Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
ORANGE COUNTY <br />BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS <br />ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT <br />Meeting Date: September 2, 2008 <br />Action Agenda <br />Item No. "7-q <br />SUBJECT: Solid Waste Process Technology Assessment <br />DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC HEARING: (YIN) No <br />ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: <br />Final Report - Solid Waste Process Gayle Wilson, 968 -2885 <br />Technology Assessment (Under <br />Separate Cover) <br />PURPOSE: To provide an assessment of solid waste processing technologies (WPT) as <br />alternatives to landfilling as a primary means of waste disposal. <br />BACKGROUND: The Board of County Commissioners requested that an assessment of <br />alternative solid waste processing technologies be conducted and referred this request to the <br />Solid Waste Advisory Board (SWAB). At its February 7, 2008 meeting, the SWAB discussed <br />methods and rationale for evaluating alternative technologies. At the April 3, 2008 SWAB <br />meeting, an outline for a scope of work was adopted and utilized to develop a final scope of <br />work for Olver, Inc. In late April, staff authorized Olver, Inc. and their sub - consultant GBB, Inc. <br />to proceed with the Waste Processing Technology Alternative Study. At the June 24 BOCC <br />meeting, a status report was provided that indicated that a final report would be presented at <br />the September 2, 2008 BOCC meeting. GBB, Inc. conducted a presentation of the draft final <br />report to the SWAB at its August 7, 2008 meeting. <br />The consultant in the report concludes: <br />• the quantity of Orange County post diversion solid waste available for WPT is much less <br />than would support or justify any of the alternative technologies available or considered <br />in the report, <br />• even with about 35% more waste available to process, the cost, at least $100 per ton, <br />would be significantly greater and include more variability risk when compared to the <br />approximately current $50 per ton for landfilling, <br />• economies -of -scale apply to WPT to a degree as much as, or greater than transferring <br />and landfilling, <br />• residue /ash and by -pass material, which consists of as much as 30 -35% by weight of the <br />incinerated material, would still require disposal by landfilling or, if feasible, an alternative <br />use, which has not been widely accepted in the United States, <br />