Clear The Air News Blog Rotating Header Image

Incineration – Solid Waste Disposal

Elderley widow unable to sell her house because of proposed incinerator

http://www.stroudnewsandjournal.co.uk/news/9758091.print/

10:51am Wednesday 13th June 2012

By Chris Warne

AN ELDERLEY widow who lives in Little Haresfield says she has been unable to sell her house because Gloucestershire County Council plans to build a mass burn incinerator nearby.

As a result of ill-health, 81-year-old Jo Marsden decided to put her four-bedroom property up for sale in January so she could move closer to her daughter, who lives in Somerset.

However, she says potential buyers have been put off purchasing her converted bungalow because GCC intends to locate an incinerator less than a mile away at Javelin Park.

“I had a mini stroke before Christmas and that set alarm bells ringing,” said Mrs Marsden, a former primary school teacher.

“I was not able to shop for myself and I was having to rely on the support of my neighbours so I decided it was time to move.

“I put the house on the market and I have had about five or six different people come round to look at it.

“One lady who was very keen said she would make an offer but when she found out about the incinerator she changed her mind. She had three little daughters and she did not want to expose them to it.”

Although Mrs Marsden is likely to see a significant reduction in the value of her home if planning permission for the waste burning facility is granted, she has been told she will not be entitled to any compensation.

Her house is still up for sale but she said no-one looks around it anymore.

Mrs Marsden who moved into her current residence in 1984 has accused GCC of ignoring the views of local residents.

“I am very unhappy because the county council has not listened to us. We have formed GlosVAIN and had demonstrations but they just do not listen.”

Mrs Marsden added: “I do not want to be portrayed as a little old lady who can’t sleep, because I am a fighter. I have spent a lot of time writing to the county council and I will continue to fight this.”

A spokesman for Urbaser Balfour Beatty, the company hoping to build in the incinerator, said: “While we are not in a position to comment on individual cases, it is normal to have a period of uncertainty around proposed developments while the planning application is being considered.

The spokesman added: “Potential impacts on surrounding villages have been taken into account in the planning application. The facility will be constructed and operated according to best practice guidelines.”

Back

© Copyright 2001-2012 Newsquest Media Group

Residents in Guangdong say No to the Garbage Plant

From: James Middleton [mailto:dynamco@netvigator.com]
Sent: 12 June, 2012 08:12
To: Edward Yau Tang Wah EPD; EPD HKG; ceeo@ce-elect-office.hkkswong@rlphk.commartin.putnam@hkairport.comelvis_au@epd.gov.hk
Subject: Residents in Guangdong say No to the Garbage Plant

Secretary for the Environment

Mr Edward Yau Tang Wah

Dear Sir,

In the recent EIA documents for the proposed Shek Kwu Chau incinerator project we could not find any reference to the following  imminent  incinerator projects

just across the border from Hong Kong.

Since your staff Mr Elvis Au has frequently stated in public that the majority of the winds across Hong Kong are northerlies for most of the year, it stands to reason that these upcoming 24/7 projects will have a serious  influence on transboundary pollution levels in Hong Kong which is already affected  by marine shipping pollution levels without any Emissions Control Area in place.

Why were these (easily searched) major polluting projects omitted by the consultants from the EIA on the Shek Kwu Chau  incinerator?

Yours faithfully,

James Middleton

Chairman

www.cleartheair.org.hk

http://www.martingmbh.de/index_en.php?level=1&CatID=9&inhalt_id=10&presse=84&do=showDetail#84

23/04/2012 Foshan Nanhai I, China
Extension by 3 lines
In March 2012, our cooperation partner Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Environmental & Chemical Engineering Co., Ltd. (MHIEC) was awarded the contract to supply the technical equipment for the extension of the Foshan Nanhai I plant. Three MARTIN reverse-acting grates with a width of 9.48 m will be used. The throughput is 3 x 500 t/d. (1500 t/d)

Start-up of the 3 combustion lines is planned for 2013.
07/12/2011 Dongguan Downtown, China
Order for delivery of three grate systems
Our licensee, Chongqing Sanfeng Covanta Environmental Industry Co., Ltd., has been awarded a new contract to supply grate systems. Three combustion systems will be supplied to the waste-to-energy plant in Dongguan Downtown (Guangdong province), People`s Republic of China. The grates with a throughput of 600 t/d each will be manufactured in China and will use the MARTIN SITY 2000 technology. (1800 t/d)
19/10/2009 Dongguan, China
Order for delivery of 3 grate systems
Our licensee, Chongqing Luneng Environment Industry Co., Ltd., has been awarded a new contract to supply grate systems. Three combustion systems will be supplied to the waste-to-energy plant in Dongguan (Guangdong province), People’s Republic of China. The grates will be manufactured in China and will use MARTIN SITY 2000 technology. Each grate will have a throughput rate of 600 t/d. (1800 t/d)

http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/714075.shtml
Residents in Guangdong say no to the garbage plant

Global Times | 2012-6-11 1:50:02
By Tu Lei

Hundreds of residents from two cities in South China’s Guangdong Province again took to the street in the provincial capital of Guangzhou Sunday to show their concern over a plan to build a garbage incinerator, according to several postings on Sina Weibo Sunday.

