Brown County Waste Stream Committee White Paper

Transcription

1 Brown County Waste Stream Committee White Paper Introduction The Brown County Waste Stream Committee is one of four economic development committees created in March 2012 by Brown County Executive Troy Streckenbach to focus on establishing an attainable business plan and long-term strategy of redirecting the amount of waste going into landfills, and turning it into marketable, saleable materials thus positioning Brown County to be environmentally sustainable and economically beneficial. Committee Vision & Goals The committee began meeting monthly in April 2012 with the vision being for Brown County to repurpose the maximum amount possible from the existing waste stream into beneficial re-use opportunities. Criteria to be satisfied include: reduce the amount going into landfills with minimum capital expenditures, while maintaining the lowest possible costs for users of the service and find the best options for the environment. The committee was comprised of a broad cross-section of individuals representing public/private entities, education and County government. Dean Haen, Brown County Port and Solid Waste Lisa Harmann, Advance Economic Development John Katers, UW-Green Bay Amy Kox, Northeast Wisconsin Technical College Fred Monique, Advance Economic Development Andrew Nickodem, Golder & Associates Jim Resick, Brown County UW-Extension Bill Seleen, ReStore Joe Vanrossum, UW-Extension Madison Robyn Nielsen, UW-Green Bay Intern Jennifer Gumz, UW-Green Bay Intern Troy Streckenbach, Brown County Executive As an advisory committee, the group established a set of goals and processes which are summarized below: 1. Review history and inventory all the current offerings of the Brown County Solid Waste Operation. A detailed report provided by the Brown County Port and Solid Waste Department revealed the current comprehensive and wide array of waste management programs presently being provided. 2. Conduct a waste stream characterization study. After reviewing current waste stream studies and existing data from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Solid Waste Association of North America (SWANA) consortium, the committee opted to utilize their findings versus conducting their own characterization study. It was felt that Brown County most likely would not deviate substantially from Wisconsin s typical waste stream composition. 1

2 3. Conduct a Market Development Directory. A research grant was submitted and obtained from the University of Wisconsin System Solid Waste Research Council (SWRC) to fund two undergraduate students to conduct a study. An inventory was compiled identifying all area companies/organizations involved in re-use, restoring, processing, manufacturing and re-purposing waste to identify potential gaps in beneficial reuse of our waste stream. Research also included a decision tree analysis for each of the waste stream components. 4. Identify all existing technologies to determine feasibility and compatibility. A SWOT analysis was done on the various existing technologies (anaerobic digestion, CNG, waste to fuel processes, pyrolysis, organics recycling, etc.) to investigate and address the economic, social and environmental implications of these opportunities for Brown County. 5. Analyze the potential of the South Landfill site. The Committee considered transforming the South Landfill site into a resource recovery or resource management park to provide waste management services at the lowest cost possible to end users and provide options that are also environmentally sound. 6. Provide recommendations to the various government bodies as well as private industrial entities concerning a long term strategy for redirecting the amount of waste going into landfills. The Committee felt that a key component to the success of the short-term and long-term objectives identified would be increased education. Background and County Assets The Port and Solid Waste Department is an Enterprise Fund of Brown County. The solid waste side of the operation offers solid waste management services to municipal, commercial and residential interests. The Solid Waste Department has been in business for more than 40 years providing cost-effective, efficient and environmentally responsible solid waste management services for Brown County and more recently northeastern Wisconsin. The Department s services include operating a Solid Waste Transfer Station, a Single Stream Recycling Transfer Station, a regional Household Hazardous Waste Collection Facility, the East Landfill Gas-to-Energy Facility, maintenance of two closed landfills, and coordination of household sharps and pharmaceutical collection and disposal programs. The Department also provides recycling programs for tires, freon-containing appliances and electronics. The success of all of these programs is based on a forward thinking Solid Waste Board and staff that build long-term relationships in the public and private sector and secure long-term relationships in both solid waste and recycling agreements. The Solid Waste Board and staff are committed to identifying and implementing emerging solid waste management technologies that are economical and environmentally beneficial. See Appendix A for complete Brown County Port and Solid Waste Department Strategic Solid Waste Management Plan. BOW Agreements In November 2001, Brown, Outagamie and Winnebago Counties (BOW) signed an Intergovernmental Solid Waste Disposal Agreement. The Agreement is for twentyfive (25) years. The intention of the agreement is to ensure Tri-County municipalities, businesses and citizens have sufficient licensed solid waste disposal capacity for the next 25 years. The consolidation of disposal capacity by this Agreement resulted in more effective and 2

