Mailing address Postbus 5076 6802 EB ARNHEM Netherlands T +31(0)26 7513800 F +31(0)26 7513818 Street address Westervoortsedijk 50 6827 AT ARNHEM Netherlands www.mwhglobal.nl KVK Haaglanden 27 18 43 23 ING Bank Delft 65 93 74 331 IBAN NL 63 ING B 0659 374331/BIC INGBNL2A MWH is ISO 9001:2008 and VCA* certified The potential for Waste Management in Brazil to Minimize GHG emissions and Maximize Re-use of Materials Final version Client Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment Authors Drs. M.A.M. Corsten (Utrecht University) Prof. Dr. E. Worrell (Utrecht University) Drs. J.C.M. van Dael (MWH BV) Project number M12B0068 Document \m12b0068r01 final.doc Date July 11, 2012
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Mailing address Postbus 5076 6802 EB ARNHEM Netherlands T +31(0)26 7513800 F +31(0)26 7513818
Street address Westervoortsedijk 50 6827 AT ARNHEM Netherlands www.mwhglobal.nl
KVK Haaglanden 27 18 43 23 ING Bank Delft 65 93 74 331 IBAN NL 63 ING B 0659 374331/BIC INGBNL2A MWH is ISO 9001:2008 and VCA* certified
The potential for Waste
Management in Brazil to
Minimize GHG emissions and
Maximize Re-use of Materials
Final version
Client Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment
Authors Drs. M.A.M. Corsten (Utrecht University)
Prof. Dr. E. Worrell (Utrecht University)
Drs. J.C.M. van Dael (MWH BV)
Project number M12B0068
Document \m12b0068r01 final.doc
Date July 11, 2012
2
Authors MWH B.V. and Utrecht University Date July 11, 2012, Final version
3
Authors MWH B.V. and Utrecht University Date July 11, 2012, Final version
Contents
Executive summary 5
1 Introduction 13
2 The current situation of MSW management in Brazil 15
3 Methodology 17
3.1 System boundaries 17 3.2 Energy calculations 18 3.3 Emission calculations 18 3.4 Allocation of energy and emission savings 21
4 Brazilian data - Current and 2030 reference scenario 23 4.1 Waste generation 23
4.2 Composition 23 4.3 Recycling and disposal 24
5 Scenarios 25
5.1 Waste Law 25
5.2 Recycling+ 26
6 Results 27 6.1 Waste hierarchy 27
6.2 Impact on GHG-emissions 28 6.3 Impact on energy savings 30
7 Conclusions and recommendations 33 7.1 Impact of implementing Recycling+ on Brazilian waste management 33
7.2 Recommended further research 34
Appendix 1: References
Appendix 2: Quantitative outcome of scenariosReferences
Appendix 2: Quantitative outcome
4
Authors MWH B.V. and Utrecht University Date July 11, 2012, Final version
5
Authors MWH B.V. and Utrecht University Date July 11, 2012, Final version
Executive summary
Introduction
The reductions in greenhouse gas emissions that are necessary to avoid negative impacts of climate
change in addition to the future limitations in the availability of selected resources stress the need for
increased energy and material efficiency. Waste management can play a key role in achieving
greenhouse gas emission reductions and increases in material efficiency. Currently in many devel-
oping countries, the focus of waste management is on waste disposal in landfills and dumps, which
creates significant emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG). Especially in emerging economies like
Brazil, the growing population and economic activity will result in a significant increase in the genera-
tion of waste in the coming decades. The growing impact of the current waste management practic-
es in these countries stresses the need for a change in how waste is handled.
This study assesses the potentials for reducing energy and GHG emissions for Brazil for different
waste management scenarios using the iWaste model. Various state-of-the-art waste treatment
techniques that are currently used in countries like the Netherlands are taken into account in this
study. Brazil is selected as the focus country, being an example of what can be achieved in terms of
waste management in emerging economies. The in this study identified energy and GHG emission
reduction potentials are presented at the RIO+20 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Devel-
opment in June 2012.
