Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Sustainability Guide
for
Energy from Waste (EfW)
Projects and Proposals
First Draft
Discussion Draft
Final (AGO) Draft
Plain English Draft 1
Plain English Draft 2
Edition 1
1/07/03
3/07/03
10/11/03
10/12/03
19/12/03
22/12/03
Page i
Preface
The Sustainability Guide for Energy from Waste (EfW) Projects and Proposals is an initiative of the
EfW Division of the Waste Management Association of Australia (WMAA). The EfW Division has
also developed a Code of Practice for the EfW Sector in Australia to support the Sustainability
Guide.
These two documents form the first and second parts of the WMAA Energy from Waste
Sustainability Project. Together they provide the fledgling EfW industry with a widely accepted
protocol, process and strategic framework for assessing EfW projects and proposals.
The vision of the Energy from Waste Sustainability Project is for a sustainable Australia with our
systems, facilities and infrastructure working to avoid and minimise waste, recover valuable
resources and energy and close the loop on urban resource consumption.
The Sustainability Guide is intended to help the community, government and industry stakeholders
know when it is acceptable to conserve materials presenting as urban "wastes" in something close
to their original form and when to convert them to energy through a variety of processes.
The Sustainability Guide recognises the crucial role played by the community in any EfW project or
proposal. In effect, the community act as arbiters of sustainability on behalf of current and future
generations. It acknowledges that without broad community agreement to an EfW project, or a
"community' licence to operate," an EfW project cannot go ahead. The document is framed to keep
the community actively involved, fully informed and engaged regularly and transparently in order to
facilitate an outcome that provides for sustainable resource use in the interests of current and
future generations.
Although the Sustainability Guide does discuss some EfW technologies, a deliberate decision has
been made to focus on outcomes rather than being prescriptive in terms of technology, process or
methodology. The document presents a number of project scoping principles stakeholders can use
to assess whether a project or proposal falls within the principles of ecologically sustainable
development.
The Code of Practice supporting the Sustainability Guide is intended to demonstrate the EfW
industry's commitment to operating within the framework of ecologically sustainable development.
By signing up to the Code members of the EfW industry are publicly stating their commitment to
act for the recovery of the highest resource value from secondary resource materials, ensure
transparency in their decision-making processes, meet all legislative requirements and
continuously improve in all the aspects of their operation over which they have control.
The Sustainability Guide and Code of Practice are living documents that derive their functionality
and credibility from their inclusiveness, continual improvement and interaction with stakeholder
requirements, as accommodated against a founding philosophy of sustainable resource use.
They were developed over three years from November 2000 to December 2003 and involved
extensive consultation with a wide range of stakeholders (see Appendixes A, B, C and D). The
Australian Greenhouse Office provided significant sponsorship for the project, as did a wide range
of government and industry parties (see Appendix C).
Page ii
Signatories to the Code and their current compliance status will be kept on the WMAA EfW
Division website at www.wmaa.asn.au/efw.
The EfW Division of the WMAA and its state-based Working Groups will regularly produce updated
editions of the Sustainability Guide and Code of Practice in a culture of continuous improvement
and in the face of changing circumstances and needs. Edition 2 of the Sustainability Guide is due
for completion at the end of 2004.
Page iii
Contents
Section 1: Introduction
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
10
1.8
11
1.9
12
14
2.1
14
2.2
16
2.3
17
2.4
18
2.5
20
2.6
25
2.7
27
29
3.1
29
3.2
32
3.3
33
3.4
37
3.5
42
3.6
46
3.7
50
3.8
53
57
Section 5: Glossary
58
Page iv
Section 6: Appendixes
61
62
63
Appendix C Sponsors
65
66
89
90
List of Tables
Table 3-1: PSP1 Qualitative Assessment Matrix ........................................................................ 36
Table 3-2: PSP1 Evaluation Matrix............................................................................................. 36
Table 3-3: PSP2 Qualitative Assessment Matrix ........................................................................ 41
Table 3-4: PSP2 Evaluation Matrix............................................................................................. 41
Table 3-5: PSP3 Qualitative Assessment Matrix ........................................................................ 44
Table 3-6: PSP3 Evaluation Matrix............................................................................................. 45
Table 3-7: PSP4 Qualitative Assessment Matrix ........................................................................ 49
Table 3-8: PSP4 Evaluation Matrix............................................................................................. 49
Table 3-9: PSP5 Qualitative Assessment Matrix ........................................................................ 52
Table 3-10: PSP5 Evaluation Matrix........................................................................................... 52
Table 3-11: PSP6 Qualitative Assessment Matrix ...................................................................... 56
List of Figures
Figure 3-1: Assessment Roadmap of Project Scoping Principles .................................................. 31
Figure 3-2: PSP2 Iterative review process .................................................................................. 38
Figure 3-3: PSP3 Iterative review process .................................................................................. 44
Figure 3-4: PSP4 Iterative review process .................................................................................. 48
Page v
Section 1: Introduction
This section provides an overview of the main issues that relate to the complex topic of
energy recovery from societys urban waste streams. It introduces the structure of the
Sustainability Guide and outlines the process of its development.
(Many of the issues touched on in the introduction are explored in more detail elsewhere in the
document and referenced accordingly. The section may only be of value to first-time readers of
the Sustainability Guide.)
1.1
The wastes in
question
1.1.2
1.1.3
ii)
Page 1
1.1.4
1.1.6
ii) they have a net calorific value that could be recovered and
would otherwise be lost through disposal to landfill.
1.1.7
Page 2
1.1.9
Page 3
1.2
1.2.2
1.2.3
1.2.4
Page 4
1.3
The potential
benefits
The potential
disadvantages
Landfill disposal itself has a range of problems including leachate and the generation of methane, a potent
greenhouse gas. These impacts can be difficult to manage because of the indeterminate boundaries of
landfill impact. Furthermore, landfilling the materials may not recover the highest resource value for the
material.
Page 5
Better information
exchange is
needed to promote
community
confidence in EfW
projects
1.3.3
1.3.4
Page 6
1.4
1.4.2
1.4.3
A national strategic
planning
framework was
needed
Page 7
1.5
1.5.2
ii)
iii)
iv)
v)
vi)
vii)
Page 8
1.6
Why do we need
an EfW
sustainability guide
and code of
practice?
1.6.3
1.6.4.
1.6.5.
Page 9
1.7
Wide consultation
improves an EfW
project's chances
of success
community
a) neighbouring residents, workers, businesses and
sensitive landuses such as schools, community
centres and aged care facilities
b) the electorate (local, state, federal)
c) environmental NGOs
d) special interest groups
ii)
government
a) local government
b) state governments and their individual agencies
c) federal government and its individual agencies
iii)
industry
a) project developers and proponents
b) waste generators, suppliers and collectors
c) technology developers and vendors
d) energy wholesalers and retailers
e) energy consumers
f)
g) ancillary suppliers.
Page 10
1.8
The Sustainability
Guide helps the
community,
government and
industry decide
which projects are
acceptable
1.8.2
ii)
iii)
Page 11
1.9
ii)
iii)
iv)
Page 12
1.9.2
1.9.3.
1.9.4
The EfW Division of the WMAA is the peak national body, with
Working Groups in most states of Australia. These Working
Groups will submit editorial suggestions or factual
modifications to the national body for assessment in the
regular updating and review process.
Page 13
2.1
2.1.2
2.1.3
Establishing the
benchmark
What is
sustainability?
The Sustainability
Guide looks to
avoiding,
minimising,
reusing, recycling
and reprocessing
waste before
considering the
potential of EfW
projects kicks in.
2.1.5
2.1.6
Note that the terms "ecologically sustainable development" and "sustainable development" are used
interchangeably.
Sustainability Guide for EfW Projects and Proposals
Edition 1 - 22/12/03
Page 14
1.1.2
2.1.8
Embodied energy
needs to be
considered
i)
ii)
iii)
2.1.9
2.1.10
Page 15
2.2
The Sustainability
Guide deals with
the residuals of
three urban waste
streams
ii)
iii)
2.2.2
2.2.3
2.2.4
2.2.5
Page 16
2.3
The viability of an
EfW project
depends on the
properties of the
materials, their
location and the
energy recovery
pathway or
infrastructure
ii)
iii)
iv)
2.3.2
2.3.3
2.3.4
2.3.5
Page 17
2.4
2.4.2
2.4.3
The Sustainability
Guide promotes
EfW when all other
resource recovery
options have been
exhausted, not
WtE as a byproduct of
incineration
2.4.4
i)
ii)
iii)
Page 18
i)
ii)
iii)
2.4.5
2.4.6
Note that the Sustainability Guide does not preclude the use of monofill as a long-term storage option. This
would simply become one of the technology options to assess when considering highest resource value.
Page 19
2.5
ii)
Generic
approaches for
unsorted urban
wastes
In the three generic systems and technologies set out in i, ii and iii above it is only the organic biomass
fraction of the urban wastes that is altered or converted by the process. The metals and inert materials
remain substantially unchanged. A biologically stable organic fraction will result from the digestion for future
processing, application or disposal. The primary outcomes of these systems or technologies are volume
reduction, biochemical stabilisation and some calorific energy recovery.
Sustainability Guide for EfW Projects and Proposals
Edition 1 - 22/12/03
Page 20
iv)
v)
2.5.2
Generic
approaches for
selected urban
wastes
i)
ii)
Page 21
b)
c)
Page 22
2.5.3
ii)
iii)
Page 23
b)
c)
d)
Page 24
2.6
ii)
iii)
environmental NGOs
iv)
2.6.3
2.6.4
Page 25
2.6.5
ii)
iii)
Page 26
2.7
ii)
2.7.1
2.7.2
ii)
iii)
iv)
Page 27
v)
Page 28
3.1
Project scoping
principles or PSPs
take the
guesswork out of
assessing the
sustainability of an
EfW project
3.1.2
ii)
iii)
ii)
b)
Page 29
iii)
3.1.3
Page 30
NO
STOP PROCESS
YES
PSP3: Control of
environmental outcomes
Evaluation of optimum
conversion pathway
Page 31
3.2
3.2.2
3.2.3
3.2.4
i)
PSP title
ii)
iii)
iv)
v)
However, a project that demonstrated a positive sustainability assessment and therefore an important role
in delivering a sustainable resource outcome for the communitys urban wastes but failed a standard
commercial viability assessment by the project proponent might be a candidate for public support or
subsidy as a tangible internalisation of certain ESD externalities.
