Indirect Gasification of Municipal
Solid Waste
Team Bravo
Eleftherios Avtzis
David Garcia
Bryan Isles
Zack Labaschin
Alena Nguyen
Mentor
Dan Rusinak
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Overview
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Design Basis
Economics
Block Flow Diagram
Sample Calculations
Conceptual Control Scheme
Plant Plot
Recommendations
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Design Basis
• Project Design Goals
• Indirect Gasification of Refuse-Derived Fuel
using TBE Process
• Providing High Quality Synthesis Gas to Team
Alpha’s Specifications
• Location: Newton County Landfill in Brooke, IN
• Environmentally Friendly Process
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Design Basis
•Commercial Scale Production
•13,000 tons per day MSW
• 6,000+ tons per day Syngas
•Ideal Max. Output 7,100 tons per day
•Scale-up Available
Engineering Specifications
Team Bravo Syngas
Syngas
(tons/day)
Max. tons/day from
11,025 tons/day RDF
7,105
Team Alpha Syngas
Specification
Pressure
725 psi
Temperature
518°F
Min. tons/day
6,000
H2/CO Ratio
2
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Economics
This table displays the
selective economics for year
zero, one, five, eight, fifteen,
and twenty. The project life is
projected for twenty years.
The net present value and
internal rate of return are also
displayed. IRR = 32.23%
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Economics
This table displays the cost for
selected processes and units
required for Team Bravo’s
indirect gasification of
municipal solid waste. The
capital cost as well as the
operations, utilities, salaries,
and annual cost in total are
also listed.
332 Days in Op.
Process Stage
Acid Cleanup
ZnO and Pot Still
SMR and WGS
Comp., HX and Misc.
TBE Process
RDF Processing
Single Cost
TIC
$25,730,610
$9,326,704
$101,575,592
$100,965,603
$300,000,000
$112,665,824
CO2 Removal
Olivine
Disposal
Raw Materials
$25,730,610
N/A
N/A
N/A
Capital Cost
Total Op.
Total Utilities
Salaries
Total Annual Costs
$675,994,943
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Annual Costs
Utilities
Op. Costs
$726,218
$3,230,000
$32,438
$927,545
$36,406
$870,919
$88,400,000 $101,000,000
In Above
In Above
In Above
In Above
$726,218
N/A
N/A
N/A
3230000
$1,412,137
$3,205,769
$1,912,137
N/A
$113,876,370.18
$89,921,280.80
$3,960,000
$207,757,650.98
Block Flow Diagram
Streams Reflect PFD
Return to
landfill
5, 11,14
1
MSW
MSW
Processing
Ash to
landfill
RDF
Sulfur
Halogens
Hazardous
materials
27,36
Gasifier
19
Raw SynGas
28
10
Cooling &
Cleaning 42
51
Steam
Electrical
grid
Electricity
71, A3, A4
Steam
Generation
68,70
57
52
CO2
Team Alpha
Gasoline
Production
SynGas at spec.
