Compost Process Modeling

Jim Levis, PhD

Research Assistant Professor
Department of Civil, Construction, and Environmental Engineering

Keith Hodge, PE
Graduate Research Assistant
Department of Civil, Construction, and Environmental Engineering

Morton Barlaz, PhD

Professor and Head S
Department of Civil, Construction, and Environmental Engineering
WOLF
http://go.ncsu.edu/SWM-LCA
1
 Outline
• Introduction
• Mass Flows
• Composting Technologies
• End Product Use
• Illustrative Results

2
 Composting
• A biological process in which organic matter is
decomposed aerobically
Organic matter + O2 ---> CO2 + H20 + heat + cell mass

3
 Remanufacturing

Comingled
Commingled
Recyclable
MRF
Collection

Solid
Waste
Systems Thermal
WtE
Ash
Landfill

Mixed Waste/
Mixed
Residual
Waste MRF
Collection

Anaerobic
Digestion

Organics Soil
Collection Amendment

Composting
Landfill

4
Mixed Waste Recyclables Combustibles Organics Ash
 The Composting Process Model

Incoming Waste
Materials (Mgin)

Direct Emissions (kg/Mgin)

Equipment Fuel Use (L/Mgin)

Electricity Use (kWh/Mgin)

Composting Process
User Inputs
Model
Transportation Use (kg-km/Mgin)

Capital Cost ($/Mg-yr-1)

Operating Cost ($/Mgin)

Residual
Final Compost
Contaminants
(Mgout/ Mgin)
(Mgout/ Mgin)
5
 Organic matter

MSW (covered in SWOLF)

• Yard waste (grass, leaves, branches)
– Paper bags, biodegradable plastic bags
• food waste
• soiled paper (paper towels, tissues)

Additional Compostables
• sewage sludge (biosolids)
• special wastes
– agricultural
– food processing industry
• seafood, vegetable canning, brewery, etc. 6
 Objectives of Composting

• Volume reduction
• Production of a useful product
– Depending on feedstock and markets
• Landfill diversion
– “Avoided” methane production

7
Mass transformation in composting

8
 11 H2O | 16 VS | 2 Ash

Composting
Material Flow

9
 Mass Flow Life-Cycle Inputs

Input Units Yard Waste Food Waste Source

Value Value
C-loss during composting % 57.2 65.7 U.S. EPA, 2003

N-loss during composting % 13.9 83.9 U.S. EPA, 2003

VS loss per C loss kg VS/kg C 2 1.9 U.S. EPA, 2003

C loss as CH4 % 2.7 2.7 Boldrin et al., 2009
N loss as N2O % 1.8 1.8 Boldrin et al., 2009

10
 General Fuel and Electricity Life-Cycle
Inputs
Input Units Value Source
Grinder fuel use gal/ton 0.63 Diamond Z Sales literature
Vacuum system fuel use gal/ton 0.05 Airlift separator literature
Front end loader fuel use gal/ton 0.075 Komilis and Ham (2004) and U.S.
EPA (2004)
Annual office area electricity use kWh/tpd 450 Komilis and Ham (2004) and U.S.
DOE (2003)
Screen electricity use (pre and kWh/ton 0.82 Komilis and Ham (2004)
post)
Curing time days 30 Facility operators
Turning frequency during curing days/turn 7 Facility operators
Windrow turner fuel use gal/ton/ 0.007 Backhaus windrow turners
turn literature
11
 Compost Technologies

• Windrows

• Aerated static pile

• In-vessel composting

• Gore Compost Covers

12
 Compost Technologies: Windrows

• A long narrow (elongated) pile

– width (8’ to 16’) and height (6 to 8’) determined by
equipment to be used for turning, turning frequency,
and climate
• May contain a paved surface for ease of turning and
leachate collection
• Retention time varies with turning frequency which varies
with raw material, objectives and space
• Mechanical aeration is not typical but a possibility

13
14
15
 Windrows - Key Life-Cycle Inputs

Input Units Value Source

Windrow Active composting time days 70 Facility operators
Turning frequency days/turn 3 Facility operators
Windrow turner fuel use gal/ton 0.007 Backhaus windrow turners
literature

16
 Compost Technologies: Aerated static
pile

• Pile is mechanically aerated by placing pile over a pipe

network connected to a blower
• May be located under a roof
• In absence of turning outside of pile may not reach 50oC
– add a layer of composted material over top for
insulation and odor control
• Covers:
– reduce effect of rain and evaporation by solar
radiation

17
 Suction Pressure Natural
aerated aerated aeration

Mature
compost
Porous media
Odor
Condensed
filter
water trap
18
 Aerated Static Piles- Key Life-Cycle
Inputs

Input Units Value Source

Active composting time days 20 Facility operators
Aeration electricity use kWh/ton 3.8 New York Blower Co.
literature, Facility operators

19
 Compost Technologies: GORE Covers

• Allow CO2 to leave

• Restrict microbial
emissions
• Restrict water infiltration
• Restrict release of odors
– Gas permeability
– Condensation layer
inside the tarp

