Bio-affald i den grønne omstilling

Transkript

1 Bio-affald i den grønne omstilling Ciprian Cimpan Marianne Rothmann Birgitte Lilholt Sørensen Henrik Wenzel SDU Life Cycle Engineering, Affaldsdage 2016, Vejlefjord Hotel, Vejle, november 2016 Dansk Affaldsforening

2 Karakteristik af affald på Fyn - 489,000 inhabitants (40% in Odense) - 10 municipalities - Average density 100 persons/km 2-27% multi-family and 73% singlefamily residences - 277,000 tonnes/y total MSW generation 570 kg/inh./y 2

3 Karakteristik af affald på Fyn 3

4 Genvindingsprocenter på Fyn Recycling rates in each municipality according to appendix 5 calculations (Miljøstyrelsen, 2014) supported by pie charts. The size of the pie chart indicates the magnitude of material collected. 4

5 Materialegenvinding på Fyn Paper Cardboard Glass Metal Plastics Assens 71 % 55 % 51 % 52 % 32 % Faaborg-Midtfyn 64 % 38 % 69 % 62 % 25 % Kerteminde 47 % 64 % 86 % 50 % 44 % Langeland 69 % 53 % 83 % 53 % 23 % Middelfart 95 % 43 % 62 % 98 % 22 % Nordfyn 54 % 30 % 79 % 53 % 14 % Nyborg 72 % 44 % 74 % 36 % 31 % Odense 75 % 30 % 79 % 28 % 21 % Svendborg 52 % 29 % 66 % 43 % 11 % Ærø 41 % 73 % 72 % 34 % 21 % Funen, Total 69 % 38 % 73 % 44 % 23 % 5

6 Affaldsforbrænding på Fyn Waste incineration plant (WtE) Quantity of residual waste [tonnes] Share of the residual waste Odense 82, % Krafvarmeværk A/S Svendborg 22, % Kraftvarmeværk A/S Energnist 7, % Total 111, % 6

7 Bio-affaldspotentiale på Fyn

8 Bio-affaldspotentiale på Fyn Total Potential Total low collection Total high collection Singlefamily Multifamily Singlefamily Multifamily Singlefamily Multifamily [tonnes] [tonnes] [tonnes] [tonnes] [tonnes] [tonnes] [tonnes] [tonnes] [tonnes] Assens Faaborg- Midtfyn Kerteminde Langeland Middelfart Nordfyn Nyborg Odense Svendborg Ærø TOTAL

9 Analyser & metoder Conceptual design of new waste management systems - Separate collection of recyclables and organic waste/ biowaste - Mechanical processing and sorting of residual waste before WtE Mass and energy flow modelling - Detailed mapping of the current waste management system - Mass flow model development for simulation of different management strategies Carbon footprint - system modeling based on consequential life cycle assessment methodology (i.e. system expansion to include processes that react to changes in waste management and use of marginal data) Socio- and business economics assessment - Under work at the moment 9

10 Omfang: 24 forgrundsscenarier SF = Single Family households, MF = Multi Family households Systems archetypes Separate collection Treatment of remaining residual waste WtE: Incineration CHP CS-ADwet: Central sorting with wet digestion CS-ADdry: Central sorting with dry digestion CS-Biodry: Central sorting with biodrying System 0 Existing schemes 0-WtE 0-CS-ADwet 0-CS-ADdry 0-CS-Biodry System 1 Existing schemes + Biowaste SF System 2 Existing schemes + Biowaste SF and MF 1-WtE 1-CS-ADwet 1-CS-ADdry 1-CS-Biodry 2-WtE 2-CS-ADwet 2-CS-ADdry 2-CS-Biodry System 3 Dual-stream 3-WtE 3-CS-ADwet 3-CS-ADdry 3-CS-Biodry System 4 Dual-stream + Biowaste SF System 5 Dual-stream + Biowaste SF and MF 4-WtE 4-CS-ADwet 4-CS-ADdry 4-CS-Biodry 5-WtE 5-CS-ADwet 5-CS-ADdry 5-CS-Biodry 10

11 Nye elementer Long-term future perspective on the energy system 2 tracks towards the future energy system in DK time periods ( , , and beyond 2050) Quality aspect of waste-derived energy Effects of flexibility in production of waste-derived electricity and heat which leads to different technologies being affected on the market Indirect effects of MSW management strategies Effects/Synergy with manure-biogas in DK co-digestion of biowaste with manure Effects of recycling on already existing WtE capacity liberated capacity by increased recycling can be offered on the market 11

