Solid Waste & Recycling Magazine June-July 2012

ng rt: li po cyc Re Re e 28 ry ag tte p Ba —

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

WASTE MANAGEMENT IN CANADA

Evolution of the State of the Art — page 8

CPMP No. 40069240

An EcoLog Group Publication

CLEANTECH: Waste-to-Energy & Waste Innovation – pages 16-18&23, 24-26 swr j-j 2012 cvr pg 01.indd 1

25/06/12 11:26 AM

2012 ClimbAbrd-SolidWstRe.qxd:Layout 1

5/2/12

9:13 AM

Page 1

CLIMB ABOARD AND SEE WHAT REAL COMPACTION IS ALL ABOUT!

Advantage 600 – 127,500 lbs.

Which brand of landfill compactors is best? Only one is purpose built and designed for landfills. That’s the Al-jon Advantage Series with greater compaction and four-wheel stability. There’s no wire wrap on wheels… or bellypan to get hung up in the mud.

Al-jon is the benchmark for performance and reliability. Backed by our North American network of strategically placed service centers, we’re ready to maintain and service all your compactor needs. • Al-jon MFG., LLC • 15075 Al-jon Ave., Ottumwa, Iowa USA 52501 641-682-4506 or 800-255-6620 in North America • www.aljon.com

Advantage 500 – 87,000 lbs.

swr j-j 2012 ad pg 02.indd 2

Advantage 525 – Up to 110,000 lbs.

19/06/12 8:59 AM

Solid Waste & Recycling

CONTENTS June/July 2012 Volume 17, Number 3

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

COVER STORY

WASTE MANAGEMENT IN CANADA 8 Cover art by Charles Jaffe

After sleuthing through the data two of our intrepid contributing editors put together a fascinating overview of waste management in Canada and the evolution of the state of the art.

by Paul van der Werf & Michael Cant

FEATURES CLEANTECH: WASTE INNOVATION Waste Management Inc.’s investment in new technology.

by Wes Muir 16

SITES & SPILLS EXPO

CLEANTECH: WASTE-TO-ENERGY Plasco’s Trail Road Facility

by Guy Crittenden

Four-page preview of this special event sponsored by our sister publication HazMat Management magazine.

24

DIVERSION: BATTERIES Report on battery stewardship across Canada.

by Clarissa Morawski

28

Pages 19-22

DEPARTMENTS Editorial Up Front IC&I Waste Waste Business Events Regulation Roundup Transportation Technology Collection Ad Index Blog

Waste Innovation, page 16

4 6 27 32 33 34 35 36 37 38

NEXT EDITION Official Show Guide: Compost Council of Canada Conference and Trade Show Editorial: Dual-stream and single-stream recycling. Composting equipment, bins and bags. C&D waste.

Space closing: July 22, 2012.

Artwork required: July 25, 2012.

Waste Expo, page 33

Collection, page 36

June/July 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 3

swr j-j 2012 contents pg 03.indd 3

19/06/12 12:35 PM

EDITORIAL

by Guy Crittenden “In 2009, 670,000 tons of aluminum cans and two million tons of PET bottles were successfully disposed.”

Not Enough Soft Drink Containers Going to Landfill: Report

A

ccording to the Ontario-based Institute for Beverage Container Fynothing is thankful nowadays to go out and buy individually-botLandfilling (IBCL), not enough used containers for soft drinks tled water shipped in diesel powered trucks rather than via the Victorianand other beverages are making their way into landfill, despite era technology of water taps and pipes in her home. Plus the products years of concerted effort by industry stakeholders to thwart or underfund are loaded with sugar and hidden extras like caffeine and phosphoric alternatives. acid that taste great and keep kids alert and ample.

“The latest statistics are disappointing for plastic bottles and steel or Interestingly, years ago Ontario (home of the pesky blue box) set a aluminum cans,” says IBCL Executive Director Confusa Wonk, who noted goal of 40 per cent waste landfilling by 2008; typically, this goal came that landfilling of used beverage containers has stalled at about 50 per cent and went with little enforcement. in most North American jurisdictions, with the remainder being lost to mu“At least we negotiated to only pay 50 per cent of net recycling costs nicipal curbside recycling programs. in Ontario,” says the IBCL’s Wonk, whose real concern is product stewIn its latest report, Beverage Container Landfilling: What’s Best for ardship and European-style “extended producer responsibility” (EPR) Industry is Best for You, the IBCL notes that the most egregious prothat would require her members to pay all the end-of-life management grams offer consumers cash incentives to return their empties to stores costs of their packaging. Such schemes, the IBCL report notes, often or recycling depots. have the perverse effect of discouraging compan“These so-called ‘bottle bill’ jurisdictions just ies’ design-for-disposal (DfD) efforts and forcing don’t get it,” says Wonk, noting that 80 per cent or them to internalize their waste packaging costs more of containers in areas with deposit-refund sysrather than externalize them onto consumers and tems may be diverted from disposal — alarming the environment where they belong. rates virtually unknown in most of North America, Thankfully, by setting up industry funding orwhere the absence of financial incentives ensures ganizations with arcane rules, and by selecting that at least half (and often more than three quarwhich service providers collect and processes their ters) of containers make it to landfill. materials, IBCL member companies have kept dis“If we’re not vigilant the whole continent is goruption of container landfilling to a minimum while ing to look like the freakin’ Beer Store,” Wonk ex- 1925 publicity photograph showing an Orange they try to get new governments elected. claimed, referencing the Ontario system that diverts Crush delivery truck. Ironically the truck had no But there are storm clouds on the horizon. In a ability to “crush” the bottles for landfilling. almost all that province’s beer, wine and spirit con“back to the future” twist, the most regressive tainers. legislation is currently being implemented in Brit“Although we prefer proven direct-to-landfill technology,” adds ish Columbia which (predictably) first introduced forced container deWonk, “we take consolation knowing that in areas where we’ve supposits back in 1970. BC plans to go compel industry “stewards” to pay ported curbside recycling, at least half the containers will likely still get the full cost of paper and packaging currently managed in the blue box. to landfill for years.”