“We do not want the garbage incinerator built in our city, and we have no better option but to stage this rally,” a participant surnamed Hu from Qingyuan, a city neighboring Guangzhou, told the Global Times Sunday.

Hu said the Fenshui garbage incineration project near the boundary of the neighboring cities of Qingyuan and Guangzhou has vexed residents for its possible impact on resident’s health and the environment.

“Only two months are left for the provincial environmental protection bureau to make a final decision on its location. The company they’ve selected also isn’t qualified to build the plant, and there has been no open bidding for the project.” “Some 20 villages and three large residential communities are within 3 kilometers of the plant,” according to a posting from a Weibo account that was opened to oppose the plant.

There are nine villages within 2.5 kilometers of the plant, the Guangzhou-based Nanfang Daily reported on May 30. The first rally took place on the morning of May 23, when some 200 residents came to Guangzhou to show their displeasure. This time, “There were nearly 1,000 residents joining the gathering that lasted six hours,” Hu said.

“Burying the garbage will take too much land, while an incineration plant is quite scientific and popular overseas,” an official also surnamed Hu with the urban management commission of Guangzhou, told the Global Times. “We have made a thorough argument for picking the site and assessed the impact on the environment.”

The Standing Committee of Guangzhou City People’s Congress said in April that the city will build six garbage incineration plants over the next three years, and the location is to be finalized this year.

The city government said on May 22 that Guangzhou’s population is expected to be 18 million in five years, and they will produce 18,000 tons of garbage a day, far surpassing the city’s current handling capacity.

http://titan-machinery.com/en/industry-news/shenzhen-waste-incinerator/

23/04/2012 Foshan Nanhai I, China
Extension by 3 lines
In March 2012, our cooperation partner Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Environmental & Chemical Engineering Co., Ltd. (MHIEC) was awarded the contract to supply the technical equipment for the extension of the Foshan Nanhai I plant. Three MARTIN reverse-acting grates with a width of 9.48 m will be used. The throughput is 3 x 500 t/d. (1500 t/d)

Start-up of the 3 combustion lines is planned for 2013.
07/12/2011 Dongguan Downtown, China
Order for delivery of three grate systems
Our licensee, Chongqing Sanfeng Covanta Environmental Industry Co., Ltd., has been awarded a new contract to supply grate systems. Three combustion systems will be supplied to the waste-to-energy plant in Dongguan Downtown (Guangdong province), People`s Republic of China. The grates with a throughput of 600 t/d each will be manufactured in China and will use the MARTIN SITY 2000 technology. (1800 t/d)
19/10/2009 Dongguan, China
Order for delivery of 3 grate systems
Our licensee, Chongqing Luneng Environment Industry Co., Ltd., has been awarded a new contract to supply grate systems. Three combustion systems will be supplied to the waste-to-energy plant in Dongguan (Guangdong province), People’s Republic of China. The grates will be manufactured in China and will use MARTIN SITY 2000 technology. Each grate will have a throughput rate of 600 t/d. (1800 t/d)

http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/714075.shtml
Residents in Guangdong say no to the garbage plant

Global Times | 2012-6-11 1:50:02
By Tu Lei

Hundreds of residents from two cities in South China’s Guangdong Province again took to the street in the provincial capital of Guangzhou Sunday to show their concern over a plan to build a garbage incinerator, according to several postings on Sina Weibo Sunday.

“We do not want the garbage incinerator built in our city, and we have no better option but to stage this rally,” a participant surnamed Hu from Qingyuan, a city neighboring Guangzhou, told the Global Times Sunday.

Hu said the Fenshui garbage incineration project near the boundary of the neighboring cities of Qingyuan and Guangzhou has vexed residents for its possible impact on resident’s health and the environment.

“Only two months are left for the provincial environmental protection bureau to make a final decision on its location. The company they’ve selected also isn’t qualified to build the plant, and there has been no open bidding for the project.” “Some 20 villages and three large residential communities are within 3 kilometers of the plant,” according to a posting from a Weibo account that was opened to oppose the plant.

There are nine villages within 2.5 kilometers of the plant, the Guangzhou-based Nanfang Daily reported on May 30. The first rally took place on the morning of May 23, when some 200 residents came to Guangzhou to show their displeasure. This time, “There were nearly 1,000 residents joining the gathering that lasted six hours,” Hu said.

“Burying the garbage will take too much land, while an incineration plant is quite scientific and popular overseas,” an official also surnamed Hu with the urban management commission of Guangzhou, told the Global Times. “We have made a thorough argument for picking the site and assessed the impact on the environment.”

The Standing Committee of Guangzhou City People’s Congress said in April that the city will build six garbage incineration plants over the next three years, and the location is to be finalized this year.