Page 32
3.3
3.3.2
Page 33
ii)
iii)
iv)
v)
b)
c)
d)
Page 34
3.3.3
environmental accounting
risk assessment
Assessment at this fundamental and initial stage highlights the important link between design intent at the product
initiation stage with the range and serviceability of systematically available options for both the by-products from the
production process and the post-consumer fate of the products or packaging themselves.
The urban wastes that are the subject of this Sustainability Guide arise as by-products of the productive processes as
well as post-consumer discards. The interface between designing products and services sustainably and sensitively for
a secondary resource or post-consumer fate that cannot be provided is as wasteful as providing secondary resource
recovery services that are sub-optimised by inconsiderately designed products or packaging (eg. making a recyclable
soap container that although made of cardboard, has a metal spout, a plastic handle and non-recyclable coating). The
concepts of extended producer responsibility (EPR) and/or product stewardship (PS) have a direct and causal
relationship with the (usually government) role of waste management planning or secondary resource recovery,
reaggregation and systematic value recovery.
The provision of EfW options and facilities should be seen as providing for the recovery of the most sustainable
inherent energy values from materials that were specifically designed or made available for such a fate.
Page 35
3.3.4
Yes or not
applicable
(N/A)
Assessment
No
Provisional
Assessment
No
Provisional
In light of the quality of the information provided and
the above responses, on balance has the case been
sustained that the materials in question have no
higher resource value than to be converted for their
calorific value?
A provisional response would indicate that a move to PSPs 26 might be appropriate, especially if
very positive results could be expected from future assessments. However, a systematic review of the
suitability of the apparently available materials for conversion to energy might be more rewarding.
Yes
Page 36
3.4
3.4.2
ii)
iii)
iv)
v)
Page 37
3.4.3
Feedstock characterisation
Efficiency / impact
assessment
Efficiency / impact
improvement
Assessment Matrix
3.4.4
required to justify
demand
Provisionally
acceptable
i)
b)
c)
d)
Page 38
ii)
iii)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Page 39
iv)
b)
c)
d)
Page 40
3.4.4
ii)
iii)
iv)
Yes or not
applicable
(N/A)
Assessment
No
Provisional
Assessment
No
Provisional
In light of the responses and information provided, can
a position be sustained that, on balance, the selected
conversion pathway and process is the most efficient
for the urban wastes in question?
Note The issue of the resultant impacts of the project
will be evaluated in PSP3 below.
A yes response would suggest that a move to PSPs 36 was appropriate and that preliminary
community consultation could proceed on the basis of the information that had been generated from
PSPs 1 and 2.
A no response would suggest that further review of the options was required before continuing or that
the proposal should proceed no further.
A provisional response would indicate that positive results from PSPs 36 could improve the projects
sustainability profile but that the project was unlikely to satisfy a formal consent or approval process in
its current form.
Yes
Page 41
3.5
3.5.2
ii)
iii)
iv)
v)
This Sustainability Guide advocates the pretreatment or fuel preparation route since it has the
greatest potential to provide the greatest level of
impact control or certainty of outcomes (see 2.4.4 iii).
Fuel preparation by mechanical, manual or automated
systems to produce a product to a defined specification
that can be made available for direct conversion will not
only demonstrate the greatest level of assurance to the
community but will allow for a more targeted conversion
process design that incorporates management systems
to deal with any tertiary impacts.
vi)
vii)
Page 42
viii)
The
demonstration
of
appropriate
quality
assurance/quality control (QA/QC) systems is essential
for satisfaction of this PSP. Some of the poor public
perception of energy recovery from wastes originates
from environmental impact issues.
Historically incineration was adopted as a disposal-based
technology that sought to destroy or reduce the volume
and toxicity of urban wastes by intense thermal oxidation,
with any energy recovery as a by-product of the main
activity (see 2.4). The process accommodated the
heterogeneous and indeterminate nature of the wastes. If
environmental impacts were recognised as an issue they
were dealt with by ever-more complex gas clean-up,
water treatment, ash management and OH&S
techniques.
3.5.3
ix)
x)
xi)
ii)
b)
Page 43
PSP2
Assessment Matrix
3.5.4
or not sufficiently
controlled
Impacts acceptable
and manageable
iii)
strategic
b)
mechanical
c)
systematic
d)
Yes or not
applicable
(N/A)
Assessment
No
Provisional
Page 44
A yes or N/A response to each question should facilitate a simple response to the next stage (see
Table3.6).
A no response to either question would suggest that a review of the particular issue was advisable. No
responses are likely to feature prominently in any future consent or approval process.
A provisional response to either question may also draw attention during a formal consent or
approval process but may be offset by positive responses to all other criteria.
Assessment
No
Provisional
In light of the responses and information provided, can
a position be sustained that control of the potential
impacts can be maintained for the duration of the
project?
A yes response would suggest that a move to PSPs 46 was appropriate and that preliminary
community consultation could proceed on the basis of the information that had been generated from
PSPs 1, 2 and 3.
A no response would suggest that a further review of the control mechanisms was required or that the
proposal should proceed no further.
A provisional response would indicate that positive responses to previous or future criteria would be
required to provide the level of confidence necessary in a formal consent or approval process.
Yes
Page 45
3.6
3.6.2
emissions to air
emissions to water
emissions to land
traffic issues
greenhouse issues
odour
dust
b)
c)
OH&S issues
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
Page 46
3.6.3
ii)
iii)
ii)
iii)
iv)
v)
vi)
Page 47
3.6.4
vii)
viii)
ix)
b)
c)
Assessment Matrix
3.6.4
PSP2
or not sufficiently
controlled
Impacts acceptable
and manageable
Page 48
Yes or not
applicable
(N/A)
Assessment
No
Provisional
Assessment
No
Provisional
In light of the above responses and the quality of the
information provided, can a position be sustained that
acceptability and control of the social and economic
impacts can be maintained for the duration of the
project?
A yes response would suggest that a move to PSPs 56 was appropriate and that preliminary
community consultation could proceed on the basis of the information that had been generated from
PSPs 1, 2, 3 and 4.
A no response would suggest that a further review of the control mechanisms was required or that the
proposal should proceed no further.
A provisional response would indicate that positive responses to previous or future criteria would be
required to provide the level of confidence necessary in a formal consent or approval process.
Yes
Page 49
3.7
3.7.2
3.7.3
ii)
iii)
ii)
Page 50
i)
by the proponent:
website
newsletters
annual reports
b)
contractual commitments.
Page 51
3.7.4
iii)
iv)
Yes or not
applicable
(N/A)
Assessment
No
Provisional
Assessment
No
Provisional
In light of the above responses and the quality of the
information provided, can it be reasonably determined
that the level of environmental, social and economic
impacts, positive and negative, deemed both desirable
and acceptable at the commencement of the project
will be delivered and monitored over the life of the
project?
A no response would suggest that a further review of the proposed assurance mechanisms was
required or that the proposal should proceed no further.
A provisional response would indicate that positive responses to previous or future criteria would be
required to provide the level of confidence necessary in a formal consent or approval process.
Yes
Page 52
3.8
3.8.2
ii)
Page 53
iii)
b)
b)
Page 54
3.8.3
c)
d)
ii)
iii)
modularity
b)
c)
Page 55
3.8.4
Assessment
No
Provisional
Have the commercial arrangements for the proposal
or project been developed to support and reinforce the
sustainability criteria of all other PSPs?
A no response would suggest that a further review of the proposed assurance mechanisms was
required or that the proposal should proceed no further.
A provisional response would indicate that positive responses to previous or future criteria would be
required to provide the level of confidence necessary in a formal consent or approval process.
Yes
Page 56
NO
STOP PROCESS
YES
PSP3: Control of
environmental outcomes
Evaluation of optimum
conversion pathway
Page 57
Section 5: Glossary
Aggregate/aggregation
Ash
Avoidance
Bagasse
The residual woody stem material that results from the process
to recover the sugar content from sugar cane
Beneficiation
Biogas
Biomass
Bioreactor Landfill
Calorific value
The energy value per unit mass (or volume) that is released by
a material in combustion, normally measured in mega-joules per
kilogram (MJ/kg) or giga-joules per tonne (GJ/t).
Char
Clean(er) production
Community
operate
licence
Digestate
Page 58
Energy
technologies
recovery
Environmental externalities
Initial arising
Lignocellulosic
Methane
Monofill
OECD
OH&S
Process
(PEFs)
PSP
Reduce
Recycling
fuels
Page 59
Reuse
Secondary resource
Waste
ii)
Waste minimisation
and
the
and
and
last
ii)
Page 60
Section 6: Appendixes
Appendix A Working Group Members
Appendix B Reference Group Members
Appendix C Sponsors
Appendix D Stakeholder Workshops and Results
Appendix E
Appendix F
Literature Review
Page 61
Organisation
Warnken ISE
Jeff Angel
Stephen Schuck
Bioenergy Australia
Tony Wright
Neil Chapman
Resource NSW
Graeme Jessup
SEDA
Raymond Kidd
EcoRecycle Victoria
David Moy
Fraser Bell
Lillias Bovell
Planning NSW
Page 62
Organisation
Craig Midson
Stephen Joseph
Mark Hipgrave
Don Chambers
C4ES
Patricia Nicholls
C4ES
Kathryn Turner
Joe Lunardello
City of Monash
Allan Pilcher
Country Energy
Sara Beavis
Griff Rose
CVC Reef IM
Brett Corderoy
Delta Electricity
Graham Spalding
Clinton Watkins
Toby Hutcheon
Ecomatters
Greg Watt
Louise Drolz
John Lawson
Michael Clarke
Griffith University
Russell Wade
Individual
Nick Orr
Individual
Craig Fraser
Individual
Neil Rose
Christine Wardle
Meinhardt
Peter Brotherton
Sharon Denny
Nigel Green
David Rossiter
Shani Bienefelt
Pantechnicon
Peter Goggin
John Sparkes
Planning NSW
Joanna Missen
PPK
Kylie Hughes
Amy Hogan
Tim Powe
Neil Chapman
Resource NSW
Marc Stammbach
Andrew Thaler
scrapp.com
Chris Pickering
Gabrielle Henry
John Hewitson
Teris (Aust)
Andrew Brownlow
Terra Consulting
Don White
Lynne Forster
University of Tasmania
Denis James
Visy Recycling
Mohan Selvaraj
Terry Carter
Paul Oakes
Worley Developments
The comments from the review process were assessed by the Working Group and included as deemed appropriate. It should be
emphasised that there was a degree of diversity within the comments, ranging from strong support to strong opposition. Thus, the list
of contributors should not be taken as an endorsement of the Sustainability Guide by either the individual or the organisation listed
below.
