Municipal Solid Waste:

A Solution to the Growing Problem

Jessica Beard
Brant Bennett
Jason Black
Adam Bymaster
Alex Ibanez
 Purpose
• Investigate and select an alternative
method of MSW disposal
• Design a waste processing plant
• Advance the previous deterministic model
to optimize a construction and expansion
timeline
• Select a feasible investment strategy
 Today’s Agenda
1. MSW in the United States
- City selection
- Waste disposal methods
2. Pyrolysis Processing Plant
3. Producing Hydrogen from Synthetic Gas
- Other possible end products
4. MSW Processing Plant Capital Costs
5. Deterministic Model
6. Results
7. Ownership
 Background
• Municipal Solid Waste in the United States
– Composition
– Waste Disposal
MSW Production and Disposal, 1960-2001

250
Million Tons Per Year

200

150

100

50

0
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Year
MSW Produced MSW Disposed
 Waste Disposal in the U.S.
Combustion
• Close to 210
14.7% Recovery
29.7% million tons of
MSW per year
• Methods
– Landfilling
Landfilling
55.6% – Incineration
– Pyrolysis
Recovery Landfilling Combustion

– Recycling
 City Selection
• Cities Considered:
– New York City, New York
– Los Angeles, California
– Detroit, Michigan
– Hilo, Hawaii
• Basis of Analysis
– Amount of MSW produced
– Population and Population growth
– Cost of current disposal method
 Municipal Solid Waste
Produced
• Total MSW Municipal Solid Waste Produced
Generation
50000
• Recycling Rates 45000
40000
• Waste Disposal 35000

M S W to n s /d a y
Methods 30000
25000
– NYC—Transporting
20000
MSW
15000
– Detroit—Incineration and 10000
Landfilling 5000
– Hilo—Transporting 0
MSW and Landfilling New York City Los Angeles Detroit Hilo
City
– Los Angeles—Landfilling
 Population
Metropolitan Area of City
• Metropolitan Area
25
Populations
20
• NYC has largest
P o p u la tio n (M illio n )

15 metropolitan
10
population
• Hilo has a
5
population under a
0
New York City Los Angeles Detroit Hilo
million
City
 Population Growth
• Hilo has the largest Population Growth

population growth but 20

very small population 18

16

• New York also has

P e r c e n t G r o w th
14
12
large population 10

growth 8
6

• Detroit has smallest 4

2
population growth 0
New York City Los Angeles Detroit Hilo

City
 Price to Dispose of MSW
Price to Dispose of MSW
• Average Prices
80
• New York Fresh Kills
70
Landfill Closed—
60
Transporting Waste Out
50
of State
P r ic e ($ )

40 • Cost of Incineration
30 High
20
• Hilo Running Out of
10
Space
0
New York City Detroit Hilo Los Angeles • West Coast Has More
City
Space than East Cost
 Location Choice…
• New York City:
– Price to Dispose of MSW: $63.30
– Population of Metropolitan Area: 22 million
– Amount of MSW in Metro: 46,000 tons/day
– Landfilling in NYC
• Prevention of landfilling in high density NYC
• 9 private and 23 public landfills—capacity of 60
million tons
• 17 companies with three year base contracts and
two 1 year extensions
 Disposal Methods
• Methods Considered
– Landfilling
– Incineration
– Pyrolysis
• Basis of Analysis
– Cost to build and operate
– Environmental Concerns
– Production of Products
 Landfilling
• Advantages
– Small Capital Investment
– Little Maintenance
– Cheaper Disposal Fees
• Disadvantages
– Environmental Pollution
• Methane Carbon Dioxide
• Leachate
– Property Decrease in
Value
Source: http://www.zerowasteamerica.org/Landfills.htm
 Incineration
• Advantages
– Minimizes Landfill
Volume
– Recovery of Energy
• Disadvantages
– High Building and
Operation Costs
– Air Emissions
– Toxic Ash

Source: http://www.meniscusclients.com/portfolio/cwa/tech_info.htm
 Pyrolysis
• Advantages
– Minimizes Landfill
Volume
– Recovery of Energy
– Production of
Synthetic Gas
• Disadvantages
– Air Emissions—
– Leachate
– Slag—Landfilled or
used in road
foundations
 Method Choice…
• Pyrolysis
– Land Constraints in NYC
– Production of Syngas
• Mixture of CO, CO2 and H2
• Can lead to production of synthetic fuels,
hydrogen, ammonia, alcohols, aldehydes,
carboxylic acids
 Pyrolysis Process
• Why Separate Before Pyrolysis?
– Enhance Profit / Reduce Costs
• Sell Recyclable Metals; Low Heat Value
• Reduce Wear and Tear on Equipment
• Easier Than Separation After Pyrolysis
– Control Refuse Properties
• Slag Seals Refuse if Proper Proportions
 Front End Separation
Purox Feed Energy
13.8x109 Btu/D

