Waste-to-Energy Project Pathways Toolkit
Self Assessment Survey
Project Pathways Portal
Universal Contents Library
The ‘Council Waste to Energy Toolkit’ is proudly funded by the Queensland Government. The Queensland Government makes no statements, representations, or warranties about the accuracy, completeness or reliability of, and you should not rely on, any information contained in this website. You should make your own inquiries and obtain advice specific to your particular circumstances. To the extent permitted by law, the Queensland Government disclaims all responsibility and all liability (including without limitation, liability in negligence) for all expenses, losses (including direct and indirect losses), damages and costs you may incur as a result of the information in the toolkit or on this website being inaccurate or incomplete in any way, and for any reason; or being subject to infection by computer viruses or other contamination.
To get started, click here to complete the suvey to assess your council's archetype, and mapping where your information needs are
Start Here
1.1 Overview Understanding the Basics
Action Plan Checklist
Guide
Waste-to-Energy (WTE) refers to the process of converting organic waste into usable energy sources such as biogas, electricity, or heat. This approach not only helps councils divert waste from landfills but also provides opportunities for generating revenue through renewable energy production. Municipalities can benefit from multiple WTE pathways, contributing to sustainability goals while addressing organic waste management challenges.
This library provides councils with practical insights, technical guidance, and strategic frameworks to successfully implement organics Waste-to-Energy (WTE) solutions that drive sustainability and economic benefits. After reviewing these resources, you should have a better understanding of:
•
Strategies for landfill diversion – Reduce methane emissions and extend landfill life by implementing effective waste-to-energy solutions.
Best practices for waste quality management – Improve feedstock quality through contamination control to optimise AD and composting performance.
Financial planning guidance – Develop a strong business case and long-term investment strategy for WTE projects.
Regulatory & permitting navigation – Understand key emission controls, zoning laws, and grid connection requirements for project approval.
Market development & offtake strategies – Learn how to secure reliable buyers for biogas, compost, and by-products to enhance financial sustainability.
Adaptation to seasonal waste variations – Plan for fluctuations in food and garden waste throughout the year to maintain processing efficiency
Insights into diverse organics WTE technologies – Understand options like Anaerobic Digestion (AD), Aerobic Composting, Biochar Production & Pyrolysis, Fermentation, Bioprocessing, Chemical Treatment, and Bio-refining to maximise energy recovery and resource efficiency.
Pathways to renewable energy & revenue generation – Learn how to convert organic waste into biogas, electricity, or compost to create new income streams and lower disposal costs.
1.2 Benefits
There are several key advantages of incorporating WTE solutions into organic waste management strategies:
Increased landfill diversion rates, reducing methane emissions and extending landfill life.
New revenue streams through the sale of biogas, compost, or biochar products, creating financial sustainability.
Cost savings on waste disposal, particularly when paired with regional processing hubs that optimise transportation and logistics costs.
Generation of renewable energy, which can be sold to the grid or used to power municipal operations, reducing dependence on fossil fuels.
1.3 Challenges and Considerations
While WTE is a promising approach, your council must carefully address the following considerations:
Feedstock quality control: Contamination can hinder the efficiency of AD and composting systems, requiring rigorous pre-sorting mechanisms.
Initial investment requirements: WTE facilities require significant upfront CAPEX, which must be justified with a strong financial model and long-term return on investment.
Regulatory compliance and permitting: Emission controls, waste handling permits, and environmental impact assessments must be managed effectively to ensure project approval.
Offtake agreements: Establishing reliable buyers for energy and by-products is critical for financial sustainability and project viability.
1.4 Policy & Regulatory Landscape for Organic Waste Processing
Permitting Needs
Emissions compliance with state & national air quality regulations.
Zoning & land-use approvals for WtE plant siting.
Grid connection requirements for biofuel or electricity distribution.
Odor & air pollution management, & AD.
Navigating regulatory requirements for any WtE is key to successful facility deployment, you must have a robust understanding of:
The Waste Knowledge Library serves as a comprehensive resource for councils, waste service providers, and sustainability professionals. It provides best practices, case studies, and decision-making tools tailored to different council archetypes, ensuring effective and sustainable waste management strategies in pursuing waste to energy solutions.
How to use this Library - Guide
Each section provides information specific to your material focus area covering feedstock management, suitability of technological solutions, and market off-take potential.
Case studies are included to support practical implementation.
In certain sections, this library contains downloadable links to key decision-making tools, templates and models that are designed to support your own projects and
TO FINISH
Feedstock
Data sources
Characteristics
Properties
Value
Procurement & Implementations
Pathway and decision gates
Commercial model
Risk vs return
Off-take / Market
Security
Availability or access
Value of outputs
Technology
Info sheets
Min viable quantities
Max Scale
Operating costs
Complexity
Capex
Organics
General Waste
Introduction to Organics Processing
Understanding Organics Feedstocks
Technologies for Organics Processing
List of tools/templates for download
Case Studies
Offtake & Market Potential for Organics Processing
Home
Organics WtE Library Index
Visit GRC
2.1 Breakdown of Organic Waste Streams
Effective feedstock management is essential for optimising WTE and organic processing solutions. Councils managing Typical - Organics waste streams must have a robust understanding on the following factors:
Organic Waste Breakdown:
Food waste: Household scraps, restaurant and commercial organics, which form the bulk of FOGO collections.
○
Garden waste: Lawn clippings, branches, leaves, which vary seasonally but provide valuable composting material.
Agricultural waste: Manure, crop residues, and food processing by-products, which can be incorporated into AD processes.
2.2 Contamination Control & Source Separation Strategies
Contamination Risks
Plastics, glass, and non-compostable materials negatively impact composting and AD systems, reducing product quality and marketability.
Cross-contamination in multi-bin collection systems can lead to increased processing costs and operational inefficiencies.
Contaminated Fibers: Soiled paper, napkins, and bio-based packaging materials
2.3 Seasonal & Geographic Considerations for Organics Processing
Understanding trends, i.e. Seasonal Variability, future forecasts, ABS/development control data,
Higher garden waste volumes in spring and summer due to increased yard maintenance.
Increased food waste generation during holiday seasons, requiring additional processing capacity planning.
2.4 Data Collection & Feedstock Mapping
Accurate data collection and mapping are critical for ensuring efficient feedstock utilisation. Councils should consider:
Mapping for FOGO Collection: Identifying high-waste generation areas to prioritise infrastructure upgrades and optimise collection routes.
Waste Characterisation Studies: Conducting regular compositional waste audits to track feedstock composition changes and contamination trends
Community Engagement Surveys: Using behavioural data to increase participation and correct sorting habits, ensuring better feedstock quality for processing.
Index
3.1 Overview of Organic Waste Processing Options
Selecting the right processing technology is crucial for optimising organic waste recovery. Councils must evaluate available technologies based on efficiency, scalability, and cost-effectiveness: Listed below are the processing options for consideration, click on buttons on the right to get a detailed insights into the technology:
3.2 Wet and Dry AD Systems
Anaerobic digestion is a biological process that breaks down organic material in the absence of oxygen, generating biogas (methane & CO₂) and digestate (a nutrient-rich byproduct for land application). Councils evaluating AD must consider the benefits, limitations, and operational requirements of Wet AD and Dry AD systems.
3.3 Aerobic Composting Options
Aerobic composting technologies, including Windrow Composting, In-Vessel (Tunnel) Composting (IVC), and Aerated Static Pile (ASP) Composting, offer effective solutions for processing organic waste by leveraging controlled oxygen exposure to accelerate decomposition, enhance compost quality, and manage environmental impacts, with each method suited to different operational scales and site constraints.
1. Anaerobic Digestion (Wet and Dry)
Anaerobic Digestion (AD): Produces biogas and digestate; best suited for food waste and high-moisture organics. AD is best suited for councils with high food waste generation and interest in energy production (biogas).
2. Aerobic Composting
Aerobic Composting: Traditional windrow composting vs. in-vessel systems; ideal for garden waste and mixed FOGO streams.Composting is the simplest and most cost-effective solution for managing garden waste and producing soil amendments.
3.4 Biochar Options
Biochar is a carbon-rich material produced through the pyrolysis of organic waste in a low-oxygen environment. This process converts biomass into a stable carbon form, which has multiple agricultural, environmental, and energy applications.
For councils managing organic waste, biochar production provides an alternative pathway to landfill diversion, allowing for carbon sequestration, soil improvement, and renewable energy generation.
