Solid Waste & Recycling February/March 2011

k y or /Y erg am En rh to- ct Du te- oje 19 as Pr age W p

—

Solid Waste & Recycling Canada’s magazine on collection, hauling, processing and disposal February/March 2011 $10.00

CPMP No. 40069240

An EcoLog Group Publication

GOOD NEIGHBOURS Winning community support for Guelph’s new organics plant — page 8

New Ontario Waste Management Association column — page 16 swr f-m 11 Cover nl pg 1.indd 1

18/02/11 2:30 PM

We’re not trying to reinvent the wheel.

We’re asking you to reimagine your business.

Imagine extending the life of your tires by two or three more times.

Imagine cutting your operating costs without sacrificing performance.

Imagine running on tires that actually lighten their load on our planet.

That’s the power of world-class Bandag retreads. And while we certainly didn’t reinvent the wheel, retreads can help revolutionize your business.

Making your fleet leaner, more profitable and more competitive than you might have ever thought possible. To learn more, visit bandag.com.

©2010 Bridgestone Canada, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

SolidWasteRec-BanReimagineAd-FebMar.indd 1 swr f-m 11 pg 2 AD.indd 2

1/19/11 3:59 PM 10/02/11 12:34 PM

Solid Waste & Recycling

CONTENTS February/March 2011 Volume 16, Number 1

Canada’s magazine on collection, hauling, processing & disposal

COVER STORY How the City of Guelph gained community acceptance for a composting plant planned for the same location where a previous plant had experienced problems.

by Amy Burke & Bill Shields

FEATURES

CleanTech Canada

SOFTWARE: TRANSFER STATIONS Edmonton’s management software.

by Kevin Litwiller

14

DEPARTMENTS Editorial

4

Up Front

6

Association News

16

Organic Matters

26

Waste Business

28

8 Cover art by Charles Jaffé

COMPOST CONTROVERSY

(PAGES 19-24) WASTE-TO-ENERGY: INCINERATION Durham and York Regions’ waste incineration project

by Jim McKay

19

WASTE-TO-FUEL: ETHANOL CLP turns food waste into fuel

by Jack McGinnis

23

Regulation Roundup 31 Equipment

33

Ad Index

37

Blog

38

NEXT EDITION Bonus Distribution: Waste Expo 2011 Single-stream recycling. Multi-rez diversion. E-waste. Agricultural waste. Landfill gas-to-energy. Greenhouse gas. Baler selection.

Space closing: March 29, 2011; Artwork required: April 5, 2011. Advertisers, contact Publisher Brad O’Brien at 1-888702-1111 ext. 2.

Software: Transfer Stations, pg. 14

Waste-to-Energy: Incineration, pg. 19

Equipment, pg. 33

February/March 2011 www.solidwastemag.com 3

swr f-m 11 conts pg 3.indd 3

16/02/11 9:50 AM

EDITORIAL

by Guy Crittenden “The report funded by Coca-Cola was written by consultant Gil Friend and his associates at Natural Logic, California.”

Nestlé and the Watering Down of EPR

I

n early January I received an interesting and disturbing email from Product Policy Institute (www.productpolicy.org) Executive Director Bill Sheehan about an article by Nestlé CEO, Kim Jefferies — “Why It’s Time to Rethink Recycling in the US” — that was posted to greenbiz.com right before Christmas and has been widely circulated.

Sheehan wrote, “Jefferies embraces a version of Extended Producer Responsibility that would do away with industry-managed beverage con­tainer deposit-refund laws and replace them with industry-managed, government-delivered curbside programs. Jefferies’ description of ‘EPR’ as an alternative to deposit-refund systems is echoed in a recent report funded by Coca-Cola.... It seems to be part of a coordinated beverage industry campaign to co-opt EPR rather than fixing bottle bills and making container deposits the cornerstone of EPR for packaging.”

Readers should acquaint themselves with Jeffries’ article, the Coca-Cola study and criticisms of both, as they represent the latest skirmish in the longstanding war between industry and environmentalists over deposit-refund systems, which some describe as the original EPR program.

Jefferies article is on behalf of Nestlé Waters North America — a division of Nestlé that has a stated goal of achieving a 60 percent recycling rate for all PET plastic beverage containers in America by 2018 (not just the company’s own packaging).

Jeffries states that in “our efforts to identify workable solutions to reach that goal, we have to rethink the recycling challenge.” So far so good. He then (correctly) states, “[R]ecycling rates, currently at 25-30 percent, are not improving significantly. Logistics costs are rising and government fiscal crises jeopardize the viability of programs.”

Having written that, you’d think Jeffries would advocate the expansion of bottle bills to all 50 US states. Instead, the author smears the bottle bill programs in the 10 states that have them, writing that “[t]he problem with bottle bills is they create an enormous government bureaucracy, do only a reasonable job of diverting a very small portion of the waste stream — beverage containers — from landfills and do nothing to build curbside, public space and commercial recycling infrastructure.

Bottle bills also lack consistent public education about the importance of recycling.”

His article continues with a confusing mish-mash of complaints about bottle bills and the amount of paper going to landfill, lack of recycling space at stores, and the fate of unredeemed deposits.

Experts in deposit-refund systems quickly skewered Jefferies’ article. Critics included the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality’s Peter Spendelow who dismissed the claim that bottle bills create an enormous government bureaucracy, writing that “there is no employee of the State of Oregon whose main job is to administer the bottle bill.

Spendelow also skewers Jefferies’ claim that bottle bills do nothing to

address paper recycling infrastructure, writing, “Actually, indirectly they do, by making the recycled paper supply much cleaner.... Broken glass is a major contaminant in the paper, costing our paper mills millions of dollars in damage to equipment and forcing them to install additional cleaning technology.”

NYPIRG’s Laura Haight wrote that her jaw dropped when she read the line about an enormous government bureaucracy. “Here in New York,” she wrote, “we have less than one full-time staff person in the DEC overseeing the program.... With an average return rate of over 70 per cent and more than six billion bottles and cans recycled each year in NY alone, the bottle bill is a great example of how effective EPR can be — all at virtually no cost to taxpayers.”

The report funded by Coca-Cola was written by consultant Gil Friend and his associates at Natural Logic, California. The report proposes a strategy to collect all consumer packaging and printed paper together, as an alternative to bottle deposit laws. The system proposed for recycling of packaging material is 100 per cent funded by producers, with the Recovery Organization (NPRO) controlling the funds, contracts and details of curbside recycling programs. Alternately, funding responsibility could be shared between producers and municipalities, but the research suggests that a “full cost” system provides for better control of recovery system efficiencies, and more powerful incentives for product design strategies that will drive further waste stream reductions.

This approach stands in contrast to the EPR approach advocated by Andrew Green and Michael Trebilcock in a C.D. Howe Institute paper published last December. They conclude that the best system is one that imposes individual responsibility to the greatest extent possible and allows for a range of contractual arrangements to undertake these responsibilities. They argue that competition and the underlying governance structures are central to the effectiveness, efficiency, and fairness of the program but are often neglected or poorly designed. (They recommend fixes.)

There may be merit in contemplating alternative approaches to EPR, but Jefferies’ article doesn’t give much confidence that the Coca-Colafunded report is much more than smoke and mirrors from industries that wish to avoid direct responsibility for the end-of-life-management of their products and packaging.

Note: I’ve posted Jefferies’ article and the critic’s comments on my blog at www.solidwastemag.com The next edition of this magazine will feature an article examining single- versus dual-stream recycling and their effects on paper mills and markets.

Guy Crittenden is editor of this magazine. Contact Guy at gcrittenden@solidwastemag.com

4 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2011

swr f-m 11 editorial pg 4.indd 4

16/02/11 10:01 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 f-m 11 pg 5 AD.indd 5

10/02/11 2:24 PM

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

New OWMA staff

T

he Ontario Waste Management Association (OWMA) is pleased to announce that Peter Hargreave has joined the association team as Director, Policy and Strategy. Peter brings to OWMA a wealth of experience in waste management policy development, managing relationships and contentious issues and the evolution of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) programs in Ontario. Peter most recently served as Director of Policy for the Hon. John Wilkinson, Minister of the Environment where he managed issues related to waste management, air quality, climate change, toxics and land. Prior to his work at the Ministry of the Environment, Peter served in Senior Policy Advisor positions with the Ontario Minister of Revenue and the Minister of Government Services.

Peter Hargreave “Peter will be a valuable addition to the OWMA team as we focus on leading the waste management sector and providing a strong sector voice on a range of issues important to our membership,” stated Rob Cook, OWMA President.

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 business-to-business information services company that also publishes HazMat Management magazine and other information products.

The magazine is printed in Canada.

Solid Waste & Recycling provides strategic 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) 510-6798.

Contact Peter at the OWMA office, 905-791-9500.

Return undeliverable Canadian addresses to: Circulation Department, Solid Waste & Recycling 12 Concorde Pl, Ste 800, Toronto, ON M3C 4J2 Call: (416) 442-5600 Fax: (416) 510-5148 E-mail: 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: 1-800-268-7742 Fax: 416-510-5148 E-Mail: jhunter@businessinformationgroup.ca Mail to: Privacy Officer

Business Information Group

12 Concorde Pl, Ste 800

Toronto, ON Canada M3C 4J2 Solid Waste & Recycling, USPS 018-886 is published bimonthly by Business Information Group. US office of publication: 2424 Niagara Falls Blvd, Niagara Falls, NY 14304-0357. Periodicals Postage Paid at Niagara Falls, NY. US postmaster: Send address changes to Solid Waste & Recycling, PO Box 1118, Niagara Falls, NY 14304.

Dennis Jackson at NRC D

ennis Jackson has landed at Natural Resources Canada. Please find his contact information below: Dennis Jackson, Community Energy Analyst CanmetENERGY, Natural Resources Canada Tel: 613- 996-6119 Email: dennis.jackson@nrcan-rncan.gc.ca Web: www.canmetenergy.nrcan.gc.ca

We acknowledge the financial support of the Government of Canada through the Canada Periodical Fund (CPF) for our publishing activities. © 2011 All rights reserved. No part of this pub­li­ca­tion may be reproduced without prior con­­sent.

Print edition: ISSN-1483-7714

Online edition: ISSN-1923-3388

The Forest Stewardship Council logo signifies that this magazine is printed on paper from responsibly managed forests. “To earn FSC certification and the right to use the FSC label, an organization must first adapt its management and operations to conform to all applicable FSC requirements.”

