Moving Grate Incineration: Preferred WTE Technology

By Rachael Lew | April 25, 2016 - 12:46 pm |

Incineration is the most popular waste treatment method that transforms waste
materials into useful energy. The incineration process converts waste into ash,
flue gas, and heat. The type of thermal WTE technology most commonly used
worldwide for municipal solid waste is the moving grate incineration. These
moving grate incinerators are even sometimes referred to as as the Municipal
Solid Waste Incinerators (MSWIs). As of August 2013, of more than 1000 of 1200
Waste-to-Energy plants (among 40 different countries) there is no pre-treatment
of the MSW before it is combusted using a moving grate. The hot combustion
gases are commonly used in boilers to create steam that can be utilized for
electricity production. The excess energy that cant be used for electricity can
possibly be used for industrial purposes, such as desalination or district
heating/cooling

Benefits of Moving Grate

The moving grate incineration technology is lenient in that it doesnt need prior
MSW sorting or shredding and can accommodate large quantities and variations
of MSW composition and calorific value. With over 100 years of operation
experience, the moving grate incineration system has a long track record of
operation for mixed MSW treatment. Between 2003 and 2011, it was reported
that at least 106 moving grate incineration plants were built worldwide for MSW
treatment. Currently, it is the main thermal treatment used for mixed MSW.

Compared to other thermal treatment technologies, the unit capacity and plant
capacity of the moving grate incineration system is the highest, ranging from 10
to 920 tpd and 20 to 4,300 tpd. This system is able to operate 8,000 hours per
year with one scheduled stop for inspection and maintenance of a duration of
roughly one month. Today, the moving grate incineration system is the only
treatment type which has been proven to be capable of treating over 3,000 tpd
of mixed MSW without requiring any pretreatment steps. Being composed of six
lines of furnace, one of the worlds largest moving grate incineration plants has
a capacity of 4,300 tpd and was installed in Singapore by Mitsubishi in 2000

Working Principle

Moving-grate incineration requires that the grate be able to move the waste
from the combustion chamber to allow for an effective and complete
combustion. A single incineration plant is able to process thirty-five metric tons
of waste per hour of treatment.
 The MSW for a moving grate incinerator does not require pretreatment. For this
reason, it is easier to process large variations and quantities. Most of these
incineration plants have hydraulic feeders to feed as-received MSW to the
combustion chamber (a moving grate that burns the material), a boiler to
recover heat, an air pollution control system to clean toxins in the flus gas, and
discharge units for the fly ash. The air or water-cooled moving grate is the
central piece of the process and is made of special alloys that resist the high
temperature and avoid erosion and corrosion.

The waste is first dried on the grate and then burnt at a high temperature (850
to 950 degrees C) accompanied with a supply of air. With a crane, the waste
itself is emptied into an opening in the grate. The waste then moves towards the
ash pit and it is then treated with water, cleaning the ash out. Air then flows
through the waste, cooling the grate. Sometimes grates can also be cooled with
water instead. Air gets blown through the boiler once more (but faster this time)
to complete the burning of the flue gases to improve the mixing and excess of
oxygen.

Suitability for Developing Nations

For lower income and developing countries with overflowing landfills, the
moving grate incinerator seems suitable and efficient. Moving grate incineration
is the most efficient technology for a large-scale mixed MSW treatment because
it is the only thermal technology that has been able to treat over 3,000 tons of
mixed MSW per day. It also seems to be considerably cheaper than conventional
technologies.

Compared to other types of Waste-to-Energy technologies, this type of system

also shows the highest ability to handle variation of MSW characteristics. As for
the other incineration technologies like gasification and pyrolysis technologies,
these are either limited in small-scale, limited in material for
industrial/hazardous waste treatment, requiring preprocessing of mixed MSW
before feeding, which make them not suitable for large-scale mixed MSW
treatment.

Conclusion

For the reduction of significant waste volume, treatment using a moving grate
incinerator with energy recovery is the most commonly used form of waste-to-
energy (WTE) technology. The moving grates ability to treat significant volumes
of waste efficiently, while not requiring pre-treatment or sorting is a major
advantage that makes this suitable for developing countries. This technology
could provide many other benefits to such nations. Implementing moving grate
incinerators is most suitable for developing nations because not only will it
reduce waste volume, but it would also reduce the demand for landfills, and
could recover energy for electricity.
Strange Minerals From Siberian
Mine Are Unlike Anything Found
in Nature
Ria Misra
8/05/16 2:00pm
Filed to: SIBERIA

Sample of zhemchuzhnikovite (Image: Igor Huski, Frii Research Group, McGill

University)

From deep inside a Siberian mine, researchers have catalogued a series of materials
unlike any others yet found in the ground. They do, however, bear a startling similarity
to certain lab-grown materials that werent thought to exist in nature at alluntil now.

In the last few decades, chemists have been crafting a series of new materials in their
labs called metal-organic frameworks, or MOFs. These materials are molecular
sponges, capable of soaking up gases like hydrogen or carbon dioxideeven storing
them for future use, like a cell. A new paper in Science Advances reveals that not only
are these materials also found in nature, weve had them in our hands for over 70 years.
We just didnt know what they were.

The samples of the two minerals, stepanovite and zhemchuzhnikovite, were originally
catalogued by geologists starting in the 1940s after being pulled from mines in Siberia.
With the technical limitations of the time, however, their unusual properties went by
mostly unnoticed. Then, in 2010, chemistry professor and senior author of todays
paper, Tomislav Frii of McGill University, came across an account of the samples in
an old article in a mineralogy journal. He was struck by certain structural similarities
between the minerals and todays lab-generated MOFs.
With the original samples in Russia unavailable, grad student and first author Igor
Huskic, also of McGill, set about creating synthetic versions of the samples using the
details from the old mineralogy journal. He was successful and the synthetic versions of
the minerals did, indeed, mimic the MOF materials. But it wasnt until their Russian co-
authors tracked down actual samples from decades ago that the team could confirm that
finding.

Left: Zhemchuzhnikovite crystal sample (Image: Igor Huski, Frii Research Group,
McGill University) Right: Chemical structure of the mineral (Image: Luzia Germann,
Dinnebier Research Group, MPI Stuttgart and Igor Huski, Frii Research Group,
McGill University)

Its the opposite of how its usually done. Usually what happens is a type of material is
discovered in nature, its analyzed, Frii told Gizmodo, and then we find it has
interesting properties, which we can then mimic in the lab.

The lab-grown versions of the MOFs have generated considerable excitement among
researchers because of their possible applications. Among the potential uses is using
them as carbon sequesters for the carbon dioxide we pump out into the atmosphere or
even using them to create incredibly-efficient fuel cells. But those applications are still
down the road, raising the question of what might have been had we recognized these
properties earlier.

One conclusion I can make is, if it were possible in the 40s to perform structural
analysis like this, then the whole area of MOFs would have been accelerated by 50
years, Frii said.

The conditions in which these samples were found were unusual. The mine in Siberia
was 250 meters deep and under a layer of thawing permafrost. So only a very small
amount of the samples were collected. Still, Frii is optimistic that there could be
other sources out thereeasier to get to and much more more abundantwith similar
properties to MOFs.

The next step is to figure out just where similar minerals could be found, and continue
to work out just what we might be able to do with both them and their lab-grown
equivalents.