Agenda - 12-01-2008 - 3d - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

concern about greenhouse gases, a change in flow control legislation, and the increasing cost oflong distance transfer and disposal. Recent activity in the evaluation and procurement ofVVPT by other U.S. cities and counties isdetailed. Like Orange County, these localities are exploring alternatives for service to their citizens. Information on the investigations of New York City, the City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, and King County, VVA into the applicability ofVVPTis highlighted. Current VVPT procurements are outlined, including: a resource recovery facility for Frederick and Carroll Counties, MD; expansion of the Harford, MD \NTE facility; negotiations by the City of Sacramento, CA for a plasma gasification project; Broward County, FL's Request for Expressions of Inbansat to evaluate potential waste disposal options; a plasma .arc gasification project proposed in St. Lucie County, FL; and VVTE plant expansions in Hillsborough and Lee Counties, FL, that are currently being constructed. Atota| of 80 technology vendors offering 14 different technologies are represented, evaluated, screened, or selected during these research and procurement projects. The economic characteristics of the various waste processing technologies, including capital and operating costs and hok' are summarized in the report. Generally, capital coat for / the proven bachno\ogi. es are in the range of $150,000 to $250,000 per ton of installed capacity, depending on size and plant configuration. Operating coots are in te range of $35 to $GO per ton processed, not including residue disposal, again dependent on size, equipment and operating profile, and assuming a private mp=----tor' These figures are based on industry rules-of-thumb, recent operating results from selected facilities, surveys of industry professionals and related references. Of the vvaata processing technologies examined, only VVTE is a proven technology which could be recommended for implementation consideration by Orange County at this point intime. As mentioned earlier, there are O9VVTE plants generating power in the U.S. and hundreds worldwide. The other technologies discussed are in various stages of development and are not mature enough to mitigate the risks potentially inherent with their implementation. In evaluating waste n enooie fo Oane Comy o osder t s apparent that there is not enough waste generated by the County to gain the economies of scale necessary to make a waste processing technology a cost-effective investment. The estimated cost to process waste at a 300 TPD VVTE facility in Orange County is esti mated at $103 per ton. To improve the economics of utilizing waste processing technology, Orange County would need to partner with an adiaoancommunity. counity. T= �- — �O� competitive erton is not competitive with the County's currant landfill ' with Waste Industries' . 42 per ton to transfer and cost of � disposal f�� of �49 or w a� dispose ofwaste. Although currently unknown, the cost of the County's new transfer station and |andfi||ing at a remote site is unlikely to reach $102 per hon. As the County investigates the cost of transfer and disposal in preparation of its landfill closing, VVPTcou|d be more economically attractive once the coat of transfer and disposal is known. If $102 per ton were to look competitive, it is recommended that Orange - County conduct a VVTE plant t faasibi|ity study which considers mass-burn modular technologies, and/or fuel production approaches. GBB/CO8027-01 ES-2 August 15, 2008