How Gasification Turns Waste Into Energy

How Gasification Turns Waste Into Energy

Our society produces a lot of waste. Over 2 billion tons
per year, in fact. A number that’s expected to grow
by 70 percent by 2050. That’s a line of garbage trucks stretching
from San Francisco to New York City every single day. Organic materials in
landfills decompose. They produce methane, a
very potent greenhouse gas. Solid waste, plastics,
paper, cardboard. There’s a lot of energy within
those – carbon and hydrogen. Why don’t you do
something useful with it? Converting waste into energy is
not a new idea. Usually, though, this has meant incineration
– that is, burning our trash to recover some energy. But that has major drawbacks. Incineration creates toxic ash and
hazardous chemicals called dioxins. And heat and electricity are pretty
much the only usable outputs. A better solution may lie in
gasification, an old technology which has only recently been repurposed as a
way to deal with our waste. Gasification companies don’t
burn trash. Instead, they turn it into a gas, in
a process that they say is both economical and eco-friendly. The focus is on producing a good
quality syngas that can be converted into higher value energy products on the
back end, be it electricity, hydrogen, diesel fuel, possibly even
chemicals, fertilizer, etc., in the future. It’s an exciting
idea, and some major players, including the Bill Gates-led fund Breakthrough
Energy Ventures, have thrown their weight behind it. While in the
past, gasification companies have struggled to scale up and meet their
energy production targets, now companies like Sierra Energy, Enerkem and Plasco say
they’re ready to commercialize and expand. I think we have over
9,000 interested parties from around the world who’ve contacted us already. The question is how quickly
can we get one? The answer is soon. The world’s first municipal waste incinerator
was built in 1874 in Nottingham, England, and like incinerators
of today, it converted trash into ash, gas and
heat via combustion. Initially, the purpose was just
to shrink our waste. Eventually though, Great Britain and
Germany did start recovering energy from the process. But the idea didn’t
really catch on i n the U.S. Domestic electricity prices were already
low, and as emission standards tightened, incineration got even more
expensive as compared to landfilling. It wasn’t until the oil
embargo and resulting energy crisis in the 1970s that the U.S. really took an interest
in waste-to-energy tech. Over 100 waste-to-energy incineration plants
were built, but when fuel prices dropped, interest waned. You see a lot of interest in
this waste conversion or biomass conversion when the fuel price
is really expensive. And then when the fuel
price drops, nobody really cares. Today, there are about 70
waste-to-energy plants in the U.S., and the number is declining. But globally, many European countries
still rely heavily on incineration. And Japan and China have been
building waste-to-energy incinerators at a rapid clip. But many environmentalists say
we need a better solution. Incinerators still emit harmful pollutants,
especially in countries with lax environmental regulations. So burning waste to get rid of it
may appear to be cheap, but the long-term health consequences for
the community is terrible. So companies like Hart’s Sierra
Energy are looking towards gasification, an old technology that proponents hope to
repurpose as a cleaner and more economical waste-to-energy solution. In the gasification process,
materials aren’t combusted. No toxic ash or dioxins are produced. Instead, a highly controlled amount of
oxygen or steam reacts with the waste, turning it into a gaseous
mixture of carbon monoxide, hydrogen and other elements. This synthetic gas
has applications beyond electricity generation. It can be converted into
high value products like diesel fuel, hydrogen fuel or ethanol. So even if electricity prices stay low,
there’ll be a market for these outputs. We seen much more
value in chemicals and biofuels. Methanol is an important building
block in the chemical industry. Ethanol is, of course as you
know, can be blended and fuels. In this way, w aste-to-energy gasification
plants have both upstream and downstream revenue potential. On one side, you’re being paid to
take garbage that normally would be dumped into a landfill. So that’s one source of revenue. You then take that waste and
you turn it into recycled products. Those products have very high value. And so from a business model
perspective, you’re getting paid on both ends. But a main challenge facing
companies like Sierra Energy, Enerkem and Plasco is dealing with the
unpredictability of using municipal solid waste as the fuel. Globally, there
are hundreds of gasification plants that generate electricity from fossil
fuels like coal, but waste-to-energy gasification is a
whole different game. Tailoring your gasification when your fuel
