Solid Waste & Recycling August/September 2012

n io n rs tio 4 ve a Di tific ge 3 r a Ce p —

Solid Waste & Recycling Canada’s magazine on collection, hauling, processing and disposal August/September 2012

ORGANICS MANAGEMENT Successes, challenges and new technology across the country — page 8 CPMP No. 40069240

An EcoLog Group Publication

Compost Council of Canada conference — pages 21-24 swr a-s 2012 cvr nl pg 01.indd 1

12-08-20 8:21 AM

HIGHEST PRODUCTIVITY SAFEST SYSTEM @ the LOWEST COST Live Demo Nov 14-15

Canadian Waste & Recycling

Expo

Booth 1223 HIGHEST PRODUCTIVITY At 4-5 seconds the Curotto-Can AFL has the fastest load time of any automated system. Fast loading translates into a 25%-30% productivity advantage. The AFL is also the only true “take-all” system capable of handling large bulk (such as furniture and mattresses), green waste and flattened oversize cardboard.

SAFEST SYSTEM Eyes Forward Ergonomics is the safest for the operator as it eliminates repetitive strain injury associated with constantly looking back. Operators can also see and remove contamination. You can stop contamination - before its packed - at the curb. Reduce waste stream contaminants to less than 5%.

LOWEST COST The Curotto-Can AFL replaces: the ASL, the recycler, the rear loader, and the carry can/tipper. Standardize the fleet with the AFL and significantly reduce the total number of units. The Curotto-Can can be mounted or dismounted in less than 5 minutes. Swap out quickly and eliminate truck downtime due to arm problems.

The Commercial Gripper is capable of handling the heaviest of carts. Haulers use the Commercial Gripper to collect 96 gal carts while on route collecting commercial 5 yd bins thus eliminating a “chase” truck. With the Commercial Gripper, one unit does it all!

See the live demo at our booth.

swr a-s 2012 Currotto ad pg 02.indd 2

Call for our new fact-filled brochure and DVD package that explains all the advantages of the AFL system.

(707) 939-2802

www.thecurottocan.com

12-08-15 10:27 AM

Solid Waste & Recycling

CONTENTS August/September 2012 Volume 17, Number 4

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

ORGANICS MANAGEMENT IN CANADA

8

Two of our contributing editors look across the country at the evolution of organics management, from composting to waste-to-biofuel

by Paul van der Werf & Michael Cant

FEATURES

DEPARTMENTS

COLLECTION: ORGANICS CONTAINERS Impact of different bags and containers for organics.

by Maria Kelleher 16

RECYCLING: CARTONS Current options for recycling polycoat containers.

by Elisabeth Comere

20

PRODUCT STEWARDSHIP: EPR REPORT A new province-by-province EPR report card.

by Barbara McConnell

28

IC&I WASTE: PUBLIC EVENTS Menkes and Bentall LLP property managers.

by Diane Blackburn

Collection, page 16

Editorial

4

Up Front

6

Transportation Technology

31

OWMA Report

36

Waste Business

37

Regulation Roundup

38

Products

39

Ad Index

41

Blog

42

NEXT EDITION 30

DIVERSION: CERTIFICATION PROGRAM RCO’s Waste Diversion Certification Program.

by Jessica Wilkinson

Cover art by Charles Jaffe

COVER STORY

34

Official Show Guide: Canadian Waste & Recycling Expo Editorial: Single- vs. dual-stream recycling, MRF case study, public event recycling, landfill bioreactors, heavy equipment.

Space closing: September 22, 2012.

Artwork required: September 26, 2012.

Product Stewardship, page 28

IC&I Waste, page 30

August/September 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 3

swr a-s 2012 contents pg 03.indd 3

12-08-15 10:27 AM

EDITORIAL

by Guy Crittenden “Since 1985, the soft drink industry has saved several billion dollars in Canada.”

How We Got Coked Up on Recycling

I

n May 2012, David McRobert published My Municipal Recycling Program Made Me Fat and Sick: How well-intentioned environmentalists teamed up with the soft drink industry to promote obesity and injure workers (CreateSpace — An Amazon.com company, Charleston, South Carolina). McRobert is a well known environmental lawyer whose career has included a stint at Pollution Probe, policy advisor positions with an Ontario NDP government and the office of the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario, and lecturing at universities. (He recently became an online columnist for this magazine’s website and sister publication HazMat Management magazine.)

McRobert pulls no punches faulting the softdrink industry not only for the vast amounts of its packaging waste that enter landfills across North America or are recycled mostly at taxpayer expense, but for the effect of the liquid products themselves on human health.

There’s an unspoken axiom among waste consultants that it’s fair game to criticize softdrink packaging and diversion rates, but not the drinks themselves. McRobert missed that memo, and we can be thankful for his direct and bleak assessment. His chapter detailing the obesity and other health impacts of soft drink consumption on poor people and especially on indian reservations is devastating.

McRobert writes that when he worked in the Waste Reduction Office of Ontario’s environment industry he ran into institutional resistance to his proposals that deposit-refund laws be implemented for used beverage containers; an option staff there had “jettisoned in 1985 and were well beyond conceptually,” McRobert writes.

The book is filled with colorful behind-the-scenes vignettes such as this one: “The Deputy Minister Gary Posen also convened standing-room only staff meetings (attended by various Assistant Deputy Ministers, Directors and other senior staff) in the large Deputy’s boardroom on the 12th floor of Ministry’s main office at 135 St. Clair to discuss, in a few minutes, the options I had outlined in more than 100 pages; in retrospect, this was a transparent (but unsuccessful) attempt by the Deputy and senior MOE civil servants to bury the issue of universal container depositrefund systems and silence dissent.”

McRobert’s book retells the story of how the soft-drink industry, aided by the grocers, undermined the system of refillable glass containers managed under deposit, then replaced it with today’s single-use packaging that it cleverly rebranded “recyclable.”

“In 1976,” McRobert writes, “a law under the Environmental Protection Act was passed allowing the Ontario government to enact regula-

tions banning non-refillable soft drink containers. However, the regulations banning non-refillables were never passed and instead in 1978 the soft drink industry convinced the Minister of the Environment to sign a ‘voluntary agreement’ that soft drink companies and retailers would sell 75 percent of its soft drinks be in refillable containers.

“The 75 percent ratio for refillable class containers was never reached though because the soft drink industry had trouble with the targets and at least one 2-litre bottle had ‘exploded’ when it fell on the floor of an Ontario supermarket in 1978.”

McRobert recounts the power dynamic between different material producers such as the aluminum and plastic industries, which wanted in on the lucrative soft drink container business, and the political deals in which environmental groups agreed to relaxation of the refillable quote in return for a $1-million contribution to set up Ontario Multi-Material Recycling Inc. (OMMRI) to expand blue box recycling programs (later raised to $20 million).

McRobert writes that “By the late 1980s, the economics of the arrangement had become clearer. In 1988, it was estimated that not having to operate a full-scale bottle deposit/return system was saving the soft drink industry about $60-80 million annually. However, the industry collectively contributed only $20 million to the Blue Box program between 1986 and 1990 ($5 million per year) and there was evidence in 1990 that $10 million of money was arranged through capital cost allowances under the federal Income Tax Act to OMMRI and the soft drink companies. Since 1985, the soft drink industry has saved several billion dollars in Canada. Indeed, this explains the SD industry’s willing financial support for the Blue Box program back in the early 1980s.”

McRobert continues: “Options that might have proven more sustainable were not explored. Other types of container types such as refillable PET (Polyethylene terephthalate) were not considered even though these technologies were being used in Europe and South America and easily could have been adopted.”

The book is an interesting reminder of how we ended up in the current recycling paradigm and the commercial interests that were served by making recycling (and not reuse and reduction) the altar in front of which we genuflect and ask forgiveness for our environmental sins. I recommend it.

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

4 www.solidwastemag.com August/September 2012

swr a-s 2012 editorial pg 04.indd 4

12-08-15 10:27 AM

Solid Waste & Recycling & DM Public Relations present the E-waste Recycling Innovation Award.

Solid Waste & Nomination process: Recycling magazine is seeking nominations for the E-waste Recycling Innovation award.

1.

How has the organization exhibited leadership in its approaches to sustainability?

2. What accomplishments and innovations has the nominee made that will impact the e-waste recycling industry?

3.

4. What are some quantitative results of the nominee’s

environmental success?

5. What other information should the judges know about the environmental success of your innovations?

How are these innovations contributing Email your nominations to to environmental contestinfo@solidwastemag.com protection and Contest closes Sept 15th sustainable practices?

www.dm-pr.com

DeAnne Merey DM Public Relations, President 646-785-9594 dmerey@dm-pr.com Corporate Headquarters 340 East 64th Street Suite 29D New York, N.Y. 10065

DM PUBLIC RELATIONS AD.indd 1

12-08-14 8:52 AM

swr a-s 2012 DM-PR ad pg 05.indd 5

12-08-15 10:28 AM

Solid Waste & Recycling

UPFRONT

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

Guy Crittenden Editor gcrittenden@solidwastemag.com Brad O’Brien Publisher bobrien@solidwastemag.com Jamie Ross Account Manager jross@solidwastemag.com Sheila Wilson Art Director Kim Collins Market Production Anita Madden Circulation Manager Carol Bell-Lenoury Mgr EcoLog Group Bruce Creighton President Business Information Group Contributing Editors Michael Cant, Rosalind Cooper, Maria Kelleher, David McRobert, Clarissa Morawski, Usman Valiante, Paul van der Werf Award-winning magazine Solid Waste & Recycling magazine is published six times a year by EcoLog Information Resources Group, a division of BIG Magazines LP, a div. of Glacier BIG Holdings Company Ltd., a leading Canadian businessto-business information services company that also publishes HazMat Management magazine and other information products. The magazine is printed in Canada.

Solid Waste & Recycling provides strategic information and perspectives on all aspects of Canadian solid waste collection, hauling, processing and disposal to waste managers,haulers, recycling coordinators, landfill and compost facility operators and other waste industry professionals.

Subscription Rates: Canada – $51.95 (add applicable taxes) per year, $82.95 (add applicable taxes) for 2 years, single copy $10.00. USA and all other foreign – $82.95 per year US single copy US10.00 Canadian Publications Mail Product Sales Agreement No. 40069240 Information contained in this publication has been compiled from sources believed to be reliable, thus Solid Waste & Recycling cannot be responsible for the absolute correctness or sufficiency of articles or editorial contained herein. Articles in this magazine are intended to convey information rather than give legal or other professional advice. Reprint and list rental services are arranged through the Publisher at (416) 510-6798.

Return undeliverable Canadian addresses to: Circulation Department, Solid Waste & Recycling 12 Concorde Pl, Ste 800, Toronto, ON M3C 4J2 From time to time we make our subscription list available to select companies and organizations whose product or service may interest you. If you do not wish your contact information to be made available, please contact us via one of the following methods: Phone: 1-800-268-7742 Fax: 416-510-5148 E-Mail: jhunter@businessinformationgroup.ca Mail to: Privacy Officer Business Information Group 80 Valleybrook Drive Toronto, ON M3B 2S9 We acknowledge the financial support of the Government of Canada through the Canada Periodical Fund (CPF) for our publishing activities. © 2012 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced without prior consent.

Print edition: ISSN-1483-7714

Online edition: ISSN-1923-3388

LETTERS Dear Editor:

Thank you for covering the publication of our recent report on EPR for packaging in the US [on the website].

However, the reporter got one crucial bit of information wrong. The next to last paragraph states: “Spearheading action are companies such as ColgatePalmolive, General Mills, Kraft Foods, Safeway, Supervalu, Target, Kroger, Procter & Gamble, Unilever, Walmart, Ahold USA, and Whole Foods.” I wish!