Page 63
Reviewing draft documentation from the perspective of the organisation being represented
and the wider stakeholder group,
Providing written comment to the Working Group by the due date required (14 May 2003),
and through a template that will be supplied by the Project Manager,
It should be noted that the Working Group does not necessarily undertake to include verbatim all
of the written submissions received from the Reference Group into the final publication. The
Working Group will, however, undertake to consider these views and to strive to reach a
consensus position.
Membership on the Reference Group is honorary and has been initiated by application or
nomination to the Working Group. By signing this Consent to Act form the Reference Group
member offers to participate on the Reference Group and agrees to undertake the duties that are
outlined above. A list of participating Reference Group members will be maintained on the EfW
Divisions website.
Name:
Date:
Signature:
Phone:
Organisation Represented:
Fax:
Please sign, date and fax this form back to 02 9571 4900
Page 64
Appendix C Sponsors
Australian Greenhouse Office
Renewed Fuels
Cement Industry Federation
QLD Environmental Protection Agency
Resource NSW
SA Environmental Protection Agency
SEDA NSW
Waste Service NSW
Babcock & Brown
Sustainable Energy Authority Victoria
C4ES
Delta Electricity
CS Energy
Global Renewables
Department of the Environment and Heritage
CVC Reef
Novera Energy
Recycling and Recovery Industries
Stanwell Corporation
Page 65
Introduction
Energy from Waste (EfW) is often perceived to be no more than poorly disguised incineration and
a technology that both destroys resources and creates pollution. However, EfW can present a
viable solution for recovering resources that would otherwise be lost to landfill, while at the same
time reducing the use of fossil fuels for our energy sources.
The EfW Division of the Waste Management Association of Australia responded to the need for
guidance to resolve this potential conflict by launching the Energy from Waste Sustainability
Project. This project received the support of Commonwealth Government funding through the
Australian Greenhouse Office, in addition to receiving support from fifteen industry and
government bodies.
The Sustainability Project aimed to develop two support documents:
1. A Sustainability Guide for EfW Projects; and
2. An Energy from Waste (EfW) Industry Code of Practice.
The intention was that the Sustainability Guide would provide a framework around which the
dialogue and debate on Energy from Waste issues could occur. In particular the Guide would:
Provide a design template for EfW project design, development and implementation.
In doing this it was anticipated that the overall impact of the Guide would be to assist projects in
maximising the benefits while minimising or avoiding any negative impacts of EfW.
The development of an Industry Code of Practice was seen a necessary step to ensure industry
commitment to meeting the principles put forward in the Sustainability Guide.
In order to gain stakeholder input on the issues that would form the backbone of these
documents, a total of eighteen stakeholder workshops were held across eleven locations in
Australia during the months of September, October and November 2002.
Warnken Industrial and Social Ecology Pty Ltd, as the project manager for the Energy from Waste
Sustainability Project, were contracted to organise and facilitate the workshops, document
workshop outcomes and prepare an overall summary document of major themes emerging from
the workshops.
This document provides an overview of the outcomes from those workshops. Section 2 outlines
the process that was involved in the running of the workshops, Section 3 groups the workshop
outcomes according to framing considerations for EfW and then under the three legs of
ecologically sustainable development, namely, Social, Political and Legislative considerations,
Sustainability Guide for EfW Projects and Proposals
Edition 1 - 22/12/03
Page 66
Environmental aspects and Techno-economic issues. A selection of quotes from the workshop
reports are presented in call out boxes to illustrate the flavour of participant input.
Section 4 details suggestions for the Sustainability Guide, in particular changes to the draft
framework of project scoping principles that the Working Group had developed prior to the
workshops and Section 5 presents the issues and suggestions regarding an Energy from Waste
Industry Code of Practice.
The Process
As was stated, the aim of the stakeholder consultation was to ensure that both the positive and
negative aspects of Energy from Waste (EfW) projects were captured to assist the development of
the Sustainability Guide. In order to deliver against this project requirement broad-based
stakeholder workshops were convened in eleven cities and towns across Australia. A complete
listing of the workshop dates and venues can be found in Annexure 1.
Two sets of workshops were hosted at seven of the larger locations, namely the broad-based
morning stakeholder workshop, and a smaller invitational expert workshop. In this section we
describe how these two sets of workshops were run and the outputs they delivered. These
outputs are synthesised in this report.
Email newsletters,
Internet sites.
Interested parties were invited to register for the morning stakeholder workshops online.
Representation at the smaller afternoon workshops was by invitation only. Invitation lists were
compiled with input from the local Working Group member and through a review of the online
registrations. In some instances a general invitation was also made to workshop participants on
the day.
In total 299 people from thirteen stakeholder groups attended the eleven morning stakeholder
workshops, and 71 people attended the afternoon sessions (see Section 2.2.2 for a breakdown of
stakeholder participation). From the morning sessions approximately 1,800 flash cards were
produced detailing issues (positive and negative) related to EfW. Complete listings of participants
attending the workshops and the issues that were raised can be found in the specific workshop
reports, downloadable from the EfW Division of the Waste Management Association of Australia
homepage.
www.wmaa.asn.au/efw/home.html
Page 67
Stakeholder Workshops
Stakeholder workshops were run over a morning session of three hours. The aim of these
sessions was to ensure that all the concerns and perceptions of the stakeholders present were
captured. To this end these sessions focussed on issue identification only, no attempt was made
to reach consensus on issues raised.
Summary of Process
The morning sessions started with an introduction to the project, to ensure, as far as possible that
all people present were presenting issues relative to a consistent basis. The attendees selfselected into smaller groups, run as Tables for the workshop. Tables consisted of six or more
people, with a maximum of ten per table. Each table had a facilitator who was given support
instructions on how to facilitate the process for their table. The participants were invited to spend
some time writing their concerns onto flash cards provided. As a group the table then decided on
generic groupings for these issues, and recorded these onto overhead transparencies for
presentation to the workshop as a whole. The workshop reconvened to allow for presentation of
the table discussions.
The tables were also asked to act as a Citizens Jury and vote on the following issues:
EfW has a role to play but that role is determined on a case by case basis; or
The results of these votes were recorded and presented to the workshop as a whole.
Following the group report back session the draft framework of project scoping principles was
presented. An attempt was made to summarise issues identified during the report back session
that would need to be addressed within this framework.
Breakdown of Stakeholder Participation
Participants who registered online also nominated a stakeholder grouping that best fitted their
interest/activities related to Energy from Waste. This breakdown has been used to provide an
estimate on the ratios of stakeholder representation amongst workshop attendees and is
presented in Table D-1 below.
Page 68
6%
Consultants
21%
Developers/Technology
Providers
7%
Energy Sector
7%
1%
Feedstock Providers
3%
Finance Sector
1%
Government Federal
1%
Government Local
24%
Government State
14%
Media
1%
6%
Other
8%
Nature of Outputs
All of the flash cards submitted by the workshop attendees were transcribed after the workshop.
These comments, together with a transcription of the overheads used by each table and a record
of the voting of each table formed the output of each workshop.
This final output was in the form of a workshop report which was circulated to all workshop
attendees, and has been made available to the public on the WMAA EfW homepage.
The reports contain a wealth of information and, in their entirety, describe the complexity of the
EfW issue in Australia. A synthesis of the stakeholder workshop outcomes is included below.
Page 69
Process
The smaller workshops made use of the results of the stakeholder workshops, as well as any
further issues which attendees felt were significant, and attempted to determine:
Whether the draft Project Scoping Principles (PSP) developed by the Working Group
addressed these issues, and if so, which PSP addressed the issue; or
Whether the issue was not addressed by the PSP framework and thus required either further
discussion in the Guide, or the establishment of a new PSP.
Secondly, the development of an Industry Code of Practice (CoP) was discussed. At some
workshops this was the only item of discussion. The discussion centred around answering the
following:
What are the issues with implementation and ownership of the CoP?
The aim of these workshops was to build consensus. For this reason, and because the number of
attendees at these workshops was relatively small, workshops were run as group sessions with a
single facilitator.
Nature of Outputs
Workshop reports were also generated for all of the smaller workshops. These can be downloaded
from the EfW homepage. These reports detail how the issues highlighted in the stakeholder
workshops can be grouped into the relevant PSP. Issues which fell outside the Draft PSPs were
highlighted and, where relevant, additional PSPs were suggested. Elements which require more
discussion than has been included in the Draft Sustainability Guide were ear-marked for more indepth discussion.
The breadth of considerations to be included in an Industry Code of Practice was also reported.
Page 70
Framing Considerations
A number of different philosophical bases for decision making on project selection were
highlighted at the workshop:
Care should be taken to deliver highest possible resource recovery and to maintain organic
value as far as possible before using material as an energy source.
Decision making should incorporate the big picture and be strategic in nature, including life
cycle considerations and being solution focussed and not problem focussed.
Extended producer responsibility should play a role in the development of strategies, and
EfW projects should not undermine the future viability of other extended producer responsibility
plans.
Care should be taken to ensure that excess energy availability does not lead to inefficient and
wasteful energy use.
EfW projects are consistent with ESD objectives and are making use of a resource which might
otherwise be wasted.
