MSW Brazil-Very expensive Landfill cost 3x to 5x than Singás plus have very short useful life and dont generate revenue, but high daily ton. expenses

MSW Brazil-Very expensive Landfill cost 3x to 5x than Singás plus have very short useful life and dont generate revenue but high daily ton expenses

“For Brazil more South Americans Countries plus possible International bold Investors/Partners/Manufacturers Too” -?

SUMMARY

In a scientific and socio-economic and environmentally correct and very profitable way, I will try to demonstrate here that to process the good volumes of "refuse-derivate fuel" RDF in Brazil and in South American Countries in new plants - which still barely exist here - will need investments of 3 times to 5 times lower in US$/plant than to send such MSW and other residues/leftovers for very expensive Landfill or Biodigester, these with a short useful life (between 8 and 13 years) and that do not produce any daily income , but only with high expenses to land 01 ton.

Such RDF will be more obtained with the processing of large volumes of MSW (Municipal Solid Waste) plus with residual biomass, being the RDF already with 16% humidity and minimum calorific richness of 3,000 kcal/kg and everything for the very rapid production of very syngas or synthesis gas in more technical modern machines mastered for more than 50 years in Asia, Europe and the USA - including vehicular use in the 2nd war (vehicular gas from wood or coal).

Thus, there will be previous and fast pressings in special national machines of the high local/regional volumes of MSW "Municipal Solid Waste" plus organic biomass, some with average humidity of up to 50% and others with low calorific richness, and to be well detected, as well as mix and enrich well before with other very rich residual and inorganic items. The main items to be processed are biomass such as (bark, straw, leaves, roots, cultivated wood, pruning of gardens and trees) and other leftovers or organic debris (feces, sewage, hair, leathers, etc.) or inorganic (worn tires, plastics etc.), as long as they are non-mineral (never metals, glass, etc.).

Such syngas - after its very modern production, very cheap and socio-economically and environmentally entirely sustainable and developmental - proceeds to washing, cooling and purification and, afterwards, to the production of a lot of electricity/heater for 24 hours/day and for its own uses. and/or for sales. Everything will take place in cheap and fast processing/synthesizer plants (5 to 10 minutes), but with up to 50 years of useful life.

ARTICLE -

MY PROPOSE for South America SA Countries Municipal/People/Industrial/Manufacturer/Investor (specially for Brazil): My honest and fair (non-mafia) partnerships PROPOSAL for rapid and fundamental universalization/intensification of advanced Syngas (synthesis gas) production by really sustainable more already very tested safety technologies to produce lots of local/regional own and very cheap electricity and/or industrial steam plus, especially, to promote a giant environmental cleanup through fast hourly/daily processing of dirty residues or even cultivated biomasses. I propose to implement thousands of electrical processing/generating plants, individual or collective/cooperative, to process all volumetric and gross residues (without selective collection) of MSW "Municipal Solid Waste", biomass (bark, straw, leaves, roots, cultivated wood, pruning of gardens and trees) and other leftovers or organic debris (feces, sewage, hair, leathers, etc.) or inorganic (worn tires, plastics - most derived from bad gas or oil etc.), as long as they are non-mineral (never metals, glass, etc.). All these items high moisture contents will be very well prepared before to transformer them in good RDF (“Refuse-derivate Fuel”) only with 16% moisture. These technologies have been used for over 50 years in the countries of Asia, Europe and in the USA in addition to providing high agribusiness/rural cooperative net profits (minimum daily costs processing per ton) and with long useful life (over 30 years).Besides these they require investments in US$/ud of only 1/3 to 1/5 of Brazil’s current sanitary landfills frequent destination with very short useful life (8 to 15 years) and that produce nothing of daily income; ditto in high risky and very expensive projects for biogas too.

So, in this innovative and timely article, we seek to present the best technological solutions - really effective for more than 50 years in Europe, Asia and the USA, although they still do not exist here - for excellent local/regional environmental cleaning and with much less investment, very low daily operating costs and good net income. All these provided mainly due to the correct disposal of urban and rural waste and other dirty or clean waste (especially MSW), including for generation of a lot of electrical energy and/or production of a lot of industrial steam - own or to sell - (by isolated farm or group/cooperative/agribusiness/food processor projects etc.). All this will happen via technologies to quickly and safely produce a lot of syngas (synthesis or synthetic gas) in special minis, small to large machines (singasifier) all made in special steels.

Also, here, we try to honestly and technically compare the smaller values to invest plus very low operational costs more good power/heater offer plus financial results of such singasifier high cleaner/processor projects above with the current in almost all South America countries. All our municipal has wrong destinations sanitary landfills current and, worse, with very high investments needed plus his very expensive daily operation cost per ton plus his short operational life.?

As a curiosity, such syngas was already widely used in Europe and in USA in the form of vehicular gas (“the poor wood gas”) in World War II, when almost all petroleum derivatives were only for tanks and other machines (all syngas = gas was produced only from wood or coal - please see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8un7W2QpZag&t=111s more at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VcozDpQBMg&t=3s until in current days with good previous RDF coming from very much biomass as at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6e3CprVTi8&t=2s more at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqWOCHI9wuo&t=2s including for compressing wood gas for future use at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MaJ_-xmtsXc&t=77s – As all already youtube public videos forms, including advertisements.

Thus, current although in great fashion of implantations and uses throughout in Brazil the hundreds of expensive sanitary landfills implemented, or being implemented, have already been revealed more as major and recurrent municipal and political problems, than as good and real, municipal socio-environmental and economic local one municipal solution or a set of neighboring municipalities. Here, unfortunately, it is still a taboo and dangerous subject and that even the courts of auditors until plus the specialized press more serious environmentalists and some local or regional politicians y think looks like they are or already they feel very afraid to disclose and/or to analyze and/or to denounce this socio-environmental problems/no power/no revenues but with very high costs and sequential and frequent problems. All fearing the possible and even possibly recurring consequences or repercussions (some of them possible or already well known) because when implanting a legal sanitary landfill of any quality and cost in the municipalities can be very dangerous because this could dissatisfy local voters a lot (even as possible direct source of much even legalized corruption).