If these companies were on board, EPR for packaging in the U.S. would be a reality. Rather, it should have stated something to the effect of “As You Sow has led engagement of major consumer goods and grocery companies to adopt EPR polices. These companies include Colgate-Palmolive, General Mills, Kraft Foods, Safeway, Supervalu, Target, Kroger, Procter & Gamble, Unilever, Walmart, Ahold USA, and Whole Foods.” The only two major brands that are publicly calling for producers to take responsibility for packaging are Nestlé Waters and Coca-Cola.

Thanks for your interest in our work.

Conrad MacKerron, Senior Director As You Sow www.asyousow.org

IPL: largest wheeled cart contract

I

PL Inc., one of North America’s leading manufacturers of plastic products, has received its largest contract ever in the environment sector. The $14.5 million contract, from the City of Winnipeg, Manitoba, is for production of 343,000 wheeled carts.

Production for the order got under way at IPL’s Saint-Damien plant in April.

“IPL is well known in Quebec environmental circles,” says Jan Lembregts, IPL president and CEO, “and now this contract will allow our products to gain visibility in western Canada and help us expand IPL’s presence in that market.”

Visit www.ipl-plastics.com

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

For more information, visit www.fsc.org

6 www.solidwastemag.com August/September 2012

swr a-s 2012 upfront pg 06-07.indd 6

12-08-15 10:28 AM

UPFRONT

GRAND OPENING OF MOLOK NORTH AMERICA

The environmentally conscious band, Vocal Trash from Texas, thrilled the audience.

O

n May 29, 2012 a grand opening was held for the new plant of Molok North America Ltd. in Mount Forest, Ontario. Two events were organized to celebrate the opening of this super efficient 39,000 square foot building; one in the morning for children, another in the afternoon for adults.

Six hundred children from the area schools came to celebrate the opening and learn about recycling in a fun way. A performance by Vocal Trash, an environmentally conscious band from Texas, thrilled

Veolia deal creates new waste colossus

V

eolia Environnement has sold its US waste business to a unit of Highstar Capital for $1.9 billion, the New York-based company announced. Veolia, one of the world’s biggest water and waste companies, has made the new deal in an attempt to cut 20 per cent of its debt by the end of next year. Its US subsidiary, Veolia ES Solid Waste Inc., had revenues of $818 million in 2011, and operates from more than 300 locations. The new combined business, which will operate as Advanced Disposal Services, will be the largest privately-owned environmental services business in the US. It will have operations in 20 states and have annual revenues of approximately $1.4 billion. The company will also have a fleet of some 3,000 trucks, 47 landfills, 92 transfer stations and 5,450 employees.

the audience. Over 120 people toured the new facility and participated in the festivities.

Molok deep-collection containers are an innovative waste management solution that offers a compact, hygienic and odourless collection point for various waste types. Only 40 per cent of the container is visible, while remainder is underground.

Visit www.molokna.com

$11 BILLION LOST TO LANDFILL ANNUALLY: REPORT

A

new report zeroes in on US companies missing out on more than $11 billion each year as they fail to take post-consumer responsibility for packaging that could be recycled.

The report, “Unfinished Business: The Case for Extended Producer Responsibility for Post-Consumer Packaging,” was released in July 2012 by As You Sow, a nonprofit organization that suggests the financial burden for product responsibility should shift from taxpayers to manufacturers, as is the case in certain Canadian and European communities. According to the new report, the US currently has a recycling recovery rate of 48.3 per cent for packaging and 52.7 per cent for paper and paperboard products. This is well behind European countries such as Denmark, which has a recovery rate of 84 per cent.

Visit www.asyousow.org/download/epr/shtml August/September 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 7

swr a-s 2012 upfront pg 06-07.indd 7

12-08-15 10:28 AM

COVER STORY

by Paul van der Werf & Michael Cant “This has led to organics overtaking paper as the most recycled item on a per capita basis.�

Successes, challenges and new technology across the country

Organics Managem

8 www.solidwastemag.com August/September 2012

swr a-s 2012 cvr sty pg 08-15.indd 8

12-08-15 10:28 AM

COVER STORY

I

t is one of the world’s great ironies that with all the advancements in agriculture — which have had positive impacts on feeding people — that many still go hungry. At the recent summit on sustainable development in Rio de Janeiro, the UN Food agency reported that one in seven people on this planet still don’t get enough to eat.

It was also ironic, but more deliciously so, when Olivier De Schutter, the UN Human Rights Council’s “Special Rapporteur on the right to

food,” made his May visit to Canada to investigate this country’s “unacceptable” rates of food insecurity that he didn’t take note of the great amount of food that ends up in the waste stream.

Organic waste (i.e., food and yard waste) continues to make up a significant part of our waste stream. Beyond unavoidable spoilage the organic waste that finds it ways to our curbs and bins could be the difference between food “security” and “insecurity,” never mind the environmental impacts that result from their landfilling.

gement in Canada

Harvest Power’s Energy Garden in Richmond, BC turns the Metro Vancouver region’s food scraps and yard trimmings into clean, renewable energy through anaerobic digestion.

August/September 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 9

swr a-s 2012 cvr sty pg 08-15.indd 9

12-08-15 10:28 AM

COVER STORY

Figure 1. Per capita waste diversion of paper and organic wastes.

Figure 2. Capture rate of residential and IC&I organic waste in Canada.

On the single-family residential side, great strides have been made in swaths of the country; think Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick, Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia. These provinces capture and mostly compost organic wastes. (Examples of current and possible future organics processing successes are included in the pictures that accompany this article.)

Even with these successes, the overall capture rate (of total food and leaf-and-yard waste) is about 25 per cent, assuming that it makes up about 30 per cent of the total waste stream. The diversion of organic waste is going to eventually hit a squishy glass ceiling of sorts, much in the same way that overall diversion has.

To date, overall waste diversion success largely resides with singlefamily households.

As available single-family household organics are captured we’re left with the more difficult-to-capture streams (using current sourceseparation approaches). This includes the multi-residential sector with which we continue to struggle on the dry recycling side (never mind organics and the IC&I), parts of which have flickering interest in organics diversion, but struggle with finding processing capacity and, in general, tend to gravitate to lowest-cost options.

We need to ask ourselves how far we want to go with organics diversion?

If we’re satisfied with current single-family and (some) IC&I organic waste diversion, then we need to go no further. However, if diverting organics from landfill is important we need to identify new approaches, to help us broaden the scope of organic wastes that we can collect (that

10 www.solidwastemag.com August/September 2012

swr a-s 2012 cvr sty pg 08-15.indd 10

12-08-15 10:29 AM

Communities are increasingly interested in harnessing the full carbon and nutrient potential of organic materials through anaerobic digestion and composting. (Diagram courtesy of Harvest Power)

Screen, Mix & Aerate Compost

llu.net www.a

scan for video

World’s Largest Windrow Turner

ALLU COMPOSTING TOOLS Screener Crushers & Windrow Turners • Available to fit EVERY machine • High production even with wet muddy materials • 5/8” & 1” Screening size with replaceable hammers

• Track driven straddle type windrow turner • Create 10’x26’ windrows with no flails or paddles • 6000 cu. yards/hour turning capacity

ALLU Group, Inc. | Info Call: 1-800-939-2558 | Email: usa@allu.net August/September 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 11

swr a-s 2012 cvr sty pg 08-15.indd 11

12-08-15 10:29 AM

Well covered.

Well done!

W. l. Gore & Associates German Phone: +49 89 4612-2712 | Fax: +49 89 4612-42712 | North America Phone: 410-506-5041 | Fax: 410-392-4452 gorecover@wlgore.com | gorecover.com GORE速 and designs are trademarks of W. L. Gore & Associates. DA 168

12 www.solidwastemag.com August/September 2012

swr a-s 2012 cvr sty pg 08-15.indd 12

12-08-15 10:29 AM

COVER STORY b

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

The Dutch, driven in part by the requirements of the Landfill Directive are real systems integrators when it comes to waste management. Orgaworld’s Amsterdam Greenmills® site is a clear example of this. Orgaworld along with its partners operate a facility that receives IC&I organic waste from a number

November 14 - 15, 2012 International Centre, Toronto, ON Canada

of sources and produces a number of products.

Amsterdam Greenmills® includes a large AD facility, a wastewater treatment plant , a biodiesel production facility from cooking oils and a vegetable oil storage terminal. They are in the process of constructing a de-packaging facility for supermarket waste (January 2013). All systems are closely integrated regarding residual heat recovery, process stream recovery and logistics. The site also enables surrounding industrial partners (e.g., Cargill) to make use of the waste and wastewater facilities through a dedicated pipeline.

The approach is to direct incoming organic wastes to the best possible treatment option — the one that will allow them to derive the greatest economical and ecological benefit at the lowest cost. This flexibility allows them to deal with the inevitable variation that exists in IC&I organics streams, from the

“The quality of visitors and prospects were excellent.”

Samantha Goetz, Orbis Corporation

“CWRE offers our company a means to reconnect with our current customer base and establish new customers all in one convenient location.”

Jackie W. Barlow, II Vice President Paradigm Software

well source-separated to the more contaminated.

Currently the facility produces sustainable electricity, second-generation biodiesel, organic fertilizers and heat. The production of low temperature heat is directed to the city’s district heating grid and the high temperature heat (steam) is being used to make organic fertilizers. In the future, more valuable products are expected to be produced from advanced fermentation and

Reach Your Target Market!

85% of Canadian Waste & Recycling Expo attendees plan to

purchase products from exhibiting companies up to $250,000.* *2011 Canadian Waste & Recycling Expo Attendee Survey

conversion processes.

is, move into multi-residential and commercial waste streams in a more meaningful way).

However if we believe that the environmental, never mind the social, impacts warrant a beyond-landfill approach, fundamental changes need to be occur.

In that case it’s time to take a hard look at the current paradigm, which is largely voluntary and exclusively focused on source separation.

The way forward includes new processing technologies that can produce energy, plus increasing our ability to handle more mixed and contaminated streams of organic wastes, with some level of regulation that limits or bans organic waste from landfills.

LANDFILL BANS We often look to Europe for examples we should emulate.

The EU’s 1999 Landfill Directive’s purpose was to reduce to the greatest extent possible the negative environmental impacts of landfilling by implementing strict requirements for waste and landfill. It was estimated that thee per cent of the EU’s greenhouse gas emissions came from landfills. A key part of this Directive is that member states reduce the amount of biodegradable municipal waste that they landfill to “35 per cent of 1995 levels” by 2016 (for some countries by 2020).

This Directive does not prescribe how member states achieve these goals; this has resulted in different creative approaches by the various EU countries.

In the Netherlands, for instance, a combination of composting, anaerobic digestion and incineration has been used to essentially reduce landfilling to zero. The Dutch industry continues to integrate various technologies together at its facilities to offer the broadest possible set of solutions. (See example of Amsterdam Greenmills above.) This industry has been driven by the Landfill Directive and Dutch waste management planning at a national level.

In Canada there is body that could create a Landfill Directive like the one in Europe. The Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment

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

12/11SWR

August/September 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 13 CWRE12 SWR Ad 3.375 x 11.indd 1

swr a-s 2012 cvr sty pg 08-15.indd 13

12/5/2011 3:56:19 PM

12-08-15 10:29 AM

COVER STORY

(CCME) long ago prepared publications on a number of environmental matters (e.g., CCME Composting Guidelines 2005). This would be the body to develop a Landfill Directive-like document for Canada.

The Province of Nova Scotia long ago banned organics from landfill and Quebec appears to be preparing to do the same. Nova Scotia’s ban spawned its robust composting industry.

