’s n ia io ot rs Sc ive va s d m 7 No nic ste e 2 y ga s pag or —
Solid Waste & Recycling Canada’s magazine on collection, hauling, processing and disposal April/May 2010 $10.00
CPMP No. 40069240
An EcoLog Group Publication
ROLLING STOCK
Ontario’s new program to recycle scrap tires — page 8
Natural attenuation landfills — page 23 swr a-m 2010 Cover pg 1.indd 1
01/11/10 9:36 AM
R e c y c le y o u r
rec har gea ble bat ter ies
and cell phones
W hether at home, work or play, rechargeable batteries and cell phones are part of our lives.
O nce they no
longer hold their charge, recycle them.
C all 2R ecycle supplies free collection boxes for your workplace as well as at drop-off locations at retail and within your community.
Go to www.call2recycle.org to register your business for free and to find nearby participating collection sites.
You can also recycle at any participating hardware supply store:
877-2-RECYCLE swr a-m 2010 pg 2 AD.indd 2
07/04/10 2:46 PM
Solid Waste & Recycling
CONTENTS April/May 2010 Volume 15, Number 2
Canada’s magazine on collection, hauling, processing & disposal
Tire Stewardship
Some product stewardship programs in various provinces have been criticized for being anti-competitive, inefficient and ignoring existing markets. Has Ontario’s scrap tire program finally got it right? by James Sbrolla
8 Cover art by Charles Jaffé
COVER STORY
FEATURES AGRICULTURAL WASTE: CONTAINERS
DEPARTMENTS
New CleanFARMS initiatives. by Barry Friesen
15
IC&I WASTE: GENERATION The Owen Sound commercial waste study. by Maria Kelleher
18
COLLECTION: AUTOMATION Collection program in Lethbridge, Alberta. by Carl Friesen
22
LANDFILL TECHNOLOGY: LEACHATE Natural attenuation landfills. by Darren MacNeil
23
Editorial
4
Up Front
6
Composting Matters
27
Waste Business
29
Regulation Roundup
31
Equipment
35
Ad Index
37
Blog
38
PACKAGING: CONSUMABLES Sun Chips compostable chip bag. by Guy Crittenden
33
NEXT EDITION Deposit-refund systems for beverage containers • Source-separated organics • Waste-to-Energy • Compactor technology. Space closing: June 1, 2010. Artwork required: June 8, 2010. Advertisers, contact Publisher Brad O’Brien at 1-888-702-1111 ext. 2.
Agricultural waste, pg. 15
Collection, pg. 22
Landfill technology, pg. 23
April/May 2010 www.solidwastemag.com 3
swr a-m 2010 Cont pg 3.indd 3
08/04/10 8:17 AM
EDITORIAL
by Guy Crittenden “Waste Diversion Ontario has filed a notice of breach-ofagreement with OES under the WEEE Program Agreement.”
A WEEE Problem
I
n a market economy such as Canada’s, the idea that competitive markets result in innovative products at less cost to consumers is generally understood. Competitive markets are also necessary to ensure innovative, environmentally effective and economically efficient recycling and Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) programs. Unfortunately, the planners of Ontario’s Waste Electronic and Electrical Equipment (WEEE) program have missed this point, and the plan is failing miserably from an environmental and economic perspective. Operated by Ontario Electronic Stewardship (OES), Ontario’s WEEE program was tasked with diverting 42,000 tonnes of WEEE in its first year of operation. Approved in July 2009, it should have recovered and recycled 31,500 tonnes of WEEE by January 2010, but only managed to recover and recycle about 12,000 tonnes (or 38 per cent of the target). To date the program has levied over $30 million in electronic stewardship fees from Ontario electronics consumers, yet the overwhelming bulk (about 80 per cent) of WEEE generated in Ontario is still hoarded, disposed of, or handled outside of the OES program (a program approved by the Ontario’s environment minister). OES itself admits that a lot of the material it’s responsible for recovering and recycling is flowing outside of its program to markets unknown, stating, “OES Phase 1 WEEE collection tonnage is tracking substantially lower than projected in the Revised WEEE Program Plan. This is largely due to the fact that OES is actively competing for WEEE with a group of companies that have chosen not to participate in the OES program. As a result, non-participating collection organizations are handling some of the volumes that OES had anticipated would flow through the OES system...” The question is: Who are these companies and where is the material that’s supposed to be recycled by OES-approved WEEE processors going? (And why have regulated WEEE programs if the bulk of materials flow outside of those programs to unregulated processors?) Notwithstanding well documented program failure, OES’ continues to resist redesign of key elements of its program. As a result Waste Diversion Ontario (WDO) has filed a notice of breach-of-agreement with OES under the WEEE Program Agreement between WDO and OES. The breach notice contends that OES has failed to comply with the terms of WEEE Program Plan. The largest WEEE processor under the Ontario WEEE program is Sims Recycling Solutions. Sims operates 39 WEEE recycling operations worldwide, including a flagship processing facility in Brampton, Ontario. It’s getting less material now than it was pre-program and has lost money for the first time in Ontario as a result of the OES program. In an October 2009 letter to Environment Minister Gerretsen, Cindy
Coutts, President of Sims Recycling Solutions Canada, states, “Under the WEEE program all WEEE collected by registered collectors is consolidated (in OES controlled consolidation centers) and then allocated to WEEE processors under a quota system. There is no way for a processor to ‘grow the business’ — any WEEE collected by a given processor on its own initiative is then allocated to its competitors by OES based on the set quotas.” The Sims letter goes on to highlight a bizarre effect of the OES quota system, noting that “...if Sims Recycling Solutions were to organize and fund a creative collection event (say through a school board or Rotary Club) we would only receive our allocated 30 per cent of the WEEE we collect for processing despite the fact that Sims was responsible for recovering 100 per cent of this material. The other approved processors would receive the remaining 70 per cent of what Sims collected despite not being involved in the development or execution of the innovative collection event.” Sims has put a hold on a $16 million planned investment into an innovative technology in Ontario since there’s no mechanism to ensure an acceptable return on the investment in the current climate. Despite the failure of the current OES WEEE program, Ontario’s environment ministry and OES announced the expansion of this program to include other materials on March 30, 2010. Then, on March 31, OES quietly announced they will be reviewing their WEEE allocation system. Hopefully the review will lead to replacement of the current anticompetitive EPR model for WEEE with a system in which any processor who meets the environment standard will be free to engage collectors and haulers to “pull in” WEEE from whatever part of the province it can. Specifically, the WEEE program amendments should eliminate OES-controlled consolidation and quotas and offer decent incentives to collect materials and encourage competition and innovation. The system should include a rigorous environmental standard for processors, a point-of-pickup to post-processing tracking system for WEEE, and an audit and verification program to ensure ongoing proper processing of the materials. A pretty good example of a program that does not pick winners and losers in collection, transportation and processing markets, and which harnesses competition to meet environmental objectives is Ontario’s stewardship program for scrap tires, which is the subject of our Cover Story on page 8. Guy Crittenden is editor of this magazine. Contact Guy at gcrittenden@solidwastemag.com
4 www.solidwastemag.com April/May 2010
swr a-m 2010 Edit pg 4.indd 4
08/04/10 8:21 AM
20998 Paral SolidWasteRec.qxd:Layout 1
3/11/09
11:57 AM
Page 1
“Our Al-jon 525 will pay for itself in 3 to 5 years – just on saved air space!”
THE ADVANTAGE SERIES
Al-jon puts real teeth into compaction with its patented lugs. “We’re getting 1,800 to 2,000 pounds of compaction daily, compared to 1,200 to 1,400 pounds with our old yellow machine,” Mike Paral states.
Mike Paral Facility Manager Kewaunee County Solid Waste Kewaunee, WI
ADVANTAGE 600 – 127,500 LBS.
“It rips materials to shreds with no big pieces left.” The benefit? “We proved to our Board that our Al-jon unit will pay for itself in 3 to 5 years – just on saved air space,” he adds. Repairs and service? “Al-jon bends over backwards to
ADVANTAGE 525 – UP TO 110,000 LBS.
make sure our machine is running,” he explains. “And if it ever isn’t, they get it fixed within a day. Al-jon service is just phenomenal!” ADVANTAGE 500 – 87,000 LBS. Get details today. • Al-jon MFG., LLC • 14599 2nd Avenue • Ottumwa, Iowa USA 52501 641-682-4506 or 800-255-6620 in North America • www.aljon.com
K E E P I N G I T S I M P L E . B U I L D I N G I T S T R O N G.
swr a-m 2010 pg 5 AD.indd 5
09/04/10 7:36 AM
Solid Waste & Recycling
UPFRONT
Canada’s magazine on collection, hauling, processing & disposal
Guy Crittenden Editor gcrittenden@solidwastemag.com Brad O’Brien Publisher bobrien@solidwastemag.com Jamie Ross Account Manager jross@solidwastemag.com Sheila Wilson Art Director Kim Collins Market Production Selina Rahaman Circulation Manager Carol Bell-Lenoury Mgr EcoLog Group Bruce Creighton President Business Information Group Contributing Editors Michael Cant, Rosalind Cooper, Maria Kelleher, 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 divi sion of BIG Magazines LP, a div. of Glacier BIG Holdings Company Ltd., a leading Canadian businesstobusiness information services company that also publishes HazMat Management magazine and other information products. The magazine is printed in Canada. Solid Waste & Recycling provides strategic informa tion 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. Canadian Publications Mail Product Sales Agreement No. 40069240 Information contained in this publication has been com piled 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 ad vice. Reprint and list rental services are arranged through the Publisher at (416) 5106798. Return undeliverable Canadian addresses to: Circulation Department, Solid Waste & Recycling 12 Concorde Pl, Ste 800, Toronto, ON M3C 4J2 Call: (416) 4425600 Fax: (416) 5105148 Email: srahaman@bizinfogroup.ca 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: 18002687742 Fax: 4165105148 EMail: jhunter@businessinformationgroup.ca Mail to: Privacy Officer Business Information Group 12 Concorde Pl, Ste 800 Toronto, ON Canada M3C 4J2 Solid Waste & Recycling, USPS 018886 is published bimonthly by Business Information Group. US office of publication: 2424 Niagara Falls Blvd, Niagara Falls, NY 143040357. Periodicals Postage Paid at Niagara Falls, NY. US postmaster: Send address changes to Solid Waste & Recycling, PO Box 1118, Niagara Falls, NY 14304. We acknowledge the financial support of the Government of Canada through the Publications Assistance Program towards our mailing costs. © 2010 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced without prior consent. ISSN14837714 PAP Registration No. 10991
OUR TOP LETTERS Dear Editor,
RE: “Who’s Hot? Waste-to-Energy Companies in Canada” by John Nicholson (February/March 2010 edition) I just finished reading the article “Who’s Hot?” and it seemed like a very good time to introduce Renewable Energy Management Inc. (REM) to you. REM is a project development company that owns the intellectual property license for Canada, the United States and the Caribbean Territories of ENTECH Renewable Energy Solutions Ltd. (www.entech-res.com) — a leader in Advanced Conversion Technology (ACT), a low temperature gasification process for converting waste into clean renewable rnergy while maximizing recycling and reuse. There is a 20 year history with the technology and over 160 facilities built and distributed globally. Our corporate head office for North America is located in Pickering, Ontario. Our REM specific website is www.remenergysolutions.com and we have a project under way in Port Hope that will be located in Wesleyville. (See www.rem-wesleyville.ca) We also have a project in the County of Brant that will be starting its EA screening process any time now. These two project sites are strategically located and can offer a tremendous benefit and value to waste management organizations in southern Ontario.
