Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The civilisation biorefinery –
Efficient material and energy utilization of urban
waste and wastewaterbased bioresources
Institute of Wastewater Management and Water Protection
Bioconversion and Emission Control Group (BIEM)
BioResourceInnovation (BRI)
Email: [email protected]
Tel.: 040 42878 3154
Ina Körner
Email: [email protected]
eseia summer school 15-28.07.2013; Transilvania University of Brasov, Romania
Structure
1. Biobased-Economy & Bioresources
2. Actual management of secondary and tertiary bioresources
3. Examples for innovative systems
– Civilisation biorefinery
– KREIS-project
– Innovative collection systems
4. Project based work
– Sustainable regions
*) after Kamm et al., 2000
A biorefinery is a complex and integrated system of processes and
plants in which bioresources are converted into a multitude of
products in the form of materials or energy.* It is characterised by as
complete and efficient material utilisation as possible.
conversion
processes Bioresource
Product A
Product B
Product X
. . .
Biorefinery Definition
Biorefinery – Summary
modifid after S. Freyer (BASF), Kamm (BIOPOS)
Biobased Products
Raw materials for chemical industry
Elektricity, Fuel, Heat
Food & Feed
Biochemical and/or thermochemical conversion processes
Wood
Residues from Agriculture & Forestry
Energy plants / Algae
Organic / organic containing waste
Goal: ZERO-Waste / Emissions
Carbohydrates
Plant Fat & Oil
Proteins
Lignin
Bioresource
biological energy
production
thermal
energy production
Biomethane
Biohydrogen
Bioethanol
Pre-
treatment
Post-
treatment
mechanical
biological
physical
chemical
combinations
combinations
combinations
Manifold cascade options
substancial
products
energy
products
mechanical
biological
physical
chemical
Incineration
Pyrolysis
Gasification
Key process
Centralized & decentralized units as a symbiosis
Leaves
Bio-bin waste
Waste wood
Food waste Electricity
Heat
Product
X-Y
. . .
Collection
in the region
Distribution
in the region
Export
(highly
value-added
Products)
Compost
Unit B
Unit X
. . .
. . .
Unit Y
The civilisation biorefinery: Principal Set up
Pellets
Bioresource
X-Y
Unit A
Goal: Most complete & efficient utilization of urban bioresources.
Approach: Holistic and integrative.
Bioresources Process Cascades Produkt Mix
Energy
use
Biores-
source
Energy
generation
Energy
carrier
Pressing
Steam refining
Enzyms
Siliage
...
Solid fuel
Hydrogen
Ethanol
Methane
...
Biobin waste
Garden waste
Leaves
Grass
...
Residue
Post-
treatment
Material
Product
Product-
use
Compost products
Mineral fertilizer
Digestate products
...
Composting Pelletizing
Stripping
...
Parc management
Vacuum systems
Garden box
Biobin
...
The various bioresources, technical systems and products require many
various cascades !
An holistic approach is needed!
Collection pre-
treatment
●
● ●
● ●
●
Process cascades and cascade nets
The city: A Bioresource consument Data for Hamburg 2009
Energy carriers
Food
Material
products
Kalkuliert nach Daten von: klima.hamburg; fao; nabu
Primary energy demand: 223 Mrd. MJ / a
With: 6 Mrd. MJ / a
from Biorsources (Klärgas, Müll)
Nutrient uptake:
9 Mio. MJ / a
Paper demand: 0,4 Mio. Mg / a (6 Mrd. MJ / a)
Additional: z.B. Construction materials, Wood- & wood material products
Im Jahre 2010 lag der Verbrauch von Papier, Pappe
und Karton in Deutschland bei 242,9 kg pro
Einwohner.
http://www.umweltbundesamt-daten-zur-
umwelt.de/umweltdaten/public/theme.do?nodeIdent=
2314
http://www.bmelv-
statistik.de/index.php?id=139&stw=Nahrungsmittelverbrauch
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_foo
d_energy_intake
According to the Food and Agriculture Organization
of the United Nations, the average minimum daily
energy requirement is about 1,800 kilocalories
(7,500 kJ) per person.[3]
Germany 3,530 14,770
Country Daily dietary energy consumption per capita (2005-07)[4]
kilocalories kilojoules
Im Jahr 2011 erreichte der Primärenergieverbrauch
nach Angaben der Arbeitsgemeinschaft
Energiebilanzen mit 13 521 Petajoule (PJ) den
niedrigsten Stand seit Anfang der siebziger Jahre
und lag um 5 % niedriger als im Vorjahr.
