A recent study (PDF) from the American Chemistry Council and the University of Texas at Austin has demonstrated that fuel created from nonrecycled post-consumer plastics and other waste can be used to power energy-intensive commercial and industrial operations.
Michael Webber and his team of researchers at the University of Texas at Austin Cockrell School of Engineering tested a fuel made from nonrecycled residue from material recovery facilities (MRFs), which sort municipal waste. About 5 to 15 percent of that waste is too contaminated or soiled to be recycled economically, and it normally would go to landfills. This residue is composed mostly of high energy content nonrecycled plastics and fiber -- mostly paper, paperboard, and cardboard.
A study demonstrated that solid recovered fuel created from nonrecycled plastics and other waste can power energy-intensive commercial and industrial operations. (Source: Balcones Resources/University of Texas at Austin)
This mixed residue can be processed into solid recovered fuel (SRF), which can replace or supplement traditional fuel sources. The study looked at the benefits and tradeoffs -- economic, energetic, and environmental -- of converting nonrecycled post-consumer plastics and fiber waste from MRF streams into SRF. A pilot project tested an SRF created from such residue and used to power a cement kiln in Texas.
Balcones Fuel Technology of Little Rock, Ark., used a blend of 60 percent MRF residue and 40 percent post-industrial waste products to produce a mix estimated at 60 percent plastic and 40 percent fibrous material. The research team conducted an experimental test burn of 130 tons of the fuel in the cement kiln's precalciner, a combustion chamber that preheats and decarbonizes raw materials before they enter the kiln. A ton of the fuel was fed into the kiln every hour for 24 hours. The rate was then raised to two tons per hour for the next 48 hours.
Based on heating value measured during the experiment, the SRF supplied about 10 percent of the precalciner's energy needs during the one-ton/hour test and 20 percent during the two-ton/hour test. The researchers also sent a sample of the fuel to an independent lab for elemental analysis and energy value calculation. The study found that the SRF provides the same energy (Btu/lb) as the bituminous coal the kiln normally uses. The SRF's energy density is 10 percent higher than sub-bituminous coals and 80 percent higher than lignite coals.
Researchers also recorded emission data from the test burn. The data was used in a lifecycle analysis of SRF production and use, including transportation, landfill, and processing steps. Energy use and emissions were tracked at each step for two cases. In the reference case, MRF residue went to a landfill, and the kiln used only coal for fuel. In the SRF case, the residue was processed into fuel and offset some of the coal used to power the kiln. The SRF case reduced the kiln's sulfur dioxide emissions by 50 percent and carbon emissions by 1.5 percent over the reference case. The lifecycle analysis showed that, at one ton/hour, the SRF reduced sulfur dioxide emissions by 19 percent to 44 percent.
Webber's study concluded that diverting as little as 5 percent of nonrecyclable materials from MRFs and recovering their energy in the form of SRFs would generate enough energy to power 700,000 American homes each year. By displacing coal, that diversion would eliminate the same amount of carbon emissions as removing a million cars from US roads.
The carbon emission savings are small, but don't miss the real point. From what I understand, isn't the real goal of using these unrecyclable materials to keep it out of landfills, and therefore reducing the need for so many landfills? We do get complacent in this country about landfills, because we do a good job of hiding them. Problem is that we are running out of places to hide them, and nobody wants a landfill in their back yard. A good point was made that in Europe, they are more concious of the issue of landfills, because they don't have as many places to hide them, and the problem is more in the public eye. It seems like a win-win-win situation. How could you argue with a system that reduces the number of mountains that we have to blow the top off of, reduces the landfill waste, reduces large amounts of SO2 (less scrubbing necessary), and saves a little of Carbon emissions as a bonus. Without some data, it seems moot to argue about the 700,000 homes/year, so it might be 500,000 or 800,000 who really cares, let's not miss the point, which is not carbon sequestering.
The carbon emissons are only 1.5 % ? that is pitiful. This is probably within experimental error. why bother with this approach? Is SO2 that big an issue to scrub? I suggest it is misleading to take huge landfill numbers and mulitply by some small possible not even real % and claim that recovering energy from SRF s is equal to 700,000 homes /yr.
Nadine, to clarify, these do not use recyclables, but items that can't be recycled. To answer your question, during the reporting for this feature article on fuels from plastic: http://www.designnews.com/author.asp?section_id=1392&doc_id=242808 I learned from industry experts that solid recovery fuel (SRF) and/or refuse derived fuel (RDF) processes, which mix paper with plastic, are more common in Europe, but not yet so in North America. I also learned that, in general, because there's much less landfill space--due to much smaller geography and higher population density per square mile--Europe is farther along in R&D and also deployment of turning plastics into fuel, meaning prevalence, not scale of deployment.
