILIC PLANTS ARE DRY FERMENTATION ONLY 1 DRY SYSTEM OPERATES MOSTLY MESOPHILICALLY

WET VERSUS DRY 2250000 100 2000000 CUMULATIVE (TON/YEAR). 1750000 1500000 1250000 1000000 750000 500000 % WET % DRY 80 60 40 20 % OF TOTAL 250000 0 till 1990 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 0 WET DRY % WET % DRY

WET VERSUS DRY DRY 57%, WET 43% IN 2003-2004: 60% WET 34% DRY LAST 2 YEARS: 54% DRY

ONE VERSUS TWO-PHASE 3500000 100 CUMULATIVE (TON/YEAR), 3000000 2500000 2000000 1500000 1000000 % TWO % ONE 80 60 40 20 % OF TOTAL 500000 0 till 1990 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 0 ONE TWO % ONE % TWO

ONE VERSUS TWO-PHASE 87% ONE-PHASE VS 13% TWO-PHASE LAST 3 YEARS: 16% TWO-PHASE

SINGLE FEEDSTOCK VERSUS CODIGESTION 3600000 100 3300000 % SOLID WASTE CUMULATIVE (TON/YEAR) 3000000 2700000 2400000 2100000 1800000 1500000 1200000 900000 600000 300000 % CODIGESTION 80 60 40 20 % OF TOTAL 0 till 1990 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 0 SOLID WASTE CODIGESTION % solid waste % codigestion

SINGLE FEEDSTOCK VERSUS CODIGESTION 93% ONLY SOLID WASTE VS 7% CODIGESTION LAST TWO YEARS: 6% CODIGESTION CODIGESTION WITH ENERGY CROPS (CORN)

BIOWASTE VERSUS RESIDUAL WASTE 2200000 100 2000000 CUMULATIVE (TON/YEAR) 1800000 1600000 1400000 1200000 1000000 800000 600000 400000 % RESIDUAL WASTE % BIOWASTE 80 60 40 20 % OF TOTAL 200000 0 till 1990 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 0 BIOWASTE RESIDUAL WASTE % biowaste % residual

BIOWASTE VERSUS RESIDUAL WASTE IN 1998: 87% BIOWASTE VS 13% RESIDUAL WASTE IN 2006: 48% BIOWASTE VS 52% RESIDUAL WASTE LAST TWO YEARS: 33% BIOWASTE VS 67% RESIDUAL WASTE

SUPPLIERS 27 DIFFERENT SUPPLIERS 3 SUPPLIERS HAVE MORE THAN 15 PLANTS OF SAME SYSTEM: VALORGA, KOMPOGAS AND DRANCO LINDE: DRY AND WET SYSTEM + 10 OF EACH FIVE COMPANIES: > 2/3 OF PLANTS AND 70% OF CAPACITY 22 COMPANIES FOR 30% OF CAPACITY, 12 COMPANIES HAVE NOT SOLD A PLANT SINCE 2002

SUPPLIERS DIVERSITY IN SUPPLIERS - 6 COMPANIES WITH DRY TECHNOLOGY - 21 COMPANIES WITH WET TECHNOLOGY

DIVERSITY IN APPLICATION MIXED WASTE + BIOWASTE + RESIDUAL WASTE RESTAURANT WASTE - CORN - INDUSTRIAL ORGANICS AS ADDITIONAL FEEDSTOCKS MIXED/RESIDUAL WASTE: PARTIAL STREAM DIGESTION (20 TO 70% OF ORGANICS) AND FULL STREAM DIGESTION (100% OF ORGANICS)

FULL STREAM DIGESTION RESIDUAL WASTE METALS RDF BIOGAS PROCESS WATER WATER CO 2 DRY SORTING ANAEROBIC DIGESTION DEWATERING AEROBIC COMPOSTING / DRYING INCINERATION OR LANDFILL

PARTIAL STREAM DIGESTION RESIDUAL WASTE METALS RDF CO 2 WATER WATER DRY SORTING AEROBIC COMPOSTING DRYING 20-70 % ANAEROBIC DIGESTION BIOGAS INCINERATION OR LANDFILL