changes over time is the Holy Grail. And if they can consistently
gasify and produce their natural gas from these waste materials, even if
the content changes, that’s an exciting option. Here are some of
the main players taking that plunge. Davis, California based Sierra Energy
was founded in 2004. Back then, CEO Mike Hart, who is
also the CEO of Sierra Railroad Company, was seeking to improve the fuel
efficiency of his locomotive fleet. We were trying to figure out a
way to make our own fuel. We wanted to do
something better than diesel. He was judging a
business competition at U.C. Davis when he heard about how
blast furnaces, one of mankind’s oldest technologies, could be used to convert
any mixture of materials into a usable synthetic gas. Hart bought the patents to this
technology and Sierra Energy was born. Over time, its mission expanded
far beyond its initial reach. People are realizing that climate change
is a very real problem. When you throw away one ton of
garbage, every ton is about 6.2 tons of CO2 equivalent goes into the
atmosphere in the form of methane. Methane is 86 times more potent a climate
change gas than CO2 over a 20 year period. Our technology provides one
way of trying to address that problem. Last July, Sierra Energy closed
its $33 million dollar Series A funding round, led by Breakthrough Energy
Ventures, the Bill Gates led investor fund that also includes Marc
Benioff, Jeff Bezos and Richard Branson. Now, the company has partnered
with the Department of Defense to develop its first small-scale commercial
facility at Fort Hunter Liggett in Monterey County, California. This demo facility can handle 20 tons of
waste per day, and if all goes according to plan, it will begin
processing trash in early 2020. Ultimately, Sierra Energy says what sets them
apart is their use of the blast furnace, a centuries old technology
in the iron and steel industry. Here’s how it works. A blast furnace, which is the
technology platform that Sierra Energy uses, is a high temperature vessel. Solid materials go in at the top. Injecting gases are placed
in at the bottom. And you have a
big countercurrent heat exchanger. We’re injecting oxygen and steam at
the base instead of hot air. And at the top, we’re placing in
solid waste materials instead of those mined materials from the ground. And instead of the focus being
producing good quality metal out the bottom, our focus is on making a
good qualit y syngas, synthesis gas, out the top of the vessel. Once the
syngas is produced, the local community or developer will decide what
to do with it. The company lists electricity, hydrogen,
renewable diesel fuel and ammonia as likely end products. About 10 percent of the waste material can’t
be converted to gas and so is instead turned into a stone that
can be used as construction material. Because of this wide variety of use
cases, it’s hard to say for sure exactly how clean the
end-to-end process will be. It really depends on the
specifics of the project. How far waste is having to
be brought to the location. Some of the configuration
of the plant itself. Hart is confident though, that in almost
every case, it will be carbon negative. Because even if you’re making
electricity or diesel for a vehicle, the amount of pollution that
comes out of the tailpipe or smokestack is less than the amount
of emissions that you’re offsetting in the first place. Furthermore, Sierra
Energy’s plant doesn’t rely on external energy to operate. Instead, Hart says that about 20 percent
of the energy created is used to run the plant itself. And so by some people’s analysis, you
can make this carbon negative or carbon neutral. By other analyses, y ou
can’t quite get there, but it’s certainly cleaner than
fossil natural gas. Over the next few years, Hart says
the company plans to build out community-scale systems that can handle about
50 tons of waste per day, the equivalent of approximately
50,000 people’s trash. If we want to have
an impact on that 13.2 billion tons a year of greenhouse gas,
we need to have thousands of these systems around the world
as quickly as possible. That’s our goal as a company. While Sierra Energy’s most recent funding
round has put it in the spotlight, there are a number of
other veterans in this space. Two of the biggest are Plasco
Conversion Technologies, f ounded in 2005, and Enerkem, founded in 2000. Like Sierra Energy, both aim to
turn municipal solid waste into valuable end products through gasification. But unlike Sierra Energy, these
two companies have actually accumulated years of firsthand experience
operating full-scale gasification plants, dealing with their fair share of
delays and setbacks along the way. Plasco Conversion Technologies uses plasma
to refine the waste from gasification into a clean syngas. The company operated a large demonstration
facility in Ottawa from January 2008 to January 2015, capable of accepting
135 tons of waste per day. Eventually, Plasco got approval to build
a commercial scale plant, a nd though the company raised over $300
