The Observer, September 5, 2008
Volume XLI, Issue 2
Global Scorning: Lawmakers should re-evaluate cost of waste disposal
When we were young, we were taught cute rhymes about reducing, reusing, and recycling in hopes that we would maintain an awareness of the state of our environment. Now the cute phrase that comes to mind is "plasma gasification, to remedy a wasteful nation."
The idea behind plasma gasification comes from the law of conservation of matter, which states that matter cannot be created nor destroyed. Plasma gasification is a process that turns everyday waste into an energy resource. It might sound like a fancy word for biofuels, but there are two key differences between the two: the plasma process involves no incineration, and it emits no sulfur dioxide. In fact, there is no fire or smoke involved with plasma gasification. Instead, a device called the plasma torch shoots an electric current across an electrode assembly, ionizing an inert gas. This ionized gas becomes scorching hot – up to 27,000 degrees Fahrenheit. Then the molecular bonds are torn apart, leaving behind a syngas, a gas mixture of carbon monoxides, carbon dioxide, and hydrogen. Once the garbage is obliterated, the leftover syngas is burned like natural gas, producing enough electricity to run the gasification plant and concurrently give energy back to the grid.
Though this method is new, cities such as New Orleans are currently considering this technology for their municipal waste sites. Sun Energy Group, an energy company based in New Orleans, believes that a plasma gasification facility would yield about 55.2 kilowatts of power per ton of trash. Additionally, the company claims that the gasification process would emit only very small amounts of carbon dioxide, comparable to a natural gas plant's emissions.
However, the same problem that plagues solar and wind energy afflicts plasma gasification: simple economics. The cost of the plasma process, including the money to be made selling electricity back to the grid, is a hefty sum. It is speculated that the plasma gasification process would cost about $172 per ton of trash, while municipal landfills charge about $35 per ton. Plasma gasification proponents question these numbers, though: the Plasco Energy Group claims that due to increasing efficiency of plasma gasification, 46 percent of the processed waste becomes energy, compared to 18 percent for older technologies. Even so, the methodology used currently to compute the cost of processing waste at landfills places plasma gasification at a severe economic disadvantage.
But the traditional methodology used to identify the cost of waste fails to incorporate the cost of pollution to the environment. Landfills seep chemicals into water systems and eventually into our water supply. According to eia.doe.gov, rainwater flushes the hazardous liquids from municipal waste sites into nearby streams and groundwater supplies. Additionally, these sites affect the health of nearby residential sites. The website also points out that, in addition to the health hazards of municipal landfills, a number of regions are running out of space to bury their waste.
Why aren't we considering these effects when evaluating a technology that is more efficient in generating fuels and significantly more effective in eliminating the waste in terms of quantity and time?
If we are to adapt new technologies to improve our environment and quality of life, then we must incorporate new evaluation processes that eliminate built-in subsidies by not including a more global analysis of cost. That will require a major change in the mindset of many decision makers in the government. For now, while plasma gasification remains underutilized, we can watch videos of the process on YouTube and continue to be hopeful.
Michelle Udem is a third-year economics and environmental studies major.