Waste Energy
13.9x109 Btu/D
Purox Pyrolysis Facility
Desulfurization
Wastewater Plant
Oxygen Plant
 Oxygen Plant (cont.)
• Air Separation
– 78.1% N2, 20.9% O2, 0.934% Ar, 0.035% CO2
• 280 TPD O2 = 1 Purox Reactor
• Equipment: Compressor, Heat
Exchanger, Distillation Columns
 Oxygen Plant (cont.)
• Purpose:
– Eliminate Nitrous Oxides
• Environmental aspects
– Increases concentration of reactants
– Raise reactor temperature to effectively
destroy toxins
 End Product Possibilities
• Hydrogen
• Ammonia
• Polycarbonates
• Synthetic Fuel
• Methanol
• Dimethyl Ether
• Acetic Acid
 End Product Possibilities
• Hydrogen
Uses: fuel cells, alternative fuels,
petroleum industry applications

(1) CH4 + 2 H2O ÅÆ 4 H2 + CO2

(2) CO + H2O ÅÆ CO2 + H2

Sale Price: $2500/ton

 End Product Possibilities
• Ammonia
Uses: fertilizers, refrigeration, processing

N2 + H2 Æ 2 NH3

Sale Price: $200/ton

-using H2 ($2500/ton) and N2 ($160/ton)
 End Product Possibilities
• Polycarbonates
Uses: drink bottles, CD/DVD substrates, audio/video
cassettes

(1) CO2 + H2 Æ CO + H2O

(2) 2 NaCl + CO Æ 2 Na + Phosgene
(3) Phosgene + bisphenyl-A Æ Polycarbonate + 2 HCl

Sale Price: $66/ton (HCl $72/ton)

-using H2 ($2500/ton)
-using bisphenyl-A ($2000/ton) and NaCl ($46/ton)
 End Product Possibilities
• Synthetic Fuel
Uses: diesel fuel, waxes

CO + 2 H2 Æ CH2 + H2O

Sale Price: $630/ton

- using H2 ($2500/ton)
 End Product Possibilities
• Methanol
Potential Uses: MTBE, DME,

(1) CO + H2O Æ CO2 + H2

(2) CO + 2H2 Æ CH3OH
(3) CO2 + 3H2 Æ CH3OH + H2O

Sale Price: $254/ton

- using H2 ($2500/ton)
 End Product Possibilities
• Dimethyl Ether
Uses: alternative fuel (developing countries)

(1) 3 CO + 3 H2 Æ CH3OCH3 + CO2

(2) 2 CO + 4 H2 Æ CH3OCH3 + H2O

Sale Price: $109/ton

- using H2 ($2500/ton)
 End Product Possibilities
• Acetic Acid
Uses: photo film, vinyl acetate, vinegar

CH3OH + CO Æ CH3COOH

Sale Price: $800/ton

- results from CH3OH that results from
H2 ($2500/ton)
 End Product Comparison
2500

2000

1500 Sale Price ($/ton)

Price ($/ton MSW)
1000 Revenue ($ MM/yr)

500

0
Hydrogen Ammonia Synthetic Fuel Methanol Polycarbonates
 Product Possibilities
• Ammonia
• Polycarbonates
• Synthetic Fuel
• Methanol
• Dimethyl Ether
• Acetic Acid
• Hydrogen
 Synthetic Gas
Component Composition

H2 12.5%

CO 20.8%

CH4 5.7%

H20 47.9%

CO2 12.5%

N2 0.6%
 Hydrogen Plant
H2O H2O CO, CO2, CH4, N2
CO2

99.999%
Syngas Pure H2

Steam Water-Gas Pressure

CO2
Reformation Shift Swing
Removal
Adsorption
33.8 MM Btu/hr
Steam Reformation

P = 20 atm
CH4 + H2O Æ 3H2 + CO
CO + H2O Æ CO2 + H2
T=1600 °F
OVERALL REACTION:

CH4 + 2H2O Æ CO2 + 4H2

∆HRX = 84,000 Btu/lbmol
• Coal fired furnace
• Heat Load of 140 Million Btu/hr
• Steam:Methane = 8
• 170 tubes, 5-in ID, 40 ft. long
• 380,000 lbs Nickel-Alumina Catalyst
 Hydrogen Plant

