l tia en ion sid rs Re ive 15 ti- D e ul e g M ast pa W —
Solid Waste & Recycling Canada’s magazine on collection, hauling, processing and disposal February/March 2014
BURNING DESIRE
Metro Vancouver’s waste plan faces scrutiny — page 8
CPMP No. 40069240
An EcoLog Group Publication
Natural Gas Vehicles supplement — pages 17-40 01 swr feb-mar 2014 nl cvr pg 01.indd 1
14-02-20 11:56 AM
Exclusive Sales and Service for BOLLEGRAAF, LUBO and TITECH
Solutions for sorting • Single Stream • Commercial Waste • Construction & Demolition • Municipal Solid Waste
• Waste to Energy/Fuel • Balers • Presorted Plastics • E-Waste
Selecting a recycling system requires trust. Since 1984 VAN DYK Recycling Solutions has led the North American Market by building over 1,780 highly efficient and profitable plants.
Van Dyk Baler Corp. and Lubo USA, DBA:
VDRS.com ● 203-967-1100 ● info@vdrs.com W E O R I G I N AT E , O T H E R S I M I TAT E
Exclusive North American Sales & Service for Bollegraaf, Lubo & TITECH Recycling Machinery
02 swr feb-mar 2014 ad p 02.indd 2
14-02-13 11:39 AM
Solid Waste & Recycling
CONTENTS February/March 2014 Volume 19, Number 1
Canada’s magazine on collection, hauling, processing & disposal
COVER STORY
DISPOSAL: METRO VANCOUVER
8 Cover art by Charles Jaffe
Metro Vancouver, BC, is “ground zero” for the leading trends in waste management in Canada. Our editor looks at how much waste is generated and where it’s currently sent, and the Metro’s detailed plan to recycle more while using flow control to send residual waste to a new incinerator, against a backdrop of opposition from the private sector and concerned citizens. by Guy Crittenden
DEPARTMENTS
FEATURES DIVERSION: MULTI-REZ CIF’s study of waste diversion in the multi-residential sector. by Mike Birett
15
LANDFILL TECHNOLOGY: LEACHATE Technology to treat landfill leachates. by Richard Aho
42
SPECIAL PULL-OUT SECTION
NATURAL GAS VEHICLES FOR THE WASTE & RECYCLING INDUSTRY
Special feature articles on the technologies and payback times related to converting fleets to natural gas engines and fuelling stations. — pages 17-40
Multi-rez diversion, pg. 15
Editorial
4
Up Front
6
Waste Business
34
Organic Matters
45
IC&I Waste
47
Regulation Roundup
51
Ad Index
53
Blog
54
NEXT EDITION: April/May 2014 Edi torial: Plastics recycling. Product stewardship for containers. Landfill closure system. Spotlight. Separation equipment. Natural gas engines in cold weather. Space closing: March 21, 2014. Ar twork required: March 28, 2014.
Leachate treatment, pg. 42
Organics cart, pg. 45
February/March 2014 www.solidwastemag.com 3
03 swr feb-mar 2014 conts p 03.indd 3
14-02-13 11:39 AM
EDITORIAL
by Guy Crittenden
WDO lobbied to reject Call2Recycle plan
“The CMHSW program specifically excludes slag production as ‘down-cycling’ from the calculation.”
A
media dustup in Ontario in mid-January shows that recycling companies have become wary of proposed product stewardship programs that could jeopardize their businesses. The matter concerns changes to product stewardship for used singleuse (i.e., AA, AAA, C, D etc.) batteries. Via their organization Call2Recycle, battery producers (e.g., Duracell, Energizer, Ray-o-Vac, etc.) are proposing an industry stewardship plan (ISP) to set up their own battery collection program rather than continue to participate in the province’s existing Consolidated Municipal Household and Special Waste (CMHSW) program. Unlike the CMHSW program, ISPs are approved solely by Waste Diversion Ontario (WDO) and not the environment minister. How it actually works is a bit of a black box, with some discussions held behind closed doors; this naturally makes stakeholders nervous. Ontario’s Waste Diversion Act has been criticized by environmental groups, private companies and organizations like the Ontario Waste Management Association (OWMA) for producing stewardship “monopolies” that disrupt existing markets. Recyclers of used oil and waste electronics, for example, complained when programs harmed their businesses rather than simply add to the recycling they were already doing. In September 2013, Call2Recycle submitted a stewardship plan for used batteries (for the third time, after previous applications were rejected by WDO). A number of stakeholders flew into action, lobbying the WDO board and the environment ministry to reject the plan. The stakeholders included a nine big-name environmental groups (e.g., the David Suzuki Foundation, Greenpeace Canada, the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, etc.), a number of Ontario municipalities, trade associations, plus private companies such as Raw Materials Co. (RMC) in Niagara Region that employs 47 people and turns 80 to 92 per cent of single-use batteries into re-usable steel and fertilizer. Their concern was that Call2Recycle — which operates programs in British Columbia, Manitoba and Quebec — would permit “down-cycling” of used batteries into slag (used as a aggregate replacement in roadbeds and parking lots) rather than “upcycle” them into value-added products. They’re also concerned about low diversion rates, estimated at just 13.7 per cent in 2012 for the program Call2Recycle operates in BC, based on total batteries sold into the market. These concerns were picked up in a Toronto Star editorial that focused on the issue of standards, the potential of the plan to kill jobs and “previous criticism for low collection rates” of Call2Recycle’s programs. Call2Recycle Canada (call2recycle.ca) is sponsored by the major battery companies and operates an industry-led voluntary program in Ontario in which consumers can drop off batteries weighing less than 5 kg each and also old cellphones for recycling free of charge at 1,300 locations. The program claims to have diverted over 39 million kilograms of batteries across Canada since its inception in 1997. However, Ontario’s shift to mandatory EPR is all about raising the bar higher than such “first generation” programs, worthwhile as they may be. Boosting performance includes several elements: 1. Though phased in, programs must achieve higher-than-existing
diversion rates according to schedules, with 80 or 90 per cent diversion being reasonable within a couple of years. 2. The diversion level must be verifiable and include robust data collection, reporting and oversight. (Call2Recycle’s program results in the past have included kilograms collected, but not what percentage this represents of batteries sold into the market.) 3. High recycling standards must be achieved, following industry best practices, that convert the materials into value-added products. The environmental groups’ letter states that Call2Recycle sends its batteries to a smelter in Pennsylvania where much of the material ends up as slag or baghouse dust. This is a lower-value end product than what RMC, for instance, produces. The CMHSW program that was approved by WDO and the Ontario Minister of Environment in 2009 sets an 80 per cent recycling efficiency rate for batteries. The CMHSW program specifically excludes slag production as “down-cycling” from the calculation. Call2Recycle Canada Executive Director Joe Zenobio responded to the Toronto Star article with a letter in which he writes Call2Recycle “believes that the service provider network could involve not only one sorter or processor, but may include several different companies.” He notes that, to mitigate concerns about transparency, the organization will “form an advisory group and secure a ‘Fairness Commissioner’” (e.g., a retired senior judge) to oversee the service provider award process. Zenobio also writes that “Call2Recycle is committed to meeting the recycling efficiency rates approved by the Minister.” This is reassuring, but concerns diversion rates and not the ultimate fate of the material. In fact, Zenobio specifically defends the smelter option as environmentally sound, noting that the slag “has been endorsed by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation as an eco-friendly input into road construction.” We can’t expect the organization to say bad things about where it’s been sending used batteries all these years, but certainly WDO and the province will have to ensure that collected materials are not exported for this kind of lower-end use, even if it turns out to be the cheapest. NOTE: Readers can read the letter and article exchange on my online blog starting here: http://blog.solidwastemag.com/wdo-lobbied-toreject-call2recycle-plan/ Guy Crittenden is editor of this magazine. Contact Guy at gcrittenden@solidwastemag.com
4 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014
04-05 swr feb-mar 2014 editl p 04-05.indd 4
14-02-13 11:40 AM
Special WasteExpo Offer for Solid Waste & Recycling Readers: Enjoy FREE WasteExpo Exhibit Hall Admission & 25% off the Conference Program. Simply use code VP32 @ www.wasteexpo.com
MORE SOLUTIONS. MORE CONNECTIONS. MORE BUSINESS.
MORE OF WHAT YOU WANT. Join us at WasteExpo 2014 in Atlanta—a Waste360 event. Because you deserve more. More exhibitors. More attendees. More education. More connections. All in one place, over four days. Over 11,000 total participants and 550 exhibitors were at Make Money. Save Money. Stay Safe and Compliant.
WasteExpo in 2013. No other event comes close to its size, scope and business opportunities.
Conferences & Special Events: April 28-30, 2014
Exhibits: April 29-May 1, 2014
Georgia World Congress Center, Atlanta, GA USA
wasteexpo.com
Last year, we successfully added a Composting/Organics Track, a C&D Workshop, a Matchmaking Program, a Show Floor Presentation Theater, and an Investor Summit—and you can be sure we’re not done yet. Look for more innovation and business opportunities—from the one event designed to help you make money, save money and stay safe and compliant.
Additional Waste360 Events: Charting the Course to Sustainable Materials Management
Associated with:
Sponsored by:
Produced by:
Charting the Course To Sustainable Materials Management
healthcarewasteconf.com
waste360.com wastesymposium.com
04-05 swr feb-mar 2014 editl p 04-05.indd 5
14-02-13 11:40 AM
Solid Waste & Recycling
UPFRONT
Correction
Canada’s magazine on collection, hauling, processing & disposal
Guy Crittenden Editor gcrittenden@solidwastemag.com Brad O’Brien Publisher bobrien@solidwastemag.com Dave Douglas Account Manager ddouglas@bizinfogroup.ca Sheila Wilson Art Director Kimberly Collins Market Production Anita Madden Circulation Manager Bruce Creighton President Business Information Group Contributing Editors Michael Cant, Rosalind Cooper, Maria Kelleher, David McRobert, Clarissa Morawski, Usman Valiante, Paul van der Werf Award-winning magazine Solid Waste & Recycling magazine is published six times a year by EcoLog Information Resources Group, a division of BIG Magazines LP, a div. of Glacier BIG Holdings Company Ltd., a leading Canadian businessto-business information services company that also publishes HazMat Management magazine and other information products. The magazine is printed in Canada. Solid Waste & Recycling provides strategic information and perspectives on all aspects of Canadian solid waste collection, hauling, processing and disposal to waste managers, haulers, recycling coordinators, landfill and compost facility operators and other waste industry professionals.
I
n the last edition (December 2013/January 2014) the untitled map in the Cover Story about recycling access in Canada on page 12 contained an error. Shapes within the map would allow a reader to locate Northumberland, Peterborough and Hastings Counties in Ontario. Extrapolating from these and the locations of boundary lines suggest that the Townships of Stirling-Rawdon, Wollaston and Limerick are designated “no recycling” by the map’s legend. However the Township of Stirling-Rawdon is a member of the Centre and South Hastings Waste Services Board (Quinte Waste Solutions, QWS) and thus receives full blue box service, while Wollaston and Limerick have contracts with QWS and for the haulage and processing of a full range of depot-collected material. The author informs us that the legend should have described these areas as “Municipalities/Townships unstudied due to population below 5,000, or no recycling program.” Limerick (population 352), Stirling-Rawdon (population 4,978) and Wollaston (population 708) are not researched as the study threshold was a population of 5,000 people. The author states that an exception will be made for the next recycling access report and these counties will be included.
Waste-free lunch successes
Subscription Rates: Canada: $53.95 (add applicable taxes) per year, $87.95 (add applicable taxes) for 2 years, single copy $10.00. USA: 1 Year $56.95, single copy $10.00. Foreign: 1 Year $87.95, single copy $10.00.
Winning school children on tour in Waterloo, Ontario.
Canadian Publications Mail Product Sales Agreement No. 40069240 Information contained in this publication has been compiled from sources believed to be reliable, thus Solid Waste & Recycling cannot be responsible for the absolute correctness or sufficiency of articles or editorial contained herein. Articles in this magazine are intended to convey information rather than give legal or other professional advice. Reprint and list rental services are arranged through the Publisher at (416) 510-6798. Return undeliverable Canadian addresses to: Circulation Department, Solid Waste & Recycling 80 Valleybrook Drive, Toronto ON M3B 2S9 From time to time we make our subscription list available to select companies and organizations whose product or service may interest you. If you do not wish your contact information to be made available, please contact us via one of the following methods: Phone: 1-800-268-7742 Fax: 416-510-5148 E-Mail: jhunter@businessinformationgroup.ca Mail to: Privacy Officer Business Information Group 80 Valleybrook Drive Toronto, ON M3B 2S9 We acknowledge the financial support of the Government of Canada through the Canada Periodical Fund of the De partment of Canadian Heritage. © 2014 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced without prior consent. Print edition: ISSN-1483-7714
Online edition: ISSN-1923-3388
A
s part of Waste Reduction Week (WRW) in Canada (October 21-27, 2013) elementary schoolchildren across Ontario committed to reducing, reusing, and recycling for lunch and made a significant contribution to the province’s waste diversion efforts. Sponsored by the Carton Council of Canada, the annual Waste-Free Lunch Challenge helps schools decrease the amount of garbage they generate, and educates students, teachers, and parents about smart consumption and waste reduction. In 2013, approximately 700 classrooms or schools from 56 school boards took an active role in waste minimization by utilizing reusable, refillable, and recyclable containers for lunch. In doing so, participating schools kept nearly 16,000 kg of lunch material from entering landfill — equivalent to 35 grand pianos — over the course of a week. Schools sorted, weighed, and recorded their lunchtime waste generation before WRW to establish a baseline, and then again during Waste Reduction Week to measure the difference. Since 2010, over 525,000 children across the province have participated in the program, which is operated by the Recycling Council of Ontario (RCO). Visit wastefreelunch.com
The Forest Stewardship Council® logo signifies that this magazine is printed on paper from responsibly managed forests. “To earn FSC® certification and the right to use the FSC label, an organization must first adapt its management and operations to conform to all applicable FSC requirements.” For more information, visit www.fsc.org
6 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014
06-07 swr feb-mar 2014 upfront p 06-07.indd 6
14-02-13 3:50 PM
UPFRONT PROGRESSIVE WASTE, TERRACYCLE PARTNER FOR ZERO-WASTE PROJECTS
TerraCycle Founder and CEO Tom Szaky (left) with Joseph Quarin (right) President & CEO of Progressive Waste Solutions at the news conference announcing the new zero waste partnership between the two companies.