The city government said on May 22 that Guangzhou’s population is expected to be 18 million in five years, and they will produce 18,000 tons of garbage a day, far surpassing the city’s current handling capacity.

http://titan-machinery.com/en/industry-news/shenzhen-waste-incinerator/

China’s Largest Waste-To-Energy System Heads For Shenzhen

Posted in: Industry news | January 26, 2011 at 3:06 pm

2 comments

The second phase of the Bao’an Waste-to-Energy Plant, which is invested in by Shenzhen Energy and Environment Company, is expected to be the largest of its kind in China with a daily production capacity of 4,200 tons.

It is learned that Shenzhen produces 12,074 tons of waste are being yielded in Shenzhen every day. Though city has set up seven waste incineration power plants with a total capacity of 4,875 tons per day, it can still not meet the increasing demand.

At present, SEEC incinerates 2,450 tons of waste each day, which accounts for 50% of the city’s total waste incineration. In addition, the company has three projects under construction which are expected to add a daily capacity of 6,300 tons for the city.

Set up in 1997, SEEC is one of the major waste disposal companies in Shenzhen.

China’s Incinerators Loom as a Global Hazard

Timothy O’Rourke for The New York Times

A worker shoveled trash at the Baoan incinerator in Shenzhen, which also generates power.

O

By KEITH BRADSHER

Published: August 11, 2009

SHENZHEN, China— In this sprawling metropolis in southeastern China stand two hulking brown buildings erected by a private company, the Longgang trash incinerators. They can be smelled a mile away and pour out so much dark smoke and hazardous chemicals that hundreds of local residents recently staged an all-day sit-in, demanding that the incinerators be cleaner and that a planned third incinerator not be built nearby.

Timothy O’Rourke for The New York Times

A truck delivering trash to the Baoan incinerator in Shenzhen, China. The incinerator is relatively clean, but is also costly.

Enlarge This Image

Timothy O’Rourke for The New York Times

Zhong Rigang, the chief engineer at the Baoan incinerator, saw little enthusiasm among the public for recycling.

Enlarge This Image

Timothy O’Rourke for The New York Times

The Longgang incinerators in Shenzhen were the focus of a recent all-day sit-in by hundreds of local residents.

A blog about energy, the environment and the bottom line.

Go to Blog »

After surpassing the United States as the world’s largest producer of household garbage, China has embarked on a vast program to build incinerators as landfills run out of space. But these incinerators have become a growing source of toxic emissions, from dioxin to mercury, that can damage the body’s nervous system.

And these pollutants, particularly long-lasting substances like dioxin and mercury, are dangerous not only in China, a growing body of atmospheric research based on satellite observations suggests. They float on air currents across the Pacific to American shores.

Chinese incinerators can be better. At the other end of Shenzhen from Longgang, no smoke is visible from the towering smokestack of the Baoan incinerator, built by a company owned by the municipal government. Government tests show that it emits virtually no dioxin and other pollutants.

But the Baoan incinerator cost 10 times as much as the Longgang incinerators, per ton of trash-burning capacity.

The difference between the Baoan and Longgang incinerators lies at the center of a growing controversy in China. Incinerators are being built to wildly different standards across the country and even across cities like Shenzhen. For years Chinese government regulators have discussed the need to impose tighter limits on emissions. But they have done nothing because of a bureaucratic turf war, a Chinese government official and Chinese incineration experts said.

The Chinese government is struggling to cope with the rapidly rising mountains of trash generated as the world’s most populated country has raced from poverty to rampant consumerism. Beijing officials warned in June that all of the city’s landfills would run out of space within five years.

The governments of several cities with especially affluent, well-educated citizens, including Beijing and Shanghai, are setting pollution standards as strict as Europe’s. Despite those standards, protests against planned incinerators broke out this spring in Beijing and Shanghai as well as Shenzhen.

Increasingly outspoken residents in big cities are deeply distrustful that incinerators will be built and operated to international standards. “It’s hard to say whether this standard will be reached — maybe the incinerator is designed to reach this benchmark, but how do we know it will be properly operated?” said Zhao Yong, a computer server engineer who has become a neighborhood activist in Beijing against plans for an incinerator there.

Yet far dirtier incinerators continue to be built in inland cities where residents have shown little awareness of pollution.

Studies at the University of Washington and the Argonne National Laboratory in Argonne, Ill., have estimated that a sixth of the mercury now falling on North American lakes comes from Asia, particularly China, mainly from coal-fired plants and smelters but also from incinerators. Pollution from incinerators also tends to be high in toxic metals like cadmium.

Incinerators play the most important role in emissions of dioxin. Little research has been done on dioxin crossing the Pacific. But analyses of similar chemicals have shown that they can travel very long distances.

A 2005 report from the World Bank warned that if China built incinerators rapidly and did not limit their emissions, worldwide atmospheric levels of dioxin could double. China has since slowed its construction of incinerators and limited their emissions somewhat, but the World Bank has yet to do a follow-up report.