3. BioChar Production
Biochar Production: Pyrolysis of organic waste to produce carbon-rich biochar; enhances soil quality and offers carbon sequestration benefits. Biochar production is an innovative option for councils seeking carbon sequestration, soil improvement, and energy recovery from woody or dry biomass fractions.
4. Other Technologies
Overview Of Other Processing Options:
Fermentation – Uses microbial processes to break down organic waste and produce bio-based chemicals or fuels.
Bioprocessing – Leverages biological systems to extract valuable materials and energy from organic waste.
Chemical Treatment – Applies chemical processes to enhance energy extraction or create alternative fuels.
Bio-refining – Develops bio-based products from organic waste, supporting circular economy initiatives.
3.5 Other Organics Processing Technology
The table below provides a comparative overview of Fermentation, Bioprocessing, Chemical Treatment, and Bio-refining, detailing their process characteristics, outputs, feedstock suitability, energy efficiency, environmental impact, and investment considerations. Understanding these technologies allows councils and industries to evaluate the best-fit solutions for their waste streams and sustainability objectives.
3.6 Cost & Scalability
Understanding the financial and operational considerations and scalability of your preferred technology is a key step is understanding, considering undertaking a detailed study of:Click the boxes to expand details for the various organics processing technologies
Wet AD
Features
Dry AD
Organic material is mixed with water to create a slurry, which is digested in an oxygen-free environment to produce biogas and digestate.
Organic material is digested with little to no added water, operating at a higher solids content than Wet AD.
Process Overview
Biogas (methane & CO₂), liquid digestate (used as fertilizer).
Biogas (methane & CO₂), solid digestate (compost-like material for soil amendment).
Main Outputs
Liquid-rich organic waste, wastewater sludge, and food waste.
High-solids organic waste, including green waste, agricultural residues, and municipal solid waste.
Best For
Food waste, manure, wastewater sludge, and other high-moisture organic waste.
Yard waste, crop residues, source-separated organics, and dry municipal waste.
Feedstock Type
Faster processing due to high microbial activity in liquid environment.
Slower process due to reduced microbial mobility in drier conditions.
Processing Speed
High methane yield, but requires additional energy for liquid handling and pumping.
Lower methane yield per unit volume, but higher overall energy efficiency due to reduced water usage.
Energy Efficiency
Requires more space for digestate storage and liquid handling infrastructure.
More compact system due to higher organic matter concentration per volume.
Land & Space Needs
Can generate high nutrient runoff if digestate is not managed properly.
Produces minimal wastewater, reducing risk of nutrient runoff and pollution.
Environmental Impact
Moderate to high – requires liquid waste management systems and pumping infrastructure.
High – requires more robust digestion chambers but reduces water handling costs.
Investment Cost
Pros and Cons for Wet and Dry AD Systems
Wet AD Systems
Dry AD Systems
Converts organic waste into biogas and liquid digestate
Processes high-solid content waste into biogas and semi-solid digestate
Fully enclosed process, minimizing external contamination
Tolerates higher contamination, allowing mixed waste streams
Lower odor potential due to liquid containment
More flexible feedstock acceptance, including dry garden &and green waste
Highly proven technology with extensive operational data
Lower OPEX, reducing ongoing operational costs
Advantages
Higher biogas yield, maximising energy recovery
Less complex system, reducing maintenance requirements
Smaller footprint, ideal for urban or enclosed settings
Range of energy products, including biofertilisers
Requires source-separated food waste, limiting feedstock
Lower biogas yield compared to Wet AD systems
More complex system, requiring additional pre-treatment
Higher odor potential if digestate composting is required
Higher OPEX due to liquid handling and effluent treatment
Fewer operational references and track records, making implementation riskier
Disadvantages
Maintenance challenges from grit, plastics, and sludge
Urban sites less suitable, due to land and odor restrictions
Effluent lagoon required, leading to potential odor issues
Digestate requires composting before land application
Organic waste is placed in long rows (windrows) and turned for aeration.
Organic material is placed in static piles with forced aeration.
Windrow Composting
In-Vessel (tunnel) Composting (IVC)
Organic waste is enclosed in a vessel with controlled aeration.
Aerated Static Pile (ASP) Composting
Green waste, mixed organic waste.
Food waste, biosolids, animal by-products.
Large-scale food and green waste processing.
3-6 months
4-8 weeks
High – requires large areas.
Moderate – enclosed system reduces land footprint.
Lower than windrows – compact design with aeration.
Land Requirement
Low capital cost, low operating costs.
High capital and operating costs due to automation.
Moderate capital cost, lower labor costs.
CAPEX & OPEX
Moderate – requires buffer zones to manage odor.
High – enclosed design minimizes odors.
Moderate – odor control depends on aeration quality.
Odor & Emission Control
Manual turning requires regular labor input.
Automated aeration and process control.
Forced aeration eliminates need for turning.
Aeration & Labor Needs
Good, but may require screening.
High-quality compost with faster stabilisation.
High-quality compost with efficient processing.
Compost Quality
Requires leachate and odor management.
Meets stricter environmental standards.
Efficient, but requires engineered airflow systems.
Environmental Compliance
Best for regional/rural councils with large land areas.
Suitable for urban councils with space constraints.
Ideal for high-volume processing in limited space.
Scalability
Organic material is heated at low temperatures (400-600°C) over hours.
Rapid heating of organic matter (500-1000°C) in seconds.
Partial oxidation of biomass in a controlled environment.
High biochar yield, minimal bio-oil and syngas.
High bio-oil production, some biochar.
High syngas production, minimal biochar.
Soil enhancement, carbon sequestration.
Biofuel production, industrial applications.
Renewable energy, electricity generation via gas.
Green waste, wood chips, biosolids.
Agricultural residues, food waste.
Mixed organic waste, dry biomass.
Slow (several hours).
Very fast (seconds to minutes).
Medium-speed thermal conversion.
Moderate – produces stable carbon.
High – maximizes bio-oil for energy use.
High – syngas used for heat and power.
Moderate – batch or continuous systems.
High – industrial-scale processing.
Moderate – requires integration with energy plants.
Low emissions, carbon sequestration benefits.
Moderate emissions, potential for refining bio-oil.
Lower emissions than incineration, high energy recovery.
Moderate – suitable for municipal applications.
High – requires advanced processing infrastructure.
High – requires engineered gasification systems.
Slow Pyrolysis
Fast Pyrolysis
Gasification
Uses microbial processes to break down organic waste into bio-based chemicals or fuels.
Applies chemical processes to enhance energy extraction or create alternative fuels.
Develops bio-based products from organic waste, supporting circular economy initiatives.
Bio-refining
Leverages biological systems to extract valuable materials and energy from organic waste.
Bioethanol, butanol, organic acids (e.g., lactic acid).
Biogas, biohydrogen, biopolymers, nutrient recovery products.
Bio-oil, synthetic fuels, hydrogen, syngas.
Biofuels, biochemicals, bio-based plastics, fertilizers.
High-carbohydrate organic waste, biofuel production.
Maximizing resource recovery from mixed organic waste streams.
Converting complex organic waste into high-energy fuels.
Maximizing value extraction from organic waste through multi-product processing.
Food waste, agricultural residues, sugar/starch-rich waste.
Food waste, wastewater sludge, biodegradable plastics.
Mixed organic waste, lignocellulosic biomass, contaminated fibers.
Agricultural waste, forestry residues, food processing byproducts.
Moderate (days to weeks depending on microbial strain).
Slow to moderate (varies by process and target product).
Fast (minutes to hours depending on chemical reaction kinetics).
Moderate to fast (varies by target product and refining method).
High (efficient energy conversion but limited to specific feedstocks).
High (efficient resource extraction with minimal emissions).
Moderate (energy-intensive processes but high-value output).
High (efficient recovery of multiple valuable outputs).
Moderate (industrial-scale bioreactors needed).
Moderate (dependent on process scale and integration).
Moderate to high (depends on reactor type and chemical input needs).
High (requires integrated processing infrastructure).
Low emissions but requires proper waste pre-treatment.
Low environmental impact; enables circular economy applications.
Potentially high emissions if not properly managed; chemical residues may require disposal.
Low to moderate (varies based on waste stream and product).
Medium to High (bioreactors, enzymes, and microbial culture costs).
Medium (requires specialized microbial cultures and processing units).
High (capital-intensive due to reactor systems and chemical input requirements).
High (complex processing facilities needed, but high-value outputs justify investment).
Moderate to High ($10M–$50M) – Requires specialized infrastructure for biogas capture and digestate treatment.
