Stakeholder Working Group Meeting Florida Solid Waste Management: State of the State

Stakeholder Working Group Meeting Florida Solid Waste Management: State of the State October 5, 2017 Department of Environmental Engineering Sciences Engineering School for Sustainable Infrastructure and Environment University of Florida 10/11/2017 1

Introductions 10/11/2017 2

Solid Waste Management: State of State Motivation and Justification: Market values for recyclable commodities are lower than they have been in years. Recovered material purchasers (e.g., paper mills) are demanding higher quality product while at the same time product quality from many materials recovery facilities (MRF) has declined with the predominance of single stream programs. The waste stream has evolved less newspaper, more composite packaging

Solid Waste Management: State of State Motivation and Justification: More efficient collection vehicles and strategies Waste management technologies that were historically never considered feasible are actively being pursued Gasification, anaerobic digestion, source separated organics Statutory, regulatory, and policy requirements drive additional recycling or landfill diversion Florida 75% recycling goal; required C&D recycling where economically feasible Landfill costs remain low Low Solids Anaerobic Digestion System for SSO in Toronto, Canada

Commodities Pricing Recyclables Commodity Pricing Monthly Averages In July, the Chinese notified the World Trade Association (WTO) of its intent to ban 24 materials from import into China. Mixed plastic, plastics that once contained food, rigid plastics and mixed waste paper were among the materials identified as banned as of January 1, 2018. Earlier this month, the Chinese announced a new ratcheting down of the quality of material flowing into the country. This 0.3% prohibitive limit is effective before the ban takes place. The new quality specifications apply to all materials, even those not included on the banned list (such as newspaper or cardboard). The Chinese Government has not issued the required quotas necessary for its mills to buy recycled material. This is resulting in a short-term reduction of all tons being allowed into China for recycling.

10/11/2017 6

Project Objectives Form a state-wide stakeholder working group and foster a dialogue on the state of solid waste Compile cost data from Florida municipalities Estimate materials flow and composition for the Florida solid waste stream Create a database of commodities pricing for recyclables 2014 Florida Waste Generation: FDEP Annual Reports

Project Objectives Develop a series of specific waste management options (for Florida conditions) and conduct an economic and environmental assessment of different waste management technologies LCA tools + collected data Evaluate the economic viability feasibility of CDD recycling, as well as emerging waste management technologies, for different FL regions Develop a publically available summary document that outlines the findings and provides data Whitepaper Produced as Deliverable for Hinkley Combustion Recycling Project

Project Tasks The proposed research project is broken down into the following four tasks: Task 1: Establish Stakeholder Working Group Task 2: Compile Available Data on FL Solid Waste Management Economics Task 3: Develop Waste Economic and Environmental Scenario Evaluations Task 4: Summary Whitepaper: Florida Solid Waste Management: State of the State

Today s Goals Discuss the current numbers with respect to how much waste is produced, recycled, combusted, and landfilled in Florida. Explore data gaps with respect to waste amounts, disposition, and cost. Examine opportunities and limitations to reaching the current State recycling goal, and discuss how SMM might be integrated into alternative goals. 10/11/2017 10

Agenda Activity Introductions, and Agenda MSW Management in Florida: The Current Numbers Getting to 75%: County Case Studies Getting to 75%: State Approaches Lunch Moving toward SMM Adjourn Schedule 10:00-10:15am 10:15-10:45am 10:45-11:15am 11:15-12:15pm 12:15-1:00pm 1:00-1:45pm 1:45pm 10/11/2017 11

MSW Management in Florida The Current Numbers 10/11/2017 12

Current Data All the available data is listed under the FDEP Solid Waste Management in Florida 2015 Annual Report and retrieved from RE-TRAC. http://www.dep.state.fl.us/waste/categories/recyclin g/swreportdata/15_data.htm 10/11/2017 13

Current Data Reported Data 10/11/2017 14

Current Data Reporting System 10/11/2017 15

Current Data Reporting System 10/11/2017 16

Current Data Types of Recycling Credits Total Recycling Credits Traditional Recycling Credits Standard Recycling Credits Traditional recycling credits Renewable energy recycling credits As described by FDEP Only MSW material components recycled 10/11/2017 17

Recycling Credits Traditional Recycling Credits Yard trash used as a landfill cover Other MSW used as landfill cover Treated contaminated soil used as a landfill cover Fuel or fuel substitute recycling credits Recycling of MSW material components 10/11/2017 18

Recycling Credits Renewable Recycling Credits Landfill gas generated from yard trash Landfill gas generated from MSW Waste To Energy Other renewable energy other than WTE Yard trash disposed beneficially in a landfill to generate energy other than landfill gas 10/11/2017 19

Florida Total Waste Generation Standard Recycling Rate: 40.6% Traditional Recycling Rate: 44.7% Total Recycling Rate: 55.8% 15.2 million tons standard recycled 4.51 million tons combusted 17.7 million tons landfilled 16.7 million tons traditionally recycled 4.51 million tons combusted 16.2 million tons landfilled 20.8 million tons total recycled 892,526 million tons combusted 15.6 million tons landfilled 37.4 Million tons 37.4 Million tons 37.4 Million tons 10/11/2017 20

