New Technologies Demonstrator Programme Research, Monitoring and Evaluation Project Report

Research, monitoring and evaluation of the Scarborough Power/GEM pyrolysis facility in Seamer Carr, Scarborough, Yorkshire.

Produced for Defra

Authors

PT Williams and JR Barton University of Leeds

2010

DEFRA New Technologies Demonstrator Programme Research, Monitoring and Evaluation of the Scarborough Power/GEM Pyrolysis Facility, Seamer Carr, Scarborough, Yorkshire.
Final Report 5th March 2010 Prepared by: Paul T. Williams & John Barton (University of Leeds) Contractor: The University of Leeds Contact: Professor Paul T. Williams School of Process, Environmental & Materials Engineering The University of Leeds Leeds LS2 9JT

2 Executive Summary The Defra New Technologies Demonstrator Programme provides grant funding to support the demonstration of new technologies under the Waste Implementation Programme. One of the technologies supported was the Scarborough Power Ltd. flash pyrolysis system. The process involves the flash pyrolysis of solid recovered fuel from municipal solid waste to produce synthetic gas, which is combusted in a gas engine to subsequently generate electricity. The University of Leeds was awarded a contract to undertake Research, Monitoring and Evaluation (RME) of the Scarborough Power Ltd., plant and commenced in January 2008. The Research Monitoring and Evaluation specification prepared by the University of Leeds set out a programme based on the expectation that full commissioning of the Scarborough Power Ltd plant would be completed by late Summer/ early Autumn of 2008. However, since Summer 2008 through to the end of the extended contract deadline of December 31st 2009, the Scarborough Power Ltd plant has suffered continual commissioning problems and did not produce a continuous and extended fully operational period to design specification on which a meaningful study could be undertaken during the RME period. The University of Leeds have therefore undertaken only very limited work on the monitoring and evaluation of the plant and none of this work relates to operation at design specification. Scarborough Power Ltd. have reported (December 2009) that due to the lack of monitoring instrumentation and data logging, the gathering of data on the plant throughout the Research Monitoring and Evaluation contract period was very poor and that insufficient data was gathered to enable a meaningful evaluation of the plant. Scarborough Power Ltd report that the quality of data recorded, although sufficient for their internal purposes, would not withstand the quality assurance level required for evaluation by Leeds University. During short run commissioning trials the steady and consistent operational periods needed to gather data for reliably assessing performance do not exist. The plant is a genuinely new process in terms of the throughput and commercialising of the concepts developed and trialled at pilot scale by the technology supplier, GEM Ltd. It is unfortunate that continuous operation of the Scarborough Power Ltd., plant could not be completed during the Defra New Technologies Demonstrator Programme time frame, even with the extension of this contract until 31st December 2009. However, it is understood that Scarborough Power Ltd., remain committed to completing the modifications needed to permit the plant to be fully commissioned. It is evident that the plant overall did not perform to full design expectations during the RME contract period and, until such time as continuous operations are established, the process must be considered, as yet, unproven overall.

3 Contents Page 1. Introduction and Context 2. Process: Scarborough Power Ltd Plant Process description 3. Reliability, Availability, Maintainability and Operability 3.1 Background 3.2. RME Monthly Reports to Defra 4. Process Operation 4.1. Solid Recovered Fuel Input 4.2. Mass and Energy Balances 5. Legislation & Regulation: Scarborough Power Ltd. Plant and the EC Waste Incineration Directive (WID) 6. Health & Safety 7. Conclusion 8. References Annex 1. RME Specification table and data availability Annex 2. Meetings Timeline 5 8 12 12 13 14 14 17 19 20 20 21 22 35

List of Tables Table 1. Results of SRF sampling Table 2. Solid Recovered Fuel and char analysis, 2007 and 2009

Page 15 16

Table 3. Scarborough Power Ltd., Syngas Generation & Biomass Accountability 18

List of Figures Figure 1. Map of area Figure 2. Scarborough Power plant in context Figure 3. Schematic diagram of the Scarborough Power Ltd. Plant Figure 4. Material monitoring flowchart 5 6 10 17

Boxes Box 1. The Pyrolysis Process 11

Units SI Units have been used throughout this report Glossary CEMS CV GEM GC HC LU MRF NOx NYCC RME ROCs SCR SPL SRF TOX WID - Continuous Emissions Monitoring System - Calorific Value - GEM flash pyrolysis system - Gas Cooler - Hydrocarbons - Leeds University - Materials Recycling Facility - Nitrogen Oxides - North Yorkshire County Council - Research, Monitoring and Evaluation - Renewable Obligation Certificates - Selective Catalytic Reduction - Scarborough Power Ltd. - Solid Recovered Fuel - Thermal Oxidiser - Waste Incineration Directive

5 1. Introduction and Context Scarborough Borough Council boundary (Figure 1) covers the coastal towns of Whitby, Scarborough and Filey and includes approximately 50% of the more sparsely populated coastal hinterland of the North Yorkshire Moors National Park. The Borough's population is 106,243 (Source: 2001 Census Area Statistics), with 60% of residents living in the three coastal towns, of which Scarborough accounts for the majority of residents (~ 50,000). As a major tourist destination, the resident population can double in the peak summer tourist season but the area attracts visitors all year round given its easy access from the major conurbations of West Yorkshire and Cleveland. Scarborough is a collection authority, the disposal authority is North Yorkshire County Council (NYCC) which provides services for six other districts in the area. The main contractor for operating the waste disposal services of North Yorkshire County Council (and the unitary authority of York City) is Yorwaste.

Figure 1. Map of area. The Scarborough Power Ltd., GEM Flash Pyrolysis Thermal Process is located at Seamer Carr on the southern edge of Scarborough town and is designed to convert a municipal solid waste derived solid recovered fuel (SRF) into a synthetic fuel gas for combustion in a gas engine to generate electricity with the potential for further recovery of heat for offices / process use. It is one of the Defra supported New Technologies Demonstrator plants. The Seamer Carr site is owned and operated by Yorwaste and includes a non-hazardous landfill, a Materials Recycling Facility (MRF) and a green waste windrow composting system. The main fuel feedstock is prepared on site by Wastec Ltd. from residual domestic waste (mostly in green wheeled bins) delivered by Scarborough Borough Council /

6 Yorwaste. The upstream collection systems and the Wastec Ltd. plant do not form part of the New Technologies Demonstrator project. However, information on upstream activities is important in placing the Scarborough Power Ltd. project in context. It is also important in evaluating the contribution of the Scarborough Power Ltd. Plant to overall biodegradable municipal waste diversion and putting the amount of energy recovered into a wider context. In addition, weight data on household waste arisings, upstream bring and collect recycling flows, residual waste flows delivered to Wastec Ltd. and reject and product flows from this plant would enable a fuller evaluation of the Scarborough Power Ltd. process.
Scarborough Households Council Collect Residuals

Collect Recyclables Wastec nonfuel outputs Bring systems

Wastec Ltd plant Shredded SRF

Treatment Transfer

Scarborough Power GEM Flash Pyrolysis Plant Drying, Refining, Converting, Gascleaning, Power Generation Markets materials compost electricity