MANAGING MIXED STREAMS Twenty years ago there were great pretenders who promised that you could process a mixed waste stream and the compost end-products would be just like those produced from fully source-separated waste streams. However, as Shakespeare wrote, we learned you cannot make silk from a pigs ear.

Walinga VC2336

6/11/07

N O W

2:36 PM

The key with more mixed and contaminated feedstocks is to understand what can be can be done with them as opposed to what cannot. There are already hints of what this could look like in Canada.

The source-separated organics programs in Toronto, York Region and sometimes Edmonton have been criticized for allowing conventional plastic film bags to convey organics to processing facilities. While challenging, these facilities have shown it’s still possible to produce marketable compost while allowing bags.

If the stage was broadened beyond composting it could result in opportunities to process organic wastes found in the multiresidential and IC&I sector, as well residues from all sources. Newer approaches to dealing with these wastes include anaerobic digestion (AD) and mechanical biological

treatment (MBT). These technologies that can better accommodate pre- and post-processing technologies to remove contamination.

NEW TECHNOLOGICAL APPROACHES Anaerobic digestion, while not new, can be advantageous from a material-handling perspective. In systems where there-s wet preprocessing, there’s the opportunity to separate and remove contaminants for organic wastes.

It’;s starting to grow in Canada.

The City of Toronto is currently building a 90,000 tonne/year anaerobic digestion facility adjacent to its current AD facility. This will allow that city to effectively remove contamination, more easily than from composting systems, from the broadly defined source-separated organics and allow the city to create biogas and ultimately compost.

Page 1

O N L I N E !

Recycler

www.walinga.com R e c y c l i n g a n d re n d e r i n g a ro u n d t h e w o r l d !

Head office: R.R. #5 Guelph ON Canada N1H 6J2 Tel (519) 824-8520 Fax (519) 824-5651

70 3rd Ave. N.E. Box 1790 Carman, Manitoba Canada R0G 0J0 Tel (204) 745-2951 Fax (204) 745-6309

6960 Hammond Ave. S.E. Caledonia, MI. USA 49316 Tel (800) 466-1197 Fax (616) 656-9550

14 www.solidwastemag.com August/September 2012

swr a-s 2012 cvr sty pg 08-15.indd 14

12-08-15 10:29 AM

COVER STORY

lected separately), removes contaminants, and biological treats (i.e., composts) the rest. The difference is that it takes the process to the production of compost. The Otter Lake facility in Halifax Regional Municipality is a clearer example of an MBT facility; that plant stabilizes residual wastes prior to landfilling.

In its more conventional sense MBT can be deployed to address the remaining residual streams such as single-family, multi-residential and IC&I residual waste streams. The process facilitates the removal of some recyclables and results in the biological decomposition of the remaining waste stream. In some cases a compost-like output (CLO) is manufactured. The remainder can then be landfilled.

MBT has been a key part of meeting the Landfill Directive for some European countries, such as Italy, and holds great promise for

Canada. The key is to understand that it will not produce top-quality compost and perhaps not any product at all.

There are hints and actions that point to Canada’s next generation of organic processing.

Freed from an exclusive focus on source separation and composting, these hints will, under the right circumstances (be they regulatory or other drivers) lead us to devise and employ new approaches that will allow us to capture benefits from a challenging waste stream.

Paul van der Werf is President of 2cg Inc. in London, Ontario. Contact Paul at 2cg@ sympatico.ca Michael Cant is Principal and Canadian Waste Sector Leader for Golder Associates in Whitby, Ontario. Contact Michael at mcant@ golder.com

ZES ODOU ALI R TR

S

NE U

Other AD facilities are under construction in Canada. For instance, Harvest Power is constructing anaerobic digestion facilities in both Richmond, British Columbia and London, Ontario. (See photos.)

Quebec also plans to invest heavily in AD facilities in the coming years.

Mechanical biological treatment (MBT) is a pretreatment method that can be used to treat mixed waste streams. There a variety of ways to set up this process. It can include separating out high caloric wastes and producing a refuse derived fuel product, plus digesting or composting a residue stream prior to landfilling or directing it to landfill.

In some ways the City of Edmonton’s centralized composting facility could be considered a MBT plant in as much as it receives a mixed waste stream (with recyclables col-

FR

EN

T

®

ESH

CLEA N

SC

Helping municipalities achieve their organic waste diversion goals.

Glad® Compostable Bags with Odour Guard® won a

2012 Best New Product Award in the Environmentally Friendly Household Products Category.

Accepted for use in municipal jurisdictions across Canada.

Please contact Glad Canada for additional information (905) 595-1425

August/September 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 15

swr a-s 2012 cvr sty pg 08-15.indd 15

12-08-15 10:29 AM

COLLECTION

by Maria Kelleher “One important decision is which type of kitchen catcher bag to allow for set-out of SSO in curbside bins.”

A

Bag to Earth Impact of different bags on organics collection

s Green Bin programs began being implemented across North America a number of years ago, communities were faced with making decisions about program design; they made certain decisions without significant information that impacted program performance. Thankfully, operational experience allows program designers to choose a system that best suits the needs of their community.

Implementation of residential source-separated organics (SSO) programs requires many decisions: what materials to collect; how they should be stored in the home and collected at the curb; the processing approach used (composting or anaerobic digestion); policies that could increase participation and capture in residential SSO programs; and, the most appropriate end markets for finished compost.

One important decision is which type of kitchen catcher bag to allow for set-out of SSO in curbside bins. Until recently this had not been empirically studied.

The impacts of different bag choices (paper, plastic, biodegradable plastic or certified compostable plastic) on SSO program performance were examined in a study recently commissioned by Bag To Earth and carried out by this author and consultant Janet Robins. The study focussed on quantifying, to the extent possible, the impacts of the choice of bag on SSO program performance. Data collected from SSO programs across Canada, predominantly in the provinces of Ontario and Nova Scotia, included: • Year that the SSO program was implemented; • Households served; • SSO tonnage collected annually since the program was initiated; • Type of bags permitted in SSO bins (paper only, certified compostable plastic, biodegradable plastic or plastic); • Frequency of garbage collection (weekly or bi-weekly); • Curbside policies which would impact on participation in the SSO program(bag limits, PAYT programs, etc.); • Facility where SSO was processed; and • Residue rates at the processing operation.

The conclusion of the analysis was that many factors impact the performance of the SSO program. Some key factors are: Size of curbside Green Bin containers provided, and the extent to which leaf-and-yard waste are collected in the Green Bin: Some communities chose small 46 litre Green Bin containers which collect kitchen waste only whereas other communities chose a larger Green Bin container, and allow some leaf and yard waste in the bin. Bin sizes in the programs studied included: 46, 80, 120, 140 and 240 litres. The community decision on the bin size is generally related to optimizing the collection system design. It also impacts on processing options chosen.

Age of the program (number of years in operation): Participation in SSO programs generally increases and the amount of SSO collected generally increases over time as residents become used to the program requirements.

Frequency of garbage collection: Participation in SSO programs and capture of SSO are both higher in communities which only collect garbage every other week. Less frequent garbage collection service encourages people to use the Green Bin more.

16 www.solidwastemag.com August/September 2012

swr a-s 2012 collection pg 16-18.indd 16

12-08-15 10:29 AM

COLLECTION

Impact of different bags

CONVENIENT

ACCESSIBLE COMPETITIVE City of Toronto Solid Waste Management: Drop & Load (Tolling) Service Toronto Solid Waste Management Services offers a convenient way to manage your waste collection.

■ Bring waste to one of 7 conveniently-located Toronto transfer stations ■

Use your own haulers and disposal sites

■

Access our certified scales, skilled staff and equipment

■

Competitive rates at $13/tonne*

■

No appointment required for collection vehicles – use facilities any time during our convenient hours including Saturdays at some location

■

Haulers can schedule loading times that work with your operations to minimize the time your drivers are onsite

To find locations and for more information visit toronto.ca/garbage/depots or call 416-397-1356 *Subject to review

August/September 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 17

swr a-s 2012 collection pg 16-18.indd 17

12-08-15 10:29 AM

COLLECTION

Curbside policies: SSO program performance is better in communities with lower garbage bag/container set out limits and in communities where extra bags or containers of garbage cost extra (through a tag system)

Conclusions

The research found that there was not sufficient evidence to indicate that the choice of a particular type of kitchen catcher bag (paper, plastic, certified compostable plastic or biodegradable plastic) significantly impacted participation or capture rates in the SSO programs examined. A number of factors are at play (including the list of the materials collected, the age of the program, frequency of garbage collection, curbside policies and size of Green Bin) that influence participation rates and capture rates.

Well performing programs include a blend of policies and practices which best meet community needs and diversion targets, while inte-

grating collection decisions with the broader integrated waste management system, and taking account of the implications of program design decisions on the organics processing operation.

Compost facility operators contacted for the study preferred paper bags, as these compost readily in existing systems, and result in residue rates of “virtually zero.” All facility operators noted that certified compostable plastic bags compost more slowly than paper bags, and they experience higher residue rates from programs that use plastic bags, including biodegradable and certified compostable plastic bags. Operators commented that a well run composting operation should be able to achieve a residue rate of below five per cent.

Maria Kelleher is Principal at Kelleher Environmental in Toronto, Ontario. Contact Maria at maria@kellenv.com

Custom Designed Recycling Solutions

We sell systems & solutions

Van Dyk Baler designs the Recycling Industry’s most profitable plants!

Over 1,000 successful installations in North America featuring: Lowest prices per ton, Innovative designs, TITECH Optical Sorters that minimize labor, Systems that consistently exceed their designed tonnage, Free lifetime technical phone support backed by the industry’s largest parts and service team.

Contact us to begin a custom designed solution for your application. phone 203-967-1100 web vandykbaler.com email info@vandykbaler.com Van Dyk Baler is the Exclusive North American Distributor of Bollegraaf Recycling Machinery and sister company of Lubo USA

18 www.solidwastemag.com August/September 2012

swr a-s 2012 collection pg 16-18.indd 18

12-08-15 10:29 AM

swr a-s 2012 Beeha ad pg 19.indd 19

12-08-15 10:30 AM

RECYCLING

by Elisabeth Comere “The Canadian residential recycling rate for used cartons in 2011 was approximately 38 per cent.”

Thinking Outside the Box Effective end-of-life management of cartons

T

etra Pak is committed to being a world leader in sustainable recycling, by promoting and encouraging effective widespread carton recycling programs. The company strives to achieve a 40 per cent global carton recycling rate by 2020, doubling the rate world-wide from 2010.

On average, “gable top” cartons are 80 per cent fibre and 20 per cent polyethylene, and “aseptic” cartons are 74 per cent fiber, 22 per cent polyethylene and four per cent aluminum. Cartons have high-quality virgin bleached long fibre and the ink is on the polyethylene layer and not the fibre. This makes cartons attractive to mills that can separate

fibre from the poly/aluminum. Some end-users can also use the poly/ aluminum either as feedstock or fuel.

Carton recycling in Canada

Based on beverage stewardship and industry funding organization data, the Canadian residential recycling rate for used cartons in 2011 was approximately 38 per cent. (This is based on data from the following sources: ABCRC, Encorp Pacific, Dairy Container Collection Program, MMSM, Encorp Atlantic, Atlantic Dairy Council, MMSB, RRFB, NWT Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Stewardship c pg 25

In-feed conveyor into hydropulping process where fibres and polyethylene/ aluminum components are separated.

20 www.solidwastemag.com August/September 2012

swr a-s 2012 recycling pg 20,25-27.indd 20

12-08-15 10:36 AM

Register Now for the National Compost Conference!

