Slashdot Mirror
Vaporizing Garbage to Create Electricity
CaroKann writes "Geoplasma is planning to build a power plant in St. Lucie County, Florida that will generate electricity by vaporizing landfill trash and sewage treatment plant sludge with plasma arcs. It will be the first plant of its kind in the USA and the largest in the world. The power plant is expected to destroy 3000 tons of garbage, generating about 120 megawatts of electricity per day. The plant will also supply steam to a nearby Tropicana juice plant. The landfill is expected to be depleted in about 18 years. In addition, up to 600 tons of melted, hardened sludge will be produced each day and will be sold for road construction."
Glad ol' Doc Brown had the right idea .. now when do I get one to stick ontop of the trunk of my time travelling Delorean?
RFC2119
We'll be harvesting landfills in 100 years to get the materials (plastic stuff mostly) that our country is so busy paying China to manufacture, then buying and disposing of in said landfills. If all that fodder is vaporized for energy, we're screwed.
The determined Real Programmer can write Fortran programs in any language.
With minimal impact, good usage of by products and so forth. The only problem is that if we can just zap away our inconvenient little problems (tonnes and tonnes of trash, for example), we will never do anything to curb our overzealous consumption. Doesn't sound like a sustainable idea in the grand scheme of things.
"The power plant is expected to destroy 3000 tons of garbage, generating about 120 megawatts of electricity per day."
Watt is a measure of energy per second. That is, power. Saying 120 megawatts of electricity per day is nonsense. I think they meant to just say 120 megawatts.
Doesn't slashdot have editors for this kind of stuff?
The summary also mentions processing 3000 tons of garbage a day, and yielding 600 tons of sludge. Unless they're converting mass directly into energy, a la nuclear fission, I'd say there's about 2400 tons of apparent gas that needs to be accounted for still.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
Here in the Halton region, which is comprised of some suburbs just West of the Toronto metro, there has been some talk of building one of these plants (although they've tossed around the number $700 million). This is an effort to deal with the reality of garbage, not to mention that reality that Toronto has been giving the entire country a continual black-eye by shipping waste to Michigan (if I were a Michiganer, I'd be pissed to be another regions dumping ground. Even as an Ontarian, the endless row of trash hauling trucks, each leaving a wake of loose garbage, is untenable).
But despite the reality that no one wants to build dumps, and Toronto has been spending millions shipping it to an entirely different country, there are still the head-in-the-sand dreamers who would rather the issue just disappears. A prominent Toronto city bureaucrat, for instance, has poo-poohed the idea, decrying the vile idea of "burning" waste. They'd rather drive it 500 miles in transport trucks to dump it somewhere else.
Let me try to brush up on my yank-math...
3000 tons = 6,000,000 pounds
120,megawatts = 120,000,000 watts
A CDROM weighs 1/2 oz.
So you'd need approx 96 AOL CDs per hour to run a 60W lightbulb. I think I have just enough of those to get me through the end of the year...
This has been attempted before. I used to work in the waste industry, and one of my clients had a plan to develop this kind of technology. The problem was that, despite predictions, the waste simply did not burn hot enough. If they've managed to overcome this obstacle, this is going to be huge. The cost-effectiveness still concerns me, but government subsidies can take care of that.
This will never get built. Let me explain: People near the Treasure Coast are retirees. And I don't mean in the "Oh, it's Florida...of COURSE there are retired people there" sense. I mean that many of its communities were planned and built specifically for bluehairs. Port St. Lucie, for example, is just such a community.
Now as impossible as it may seem, octogenarians are not really up on the newest technological advances. The moment you say the words "landfill trash" to these people, the NIMBY (not in my backyard) impulse will dominate, and granny and gramps will be making phone calls, changing zoning rules, voting down money, and generally just making Geoplasma's job as difficult as possible. They're retired. If you thought they didn't have the time or inclination to do these kinds of things, then you're mistaken.