Residual waste

Landfill disposal

Figure 2; Scarborough Power plant in context

Figure 2 is a simplified schematic diagram of activities showing the main facilities and flows of waste and products. Waste arising at the household is either taken by householders to household waste recycling centres for recycling / disposal or is source separated and collected from the household for recycling (and/or composting) with the residual waste being collected by the traditional refuse collection vehicle. The Bring / Collect waste and recycling flows may undergo some treatment (e.g. at materials recycling plant or composting plant) before transfer to either market or to landfill for disposal. The Collected residual waste can be delivered to the Wastec Ltd. plant (some via transfer station operation at Whitby) or disposed to landfill. In 2008-9, the total municipal waste arising collected by Scarborough BC was 60,501 tonnes of which 46,854 tonnes was household waste. Civic amenity waste is not included in these data as this flow is handled by the disposal authority. In terms of recycling, Scarborough BC operate a district wide collection scheme including a dry, commingled recyclable materials (not glass or textiles) collection using (blue) bags /

7 boxes and bins (depending on household type) and a garden waste collection service (Brown bins/ degradable sacks). An alternate week collection system is in place with dry recyclables and garden waste collected one week, the residual waste the next week. Residents are asked to use the network of local neighbourhood recycling banks for glass and textiles or the three main household waste recycling centres provided by NYCC. The current collection service provision was established in October 2007 and hence has been in place throughout the period of commissioning of the Scarborough Power Ltd. plant. In terms of recycling performance, Scarborough achieved a 37.5% recycling rate in 2008/9, almost identical to the national average for England of 37.6%. Although no specific sampling and analysis work on the residual waste used to produce the SRF treated by the Scarborough Power Ltd. pyrolysis plant has been undertaken, the recycling system infrastructure in place and performance achieved would suggest it is not untypical of many locations in England at the current time. If the plant had achieved full operational status, the nature of the residual waste used would have been subject to more detailed monitoring. As it transpired, selection of residual waste for processing was on an ad-hoc basis, i.e. when Scarborough Power Ltd. required fuel to commission the pyrolysis process, residual domestic waste deliveries entering the site were diverted to the Wastec Ltd. plant for processing. Only sufficient waste was treated by Wastec Ltd. to fulfil the demand for commissioning and this was but a small fraction of the potential available and most was sent directly to the landfill. The Wastec Ltd. process is based in mechanical separation of mixed wastes and includes a bag splitter, trommel (rotary screen), kinetic streamer (separator using ballistic / shape factors to sort), eddy current separator (for Aluminium recovery), magnetic separation (Ferrous recovery) and air separators (to reject heavy items). It has the potential to recover materials for recycling (e.g. metal, glass, wood and rigid plastics) but the operational settings are geared to recovering the majority of the input as fuel for the Scarborough Power Ltd. plant. Two distinct process streams are made available to the Scarborough Power Ltd., plant, a coarse sized product containing mainly the lighter paper, plastics and textiles. which is then shredded and a fine sized residue which has a high proportion of organic matter, particularly food waste which is not targeted by a source separate collection system for composting or anaerobic digestion in the Scarborough District. The coarse light fuel fraction is shredded to approximately <25 mm. Both the shredded light fraction and organic rich fine fraction are mixed together and represent the SRF feedstock to the Scarborough Power Ltd plant. The Wastec Ltd. plant is designed to operate ~ 40 hours per week over 5 days and is expected to process some 25,000 tonnes of waste per annum and, after removal of recyclable material, oversize and inert material, produce approximately 18,000 tonnes per annum of SRF (undried). During the monitored period, the plant only operated when requests for SRF fuel were made by Scarborough Power Ltd. to commission the pyrolysis plant. No direct monitoring of the Wastec Ltd. plant by Leeds staff was undertaken during commissioning, apart from a short pre-test trial to establish sampling protocols. Had full operating status been achieved, the intention was to fully report the throughputs and mass balance for the Wastec Ltd. facility over the designated 12 months monitoring period. This would have been supplemented by more detailed fuel quality assessment during the on-site Scarborough Power Ltd. process evaluation tests. Weighbridge data was supplied to confirm that residual household waste from Scarborough district was used as feedstock to produce the SRF for commissioning trials but the precise yield and

8 quality of the SRF processed by Scarborough Power Ltd. could not be ascertained. In part, this was due to the intermittent processing but it was also reported that calibration of the belt-weighing device on the fuel delivery conveyor had not been completed. Once prepared, the SRF is transferred over to storage in the Scarborough Power Ltd facility via a transfer and shuttle conveying system and operations from this point onwards were to be the focus of the Research, Monitoring and Evaluation specification had the plant achieved continuous operations. 2. Process: Scarborough Power Ltd Plant Process description Figure 3 shows a simplified schematic diagram of the Scarborough Power Ltd. plant. The incoming Solid Recovered Fuel (SRF) is passed to the Feed store bunker. The SRF bunker is sized to provide approximately 2 days supply to the GEM pyrolysis converter. A front loader vehicle takes material from the SRF store and charges the feed hopper of the granulator which reduces the particle size from <25 mm to that required for pyrolysis of no more than 2 mm in one direction. The discharge of finely ground SRF from the granulator is conveyed to the inlet feed hopper of the dryer via a weigh conveyer. The dryer uses waste heat from the gas engine as the main heat source and produces a dried SRF feedstock for the GEM pyrolysis converter of between 3% - 5% moisture content. The exhaust gases from the dryer are fed to the thermal oxidiser to combust any volatile organic components driven off from the drying of the SRF. The designed 18,000 tonnes (undried) per year input from the Wastec Ltd. plant is converted to 12,000 tonnes per year throughput of dried SRF which equates to a maximum throughput of 1.5 tonnes/hour of SRF into the GEM pyrolysis converter. The downstream equipment is sized for the GEM pyrolysis converter to operate on a continuous basis, i.e. to operate 168 hrs per week (i.e. 24 hours/day, 7 days/week). The dry SRF from the dryer is pneumatically fed into the flash pyrolysis unit via an air tight feeding system. The feeding system consisting of primary and secondary cyclones to ensure the fine grained nature of the SRF is fed to the GEM pyrolysis converter (~ 2mm). The solid from the cyclones is fed via an auger to trouser leg diverter valves to four pinch roller feeders. The pinch roller feeders expel any air from the SRF and pressure seal the GEM converter pyrolysis chamber from the outside atmosphere. Four knife valves associated with the four pinch roller feeders feed two SRF feed augers which in turn feed the GEM pyrolysis converter. The GEM pyrolysis converter operates at a high pyrolysis temperature of 810 C in an oxygen free and turbulent environment. Box 1. describes the process of pyrolysis. The outer chamber of the pyrolysis converter is heated by gas burners fuelled using either natural gas or the produced pyrolysis gas (syngas). Pyrolysis, oxygen-free, conditions within the GEM converter are provided by recycled pyrolysis gas. A turbulent environment is provided by a central internal rotor, driven by a hydraulic motor that ensures that the SRF is well distributed within the reactor. The spinning