22nd Annual

National Compost Conference September 19-21, 2012 ď Ź MontrĂŠal, QC

Organics are the #1 material recycled across Canada. This achievement reflects the progress of organics recycling amongst municipalities, businesses and institutions. And yet still, much more needs to be done.

Compost advocates are invited to gather in Montreal this September for the 22nd Annual National Compost Conference, an important time for learning, networking and updating on our collective organics recycling efforts and vision for compost advances everywhere.

This year, our conference will provide advance days for additional training opportunities as well as offering a dynamic line-up of facility tours and presentations. We look forward to your contribution and involvement in this milestone event.

www.compost.org ď Ź 1-877-571-GROW(4769) swr a-s 2012 ccc pg 21-24.indd 21

12-08-15 10:37 AM

Register Now for the National Compost Conference!

Give Back to the Earth … Compost!

22nd Annual National Compost Conference September 19-21, 2012  Montréal, QC

Here’s the program to advance your technical knowledge about organics recycling Pre-Conference Training Opportunities MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 17TH & TUESDAY SEPTEMBER 18TH COMPOST FACILITY OPERATOR COURSE

TUESDAY SEPTEMBER 18TH ODOUR MANAGEMENT 101

On Wednesday September 19th, our tours will visit:

Complexe Environnemental Saint-Michel

In 1996, the complex began a project geared to turning one of North America’s largest landfills into a viable resource by converting the area’s release of biogas into usable electricity. In the same year, Hydro-Québec signed a 25-year contract to buy the converted energy. In concert with its biogas conversion project, the St. Michel Environmental Complex also serves as a city recycling sorting centre and composting site.

McGill University’s On-Site Composting

2010 welcomed the installation of an organics recycling and composting program at McGill University. Over 62 tonnes of pre & post-consumer organic residuals generated from the campus’ main cafeterias including Royal Victoria College, New Residence, the Faculty Club and the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) are now processed annually. Opportunities for increased expansion are being considered to capture more than 3 times the current potential.

Ferme CMJI Robert

Composting has taken its place in the farm activities of Ferme CMJI Robert, an apple and grape producer with interests in apple cider, wine, juice and other value-added products. Green residuals from a nearby golf course join the on-farm fruit-crop residuals for composting within a rotating drum system with the finished compost product destined for return to the farm’s soil.

Polykar

Polykar, a family business founded in 1987, is a manufacturer of polyethylene film, garbage bags and food packaging. In 2003, the Saint-Laurent facility obtained the ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 certifications. Polykar received the ICI ON RECYCLE! Award from Recyc-Québec for excellence in waste management. The compostable line of Polykar’s products are certified by the Bureau de normalisation du Québec (BNQ), Biodegradable Products Institute (BPI) and meet the North American standards of compostability set forth by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM-D6400).

swr a-s 2012 ccc pg 21-24.indd 22

12-08-15 10:37 AM

Our 2012 National Compost Conference Program THURSDAY SEPTEMBER 20th

FRIDAY SEPTEMBER 21st

GIVE BACK TO THE EARTH … COMPOST! Sustainable SITES Initiative: Beyond LEED Compost Advances in Quebec

REGULATORY UPDATES Municipal Solid Waste Organics Processing in Canada Expanding Organics Recycling Management in Québec Development of the CCME & BNQ Compost Criteria RESEARCH MATTERS An Overview of Sustainable Farming Systems Capturing the Heat from Composting Refining CO2 from Composting for Methanol

COMPOST FOR THE HEALTH OF SOILS Soil-Carbon Sequestration in Ontario: A Report of the Environmental Commissioner’s Roundtable Compost as a Substitute for Mineral Fertilizers TO BE OR NOT TO BE … COMPOSTABLE Industry Standards Developments in Compostable Products The Practicality of Compostability ANAEROBIC DIGESTION Composting and Anaerobic Digestion: Successful Process Combinations in Québec Sorting and Pre-Treatment Technologies for Anaerobic Digestion and Composting Facilities A Comparison of Digestate versus Septage as Process Feedstocks Combining Anaerobic Digestion and Composting FEEDING THE PROCESS Compost Research Trials Facility Infrastructure Requirements for the Composting of Source-Separated Organics Composting for Animal Disease Control Wood Stove Ash as a Compost Feedstock VERMICULTURE’S PRESENT AND FUTURE Putting Worms to Work for Organics Recycling International Initiatives in Vermiculture OVERCOMING BARRIERS Maximizing Waste Diversion in Apartment Buildings: Piloting a Multi-Residential Source-Separated Organics Program Lessons Learned in the Implementation of Community & Institutional Organics Recycling Programs

IMPROVING OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT Optimizing Process & Cost with Odour Monitoring Operational Efficiencies in Municipal Organics Processing Optimization of “Recipes” for Co-Composting of Food Residuals and Agricultural Crop Residuals MARKETING COMPOST PRODUCTS Landscaping and Environmental Trends in Compost Usage Marketing Digestates and Compost Products Manufactured at Various Organic Residuals Treatment Facilities of Greater Montréal Biosolids Treatment and Agricultural Land Application in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu BEING RESOURCEFUL THROUGH ORGANICS RECYCLING Rethink Your Waste in Municipal Facilities: Implementing a Source Separation Organics Program in Municipal Facilities Composting Advances for Gatineau!

Landfill Diversion and Compost Opportunities MAKING TECHNOLOGY WORK Web-Based In-Vessel and ASP Compost Process Controls Odour Monitoring for Anaerobic Digestion Facilities Risks Inherent with Big Technology Solutions CITIES FEED FARM SOILS: MOVING COMPOST INTO AGRICULTURE A panel update from Nora Goldstein, BioCycle; Larry Conrad, Region of Peel; Christine Brown, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture Food & Rural Affairs; Lambert Otten, Bob Paulin & Susan Antler, The Compost Council of Canada

COMPOSTABLE www.compostable.info

swr a-s 2012 ccc pg 21-24.indd 23

12-08-15 10:37 AM

Register Now for the National Compost Conference!

Give Back to the Earth … Compost!

22nd Annual National Compost Conference September 19-21, 2012  Montréal, QC

To register, visit www.compost.org or call 1-877-571-GROW(4769) CONFERENCE EXHIBITORS INCLUDE: AIR PHASER ENVIRONMENTAL AL-PACK ENTERPRISES LTD.

LAFLÈCHE ENVIRONMENTAL INC. MANAGED ORGANIC RECYCLING INC.

ALLU GROUP BIOFERM ENERGY SYSTEMS

METABOLIX MILLER COMPOST

BUREAU DE NORMALISATION DU QUÉBEC DURABAC

N-VIRO SYSTEMS CANADA ODOTECH INC.

ORBIS CORPORATION PATZ EDMONTON WASTE MANAGEMENT CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE SCARAB MANUFACTURING & LEASING EGGERSMAN ANLAGENBAU BACKHUS SSI SCHAEFER ENGINEERED COMPOST SYSTEMS VERMEER CANADA INC. GROUPE COMMERCIAL PAUL LAROUCHE VERTAL INC. IPL INC. W.L. GORE KOMPTECH ONTARIO ECOSAFE ZERO WASTE

It’s time to register now!

Visit www.compost.org or fax back (416-536-9892) for more information: YES! I’m intersted in attending. Please send me more info.

Name: Organization: Address: City: Phone:

Province/State:

Postal/Zip Code:

Fax:

Email:

swr a-s 2012 ccc pg 21-24.indd 24

12-08-15 10:37 AM

2.

1.

3.

(1) Wet lap pulp at the end of the carton conversion process is stored before shipment to a tissue or paper mill.

(2) After the carton fibre and poly/aluminum components are separated, the resulting fibre yield can be developed into tissue paper.

(3) Roofing tiles made from recycled carton fibre.

Ontario, PEI Ministry of Environment, Energy and Forestry, Quebec residential waste audit data (2010), Sarcan, Yukon Environment.) To expand carton recycling, Tetra Pak along with SIG, Elopak and Evergreen, established the Carton Council of Canada (CCC) in 2011.

CCC’s strategy for increasing carton recycling rests on a four-prong approach: 1. Develop robust sustainable end markets for post-consumer cartons to ensure they’re recycled into usable end products. CCC has worked successfully with the North America paper industry to expand the number of mills taking cartons from one to 10 in the last three years, with more expected to come online over the next year.

2. Work with material recovery facilities (MRFs) to overcome barriers to sort post-consumer cartons in their own-grade. In Ontario, the CCC is collaborating with the industry funding organization to collect detailed data on the flow of used cartons from discard to end-markets. These data will help the CCC identify and pursue opportunities to increase capture and recovery of used cartons and potentially other composite paper packaging such as coffee cups, ice-cream cartons and freezer board in other Canadian jurisdictions as well.

3. Collaborate with local communities to encourage consumers to recycle cartons. Approximately 94 per cent of Canadians have access to residential beverage carton recycling but not everyone recycles them. The Capital Regional District in British Columbia (CRD), which

recently added cartons to its residential recycling program, provides an opportunity for the CCC to provide communications and technical support to ensure carton recycling in the CRD is as successful as possible.

4. Promote policies that support increased carton recovery. CCC supports policy measures, such as mandating carton collection, or introducing landfill bans.

Expanding yield, and who pays?

A key measure of carton recycling success is total material yield — the percentage of incoming tons actually recovered and manufactured into new product.

Tetra Pak’s core focus over the last three years has been to identify and supply paper mills that desire cartons as a feedstock. However, Tetra Pak is working to develop recycling solutions that address the carton in its entirety (including the poly/al layers) and achieve the highest total yield possible. (Two examples — ReWall in Des Moines, Iowa, and Groupe RCM, in Quebec — are profiled here.)

Even without poly/al recovery, separation of cartons for shipment to tissue mills results in fibre yield of 70-79 per cent — the same as coated book stock, sorted office paper or printer’s mix: three feedstock mainstays. Consequently, CCC has also worked to increase North American tissue mill demand for cartons.

Depending on the jurisdiction, the cost to collect, sort and process August/September 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 25

swr a-s 2012 recycling pg 20,25-27.indd 25

12-08-15 10:36 AM

Price Sheet, which reflects Ontario market price trends for post-consumer commodities, the average price paid for used cartons in 2012 has been $116/tonne. (You can view a sample of the Price Sheet at http://stewardedge.ca/ pdf/pricesheet/2012/04_2012.pdf)

Spotlight on recyclers

Baled polycoat cartons ready for shipping.

used cartons is either born in part or fully by producers (brand owners, retailers and first importers — Tetra Pak’s customers) or by the consumer and/or producers (in deposit jurisdictions). Tetra Pak’s work to develop strong, sustainable demand for cartons is helping to keep costs competitive with other obligated

materials and support sustainable carton recycling growth.

Commodity pricing for used cartons reflects carton fibre quality and yield. Pricing varies with commodity cycles, transportation distances, transportation method, quality of bales, etc. According to The StewardEdge Inc.

Groupe RCM of Yamachiche, Quebec expects to begin production in the fall of this year of a low-density granule suitable for a range of applications. RCM’s pioneering line will use a “thermokinetic” process that relies on highspeed knives enclosed in a mixing head to homogenize disparate waste materials with combined physical properties, transforming packaging waste including cartons, plastic bags and films, into plastic granules for extrusion into products such as pallets, railroad ties and flowerpots.

