Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSWAB minutes 050307 Minutes Regular Meeting Solid Waste Advisory Board May 3, 2007 Approved June 7, 2007 Attendance : Linda Bowerman, Al Vickers, Bonnie Norwood, Jan Sassaman, Remus Smith and Michele Thomas Staff: Blair Pollock, and Wanda McCain Sassaman welcomes the new member [Michele Thomas] of the SWAB representing Hillsborough . Thomas states that I run Daniel Boone Tutoring Center . I 've been in Hillsborough for twelve years . I ' m within one project of my state environmental certification and my main focus of interest is in the waste stream . I am getting my masters in public administration . 1 . Adoption of Minutes from April 5 SWAB meeting Bowerman moves to accept the minutes with one clarification. In the comment made about waiving the traffic analysis, I would like it to be clear that it was a bad idea . They should do it. They should also do a much larger more comprehensive study . Norwood states that there was a traffic study for Purefoy Dr . (road in Rogers Road area) with Habitat being built there which will increase the traffic to 700 cars a day on a road that is not a quarter of a mile long . The traffic engineer person said the road will handle between 3, 000 and 5, 000 cars . Don' t waste the money . Bowerman states that given the objections people had [to the Transfer Station] it would be much better off to have done the survey and have it say that everything is fine than not to do it and have yet another thing for people to point at. Vickers 2nd with the caveat that minutes are changed to reflect Linda' s wording , Passes unanimously . 2 . Board Comments Norwood states that Van, the wonderful young man that works at the convenience center on Eubanks Rd, his wife did make it through her surgery . There was definite notice in how it was run when he was away . Smith states that the comments I ' ve been getting are about the disappointment of closing Hwy 57 and the other one [Walnut Grove] is not easy to get in and out of. The two recycling bins are being well received and well used . Sassaman states that there was an interesting article brought to my attention that showed the reaction of those to a waste facility to be located in their neighborhood [ distributes article] . 1 Minutes - Regular Meeting Solid Waste Advisory Board May 3, 2007 Approved June 7, 2007 Joe Clayton has informed the County that he does not wish to be reappointed . Randy Kabrick has written to [Chapel Hill Mayor] Kevin Foy that he will be resigning effective May 1 . Having said that, I would welcome a resolution to thank Joe and Randy for their efforts . Smith states that they should also get some type of certificate they can frame along with the letter . Staff agrees to prepare letter and certificates for Joe Clayton and Randy Kabrick . 3 . Overview of May 10 Solid Waste Plan Work Group Meeting Pollock states that next Thursday we will give a broader update of our consultants' recycling study and the solid waste rural area study . There will be two formal presentations, which you will receive tomorrow . One study is the rural solid waste collection study in which there is a part for residential and a part for commercial waste . The nut of it is : Are we better off with the current system of laissez faire waste collection with the convenience centers or with some kind of franchise type operation that provides rural solid waste collection? Jeremy O ' Brien from Olver will be presenting the results of some financial analysis he did that looks at the current option versus the other . To boil down some of the key issues, one is when we value the total cost of the system there is the hard cost of operating the centers and there is the less clear-cut value of people ' s time and effort to go to the centers . If you add the cost of trips plus operating the centers, it' s over $2 million per year . Valuing the cost of individual trips is a policy decision and it matters when you compare it to the value of the truck trips going to everyone' s house . Does the reduced air pollution from running one truck not four have any economic value ? Should the collection be voluntary or mandatory ? If there is a franchise hauler, should you be required to use that hauler or use the convenience centers and have a charge there per bag of waste delivered . If there is a charge, it makes self haul less attractive if for example you have three bags a week at a dollar a bag and have to haul them there against getting it picked up weekly at $13 per month . How does one perceive the cost when it seems free to use convenience centers ? The commercial side will have a lay out of [analysis of franchise hauling from the] 350 commercial or non-residential properties in the unincorporated area so the service doesn ' t look that attractive to a hauler because he has to go far between stops . The economic analysis shows that it is more expensive to put a bundle of services together [fora franchise to serve all the unincorporated businesses] and bring it to our landfill . Assuming that they don' t all go to our landfill now . The way that it would make sense is if it was tied to one of the towns ' waste collection systems and that part will not be presented next week . 2 Minutes - Regular Meeting Solid Waste Advisory Board May 3, 2007 Approved June 7, 2007 The other piece you will see is specifically about the dropoff sites and convenience centers as a way to manage recyclables and solid waste . Jim Frey did an analysis on how much it really cost to run the convenience centers and the dropoff sites to collect garbage and recyclables and what are some other ways to do it. We see this as a two -meeting process . The first meeting to hear all this stuff and then a second meeting to make a recommendation on rural solid waste collection and on the dropoff sites and convenience centers . From there we will move on to the other study which is the MRF . There are two separate bids for that. One is to look at what it would be like if any of the four MRFs took our materials, processed it, and paid us for some of the revenue of the materials . You will be hearing about that in a month or SO * There will be two opportunities next Thursday to talk . At 10 : 00 to 12 : 00 there will be the coffee klatch at our facility and at 5 : 00 to 8 : 00 pm there will be the formal presentation by the consultant. 