9 rotor maintains an internal gas flow such that the SRF is drawn into the top centrifuge section of the rotor and under centrifugal force is forced towards the external walls of the reactor. The SRF entering the GEM pyrolysis converter is heated rapidly under flash pyrolysis conditions of high heating rate to high temperature. The inert and char material is centrifugally separated from the product gas within the pyrolysis converter and moves down the inner part of the reactor chamber where it is removed via a water cooled auger/pinch roller. The product synthetic gas leaves the bottom of the converter and the solid char and ash material particles are separated from the synthetic product gas by cyclone. The solids are discharged from the bottom of the cyclone and are cooled and removed via a second set of water cooled augers/pinch rollers to a common discharge system with the solids from the GEM pyrolysis converter. The synthetic gas exits the cyclone and flows to gas cooler 1 (GC 1). The gas is cooled and scrubbed by direct contact with rape seed oil which is sprayed into a jet venturi. The oil is in turn cooled against cooling water in a separate heat exchanger, in a loop which also contains a centrifuge to clean the oil of contamination with char particles. The temperature of the gas leaving the first cooler is controlled at 150 C by modulating the flow of water to the oil cooler. The gas then flows to a second gas cooler (GC 2) where it passes through the tube side of a shell and tube heat exchanger. Chilled water is circulated on the shell side to cool the gas and condense out water and hydrocarbons, which are collected in a separate condensate vessel. The water and organics are allowed to separate and the water stream is pumped to the process effluent tank. The hydrocarbon organic fraction is returned to the inlet duct of the converter for further pyrolysis. The cooled pyrolysis gas is extracted and pressurised using a compressor (Gas Blower) and passed into a gas buffer tank. The blowers have a gas cooler (GC 3) on the discharge to remove the heat of compression and cool the gas to <50 C. Some syngas from the gas blowers is recycled back to the converter to maintain constant pressure in the system and to maintain an oxygen-free environment. The pyrolysis gas is fed from the gas buffer tank to the reciprocating (Diesel) gas engine manufactured by Deutz. The engine drives an electrical generator which produces electricity for export to the National Grid and for in-house use. The engine is started using natural gas. When the pressure in the pyrolysis buffer tank rises to a sufficient level, the synthetic pyrolysis gas is mixed with the natural gas fed to the engine. As the rate of syngas production rises, controlled by the speed of the inlet screw augers, the flow of natural gas is reduced to maintain the thermal fuel consumption of the engine constant. Syngas has approximately half the calorific value of natural gas. As the production of syngas increases, the natural gas line is closed and then the engine runs on 100% synthetic pyrolysis gas produced from the GEM flash pyrolysis converter. The electricity generator is designed to produce 1.8MW of electricity from the 18,000 tonnes/year input of SRF (equivalent to 12,000 tonnes/year of input dried SRF to the GEM pyrolysis converter).

10

Wastec SRF Bunker SRF Preparation

Granulator

Weighbridge Exhaust Hopper Stack Dryer CEMS TOX Hot Gases SCR Cyclones Cyclone Auger

Feed Diverter Valves

Pinch Roller Feeders

Knife Valves

Electricity Generator

Gas Engine Gas Cooler Coalescers Gas Buffer Tank GC 3 Gas Blowers Gas Coolers GC 2 GC 1 Cyclone GEM Converter

Feed Augers

HC Tank

Oil Cooler Char Augers

Effluent Tank

Oil Pump Char

Figure 3. Schematic diagram of the Scarborough Power Ltd. Plant

11

Box 1. The Pyrolysis Process Pyrolysis is the thermal degradation of organic waste in the absence of oxygen to produce a carbonaceous char, oil and combustible gases. Waste materials are composed of complex chemical compounds, for example municipal solid waste contains paper and cardboard which are composed of large, complex polymeric, organic molecular chains such as cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin. Similarly, wood based wastes are also mainly composed of large cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin polymeric molecules. Plastics are composed of large polymer chains. The process of thermal degradation or pyrolysis of such materials, in the absence of oxygen, results in the long polymer chains and molecules breaking to produce shorter molecular weight chains and molecules. How much of each char, oil and gas product is produced is dependent on the process conditions, particularly temperature and heating rate. Very slow heating rates coupled with a low final maximum temperature maximises the yield of char. Moderate heating rates in the range of about 20 C/min to 100 C/min and maximum temperatures of 600 C gives an approximate equal distribution of oils, char and gases. This is referred to as conventional pyrolysis or slow pyrolysis. Very high heating rates of about 100 C/s to 1000 C/s at temperatures between about 500 C and 600 C and with rapid quenching lead to the formation of a mainly liquid product, referred to as fast pyrolysis. The primary liquid products of pyrolysis are rapidly quenched and therefore prevents breakdown of the products to gases in the hot reactor. Higher heating rates and high temperatures to 800 C (such as are found in the GEM pyrolysis converter) favours the formation of gas as the oil products quickly breakdown to yield a mainly gas product. The gas from pyrolysis of MSW is composed of mainly, hydrogen, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and methane, with minor concentrations of other gases, including hydrocarbons, such as ethane, ethene, propane, propene and butane and butene.

12 The hot exhaust gases from the engine passes through a selective catalytic reduction (SCR) system to reduce nitrogen oxides (NOx) via a catalytic reaction of the NOx with ammonia (as urea). The hot gases from the engine are used to dry the incoming solid recovered fuel in the dryer. The moisture saturated exhaust gases emitted from the SRF dryer, pass to a Thermal Oxidiser (TOX) where volatile organic compounds are oxidised before discharge of the flue gases to the stack. A continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) monitors the exhaust gases in the stack. 3. Reliability, Availability, Maintainability and Operability 3.1 Background The University of Leeds was awarded a contract to undertake Research, Monitoring and Evaluation (RME) of the Scarborough Power Ltd., plant and commenced in January 2008. The Research Monitoring and Evaluation specification prepared by the University of Leeds set out a programme based on the expectation that full commissioning of the Scarborough Power Ltd plant would be completed by late Summer/ early Autumn of 2008 (Annex 1) . The Scarborough Power Ltd plant construction commenced in Spring 2008, with some process units being built off-site. Plant completion was expected late Summer/early Autumn of 2008 with commissioning expected to be complete by September 2008. Via discussion with Scarborough Power Ltd, Leeds University planned on-site research and monitoring campaigns in the 3rd week of November 2008 and 3rd week of February 2009 (Annex 2). However, the Scarborough Power Ltd project did not complete plant construction until late December 2008. Following the completion of construction, commissioning commenced but the plant was beset with a number of commissioning problems. In anticipation that the plant would be available for practical monitoring in early 2009, a brief sampling exercise was undertaken by Leeds University at the Wastec Ltd. fuel preparation plant in early December 2008 in order to test out the planned fuel sampling regime (Table 1). A residual waste load from Scarborough Borough Council was run through the plant and samples of the fine and coarse shredded fuel fraction taken for analysis of moisture content (At the time the conveyor transfer system to the Scarborough Power Ltd. plant had not been commissioned). Results of the analysis indicated that satisfactory confidence levels (+/- 5% @95% confidence) for determining input fuel moisture contents could be achieved with 10 to 15 sample increments of ~ 1000g (Table 1). As it was not possible to establish the mix of undersize and oversize that would make up the fuel input to the plant, no additional chemical analysis was carried out on these samples to look at confidence levels for the other bulk fuel properties of ash and calorific value. Furthermore, protocols for establishing the energy associated with the biogenic content (and hence the energy qualifying for Renewable Obligation Certificates (ROCs)) had not been agreed with Ofgem at the time (and are still to be confirmed). However, similar confidence levels for ash and CV would be anticipated based on sampling experience at other SRF/RDF plants in the past (Barton 1985, Scott 1984) and the test provided a sound basis for planning the monitoring work once commissioning had been completed. It is also worth noting that the SRF at this point would be expected to exhibit higher variability

