W12A Annual Report Waste Generation Projections & Landfill Capacity Assessment

Transcription

1 W12A Annual Report 2015 Waste Generation Projections & Landfill Capacity Assessment Prepared by City of London 300 Dufferin Avenue P.O. Box 5035 London, Ontario N6A 4L9 March 2016

2 This page has been left intentionally blank.

3 W12A Landfill Annual Report Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction Population Projections W12A Landfill Service Area Expansion Waste Types General Residential Industrial, Commercial and Institutional (IC&I) Waste Construction, Renovation and Demolition (CR&D) Waste Sewage Sludge Ash Sewage Sludge/ Biosolids Street Sweepings/ Road Works Other Municipal Operations Water Treatment Plant Process Residuals Contaminated Soil Waste Generation Projections Landfill Capacity Assessment Page i

4 W12A Landfill Annual Report List of Tables Table 1 Population Projections Table 2 Proposed New Sources of Waste for W12A Landfill Table 3 Waste Types Table 4 Estimated 2014 CR&D Quantities Table 5 Waste Generation Projections List of Figures Figure 1 Locations of Potential New Sources of Waste for the W12A Landfill Figure 2 Composition of Residential Garbage Figure 3 CR&D Recycling Process Residuals Figure 4 Sewage Sludge Ash Figure 5 Water Treatment Plant Process Residuals Figure 6 Waste Generation Projections Running Total (2016 to 2065) Figure 7 W12A Landfill Remaining Site Life List of Appendices Appendix A Population Projections Appendix B Historical Data on Waste Generation, Disposal & Diversion Rates Appendix C How Residential Waste is Managed Appendix D Waste Generation Projections Page ii

5 W12A Landfill Annual Report 1.0 Introduction This Waste Generation Projections and Landfill Capacity Report provides a review of historical waste quantities, projects future waste quantities and estimates the remaining life of the W12A Landfill. Historical information is provided on waste generation, diversion and disposal rates for the various types of waste that are being deposited at the W12A Landfill. This data is used to develop waste quantity projections for the next 50 years for a variety of scenarios that take into account: Population growth estimates Provincial waste diversion target of 60% for residential; industrial, commercial and institutional (IC&I); and construction, renovation and demolition (CR&D) waste Proposed provincial legislation (Waste-Free Ontario Act, Bill 151) which could result in significant changes to how recyclables, organics and garbage would be managed in both the municipal (residential) sector and private (IC&I) sector in Ontario Existing waste audit data Potential waste management options for materials not under municipal control should tipping fee rates for the W12A Landfill or nearby private landfills be changed The waste quantity projections are then used to estimate the site life of the W12A Landfill. The waste quantity projections suggest that the W12A Landfill has between 8 and 15 years of capacity remaining (2023 to 2030) depending on how residential, IC&I and CR&D waste is managed in the future. With no changes in the existing waste management practices it is estimated that the W12A Landfill has 10 years of capacity remaining (2025). Page 1

6 W12A Landfill Annual Report 2.0 Population Projections For many types of waste the quantity generated is directly proportional to an area s population. As the population increases the quantity of waste increases and if the population decreases the quantity of waste decreases. For this reason population projections were developed for the 50 year study period. The most recent population projections for the City of London are contained in the report Employment, Population, Housing and Non-Residential Construction Projections, City of London, Ontario, 2011 Update prepared by the Altus Group in 2012 for the City of London. The update report provides population estimates for the years 2016, 2021, 2026, 2031, 2036 and These population estimates were used to develop permanent population projections for the period 2016 to For the period 2016 to 2041, the report s estimates were used for the years that a population estimate existed. For other years between 2016 and 2041, the population was estimated by interpolation. For the period 2042 to 2065, it was assumed the rate of population growth would be the same as the period 2036 to Seasonal population projections were developed to account for the large number of out of town students living off campus and attending Western University and Fanshawe College. It was assumed that each student living off campus would generate two thirds of the garbage of a permanent resident since they typically attend school for 8 months of the year. The growth in the number of students was assumed to match the growth in permanent population. The population projections for City of London for the period 2016 to 2065 are summarized in Table 1. More detailed tables and information on the population projections are presented in Appendix A. Table 1 - Population Projections Year Permanent Population Equivalent Seasonal Population Total Average Growth ,700 21, ,400 22, , ,700 23, , ,900 24, , ,800 25, , ,600 26, , ,300 31, , % 1.05% 0.80% 0.85% 0.81% 0.81% Page 2

7 W12A Landfill Annual Report 3.0 W12A Landfill Service Area Expansion The City of London has applied to the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) for an amendment to the Environmental Compliance Approval (ECA) for the W12A Landfill to accept waste from five locations that are outside W12A Landfill s current approved service area. These locations are shown on Figure 1 (next page) and the types of waste to be accepted are listed in Table 2. Table 2 Proposed New Sources of Waste for W12A Landfill Source Waste Type Estimated Average Annual Quantity (tonnes/year) Lake Huron Water Treatment Plant (located north of Grand Bend) Elgin Area Water Treatment Plant (located east of Port Stanley) TRY Recycling (Clarke Road, abutting London s north municipal boundary) Thames Centre Elgin County Water treatment plant process residuals Water treatment plant process residuals Construction, renovation and demolition recycling process residuals and residential garbage from the City s EnviroDepot Curbside collected residential waste generated in the winter months Municipal Hazardous Special Waste (MHSW) 9,000 11,000 20,000 (CR&D) 500 (Residential) Comments Waste generated from drinking water treatment process; Majority of water produced for London Waste generated from drinking water treatment process; Majority of water produced for London Majority of CR&D residuals (80% to 90%) generated from processing material from London. Residential waste currently going to existing depots within London. Lowers cost for Thames Centre and City of London Provides convenient location for Elgin residents and lowers cost for City of London No changes to the landfill are proposed in order to increase the service area to accept waste from the five locations listed above. There will be no changes to the landfill s approved rate of fill (amount of waste the landfill can receive in a year), types of waste that can be accepted, size or capacity of the landfill or engineering controls to protect the environment and mitigate nuisance impacts. Page 3

