Economic
and
Cross Media aspects
Bo Jansson
Swedish Environmental Protection Agency
Bo.jansson@naturvardsverket.se
• The IPPC Directive
• The BREF document
• Some Swedish examples
Definition of BAT
Best Available Techniques
• Technique includes both technology used and
the way the installation is designed,
built, operated and
decommissioned
• Available techniques are those developed on
a scale which allows
implementation in the relevant
industrial sector under
economically and technically
viable conditions
• Best Means most effective in achieving a
high level of protection of
environment as a whole
Annex 4
1. Use of low-waste technology
2. Use of less hazardous substances
3. Furthering of recovery and recycling of
substances generated and used in the process
and of waste
4. Comparable processes, facilities or methods of
operation which have been tried out with success
on an industrial scale
5. Technological advances and changes in
scientific knowledge
6. The nature; effects and volume of emissions
concerned
Annex 4 cont.
7. Commissioning dates for new or existing
installations
8. Length of time to introduce BAT
9. Consumption and nature of raw material used in
process and energy efficiency
10. Need to prevent or minimise the over all impact
of emissions
11. Need to prevent accidents and to minimise
consequences
12. Information published by Commission (art 16(2))
Art 10
BAT and Environmental Quality Standards
• Where an environmental quality standard
requires stricter conditions than those
achievable by the use of BAT additional
measures shall be required which might
be taken in order to comply with the EQS
BREF Document on
Economics and Cross-Media Effects
May 2005
• Methodologies for assessing which of
alternative techniques is “the best”
• 9 guidelines for applying these
methodologies
• Assessment on Economic Viability in a
sector
Flow sheet
GL 5
GL 1 Identify alternative options
Identify alternative options
GL6
Gather and validate
GL 2 cost data
Inventory of emissions and
consumption
GL7
Define cost components
GL 3
Calculate/assess GL 8
cross-media effects Process cost information
GL 4 GL 9
Interpret Attributing costs to
cross-media conflicts environmental protection
Cost effectiveness analysis
Balance of costs and environmental benefit
Guideline 1
Necessary information to scope and identify
alternative techniques
• Selection of raw material
• Process design
• Process control
• End of pipe technology
Guideline 2
Inventory of emission and consumptions
• Pollutants released (air and water)
• Used energy
• Produced waste
• Monitoring data from existing installations
• BREF documents
• Research reports
• Data from Pilot plants
• Information from equipment manufacturers
DATA QUALITY
Guideline 3
Estimate environmental effects
• Human toxicity
• Global warming
• Aquatic toxicity
• Acidification
• Eutrofication
• Ozone depletion
• Photochemical Ozone creation potential
• Etc????
Guideline 4
How to interpret the cross-media conflicts
• Simplistic approach- just compare
• Compare with European totals
• Compare using EPER
• Compare to benchmark
• Environmental Quality
• Local considerations
• Long term irreversible effects contra Short term
reversible effects
• Priority to persistent, bioaccumulative, toxic and
carcinogenic substances
Costs for Environmental
Protection
• Calculate cost efficiency
• Balancing costs and Environmental
benefits
Guideline 5
Scope and identify alternative techniques
• Selection of raw material
• Process design
• Process control
• End of pipe technology
Guideline 6
How to gather and validate cost data
Sources of cost data
• Industry
• Technology suppliers
• Authorities
• Consultants
• Published information (BREF)
• Comparable projects from other industries
Data Quality Transparency
Guideline 7
Define the cost components
Investment costs
• Installation costs
Operating costs
• Energy
• Material
• Labour cost
• Maintenance
Guideline 8
Process the cost information
• Establishing prices in the base year
(Inflation)
• Discounting
• Interest rate
• Calculating annual costs
Cost per unit of product
Cost per unit of reduced emission
Swedish practice
• Interest rate, 4-6 %
• Depreciation, Economical life time,
– 10-20 years
Guideline 9
Attributing costs to environmental protection
Balancing Costs and Environment Benefits
• Some Swedish examples: 1SEK=~10 Euro
• SIKA - Swedish Institute for Transport and
Communication Analysis
• A working group (incl. all authorities with
responsibilities for traffic issues and Sw. EPA)
SO2 NOx CO2 VOC
SEK/KG SEK/KG SEK/KG SEK/KG
Taxes/ 15 50 0,91
charges
SIKA 25+ 75+ 1,50 38+
Recommendation
(35-200) (5-36) (6-40)
(2008:3)
Examples
Preem refinery, Gothenburg
• Two parallel crude distillation units
50 % fuel oil and 50 % refinery gas to each
furnace
NOx NOx
50 % 50 %
CDU1 CDU2
50 % 50 %
Examples
Preem refinery, Gothenburg
• Two parallel crude distillation
units
50 % fuel oil and 50 % refinery NOx NOx
gas to each furnace
50 % 50 %
CDU1 CDU2
50 % 50 %
Options
Low NOx burners (both gas fired and oil fired) in both
furnaces
SCR installations on both furnaces
Examples
Preem refinery, Gothenburg
• Two parallel crude distillation
units
50 % fuel oil and 50 % refinery NOx NOx
gas to each furnace
50 % 50 %
CDU1 CDU2
50 % 50 %
Options
Low NOx burners (both gas fired and oil fired) in both
furnaces Relatively low NOx reduction for Low NOx
burners for oil as fuel, Relatively expensive with low NOx
burners both for oil and gas
SCR installations on both furnaces Expensive Technique not
so cost effective for relative small gas fired installations
Examples
Preem refinery, Gothenburg
Two parallel crude distillation
units
50 % fuel oil and 50 % refinery NOx NOx
gas to each furnace
SCR
100 % oil
CDU1 CDU2
100 % gas
Option 3 Solution (BAT)
Allocation of gas to one furnace and oil to the other.
Installation of Low NOx burners in the gas fired unit,
installation of SCR at the oil fired unit
A Total NOx reduction from CDU of ~70 % to a reasonable
cost (less than 50 SEK/kg reduced NOx)
Shoepress- PM5 (1)
Mondi Pulp and Paper mill
Annual cost, investment 100 MSEK (~10M
Euro) different interest rate and depreciation
16
14
MSEK/year
12
10
8 6%
4%
6
4
2
0
10 år 15 år 20 år
Skopress- PM5 (2)
Balancing costs and benefits
16
14
12
10
8 6%
4%
6 Value of energy
saving
4
2
0
10 år 15 år 20 år
Skopress- PM5 (3)
16
14 Value reduced NOx emission
12
10
8 6%
Värde av
energibesparing
4%
6
4
2
0
10 år 15 år 20 år
Shopress- PM5 (4)
16 Value reduced CO2 Emission
14
12 Value reduced NOx emission
10
8 6%
4%
6 Värde av
energibesparing
4
2
0
10 år 15 år 20 år
Shoe press
• Other Environmental Protection benefits?
• SO2 Emission reduction
• Dust emission reduction
Example Skoghall Pulp and paper mill
Sweden
PROCESS
Pre treatment Bio treatment Sedimentation
RECIPIENT
Pre treatment In process Biological Chemical