Caracterizacion de Resoduos Solidos Municipales 2016 PDF

5.
Congreso Residuos Slidos en el Peru

September 2016
Characterisation of Waste
Characterisation of
Municipal Solid Wastes
University of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences, Vienna
Department of Water, Atmosphere
and Environment
Institute of Waste Management
Stefan Salhofer
Gudrun Obersteiner
Marion Huber-Humer
Peter Beigl
Erwin Binner
Marlies Hrad
Peter Lechner
Sabine Lenz
Peter Mostbauer
Florian Part
Alexandra Pukhnyuk
Roland Ramusch
Silvia Scherhaufer
Elisabeth Schmied
Benjamin Steuer
Nicole Unger
Nina Degischer
Thomas Ebner
Reinhold Ottner
Zorica Stamenkovic
Anna Happenhofer
Christian Hochhauer
Aleksander Jandric
Daniel Lesny
Erwin Binner MSc. Simon Neubauer
BOKU-
BOKU-University / Vienna
1 Institute
Erwin Binner of Waste Management La Molina 2016
Outlook
Analysis of Waste Composition

- Sampling Plan
- Number of Increment Samples
- Stratification
- Examples
2 Erwin Binner La Molina 2016
ABF-BOKU / Erwin Binner page 1

5. Congreso Residuos Slidos en el Peru
September 2016
Analysis of
Waste Composition
Sampling of Wastes
wastes in most cases are

very inhomogeneous
particle size
water content
content of hazardous compounds

the problem is to get a

representative sample

September 2016
Sampling of Wastes
Municipal Solid Wastes (MSW) - Delivery
5 Erwin Binner
photo: Erwin Binner
La Molina 2016
Methods for Evaluation

Waste Separation Analysis (WSA)
in order to obtain data on waste amount and

composition one possibility is to carry out a
Austrian Standard (NORM S 2097)

definition WSA: quantitative and qualitative
determination of waste fractions obtained by
sorting of waste
a WSA consists of the sorting and an analysis of
spot samples

September 2016

Procedure
motive / goal
(accuracy)
sampling scheme
(universal set, where to take samples and how many, which
fractions to analyse (products, materials) etc.)
sampling
(and documentation)
sorting of samples
analysis of results
report

Sampling Plan Sorting Fractions
fractions (components): compromise between

detailed results and effort, may be based on
materials, products or grain size
mostly based on materials, completed by selected

product groups and a sieving step
- recycling orientated (focused on materials)

- prevention orientated (focused on products)

September 2016

Sampling Plan Number of Increments
date of sampling
there are seasonal fluctuations because of:
- fluctuation in amount (biogenous wastes)
- consumer behaviour (beverages during summer,
Christmas holidays)
- daily variation (working day / weekend)
3 to 4 campaigns during the year

wastes from one week
(depending on collection interval
1 to 7 samples are to be analysed)

number of increments: very important

- an increment sample is part of the population by
which via statistic data a characterisation of the
population shall be done.
compromise between accuracy and effort
- every element of population has to have the same
chance to become part of the sample
the less the homogeneity, the larger the
number of increment samples
calculation of number by statistical
criteria
choose of increments by chance (luck)

September 2016

number of increments - calculation
(according to SCHARFF, 1991)
! problem: needed data prior to analyses

11 Erwin Binner mostly not available! La Molina 2016

number of increments (simplification)

according to Austrian Standard -NORM S 2097-2 (2005)
( )
* 1- 2 n
n=
Ki
if
N
< 0.05
n = number of increments
= standard deviation
= confidence coefficient (1.96 for 95% safety)
Ki = allowed confidence interval
N = population
! problem: varies for each fraction!


September 2016

number of increments (case studies)

(Dahlen und Lagerkvist, 2008)
5 % of inhabitants should be covered (Nordtest, 1995)

100 to 200 households per stratum (Nordtest, 1995)
45 m3 volume of collection bins (EU, 2004)
amount (volume) per increment:
each collection vehicle 90 to 150 kg (ASTM, 2003)
6 m3 per stratum (EU, 2004)
300 kg per stratum when sorting collection bins
(Maystre und Viret, 1995)
10 increments if > 100 kg each (Sharma und Mc Bean, 2007)
40 increments if < 100 kg each (Zeng et al., 2005)

approximation for MSW:

Ms = 0.6 x max. grain size
Ms minimum amount of sample, in kg
max. grain size, in mm
max. grain
size
20 mm 50 mm 100 mm 200 mm 300 mm 400 mm
amount of
sample 12 kg 30 kg 60 kg 120 kg 180 kg 240 kg
density (kg/l)
1) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3
volume of
sample 15 l 43 l 100 l 240 l 450 l 800 l
14 Erwin Binner 1) very rough estimation!!

