Your discussion seems to be confused about how to get from combustion-based EfW to SAF as if only Fischer Tropsch technology is needed. You need carbon capture, hydrogen production and synthesis of methanol, and then FT as the final step. There are companies working on skipping the methanol step but nothing at TRL9 - yet at least.  The Achilles heel is the energy cost of producing hydrogen. 

There are many things that have yet to be addressed in this UK-ETS approach to EfW:

- C-14 analysis in a gaseous sample cannot be analysed in the UK and only one lab in Germany that I am aware of

- C-14 cannot provide any means of pass-through to the waste producer - as opposed to the EfW plant

- It is still not clear if pass-through of UK-ETS cost is to be regulated or how it is to be operationalised on an equitable basis

- pass-through of UK-ETS cost will be almost impossible to do on an equitable basis for a merchant plant with perhaps upwards of 20 contractors sending waste to the plant. It is theoretically relatively easy if a plant has one or two LA contracts for household waste

- it is easy to imagine a disincentive to the waste management contractor who is diligent about plastic removal but because of the pass-through difficulty finds himself charged the same gate fee as the contractor next door who saves money by not processing out much, if any, of his plastic content and sends it as is to the EfW Plant. 

A worthy cause Neville and I wish you and Paul zero blisters and that Islay treats you to a nice malt or two when you get there. As you get nearer to Scotland and particularly the west coast, make sure you have a midge net and some Smidge - in the right weather conditions the midges will drive you crazy otherwise!

Thank you for the insights, Dale. The unjustified fear of pollution from EfW often fomented by the media is not something unique to Canada. Permitting an EfW in the UK has always been difficult and sometimes impossible with some attracting thousands of objections and outrageous claims of dangerous emissions being made to further their cause. As you know EfW emissions are heavily regulated, and with the right technology and process design are significantly below both regulatory limits and all other combustion processes such as coal fired power plants. 

More significant perhaps, is the difference between the UK (and it seems Canada also) where we have historically regarded waste as a problem whereas in Scandinavia and indeed most of Europe they see waste as a resource - to be recycled where possible/sensible or converted into energy in the form of electricity and heat. Here our traditional, and indeed still commonly current designs are based on a premise that the approach needs to be one of still dealing with the problem in as cheap a way as possible and energy efficiency has not been part of the picture. So, we are still referring to EfW facilities as 'incinerators' - a misnomer if ever there was one. 

I believe your City of Hamilton is moving in the right direction.  

HI Keith - thanks for the article. Some good insights into why the UK DH uptake has been so poor. If I may please could I add a couple of issues that have also hindered and exemplify the problem:

1. There has been and I believe still is a fundamental difference between the European and UK view of waste. We think of waste as a problem while Europeans view waste as a resource. Simple but fundamental to everything waste related. 

2. As a very recent example of this view, we recently approached a very well-known large supermarket with a view to getting from them a commitment to connect to the planned DH infrastructure in Inverurie. The answer - they would not take any heat if it was sourced from waste. 

So, ignorance and discriminatory bias is still very prevalent it would seem. 

Excellent article Keith. It's interesting to see how recently and rapidly things have changed. I'm looking forward to reading your next instalment! 

Excellent summary and analysis Paul and Richard - thank you. 

Hi Paul - interesting article but you seem to correlate gate fees in SE Asia in terms of MWh rather than tonnes of waste through the gate? You state that '... - in Pakistan, for example, EfW tariffs of are $100 per MWh....'. I take this to mean (in context) that there is a government-led scheme where they guarantee a price of $100/MWh for power produced from an EfW. However, that is not a gate fee but essentially a CfD for power offtake - two different things and without a true gate fee I would suggest financially non-viable. On a trip a couple of years ago to Malaysia I looked at their waste disposal arrangements and put very simply at $20/tonne landfill fee, EfW is a non-starter - so you are correct, something needs to change. It is no different in many parts of the USA. In that State (California) of environmental stewardship held up as the world's go-to for how it should be done, they are closing EfW's and using landfill instead. Two steps back comes to mind!