Waste Management xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Waste Management
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/wasman

Waste to energy – key element for sustainable waste management

Paul H. Brunner ⇑, Helmut Rechberger
Vienna University of Technology, Institute for Water Quality, Resource and Waste Management, Austria

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Human activities inevitably result in wastes. The higher the material turnover, and the more complex and
Available online xxxx divers the materials produced, the more challenging it is for waste management to reach the goals of
‘‘protection of men and environment’’ and ‘‘resource conservation’’. Waste incineration, introduced
Keywords: originally for volume reduction and hygienic reasons, went through a long and intense development.
Waste to energy Together with prevention and recycling measures, waste to energy (WTE) facilities contribute signifi-
Air pollution control cantly to reaching the goals of waste management. Sophisticated air pollution control (APC) devices
Metal recovery
ensure that emissions are environmentally safe. Incinerators are crucial and unique for the complete
Bottom ash
Waste analysis
destruction of hazardous organic materials, to reduce risks due to pathogenic microorganisms and
Biogenic carbon viruses, and for concentrating valuable as well as toxic metals in certain fractions. Bottom ash and APC
Hazardous substances residues have become new sources of secondary metals, hence incineration has become a materials
recycling facility, too. WTE plants are supporting decisions about waste and environmental management:
They can routinely and cost effectively supply information about chemical waste composition as well as
about the ratio of biogenic to fossil carbon in MSW and off-gas.
Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction first step, the total turnover of materials in modern societies is

Waste management practices have evolved over many centu-
ries. While in the beginning, hygienic considerations were on top
of the priority list, the rapidly rising amount and complexity of
wastes became main issues of waste management in today’s
affluent societies. In parallel to the economic development, waste
management went through several stages to reach the high
technological level that is observed today. Sophisticated collection
systems, paired with efficient separation processes, allow high
recovery and recycling rates. Additionally, a large fraction of
municipal solid waste (MSW) is treated in waste to energy (WTE)
plants, and most toxic organic wastes are destroyed in hazardous
waste incinerators. In view of high and increasing recycling rates
and of growing investments into prevention measures, the
question arises, what the main function of thermal processes in
modern waste management is. Is incineration still necessary and
appropriate to fulfill waste management goals, or are other and
better means available?
The objective of this introductory paper is to investigate the role
thermal processes play for sustainable waste management. In a
⇑ Corresponding author. Address: Institute for Water Quality, Resource and
Waste Management, Vienna University of Technology, Karlsplatz 13/226, A-1040
Vienna, Austria. Tel.: +43 1 58801 226 41; fax: +43 1 58801 9 226 41.
E-mail address: paul.h.brunner@tuwien.ac.at (P.H. Brunner).
URL: http://iwr.tuwien.ac.at/en (P.H. Brunner).
summarized, because this anthropogenic metabolism determines
the wastes that have to be taken into account by any waste man-
agement system. Next, the goals of waste management, which
are crucial for the design of management strategies, are discussed.
The question is addressed how these goals can be reached, and
which contributions processes such as WTE can provide. Emphasis
is laid on the following topics: energy, materials, costs, and social
acceptance. The capacity of WTE to contribute to a recycling soci-
ety is investigated by assessing the potential to supply energy and
secondary materials from wastes.
A unique characteristic of this paper is the material balance
approach: Waste management and all corresponding treatment
processes are considered as input–output systems that have to
observe the requirement of the law about the conservation of
matter. This ensures a holistic view, affirming that valuable as well
as hazardous substances and energy are taken into account, from
entering waste management until disposal in final sinks. Also,
additional features of WTE are taken up such as the application
of incinerators for analytical purposes (waste composition, fraction
of biogenic carbon in waste input). Finally, reasons are summarized
why WTE is an indispensable part of every sustainable waste
management system.
This introduction focuses mainly on MSW incinerators (grate
furnaces and fluidized bed combustion) and does not cover all
available thermal waste treatment processes. Technologies such
as gasification (cf. Arena, 2012), pyrolysis (Malkow, 2004) and