64
CO2
Removal
65
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Methane
Reforming
53
Clean
SynGas
Water
Gas Shift
A2
Block Flow Diagram
Streams Reflect PFD
27, 36
Ash to
landfill
1
MSW
964,512 Ib/Hr
MSW
Processing
RDF
19
918,583 Ib/Hr
72 lb/Hr Olivine
21,954 Ib/Hr Ash
TBE
Gasification
20
5,11,14
Steam
Return to
landfill
365,600 Ib/Hr
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Raw SynGas
28
8,301 Ib/Hr NH3
740,221 Ib/Hr CO2
259,924 Ib/Hr CO
7,395 Ib/Hr C2H6
39,095 Ib/Hr C2H4
55,206 Ib/Hr H2
1,616 Ib/Hr HCl
3,020 Ib/Hr H2S
55,448 Ib/Hr CH4
71,381 Ib/Hr H2O
Block Flow Diagram
Streams Reflect PFD
Raw SynGas
28
71,381 lb/Hr H2O
740,221 lb/Hr CO2
259,924 lb/Hr CO
55,448 lb/Hr CH4
55,206 lb/Hr H2
39,095 lb/Hr C2H4
7,395 lb/Hr C2H6
3,020 lb/Hr H2S
1,616 lb/Hr HCl
8,301 lb/Hr NH3
Cooling &
Cleaning
51
2,071,381 Ib/Hr H2O
264,933 Ib/Hr CO2
2,866 Ib/Hr H2S
71,000 Ib/Hr MDEA
475,288 lb/Hr CO2
252,477 lb/Hr CO
51,619 lb/Hr CH4
55,098 lb/Hr H2
25,815 lb/Hr C2H4
3,330 lb/Hr C2H6
Che 397 - Team Bravo
42
Block Flow Diagram
Streams Reflect PFD
Clean SynGas
475,288
252,477
51,619
55,098
25,815
3,330
Ib/Hr CO2
Ib/Hr CO
Ib/Hr CH4
Ib/Hr H2
Ib/Hr C2H4
Ib/Hr C2H6
51
Methane
Reforming
A2
52
x3
44,970
673,870
62,887
181,112
Ib/Hr CO2
Ib/Hr CO
Ib/Hr H2
Ib/Hr H2O
99,212 Ib/Hr H2O
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Water Gas
Shift
53
x3
289,758
518,095
74,014
80,972
Ib/Hr CO2
Ib/Hr CO
Ib/Hr H2
Ib/Hr H2O
Block Flow Diagram
Streams Reflect PFD
57
54
289,758
518,095
74,014
80,972
Ib/Hr CO2
Ib/Hr CO
Ib/Hr H2
Ib/Hr H2O
289,758 Ib/Hr CO2
2,000,000 Ib/Hr H2O
CO2
Removal
64
437,500
62,500
65
80,595
11,514
Ib/Hr CO
Ib/Hr H2
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Ib/Hr CO
Ib/Hr H2
Team Alpha
Gasoline
Production
Sample Calculation
Gasification
Sizing
Calculation
CO
CO2
CH4
H2
C2H4
C2H5
H20
Σ
Kmol/Day
127,404
87,616.9
60,950.9
245,726
16,507.5
0
113,551
651,756.3
Sizing of Gasification Unit Inputs
MW (Kg/Kmol)
WT Frac
MW x WT Frac (Kg/Kmol)
28
0.195477972
5.473383226
44
0.134431996
5.915007803
16
0.09351793
1.496286879
2
0.377021288
0.754042577
28
0.025327718
0.709176114
17
0
0
18
0.174223095
3.136015716
153
1
17.48391232
Table 5-1: Calculation of synthesis gas molecular weight for ideal gas density equation.
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Sample Calculation
PV = NRT
Gasification Sizing
Calculation
P=
n
RT
V
P !MW = ! RT
! syn = P
MWsyn
RT
g
g
mol
! syn =
=
374.4
3
m3
² 5 Bar!m
8.314 !10
1123K
mol!K
2Bar !17.48
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Sample Calculation
Gasification Sizing
Calculation
kmol
kg
kg
w = 651, 756.3
!17.48
= 11, 392, 700.124
day
kmol
day
m3
day
hour
m3
q = 30, 429, 220.42
!
!
= 352.2
day 24!hour 3600sec
sec
Assume superficial gas velocity of 7.5 m/s
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Sample Calculation
Gasification Sizing
Calculation
m3
352.2
q
sec = 46.96m 2
A= =
m
v
7.5
sec
d=
4A
!
=
Che 397 - Team Bravo
4 !46.96m 2
!
