James Parker on Shale Gas China (Diplomat)

As Anthony Fensom’s recent article on the U.S. underscores, knowledge of the vast potential of “unconventional oil and gas” has been spreading rapidly in recent years. 

But, as Pacific Money has noted before, North America is not the only potential benefactor of this trend. In fact, China is believed to hold the world’s largest reserves of shale gas, with the Ministry of Land and Resources estimates the country has134 trillion cubic meters of shale gas with 25 tcm of this recoverable.

Coincidentally, China this week announced that 16 companies had won a second round of bidding to explore 19 shale gas blocks around central China in Henan, Hubei, Hunan, Guizhou, Jiangxi and Zhejiang provinces, as well as in the Chongqing area. The successful bidders were all domestic—14 state-owned firms and 2 privately-owned ones — and have agreed to invest 12.8 billion yuan (U.S.$2 billion) over the coming years.

Given the limited extraction capability of Chinese firms, this will exacerbate the already immense challenges China faces in extracting the natural gas and bringing it to market.

These challenges are among the factors that have caused China to fall behind its own shale gas targets. Last year the National Energy Administration announced the goals of producing 6.5 billion cubic meters of shale gas annually by 2015 and between 60 and 100 billion cubic meters by 2020. But with China still not producing shale gas commercially the 2015 target seems increasingly out of reach. Besides this latest auction Beijing has announced subsidies to shale gas producers as a means of jump starting the industry.

Also working in China’s favor is the fact that much of its suspected shale gas reserves are located relatively close to population centers along the coastal areas. This should lessen the burden Beijing faces in building the necessary infrastructure to bring extracted shale gas to markets.

Still, the United States and Canada are years head of Beijing in terms of their ability to extract and transport shale gas. As British Petroleum (BP) noted in its recent report, although Asia is estimated to have more shale gas reserves than North America, extraction and above ground factors mean that “North America will continue to dominate production” through 2030, while the “pace of development elsewhere is likely to be measured, given the lengthy checklist of factors required for development of shale gas.”

For example the U.S. already has more than 210 natural gas pipelines stretching across 300,000 miles and reaching almost every major market in the country. By way of comparison in 2010 China had just 22,400 miles of natural gas pipelines and the government expects this to increase to just 62,100 miles by 2015.

As a result, BP expects that China’s gas production will grow at over 6 percent annually through 2030 with 46 percent of this growth coming from shale gas and coal bed methane (CBM). By that time BP expects shale gas and CBM to account for 63% of North America’s gas production.

Other challenges will also have to be overcome if China is to stand a chance at realizing its own shale gas boom.  Aside from the lack of pipelines and mid-to-downstream infrastructure, these include a lack of storage capabilities and a non-market driven pricing scheme which discourages the high level of investment necessary to achieve shale gas extraction.  Indeed, energy producers in China often end up squeezed between government capped prices on the market and varying production costs – in effect subsidizing consumers. Furthermore, China’s relative lack of progress so far means that certain geological factors – such as more difficult to exploit deposits or lack of water required for extraction – remain less known.  Of course, with heavy state owned enterprise (SOE) influence in the sector, as well as an abundance (for now) of cheap credit, not all of these problems are necessarily insurmountable.

OPEC Cuts Oil Output to 14-Month Low Amid Economic Uncertainty

OPEC reduced its production to the lowest level in 14 months as budget wrangles in the U.S., uncertain impact of stimulus measures in Japan and Europe’s struggle to boost growth cloud outlook for fuel demand.

The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries cut output by 465,000 barrels a day in December to 30.4 million, the lowest since October 2011, led by a reduction in Saudi Arabia, the group said today in its monthly report, citing secondary sources. That’s 800,000 a day more than the average 29.6 million the group estimates it will need to provide this year. OPEC kept is 2013 global demand forecast unchanged.

“Fiscal uncertainties persist,” OPEC’s Vienna-based secretariat said in the report. “The U.S. is not the only country faced with fiscal challenges” as the impact of stimulus in Japan is unclear and “there remains some uncertainty about the near-term future development” in Europe.