Doug Starr, Executive VP
Renewable Energy Management Inc. doug-starr@rem-energysolutions.com
Insight conference focuses on applications
R
epresentatives of the public and private sector from across Canada received practical advice and heard about best practices in waste management at the Canadian Waste Management conference in Richmond Hill, Ontario, February 22-23. This conference, hosted and produced by Insight Information, focused on new strategies and technologies. This included the use of social marketing in rapidly growing Halton Region west of Toronto, to promote a new curbside recycling and organics program through the help of a cartoon frog that is expected to soon have its own Facebook fan page. Jim Downham, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Packaging Association of Canada, talked about how the packaging industry is taking responsibility for supporting waste reduction through
smarter packaging technology and design. Presenters also discussed the impact of new technologies. Carol Hochu, Executive Director of Ontario Electronic Stewardship, discussed the impact of the steady flow of new electronic products, which generates a flow of obsolete, used products that contain materials that must be diverted from landfill. Some presentations dealt with vexing practical problems, such as one by David Myles of Halton Region and Andrew Boyd of the City of Kawartha Lakes, on “The popular blue box lids: is it worth it? Others were more conceptual, such as how to benefit from the Feed In Tariff (FIT) for organics processing, delivered by John Haanstra of Maple Reinders Constructors Ltd. — Carl Friesen
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 April/May 2010
swr a-m 2010 Upf pg 6-7.indd 6
07/04/10 2:16 PM
RWANDA SAYS “NO” TO POLYETHYLENE BAGS Photos by Carl Friesen
W
alking from the plane to the airport terminal in Kigali, the capital of the central African country of Rwanda, I saw a sign on the door telling me that polyethylene bags are banned in Rwanda. “They’ll never make that work,” I remember thinking. It wasn’t until I got to my hotel later that day, in the city of Goma in the Democratic Republic of Congo, that I realized I had unknowingly violated Rwandan law — there in my suitcase was a polyethylene bag full of small shampoo bottles, pens and other small items I’d intended as gifts. On the way back through Rwanda after completing a week-long consulting assignment, I was careful to not have any plastic bags in my luggage. The Rwandans I met were quite proud of the bag ban, saying that it made the cities and countryside much cleaner. And it seems to fit Rwanda’s shiny new positioning as a tourism and information technology destination. No plastic bags blowing in
the wind as there were in Congo, where they could be eaten by domestic animals such as goats, and wildlife, with sometimes-lethal results for the animal. Rwanda enacted its law in 2008, banning the manufacturing, import, use and sale of polyethylene bags. Some business owners complained about the higher cost of paper bags, but the government held firm, saying that in rich countries there were facilities to recycle plastic, but a country like Rwanda could not afford this. And indeed, the wood carvings I bought at a handicraft centre were handed to me in paper, not plastic, bags. Given the opposition raised when some Canadian municipalities took steps to limit the use of plastic bags, I found the Rwandans’ quiet pride in their legislation to be quite welcome. If I travel to Rwanda again — and I hope to — it’s for sure that there won’t be any banned substances in my luggage. — Carl Friesen
Waste veteran to head new WTE company
Z
ero Waste Energy (ZWE), a leading waste industry company specializing in recyclable commodity recovery combined with energy production, announced today the selection of Eric Herbert as Chief Executive Officer (CEO). Herbert brings a deep knowledge of the industry’s metrics and a unique ability to design, build, and operate innovative facilities to the new company. He has more than 15 years’ of senior executive leadership experience in the solid waste industry and more than 10 years’ of experience in the engineering and construction industry. ZWE combines commodity recovery and energy production through unique waste-to-energy processing systems, utilizing a variety of patented technologies to capture and recycle waste streams with an emphasis on transforming the organic fraction into electricity or compressed natural gas through a dry anaerobic digestion process. Contact Eric Herbert at 408-938-4945
April/May 2010 www.solidwastemag.com 7
swr a-m 2010 Upf pg 6-7.indd 7
07/04/10 2:16 PM
COVER STORY
by James Sbrolla “In a way, OTS and its stewards are working toward the end of the program.”
Ontario’s new program to recycle scrap tires
O
n September 1, 2009 Canada’s largest and much anticipated Used Tires Stewardship Program was launched. The program was developed (and will be implemented and managed by) Ontario Tire Stewardship (OTS) — an Industry-Funded Organization convened by Waste Diversion Ontario in response to a Program Request Letter issued by Ontario’s Minister of the Environment John Gerretsen. The program goals are: • Divert 90 per cent of Ontario’s on-road, and 50 per cent of the offroad, tires to value-added recycling by the end of 2012; • Eliminate illegal dumping of tires and clean up existing stockpiles; • Develop Ontario scrap tire processing capacity to manage 100 per cent of the province’s scrap tires; and • Build markets in Ontario to use the tire-derived products (TDPs) made from the scrap tires. The launch of this program thrusts Ontario into the fore-
front of used tire stewardship with a program that commits to delivering short-, medium-, and long-term environmental and economic benefits. “But wait,” the sharp-eyed tire user might say. “Hasn’t Ontario had a tire program for years? What about the tire tax I pay when I get rid of my old tires?” In reality the management of scrap tires in Ontario has been a strictly free-market enterprise since the repeal of the Ontario Tire Tax by the Government in 1993. In that free-market system, the consumer paid the tire retailer/garage/municipal depot to take the scrap tires, the tire retailer/garage/municipal depot paid a hauler to take the tires away, and the tire hauler paid a processor/power plant/cement factory to take the tires. There was a built-in motivator to get rid of tires at the lowest possible cost, and this led to approximately 50 per cent on Ontario’s tires being shipped to the US to be used as fuel.
Rolling Stock 8 www.solidwastemag.com April/May 2010
swr a-m 2010 Cvrsty pg 8-14.indd 8
07/04/10 2:18 PM
COVER STORY
“Approximately 50 per cent of the 10 million scrap tires generated each year were being used as fuel in US cement kilns and power plants.” While this approach did drive high collection rates, and provided the majority of Ontarians access to locations that would take their old tires, policymakers sought a system that would see scrap tires preferentially diverted to recycling applications and away from use as a fuel (or landfill disposal). This was the impetus for the designation of used tires in a stewardship program. According to Andrew Horsman, Executive Director of OTS, “This program is funded by a Tire Stewardship Fee (TSF) paid by the “steward” (brand-owners and first importers into Ontario) to OTS. The old financial model of scrap tire management is thrown out, and replaced by an incentive-based approach whereby the payment for the collection, transportation, and processing of scrap tires is contingent on proof that the tires have moved through the chain to the next approved point as determined by OTS. “This eliminates any incentive to deliver tires for use as fuel, or to illegally dump them, as these are not OTS-approved end uses and the transporter delivering the tires will not be paid any incentive.” Strategically the OTS approach can be broken down into three components, essentially short, medium, and long-term objectives, which could extend far beyond the timeline for the current approved plan: 1. Short term: Ensure Ontario’s scrap tires are only going to approved end-uses; 2. Medium term: Work with the existing Ontario scrap-tire management industry to manage 100 per cent of Ontario’s scrap tires within the province; 3. Long term: Build markets in Ontario to use the TDPs made from Ontario’s scrap tires. While these objectives mirror the elements of the minister’s program request letter, they also reflect the business planning approach of OTS:
ck
only by creating sustainable infrastructure and demand for TDPs will the costs of, and need for, a full-blown stewardship program for used tires ever be eliminated. In a way, OTS and its stewards are working toward the end of the program. The ultimate vision is one of a stronger green economy that uses scrap tires as a raw material to be sourced as opposed to a waste to be managed.
Ensuring approved end-uses The issue in Ontario with scrap tires was not fundamentally the problem of stockpiles or the difficulty in finding places for them to go; it was their end use. Approximately 50 per cent of the 10 million scrap tires generated each year were being used as fuel in cement kilns and power plants in the U.S. While some may debate the merits of this use, the end result was that this 50 per cent was not being “diverted” from disposal in terms of the ministry’s definition. More importantly, the wide-spread use of this low-cost option meant that Ontario processors making TDPs did not have access to the supply of tires necessary to sustain and grow their businesses. While the existing industry provided an excellent base, it could only handle about 60 per cent of Ontario’s tires even if fully supplied. OTS has moved quickly to rectify this. The introduction of a tracking system has virtually eliminated illegal dumping, and has allowed OTS to develop a fuller picture of the current market dynamics. This information will be leveraged to improve the program as it moves forward. The need to preserve the out-of-province processing option was recognized immediately, due to the current shortfall in Ontario-based processing capacity. OTS addressed this issue by issuing a Request for Proposals (RFP) for processing capacity outside of Ontario, and executed contracts with the respondents based on a number of factors, inApril/May 2010 www.solidwastemag.com 9
swr a-m 2010 Cvrsty pg 8-14.indd 9
07/04/10 2:19 PM
COVER STORY
N
National Rubber
ational Rubber Technologies (NRT) is North America’s largest vertically-integrated manufacturer of engineered industrial and automotive rubber and plastic products from both new and recycled materials. NRT operates a tire recycling plant, located at 99 Commissioners Street in the Port District of Toronto, which can accommodate receipt of passenger and medium truck used tires from any and all trucks. Using environmentally green processes, the plant has the capacity to process over three million used tires annually, equivalent to approximately 30,000 tonnes. NRT recycles 100 per cent of used tires through proprietary processes that have the capability to convert approximately 83 per cent of the weight of a used tire into reusable raw materials. The reclaimed rubber and tire cord components are used in NRT’s manufacturing process to produce a number of different products. NRT claims to be the only company in Ontario that recovers the rubber, fibre and
Trusted Proven Flexible For over 25 years solid waste management organizations have trusted Geoware to provide solutions that guide you through the requirements of a dynamic, ever-changing industry. We are dedicated to simplifying your world with proven, industry standard software and services that are practical, flexible and scalable to respond to any business need.
steel components to the highest level. NRT also operates a manufacturing plant located in Toronto that processes recycled tire crumb (from the tire recycling plant) into commercialized value-added materials ranging from basic rubber sheets and mats to molded parts (e.g., automotive). NRT uses recycled material to make molded engineered parts, rather than garden mulch or tire derived fuel, resulting in higher and greener waste diversion. NRT can also offer province-wide used tire haulage through its National Tomlinson division. The division is a partnership with Tomlinson Systems, an Ancaster, Ontariobased logistics service provider with a large fleet of trucks and trailers. Through National Tomlinson, NRT can offer tire collection bins or trailers that can be spotted on collection premises free of charge. The company can also clean up used tire stockpiles as required. Visit www.nrtna.com
analyze
plancontrol manage
report execute
Call today. Let’s get started!
1.800.900.4252 | www.geoware4.com 10 www.solidwastemag.com April/May 2010
swr a-m 2010 Cvrsty pg 8-14.indd 10
07/04/10 2:20 PM
COVER STORY “The fast-paced growth in local scraptire processing should eliminate the need to send tires outside of the province within 12 months from program launch.”
cluding their ability to demonstrate compliance with the diversion hierarchy required by OTS (i.e., no burning or province-wide tracking system for used tires, landfill). registering the collectors, haulers and procesThe results to date have been excellent, sors operating in the province, designating apwith OTS currently exceeding the diversion proved end uses, and establishing an “Ontarioobjectives of 90 per cent of on-road tires and first” policy (whereby OTS commits to work 50 per cent of off-road (OTR) tires, based on with registered haulers to supply Ontario procurrent information regarding tires supplied cessors before sending them out of province). into the market and reports from Ontario processors. Through 2010, OTS will be conGrowing local capacity ducting compliance reviews to validate the reWhile pre-program consultations with Onporting so far. tario processors indicated a potential surplus Although less than a year old, the Used of tires of between three and four million, the Tires Stewardship Program has already launch of the program has driven some preWalinga VC2336 6/11/07 2:36 PM Page 1 achieved its short-term goal by introducing a dictable, but nevertheless welcome, activity.