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2014.02.003
0956-053X/Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article in press as: Brunner, P.H., Rechberger, H. Waste to energy – key element for sustainable waste management. Waste Management
(2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2014.02.003
2 P.H. Brunner, H. Rechberger / Waste Management xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
plasma arc (Pourali, 2010) treatment are discussed in other papers
of this special issue on thermal waste treatment. However, most
aspects that are considered in the following paragraphs are
independent of the type of thermal treatment, and the conclusions
hold true for a wide array of thermal treatment technologies.
2. Waste as a product of the metabolism of the anthroposphere
The sphere where human activities take place – the anthropo-
sphere – can be looked at as a living organism with inputs, stocks
and outputs. To operate this metabolism, materials are imported
from the earth’s crust or synthesized from precursors, and are uti-
lized over a certain time. Like any living organism, the anthropo-
sphere sets off materials. These are on one hand emissions to
water, air and soil, and on the other hand waste products gener-
ated by the use of consumer products and the replacement of
investment goods. Hence, waste management controls a large frac-
tion of the output of the anthropogenic metabolism. In order to
design and plan waste management systems, the metabolism of
the anthroposphere must be known. Without this knowledge,
neither future amounts of wastes nor its compositions can be
anticipated. In particular the stock of materials in long living goods
is of primordial importance, because this stock comprises the
largest amounts of bulk materials, and of hazardous materials, too.
The evolution of civilization goes hand in hand with a growing
per capita turnover of materials. During prehistoric times,
primitive men had a total throughput of about 6 t/capita and year,
consisting mostly of food, air, and water, and a few kilograms for
tools and clothing. In contrast, a modern citizen requires about
86 tons per capita and year just for the activities in his private
home and for transportation (cf. Table 1).
If larger system boundaries are taken into account, considering
all materials that are required to sustain urban life in a city (public
and private infrastructure such as buildings for administration,
education, sports, culture and leisure; roads, public transport;
industry, service industry, trade, and commerce), the material
turnover increases to about 200 tons per capita and year. An actu-
ally larger amount of material flows results if the total turnover is
regarded, including mining and production processes and their
respective tailings and wastes.
Even more striking is the growth in material stocks: While the
per capita belongings of primitive men amounted to less than
100 kg, the stock of his modern counterpart is about one thousand
times larger and amounts to more than 300 tons in his private
home (including transportation infrastructure), and even 400 tons
if the total urban metabolism is considered. The bulk of this stock
consists mainly of mixtures of sand, gravel, and stones (concrete,
bricks, other building materials), metals (iron, aluminum, zinc,
copper), plastics, and wood. In addition, many metal compounds
and thousands of organic substances are comprised in the stock
to ensure certain functions.
Table 1
Per capita material flows through private households in affluent societies (based on data from Baccini and Brunner, 2012).
Activity Input [t/c.y]
Total Water fraction
To nourisha 5.7 1.0
To clean 60 60
To reside 10 0 1.0
To transport 10 0 1.6
Total 86 61
a
Including air for breathing.
b
Change in stock [t/c.y].
Please cite this article in press as: Brunner, P.H., Rechberger, H. Waste to energy – key element for sustainable waste management. Waste Management
(2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2014.02.003
For waste management, the stock is important because it repre-
sents the future waste. Materials in the stock cannot be prevented,
they already exist and will eventually become obsolete. Thus, the
understanding of stock dynamics is important for early recognition
of waste amounts and compositions. Fast growing economies such
as some Asian countries still have a comparatively small material
stock which is now rapidly filled up. For these countries, input into
the economy is much larger than the output, thus to establish a recy-
cling market for long living materials is difficult due to the lack of
wastes for recycling. It will take several decades until the large
amounts of steel and construction materials come to their end of life
status and enter waste management and recycling. In contrast, ma-
ture societies with a highly developed infrastructure and lower
growth rates are more likely to have a waste output that can be com-
pared to the primary supply input. For these countries, recycling can
provide a major part of the commodities needed in the market.
For both types of metabolism – fast growing or mature – it is a
fact that all materials that are brought into the system at one point
in time will turn into waste. The only exceptions are dissipative
emissions during the life time of the material (e.g. CO2, or products
of weathering, corrosion, and erosion), and certain materials of very
high cultural value that are preserved ‘‘forever’’. Thus, it is impor-
tant not only to know the mass of the stock, but also its composition.
The content of materials in the anthropogenic stock changes
constantly and is as dynamic as the mass of the stock. While most
materials are inorganic and potentially well suited for recycling,
many organic substances are also contained in the stock. These or-
ganic materials comprise degradable substances such as cellulose
(wood) as well as refractory compounds such as PVC (polyvinyl-
chloride). The bulk of these substances, in particular polymers such
as PET (polyethylene terephthalate) or PP (polypropylene), are of
no health concern, but some are hazardous and are regulated as
so called POPs (persistent organic pollutants) by the Stockholm
convention. Today’s anthropogenic stock contains substances that
are out phased by the Stockholm convention, and thus are highly
restricted in their use; due to their hazardous properties, they can-
not be put on the market today as recycling products. Alternative
solutions are required.
The stock of hazardous organic materials is large, and amounts
globally to millions of tons. Because products often contain POPs,
such as the flame retardants polybrominated diphenylethers
(PBDEs) in plastic materials, the mass flows of materials containing
POPs are huge. This is also the case for certain heavy metals that
are added to polymers: in order to improve properties such as
resistance towards degradation by UV-light, temperature, chemi-
cals, and microorganisms, heavy metals like lead, zinc, tin,
antimony and others are used as additives for plastic materials.
The stock of PVC for instance holds large amounts of cadmium that
– in the past – has been used as a stabilizer in the range of 1–10 g
Cd per kg of PVC.
Although there is abundant data about the individual produc-
tion and consumption of goods and substances, there is no compre-
Output [t/c.y] Stock [t/c]
Solid waste Sewage Off gas
0.1 0.9 4.7 <0.1
0.02 60 0 0.10
0 7.6 120 + 1b
0 6.0 280 + 2b
2.7 61 19 300 + 3b
 P.H. Brunner, H. Rechberger / Waste Management xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
hensive, systematic, transparent, and readily available knowledge
base about materials in anthropogenic flows and stocks. Data sets
are punctual, are difficult to cross check, and include large and
often unknown uncertainties. It is thus possible but not easy to
derive waste generation and waste composition data from anthro-
pogenic metabolism data. If input (supply) data and output (waste)
data are combined and used for material balances, cross checking
allows decreasing uncertainties to a certain degree. It must be
kept in mind, that waste analyses are – mostly due to sampling
problems – associated with large errors that often are not detected
because of a lack of cross checking methodologies. If in future,
economic data from statistical offices, market research data, and
waste management data are organized in a mass balance oriented,
compatible and transparent way, a knowledge base of high value
could be established for waste management.
To summarize, wastes are the result of the anthropogenic
metabolism. Because of the very high throughput and stock of
materials in the anthroposphere, waste management has to cope
with large and increasing amounts of wastes. The composition of
the material flows and stocks is highly diverse, and contains all pos-
sible substances, hence waste management must be able to control
a very large array of beneficial and hazardous materials. Matters are
further aggravated by the fact that uncertainties about waste
amounts and composition are high and sometimes unknown.
3. Goals of waste management
Waste management has been established as a public service for
at least two millennia. While in the beginning of the first dense set-
tlements, hygienic considerations were on top of the priority list,
during the last decades the rapidly rising turnover of materials be-
came the main issue of waste management. The strategies to cope
with growing wastes were manifold, from removal of waste as fast
as possible, to bury and forget, to filter strategies, to recycling and
urban mining, and to today’s waste hierarchy. Although the strat-
egies and means varied, the goals of waste management proved
to be resistant to change over time. They can be summarized as fol-
lows: The objectives are the protection of men and the environ-
ment, and the conservation of resources such as materials,
energy and space. Already in the 1980ies, progressive countries
started to add a third objective, namely ‘‘after care free waste man-
agement – no export of waste related issues in time’’. Thus they
looked for means to reduce the burden for future generations
resulting from poor landfilling and from recycling wastes loaded
with hazardous substances. It is noteworthy that the third objec-
tive to protect future generations has been introduced before ‘‘sus-
tainability’’ became the predominant world view.
Today, it is well established that the main purpose of waste
management is to protect men and the environment. In many
countries, modern waste management fulfills this purpose so well
that it has faded from the public spotlight. It comes to the fore only
when a particular crisis takes place, such as the epidemics with
swine fever and bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), or
sewage sludge contaminated with radioactive fallout from the
Chernobyl disaster. In both cases, the public as well as politicians
highly appreciated the reliable technologies that modern waste
management offers to handle such crisis with large amounts of
wastes. Thermal treatment in cement kilns allows coping with
hygienic challenges such as BSE, and sludge incinerators can
decrease the volume of radioactive sludge to a small volume
suitable for disposal in special storage sites.
More in the focus of today are resource related issues:
‘‘Conservation of resources’’ appears to have surpassed the goal
of protection of men and the environment. A large benefit of
resource conservation and recycling is again the protection of
Please cite this article in press as: Brunner, P.H., Rechberger, H. Waste to energy – key element for sustainable waste management. Waste Management
(2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2014.02.003
3
men and environment: If wastes are recycled and secondary mate-
rials are used, less primary materials must be produced and taken
from the ground. Because mining requires more energy, water,
land, and materials, and causes by far more environmental pollu-
tion and workplace accidents, the recycling of goods represents a
large and significant contribution to protecting men and the
environment.
A second motivation for recycling, and today the main reason
for the focus on resource conservation, is the high volatility of re-
source prices, the corresponding temporarily reduced resource
availability, and sometimes also geopolitical resource consider-
ations. Rises in resource prices are a repeated phenomenon during
economic history, with recent peaks e.g. in the 1970ies and 2010s
and appertaining recycling booms in the waste world. Also, the
issue of geological resource scarcity is at times put forward. It is of-
ten discussed controversially because of the large uncertainties
regarding (i) reserves and resources, (ii) future resource needs,
and (iii) technologies available in distant times that are not yet
known and that can potentially expand the resource base consider-
ably (cf. fracking).
In order to reach the goals stated above, waste management
may only yield three kinds of products: recycling goods to replace
primary materials, residues well suited for landfilling with little
after care, and residual emissions that are small enough not to
harm the environment. This requires high-tech, environmentally
sound, and affordable waste treatment processes. Recycling must
yield ‘‘clean’’ cycles, separating harmful impurities from valuable
materials. Logistic systems must keep entropy low, increasing
substance concentration and thus minimizing the need for energy
input into waste management. If clean cycles are established,
recycling residues will be produced that need to be disposed of
carefully, hence ‘‘sinks’’ are required.
There are two types of sinks: For inorganic materials, sinks are
places on the planet where materials can be safely disposed of.
Such sinks are e.g. the sea sediment where calcium carbonate is
deposited, or a landfill of pre-treated bottom ash. For organic mate-
rials, sinks are transformation processes that destroy organic com-
pounds. Typical examples are biochemical or thermal processes,
where a substance such as cellulose or benzene is mineralized into
carbon dioxide and water. The sinks can be further classified into
natural sinks (sea, sediment, atmosphere, soil etc.) and anthropo-
genic (man-made) sinks. Anthropogenic sinks are usually supplied
by waste management. They comprise landfills, incinerators, and
other processes that transform organic compounds into mineral-
ized substances like water and carbon dioxide. The term ‘‘final
sink’’ stands either for a sink where a substance has a very long res-
idence time of >10,000 years, or for a transformation process
where a substance is completely transformed into other products.
To reach the goals of waste management requires technology,
know-how, administrative capacity, public acceptance, and first
of all sufficient financial resources. According to their economic
capacity, countries spend between 0.2% and 0.4% of their GDP
(gross domestic product) for waste management (Brunner and
Fellner, 2007). Taking into account per capita GDP ranges from a
couple of hundred US$ to several ten thousand US$, it becomes
clear that there is no uniform solution for all when attempting to
reach the goals of waste management. What is needed are tailor-
made, regionally adapted, and affordable concepts. They are likely
to be accepted by the public as solutions for their waste manage-
ment problems.
4. The evolution of waste incineration
How can waste incineration contribute to reaching the goals of
waste management? The earliest incinerators were built around
the end of the 18th century to overcome the practice of disposing
4 P.H. Brunner, H. Rechberger / Waste Management xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