Brent crude futures, trading at about $110 a barrel in London today, advanced 3.5 percent last year as threats to supply in the Middle East were balanced by risks to demand from Europe’s debt crisis and the U.S. budget dispute.

The drop in OPEC production last month is the steepest since March 2011, when Libya’s exports were halted during the uprising against deposed leader Muammar Qaddafi. Group output remains 400,000 barrels a day more than the collective target of 30 million reaffirmed at the organization’s most recent meeting in December.

Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest crude exporter, cut output by 420,800 barrels a day in December to 9.2 million, OPEC said. The second-largest decline last month was in Iraq, where supplies fell 196,300 barrels a day to 3 million. Production also dropped in Iran, by 20,400 barrels a day to 2.7 million.

In addition to supply data compiled from secondary sources, OPEC also provides production numbers submitted directly by member countries. Saudi Arabia pumped 9.023 million barrels a day in December, according to its submission. The number is the same as that given by a person with knowledge of the Kingdom’s oil policy on Jan. 10.

“Saudi Arabia cut its oil output significantly in December,” said Carsten Fritsch, an analyst at Commerzbank AG in Frankfurt.

OPEC boosted estimates for supplies from outside the group by about the same amount as it lowered projections for demand for its own crude.

Non-OPEC producers such as the U.S., Canada and Brazil will bolster output by 900,000 barrels a day to 53.9 million this year, according to the report. That’s about 85,000 a day more than OPEC estimated last month.

Global oil demand will increase by 760,000 barrels a day, or 0.9 percent, this year to 89.6 million barrels, OPEC said.

OPEC’s members are Algeria, Angola, Ecuador, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Venezuela. The organization is next scheduled to meet in May.

The International Energy Agency, an adviser to consuming nations based in Paris, will publish its next monthly forecasts of supply and demand on Jan. 18.

To contact the reporter on this story: Grant Smith in London at gsmith52@bloomberg.net

Qatar Foundation y el Sol (Diario El Pais de España)

En temas económicos, el golfo Pérsico es la cuna del petróleo, del combustible casi regalado, de los caprichos millonarios y de las islas artificiales. Sí. Pero ahora empieza a ser también un destino para las renovables. En previsión del declive petrolero, y animados por sus fabulosas reservas de dinero, Catar, Arabia Saudí, Kuwait o Emiratos han lanzado una nueva carrera para liderar el desarrollo de la energía solar.

 Para llegar a Rabi Mohtar hay que atravesar la imponente Qatar Foundation. Decenas de edificios recién construidos en un campus con sucursales de prestigiosas universidades de EE UU y centros de investigación punteros en energía y biomedicina. La sede está a las afueras de Doha, la capital de Catar que alberga la cumbre del clima, y por las calles abundan los todoterrenos (Hummers incluidos) que levantan polvo de las obras. El aire acondicionado está a tope y por los pasillos abundan los estudiantes occidentales, la inmensa mayoría becados. Mohtar es el director ejecutivo del Instituto de Investigación de Energía y Medio Ambiente de Qatar (QEERI, en sus siglas en inglés), uno de los centros encargados de la I+D en renovables. “El potencial de energía solar en la región del Golfo es enorme. Estamos bendecidos con una alta radiación solar, y por eso la energía solar es una inversión natural a largo plazo, más allá del gas y del petróleo”, explica en una sala de la Universidad de Georgetown, cuya sede original está en Washington.

El QEERI fichó hace tres meses como jefe de investigación en energía solar a Diego Martínez, un ingeniero español que pasó 22 años —los últimos nueve como director— en la Plataforma Solar de Almería, delCiemat, el centro público español equivalente al QEERI.

Martínez explica la apuesta por las renovables de una zona extremadamente rica en recursos fósiles: "Esta gente es inteligente y sabe que en 20, 50 o 100 años los hidrocarburos se van a agotar e intentan diversificar. Es un ejercicio de previsión".

