Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
r. <br />O <br />shown in Table 1 excludes the diversion of large inert debris for reuse or processing for sale as a <br />gravel substitute. Use of large, inert material could increase diversion substantially since we <br />estimate it is over 30% of the waste stream. However our abiliry to successfully process and <br />compesitively market this product is limited by the abundance of inexpensive gravel produced <br />neazby. <br />Another, simpler but less effective approach to diversion could involve requiring source separation <br />of only those materials easily handled manually or caused to be separated in response to differential <br />fees. We believe that clean wood wastes and some metals could be diverted for reuse, recycling or <br />composting through these methods. The potential for diversion is shown in Table 2. <br />Table 2 <br />Summary of Estimated Diversion Rates for Clean Wood Waste and Metal Using Manual <br />Separation at the source or the landfill • <br />Materials Total Tons in Waste . 25 <br /> Stream diversion <br />Clean Wood ~ 5000 1250 <br />waste - <br />~ etal ~ 1750 43~, <br />Total Diversion 6750 1688 <br />Potential <br />Percent of CBcD S.1 <br />diverted <br />Discussion <br />We provide some detail on five options for managing construction and demolition wastes. All of <br />them, even the "no-build" option could provide a potential for some level of diversion using <br />differential fees and construction waste planning requirements. We believe that, without a semi <br />automated processing facility of some kind, the diversion levels would be minimal (azouad 5%) <br />and limited amounts of only clean wood wastes and some types of metals could be captured. If a <br />processing facility were constructed, it is possible that significant construction and demolition <br />waste tonnage could be diverted from Iandfilling for reuse and recycling. Any option that included <br />diversion would require some staff ng to be successful. • <br />The Owners Group has adopted a goal of 2590 waste reduction for the construction waste stream. <br />This goal has not yet been formally adopted by the member ;ovemments. Formal adoption of the <br />reduction goal for construction and demolition wastes, would facilitate implementation of policies <br />to attain the goat. <br />I <br />.,. <br />A range of options outlined and discussed in this section include everything from no-build through <br />a complete processing facility. A series of prevention measures could be applied under a variety <br />of the processing or disposal scenarios. - We assume collectioa of construction and demolition <br />