of municipal solid wastes on agricultural fields. Farmers objected
to the decreasing nutrient value of MSW, and complained about
the increasing content of glass, ceramics and other constituents
that accumulated in their fields and harmed agricultural practice.
In the following, large towns such as Hamburg and London could
neither cope with the volume of waste within their territories,
nor could they dispose of wastes in their rivers Elbe or Thames
for hygienic reasons. Hence, they constructed the first rather sim-
ple incinerators, consisting of furnace and stack (de Fodor, 1911).
This practice contributed significantly to protecting the population
from hygienic problems such as cholera and typhoid fever that
were prevalent at the time. It also succeeded in reducing the vol-
ume of waste by a large fraction. In part, the resulting bottom
ash was used as a raw material to produce construction materials,
with unknown success.
For the first MSW incinerators, energy recovery was not a goal,
they were built for hygienic and volume reduction reasons. Mod-
ern WTE facilities transform the chemically bound energy of
MSW into heat and/or electricity. However, already 100 years ago
a few incinerators produced electricity and steam, too, as de Fodor
pointed out in 1911 in his seminal book on ‘‘Elektrizität aus
Kehricht’’ (‘‘Electricity from MSW’’) (de Fodor, 1911). Utilization
of energy became a technical requirement when sophisticated air
pollution control was introduced: The flue gas had to be cooled,
and this was best done by applying first a condensation cooler,
and later a heat exchanger. Heat was supplied if a consumer such
as a paper mill or a district heating system was available. Electric-
ity was produced in all other cases.
While this first generation of incineration plants contributed to
the protection of men and the environment with regards to haz-
ardous microorganisms and pests, it at the same time presented
a new chemical threat. Without any flue gas cleaning, and due to
the poor incineration conditions, emissions were high. It was not
surprising that incineration was opposed by the public due to the
new nuisances. However, because of the lack of knowledge in the
fields of air pollution and its control, it took several decades before
furnace technologies were improved and efficient filters came to
the market. In the 1950ies and 60ies, the first MSW incinerators
equipped with filters were installed. Some of these incinerators
made use of the energy in MSW by supplying it for town heating
or using it to produce electricity. Due to the increasing content of
aggressive constituents in MSW such as PVC (polyvinyl chloride)
decomposing to hydrochloric acid, the air pollution control (APC)
equipment required significant improvement before it could cope
with the beginning legislation. Still, the results of waste incinera-
tion were an environmental disaster (Brunner and Zobrist, 1983).
It took a new generation of science, technology, and legislation
to perform the quantum leap that was necessary to improve incin-
eration to the point that it became a valuable means to reach the
goals of waste management. The initial trigger was public opposi-
tion, which made it impossible to install new waste incinerators.
Investigations into the surroundings of waste incinerators showed
high accumulations first of heavy metals, later also of chlorinated
aromatic compounds such as dioxins and furans. Hence, legislators
included additional parameters in their emission regulations, such
as volatile heavy metals and dioxins. In particular, the limitation of
mercury and dioxins proved to be a quantum leap, because it
required completely new technologies to remove these constitu-
ents from the off-gas. The old filter technologies that were based
on cyclones and sometimes on one-chamber electrostatic precipi-
tators were superseded by modern multi-stage filter systems.
These wet and dry systems did not only eliminate the bulk of the
fly ash as the previous filters, but they also were capable of remov-
ing fine particulates. This is especially important because these fine
particles are carriers of heavy metals and POPs. As a consequence,
the fly ash content of flue gas was continuously reduced from
>150 mg/Nm3 to <5 mg/Nm3. For specific substances such as lead
and cadmium a more than thousand fold decrease in emissions
resulted.
Besides off gas, incinerators produce bottom ash and air
pollution control residues (cf. Fig. 1). Today, these residues are
treated with much more care than in the beginning of incineration
when they have been used as soil conditioner, construction mate-
rial and the like. While bottom ash is now landfilled or specially
treated for use in construction, APC residues are enriched in heavy
metals and are more hazardous. They are disposed of in
underground storages. The latest development is to extract
secondary resources such as iron, aluminum, copper, zinc and
other metals from these residues. Thus, in the future, incineration
is likely to become a means to conserve resources by both utilizing
energy and recycling materials.
5. Objectives of modern waste to energy plants
The potential of waste incineration goes way beyond fulfilling
the first goal of waste management as stated above. Modern
WTE plants can contribute significantly to the second and third
goals as well (resource conservation, and minimization of after-
care). Thus, the objectives of incineration must be newly defined.
The original goals of sanitation and volume reduction are still valid
and are becoming even more important today: Biological risks are
on the increase, and the urban sprawl prohibits the siting of new
landfills close to population centres. Additionally, environmental
protection has become a major goal for incineration. It has to be
kept in mind that the output of the metabolism of the anthropo-
sphere contains large amounts of hazardous organic materials that
cannot be recycled. For these substances, thermal destruction by
WTE is the main path towards a sustainable solution. Without
incineration, the risks originating from these compounds could
not be managed. Well designed and operated incinerators are
excellent ‘‘final sinks’’ for most hazardous organic substances such
as POPs. Refractory organic materials are mineralized in a con-
trolled way, and are converted into CO2, H2O and – depending on
their composition – inorganic halogen compounds.
Hence, today the goals of waste management can be summa-
rized as follows:
 hygienisation,
 volume reduction,
 environmental protection,
 mineralization and immobilization of hazardous substances,
 resource conservation,
 affordable costs and public acceptance.
5.1. Hygienisation
One of the main advantages of thermal treatment is the
complete destruction of any living organisms due to the off-gas
temperature of >850 °C at a residence time of >2 s. In contrast to
other waste treatment processes such as composting or mechani-
cal treatment, all bacteria, viruses, prions and the like are reliably
destroyed by incineration. This is of particular importance in case
of epidemics, when large amounts of infectious materials may have
to be disposed of. Also, in order to cope with the problem of inva-
sive plants and pests, thermal treatment is a dependable means for
disposal.
5.2. Volume reduction
The mass reduction by incineration is displayed in Fig. 1:
Depending on the composition of MSW and the specific