http://www.umweltbundesamt-daten-zur-
umwelt.de/umweltdaten/public/theme.do?nodeIdent=
2326
Other recorded sources
Leaves
Bulky waste
Green waste
Waste wood
Delivery to recycling centres
Collection: Stadtreinigung Hamburg
Market
& Event waste
190.000 Mg/a
330. 000
Mg/a
27.000 Mg/a Bio bin
MSW Waste wood from business op.
Leftovers, food waste, special batches.
Green waste from public land
The city: A bioresource producent Data of Hamburg 2009
Source: Adwiraah, 2009; FHH-BSU, 2010
15.000 Mg/a
15.000 Mg/a
15.000 Mg/a 20.000 Mg/a
12.000 Mg/a 53.500 Mg/a
60.000 Mg/a
48.000 Mg/a
60.000 Mg/a
60.000 Mg/a
Biowaste Other waste
Green waste from private properties
Waste wood from construction sites
16.000 Mg/a
60.000 Mg/a 60.000 Mg/a
261.100 Mg/a
Waste paper from private
households and business
Waste Paper / Wood
RESIDUAL WASTE -
Incineration
WASTE WOOD -
Incineration
FOOD WASTE-
Digestion
BIO WASTE -
Composting
LEAVES-
Pelletizing
Treatment Facilities: Organic Waste Plants Hamburg
FOOD WASTE -
Digestion
WASTE PAPER -
Recycling P P
P
Treatment Facilities: Waste Water Treatment Hamburg
Waste water collection pipelines
Waste Water Treatment
Facilities
Sewage Sludge Treatment
facilities + Co-Substrates
154 Mio. Mg/a Waste Water
with 1 Mio. Mg/a Urine & Faeces
Fotos, Daten: HSE, 2008
BIOMASS
Organics from waste and
sewage
Visualisation of bioresources flows Data for main Waste & Wastewater flows in Hamburg
GREEN WASTE
various
~ 30,000 Mg/a
BIO-BIN WASTE -
composting
5,700 Mg/a
LEAVES
pelletising
6,400 Mg/a
FOOD WASTE
Fermentation
2,300 Mg/a
WASTE WOOD -
energy recovery
87,000 Mg/a
SEWAGE -
treatment
67,000 Mg/a
RESIDUAL
WASTE
incineration
36,000 Mg/a
material or
energy
recovery
Not included: e.g. waste paper
Disposal Disposal
BIOMASSE Material recovery :
Energy recovery :
disposal
6% : 43%: 51%
Processes:
all mass flows (Mg/a): organic dry matter
OTHERS
Körner, 2009
BIO-
WASTE-
Composting
RESIDUAL-
WASTE-
Incineration
WASTEWATER –
Treatment
WASTE WOOD-
Thermal
Treatment
LEAVES -
Pelletizing
FOOD-
WASTE-
Digestion
INPUT (in 1.000 Mg organic-dry mass / a)
OUTPUT - substantial (in 1.000 Mg organic-dry mass / a)
OUTPUT - energetic (in Mio. MJ / a)
0,9
87,4
66,7
36,5
6,4 5,7 2,8 6,1 15,3
905
64,1
Compost Pellets
Evaluation of treatment methods Data from Hamburg 2009
5% of the organic is included in the compost resp. in the pellets.
24% of the organic is transformed into heat and electricity.
71% of the organic is unutilized lost mainly as carbon dioxide.
51 % Heat
49 % Electricity
82%
Heat
18%
Electricity
56%
Heat
44 %
Electricity
Bulk Products
Special Products
For regional application!
For subregional export!
• Digestate products
• Composts
• Mulch
• Wood chips
• Briquettes
….