13 than SRF entering the reactor (the key sampling point for fuel analysis) after the Atritor drying process (where further size reduction and mixing occurs) In late December 2008 SRF was introduced to the plant and a number of issues were identified requiring further design work and plant modifications. These were completed during January 2009 in parallel with the commissioning of all other items of equipment. Commissioning of the ancillary equipment uncovered design issues with the exhaust and drier systems requiring plant modifications. It was reported that modifications were completed on 6th February 2009. The Flash pyrolysis GEM Converter reached the full operating temperature of 800 C on the 8th February 2009 and feeding of waste material using the integrated system was achieved on the 10th February 2009 producing syngas. Contact made with the technology supplier (GEM) in February 2009 indicated that there was an expectation that operation at 50% design capacity would be achieved by mid March 2009 closely followed by operation at 100% allowing the system to generate electricity from 100% syngas. Leeds University staff were not on site during this period as operations were geared to commissioning rather than establishing performance under known test conditions. On the basis that commissioning was now in progress, an extension to the Leeds University RME contract was requested and granted in March 2009 with a revised end-date of 31st December 2009. Scarborough Power Ltd. reported in June 2009 that plant operations were in a stop period. The technology supplier and contractors were conducting an initial review of the plant, carrying out maintenance and making minor modifications and improvements to improve availability. It was reported that plans to complete this phase by the end of June, entering into another operational period throughout July were envisaged. However, Scarborough Power Ltd. reported that, during the July operational period further commissioning issues were experienced. It had become apparent that bottlenecks within the plant design restricted continuous operation at design feed-rates. A full technical review launched in August 2009 sought to fully identify the process restrictions and the rectifications required. Independent verification of the proposed solutions and the necessary funding to implement them were sought and secured by late 2009, leading to a plant re-commissioning phase planned for 2010. 3.2. RME Monthly Reports to Defra The problems of commissioning the plant were highlighted to Defra as Problematical in the October, November and December 2008 and January 2009 monthly reports sent to Defra (via the ex-officio advisor to the Research Sub-Group of the Technologies Advisory Committee). In the February and March 2009 monthly reports the situation was reported as Highly Problematical. An extension to the project deadline from March 31st 2009 to December 31st 2009 was requested and granted by Defra to accommodate the delays in commissioning.

14 Since April 2009 Leeds University have been waiting for the full commissioning of the plant to be completed. The mid-September 2009 Monthly Report highlighted the Highly Problematical situation. The ongoing problems of plant commissioning were reported to Defra on 26th October 2009 in a Draft Status Report and Leeds University concluded that it was extremely unlikely that any meaningful, fully operational, data could be collected prior to the contract deadline of 31st December 2009. Guidance was sought from Defra and it was recommended that Leeds University would submit a RME report, but including an overview as to the restricted nature of the RME report content (Annex 1). 4. Process Operation Scarborough Power Ltd. have reported to Leeds University that due to the lack of monitoring instrumentation and data logging, the gathering of data on the plant was very poor, potentially inaccurate and could be misinterpreted. They also report that insufficient data was gathered to enable a meaningful evaluation of the Scarborough Power Ltd. plant. During the plant commissioning period from approximately Autumn 2008 to Autumn 2009, the Scarborough Power Ltd team report that the quality of data recorded, although sufficient for their internal purposes, would not withstand the quality assurance level required for evaluation. For example, data to enable mass and energy balances was not available, since the existing data was based on reduced feed-rates and this was the case for only short periods of time. In addition, it was reported that, although accurate metered electricity data was available, it was associated with manual readings and estimates that would be prone to a degree of error. It is unfortunate that the full commissioning process could not be completed in the timescale of the Defra RME contract period such that a full evaluation of the plant could be completed. However, there are some limited data which can be reported in the following sections; 4.1. Solid Recovered Fuel Input The Solid Recovered Fuel input to the Scarborough Power Ltd plant was investigated by University of Leeds staff. The work was carried out as preliminary work to inform the SRF sampling requirements when the full on-site research, monitoring and evaluation test campaigns were to be carried out. The main aim was to establish the sample size requirements of the SRF. The results are shown in table 1. It was found that for initial practical monitoring of SRF feed input, 15 increments of 1kg (150 kg total before size reduction / sub-sampling) of the (combined) fine/coarse fuel stream should provide a reliable sample for assessing drying demand and efficiency. In addition, it was noted that the waste input was from one round of sampling only but moisture values obtained were higher than expected for the coarse shred fraction in particular. Following processing by the Wastec Ltd. plant, the moisture content (48.7 wt%) of the fines (<15mm) flow would be expected to be high given food waste dominates the smaller sized waste components; but lower moisture contents than the

15 42.9 wt% measured were expected for the coarse shred fraction. The high moisture content in this fraction is likely to be due to the upstream recycling collection system which diverts dry materials for recycling which will tend to increase the proportion of high moisture content food waste in the residual waste. Higher proportions of food waste and moisture transfer in storage, collection and processing to the dryer combustible waste categories such a paper, plastics and textiles, which make up the majority of the coarse shred, would result in higher than anticipated values. The fuel to Scarborough Power Ltd. is a combination of these two flows and hence likely to be in excess of 45 wt% on this particular test compared to the design level expected of ~ 35 wt%. High moisture contents in the SRF could impact on plant operations if dryer capacity was overloaded and also would require additional energy to be supplied. The energy demand (specific and latent heat demand) to reduce moisture levels to the 5 wt% needed prior to pyrolysis is some 1.2 MJ/kg of input fuel @ 45 wt% moisture compared to ~ 0.9 MJ/kg for 35 wt% moisture fuel. Expressed in terms of dry fuel to the pyrolysis reactor, the drying energy demand could increase from ~ 7.5% to ~ 12% of the available chemical energy in the fuel. In the case of Scarborough Power Ltd., the energy is provided by waste heat from the gas engine which would not otherwise be utilized but in other configurations/ circumstances, this waste heat might have a more productive end use.

16 Table 1. Results of SRF sampling Test Objective Assessing sample size requirements for moisture content of input fuel to GEM plant 15 increments of ~ 500g for fine fuel. ~1000g for coarse shred fuel. Samples individually assessed for moisture - oven drying @ 90C 24h (checked to steady wt) Plant input. One RCV load from Scarborough Council Plant Operations Only one streamer operational, feedrate 50 - 60% design (estimate ~ 5tph) Fuel product collected in skips / bags - no conveyor connection to GEM plant No Mass balance undertaken (not all feed processed, product weighing impractical))
<15mm fines fuel samples Average sample weight 550g time sample nos moisture % 14.02 1 48.91 14.12 2 53.20 14.23 3 41.80 14.29 4 46.29 14.36 5 42.06 14.43 6 43.89 14.48 7 49.73 14.53 8 41.83 14.58 9 52.86 15.03 10 45.08 15.08 11 46.73 15.13 12 54.06 15.18 13 51.42 15.23 14 55.13 15.28 15 57.35 Average 48.69 SD 5.18 Standard Error * 1.34 95% confidence** 2.90 95% confidence 48.7 +/- 2.91 true mean is (+/- 6%) * standard error = SD/sqr nos of samples ** 95% confidence (15 samples) = 2.17*SE Coarse shred fuel samples Average Sample weight 1050g time 14.05 14.15 14.25 14.33 14.41 15 14.55 15.05 15.15 15.15 15.20 15.35 15.18 15.23 15.28

sample nos 1 2 3 4 5 7 6 8 9 10 11 14 13 14 15 Average SD Standard Error 95% confidence 95% confidence true mean is

moisture % 36.52 45.94 40.33 39.72 45.15 46.27 37.06 38.55 42.17 43.34 32.38 43.47 38.31 39.86 42.91 40.80 3.89 1.00 2.18 40.80 +/2.18 (+/- 5%)

