INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION AND RESEARCH:

42

K. Singh et al.: Municipal Solid Waste to Energy: Potential for Application in Trinidad and Tobago

ISSN 1000 7924 The Journal of the Association of Professional Engineers of Trinidad and Tobago Vol.38, No.1, October 2009, pp.42-49

Municipal Solid Waste to Energy: An Economic and Environmental Assessment for Application in Trinidad and Tobago Kamel Singha, Solange O. Kellyb and Musti K.S. Sastry cΨ a, b

c

The University of Trinidad and Tobago, Pt. Lisas Campus, Esperanza Road, Brechin Castle, Trinidad and Tobago, West Indies E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected]

Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, The University of West Indies, St. Augustine Campus, Trinidad and Tobago, West Indies E-mail: [email protected] Ψ

Corresponding Author (Received 15 May 2009; Revised 13 August 2009; Accepted 21 September 2009)

Abstract: Economic and social progress in Trinidad and Tobago has resulted in the tripling of generation of solid waste from 1990 to 2007. It is anticipated that by 2020 the waste generated will exceed 1.4 million tons per annum (tpa). As a small island developing state, the country will be confronted by shortage of land area for setting up new landfills, significant environmental deterioration, negative public health impacts and scarcity of resources for the safe disposal of the waste. This paper presents comparison of various technologies for converting Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) to energy, and proposes a new Waste-to-Energy (WTE) process based on plasma gasification technology. A brief cost- benefit analysis of the plants has been presented from which it is shown that this proposed WTE process is a feasible option and an environmentally favorable solution to the problem of solid waste management in Trinidad and Tobago. Keywords: Municipal Solid Waste, Solid Waste Management, Waste to Energy, Plasma Gasification

1. Introduction Household waste (or domestic waste) with sometimes the addition of commercial wastes collected by a municipality within a given area is known as Municipal Solid Waste (MSW). Disposal of this waste is a challenging task in every part of the world due to the associated health risks and impact on the environment. In Trinidad and Tobago, most of the solid waste collected is disposed of in the country’s three major landfills; the Beetham Landfill which is the largest landfill located on the outskirts of the country’s capital and poses an ecological threat as it is located in a wetland environment; the Forres Park Landfill in Claxton Bay is the only engineered sanitary landfill (i.e., constructed with a leachate collection system which requires extensive maintenance), and the Guanapo Landfill in Arima which has the potential to have a direct negative impact on the underlying aquifer and all the surface water downstream of the site is in close proximity to

many private residences. Figure 1 shows the daily amount of waste taken to each of the landfills in 2007. Figure 1 shows the daily average amount of solid waste received at Trinidad’s 3 Major Landfills, (SWMCOL, 2007). Approximately, 214,880 tons of solid waste were generated in 1990, increasing to 607,788 tons in 2007 (SWMCOL, 2007). It is anticipated that the Beetham Landfill, which accounts for 55% of the country’s waste, will reach its capacity within the next few years.

Figure 1. Daily Average Amount of Solid Waste at Trinidad’s 3 Major Landfills

43


The problem of solid waste management (SWM) is now of national importance. Figure 2 shows the waste generated annually. It is estimated that by the year 2020, the country will be generating 1.4 million tons of MSW per year. The GORTT has approved a MSW Management Policy in 2008 (GORTT, 2008). This policy seeks to address strategies for managing waste in a manner that would protect the environment and integrate waste systems, using cost effective measures. It is within this context that a WTE plant is proposed.

components received (see Table 1). Table 1. The 1995 Waste Qualification Study for Three Major Landfills Component Plastics Paper Organics Food Glass Metals Textiles Rubber & Leather Fines Yard And Garden Non-Recylables

Total

Beetham (%)

Forres Park (%)

Guanapo (%)

Total (%)

20% 20% 16% 10% 10% 10% 7% 5% 0% 0% 0% 100%

13% 18% 0% 39% 8% 8% 4% 2% 2% 6% 0% 100%

20% 20% 17% 11% 6% 10% 9% 7% 0% 0% 0% 100%

17% 19% 11% 21% 9% 9% 7% 4% 1% 2% 0% 100%

Source: Based on SWMCOL (1995)