Lower ($1M–$10M) – Windrow composting is least expensive, while in-vessel composting has higher CAPEX.
Moderate to High ($5M–$30M) – Advanced pyrolysis systems require higher upfront investment.
CAPEX Investment •
Anaerobic Digestion (AD) (wet and Dry)
Aerobic Composting
BioChar Production
Category
Requires skilled operation, maintenance of gas cleaning systems, and digestate handling.
Lower operating costs, but dependent on labor-intensive processes and land requirements.
Moderate operating costs, with maintenance required for thermal processing systems.
OPEX Considerations
Revenue from biogas sales, digestate products, and carbon credits. ROI depends on feedstock supply contracts and energy demand.
Compost sales to agriculture, landscaping, and municipal use. ROI influenced by contamination levels and compost quality.
Biochar sales, soil amendment markets, and carbon credit trading. Long-term ROI dependent on carbon sequestration incentives.
Economic Feasibility & ROI
Eligible for biogas subsidies, clean energy funding, and carbon credits.
Supported by waste diversion grants, soil health initiatives, and local government funding.
Qualifies for carbon sequestration incentives, biochar market development funding, and emission reduction credits.
Funding & Incentives
Best suited for medium-to-large waste generators with consistent organic waste streams.
Highly scalable from small-scale community composting to large municipal operations.
Limited by biochar market demand but viable for regional and agricultural applications.
Subject to strict environmental controls for biogas emissions, digestate quality, and wastewater discharge.
Requires compliance with odor control, pathogen reduction, and land application regulations.
Regulated for air emissions, feedstock suitability, and carbon sequestration standards.
Regulatory Landscape
Complex permitting process for gas capture, emissions, and digestate management.
Simpler permitting for traditional composting, but enclosed/in-vessel systems face stricter regulations.
Requires air emissions permits and alignment with carbon reduction programs.
Permitting & Compliance
Ideal for councils with large organic waste streams and energy recovery potential.
Best for urban and regional councils with high compost demand.
Suited for regions with strong carbon sequestration incentives and agricultural land use.
Market Suitability
Medium to High – Requires bioreactors, microbial cultures, and enzyme production facilities.
Medium – Needs specialised processing units and microbial culture systems.
High – Capital-intensive due to reactor systems, chemical inputs, and safety controls.
High – Requires integrated processing infrastructure with multiple product streams.
CAPEX Investment
Moderate – Costs for feedstock preparation, microbial maintenance, and process monitoring.
Moderate – Dependent on energy use and microbial culture management.
High – Chemical costs, catalyst replacement, and emissions control add to expenses.
High – Complex operations require skilled labour and continuous monitoring.
Moderate – Profitability depends on bioethanol market prices and process efficiency.
Moderate to High – Valuable biogas and biopolymer products improve return on investment.
High – Can generate high-value synthetic fuels, but subject to volatile market prices.
High – Strong potential in biobased products and circular economy applications.
Eligible for biofuel subsidies, green energy incentives, and R&D grants.
Circular economy grants and waste recovery funding available.
May qualify for and waste-to-fuel initiatives.
Supported by government incentives for bio-based industries and carbon reduction policies.
High – Scalable with modular bioreactors and adaptable feedstock inputs.
High – Can be integrated into existing waste processing facilities.
Moderate – Requires large-scale investment for viability.
Moderate to High – Best suited for large-scale operations with diversified product outputs.
Subject to biofuel production and environmental impact regulations.
Requires adherence to biogas safety standards and organic waste handling laws.
Governed by emissions controls, chemical handling laws, and hazardous waste regulations.
Influenced by bio-economy policies, environmental product certification, and sustainability targets.
Requires approval for biofuel production and wastewater discharge.
Compliance with renewable energy standards and organic waste regulations.
Stringent permitting for emissions, hazardous chemicals, and effluent management.
Requires multi-sector compliance for energy, waste, and product safety regulations
Best for bioethanol and biochemical production in renewable energy markets.
Suitable for waste-to-biogas applications in municipal and industrial settings.
High-value in synthetic fuel production and green chemistry industries.
Ideal for advanced material recovery and sustainable product market.
Fermentation
Bioprocessing
Chemical Treatment
This summary outlines capital investment, operational costs, scalability, and market potential for Fermentation, Bioprocessing, Chemical Treatment, and Bio-refining, helping decision-makers assess feasibility and funding opportunities for each technology
4.1 Organics End Market Development & End-Use Applications
Successfully managing organic waste extends beyond processing—it requires establishing stable markets for end-products such as compost, digestate, and biogas. Councils must secure reliable buyers and revenue streams to ensure financial sustainability, mitigate risks, and maximise environmental benefits.
Market Research and Entry:
Target high-value markets: Agriculture (e.g. fertiliser replacement), urban landscaping, forestry, and soil remediation.
Expand biochar and organic soil conditioner sales to industries focused on soil restoration.
Secure long-term offtake agreements
Partner with utilities, manufacturers, and processing plants for WTE contracts.
This section outlines key strategies for marketability, revenue generation, and contract structuring to strengthen the business case for organic waste recovery.
Supply compost to agriculture cooperatives & commercial landscaping services.
Develop contract-based supply for anaerobic digestion (AD) byproducts.
4.2 Biogas & Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) for AD Facilities
Revenue Models:
To strengthen financial viability, councils should consider the followings:
Explore renewable energy sales
Establish Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) for biogas & Renewable Natural Gas (RNG).
Assess district heating or combined heat & power (CHP) applications.
Determine grid injection feasibility for biomethane.
Leverage carbon credit markets
Generate revenue via verified carbon offset programs (e.g., Australian Carbon Credit Units - ACCUs).
Position biochar as a carbon sequestration opportunity to earn carbon credits.
Quantify the economic impact of methane avoidance & GHG reductions for ESG reporting.
Organics - List of Tools and Templates
Anerobic Digestion Fact Sheet and Glossary Terms
Download Report
How to Guide: Undertaking a Feedstock Analysis
How to Guide: Procurement Roadmap and Procurement Evaluation Tool
Cost Benefit Analysis Template
Shoalhaven Starches (NSW)
Manildra Group
Australia’s largest bioethanol producer, processing surplus starch from its integrated wheat milling operations.
Produces up to 300 million litres/year of fuel-grade ethanol, which is used in petrol blends and exported to multiple sectors.
A model for industrial-scale fermentation using food manufacturing by-products in regional settings.
6.1 Fermentation - Converting Sugar-Based Waste to Fuel & Products
Wilmar BioEthanol (Sarina, QLD)
Located in the heart of sugarcane country, this facility converts sugarcane molasses into 60 million litres/year of ethanol.
The site integrates closely with adjacent mills and sugar farms, supporting local jobs and closing the loop on milling residues.
Wilmar
Alcohol & Beverage Sector
Fermentation underpins operations of major brewers like Asahi (Carlton United) and Lion (Kirin), with breweries in VIC, QLD, SA and WA.
Over 700 microbreweries across the country apply small-scale fermentation with growing interest in co-product recovery (e.g. CO₂ capture, spent grain reuse).
National
Where It's Working - Australian Application
Relevance & Opportunities for Councils
Fit-for-purpose in:
Councils with WWTPs or agricultural waste streams
Regions seeking bioenergy/low emissions infrastructure
Organics recovery initiatives with nutrient return potential
6.2 Anaerobic Digestion – Biogas from Organics
Richgro Bioenergy Plant (WA)
Closed-loop system processing 50,000 tonnes/year of organic waste from supermarkets and food manufacturers.
Generates 2 MW of electricity and 2.2 MW of heat, exporting renewable energy to the WA grid and powering Richgro’s adjacent operations.
Digestate is transformed into liquid biofertiliser, supporting circular farming practices.
Client Name
Richgro
Logan Water Biosolids Gasification (QLD)
Processes 34,000 tonnes/year of sewage biosolids, replacing long-haul transport and land application.
Generates biochar with negligible contaminants, used as a soil additive and carbon sink.
Delivered in partnership with Pyrocal, WSP, Stantec and Downer; co-funded by ARENA ($6.2M).
Logan City Council
Rivalea (Corowa, NSW)
Captures methane from piggery waste using a covered anaerobic lagoon.
Methane fuels a Combined Heat and Power (CHP) unit for onsite processing and heating.
Shows viability of AD for on-farm and peri-urban agricultural enterprises.
Cefn & PigCo Projects (NSW & QLD)
Modular digesters installed to convert piggery and feedlot waste into biogas.
