3 Energy Production From Plastic Solid Waste (PSW)
S.M. Al-Salem
Environment & Life Sciences Research Centre, Kuwait Institute for Scientific Research, Kuwait
3.1 Key Concepts
Waste is a byproduct of the day-to-day activities
that we as consumers conduct. Solid waste (SW)
originating from various sectors can be handled in
many ways. There have been various established
technologies on an industrial scale, where waste is
valorized to meet the demand of a certain country
or community. In addition, plastics comprise a very
significant proportion of this waste. We have
detailed in the past two chapters the fact that plas-
tics encompass a high calorific value (CV). This
energy content is what makes plastics a material
that is highly desired for incineration processes.
Incineration is the technology that is typically
associated with energy recovery. Although many of
us would also relate energy recovery from waste-
to-landfill gas generation (LFG) or biogassing (or
even thermo-chemical treatment), but it is releasing
the embodied energy content of a material is what
is considered to be an energy recovery scheme. It is
not possible to talk about the technologies and key
concepts in energy recovery from plastics without
detailing the major key concepts of SW incinera-
tion. SW incineration can be found at the most
advanced level of treatment, and is certainly con-
sidered the highest in preference order when it
comes to the PSW management hierarchy (see
Chapter 2: Major Technologies Implemented for
Chemicals and Fuel Recovery).
Incineration can also be found coupled with
other technologies. It could be dedicated to treat a
certain byproduct (e.g., ash), and it can also be a
treatment option for a certain waste stream, such as
medical waste or hazardous waste.
Incineration feedstock is something that needs
careful consideration, and should meet certain
requirements. The most important parameter that
must be well controlled is the lower CV which was
noted earlier in Chapter 2, Major Technologies
Plastics to Energy. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-813140-4.00003-0
© 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Implemented for Chemicals and Fuel Recovery.
The LCV is the energy content that makes the feed-
stock lucrative enough to incinerate and then
recover energy. If this parameter is controlled,
other parameters will be considered as associated to
the LCV.
Therefore, quality, account of seasonal variation,
source of material, and composition, etc., will fol-
low the careful monitoring of LCV. This is the rea-
son why the incineration of extreme composition of
materials (e.g. plastics and sand alone) is not
recommended for incineration and co-incineration.
This is despite having high energy content for plas-
tic feedstock on its own [1].
Moreover, there must be very good consideration
for the economical values of waste that is used for
the incineration process. This is in terms of contin-
uous availability of feedstock material and the utili-
zation of the right economy of scale of the unit.
The throughput of the material must be constant
and somewhat stable in generation throughout the
four seasons to ensure generation of energy is fairly
constant all year long.
Many third world (developing) countries have a
continuous and well-documented scavenging activ-
ity in waste dumps, landfill sites, and around incin-
eration and other treatment plants (Fig. 3.1).
Scavengers of waste usually target plastics. This is
in order to resell this material to recyclers and pri-
vate industries that can operate a cheaper process
with a feedstock originating from waste at lower
prices than market ones. This also reduces the CV
of the incineration unit feedstock due to the recov-
ery of valuable fractions of plastics with high
energy value intended for incineration.
At the heart of any integrated solid waste man-
agement (ISWM) system, lies energy recovery
through incineration processes. Incineration also
relies heavily on landfill sites where residues are
typically landfilled as a final disposal method. Of
45
46
Figure 3.1 Documented waste scavengers in an active landfill operating in the state of Kuwait, targeting mainly
plastic articles.
course, landfilling of a large amount of waste will
not be achieved in this technique due to the very
simple fact that the majority of the SW has been
incinerated. Taking careful consideration of the
type of incineration process for energy recovery (or
general waste to energy, WtE technologies) is a
must. Energy recovery from waste that is rich in
plastics is a success story in many societies and
countries. However, it is invaluable to control, as
mentioned earlier, the energy content and, conse-
quently, other parameters through proper material
separation and a highly efficient collection system
(Fig. 3.2).
Social acceptance and accountability are also
key issues that have to be considered for a good
energy recovery scheme, where the sustainability of
the process itself is controlled by the optimization
of the economic, environmental, and social aspects.
There should also be a good use of the resources
surrounding the material availability, where ulti-
mately the decision to incinerate for energy recov-
ery is higher in preference than biological treatment
or TCT on an individual basis.
There should be a general acceptance for the
increasing operational and maintenance costs asso-
ciated with the investment of energy recovery
plants. It is essential also to establish a good econ-
omy for energy and the byproducts produced
PLASTICS TO ENERGY
(electricity, heat, steam, metals, ash, etc.). The
number of jobs created and the green (environmen-
tal) image also make for grand incentives for socie-
ties to support such ventures. Various societies
have had their share of success stories when it
comes to energy recovery from plastics and waste.
McDougall et al. [2] detailed various case studies
on both a country and city basis that shows that
WtE, and in particular, incineration, is something
that is essential for reclamation and treatment of
products from waste. One of which is the case of
Prato (Italy) where the control of waste, especially
film plastics that account for 140 tonnes, is man-
aged post separation in two material recovery facil-
ities to recycling schemes.
The Hampshire (UK) IWMS system on the other
hand, has an incineration plant that processes 10%
of the collected recyclables in the area, with only
5.5% diverted to composting. Many developing
world countries have a large dependency on incin-
eration for energy recovery. The State of Kuwait,
an oil-dependent West Asian nation with one of the
highest SW generation rates in the world (5.75 kg
per capita per day), is currently faced with serious
issues regarding the management of resources in
terms of SW accumulation and reclamation. It has
been announced that in the recent future, recycling
of rich plastic and organic municipal solid waste
3: ENERGY PRODUCTION FROM PLASTIC SOLID WASTE (PSW) 47

Waste generation
(including plastics)

Recyclables Materials recovery

and sorting Recycling

Collection and
transportation
Emission control

Incineration Energy Residue

(WtE) ash handling

Treatment options

Recycling
Other treatment products
(including energy
landfilling) soil improvement, etc.

Figure 3.2 Principle components of waste streams treatment options highlighting important stages for a suc-
cessful energy recovery scheme.

