Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Minutes - Regular Meeting <br /> Solid Waste Advisory Board <br /> September 4, 2008 <br /> Approved October 2, 2008 <br /> Wilson replies it depends on which technology you are talking about. <br /> Pollock states that one of the things they talk about is modular units which are smaller <br /> and more costly, but you can essentially bring in another module . But when you <br /> build big water-wall mass combustors the throughput can be low initially but you can <br /> add more material to them . You can' t readily expand them like building a room on a <br /> house . <br /> Sassaman states that the modular ones are easier . In Orange County I' m not sure that <br /> within reason the actual dollar cost should be the primary driving factor if we want to <br /> be technologically in the forefront. Were doing recycling not because it' s cost <br /> effective but because it' s the right thing to do . <br /> Grunwald asks if there is an environment now politically that would be open to the <br /> higher cost of this . It is not cheaper [than landfilling] but we are running out of <br /> landfill space . <br /> Sassaman states that our role is to look at what is technically feasible, look at the <br /> economics of it and what might be the right thing to do . The political decision would <br /> be made by the elected officials . <br /> Norwood asks why it would be attractive to UNC to refit their plant. Would they <br /> make a profit from the County ' s garbage or would the county have to chip in for the <br /> refitting? What would be the driving factor for them to do that? <br /> Sassaman states that that would be the thing we would need to investigate . That is <br /> why I asked if there would be a carbon offset benefit. The carbon offset is what made <br /> the landfill gas so attractive to UNC . Is it better to burn coal? <br /> Pollock states that Harvey Gershman and I took a walk to the coal plant; he stated, <br /> politics aside, one could do this, physically accommodate it. You could bring garbage <br /> into a coal bunker, if they wanted to do that. From the perspective of the carbon <br /> footprint issue of garbage vs . coal there is a politically driven split. The report GBB <br /> did for us they are saying yes it is a major carbon offset. By burning the garbage you <br /> are going carbon neutral against coal . There is another report funded by a variety of <br /> groups including the Global Anti Incinerator Alliance, where their conclusion is the <br /> opposite because of all the up stream energy that is embodied in making the things by <br /> burning those things you' re doing worse carbon wise than coal . There are grounds <br /> for debating the carbon footprint. That is not so with landfill gas everyone is in <br /> agreement that is a carbon offset. The world is changing regarding the evaluation of <br /> carbon offsets . <br /> 7 <br />