These models are suitable for low-tech, medium-scale rural deployment, with CAPEX partially offset by energy savings and carbon credit potential.
Cefn & PigCo
6.3 Composting – Soil Solutions from Organic Waste
Phoenix Power Recyclers (Yatala, QLD)
Operates one of Australia’s largest organics processing hubs.
Accepts food and garden waste, grease trap residues, and other inputs.
Phoenix Power Recyclers
Other Regional Councils
Demonstrate successful rollouts of FOGO with high capture rates and community education campaigns.
Composting is increasingly combined with soil carbon initiatives and local food production strategies.
Shoalhaven, SA Metro Councils, Penrith
NuGrow (Ipswich, Rockhampton, Bundaberg, Kogan QLD)
Long-standing FOGO partner in Ipswich since 2011.
16,645 households participate, yielding 22,000 tonnes/year of organics and producing 14,000 tonnes of compost annually.
Product is certified and sold into the agricultural and landscaping markets.
NuGrow
Composting is an accessible, proven solution for councils to reduce landfill, cut methane, and return nutrients to land.
Infrastructure can be low-tech (windrows) or high-tech (in-vessel systems) depending on urban/rural context.
Opportunities for councils to co-invest or partner with composters, provide secure feedstock, and develop markets for recycled organics through procurement, local agriculture, and revegetation.
Regional or peri-urban LGAs with green space or farming
Councils implementing or scaling FOGO
Circular land and water management initiatives
Outputs include compost, mulch and soil conditioners meeting regulatory standards.
6.4 Biorefining – Advanced Waste-to-Product Systems
Biorefining is ideal for councils managing biosolids, woody waste, and difficult residuals — transforming liabilities into high-value fuels or carbon products.
Biochar outputs can support land remediation, water retention, and carbon offset programs.
Councils can act as hosts or feedstock partners, enabling innovation precincts and green jobs.
Wastewater operators or regional hubs with biosolids
Councils with large-scale wood, crop, or green waste
Emissions reduction and circular industry pilots
Northern Oil Advanced Biofuels Pilot (Gladstone, QLD)
Converts biomass into renewable bio-crude, simulating fossil fuel replacement for shipping and aviation.
Testing waste streams from forestry, sugarcane, and municipal organics.
Southern Oil
Rivalea Australia
ReWaste (VIC)
The ReWaste plant digests commercial food waste and sewage sludge to generate 25% of the treatment plant’s electricity needs.
Reduces disposal costs for local businesses and provides a reliable food waste diversion solution.
Yarra Valley Water
Organics Waste Case Study
Bioprocessing technologies use natural processes—like fermentation, anaerobic digestion, composting, and biorefining—to transform organic waste into renewable energy, soil products, and fuels. These solutions are increasingly being adopted across Australia to reduce landfill, lower emissions, and create local circular economy opportunities.
The following section highlights four real-world case studies of how councils, utilities, and industry partners are applying bioprocessing to manage food waste, biosolids, green waste, and agricultural by-products.
A more detailed version of the case studies can be found here:
Composting
Biorefining
Anerobic Digestion
For councils with a focus on managing general waste, Waste-to-Energy (WtE) refers a process that converts non-recyclable waste into usable forms of energy, such as electricity, heat, and fuels. This technology serves as a landfill diversion strategy while contributing to renewable energy targets. It provides an alternative to traditional waste disposal by recovering energy and reducing environmental impact.
This library provides councils with practical strategies, technology insights, and regulatory guidance to successfully implement General Waste-to-Energy (WTE) solutions, driving sustainability, economic benefits, and energy resilience. After reviewing these resources, you should have a better understanding of:
Strategies for landfill diversion – Reduce methane emissions and extend landfill lifespan by converting non-recyclable waste into energy.
Insights into diverse WTE technologies – Exploring options such as incineration, gasification, pyrolysis, anaerobic digestion (AD), and modular WTE systems based on waste composition.
Financial feasibility planning – Develop a cost-effective approach by evaluating CAPEX, operational costs, and long-term economic viability.
Regulatory & compliance guidance – Navigate emissions controls, permitting processes, and zoning approvals to meet strict air quality standards.
Community engagement strategies – Address public concerns about emissions and incineration through transparent communication and stakeholder engagement.
Optimisation of waste sorting & feedstock quality – Improve WTE efficiency with MRF enhancements, pre-treatment (shredding, dewatering, mechanical sorting), and contamination reduction strategies.
Revenue generation pathways – Understand how to create income through energy sales (PPAs), carbon credits, and material recovery (e.g., extracting metals from combustion ash).Energy security improvements – Learn how to integrate WTE output into district heating networks and industrial energy supply chains.
Circular economy integration – Learn how to maximise material recovery from residual waste streams to improve resource efficiency.
Adaptation to waste composition & seasonal trends – Learn how to assess MSW variability to optimise processing efficiency and resource recovery.
Councils considering WTE solutions can maximize economic and environmental benefits through the following:
Increased landfill diversion, reducing methane emissions and extending landfill lifespan.
Enhanced circular economy integration, improving recovery rates for residual waste.
Revenue generation through:
Reduced waste transportation costs, particularly when co-locating WTE infrastructure with MRFs or transfer stations.
Improved energy security, with potential integration into district heating or industrial energy supply chains.
While WTE offers significant advantages, councils must carefully evaluate the economic, environmental, and regulatory landscape before implementation:
Introduction to General Waste Processing
Understanding General Waste Feedstocks
Technologies for General Waste Processing
Offtake & Market Potential for General Waste Processing
Material recovery, such as metals extracted post-combustion.
Carbon credits for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Energy sales (electricity and heat production) under Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs).
Capital Investment & Operational Costs:
Feasibility studies and cost-benefit analyses are essential to ensure long-term viability.
Ongoing OPEX includes maintenance, emissions controls, and ash disposal.
WTE facilities require substantial CAPEX investment.
Public Perception & Stakeholder Engagement:
Clear demonstration of environmental benefits and emissions mitigation is essential to securing social license.
Community concerns over emissions and incineration must be addressed through public engagement and transparent communication.
Air Quality & Emissions Compliance:
Best Available Techniques (BAT) for emissions control must be integrated into facility design.
Strict regulations govern emissions of NOx, dioxins, and particulates.
Permitting Needs:
Odor & air pollution management, particularly for incineration & AD.
General Waste WtE Library Index
2.1 Understanding Your Waste Composition
Effective WTE and recycling strategies require an in-depth understanding of available feedstocks. Councils need to assess composition, variability, and seasonal trends of general waste streams to ensure efficient processing and maximise resource recovery
Residual MSW (Municipal Solid Waste):
Contaminated Paper: Paper products soiled by food, oil, or other contaminants, making them unsuitable for recycling.
Textiles: Clothing, fabrics, and synthetic materials that are difficult to process conventionally.
Plastics: Mixed plastics, including film plastics and rigid containers, that have limited recycling markets.
Non-recyclable Materials: Laminated packaging, composite materials, and contaminated residuals.
Recyclable Fractions:
Paper & Cardboard: Clean, uncontaminated fractions for recycling.
Construction & Demolition Debris: Wood, concrete, and metals that can be repurposed.
Plastics: PET, HDPE, and PP plastics with strong secondary markets
Metals: Ferrous and non-ferrous materials recoverable through MRFs.
Organic Residues:
Food Waste: Unavoidable food scraps from households and commercial sources.
Green Waste: Leaves, branches, and grass clippings with composting potential.
Contaminated Fiber Fractions: Soiled paper, napkins, and bio-based packaging materials
2.2 Sorting & Pre-Treatment Requirements
To improve feedstock quality, councils must implement sorting and pre-treatment measures that maximise material recovery before WtE processing.
Pre-treatment Processes:
Mechanical Sorting: Using optical and density-based sorting to extract valuable materials.
Dewatering: Removing excess moisture from organic waste to improve calorific value.
Shredding & Size Reduction: Breaking down large waste items for more uniform processing.
Contaminant Reduction Strategies: Developing contamination management plans to improve recyclability and processing efficiency.
MRF Optimisation: Enhancing sorting capabilities to separate high-value recyclables from residual MSW.
2.3 Feedstock Variability & Seasonality
Waste streams fluctuate due to seasonal, economic, and social factors, impacting processing efficiency.
Construction & Demolition Cycles: Variable material availability based on urban development trends.
Food Waste Surges: Higher organic waste generation during festive seasons and community events.
Retail Sales Peaks: Increased plastic and paper waste from consumer packaging during holiday periods.
Dry periods generate higher levels of dust and airborne particulates.