P
rogressive Waste Solutions Ltd. has acquired a nearly 20 per cent interest in recycling firm TerraCycle Canada. The companies are beginning to collaborate on a range of unprecedented “zero waste” recycling initiatives for homes, municipalities and businesses throughout Canada. Solid Waste & Recycling magazine was on hand for the official announcement on January 29, 2014, when more information was revealed about the partnership. TerraCycle announced its rebranding as a Progressive Waste Solutions partner. According to the two companies, Progressive Waste’s “vast network and infrastructure will bring extended distribution, efficiency, and enhanced ease-of-use to TerraCycle’s free nationwide recycling fundraisers already taking place at over 5,000 schools and charities nationwide.” Progressive’s 19.9 per cent investment in TerraCycle Canada represents approximately $1 million. The companies view this as just
S
Recycling access high for paper boxes
ome 95 per cent of Canadians now have access to recycling options for paper boxes and cartons, says the Paper and Paperboard Packaging Environmental Council (PPEC). The stats, compiled by CM Consulting, show that recycling access numbers have grown since 2000, when recycling access for Canadians hovered around 85 per cent. (See Cover Story of last edition: December 2013/January 2014) “Canadians no longer have any excuses for placing paper boxes in the garbage,” says PPEC Executive Director John Mullinder, who addressed the stats in a January 22, 2014 statement to media. “They don’t belong there,” added Mullinder, “and besides, we need them to make new boxes.” Mullinder says most of the new boxes manufactured in Canada are made from 100 per cent recycled material that’s been collected from the back of factories or supermarkets or from curbside or depot programs. Visit ppec-paper.com
T
the start of an exciting partnership and look forward to leveraging opportunities together. TerraCycle Canada made news headlines last year with the introduction of a novel recycling program for cigarette butt litter in the City of Vancouver, BC. The company also partnered in November of last year with Progressive Waste Solutions on a Zero Waste Recycling program for Maple Ridge, BC that enables residents to recycle almost all their household waste. Globally, TerraCycle has repurposed more than 2.6 billion pieces of food and beverage, office and school supply, e-waste and other hard to recycle waste streams such as diaper packaging. These collections have raised more than US $8 million dollars for charity through its various packaging reclamation programs. Visit terracycle.ca and progressivewaste.com
GUELPH TOPS WASTE DIVERSION RANKING
he City of Guelph handily achieved the top residential waste diversion rate of any Ontario municipality in 2012, according to the province’s waste management data on the top-20 least wasteful municipalities. Municipal datacall information submitted to Waste Diversion Ontario (WDO) details the percentage of Blue Box items and other materials kept out of landfills. Of the more than 400 municipalities analyzed, WDO’s data shows that Guelph’s residential diversion rate was 67.7 per cent for 2012, more than four per cent higher than Owen Sound, the second best performing Ontario municipality. The top-20 diversion rates range from 52 per cent (Orillia) to 67.7 per cent, WDO states in its annual report. For the first time, the top performing municipality will receive the Ron Lance Memorial Award in honour of the municipal datacall’s former manager, who died in October 2012. Guelph will receive the award at a meeting of city council. Meaford, Ontario’s residential waste diversion leader in 2011, made the list again in 2012 at 59.73 per cent, which ranked fourth overall. Visit wdo.ca February/March 2014 www.solidwastemag.com 7
06-07 swr feb-mar 2014 upfront p 06-07.indd 7
14-02-13 3:50 PM
COVER STORY
Vancouver skyline.
Burning Ambition Metro Vancouver’s waste diversion and disposal plans face scrutiny
E
very year residents and businesses in Metro Vancouver, British Columbia generate just over three million tonnes of solid waste. In 2010, about 1.6 million tonnes of this (55 per cent) was recycled and diverted from disposal in the region. The remaining 1.4 million tonnes was managed at a 25-year-old waste-to-energy facility in Burnaby, BC (280,000 tonnes) or other facilities (e.g., landfills) operated by Metro Vancouver, the City of Vancouver, or private businesses. A major destination for post-recycling “residual” waste was — and continues to be — the Cache Creek Landfill in Thompson-Nicola Regional District, operated by Wastech Services Ltd. This 48-hectare landfill is permitted to receive up to 500,000 tonnes of municipal solid waste per year, with an approved total waste capacity of 10 million tonnes. The landfill received extensions from the government in 2009 and 2010, and plans to install technology to capture landfill gas and convert it into liquified natural gas (LNG). Like other municipalities, Metro Vancouver is under pressure from the province to increase diversion, requiring that Metro divert 70 per cent of its waste (through recycling, composting or other programs) by 2015, and 80 per cent by 2020. Debate centres on how to achieve this, and what to do with the residual waste. Metro Vancouver expects support in its overall waste minimization efforts from BC’s new Stewardship Plan for Packaging and Printed
by Guy Crittenden “The private sector says Metro Vancouver really wants a guaranteed supply of input material for its planned $470 million wasteto-energy facility.”
Paper under the province’s Recycling Regulation, under which the cost of recycling will be picked up by industry, starting in May of this year. The funds will flow from industry organization Multi-Material BC (MMBC), which has recently entered into funding agreements with most BC municipalities. Even with stewards paying for recycling, it could take a long time for product stewardship to heavily impact downstream waste generation. So, Metro Vancouver is investing in recycling and organic waste diversion programs. Kitchen scraps will officially be banned from disposal along with other organics in 2015. However, even with all these efforts, residual waste will need to be dealt with. As John Foden of the Canadian Energy-From-Waste Coalition put it, even if Metro gets 90 per cent resident participation and recycles 90 per cent of what they throw out — and even if markets are found for 90 per cent of that material — only about 72 per cent of the waste will actually be diverted.
8 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014
08-14 swr feb-mar 2014 cvr sty pg 08-14.indd 8
14-02-13 3:47 PM
COVER STORY
Metro Vancouver seems to agree, estimating that 700,000 tonnes of residual waste will need to be disposed in 2018. That’s almost threequarters of a million tonnes of low-value stuff. The question then becomes: What to do with this material? And that’s where opinions differ.
WASTE-TO-ENERGY Arguably the die was cast for incineration in 2011 when the BC government rejected a Metro Vancouver plan to create a landfill at Ashcroft Ranch in the province’s Interior. Staff embraced the idea of an “integrated waste disposal system” that roughly follows the waste management hierarchy, with reduction and recycling at the top and disposal at the bottom. But Metro has its own interpretation of what it calls the “5Rs hierarchy.” Since waste-to-energy is its preferred disposal method, its
diversion rate “includes some source-separated material utilized as fuel being considered ‘recycled.’” Critics say this puts incineration in competition with recyclers for materials like paper and plastic that have energy content. There’s also an assumption that incineration is better than landfilling. Metro Vancouver staff say incineration is cheaper over the long term due to power sales. They quote analysis by an independent consultant who puts the cost of landfilling for 35 years at more than $1 billion. Waste-to-energy can be expected “to return a small surplus over that same period,” they state. The owners of local landfills, of course, disagree and have hired high-profile lobbyists with connections to Premier Christy Clark to sway the debate that may yet end up in court. In a Vancouver Sun article, Russ Black, of Belkorp Environmental
The Cache Creek landfill is operated by Belkorp Environmental Services subsidiary Wastech. This 48-hectare landfill is permitted to receive up to 500,000 tonnes of municipal solid waste per year, with an approved total waste capacity of 10 million tonnes.
February/March 2014 www.solidwastemag.com 9
08-14 swr feb-mar 2014 cvr sty pg 08-14.indd 9
14-02-13 3:47 PM
COVER STORY
Belkorp Environmental Services plans to invest approximately $30 million and create up to 80 new jobs by building an advanced material recovery and recycling facility in Coquitlam. Belkorp’s facility has the support of the City of Coquitlam, and would process 260,000 tonnes per year of material. The company says source-separation requirements in Metro Vancouver bylaws stand in the way of the plant; Metro Vancouver staff say the proposal is a ploy to delay or thwart their waste-to-energy plans and allow Belkorp’s subsidiary to continue hauling waste to its Cache Creek landfill.
Services Inc. — owner of Wastech, that operates the Cache Creek landfill — made the counter argument, including that a new incinerator will contribute more unwelcome emissions into the Fraser Valley air shed, and that such plants generate toxic ash that still requires disposal.
Most upsetting to private sector haulers and facility operators is that Metro Vancouver plans to impose “flow control” in order to keep residual waste inside its borders. Metro Vancouver’s Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan (ISWRMP) includes flow control to
10 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014
08-14 swr feb-mar 2014 cvr sty pg 08-14.indd 10
14-02-13 3:47 PM
COVER STORY prevent waste export outside the region to cheaper facilities with (what it deems) lax recycling standards. Metro Vancouver wants “control over tipping fees, disposal bans and material prohibitions.” In 2013 Metro Vancouver endorsed Bylaw 280 — a flow control measure — to (among other things) prevent waste being sent to Abbotsford, BC from where it may subsequently be shipped to a private landfill in the arid Columbia River region of Washington State. Private sector companies such as Northwest Waste Solutions, BFI Canada and Belkorp Environmental Services say what Metro Vancouver really wants is a guaranteed supply of input material for its planned $470-million waste-to-energy facility, which it aims to open in 2018 to handle 370,000 tonnes of waste (beyond what’s consumed in Burnaby). Metro Vancouver is pushing ahead, with nine companies representing 10 technologies shortlisted to develop the technology that will power the plant. Metro is actively searching for a location to build its proposed plant. Critics charge that incinerators are capital-intensive projects that, once built, require a steady stream of waste material to “feed the beast.” The private waste industry says Bylaw 280 creates a waste monopoly for Metro Vancouver. Opinion is not uniform, however. The Recycle First Coalition — made up of 11 smaller recycling companies — supports the regional initiative and continued source-separation of materials over single-stream processing in mixed-waste material recovery facilities (MWMRFs). According to Metro officials, the region’s $107 per tonne tip fee is
NEW
Logo for Zero Waste Canada. The organization resents Metro Vancouver’s appropriation of the term to mean “zero waste to landfill.”
being undercut by fees in the range of $70 in Abbotsford. The region estimates that 70,000 tonnes of multi-rez and IC&I waste left the region last year, up from 50,000 tonnes in 2012.
ZERO WASTE Citizen groups are upset by Metro Vancouver’s appropriation of the term “Zero Waste,” which normally denotes a symbiotic cradle-tocradle system that eliminates waste or uses the byproduct of one process as the raw material input for another. Metro Vancouver uses the term “zero waste to landfill,” which is quite different. Metro Vancouver even joined with the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) to create the National Zero Waste Council, which has been dismissed by citizenled Zero Waste Canada as nothing more than a PR exercise to confound the public and make incineration seem palatable.
WITH
COMPOSTABLE
BAGS
Helping municipalities achieve their organic waste diversion goals FOR USE IN MUNICIPAL COMPOST PROGRAMS WHERE APPLICABLE. Febreze™ is a trademark of The Procter & Gamble Company, used under license.
February/March 2014 www.solidwastemag.com 11
08-14 swr feb-mar 2014 cvr sty pg 08-14.indd 11
14-02-13 3:47 PM
COVER STORY Built in 1988 the plant is owned by Metro Vancouver and operated by Covanta Energy.
Zero Waste Canada issued a news release that quoted Ric Anthony, Chair of parent organization Zero Waste International Alliance, who stated, “There can be no form of deliberate resource destruction in a zero waste world.” ZWIA asserts that “Zero Waste to Landfill is a bogus claim that falsely implies an element of environmentalism to disguise blatant commercialism.”
DETAILS AND COSTS
280,000 tonnes of waste are processed each year at a waste-toenergy plant in Burnaby, BC.
Metro Vancouver’s Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan (ISWRMP) — published in July 2010 — contains qualifiers about its goals. The ISWRMP refers to an “aspirational target” of 80 per cent diversion compared to 2010 waste levels, “assuming there will be sustained markets for all diverted material.” The ISWRMP aims to increase the regional diversion rate from an average 55 per cent to a minimum of 70 per cent by 2015. The overall 70 per cent diversion target is itself made up of sectoral targets: • Multi-family 30% (from the 2010 level of 15%) • Single-family 65% • IC&I 70% • Demolition, land clearing and construction 80%
12 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014
08-14 swr feb-mar 2014 cvr sty pg 08-14.indd 12
14-02-13 3:47 PM
COVER STORY
“Metro Vancouver warns that shipping waste outside the region for incineration or landfilling could increase costs by $1.5 billion over 35 years, or $43 million annually.” Metro plans to use the Vancouver Landfill to absorb residual waste flows in excess of 780,000 tonnes per year, and to take-in residuals from the waste-to-energy plants if residuals are below this level. Regarding costs, the ISWRP states that, “Within Metro Vancouver, net expenditures associated with solid waste disposal are currently estimated to be $360 million annually. This reflects the cost for collection, transportation, and disposal of solid waste remaining after recycling. Following implementation of actions within this Plan, regional solid waste disposal net expenditures are projected to decrease by 39 per cent to $220 million annually — a decrease of $140 million each year. This decrease is due to the reduction in waste quantities, and increased revenues from energy recovery...” The authors of the report include a warning against shipping Metro Vancouver’s residual waste outside the region for either incineration or landfilling, both of which they state will increase net costs “by $1.5 billion over 35 years, or $43 million annually.” (See Table 1.) They estimate one-time capital cost of the waste-to-energy facilities will be $440 million with annual operating costs under the financing and
ownership structure “$15 million lower than current costs.” Tip fees will rise over the 15 year amortization period and, when the debt is retired, energy revenues and no debt repayment costs will result in net revenues over a 30-year operating period. The authors compare this favorably over the 30-year period to “a $3.1 billion expenditure for an option emphasizing mechanical biological-treatment processing or a $1.5 billion expenditure for an option emphasizing landfilling. The ISWRP pans the idea of the private sector building waste-toenergy facilities, stating that the cost of Metro’s goals could take longer to recover, with the warning that “regional tipping fees could increase gradually over time due to inflated contract costs.”
MWMRFS Private companies say the problem with Bylaw 280 and the direction of material to waste-to-energy facilities is not just that it takes material away from landfill operators: it discourages private sector investment in mixed waste material recovery facilities (MWMRFs) that companies like Belkorp and Northwest Waste Solutions wish to build, that would
TABLE 1 REGIONAL WASTE MANAGEMENT — NET EXPENDITURES
Source: Metro Vancouver waste plan documents.