17 Data analysis provided by the Scarborough Power Ltd team is confined to the SRF after drying and gives values for the SRF in 2009 and also data from 2007 used for GEM pilot plant trials (Table 2). While these results illustrate that the drying system installed is achieving the desired moisture reduction to ~ 5% required to ensure a high calorific value syngas can be achieved, operating conditions and input SRF moistures are not available to demonstrate at this stage that the system meets design performance at full load. Ash content for the 2009 sample, at 29%, was higher than anticipated based on the 2007 data suggesting further optimization of the Wastec Ltd. fuel preparation circuit and refining at the Atritordrying stage was needed. Achieving lower ash contents is very desirable from both a fuel quality perspective and to minimize potential fouling / handling problems associated with the discharge from the reactor and char/particulate removal from the gas stream. Limited data on the analysis of char derived from the pyrolysis of SRF for the 2009 commissioning trials and also 2007 data from GEM pilot plant trials were provided by Scarborough Power Ltd., (shown in table 2). The 2007 data was obtained from the GEM pilot plant operating on SRF.

Table 2. Solid Recovered Fuel and derived pyrolysis char analysis, 2007 and 2009 (Data provided by Scarborough Power Ltd.)
FEED Moisture (%) Ash (%) GCV (KJ/Kg) NCV (KJ/Kg) Elemental analysis C H N O S Cl F 2007 5.5 18.1 17769 (%) 43.2 6.4 0.6 26.6 0.3 0.3 <0.1 36.4 4.4 1.6 23.8 0.3 0.2 <0.1 2009 4.4 29 18125 17271 CHAR 2007 2009 2.3 68.475 73.2 9461 10162.5 9184 (%) 22.575 29.1 5.125 0.6 0.45 1 0.375 <0.1 0.3 0.8 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

18

4.2. Mass and Energy Balances

Scarborough Power Ltd., report that the fuel measurement sampling system has not yet been approved by Ofgem and therefore data could not be provided to determine mass and energy balances. The plant application (specific to the technology and process) for ROCs (Renewable Obligation Certificates) accreditation has been approved. Scarborough Power Ltd., also report that the Continuous Emissions Monitoring System data was not available for the RME reporting period due to a calibration issue which produced data that the Environment Agency and Scarborough Power Ltd, deemed unreliable. Whilst some continuous emissions monitoring data exist from earlier trials, Scarborough Power Ltd. have concluded that the data, apart from representing sub-design throughputs and non-optimised process conditions, could not be relied upon. Scarborough Power Ltd., planned full material and energy balances for the plant (Figure 4 and Table 3). However, the Scarborough Power Ltd team reported that no detailed accurate data could be provided due to problems outlined previously.

SCARBOROUGH POWER - MATERIAL MONITORING FLOWCHART

Rape Seed Oil Suppliers Data Processed SRF No weight Daily Sample (Det'm Biomass Content to proportion syngas)

Natural Gas Flowmeter Suppliers Data

(3) (2) (1)

PYROLYSIS CHAMBER

GAS COOLER

Total gas Flowmeter In-line sample and analysis

(4)

GAS ENGINE

(3) - (5)

Gasifier Char No weight No Sample(assume Biomass Content as feedstock to proportion loss)

Rape Seed Oil Cake from gas cooler Weighbridge Sample as discharged (Det'm Biomass Content to proportion oil lost)

(6)

LANDFILL
(5)

Figure 4. Material monitoring flowchart (Supplied by Scarborough Power Ltd.)

19

Table 3. Scarborough Power Ltd., Syngas Generation and Biomass Accountability (supplied by Scarborough Power Ltd.)

SCARBOROUGH POWER - SYNGAS GENERATION - BIOMASS ACCOUNTABILITY

Measurements and Analysis Calculations

SRF

Sample on daily basis Determine Moisture, Ash, Sulphur, Calorific Value and Biomass Content by energy on monthly sample.

Calculate the proportion of SRF contributing to syngas production from the biomass content by energy.

(1)

Natural Gas

Determine Volume by Flowmeter Use Calorific Value from Billing data

Calculate the natural gas energy (CV) contribution to generation by measuring the volume used and energy (CV) contribution by the natural gas when generation is in progress.

(2)

Rape Seed Oil

Determine Volume used by stock measurment at month end Use Calorific Value from Suppliers data sheets

Calculate the volume of rape seed oil used by measurement of stock levels at the beginning of the month plus deliveries in the month less stock levels at the end of the month. Correct this value for losses into the rape seed oil cake (5) that went to landfill.

(3)

Total gas

Sample total gas flow to the gas engine throughout burn periods Determine Volume by Flowmeter Determine Volume of synagas by deduction of natural gas Determine Calorific Value using in-line Calorimeter

Calculate the volume of syngas in total gas using (2) above. Calculate the syngas produced from the biomass component of the SRF using (1) above. Deduct the value (2) to correct for the natural gas CV contribution and also deduct the value (3) to correct for the rape seed oil CV contribution.

(4)

Rape Seed Oil Cake

Sample as and when discharged from Gas Cooler Record weight of all cake discharged from Gas Cooler and sent to landfill Determine Moisture, Ash, Sulphur, Calorific Value and Biomass Content on monthly sample. Use Specific Gravity from suppliers data sheet.

Calculate the proportion of rape seed oil that went to landfill in the cake using weighbridge records and the biomass content by energy (CV). Convert to a volume using Specific Gravity.

(5)

Gasifier Char

Assume Biomass Content is as determined in the SRF. There will be no effect on the proportion of syngas generated from biomass as a result of biomass lost into the char.

There is no calculation required as the losses from the system through carry over of Biomass into the char will be at worst in the same proportion as the biomass content by energy in the SRF and at best less than this (from a ROC eligibility perspective) ie.it would be an overestimate of biomass losses so the syngas may be seen as having a lower biomass content by energy than actual

(6)

