Ann: WMRC Project Completion, page-99

Went through EMRC website and its proposed RRPark at Red Hill.

I was thinking that ANQ will also win this project but going through the numbers and possible rationale, can't be conclusive - or as "conclusive" as a self-interested shareholder too lazy to get on site can be.

If I have to bet, I'd bet ANQ will win EMRC. But not enough concrete evidence and way too much possibilities.

Thought I'd share what I found and hope you guys can fill in some gap and could make better sense of it. In particular the scalability of gasification.

Why it may not win, but unlikely to lose:

1. EMRC is developing a wood to energy pyrolysis plant at Hazelmere. We may assume they like the technology or the energy approach and 100% diversion... so could go for gasification. But they won't as I'll try to reason below;
2. Talis consultant (a guy name something King) was at a couple of EMRC council meetings. His presentation was closed-door affair so don't know what he recommends. Another council minute state that EMRC's chairman or head of waste infrastructure should meet again with, I think it was Phoenix Energy, and ask for one month extension on their Tender period for council to consider. This was August 2015 I think.
From googling and scanning a couple of Talis and King report, or report that cites them... King/Talis seem to recommend Gasification. I think this was recommended for some Southern region, also in WA. But I was scanning and didn't take these seriously as EMRC would make its own judgment and Talis' advise, I think, would depends on the council and their requirements.

---


Why ANQ may win EMRC:

1. As the timeline and updates on its website said, EMRC started out with a bunch of options for its RRPark and last year or in 2014 decided to only go for either Anaerobic Digestion (ANQ) or Gasification (PE). Note that pyrolysis was dropped off as an option for this RRPark.

2. EMRC decided, also stated on its website, that Red Hill is where the new RRP will be. It's the best option, they say.

3. EMRC already have a pyrolysis operation in development - I think Ansac got $5M recently from EMRC/WA gov't grant to begin design and implementation. This is Hazelmere.


Hazelmere and Red Hill were the two options for the new RRP, but it was decided that Red Hill is most suitable. Why?

If you are going to go for gasification, turning waste to energy... Why not also do it at the same site you're collecting mattresses and timber and producing feedstock for fueling from pyrolysis.

Would make more sense to have a gasification plant on the same site with relatively flamable source material to generate power - at Hazelmere.

Further, as their more precise proposed location indicate (below), the new RRPark will only be 400m from residents. I'd be pretty upset if council decides the built a big massive power plant 400m from where I live... but then I also live next to a tip so maybe no ground to complaint?

But on a more serious note, whatever is proposed was rejected by the EPA and this was overturned recently by the convenor/minister. So maybe it's really bad but the gov't thought otherwise.

But....


FOOTPRINT.

Red Hill site (highlighted red) is around 2ha, or 20,000m2. (www.daftlogic.com)





Compare Phoenix Energy's proposed plant at Kwinana:
http://www.kwinana.wa.gov.au/Docume...8---Kwinana-Waste-to-Energy---DA-Submission-d




"...the construction of a Waste to Energy plant, to process 400,000 t/yr of residual Municipal Solid Waste from the City of Kwinana and other municipalities..." etc. (pdf file's p.1)

"...the Development Envelope (excluding easements) associated with the Proposal is 3.4793 ha" (pdf file's p.43)


Footprint = 34793/400 000 = 0.087 m2 per tonne.
Compares to ANQ's 0.096m2/t.
Slightly better than ANQ, but note that this Kwinana plant have scale on its side while ANQ's avg footprint above is on a mere 60,000 plant.
But if we were to take, maybe a more biased but still reasonable, approach and assumes that PE's gasification would need around 3.4ha or slightly less while only 2Ha will do it for ANQ at up to 150k tonnes... Counter agrument would be that there's plenty of land at Red Hill and EMRC was open to most of it if they have to (as stated in the 2010 tender EOI docu, see below for link).

----

What are EMRC's requirements?

IF ANQ: 60k to 150k tones. or 5,760m2 to 14,400m2
IF PE/gasification: 90k to 200k. OR 7,830m2 to 17,400m2

In EMRC's proposal for EOI:

NOTE above and also page 22 that EMRC looks for modular design - i.e. starts at 60 or 90k tonne and move on up later.

Not sure how easy/economical for gasification to modularised. ANQ's system is made for this approach. My own unskilled quick look at Kwinana's proposed plant suggests gasification is a headache to upscale later on.


The proposed site's footprint of around 20,000m2 would fit both option. But here we're assuming gasification plants could be scaled and modularised by the tonne - something that might not work in a direct line as we're assuming.

So footprint wise, I'd lean towards ANQ but need to fill that scalibility knowledge gap and maybe a detailed plan from EMRC like one's from Nowra council for their Shoalhaven proposal.

---

WHAT PRODUCT MORE SUITED TO EMRC: POWER OR COMPOST

Compost, and plenty of it.

EMRC councils are more rural-based. While electricity can be sold from anywhere - which also mean a gasification won't be too out of place on Red Hill - current oil/gas prices, the general capital cost nature of power plants (as shown by an IEA report) mean if power is needed it'd be more efficient for a gas-powered, or any other sourced powered, plants than from gasification.

Compost seems a more preferable by product of recycling than power for EMRC region.







CONCLUSION
From both the initial capital outlay, the footprint and a byproduct more suitable for the regional areas perspective, Anaerobic Digestion from ANQ seem the most suitable for EMRC.

Now if only the Councillors think like we do .

---
ASIDES
News report a proposed 200,000 ton (181,437 tonnes) gasification plant in Nevada goes for $US200M (here). Interesting too that this Spanish firm Abengoa files for bankruptcy in 2016 so the plant might not go ahead.