For more information, visit www.fsc.org

6 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2011

swr f-m 11 upf pg 6-7.indd 6

16/02/11 10:09 AM

NEW CALL2RECYCLE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR IN CANADA

C

all2Recycle®, North America’s only free battery and cell phone collection program has announced its heightened commitment to diverting batteries from Canada’s landfills with the appointment of a new Canadian executive director and a reconstituted board of directors, as well as the opening of a new office in Toronto.

Joe Zenobio was appointed executive director for Call2Recycle Canada, charged with driving the strategic direction for the organization’s expanding Canadian presence and serving as the liaison between battery manufacturers, government agencies and Call2Recycle’s program participants.

Zenobio most recently served in various leadership roles in Canada and the U.S. including president, chief operating officer and senior vice president, products and solutions for GS1, one of the largest e-commerce and value chain organizations in the world.

“The battery recycling landscape is changing rapidly in Canada as provincial governments, the

battery industry and consumers seek a mutuallybeneficial solution for keeping batteries out of the waste stream,” said Carl Smith, president and CEO of Call2Recycle. “Joe’s experience in managing strategies to address the needs of multiple stakeholders is already proving to be beneficial as our program continues to grow in Canada.”

The new RBRCC board members include Nick Aubry, manager, national parts operations and environment service, Sony Canada; Kent Hatton, brand group director, Energizer Canada, Inc.; Alan Moyer, director, Panasonic Canada; Susan E. Nieuwhof, director, external relations, Proctor & Gamble Canada; Gary Van Heerwaarden, director — team lead, Rayovac; and Smith from Call2Recycle.

Call2Recycle collects batteries and cell phones through its network of more than 30,000 retailers, communities and businesses across North America.

Its new office address is 4576 Yonge Street, Suite 606, Toronto, ON, M2N 6N4. To find a local Call2Recycle collection site, visit call2recycle.ca

Joe Zenobio

OBITUARY

TerraCycle helps schools, non-profits

T

erraCycle, Inc., a leader in the collection and reuse of non-recyclable post-consumer waste, has collected over 500,000 post-consumer wrappers from over 3,000 schools and non-profits in Canada through a partnership with Kraft Foods. The initiative, which was launched in spring 2010, was able to reach this milestone thanks to a donation from Kraft Foods of more than $11,000, which was distributed to Canadian schools and non-profits for the collection of post-consumer wrappers.

TerraCycle repurposes this collected waste into new eco-friendly materials and products that are available online and through major retailers.

In addition to the Kraft Foods-sponsored collection program, TerraCycle has teamed up with three other companies — Stonyfield Farm, Nestlé Canada and Glad — to launch three new collection programs in Canada.

The Stonyfield Farm-sponsored program will pay schools and nonprofits two cents for every used yogurt cup they collect. It will accept cups regardless of brands. The Nestlé-sponsored program aims to collect chocolate wrappers from schools and non-profits. This program will give two cents for every chocolate wrapper collected and sent to TerraCycle. Finally, the Glad-sponsored program intends to collect and recycle sandwich bags and containers. Schools and non-profits will receive two cents for each container or 10 sandwich bags they collect.

Worldwide, TerraCycle’s collection programs have collected more than two billion non-recyclable packaging units and given more than $1.8 million to schools and non-profits.

Visit www.terracycle.ca

I

Jack McGinnis

t’s with great sadness that we inform readers that longtime waste and recycling industry expert Jack McGinnis passed away on Saturday, January 29, 2011. McGinnis was well known and highly regarded among North American professionals for his work with clients in the waste diversion and organics management areas, and as a founder of the Recycling Council of Ontario (RCO) and Ontario’s popular Blue Box curbside recycling program.

NOTE: On page 23 we offer an article written by Jack McGinnis about Canadian Liquid Processors (a client of his) in our CleanTech Canada supplement.

The article is being printed in homage to McGinnis as the last thing he wrote.

February/March 2011 www.solidwastemag.com 7

swr f-m 11 upf pg 6-7.indd 7

16/02/11 10:09 AM

COVER STORY

by Amy Burke & Bill Shields “The community consultation process went beyond the legislative requirements, more closely resembling an Environmental Assessment.”

Stakeholder relations and comprehensive contingency planning key to composting success in Guelph

An Organic Relationship

W

ith organic matter comprising 30 to 40 percent of residential waste, successful management of organics is vital to any municipal solid waste program. Accordingly, a large part of a municipal diversion strategy is identifying and gaining support for organic waste processing operations. Taking a leading role in diversion in Canada, the City of Guelph, Ontario is familiar with the successes and challenges associated with organic waste management.

Guelph is a university city whose progressive 125,000 residents take a keen interest in environmental matters; waste management is no exception. A third-party 2008 survey found that 68 per cent of residents said that they wanted Guelph to exceed the provincial waste diversion goal of 60 per cent. Another 27 per cent said the city should achieve and maintain the provincial waste diversion target.

A decade ago, Guelph was one of the few cities in North America to collect residential organic waste at curbside, to be processed into compost at a municipal facility. The city decided to close the local processing operations in 2006, while still recognizing the program’s significance to the community. Since that time, Guelph has been exporting its curbsidecollected source-separated organics (SSO) for management at an energyfrom-waste facility. However, as energy-from-waste is not classified as diversion from disposal by the Ontario Ministry of the Environment, the closure of the organic processing facility resulted in a negative impact

on the city’s waste diversion rate (from 45 per cent in 2005 to 39 per cent in 2006).

In 2007, the desire to re-establish Guelph as a waste diversion leader caused the city to reconsider a local composting operation. Other factors influencing this decision were the high cost of the energy-from-waste option, concern about the environmental impact of long-distance hauling, and the missed opportunities for revenue from compost sales.

So, as part of its 2008 Solid Waste Management Master Plan, the Guelph made plans to proceed with a new organics facility, to be part of an overall integrated waste management solution at the Guelph Waste Resource Innovation Centre. Since the previous organics facility had been located at this site, the city was able to use some of the existing buildings, modified to meet the requirements of the updated processes.

The Guelph Organic Waste Processing Facility (OWPF), which has passed through the approvals stage and is now under construction, will process Guelph’s “wet” waste stream into organic compost. The re-establishment of local organic waste management will contribute to the city’s goal to achieve 65 per cent per cent waste diversion by 2016.

Community involvement key to site approvals Ontario’s current approval climate for projects involving SSO waste is very challenging. Understanding the sensitivity of siting composting facilities in the province, and anticipating keen interest from the com-

8 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2011

swr f-m 11 cvrsty pg 8-13.indd 8

16/02/11 10:12 AM

COVER STORY

“In Ontario, it’s no longer good enough to just state in an environmental application that steps will be taken to deal with potential process upsets or nuisances.” munity in this project, consultation with both regulators and the public was initiated at the early stages of developing the permitting application for the proposed OWPF. The city decided to carry out a community consultation process that went beyond the legislative requirements, more closely resembling the level of consultation required by an Environmental Assessment (EA).

This included demonstrating the planned engineering controls, processing measures and operational procedures to manage odour, litter, noise, traffic and other potential impacts that the facility might have — and particularly the backup or contingency plans to be implemented if the usual steps failed.

The consultation process aimed to determine issues of importance to the community and to provide responses to community concerns.

Accordingly, the city held two consultation meetings in an open-house format, and held two meetings with local residents’ interest groups. A

project information website was established and an email address was also publicized, so that stakeholders could comment or ask questions about the composting plant and its planned operations.

Contingency planning for process upsets As laid out by the environment ministry’s updated “Guide for Applying for Approval of Waste Disposal Sites,” designing and planning Guelph’s new OWPF required detailed advanced planning for potential breakdowns or failures in the process. In Ontario, it’s no longer good enough to just state in an environmental application that steps will be taken to deal with potential process upsets or nuisances. Guelph prepared a detailed analysis of the possible problems, and an equally detailed description of the steps that will be taken in each instance, demonstrating that the right equipment, staff and other necessities are available to minimize the risk of their occurrence and implement those backup plans, if necessary.

Artist’s rendering of Guelph’s Organic Waste Processing Facility (OWPF).

February/March 2011 www.solidwastemag.com 9

swr f-m 11 cvrsty pg 8-13.indd 9

16/02/11 10:12 AM

Walinga VC2336

6/11/07

2:36 PM

Page 1 Aerial view showing facility layout.

N O W

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

10 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2011

swr f-m 11 cvrsty pg 8-13.indd 10

16/02/11 10:14 AM

COVER STORY

Response planning included, for instance, a description of what would happen in a power outage. The planning included such items as how long the facility could operate on backup power, at what point the facility would need to close its doors to new organics shipments, what would be done with those shipments, and phased facility re-start procedures.

The comprehensive nature of contingency planning included how to deal with shipments of organic waste received from new sources of generation. In addressing the stringent requirements of the ministry, Guelph will implement procedures to test material from any new source of organic waste delivered to the OWPF to see if it meets minimum quality requirements.

Organic waste management into the future One of the design priorities in the OWPF is the need to meet needs not just in the present,

See us at WasteExpo booth 3137

Risk-management steps at the Guelph OWPF

S

ome of the measures that will be implemented at the Guelph OWPF to minimize the risk of potential negative impacts are:

• The entire composting process will be done indoors, within a building operated under negative air pressure; • Receiving area doors will be kept closed at all time, except to allow for entering or exiting of hauling trucks; • Air curtains — air forced downwards from fans located above the door, acting as an invisible curtain — will be installed on receiving bays doors to further reduce the risk of any fugitive odours emanating from the building; • Truck loads will be inspected before unloading, so unacceptable material can be identi­fied, removed and disposed of properly; • Landscaping enhancements have been completed in the vicinity of the OWPF, including berms and vegetation, to reduce noise and improve the aesthetics of the site.

The CompuWeigh� System Superior Software, Superior Service • Real-Time Processing • Accounts Receivable • Reporting • Security • Video Monitoring • Scale Monitoring • SQL Database • Oracle Database 4Recyclers 4Scrap 4Landfills 4Transfer Stations

4MRFS 4Quarries 4Aggregate 4Unattended Facilities

For more information and a free demo, please call us at (410) 329-1300 or visit our website at:

www.ParadigmSoftware.com

Sold and supported exclusively by Paradigm Software LLC February/March 2011 www.solidwastemag.com 11

swr f-m 11 cvrsty pg 8-13.indd 11

16/02/11 10:15 AM

COVER STORY

but in the future. Guelph currently generates some 10,000 tonnes of organic waste annually. The OWPF is designed to handle 30,000 tonnes of organic waste feedstock per year. While the amount of organic waste Guelph generates is expected to reach 16,000 tonnes per year over a 25 year period, there is room for the city to process organic waste from other sources, to generate additional revenue from fees and from the sale of the product. This may include waste from food processors in the city or elsewhere, and the organic waste from other municipalities.