3 efficient solid waste disposal and waste transfer for Tri-County municipalities, businesses and citizens. By executing of the Agreement, each County contributed a licensed solid waste disposal facility asset. Each County agrees to provide landfill facilities and operations to the other Counties or make them whole at a level of service and in a manner mutually agreeable for two (2) years or until termination of the Agreement. Subject to the Agreement is Brown County s South Landfill, Outagamie County s Northeast Landfill and Winnebago County s Sunnyview Landfill. In 2012, Winnebago County s landfill reached capacity and filling began at the Outagamie County s Landfill. The Agreement requires in year 14 (2016) the Counties conduct a review the Agreement and the Cooperative Landfill Plan (exhibit B below). At such time, the Counties may elect by simple majority vote of the full membership of the governing body (Brown County Board of Supervisors, Outagamie County Board of Supervisors and Winnebago County Solid Waste Management Board) to renew the Agreement at the end of the twenty-fifth (25 th ) year of the original term or when Brown County South Landfill, which has the capacity of 5.2M tons, is full, whichever is later, or at the end of the twenty-fifth (25 th ) year of any renewal term during which the election is made. As part of the Agreement, each County agreed to an annual designated tonnage schedule. There is an upper and lower threshold that triggers potential reallocation of costs attributed to the 3

4 County shortfall or overage. Annually, a year-end reconciliation of accounts will be prepared examining tonnage deviations and actual shared costs. Common costs and revenues shall be borne as system costs and revenues, while direct County costs and revenues, which that County has control over shall be County costs and revenue. Counties shall annually share administrative and disposal costs based on tonnage. Transfer Station operation and hauling costs shall be borne individually. County costs associated with entering the Agreement shall be shared proportionate to tonnage and paid annually in advance. The physical and financial assets of each County remain the separate assets of the respective Counties. Additional programs not specifically listed in the Agreement remain the separate programs of the respective Counties. The liabilities of each County, including but not limited to long-term debt and closed landfills remain separate to the extent permitted by law for separate entities. The following graph illustrates the efficiency gained by consolidation as reflected in Brown County solid waste tipping fee from 1992 to In March 2008, Brown, Outagamie and Winnebago Counties signed an extension of the Intergovernmental Recycling Agreement that commenced on January 1, 2003, and terminates December 31, This agreement designated Outagamie County as the site for construction the Single Stream Materials Recycling Facility (MRF) with Brown and Winnebago converting their MRFs into transfer stations. The three counties shared in the capital construction, operation and maintenance and revenue generated from the sale of recyclable commodities. 4

5 Waste Characterization The BOW partners landfill approximately 550,000 tons of municipal solid waste (MSW) each year. It is assumed that the composition of this MSW is consistent with the results found in a statewide waste characterization study that was completed in 2009, which is represented in the following graph. See Appendix B for the 2009 Wisconsin State-Wide Waste Characterization Study The individual materials from the waste characterization study were further classified by this Committee into categories based on the potential to optimize or enhance recycling, the potential to create new markets because of the volume that might be available from the BOW partners or materials that offer little current opportunity due to low volumes or other limitations. From the study, four decision options were identified for inclusion in the decision tree, which are summarized below: Optimize materials in this category are already banned from landfill by state statue or are already collected through the Brown County Household Hazardous Waste facility. These materials include high value items such as ferrous and non-ferrous metals, plastics and paper. Also included are potentially hazardous materials such as compact fluorescent lights and household hazardous waste. These are materials comprising approximately 14.0% of materials currently being landfilled in Wisconsin. Enhance materials in this category generally include materials being collected through private sector recycling, such as ferrous and non-ferrous scrap, pallets, textiles, and carpet. It also includes construction and demolition materials such as wood, drywall and other bulky items like furniture. These materials comprise approximately 37% of the materials currently being landfilled in Wisconsin. 5

6 Create this category generally includes organic materials such as food scraps and other compostable materials. It also includes several types of plastics such as agricultural film and other similar sources of film. These materials comprise approximately 23% of the materials currently being landfilled in Wisconsin, with food scraps making up nearly half of the materials in this category. Problem Materials this category includes a number of low volume materials, including several types of plastic, diapers, small appliances, and treated and stained wood. These materials comprise approximately 26% of the materials currently being landfilled in Wisconsin. Based on the categories above it can be seen that significant potential may exist to reduce landfill volumes through better efforts optimize, enhance and create markets for a range of materials, with the most significant opportunities being for plastics and organics. See the following Waste Composition and Availability summary. 6