million dollars, it ultimately wasn’t enough. The new plant was never built,
t he demo facility shut down, and Ottowa severed ties with the company. But Plasco kept chugging along and reemerged
with a new outlook on the market. We put in 1.2 million man hours and a decade
of work and $407 million dollars. We can tell you many
ways that don’t work. And what we do now does work. In the process, w e realized
that the waste-to-electricity market, the waste-to- energy market
was going away. Unable to compete with the low price
of natural gas, Plasco now aims to produce synthetic fuels for use in
internal combustion engines, which can power cars, planes and trains. The company no longer operates any plants,
but it says there are a number of projects in the works. And for these future endeavors, Plasco
has slimmed down its business model. We aren’t doing build,
own, operate, transfer anymore. We’re doing selling the
equipment and the technology. So we restricted what we did ,
so we weren’t in competition with the entire world, but
more in cooperation. Another player, Enerkem, developed
the world’s first commercial waste-to-biofuels facility of
its kind. It’s been operating in Edmonton, Canada
since 2014 and is currently focusing on turning trash into
ethanol biofuel and chemicals like methanol. It’s a facility that can take
up to 100,000 tons per year of waste, around 300 tons per day. So this type of size would represent
a community of around half a million to 700,000 inhabitants. This plant uses a technology called a
fluid ized bed gasifier, in which the trash is dropped into a bed
of hot sand, oxygen and steam. The precise mixture causes the waste to
heat up and turn immediately into gas. But Enerkem has also faced
challenges as it’s scaled up. The company initially predicted its first
plant would operate at full capacity by 2012, but it
still isn’t there yet. The company won’t reveal how close
it is to full-scale operation, but Chornet says that despite the delays, he’s
glad that his company is taking the time to get it right. We’re really
proud that we did not skip any steps. However, this comes at a cost. So we have both a patient
approach and a realistic approach for innovations of this scale. And also we have an enormous database
as well as operation time at commercial level. So these three
aspects really differentiate us. In its 20 year history,
E nerkem has raised $616.5 million dollars and now has plans
to build additional facilities in the Netherlands, Spain, the U.K. and Canada. It’s one of the
most well-established companies in the space, but with just one commercial facility,
there’s still plenty of room for others to play catch up and learn
from what’s worked and what hasn’t. Everyone likes to be in the
race to be number two. The idea is the first plant, the
pilot plant is more expensive, so you’d rather learn from somebody else. On this topic, I’m
not at all worried. The first one at large-scale may have
some kinks in it, but it’s also likely to get some of the best
subsidies and deals from the municipality. These potential subsidies, alongside other policy
drivers, stand to play a major role in determining how
quickly this tech spreads. So the future for gasifiers is, in my
view, more tied to the economics of the climate change story, t he
prices on carbon, the prohibitions on emitting any fossil fuels, than it is
on the technology, which we’ve known about for a long time. Given
current policies, such as California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard, S ierra Energy says
it could build many more plants, but not on the scale that
they’d like to see eventually. To get to hundreds is very feasible. But to get many thousands, that will
need different regions of the world to step up and force people
to divert waste from the landfill. This could look like higher
landfilling fees, carbon credits, carbon taxes, emissions regulations
or subsidies. Any and all would be a boon, s
o long as these gasification companies can operate as cleanly as they claim. But as climate policies and priorities
shift in tandem with election cycles, it can be hard for this
tech to establish a strong foothold. Once we know, o kay, this is a
policy that we’re going to stick with for 10 years, I think there will be
a lot of confidence from these investors. But if you don’t know what the policy is
going to be in every two years or three years or four years, it’s
very difficult to make any decision. But as our landfills fill up
and the world gets hotter, companies, investors and the public at large are
realizing that we can’t wait much longer to seek novel solutions. People who say, we’ll recycle our way
out of it using conventional means, those people are out of their minds. It’s not happening. If we’re gonna do anything to try
to reduce climate change, those 13.2 billion tons of CO2 equivalent going
into the atmosphere from landfills is the very first place that we
should try to address it.