Guelph’s new OWPF is scheduled to begin operating in spring/summer 2011. It will be owned by the City of Guelph and operated by AIM Environmental Group (www.aimgroup.ca), which also operates a similar-sized compost facility in the nearby City of Hamilton.

The scale house.

Amy Burke, B.Sc. (Environmental Science) is a member of the waste management practice of Golder Associates Ltd., based in Whitby, Ontario. Contact Amy at amy_burke@golder.com Bill Shields is Supervisor, Governance & Compliance, with the City of Guelph. Contact Bill at bill.shields@guelph.ca

MEET JAKE He’s proud to announce that Jake, Connor & Crew is now offering superior quality container products to the Waste and Recycling industries.

You can expect the same exceptional customer service and cost effective pricing that has made us the largest supplier of containers in the document protection industry around the world for over 15 years.

Your Best Friend in Waste & Recycling. www.jakeconnorandcrew.com 519.576.9865

12 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2011

swr f-m 11 cvrsty pg 8-13.indd 12

17/02/11 8:25 AM

WE11 Solid W

we:reach WasteExpo 2011. Reach new customers through our menu of comprehensive marketing programs. As environmentalists, you make it easy being green. And we want to make it easier for you to make some green. With over 11,000 professionals looking to grow their market share and expand their businesses—90% of them are involved with the purchase of products and services—WasteExpo is the place to be. And with expanded sponsorship and marketing programs, it’s never been easier to gain awareness and reach these buyers. Whether you’re looking for a new product or service, or launching one, WasteExpo 2011 is the perfect environment to help grow your business. For more information about WasteExpo please visit us at www.wasteexpo.com

Conference: May 9–11, 2011 Exhibits: May 10–12, 2011 Dallas Convention Center, Dallas • Texas

wasteexpo.com FREE EXHIBIT HALL CODE: VP28

Co-located with:

In Association with: Global Waste Management Symposium

May 10-11, 2011 www.wastetraininginstitute.com

May 11-12, 2011

www.healthcarewasteconf.com

Promoting Technology and Scientific Innovation

www.wastesymposium.com

Sponsors:

www.landfillconference.com Produced by:

May 9-10, 2011 www.fluidpowerexpo.com

WE11 Solid Waste pg and8-13.indd Recycling13 8.125x10.875.indd 1 swr f-m 11 cvrsty

1/10/201110:15 8:48:26 16/02/11 AM AM

S O F T WA R E

by Guy Crittenden “Software represents a small percentage of the overall cost of waste management facilities, but it is absolutely crucial to their success.”

Software for Waste Management Managing information at the City of Edmonton

T

he City of Edmonton, Alberta, is one of Canada’s most vibrant and growing cities, with a population over 750,000, more than half of whom are under the age of 40. The city has been proactive with its waste management strategy with a focus on maximizing diversion from landfill and minimizing environmental impacts.

At the centre of its efforts is the Edmonton Waste Management Centre (EWMC) — a unique collection of advanced waste processing and research operations including facilities for composting, processing of recyclables and e-waste, power production from landfill gas, construction and demolition waste recycling and environmental protection and monitoring. The EWMC also houses a research and development facility that’s part of the Edmonton Waste Management Centre of Excellence.

Business situation

Edmonton was an early adopter of Geoware software (www.geoware4. com) and has been using the system since 1992. During that time the software has grown from a simple scalehouse ticketing system, to a fullfledged waste management, ERP system.

As Edmonton enhanced its recycling programs in the 1990s, built a MRF at the EWMC and constructed a composting facility that began processing in 2000, the city’s Geoware system was enhanced to improve the monitoring and control of material flow and site operations.

The implementation of the programs served by these facilities enabled Edmonton to divert 60 per cent of its residential waste from landfill.

As the closure of its landfill became imminent, the city raised the bar for itself again and set a diversion goal of 90 per cent. To further reduce dependency on landfill and reduce the associated greenhouse gas (GHG) production, Edmonton undertook an initiative to build a wasteto-biofuels facility. At capacity, this facility will convert 100,000 tonnes of municipal solid waste into 36 million litres of biofuels annually and help reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by six million tonnes over the next 25 years (the equivalent of removing 42,000 cars from the road annually).

In 2008, as part of the $130 million waste-to-biofuels initiative, Edmonton began building a new Integrated Processing and Transfer Facility (IPTF). In addition to substantial physical infrastructure, the city needed to monitor and control a wide variety of material flows including truck loading, bin movement and conveyor scale systems.

This new facility had to be effective and efficient in its operations, which meant managing such variables as staff and equipment during peak and slower periods, but also the various waste streams so they could: • Optimize the processing of material through the facility; • Maximize diversion rates in order to receive valuable credits and incentives;

Schematic of waste management

• Optimize the use of transfer trailers; • Avoid costly penalties in waste transfer haulage and refuse-derived fuel contracts; and • Maximize the value of waste receiver contracts.

One of the key components in achieving these goals is access to timely, detailed and accurate information. This allows greater levels of efficiency and provides the kind of detailed reporting required to ensure qualification for various incentive program(s).

Solution

Edmonton required a fully integrated information and control system at its new IPTF. Geoware was engaged from the early planning stages to ensure integration with the overall facility design. The early engagement included: • Detailed requirements gathering and documentation; • Analysis of new business processes; • Analysis of vehicle and material flows; • Examination and documentation of expanded reporting requirements ; • Documentation of equipment requirements; and • Documentation of IT infrastructure.

Building on the city’s past software investment in administration and scalehouse modules, the IPTF project required additional modules including:

14 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2011

swr f-m 11 software pg 14-15.indd 14

16/02/11 10:16 AM

S O F T WA R E

• Transfer Loading: Provides real-time process control and communication across the facility, between drivers, loaders, other operations personnel and administration staff for live loading of material.

• Transfer Logistics: Delivers real-time status of all personnel and equipment including loaded and unloaded trailer inventories and vehicles in transit.

• Transfer Contract Management: Includes monitoring and reconciliation tools to support the management of contracts with haulers and waste receivers.

• Inter-Facility Processing: For real-time monitoring, control and reporting on the flow of materials between processing facilities within the IPTF. The software modules are integrated with a

number of other enabling technologies including: • Six vehicle scales, two multi-deck, vehicle scales and five conveyor scales; • Ten lanes of automated traffic control, including lights, gates, overhead doors, and loop detectors; • Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) of multi-component vehicles and bins; • Multiple remote displays for scalehouse, transfer and loading operations; and • Wireless, hand-held terminals, proximity cards and readers, and driver’s terminals.

Integration of these new modules has resulted in a highly-automated management and control system to increase efficiencies and optimize resources. IPTF managers no longer need to walk out to the production area to see

what is going on. Now they have all the data at their fingertips. Reporting is easy; staff simply save the three or four main reports they use everyday so they can quickly get everything they need.

Software represents a small percentage of the overall cost of waste management facilities, but it is absolutely crucial to their success.

Guy Crittenden is editor of this magazine. Contact Guy at gcrittenden@solidwastemag.com Learn about more waste and recycling products and services by visiting www.solidwastemag.com

February/March 2011 www.solidwastemag.com 15

swr f-m 11 software pg 14-15.indd 15

16/02/11 10:16 AM

A S S O C I AT I O N N E W S

by Rob Cook OWMA has developed and approved a waste sector strategy for organics diversion and processing in Ontario.

Ontario Waste Management Association Update

T

he Ontario Waste Management Association (OWMA) represents leading companies and public organizations in the waste management sector. OWMA is “the voice of the waste sector” and strives to enhance the professionalism and stature of the waste sector with the public and government at all levels. The challenges and opportunities facing waste management in Ontario have necessitated practical yet innovative policy approaches to be developed by the membership and to be advocated for by the Association. The coming year will be challenging — a provincial election, waste infrastructure capacity problems and waste system economic challenges.

OWMA has translated success into significant membership growth over the past two years with over 125 new members representing an increase of 72 per cent over a 24 month period; this is a massive increase at a time when many organizations are facing reduced membership and resource challenges.

CVOR Coalition: OWMA has engaged the Ministry of Transportation regarding the CVOR system and the negative impact of new guidelines on public and private low kilometre fleet operators. OWMA has spearheaded the formation of a coalition of industries and municipal

Annual Meeting

Provincial update

Organics Diversion Strategy/Compost Guidelines: OWMA has developed and approved a waste sector strategy for organics diversion and processing in Ontario. OWMA is engaged with senior management at the Ministry of the Environment on organics processing and composting challenges and is currently engaged in a review to provide comments on the final version of new compost standards and guidelines.

Approvals Modernization: In 2010 the environment ministry’s Approvals Modernization Initiative was launched and OWMA is a member OWMA 2011 Annual General Meeting (March 2, 2011), Westin Bristol Place of the permanent Stakeholder Advisory Committee for the initiative.

Hotel, Toronto, Ontario. A full day of workshops, presentations and keynote Pub−2009−E.jpg OWMA has participated directly in “Risk Assessments” for CofA (sysspeakers highlighted by John Wilkinson, the Minister of the Environment as dinner speaker. tems) and will be engaged in assessments of other waste management infrastructure.

16 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2011

swr f-m 11 owma assn news pg 16-18.indd 16

16/02/11 10:17 AM

A S S O C I AT I O N N E W S

organizations with common negative impacts and concerns regarding CVOR to advocate for changes to the Guideline.

initial federal incorporation of a national organization. Development of a national association will be an ongoing priority in 2011.

Hazardous Waste: OWMA has established a new Hazardous Waste Caucus of members with an interest in hazardous waste

Waste Diversion Programs (MHSW & WEEE): Pre- and post the eco-fee debacle, OWMA has pursued public sector and private implementation issues and concerns with WDO programs in MHSW and WEEE. OWMA efforts focus on protecting the interests of the waste management sector and ensuring that WDO plans focus on funding and do not disrupt and displace marketplace relationships between existing parties (municipal and service providers).

U.S. Waste Export: OWMA is monitoring the continued exporting of waste to US jurisdictions — the Michigan/Ontario waste agreement and issues associated with continued IC&I waste export. OWMA is engaged in consultation with Environment Canada regarding CEPA regulatory changes for the export of non-hazardous waste to U.S. jurisdictions.

Inside OWMA

Leadership Initiative: OWMA embarked on the most significant new waste management sector initiative since the creation of the Association over 25 years ago. The “Leadership Initiative” and new Code of Ethics have changed how OWMA accepts new members and the expectations of the Association relative to the ethical business conduct of member companies. The ethical business conduct of OWMA members is fundamental to establishing organizational and industry credibility and creating marketplace dynamics whereby responsible and ethical companies can compete and users of member services are protected.