12 Resultater: Materialegenvinding Material efficiency results - separate collection and treatment % functional unit / year System System 0-CS System System 2-CS System System 3-CS System System 5-CS 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0-WtE ADwet ADdry Biodry 2-WtE ADwet ADdry Biodry 3-WtE ADwet ADdry Biodry 5-WtE ADwet ADdry Biodry 14% 14% 14% 14% 31% 31% 31% 31% 37% 33% 44% 50% 20% 20% 30% 30% 59% 55% 65% 71% 4% 4% 4% 34% 34% 6% 6% 6% 24% 24% 23% 23% 23% 23% 4% 4% 4% 23% 23% 23% 23% 6% 6% 6% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 40% 40% 40% 40% 40% 40% 40% 40% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 0% Collected for recycling Collected biowaste Incineration Central sorting materials Central sorting RDF Central sorting organics Separate collection level 12

13 13

14 Resultater: Materialegenvinding 14

15 Resultater: Carbon Footprint Carbon footprint (net) - reference system without biowaste vs. alternatives with biowaste (mono- and co-digestion with animal slurries) 15

16 tonne CO 2 eq. /tonne imported waste Resultater: effekten af affaldsimport Low eff. = landfill without gas utilization High eff. = landfill with gas utilization Present ( ) Mid-term ( ) (Long-term ( )) Low eff. Landfill High eff. Landfill Low eff. Landfill High eff. Landfill Low eff. Landfill High eff. Landfill 1 0,5 0-0,5-1 -1,5 Preparation UK Incineration emissions DK Avoided landfilling UK Transport (ship+land) Avoided energy DK Net 16

17 Nogle konklusioner Materialegenvinding hvordan når vi målene? - Kildesortering og indsamling af bio-affald er den nemmeste og mest omkostningseffektive måde at nå målet om 50% genvinding på - En genvindingsprocent over 65% er opnåelig - Materialegenvinding vil udgøre den væsentligste miljøgevinst ved affaldshåndtering i en vedvarende energi fremtid Carbon footprint - GHG gevinsten ved W-t-E falder i fremtiden, når energisystemet udvikles mod vedvarende energi - Fremtidige GHG besparelser ved W-t-E afhænger systemintegrationen fx RDF lagring til brug for varme i vintersæsonen - Bio-affald bør indsamles separat og prioriteres som co-substrat til gylle-biogas - Import af affald til danske affalds CHP anlæg er klimavenligt på kort til mellemlangt sigt. Import støtter på denne måde en transition mod større grad af materialegenvinding. På langt sigt er der større klimagevinst ved at deponere affald på moderne deponier end ved W-t-E 17

18 Forbehandling af kildesorteret bio-affald

19 Forbehandling af kildesorteret bio-affald

20 Lokalisering af og transport til og fra forbehandlingsanlæg

21 Lokalisering af og transport til og fra forbehandlingsanlæg

22 Omkostninger ved forbehandling Plant 1 Plant 2 Plant 3 Plant 4 Plant 5 Capacity tonnes/year 10,000 15,000 20,000 30,000 60,000 Operation hours hours/year 1,940 1,940 3,880 3,880 3,880 Investment buildings 1000 kr. 5,185 5,185 5,185 5,185 5,185 Investment equipment 1000 kr. 12,500 20,020 12,500 20,020 23,870 Investment aeration and biofilter 1000 kr Other (10%) 1000 kr. 1,336 2,088 1,336 2,088 2,473 Total investment 1000 kr. 19,872 28,144 19,872 28,144 32,379 Capital expenditure 1000 kr./year 1,380 1,989 1,380 1,989 2,301 Maintenance 1000 kr./year Insurance 1000 kr./year Operators 1000 kr./year ,000 1,000 1,000 Electricity and water 1000 kr./year ,110 2,115 Operational costs 1000 kr./year 2,858 3,913 3,737 4,959 6,418

23 Omkostninger ved forbehandling

24 Transport Transport Methane yield Price Reject biopulp incineration kr. per ton kr. per ton Nm 3 /ton VS kr. per Nm 3 CH 4 kr. per ton biopulp biopulp Pessimistic values Optimistic values Omkostninger ved forbehandling biopulp reject