8 W12A Landfill Annual Report The City has applied to expand the service area of the W12A Landfill because: Lowers cost Cost for London to operate the landfill is lowered due to economies of scale. Tipping fees for the municipalities and organizations using the W12A Landfill are lower than alternative disposal locations. Managing own waste Over 80% of the waste from the new areas is generated as a result of organizations providing services to residents of London (e.g., providing safe drinking water, construction, renovation and demolition waste recycling). Regional coordination London and several nearby municipalities already work together on recycling and MHSW programs. Accepting MHSW from Elgin County and municipally collected garbage from Thames Centre is a continuation of the regional approach to finding solutions for managing waste. For example, accepting MHSW from Elgin County will provide a convenient location for its residents to take their MHSW which will reduce the amount of material ending up in the garbage. It is expected that approval of the service area expansion will occur in It should be noted that Municipal Council remains in full control on where materials can come from that will be accepted at the W12A Landfill (provided that the areas are listed in the approved service area for the landfill and the materials are permitted under the ECA). An expanded service area does not commit Council to accepting material from these areas. Figure 1- Locations of Potential New Sources of Waste for the W12A Landfill Page 4

9 W12A Landfill Annual Report 4.0 Waste Types 4.1 General This section of the report looks at the different types of waste that the City is responsible for as well as waste not controlled by the City but accepts at the W12A landfill for disposal. Current and future generation, diversion and disposal rates are developed for each waste type. The waste has been organized or categorized into nine types based on their characteristics as outlined in Table 3. Table 3 - Waste Types Type Composition 1 Characteristic Density (kg/m 3 ) Putrescible 2 Residential Mixture 800 Yes IC&I Mixture 800 Yes CR&D Mixture 800 Yes Sewage Sludge Ash Uniform 1,200 No Biosolids Uniform 1,200 Yes Street Sweepings/Road Works Uniform 1,800 No Other Municipal Operations Mixture 800 Yes Water Treatment Plant Process Residuals Uniform 1,800 No Contaminated Soil Uniform 1,800 No Notes 1. Mixture refers to waste that is heterogeneous (contains a variety of different materials). Uniform refers to waste that is homogeneous (contains same material). 2. Putrescible refers to waste that is solid waste that contains organic matter capable of being decomposed by microorganisms and of such a character and proportion as to cause obnoxious odours. Historical data on the waste generation, disposal and diversion rates for these materials are presented in Appendix B and discussed below. 4.2 Residential General Residential waste refers to waste generated from all single family, multi-family, high-rise and low-rise buildings. This category also includes some commercial and institutional waste collected on residential garbage routes but excludes residuals generated from recycling or composting residentially collected materials. The W12A Landfill receives residential waste from the City of London and from the Municipality of Thames Centre. Page 5

10 W12A Landfill Annual Report City of London In general over the last 25 years there has been a small downward trend in residential waste generation, increasing waste diversion and decreasing waste disposal. Currently Londoners generate approximately 420 kilograms/year per capita of residential waste (includes about 20 kilograms/year per capita of light IC&I) with 45% of the residential waste being diverted through various programs. The breakdown of the 55% that is disposed of in the W12A Landfill is presented in Figure 2. Further details on the composition of residential waste in London and how it is currently managed is presented in Appendix C. Figure 2 Composition of Residential Garbage Garbage 30% Organics 35% Garbage 30% Organics 45% Depot Materials 10% Film Plastic 5% Blue Box Recyclables 20% Multi-res Depot Materials 10% Film Plastic 5% Blue Box Recyclables 10% Curbside The residential diversion rate in the future will depend on a number of factors many of which are outside the control of the municipality (e.g., changing public attitudes, improvements in technology for processing material, changes in packaging, changes in provincial legislation). One key factor is new draft legislation that would dramatically overhaul the province s recycling regime if enacted. Entitled the Waste-Free Ontario Act, Bill 151 proposes to transition Ontario to a producer responsibility regime. One of the key changes that would result from this new legislation is a shift in responsibility for the diversion of Blue Box recyclables from municipalities to industry. In fact, industry would be responsible for almost all residential waste diversion programs except for organics programs (e.g., leaf and yard waste, source separated organics). The province would establish diversion targets for each material and establish an independent oversight body to ensure compliance by industry. The potential lack of control or responsibility for a number of factors/programs that will determine the overall residential diversion rate makes it difficult to project future residential diversion rates. Page 6

