Waste Characterization: Table 1

4
Waste Characterization
The rst step in solving waste management problems is to abandon the hopeless view that
waste is an indenite state of matter tied to its genesis as the unusable residue of a
process or an unwanted discard of human activity. Instead, waste should be regarded in its
own right as a feedstock, a fuel, and=or a potentially useful material. In this new light, the
analyst then must seek to determine values for the physical and chemical engineering
properties that, though less consistent than those of conventional materials and fossil fuels,
nonetheless are the dening measures that characterize behavior.
Supporting this line of thought, one must discard the sense that waste is so
heterogeneous in its composition and so variable in its properties that problems with its
proper management and use cannot be dened, let alone solved. To be sure, waste streams
will often exhibit great variability point to point and over time. The designer must,
therefore, provide processes with more operating exibility, reserve capacity, and materials
stamina than conventional process equipment. But the development of a working
estimate of average waste composition and properties along with a sense of the expected
excursions from those averages is the necessary starting point of design.
Several properties important in waste characterization are shown in Table 1 (107).
Although it is seldom necessary to characterize wastes in all the areas in Table 1, such a
checklist can be useful in alerting the waste manager to processing constraints and
opportunities, permitting requirements, or safety hazards.
Desired data are often lacking to precisely dene the design basis for waste
processing systems. Many waste studies have demonstrated the large errors possible
from desk-top estimates of the generation rate, composition, or properties of waste. It is
strongly recommended, therefore, that especially commissioned waste surveys and
analyses should be incorporated into the problem denition phase of the design effort.
Careful consideration should also be given to the range of variation in composition.
For municipal waste, for example, seasonal changes in yard waste content and local
precipitation patterns lead to day-to-day uctuations in moisture content. Economic class,
geographical region, culinary preferences, and residential styles (homes, apartments,
hotels, and campgrounds) are signicant. In industry, seasonal shifts in production patterns
or periodic housekeeping activity leads to variation.
Table 1 General, Physical, and Chemical Parameters of Possible Signicance in the Characterization of Solid Wastesa
General parameters
Compositional weight fractions
Process weight fractions
Domestic, commercial, and institutional

Paper (broken into subcategories)
Food waste
Textiles
Glass and other ceramics
Plastics
Rubber
Leather
Metals
Wood (limbs, sawdust)
Bricks, stones, dirt, ashes
Combustible
Compostable
Processable by landll
Salvageable
Having intrinsic value
Other municipal
Dead animals
Street sweepings
Catch-basin cleanings
Agricultural
Field
Processing
Animal raising
Industrial
Mining=metallurgical
Special
Radioactive
Munitions, etc.
Pathogenic
Physical parameters
Total wastes
Size
Shape
Volume
Weight
Density
stratication
Surface area
Compaction
Compactibility
Temperature
Color
Odor
Age
Radioactivity
Physical state
total solids
liquid
gas
Solid wastes
Liquid wastes
Gaseous wastes
Souble (%)
Suspendable (%)
Combustible (%)
Volatile (%)
Ash (%)
soluble (%)
suspendable
Hardness
Particle-size distribution
shape
surface
porosity
sorption
density
aggregation
Turbidity
Color
Taste
Odor
Temperature
Viscosity data
specic gravity
stratication
Total solids (%)
soluble (%)
suspended (%)
settleable (%)
Dissolved oxygen
Vapor pressure
Effect of shear rate
Effect of temperature
Gel formation
Temperature
Pressure
Volume
Density
Particulate (%)
Liquid (%)
Table 1 (continued)
Chemical parameters
General
pH
Alkalinity
Hardness (CaCO3
MBAS (methylene blue active substances)
BOD (biochemical oxygen demand)
COD (chemical oxygen demand)
Rate of availability of nitrogen
Rate of availability of phosphorus
Crude ber
Organic (%)
Combustion parameters
Heat content
Oxygen requirement
Flame temperature
Combustion products (including ash)
Flash point
Ash fusion characterization
Pyrolysis characterization
Toxicity
Corrosivity
Explosivity
Other safety factors
Biological stability
Attractiveness to vermin
a
Source: Ref. 107.
Organic
Soluble (%)
Protein nitrogen
Phosphorus
Lipids
Starches
Sugars
Hemicelluloses
Lignins
Phenols
Benzene oil
ABS (alkyl benzene sulfonate)
CCE (carbon chloroform extract)
PCB (polychlorinated biphenyls)
PNH (polynuclear hydrocarbons)
Vitamins (e.g., B-12)
Insecticides (e.g., Heptachlor,
DDT, Dieldrin, etc.)
Inorganic and elemental

Moisture content
Carbon
Hydrogen
(P2 O5 and phosphate)
Sulfur content
Alkali metals
Alkaline-earth metals
Heavy metals
especially Mercury
Lead
Cadmium
Copper
Nickel
Toxic materials
Chromium
especially Arsenic
Selenium
Beryllium
Asbestos
Eutrophic materials
Nitrogen
Potassium
Phosphorus
Precious metals
Such changes in waste characteristics must be provided for in the design and
operating protocols of waste processing systems. Even with such relatively obvious
foresight, however, the worst (live ammunition, cans of ammable solvent, containers of
toxic chemical, etc.) should be anticipated.
The cardinal rule in waste management design is to ask, What happens when. . .? rather than
What if. . .?
Although the analysis of the specic wastes to be processed is desirable, it is useful to have
some general data for preliminary screening of concepts. The data presented below meet
this need. In general, these data were generated by methodical sampling, segregation,
weighing, and=or analysis of the waste streams. More comprehensive data can be found
elsewhere (108).
I.
A.
GENERAL
Chemistry
The relative importance of the chemical composition of a waste is generally greater for
sludge=solid wastes than for liquids and much more so than for gases. This generalization
derives from the usually large fraction of noncombustible inorganic constituents in solid
wastes and the frequently important impact of these elements on system design. The
presence of toxic elements and compounds also is important through the resulting impact
on worker safety, combustion system efciency requirements, air pollution control, and=or
designation of the unit as a hazardous waste incinerator.
Carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen are clearly important as the primary elements
constituting the fuel fraction of a waste. From data on CHO alone, most of the contribution
to the heating value may be estimated.
Nitrogen is modestly important as it appears in fuel value calculations but can be
signicant as it affects the generation of NOx air pollution (via the fuel nitrogen
mechanism).
Sulfur in the waste as the element, and that appearing in organic sulfur compounds
or inorganic suldes, is important as it can result in the generation of the acid gases SO2
and SO3 during incineration, which impacts on air pollution and corrosion.
Chlorine content as organic chlorides generating HCl is also important as it affects
air pollution and boiler corrosion. Note that the high-temperature corrosion caused by
chloride in the ash layer on the tubes has been observed to decrease as the sulfur content of
the waste increases.
Phosphorous can be important primarily as it affects the melting point of residues
and slag deposits. Incineration of organophosphate pesticides produces phosphorous
pentoxide that signicantly depresses the slag fusion temperature. Some inorganic
phosphates depress the ash melting point. Insoluble ferric phosphate, for example, is
often formed as a reaction product to remove soluble phosphates as a step in wastewater
treatment. Unless lime CaOH2 is added in slight excess of the amount stoichiometrically balanced with the ferric phosphate to form calcium triphosphate, the sludge ash
fusion temperature can be depressed below 800 C and slagging problems can develop in
sludge incineration systems.
Potassium and sodium content are important as they indicate the presence of lowmelting compounds (e.g., NaCl, NaSO4 ) which affect slag fusion temperature. The sodium
chloridesulfate eutectic is particularly troublesome in burning renery and petrochemical

sludges.
Toxic organic compounds are clearly important as they impact worker safety and the
requirement for effective combustion and combustion control. Stack emission of many
specic organic compounds that have demonstrable health effects at low concentrations
(e.g., benzene and vinyl chloride monomer) is limited in many countries by the air
pollution regulations.
Heavy metals and other toxic elements (especially Cd, Hg, Pb, Zn, Cr, Cu, Be, As,
Se, Ni, and Ag) are important since combustion will not destroy them: They will appear in
the residue and in the y ash, thus, perhaps, rendering the residues subject to the hazardous
waste regulations with consequent ballooning of the cost, liability, and administrative
complexity of residue disposal.
Those toxic elements with compounds that volatilize at combustion temperatures
(especially the chlorides and some oxides of Cd, Hg, Pb, Zn, As, Se, and Ag) are of
interest since they will often be emitted from the stack as a submicron particulate and as a
deposit on other nely divided particulates. Most data indicate a signicant enrichment
of the content of these volatile elements in the particulate relative to that in the raw waste
(see Chapter 13).
Ash chemistry can be used to give insight into possible problems with refractory
attack and ash fusion (slagging) problems.
B.
Heat of Combustion
In the analysis and design of incineration systems, few waste parameters are as important
as the heat of combustion. A fundamental approach to estimation of this quantity is
described in Chapter 2, Section I. The correlations and estimation tools supplied here are
more tailored to the waste incineration eld and, in some cases, may be more easily
applied.
All of the estimation methods are based on use of the ultimate analysis to synthesize
the mean heat of combustion. As such, their accuracy is dependent on the accuracy of the
underlying ultimate analysis. Several of the methods are renements of the Dulong
formula. The original application of Dulongs formula was in estimation of the heat of
combustion of coal. The underlying assumption of the Dulong formula (2) assumes a
negligible heat of formation of the organic matter relative to the heat of combustion of the
elements:
kcal=kg dry basis 8;080 weight fraction carbon
34;460 weight fraction hydrogen
4;308 weight fraction oxygen
2;250 weight fraction sulfur
A more complete expression (3) developed for municipal solid wastes incorporates
compensation for the heat losses in calcining carbonate carbon and for nitrogen. Its use
requires knowledge of the weight fraction (dry basis) of organic and inorganic (carbonate)
carbon, oxygen, sulfur, hydrogen, and nitrogen (denoted Corg, Cinorg , O, S, H, and N,
respectively) in the waste sample. The equation is
kcal=kg dry basis 7;831 Corg 35;932 H2 O2 =8 2;212 S
3;545 Cinorg 1;187 O2 578 N2
Using the Dulong equation, estimate the heating value of a waste

with the composition: 45.85% organic carbon, 0.83% inorganic carbon, 6.61%
hydrogen, 35.94% oxygen, 1.03% nitrogen, 0.1% sulfur, and 9.64% ash.

0:3594
kcal=kg dry basis 7;8310:4585 35;932 0:066
8
EXAMPLE 1.
2;2120:001 3;5450:0083 1;1870:3594

5780:0103 4;747 kcal=kg
The three heating value estimation relationships that follow were developed to
estimate the heat of combustion (DHc ) of the combustible fraction of industrial and
municipal wastes (kcal=kg) on a moisture and ash-free or MAF basis. One must use the
weight percent of hydrogen (H), oxygen (O), sulfur (S), etc., on a dry, ash-free basis and
substitute the percent (not the decimal percent) value in the equations. The Vondracek
value is on an as-red basis and the waste analysis is input as noted.
Chang equation
DHc 8561:11 179:72H 63:89S 111:17O 90:00Cl 66:94N
Modied Dulong equation

DHc 78:31C 359:32H O=8 22:12S 11:87O 5:78N
Boie equation
DHc 83:22C 275:48H 25:8O 15:0N 9:4Cl 18:5F 65:0P
12:2Fe
Vondracek equation
DHc as fired C89:17 0:0622C1 270H O=10 25S
For the Vondracek equation, C1 is the carbon content on a moisture and ash-free basis and
C, H, O, and S are the percents of the elements on an as-red (wet) basis.
The Chang equation (205), the modied Dulong equation, the Boie equation, and
the Vondracek equation were tested against one another for the prediction of the heat of
combustion of 150 pure organic compounds where laboratory data were available to test
the accuracy of prediction. In this comparison, the average error relative to the laboratory
value was for Chang, 1.48%; for Dulong, 5.54%; and for Boie, 11.38%.
Changs equation was clearly superior for this task. However, the Boie equation was
originally developed and is well regarded for estimation of the heat of combustion of
mixed wastes (especially high cellulosic material) such as refuse or wood. An analysis by
Rigo (206) suggests that Vondracek and Boie are, statistically, equivalent estimators of
heat content. The modied Dulong equation is generally best for fuel-like, highcarbon=hydrogen materials such as coal, peat, or lignite, but Rigo (206) found it less
accurate for refuse predictions.
Each of the prediction equations relates heat content to waste chemistry. It is not
surprising, therefore, that an evaluation of data for wastes and fuels shows that the heat
release and the air requirement (also derived from waste chemistry) are, approximately, in
a constant proportion (Table 2). Although the stoichiometric air requirement per million
kcal for refuse is in line with that for other fuels, refuse has a relatively low air requirement
per kilogram of fuel. Since refuse is now burned at bed depths that approximate coal heat
release rates (kcal hr1 m2 ), the air rates (m3 sec1 m2 ) could, in principle, be similar to
those used for coal stokers. In practice, however, much higher air rates are used in
incinerators to assist with drying and to temper ultimate combustion temperatures.
Incineration is often considered for the disposal of wastewater containing high
concentrations of organic material. The contaminant concentration of these wastes is often
determined as the chemical oxygen demand, or COD. For this test, the oxygen uptake from
a highly oxidizing chemical (often chromic acid) is used. The results are reported in
milligrams (of oxygen) per liter. As noted in Table 2, the higher heating value for a wide
variety of fuels is approximately the same per unit weight of oxygen: about 1360 kg of air
per million kcal heat release. This equivalence can, therefore, be used to estimate the heat
content of such aqueous wastes. It should be noted that some classes of organic
compounds (e.g., many aromatic compounds) are incompletely oxidized in the COD
test procedure. Thus, estimates of combustion parameters from COD determinations may
be in error (on the low side) depending upon the concentration of these chemically
refractory materials.
Lastly, it should be noted that due to the approximate equivalence of heating value
with air requirement, not only can one estimate heating value from combustion stoichiometry but the reverse may also be useful: estimation of the theoretical combustion air
requirement from bomb calorimeter or other data on heating value.
EXAMPLE 2. Estimate the theoretical air requirement and the heating value for
methane (CH4 ), which has a HHV of 13,275 kcal=kg. Also, estimate the theoretical air
requirement for a waste of unknown composition that, from bomb calorimeter tests, has a
heating value of 2900 kcal=kg.
Table 2 Theoretical Air Requirements of Municipal Refuse and Other Fuels

Fuel
Refuse
Wood
Peat
Lignite
Sub-bituminous B
Bituminous high volatile
Bituminous volatile
Anthracite
Fuel oil
Methane
a
MM millions, M thousands.
kg Air=kg fuel
kg Air=MM kcala
sm3 Air=M kcal
3.22
3.29
2.33
5.27
7.58
9.08
10.99
9.23
13.69
17.26
1303
1265
1300
1343
1332
1336
1368
1496
1350
1300
1.10
1.07
1.10
1.13
1.12
1.13
1.15
1.26
1.14
1.10
Methane will burn according to the stoichiometric relationship

CH4 2O2 ! CO2 H2 O
kg air
2 mol O2
mol CH4
100 mol air 29 kg air
17:3

kg fuel
mol CH4 16 kg CH4 21 mol O2
mol air
Approximate heating value
17:3 kg air
106 kcal

12;720 kcal=kg
kg fuel
1360 kg air
Based on the approximate equivalence of 1360 kg of air with one million kcal, the
estimated stoichiometric air requirement of the waste is
2900 kcal 1360 kg air
kg air