Care should be taken to ensure that future scenarios are explored when a project is proposed.
While many workshop participants stressed the need for action in the short-term, there was
the concern that projects accepted now might jeopardise the potential (both environmental and
economic) for future technologies to survive.
The potential for EfW processes to destroy some hazardous wastes deserves comment.
The results of the citizens jury provide an overall perspective on the general philosophical
position of participants with regard to Energy from Waste.
Community education including the communication and explanation of risks associated with
emissions, addressing perceptions relating to concerns around forestry depletion and human
health effects, resolving misconceptions relating to the efficacy of technologies and ensuring
community perception of EfW as a way of delivering sustainable outcomes to communities.
There is the potential for proactive capacity building to reduce some of the emotional debate
around EfW projects. The community should be made aware of EfW projects, and the final
destiny of the wastes which they produce, with the intention of ensuring that waste becomes
the responsibility of the community and not the regulators.
Page 71
It should be noted that the newer the technology proposed for a project, the greater will be the
uncertainty of the community about the ability of the technology to deliver the projected
outcomes.
Care should be taken to ensure that community behaviour is not adversely affected, that
over consumption should not be encouraged, and that existing behaviour relating to recycling
initiatives (splitting wastes at source) are not undermined; the potential exists to enhance
existing community behaviour through well-managed kerbside systems.
Stakeholder values should be considered during decision making processes on EfW projects.
This links to the consumer education issue as the appropriate information needs to be
available to stakeholders to support effective debate between stakeholders.
Ensuring that all communication is transparent and that project proponents are accountable,
this will build the credibility of the industry. Care should be taken to ensure that information
supplied is consistent.
Appropriate siting of new facilities which includes a consideration of all community values,
issues relating to transport routes; buffer zones should be maintained.
The perception that EfW technologies are equivalent to incineration needs to be addressed in
the short term.
EfW projects have the potential to encourage uniform and integrated waste management
across cities and to aid local government to deliver against their responsibilities in this regard.
Significant levels of co-ordination will be required to link the management of wastes at a local
level to regional infrastructure.
Waste strategies developed at a local level should be consistent and developed in a cooperative manner; they should also be commercially viable. Local authorities have the
greatest role to play in ensuring that highest resource recovery is being realised in their region.
Landfill infrastructure is in place and generates income at a local level, care should be taken
to understand existing infrastructure and future requirements. At the same time a number of
landfills are to close in the near future and valid alternatives are sought; however, the majority
of alternatives will result in increased costs to rate payers. Currently low landfill charges have
the potential to undermine the economic viability of EfW projects.
Catering for the needs of remote communities is complex and not to be under-estimated, at
the very least the trade-off between transport distances and energy recovered must be
assessed. Partnerships may have a significant role to play here.
Page 72
Local Authorities have a significant role to play in communication with communities and in
engaging the community in relevant debates and decision making processes.
Jurisdictional issues need to be clarified, between local, state and federal government.
Using waste to supply energy includes an implicit understanding that wastes will be generated
and may be seen to undermine any zero waste programmes.
Regulation of EfW projects in some form is required, whether this is self-regulation or through
enacted legislation with preference being voiced for the latter. Regulation should not be
prescriptive, it should support innovation on the part of the project proponent and not limit the
potential future of technology development. Mandatory standards which have the support of
statutory authorities are needed.
Any policy developed should recognise the interplay between energy and waste generation
and should ensure that one is not supported through over-emphasis being placed on the other.
There is the need for consistency and uniformity in the governments policy direction. Current
impediments to distributed energy recovery are seen to be both regulatory and commercial,
efforts need to be made to match technology and policy.
The complexity of current legislation was highlighted as a stumbling point, this coupled with
uncertainty around future legislation has the potential to undermine any benefits which EfW
projects might deliver. Concern was also expressed about the time and cost of application
processes. Care should be taken to ensure that any control mechanisms developed are
objective.
A review of tariff levels on electricity and gas is necessary in order to make alternatives which
are more environmentally and economically feasible.
The potential for State Governments to develop integrated strategies for their states should be
investigated and supported.
Page 73
Environmental
Environmental Benefits
The perceived environmental benefits associated with EfW projects were consistent across the
stakeholder workshops, and include:
A decrease in the material sent to landfill with associated availability of landfill volume and
reduction of the impacts associated with landfilling materials (such as impacts on ground
water). In addition to this the wastage of materials is avoided, i.e. producing energy from
waste is preferable to doing nothing with the waste and thus losing the energy which it
contains. This exemplifies improved resource recovery and can potentially increase recycling
opportunities.
Dependency on fossil fuels will be reduced. In spite of the fact that the renewable nature of
feedstreams to EfW processes was debated and no conclusions were drawn, it was accepted
that, in general, energy produced from waste materials was preferable to that derived from
fossil fuels and could be seen as relatively more sustainable.
A reduction in total greenhouse gases associated with the provision of energy could be
achieved. It must be noted that there was significant confusion regarding the greenhouse gas
implication of EfW projects. This was highlighted as an area requiring publicly accessible
information.
Off-gases and residues which would require adequate management using tailored pollution
control equipment. In addition, further research is required to ensure that EfW processes are
sufficiently well understood and that pollution control technology selected is adequate to
ensure that the processes operate within, or beyond, legislative limits. Performance relative to
these standards should be consistent. Emissions of specific concern were dioxins arising form
the combustion of PVC and the effects associated with the metals present in CCA treated
timbers. It is these effects which lead to the desire for buffer zones described in section 3.2.1.
Other environmental impacts which should be considered include the nuisance impacts of
noise, odour, visual impacts etc.
Environmental impacts associated with EfW projects have the potential to be both short-lived
(off-gas emissions) and long-term (effects associated with solid residues and persistent
compounds). Adequate management of these is a pre-requisite.
Feedstock quality control is significant as any contaminants in the feedstream will report to
one or other residue from an EfW process and would require active management to ensure
that the natural environment is not negatively effected. Emphasis was placed on CCA treated
timbers in this context.
Impacts associated with the storage of feedstreams must be quantified and addressed.
Page 74
Streams which might have been recycled and retained in the industrial economy will no longer
be available.
Potential actions which can be taken to minimise the deleterious environmental effects of EfW
processes are:
Extended producer responsibility and design for the environment to ensure that
environmental considerations are taken on board at the outset of the project; care should be
taken to ensure that closure and decommissioning are included in any project proposal.
EfW processes have the potential to have limited environmental impact, this needs to be
communicated effectively to the broader community.
Best practice for different fuel sources should be established; processes should be operated
optimally with state-of-the-art process control; all attempts should be made to minimise human
error; energy efficient processes should be a focus; appropriate materials and streams should
be identified and materials adequately sorted. It should also be recognised that Best Practice
is potentially region or site specific.
Replacing existing systems which do not have adequate environmental performance; this
might include improved gas recovery from landfills.
Techno-Economics
This category includes consideration of specific suitable technologies, as well as an indication of
potential constraints on the operation of these technologies. Economic barriers and constraints
are also highlighted.
Management of the EfW Feedstream
The management of the feedstream could be related to environmental considerations
(contaminants contained in the feedstream could lead to environmentally unacceptable emissions)
or social considerations (changing the manner in which wastes are collected can change social
attitudes to waste generation and collection). For example:
Wastes which have the potential to form part of the feedstream to EfW processes should be
classified and their maximum potential realised.
EfW projects should incorporate a consideration of risk associated with the supply of waste as
a feedstream, contingency plans for the replacement of wastes as feeds should be made to
ensure that waste is not generated to feed the furnace.
Unacceptable contaminants (defined relative to potential emissions from the process) must
be removed from the feedstream; this process must be monitored, audited and reported to
ensure a high level of quality control on the feedstream.
Information on the quality, quantity and value of potential feedstreams needs to be generated.
The impact of transport should be minimised either by limiting the distance between
feedstream generation and utilisation or by accessing back loading opportunities.
Page 75
Trade-off between security of supply and potential to undermine better uses for the
feedstream project proponents desire a known quantity of feed for a significant amount of
time, these long-term contracts have the potential to undermine the economic potential of
alternative uses for the feedstream.
Technology should be fit for purpose; dont just accept solutions which have worked overseas
at the same time dont try to re-invent the wheel; equal opportunity should be extended to all
technologies, whether or not they are EfW technologies.
Technologies should be flexible in order that they can both manage inconsistency in feed
materials, and retain the potential to respond to future changes in waste management;
technologies should represent a long-term solution without constraining the ability of future
communities to strive for their own sustainable development.
Technology is not the only fix, and should not be developed in isolation. For instance,
partnerships for behavioural change related to waste minimisation should be investigated.
Inefficiencies in technologies used previously have the potential to undermine future EfW
projects (negative historical legacy of EFW).
Opportunities for co-generation of energy, and co-firing with existing fossil fuels should not
be overlooked.
There is significant concern about the uncertainty associated with the operation of EfW
technologies, both because a significant number of the technologies is unproven at a process
plant scale, and because of the non-homogeneity of the feedstream; these concerns should be
addressed through a formal communication strategy.
Scale of application of EfW technologies could include both distributed and centralised
operations, this will vary between regional and metropolitan areas.
New, innovative EfW technologies have the potential to lead to new opportunities.
Economic Considerations
The economic considerations covered at the workshops included both project-specific financial
considerations, as well as potential future levy structures. Both of these sets of considerations are
included below:
Page 76
Existing landfill levies and energy costs are currently too low to render EfW technologies
economically viable (even if they are proven to have better environmental performance and
are accepted by stakeholders in the area); levy structures may need to be re-evaluated to
ensure that the true cost of landfilling and energy provision are reflected; funding is
required to support initial plants/pilot projects, government support is necessary in this
context.
EfW projects must internalise all externalities and ensure that they had made adequate
provision for such considerations as planning for closure.
The fact that overseas solutions are not necessarily economic in Australia should be
acknowledged, addressing this could be included in any community education process.
Further market research into the need for green electricity may be required.
The number of jobs created and/or destroyed and the investment in the local community
should be quantified.
Tradeable certificates such as RECs were highlighted as having a significant role to play
in ensuring that EfW projects are economically viable.