4 . Landfill Gas Report to BOCC Pollock states that the initial option was to look at what it might look like for all the various county buildings and schools that are bit nearbuilt near the landfill area to become users of the gas and the economics don' t work very well. There is not enough of a heating load to make it worthwhile to run piping to all those buildings . The other co-generation project was for Carolina North. The economics of that looked better but there ' s no Carolina North yet. The timing of Carolina North against when we close the landfill and start pulling methane is fairly critical . If you build a stand alone electricity generation only facility, the buy back price for the electricity is not high enough . The green power credit of $0 . 15 to $ 0 . 19 cents per kilowatt hour plus the $ 0 . 021 or $0 . 022 that Duke Power is willing to pay, it' s not enough . The power companies are only willing to pay the lowest rate they have to . We have to get at least $ 0 . 05 per kilowatt hour . The summary of the report states that for a heat and power project to work, Carolina North has to be there . UNC seems like a willing buyer . We don' t know when it will be built. The down side is if it [co- generation project] doesn ' t get built the methane gas will need to be vented . Sassaman asks what is the BTU per cubic foot. Pollock replies about one half of what natural gas is, which is 1 , 000 BTU per cubic foot while landfill gas is about 400 BTU per cubic foot. Bowerman states that so none of the other schools can do it, it would have to be a brand new school to use gas . There is Seawell, the middle school and the high school all next to each other, don' t they use gas ? 3 Minutes - Regular Meeting Solid Waste Advisory Board May 3, 2007 Approved June 7, 2007 Pollock states that it' s not clear . They may need to re-revisit that. Another problem is that there would need to be a dedicated gas pipeline because the gas utility won' t allow landfill gas into their pipeline because they can ' t be sure of its purity . The cost of a dedicated pipeline is very high . We are below the EPA' s regulatory threshold [for the landfill] but we' re still trying to deal with the methane . Bowerman asks if there is some way to lower the cost by getting it partly subsidized by some engineering class at a school? There must be some opportunity for a teaching project? Pollock asks which part do you see the cost being pushed down - the installation or the engineering? Bowerman replies that there might be something like free labor . Pollock states that if a private investor were to come in then they would benefit from the landfill gas tax credit. The economics look so marginal without a guaranteed use of the heat they haven' t been able to entice someone in . The particular problem is that methane is 23 times more potent than CO2 as a greenhouse gas . Even flaring the methane to make it into CO2 would be a better solution, even though it' s a poor second . Vickers notes that no collection system is required . Smith states that it would be a good place for greenhouses there . Pollock states that the only problem with greenhouses is that they only have a heat load of four or five months a year . Norwood asks if there are figures when you talk about having to vent the methane into the air . Are there figures on how much you can do that? The greenhouse effect of the methane and the vehicle emissions in the area could make the local atmosphere dangerous ? Pollock states that they have not set those emissions limits yet. The big immediate problem is migration of methane underground to the nearest crawl space . The danger of explosion is reduced, but the methane does reach the atmosphere sooner causing more greenhouse gas build up . There will be a whole series of vents with pipes like on the north side so there would be one vent per acre or 26 stacks or a collection system if we can collect it. On the north side there are 45 stacks and we monitor methane monthly and methane production is just peaking now . We capped it in 1995 . Vickers notes that even after all the analysis there is no economically viable project. 4 Minutes - Regular Meeting Solid Waste Advisory Board May 3, 2007 Approved June 7, 2007 Pollock notes that having a nearby industrial user as at Raleigh really makes the difference as their industrial boiler at Ajinimoto uses the gas year round in a boiler . Thomas suggests that if the gas can be given away they don' t need a utility license . Then the gas could be given away to a business and the business would lease the property from the county and charge the right amount to cover costs . Vickers states that there is no business close enough . Thomas suggests there could be one if you made gas available and you got one to come there . Pollock states that the Town Operations Center could possibly have been a user for vehicle fuel but they wanted the County to develop the whole infrastructure and clean up the gas and then the Town might be interested . Sassaman states that there are several issues - how much energy is there, what form it' s in, and the timing . The landfill gas is available for twenty or thirty years, but it peaks . It is not a steady, constant source . You have to have someone nearby that can take it when it is available . You have to do something with the thermal energy which is not so readily available in the summertime . Vickers asks about using a diesel generator, which can handle dirtier fuel and just make electricity and sell it all the time . Pollock mentions that the buy back rates keep all the electric generating options unattractive . It could be done if someone wanted to step up and pay the difference . If UNC had enough hot water loads and laboratory loads at Carolina North, they might make it work . Bowerman asks if there isn' t someone who wants to set up a business that could use it in biodiesel or some other investment. Pollock notes that you need to make a large investment in infrastructure so it would have to be certain. [Notes it' s $ 7 . 