Please cite this article in press as: Brunner, P.H., Rechberger, H. Waste to energy – key element for sustainable waste management. Waste Management
(2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2014.02.003
 P.H. Brunner, H. Rechberger / Waste Management xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
Fig. 1. Typical mass flows through a waste to energy facility equipped with dry (ESP) and wet air pollution control systems, in kg per kg of MSW. In addition to the flows
presented in this figure, about 5 kg of air are required for combustion, increasing the amount of flue gas by the same extent.
combustion and APC technology, the mass ratio of MSW to bottom
ash is about 4:1, and of bottom ash to APC residue about 10:1.
Thus, about three fourth of the mass of MSW are released by the
off-gas. In terms of volume, the reduction from MSW to solid
residues is about tenfold. An exact number is difficult to present
because of the ambiguous definition of the density of MSW, and
the point of reference. It has to be kept in mind that waste is
compacted first at the household level, then in the collection
vehicle, and changes again the density when landfilled or mixed
in the bunker of the incinerator. In any case, incineration is by
far the most powerful treatment for volume reduction, and thus
conservation of landfill space.
5.3. Environmental protection
One of the main objectives of incineration is environmental pro-
tection. Wastes may contain ‘‘everything’’, hence emissions from
badly controlled incinerators may also comprise a large array of
hazards. While in the past, incinerators have been key sources of
pollutants such as dust, hydrochloric acid, carbon monoxide, poly
aromatic hydrocarbons, and dioxins and furans, today they are
clear sinks for all organic and many inorganic substances. Emis-
sions of modern WTE plants are able to clearly undercut the most
stringent of present air pollution standards (see paper by XY in this
special issue). For successful clean air management, it is crucial to
allocate the different wastes to appropriate combustion facilities
with adequate air pollution control.
Combustible wastes comprise MSW and other waste types such
as hazardous waste, commercial waste, industrial waste, construc-
tion and demolition waste, sewage sludge from municipal and
industrial wastewater treatment plants. A survey in Austria
(Fehringer et al., 1997) reveals that typically about 1 ton of com-
bustible wastes is generated per capita and year. Table 2 gives a
rough indication of the distribution of the various waste types,
including their content in energy and cadmium. There are distinc-
tive differences with respect to contamination with hazardous
constituents, requiring clear regulation for assigning specific waste
streams to appropriate combustion and APC technologies.
For example, there is a large fraction of comparatively clean
wastes (clean wood, saw dust, uncontaminated paper) that is
appropriate to be utilized in common industrial boilers. However,
there is also a significant fraction of highly contaminated wastes
(besides MSW these are certain mixed plastic fractions, combusti-
ble fractions from construction and demolition waste, hazardous
wastes) that require the treatment in specialized combustion
Please cite this article in press as: Brunner, P.H., Rechberger, H. Waste to energy – key element for sustainable waste management. Waste Management
(2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2014.02.003
5
facilities with advanced air pollution control. There is no correla-
tion between heating value and grade of contamination (cf.
Fig. 2). Hence it is necessary to chemically characterize wastes
prior to combustion. Such analysis, which is often laborious and
costly is not required if combustion takes place in facilities with
advanced air pollution control, because such technology can han-
dle also high concentrations of contaminants. It should be remem-
bered that waste inputs into collection systems are hard to control,
thus robust waste treatment processes are indispensable.
The selection of an APC system is determined by legislation and
cost effectiveness. It is important to include the total incinerator sys-
tem for an assessment: For instance, wet systems discharge the salts
immediately into the receiving waters, and require a certain size of
dilution capacity. If a dry system is chosen, and the APC residues are
landfilled, this may result in the slow release of a large amount of
salts over a long time period. A third solution is to recycle the salts
by recovering them from brine or solid residue, which in both cases
is costly. Hence, for environmental assessment, it is necessary to
analyze the total waste treatment system with all inputs and down-
stream processes such as disposal or reuse of filter residues, and to
follow material flows over larger hydrological scales and times.
Air pollution control results in filter residues. Depending on the
APC technologies applied, these residues are liquid, solid or both. If a
dry control system is chosen, the product consists of solid filter dust,
enriched by a neutralization agent to remove acids from flue gas.
Wet systems produce typically waste water to be purified, sludge
from sewage treatment, and dry material from particulate removal.
Bottom ash is usually landfilled after pre-treatment (magnetic
separation of iron, possibly followed by curing in water and air).
This results – besides a significant load of salts – in little emissions
because of the comparatively high pH of the produced leachate.
Depending on the quality of the oxidation process in the furnace
(residence time, temperature, turbulence, air flow and oxygen con-
tent), landfilling of bottom ash may yield more or less emissions of
dissolved organic carbon (DOC), too. In the very long term, bottom
ash landfills may leach some metals if they turn from an anaerobic
to an aerobic state.
5.4. Mineralization and immobilization
The main advantage of incineration over all other waste treat-
ment processes is the mineralization of organic substances that
is the conversion of CxHyOz to carbon dioxide and water. Taking
into account the many million tons of refractory organic sub-
stances that are produced each year, incineration is a key process
6 P.H. Brunner, H. Rechberger / Waste Management xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