DRANCO PLANT POHLSCHE HEIDE PARTIAL STREAM DIGESTION AND TUNNEL COMPOSTING WITHOUT WASTEWATER PRODUCTION

MAJOR DRIVING FORCES FOR ANAEROBIC DIGESTION PRODUCTION OF RENEWABLE ENERGY: VALUE UP TO 40 TO 50 EURO PER TON DIGESTED ODORS: 200X LESS ODORS TO BE TREATED IN THE BIOFILTERS COMPARED TO AEROBIC TREATMENT SURFACE AREA: TWO TO FOUR TIMES LESS SURFACE AREA NEEDED RECOVERY OF BOTH COMPOST AND BIOENERGY REDUCTION OF ORGANICS GOING TO LANDFILL (EU-DIRECTIVE)

OUTSIDE OF EUROPE LESS THAN 10% OF CAPACITY INSTALLED IN EUROPE EMERGING COUNTRIES: JAPAN, KOREA, AUSTRALIA, ISRAEL, CANADA BUT STILL RATHER LIMITED

CASE STUDY: BRECHT II FACILITY

DRANCO: ANAEROBIC DIGESTION OF SOLID WASTE

DRANCO BRECHT FACILITY LARGEST DIGESTION PLANT IN OPERATION ON BIOWASTE 2 UNITS: 15 000 T/Y AND 50 000 T/Y COMBINED INSTALLED POWER: 2MW SURFACE AREA: 2 HA 5 YEARS OF SUCCESFUL OPERATION ALL COMPOST CERTIFIED AND SOLD

OPERATION BRECHT II 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005* FEEDSTOCK (T/Y) - BIOWASTE - OTHER TOTAL 48 144 1 361 49 505 45 394 966 46 360 45 691 1 776 47 467 51 229 2 525 53 754 52 190 2 110 54 300 PRODUCTION OF BIOGAS - M³ BIOGAS (IN MILLIONS) - M³ BIOGAS/TON INCOMING - M³ BIOGAS/M³/DAY 6.1 122 6.9 5.8 125 6.6 6.0 127 7.4 6.9 127 7.4 - - - VOLUMETRIC CAPACITY USED 83% 83% 70% 81% - *2005 BASED ON 31 WEEKS

BRECHT II PLANT INPUT IN REACTOR & BIOGAS PRODUCTION -DRANCO PLANT BRECHT II- 1.200 240 1.100 220 1.000 200 900 180 tons 800 700 600 500 400 160 140 120 100 80 Nm³/ton input 300 60 200 40 100 20-1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 Week (2003) - Total reactor input Biogas production

BRECHT II PLANT TONS FED & BIOGAS PRODUCTION TONS/WEEK 1.600 300 1.400 250 TON 1.200 1.000 800 200 150 t m³ 600 400 200 100 50-23 28 33 38 43 48 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 2 7 12 17 22 27 32 37 42 47 52 2 7 12 17 22 27 32 37 42 47 52 week - tons fed biogas production per ton

RESULTS 5-YEARS CELEBRATION IGEAN-2 PLANT YEAR BIOWASTE TREATED BIOGAS PRODUCED BIOGAS PER TON ELECTRICITY PRODUCED (MWH) USE OF ENGINES (%) 1 42818 4.769.000 111 7813 89 2 46494 4.888.000 105 7891 89 3 46707 5.233.000 112 8311 88 4 47396 5.639.000 119 8820 95 5 52354 5.667.000 108 9055 97 TOTAL 235769 26.197.000-41890 - AVERAGE 47154 5.239.400 111 8378 92

CONCLUSION STATE-OF-THE-ART CONSIDERABLE GROWTH : AROUND 30% OF BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT OF SOLID WASTE IS ANAEROBIC EXPERIENCED SUPPLIERS WITH VARIETY OF TECHNOLOGIES INTEGRATED IN VARIOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT SCHEMES ACROSS MOST OF EUROPE AD OF SOLID WASTE HAS BECOME AN ESTABLISHED TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY, ON EQUAL FOOTING WITH AEROBIC COMPOSTING FOR EITHER BIOWASTE OR ORGANICS FROM MSW