Installation costs for remote communities should not be underestimated; the potential for
EfW projects to add an economic burden to local government and/or communities should
be highlighted.
Life Cycle Assessment should be used to compare between potential EfW technologies
and to determine whether EfW or alternative recycling processes are preferred.
The entire project life cycle from project selection to closure and post-closure should be
considered.
Page 77
EfW projects should be monitored and audited and should be required to report their
performance in a transparent manner.
EfW has a role to play but that role is determined on a case by case basis; or
The intention of this straw poll was to identify any poles of very strong opposition or strong
support to EfW projects. While there were some reservations about the structuring of the
question, the majority of workshop participants (76% + 22% = 98%) expressed support for the
concept of EfW having a role to play in resource recovery from waste. Only a small minority of
participants (2%) expressed absolute opposition to EfW.
The break down of voting at Workshops is presented in Table D-2 below.
Page 78
Contingent
Strongly Yes
EfW always
has a role to
play in any
form
Canberra
14
Sydney
38
Hobart
0.5
22
0.5
Perth
23
14
Melbourne
35
14
Shepparton
10
Darwin
Adelaide
25
Dubbo
Townsville
Brisbane
22
Totals
6.5
205
58.5
2%
76%
22%
It is noted that the majority of those supporting EfW suggested that projects must be evaluated on
a case-by-case basis. This highlighted the need for mechanisms such as the Sustainability Guide
to provide the assistance in deciding those case-by-case instances.
(Note: the discrepancy between total votes cast in the ballot above and the workshop participant
summary is caused by the Project Manager and the Chairman not voting at workshops and also
from participants who left early from a workshop. A half vote was recorded in two instances where
the participant voted half way between the two categories.)
Page 79
Involvement,
Education,
Provision of information,
Consultation,
Participation,
Engagement,
Awareness,
Health issues,
Employment,
Transparency,
Accountability,
Siting,
Page 80
Waste Minimisation,
Waste Hierarchy,
Impacts on Recycling.
Page 81
the available fuel source(s) in the circumstances. Conversion inefficiency means wasted resource
value.
Cost of technology,
Cogeneration,
Siting of technology,
Transport implications,
Redundancy,
Project Scoping Principle #3 - Systems Quality Control for Assurance of Optimum Environmental
and Social Outcomes
Aim: To demonstrate that where the available residuals cannot be presented entirely fit-forpurpose, that the selected conversion processes and management systems can control
unacceptable by-products or pollutants or unintended environmental impacts.
Emissions to water,
Water use,
Stockpile management,
Pollutant inventories,
Quality assurance,
Feedstock flexibility,
Page 82
Hazardous materials.
Waste minimisation,
Renewable energy,
Transport costs.
Project Scoping Principle #5 - Measures to Compensate for the Inadequacies of the Prevailing
Market Conditions
Aim: To oblige proponents to quantify any required normalisation of market conditions to meet
ESD objectives - which may include impact of landfill levies, incentives or subsidies - to
demonstrate an internalisation of the environmental externalities.
Internalisation of externalities,
Market forces,
Page 83
Fate of landfill,
Regulatory framework,
Economic issues,
Regional solutions,
Page 84
Overall however, there was support for the concept of a Code of Practice, the key question being
the level of detail to be included in the CoP. For instance, whether to have a Code that was
predominantly at a strategic level or whether to develop a nuts and bolts, highly prescriptive and
operational document.
It was generally felt that the Code would be more operational than the Sustainability Guide, but
would not have the level of detail included in project licence conditions. Another observation
based on the development of the Clinical Waste Management Code of Practice was that the entire
process lasted six years and required several iterations to develop the detail and consensus on
the CoP.
The issue regarding the level of detail was not resolved. What was supported was the fact that
consensus was required in order for the CoP to be of any value and that community input into the
development of the CoP was also necessary.
Who is the Energy from Waste Industry?
The scope of the EfW Industry was debated. A functional description of the Industry as being
those elements providing the feedstock, providing and operating the processes and
marketing or managing the outputs suggested that the industry comprised:
Waste suppliers,
Technology providers,
Operators,
Product purchasers,
Community groups and NGOs (ultimately determine the go/no go status of a project),
It was noted that there were differences between the generation of heat and the generation of
electricity, potentially requiring differentiation the CoP owing to different participants. The issue of
size of operation was also flagged, i.e. the Code should not discriminate against smaller scale
industry members.
Role of Government
A nationwide Code of Practice was seen as a measure of proactively engaging with government at
all levels, especially if consensus amongst the majority of industry could be achieved. It was
suggested that a nationwide CoP could play a part in supporting commonality and consistency
between state legislatures. This would be the case if the CoP was able to be called up in state
legislation, highlighting the need for the CoP to be endorsed by regulators.
Page 85
Industry credibility,
Recognition,
Ownership, Evolution and the Role of the Waste Management Association of Australia
It was generally recognised that the CoP would need to be owned and administered by one
organisation in order to ensure that the Code is updated and revised on a regular basis (eg. every
three years). A potential role for the Waste Management Association of Australia to play in this
regard was noted.
Against this it was recognised that there are requirements to resource this evolutionary approach
and that the regulation of the CoP could be problematic.
Compliance with an Industry CoP
Associated with the notion of an Industry Code of Practice was the issue of managing noncompliance with the Code, i.e. what is the mechanism for assessment and enforcement?
Suggestions included:
Expulsion of member,
Market forces,
Legal Implications
In addition to issues surrounding compliance with the CoP, a number of other legal issues were
also identified, such as the potential for the CoP to be called up in legislation and the implications
of the the CoP with regard to competition policy.
Also at issue was the liability issue associated with dependence on a CoP to establish regulatory
performance. It was not known whether a disclaimer would be sufficient to manage that liability.
Sustainability Guide for EfW Projects and Proposals
Edition 1 - 22/12/03
Page 86
Page 87
Location
Date
Time
Venue
Attendance
Canberra
18-Sep
9am - 12noon
23
Sydney
24-Sep
9am - 12noon
46
Hobart
25-Sep
9am - 12noon
22
Perth
1-Oct
9am - 12noon
42
Melbourne
8-Oct
9am - 12noon
54
Shepparton
10-Oct
10am - 1pm
16
Darwin
22-Oct
9am - 12noon
14
Adelaide
24-Oct
9am - 12noon
32
Dubbo
29-Oct
9am - 12noon
Townsville
6-Nov
9am - 12noon
Brisbane
7-Nov
9am - 12noon
Hilton Brisbane
32
Page 88
Appendix E
Development
Australias
National
Strategy
for
Ecologically
Sustainable
decision making processes should effectively integrate both long and short-term economic,
environmental, social and equity considerations,
where there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific
certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental
degradation,
the global dimension of environmental impacts of actions and policies should be recognised
and considered,
the need to develop a strong, growing and diversified economy which can enhance the
capacity for environmental protection should be recognised,
cost effective and flexible policy instruments should be adopted, such as improved valuation,
pricing and incentive mechanisms, and
decisions and actions should provide for broad community involvement on issues which affect
them.
It is identified in the strategy that the guiding principles and core objectives need to be considered
in their entirety, and that no objective or principle should predominate over the others.
Page 89
Introduction
This literature survey was prepared as a supporting information document for a project on the
development of a set of Sustainability Guidelines and an Industry Code of Practice for the recovery
of Energy from Waste. These documents are being developed by the Energy from Waste Division
of the Waste Management Association of Australia under a grant provided by the Australian
Greenhouse Office and with the support of industry sponsors.
In the Draft Implementation Plan for the above project, the aims of the literature review were
identified to be to:
1. Review guidelines, codes of practice, case studies and legislation as they relate to
sustainability of the energy from waste industry,
2. Highlight whether current guidelines address highest resource value of materials,
3. Discuss whether current guidelines have a mechanism for trade-offs between technoeconomic, environmental and socio-political criteria,
4. Identify whether current guidelines utilise life cycle assessment and life cycle thinking as
streamlined approaches to EfW issues,
5. Identify and comment on any EfW projects which have been assessed on the basis of
sustainability,
6. Assess what tools are available for the evaluation of sustainable EfW projects,
7. Assess what legislative mechanisms are available to improve sustainability outcomes,
8. Highlight significant issues encountered by established EfW projects, and
9. Develop a glossary of EfW terms.
This document represents a synthesis of information which is available in the open literature within
the context of these aims. A database of the literature sources consulted during the course of this
work can be made available. This information resource can be made available to the greater EfW
Division membership through the division website.
Page 90
minimisation in which industry and consumers go beyond current standards and employ best
available technologies and techniques for minimising their demands on the environment; and
sustainable development in which economic growth continues whilst reducing the impact it
has on the environment.
Page 91
Page 92
Page 93
proportion of the energy produced from the combustion of the fuel gases9.
Thermal pyrolysis differs from gasification in that the thermal decomposition takes place in the
absence of oxygen. This process modification results in the creation of an energy rich oil and
combustible solid residue (known as char) together with the fuel gas.
A number of advantages of pyrolysis and gasification over mass burn technologies are identified.
Firstly, it may be feasible to gasify significantly smaller volumes of waste than may be treated in
mass burn incinerators. This suggests greater scope for application of this technology in smaller
communities than the large cities which typically support incinerators today. Furthermore, there is
less need to keep the gasifier running 100% of the time as start-up periods are significantly less
than for mass burn incinerators. Finally these systems are also able to operate at less than 100%
of capacity so there is flexibility when there is a decline in waste availability. This is in contrast to
MBI where operating at below 100% capacity reduces the economic viability of the operation.
The major environmental benefit of these processes are that they retain pollutants (the sulphur,
heavy metals etc.) in the ash instead of the gas phase. The solid waste (ash) streams are
generally easier to manage than off gases.
The potential requirement for fuel preparation to provide the relatively homogeneous feedstock
required is one disadvantage of these processes. The fuel material requires shredding prior to
gasification. The savings made by not requiring the level of gaseous emission controls, may offset
fuel preparation costs, resulting in a potentially economically viable process9.