N O W
Three existing Ontario processors are investing in capacity and technology upgrades that are expected to add 20,000 to 30,000 tonnes of increased capacity. As well, a number of out-of-province processors are making investments in Ontario that are expected to add 50,000 to 65,000 tonnes of incremental annual capacity for on-road and off-road tire processing. OTS registered its first new Ontario tire processor in December 2009. Investment in tire processing capacity in Ontario over the next 12 to 18 months is expected to exceed $20 million. This fast-paced growth in local scrap-tire processing should eliminate the need to send tires outside of the province within 12 months
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
April/May 2010 www.solidwastemag.com 11
swr a-m 2010 Cvrsty pg 8-14.indd 11
07/04/10 2:20 PM
COVER STORY
Emterra Tire Recycling
L
ocated in Brampton, Ontario Emterra Tire Recycling operates an integrated used tire collection and processing business. Launched in 2005, the company is part of the Emterra Group, which operates a variety of waste management businesses in Ontario and Western Canada. The tire collection division services a wide range of municipal and commercial customers in eastern, central and southwestern areas of Ontario in addition to the Niagara Region and GTA. In addition to the traditional methods of handling tires the company also offers a containerized service. The Emterra Tire Recycling plant specializes in the processing of passenger car and light truck tires, although the collection arm of the business handles all types of tires. Inbound tires are sorted by type and condition, with those not suitable for reuse funneled into the recycling process line. Following a careful inspection for contaminants, non-reusable tires are shredded and ground, producing three marketable commodities: steel, crumb rubber and tire fibre. Used tires are sold both domestically and through export.
OUR CUTTING EDGE IS LEAN AND
GREEN A CART IS NOT JUST A CART, ASK US WHY?
PROTECT THE PLANET AND YOUR BOTTOM LINE The Schuyler Rubber cutting edge sweeps thoroughly and efficiently, decreasing tipping-floor protection costs by up to 50%. Its streamlined construction and adjustable bolt pattern make it easy to install, and its reinforced rubber edge
• The
is made from 100% recycled truck tires. Green makes good business sense.
• Superior
Call 1-800-426-3917 to find out how you can better protect your tipping floor.
* Based on a comparison of competitive containers. ** 95-gallon model
WWW.SCHUYLERRUBBER.COM 12AD SIZE www.solidwastemag.com April/May 2010 : 4" X 5"
swr a-m 2010 Cvrsty pg 8-14.indd 12
industry’s strongest lid moisture barrier • Excellent wind stability • Standard 12" wheel** and 7/8" axle • Easy lower bar assembly
SCHAEFER SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
P.O. Box 7009 Charlotte, NC 28241 Tel: 877-724-2327 Fax: 704-588-1862 email: general@ssimail.net
www.ssi-schaefer.us
ONLY SCHAEFER. DESIGNED FOR TOMORROW. BUILT FOR TODAY. AD VERSION 3
09/04/10 6:49 AM
COVER STORY
tario Center for Environmental Technology Advancement (OCETA) to conduct a market assessment. According to Kevin Jones, President of OCETA, “With OTS, we plan to look at where the markets are in North America, how large they are, what the barriers are to growing this market, and how OTS can best direct resources and efforts to help Ontario’s industry perform successfully.” (Learn more about OCETA in the forthcoming CleanTech Canada supplement in the Summer edition of HazMat Management magazine.) As well, OTS engage directly with endusers to understand their perception of tirederived products and how OTS can help them become greater consumers of them. Key sectors include the provincial government, municipalities, commercial building operators, and
from program launch. This is not only true for the on-road passenger and medium truck tires, but also for the more difficult to manage larger OTR tires. OTS is working with specialists in management of OTR tires from across Canada and with stewardship programs in other Canadian provinces to identify best practices and key learnings. While their large size and different material composition can pose a significant challenge for processors, certain companies have specialized in handling this type of tire.
Building markets Despite having launched the program only eight months ago, OTS is already looking to the future where the main challenge will be access to sustainable, high-value markets for the recycled product manufacturers. To this end, OTS is working with the On-
Back Cover
Inside Back
James Sbrolla is the Entrepreneur in Residence at MaRS and OCETA and Chairman of Environmental Business Consultants. He can be reached at sbrolla@rogers.com
Gordon McGuinty was responsible for the Rail Cycle North consortium, which included some of North America’s largest rail and waste corporations and was awarded the largest waste management contract in Canada. For fourteen years Front Cover McGuinty wasSpine the force behind the Adams Mine landfill project as a solution to Ontario’s garbage disposal crisis until it was TRASHED!
r contract, A botched billion-dolla rdice... ism, political cowa ct, environmental terror s Mine landfill proje of how the Adam story true the is This solution to and cost-effective sound tally nmen tion the most enviro -class rail transporta world a and , crisis to disposal by the City of Toron Ontario’s garbage mismanagement killed by political ed fourteen surviv ll opportunity were landfi Adams Mine nt of Ontario. The rs, four provincial and the Governme ts and contract tende smen asses tal er l cross-bord years of environmen and an internationa municipal elections actions governments, five political pen. The by the stroke of a only to be trashed trucking dispute, — Dalton McGuinty, senior politicians and media , st the efforts of of environmentalists Lastman — set again Mel n, Layto bing Rae, Jack io, weave a distur Mike Harris, Bob right thing for Ontar striving to do the ordinary citizens ge. tale of political garba io Ontar of s tonne of ns — and why millio , why it happened United States — How it happened to landfills in the day being trucked and garbage are to this le, perseverance peop of story a is been told before. politics. It has never
This is the true story of how the Adams Mine landfill project was killed by political mismanagement at the City of Toronto and by the Government of Inside Front Ontario. ction
An author’s refle
book? It’s from writing this What did I learn you are matter what side a little scary. No t the be concerned abou on, we should all g and al decision makin politic our of ty fragili selves. them rs make the decision d organized, well funde If small groups, well a -savvy, can stop and extremely media s Mine, what is next? project like the Adam Adams Mine, miles the like site a And if of thousands of acres from anyone, with used land, cannot be severely damaged can we can, and where as a landfill, what find solutions? ahead serious problems We have some so rs are so insecure, if our political leade they g re-elected, that afraid of not gettin the for right decisions can’t make the world the population. The environment and media -driven, and the has become media das. drives political agen
Order your copy of TRASHED! today and get the story behind the political garbage as it has never been told before.
uinty.com
www.gordonmcg
$25.95
word
Excerpt from Fore by Paul Godfrey
tabout a real projec “ (This) is a real story rtant environmental, one that had impo for al implications business and politic with ip and our relationsh Ontario, Canada s.” State d the Unite
Gordon McGuinty
Gordon McGuinty , Gordon for over thirty years An entrepreneur Cycle nsible for the Rail McGuinty was respo some of North , which included North consortium rations corpo rail and waste America’s largest management the largest waste and was awarded years McGuinty da. For fourteen contract in Cana s Mine landfill Adam the d was the force behin garbage on to Ontario’s project as a soluti speaking to , when he is not disposal crisis. Today between he divides his time nces, audie sted intere Alberta and his the mountains of his residence in office in Ontario.
residential developers (among others). Aliapur, the French Tire Recycling Agency, has released a report highlighting how a great reduction in things such as GHG emissions and water use can be realized through the use of recycled rubber products. This kind of information could facilitate the adoption of recycled rubber products by organizations concerned with reducing their overall environmental footprint. Horsman sums up: “OTS just plans to keep rolling along, transforming old tires into green products.”
858-0-7 42595 >
-9865 ISBN 978-0
elevation press
www.trashedpolitical t design
ompany.com - Jacke
www.penneyandc
garbage.com
585807 9 780986
order online:
www.trashedpoliticalgarbage.com
$25.95
April/May 2010 www.solidwastemag.com 13
swr a-m 2010 Cvrsty pg 8-14.indd 13
08/04/10 3:09 PM
COVER STORY
A longer reach for EPR in Canada
Expired batteries are among the priority targets for Extended Producer Responsibility. Image by Carl Friesen
S
teadily and relentlessly, despite best attempts to manage it, Canada’s solid waste flows continue to grow — from 752 kg per capita disposed in 2000 to 835 kg in 2006, according to Statistics Canada. In a presentation to the Canadian Waste Management Forum, hosted and produced by Insight Information (in Richmond Hill, Ontario in February), Director of the Waste Reduction and Management Division for Environment Canada Carolyne Blain described Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) as part of the solution to the growing problem of waste. She offered the 2001 OECD definition of EPR: “An environmental policy in which a producer’s responsibility, physical and/or financial, for a product is extended to the post-consumer stage of a product’s life cycle.” Starting with a paint program in British Columbia in 1994, Blain said, various provincial, regional and national programs have covered a wide range of products including packaging, tires electronics, batteries and other materials. Drivers include growing concern about hazardous and toxic substances and waste, and a disproportionate part of the waste management burden being placed on municipalities. Many EPR initiatives are provincial in orientation, and vary widely by which materials are managed and to what degree of completeness. However, through Environment Canada, the federal government is increasing its involvement, largely through the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) of 1999. CEPA Section 93 can be used to require EPR for Schedule 1 toxic substances, or products that contain toxic substances. Ozone Depleting Substances management at the end of life were identified as a goal of the Montreal Protocol, and the federal government is working towards regulations of these substances
in both stationary and mobile air conditioning and refrigeration units. Participation in a stewardship program is expected to be required of all producers, importers and distributors; exact scope of the regulation is still under consideration and is expected for publication in the Canada Gazette in 2011. Other national commitments to EPR come through the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME), which established a Task Group in 2005 to identify ways to harmonize, expand and improve EPR programs in Canada. Canada-wide principles were published in 2006. In October 2009, CCME approved a nation-wide Action Plan to set timelines for implementation, provide guidance for EPR development and implementation and strengthen the use of EPR as an environmental risk-management tool. Key challenges for the CCME initiative, according to Carolyne Blain, are: • Availability and effectiveness of collection and processing infrastructure; • Fees and levies: visible or invisible/internalized; fixed or variable; • Creation of level playing fields and avoiding free riders; • Establishing performance requirements — setting recovery rates and targets; • Establishing environmentally sound management standards for recycling and end of life management; • Streamlining and harmonizing regulations and program implementation; • Program governance and accountability; • Moving beyond recycling: stimulating toxics reduction and environmental design, promoting waste minimization and encouraging reuse and refurbishment. Written by Carl Friesen. Principal, Global Reach Communications. Contact Carl at cfriesen@rogers.com
14 www.solidwastemag.com April/May 2010
swr a-m 2010 Cvrsty pg 8-14.indd 14
08/04/10 8:42 AM
by Barry Friesen, P.Eng.
A G R I C U LT U R A L W A S T E
“CleanFARMS has asked Health Canada’s Pesticide Management Regulatory Agency to develop national requirements.”
Clean Farms
Re-launched pesticide container stewardship program aims for 80 per cent diversion, and more
O
n February 2010, the commitment to environmental stewardship by Canada’s plant science industry was highlighted with the launch of CleanFARMS™ Inc. CleanFARMS stepped out from under the CropLife Canada umbrella to re-launch the highly successful empty container recycling and obsolete product collection programs as an independent, not-for-profit organization. The reason for the move is simple: A changing regulatory climate coupled with the public’s desire for industry responsibility requires all industries to address stewardship. For CropLife Canada, that meant making its well established success public.
But the new direction means even more.
CleanFARMS is encouraging higher rates of recycling by bringing in new members and stakeholders that may not have participated in container recycling in the past. And, CleanFARMS is looking toward build-
ing upon these programs by ensuring that all agricultural waste is effectively and responsibly managed, which will mean managing additional stewardship programs in the future. Up to now, the company has operated two separate programs: Empty Pesticide Container Recycling and Obsolete Pesticide Collection. On a national basis, the empty container management program has collected and recycled over 82 million containers. Its national recovery rates hover around 61 per cent — remarkable for a voluntary program. Still, the organization hopes to see this number jump even higher under its new identity. With commitment by industry, farmers and other stakeholders, it’s aiming for an 80 per cent return rate. While the program will no longer be run by CropLife Canada, CleanFARMS shares the same core values, including a commitment to safety, innovation, and sustainability.
Empty pesticide containers being bundled for recycling in Saskatchewan.