11 W12A Landfill Annual Report Items that need be considered when looking at future residential diversion rates include: The Province announced a provincial waste diversion target of 60% for all waste sectors (residential, IC&I and CR&D) in London currently has a diversion rate of 45% (of the residential portion) which is better than most municipalities that do not have a Green Bin program. Diversion rates for the large municipalities that have Green Bin programs varied from 45% to 60% with an average between 50% and 55% (WDO Datacall, 2013). In December 2013, Road Map 2.0 The Road to Increased Resource Recovery and Zero Waste (Road Map 2.0) was released which looked at numerous initiatives, including the Green Bin program, to increase waste diversion. These initiatives have the potential to reach 60% waste diversion and would take at least five years to fully implement. Multi-residential units have much lower diversion rates compared to single family homes. In London the average diversion rate for single family homes is 50% compared to less than 20% for multi-residential units. London has a higher percentage of multi-residential units (i.e., apartments buildings) compared to many other large municipalities. Approximately one in three housing units in London are multi-residential. The percentage of multi-residential units are expected to increase in the future due to intensification (as per The London Plan) which will make it more difficult to increase diversion. Considering the above, the assumptions used in determining the amount of residential waste from London that will require disposal capacity in the future include: Residential waste generation will be 420 kilograms/year per capita in 2016 There will be no change in the waste generation rate in future years The residential diversion rate will be 45% (or about 185 kilograms) in 2016 The residential diversion rate could increase to 60% (or about 250 kilograms/year per capita) in the future if appropriate waste diversion programs are implemented Thames Centre The City has an agreement with Thames Centre to accept municipally collected residential garbage during winter months (so that the Thames Centre Landfill can close in the winter months and reduce operating costs) and in return the City can dispose of an equivalent amount of residential garbage in the Thames Centre Landfill in the summer. Thames Centre disposes of approximately 800 tonnes of waste at the W12A Landfill during the winter months. The City of London has applied for an amendment to the ECA for the W12A Landfill to accept waste in the winter from Thames Centre without sending a corresponding amount of garbage back to Thames Centre in the summer. It is expected a decision on the City s application to the MOECC will be made in For the purposes of this study it is assumed that the W12A Landfill will receive 800 tonnes of garbage from Thames Centre without sending a corresponding amount back beginning in It is assumed that this amount will increase at the same rate as residential waste in London increases. Page 7

12 W12A Landfill Annual Report 4.3 Industrial, Commercial and Institutional (IC&I) Waste Industrial, Commercial and Institutional (IC&I) waste consists of: Industrial waste, which is generated by manufacturing and primary and secondary industries and is managed off-site from the manufacturing operation; Commercial waste generated by commercial operations such as shopping malls, offices, etc.; and Institutional waste generated by institutional facilities such as schools, hospitals, government facilities, universities, etc. The majority of IC&I waste is managed by the private sector although a small amount of commercial and institutional waste is managed by the City primarily limited to small businesses and offices on residential garbage routes and City facilities. This makes getting information and the calculation of waste generation, disposal and diversion rates difficult to determine. Estimates of IC&I waste generation for London from 1997 (480 kilograms/year per capita) and more recent estimates for the province as a whole (530 kilograms/year per capita) are similar; Most IC&I waste is currently exported from London or diverted. Estimates for the province as a whole suggest that only 10% to 15% of IC&I waste is diverted from disposal; Average disposal rate at W12A Landfill over the last five years has been declining; Approximately 13,600 tonnes of IC&I waste was disposed of at the W12A Landfill in 2015 or 35 kilograms/year per capita; this represents less than 10% of the IC&I waste generated. A significant portion of the IC&I waste received paid no or preferential tipping fees (e.g., waste from charities that divert waste like Goodwill, residuals from the City s Material Recovery Facility, etc.) Waste Export The IC&I disposal rate in the future will depend on a number of factors which are outside the control of the municipality and have the potential to result in dramatically different amounts of waste that will have to be managed by the City. Most IC&I waste from London is exported to Private landfills in southwestern Ontario (e.g. Twin Creeks Landfill in Warwick, Ridge Landfill in Chatham) Private landfills in Michigan (more than 2 million tonnes of IC&I waste was shipped in 2014 from Ontario) Currently most IC&I waste is exported to private landfills in southwestern Ontario or Michigan. Some or all of this waste could come to the W12A Landfill if private tipping fee rates are increased; if access to landfills in Michigan is restricted as part of new regulations under Bill 151 (Waste-Free Ontario Act) or if tipping fees for IC&I waste are reduced at the W12A Landfill. Page 8

13 W12A Landfill Annual Report Alternatively regulations under Bill 151 have the potential to reduce the amount of waste going to the W12A Landfill by increasing the amount of IC&I waste that is required to be diverted. The province currently has a diversion target of 60% for IC&I waste but only 10% to 15% of IC&I waste is actually diverted. Higher tipping fees at the landfill could also reduce the amount of IC&I waste received at the landfill. The assumptions used in determining the amount of IC&I waste from London that will require disposal capacity in the future include: IC&I waste generation will be 500 kilograms per capita in 2016 There will be no change in the generation rate in future years The IC&I disposal rate will be 35 kilograms per capita in 2016 which is the same as 2015 The amount of IC&I waste that will require disposal at City facilities could vary from a low of 25 kilograms/year per capita (about 70% of the current rate) to 200 kilograms/ year per capita (60% diversion rate with all remaining waste going to City facilities) 4.4 Construction, Renovation and Demolition (CR&D) Waste CR&D waste refers to waste generated by construction, renovation and demolition activities and generally includes brick, wood, drywall, metal, asphalt singles, insulation, doors, windows, etc. For the purposes of this report it excludes materials like asphalt and concrete that can be diverted from landfill for reuse at no or minimal cost. CR&D waste comes from a diverse range of sources and like IC&I waste is not under municipal control. This makes getting information about CR&D waste and the calculation of waste generation, disposal and diversion rates difficult. The majority of CR&D waste goes to one of three local CR&D recycling facilities with a small amount exported for disposal. It is estimated that approximately 100,000 tonnes of CR&D waste was generated in London in 2014 (see Table 4) which translates to a generation rate of approximately 255 kilograms/year per capita. Approximately 50% to 60% of the material going to construction and demolition waste recycling facilities is diverted to beneficial uses while the remaining 40% to 50% becomes process residual waste that is sent for disposal. The process residual waste is solid non-hazardous waste consisting of insulation, flat roofing, and other materials that cannot be recycled (see Figure 3, next page). Table 4 - Estimated 2014 CR&D Quantities Facility Processed (tonnes) Green Valley Recycling 35,000 Try Recycling Dingman 38,000 Try Recycling Clarke Road 17,000 Export 1 10,000 Total 100,000 Notes 1. It is estimated only a small percentage (10%) of CR&D waste is exported based on conversations with industry members. Page 9