Next, Let s Break This Down By 4 Major Categories 1. Residential MSW* 2. Non-residential MSW* 3. C&D Debris 4. Yard Trash *Not including yard trash or C&D debris. 10/11/2017 21

Assumptions There are assumptions that are made that are needed to find the data we are looking for. 10/11/2017 22

Assumptions Yard Trash and C&D Debris using best judgment yard trash and C&D Debris were removed from residential and nonresidential WTE & Landfill A portion of the collected tons for all MSW material components goes to either WTE or LF based on the relative amounts of each counties total WTE and LF 10/11/2017 23

State of Florida Total Waste Generation by Category Categorizing the total 32.5 million tons of collected MSW into the four categories 4.20 million tons yard trash 12.35 million tons residential 9.15 million tons nonresidential 11.30 million tons C&D Debris 37.4 Million tons 10/11/2017 24

State of Florida Total Waste Generation by Category Categorizing the total 32.5 million tons of collected MSW into the four categories 12.35 million tons residential 12.35 Million tons 10/11/2017 25

Residential Waste Generation Standard Recycling Rate: 18.9% Traditional Recycling Rate: 20.5% Total Recycling Rate: 41.3% 2.33 million tons standard recycled 2.29 million tons combusted 2.52 million tons traditional recycled 2.29 million tons combusted 5.10 million tons total recycled 7.72 million tons landfilled 7.53 million tons landfilled 7.24 million tons landfilled 12.35 Million tons 12.35 Million tons 12.35 Million tons 10/11/2017 26

Non-Residential Categorizing the total 32.5 million tons of collected MSW into the four categories 9.15 million tons nonresidential 9.15 Million tons 10/11/2017 27

Non-Residential Waste Generation Standard Recycling Rate: 39.1% Traditional Recycling Rate: 42.5% Total Recycling Rate: 63.4% 3.58 million tons standard recycled 1.69 million tons combusted 3.89 million tons traditional recycled 1.69 million tons combusted 5.80 million tons total recycled 3.87 million tons landfilled 3.56 million tons landfilled 3.35 million tons landfilled 9.15 Million tons 9.15 Million tons 9.15 Million tons 10/11/2017 28

C&D Debris Categorizing the total 32.5 million tons of collected MSW into the four categories 11.30 million tons C&D Debris 11.30 Million tons 10/11/2017 29

Since C&D is assumed to not be combusted and it is assumed the treated contaminated soil recycling credits and other MSW used for LF cover recycling credits originate from the landfill C&D tons C&D Debris 7.07 million tons recycled 4.29 million tons landfilled Traditional Recycling Rate: 59.9% Total Recycling Rate: 62.6% Standard Recycling Rate: 62.6% 11.30 Million tons 10/11/2017 30

Yard Trash Categorizing the total 32.5 million tons of collected MSW into the four categories 4.20 million tons yard trash 4.20 Million tons 10/11/2017 31

Yard Trash Generation Standard Recycling Rate: 50.0% Traditional Recycling Rate: 67.3% Total Recycling Rate: 80.7% 2.09 million tons standard recycled 528,696 tons combusted 1.57 million tons landfilled 4.20 Million tons 2.82 million tons traditionally recycled 528,696 tons combusted 845,859 tons landfilled 4.20 Million tons 3.38 million tons total recycled 812,465 tons landfilled 4.20 Million tons 10/11/2017 32

Recycling Rate Recycling Rates by Category 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Residential Non-Residential C&D Debris Yard Trash Standard Recycling Rate Traditional Recycling Rate Total Recycling Rate 10/11/2017 33

Quantifying Environmental Burdens Life Cycle Assessment Models EPA WARM Model 10/11/2017 34

GHG Emission Factors Net CO 2, CH 4, N 2 O, Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalents (MTCO2E) MTCO2E Ton Waste Mass of Waste 10/11/2017 35

WARM GHG Emission Factors 10/11/2017 36

WARM GHG Energy Factors 10/11/2017 37

Collection and Transportation CO2 Collection and Transportation Solid Waste Waste Management Facility CO2 0.04 MTCO2E Ton Waste Distance 10/11/2017 38

Final Disposition Landfill CO2 CO 2, CH 4, N 2 O Thermal Solid Waste Waste Management Facility Biological 10/11/2017 39

Landfilling Landfill in India Landfill in South America Construction Equipment Operation Decomposition Primarily anaerobic CO 2 What about carbon storage? Is all carbon the same? C 6 H 10 O 5 + H 2 O 3CH 4 + 3CO 2 GHG Emit to Capture and Energy 10/11/2017 Atmosphere Flare Recovery 40

10/11/2017 41

Biological Treatment Construction Equipment Operation CO 2 What about carbon storage? Is all carbon the same? Anaerobic Digestion in Canada Composting Primarily aerobic process Composting in Philippines C 6 H 10 O 5 + 6O 2 6C0 2 + 5H 2 O Anaerobic digestion C 6 H 10 O 5 + H 2 O 3CH 4 + 3CO 2 Energy Input Energy Output 10/11/2017 42