8 mfl4ien . ,millionj Vickers states that there will be significant regulatory oversight. It is easier to add a gas fired burner to a coal plant, did UNC look at that? What is the bottom line on the report? Pollock states that to accept this report at face value without the various options stated tonight, if UNC starts building Carolina North in the next two years, it makes 5 Minutes - Regular Meeting Solid Waste Advisory Board May 3, 2007 Approved June 7, 2007 sense to build a gas collection system . All the three plans at Carolina North show a power generation station . The recommendation is that the County eonfinuecontinues discussion with UNC on using gas at Carolina North . It is about break even . Sassaman adds the social and environmental benefits need to be added in. Bowerman states that you could bring the gas line down the tracks to the cluster of schools as it runs right near there . Pollock notes that it is hard to site even a greenway on top of a pipeline . Sassaman adds that there is a much higher quality steel required for gas pipelines due to the excess pressure and when they blow up, it' s significant. Bowerman asks if the report can be made more public so that the questions about using the gas don t continue to arise ? People ask about it all the time . Pollock mentions that it' s public information now but we could do more to publicize it through our articles in the paper . Sassaman states that looking at table 3 annual average cost, were they incorporating future energy costs and on page 2 did they just guess at the BTU value or is there some real knowledge of what our gas is ? Pollock replies that I don' t know the answers to that. We can find out. We have been sampling the methane for the past few years . Vickers asked if the County looks at fueling its own fleet of trucks from the compressed natural gas ? Pollock replies that he doesn' t know but it' s not a bad idea to look at CNG fuel . Norwood asks how much does it cost to refit a truck and then figure out if there are any real savings or are you doing it more for the environment and is it worth it? Pollock says perhaps if the County trucks, school buses, and UPS do it, perhaps there is enough replacement for diesel fuel . There is every reason for us to respond to this . 5 . Options for Extending Life of Landfill Sassaman asks do we have the estimates for the remaining life as stated in the memo at this meeting . Pollock states that if Gayle were here, he would have those . We can have them for you next month . 6 Minutes - Regular Meeting Solid Waste Advisory Board May 3, 2007 Approved June 7, 2007 6 . Programs/Services Update SW Operations Center Pollock states that because of the experimental waste water system it is not going to make the commissioners June meeting . Highzvay 57 Convenience Center Site Identification Pollock states that there is still no new site yet. Walnut Grove Convenience Center Temporary Expansion Pollock states that it is up and running and look forward to changing that site to a higher quality site . Orange County Comprehensive Planning Process Pollock states that the county is involved in updating it comprehensive plan for the first time since 1981 . One of the things they started to do was look at the land use element and decided that it should be a broader look . They decided to involve the advisory boards with a hierarchy of those in the foremost like land use and transportation, etc . In order not to leave out any boards, other boards will participate in the goal setting process . Gayle suggested that I become the liaison because the SWAB ' s plate is full, I am familiar with it, and I ' m the Solid Waste Planner . But, if the SWAB wants to appoint their own representative they can. So there are two issues for you all to decide on - appointing a liaison and what ief-goals-doeskind of goals do the SWAB want to bring to the planning process . We have given you some goals to push against. Where do land use and solid waste goals intersect. It' s hard to get anything sited, for example building a composting plant would require appropriate zoning regulations . Sassaman asks who do we want to be the liaison between the SWAB and the planning board . Smith replies Blair . Linda 2nd , Passes unanimously . Pollock mentions that he will function in this role until and unless the SWAB decides they want a member to do it. Sassaman asks are there any other goals we want Blair to put forward . Vickers states that in the third item you have listed on providing adequate facilities for multi-family residential, it seems to be a no brainer but the last three development issues I reviewed for Carrboro had shown no way to collect waste and recyclables . 7 Minutes - Regular Meeting Solid Waste Advisory Board May 3, 2007 Approved June 7, 2007 Pollock states that after this was sent out Gayle added more verbiage to that point. We are supposed to have a process where the solid waste department saw everyone ' s plans to avoid exactly that situation in a formal manner . This helps do that by requiring a solid waste plan showing how waste and recyclables will be handled so we can respond and determine if it' s adequate . For example, when the Town of Chapel Hill goes through development review, we review each plan formally to prevent problems . At Churton Grove outside Hillsborough we can' t even turn the recycling truck around through the tight streets they built. Ideally the Towns' and County' s planning process would formally involve the Solid Waste Department so this wouldn' t happen again . We' ve been talking to them about this for ten years . Vickers moves to authorize Blair to put forth these four goals and if a sufficient number of board