100 Replies to “How Gasification Turns Waste Into Energy

  1. The problem is the same as its always been. People collectively are usually pretty stupid.
    For instance, even with Wikipedia and google on their phones, they still for the life of them can't tell the difference between gasification and incineration.
    Another challenge is gasification plants have to compete with "cheaper" fuels, such as natural gas.
    The problem with that simplistic thinking is fossil fuels aren't cheap when you include environmental costs.

  2. Why not use garbage as a way to compliment renewable energy sources? Only burn it when solar & wind are at their low. Garbage can be the "Seasonal" energy source we need to make solar & wind work.

    Also (since the fuel changing over time is a challenge 4:45 ) having a large amount of garbage on hand means it can be mixed more and therefor be more consistent. Your Welcome . . .

  3. What a bunch of crap advertising to promote another polluting system
    YOUR COOKING TO POLLUTE to recover !

    What happened to doing away with creating plastics all together ?
    We lived centuries without plastics and now everything is throw away plastics,
    Now it's time to throw away the manufactures of plastics,
    Stainless steel eating utensils last a long time, but fast food restaurants do not like licking up after customers and cleaning utensils.
    The same goes for party goers and their plates,
    People are to damn lazy to correct themselves and those people for their arrogance who don't care about this world need to be shot !

  4. You need government investment in these initial plants to crowd-in other investments. When the guy says “everybody’s racing to be #2” that’s because the private sector isn’t able/willing to invest that initial large-scale patient capital to develop the technology and find innovative cost-saving solutions.

    If waste and climate change is a national security risk, instead of spending billions of dollars on failed fighter jets, or instead of relying on the private sector alone, we should spend that money more productively. Imagine: the other guy said that, ideally, we’d have a waste syngas plant for every 50 thousand people. Eventually, if they’re able to make back that money, they’d be able to pay back a government guaranteed loan. Give those plants guaranteed loans and kickstart a nationwide good-paying jobs program.

    That’d be a green new deal.

  5. There seems to be a lot of misinformation in this video. Firstly electricity is one of the most valuable things you can get from waste, so incinerators really aren't that bad in this regard, especially when they manage to valorize heat as well. Secondly emissions from waste to energy plants are strongly controlled. dioxins, acid gasses, NOx etc. are filtered. Most of the slag is used as a base construction material (road filler etc). It is true though that incinerators concentrate harmful pollutants (chloride, heavy metals, mercury, dioxins…) in filter ashes, and those need to be disposed in safe landfills. But then again those pollutants are only resulting from the waste composition.
    Currently the gas produced by a waste gasifier is so low grade that the only way to use it is in a boiler… So in the end the whole process requires much more investment than an incinerator, especially when considering the upstream preparation (sorting, shredding, …), and produces much less output than a conventionnal waste incinerator.

  6. Peoples doesn't pay attentions that even without the Climate change issues having alternative Energy source that comes from our modern way of life (waste)besides Fossils Fuels means less dependency on Oil Producing countries monopolies and economic influences for the rest of the world.
    it means less ass kissing the US and Arabs.
    third world economy countries should be the first priorities for those gassifier companies to pitch their plans.

  7. It is imperative for responsible govt to process/recycle waste. It prevents landfills from being overloaded with the waste as well as environment friendly. The raw material i.e. waste is always going to be there and therefore it is critical to process/recycle it.

  8. I’ve always thought things like this were good ideas. But taxes are so high & always getting raised, there has to be another way to raise enough money. Or how about lower our taxes so we can choose which taxes to replace with better ones.

  9. Shell and other oil companies will buy the equipment patients then never build the equipment to allow this to move forward.
    My faith in the good of humanity is completely gone.

