Alternate Resource Partners News
During the 9th Global CemFuels event held in Dubai on February 16 & 17 in 2015,
Ed has delivered the following two presentations:
    1) RDF/SRF pricing and its influence on the waste management competitive arena:
He said that cement plant managers will ask themselves a simple question: "Is it cheaper than coal?" If the potential alternative fuel is cheaper than coal, then it is likely to be considered - and if not cheaper than coal, then it will probably not be considered. However, AF has other costs associated with its use, including storage, feeding, processing, quality control, loss of production, continuous emissions monitoring and other issues. Ed pointed out that whatever your prospective AF, you will find somebody, somewhere trying to eliminate that waste from the market within the next five to ten years, so that you have to have flexibility in AF fuel supply. Costs involved in AF supply are collection, transportation, pre-processing, documentation, receiving, handling, treatment, co-processing, monitoring and reporting. The price that can be levied or achieved is partly dependent on the costs involved in alternative 'disposal' of the material. Landfill costs in Europe, for example, never decrease, whereas in the US there is seldom a tax for placing material in a landfill. Ed pointed out that cement kilns are often versed against incineration and EfW ('energy from waste') facilities and these facilities often do not care too much about the quality and calorific value of the material. Incinerators in continental Europe have now achieved 'R1' status, to allow the materials that they use to count as being recycled. At the moment, the UK is exporting around 1.5Mt of refuse-derived-fuel (RDF) to continental Europe, since the UK has not built sufficient EfW facilities and there is currently a major surplus of EfW facilities on the continent - so that material is traveling down the route of most value.
To view the full presentation press here
     2) Treatment by co-processing in cement kilns of (obsolete) pesticides
                             A local solution for an international problem
Ed Verhamme reascended to the stage to give the final presentation at the conference, on the combustion of obsolete pesticides in cement kilns. A trial burn in an un-named central Asian cement kiln allowed investigators to conclude that burning pesticides does not affect emissions from the kiln, that the wastes are well destroyed in the kiln, that there in no additional pollution from the kiln and that the quality of the clinker and the cement is not adversely affected. There are stores of obsolete pesticides around the world that are difficult to destroy: cement kilns seem to be an effective solution to the problem, particularly in former Soviet-states in Asia and Eastern Europe. A disposal gate fee of perhaps Euro2000/t means that the investment in equipment to allow the material to be processed is probably economic, and the equipment can then be used for other hazardous waste and other AF.
To view the full presentation press here