(MSW) that will rid the country and landfills of
some 50 % of total waste load, will be treated in a
1 million tonnes per annum capacity incineration
unit for energy recovery purposes, and be inte-
grated with the national grid [3]. Kuwait also hosts
two incineration plants that processes waste, includ-
ing plastics in 5 tonne per day units. These energy
recovery plants are monitored for their emissions
and also produce 5 % ash that is buried in a nearby
landfill site.
In other Middle East countries, established LFG
recovery systems for energy production revolve
around recovering methane gas (C1) to power up
turbines and other units. These are hosted in
Turkey, namely in its capital city, Ankara where
60% of the organic fraction from MSW is utilized
in a zero landfill waste scheme to power 22.5 MW
for the national grid [4]. The United Arab Emirates
(UAE) is also following suit within the municipal-
ity of Dubai in an Al-Quais landfill site valorizing
22 years of MSW buried underground [5].
Feedstock for energy recovery via incineration,
especially originating from waste, has to have a
minimum requirement of categories (blend) and
composition with a certain energy content when it
comes to plastics. Table 3.1 shows the minimum
requirement of plastic materials that must be pres-
ent within the feedstock to be able to be considered
for incineration.
There is a general confusion that exists among
sectors and authorities that handle and deal with
energy recovery units. The confusion lies among
the three main terms which are used in this type of
work. These terms are thermal treatment, combus-
tion, and incineration. Thermal treatment (or
destruction) is the process whereby the material is
mixed with oxygen with or without the aid of an
external energy source, and a solid ash is recovered
from the bottom of the vessel while carbon dioxide
(CO2) and water are exited from the top. Thermal
treatment allows for the recovery of heat and
energy, which are also typically produced from the
process.
Combustion on the other hand, is the reaction
itself that takes place between a hydrocarbon (HC)
with oxygen (O2) to produce carbon dioxide (CO2)
and water. On the other hand, incineration is the
process where materials are heated in the presence
of oxygen to oxidize organic compounds.
Incineration will utilize the main combustion
48 PLASTICS TO ENERGY

Table 3.1 Waste Definition and Classification Various plastic materials produce (postincinera-
Based on Point of Origin and Source tion) ash and metals due to the presence of con-
taminants in the feedstock material. The product
Lower CV
gases are likely to host various numbers of inor-
Category (MJ/kg)
ganic and organic compounds as well.
Organics (food and kitchen 15 20 The combustion reaction of organic materials
waste) and HCs will ultimately result in complex bypro-
Plastics: ducts. When complete combustion with total oxida-
PE 45 tion of all carbon, sulfur, etc., is achieved, no
oxidation of nitrogen (N2), in theory, is to take
PVC 15 25
place. There are a number of parameters that can
Polystyrene 40 control and manipulate a combustion reaction with
Polypropylene 45 a certain feedstock. These are the lower and higher
Fines (,12 mm mesh) 15 CVs of the material used as a feedstock (see
Table 2, Chapter 2: Major Technologies
Implemented for Chemicals and Fuel Recovery).
reaction where HCs are burned (combusted) with The unit design also plays a major role in energy
oxygen to release embodied energy thus: recovery and range of combustion reactions.
However, it is best to validate the feedstock mate-
HC 1 O2 -CO2 1 H2 O 1 Energy (3.1) rial by examining three parameters for applicability
of combustion and combustibility without auxiliary
Hence, incineration is a type of thermal treat-
fuel [1]. These are the ash content (residual), com-
ment that combusts the HC for energy release.
bustible fraction, and the moisture content of the
Thermal treatment also hosts other treatment meth-
feedstock (i.e., raw waste with plastics, organics,
ods such as gasification (use of gasifying agents
etc.).
such as oxygen, steam, air, etc.), hydrolysis, and of
The Tanner Triangle Plot given below in
course, combustion, where the following stoichimo-
Fig. 3.3 shows the range of combustibility of mate-
metric reaction takes place [6]:
rials. The feedstock is applicable for combustion
C20 H32 O10 1 x1 O2 1 x2 H2 OΔ -y1 C 1 y2 CO2 (without auxiliary fuel) if it falls within the shaded
1 y3 CO2 1 y4 H2 1 y5 CH4 1 y6 H2 O area, where moisture ,50%, ash ,60% and com-
1 y 7 Cn Hm bustible fraction is . % [See Ref. [1] for full
details on waste assessment for combustibility and
(3.2)
properties. The same reference gives the criteria for
Coefficients (x and y), denoted in the previous waste incineration (combustion technologies).].
equation, will balance both sides of the chemical
reaction. For example, when certain polymerized
materials are incinerated, the following reactions will 3.2 Types of Incineration Units
take place while the possibility of producing energy
is present at certain combustion conditions [7]: Incineration units vary in size, design, and opera-
Polyethylene (PE): tion. They will all operate a combustion system
that works mainly to reduce the volume and size of
C2 H4 1 3O2 -2CO2 1 2H2 O (3.3) the feedstock materials (typically commingled SW)
and temperature range. Incineration units can be
Butyl rubber: divided into a number of categories based on the
ability to destroy contaminants [7]. These catego-
C9 H16 1 13O2 -9CO2 1 8H2 O (3.4) ries are rotary kiln, moving grate, multiple heart,
liquid injection, fluidized bed, and finally, multiple
Teflon: chamber.
However, before going into detail and before
C2 F4 1 O2 -9CO2 1 4HF (3.5) examining case studies of plastics used as feedstock
to each type, in addition to the application of these
3: ENERGY PRODUCTION FROM PLASTIC SOLID WASTE (PSW) 49

%Moisture (W ) cause a public health concern from the pollutant

exposure of its chimney stack. Mass burning using
movable grates is considered to be the only tech-
nology that fulfills the criteria of proven feasibility

10
90
by the World Bank [1].

20
80 Unlike mass burning technologies, pretreated
incineration plants are very limited due to their
30
70
complications in preparing and sorting the feed-
40

60
stock material. The reader should also note that
W = 50%
50

50
energy recovery is done in a different part (or sec-
tion) of the incineration process after the combus-
60