In such landfills, there is always a need for very expensive investments, as we will see below; ditto with very high daily operating costs per gross ton to be buried properly as will be seen below; this without generating income, but only daily/hourly high expenses. Almost everyone has a short useful life. So, all landfills buried operations should be highly questionable by citizens and environmentalists because they have great environmental risks since high biogas volumes - with very high methane contents - are produced in long-long time/years at to be buried of such gross raw MSW or pre-harvested gross waste/organic or gross leftovers. In this type of pre-harvested or selective operations to occur a prior collection of expensive items to be sold for recycling such as metals, bottles/glass, good wood/timber, some plastics etc.

Socioeconomically this selective collection - or pre-sorting of rich items (recyclables) - may even be a good partial solution (very encouraged in Brazil) since it employs a lot of very poor people (here called cooperative collectors) but, environmentally, it is another big mistake/error, because such high volumes of garbage residue MSW and similar now become a very poor paste and very liquid final residue, like a broth or sludge, with much more organic and up to 70%-90% humidity (very low LCV of only 400 kcal/kg). So, it is difficult to dispose them for the correct final environmental destination.

Thus, such final broth - coming from the collection/previous selection of MSW and others above in urban buildings, ag-industries, food factories and in cooperatives (in Brazil it is better known as stinking paste or slurry or cesspool sludge) - becomes almost impossible to be previous transformed into good RDF to be well syngasified more to generate electricity and thus generate very good plants income and so much more jobs and local developments.

In all these places (landfills or back of the headquarters of the collectors' cooperatives), this smelly paste or bad small juice is, in the end, totally directed/pumped to neighboring settling ponds, where it is exposed for days to full sun (absolutely contaminating the soils, subsoils and watery and air etc. local and microregional). Concluding, after it dries a little it has to be well buried in such legal or even improvised sanitary landfills. Worse than all this occurs intensively and in an incentivized way and under the protection of local or regional laws and policies.

In time, in our future processing plants of raw MSW and others above for the production of electricity and/or steam via syngas production, such metallic items more glass, large pieces of wood etc. will also be well pre-picked and removed in advance, because they can greatly damage into syngasifiers too (in all this plants type Brazilian law requires the participation of some collectors from a well-organized local cooperative at this stage, even if entirely private plant, and also the elimination/reduction of bad odors from gross raw MSW). However, everything will take place in a highly technological and sustainable way in our processing plants, because only after such pre-cleaning, everything will be immediately well to ground into pieces of up to 3 cm and then well pressed and then dried in special machines (CDDM - see at the end) and even with the use of very hot smoke comes from when the syngas is burned in the very modern diesel-Bosch type moto-generators in the same plant (that can operate for 20 hours/day and for up to 20 consecutive years).

That biogas (not syngas) also contains up to 65% methane (just to be considered as the second most harmful gas are ahead of CFC, but much worse than co2), compared to only up to 8% hydrogen, therefore, almost an incendiary bomb added to a large socio-environmental bomb). On the contrary, our syngas, well washed, cooled and purified beforehand, contains 30% to 45% h2 (to be transformed only into Co2 in the subsequent burning for power Generation and/ or steam production) and only 6% to 10% of methane.

Thus, we all know that it may not be a good option to implement such landfills, because for years we know there was better gasification systems and projects in Asia, Europe and even in North-American countries. All of them also are much cheaper, more efficient, well tested, operating well and producing good at high profits for each plant more for its proper and/or operator and/or investor and/or municipalist bodies and not just costs. And also, these are not old biogas projects that are very rich in methane and low in hydrogen and to be produced more with animal/human feces, sewers etc. in the old biodigesters and which occupy large areas and which are also very risky, but plants to produce syngas very rich in hydrogen (up to 45%) and poor in methane (up to 10%) and by fast, safe, low-polluting syngasifiers and in special steels.

In Brazil and probably in other SA countries there are recent laws that allow investing with security in very much profitable Public-Private Partnerships syngas plants (The PPP partnerships) for long periods of up to 50 consecutive years, which greatly reduces the necessary amounts of direct and necessary initial investments in each plant, but generate most and good net revenue, but to be shared between such partners and/or with parties to be reinvested in expansions system in PPP forms too for more processing local or regional plants.

Thus, although in the current giant fashion for municipalities (specially for many politics until for some environmental technicians from the city hall), this can be, without a doubt, the worst environmental and socio-economic choice currently made by cities, by Governments plus their politicians and leaders (and without demerits and nothing personal against, because there are – and there will still be – many, many municipalities and Governments that buy, install and manage them and even universities, professors, consultants, technicians, equipment manufacturers and even environmentalists who approve and defend them).

A properly landfill burying (legally and properly) for raw waste MSW or organic excesses - "stinky paste” - (including from recycling centers or waste of processing or the agro-industrial leftovers from our ceasas etc.), it is not easy or cheap to build or to operate well because it requires very deep and well isolated hermetic and thick walls of reinforced concrete - or other highest quality material – in all walls at the bottom, sides and above.

Also, the landfill installation sites have to be special, large, very firm and very sunny areas - that is, much less porous, far from watery, rivers and creek areas and from houses - and not far from city centers or their large industries/agro-industries, in general, with very high volumes of waste producers, also to be buried.