April/May 2010 www.solidwastemag.com 15
swr a-m 2010 AgWaste pg 15-17.indd 15
08/04/10 11:50 AM
A G R I C U LT U R A L W A S T E
mains. Even the end product is extensively tested for residual material. End uses for the products are restricted so that only very specific products can be made from the containers. To the user of the pesticide products, the request is simple: Rinse, Remove, Return. Containers must be either triple-rinsed or pressure-rinsed and caps and booklets removed before they’re returned to ensure recyclability of the containers. Users returning containers have over 1,150 locations across Canada to choose from. They can also visit the website www. cleanfarms.ca to find a location nearest to them. Over the next few years, CleanFARMS will look for end-of-life solutions to deal with all the additional materials associated with these containers such as caps, booklets, corrugated shipping cartons and any other materials associated with the containers.
Other wastes Clean plastic shard ready for recycling.
Pesticide container recycling
The Empty Pesticide Container Recycling Program encourages farmers, horticultural operations and golf courses that use commercial pesticides to return all empty commercial pesticide containers less than 23 litres in size. The containers can be taken to any one of over 1,150 designated sites across Canada. In seven of the nine provinces where the program operates, those designated locations are dealers. In Manitoba and Alberta, locations are regional management sites operated by local municipalities. CleanFARMS contractors collect the containers and shred them to the appropriate size. The plastic shreds are sent to various customers who manufacture them into various products, the most common being farm drainage tile. There is no cost to the farmer or to the collection sites. For the larger containers, it’s the responsibility of the manufacturer to manage their return and shredding. Once shredded, they must either be safely disposed or be given back to CleanFARMS to be safely recycled. Because of the nature of the material processed, strict health, safety and environmental procedures must be followed by all contractors
and processors. Empty containers are tested for cleanliness, and plastic shreds undergo testing to ensure that no product residue re-
The second program CleanFARMS operates is called the Obsolete Pesticide Collection Campaign. Launched in 1998, this program gives users a safe way to dispose of obsolete or unwanted products, ensuring no chemicals are released back into the environment. Since 1998 more than 1.3 million kilo-
The plastic containers are frequently recycled into farm drainage tile, shown here.
16 www.solidwastemag.com April/May 2010
swr a-m 2010 AgWaste pg 15-17.indd 16
07/04/10 2:27 PM
A G R I C U LT U R A L W A S T E ®
BALERS grams of unwanted and obsolete product have been disposed of safely. In fact, the program received the Alberta Premier’s Award of Excellence in 2003. As mentioned, CleanFARMS is positioned to manage other on-farm wastes. In 2009, working in partnership with the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, the Canadian Animal Health Institute and other stakeholders, CleanFARMS collected obsolete pesticides, obsolete on-farm pharmaceuticals and used sharps during its collection program. The future of this type of partnership will continue to be explored. In the prairies, CleanFARMS has worked with the Saskatchewan Waste Reduction Council and the Recycling Council of Alberta to identify solutions to agricultural film waste. The Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment has recently partnered with the organization to scope out the agricultural film market with the view to identify appropriate end-of-life solutions for these products. It is expected that other provinces will also be interested in partnering on this work.
The future
New stewardship legislation in Manitoba (Manitoba’s Packaging and Printed Paper Stewardship Regulation) now requires manufacturers or first importers of these products to effectively manage their packaging waste. Fortunately, CleanFARMS has a ready-made solution for its stewards and has submitted an Industry Stewardship Plan to Manitoba Conservation to cover its member’s obligations under this regulation. It’s expected that other provinces may follow suit. So, rather than having to address these stewardship schemes in a piecemeal fashion, CleanFARMS has asked Health Canada’s Pesticide Management Regulatory Agency to develop national requirements that require every registrant of pesticides to have a container management program. By building on CleanFARMS success, government and the agriculture industry can achieve easy wins for the environment. Barry Friesen, P.Eng. is General Manager of CleanFARMS(tm) Inc. Barry can be reached at friesenb@cleanFARMS.ca
Harris introduces the NEW HLO 5443 and the NEW HSO 4529 horizontal balers. Each one of these balers features a super small footprint allowing them to fit in places traditional balers cannot. The 50HP model for each of these features an “economy mode” shutting down one of the twin 25HP motors to save energy and saving you money. And let’s be honest, it is about saving you money.
®
800.373.9131 770.631.7290
www.harrisequip.com April/May 2010 www.solidwastemag.com 17
SWR_HSOHLO_AprilMay2010.indd 1
swr a-m 2010 AgWaste pg 15-17.indd 17
3/11/10 3:42:12 PM
07/04/10 2:27 PM
by Maria Kelleher
I C & I WA S T E
“Owen Sound provides an excellent opportunity to see how the business mix of a typical small city contributes to the IC&I waste produced.”
IC&I Waste: The Mystery Part II Owen Sound study indicates who produces what (and what happens to it)
T
hey say you need good information to develop good policy... One of the challenges dogging policy development for industrial, commercial and institutional (IC&I) waste and in assessing the effectiveness of existing policies and regulations is the lack of detailed data on which businesses or business groups produce the most waste, and how business size affects the amount. In the February/March edition (see Cover Story) we looked at the picture from a macro perspective. Now we turn to a key question: To what extent do small businesses contribute to the tonnages tonnes of non-residential waste disposed in Canada each year? Without this information it’s difficult to develop an effective policy for IC&I waste diversion and (importantly in the policy development stage) it’s hard to know how effective policies that focus waste generator types will be.
Policymakers intent on reducing IC&I waste sent for disposal need to figure out how to address the waste coming from small businesses. While each individual small business might generate a small amount of IC&I waste, collectively (because of their large numbers) they may contribute a sizeable portion of the total.
Owen Sound
The City of Owen Sound in Southern Ontario has a population of about 22,000 — with an additional 10,000 living in the surrounding area. The city instituted a mandatory recycling by-law in 2006 requiring all IC&I establishments to submit a waste audit report identifying the amount of waste produced, diverted and disposed. Data from 687 waste audit reports submitted by all businesses in the city were entered into a custom designed database and analyzed.
Table 1: Amount of Waste Disposed and Diverted By Businesses of Different Sizes in City of Owen Sound, From Self Reported Waste Audit Information Employee Size Range
Number of Companies
Sum of Employees in these companies
% Sum of Employees in these companies
Waste Generated / Employee (tonnes)
Waste Generated (T/yr)
Waste Disposed (T/yr)
Waste Volume (Cu yds/yr)
% of Total Waste Disposed
Recyclable Volume diverted (Cu Yd/yr)
Recyclable Weight Diverted (T/yr)
Diversion Rate (T/T)
1–5
333
915
9%
3.28
3,000
2,246
18,364
19%
7,326
753.39
25%
6–10
137
1,014
10%
2.75
2,785
1,970
16,103
16%
11,996
815.56
29%
11–15
41
537
5%
2.21
1,186
998
8,155
8%
2,705
188.37
16%
16–20
24
437
4%
2.28
997
334
2,729
3%
14,071
662.86
67%
21–30
28
740
7%
1.00
741
554
4,533
5%
2,699
186.44
25%
31–40
12
502
5%
2.12
1,065
742
6,065
6%
6,657
323.45
30%
41–50
4
169
2%
1.48
250
218
1,778
2%
394
32.85
13%
51–100
21
1,653
16%
1.15
1,907
1,684
14,676
14%
3,200
222.27
12%
101–200
10
1,455
14%
0.98
1,431
1,320
7,672
11%
1,238
110.85
8%
> 200
5
2,820
28%
0.46
1,303
1,045
5,679
9%
1,410
258.00
20%
Unknown
47.00
Unknown
Unknown
1,132
908
7,426
8%
1,982
223.09
20%
662
10,242
100%
15,797
12,020
93,179
100%
53,679
3,776.88
24%
25
Unknown
Total Unreliable data
Unknown 1.54
18 www.solidwastemag.com April/May 2010
swr a-m 2010 IC&I pg 18-21.indd 18
07/04/10 2:28 PM
I C & I WA S T E
Wholesale Trade
Information
Transportation & Warehousing
Professional, Scientific & Technical Services
Construction
0
Public Admin., Government
Education Services
Finance, Insurance, Real Estate, Renting, Leasing
500
Other Services (except Public Administration)
1000
Arts, Entertainment & Recreation
1500
Admin & Support, Waste Mgmt & Remediation Services
2000
Manufacturing
2500
Accommodation & Food Services
3000
Health Care & Social Assistance
3500
Waste Disposed (Tonnes)
Information on waste density, and the quantities of waste and recyclables generated by Owen Sound businesses, was provided to Kelleher Environmental by Miller Waste, a waste management company that collects most of the IC&I waste from the city’s businesses, and that operates a transfer station in through which most Owen Sound IC&I waste passes. The database sorted the information by size of company (measured as number of employees) as well as by NAICS Code (a coding system for different business categories). Table 1 shows the volume of waste disposed and diverted by companies of different sizes in Owen Sound: • About half of the disposed waste is from companies with less than 20 employees; • 30 per cent of the disposed waste is from companies with greater than 50 employees; and • the remainder (20 per cent) is from companies with 21 to 50 employees. Based on the self-reported data submitted by almost 700 businesses of
Retail Trade
Figure 1: Relative Contribution of IC&I Establishments in Different NAICS Codes in City of Owen Sound to the Residual IC&I Waste Stream
NAICS Industry Category
NAICS Industry Category graph.indd 1
23/03/10 10:45 AM
© 2010, GAC
Need Sustainable Solutions? Ask Golder
Focused on Evolving Priorities for Tomorrow’s Communities
At Golder, we understand that sustainable solutions are important to your business. We have 50 years experience working with clients across Canada and around the world delivering integrated solutions for: • Waste • Transportation • Climate Change
• Water • Buildings • Ecosystems-Biodiversity
• Energy • Urban Renewal • Infrastructure
A World of Capabilities Delivered Locally. North America + 800 275-3281
solutions@golder.com GO634_10B-019_CAN_LZolper_v3.indd 1
swr a-m 2010 IC&I pg 18-21.indd 19
www.golder.com April/May 2010 www.solidwastemag.com 19 10-03-04 11:46
07/04/10 2:33 PM
I C & I WA S T E
all sizes in the city, the overall diversion rate for IC&I waste is about 24 per cent. This is in contrast to the 11 per cent figure reported by Statistics Canada in the most recent WMIS survey. It should be noted that in an ideal world, the self-reported figures should be verified through site visits to each business, or a selected number of businesses. However, for a city of just 20,000 residents, this would involve almost 700 site visits, and a prohibitive investment in time for current purposes. Table 2 shows the data collected by industry type, using the NAICS classification system. The study database calculated by NAICS code the waste generation per employee, total waste generated, blue box materials recycled, and waste disposed, based on self reported audits by City of Owen Sound businesses. The table shows that key contributors to the residual IC&I waste stream in Owen Sound are: • Retail 28 per cent; • Accommodation and Food Services 19 per cent; • Healthcare 12 per cent; and • Manufacturing 11 per cent.
Together, these four sectors contribute to 70 per cent of the residual IC&I waste stream. The data provides a very valuable dataset for IC&I waste management planning, as all businesses in the city (regardless of size or the business involved) were required to submit a waste audit report. The City of Owen Sound therefore provides an excellent opportunity to see how the business mix of a typical small city contributes to the IC&I waste produced, and therefore identify the diversion opportunities available. It’s particularly valuable as most of the businesses in Owen Sound are small (almost half have five employees or less), and there are virtually no data available on the extent to which small companies contribute to the overall IC&I waste stream.
Conclusions
The key question now becomes: If at least half of the IC&I waste generated in a typical city or community comes from small businesses, what is an effective strategy or policy to encourage IC&I waste diversion? Mandatory recycling ordinances are one effective way to increase
Li’l Fella
WWW.LIL-FELLA.COM
613-534-2289
Waste Container Delivery Unit
ly, The Weight is Over ... the Rear Axle! l a n i F Available on a GMC W5500 Truck Chassis or as a kit, ready to install on your own truck chassis.