3:94
6
kg fuel
10 kcal
kg fuel
C.
Ash Fusion Characteristics
The ash melting point is often a waste property that limits the burning rate on hearths and
grates. The same is true for hand-red and stoker-red coal boiler furnaces. Ash fusion is a
fearsome matter in uid bed furnaces where continued operation of the system depends on
maintaining dry bed grains. Accumulation of ash on boiler tubes and in ductwork is
another operating problem where the key variable is the temperature at which the ash
becomes tacky,
As a consequence of the importance of ash fusion temperature, the prediction of the
onset of slagging (fusion of the ash) and fouling (accumulation of fused deposits) has been
and remains an important concern to fuels technologists. Since ash contains seven major
and numerous minor constituents in several hundred different mineral compositions and
crystal forms, analysis of the problem and formulation of reliable prediction tools is
difcult.
In the course of burning off the combustible matter, the mineral matter in coal is
converted into the oxides. These are principally SiO2, Al2 O3 , Fe2 O3 , CaO, MgO, Na2 O
and K2 O for coal. In the case of coal, TiO2 and P2 O5 are also present but in small
quantities. For biological sludge, the P2 O5 can be over 10% of the ash and refuse
phosphorous is variable, but probably less than 5%. Often, the SO3 content of ashes is
reported since, under the ASTM ashing procedure, SO3 is captured by the alkaline earth
and alkali metal oxides. These sulfates decompose above 1000 C and, therefore, analytical
data used for prediction of ash melting behavior should be normalized to a sulfur-free
basis.
Coal technologists have often made use of the silica percentage concept or silica
ratio method (199). The silica percentage method for the estimation of slag viscosity,
based on linear regression analysis of viscosity data on 35 coal slags (correlation
coefcient 0.989), predicts the viscosity in poises a reference temperature (2600 F or
1427 C) as a function of the percentage of silica in the slag as
loge viscosity at 1427 C 0:05784%SiO2 1:8452
A somewhat more precise prediction of viscosity based on composition was developed by

Watt and Fereday (202) and Hoy (203). Their prediction considered the effect of Al2 O3 on
viscosity and gives some improvement in predictive accuracy but at the price of
mathematical complexity. Reid and Cohen (199) extended the prediction equation based
on the silica percentage estimation of slag viscosity at one temperature to a general
formula giving the viscosity (Z) in poise as a function of the temperature ( C) and the
percentage of silica (expressed as a decimal) as
Z0:1614 0:0008136T 1:1607 exp0:2989 0:9335%SiO2
The ash fusion prediction formula estimates the temperature of critical viscosity (Tcv )
that marks the temperature where behavior shifts from glass-like to a pseudoplastic solid
that resists ow under gravity. The Tcv probably signies the presence of a solid phase
within the melt. Above this temperature, the slag behaves as a Newtonian uid with linear
stressstrain relationships. The Tcv value is higher than the sticky point by from a few
degrees to somewhat over 100 C. The estimate by Hoy et al. (200) is
Tcv 2990 1470A 360A2 14:7B 0:15B2
where, using the percentages of the several oxides in the ash analysis,
A SiO2 =Al2 O3
B Fe3 O3 CaO MgO
and the analysis is normalized such that
SiO2 Al2 O3 Fe2 O3 CaO MgO 100
The relationship in Eq. 9 is satisfactory for most coal ash compositions, but there can be
signicant error when the ratio of SiO2 to Al2 O3 exceeds about 3.0.
The prediction equation presented below as Eq. (10) is a combination of a
correlation by Hoy (200) based on analysis of an extensive data base (201) for coal ash
with a correlation by this author based on data for biological wastewater treatment plant
sludge. The sludge data are summarized in subsequent sections of this chapter (Table 34).
The coal ash data on which the Hoy correlation was based were obtained in a Margulestype viscometer operating up to 1600 C using a platinum crucible and bob and with a
controlled atmosphere. Atmospheric control is necessary because under reducing conditions some of the oxides in the ash become less highly oxidized (e.g., Fe2 O3 shifting to
FeO). This can lead to signicant changes in the fusion temperatures. Typically, fusion
occurs at a signicantly lower temperature under reducing conditions.
Niessen (204) analyzed 26 sets of sewage sludge ash melting point data to allow
more accurate estimation of the ash melting point for application to incinerators burning
biological wastewater treatment plant sludge. Particularly for the uid bed systems but also
for multiple hearth furnaces, ash fusion or stickiness to any signicant degree can create
severe operational difculties. The correlation in Eq. (9) greatly overestimates fusion
temperatures for this ash type. Niessen used Eq. (8) to estimate the temperature where the
ash viscosity was 1000 poise. He then compared the resulting temperature with the initial
deformation temperature (oxidizing conditions) which is a benchmark for stickiness". He
found that the temperature from Eq. (8) T8 predicted a value that was too high. The error
correlated with the ratio of basic to acidic oxides in the ash. An improved estimate of the
temperature of incipient fusion Tid (standard deviation of the error in the adjusted estimate
of Tid equals 55 C) is given by

Fe2 O3 CaO MgO Na2 O K2 O
10
Tid T8 206:03 377:56
SiO2 Al2 O3 TiO2
An exhaustive regression analysis of the ash fusion characteristics of 260 samples of coal
ash from the United States, Italy, Spain, Germany, Australia, Poland and Africa and 35
samples of biomass ash was made by Seggaini (475). He developed correlating equations
for the ASTM standard ash fusion conditions under both oxidizing and reducing
conditions with variables formulated as combinations of the weight and=or percentages
of ash constituents. Not surprisingly, he found that the mol percentages of constituents was
always preferred to the weight percentage. Thus, unlike the equations presented above,
composition data substituted into his correlations should be calculated as mol percentages.
He also obtained the best results when iron was calculated as FeO rather than Fe2 O3 and
when the data were normalized to an SO3 -free basis. The nal equations are of the form
T constant ax1 bx2 cx3
The form of the variables and the several constant terms are presented in Table 3 noting the
following:
Compositions are mol percents, normalized to an SO3 -free basis.
The silica value (SV) differs, however, and is calculated using the compositions
calculated as weight percentages as
SV SiO2 =SiO2 Fe2 O3 CaO MgO
The dolomite ratio is the fraction of bases present as CaO and MgO also calculated
using the compositions calculated as weight percentages:
dolomite ratio CaO MgO=Fe2 O3 CaO MgO K2 O Na2 O
Percent base equals the sum of mol percent Fe2 O3 , CaO, MgO, K2 O, and Na2 O.
Percent acid equals 100 minus percent base or the sum of the mol percent SiO2 ,
Al2 O3 and TiO2 :
R250 is a ratio calculated rst by normalizing the sum of SiO2 , Al2 O3 , Fe2 O3 , CaO,
and MgO to 100% and then calculating the ratio:
R250 SiO2 Al2 O3 =SiO2 Al2 O3 Fe2 O3 CaO
The notation abs indicates absolute value.
Table 3a Variables in Ash Fusion Temperature Correlation
Variable
x0
x1
x2
x3
x4
x5
x6
x7
x8
x9
a
Meaning
Variable
Meaning
expsilica value2 101

% P2 O5 on asha
% SiO2 on asha
% Fe2 O3 on asha
% Al2 O3 on asha
% TiO2 on asha
% CaO on asha
% MgO on asha
% K2 O on asha
% Na2 O on asha
x10
x11
x12
x13
x14
x15
x16
x17
x18
x19
% Na2 O on coala
% basea
% acida
R-250a
dolomite ratiob
% base=% acida
silica valueb
exp104 x2 x4
exp102 x2 x4
exp0:1x15 12
Concentrations are in mol percent on an SO3 -free basis.

Concentrations are in weight percent.
Source: From (475).
b
Table 3b Coefcients of Ash Fusion TemperaturesReducing Conditions
No.
Variable
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
x0
x1
x2
x3
x4
x5
x6
x7
x8
x9
x1 2
x2 2
x3 2
x4 2
x5 2
x6 2
x7 2
x8 2
x9 2
x2 x3
x2 x4
x2 x6
x3 x4
x3 x6
x3 x7
x4 x6
x6 x7
x2 x4
x6 x7
x3 =x6
x2 =x4 2
x2 x4 2
x2 x4 =x3
x11
x11 2
x19
x14 2
x15
x15 2
x15 12
x9 x15
x3 =x11
x13
Abs x15 1
x16
x16 2
Initial
deformation
(IDT)
93.944
19.55
25.546
45.160
5.8404
1.5985
1.5816
1.2348
0.0814
2.3959
6.2074
0.39542
0.27112
4.4499
5.0069
0.0912
0.42422
0.019822
15.973
16.478
227.08
735.56
Height
width
(ST)
Height
width=2
(HT)
Fluid
(FT)
Tcv
16451.
8484.1
54.286
101.77
1882.3
15.194
43.26
111.47
230.41
274.77
34.747
214.3
232.0
237.68
3.4543
5375.0
0.61899
0.75485
1.5323
1.1018
0.10266
1.6596
0.58836
1.52
2.7719
7.5792
6.6806
1.4701
0.18652
1.479
1.276
1.1486
3.84
0.48885
1.5312
1.967
0.3235
0.802
0.26758
2.99
1.1638
0.55503
0.1355
1.182
1.2297
2.177
0.4545
2.487
2.8610
1.1151
1.3607
2.0264
0.35805
1.5470
1.470
1.0598
2.0326
0.8958
0.3688
23.859
37.946
0.00919
0.09338
1.685
160.32
63.820
47.717
0.47624
0.619
343.39
20137.
1616.2
10104.
0.091314
8.2745
10106.
71.576
6408.0
12124.
165.61
1045.3
23613.
6158.1
1748.2
1849.3
Table 3b (continued)
47 x14
48 x17
49 x18
Constant term
Standard
deviation ( C)
r2 of Correlation
2.3436
29298.
11306.
43699.
84.5
0.82
441.27
11481.
2307.1
4745.2
66.8
0.83
8456.4
56.8
127.71
2576.6
73.8
0.88
52.2
0.82
0.86
Source: From (475).
Table 3c Coefcients of Ash Fusion TemperaturesOxidizing Conditions
No. Variable
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
Initial
deformation
(IDT)
Height
width
(ST)
Height
width=2
(HT)
Fluid
(FT)
Tcv
x0
20730.
543.46
24484.
15946.
164526.
x1
186.5
17.125
44.583
68.941
12900.
x2
18084.
16209.
2154.3
15276.
960594.
x3
8195.
4563.7
1088.2
2449.7
735233.
18065.
16193.
2016.6
15252
959798.
x4
x5
99.951
10.867
175.12
53.762
11798.
9539.8
6311.1
15582.
6913.5
333078.
x6
9669.5
6147.8
15543.
6709.7
332825.
x7
x8
8072.0
4349.0
1139.2
2173.9
736015.
8060.6
4351.7
1206.4
2171.9
736002.
x9
13.198
8.6585
8.936
16.583
3419.6
x1 2
x2 2
19.497
1.2099
2.358
0.19781
16.020
0.60209
1.5299
0.79626
2.1125
7.0293
x3 2
x4 2
1.6574
0.79718
0.27981
0.78967
23.841
x5 2
0.4122
3.5648
10.858
5.2889
6.1493
0.82549
1.2347
0.59307
1.1161
4.0657
x6 2
x7 2
0.57076
1.1538
0.38648
1.8361
4.1022
x8 2
0.23092
0.7556
2.4847
0.5194
6.6166
x9 2
1.9088
0.98841
11.37
1.3338
5.5105
x2 x3
0.068062
0.76729
1.5117
2.0645
2.1615
x2 x4
2.9676
2.3044
3.4773
2.2167
56.430
x2 x6
0.11222
0.78797
0.18977
1.4414
3.0119
0.2231
0.78288
3.2271
2.7169
0.97246.
x3 x4
1.9808
2.4232
2.1618
3.1316
0.71224
x3 x6
x3 x7
0.51986
1.8214
1.1611
0.92908
4.1939
x4 x6
0.48264
0.99078
0.97349
2.4124
0.90895
x6 x7
0.45071
1.0683
0.9715
0.39195
2.0637
18143.
16074.
2098.1
15429.
947414.
x2 x4
x6 x7
17755.
1768.9
16717.
4551.0
403047
x3 =x6
2.3786
4.9007
27.432
5.7066
3.8785
0.
0.012824
41.134
0.002178
739.05
x2 =x4
x2 x4 2
0.
0.
0.60352
0.
50.349
x2 x4 =x3
0.12371
0.0042819
0.18732
0.082176
0.66483
(continued)
Table 3c (continued)
No.
Variable
34 x11
35 x11 2
36 x19
37 x14 2
38 x15
39 x15 2
40 x15 12
41 x9 x15
42 x3 =x11
43 x13
44 Abs x15 1
45 x16
46 x16 2
47 x14
48 x17
49 x18
Constant term
Standard
deviation
( C)
2
r of correlation
Initial
deformation
(IDT)
Height
width
(ST)
Height
width=2
(HT)
8039.3
0.0044444
0.60247
0.54954
0.
0.
264.68
327.72
8223.
17163.
4158.7
8490.2
4157.7
8490.0
4.9830
1.4096
633.55
492.93
8401.3
5326.4
153.15
185.39
2519.7
2391.7
3810.6
196.24
693.63
871.62
3922.2
3381.9
19389
11931.
12986.
1697.6
79.3
64.2
0.84
1252.6
0.20981
0.
348.26
16789.
8046
8027
3.4407
173.34
224.92
412.17
13677.
4504.7
575.95
993.51
18014.
38446.
46.0
0.84
0.92
Fluid
(FT)
Tcv
2179.2
724118.
0.14651
2.6125
0.
1265.3
135.52
632.4
11896
302980.
5967.4
156124.
5965.0
157814.
4.6028
225.37
284.06
889.43
1296.4
8178.4
135.48
2713.9
761.88
44555.
2807.6
2408.7
22.048
519.42
19165
148605.
7482.3
180164.
42543.
1137313.
69.0
47.0
0.84
0.89
Source: From (475).
The surface tension (g) of coal slags (and, by extrapolation, other slags) is typically
300400 dyne=cm in air and may be estimated at 1400 C in air (392) from
g 3:24SiO2 5:85Al2 O3 4:4Fe2 O3 4:92CaO 5:49MgO
1:12Na2 O 0:75K2 O
11
where the indicated compositions are on a weight percent basis and total to 100%.
Extrapolation to other temperatures is made using a temperature coefcient of surface
tension of minus 0.017 dyne=cm per C.
In addition to the general ash fusion characterizations described previously, one must
be alert for the special cases where particular mixes of compounds form a low-melting
eutectic. This is shown in Table 4 for several common (and, often, problem) alkali salt
systems.
D.
Smoking Tendency
Although not an unfailing rule, the tendency of a material to form soot under less-thanoptimal combustion conditions appears to be generally related to the ratio between the
unbound hydrogen and the carbon content of a material. This ratio is calculated as
unbound hydrogen-to-carbon ratio
%O2
8
%C
%H2
11
Table 4 Melting Points of Common Eutectic Mixtures

Compound
#1
Compound
#2
Mol
percent #1
Mol
percent #2
Melting point
( C)
NaCl
Na2 SO4
Na2 CO3
Na2 OSiO2
MgSO4
MgSO4
Na2 OSiO2
NaCl
NaCl
Na2 SO4
Na2 SO4
Na2 SO4
Na2 SO4
Na2 CO3
Na2 CO3
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
41
55
35
38
53
59
45
65
62
47
800
884
851
800
1185
660
635
623
633
828
Table 5 Comparative Sooting Tendency of

Waste Materials
Waste material
Mixed paper
Softwood
Linoleum
Polyurethane
Polystyrene
Waxed paper carton
Polyvinyl chloride
Cooking fats
Rubber
Oils, paints
Polyethylene
Unbound H-to-C ratio