Methodoloy iWaste-model
A schematic representation of the system boundaries used in this study is shown in Figure S1. In
this study the calculation of energy consumption, CO2 emissions, and savings for the processing of
various materials starts at the level of waste generation and ends at the level of secondary material
production. Processes such as collection, transportation, sorting and separation that may occur dur-
ing all phases from the generation of waste until its final processing (e.g. recycling, incineration, use
as refuse derived fuel (RDF)) or disposal (i.e. landfill) are included within the boundaries of this
study. The model also takes into account losses that occur during the various steps of waste pro-
cessing. The avoided energy consumption and CO2 emissions are attributed as energy- and CO2
savings to the specific processing option of the material.
6
Authors MWH B.V. and Utrecht University Date July 11, 2012, Final version
Figure S1. Schematic representation of the system boundaries used in this study on waste management in Brazil.
Note: between most of the processing steps a transport step is included, which is not depicted.
Data on waste stream volumes and composition are specific for the Brazilian situation. The disposal
of waste in landfills is currently common practice in MSW management in Brazil. The other pro-
cessing options included in the iWaste model are recycling, incineration in a waste-to-energy incin-
erator, and use of waste as refuse derived fuel (e.g. in industrial processes). Waste disposal and
processing is modeled in terms of the volume of materials in the waste stream, energy consumption
and related CO2 emissions. Subsequently, for each of the materials in the waste streams, the contri-
bution to total energy consumption and CO2 emissions of waste management in Brazil is calculated.
The model distinguishes the materials that comprise the majority of waste generated in Brazil as
shown in Table S1.
Table S1: Materials and products included in the iWaste model for Brazil.
Materials and products in MSW
Paper and cardboard Steel PET
Glass Aluminum Cardboard drinking packages
Textiles Polyethylene (PE) Wood
Organic wastes Polypropylene (PP) Mineral materials
Scenarios
To assess the potential for waste management to reduce energy consumption and CO2 emissions in
Brazil two scenarios were evaluated in this study: Waste Law and Recycling+. These scenarios are
derived from the 2030 reference scenario, as the targets in the National Waste Plan that is currently
being developed, are set for 2031.
For the projection of waste generation data to 2030, the MSW treatment Reference Scenario for
Brazil was used as defined by the World Bank (2010). This Reference Scenario uses the waste gen-
eration data from Abrelpe as a starting point and estimates the growth in waste generation based on
forecasts of population growth and future rates of waste generation per capita.
7
Authors MWH B.V. and Utrecht University Date July 11, 2012, Final version
It assumes that current conditions will persist, as it will take time before the various initiatives that are
currently developed will be implemented. The amount of waste collected is projected to grow to 85
Mt per year in 2030 (World Bank, 2010). Taking into account a collection efficiency of 89%, waste
generation will grow to 95.5 Mt per year in 2030. This means an increase of about 57% compared to
2010.
The Waste Law scenario is based on the Brazilian Waste Law and the targets set by the National
Waste Plan, which is currently under development in Brazil. Though National Waste Plan targets are
not final yet, the ambitious targets known at the time of this study were used in this scenario. The
targets set by the National Waste Plan include the reduction of dry recyclable waste (36% by 2031)
and organic waste (53% by 2031) disposed at landfills. Other targets include the recovery of landfill
gas. In 2031, about 250 MWh/year of landfill gas should be recovered from landfills. This represents
83% of the total 300 MWh/year of gas production in landfills referred to by the National Waste Plan.
In the Recycling+ scenario, the focus is on recycling materials from MSW and anaerobic digestion of
the organic fraction. According to the waste management hierarchy, the materials that are not recy-
cled will be incinerated to recover energy. In addition, in the Recycling+ scenario no untreated mu-
nicipal solid waste is landfilled as the minimum processing option is incineration. Similar to the
Waste Law scenario, the Recycling+ scenario requires the separate collection of MSW in a wet and
dry fraction. The Recycling+ scenario assumes that 80% of the separately collected wet fraction is
processed in an anaerobic digester. In addition to compost anaerobic digestion also produces biogas
that can be used for electricity generation. The efficiency of electricity generation from biogas is as-
sumed to be 35%. The separately collected dry fraction is processed in a material recovery facility
(MRF) that separates various fractions for recycling.
