Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.



Published on

Waste-to-energy technologies convert waste matter into various forms of fuel that can be used to supply energy. Waste feed stocks can include municipal solid waste (MSW); construction and demolition (C&D) debris; agricultural waste, such as crop silage and livestock manure; industrial waste from coal mining, lumber mills, or other facilities; and even the gases that are naturally produced within landfills.


  1. 1. WASTE TO
  2. 2. WHAT IT MEANS?Waste-to-energy technologies convert wastematter into various forms of fuel that can beused to supply energy. Waste feed stocks caninclude municipal solid waste (MSW);construction and demolition (C&D) debris;agricultural waste, such as crop silage andlivestock manure; industrial waste from coalmining, lumber mills, or other facilities; andeven the gases that are naturally producedwithin landfills.
  3. 3. WHY WASTE TO ENERGY?Waste-to-energy technologies can address twosets of environmental issues at one stroke - landuse and pollution from landfills, and the well-know environmental perils of fossil fuels.However, waste-to-energy systems can beexpensive and often limited in the types ofwaste they can use efficiently; only some can beapplied economically today.
  5. 5. Tons 1000 2000 3000 4000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 5000 0 Mumbai Delhi Kolkata Chennai Bengaluru Hyderabad Ahmedabad Kanpur Surat Lucknow Pune Bhopal Jaipur Ludhiana Nagpur Vadodara SOME STATISTICS Indore Varanasi Agra Vishakhapatnam Patna Amritsar Meerut MaduraiMajor cities Coimbatore Thiruvananthpuram Vijayawada Allahabad Srinagar Kochi Production of garbage in Tons/day Chandigarh Mysore Rajkot Faridabad Jabalpur Nashik Bhubaneshwar Dehradun Jamshedpur Bhayandar Ranchi Jammu Guwahati Bhavnagar Raipur Jalgaon
  6. 6. waste generated per capita 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.2 1.4 1.6 0 1 Mumbai Delhi Kolkata Chennai Bengaluru Hyderabad Ahmedabad Kanpur Surat Lucknow Pune Bhopal Jaipur Ludhiana Nagpur Vadodara Indore Varanasi Agra STATISTICS CONTD. Vishakhapatnam Patna Amritsar Meerut Maduraimajor cities Coimbatore Thiruvananthpuram Vijayawada Allahabad Srinagar per capita production in tons Kochi Chandigarh Mysore Rajkot Faridabad Jabalpur Nashik Bhubaneshwar Dehradun Jamshedpur Bhayandar Ranchi Jammu Guwahati Bhavnagar Raipur Jalgaon
  7. 7. Integrated and Sustainable Solid & Liquid Waste Management(Interlinking & interconnecting Method) Composting Vermi – Waste Composting Collection Drying Unit SecondarySegregation SLWM Office Admin Liquid Cattle Shed Waste Tertiary Management Segregation, Processing and storage Unit
  9. 9. TECHONOLGY SELECTIONCONSIDERATIONS • CO2 Control • DXNs Control Environment • Emission Control • Landfill Control • Cost Control • Profit Economy • Growth • Energy Recovery • High Efficiency Energy • Utilization / Sale Waste • Waste type • Waste quality Characteristics • Waste content
  10. 10. ENVIRONMENTSource: Sewage and Industrial Effluent Treatment, J. Arundel (Blackwell Science, 1995)
  12. 12. Mass and Energy BalanceTechnology Plant Capacities (TPD Power Generation MSW) Potential (MW /100 TPD)Biomethanation 150, 350, 500 and 1000 1Landfill with Gas recover 100 0.4Gasification 500 2Compositing NA NAIncineration 500 1.24
  13. 13. WASTE CHARACTERISTICS (INDIAN)Note: Values of coal and fuel oil are included for the purpose of comparisons*Adapted from
  14. 14. Assessment of TechnologiesWTE technology options have been analysed using a set of five main evaluation criteria:• System Configuration (0-30) – Simplicity and operability (0-12), process flexibility (0-12) and scale-up potential (0- 6).• System auxiliaries (0-30) – Pre-treatment (0-20), post-treatment (0-10).• Environmental Aspects (0-30)• Resource Recovery (0-30)• Commercial Aspects (0-30) – Capital Cost (0-12), Operational Cost (0-12), Track Record (0-6).