Catar anuncia una inversión de 15.000 millones en una megacentral solar

No es solo una apuesta a medio plazo. El agua que consume la región es desalada, requiere gran cantidad de combustibles fósiles (sea fuel o gas, según el país). Así que si consiguen desalar agua o refrigerar los enormes edificios con renovables, tendrán más gas y petróleo que exportar. "Uno de los proyectos pioneros en Catar, en colaboración con el Ciemat, es usar la termosolar para producir electricidad y usar el calor residual para producir agua desalada por destilación, lo que cerraría el ciclo del agua, la energía y la comida", señala Martínez. Quizá como muestra hacia el exterior de que iba en serio, Catar, el país con mayor emisión de CO2 por habitante del mundo, apostó fuerte por albergar la cumbre del clima y esta semana ha anunciado que invertirá hasta 20.000 millones de dólares (15.300 millones de euros) en una central fotovoltaica de 1.800 megavatios de potencia (casi como dos reactores nucleares). En julio pasado, anunció que Qatar Solar Technologiesinvertiría junto a dos socios 1.000 millones de dólares (765 millones de euros) en una fábrica de módulos de silicio fotovoltaico.

Los proyectos y las cifras son tan grandes como todo lo que se plantea en esta región, ya sean estadios de fútbol solo para el Mundial o rascacielos infinitos. Y no es solo Catar. Arabia Saudí dijo en mayo que invertirá 100.000 millones de dólares (76.500 millones de euros) para convertirse en el mayor centro de producción y distribución de paneles fotovoltaicos del mundo, y planea instalar 14.000 megavatios solares (la potencia de 14 reactores nucleares) hasta 2030.

Abu Dabi construye una ciudad enorme enteramente con renovables (Masdar), y en junio de 2009 consiguió —con petrodólares de por medio— llevarse la sede de la recién creada Agencia Internacional de Energías Renovables (Irena).

Fuente: IRENA.

El director general de esta institución, el keniano Adnan Z. Amin, explica en los pasillos de la cumbre del clima por qué tiene sentido esta inversión: "Son países que ya tienen los recursos humanos y las infraestructuras energéticas avanzadas. Para ellos es muy efectivo invertir en renovables. Hay un renacimiento de estas energías en el Golfo. No será de combustibles fósiles, sino de energía solar".

Los países de la región cuentan con recursos humanos e infraestructuras

Uno de los grandes motores de este auge es el intento de reducir el consumo interno de combustibles fósiles para aumentar la exportación. Eso explica también el interés de algunos de estos países por la energía nuclear. Cuanto menos gas y fuel consuman para producir electricidad más podrán exportar para los coches del exterior.

Los números son difíciles de hacer. En Catar, el litro de gasolina para los coches cuesta el equivalente a 20 céntimos de euro, pero, como explica Amin, "por cada litro de gasolina que usan en casa pierden cinco veces más por no exportarlo. Ven que su demanda interna crece muy rápido, y que si siguen subvencionándola en casa van a perder enormes cantidades de ingresos del exterior en exportaciones".

En Irena trabaja como director de Asesoramiento en Política otro español, Hugo Lucas, que llegó allí hace tres años procedente del IDAE (Ministerio de Industria). Lucas ha viajado por todo el Golfo hablando con los responsables de los países y ha notado el cambio en estos años: "Ven que los países que queman petróleo para producir electricidad están perdiendo dinero". Lucas destaca que todo va muy rápido porque "la curva de disminución de costes de la fotovoltaica es fortísima".

Los flujos de exportación de petróleo van a virar hacia Asia

Aún falta por ver cómo afectarán la arena del desierto y la humedad de la costa a los paneles fotovoltaicos y a los espejos de las enormes centrales termosolares. Probablemente, aumentará los costes de mantenimiento (al tener que limpiarlos con más frecuencia) y castigará más los equipos, algo que se puede compensar con la enorme radiación solar que recibe. Mohtar añade otro problema: la falta de agua. "En la termosolar, en España, Alemania o Estados Unidos, la refrigeración se hace con agua, y ese es un lujo que aquí no podemos permitirnos". Hay que buscar sistemas mediante aire.

Pero Martínez señala que los problemas de financiación para investigar son muy distintos de los de España. "En Almería tenía dinero para abrir la puerta del centro y pagar los sueldos. Pero si querías hacer proyectos tenías que ir a Bruselas. Aquí el dinero no es infinito pero está bastante mejor que en España".