25 Transport Transport Methane yield Price Reject biopulp incineration kr. per ton kr. per ton Nm 3 /ton VS kr. per Nm 3 CH 4 kr. per ton biopulp biopulp Pessimistic values Optimistic values Omkostninger ved forbehandling biopulp reject Odense Kommune Fyn samlet

26 Restaffald Bioaffald Restaffald Bioaffald Papir/pap Plast/metal Restaffald Bioaffald Papir/pap Plast Glas/flasker Metal Scenarie 1 Forbehandling Pulpning Bioforgasning Mulige scenarier fremover? Scenarie 2 Forbehandling Pulpning Bioforgasning Central sortering Kilde opdelt Glas/flasker Scenarie 3 Forbehandling Pulpning Bioforgasning Central sortering Restaffald Glas/flasker Scenarie 4 Forbehandling Pulpning Bioforgasning Central sortering Restaffald/bioaffald Glas/flasker

27 Full report at: re/lifecycleengineering/researchpublications Thank you! 27

28 Extra slides for Q&A

29 Different qualities for electricity and heat Continuous electricity or baseload power production is associated with power plants with continuous operation and supply of electricity throughout the year, with breaks only for planned maintenance or service. Flexible electricity represents a balancing power production, and is associated with power plants which can operate based on market demand. Continuous heat, (same as continuous electricity) accounts for the heat generated from waste incineration (together with electricity) and generated in the utilization of biomethane (heat as a by-product of electricity production). Flexible heat here accounts for heat generation from combustion of RDF in waste incineration plants. RDF is assumed prioritized (stored) for heat generation in the cold part of the year. 29

30 Waste management considering the future evolution of Danish energy Continuous and flexible electricity and heat will replace different marginal production depending on time perspective Electricity Heat Present Continuous 100 % coal power 100 % natural gas Flexible 100 % coal power 100 % natural gas Mid-term Continuous 10 % coal, 5 % natural gas, 18 % biomass 1, 66 % wind power 50 % heat pumps and 50 % natural gas Flexible 100 % coal power 100 % natural gas Long-term Continuous 5 % coal, 5 % natural gas, 15 % biomas 2 and 75 % wind and solar power 50 % heat pumps, 25 % biomass and 25 % natural gas Flexible 25 % coal, 25 % natural gas, 50 % biomass 2 50 % biomass and 50 % natural gas Beyond 2050 Continuous 100 % wind and solar power 80 % heat pumps and 20 % biomass Flexible 100 % biomass % biomass [1] The biomass marginal is used in direct combustion CHP [2] The biomass marginal is used in wood gasification with syngas reforming to SNG stored and used for power 30

31 Marginal biomass for future energy production A progressive biomass marginal, which reflects an increasing demand for biomass over time. A dirty biomass marginal, which reflects the use of biomass with a high carbon footprint in all four time perspectives, namely harvest from existing boreal forests. Progressive biomass marginal 100 years 20 years amortisation amortisation (kg CO₂ per MJ) (kg CO₂ per MJ) Dirty biomass marginal 100 years 20 years amortisation amortisation (kg CO₂ per MJ) (kg CO₂ per MJ) Present ( ) Mid-term ( ) Long-term ( ) Beyond

32 Cascading effects Combustible waste imports Current waste incineration capacity will still be utilized fully in the future Recycling liberates capacity which can be offered on the market Importing of combustible waste from countries which still landfill brings GHG benefits, and is foreseeable to happen until

33 Biowaste co-digestion with animal manure - avoiding reference manure handling There is strong demand for cheap biomass co-substrates biowaste can contribute to more manure biogas production 33

34 Biowaste co-digestion with animal manure - avoiding maize production Alternatively to promoting more manure-biogas, biowaste can substitute other co-substrates, such as energy crops in the biogas plants 34

35 Distribution of population in % within the region of Funen (left) and population density in persons/km 2 in each of the 10 municipalities (right) 35

36 Share of Population (2014) Share of housings (2014) Demography of the catchment area 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Urban areas (byområder) Rural areas (Landdistrikter) Primary housing Secondary housing 36

37 Distribution of single family households (left) and multifamily households (right) 37

38 Recyclables 40% in Odense 38

39 Recyclables collected amounts and modes of collection 39