0.0065
0.0191
0.0625
0.0641
0.0913
0.0927
0.1200
0.1325
0.1333
0.1343
0.1677
For wastewater sludge, this ratio is about 0.0032; for comparison with other materials, see
Table 5.
II.
SOLID WASTE
Most of the material that is incinerated falls within the class solid waste. Unfortunately,
this class of wastes is very difcult to deal with as an engineering material. Securing a
representative sample is often most problematical. Materials handling is difcult and can
expose workers to risk. Blending is slow and incomplete. However, for incinerator analysis
and design purposes, even highly heterogeneous solid wastes can usefully be considered as
a relatively discrete material with acceptably reproducible properties and characteristics.
Clearly, a somewhat long averaging time may be needed before this constancy is apparent.
The data and correlations given below are an attempt to summarize useful information
regarding the characteristics of several classes of solid wastes. As with other information in
the waste management engineering eld, one must recognize that signicant excursions
from these mean values are to be expected.
A.
Solid Waste Composition
In this context, composition refers to the category of material (paper, glass, etc.) in the
waste streams. Composition data are reported in this form since the analysis method,
(visual categorization) is low-cost and can rapidly and economically be applied to large
quantities of waste. This latter point is important if a meaningful characterization is to be
made on a stream that is grossly heterogeneous. Data in this form may be translated into
mean overall chemical compositions and the like by taking the weighted average of the
chemical compositions of specied components. Lastly, data on a categorical basis are
directly usable to estimate the potential for materials recovery.
1.
Mixed Municipal Refuse
In many instances, the waste stream of interest cannot be directly sampled. Under such
circumstances, data from other municipalities can be useful as an indicator of mean refuse
composition. Generally, municipal refuse is categorized as shown in Table 6.
An examination of refuse composition data from across the United States shows
great variability, reecting local practices regarding the wastes accepted at landlls or
incinerators, seasonal effects (e.g., on yard waste quantities), economic level of the
citizens, incorporation of commercial or industrial waste, etc. These data can be
rationalized, however (109, 110), into an estimated national average composition.
These results are more useful if the moisture levels of the components are adjusted,
category by category, to a moisture basis corresponding to the manufactured state of the
materials entering the refuse storage bunker, that is, changing from the mixed or as-red
basis to an as-discarded basis. The moisture content values shown in Table 7 can be
used to effect this basis shift.
Carrying out the moisture adjustment does not materially change the total moisture
content of the refuse mix, only the distribution of moisture among the refuse categories.
Discarded solid waste, as it is mixed together with other refuse materials, may either lose
or absorb moisture. Food wastes, for example, may transfer signicant quantities of
moisture to paper and textiles. The as-discarded basis is useful in indicating the true
relative magnitude of waste generation for the various categories, as the appropriate basis
for estimating salvage potential, and as the basis for forecasting refuse generation rates and
chemical and physical properties. Such basis adjustments can become critical for wastes
Table 6 Primary Constituents of Categories of Mixed Municipal Refuse
Category
Glass
Metal
Paper
Plastics
Leather, rubber
Textiles
Wood
Food wastes
Miscellaneous
Yard wastes
Description
Bottles (primarily)
Cans, wire, and foil
Various types, some with llers
Polyvinyl chloride, polyethylene, styrene, etc., as found in packing,
housewares, furniture, toys and nonwoven synthetic fabrics
Shoes, tires, toys, etc.
Cellulosic, protein, woven synthetics
Wooden packaging, furniture, logs, twigs
Garbage
Inorganic ash, stones, dust
Grass, brush, shrub trimmings
Table 7 Estimated Average Percent Moisture in

Refuse on an As-Discarded and As-Fired
Basisa
Component
Food wastes
Yard wastes
Miscellaneous
Glass
Metal
Paper
Plastics
Leather, rubber
Textiles
Wood
a
As-red
As-discarded
63.6
37.9
3.0
3.0
6.6
24.3
13.8
13.8
23.8
15.4
70.0
55.3
2.0
2.0
2.0
8.0
2.0
2.0
10.0
15.0
From Ref. 109.
where a substantial fraction of the waste is very moist and, thus, where profound effects of
moisture transfer occur.
An excellent example of a geographical area where these circumstances occur to a
signicant degree is found in the Pacic Rim (e.g., China, Korea, Japan, Taiwan). In these
countries, large quantities of very moist (>85% moisture) food waste are combined with
relatively little absorbent paper material. As a result, the categorical solid waste composition data are greatly distorted. A spreadsheet model to reallocate waste compositions using
the measured moisture content on an as-red basis to the as-discarded basis useful in
estimating waste properties, heating value, etc., is described in Appendix F and provided as
a le on the diskette provided with this book.
The seasonal and annual average compositions shown in Table 8 were derived from
an analysis of over 30 data sets from municipalities throughout the United States. Based on
Table 8 Estimated Average Municipal Refuse Composition, 1970 (Weight Percent, as Discarded)a
Annual average
Category
Paper
Yard wastes
Food wastes
Glass
Metal
Wood
Textiles
Leather, rubber
Plastics
Miscellaneous
Total
a
b
Summer
Fall
Winterb
Spring
As-discarded
As-red
31.0
27.1
17.7
7.5
7.0
2.6
1.8
1.1
1.1
3.1
100.0
39.9
6.2
22.7
9.6
9.1
3.4
2.5
1.4
1.2
4.0
100.0
42.4
0.4
24.1
10.2
9.7
3.6
2.7
1.5
1.4
4.2
100.0
36.5
14.4
20.8
8.8
8.2
3.1
2.2
1.2
1.1
3.7
100.0
37.4
13.9
20.0
9.8
8.4
3.1
2.2
1.2
1.4
3.4
100.0
44.0
9.4
17.1
8.8
8.6
3.0
2.6
1.5
1.4
3.6
100.0
From Ref. 110.

For southern states, the refuse composition in winter is similar to that shown here for fall.
Table 9 Estimated Average Generated Refuse Composition 19601995

(Weight Percent As-Described, Mixed Refuse)
Year
Component
1960
1970
1980
1990
1995
Paper & paperboard

Yard wastes
Food wastes
Glass
Metal
Wood
Textiles
Leather & rubber
Plastics
Other
Estimated Rate (kg=person=day)
34.1
22.8
13.9
7.5
12.4
3.4
1.9
2.2
0.4
1.5
1.21
36.7
19.1
10.5
10.5
11.4
3.1
1.5
2.5
2.5
2.2
1.47
36.6
18.2
8.5
9.9
10.2
4.7
1.7
2.8
4.4
3.0
1.65
35.4
17.0
10.2
6.4
8.0
6.0
2.9
2.9
8.4
2.9
2.05
38.5
14.1
10.2
6.1
7.5
5.0
3.4
2.9
8.8
3.4
2.00
Source: From (450).
estimates of forecast manufacturing rates of paper, metal cans, and other consumer and
industrial products and estimates of the prompt and delayed disposal rate of these
commodities for the United States overall, composition forecasts can be prepared (Table
9). In the forecasts (450), consideration was given to the mean useful life of the products.
Table 9 also shows the estimated per capita waste generation rate patterns over the period
from 1960 through 1995.
Waste sampling and analysis data are shown in Tables 10a and 10b to illustrate the
high degree of variation to be expected in waste sampling. In addition to these regional
differences, one can expect seasonal variation in the composition and quantity of wastes.
The average of three years of data from New Jersey (384) from a region where the waste
was about 54% residential and 46% commercial and industrial showed 122% of the annual
average volumetric monthly waste quantity was received in May; about the average from
July through October; then declining almost linearly to only 78% of the average in
February and climbing back to the peak in May. The refuse density varied from 435 kg=m3
in the summer to 390 kg=m3 in the winter.
The data in Table 11 are given for comparison with the U.S. refuse composition
estimates. For the U.S. refuse data, the decline in the use of coal for home heating is shown
in the change in refuse ash content between 1939 and 1970.
A review of Table 9 shows the dramatic increase in the plastics content of the waste
stream. Plastics is a generic term referring to a wide range of different resin bases, each
with differing chemistries and properties. The estimated U.S. average distribution of
plastics, as found in the waste stream, is summarized in Table 12 (450).
2.
Construction and Demolition Waste
Wastes generated in the course of construction and demolition (C&D) activities can
comprise a large fraction of the total waste disposal requirement in metropolitan areas.
Estimation of the quantities and composition of this waste can be made (451) based on the
oor area of the building to be constructed or demolished and the general structural type of
the building. In general, the original data underlying the waste estimates were volumetric
Table 10a Solid Waste Weight Percent Characterization Data (1988, 1990) [291]
Waste category
Indianapolis, IN
Kauai,
HI
King
Co., WA
Bergen
Co., NJ
Monroe
Co., NY
38
8
13
22
7
1
4
0
0
0
26
7
20
24
5
1
6
1
3
9
27
7
19
31
4
1
3
1
7
0
44
9
9
17
7
1
5
4
5
3
42
10
7
24
10
1
5
0
0
0
Ann
Arbor,
MI
Portland,
OR
San
Diego,
CA
Santa
Cruz
Co., CA
National
estimate
29
8
8
39
4
1
5
2
2
2
29
7
11
33
3
1
7
0
9
1
26
7
21
23
4
1
3
0
6
10
33
8
15
18
7
1
5
0
6
7
34
9
20
20
7
1
7
0
2
0
Paper
Plastics
Yard debris
Miscellaneous organics
Glass
Aluminum
Ferrous metal
Nonferrous metal
Miscellaneous inorganics
Other
Waste category
Paper
Plastics
Yard debris
Miscellaneous organics
Glass
Aluminum
Ferrous metal
Nonferrous metal
Miscellaneous inorganics
Other
Table 10b Standard Deviations of Solid Waste Characterization Data (Percent of Reported
Average Weight Percent Values) [291]
Waste
category
Paper
Plastics
Yard debris
Misc. organics
Glass
Aluminum
Ferrous metal
Nonferrous metal
Misc. inorganics
Portland,
OR
Cincinatti,
OH
Bergen Co.,
NJ
Rochester,
NY
Sacremento,
CA
6
14
11
12
24
35
13
63
11
20
10
26
52
16
48
27
137
54
19
35
28
86
32
50
54
48
59
13
19
26
32
46
76
29
161
14
3
17
17
2
56
15
80
30
Table 11 A Summary of International Refuse Composition Data

(Weight Percent, Mixed Refuse)
Country
Australia
Austria
Bangladesh
Belgium
Bulgaria
Burma
Chinac
Colombia
Czechoslovakia
Denmarka
United Kingdom
Finlanda
France
Gabona
Western Germanyb
Hong Kong
Indiab
Indonesiab
Iran
Italya
Japanb
Kenya
Netherlandsb
New Zealand
Nigeriab
Norway
Pakistanb
Philippines
Saudi Arabia
Singapore
Spainb
Sri Lanka
Sudan
Swedenb
Taiwan
United Statesb
Ref.
Paper
Metal
Glass
Food
Plastic
300
300
307
314
314
302
449
302
314
314
302
314
310
314
302
307
302
302
314
310
309
314
313
307
302
301
312
311
306
307
314
302
308
314
307
303, 304, 305
38.0
35.0
2.0
30.0
10.0
1.0
3.1
22.0
13.4
32.9
37.0
55.0
30.0
6.0
20.0
32.0
3.0
10.0
17.2
31.0
21.0
12.2
22.2
28.0
15.5
38.2
2.2
17.0
24.0
43.0
18.0
8.0
4.0
50.0
8.0
28.9
11.0
10.0
1.0
5.3
1.7
3.1
0.3
1.0
6.2
4.1
8.0
5.0
4.0
5.0
5.0
2.0
1.0
2.0
1.8
7.0
5.7
2.7
3.2
6.0
4.5
2.0
2.2
2.0
9.0
3.0
4.0
1.0
3.0
7.0
1.0
9.3
18.0
9.0
9.0
8.0
1.6
6.0
0.8
2.0
6.6
6.1
8.0
6.0
4.0
8.0
10.0
10.0
8.0
1.0
2.1
3.0
3.8
1.3
11.9
7.0
2.5
7.5
1.75
5.0
8.0
1.0
3.0
6.0
8.0
3.0
10.4
13.0
24.0
40.0
40.0
54.0
80.0
60.0
56.0
41.8
44.0
28.0
20.0
30.0
77.0
21.0
9.0
36.0
72.0
69.8
36.0
50.0
42.6
50.0
48.0
51.5
30.4
52.5
43.0
53.0
5.0
50.0
80.0
30.0
15.0
25.0
17.8
0.1
6.0
1.0
5.0
1.7
4.0
4.5
5.0
4.2
6.8
2.0
6.0
1.0
3.0
2.0
11.0
1.0
6.0
3.8
7.0
6.2
1.0
6.2
0.1
2.0
6.5
1.2
4.0
2.0
6.0
4.0
1.0
2.6
8.0
2.0
3.4
Major cities.
Data averaged for two or more cities.
c
Data for Qingdao municipal government.
Source: From (315).
b
(since the generators were concerned with the numbers of trucks needed to haul off the
material). Conversion factors are provided to readily convert between the volumetric and
mass bases.
Table 13 presents the waste generation intensity in the course of demolition of
buildings of various types.
In the course of construction activity, waste is generated in proportion to the usage of
various building materials. The fraction lost, thus contributing to the municipal waste
Table 12 Estimated Average Mix of Plastics in Municipal Refuse (1966)
Resin
Polyethylene terephthalate
High-density polyethylene
Polyvinyl chloride
Low-density, very low density
polyethylene
Polypropylene
Polystyrene
Other resins
Abbreviation
Estimated
thousands of short
tons disposed=year
Percent of
total
plastics
discarded
PET
HDPE
PVC
LDPE=LLDPE
900
1440
870
2510
7.4
11.8
7.1
20.5
PP
PS
1670
1790
3050
13.7
14.6
24.9
Source: From (450).
Table 13 Estimated Waste Generation in Demolition Activities

Building type
Material
Concrete
Steela
Tile
Brick
Glass
Wallpaper
Paper oor
Wood oor
Concrete block
Wood
Mortar
Units
Brick
Steelb
RCc
SRCd
Wood
m3 =m2
ton=m2
m 2 m2
piece=m2
m2 m2
m2 =m2
m2 =m2
m2 =m2
piece=m2
m2 m2
m2 =m2
0.348
0.031
0.050
292
2.370
1.131
0.344
2.800
0.076
3.210
0.292
0.058
0.098
101
0.131
2.21
0.039
0.855
0.460
0.031
0.461
75
0.203
1.717
0.332
3.43
2.17
0.045
3.54
0.565
0.051
0.224
43
0.006
2.79
11.2
0.033
0.850
0.483
105
2.370
1.131
0.344
0.175
Total steel in construction work.