Thus, all municipalities have to accept or live with their landfills most with very short useful life and even smelly, although a lot called as "modern but non efficient landfills” but still inefficient and without real socio-economic and environmental returns (useful life already proved of only 8 to 15 years or until it spills and/or starts to leak and/or contaminates the soils, subsoils and neighboring and/or deep waters). Furthermore, the amounts to be invested in its construction and in its maintenance can be called exorbitant, even more so when confronted with the low real socio-environmental results more there are no economic results, but only high initial investments and high daily costs per ton to bury well and not to process.

Even with the local populations knowing little and, indeed, very little, or almost nothing, for participating/supervising about -, the amounts to be invested are easily verifiable, as they are very high and between R$ 15.0 million (= Us $ 3.0 million/ton.) to R$ 525.0 million (= Us $ 105.0 million/ton.)/01 landfill, according to the population to be served - see below. In addition to the fact that such landfills never generate revenue they still have very high daily operating costs from R$ 90.00/t. (= Us $ 16/ton.) to R$ 160.00/t. (= Us $ 32/ton) to a properly landfill just for only 01 ton, all when, in fact, they comply with current environmental requirements and regulations, including transport costs.

In 2009, according to a complete below diagnosis prepared in Portuguese by the FGV (Funda??o Getúlio Vargas) for the BNDES, the construction of a large landfill, with the capacity to receive 2,0 thousand tons/day of gross garbage MSW - coming from a population of about 2.5 million people - does not go out for less than R$ 525.8 million (equal to approximately Us $100.0 million at current exchange rates). Our BNDES Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Economico e Social (“the National bank for economic and social development”) is the largest Brazilian state-owned investor bank and receives annually - legally and mandatorily - a small part of the resources of the many taxes applied in Brazil plus the results of its previous investments, including abroad. See complete data on the BNDES study?https://web.bndes.gov.br/bib/jspui/bitstream/1408/3041/2/Estimativa%20de%20investimentos%20em%20aterros%20sanitarios_P.pdf .?

Now, I will present some initial unquestionable facts plus regional reports/diagnoses made by BNDES based in municipal data raised by FGV Funda??o Getulio Vargas (“the FGV Getulio Vargas Private Foundation” - one old and highly respected Economic Diagnoses in Brazil) plus from the ABETRE Associa??o Brasileira de Tratamento de |Lixos (the “Brazilian Waste Treatment Association”). Even disregarding the short useful lives they point to the very high daily costs of correct and legal grounding for each ton entering the well-located and well-constructed by some Municipals sanitary landfill (see table 17), the smallest landfill considered for 100 t/day from up to 100,000 inhabitants/day from a medium-sized city or in the sum of some neighboring ones (about 10 t/hour in 10 hours of deposition without operational risks at night) already if there were total amounts to be invested of R$ 52.4 million (about Us $ 10.0 million at the current exchange rate and not at the time). Also, for them in the highest considered landfill - for 2,000 t/day of large cities with up to 2, 0 million/inhabitant or the sum of some medium-sized, but neighboring (equal to 200.0 t/hour in 10 hours) - the values to invest, at the time, reached a high R$ 525.8 million (about Us $ 100, 0 million at the current exchange rate and not at the time).

Still about it, please also see the links only in Portuguese: 1) https://licitacao.com.br/index.php/precos-iniciais-de-arro-assustam-mas-o-prefeito-diz-que-valores-deverao-cair/ ; 2) https://liberal.com.br/cidades/americana/engep-vence-licitacao-com-mais-que-o-dobro-do-preco-por-tonlada-1379149/ ; 3) https://www.itapolis.sp.leg.br/imprensa/noticias/0/18/0/946.

In Itápolis City – interior of the very rich the S?o Paulo State - see link above in 2021, this daily cost to process MSW per ton was R$ 152.00/t (= Us$ 30/ton), because, in addition to the R$ 105.00/ton (US$ 20/ton) for landfilling household waste, there is a cost of R$ 47 .00 (US$ 10/ton.) for its transport. It is a very small city that produces only 26.0 tons of gross domestic waste daily (01 to 02 trucks), but the local landfill would require the daily disbursement of approximately R$ 3,952.00 (Us $ 760/daily) at the time for more proper - or probable - landfilling of waste.

Almost keeping the budgets in terms of values, in mid-2021, a medium-sized interior of Brazil sanitary landfill - to serve the population of 1.0 million people daily - was around R$ 236.5 million - equal to about Us $ 47.0 million at the current exchange rate -, with a capacity to land 800 tons/day, remembering that, in general, 01 inhabitant produces from 0.8 kg/day to 1.2 kg/day of gross raw waste MSW, depending on personal income and the place that he lives. Also, the quality and type of waste differ greatly in the same way. Municipalities with a population of 200,000 peoples, on the other hand, have the option of investing very expensive R$ 52.4 million (= Us $ 11.0 million) for a single landfill with capacity of only 100 tons/day (average discharge of only 10 ton. /Working hour). See: https://www.oim.tmunicipal.org.br/abre_documento.cfm?arquivo=_repositorio/_oim/_documentos/46D719DD-B23E-CE61-F08E86D0722CC1CA13022013110809.pdf&i=2274 .

Here comes the essential question: until when and how is the messy Brazil Environmental Law on MSW destinations of 2010 (Law 12,305 that instituted the National Solid Waste Policy) contributing to this? If it has demanded a lot and quickly requirements, why didn't it point to the sources of funds for it? Idem, because nothing pointed to the technical and operational cleaner correct/best operations for that? much less for the industrial and marketing requirements? even knowing that it would be a new market in Brazil and to be very cannibalized/even corruptible, which could even worsen the future environmental situation?

On the other hand, and as a technological-energetic and socio-economic environmental counterpoint, some 50 years ago in old Europe (mainly in Germany and low countries) and in Asia (especially Japan, China and India) there are already better technological options as well cheaper, much more efficient and highly profitable for everyone, as they are well designed to process previous RDF all comes from gross urban waste MSW and others item above. It is mainly the rapid and constant syngasifications indoors of such RDF comes from gross MSW and others dirty and/or clean (the newest ones occur in high-strength steel machines, the syngasifiers in their various forms of processing and controlled directions for central injections of dirty or clean raw materials above and with a small localized injection of a little of steam and/or natural air and even of a little oxygen).