14 W12A Landfill Annual Report CR&D waste is banned from the W12A Landfill because there are local recycling options however CR&D recycling process residuals are accepted for disposal. The W12A Landfill could get up to 120 kilograms/year per capita if all CR&D waste went to CR&D recycling facilities and all the process residuals came to the W12A Landfill. In 2015 the W12A Landfill received 34,000 tonnes of CR&D process residuals. This represents approximately 70% of all potential CR&D recycling process residuals from London. It should be noted that one of the facilities that recycles CR&D waste from London (Try Recycling Clarke Road) is located just outside London and is outside the service area of the W12A Landfill. The City has made an application to MOECC to amend the ECA for the W12A Landfill to accept CR&D process residuals from the Try Recycling Clarke Road facility. The City made this application because the majority of process residuals are generated from processing material from London. It is expected a decision on the City s application to the MOECC will be made in Figure 3 - CR&D Recycling Process Residuals The amount of CR&D waste generated each year will vary based on the strength of the economy and the housing market. For the purpose of this study, it is assumed: 2014 represents an average year for CR&D waste generation (255 kilograms/year per capita) The amount of CR&D waste generated per capita is not expected to increase or decrease in the future The maximum CR&D recycling process residuals is 120 kilograms per capita (approximately 47% of CR&D waste) The amount of CR&D process residuals that will require disposal at the W12A Landfill could vary from a low of 0 kilograms/year per capita (lower disposal cost elsewhere) to 85 kilograms/year per capita (2014 rate) to 120 kilograms/year per capita (100% of all process residuals including residuals from Try Recycling Clarke Road) Page 10

15 W12A Landfill Annual Report 4.5 Sewage Sludge Ash Sewage sludge is nutrient-rich organic material that is a by-product from wastewater treatment plants. The City operates six wastewater treatment plants of which the Greenway Pollution Control Centre (Greenway) is the largest. Greenway receives all of the residual sewage sludge produced in the City where it is dewatered. Until 1988 all sewage sludge was landfilled. Beginning in 1988, sewage sludge was incinerated at Greenway and landfilled when the incinerator was down for repairs or maintenance. Dewatered Sewage Sludge Approximately 25% solids and 75% water 60,000 to 65,000 tonnes generated per year 90% to 95% incinerated 90% to 95% weight reduction when incinerated Incineration of the sewage sludge destroys all organic matter resulting in an inorganic ash that is a non-hazardous solid waste. The ash is red in colour and consists of silt/clay size particles (See Figure 4). The average amount of sewage sludge ash generated over the last decade is approximately 5,500 tonnes per year or 15 kilograms per capita per year. Until 2008, sewage sludge ash was taken to the W12A Landfill for disposal. Between 2008 and 2014, Figure 4 Sewage Sludge Ash some or all of the ash each year was taken to St. Marys Cement where the ash was incorporated into the cement making process. Recently, St. Marys Cement stopped taking the ash and has advised the City that it is very unlikely that we will resume use of this ash in the foreseeable future because the variation in ash makes it difficult to incorporate into the cement making process. The report Greenway PCP Solids Options Study (R.V. Anderson, 2011) considered sewage sludge projections and the capacity of the incinerator. The report found that the incinerator would reach capacity sometime after 2028 if growth in sewage sludge production was equal to the growth in population. Based on historical growth of approximately 0.2%, the incinerator would have capacity lasting beyond Considering the above, the assumptions used in determining the amount of sewage ash to be managed in the future include: Sewage sludge ash generation will be 15 kilograms per capita in 2016 Sewage sludge ash generation would increase 0.2% per year The Greenway incinerator will have sufficient capacity until at least 2070 No sewage sludge ash would be managed by St. Marys Cement Page 11

