SWAG agenda 042215 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

•• • domh qR Comprehensive Review of Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Options 12.0 ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES - TOWN OF CHAPEL 1111.1. BENCHMARK The objective of this task was to review the Town and regional solid waste systems and known waste -to- energy (WTE) and waste conversion (WC) technologies to establish a long -term strategy and benchmark system requirements necessary to engage identified feasible technologies. This section of the report identifies key system and technology metrics by which the Town may best position itself to take full advantage of WTE and WC technologies as they may emerge. During the course of our study, SCS relied on recent information and data collected by Orange County, North Carolina in its solid waste master plans , an alternative energy analysis conducted by the University of North Carolina20, and a recent summary rcpoit of waste conversion technologies by the Applied Research Foundation of the Solid Waste Association of North America 1. In addition, SCS has been monitoring the progress of WTE and WC technologies over the past few years through a series of presentations, trade journal articles, and books22. . Thus, much of the initial discussion in this section is briefly focused on background, history, and the current status of these technologies. This is then followed by a benchmarking of the Town against the current status of these technologies and recent developments. 12.1 REASONS TO SELECT A WTE OR WC TECHNOLOGY One of the first questions the Town must answer is what technology will be chosen to convert its solid waste into energy. This includes consideration of factors (which will be discussed later) such as: available energy and materials markets; the size of the Town's waste flow; site availability and location; capital and operating costs; ownership and financing considerations; and the level of risk to be assumed by the Town or the facility operator. In evaluating whether or not one technology better suits its needs than another, the Town may often discover conflicting goals and values within both the community and within the target WMWC project. For example: A particular technology may produce the greatest amount of energy for the Town's waste, albeit at high projected capital and operating costs. • Engaging in WTE or WC technology may impact historical success in other recycling or waste diversion practices (i.e., directing organics from a composting operation to a digester technology). 19 GBB, Alternative Waste Processing Technologies Assessment, August, 2008. 20 Affiliated Engineers, Alternative Energy Analysis, July 2010. 21 Applied Research Foundation, Solid Waste Association of North America, Waste Conversion Technologies, December 2011. 22 Marc J. Rogoff and Francois Screve, Waste -to- Energy Technologies and Project Implementation, Elsevier, June 2011; Marc J. Rogoff, Bruce Clark and Amanda Moore, "Solid Waste Deja vu: Waste -to- Energy Plant Technologies Break New Ground", APWA Reporter, March 2009. v2.1 154 10/22/12