Table 2
The composition of combustible wastes differs from conventional fuels and ranges from harmless to hazardous; HV = lower heating value (after Fehringer et al., 1997).

C N S Cl Cd Hg Pb Zn HV
g/kg g/kg g/kg g/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg MJ/kg
All combustible wastes
Mean 450 9.1 2.3 4.3 5.7 0.8 230 520 13
Min 100 0.20 0.06 0.010 0.01 0.001 <1 1 5
Max 900 670 17 480 500 10 4000 16 000 41
Specific combustible wastes and fuels
Sawdust 470 0.3 1.0 0.60 0.8 0.02 3 30 17
Mixed plastics 640 7.9 0.70 17 73 1.3 390 550 25–35
MSW 240 7.0 4.0 8.7 11 2 810 1 100 10
Coal 850 12.0 10 1.5 1 0.5 80 85 30
Fuel oil 850 3.0 15 0.010 <1 0.01 10 20 41

5.5. Resource conservation

Fig. 2. Heating value and Cd content of combustible wastes in Austria (Fehringer
et al., 1997). A: sludge, uncontaminated wood, bark, paper; B: waste oil, chipboard
wood, coal dust, screenings, rejects, etc.; C: bulky waste, end-of-life tires, adhesive,
rubber, solvents, dyes; D: MSW; E: various plastics.
to safely dispose of these substances by mineralization, converting
them into harmless end products. Based on the heterogeneity of
MSW and wastes in general, complete mineralization is a major
challenge. In contrast to natural gas, fuel oil, and even coal, the com-
bustion of MSW requires special measures for complete mineraliza-
tion. Furnace residence times must be longer, and designing the
furnace and grate is more demanding. Best MSW incinerators come
close to the mineralization efficiency of coal fired power plants (Corg
to Cmineral  99%). High mineralization efficiency is important also
because of the remaining organic carbon in bottom ash and APC res-
idues. Organic carbon is potentially degradable, producing organic
acids and finally CO2 and thus reducing the pH of ash deposits.
The residues of incineration are often landfilled or disposed of
in underground storage sites. It is important that the interaction
with water does not result in emissions to the environment. Bot-
tom ash and APC residues both contain salts such as chlorides, sul-
phates and nitrates which are partly soluble in water. Hence,
before safe disposal, the residues have to be treated in order to
ensure low chemical mobility and hydraulic permeability.
Stabilization with cement reduces infiltration of water. Control of
pH, redox conditions, and chemical speciation are important for
ensuring immobilization of both bottom ash and APC residues.
5.5.1. Materials
The products of incineration represent both, hazardous materi-
als and resources. By additional treatment, they can be upgraded to
valuable products separating the hazardous substances from the
rest. In principle, the additional treatment is determined by
economics: If there is a market for the products, and if there are
technologies available that can competitively upgrade residues
for this market, incineration products will be recycled. At present,
several new technologies are developed in this field.
During incineration, atmophilic metals are highly enriched in
APC residues, and lithophilic substances accumulate in bottom
ash. Incinerators can act as concentrators for many substances,
which is a prerequisite for successful material recovery. Hence,
attempts for upgrading bottom ash are manifold. As mentioned
above, since the beginning of incineration, ash was used as a pre-
cursor to produce construction materials. This practice disap-
peared and returned with increasing regularity. Unfortunately,
while many statements about the utilization of bottom ash in con-
struction can be found, the reasons for discontinuing the utilization
of bottom ash are not documented. Hence, it is not known if long
term technical failures or economic aspects are the cause for the
fact that still today most bottom ash is landfilled. What in contrast
is known is that the relevance of bottom ash use for resource
conservation is small: Processed bottom ash could substitute
gravel in certain applications such as in road construction. Today’s
consumption of gravel amounts roughly to 5.000 kg per capita and
year. Compared to this the maximally possible generation of bot-
tom ash from MSW incineration is 50–100 kg per capita and year,
substituting 1–2% of primary resources. The chemical composition
of mechanically processed bottom ash differs much from the qual-
ity of natural gravel, and it is likely that a significant load of heavy
metals is introduced into the road network. This on one hand
potentially contaminates soil and groundwater over long time
periods. On the other hand, it hampers future recycling of road
construction materials. Thus, when applying bottom ash for
construction, the goals of ‘‘protection of men and the environment’’
and of ‘‘resource conservation’’ have to be carefully compared and
weighted against each other.
A number of valuable materials such as iron, stainless steel, alu-
minum, copper, and brass are concentrated in the bottom ash.
Intensive characterization has shown that some metals are present
in metallic form, and not as an oxide or other compound (Skutan
and Rechberger, 2007; Mitterbauer et al., 2009). Thus, for example,
Fig. 3 shows that more than 50% of the copper contained in the
bottom ash is potentially recoverable by a mechanical process;
particles larger than 1 mm are considered to be detectable and
removable by a combination of spectroscopic detection and
pneumatic/mechanical separators. Technological development