7 Private Sector Recycling and Resource Recovery A study of the 2012 Wisconsin Manufacturer s Directory determined that there are approximately 221 plastics companies in the state, employing 21,470 workers. Of these companies, 21 are within the BOW area, employing 1,653 workers. The materials produced by these companies include but are not limited to plastic sheet and film of various compositions, laminated products, resins, tubing and piping, packaging, bottles, and bags, as well as thermoformed, extruded, and injection molded products. The directory also lists 47 companies in Wisconsin which work with organic materials, and these companies employ 1,359 workers. Only 3 of these companies are located in the BOW area, employing 295 workers. The materials provided or produced by these companies include but are not limited to various forms of fertilizer, bark, firewood, compost, lubricants, matting and pads, netting, and fiber cans. A listing of these companies has been provided with this report. See Appendix C for the Market Development Directory on Plastics and Organics. There is also an existing infrastructure of companies in the BOW area with a history of managing these and other industrial materials and byproducts. Kadant, Inc has been producing cellulose based materials recovered from papermaking waste materials since These materials can then be used as industrial absorbents, substrate for crop protection and pest control applications, and in premium cat litter products. Since 1999, these similar residual materials from papermaking processes have been used by another company, Encap, to create lawn and garden kits that are biodegradable and safe for children and pets. And a recent addition to the area is Greenwood Fuels, which converts clean industrial residuals into pellets that provide the same benefits of coal but with less harmful emissions. A comprehensive listing of these materials and other companies like these can be found in the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Recycling Markets Directory. 7

8 Existing Waste Resource Management Hierarchy Wisconsin has a long-standing policy for solid waste reduction, reuse, recycling, composting, and resource recovery. It holds that, the maximum solid waste reduction, reuse, recycling, composting, and resource recovery is in the best interest of the state in order to protect public health, to protect the quality of the natural environment and to conserve resources and energy. There has been little basis to quarrel with this finding. However, perhaps a new paradigm is required, as a lot has changed including not only the price of energy but the overall marketplace of products, the nature of waste (at least in some instances), and the impacts caused by a growing population. The objective is to establish a policy that is environmentally and economically sound and to then find new and more effective ways to achieve this basic policy. In the current law, the state encourages the following priorities whenever possible and practical : (a) The reduction of the amount of solid waste generated. (b) The reuse of solid waste. (c) The recycling of solid waste. (d) The composting of solid waste. (e) The recovery of energy from solid waste. (f) The land disposal of solid waste. (g) The burning of solid waste without energy recovery. Section (1), Wis. Stats. (emphasis added). Section (12), Wis. Stats. This policy was first enacted in 1983, with modifications in 1989 and Except where otherwise required, this policy is indeed only a policy. It does not require that materials be handled by the higher priorities, nor that state regulations prohibit or inhibit the development of facilities near the bottom of the hierarchy. State agencies, local governments, businesses and citizens have responded to this hierarchy in many ways. With recycling and composting higher on the hierarchy than landfilling, mandatory recycling laws were adopted in Wisconsin. Future Waste Resource Management Hierarchy The future of the solid waste management in Brown County considers the waste stream as a resource that can be recycled and reused. Currently, traditional recyclables are separated by residents and further processed at the single stream Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) in Outagamie County. Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) is also collected regionally at the Brown County facility. The remainder of the waste stream is hauled to the Outagamie County landfill for disposal. The composition of the landfilled material consists of: Traditional recyclables such as paper and cardboard, PET, HDPE and glass bottles, aluminum and metal cans, electronics and tires. Construction and demolition waste (C&D), shopping bags, plastic film and other plastic containers, metal scrap, carpet and furniture. Organics such as food waste, animal waste, compostable paper and other organics. Other materials such as dirt, diapers, treated wood and miscellaneous materials. 8

