Critical Review of Existing Studies and Life Cycle Analysis on the Regeneration and Incineration of Waste Oils
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
CRITICAL REVIEW OF EXISTING STUDIES AND LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS ON THE REGENERATION AND INCINERATION OF WASTE OILS FINAL REPORT DECEMBER 2001 EUROPEAN COMMISSION DG ENVIRONMENT A2– SUSTAINABLE RESOURCES- CONSUMPTION AND WASTE TAYLOR NELSON SOFRES CONSULTING Mrs. Véronique MONIER 00 33 1 40 92 47 00 E-mail: [email protected] BIO INTELLIGENCE SERVICE Mr. Eric LABOUZE 00 33 1 42 17 46 06 E-mail: [email protected] VMR/OPA/MSI/ 20 AW 83 -5 TAYLOR NELSON SOFRES S.A. 16, rue Barbès - 92129 Montrouge cedex Tél : 33(0)1 40 92 45 67 Fax : 33 (0)1 47 35 12 84 - Site Web : www.sofres.com Études de marché et d’opinion S.A. au capital de 565 144 100 F – RCS NANTERRE B 414 496 315 00022 – APE : 741 E C O N T E N T Executive Summary ____________________________________________________5 A. Introduction and Current Situation __________________________________________ 15 1 Presentation of the Project_______________________________________________t 16 1.1 Context and Objectives of the Project___________________________________________t 16 1.2 Content of the Project _______________________________________________________ 16 2 Types of Oils and Types of WO Disposal Routes ____________________________ 19 2.1 Types of Base Oils and WO __________________________________________________ 19 2.2 Types of WO Disposal Routes ________________________________________________ 20 3 Current Situation of WO Management in Europe_____________________________e 22 3.1 WO Quantities in the European Union __________________________________________ 22 3.2 Some Elements about the WO Management in the E.U. ____________________________ 33 B. Technico-Economic Analysis of WO Treatment Processes ______________________ 37 4 Regeneration __________________________________________________________ 38 4.1 Type of WO Eligible for Regeneration___________________________________________n 38 4.2 Quality of the Base Stock Produced and Outlets __________________________________ 39 4.3 Existing Regeneration Technologies____________________________________________s 41 4.4 Criteria of Success _________________________________________________________ 46 4.5 Economics of Regeneration __________________________________________________ 46 4.6 Regeneration and employment ________________________________________________ 56 5 Thermal cracking_______________________________________________________g 57 5.1 Type of WO Eligible for Thermal Cracking _______________________________________ 57 5.2 Type of Outputs Produced and Markets _________________________________________ 57 5.3 Available Processes ________________________________________________________ 57 5.4 Economics of Thermal Cracking _______________________________________________ 60 6 Other Disposal Routes __________________________________________________ 61 6.1 Re-use ___________________________________________________________________ 61 6.2 Gasification _______________________________________________________________ 61 6.3 Burning After Severe Re-Processing ___________________________________________ 61 6.4 Burning After Mild Re-processing ______________________________________________ 62 TAYLOR NELSON S O FRES Consulting _______________________________________________________________________________________ 2. 20 AW 83 –5 (December 2001) Critical Review of Existing Studies and Life Cycle Analysis on the Regeneration and Incineration of WO C O N T E N T ( C O N T I N U E D ) 6.5 Burning in Cement Kilns _____________________________________________________ 62 6.6 Other Direct Burning ________________________________________________________ 64 7 Conclusions of the Technico-economic Analysis ____________________________ 65 7.1 Bottlenecks of the Regeneration Development____________________________________t 65 7.2 Possible Measures to Stimulate Regeneration ____________________________________ 67 C. Critical Assessment of LCA Studies Comparing Regeneration and Incineration _____ 69 8 Background informations on Life Cycle Analysis (LCA)_______________________) 70 8.1 LCA as a Tool for the Evaluation of Environmental Performances of Recovery Options____s 70 8.2 Methodological Framework of LCA _____________________________________________ 71 8.3 Key Features of LCA ________________________________________________________ 72 8.4 Specific Requirements to Make a Comparative Assertion from LCA Results ____________ 73 9 LCA in Waste Management Policy_________________________________________y 74 9.1 From Product-Orientated LCA to Process-Orientated LCA __________________________ 74 9.2 Policy-Orientated LCA_______________________________________________________A 74 9.3 Factors Affecting the LCA Results of Waste Management Options ____________________ 