Results
The results of this exploratory analysis for Brazil offer more insight into the potential reductions in
GHG emissions and energy consumption for different waste management scenarios. It shows what
results might be achieved with sustainable waste management using currently available technology.
However, actual results will depend on investments and implementation of waste collection systems,
waste treatment facilities and the sanitation of inadequate landfill sites.
Waste hierarchy
The share of the various processing options (i.e. recycling, landfill, incineration with energy recovery)
of the various materials in MSW for all three scenarios, i.e. the reference scenario, the Waste Law
scenario and the Recycling+ scenario, is shown in Figure S2. In the Waste Law scenario, there is a
shift towards recycling materials, though more than half of the generated waste is still landfilled. In
the Recycling+ scenario more than 70% of all generated waste is recovered for recycling. Also, land-
filling is replaced by incineration with energy recovery.
8
Authors MWH B.V. and Utrecht University Date July 11, 2012, Final version
Figure S2: Share of recycling per material, waste-to-energy and landfill for the three scenarios.
Impact on GHG-emissions
Figure S3 shows the impact on GHG emissions for the three different scenarios and shows the con-
tribution of the various materials in MSW.
9
Authors MWH B.V. and Utrecht University Date July 11, 2012, Final version
Figure S3: GHG-emissions for 2010 situation and the three scenarios for 2030 in Brazil.
In table S2 the GHG-emissions in the two more ambitious scenarios are compared to the Baseline
2030 scenario for the three materials from MSW that have the largest impact on GHG emissions.
Table S2: Changes in GHG-emissions for three waste components compared with Baseline 2030 (in Mt CO2eq/yr).
Differences in GHG-emissions
(Mt CO2eq/yw)
Material Baseline 2030 –> Waste Law Baseline 2030 –> Recycling+
Organic waste - 29.8 - 36.6
Paper and cardboard - 12.2 - 16.7
PE - 7.6 - 18.6
10
Authors MWH B.V. and Utrecht University Date July 11, 2012, Final version
Impact on energy savings
Figure S4 shows the energy balances for the different scenarios with the contribution of the various
materials in MSW.
Figure S4: Energy balance for the current situation and the three different scenarios.
Table S3 shows potential reductions in energy consumption in the two more ambitious scenarios in
comparison to the Baseline 2030 scenario for the three major materials that have the largest energy
saving potential.
Table S3: Changes in energy consumption for three waste components compared with Baseline 2030 (in PJ/yr).
Energy savings
(PJ/yr)
Material Baseline 2030 –> Waste Law Baseline 2030 –> Recycling+
PE - 99.1 - 594.0
Paper and cardboard - 39.3 - 98.8
Organic waste - 19.7 - 69.4
Recommendations
To make major steps in reducing and preventing GHG emissions future waste management choices
should affect the recycling of organic waste (responsible for 76% of GHG-emissions) and paper and
cardboard (responsible for 19%).
11
Authors MWH B.V. and Utrecht University Date July 11, 2012, Final version
The presented (draft) targets in the Waste Law scenario result in reducing/preventing GHG emis-
sions because of landfill gas recovery and a higher rate of recycling organic waste and dry recycla-
bles. In addition to the giant change in applying landfill gas recovery techniques and other measures
to create sanitary landfill sites, other big transformations required for this scenario include the change
to two bin collection (with all associated logistic issues related to distributing bins and implementing
collection systems) and setting up an infrastructure of recycling facilities.
To realize the maximum on GHG avoidance and on energy savings high-quality recycling and high
efficiency energy recovery should be applied. This means a transition to the Recycling+ scenario.