40
25%

tion chamber. Fig. 3.4 outlines the incineration unit

70

30
C=

plant as a whole to give the reader a better under-

80

20
standing of the process flow diagram of waste
90

10
A=

incineration.
4-%

In Fig. 3.4, it is key to understand that all types

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

of combustion chambers (vessels) will operate to

% Ash (A)
Figure 3.3 Material combustibility assessment tan-
ner triangle plot according to World Bank Report [1].
units to waste materials in general, it should be
noted that this classification is based on unit type
and process specific categorization. In other words,
there is another way of categorizing incineration
units based on the feedstock treatment of the com-
bustion system, which are mass burning and
homogenized feedstock burning.
It should also be noted that mass burning is the
most widely used and well-developed technology
when it comes to incineration. Mass burning is the
combustion of unsorted MSW, with the aim of con-
verting feedstock into useable energy [8] under cer-
tain operating conditions. This technology requires
little and almost no pretreatment of feedstock. The
majority of treatment plants around the world oper-
ate this type of incineration using a moving grate
operation.
This technique is also the most feasible when it
comes to the economy of scale, and is considered
the height of in rate of return of WtE technologies.
However, just like in the case of all incineration
units, there are major environmental implications
associated with this technology. There has always
been a risk of formation of dioxins [dioxin is the
term collectively given to the structurally related
polychlorinated chemicals to polychlorinated diben-
zo para dioxins (PCDDs) and polychlorinated
dibenzofurans], nitrogen oxides (NOx), and the
deterioration of local air quality that will ultimately
% Combustible (C) facilitate the material feedstock reaction with O2 to
produce the heat required for energy recovery from
the exothermic reaction. These materials are what
we can consider as fuel to this process. In our case,
plastic-rich feedstock or a plastic material. The fur-
nace can also operate depending on the mode of
the flow of gases and the feedstock material as
depicted in Fig. 3.5.
The first type of mass burning incinerator unit
that is considered quite common is the rotary kiln
incinerator. Fig. 3.6 shows a typical rotary kiln
incineration plant used in MSW incineration. The
unique feature of this unit is the combustion cham-
ber, which is a heated rotating cylinder mounted at
an angle with baffles to add the required turbulence
for the process. The rotary kiln itself consists of a
layered burning unit where the material is trans-
ported through the furnace by the rotation of the
cylinder.
Most organic materials are incinerated in this
type of unit. It has been also reported to incinerate
the solids and sludge. The temperature of operation
in this type of process can vary between 800°C and
1650°C, and the kiln cylinder can be of a wide
range in diameter between 1 and 5 m, and 8 and
20 m in length, with a throughput range between
0.1 and 20 tonnes per hour.
Moving grate technologies in incineration plants
are predominant in the waste management market.
The main feature of this type of unit is the transpor-
tation facility of the material, which is done
through the furnace in a roller grate after an over-
head carne feeds waste into a dedicated hopper
(chute) to the furnace (Fig. 3.7).
50 PLASTICS TO ENERGY

Material/waste
source

Boiler End use

Treatment
sorting, homogenizing, shredding Stack emission

Temperature
Combustion
reduction & heat Air pollution control
process
recovery

Ash (slag) recovery Safe disposal

Figure 3.4 Schematic flow diagram of typical incineration plant.

Figure 3.5 Classification of furnace type with respect to flow of gases and feedstock materials. From van
Blijderveen, Ignition and Combustion Phenomena on a Moving Grate With Application to the Thermal
Conversion of Biomass and Municipal Solid Waste, PhD thesis, University of Twente, Enschede, The
Netherlands, December (2011) [9].
3: ENERGY PRODUCTION FROM PLASTIC SOLID WASTE (PSW) 51

Atmosphere
Quench
Demister Stack
Secondary
burner
Air Afterburner
Natural extension ID fan
ID fan
gas, Solids Carbon bed Hepa
liquid Afterburner
feeder Packed adsorber filter
feed
column
Transfer Main scrubber
duct burner
Ash
bin Venturi
Air scrubber
Scrubber
Rotary Natural
liquid
kiln gas,
recirculation
liquid feed
Redundant air
Primary air pollution
Rotary kiln incinerator pollution control
control system
system

Figure 3.6 Schematic diagram of a typical rotary kiln incineration unit. From USEPA (J. Lee, D. Fournier, Jr.,
C. King, S. Venkatesh, C. Goldman, 1997. Evaluation of rotary kiln incinerator operation at low to-moderate
temperature conditions EPA/600/SR-96/105 March)[10].

Figure 3.7 Schematic diagram of a moving grate incineration unit equipped with energy (power) generation
and emission control [11].
52
Figure 3.8 Design of the grates in waste incineration plants [9].
Grates used in this process can vary in design
and operation. The majority of which will consist
of rows of bars which move with or against the
waste flow (Fig. 3.8). The movement of the grate is
what results in good mixing of the feedstock.
Roller grates are also commonly found in many
plants that deal with waste feedstock. Feedstock is
first dried in the combustion chamber (100°C) and
then heated under pyrolytic (e.g., inert) conditions
at about 250°C. Oxygen (O2) gas is then supplied
to have a combustion reaction occurring at 450°C.
Oxygen is also additionally supplied and large heat
is then recovered as energy.
The design and movement of the grate is key in
transporting and agitating the waste material. As it
is a mass burning type of unit, there is no immedi-
ate need for pretreatment of the feedstock before
incineration. In energy recovery installations
(Fig. 3.7), the hot gases resulting from the combus-
tion process are used to create steam for power
generation purposes. Energy recovery will be dis-
cussed at later stages of this section. Also, it should
be noted that moving grates give the highest possi-
ble treatment capacity, where throughput can be
managed between 10 and 4300 tonnes per day [12].
Fluidized bed incinerators are, as their name
implies, based on the principle of fluidization of
the feedstock material by suspending the solids
using air (fluidizing agent). Fluidization is a well-
defined and reported unit operation in chemical
engineering that has a very versatile application
and use. Fluidized bed incinerators are also
reported to incinerate waste very rapidly, and can
deal with a number of feedstock from waste,
including MSW and PSW.
The most common type of this unit in the pres-
surized fluidized bed combustion process where
fuel (in this case MSW or PSW) is injected under
pressure into the combustion chamber hosts inert
sand particles that will transfer the heat to the fuel.
Hence, fluidization has always been a good process
PLASTICS TO ENERGY
in providing good heat and mass transfer, control of
product range, and good control of the combustion
reaction. Heat is also supplied throughout the com-
bustion process as necessity persists. Air is supplied
into the bottom of the particle bed that leads to
their suspension during the fluidization process [6].
Table 3.2 gives a summary of the advantages and
disadvantages of the main incineration unit technol-
ogies used in energy production from waste and
consequently, plastic materials.
Another less common process is the multiple
hearth combustion furnace used in the incineration of
various contaminants (solids) and sewage sludge.
The concept was developed back in the 1900s for
treating and roasting iron ore (Fe2O3), where air
cooled vertical cylinders are used to incinerate solids
and sludge. This type of unit is not used for the treat-
ment of MSW and certainly not plastics or polymeric
waste on their own, but is considered a main type of
incineration unit in waste management (Fig. 3.9).
The feedstock is slowly fed from the top through
the stacked hearth. The outer shell is typically man-
ufactured of steel, where a hollow cast iron rotating
shaft runs through the center. Operating tempera-
ture of this unit can significantly vary from 800°C
to above 1600°C.
A lesser common type of waste incineration unit
is the electric infrared unit used in sludge treatment
plants (Fig. 3.10). A furnace, coupled with a con-
veyer belt, will extend the length of the unit.
Infrared heating elements will be placed on the top
roof of the conveyer belt. The waste containing
high moisture (such as sludge) will be dried along
the length of the unit’s conveyer. Ash will also be
recovered from the process and excess air might
vary significantly between 20% to 70% [13].
All the various designs of incineration units will
share a number of common aspects. They will all
allow the thorough mixing of feedstock material
with air in temperatures high enough to achieve a
combustion reaction between 750°C and 1000°C.
Table 3.2 Summary of the Advantages and Disadvantages of the Main Incineration Technologies [1]