For delivery and retrieval of standard side-pocket bins up to 8 cubic yards in size and 6,000 pounds in weight. DELIVERS YOUR WASTE CONTAINERS WHERE NO CONVENTIONAL F.E.L. CAN GO! The Li’l FELLA’s patented design lifts the weight forward of the rear axle. No need for a costly heavy-duty truck to balance your load — with the Li’l FELLA, it’s already balanced! The Li’l FELLA SAVES YOU MONEY EVERY TRIP!
Tight Turning Radius The Li’l FELLA has handling that might remind you more of a sports car than a heavy truck. Pick-up and deliver containers in tight spots — without leaving the cab!
20 www.solidwastemag.com April/May 2010
swr a-m 2010 IC&I pg 18-21.indd 20
07/04/10 2:33 PM
I C & I WA S T E
Table 2: Amount of Waste Disposed and Diverted By Business Sector in City of Owen Sound, From Self Reported Waste Audit Information NAICS Code
Waste Gen per Employee (t/y)
Waste Generated (T/yr)
Waste Disposed (T/y)
% of Total Waste Disposed
Blue Box Materials Recycled (T/yr)
Diversion Rate (%)
44-45
Retail Trade
2.75
4,340
3,313
28%
1026
24%
72
Accommodation & Food Services
3.01
2,911
2,234
19%
677
23%
62
Health Care & Social Assistance
0.61
1,542
1,432
12%
110
7%
31-33
Manufacturing
0.84
1,731
1,358
11%
373
22%
71
Arts, Entertainment & Recreation
5.31
1,152
1,084
9%
68
6%
56
Admin & Support, Waste Mgmt & Remediation Services
17.12
822
619
5%
202
25%
81
Other Services (except Public Administration)
2.00
810
618
5%
192
24%
61
Education Services
0.91
688
553
5%
135
20%
52-53
Finance, Insurance, Real Estate, Renting, Leasing
0.54
276
182
2%
94
34%
23
Construction
16.96
543
157
1%
386
71%
92
Public Admin., Government
0.56
222
117
1%
105
47%
48-49
Transportation & Warehousing
0.75
151
112
1%
39
26%
541
Professional, Scientific & Technical Services
0.57
175
107
1%
67
39%
42
Wholesale Trade
1.77
129
75
1%
54
42%
51
Information
0.34
63
26
0.2%
37
58%
221
Utilities
NOTES
Industry Sector
16
12
0%
4
24%
1.52
15,569
12,000
100%
3,569
23%
1. Not all businesses reported both waste and recyclable data. In some cases they may have reported both but we determined that one of the data sets may be highly unreliable thus did not include their data in the query. Thus there are cases where recyclable data may be included but waste disposed may not and vice versa. 2. Construction industry represented here does not include the C&D industry but only small typical contractor/renovators with a few employees that completed the ICI surveys. 3. The number of employees in the Utilities sector was not reported.
diversion by IC&I generators. However, they need to be enforced, and tions. These “end of pipe” policies put the onus on haulers to ensure that markets need to be available or developed, for the additional material their clients are recycling the banned materials. recovered. Landfill bans on recyclable materials or surcharges on loads with Maria Kelleher is Principal of Kelleher Environmental in Toronto, Pub−2009−E.jpg high recyclable material content have been implemented in some locaOntario. Contact Maria at mkelleher@kellehergroup.ca
April/May 2010 www.solidwastemag.com 21
swr a-m 2010 IC&I pg 18-21.indd 21
07/04/10 2:33 PM
COLLECTION
by Carl Friesen “A workforce that had 97 loss time days and three injuries in 2004, to one loss time day and one injury in 2009.”
Against the Wind
Automated collection in Lethbridge, Alberta
H
igh winds, back alleys and the legacy of a failed 1981 experiment forced a need to develop highly customized solutions when the southern Alberta City of Lethbridge decided to update its curbside waste collection processes. In his presentation to Canadian Waste Management conference by Insight Information (in Richmond Hill, Ontario, February 22), Lethbridge’s Waste and Recycling Manager David Schaaf said that the city (population 85,000) saw several factors driving its move to automated cart collection. One was the drive to a clean community — traditional uncovered trashcans were often knocked over or had the contents blown out by the city’s frequent high winds. Also, Schaff said, like many Prairie cities, Lethbridge has many back alleys where residents place their trash for collection; with these locations out of public view, the tidiness of the waste enclosures sometimes left room for improvement. Another factor was the need to protect employees’ health and safety from cuts and needle jabs from bags of waste, and from the stresses of frequent heavy lifting day after day. Accordingly, the municipal government decided to introduce covered, wheeled trash carts that could be picked up by automated equipment (in particularly narrow alleys, semi-automated equipment). This program would offer carts in the residents’ choice of sizes — three or five bags — with incentives for taking a smaller cart, with extra carts available. Residents would be responsible for their own carts. The program would be rolled out in stages, starting with some of the newer communities and culminating in the longer-established sections of the city. Focus groups, open houses and the news media helped spread the message about the cart program. During the public consultation and education program, city representatives were frequently reminded of a pilot program of 1981 that involved bins picked up by automated truckmounted systems. Although this program briefly put Lethbridge well to the forefront of technology for waste collection, it was discontinued. However, that program provided some valuable pointers for the current program. The city did what it could to persuade residents to put their waste at the front of their homes rather than the rear, for easier and faster collection. Challenges included persuading them to leave at least a metre between the back of the cart and a wall — made more memorable by telling residents that they should be able to stand behind their cart, so
Grain elevators, Lethbridge, Alberta.
that the automated equipment could make the pickup. In the case of residents with special needs, city workers carried out site visits and met with residents to find an appropriate work-around. Schaaf said that for employees, the change has been significant. They have moved from labourers who picked up and dumped trash to being technicians, equipment operators and problem solvers. Regarding health and safety, a workforce that had 97 loss time days and three injuries in 2004 to one loss time day and one injury in 2009. Lessons learned included the importance of getting residents to “take the cart home” onto their property after it was emptied. This is partly because Lethbridge’s high winds mean that even though the carts are designed to be stable in windy conditions, they can still end up far from home some days. Carl Friesen is a writer based in Mississauga, Ontario who specializes in helping business professionals build their profile through published articles. He is a Senior Associate with emerson consulting group inc. Contact Carl at 289-232-4057 or carl@thoughtleading.com
22 www.solidwastemag.com April/May 2010
swr a-m 2010 Collect pg 22.indd 22
07/04/10 2:34 PM
LANDFILL TECHNOLOGY
by Darren MacNeil “The region retained Conestoga-Rovers & Associates to prepare a Remedial Action Plan (RAP) and a Site Operations Report (SOR).”
Natural Attenuation Managing natural attenuation landfills
T
he swamp reluctantly released its grip on my steel-toe rubber boots as I lurched my way to a tiny yellow flag implanted on the bank of the wetland. The flag marked a 2” diameter clear plastic tube that conveyed a barely perceptible flow of groundwater, known as a seep, from the bank. In this mosquito infested location, it took a painfully slow 47 seconds to fill a 40 ml vial. This record will be used in a pilot study to evaluate how the recently installed leachate collection trenches are impeding the seep flow into the wetland. As an employee of the Region of Durham, it’s my responsibility to oversee the implementation of a remedial action plan to mitigate the effects the Brock Landfill is currently having on the wetland. Dealing with past landfill siting mistakes to ensure a positive outcome is a difficult feat, especially in the field of waste management. When the Region of Durham was formed in 1974, it assumed ownership of seven landfills that can be defined as natural attenuation sites. One common characteristic of these types of landfills is that they operated for decades before current regulatory requirements for landfill design and operation were enacted. The legacy of these historical landfill siting decisions presents many challenges to municipalities today as they assume responsibility for these landfills, whether active or inactive. The primary challenge with managing a natural attenuation landfill is created at the very inception of the landfill itself. Historically, landfill operations were situated in areas that, at the time, were considered to
have little economic and/or ecological value: areas in or near wetlands, streams, abandoned gravel/sand pits, and rural areas far removed from developed communities. The proximity to wetlands and streams would later prove to be an environmental liability because the gravel and sand pits used as landfills provided porous subsurface pathways for leachate migration. The Brock Landfill is a prime example of the lack of concern for the environmental issues that existed when dumping began in the former gravel pit in the 1950s. Data from boreholes at the Brock Landfill indicate that sections of the waste fill area are directly underlain by a layer of fine to coarse sand and/or are directly submerged in the water table. One could compare this soil profile to be as effective at attenuating leachate as a coffee-maker without a filter. In addition, nearly a third of the approved one hundred acre site is covered by the Gibson Hill Swamp, identified by the Ministry of Natural Resources as a Provincially Significant Wetland. It’s reasonable to assume that the ecological importance of the wetland was not recognized at that time. Another problem facing many small “legacy” landfills is development encroachment. Landfills originally situated in remote areas have slowly acquired neighbours in the form of farms and subdivisions. The buffer areas required for the natural attenuation process have been reduced or have entirely disappeared. The Brock Landfill site abuts a wetland to the south and east, and a former farming property to the north.
Contractors examine the clear stone backfill in the leachate
Contractors covering a leachate collection pipe with clear stone and a geotextile.
collection trench constructed for the pilot study.
April/May 2010 www.solidwastemag.com 23
swr a-m 2010 Landfill pg 23-26.indd 23
08/04/10 8:45 AM
LANDFILL TECHNOLOGY
A pilot-scale leachate collection system under construction at the Region of Durham’s Brock Landfill.
To obtain more breathing room, the region purchased the property to the north to eventually establish a contaminant attenuation zone. The site is now located in a predominantly agricultural area. Again, one of the legacies of an older landfill is that no consideration was given as to how the surrounding area would change over time. The proximity of other land uses presents municipalities with additional engineering challenges of modifying natural attenuation landfills to mitigate off-site impacts and protect adjacent properties and their occupants. To address the deficiencies in design and operation of these landfills, municipalities can implement voluntary groundwater monitoring programs, purchase adjacent properties to re-establish buffer zones, and initiate remedial work to mitigate leachate and landfill gas migration. However, it’s almost certain that the usual challenges associated with the operation and post-closure care of modern landfills will be amplified by the deficiencies inherent in historical landfill siting practices. In 2006, Durham was issued a Provincial Officer’s Order to address off-site impacts to adjacent properties originating from the Brock site. In response, the region retained Conestoga-Rovers & Associates to prepare
To find out more about the
Beautiful and efficient MOLOK Deep-Collection system for waste, recyclables & organics, contact: MOLOK North America Ltd. 1-877-558-5576 Waste Management 519-323-1354 ext. 29 Equipment Omnibac Inc. (Quebec) 418-277-2107 Rollins Machinery (B.C.) 1-800-665-9060 Halaw Contracting (First Nations) 604-894-6904
24 www.solidwastemag.com April/May 2010
swr a-m 2010 Landfill pg 23-26.indd 24
07/04/10 2:39 PM
LANDFILL TECHNOLOGY
a Remedial Action Plan (RAP) and a Site Operations Report (SOR). The RAP contains five primary remedial components, all of which are interdependent and interconnected: land acquisition to provide additional land space for natural abatement and future control measures; shaping and contouring of the site to effectively maximize storm water runoff; an engineered cover system to minimize infiltration and reduce the volume of leachate generated; a surface water system to convey storm water to the wetland, control sediment discharge, and prevent erosion; and a leachate management system to intercept, collect, and treat leachate. The objective of the RAP is to augment a natural attenuation site with engineered controls. Currently, a temporary re-circulation system, consisting of two collection trenches terminating at one end to a pump, and connected to a retention pond by forcemains, has been constructed in order to conduct a pilot study to determine how much leachate is generated and how it will be treated. Based on field data, a report that evaluates the leachate treatment options available will be submitted to the environment ministry for approval and eventual amendment to the CofA. Including
A leachate seep entering the wetland area adjacent to the Brock Landfill’s inactive fill area, identified with a yellow flag as No. 4 for the pilot study
custom designed solutions for recycling Van Dyk Baler Corp. is the exclusive North American Distributor for Bollegraaf Recycling Machinery. Van Dyk Baler Corp. specializes in design, manufacturing and servicing of Balers, dual & single stream systems, and MSW sorting systems. Key technologies include: highcapacity pre-press flap Balers, Drum Feeders, ONP Screens, Paper Magnets, Paper Spikes, TITECH Optical Sorting and Shredders.