I know it makes no logical sense to want to make use of modern garbage disposal technology, and yet not want it anywhere within a million miles of you, but trust me, that is the mentality. The article characterizes this as a county-wide effort. I bet not. I bet the people who are slated to have this trash burning marvel right next to them will soon be mad as hell in 3...2...1...
"Okay, who is the shit-head who threw away a barrel of sodium!"
Table-ized A.I.
Well most of that will be water vapor. I think this is great and worth trying. I do think that my opinion of this counts a lot more than most of the people posting on slashdot.
I happen to live in Port Saint Lucie, FL. If this meet the emissions standards which the small plants in Japan do then it will beat the daylights out of an other coal fired plant and get ride of that huge landfill.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
120 megawatts per day? So, after about 8 days, it'll be generating a gigawatt? In a year, will it be producing 43.8 gigawatts?
Probably not.
My first guess was that it's probably generating 120 megawatt-hours per day, or what those of us who know physics would call "5 megawatts".
They say that they'll use about 1/3 of the generated energy, and plan to sell the remainder back to the grid. Electricity is usually worth something like $20-$50 / MWh. If they're selling 3.3MW into the grid, they might be able to get $1600 - $4000 / day from this thing.
However, they also say that they can recoup their $425M investment in 20 years. Assuming a 4% interest rate (municipal borrowing is cheap!), they'd need to pay back a little over $2.5 million per month, or about $85,000 per day.
If the power plant is actually generating 120 megawatts, then they're looking at (80*24) megawatt-hours per day, or $38,400 - $96,000. They're also selling steam and sludge, and I don't know what the current market value of those is. Yes, I know that you pay $60 - $100 / megawatt-hour for your home electric service, but electricity on the bulk market (especially at night) is a lot cheaper.
"Plasma arc" = incinerator. No fancy chemical or nuclear processes happen, they still dump out a huge amount of CO2, just like normal incinerators. Sure, they scrub the exhaust for really harmful chemicals and particles, but they still release a lot of CO2.
It's not possible to have "120 megawatts per day". A watt is a RATE of energy usage (joules per second, in fact). It takes 120 MW to power a million 120W light bulbs -- for 5 seconds, or 5 hours, or a day, or a year -- how long you keep that rate up, has nothing to do with how fast the actual rate is !
Perhaps the article meant "120 megawatt-hours per day", although that would be a very strange unit of measurement (not as bad as Libraries of Congress, though).
I'm sorry, but I highly doubt I'll be consuming any more Tropicana products if they're going to be made from steam of vaporized landfill waste... There's just something unsettling about that.
"Geoplasma expects to recoup its $425 million investment, funded by bonds, within 20 years through the sale of electricity and slag."
Does this mean that during the last two years, St. Lucie County will be importing trash from other counties? What if those counties also build these things? Will "trash pirates" be raiding nearby landfills for material to burn?
Nothing for 6-digit uids?
As would the oil/coal/natural gas power plant that was burning afore mentioned fossil fuels, as well.
If we require a amount of energy and produce x amount of CO2 and y amount of trash, but have a way to reduce y without drastically increasing x, then I don't see why this is such a bad thing. If the exhaust is scrubbed, and the CO2 is nearly the same, then we've taken one little step toward a cleaner world.
Ideally, there may come a time when our cars don't produce CO2, industry produces minimal amounts, and our power plants are primarily green as well. In that case, dumping *some* CO2 into the atmosphere while reducing the amount of landfill we need for garbage is one hell of a bargain.