Biological Mechanisms Anaerobic Digestion
Anaerobic digestion relates to the organic breakdown of wastes via biological degradation to
produce a relatively stable solid residue (digestate) similar to compost, and biogas, a mixture of
methane and carbon dioxide which may then be used as fuel. Anaerobic digestion is particularly
suited to wet, organic material and as such has been used for the treatment of sewerage sludge
for over a century5.
Compared to other EfW processes, anaerobic digestion recovery of energy for the purpose of
electricity generation is about twice as efficient as recovery of energy from landfill, only a third as
efficient as recovery via mass burn, and a fifth as efficient as gasification.
Potential negative impacts will be similar to other solid waste management options and with proper
planning can be minimised to acceptable levels. Advantages include that the input of waste, seen
as a liability, can be reduced to a saleable soil conditioner and that all the greenhouse gas
generated by digestion is burnt for energy recovery rather than letting some of it escape to the
atmosphere as would occur in landfill9.
Biological Mechanisms - Landfill Gas
Landfill gas is generated by similar biological processes to those which are utilised in anaerobic
digestion technologies, but this category refers to in-situ gas generation from landfill sites. The
resulting gas consists of a mixture of carbon dioxide and methane (in roughly equal quantities),
with a large number of trace components, with the methane content of the gas (typically around
40-60% by volume) making it a useful fuel. The gas is formed when the waste deposited in
landfills breaks down as a result of microbial action. It is collected through a series of wells drilled
into the landfill site.
Bioreactor landfills refer to landfills that are managed to maximise the production of landfill gas. In
this sense they are more like an anaerobic digestor than a landfill. The accelerated generation of
Sustainability Guide for EfW Projects and Proposals
Edition 1 - 22/12/03
Page 94
landfill gas is accomplished by increasing the rate of anaerobic decomposition through the recirculation of leachate (a liquid generated from the anaerobic decomposition process) and also
through the occasional addition of sewerage sludge.
The captured landfill gas is combusted in one of a variety of technologies (including gas turbines,
dual fuel (compression ignition) engines and spark ignition engines) for energy recovery. These
engines may range from a few hundred kilowatts to several megawatts. Fuel conversion efficiency
ranges from 26% (typically for gas turbines) to 42% (for dual-fuel engines).
In Australia, the installed electricity generating capacity from landfill gas was approximately 72MW
in 1997. In 1998 there were15 projects in operation10.
The UK, however, currently has approximately 150 sites generating electricity which is fed into the
grid. The UK landfill gas resource is estimated to be equivalent to around 6.75TWh per year
(around 2% of current UK electricity demand). This equates to around 850MW of installed
capacity.
The number of schemes using landfill gas in the UK is expected to rise as EU directives to control
methane emissions to the atmosphere are put into effect. In the longer term, beyond 2025, the
number of new landfill gas recovery schemes is expected to decline as the implementation of the
EU Landfill Directive diverts organic wastes away from landfill and thus reduces methane
generation5. One of the problems related to the removal of green waste in a landfill is, therefore,
the potentially reduced generation and recovery rates, making recovery facilities less economically
viable.
Plasma Processes
Various plasma processes have been developed which have the potential advantages of 100%
diversion of waste from landfill, the recovery of energy from this waste stream, and the main waste
product being an inert glassy slag. Integrated facilities can be designed to produce negligible or
no liquid or gaseous wastes.
The Solena Group11 describes one such process, namely Plasma Gasification Vitrification (PGV).
The PGV systems completely disassociate all waste matter (organic and inorganic) for energy
recovery and material recycling. A Plasma Gasification Reactor (PGR), which houses one or more
plasma arc torches, is used for this process. These torches generate, through electric power, a
high temperature environment of between 5,000 to 14,000 C. The extreme temperature of the
plasma system completely disassociates the atoms in any organic material into simple gases while
simultaneously melting all the inorganic materials. This process of thermal depolymerisation /
steam gasification is called Plasma Gasification Vitrification (PGV).
An example of a plasma arc plant in operation is located near Kyoto in Japan, which uses
technology developed by Nippon Steel. Two plants each process 300 tonnes/day. The cost of
construction of these two plants was 10.7 billion yen for the first and 21.3 billion yen for the
second.
Plasma arc technologies use significant amounts of energy in their operation (parasitic load). The
amount of electrical energy that can be generated from these processes is contingent on the
amount of inorganic material in the feedstream, with a preference for lower amounts. The Solena
technology using a combined cycle gas turbine and a feed stream of sorted Refuse Derived Fuel
(15 MJ/kg), can operate at an electrical efficiency of approximately 30%*.
Page 95
Page 96
Page 97
Community Acceptance
Community acceptance and effective communication is significant when obtaining a community
'license to operate' for an EfW facility. A study across five countries in the European Union of
public acceptability of energy from waste and energy from biomass residues found differences in
acceptability across different countries. These were attributed to many factors, including different
cultures in energy and waste disposal, different regulatory approaches, and differences in the level
of consultation with local communities prior to planning16. The study found that in many areas
where schemes have been successfully developed, the local community was involved in extensive
consultation, and that schemes that failed to gain consent have also failed to gain support from the
local communities, particularly local authority officer and councillors and the local media.
Visual Impacts of EfW Facilities
One less readily identifiable but significant impact of EfW facilities is the visual impact which it may
have on the surroundings. Design of such facilities should thus include aesthetic considerations,
and plants should be designed to be as tidy and visually unobtrusive and appealing as the process
and space requirement will allow7.
Subsidies
Subsidies are one area which can affect the economic viability and sustainability of energy
projects. De Moor et al17 reported that in the OECD, higher subsidies are given to the more
environmentally damaging fuels - coal subsidies are the highest, followed by oil, then nuclear
power and finally natural gas. The proportion of total funding (around five per cent) devoted to
sources of renewable energy, the most environmentally friendly sources, is the lowest.
The guidelines entitled Caring for the Earth: A Strategy for Sustainable Living 18, published by the
World Conservation Union, the United Nations Environment Programme and the WWF-World
Wide Fund For Nature suggest that charging and pricing systems should be used to achieve
improved standards of efficiency. They suggest that energy prices should reflect the full social and
resource cost of the product, and that charges should also be used as an incentive for saving
energy. No additional criteria for evaluating these 'costs' were proposed in those guidelines.
Summary
A number of different issues have been highlighted from literature which will contribute to
determining the sustainability of EfW projects. These include that the feed to the process must be
sustainable and EfW should represent the highest resource value, pollution (visual, air and solid)
issues must be addressed, and subsidies should be awarded to assure the economic viability of
projects which represent achievement of meeting the highest sustainability considerations.
It is recommended that these issues should be included amongst those addressed in the
Sustainability Guide and Code of Practice for EfW projects. It is expected that further issues will
be identified during workshops and by other stakeholders during the course of this project which
will be used to augment this list.
Page 98
Two reports are currently being prepared which are worthy of mention here. IEA Bioenergy, is
currently preparing a position paper on energy recovery from MSW and its role in sustainability.
One major focus of this report is the greenhouse gas implications/benefits from EfW projects.
The US Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) has prepared a draft report that provides a
discussion about what constitutes "sustainable biomass" electricity. Although the report does not
focus exclusively on EfW in the context of this project, it does address the use of paper, garden,
food and wastes from municipal sources. It is intended that this report, though not providing a
definition of sustainable biomass for energy generation, will provide support to building consensus
around such a definition. The consensus building approach is based on identifying sustainable
and unsustainable aspects of biomass, sustainability criteria, technology types and existing
research and analysis that can be used to support or oppose any given biomass project. The final
report is expected to be published late 2002.
A number of generic sets of principles of sustainability are also presented in this current document.
These are presented in the following chapter. In the last chapter of this literature review these
documents are synthesised and their relevance to EfW is presented.
Changing Course
Whilst none of these focus specifically on energy, or for that matter, Energy from Waste, some do
make mention of energy within their recommendations. Relevant sections of four of these
guidelines are summarised below to give some indication of the types of principles contained
therein. Many of the others are fairly similar in their content, referring to generic concepts. The
implications of these principles for development of the EfW Sustainability Guide and Code of
Practice
are
summarised
in
Table
3
of
Section
10.
Page 99
Page 100
of biomass-based fuels where they can be derived from crop residues, surpluses, or are produced
on land not otherwise needed for food growing, or are not of higher value under natural or seminatural vegetation."
Australias National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development
Australias National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development (NSESD) aims to provide
strategic directions and a framework for government to direct policy and decision-making5. The
strategy incorporates many aspects of the other sets of principles discussed here.
Three core objectives of the principles are identified:
to enhance individual and community well-being and welfare by following a path of economic
development that safeguards the welfare of future generations
to protect biological diversity and maintain essential ecological processes and life-support
systems
Seven guiding principles for achieving these objectives are proposed. These are that:
decision making processes should effectively integrate both long and short-term economic,
environmental, social and equity considerations
where there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific
certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental
degradation
the global dimension of environmental impacts of actions and policies should be recognised
and considered
the need to develop a strong, growing and diversified economy which can enhance the
capacity for environmental protection should be recognised
cost effective and flexible policy instruments should be adopted, such as improved valuation,
pricing and incentive mechanisms
decisions and actions should provide for broad community involvement on issues which affect
them
It is identified in the strategy that the guiding principles and core objectives need to be considered
in their entirety, and that no objective or principle should predominate over the others.
With specific reference to energy, the strategy states the challenge to be To limit production of
harmful emissions without reducing economic efficiency, improve the availability, efficiency and
affordability of alternative energy sources, and improve the technical and economic efficiency of
urban and non-urban transportation. Additional objectives include lowering of greenhouse gas
emissions and promoting the research into- and use of- renewable energy. No specific reference
to energy from waste is made in this strategy.
Sustainability Guide for EfW Projects and Proposals
Edition 1 - 22/12/03
Page 101
Consideration of how the project is impacting on the environment and how negative impacts can be
mitigated and opportunities from positive impacts maximised. For example, has an environmental
assessment or appraisal of the project been undertaken?
