Browse
Search
SWAB minutes 020708
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Solid Waste Advisory Group
>
Minutes
>
2008
>
SWAB minutes 020708
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/14/2019 4:29:24 PM
Creation date
1/14/2019 4:08:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/7/2008
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Advisory Bd. Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Minutes - Regular Meeting <br /> Solid Waste Advisory Board <br /> February 7, 2008 <br /> Approved April 3, 2008 <br /> between when we now predict the landfill will close and the transfer station could be <br /> finished . <br /> Things that are smaller than cardboard are hard to detect to ban . When a truck <br /> contains a lot of cardboard, you know it. Once you ban things at a residence, it' s hard <br /> to police all those roll carts . <br /> Vickers points out that it is especially hard with the automated carts they use in <br /> Carrboro . <br /> 7. BOCC Request for Technology Assessment of Landfill Alternatives Sassaman states <br /> that the Board would like us to look at potential technology for disposing of solid <br /> waste that is an alternative to landfill . The question that I ' ve raised is how are we <br /> going to do that? There are a lot of technologies out there . But how are we going to <br /> evaluate the technical issues, scientific issues, and financial issues, etc . One possibility <br /> is to request some assistance consulting through the solid waste office . Some of my <br /> thought processes are there are a bunch of incineration technologies . The questions I <br /> would ask include : The maturity of the technology - we do not want an experimental <br /> technology to handle our waste, Public acceptability - what technology would the <br /> public in Orange County like, Space needed - ten acres, 1 , 000 acres, What is the fee <br /> and level of tonnage for economic viability, Is it easy to use, What kinds of extra fees <br /> and technology would we need to operate it, Could Orange County own and operate <br /> it, Is it readily permittable here, Is it a facility that can handle our waste . and what <br /> kind of residuals are generated . <br /> Norwood states that the issue of bringing outside trash in to feed an incinerator, we <br /> didn' t want to do that before . With the carbon trash do you want more stuff on <br /> Eubanks , . . . The issue of placing it [raises] concerns of the surrounding areas [with <br /> respect to] the fumes of it, that was brought up before . Who would control it, we don ' t <br /> have the knowledge so we would have to learn, how much control would we have <br /> over an outside company . If an outside company came in we would not be in control . <br /> How much money would it save over the transfer station? What would it cost to set it <br /> up . <br /> Grunwald states that the first thing I think when I hear incineration is toxic sludge . <br /> When you were going through your list the problem with all the issues seems to boil <br /> down to " not in Orange County " . Has it been considered for a cooperative effort with <br /> a neighboring county ? There are other surrounding counties other than Durham . <br /> Sassaman states that one of the things I' ve thought about when I think of this is a <br /> regional facility . <br /> Vickers points out that Wake County has their own landfill and has ruled out others . <br /> 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.