Such central and vertical injection of RDF occurs more via special good steel tube semi-sealed steel and with a well-planned and controlled opening in the upper and lower parts, it is in the form of a funnel or a bezel (depending on the types of machines and the dirty items and raw materials to be processed) and with the injection of the items to be syngasified occurring from top to bottom in the best syngasifiers of the CFB type - see below. In general, the useful horizontal diameter of such an internal injector tube is equivalent to 50% to 70% of the total diameter of the Machine and the vertical length of this tube is equivalent to 80% to 90% of the total length of the machine; and the flaming pyrolysis plus the real syngasifications occur in all remaining internal spaces and, in most CFB syngasifiers, from bottom to top (that is, in the opposite flow to the central injection), with the output of the syngas already ready and for external cooling and purification occurs at the top of the machine.

When using only gross municipal waste MSW and others above still to be transformed previous into good RDF - see later - the initial requirements of debris/leftovers/biomasses/tires pieces are to have a maximum size of 30 mm plus humidity less than 50% and a good minimum gross and initial calorific level of 2,500 kcal/kg (to be expanded to the required minimum of 3,000 kcal/kg when already processed into RDF with only 16% moisture). In this condition, modern Chinese, Indian and north American small/medium syngasifiers - built in steel and in a circulating fluid bed form/type - need only 1.0 kg to 1.5 kg of good RDF to generate 1.0 KWh of liquid electricity.

Operationally, everything takes place for the continuous production of electricity and/or industrial steam - at very low costs - and additionally promoting an excellent and even gigantic local or micro-regional (isolated, group, agro-industrial or cooperative) environmental cleaning. All this comes from urban or rural gross waste MSW and similar above (provided they are well prepared in advance, with their exclusive technologies, and to reduce the initial humidity from 50% (gross raw waste) to 80% (sewage, sludge and RLU) for the necessary and previous RDF this only up to 16% humidity and up to 3 cm and/or well mixed with local or neighboring |MSW more biomasses such as rice and soybean husks or coffee/cocoa/coconut husks or various other straws, sawdust, very much food leftovers comes from millions of houses more from thousands wholesalers/retailers/distributors, hospitals, military barracks, schools, food factories, ag-processors, slaughterhouses, meat houses/boutiques, restaurants etc.

External companies of great renown, responsibility and international energy and clean environmental experience efforts that have been intensely dedicated for years to manufacture, test, implement and operate such syngasifier machines of different sizes, types and costs. All have the characteristics of promoting a giant environmental cleanup - much cheaper compared to such landfills, biodigesters and incinerators and with a long useful life (30 to 50 years) -, while providing large and immediate constant and reliable profits to their owners; they also provide great savings to the implanting municipalities and idem great political victories and very much respect from all for the leaders and technicians who fought for them.

They stand out according to country of origin, worldwide, among the 80 young or old largest manufacturers of syngasifiers of different sizes/different technologies/costs/results and since 2000 (see each site, always looking for the company name plus the English words “gasifier project”) the following major manufacturers and/or installers/operators: 1) Germany and Netherlands – Lurgi, Fraunhofer, ECN-Bivikin, Foster Weller, Milena, UHDE; 2) USA - Westinghouse-Alter NG, Siemens, GE, Thrive Systems, GEK - All Power Labs Berkeley, Victory Gasworks, Vulcan Gasifier; 3) Japan - Mitsubishi, Itochu-Hitachi; 4) England - Outotec, Cutec, Stak: 5) Spain -?Eqtec, Garringer; 6) Italy - Pyromak, Entrade; 7) China - Haiqi, Fengyu, Shuliy, Wuxi, Powermax; 8) India - Ankur, Chandepur, Trillion, Husk Power.

Thus, although they do not exist in Brazil and/or maybe in the SA countries, in the USA, Germany, Spain and China there are complete syngasifiers, but, processing only RDF, as described above and below, which requires expanding the initial budget already placed in Brazil by another 20% to 30% in US $. Concluding the medium, large and giant syngasifiers from the companies mentioned above are very efficient, but still very expensive in all world (between Us$ 3.0 million/01 MWh to Us$ 5.0 million/01 MWh/4 t. hour processing of gross raw waste MSW (50%-60% moisture). When it goes placed in the interior of Brazil also still need to add + 20% to + 30% in Us$/plant to previous transformers of gross MSW and other biomasses or debris into good high calorific contents RDF (“refuse-derived fuel”), all according to the initial quality of the gross garbage MSW and other and the place too.

However, beneficially, in China, India and the USA there are smaller syngasifiers, even more effective and much cheaper (for 01 to 05 small neighboring municipalities) and that can be assembled by us in the interior of Brazil and in SA countries, in a complete and really efficient way and with guarantees for up to Us$ 1.8 million/01 MWh/5 t./hour of gross MSW with 50-60% moisture (which cannot comes from pre-cleaning or selective pre-collection in houses or buildings, in companies and on the streets). All raw garbage MSW and or plus other above need to be well prepared by us with our special machines – investments equal to + 30% of the initial budget - being the initial 70% of maximum budgeted value for some machines imports to be paid in 90 days. Theis values budgeted (70%) goes for the acquisitions of the China/Indian/Yankees modern syngasifiers plus for the other items to be legally imported from our reliable supplier and already posted in interior Brazil.