Technology
Name Moving Grate Rotary Kiln Fluidized Bed
Advantages No need for sorting, No need for sorting, Simple design and
pretreatment or shredding pretreatment or well established
of feedstock shredding of technique
Technology meets and feedstock Low associated
demand of the markets Overall thermal costs
Accommodates variation efficiency of 80 % 90 percent
in CV of feedstock due to Accommodates thermal efficiency.
design variation in CV of Suitable for
85% thermal efficiency of feedstock due to various types of
process with throughput of design waste.
multiple of furnaces
Disadvantages High capital (CAPEX) and High capital (CAPEX) Not common
operational (OPEX) cost and operational technology due to
(OPEX) cost capacity
Not as common as constraints
the moving grate
Limited throughput
capacity compared to
grate technology

Figure 3.9 Cross section diagram of a multiple hearth incinerator used in sludge treatment [13].
54
Figure 3.10 Cross section diagram of sludge/waste incineration unit of electric infrared type [13].
They will all also allow flue gases to be scrubbed
for removal of hazardous chemicals, and particulate
matter (PM) will be removed by electrostatic pre-
cipitation and filters. While incineration occurs, the
energy is recovered as heat from the flue gases
resulting from the process.
All energy recovery schemes will require the
cooling down of the flue gases by using a boiler,
which then will allow the gases to exit and be part
of the air purification and pollution control configu-
ration of the plant. Three main types of boilers are
available to cover the wider spectrum of energy
and utility production. These are the hot water
boiler, and low and high pressure (HP) steam boi-
lers. The flue gases exiting the boiler will ulti-
mately result in having heat, steam, power, or a
combination of these utilities produced for the
national grid or energy distributor, to be then used
by the general public. The types of boilers are sum-
marized in Table 3.3.
Various types of incineration units can be used
with the available boilers and energy recovery con-
figurations. In addition, the type of the waste and
level of contaminants govern the process due to the
unit’s operation in handling the various types of
hazardous waste. Fig. 3.11 shows how the steam
boiler may be configured with the rotary kiln incin-
eration process overall. The amount of energy
recovered is governed by the previously stated
parameters discussed in this chapter. As noted pre-
viously, grate type incineration units are the most
common incinerators of waste plants. This technol-
ogy is noted to produce large amounts of heat due
to the constant oxygen supply provided. HP-steam
boilers are a lucrative (and possible) route for the
recovery of combined heat and power (CHP).
Fig. 3.12 shows a schematic flow diagram of this
PLASTICS TO ENERGY
process, with energy recovery and the flow gases
cleanup processes as described previously in
[14 15].
3.3 Incineration of Plastics
The problem of plastics accumulation as a major
part of the waste stream is something that could be
managed via energy recovery methods. As noted in
the past chapter, these technologies are considered
the most beneficial for the end user and consumer
due to the fact that utilities (power, steam, and
heat) are produced from them. Plastics are a very
lucrative source of energy due to their nature as a
crude oil derivative product. However, there exists
the major problem of economic viability in the
industry when it comes to all methods of recovery.
The advantage of energy recovery is the possibility
of overcoming this problem by producing high-end
and easily marketed products (utilities).
The nature of plastics gives the feedstock rich
characteristics in terms of energy content similar to
conventional fuels. Excess heat can be easily pro-
duced from the incineration of plastics, and can
also serve households and communities as a utility
supply. A good example of applying incineration of
plastics-rich feedstock is the United Kingdom,
where the majority of the units used in incineration
are of the moving grate type, and treat waste with
high percentages of PSW. Incineration of PSW can
also reduce the amount of waste (by volume) in the
range of 90% 99% depending on the constituting
polymers. This significantly reduces the depen-
dency on landfills.
Plastics in incineration process serve two main
objectives according to Westerhout et al. [16].
3: ENERGY PRODUCTION FROM PLASTIC SOLID WASTE (PSW) 55

Table 3.3 Type of Boilers Used in Energy Recovery Systems From Incineration Units

Boiler Hot Water Boiler LP Steam Boiler HP-Steam Boiler

Principle Flue gases will heat the
water to be used in heat
production
The boiler efficiency
can reach 80 % (i.e.,
thermal and overall
recovery)
Higher temperature of
water (above 160°C)
can be achieved with
manipulating
operational pressure of
the unit
Energy Heat generation only
application No power or
combination of steam
and power with heat is
possible
Notes Simple in design and
has low CAPEX
Limited use and
application due to low
energy content of hot
water
If cooling tower is used
to cool gases, no
recovery of energy is
possible
Flue gases will
produce steam in the
temperature range of
120 250°C and a
pressure around 20
bars
The boiler can feed to
a cooling tower but no
energy recovery is
possible with this
configuration
80% thermal recovery
is possible
Heat generation only
No power or
combination of steam
and power with heat is
possible
Simple in design and
has low CAPEX
Limited use and
application due to low
energy content of hot
water
If cooling tower is used
to cool gases, no
recovery of energy is
possible
Most complex in
operation and design
Possibility of producing
power and heat, or a
combination of both, in
addition to, steam
35% of efficiency is
achieved with power
generation, and 75% of
combined steam and
power
CHP can be in a
process of 85% overall
efficiency
Steam, power, and
heat
Combination of steam
and power with heat is
also achieved and
possible after setting-
up proper turbine units
Complex in design
Highly profitable and
can be used in various
communities to cover
local needs

They act as a fuel source to supply energy in com-
bustion phase, and they act as a reducing agent for
pyrolysis and gasification in replacing coke. The
use of plastic materials as a supplement fuel has
been reported in the steel making industry using
incineration units as well [17,18].
Plastics can be incinerated in high amounts
within MSW. Moreover, there exits a number of
issues with plastics being incinerated with MSW
that one should look out for. These could be sum-
marized as per the following:
• Heavy metal content in feedstock must be
eliminated to be able to produce reusable slags
and ash from incineration [19,20].
• Incineration units nowadays are moving
toward technologies that will operate with rel-
atively low temperatures around 850°C, hence
applicability of plastics material content within
this range of temperature must not be
overlooked.
As previously noted, emission control is a major
technical point when it comes to the incineration
process. One of the main technologies that can
reduce carbon emissions of the incineration process
is the oxygen/recycled flue gas (O2/RFG) combus-
tion system. This technique used by chemical and
combustion engineers, is based on separating the
N2 gas from the air, while pure O2 gas is mixed
56 PLASTICS TO ENERGY

Figure 3.11 Incineration of hazardous waste plant showing configuration with steam boiler [14] [15].