Steel-frame type. cReinforced concrete construction type.
d
Steel-framed reinforced concrete structure.
Source: From (451).
b
Table 14 Rate of Loss of Building Materials in Construction Activities

Materials
Sources
Losses (Range, Average) as %
Concrete
Tile
Brick
Glass
Wallpaper
Wood
Mortar
Formwork
Reinforced concrete work

Masonry work
Masonry work
Window frame work
Decoration work
Carpenters work
Masonry, waterproong work
Reinforced concrete, building work
12 (1.5)
23 (2.5)
15 (3.0)
215 (6.0)
120 (11.0)
1030 (13.0)
0.3
16.7a
a
Data obtained from speciality contractors.
Source: From (451).
Table 15 Conversion Factors for Building Materials

Material
Concrete
Tile
Brick
Glass
Wallpaper
Paper oor
Woodform
Concrete block
Mortar
Wood
Units
3
kg=m
kg=m2
kg=piece
kg=m2
kg=m2
kg=m2
kg=m2
kg=piece
kg=m2
kg=m2
Conversion factor
2300
28.8
2
9.9
0.3
2.6
6.7
6.7
33
573
Source: From (451).
stream, differs widely between these materials (Table 14). Using the volume-to-mass
conversion factors from Table 15, the waste generation intensity from construction activity
can be estimated and is shown in Table 16. Data from Germany (453) indicate that the
average compositional breakdown of typical construction site waste is 64.85% mineral
matter, 31.24% combustible matter, and 3.91% metal.
3.
Institutional, Commercial, and Industrial Waste
Solid wastes from institutional and commercial sources (schools, ofce buildings, stores,
small businesses) almost equal that generated by residences. Industrial waste generation
Table 16 Estimated Waste Generation from
Construction Activities (kg=m2 oor area)
Building type
Materials
Concrete
Tile
Brick
Glass
Wallpaper
Woodform
Wood
Mortar
Fiber
Packing
Plastic
Steel
Miscellaneous
a
Concretea
Block
Wood
15.870
0.333
4.530
0.120
0.055
3.841
3.380
0.351
0.317
1.428
2.904
5.174
9.522
12.000
0.035
17.490
1.410
0.037
3.156
5.668
0.318
0.240
1.080
2.196
3.912
7.200
0.000
0.348
6.270
1.410
0.037
0.000
13.000
0.318
0.279
1.250
2.550
4.543
8.361
This is a summary of data for reinforced concrete, steel-framed,

reinforced concrete, and steel-frame building types.
Source: From (451).
can exceed the combination of residential and commercial wastes. Yet, with their
importance apparently obvious, little published data exist.
The information on industrial and commercial waste generation rates and compositions is difcult to obtain, correlate, and=or to generalize because of the following factors:
Manufacturing establishments, even those in the same type of business, may differ
widely in their waste-generating practices.
Most rms are reluctant to reveal production and related statistics for fear of the data
being used to the competitive advantage of others.
Some rms are reluctant to provide information on waste volumes and composition
for fear the data will indicate noncompliance with pollution control regulations.
Regardless of their wastes pollution-related characteristics, there is also a
tendency for rms to underestimate its quantity.
Some industrial activities are subject to seasonal uctuations.
The extent of salvaging, recycling, sale to scrap dealers, or other reclamation of
wastes differs greatly among manufacturers.
Many rms have little understanding of and few records on their waste generation
and characteristics.
Data for mixed commercial refuse and for a variety of industries have been prepared,
however (Tables 17, 18, and 19 and Ref. 108), but considerable care should be exercised in
their application to any specic industrial establishment or geographic region.
B.
Solid Waste Properties
The categorical composition is the starting point for the development of parameters of
interest to the incinerator designer. Although the manipulation of gross categorical data to
(text continues on p. 129)
Table 17 Composition of Commercial Refuse (Weight
Percent, Mixed)
Commercial wastes
Component
Metal
Paper
Plastics
Leather, rubber
Textiles
Wood
Food waste
Yard waste
Glass
Miscellaneous
Total
a
Kentuckya
Michiganb
10.6
60.4
9.4
6
57
1
7.1
11.3
1.2
100.0
Source: Ref. 114 (sampling and analysis).

Source: Ref. 115 (engineering estimates).
c
Source: Table 27.
b
1
2
24
0
6
3
100
Residential
wastesc
8.6
44.0
1.4
1.5
2.6
3.0
17.1
9.4
8.8
3.6
100.0
Table 18 Industrial Waste Compositiona

Component (wt %)
SIC number
20 Food and kindred products
Data points
Average
Standard deviation
Condence limits
22 Textile mills
Data points
Average
Standard deviation
Condence limits
23 Apparel products
Data points
Average
Standard deviation
Condence limits
24 Wood products
Data points
Average
Standard deviation
Condence limits
25 Furniture
Data points
Average
Standard deviation
Condence limits
Paper
Wood
Leather
Rubber
Plastics
Metals
Glass
30
52.3
32.7
11.7
30
7.7
10.9
3.9
30
30
30
30
8.2
3.7
1.3
30
4.9
2.8
1.0
18
45.5
40.3
18.6
18
18
0
0
18
18
4.7
10.7
4.9
18
17
55.9
37.4
17.8
17
17
0
0
17
0
0
17
17
0
0
9
16.7
33.6
22.0
9
71.6
34.8
22.7
9
0
0
9
0
0
9
0
0
9
0
0
9
0
0
7
24.7
12.3
9.1
7
42.1
16.2
12.0
7
0
0
7
0
0
.9
.4
.1
Textiles
Food
Miscellaneous
30
0
0
30
16.7
29.9
10.7
30
9.2
21.1
7.5
18
18
26.8
38.1
17.6
18
18
17
0
0
17
36.5
37.3
17.7
17
1.35
2.8
1.3
17
9
7.8
19.7
12.9
7
26 Paper and allied products

Data points
Average
Standard deviation
Condence limits
27 Printing and publishing
Data points
Average
Standard deviation
Condence limits
28 Chemical and allied
Data points
Average
Standard deviation
Condence limits
29 Petroleum and allied
Data points
Average
Standard deviation
Condence limits
30 Rubber and plastics
Data points
Average
Standard deviation
Condence limits
31 Leather manufacturing
Data points
Average
Standard deviation
Condence limits
20
56.3
8.7
3.8
20
11.3
15.5
6.8
20
0
0
20
0
0
20
20
9.4
18.2
8.0
20
20
20
20
14.0
27.5
12.1
26
84.9
5.3
2.2
26
5.5
12.3
4.7
26
26
0
0
0
26
26
26
0
0
0
26
26
26
48
55.0
34.0
9.6
48
4.5
6.2
1.7
48
48
48
9.3
17.0
4.8
48
7.2
13.9
3.9
48
2.2
4.2
1.2
48
48
48
19.7
32.8
9.3
5
72.1
35.7
31.4
5
6.8
4.4
3.9
5
0
0
5
0
0
5
15.3
30.7
27.0
5
4.4
5.2
4.6
5
0
0
5
0
0
5
1.0
1.3
1.1
13
56.3
31.5
17.2
13
5.2
6.2
3.4
13
0
0
13
9.2
20.3
11.0
13
13.5
20.7
11.3
13
13
0
0
13
13
13
3
6.0
4.2
4.7
3
3.9
5.4
6.1
3
13.5
19.2
21.7
3
0
0
3
0
0
3
53.3
47.3
53.6
(continued)
Table 18 (continued)
Component (wt %)
SIC number
32 Stone, clay, and glass
Data points
Average
Standard deviation
Condence limits
33 Primary metals
Data points
Average
Standard deviation
Condence limits
34 Fabricated metals
Data points
Average
Standard deviation
Condence limits
35 Nonelectrical machinery
Data points
Average
Standard deviation
Condence limits
Paper
Wood
Leather
Rubber
Plastics
Metals
Glass
Textiles
Food
Miscellaneous
16
33.8
37.5
18.4
16
4.3
8.4
4.1
16
0
0
16
16
16
8.1
24.8
12.2
16
12.8
29.6
14.5
16
16
0
0
16
40.0
44.8
22.0
12
41.0
27.4
15.5
12
11.6
12.4
7.0
12
0
0
12
12
5.4
9.8
5.5
12
5.5
7.8
4.4
12
2.0
4.3
2.4
12
0
0
12
12
29.0
40.0
22.7
36
44.6
37.7
12.3
36
10.3
20.8
6.8
36
0
0
36
36
36
23.2
34.5
11.3
36
36
36
36
12.2
31.0
10.1
48
43.1
34.3
9.7
48
11.4
19.5
5.5
48
48
48
2.5
6.8
1.9
48
23.7
30.8
8.7
48
48
0
0
48
48
36 Electrical machinery
Data points
Average
Standard deviation
Condence limits
37 Transportation
Data points
Average
Standard deviation
Condence limits
38 Scientic instruments
Data points
Average
Standard deviation
Condence limits
39 Miscellaneous manufacturing
Data points
Average
Standard deviation
Condence limits
a
19
73.3
24.4
11.0
19
8.3
10.1
4.5
19
0
0
8
50.9
34.2
23.8
8
9.4
6.3
4.4
8
0
0
8
44.8
34.0
23.6
8
2.3
3.6
2.5
20
54.6
38.7
17.0
20
13.0
23.7
10.4
Source: Ref. 110; condence limits are 95%.
19
19
3.5
7.0
3.1
19
2.3
3.5
1.6
19
19
0
0
19
1.2
2.4
1.1
19
8
1.4
1.5
1.0
8
2.1
2.9
2.0
8
0
0
8
19.5
33.3
23.1
8
0
0
8
0
0
8
6.0
6.4
4.4
8
8.4
17.2
11.9
8
0
0
20
20
20
11.9
22.2
9.7
20
5.0
10.3
4.5
20
20
20
20
8.1
14.0
6.1
Table 19 Typical Waste Composition of Institutional, Commercial and Light Industrial Generators (Weight Percent)
Generator type (see Notes for key)
Component
Mixed paper
Newsprint
Corrugated paper
Plastic
Yard waste
Wood
Food Waste
Other organics
10.3
33.7
10.0
8.6
5.3
1.7
13.0
7.4
11.3
11.5
27.5
13.7
0.5
0.7
4.9
7.5
28.6
2.5
26.1
6.9
0.0
0.1
6.7
0.1
43.0
3.5
21.5
3.7
0.0
8.5
2.2
1.2
11.8
6.7
37.4
8.0
2.8
3.6
12.4
1.9
12.9
7.2
35.6
11.1
0.5
15.0
0.7
2.0
15.9
13.2
44.9
5.6
0.7
9.4
0.2
0.2
8.5
19.8
10.3
2.0
3.2
46.6
0.2
5.8
19.8
1.7
29.4
7.3
3.6
0.5
1.6
8.3
13.1
0.4
27.8
22.2
0.0
27.2
0.4
2.0
2.2
0.5
17.4
3.8
3.2
27.1
1.0
2.3
Total combustibles
90.0
77.6
71.0
83.6
84.6
85.0
90.1
96.4
72.2
93.3
57.5
Ferrous
Aluminum
Glass
Other inorganics
2.5
1.1
5.9
0.3
6.9
2.7
11.9
0.9
8.2
1.5
6.2
13.1
0.6
0.4
0.8
14.6
3.6
0.7
2.7
8.6
10.0
0.4
1.5
3.1
3.9
0.3
1.4
4.3
0.6
0.1
0.1
2.8
16.4
1.5
9.9
0.0
0.8
0.9
4.9
1.0
17.5
0.1
1.0
23.9
Total noncombustibles
9.8
22.4
29.0
16.4
15.6
15.0
9.9
3.6
27.8
6.7
42.5
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Total
Amultifamily dwelling; Bhotels; Cschools; Dofce buildings; Eshopping center, Fwarehouse; Gelectric manufacturers; Hwood products manufacturers; I
dealers=repair shops; Jplastic manufacturers; Kconstruction. (Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding.)
Source: From (453).
establish average chemical composition, heat content, and the like requires assumptions of
questionable accuracy, it is a necessary compromise. Typically, several (perhaps one to
three) tons of waste from a 200 to 1000 ton=day waste ow are analyzed to produce a
categorical composition. Then a still smaller sample is hammermilled and mixed, and a
500-mg sample is taken. Clearly, a caloric value determination on the latter sample is, at
best, a rough reection of the energy content of the original waste.
1.
Chemical Analysis
Stepping from the categorical analysis to a mean chemical analysis provides the basis for
stoichiometric calculations. The macrochemistry of waste (the percentage of the major
chemical constituents carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, sulfur, nitrogen, chlorine, and ash) is an
important input to estimates of heat content, combustion air requirements, incinerator mass
balances, etc. The microchemistry of waste (the content of heavy metals and other
environmentally important species present at the parts per million level) is also important
in revealing potential air or ash emission problems.
a. Mixed Municipal Refuse
MAJOR Chemical Constituents. Chemical data for average municipal refuse components based on the mixed refuse of Table 8 are presented in Tables 20 and 21. Although
these data may not be at all representative of the material of interest in a given design
effort, the general approach to data analysis presented here may be used. The process
begins with refuse categorical compositions (such as Table 6) and incorporates the effects
of the moisture exchange processes discussed above to produce the baseline refuse
elemental statistics used in heat and material balance computations, etc.
MINOR Chemical Constituents. Increasing interest in the emission rate of metals
with health effects (an important part of the class of air pollutants called air toxics") leads
to a need to understand the sources and typical concentrations of many of the trace
elements in waste streams. These concentrations, clearly, vary widely in different waste
components and even within relatively narrow categories of waste. Thus, data on typical
concentrations must be used with appropriate caution. Table 22 indicates the result of three
extensive analyses of the trace metal concentrations in mixed municipal refuse (455, 456,
457).
A detailed breakdown of several of the important trace elements was made for
wastes delivered to the Burnaby, British Columbia (serving greater Vancouver) MWC
(454). The analytical results for a wide range of individual waste components are shown in
Table 23.
b. Specic Waste Components. Data for specic waste components are given in Table 24.
These data may be used when detailed categorical analyses are available or when one
wishes to explore the impact of refuse composition changes.
It is of importance to distinguish between the two types (soluble and insoluble) of
chlorine compounds found in refuse. The most important soluble chlorine compounds are
sodium and calcium chloride. These compounds (substantially) remain as solid inorganic
salts in the bottom ash and y ash. The insoluble chlorine compounds are principally
chlorine-containing organic compounds [e.g., polyvinyl chloride (PVC), polyvinylidene
chloride (Saran), etc.] that form HCl in combustion processes and thus generate a
requirement for acid gas control. Data on the distribution of the two forms of chlorine
(378) are shown in Table 25.
(text continues on p. 140)
Table 20 Estimated Ultimate Analysis of Refuse Categories (% Dry Basis)a
Category
Metal
Paper
Plastics
Leather, rubber
Textiles
Wood
Food wastes
Yard wastes
Glass
Miscellaneous
Ash
Fe
Al
Cu
Zn
Pb
Sn
P**
Cl
Se
%
Fixed
carbon
(dry
basis)
4.5
45.4
0.6
6.1
4.3
42.1
0.05
0.3
90.5
6.0
0.01
0.12
59.8
8.3
19.0
1.0
11.6
0.3
46.2
48.3
41.7
49.2
0.52
13.0*
6.4
6.0
5.8
6.5
0.07
2.0*
41.8
42.4
27.6
36.1
0.36
12.0*
2.2
0.3
2.8
2.9
0.03
3.0*
3.2
2.9
21.9
5.0
99.02
70.0
0.2
0.11
0.25
0.35
77.3
20.1
2.0
2.0
0.01
0.6
0.03
0.01
0.03
0.05
0.24
0.04
6.0
Trace
0.5
11.3
5.1
6.
3.9
14.1
5.3
19.3
0.4
7.5
From Ref. 21; (*) estimated (varies widely); (**) excludes phosphorus in CaPO4 .
Table 21 Ultimate Analysis of Annual Average 1970 Mixed Municipal Wastea

Composition of average refuse (kg=100 kg dry solids)
Category
(wt %)
As-red
(wt %)
As-discarded
(% moisture)
As-discarded
8.7
44.2
1.2
1.7
2.3
2.5
16.6
12.6
8.5
1.7
100.0
8.2
35.6
1.1
1.5
1.9
2.5
23.7
15.5
8.3
1.7
100.0
2.0
8.0
2.0
2.0
10.0
15.0
70.0
50.0
2.0
2.0
Metal
Paper
Plastics
Leather, rubber
Textiles
Wood
Food waste
Yard waste
Glass
Miscellaneous
Total
Average Refuse Summary (As-red Basis: 100 kg Average Refuse)

Component
Moisture H2 O
Carbon (C)
Hydrogen (H2 -bound)
Oxygen (O-bound)
Hydrogen (H2 )
Sulfur (S)
Nitrogen (N2 )
Ash
Total
wt %
Mol
28.16
25.62
2.65
21.21
0.80
0.10
0.64
20.82
100.0
1.564
2.135
1.326
1.326
0.399
0.003
0.023
Higher heating value (water condensed): 2472 kcal=kg