  10. I'm confused about the capability of these facilities… can they convert bio waste into hydrocarbon fuels, to offset methane emissions from landfills? I thought it was only capable of converting plastics to hydrocarbon gases… obviously plastics in landfills aren't biodegraded to produce methane quickly

  11. In Denmark, alot of waste-water plants use the biological waste in bio-reactors to create biogas – the biogas is primarily methane (60v% methane, 40v% CO2) which is used to power a biogas-motor (basicly a gas motor) – which powers a small generator (around 500kW) – the electricity from the generator is sold on the national electric grid, and the heat from the coolingwater is sold as district heating – some waste-water plants purify their biogas into natural gas and sells this onto the national gas distribution net.

    Non-biological waste is burned and the heat supply the local area with more district heating – the fluegas from the furnace is cleaned through a sophisticated system, leaving only CO2 back…

  12. What a crock of crap. No one has yet to figure out how to recycle a plastic bottle. Much less recycle everyone's trash and turn into biofuel. Wait, let me make sure I put this properly for all of you know-it-alls. We figured out a way to do it. But just like the recycling of the plastic bottle. It cost three times the amount to recycle a bottle than it does to make a new one.

  13. Looks promising, however did you hear when the guy said “force”? Really authoritative much? They are going to collect fees, use force and request negotiate subsidies, that means or could mean higher taxes in some municipalities.
    Way wrong answer, to a made up crisis. If this idea is of benefit to the civil society, then it should be self evident and stand on its own financially.

  14. "If there were no debts in our money system, there wouldn't be any money." Marriner Eccles/ Governor of the Federal Reserve. September 30, 1941. House Committee Hearing on Banking and Currency

  15. Diary of an Economic Hitman. Endless illegal US wars and illegal coups in the middle east latin america, and everywhere else around the world.. CIA, Juan Guaido, Venezuela's oil reserve, Salomani assassination, US petro dollar, Iran's oil reserve. All the Weapons manufacturing industry's stocks went up after Trump's assassination of Salomani. The primary goal of commerce and businesses is to maximize profits regardless of the social and environmental costs. Perpetual debt, market caused inflation, and interests on top of debt. Inflation is a hidden privatized tax on the consuming public. Modern money mechanics and the fractional reserve banking system. International Monetary Fund, The World Bank, and the World Trade Organization.

  16. I created the mess, and now i come with a solution…..but only to create another big mess. But that's another time's story 😉

  17. mmmm yes global warming is human caused let us all shove the methane hose up our cows asses even though methane reacts with nitrogen in the atmosphere

  18. Market: comes up with something that really helps combatting climate change, and prevents CH4 to enter the atmosphere
    Leftists: it makes fuels, these get to CO2 when being combusted, CO2 bad. Solution bad.
    Stupid leftists.

    CH4 is much worse as a greenhouse gas then CO2, periods.

  19. excelente diferencial em benefício do meio ambiente quando terá um desse no Brasil. 🌐👍👍👍👍🇧🇷🇧🇷🇧🇷🇧🇷🇧🇷🇧🇷🇧🇷#jzbastos

  20. Once upon a time companies got paid to take used vegetable oil away now they pay to take away. Getting rid of the trash might pay because it has little value now, if this becomes a success these companies will have to pay for the trash to keep running.

  21. The Enviro-Nazi Liberals will never accept any solutions because they will always need these problems to exist in order to continue their desires to control others and make everyone's lives miserable, like they are.

  22. This letter was send by the request of the Priest and Christian to them in Sinai, from RasullAllah s.a.a.w. The messege in it is directed to us Muslim. Please read it. More infos->
    Ashtiname of Muhammad s.a.a.w