Consideration of alternatives which are potentially more sustainable (e.g. different fuel, technology,
process, raw materials, site );
Ensuring that benefits of the project are maximised by maximising efficiency and the long term legacy eg
by considering what the site/facility will be like in 50 years?
Ensuring that the development is appropriate to the area through work with local communities,
businesses, local authorities and services providers to maximise the local ownership of any
new/improved generation or distribution systems;
Maximising the opportunities to raise awareness of sustainable energy production and its linkages to
resource conservation, greenhouse effect and other environmental pollution, degradation and inequality
issues.
A selection of suggested actions which could be implemented or integrated into projects is also
presented in this work. These include to:
identify, assess and evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the project through an EIA or
environmental appraisal and ensure that any negative impacts are avoided or mitigated and any positive
impacts are maximised, through seeking advice and guidance from environmental groups and
organisations if necessary;
consult and work with local communities, business, industry, local authorities to develop generation
capabilities which will maximise natural resource conservation (through energy efficiency, use of
renewable fuels), clean technology and innovative energy generation and transportation systems;
maximise the sustainability of the project e.g. by using best environmental practice in any construction,
undertaking an energy audit to identify potential areas for conservation, minimising the construction
footprint of any new facilities/pipelines/transmission lines , planting native wild flower and tree/shrub
Page 102
species in any landscaping or post-construction restoration, using clean emissions and production
technology or renewable fuels;
maximise the long term added value and sustainability of the project by giving a clear commitment to
manage any land which forms part of the project, in a sustainable manner; maximise opportunities to
encourage people to think more sustainably about their use of energy. Advertise widely the benefits of
energy efficiency in the home, office, factory and recreational area and reach out to schools, community
groups, businesses and industry to increase awareness.
A selection of suggested targets which could be used to report the progress and success of the
project could include:
number of buildings (or floor space of buildings/offices) which have been fitted with energy
saving/efficient devices;
It is suggested that the core values and ideas expressed in this Welsh set of guidelines represent
a good starting basis for the development of sector specific guidelines such as that which is being
explored for energy from waste.
Best Practice Guidelines for Wind Energy Development British Wind Energy Association
The British Wind Energy Association has developed a set of guidelines for development of wind
energy facilities. The layout of these guidelines merit mention here. For each step in the project
timeline, from site selection to decommissioning and land reinstatement, guidance is provided on
what are identified to be the three key elements of the process, namely:
1. Technical and commercial considerations;
2. Environmental considerations; and
3. The need for dialogue and consultation26.
Code of Practice Development of the Shellfish Industry, British Columbia, Canada
In Canada the British Columbia Shellfish Aquaculture Industry has developed a Code of Practice
to serve as a guideline to shellfish aquaculture companies to ensure their operations are
conducted in a manner that works in concert with the marine environment. The CoP aims to
"provide guidance for addressing and minimising negative environmental impacts and
maximising positive impacts related to normal farm practices on shellfish aquaculture tenures.
The CoP will promote the responsible development and management of a viable and responsible
BC shellfish aquaculture sector". General areas covered by this CoP include siting, tenure
modification, waste management, access, private property and riparian rights, noise & light, odour,
visual quality, interaction with wildlife, transplant and import of stocks, biofouling control, use of
vessels, vehicles and marine equipment, equipment & construction standards, use & storage of
chemical, fuel & lubricants, and operations and training27.
The Province of Manitoba, Canada's, Sustainable Development Code of Practice
This Province of Manitoba's sustainable development code of practice28 is a generic code for
development within the province. In this guideline it is recommended that the decisions and
activities of the public sector should strive towards:
a.
b.
ensuring the most efficient and effective use of human, natural and financial resources with due
consideration of full-cost accounting;
Page 103
c.
including processes for informing those affected by decisions and actions in a timely manner and
ensuring meaningful opportunity for public consultation and due process, including, where
applicable, collaborative decision making, consensus building and alternative dispute resolution;
d.
e.
minimising waste and utilising environmentally, socially and economically sound and viable
substitutes for scarce resources;
f.
g.
recognising the value of, and integrating where possible, traditional knowledge and intergenerational
considerations;
h.
being effective stewards in the management of the economy, environment, human health and social
well-being for present and future generations;
i.
recognising that all departments and agencies share responsibility for the pursuit of sustainable
development in Manitoba;
j.
anticipating, mitigating and preventing adverse impacts to the economy, environment, human health
and social well-being;
k.
l.
ensuring local decision making is consistent with global environmental, economic and social
responsibilities.
complying with the requirements of applicable regulations, laws and policies; ensuring that submissions
to authorities, regulations, policies and procedures are consistent with the Principles and Guidelines of
Sustainable Development; ensuring administrative policies and procedures are streamlined, coordinated
and integrated, ensuring enforcement procedures are fair and equitable;
providing employees with information, work skills training and education in sustainable development
practices; ensuring meaningful opportunity for public consultation; ensuring assessment of proposed
programs and projects is carried out to determine and address sustainability impacts; rewarding
innovative actions (social, scientific, technological, financial) for initiatives having proven sustainable
development benefits; participating, where possible, in resource management initiatives at the local level
and supporting groups interested in human and natural resource management issues,
Employing the 4Rs (reducing, reusing, recycling and recovering) in its use of resources and the
management of waste, ensuring efficient use of water, energy and other resources in its operations,
practising conservation of non-renewable resources and using viable substitutes for scarce resources.
Seeking opportunities, to harmonise provincial laws and processes internally and with other jurisdictions
based on uniform, common or appropriate social, health, development, environmental and natural
resources standards.
Page 104
Summary
This section has provided examples of sustainability codes of practice and guidelines for
sustainable development in other sectors. Whilst no such documents were found for the Energy
from Waste sector in particular, it is proposed that the structure of these guidelines provide a
starting point for development of those for EfW projects.
The establishment of the Australian Greenhouse Office (AGO). The AGO has released the
National Greenhouse Strategy, which provides a framework for Australias response to its
greenhouse gas commitments.
The AGO also developed the Renewable Energy
Commercialisation Programme (RECP) which provides grants for new technology
development in the area of renewable energy. Several EfW projects have received funding
under this programme. Furthermore, the Remote Renewable Power Generation Program
provides financial support to increase the use of renewable energy generation in remote parts
of Australia that presently rely on diesel for electricity generation.
Drawing up of the national renewable energy programme, and the Renewable Energy
(Electricity) Act of 2000. The Act sets a mandatory target of an additional 9 500 GWh/a of
renewable energy target for all electricity retailers and wholesale purchasers by 2010.
Retailers and purchasers who do not meet this target can elect to pay a penalty. .As part of
this programme Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs), which represent a tradeable
commodity on the basis of each MWh of renewable energy which is generated, have been
implemented. The Act further identifies the organic component of MSW to be an eligible fuel
for the generation of Renewable Energy Certificates, providing a significant market driver to the
development of EfW projects.
A summary of the current status of policy and legislation around the states in Australia is
presented in Table F-1.
Page 105
Table F-1: Australian State Government Policy & Legislation Regarding EfW Projects
State/Territory
ACT
NSW
NT
QLD
SA
Sustainable
Energy Office
Sustainable Energy
Development
Authority (SEDA)30
Department of
Business, Industry
and Resource
Development
Office of
Sustainable Energy,
EPA
Sustainable and
Renewable Energy
(Energy SA)
Funding Programs
for EfW
Carbon Targets
related to Electricity
Renewables
Investment
Programme funding
NSW Electricity
Retailer Greenhouse
Benchmarks
Queensland
Sustainable Energy
Innovation Fund
State Energy
Research Advisory
Committee
(SENRAC)
TAS
VIC
Sustainable Energy
Authority
WA
Sustainable Energy
Development Office
(SEDO)
Renewable Energy
Assistance
Programme
Specific Waste
Legislation
No Waste by 2010
Waste Avoidance
and Resource
Recovery Act
2001
Waste
Management and
Pollution Control
Act 1999
Environmental
Protection (Waste
Management)
Policy 2000
Environment
Protection (Waste
Management)
Policy 1994
Development of
Tasmanian Waste
Strategy
Environment
Protection
(Resource
Efficiency) Act
2002
Waste
Management Bill
under
development
Waste Planning
and Management
ACT NOWaste30
Resource NSW
EfW Policy
Protection of the
Environment Policy
(PEP) under
development
Department of
Infrastructure,
Planning and
Environment
Office Sustainable
Resources, EPA
Waste Management
Committee (SA
EPA)
Department of
Primary Industries
Water and
Environment32
EcoRecycle
Victoria33
Waste Management
Board
Bioenergy policy on
wood waste under
development
Page 106
community/NGO objections
Economic Risks
Economic risks surrounding EfW projects primarily relate to costs and availability implications
associated with supply of the material used for generation of energy. Costs of material are
influenced by a number of factors, including competition for suitable material, which will potentially
increase as the market grows, gate fees, transport costs and the degree of pre-treatment required
(which depends again on quality of material and technology chosen for processing). The value of
recoverable RECs represents a further significant consideration in terms of EfW projects.
In addition to supply issues, given the uncertain and changing policy and regulatory conditions, it is
difficult to fully account for costs for licensing an EfW facility. This which may imply costly
administration, public participation, marketing; pollution control equipment and management
procedures, and hence on-going management costs. Not being able to accurately plan for these
costs is a potential limitation to such facilities.
Community and Environmental NGO Objections
Community concerns regarding EfW facilities largely relate to concerns about health issues. Past
negative experience with incineration facilities (such as the Waverly Woollahra incinerator) and
existing EfW projects such as Liddell power station have led to mistrust of such facilities. Such
experience has also contributed to a distrust of licensing authorities with respect to approval of
such facilities.
Environmental NGOs have expressed a number of issues in opposition to EfW. These include:
Preference for material recycling with perceived socio-economic benefits of job creation
etc,
It is essential that communication strategies regarding EfW projects address these issues and
maintain ongoing interaction with these stakeholder groups to ensure that all viewpoints are
addressed.
Page 107
Summary
This literature review has presented an overview of information contained in publicly available
literature. A number of aims were identified at the start of this literature review, and a summary of
the extent to which these aims have been achieved is presented below.