Todo el sector mira al Golfo, y más con la moratoria decretada en España y las dificultades de financiación en Europa. La española Isofotón anunció en septiembre el desarrollo de proyectos fotovoltaicos en Arabia junto a una firma saudí. Teresa Ribera, exsecretaria de Estado de Cambio Climático y responsable de Nuevos Mercados de Isofotón, dice que, además de reducir el consumo interno de combustibles fósiles, los fondos soberanos "han llegado a la conclusión de que tienen 30, 40 o 50 años de petróleo y quieren colocar bien su dinero, sobre todo en el medio y largo plazo, y han decidido invertir en renovables para ver cuál es la baza ganadora".

Los fondos soberanos invierten en espera de ver qué baza es ganadora

Por eso estos países están detrás de muchas inversiones en renovables en Europa. En octubre de 2011, el rey Juan Carlos inauguró una innovadora central termosolar de torre en Sevilla. Lo hizo junto al jeque Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, príncipe heredero de Abu Dabi. La central es un proyecto conjunto de la española Sener y la emiratí Masdar.

El pasado septiembre, Marruecos anunció que su primera termosolar junto al Sáhara la construiría un consorcio liderado por la saudí Acwa Power, para el que trabajarían las españolas Acciona, Sener y Tsk. Fuentes del sector creen que ganó el concurso con una oferta tan baja que solo se explica por el interés geopolítico de Arabia por entrar en el mercado del Magreb (hasta entonces dominado por Abengoa).

Las perspectivas energéticas son ahora mismo especialmente cambiantes. Debido al auge del petróleo y gas no convencional, Estados Unidos será en 2020 el primer productor de crudo, según el último informe anual de la Agencia Internacional de la Energía, lo que tiene un impacto enorme en estos países y en sus flujos de exportación "que van a virar hacia Asia", según Ribera, lo que tendrá un enorme impacto en las relaciones internacionales.

Si todo esto es un lavado de cara verde, una forma de aparentar que se hace algo por la energía limpia mientras

se mantiene un modelo de despilfarro energético y de fomento del petróleo, es algo que aún tardará en verse. Amín, el responsable de la Agencia Internacional de Renovables, cree que no es el caso: "Sería greenwashing el anuncio de un evento concreto, como podría ser esta cumbre del clima. Pero lo que estamos viendo es una inversión muy sustancial y un uso de recursos humanos grande. No haces estás inversiones para lavar tu imagen. Para eso cuelgas un par de pósters, pero no inviertes miles de millones de dólares en proyectos y en innovación si luego no quieres hacer nada".

US Energy vs Opec Production (Scott Tong)

Study supports exporting U.S. natural gas

If you think of the world oil market as a big stack to be filled, North America is suddenly pouring in big amounts. It's because of new drilling technologies, like hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.

In just two years, North America has disrupted other world suppliers, says Jamie Webster at PFC Energy. He's in Vienna for the OPEC meeting.

"Because the United States and Canada has kind of filled up that stack," Webster says, "it has reduced the amount that OPEC needs to bring on. So that is why the boom in the United States is in fact already affecting OPEC."

The dynamic suggests less revenue for OPEC producers like Saudi Arabia. And yet, Saudi always matters. It's the world's key swing producer, to tighten or loosen supplies when needed, kind of what the Federal Reserve does with money.

"Saudi Arabia will still be, if I may say so, the central banker for the oil industry for many years to come," says former OPEC economist Fatih Birol, now with the International Energy Agency.

Birol thinks Middle East oil shipments to America will dwindle to zero within a few years. Which has raised a debate: how much should Washington care about the Mideast? Would the U.S. military still come to the defense of Kuwait, as it did in 1990?

Some in the not-so-much camp argue for a downsized Pentagon budget to reflect that. Others argue the U.S. remains the world's lone energy policeman, and will keep it that way.

"We are the only country in the world currently, like it or not, that can project power in the Middle East," says Ed Chow of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "There is no substitute for the Middle East for oil. And there is no substitute for American military power to secure that supply of oil for the world economy.

