Is It Better To Burn or Bury Waste for Clean Electricity Generation?

Abstract

The use of municipal solid waste (MSW) to generate electricity through landfill-gas-to-energy (LFGTE) and waste-to-energy (WTE) projects represents roughly 14% of U.S. nonhydro renewable electricity generation. Although various aspects of LFGTE and WTE have been analyzed in the literature, this paper is the first to present a comprehensive set of life-cycle emission factors per unit of electricity generated for these energy recovery options. In addition, sensitivity analysis is conducted on key inputs (e.g., efficiency of the WTE plant, landfill gas management schedules, oxidation rate, and waste composition) to quantify the variability in the resultant life-cycle emissions estimates. While methane from landfills results from the anaerobic breakdown of biogenic materials, the energy derived from WTE results from the combustion of both biogenic and fossil materials. The greenhouse gas emissions for WTE ranges from 0.4 to 1.5 MTCO 2 e/MWh, whereas the most agressive LFGTE scenerio results in 2.3 MTCO 2 e/MWh. WTE also produces lower NO x emissions than LFGTE, whereas SO x emissions depend on the specific configurations of WTE and LFGTE.

Factors influencing the life cycle burdens of the recovery of energy from residual municipal waste

“…Mathiesen et al (2009) discussed some of the issues in identifying the ''marginal technology'' (the energy production technology or technologies displaced by the EfW) and noted that making the selection was a complex process which should be subject to sensitivity analysis when performing LCA studies. Kaplan et al's (2009) LCA of EfW and landfill in the USA selected 1 MW h of electrical power production rather than mass of waste managed as the functional unit. They concluded that EfW emitted less CO 2(eq) , SO 2 and NOx than coal-fired power or from landfill with power generation, but more of each pollutant than conventional gas-fired power.…”

Waste Not, Want Not: Analyzing the Economic and Environmental Viability of Waste-to-Energy (WTE) Technology for Site-Specific Optimization of Renewable Energy Options

“…This tool has been in use for more than a decade, and incorporates comprehensive energy, environmental impact, and cost models for MSW management alternatives, including landfill disposal, composting, recycling, and combustion with energy recovery (EPA 2000; Harrison et al 2000;Kaplan et al 2009). EPA and RTI have recently been developing a new version of the tool for public distribution (eliminating a previous requirement for use of commercially licensed software).…”

“…Due to the lack of detailed information about the landfill where Boulder's residual MSW is currently discarded, we did not perform new modeling of that waste management alternative. Instead, the results for MSW combustion are compared to estimates of energy and environmental impacts of landfill disposal with electricity generation from landfill gas that Kaplan et al (2009) developed using a previous version of the MSW-DST model, using nationally representative conditions and assumptions.…”

“…Costs were approximately halved for the large system. Kaplan et al (2009) compared life-cycle impacts of landfill gas-to-energy and mass-burn WTE for representative conditions in the United States. They estimated about 590 kWh of electricity would be produced per ton of MSW combusted, producing 0.91 kg/kWh of biogenic CO 2 and 0.56 kg/kWh of fossil CO 2 as direct emissions.…”

Waste to Energy: An Assessment of Application of the Selective Fuel for Applications in Industries using a Mixture of "A" Grade Coal and Municipal Solid Waste

“…The projects like these even benefits the waste management issue as the waste itself acts as a resource. WTE can reduce the transport of MSW to distant landfills and the associated emissions and fuel consumption [4]. According to 2069/70 budget of Kathmandu Metropoltan City (KMC), the annual spending on landfilling is Rs 7370230.68 [6].…”