• Pellets
• Mineral fertilizers
• Biofuel
• Natural gas substitute
• Biochar
...
Energy Products Material Products
Platform chemicals
Pictures provided by: I. Körner (BRI); B. Saake (UNIHH); J. Huisman (WUR)
PRODUCT MIX Consideration of product demands & options
• Lignin
• Pectins
• Proteins
• Fats
• Carbohydrates
…
before
Hierarchy on waste utilisation European Waste Directive: 2008/98/EG
before * * * Preparing for re-use
5 hierarchy levels
Recovery split into 3 levels
Advanced goals: Use cascades for material and energy recovery
Biorefinery technology Zero Waste Approaches
Industry & Commerce
Science Population
Politics
Civilisation biorefinery
Waste & Waste Water management
Agriculture & Forestry
City planing
Logistics
Energy management
Material management
collection, conversion, utilization of bioresources
Situation adapted, holistic solutions!
Area comprehensive cooperations!
Structure
1. Biobased-Economy & Bioresources
2. Actual management of secondary and tertiary bioresources
3. Examples for innovative systems
– Civilisation biorefinery
– KREIS-project
– Innovative collection systems
4. Project based work
– Sustainable regions
• KREIS-“Kopplung von regenerativer Energiegewinnung mit innovativer
Stadtentwässerung“ Demonstrationsvorhaben Jenfelder Au
• New residential area in Hamburg, 35 ha
• Hamburg-Water-Cycle for 610 households, 1830 persons
• Energy and heat from black water and waste (geothermal energy, solar heat)
KREIS-Project
Quelle: HAMBURG WASSER
HAMBURG WATER Cycle:
• Separate collection / treatment of waste water
• Treatment of greywater: trickling filter
• Vacuum toilets for blackwater collection
• 900 m³ fermenter for anaerobic digestion of blackwater
• Electricity 100 kW
HAMBURG WATER Cycle ®
Black water Grey water Rain water
CHP Vacuum
station
6 74
7500 340
6800 270
9600 630
2000 14
300 7
high very low Vacuum
toilette
[l/PE*d]
[mg/l]
[mg/l]
[mg/l]
[mg/l]
[mg/l]
qualitative
Amount
Dry matter
Org. dry matter
COD
Nitrogen
Phosphorus
pharmaceuticals
Source: HAMBURG WASSER
Jenfelder Au
2013 2016
Photos: Saskia Hertel
21
Flow sheet for the black water pathway
Actually built steps
Suggested extensions outcomes
On-site
Off-site
22
Blackwater
Vacuum station
Heat
Electricity
Anaerobic pretreatment
facility
Biogas
2 gas
turbines13
0 kW
Sewer
Grease trap
residues
Storage and
dosing
On-site
Off-site Actually built steps
Suggested extensions outcomes
Flow sheet for the black water pathway
KREIS-Project
Partners:
Scientific project coordination; Economic decision model
Treatment of greywater; Degradation of phamaceutics in the blackwater
Project coordination; economic evaluation; vacuum
system; test operation of blackwater and greywater
treatment; communication design
Acceptance analysis
Co-Substrates for anaerobic digestion
vacuum system
Energy concept; operational concept of energy supply
Ecological evaluation
vacuum system; economic evaluation
Geothermal energy Gefördert vom
Options for co-substrates for anaerobic
digestion
greenwaste fruitwaste
blackwater
Lawn cuttings Kitchen waste
Fat separator residues leaves
?
Evaluation of territorial bioresources Bioresource Generation period/ Actual pathway Accessibility
Pri
vate
was
te w
ater
Black water whole year planned
Grey water treatment
residue
whole year planned
Mixed waste water whole year / sewer not considered
Pri
vate
was
te
Kitchen waste whole year / Bio-Bin, Garbage-Bin mid/long term
Lawn cuttings March-October/ Bio-Bin, Garbage-Bin, Recycling
stations, yard
mid/long term
Garden waste not considered not considered
Leaf October-November/ Bio-Bin, Garbage-Bin, Leaf-Bag,
Recycling stations, yard
mid/long term
Pu
blic
was
te
Lawn cuttings March-October/ contracted disposers short/mid term
Tree-/Green cuttings not considered not considered
Leaf October-November/ pellet company (from roads),
contracted disposers (public spaces), public space
not yet considered
Co
mm
.