February/March 2014 www.solidwastemag.com 13
08-14 swr feb-mar 2014 cvr sty pg 08-14.indd 13
14-02-13 3:47 PM
COVER STORY
use advanced sortation equipment and robotics to recycle material from the IC&I and multi-residential sectors. (Achieving high diversion rates in apartments and multiplexes is notoriously difficult.) Via its subsidiary Wastech, Belkorp handles 210,000 tonnes of waste under contract with Metro Vancouver at its Cache Creek landfill, and also operates waste transfer stations for each of North Vancouver, Coquitlam, Surrey and Matsqui. The $35-million contract expires in 2016 and Belkorp wants to move into the material recovery business; it’s considering con-
structing up to three MWMRFs at a cost of up to $100 million. While Metro Vancouver says it would support private sector MWMRFs, the company is concerned that Metro Vancouver’s flow control prevents it from making an adequate return. The company points to a stipulation in Bylaw 280 that requires trucks delivering waste to such facilities contain no more than five per cent of prohibited recyclable materials such as metals, plastic, paper and paperboard. With all the valuables removed, the business proposition for MWMRFs is killed. The Recycle First Coalition opposes MWMRFs and favors the kind of plants its members have built that manage source-separated recyclables (more typically generated by single-family homes). Their members have invested $135 million in recycling infrastructure over the past five years. Northwest Waste Solutions, meanwhile, spent half of a planned $30 million on a building to house a MWMRF in southeast Vancouver that sits empty because Metro Vancouver has refused to license it. The company believes the facility could divert up to 80 per cent of IC&I and multi-rez waste and be profitable with a tip fee of about $100 a tonne, but thinks Metro Vancouver is stifling innovation and withholding the license because the plant would divert material away from its planned incinerator. The company says that if the environment ministry approves Bylaw 280, it may be sent for judicial review. Metro Vancouver’s tip fee Galaxy2R ® of $107 per tonne is expected to rise to $157 by 2017 to pay for the operating and capital costs of the new waste-to-energy facility, and also from a reduction in waste volumes. Marathon leads where other manufacturers follow. Marathon Metro Vancouver has announced four poGalaxy2R® models 2R250N, 2R310W, and 2R450W have an tential sites — in Port Mellon, Delta, Nanaimo externally adjustable shear blade to enable easy maintenance for increased longevity and a tongue-and-groove floor for added and Vancouver — as well as technologies for durability as standard features. An optional fully automatic up to five waste-to-energy plants in or outside stamper is available to assist in clearing jams. the region. Officials are also to select one or Marathon Galaxy2R balers and ATLAS balers enable baling of more sites for option from among six private your recyclable paper and plastic plus they’re also ideal for baling contenders in February. select non-ferrous scrap. In April, Metro Vancouver will start to hear Marathon has a baler right for you. from the public once agreements are signed Call us today at 1‑800‑633‑8974! and a consultation process is launched, and For more information, visit www.marathonequipment.com a provincially-mandated consultation begins to find the authorized Marathon Representative nearest you. with the Fraser Valley Regional District that opposes waste incineration at all costs. Local opposition may pose as big a challenge for Metro Vancouver’s plans as private sector complaints over monopoly and flow control. It will be interesting to watch how this all plays out in the months and years ahead.
Excellence is built in before recyclables come out.
Atlas Baler
Marathon’s full-featured balers come with many options, but innovative design and sturdy construction are standard with all.
Guy Crittenden is editor of this magazine. Contact Guy at gcrittenden@solidwastemag.com
© 2014 Marathon Equipment Company. All rights reserved.
14 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014 2619_1312_ESG_MarathonBalerAd_Half_FA.indd 1
08-14 swr feb-mar 2014 cvr sty pg 08-14.indd 14
1/20/14 4:23 PM
14-02-13 3:47 PM
DIVERSION
Progress in Multi-Residential Recycling
W
hen people think of Canada, they often reflect upon the wide open expanses of our prairies and northern wilderness. The reality, of course, is that Canada’s population is strung out like a thin ribbon along the coastline and southern border. As the population grows and service delivery costs to remote communities increase, population intensification will be an escalating issue in localities like the Greater Toronto Area or GTA. In fact, almost a quarter of Ontario’s entire population and half of Toronto already resides in multi-residential housing. That reality presents a serious and growing challenge for Blue Box program operators. While curbside collection has its challenges, multires recycling faces its own unique issues like low recovery, high contamination, multi-lingual environments, high turnover of residents, absentee landlords and building design barriers, just to name a few. (See Cover Story, page 8, to see how Metro Vancouver faces the same challenges.) In 2009, the CIF established an initiative under the leadership of Anne Boyd, on secondment from the City of London, to address the issue of cost-effective diversion from the multi-res sector. After reviewing programs in operation at the time, including projects done under the CIF’s predecessor — the Effectiveness & Efficiency (E&E) Fund — and talking to members of the Municipal Waste Association Multi Res Committee, Boyd identified four primary best practices common to successful multi res diversion programs including:
by Mike Birett “Through the 39 CIF funded projects, participants added nearly 10,000 cubic metres of recycling container capacity.”
• Maintain a database of multi res properties; • Measure and monitor multi rez performance; • Provide adequate recycling container capacity; and • Develop a promotion and education program specific to MR recycling. With these practices in mind, Boyd developed a program for the CIF to assist interested municipalities with the implementation of the identified best practices. The program focused on implementation of a series of eight practical, timesaving tools to assist municipalities in program optimization. The CIF provided approximately $2.8 million to assist with development of the toolkit, project support and to fund 33 municipalities to implement the proposed best practices. The participating municipalities contributed an additional $2.7 million to the project. February/March 2014 www.solidwastemag.com 15
15-16,41 swr feb-mar 2014 diversion p 15-16,41.indd 15
14-02-13 11:44 AM
DIVERSION
In addition to the individual municipal projects, the CIF funded several projects to advance our collective knowledge on best practice implementation in this sector. From one of these projects a fifth best practice was identified: “develop a site plan approval process that requires optimal recycling in new building constructions.� To assist municipalities in implementing this best practice, the CIF developed a set of guidelines for building standards for new multi-family structures. The building standards have been formally recommended for inclusion as part of the Ontario Building Code and as part of the LEEDs certification program. Many municipalities have adopted the standards into their local legislation as either a by-law or as a regulation.
Results In the spring of 2013, CIF staff completed a review of reports from those municipalities that had completed their projects and organized a series of roundtable webinars with staff from 22 participating municipalities to discuss results to date, key project learnings, and future support needs. At the time of the round tables, 15 of the CIF funded projects were complete. While only a third of the projects are complete, the results are nonetheless informative. All the webinar participants acknowledged that use of a database improved operational control of their programs
Residential blue bins.
Walinga VC2336
6/11/07
2:36 PM
N O W
... continues on page 41
Page 1
O N L I N E !
Recycler
www.walinga.com R e c y c l i n g a n d re n d e r i n g a ro u n d t h e w o r l d !
Head office: R.R. #5 Guelph ON Canada N1H 6J2 Tel (519) 824-8520 Fax (519) 824-5651
70 3rd Ave. N.E. Box 1790 Carman, Manitoba Canada R0G 0J0 Tel (204) 745-2951 Fax (204) 745-6309
6960 Hammond Ave. S.E. Caledonia, MI. USA 49316 Tel (800) 466-1197 Fax (616) 656-9550
16 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014
15-16,41 swr feb-mar 2014 diversion p 15-16,41.indd 16
14-02-13 11:44 AM
A Special Pull-Out Supplement to Solid Waste & Recycling magazine
NATURAL GAS VEHICLES For the Waste & Recycling Industry
COST SAVINGS AND GREATER SUSTAINABILITY DRIVING INDUSTRY DEMAND! Sponsored by the Canadian Natural Gas Vehicle Alliance
17-18 swr feb-mar 2014 cng cvr pg 17-18.indd 17
14-02-13 3:47 PM
NOTHING WASTED Save money while helping the planet. Now that’s an opportunity you can’t afford to waste.
Discover how to start saving on fleet fueling with natural gas today. www.cleanenergyfuels.com
Canada Contact: (604) 838-9538 ijohnstone@cleanenergyfuels.com
17-18 swr feb-mar 2014 cng cvr pg 17-18.indd 18
14-02-25 9:32 AM
SPECIAL PULL-OUT SUPPLEMENT CONTENTS
NATURAL GAS VEHICLES FOR THE WASTE & RECYCLING INDUSTRY EDITORIAL: TRUCKS Issues around factory-built natural gas vehicles.
20
by Alicia Milner
COVER STORY: PAYBACK Our editor looks at the technologies, trends and payback times. by Guy Crittenden
MUNICIPAL CASE STUDY: BLUEWATER Bluewater Recycling Association’s switch to natural gas vehicles.
21 28
PRIVATE SECTOR CASE STUDY: NORFOLK The switch to natural gas vehicles by a small waste collection company. by Chris Thomas
31
WASTE BUSINESS: NATURAL GAS Technology of natural gas from biogas plants and landfills, etc. by John Nicholson
35
ENGINES: CUMMINS WESTPORT Anatomy of the industry-leading natural gas engine.
by Guy Crittenden
38
Sponsored by the Canadian Natural Gas Vehicle Alliance February/March 2014 www.solidwastemag.com 19
19 swr feb-mar 2014 conts p 19.indd 19
14-02-13 11:45 AM
C N G VA E D I T O R I A L
by Alicia Milner “Transport Canada has jurisdiction over the safety compliance for new vehicles sold in Canada.”
Factory-Built Natural Gas Trucks For the waste and recycling industry
A waste collection vehicle fitted with a compressed natural gas engine.
A
ll major truck manufacturers offer factory-built chassis for waste and recycling applications, available through their dealer networks. The engines used in natural gas waste trucks are supplied by Cummins Westport. (See article, page 38.) Two natural gas engines for waste and recycling applications are available from Cummins Westport. The 8.9 litre ISL G engine has ratings of 300-320 horsepower, 860-1,000 lb/ft torque; the ISX 12 G ISX12 G has ratings of 320-350 horsepower and 1150-1450 lb/ft torque. Both engines have performance and warranty coverage similar to diesel engines. Factory-built refuse trucks — whether diesel or natural gas — are brought to market through a process that involves multiple suppliers. The truck manufacturer integrates the engine into the chassis which is then shipped to a body manufacturer. The natural gas fuel system may be installed at the factory by the truck manufacturer or it may be installed by the body manufacturer (or another third party). The fuel system can be designed for either compressed natural gas (CNG) or liquefied natural gas (LNG). Transport Canada has jurisdiction over the safety compliance for new vehicles sold in Canada. For vehicles like waste trucks that are manufactured in stages involving different parties, there’s a clearly defined process for complying with Transport Canada’s safety requirements through the National Safety Mark (NSM) process. Any supplier that alters a vehicle prior to first sale must hold the NSM for that specific alteration, in order to be in compliance.
So, for example, a body manufacturer who holds the NSM for refuse body installations and who adds CNG fuel system installations to their services must apply to Transport Canada for an NSM specifically for the natural gas fuel system installation. Fleet owners interested in purchasing natural gas trucks should ask their dealers to confirm that — if a party other than the truck manufacturer is installing the natural gas fuel system — the party holds the NSM for the fuel system installation. For a copy of the NSM Guideline or for more information, please contact the author or Don Moore (don.moore@atminc.on.ca) at the Canadian Transportation Equipment Association. Also, three new hubs are in operation across Canada to provide ready access to information about natural gas vehicles as an affordable, lower emission option for fleets. The information hubs offer fleet workshops as well as respond to fleet inquiries via a toll-free national phone line (1844-242-8485). A series of fleet workshops was held across Canada in February 2014. More workshop dates will be announced in the Spring of 2014. For more information, please go to gowithnaturalgas.ca/regional-hubs or call 1-844-242-8485. Alicia Milner is President of the Canadian Natural Gas Vehicle Alliance (CNGVA) in Ottawa, Ontario. Contact Alicia at alicia.milner@cngva.org
20 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014
20 swr feb-mar 2014 cngva editl p 20.indd 20
14-02-13 11:45 AM
N AT U R A L G A S V E H I C L E S U P P L E M E N T
Payback! Attractive return on investment from switching to natural gas vehicles in the waste and recycling industry
Emterra truck fleet at fuelling station. Photo courtesy of Clean Energy Fuels.
February/March 2014 www.solidwastemag.com 21
21-27 swr feb-mar 2014 cng cvr sty p 21-27.indd 21
14-02-13 3:48 PM
N AT U R A L G A S V E H I C L E S U P P L E M E N T
A
bout 40 per cent of all new waste and recycling trucks purchased last year in Canada and the United States operate on compressed natural gas (CNG). According to a recently-released white paper from researchers at WIH Resource Group, Inc., approximately 175,000 waste and recycling trucks operate in the United States. For every litre of diesel fuel these vehicles burn, 10 kilograms of carbon dioxide is emitted. That’s 4.5 billion litres of diesel releasing 12.2 billion kilograms of CO2. These emissions are a potent local source of urban air pollution. Natural gas reduces fuel consumption and emissions dramatically. There are fewer CNG trucks in Canada than in the United States, but many fleets have followed the trend and are upgrading to CNG systems. Examples include Progressive Waste in Coquitlam, BC, Barrie, Ontario and Laval Quebec; Emterra Waste in Chilliwack, BC and Winnipeg, Manitoba; and, Bluewater Recycling Association in Huron Park, Ontario. Switching waste and recycling trucks from diesel to natural gas is a priority for many Canadian municipalities as well as private waste haulers. In addition to improved environmental performance, the price of natural gas is up to sixty cents less per diesel litre equivalent than
by Guy Crittenden “Locations that replace 15 to 25 per cent of their fleet in the first year can quickly expect positive cash flow.”
diesel; in this instance, doing the right thing environmentally costs less, not more. And prices tend to be more stable as the gas is produced in North America. Trucks using compressed natural gas cost between $15,000 and $35,000 more than conventional diesel trucks, according to WIH Resource Group, primarily due to the higher cost of the fuel cylinders. But as the CNG trucks gain in popularity the relative costs are declining. And their higher costs are more than offset by fuel savings. Simply put, the greater the desired truck range the greater the investment in fuel cylinders, which can be mounted behind the cab, on the roof of the body, or affixed to the chassis rails.
Small compressor station solution from Clean Energy Fuels. The company says it’s key to have everything in one box versus having the dryer, compressors and buffer storage tanks in a large yard.
22 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014
21-27 swr feb-mar 2014 cng cvr sty p 21-27.indd 22
14-02-13 3:48 PM
N AT U R A L G A S V E H I C L E S U P P L E M E N T
Trucks being fuelled with natural gas. Photo courtesy of Change Energy Services, a supplier of compressed gas fuelling solutions. The company offers everything from code compliance review to full design and project management.
www.CRAworld.com
Proudly Serving Clients Since 1976 g Biogas Collection and Utilization
g Greenhouse Gas Assurance Services
g Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) Fueling Stations
g Municipal Infrastructure and Planning
g Construction Management
g Regulatory Compliance/Permitting/ Auditing
g Engineering Design
g Risk Assessment
g Environmental Assessments/Remediation
g Solid/Hazardous Waste Facility Design
info@CRAworld.com 3,000 Staff in 100+ Offices
WORLDWIDE
ENGINEERING,
ENVIRONMENTAL,
CONSTRUCTION,
AND
IT
SERVICES
February/March 2014 www.solidwastemag.com 23
21-27 swr feb-mar 2014 cng cvr sty p 21-27.indd 23
14-02-13 3:48 PM
N AT U R A L G A S V E H I C L E S U P P L E M E N T
Fuelling equipment installation from ANGI Energy Systems.
Congratulations! Compressed Natural Gas & Infrastructure Consultants Marathon is North America’s leading CNG consulting firm dedicated to providing technical and financial analysis and support services for CNG infrastructure projects. Marathon has extensive experience in the design of CNG fueling stations and garage modifications for the refuse market.
On Converting to NGV
Marathon is pleased to offer the following CNG specialized consulting:
Change Energy Services would like to congratulate Bluewater Recycling, Green for Life and Norfolk Waste Disposal on their conversions to NGV in 2013. It was a pleasure to work with you on these projects.
• • • • • •
Feasibility Analysis Concept and Detailed Design Support for CNG Stations Maintenance and Storage Garage Upgrade Analysis for CNG Vehicles Bid, Construction and Commissioning Period Support CNG Station Technology, Design and Operations Training Programs Operational Support
Let Marathon be your CNG expert!
www.changeenergy.ca
Marathon Corporation Contact: radams@marathontech.ca
www.marathontech.ca 24 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014
21-27 swr feb-mar 2014 cng cvr sty p 21-27.indd 24
14-02-13 3:48 PM
N AT U R A L G A S V E H I C L E S U P P L E M E N T
REAL-WORLD EXAMPLES
M
arie-Genevieve Poitras, Canadian Sales Manager for ANGI Energy Systems, delivered a presentation on payback for natural gas conversion at the CNGVA Refuse Workshop in October, 2013. Typical vehicle upcharges, Poitras says, for CNG engine and fuel systems are about $32,000 for 228-litre fuel capacity, $38,000 for 266 litre- and $45,000 for 342 litre fuel capacity in a natural gas truck. But once natural gas trucks are in service, owners start to save money. (It’s important to note that American operators enjoy an excise tax credit under the US Energy Policy Act that makes CNG an even better bargain in that country. When looking at US examples, it’s important for Canadians to stick with conservative estimates as they aren’t entitled to the US excise tax credit. But the savings are still there.) In her presentation, Poitras gave the example of Randy’s Sanitation in Minnesota. That firm’s return on investment was 48 months for a system that included 15 trucks. The million dollar investment was made up of $550,000 for the station and $450,000 for truck incremental costs (15 CNG fuel systems). With fuel savings of 65 cents per litre, in year one five trucks (using 190,000 litres) will save $125,000. In year two, with another five trucks replaced, fuel savings will total about $237,000 on 361,000 litres of fuel. In year three, when the last five trucks are replaced, $325,000 will be saved on 494,000 litres of fuel, and the savings will carry on forward. Over 10 years Randy’s Sanitation will save a net $1,962,500. The story is similar for Advanced Disposal in Indiana, whose ROI for natural gas trucks will take 49 months. In Advanced’s case, the station investment of $1.4 million and truck incremental investment (for 50 trucks) is $1.5 million (for a total of $2.9 million). The company expects savings of 59 cents per litre. In the first year, 20 trucks will be replaced for a savings of $450,000 on 760,000 litres of fuel. Over the next four years the company will replace seven or eight more trucks each year. By year five this will generate savings of $1.12 million. Over 10 years the firm will enjoy a net savings of $6,662,500. Kimble Refuse of Ohio has a similar story to tell. Kimble plans to replace 45 trucks in the first year, and 15 more in the second year of its program. Savings on fuel will return $1.34 million in the first year, which grows to $1.78 million in year two. Over 10 years Kimble will save an astounding $14,127,000.
INFRASTRUCTURE ANGI Energy Systems of Janesville, Wisconsin (angienergy.com) is a leader in energy efficiency and has participated in more than 35 waste industry projects in North America over the past two years. According to Marie-Genevieve Poitras, Canadian Sales Manager for ANGI Energy Systems, the payback time is appealing for natural gas vehicles. “CNG fuel costs to operators are typically 40 to 50 per cent less than diesel after factoring in all incremental vehicle and CNG station infrastructure costs,” Poitras says. “Payback on investment is highly dependent on fuel usage per vehicle and the fleet replacement schedule”. “Locations that replace 15 to 25 per cent of their fleet in the first year can quickly expect positive cash flow.” And economies of scale help with natural gas installations “In cases where a hauler is replacing an entire fleet for a new hauling contract,” Poitras says, “they can expect to get a full return on incremental investment in less than three years”. Many waste and recycling fleets are aware they need to move to CNG-powered fleets to remain competitive. Clean Energy Fuels (cleanenergyfuels.com) and its Canadian Subsidiary, IMW Industries (imw.ca) are market leaders in Canada, North America and worldwide and have participated in hundreds of waste industry projects over the past three decades. According to Iain Johnstone, Canadian Senior Business Development Manager, “It’s critical that waste and recycling companies look to full
service CNG station system suppliers who can not only provide great CNG station equipment but ongoing maintenance for the stations as well. “Too many waste and recycling companies recognize that full preventative maintenance is required for their fleet, while not recognizing that the same is required for their CNG station equipment.” Johnstone says serious performance and safety issues can arise from purchasing CNG station equipment without the maintenance resources of a company that can remotely monitor this equipment and ensure trained people are available for preventative and emergency service 24/7. According to a presentation Poitras delivered at the CNGVA Refuse Workshop in October, 2013, typical station budgets range from about $600,000 for 15 trucks to $1.3 million for 50 trucks, and up to $1.8 million for 100 trucks, dependent upon site conditions. Doubling the price tag delivers far more than double the number of trucks serviced. Both Johnstone and Poitras also mention that CNG vehicle maintenance facilities need to meet different standards than diesel vehicle maintenance facilities, and the cost of necessary modifications or equipment must also be factored into budgets. Costs usually range from about $70,000 for a two-bay shop to upwards of $175,000 for larger shops. Clean Energy and IMW Industries are able to provide comprehensive reports on what is needed to bring existing or new facilities up to CNG maintenance facility code, as well as perform the required work. February/March 2014 www.solidwastemag.com 25
21-27 swr feb-mar 2014 cng cvr sty p 21-27.indd 25
14-02-13 3:48 PM
N AT U R A L G A S V E H I C L E S U P P L E M E N T
TRUCK PROCUREMENT AND FUEL COST Change only cells highlighted in Yellow i.e. # of trucks added annually, $/liter, & # liters consumed annually
Truck Procurement
No. of Trucks
Cost Per Diesel Truck
Cost Per Truck Initial Truck Purchase 15 Next Truck Purchase 15 Next Truck Purchase 15 Next Truck Purchase 15 Total Trucks 60
Fuel Costs (Flat Line)
Est. Fuel Cost Per Liter Est. Liters consumed per truck per year Annual Fuel Cost Per Truck Year 1 15 Year 2 30 Year 3 45 Year 4 60 Year 5 60 Year 6 60 Year 7 60 Year 8 60 Year 9 60 Year 10 60 10 Year Total Fuel Total Truck Cost 10 Year Truck Purchase & Fuel Average Savings Per Truck
Cost Per CNG Truck
CNG Savings Vs. Diesel
$250,000 $3,750,000 $3,750,000 $3,750,000 $3,750,000 $15,000,000
$285,000 $4,275,000 $4,275,000 $4,275,000 $4,275,000 $17,100,000
$(35,000) $(525,000) $(525,000) $(525,000) $(525,000) $(2,100,000)
Diesel
CNG
$1.20 35,000 $42,000 $630,000 $1,260,000 $1,890,000 $2,520,000 $2,520,000 $2,520,000 $2,520,000 $2,520,000 $2,520,000 $2,520,000 $21,420,000 $15,000,000 $36,420,000
$0.60 38,500 $23,100 $346,500 $693,000 $1,039,500 $1,386,000 $1,386,000 $1,386,000 $1,386,000 $1,386,000 $1,386,000 $1,386,000 $11,781,000 $17,100,000 $28,881,000
$— $18,900 $283,500 $567,000 $850,500 $1,134,000 $1,134,000 $1,134,000 $1,134,000 $1,134,000 $1,134,000 $1,134,000 $9,639,000 $(2,100,000) $7,539,000 $125,650.00 Source: Clean Energy Fuels
They have provided these services to multiple Canadian public and private waste and recycling companies.
SAVINGS AND PERFORMANCE Once natural gas trucks are in service, owners start to save money. For example, a Canadian waste and recycling company that purchases fifteen CNG powered trucks each year over four years (or a total fleet of sixty trucks) pays a $35,000 premium for each CNG powered truck over the equivalent diesel-powered truck. According to Johnstone, it burns 35,000 diesel litre equivalent of fuel per year. Based on a diesel cost of $1.20 and CNG diesel litre equivalent cost of 60 cents, fleet owners should expect savings of $125,000 per truck or $7.5 million for the fleet over a ten-year period. (See above chart.) That’s a pretty good return for doing something that benefits the environment and makes a public or private waste company more attractive to customers.
PERFORMANCE But what about performance? TruStar Energy of Rochester, Minnesota has built over 50 CNG stations for the waste and recycling industry in North America since 2010. According to TruStar’s Scott Edelbach, environmental performance can be boosted and fuel costs reduced, without loss of performance. “CNG trucks perform as well as diesel trucks in 90 per cent of applications,” Edelbach says, “with the Cummins CNG engine.” With the Cummins Westport ISL G 8.9 natural gas engine there are
no issues with diesel particulate traps and no need for DEF because the engines only have three way catalyst after treatment. “Maintenance costs are comparable with the Cummins 8.9 diesel equivalent and drivers really like the quieter engines,” Edelbach says. Gas utilities such as FortisBC, ATCO Gas, SaskEnergy, Manitoba Hydro, Union Gas, Enbridge Gas and Gaz Metro are also excited to add this new natural gas load as it will benefit existing customers and their public or private sector shareholders. So, with excellent performance, lower fuel costs and attractive payback the Canadian waste and recycling industry can be expected to adopt natural gas vehicles at an accelerated rate in the next few years. Guy Crittenden is editor of this magazine. Contact Guy at gcrittenden@solidwastemag.com
WIH Resource Group, Inc.’s 65-plus page industry white paper Alternative Fuel Use in Refuse Collection Fleets is available for download for $299 at http://wihrg.com/wihs_online_store Purchasers will also get a 14-page supplemental updatefree of charge.
26 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014
21-27 swr feb-mar 2014 cng cvr sty p 21-27.indd 26
14-02-13 3:48 PM
COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS
FLEET SOLUTIONS
If your fleet isn’t using natural gas, you’re wasting a precious resource. Your money. Natural gas is the only fuel that has actually dropped in price over the past decade. And that means if you’re using anything else, you’re throwing good money away. With annual at-the-pump savings of up to 50 per cent, now is the perfect time to convert to Compressed Natural Gas (CNG).
As the appetite for low-cost, low-emission alternatives to diesel and gasoline continues to grow, so do the advantages of switching to a fuel that reduces costs, burns cleaner and helps you win and retain customers. For more information, please send an email to ngtransport@uniongas.com.
A member of our dedicated CNG team will meet with you and answer your questions. If you’d like, Union Gas will provide a FREE, first-cut assessment of natural gas as a fuel for your fleet.
© Union Gas Limited 02/2014 UG20130143
21-27 swr feb-mar 2014 cng cvr sty p 21-27.indd 27
FILE NAME: UGLC-0012 -4C-1
TRIM: 8.375” x 11.125
14-02-13 3:48 PM
N AT U R A L G A S V E H I C L E S U P P L E M E N T
Francis Veilleux, President of Bluewater Recycling Association, says that changing the fleet over to natural gas is a no-brainer in the long run, for both economic and environmental reasons.
Blue Water, Green Fuel Reasons behind Bluewater’s launch of CNG waste and recycling trucks
T
he Bluewater Recycling Association’s President Francis Veilleux has just taken delivery of his first four natural gas powered trucks and is already anticipating some concerned phone calls. The new technology is so quiet that customers, waiting for that familiar rumbling noise before taking out their waste, might miss the pickup. The calls, if they come, will be a good opportunity to point out that the noise from compressed natural gas (CNG) trucks is less than their diesel counterparts by over ten decibels. But quiet operation is just one of the many pluses that led Bluewater to take a hard look at the business case for natural gas vehicles. Bluewater is a cooperative association that operates waste and blue box collection on behalf of 23 municipalities spread over four counties in Southwestern Ontario. Its fleet of 42 vehicles provides automated cocollection of waste and recycle bins, serving close to 185,000 people in 85,000 homes and businesses. It’s a largely rural operation with over 7,000 kms of roads to cover, with customers as close as five minutes away and as far as 90 minutes. In this challenging business Bluewater is constantly looking for ways to improve service and push efficiencies.
New technology Ten years ago Bluewater started looking for more efficient and cleaner alternatives to conventional diesel for fueling its trucks. They were part
by Fern Miller “Natural gas vehicles cut fuel costs for fleets with stop-start operations.”
of a North American group exploring hybrid technologies — diesel combined with hydraulic or electric assist — but the efficiency gains of these options did not compensate for their added costs. CNG offered a cleaner burning option and that’s why Bluewater looked very seriously at converting the collection fleet to natural gas in 2007. But as Veilleux puts it, “We couldn’t make the numbers work. At that time diesel was less expensive than today while natural gas technologies were costly.” What changed? Over the past decade new natural gas discoveries have resulted in plentiful supply and historically low prices while the price of diesel has gone up significantly. The equivalent of a litre of diesel in natural gas now costs roughly half as much as that diesel litre. During this same period, diesel equipment became more costly and complex as it was faced with meeting increasingly stringent environ-
28 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014
28-30 swr feb-mar 2014 cng municipal p 28-30.indd 28
14-02-13 11:47 AM
N AT U R A L G A S V E H I C L E S U P P L E M E N T
mental regulations. The changes introduced to reduce emissions have also reduced diesel fuel efficiency. “Ten to fifteen years ago one of our diesel trucks would use an average of 15 litres per vehicle hour of operation,” Veilleux notes. “Now it’s 20 litres, and the fuel costs twice as much.” Natural gas vehicles have come a long way in the last decade. Today there is a wide variety of dedicated heavy-duty vehicles on the market, fully tested with factory installed CNG systems and offering dieselcomparable power and torque. Veilleux considers the new generation of natural gas technologies more reliable than today’s diesel offerings. Cleaner burning natural gas also makes for lower maintenance costs with less frequent filter replacements, oil changes and tune-ups. This adds to the savings achieved through lower fuel costs.
Cost/benefit analysis It’s commonly thought that only very high-mileage businesses realize economic benefits from switching to natural gas fuel. As a rural operation Bluewater logs a fair amount of kilometers per truck. But for a stop-start service it is really “total hours of operation” that make the business case.
As Veilleux says, “At around 40,000 kilometers per year, our trucks don’t compare in mileage to a highway tractor that can log up to 400,000 kilometers. “Regardless, our trucks run 10 hours a day and burn fuel when they are idling and lifting the bins whether they are going anywhere or not.” Veilleux’s team conducted a robust business analysis prior to making the move to natural gas. This included assessment of the risks associated with a commodity price rise and/or new tax on natural gas fuels. The CNG truck option passed with flying colors. Like all environmental service businesses, Bluewater wants to keep its own eco-impact low. That’s why its especially pleased with the environmental dividends that CNG offers. Natural gas burns cleaner than diesel, delivering 20 to 30 per cent less greenhouse gas emissions. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are also lower. Best of all, particulate emissions are near zero. This means that CNG trucks meet government environmental targets without expensive and finicky emissions control technologies. Quiet operation makes CNG vehicles ideal for municipal operations. “Reducing noise is very important in our business, Veilleux says. “When we collect early in the morning or late at night we don’t want to disturb people.”
Natural gas. Good for driving innovation. From tractor-trailers and delivery trucks to transit and waste haulers, FortisBC works with local fleet operators to put natural gas-fuelled vehicles on B.C. roads. Saving operators up to 50 per cent* in fuel costs, natural gas also helps to improve air quality. For financial incentives, visit fortisbc.com/ngt or email ngt@fortisbc.com. *Based on comparison of fuel costs of diesel and FortisBC Rate 6 (fuelling station) from 2000 to 2011. FortisBC uses the FortisBC name and logo under license from Fortis Inc. (14-041.1 01/2014)
February/March 2014 www.solidwastemag.com 29
28-30 swr feb-mar 2014 cng municipal p 28-30.indd 29
14-02-13 11:47 AM
N AT U R A L G A S V E H I C L E S U P P L E M E N T
Although Bluewater had already introduced an automated system of dual waste and recycling collection, Veilleux notes that this was not a factor in the decision to go with natural gas. For him natural gas fueling is a “long-term no brainer independent of the system of collection.” The trucks simply offer better economics with valuable environmental benefits. The CNG trucks delivered in 2014 all feature 320 hp engines and provide automated collection capability. They include three side loaders from Labrie Environmental Group for pickup of residential “wheelie bins” and one front-end loader from McNeilus to service commercial front-end bins. New CNG vehicles will be added at the rate of four per year as older diesel vehicles are retired. In seven years most waste and recycle collection will be handled using these natural gas trucks. A small contingent of diesel trucks will be kept to cover some extra long runs.
Refueling Once it made the decision to phase in CNG, the biggest challenge for Bluewater was refueling. All of the collection trucks are return-to-base vehicles, dispatched from and coming back to a central facility at Huron
Park. There are no commercial CNG fueling stations in the service area, making on-site refueling essential. Bluewater considered leasing a station or starting small with a modular refueling unit that could be scaled up as their CNG fleet grew. But it decided that in the long run it would be less expensive if they added full refueling capacity up front. Bluewater opted for a two-compressor CNG fueling station for overnight fill-up at the home base. This system can easily service up to 30 trucks. And fast-fill capability can be added in the future if it is needed. Union Gas facilitated Bluewater’s on-site fueling option by installing a separate line to supply natural gas in the volumes the fleet will require. The station was expected to be completed by early 2014 but, because of heavy snow this winter, the installation has been set back to spring. In the meantime, the first four CNG-powered trucks will be fueled at a portable station rented to cover the gap. That means no delay in getting them on the job and no waiting to capitalize on the economic and green benefits of natural gas. Fern Miller is a freelance writer based in Toronto, Ontario who wrote this article in collaboration with the Union Gas natural gas vehicle team. For more information contact ngtransport@uniongas.com
Celebrating 50 Years SOLID WASTE TRANSFER
Fuelling the Future Today
More affordable and cleaner burning than diesel or gasoline, natural gas goes beyond your bottom line to benefit your entire business.
Shredding Services Mobile or OnSite Accepting E-Waste
1-800-616-0347
•
Low cost, stable price
•
Quick cost recovery on conversions
•
Flexible refuelling options (on-site or off-site)
•
Up to 25% fewer CO2 equivalent emissions
For converting from traditional fuels to natural gas, contact SaskEnergy Business Development at 306.777.9018.
www.norfolkdisposal.ca
Waterford, Ontario
30 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014 NORFOLK AD.indd 1
28-30 swr feb-mar 2014 cng municipal p 28-30.indd 30
13-10-21 9:16 AM
14-02-13 11:47 AM
N AT U R A L G A S V E H I C L E S U P P L E M E N T
by Chris Thomas “Waste and recycling fleets are ideal for natural gas because of their return-to-base daily operations.”
Norfolk Disposal Chooses Natural Gas Profile of a small private collector’s decision to go with CNG
D
iesel has been the fuel of choice since Norfolk Disposal first got into the waste management business more than 50 years ago. Now operating a fleet of 48 refuse trucks over a four-county area in Southern Ontario, general manager Bernie Debono began to look at natural gas as an alternate fuel in the fall of 2012 as a way to reduce fuel costs. Debono said his father Louis, who founded the business, had previously experimented with alternative fuel when he converted some of the Norfolk’s trucks to propane in the late 1970s. “He’s aware of what we’re trying to achieve,” Debono says. “The concept (of alternate fuels) was always there.” Recognizing that changing fuel source is a “big step,” Debono undertook an extensive investigation of the process of conversion and cost benefits. “The learning curve was pretty steep,” he says. “There were lots of considerations.” His first step was to contact Murray Smith, business manager of strategic markets for Union Gas. “Murray was my go-to guy for this development,” Debono acknowledges. Smith says Union Gas got out of the natural gas-fueled vehicle market in 2000, but re-evaluated it three or four years ago when prices began to fall (with the explosion of shale gas extraction technology and the
decoupling of oil and natural gas pricing). The company now supports the market and is active in “getting the message out.” “It’s surprising how many people are now looking at natural gas for fuel,” he says. Natural gas vehicles are definitely trending upwards, particularly in the waste management sector. For example, Waste Management has more than 2,000 heavy-duty natural gas powered trucks operating in North America today. Other companies have made a similar commitment to natural gas. In 2013, a significant percentage of new waste and recycling trucks ordered will use natural gas. Currently, 350 such trucks use compressed natural gas (CNG) in Canada. Smith says recent vehicle technology changes have resulted in better fuel efficiency and increased mileage, which helps make an economic case for fleet conversion. But the biggest upfront cost is a filling station. Natural gas (from utility line pressures of 10, 20 and up to 100 psi) are compressed to the 3,600 psi required to power the vehicles. “The barrier to cost recovery is the price of a fuelling station,” Smith says. “You need 25 to 30 vehicles to justify the cost.” Norfolk Disposal’s operation fits the bill. Three months ago, Debono purchased a CNG powered vehicle to help determine the feasibility of conversion of his business. He found February/March 2014 www.solidwastemag.com 31
31-34 swr feb-mar 2014 cng private sector p 31-34.indd 31
14-02-13 3:48 PM
“Debono is in the process of retrofitting his maintenance facility to be licensed as a natural gas vehicle service centre to accommodate the filling station, including a special area for truck refueling.”
DRIVE CLEAN NEW NATURAL GAS
PUBLIC STATIONS MONTREAL AND BERTHIERVILLE
CARBON DIOXYDE (CO²) REDUCE UP TO
FUEL SOURCING COSTS REDUCE UP TO
90 % 50 %
that CNG did not limit his current routes and there were “definite savings” in the cost of fuel. Based on this he’ll be running five CNG trucks this spring. A big financial consideration was the size of compressor. “I want to size the compressor to fuel the number of vehicles we’re doing,” he says. “We have to put enough volume through to make it feasible. “The larger the filling station, the less cost per truck, but it’s a balancing act.” Debono is in the process of retrofitting his maintenance facility to be licensed as a natural gas vehicle service centre to accommodate the filling station, including a special area for truck refueling. His own four mechanics and a driver have been trained to operate the filling station and the vehicle. “The guys in the shop have been really good and open minded,” he says. Alicia Milner, president of the Canadian Natural Gas Vehicle Alliance (CNGVA), acknowledges that natural gas conversion is complicated. “You have to do your homework and make sure it’s right for you,” she says. (See her guest editorial on page XX.) Steve Donnelly, Southern Ontario territory sales manager for truck
Cummins Westport The Natural Choice The Cummins Westport ISX12 G and ISL G natural gas engines deliver strong pulling power and durability for your heavy duty truck and refuse applications. 250 – 400 hp / 660 – 1450 lb-ft torque Maintenance-free aftertreatment Lower total fuel costs
EBI NATURAL GAS 1 855 836-8331 Do you have to change your vehicle soon? Our advisors could guide you in your choice of renting or buying natural gas vehicles.
Cummins Westport natural gas engines are available factory-direct from leading truck manufacturers, with service, support, and warranty from the Cummins service & distribution network. Learn more at The Natural Gas Academy: cumminswestport.com
NATURAL, RENAWABLE, ECOLOGICAL 32 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014
31-34 swr feb-mar 2014 cng private sector p 31-34.indd 32
14-02-13 3:48 PM
N AT U R A L G A S V E H I C L E S U P P L E M E N T
A big financial consideration was the size of compressor.
builder Peterbilt, says his company has been involved in the production of natural gas-powered vehicles for 25 years. He says waste and recycling fleets are “ideal” for natural gas because of their return-to-base (“hub and spoke”) daily operations, which allows for overnight on-site re-fuelling. Donnelly applauds Debono’s step-by-step approach. “He’s taking baby steps, trying and testing and not tying up a lot of dollars,” Donnelly says. “So far, it’s working for him.” Debono agrees.
“I’m happy we did it,” Debono comments. “I have the knowledge to say we can move forward and we will move forward.” The first phase of the filling station will be completed this spring. By September Debono expects to have five trucks on the road. He envisions 20 to 25 units, or close to half the fleet, running on natural gas over the next five years. Chris Thomas is a freelance writer in Simcoe Norfolk County, Ontario
Beyond Bean Counting... Accounting, audit, tax, business valuations, insolvency and business advisory services.
Congratulations to Emmie Leung, CEO of Emterra Group, for the 2013 CWS Executive of the Year Award! taylorleibow.com
February/March 2014 www.solidwastemag.com 33
31-34 swr feb-mar 2014 cng private sector p 31-34.indd 33
14-02-13 3:48 PM
EMTERRA - SWR Ad FINAL.pdf
2
2/4/2014
7:17 PM
Our logo is not the only thing that’s
GREEN
C
M
Y
CM
MY
At Emterra Group, we’re passionate about better waste and recycling management and contributing to cleaner, healthier communities.
CY
CMY
K
That’s why we’re converting our fleet of waste and recycling trucks to cleanerburning natural gas. Emterra operates one of the largest fleets of natural gasfuelled trucks in Canada, each one cutting green house gas emissions by 20%. We’ll continue expanding our green fleet so we can all breathe a little easier.
To find out more: www.emterra.ca | 905-336-9084
31-34 swr feb-mar 2014 cng private sector p 31-34.indd 34
14-02-13 3:48 PM
by John Nicholson “Arrangements are currently underway to pilot test SulfaCHAR at a landfill.”
Vehicles Fuelled on Waste
M
any readers will recall the “Back-to-the-Future” movies series when Doc refuels his vehicle with garbage after visiting the future and purchasing a generator which uses waste as fuel. Filmed in the 1980s, the series made some bold predictions as to what the future will look like. Although we currently don’t put banana peels and stale beer into a fusion generator to fuel our vehicles, it’s possible today to fuel a vehicle with fuel generated from waste. A number of companies produce natural gas from waste for use as fuel in vehicles through various means. Waste can be anaerobically digested to produce biomethane, fermented to produce bio-ethanol, or chemically reacted to produce biodiesel. Of the three bio-based fuels that can be made from waste feedstock, biomethane has the highest efficiency in terms of fuel produced per unit of biomass feedstock.
and corrosive liquid. The drawback with using activated carbon is the waste disposal of the spent cartridges. A new technology developed at the University of Toronto may offer a better solution for removing hydrogen sulphide from biogas and LFG.
SulfaCHAR from the UofT The patented hydrogen sulphide removal technology developed at the UofT is called SulfaCHAR and is licensed to CHAR Technologies Inc. for commercial development. SulfaCHAR is produced by taking anaerobic digestion solids and heating them in a modified pyrolysis system.
Natural gas from AD Biomethane refers to the cleaned and upgraded biogas produced from anaerobic digestion (AD) of organic matter (i.e., manure from farms or source-separated organics). Biogas produced from the anaerobic digestion process contains 60 percent methane, 39 percent carbon dioxide, and one per cent impurities. Making biomethane from biogas involves the removal of the carbon dioxide and impurities. After cleaning the biogas such that it’s over 96 per cent methane, it’s then upgraded into a high-pressure gas referred to as compressed natural gas (CNG). The CNG can then be used as fuel in vehicles. In Canada, any landfill or biogas facility is a source of biomethane. One of the key advantages of biomethane use in vehicles is the longterm cost savings and greenhouse gas reductions over non-renewable diesel and natural gas fuels. Such fuel is a natural for the waste and recycling industry, since many of the hauling companies also own landfills from which methane can be captured.
Cleaning biomethane A major challenge in producing biomethane is the cleaning of the biogas to remove impurities. Hydrogen sulphide naturally occurs as part of the anaerobic digestion process in concentrations ranging from 50 to 5,000 ppm. It’s highly corrosive to equipment and hence needs to be removed. Typical removal methods of hydrogen sulphide at biogas facilities is ferric chloride; the typical method of removal at landfills is a combination of chillers and/or activated carbon. The drawback of ferric chloride is the storage and handling of a toxic Andrew White, President and Co-founder of CHAR Technologies, inside the pilot test trailer. He’s leaning on a filter filled with SulfaCHAR, the product that removes hydrogen sulfide from biogas.