= 7.73m
Sample Calculation
Absorber
If !t = 0.6m
H » 1.1(0.6m)(35stages) = 23.1m = 75.79 ft
lb
hr = 63.23 lb = 1012.85 kg
rL =
3
ft 3
m3
4 ft
7.32 ×10
hr
lb
8.65×10 5
hr = 4.23×10 -2 lb = 0.678 kg
rV =
3
ft 3
m3
7 ft
2.04 ×10
0.5
é
hr
kg ù
ê (1012.85 - 0.678) m3 ú
2
m
ûv = -0.171( 0.6m) + 0.27× ( 0.6m) - 0.047 ê
= 2.06
ú
kg
s
ê
ú
0.678 3
ë
û
m
6.63×10 6
(
)
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Sample Calculation
Absorber
æ
lb öæ
kg öæ hr ö
4 ç8.65×10 5 ÷ç 0.4536 ÷ç
÷
è
ø
è
ø
è
hr
lb 3600s ø
Dc =
æ
kg öæ
mö
p ç 0.678 3 ÷ç 2.06 ÷
è
m øè
sø
Dc = 9.95m = 32.7 ft
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Conceptual Control Scheme
The TBE Process
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Conceptual Control Scheme
Acid Cleanup
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Newton County
Prevailing Wind
This figure represents
the one square mile area
that Newton County
Landfill owns and
occupies. The current
active landfill covers a
quarter mile space,
allowing for Team Bravo
to build their process on
available Newton County
land.
Team Bravo
Current MSW Active Site
711 ft
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Plot Area
County Rd 400 S
Office
Prevailing Wind
CO2
Claus
Tank and Storage
To Alpha
Utility
RDF
Processing
Active Landfill
TBE
Process
Power Generation
Flare
Che 397 - Team Bravo
328 ft
S 300 E
Syngas Treatment
This figure
shows the basic
plot area of
Team Bravo’s
process and
supporting
facilities. Blocks
were chosen in
order to best
take advantage
each process
Plant Plot
This figure represents
the plant plot area of
both the TBE process
and most of the
syngas treatment
facilities. Placement
was based on need of
access. The
compressors are
situated next to a plant
maintenance road.
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Recommendations
Move forward with the Indirect Gasification of
Municipal Solid Waste Design Project
•Environmental Benefits
•Lower Landfill Methane Emissions, CO2 Treatment and Little Thermal Pollution
•Excellent Location
•Newton County Landfill Provides Plenty of Feedstock and Space
•High Economic Sensitivity
•Increase Annual Expenses and Capital Investment $100MM  IRR = 19.02%
•Increase Capital Investment More by $100MM  IRR = 16.15%
Che 397 - Team Bravo
References
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) to Liquid Fuels Synthesis, Volume 1: Availability of
Feedstock and Technology (PNNL-18144)
Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) to Liquid Fuels Synthesis, Volume 2: A Technoeconomic Evaluation of the Production of Mixed Alcohols (PNNL-18482)
www.taylorbiomassenergy.com - TBE
www.rentechinc.com – Rentech
Engineering Toolbox
Heats of formation: http://cccbdb.nist.gov/hf0k.asp
Municipal Solid waste Generation, Recycling, and Disposal in the United States:
Facts and Figures for 2008 – EPA
Higman, Christopher and van derBurgt, Maarten. Gasification 2nd Edition. Gulf
Professional Publishing. Oxford, 2008.
Paisley, Mark A., Corley, Ralph N. and Dayton, David C. Advanced Biomass
Gasification for the Economical Production of Biopower, Fuels, and Hydrogen.
Taylor Biomass Energy
Aspen Acid Removal
Furnace-Boiler Schematic
Ash Material Balance
wood
wood
wood
leather
(treated) (untreated) (demo)
PET
organic
0.0286
0.8678
0.6878
0.00552
0.3859
0.4137
1.000
ash
3.1614
(tons/day)
95.66
75.82
0.6090
42.54
45.61
263.41
wt %
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Totals
Composition of Syngas
Compound
H2
CO
CH4
C2H4
CO2
C2H6
N2
Percent
45 – 48%
15 – 20%
10 – 13%
1 – 3%
18 –20%
0 – 1%
Trace
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Dioxins
• At 800-900°C, dioxins thermally
decomposes
• SynGas temp. through gas conditioning unit
is raised to 1000°C
• No copper: which promotes dioxin
formation
• Dioxins tend to adsorb on char and
breakdown in the combustion reactor
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Carbon Footprint
Carbon IN
(kmole/day)
Carbon OUT
(kmole/day)
Ratio of OUT/IN
393,142.7
238,659.6
0.607
Environmentally friendly process by removing carbon waste from the
environment.
