32 comments on Post peak Italy: Naples submerged by waste
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
32 comments on Post peak Italy: Naples submerged by waste
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
User login
Personnel
Editors
Contributors
Peak Oil Primers
Archives
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
Vital Trivia
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
GAIA Host Collective
Burning of trash is really problematic. Yes, it does represent energy but what kind of energy. It is probably closer to coal or perhaps lignite or peat. Waste to energy systems burn at a rate that is designed to optimize steam generation for electic turbines. The mixed nature of many waste streams often does not allow adequate combustion. Some portions are too wet, others have a low heat value. Many existing plants produce significant quantities of PIC's (products of incomplete combustion), sub 10 micron flyash that baghouses cannot capture, and are dioxin generators. Most waste to energy facilities still generate 15% or higher ash streams which still need a landfill, sometimes a hazardous waste landfill. They tend to get sited in poor neighborhoods so rich folks won't have to deal with health issues. Trash incineration is inferior to landfilling. Not producing so much in the first place is best.
Another long story. Energy can be obtained from trash, but not from any trash. The trash must be pre-processed; it has to contain a certain fraction of plastic. Then there are the problems with the emissions, the fact that a landfill is still needed. One of the consequences of peak oil, anyway, will be to reduce the amount of plastic in domestic garbage. That will reduce the capability of incinerators to generate energy and may make plants become net energy absorbers rather than producers. So, energy will be needed for incinerating waste. Another nice negative feedback effect that may rapidly make incinerators as obsolete as steamships. Not that it would be a bad thing altogheter.....
Despite my best efforts at recycling, reducing, and reusing my bin still ends up with a fair proportion of soiled food packaging - plastic or paper. It does seem to me to be a waste to landfill this calorific material. I assume WTE plants have some capability to contribute towards peak capacity unlike most renewable systems?