Where next: For the european waste derived fuels market?

SITA UK's new SRF plant in the Midlands is set to produce some 60,000 tonnes of cement grade fuel per year credit: UNTHA UK The idea of diverting residual waste from landfill by converting it into a variety of different quality fuels is not a new one. But while some countries have established sufficient infrastructure some years ago, many European countries are now in a race to reach their Landfill Directive targets. by Ben Messenger As landfill taxes in many European countries have risen, and with the impending Landfill Directive targets looming ever larger on the horizon, the market for Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) plants has seen significant growth. According to a recent report by analysts at Research and Markets, between 2005 and 2011 the number of operational MBT facilities in Europe rose by almost 60% to a total of 330. Within the same period, the report found that treatment capacities grew by around 70% to 33 million tonnes annually. According to the analysts, this growth will continue over the next five years, with the number of plants increasing to around 450 and annual capacity rising to 46 million tonnes. Under the EU Landfill Directive, which stipulates a pre-treatment of municipal wastes, the landfilling of biodegradable waste is particularly restricted. The report, Market Study MBT - The European Market for Mechanical Biological Treatment Plants, notes that in terms of this type of treatment, MBT technology is currently the only alternative to waste incineration, which in many cases is not favoured politically. At the same time, the analysts say that the growing number of MBT facilities is also being driven by increased demand for high-grade Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) and Solid Recovered Fuel (SRF). With increasing energy prices, the use of these fuels has become popular at cement mills, waste to energy facilities and even at coal fired power plants. Eastern Promise While a number of countries such as Germany, Austria, Switzerland and the Netherlands are either approaching, or have reached, the point of having sufficient MBT capacity to process all of their residual waste, others such as the UK , Ireland and some of the Eastern European countries are seeing a rapid growth to their installed capacity. Speaking to WMW, Laura Minotto, export sales and project manager for Italian shredder manufacturer Bano, notes that while some countries in Europe have long established sufficient infrastructure, Eastern European countries are now looking to catch up. According to Minotto the big waste and recycling companies from western Europe, such as France's SITA are now opening new plants in Eastern Europe. Indeed, one of Bano's customers which operates an RDF/SRF facility in the city of Otrokovice in the Czech Republic is currently benefitting from a deal that sees it supplied with feedstock by SITA. Shredders combined with trommels, air shifters, magnets and eddy current separators ensure the facility achieves the specification Credit: UNTHA UK The company produces a final product which is usually sold to the cement industry, but says that there is an opportunity to supply power generators too. It is also planning to open an additional separation and waste grinding facility in a neighbouring region. According to Minotto, in the more advanced countries such as the Netherlands' Bano is now moving to a stage where most of its projects involve the modernisation of existing facilities. Outside of Europe, she says that there is a similar situation in Japan, where 15 years ago Bano supplied some of the most advanced RDF production lines of the time, and is currently winning contracts to update those lines. Northern Lights While there is undoubted growth in the Eastern European markets for residule waste processing equipment, Chris Oldfield, managing director of shredding systems specialist UNTHA UK tells WMW that the Nordic states are also very active. "UNTHA's been extremely busy in Finland in particular - and in Denmark," he says. Oldfield also notes however that in Germany, where the market is mature and there is less need for new infrastructure, demand is somewhat slower. The UK market which has been strong and is also showing signs of slowing. "The UK has been quite good over the past couple of years and we've done some really nice SRF facilities. But we're now seeing that that's perhaps slowing down a little bit. We need more facilities in the UK itself that can use this resource," explains Oldfield. A Question of Capacity While the number of facilities producing a variety of fuels from wastes has grown rapidly, in some countries such as the UK and Ireland the installed capacity of facilities which process the end product has not kept pace. This, combined with an over capacity of such facilities in other countries, such as the Netherlands, has led to a controversial increase in exports. A recent report prepared by engineering consultants, AMEC for the UK's Chartered Institution of Wastes Management (CIWM), highlighted some of the key issues raised by the growth of RDF and SRF exports. The study 'Research into SRF and RDF Exports to Other EU Countries' was conducted in association with and co-funded by Zero Waste Scotland and Ireland's Environmental Protection Agency. According to the report, in 2012 the UK and Ireland exported almost 868,000 tonnes of RDF/SRF to Europe. However, despite it being against the law to export raw 'untreated' MSW, much of those exports could indeed have been considered to be just that, or at least close to. "Because the receiving facilities don't have these very high quality standards for RDF as those that use SRF, while it's illegal to export untreated MSW, the truth is that because it's not policed properly and the EU is relatively weak in that area, there are things being exported that it would be better to recover," says Oldfield. "As long as the EA has no teeth it's a situation that will continue," he adds. Missed Opportunity The AMEC report rightly points to the near £43 million being paid to European waste to energy facilities to take these exports, as well as the £34.7 million per year spent purchasing coal with the equivalent energy value, This is based on 1.5 tonnes of RDF/SRF displacing 1 tonne of coal. Oldfield however, highlights the opportunities being missed to recover materials. Paraphrasing from a conference speaker he had recently seen, Oldfield explains: "When our ships come in from the UK to the European countries, they're almost waving them in because they contain so much metal and raw material that they can sort. We're missing a trick. Standards and quality According to the European Recovered Fuel Organisation, there is an increasing need for a clear description of the quality of secondary fuels. The two most common terms for the fuel produced by MBT facilities, RDF and SRF, are often used interchangeably, but there is an important distinction. The term 'RDF' covers a wide range of fuels derived from waste, usually from the residual fraction left after recycling, its quality and environmental features are not analysed using acknowledged methods. Producers of SRF on the other hand control the production processes to ensure they meet the specifications. Under EU standards, SRF is categorised into five classes according to its net calorific value, as well as its chlorine and mercury content. Achieving a classification for a product enables it to be accepted by a wider range of end users. So are producers moving away from RDF towards the production of more valuable SRF? Not according to Oldfield: "In some respects the opposite. The receiving plants in Europe don't have any real quality requirements and they almost like the lower CV requirements that MSW provides as they process more material and receive more gate fees", he says. Oldfield also points out that as time goes by the new member states will increasingly have to find a way to deal with their waste and will likely begin processing it into fuels. "And that's one reason why I feel that we should have quality standards in RDF that are adhered to. If we had those and we were producing a fuel and not a waste, and the fuel has to meet a certain standard regarding heavy metals and so on, then that would protect everyone," he concludes. Conclusions While the debate over RDF/SRF exports and quality will continue, the need to treat residual waste remains. The market for equipment to process residual waste into fuels looks set to continue its expansion from its heartlands into countries that have been slower to adopt the technology. It would seem logical that this should be followed by the development of domestic capacity to process the end product - and indeed in a number of countries plans to deliver that capacity are already underway. Ben Messenger is managing editor of WMW. e-mail: benm@pennwell.com