This work evaluates the techno-economic prefeasibility of waste to energy projects in Colombia using four different conversion technologies of incineration, gasification, anaerobic digestion and landfill gas. Three study cases were selected to represent typical urban centers in Colombia, which were namely Guayatá, Andes and Pasto. After feasible technologies were identified for each case, their energy recovery potential was calculated based on the mathematical models and publicly available information about the composition of the wastes produced in these three municipalities. A subsequent economic analysis was conducted by applying the incentives established in Law 1715 for projects involving non-conventional renewable energy sources. The cash flows produced by each technology in the three scenarios were evaluated to obtain the Internal Rate of Return (IRR), which was found to be influenced by the benefits of this legislation. However, the economic benefits were not significant in the small municipality of Guayatá. In turn, in Andes, a high electricity price (100 USD/MWh) would entail a positive IRR of 2.6%. In Pasto, which is the biggest city of the three, the maximum IRR of landfill gas and anaerobic digestion reached 13.59% and 14.27%, respectively. The results show that these types of projects can have positive economic results if tax and government incentives are taken into account.

This work evaluates the prefeasibility of energy from waste projects in Colombia under the guidelines of Law 1715. That piece of legislation proposes tax incentives for non-conventional energy initiatives, such as deductions of up to 50% on the investment through income tax, VAT exemption, tariff exemption, and accelerated depreciation of assets. Pasto, Colombia, was selected as the case study. Subsequently, incineration, gasification, anaerobic digestion, and landfill gas technologies were evaluated. The potential of electric power generation from municipal solid waste (MSW) of each conversion technology was estimated with mathematical models. Additionally, the economic evaluation considered five cases that combine loan options, accelerated depreciation, and income deductions. Finally, the prefeasibility analysis of each case and technology was based on the internal rate of return (IRR) and levelized cost of electricity (LCOE). The results reveal that only anaerobic digestion and landfill gas technologies constitute viable projects in case of traditional investment with and without loans, because they present IRRs greater than the discount rate, of 6.8%. However, by including the incentives in Law 1715 in the economic evaluation, IRRs of 11.18%, 7.96%, 14.27%, and 13.59% were obtained for incineration, gasification, anaerobic digestion, and landfill gas, respectively. These results make all four technologies feasible in this context.