Bollegraaf HBC 120 Baler
Regional Sales Managers will provide custom designed solutions for each application.
The Bolleagraaf HBC Baler Line: HBC 35, 40, 60, 80, 100, 110, 120, 140, 180
waste expo booth #3323
Van Dyk Baler Corp. is the Exclusive North American Distributor of Bollegraaf Recycling Machinery 78 Halloween Blvd., Stamford, CT 06902 (P) 203-967-1100 (W) www.vandykbaler.com (E) info@vandykbaler.com
April/May 2010 www.solidwastemag.com 25
swr a-m 2010 Landfill pg 23-26.indd 25
07/04/10 2:36 PM
LANDFILL TECHNOLOGY
EMF a
“When one considers the impact of the Brock Landfill in isolation, it may not seem like much; 12/12/08 10:48 AM Page 1 however, the cumulative effects of hundreds of similar landfills are significant.”
Compared to Steel, EMF Containers will ... Last Twice as long and Cut Total Cost of Ownership in Half! Durable
Lightweight
Long-Lasting
Fibreglass
Environmentally Friendly
Call EMF Containers and Start Saving Today! Call Timothy England : 416-804-9636
e-mail : time@emfcontainers.com www.emfcontainers.com
consulting fees and construction costs, the pilot study to date has cost nearly $450,000. The property north of the site was purchased by the region to establish a contaminant attenuation zone, for approximately $950,000, and the budget estimate to implement the remaining components of the RAP is over $10 million. Since each of the remedial components of the RAP are interconnected, it’s necessary to establish how the leachate will be treated before the overall design can be finalized. The current RAP schedule allows for a year for design finalization, required ministry approvals, and the procurement process, to precede actual construction. Construction is scheduled over a three-year period to accommodate the current proposed plan to contour the site by importing 80,000 tonnes of waste or engineered fill over that period. There are also financial implications to be considered given that projects cannot proceed without the capital to support them. Fortunately, Durham is able to support the active and inactive landfills in its jurisdiction with responsible voluntary groundwater monitoring, consultant reports, and dedicated employees committed to the perpetual care of the landfills. Smaller municipalities may not have the resources or funding to provide the appropriate and necessary care of the landfills for which they’re responsible. Provincial requirements that old landfills be brought up to current standards should be accompanied by provincial funding to municipalities struggling to meet these standards. In April 2009, a program was announced by Ontario’s environment ministry to assist six municipalities with the upgrades required to meet mandatory regulations in the process of capturing landfill gas emissions. Although this is a step in the right direction, many more municipalities require assistance. When one considers the impact of the Brock Landfill in isolation, it may not seem like much; however, the cumulative effects of hundreds of similar landfills are significant. Durham has seven landfills in its perpetual care program, and all of them to various degrees have off-site impacts. Darren MacNeil, B.Sc., works in the Waste Management Department of the Regional Municipality of Durham, Ontario. Contact Darren at darren.macneil@durham.ca
26 www.solidwastemag.com April/May 2010 2010
swr a-m 2010 Landfill pg 23-26.indd 26
07/04/10 2:36 PM
C O M P O S T I N G M AT T E R S
by Paul van der Werf “The former glut of 40 waste disposal facilities has been reduced to just seven. Where there once were no composting facilities there are now 19.”
The Power of the Ban Nova Scotia’s organics diversion system
T
he Province of Nova Scotia has a special place in my heart. My wife’s family is from Truro. I have some good friends there and I also own a piece of property in Gaspereau beside vineyards that overlooks a beautiful river valley (which I like to call my “personal carbon off-set”). Another thing that makes this place so special is Nova Scotia’s unfettered and substantive contribution to the management of organic wastes. Like many jurisdictions, at one time or another Nova Scotia featured many waste disposal facilities (some good, but most not so good) including those that open-pit burned. I’ve seen the same story in places as diverse as Ireland and Caribbean, where realization has also emerged that this is not right and must be changed. In 1998 Nova Scotia took a bold step and banned compostable waste from landfill. The ban was a part of the province’s 1995 Solid Waste Resource Management Strategy (and was only one 13 disposal bans). While the word “ban” is enough to the get environmentally faintof-heart and commercially vested hyperventilating, bans recognize a maxim that the only true way to change things is through a quantitative dictum of some sort. A ban turns the switch to “off.” This approach gets certain climate change types worked up. If you ban it, they say, you can’t collect greenhouse gas credits for diversion later on. The answer is simple: change the rule.
In some way a disposal ban is a progenitor to the Zero Waste schemes today, except that it’s real and has teeth. A ban does not pre-suppose that every piece of organic waste is kept out of landfill. It sets the bar high. In Nova Scotia’s case, the ban clearly articulated where the province wanted to go: improve waste management; divert more from landfill; stop calling it waste if it isn’t; and, create green jobs. Barry Friesen, now the General Manager for CleanFARMS™ (see article, page 15) worked as a waste resource manager for Nova Scotia at the time of the ban and had a hand in shaping the province’s program. “It seemed clear to us that the only way to achieve the national goal of 50 per cent solid waste diversion was for each province to address organics,” Friesen says. This seems pretty obvious today but at the time I think our heads were in the qualitative glow of waste diversion and we really hadn’t added up how we were going to meet these aggressive goals. “Recycling wasn’t enough,” Friesen says. “Studies conducted in Nova Scotia in the early 1990s proved this to be true.” “The challenge was that diverting organics was going to be more costly than the older style of open burning and landfilling of the past. Bans were therefore introduced as a way of ensuring the diversion of paper fibre, steel, aluminum, glass and organics from disposal.” The need for change and its realization means revolution on some level. A ban is a revolution. This type of change also means higher cost.
27 www.solidwastemag.com April/May 2010
swr a-m 2010 CMat pg 27-28.indd 27
08/04/10 12:00 PM
C O M P O S T I N G M AT T E R S
Just as money can be used as a motivator, the higher costs of change releases our hard-wired aversion to spending more than we absolutely have to. This is fine on many levels but sometimes we don’t pay the “right cost” — just what we choose that something should cost today. The City of Lunenburg claims to have launched the first curbside composting program in the Americas. The province took a unique approach, again related to something very quantitative, and that was jobs. Without coming right out and saying so, they took a “triple bottom line” approach to dealing with waste. Nova Scotia’s new thinking of waste as a resource, something not to just check away, had a far-reaching effect that most of us probably don’t appreciate. “In Nova Scotia and across the Atlantic, creating sustainable jobs are seen as paramount in almost every initiative,” says Friesen. “The Atlantic Region had long suffered from a ‘brain drain’ and was derided by those in larger provinces for receiving federal ‘equalization’ payments.’ “Yet the Region realized that exploiting resources without full lifecycle management can have devastating results. The collapse of some fisheries, the closure of mines and the cost of managing many environmental problems left by older industries loomed large.”
Results
Nova Scotia’s current waste diversion rate is about 68 per cent — far higher than other provinces, and not to mention the lowest per-person waste disposal rate in Canada. The former glut of 40 waste disposal facilities has been reduced to just seven. Where there once were no composting facilities there now are 19. That’s a pretty convincing turnaround! And what about the future organic waste diversion? “Nova Scotia has a robust diversion system that the rest of Canada can learn from,” says Friesen. “More technologies and best practices are spreading across the country. It’s important that the organics industry continue to band together to showcase the best technologies and the best practices to ensure its continued success.” Nova Scotia has forged much of the trail for composting. Others have followed. It’s said that no place in the province is more than 70 km away from the ocean. I’d hazard the same could be said for composting facilities. Paul van der Werf is president of 2cg Inc. in London, Ontario. Contact Paul at www.2cg.ca
Up to 1400 homes per day Truck can be used for both automated resi and commercial Works with LH or dual drive Best solution for going automated
The Slammin’ Eagle is the most durable and productive automated carry-can on the market today.
Call: (707) 939-2802 Video at: thecurottocan.com April/May 2010 www.solidwastemag.com 28
swr a-m 2010 CMat pg 27-28.indd 28
07/04/10 2:49 PM
by John Nicholson, M.Sc.,P.Eng.
WA S T E B U S I N E S S
“EFS-Plastics has invested over $6 million in its mixed plastics recycling operation. Employing 11 people, the company is poised for even further growth.”
Plastics Recycling in Canada The business case for plastics recycling
A
lthough man-made plastics have been around since the late 1800s, recycling them is relatively new. Questions about the health and environmental impacts associated with the production of plastic from virgin resins began in the 1960s, especially in respect to discarded beverage containers and litter. By about two decades later, municipalities across Canada initiated plastic recycling programs. The plastics recycling industry in Canada is relatively new; the first companies set up shop in the late 1970s. The growth of the industry has mirrored the growth of municipal recycling programs. With over seven major types of recyclable plastic from either the post-industrial waste stream (i.e., scrap material left over during manufacturing) or the post-consumer market (i.e., plastic bottles put in a blue box and left at the curb), and with the market still in development, there are still opportunities in the plastics recycling business. The most common plastics recyclers in Canada process polyethylene terephthalate (PET) used to manufacture soft-drink and water bottles and high density polyethylene (HDPE) used in butter and yoghurt tubs. New opportunities exist for those looking to get into recycling film (i.e., grocery bags), polypropylene, and the other types of numbered plastics 1 thru 7. Other growth areas within the industry include vertical integration, whereby a company becomes a product manufacturer and recycler. The savings in capital and operational costs from such an operation combined with better controls over feedstock makes it inevitable that such operations will soon be in established. (See article, page 38.)
Market drivers & challenges
Several drivers are helping the industry grow, one of which is the growing worldwide demand for plastic, especially in the developing world. Another is regulatory: the continued focus by various provincial and municipal governments in Canada to divert waste from landfill and promote the 3Rs. More supply equals more opportunity for the plastics recycling industry. One economic driver for industry growth is the rising cost of virgin feedstock material for manufacturers of the plastic-containing material. Plastic recyclers are increasingly able to produce recycled pellets equal in quality to virgin feedstock but at lower cost. Moreover, manufacturers using recycled plastic are able to advertise their goods as “environmentally friendly.” However, a new challenge facing the plastics recycling industry is contamination of incoming material with biodegradable plastic. Biodegradable plastics are not compatible with plastic recycling programs. The presence of biodegradable plastic in recycled plastic lowers the quality of the end product. This is a contentious issue and will only be solved when some kind of system is created for consumers in which they can easily determine which plastics go in the recycling bin and which go in the composter or green bin.
