Environmental group’s new risk assessment targets the viability of gasification

A new risk assessment from Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA), Berkeley, California, finds that companies promoting waste-to-energy projects like gasification and pyrolysis have a 30-year track record of failures and unfulfilled promises. After decades of industry promising a solution that both manages waste and produces energy, the vast majority of proposed plants were never built or were shut down, GAIA concludes.

According to the report “Gasification and Pyrolysis: A High Risk, Low Yield Investment,”  "the potential returns on waste gasification are smaller and more uncertain, and the risks much higher, than proponents claim."

GAIA is a worldwide alliance of more than 800 grassroots groups, nongovernmental organizations and individuals in over 90 countries whose ultimate vision is “a just, toxic-free world without incineration.”
The alliance also promotes zero waste “as a holistic solution and an economic shift toward justice and sustainability.”

The report’s author Monica Wilson says, "The global spotlight on marine plastic pollution has led to increasing proposals for technological solutions. But it's important that investors recognize these processes do not work as promised and set us back in developing real solutions."

The report sites, billions of dollars of investments on unsuccessful ventures in the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, United States and Germany. In 2016, the failed U.K. project by Pennsylvania-based Air Products lost $1 billion alone, the report states.

Many gasification projects that have attempted operations, have closed after failure to meet projected energy generation, revenue generation, and emission targets. Despite decades of opportunity the industry has not resolved these problems. Other projects have failed in the proposal stage — after raising significant investments — due to community opposition and government scrutiny into false and exaggerated claims.

Gasification plants have sought public subsidies to be profitable — particularly from feed-in tariffs. However, these facilities would regularly burn fossil fuel-sourced material including plastic waste and coal, contradicting the purpose of "renewable energy," says GAIA.

Over 100 major environmental organizations released a public letter in February stating that "We are deeply concerned by the promotion of feed-in-tariffs and other renewable energy subsidies for gasification, incineration, and the use of plastics as fuel."

The report concludes that municipal zero waste programs relying on source separation, recycling, composting, and redesign of no-value products have demonstrated economic and technical success.