10/11/2017 43

Thermal Treatment Excess Air Combustion in Taiwan Construction Equipment Operation CO 2 Is all carbon the same? Gasification in US Excess Air Combustion CO 2, N 2 O Pyrolysis, Gasification Energy Output Syngas and other products (CO, H2, Carbon) Energy Output Combustion Liquid Fuel CO 2, N 2 O 10/11/2017 44

10/11/2017 45

Recycling CO2 CO2 CO 2, CH 4, N 2 O CO2 Raw Materials Extraction Manufacturing Solid Waste Waste Management Facility 10/11/2017 46

Recycling CO2 CO2 CO2 CO 2, CH 4, N 2 O Raw Materials Extraction Manufacturing Solid Waste Waste Management Facility 10/11/2017 47

10/11/2017 48

WARM GHG Emission Factors for Recycling Aluminum Cans Cardboard Newspaper Computer Steel Cans PET Plastic HDPE Plastic Glass Asphalt Shingle Drywall 2 0-2 -4-6 GHG Emissions (MTCO2E/ton) -8-10 10/11/2017 49

Source Reduction CO2 CO2 CO2 CO 2, CH 4, N 2 O Raw Materials Extraction Manufacturing Solid Wast e Waste Management Facility 10/11/2017 50

10/11/2017 51

Getting to 75% County Case Studies 10/11/2017 52

Opportunities to Apply SMM Tools and Principles to Waste Management Decision Making A state or community could use a life cycle model to evaluate priorities for developing regulations or policies Compare different scenarios (e.g., waste to energy versus SSO) to assess which approach provides the overall lower environmental burden. 10/11/2017 53

Sarasota County Case Study Town of Long Boat Key City of Sarasota City of Venice City of North Port 10/11/2017 54

Approaches to 75% Waste to energy (WTE) scenario: Divert 100% of materials landfilled to WTE, this reduces landfill waste by 70%. Mixed waste processing scenario: recover 10% of materials otherwise landfilled in a MWPF. Biosolids and yard trash composting scenario: 100% of all biosolids collected composted with all of the collected yard trash at central county landfill (56% of total collected yard trash in the county). Commercial food waste and yard trash composting scenario: all yard trash collected by county (56% of total collected yard trash in the county) composted with 58% of commercial food waste otherwise landfilled. Food waste anaerobic digestion scenario: Assumed 65% of all food waste otherwise landfilled AD. 10/11/2017 55

Thousand MTCO2E GHG Emissions: 2016 Baseline and Scenarios 0 2016 Baseline Mixed Waste Processing Waste-to-Energy Biosolids and Yards Trash Composting Commerical Food/Yard Trash Composting Organics Anaerobic Digestion -100-200 -300-400 -500-600 -700-800 -900 10/11/2017 56

Thousand mmbtu Energy Use: 2016 Baseline and Scenarios 0 2016 Baseline Mixed Waste Processing Waste-to-Energy Biosolids and Yards Trash Composting Commerical Food/Yard Trash Composting Organics Anaerobic Digestion -1,000-2,000-3,000-4,000-5,000-6,000-7,000-8,000 10/11/2017 57

Recycling Rate Recycling Rates: 2016 Baseline and Scenarios 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2016 Baseline Mixed Waste Processing Waste-to-Energy Biosolids and Yards Trash Composting Traditional Recycling Rate (%) Total Recycling Rate (%) Commerical Food/Yard Trash Composting Organics Anaerobic Digestion 10/11/2017 58

Palm Beach County Case Study

Approaches to 75% Glass pozzolan processing scenario: 94% of all glass recycled would be processed to become a pozzolan used in concrete manufacture, remaining glass is recycled traditionally. WTE bottom ash recycling scenario: 60% of WTE Ash is used as road base replacing limerock and through advanced metal recovery 2% of the ash is additionally recycled; results in 30% reduction of materials landfilled. WTE bottom ash recycling and glass pozzolan processing scenario: Combines both scenarios. 10/11/2017 60

Thousand mmbtu GHG Emissions: 2016 Baseline and Scenarios 0 2016 Baseline Glass Pozzolan Processing BA Recycling BA Recycling and GP Processing -5,000-10,000-15,000-20,000-25,000 10/11/2017 61

Thousand MTCO2E Energy Use: 2016 Baseline and Scenarios 0 2016 Baseline Glass Pozzolan Processing BA Recycling BA Recycling and GP Processing -200-400 -600-800 -1,000-1,200-1,400-1,600-1,800 10/11/2017 62

Recycling Rate Recycling Rates: 2016 Baseline and Scenarios 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2016 Baseline Glass Pozzolan Processing Traditional Recycling Rate BA Recycling Total Recycling Rate BA Recycling and GP Processing 10/11/2017 63

