Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 02-05-2008-11a Memorandum To: Laura Blackmon, Manager From: Gayle Wilson, Director, Solid Waste Management Subject: Landfill Bans and Recycling - Tools to Extend Landfill Life and Reduce Waste Date: February 5, 2008 This memo responds to a BOCC question at its meeting on November 15, 2007 about what types of landfill or collection bans might effectively extend the life of the Orange County Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Landfill until such time as a transfer station can be sited, permitted, built and opened. Current time lines have the transfer station not able to be open until 3-6 months after the landfill is projected to be full, thus actions to extend landfill life are critical to ensuring that the County is able to meet its obligations under the Interlocal Agreement to offer environmentally sound and effective means of disposal. Staff research contained within this memo is not meant to pre-empt the more formal solid waste planning process being led by the Solid Waste Plan Work Group, which is examining programmatic improvements in a more systematic and integrated manner. The Solid Waste Plan Work Group has been generally meeting every three to six months, and the Group's next meeting should occur in March 2008. The information provided here is primarily included because the potential opportunities are compatible with existing efforts and can be implemented relatively quickly, albeit with very modest impact on disposal tonnages. Landfill or Collection Bans The materials staff believes could be considered for landfill bans include: • newspaper, • glossy magazines, • plastic bottles (a state-wide landfill ban comes into effect on October 1, 2009), • residential corrugated cardboard (a ban of commercially (non-residential) generated corrugated cardboard is already in effect), • commercially produced waxed corrugated cardboard (heretofore considered "unrecyclable"), • clean wood waste from the residential sector (a ban of commercially generated clean wood waste is already in effect), • commercial food waste from large generators, and • Cathode Ray Tubes (CRTs) that would mostly be televisions and older computer monitors. In its initial review, staff considered the timing, efforts and logistics necessary to implement, enforcement factors, and amount of landfill space saved. Initial assessment suggests that the County may want to pursue additional information on implementing a ban of the lead-bearing Cathode Ray Tubes (CRT) commonly associated with televisions and computer monitors. Initial staff evaluation indicates other landfill or collection bans may not yield sufficient landfill space savings relative to problems identified with overall timing, implementation costs, and enforcement factors. Staff is certainly open to investigating all available options further based on additional direction. A more complete review of staff research and findings relative to bans begins in Section I of this memo. Recycling Programs Additions and Expansions This memo also expands on the Commissioners' ban inquiry to include a discussion of how other recycling programs could be used to divert more waste from the landfill and extend its life by means rather than implementation of additional disposal bans. Staff discussed several possibilities with the Solid Waste Advisory Board (SWAB) at the December meeting and considered those comments in formulating this information. Initial assessment suggests that the County may want to pursue additional information on implementing curbside recycling of residential cardboard linked to enforcement of the collection ban on this sector, banning televisions and computer monitors from the landfill, and adding bulky rigid plastics to drop-off sites where space allows. These measures combined could save, based on initial estimates, 1.4 months of landfill space by April 2011 and extend landfill life to about mid-May 2011. Staff believes these measures could be implemented by mid 2008-09. BOCC authorization to proceed immediately with pre-implementation planning would allow for the most expedient implementation. A more exhaustive review of staff research and findings relative to recycling program efforts begins in Section II of this memo. Bases on direction from the Board, staff could proceed with additional review, planning and implementation of the programmatic recommendations and could present an agenda item for BOCC consideration in late February or March, 2008. Where funding is required beyond existing approved FY 2007/08 budget capabilities, staff could return to the BOCC for necessary authorization. The CRT ban, if pursued by the County, would require an ordinance amendment following established protocols. I - Landfill and Collection Bans: When considering which materials could potentially be banned from disposal in Orange County's landfill, this report considers materials that are readily recyclable or compostable, and that are either already collected by current recycling programs or that have reasonable potential to be collected by the County's recycling program. Additionally, viable markets / recycling outlets for the chosen materials must exist so that the County can have high confidence in the ability to market the material after it is collected. Before discussing potential new bans, staff thought it might be beneficial to briefly review current collection/landfill bans in place at the County level. Orange County banned corrugated cardboard from landfilling in 1996. Orange County passed the Regulated Recyclable Materials Ordinance (RRMO) in 2002. The RRMO effectively bans landfilling regulated materials by requiring that regulated materials be recycled. The RRMO regulates the following materials: scrap metal, and clean (unpainted untreated) wood waste. It also includes the earlier banned corrugated cardboard. While the RR.MO and the various Towns' adoption of the RRMO has nominally banned corrugated cardboard from disposal from all waste generating sectors (except the residential sector in the specific case of Carrboro), the ban on residential cardboard has not been enforced heretofore pending development of residential curbside collection. 