Planning for Innovation in Waste Management and Recycling

February 10, 2012

Dr. John F. Katers, UW-Green Bay / SEH

Andrew Dane, AICP, Short Elliott Hendrickson (SEH)

Current Experience

• Academic

– Associate Professor, Natural and Applied Sciences (Engineering), UW-Green Bay

– Co-Director, Environmental Management and Business Institute (EMBI)

• Business

– Project Design Leader, SEH

– Bioresources Development Manager, ENCAP

– Chair, Brown County Solid Waste Board

Previous Experience

• 1995 - 1999

– Commodity Specialist for the Wisconsin Recycling Market Development Board (RMDB)

• Assisted in market development efforts in Wisconsin for a range of recycled materials

– Recycling Specialist for UW-Extension

• Waste minimization and pollution prevention assessments for business/industry

• 1993

– Thesis on “The Economics of Recycling in WI”

Summary of the Opportunity

Waste is often a material in the wrong form

Waste = MISPLACED RESOURCE

Waste = ENERGY

Recycling is a small component in the overall system

Potential sources

- Municipal

- Industrial

- Agricultural

Opportunities

- Increasing landfill tipping fees and transportation costs

- Local resource assessments (waste sheds)

- Aggregation of wastes

Waste Management Hierarchy

• Reduce

– Zero Waste?

• Reuse

• Recycle

• Compost

• Energy recovery

• Land disposal

– Landfill, land application

• Burning without energy recovery

Reduce

• Waste Minimization / Pollution Prevention

– Education

– Maintenance

– Product design decisions

– Raw material selection

Non-toxic

Renewable

Abundant

Locally available

– Process changes

PRODUCER RESONSIBILITY / PROCESS EFFICIENCY!

Reuse - Tosca

• Refurbish beer barrels and cheese boxes

• Food Tech — Keg ER — History.com Videos#keg-er

• Completed an LCA on cheese boxes

– Driven by the likes of Wal-Mart

Wisconsin’s Recycling Law

Wisconsin Act 335

• Landfill/incineration bans

• Grants to “Responsible Units”

• Grants tied to “Effective Recycling Programs”

Benefits from Recycling

• Conservation of resources

• Avoidance of green house gas emissions

• Reduction of litter and illegal dumping

• Contribution to the local economy

– Jobs, business creation/expansion, business tax revenue, feedstocks for industry, revenue from recyclables

• Avoided expansion of landfills

Market Value of Landfilled Recyclables in Wisconsin

Avg Price

Per Ton Tons Market

Material Dec-’09 Landfilled Value

OCC $75 167,000 $12,525,000

ONP 6 $35 64,000 $2,240,000

Magazines $35 42,000 $1,470,000

Office Paper $215 31,000 $6,665,000

Mixed Paper $63 82,000 $5,166,000

Aluminum Cans $1,312 9,000 $11,808,000

Steel Cans $117 19,900 $2,328,300

Clear Glass $31 15,000 $465,000

PET $176 24,000 $4,224,000

HDPE clear $478 6,200 $2,963,600

HDPE colored $310 9,300 $2,883,000

Total $52,737,900

Recycling Funding

• RU Grants in Wisconsin

– Covered 30-40% of operating costs

– Elimination of all funding was considered during the last state budget deliberations

• Recycling Market Development Grants

– Planning Grants (RMDB)

– Low Interest Loans (RMDB)

– Demonstration grants (WDNR)

– Research Grants (UW System)

Economies of Scale by RU Size

Cost Comparisons By RU Size

0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 300.0

<2000

2,000-5,000

5.000-10,000

10,000-25,000

25,000-50,000

50,000-100,000

>100,000

Po

pu

lati

on

Siz

e

Avg Lbs/person Avg $/person Avg $/Ton

Emerging Trends

• Single Stream Collection

– Increase recycling rates, reduce costs

• Beyond the “Blue Bin”

– Trash and recycling synergies

– Waste sorting – quantify “wasted resources”

– Pay As You Throw (PAYT or VBF)

• Inter-government cooperation

– Joint contracting, services, outreach

– Local agreements or consolidation

New Opportunities: C&D Recycling

• Benefits

– New and expanded businesses

• local, regional

– Prolong landfill life

– Conserve resources

• Top materials

– Shingles (30%)