Lower heating value (water as vapor): 2167 kcal=kg
Ash
H2
O2
N2
Weight
10.13
2.74
0.17
0.24
0.08
0.09
2.17
0.54
11.21
1.62
28.99
0.50
20.70
0.90
1.23
1.10
1.43
4.13
5.31
0.06
0.30
35.66
0.067
2.781
0.125
0.170
0.152
0.178
0.574
0.701
0.008
0.046
4.802
0.481
19.193
0.285
0.390
0.995
1.260
2.730
3.890
0.041
0.278
29.543
0.0011
0.0547
0.0045
0.0062
0.0048
0.0033
0.0248
0.0378
0.1372
0.0056
0.1368
0.0150
0.0205
0.0523
0.0089
0.2772
0.3129
0.0034
0.0696
0.9022
11.19
45.59
1.50
2.05
2.38
2.96
9.90
10.79
11.32
2.32
100.00
Table 22 Summary of Elemental Concentrations of Various Fractions of MSW

Charlestown, PEI
(Combustibles fraction) n 12a
Element
Al
Ba
Ca
Cd
Cr
Co
Cu
Fe
Pb
Hg
Na
Ni
Sn
Zn
Quebec City, PQ
(Combustibles fraction) n 12
Hartford, CT
(RDF) n 12
Mean
Std. dev.
Median
Mean
Std. dev.
Median
Mean
Std. dev.
Median
12,050
1.2
5,140
0.7
21.8
0.17
48.3
2,365
82.4
0.17
3,040
4,25
14.2
146
4,060
4.04
1,375
1.14
16.3
0.58
25.4
1,830
47.4
0.39
2,070
2.22
5.51
61.5
22,225
0
5,125
0
16.5
0
41
1,960
79
0
2,400
4
12.5
134
5,530
147
20,060
8.06
172
3.71
430
6,050
732
1.23
2,470
45.1
54.9
429
1,740
66.9
6,470
7.39
215
1.76
660
1,385
1,080
1.04
1,010
8.01
108
243
5,233
145
17,250
5.5
112
2.8
108
5,970
255
0.74
2,170
43
20
39
72,220
385
76,260
30.3
433
52.8
8,930
31,930
2,760
0.11
71,960
442
889
5,870
19,930
130
14,460
10.1
495
34.2
17,130
20,205
2,155
0.10
63,550
407
337
9,050
66,200
395
79,700
29.0
275
42.9
1,720
23,050
1,820
0.08
53,000
280
875
2,560
a
n number of samples.
Source: From (458). Charlestown data from (455). Quebec City data from (456). Hartford data from (457).
Table 23 Metal Concentrations in Components of Municipal and Commercial Waste Materials

Category
Major
Paper group
Fine papers
Books
Magazines
Laminates
Newsprint
Browns
Residual mixed
Plastic group
Film
Food=beveragec
Food=bev. (cont.)c
Minor
Glued
Not glued
Wax=plastic
Foil
Glued
Not glueda
Not gluedb
Corrugated
Kraft
Box board
Color
Flexible
Rigid
No. 1 PETE
No. 2 HDPE
No. 3 PVC
No. 4 LDPE
No. 5 PP
No. 6 PS
Other
Footnotes on p. 136.
Elemental composition in ppm (grams=ton of component)

Al
As
Ba
Be
3283
2874
9808
22413
5603
101,262
3772
4203
4282
1030
1687
3319
1505
1.3
0.4
1.1
1.8
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.8
0.7
1.2
2.2
37.6
2.5
7.6
3.7
15.4
6.1
6.9
16.5
3.1
4.7
6.0
6.6
7.7
62.6
24.2
36.9
22.3
25.1
9.3
18.4
23.2
6.3
11.3
31.0
14.3
0.1
0.01
7.4
0.2
0.1
7.2
0.3
1.0
6.3
0.3
1.0
1.1
0.1
3236
980
12,451
1394
2438
90
262
736
36
19688
0.5 13.7 169.8

1.7 29.7 11.0
1.3
5.4 128.5
0.8 193.5
8.0
1.5 29.4 83.5
1.1
7.2
0.0
0.2 12.0
5.0
0.5
5.3
4.5
0.2
3.9
3.4
1.2 20.0 117.9
Cd
Cr
Cu Hg
Mn
Ni
0.1
3.4
8 0.3 24.6
7.9
0.4
8.7 40 0.2 48.2
1.4
0.001 16.6 26 0.3 50.9 17.6
0.3
5.8 37 0.3 50.9
8.2
0.3
3.2
7 0.1 25.5
5.4
0.1
44.6 226 0.1 64.5
8.7
0.1
1.3 10 0.3 19.5
4.3
0.1
3.8 13 2.9 45.0
6.2
0.1
215.1 36 0.3 81.9 106.5
0.1
1.8
3 0.1 17.3
3.8
0.1
4.7 11 0.5 28.1
7.7
0.2
5.4 12 0.2 41.0
6.8
1.7
33.0 24 0.4 51.2
7.5
0.1
6.6
0.1
2.8
0.1 37.2
1.9
5.3
2.7
2.9
0.02 4.5
4.0
2.5
0.04 1.9
0.03 4.7
0.5 79.3
115.1
86.0
119.6
16.7
15.0
2.6
4.7
31.6
7.1
44.1
25
20
75
31
24
2
10
16
9
57
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.4
34.1
33.0
53.0
60.0
36.5
11.7
9.4
31.9
3.6
41.7
Pb
4.5
0.005
0.4
5.9
7.1
92.3
2.4
7.2
5.7
3.8
9.3
12.0
229.4
8.0 361.5
5.9 279.3
27.2
33.7
8.3
61.5
7.0
60.6
2.6 2160
4.2
56.0
6.0
69.3
5.7
25.0
38.2 157.7
Sb
2.3
0.03
1.6
98.9
3.7
20.2
1.2
2.5
1.8
1.5
1.6
2.8
5.0
27.1
10.7
17.1
174.1
52.0
29,700
16.0
51.2
44.0
101.3
Se
0.25
0.13
0.08
0.13
0.05
0.02
0.11
0.11
0.07
0.04
0.05
0.04
0.03
Sn
8
24
36
31
12
11
18
24
25
4
13
11
25
Zn
208
88
36
18
16
119
8
19
29
10
22
29
81
0.01
92
1132
0.02
31
67
0.04 179
52
0.05
6
97
0.005 14
142
0.03
17
3
0.03
0.01
89
0.03
18
40
0.02
25
96
0.15
96
273
Category
Major
Minor
Plastic group (cont.)

Housewares
Clear
White
Blue
Yellow
Other
Toys & Other
Videotape
Organics group
Yard & garden
Lawn & plant
Branches
Food waste
Organic
Shells & bone
Wood
Finished
Unnished
Textiles
Leather
Rubber
Footwear
Other

Al
As
406
856
1686
826
1154
565
136
0.1 0.5 18.5 0.5

0.9
6.4
0.2 7.1
8.5 1.5
2.5 595.
3.1 16.9 565.0 0.03 289.7
8.7
0.3 8.1 227.1 0.1
104.8 1287
0.3 5.9 168.1 0.5
100.9 359.
0.5 9.5 83.1 1.5
75.8 229.
14.3 64.7 27.4 0.0 2195
94.1
15547
4328
2910
431
415
894
2648
7.3
0.9
1.2
5.1
34.0
0.4
0.7
Ba
Be
527.1 132.8 2.6

22.5 54.2 9.7
328.7 17.4 0.0
14.6 46.3 16.1

20.9 27.9 17.4
6.9 23.0 2.2
5.6 91.9 2.7
Cd
6.0
1.1
2.0
1.1
0.04
2.8
11.9
Cr
101.
24.1
22.6
113.
56.1
440.
1831
Cu
Hg
Mn
Ni
7
44
80
17
29
98
38
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.1
0.2
6.1
249.5
11.2
22.7
14.1
219.5
338.1
15.6
146.
16.3
9.0
2.8
27.7
17.6
690
45
43
109
46
67
25
1.4
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.4
1.1
0.1
Pb
Sb
Se
Sn
Zn
61.7
41.8
64.3
2479
647.3
102.8
882.0
24.9
24.9
90.3
62.9
254.7
93.4
211.7
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.08
0.22
0.03
0.02
316
66
106
145
62
66
60
108
129
76
277
199
349
774
498.4 23.6 153.6

184.7 10.8 61.9
101.2 4.8 72.0
258.3 8.3 562.9

117.2 0.8 324.3
36.7 0.8 128.2
25.2 5.5 133.8
52.2
7.8
12.8
0.2
0.5
96.4
4.0
0.07
0.04
0.05
0.02
0.01
0.03
0.03
79
19
38
18
31
43
37
365
124
186
117
205
142
764
Metals group
Ferrous
Bimetallic
Nonferrous
Glass group
Combined
Light Bulbs
Beer cans
Soft drink cans
Food cans
Band & Strap
Manufactured
Beer cans
Soft drink cans
Food cans
Electric motor
Other
Beer cans
Soft drink cans
Food cans
Manufactured
Foil pack
Other
Clear
Green
Brown
Other color
120,400
120,400
1348
626
181,300
750,000
585,583
731,000
370,000
337,500
850,000
8.8
8.8
7.0
40.0
9480
0.2
0.4
7215
199
0.8
8369
13,449
10,819
9796
6036
1.0
9.8
6.9
0.4
125.6 43.0
125.6 43.0
161.0
1.8
372.0
2.2
98.0 1274
9.0 67.0
19.7 157.7
17.2 10.3
20.0 34.0
15.0 27.0
20.0 12.0
88.8
44.6
29.2
21.5
340.8
486.6
190.7
784.7
0.004
0.004
0.004
0.1
0.0
0.01
0.3
0.4
0.1
0.2
1.0
0.4
0.2
0.01
61.9 302.7
61.9 302.7
43.1 158.8
15.0 492.0
9.1 289.1
3.0
95.0
6.0
89.3
1.7 172.0
5.6 1354
51.0 134.3
2.0 200.0
4.8
0.3
1.7
0.4
943.0
46.2
91.5
323
323
99
119
(e)
1141
1094
645
194
279
750
36.4
36.4
5.6
0.02
5.4
0.3
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.8
0.2
4690
4690
3459
(d)
1056
7694
7307
3059
132
2367
3557
22 0.2 179
6 0.1 250
92 .06 256
29 0.1
76
166.0
166.0
160.4
41.7
38.9
27.9
19.1
34.1
7.2
40.4
0.0
230.5
230.5
344.3
596.0
609.6
68.0
32.3
95.5
94.0
0.004
111.0
10.1 109.3
62.7
2.0
22.8 103.1
12.5 90.0
68.8
68.8
88.2
163.0
74.5
20.0
18.0
25.8
23.0
0.03
30.0
0.06
0.06
0.04
0.09
20.58
0.01
0.01
16.34
5.00
0.01
19.0
144.7
36.5
25.4
154.3
0.77
0.06
0.48
0.16
986
986
793
216
137
80
81
114
297
53
132
886
886
1566
30
7332
170
248
445
(h)
120
518
50 60
166 21
27 251
74 1671
Category
Major
Inorganic group
Light construction

Minor
Al
Rock=sand=dirt 71,574
Drywall=plaster
490
Glass insulation
977
Other insulation
Other
3150
As
Ba
Be
6.0 2850 807.8 0.01

0.6 288
31.0 0.9
0.7
53.6 296.7 0.1
17.0
13.2 61.1 0.2
Small appliances group

Electrical parts
Brass & copper
Plastic
34,368 777.1
Other metals
Household hazardous
Batteries
Lead acid
Carbon
6500
2.8
Ni-cadmium
10000
4.4
Alkaline
815
1.0
13.2
11.8
1.4 0.04
18.0
70.0
59.0
14.0
12.0
7.6
Cd
Cr
Cu
Hg
Mn
Ni
Pb
20.0 187.0 134

2.0
8.6
7
0.05 14.1 48

0.4
34.0 112
0.3 1074 155.8 1545

0.3
21.0
4.2
38.0
1.1 102.5
8.2
40.8
0.1 111.2 23.5

30.1
3.6
0.1
0.3
31
0.0 12%
0.3 1940

251.3 915

29.6
38.0 140 20.5

(f)
64.0 53
0.3 2788
74.0 (g) 242.
(f)
(a) Black and white.

(b) colored.
(c) PETE polyethylene terephthalate; HDPE high-density polyethylene; PVC polyvinyl chloride.
(d) 14,000
(e) 744,800
(h) 400,000
(f) 179,999
(g) 12,000
(i) 63,000
(j) 14,000
LDPE low-density polyethylene; PP polypropylene; PS polystyrene.
Source: From (454).
4.4
278.0
315.0
726.0
Sb
200.4
38.0
5.2
0.8
Se
Sn
Zn
0.79 126 5118

0.20
26
21
0.03 114
12

0.003 89
57
662.3 4802
3.05
80
63
40.0
113.0
143.0
0.04
0.11
0.02
354
53
342
(i)
685
(j)
23
670
60
Table 24 Proximate and Ultimate Analyses and Heating Value of Waste Components
Proximate analysis (as-received)
weight %
Noncomb.
As
received
Dry
Moisture
and
ash free
0.25
0.05
0.00
0.07
0.09
0.18
0.12
0.15
0.17
0.20
0.16
0.11
0.09
0.21
0.08
0.10
0.16
0.09
6.00
1.52
1.07
23.43
5.34
2.77
1.22
6.93
13.72
3778
4430
4031
2919
3913
4078
6293
4032
3382
4207
4711
4281
3044
4127
4279
6518
4294
3543
4475
4778
4333
3972
4361
4411
6606
4583
4111
37.55
41.67
24.65
14.82
28.76
27.62
1.68
1.11
1.02
0.43
3.30
2.97
0.20
0.12
0.19
0.07
0.52
0.25
4.89
3.46
5.08
0.00
16.00
21.87
997
948
4235
9148
1317
4594
4453
6913
9148
4713
4026
4833
4611
7283
9148
5611
5144
42.26
39.0
0.14
0.2
0.08
1.2
1.00
2.8
1168
2617
2336
3538
Moisture
Volatile
matter
Fixed
carbon
Noncomb.
Paper and Paper Products

Paper, Mixed
Newsprint
Brown Paper
Trade Magazine
Corrugated Boxes
Plastic-Coated Paper
Waxed Milk Cartons
Paper Food Cartons
Junk Mail
10.24
5.97
5.83
4.11
5.20
4.71
3.45
6.11
4.56
75.94
81.12
83.92
66.39
77.47
84.20
90.92
75.59
73.32
8.44
11.48
9.24
7.03
12.27
8.45
4.46
11.80
9.03
5.38
1.43
1.01
22.47
5.06
2.64
1.17
6.50
13.09
43.41
49.14
44.90
32.91
43.73
45.30
59.18
44.74
37.87
5.82
6.10
6.08
4.95
5.70
6.17
9.25
6.10
5.41
44.32
43.03
47.34
38.55
44.93
45.50
30.13
41.92
42.74
Food and Food Wastes

Vegetable Food Wastes
Citrus Rinds and Seeds
Meat Scraps (cooked)
Fried Fats
Mixed Garbage I
Mixed Garbage II
78.29
78.70
38.74
0.00
72.00
17.10
16.55
56.34
97.64
20.26
3.55
4.01
1.81
2.36
3.26
1.06
0.74
3.11
0.00
4.48
49.06
47.96
59.59
73.14
44.99
41.72
6.62
5.68
9.47
11.54
6.43
5.75
Trees, Wood, Brush, Plants

Green Logs
Rotten Timbers
50.00
26.80
42.25
55.01
7.25
16.13
0.50
2.06
50.12
52.30
6.40
5.5
Waste component
Higher heating value