Figure 3.12 Incineration of SW using moving grate technology with energy recovery as shown by Holder et al.
[15].
3: ENERGY PRODUCTION FROM PLASTIC SOLID WASTE (PSW)
with CO2 rich recycled flue gas from the combustion
chamber. Thus, the easy recovery of CO2 from this
rich carbon stream becomes an effort of reducing it
and controlling its emissions. A number of energy
recovery plants use techniques such as coal fired
power generation systems and integrated gasifica-
tion combined systems (ICGS) [21,22]. Fig. 3.13
shows an experimental setup used by Chen and
Huang [22] in their work. PE plastic granules were
used to simulate PSW incineration, and were fed at
a rate of 24 g/min after reaching steady state temper-
ature conditions. It was reported that the emission of
CO decreased with the rising ratio of the recycled
flue gas with O2 levels below 40%. This facilitates
for the user a window for manipulating the process
conditions for a better emission control. Tang et al.
[23] studied the behavior of polymeric materials
present in MSW. Combustion conditions were
achieved utilizing a thermogravimetric analyzer
where polyvinyl chloride (PVC), leather, and rubber
were subjected to various heating ramps. O2, CO2,
and N2 were used as gaseous atmospheres, ensuring
combustion and pyrolysis conditions, while creating
a means to determine the effect of CO2 addition on
the behavior of the material. No change in weight
loss of materials studied occurred below 600°C with
respect to reaction media. Smol et al. [24] also deter-
mined the benefits of incineration with the aim of
waste treatment, namely sewage sludge, and linked
the utilization of incineration of ash, after processing
it in the form of vitrified microspheres, to a reduc-
tion of thermoplastic resin weight and an
Figure 3.13 Experimental setup of plastics incineration used by Chen and Huang [22].
57
improvement of the flow of resin in the composite,
in thermoplastics, and in the production of layers
resistant to scratching, and finally, in the production
of anti-condensation paints and thermal insulation
layers. The work stemmed out of the importance of
recovering phosphorus (P), which is an emerging
topic due to the benefits of recovering this chemical
and enforcing stringent environmental regulations
[25].
The reader might have noted earlier that plastics
that have a high CV can be comparable or superior
to conventional fuels in many cases. In fact, 25%
of the CV of MSW is estimated to be from the
plastics present in it [26]. The average CV of MSW
is typically assumed to be 20,000 Kj/kg [1]. Plastic
materials will combust in two distinct phases: a
pyrolysis phase followed by a combustion phase
[26 28]. In the first phase, the plastic material will
decompose chemically from heat into gaseous com-
pounds related to the type and nature of the plastic
material [27]. Combustion will then occur at the
flame when the gases enter it. Due to combustion
reaction conditions, the combustion gases will typi-
cally be very stable, with a small atomic structure
(two or three atoms) such as H2O, CO2, NO, CO,
and SO2 [29]. Particular attention must be paid to
incomplete combustion conditions where insuffi-
cient amount of O2 gas can lead to the formation of
CO and the release of more complex, structured
chemicals which are considered a major concern in
regards to the incineration process (e.g.,
chlorobenzene).
58
Bujak [30] conducted a major scale study where
a rotating kiln incineration unit was used to treat
the plastic scrap of a plastic tape manufacturing
facility. In addition to the recovered heat, the pilot
plant unit eliminated all emissions of SO2, CO,
NOx, and dust, which showed great potential for
future upgrading of existing industries in order to
meet environmental regulations. A major reduction
in environmental stressors were also detailed and
achieved in Frey’s et al. [31] work after simulating
grate furnace incineration of MSW with a fraction
of plastic mixed with refuse derived fuel (RDF).
Incineration of tyres is also manageable and can be
of great benefit for energy recovery producers
where incinerating used rubbers are considered as a
fuel source [32]. All of which deems plastic and
polymeric materials a good source of energy for
potential treatment in incineration units.
3.4 Governing Regulations and
Key Criteria
Incineration of fossil fuels is considered to be the
main source of greenhouse gases (GHGs) emissions
into the atmosphere. Incineration technologies within
the WtE context are regulated in every country and
region in the world, with the main concern having
always been in how to meet permissible limits of air
pollution control criteria. Waste management regula-
tions are strict, on occasion, with incineration facili-
ties in controlling their feedstock materials, and
consequently, the release of some chemicals from
their exhaust gas systems. In many cases, regulations
will require the separation of recoverable materials
and recyclables from the feedstock. However, the
percentage of recovery varies from one country to
another, where, for example, in the United States, 25
% is mandatory [33].
European Union (EU) and the United States
incineration plant regulations cover and categorize
incineration units into three main types depending
on their emission strengths and type of waste feed-
stock they handle. The first is the mass burn com-
bustor. It was noted earlier that this is quite a
common technique in handling throughputs due to
ease of operation (in relative terms). Some 55 % of
MSW within Europe and the United States is pro-
cessed in such a manner. Due to the excess air
being fed in the system, gas exhaust volumes are
PLASTICS TO ENERGY
always a cause for worry with these type of units.
The second is RDF combustors. These are a sub-
classification of the pretreatment type of incinera-
tion unit, and RDF is typically co-incinerated with
coal. The last classification is the modular combus-
tor, which is the smallest in size and feed through-
put, with a variation in the amount of air being fed
in for the execution of the combustion reaction.
Incineration generates chemicals that are consid-
ered major criteria GHGs and are climate relevant.
Incineration is associated with the release of CO2,
CO, nitrous oxide (N2O), ammonia (NH3), and
nitrogen oxides (NOx). Dioxins and other chemicals
are also released from this process. Incinerating one
tonne of MSW is associated with the (minimal)
release of 700 kg of CO2 [34]. Table 3.4 shows the
different volumes of exhaust gases released from
incineration units. It can be noted that MSW incin-
eration is considered the lowest in release exhaust
gas volume in comparison to other feedstock mate-
rials. This can be attributed to the commingled
nature of MSW, and can be considered as an added
advantage to MSW incineration.
The incineration unit exhaust gases will contain
various pollutants released into the atmosphere
depending on the zone of combustion with the
design of the unit and the operating temperature.
The higher the temperature, the more pollutants
will be destroyed in the process. The zones within
the incineration unit that will contribute to product
formation are the combustion and post combustion
zones. Both NOx and dioxins are formed in the
combustion zone, but with different temperature
ranges. NOx is formed at temperatures higher than
1450°C, while dioxins are formed within the tem-
perature range of 150 400°C [15]. Dioxins are the
result of PVC waste.
There exists a variety of heavy metals that are
present in incineration units’ feedstock materials
which will be in the incineration bottom ash or
Table 3.4 Incineration Units Exhaust Gas Release
Volume by Feedstock [34]
Estimated Volume
Feed Type (m3/Mg Waste)a
MSW 5500
Hazardous waste 7000
Sewage sludge 8000
a
Dry basis. Mg (Mega gram equivalent to 106 grams).
3: ENERGY PRODUCTION FROM PLASTIC SOLID WASTE (PSW)
released as PM from the exhaust system [35].
Table 3.5 shows major criteria pollutants that are
monitored and regulated in incineration processes.
Control of these emissions is achieved using scrub-
bers among other installations.
3.5 Notes and Case History
Success Stories
The process of energy recovery by incinerating
plastic materials has immense environmental bene-
fits. Not only does it reduce the amount of PSW,
but it also destroys harmful blowing agents, chemi-
cal additives, (mainly chlorofluro carbons present
in PSW shreds), granules, and foams [36]. Fire
retardants present in plastics also increase the com-
plexity of the incineration process. Energy recovery
schemes utilizing WtE technologies can be found at
the heart of many governmental initiatives toward
waste management. The United Kingdom is esti-
mated to provide 17 % of its electricity from waste
by the year 2020 [37]. The United Kingdom’s tar-
get was declared back in 2006 to produce 700
MWe from MSW, which rids the country of 25 %
of its total waste load. Various counties around the
United Kingdom have noticed this implementation
of new WtE plants over the past decade or so.
Hampshire hosts a number of energy recovery
plants from waste, collectively treating about 45 %
of its MSW. Kent also hosts a 500 kilo tonnes per
annum (ktpa) facility for MSW incineration
[37 40].
Within the EU, many states consider WtE tech-
nologies as a main source of power using mass
burning to cover utility demand for communities
around the continent. Denmark, Sweden, and
Germany are prime examples of this strategy. The
Table 3.5 Major Pollutants and PM Regulations [15]
PM
Region (mg/m3)
United Statesb 0.18 115
EU 10
Japan 150
a
Provided in unit of toxic equivalency.
b
Values encompass all nonhazardous incinerator types designated by EPA regulations.
c
Combined with thallium containing compounds.
PCDD/F, polychlorinated dibenzo para dioxins and dibenzofurans.
59
use of incineration in blast furnaces has always
been applied in Germany for the production of iron
for steel manufacturing by reducing iron ore
(Fe2O3) to iron (Fe) using fossil fuels as reducing
agents in the process. Plastics have been applied as
a reducing agent in incineration for production of
steel. Stahlwerke Bremen (Germany) and British
Steel (United Kingdom) are two examples of com-
panies that have tried such strategies in treating
waste whilst reducing costs and environmental bur-
dens with the use of PSW. Capacity of operation
have reached 7000 tpd of iron using this technique,
with the added advantage of using PSW as a feed-
stock with minimal sulfur content and minimal
dioxin emissions as well [41].
Replacing coal with plastics in blast furnace
incineration has become more dominant nowadays
in industries the world over, and has reached Asian
ventures such as the Steel Making Company in
Korea [42 44] as well. Germany is also reported
to have the highest number of incineration units in
Europe, exceeding 53 with a capacity surpassing
10.7 million tpa [45]. The United States hosts over
190 incineration units with a capacity of 110 tpd.
The European Trade Association of Diisocyanates
& Polyols Producers (ISOPA) declared its support
of incineration of MSW with energy recovery
schemes back in 2007, since it utilizes the conti-
nent’s PSW, which on average makes up 7 % of
total SW loads and produces a constant ash content
that can be used in various civil engineering appli-
cations [46]. The BSL incineration process is
another example where chlorine rich plastics (con-
taining PVC) are treated using rotary kiln incinera-
tion with the aim of producing HCl from the
energy of the process itself [41]. The process can-
not accept only PVC waste, as the high CV will
cause temperature control problems. However, 45
Cadmium Mercury PCDD/F
(Cd, mg/m3) (Hg, mg/m3) (Ng/m3)a
0.001 18 0.001 0.55 0.0022 5
c
0.05 0.05 0.1
N/A N/A 0.1 5
60
ktpa is the overall throughput capacity of the pro-
cess with a heat production capacity of 25 MW
with 15 ktonnes of PVC content. Fig. 3.14 depicts
the BSL process, where a combustion chamber is
fitted after the rotary kiln reaches 900 1200°C of
operating temperature. HCl is released and recov-
ered during this stage. The energy (steam), slag,
and HCl are considered to be the products of this
process. The main advantage of this configuration
is that dioxins and furanes are diminished.
The United Kingdom’s Department of
Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs (DEFRA)
has declared that the country host 15 incineration
plants with a capacity that exceeds 3 million tonnes
of MSW [47]. All of the previously stated employ
what is commonly known as co-incineration treat-
ment, where plastics are fed with another type of
SW stream to the incineration unit. Plastic waste is
also mixed, in some cases, with coal, not only
waste. Boavida et al. [48] combusted PSW with
coal using a fluidized bed combustor (CFB). The
objective of the work was to reach a fuel mixture
with as little variation in heat as possible. The vola-
tile release was the main cause of variation when
PSW was added, hence, essential to control in
Waste Air
Pretreatment
(shredding depending Rotary kiln
on waste size)
Water HCl absorption
Flue gas
purification
HCl purification
Figure 3.14 BSL incineration process of plastics.
PLASTICS TO ENERGY
terms of shape and type of polymer. In addition,
CFB combustors are increasing in popularity due
to: (1) Their less complex emissions control system
of the configuration. (2) Their high combustion
efficiency with a simple operation and fast
response. (3) Reduction in boiler size. (4) Low cor-
rosion with easier ash removal. One of the most
common technologies around Europe is the Ebara
Co. CFB, with more than 100 units installed around
the world. The Spanish capital of Madrid has a
commissioned unit that handles 10% of the city’s
waste with a throughput of 9 % of PSW. The main
advantage of this technology is that it has no mov-
ing parts, and it is equipped with a slanted bed floor
to produce a revolving sand motion [37].
Cement kilns have been commonly used as well
in PSW incineration. For the past three decades,
cement kilns have been using PSW as an alternative
feedstock (Fig. 3.15). The design of the unit suits
PSW very well [41] due to the fact that kilns are
able to reach desired temperatures with ease, have a
substantial length size, a long residence time of the
fuel in the kiln, and alkalinity of the kiln’s environ-
ment. Gas temperatures within the kiln can reach up
to 2000°C in the combustion zone, and the gas
Slag
Post combustion
Gas cooling Water
Steam
3: ENERGY PRODUCTION FROM PLASTIC SOLID WASTE (PSW)
Figure 3.15 Schematic flow diagram of a typical cement kiln [2].
residence time is about three seconds, with tempera-
tures around 1200°C. The nature of the kiln allows
the solid feedstock to flow in the opposite direction
along its kiln (200 m), resulting in a long residence
time of the gases of 4 6 s at 1800°C, and 15 20 s
at 1200°C [49]. There exists some 250 units in
cement plants around Europe with a production rate
of 170 million tonnes of cement per annum [17].
Poland is a prime example of this cement industry,
with about 11 mtpa cement production [41].
According to past surveys, the following countries
have a high percentage of alternative fuel use in the
percentile values given: Holland (72 %), Switzerland
(34%), and Belgium (30 %). There exists two pro-
cess that are dominant in this application, a dry and
a wet process. The former relies on the introduction
of the material in a dry form in the kiln, while the
latter introduces it as a slurry. A disadvantage of the
wet process is that it needs more energy requirement
(5000 MJ/tonne for the wet process in comparison to
3600 MJ/tonne for the dry process), since no water
has to be evaporated in the dry process.
The emerging Chinese market has a very unique
and rapid development rate in comparison to other
countries. The energy consumption in China is
unfavorable due to the energy endowment. Keeping
61
in mind that China alone produces 29% of the
world’s MSW [50], landfilling using sanitary land-
fill sites is the predominant method of waste treat-
ment [51]. However, incineration and composting
are the other two alternative technologies used for
waste management in the country. Moving grate
furnaces, rotary kilns, and fluidized beds are the
common technologies used. In the year 2014, 188
incineration units were in operation in China treat-
ing over 32 % of the total MSW [52].
There seems to be a great investment in the
alteration of technologies and management of waste
plans around the world toward energy production.
Incineration has not only proven itself as an eco-
nomical investment, but also as a very good method
for energy production around the world. This is evi-
dent from the examples illustrated from around the
world. However, the production of energy can also
benefit from the production of various fuel sources
which chemical and fuel production technologies
from plastics can deliver. These methods, which
were touched upon in Chapter 2, Major
Technologies Implemented for Chemicals and Fuel
Recovery, will be illustrated later on in this book to
give the reader the full view of the treatment meth-
ods available that can be used to valorize PSW.
62 PLASTICS TO ENERGY