20 5. Legislation and Regulation: Scarborough Power Ltd. Plant and the EC Waste Incineration Directive (WID) The Scarborough Power Ltd., GEM flash pyrolysis plant is subject to regulation under the EC Waste Incineration Directive (WID) (2000). The Directive and the Defra Guidance on the Directive (2006) states that, Incineration plant means any stationary or mobile technical unit and equipment dedicated to the thermal treatment of wastes with or without energy recovery of the combustion heat generated. This includes the incineration by oxidation of waste as well as other thermal treatment processes such as pyrolysis, gasification or plasma processes in so far as the substances resulting from the treatment are subsequently incinerated. The Defra Guidance (2006) also clarifies thermal treatment and pyrolysis and gasification in that if a gasification/pyrolysis plant produces a number of products, one or more of which are subsequently burnt, then the WID applies to the whole plant. In cases where the products are burnt away from the gasification/pyrolysis plant (remote units), the WID will apply both to the plants initially producing, as well as subsequently using these products. Figure 2 shows that the Scarborough Power Ltd., plant involves flash pyrolysis of the solid recovered fuel (from municipal solid waste) to generate a pyrolysis gas which is subsequently combusted (incinerated) in a gas engine. The gas engine exhaust passes to the thermal oxidizer (TOX) and/or to the dryer and then to the TOX to destroy any toxic organic compounds. In addition, the Waste Incineration Directive (2000) and also the Defra Guidance on the Directive (2006) requires an operating condition of 850 C for 2 seconds in that Incineration plants shall be designed, equipped, built and operated in such a way that the gas resulting from the process is raised, after the last injection of combustion air, in a controlled and homogeneous fashion and even under the most unfavourable conditions, to a temperature of 850 C, as measured near the inner wall or at another representative point of the combustion chamber as authorized by the competent authority for two seconds. However, the Directive also states that, conditions different from those laid down above in relation to temperature for certain thermal processes may be authorized by the competent authority (i.e. the Environment Agency), provided the requirements of the Waste Incineration Directive are met. That is, the emission limits set out in the Directive must be met, irrespective of any derogation, given by the Environment Agency in regard to operating temperature and gas residence time. The Defra Guidance on the Directive (2006) also states that Furnace temperatures and the flue gas residence time are the two parameters that can be derogated provided the plant does not exceed the emission limits As such, Scarborough Power Ltd., applied to the Environment Agency for a derogation from the Waste Incineration Directive as the process was a thermal treatment (pyrolysis) process rather than an incinerator. The application for the derogation included computational fluid dynamics simulation of the down stream thermal oxidizer (TOX) by Ansys Fluent. The Fluent computational fluid dynamics simulation was used to simulate the flow of gases in the thermal oxidizer to

21 calculate the temperature distribution and the gas residence time. The simulation results reported a minimum temperature in the thermal oxidizer main combustion chamber of 765 C and a gas residence time of 0.73 seconds. Not-with-standing the derogation on temperature and residence time, the plant would still have to meet the emission limits of the Waste Incineration Directive. 6. Health & Safety The Scarborough Power Ltd. site is located at the Seamer Carr site, owned and operated by Yorwaste and includes a non-hazardous landfill, a Materials Recycling Facility (MRF) and a green waste windrow composting system. During the plant construction and commissioning phases, Leeds University personnel visited the site on several occasions. On arrival at the site, visitors were required to sign in at the office (and to sign out again before they leave). Visitors and site staff were required to wear a high-visibility jacket or vest, safety boots and hard hats. Leeds University personnel were accompanied by a member of the Scarborough Power Ltd. staff while on the site. It was clear that Health and Safety was taken very seriously at the site. 7. Conclusion The Research Monitoring and Evaluation specification prepared by the University of Leeds set out a programme based on the expectation that full commissioning of the Scarborough Power Ltd plant would be completed by late Summer/ early Autumn of 2008. However, since Summer 2008 through to the end of the extended contract deadline of December 31st 2009, the Scarborough Power Ltd plant has suffered continual commissioning problems and did not produce a continuous and extended fully operational period to design specification on which a meaningful study could be undertaken. The University of Leeds have therefore undertaken only very limited work on the monitoring and evaluation of the plant and none of this work relates to operation at design specification. Scarborough Power Ltd. have reported (December 2009) that due to the lack of monitoring instrumentation and data logging, the gathering of data on the plant throughout the Research, Monitoring and Evaluation contract period was very poor. They also report that insufficient data was gathered to enable a meaningful evaluation of the Scarborough Power Ltd. plant. Scarborough Power Ltd report that the quality of data recorded, although sufficient for their internal purposes, would not withstand the quality assurance level required for evaluation by Leeds University. During short run commissioning trials the steady and consistent operational periods needed to gather data for reliably assessing performance do not exist. The plant is a genuinely new process in terms of the throughput and commercialising of the concepts developed and trialled at pilot scale by the technology supplier, GEM Ltd. It is understood that Scarborough Power Ltd., remain committed to completing the modifications needed to permit the plant to be fully commissioned.

22 In conclusion, it is evident that the plant overall did not perform to full design expectations during the RME contract period and, until such time as continuous operations are established, the process must be considered, as yet, unproven overall.

8. References Barton JR, Poll AJ (1985) Doncaster Plant Operation. Test Report No2, WSL LR572(MR), October 1985 Scott DW (1984) The Construction and Testing of a Sampling Programme for Refuse Derived Fuel. WSL CR2547(AP), March 1984.

23

Annex 1. Data Availability in relation to RME Specification The data made available by Scarborough Power Ltd is presented (in bold) in Annex 1 in relation to the original Research, Monitoring and Evaluation Specification table. Annex 1. RME Specification table and data availability Theme
[1] Process

Parameter
A description and flow diagram outlining each main stage of the demonstrator project.

Methodology
Site observation. GEM process flowsheets and installation diagrams, plan and elevation. Scarborough Power and Wastec Ltd. feedstock preparation diagram and process flow sheet. Process material and energy balance informed from inputs and outputs.

Reporting
GEM, Scarborough Power and Wastec Ltd. to LU, 1st report and final report.

Data Availability and Final RME Report

Process flow sheets made available from Scarborough Power Ltd. plus site observation

LU to Defra, GEM, Scarborough Power via Final report LU to Defra, GEM, Scarborough Power via Final report

STATUS: COMPLETE (Process description in RME Final Report)

Material and energy flows

The Research Monitoring and Evaluation specification prepared by the University of Leeds set out a programme based on the expectation that full commissioning of the Scarborough Power Ltd plant would be completed by late Summer/ early Autumn of 2008. However, since Summer 2008 through to the end of the extended contract deadline of December 31st 2009, the Scarborough Power Ltd plant has suffered commissioning problems and did not produce a continuous, extended,

24

operational period to design specification during the RME contract period on which a meaningful study could be undertaken. Scarborough Power Ltd. have reported (December 2009) that due to the lack of monitoring instrumentation and data logging, the gathering of data on the plant throughout the Research Monitoring and Evaluation contract period was very poor. The conclusion of the Scarborough Power Ltd. team is that insufficient data was gathered to enable a meaningful evaluation of the plant. The Scarborough Power Ltd team report that the quality of data recorded, although sufficient for internal purposes, would not withstand the quality assurance level required for evaluation by Leeds University.
STATUS: UNABLE TO COMPLETE

Data obtained from Scarborough Power, GEM and Wastec Ltd. for normal operating

GEM, Scarborough Power and Wastec Ltd. to LU as required. GEM, Scarborough Power and

Planned on-site monitoring and sampling campaigns which would be in-turn correlated with the plant mass and energy balances and plant outputs were planned.