9 Many of these landfilled materials are a valuable resource that can be recycled, reused or processed and converted to energy or fuel. Some of the materials can be recovered by further educating the public on recycling and utilizing existing infrastructure. Reuse and recycling of other materials may require additional investments in infrastructure and new conversion technologies. The result of these actions will be a more sustainable approach to solid waste management. Based on existing infrastructure operated by the BOW, as well as private companies located in the region, opportunities may exist to extract more economic value from these resources, while also creating economic development opportunities and reducing landfill disposal. TARGETED OPPORTUNITIES 1) Recycling a) Single Stream Recycling. Optimize recovery of existing recyclables that still end up being disposed of in the landfill. This includes paper, cardboard, HDPE, PET and glass bottles, aluminum and steel cans and is approximately 12.5% of the waste stream that is landfilled. This would use the existing infrastructure, with an emphasis on public education to increase the amount of recovery from the residential waste stream. Brown County already provides education that could be enhanced with additional funding. The MRF located in Outagamie County has the capacity to receive additional recyclable materials, but additional staff may be necessary. The public in general has a positive attitude towards recycling, sustainability and less landfilling that will help drive this initiative towards better recycling practices. Brown County needs to be aware of the economics of each recyclables stream to insure that it is viable. Life cycle costs of the materials should be considered. b) Electronics. Less than 1% of the landfilled waste stream is electronics, but these materials present issues of toxicity from heavy metals, etc. Increasing public education that recyclables cannot be disposed of in landfills will enhance recovery. Also education of the public on where electronics can be dropped off for recycling will be necessary. 2) Household Hazardous Waste-Maintain and increase education and public awareness of the HHW program, which has successfully collected more than 1 million pounds of materials since the 1990 s. 3) Additional recycling opportunities a) C&D waste represents a large amount of the waste stream that is still landfilled. C&D includes wood, drywall, shingles, concrete and brick. It is bulky and difficult to handle in a transfer station. The infrastructure to separate and recycle or reuse C&D does not currently exist in Brown County. Implementing C&D recycling would involve additional costs. Public-private partnerships may be able to be initiated that will provide recycling and reuse opportunities for C&D. b) Other plastics such as shopping bags, industrial film and #3-#7 plastic bottles could be recycled through public-private partnerships while creating jobs. 4) Organics Organics represent 20-25% of the waste stream that is landfilled. Brown County does not currently have any infrastructure in place to process and manage organics. The waste 9

10 industry in the United States is actively assessing methods to utilize the organics waste stream. Methods to handle organics include composting and a wide variety of conversion technologies. Composting provides useable materials that can be used to enhance soil nutrients for plant growth. Technologies are commercially available to waste materials into energy or fuel that can be used to generate power and run vehicles. Composting and anaerobic digestion are two methods of managing organic waste currently in use in the waste industry. The following sections describe these processes. AEROBIC COMPOSTING Composting is the biological decomposition of the organic constituents of wastes under controlled conditions. The term "decomposition" is used instead of "stabilization", because when applied to a practical usage, the process is rarely carried on to the point at which the waste is completely stabilized. The term "biological" distinguishes composting from other types of decomposition, such as chemical or physical. Organic is applicable because, with few exceptions, only the organic portion of wastes is subject to biological breakdown. A very important term in the definition of composting is "controlled". It is the application of control that distinguishes composting from the natural rotting, putrefaction, or other decomposition, that takes place in an open dump, a sanitary landfill, in a manure heap, or in an open field. Controlling the decomposition of waste products requires an understanding of the interaction of a multitude of variables that affects the rate of decomposition. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION The anaerobic digestion process is an established technology for sustainable processing of residues and waste. It can be used to treat biodegradable wastes and produce saleable products with economic value. This is a natural process where complex organic matter is broken into simpler substances by microorganisms under oxygen-free conditions. Anaerobic microorganisms digest the organic matter in the absence of oxygen, to produce methane, carbon dioxide and solid residue. The digestion process itself takes place in a digester and there are several types and designs available depending on feed wastes, climate and other conditions. Anaerobic Digestion systems for organic solid waste may share similar characteristics and designs with farm-based systems, or they may be designed for removing organic matter from wastewater. Food processing systems will likely be sized to meet either the heating requirements of the facility or to manage the byproducts produced on-site or from several food processing facilities located in the same area. ANAEROBIC COMPOSTING (High Solids Anaerobic Digestion) As opposed to aerobic composting, anaerobic composting is in the absence of oxygen and combines some of the best aspects of anaerobic digestion and composting. Dry systems typically operate at a range of 20-40% solids. Examples of commercially available high solids content dry digestion systems (one stage) include BioFerm, Dranco, Kompogas and Valorga. Dry systems use considerably less water as part of the process than wet systems. This in turn leads to lower energy requirements for in-plant needs, because less energy is needed for heating process water, and for dewatering AD reactor contents. Many dry systems use plug flow reactor designs or are done using a batch process. This approach helps to maintain a balanced organic load inside the reactor by adding partially fermented slurry into the reactor while fully digested residue is extracted. It should be noted that the first high 10