All other amounts to be invested previously in land, buildings and labor contracting costs for constructions; all places to continuous process of MSW and/or other above will be borne by the municipalities (city hall) and/or by local processing companies licensed by the municipalities. When the processing is of rural MSW and similar above etc., the amounts foreseen above must be previously invested by agroindustry, cooperatives and other interested companies, both in the giant local/regional environmental cleanups foreseen, as in the future offers of electric energy or heating - own use and/or to sell - and even already clean water (up to 50% of the initial volume and to be returned locally for further treatment and subsequent consumption or seller).

Note that all of the above joint operations by processors/syngasifiers plants of any size and location such as 24 hours sales of lots of electrical energy plus industrial steam for heating plus already treated water plus adequate and legal processing/destination of old tires (where their manufacturers have to pay for this according to the laws in force) more than metals, glass collected on the conveyor belts before syngasifications and his sales, etc. Total syngasifications costs is very low, because all MSW and similar to be processed will be received, free of charge, at the door of the processing plant (compulsory and common condition today in these countries and which includes the high costs with internal transport of these item comes from houses, buildings and streets up to the plant).

See the link below with one Indian detailed and recent article in English about good forms/singasifiers machines for power generation or steam heater (good net revenues plants much more local jobs) more, specially, to promote a giant and fast local/regional sustainable clean of gross MSW, debris, biomasses and other revolutionary new technology. All this is as I also propose for all South America??countries, mainly for Brazil solutions (singasifiers machines already are in use last 50 years in old Europe more in Asia countries plus in USA). Please also see other technical details and costs/results at:??https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262770436_A_comparison_of_catalysts_zeolite_and_calcined_dolomite_for_gas_production_from_pyrolysis_of_municipal_solid_waste_MSW?enrichId=rgreq-963b2967a1887e26255fc8918cc8c08d-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI2Mjc3MDQzNjtBUzo1ODg4NTY5NDAzMzEwMTBAMTUxNzQwNTg0Mzk1Mw%3D%3D&el=1_x_2&_esc=publicationCoverPdf

So, in my opinion, all types and ways of solving well - and for fast solutions of our great high soil-subsoil-air-water polluting/expensive power worse problems (expanding as the population expands and so does personal local income) - should be much better to be researched plus with many cheap and fast singasifiers to be manufactured here in Brazil and other SA countries (Brazil is a giant agricultural country and with a lot of annual residues, leftovers, debris etc. productions and almost dropouts; all with serious environmental problems for fast local solutions; plus large low-income population with very great producer of gross garbage MSW and all with great local difficulties to transport and to process at expensive and wrong landfills – see below).

I repeat that they are complete syngasifiers and not simple initial pyrolyze or not the harmful incinerators just for thermal burning and erroneous generation/production of steam, unsustainable, which should have already been banned, including in rural areas of Brazil more SA countries.

Technically and operationally, see the link at the end (English), that scientists from India point out that the continued use of dolomitic limestone as a very fast catalyst for syngas high production, functioning as an incandescent and constant lava at the bottom of fixed bed syngasifiers has not only greatly increased the speed of processing but also has greatly expanded the production of high quality singás (also y highly recommend CFB bed syngasifiers floating, for which I have 3 patent applications in progress. As y said above such an operation with dolomitic catalases ignites/explodes high volumes for the tar more more the blonde glycerin, all coming from the rapid and closed pyrolysis (but this pyrolysis is only an initial and basic reaction for the total syngasifications that occurs only at the top of only CFB bed singasifiers).

So, such RDF disposable residues in constant flaming pyrolysis as above more tar/glycerin explosions allow to reach very high average temperatures of 650o - 750o C at the top of the syngasifier being the ideal volumetric for good internal fast syngasifications only occurs from 600o C. Thus, the higher internal top temperature is the direct responsible by the volumes more the quality and the purity of the singás, after to be cooled and purified immediately and then goes to immediate burning in specific and moderns motor-generators high performance and specific for syngas (the diesel-otto cycle engines) or to be injected into externals “fire tubes” to extend the reheating of circulating HTF thermal fluid - see more data below (also see below link with “fire tubes” operations for much water heaters for immediate DSG power generation or for specific HTF reheating for external storable and after for Rankine power generation).

Thus, as described above the dolomitic limestone mentioned is a powerful catalyst and really provides that the tar and other items can act as a 2nd internal fuel, before they explode on top of the singasifier CFB Machine. All comes to increase the syngas high temperature (in normal singasifier without streamers) or of the HTF high temperature (in my Volcano II singasifier with 2-3 streamers) to the maximum. Furthermore, this operation is nothing releasing polluting residues in such syngas, which It greatly reduces your cooling costs more than cleaning and it expands your speed and effectiveness.

Also, I have proposals – 04 patent applications for machines in progress – to design, install and maintain much cheaper, very efficient plants and giant immediate environmental cleaners exclusive machines that can even add up in a hybrid hourly way with other generating sources, such as wind power in small towers or artificial water going for very modern and recent vortices mini-small power plants and without natural falls?(only artificial falls of only up to 3 m in depth due to water deviations plus construction and concreting of a tubular more vertical well at ground level and to accumulate more movement of the 02 vertical helices moved by the falling flows at the entrance on top more at the bottom of the well and after discharge of the water).?It can also be generated a little or moderately in cheap local/microregional PCHs and only by mini/small rivers or creeks with only 1-2 m deep currents (all for up to 24 hours/day) and even with photovoltaic solar, this only daytime and with only 03 to 05 small batteries at the foot, but collecting and supplying for 8-12 hours/day. Also, hybrid projects to can added for the night power or heater production some cheap machines to process much local garbage gross MSW for syngas. All goes to generate night electricity with syngas motor generators (or syngas with up to 30%-45% clean h2 and only up to 8% methane) and in total replacement of diesel motor generators (expensive and highly polluting) or biogas/landfill (content of up to 65% methane and only 5% h2, that is, possibly highly polluting and with high local risks) or even natural gas (same as above) including thermoelectric plants, even fireflies.