Accreditation Program: OWMA has initiated a new accreditation and certification program for waste sector personnel and the first two accreditation programs are under development for release and delivery in 2011. This program may be linked to a national accreditation program through a new waste sector association at the national level.

National Association: OWMA has led the formative actions for a national waste management sector association and has completed an

So tough, even a bear can’t destroy it. Now that’s Toter tough!

Check it out at www.tiny.cc/bearcart

the world’s

toughest

CArts

Tm

Why Retailers Love Toter · Increased sales to customers with automated trash or recycling programs · The only fully assembled, stackable cart · Strong margins and quick inventory turns · Easy to cross-merchandise with other products

www.toter.com February/March 2011 www.solidwastemag.com 17

swr f-m 11 owma assn news pg 16-18.indd 17

16/02/11 10:17 AM

A S S O C I AT I O N N E W S

Montreal Symposium

management and WDO MHSW program issues.

Rob Cook is Executive Director of the OWMA. For more information about membership with the OWMA, please visit www.owma.org or contact Michele Goulding at 905-791-9500 or mgoulding@owma.org

Canadian Waste Sector Symposium 2011 (November 7-9, 2011), The Palais des congrès de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec. A major event for the waste sector across Canada featuring tours, keynote speakers, workshops with over 40 speakers and networking opportunities.

This is a new regular column from the Ontario Waste Management Association (OWMA) to inform readers of events and news relevant to OWMA members and the waste sector in general. — ed.

Rethink waste collection.

• compact • attractive • sanitary • secure • efficient

Molok North America

P.O. Box 693 Mount Forest, ON N0G 2L0 | 1-877-558-5576 | www.molokna.com | molok@molokna.com 18 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2011

swr f-m 11 owma assn news pg 16-18.indd 18

06/04/11 8:16 AM

CleanTech Canada

DURHAM AND YORK REGIONS USE COVANTA TECHNOLOGY TO TURN WASTE INTO POWER

WASTE-TO-ENERGY

P

Rendering of the facility, scheduled for completion in 2014.

lanning and implementing a new waste-to-energy (WTE) facility is technically, environmentally, economically, and (perhaps of most importance) politically complex. These projects require a significant investment of time, research, negotiation and sacrifice with a constant focus on strategic planning and decision making.

In 2004, Durham and York Regional Councils directed staff to proceed with an environmental

by Jim McKay

“The EA process came to closure on November 19, 2010, with the issuance of approval by the Ontario environment ministry.”

assessment (EA) process to establish a long-term, local and sustainable waste disposal solution to be incorporated as a key component of the Regions’ long term integrated solid waste management systems. This direction was provided to address increasing difficulties in securing long-term disposal capacity and increasing costs of transportation of waste across the Canada/ US border. At that time, and until very recently in Durham’s case, the Regions relied upon long-haul shipping to Michigan landfills for managing their post-diversion residual wastes.

In Ontario, only the most difficult and complex municipal projects are subject to approvals as individual EAs under the Environmental Assessment Act process. The EA Act requires the proponent to identify the problem at hand, provide justification for the proposed project, and identify the potential environmental impacts caused by the project, while consulting with the public, agencies, stakeholders, proponents and opponents.

This can be a very long and arduous process, with some EAs for disposal facilities lasting 10 or more years. When all is said and done, if the regulators are satisfied approval is usually granted.

The EA was the most significant and most debated approval undertaken by the Regions. Pursuing this approval was February/March 2011 www.solidwastemag.com 19

swr f-m 11 ctc w to e pg 19-22.indd 19

16/02/11 10:18 AM

CleanTech Canada

TECHNICAL

never thought to be an easy task in a province where only 10 years earlier waste-to-energy had been banned. Advancing the project was further complicated by external factors such as: older thermal treatment facilities had recently been closed due to poor environmental performance; landfilling was cheap; and, the politics of the day shied away from controversial waste management issues. Despite these many challenges, the Regions felt a long-term waste management solution was necessary and critical decisions, sometimes unpopular, were made. At times the debate polarized the politicians at various governmental levels along with the public.

Five-step approvals process Implementation of the project essentially consisted of five key steps. The first step developed the “Road Map” for completion of the study and once everyone agreed to the approach (including the Ontario Ministry of the Environment) the actual study could be initiated. In Ontario, this “Road Map” is called the EA Terms of Reference (ToR), a challenging document to develop given the lack of precedence for this type of facility in Ontario in recent times.

“The siting process was likely the most controversial of all aspects of the project.”

The EA study commenced with a review of technologies capable of managing post-diversion residual solid waste, largely from residential sources. This technology review investigated everything from mechanical/biological treatment (MBT) with stabilized landfill to a range of thermal alternatives, some with a refuse-derived fuel (RDF) component, others without. It was necessary to complete this evaluation early in the process, so a conscious decision was made to focus the evaluation on “thermal technologies” and not to differentiate, at that point, between more traditional mass burn technologies and new and emerging conversion technologies. This differentiation would come later as part of the procurement process where more “concrete” data could be obtained and evaluated. This second step of this process concluded that thermal treatment with materials and energy recovery was the preferred option.

Once a technology process had been identified, the third step of the study was to identify a site to construct and operate the facility. The siting process was likely the most controversial of all aspects of the project. Up to this point there was very little opposition. However, once dots started to be placed on maps, the opposition grew and also became organized.

It was decided that the Regions would select a site before soliciting proposals from vendors for several reasons. First, it would allow proposals to be evaluated on an “apples-to-apples”

T

he proposed facility has an initial approved design capacity of 140,000 tonnes per year (tpy) and with expansion(s) a maximum design capacity of 400,000 tpy. The Regions have contracted Covanta Energy Corporation as the design, build, operate and maintain contractor. Covanta and its team members are planning to start construction of the plant in 2011 with full operation scheduled for 2014.

At the approved design capacity of 140,000 tpy, there will be two completely independent waste processing trains at the facility. Each train will consist of a feed chute, stoker, integrated furnace/boiler, acid gas scrubber, a fabric filter baghouse and associated ash and residue collection systems. Steam produced in the boilers will drive an electrical power generating system consisting of one turbine-generator set, switchgear and an air cooled condenser, to produce electricity for delivery to the grid, for in-plant use and potentially to provide district heating and/or cooling to the neighboring Courtice Water Pollution Control Plant and Clarington Energy Business Park.

The facility will incorporate a state-of-the-art flue gas treatment design that includes: Covanta’s proprietary Very Low NOx system; a Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction (SNCR) system with aqueous ammonia injection for additional NOx control; powdered activated carbon (PAC) injection for mercury and dioxins control; a spray dryer absorber (SDA) for acid gas control; and a fabric filter baghouse for particulate heavy metals removal. In addition to the standard continuous emission monitoring systems (CEMS), the facility will also include a state-ofthe-art continuous emissions sampling system for dioxins and furans.

To manage the hazardous fly ash component from the facility, Covanta will employ an innovative system that stabilizes the hazardous material onsite by fixing any potentially harmful elements in the ash using a mixture of Portland cement, pozzolan and water. The facility will be designed as a zero process water discharge facility, with only the need to manage stormwater, some of which will be captured and utilized for irrigation of the onsite vegetation.

The total price tag for the facility is $235.76 million (as of February 19, 2009). The annual operating fee for the facility is $14.67 million (as of February 19, 2009), excluding consideration of revenues from electricity or ferrous and non-ferrous recoveries. The plant will be designed to recover 60 per cent to 80 per cent of the metals received in the waste that can then be sold to recycling markets.

Covanta has provided an electricity production guarantee of 767 kilowatt hours per tonne of waste resulting in a minimum of $8.59 million in annual electricity revenues, based on the agreement with Ontario Power Authority to purchase electricity at a fixed price of 8 cents per kWh.

20 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2011

swr f-m 11 ctc w to e pg 19-22.indd 20

16/02/11 10:18 AM

CleanTech Canada

DETAILS

February/March 2011 www.solidwastemag.com 21

swr f-m 11 ctc w to e pg 19-22.indd 21

16/02/11 10:19 AM

CleanTech Canada

Elevation of the facility.

basis. Second, it was deemed a fairer process if every vendor had the same site by focusing the evaluation on their technology versus their ability to secure a preferred site.

The traditional siting process started with an initial screening, followed by the identification of a long-list, then a short-list and finally a preferred site. What was critical to the success of the siting process was that the approach and evaluation criteria were developed in consultation with the public and approved by both Regional Councils before the site selection process was initiated. This way, the preferred site was selected through a process developed with the public, and without the participation and pressure of the emotional NIMBY participants. In the end, polling suggested that 85 per cent of the residents were in favor of the facility. However, with the vocal minority dominating the public meeting process, you’d think differently. Ultimately, a preferred site was identified in Clarington, Ontario.

With a technology and site in hand, the fourth step was to identify a specific thermal treatment technology vendor.

This was a two-phase process that utilized a Request for Qualifications to short list the number of vendors and technologies, followed by a Request for Proposals to select a single preferred vendor. From this process, Covanta Energy Corporation was identified as the preferred vendor to design, build, operate and maintain the facility.

The final step in the EA process — now in its fifth year of study — was to complete site-specific and vendor-specific impact assessments. Of all the studies completed, the most important was the human health and ecological risk assessment.

The results of this assessment provided the political decision

makers the reassurance that they were approving a facility that could be built and operated without impacting the health of their constituents.

The EA process came to closure on November 19, 2010, with the issuance of approval by the Ontario environment ministry.

Conclusion The Durham/York situation is not unique. Many Ontario municipalities who relied on Michigan for their disposal needs faced the same issue: “Where do I bring my post diversion residuals once the Michigan option is gone?” In 2004, Durham and York Regional Councils made the decision to establish their own local waste disposal infrastructure and to build an integrated and sustainable waste management solution. The Councils declared that the days of shipping waste into someone else’s backyard were over. To see this vision through to execution took a tremendous amount of effort and political will. However, the precedent that this project sets could force a change in the waste-to-energy industry, setting a new standard for how new facilities are developed, operated, and regulated in the future.

In addition, the implementation of this project shows that, after more than a decade, a greenfield WTE facility can be developed in North America and that such systems are, once again, a viable component for residuals disposal as part of an integrated waste management system.