This transition affects waste collection and waste treatment. Materials like paper and cardboard,
plastics PP, PE and PET have the highest recycling rates if contamination with organic waste is as
low as possible. Separate collection, for example in a two bin system, provides a good quality of the-
se dry recyclables. In a MRF (Material Recovery Facility) the dry recyclable materials are separated
in a mechanical way combined with handpicking. MRF techniques are available in countries like
Germany and UK.
To optimize the treatment of the organic fraction (kitchen and garden waste) digestion with gas and
heat recovery is recommended. The digestate can be composted and the compost can be used as
fertilizer. The qualitative (legislative) demands of fertilizer determine the extends of contamination of
the separate collected organic waste. Digestion and composting techniques are available in the
Netherlands.
In the Recycling+ scenario the infrastructure has to be expanded with high efficiency incineration
plants and the output of the recycling facilities has to increase. The change to another collection sys-
tem and to using recycling facilities creates new employment opportunities. Because of the sanitation
of landfills required by the Waste Law and the choice for ‘no waste to landfill’ in the Recycling+ sce-
nario, the current ‘wastepick’ problem will turn to a ‘labor-issue’. Both waste collection and waste
treatment can play a role in providing work opportunities to waste pickers.
Three elements of Dutch and/or European knowledge and experience can contribute to the shift from
the current situation to a situation with traits from the Waste Law / Recycling+ scenarios. These ele-
ments are:
Developing and executing waste management policy;
Implementation of waste collection systems (bins, trucks, logistics);
Engineering and planning waste treatment plants:
Landfill gas recovery;
Two bin separate collection;
Digestion of organic waste;
MRF.
Examples of Dutch waste management companies are shown on the websites of two Dutch waste
associations. (www.wastematters.eu and www.nvrd.nl).
ABB, 2011. Trends in global energy efficiency 2011. Country reports – Brazil. February, 2011. Afval Energie Bedrijf (AEB). Value from waste – Waste fired power plant, the new standard for re-covery of sustainable energy, metals and building materials from urban waste. Waste and Energy Company, City of Amsterdam; 2006. Angulo, S.C., Miranda, L.F.R., John, V., 2002. Construction and demolition waste, its variability and recycling in Brazil. Sustainable Buildings 2002 [available at: http://www.reciclagem.pcc.usp.br/ftp/SB_2002_angulo%20et%20al.pdf] Aprelpe, 2010. Panorama Aprelpe, 2012. Personal communication Bianchini, A., Filho, C.S., 2006. Waste management in developing countries: Present conditions and foreseen paths – a Brazilian overview. Abrelpe, Brazil Center for Clean Air Policy (CCAP), 2008. Sector-based Approaches Case Study: Brazil Cement.
ICF International.
Corsten, M., Worrell, E., van Duin, A., Rouw, M., 2010. Saving materials – The potential contribution of sustainable waste management and recycling to greenhouse gas emission reduction in the Neth-erlands, Utrecht University, the Netherlands. Fergutz, O., Dias, S., Mitlin, D., 2011. Developing urban waste management in Brazil with waste picker organizations. Environment and Urbanization 23, pp.597-608. Gomes, C.F.S., Nunes, K.R.A., Xavier, L.H., Cardoso, R., Valle, R., 2008. Multicriteria decision mak-ing applied to waste recycling in Brazil. Omega 36, pp. 395-404. IBGE, 2000. National Survey of Basic Sanitation – Urban cleaning and garbage disposal 2000. Insti-tuto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatistica. IEA, 2010. Energy Balances 2010. International Energy Agency, Paris, France. IEA, 2011. CO2 emissions from fuel combustion – highlights. International Energy Agency, Paris, France.
IPCC, 1997. Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Intergovern-mental Panel on Climate Change, United Nations Environment Programme, Organization for Eco-nomic Co-Operation and Development, International Energy Agency. Paris, France. IPCC 2006, 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, Prepared by the Na-tional Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme, Eggleston H.S., Buendia L., Miwa K., Ngara T. and Tanabe K. (eds). Published: IGES, Japan.