Wet conditions increase moisture content, impacting incineration efficiency
Weather-Related Factors:
2.4 Data Collection and Analysis
Accurate data collection is essential for understanding waste trends, optimizing resource recovery, and improving processing efficiency. Your council should leverage data-driven decision-making to enhance feedstock management, using the following approach.
Conducting periodic assessments and waste characterisation audits: to quantify different waste fractions and contamination rates.
Capturing real-time waste tonnages from transfer stations and MRFs: to monitor fluctuations and processing capacity.
Reviewing long-term waste generation trends: to predict seasonal peaks and inform infrastructure planning.
Engaging businesses and residents: to identify behavioral trends influencing waste disposal and recycling habits
3.3 WtE Processing Options – Decision Matrix
Choosing the right Waste-to-Energy (WTE) technology is essential for ensuring efficiency, sustainability, and economic feasibility in waste management. Different technologies cater to varying waste compositions, processing scales, and regulatory requirements. The following WTE solutions are applicable for general waste focused councils:
Large urban councils with high, consistent waste volumes
Medium to large councils with reliable waste streams looking for energy and material recovery
Regional and industrial councils with lower, decentralised waste volumes
Councils with high food waste and organic fractions within MSW
Mass-Burn Incineration
Gasification & Pyrolysis
Small-Scale Modular WTE
Anaerobic Digestion (AD)
Mixed MSW, nonrecyclable plastics, contaminated paper, textiles, refuse-derived fuel (RDF)
High-carbon MSW, plastics, wood waste, RDF, biomass residues
MSW fractions, RDF, organics, dry biomass
Food waste, garden waste, organic sludges, source-separated organics
Key Feedstocks
Large-scale incineration plants, emission control systems, grid connectivity for electricity export
Advanced thermal processing facilities, syngas cleaning systems, biochar collection
Compact processing units, district heating/microgrid integration, localized waste hubs
Digesters, gas capture systems, biogas upgrading for RNG production
Infrastructure Requirements
High – Significant CAPEX & OPEX due to emissions controls and plant construction
High – Advanced systems require costly pre-treatment and gas purification
Medium – Lower CAPEX compared to large WTE plants but limited economies of scale
Medium to High – Moderate CAPEX but requires digestate management strategies
Moderate to High – Air emissions require strict controls; ash and APC residues need disposa
Lower than incineration – Reduced air emissions and residual ash
Low to Moderate – Lower emissions due to small-scale operations, but efficiency varies
Low – Captures methane, preventing landfill emissions
Electricity, district heating, steam for industrial use
Syngas for electricity and fuels, biochar for soil enhancement, liquid fuels for industrial use
Local energy generation, microgrid integration, district heating
Renewable natural gas (RNG), digestate for fertiliders, carbon credit markets
End Market Opportunities
3.4 Cost & Scalability
Understanding the financial and operational considerations and scalability of your preferred organics processing technology is a key step is understanding, considering undertaking a detailed study of:
Highest (~$100M+) – Proven long term returns
Moderate (~$30M–$80M) – Potential biofuel revenue
Flexible (~$5M–$30M) – Lower economies of scale
Lower (~$10M–$50M) – Dependent on organic feedstock
High maintenance and emissions control costs
Moderate due to gas cleaning requirements
Variable, depending on scale and integration
Lower operational costs, but reliant on feedstock quality
Power sales, heat recovery, gate fees
Biofuels, syngas, biochar markets
Regional/localized power and heat applications
Biogas sales, digestate products
Revenue Potential
Best for large, consistent waste volumes
Suitable for mid-to-large scale with consistent feedstock
Modular and decentralized, adaptable for small-medium sites
Ideal for organic-heavy waste streams
Stringent emission and environmental controls required
Requires advanced gas cleaning & emission controls
Easier permitting due to smaller footprint
Permitting for waste treatment & biogas handling
Regulatory & Permitting
Large cities, waste hubs with high MSW volumes
Industrial sites, waste-to-biofuel projects
Rural and regional councils, niche energy projects
Councils with high food/organic waste streams
3.2 WtE Processing Options – Pros and Cons
Comparative Analysis of Pros and Cons Across Leading Waste-to-Energy Technologies
Combustion (Mass-Burn Incineration)
Challenges
Best suited for large, consistent waste volumes (100,000+ tpa).
Reduces landfill reliance by 70–95%.
Established technology with a strong track record of energy recovery.
Can integrate Combined Heat & Power (CHP) systems for increased energy efficiency.
High CAPEX & OPEX costs due to complex emissions control systems.
Generates bottom ash & air pollution control residues (APCr), requiring additional processing or disposal.
Potential public resistance due to concerns over emissions and air quality.
Higher energy efficiency than conventional incineration.
Converts MSW into valuable syngas, which can be used for electricity or fuel production.
Lower emissions compared to mass-burn incineration.
Potential revenue from biochar and liquid fuel markets.
Requires consistent feedstock quality for stable operations.
Higher CAPEX due to advanced gas cleaning and processing needs
Limited commercial-scale examples, leading to investment risks.
Lower CAPEX & quicker deployment than large-scale plants.
Suitable for regional waste hubs or industrial zones.
Can integrate into district heating networks and microgrid systems.
Limited processing capacity (5,000–30,000 tpa), requiring integration with other waste treatment strategies.
Limited economies of scale, potentially impacting financial feasibility.
Technology readiness varies, requiring feasibility assessments before investment
Captures methane, preventing emissions from landfilled waste.Produces renewable natural gas (RNG) and digestate for agriculture.
Lower emissions footprint than thermal WTE technologies.
Can be co-located with MRFs to process organic fractions from mixed waste.
Requires high organic content in feedstock, limiting its application for general MSW.
Digestate market development may be necessary for long term financial viability
Scalability challenges, particularly in mixed MSW environments.
Thermal Treatment (Gasification & Pyrolysis)
Small-Scale Modular WTE Solutions
Anaerobic Digestion (AD) for Residual Organics
3.1 WtE Processing Options – Overview
1. Combustion (Mass-Burn Incineration)
High-temperature combustion of mixed municipal solid waste (MSW) to generate electricity and heat. This method is widely used in large scale WTE plants.
2. Thermal Treatment (Gasification & Pyrolysis)
Thermal treatments that convert waste into syngas, biochar, and synthetic fuels through low-oxygen (gasification) or oxygen-free (pyrolysis) processes.
3. Small-Scale Modular WTE Solutions
Emerging compact, decentralised WTE technologies that enable localised energy production and waste processing
4. Anaerobic Digestion (AD) for Residual Organics
A biological process that decomposes organic material in an oxygen free environment, producing biogas and digestate. While more commonly applied to source-separated organics, AD can process residual organic fractions within MSW.
4.1 Key Offtake Pathways
A successful WTE strategy requires stable market demand for energy, heat, and recovered materials. Councils must explore offtake agreements, industry partnerships, and policy incentives to ensure sustainable revenue streams and circular economy outcomes.
Energy Sales through Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs)
Renewable Energy Certificate (REC) eligibility for green energy incentives.
Cogeneration (CHP) potential for district heating and local energy supply.
Long-term contracts with utilities and industrial users to sell electricity or heat from WTE plants.
This section outlines key strategies for marketability, revenue generation, and contract structuring to strengthen the business case for organic waste recovery
Key Offtake Pathways:
Material Recovery Market Expansion for Sorted Recyclables
Exploring export opportunities for materials with limited domestic markets.
Partnerships with manufacturers and recyclers to close material loops.
Diversification of high-value material sales, such as plastics, metals, and fiber.
Waste-Derived Fuels (RDF/SRF) for Industrial Use
Compliance with fuel quality standards to ensure regulatory acceptance.
Supply agreements with energy-intensive industries to offset fossil fuel usage.
Refuse-Derived Fuel (RDF) & Solid Recovered Fuel (SRF) as alternative fuels for cement kilns, steel production, and industrial boilers.
Biochar & Digestate Markets (For Pyrolysis & AD Systems)
Digestate processing for compost, fertilizers, and land rehabilitation projects
Biochar utilization in soil enhancement, carbon sequestration, and filtration applications.
4.2 Revenue Models
Maximising economic value from WTE requires a diverse portfolio of revenue streams, ensuring financial viability and return on investment.
Energy Offtake Contracts & Heat Utilisation
Waste heat recovery for industrial applications or community energy networks
Agreements with commercial or municipal users for district heating or process steam.
PPAs with grid operators to secure stable electricity sales.
