Waste to Energy Incineration

Critics of waste incineration argue that these plants often create more environmental problems than they solve. They point out, for example, that incinerators are a major source of dioxin, mercury, and halogenated hydrocarbon release into the atmosphere. In addition, incinerators are very expensive to build and to maintain, and they provide fewer jobs to members of the surrounding community than other methods of solid waste disposal. Also, companies have a dismal record of siting incinerators in disadvantaged communities, where residents suffer the worst consequences of incinerator use. Finally, waste-to-energy incinerators are of little value in tropical and subtropical countries, where the cost of plants and the availability of additional energy sources make them impractical. 

Combustible portions of the wastes that cannot be recycled are then burned to produce energy. In this respect, a resource recovery plant is similar to a waste-to-energy incinerator. In fact, the terms resource recovery plant and waste-to-energy incinerator are sometimes used interchangeably. Noncombustible materials in waste are then shredded and buried in a sanitary landfill. Since they are treated before dumping, they tend to take up less space and are more suitable for landfill disposal. 

Petrochemicals Chemicals derived from the refining of hydrocarbons (oil and natural gas). Plastics are created through processing of petrochemicals, making them valuable as a fuel in waste-to-energy incineration facilities. 

Incineration using modem waste-to-energy incinerators to capture the energy value of waste, while greatly reducing its volume. Incineration is the more usual method of disposal and often there are incinerators on the hospital site. However, the incinerators need to meet the EC requirements for performance and to have the appropriate after-burners and gas cleaning facilities to minimise air emissions. 

The plastics industry s response has been to commit itself even more firmly to recycling and to reaffirm its earlier position that waste-to-energy incineration is critical. 

It has been reported that the United States recycles only about 10 percent of all its waste, incinerates about 13 percent, and assigns the remainder to landfills. Japan recycles 50 percent, incinerates 34 percent, and landfills 16 percent. Western Europe recycles some 30 percent and has large-scale waste-to-energy incineration. These other countries have had to take earlier action, since they literally have no landfill areas in the way the United States does. 

Eighty percent of the PLA and GPPS clamshells are sent to landfill at end-of-life and 20% are sent to waste-to-energy incineration. 

The Index of Merit has been developed relative to waste-to-energy incineration the lower... 

The reason for this is that frequently all the fossil resources used during the manufacture of bioplastics are not taken into account, particularly when chemical modification of the biological raw material is involved during manufacture. Nor has the question of alternative use of agricultural land for polymer intermediates been accounted for when it competes with food production. The calorific value of hydrocarbon polymers when burned in an appropriate waste-to-energy incinerator is similar to the oil from which they were manufactured, whereas bio-based polymers are generally less useful as fuels. 

---