Jim McKay is with HDR Inc. in St. Catharines, Ontario. Contact Jim at jim.mckay@hdrinc.com

22 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2011

swr f-m 11 ctc w to e pg 19-22.indd 22

16/02/11 10:19 AM

CleanTech Canada

CLP TURNS FOOD AND BEVERAGE WASTE INTO CLEAN FUEL

I

FUEL FOR LOVE

n Ontario, a little known industry exists, built by creating value out of what was production discards from another company. Canadian Liquids Processors (CLP) takes food and beverage “wastes’ and turns them into recycled commodities and fuel. The wastes are created from situations such as overproduction, quality or packaging issues, stale-dated or recalls by the producer; CLP transforms them into valuable commodities such as container glass, cardboard, aluminum, etc. and the liquid becomes ethanol for industrial use. Traditionally these discarded products and packaging would have ended up in landfills across Canada and the United States. They can include pop, juice, fruit drinks, sports drinks, concentrates, beer, wine, coolers, distilled spirits, bulk liquid, and bulk products that cannot be discharged by companies and need to be recycled.

For more than 12 years, CLP has been transforming waste beverages into ethanol, pioneering this method of recycling in Canada. At CLP’s 60,000 sq.ft. facility in Hamilton, Ontario millions of litres of liquid waste are converted into ethanol each year. CLP is the only distillation and product destruction facility of its type in Canada that is licensed by both the Ministry of Environment and Canadian Customs and Revenue (Excise). All recyclable packaging such as glass, plastic, aluminum, steel, tetra, other specialty packaging, cardboard is recovered and primarily sent to end users such as glass bottle manufacturers, sheet aluminum and cardboard manufacturers.

CLP’s customers include many of the major international alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverage and sugar-based manufacturers.

They trust their quality rejects, recalls, and stale dated product with CLP because the company can ensure that their less-thanperfect products never re-circulate back into the marketplace where their brand can be compromised or a consumer can potentially be harmed. In addition to 24-hour on-site security, video surveillance, secure fencing and controlled access, CLP tracks every product from the time it is received until destruction.

During times of crisis management, food and beverage companies call upon CLP to provide the complete recall service. This is a comprehensive arranging of transport, pickups and destruction of the food or beverage products.

CLP provides the Retailer and Distributor Product Destruction Log that the FDA requires and/

by Jack McGinnis

or any certificate of destructions that the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and Canadian Customs and Revenue (Excise) needs. CLP works very closely with the FDA, Canadian Food Inspection Agency.

CLP appreciates that recalls are a difficult time for a company as there are many factors to consider, the most important being the expedient removal of the product from the retail environment and ensuring that all recalled product is completely destroyed while protecting the brand and reducing opportunities for negative impact on public safety. CLP through its closed loop system ensures that the destruction is done completely and confidentially. In January 2011 they will work very closely with the Packaging Association of Canada for one of the most comprehensive mock recall and traceability field trials for the packaging industry including retailers, food manufacturers and suppliers.

CLP is a wholly owned Canadian company, operating in Hamilton, Ontario owned since 2004 by Emmie Leung, an innovator in the recycling industry for more than 30 years. Ms. Leung is also the driving force behind Halton Recycling Ltd. in Ontario and International Paper Industries Ltd. in Western Canada. A number of these divisions are now being brought under the new February/March 2011 www.solidwastemag.com 23

swr f-m 11 ctc w to f pg 23-25.indd 23

16/02/11 10:20 AM

CleanTech Canada

banner of the Emterra Group. All the companies are focused on waste management, specializing in diverting and converting waste into saleable, marketable products. The newest member is Canadian Eco Rubber, an innovative tire recycling company in Ontario. Leung’s personal philosophy is to find opportunities in

You drive innovation.

We help enable it.

Miller Thomson llp ’s CleanTech Practice Group applies its depth and breadth of knowledge and experience to help clients in a variety of industries. The CleanTech group provides integrated legal expertise in many areas, such as: • • Innovative remediation technologies • Waste and recycling programs • Water and wastewater treatment projects • For more information about our CleanTech legal services, contact:

every challenge; and, all things, even “waste,” is a resource. CLP also has Emterra as one of its clients providing glass processing services to recyclers who collect municipal waste glass.

CLP has a passion for glass recycling and beneficiation (the cleaning and sizing of recycled glass into furnace-ready cullet.)

CLP ships more than 46,000 tonnes per year of furnace ready cullet to container glass manufacturers such as Owens-Illinois, Saint Gobain and Anchor Glass. Significant sustainability benefits are realized from the cradle to cradle use of recycled glass in making glass containers.

• Every 1 kg cullet used as raw material = 1.2 kg virgin materials saved.

• Every 10 per cent cullet used is a 5 per cent savings in carbon emissions and 3 per cent energy savings.

• Melting cullet requires only 70 per cent of the energy needed to melt raw materials.

As a firm believer in “zero waste,” CLP completes waste audits and waste reduction work plans for retail, manufacturing, hotel/

Waste – The Social Context: People, Policies, Persuasion, and Payoffs.

May 8 – May 11, 2011 Edmonton Alberta

An international conference on the social, environmental, and economic aspects of waste management For more information and to register online, visit www.ewmce.ca and follow the links

Aaron Atcheson, Partner 519.931.3526 aatcheson@millerthomson.com

Contact: 780.496.7316or ewmce@edmonton.ca

24 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2011 MT_CleanTech Canada Guide Ad_v4.indd 1

swr f-m 11 ctc w to f pg 23-25.indd 24

5/28/2010 4:24:03 PM

17/02/11 10:12 AM

CleanTech Canada Canada’s ONLY trade event serving the waste, recycling and public works markets

November 9 - 10, 2011 Palais de Congrés de Montréal Montréal, QC Canada

motel, restaurants, hospitals, special events among many others. These custom designed waste diversion programs with the 3Rs in mind are required

by Ontario’s Ministry of the Environment under the Ontario Regulation 102 for the Institutional, Commercial and Industrial sector. CLP designs customized programs to meet specific goals of the company by assessing the recycling needs, helps to set goals and targets as well as define strategies to accomplish these goals.

waste driven. environment inspired. out of the box solutions.

Jack McGinnis is Manager of RDC Group in Brougham, Ontario.

Shortly after writing this article we regret that the author Jack McGinnis passed away. We printed the article in respect for his last writing. See the obituary on page 7. — ed.

• Strong showing of leading manufacturers • Diverse and qualified group of key buyers • Numerous networking opportunities • An informative symposium program • Top-notch showcase of new products • Insightful waste sector facility tours

For more information on this exciting industry event, please contact Arnie Gess Call: +1.403.589.4832 Email: arnie.gess@cwre.ca Visit: www.cwre.ca

02/11OWMA

CWRE11 SWR 3.875 x 10.indd 1

swr f-m 11 ctc w to f pg 23-25.indd 25

2/7/2011 10:24:29 AM

16/02/11 10:20 AM

O R G A N I C M AT T E R S

by Paul van der Werf “From the petroleum industry we learn that making fuels doesn’t generate as much revenue as making chemicals.”

Welcome to the Machine Thermo-chemical approaches to organic waste management

S

ome interesting technological approaches are being developed to deal with organic wastes that focus on thermo-chemical rather than biological processes. They have the potential to alter the landscape of organic wastes can be managed.

Primarily they offer the opportunity to convert this waste into energy that can be contained for later use and/or development of other chemicals.

The University of Western Ontario’s Institute for Chemicals and Fuels from Alternative Resources or ICFAR (cleverly pronounced as “i see far”) (www.icfar.ca) is at the forefront of this research.

The Institute seeks to be “a leader in the development of technologies and processes for the production of chemicals and fuels from alternative resources” and to “quickly move research from the lab benches to large demonstration projects ... paving the way for Ontario bio-fuel and chemical innovations to get to the global marketplace.”

Pyrolysis (thermo-chemical decomposition of organic material at elevated temperatures in the absence of oxygen) is being used at this facility to develop next generation biofuel technologies. Currently the

focus is on using waste streams such as agricultural residuals forestry residuals and food residuals, such as corn stover and cobs, to produce a bio-oil which can be turned into a variety of products. Considerable efforts are being made at ICFAR to work at ways of densifying residues to reduce the costs of transportation (from where the biomass is produced to future upgrading facilities). This can include transforming it into a liquid bio-oil where the biomass is produced.

And while we think that energy is the primary natural and possibly lucrative by product, that is only partly true. As Dr. Franco Berruti a cofounder of ICFAR and a University of Western Ontario professor points out, “We need to learn from the petroleum industry. Making fuels does not generate much revenue. Making chemicals does!”

“If you look at petroleum refineries,” Berruti says, “70 per cent of petroleum resources generate only 43 per cent of the revenue when utilized for transportation fuels. However, four per cent of petroleum resources generate 42 per cent of the revenue when utilized to produce chemicals.”

So at ICFAR the research is focussed on generating fuels but also on

custom designed solutions for e-scrap sorting TITECH combisense

Shredding E-Scrap?

Losing metals in your plastics?

TITECH optical sorters are the solution to recover more than 97% of your NF metals and circuit boards.

TITECH finder

Lubo uSA iS the excLuSive North AmericAN DiStributor for Lubo & titech recycLiNg equipmeNt iN the pAper, pLASticS, e-ScrAp AND wASte mArketS 78 hALLoweeN bLvD., StAmforD, ct 06902 (p) 203-967-1140 (w) www.LubouSA.com (e) iNfo@LubouSA.com

26 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2011

swr f-m 11 orgmat pg 26-27.indd 26

16/02/11 10:21 AM

O R G A N I C M AT T E R S

the potential extraction of valuable chemicals.

And there’s more.

“In the process of producing liquids, using pyrolysis, solid bio-char is produced as a coproduct. This material is stimulating a great deal of interest, worldwide, as an outstanding soil amendment and fertilizer, as a fuel to potentially substitute coal in power plants, as well as an effective and efficient carbon sequestration technology,” says Berruti.

Finally the pyrolysis process generates gas which can be used directly to help to fuel the pyrolysis process itself and make it selfsustainable.

These types of technologies and the products developed can work with existing technologies such as composting.

As Berruti notes, “We are seeing that biochar produced by pyrolyzing organic materials is considerably enhanced in its value as soil amendment and fertilizer when it is mixed with compost. We truly believe that a very effective way of dealing with organic residues is their transformation into bio-char and compost and in the commercialization of their mixtures.”

The R&D work of the ICFAR team has led to the creation of a spin-off company, AgriTherm Inc. This start-up is dedicated to developing, manufacturing and marketing portable and stationary equipment for producing bio-oil and bio-char from biomass, specifically agricultural residues and transition crops.

ICFAR has now started to tackle municipal solid waste as well.

“The big issue with municipal waste is heterogeneity,” continues Berruti. “Gasi­fica­ tion and transformation of syngas into methanol and higher alcohols may be a solution.”

Some jurisdictions, most notably the City of Edmonton, are headed down the path to gasify a portion of their waste stream. Working with Enerkem Alberta Biofuels, they are in the process of constructing a waste-to-biofuels production facility that’s scheduled to open in 2011. The facility will be fed with recalcitrant “organics” such as plastics, rubber, waste wood separated from the residential waste stream (prior to composting) and residues generated from their composting and residential recycling programs.

