Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Comparing the greenhouse gas emissions from three alternative waste combustion concepts

  • Pasi Vainikka*
  • , Eemeli Tsupari
  • , Kai Sipilä
  • , Mikko Hupa
  • *Corresponding author for this work
    • VTT (former employee or external)
    • Åbo Akademi University

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

    Abstract

    Three alternative condensing mode power and combined heat and power (CHP) waste-to-energy concepts were compared in terms of their impacts on the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from a heat and power generation system. The concepts included (i) grate, (ii) bubbling fluidised bed (BFB) and (iii) circulating fluidised bed (CFB) combustion of waste. The BFB and CFB take advantage of advanced combustion technology which enabled them to reach electric efficiency up to 35% and 41% in condensing mode, respectively, whereas 28% (based on the lower heating value) was applied for the grate fired unit. A simple energy system model was applied in calculating the GHG emissions in different scenarios where coal or natural gas was substituted in power generation and mix of fuel oil and natural gas in heat generation by waste combustion. Landfilling and waste transportation were not considered in the model. GHG emissions were reduced significantly in all of the considered scenarios where the waste combustion concepts substituted coal based power generation. With the exception of condensing mode grate incinerator the different waste combustion scenarios resulted approximately in 1 Mton of fossil CO2-eq. emission reduction per 1 Mton of municipal solid waste (MSW) incinerated. When natural gas based power generation was substituted by electricity from the waste combustion significant GHG emission reductions were not achieved.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)426-437
    JournalWaste Management
    Volume32
    Issue number3
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2012
    MoE publication typeA1 Journal article-refereed

    Funding

    Financial support from the Bioenergy NoE (through contract SES6-CT-2003-502788) and the Graduate School in Chemical Engineering are gratefully acknowledged.

    UN SDGs

    This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

    1. SDG 11 - Sustainable Cities and Communities
      SDG 11 Sustainable Cities and Communities
    2. SDG 12 - Responsible Consumption and Production
      SDG 12 Responsible Consumption and Production
    3. SDG 13 - Climate Action
      SDG 13 Climate Action

    Keywords

    • Co-combustion
    • coal
    • combustion
    • emissions
    • energy model
    • greenhouse gas
    • municipal solid waste
    • solid recovered fuel

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Comparing the greenhouse gas emissions from three alternative waste combustion concepts'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this