UNEP Open Burning of Waste

UNEP Open Burning of Waste
4 th Toolkit Expert Workshop
Geneva, December 1, 2009

China:
Dr. Gang Yu
Department of Environmental
Science and Engineering
Tsinghua University, Beijing
Mexico:
M.Sc. Gustavo Solórzano Ochoa
SEMARNAT,
National Center for Environmental
Research and Training (CENICA)
México, D.F.
Sponsors:
Government of Sweden through
SIDA
Project Partners
Sweden:
Dr. Stellan Marklund
Umeå University
Department of Environmental
Chemistry, Umeå
USA:
Dr. Brian K. Gullett
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management
Research Laboratory (E305-01),
Research Triangle Park, NC
Chlorine Chemistry Division,
American Chemistry Council,
USA

Waste Characterization

4.96
0.40
1.20
0.19
7.77
6.91
Waste Composition: Mexico
0.27 9.12
5.05
20.11
0.78
1.76
Rural Tipo Rural Waste Tipo Semi-urban Semi Semi urban ‐ Urbano Waste
6.31
61.73
10.97
Fibras de celulosa
Plásticos
Orgánicos
Metales
Material vitrificado
Vestido
Sanitarios
Electronicos y Baterias
Otros
Tipo Urbano Urban con Industrial Residuos Waste
Industriales
(pepenado)
27.97
6.09
28.43
Fibras de celulosa
Plásticos
Orgánicos
Metales
Material vitrificado
Vestido
Sanitarios
Electronicos y Baterias
Otros
4.64
2.51
1.56
5.01
2.85
1.09
11.15
0.42
5.71
9.00
0.05
6.70
52.91
14.41
Fibras de celulosa
Plásticos
Orgánicos
Metales
Material vitrificado
Vestido
Sanitarios
Electronicos y Baterias
Otros
Urban Tipo Urbano Industrial con Waste—As Waste Residuos As Industriales Delivered
(sin pepenar)
11.80
40.75
14.89
14.56
Fibras de celulosa
Plásticos
Orgánicos
Metales
Material vitrificado
Vestido
Sanitarios
Electronicos y Baterias
Otros

Waste composition: China
Composition Urban Semi-Urban Rural
A
B
C
Dust 5 20 38
Wet waste 50 48 40
Plastics 16 10 5
Soft 10 6.5 3.5
Hard 6 3.5 1.5
Paper 16 10 4.5
Paper packages 2 2 1
Uncoated 9 5 2.5
Coated 5 3 1
Metal 2 2 1
Glass 2 1 1
Textile 2 2 2
Rubber 2 1 1
Disposable diapers/ Feminine
napkins
1 1 0
Others 4 5 7
Leaves 2 2 2.5
Wood 1 1 2
Ceramic 1 1 1
Brickbat 0.5 1 1.5

Noncombustible

Field Sampling Plan
Mexico (10)
1. Rural
2. Semi-urban
3. Urban industrial
4. Urban industrial as delivered at landfill
5. Urban industrial + 1% e-waste
China (10)
1. Urban – small site + small site with concrete walls
2. Semi-urban – small + small site with concrete wall
3. Rural

China, rural waste, with wall

Mexico Rural

New sampler
developed for
sampling fumes
from open burn
events:
High-volume
sampler with
sampling head
downwards;
filter and PUF
cartridge

Mexico Rural waste; poor combustion

Mexico urban industrial, very good combustion

China Rural

Results and Evaluation

ng TEQ/
log
ngTEQ/kg Mass
Country Sample Waste
kg C C Loss, kg
Mexico RR1 Rural-Rural-MX 2377 3.376 24%
Mexico RR2 Rural-Rural-MX 2787 3.445 33%
Mexico UIBS1 Urban-ind BS-MX 366 2.564 30%
Mexico UIBS2 Urban-ind BS-MX 253 2.402 33%
Mexico UI1 Urban-industrial-MX 1440 3.158 42%
Mexico UI2 Urban-industrial-MX 556 2.745 44%
Mexico SU1 Semi-urban-MX 198 2.296 34%
Mexico SU2 Semi-urban-MX 153 2.184 46%
Mexico UIEW 1 Urb-ind + e-waste-MX 182 2.260 57%
Mexico UIEW 2 Urb-ind + e-waste-MX 463 2.665 44%
China XZ1, no wall Urban-China 42.2 1.626
China XZ2, no wall Urban-China 220 2.342
China XZ1, wall Urban-China 114.2 2.057
China XZ2, wall Urban-China 74.1 1.870
China FS1, no wall Semi-urban-China 13.0 1.114
China FS2, no wall Semi-urban-China 33.1 1.519
China FS1, wall Semi-urban-China 23.9 1.378
China FS2, wall Semi-urban-China 110.0 2.041
China BQ1 Rural-China 116 2.065
China BQ2 Rural-China 40.0 1.602
Results – EF to Air
Median 167
Average 478 39%
Min 13
Max 2787
Geomean 172

A short tour of the waste open
burning calculations

“ng TEQ/kg C burned”
• Blower draws CO, CO 2 through to CEM analyzer
• PCDD/PCDF, particulates catch on fiberglass
filter or PUF filter
• Product of concentration and blower rate
generates volumes of CO, CO 2 each minute
• Volumes are converted to mass, then to mass of
carbon
• Filter sample is analyzed to give ng PCDD/PCDF
(TEQ)
• Quotient is ng TEQ/kg C burned

How much carbon is burned?
Carbon burned
= 1 ton of waste x combustible carbon (%)
x carbon oxidation factor (%)

58% Carbon Oxidation
Factor (COF)
23.2 % carbon
burned
40%
combustible
carbon
Thus:
23.2% of EF ng/kg C
= EF ng/kg waste
(not 40%)

Sensitivity Analysis: Full Dataset
• 58% COF for municipal waste is default
• COF x CC x EF (ng TEQ/kg C burned)
EF,
ng/kg C
75 th %ile
= 436
50 th %ile
= 167
25 th %ile
= 48
76
8
39
30% 50%
Combustible Carbon
126
14
Thus: low-high
= 8–126 ng TEQ/kg waste

Thank you very much