25

conditions Detailed data obtained during on-site monitoring and sampling and analysis campaigns by LU

Wastec Ltd. to LU for on-site periods. LU campaign data to Scarborough Power and GEM via LU progress reports and final report

However, since the plant did not become fully operational for any extended period of time during the RME contract period and therefore the work could not be carried out STATUS: UNABLE TO COMPLETE Request made to Scarborough Power Ltd for data received the following response; Having read through the requested information, we do not believe we have adequate information to enable Leeds to complete a meaningful evaluation of the SPL plant. As described within our Project Report, the lack of instrumentation and data logging on the SPL demonstrator is very poor. The existing data is based on reduced feedrates, it includes accurate metered electricity data, however it also includes a proportion of manual readings and estimates that will be prone to a degree of error. A meaningful mass and energy balance can only be determined from accurately (manually) collected data when operating at full design rates. The quality of data recorded, although sufficient for our internal purposes, would not withstand the quality assurance level required for evaluation by a reputable research organisation. External use of existing data would

26

require substantial process & operational understanding that would be difficult to convey within the report. It is for these reasons we feel an evaluation report based on existing data would be potentially inaccurate and could be misinterpreted. STATUS: UNABLE TO COMPLETE Sub-system mass and energy flows Sub-system mass and energy flows 1. Assessment of the SRF feedstock preparation subsystem. Using Scarborough Power and Wastec Ltd. data. Where available Scarborough Power to provide samples for LU analysis. SRF feed preparation, shredding, drying, metals recovery, metal contamination with paper and plastics etc. LU to sort and submit for cv, ash and moisture analysis as required. Scarborough Power and Wastec Ltd. data to LU. Also detailed data to be provided by Scarborough Power for days when on-site monitoring is being carried out by LU (Data to be supplied within 1 week of on-site testing by LU) Information was requested from Scarborough Power Ltd. regarding the weight of rejects from the Atritor / dryer system. The response was; During commissioning this was contaminated with other waste materials and any data presented would not be representative of stable plant operation

LU analysis data to Scarborough Power via quarterly reports as appropriate. STATUS: UNABLE TO COMPLETE

2. Assessment of the GEM flash pyrolysis unit and gas cleaning system

Using Scarborough Power and GEM data. LU will also sample and analyse gases exiting the flash pyrolysis unit and also exiting the gas clean-

Scarborough Power and Wastec Ltd. data to LU. Also detailed data to be provided by Scarborough Power for days when on-site monitoring is being carried out by LU (Data to be

Several on-site sampling and monitoring campaigns were planned, however, because the plant did not become fully operational during the RME contract period, the work could not be carried out A request was made to Scarborough Power

27

up system. Analysis to include analysis of condensed oils/tars and gases. Analysis of char from cyclone Analysis of oil bleed Analysis of scrubber effluent

supplied within 1 week of on-site testing by LU) Where applicable, LU progress reports and final report

Ltd related to the amount of electricity exported during the monitoring period to ascertain how much was attributable to pyrolysis syngas. Their response was; There is insufficient data logging within the current gas compositional analyser to determine this. A request was made to Scarborough Power Ltd. regarding pyrolysis syngas composition and calorific value. Scarborough Power report; Whilst the (gas) grab samples were encouraging, as stated in the DEFRA report it is too early in the commercial operation of the plant to draw firm conclusions on the range of CVs achieved from MSW In addition, they report; There is insufficient data logging within the current gas compositional analyser. STATUS: UNABLE TO COMPLETE A request was made to Scarborough Power Ltd for information regarding the parasitic gas use and parasitic electricity use and they report that; ..numbers are indicative and will need to be confirmed following extended running of the plant and varying feed

3. Assessment of the gas engine and generator system

Using Scarborough Power and GEM normal operating data

Scarborough Power and GEM data to LU

Also detailed data to be provided by Scarborough Power for days

28

when on-site monitoring is being carried out by LU (Data to be supplied within 1 week of on-site testing by LU) 4. SRF dryer and thermal oxidizer system Using Scarborough Power and GEM normal operating data Scarborough Power and GEM data to LU Also detailed data to be provided by Scarborough Power for days when on-site monitoring is being carried out by LU (Data to be supplied within 1 week of on-site testing by LU)

rates.

STATUS: UNABLE TO COMPLETE Since the plant did not become fully operational for an extended period of time during the RME contract period, any meaningful work on the SRF dryer and thermal oxidizer could not be carried out

STATUS: UNABLE TO COMPLETE

Inputs

SRF

Normal operating data for the plant to provide information on; -waste input, including mass, cv, moisture, ash. LU to analyse for CHNOS & Cl content, and waste category composition of SRF.

Normal Operating Scarborough Power data to LU on a monthly basis.

Also data to be provided by Scarborough Power for days when on-site monitoring is being carried out by LU (Data to be supplied within 1 week of on-site testing by LU)

The Solid Recovered Fuel input to the Scarborough Power Ltd plant was investigated as preliminary work to inform the SRF sampling requirements when the full on-site research, monitoring and evaluation test campaigns were to be carried out. The main aim was to establish the sample size requirements of the SRF. (See Section 4.1). Limited data on SRF composition was supplied by Scarborough Power Ltd and is included in Section 4.1 More detailed analyses of the SRF was to be undertaken related to the full operational

29

phase of the plant related to the planned onsite monitoring and sampling campaigns which would be in-turn correlated with the plant mass and energy balances and plant outputs. However, since the plant did not become fully operational for extended periods of time during the RME contract period, the work could not be carried out. STATUS: UNABLE TO COMPLETE Inputs Natural Gas Chemicals e.g. treatment chemicals, rapeseed oil Normal metered operating data for the plant to provide information on natural gas consumption, chemicals such as scrubber solutions, rapeseed oil scrubber, etc. Where data is limited or unavailable, discussion will be held between Scarborough Power and LU regarding testing and analysis particularly for LU monitoring campaigns. Marketed/Market able Outputs Electricity Normal metered operating data for the plant should provide information on electricity generated. Normal Operating Scarborough Power data to LU on a monthly basis. Insufficient continued data logging available

Also data to be provided by Scarborough Power for days when on-site monitoring is being carried out by LU (Data to be supplied within 1 week of on-site testing by LU) Scarborough Power data to LU.

STATUS: UNABLE TO COMPLETE Scarborough Power Ltd. reported that the plant operated at less than full capacity and natural gas was used to supplement pyrolysis gas to the engine. Scarborough Power Ltd., report that it was not able to proportion how much of the electricity

30

generated was due to the pyrolysis synthetic gas due to insufficient data logging within the gas compositional analyzer. STATUS: UNABLE TO COMPLETE Metals Normal operating data for the plant should provide information on ferrous and non-ferrous metals recovered Normal operating data for the plant should provide information on mass of char produced. LU will analyse the char for moisture, ash and cv. Scarborough Power data to LU. Normal full design operation was not achieved

NonMarketed/Market able Outputs

Char/ash

Scarborough Power data to LU. Also detailed data to be provided by Scarborough Power for days when on-site monitoring is being carried out by LU (Data to be supplied within 1 week of on-site testing by LU) Where applicable, LU progress reports and final report

STATUS: UNABLE TO COMPLETE Request made to Scarborough Power Ltd for data on char received the following response Quantification of char volumes produced has been difficult due to char carryover into the gas system, however a one off grab sample char analysis has been taken and can be provided. Data on the char analysis is reported in the RME report section 4.1

Rapeseed oil cooler

Normal operating data for the plant should provide information on rapeseed oil bleed and subsequent feed to the flash pyrolysis unit.

Scarborough Power data to LU. Also detailed data to be provided by Scarborough Power for days when on-site monitoring is being carried out by LU (Data to be supplied within 1 week of on-site

STATUS: UNABLE TO COMPLETE Scarborough Power reported that; Operational experience has shown that any carried over rapeseed oil remains as liquid that can be drained from the system and does not contribute to the CV of the gas consumed within the engine.

