Green Cone Limited

1
Green Cone Limited

• Food Waste the alternatives

Presentation to North East Recycling Forum
22nd January 2008
2
Agenda

• The problems of food waste
• Choices of treatment
• comparison of centralised facilities with Food
  Waste Digesters (FWDs)
• carbon footprint
• costs
• other
• FWDs an outline
• Conclusions

3
Food Waste The problem fraction

• 20-30 of MSW
• Landfill targets to be met
• Contaminates other waste
• Costly to collect
• Only 35 of food waste is compostible in
  traditional units

4
Choices of Treatment

• Central Plants
• In-vessel i.e. Teg, Vital Earth, LINDE
• Anaerobic Digestion, i.e. DRANCO, LINDE
• At home
• Food Waste Digesters (FWDs)
• Macerators

5
Considering Carbon Footprints

• Direct Burdens Plant emissions landfilling
  residues energy used.
• Indirect Burdens Associated with construction,
  maintenance and consumables.
• Avoided Burdens Use of compost or energy derived
  from processing of waste.
• Transport Carriage of waste to processing plant.
  
• Landfill Lead time till plant constructed.

6
Comparison of Carbon FootprintKgCo2/t.waste

• Direct/ Transport Sub Avoided Bal.
• Indirect Landfill Total Burdens
• Centralised Facilities
• AD DRANCO 71 88 159 (194) (35)
• IVC LINDE 54 88 142 (145) ( 3)
• TEG 18 88 106 ( 45) 61
• FWDs 5 0 5 0 5
• Assumes energy can be fully used and good quality
  compost produced.
• Figures extracted from SLR Sustainability Report

7
Comparison of CostsCentralised Facilities and
FWDs

• Centralised Facilities Note 1 166 per ton
• FWDs Note 2 23 per ton
• Note 1 Vehicles 46 Fuel 10
• Note 2 A Green Cone diverts 0.5 kg per day
  costs 42.50 10 year life
• Figures extracted from detailed study of Cheshire
  County by SLR Consultants

8
Comparison of Other Principal Factors
9
Food Waste Digesters - Benefits

• Environmental
• Reduced transport pollution
• Disposal of food waste at source
• Financial
• Fixed cost cheapest method
• Cost of other systems rising
• Legislation
• Meet all requirements
• Other
• Empowerment of individuals
• Segregation of organics
• Other recycling increases

10
Food Waste DigestersDo they work?

• Every council that has purchased units has
  acquired further units in subsequent years.
• Guildford 16,000 units lowest waste arisings.
• Major trials show 75 of users recommend FWDs to
  a friend.
• Many positive independent surveys for County
  Councils.
• Improve other recycling rates

11
Food Waste DigestersHow do they work?

• Create ideal environment for microbial
  degradation and worms
• Maintain aerobic conditions
• Reduce waste to primary components of water and
  CO2 (Green Cone) plus compost (Green Johanna)
• Design eliminates smells/access by pests
• A totally natural process

12
Food Waste DigestersBenefits to householder

• Reduce waste for collection charging?
• Help with alternate weekly collections
• No more smelly bins
• Other rubbish dry and easy to recycle
• Completely natural and safe
• Vermin not attracted

13
Food Waste Digesters The Options
14
Conclusion

• No one solution but FWDs
• Remove 20 of waste stream at source
• The best environmental solution
• Reduce householders carbon footprint
• Are cost effective
• Complementary to traditional garden composters
• Popular with users
• Should be an integral part of Waste Strategy

15
T H I S
Green Cone