Characterization of solid-waste conversion and cogeneration systems

Technical Report · Tue Aug 15 04:00:00 EDT 1978

DOI:https://doi.org/10.2172/6169636· OSTI ID:6169636

Ritschard, R L; Haven, K F; Henriquez, M; Kay, J; Walzer, W

Recovery of municipal solid wastes (MSW) can reduce the mass of landfilled wastes by as much as 95% and can tap a vast new energy resource. The yearly collection of MSW is estimated to be 125 million tons nationwide. Three basic technologies for recovering energy from MSW are considered, namely: direct combustion using a waterwall incinerator in which heat from burning refuse is converted to steam by circulating water in steel tubes jacketing the interior of the incinerator; manufacture of a relatively uniform shredded, pulverized, or pelleted refuse-derived fuel for supplemental firing in a utility boiler; and pyrolysis or destructive distillation of MSW to extract a low-Btu fuel gas. While resource and energy recovery systems can be installed independently, the processes described here include both energy and resource-recovery systems as well as necessary pollution-control equipment for gaseous emissions. Three end-use applications of cogeneration systems are characterized, including: fluidized-bed cogeneration systems for use in the pulp and paper industry; diesel system using the digested sewage gas of a sewage treatment plant for electricity generation as well as heating and pumping; and an enhanced oil recovery system. Comparisons are made of system inputs per 10/sup 12/ Btu steam output for Landguard pyrolysis, Garrett flash pyrolysis, Union Carbide Purox process, direct combustion, refuse-derived fuels, fluidized-bed cogeneration, diesel cogeneration, and enhanced oil recovery (cogeneration). The RFD system is by far the cheapest to build and is also the most efficient in terms of energy recovery per ton of MSW. The fluidized-bed system has the highest overall system efficiency. However, the PUROX system uses the least ancillary energy and is the only system not requiring an input water flow. Thus the RFD is the most favorable for capital inputs and the PUROX is the most favorable for operational inputs.

• Research Organization: California Univ., Berkeley (USA). Lawrence Berkeley Lab.
• DOE Contract Number: W-7405-ENG-48
• OSTI ID: 6169636
• Report Number(s): LBL-7883
• Country of Publication: United States
• Language: English

Related Subjects

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS
200103* -- Fossil-Fueled Power Plants-- Waste-Fueled Systems
29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY
290800 -- Energy Planning & Policy-- Heat Utilization-- (1980-)
299003 -- Energy Planning & Policy-- Unconventional Sources & Power Generation-- Other-- (-1989)
32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATION
320604 -- Energy Conservation
Consumption
& Utilization-- Municipalities & Community Systems-- Municipal Waste Management-- (1980-)
CHEMICAL REACTIONS
CO-GENERATION
COMBUSTION
CONVERSION
DECOMPOSITION
DEUS
DIESEL FUELS
EFFICIENCY
ENERGY EFFICIENCY
ENERGY RECOVERY
ENERGY SOURCES
ENHANCED RECOVERY
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
EVALUATION
FLUIDIZED BED
FOSSIL FUELS
FUELS
INDUSTRY
LAND USE
MANAGEMENT
MUNICIPAL WASTES
NORTH AMERICA
OXIDATION
PAPER INDUSTRY
PETROLEUM
POWER GENERATION
PUBLIC HEALTH
PYROLYSIS
RECOVERY
REFUSE DERIVED FUELS
RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES
RESOURCES
SOLID WASTES
STEAM GENERATION
TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT
THERMOCHEMICAL PROCESSES
USA
USES
WASTE MANAGEMENT
WASTES
WOOD PRODUCTS INDUSTRY