Syngas:
24% H2 56% H2
39.9% CO Steam 15.8% CO
10.9% CH4
Reformation 0.1% CH4
24% CO2 26.9% CO2
1.2% N2 0.9% N2

3050 lbmol/hr 4380 lbmol/hr

36.8 MM Btu/hr Water-Gas Shift

• 300,000 lbs Chromia-

promoted iron catalyst
• Steam:CO = 8
9.8 MM Btu/hr • 4 X 36ft reactors
– 100 tubes
– 3-in ID
CO + H2O ÅÆ CO2 + H2
• 2 X Heat Exchangers
• Flash Drum
 Hydrogen Plant
H2O H2O

62.3% H2
56% H2
1.5% CO
15.8% CO Water-Gas 0.1% CH4
0.1% CH4 Shift
0.2% H2O
26.9% CO2
35.2% CO2
0.9% N2
0.8% N2
4380 lbmol/hr 4960 lbmol/hr
CO2 Removal
 Hydrogen Plant

62.3% H2 96.4% H2

1.5% CO 2.3% CO

0.1% CH4 CO2 0.2% CH4

0.2% H2O Removal 0.2% H2O

35.2% CO2 0% CO2

0.8% N2 1.2% N2

4960 lbmol/hr 3203 lbmol/hr

Pressure Swing Adsorption
W=5551.58 HP

W=1022.2 HP
 Hydrogen Plant

96.4% H2
2.3% CO
0.2% CH4
0.2% H2O
0% CO2 99.99% Pure Hydrogen
Pressure
1.2% N2
Swing
Adsorption 3090 lbmol/hr
3203 lbmol/hr
 MSW Processing Plant
Capital Costs
• Based on plant processing 1500 TPD
MSW
• Capital Investment
– Purox Pyrolysis Plant
– Hydrogen Production Plant
• Production Costs
– Operating Costs
– Transportation Costs
Purox Pyrolysis Capital Costs

1975 2004
Item $ millions $ millions
Construction 47.1 126.9
Interest during construction 4.30 11.59
Startup Costs 2.56 6.90
Working Capital 1.56 4.21
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT 55.5 149.6
 Hydrogen Capital Costs
Steam Reformation Compressor $5,727,400
Steam Reformer $2,000,000
Water-Gas Shift High Temp. Reactor X 4 $1,029,776
Heat Exchanger $8,000
Flash Drum $112,000
CO2 Removal Stripper $1,694,000
Turbine $312,000
Slump Tank $26,000
Compressor X 4 $964,000
Flash Drum X 3 $126,000
CO2 Storage Tank $3,400,000
Pump $114,000
Refrigerator $485,000
PSA stuff PSA $2,201,000
Storage/Production Compressor $3,000,000
Heat Exchanger $1,500
Storage Tanks X 12 $3,700,000

Total Equipment Costs $24,900,676

 Waste to Hydrogen TCI
& Production Costs
• TCI of Plant
– $300 million
• Production Costs
– $56 million/year
– Utilities, Catalysts, Labor
– Do not account for transportation costs
 Deterministic Model
• Advance the previous deterministic model
• New additions:
– Refined Plant Investment & Production Costs
– Allowed plants to expand by incorporating
new capital costs
– Updated contracts and locations
– Developed new transportation costs
 Refined Plant Investment &
Production Costs

2,500 $600

$500
2,000
y = 0.1356x - 20.722

TP C , M illions
FCI, millions $

$400 y = 0.0358x - 3.9913

1,500
$300
1,000
$200
500 $100

0 $0
0 5000 10000 15000 0 5000 10000 15000
Capacity, TPD Capacity, TPD

Scaled Up TCI Scaled Up Operating Costs

 Contracts & Locations
• Updated contracts
– Many contracts recently expired
• Reconfigured mileage
– Account for highways and driving times
– More accurate mileage from transfer
location to possible facilities
 Plant Transportation Costs
•• MSW Semi-Dump Trucks
MSW Trucks
– Capacity = 15 tons of waste
(waste / day)
– $80,000 each
# trucksMSW =
(Capacity * (# trips / day))
– Mileage = 6 miles/gallon MSWtrucks
– Lifetime = 1MM miles +

•• H
H22 Tanker Trucks
Tanker Trucks
(H / day)
– Capacity = 4.5
# trucksH
tons
= hydrogen
2 produced