La Molina 2016

September 2016

Sampling Plan Level of Access
level of access
waste collection bin (e.g. waste):
- samples which are not of interest can be excluded easily
(e.g. commercial waste)
- huge effort for planning and sampling
- accessibility of bins (locked houses)
collection vehicle:
- high representativeness by mixing
- large sample amount
- Increase of fines
- compaction

Sampling Plan Stratification
strata of population:
similarities and differences in varying parts of the area
of investigation
- economic structure
- agriculture / forestry / commercial area / services area
- income of inhabitants
- settlement structure
- settlement density (multistory building / garden area)
- residential area / commercial area
- tourism
- waste management criteria
- collection interval / volume of collection bins
- measures for prevention / measures for recycling

September 2016

Sampling Plan Stratification
stratification allows:
- more exact characterisation of population
- increase of representativeness of results
- in the strata should exist a very homogenous
structure, but different strata should differ as clear as
possible
stratification takes place according to:
- socio-economic criteria (age-, education-, economy)
- settlement criteria (settlement density)
- waste management criteria
(collection system, fee system)

Calculation
extrapolation of data
simple estimation: direct calculation from average of
increment on average of population
estimation including rates: dependence of
command variable from another measurement is used.
Base mostly is number of inhabitants (I)
stratified increments need a stepwise calculation:
first in strata (i to n), second to population by share of
stratum (s)
mean1*s1+mean2*s2+..+meann*sn
meanpop = spop
s (share of stratum) may be based on inhabitants or mass or

September 2016

Uncertainties
limits and disadvantages

huge effort in labour
sorting residue remains (not classifiable fines)
fractions with low share (e.g.: batteries) are estimated
very roughly (by chance!)
difficulties in homogenisation for physical/chemical
analyses
limited comparability because of different modi
operandi in praxis (STANDARDISATION is limited
because of variable local conditions and questions,)

Example MSW Composition
question: composition of residual waste in multi
dwellings in the surrounding of Vienna
10 multi dwelling buildings with in average
63 households and 149 inhabitants
collection system: kerbside collection of residual
waste, biogenous waste, waste paper and yellow bag
(packaging material)
time frame:
classification campaigns from beginning of May to
beginning of July1999. Additional from May 1999 to
June 2000 the filling degree of residual waste bins and
bins for recyclables was estimated.
level of access:
waste bins ready for collection (120 l, 240 l, 770 l or 1100 l)

September 2016

fractions (components) for sorting:

1. paper/cardboard 9. biogenous waste
2. wood 10. food waste
3. leather/rubber/textiles a) proper for bio-bin
4. plastic packaging b) not for bio-bin
5. plastic non packaging 11. mineral
6. compounds packaging 12. metals packaging
a) beverages 13. metals non packaging
b) others 14. glass packaging
7. compounds non pack. 15. glass non packaging
8. sanitary products 16. WEEE (electric/electronic)
17. Fines (0-40 mm)

Example Procedure
sieving <40mm
+ data collection
scale
sorting table
scale
source: ABF-BOKU
fractions

September 2016

fraction / component share mass%
paper, cardboard 9.5 %
wood 1.2 %
leather, rubber, textiles 5.5 %
plastic (packaging) 4.7 %
plastic (non packaging) 1.3 %
compounds (beverage packaging) 1.0 %
compounds (other packaging) 1.9 %
compounds (non packaging) 1.9 %
sanitary products 12.5 %
biogenous wastes 22.5 %
food wastes (proper for bio bin) 9.2 %
food wastes (not for bio-bin) 2.4 %
mineral wastes 3.0 %
metal (packaging) 1.8 %
metal (non packaging) 1.1 %
glass (packaging) 3.3 %
problematic wastes (hazard. waste from households) 0.8 %
WEEE (electric/electronic) 0.5 %
fines (0-40 mm) 15.8 %
sum 100
La %
23 Erwin Binner Molina 2016