Airborne dioxin is not the only problem from incinerators. The ash left over after combustion is laced with dioxin and other pollutants. Zhong Rigang, the chief engineer at the Baoan incinerator here, said that his operation sent its ash to a special landfill designed to cope with toxic waste. But an academic paper last year by Nie Yongfeng, a Tsinghua University professor and government adviser who sees a need for more incinerators, said that most municipal landfills for toxic waste lacked room for the ash, so the ash was dumped.

Trash incinerators have two advantages that have prompted Japan and much of Europe to embrace them: they occupy much less real estate than landfills, and the heat from burning trash can be used to generate electricity. The Baoan incinerator generates enough power to light 40,000 households.

And landfills have their own environmental hazards. Decay in landfills also releases large quantities of methane, a powerful global warming gas, said Robert McIlvaine, president of McIlvaine Company, an energy consulting firm that calculates the relative costs of addressing disparate environmental hazards. Methane from landfills is a far bigger problem in China than toxic pollutants from incinerators, particularly modern incinerators like those in Baoan, he said.

China’s national regulations still allow incinerators to emit 10 times as much dioxin as incinerators in the European Union; American standards are similar to those in Europe. Tightening of China’s national standards has been stuck for three years in a bureaucratic war between the environment ministry and the main economic planning agency, the National Development and Reform Commission, said a Beijing official who insisted on anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the subject publicly.

The agencies agree that tighter standards on dioxin emissions are needed. They disagree on whether the environment ministry should have the power to stop incinerator projects that do not meet tighter standards, the official said, adding that the planning agency wants to retain the power to decide which projects go ahead.

Yan Jianhua, the director of the solid waste treatment expert group in Zhejiang province, a center of incinerator equipment manufacturing in China, defended the industry’s record on dioxin, saying that households that burn their trash outdoors emit far more dioxin.

“Open burning is a bigger problem according to our research,” Professor Yan said, adding that what China really needs is better trash collection so that garbage can be disposed of more reliably.

Critics and admirers of incinerators alike call for more recycling and reduced use of packaging as ways to reduce the daily volume of municipal garbage. Even when not recycled, sorted trash is easier for incinerators to burn cleanly, because the temperature in the furnace can be adjusted more precisely to minimize the formation of dioxin.

Yet the Chinese public has

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/12/business/energy-environment/12incinerate.html?pagewanted=all

shown little enthusiasm for recycling. As Mr. Zhong, the engineer at the Baoan incinerator, put it, “No one really cares.”

Keppel Seghers is currently one of the leading providers for imported WTE solutions in China. Its in-house technology is supplied for the expansion of an existing WTE plant in Shenzhen, Guangdong.

Keppel Seghers’ technology will enable the facility to treat an additional 3,000 tonnes to the existing 1,200 tonnes of municipal waste per day. When completed, the WTE plant will be the largest in China with an eventual capacity to treat 4,200 tonnes of municipal waste per day.

The existing WTE plant’s key components were also provided by Keppel Seghers in 1999, when it was built. Back then, the plant was also the largest WTE plant in China.

Heated opposition feared for city’s incinerator plan

Updated: 2011-09-17 08:06

By Zheng Caixiong (China Daily)

Print Mail Large Medium Small 0

SHENZHEN, Guangdong – The government of the special economic zone is having trouble finding a location for the construction of a gigantic garbage incinerator.

Lu Ruifeng, executive deputy mayor of Shenzhen, said the city plans to build the world’s largest garbage incinerator, with a designed capacity to handle more than 5,000 tons of garbage a day.

“But it is really a headache to choose the right location for the project,” Lu said.

Lu made the remarks while meeting with Chen Xiaochuan, vice-chairwoman of the Guangdong Provincial People’s Congress, who was leading a group of deputies from the province’s legislative body to inspect the city’s environmental protection work early this week.

Although Lu did not reveal what the problems were, insiders said the city government worried the project could meet opposition from people living near any chosen location.

In Guangzhou, about 100 kilometers away from Shenzhen, the city government had to postpone construction of a similar project in its Panyu district last year because of residents’ strong opposition.

After the Guangzhou government chose a site in the Panyu district to build its garbage incinerator in late 2009, the overwhelming majority of nearby residents signed a petition to oppose the project. They were worried it would pollute the environment and harm their health.

As a result, the Guangdong provincial government had to make concession and announced it would postpone construction.

The Guangzhou garbage incinerator project had also stirred controversy among environmental experts and scholars.

Zhao Zhangyuan, a retired researcher for the Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, said incineration will cause pollution.

“Burning garbage produces many poisonous gases, even when advanced technology and equipment are used,” said Zhao, who strongly opposed construction of the project.

Guangzhou authorities are now looking for a different site to build their garbage incinerator.

But Xu Haiyun, chief engineer with the China Urban Construction Design and Research Institute, said garbage incinerators will not pose health risks because the gases discharged would be strictly in line with the country’s standards.

“There is a garbage incinerator in downtown Bonn, Germany, and similar facilities have been constructed in Japan,” Xu said.