    In the name of ALLAH, the Most Beneficent the Most Merciful

    This is a letter which was issued by Mohammed, Ibn Abdullah, the Messenger, the Prophet, the Faithful, who is sent to all the people as a trust on the part of God to all His creatures, that they may have no plea against God hereafter. Verily God is Omnipotent, the Wise. This letter is directed to the embracers of Islam, as a covenant given to the followers of Jesus the Nazarene in the East and West, the far and near, the Arabs and foreigners, the known and the unknown.
    This letter contains the oath given unto them, and he who disobeys that which is therein will be considered a disbeliever and a transgressor to that whereunto he is commanded. He will be regarded as one who has corrupted the oath of God, disbelieved His Testament, rejected His Authority, despised His Religion, and made himself deserving of His Curse, whether he is a Sultan or any other believer of Islam. Whenever Christian monks, devotees and pilgrims gather together, whether in a mountain or valley, or den, or frequented place, or plain, or church, or in houses of worship, verily we are [at the] back of them and shall protect them, and their properties and their morals, by Myself, by My Friends and by My Assistants, for they are of My Subjects and under My Protection.
    I shall exempt them from that which may disturb them; of the burdens which are paid by others as an oath of allegiance. They must not give anything of their income but that which pleases them—they must not be offended, or disturbed, or coerced or compelled. Their judges should not be changed or prevented from accomplishing their offices, nor the monks disturbed in exercising their religious order, or the people of seclusion be stopped from dwelling in their cells.
    No one is allowed to plunder these Christians, or destroy or spoil any of their churches, or houses of worship, or take any of the things contained within these houses and bring it to the houses of Islam. And he who takes away anything therefrom, will be one who has corrupted the oath of God, and, in truth, disobeyed His Messenger.
    Jizya should not be put upon their judges, monks, and those whose occupation is the worship of God; nor is any other thing to be taken from them, whether it be a fine, a tax or any unjust right. Verily I shall keep their compact, wherever they may be, in the sea or on the land, in the East or West, in the North or South, for they are under My Protection and the testament of My Safety, against all things which they abhor.
    No taxes or tithes should be received from those who devote themselves to the worship of God in the mountains, or from those who cultivate the Holy Lands. No one has the right to interfere with their affairs, or bring any action against them. Verily this is for aught else and not for them; rather, in the seasons of crops, they should be given a Kadah for each Ardab of wheat (about five bushels and a half) as provision for them, and no one has the right to say to them 'this is too much', or ask them to pay any tax.
    As to those who possess properties, the wealthy and merchants, the poll-tax to be taken from them must not exceed twelve drachmas a head per year (i.e. about 200 modern day US dollars).
    They shall not be imposed upon by anyone to undertake a journey, or to be forced to go to wars or to carry arms; for the Muslims have to fight for them. Do no dispute or argue with them, but deal according to the verse recorded in the Quran, to wit: ‘Do not dispute or argue with the People of the Book but in that which is best’ [29:46]. Thus they will live favored and protected from everything which may offend them by the Callers to religion (Islam), wherever they may be and in any place they may dwell.
    Should any Christian woman be married to a Muslim, such marriage must not take place except after her consent, and she must not be prevented from going to her church for prayer. Their churches must be honored and they must not be withheld from building churches or repairing convents.
    They must not be forced to carry arms or stones; but the Muslims must protect them and defend them against others. It is positively incumbent upon every one of the follower of Islam not to contradict or disobey this oath until the Day of Resurrection and the end of the world.

  23. when trash becomes business what do you think will happen they will need more trash hence more plastic more oil usage and so on so further so did they really reduce oil consumption or making profit out of people fear

  24. I think the technology is always 10 years away and an advertisement because more and more big countries and EU in particular move away from plastics. So this is just an ad how nice petroleum industry is (and Conservative and not innovative at all)

  25. Since I actually have a clue having dealt with coal gasification and synfuels, it takes energy to make the oxygen needed for the gasification, and energy to heat the biomass and gasify it. It takes energy to clean the gases produced (not all are friendly) and more energy to reform the gases into the actual gases (hydrogen and carbon monoxide) known as syngas to turn into usable products.

    Energy balance needed will require natural gas being burned and a negative energy balance.

  26. Agree that we need more waste to energy plants around the world. It's a shame however that it is so difficult to organize these projects and market their products in a costly manner.

  27. lmao…says we should use gasification…completely ignores waste oil burning…it's illegal in most of canada…way to go canada…support one thing via the media and legislate completely the opposite way.

  28. Until it's cheaper than digging a hole, and pumping it out if the hole and into my car, I think we're chasing unicorns.