Thanks for the clarification on the different processes Ann. I was referring to the fact that both use post-consumer trash or recyclables to make fuel. I should have been clearer.
How is Europe ahead of North America using this? I haven't heard of any large-scale use of this type of fuel.
Most new or expanded landfills in the US are placed in extremely poor communities. I don't think we have the space. I think it's that marginalized areas are easily manipulated here. It's hard to focus on protecting the environment when the kids are hungry.
Thanks, Nadine. This is a different type of fuel than JBI makes. It's a solid recovered fuel (SRF) that mixes plastic and other waste, mostly paper-based, via compression into pellets that can be burned. As we reported here http://www.designnews.com/author.asp?section_id=1392&doc_id=242808 JBI does something quite different: plastics to fuel (PTF) using pyrolysis (thermochemical, not burning), which creates fuel oil out of plastics via chemical, not mechanical, processes. Regarding commercialization, I don't think anything in particular is keeping these technologies from the market. They've all been in R&D for awhile and are in process of being scaled up. North America is considerably behind Europe in this field, partly because (I've been told) we've had more room for landfills so less motivation.
Nice article. This sounds similar to what JBI Inc does in Canada. There's been a lot of research and breakthroughs in this but very little implementation.
What's preventing this from getting out into the market? Or, at least used/purchased by governments or large corporations who can be innovators.
The idea is to use a resource that's being wasted and would otherwise end up producing C02, plus get a cleaner-burning fuel. SRF is more common in Europe and other countries, but less so in the US, as we discuss here http://www.designnews.com/author.asp?section_id=1392&doc_id=242808
Thanks for clarifying Ann. That makes much more sense, and with the comparison to being cleaner than coal burning, sounds like this could have a bright future.
Beth, SRF is created by compression, not by burning. The emissions discussed here are from the normal operation of the cement kiln, not from creating the fuel. Cement kiln emissions were lower using this fuel than using coal.
Interesting story, Ann. I agree with Beth about not wanting to breathe in plastic residue, but it sounds the emissions are cleaner than coal, which we're already breathing in.
Inspired by the hooks a parasitic worm uses to penetrate its host's intestines, the Karp Lab has invented a flexible adhesive patch covered with microneedles that adheres well to wet, soft tissues, but doesn't cause damage when removed.
Engineers at the University of California, San Diego are designing a robotic arm that takes inspiration from the loose, flexible, yet very strong structure of the armored plates on a seahorse's tail.
Researchers at the Missouri University of Science & Technology have designed a new nanoscale material that can transmit light faster than the 186,000 miles per second it usually takes to travel through air.
It has often been said that as California goes, so goes the nation. This spring, the state's wind power is setting energy generation records and solar energy generation is expected to rise sharply during the second half of 2013.
The latest model of Liquid Robotics' Wave Glider autonomous, unmanned marine vehicle (UMV), the SV3, is reportedly the world's first hybrid wave- and solar-power-propelled unmanned ocean robot.
From Dell / Intel® New Paradigms in Design Work Scott Hamilton, vertical market strategist for Dell Precision workstations, 5/2/2013 3
Early in my career, I worked as a draftsman and remember the days of drawing on vellum with numbered pencils and Mylar with plastic lead. This was a fun experience in the sense that I ...
I've been using workstations for more than 10 years and love finding ways to get more performance from my system. With demanding professional applications that require more power each ...
A lasting memory from my first job as an engineer in an auto assembly plant is standing on hard concrete at six in the morning, vending-machine coffee clutched in hand, listening to ...
A quick look into the merger of two powerhouse 3D printing OEMs and the new leader in rapid prototyping solutions, Stratasys. The industrial revolution is now led by 3D printing and engineers are given the opportunity to fully maximize their design capabilities, reduce their time-to-market and functionally test prototypes cheaper, faster and easier. Bruce Bradshaw, Director of Marketing in North America, will explore the large product offering and variety of materials that will help CAD designers articulate their product design with actual, physical prototypes. This broadcast will dive deep into technical information including application specific stories from real world customers and their experiences with 3D printing. 3D Printing is
To save this item to your list of favorite Design News content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
If you found this interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each service to share an item via that service.
Tweet This
6 