resi
diu
es Greasy water whole year/ contracted disposers short term
Fruit residue water whole year/ far off biogas plant short term
Restaurant waste whole year/ contracted disposers not yet considered
Finding information for quantification
Data's of biotope cadaster:
• Different categories
• Buildings
Public buildings:
Community/ Industry/ Administration…
Private buildings: Town houses/rural housing…
• Green areas
Public green areas: Sports facilities/leisure facilities/parks/cemetry…
Private green areas: orchard/garden plot…
Under nature protection: Fens…
Lila-Abstufungen: bebaute Flächen
Grün-Abstufungen: Grünflächen
Rot umrandet: Jenfelder AU
Built-up areas
Green areas Jenfelder Au
District Wandsbek (Hamburg)
District Wandsbek
Quantification of the potentials Example: grass cuttings in Wandsbek
5-km-radius
Jenfelder Au
Hamburg
7 -14 km
21-29 km 21-29 km
Public green area: 1.299 ha
Fresh matter: 21.315 Mg/a
Biogas: 3.711.534 m³/a
→ enough grass cuttings for the anaerobic
digestion facility in less than 5 km around
Jenfelder Au from public green areas
Source: Janina Martina Flerlage
Jenfelder Au, 5-km-radius within district Wandsbek,
Fruit processing company 7-km-distance, district Wandsbek
Basic characterisation of the most suitable options - Estimates used for calculations-
Bioresource Bioresource potential
[Mg/a]
Dry Matter Organic
dry mater
Fresh
matter
Dry
matter
Organic
matter
[%] [% DM]
Black water 5 000 350 227 0.7 65
Kitchen waste 150 60 30 40 50
Fruit residue water 3 000 180 171 6 95
Private Lawn cuttings 12 000 3 600 2 520 30 70
Public Lawn cuttings 70 000 24500 19 600 35 80
Greasy water 1 500 10 9 3 91
Consideration of further frame conditions for selection
Frame conditions of the initiators:
• 900 m³ volume of the digestor
• Complete black water
• Pumpable co-substrates
• (Territorial bioresources)
Black water Greasy water Lawn cuttings
Fruit residues
& kitchen waste
Opinions of external stakeholders:
Technical considerations
Facility throughput depending
on retention time:
• 10 days – 33 000 m³/a
• 25 days – 14 000 m³/a
• 50 days – 6 500 m³/a
12 m³ of blackwater per day
2/3rd free reactor capacity if retention
time is 25 days
Bioresource volume potential
in total 127 000 m³/a)
Grass juice
Grass sludge
Comparing alternatives by experiments
Press juice preparation
Commercially collected
lawn cuttings
Screw press Press cake Press juice
Sludge preparation
Macerator Particle size of sludge decrease with shredding time &
water addition
Lawn silage : water
1 : 1.375
Lawn silage : water
1 : 1.375
Lawn silage : water
1 : 0
Anaerobic digestion investigations
Batch systems with 1-L-reactors Continious system with 10-L-reactors
Continious system with 100-L-reactor
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
0 200 400 600
Bio
gas
yie
ld (
l N/k
g o
DM
)
Time (hours)
Fats residue
Lawn Juice
Lawn cuttings
Silage
Press Cake
Blackwater
Biogas potentials
Bioresource Biogas potentials
nl/kg oDM
nl/ kg FM
Black water 500 2 Greasy water 1000 27 Private lawn 550 116 Public lawn 550 154
Kitchen waste 600 120 Fruit residue water 600 34
Examples from Batch-Tests (VDI 4630)
Values used for calculations
Organic dry matter
Fresh matter
Greasy water
Lawn cuttings
Black
water
34
Sz. Input
m3/d
DM
%
Biogas
nl/kg oDM m3/d
Energy
kWel. kWth.