Gasification of raw municipal waste or organic wastes such as uncomposted organic wastes is not feasible because the moisture content is too high. All of these wastes will first be transformed into a refuse derived fuel “fluff” in an RDF plant (currently under detailed design) prior to gasification. The syngas will primarily be converted to biofuels such as ethanol and methanol. These will be used to help power vehicles. A future column will explore this project in greater detail. (See article on CLP in the CleanTech Canada section, page 23.)

The management of organic wastes is clearly moving to more complex yet interesting places. As always it will remain to be seen whether these new approaches represent real, practical and cost efficient solutions. With the fairly constant upward pressure on energy costs it seems likely that at least some of these processes will be viable.

Paul van der Werf is president of 2cg Inc. in London, Ontario.

Contact Paul at www.2cg.ca

UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY: TRADE MISSION TO THE NETHERLANDS Are you looking for state of the art solutions for your Waste Diversion or Recycling programmes?

Stop looking and join us on the Trade Mission to the Netherlands in October 2011: Meet with the Global leaders in Waste Technology • Excellent opportunity for matchmaking and international partnerships • Attend Environmental Trade Show • Meet innovative companies from the Netherlands • Site visits and discussions with policy makers • Unique networking opportunity • Cost to participate approx CAD$ 2500 per person For further information please contact the Consulate General of the Netherlands: karim.tejani@minbuza.nl Consulate-General of the Kingdom of the Netherlands Trade Department Drs. Karim Tejani Senior Advisor 1 Dundas street west, Suite 2106 Toronto, ON M5G 1Z3 Tel: +1(416) 598 2534 ext. 226 Fax: +1(416) 598 8064 www.cgtoronto.org February/March 2011 www.solidwastemag.com 27

swr f-m 11 orgmat pg 26-27.indd 27

16/02/11 10:21 AM

WA S T E B U S I N E S S

by John Nicholson “I’m predicting at least five more years of growth in the waste management sector before some sub-sectors begin to mature.”

Waste Industry Outlook

A

ccording the recent information released by Statistics Canada, waste management in Canada is a $5.6 billion industry. Waste Management Survey: Business and Government Sectors — 2008 (StatsCan, 2010) paints a rosy picture for the waste industry sector and I predict more good days ahead. Below are my top five waste business opportunities in Canada.

5. Waste-to-Energy

The Ontario government’s approval of the environmental assessment for a $260 million municipal waste incinerator for the Regions of York and Durham in Ontario has opened the floodgates for more municipalities across Canada to seriously purse waste-to-energy (WTE) projects to follow suit. (See article about the project on page 19.)

An interesting point about the York-Durham project is that it is a mass burn incinerator. The future may be in more advanced forms of thermal treatment of waste like gasification. There are already a number of WTE partners with demonstration facilities operating or planned including Enerkem is in Edmonton, Plasco in Ottawa, REM in Wesleyville, Elementa in Sault St. Marie, and Alter Nrg in Dufferin County.

The next few years will see more full-scale WTE facilities being built in Canada.

4. Waste as Feedstock

The growing number of companies making saleable products from waste has grown tremendously over the past few years and will only continue to grow. Examples include Watson Brown regenerating scrap rubber into its un-vulcanized form and XPotential Products Inc. manufacturing parking curbs from recycled plastic.

One of the biggest challenges facing manufacturers that utilize waste as feedstock is the legislative regime in some Canadian jurisdictions that consider waste to be waste no matter how it’s utilized. If governments want to divert from landfill and promote green jobs, they will have to accelerate changes to the rules that allow waste to be used as feedstock.

3. Bioenergy

It continues to amaze me how slow Canada is in utilizing biomass. The tremendous bioenergy potential in Canada has been well documented, most recently in Canada Report on Bioenegy 2009.

Some footprints are bigger than others

Reduce. Reuse. Recycle. Recover Energy-from-Waste.

Each year, Canadians recycle approximately 8 million tonnes of waste, but still landfill an additional 27 million tonnes. Take that landfilled waste and turn it into energy and you could power approximately 1.7 million homes and offset 27 million tonnes of greenhouse gases, the equivalent of pulling over 5 million cars off the road for a year.

For more information, visit CovantaEnergy.com.

28 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2011

swr f-m 11 wbusi pg 28-30.indd 28

16/02/11 10:24 AM

WA S T E B U S I N E S S

The great aspect of bioenergy is that you produce energy while getting rid of waste.

It’s also carbon neutral and capable of providing steady renewable electricity flow (unlike solar and wind). Besides agriculture sources (manure) and forestry feedstock, there is also feedstock in urban centres (e.g., used coffee grinds, expired food).

There are players in Canada but plenty of room for growth. (See Organic Matters column on this topic, page 26.)

2. Landfills

The data doesn’t lie — despite a 10 per cent increase in recycling and composting rates between 2006 and 2008, the quantity of municipal waste sent to landfill remained unchanged at 26 million tonnes. I don’t predict this number to seriously fall anytime soon.

Even the more ardent supporter of zero waste concedes that landfills will be necessary for some time. To get approval for a landfill

at a greenfield site, you need about $1 million dollars for the environmental assessment, about five to 10 years of patience to deal with the consultation and study phases, and the willingness to accept the fact that the government may never give you the go-ahead even with an EA. What I see happening with landfills is what I see happening with oil refineries. No one is building new ones; they’re just expanding the ones they have. Similarly, there’s a growing list of entrepreneurs examining the possibility of mining older landfills and re-opening them.

1. Above-average Growth

No matter what sub-sector one considers among the 32,000 waste management professionals that were employed in Canada in 2008, their jobs will be relatively secure over professionals in other industries. The number of professionals in the industry will continue to grow. Between 2006 and 2008 the full-time

employment grew 11 per cent, with more than 75 per cent of those jobs being created in the private sector.

New sub-sectors are starting up and growing rapidly in the waste industry. Tire recycling, e-waste recycling, industrial composting, plastics recycling, waste-to-energy, and bioenergy will all continue to grow.

I’m predicting at least five more years of growth in the waste management sector before some sub-sectors begin to mature.

The only way I can see the industry dropping off would be serious moves toward eliminating the creation of waste in the first place (the highest stage in the waste hierarchy). This is a noble goal but one that I don’t see that happening any time soon.

John Nicholson, M.Sc., P.Eng., is a consultant based in Toronto, Ontario. Contact John at john.nicholson@ebccanada.com

Services Waste audits

Solutions through experience

Waste diversion program planning Compliance monitoring and reporting Facility optimization and performance testing

AET Consultants is a multi-disciplinary environmental consulting and auditing company offering services in Waste, Ecology, Building Sciences, Energy and Environmental Management. With over 600 waste studies completed in Ontario and across Canada, AET’s Waste Management Team has the extensive experience, capabilities and proven track record that, among other benefits, assures that our clients receive value-added services, credible results and effective solutions.

Environmental Consultants, Ecologists and Scientists

Pilot program design and monitoring System planning and program assessments Public consultation AET Consultants 531 Wellington St. North Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2H 5L6 519.576.9723 www.aet-consultants.com

February/March 2011 www.solidwastemag.com 29

swr f-m 11 wbusi pg 28-30.indd 29

16/02/11 10:24 AM

Covering all aspects of environmental business in Canada

nt mana geme

nt mana geme

Environment Business of the Solutions for the

PCBs

the How to Comply with irements New Destruction Requ

p

Solid Waste & Recycling

Ethanol ER training reduction Diesel emissions update Sunrise Propane

—

Guide

se Emergency Respon

ield Regs Ontario Brownf

& Recycling

Canada’s magazine on collection, hauling, April/May 2009 processing and disposal $10.00

Landfill Mining

Canada’s magazine October/Novembe on collection, hauling, processin g and disposal r 2009 $10.00

Emissions Offsets

The City of Barrie’s restoration project — page 8

InSIdE:

BROWNFIELDS Published by HazMat

Management magazine ED PUBLISH

IN

for Decoding the new rules businesses — page 8

MARKETPLACE

TION ASSOCIA

FCM

Centre for Sustainable Community Developments

The Canadian Real Estate Association

Canadian Brownfields

WITH:

Network

Canadian

WINTER 2009

SYDNEY TAR PONDS

BROWNFIELDS

Update on cleanup progression

Published by HazMat

Management magazine ED PUBLISH

IN

Centre for Advanced

MARKETPLACE

TION ASSOCIA

FCM Fund Green Municipal vert Fonds municipal

The Canadian Real Estate Association

O R E D S P O N S

Canadian Brownfields

WITH:

Network

CORPORATE PARTNER:

BANFF BIOSOLIDS

FALL 2009

CPMP No. 40069240

B Y :

SITE REMEDIATION

Visualization

restoration The Guild Inn

project

AM 12/15/08 10:13:42

BFM winter 09

Publication An EcoLog Group

Solid Waste

ng cli cy ets Re ark e 20 M ag

HazMat

Annual Buyers

FALL 2009 ag.com

www.hazmatm

pa

Environment Business of the Solutions for the

te as n W &I sio ies IC iver tud 7 D e S 4-1 1 s Ca ges

HazMat

WINTER 2009 ag.com www.hazmatm

cover pg 17.indd

17

40069240 / CPMP no.

O R E D S P O N S

Centre for Advanced

BFM fall 09 cover

Publication An EcoLog Group

40069240 / CPMP no.

PRofiling

HazMat

PRoDuctS

pg 17.indd 17

B Y :

Visualization

pages 17-31

PM 08/09/09 2:56

– pages 38-42

CPMP No. 40069240

An EcoLog Group

Co-Composting

Publication

Advancements

in Scale House

in the Scenic Town

An EcoLog Group

Publication

Waste Pelletizati on

and Plant Tour

— page 14

— page 8

Tech — page 24

Clean Up Your World.

November 3 – 4, 2011 November 2, 2011 • Workshops Toronto, Ontario, Canada

sitesandspills.com For Advertising and Sponsorship Opportunities, please contact: Brad O’Brien, Publisher Call: 416 510-6798 Email: bobrien@bizinfogroup.ca

Jamie Ross, Account Manager Call: 416 510-5221 Email: jross@bizinfogroup.ca

ENVIRONMENT MEDIA GROUP AD.indd 1

15/02/11 2:12 PM

swr f-m 11 wbusi pg 28-30.indd 30

17/02/11 9:23 AM

R E G U L AT I O N R O U N D U P

by Rosalind Cooper, LL.B “The RCO is developing certification criteria for a ‘3RCertified Program.’”

