Talk:B2-Environmental problem targeted - Revision history

P.santinello at 05:14, 17 July 2011

2011-07-17T05:14:06Z

P.santinello at 11:51, 16 July 2011

2011-07-16T11:51:50Z

P.santinello: /* Environmental problem targeted: PSA work */

2011-07-16T11:45:44Z

‎Environmental problem targeted: PSA work

P.santinello: /* Environmental problem targeted: PSA work */

2011-07-16T11:44:12Z

‎Environmental problem targeted: PSA work

P.santinello at 11:34, 16 July 2011

2011-07-16T11:34:38Z

P.santinello at 10:17, 16 July 2011

2011-07-16T10:17:39Z

P.santinello at 10:09, 16 July 2011

2011-07-16T10:09:12Z

P.santinello at 09:27, 16 July 2011

2011-07-16T09:27:32Z

P.santinello at 08:28, 16 July 2011

2011-07-16T08:28:36Z

P.santinello at 07:36, 16 July 2011

2011-07-16T07:36:46Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:14, 17 July 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	== Preocess description ==
		+	'''inserire se possibilie'''
		+	I fanghi di supero biologico estratti dalle vasche di ossidazione della linea acque, vengono in parte ispessiti dinamicamente (ispessimento meccanico) ed inviati ad una vasca di continuità ed in parte vengono utilizzati per la miscelazione con la FORSU selezionata e triturata. Per la diluizione è contemplata anche la possibilità di utilizzare acqua (di lavaggio o di rete). La totalità dei fanghi ottenuti nel pre-ispessitore viene inviata alla vasca di continuità per l’alimentazione dei digestori anaerobici;
		+	la FORSU viene selezionata con filiera di processo dedicata sino alla formazione di un prodotto di dissipazione secondaria che viene immagazzinato in serbatoi di miscelazione in cui convergono i fanghi di supero biologici non ispessiti e/o le acque di lavaggio dell’area FORSU stessa;
		+	La digestione anaerobica verrà garantita dall’utilizzo di due digestori anaerobici del volume di 3000 e 1500 m3, rispettivamente. Questi potranno funzionare sia in parallelo che in serie, utilizzando il più piccolo dei due come fase di accumulo e finissaggio del processo di stabilizzazione;
		+	Il biogas prodotto verrà inviato, dopo desolforazione e deumidificazione, a gruppi di co-generazione, ottenendo sia il calore necessario per il mantenimento delle condizioni termiche necessarie al funzionamento del processo di digestione anaerobica nei due digestori e di altri servizi in impianto sia una produzione di energia elettrica da utlizzare in impianto o immettere nella rete nazionale. Entrambi i digestori saranno dotati di sistemi on-line per la determinazione della portata e della percentuale di metano del biogas prodotto.
		+	I fanghi digeriti verranno inviati al post-ispessitore, che funzionerà in continuo. Qui si produce un surnatante che viene inviato ad un bacino destinato alla raccolta ed equalizzazione dei surnatanti e poi rilanciato in testa impianto. I fanghi ispessiti verranno inviati in continuo al serbatoio di accumulo; in tal modo si disporrà di una riserva di fango con cui alimentare la disidratazione con un substrato dalle caratteristiche costanti assicurando così prestazioni costanti nella fase di disidratazione;
		+	la disidratazione verrà condotta in estrattore centrifugo ed i surnatanti prodotti verranno inviati alla vasca di accumulo che rilancia in testa alla linea acque.
		+
		+
	== Environmental problem targeted: PSA work ==		== Environmental problem targeted: PSA work ==

@@ Line 64: / Line 64: @@
 == State of the art and innovative aspects of the project ==
 Provide a description of the state of the art of the technique or method addressed. Elaborate on the technical description of the processes or methods and/or proposed innovation(s), new elements, improvements. Describe the previous research and experience carried out in preparation for the project implementation, including feasibility studies.
 Please take into account that the innovative nature of the proposed actions can be evaluated from different perspectives: a) relative to the technologies applied by the project (technological innovation), b) relative to the way technologies are implemented (innovation in processes or methods) and, c) concerning the business and economic models developed by the project (economic and business innovation). These different dimensions of the innovatory nature have to be compared with the state of the art at global (world) level.
 N.B. Geographical technology or practice transfer alone (without a genuine development of innovative character) can not be considered as innovative. Equally, projects which involve pure research and development or merely preparatory activities (studies, surveys, etc) can not be considered innovative per se.
 == Overall picture ==

