The Future of Garbage
Image from Popular SciencePlasma gasefication has the potential to turn garbage into energy. It sounds futuristic, but it is being done today.
The process can take everything from household waste to toxic chemicals and “poof” turn them into nothing. Literally. The by-products are an obsidian like glass, and synthesis gas (or syngas) that can be converted into fuels like natural gas or highly sought after hydrogen.
Plasma gasefication is promising since municipal waste and overflowing landfills are becoming larger problems worldwide. Plus the process doesn’t produce air-polluting emissions like incinerators, a common but controversial landfill alternative.
Popular Science magazine featured a plasma conversion facility in Bristol, Connecticut, headed up by Joseph Longo. Longo is founder and CEO of Startech Environmental Corporation (one of about a dozen companies involved in furthering this technology) who has pioneered waste solutions such as the conventional trash compactor. Now he’s moved on to what could be the next generation of waste disposal.
[Plasma gasification] works a little like the big bang, only backward (you get nothing from something). Inside a sealed vessel made of stainless steel and filled with a stable gas—either pure nitrogen or, as in this case, ordinary air—a 650-volt current passing between two electrodes rips electrons from the air, converting the gas into plasma. Current flows continuously through this newly formed plasma, creating a field of extremely intense energy very much like lightning. The radiant energy of the plasma arc is so powerful, it disintegrates trash into its constituent elements by tearing apart molecular bonds. The system is capable of breaking down pretty much anything except nuclear waste, the isotopes of which are indestructible.
Perhaps the most amazing part of the process is that it’s self-sustaining. Just like your toaster, Startech’s Plasma Converter draws its power from the electrical grid to get started. The initialvoltage is about equal to the zap from a police stun gun. But once the cycle is under way, the 2,200˚F syngas is fed into a cooling system, generating steam that drives turbines to produce electricity. About two thirds of the power is siphoned off to run the converter; the rest can be used on-site for heating or electricity, or sold back to the utility grid. “Even a blackout would not stop the operation of the facility,” Longo says.
Plasma gasefication does sound like a dream come true. What could be better than eliminating massive amounts of waste from the world? The Popular Science article cites critics who point out that there are heavy metals in the obsidian-like glass byproduct, which breaks down easily in water and could contaminate soils and ground water if not disposed of properly. Others doubt the cleanliness of the syngas, which would serverely limit its use.
I wondered about some other unintended effects to this potential “solution” to our increasing garbage load. Even if plasma gasefication is the next step in dealing with the world’s waste, garbage would still need to be hauled to plasma converter sites. While the facilities would be considerably smaller than landfills, and much easier to place in close proximity to waste generating areas, it wouldn’t necessarily change the way waste is picked up (often with polluting diesel powered trucks) but simply where it is taken to.
Another issue that concerns me is that people might recycle less than they already do. One motivator to recycling is knowing that you’re eliminating waste in landfills and you’re promoting post-consumer content in products such as paper, and the reuse of metals such as aluminum. However, if plasma gasefication is implemented on a mass scale, and people stop worrying about the amount of waste generated since that waste will essentially disappear, recycled materials might decrease, prompting the increase of new materials or virgin products (ie. cutting of new trees rather than using recycled paper for new paper products.)
Additionally, the phasing out of landfills (if we get to that point) would also require businesses who have built up their operations using methane gas from landfill sites to find alternate means of generating this fuel source.
Overall, plasma gasefication is a very appealing solution for our increasing global waste problems, and we’ll be keeping an eye on its progress.
Tags: garbage, Green Tech, landfill, Physics and Engineering, plasma gasefication, Science and Tech, waste reduction

March 2nd, 2007 at 11:08 pm
It’s a common misconception that either WTE or gasification will lead to less recycling, but I’ve never seen the people making this assertion point to a WTE community with low recycling rates to prove the point. And advocates of the process point out that you tend to see more recycling associated with these facilities than you do with landfill cities.
That makes sense because some recyclable products have no energy in them and so make the WTE or plasma equipment less efficient.
And to the point about “virgin” products, using farmed trees for paper is a good way to sink carbon, since only the above ground parts of the trees are harvested, leaving the roots underground where they build the soil and sink carbon.
Converting closer to 100% of our waste stream either into new uses, new products, or energy would be a huge improvement. Avoiding landfills and the methane and CO2 they produce would be a positive if you’re concerned about GHG. Since a scandalously small percentage of our landfills have their methane converted to energy, I don’t see the loss of that energy source, if landfilling were ended in favor of gasification, as a decrease in the total amount of useful energy but an increase.
The GAIA folks need to get real about this. Or just grow up.
March 5th, 2007 at 8:09 pm
I am doing a project about how Garbage turns into electricity. Is there any other information i should know??
Mac
September 4th, 2007 at 7:31 am
Do you know of any actual projects operating in a commercial environment yet. For that matter are there any that really work in a test phase currently?
Thanks
Joe
October 17th, 2007 at 8:45 pm
I find the process and benefits of the plasma gasification intriguing and promising. I wish Joe Longo great success with his invention. There are no perfect solutions for creating clean energy or disposing of our waste; but Mr. Longo’s approach appears to be just about as good as it gets. I found Amy Stodghill’s commentary interesting and fair; however, I think her concerns are slightly misguided. She seems to primarily be concerned about a possible reduction in recycling and also in the pollution cause by transportation of trash to the gasification facility. Trash transportation occurs today whether going to a landfill or to a recycling center, so worst case there is no change with the gasification alternative. That said, recycling today is economically inefficient. It usually involves redundant trash pickups by those polluting garbage trucks that Ms. Stodghill is concerned about. Then, after you transport the materials, you need to put energy in, causing more pollution (and cost), in order to process the materials being recycled. It may not be PC to say it, but recycling itself is not really very environmentally friendly. Gasification should reduce transport costs and pollution (particularly in cities) by limiting the need for redundant pickups and also reducing travel distances. The net effect should be less pollution, efficient and clean power, and reduced dependency on foreign oil.
February 9th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
[...] Garbage Strategies [...]
June 9th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
[...] The Future of Garbage another way to make energy from waste [...]