Waste Initiatives across Canada Alberta tire program expands

Alberta Environment and Alberta Recycling announced that the tire recycling program in the province will be expanded to include a disposal surcharge for industrial and off-road tires. Industrial/off-road tires are tires that are used on industrial non-agricultural vehicles or industrial non-agricultural equipment and that are not licenced for highway use.

Such tires include those used on excavators, haulers, and loaders, as well as on equipment used in logging and materials handling.

The applicable surcharges will be based on tire size. Small tires with a rim size of up to 24 inches will have an associated surcharge of $40 per tire. Medium tires with a rim size greater than 24 inches but not greater than 33 inches will have a surcharge of $100 per tire. Large tires with a rim size greater than 33 inches will have an associated surcharge of $200 per tire.

These changes will be made effective by amending Schedule 6 of the Tire Designation Regulation under Alberta’s Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act and will come into force on April 1, 2011. There will be no increase in the applicable surcharges for tires on cars, pickup trucks, and other light-duty vehicles.

RCO developing certification criteria

The Recycling Council of Ontario (RCO) is conducting public consultation with respect to the development of certification criteria for its “3RCertified Program.” The program is expected to be launched in the second quarter of 2011 and is intended to provide public recognition to businesses and organizations for accomplishments in waste diversion.

The RCO is developing performance criteria against which to measure businesses and determine qualification for certification. Those businesses that achieve “3RCertified” status will receive a third party verification of their waste management system, and be entitled to use and reference the 3RCertified brand. The brand will signify that the business has made significant achievements in managing and diverting solid waste, and that it is compliant with regulations relating to reduction, reuse and recycling in Ontario.

The benefits of obtaining 3RCertified status include: enhanced public image and positive recognition; confirmation of compliance with certain regulatory requirements; receipt of third party verification of solid waste management programs and ongoing performance improvement; use of standardized tools for tracking, measuring and preventing solid

Equipment for the processing of recyclable materials Design • Fabrication • Installation • Repair

Your objectives are also our concerns!

Cutting edge equipment Very competitive prices Exceptional after sale services Guarantee of success for your business Working with you to better the environment

Disc, ballistic and optical separators Bag openers Glass cleaners Material levelers Trommels Conveyors

Classic Quality.

Legendary Performance.

4320 Harvester Road, Burlington, Ontario L7L 5S4 Tel: (905) 333-0779 Fax: (905) 632-4557 Toll-free 1-888-820-7335

www.autocartruck.com

Ask us for a cost assessment and you will see the BMG difference

www.bmgenvironment.com • 1 819 362-3294 February/March 2011 www.solidwastemag.com 31

swr f-m 11 regrndup pg 31-32.indd 31 Autocar.indd 1

7/28/10 2:44 PM

17/02/11 8:34 AM

R E G U L AT I O N R O U N D U P

waste disposal; and, cost savings achieved through reduction of material use.

Manitoba agricultural waste

The federal government and the Province of Manitoba are providing a grant of $25,000 to an organization to investigate better ways to collect and responsibly manage agricultural waste generated on farms in the province. The organization, CleanFARMS, has been mandated to conduct research to identify the types

and quantities of waste, paper, plastic and other materials that are generated by farmers so that options can be developed to manage these materials. The objective is to establish a system to manage collection and recycling of agricultural waste. CleanFARMS currently operates an empty pesticide container recycling program.

The Manitoba Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives provided $15,000, and Manitoba Conservation contributed the remaining $10,000. The research is intended

EMF Containers Fibreglass ADVANTAGE Light Weight Durable Long Lasting Built for the cold climate Fibreglass Environmentally Friendly

Make technology work for you, get the solution that’s proven.

Reduce your operating cost and improve your bottom line.

21 Empey Street, Brantford, Ontario, Canada N3S 7P9 Phone: 1 855 630 5551 Fax: 519 751 7090 sales@emfcontainers.com A Division of Baireng Technologies Inc.

www.emfcontainers.com

to find alternatives to the current practice of farmers of either burning or sending materials that are readily recyclable to landfills. The research is expected to be completed by mid2011.

Newfoundland and Labrador waste paint

Recent amendments to Newfoundland and Labrador’s Waste Management Regulations under the Environmental Protection Act are intended to permit paint producers to play the lead role in managing end-of-life treatment of products through a new recycling program.

Paint producers will be required to register with the Multi-Material Stewardship Board and submit a plan to develop, finance and manage the collection and recycling of their products, either independently or through a non-government, industry-appointed stewardship organization. The Multi-Material Stewardship Board is responsible for approving the plans and for ensuring compliance with the timelines, requirements and targets.

Paint producers will collect and recycle paint products when they reach of the end of their useful life, and are required to ensure appropriate geographic coverage for all consumers. Paint producers must also be able to demonstrate that the waste paint is being recycled in an approved legal manner and provide updates regarding the manner in which products are being designed to be more environmentally sustainable.

Lead in some reusable bags

Reusable bags are considered an environmentally friendly alternative to plastic bags. But some reusable bags are presenting a different issue. There are several companies that have voluntarily withdrawn their reusable bags on the basis of lead being present in the bags.

Lululemon Athletica announced a voluntary withdrawal of certain reusable bags from their stores due to lead content. Sears Canada also issued a voluntary safety recall of their reusable shopping bags on the basis that testing revealed that the level of lead did not meet standards required by Sears.

Rosalind Cooper, LL.B., is a partner with Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP, with offices across Canada. Ms. Cooper is based in Toronto, Ontario. Contact Rosalind at rcooper@tor.fasken.com

32 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2011

swr f-m 11 regrndup pg 31-32.indd 32

16/02/11 10:26 AM

EQUIPMENT

ST-100 shredder

MILLION THAT’S HOW MANY COMPUTERS GET JUNKED EVERY YEAR. Electronic waste—including computers, hard drives, phones, printers, AV equipment and small appliances —contains many toxic substances as well as reusable precious metals. For businesses and the environment, it’s a major recycling issue. For you, it’s an opportunity.

By utilizing Shred-Tech’s e-waste technologies, you can ensure that post-consumer electronics are efficiently and economically recycled. In short, it’s a way to expand your offerings, your customer base, and, ideally, your profits.

Shred-Tech’s ST-100 shredder.

S

hred-Tech, providers of heavy-duty shredders to the waste and recycling industry, introduce what the company describes as a revolutionary design in its redesigned ST-100.

This model offers cutting chamber sizes of 60.5 x 32 inches and 45 x 32 inches, suitable for loading bulky wastes. Bulkheads eliminate the migration of debris into seals and bearings, which thus increases overall shredder durability. The drive system is offered in both hydraulic and electric gear-reduced motors (the redesigned system offers one 75 hp or 100 hp motor). The hydraulic model has optional 100 and 150 hp power units. Internal gear reduction provides maximum transfer of power from

Make a difference by choosing from our e-waste capabilities and entire line of reduction/recycling solutions.

Visit shred-tech.com or call 1-800-465-3214

February/March 2011 www.solidwastemag.com 33

swr f-m 11 equipment pg 33-36.indd 33

16/02/11 10:31 AM

EQUIPMENT

the motor to the cutting chamber for optimum efficiency.

Shred-Tech engineers design each knife profile and configuration specific to each application for maximum throughput and optimum shred size. The control panel features illuminated function buttons, keyed power switch, fused lockable disconnect, hour metre and programmable logic controller for shredder functions (including knife reversal on overload). The stand and hopper are extra heavy duty, and there’s an option to modify the stand and hopper to suit specific applications or installations.

The unique design of the machined hex shafts maximizes knife placement options and allows for easy knife removal and machine maintenance. Size for size the hex shaft is several times stronger than a keyed shaft. The hex shaft drive system offers the highest knife tip force of any equivalent shredder on the market. Also, several design refinements incorporated into the ST-100 shredder increase

ease of maintenance and shredder durability.

Bulkhead walls at either end of the cutting chamber provide excellent bearing and seal protection. The modular construction facilitates quick and easy assembly.

Visit www.shred-tech.com

Tarp deployment system

Southwestern Sales Company has announced it has acquired Mercer Motor Works and the patented Tarp Deployment System. The company will move manufacturing of the product line to its factory in Rogers, Arkansas. The acquisition brings together two industry-leading solutions to more safely and efficiently deploy landfill alternate daily cover.

“For several years, landfill operators searched for a safe, reliable and cost-effective solution for spreading alternate daily cover tarps,” states Gerald Barrett, tarpARMOR sales and marketing manager. “We initially responded to the end user’s concerns with existing automated tarp designs and continued

The tarpARMOR Tarp Deployment System safely and efficiently covers up to 12,000 sq ft. of working face.

developing the system until we arrived at a complete solution for landfill operators.”

Listening to customer’s concerns about their need to reduce equipment maintenance and increase tarp life and coverage, company engineers developed the tarpLOX™ system, a patent-pending solution to securely connect lateral ballast cables to side support chains.

The result is a tarp system that maintains a taut 40 ft. wide tarp without bunching even in the most severe environmental conditions.

Leaders in the distribution of specialized heavy equipment in the construction and environmental industries Mobile Crushers

Landfill Compactors

SALES

RENTALS

Innovative line of equipment Machines that provide new ways of being competitive and efficient while being profitable Shredders & Grinders

Stationary Plants

PARTS

SERVICE

Unparalleled client experience

Screens

Crushing Equipment

info@voghel.com Qc 514 990.6636 Ont 416 444.1358 www.voghel.com

Committed to your success!

34 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2011

swr f-m 11 equipment pg 33-36.indd 34

16/02/11 10:31 AM

FIELD EXPERTS The TDS tarp deployment system allows one operator to lay up to 12,000 square feet of tarp in less than 10 minutes from the comfort of the cab of existing landfill equipment.

Two models are available, the TDS-30 and the TDS-30 HC. The smaller model, the TDS-30, deploys three 6.5 ounce per square yard tarps and weighs in at 3,000 lbs. It is applicable for landfills that have high sludge content, muddy conditions, or otherwise require the use of low ground pressure vehicles. Made with a frame of heavy gauge steel, it has wide foot pads directly welded to the frame. The heavier TDS-30 HC weighs 4,000 lbs and can deploy up to four 9.4 oz per square yard tarps that are 30 x 100 ft. for total coverage of up to 12,000 square feet.