    That's just my 2 cents. I know this matters

  29. Thank you for a definitive explanation of the different gasification methods. I've been interested in fluid bed gasifiers for many years. I have a background in industrial insulation and would love to see this technology be applied at a small community scale. Perhaps something skid mounted to be distributed, which would minimize long distance hauling of trash.

  30. As an experienced chemical engineer having commissioned and operated Fisher Tropsch Syntheses plants and Heavy Oil Residue Gassification plants I fully agree with the waste gasification processes to produce methanol, ethanol, kerosine, etc. without producing any CO2 emissions. Please realise this gassification method which could also be applied to Coal-Gassification has a higher cost price of about 20 % in comparison with energy produced by combustion of coal, oil or natural gas. Possibly the cost reason is the only bottleneck for Waste and or Resid Oil/Coal Gassification. In Germany Leuna at the TOTAL Oil Refinery are 6 heavy residue visbreaker and FCC heavy bottoms oil gasification reactors in operation since 1999, producing methanol for MTBE production, for information. Regards, from Hulst, The Netherlands.

  31. Why aren’t there taxes related to industrial landfill usage? Wouldn’t that increase the relative cost while raising funds for research in alternative waste disposal systems?

  32. Don't be fooled by this propaganda. If you listen closely to this video it's all about climate change and raising carbon taxes. Where are the Hydrogen Salt Reactors that were developed in the 50's? Clean and cheap energy forever and non toxic waste to the environment. Where did those go? It's been on the drawing board now for 70 years. All the clean and cheap energy you could ever want.

  33. sooo, they are still incinerating it, and just capturing the exhaust for further processing. They could take the paper and food wastes and feed worms and create soil… all the fuel is in plastics anyway.

  34. Awesome video. I am a chemical engineering phd student studying conversion of typical non recycle plastic streams to fuels. It's hard for me to wrap my head around these companies trying to engineer a plant that converts a feedstock, municipal solid waste, whose composition can change drastically from day to day. I can't see this idea of "just throw anything you don't want anymore into your trash can and we'll convert it to valuable products with no pollution" being realistic. I think more organization is required. We need to expand the recycling network. There is only 7 different labels for recycling. SEVEN!!!! In my opinion we should have hundreds and there should be laws in place which make it mandatory for companies to label what their disposable product is made of. Then we can have sorting facilities where people can dispose of their waste in an organized fashion. Then these waste to energy companies can say "OK we can convert a mixture of 10% #3 waste, 15% #8 waste, etc. and reliably get these desired products." I have been realizing more and more lately that there has to be a collaboration between politics and science in order to solve this climate and waste crisis we face in the world today. If oil, gas, single use plastics, and products are harmful to the environment are not taxed at a higher rate than green products, it is going to be extremely hard for these green companies to survive economically. Also one last note, this video talks about how much methane is sent to the atmosphere through landfills and how harmful methane is as a green house gas. Well I just wanted to point out that "there are 1.4 billion cattle in the world, and that number is growing as demand for beef and dairy increases; together with other grazing animals, they contribute about 40 percent of the annual methane budget." (Natgeo). So just a reminder if you love the environment, ditch the meat, ditch the cheese, and #govegan

  35. 3 Companies with enormously complicated solutions with 20 years of of largely taxpayer funded research and really nothing to show for it. Gassification works well if you have one fuel but not very well when you have all the different things that make up municipal garbage. Time to move on to something new

  36. 14:18 – "Force people. . . " That's the left's vision for progress.
    Converting garbage to useful products will take place ONLY when people want those useful products at that price. Until then, while the technology is interesting and the research is valuable, it won't be practical until it's seen as better by customers than the status quo. And THAT'S why the left has to force people to buy what they don't want.

  37. The near perfect weapon in the fight against GHG. Gasification consumes trash and produces electricity, diesel and my fuel of choice HIGH OCTANE CLEAN CELLULOSIC ETHANOL. One of the benefits of cellulosic ethanol is it reduces greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) by 85% over reformulated gasoline. These stocks will be winners.

  38. Lebanon is drowning in waste and we don’t even have 24 hour electricity but our government doesn’t want funding from other countries unless they can each take a piece of the pie to put into their personal pockets , shame on them

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *