Data Summary of Municipal Solid Waste Management Alternatives. Volume 1: Report Text Page: 97 of 216
This report is part of the collection entitled: Office of Scientific & Technical Information Technical Reports and was provided to Digital Library by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
This subsection presents the results of a life-cycle analysis of emissions. The bases are the
same as those used for calculating the energy balance.
Air emissions from selected new mass burn facilities are summarized in Table 5.2. Air
emissions from all the steps of an integrated strategy using mass burn are shown in the sub-
section on integrated strategies.
The largest potential source of water pollution from mass burning is the leachate from the
landfilled ash and scrubber solids. These emissions are quantified in the section on landfills. No
data on water emissions from the front-end or boiler operations of the mass burn plant were
found. Those emissions are sometimes fed into the boiler for combustion or discharged to a
treatment plant. For example, SEMASS, a shred-and-burn RDF plant, is a zero-discharge plant
because it consumes all the process waste water and sewers only waste water from the bathrooms
and showers (see Appendix B).
The residue from mass burning includes:
" A small quantity of oversize objects such as white goods and furniture (ac-
counting for perhaps 4% of the MSW by weight)*
" Scrubber waste.
About 24% of the weight of MSW that is mass burned becomes ash for disposal. However, that
ash and the scrubber residue combined occupy about 10% of the space that would be needed to
dispose of the raw MSW compacted and covered in a landfill (FR, 1991 a). When mass burning
is used in conjunction with source separation or mixed waste processing, the ash volume is
smaller because some of the noncombustible glass and metals are removed. The landspace
requirements for landfilling ash are covered in Section 6.
Integrated Strategy Example: Mass Burning of MSW with Electricity Generation and Ash
Disposal in a Monofll
To illustrate the application of the data on technologies to the evaluation of options for an
integrated MSW management strategy, this section compares the energy balance and air and
water emissions for two strategies:
- Collection and transportation of mixed MSW in a packer truck, plus mass
burning of the MSW with recycling of some ferrous metal, plus landfilling the
ash in a monofill (Strategy 2 in Table 1.1)
* Approximately one-half of these products are recyclable as scrap metal (wTe, 1992).
Here’s what’s next.
This report can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Report.
SRI International. Data Summary of Municipal Solid Waste Management Alternatives. Volume 1: Report Text, report, October 1992; Golden, Colorado. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc1310776/m1/97/: accessed May 24, 2019), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.