(CapacityH trucks * (# trips / day))

2

– Tube Trailer = $340,000 2

– Truck Cab = $110,000

 Private Enterprise
• Private
– Model will determine profitability based on
NPW
– Determine if ROI is greater than 10%
– Raise money through investors
• Public as an alternative
– Raise money through municipal bonds
– Model will determine minimum disposal fee
with out process losing money
 Mathematical Model
• Pre-determined Factors
– Process: Pyrolysis
– Final Product: Hydrogen

• Implement deterministic, stochastic

mathematical model for logistic planning
 Material Balances,
Pyrolysis- TCI & Hydrogen- TCI
Objectives,
Operating Cost
& Constraints

Deterministic Model

Processing/
Ownership Consumers
Production Plant

Private Size/Capacity Location Transportation

Expansions at
Public
time t, plant j Transfer of wastes from Transfer of products
transfer station to plant to consumers
 Importance of Model
• Aid in planning of process
– Implement and control the most efficient and cost-
effective flow of materials in relation to time
– Account for current MSW disposal contracts
– Encompass transport of MSW and final products
– Execute the right number, location, and capacity of
plants
– Incorporate expansions in relation to time, money,
and the amount of trash
 Private Plant Locations

Hempstead,
NY

Islip,
NY

Babylon,
NY

Huntington,
Charlespoint,
Oxford, NY
NY
NJ
 Private: Annual Waste Processed
compared to Waste Available
4.50
4.00
3.50
• By 2014, 86% of MSW is
3.00
processed
MM tons/y

• Over2.50
20 year span, 78% of
MSW2.00
available is processed
• 197 MSW
1.50 Semi-Trucks
1.00 Waste Processed
0.50
Waste Available
0.00
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19
year
 Private: Waste Processed/
Expansions at Each Plant
2500

Amount of Waste
Processed 2000
(tons/day)

1500
Oxford, NJ

Hempstead, 1000
NY
Islip, NY
500
Babylon, NY

Huntington, 0
NY 1

07 2

08 3

09 4

10 5

13 6

15
Charlespoint,
NY Year
 Private: Revenue
and Operating Costs
1200

1000

800 Total
Revenue
($MM/y)

600 Total
Operating
Costs
400

200

0
2007 2012 2017 2022 2027
year
 Private: Cumulative Cash
$5

$4

• Total Capital Investment (20

$3
years)= $2.0 MMM
• NPW (20 years)=$2 $198 MM
$MMM/y

• Return on Investment
= 12.5% $1

• 508 Hydrogen Tankers

$0
• Disposal Fee $45/ton
2007 2012 2017 2022 2027
• Saves City of -$1
New York over
$54MM/y
-$2
year
 Investment Strategy
• Private Feasible
– Total Capital Investment (20 years)
=$2.0 MMM
– NPW (20 years) =$198 MM
– Return on Investment
=12.5%
Public as an Alternative
 Public Plant Locations

Hempstead,
NY

Islip,
NY

Babylon,
NY

Huntington,
Charlespoint,
Oxford, NY
NY
NJ
 Public: Cumulative Cash
$3.50

$3.00

$2.50
Cash Savings($MM/year

$2.00

$1.50

$1.00

$0.50
B1 B2 B3
$0.00
-$0.502007 2012 2017 2022 2027

-$1.00

-$1.50
year
 Public: Cumulative Cash
with Bonds
$3.00

$2.50
Cash Savings($MM/year

$2.00

$1.50
B1 B2 B3
$1.00

$0.50

$0.00
2007 2012 2017 2022 2027
-$0.50

-$1.00
year
 Public: Bonds
All bonds areAmount
• Total 10 yearinbonds
Bondsat=4% interest
$1.14 MMM
• Bond 1 Interest Paid = $5.5MM
• Total
– Amount issued in 2007 = $974 MM
– Pay off amount (w/interest) = $1.44 MMM
• Bond 2
– Amount issued in 2011 = $136 MM
– Pay off amount (w/interest) = $201 MM
• Bond 3
– Amount issued in 2014 = $30 MM
– Pay off amount (w/interest) = $44 MM
 Public: Annual Waste Processed
compared to Waste Available
4.50
4.00
3.50
• By 2015, 84% of MSW is
processed3.00
MM tons/y

• Lifetime 69%
2.50waste processed
• No taxes 2.00
• Fee charged to city $35/ton saves
1.50
city $75 MM/y
• TCI = $1.91.00
MMM Waste Processed
0.50 Waste Available
0.00
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21
year
Questions