Lu Ruifeng promised Shenzhen’s garbage incinerator would use the world’s most advanced technologies, equipment and management system and uphold the strictest discharge standards to avoid polluting the environment.

“Shenzhen, a densely populated city that lacks land resources, will treat its waste mainly through burning in the future, in addition to burying and composting,” Lu said.

According to Lu, Shenzhen’s treatment rate of consumer waste will exceed 80 percent in 2015.

In addition, a number of garbage treatment facilities will be built or expanded in the coming years.

Yin Qingwei, a Shenzhen white-collar worker, said the city needs to build a big garbage incinerator to deal with its growing garbage problem.

“But the government should carefully consider the public opinion and seek suggestions from residents to choose the right location,” he said.

Construction should not start before the majority of residents have reached an agreement with the government, he added.

China Daily

http://news.newclear.server279.com/?p=3958

Shenzhen plans world’s largest incinerator

Apr 6th, 2012 by Editor.

Choi Chi-yuk and Cheung Chi-fai

Sep 15, 2011

Shenzhen plans to build the “world’s largest” rubbish incinerator, capable of processing 5,000 tonnes a day, in an effort to cope with the almost five million tonnes of domestic waste produced by the city each year.

Lu Ruifeng, the city’s executive vice-mayor, told a group of Guangdong provincial People’s Congress delegates on Tuesday that because its landfills could no longer cope with the growing trash pile produced by its 13 million residents, the city was planning to build the world’s largest incinerator, the Guangzhou-based Nanfang Daily reported yesterday.

Lu said public consultations had been held on site selection. He admitted that where to put the incinerator was one of the most challenging problems for the project.

The Nanfang Daily said Shenzhen planned to build three waste incinerators by 2015 to burn 80 per cent of the city’s rubbish. It said two of the plants would be in Laohukeng and Nanshan district, both in the west of the city, with the third to be built at an unspecified site in the city’s east.

A report in the Guangzhou Daily said Shenzhen had three waste incineration plants in the pipeline, capable of processing a total of 6,300 tonnes of rubbish a day.

Lu said that in order to meet environmental protection standards for the incinerator’s emissions – smell, liquid, ash residue and airborne ash particles – it would make use of mechanical grate technology to improve combustion. It would also adopt advanced management and stick to the highest global air quality standards, the Nanfang Daily reported.

It said Shenzhen was dealing with 4.8 million tonnes of trash a year.

Michelle Au Wing-tze, senior environmental affairs officer at Friends of the Earth (Hong Kong), said Shenzhen was taking a wrong path in waste management.

“Guangzhou has just started to ask people to separate and recycle waste, but Shenzhen is heading in the opposite direction,” she said.

“It is definitely not an image boost to tell others the incinerator will be the world’s largest.”

Au said that if the incinerator had any adverse environmental impacts, like dioxin pollution, it would not just hit Shenzhen and Hong Kong but could spread far beyond the region.

Last year, the daily per capita waste disposal rate in Shenzhen was 1.26kg, compared to 1.28kgin Hong Kong and 0.77kg in Guangzhou.

Hong Kong is also planning to build a large incinerator, with a capacity of 3,000 tonnes a day, on a reclaimed site at Shek Kwu Chau, south of Lantau Island. Environment officials have not ruled out the need to build an extra incinerator to cope with mounting waste.

Waste incineration projects are a sensitive issue in Guangdong, with proposals for new plants often met by fierce local demonstrations, forcing plans to be put on hold. In January, more than 1,000 residents from two districts of Guangzhou staged separate protests against incinerator projects near their neighbourhoods.

Growing environmental awareness among mainlanders as living standards have improved in recent years have fuelled more protests over environmental concerns.

Copyright (c) 2011. South China Morning Post Publishers Ltd. All rights reserved

http://news.asiaone.com/News/Latest%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20120506-344097.html

ASIAONE NEWS SINGAPORE

Loud bangs then fire at Tuas incinerator

AsiaOne

Sunday, May 06, 2012

SINGAPORE – An incinerator at a waste management plant in Tuas caught fire early Sunday morning. According to witness statements, three loud bangs were heard before flames were sighted.

An eyewitness told the Straits Times that technicians on duty were transporting oil sludge into a funnel leading to the incinerator when they heard the three loud explosive bangs, followed by the flames.

The technicians then sounded the alarm and left the control room, which reportedly caught fire just seconds later.

The roof also partially collapsed, reported the English daily.

The Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) said they were alerted to the fire at around 12.50am at Eco SWM, in Tuas. Deploying three fire engines, SCDF officers put out the fire within 30 minutes of their arrival.