Figure 2. Total Estimated Annual Tons

The objective of the paper is to assess the various WTE conversion technologies based on an economic and environmental analysis with the aim of selecting the most appropriate technology. The paper also introduces a novel approach to waste management in Trinidad from collection to conversion to electrical energy. The discussion is divided into 6 sections. The issues related to SWM and related information is provided in Section 1. A detailed composition of waste is presented in Section 2; along with the forecast of the amounts of waste that will be generated in future. Section 3 presents a comparative study of Thermochemical Conversion Technologies that are presently used. The details of the proposed WTE plant for SWM in Trinidad and Tobago are presented in Section 4, along with a brief cost estimation. The socio-economic and environmental benefits are illustrated in Section 5. Overall conclusions are provided in Section 6. 2. Waste Quantification and Characterisation In 1995, SWMCOL conducted a household waste qualification study for the nation’s three major landfills categorises. The study quantified the major

Sixty eight percent (68%) of household waste came from primarily four components; paper, plastic, organics and food. Food accounted for 21%, paper 19%, plastics 17% and organics 11%, respectively. Each of the components has some level of recovery. The opinion of subject matter experts interviewed anticipated possible recovery rates based on 1995 total generation figures at the landfills. The highest recovery rate is expected to be glass at 25% because of the existing arrangement between salvagers of the Bottle Vendors Association of the Beetham Estate, SWMCOL and Carib Glassworks Limited (CGL), where SWMCOL purchases the glass from the salvagers and acts as their facilitator for its resale to CGL. Metal recovery is also about 25% because of the ease of retrieval. Recovery of materials for recycling and composting was estimated at 54.47 tonnes or 11.6% of daily generation, leaving 414.53 tonnes to be converted into useful energy. Based on a characterisation and quantification analysis with the use of handbook data, (Kreith, 2007), the calorific value (CV) of the waste discarded was calculated and found to be 16,150 kJ/kg. With such a high CV potential, there exists an opportunity for the conversion of the waste to much needed useful clean electrical energy generation. 3. Thermochemical Conversion Technologies Incineration and Conventional Gasification are the two proven technologies with energy recovery capabilities that are currently in use for SWM in different parts of the world.


3.1 Incineration Waste incineration has been and continues to be practiced in many countries in order to accomplish disposal in a cost effective manner. A major benefit of incineration is the volume reduction of the original waste by 95~96%, depending on the composition and degree of material recovery such as metals from the ash for recycling. Incineration reduces the necessary volume destined for landfilling significantly, in addition to treatment of certain institutional wastes in niche areas as clinical wastes and certain hazardous wastes where pathogens and toxins can be destroyed by high temperatures (Speight, 2008). The amount of heat recovered from the incineration process is quite small when compared to other thermochemical conversion technologies. Hence it is not surprising that incineration used in conjunction with steam cycle boilers and turbine generators achieves lower efficiency. The most publicised concerns about incineration of MSW involve the fear that it produces significant amounts of dioxin and furan emissions. Dioxins and furans are considered by many to be serious health hazards. The concerns over its health effects have been significantly lessened by advances in emission control designs and stringent air pollution rules. Inspite of this incineration for waste disposal and energy production, it remains a controversial topic for waste management (Ojolo and Bamgboye, 2005). 3.2 Conventional Gasification Process Gasification offers more scope for recovering products from waste than incineration. When waste is incinerated the only practical product is energy, whereas the gases, oils and solid char from gasification can not only be used as a fuel but also purified and used as a feedstock for petrochemicals and other applications (Speight, 2008). A process flow for the gasification of MSW is as shown in Figure 3. The principle behind waste gasification and the production of gaseous fuels is that waste contains carbon and it is this carbon that is converted to gaseous products via gasification chemistry. Thus when waste is fed to a gasifier, water, and volatile matter are released and a char residue is left to react further. The product gas generally contains large amounts of hydrogen and carbon monoxide and a small amount of methane, as well as carbon dioxide and steam.