List of Abbreviations [5] CW, 2013. Construction Weekly Online,

Dubai launches landfill gas recovery project.
C1 methane gas Available from: http://www.constructionwee-
CFB fluidized bed combustor konline.com/article-20404-dubai-launches-first-
CHP combined heat and power landfill-gas-recovery-project/
CO carbon monoxide [6] D.A. Vallero, Fundamentals of air pollution,
CO2 carbon dioxide U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/
CV calorific value Elsevier Academic Press, MA, US, 2008.
EU European Union [7] T.M. Letcher, D.A. Valero, Waste: A
GHGs greenhouse gases Handbook for Management, Academic Press
HC hydrocarbon Elsevier, US, 2010.
HP high pressure [8] McLanaghan, S.R.B., 2002. Delivering the
ICGS integrated gasification combined landfill directive: the role of new and emerg-
systems ing technologies.
ISWM integrated solid waste management [9] M. van Blijderveen, Ignition and Combustion
ktpa kilo tonnes per annum Phenomena on a Moving Grate With
LFG landfill gas generation Application to the Thermal Conversion of
LP low pressure Biomass and Municipal Solid Waste, PhD the-
MSW municipal solid waste sis, University of Twente, Enschede, The
N2 nitrogen Netherlands, 2011. December 2011.
N2 O nitrous oxide [10] Lee, J., Fournier, D., Jr., King, C., Venkatesh,
NH3 ammonia S., Goldman, C., 1997. Evaluation of rotary
NOx nitrogen oxides kiln incinerator operation at low to-moderate
O2/RFG oxygen/recycled flue gas temperature conditions EPA/600/SR-96/105
O2 oxygen March.
P phosphorus [11] Database of Waste Management Technologies,
PCDD/ polychlorinated dibenzo para dioxins 2017. Waste to Energy 1-2: grate incineration
F and dibenzofurans technology. Available from: http://www.epem.
PE polyethylene gr/waste-c-control/database/html/WtE-01.htm
PSW plastic solid waste [12] Lew, R., 2016. Moving grate incineration:
PVC polyvinyl chloride preferred WTE technology. Available from:
RDF refuse derived fuel http://www.bioenergyconsult.com/moving-grate-
SO2 sulfur dioxide incineration/
SW solid waste [13] USEPA, 1996. Sewage sludge incineration—
TCT thermo-chemical treatment US EPA, AP-42, Vol. I. Available from:
UAE United Arab Emirates https://www3.epa.gov/ttnchie1/ap42/ch02/final/
WtE waste to energy c02s02.pdf
[14] European Union for Responsible Incineration
References and Treatment of Special Waste (EURITS),
2017. Available from: http://www.eurits.org/
[1] World Bank, 1999. Technical Guidance [15] A.L. Holder, E.P. Vejerano, X. Zhou, L.C.
Report, municipal solid waste incineration. Marr, Nanomaterial disposal by incineration,
[2] F.R. McDougall, P.R. White, M. Franke, P. Environ. Sci. Process. Impacts 15 (2013)
Hindle, Integrated Solid Waste Management: 1652 1664.
A Life Cycle Inventory, second ed., Blackwell [16] R.W.J. Westerhout, J.A.M. Kuipers, W.P.M.
Publishing, Cornwall, UK, 2008. ISBN 0-632- van Swaaij, Experimental determination of the
05889-7. yield of pyrolysis products of polyethylene
[3] KN, 2016. Kuwait News Bulletin. Available and polypropylene. Influence of reaction con-
from: http://www.kuwaitnews.com/kuwait/ ditions, Indus. Eng. Chem. Res. 37 (3) (1998)
baladi/121389-2016-12-03-09-28-14 841 847.
[4] SP, 2013. South pole news. Mamak landfill [17] Janz, J., Weiss, W., 1996. Injection of waste
gas recovery. plastics into the blast furnace of steelwork, in:
3: ENERGY PRODUCTION FROM PLASTIC SOLID WASTE (PSW)
Proceedings of the 3rd International Iron
Making Congress, Gent, Belgium, September
16 18, pp. 114 119.
[18] Ariyama, T., 1996. Development of a new
scrap melting process based on massive coal
and plastics injection, in: Proceedings of the
3rd International Iron Making Congress, Gent,
Belgium, September 16 18, pp. 314 321.
[19] J. March, Advanced Organic Chemistry:
Reactions, Mechanisms, and Structure, 4th
ed., John Wiley & Sons, US, 1992.
[20] E. Kowalska, Z. Wielgosz, J. Pelka, Use of
post life waste and production waste in ther-
moplastic polymer compositions, Polym.
Polym. Composites 10 (1) (2002) 83 91.
[21] N. Kimura, K. Omata, T. Kiga, S. Takano, S.
Shikisima, The characteristics of pulverized
coal combustion in O2/CO2 mixtures for CO2
recovery, Energy Conserv. Manage. 36 (1995)
805 808.
[22] J. Chen, J. Huang, Theoretical and experimen-
tal study on the emission characteristics of
waste plastics incineration by modified O2/
RFG combustion technology, Fuel 86 (2007)
2824 2832.
[23] Y. Tang, X. Ma, Z. Lai, Y. Fan,
Thermogravimetric analyses of co-
combustion of plastic, rubber, leather in N2/
O2 and CO2/O2 atmospheres, Energy 90
(2015) 1066 1074.
[24] M. Smol, J. Kulczycka, Z. Kowalski, Sewage
