Waste to Energy

Time to stop the waste

By Marc Stammbach

IN a recent Inside Waste Issue, one of the Australian landfill stakeholders confirmed that around 70 per cent of landfill gas captured over the life of landfill. The IPCC states that methane has 28 times the greenhouse gas (GHG) potential of carbon dioxide, yet our political leaders aim for net-zero carbon emissions by 2050.

Add to this the USA EPA, which summarises that landfill gas is produced at a stable rate for around 50 years with 50 per cent methane content. The are several consequences. This includes that any benefit of the 70 per cent capture of landfill gas is offset by the escaping methane or an equivalent of 420 per cent (30 per cent fugitive x 50 per cent methane content x 28 GHG factor). In other words we are still emitting the equivalent of six times more carbon dioxide (420 per cent/70 per cent) into the atmosphere.

This starkly contrasts with the current landfill practice in Australia where the gas capture is celebrated as a success and financially rewarded with carbon credits. The active landfill period of 50 years means that any zero GHG by 2050 commitment is already doomed and will need to continue to at least 2080. This is because with the current policies, reactive landfills will still be part of waste management in 2030. Therefore, our landfills will continue to be GHG emitters past 2050 and we truly pass the problem down the generations while missing carbon neutrality at that time. Our grandchildren are unlikely to thank us for this debt.

We need to stop the waste and stop wasting time. We must act now. Stop pretending that landfilling is a sustainable solution. It is not.

We need to applaud the jurisdictions that are already enforcing separate food and green waste collection. Then we need to rethink the need of source separation in all the other states, not by 2030 as some jurisdictions are targeting, but for tomorrow.

There is a need to stop pretending that conversations about which state or territory government has the most enlightened policy approach to a circular economy is the same as Australia nationally taking meaningful action to prevent valuable resources from being buried in landfill.

Then there are the more obvious solutions such as stop landfilling of untreated waste and getting the recyclables and organics out.

Finally, there needs to be a push for anaerobic digestion of organics. In-vessel composting is great, but also needs energy instead of producing renewable energy in the form of bioelectricity or biomethane, which is something that is done by anaerobic digestion.

Energy from Waste (EfW) is a viable solution because: • Private industry will take care to avoid over investment • Stop spreading the fallacy that there is EfW overcapacity in Europe. This was temporary over a few years and has been mostly discussed out of context. We should be grateful if there is some over-capacity because we always need services. • EfW does not hinder recycling and waste reduction initiatives. Some countries with some of the highest recycling rates in the world also have the highest EfW rates. • Stop claiming EfW causes harmful emissions. It is plainly wrong.

Many countries in Europe have EfW facilities in the heart of their cities and in the immediate neighbourhood of residential areas. • If treasury and the EPA can’t see past the revenue from landfill levies then go-ahead and tax EfW but also

Stammbach believes that private industry will avoid over investment in the EfW sector. The supposition that EfW causes harmful emissions is wrong.

ramp up the landfill levies (they are mostly a general tax income, and not a levy).

Shouldn’t we wait for something better than EfW? Look in the mirror and explain to your grandchildren why you watched on and took no action while we have continued to use landfills since the year 2000 and their emissions up to at least 2080.

Even the Greens can be realists, but no, not the local ones. In Germany, the birthplace of the Greens, they support thermal waste to energy for more than 25 years because it recovers energy from waste that otherwise won’t be recycle and it’s clean, green and effectively deals with the environmental and economic waste of landfill.

EfW is an essential element of a circular economy, which cleans up 96 per cent of the incoming material and concentrate pollutants in the flue gas treatment residues. Those residues still must be landfilled but will produce no further greenhouse gas. And if your pocket is willing, we can even recycle that 4 per cent.

The cleaned 96 per cent of the initial residual waste is turned into approximately 20 per cent aggregate, which can be reused in road construction as it is done in many jurisdictions throughout the world. About 4 per cent of the metals can be recycled – true urban mining inclusive of ferrous, aluminium, copper and gold. Around 76 per cent will be carbon dioxide and water.

Didn’t we just discuss the importance of carbon dioxide in landfills above? Yes, CO2 will be formed and around 50 per cent therefore is of fossil origin from the waste and harmful.

Hence, carbon sequestration is the next frontier. The first pilot plants have been successfully operated (Fortum Oslo Varme’s waste-to-energy, Norway). The first full-scale projects are in discussion. Full sequestration means that an EfW will be carbon-negative as roughly half of the CO2 is derived from organic material and is already climate neutral.

Contrast this to the landfill of today, which will continue to spew GHG gases in 2050 and beyond with no technical means to change its way unless you dig it out and burn the remains in an EfW plant.

The challenge is not the capture but the storage of carbon dioxide. There are few suitable reservoirs, and the development time is long.

Alternatively, CO2 contained in the EfW flue gases can be captured at the source. The CO2 is being reacted with calcium to form mineral calcium carbonate – a stable, non-toxic, valuable component that has many uses, including as a raw material in the construction industry, a fertiliser, and a mineral filler in the paper, paint, and plastics industries. The high achievable capture rates can enable EfW to become carbon sinks. The system is also geographically independent.

Hence, our political leaders should enable carbon sequestration solutions instead of embracing landfills, hampering EfW, and believing a cap on EfW will do any good for our environment. It is time to stop the waste, source-separate now, and recover value in the inevitable residual waste with EfW and carbon sequestration. iw

Marc Stammbach is the managing director of Hitachi Zosen Inova (HZI) Australia

Trusted Advisors in Property, Environment, Planning, Waste & Local Government Law

Experts in all areas of waste including:

DAs and Land & Environment Court Appeals EPA Investigations & Prosecutions Waste Contracts Operational Issues & Waste Legislation Waste Transportation Asbestos Issues

Contact one of our advisors now:

02 9929 3031 or waste@honeslawyers.com.au

or find out more at:

www.honeslawyers.com.au/what-we-do/waste/

Queensland’s bold approach to address First Nations waste challenges

By Anne Prince

QUEENSLAND’S Respecting Country, A Sustainable Waste Strategy for First Nations Communities, provides a framework for 17 First Nations councils to transition to improved waste practices. The Queensland Government is the first and only state in Australia to develop a specific waste strategy for First Nations councils and communities, acknowledging that existing state strategies continue to leave behind communities with unique and specific challenges.