2 It is important to note that the impact of any landfill bans will be different on each of the three distinct sectors that deliver waste to the MSW Landfill (Residential, Multifamily, and Commercial). Other issues that should be considered when contemplating bans include enforceability, the estimated percent of the banned material that is reasonably recoverable, public resistance to any potential bans, the recycling program's ability to manage the banned materials, and the time and effort needed to prepare for and implement associated recycling efforts. Additionally, when considering the space-saving consequences of a ban, it is important to consider not only the tons of material diverted, but more importantly the volume or space that the material would occupy in the landfill. While this may seem a subtle distinction, because different materials behave differently when compacted and as they age . in the landfill environment, a material that may generate a large tonnage diversion such as food waste may not necessarily result in a large amount of space-savings due to the materials density and composition. Food waste, for example, is largely water and highly compactable thus high tonnage may not result in high space savings where a low density material might have the opposite impact, low tonnage but higher space savings. The materials staff believed could be considered for landfill bans in this report include: • newspaper, • glossy magazines, • plastic bottles (a state-wide landfill ban comes into effect on October 1, 2009), • residential corrugated cardboard (a ban of commercially (non-residential) generated corrugated cardboard is already in effect), • commercially produced waxed corrugated cardboard (heretofore considered "unrecyclable"), • clean wood waste from the residential sector (a ban of commercially generated clean wood waste is already in effect), • commercial food waste from large generators, and • Cathode Ray Tubes (CRTs) that would mostly be televisions and older computer monitors. When considering the implementation of further landfill bans, it is important to consider the timing, cost to implement, and amount of landfill space saved. The effort and logistics necessary to put the bans in place would require staff resources from the County and the Towns and would result in expenses directly to the Solid Waste enterprise fund as well as to the municipalities as they make their own enforcement efforts as they've done on the RRMO. Additionally, implementing all the above listed bans effectively by mid-year 2008-09 would be a very ambitious goal that would only save an estimated 1.5 months of landfill space. The public and waste haulers would need significant education and advanced notice prior to the implementation of the bans. The original cardboard ban, passed in 1995 and first enforced in 1996, took over a year to implement and then another year to make fully effective after getting municipalities involved and further fine-tuning. The RRMO took two years to become effective, and has resulted in significant shift of construction and demolition waste tonnage from the County's facility to certified private out-of-County processors for sorting as well as some `sneaking away' to private landfills. In terms of space-savings, different items result in different amounts of diversion and landfill space saved. While implementing a ban of the lead-bearing Cathode Ray Tubes commonly associated with televisions and computer monitors will not result in significant space savings, it 3 could result in a decrease in toxicity of the waste stream. Orange County's electronics recycling program is well-developed and ready to manage the additional materials a ban could create. While a ban on newspapers, magazines or plastic bottles in theory shows a higher percentage savings than corrugated cardboard, staff is concerned that those bans would be far more difficult to enforce than beginning to enforce the already existing ban on the much more visible corrugated cardboard. Further, there is a large public demand for curbside cardboard recycling and that service could be a natural companion piece to enforcement of the current non-residential ban. II - Recycling Program Additions and Expansions Considerations for extending the life of the landfill by means of expanding current recycling services and implementing services for new materials include: A. Addition of rigid plastics, textiles and recyclable plastic film at the drop off sites and/or solid waste convenience centers; Items identified by staff that could be reasonably considered for addition to most drop-off recycling sites include large rigid plastics, injection molded plastics (cups and tubs), textiles, and recyclable plastic film. It is not feasible to consider adding any of these materials to the curbside recycling program at this time due to the fact that area processing facilities will not commit to accepting these materials commingled with traditional recyclables and marketing of these materials would require that materials be baled and sold in truck-load quantities. In general, markets for all of these materials have strengthened considerably over the past few years. Staff at this point believes that in the short term, the opportunity exists for adding only one of these items, due to, space constraints at the convenience centers and that collection requires intermediate processing and short-term storage at Orange County's current recycling processing area. Before the County could consider managing injection molded plastics, rigid plastics, or plastic film, the Solid Waste Management Department would need to be able to free up processing capacity by making changes in the way the traditional recyclables (bottle and cans) from the drop-off and commercial recycling programs are managed by moving towards the commingling of these containers and shipping the can and bottle mixture to an existing commercially operated materials processor. This transition was discussed in detail at the Solid Waste Work Plan Group meeting on November 28, 2007, and a recommendation to the BOCC on this matter is forthcoming. The addition of rigid plastics (buckets, toys, kiddie pools) may provide an estimated savings of 1.1 months of landfill space. B. Addition of corrugated cardboard to the curbside recycling programs; The option of adding corrugated cardboard to the Urban and Rural Curbside Recycling Programs could be available for implementation as soon as July 2008 (if enterprise funds are authorized for the current year). The costs of the addition to the Urban Curbside program are known because terms for this expansion are written into the current contract at an additional $0.20 