The use of refuse derived fuels (RDF) from municipal solid waste can be a valuable strategic component in an integrated waste management system designed to meet targets for reduced landfill of municipal waste. This is one of the main conclusions of a report published at the end of August by the European Commission’s Environment Directorate and produced in July 2003 by consultants, WRc.
RDF in this context means any waste traded and co-burnt in installations for power generation or in a manufacturing process where heat is required. The study looked at RDF across the current 15 EU Member States and makes for interesting reading. Not surprisingly the report makes the point that waste and energy laws and policies are complex and dynamic but also overlapping and in places inconsistent. With some understatement the report states that such laws and policies “need thoughtful integration” together with more flexibility.
At the heart of the issue is the Landfill Directive and its requirement for diversion of waste from landfill. Allied to this are the policies to reduce reliance on fossil fuels for energy.
The Report concludes that the use of the combustible component of municipal waste as RDF in co-incineration can provide a useful alternative to landfilling and, it is argued, can be preferable to incineration. Indeed, the report states that use of RDF is generally less environmentally harmful than dedicated incineration but this is partially offset by higher emissions of specific substances, such as mercury.
Whilst the need for diversion of waste from landfill can be partially met by the use of RDF, WRc looked at the argument that in the overall context of the waste hierarchy, RDF undermines the superior objectives of recycling and reuse. The report rejects this, stating that RDF does not preclude the growth of recycling. A reason cited for this - at least in terms of the biodegradeable component of RDF – is that the process can allow for increased movement away from co-incineration of mixed waste with the composting of the source-separated biodegradeable waste. Also, the fact that RDF is used in co-incineration side steps the requirement for investment in capital-intensive, dedicated incineration, from which there would be greater inertia against an increase in recycling. There remains the risk, the report acknowledges, that RDF production could reduce rates of recycling for non-biodegradeable waste. If a better price is available for waste as fuel than that available for recycling, clearly the use of RDF would prevail in the absence of contrary regulatory requirements.
The Incineration Directive (2000/76/EC) provides for less stringent emission limits for certain substances used in co-incineration plants compared to dedicated incineration plants. These lower limits do not apply where “untreated mixed municipal waste” is used to produce RDF. Neither the directive nor the UK guidance issued by DEFRA defines “treatment”. There have been arguments that in the absence of such a definition it is possible that any amount of separation at source, however minimal, could be construed as “treatment” and so provide an artificial advantage for RDF co-incineration. This, it is argued – and as the report acknowledges – could artificially encourage promotion of co-incineration at the expense of recycling and re-use.
From a climate change point of view, the report comes out in favour of RDF where such RDF is used as a substitute for fossil fuel (e.g. in coal power plants and cement works). Such substituted use of RDF can show a large number of ecological advantages when compared with incineration (subject to the above point concerning “treatment”).
The report advises that RDF ought not to be considered in isolation as a means for dealing with municipal waste. Rather it is a component in an overall strategy along with incineration, composting, recycling and re-use etc. Whether RDF production in the UK will in fact become a major part of any waste strategy remains to be seen.
For further information please contact Paul Sheridan at [email protected]
Social Media cookies collect information about you sharing information from our website via social media tools, or analytics to understand your browsing between social media tools or our Social Media campaigns and our own websites. We do this to optimise the mix of channels to provide you with our content. Details concerning the tools in use are in our privacy policy.