16 W12A Landfill Annual Report 4.6 Sewage Sludge/ Biosolids As noted in the previous section, approximately 90% to 95% of the City s sewage sludge is incinerated at Greenway. Up until 2006 raw sewage sludge was landfilled when the incinerator was down for maintenance or repairs (5% to 10% of the time). Beginning in 2007 the sewage sludge was treated by lime stabilization before being landfilled (treated sewage sludge is referred to as Biosolids). The average amount of Biosolids generated since 2012 is approximately 6,700 tonnes per year or 18 kilograms per capita per year. As noted in the previous section, sewage sludge is growing at about 0.2% per year which is less than the growth in population. The City has looked at three options for sewage sludge that was not incinerated instead of the landfilling Biosolids. In 2008 to 2010 the City looked at using the lime stabilized Biosolids as an agricultural amendment. The Biosolids contain beneficial levels of nitrogen, ammonia, potassium and calcium. Application of the Biosolids to agricultural land is restricted to certain times of the year when the material is required, while production of the Biosolids can occur at any time because of the need for unexpected repairs or maintenance of the incinerator. The inability to find a storage solution for the bioset when agricultural land was not available made this option impractical. This option could be explored again to given the passage of time. The Province introduced new Composting Guidelines in 2012 which allow for adding sewage sludge Biosolids as feedstock material in the production of Category A or B compost but not Category AA (highest quality compost). Sewage Biosolids is limited to a maximum of 25% of the feedstock blend (on a dry weight basis). TRY Recycling has expressed an interest in composting the Biosolids and proposed undertaking a pilot composting program at the W12A Landfill to determine if this would be financially and technically viable. This pilot will proceed if the option of using the Storm Fisher anaerobic digester (discussed below) for the Biosolids does not proceed. In 2015, Storm Fisher applied to the MOECC to approve processing of Biosolids at its anaerobic digestion facility located at 1087 Green Valley Road in London. The City is currently exploring this option. Considering the above, the assumptions used in determining the amount of sewage ash to be managed in the future include: Biosolids generation will be 6,700 tonnes in 2016 Biosolids generation would increase 0.2% per year Biosolids will continued to be landfill. This assumption may change if the City is successfully is finding another option for the management of Biosolids Lime Stabilized Biosolids Approximately 37% solids and 63% water Produced by adding approximately 20% (by weight) lime to the sewage sludge Lime raises ph to 12 or higher which kills any bacteria or viruses Reduces odours Page 12

17 W12A Landfill Annual Report 4.7 Street Sweepings/Road Works Each year the City removes the sand, salt, leaves and debris left on roads from the winter season through its street sweeping program. London, like most municipalities in Ontario, landfills street sweepings because of the debris, salt and other potential contaminants. Consideration of various management options for street sweepings suggests that using this material as landfill cover is the most practical use. Sometimes this is not possible because of the time of the year (e.g., already excess cover material), weather conditions (e.g., dry and windy resulting in blowing sand from the stockpiles) or the amount of debris in the street sweepings. It is estimated that approximately 50% of the street sweepings is used as cover material and 50% is disposed of as waste. The City also often has excess soil from road, sewer or water main maintenance and repairs. Consideration of Other Management Options for Street Sweepings Screen and reuse as winter sand Sand loses its sharp edges after being used Does not provide sufficient traction compared to new sand Screen and reuse as fill Contamination from salt and other compounds may prevent reuse Litter and other debris in street sweepings would have to be removed before reuse Like street sweepings this material often needs to come to the landfill because of debris or potential contaminants such as road salt. The amount of street sweepings can vary greatly from year to year because the amount generated is directly linked to the length and severity of the winter. The amount of road work material depends on the number of projects and what is encountered. Over the last decade the annual quantity of street sweepings and road material has varied from 22,000 tonnes to 47,000 tonnes with an average of approximately 35,000 tonnes (90 kilograms per capita per year). Considering the above, the assumptions used in determining the amount of street sweepings/road works material to be managed in the future include: Street sweepings/road works generation will be 90 kilograms per capita in 2016 Street sweepings/road works generation would increase at the same rate as population growth Street sweepings/road works will continue to go to the landfill in the future with 50% being used as cover Page 13

18 W12A Landfill Annual Report 4.8 Other Municipal Operations Other Municipal Operations consists of waste generated by City operations excluding street sweepings, Biosolids and sewage sludge ash. This includes non-recyclable waste from City parks, residuals from the City s Material Recovery Facility and grit from wastewater treatment plants. Over the last five years the annual quantity of waste from Other Municipal Operations has varied from 5,600 tonnes to 9,600 tonnes with an average of approximately 8,000 tonnes (20 kilograms per capita per year). There is limited opportunities to divert this material. Considering the above, the assumptions used in determining the amount of Other Municipal Operations waste to be managed in the future include: Other Municipal Operations waste generation will be 20 kilograms per capita in 2016 Other Municipal Operations waste generation would increase at the same rate as population growth Other Municipal Operations waste will continued to go to the landfill in the future 4.9 Water Treatment Plant Process Residuals This waste is generated when turbid water from the lakes is pumped into the water treatment plants and the suspended solids causing the turbidity are removed. The residuals are generated from filter backwash wastewater and other intermittent plant process waste streams. This process residual is soil like in nature (i.e., suspended sediment from turbid lake water). Pictures of the water treatment plant process residuals and the water treatment plant process residuals being loaded onto a truck for transport are shown below. Figure 5 - Water Treatment Plant Process Residuals Page 14