If the U.S. is a winner in the new energy order, Russia may be a loser. Its natural gas stranglehold on the European market is threatened by new shale gas supplies popping up elsewhere.

And China? Its energy thirst makes it increasingly reliant on Mideast oil, and nervous about it.

"This is why China is building a navy that can roam further than its territory," says international oil analyst Robert McNally of the Rapidan Group. "They've been building alliances with countries along the way to the Middle East. And down the road will likely look to protect its supply lines, probably in the same way we have."

Still, the U.S. production stirring up all this talk has uncertainties: how safe is it to drill shale oil and gas? How will it be regulated, and exported? How quickly do wells decline?

Regardless, OPEC thinks the world's energy music is already changing, and is trying to dance along.

About the author

Scott Tong is a correspondent for Marketplace’s sustainability desk, with a focus on energy, environment, resources, climate, supply chain and the global economy.

US net oil exporter by 2030

The United States will overtake Saudi Arabia as the world’s leading oilproducer by about 2017 and will become a net oil exporter by 2030, the International Energy Agency said Monday.

A blog about energy and the environment.

Go to Blog »

Enlarge This Image

Eric Gay/Associated Press

A drilling rig near Kennedy, Tex. There are several components of the sudden shift in the world’s energy supply, but the prime mover is a resurgence of oil and gas production in the United States.

Enlarge This Image

Jim Wilson/The New York Times

Oil facilities in North Dakota. The International Energy Agency said the United States would be a net exporter of oil by 2030.

Readers’ Comments

Share your thoughts.

• Post a Comment »
• Read All Comments (185) »

That increased oil production, combined with new American policies to improve energy efficiency, means that the United States will become “all but self-sufficient” in meeting its energy needs in about two decades — a “dramatic reversal of the trend” in most developed countries, a new report released by the agency says.

“The foundations of the global energy systems are shifting,” Fatih Birol, chief economist at the Paris-based organization, which produces the annual World Energy Outlook, said in an interview before the release. The agency, which advises industrialized nations on energy issues, had previously predicted that Saudi Arabia would be the leading producer until 2035.

The report also predicted that global energy demand would grow between 35 and 46 percent from 2010 to 2035, depending on whether policies that have been proposed are put in place. Most of that growth will come from China, India and the Middle East, where the consuming class is growing rapidly. The consequences are “potentially far-reaching” for global energy markets and trade, the report said.

Dr. Birol noted, for example, that Middle Eastern oil once bound for the United States would probably be rerouted to China. American-mined coal, facing declining demand in its home market, is already heading to Europe and China instead.

There are several components of the sudden shift in the world’s energy supply, but the prime mover is a resurgence of oil and gas production in the United States, particularly the unlocking of new reserves of oil and gas found in shale rock. The widespread adoption of techniques like hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling has made those reserves much more accessible, and in the case of natural gas, resulted in a vast glut that has sent prices plunging.

The report predicted that the United States would overtake Russia as the leading producer of natural gas in 2015.

The strong statements and specific predictions by the energy agency lend new weight to trends that have become increasingly apparent in the last year.

“This striking conclusion confirms a lot of recent projections,” said Michael A. Levi, senior fellow for energy and environment at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Formed in 1974 after the oil crisis by a group of oil-importing nations, including the United States, the International Energy Agency monitors and analyzes global energy trends to ensure a safe and sustainable supply.

Mr. Levi said that the agency’s report was generally “good news” for the United States because it highlighted the nation’s new sources of energy. But he cautioned that being self-sufficient did not mean that the country would be insulated from seesawing energy prices, since those oil prices are set by global markets.

“You may be somewhat less vulnerable to price shocks and the U.S. may be slightly more protected, but it doesn’t give you the energy independence some people claim,” he said.

Also, he noted, the agency’s projection of United States self-sufficiency assumed that the country would improve gas mileage in cars and energy efficiency in homes and appliances. “It’s supply and demand together that adds up to this striking conclusion,” Mr. Levi said.