44

Pre-treatment

Figure 3. Process Flow for the Gasification of the Municipal Solid Waste Source: Abstracted from Speight (2008)

By displacing fossil fuels, gasification can help (i) meet renewable energy targets, (ii) address concerns of global warming, and (iii) contribute to achieving Kyoto Protocol commitments. Associated with gasification of MSW, the issues include feedstock homogeneity, feedstock heterogeneity, and process scale up that can lead to a number of mechanical problems, shutdowns, sintering and hot spots leading to corrosion and failure of the reactor wall. 3.3 Plasma Gasification Process One of the increasingly popular types of gasification is Plasma Gasification. Plasma gasification technology has been shown to be the most effective and environmentally friendly method for solid waste treatment and energy utilisation. It is a non-incineration thermal process that uses extremely high temperatures in a partial oxygen environment to decompose completely the input waste material into very simple molecules. The products of the process are a fuel or gas known as synthesis gas and an inert vitreous material known as slag (Stehlı´k, 2009). Plasma gasification uses an external heat source to gasify the waste, resulting in very little combustion. Almost all of the carbon is converted to fuel. The high operating temperatures allow for the breaking down of all tars, char and dioxins. The exit gas from the reactor is cleaner, and there is no ash at the bottom of the reactor. The waste feed sub-system is used for the treatment of each type of waste in order to meet the inlet requirements of the plasma furnace. For example, for a waste material with high moisture content, a drier will be required. However, a typical feed system consists of a shredder for solid waste size reduction prior to entering the plasma furnace. The plasma furnace is the central component of the system where gasification and vitrification takes place. Plasma torches are mounted at the bottom of

45


the reactor, they provide high temperature air (i.e., almost three times higher than traditional combustion temperatures) which allow for the gasification of the waste materials. Figure 4 shows a block diagram of the plasma gasification process. (Mountouris et al., 2006) The gas produced in the furnace system is referred to as synthesis gas. This gas then enters the synthesis gas cleaning system. Gas cleaning refers to the process of removing acid gases, suspended particulates, heavy metals and moisture from the synthesis gas prior to entering the energy recovery system where power, steam and synthetic fuels can be obtained. Unlike waste incineration, plasma gasification WTE technology has proven to have a benign impact on the environment.

Table 2. Comparison of Thermochemical Conversion Technologies Plasma Gasification Gasification of solids by partial oxidation and water-gas shift reaction resulting in high quantities of hydrogen and carbon monoxide. Wide range of composition of MSW can be used. Simultaneous feeding of organic and inorganic constituents is allowed. Vitreous slag produced; slag can be used for making bricks, road bed etc. Can be used with a combined steam and gas cycle or simple cycle gas turbine for achieving high thermal efficiency.

Conventional Gasification Gasification of solids by oxidation resulting in high quantities of CO2

Operation stability requires control of moisture as and a more homogeneous type of MSW

Incineration Attempts complete combustion of solids resulting in high quantities of environmentally unfriendly gases like CO2 being produced. Operation stability requires control of moisture and heat content.

Ash produced needs to be landfilled

Ash produced which needs to be landfilled

Can be used with a combined steam and gas cycle or simple cycle gas turbine for achieving high thermal efficiency.

Can be used with steam cycle

Table 3. Some of the existing plasma gasification WTE facilities Year Commissioned 2004 2002

Figure 4. Plasma Gasification Process Source: Abstracted from Mountouris et al. (2006)

2003 1995

A comparative analysis among the three technologies - conventional gasification, incineration and the plasma gasification process - is summarised in Table 2 (AlterNRG, 2008). From this, it can be seen that plasma gasifications technology for SWM is a superior, environmental-friendly, safe and sustainable solution. 3.4 Existing Plasma Gasification WTE facilities There are a few Plasma gasification WTE facilities existing throughout the world. Some are listed in Table 3. Planning is also being done for the establishment of additional facilities in Canada and new facilities in the US, India, England and Wales. In the Caribbean (with the exception of Jamaica), there has been little attempt at WTE using plasma gasification. The capital cost of such technologies appeared far too high to be considered an appropriate waste management solution.