19 W12A Landfill Annual Report The City has made an application to MOECC to amend the ECA for the W12A Landfill to accept water treatment plant process residuals from the Lake Huron and Elgin Area water treatment plants. The City made this application because: The process residuals from the Lake Huron plant are currently being sent to a closed landfill in the Municipality of South Huron and being used as fill. It is expected that this option will no longer be available in the near future. The process residuals from the Elgin Area plant are currently being discharged back into Lake Erie however a residuals management facility is under construction and once completed will capture the residuals. The majority of process residuals are generated as a result of providing drinking water to London. It is expected a decision on the City s application to the MOECC will be made in If approved, it is estimated that the W12A Landfill will receive approximately 20,000 tonnes per year of process residuals. If approved the City will look at the potential for the process residuals to be used as cover material and thereby not consume any landfill space. The City is considering this because the material has few to no odours and chemical testing of the material shows that it generally meets soil quality standards for agricultural land use. The high moisture content and fine uniform nature of the sediment may make it difficult to spread over the waste and limit its effectiveness as cover material. It may be also be more difficult to use in the winter because of freezing. Rules for Using Contaminated Soil as Cover Material No offensive odours Can be spread in 150 mm layers Chemical testing demonstrates it meets soil quality standards for industrial land use (does not have to meet residential or agricultural land use standards) Considering the above, the assumptions used in determining the amount of water treatment plant process residuals to be managed in the future include: The W12A Landfill will begin accepting water treatment plant process residuals in 2017 Water treatment plant process residuals generation will be 50 kg/capita per year (approximately 20 kilograms per capita) in 2017 Water treatment plant process residuals will increase at the same rate as population growth 50% of the material will be used as cover material and 50% of the material will be buried as waste Page 15

20 W12A Landfill Annual Report 4.10 Contaminated Soil The W12A Landfill is licensed to accept contaminated soil. Depending on the level of contamination the soil is either buried as waste or used as cover material. The quantity of material being received at the W12A Landfill has changed over time. Beginning 2002 the landfill started to receive more contaminated soil when it lowered the tipping fee for this material. Prior to this most contaminated soil was exported to other landfills in Southern Ontario or Michigan. More recently the amount of contaminated soil being accepted at the W12A Landfill has dropped with the opening of a nearby contaminated soil processing facility by GFL in Dorchester in On average the landfill received 5,600 tonnes per year over the last three years but received 25,700 tonnes per year in the seven years prior to that. It is believed prior to the opening of the GFL facility the W12A Landfill received the majority of contaminated soil generated in the City but an unknown amount continued to be exported to nearby landfills. Considering the above, the assumptions used in determining the amount of contaminated soil to be managed in the future include: It is assumed the W12A Landfill will receive approximately 5,900 tonnes of contaminated soil (15 kg/capita per year) in 2016 of which 50% will be able to be used as cover material If there is no change in the tipping fee structure, the majority of this contaminated soil will be exported for disposal/treatment. Conversely, a lower tipping fee may result in more contaminated soil being received Page 16

21 W12A Landfill Annual Report 5.0 Waste Generation Projections Waste quantity projections for the City of London for the next 50 years were developed for three different scenarios. These waste quantity projections represent the likely range of waste quantities that can be expected taking into account: Population growth Provincial waste diversion target of 60% for residential, IC&I and CR&D waste Possible changes to the management of IC&I and CR&D waste due to changes to the tipping fee structures at the W12A Landfill and alternative disposal locations The three scenarios were: Scenario A Status Quo In this scenario it is assumed there are no changes to the quantities, or types of waste, or how they are managed except for approval of the City s application to expand the W12A Landfill s service area. It is assumed that waste from the new areas would start coming to the W12A Landfill beginning in This includes water treatment plant process residuals from the Lake Huron and Erie Area water treatment plants and CR&D recycling residuals from TRY Recycling s Clarke Road facility. Scenario B Decrease in Residential, IC&I and CR&D Recycling Residual Quantities This is the same as scenario A except: diversion of residential waste will increase from 45% to 60% over the next five years the quantity of IC&I waste coming to the W12A Landfill drops to 25 kilograms per capita/year (70% of the current quantity) because of cheaper disposal alternatives or increased diversion the quantity of CR&D recycling residuals coming to the W12A Landfill drops to 0 kilograms per capita/year because of cheaper disposal alternatives Scenario C Increase in IC&I Waste Quantities This is the same as scenario A except: diversion of residential waste will increase to 60% from 45% over the next five years the quantity of IC&I waste coming to the W12A Landfill will increase to 200 kilograms per capita/year because W12A Landfill becomes the least expensive disposal option. This is represents all the IC&I waste after allowing for a 60% diversion rate. The amount of waste for each scenario is presented in Appendix D and summarized in Table 5 and Figure 6 (next page). Table 5 Future Waste Disposal Requirements Projections Year Annual Quantity (tonnes) Running Total (tonnes) Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C , , , , , , , , ,000 2,407,400 1,700,400 2,824, , , ,200 5,070,500 3,496,100 5,931, , , ,300 7,959,000 5,444,500 9,301, , , ,400 11,088,100 7,555,000 12,953, , , ,200 14,479,900 9,842,900 16,910,800 Page 17

22 W12A Landfill Annual Report Figure 6 Waste Generation Projections Running Total (2016 to 2065) Page 18

23 W12A Landfill Annual Report 6.0 Landfill Capacity Assessment The remaining site life for the W12A Landfill was calculated for the three scenarios described in Section 5. These calculations are detailed in Appendix D and summarized below. Determine remaining capacity (volume) of W12A Landfill Based on a topographic survey, it is estimated that the remaining disposal volume is 3,230,000 m 3 as of January After allowing for final cover (360,000 m 3 ) and daily/intermediate cover (assume 4 parts refuse to 1 part soil), approximately 2,300,000 m 3 of disposal capacity is available for waste as of January Determine waste volumes The volume of residual waste for each of the three scenarios was calculated using the waste densities in Table 3. Determine Site Life The remaining volume of 2,300,000 m 3 available for the disposal of waste at the W12A Landfill was compared against estimated volume of waste requiring disposal for each of the scenarios. The waste quantity projections suggest that the W12A Landfill has between 8 and 15 years of capacity remaining (2023 to 2030) depending on how residential, IC&I and CR&D waste is managed in the future. With no changes in the existing waste management practices it is estimated that the W12A Landfill has 10 years of capacity remaining (2025). This is illustrated in Figure 7. Page 19