Dr. Birol said the agency’s prediction of increasing American self-sufficiency was 55 percent a reflection of more oil production and 45 percent a reflection of improving energy efficiency in the United States, primarily from the Obama administration’s new fuel economy standards for cars. He added that even stronger policies to promote energy efficiency were needed in the United States and many other countries.

The report said that several other factors could also have a large impact on world energy markets over the next few years. These include the recovery of the Iraqi oil industry, which would lead to new supply, and the decision by some countries, notably Germany and Japan, to move away from nuclear energy after the Fukushima disaster.

The new energy sources will help the United States economy, Dr. Birol said, providing continued cheap energy relative to the rest of the world. The energy agency estimates that electricity prices will be about 50 percent cheaper in the United States than in Europe, largely because of a rise in the number of power plants fueled by cheap natural gas, which would help American industries and consumers.

But the message is more sobering for the planet, in terms of climate change. Although natural gas is frequently promoted for being relatively low in carbon emissions compared to oil or coal, the new global energy market could make it harder to prevent dangerous levels of warming.

The United States’ reduced reliance on coal will just mean that coal moves to other places, the report says. And the use of coal, now the dirtiest fuel, continues to rise elsewhere. China’s coal demand will peak around 2020 and then stay steady until 2035, the report predicted, and in 2025, India will overtake the United States as the world’s second-largest coal user.

The report warns that no more than one-third of the proved reserves of fossil fuels should be used by 2050 to limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius, as many scientists recommend.

Such restraint is unlikely without a binding international treaty by 2017 that requires countries to limit the growth of their emissions, Dr. Birol said. He added that pushing ahead with technologies that could capture and store carbon dioxide was also crucial.

“The report confirms that, given the current policies, we will blow past every safe target for emissions,” Mr. Levi said. “This should put to rest the idea that the boom in natural gas will save us from that.”

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: November 12, 2012

An earlier version of this article misstated the International Energy Agency’s prediction of American self-sufficiency in energy production. The agency said 55 percent of the improvement would come from more oil production and 45 percent from improvements in energy efficiency. It did not say that domestic oil production would rise 55 percent. Also, an earlier version of a photo caption with this article misidentified the equipment shown in use in an oil field in Greensburg, Kan. It is a pump jack, not an oil rig.

A version of this article appeared in print on November 13, 2012, on page B6 of the New York edition with the headline: U.S. Is Forecast to Be No. 1 Oil Producer.

Sweden to import 800,000 Tonnes of Waste (wired uk)

Sweden plans to import nearly 800,000 tonnes of waste each year to satisfy its waste-to-energy plants -- waste conscious Swedes have been recycling so efficiently, the country doesn't have enough of its own trash to burn. According to an environmental advisor, it could spell the beginning of a future where garbage actually becomes worth something.

"I would say maybe in the future, this waste will be valued even more so -- maybe you could sell your waste because there will be a shortage of resources within the world," said Catarina Ostlund, senior advisor for the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. As it stands now, countries will actually pay Sweden for the service.

Sweden began incinerating its trash in the 40s and now, each year, it sends a paltry four percent of its waste to landfills. This has been made possible by the tightening of restrictions on waste disposal -- landfilling of organic waste was outlawed in 2005 -- and the fact that the incineration process has become a cleaner, greener alternative in recent years, with most harmful byproducts of the conversion destroyed.

Currently, 20 percent of Sweden's heat supply is produced by incinerating garbage -- that's 810,000 homes -- with the remaining energy providing 250,000 homes with electricity. To make up for the lack of litter generated by its diligent citizens (the country's plants can process two million tonnes of household waste), Sweden will mainly be importing trash from Norway. Not only will Norway be paying Sweden to destroy its waste, the only thing it will get back in return will be a pile of ash, rich with heavy metals and harmful dioxins that will need to be deposited in landfills. Despite this added burden, it is still the most economical way for Norway to dispose of its household waste.

Sweden is ahead of the curve when it comes to meeting the EU's 2020 sustainability directives, and well ahead of other nations when it comes to its waste-to-energy plan. According to a Eurostat report, municipal waste in Sweden was landfilled at a rate of seven kilograms per inhabitant in 2009 -- compare this to figures for the UK, a hefty 260kg per inhabitant. Conversely, Sweden incinerates 235kg of municipal waste per person, and the UK, just nine kilograms. Countries like Estonia, Greece, Romania and Turkey still do not operate any waste-to-energy plants, and could present future partnerships for Sweden.