Jim Hedrick, a researcher at IBM’s Research facility in San Jose, California, works on new formulas that could make it easier to recycle the 13 billion plastic bottles disposed of each year globally. IBM and Stanford University scientists announced on March 9, 2010 a chemistry breakthrough that could lead to new environmentallysustainable plastics which promise to significantly reduce waste and pollution. (See Blog column, page 38.) Photo by Monica M. Davey
April/May 2010 www.solidwastemag.com 29
swr a-m 2010 WBus pg 29-30.indd 29
07/04/10 2:50 PM
WA S T E B U S I N E S S
If the governments and consumers are godo the same for plainer domestic wastes like ing to support the plastic recycling industry in plastic? Canada there needs to be an examination on Plastics recycling and the green economy the use of biodegradable plastic in packaging. EFS-Plastics in Sarnia is an example of CanIf the utilization of biodegradable plastic is goadian-based company utilizing cutting edge ing to be promoted then government and the technology to recycle plastics and create feedpublic need to be aware that it could be to the stock to make new products. Specializing in detriment of recycling other plastics. post-consumer plastics, the company has inAnother challenge hindering the growth of vested over $6 million in its mixed plastics the plastics recycling industry in Canada is the recycling operation. Employing 11 people, the offshore shipment of used plastics. Although it’s company is poised for even further growth. difficult to get accurate statistics on the exact perThe company has been able to overcome centage of used plastics shipped offshore, some the challenges of offshore shipments and within the plastics recycling industry have estibiodegradable plastics by securing long-term mated that up to 40 per cent of mixed plastics and supply arrangements directly with municipal60 per cent of film plastic ends up in cargo conities and utilizing its technology to ensure the tainers destined for recycling centres in China. recycled the specifications of The offshore shipment of hazardous waste 10:23 groundworks/MC7564/SWR 12/5/08 AM plastic Page meets 1 buyers. is currently banned from Canada. Is it time to
One way municipalities can help the plastics recycling industry is through signing such long-term supply agreements. By going through brokers, municipalities are contributing the offshore shipment of a valuable commodity that could be recycled in Canada for use in the manufacture of new products here. The federal and provincial governments can assist the plastics recycling industry by providing clear policy direction. And of course, you and I can help the plastics recycling industry by sorting wastes appropriately, and only purchasing products made from (or packaged in) recyclable plastics. John Nicholson, M.Sc., P.Eng., is a consultant based in Toronto, Ontario. Contact John at john.nicholson@ebccanada.com
30 www.solidwastemag.com April/May 2010
swr a-m 2010 WBus pg 29-30.indd 30
07/04/10 2:50 PM
R E G U L AT I O N R O U N D U P
by Rosalind Cooper, LL.B “The Government of the Northwest Territories has announced that milk containers will now be part of its Beverage Container Program.”
Waste Initiatives Across Canada BC’s new recycling requirements
The Government of British Columbia has announced that antifreeze and lead-acid batteries will be required to have recycling programs managed by producers, who are required to develop and submit for approval recycling programs by July, 2011. Any producers that intend to develop a Product Stewardship Plan under the recycling regulations must submit a plan to the Director for approval by October 1, 2010. In addition to antifreeze, antifreeze containers will be included in the recycling regulations. The lead-acid batteries included in the recycling regulations are those commonly found in cars, motorcycles, boats and locomotives. The recycling rules for these batteries are now being standardized with other industry-led recycling programs in the province. In the past, lead-acid batteries were subject to a fee imposed by the government, which was then made available to offset recycling costs faced by processors. A recycling program led by industry doesn’t collect fees, although industry can set its own fees to defray the cost of recycling.
Ontario blue box plan revisions
On March 16, 2010, Stewardship Ontario’s Board of Directors approved the Draft Revised Blue Box Program Plan and submitted it to Waste Di-
version Ontario for review. The revisions were developed in response to a request by the environment minister in August 2009 to ensure that curbside recycling will achieve 70 per cent waste diversion target by 2011. The Draft Revised Plan describes how improving recycling performance in multi-residential housing can increase the current recycling rate of 66 per cent, but will not allow the 70 per cent target to be achieved. The reason given for this is the change in composition of blue box materials, whereby overall tonnage is declining as a result of decreases in sales and size of print media and increases in lighter-weight and more difficult to recycle mixed plastic packaging (such as clear containers used for fruit and baked goods). The plan includes products made from materials that are nearly identical to, and have a function similar to, packaging. Such materials may already be collected through the Blue Box Program Plan, but were not included in the original 2003 plan (and no fees are being paid in respect of those materials). The addition of these materials to the list of designated materials allows costs to be allocated across all producers. Stewardship Ontario has developed three criteria in order to determine which materials should be added to the plan. The first is similarity of the product to currently included material. The second criterion is the
Caring for
Tomorrow’s Generations
Walker Environmental Group - providing sustainable solutions for all your environmental needs. Composting ■ Biosolids Management ■ Landfill Gas & Renewable Energy Projects Water/Wastewater Design/Build/Operate ■ Environmental Project Management ■ ICI Waste Haulage ■ Waste Transfer & Recycling ■ Landfill Disposal ■ ■
P.O. Box 100 Thorold, ON L2V 3Y8
905-680-1900 www.walkerind.com April/May 2010 www.solidwastemag.com 31
swr a-m 2010 RRdup pg 31-32.indd 31
07/04/10 2:52 PM
R E G U L AT I O N R O U N D U P manner in which the product is intended to be used by consumers. (Essentially, if the function of the product is similar to packaging and the material is intended to have a short life span, it will likely be included.) The third is how the consumer uses the product. If the consumer is likely to dispose of the product in the blue box, it will likely be included. Some of the products to be added include: aluminum pie plates and foil; plastic bags intended to be used to store and/or set out recyclables for collection; boxes; disposal cups, plates, bowls and containers including “take out” style paper or plastic; food storage bags; storage containers intended for use with consumerables (such as purchased metal or plastic, similar to decorative or durable containers for food, medicine or other consumerable products); gift bags and boxes; gift wrap and glass jars.
Manitoba stewardship regs
ation as of March 31, 2010 and its functions have been replaced by Multi-Material Stewardship Manitoba. The latter entity will carry out its mandate under a new Packaging and Printed Paper Stewardship Regulation under Waste Reduction and Prevention Act.
Territorial developments
The Government of the Northwest Territories has announced that milk containers will now be part of its Beverage Container Program, thereby expanding the Waste Reduction and Recovery Program in the NWT. Containers that will now be included are milk jugs, milk and milk substitute cartons, yoghurt drink bottles, condensed or evaporated milk cans, and creamer bottles. The containers will be accepted at all bottle depots in the Northwest Territories, although bottle depots may refuse to accept containers for sanitary reasons if they have a strong odour or are not rinsed properly. Infant formula and milk and liquid milk products in containers of less than 30 ml are not part of the program. The funds raised through the Beverage Container Program go into the Environment Fund, which is used to cover program expenses and improve waste reduction and recovery programs. The Yukon Liquor Corporation has announced that, effect April 19, 2010, single-use bags will no longer be offered with purchases. The elimination of plastic bags constitutes a slightly different approach than the programs adopted by other companies and other jurisdictions whereby there is a charge or fee associated with the provision of singleuse bags.
Two regulations have been published pursuant to Waste Reduction and Prevention Act in Manitoba, one dealing with electrical and electronic equipment and another dealing with household hazardous material and prescribed material. The first regulation deals with electrical and electronic equipment and provides that no person shall supply designated material for consumption unless the steward of the material operates or subscribes to an electrical or electronic equipment stewardship program. This prohibition will take effect on April 1, 2011. The second regulation deals with household hazardous material and prescribed material and provides that no person shall supply designated material for consumption unless the steward of the designated material operates or subscribes to an household hazardous material or prescribed material stewardship program. This prohibition also comes into effect Rosalind Cooper, LL.B., is a partner with Fasken Martineau DuMoulin on April 1, 2011. LLP, with offices across Canada. Ms. Cooper is based in Toronto, The MetalOutAd_3_09:Layout Manitoba Products Stewardship1Corporation ceased PM oper-PageOntario. Contact Rosalind at rcooper@tor.fasken.com 1897 3/26/09 has12:25 1
Eddy Current Separators
Stationary and Self-Contained Compactors Belt Filter Presses • EPS Foam Densifiers Depackaging Xtractors • Dewatering Extruders
USA Made - USA Backed Waste & Recycling Systems Designed per application
XTRACTOR
Magnetic Drum Separators
Suspended Electromagnets
www.brightbeltpress.com www.sebrightproducts.com
269-793-7183 • 800-253-0532 US 269-793-4022 fax • Hopkins, MI 49328
FREE VIDEO & LITERATURE! Call: 1-888-300-3743 or visit www.eriez.com
32 www.solidwastemag.com April/May 2010
swr a-m 2010 RRdup pg 31-32.indd 32
07/04/10 2:52 PM
by Guy Crittenden
PA C K A G I N G
“This new package will completely break down into compost in a hot, active compost pile in approximately 14 weeks.”
Compostable Chip Bags SunChips innovation creates new possibilities
A
s we reported in our last edition, SunChips®, Frito Lay Canada’s popular line of multigrain snacks, has introduced the world’s first 100 per cent compostable chip bag. The news release extols that “This green innovation, a first-of-its kind initiative, will change the way Canadians hear, see and think about product packaging in the future.” Starting in March 2010, SunChips packaging will be made from more than 90 per cent renewable, plant-based materials. This new package will completely break down into compost in a hot, active compost pile in approximately 14 weeks. On store shelves, it has a unique sound, the new sound of green. The company has provided some hip promotional materials, including a “Greenvention” contest and sound bites that you can listen to at www.sunchips.ca/newsoundofgreen The compostable chip bag was launched in March in the 225g &
425g size bags, with the balance of SunChips packages transitioning into the compostable packaging in August 2010. Marc Guay, President, Frito Lay Canada says the packaging made from renewable material “represents the next small step in Frito Lay Canada’s environmental sustainability journey.” Frito Lay Canada has worked for more than a decade to reduce the company’s environmental impact. In addition to the compostable chip bag, it has diverted more than 92 per cent of manufacturing waste from landfills into re-use streams in 2009 and reused approximately 30 million shipping cartons annually and 200 million since 1999 — equivalent to more than 300,000 trees saved annually and more than 2 million trees saved since 1999. The renewable material used to produce the SunChips bag is made
s Start for a 6 0 4 little as $ th n o per m
It’s Not What You Store –
It’s Not What You Haul –
It’s How You Haul It!
It’s How You Store It!
sm
sm
Say goodbye to single-use roll-off trucks! Pro-Tainer’s Pro-Roll Off System™ gives you the versatility for full-time use with easy operation by one person. From construction to landscaping to refuse & recycling make use of our storage sheds, flat beds, roll offs and recycling drop boxes.
“Outstanding” 2003 & 2004 GSA Contractor Assessment GSA# GS-07-F-9978H & GS-30-F-1034D, DOD# SP0500-01-D-0019
INC.
April/May 2010 www.solidwastemag.com 33
swr a-m 2010 Packag pg 33-34.indd 33
09/04/10 9:51 AM
PA C K A G I N G
from a plant-based PLA material. PLA, polylactic acid, is a versatile and compostable polymer made from starch. After four years of research and testing, Frito-Lay North America’s Research and Development team identified PLA as the key material that meets the company’s performance expectations. The compostable packaging has a different sound than traditional bags because the plant-based materials are not as soft at room temperature. The development has been met with concern, however, from some professionals in the recycling industry, as such material may cross-contaminate recycling lines when it doesn’t end up in compost green bins. Vivian De Giovanni, Executive Director of the Municipal Waste Association says, “Municipalities are concerned with: residents being confused and putting some of the PLA in the recycling stream and some petroleum based products in the Green Bin. “The broader issue is not about trying to establish barriers for businesses trying to do the right environmental things, but about fostering communication beSunCh ips® b tween those that design the product rand compo packaging and those that handle the packaging stable chip ba g at end of life.” The SunChips’ compostable packaging of composting,” says Susan Antler, Executive has been certified through the Biodegradable Director of the Compost Council of Canada. Products Institute (BPI), the only internation“We hope the introduction of initiatives such ally recognized labeling program. As such it as the compostable SunChips bag will encourpresents the opportunity for incorporation age and make it easier for Canadians to parinto waste management programs destined for ticipate in composting such that over time, we composting, provided the local infrastructure will see an increase in the number of Canadian is both available and capable of including this households that compost. This will hopefully packaging material within their system. In the also spur the industry to continue to develop months ahead, SunChips says it will work with and enhance the technology needed to create local composting initiatives to enable the new packaging from renewable resources such that packaging to be included in green bin proit can be easily incorporated into waste mangrams as much as possible. agement systems.” Where recyclers are concerned, comFor more information, visit www.sunchips.ca posting leaders are excited. “Having designed packaging with the Guy Crittenden is editor of this environment in mind, SunChips’ certifimagazine. Contact Guy at ed compostable packaging will help raise gcrittenden@solidwastemag.com awareness of the environmental importance 34 www.solidwastemag.com April/May 2010
swr a-m 2010 Packag pg 33-34.indd 34
07/04/10 2:53 PM
EQUIPMENT One-stop compaction shop for Newfoundland and Labrador
As a heavy machinery dealership serving Newfoundland and Labrador, Case Atlantic has carved out a reputation for itself in the construction industry by connecting with its customers. This connection is now stronger as it has recently become an Ammann compaction equipment dealer. Case Atlantic is affiliated with Diesel Injection Sales and Service, which has been providing fuel injection and related services for construction equipment owners and operators for more than 45 years. As a dealership, Case Atlantic has been operating for less than two years. However, in that time, it has developed long-term partnerships with customers in the local construction industry by reinvesting in additional products and services. In its first 12 months of operation, it has offered new equipment in just about every category including skid steer loaders, backhoes, wheel loaders and excavators. As of December last year, it’s now a one-stop shop for compaction machinery. “That’s something that we didn’t have, especially for road construction contractors. We didn’t have anything for paving, asphalt and road preparation... we needed a complete com-
THE
(From left to right) Steve Tucker, Case Atlantic and Vince Dinn, Ace Paving Ltd., in front of an Ammann ASC70 machine.
