An alternative method to determine the share of fossil carbon in solid refuse-derived fuels – Validation and comparison with three standardized methods

Schwarzböck, Therese; Aschenbrenner, Philipp; Spacek, Stefan; Szidat, Sönke; Rechberger, Helmut; Fellner, Johann (2018). An alternative method to determine the share of fossil carbon in solid refuse-derived fuels – Validation and comparison with three standardized methods. Fuel, 220, pp. 916-930. Elsevier 10.1016/j.fuel.2017.12.076

Preview

Text Schwarzböck_Adapted balance method for fossil carbon determination of RDF (Fuel 2018).pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution (CC-BY). Download (1MB) | Preview

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

Interest & Impact

Downloads

570 since deposited on 07 May 2018
99 in the past 12 months

Citations

5 Citations in Web of Science ®
6 Citations in Scopus

Search

in Google Scholar™

Services

Actions (login required)

Edit item

Actions (login required)

Edit item