IVAM, 2008. Environmental analysis of anaerobic digestion of organic waste. Commissioned by the Association for Waste Companies, Amsterdam, Netherlands. John, V.M., Angulo, S.C., Miranda, L.F.R., Agopyan, V., Vasconcellos, F., 2004. Strategies for inno-vation in construction demolition waste management in Brazil. In CIB World Building Congress, Toronto, Canada [available at: http://www.reciclagem.pcc.usp.br/ftp/strategies_john%20et%20al.PDF ]. Laurijssen, J., Marsidi, M., Westenbroek, A., Worrell, E., Faaij, A., 2010. Paper and biomass for en-ergy? The impact of paper recycling on energy and CO2 emissions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 41(12),pp.1208-1218. Lopez-Delgado A, Pena C, Lopez V, Lopez FA. Quality of ferrous scrap from MSW incinerators: A case study of Spain. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2003;40:39-51. Magalhaes, G., Alves, J., Santo Filho, F., Kelson, M., 2010. Understanding methane emissions from passive systems in landfills in Brazil: a contribution for reducing the uncertainties concerning the amount of methane recovered (R) in greenhouse gas emission inventories from waste management and for better estimating the parameter Adjustment factor (AD) in landfill gas collection and destruc-tion/recovering projects under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). Manchini, S.D., Nogueira, A.R., Kagohara, D.A., Schwartzman, J.A.S., De Mattos, T., Rosa, A.H., 2007. Influence from the type of waste collection (mixed or segregated) on recycling post-consumer polyolefins films. Polimeros 18 (4), pp.289-296. Monteiro, J H P, Mansur, G.L., Battipede, L., Segala, K., Reed, D.. 2008. Manual on Municipal Solid Waste Integrated Management in Latin American and Caribbean Cities. International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Montevideo. Nunes, K.R.A., Mahler, C.F., Valle, R., 2007. Recycling centers for construction and demolition wastes in Brazil: A study case for Rio de Janeiro. Proceedings Eleventh International Waste Man-agement and Landfill Symposium, 1-5 October 2007, Sardinia, Italy. Oliviera, L.B., Rosa, L.P., 2003. Brazilian waste potential: energy, environmental, social and econom-ic benefits. Energy Policy 31, pp.1481-1491. PRN (2009c) Factsheet omrekening aandeel oud papier en – karton in het huishoudelijk restafval naar gewicht op het moment van afdanken en in luchtdroge toestand, Stichting Papier Recycling Nederland, April 2010. Reimann D. CEWEP Energy Report II (Status 2004-2007) - Results of specific data for energy, R1 plant efficiency factor, and net calorific value (NCV) of 231 European Waste-to-energy plants. Con-federation of European Waste-to-Energy Plants, Brussels; 2009. Ribeiro, S.G., 2010. Waste management in Brazil. Presentation at the WTERT 2010 bi-annual meet-ing at Columbia University, New York City, October 7-8, 2010. Shen, L., Worrell, E., Patel, M., 2010. Open-loop recycling: A LCA case study of PET bottle-to-fibre recycling. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 55(1),pp.34-52. Smith, A., Brown, K., Ogilvie, S., Rushton, K., Bates, J., 2001. Waste management options and cli-mate change. European Commission. Tayibi H, Pena C, Lopez FA, Lopez-Delgado A. Management of MSW in Spain and recovery of packaging steel scrap. Waste Management 2007; 27(11):1655-1665.
Thompson, S., and S. Tanapat, 2005. Modeling waste management options for greenhouse gas reduction. Journal of Environmental Informatics 6(1), pp.16-24. UNFCCC, 2012. Website: http://cdm.unfccc.int/Projects/projsearch.html [accessed May 2012]. World Bank, 2010. Brazil low carbon case study, technical synthesis report – Waste. World Bank, 2012. Website: http://data.worldbank.org/country/brazil [accessed May 2012]. Worrell E, van Heijningen RJJ, de Castro JFM,. Hazewinkel JHO, de Beer JG, Faaij APC, Vringer K. New gross energy-requirement figures for materials production. Energy 1994;19(6):627-640.