Incineration

Incineration of the “household refuse” urban and residues

This technique developed in the urban centres starting from the Années 1960, in the absence of policy of Tri of waste, Compostage and Recyclage of materials, and because of a new offer of material of incineration able to treat significant amounts of waste, and increasing difficulty to find sites of Décharge,

Ecological impacts

The incineration does not make disappear waste. It transforms them into Fumée S, and gas (and Steam primarily; Gas with greenhouse effect), but also out of metal vapors (for lead and mercury), and in solid residues (Blast-furnace slag S, REFIOM) put in discharge (or sometimes used as construction materials or of earthwork) and in ashes often significantly polluted, under product then recycled without one being posed much question about their character Polluant. After one showed in the years a 1970-1990 broad contamination of the environment by the Heavy metals and the Dioxine S emitted by the first generations of Incinérateur S, the Réglementation, at least in the rich countries, their imposed standard increasingly constraining S and controls. Nevertheless incinerated tonnages increasing, the total emissions of CO2 increase, and the immissions of pollutants in the air remain considerable, in particular under the wind of the installations.

Each new project of installation must now comprise an impact study of the project on the environment before being authorized to exploit. Moreover, many units under operation post on Internet their results of measurement of pollutants. One little by little became aware of the toxicity of smoke of the Incinérateur S containing of the Dioxine S and the Furane S and prohibited for example the mixture of ashes with the solid residues after combustion (Mâchefer S) whose re-use in a growing number of country from now on is subjected to more or less constraining and observed conditions.

Acceptability

The construction of incinerators, just like the establishment of discharges or even sometimes of a Déchetterie, are the subject almost always of polemical sharp. It is more and more badly accepted, not only by the residents, but by the agricultural world and certain agroalimentary companies (the Bonduelle canning facility for example in the North of France, which protests against the installation of a large incinerator ( “Flamoval” ) " with the vent" from its principal production zones vegetable). The incineration makes it possible to limit the recourse to the discharge, but fault of reduction of waste to the source, incinerated tonnage does not cease increasing, thus that the volume of residues, all the more toxic as the effectiveness of filtration was improved.
Dans the years 1980 and 1990, the public authorities, in the rich countries often put the incineration on the same plan as the discharge, letting the local authorities be determined for one or the other of these solutions, while encouraging more and more the recycling of waste to decrease incinerated tonnages, in limiting the water content of it (food waste, not emptied bottles.). Certain communities avoid any incineration, but at the price of the recourse to the hiding (or storage) of part of waste, even after a thorough sorting. The development of écoproduits could in the future allow a rate much higher of recycling or re-use. In particular to respect the protocol of Kyoto, the authorities tend to encourage tri-recycling, but also sometimes to reinforce the dies of energy valorization; methanisation (still very marginal in France) and/or incineration, methanisation also allowing the valorization of the organic matter, like composting, but requiring waste free from contaminants not Biodegradable S or Biocide S. the valorization-matter makes it possible to strongly limit the quantities of waste to be put in discharge or to incinerate.
L' incineration remains promoted in the event of medical crisis (cf elimination of waste at the risk, contaminated ( mad cows , Avian flu…) or for the treatment of certain hospital waste, with the adequate precautions. This method is not appropriate for the crises of the type Tchernonbyl .

The Crémation of the corpses enjoys a strong acceptability in the public, but also seems to be able to pose environmental problems that its promoters had not taken into account. It moreover is less normalized and less controlled.

Regulation

It varies according to the times and the countries, with sometimes of the exemptions (for the hospitals, of small industrialists or craftsmen, the soldiers, etc) but the stack disposals of the incinerators are overall more and more regulated and supervised, in particular for the dioxin emissions, of Poussière S, heavy metals and of acid gases. The question of the impacts of the Nanoparticule S is an emerging question which is not the subject yet of legislation for the incineration.

The promoters of a new generation of incinerators developing the energy produced by the combustion of waste (Co or Trigénération) assert that by producing heat and/or electricity, and by developing the recovery of ferrous and sometimes non-ferrous metals best, they contribute to limit the gas emissions to greenhouse effect of the sector waste.
Leurs detractors estimate that a policy of reduction of waste to the source, écoconception of the products and generalization of the Méthanisation of waste organics, would be from this point of view more efficient. Some also note that a policy of reduction of volume and mass of packing and suremballages and treatments more local (individual composting, recycleries, ressourceries, punt form-wood, platform of methanisation, etc) would decrease transport of waste, also polluting. This last strategy is increasingly constant in the countries in advance from the point of view of the environment (Germany, Sweden, Denmark.), and in France by Ademe.

Costs

The costs of the incineration can appreciably vary project with another, according to the economic assumptions (financial montage of the community to refund the investment), choice and performance of the mode of energy valorization (the sale of energy brings significant receipts, up to 15-20 euros the ton of treated waste), existence or not of a valorization of the blast-furnace slags (the setting in discharge of the blast-furnace slags costs often more expensive than their valorization in road engineering) and the technical choices. The costs of treatment per incineration are overall comparable, even slightly higher, with those of the setting in discharge. There exist very strong local disparities, as well for the installations of storage (the prices can vary between 30 and 120 €/t) as for the incinerators (between 50 and 120€/t). The structure of the cost of treatment (damping of the investment, running cost, receipts energy) is also different, the incinerator for example requiring for the building owner an important initial investment whom can represent according to the cases half of the cost of treatment. The choice of the way of financing of the investment (equity, loan,…) and the amount of the subsidies has finally an direct impact on the cost of treatment.

See too

External bonds

heat treatment according to Ademe
Fight against the incineration by Greenpeace France.
Ministry for ecology and sustainable development, " section incineration of the déchets"
- the incineration.org site, to reach complete information on the incineration of household waste
the site of the National center of Independent Information on Waste - CNIID - to see the countryside waste disposal (incineration and hiding)]
France of the Incineration - a site managed jointly by the CNIID and Greenpeace

Random links: