[USCC] Landfill
David Goldstein
David.Goldstein at ventura.org
Wed Dec 31 18:54:50 CST 2008
Matt,
I'm not defending the use of organics as alternative daily cover at landfills, but just to keep things clear, we should cover the counterpoints to some items discussed below.
1. Since many landfills close due to time (permit expiration and community opposition to renewal), rather than due to tonnage or volume, we can't always say it is a waste of space to use yard clippings as alternative daily cover.
2. Some in the landfill industry claim they are doing a better job of addressing climate change than the compost industry does. They may have a point when it comes to sequestering carbon from very woody waste, and some curbside yardwaste collection routes can be inefficient, but you have a good point (below) about five years of un-captured methane emissions from more nitrogen rich loads.
3. In some cases, prohibiting yard waste as alternative daily cover could result in importing dirt from off-site, which can cause more emissions.
Happy new year,
David Goldstein
Recycling Market Development Zone
>>> "Matthew Cotton" <matt at mattcotton.com> 12/31/2008 9:32 AM >>>
Myron -
Thanks for kicking off a great topic for (almost) 2009. The issue of
"feedstock competition" is an important one. As you know, almost half
of the states ban some form of yard trimmings from landfills. A few
states are now considering similar bans on food scraps. As we all
learn more about greenhouse gas and climate change, there is likely
going to be an increase in the connection between putting organic
materials in landfills and the methane that is created. Yes, some
landfills have very sophisticated "landfill gas" collection systems.
These systems can measure the amount of gas captured, but they don't
measure the gas they don't capture. There are theoretical models
which can both over and under estimate the amount of landfill gas
that might be generated. As you can imagine, all sorts of variables
contribute to this - waste composition, compaction and covering
methods, climate, age of the landfill, and perhaps the most important
one - when the gas system is installed and operating - many of these
systems are not activated for up to 5 years after waste is placed,
thus that food waste from your Holiday dinner may be covered and
compacted and generating methane well before the gas collection
system is turned on.
Sally Brown has made some initial conceptual estimates of this using
the gas production numbers from anaerobic digestion studies, so that
is a place to start if you want to generate some numbers. This is
important for a few reasons - first we need to know a lot more about
how organics behave in landfills and appreciate that every landfill
is different. But perhaps more importantly if there are to ever be
carbon credits for composting, we need to be able to accurately
calculate the avoided methane emissions from not landfilling organics
(not to mention the benefits of applying compost - something else Dr.
Brown is working on).
The USCC's Legislative and Environmental Affairs Committee is
actively engaged in these issues. There are two Fact Sheets on the
USCC Website which provide some good background.
http://www.compostingcouncil.org/education/resources.php
We are likely to see more efforts to overturn landfill bans in those
states that have them and more efforts to get more organics back to
landfills in those states that don't; most of this will be about
alleged increases in landfill gas recovery. In addition to the
problems listed above, the amount of electricity received from
increasing organics in landfills is often grossly overstated. J.D.
Lindeberg (Chair of the USCC's L&EA Committee) wrote an excellent
critique of this in an effort to thwart efforts to overturn
Michigan's landfill ban on organics. This should also be on the USCC
website.
The policy basis behind most of the state landfill bans on organics
is as sound today as it was in the early 1990s - organics take up a
lot of space in landfills. While a few people who should know better
still labor under the misunderstanding that organics breakdown in
landfills, we learn over and over again that this is overstated. A
recent study by a landfill engineering company here in CA estimated
that a particular county was spending $11 - $12 million a year in
lost landfill space by using processed yard trimmings as landfill
cover (A bizarre practice, which in CA is equivalent to
"recycling"). This was processed yard trimmings, with airspace
savings calculated after compaction (so, fairly conservative). All of
this was based on a relatively low tipping fee of $22/ton.
Given the current economic situation, I don't think any City or
County can afford to be that wasteful.
Here's to a Happy New Year filled with composting opportunities!
See you in Houston.
Matthew Cotton
Integrated Waste Management Consulting, LLC
19375 Lake City Road
Nevada City, CA 95959
(530) 265-4560
Fax (530) 265-4547
matt at mattcotton.com
www.mattcotton.com
On Dec 30, 2008, at 2:21 PM, hirschsys at aol.com wrote:
>
> For future discusions:
>
> As active landfills put in gas collection systems they sometimes
> claim to now be a recycling option because they capture?some of the
> methane.? This has actually caused the closing of some good
> composting operations due to yard trimmings being diverted back
> into landfills.
>
> Does someone have the?statistics on this subject?? Estimates of the
> carbon going into a landfill would be fairly?easy to calculate, the
> captured methane coming out is measureable.? An estimate of how
> long a landfill will continue to produce is? available so therefore
> an efficiency should?have been calculated.? I am sure it has , I
> just don't remember it.