• www.gore.com/en_xx/prod
20
ucts/fabrics/swt/index.html
21
 GORE Cover System- Key Life-Cycle
Inputs

Input Units Value Source

Active composting time days 30 Facility operators
Aeration electricity use kWh/ton 5.1 New York Blower Co.
literature, Facility operators

22
 Compost Technologies: In-vessel
• Most expensive alternative
– Applicable to food waste and other rapidly degradable
materials
• More environmental control over all variables
– aeration
– temperature
– odors
– decomposition rate
• Process Alternatives
– Rotating drum
– Indoor aerated static pile 23
 In-Vessel - Key Life-Cycle Inputs

Input Units Value Source

Active composting time days 20 Facility operators
In-vessel electricity use kWh/ton 27 Facility operators

24
 End Product Use
• Soil conditioner: high organic content increases moisture holding
capacity of soil
• Nutrient content
– depends on the starting material
– nutrients and/or soil may be added for certain markets
• Markets (identify before producing compost)
– landfill cover soil – mixed MSW
– nurseries and landscapers for seedlings – yard waste
– state roads and parks – yard waste
– city residents (give away or sell) – yard waste
– Agriculture IF the material is pure and has a nutrient value
• Model allows
– No offset
– Fertilizer offset (N,P,K)
– Peat offset 25
 End Product Use Inputs
Input Units Value Source
Haul distance to land mi 30
Land application diesel use gal/ton 0.29 Berglund and Börjesson
(2006)
Carbon remaining after 100 years % 10 Bruun et al. (2006)
Carbon stored from humus production kg C/kg C in 0.19 U.S. EPA (2006)
in soil compost
Percent applied N that is released as % 1.5 Hansen et al. (2006)
N2 O
Nitrogen mineral fertilizer equivalent kg N in 0.4 Boldrin et al. (2009)
compost/kg
N in fertilizer

26
 End Product Emission Factors

Emission N (kg/kg N) P (kg/kg P) K (kg/kg P) Peat (kg/Mg)

Carbon Dioxide – Fossil 5.18 0.411 0.342 18

Methane 0.04 0.002 0.02 0.27
Nitrous Oxide 2.19E-02 5.44E-05 8.16E-04 7.29E-04
GWP (kg CO2e) 12.7 0.48 1.09 25

27
Illustrative Results (Fertilizer Offset) –GWP
(1 ton food waste; 0.3 tons yard waste)

28
Illustrative Results (Fertilizer Offset) –Total
Energy Use (1 ton food waste; 0.3 tons yard
waste)

29
 http://go.ncsu.edu/SWM-LCA
References
• Berglund, M. & Börjesson, P. (2006) Assessment of energy performance in the life-cycle of biogas production.
Biomass and Bioenergy, 30,254– 266.
• Boldrin, A.; Andersen, J.K.; Moller, J.; Christensen, T.H.; Favoino, E. (2009) Composting and compost utilization:
accounting of greenhouse gases and global warming contributions Waste Manage. Res., 27 (8), 800-812.
• Bruun, S., Hansen, T.L., Christensen, T.H., Magid, J. & Jensen, L.S. (2006) Application of processed organic
municipal solid waste on agricultural land: a scenario analysis. Environmental Modeling and Assessment, 11, 251-
265.
• Hansen, T.L., Bhander, G.S., Christensen, T.H., Bruun, S. & Jensen, L.S. (2006) Life cycle modelling of
environmental impacts of application of processed organic municipal solid waste on agricultural land
(EASEWASTE). Waste Management & Research, 24, 153-166.
• Komilis, D. P.; Ham, R. K. (2004). Life-Cycle Inventory of Municipal Solid Waste and Yard Waste Windrow
Composting in the United States. J. Env Eng, 130(11), 1390–1400.
• Levis, J. W.; Barlaz, M. A. (2011). What is the most environmentally beneficially way to treat commercial food
waste? Environ. Sci. Technol, 45 (17), 7438-7444.
• Levis, J. W., Barlaz, M. A., (2013). Composting Process Model Documentation. Raleigh,
NC. http://www4.ncsu.edu/~jwlevis/Composting.pdf.
• U.S. EPA (2003) A Laboratory Study to Investigate Gaseous Emissions and Solids Decomposition During
Composting of Municipal Solid Wastes EPA-600/R-03-004; U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste: Washington, DC,
2003.
• U.S. EPA. 2004 Exhaust and crankcase emission factrs for nonroad engine modeling - compression-ignition
EPA420-P-04-009, Office of Air and Radiation.
• U.S. EPA (2006) Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases: A Life-Cycle Assessment of Emissions and
Sinks http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/wycd/waste/downloads/fullreport.pdf Date accessed: 06-02-2010.
• U.S. DOE 2003 Commercial building energy consumption and expenditures 2003 Energy Information
Administration, http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/TableView.aspx?table=3.1.13
30