Located in De Pere, Wisconsin, Fox River Fibre’s current capacity is 400 tpd of pulp or 570 tpd of post-consumer feedstock. The mill uses high consistency batch pulpers that separate fibre from polyethylene and aluminum components. Used cartons and water are introduced together. The high consistency of the

End markets consuming cartons The following facilities use cartons to produce products including tissue and toweling, de-ink pulp and green building products made from shredded whole cartons: • GET (Grupo Empresarial Transforma) – San Juan del Rio, Queretaro • Kimberly Clark de Mexico – Ecatepec and Ramos Arizpe, Mexico • ReWall – Des Moines, Iowa: will be expanding their facility in Q3 2012 to increase the production of building products like wallboard, sheathing, ceiling tiles and backerboard through an innovative European tested whole carton recycling technology that uses both the carton fiber and poly/aluminum (poly/al) in their building products.

• SCA Tissue North America – Cherokee, Alabama • Tissue Technology – De Pere, Wisconsin • Great Lakes Tissue – Cheboygan, Michigan • Fox River Fiber – De Pere, Wisconsin • Fibrek – Fairmont, West Virginia • RCM – Yamachiche, Qc, Canada (expected to begin production in Q3 2012 26 www.solidwastemag.com August/September 2012

swr a-s 2012 recycling pg 20,25-27.indd 26

12-08-15 10:37 AM

4.

5.

(4) and (5): Composite board materials made from recycled polycoat cartons.

(6): Typical polycoat beverage cartons or “drink boxes.”

6.

pulp allows a strong inter-fiber friction effect resulting in a high defibering rate. For deinking applications, the strong friction effect enables very good ink detachment while the low speed of the turbine minimizes contaminant fractionation and facilitates the removal of fragile contaminants.

According to Brian Hesprich, Vice Presi-

dent, Finance, their standard feedstock of sorted office paper (SOP) is becoming more difficult to source due to less office waste being produced. The ability of Fox River to use post-consumer carton stock helps increase the availability of its feedstock and take pressure off of SOP. The mill is currently working to find a beneficial use for the poly/aluminum residuals

and management is confident they will find a solution and meet their goal of keeping 100 per cent of incoming cartons out of landfills.

Elisabeth Comere is Director, Environment & Government Affairs, Tetra Pak, in Vernon Hills, Illinois. Contact Elisabeth at elisabeth. comere@tetrapak.com

Need a Solution for Organic Waste?

Wastequip’s Organics2Go™ program is the solution.

Wastequip can tailor a sustainable, cost-effective system for your organic waste transport, storage and collection needs.

• BIOBIN® BIOFILTRATION SYSTEM

• CARTS AND CART LIFTERS

• DIGESTERS

• STEEL AND PLASTIC CONTAINERS

wastequip.com/organics2go | 877-468-9278 | sales@wastequip.com

August/September 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 27

swr a-s 2012 recycling pg 20,25-27.indd 27

12-08-15 10:37 AM

P R O D U C T S T E WA R D S H I P

by Barbara McConnell “The 2011 Report Card is the first of five annual ratings that EPR Canada plans to produce and publish on its website.”

EPR Report Card BC earns top grades, other provinces and feds trail

E

PR Canada released the first of its kind report card in July benchmarking the progress Canada’s federal, provincial and territorial governments are making to require producers (manufacturers and brand owners) to be 100 per cent responsible for their products and packaging after consumers are done with them.

The report card compares the policies and programs each government either had in place or had pending by the end of 2011 and assigns standard grades.

British Columbia (BC) earned the highest score, an A-, in recognition of its focus on extended producer responsibility (EPR) as a tool to increase waste diversion and prevent pollution. In the report card, EPR Canada said that BC had made “a clear commitment to the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment’s (CCME) Canada-wide Action Plan for EPR, having designated more than two-thirds of the product categories including beverage containers, various types of special and hazardous waste, electronic and electrical products, tires and packaging and printed paper.”

Geoff Love, co-founder of EPR Canada says BC’s positive action on making the producer responsible clearly put it ahead of other governments in Canada.

“The major reason the province lost some points was for not applying penalties when obligated producers failed to meet waste recovery targets within specified timelines,” Love says.

About 50 people, including representatives from industry and stewardship organizations, attended a news conference in Vancouver where EPR Canada released the report.

BC Environment Minister Terry Lake accepted a certificate of recognition and spoke about the central role EPR must play in reducing the amount of waste that ends up in BC landfills. He credited the cooperative relationship among his staff, industry and BC consumers for the success BC has had in putting effective EPR programs in place.

Manitoba, Quebec and Nova Scotia received grades of Bfor the progress they had made in meeting their commitment to the CCME’s Action Plan. Ontario and Prince Edward Island each got a C+, marginally ahead of Alberta which earned a C. Saskatchewan, New Brunswick and Newfoundland and Labrador each received a C-.

The only jurisdiction to receive a failing grade at F was the federal government largely for not moving forward on stated intentions to legislate EPR for toxic waste over which it has jurisdiction. As a result, says EPR co-founder Duncan Bury, provincial governments are confused about who should take responsibility for managing the waste.

Due to the unique challenges faced by the northern territories, EPR Canada chose not to allocate a score this year to the Yukon or the Northwest Territories, though both responded to the questionnaire.

Cover of the 2011 Report Card

28 www.solidwastemag.com August/September 2012

swr a-s 2012 prod stew pg 28-29.indd 28

12-08-15 10:38 AM

P R O D U C T S T E WA R D S H I P

“EPR Canada assigned two members to analyze and score each submission independently.”

However, EPR Canada noted that each showed progress toward putting EPR programs in place.

EPR Canada developed the report card by sending a questionnaire to the ministers of environment of each jurisdiction. All responded but Nunavut, which could not return the completed questionnaire on time.

EPR Canada assigned two members to analyze and score each submission independently. After comparing notes and arriving at a consensus score, the entire organization reviewed the results and reached consensus on final scores. The members of EPR Canada who completed the scoring are posted on the EPR Canada website.

“The purpose of the report card is to showcase what the governments across Canada are doing to move public policy on producer responsibility forward,” Bury says. “By shining a light on progress, EPR Canada hopes to encourage leadership, innovation and best practices in EPR policies and to influence the evolution of product stewardship and partial EPR to full EPR programs.”

The CCME defines EPR as a policy approach in which a produ-

cer’s responsibility, physical and/or financial, for a product is extended to the post-consumer stage of a product’s life cycle, shifting it away from municipalities and regional waste authorities. It also encourages producers to incorporate environmental considerations in the design of their products. The federal, provincial and territorial governments have all committed to regulating EPR programs for the materials designated under the CCME’s Action Plan.

The 2011 Report Card is the first of five annual ratings that EPR Canada plans to produce and publish on its website, www.eprcanada.ca The results will be posted during the second quarter of each year.

EPR Canada is a not-for-profit organization whose members have been involved in EPR policies and programs since their inception in Canada in the 1990s. Canada is an acknowledged world leader in this area of environmental achievement.

Barbara McConnell is president of McConnell Weaver Strategic Communication in Toronto, Ontario.

Contact Barb at mcweav@kos.net

HOW DO YOU FIND WASTE SOLUTIONS? JUST ASK GOLDER. Our global team of waste experts understands all aspects of waste management systems, facility design, operation and strategies. From planning through to closure, Golder delivers effective, innovative solutions.

Engineering Earth’s Development, Preserving Earth’s Integrity.

Canada + 800 414-8314 solutions@golder.com www.golder.com August/September 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 29

swr a-s 2012 prod stew pg 28-29.indd 29

12-08-15 10:38 AM

I C & I WA S T E

by Diane Blackburn “The only waste sent to landfill was a small 1.5 kg bag of soiled plastic wrap and latex gloves for sanitary food handling.”

Barbecue Time Waste reduction by Menkes Property Management Services and Bentall LLP

W

hen the lazy days of summer are upon us it’s time for patios, cold drinks and the requisite barbecue delicacies fresh off the grill. The social conviviality generated by an outdoor food fest has been adopted by many organizations as a way to foster goodwill and visibly communicate corporate recycling trends. Refreshments combined with entertainment always find a receptive audience and so some property management companies have made the tenant appreciation barbecue a rite of summer, where everyone can chow down and enjoy a little break from the daily lunch ritual of a soup and sandwich consumed precariously over the computer keyboard.

Our spotlight for this edition is on two amazing companies: Menkes Property Management Services and Bentall LLP. Both these organizations have taken home multiple Platinum awards for excellence at the Ontario Waste Minimization Awards and both are “hosts with the most” when it comes to their annual BBQs. If you get panicky at the thought of more than a dozen people eating on your back deck, consider these numbers: In July, 5000 Yonge Street (Menkes Trans America Tower) saw 1,400 people flow out on to the property that borders the Toronto Centre for the Arts for the annual barbecue festivities complete with ice cream trucks and a steel pan musician lending a Caribbean air to the sunny mid-day gathering.

The waste generated was primarily soiled plastic wrap, cans and plastic bottles, food waste, compostable plates and cutlery, napkins and cardboard. Total materials generated were 265.3 kg. Total materials diverted/recycled were 260.2 kg. Only the soiled plastic wrap (5.1 kg) was sent to landfill, so total diversion was a whopping 98 per cent!

Even greater crowds turned out at the sprawling 25 acre RBC Campus (Bentall LLP) at 6880 Financial Drive in Mississauga for the 2011 Canada Day Green Country Jamboree.

3,300 people (of a total 6,000 employee roster) turned out to enjoy a foot-stomping good time and in the process were able to divert food waste, flatware, cutlery, napkins, cardboard, salad containers, pop cans, fuel cans and plastic wrap. Total waste generated was 1,253.5 kg. Total materials recycled were 1,252 kg. The only waste sent to landfill was a small 1.5 kg bag of soiled plastic wrap and latex gloves for sanitary food handling. Total diversion: 99 per cent.

“Having the cooperation of an environmentally savvy caterer is es-

Pre-planning, strategic bin placement and menu selection proves important and sorting is inevitable post event.

sential,” says Cindy Woyslaw, General Manager at Menkes, 5000 Yonge. “They get everything organized according to your specifications to ensure a well-coordinated, waste free event.”

And then it’s up to the green teams under the supervision of a seasoned waste services provider to make sure everything goes in the right bin and that there’s no cross contamination of food with pop cans, water bottles and other sundry items.

With each barbeque success, pre-planning, strategic bin placement and menu selection proves important and sorting is inevitable post event.

Whether caterers are involved or all the cooking/cleanup is performed by staff volunteers, it’s a total team effort to deliver a waste free event.

In the case of Menkes and Bentall they both rely heavily on Wasteco, which has been instrumental in helping them develop and execute the game plan for waste free events and other reduction/recycling strategies in their respective properties.

Wasteco’s point man for these activities is Steve House, a veteran in the waste industry who personally oversees the on-site activities and has been seen “dumpster diving” to salvage pop cans and other misplaced recyclables from organics bin. It’s a bit of mucky job but then the point is clearly get the message: recycling is a serious business even when you are at play.

Diane Blackburn is Events Manager for the Recycling Council of Ontario (RCO) in Toronto, Ontario.

Contact Diane at events@rco.on.ca

30 www.solidwastemag.com August/September 2012

swr a-s 2012 ic&i waste pg 30.indd 30

12-08-15 10:38 AM

T R A N S P O R TA I O N T E C H N O L O G Y

Compressed Natural Gas

Emterra building Canada’s largest CNG fleet in Winnipeg

T

en years ago, heavy equipment fleets boasted no more than a few token natural gas vehicles. But technology improvements leading to better engine performance and an abundant and predicable supply of natural gas have brought the environmental and economic benefits of natural gas vehicles into focus. One of the first to grasp the significance of using compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicles for the waste management business in Canada is Emterra Environmental in Winnipeg, Manitoba.

With a fleet of nearly 60 CNG-powered trucks and a private, onsite CNG refuelling station, Emterra will soon earn the distinction of having the largest fleet of CNG waste and recycling trucks operating in a coldweather climate in the world.