>
> Could someone from the compost?group help me on this.???
>
> Thank you
> Myron Hirschman?
Matt,
I'm not defending the use of organics as alternative daily cover at landfills, but just to keep things clear, we should understand the counterpoints to some items discussed below.
1. Since many of our landfills close due to time (permit expiration and community opposition to renewal), rather than due to tonnage or volume, we can't always say it is a waste of space to use yard clippings as alternative daily cover.
2. Some in the landfill industry claim they are doing a better job of addressing climate change than the compost industry does. They may have a point when it comes to sequestering carbon from very woody waste, and some curbside yardwaste collection routes can be inefficient, but you have a good point (below) about five years of un-captured methane emissions from more nitrogen rich loads.
3. In some cases, prohibiting yard waste as alternative daily cover could result in importing dirt from off-site, which can cause more emissions.
D.G.
>>> "Matthew Cotton" <matt at mattcotton.com> 12/31/2008 9:32 AM >>>
Myron -
Thanks for kicking off a great topic for (almost) 2009. The issue of
"feedstock competition" is an important one. As you know, almost half
of the states ban some form of yard trimmings from landfills. A few
states are now considering similar bans on food scraps. As we all
learn more about greenhouse gas and climate change, there is likely
going to be an increase in the connection between putting organic
materials in landfills and the methane that is created. Yes, some
landfills have very sophisticated "landfill gas" collection systems.
These systems can measure the amount of gas captured, but they don't
measure the gas they don't capture. There are theoretical models
which can both over and under estimate the amount of landfill gas
that might be generated. As you can imagine, all sorts of variables
contribute to this - waste composition, compaction and covering
methods, climate, age of the landfill, and perhaps the most important
one - when the gas system is installed and operating - many of these
systems are not activated for up to 5 years after waste is placed,
thus that food waste from your Holiday dinner may be covered and
compacted and generating methane well before the gas collection
system is turned on.
Sally Brown has made some initial conceptual estimates of this using
the gas production numbers from anaerobic digestion studies, so that
is a place to start if you want to generate some numbers. This is
important for a few reasons - first we need to know a lot more about
how organics behave in landfills and appreciate that every landfill
is different. But perhaps more importantly if there are to ever be
carbon credits for composting, we need to be able to accurately
calculate the avoided methane emissions from not landfilling organics
(not to mention the benefits of applying compost - something else Dr.
Brown is working on).
The USCC's Legislative and Environmental Affairs Committee is
actively engaged in these issues. There are two Fact Sheets on the
USCC Website which provide some good background.
http://www.compostingcouncil.org/education/resources.php
We are likely to see more efforts to overturn landfill bans in those
states that have them and more efforts to get more organics back to
landfills in those states that don't; most of this will be about
alleged increases in landfill gas recovery. In addition to the
problems listed above, the amount of electricity received from
increasing organics in landfills is often grossly overstated. J.D.
Lindeberg (Chair of the USCC's L&EA Committee) wrote an excellent
critique of this in an effort to thwart efforts to overturn
Michigan's landfill ban on organics. This should also be on the USCC
website.
The policy basis behind most of the state landfill bans on organics
is as sound today as it was in the early 1990s - organics take up a
lot of space in landfills. While a few people who should know better
still labor under the misunderstanding that organics breakdown in
landfills, we learn over and over again that this is overstated. A
recent study by a landfill engineering company here in CA estimated
that a particular county was spending $11 - $12 million a year in
lost landfill space by using processed yard trimmings as landfill
cover (A bizarre practice, which in CA is equivalent to
"recycling"). This was processed yard trimmings, with airspace
savings calculated after compaction (so, fairly conservative). All of
this was based on a relatively low tipping fee of $22/ton.
Given the current economic situation, I don't think any City or
County can afford to be that wasteful.
Here's to a Happy New Year filled with composting opportunities!
See you in Houston.
Matthew Cotton
Integrated Waste Management Consulting, LLC
19375 Lake City Road
Nevada City, CA 95959
(530) 265-4560
Fax (530) 265-4547
matt at mattcotton.com
www.mattcotton.com
On Dec 30, 2008, at 2:21 PM, hirschsys at aol.com wrote:
>
> For future discusions:
>
> As active landfills put in gas collection systems they sometimes
> claim to now be a recycling option because they capture?some of the
> methane.? This has actually caused the closing of some good
> composting operations due to yard trimmings being diverted back
> into landfills.
>
> Does someone have the?statistics on this subject?? Estimates of the
> carbon going into a landfill would be fairly?easy to calculate, the
> captured methane coming out is measureable.? An estimate of how
> long a landfill will continue to produce is? available so therefore
> an efficiency should?have been calculated.? I am sure it has , I
> just don't remember it.
>
> Could someone from the compost?group help me on this.???
>
> Thank you
> Myron Hirschman?
More information about the Compost
mailing list