Please cite this article in press as: Brunner, P.H., Rechberger, H. Waste to energy – key element for sustainable waste management. Waste Management
(2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2014.02.003
 P.H. Brunner, H. Rechberger / Waste Management xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
such as dry bottom ash withdrawal and separation of smallest par-
ticles from bottom ash will increase the metal recovery rate of WTE
facilities further (Morf et al., 2013). Today’s efforts are directed to-
wards complete recycling of bottom ash by metal extraction and
upgrading the remaining fraction to a construction material. Such
progress allows reconsidering the current practice of separate
metal collection by the consumer. It may well be that in future,
the optimal point of collection with respect to recovery efficiency
and costs is shifted from prior to post combustion.
For APC residues, too, new concepts are developed to increase
resource efficiency: Abundant metals such as zinc, iron, lead,
copper, aluminum (Table 3) are potentially recoverable from fly
ashes, either by wet-chemical (by acid and/or alkaline washing)
or thermo-chemical processes (Kuboňová et al., 2013). Such a full
scale plant is in operation in Switzerland recovering zinc from
APC residues by solvent-extraction and electrolysis. The commer-
cial product contains 99,995% zinc, representing 50% of the input
of Zn via MSW. In addition, a mixture of cadmium, lead, and copper
is recovered as a secondary resource, too (Schlumberger and
Bühler, 2013). It remains to be seen how economic and environ-
mentally sound these new concepts will be when implemented
in practice on a large scale.
5.5.2. Energy
In modern countries, energy in MSW and other wastes amounts
to around 5% of the total energy demand. The effective utilization
of this energy thus can reduce the demand of other energy carriers
such as fossil fuels. MSW is a comparably heterogeneous fuel of
complex composition, and therefore difficult to process. Especially
the high contents of chlorine and sulphur in MSW result in large
concentrations of acids in the raw gas. In order to keep boiler cor-
rosion low, the steam parameters in typical WTE facilities are lim-
ited to 400 °C and 40 bar. Conventional thermal power plants that
are fired with fossil fuels realize steam parameters up to 550 °C
and 250 bar. The low steam parameters of WTE are responsible
for comparably low energy efficiencies.
Fig. 4 displays energy balances for two typical cases (ÖWAV,
2013): The facility on the left hand side produces only electricity
(Case A). Around 20% of the energy is lost via off-gas, discharge
of the ashes and losses by radiation, convection, and heat conduc-
tion. The largest fraction (56%) is lost via steam condensation and,
to a minor extent, losses in the generator. The facility itself
consumes 2.6% of the produced electricity to run fans, pumps
and other aggregates. The overall efficiency for electricity produc-
tion from MSW amounts to some 21%.
On the right hand side of Fig. 4 (Case B), the steam is not fully
expanded in the turbine resulting in a lower electricity production
but a higher steam temperature after the turbine (150–200 °C
instead of 30–40 °C on the left side). Such a heat stream can be
Fig. 3. Occurrence of selected metals in different fractions of MSW bottom ash after
magnetic separation of iron (Skutan and Rechberger, 2007).
Please cite this article in press as: Brunner, P.H., Rechberger, H. Waste to energy – key element for sustainable waste management. Waste Management
(2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2014.02.003
7
used for district heating. The heat of condensation is not lost to
the environment but used. The total thermal efficiency of such a
combination can be as high as 74%. However, for a technically
sound comparison of energy efficiencies of power plants the
exergetic efficiency has to be applied. In the example of Fig. 4 this
would be:
MSW ¼ 100% exergy
Electricity ¼ 100% exergy
Exergy of heat ¼ Flow of heatðQ Þ  Carnot efficiency ðg ¼ 1  T E =T H Þ
T E ¼ Temperature of the environment ð15  C ¼ 288 KÞ
T H ¼ Thermodynamic medium temperature of Q
T H ¼ ðT 1  T 2 Þ= lnðT 1 =T 2 Þ
T 1 ¼ Outgoing temperature ð150  C ¼ 423 KÞ
T 2 ¼ Return temperature ð50  C ¼ 323 KÞ
T H ¼ 371 K and g ¼ 0:233
The exergetic efficiencies for Case A and B then are:
gex;A ¼ 21:2% gex;B ¼ ð6:0 þ 68:4  0:233Þ ¼ 21:3%
This shows that from a technical point of view both technolo-
gies perform rather identical. Therefore, none of all possible energy
conversion systems should be generally favored as long as the
exergetic efficiency is in the range of >20 %. The selection of an
optimal energy conversion system for a specific site has to be
rather based on economic and demand considerations. Efforts are
made to increase the steam parameters of WTE facilities to reach
exergetic efficiencies up to 30%. Instrumental for such progress is
a combination of measures such as: improved boiler design,
utilization of advanced materials, optimized configuration of
the water–steam cycle, intermediate superheating, lower conden-
sation pressure, reduction of excess oxygen, and improved mainte-
nance intervals.
5.6. Affordable costs and acceptance by the public
To reach public acceptance is particularly difficult for waste
treatment systems that had a difficult and controversial past, and
that are expensive. The high costs of incineration plants are mainly
due to the sophisticated air pollution control systems that require
additional measures such as a waste water treatment, APC residue
treatment and disposal. Also, energy supply and bottom ash treat-
ment and disposal are additional cost factors. For environmentally
sound MSW incineration, a minimum standard of APC and residue
treatment is mandatory, hence cutting incineration costs is limited
by emission regulations. As mentioned before, cost optimizations
have to be performed taking the total system including long-term
costs arising from disposal of residues into account. Such optimiza-
tions will be based on regional aspects, too (availability of
receiving waters for effluents, frequency and intensity of inversion
layers, other sources of pollution). In any case, if incineration is not
cost competitive, market penetration will be difficult. This is the
challenge for emerging economies that can hardly afford waste
to energy plants due to the high costs. Since the willingness to
pay for waste management ranges between 0.2% and 0.4% of GDP
(Brunner and Fellner, 2007), and incineration costs are around
100 US$ per ton of MSW, WTE it is out of the reach of countries
with a per capita GDP of 300–3000 US$. Even if incineration costs
8 P.H. Brunner, H. Rechberger / Waste Management xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

Table 3
Metal content in fly ashes from Swiss WTE facilities (Schlumberger and Bühler 2013).

Substance Concentration [mg/kg DS] Substance Concentration [mg/kg DS]

Min Max Min Max
Aluminum 25,000 45,000 Copper 1500 5000
Antimony 700 5000 Magnesium 6000 18,000
Arsenic 20 120 Manganese 400 900
Barium 50 200 Sodium 25,000 70,000
Lead 7000 25,000 Nickel 60 300
Cadmium 150 1000 Mercury 0 3
Calcium 100,000 250,000 Silver 30 60
Chrome 100 500 Silicon 50,000 100,000
Cobalt 20 100 Titan 2500 5000
Iron 18,000 55,000 Zinc 20,000 120,000
Potassium 30,000 60,000 Tin 800 3000

Fig. 4. Typical energy balances of WTE facilities. Case A: maximum electricity production; Case B: heat-power coupling (ÖWAV, 2013).