Explanation for choosing a scenario
1 36 (Blackwater) 0.7 500 77 8 13 For comparision only
2 12 (Blackwater)
24 (Greasy water)
2.2 963 680 68 106 Greasy water available in high amounts on short
term
3 12 (Black water)
4 (Greasy water)
8 (Lawn sludge)
12 (Lawn juice)
8.9 609 1433 127 199 Territorial available share of greasy water;
Maximum share on lawn sludge to remain
pumpable; additional liquid co-substrate
necassary
4 12 (Black water)
14 (Greasy water)
10 (Lawn sludge)
8.9 621 1486 135 212 Maximum share of lawn sludge,
supra-territorial greasy water shares
5 12 (Black water)
14 (Greasy water)
10 (Lawn sludge)
8.9 621 1486 135 212 As before but different particle size of the lawn
sludge
6 12 (Black water)
12 (Greasy water)
12 (Lawn juice)
3.6 788 789 73 115 Only liquid substrates for easy pumpability
7 12 (Black water)
10 (Lawn sludge)
14 (Lawn juice)
10.6 589 1612 141 222 Exchange of greasy water by lawn types due to
sustainability reason
8 12 (Black water)
24 (Lawn juice)
4.9 692 897 79 124 As before, but only lawn juice due to pumpability
Developing and investigationg scenarios
for decission support
Consideration of options for the residue
treatment
Saskia Hertel, 2012
Digestate
Solid-liquid separation
Sedimentation Centrifugation Filter Press
Treatment of liquid
Membrane
separation
Biological
treatment
Ammonia
stripping
Eva-
poration
Clean water Mineral
fertilizer
Liquid
fertilizer MAP
Ion
exchange
MAP-
precipitation
Utilisation without
separation
Application on land Solid
matter
drying
Treatmant of Solids
Drying HTC Pelletizing Composting
Solid
matter compost pellets biochar
Application on land heating Grey water
treatment Application on land/
sale
Characteristics, advantages, disadvantages
Solid-liquid separation of digestate in lab scale:
Sedimentation:
easy process
low energy consumption
low separation efficiency because of small particles
difficult with fat residues
Centrifugation:
high energy consumption
good separation efficiency
Chamber filter press:
used for sludge dewatering
good separation efficiency
Saskia Hertel, 2012
Source: Flottweg SE
Source: direct industry
Source: jkf-kuebler
Treatment of solid fraction:
• Composting:
Easy, established process
Only without pharmaceuticals
• Hydrothermal Carbonisation (HTC)
High energy consumption
Degradation of pharmaceuticals not sure
• Pelletizing
For fuel, also with pharmaceuticals
Problem: high nitrogen content
Treatment of liquid fraction:
• Ammonia stripping
• Phosphate precipitation
Saskia Hertel, 2012
Fotos: Roman
Jupitz
Characteristics, advantages, disadvantages
Structure
1. Biobased-Economy & Bioresources
2. Actual management of secondary and tertiary bioresources
3. Examples for innovative systems
– Civilisation biorefinery
– KREIS-project
– Innovative collection systems
4. Project based work
– Sustainable regions
Traditional
• hygienic
• ecologic
• aesthetic
• low odour
Goals: Waste Collection
Advanced
• Getting
bioresources
• area wide
• reliable
• user-friendly
• cost efficient & -covering
Inventory results for the district Bergedorf
-Wet & Solid Bioresources-
Solid Bioresources
84.000 Mg/a Wet Mass
560.000 m³/a Waste water volume
0,7 Mg Wet Mass / Inhabitant & a 46 m³ Waste water/ Inhabitant & a
Liquid Bioresources
Other mixed green
Food residues
Leaves
Woody garden residues
Kitchen waste
Horse manure
Herbacous garden residues
Mixed Green from road sides
Wood cuttings
Grass and lawn
Industrial fruit residues
Grease trap residues
Tipping point Curslack
Domestic wastewater
Biowaste collection in Europe
Barth, 2011
Potential of organic waste in
EU27:
115 Mio. Mg/ a
Recycling in 2009:
16 Mio. Mg organic waste
11 Mio. Mg green waste
5 Mio. Mg digested
Only 25 % of the
potential recycled
potential
approx. 120.000 Mg/a
Biowaste collection in Hamburg - 2009 -
Average collected biowaste
Hamburg 35 kg/ capita
Germany 110 kg / capita
EU 45 kg / capita
Collection area
No collection area
Waste per district
(Mg/a)
Potential per district
Adwiraah
Collection of Kitchen Waste
0
20
40
60
80
100
Mas
sen
ante