February/March 2014 www.solidwastemag.com 35
35-37 swr feb-mar 2014 waste bus p 35-37.indd 35
14-02-13 11:48 AM
N AT U R A L G A S V E H I C L E S U P P L E M E N T
Fair Oaks Farms has its own buses “powered by poo” (biomethane produced on-site from the anaerobic digestion of cow manure).
The result is a product that adsorbs hydrogen sulphide and other impurities in the same way as activated carbon. However, unlike activated carbon, SulfaCHAR catalytically converts the hydrogen sulfide to elemental sulphur, an ingredient of commercial fertilizer. The resulting byproduct can be sold as an agricultural amendment. Pilot testing of SulfaCHAR at a commercial biogas facility in Ontario has proven the technology works at removing hydrogen sulfide. Preliminary test results from University of Guelph on the utilization of spent SulfaCHAR as an agricultural amendment has also been encouraging. Arrangements are currently underway to pilot test SulfaCHAR at a landfill. The added challenge of cleaning LFG is the presence of siloxanes in the gas.
farm produces biomethane for on-farm vehicle fleet by anaerobically digesting the manure from the 11,000 dairy cow herd. By using biomethane generated from manure for its milk delivery fleet, the farm saves of cost of purchasing 1.5 million gallons of diesel fuel per year. Moreover, there is enough biomethane to also run a 1 MW generator that provides electrical power for the farm operations. The first biomethane production facility in Canada is located in Abbotsford, British Columbia and is owned and operated by Catalyst Power. The feedstock to the anaerobic digester at the site includes 200 tonnes/day of agricultural material (dairy and poultry manure and crop residues) and 40 tonnes/day of non-agricultural waste (i.e., food processing waste). The biogas from the anaerobic digester is cleaned and upgraded to biomethane. The biomethane is fed into the local natural gas utility grid. John Nicholson, M.Sc., P.Eng., is a consultant based in Toronto, Ontario. Contact John at john.nicholson@ebccanada.com
Facilities An excellent example of where the use of waste as fuel is currently working can be found at Fair Oaks Farms in rural Indiana. The dairy
CORRECTION The author thanks Paul Aucoin, Director of CPIA Business Development for Quebec and Maritimes for pointing out that in the last edition my reference was incorrect about Montreal polystyrene being recycled at NARS: It is sent to Polystyrene Plus Inc in the Eastern Townships.
Consulting Engineers
Langley, BC, Canada
➤ CNG / LNG Site Design ➤ NGV Fuelling Facilities ➤ NGV Maintenance Facility Modifications ➤ HAZOP Studies and Facilitations At ANGI Energy Systems we are true believers and activists in making CNG go from an alternative fuel to a standard viable fuel source for fleets worldwide. With over 30 years of experience and a reputation as a leader in the industry, we provide innovative refueling system solutions for all of your needs. We are the future of fuel today.
➤ Gas Compression and Pressure Let-down ➤ EPCM Services ➤ Domestic and International Standards Development
Geoff Bowering, VP Business Development Dir 604-757-9082 www.jenmarconcepts.com 36 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014
Solid Waste_Recycling magazine QT Page Ad.indd 1
35-37 swr feb-mar 2014 waste bus p 35-37.indd 36
2/4/14 3:25 PM
14-02-13 11:48 AM
B lue Effect No. 5 THREE TRUCKS ARE BETTER THAN FOUR In Quebec, transportation is the industry that produces the most greenhouse gases. Natural gas offers a solution for reducing the environmental footprint of heavy trucks, and it’s available immediately. Not only is it 40% more cost-effective than diesel, but Blue can help reduce GHG by up to 25%. So, if four trucks switch to natural gas, it’s as if there were one less truck on our roads. Just the type of resource that will make Quebec go even further. Discover more Blue Effects at gazmetro.com/blueeffect.
35-37 swr feb-mar 2014 waste bus p 35-37.indd 37
14-02-13 11:48 AM
CNG ENGINES by Guy Crittenden The ISX12 G meets 2013 US EPA and California Air Resource Board (ARB) emission standards.
Workhorse of the Industry Anatomy of Cummins Westport’s ISX12 G natural gas engine.
C
ummins Westport ISX12 G natural gas engine is a large-displacement natural gas engine that suits a variety of heavy-duty vehicles, including regional-haul truck/tractor, vocational, and waste and recycling applications. With a displacement of 11.9 liters and up to 400 hp and 1450 lb-ft of torque, the ISX12 G is a natural choice when considering alternative fuel for demanding applications such as those in the waste and recycling sector. The engine operates on 100 per cent natural gas that can be carried on the vehicle in either compressed (CNG) or liquified (LNG) form. The ISL G can also run on renewable natural gas (RNG). (See Waste Business article, page 35.) Featuring the same proven Stoichiometric cooled Exhaust Gas Recirculation (SEGR) combustion technology, spark ignition and simple Three-Way Catalyst (TWC) aftertreatment as the Cummins Westport ISL G engine, the ISX12 G delivers strong pulling power and heavy-duty durability and reliable performance. For best reliability and durability, the recommended maxi mum GVW for line-haul applications is 80,000 lb (36,287 kg). Recommended gearing is 1400 rpm to 1500 rpm at cruise speed, to optimize fuel economy. The ISX12 G meets 2013 US EPA and California Air Resource Board (ARB) emission standards as well as the 2014 EPA and US DOT fuel economy and greenhouse gases regulations.
FEATURES: •F actory-Built, Dedicated Natural Gas Engine: Built on the same assembly line as Cummins ISX diesels, the ISX12 G shares many components and parts with Cummins ISX12 Series diesels. •C ooled-EGR Combustion Technology Takes a measured quantity of exhaust gas and passes it through a cooler to reduce the temperature before mixing it with fuel and the incoming air charge to the cylinder. The use of cooled EGR in combination with stoichiometric combustion improves power density and fuel economy versus lean-burn or traditional stoichiometric natural gas engines. •T hree-Way Catalyst After-treatment Three-Way Catalysts (TWCs) are effective, simple devices, packaged as part of the muffler, that provide consistent emissions control performance and are maintenancefree. No Diesel Particulate Filter (DPF) or Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) systems are required. •A dvanced Air Handling Electronic control for precise air handling.
Wastegate turbocharger with water-cooled bearing housing for durability. • Fuel Capability Natural gas can be stored on the vehicle in either compressed (CNG) or liquefied (LNG) form. The ISX12 G can also operate on renewable natural gas or biomethane that meets fuel-quality specifications. For more information, contact Cummins Westport of Vancouver, BC by visiting cumminswestport.com
38 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014
38-40 swr feb-mar 2014 cng engines p 38-40.indd 38
14-02-13 11:49 AM
CNG ENGINES
Coil-On-Plug Ignition
Wastegate Turbocharger EGR Valve
4-Valve Cylinder Head
Fuel Module
High-Energy Ignition System Engine Control Module (ECM)
FEATURES AND BENEFITS. >A dvanced Air Handling — Electronic control for precise air handling. > Proven Wastegate Turbocharger — A small-frame, fixed-geometrey, wastegate-style turbocharger is used. A water-cooled bearing housing adds durability. > E ngine Control Module (ECM) — Constantly monitors and controls engine sensors, fuel system and ignition system. Drive-by-wire throttle control. Provides OEM and end-users with the ability to tailor performance of the engine to fit the vehicle’s mission. Full interface capability to Cummins INSITE™ and Cummins QuickCheck diagnostic service tools. >H igh-Energy Ignition System — provides better performance and longer service intervals, improved spark plug and coil durability and self-diagnostics. The ignition module and fuel module are controlled bya full-authority CM2180A ECM with programmable features, which is compatible with Cummins diagnostic tools.
>A ccessory Belt Drive System — Self-tensioning serpentine polyvee belt accessory drive system for water pump, engine-mounted fan hub and most alternators. >A ir Intake System — Charge-air cooling reduces emissions by lowering intake manifold air temperatures. >H igh-Efficiency Lube Cooler — Lowers oil temperatures, for longer engine life. >C rankshaft — The eight-counterweight, full balanced, high-tensilestrength steel forging has induction-hardened fillets and journals, for outstanding durablity. >O ptional Engine Braking — 240 hp (180 kW) at 2100 rpm. > Transmission — Automatic and manual options available. > Front- and Rear Engine Power Take-Off (FEPTO and REPTO) — Options provide additional torque, for a varietyof vocational applications.
February/March 2014 www.solidwastemag.com 39
38-40 swr feb-mar 2014 cng engines p 38-40.indd 39
14-02-13 11:49 AM
Heil CNG vehicles run clean and save you green.
Heil’s CNG-fueled refuse collection vehicles provide the productivity you’ve come to expect from their diesel counterparts. But these workhorses have the added advantage of running on environmentally friendly compressed natural gas, which delivers lower fuel and maintenance costs.
At Heil, we recognise that a CNG fuel delivery system must integrate seamlessly not only with the chassis and the body, but also with your dedicated CNG fueling station. We design our CNG-fueled units to deliver the same productivity as a diesel unit, while saving you money with clean, compressed natural gas as fuel. Whether you are in the early stages of evaluation or ready to make the leap forward, Heil’s experts can provide the guidance you need to make the right decision for your business. Robust Standard Offering: No one in the waste industry offers the breadth of CNG system configurations available from Heil. Whether your application requires a fuel pod location on the roof, on the front of the body, behind the chassis, or on the frame rail, Heil has the right design for you. Local Service, Training, and Support: Anyone can sell you a CNG system, but Heil is unmatched in the industry with local service, training, and support after your purchase. Heil’s knowledgeable and experienced Canadian Dealer Network is available for you for the entire life of your CNG system.
For more information, turn to Heil’s Canadian Dealer Network. Visit www.heilco.ca to find the authorised Dealer nearest you.
© 2014 Environmental Solutions Group. All rights reserved. All trademarks are property of Environmental Solutions Group.
3103_1401_ESG_Heil_CNG_Ad_FA.indd 1 38-40 swr feb-mar 2014 cng engines p 38-40.indd 40
2/11/14 4:19 PM 14-02-13 11:49 AM
DIVERSION
... continued from page 16
but with important differences. Smaller municipalities found the CIFthat significant progress is being made by municipalities to identify and developed template to be unnecessarily complex for their day-to-day implement better practices within the multi res sector. At the same time, needs. Medium-sized municipalities already had some version of it’s equally clear that the need to focus resources on this sector will grow a database in place prior to project implementation, but the majorincreasingly important for urban communities. ity transferred their multi res programming information into the CIF Multi Res Access database template. There was agreement among Mike Birett is Director of the Continuous Improvement Fund (CIF) in this group that the Access database developed by the CIF provided Barrie, Ontario. Contact Mike at mbirett@wdo.cav the level of data organization and report generating capabilities they required. Large municipalities, for the most part, already had sophisticated databases of their own. Not surprisingly, all webinar participants confirmed the positive impact of providing adequate recycling capacity in their buildings, which had been identified through both E&E and CIF work as 50 litres of capacity per unit. Through the 39 CIF funded projects, participants added nearly 10,000 cubic metres of recycling container capacity. The result of this increase in capacity, and Highest Efficiency Composting & Lowest Electrical Use the implementation of the recommended best practices, was an average increase of approxiCombining BDP’s fully automated, agitated In-vessel Composting System (ICS) mately 20 per cent in the tonnage of materiwith BacTee’s ultra efficient, negative aeration/ventilation and odor control als collected. This is especially significant in systems maintains the highest quality compost with the lowest energy comparison with curbside collection tonnage, consumption and smallest facility footprint which many participants noted decreased during the same observation period as a result of material composition changes (e.g., packaging light-weighting). Smaller municipalities did, however, note that the data collection requirements involved in this project placed a significant strain on their resources and would need to be considered in developing longterm provincial reporting requirements for the sector. Participants also reported that the superintendent’s handbook and template communications materials developed by CIF were widely used and appreciated. Most small and medium municipal participants identified that there is a continued demand for this support. Larger municipalities indicated that they had adequate internal resources to support this function. Similarly, webinar participants saw high value in the train-the-trainer workshops. However, as with past multi res pilots and projects, many identified that they had difDon Mathsen, Chief Engineer Richard Nicoletti, Product Manager ficulty engaging building superintendents Grand Forks, North Dakota Greenwich, New York to participate in their own subsequent workPh: 701 775 8775 Ph: 518 695 6851 shops. Further refinement of these tools and Email: don@bactee.com Email: Rich@bdpindustries.com techniques for engaging multi res stakeholdwww.bactee.com www.bdpindustries.com ers was recommended. While significant barriers to multi res recycling still exist, it’s clear from the work completed to date by the CIF and its partners
+
The Power of 2 Provides:
February/March 2014 www.solidwastemag.com 41
15-16,41 swr feb-mar 2014 diversion p 15-16,41.indd 41
14-02-13 11:44 AM
LANDFILL TECHNOLOGY Processed material pile.
Leachate Treatment Powerful solutions from aerobic operations
H
ow do you treat twenty million gallons of leachate from an operating landfill for less than a half a cent per gallon? “We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them,” wrote Albert Einstein. Aerobic operation of a modern landfill is a cost effective and environmentally sound opportunity to eliminate the liability of waste while sustaining resources. The cost of trucking and treating leachate is enough to inspire development of an on-site, robust biological treatment system capable of operating in the climate of the northern US and Canada. The varying conditions and years of treatment have furnished sufficient data to address all but the most unusual leachate conditions. And the standard of “what is possible” just got a lot bigger. It takes awhile to tell landfill operators that we are chopping costs, protecting the environment, and achieving a higher level of sustainability in Michigan. This is an invitation to operators to visit a site and evaluate aerobic treatment, if you have leachate related issues. Conventional wastewater treatment technology fails to effectively treat leachate. Leachate treatment requires the biological intensity of a solids digestion system.
Requirements & benefits Leachate quality is a function of the solids that are interred in the landfill. Leachate serves as the “pivot point” around which aerobic treat-
by Richard Aho “At a 12 million gallon site the cost to discharge to water came in at $0.0063/gal.”
ment operates. The digestion of the leachate contamination occurs in the solids: there is no other way to maintain the biological intensity. Optimized microorganisms are required to process leachate to surface water discharge standards. Leachate treatment requires dedicated solids in which the processing microorganisms are controlled and manipulated. Solids host the massive biological population that’s controlled by the digestion system. Developing the sextillion+ (1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000+) microorganisms per parent organism per day is the responsibility of the operator. A smart operator understands process, permits, equipment, and biological variables. Aerobic treatment of leachate cleans the water to an elemental state. The laws of conservations of matter are still in force, but the complex contaminant compounds found in the leachate end up in a reduced and nontoxic elemental form. Metals are oxidized and stabilized, which greatly reduces toxicity. Low cost treatment with minimal capital requirements furnishes an investment that’s recovered before the ‘time value of money’ becomes
42 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014
42-44 swr feb-mar 2014 landfill p 42-44.indd 42
14-02-13 11:49 AM
LANDFILL TECHNOLOGY
a factor. Development of the self-sufficient landfill that doesn’t rely on leachate trucking and/or the good graces of a wastewater treatment facility was a wonderful improvement. The pain and cost of having a wastewater plant turn away a leachate delivery is something that should be avoided. On-site control of all aspects of a landfill operation has always been a worthy goal. System scalability and biologically flexible treatment capability has been a huge advantage over the years. Aerobic processing is operating in multiple locations in the wide variation of climate offered by Michigan, which would be of interest to Canadians.