11 solids anaerobic digestion system in North America was recently constructed at UW- Oshkosh by Bioferm. One of the major advantages of anaerobic digestion (low solids or high solids) is the ability to produce biogas. The table below provides data on biogas yields from various components of the municipal solid waste stream. Table 1 Biogas Yield from Sources of Municipal Solid Waste Biogas Yield from MSW Materials Moisture (% wt) Biogas Yield m 3 /kg of material feed* Paper Newspaper Cardboard/Boxboard Telephone Directories Office paper Mixed paper Kitchen Waste Food Yard waste Grass Leaves Brush Other organic Biogas Yield ft 3 /lb of material feed Source: ICF Consulting, Determination of the Input of Waste Management Activities on Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Report submitted to Environment Canada. As noted previously, this biogas could be used to produce electricity, cleaned and converted to CNG for use as a vehicle fuel, or cleaned up to the point where it could be injected into the existing natural gas pipeline. All of these options could be considered in conjunction with the opening of the future Brown County South Landfill. 11

12 Conclusions and Recommendations It is evident that we have real strength in our current solid waste recycling infrastructure, staff experience, the number of companies recycling in the region, and the asset of the future South Landfill. However, threats exist as they relate to the regulatory environment and changes, costs, and convenience of disposal. Acceptance of the status quo is not an option as waste reduction opportunities exist and a long-term strategy must be established. As a result of this 10 month collaboration, it is the recommendation of this committee that the following actions be taken: ENHANCE: Efficiency - Expand collaborative recycling program for plastics (3-7), organics and commercial recycling by creating the infrastructure to accommodate such expanded programs. Brown County has existing capabilities and current companies in the recycling business that we could further develop by growing collections and the collection strategy. Brown County does have state-of-the-art single stream recycling technology capabilities that all communities should be utilizing through recycling collection to best optimize efficiencies. Education - Expand upon current educational impact through regional messaging and better utilization of the county s website. Change the mindset of people to view our waste as a valuable resource. Look to utilizing interns for educational outreach to the communities. Explore incorporation of community-based social marketing with traditional recycling education. Promote - Although some private/public partnership do exist, work on enhancing, or developing, additional partnerships and recruiting companies to the region that have already proven successful in the resource recovery industry. Economic Development - Build off of our current recycling cluster and utilize Economic Development Organizations to help with strategic and targeted supply chain development. Identify gaps/opportunities whereby business attraction can be promoted along with the nuturing of new businesses/entrepreneurs to help fill those gaps. OPTIMIZE: Pursue grant opportunities with the possibility of collaborating with other related groups such as the phosphorus committee being that there is a natural synergy between waste and point/nonpoint pollution. Additional funding could be used to further our efforts of resource recovery systems, public education, analysis, feasibility studies and other items related to the development of the South Landfill. PROBLEM MATERIALS: Encourage research and development by universities and/or the private sector to address problem materials. CREATE: Communication - Create a more robust dialogue between other groups/stakeholders such as community groups, government, advisory/policy boards, and universities. Resource Recovery Park - Our greatest long-term opportunity involves the strategic utilization of Brown County s South Landfill as a potential resource recovery park. Brown County South 12

13 Landfill received a feasibility determination in 1996 identifying 9.3M cubic yard MSW landfill and an additional 3.7M cubic yard industrial monofill. The feasibility determination means the property meets the criteria of a sanitary engineered landfill facility. The Plan of Operation was submitted in 1998 with a design capacity of 8M cubic yards (5.2M tons) MSW capacity. The 2001 BOW Intergovernmental Solid Waste Disposal Agreement allowed Brown County to utilize Winnebago and Outagamie County s landfills and delayed construction of the South Landfill. In 2012, Winnebago s landfill reached capacity and Outagamies landfill opened with a remaining site life of years, based on historical filling rates. The current BOW Agreement requires Brown County to construct the South Landfill and operate it as the regional landfill once Outagamies landfill reaches capacity. The current Plan of Operation will need to be updated to account for the BOW Agreement and to incorporate any changes in technology or regulations which have occurred since The total capital cost in 2012 dollars of landfill construction and closure is $30M with $9M needed by 2018 for construction sequence 1 and all the site work. In addition, Brown County may desire to set aside sufficient land for further waste separation, recycling, processing, and energy conversion as part of an Eco-waste industrial park. The amount of land necessary and the cost of any process or new technology will be determined in the future. Brown County will pursue a $ ,000 US Department of Agriculture Rural Solid Waste Management Grant to provide the technical assistance to plan the Eco-waste industrial park site plan. In conclusion, we recommend Brown County Executive Troy Streckenbach make a decision on how to move these aforementioned recommendations forward including the potential continuation of this committee in some shape or form. 13