ile in
%
Sonstige Abfälle
Sonstige Organik
Unbenutzte Lebensmittel
Küchenabfall
Waste composition
in the residual waste bin
Kitchen waste: 8.650 Mg/a;
mainly in residual waste bin
Quellen: Inventuren 2009 – Oldenburg, Adwiraah; Restmüllsortierung Mehrfamilienhaus Juni – Adwiraah;
12 Biotonnensortierungen – Adwiraah
The biobin is more a garden waste bin &
contains up to 90% garden waste (71%-100%)
Collected in the district Bergedorf / Hamburg
Biobin density
Population density
Other waste
Other organic
Unused food
Kitchen waste M
ass f
racti
on
in
%
Today:
Kitchen waste: high content of unused food;
low efficiency
Short term:
Expansion biobin
Pilot systems for new collection methods
Collection of Kitchen Waste
Long term:
Introduction of new systems starts by new
buildings and restoration
Efficient systems obligatory by law
http://www.hamburg.de/stadtplanung-
bergedorf/projekte/in-planung/
Total potential
Increased(Germany)
Collected by biobin
Fre
sh
Kit
ch
en
was
te m
as
s
AD operators Transport company Households
Kitchen Waste Collection Chain -Strategy development-
• Are fractions preventable? • Re-organization potential from households, transport & treatment
companies…?
Kitchen waste
Waste collection device
1. Storage Pick up / Transport 2. Storage Pre-treatment AD Unit
Other Waste fractions Digestate fractions
All solutions will be goal & situation depending: e.g. from region, income, housing structures, street infrastructure, policy, companies interests…
Underflour biowaste containers
better optical appearance, better area utilization,
protected from direct solar radiation but higher
investments
Storage volume: 3 – 5 m³
Different types of system
Innovative collection systems - Transport company responsibilities -
Bin including funnel for lifting out Underground system with suction opening
Scheme of sub-surface vacuum system; transport of waste into a central storage by suction (sorce: envac-System-Brocure 2009)
Vacuum system
Separated collection via aboveground funnels
Odourless & silent transport via underground pipelines
Collection trucks suck the waste of the temporary collection
containers for further transports
Innovative collection systems - Transport company responsibilities -
Individual vessels
Paperbags
Plastik bags
Bioplastic bags
Provided mini-vessels
Into the sink
Into a special device
???
Collection device options at home
In the Kitchen:
A bin/ container outside
A gate in the house
A gate outside
Directly at the roadside
A kitchen waste
shredder
A kitchen waste press
???
Transport to / operation of:
Transport when?
When it is full
At certain dates
Directly after generation
When it stinks
???
Transport by:
A truck
A pipeline
A waterway
???
Kitchen waste is hackled in the sink
with running water
The mashed waste is transported to
an underfloor collection container
Separated wastewater streams
would allow the combination with
blackwater
Collection device options at home
Macerator in the kitchen
Innovative collection systems
Kitchen waste is compressed with a manual
or small electric press; enzymes may
increase pressing efficiency
The fluid fraction enters the
The separate blackwater collection system for
decentral co-digestion
A decentralized collection container for direct
utilization in a decentral or mini AD unit
The compacted solid fraction
comes to home compost
Is collected by public waste collection
Small (manual) press:
Different sized bags for tight packed biowaste
Into the kitchen biobin and subsequently
e.g. in sub-surface system out of sight
Bio bag reusable, separation in utilisation
plant
Different couloured bags for bio, residual
waste and recycables
All waste in one bin or sub-surface system,
separation in utilisation plant
Floating bags
Transport in the sewage system
Examples for special bag systems
Paper Bags
Exercises
• Draw the collection chain for your home (form A)
• Choose an other option for a collection device and a transport y system
and connect in a logical way (form B).
• Ranking of scenarios / Suggest an option (form C)