  15. 15. Evaluation checklist
  17. 17. CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF WTE TECHNOLOGIESCRITERIA INCINERATION ANAEROBIC DIGESTION GASIFICATION/ PYROLYSISPower generation Steam turbine Gas turbine Gas/Steam turbineEfficiency 50 – 60% (based 85-90% (based on 50 – 60% (based on 90-95% (based onon calorific value) volatiles) calorific value)volatiles)Residue Ash Digested slurry Ash, CharResidue Disposal Landfill Farm land Reuse possible, or as roading materialRelative Capital Very High Medium Very HighCostO&M High Low Limited (few moving parts)Commercial viability Less viable owing to Readily viable Varies considerably costly downstream air pollution control
  18. 18. CRITERIA INCINERATION ANAEROBIC DIGESTION GASIFICATION/ PYROLYSISAir Pollution Overall Dust Collection, Gas H2S – Scrubbing Dust collection, Gas Scrubbing (Elaborate) (Compact) scrubbing (Compact)Water Pollution Minor Down-stream aerobic LowSolid/Hazardous Ash to Landfill Stabilised sludge Ash/Slag (Reuse)wastesEnvironmental Can be minimized Minimum Can be controlledimpacts (costly) (additional costs)Waste disposal Complete, except for ash Complete except for Complete, except for ash to landfill sludge stabilizationWaste Collection Municipal/Agency Municipal/Agency Municipal/Agency
  19. 19. Commercial ViabilityGOI have provided assistance to the tune of Rs.2500 crores under12th Finance Commission for SWM. Income Tax relief has also beenprovided to waste management agencies and Tax free municipalbonds have been permitted by GOI.The 11th Five Year Plan has envisaged an investment of Rs.2212crores for SWM.Private Sector Participation in SWM: The private sector has beeninvolved in door-to door collection of solid waste, street sweepingin a limited way, secondary storage and transportation and fortreatment and disposal of waste. Cities which have pioneered inPPPs in SWM includeBangalore, Chennai, Hyderabad, Ahemdabad, Surat, Guwahati, Mumbai, Jaipur etc.
  20. 20. WHY NOW?
  21. 21. Funding
  22. 22. GOVERNMENT POLICIES The establishments providing wastes like industries, hospitals are required to follow the relevant Rules under the Environment Protection Act 1986 as follows: Hazardous Waste (Management and handling Rules),1989 Bio-medical Waste (Management and Handling Rules) 1998 Municipal Solid Waste (Management and Handling Rules 2000) GOI Initiatives for SWM  Reforms Agenda (Fiscal, Institutional, Legal)  Technical Manual on Municipal Solid Waste Management  Technology Advisory Group on Municipal Solid Waste Management  Inter-Ministerial Task Force on Integrated Plant Nutrient Management from city compost.
  23. 23.  Tax Free Bonds by ULBs permitted by Government of India Income Tax relief to Waste Management agencies Public-Private Partnership in SWM Capacity Building Urban Reforms Incentive Fund Guidelines for PSP and setting up of Regulatory Authority Introduction of Commercial Accounting System in ULBs & other Sector Reforms Model Municipal Bye-Laws framed / circulated for benefit of ULBs for adoption Financial Assistance by Government of India - 12th Finance Commission Grants
  24. 24. COMPETING TECHNOLOGIESTECHNOLOGY ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGESMSW • Reduces waste • Project cost per MW- Rs 10.5 cr • Produces fertilizers • Can leach toxins into groundwater • Produces byproducts • Releases significant greenhouse-gas • Uses potentially valuable land emissions, especially methane • Reduces significantly GHGSolar power • Free beyond initial capital investment and • Project cost per MW- Rs 17cr maintenance • Efficiency of only 6% to 20% • Available to many regions • Requires consistent minimum levels of • National Missions support Solar Power sunlight; not suitable for cloudy climates extensively or useful after sundown • Solar wafers are non-biodegradableTidal Energy • Zero Emissions • High maintenance costs • Can produce more power per turbine • Requires proximity to coast or river than wind • Somewhat intermittent: power not generated at slack tide • Still in early R&D phaseHydroelectric power • Low-cost energy generation • Dam construction can destroy habitats • Renewable non-polluting resource and alter local ecosystems • Creates new reservoirs or lakes • Must be located on significant waterway; • Project cost per MW- Rs 4 cr not suitable for drier regions
  25. 25. COMPETING TECHNOLOGIESTECHNOLOGY ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGESWind power • Free beyond initial capital investment • Efficiency of only 20% to 30% for and maintenance ground-based systems • Already cost-competitive with fossil • High initial capital cost Intermittent fuels power production • Can supply localized power • Requires large land area used independent of grid inefficiently • Relatively small footprint • Zero emissionsNuclear power • Well-established and cost-competitive • Radioactive waste from power plants with the least expensive energy sources takes hundreds to thousands of years to used today decay, and therefore must be stored in • Lower emissions – i.e., pollutants and a safe long-term location greenhouse gases – than coal and other • Risk of “meltdown” or Chernobyl-scale conventional power disasters • Unavailability of domestic enriched uraniumThermal power • Project cost per MW- Rs. 4 cr • Limited coal • Polluting technology
  27. 27. CASE STUDY ; Timarpur Okhla Integrated Municipal Solid Waste Management Project
  28. 28. ABOUT THE PROJECTDelhi generates 7,000 metric tonnes (MT) of Municipal Solid Waste(MSW) daily, which is expected to increase to 18,000 MT by 2021. Thepresent landfill sites that are being utilized for disposing the garbage areapproaching their full capacity and even with the envisaged capacityaddition, the situation is unlikely to improve.The Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) has thus embarked on aproject to reduce the amount of MSW being disposed in the landfill sitesand utilizing the waste for productive purposes such as generation ofpower from waste. MCD has identified two locations, namely Timarpurand Okhla, for implementing this project.