Long-Term Contracts for Recyclables & Waste-Derived Fuels
Establishing contracted waste feedstock supply chains to ensure pricing stability.
Direct agreements with reprocessors and manufacturers to secure demand for offtakes
Carbon Credit Monetisation
Accreditation under verified offset programs (e.g., Australian Carbon Credit Units – ACCUs, Gold Standard, Verra).
Participation in voluntary and compliance-based carbon markets to generate revenue from emission reductions and avoided methane emissions.
Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) for WTE Infrastructure
Attracting impact investors and green financing institutions for circular economy projects.
Leveraging co-financing models with the private sector to fund infrastructure development.
Exploring government grants and subsidies for sustainable waste solutions.
General Waste - List of Tools and Templates
Glossary of Terms
General Waste Case Study
As councils move to reduce landfill dependency and meet emissions reduction targets, Waste-to-Energy (WtE) offers a viable pathway for valorising non-recyclable general waste.
While organics and recyclables can be diverted through established systems, a significant portion of municipal solid waste (MSW) remains as residuals. These residuals — often too contaminated or complex for recovery — present both a challenge and an opportunity.
Thermal and biological WtE technologies are evolving to meet local government needs, with options ranging from large-scale combustion to small-scale gasification and engineered biocells that accelerate landfill gas recovery.
Thermal Combustion
Biocell in Landfill
These solutions can support net-zero goals, extend landfill life, and generate local energy or fuel, making them increasingly attractive to both metropolitan and regional councils.
6.1 Thermal Combustion - Baseload Power from General Waste
Kwinana (WA)
Australia’s first large-scale thermal Waste-to-Energy facility, designed to process 400,000 tonnes of residual municipal solid waste per year. The Avertas Energy facility in Kwinana, Western Australia, is set to begin waste processing in July 2024.
Delivers 36 MW of baseload electricity to WA’s grid – enough to power ~50,000 homes.
Part of WA’s waste diversion strategy and supported by long-term waste supply agreements with multiple Perth councils.
Avertas Energy
Relevance & Opportunities for Councils and Regional Communities
Thermal combustion provides a high-throughput option for managing non-recyclable general waste at scale.
Best suited to metro regions with stable feedstock volumes and limited landfill capacity.
Projects can benefit from long-term council offtake agreements and renewable energy incentives.
Metropolitan, urban rural ROCs/councils with residual MSW issues
Waste alliances seeking landfill alternatives
Regions pursuing renewable baseload energy from waste
Avertas represents a flagship model for urban WtE infrastructure combining waste reduction with renewable energy generation.
6.2 Gasification – Low-Emission Energy from Residual Waste
MIHG Technology (Pilot Sites Across Australia)
Emerging small-scale gasification technology with modular deployment potential. The MIHG (Moving Injection Horizontal Gasification) system processes 10,000–15,000 tonnes per year of mixed general waste with minimal pre-treatment.
Pilot Plant Development
Wildfire Energy has constructed a pilot MIHG plant with an instantaneous feed capacity of 1 tonne per day. The pilot facility includes:
MIHG reactor and oxidant supply system
Wildfire Energy
Gasification suits regional and outer-urban areas with limited landfill space and rising carbon liability.
Offers decentralised WtE with lower emissions and smaller land footprint than incineration.
Can enable energy autonomy, reduce methane, and stimulate local green manufacturing.
Regional or rural LGAs with 10,000–20,000 tpa residual waste.
Councils seeking scalable low-carbon WtE options.
Regions aiming to transition toward net-zero waste and energy.
Handles variable waste streams including MSW, C&I, plastics, and biomass. Produces syngas for electricity, hydrogen, and fuel production, with potential for co-firing or integration with hydrogen hubs.
Requires no complex feed mechanisms and assumes up to 90% availability from MSW, C&I, C&D and green waste.
Syngas clean-up system including electrostatic precipitator (ESP), gas blower, gas cooler, and adsorbent bed
Real-time measurement, monitoring, and automated control systems
A new 2nd Generation MIHG Reactor
Syngas engine for onsite electricity production
Compression and pressure swing adsorption (PSA) unit for hydrogen purification
In 2023, the pilot plant was upgraded to include:
Full automation, mirroring the control systems of a future commercial-scale MIHG plant
The plant has conducted over 90 successful gasification runs using a wide range of feedstocks, validating:
Design gas heating values and flow rates
Suitability of syngas for gas engines and hydrogen production
Consistent syngas quality and flow from the moving injection concept
6.3 Biocell in Landfill – Enhanced Methane Capture & Energy Recovery
Where It's Working - Pilot Applications & Council-Led
Pre-Processing (Sorting and Separation)
Gas Capture & Utillisation
Technology & Process Features
Cell Design: Engineered, lined and covered landfill cells with gas wells, leachate collection, and gas extraction piping.
Feedstock: Organic-rich general waste streams (MSW with high putrescible content).
Pre-Processing: Optional sorting to remove recyclables or non-biodegradables. Organics are directed to active biocells.
Energy & Environmental Outcomes
Methane Yield: Estimated at ~100–150 m³ CH₄ per tonne of decomposing organic waste
Energy Use: Captured methane can power a CHP unit or be injected into the grid depending on volume and quality.
Mass Reduction: Biological drying and digestion can reduce waste mass by ~1–15% before final landfilling (placeholder)
Moisture Management: Leachate is recirculated to accelerate decomposition, enabling faster methane generation.
Gas Capture: Covered cells collect and channel methane-rich biogas for energy use.
Monitoring: Real-time or periodic monitoring of leachate chemistry, gas volumes, and methane content to optimise system performance.
Residuals: Remaining stabilised solids are safe for landfilling or potentially for use in future cell lining or capping.
Implementation Pathway
Feasibility Assessment: Evaluate waste composition, site infrastructure, and regulatory approvals.
Design & Engineering: Develop detailed cell designs, including liners, covers, leachate systems, and gas extraction infrastructure.
Construction & Setup: Build biocells and install monitoring systems. Commission the gas capture system.
Operation & Monitoring: Fill cells with waste, manage leachate recirculation, and monitor gas production over time.
Energy Integration: Flare, generate electricity, or compress methane for use in vehicles or export.
Post-Stabilisation & Reuse: Once digestion is complete, the cell is capped and may be repurposed or re-used depending on site strategy.
Biocells are particularly valuable where:
Landfill space is limited or approaching capacity
Capital constraints prevent large-scale WtE development
Regional councils operating their own landfills
Sites without access to advanced WtE or AD facilities
LGAs aiming to cut emissions from existing landfill sites
Emissions from legacy landfill operations must be reduced
Opportunities exist to valorise organics without complex processing
They offer a practical transition pathway for councils to:
Improve landfill gas capture performance
Reduce long-term carbon liabilities
Support staged infrastructure investment
Unlock circular opportunities through gas use or carbon credit generation
Councils testing circular or hybrid waste recovery models
We understand that every WtE journey is different. A successful strategy should be the right fit for your council – focusing on your unique risks and opportunities. No matter where you are on your journey, this toolkit should help you identify, prioritise, implement and evaluate critical steps at every stage of your WtE project pathways transition, from strategy through execution and performance monitoring.
Key Characteristics
Large Councils with predictable waste streams.
>45,000 tpa of residual waste (10,000 - 25,000 tpa of organics).
Well-established FOGO services with scaling potential.
Moderate budget flexibility ($5M-$15M).
Moderate waste management expertise and existing infrastructure (MRFs, regional hubs).
Small regional councils with highly variable waste generation (3,000-10,000 tpa).
Rely on seasonal industries (agriculture, tourism) with fluctuating waste streams.
Limited infrastructure (only transfer stations, no Material Recovery Facilities (MRFs).
Small budgets (<$5M), requiring grant-funded solutions.
Medium-large urban councils with standard MSW management systems.
>45,000 tpa residual waste, including alternative recyclables and some organics.
Moderate budge flexibility ($5M-$15M).
Good collaboration with Regional Councils and moderate industry partnerships.
Regional councils with unpredictable waste volumes (3,000-10,000 tpa).
Limited infrastructure (only transfer stations, no MRFs or processing facilities).
High transport costs for waste disposal.
Small budgets (<$5M), relying on grants and inter-council collaboration.
Organics Focused Project Pathway
General Waste Focused Project Pathway
WtE Project
1. Concept Stage (1st Gate Review)
Conduct detailed waste audits to assess the availability and consistency of organic feedstock.
Organics composition (food waste vs green waste).
Calorific value and methane potential for AD feasibility.
