A simplified RDF production was made, together with a waste characterization of MSW from Hanoi area. Three experiments were done, two with active aeration and one without. A high water content was determined at all RDF, which has a negative influence on the lower heating value and a saving-effect. A accumulation of the heating value to the higher class (>40mm), was not completely possible, also no complete transfer of mineral contents to the lower class (<10mm). The RDF reach in most cases the criteria for a fuel for different limit values, heavy metals, chloride and sulfur. An economic benefit could be possible with a surplus income by using RDF instead of coal (lignite), also by avoiding landfill gas and sell emission rights via CDM. More and detailed investigations seem to be necessary to confirm these results.:I. Index I II. Abbreviations III III. List of Tables IV IV. Figures VII V. Acknowledgements VIII VI. Summary IX 1. Introduction 1 2. Materials and methods 3 2.1 Waste Composition Analyze 3 2.2 Sample analyze 4 2.2.1 Water Content 4 2.2.2 Size reduction 5 2.2.3 Carbon content 5 2.2.4 Chloride and Sulfur 7 2.2.5 Heavy metals 7 2.2.6 fossil and biogenic carbon 9 2.2.7 Ash content / Los of Ignition 11 2.3 biological Stabilization 11 2.3.1 Active Aeration 12 2.3.2 Passive aeration 12 2.4 Clean Development Mechanism 13 2.4.1 Kyoto Protocol 13 2.4.2 International emission trading 14 2.4.3 Clean Development Mechanism 15 2.4.4 Avoidance potential of emissions from waste through RDF production 22 2.5 Economic calculation 27 2.6 Comparison to the usage of primary energy sources 28 3. Results 30 3.1 Waste characterization 30 3.2 Mass Balance of RDF Production 33 3.3 Water content 34 3.3.1 Waste from Characterization 34 3.3.2 RDF 35 3.4 Heating value 36 3.4.1 Waste from Characterization 36 3.4.2 RDF 37 3.5 Heavy metals 38 3.5.1 Waste from Characterization 38 3.5.2 RDF 39 3.6 Chloride and Sulfur content 41 3.6.1 Waste from Characterization 41 3.6.2 RDF 42 3.7 Total carbon content 42 3.8 Biogenic / fossil carbon content / Ash 43 3.9 Methane avoidance potential 44 3.10 CO2e emission through RDF usage 45 3.11 Economic comparison 46 3.12 Comparison to coal 47 4. Discussion 48 4.1 1st Thesis 48 4.2 2nd Thesis 53 4.3 3rd Thesis 61 4.3.1 Mechanical requirements 62 4.3.2 Caloric requirements 63 4.3.3 Chemical requirements 64 4.4 4th Thesis 71 4.4.1 Environmental benefit 71 4.4.2 Economical benefit 74 5. Conclusion 77 References 79 Annex I - Tables I Affidavit – Eidesstattliche Erklärung I