per household per month or about $43,500 per year for the approximately 18,000 homes currently on the program. The cost to add corrugated cardboard to rural curbside could be greater than the urban program because the additional bulk may accelerate the need to add an additional collection 4 truck as routes are adjusted to accommodate the additional tonnage managed. In addition to this, managing the additional fiber at the current facility would require that the County proceed to a more efficient storage and hauling system for the currently managed materials. Details of this were discussed at the Solid Waste Plan Work Group on November 28, 2007, and a recommendation will be brought to the BOCC at an upcoming meeting. Including a maximum size or cut down requirement for acceptable cardboard will be critical to program operations. In the current two-bin system, and even in any future cart system, cutting down the cardboard would be a requirement for fitting the cardboard into the bins or carts and then into the trucks. This means that corrugated cardboard placed at the curb that was not flattened and/or cut to the minimum size would need to be rejected. The Town of Cary has a cut- down requirement to 2'x 3' to fit the material in their 18 gallon curbside bins, and the County would need to adopt a similar standard. While enforcement of this standard may cause frustration to some residents, as an alternative to cutting boxes down, oversized boxes could still be taken to drop-off sites, and benefits to the community-at-large. would likely outweigh the inconvenience. Based on initial review, the estimated landfill space savings of adding cardboard to residential curbside collection services is 0.3 months. C. Expansion of the rural curbside recycling program to an additional 5,000 homes (about 60% of the households in the unincorporated portion of Orange County are presently serviced). Based on initial review, the staff level of planning/preparation, staff commitment and cost to implement this level of expansion would not allow implementation in time to have any meaningful impact on landfill space savings. D. Expansion of the commercial recycling programs. (not analyzed here as it is under review by the Solid Waste Plan Work Group) This memo does not address expansion of the commercial recycling effort beyond the County's current modest effort in cans and bottles and food waste from selected establishments. There is a considerable amount of recyclable material remaining in the commercial waste stream. Expansion to adequately and thoroughly serve this sector is complex, potentially costly and already under study by the Sold Waste Plan Work Group. Additionally, developing an effective sector-wide program has a planning horizon that is longer than the time needed to save landfill space. Thus it is considered separately and more deliberately. The Solid Waste Work Plan Group has on its immediately upcoming agenda the consideration of various options for expansion of commercial recycling programs and will likely make recommendations regarding commercial recycling later this year. III - Summary It has not generally been County procedure in the past to implement landfill bans without first ensuring that there are reasonable alternative options available besides landfill-based disposal. Preliminary assessment indicates that it makes sense to couple the addition of corrugated cardboard to the urban and rural curbside recycling programs with expansion of enforcement of the existing cardboard collection ban to the residential sector. The two in conjunction would likely produce greater diversion and landfill space savings than either one option taken alone. 5 In general, bans are sometimes the least effective and most onerous means of saving landfill space. Staff suggests that if the Board were to consider additional bans, that it consider banning a limited number of items, and that it do so only after an in-depth community discussion about the utility of further bans. The community overall has had a negative experience lately with bans and additional bans may create more of adversarial relationships around solid waste issues in Orange County. Extending to the residential sector enforcement of the existing ban for corrugated cardboard and adding a ban on cathode ray tubes (CRTs) may be worth further investigation and consideration. They are the easiest to enforce, least likely to meet strong public resistance, provide for a reasonable implementation timeframe and strong, low cost and readily available recycling options exist for these items. Adding rigid plastics to convenience centers and drop-off sites would fit within the current overall departmental operational and financial structure and can be implemented in a time frame to extend landfill life those few critical months projected as necessary to bridge the gap from landfill closure date to transfer station opening. Efforts being undertaken by the Solid Waste Plan Work Group on commercial waste, franchising, rural waste collection, financing and an overall integrated plan have a much longer planning horizon, are more complex and potentially more effective in the big picture of meeting County solid waste goals. Staff recognizes the Board's concern that the new transfer station siting process may require more immediate steps. Considering the resources required to plan and implement the program augmentations and expansions described in this report, it is not possible to implement all options, and staff believe that the effort to save landfill space is most likely to be successful by focusing on two or three top priorities. While these highlighted measures are not necessarily, the largest space savers, staff is reasonably sure of their utility, acceptance from residents, based on public feedback and our ability to implement them effectively in the short time allotted, as they build on current program infrastructure, existing markets and internal financing structures. Based on direction from the Board, staff could proceed with additional review, planning and implementation of the programmatic recommendations and could present an agenda item for BOCC consideration at an upcoming BOCC meeting. Where funding is required' beyond existing approved FY 2007/08 budget capabilities, staff would return to the BOCC for necessary authorization. The CRT ban, if pursued by the County, would require an ordinance amendment following established protocols. 6