Getting to 75% State Approaches 10/11/2017 64

State Approaches 10/11/2017 65

Approach 1 Waste-to-Energy (WTE) approach: Increase the capacities of existing WTE in Miami-Dade, Broward, & Pinellas and add new WTE facilities in 11 counties that do not have WTE facilities. 10/11/2017 66

Approach 1 Waste-to-Energy (WTE) approach: The increased capacity results in a target landfill rate of 2.6% in those counties 10/11/2017 67

MTCO2E/Person GHG Emissions: 2016 Baseline and Approaches -1.060 2016 Baseline WTE Approach -1.070-1.080-1.090-1.100-1.110-1.120-1.130 10/11/2017 68

mmbtu/person Energy Use: 2016 Baseline and Approaches -11.00 2016 Baseline WTE Approach -11.50-12.00-12.50-13.00-13.50-14.00 10/11/2017 69

Palm Beach Hillsborough Pinellas Pasco Monroe Lake Brevard Calhoun Walton Duval Gulf Jackson Martin Washington Orange Volusia Sarasota Escambia St. Lucie Santa Rosa Okaloosa Okeechobee Nassau Flagler Highlands Gadsden Wakulla Franklin Hardee Glades Madison Dixie Union Lafayette Tons per Year Approach 1 Florida MSW Disposal 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 - County 10/11/2017 Landfill Waste-to-Energy 70

Current Miami-Dade Broward Pinellas Lake Bay Polk Duval Orange Brevard Volusia Seminole Escambia Manatee Sarasota Collier Marion Santa Rosa Leon Alachua Okeechobee Indian River St Johns Martin Flagler Clay St. Lucie Hernando Suwannee Okaloosa Highlands Charlotte Osceola Nassau Columbia Sumter Putnam Jackson Citrus DeSoto Levy Gadsden Walton Hardee Wakulla Baker Taylor Bradford Franklin Calhoun Glades Washington Jefferson Hamilton Dixie Gulf Gilchrist Madison Union Liberty Holmes Lafayette Monroe Hendry Statewide Recycling Rate 80% Waste-to-Energy Alternative 70% 60% 50% WTE Renewable Energy Credits 40% 30% 20% Traditional Recycling Rate 10% 0% County 10/11/2017 71

Statewide Recycling Rate (Millions) 100% 90% 80% New Capacity North Florida (0.6 million tpy) $800 $600 $400 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Capacity Increase (3.1 million tpy) New Capacity Central Florida (2.2 million tpy) New Capacity SW Florida (0.7 million tpy) $200 $0 -$200 -$400 -$600 -$800 0% Current Miami- Dade Browar Pinellas Duval Polk Orange Semino Osceol d le a Brevar d Volusia Manate Sarasot Collier Charlot e a te Renewable Energy 12.00% 14.35% 16.48% 16.72% 17.60% 18.50% 19.14% 19.64% 19.78% 20.40% 20.99% 21.33% 21.68% 21.94% 22.08% Traditional 44.00% 44.00% 44.00% 44.00% 44.00% 44.00% 44.00% 44.00% 44.00% 44.00% 44.00% 44.00% 44.00% 44.00% 44.00% Cumulative Cost $124,3 $237,2 $250,1 $296,7 $344,5 $378,1 $404,7 $411,9 $445,0 $476,0 $494,4 $512,5 $526,6 $533,9 Cost per ton $81 Cost per percentage point $53 million -$1,000 10/11/2017 72

Approach 2 Mixed Waste Processing (MWP) approach: Increase the residential recycling rate to 55.7% and the non-residential recycling rate to 47.6% for 13 counties. 10/11/2017 73

Approach 2 Mixed Waste Processing (MWP) approach: Residential 55.7% target includes: Single Stream MWP in conjunction with current curbside recycling Organics Composting Non-Residential 47.6% target includes: Single Stream MWP Organics Composting 10/11/2017 74

MTCO2E/Person GHG Emissions: 2016 Baseline and Approaches 0 2016 Baseline MWP Approach -0.2-0.4-0.6-0.8-1 -1.2-1.4-1.6 10/11/2017 75

mmbtu/person Energy Use: 2016 Baseline and Approaches 0.00 2016 Baseline MWP Approach -2.00-4.00-6.00-8.00-10.00-12.00-14.00-16.00 10/11/2017 76

Current Miami-Dade Broward Pinellas Palm Beach Brevard Polk Volusia Seminole Escambia Santa Rosa Sarasota Levy Hillsborough Collier Orange Marion Lake Alachua Flagler Clay Suwannee Highlands Bay Leon Hernando Charlotte Okaloosa St Johns Martin Indian River Nassau Osceola Jackson Pasco Sumter Columbia Lee Okeechobee Monroe DeSoto Walton Hardee Calhoun Glades Manatee Taylor Baker Putnam Citrus Wakulla Franklin Washington Jefferson Bradford Gadsden Gulf Dixie Union Hamilton Gilchrist Liberty Lafayette Holmes Hendry Madison Duval St. Lucie Total Recycling Rate Cumulatie Cost ($) 100.0% Mixed Waste Processing Alternative $600,000,000 90.0% 80.0% $400,000,000 70.0% $200,000,000 60.0% $- 50.0% 40.0% $(200,000,000) 30.0% $(400,000,000) 20.0% 10.0% $(600,000,000) 0.0% $(800,000,000) 10/11/2017 Counties 77