Costs & conclusions The cost to treat a gallon of leachate should be always less than one cent per gallon. At 20 million gallons a year and $0.20 per kilowatt hour, the cost to treat per gallon was $0.005. At a 12 million gallon site the cost to discharge toEDDYAD_SW&R4_13_Layout water of the State of Michigan1 came in at10:10 AM Page 1 3/25/13
Discharge lagoon leachate.
Superior Recovery of Aluminum “Fines” Independent tests show Eriez’ Eddy Current Separators throw aluminum “fines” nearly 20% farther than other top selling brands. This extra distance is critical to improving separation and recovery. Now stocking 1, 1.2, and 1.5 meter machines. Optional features include feeder, feeder support framework, separation shroud and controls. Eriez… improving metal recovery
NOW
STOCKING 3 SIZES the 1.5-Meter Eddy as shown is just $
109,305
SGS Findings
NEARLY
20%
FARTHER
ERIEZ Competitor
THROW
See the SGS report online!
Visit Recovery.Eriez.com
February/March 2014 www.solidwastemag.com 43
42-44 swr feb-mar 2014 landfill p 42-44.indd 43
14-02-13 11:49 AM
OWMA AD
6/5/07
7:33 AM
Page 1
Basin test hole, one foot deep.
$0.0063. Each site has its own variable and those change each year. Electrical costs, operator skill, the cost of the required storage are of the greatest financial consequence. Primary operating costs consist of labor, electricity, piping and fittings, testing, permit fees, and an operating license. Capital cost include leachate storage, pumps, instruments, and engineering. All these cost are included in the less than a cent cost. Aerobic digestion is a quantum leap forward for the treatment of leachate and the processing of solids of a landfill. Public sites in Michigan are available to tour and compare. The more sites that utilize the process, the better the technology will function; trading of microorganism is beneficial for all sites involved. Increased control and understanding of the biological potential of a landfill furnishes a safer, stable facility. When it rained too much, paying for off-site leachate treatment by gutting the capital improvement funds is a reality most of us have faced. On-site treatment and the associated savings are wonderful in comparison. Biotreatment also offers the opportunity to treat materials that are too toxic for a wastewater treatment facility. The intense biological rinse required to digest the solids in the landfill furnishes the opportunity to clean leachate and minimize the damage of inappropriate disposals. Richard Aho is Principal of EWS LLC in Marquette, Michigan. Contact Richard at raho@ewsview.com
Ontario Waste Management Association
Who’s standing up for Your Business? If you own or manage a private sector waste management company involved in any facet of solid or hazardous waste management – let us stand up for you ‌join OWMA today! OWMA has a primary mission to support a strong and viable waste service industry and to ensure that OWMA member companies are recognized as industry leaders.
Contact: Michele Goulding (905) 791-9500 www.owma.org 44 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014
42-44 swr feb-mar 2014 landfill p 42-44.indd 44
14-02-13 11:49 AM
O R G A N I C M AT T E R S
by Paul van der Werf “A cart with a spherical bottom can reduce collection time by up to 20 per cent.”
Bottoms Up! New cart design adds strength and efficient emptying
C
anada’s first green bin programs have now passed their 20th anniversary. Notwithstanding the youth of these programs, the carts and bins used to collect organics have evolved considerably. Debate continues over the best way to collect the full range of organic wastes from the residential curbside. What is the ideal form to follow the most efficient function? This question arose with the first-generation programs, which typically collect food and yard waste in the same 240 litre cart, and also with second-generation programs that collect only food waste (and some non-recyclable paper) in 45 litre bins. Key issues with both carts and bins have been their strength, the time required to empty them, cleanliness, and the impact of cold winters on organic wastes (freezing them to the inside of the containers). While containers come in different sizes, what unifies them reminds me of a Queen song: They all have square fat bottoms. Until recently no one seems to have considered a cart with a perky round bottom. The P. Henkel company of Germany — started by the grandson of Willy Otto (as in Otto carts) — has developed a cart with a spherical bottom. In Canada they’re exclusively distributed by Nova Scotia’s Speed Eco group. Paul Speed, Speed Eco’s owner, is no stranger to this industry. He’s arguably responsible for selling more carts into green bin programs than anyone else in Canada. His almost off-grid approach (no web site, no social media) relies on personal relationships built up over his 25 years in the industry. He has excelled in creating the necessary narratives to match green cart design changes. “In the 1960s everyone thought that Converse running shoes were what you needed if you had to run from point A to B,” Speed says. “At some point Nike came along and said, Why don’t you try these more comfortable shoes that you can actually run in?” While a still a hipster fashion statement, nobody really runs in Converse running shoes anymore. Likewise, for carts it may no longer be hip to be square. “The physics behind the spherical bottom design quite simply means that the organic waste slides out more quickly,” says Speed, “and since there are no corners, all the organic waste is removed. “Quite frankly they are the next generation of carts.” The sphere is the strongest geometric shape and therefore makes a cart stronger. This helps them better resist the inevitable pounding they receive from waste collectors.
P. Henkel’s new organics cart is distributed in Canada by Speed Eco.
February/March 2014 www.solidwastemag.com 45
45-46 swr feb-mar 2014 organic matters p 45-46.indd 45
14-02-13 11:50 AM
O R G A N I C M AT T E R S
A typical urban installation.
Inroads The carts have started making inroads in Canada. In the spring of 2013 a number of communities, with some of the longest running green bin programs (including Lunenburg, Chester and Bridgewater Nova Scotia), started testing the carts. During this (very cold) winter the carts have also been tested at various IC&I locations in Nova Scotia. Overall, waste collectors have been happy with how the carts function. The organic waste that gets stuck in the corners of square-bottomed bins slows waste collectors down. A cart with a spherical bottom has no hiding places and can reduce collection time by up to 20 per cent (and remain relatively clean). Some audit work was completed in residential areas in the fall after three months of summer usage. In a street audit of 200 homes in four communities, up to 60 per cent of square-bottomed carts had 0.5-1.5 kg
of residuals left in them after emptying, compared to 10 per cent of the spherical carts which had no more than 0.5 kg of residue. This winter has provided an excellent opportunity to test cart performance as it relates to freezing. Study of use at IC&I locations, an in particular a popular coffee shop, has been promising. The coffee ground and filter mÊlange comes out after a (normal) knock from the cart lifter (as part of the emptying process) to break the seal, while waste collectors struggle, sometimes for minutes, with the square-bottomed carts. Both Lunenburg and Chester, Nova Scotia currently supply these carts to residents to replace broken carts. As well, Nova Scotia IC&I waste collectors GE’s All Trucking Ltd and EFR Disposal are using these carts. Paul van der Werf is President of 2cg Inc. in London, Ontario. Contact Paul at 2cg@sympatico.ca
46 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014
45-46 swr feb-mar 2014 organic matters p 45-46.indd 46
14-02-13 11:50 AM
I C & I WA S T E
by Diane Blackburn “Entropex is ranked eighth largest postconsumer recycler in North America.”
Mixed Rigid Plastic A look at plastics recycler Entropex
Mohammad Rahbari, Director Technology Development, keeps the RigidReclaim™ technology finely tuned to meet the demands of the myriad of plastics that Entropex processes.
S
aid Mr. McGuire to Benjamin Braddock in The Graduate (1967) ... “I just want to say one word to you. Just one word…plastics.” A pronouncement for the ages — riding the impending tsunami of plastic consumerism. Yet plastic is not new. The precursor to plastic, natural rubber, was invented by Charles Goodyear in 1837 and improved in 1844 when he patented Vulcanization. The plastic era launched in 1839 with the discovery of polystyrene by Eduard Simon, a German apothecary who did not know that what he had isolated from natural resin was a plastic polymer. Another German, organic chemist Hermann Staudinger, published his theories on polymers in 1922, and ultimately won the Nobel Prize for chemistry in 1953 based on this specific research. In 1930 BASF developed a method for the commercial manufacture of polystyrene and in 1937 Dow Chemical introduced polystyrene to the US market. On the journey to plastic ubiquity, little consideration was given
to how this substance would be handled at the end of its useful life. Mainstream environmentalism was still a long way off and the term “end of life” related to inanimate objects was not even in the lexicon. Seventy years on, we have a confusing array of plastics numbered 1 through 7, and products entombed in impenetrable plastic packaging. Where does plastic go to die? Until recently, mixed rigid plastic (MRP) went to landfill but now more of this prolific polymer is ending up at Entropex (ISO Certified 9001) — a privately-owned company in Sarnia, Ontario. Entropex is ranked eighth largest post-consumer recycler and eighteenth largest plastic recycler in North America. Entropex has embraced the difficult task of MRP heretofore shunned by traditional plastic recycling processes that focus solely on PET or PETE. In 2011 the company commissioned RigidReclaim™, an MRP technology, for the express purpose of recovering these more difficult postconsumer plastics. This strategy resulted in 27,958,022 kg of mixed rigid plastics being processed during the first 16 months of operation. February/March 2014 www.solidwastemag.com 47
47-48 swr feb-mar 2014 ic&i waste p 47-48.indd 47
14-02-13 11:51 AM
I C & I WA S T E
By 2013 Entropex anticipated a process volume in the vicinity of 30,000 tonnes. Entropex led the initiative to introduce RigidReclaim as a measure to broaden the spectrum of recycling for consumer plastics, thereby improving Ontario’s diversion rate (which prior to 2010 could rightfully be classified as abysmal for this material). A consortium was formed with municipal, steward and end users lending themselves to the goal of doubling diversion by 2014. The MRP operation recovers 71.5 per cent of mixed-rigid plastic feedstock — materials that would otherwise be heading to landfill. Nonrecoverable materials such as residual waste and metals are directed to energy operations, with as little as possible disposed. The province has experienced a 30 per cent increase in the recovery of rigid plastics since the start of Entropex’s MRP initiative and, as municipalities expand their Blue Box collection of plastics 1 through 7, this rate will rise significantly. Reclaiming rigid plastics for reintegration into the manufacturing process is not simple given the variety of feedstock collected. Alluded to above, the variously numbered plastics have unique properties and cannot all be lumped together for processing. In evaluating the viability of the MRP technology for the pilot, much study was given to understanding the myriad characteristics of each resin stream, as those properties determine the suitability of the resin for downstream markets (with the objective of making the best match possible). Some of the feedstock separated and graded by Entropex is appropriate for remanufacture into polyester carpet, cloth or bottles, while the more complex resins can be broken down and reappear in the market place as building products, garden furniture, pails, shovels, or even tractor seats. The higher the commercial value of the remanufactured product, the tighter the tolerances on what recycled materials can be used to
These polyethylene (PE) pellets might become a Muskoka chair while other complex resins could be reborn as automotive seating.
Entropex founders Keith and Kevin Bechard (Keith pictured here) are committed to upcycling the mixed rigid plastics they process into the highest level of newly manufactured commodities.
produce that product. If your new car seat has been made from recycled resins, you can bet those materials were at the very top of the recycled plastic food chain. The Bloom Centre for Sustainability quantified the environmental impacts of Entropex’s MRP technology against the production of virgin resins in a 2013 report that showed significant reductions in: tonnes of GHG (85%), SOx (94%), NOx (83%), PM (95%), CO (90%), VOC (94%), Waste (89%) and in Water (m3 — 57%). RigidReclaim technology also satisfies the need to advance clean technology, create Ontario-based (green) jobs, and improve resource efficiency. Recognition has come to Entropex from some heavy weights. In November 2013, The American Chemistry Council presented the company with the “Innovation in Plastics Recycling Award.” Entropex also won a Gold status in the “Program Operator” category from the Recycling Council of Ontario at its 2013 annual awards gala. The impressive results generated by Entropex over a fairly short timeline should mandate that every margarine tub and yogurt cup in Ontario find its way to Sarnia to be reincarnated (another “R”) into only the highest quality new commodities. Now that’s a sustainable, madein-Ontario solution we can all appreciate. Diane Blackburn is Events Manager for the Recycling Council of Ontario (RCO) and produces the RCO’s annual Waste Minimization Awards. This column regularly profiles finalists and winners from that awards program. Contact Diane at events@rco.on.ca
48 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014
47-48 swr feb-mar 2014 ic&i waste p 47-48.indd 48
14-02-13 11:51 AM
OWMA REPORT
by Rob Cook “The government deserves credit for taking on a politically difficult issue that desperately needs addressing.”
What If...? What if Ontario’s Waste Reduction Act fails?
