Is burning plastic waste a viable solution?
I am putting this question out there, even though the idea doesn’t sit that well with me. This post sat as an unfinished draft from February until today.
Some scientists at Penn State have taken the idea and come up with some prototypes. These machines take non-recyclable plastic waste like plastic mulch film and irrigation tape and extrude and slice them into nuggets that can be added to the mix used at existing coal fired generators. They have also designed burners for applications like heating greenhouses.
Plastic was blended 5 and 10 percent by calorific content with coal. Dirty mulch film and drip irrigation tape from three States was made into Plastofuel™. It was then sliced into small pieces, then burned with the coal in a stoker simulator. Air emissions and burn quality were closely monitored. Test results were encouraging.
This idea is being put into practice to heat greenhouses in Pennsylvania. The research tested dioxin output from the process and it was well within EPA limits. I am concerned that any number of other toxins could be released into the air by this process.
I have had some time to think about this idea and I have thought of many reasons why it isn’t a good idea. The tidiest argument is that it’s application will not have any real impact on plastic litter in the environment. It will always be more cost effective to source agricultural plastic waste and pre-consumer waste than to collect or purchase actual litter.
Note: The emissions tests for this stuff was funded by the American Plastics Council, now called the American Chemistry Council.
July 30th, 2009 at 3:04 pm
Interesting topic.
This report prepared by the Recycling Council of British Columbia is lengthy but very comprehensive and offers further insight on the whole “Waste to Energy” (WTE) idea, including the burning of plastic.
http://www.rcbc.bc.ca/files/u3/policypaper_101024_wteoption.pdf
Page 19 in particular discusses, for me, the biggest reason why burning waste of any sort is not a viable long-term solution: It requires a steady stream of trash, which is completely contradictory to the whole Zero Waste principle the WTE industry suggests it’s trying to achieve.
Page 6 discusses air contaminants and emissions and how the WTE company being studied offers misleading information about emission levels.
It’s tough, there needs to be some solution for dealing with the amount of waste already present, but as a short term solution only, not something that promotes and perpetuates the same behaviour that got us here in the first place.
July 30th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
My city is supposed to be building a gasification plant. http://www.plascoenergygroup.com/
They say that the dioxins usually created are negliable due to the high temperature of the burning, but I worry.
Burning is only the answer if we don’t want to stop consuming rapidly. Which obviously people do not want to stop.