Mixed Waste Processing Alternative 100% $400,000,000 90% $300,000,000 80% $200,000,000 70% $100,000,000 60% 2.7% 4.9% 5.5% 6.1% 6.5% 7.0% 7.3% 7.6% 7.8% 8.0% 8.1% 8.3% 8.4% $- 50% 40% $(100,000,000) 30% $(200,000,000) 20% $(300,000,000) 10% $(400,000,000) 0% $(500,000,000) Cost per ton $35 Cost per percentage point $37 million 10/11/2017 78

Approach 3 Traditional Recycling 10/11/2017 79

Miami-Dade County Palm Beach County Hillsborough County Orange County Broward County Pinellas County Duval County Brevard County Lee County Collier County Sarasota County Volusia County Manatee County Charlotte County Polk County Pasco County Alachua County Escambia County St. Lucie County Leon County Indian River County Monroe County Marion County Martin County Bay County Seminole County Sumter County St. Johns County Putnam County Citrus County Lake County Hernando County Clay County Osceola County Okaloosa County Santa Rosa County Nassau County Hendry County Desoto County Columbia County Highlands County Flagler County Suwanne County Walton County Okeechobee County Wakulla County Gadsden County Bradford County Franklin County Jackson County Madison County Taylor County Levy County Baker County Washington County Hamilton County Calhoun County Hardee County Gilchrist County Holmes County Recycling Center Gulf County Union County Jefferson County Glades County Liberty County Lafayette County Dixie County Traditional Recycling Mass (tons) 1,600,000 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 Traditional Recycling (2016) 30 # Counties 37 97% Traditional Recycling Mass 3% 43% Weighted Avg Standard Recycling Rate 16% 59% Weighted Avg Total Recycling Rate 22% 92% Collected Waste Mass 8% 400,000 200,000 0 County 10/11/2017 80

Miami-Dade County Palm Beach County Hillsborough County Orange County Broward County Pinellas County Duval County Brevard County Lee County Collier County Sarasota County Volusia County Manatee County Charlotte County Polk County Pasco County Alachua County Escambia County St. Lucie County Leon County Indian River County Monroe County Marion County Martin County Bay County Seminole County Sumter County St. Johns County Putnam County Citrus County Lake County Hernando County Clay County Osceola County Okaloosa County Santa Rosa County Nassau County Hendry County Desoto County Columbia County Highlands County Flagler County Suwanne County Walton County Okeechobee County Wakulla County Gadsden County Bradford County Franklin County Jackson County Madison County Taylor County Levy County Baker County Washington County Hamilton County Calhoun County Hardee County Gilchrist County Holmes County Recycling Center Gulf County Union County Jefferson County Glades County Liberty County Lafayette County Dixie County Traditional Recycling Mass (tons) 1,600,000 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 Traditional Recycling (2016) 30 # Counties 37 95% Traditional Recycling Mass 5% 43% Weighted Avg Standard Recycling Rate 43% (270% Increase) 59% Weighted Avg Total Recycling Rate 49% Statewide Recycling Rate Increase = 2% 400,000 200,000 0 County 10/11/2017 81

Alternative Approaches to a 75% Recycling Rate 10/11/2017 82

Where we left off January 10, 2017 We discussed an approach to track Florida s waste management progress using measurements other than a weight-based recycling rate. WARM Emission and Energy Factors Net CO 2 Emissions and Net Energy Use 10/11/2017 83

Approach Since the statute was passed in 2008, let s set this as our baseline year. Originally in that year Florida had a recycling rate of ~29%. Recycling Rate (% Weight) 29% 2008 Measured 10/11/2017 84

Approach Then we come up with a hypothetical waste management scenario that reached 75% in 2008. We will use this to set the threshold the state will aspire to. 75% Recycling Rate (% Weight) 29% 2008 Measured 2008 Hypothetical 10/11/2017 85

Approach Use this hypothetical 75% recycling scenario, calculate a corresponding GHG emission and energy use values/footprints (with WARM factors) 75% Recycling Rate (% Weight) 2008 Hypothetical 10/11/2017 86

Approach Calculate a baseline GHG footprint 75% Recycling Rate (% Weight) GHG Emissions (MTCO2E) -XXX MTCO2E 2008 Hypothetical 10/11/2017 87

Approach Calculate a baseline energy footprint 75% Recycling Rate (% Weight) Energy Use (MMBTU) -YYY MMBTU 2008 Hypothetical 10/11/2017 88

2015 42% Traditional 54% Adjusted Target = -26 million MTCO2E 10/11/2017 89

Constructed and operated WTE facilities in Orange and Duval Counties 42% Traditional 59% Adjusted Target = -26 million MTCO2E 10/11/2017 90