I
t would not be an exaggeration to say that the waste management framework in the Province of Ontario is in on life support. The challenges of today are the product of years of political grandstanding (by all parties), a lack of political will and leadership, and short-sighted policy development. Positive recycling or waste diversion success stories exist — there are many — but the overall picture is not especially positive. Currently, Ontario remains stuck at a 25 per cent waste diversion rate that has remained relatively stagnant for the last two decades. The province lacks sufficient disposal capacity to manage its own residual waste, as evidenced by the three to four millions tonnes it ships to the
US each year. (If the opponents of this waste exportation were to shut the border or seriously hamper the movement of waste into Michigan or New York., the disposal crisis would be on the doorstep of Ontario residents in just three days. Chaos would ensue.) There’s an economic loss in exporting waste: the province is losing not only the material and/or energy value of these resources, but also the business opportunities associated with recycling and integrating recovered resources into new products and packaging (that can be sold again). The economy suffers from the loss of the investment and jobs associated with not having a sustainable domestic capacity for waste recycling and disposal. February/March 2014 www.solidwastemag.com 49
49-50 swr feb-mar 2014 owma report p 49-50.indd 49
14-02-13 11:52 AM
PROFESSIONAL CARDS
OWMA REPORT
The AMRC is now the MWA... with a new website to match our new name
www.municipalwaste.ca
3,000 Staff in 100+ Offices
Proudly serving Municipal and IC&I clients since 1976 • Solid/Hazardous/Demolition Waste Management, Recycling, Diversion • Composting, Digestion, Waste to Energy, Biosolids/Biogas Utilization • Air Quality Monitoring & Modelling, Permitting/Auditing Compliance • MRF’s, Reuse/Recycle for HHW, WEEE, and Durable/Bulky Wastes ...and much more!
www.CRAworld.com • 1-800-265-6102 Worldwide Engineering, Environmental, Construction, and IT Ser vices
Project1
11/13/06
10:28 AM
Page 1
The current government has shown some leadership in introducing Bill 91, the Waste Reduction Act and related strategy, which attempts to address many of the challenges to waste recycling and disposal, namely by moving the province toward extended producer responsibility (EPR). Is the legislation perfect? Absolutely not, and it will need some substantial amendments. But the government deserves credit for taking on a politically difficult issue that desperately needs addressing (and in a minorityled legislature). The government could have taken the same approach as others — to tell the population that more waste can be diverted without it costing anyone an extra dime, or by using the example of a handful of steward companies doing the right thing, or by telling us how smart and conscious our kids are. If any of these approaches were actually valid, we would have solved our problems years ago. If Ontario’s political parties aren’t able to find a path forward on this important file, if they continue to tell half-truths, use erroneous data and hide behind vague principles as an excuse for inaction, then Bill 91 will fail and we will have missed a rare opportunity to take our waste management framework off life support. Continued waste export, stagnant diversion rates, monopoly-driven diversion programs, eco-fees, an unsustainable tax burden on municipal taxpayers, and reduced investment and reduced job creation in the recycling industry will prevail. Unfortunately, at Queen’s Park it’s reasonable to expect that political grandstanding, lack of leadership and catering to self-serving political interests will rule the day. Even at this late date, let’s hope sense can prevail on Bill 91. Rob Cook is CEO of the Ontario Waste Management Association (OWMA) in Brampton, Ontario. Contact Rob at rcook@owma.org
50 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014
49-50 swr feb-mar 2014 owma report p 49-50.indd 50
14-02-13 11:52 AM
R E G U L AT I O N R O U N D U P
by Rosalind Cooper, L.L.B. “The Stewardship Agencies of British Columbia undertook an examination of four areas of product stewardship.”
Regulatory Changes Across Canada And EPR developments in BC Ontario off-road tire fees Charges, commonly referred to as “eco fees”, are used in Ontario to create revenue to provide financing for diversion of off-road tires from disposal. On April 1, 2013, Ontario Tire Stewardship (OTS) imposed a significant increase in these charges. Fees for typical agricultural tires rose from $15 to $353. The highest eco-fee is now $1,311 for off-road tires in the top weight class (over 1,200 kg). Previously, eco-fees had been capped at $250 and most were under $100. The increase in eco fees drew opposition from manufacturers, dealers and consumers, and Waste Diversion Ontario (WDO) has been ordered to report to the Ministry of the Environment on the future of the diversion program for off-road tires. Until then, the eco fees are frozen, but at the higher rates. WDO has been ordered to report back to the environment ministry no later than September 12, 2014 on the findings and recommendations of a multi-stakeholder advisory committee that will consider options for reuse, recycling and diversion of off-road tires. In addition to considering various options, the report must also deal with consumer concerns over design, operation, governance and costs of the off-road portion of the used tires program in Ontario.
Saskatchewan antifreeze recycling regs The Used Petroleum and Antifreeze Products Collection Regulations were published under Saskatchewan’s Environmental Management and Protection Act, 2002 in September of 2013 and came into force on January 1, 2014. The Regulations provide for recycling of antifreeze and containers, diesel exhaust fluid, and diesel fuel filters, and also increase the list of recyclable petroleum products managed by the Saskatchewan Association for Resource Recovery Corporation.
The Corporation currently operates the program for used oil, used oil filters and used plastic oil containers (up to 50 litres). The program is led by industry and approved by the province. In order to fund the new program, members of the Corporation will be adding an environmental handling charge to the price of antifreeze (concentrate and pre-mix), antifreeze containers up to 50 litres, and diesel exhaust fluid containers up to 50 litres. This handling charge will be coming into effect on April 1, 2014 and will be similar to that on new petroleum products.
Ontario OH&S for waste and recycling The Ontario Ministry of Labour announced that its latest workplace health and safety focus will be on hazards associated with recycling and waste management in the industrial and health care sectors. In the industrial sector, the focus will be on employers involved in recycling commodities and other materials, as well as workplaces where handling of waste is a significant part of operations. This would include companies and municipalities whose workers collect, transport, process, sort and dispose of waste and recyclable materials.
Product stewardship in BC Recent criticism of the stewardship program for printed paper and packaging in British Columbia has resulted in delays in implementation of the program. Currently, British Columbia has the most extensive stewardship programs in Canada and consumers are able to dispose of everything from appliances to drinking containers by returning them to a depot for recycling. The programs are all industry funded and operated by not-for-profit organizations created for the purpose of managing the programs. There is no provincial government involvement, except to designate those products that are subject to stewardship and to set performance targets. February/March 2014 www.solidwastemag.com 51
51-52 swr feb-mar 2014 regrndup p 51-52.indd 51
14-02-13 11:52 AM
R E G U L AT I O N R O U N D U P
At the request of the Ministry of the Environment in British Columbia, the Stewardship Agencies of British Columbia — a group of seventeen organizations involved in product stewardship — undertook an examination of four areas of product stewardship and produced an action plan for improvement. One of the issues of concern is the availability of multi-program depots which accept a wide range of designated products managed by different programs. In some areas these multi-program depots are widely available but, in other locations, residents must take recyclables to multiple locations for disposal.
An objective of the action plan is to increase the number of multiprogram depots. British Columbia’s newest program for paper and printed products, which has a launch date of May 19, 2014, has been controversial because many municipalities already operate such programs and fear the new program would interfere with those existing programs. Municipalities were given three options and a deadline to make a decision with respect to their involvement in the program. One option was to accept the funding formula proposed by the stewardship agency, Multi-Material British Columbia (MMBC) and continue operating the municipality’s program, but deliver the recyclables to MMBC. Another option was to have MMBC take over and pay for the municipality’s program; the final option was to opt out entirely, continuing with the status quo without funding or interference from MMBC. Many municipalities in British Columbia believed that that the contract terms were too onerous and the deadline for a decision was unfair. In the end, the September 16, 2013 deadline was extended and contract terms have been modified. As a result, several municipalities have come to terms and reached agreement with Multi-Material British Columbia. (For more information on waste management in BC, read this edition’s Cover Story on page 8, about Metro Vancouver’s waste plan.) Rosalind Cooper, LL.B., is a partner with Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP in Toronto, Ontario. Contact Rosalind at rcooper@tor.fasken.com
CNG Trucks Cold Weather Performance F
leets who want to understand how factory-built natural gas refuse trucks perform in Canadian winter conditions can now learn from a report profiling the cold weather experience of Quebec-based fleet EBI, which operates 18 Peterbilt CNG cab-over waste trucks with Cummins Westport 8.9 litre engines in the Montreal area. Funded by Transport Canada’s ecoTechnology for Vehicles II program and released in late October 2013, the report Evaluation of the Winter Performance of Compressed Natural Gas Refuse Trucks describes how the CNG trucks operate well with no issues in cold weather, provided normal winter aids are used and the vehicle design is suitable for cold weather. Key pointers for fleets operating natural gas trucks in cold weather include using the appropriate oil for the Cummins Westport engine and ensuring the refueling station has a gas dryer to remove moisture from the fuel, which could freeze at low temperatures. EBI has since gone on to acquire another 32 CNG trucks based on their satisfactory performance, emissions reductions, and fuel savings. Visit: http://stream1.newswire.ca/media/2013/11/15/ 20131115_C7852_DOC_EN_33392.pdf
52 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014
51-52 swr feb-mar 2014 regrndup p 51-52.indd 52
14-02-13 11:52 AM
Advertisers’ Index Company
Page #
February/March 2014
Company
Page #
AMRC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
JenMar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
ANGI Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Machinex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
BDP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Mack Truck . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Change Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Marathon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Clean Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Clorox (Glad) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Conestoga-Rovers & Assoc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22, 50 Cummins Westport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 EBI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Emterra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14, 33 Environmental Business Consultants (J. Nicholson) . . . . . . . 50 Eriez . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Norfolk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 OWMA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Paradigm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Paul Van der Werf (2CG) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 RTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Trux Route Management Systems Inc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Union Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
ESG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Van Dyk Baler Corp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Fortis BC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Walinga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
GasMetro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
WasteAsia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Heil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Waste Expo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Looking to Grow Your Customer Base?
12 Million+ We’ll Help You Get Started CONTACT LISTS ON-DEMAND – Improve your reach and boost revenue with Scott’s Contact Lists On-Demand – over 12 million North American business contacts. Great for direct mail, fax, telesales and email campaigns. EMAIL MARKETING SERVICE – Improve conversion rates with Scott’s Email Marketing Service. We’ll help target your most valuable audience, design engaging emails, deploy your message, measure results, and provide you the leads that showed interest in your brand. DATA SERVICES – Maximize your database potential and improve ROI using Scott’s Data Services: Data Hygiene, Data Appends, Database Management, Custom Research, and more.
1.877.517.6864
Ref: SMSA34H
solutions@scottsdirectories.com ScottsDirectories.com
February/March 2014 www.solidwastemag.com 53
53 swr feb-mar 2014 ad idx p 53.indd 53
14-02-13 2:08 PM
BLOG
by John Mullinder “Bill 91 is a thinly disguised scheme of ‘taxation without representation’ that panders to municipal interests.”
Who gets to drive the Blue Box truck?
I
ndividual provinces will determine the “rules of the road” for future curbside recycling (Blue Box) programs across the country by establishing extended producer responsibility (EPR) frameworks, setting policy and monitoring performance. But who will actually drive or control the Blue Box truck? We would argue that the “driver” should be the producers of residential printed paper and packaging since they have the most impact on designing what materials end up in Canadian homes. They’re also the ones to whom responsibility (financial and/or operational) has been, or is being, extended. The rest of us (municipalities, recyclers, processors, material suppliers and consumers) are really “passengers” of one kind or another, sometimes scrambling over each other to get closer to the wheel while suggesting different ways of getting “there.” What we are witnessing in Canada at the moment is a changing dynamic and tension between these various players as the country transitions to full or partial producer funding of Blue Box programs. Producers are quite rightly resisting signing blank cheques for something over which they have little or no control. British Columbia, to its credit, has allowed producers to design a program that looks to be far more comprehensive, effective and efficient (e.g., same materials right across the province) than the current one. BC has determined the framework and has stood back and enabled EPR to happen: it’s allowed the producers to be drivers of the Blue Box truck, as long as they follow the “rules of the road.” Ontario, on the other hand, in Bill 91, the Waste Reduction Act, has deliberately handed the keys to municipalities. Ontario producers do not control what or how materials are collected and processed. They do get to pay though. Under Bill 91 up to 100 per cent of the costs! In effect, Bill 91 is a thinly disguised scheme of “taxation without representation” that panders to municipal interests. It’s a perversion of EPR principles because it enforces a financial responsibility on producers while giving them little or no control over their costs. Many municipalities have done a good job, but their future role should be diminished if EPR is to be an effective public policy tool. They should be passengers along with the rest of us, not driving the truck. While many of them may end up collecting Blue Box recyclables,
in open competition with the private sector, we don’t believe that local governments generally should be processing and selling commodities into global spot markets with taxpayers’ money, especially when producers are being regulated to pay more and more of Blue Box financial and operational costs. The argument that taxpayers’ money — already invested in collection and processing equipment — will go to waste if municipalities are denied a lead role, is misguided at best. Material recovery facility (MRF) equipment has a life span of maybe 10 years, collection vehicles perhaps seven, after which they have to be replaced. There clearly has to be a transition period for local government to adjust to its new and lesser role. A second key element also needs to be considered in this debate: How best to achieve economies of scale? Material recycling is primarily an industrial activity, not a municipal one. Toronto’s Blue Box program, the largest in the province, supplies only 8 per cent of the total tonnage of paper recycled in Ontario. If we limit ourselves to packaging alone, almost 60 per cent of it (mainly old corrugated boxes) is estimated to be sent for recycling by Ontario industry, not by local governments. To achieve this, the private sector has a long history of building transfer stations and MRFs. There are economies of scale in modifying these already existing industrial MRFs to accept Blue Box materials. Many have already done this. So a key question that government policy makers and producers regulated under EPR schemes need to consider is whether municipalities should actually be involved in Blue Box material processing at all. Given that most printed paper and packaging is already being processed in private sector MRFs, why do we need brand spanking new municipal ones, funded by taxpayers’ dollars (that are then later reimbursed by producers under some EPR scheme)? It doesn’t make a lot of sense, environmentally or economically. We face some interesting times ahead. Stay tuned! John Mullinder is Executive Director of PPEC (the Paper & Paperboard Packaging Environmental Council). Contact him at jmullinder@ppec-paper.com
54 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2014
54 swr feb-mar 2014 blog p 54.indd 54
14-02-13 11:53 AM
CANADA’S FIRST CHOICE FOR RECYCLING SOLUTIONS & SERVICES EXPERIENCE RESULTS WITH THE LEADER IN MRF DESIGN Machinex is renowned as an industry leader in the engineering, design, and manufacturing of custom-built sorting systems. We also offer a full range of cutting-edge recycling equipment.
Flexibility Unmatched Product Purity Superior Maintenance Accessibility
1 877 362-3281
sales@machinextechnologies.com
machinextechnologies.com
EXPERIENCE RESULTS WITH SERVICE & MAINTENANCE Machinex Recycling Services is available 24/7 to service all Machinex sorting systems and recycling equipment as well as American Baler products.
Canadian Distributor for :
Balers & Baling wire Service, Spare parts & Training Programs Preventative Maintenance Programs
55-56 swr feb-mar 2014 ad p 55-56.indd 55
1 800 463-4298
sales@machinexrt.ca QUEBEC • TORONTO • VANCOUVER
14-02-13 11:53 AM
“WE DON’T HAVE TO MAKE SACRIFICES WITH MACK NATURAL GAS TRUCKS.” DAN PIO PROGRESSIVE WASTE SOLUTIONS Mack not only set the standard for the refuse industry—we’ve raised it with our natural gaspowered TerraPro™ trucks. Canada’s largest waste and recycling fleet, Progressive Waste Solutions, needed trucks to satisfy both ends of their environmental and economic spectrum. So they chose Mack. Now with a growing fleet of over 100 NG TerraPros, they can deliver environmentally friendly solutions without compromising uptime. With Mack, Progressive Waste Solutions proves that the best results don’t require sacrifice.
To learn more about how Mack natural gas trucks can improve your business, visit MackTrucks.com.
55-56 swr feb-mar 2014 ad p 55-56.indd 56
14-02-13 11:53 AM