Visit www.tarparmor.com

Project1

11/13/06

10:28 AM

Paintable shaft collars

A full line of paintable steel shaft collars that let manufacturers and maintenance departments precisely match OEM colours has been introduced by Stafford Manufacturing Corp. of Wilmington, Massachusetts. Stafford Paintable Shaft Collars are machined from steel and phosphate coated; preparing them to be painted. Permitting complete machinery and

Page 1

THE SMART CHOICE Toll Free: 1-800-363-7950

www.liebherr.ca February/March 2011 www.solidwastemag.com 35

swr f-m 11 equipment pg 33-36.indd 35

16/02/11 10:31 AM

EQUIPMENT

equipment colour matching, they come in 1and 2-piece clamp-type styles in over 30 standard sizes from 1/8” to 6” I.D. and specials up to 16” I.D. Available with round, square, and threaded bores, the shaft collars can be customized with face and O.D. treatments such as holes, flats, and knurls. Power transmission and structural applications include actuators, stops, spacers, and component or device mounting. The collars are priced according to style, size, and custom design requirements. Samples are pricing are available upon request.

Visit www.staffordmfg.com

Fine particle reclamation

The Eriez® FinesSort™ Metal Recovery System (MRS) utilizes a series of powerful magnetic components to process discarded “fines” material that has passed through the initial

Une Société de TransForce A TransForce Company

Composting BioReactor Landfill Waste Water Treatment Facility Soil Remediation Facility 17125 Lafleche Road Moose Creek ON 613-538-2776 • www.laflecheenvironmental.com

The AMRC is now the MWA... with a new website to match our new name

www.municipalwaste.ca

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

screening stage to recover valuable ferrous and nonferrous metals. FinesSort MRS not only reduces the amount of waste destined for landfill, but also reclaims thousands of pounds of metals per day.

“This System is a perfect solution for any scrap yard operators looking to be more environmentally-friendly and profitable,” said Mike Shattuck, Eriez Heavy Industry Project Manager. According to Shattuck, FinesSort offers payback on investment in as little as six months.

Shattuck explains, “Scrap yard operators often only focus on reclaiming larger sized nonferrous metals, ignoring smaller material referred to as ‘fines’ which represents roughly 15 percent of the original total flow.” He continues, “When you consider that within the fines, generally less than five percent is recyclable metal, the stream may seem insignificant.

However, reclaiming these valuable metals can be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars annually!”

FinesSort MRS is available in 60-inch widths which can typically process ~15 tph. of fines. Each machine is built of heavy gage steel and assembled on a rugged steel framework.

Material is presented to the ferrous separation portion of the machine where a series of magnetic separators recover any ferrous present in the material stream. The initial separation consists of a Rare Earth Dynamic Head Pulley where weakly magnetic material is removed from the material stream. This ferrous material is presented to a Cleanup Drum where saleable ferrous is removed, cleaned and conveyed to a collection bin. Magnetic debris is delivered to a waste conveyor.

Nonferrous materials are presented to a High Frequency Eddy Current to recover smaller pieces of nonferrous metals. Recovered nonferrous metals are conveyed to a collection bin. Recovery and grade of nonferrous metals is typically +90 percent. Nonferrous debris is delivered to a waste conveyor.

Visit www.eriez.com

36 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2011

swr f-m 11 equipment pg 33-36.indd 36

16/02/11 10:32 AM

Advertisers’ Index Company

OWMA AD

Page #

February/March 2011

Company

Page #

2cg/Paul van der Werf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Liebherr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

AET Consultants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Mack Trucks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

AMRC/Municipal Waste Association . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36

Miller Thomson LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Bandag Tires . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

Molok . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Battery Broker Environmental Services Inc., The . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Netherlands, Consulate-General/Kingdom of the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

BMG Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Ontario Waste Management Association . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Borden Ladner Gervais LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Paradigm Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Bulk Handling Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

RBRC – Rechargeable Battery Recycling Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Canadian Waste & Recycling Expo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Schuyler Rubber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Covanta Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28

Sheehan Trucks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

City of Edmonton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

ShredTech . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

EMF Containers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Trux Route Management Systems Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Environment Business Consultants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Van Dyk Balers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Eriez Magnetics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Voghel Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

Geoware Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

Vulcan Scales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

6/5/07

7:33 AM

Page 1

Jake Connor & Crew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Walinga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Lafleche . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Waste Expo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Laurin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

1897 Waste Quip .MetalOutAd_3_09:Layout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . .3/26/09 . . . . . . . . . . . 12:25 . . . . 17 PM

Page 1

Ontario Waste Management Association

Who’s standing up for Your Business?

If you own or manage a private sector waste management company involved in any facet of solid or hazardous waste management – let us stand up for you …join OWMA today!

OWMA has a primary mission to support a strong and viable waste service industry and to ensure that OWMA member companies are recognized as industry leaders.

Contact: Michele Goulding (905) 791-9500 www.owma.org

Eddy Current Separators

Magnetic Drum Separators

Suspended Electromagnets

FREE VIDEO & LITERATURE! Call: 1-888-300-3743 or visit www.eriez.com

February/March 2011 www.solidwastemag.com 37

swr f-m 11 ad idx pg 37.indd 37

17/02/11 10:00 AM

BLOG

by Duncan Bury “An invisible eco fee makes PRO members more directly accountable to the corporate head office which is now the source of the funding.”

Eco Fee-Included Pricing

T

he majority of extended producer responsibility (EPR) programs in Canada are funded through the use of an eco fee-excluded pricing mechanism. Eco fees are excluded from the posted or advertised price of the product and are collected separately at the point of purchase.

Generally, EPR legislation is silent on the issue of the visibility or nonvisibility of eco fees and the majority of producers and retailers, when given a choice, have chosen the eco fee-excluded approach. By ducking the issue in their EPR regulations, an approach which is also reflected in the CCME’s Canada-wide Action Plan for EPR, governments have in effect defaulted to the eco fee-excluded approach.

In contrast, under New Brunswick’s Designated Materials Regulation which supports the EPR paint program, “no brand owner shall charge a retailer and no retailer shall charge a consumer any separate fee with respect to the costs associated with implementing or operating a paint stewardship plan ...” Quebec’s Eco-peinture program operates in a similar way but is governed not by a regulation but by an accreditation agreement between Recyc-Quebec and the paint stewards.

The failure to launch Phase 2 of the Ontario Municipal Hazardous and Special Waste (MHSW) program last year, while setting back the progress of EPR in the province and perhaps elsewhere, has had at least one positive outcome by focusing badly needed attention on the whole eco fee mechanism.

In a similar fashion to the GST/HST, where Canada is unique in making such a value added tax visible, the visibility of eco fees may have served to heighten consumer awareness about EPR programs, but often at the price of misinformed public debate about who is responsible for imposing the fees and confusion as to whether or not the fees are a tax under another name. Consumers also have no idea of the real cost of what they are buying until they get to the till. What is needed is a proper communications strategy to support the EPR program. Such a strategy should not be confused with the supposed communication of the added price itself.

Eco fee-included pricing can serve to encourage producers to internalize end-of-life costs in the price of goods, as they do with other costs incurred in manufacturing and selling their products. Visible eco fee-excluded pricing unfortunately gives no such signals to producers.

With a visible fee, the producer is less directly accountable because the consumer explicitly pays the fee. The producer prices the product for the market with due regard for competitive and profit pressures, and then simply adds the eco fee. This is not a recipe for environmental

accountability or environmental product performance. It is a recipe for fee collection.

Because most producer responsibility organization (PROs) have their own source of funding from visible fees, they can operate largely independently from corporate head offices. This independence may support efficient decision making but it is another question altogether whether it provides any incentives for better product environmental design. It very likely does not. Conversely, an invisible eco fee makes the PRO member more directly accountable to the corporate head office which is now the source of the funding. There may be a price to pay in the efficiency of decision making, but that would be a price worth paying if it helped meet EPR policy objectives.

While recognizing the mistakes made in the Ontario MHSW program — and there is lots of blame to go around — much of the controversy and the retreat might have been avoided, if the eco fee had been included in the price of the products covered by the program rather than excluded and added at the point of purchase.

Eco fee-included pricing is clearly not a magic bullet for all that ails EPR programs. It needs to be put into action along with proper communications and differential fees, and other supporting regulations and policies such as toxics reduction and green procurement.

Because there is so little experience with eco fee-included pricing in areas where there are real environmental design opportunities, it is also fair to ask whether it would in fact advance improved life-cycle environmental performance. We won’t know until we try.

Finally, if there is any lesson from the July 2010 Ontario debacle it is surely that governments can no longer duck the eco fee issue and will have to seriously consider more prescriptive approaches regarding EPR program fees in the future. Producers, for their part, are going to have to recognize that calls for environmental accountability are not going to go away. Perhaps a good look at the New Brunswick and Quebec approaches would be a place to start.

NOTE: A more fulsome and detailed discussion of eco fees and other related EPR issues can be found in Duncan Bury’s article, “Should Ex­tended Producer Responsibility Programs Use Eco Fee-Included Pricing?” in the Canadian Tax Journal (Vol.58. No.4).

Duncan Bury is principal of Duncan Bury Consulting in Ottawa, Ontario. Contact Duncan at Duncan@duncanburyconsulting.ca

38 www.solidwastemag.com February/March 2011

swr f-m 11 blog pg 38.indd 38

16/02/11 10:32 AM

GOOD AS

GOLD. 2010 BOW Tri-County Single Stream System Appleton, WI

2009 GreenWaste Recovery MSW System San José, CA What do the 2009 and 2010 winners of the Solid Waste Association of North America (SWANA) Gold Award for Recycling Systems have in common? Both were built by BHS. These awards honor the best solid waste programs and facilities in North America based on excellence and innovation.

Congratulations to everyone at BOW Tri-County and GreenWaste Recovery--BHS is proud to be a part of their success. BHS partners with these and other companies to create the most efficient and innovative sorting and handling systems in the world. Let us help you prepare for what’s ahead.

See what the global leader can do for you at: bulkhandlingsystems.com

What’s next.

Bulk Handling Systems • 3592 West 5th Avenue, Eugene, OR 97402 USA • Tel: 541.485.0999 • 866.688.2066

BHS Gold ad MSW Mgt 9-2010.indd 1 swr f-m 11 pg 39 AD.indd 39

9/10/10 4:31 PM 10/02/11 2:41 PM

TO NEVER SLOW YOU DOWN

ADVANTAGE #83 THE MACK TERRAPRO CABOVER AUTOMATICALLY REGENERATES THE DPF WHILE YOU WORK SO YOU CAN STOP AND GO ON YOUR OWN TERMS TO WORK MORE EFFICIENTLY. ®

®

SEE ALL THE ADVANTAGES AT MACKTERRAPRO.COM ©2011 Mack Trucks, Inc. All rights reserved.

MCKTRK_6446_BltTPrCbOv_SWRM.indd 1

1/24/11 10:52 AM

swr f-m 11 pg 40 AD.indd 40

10/02/11 2:41 PM