(kcal=kg)
Ultimate analysis (dry) weight %
2361
3644
(continued )
Proximate analysis (as-received)
weight %
Waste component
Demolition Softwood
Waste Hardwood
Furniture Wood
Evergreen Shrubs
Balsam Spruce
Flowering Plants
Lawn Grass I
Lawn Grass II
Ripe Leaves I
Ripe Leaves II
Wood and Bark
Brush
Mixed Greens
Grass, Dirt, Leaves
Domestic Wastes
Upholstery
Tires

(kcal=kg)
Ultimate analysis (dry) weight %
Noncomb.
As
received
Moisture
and
ash free
Moisture
Volatile
matter
Fixed
carbon
Noncomb.
7.70
12.00
6.00
69.00
74.35
53.94
75.24
65.00
9.97
50.00
20.00
40.00
62.00
2162
77.62
75.05
80.92
25.18
20.70
35.64
18.64
66.92
67.89
26.74
13.93
12.41
11.74
5.01
4.13
8.08
4.50
19.29
11.31
6.32
0.75
0.54
1.34
0.81
0.82
2.34
1.62
2.37
3.82
4.10
0.80
5.00
4.94
51.0
49.4
49.7
48.51
53.30
46.65
46.18
43.33
52.15
40.50
50.46
42.52
40.31
36.20
6.2
6.1
6.1
6.54
6.66
6.61
5.96
6.04
6.11
5.95
5.97
5.90
5.64
4.75
41.8
43.7
42.6
40.44
35.17
40.18
36.43
41.68
30.34
45.10
42.37
41.20
39.00
26.61
0.1
0.1
0.1
1.71
1.49
1.21
4.46
2.15
6.99
0.20
0.15
2.00
2.00
2.10
<.1
<.1
<.1
0.19
0.20
0.26
0.42
0.05
0.16
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.26
0.8
0.6
1.4
2.61
3.18
5.09
6.55
6.75
4.25
8.20
1.00
8.33
13.00
30.08
4056
3572
4083
1504
1359
2054
1143
1494
4436
1964
3833
2636
1494
4398
4056
4341
4853
5301
4459
4618
4274
4927
3927
4785
4389
3932
3491
4442
4078
4411
4978
5472
4700
4944
4583
5150
4278
4833
4778
4519
4994
6.9
1.02
75.96
64.92
14.52
27.51
2.62
6.55
47.1
79.1
6.1
6.8
43.6
5.9
0.3
0.1
.1
1.5
2.8
6.6
3867
7667
4155
7726
4272
8278
Dry
Leather
Leather Shoe
Shoe, Heel & Sole
Rubber
Mixed Plastics
Plastic Film
Polyethylene
Polystyrene
Polyurethane
Polyvinyl Chloride
Linoleum
Rags
Textiles
Oils, Paints
Vacuum Cleaner Dirt
Household Dirt
10.00
7.46
1.15
1.20
2.0
320
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
2.10
10.00
1531
0
5.47
3.20
68.46
57.12
67.03
83.98
98.54
98.67
87.12
86.89
64.50
84.34
55.68
20.54
12.49
14.26
2.08
4.94
0.07
0.68
8.30
10.85
6.60
3.46
8.51
6.26
9.10
21.16
29.74
9.88
10.00
1.19
0.45
4.38
2.06
26.80
2.20
16.30
30.34
70.00
60.00
42.01
53.22
77.65
60.00
67.21
84.54
87.10
63.27
45.14
48.06
55.00
46.19
66.85
35.69
20.62
8.00
5.32
7.09
10.35
7.20
9.72
14.18
8.45
6.26
5.61
5.34
6.60
6.41
9.63
4.73
2.57
11.50
22.83
7.76
22.60
15.82
0.00
3.96
17.65
1.56
18.70
31.20
41.85
5.20
20.08
4.00
10.00
5.98
0.50
0.46
0.06
0.21
5.99
0.08
0.10
4.12
2.18
2.00
6.26
0.50
0.40
1.00
1.34
2.00
0.07
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.14
0.40
0.13
0.20
1.15
0.01
10.10
22.86
30.09
10.00
10.20
6.72
1.19
0.45
4.38(a)
2.06(b)
27.40
2.45
3.17
16.30
32.09
72.30
Municipal Wastes
Street Sweepings
Mineral (c)
Metallic (c)
Ashes
20.00
26
311
10.00
54.00
2.68
6.00
24.12
20.00
63.2
34.70
0.52
4.54
28.0
4.76
0.07
0.63
0.5
35.20
0.36
4.28
0.8
0.14
0.03
0.05
0.20
0.00
0.01
0.5
25.00
99.02
90.49
70.2
Remaining 2.42% is chlorine.

Remaining 45.41% is chlorine.
c
Heat and organic content from labels, coatings, and remains of contents of containers.
Source: Refs. 3840, 116118.
b
4422
4024
6055
6222
7833
10,932
9122
6224
5419
4528
3833
7444
3548
2039
4917
4348
6126
6294
7982
7692
10,961
9139
6236
5431
4617
4251
4464
7444
3753
2106
5472
5639
8772
7000
8889
8261
11,111
9172
6517
5556
6361
4358
4611
8889
5533
7583
2667
2089
3333
47
412
2318
4444
4333
7778
Table 25 Soluble and Insoluble Chlorine Content of Refuse Constituents [378] (Mass Percent
Dry Basis)
A. Baltimore County, MD
Waste
category
Total
% Cl2
Std.
dev.
Soluble
% Cl2
Std.
dev.
Insoluble
% Cl2
Std.
dev.
Paper
Plastics, soft
Plastics, hard
Wood=vegetable
Textiles
Fines
Total
0.251
0.055
0.083
0.005
0.019
0.042
0.455
0.0063
0.0100
0.0326
0.0018
0.0090
0.0053
0.0363
0.088
0.004
0.000
0.003
0.006
0.009
0.110
0.0077
0.0013
0.0000
0.0007
0.0031
0.0011
0.0085
0.163
0.051
0.083
0.002
0.013
0.033
0.344
0.0099
0.0101
0.0326
0.0009
0.0095
0.0054
0.0373
B. Brooklyn, NY
Waste
category
Total
% Cl2
Std.
dev.
Soluble
% Cl2
Std.
dev.
Insoluble
% Cl2
Std.
dev.
Paper, unbleached
Paper, bleached
Plastics, soft
Plastics, hard
Wood=vegetable
Textiles
Fines
Total
0.211
0.013
0.123
0.332
0.056
0.020
0.131
0.886
0.0702
0.0015
0.0427
0.1038
0.0145
0.0102
0.1141
0.1757
0.140
0.007
0.007
0.009
0.023
0.007
0.022
0.215
0.0618
0.0017
0.0014
0.0049
0.0026
0.0028
0.0114
0.0632
0.071
0.007
0.117
0.323
0.034
0.013
0.109
0.674
0.0935
0.0023
0.0427
0.1039
0.0147
0.0106
0.1147
0.1869
2.
Bulk Density
In many smaller municipalities, weighing scales for refuse vehicles are not available. In
such circumstances, data is often gathered on a volumetric basis. Bulk density data are
presented in Table 26.
3.
Thermal Parameters
Once a weight-basis generation rate is established, data on the heating value of waste
components are of great interest to the combustion engineer. The information in Table 27
is presented to supplement the data in Table 24.
4.
Municipal Refuse as a Fuel
Electric power plants and industrial combustion systems represent a rich source of data and
proven design experience for understanding and improving incineration systems. To use
these data, however, it is necessary to appreciate the similarities and differences between
municipal refuse and its associated combustion parameters and those for other fuels.
a. Heat Content. Municipal refuse, though quite different from high-rank coals and oil,
has considerable similarity to wood, peat, and lignite (Table 28). It would be reasonable,
therefore, to seek incinerator design concepts in the technology developed for the
combustion of the latter materials. Refuse does, however, have distinguishing characteristics, such as its high total ash content, which may require more extensive ash-handling
(text continues on
146)
Table 26 Bulk Density of Mixed Wastes and Waste Components (kg=m3 )

Unspecied
average
Mixed residential wastes
Garbage, kitchen waste
Mixed refuse with garbage
Mixed refuse without garbage
Residential
Residential in paper sacks
Wet residential
Damp residential
Dry residential
Bunkered refuse (811 m high)
10% Moisture
20% Moisture
30% Moisture
40% Moisture
50% Moisture
Single-family dwelling
Multiple-family dwelling
Apartment house
Residential waste components
Grass and trimmings
Metal cans
Unbroken glass and bottles
Broken glass
Rags
Paper and cardboard
Paper
Wet paper
Rubber
Bulky wastes
Household bulky
Average bulky
Tree cuttings
Logs and stumps
Green logs
Limbs and leaves
Brush
Furniture
Major appliances
Wood crates
Battery case and
miscellaneous auto
Auto bodies
Wood pallets, driftwood
Tires and rubber products
370
Loose
Other
185
185
140
195a
280a
145
115
170
130
120
Range
Reference
300450
119
119
119
120
120
120
120
120
60255
80160
115255
90215
55145
155
180
225
275
345
105
110
150
121
121
121
121
121
121
122
122
130
95
415
1190
115
110
140
165
270
215b
100
190
135
400
320
160
30
50
180
110
715
130
210
240
800c
190d
119
119
119
123
124
119
124
124
124
125
125
125
119
121
119
119
119
119
119
119
119
125
119
(continued)
Unspecied
average
Construction-demolition
Mixed demo, nonburnable
Mixed demo, burnable
Mixed const, burnable
Mixed construction I
Mixed construction II
Broken pavement, sidewalk
Municipal
Street dirt
Alley cleanings
Street sweepings, litter
Catch-basin cleaning
Sewage-sludge solids
Sewage screenings
Sewage skim (grease)
Industrial waste
Sawdust
Bark slabs
Wood trimmings
Wood shavings
Mixed metals
Heavy metal scrap
Light metal scrap
Wire
Dirt, sand, gravel
Cinders
Fly ash
Cement industry waste
Other ne particles
Oils, tars, asphalts
Mixed sludges (wet)
Chemical waste, dry
Chemical waste, wet
Leather scraps
Shells, offal, paunch, eshings
Textile wastes
Rubber
Plastics
Agricultural waste
Pen sweepings
Paunch manure
Other meat-packing waste
Dead animals
Mixed vegetable waste
Mixed fruit waste
Loose
1430
360
255
965
Other
Range
Reference
1520
119
119
125
119
125
119
1370
150
250
1445
1040
950
950
119
126
125
119
119
119
119
290
400
580
240
120
2410
800
320
1445
900
1285
1425
965
965
1190
640
965
180
300
180
300
30
123
123
123
123
123
119
119
119
119
124
119
119
119
119
123
119
119
123
123
123
123
123
160
650
1030
1030
355
355
355
119
119
119
119
123
123
(continued )
Unspecied
average
Loose
Agricultural waste (continued)

Beans or grain waste
Potato-processing waste
Chaff
Mixed agricultural
Residues
Liquid slag
Dense solid slag
Solid ash
Loose powder ash
Fine ground slag
Other
775
670
60
585
240288
224272
192256
2456
96144
Dumped packer truck density, expanded from 215 kg=m3 in packer truck.
Compacted in packer truck.
c
Density of wood.
d
Chipped.
b
Table 27 Higher Heating Value of Refuse Components (kcal=kg)a

Ash
content
(dry
basis)

(kcal=kg)
Dry
basis
24.05
6.53
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
8.87
0.77
10.57
Dry,
ash-free
4198
4652
4488
4283
6111
6667
6.55
4.02
3943
4179
5588
4500
5795
4443
4184
8861
9400
Reference
119
119
123
119
Paper, paper products

Books, magazines
Cardboard
Mixed paper I
Mixed paper II
Waxed paper
Waxed cartons
Food, food wastes
Garbage (California)
Cooking fats
Sugar (sucrose)
Starch
Coffee grounds
Corn on the cob
Brown peanut skins
Oats
Wheat
Castor oil
Cottonseed oil
Trees, wood, brush, plants
Brush (California)
Excelsior
Greens (California)
Range
4044
9000
3943
4179
8861
9400
4732
4792
4396
(continued )
180
180
180
180
180
Ash
content
(dry
basis)
Trees, wood, brush, plants (continued)
Lignin
Wood (California)
Pitch
Wood (Washington, D.C.)
Sawdust (pine)
Sawdust (fur)
Wood, beech (13% H2 O)
Wood, birch (11.8% H2 O)
Wood, oak (13.3% H2 O)
Wood, pine (12.2% H2 O)
Domestic wastes
Linoleum
Rags, linen
Rags, cotton
Rags, silk
Rags, wool
Rags, mixed
Rags, cellulose acetate
Rags, nylon
Rags, rayon
Rubber
Shellac
Asphalt
Plastics
Phenol formaldehyde
Polyethylene
Polypropylene
Polystyrene
Polyurethane foam
Styrene-butadiene copolymer
Vinyl chloride=acetate copolymer
Metals
Aluminum (to Al2 O3
Copper (to CuO)
Iron (to FeO:947 )
Iron (to Fe3 O4 )
Iron (to Fe2 O3 )
Lead (to PbO)
Magnesium (to MgO)
Tin (to SnO2 )
Zinc (to ZnO)
a
Source: Refs. 40, 127, 128; see also Table 4.16.

(kcal=kg)
Dry
basis
Dry,
ash-free
5850
4678
1.13
8406
1.65
4925
5376
4583
3636
3717
3461
3889
27.4
6361
3962
4000
4662
2.19
2.19
48.0
5444
4189
4444
7328
416
7111
7544
9533
6217
11083
11083
9906
5700
9833
4906
7417
603
1200
1594
1756
250
5911
1169
1275
Table 28 Heat Content of Municipal Refuse and Other Fuels