The strategy aims to improve health, social, environmental, economic and compliance outcomes in often forgotten locations by identifying priorities and setting performance benchmarks and timeframes for transition. Launched in April 2021, development of the strategy was funded by the Queensland Department of Environment and Science (DES) who partnered with the Local Government Association of Queensland (LGAQ) to undertake contract and project management services. A.Prince Consulting (APC) developed the policy, undertaking consultation and engagement with all councils, including site visits to every community to identify the issues and opportunities. Importantly, the strategy was codesigned in collaboration with the First Nations councils.

First Nations councils, unlike other Queensland local government areas, have a negligible rate base and are entirely reliant on state and Commonwealth grants for both capital and operational budgets. Although waste management is an essential service, it is often overshadowed by other pressing issues and competing priorities. This has resulted in decades of legacy waste accumulation, the purchase of cheaper secondhand equipment (which is prone to breakdowns and requires more regular servicing), or equipment that is not fit-for-purpose or expensive to operate and maintain. In many cases there are also substandard and overflowing landfills where burning for volume reduction is commonplace.

TORRES REGION PROGRESSING A WASTE SOLUTION

Current process everything is landfill / burnt

STEP01

STEP02

STEP03

Proposed NEW approach

Return empty skip bins

Build a transfer station

Bale all waste

Recycling

NPARC to Horn Island Batteries Composting

Electrical waste

Skip bins loaded onto barge

NPARC Landfill Oil

Tilt tray bales to landfill TSIRC to NPARC

A RWMP has been developed for the Torres Straits and Northern Cape York communities.

The Queensland Government is keen to address these failings. It understands each council is facing specific issues requiring tailored solutions. As a result, Regional Waste Management Plans (RWMPs) are being developed to support implementation of the strategy. The plans detail both the council-specific and regionallevel actions and funding required to support acquisition of fit-forpurpose equipment, infrastructure and programs to address current and future needs.

The first RWMP has been developed by APC for the Torres Straits and Northern Cape York Peninsula communities, covering Torres Shire Council (TSC), Torres Strait Island Regional Council (TSIRC) and Northern Peninsula Area Regional Council (NPARC). The region is home to 10,900 people in 22 communities, generating an estimated 8,044 tonnes of waste per annum. Budget constraints are often a limiting factor in finding suitable regional solutions. However, for the first time the most appropriate, long-term and sustainable waste solutions are being considered for current and future generations.

TSIRC faces the greatest challenge of any council in Australia. It replicates services on 15 outer islands spread across 42,000 km2 of ocean, with populations ranging from 85 to 813 residents. Each island has a landfill operating at or beyond capacity, some close to groundwater bore sources. A number of landfills only manage to contain waste and reduce volume through non-compliant burning practices. Alternative landfill sites are limited given the size, topography, hydrology, Native Title and land tenure complexities on the islands. The region has minimal resource recovery given the high freight costs and stringent biosecurity requirements designed to protect mainland Australia.

Between 2007 and 2010, a successful pilot waste project was undertaken on Warraber Island, a coral-atoll home to 254 residents. This community embraced a FOGO service a decade before mainland councils, and operated an on-island composting program using shredded cardboard for a community garden, resulting in greater food security for the residents. A recycling program was also initiated, with a mini sorting station for baling recyclables for export to Cairns. These two initiatives alone resulted in a reduction in waste to landfill of 66 per cent by weight and 45 per cent by volume, with an average material recovery rate of 80 per cent. The Warraber pilot program was designed to be transferable to all outer islands. However, it was discontinued due to limited recurrent funding.

The proposed solution for the region follows the proven concepts of recycling, composting, a container refund scheme (CRS), and the separation of household, hazardous/ problematic and bulky wastes. All outer island landfills will be capped and closed, and new mini transfer stations will be constructed for baling of all residual waste for export. This is modelled on a process used in other remote island communities, including Lord Howe Island and Norfolk Island. The proposed destination for the baled waste is the newly constructed 30year capacity landfill at NPARC. Here, waste will be treated under quarantine procedures using deep burial and geo-marking. Both Queensland Biosecurity and the Commonwealth Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment (AWE) have been engaged in the process to mitigate biosecurity risks.

To support this approach, TSIRC has introduced new by-laws that came into effect from 1 July 2021, prohibiting any commercial or construction waste being deposited on the outer island landfills. A ‘Containers for Change’ program is being trialled on Coconut Island, with uncompacted containers transported in freight chillers to meet biosecurity requirements.

The draft RWMP recommends that the Warraber Island project be reinstated and expanded. It is anticipated a 69 per cent reduction in waste to landfill could be achieved by recycling (20 per cent) and composting (49 per cent) on each island of origin. This initiative provides an opportunity to measure diversion, recovery, project logistics, operations and financial performance while allowing other islands, stakeholders and agencies to see the program in action. It also affords an opportunity to apply the ‘learn by doing’ mantra while seeking continuous improvement.

Once finalised and released, the RWMP will be the roadmap to a better future for waste management practices on these remote islands. The current waste management regimen has developed in an ad hoc way over many years.

Significant investment is now essential to bring operations up to today’s regulatory standards and to safeguard the health of all islanders. iw