75 9.4 Specific Environmental Problems not Covered by LCA _____________________________ 77 10 Review of the LCA Studies Related to WO Recovery Options __________________ 79 10.1 Brief Presentation of the Studies under Consideration ______________________________ 79 10.2 ‘Burning or Re-refining Used Lube Oil? - Life Cycle Assessments of the Environmental Impacts’ [16], 1995 (Norway) _________________________________________________ 81 10.3 ‘WO - Fuel or Lubricant?’, Examination for Precedence in Accordance with the Waste Recycling Act [18], 1997 (Germany) ___________________________________________ 85 10.4 ‘Recyclage et Valorisation Energétique des Huiles Usagées - Atouts et Faiblesses’ [21], 2000, ADEME (F) _______________________________________________________________ 91 10.5 ‘Ökologische Bilanzierung von Altöl-Verwertungswegen’ [17], 2000, UBA (Germany) ____ 103 11 Lessons from the Review of the LCA Studies Related to WO Recovery Options__s 111 11.1 Scope of the LCA Studies Comparing Several WO Disposal Options _________________ 111 11.2 Results of the LCA Studies __________________________________________________ 114 TAYLOR NELSON S O FRES Consulting _______________________________________________________________________________________ 3. 20 AW 83 –5 (December 2001) Critical Review of Existing Studies and Life Cycle Analysis on the Regeneration and Incineration of WO C O N T E N T ( C O N T I N U E D ) 12 Conclusions of the LCA Studies Critical Assessment _______________________ 123 12.1 Soundness of the LCA Results _______________________________________________ 123 12.2 Gaps in the LCAs Available__________________________________________________e 126 12.3 Main LCA Results _________________________________________________________ 127 APPENDICES ______________________________________________________________________ 129 Appendix 1 List of the Available Studies Gathered and Analysed ______________________________ 130 Appendix 2 List of Experts Interviewed or Contacted________________________________________ 137 Appendix 3 Types of Base Oils and WO _________________________________________________ 140 Appendix 4 Multi-country Analysis ______________________________________________________ 143 Appendix 5 Financial Flows between Actors ______________________________________________ 162 Appendix 6 Cost and WO Gate Fee for a Regeneration Plant ________________________________ 179 Appendix 7 Cost and WO Gate Fee for a Thermal-Cracking Plant _____________________________ 189 Appendix 8 Some Elements from ‘Collection and Disposal of Used Lubricant’ [19], 1996, CONCAWE _ 192 Appendix 9 ‘Environmental and Economic Impact of Re-Refined Products: a Life Cycle Analysis’ [20], FIAT (Italy) _____________________________________________________________________________ 197 Appendix 10 Impact Categories in LCA __________________________________________________ 201 TAYLOR NELSON S O FRES Consulting _______________________________________________________________________________________ 4. 20 AW 83 –5 (December 2001) Critical Review of Existing Studies and Life Cycle Analysis on the Regeneration and Incineration of WO Executive Summary Context, Objectives and Methodology of the Project n One of the main axes of the directive 75/439/EC on Waste Oils (WO), amended in 1987, is that, among the different options for recovery, priority is given to the regeneration of WO over their incineration. But several studies clearly demonstrate that Member States (MS) do not favour regeneration of WO, but on the contrary are widely using WO as fuel in industrial installations. n Launched by the EC in the frame of the revision of this amended directive, the main objective of this study is to undertake a thorough technico-economic and environmental analysis of the literature available about the regeneration of WO and its comparison with their incineration. n For that purpose, more than 75 studies have been analysed. In order to update some of the obsolete information, to overcome some of the inconsistencies, and to gather information about new subjects still poorly covered by the literature (such as new regeneration technologies and thermal cracking), a lot of experts have been interviewed. A critical assessment has been performed for the four Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) studies available: • Burning or Re-refined used lube oil? - The Norwegian environmental protection agency,1995, • WO - Fuel or lubricant? - Examination for precedence in accordance with the waste recycling act - Lower Saxony Minister of the Environment (Germany), post 1997, • Recyclage et Valorisation énergétique des huiles usagées - Atouts et faiblesses – ADEME (France), 2000, • Ökologishe Bilanzierung von AltölVerwertungswegen - Ökologisher Vergleich von vier wichtigen Altölwertungsverfahren – UBA (Germany), 2000. The first International Standard concerning