Incineration has also become far greener since the 80s in Sweden, when limits on emissions were tightened. According to a report released by the country's waste management association, Avfall Sverige, since that time incineration emission levels have dropped by between 90 and 99 percent because of better waste sorting technologies.

Byproducts of incineration include ash and flue gases, which both contain harmful substances like dioxin. These are now largely cleaned out, however. Dust is passed through an electrostatic precipitator to give the particles a negative electric charge. These are then attracted to positively charged metal plates, shaken off, collected and taken to an ash silo. The gases are washed out with water that contains lime -- this reacts with the gases and removes them. This is done several times to remove different things -- first heavy metals, then acids, sulphur dioxide and the remainder. Finally, a catalytic convertor removes nitrous oxides by passing the remaining flue gases through a porous material and converting them to nitrogen. The idea is that mainly carbon dioxide and water are released and, under the terms with Norway, anything else will be deposited in landfills.

Sweden to import 800,000 Tonnes of Waste (wired uk)

Sweden plans to import nearly 800,000 tonnes of waste each year to satisfy its waste-to-energy plants -- waste conscious Swedes have been recycling so efficiently, the country doesn't have enough of its own trash to burn. According to an environmental advisor, it could spell the beginning of a future where garbage actually becomes worth something.

"I would say maybe in the future, this waste will be valued even more so -- maybe you could sell your waste because there will be a shortage of resources within the world," said Catarina Ostlund, senior advisor for the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. As it stands now, countries will actually pay Sweden for the service.

Sweden began incinerating its trash in the 40s and now, each year, it sends a paltry four percent of its waste to landfills. This has been made possible by the tightening of restrictions on waste disposal -- landfilling of organic waste was outlawed in 2005 -- and the fact that the incineration process has become a cleaner, greener alternative in recent years, with most harmful byproducts of the conversion destroyed.

Currently, 20 percent of Sweden's heat supply is produced by incinerating garbage -- that's 810,000 homes -- with the remaining energy providing 250,000 homes with electricity. To make up for the lack of litter generated by its diligent citizens (the country's plants can process two million tonnes of household waste), Sweden will mainly be importing trash from Norway. Not only will Norway be paying Sweden to destroy its waste, the only thing it will get back in return will be a pile of ash, rich with heavy metals and harmful dioxins that will need to be deposited in landfills. Despite this added burden, it is still the most economical way for Norway to dispose of its household waste.

Sweden is ahead of the curve when it comes to meeting the EU's 2020 sustainability directives, and well ahead of other nations when it comes to its waste-to-energy plan. According to a Eurostat report, municipal waste in Sweden was landfilled at a rate of seven kilograms per inhabitant in 2009 -- compare this to figures for the UK, a hefty 260kg per inhabitant. Conversely, Sweden incinerates 235kg of municipal waste per person, and the UK, just nine kilograms. Countries like Estonia, Greece, Romania and Turkey still do not operate any waste-to-energy plants, and could present future partnerships for Sweden.

Incineration has also become far greener since the 80s in Sweden, when limits on emissions were tightened. According to a report released by the country's waste management association, Avfall Sverige, since that time incineration emission levels have dropped by between 90 and 99 percent because of better waste sorting technologies.

Byproducts of incineration include ash and flue gases, which both contain harmful substances like dioxin. These are now largely cleaned out, however. Dust is passed through an electrostatic precipitator to give the particles a negative electric charge. These are then attracted to positively charged metal plates, shaken off, collected and taken to an ash silo. The gases are washed out with water that contains lime -- this reacts with the gases and removes them. This is done several times to remove different things -- first heavy metals, then acids, sulphur dioxide and the remainder. Finally, a catalytic convertor removes nitrous oxides by passing the remaining flue gases through a porous material and converting them to nitrogen. The idea is that mainly carbon dioxide and water are released and, under the terms with Norway, anything else will be deposited in landfills.