A SCDF spokesperson said that all 25 employees who were onsite when the incident happened are accounted for. No injuries have been reported.

dassa@sph.com.sg

Download PDF : SingaporeExpertreport

MARTIN Gmbh für Umwelt- und Energietechnik

http://www.martingmbh.de/index_en.php?level=2&CatID=6.23&inhalt_id=19

the problem is, the remaining 22% bottom ash and 6-7% highly toxic fly
ash by weight.
So what do you do with the ash ?  landfill.
And if the landfills are full……………………..?

http://www.martingmbh.de/index_en.php?level=1&CatID=9&inhalt_id=10&presse=84&do=showDetail#84

23/04/2012 Foshan Nanhai I, China
Extension by 3 lines
In March 2012, our cooperation partner Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Environmental & Chem-ical Engineering Co., Ltd. (MHIEC) was awarded the contract to supply the technical equipment for the extension of the Foshan Nanhai I plant. Three MARTIN reverse-acting grates with a width of 9.48 m will be used. The throughput is 3 x 500 t/d.

Start-up of the 3 combustion lines is planned for 2013.

07/12/2011 Dongguan Downtown, China
Order for delivery of three grate systems
Our licensee, Chongqing Sanfeng Covanta Environmental Industry Co., Ltd., has been awarded a new contract to supply grate systems. Three combustion systems will be supplied to the waste-to-energy plant in Dongguan Downtown (Guangdong province), People`s Republic of China. The grates with a throughput of 600 t/d each will be manufactured in China and will use the MARTIN SITY 2000 technology.
19/10/2009 Dongguan, China
Order for delivery of 3 grate systems
Our licensee, Chongqing Luneng Environment Industry Co., Ltd., has been awarded a new contract to supply grate systems. Three combustion systems will be supplied to the waste-to-energy plant in Dongguan (Guangdong province), People’s Republic of China. The grates will be manufactured in China and will use MARTIN SITY 2000 technology. Each grate will have a throughput rate of 600 t/d.

Talking trash

The Economist

Energy from waste: Incinerators that use rubbish as a fuel to generate electricity and heat continue to have an image problem. That is unfair, because the technology has advanced considerably and has cleaned up its act

TOWARDS the end of “Toy Story 3”, Buzz Lightyear, Sheriff Woody and the other toys find themselves heading into the maw of a moving-grate garbage incinerator. In real life, if the plant had been built before 1989, burning plastic toys in it would produce a nasty dose of dioxins and furans—toxic emissions from combustion in the presence of chlorine—along with heavy metals and some dubious organic compounds. Until then, few people were aware that such chemicals presented a serious health hazard, capable of upsetting the immune system, damaging the liver and causing cancer. Municipal incinerators were among the worst offenders.

The industry subsequently spent billions of dollars retrofitting incinerators with activated-carbon injectors and particle traps to capture the dioxins, furans and volatile metals like cadmium and mercury. Thanks to new rules, the emission of such toxic chemicals from waste processing has been reduced a thousandfold. The total output of dioxins and furans from all the incinerators in America is now less than ten grams a year, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). People burning rubbish in their backyards, by contrast, may produce 50 times as much.

Even so, municipal incinerators—especially the new waste-to-energy (WTE) plants that use rubbish as a fuel to generate electricity and heat for local distribution—continue to have an image problem. In many countries people generally prefer their waste to be composted (provided, of course, the landfills are nowhere near their own backyards). But without costly plumbing, landfills produce copious quantities of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas that does more than 20 times the damage to the environment as comparable emissions of carbon dioxide.

At some of the larger municipal landfills, the methane produced by anaerobic decomposition is captured and used to generate electricity. The mountain of rubbish at the Puente Hills Landfill in Los Angeles, the largest of the 1,900 municipal landfills in America, is over 500-feet high—taller than most of the skyscrapers in the city’s downtown area. With 60 years’ worth of decomposing rubbish, Puente Hills produces enough methane to generate electricity for 70,000 homes.

But landfill space is increasingly scarce, and as the rubbish piles up, officials are reconsidering the sensitive issue of incineration. Modern incinerators capture the energy from solid waste as well as the emissions from the combustion. Such WTE plants burn rubbish at temperatures high enough (over 850°C) to break the molecular bonds in dioxins and other toxic chemicals and thus render them harmless. The flue gases are cooled in heat exchangers, producing steam to drive electricity-generating turbines.

The gases are then passed to a cleaning system that filters fine particles from the flow and scrubs the gas to remove sulphur dioxide, acids and heavy metals. Next, the flue gases pass through a catalytic converter, where the nitrogen oxides are chemically reduced using ammonia or urea. Finally, any volatile heavy metals remaining in the flue gas are absorbed by activated-carbon powder. The volume of the ash left after combustion amounts to around 5% of the waste ingested. The ash at the bottom of the combustion chamber is either buried in municipal landfills or recycled as aggregate for the construction industry. The fly ash that rises up the flue needs further processing to remove any toxic particles that might be clinging to its surface. The result is a remarkably clean and efficient process for disposing of rubbish.

Because much municipal rubbish (eg, paper, cardboard, wood, cloth and food scraps) has a biological origin, the electricity and heat produced by WTE plants is considered renewable energy. And for every tonne of municipal waste that avoids being buried in a landfill and is burned instead in a WTE plant, the amount of methane entering the atmosphere is reduced by the equivalent of almost a tonne of carbon dioxide, calculates the EPA.