In time, I also have a recent patent application in progress in which I will use circulating bed syngasifiers also with incandescent dolomite in basin to reach the same temperature of up to 900o C, but which I intend to steal (70%-80%), as in the well-known thermal absorption chillers for reheat hot water or other hot liquids (not for refrigeration), via 2 ascending coils with 3 m high from mid to top and 3 inches wide/flows welded/slotted upwards on outer walls and top.

They will be installed in my VOLCANO II singasifier as similar to one vertical steel tank (or even taking advantage of) this in AISI 316 noble steel and for about 30 thousand liters as the current and semi-ready ones in thick steel as in the current ones for transporting milk and/or fuel, where up to 30.0 t/hour of rural or urban raw waste would be processed for 20 hours/day (like a paste and already with 16.0% humidity) and coming from up to 800,000 -1,000,000 low-middle-income neighbors - equal to 45.0 t/hour of gross raw waste MSW and still with 50 % moisture (see below too).

With these high volumes of gross raw waste offered - and to be processed very quickly and environmentally very correct and totally sustainable locally and regionally (MSW and other waste and biomass) - now technically already well transformed into good "refuse-derived fuel" RDF " in our initial and exclusive machines (see at the end) - my future VOLCANO II will already be able to generating between 15.0 MWh - 20.0 MWh/unit and continuously, processing up to 30 t/hour with 16% humidity).

So, will collect/steal in some strategic coils the excess thermic in the places already described (no longer so useful in those places). Such coils will contain much circulating thermal fluid and reheating (HTF = “heat transfer fluids', such as the LANX 500 or Therminol VP 2, fully sustainable and only comes from fertilizers or from renewable vegetable oils such as soy/sunflower etc.) and which will then take 3-4 hours to cool externally (well stored in cheap concrete tanks with thermal pads), even producing more about 12 complete cycles of steam-condensate-water for Rankine electric generation, everything until it cools down and needs to be re-entered in the same machine to reheat (for example: at Google's Ivanpah heliothermic solar plant in the Mojave desert - USA and only for up to 450o C - it is already managed to generate for at least 80 cycles above – a record - and perpetuating that generation for up to 7 hours before the HTF needs to come in and reheat in solar tubes in high solar thermic central tower daily receiving thermic from cents of concentrate more reflexives and direct mirror neighbors).

In another my cheap and inedit and very possible proposal with more technical details below. My proposal for small initial singasifier has total full budget and it is 100% national and already installed in the interior Brazil. Total budget is possible of only Us$ 1.1 million/1.0 MWh/processing 4.0 t/hour of gross raw waste MSW still with 50% maximum humidity. The gross MSW and/or other above, meantime, have to be very well prepared only by us. My singasifier Project has, however, to be completed, tested, nationalized and pre-patented to be finalized and still to prototype/measure/test/correct/improve etc. Only it will work well as the local quality of the waste and/ or MSW more similar, in addition to the production of cold and clean syngas would reduce to some 20-30% of the total volumes predicted above, but this would be burned externally in Chinese or Indians or yanks “fire tubes”, for additional heating of even about 10%-20% more for HTF 24 h/day reheating, circulating and recoverable up 550o C too - see below - all for much energy or steam fast and cheap productions and/or for industrial use.

As you can see below, between 70%-80% of the very high internal temperatures obtained and above 650o C in my future VOLCANO II machine have other indirect objectives below (it is only achieved after the continued explosions of a lot of tar, glycerin’s and the others, all present and highly combustible/internal explosives at high temperatures forms). This only happens in this type of "fast Circulating Fluidized Bed" named CFB syngasifier and with high initial flaming pyrolysis to be obtained with incandescent and recoverable dolomite, lava type, always liquid and in a small basin at its my machine base - see above too). This very high local temperature makes it possible to reheat a lot of circulating and recoverable thermal fluid and for 24 hours/day (HTF - "heat transfer fluid"). This will occur in the free spaces more on the walls of the machine and using 2 to 3 coils added together and large local heat scavengers (as in absorption chillers for hot liquids), all up to 3 inches each and ascending between its middle and your top. Thus, such high localized temperature will not only be used in the internal production of syngas, per se, but mainly in the continued reheating of a lot of circulating thermal fluid HTF between 95o C and 550o C (as in Therminol VP II or similar with such thermal ranges and fast internal reheats in just 3 minutes total), including being possible to add/hybridize such HTF locally with the same fluid coming from different solar sources etc., but these at a maximum of 350o C - 420o C.

ADDENDUM -

Below I present a little of Technical and Cost Data and Results of the technology for producing very good syngas – still non-existent in Brazil and most of in South America SA countries too, but widely used cheaply for more than 50 years in Europe, Asia and the USA (even for vehicular gas in II war comes from wood or charcoal). These syngas technologies can to promote excellent and very profitable, rapid more continued, local or regional, giant and very safe environmental cleanup plus to do lots of very cheap industrial steam/electrical power Generation - own and or to sell. All will occur with low upfront investments and minimal daily operating costs (in stand-alone or for group/agro-industrial/cooperative plants) and comes from a lot of local/industrial/neighbors/nearby villages raw waste MSW and/ or other well described at the beginning of this article.

Rapid syngasifications does not process directly urban/rural waste = MSW and/or other items above, but directly only the final RDF (“Refuse-Derived Fuel”), a kind of waste fuel coming from those MSW and/or other residuals (in Brazil some RDF are better known as CDR (Fuel Derived from Waste-Residuals). Such high quality testable/verifiable in RDF will be those obtained only from gross more wet waste = MSW, biomass, feces, etc. (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refuse-derived_fuel . But, beforehand, they need to be very well prepared, since none world singasifier machine process MSW and/or similar above directly and for the continuous and cheap electric generation and/or production of cheap industrial steam (except some rice husks and some straw very much dry and in some places).