Location 3-5 tpd facility Tainan City, Taiwan 24 tpd facility in Mihama/Mikata, Japan 200-280 tpd pfacility Japan – Eco Valley Waste to Energy Facility Ishkawajima, Japan

1992

Chicoitimi, Quebec, Canada

1989

Ohio, USA

Type Information not available District Heating Electricity Generation Electricity Generation Commercial Aluminium Dross Recovery Furnaces Commercial Cast Iron Production

Sources: Based on AlterNRG (2008) and Wikipedia (2009)

4. Proposed WTE Plant in T&T Based on the amounts of waste generated in Trinidad and Tobago, a WTE pilot plant rated at 450 tonnes per day (tpd) is proposed and the possibilities of establishing the same are analysed. The proposed location of the plant is the Beetham Landfill, Port-ofSpain due to the fact that it is the largest of the three landfills in the country and fast reaching its limits. It is assumed that this proposed plant will ideally have a 3-shift operation, 7 days per week. The waste collection model considered in this study includes the purchase of landfill space per

46


tonnage of waste by the waste collector from the WTE plant facility. The charge applied by the WTE facility will be referred to as the “Tippage cost”. The WTE plant operators will be responsible for managing the landfill where the waste will be stored prior to its conversion to energy. Scales would be integrated into an automated record keeping system to record the weight of MSW delivered to the plant. Collections would be done in two 12-hour daily shifts, 6 days per week, while gasification will be continuous, so ample storage of MSW usually 2-3 days (i.e., 1,350 tonnes) is required. MSW can be received in a floor dump type of operation where the recovery process is performed. Remaining MSW can then be loaded onto conveyors that carry the material to a flail mill or trommels where it is then processed. Figure 5 shows the overall process of the proposed WTE model. In determining the plant size, economies of scale are considered. The plant will serve the island; however consideration must be given to haulage cost to Beetham, Port of Spain on overall project economics.

Figure 5: Flow diagram of proposed model for WTE system

4.1 Preliminary Costing A preliminary cost estimate is prepared for the 450 tpd waste to energy plant utilising a combined cycle power generating. Table 4 shows a cost comparison between the three waste conversion technologies: plasma gasification, incineration and conventional gasification technologies.

Table 4. Cost Analysis for a 450tpd WTE Pilot Plant Using Plasma Gasification, Incineration and Conventional Gasification Technologies Plasma Gasifier Waste capacity (tpd)

Incinerator

450.00

Conventional Gasifier 450

450

Unit power potential (MWe)

35.11

12.49

22.11

Calorific value for MSW (MJ/kg)

16.10

16.10

16.10

Calorific value for NG (MJ/m³)

38.00

38

38.00

$ 127,528,089.89

$ 103,477,500.00

$ 120,493,800.00

Total unit price Tippage Cost Scenario #1

$

5.00

$

5.00

$

5.00

Scenario #2

$

10.00

$

10.00

$

10.00

Scenario #3

$

15.00

$

15.00

$

15.00

Scenario #4

$

20.00

$

20.00

$

Plant operation time (360 days/yr at 24 hr/day) Total power production (Kwh/yr) Debt service coefficient Operating and maintenance factor Estimated Economic Life (years)

20.00

8640.00

8640.00

8640.00

303,370,786.52

107,912,219.18

191,042,630.14

0.1158

0.1158

0.1158

0.05

0.05

0.05

5

5

Present value of annual costs over the estimated economic life

$ 65,081,039.17

$ 37,719,551.13

$

61,491,250.47

5

Present value of annual revenues without tippage cost

$ 91,416,538.34

$ 32,517,836.13

$

57,568,021.37

Average annual net cash inflows without tippage cost

$ 26,335,499.17

$ (5,201,715.01)

$

(3,923,229.10)

Scenario 1 - $5.00

$ 30,272,308.16

$ (1,264,906.02)

Scenario 2 - $10.00

$ 34,209,117.15

$

Scenario 3 - $15.00

$ 38,145,926.14

$

Scenario 4 - $20.00

$ 42,082,735.13

Average annual net cash inflows with tippage cost applied $

13,579.89

2,671,902.97

$

3,950,388.88

6,608,711.96

$

7,887,197.87

$ 10,545,520.95

$

11,824,006.86


The capital costs for the plasma gasifier, incinerator and conventional gasifier to energy plants have been estimated at USD 127.528 million, USD 103.477 and USD 120.493 million, respectively (all based on supplier prices). Tippage costs are assumed to vary from USD 5.00 to USD 20.00 per ton. The analysis shows that the Plasma Gasifier is the most feasible thermochemical conversion technology. Without the application of the tippage cost, the payback period for the plasma gasifier plant is 5 years (see Table 5), and as the tippage cost increases the plant becomes even more profitable. The small amount of energy produced per unit ton of waste by the incinerator renders it the least attractive option. Table 5. Payback Period for Each Plant at Selected Tippage Costs Payback Period for Selected Scenarios (Years) No "tippage cost" Scenario 3 - $15.00. Scenario 4 - $20.00