are reduced by half, this situation does not change much for low
income countries.
Public acceptance of WTE plants has improved during the past
decades. Fundamental opposition has become rare because avail-
able, transparent and independent information about the pros
and cons of incineration allows drawing objective conclusions
about this technology. In particular, it has been shown by
numerous environmental impact statements that MSW incinera-
tion can be performed in an environmentally sound manner. While
this information alone does not guarantee public acceptance, the
open, transparent, and trustful involvement of the public in the
decision process has most often improved community approval
for incineration.
6. Additional benefits of thermal waste treatment for waste
management
Reliable analysis of MSW and other wastes is a necessary but
time consuming and costly operation. Particularly, if waste compo-
sition is to be followed over longer time periods, financial
constraints usually demand that sample size and frequency remain
small, and thus uncertainty is high. Incinerators are highly useful
tools for monitoring waste composition and waste-born substance
flows over longer time periods. Since WTE facilities transform
heterogeneous wastes into comparatively homogeneous residues,
they are well suited for accurate and cost-effective monitoring of
MSW composition (Brunner and Mönch, 1986; Brunner and Ernst,
1986). The principle consists of a first elaborate mass balance of
the incinerator including error propagation, followed by routine
measurements of a reduced amount of samples of the incineration
residues (Morf et al., 2013; Bauer, 1995). Based on the initial mass
balance, MSW can be characterized by analyzing a single incinera-
tion product such as fly ash only (Morf and Brunner, 1998). An
example is given in Table 4, demonstrating how temporal trends
of changes in MSW composition can be detected, and how the
results can be used for evaluating the effectiveness of waste related
regulations about hazardous materials (e.g. Hg in batteries,
thermometers, small WEEE) (Morf et al., 2005). The case study
illustrates that only Cadmium shows a significant trend during
the period from 2000 to 2004, which is likely due to the ban of
Cd in plastic additives, and the continuous replacement of Cd by
Lithium in rechargeable accumulators.
A similar approach has been developed to determine (i) the
emissions of fossil and biogenic carbon dioxide from WTE facilities,
and (ii) the fossil and biogenic fractions of the heating value of the
waste incinerated. These values are relevant for greenhouse gas
inventories, for emission trading schemes ETS (e.g. in Sweden
and Denmark where WTE is included in the ETS), or for the
determination of the ‘‘green’’ fraction of electricity or heat

Please cite this article in press as: Brunner, P.H., Rechberger, H. Waste to energy – key element for sustainable waste management. Waste Management
(2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2014.02.003
 P.H. Brunner, H. Rechberger / Waste Management xxx (2014) xxx–xxx 9

Table 4
Trends in MSW composition, as measured by balancing incineration products in Vienna during 2000–2004, in (g/kg MSW) (Morf et al. 2005).

Element 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 MW (00–04) Trend 2000–2004 Significance
C 195 ± 21 198 ± 10 184 ± 10 190 ± 12 185 ± 9 190 ± 5 –
Cl 4.8 ± 0.7 4.9 ± 1 4.6 ± 0.2 4.5 ± 0.2 5.5 ± 0.5 4.9 ± 0.3 not sign.
Fe 28 ± 2 28 ± 2 27 ± 2 29 ± 2 28 ± 3 28 ± 9 –
Al 10.0 ± 1.2 11.2 ± 1.8 7.5 ± 0.6 11.8 ± 2 11.6 ± 2 10.6 ± 0.8 marginal sign.
Pb 0.24 ± 0.05 0.33 ± 0.06 0.27 ± 0.03 0.26 ± 0.04 0.32 ± 0.08 0.29 ± 0.024 not sign.
Zn 0.57 ± 0.07 0.61 ± 0.06 0.60 ± 0.05 0.52 ± 0.05 0.53 ± 0.05 0.56 ± 0.025 –
Cu 0.24 ± 0.05 0.31 ± 0.07 0.27 ± 0.02 0.29 ± 0.05 0.35 ± 0.07 0.30 ± 0.024 not sign.
Cd 0.0071 ± 0.0008 0.0068 ± 0.001 0.0057 ± 0.0005 0.0049 ± 0.0004 0.0050 ± 0.0005 0.0058 ± 0.00035 sign.

Hg 0.0011 ± 0.0002 0.00084 ± 0.00011 0.00091 ± 0.0001 0.00097 ± 0.0002 0.00074 ± 0.0001 0.00089 ± 0.00007 marginal sign.

Fig. 5. Monthly and daily mean values of specific fossil CO2 emissions from a WTE plant and the resulting annual average of biogenic and fossil CO2 emissions (Obermoser
et al., 2009).

produced. The so-called balance method calculates these numbers
by solving a set of equations (Fellner et al., 2007). Data required are
available from literature (e.g. mean composition of biomass), and
from operating data routinely measured in WTE plants. Thus, no
additional measurements are required. Hence the balance method
is easy to implement on an incinerator by installing an available
software (BIOMA) directly linked to the operating system of the
WTE facility. The advantages are: statistically derived uncertainty
of the result, temporal resolution of the results from daily to
annual mean values, and virtually no operational costs. Fig. 5
provides exemplary results and proves that daily values may vary
considerably. Therefore measurement campaigns over a few days
or even some weeks will not deliver reliable results. The uncertain-
ties of the balance method are highest for daily values and are
reduced to <5% relative for annual results (Obermoser et al., 2009).
7. Summary and conclusions
Unprecedented technological and economic progress during the
last centuries resulted in a very large and still growing production
and consumption of materials. Today‘s human activities depend on
high and sophisticated material flows and stocks. Inevitably, this
large growth rate at the input side of the anthropogenic metabo-
lism entails a similar increase at the output side. Because the
largest flow of solid materials consists of long living construction
materials, the amount of wastes that eventually must be treated
will be much bigger than todaýs waste flows.
In parallel to the phenomenon of growth, the material turnover
also changed in composition. A large range of organic substances
such as wood and its derivatives, plastic materials, dyes and paints,
solvents, and pharmaceuticals are produced in increasing amounts.
New products, especially in the electronic sector, contain new sub-
stances that have never been used before in consumer goods. The
use of highly compounded materials is on the rise. Thus, wastes
are not only increasing in mass flow, but also in heterogeneity,
complexity, and in the content of new and sometimes hazardous
substances, particularly of organic origin and of trace elements.
Waste incineration is but one of many tools that waste manag-
ers have at their disposal. Some waste constituents are well suited
for separate collection and recycling or biological treatment. Some
are not and must be safely disposed of. The main objective of waste
incineration is to protect men and the environment from the haz-
ards that are resulting from the modern anthropogenic metabo-
lism: Incineration is the key tool to destroy hazardous organic
substances and to concentrate toxic metals in relatively small
amounts of filter residues. Combustion conditions in modern
WTE plants guarantee the complete mineralization of organic sub-
stances including refractory compounds such as POPs. Pathogens
and other microorganisms are reliably destroyed. Waste volume
is decreased by one order of magnitude. Because of sophisticated
APC, the resulting emissions are way below emission standards.
Technologies are available to immobilize incineration residues be-
fore disposal. Innovative attempts to recover metals from these
residues are successful and are supporting the recycling paradigm
of waste management, opening up new possibilities for alternative
collection schemes for several waste constituents. Hence, WTE is
on the way of becoming an important tool for material recycling
and resource conservation, too.