Established a Bottle Bill and Recycled 80% of Glass, Aluminum Cans, and Plastic Bottles 44.9% Traditional 56.6% Adjusted Target = -26 million MTCO2E 10/11/2017 91

Recycle 80% of Glass, Aluminum Cans, Plastic Bottles, Newspaper, Cardboard and Office Paper 51.4% Traditional 63.0% Adjusted Target = -26 million MTCO2E 10/11/2017 92

Food Waste Recycling (composting) to 80% 47.0% Traditional 57.7% Adjusted Target = -26 million MTCO2E 10/11/2017 93

Recycle 80% of C&D and Yard Trash 52.4% Traditional 64.1% Adjusted Target = -26 million MTCO2E 10/11/2017 94

Target = -26 million MTCO2E Recycle 80% of Glass, Aluminum Cans, Plastic Bottles, Newspaper, Cardboard, Office Paper, Yard Trash, C&D and Food Waste 66.0% Traditional 76.7% Adjusted 10/11/2017 95

2015 42% Traditional 54% Adjusted Target = -275 million mmbtu 10/11/2017 96

Constructed and operated WTE facilities in Orange and Duval Counties 42% Traditional 59% Adjusted Target = -275 million mmbtu 10/11/2017 97

Established a Bottle Bill and Recycled 80% of Glass, Aluminum Cans, and Plastic Bottles 44.9% Traditional 56.6% Adjusted Target = -275 million mmbtu 10/11/2017 98

Recycle 80% of Glass, Aluminum Cans, Plastic Bottles, Newspaper, Cardboard and Office Paper 51.4% Traditional 63.0% Adjusted Target = -275 million mmbtu 10/11/2017 99

Food Waste Recycling (composting) to 80% 47.0% Traditional 57.7% Adjusted Target = -275 million mmbtu 10/11/2017 100

Recycle 80% of C&D and Yard Trash 52.4% Traditional 64.1% Adjusted Target = -275 million mmbtu 10/11/2017 101

Recycle 80% of Glass, Aluminum Cans, Plastic Bottles, Newspaper, Cardboard, Office Paper, Yard Trash, C&D and Food Waste 66.0% Traditional 76.7% Adjusted Target = -275 million mmbtu 10/11/2017 102

After the Working Group Meeting We began to explore alternative ways to present the results. -26 million MTCO2E GHG emissions and -270 million mmbtu These numbers are a bit abstract. We developed a procedure to equate these numbers to the traditional recycling rate. We presented this at RFT in June 2017. 10/11/2017 103

Approach 75% Recycling Rate (% Weight) GHG Emissions (MTCO2E) -XXX MTCO2E 2008 Hypothetical 10/11/2017 104

Approach 75% -25.8 million MTCO2E Recycling Rate (% Weight) & GHG Footprint (MTCO2E) = 2008 Recycling Rate Baseline 2008 GHG Footprint Baseline 10/11/2017 105

Approach 75% -25.8 million MTCO2E Recycling Rate (% Weight) & GHG Footprint (MTCO2E) -15 million MTCO2E 2008 Recycling Rate Baseline 2008 GHG Footprint Baseline Future Year GHG Footprint Baseline 10/11/2017 106

Approach 15 million 25.8 million x 75% = 43.6% 75% -25.8 million MTCO2E Recycling Rate (% Weight) & GHG Footprint (MTCO2E) -15 million MTCO2E 43.6% 2008 Recycling Rate Baseline 2008 GHG Footprint Baseline Future Year GHG Footprint Baseline Future Year Effective Recycling Rate 10/11/2017 107

RFT Presentation Examined progress toward recycling at several different future waste management scenarios Build more WTE Increase residential recycling Institute SSO More C&D and yard trash recycling 10/11/2017 108

Applying SMM for Florida SWM in 2020 Progress Towards Baseline 2 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Expand WTE SMM Scenario A SMM Scenario B Duval, Brevard, Polk, Volusia, and Orange county divert a third of their total collected MSW into WTE. SMM Scenario C SMM Scenario D 2015 Portfolio Baseline 2 Metric Recycling Rate (With WTE) GHG Savings Energy Savings 10/11/2017 109

Applying SMM for Florida SWM in 2020 Progress Towards Baseline 2 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Expand WTE SMM Scenario A Enhance Recycling SMM Scenario B SMM Scenario C 75% recycling of residential curbside materials for newspaper, glass, aluminum cans, plastic bottles, steel cans, corrugated paper, and office paper. SMM Scenario D 2015 Portfolio Baseline 2 Metric Recycling Rate (With WTE) GHG Savings Energy Savings 10/11/2017 110

Applying SMM for Florida SWM in 2020 Progress Towards Baseline 2 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Expand WTE SMM Scenario A Enhance Recycling SMM Scenario B SSO SMM Scenario C SMM Scenario D Organics recycling program will increase the Florida s food recycling rate to become 75% 2015 Portfolio Baseline 2 Metric Recycling Rate (With WTE) GHG Savings Energy Savings 10/11/2017 111

