WASTE-TO- ENERGY AS A KEY COMPONENT OF INTEGRATED SOLID MANAGEMENT FOR SANTIAGO, CHILE: A COST- BENEFIT ANALYSIS

by Paula Estevez Weinstein Advisor: Prof. Nickolas J. Themelis

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Earth Resources Engineering Department of Earth and Environmental Engineering Fu Foundation School of Engineering and Applied Science Columbia University

May 2006

Executive Summary

Santiago’s current solid system is in crisis and faces important political, geographical and environmental challenges that make it non-sustainable. Therefore, there is an urgent need to move towards an Integrated Solid Waste Management that includes modern alternatives, such as waste-to-energy (WTE). In a “sustainable development” approach, waste should be regarded as a resource for materials and energy recovery and not simply as a product for disposal. The objective of this research is to examine what the city of Santiago is doing regarding its (MSW) and to propose an Integrated Solid Waste Management for Santiago that focuses on the use of WTE as the key component. This report offers a Cost-Benefit Analysis of one WTE plant that will serve two municipalities of Santiago, La Florida and Puente Alto. The mass-burn technology of the Martin Reverse-Acting Grate was selected for a WTE plant of capacity of 1000 metric tons/per day. This plant will provide 600 KWh/ton of MSW of net electricity output to utilities, equivalent to a saving of 50 gallons (190 liters) of fuel per ton. The facility will use a total land surface area of 6 hectares. The cost-benefit analysis indicated that at the assumed gate fee (tipping fee) of USD14/ton the project has a positive Net Present Value (NPV) of $18 million at a 9% discount rate, therefore the project should be undertaken. The initial investment would be paid back in 17 years while the WTE plant would have a useful life of at least 30 years. It should be noted that the gate fee of USD14 is very low by modern standards since controlled landfilling is reported to cost USD30 to USD40 per ton. Thus, the sensitivity analysis showed that the WTE facility could charge a significantly lower fee than current and still have a positive NPV. However, a very small increase or decrease in the electricity price or heating value can make a dramatic difference in profitability. Before the construction of the plant, the none-quantifiable impacts such as the environmental, social and economic factors must be carefully examined. The perception of air pollution associated with the incinerators of the past and the location of the WTE plant are factors that could generate opposition from the host community. On the other hand, modern Waste-to-Energy plants have been shown to result in a dramatic decrease in air emissions in comparison to landfills. Also, their emissions are much below the EPA standards and lower than coal power plant emissions. In addition, the location of a WTE plant will be closer to the municipalities than the present landfills. This will reduce truck travel and diesel emissions to the atmosphere, and a significant reduction in generated smog. Overall, the non-quantifiable benefits seem to overweight the non-quantifiable costs, therefore supporting the construction of a WTE plant for Santiago. The community would have to be educated about these issues. Considering that the current waste management situation in these two municipalities is almost identical to the rest of Santiago, the possibilities of WTE as a widespread solution for waste management are very promising. Santiago’s government should implement an integrated solid waste management system that would classify MSW under four categories: “recyclable”, “combustible,” “compostable,” and “landfillable” waste. The government has already set a goal for of 25% of the waste stream; in addition, the WTE plant proposed in this study for La Florida and Puente Alto could process an additional 14% of the waste stream of Santiago. Regarding “compostable waste”, according to international standards, 5% of

2 Santiago’s waste could be composted. Under this scenario, Santiago’s waste to be disposed into landfills would be reduced by 44%. This would be a major step towards Integrated Solid Waste Management and the goals of sustainable development. Positive experience with WTE and its widespread use in other countries should provide an encouraging prospect for Chile too. The Amsterdam WTE experience showed that part of its success was due to increasing the involvement of the citizens in the waste management process. This was achieved by means of educating to the community and convincing the public and other stakeholders of the benefits of combustion for treating the city’s waste. This experience demonstrates what can be done with WTE and offers an excellent example of integrated solid waste management from which Santiago could derive similar benefits.

3

Acknowledgements

I extend my deepest gratitude to my advisor, Professor Nickolas Themelis, for proposing this project and for his support and guidance throughout. Without his vision this project would have not been possible. I would also like to recognize my husband, Juan Somavia, for his invaluable insights, advice and support through the entire program, and the most important, for being the editor of this thesis. I am very grateful to my family, for their economic support and encouragement throughout my graduate studies. I would particularly like to thank Joost Meijer, from the National Environmental Commission of Chile (CONAMA), Andres Villalobos from La Florida Municipality, Manuel Jose Ossandon, the Mayor of Puente Alto Municipality, Leopoldo Perez from Puente Alto Municipality and Gerardo Rojas Silva from Vitacura Municipality. Their openness and willingness to share information and ideas was a key part of this project. Finally, thanks to my colleges and friends from Columbia’s Department of Earth and Environmental Engineering who have provide friendship and feedback which have been of great help, including: Priscilla Ulloa, Karsten Millrath, Kanako Okada, Georgina Columbus, Liliana Themelis and Kimberly Labor.

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 2 1. INTRODUCTION...... 7 2. INTEGRATED SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT...... 7 2.1. DEFINITION OF SOLID WASTE ...... 7 2.2. THE NEED OF AN INTEGRATED SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT...... 8 2.3. COMPONENTS OF AN INTEGRATED SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ...... 9 3. OVERVIEW OF SANTIAGO’S MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ...... 10 3.1. HISTORY ...... 10 3.2. INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK ...... 11 3.3. RATE OF MSW GENERATION ...... 11 3.4. CHARACTERIZATION...... 12 3.5. RESPONSIBILITY FOR WASTE MANAGEMENT IN SANTIAGO ...... 13 3.6. COLLECTION, TRANSPORT AND FINAL DISPOSAL OF MSW...... 14 3.6.1. MSW Flow ...... 14 3.6.2. Landfills...... 15 3.6.2.1. Loma Los Colorados...... 16 3.6.2.2. Santa Marta ...... 16 3.6.2.3. Santiago Poniente ...... 16 3.7. CURRENT MSW MANAGEMENT COSTS ...... 16 3.8. STATUS OF RECYCLING...... 17 3.9. CURRENT AND FUTURE POLICIES AND STRATEGIES...... 19 4. WASTE-TO-ENERGY...... 20 4.1. OVERVIEW...... 20 4.2. WASTE-TO-ENERGY AS A RENEWABLE SOURCE OF ENERGY...... 22 4.3. WASTE-TO-ENERGY FOR SANTIAGO ...... 22 5. COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF A WASTE-TO-ENERGY PLANT FOR LA FLORIDA AND PUENTE ALTO MUNICIPALITIES ...... 25 5.1. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT...... 25 5.2. STAKEHOLDERS AND SECONDARY MARKET EFFECTS ...... 26 5.3. NON-QUANTIFIABLE IMPACTS ...... 28 5.3.1. Environmental Impacts...... 29 5.3.2. Economic Impacts ...... 30 5.3.3. Social Impacts ...... 31 5.4. ASSUMPTIONS ...... 34 5.4.1. Technology ...... 34 5.4.1.1. Available Technologies...... 34 5.4.1.2. Selecting the Appropriate Technology...... 37 5.4.2. Location ...... 38 5.4.3. Energy Genera