Please cite this article in press as: Brunner, P.H., Rechberger, H. Waste to energy – key element for sustainable waste management. Waste Management
(2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2014.02.003
10 P.H. Brunner, H. Rechberger / Waste Management xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
First priority of waste incineration is the protection of the
environment: There is no other means in waste management to
prevent hazardous organic wastes from entering the environment
and to concentrate heavy metals in small amounts of residues.
Nevertheless, to recover energy from waste is also of relevance,
even if all wastes produced cannot satisfy more than a few
percentages of a national energy demand. On a regional level,
and embedded in a smart energy grid, MSW incineration contrib-
utes positively to a low carbon energy supply, reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases.
Incinerators have a considerable potential as an analytical tool
to support waste management. They can supply reliable and
comparatively inexpensive information about waste composition,
about trends in composition, and about the biogenic fraction in
MSW and other wastes. Because incinerators have been in the
focus of public attention for a long time, they are very well inves-
tigated facilities with little unknowns. This is of great value for
decision makers because they have proven and reliable informa-
tion at hand. When comparing new and alternative scenarios, or
when performing environmental impact statements, transfer coef-
ficients of thermal processes allow rigid and impartial comparison
based on proven, hard facts.
To conclude, modern incineration has gone a long way of
intense development towards an environmentally sound practice
of waste management. No other waste treatment process was so
much in the focus of public debates and regulation. This publicity
was a very strong motivation for improving incineration technol-
ogy to today’s state, where total emissions of WTE plants are at a
scale that does not impact the environment anymore. It is safe to
say that, thanks to the highly developed combustion and air pollu-
tion technology, state of the art waste incineration reaches the first
goal of waste management ’’protection of men and the environ-
ment’’, and is also on the verge of becoming a relevant player for
resource conservation and materials recovery, the second goal of
waste management.
References
Arena, U., 2012. Process and technological aspects of municipal solid waste
gasification. A review. Waste Manage. 32 (4), 625–639.
Baccini, P., Brunner, P.H., 2012. Metabolism of the Anthroposphere – Analysis,
Evaluation and Design, second ed. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Bauer, G., 1995. Die Stoffflußanalyse von Prozessen der Abfallwirtschaft unter
Berücksichtigung der Unsicherheit. PhD Thesis, Vienna University of
Technology.
Please cite this article in press as: Brunner, P.H., Rechberger, H. Waste to energy – key element for sustainable waste management. Waste Management
(2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2014.02.003
Brunner, P.H., Ernst, W., 1986. Alternative methods for the analysis of municipal
solid wastes. Waste Manage. Res. 4, 147–160.
Brunner, P.H., Fellner, J., 2007. Setting priorities for waste management strategies in
developing countries. Waste Manage. Res. 25, 234–240.
Brunner, P.H., Mönch, H., 1986. The flux of metals through municipal solid waste
incinerators. Waste Manage. Res. 4, 105–119.
Brunner, P.H., Zobrist, J., 1983. Die Müllverbrennung als Quelle vonMetallen in der
Umwelt [Solid Waste Incineration as a Source of Metals in the Environment].
Müll und Abfall 9, 221–227.
de Fodor, E., 1911. Elektrizität aus Kehricht. Reprinted by MABEG, Budapest.
Fehringer, R., Rechberger, H., Pesonen, H.-L., Brunner, P.H., 1997. Auswirkungen
unterschiedlicher Szenarien der thermischen Verwertung von Abfällen in
Österreich. Vienna University of Technology, Institute for Water Quality,
Resource and Waste Management, Vienna, Austria.
Fellner, J., Cencic, O., Rechberger, H., 2007. A new method to determine the ratio of
electricity production from fossil and biogenic sources in waste-to-energy
plants. Environ. Sci. Technol. 41, 2579–2586.
Kuboňová, L., Langová, Š., Nowak, B., Winter, F., 2013. Thermal and
hydrometallurgical recovery methods of heavy metals from municipal solid
waste fly ash. Waste Manage. 33, 2322–2327.
Malkow, T., 2004. Novel and innovative pyrolysis and gasification technologies for
energy efficient and environmentally sound MSW disposal. Waste Manage. 24
(1), 53–79.
Mitterbauer, G., Skutan, S., Rechberger, H., 2009. Charakterisierung der Rostasche
der MVA Dürnrohr im Hinblick auf die Rückgewinnung von Metallen, Institute
for Water Quality, Resource and Waste Management, Vienna University of
Technology, unpublished.
Morf, L.S., Brunner, P.H., 1998. The MSW incinerator as a monitoring tool for waste
management. Environ. Sci. Technol. 32, 1825–1831.
Morf, L.S., Brunner, P.H., Ritter, E., 2005. Online-Messung der Stoffbilanz auf der
MVA Spittelau, Endbericht – Synthese der Resultate 2000–2004, im Auftrag der
Magistratsabteilungen 22 und 48 der Stadt Wien und der Fernwärme Wien
GmbH.
Morf, L.S., Gloor, R., Haag, O., Haupt, M., Skutan, S., Di Lorenzo, F., Böni, D., 2013.
Precious metals and rare earth elements in municipal solid waste – sources and
fate in a Swiss incineration plant. Waste Manage. 33, 634–644.
Obermoser, M., Fellner, J., Rechberger, H., 2009. Determination of reliable CO2
emission factors for waste-to-energy plants. Waste Manage. Res. 27, 907–913.
ÖWAV – Österreichischer Wasser- und Abfallwirtschaftsverband, 2013.
Energetische Wirkungsgrade von Abfallverbrennungsanlagen, ÖWAV-
Regelblatt 519. Austrian Standards plus Publishing, 1020 Vienna, Heinestraße 2.
Pourali, M., 2010. Application of Plasma Gasification Technology in Waste to
Energy—Challenges and Opportunities. IEEE Trans. Sustainable Energy 1 (3),
125–130.
Schlumberger, S., Bühler, J., 2013. Metallrückgewinnung aus Filterstäuben der
thermischen Abfallbehandlung nach dem FLUREC-Verfahren. In: Thomé-
Kozmiensky (Ed.), Aschen – Schlacken – Stäube aus Abfallverbennung und
Metallurgie. TK Verlag Karl Thomé-Kozmiensky, Neuruppin, Germany, pp. 377–
396.
Skutan, S., Rechberger, H., 2007. Bestimmung von Stoffbilanzen und
Transferkoeffizienten für die Linie II der MVA Wels. Final Report, Institute for
Water Quality, Resource and Waste Management, Vienna University of
Technology.