1. Review guidelines, codes of practice, case studies and legislation as they relate to
sustainability of the Energy from Waste industry
A number of generic guidelines for sustainability were reviewed. No documents were,
however, found in the course of this literature review which relate directly to Energy from
Waste within the context of the guiding the sustainable development of EfW projects.
2. Highlight whether current guidelines address highest resource value of materials
A review was provided of the traditional waste hierarchy and the new Waste Avoidance and
Resource Recovery Act (WARRA) in NSW. These guidelines do not provide decision makers
with the tools to distinguish between options for resource recovery, an issue which needs to be
explored in the context of this current project.
3. Discuss whether current guidelines have a mechanism for trade-offs between technoeconomic, environmental and socio-political criteria
No record of such guidelines were found in open literature. Various tools were, however,
identified in the course of this study for making such tradeoffs, although outputs from these are
potentially too detailed for use for large groups of non-technical stakeholders.
4. Identify whether current guidelines utilise life cycle assessment and life cycle thinking as
streamlined approaches to EfW issues
Whilst life cycle thinking and LCA tools are widely used to support environmental decision
making, no reports of their application to EfW decisions was found.
5. Identify and comment on any EfW projects which have been assessed on the basis of
sustainability
No such reports were found during the course of this literature review.
6. Assess what tools are available for the evaluation of sustainable EfW projects
No record of such tools was found in the open literature. The challenge, as has been
previously identified, is to develop a such a set of metrics which are accessible to both
technical and non-technical stakeholders.
7. Assess what legislative mechanisms are available to improve sustainability outcomes
A number of Australian Commonwealth and State government initiatives which support growth
of renewable energy, and in particular the greenhouse gas abatement benefits associated with
renewable energy, were identified. The difficulty remains the establishment of what constitutes
a sustainable renewable (in this case Energy from Waste) activity.
Page 108
Page 109
Table F-2: Summary of Other Principles & Guidelines, & Comments as they may be applied to EfW Projects
Principle
Assessment of progress toward sustainable development should consider the well-being of social,
ecological, and economic sub-systems, their state as well as the direction and rate of change of that
state, of their component parts, and the interaction between parts, and consider both positive and
negative consequences of human activity, in a way that reflects the costs and benefits for human and
ecological systems, in monetary and non-monetary terms
Assessment of progress toward sustainable development should consider economic development and
other, non-market activities that contribute to human/social well-being.
Consideration of alternatives which are potentially more sustainable (e.g. different fuel, technology,
process, raw materials, site );
Consideration of maximisation of environmental sustainability opportunities - the project may be
promoting a sustainable means of energy production but it could still have negative impacts or perhaps
positive impacts which are not fully utilised.
minimising waste and utilising environmentally, socially and economically sound and viable substitutes
for scarce resources;
Assessment of progress toward sustainable development should be based on an explicit set of
categories or an organising framework that links vision and goals to indicators and assessment criteria,
a limited number of key issues for analysis, a limited number of indicators or indicator combinations to
provide a clearer signal of progress, standardising measurement wherever possible to permit
comparison
Assessment of progress toward sustainable development should adopt a time horizon to capture both
human and ecosystem time scales, and take into account the needs of current and future generations,
define the space of study large enough to include not only local but also long distance impacts on
people and ecosystems and build on historic and current conditions to anticipate future conditions where we want to go, where we could go.
Ensuring that benefits of the project are maximised by maximising efficiency and the long term legacy
eg by considering what the site/facility will be like in 50 years?
Assessment of progress toward sustainable development should develop a capacity for repeated
measurement to determine trends, be iterative, adaptive, and responsive to change and uncertainty
because systems are complex and change frequently, adjust goals, frameworks, and indicators as new
insights are gained and promote development of collective learning and feedback to decision- making.
improving scientific understanding through exchanges of scientific and technological knowledge, and
by enhancing the development, adaptation, diffusion and transfer of technologies, including new and
innovative technologies.
Page 110
Principle
In order to achieve sustainable development, environmental protection shall constitute an integral part
of the development process and cannot be considered in isolation from it.
Environmental issues are best handled with the participation of all concerned citizens, at the relevant
level. At the national level, each individual shall have appropriate access to information concerning the
environment that is held by public authorities, including information on hazardous materials and
activities in their communities, and the opportunity to participate in decision-making processes. States
shall facilitate and encourage public awareness and participation by making information widely
available. Effective access to judicial and administrative proceedings, including redress and remedy,
should be provided.
Maximising the opportunities to raise awareness of sustainable energy production and its linkages to
resource conservation, greenhouse effect and other environmental pollution, degradation and inequality
issues.
In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States
according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full
scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent
environmental degradation.
Environmental impact assessment, as a national instrument, shall be undertaken for proposed activities
that are likely to have a significant adverse impact on the environment and are subject to a decision of a
competent national authority.
National authorities should endeavour to promote the internalisation of environmental costs and the use
of economic instruments, taking into account the approach that the polluter should, in principle, bear the
cost of pollution, with due regard to the public interest and without distorting international trade and
investment.
Costs, taxes, levies, penalties and incentives should represent the true
cost of an activity, including environmental costs. Novel ways for
accomplishing this without a strong legislative framework should be
developed.
Page 111
Home
Page',
Online
at
at:
10. Australian
Greenhouse
Office,
'Biomass
Applications',
found
online
at:
http://www.greenhouse.gov.au/renewable/reis/technologies/biomass/bioapp.html.
Accessed
11 September 2002.
11. The Solena Group, found online at http://www.solenagroup.com. Accessed 19 July 2002.
12. Schipper, L., Unander, F. and Marie-Lilliu, C., (2000), 'The IEA Energy Indicators Effort:
Increasing the Understanding of the Energy/Emissions Link', IEA: COP 6, The Hague, 13-14
Nov 2000.
13. Jackson, D.V. (1988), 'A Review of Developments in the Production and Combustion of
Refuse Derived Fuel', in Proceedings of a Seminar on Recovery Energy from Municipal and
Industrial Waste through Combustion, A. Brown, P.Evemy and G.L. Ferrero eds, Essex:
Elsevier.
14. NSW Government (2001), Waste Avoidance And Resource Recovery Act, Updated 18 January
2002.
15. Resources NSW, found online at http://www.resource.nsw.gov.au/about.htm, accessed 25 July
2002
16. AEA Technology, (2001), Comparison of public acceptability of energy from waste and energy
from
biomass
residues
in
5
EU
states.
Available
online
at
http://www.etsu.com/integrate/INTEGRATEReport_for_web.pdf. Accessed 29 July 2002.
Sustainability Guide for EfW Projects and Proposals
Edition 1 - 22/12/03
Page 112
Tasmania,
Page 113
Page 114
Principle 17: Environmental impact assessment, as a national instrument, shall be undertaken for proposed activities
that are likely to have a significant adverse impact on the environment and are subject to a decision of a competent
national authority.
Principle 18: States shall immediately notify other States of any natural disasters or other emergencies that are likely to
produce sudden harmful effects on the environment of those States. Every effort shall be made by the international
community to help States so afflicted.
Principle 19: States shall provide prior and timely notification and relevant information to potentially affected States on
activities that may have a significant adverse transboundary environmental effect and shall consult with those States at
an early stage and in good faith.
Principle 20: Women have a vital role in environmental management and development.
therefore essential to achieve sustainable development.
Principle 21: The creativity, ideals and courage of the youth of the world should be mobilised to forge a global
partnership in order to achieve sustainable development and ensure a better future for all.
Principle 22: Indigenous people and their communities, and other local communities, have a vital role in environmental
management and development because of their knowledge and traditional practices. States should recognise and duly
support their identity, culture and interests and enable their effective participation in the achievement of sustainable
development.
Principle 23: The environment and natural resources of people under oppression, domination and occupation shall be
protected.
Principle 24: Warfare is inherently destructive of sustainable development. States shall therefore respect international
law providing protection for the environment in times of armed conflict and cooperate in its further development, as
necessary.
Principle 25: Peace, development and environmental protection are interdependent and indivisible.
Principle 26: States shall resolve all their environmental disputes peacefully and by appropriate means in accordance
with the Charter of the United Nations.
Principle 27: States and people shall cooperate in good faith and in a spirit of partnership in the fulfilment of the
principles embodied in this Declaration and in the further development of international law in the field of sustainable
development.
Page 115
3.
ESSENTIAL
ELEMENTS
4.
ADEQUATE
SCOPE
5.
PRACTICAL
FOCUS
6.
OPENNESS
7.
EFFECTIVE
COMMUNICATION
8.
BROAD
PARTICIPATION
9.
ONGOING
ASSESSMENT
10. INSTITUTIONAL
CAPACITY
Description
consider the well-being of social, ecological, and economic sub-systems, their state as
well as the direction and rate of change of that state, of their component parts, and the
interaction between parts, and
consider both positive and negative consequences of human activity, in a way that
reflects the costs and benefits for human and ecological systems, in monetary and nonmonetary terms
Assessment of progress toward sustainable development should:
consider equity and disparity within the current population and between present and
future generations, dealing with such concerns as resource use, over-consumption and
poverty, human rights, and access to services, as appropriate,
adopt a time horizon long enough to capture both human and ecosystem time scales
thus responding to needs of future generations as well as those current to short term
decision-making,
define the space of study large enough to include not only local but also long distance
impacts on people and ecosystems
build on historic and current conditions to anticipate future conditions - where we want
to go, where we could go
Assessment of progress toward sustainable development should be based on:
an explicit set of categories or an organising framework that links vision and goals to
indicators and assessment criteria,
make the methods and data that are used accessible to all
make explicit all judgments, assumptions, and uncertainties in data and interpretations
Assessment of progress toward sustainable development should:
draw from indicators and other tools that are stimulating and serve to engage decisionmakers
aim, from the outset, for simplicity in structure and use of clear and plain language
Assessment of progress toward sustainable development should:
ensure the participation of decision-makers to secure a firm link to adopted policies and
resulting action
Assessment of progress toward sustainable development should:
be iterative, adaptive, and responsive to change and uncertainty because systems are
complex and change frequently
Page 116