L.A. County Ushers in Waste-to-Energy Conversion
Technologies Tested as Puente Hills Landfill Prepares to Close
Autoclave Testing Program
Municipal solid waste travels on a conveyor into a rotating steam autoclave reaction vessel in a two-year testing program being conducted by the Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority in partnership with the USDA and Comprehensive Resources Recovery and Reuse (CR3), the company that developed the cellulose recovery system. Cellulose can be used for ethanol production, compost, paper pulp or anaerobic digester feedstock for methane production.
Pat Proano
Pat Proano is assistant deputy director of the L.A. County Public Works Environmental Programs Division.
Welcome to the discussion.
-
Current users sign in here.
-
If you do not have an account, set one up!
It's easy to do and it's free!
2 comments:
© Copyright 2013, Sustainable City Network, Inc., Dubuque, IA. Powered by BLOX Content Management System from TownNews.com. [Terms of Use | Privacy Policy]
Adelaide Chen posted at 5:12 pm on Thu, Sep 27, 2012.
Mike, congrats to Sierra Energy Corp. on your $5 mil grant from the California Energy Commission to build a conversion technology gasifier demonstration project in Sacramento. The assumption that anaerobic digestion is the more accepted conversion technology based on speaking with CR&R Incorporated as well as LA County Dept. of Public Works advocating for the state to provide legislation on this front. They said thermal technologies are harder to permit, with one example with the Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority in which they had their RPS credits rescinded for their plasma gasification facility.
It's good to know that while anaerobic digestion is better than incineration, it uses "five times as much energy to create the same amount of energy as a gasifier." And it is eye opening to me that some types of gasification can function at a zero tip fee, especially when landfills cost aren't cheap.
Sorry we didn't get to have an interview with you!
SierraEnergy posted at 4:30 pm on Thu, Sep 27, 2012.
I take issue with two assertions by the author:
1) "Anaerobic digestion is more acceptable compared to thermal technologies"
This is an odd assumption. The public knows little about either and would be apalled by how wasteful Anaerobic digestion is with the energy that is found in waste. In energy output, it is similar to incineration. It is far better for the environment from the perspective of toxic emissions and residual ash, but why use as much as five times as much waste to create the same amount of power that a gasifier can produce with similar emissions and have no waste residual?
2) "Without approved Renewable Portfolio Standards credits, thermal conversion technologies aren’t financially feasible." That is simply nonsense. Some types of gasification is capable of functioning profitably at zero tip fee. No other technology can do that.
Visit www.sierraenergycorp.com if you would like to see more about this.
Mike Hart
President, CEO
Sierra Energy
Davis, CA