An alternative method to determine the share of fossil carbon in solid refuse-derived fuels – Validation and comparison with three standardized methods. (15th May 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Schwarzböck, Therese; Aschenbrenner, Philipp; Spacek, Stefan; Szidat, Sönke; Rechberger, Helmut; Fellner, Johann
• Is Part Of: Fuel. Volume 220(2018)
• Page Start: 916
• Page End: 930
• Publication Date: 2018-05-15
• Subjects: A ash content -- aBM adapted Balance Method -- BM Balance Method -- C&I commercial & industrial waste -- MS Manual Sorting method -- MSW municipal solid waste -- n number of samples -- RDF refuse-derived fuel -- R2 correlation coefficient -- SD standard deviation -- SDM Selective Dissolution Method -- SRF solid recovered fuel -- TC total carbon in the water-free sample -- TH total hydrogen in the water-free sample -- TIXwf total inorganic content of the respective element in the water-free ash -- TN total nitrogen in water-free sample -- TO total oxygen in the water-free sample -- TOC total organic carbon -- TOH total organic hydrogen -- TON total organic nitrogen -- TOO total organic oxygen -- TOS total organic sulphur -- TOXBIO total organic content of the respective element in the water-and-ash-free biogenic matter -- TOXFOS total organic content of the respective element in the water-and-ash-free fossil matter -- TOXRDF total organic content of the respective element in the water-and-ash-free RDF -- TS total sulphur in the water-free sample -- TXwf total content of the respective element in the water-free sample -- waf water-and-ash-free -- wf water-free -- wt% percentage by weight -- xB, waf biogenic mass fraction on water-and-ash-free basis -- xB, wf biogenic mass fraction on water-free basis -- xB, TC share of biogenic carbon -- xF, waf fossil mass fraction on water-and-ash-free basis -- xF, wf fossil mass fraction on water-free basis -- xF, TC share of fossil carbon -- 14C-Method Radiocarbon Method -- %abs absolute percentage -- %rel relative percentage; Fossil carbon -- Biomass content -- Refuse-derived fuels -- Balance Method -- Radiocarbon Method -- Selective Dissolution Method; Fuel -- Periodicals; Coal -- Periodicals; Coal; Fuel; Periodicals; 662.6
• DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2017.12.076
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0016-2361

Abstract

Highlights: Validation of alternative method (adapted Balance Method) to determine fossil carbon in RDF. Three different types of refuse-derived fuels (RDFs) are investigated. Results are compared to Radiocarbon Method, Selective Dissolution, Manual Sorting. Excellent agreement of alternative method to Radiocarbon Method. Reliability of alternative method is independent of RDF type. Abstract: Today different types of wastes are used as refuse-derived fuels (RDF) either in waste-to-energy plants or as fuel substitutes in energy-intensive industrial processes. In order to quantify their greenhouse-gas relevance (fossil carbon content), reliable and practical analytical methods are required, which allow differentiation between biogenic and fossil organic carbon. In the present paper, an alternative method to determine the fossil share in RDFs is examined and validated. The so-called "adapted Balance Method" (aBM) is applied to three different RDFs and the results are compared to three standardized methods, namely the Radiocarbon Method ( 14 C-Method), the Selective Dissolution Method (SDM), and the Manual Sorting Method (MS). The aBM is based on the distinctly different elemental composition of water-and-ash-free biogenic and of fossil matter ( TOXBIO and TOXFOS ). Within the study, these compositional data are derived by manual sorting of the RDFs. The results show that the values obtained by the aBM are in excellent agreement with the results of the 14 C-Method (considered as reference method). Mean deviations between the two methods of −0.9 to +1.9% absolute for the share of fossil carbon are found which are statistically insignificant. High trueness and reliability of the aBM can be expected, independent of the RDF type. In contrast, the reliability of the other standardized methods (SDM and MS) appears to strongly depend on the type and composition of the RDF. The results further indicate that the generation of RDF-specific data on TOXFOS is important for the aBM if significant shares of polymers with comparably high oxygen content might be present in the RDF and if low uncertainties of the results (<3% relative) are required. The findings demonstrate that the alternative method has advantages compared to standardized methods with respect to reliability and/or costs.