Total Carbon Dioxide OUT
6,801 tons/day
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Design Basis
• River Bend Prairie Landfill
– 88 Acres
– 20 Acres of expansion
– Access to MSW of
Chicago
– Rail and River access
– Residential
– Limited Expansion
Design Basis
• Newton County Landfill
– 265 Acres
– Room for expansion
– Access to MSW of South
Chicago
– Transportation
– No river access
Design Basis
• Environmental Review
 Positives
• Removal of MSW from local landfill (75% of 12000 tonnes
per day estimated value enter gasification processing)
• Gasification by-products are captured and properly stored
(no venting into atmospheres)
– Negatives
• 400 million lbs of hazardous waste per year (mostly ash)
• 100,000 lbs will need relocation (cannot be further utilized)
Design Basis
Industrial Standard Review
• Clean Syngas produced in 2.4-3.0 ratio H2/CO for use by
chemical production
Clear Statement of Feedstock
• MSW from landfills
• Return to landfill includes: glass, appliances, paints or
oils
• Metal will be recycled
Methane Emissions in U.S.
Top 5 Sources
Source Category
2008 (Tg of CO2Equi.)
%Total
Enteric Fermentation
140.8
24.81
Landfills
126.3
22.26
Natural Gas Systems
96.4
16.99
Coal Mining
67.6
11.91
Manure Management
45.0
7.93
Total for US
567.4
100.00
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Municipal Solid Waste
• EPA 2008 report on MSW generation
– Approximately 250 million tons of MSW
generated by Americans in 2008
• ~33.2% is recycled and composited (83 million tons)
– Approximately 4.5 pounds of MSW
generated per person per day
• 1.5 pounds of the 4.5 is recycled and composited.
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Municipal Solid Waste
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Why MSW?
•
•
•
•
•
Renewable Energy Source
Helps the Environment (CH4 emissions)
Cost effective
Transportation Reduction
Located near cities and existing
infrastructure
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Disadvantages of MSW
• Preparation of feedstock
• A lower heating value than conventional
feedstocks
• Higher Ash content than conventional
feedstocks
Che 397 - Team Bravo
MSW to RDF
• MSW – municipal solid waste in
• Sorting – removal of recycle metals and
other rejects
• Screening procedures
• Shredding and drying
• RDF – Refuse Derived Fuel out
Current Processes
• Batelle
• Silva Gas
• Montgomery Project
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Disadvantages of Other Processes
•
•
•
•
•
High pressure/Energy intensive
Lower quality raw syngas
Air or oxygen requirements
Poor scale up
Unproven technology
Advantages of TBE Process
•
•
•
•
•
Low pressure
Relatively low temperature
Efficient ash removal
Indirect gasification
Residence time less than one second
RDF Processing
Shredder
• Hammers running at
high speeds to chop
and shred waste
Trommel Screen
• Rotating, tubular
vessels for sorting
waste by size
Mill
• Shred material into
fie particles
Eddy-Current
Separator
• Ejects non-ferrous
metals for recycle
Magnetic Separator
• Removes ferrous
metals for recycle
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Trommel Screen
•Cylinder with screen on the
outside
•Sorts shredded MSW by size
•Rotates to drive the MSW
through from one side to the
other
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Eddy-Current Separator
•Basic schematic of Eddy-Current
Separator
•Non-Ferrous metals are ejected
•This is prior to removal of
ferrous metals
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Magnetic Separator
•For removal of Ferrous
metals
•Uses magnets to hold iron
containing metals to the
roller