31

LU will analyse the oil for moisture, cv and composition.

testing by LU)

Where applicable, LU progress reports and final report Scrubber effluent Normal operating data for the plant should provide information on scrubber effluent produced. LU may need to analyse the effluent for halogen content, hydrocarbon content. Scarborough Power data to LU. Also detailed data to be provided by Scarborough Power for days when on-site monitoring is being carried out by LU (Data to be supplied within 1 week of on-site testing by LU)

STATUS: UNABLE TO COMPLETE Insufficient continued data logging available

STATUS: UNABLE TO COMPLETE

Where applicable, LU progress reports and final report

Exhaust gases

Normal operating data for the plant should provide information on exhaust gas composition, temperature and gas flow rate.

Scarborough Power data to LU. Also detailed data to be provided by Scarborough Power for days when on-site monitoring is being carried out by LU (Data to be supplied within 1 week of on-site testing by LU) A request for continuous emissions monitoring (CEMs) data in relation to operation during the plant commissioning period was made to Scarborough Power Ltd. Their response was; The CEMs emission data is not available since at our last site inspection the EA have highlighted an issue with the units calibration, therefore we cannot share information the EA deem currently unreliable.

32

Insufficient continued data logging available

STATUS: UNABLE TO COMPLETE [2] Reliability, Availability, Maintainability and Operability A range of parameters relating to different pieces of operational equipment - the reliability of all main plant and machinery during the operational phase; - the operating hours and downtime for maintenance, or on other grounds; fluctuations from normal operating conditions; - the maintenance frequency and type (e.g. routine, breakdown etc); - description of the main control systems used for automatic control (i.e. to display Logging responsibility with Scarborough Power with regular feedback to LU Scarborough Power to LU on a 3 monthly basis LU to incorporate into Defra report with any comments

The plant did not become fully operational to full design specifications for extended periods of time during the RME contract period and therefore the work could not be carried out

STATUS: UNABLE TO COMPLETE

33

information, log data and show alarms); and - (where operationally varied by the demonstrator project operator) process responsiveness to changes in one or more key variables. [3] Legislation and regulation Compliance with key legislative and regulatory requirements

- compliance with all key legislative and regulatory requirements; and - contribution to BMW diversion and wider targets (e.g. BVPI recycling, ROCs under the Renewables Obligation, Climate Change Bill etc.).

Enviros to monitor but LU will also receive SP reports to the EA (monthly) and review in light of direct test data. No significant contribution to recycling targets directly but Wastec Ltd. metals recycling / other performance will be made available to LU for reporting. BMW diversion at plant will be 100% under normal operating conditions. Initial bmw content of input fuel will be measured and reported by

Enviros to report to Defra LU to summarise monthly findings to provide context for commenting on process performance. LU to report recycling / MBW diversion and ROC allocation per tonne of input in final report. These data will be presented in context of the household waste management system.

The key legislation covering the plant is the Waste Incineration Directive (WID) (2000). An application was made by Scarborough Power Ltd for a derogation in relation to temperature and residence time. Scarborough Power Ltd. report that; The WID operating condition derogation was based on fluid dynamic modelling of the thermal oxidiser conducted by Ansys Ltd. This demonstrated exactly what temperature and residence time the SPL thermal oxidiser would deliver, these conditions were implemented into the permit as the required operating conditions for WID. The CFD modelling report conducted by Ansys Fluent and provided by Scarborough

34

LU. ROCs obtained will be reported by SP to LU

Power Ltd., is discussed in section 5. Information regarding the eligibility of the Scarborough Power Ltd plant for Renewable Obligation Certificates (ROCs) was requested. The response of Scarborough Power Ltd., was; SPLs Fuel Monitoring Sampling has not yet been approved by Ofgem and therefore cannot be provided. The basis on which the plants eligibility has been determined and how the parasitic accounting has been agreed can be shared. However until the mechanism has been actually used to claim ROCs it is difficult to assess its operability, effectiveness and whether this methodology should be copied by other similar plants. STATUS: UNABLE TO COMPLETE

[4] Health and safety

A range of possible issues identified in site risk assessments and operating procedures

LU staff to report any observed infringements or hazards to the site manager

LU to Scarborough Power as events occur plus logging on LU site diary

Leeds University staff were only on-site during the construction and commissioning stages for infrequent periods. Only general comments regarding Health & Safety could be made STATUS: LIMITED INFORMATION AVAILABLE, UNABLE TO COMPLETE

[5] Headline capital and

Various

Data to be collected by Enviros

Enviros to report to Defra and LU The Scarborough Power Plant did not

35

operating costs

become fully design operational for an extended time during the RME contract period. Therefore comments regarding capital and operating costs would be inappropriate. STATUS: UNABLE TO COMPLETE

36 ANNEX 2 : Meetings Timeline [1] Date: January 2008 Commencement of the RME Scarborough Power Ltd. Contract [2] Date: 23rd April 2008 Personnel: Paul Williams, John Barton, Dr Jude Onwudili (LU), representatives from Eunomia, Yorwaste, GEM, Caron Contractors Engineering, Enviros, RPS and AiIE Location: Cayley Court, Scarborough Business Park, Scarborough Inception meeting to develop an RME specification. [3] Date: 11th June 2008 Personnel: Paul Williams, John Barton, (LU) Joanna Billen (GEM/Scarborough Power Ltd.) Location: Torbay, June 2008 Discussion of proposed GEM/Scarborough Plant, including plant operation, plant build timetable, commissioning timetable, sampling and analysis protocols, planned on-site monitoring dates, RME draft protocol etc. [4] Date: 8th October 2008 Personnel: Paul Williams, John Barton, Dr Bill Nimmo (LU), Joanna Billen (GEM/Scarborough Power Ltd.) Location: GEM/Scarborough Power Ltd. site, Seamer Carr, Scarborough Discussion of current progress on commissioning, planning of on-site monitoring campaigns, identification of potential sampling points, data analysis. Tour of site. [5] Date: 26th November 2008 Personnel: Paul Williams, John Barton, (LU), Stuart McLanaghan (AiIE) Mike Brown (Eunomia) Location: Leeds University Teleconference call Discussion of current progress on the Scarborough Power Ltd. project and commissioning difficulties. [6] Date: 14th December 2008 Personnel: John Barton (LU), Mike Greenhalf (LU) Geoff Green (LU), Gordon Moorhead (Wastec Ltd.) Sampling Visit to Wastec Ltd. plant to test fuel sampling protocol [7] Date: 26th February 2009 Personnel: Paul Williams, John Barton (LU) Joanna Billen (GEM/Scarborough Power Ltd.) Location: GEM/Scarborough Power Ltd. site, Seamer Carr, Scarborough Discussion of current progress on commissioning, planning of on-site monitoring campaigns, identification of potential sampling points, data analysis. Tour of site. [8] 4th March 2009 Personnel, Paul Williams Location: Huyton Business Park, Lancashire Defra New Technologies TAC Research Sub-Group Meeting RME Update Presentation Presentation of RME specification, current status of plant commissioning. Reported the planning and preparation for on-site monitoring and testing. Reported major plant commissioning difficulties in relation to RME deadline of 31st March 2009. Recommended extension to project