I'm guessing the most optimistic person in the world wrote that. First they aren't generating much power, the waste steam is a huge maintenance hassle as steam pipes either need to be made of stainless steel or something else that isn't going to rust. Second, after building it they are going to discover that they need to spend millions every year on scrubbers just to keep themselves below the EPA limits on the pollution, heavy metals and other nasty stuff from getting into the air. After doing that they will find out that their garbage fees go up astronomically as a result of the number of shutdowns due to violating said EPA standards because half the residents are throwing away toxic materials in the trash (you can ask people not to throw mercury, batteries and toxic chemicals away but they will still do it) and as a result of the damage said materials do to the scrubbers, incinerator and geration systems. And finally they will be paying to dispose of the hazerdous sludge that contains the remainder of the heavy metals and other toxic chemicals (take two household chemicals toss in a plasma arc and what will you get? millions of cominations of nasty nasty substances that can't be predicted or accounted for) that weren't belched out of the smoke stack. And if they think for a minute any roadway designer or contractor is going to use that stuff without being mandated by law they need to lay off the crack.
The fact is that you don't build roads with materials that have unknown and extremely variable properties. 50 years ago they might have used the sludge in road construction (because they didn't know better) but not now, the chemical properties could be destructive/corrosive to the roadway, cause hazardous contamination in runoff and dust, and it could range from hard durable rock like material to a bad bit of clay. We don't build roads out of trash, unless someone is paying for you to take that trash, and it's a guaranteed uniform and chemically neutral substance, like glass. But this is what happens when you let the marketing department write your article.
Our county made the mistake of building an incinerator 20 years ago, it was the worst mistake they ever made and became the biggest money suction device that has kept the county broke for the length of the factility. I bet the total cost over 20 years not including interest was double the estimated price and it would have been cheaper to ship the garbage to China at the prices being paid per ton to incinerate the garbage.
If it's used effectively, a plant like this could clean up whole countries. In anticipation of it's availability, Australia has built a collection site for our most environmentally damaging garbage. Once this rubbish has been fed through a white-hot plasma, our country will be much cleaner, and it's wonderful that we'll finally be benefiting from something which has long been little more than a toxic eyesore.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
"Tropicana, made from pure garbage."
Stupidity is like nuclear power, it can be used for good or evil. And you don't want to get any on you.
Their other products are chump change:
Quarried rock goes for about $3.75/ton. Of the 9000 tons of garbage they burn, they end up with 600 tons of slag, worth about $2000/day.
Steam is worth about $10/1000 lb. The 80000 lbs of steam they'll sell to Tropicana is worth about $800/day.
They don't mention it, but they are probably able to collect tipping fees from the sewage folks and, once this landfill is gone, dumping fees for future garbage.
Still, the bottom line is electricity. If their efficiencies are off or if the market for electricity gets cheap, they may have a hard time amortizing $425 million in debt, even at favorable bond rates. $425 Million at 4.5% over 30 years would require about $2 million/month to service. Their $126K/day income gives them a gross of $3.8 million/month. Enough to service the debt and have about $1.8 million/month for salaries and other recurring costs. It might fly. But if they rack up significant maintenance costs that amount to a significant fraction of their total $425 million plant cost over the 30-year lifetime, it probably won't.
You'd be surprised. These plants exist in other parts of the world already, so it's a proven process. Toronto's been debating building one for a while (mainly for the garbage-disposal value since we now ship our trash to Michigan) but every time the environuts hear the word "incinerator", they get their collective panties in a collective bunch. Doesn't matter that the technology is proven, clean, and a damn sight better than wasting thousands of dollars and burning fossil fuels to ship our garbage to another country. Environutism has never been about being rational.
That's great, because nothing says "environmentally friendly" like spewing out miles of asphalt so that we can continue to pave the planet.
Sounds like a great idea but I'm still a bit skeptical about the composition of the byproducts. Contaminants like mercury don't simply go away, I assume they will be bound into the sludge portion of the byproduct, which is likely to be quite high given the fact that they are re-processing sewage.
What about the Dioxins from vapourised plastics, A plasma arc produces an incredible heat but Dioxins are also very resistant to being broken down in this way.
Sulphur? How is this kept out of the exhaust gases?
God was my co-pilot, but then we crashed and I was forced to eat him.