Applying SMM for Florida SWM in 2020 Progress Towards Baseline 2 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Expand WTE SMM Scenario A Enhance Recycling SMM Scenario B SSO SMM Scenario C Focus on C&D & YT SMM Scenario D 2015 Portfolio Bulk recycling programs for with a 75% recycling rate for C&D Debris and yard trash Baseline 2 Metric Recycling Rate (With WTE) GHG Savings Energy Savings 10/11/2017 112

Applying SMM for Florida SWM in 2020 Progress Towards Baseline 2 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Expand WTE SMM Scenario A Enhance Recycling SMM Scenario B SSO SMM Scenario C Focus on C&D & YT SMM Scenario D 2015 2015 Portfolio Current 2015 Portfolio Baseline 2 Metric Recycling Rate (With WTE) GHG Savings Energy Savings 10/11/2017 113

Applying SMM for Florida SWM in 2020 Progress Towards Baseline 2 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Expand WTE SMM Scenario A Enhance Recycling SMM Scenario B SSO SMM Scenario C Focus on C&D & YT SMM Scenario D 2015 2015 Portfolio Baseline 2 Metric Recycling Rate (With WTE) GHG Savings Energy Savings 10/11/2017 114

Applying SMM for Florida SWM in 2020 Progress Towards Baseline 2 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Expand WTE SMM Scenario A Enhance Recycling SMM Scenario B SSO SMM Scenario C Focus on C&D & YT SMM Scenario D 2015 2015 Portfolio 2015 2017 2019 Baseline 2 Metric Recycling Rate (With WTE) GHG Savings Energy Savings 10/11/2017 115

Since the RFT meeting We continued the refine the analysis and we worked with participating counties. One thing that became clear is that we were not truly counting source reduction. 10/11/2017 116

Florida Solid Waste Generation in 2008 and 2015 Million Tons of Solid Waste 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 2008 2015 10/11/2017 117

Per-Capita Florida Solid Waste Generation in 2008 and 2015 Tons of Solid Waste per Person-Year 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 2008 2015 10/11/2017 118

9 8 7 GHG Source Reduction Factors (based on WARM) 6 MTCO2E Ton 5 4 3 2 1 0 10/11/2017 119

100 90 80 Energy Source Reduction Factors (based on WARM) 70 MMBTU Tom 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10/11/2017 120

Florida s Per-Capita Waste Component Increase/Decrease 2008 2015 Per Capita Generation (ton/person-year) Material 2008 2015 Difference Aluminum Cans 0.012 0.010-0.002 C&D Debris 0.400 0.487 0.087 Corrugated Paper 0.137 0.128-0.009 Ferrous Metals 0.148 0.122-0.026 Food 0.092 0.100 0.008 Glass 0.042 0.043 0.001 Newspaper 0.077 0.051-0.026 Non Ferrous Metal 0.038 0.025-0.013 Office Paper 0.043 0.031-0.012 Other Paper 0.109 0.110 0.001 Other Plastics 0.061 0.073 0.012 Plastic Bottles 0.024 0.023-0.001 Steel Cans 0.017 0.015-0.002 Textiles 0.048 0.038-0.010 Tires 0.020 0.012-0.008 White Goods 0.029 0.018-0.011 Miscellaneous 0.149 0.156 0.007 Process Fuel 0.032 0.027-0.005 Yard Trash 0.170 0.177 0.007 Total 1.648 1.645-0.004 10/11/2017 121

Since the RFT meeting We have refined the analysis to include source reduction. Discussion point we not only include source reduction, but we include a source increase This requires everything to be analyzed on a per capita basis. Note: when using per capita generation rates, if we did not count source reduction, the effective recycling rates would be lower 10/11/2017 122

EfW-dominated baseline 28% EfW 7% Recycled 10% Baselines 4% 2% 4% 2% Recycled-dominated baseline Recycled 25% Landfill 8% EfW 11% 10% 9% 25% Landfill 5% 12% 1% 7% 2% 16% 4% 5% 3% 10/11/2017 Recycled MSW Materials Mixed Paper Mixed Metals Other Mixed Plastic Corrugated Paper Food C&D Debris Glass Yard Trash 123

Example for Florida: Extrapolate 2020 MSW management in Florida using different SMM approaches. Scenario EfW scenario Curbside scenario Description Expands on Florida s EfW recycling credits, by diverting a third of the total collected MSW of the five most populated counties (Duval, Brevard, Polk, Volusia, and Orange county) to a WTE facility to recover EfW recycling credits. The major residential curbside materials (newspaper, glass, aluminum and steel cans, plastic bottles, corrugated and office paper) are recycled in the state at 75%. Organics scenario The state s food waste is recycled at 75%. C&D and YT scenario The state s C&D and YT are recycled at 75%. Combination scenario Combines the curbside, organics, and C&D and YT scenarios. 10/11/2017 124