Emterra is building the fleet and infrastructure as a result of winning a contract to collect single-stream recyclables, waste, yard waste and bulky items in the City of Winnipeg, Manitoba. The company has been collecting, processing and marketing recyclables for the city since 2003.

In their bid for the bigger job, set to start October 1, Emterra included cleaner-burning, quieter CNG trucks.

“We looked at the benefits that natural gas vehicles offer and compared it with conventional wisdom. Diesel was certainly the tried and true way to go, but we had just invested in a $14.5 million dollar shift from traditional blue boxes to rollout totes to push recycling rates higher.

It made sense to opt for trucks that matched our new attitude and that promised a cleaner environment,” says Darryl Drohomerski, Winnipeg’s manager of solid waste services.

“What really impressed us was that switching to a green fleet and installing a natural gas refuelling station was Emterra’s idea as part of their commitment to promoting a healthier environment. We didn’t ask for it and they aren’t receiving a subsidy. They’re self-financing the trucks and the refuelling station,” he adds.

The CNG trucks will incorporate fourth-generation ISL G Cummins Westport natural gas engines that reduce CO2 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by up to 20 per cent. According to the Canadian Natural Gas Vehicle Alliance (CNGVA), each truck driving 143,000 km over the five-year contract will reduce GHG emissions by 40.3 tonnes compared to diesel trucks. Multiplying that by the number of trucks in operation means that over the life of the contract, over 2,400 fewer tonnes of GHG will be released into the Winnipeg environment.

“We’re blazing the trail because we see the economic and environmental value of it, and we’re taking CNG to places it hasn’t been before,” says Emterra’s CEO, Emmie Leung, “but it comes with a big challenge.

Instead of being inside a building all night, our new CNG trucks will be re-fuelling outside. So we’ll be investing in precautions that ensure the trucks start even on the coldest mornings,” Leung says.

Clean Energy is providing the pipeline-fed, time-fill (i.e., overnight refueling) CNG fueling station that will be located at the Emterra Henry Avenue material recovery facility.

Iain Johnstone, senior business development manager with Clean Energy, says one solution to combat cold weather is to install a gas August/September 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 31

swr a-s 2012 trans tech pg 31-33.indd 31

12-08-15 10:38 AM

T R A N S P O R TA T I O N TECHNOLOGY dryer at the station to eliminate any water that may be in the fuel before it’s compressed and pumped at 3600 pounds per square inch into the truck tanks.

CNGVA President, Alicia Milner, says a lot of people will be watching the Emterra initiative carefully. The CNGVA has had discussions with Natural Resources Canada and Transport Canada about implementing a study at the Emterra operation to document the performance of CNG trucks in winter conditions.

“It’s the kind of third-party, independent information that Canadian fleet managers need to make decisions about green equipment like this,” she says.

Cummins-Westport says that CNG-powered engine has come into its time.

“With fuel costs at half the price of diesel and an engine that emits less pollutants and performs well in the slow, start-stop pattern of waste trucks, it makes sense to look at CNG. Half of the approximately 5,000 cab-over waste trucks built in North America this year will be natural gas,” predicts Jeff Campbell, Cummins-Westport’s director of product marketing.

Emterra’s new fleet comprises Crane Carrier LET2 vehicles with a mix of Heil PT 100 rear-loaders and Heil Rapid Rail automated sideloader bodies.

Emterra’s new fleet comprises Crane Carrier LET2 vehicles with a mix of Heil PT 100 rear-loaders and Heil Rapid Rail automated sideloader bodies.

Emterra Environmental is an Emterra Group company. With 14 MRFs in British Columbia, Manitoba and Ontario, it processes more than 500,000 tonnes of recyclables annu-

ally. Emterra Group also includes Emterra Tire Recycling and Canadian Liquids Processing Ltd., both in Ontario.

Written by Barbara McConnell, president of McConnell Weaver Strategic Communication in Toronto, Ontario. Contact Barb at mcweav@kos.net

32 www.solidwastemag.com August/September 2012

swr a-s 2012 trans tech pg 31-33.indd 32

12-08-15 10:38 AM

T R A N S P O R TA T I O N T E C H N O L O G Y ( S I D E B A R )

by Belinda Junkin “Approximately 25 to 30 million CPC pallets move in Canada each year.�

Electronic Container Transfer Technology to ease asset tracking and transportation costs

F

or retailers and manufacturers across the country, the bottom line often hinges on their products getting to market at the right time, and at the right cost. The actual delivering of these products, however (most often by way of trucks that carry pallets and containers very long distances) can end up being a logistical, financial and environmental headache.

Many retail and manufacturing brands are faced with the transportation of empty shipping containers and pallets to and from warehouses once their products have already been shipped. This can cause redundancies, extended fleet service and time, and environmental damage from unnecessary road travel.

In order to reduce these inefficiencies, the Canadian Pallet Council (CPC) has developed an online solution to help ease asset tracking and transportation costs. Their new software, called Electronic Container Transfer (ECT), allows companies to run their logistics planning more smoothly, while being more environmentally friendly and cost-efficient.

ECT establishes opportunities for trading partners who are members of the CPC to exchange offsetting imbalances of empty shipping containers and CPC pallets simultaneously. By electronically reconciling offsetting imbalances of the same returnable empty container among trading partners, ECT eliminates or significantly reduces the transportation and handling costs while reducing road traffic and engine pollution.

How ECT works Using the database already in place, the ECT system reviews transactions on a daily basis and identifies imbalances that form loops among a wide range of trading partners. Once a loop of imbalances has been identified, the system presents the opportunity to reduce the pallet or container imbalance electronically to each company, giving CPC members the option to accept or decline each opportunity or new route. If accepted, the imbalance is either eliminated or updated in order to organize and shorten the transport route.

For example: A supplier in Kitchener, Ontario regularly ships a truckload of product to a warehouse in Vancouver. At the same time, a supplier in Vancouver regularly ships a truckload of product to a distribution centre in Mississauga.

ECT identifies the opportunity for the supplier in Kitchener to trans-

fer the empty pallets from the Vancouver warehouse to the Vancouver supplier and the supplier in Vancouver to transfer the empty pallets from the Mississauga distribution centre to the Kitchener supplier. If the parties agree to this arrangement, a total of 6,960 kilometres are avoided by returning the empty pallets through this co-operative exchange.

Key benefits of ECT The ECT functionality has two major benefits: the reduction of logistics costs for the return of empty pallets and containers and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.

By limiting redundancies in the shipping process and offsetting imbalances, the new software reduces costs by eliminating or reducing the transportation and handling costs associated with the return of empty pallets or other returnable containers. A reduction in transportation also means reduced administration costs for customers and reduced damages, fewer repairs and fewer scrap pallets due to reduced handling and transportation.

For a distributor in Toronto who has suppliers in Vancouver and Halifax, the total transportation and handling costs avoided by offsetting imbalances of 2,000 pallets (compared to returning the transportation of empty pallets) would be $59,000.

In addition to cost savings, one of the major benefits of the ECT software is its role in reducing harmful effects that can come from fleet transportation. By cutting road traffic and fuel consumption, greenhouse gas emissions can be drastically reduced. For that same distributor in Toronto who has suppliers on both coasts, trading offsetting imbalances of 2,000 pallets would have reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 77.5 tonnes. The reduction of tailpipe greenhouse gas emissions would have been 59.5 tonnes and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from the upstream production, 18 tonnes.

The CPC estimates that approximately 25 to 30 million CPC pallets move in Canada each year, a huge number when considering the potential overlaps and redundancies shipping these pallets can cause. The new ECT software is a step in the right direction in offering Canadian retailers and manufacturers the competitiveness and efficiency they require to meet their bottom lines.

Belinda Junkin is President & CEO of the Canadian Pallet Council in Cobourg, Ontario.

Contact Belinda at bjunkin@cpcpallet.com August/September 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 33

swr a-s 2012 trans tech pg 31-33.indd 33

12-08-15 10:38 AM

DIVERSION

by Jessica Wilkinson “The ‘graduates’ from the inaugural training session will soon receive their results and move to apply for AWA status.”

A Standard Waste Audit Method Bringing standardization of results to waste audits

I

n February, Solid Waste & Recycling wrote about a new waste diversion certification program recently introduced by the Recycling Council of Ontario (RCO) called 3RCertified. As 3RCertified rolls out to the industrial, commercial and institutional (IC&I) community across Ontario, the timing is perfect to examine a key element of the program and how this element can change the face of solid waste auditing, making 3RCertified the standard by which all sustainably-driven organizations will want to be measured.

The Ontario Waste Auditor Training (OWAT) and the Accredited Waste Auditor (AWA) program have been developed as part of the 3RCertified™ program, with support and sole funding from the Ontario Ministry of the Environment to standardize waste audit practices and performance measurement.

Until now, there was no standard method for conducting waste audits. Without a standard, results can often be unreliable.

RCO, through review of waste audit methodologies used worldwide, and in consultation with regulatory authorities and industry experts, developed the Standard Waste Audit Method — the backbone of the training and accreditation program. In addition, completion of a waste audit to the Standard Waste Audit Method is mandatory under 3RCertified and applicants achieve more points for using an AWA to conduct the waste audit.

In Ontario, designated generators of solid waste are required to conduct waste audits and develop waste reduction work plans under O. Reg. 102/94. IC&I generators use waste audits not only to meet compliance requirements, but as an effective tool to improve profitability through better management of materials.

Decision-makers in the IC&I sector have lacked a mechanism to confirm Waste Auditor credentials, leading to confusion in the marketplace in this fast-growing field. Waste Auditors can now be independently verified and recognized as Accredited Waste Auditors (AWA).

OWAT, as the cornerstone training program for Accredited Waste Auditors, launched in May 2012 and immediately created a groundswell of demand from all quarters. Three training sessions have already been completed and more are scheduled for regions across Ontario moving into the second half of this year as demand grows here at home and across Canada.

The training course is based on the Standard Waste Audit Method and focuses on auditing principles, sampling methods, benchmarking and data analysis, and accurate methods of measuring and reporting performance. This standard has attracted interest from participants from diverse backgrounds: seasoned professional waste auditors; recent BES university graduates; waste haulers and processors and IC&I waste generators including manufacturers, hospitals and retail chains.

So what happens inside the classroom?

The training is a combination of lectures and workshops where students work on case studies and create audit plans and develop/practice auditing skills through table-top scenarios and role-play exercises.

Students learn about modern methods of performance measurement — methods of calculating waste reduction and realistic indicators of effective source separation programs (overall capture rate) — topics which have not been explored in the IC&I sector until now. Students apply the audit findings into compliant and effective waste reduction work plans which focus on waste reduction and reuse as the first two priorities.

In turn, this leads to vigorous exchanges of information in a neutral and accepting environment where students can learn about the variety of scenarios that can be encountered in the field of waste auditing across a diverse IC&I sector. The course ends with students completing a written exam.

Once students successfully complete the two-day course and pass the exam, they can choose to apply for third-party verification and recognition of their waste auditing skills. RCO, as the independent, outcomesbased organization, will accredit waste auditors based on a combination of requirements including experience and education. Auditors can be accredited at one of three levels: AWA (Provisional); AWA (Accredited); and, AWA (Lead).

AWAs maintain their certification with RCO by proving professional development and competencies, including experience conducting audits using the Standard Waste Audit Methodology and adhering to the RCO AWA Code of Ethics which demands a consistently high degree of integrity, objectivity, accurate evidence-based approach, diligence in safety and environmental protection, confidentiality and professionalism.

The AWA designation may only be used by individuals who have successfully completed the OWAT course, proven competency requirements to the RCO and kept skills up to date by regular reporting on their professional development.