paction line,” says Geoff Pearcey, Principal of Case Atlantic. All of that changed after General Manager Ron Scott suggested they look at Ammann after witnessing the gains the company was making in European markets. The deal was sealed when Peter Price, Area
Sales Manager for Ammann in Canada paid them a visit. Contact Peter Price, Area Sales Manager-Canada, Ammann Canada, peter.price@ammann-group.com
CompuWeigh
™
SYSTEM
offers Superior Software and Service for:
Landfills Transfer Stations Recycling MRF Routing Container Tracking Dispatching
Call us for a FREE internet demo at (410) 329 1300 or download it from our website at:
ParadigmSoftware.com
Setting the standard in Solid Waste Software...
Find your green. 2cg
• Private & Public Sectors • Waste diversion planning • Residential, IC&I and • Recycling, MHSW, C&D waste streams Composting, MBT, E-Waste • Waste auditing Paul van der Werf, M.Sc. | 519-645-7733 | 877-801-7733 | 2cg.ca Mary Little | 905-372-4994
Inc.
Waste Management Consulting Services
April/May 2010 www.solidwastemag.com 35
swr a-m 2010 Equip pg 35-36.indd 35
08/04/10 12:29 PM
EQUIPMENT
BIO REACTOR AD
8/2/06
3:25 PM
Page 1
Reduce - Reuse - Replenish Putting waste to work! By controlling the power to the generator output, the e-mag controller also allows greater flexibility in matching the magnet to the material it’s handling.
Controller cuts scrap-handling costs Baycon-HMM
12/1/08
3:12 PM
Page 1
Ph: 613-538-2776
www.laflecheenvironmental.com BAYCON ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING Baycon Environmental offers personalized, responsive service, budget sensitive project solutions and years of invaluable project management experience. • Site Remediation • Site Services & Site Clearing • Mold Abatement • Asbestos Abatement
• Phase I, II, III env. assessments • Demolition • Licensed under M.O.E.E • Licensed under T.S.S.A
www.Baycon.ca Telephone: 416.405.8880 • Fax: 416.405.8830
Project1
11/13/06
10:28 AM
Page 1
After more than a year of field testing, a new magnet controller manufactured by Hubbell Industrial Controls has demonstrated that it will vastly reduce maintenance demands while enabling maximum efficiency and control during operation, even in high duty-cycle lifting applications. Hubbell announced the new controller as ready for market in co-operation with its originators, Control Services of Westmont, IL. Hubbell will manufacture the patent pending e-mag controller. Winkle Industries, Hubbell’s master distributor, will market the e-mag controller for use on all makes and models of mobile cranes in recycling and steel mill material handling applications. Control Services’ John Samila explains that the e-mag DC generator controller takes a dramatically new approach to controlling all power fluctuations inherent in the duty cycles and demands of lifting magnet applications. “The current generation of solid state DC magnet controllers are static controlled devices that are subject to speed and load variations that may negatively impact the magnet system efficiency,” he says. These systems are generally outmatched by the job, absorbing massive voltage spikes through very sudden surges and drop-offs. “Our e-mag controller withstands and eliminates inherent magnet system problems by controlling the source which is the generator.” Instead of reacting to magnet system failures as other units do, the e-mag controls the flow coming out of the generator before it becomes an issue. In essence, the e-mag prevents failures by protecting the magnet system and controlling the generator output for optimum efficiency. The e-mag design is ideal for high demand operations and is available for generators from 5 kW to as much 50 kW, with no fear of problems with maximum voltages. Contact Steve Loeck, VP Sales, Hubbell Industrial Controls, Inc., sloeck@hubbell-gleason. com
36 www.solidwastemag.com April/May 2010
swr a-m 2010 Equip pg 35-36.indd 36
07/04/10 2:54 PM
Advertisers’ Index
April/May 2010
Company Page # Company Page # 2cg/Paul van der Werf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Liebherr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Al-jon Mfg ., LLC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Mack Truck . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
AMRC/Association of Municipal Recycling Coordinators . . . . . . 36
Miller Thomson LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Battery Broker Environmental Services Inc ., The . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Molok . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Baycon Environmental Consulting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Paradigm Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Canadian Waste & Recycling Expo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Curotto-Can . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 EMF Containers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Environmental Business Consultants (J . Nicholson) . . . . . . . . . 35 Eriez Magnetics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Geoware Inc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Pro-Tainer, Inc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Rechargeable Battery Recycling Corporation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Schuyler Rubber Co . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Sebright . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Sims Cab Depot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 SSI Schaefer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Golder Associates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Trashed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Groundworx Co ., The . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Trux Route Management Systems Inc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Harris Balers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Van Dyk Baler Corp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Laurin Inc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Walinga Inc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Laflèche environmental inc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Walker Environmental . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
on
Knowledge is power. Ontario’s new power procurement program is already making a significant impact on the province’s production and consumption of electricity. Many businesses will now face a challenging period of adjustment as they gain an understanding of how the feed-in tariff program will work and what it all means for them going forward. Our National CleanTech Group has the expertise to help make sense of the new landscape being shaped by the introduction of the Green Energy and Green Economy Act. We can advise on all its aspects, including: •
the new feed-in tariff program and its provincial content requirements
•
renewable energy approvals and other required permits
•
financing for renewable energy projects and joint venture structures
•
project divestitures and acquisitions
For more information, contact: Aaron Atcheson Leader, National CleanTech Group 519.931.3526 or 416.595.2996 aatcheson@millerthomson.com
April/May 2010 www.solidwastemag.com 37
swr a-m 2010 AdIdx pg 37.indd 37
09/04/10 10:07 AM
BLOG
by Guy Crittenden “More than 13 billion plastic bottles are disposed of globally each year, many in landfills or as litter.”
Eco Plastics?
New organic catalyst polymer chemistry
I
n a paper published in the American Chemical Society journal Macromolecules, scientists from IBM and Stanford University detail discoveries that could lead to the development of new types of biodegradable, biocompatible plastics. The result of a multi-year research effort, the breakthrough also could lead to a new recycling process that has the potential to significantly increase the ability to recycle and reuse common PET and plant-based plastics in the future. An announcement made in March may have sustainability implications across a wide range of industries including biodegradable plastics, plastics recycling, healthcare and microelectronics. IBM and Stanford scientists are pioneering the application of organocatalysis to green polymer chemistry, which represents a fundamental shift in the field. This discovery and new approach using organic catalysts could lead to well-defined, biodegradable molecules made from renewable resources in an environmentally responsible way. “We’re exploring new methods of applying technology and our expertise in materials science to create a sustainable, environmentally sound future,” says Josephine Cheng, IBM Fellow and vice president, IBM Research-Almaden. “The development of new families of organic catalysts brings more versatility to green chemistry and opens the door for novel applications, such as making biodegradable plastics, improving the recycling process and drug delivery.” Disposable plastic bottles are among the most vexing environmental challenges. More than 13 billion plastic bottles are disposed of globally each year, many in landfills or as litter. While plastics are recyclable, the resulting materials are generally limited to “second generation reuse” only. This means the materials made from recycled plastic bottles are eventually disposed in landfills. In the United States, up to 63 pounds of plastic packaging per person is disposed of each year, instead of being repeatedly recycled. The IBM-Stanford breakthrough in green chemistry could lead to a new recycling process that reverses the polymerization process to regenerate monomers in their original state, reducing such waste and pollution significantly. IBM also is collaborating with scientists from King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology (KACST) to develop the recycling process
for polyethylene terephthalate (PET) plastics — a common plastic used in containers for food, beverages and other liquids. These breakthroughs also hold promise for biomedical applications. For example, many effective drugs that are designed to target cancer cells are often so potent they attack cancerous and healthy cells alike. The use of organocatalysis could help in the design of custom polymers that may aid in delivering drugs to a specific cell or region.
Scientific details The paper, “Organocatalysis: Opportunities and Challenges for Polymer Synthesis,” outlines how and why organocatalysis provides new opportunities for the preparation of sustainable plastics. Through the introduction of organic catalysis to synthetic polymer chemistry, scientists have developed a broadly applicable technology with demonstrations in a diverse range of polymerization techniques and monomer types. A major focus of their efforts has been on ring-opening polymerization — a strategy dominated by metal oxide or metal hydroxide catalysts. They’ve shown that organic catalysts both exhibit activities that rival the most active metalbased catalysts, and provide access to polymer architectures that are difficult to access by conventional approaches. The paper outlines the development of several new families of highly active, environmentally benign organic catalysts for the conversion of renewable resources to products that exhibit cost/performance characteristics comparable to existing materials. The paper also describes recycling or degradation strategies that would enable a closed-loop lifecycle for materials that meet the needs of the marketplace while helping to minimize the environmental footprint left for future generations. Additionally, the team has developed a new strategy for the synthesis of high molecular weight cyclic polyesters and the generation of new families of biocompatible polymers for biomedical applications. Visit www.ibm.com/research Guy Crittenden is editor of this magazine. Contact Guy at gcrittenden@solidwastemag.com
38 www.solidwastemag.com April/May 2010
swr a-m 2010 Blog pg 38.indd 38
07/04/10 2:57 PM
Canada’s ONLY trade event serving the waste, recycling and public works markets
November 3 - 4, 2010 International Centre Toronto, ON, Canada
waste driven. environment inspired. out of the box solutions.
Join us in 2010 for an exciting, new look and feel! The 13th edition of CWRE will embody. . . EvErything you want . . . • A strong showing of leading manufacturers • A diverse and qualified group of key buyers • Numerous networking opportunities
anD MorE . . . • An informative conference program - redesigned • Top notch showcase of new products • International pavilions • New segmented areas • Insightful facility tours
For more information on this exciting industry event, contact Arnie Gess Call 1.877.534.7285 Email arnie.gess@cwre.ca Visit www.cwre.ca
12/09 SWR
swr a-m 2010 pg 39 AD.indd 39
07/04/10 2:57 PM
STOP AND GO – ON YOUR OWN TERMS Never having to stop to clean your Diesel Particulate Filter is the competitive advantage you get with the new Mack® TerraPro™ Cabover. Our solution automatically initiates thermal regeneration while you work, cleaning the soot that collects in the DPF. This saves you time and money, and improves the efficiency of your workforce. And with its powerful, fuel-efficient MP7 engine – it’s clear the TerraPro is engineered to keep you moving forward.
MACKTRUCKS.COM ©2008 Mack Trucks, Inc. All rights reserved.
MCKTRK_4599_TProMRPg_SWR.indd 1 swr a-m 2010 pg 40 AD.indd 40
10/13/08 10:50:24 AM 07/04/10 2:58 PM