Nimbyism aside, the main objections to WTE incineration are that waste should be recycled rather than burned, and that better WTE technologies are waiting in the wings. Recycling requires the rubbish to be sorted into recyclable metals, plastics, glass and paper, with the biological residue then broken down using anaerobic microorganisms into biogas and compost. The biogas (primarily methane, carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulphide) can then be used to generate electricity, or even cleaned and compressed to make fuel for cars.

That biological step might eventually be replaced with some form of heat-treatment, such as high-pressure superheated steam in an autoclave, or gasification using a plasma arc that vaporises the waste in the absence of oxygen, so that few of the noxious products of combustion are produced. Either way, the result is a biofuel for generating electricity. Such technologies could one day prove more attractive than today’s waste-to-energy incineration.

In his book “Garbology: Our Dirty Love Affair With Trash”, the Pulitzer prize-winning author Edward Humes notes that other wealthy countries with high living standards have rejected the disposable products that make up much of America’s rubbish. According to the OECD, the average person creates 3.3lb (1.5kg) of rubbish a day in France, 2.7lb in Canada and no more than 2.3lb in Japan. By the OECD’s reckoning, the average American produces 4.5lb a day, and more recent accounting puts the figure at over 7lb a day, less than a quarter of which is recycled.

Why does America produce so much more rubbish? The difference is that in Europe and Japan it is manufacturers, rather than consumers, that are held responsible (via taxes on packaging waste) for the cost of processing the packaging used to wrap their goods. This gives them an incentive to use less of it. By contrast, in America, the cost of cleaning up the mess is dumped at the consumer’s door. That, more than anything, is what needs to change.

from the print edition | Technology Quarterly

Professor’s trips raise questions

SCMP 9/6/2012

Professor’s trips raise questions

Lai See (“Burning question over rubbish trips”, May 26) has revealed that a Baptist University professor who has received a number of research grants from the Environmental Protection Department in recent years and is an advocate of incineration is organising a trip to Taiwan.

This is to be paid for by the Environment and Conservation Fund, http://www.ecf.gov.hk/en/home/index.html on whose funding committee the professor sits.

This visit, together with a similar one to Singapore when 50 people were invited, appears to be a government exercise in “manufacturing consent” (using Noam Chomsky’s phrase for brainwashing).

Does not this report raise the interest of the directorate of audit, and the chancellor of the university, in regard to the use of public funds and academic independence? If not, why not?

S. P. Li, Lantau

Islanders backed in incinerator battle

HK Standard, Friday, June 08, 2012

The High Court has granted leave for a judicial review launched by four Cheung Chau residents over a government plan to build a waste incinerator on Shek Kwu Chau.

High Court judge Thomas Au Hing- cheung accepted all four applications.

A three-day hearing of the first case will begin on November 14.

Lawyers representing the group claim the Environmental Impact Assessment report on the multibillion dollar project is defective.

They say the report is totally inconsistent with the technical requirements of an environmental study, does not explain the reasons for constructing incinerators and does not include any feasible alternatives.

They also question the justification for building an incinerator, namely that landfills are being exhausted.

The impact of the incinerator on water quality and ecological environment is also inadequately covered in regard to contaminant leakage, public safety and health, they claim.

But counsel for the government say the report has already explained that a pressing need exists for the construction of the incinerator, and there is no alternative other than building it on Shek Kwu Chau.

WINNIE CHONG

Protesters win right to fight incinerator

SCMP – June 8, 2012

High Court grants four activists permission to launch legal challenge against government plan to build a HK$23 billion waste disposal facility off Lantau
Austin Chiu
Jun 08, 2012

Four protesters yesterday won permission to launch a court challenge against a government plan to build a massive offshore waste incinerator – even though the project is on hold.

The four were granted leave by the High Court to mount a judicial review of decisions by the Town Planning Board and the director of the Environmental Protection Department that cleared the path for building the incinerator at Shek Kwu Chau, an island south of Lantau and home to a drug rehabilitation centre with about 300 patients and staff.

The four protesters come from Lantau and nearby Cheung Chau.

The government had sought funding for the HK$23 billion incinerator (including HK$8 billion to expand landfills), which it said could handle 3,000 tonnes of waste a day, but said in April the request would not proceed during the tenure of the present government.

The four claimed that the environmental impact assessment report was substandard because it failed to explain why there were no alternative options or give details of measures to counter negative effects of the incinerator.

Leung Hon-wai, Sin Chi-man, Kwok Cheuk-kin and Ho Loy were also unhappy with the Executive Council’s decision to approve an outline zoning plan for Shek Kwu Chau and the artificial island on which the burner would be built.

The hearing will take place between November 14 and 16 before Mr Justice Au Hing-cheung.

To save public funds, only Leung’s case will proceed and the other three applicants will be bound be the decision.

Barrister Valentine Yim See-tai, for Leung and Sin, told the High Court that the government had failed to consider reasonable alternative locations and waste disposal technology.