Response to the launch of the RCO auditor training and accreditation program has reinforced the need across industry for reliable, high quality standards to govern waste auditing and reporting practices.

Need to find an accredited Waste Auditor? The “graduates” from the inaugural training session will soon receive their results and move to apply for AWA status. AWA’s in good standing will be listed on a roster on the RCO and 3RCertified websites: www.rco.on.ca and www.3rcertified.ca Jessica Wilkinson, EP(CEA) is the Lead Instructor and Technical Manager for the RCO’s 3RCertified™ Program. Contact Jessica at jessica@rco.on.ca

34 www.solidwastemag.com August/September 2012

swr a-s 2012 diversion pg 34.indd 34

12-08-15 10:39 AM

Standing out from the rest

Largest fleet of natural gas-powered waste collection trucks in Canada Starting October 2012, Emterra Environmental will have close to 60 natural gas-powered waste and recycling trucks operating in Winnipeg, Manitoba – it’ll be the largest fleet in Canada and the largest

in a cold weather climate in the world. Emterra is transitioning to natural gas because the trucks run quieter, burn cleaner and cut emissions by 20%, helping achieve healthier, more sustainable communities.

Emterra Environmental is an Emterra Group family company www.emterra.ca To find out more about Emterra, call 905-336-9084, #130

swr a-s 2012 emterra ad pg 35.indd 35

12-08-15 10:39 AM

OWMA REPORT

by Rob Cook “Municipalities using private sector landfills may bear the increased disposal cost.”

Tax Attack!

MPAC actions will increase the cost of waste disposal and force increased waste export to the US

T

he economics of waste disposal in Ontario are shifting through significant increases in municipal taxes for private companies and payments in lieu of taxes for upper tier municipalities. The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) is in the process of re-assessing landfill facilities in Ontario for the 2013-2016 municipal taxation period. MPAC intends to re-assess over 600 sites (all private and municipal landfills) and is currently seeking information to calculate a re-assessed value. The MPAC re-assessment is scheduled to be completed by November 2012 with increased assessed value and classification changes to be reflected on 2013 tax rolls and in 2013 municipal tax bills and payments in lieu of taxes.

The MPAC activity is based on the previous sales of the Ridge Landfill and Green Lane Landfill in southwestern Ontario and the assumption that based on these sales, the current value of landfills is understated. MPAC has designed a new valuation model — a modified “cost method” that intends to capture the economic value of the site. The re-assessed land value becomes a function of the remaining capacity of the landfill. It goes like this: Land Value = remaining capacity (m3) X capacity rate ($/m3) This new methodology represents a significant departure from tax assessment based on the “use of property” and fully incorporates the value of a business enterprise into the tax system. This approach is not used for other land uses. For example, the business value of different types of farm enterprises (pasture versus vineyards) is not incorporated into the valuation of specific agricultural lands.

MPAC has commenced re-assessing private landfills (2) and the City of Toronto Green Lane site and in these three situations, the assessed value has increased up to 60 times the current assessed value. New assessed values are ranging from $60 to $97 million per landfill site.

MPAC is acquiring data on the remaining private sector sites and will be sending a questionnaire to municipalities so the same methodology can be applied to municipal landfills.

The impact of this re-assessment is significant for private sector sites as the valuation increases will translate into a significant increase in municipal taxes. Business dynamics suggest that tax increases will be reflected in a significant increase in future tip fees. This increase will impact the cost of disposal in Ontario but may also drive more waste to lower-cost US jurisdictions and pose as an incentive to dispose rather than recycle materials to ensure that annual tonnage limits are met. The

MPAC re-assessments will shift the disposal marketplace in Ontario in a significant way.

The impact on municipalities is also significant. Municipalities using private sector landfills may bear the increased disposal cost depending on the contract provisions in place between the municipality and the company.

The value of municipal landfills will also increase in the range of magnitude experienced by private sites to date. The increased value for municipal facilities will be a challenge for all levels of municipal government. For upper tier municipalities, increased assessment values will directly impact the “payment in lieu of taxes” agreements with lower tier municipalities where the landfill is located. This will increase the cost to dispose of residential waste at municipal facilities.

Lower tier municipalities with a private or municipal landfill will also be impacted by: • Increased taxes from private sector facilities; however greatly increased assessment value and taxes for one taxpayer that will force a re-alignment of the entire municipal tax base.

• The risk that appeals to the re-assessment will leave municipalities exposed to refunding significant taxes.

• Impacts on municipal grant eligibility due to an increased municipal tax base.

• The challenge of planning for sustainable municipal services with high levels of taxes paid in early years declining over time as the landfill reaches capacity.

The Ontario Waste Management Association (OWMA) has been engaged in discussions with MPAC to fully understand the new MPAC assessment methodology and the implications of the re-assessment to both private and public sector members. OWMA is continuing to liaise with MPAC and will be bringing US landfill valuation experts to Ontario to meet with MPAC valuators to discuss various valuation approaches and to determine the fairest approach to valuation.

The resolution of this issue will ultimately rest with the province (Ministry of Finance). Change of this nature and magnitude is an issue of tax policy and should be the responsibility of our elected representatives and not MPAC (a quasi-independent administrative body).

Rob Cook is Executive Director for the Ontario Waste Management Association (OWMA) in Brampton, Ontario. Contact Rob at rcook@owma.org

36 www.solidwastemag.com August/September 2012

swr a-s 2012 owma report pg 36.indd 36

12-08-15 10:42 AM

by John Nicholson “A cigarette filter is 95 per cent acetate cellulose (a plastic) with the remainder being paper and glue.”

Waste Elimination Opportunities Innovative solutions introduced even with cheap landfill

I

am frequently asked about what will be the next big thing in the waste industry. My common response is... everything! More municipal and industrial recycling, more companies finding new ways of making things from residuals, more companies learning to eliminate specific waste streams, and more energy recovery from waste.

I see all these things happening to varying degrees.

To date, the success or failure of any of these waste and recycling activities has been determined by the cost of landfilling. Cheap landfilling makes it very difficult to decide to do anything with waste other than dispose of it.

Despite access to cheap landfilling in North America, industries are doggedly determined to find alternatives and seek new opportunities, some of which are discussed here.

Landfill free If landfill is so cheap and the bottom line so important why are major global companies focusing on becoming landfill free? General Motors is the latest company to proudly announce that one of its facilities (its parts distribution facility in Lansing Michigan) is landfill free. Add Unilever, Hewlett-Packard, and Xerox to the list of a growing number companies focused on zero landfill.

Walmart, the largest retailer in the world, has made the pledge to three overarching sustainability goals: use 100 percent renewable energy, operate at zero waste, and sell products that are socially and environmentally sustainable.

Municipalities around the world are also focused on reducing their dependency on landfill. For example, the Scottish Government launched a Zero Waste Plan in 2010. Under the plan, all waste is seen as a resource that is too valuable to be disposed of in landfills. One aspect of the plan calls for landfill bans for specific waste types. Another key aspect is the development of a Waste Prevention Program for all wastes with a focus on prevention and reuse of waste as priorities.

The growing focus on zero landfilling from major corporate entities is good news for companies focused on reuse, recycling, and recovery of energy from waste.

Dismantling and recycling According to Boeing, there will be a rapid increase in demand for aircraft dismantling and recycling services. The demand will be created by accelerated fleet renewal that will result in the doubling of airplanes leaving the global fleet in the next decade.

The cause for the accelerated fleet renewal is fuel costs. Newer planes reduce fuel costs by 20 percent, justifying the higher rate of fleet replacement.

Boeing, like other airplane manufacturers, has sustainability goals including one that calls for 90 per cent of airplanes to be recycled by 2016. Also, the company is focused on the utilization of recycled material — good news for recyclers and recycled product developers.

Success awaits companies that develop efficient, cost-effective dismantling and recycling capabilities and firms that manufacture aircraft components from recycled and reclaimed material.

Energy and new products Energy recovery from waste is a no brainer in Europe and is slowly gaining momentum in North America. Advanced thermal treatment technologies have been finding a niche in the waste-to-energy market.

Recently, Innovative Environmental Solutions — a joint venture between a European metal recycler and a New Jersey gasification technology manufacturer — announced that it’s developing a full-scale gasification facility near Birmingham, England. When complete the facility will convert the energy from 350,000 tonnes per year of shredder residue from end-of-life vehicles and household appliances in 40 MW of electricity.

Another niche advanced thermal treatment venture is occurring in Vancouver. Klean Industries recently began full-scale production of nano carbons through the pyrolysis of waste tires. The company is using its patented technology to produce high grade nanotubes and fullerenes (the nano material used in a wide variety of applications and products).

I don’t know why smokers feel they can just throw cigarette butts on the ground. Perhaps they think the butts are degradable (they’re not0. A cigarette filter is 95 per cent acetate cellulose (a plastic) with the remainder being paper and glue. Toronto-based Terracycle recently launched a program to collect and recycle cigarette waste in Canada. The plastic found in butts will be used in the manufacture of plastic pallets while the paper and remaining tobacco from the butts will be composted.

New companies entering the waste management sector that specialize in waste reduction, reuse, recycling, and recovery should not be discouraged. It’s clear that the world is moving to reduce waste to landfill.

Opportunities for utilization of 4R technologies will continue to grow.

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

August/September 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 37

swr a-s 2012 waste bus pg 37.indd 37

12-08-15 10:40 AM

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

by Rosalind Cooper, L.L.B. “Municipalities will be required to provide this service without funding from the province, retailers or manufacturers.”

Regulatory Update across Canada Ontario HazWaste program changes Ontario’s Ministry of the Environment has approved changes to the Consolidated Municipal Hazardous or Special Waste (CMHSW) program plan proposed by Waste Diversion Ontario (WDO). The revisions are intended to address the issue that arose approximately two years ago, when retailers began charging eco-fees on various hazardous household products and significant opposition to the fees was mounted. The fees had been introduced by retailers because certain groups of products had become subject to the CMHSW program. With the revisions, the CMHSW program will, as of October 1, 2012, only include Phase 1 municipal hazardous or special wastes (such as paints and coatings, solvents, oil filters, antifreeze, propane tanks, fertilizers and pesticides).

Responsibility for Phase 2 municipal hazardous or special wastes will be transferred to a provincially-funded program entitled the “Selected Household Hazardous Waste Initiative,” which will be managed by a not-for-profit organization that has yet to be determined. Funding in the amount of up to $3.5 million per year for the next three years will be provided to permit municipal management of six wastes: fire extinguishers, rechargeable batteries, fluorescent light bulbs and tubes, mercury-containing devices such as thermostats and thermometers, pharmaceuticals, and sharps and syringes.

Containers for Phase 3 wastes, which include items such as household cleaning products, bleaches and camping fuels, will be required to be completely emptied by consumers such that no toxic or hazardous wastes remain in these containers. On this basis, there will be no need for a diversion program or for funding associated with these hazardous materials.

Stewardship Ontario will continue to manage Phase 2 and Phase 3 wastes during the transition period, with municipal costs being covered until September 30, 2012. Municipalities that currently manage waste materials will need to plan for the transition, since they will be required to provide this service without funding from the Province of Ontario, or retailers or manufacturers of the products.

Incineration projects in BC British Columbia recently amended its Reviewable Projects Regulation to address environmental assessment requirements for incineration pro-

jects. The amendments apply to certain facilities for the treatment or disposal of municipal solid waste.

Facilities include: landfills with a design capacity of greater than 250,000 tonnes per year; devices that, with or without energy recovery, destroy waste using high temperatures with a design capacity of greater than 225 tonnes per day; or devices that, with or without energy recovery, destroy waste using high temperatures and which are located in the Greater Vancouver Regional District or the Fraser Valley Regional District.

