Comments on: Veolia to pilot carbon capture for its ‘energy from waste’ sites

By: Andrew David Smith-Lawrence

Andrew David Smith-Lawrence — Thu, 29 Aug 2024 07:07:12 +0000

The utilization of Amine based solvents for carbon capture, often results in the degradation to produce Nitrosamines. Which form part of the flue gas emissions to atmosphere.

This creates an increased risk, re carcinogens and mutagenic aspects. This should trigger an emission dispersion review at the permit application stage, via the regulator.

By: James

James — Fri, 03 May 2024 08:52:09 +0000

As with Power CCS, roughly 30% of the energy which an energy from waste facility produces would be used in the process of capturing its post-combustion CO2. The percentage would depend partly on the (variable) quality of the waste. Government plans for Net Zero (now very out-of-date) assume at least 90% of that CO2 would be permanently removed. Planning applications which propose to capture at such rates may be disingenuous (and subsequent contracts may therefore be judged void). Evidence from the very few facilities operating commercially worldwide indicates that those percentages are implausibly optimistic.
Any subsidy would presumably depend on how much CO2 is actually geologically stored. The amount stored would depend on contract arrangements with the storage site owner – which cannot guarantee permanence (availability may also be a concern) and might find it commercially more expedient to rent space to others (including from outside the UK) for a higher price.
Far less waste is likely to be produced in the near future as economies and aspirations contract – especially given the steep increase in prices required to reflect the climate, biodiversity and plastic / waste emergencies (and the related imperative of fair allocation). That rise in prices would increase the viability of recycling, further undermining justification for energy from waste facilities.

By: David Dundas

David Dundas — Fri, 16 Feb 2024 10:01:07 +0000

The present Veolia waste incinerators burn general waste which contains a high proportion of fossil organic waste such as plastics, including some PVC which when burnt produces measurable amounts of toxic chlorinated dioxines and furans. The incinerator exhaust therefore contains a significant amount of fossil carbon dioxide (CO2) a greenhouse gas, so capturing it to use it to create hydrocarbons does not make it fossil carbon free and the products should not be labelled with “e” before their name.
Veolia would be better processing the waste in anaerobic digesters that do not “burn” any plastics in the feedstock so they can be separated out for landfill or reprocessing, and the resulting biomethane which does not contain fossil carbon, reused, for example split into “green” hydrogen and green CO2 that does not add to atmospheric CO2.