The government had also failed to set out in the Environmental Impact Assessment report how it came to the conclusion that the incinerator was actually needed, Yim said.

Yim said the applicants were hoping that the High Could would rule that the government should start the decision process again, but this time with alternative options.

“This is a blank proposal without any ‘meat’ in it,” Yim said. “It is really unreasonable for the director [of the Environmental Protection Department] to say there is no reasonable and practical alternative.”

He said the government had admitted in the report that a 31-hectare marine habitat of high ecological value would be lost permanently due to the project, but it omitted details about potential health risks and dangers and mitigation measures that needed to be adopted.

Yim said the government should list the worst scenarios, such as whether there would be chemical spillage in the event of an earthquake.

“We are not here to nitpick, but this is an important public health matter; we don’t want this omitted,” Yim said.

Johnny Mok SC, for the government, rejected claims that they had not considered alternative technology. He said they had discussed four methods but came to the conclusion that thermal technology was most suitable.

He also said that the government had put forward adequate mitigation measures, which meant the amount of marine habitat that would be lost had been reduced from 50 hectares to 31 hectares.

Mok said the government was not required to carry out a hazard assessment. “We are talking about simple air pollution … It’s not going to be life threatening. It’s only going to have a very limited effect.”

austin.chiu@scmp.com

‘Question is how urgently we need it’

Cheung Chi-fai
South China Morning Post
June 8, 2012
Waste incineration will become a reality sooner or later if the city’s rubbish continues to grow unchecked, says architect Dr Wong Kam-sing, who is tipped to head the Environment Bureau in the next administration.

Wong, 49, the former vice-president of the Hong Kong Institute of Architects, said solid waste was a pressing problem and the public should ask themselves why Hong Kong produced so much of it.

As for incineration, he said it was “a matter of time and size ¦ the question is how urgently we need it and how large or small it will be. If it is done well, incineration can convert waste into energy too”, he said.

Chief executive-elect Leung Chun-ying’ s manifesto champions waste reduction at source and vows to eliminate food waste before considering incineration.

But Wong did not reveal what measures would be considered to minimise waste generation.

Lawmakers on the Legislative Council’s environmental affairs panel have refused to support a HK$14.96 billion incinerator proposed for Shek Kwu Chau, south of Lantau, saying the next administration might not want it.

Wong said another challenge for the new environment chief to face were the ever-increasing power tariffs. He said Hong Kong could consider following Macau in adopting a structure that promoted energy savings. “For those who consume more power, they might be charged a higher rate. For those small and medium enterprises or small households, they should be rewarded for using less,” he said.

Meanwhile, the Environment Bureau yesterday said power companies were planning to offer more consumption data, such as carbon emissions and average per capita power usage, in the power bills of domestic households, in response to the report of the Council for Sustainable Development on combating climate change.

Wong is a member of the Council’s subgroup that compiled the report.

Copyright 2012 South China Morning Post Ltd. All Rights Reserved

South China Morning Post

Court grants review of incinerator plan

RTHK Radio 3 News

The High Court has granted leave for a judicial review launched by four Cheung Chau residents over the government’s plan to build a waste incinerator on Shek Kwu Chau. Lawyers representing the group said the environmental impact assessment report on the multi-billion dollar project was defective.

But counsel for the government said the report had already explained that a pressing need existed for the construction of the incinerator, and there was no alternative other than building it on Shek Kwu Chau.

Al Fayed says incinerator hazardous to public health

http://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-news/top-stories/al-fayed-says-incinerator-hazardous-to-public-health-1-2341654

Published on Thursday 7 June 2012 03:43

Tycoon Mohamed Al Fayed yesterday branded a multi-million-pound incinerator planned next to his Highland estate a danger to public health.

As a public inquiry into the proposal for the £43 million waste plant in Invergordon started, the former Harrods owner claimed the development would be playing “Russian roulette” with the health of the community.

A Scottish government- appointed official is holding the hearing in Invergordon.

The project’s developer, Combined Power and Heat (Highlands) Ltd, and opponents of the plans will give evidence.

The government gave the proposals planning permission in 2010, but landowner Mr Al Fayed’s Ross Estates appealed against the approval, prompting the public inquiry.

The opponents recently received an assurance from the reporter that health and air quality will be included in the inquiry.

Mr Al Fayed, who owns Balnagown Estate, said: “The inquiry is good news for anyone who cares about the health of the people who live inInvergordon and its extensive surrounding area.

“I never had any doubt that the issue of air pollution and its effect on public health had to be considered by a Public Local Inquiry in order that the reporter would be able to hear all the relevant evidence.

“The potential damage from this waste-burning incinerator in the heart of a residential area cannot be exaggerated.

“I have already commissioned a study by a leading authority in such matters, a professor at the University of Surrey, and it is clear beyond doubt from his report that it would be playing Russian roulette with public health were permission granted for this monstrous rubbish-burner on the banks of the Cromarty Firth.

“It is vital that local people resist an unwelcome scheme, designed only to make somebody rich.”