•Releases them into separate
bin for return to landfill
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Backup Slide: Rough Mass Balance
• 2500 TPD Basis
• 625 TPD rejected material
– 306 TPD Ash (considered rejected material)
• 361.8 TPD CO2
• 219.6 TPD CH4
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Backup Slide: Reactor Compositions –
Carbon
• 2500 TPD Basis
• Gasifier composition
– Carbon
• 188767.6 lb-mol per day
• Combustion Reactor Carbon
– Carbon
• TBD
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Gasification Reactions
• C is a carbon containing compound
• Char reacts with CO2 and steam (gasifier)
C + H2O  CO + H2
+ 131 MJ/kmol
C + CO2  CO
+ 172 MJ/kmol
• Combustion reactor heats sand (olivine)
C + ½ O2  CO
- 111 MJ/kmol
CO + ½ O2  CO2
- 238 MJ/kmol
H2 + ½ O2  H2O
- 242 MJ/kmol
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Water-Gas Shift and Methane Rxns
CO + H2O  CO2 + H2
- 41 MJ/kmol
• Slightly exothermic, in Gas-Conditioning Unit
• Required to achieve Syn Gas ratio of 2.05
• Methane reforming of raw syngas
• CH4 + H2O  CO + 3H2
+ 206 MJ/kmol
Che 397 - Team Bravo
TBE Gasification Process
TBE Process
Steam
Gasifier
RDF
Flue Gas
Olivine
(Hot)
Olivine
Combustion
Reactor
SynGas
Tars
Gas Conditioning
Reactor
SynGas
Char, Ash
& Olivine
(Cool)
Ash Removal
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Air
Gasifier: Material Balance
RDF
Steam
SynGas
Tars
Olivine
IN
tons/day
OUT
tons/day
C
5,205.1
CO
3,933.7
H
681.1
CO2
4,250.5
O
3,443.8
CH4
1,077.9
N
125.4
H2
546.0
S
22.0
C2H4
510.5
Cl
11.5
Char C
1,114.3
H2O in RDF
1,534.1
Char H
0.63
H2O Supplied
2,853.1
Char N
0.22
Char S
0.00026
H2O
2,254.9
H2S
23.4
HCl
11.8
NH3
152.2
Total
13,876.1
Char
Olivine
Total
Che 397 - Team Bravo
13,876.1
Gasifier: Energy Balance
Reactions
RDF
Steam
SynGas
Tars
C + H2O  CO + H2 + 56,376 BTU/lbmol
CO + ½O2 CO2
-1.2 E5 BTU/lbmol
Olivine
Char
Olivine
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Component
CO
CO2
CH4
C2H4
C2H6
H2S
NH3
HCl
Char
Total
BTU/lbmolRDF
21,460.07
-8,286.88
-1,527.77
-260.37
-14.66
-50.52
-16.47
11,303.4
Combustion Reactor:
Material Balance
Flue Gas
Olivine
(Hot)
Air
Char, Ash
& Olivine
(Cool)
IN
tons/day
OUT
tons/day
Char C
1,114.3
CO2
4,084.4
Char H
0.63
H2O
5.63
Char N
0.22
NO2
0.72
Char S
0.00026
SO2
0.00052
O2
2,979.1
O2
0
N2
9,811.1
N2
9,814.6
Total
13,905.4
Total
13,905.4
Ash Removal
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Combustion Reactor:
Energy Balance
Reactions
C + O2 CO2
Flue Gas
Olivine
(Hot)
Air
Char, Ash
& Olivine
(Cool)
Ash Removal
Che 397 - Team Bravo
-1.7 E5 BTU/lbmol
Component
BTU/lbmolRDF
CO
-
CO2
-
CH4
-
C2H4
-
C2H6
-
H2S
-
NH3
-
HCl
-
Char
-11,171.50
Total
-11,171.50
Gas Conditioning Reactor:
Material Balance
SynGas
SynGas
Tars
Olivine
Olivine
IN
tons/day
OUT
tons/day
CO
3,933.7
CO
2,917.4
CO2
4,250.4
CO2
5,295.1
CH4
1,077.9
CH4
1,171.6
H2
546.1
H2
519.5
C2H4
510.5
C2H4
436.5
C2H6
0
C2H6
180.0
H2O
2,254.9
H2O
2,053.4
H2S
23.4
H2S
23.4
HCl
11.8
HCl
11.8
NH3
152.2
NH3
152.2
Total
12,760.9
Total
12,760.9
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Gas Conditioning Reactor:
Energy Balance
Water Gas Shift reaction reaches
thermal equilibrium.
SynGas
SynGas
Tars
Olivine
Olivine
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Component
BTU/lbmolRDF
CO
-451.03
CO2
-
CH4
-
C2H4
-
C2H6
-
H2S
-
NH3
-
HCl
-
Char
-
Total
-451.03
Gas Clean Up: Scrubber
Material Balance
Sulfur
Halogens
Raw
SynGas
Hazardous
Materials
Raw
SynGas
IN
tons/day
OUT
tons/day
H2S
23.429
H2S
23.429
HCl
11.847
HCl
11.847
NH3
152.184
NH3
152.184
Total
187.46
Total
187.46
Basically all incoming volatiles will be treated (place holder).