Woody waste fractions for biochar pyrolysis.
Evaluate regional collaboration opportunities for a shared AD or composting facility.
Engage with offtakers to determine demand for:
Biogas for local industry or grid injection.
Compost and biochar for agriculture and urban landscaping.
Digestate as an alternative to chemical fertilizers.
Compost quality standards (contamination thresholds, nutrient balance).
Biogas emissions and carbon offset potential.
Digestate land application guidelines.
Assess permitting and regulatory approvals, including:
State/Federal grants (ARENA, CEFC, Circular Economy initiatives).
Private sector co-investment (agriculture, energy markets).
Identify funding sources, such as:
2. Feasibility Stage (2nd Gate Review)
Conduct Technology Evaluation and MCA (Multi-Criteria Analysis) to compare composting, AD, and biochar production.
Wet AD: High biogas yield, suitable for food waste.
Dry AD: Best for mixed food and garden organics.
Pyrolysis/Biochar production: Suitable for woody organics, producing soil carbon amendments.
Revenue streams from energy and carbon credits.
Cost-benefit analysis vs landfill disposal fees.
Technical analysis of biogas potential (e.g., methane yield per tonne of FOGO).
Projected CAPEX/OPEX for different technology configuration.
Regulatory compliance evaluation:
Biogas plant licensing (EPA air quality controls).
Digestate classification under organic waste regulations.
Energy recovery modeling: Options include biogas-to-grid, on-site power, and bio-methane upgrading.
Economic feasibility analysis
3. Specification Development (Final Gate Review)
Selection of anaerobic digestion technology (e.g., continuous stirred-tank reactor vs. plug flow).
Wet AD (food-heavy streams) vs. Dry AD (mixed food/green waste.
Biochar pyrolysis for woody organic residues.
Pre-treatment (grinding, pulping) to maximize methane yield.
Regional collaboration for shared organics processing.
Establish procurement strategy and technology vendor selection.
Confirm regulatory approvals and carbon offset potential.
Contamination control strategies (household education, bin inspections).
Engineering design for optimal pre-treatment (e.g., grinding, pulping, dewatering of FOGO).
Regulatory compliance and permits (including EPA approvals for digestate use.
Develop financial modeling incorporating waste levy sensitivities and OPEX fluctuations.
Define feedstock handling, processing, and contamination management plans.
4. Contract Close & Design
Secure Long-term offtake agreements secured for biogas and digestate/compos.
Regulatory & Procurement Approval.
EPA licenses for emissions, digestate application, and odour control.
Land-use and planning approvals for infrastructure development.
Finalised procurement for modular digesters and biogas upgrading systems.
Implementation & Commissioning Operator training on AD system performance optimisation.
Biogas/compost offtake contracts finalised.
Selection of AD technology vendors via RFP process.
Infrastructure and pipeline connections finalized.
Training for facility operators on feedstock pre-treatment and AD efficiency optimization.
Construction and system pilot testing to validate gas production efficiency.
Engineering & Construction
Construction and commissioning commence.
Metropolitan / Urban ROCs
Rural ROCs or Standalone Council
Overview (Opportunities & Information Needs):
Urban ROCs with established FOGO services and predictable organics streams (>10,000 tpa) are well-positioned to scale up composting or anaerobic digestion (AD). The key opportunity lies in leveraging shared infrastructure and energy recovery to reduce landfill, generate biogas, and support market development for compost or digestate. Councils and ROCs need detailed feedstock data, facility siting analysis, off-take market intelligence, and tools to compare organics processing options.
Recommended Model:
Joint legal entity (e.g. regional subsidiary) or joint venture.
Steps to Form Joint Procurement Approach:
1. Form a cross-council working group and develop a shared strategic vision for organics recovery and energy outcomes.
2. Commission a pre-feasibility study to confirm feedstock volumes, technology options, siting, and infrastructure needs.
3. Secure political alignment and legal advice on governance structures and entity formation under NSW legislation.
4. Draft a business case for shared investment and apply for grant funding (e.g. ARENA, Circular Economy Infrastructure Fund).
5. Conduct market sounding to engage technology providers and potential operators.
6. Design flexibility into the model to allow for future scaling or technology integration.
7. Develop offtake agreements for power (PPAs) or digestate, and build market access strategies.
Organic Waste to Energy Focus
Recommended Project Pathway
Evaluate collaboration opportunities with neighboring councils or agricultural cooperatives to share AD infrastructure
Engage local farms and agribusinesses to understand their demand for biofertilizer and soil amendments.
Assess off-take markets for biogas, digestate (fertilizer replacement), and compost.
Identify funding opportunities (e.g., ARENA’s bioenergy funding, CEFC’s infrastructure investment loans, state-based renewable energy grants).
Preliminary site assessment for small-scale AD or co-digestion plants.
Conduct MCA (Multi-Criteria Analysis) for technology selection, comparing:
Small-scale modular anaerobic digestion (AD) with biogas capture.
Biochar pyrolysis for woody organic waste streams.
Assess biogas yield potential (e.g., methane content from food waste vs. green waste vs. manure).
Investigate decentralized micro-AD systems, such as containerized biodigesters for local waste treatment.
Vermicomposting or composting as an alternative or complementary solution.
Finalise technology selection (e.g., plug-flow AD system with pre-treatment for high-solids organics).
Define procurement strategy for modular digesters.
Engage regulatory agencies for site-specific approvals (EPA licensing, digestate application approvals).
Conduct financial modeling to assess potential revenue streams from carbon credits, biogas sale, digestate fertilizer markets.
Secure grants and financing agreements.
Develop operational guidelines to handle seasonal waste fluctuations (e.g., blending high-carbon (woody) with high-nitrogen (food waste) materials).
Finalise land acquisition and permitting approvals.
Secure offtake agreements (e.g., sale to local businesses, farms, or grid injection feasibility).
Develop workforce training programs for plant operation.
Begin site preparation, construction, and commissioning of organics processing units.
Implement real-time monitoring systems for feedstock input, gas yield, and digestate quality control.
Confirm digestate/compost utilization partnerships with local farmers.
Model energy recovery options for on-site use (e.g., using biogas for local heat demand, irrigation pumps, farm energy needs).
Estimate CAPEX, OPEX, and operational requirements for small-scale AD (e.g., plug-flow, batch digesters, or CSTR systems).
Assess regulatory compliance requirements (e.g., digestate classification, emissions, biosecurity for AD outputs).
Explore the viability of co-digestion with local manure/slurry waste to improve biogas yield.
Develop risk mitigation strategies for waste variability and seasonal fluctuations. If feasibility is confirmed, proceed to Specification Development.
Create a regional waste-sharing agreement if collaborating with other councils or agricultural groups.
Small regional councils with limited infrastructure and low, variable organics volumes (3,000–10,000 tpa) can benefit from collaborative investment in modular composting or smaller scale anaerobic digestion (AD) facilities. The key opportunity is in shared infrastructure, co-funding, and decentralised processing. Councils can enhance viability by partnering with local agribusinesses, food processors, or waste operators who may provide feedstock, land, or co-investment. Information needs include seasonal feedstock profiling, technology suitability assessments, funding pathways, and regulatory guidance for small-scale systems.
Shared investment effort with third-party operation. This can include partnerships with private sector entities that have aligned interests in bioenergy, land use, or organics processing outcomes.
Steps to Advance Shared Investment Efforts:
1. Identify regional organics processing needs and potential feedstock contributors (e.g. farms, food processors).
2. Engage councils and private sector partners to explore shared investment or service delivery.
3. Conduct feedstock and site analysis to inform facility scale, location, and co-benefits.
4. Formalise collaboration via an MoU, outlining roles, funding contributions, and performance expectations.
5. Apply for grants (e.g. ARENA, RRIF) to support capital and feasibility costs.
6. Procure a modular or mobile system suited to regional volumes, operated by an experienced service provider.
7. Establish a simple oversight mechanism for cost monitoring and performance reporting.
Rural ROCs or Standalone Councils
Material recovery and contamination audits at your MRFs to assess:
Recovery rates for plastics, paper, and metals.
Contamination levels in MSW streams.
Potential for RDF production from high-calorific fractions.
Assessment of WtE technologies (combustion, gasification, pyrolysis) based on waste stream characteristics.
Preliminary air emissions modeling for different technology options.
Identify landfill diversion targets to optimize waste stream sorting.
Evaluate policy incentives for RDF and bioenergy.
Multi-Criteria Analysis (MCA) for WtE technologies:
Moving Grate Incineration: High CAPEX, but suitable for bulk MSW processing. Best for high-volume, mixed waste streams.