@@ Line 60: / Line 60: @@
 COWS demonstration of an innovative, proven solution that can be implemented widely in Europe, with low barriers to social acceptance and low lifecycle impact (because goes astride existing facilities) adds EU value.
-Finally, COWS will help from bottom-up to clarify the regulation of co-digestion of waste with sewage sludge at sewage treatment works. Collaboration between utilities under the Water Framework Directive and waste management utilities may drive to enhanced sectoral practices and possibly to specific guidelines (e.g. considering that most water utilities are energy-hungry industries).
+Finally, COWS will help from bottom-up to clarify the regulation of co-digestion of waste with sewage sludge at sewage treatment palnt. Collaboration between utilities under the Water Framework Directive and waste management utilities may drive to enhanced sectoral practices and possibly to specific guidelines for enabling the use of digestion capacity within the water industry  (e.g. considering that most water utilities are energy-hungry industries).
 == State of the art and innovative aspects of the project ==

@@ Line 60: / Line 60: @@
 COWS demonstration of an innovative, proven solution that can be implemented widely in Europe, with low barriers to social acceptance and low lifecycle impact (because goes astride existing facilities) adds EU value.
+Finally, COWS will help from bottom-up to clarify the regulation of co-digestion of waste with sewage sludge at sewage treatment works. Collaboration between utilities under the Water Framework Directive and waste management utilities may drive to enhanced sectoral practices and possibly to specific guidelines (e.g. considering that most water utilities are energy-hungry industries).
 == State of the art and innovative aspects of the project ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:34, 16 July 2011
Line 30:		Line 30:
	energy.		energy.

−	Anaerobic codigestion is hence considered one of the most promising way to give a proper disposal to ~~the organic fraction of municipal solid waste (~~OF-MSW) coming from source or separate collection systems, with ~~projected~~ figures ~~showing~~ that ~~implementing~~ co-digestion of sewage sludge and OF-MSW, would potentially lead to recovery of some 112.000 electrical MW and 180.000 thermal MW can be ~~achieved~~.	+	Anaerobic codigestion is hence considered one of the most promising way to give a proper disposal to OF-MSW coming from source or separate collection systems, the yields of anaerobic digestion (AD) process for the treatment of 100 kg of OF-MSW being reported to be 35 kg compostable fraction with 22 and 44 KWh electricity and heat energy, respectively (J. Mata-Alvarez. Biomethanization of the Organic Fraction of Municipal Solid Wastes. IWA Publishing, 2002. ISBN 1900222140).
		+
		+	These figures show that co-digestion of sewage sludge and OF-MSW, would potentially lead to recovery of some 112.000 electrical MW and 180.000 thermal MW in Europe.
		+
		+	As anaerobic digestion is conducted in closed reactors the emissions to the air are significantly lower and easier to control than from composting. Every tonne of biowaste sent to biological treatment can deliver between 100-200 m3 of biogas. Due to the energy recovery potential from biogas coupled with the soil improvement potential of residues (especially when treating separately collected biowaste) it may often represents the environmentally and economically most beneficial treatment technique.
		+
		+	Finally, bringing OF-MSW to existing AD sludge treatement facilities may also reduce further GHG emissions thank to shorter storage before delivery, when highly biodegradable content may be released. Daily deliver to a co-digestion plant avoids anaerobiotic pockets that could release CH4.
		+
		+
		+	A number of EU legal instruments address the issue of treatment of bio-waste.
		+
		+	The Green paper on the management of bio-waste in the European Union COM(2008) 811 final states that biological treatment (including composting and anaerobic digestion) may be classified as recycling when compost (or digestate) is used on land or for the production of growing media.
		+	If no such use is envisaged it should be classified as pre-treatment before landfilling or incineration. In addition, anaerobic digestion (producing biogas for energy purposes) should be seen as energy recovery.
		+
		+	General waste management requirements such as environmental and human health protection during waste treatment and priority for waste recycling are laid down in the revised Waste Framework Directive which also contains specific bio-waste related elements (new recycling targets for household waste, which can include bio-waste) and a mechanism allowing setting quality criteria for compost. Landfilling of bio-waste is addressed in the landfill Directive which requires the diversion of biodegradable municipal waste from landfills.
		+
		+	The revised IPPC Directive (Directive 2008/1/EC) laying down the main principles for the permitting and control of bio-waste treatment installations will cover all biological treatment of organic waste above a capacity of 50 tonnes/day.
		+
		+	The incineration of bio-waste is regulated in the Waste Incineration Directive while the health rules for composting and biogas plants which treat animal by-products are laid down in the Animal By-products Regulation.
		+
		+	The RES Directive (Directive 2009/28/EC) also contains measures on how bio-wastes are to be counted towards renewable energy targets. EU legislation does not limit Member States' choices of bio-waste treatment options as long as they respect certain framework conditions, notably those set by the Waste Framework Directive. The choice of treatment options needs to be explained and justified in national or regional Waste Management Plans and Prevention Programmes.
		+
		+	Together with a definition of waste which, before the revision of the Waste Framework Directive did not set clear boundaries for when a waste has been adequately treated and should be considered a product, this has led to a wide variety of policies and treatment methods in the EU, including different interpretations of Member States as to when treated bio-waste may cease to be waste and become a product that can move freely on the internal market or be exported from the EU.
		+
		+	Standards on the use and quality of compost exist in most Member States, but differ substantially, partly due to differences in soil policies. While there is no comprehensive Community legislation, certain rules regulate specific aspects of bio-waste treatment, biogas production and compost use.
		+
		+	In this framework COWS addresses clearly an environmental problem of European breath, grounding on the most recent EU legislation and having EAP6 and Europe2020 as horizon.
		+
		+	COWS demonstration of an innovative, proven solution that can be implemented widely in Europe, with low barriers to social acceptance and low lifecycle impact (because goes astride existing facilities) adds EU value.
		+
		+
		+
		+
		+
		+
		+