Excess soil management in Ontario Ontario’s environment ministry is updating its guide for best practices for managing excess soil generated by large scale redevelopment and construction projects. The reason for the update is the numerous requests for clarification of the rules that apply to excess soil management, including when such soil must be managed as waste. The ministry has indicated that it doesn’t intend that the guide apply to small-scale construction activities at single-dwelling residential properties, or activities associated with small-scale municipal road work or sewer and water main construction.

The guide proposes that excess soil may be reused at a project site or other redevelopment sites, where the quality of the soil is appropriate.

It also permits the use of excess soil for site alteration or re-grading.

Excess soil may also be managed at approved soil recycling or treatment facilities, placed at a commercial fill site, or disposed of at a ministryapproved landfill site.

The guide recommends that a Soil Management Plan include testing of soil to ensure chemical parameters are characterized based on the assessment of a qualified person. In addition, the guide suggests that a Fill Management Plan include erosion control and run off controls. The guide also suggests that consideration should be given to whether other municipal or conservation authority approvals or permits are required for soil banking operations and that soil should not be stored at a soil bank for more than two years.

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

38 www.solidwastemag.com August/September 2012

swr a-s 2012 regrndup pg 38.indd 38

12-08-15 10:40 AM

PRODUCTS

INVOICE GATEWAY

NEW PRODUCTS FROM WOOD FIBRE

Billtrust’s Invoice Gateway™ — a hosted online bill payment site — allows waste and recycling companies to present their customers with a secure, easy-to-use online site for viewing and paying their invoices. Billtrust does all the work, setting up a hosted, branded site for your company. Your customers have a full complement of features and tools to manage and pay their bills. The result? Happy, loyal customers and unmatched efficiencies for you.

Some of the popular customer tasks supported

by Invoice Gateway include: • View the bill (an exact replica of the paper version)

• Research bills by key criteria such as date, amount, open balance, location, PO# • Search for bills based on invoice or PO# • Download the invoice data into their accounting package (e.g. QuickBooks™) • Short Pay invoices and select from dispute reason codes you provide • Dispute invoices at the line item level • Print the bills And of course, pay the bills! With Billtrust’s Invoice Gateway, companies can view and pay their invoices and statements via a secure, integrated web delivery channel.

Visit www.billtrust.com

The Centre for Research and Innovation in the Bio-Economy (CRIBE) is partnering with GreenCore Composites to develop a new green technology process that will allow wood fibre to be used in a number of new products for the packaging and building applications, such as pallets and various containers.

This new mixing process will be added to GreenCore’s existing NCell® technology allowing GreenCore to widen the type of products in which glass fibre and other compounds such as plastics can be replaced with wood fibre composite materials.

CRIBE is providing $320,000 to GreenCore Composites for this important project that will position GreenCore as the market leader in natural fibre composites and Ontario as a leader in creating a more sustainable and greener economy.

GreenCore has already demonstrated that they are capable of replacing glass fibre reinforced compounds which are used in a wide

Leaner, Greener, Cleaner— Natural Gas Delivers

New maintenance facility guideline now available

Lower fuel cost. Diesel-like performance. Quieter trucks. Up to 20% lower greenhouse gas emissions Talk to the Canadian Natural Gas Vehicle Alliance about how natural gas collection trucks can work for your fleet.

Contact Alicia Milner at (613) 564-0181 or Alicia.Milner@cngva.org.

August/September 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 39

swr a-s 2012 products pg 39-40.indd 39

12-08-15 10:40 AM

PRODUCTS

variety of products but are extremely energy intensive to produce with wood fibre composites using their patented pending NCell technology.

This wood fibre composite has been successfully piloted in many applications, from automotive parts, to rigid containers, furniture, and industrial products. The benefits include enhanced sustainability, reduced energy costs and lower carbon emissions. This technology is expected to grow GreenCore’s workforce from its current level of six employees to 40 to 45 by 2016.

Visit www.cribe.ca and Project1 11/13/06 10:28 AM Page 1 www.greencorenfc.com

Residents can access all the suggested ways to dispose of any item from trash to reduce, reuse, recycle, compost, and anything else.

ONLINE TOOL FOR RESIDENTS

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

Waste Nothing’s what-goes-where tool for residents is now being made available to local governments and other waste management agencies. By making information about proper disposal widely and easily accessible, agencies can improve customer service while better serving the environment.

Waste management agencies maintain excellent resources on the correct procedures for trash, recyclables, electronic and household hazardous waste, organics, and often local donation options as well. Too few residents are taking advantage of this, resulting in confusion and contamination, and lowering the value of collected recyclables and the quality of compost.

Waste Nothing will take the agency’s information and make it available through a simple-to-use website and mobile application, made to fit in with the agency’s existing website. Residents can access all the suggested ways to dispose of any item from trash to reduce, reuse, recycle, compost, and anything else. Nearby facilities are shown on a map with links to directions.

“I got tired of walking down the street, seeing still-usable items get thrown out with the trash. There are so many great ways to reduce waste that anyone can do, from donating old eye glasses to opting for paperless billing,” says Michael Fagan, Waste Nothing’s founder.

“I wanted to create a single place people could go that would bring this information together.”

The agency’s information is supplemented by tips from charities which accept items for donation, stores which buy used goods, and ideas from the general public.

Visit http://wastenothing.ca

40 www.solidwastemag.com August/September 2012

swr a-s 2012 products pg 39-40.indd 40

12-08-15 10:40 AM

Advertisers’ Index Company

Page #

Company

August/September 2012

Page #

2cg/Paul van der Werf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Eriez . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Allu Group, Inc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Glad . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Bee’ha Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Golder Associates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Borden Ladner Gervais . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Municipal Waste Association . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Canadian Natural Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Ontario Waste Management Association . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Canadian Waste & Recycling Expo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Paradigm Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Clean Energy Fuels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Sites & Spills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

City of Toronto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Trux Route . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Currotto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Van Dyk Baler Corp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

DM-Public Relations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Walinga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Ecolo Odor Control Technologies Inc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Walker Environmental Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Emterra Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Waste Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Environmental Business Consultants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Wastequip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

November 7 – 8, 2012 International Centre, Toronto, Canada

Tradeshow and Conference exploring: • HazMat emergency response • Forensic investigation of hazmat sites • Best practices for brownfield development, soil treatment and site cleanup • Proven clean technologies for spill clean-up • Plans and programs for environmental liability

2 Days Only – Register Today!

www.sitesandspills.com or Call Toll Free 1-800-268-7742 x6833 ➜ input or quote code “hazmat” when registering

August/September 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 41

swr a-s 2012 ad idx pg 41.indd 41

12-08-15 10:41 AM

BLOG

by David Nesseth “Any display device larger than 29 inches would cost a BC resident $31.75.”

Dim Bulbs

Industry’s plea to streamline stewardship in BC

J

uly 1, 2012 had appeared to be “E-Day” for many small British Colabout the changes,” states a June 29, 2012 CFIB letter to BC Minister of umbia businesses caught up in logistical combat over environmental Environment Terry Lake. regulations. Residential rules expanded overnight to include busiSo far, the government is listening, at least in part. In terms of the ness sectors, and suddenly light bulbs and outdoor power equipment LightRecycle program, it has been announced that the regulatory expanneeded stewardship plans. They had built-in environmental handling sion will now be phased in between July 1 and October 1, 2012. fees too.

But the contention over Environmental Handling Fees (EHF) reBusinesses knew it was coming. They just hadn’t anticipated all the mains, as Kurl has yet to hear back from the province. That said, she’s consequences. optimistic about the eventual response.

“This has nothing to do with the spirit of the requirements or oppos“We believe a comprehensive review of EHF programs with an eye ition to environmental handling fees,” Shachi Kurl, Canadian Federation to simplifying compliance fits within the framework of your governof Independent Business director of provincial affairs for B.C. and ment’s commitment,” says the CFIB’s letter, authored by Kurl. “As it Yukon told Solid Waste & Recycling magazine. stands, however, the current standards of compliance where EHFs are Kurl says it has everything to do with the “onion-like layers” of concerned more closely resemble the poster child of unnecessary regulogistics that came with the expanded regulation. The expansion relatory burden.” lates to the Recycling Regulation under CFIB says its problem with the handling the Environmental Management Act. It sets fees is the resources necessary to track prodout the requirements for product stewardship “Nobody looked at the trickle- uct information. It notes that while the EHF is in BC, which is primarily managed by the often built in at the manufacturing source, it’s down effect of this on the shop not always the case.

Product Care Association.

“Nobody looked at the trickle-down efdo not always disclose floor from the perspective of the this“Manufacturers fect of this on the shop floor from the perfact, and those that do are not always spective of the business owner,” Kurl says. consistent in their disclosure for every prodbusiness owner.”

“We’re being asked to add hours of time in uct they make,” Kurl wrote. regulatory compliance.”

The small business must contact the Kurl says she’s surprised about the lack of consultation surrounding manufacturer to confirm the EHF, CFIB says. This responsibility should the regulatory expansion, especially considering how actively engaged rest with the manufacturer, argues Kurl. Businesses must also keep track the province has been in communicating and consulting with the CFIB of how much they make each month from the fees, which could range over logistics for the ongoing HST-PST transition. from a quarter to $2.50 or more, depending on the product.

Brochures with a simple checklist and a helpline would have been an According to electronics dealer Best Buy, any display device larger ideal way to help communicate the new eco-changes, Kurl says. than 29 inches would cost a BC resident $31.75 (second only to Nova Being an environmentally-friendly business is not just a tough task, Scotia and P.E.I). These fees can fluctuate, which means business rebut a costly one, says the CFIB as it pleads to the province for a more sources are needed to track them. The business must then remit the fees streamlined eco-approach to “facilitate, not discourage, compliance” for back to a number of different designated authorities, sometimes writing its 10,000 business members in BC alone. cheques for nominal amounts, sometimes as little as five or ten dollars.

CFIB says consultation and communication over the regulatory Of course, the EHF drives up the overall cost of BC products, which expansion weren’t good enough. While some would suggest it’s the creates an altogether different concern for CFIB; namely, when customresponsibility of business owners to be up-to-date on regulations, the ers upset with the additional cost decide to order the product through CFIB is blaming communication issues for some businesses not learning the U.S. about the lightbulb recycling program until June of 2012, just a month before the regulatory expansion kicked in.

David Nesseth is web editor for Ecolog.com Contact David at “These changes are hitting some light contractors especially hard, as dnesseth@ecolog.com (Note: For more news and articles like this, visit they had signed fixed price contracts with customers before finding out www.ecolog.com

42 www.solidwastemag.com August/September 2012

swr a-s 2012 blog pg 42.indd 42

12-08-15 10:41 AM

LIV

BLEE TRI

BLEED TRIM

LIVE

Energy creation. Recycling programs. Closed-loop solutions.

All to keep your business moving forward.

These are just a few of the innovations we’re delivering for customers and communities alike. We live in a world where things can no longer go to waste.

That’s why Waste Management is ensuring that we get the most from our existing resources. It’s good for business and the environment.

For more information visit us at wm.com.

©2011 Waste Management, Inc.

001258_Cycles Brand Ad_Mech.indd 1 swr a-s 2012 Waste Manage ad pg 43.indd 43

4/12/11 2:45:08 PM 12-08-15 10:41 AM

ng at Fueli an 80 th more s across ion locat America r No th

CESolutionsSolidWaste-Canada-7-17-12.indd 1 swr a-s 2012 Clean Energy ad pg 44.indd 44

7/17/12 9:39 AM 12-08-15 10:42 AM