Gasification: Higher energy conversion efficiency, but requires homogeneous feedstock.
Pyrolysis: Converts plastics, paper waste into bio-oil and syngas.
Evaluating heat and electricity generation potential.
Emissions and environmental compliance modeling and regulatory compliance analysis:
Reviewing air pollution controls (e.g., NOx, SOx, PM10/PM2.5 limits.
Electricity vs industrial heat offtake.Potential for district heating applications.
Carbon credit opportunities through landfill diversion.
Energy recovery modeling:
Technology Selection & Optimisation
Mass burn incineration (high-volume, mixed MSW).
Gasification (syngas production for electricity, industrial applications).
Pyrolysis (bio-oil, syngas, and char from plastics, textiles, and biomass waste).
Inter-council agreements for waste consolidation.
Energy Offtake & Grid Integration
Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) for electricity sales.
RDF preparation through pre-processing and sorting.
Regulatory Compliance & Environmental Controls.
Emissions control strategies (bag filters, NOx scrubbers).
Waste heat recovery potential for local industrial users.
Waste Supply & Logistics
Final engineering approvals for plant commissioning.
Regulatory & Procurement Approvals
EPA permits for incineration/gasification emissions control.
Long-term contracts for electricity/grid connection. E.g. PPAs secured with energy offtakers (industrial heat users, grid suppliers).
Installation of air pollution control systems.
Implementation & Commissioning
Operator training on emissions monitoring and compliance.
Procurement of waste sorting, drying, and pre-processing equipment.
Full-scale commercial operation begins with ongoing performance tracking.
Pilot testing of combustion/gasification system efficiency.
Compliance with national air quality standards
Urban councils managing high volumes of residual waste (>45,000 tpa) have an opportunity to co-invest in large-scale WtE infrastructure through Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) or joint ventures. These projects can support landfill diversion, provide price stability, and enable energy and carbon offset generation. The opportunity lies in aggregating waste streams and resources to create investable infrastructure. Councils will need strong business cases, feedstock assurance modelling, off-take and energy pricing strategies, and support navigating complex regulation and carbon markets.
Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) or public-private joint venture. An SPV is a subsidiary company set up separately from a parent company (or group of councils) for a specific task, project or operation. It is designed to shield the parent organisation(s) from financial and legal risks associated with the infrastructure project, while allowing for agile commercial decision-making.
Steps to Form Joint Procurement:
1. Quantify combined residual waste volumes and assess long-term supply commitments across participating councils.
2. Build political and executive alignment on the strategic role of WtE in meeting regional waste and emissions targets.
3. Establish a governance model that defines council equity, voting rights, and roles within the SPV or JV structure.
4. Define and test the delivery model (e.g. Build-Own-Operate, Build-Own-Operate-Transfer) with clear risk allocation and exit clauses.
5. Engage early with energy off-takers, carbon credit buyers, and key regulators to shape the commercial model.
6. Develop a compelling regional business case to unlock state/federal infrastructure grants or investment incentives.
7. Launch a formal market engagement process to identify suitable technology providers, project developers, and financial partners.
General Waste to Energy Focus
Conduct a regional waste audit to analyse waste composition and calorific value.
Identify existing waste disposal challenges (e.g., landfill constraints, illegal dumping hotspots).
Gasification for mixed waste with high-energy content.
Assess technology feasibility for small-scale WtE solutions:
Micro-pyrolysis for plastics, textiles, and biomass.
Small-scale RDF production for co-firing with industrial energy users.
Conduct MCA (Multi-Criteria Analysis) for WtE technology selection
Small-scale gasification for RDF conversion to syngas.
Hybrid micro-modular WtE plants integrating sorting, drying, and combustion.
Analyse CAPEX and OPEX cost structures.
Model potential heat and energy outputs from RDF-based gasification.
Pyrolysis for mixed plastic, paper, and low-quality MSW.
Finalise small-scale gasification or pyrolysis plant specifications.
Develop procurement strategies for modular solutions.
Negotiate RDF or biochar offtake agreements with industrial partners.
Develop financial models incorporating revenue streams from carbon credits and energy sales.
Secure grant funding and private investment partnerships.
Secure regulatory compliance approvals for emissions control and energy output.
Obtain final land-use approvals and secure infrastructure readiness.
Begin construction and commissioning of the WtE facility.
Deploy emissions monitoring and compliance tracking systems.
Optimise waste sorting, drying, and pre-treatment processes.
Develop operator training programs for small-scale WtE technology.
Engage regulatory agencies for licensing small-scale energy production.
Assess long-term feedstock availability and regional waste aggregation potential.
Identify energy offtake options (e.g., power generation for council-owned facilities, sale to industrial users).
Investigate waste aggregation models (collaboration with nearby councils)
Evaluate funding options for small-scale decentralized WtE solutions (e.g., state renewable energy grants, public-private partnerships).
Remote and regional councils face high transport costs and limited access to waste processing infrastructure. With unpredictable waste volumes (3,000–10,000 tpa), there is a strong case for modular WtE solutions such as gasification or pyrolysis. Councils should explore collaborating with local industries, mine operators, or agribusinesses that generate similar waste types or could co-locate infrastructure. Key information needs include regional waste mapping, modular technology options, and shared governance and funding frameworks.
Regional collaboration model for modular WtE infrastructure. May include partnerships with private businesses (e.g. waste generators, industrial landowners, local utilities) that share an interest in energy recovery or waste reduction.
Steps to Advance Regional Collaboration:
1. Undertake a joint analysis of waste volumes, transport distances, and current disposal costs across the region.
2. Identify industrial partners (e.g. manufacturers, agri-processors, landowners) with shared infrastructure or waste needs.
3. Convene an inter-council working group to co-design project intent and delivery models.
4. Commission a feasibility study covering waste flows, technology options, and site constraints.
5. Establish a collaboration framework (Joint Authority, Inter-Council Agreement, or public-private JV).
6. Secure funding through grants and/or private capital via aligned commercial interests.
7. Procure a modular WtE system provider with experience in small-scale deployment.
Regional ROCs or Standalone Councils
8. Develop a shared oversight model for performance, reporting, and stakeholder engagement.
Archetype Selection
01 Introduction to Organics Processing
1.2 Benefits of Organics Processing WtE
1.3 Challenges and key considerations
1.1 Overview
3.2 Anerobic Digestion: Wet and Dry AD Systems & Case Study
3.3 Aerobic Composting Options Evaluation
3.4 Biochar
3.5 Other Technology Options
3.6 Cost, Scalability & Feasibility Evaluation for Organics Processing
5.1 Anerobic Digestion Fact Sheet and Glossary of Terms
5.2 How to Guide: Undertaking a Feedstock Analysis
5.3 How to Guide: Procurement Roadmap and Procurement Evaluation Tool
6.1 Fermentation
6.2 Anerobic Digestion
6.3 Composting
6.4 Biorefining
5.4 Cost Benefit Analysis Template
General Waste Library Index
1.1 Overview and Benefits of WtE
1.2 Challenges in Managing MSW & Residual Waste Streams
1.3 Defining Traits of Typical General Waste Councils
1.4 Policy & Regulatory Landscape for Residual Waste Processing
2.1 Composition of MSW & Residual Waste Streams
2.2 Contamination Risks & Sorting Technologies
2.3 Seasonal Variability in General Waste Generation
2.4 Data Collection & Waste Characterisation
3.1 Overview of Technologies
3.2 Technology Pros and Cons
3.3 Technology Evaluation and Decision Matrix
3.4 Cost, Scalability Considerations
4.1 Offtake pathways
5.1 Glossary of Terms
5.3 How to Guide: Procurement Roadmap and Procrement Evaluation Tool
6.1 Thermal Combustion
6.2 Gasification
6.3 Biocell in Landfill
6.4 Landfill Biogas Capture for Residual Organics
5.4 Cost Benefit Analyis Template
1.3 Challenges and Key Considerations
1.2 Benefits of Organics Processing
2.3 Seasonal & Geographical Considerations for Organic Processing
3.2 Anerobic Digestion: Wet and Dry AD System Case Study
3.3 Anerobic Composting Options Evaluation
4.1 Organics End Market Development & End-Use Application
5.2 How to Guide: Undertaking Feedstock Analysis
2.1 Composition of MSW & Residsual Waste Streams
2.2 Contaminination Risks & Sorting Technologies
4.1 Offtake Pathways
Offtake & Market Potential for General Processing