(Higher heating value) (kcal=kg)
Fuel
Refuse
Wood
Peat
Lignite
Sub-bituminous B
Bituminous-high volatile B
Bituminous-volatile
Anthracite
Methane
#2 Fuel oil
#6 Fuel oil
Moisture
(%)
Ash
(%)
Volatile
(dry basis
%)
28.16
46.9
64.3
36.0
15.3
8.6
3.6
4.5
0
0
1.5
20.82
1.5
10.0
12.1
6.7
8.4
4.9
14.4
0
0
0.08
62.3
78.1
67.3
49.8
39.7
35.4
16.0
7.4
100.0
100.0
100.0
As-red
Ash-free
2470
2605
1800
3925
5690
6800
8030
6170
13,275
10,870
10,145
3120
2645
2000
4465
6100
7420
8450
7205
13,275
10,870
10,300
Dry basis
Dry,
ash-free
basis
As-red
(lower heating
value)
(kcal=kg)
3440
4910
5030
6130
6720
7440
8330
6460
13,275
10,870
10,300
4845
5050
6995
7560
7200
8190
8780
7600
13,275
10,870
10,375
2185
2170
1330
3585
5375
6520
7775
6010
11,975
10,210
9,600
equipment. Excluding the massive ash (metal and glass), however, the ne ash content
(that capable of being suspended in the ue gas) is only 5.44%, suggesting that
incinerators may require less efcient particulate air pollution control devices for
comparable combustion situations. Clearly, refuse is also a lower energy fuel than most
conventional solid fuel alternatives.
As noted above, heat content can be expected to change over time and, especially, if
the character of the domestic and commercial culture is in a state of rapid evolution. This
circumstance is seen in many countries and regions where burgeoning economic development has led to revolutionary changes in buying habits and, consequently, in the
character (and quantity) of solid waste. Figure 1 shows this evolutionary development for
Kaohsiung City in southern Taiwan over the period 1983 through 1993 (511).
Figure 1 Change in MSW caloric value for Kaohsiung City, Taiwan.
b. Density. Refuse density is similar to that of wood, peat, and lignite (Table 28). Since,
in grate-red systems, coal and refuse grate retention times are comparable (4050 min),
refuse bed depths would be much greater than those for coal at comparable grate burning
rates. A typical coal stoker, for example, burns at the rate of 9,300 to 12,000 kcal hr1
m2 . This corresponds, for the bituminous coal energy density and for typical stoker
speeds, to a bed height of 12.7 to 17.7 cm. In order to provide comparable specic burning
rates for refuse, bed heights from 110 to 150 cm are required.
Table 29 indicates the average density of municipal refuse in comparison with other
fuels. The ultimate density for refuse was calculated as the weighted average of the
densities of the refuse components. Comparing the ultimate density with the as-red
density yields an approximate void fraction that is much higher for refuse than for any
other fuel shown. The high void fraction, aside from reafrming the need for a deep bed,
also indicates the difculties in obtaining uniform refuse distribution to avoid blowholes
or open spaces on the grate.
In summary, municipal refuse burning practices should be comparable with those for
low-rank carbonaceous solid fuels such as wood, peat, and lignite. Although incinerator
designs reect a portion of the technology developed to burn these other materials,
application of spreader stoker and suspension burning techniques and some aspects of
furnace design and fuel feeding have not yet found their way into conventional incinerator
practice. However, refuse does present some unique problems to the furnace designer,
particularly as a result of its high ash content, relatively low energy density (kcal=m3 ), and
high moisture content.
5.
Other Wastes
Data are often tabulated for many different wastes such as those from both specic and
general commercial and industrial sources or from specialized sources such as hospitals.
Since these data often reect highly specic processes, manufacturing techniques, raw
material choices, and so forth, etc., one must be very cautious about using such tabulated
typical data for detailed design. In general, at least some waste sampling and analysis is
merited to form a project-specic basis for design, to observe potential materials handling
or safety problems, and the like. In some cases, however, the source characteristics are
similar enough to benet from tabulated data.
a. Automobile Shredder Fluff Waste. Data were generated on the uff fraction of
the waste generated in shredding automobile bodies. The waste is about 16% of the weight
Table 29 Density of Material Refuse and Other Fuels
Fuel
Density
(as-red
kg=m3 )
Refuse
Wood (chips)
Peat
Bituminous coal (sized)
#6 Fuel
Methane
273 (av)
280
400 (est)
802
987
0.67
kcal=m3
Density
(ultimate)
kg=m3
Mean
void
fraction
(%)
676,000
730,000
712,000
5,783,000
10,010,000
9,000
963 (est)
562 (av)
802
1405
987
N=A
72
50
50
43
0
N=A
Table 30 Characteristics of Automobile Shredder FluffWaste (386)

Property
(units)
Moisture (% as-received)
Ash (% as-received)
Volatiles (% as-received)
Fixed carbon (% as-received)
Sulfur (% as-received)
Chlorine (% as-received)
HHV (kcal=kgMAF)*
Density (kg=m3 )
Size consist 6 mm
Size consist 6 to 12 mm
Size consist plus 12 mm
Component weight %
Fiber
Fabric
Paper
Glass
Wood splinters
Metals
Foam
Plastics
Tar
Wiring
Elastomers
Stack gas inlet HCl (12% O2 )
Stack gas inlet SO2 (12% O2 )
Stack gas NOx (12% O2 )
Low
value
High
value
Average
value
2
25
24
0
0.2
0.7
5,517
34
72
66
12
0.5
16.9
7,128
19
16
27
55
29
64
10
47
44
3
0.4
3.4
6,444
320
35
20
46
42.0
3.1
6.4
3.5
2.2
8.1
2.2
19.3
5.8
2.1
5.3
600 ppm
100 ppm
111 ppm
*MAF Moisture and ash free.
of the total auto body and consists mainly of the nonmetallic portion of automobiles
(excluding tires, batteries, and radiators, which are customarily removed prior to shredding). Thus, uff is generated from interior plastic trim, upholstery fabric and ller,
insulation, and padding. Data on the characteristics of this waste are presented in Table 30.
III.
BIOLOGICAL WASTEWATER SLUDGE
The biological treatment of wastewater from domestic and many industrial sources
involves a series of process steps aimed at either converting undesirable pollutants from
a solubilized state to a solid form or removing the solids from the bulk ow. Although the
processes used may involve some reduction in the pollutants (e.g., through biological
oxidation), the majority of the pollutant mass that enters the plant exits the wastewater
treatment plant as a constituent of biological sludge or biosolids.
The categories of biosolids include
Primary treatment sludgethe sludge generated through settling early in the
treatment sequence
Secondary treatment sludgethe excess biomass generated in the activated sludge

tanks under aerobic conditions through biological reproduction and growth
whereby soluble pollutants are converted into cell mass
Tertiary treatment sludgebiomass generated in advanced wastewater treatment
such as denitrication.
Other solid streams are often generated in the course of treatment though in lesser
quantities than the sludges: scum (the oatable material accumulating on clariers);
screenings (the rags, twigs, and other large solids screened from the entering wastewater), and grit (the coarse sandy=silty solids removed following screening).
Having captured the solids, some plants move directly to some kind of ultimate
disposal system such as landll or direct land application. Most plants interpose one of
several processes ahead of disposal in order to accomplish several ends: pasteurization or
other step to kill off pathogenic organisms and stabilization of the sludge such that
continued vigorous biological activity stops or is slowed. Common processes to accomplish these ends include lime addition or digestion.
Lime addition involves mixing lime (calcium oxide) with the sludge to raise both the
temperature (from the heat of hydration=slaking) and the pH to kill pathogenic organisms
and stop biological activity. This often involves addition of 20% to 30% lime (by weight
on dry solids), so a considerable increase in both mass and ash content occurs.
Digestion involves continuing biological degradation of organic compounds bound
in the sludge. The process can be conducted under aerobic conditions (with excess
oxygen) or anaerobic conditions (oxygen-decient). The latter involves thermophylic,
methane-forming organisms and, consequently, generates fuel values as digester gas that
have potential application in incineration or other energy-intensive processes as well as for
sludge preheating. Clearly, the conversion of a portion of the biomass to methane fuel (the
digester gas is about 50% methane and 50% CO2 ) results in some depletion of the fuel
value (higher ash-to-combustible ratio) of the stabilized sludge solids. Further, digestion
adversely impacts the dewatering characteristics of the sludge.
The means for ultimate disposal of wastewater treatment solids has evolved over the
years. For wastewater treatment plants that are in or near to rural areas with easy access to
farmlands and that generate sludge having low concentrations of the heavy metals mercury,
cadmium, chromium, lead, and nickel, application of liquid sludge (2% to 5% solids),
dried sludge products or composted sludge to croplands has been encouraged by many
regulatory authorities and found to be cost-effective and generally acceptable to the sludge
users. In more urbanized areas where the distance to and scale of land application would be
unreasonable and=or where intensive industrialization has led to the presence of signicant
concentrations of heavy metals in the sludge, incineration followed by ash landlling is
often practiced.
As one might suspect from the above, the characteristics of wastewater treatment
sludge are strongly related to (1) the mix of domestic, commercial, and industrial
wastewater types involved and (2) the process owsheet of the treatment plant. Thus, a
bedroom-community wastewater plant usually generates a highly organic, clean sludge,
whereas a heavily industrialized city generates a sludge that can be heavily contaminated
with undesirable heavy metals and, even, toxic organic pollutants. Some communities use
combined sewers where runoff from storms is carried (and treated) through the same
sewer system as the sanitary sewage. Thus, contaminants and the content of inert, soilderived materials in the sludge (scoured from the sewer lines during high storm ows) are
dependent on rainfall patterns. Changes and upsets in the treatment plant can signicantly
alter the characteristics of treatment and the performance of dewatering equipment. The
conclusion one must draw is that the characteristics of wastewater sludges are exceedingly
variable. Therefore, exibility in the ability to respond to changes is an important process
feature of a satisfactory sludge incineration system.
A.
Sludge Composition
The solids in sludge fall into two broad categories: the combustibles and the ash.
Combustibles include the organic cell mass and other organic matter (scum, leaves,
etc.). In this category are also the (usually) trace amounts of pesticides and other toxic
anthropogenic organic compounds. Often, workers in the eld mistakenly equate the
combustible content of sludge to the reported volatile solids (VS) content of the sludge.
VS is a sludge characterization variable often reported in the literature. One must be
cautious, however, since the protocols used in sludge analysis result in a portion of the
inorganic sludge mass associated with lime and ferric chloride treatment (used to enhance
dewatering) and of some other inorganic compounds to be reported as VS.
The ash component of sludge includes the relatively inert inorganic materials
associated with the wastewater ow (grit, silt, and sand, etc.) but also includes the
insoluble toxic metal compounds, which can be environmentally signicant.
As noted above, digestion reduces the VS content of the sludge. Wet oxidation is
another process often applied to sludge to assist in disposal. There, partially dewatered
sludge is heated to high temperatures at elevated pressures and treated with hot,
compressed air. The combination of conditions ruptures the cells and oxidizes (in the
wet condition) a portion of the VS. The resulting sludge solids dewater exceedingly well in
relatively low-cost dewatering devices (to, say, 34%40% solids) and often show an
increase in the fuel value of the organic fraction (presumably, from a shift in the relative
proportions of carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen). The high-strength liquid stream that must
be recycled to the headworks of the treatment plant is a disadvantage to wet oxidation.
B.
Sludge Properties
1.
Chemistry
The chemistry of biosolids differs signicantly from that of most other wastes. This derives
from its nature as a biomass comprised very importantly of myriad microscopic organisms.
This tends to increase the phosphorous, nitrogen, and, to a degree, sulfur content when
compared to typical refuse materials.
Data showing the range of sludge chemistry and heat content are shown in Tables 31
and 32. Please note that this table is not an exhaustive compilation and that signicantly
different sludge compositions are, undoubtedly, to be found.
2.
Physical Properties
a. Percent Solids and Dewatering. The percentage of solid matter is the most important
sludge parameter in the design and operation of incineration systems. For most municipal
treatment plants (often referred to as Publicly Owned Treatment Works or POTWs),
dewatering is seldom able to produce a sludge with more than a 25% to 27% solids cake.
Thus, the burning of sludge is more the burning of water than of organic biomass.
Further, in many plants, the sludge percent solids is allowed to be the dependent variable in
Table 31 Wastewater Treatment Sludge Data

Type
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Raw DI
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
No.
Vol. Mat.
Fixed C
Ash
Cl
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
6
50.54%
50.04%
57.55%
47.31%
50.91%
49.61%
60.71%
59.68%
45.96%
49.34%
56.29%
49.89%
61.67%
60.52%
56.94%
59.15%
44.80%
69.60%
83.20%
11.77%
12.83%
11.99%
10.74%
15.01%
10.26%
10.83%
12.88%
15.40%
10.52%
7.84%
0.00%
9.33%
9.64%
9.92%
8.87%
7.66%
8.30%
17.20%
37.69%
37.13%
30.46%
41.95%
34.08%
40.13%
28.46%
27.44%
38.64%
40.14%
35.87%
50.11%
28.78%
29.84%
33.14%
31.98%
47.54%
22.10%
9.60%
2.02%
1.88%
1.93%
2.04%
1.50%
1.76%
2.03%
1.92%
1.54%
1.61%
1.02%
0.16%
0.38%
0.38%
0.12%
0.91%
0.71%
34.04%
34.24%
38.38%
32.29%
37.13%
33.10%
39.38%
40.67%
35.00%
33.63%
35.32%
26.91%
38.08%
37.36%
36.16%
36.17%
27.92%
50.06%
45.88%
4.16%
4.10%
4.93%
3.94%
4.28%
4.07%
5.16%
5.36%
3.66%
4.20%
5.10%
2.86%
3.43%
8.28%
5.02%
5.35%
4.03%
7.00%
6.46%
5.79%
4.52%
1.86%
4.91%
6.25%
5.35%
6.29%
5.77%
5.64%
4.93%
5.29%
1.19%
2.99%
2.67%
2.67%
2.52%
2.08%
4.82%
3.70%
16.29%
18.13%
22.44%
14.88%
16.76%
15.60%
18.68%
18.84%
15.52%
15.48%
17.40%
18.77%
24.32%
24.45%
22.65%
23.60%
18.31%
15.05%
9.60%
1.06%
0.80%
0.80%
0.84%
2.22%
0.81%
0.83%
0.82%
0.84%
0.74%
0.40%
0.82%
0.67%
0.51%
0.76%
0.59%
0.11%
kcal=kg
3461
3529
4009
3292
3727
3366
4167
4294
3402
3463
3808
2057
3966
3857
3516
3572
2717
5500
4518
(continued )
Type
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Zimpro
Zimpro
Zimpro
Zimpro
Zimpro
Zimpro
No.
Vol. Mat.
Fixed C
Ash
Cl
kcal=kg
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
7
8
4
4
4
4
4
9
72.38%
71.93%
69.52%
70.70%
70.14%
69.14%
69.17%
56.10%
68.30%
43.20%
59.31%
43.04%
42.35%
43.52%
41.49%
18.44%
15.20%
18.21%
17.55%
15.34%
17.46%
13.76%
2.20%
9.31%
7.61%
10.01%
7.03%
7.26%
7.51%
2.67%
9.18%
12.87%
12.17%
11.75%
14.52%
13.40%
17.07%
41.70%
22.39%
49.19%
30.68%
49.73%
50.39%
48.97%
55.84%
0.73%
0.08%
0.77%
0.76%
0.85%
0.83%
1.00%
0.42%
0.50%
0.37%
0.33%
0.16%
0.77%
46.05%
44.91%
43.08%
45.66%
44.03%
43.66%
45.64%
26.32%
45.39%
26.95%
36.66%
25.91%
26.95%
27.12%
26.42%
6.48%
5.05%
6.14%
6.48%
6.00%
5.89%
5.50%
3.28%
5.39%
3.73%
5.36%
3.71%
3.86%
4.23%
3.67%
3.59%
3.92%
4.19%
4.18%
4.32%
4.36%
4.23%
2.77%
3.56%
2.84%
2.12%
2.42%
1.64%
1.59%
1.89%
9.18%
12.87%
12.17%
11.75%
14.52%
13.40%
17.07%
25.44%
22.55%
17.06%
24.81%
17.99%
16.84%
17.93%
11.41%
0.11%
0.80%
0.65%
0.75%
0.58%
0.29%
0.56%
0.12%
4551
3931
4150
4656
4309
4162
4210
2305
4645
2655
3705
2465
2367
2587
2681
Notes: P primary, S secondary, Zimpro heat conditioned, Dig. digested, DI Deinking plant.
Data for plants 3 and 6 are for wastewater treatment sludge from paper mills.
Table 32 Typical Higher Heating Value for Wastewater Treatment Solids

