Showing posts with label Nickolas Themelis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nickolas Themelis. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 26, 2013

Nickolas Themelis on Waste-to-Energy for New York City

New York City spends $ 200 billion per year on municipal solid waste management. Out of this $ 300 million is spent on just trawler trucks traveling 40 million miles using fossil fuels to transport waste. (Source: "Tax In, Garbage Out" (PDF) published in 2012 by New York Citizen's Budget Commission). The report goes on to suggest significant changes to New York City's waste management system, which includes the building of local waste-to-energy facilities.

Below is Professor Nickolas Themelis comment on New York City's waste management problem:
Report from New York Citizens Budget Commission is another blue ribbon report documenting the great need for NYC (New York City) to move to waste-to-energy. But any time Mayor Bloomberg starts to deal with this need, he is soon cowered by a vociferous small minority that lives in the past.
Here, Professor Themelis is referring to the opposition to building waste-to-energy facilities in New York City, based on idealism and outdated knowledge of waste-to-energy technology. By "past", he refers to the fact that waste-to-energy technology has made enormous advancements in pollution control and is now one of the cleanest sources of electricity according to United States Environmental Protection Agency.

Wednesday, December 5, 2012

Discussion on Solutions to Waste Management in India and Elsewhere

Participants (In the order of appearance. As of 12/05/2012, 2 PM EST):
 Professor Nickolas Themelis  Dr. Ranveer Singh Mahwar  Renee Gratton  Ranjith Annepu  Asit Nema   , and Nuggehalli Vasuki (CEO (retired), DSWA).

Link to the original thread on WTERT's partner D-Waste's LinkedIn group.

The report "Observations from India's Crisis" will be published soon as a PDF, DOC on wtert.org and also as a BLOG POST in this Blog

Direction: The discussion is quickly moving in the direction of discussing the best technologies for waste management in India.

Context: It started in a thread requesting help regarding a report on India's waste management crisis - by Mr. Annepu.

Initiation: The discussion was initiated by Dr. Themelis's support to the original query as a reply to a comment made by Dr. Mahwar.

Featured: Professor Nickolas Themelis's Comment On Waste Reduction:
There is no question that SOME of the waste generated in U.S. and Canada could be reduced. Both countries generate over 50% more tons per capita than Japan and other more advance nations in northern Europe. 
But these nations still incinerate about 0.3 tons per capita, rather than landfill it.
Analogy Worth a Special Mention: 
The situation with waste management is somewhat like that with public health: Good diet and exercise, vitamins, preventive medicine, all contribute to better health and less sickness. Despite all that, there will be some sick people who need to go to hospitals. It is obvious that advocating against hospitals or opposing new ones will not improve public health. 
It is the same situation with urban waste management: There all kinds of means for reduction, recycling, composting but ALL human experience has shown that at the end there remains a substantial fraction that has to go to either "incinerators with energy recovery or to sanitary landfills. Environmental organizations who oppose these two means on principle, in effect are perpetuating traditional landfilling. Regrettably, the Sierra Club is spending a lot of donated money doing just that.
Other Comments

On the use of word "Crisis" for the waste management situation in India

Dr. Mahwar's comment:
What do you mean by crises in waste management? Are there any crises of waste management in India or any where in the world in your knowledge?
Prof. Themelis's response (edited):
The use of word "crisis" is apt. For example, refer to the detailed report for just one place, Bangalore, in the New York Times. (India's Plague, Trash, Drowns Its Garden City During Strike)
Asit Nema's response (edited):
I could not agree more with you on the term 'Crisis'! Indeed we have a full blown crisis here (example Bangalore, Thiruvananthapuram-Vilappilsala and many other cities) as over the last 12 - 15 years, all interventions attempted across the country have been driven by the desire to convert 'waste-to-wealth' and 'waste-to-energy' but ironically they have resulted in 'waste-of-wealth' and 'waste-of-energy'! 
Renee Gratton's comment:
I am not entirely surprised at the state of waste management in India, (however) your report had me gasping at the effects this brings. (report will be published soon on wtert.org and this blog)

Friday, June 1, 2012

Wood Recycling in US - Difference between USEPA and Columbia - Biocycle Figures

This is an edited version of an email exchange between Mr. Steve Bratkovich of Dovetail Partners Inc.Professor Nickolas Themelis of Global WTERT Council (GWC) and Nora Goldstein of BioCycle Magazine.

Subject: Differences in wood waste and municipal solid waste (MSW) numbers published by the US EPA as Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: Facts and Figures, and the State of Garbage, a bi-annual survey conducted by Columbia University and Biocycle Magazine.

Mr. Bratkovich: The differences you found in MSW generation and management between the EPA/Franklin studies and your study is quite interesting. Also, as someone (a professional forester) engaged in the literature review of this topic I've noticed most forestry-types tend to cite the EPA numbers;
Do you (Columbia or BioCycle) have numbers that break out the wood portion of your study similar to the EPA studies? 

Prof. Themelis (for Columbia Univ.): No, we do not.

Nora Goldstein (for BioCycle): We do not have a more detailed breakdown of wood waste in the MSW stream. One thing we've noted in BioCycle articles is how much woody debris is generated by the severe weather events so many parts of the country have been experiencing in recent years. This can skew numbers, more at the local level, versus the national aggregated numbers.

US EPA's cartoon for their report: Characaterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1996 Update

Mr. Bratkovich: The US EPA (2010) estimates that "wood" comprises 15.88 million tons (generation) out of approx. 249 million tons of MSW. Of this 15.88 million tons, the EPA notes that 2.30 million tons were recovered, resulting in a 14.5% recovery.

Prof. Themelis: The EPA tonnages of recovery of various materials are reliable because they get them from numbers of industry associations, e.g. paper recycling companies. However, their numbers of tonnages of MSW landfilled are not (reliable) because they are not based on recorded tonnages of MSW landfilled, as the Biocycle/Columbia study does.

Sunday, May 6, 2012

Kenya's Waste-to-Energy Community Cooker

An exchange between Global WTERT Council (GWC) associates Perinaz Bhada and Professor Nickolas Themelis about the the community cooker fired by solid waste operating in Laini Saba slum in Kibera, Nairobi, Kenya.

Perinaz Bhada: This community cooker in Nairobi's slum uses garbage as fuel.  Apparently, it achieves temperatures up to 850C by dripping sump oil and water onto a super-heated plate.  This eliminiates the toxins from burning the garbage.  What do you think?  Is it possible to eliminate most toxins in this way on such a small scale?  And if so, can this idea be replicated?  If the toxins can really be removed using this method, then this could potentially be a good way for getting rid of garbage in many slum areas, protecting the environment from reduced open burning, reducing the use of firewood, and providing a source of heat for cooking, heating water, etc.

I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this.
Laini Saba slum, Kibera, Nairobi, Kenya's community cooker fueled by solid waste. A waste-to-energy success.

Prof. Themelis: Dioxins and furans are formed from combustion of materials that contains some chlorine. Food wastes, green wastes and even wood contain a small amount of chlorine, PVC contains about 40% of chlorine.  Burning oil will sustain the fire but even if 850 degrees C temperature is achieved, there will still be dioxin/furans at an estimated concentration of about 100 ng TEQ/standard cubic meter (same as incinerators produced before MACT* APC**). However, the amount of flue gas from such furnaces will be small and all residential wood furnaces produce dioxins/furans but we still use them because the chimney conveys out of range of the occupants. If these African stoves are equipped with proper enclosures and chimneys that lead the furnace gas above the building where the furnace is located, they should be all right.

* MACT: Maximum Achievable Control Technology
** APC: Air Pollution Control