– Clean untreated wood (15%)

– Concrete and bricks (13%)

New Opportunities: Organics

Example: Madison and Fitchburg

– System:

• Residential curbside collection

• Currently processed at Columbia County

• Future opportunities - anaerobic digestion for energy recovery

– Benefits

• Reduced disposal costs and revenue generation from composting

• Potential source of renewable energy (CNG)

• Collection strategies

– Bi weekly collection of garbage and recyclables

– Weekly collection of organics

Composting – City of Appleton, WI

• Biosolids and Yard Waste

Landfills

• Shift away from municipally owned landfills

– Very few municipal landfills still exist

– Landfills are getting larger

Energy recovery opportunities

– Out-of-state waste

• Potential Issues

– Loss of other solid waste services

• Education

• HHW facilities

Example: Brown County Solid Waste Department

• Formed in the early 1970s at the request of cities, villages and towns

– Incinerators being shut down

– Operates as an Enterprise Fund

• Constructed the first two sanitary engineered landfills in Wisconsin (1975/1976)

• Dual stream recycling established in 1992

• Constructed a HHW facility in 1998

– Currently coordinate with Outagamie and Winnebago

Example: Brown County (cont.)

• Cooperative agreement with Brown, Outagamie and Winnebago Counties established in 2002

– BOW agreement runs through 2027

• Constructed a waste transfer station in 2003

• Constructed BOW single stream MRF in 2009

• Constructed a gas-to-energy facility in 2009

• Currently in the process of extending solid waste agreements with municipalities

– 10 year contracts

• New landfill construction in 2018/2019

Incineration / Combustion

• Oneida Seventh Generation Project

– Proposed gasification project in Green Bay, WI

– 150 tons/day of MSW

– Met with significant local opposition, but all permits

have been approved

• Issues

– Potential loss of Brown County’s largest customers

– Impact on the BOW agreement

– There will be other projects like this in the future, which will impact the long-term solid waste planning process for the region

Opportunities

• Integrated Solid Waste Management

– Think about the overall waste management hierarchy and how that applies to our communities

– There are problems/opportunities beyond just MSW

• Efficiency

– Current need for municipalities to reduce costs

Program changes – contract reviews, collection changes, material changes, reduction in education

Consolidation

Program elimination

PROJECT BACKGROUND

1. A significant amount of organic materials are generated

annually in Brown County a. Dairy Farms – “Dairy Donut” of Wisconsin

b. Meatpackers

c. Rendering facilities

d. Municipal wastewater treatment plants

e. Paper mill residuals

f. Others materials

2. The cost of managing these materials has been increasing

Example: Brown County Waste

Transformation Initiative (BCWTI)

3. There have been significant environmental impacts

associated with current management practices a. Surface water quality (nutrients)

b. Ground water quality (pathogens, nitrogen, etc.)

c. Air quality / odor

4. Opportunities exist to better manage these materials a. Need to get key stakeholders involved

b. Economies of scale exist

c. These projects can be a win-win for the community and the environment

BCWTI (cont.)

1. Brown County Land Conservation Department

2. Green Bay Metropolitan Sewerage District

3. Appleton Sewerage District

4. JBS Packerland

5. American Foods Group

6. Sanimax

7. AgVentures

8. Daanen and Jansen

9. FEECO

10. ENCAP

11. UW-Green Bay

12. Wisconsin DNR

BCWTI Stakeholders

1. Financial contributions of $250,000 from stakeholders

2. AFG constructed an anaerobic digester

• Utilizing “waste” from other local generators, including JBS

Packerland

3. Green Bay Metropolitan Sewerage District considered several options for a

planned system upgrade for 2014

• “Economic Engine” for the region

• Potential marketing/sales of biosolids through ENCAP

4. Business relationship established between many stakeholders

BCWTI Results

Example: Dane County Manure Digester

Project Driver – water quality issues

• Clear Horizons system

• Serves a cluster of three dairy farms in Waunakee

First centralized digester in Wisconsin

• Primary feedstocks are manure and some high strength wastewater from local food processors

Local Resource

UW-Green Bay

• Called Eco-U in the early 1970s

• Undergraduate program

in Environmental Science

• Graduate program in

Environmental Science and Policy

• Faculty involved in research related to waste

management and resource recovery

VIDEO – UWGB, FEECO, ENCAP Collaboration

http://blog.uwgb.edu/inside/index.php/featured/leading-

learning/03/16/making_wonders_out_of_waste/

Questions?