Typical sludge higher heating
value (kcal=kg-dry basis)
Sludge type
Raw primary sludge
Activated (secondary) sludge
Anaerobically digested primary sludge
Raw, primary sludge, FeCl3 -lime conditioned
Biological trickling lter solids
Grease and scum
Fine screenings
Ground garbage
High organic grit
5,5007,000
4,7005,500
3,050
3,900
4,7005,500
9,250
4,300
4,550
2,200
the plant with detention times, efuent quality, and almost all other process variables held
to narrow tolerances. From the standpoint of thermal processing systems, this means that
the most important process variable is out of control. Clearly, in view of the increases in
fuel expense, increased environmental impacts, and other adverse consequences of the
uncontrolled swings in operating conditions which are often associated with such a plant
management strategy, the decision to implement a thermal processing system should be the
occasion to seriously reevaluate plant wet-end operating priorities and practices.
The dewatering of sludges can be affected by a number of technologies. Table 33
indicates the range of performance of such equipment. One must remember in considering
such generalizations on dewatering performance that biological sludge is a collection of
living organisms. As such, it can be young or old, sickly or healthy, highly aerobic and
vigorous or devoid of oxygen (septic) and in decline. Further, each of these characterizations of sludge state is associated with different dewatering behavior. Therefore, the
same treatment plant can, from time to time, experience wide swings in dewatering
performance due to changes in wastewater characteristics, temperature changes, plant
process upsets, or equipment malfunctions, etc.
Table 33 Typical Sludge Dewatering
Effectiveness Levels
Gravity settling
Clarier
Thickener
Hydrocyclones
Sludge drying bed
Mechanical dewatering
Vacuum lter
Belt lters
Filter press
Centrifuge (conventional)
Twin-roll nip press
Centrifuge (high g)
Percent solids
0.54
38
38
85
Percent solids
1423
1634
3045
1423
1525
2335
To assist in gravity or mechanical dewatering, a variety of coagulation and=or

conditioning aids may be used. These include alum, polymers, lime, lime and ferric
chloride, and even recycled incinerator ash. For some of the ltering devices, precoats or
ltering aids are sometimes used. While any or all of these may increase the percent solids,
it is noteworthy, with respect to the use of inorganic chemicals, that often a marginal
improvement in cake percent solids is obtained with an increase in energy parameter (see
subsection 3, Thermal Properties, ahead) and, thus, becomes less energy-efcient as a
feed to combustion systems due to the dilution of sludge combustibles with inert matter.
b. Surface Chemistry. Wastewater treatment sludges (chemical or biological) consist of
solids (organic and=or inorganic) that carry a charged outer layer. The zeta potential is a
measurable indication of the charge. The zeta potential may be used as an indicator of the
probable response of the watersolids mixture to added ionic species such as lime, alum, or
certain polyelectrolyte polymers used to coagulate and occulate the solids. These
coagulation aids are often needed to improve the dewatering characteristics of the
sludge. While not directly relevant to the incineration process, the complex surface
chemistry of sludges also signicantly impacts their rheological properties and storage
characteristics. Thus, a basic recognition of the surface-active nature of the materials can
provide a starting point for problem solving associated with materials-handling systems for
sludge materials.
c. Biology. The particular species of biological organisms in wastewater sludge may be
important. Of particular importance are the pathogens (disease-causing organisms) that
could result in operational problems and hazards and=or limitations in disposal (pasteurization or other treatment may be required by regulatory agencies in order to effect a
pathogen kill). The population of any specic organisms in sludge depends on many
factors: the source of the sludge solids, the pH and temperature, the dissolved oxygen
concentration, and other process features that encourage or discourage growth of particular
organisms. Clearly, any substantial pathogen content that develops is pertinent. Note,
however, that most pathogens are relatively vulnerable to stressed conditions. In those
situations where the sludge is stored over a prolonged time and, particularly, in the course
of composting operations, spores of certain fungi may be formed that exacerbate
respiratory problems.
For most biological sludges, anaerobic organisms are present. On standing, the
aerobic species rapidly consumes available oxygen within the sludge mass. Diffusion of
atmospheric oxygen is too slow to renew it. Therefore, after an induction period, the
anaerobic organisms begin to thrive and, in a short time, achieve dominance within the
sludge mass. This can rapidly cause odor problems during storage due to generation of
hydrogen sulde and a spectrum of mercaptans and organic suldes and disuldes.
d. Ash Fusion Temperature. Table 34 summarizes data (204) on the ash chemistry and
ash fusion temperature for several sewage sludge samples. The data illustrate the range of
typical values for these parameters and the variation to be expected within the same plant.
3.
Thermal Properties
a. Heat of Combustion. The heat of combustion of sludge combustible is roughly

comparable to that of peat, as Table 28 shows. The heat of combustion is somewhat
elevated by the presence of excess oils and greases. Often, sludge heat content is reported
in the literature in units of kcal=kg VS, but this is not desirable since the VS content can be
Table 34 Ash Composition and Fusion Temperatures for Biological Wastewater Treatment Plant
Sludge Ash
Fusion data (Deg. C)reducing
conditions
Sludge
type
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Raw DI
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Zimpro
Zimpro
Zimpro
Zimpro
Zimpro
Zimpro
Fusion data (Deg. C)oxidizing

conditions
Plant
no.
T-ID
(R)
T-S
(R)
T-Hem
(R)
T-F
(R)
T-ID
(O)
T-S
(O)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
7
8
4
4
4
4
4
9
982
1037
1021
1004
982
1004
987
996
1026
1004
1104
1365
1204
1148
1148
1093
1093
1365
1137
1160
1176
1171
1171
1143
1143
1126
1482
1004
1148
1260
1037
1282
1287
1160
1071
1087
1093
1107
1073
1093
1076
1085
1093
1093
1204
1379
1271
1235
1237
1148
1148
1415
1190
1185
1198
1198
1193
1182
1165
1151
1482
1093
1215
1315
1118
1260
1371
1187
1104
1115
1126
1148
1110
1137
1112
1121
1118
1126
1237
1393
1298
1271
1271
1173
1173
1482
1243
1207
1221
1223
1210
1218
1187
1176
1482
1129
1243
1348
1160
1398
1401
1221
1148
1143
1165
1176
1148
1162
1154
1160
1154
1165
1260
1407
1315
1310
1315
1198
1210
1482
1293
1223
1243
1246
1223
1254
1207
1201
1482
1171
1260
1376
1204
1426
1432
1254
1154
1148
1115
1148
1160
1148
1160
1165
1093
1148
1215
1390
1304
1260
1260
1148
1160
1393
1198
N=A
N=A
N=A
N=A
N=A
N=A
1168
1482
1093
1204
1315
1226
1398
1404
1204
1204
1198
1173
1198
1207
1204
1210
1215
1148
1204
1260
1401
1360
1315
1321
1193
1204
1482
1218
N=A
N=A
N=A
N=A
N=A
N=A
1187
1482
1148
1260
1376
1276
1460
1460
1235
T-Hem
(O)
T-F
(O)
1232
1260
1226
1251
1198
1223
1223
1248
1232
1260
1226
1248
1235
1260
1240
1265
1176
1221
1226
1248
1285
1310
1410
1418
1387
1410
1346
1371
1348
1371
1218
1243
1229
1260
1482
1482
1237
1257
N=A
N=A
N=A
N=A
N=A
N=A
N=A
N=A
N=A
N=A
N=A
N=A
1207
1223
1482
1482
1182
1210
1293
1315
1398
1426
1304
1326
1487
1515
1490
1518
1260
1282
(continued )
Ash analysis
Sludge
type
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Dig. P S
Raw DI
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Raw P S
Zimpro
Zimpro
Zimpro
Zimpro
Zimpro
Zimpro
Plant
no.
SiO2
Al2 O3
Fe2 O3
TiO2
P2 O5
CaO
MgO
Na2 O
K2 O
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
7
8
4
4
4
4
4
9
39.61%
35.92%
28.07%
28.14%
36.78%
28.35%
42.79%
39.47%
39.49%
31.54%
37.83%
26.63%
43.28%
41.69%
42.73%
47.00%
45.63%
11.80%
34.15%
34.10%
28.78%
33.96%
34.54%
29.35%
33.38%
36.98%
6.29%
39.80%
50.38%
46.87%
40.23%
42.43%
46.23%
41.01%
12.0%
10.3%
10.4%
9.9%
12.5%
8.9%
12.2%
13.3%
11.1%
10.4%
10.6%
21.0%
30.1%
32.8%
32.4%
23.6%
26.8%
4.1%
14.1%
18.0%
17.6%
18.2%
18.8%
15.8%
16.2%
20.1%
2.1%
20.1%
24.6%
26.6%
27.0%
34.4%
32.1%
13.1%
8.6%
9.4%
8.4%
7.6%
9.1%
7.9%
8.4%
9.1%
10.1%
8.6%
7.1%
1.4%
3.0%
2.4%
2.8%
3.2%
3.1%
8.1%
9.3%
4.0%
4.0%
3.9%
3.4%
4.2%
4.6%
5.3%
1.8%
7.1%
2.9%
3.2%
3.1%
2.8%
2.7%
5.7%
1.2%
1.8%
1.4%
1.5%
1.5%
1.5%
1.4%
1.5%
1.4%
1.2%
1.3%
4.9%
4.5%
3.4%
3.5%
2.6%
3.3%
2.0%
1.0%
0.9%
1.1%
1.2%
1.0%
1.2%
1.8%
2.4%
3.1%
5.1%
4.0%
3.6%
3.5%
0.8%
15.0%
13.9%
15.6%
21.0%
16.7%
23.1%
14.9%
12.4%
13.0%
18.1%
22.9%
1.3%
5.9%
6.4%
5.9%
5.9%
5.0%
19.6%
12.0%
14.4%
17.6%
14.6%
14.4%
17.6%
14.0%
8.7%
4.7%
11.6%
6.2%
5.1%
6.2%
5.6%
5.1%
9.4%
11.2%
10.9%
14.6%
18.7%
13.7%
14.0%
13.2%
15.7%
11.8%
13.6%
8.4%
40.6%
6.4%
6.8%
7.4%
6.9%
8.6%
39.1%
9.4%
12.3%
13.8%
12.4%
10.9%
14.0%
12.8%
10.1%
45.2%
7.8%
7.6%
6.9%
9.6%
6.1%
6.0%
21.5%
6.5%
7.1%
3.0%
4.2%
5.5%
4.9%
4.2%
3.6%
3.8%
3.3%
3.6%
2.1%
2.9%
4.0%
3.4%
8.2%
3.9%
3.3%
6.0%
6.2%
6.0%
6.2%
6.5%
6.6%
6.8%
5.5%
2.7%
2.3%
2.6%
4.1%
3.2%
3.2%
2.2%
4.6%
3.5%
3.7%
7.2%
2.9%
3.2%
4.7%
2.0%
3.3%
5.5%
3.5%
2.1%
0.5%
0.6%
1.3%
0.9%
1.6%
1.4%
2.9%
3.6%
4.0%
3.5%
3.6%
4.0%
3.1%
2.9%
1.7%
0.8%
0.6%
1.7%
0.5%
0.5%
0.6%
1.6%
2.4%
4.5%
1.5%
1.7%
2.7%
1.0%
1.4%
2.3%
2.6%
3.8%
0.5%
0.7%
0.8%
0.6%
1.0%
1.1%
2.6%
2.2%
2.6%
2.2%
2.5%
2.8%
2.7%
1.8%
3.9%
0.7%
0.6%
1.3%
0.6%
0.4%
1.6%
Notes: P primary. S secondary. Zimpro heat conditioned. Dig digested. DI Deinking plant.
Data for plants 3 and 6 are for wastewater treatment sludge from paper mills.
signicantly different than the combustible content due to a high calcium and=or ferric
hydroxide content.
The heat of combustion of wastewater sludges can be estimated from the ultimate
chemical analysis of the sludge using the Dulong, Chang, or Boie relationships [Eqs. (3),
(4), and (5)]. However, comparison (204) of predictions using these relationships with data
from fuels laboratories for a set of over 80 sludge samples from a variety of wastewater
plants showed that these equations always predict high by an average of about 9%, 17%,
and 12%, respectively. A modication of the Dulong equation for application to sludge
that, on average, predicts low by only about 6% develops the moisture, ash-free heat of
combustion by
kcal=kg 5;547C 18;287H2 1;720O2 1;000N2 1;667S 627Cl
4;333P
12
where C, H, S, etc. are the decimal percents of carbon, hydrogen, sulfur, etc., evaluated on
a dry, ash-free basis.
The heat of combustion can be expected to vary over time. Data indicate that
digested sludges fall into the low end of the heat of combustion range and heat-treated
(e.g., wet oxidation) sludges fall into the high range.
b. Energy Parameter. In comparison to many other combustion systems, the sludge
incinerator must cope with a fuel having an exceptionally high ash and moisture content.
Thus, the balance between the fuel energy in the combustible, the burdensome latent heat
demand of the moisture, and the dilution effect of the ash is especially important and
powerful. Consequently, numerous thermal studies are inevitably conducted where the
percent solids is carried as the independent parameter and dependent parameters such as
fuel use, steam generated, etc., are derived. It is both inconvenient and aggravating that the
use of percent solids as a correlating variable (1) produces nonlinear plots and (2) does
not represent a sludge property that truly is a measure of quality. That is, it is not always
benecial to increase percent solids (as, say, through adding an inorganic sludge condition
aid). A more useful variable for such investigations is the energy parameter (EP), which
combines in a single term the heat and material balance for the combustion of sludge or
other fuels or wastes. The EP is calculated as follows:
EP
1 S 106
kg H2 O per million kcal
SBV
13
where
S decimal percent solids
V decimal percent volatile
B heat of combustion kcal=kg volatile
The advantage in using the EP instead of percent solids to correlate thermochemical
calculations is that EP correlations are usually linear, whereas, over broad ranges, the
percent solids correlations are strongly curved. It can be noted that for a given percent
excess air the EP collapses the heat effects of water evaporation, ue gas heating, and
waste-derived energy supply into a single term. Using the energy parameter, for example,
fuel requirement and steam-raising potential for sludge incineration correlate linearly.
Further, a reduction in EP is always a benet: Less fuel is always needed or more energy
recovered.

Waste Characterization: Table 1

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Waste Characterization: Table 1

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

4

Process weight fractions

Domestic, commercial, and institutional

Source: Ref. 107.

Inorganic and elemental

chloridesulfate eutectic is particularly troublesome in burning renery and petrochemical

Using the Dulong equation, estimate the heating value of a waste

2;2120:001 3;5450:0083 1;1870:3594

Modied Dulong equation

Table 2 Theoretical Air Requirements of Municipal Refuse and Other Fuels

sm3 Air=M kcal

Methane will burn according to the stoichiometric relationship

Ash Fusion Characteristics

A somewhat more precise prediction of viscosity based on composition was developed by

expsilica value2 101

Concentrations are in mol percent on an SO3 -free basis.

Table 3b Coefcients of Ash Fusion TemperaturesReducing Conditions

Source: From (475).

Table 3c Coefcients of Ash Fusion TemperaturesOxidizing Conditions

Source: From (475).

Table 4 Melting Points of Common Eutectic Mixtures

Table 5 Comparative Sooting Tendency of

Unbound H-to-C ratio

Solid Waste Composition

Mixed Municipal Refuse

Table 7 Estimated Average Percent Moisture in

From Ref. 109.

From Ref. 110.

Table 9 Estimated Average Generated Refuse Composition 19601995

Paper & paperboard

Source: From (450).

Construction and Demolition Waste

Table 11 A Summary of International Refuse Composition Data

Table 12 Estimated Average Mix of Plastics in Municipal Refuse (1966)

Source: From (450).

Table 13 Estimated Waste Generation in Demolition Activities

Total steel in construction work.

Table 14 Rate of Loss of Building Materials in Construction Activities

Losses (Range, Average) as %

Reinforced concrete work

Table 15 Conversion Factors for Building Materials

Source: From (451).

Institutional, Commercial, and Industrial Waste

This is a summary of data for reinforced concrete, steel-framed,

Solid Waste Properties

Source: Ref. 114 (sampling and analysis).

Table 18 Industrial Waste Compositiona

26 Paper and allied products

Source: Ref. 110; condence limits are 95%.

Table 20 Estimated Ultimate Analysis of Refuse Categories (% Dry Basis)a

Table 21 Ultimate Analysis of Annual Average 1970 Mixed Municipal Wastea

Average Refuse Summary (As-red Basis: 100 kg Average Refuse)

Higher heating value (water condensed): 2472 kcal=kg

Table 22 Summary of Elemental Concentrations of Various Fractions of MSW

Table 23 Metal Concentrations in Components of Municipal and Commercial Waste Materials

Elemental composition in ppm (grams=ton of component)

0.5 13.7 169.8

Plastic group (cont.)

Elemental composition in ppm (grams=ton of component)

0.1 0.5 18.5 0.5

527.1 132.8 2.6

14.6 46.3 16.1

5.6 91.9 2.7