24 W12A Landfill Annual Report Figure 7 W12A Landfill Remaining Site Life Page 20

25 Appendix A Appendix A Population Projections Table A-1 Seasonal Student Population Table A-2 Historical Population Table A-3 Population Projections for the City of London Page A-1

26 Appendix A Table A-1 Seasonal Student Population Year Enrollment 1 Equivalent Population Total Equivalent Western Fanshawe Western Fanshawe Population ,000 5,400 8,320 1,600 9, ,250 5,500 8,430 1,630 10, ,500 5,800 8,550 1,720 10, ,750 5,900 8,660 1,750 10, ,000 5,900 8,780 1,750 10, ,250 6,400 8,890 1,900 10, ,500 6,700 9,010 1,990 11, ,750 6,900 9,120 2,050 11, ,000 6,700 9,240 1,990 11, ,250 6,500 9,360 1,930 11, ,500 6,700 9,470 1,990 11, ,750 6,700 9,590 1,990 11, ,000 6,900 9,700 2,050 11, ,250 7,600 9,820 2,260 12, ,500 8,300 9,930 2,470 12, ,750 8,600 10,050 2,550 12, ,000 8,600 10,160 2,550 12, ,250 9,400 10,280 2,790 13, ,500 9,600 10,400 2,850 13, ,750 9,700 10,510 2,880 13, ,000 9,800 10,630 2,910 13, ,250 10,000 10,740 2,970 13, ,500 10,500 10,860 3,120 13, ,750 10,600 10,970 3,150 14, ,000 10,900 11,090 3,240 14, ,000 12,200 12,010 3,620 15, ,000 12,800 12,940 3,800 16, ,000 13,200 13,400 3,920 17, ,300 13,800 13,540 4,100 17, ,600 14,200 13,680 4,220 17, ,900 14,800 13,810 4,400 18, ,200 15,500 13,950 4,600 18, ,900 15,880 14,280 4,720 19, ,600 16,260 14,600 4,830 19, ,300 16,650 14,920 4,950 19, ,000 16,970 15,250 5,040 20, ,700 17,290 15,570 5,140 20, ,400 17,610 15,890 5,230 21, ,100 17,930 16,220 5,330 21,550 Notes: 1. Enrollment from Western and Fanshawe registry up to Assumed to grow at same rate of population growth after The equivalent population was calculated using the following assumptions: a) 70% of Western students are from out of town and live off campus; b) 45% of Fanshawe students are from out of town and lived off campus and d) they lived in London for 8 months or 66% of the year. Estimates of percentage of students living off campus are based on information provided by the Western Housing Office. Page A-2

27 Appendix A Table A-2 Historical Population Year London 1 Westminster 2 Seasonal 3 Total ,080 5,950 9, , ,820 5,950 10, , ,590 5,950 10, , ,390 5,950 10, , ,280 5,950 10, , ,250 5,950 10, , ,220 5,940 11, , ,190 5,940 11, , ,160 5,940 11, , ,150 5,930 11, , ,950 6,100 11, , ,750 6,270 11, , ,550 6,450 11, , ,350 6,640 12, , ,170 6,830 12, , ,200 7,030 12, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,850 Notes: 1. From City of London Planning Department documents. 2. Population includes the Township of Westminster prior to In 1993 the Township of Westminster became part of the City of London. 3. Equivalent seasonal population (students) is calculated in Table A-1. Page A-3

28 Appendix A Table A-3 Population Projections for the City of London Year Permanent 1,2 Equivalent Total Seasonal 3, ,300 21, , ,700 21, , ,200 21, , ,700 21, , ,200 21, , ,700 21, , ,400 22, , ,500 22, , ,600 22, , ,700 22, , ,800 22, , ,700 23, , ,900 23, , ,100 23, , ,300 23, , ,500 23, , ,900 24, , ,500 24, , ,100 24, , ,700 24, , ,300 24, , ,800 25, , ,400 25, , ,000 25, , ,600 25, , ,200 25, , ,600 26, , ,300 26, , ,000 26, , ,800 26, , ,600 27, , ,400 27, , ,300 27, , ,200 27, , ,100 27, , ,100 28, , ,100 28, , ,100 28, , ,100 28, , ,200 29, ,200 Notes: 1. Population projections for the period 2006 to 2041 from Employment, Population, Housing and Non- Residential Construction Projections, City of London, Ontario, 2011 Update (Altus Group,2012). 2. Population projections beyond 2031 were extrapolated by assuming the same rate of growth rate after 2041 as immediately prior to Equivalent seasonal population (students) is calculated assuming 66% of students enrolled in postsecondary education are out of town students living off-campus for eight months of the year. Therefore each actual students represents 44% "equivalent" garbage of a permanent resident. 4. Growth in post-secondary enrollment is assumed to match population growth. Page A-4