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Gas Clean Up: Reformer
Material Balance
Raw
SynGas
SynGas
Steam
IN
tons/day
OUT
tons/day
CO
2,917.4
CO
4,711.5
CO2
5,295.1
CO2
7,586.9
CH4
1,171.6
CH4
0
H2
519.5
H2
1,251.9
C2H4
436.6
C2H4
0
C2H6
180.0
C2H6
0
H2O
2,053.4
H2O
0
H2O
Supplied
2,092.0
H2O
Supplied
1,115.3
Total
14,665.6
Total
14665.6
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Reverse Water Gas Shift:
Material Balance
Reactions
CO2 + H2 CO + H2O
SynGas
SynGas
At spec.
+17,644 BTU/lbmol
IN
tons/day
OUT
tons/day
CO
4,711.5
CO
7,368.8
H2
1,251.9
H2
1,060.7
CO2
7,586.9
CO2
3,411.7
H2O
1,115.3
H2O
2,824.3
Total
14,665.6
Total
14,665.6
Che 397 - Team Bravo
TBE: Total Energy Balance
Gasifier
G.C.R.
C.R.
BTU/lbmolRDF BTU/lbmolRDF BTU/lbmolRDF
CO
21,460.07
-451.03
-
CO2
-8,286.88
-
-
CH4
-1,527.77
-
-
C2H4
-260.37
-
-
C2H6
-
-
-
H2S
-14.66
-
-
NH3
-50.52
-
-
HCl
-16.47
-
-
Char
-
-
-11,171.50
TOTAL
Total
11,303.4
-11,171.50
-319.13
Che-451.03
397 - Team Bravo
Investment Trend
~ 595 tons/hour --> ~335 millions $
Che 397 - Team Bravo
TIC RDF Processing
Total Installed Cost of Some RDF Processing Equipment
Processing Unit
Non-Ferrous Material
Removal
Gravity Separation
Size Reduction
Thermal Drying
Total TIC
2011 Dollars at 5% interest
Lower
Upper
Avg
--
--
$465,390.00
$142,719.60
$1,213,116.60
$2,295,924.00
$465,390.00
$2,606,184.00
$5,832,888.00
$304,054.80
$3,819,300.60
$4,064,406.00
--
--
$8,653,151.40
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Costs
Total Installed Cost
Equipment Cost
Heat Exchangers
$
2,970,000
$
1,230,000
Compressor
$
95,000,000
$
91,700,000
Absorbers
$
949,000
$
417,000
Strippers
$
695,000
$
198,000
TBE Process
$
347,000,000
$
182,000,000
Total
$
447,000,000
$
276,000,000
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Capital Costs
Million $
(+/- 45%)
% of Total
(+/- 45%)
$58 - $153
13% - 35%
Feedstock
$22 - $58
5% - 15%
Gasification, Tar Reforming, Scrubbing
$36 - $98
9% - 23%
$90 - $238
21% - 57%
$18 - $50
6% - 16%
Year 2008
RDF Processing
SynGas Conditioning
Steam System and Power Generation
Total Capital Investment
Che 397 - Team Bravo
$224 - $597 Million
TIC Assumptions
• TIC breakdown
– Purchased Equipment
– Installation
– Instrumentation and Controls
– Piping
– Electrical Systems
– Buildings (including services)
– Yard Improvements
• Indirect Costs
– Engineering
– Construction
– Legal and Contractors
Fees
– Project Contingency
Che 397 - Team Bravo
Operating Costs
Operating Costs
Raw materials
Feedstock
Catalysts & Chemicals
By-product credits
Scrap Aluminum
Scrap Iron
Electricity sold to grid
Waste treatment or Disposal
Gasifier ash
MSW rejects
Spent carbon
Waste water treatment
Che 397 - Team Bravo
$/operating unit
0.00
0.10
-0.86
-0.58
-0.17
0.00
0.00
0.0001
0.026