Dr. John F. Katers

University of Wisconsin-Green Bay

2420 Nicolet Drive

Green Bay, WI 54311

Phone: 920-465-2278

E-mail: katersj@uwgb.edu

Andrew Dane, AICP

• BS Biology & MS Urban Planning

• 15 years of planning and community development experience.

• Planning and feasibility analysis for variety of waste to energy opportunities.

• Currently assisting confidential client with pre-feasibility study to determine potential for organics recycling.

“Organic Waste to Energy Opportunities”

• What are they?

• Why should planners care?

• What role can we play?

• Case study

– UW-Oshkosh “Dry” Digester

Organic Waste to Energy: Biogas

Organic Waste to Energy Opportunities

“Organic Waste to Energy Opportunities”

• Why should planners care?

“Organic Waste to Energy Opportunities”

• What role can planners play?

UW-Oshkosh Case Study

• UW-O owns and operates the facility. There are 30 similar systems operating in Europe and Asia.

• 1st in North America

• The system required 4-5M in capital investment with an estimated payback period of 7 to 10 years.

Feedstocks

• UW-Oshkosh’s system is designed to accept roughly 8,000-10,000 tons/year of feedstock.

• Food and yard waste, animal bedding waste, and crop residues.

• The campus produces roughly 500 tons of food waste.

• The intent is to source from within 30 miles of the facility.

• About half of the digested feedstock used as soil amendment.

Technology

• Single batch system for biomass conversion to compost and methane gas.

• There are four fermenter bays located adjacent each other. Each bay is 23 ½ feet by 16 feet by 70 feet deep.

• A front loader is used to mix each batch and to add and remove material from each bay.

• The average retention time per batch is 28 days, after which time ½ the material (200 tons of digestate) is removed as compost product and ½ is returned to the bay

Technology

• Glycol heating is used within the walls and floor of each digester bay to stimulate digestion.

• Gas production occurs within each bay and within the percolate storage tank. Gas is collected in a large flexible rubberized diaphragm which sits on top of the four bays (2nd floor of the facility).

• Gas production is converted to energy using a 370 kW Combined Heat and Power Mann Internal Combustion Engine located outside the facility.

Markets

• Power is sold back to the grid.

• At full capacity the facility would provide 10% of UW-Oshkosh’s energy.

• The CHP plant is currently running at 190 kW/hr on

average.

Operations

• Regular monitoring and testing is conducted to monitor feedstock characteristics, percolate, and digestate.

• The facility can be monitored and operated on-site and remotely using a PC.

• The control room includes safety and gas monitoring equipment and alarm system.

Opportunities & Challenges

• Opportunities

• The Oshkosh WWTP is located across the street from the digester. There are plans to receive excess gas from the WWTP, which is currently flared, in order to boost energy production. Sludge from the WWTP may be tested to determine its potential as a feedstock.

• There is interest in doing research with Mirel, a bio-plastics company.

Opportunities & Challenges

• Challenges associated with Digester:

• Food waste with plastics and other contaminants are not accepted by the facility.

• Logistics are a challenge given limited amount of land at the site; it makes loading/un-loading more difficult

• Odor smells like a farm.

• The feedstock storage area is not heated (despite unused heat from the engine), making maintenance/cleaning during the winter a challenge with freezing hoses, etc…

• The drains in the storage area were undersized; they are being upgraded by the contractor.

• The engine generator is designed to run 24X7; however with current gas production it is only running 20 hrs/day.

Conclusion

• Organic waste to energy opportunities are poised to grow

• These opportunities closely tied to land use, economic development, natural resource, and other “planning” issues

• Planners can play a key role facilitating “successful” projects

Questions?

Andrew Dane, AICP

Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc (SEH)

Phone: 920-585-3593

E-mail: adane@sehinc.com

Dr. John F. Katers

University of Wisconsin-Green Bay/SEH

Phone: 920-465-2278

E-mail: katersj@uwgb.edu