sludge ash (SSA) from large and small incin-
eration plants as a potential source of phos-
phorus e Polish case study, J. Environ.
Manage. 184 (2016) 617 628.
[25] Y. Kalmykova, K.K. Fedje, Phosphorus
recovery from municipal solid waste incinera-
tion fly ash, Waste Manage. 33 (2013)
1403 1410.
[26] Magee, R.S., 1989. Plastics in municipal solid
waste incineration: a literature study, prepared
by the Hazardous Substances Management
Research Centre of the New Jersey Institute of
Technology for the Society of the Plastics
Industry. Washington (DC). ASIN:
B00071NT32, Society of the Plastics Industry.
[27] E.A. Boettner, G.L. Ball, B. Weiss,
Combustion Products From the Incineration of
Plastics, National Technical Information
Centre, Springfield, VA, 1973. USEPA# 670/
2-73-049.
63
[28] K. Wark, C.F. Warner, W.T. Davis, Air
Pollution: Its Origin and Control, 3rd ed.,
Addison-Wesley, US, 1998.
[29] Dynamac, A., 1989. An overview of synthetic
materials producing toxic fumes during fires,
EPA contract 68-01-6239, Rockville (MD).
[30] J.W. Bujak, Thermal utilization (treatment) of
plastic waste, Energy 90 (2015) 1468 1477.
[31] H. Frey, B. Peters, H. Hunsinger, J. Vehlow,
Characterization of municipal solid waste
combustion in a grate furnace, Waste Manage.
23 (2003) 689 701.
[32] J.A. Conesa, R. Font, A. FuIlana, J.A.
Caballero, Kinetic model for the combustion
of tyre wastes, Fuel 77 (13) (1998)
1469 1475.
[33] USEPA, 1991. Plastics wastes: management,
control, recycling and disposal. United States
Environmental Protection Agency, pollution
technology review no. 201 (1991), prepared
by: Randall Curlee T, Das S, ISBN# 0-8155-
1265-1.
[34] Johnke, B., 2000. Emission from waste inciner-
ation, good practice guidance and uncertainty
management in national greenhouse gas inven-
tories, reviewed by: Hoppaus, R., Lee, E.,
Irving, B., Martinsen, T., and Mareckova, K.
[35] S. Abanades, G. Flamant, B. Gagnepain, D.
Gauthier, Fate of heavy metals during munici-
pal solid waste incineration, Waste Manage.
Res. 20 (2002) 55 68.
[36] APC, 1999. American Plastics Council,
Development of hydrocyclones for use in
plastic recycling, Technical paper.
[37] L. Yassin, P. Lettieri, S.J.R. Simons, A.
Germana, Study of the process design and
flue gas treatment of an industrial-scale
energy-from-waste combustion plant, Industr.
Eng. Chem. Res. 46 (2007) 2648 2656.
[38] Ares, E., Bolton, P., 2002. Waste incineration.
Research paper 02/34, House of Commons
Library, London.
[39] L. Yassin, P. Lettieri, S.J.R. Simons, A.
Germana, Energy recovery from thermal pro-
cessing of waste: a review, Eng. Sustainab.
(Proc ICE) 158 (2005) 97 103.
[40] Quant, A., 2005. Annual monitoring report
2004/05; Hampshire Minerals and Waste
Development Framework, Winchester, UK.
[41] A. Tukker, H. de Groot, L. Simons, S.
Wiegersma, Chemical Recycling of Plastic
64
Waste: PVC and Other Resins, European
Commission, Delft, the Netherlands, 1999.
DG III, Final Report, STB-99-55 Final.
[42] PISMC, Pohang Iron and Steel Making
Company, Technology of blast furnace with
waste plastics in Europe, POSCO Internal
Report (1996) 1 9.
[43] PISMC, Pohang Iron and Steel Making
Company, Technology of blast furnace with
waste plastics in Europe, POSCO Internal
Report (1996) 11 27.
[44] M. Asanuma, T. Ariyama, M. Sato, R. Murai,
T. Sumigama, Combustion and gasification
reaction behaviour of plastics in blast furnace,
J. Iron Steel Inst. Japan 83 (1997) 545 550.
[45] Pollution Issue, 2007. Incineration. Available
from: pollutionissues.com
[46] API, 2007. Alliance for the Polyurethanes
Industry. Available from: http://www.polyure-
thane.org/recycling
[47] DEFRA, 2006. Municipal Waste Management
Statistics 2004/05, March.
PLASTICS TO ENERGY
[48] D. Boavida, P. Abelha, I. Gulyurtlu, I.
Cabrita, Co-combustion of coal and non-
recyclable paper and plastic waste in a flui-
dised bed reactor, Fuel 82 (15 17) (2003)
1931 1938.
[49] N. Horvat, F.T.T. Ng, Tertiary polymer recy-
cling: study of polyethylene thermolysis as a
first step to synthetic diesel fuel, Fuel 78 (4)
(1999) 459 470.
[50] S. Dong, T.W. Kurt, Y. Wu, Municipal solid
waste management in China: using commer-
cial management to solve a growing problem,
Utilities Policy 10 (2001) 7 11.
[51] Y. Zhang, N. Deng, J. Ling, C. Xu, A new pyrol-
ysis technology and equipment for treatment of
municipal household garbage and hospital waste,
Renew. Energy 28 (2003) 2383 2393.
[52] X. Li, C. Zhang, Y. Li, Q. Zhi, The status of
municipal solid waste incineration (MSWI) in
China and its clean development, Energy
Procedia 104 (2016) 498 503.