  29. 29. The following facilities are to be developed as a part of the integrated municipal waste handlingproject:1. Plants for converting MSW to Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF), capable of processing 1300 TPDatOkhla and 650 TPD at Timarpur.2. A bio-methanation plant capable of handling of 100 TPD of green waste at Okhla.3. A water recovery plant capable of handling up to 6 MLD of treated sewage at the Okhla site forrecycling into process water and cooling water.4. A Power plant with a generation capacity of 16 MW at Okhla.5. Transportation of RDF from Timarpur to Okhla for combustion in the boiler of the powerplant mentioned above.The project is registered with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change(UNFCCC) for the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) to earn 2.6 million Certified EmissionReductions (CERs) over a ten-year period.
  30. 30. QUESTIONS YET UNANSWERED!!!!• What are the reasons for delay in commencement in operations?• What are the reasons for capacity increase from 16MW to 20 MW?• Is it a peak load or base load plant?• Is it connected to the grid? What are the constraints with respect to voltage and frequency fluctuations?• How will you account for the supply of waste in monsoon?• What are the waste segregating technologies used, ash and toxic gases disposal.• What are the reasons behind selecting Okhla as plant location, which is away from landfill and very close to residential area?• How are the odour and sanitation aspects being addressed with respect to local resident community?• How is the garbage being stored? Are reserves being maintained?• Do you have scope of increasing the tariff in future?• Environmental clearances and CDM credits were for 16MW, how it will be modified for 20 MW.• Is Consolidated Environment Impact Assessment (CEIA) being submitted?• Any other managerial hurdles faced in implementation of the project?
  34. 34. PROSIncentives and cash flow through carbon creditsReduced waste & increased use of land due to decrease in land fills (As MSW increase at approx 1-1.33%)Reduction in release of GHG and toxins into water.No additional fuel required to run the plant as it can support its power requirementSupply linkage issues don’t exist after tie-up’s with ULB’s.Commercially viable in many countries.Mature Technology.Increase in city sanitation.Control of emission of toxic gasses and particulates in the atmosphere can be done using filters.Done on small fronts.Support of finance by Govt.Energy prices on par with conventional sources.Long term price stabilityControl of waste streamMetal Recovery after incineration
  35. 35. CONSAbsence of segregation of waste at sourceLack of technical expertise and appropriate institutional arrangementUnwillingness of ulbs to introduce proper collection, segregation, transportation andtreatment / disposal systemsIndifferent attitude of citizens towards waste management due to lack of awarenessLack of community participation towards waste management and hygienic conditionsNeed to rationalize tariff and user chargesComplexity in unbundling urban service delivery
  36. 36. RECOMMENDATIONS• High rate biomethanation is more tailored for waste-to-energy projects in India due to the combination of factors like cost, technology, effectiveness and environmental benefits• The present trend favour material recovery facilities for and a shift away from landfills for MSW disposal.• Composting is not a WTE option and does not come out as a meritorious waste treatment process.• Technologies such as landfill with gas recovery (LFG) and composting can also become viable options for certain locations (in India) as a short to medium term option.• Outsourcing of all activities under Solid Waste Management Services recommended by 12th Finance Commission for using grants• ULBs to concentrate on segregation of waste at source• Waste processing like composting, bio-methanation should be done through public-private partnerships / private sector• Bio-medical waste to be managed by Central Bio-Medical Waste Management Facilities.• Various grants like Construction grant, Minimum revenue grant & Operational grant• Integrated solid waste Management on PPP basis