5 3 3

-

-

16

15

10

10

If the waste is not converted to energy, additional storage space (landfills) will have to be sought. Given the rapid rate of increase in waste which is estimated to reach 4,033 tpd by 2020, a new landfill has become necessary. With an estimated rate of USD 179-538 per m2 the cost of just acquiring land space, the size of the Beetham landfill (i.e., 61 hectares) will be approximately USD 109 to 328 million. This cost does not include infrastructure for an engineered sanitary landfill such as liners, leachate and gas collection systems and methane destruction processes. Hence, the conversion of WTE is, economically, a very lucrative option for the management of waste. 5. Socio-Economic and Environmental Benefits In Trinidad and Tobago, the SWM systems especially in the urban areas are challenged to deal with the growing population concentration and lifestyles, which give rise to increasing levels of commercial, industrial and household waste. Such economic and social progress has placed increasing pressure on the natural environment, threatens human health and creates an opportunity for the reoccurrence of communicable diseases. This also calls for an improved understanding of the waste management problem. It is against this backdrop that the strategic intervention of a WTE initiative is

47

proposed. This will involve government, private sector and community initiatives for the infrastructure and mechanisms for collection, storage, processing, recovery, conversion and distribution of the energy products. Such integrated approach engenders a spirit of entrepreneurship, provides employment, and contributes to the social and economic development of the country. The benefits for locating the WTE plant at Beetham are as follows: (i) Size: Largest facility comprising 61 hectares, land available for refuse receipt, processing and storage; (ii) Location: 2 km east of the capital Port-of-Spain and close proximity to major urban centers, generators of MSW (including East West Corridor, Diego Martin, and Trincity), accounts for more than 54% of the country’s waste, landfill capacity expected to be exhausted in a few years, unless measures are taken to reduce volumes destined for landfill; (iii) Existing Infrastructure: South of the Beetham Highway, well developed road infrastructure, minimise the impact from increased truck traffic. MSW will be delivered to the plant by truck, minimise queuing; and (iv) Industrial and commercial area (e.g., noise, dust, odor). Thermal efficiency, in terms of energy recovery for electricity generation from the combustion process, production of fuel gases for energy production (e.g., boilers, heat engines, and fuel cells), synthesis gas for petrochemical manufacture and slag as a value added construction material from the gasification process are the saleable products from WTE plants. The use of MSW as a fuel will result in a reduced demand for natural gas for power generation, thus diverting the natural gas to the area of manufacturing more value-added products (e.g., iron and steel, ammonia, and methanol). Gasification will also yield synthesis gas: the building block for a synthetic fuels industry (e.g., dimethyl ether (DME), Fischer-Tropsch (FT) products, methanol, and ethanol etc), (Sunggyu, 2007). The proposed plant can be configured to produce an array of energy products in ratios to suit local requirements, thus creating a new industry in the country which potentially can provide employment opportunities in recycling, recovery, maintenance, electricity generation and synthetic fuel manufacture. Plasma gasification over incineration has the added benefit that all of the organic material is fully converted to a fuel quality synthesis gas for use in combustion turbines coupled to electric generators or for chemical production. Plasma Gasification


systems have been reported to be more efficient for energy recovery, in terms of electricity generation. The temperature within the reactor reaches 2,700ºC, at which point molecular dissociation takes place. The pollutants that were contained in the waste such as dioxins, furans as well as pathogens are completely cracked into harmless compounds. The production of carbon dioxide is also greatly reduced when using Plasma gasifiers. A simple gravimetric combustion analysis using stoichiometric equations was undertaken to estimate CO2 production from the conversion of 450 tpd of MSW from each of the three thermochemical processes. From Table 6, plasma gasification showed the greatest potential for reduced greenhouse gas (GHG) production by having the smallest CO2 emissions. Table 6. CO2 Emissions from the Three Thermo-Chemical Conversion Technologies Feature CO2 Emission (tpd) Low CO2 Stoichiometric Air Chemical Equations