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 Nell'impianto di Montespertoli per compostare 15,000 tonnellate di OF-MSW vengono impiegati 1,050,000 kwh con emissioni equivalenti di 560.7 tonnellate di CO2 e un consumo pari a 241 TOE.
-Il problema potrebbe essere "locale" perchè dovuto all'assenza di un centro di compostaggio vicino (anche se questo non toglierebbe il costo energetico del trattamento).
+Il problema potrebbe essere considerato "locale" perchè dovuto all'assenza di un centro di compostaggio vicino (anche se questo non toglierebbe il costo energetico e l'impatto ambientale del trattamento).
 Dall'impianto di trattamento fanghi di Viareggio (il sito del progetto COWS) vengono oggi (pre-COWS, business-as-usual) inviati al recupero 5200 tonnellate di fanghi ogni anno, con 260 viaggi/anno a 250Km di distanza con emissioni equivalenti a 330 tonnellate di CO2 e più di 50 TOE.

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:27, 16 July 2011
Line 12:		Line 12:

	Nell'impianto di Montespertoli per compostare 15,000 tonnellate di OF-MSW vengono impiegati 1,050,000 kwh con emissioni equivalenti di 560.7 tonnellate di CO2 e un consumo pari a 241 TOE.		Nell'impianto di Montespertoli per compostare 15,000 tonnellate di OF-MSW vengono impiegati 1,050,000 kwh con emissioni equivalenti di 560.7 tonnellate di CO2 e un consumo pari a 241 TOE.
		+
		+	Dall'impianto di trattamento fanghi di Viareggio (il sito del progetto COWS) vengono oggi (pre-COWS, business-as-usual) inviati al recupero 5200 tonnellate di fanghi ogni anno, con 260 viaggi/anno a 250Km di distanza con emissioni equivalenti a 330 tonnellate di CO2.
		+
		+	Questa situazione è

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 Ogni giorno da novembre ad aprile un camion con due scarrabili (hook-lift containers) porta 20 tonnellate di frazione organica di rifiuti solidi urbani (OF-MSW) da Viareggio per 100 KM fino a Montespertoli (Florence, IT) e poi torna.
 Viareggio e Camaiore insieme arrivano quasi a 100,000 abitanti residenti, ma hanno una forte attività turistica che incide fortemente sulla quantità di rifiuti prodotta e raccolta.
-Da maggio a ottobre i viaggi fino a Montespertoli diventano nove ogni giorno con picchi anche maggiori.
+Da maggio a ottobre i viaggi fino a Montespertoli aumentano raggiungendo picchi anche di nove viaggi al giorno.
-Ogni anno circa 1500 camion fanno quel percorso per portare a destinazine l'esito dell'efficienza della raccolta differenziata. Per ogni viaggio vengono prodotti circa 540 Kg. di CO2, oltre 800 tonnellate ogni anno.
+Ogni anno circa 700 camion fanno quel percorso per portare a destinazine l'esito dell'efficienza della raccolta differenziata. Per ogni viaggio vengono prodotti circa 540 Kg. di CO2, oltre 350 tonnellate ogni anno.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-== Environmental problem targeted ==
+== Environmental problem targeted: PSA work ==
 Explain why you consider that this problem is related to European environmental policy and legislation.
 == State of the art and innovative aspects of the project ==