Setting
24 Erwin Binner
photo: ABF-BOKU
La Molina 2016

September 2016

Sorting Table

photo: ABF-BOKU

Sieving

photos: ABF-BOKU

September 2016
27 Erwin Binner
photo: ABF-BOKU
La Molina 2016

Classification (Manual Sorting)
28 Erwin Binner
photo: ABF-BOKU
La Molina 2016

September 2016

Classification (Manual Sorting)
29 Erwin Binner
photo: ABF-BOKU
La Molina 2016

Fraction 20 40 mm
photos: ABF-BOKU

September 2016

Fractions (e.g. 26 different fractions)
31 Erwin Binner
photos: ABF-BOKU
La Molina 2016
e.binner@boku.ac.at
http://www.wau.boku.ac.at
Muchas
Gracias por
Su Atencin

September 2016

Literature
ASTM International (2003): Standard Test Method for Determination of the
Composition of Unprocessed Municipal Solid Waste. In: ASTM D5231-92. American
Society for Testing and Materials, US
Austrian Standard (2005): OE-NORM S2097 part 1-4, Sortieranalyse von Abfllen.
Austrian Standards Institute
Dahlen L. and Lagerkvist A. (2008): Methods for household waste composition
studies. Waste Management 28 (2008), pp. 11001112
European Commission (2004): Methodology for the analysis of solid waste (SWA-
tool), 5th Framework Program, Vienna, Austria. <http://www.wastesolutions.org>
Maystre L.Y. and Viret F. (1995): A goal-oriented characterization of urban waste.
Waste Management and Research 13 (3), pp. 207
Nordtest (1995): Solid waste, municipal: sampling and characterisation. Nordtest
method NT ENVIR 001, Finland. <www.nordtest.org>
Sharma M. and McBean E. (2007): A methodology for solid waste characterization
based on diminishing marginal returns. Waste Management 27 (3), pp. 337344
Zeng Y., Trauth K.M., Peyton R.L., Banerji S.K. (2005): Estimation of solid waste
composition using two-way stratification and optimum sample size theory and a
case study. Solid Waste Technology and Management 31 (4), pp.198213

Caracterizacion de Resoduos Solidos Municipales 2016 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Caracterizacion de Resoduos Solidos Municipales 2016 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

5.

Congreso Residuos Slidos en el Peru

Analysis of Waste Composition

2 Erwin Binner La Molina 2016

ABF-BOKU / Erwin Binner page 1

3 Erwin Binner La Molina 2016

wastes in most cases are

the problem is to get a

ABF-BOKU / Erwin Binner page 2

Methods for Evaluation

in order to obtain data on waste amount and

Austrian Standard (NORM S 2097)

6 Erwin Binner La Molina 2016

ABF-BOKU / Erwin Binner page 3

Waste Separation Analysis (WSA)

Waste Separation Analysis (WSA)

fractions (components): compromise between

mostly based on materials, completed by selected

- recycling orientated (focused on materials)

8 Erwin Binner La Molina 2016

ABF-BOKU / Erwin Binner page 4

Waste Separation Analysis (WSA)

3 to 4 campaigns during the year

Waste Separation Analysis (WSA)

number of increments: very important

ABF-BOKU / Erwin Binner page 5

Waste Separation Analysis (WSA)

! problem: needed data prior to analyses

Waste Separation Analysis (WSA)

number of increments (simplification)

! problem: varies for each fraction!

ABF-BOKU / Erwin Binner page 6

Waste Separation Analysis (WSA)

number of increments (case studies)

5 % of inhabitants should be covered (Nordtest, 1995)

Waste Separation Analysis (WSA)

approximation for MSW:

14 Erwin Binner 1) very rough estimation!!

ABF-BOKU / Erwin Binner page 7

Waste Separation Analysis (WSA)

15 Erwin Binner La Molina 2016

Waste Separation Analysis (WSA)

ABF-BOKU / Erwin Binner page 8

Waste Separation Analysis (WSA)

17 Erwin Binner La Molina 2016

Waste Separation Analysis (WSA)

ABF-BOKU / Erwin Binner page 9

Waste Separation Analysis (WSA)

limits and disadvantages

19 Erwin Binner La Molina 2016

Waste Separation Analysis (WSA)

ABF-BOKU / Erwin Binner page 10

Waste Separation Analysis (WSA)

fractions (components) for sorting:

Waste Separation Analysis (WSA)

ABF-BOKU / Erwin Binner page 11

Waste Separation Analysis (WSA)

Waste Separation Analysis (WSA)

ABF-BOKU / Erwin Binner page 12

Waste Separation Analysis (WSA)

25 Erwin Binner La Molina 2016

Waste Separation Analysis (WSA)

26 Erwin Binner La Molina 2016