What Drives Investment Decisions in choosing Waste-To-Energy Conversion Technologies

1. What Drives Investment Decisions in choosing Waste-To-Energy Conversion Technologies John Baker, Alan Environmental George Voss, Sustainability Business Management

2. Incineration;

3. Waste Heat From Incinerators Can Be Used to Provide Heat and Power (WHP) Drawbacks • Expensive • Relatively Inefficient • Environmental Concerns

4. Waste to Energy Incudes Anaerobic Digestion;

5. Cogeneration Systems (CHP) Can Efficiently Convert Digester Gas to Electricity(~40%)&Heat(~50%) Digester Biogas CHP Power Generation Plant with “Plug & Play” Container Module, including Gas Conditioning & Treatment System

6. Waste to Syngas

7. Gasification Technologies convert a variety of waste into clean energy & commercial materials

8. Ability to Recover Recyclables Upfront • Sustainability, environmental, economic and a philosophy of zero-waste-to-landfill drive consideration • Municipalities have goals to meet • State mandates • Environmental groups fear WtE will reduce recycling • Increases BTU value of remaining feedstock • Recovers inert material that does not add to energy

9. Beneficial Use of Waste and Marketability of Products • All WtE systems create residues • Incinerator ash is mostly landfilled • Digesters have sludge and wastewater • Sludge can be composted and nutrients recovered from wastewater • Gasifiers create either a powder-like ash can be used as soil or cement additive or vitrified ash (high temperature Plasma) can be used as construction materials • All WtE projects must take in to account all residuals requiring disposal and the potential marketability of residuals that may be recycled

10. Non-recyclable waste diversion rate • Important to clients that have Corporate mandate for “Zero” waste to landfills • State mandates and EPA waste management hierarchy has landfill ranked last • Environmentalists favor highest diversion rates from landfill • The cost savings associated with diversion (equivalent to savings from avoiding tip fees) oftentimes drives the initial economics of waste-to-energy implementations

11. Experience and FinancialResources of Company • Management team important especially if the only offer on the table is a turnkey installation] • Management team needs to have technical resources for on-going support of WtE that are sold • WtE company needs to have financial resources to have guarantees and post performance bonds, etc. • WtE company financials need to show they will continue to exist in order to support the technology

12. Facility Size (acres and height) and Design Flexibility, including Design Soundness, • Based on feedstock (i.e., waste) tons(gallons)/day capacity, with fuel flexibility important in influencing economics • Ability to fit seamlessly for on-site WtE operations • Easy to operate automatically and monitor remotely • Needs to be safe and have safety approvals- like UL, CE, etc for local codes/regulations

13. Feasibility of obtaining all construction and operating permits • Political and environmentalist climate • Public/community relations • State and Federal Agency experience with permitting similar technologies • Local regulatory support • Attainment vs. non-attainment considerations for air permit • More environmental permitting challenges are usually experienced in terms of length of approval process and technology review if hazardous wastes are utilized

14. Ownership Preference • In some cases, clients prefer to own and operate Wte equipment and facilities • If a client wants to own a new technology, starting with a lease may be preferable so can gain on-site experience and confidence in eventually buying the technology • Most technologies need to have trained operators • Material handling experience is required • Some suppliers will only provide turnkey systems for concerns of inappropriate operations could cause system failures

15. Pre-processing of Fuel Mix • Determine if material handling/pre-processing is included in price/lease of equipment • Varies by technology- some take in waste “as-is” • Some require shredding/sizing • Some require RDF or pelletizing to certain size and dryness (e.g., 15% moisture) • Some require additional small amounts of fossil fuel/catalysts, etc.

16. Readiness and Reliability, Including Client References • Is technology been proven with 3rd party engineering studies? • Has the technology been commercially proven and meeting performance efficiencies, environmental and compliance permit requirements? • Are plant tours available? • Can delivery schedules be met or are there back-log issues?

17. Risk Allocation • Technology insurable? • Performance bond rating. • Shared risk? • Experience with solving problems at operating plants (e.g., retrofits, redesigns, etc)

18. Capital, Operating, Financing, and Tip Fees • Proforma for 15-20 year operating life including labor, consumable materials, parasitic load factors, feedstock contracts, recycling contracts for residuals,ROI, • Comparisons of existing options for waste disposal • Energy incentives, government grants, low interest lending programs for renewable energy projects can play an important role in initiating a waste-to-energy project

19. Standard Contractual Termsand Conditions • Evaluation of supplier contracts for turnkey, sale or lease options • Legal review • Non-performance criteria

20. Thermal and Energy Efficiency • Compare energy output per volume/ton of waste among suppliers reviewed • Some have capx higher for the same waste capacity but have higher energy production

21. Utility Needs • Sewer, water, electrical, fossil fuel needs • New construction required or existing on-site

22. Contact Us