In terms of time, a simple but very good and modern syngasifier to process up to 40 kg/h of good quality RDF can produce about 80 Nm3/h of syngas (equal to 100 m3/hour and 1.6 m3/minute, = 1.6 thousand liters/minute pressed, in a place with an average annual temperature of 35o C, an altitude of 350 m and an average annual humidity of 65%). Minus the losses, this volume would be equivalent to about 74 m3/hour, equal to 1.3 m3/minute. On the other hand, a pure or mixed syngas motor-generator - the most used (5% diesel for initial start-up and peak demand) - imported and to generate 20 KWh net consumes only between 18.0 m3/hour to 50.0 m3/hour according to quality, equal, respectively, to 0.35 m3/minute and 0.82 m3/minute – on average 0.60 m3/minute - of good singás for 20 KWh net. Comparatively, if it were to generate power only from LPG, it would be only 7.0 m3 hour of consumption for 20 KWh (0.12 m3/minute for 20 KWh i.e. - 80% minus), but LPG as NG Natural Gas are much more expensive and highly polluting.

The objective of the simplest and small-sized syngasifiers is the good minimum production of 2.0 m3 (=2.3 NM3) of good quality syngas with fast processing (up to 5 minutes) comes from only every 1.0 kg of waste MSW and/or similar above, as long as they are already well processed, previously, in RDF - see below. That is, every 1.0 t of well-processed RDF, obtained from garbage MSW and/or similar. In general, the ratio is 2.2 kg - 3.2 kg gross MSW 50%-60% moisture /1.0 kg of RDF 16% moisture depending on the quality of the raw waste or MSW and the location but it can produce up to 2,000 m3 of good quality syngas/1.0 kg waste as above. In terms of potential for electricity generation, in the case of singás, each 1.0 m3 RDF can generate between 3.5 to 5.5 KWe gross (out of up to 55%-65% of generating and transmitting losses), compared to up 6.5 kWe from biogas of biodigesters. In liquid form, each 1.0 m3 of syngas produced at 3 bars, containing at least 28% h2 and produced with good RDF, can generate net 1.2 to 2.8 kWh of electricity. So, every 1.0 kg of very good and previous RDF from gross waste MSW or similar (= 2.0 m3 of cold and clean syngas) has potential to generate 2.4 to 5.6 kWh of local net power.

Comparatively, in the case of rich LPG, each homemade cylinder weighing 13.0 kg contains 5.2 m3 of gas moderately pressed between 2 to 8 bar, compared to 3 to 6 bar coming from syngas in modern syngasifiers.

As syngas motor generators require at least 1,000 kcal/m3 to power generate, to produce a good syngas with at least 1,050 kcal/m3 it is required that all MSW and similar above are well transformed, beforehand, in very good RDF (“refuse-derived fuel”) well prepared and doubling original LCV that coming from various raw materials and waste and garbage MSW, dirty or clean. So, the RDF have at least a calorific value LCV of 3,000 kcal/kg and this at a maximum humidity of 16%, as his process efficiency is 70%.

Also, without y am going into technical detail (I have many articles published here about it), y inform that the main objective is to obtain large volumes of already cold and clean singás and with good initial Low Calorific Value = LCV of at least 4,500 kcal/kg, compared to 7,000 – 9,000 kcal/kg of natural gas LCV and to 11,000 kcal/kg of LPG, which is offset by the much larger volumes of syngas to be harvested and even pressed. LCV Low Calorific Value are also known as UCP - Util Calorific Power.

It happens that the raw waste MSW of low-income South American SA more Brazil countryside communities (in also in the vicinity of large cities), in general, reduces its daily volume between 20% to 30% (Only to 700 to 900 grams/inhabitant/day) and is poorer in terms of calorific value LCV (it contains only between 800 kcal/kg to 1,100 kcal/kg) most of it still with 50% moisture. Meanwhile, it’s very possibly to increase that LCV until to 50% to up to 2,000 kcal/kg, when already, previous, transformed into RDF with our internal technics for 16% moisture, but still at 30% smaller than the minimum required richness LCV to generate good and 24 h/day of rich syngas). Most of the low-income garbage MSW contains well more organic and less paper, packaging and plastics, which makes recycling and collection very difficult and invariably turns into the famous smelly pastes/slurry from landfills and settling ponds, which is a big environmental lie and already tolerated even by environmentalists. On the contrary in the higher net income classes, the calorific richness of the garbage more still raw material (also with an average final humidity of 40%-50%) reaches 2,300 kcal/kg LCV (expanding to 3,500 kcal/kg-4,200 kcal/kg, When, previous, transformed by us into RDF with 16% of humidity) and in rich net income classes countries its LCV even exceeds this (much more cardboard, plastics, pet, long-life packaging, uht etc.).

Our exclusive and confidential technologies to produce good and previous RDF (include enzymes etc. plus good and constant/customized shaker more high pressing by special presses plus screw threads plus imported CDDM machines (Cow Dung Dewatering Machines) plus heating/drying, previously, by engine smoke burner by generators for syngas or similar. Our techs only represent about 30% of the total cost already internalized in the locations of the environmental cleaning plants/electrical generators.

It is good to compare these national calorific levels described above in Brazil and SA countries with those presented at the end by prof. from the University of Salamanca – Spain because y thinks those ones are much more reliable and already as RDF. Please also see in table 1 of https://www.ijceronline.com/papers/Vol6_issue6/H060605061.pdf .