members comes up with other goals and approves it we will add to 1t. Smith 2nd . Norwwood states that in point two, the word landfill is there, do we want that there ? People don ' t usually think about C &D [landfill] . Sassaman asks why not. Norwood states that isn' t it a moot point now . Sassaman states that the Board of Commissioners has said that they will not site another municipal solid waste landfill in Orange County, but that doesn ' t mean that Waste Management or BFI or Vickers and Sons might want to come in and try to site a landfill in Orange County . There are also other types of landfills . Vote passes unanimously . Chapel Hill Rogers Road Small Area Planning Process - No discussion. Orange County Historic Rogers Road Community Enhancement Plan Pollock states that one reason this is brought up is Jan, and maybe others, has, has been approached to be on the enhancement committee . It' s pertinent to you all in regard to solid waste that you are likely to have higher involvement as the solid waste fund and the Department may be seen as a source of funds for improvements . The water line issue took a year of your time . And there is supposed to be support from the solid waste management staff, given the nature of the discussions of the meetings at the church there is some considerable likelihood that the solid waste fund will be a potential source of funding the improvements . You will probably be intimately involved as the SWAB . Do you want to contemplate being an open wallet or draw some lines in the 8 Minutes - Regular Meeting Solid Waste Advisory Board May 3 , 2007 Approved June 7, 2007 sand in advance or see how things unfold . Do you want to make any kind of statement on community enhancement in advance of the meetings ? Vickers states we didn' t have the option of paying for the water line; essentially any financial issues will be decided by the Commissioners, not this group . These are political decisions that are not necessarily the purpose of the SWAB . Sassaman states that we will have the option to make recommendations or chastise them . Vickers states that there will be political decision made of what is and isn' t done in the neighborhood . I don' t know if that is the purpose of the SWAB to be involved . Bowerman asks as far as money goes how much do we have and at what level does their asking us for something become meaningless, because there just isn' t the money for it. Road improvements would not fall on us right? Vickers states that on the water issue we had [guidelines on] what we could and couldn' t pay for . We had to come up with the logic that it was to prevent a lawsuit - potential future damage was the hook they used . There was limitation of what the solid waste department could pay for versus what the Commissioners could pay out of the tax revenues . Smith states that we can only react. Sassaman states that the enterprise money is needed for the enterprise . If they are spent on something else it will require us to get the money in some other way - such as increase the 3 -R Fee or taxes . Pollock states that to answer Linda ' s question. We are trying to rebuild our funds but we need over two million to cap the landfill, four million for the transfer station, and our conventional fleet replacement costs and the like like , Those monies are not in the bank anymore . Gayle will be able to give you a more thorough report on the budget next month . Bowerman states that a lot of people view it as this amount of money has been saved by placing the landfill here, so those savings should go to Rogers Rd . Sassaman asks what do they think we have saved . Bowerman replies the money that would have been spent had they put it elsewhere like they should have . 9 Minutes - Regular Meeting Solid Waste Advisory Board May 3, 2007 Approved June 7, 2007 Sassaman states that the money wasn' t there to put it elsewhere . Norwood states that there appears to be misconception. The LOG was first to say " we are doing it to you again, we ' ll compensate " . We went through traffic signs and beautification and things the neighborhood wanted . We got some . The fact the neighborhood is still a trash dump and what they are talking about cleaning up , that needs to come from within the neighborhood . They can ' t expect the county to keep stepping in because the dump is around the corner . The misconception is if they keep beating the horse all the garbage, old cars, old mobile homes will be cleaned up and everyone will have green grass in their front yard . When there is talk about beautification, I hear people wanting to have all the junk that has piled up hauled away at no expense to them without realizing that there are ways to do that now . If we have any role it would be to have a metal day or a one time clean up day . Pollock states that that is something that we could help people do as we have the labor and equipment to do it. There could be a metal day or a brush day . Doing It that way would be cheaper and better, metal has value and brush has potential value because it can be used for mulch . Sassaman states that things that I ' ve heard about are all basic municipal services . One of the other issues that keep coming up is traffic and the capacity of the road . Other than recommending I don ' t know that there is much the SWAB should say about the road . Who is going to complain about a new school in their neighborhood ? Vickers asks what is the conclusion for this item . Sassaman states that Blair is only alerting us . There is nothing to react to . Scavenging of Recyclables by Public Pollock states that now that the price of aluminum is up there has been more scavenging . At some point we may want to discuss whether scavenging is OK or if there should be a series of town ordinances that address issues stating who owns the recyclables or update a county-wide ordinance which clarifies scavenging . Other None 7. Other Business None Smith moves to adjourn Norwood 2nd . Adjourn : 9 * 10 pm Next meeting : June 7, 2008 Chapel Hill Library 10