Plasma Gas 62

Conventional Gas 188

Incineration

Yes 0.33 (sub)

No 1

3C + 2O2 → CO2 + 2CO

3C + 2O2 → CO2 + 2CO

No 1.8 (complete combustion) C + O2 → CO2

565

Moreover, the use of waste for such purposes reduces the impact of methane emitted into the environment when organic waste decomposes in landfills. Plasma gasification saves on GHG, produces more energy and can therefore be considered “more green” than conventional gasification and incineration. 7. Conclusion It is imperative to address the problems of MSW in Trinidad and Tobago with appropriate technologies, as country’s landfills have already exceeded their capacities. From the comparative analysis of WTE technologies, it can be seen that the conversion of WTE using plasma gasification technology is a viable option to the problems facing the management of waste in Trinidad. Although the proposed WTE process may cost high initially, the wide ranging economical, social and environmental benefits far exceed such costs and essentially reduce the country’s carbon footprint. Therefore, this is a sustainable solution to the SWM challenges in

48

Trinidad and Tobago. Besides, a thermoeconomic analysis of the proposed WTE process should be undertaken. Such analysis considers both the thermodynamic and economic implications for any energy conversion system. An optimum “green” WTE system can be designed based on a combinational analysis of presented approach and the results of thermoeconomic analysis. References: AlterNRG (2008), Westinghouse Plasma Corporation, Pennsylvania, USA. GORTT (2008), “Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago: New Waste Management Strategies Coming”,http://www.news.gov.tt/index.php?news=349, last accessed May 2009 Kreith, F.D.Y. (2007), Handbook of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Florida: CRC Press Taylor and Francis Group. Mountouris, A., Voutsas, E. and Tassios, D. (2006), "Solid waste plasma gasification: equilibrium model." Energy Conversion and Management, Vol.47, No. 13/14, pp 1723-1737. Ojolo, S. and Bamgboye, A. (2005), "Thermochemical conversion of municipal solid waste to produce fuel and reduce waste", Agricultural Engineering International: the CIGR Ejournal, Vol.VII ( Manuscript EE 05 006), pp.1-8 SWMCOL (1995), Report on Waste Qualification Exercise- Guanapo Landfill Site 1995, Beetham Landfill Site 1995 and Forres Park Landfill Site 1995, Solid Waste Management Company Limited. . SWMCOL (2007), Site Data 2007 (Unpublished), Solid Waste Management Company Limited Speight, J.G. (2008), Synthetic Fuels Handbook: Properties, Process and Performance. United States: McGraw-Hill. Stehlı´k, P. (2009), "Contribution to advances in waste-toenergy technologies", Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol.17, No.10, pp.1-13. Sunggyu, L.J.G. (2007), Handbook of Alternative Fuel Technology, Florida: CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group. Wikipedia (2009), “Plasma Arc Waste Disposal”. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_arc_waste_disposa l, last accessed May 2009.

Biographical Notes: Kamel Singh is a Senior Instructor and Program Leader for the Bachelor of Applied Technology and Bachelor of Engineering in Applied Process and Utilities Technology Programs at the University of Trinidad and Tobago. He has eighteen years of industrial experience in the design


and construction of process plant, pressure vessel, storage tank, pipeline, offshore production facilities, welding engineering, quality control and maintenance management. He was the Fabrication Manager at Carillion Caribbean Limited (CCL) and worked on several construction projects in energy, marine and commercial building sectors. His research interests include - modern energy systems, engineering curricula development and machine design. Solange O. Kelly has fifteen years of postgraduate research and industrial experience in process optimisation, exergy analysis, exergoeconomic analysis, air-conditioning and manufacturing. She worked as a Research Assistant at the University of the West Indies and also at the Technical University of Berlin in the extended areas of energy systems. Her work on splitting

49

exergy destruction into endogenous and exogenous parts, received the “Best Student Paper Award” by the Advanced Energy Systems Division of the ASME, in 2006. She is presently with University of Trinidad and Tobago as an Assistant Professor Musti K.S. Sastry is presently with the University of West Indies as a Lecturer in Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering and Program Coordinator for Bachelor of Technology Program at the University of Trinidad and Tobago. He is a member of IET, UK and a senior member, IEEE, USA. His research interests include Energy Systems, Electrical Power and Engineering Education