Also, to compensate for these small initial calorific difficulties in the poorest regions of Brazil or of SA countries (which can increase the cost by up to 30%) - when our special preparation and our production of customized RDF - initially, we need well measured the humidity and calorific power of each neighborhood or village MSW, then it is well classified and well mixed, in a customized way, with the raw garbage comes from every local, village or city until reaching the minimum of 3,000 kcal/kg needed in the mix. If you have not yet obtained such minimum required levels of Lower Heating Power (LHP or LCV) you need to add more to shake between 30% to 50% of the rich LCV items described below, such as harder plastics, old tires, tree/garden pruning etc., all with average LCV between 3,800 kcal/kg to 4,500 kcal/kg – see below. They need must be introduced/added in terms of weight and very well measured and prepared before. To add old or worn tires for syngas is as an excellent environmental destination too (LCV from 5,900 to 8,600 kcal/kg) and to generate good additional income for projects according other Brazil federal laws in force for the correct disposal of old tires and rubber. Please see in table 1 of https://www.ijceronline.com/papers/Vol6_issue6/H060605061.pdf .

Even the pruning of lawns and trees well processed for RDF can contain up to 3,800 kcal/kg, which helps municipalities and condominiums in their forest/gardening management and in their cleaning, including environmental ones.

Remembering that the final Lower Calorific Power (LCP = LCV) of each MSW and/or similar above in Kcal/kg (with up to 60% of initial moisture) can increase from at least 30% to 70% when they are previous transformed into the small and rich RDF and with only 16% of final moisture. It is very important to remember now that the minimum calorific requirement of RDF to produce a good syngas in Brazil is 3,000 kcal/kg, as required by our Chinese and Indian manufacturers of syngasifiers (all to produce small to medium hourly volumes of syngas over generation of a maximum of 3.0 MWh and with a maximum demand of 5.0 t./hour - 7.0 t./hour of good RDF).

Now, let's see the lower calorific levels of the most common waste and to be used as possible sources of enrichment of urban waste MSW that is already energy poor or very organic (such as leftovers from central foods-vegetables/restaurants items markets or meat/fish/milky frozen or refrigerated waste or waste from the floor of the food factory etc.) all to be transformed, previously, into good RDF for after syngasifications to generate a lot of own electricity and/or heating to be used in the same local and/or to be sold external for neighboring factories and/or for power distribution companies. So let’s go to see some LCV just measured or described at Brazil as: 1) Rice straw with a density of 130 kg/m3 and LCV of 3,300 kcal /kg; 2) Soybean hulls with a density of 160 kg/m3 and LCV of 3,300 kcal/kg; 3) Dry coconut husk, ditto 58 kg/m3 and LCV of 4,000 kcal/kg; 4) Coffee straw, ditto 144 kg/m3 and LCV of 3,800 kcal/kg; 5) Cocoa husk, idem of 65 kg/m3 and LCV of 3,900 kcal/kg; 6) Sugarcane bagasse, idem of kg/m3 and LCV of 3,200 kcal/kg; 7) Pruning of garden grass, ditto of 70 kg/m3 and LCV of 3,800 kcal/kg; 8) Pruning of trees in gardens with up to 20% initial humidity and LCV of 4,050 kcal/kg; 9) Pruning street trees with up to 20% initial humidity with LCV of 4,500 kcal/kg. Please is good to compare above data with data in table 1 of https://www.ijceronline.com/papers/Vol6_issue6/H060605061.pdf .

Also, in general, our well-prepared RDF with up to 16% moisture and small size will be much better than the SA South American countries or the Brazil gross raw municipal waste (MSW) and it has twice the minimum calorific value LCV of gross garbage MSW or other raw waste collected and that gave rise to it. See above pg. 15 LCV reliable data of Prof. emeritus of the Department of Chemical Engineering of the University of Salamanca - Spain in 2011 and available at https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00762973/document , including PCI measurements (in the case of LCV in English) in several poor and rich countries.

The minimum or maximum calorific values (LCV and HCV) of raw waste MSW and others above, with LCV presented below, and well researched by the University of Salamanca above at 2011, are much higher (up to triple) than some Brazil technical citations presented previously in works by professors and consultants in our country. Unfortunately, as y think, it seems that her are not yet correct conditions for this type of correct diagnoses and some local measurements of MSW and others contents, quality and possible calorific values of raw waste MSW and such waste are expensive and only carried out at the field and some laboratory level by the bold technicians of specialized companies like Praxair/White Martins or Linde. Recalling that we know little about MSW syngas and biomass etc., I mention that only a few private companies that manufacture cellulose and biofuels have laboratories that can carry out such evaluations of LCV/HCV thermal contents and other fundamental items (H2 contents, plus in N2, idem CO2 and some harmful gases) and this only in their forest or agricultural raw materials, but, in general, they are very secret data or very expensive data. Exams carried out by specialized public or private universities are, in general, time consuming and not very comprehensive.

On average (Table 3 of the link above), as the Salamanca at 2011, the organic-only part of municipal waste has a Higher Calorific Power (HCP/GCV = HCV) of 3,562 kcal/kg (=14,905 kj/kg), compared to 3,522 kcal/kg (= 14,739 kj/kg). ) of paper and cardboard; 5,495 kcal/kg (= 22,995 kj/kg) of PET plastics; 9,847 kcal/kg (= 41,203 kj/kg) of the plastics mix; of 10,887 kcal/kg (= 45,552 kj/kg) of very cellulosic items such as twigs, lawns, etc.; 5,090 kcal/kg (= 21,298 kj/kg) from textiles and 4,499 kcal/kg (= 18,825 kj/kg) from wood residues with little cellulose.

In addition, in table 4 at the end of the same diagnosis above in English, it can be seen that the Lower Calorific Power (LCP = LCV) of previous RDF already with up to 22% moisture (in ours good RDF, the maximum moisture will be 16%) is 5,272 kcal/kg ( = 22,061 kj/kg), compared to 4,224 kcal/kg (=17,677 kj/kg) of LCV of the MSW that gave rise to that final RDF and MSW still with 47% of average humidity (In general, gross urban waste MSW has 50%-60% initial moisture while municipal sewage and landfill slurries/sludge have up to 80% moisture).

THE END.