29 Appendix B Appendix B Historical Data on Waste Generation, Disposal and Diversion Rates Table B-1 City of London Historical Residential Waste Diversion Quantities Table B-2 City of London Historical Residential Waste Quantities Disposed of at Private Facilities Table B-3 City of London Historical Sewage Sludge Ash Quantities Disposed of at St. Marys Cement Table B-4 City of London Waste Quantities Disposed of at W12A Landfill Table B-5 Total Waste Quantities Managed by the City Table B-6 Historical Unit Generation Rates Table B-7 Estimated IC&I and CR&D Rates from Various Sources Page B-1

30 Appendix B Table B-1 City of London Historical Residential Waste Diversion Quantities Year Blue Box Recycling Organics Other Total Curbside 1 Multi 1 - Depot 1,2 Public Subtotal Home Home Yard Material 1 Fall Leaf Christmas Subtotal WEEE Tires 8 Renovation Materials Textile/Small HSW Brew ers Subtotal Residential Residential Space 1 Composting 3 Grasscycling 4 Collection Depot 5 Collection 1 Trees 6 Ban 7 Electronics 1 Appliances 1 Scrap Metal 9 Wood/C&D 9 Household Depot 10 Retail 11 Diversion (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) Item Reuse (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,690 1, , , , ,760 2, , , , , ,570 4,800 2, ,650 2, ,510 1, , ,440 32, , ,750 5,500 3,500 3,520 3,400 3, ,220 1, , ,480 38, , ,680 5,600 3,500 4,800 5,220 4, ,470 1, , ,090 43, ,890 1, ,350 5,700 3,700 4,600 2,440 3, ,030 1, , ,140 41, ,310 1, ,690 5,700 3,700 6,200 1,540 3, ,980 1, , ,200 42, ,220 1, ,370 5,300 3,700 5,550 2,400 3, ,210 1, , , ,090 46, ,480 2, ,980 5,300 3,700 5,110 2,190 5, ,540 1, , , ,210 48, ,800 2, ,500 5,300 3,750 3,910 2,850 5, ,080 1, , , ,380 49, ,110 2, ,890 5,300 3,800 5,050 2,750 4, ,260 1, , , ,500 51, ,220 2, ,960 5,300 3,800 5,350 4,470 4, ,070 1, , , ,610 54, ,470 2, ,250 5,300 3,850 4,510 4,450 4, ,550 1, , , ,920 54, ,850 2, ,890 5,300 3,850 5,830 5,520 4, ,360 1, , , ,490 61, ,200 2, ,200 5,310 3,950 4,540 5,390 4, ,250 1, , , ,970 9,860 61, ,270 3, ,610 5,340 3,950 5,300 6,420 6, ,560 1, , , ,090 10,480 65, ,570 3, ,980 5,360 3,950 7,270 8,290 6, ,200 1, , , ,100 10,860 68, ,110 3, ,530 5,420 3,950 5,450 7,170 3, ,260 1, , , ,090 10,970 61, ,520 3, ,170 5,440 3,950 5,000 10,610 3, , , , ,140 11,120 66, ,960 3, ,670 5,460 3,950 4,540 9,920 4, , , , ,140 12,060 67, ,420 3, ,300 5,490 3,020 5,230 11,160 4, , , ,520 1, ,150 13,490 68, ,500 3, ,400 5,510 3,880 6,150 15,200 4, , , ,410 1, ,150 12,720 73, ,780 2, ,420 5,540 3,920 6,620 15,650 4, , , ,420 1, ,150 12,210 71,630 Totals 531,440 46,880 8, , ,370 77, , ,690 91,510 2, ,420 21,960 2, ,670 9,420 58,990 5,340 4,780 25, ,630 1,286,470 Notes and Assumptions: 1. Weighed quantities. 2. City EnviroDepots (Clarke Road & Oxford Street) and Municipal Household Special Waste depot at the W12A Landfill. 3. Estimate based on number of units sold through City program. From 1993 to 1999, it is assumed that 80% of the units are being used and these units divert 135 kg per unit. Beginning in 2000 it is assumed each composter diverts 100 kg/year (GAP guidelines). 4. Estimate assumes curbside grass ban introduced in 1995 reduces grass generation by 50%. Beginning in 2013, grass diverted by ban estimated using WDO "GAP" guidelines. 5. Includes year materials, fall leaves, fall pumpkins and pay per bag grass clippings 6. Estimate based on the actual number of trees to fill a truck x # of trucks filled x 8 kg per tree. 7. Estimate based on generation rate of 12 kg per hhld per year. Curbside collection ban of white goods/large metal items in effect as of Starting 2010, amount diverted by Ban reduced by quantities collected at Depots. Staring 2014 as per WDO "Gap" guidelines. 8. Estimate based on one tire/capita/year and 110 tires per tonne. It was assumed the recovery rate was 75% from 1995 to 1996 and 60% after 1997 (local tire recycler closed in 1997). Beginning in 2012, as WDO Datacall "GAP guidelines (7.1 kilograms diverted/capita). 9. Estimate based on 80% of weighted materials to City depots (assume 20% process residuals) plus 50% of available material not taken to City depots. Generation rate of scrap metal is estimated to be 2.4 kg/capita/yr. Generation rate of wood/c&d waste is estimated to be 15 kg/capita/yr. 10. Estimates from up to 1999 based on 1.5 kg/litre collected, 3 kg/compressed cylinder collected at the HSW Depot. Estimates from 2000 to 2010 use various conversion factors (GAP guidelines). Estimates from 2011 onwards from Stewardship Ontario DataCall for MHSW. 11. Brewers Retail deposit return reported effective 2001 as per WDO "GAP" process. Page B-2