Applying SMM for Florida SWM in 2020 Progress Towards EfW-Dominated baseline 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% EfW Scenario Traditional GHG Energy EfW Curbside Scenario Duval, Brevard, Polk, Volusia, and Orange county divert a third of their total collected MSW into WTE. Organics Scenario C&D and YT Scenario Combination 2015 10/11/2017 125

Applying SMM for Florida SWM in 2020 Progress Towards EfW-Dominated baseline 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% EfW Scenario Traditional GHG Energy EfW Curbside Scenario Organics Scenario 75% recycling of residential curbside materials for newspaper, glass, aluminum cans, plastic bottles, steel cans, corrugated paper, and office paper. C&D and YT Scenario Combination 2015 Contribution of upstream burden (source reduction of increase) 10/11/2017 127

Applying SMM for Florida SWM in 2020 Progress Towards EfW-Dominated baseline 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% EfW Scenario Traditional GHG Energy EfW Curbside Scenario Organics Scenario C&D and YT Scenario Organics recycling program will increase the Florida s food recycling rate to become 75% Combination 2015 Contribution of upstream burden (source reduction of increase) 10/11/2017 128

Applying SMM for Florida SWM in 2020 Progress Towards EfW-Dominated baseline 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% EfW Scenario Traditional GHG Energy EfW Curbside Scenario Organics Scenario C&D and YT Scenario Combination Bulk recycling programs for with a 75% recycling rate for C&D Debris and yard trash 2015 Contribution of upstream burden (source reduction of increase) 10/11/2017 129

Applying SMM for Florida SWM in 2020 Progress Towards EfW-Dominated baseline 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% EfW Scenario Traditional GHG Energy EfW Curbside Scenario Organics Scenario C&D and YT Scenario Combination 2015 Combination of Curbside, Organics, and C&D and YT Scenario Contribution of upstream burden (source reduction of increase) 10/11/2017 130

Applying SMM for Florida SWM in 2020 Progress Towards EfW-Dominated baseline 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% EfW Scenario Traditional GHG Energy EfW Curbside Scenario Organics Scenario C&D and YT Scenario Combination 2015 2015 Mass and Disposition Contribution of upstream burden (source reduction of increase) 10/11/2017 131

10/11/2017 133

10/11/2017 134

10/11/2017 135

10/11/2017 136

10/11/2017 137

10/11/2017 138

10/11/2017 139

10/11/2017 140

Florida Solid Waste Generation in 2008, 2015 and 2016 Million Tons of Solid Waste 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 2008 2015 2016 10/11/2017 141

Per-Capita Florida Solid Waste Generation in 2008, 2015 and 2016 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.4 Tons of Solid Waste per Person-Year 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 2008 2015 2016 10/11/2017 142

Florida Solid Waste Source Reduction Waste Goes up in 2016! Per Capita Generation Change (ton/person-year) Material 2015-2008 2016-2008 Aluminum Cans -0.002-0.001 C&D Debris 0.087 0.161 Corrugated Paper -0.009-0.007 Ferrous Metals -0.026-0.020 Food 0.008 0.014 Glass 0.001 0.002 Newspaper -0.026-0.025 Non Ferrous Metal -0.013-0.009 Office Paper -0.012-0.010 Other Paper 0.001-0.005 Other Plastics 0.012 0.012 Plastic Bottles -0.001-0.001 Steel Cans -0.002 0.005 Textiles -0.010-0.007 Tires -0.008-0.004 White Goods -0.011-0.010 Miscellaneous 0.007 0.077 Process Fuel -0.005 0.000 Yard Trash 0.007 0.038 Total -0.004 0.208 10/11/2017 143

Lessons Learned Choice of baseline is important. Source reduction plays a large role. Accurate and detailed waste composition, generation and disposition data are critical. Unlike weight-based recycling rate approach, this methodology clearly differentiates between materials. Ramifications? 10/11/2017 144

Material increased to 75% recycling rate Incremental Increase Relative To The Baseline -5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% Mixed Paper Corrugated Paper Mixed Metals Mixed Plastic C&D Debris Food Glass Yard Trash Recycling Rate GHG Savings Energy Savings 10/11/2017 145

Discussion Topics Which baseline to use? What impact categories to assess? Multiple? Implications of differences among materials? How do we refine and better present this information to be of use? Other approaches to move toward SMM metrics? 10/11/2017 146

Next Steps for Working Group Need input on what we should include in Whitepaper. Need reviewers for whitepaper. One more working group meeting (Dec or Jan) 10/11/2017 147

Metric Other Approaches Greenhouse Gases Energy Consumption Water Consumption Community decides which is the most important to become the objective metric Objective Metric Baselines Acidification Potential Reporting Measurements 10/11/2017 148

Other Approaches Composting Food Waste Aerobic Digestion Landfill 10/11/2017 149

Other Approaches Consumption Composting Agriculture Practice Manufacturing Food Waste Anaerobic Digestion Landfill 10/11/2017 150

http://www.essie.ufl.edu/home/townsend/research/florida-solid-waste-issues/hc16/ ttown@ufl.edu steven.laux@essie.ufl.edu manshassi@ufl.edu 10/11/2017 151