“Just when it was getting to where ordinary families could buy alWaste and recycling consultant Clara Fynothing, Ph.D., concurs. most an entire skid of two-litre pop bottle for only a few bucks at gas “Our analysis shows deposit-refund systems mire employees in the stations, the government saddles us with these perverse costs,” comdirty ‘sunset’ waste diversion business,” Fynothing says. “We applaud plains Wonk. industry’s hiring the brightest minds out of university to thwart these Lobbyists are reportedly pressuring BC’s government to consider Dickensian systems where people sort and recycle cans and bottles all alternatives, like the smart new waste-to-energy incinerators planned for day, and help them transition to work in exciting jobs in today’s highthe Vancouver area. But time is running out. speed canning and bottling plants, and aluminum bauxite mining and According to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in smelting operations.”

2009 approximately 670,000 tons of aluminum cans and two million Fynothing points to yesteryear’s inefficient “closed loop” system in tons of PET bottles were successfully disposed. Such impressive numwhich bottles (including those for milk) were collected under deposit bers from only a few years ago will be increasingly difficult to achieve and refilled numerous times — an inefficient nightmare for today’s soft again if the EPR whack jobs get their way. drink and alcohol beverage industry that efficiently delivers its packaged If the IBCL can turn back this interference with container landfilling, goods directly to the landfill with only a quick pit stop in consumer the sky could be (literally) the limit. Here’s raising a glass (or plastic kitchens or parking lots. bottle) to that!

“Picture your poor old grandmother,” Fynothing notes, “lugging her exploding glass empties back to the store, then having to buy drinks in Guy Crittenden is editor of this magazine. Contact Guy at glass bottles previously reused dozens of times. Yuck!” gcrittenden@solidwastemag.com 4 www.solidwastemag.com June/July 2012

swr j-j 2012 editorial pg 04.indd 4

19/06/12 9:08 AM

swr j-j 2012 ad pg 05.indd 5

19/06/12 9:08 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 Account Manager Jamie Ross 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, 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

Organics collection study B

ag to Earth, a manufacturer of kraft-paper kitchen catcher bags, Green Bin and leaf-andyards waste bags, recently commissioned consultants from Kelleher Environmental to examine the impacts of different bag choices (paper, plastic or certified compostable plastic) on source-separated organics (SSO) program performance. Operating data were collected from SSO programs across Canada. The information collected included: • Year the SSO program was implemented; • Households served; • Tonnes of SSO collected annually for each year since the program was initiated; • Type of bags permitted in SSO bins (paper only, compostable plastic; biodegradable plastic or plastic); • Frequency of garbage collection (weekly or bi-weekly) • Other curbside or other policies which would impact on participation (bag limits, PAYT programs, etc); • Location where SSO was processed, and • Residue rates at the processing operation.

The conclusion of the analysis was that many factors impact on the performance of an SSO program. The choice of a particular type of bag (paper, plastic, certified compostable plastic or biodegradable plastic) did not significantly impact on participation or capture in the program — the other factors had more of an influence over participation and capture.

For a copy of the full report, contact Maria Kelleher at maria@kelleher.com

In Memoriam

I

t is with great sadness that we report the untimely passing of Raw Materials director Richard (Rick) Paul Unyi. Rick — a loving husband, father, son and brother — died in automobile accident on June 2, 2012.

Beloved husband and best friend of Melissa (nee Hills). Proud father of Tanner and Walker. Cherished son of Judy and Stan Unyi. Loving brother of Shari (Ken) Unyi and Kirk (Sara-Leigh) Unyi.

Adored uncle of Brittany, Abbey, Mackenzie, Lauren and Evan. Sadly missed by his mother in law Marilyn Malton, his father in law Doug (Chris) Hills, brother in law Graham (Annarita) Hills and his many uncles, aunts, cousins and friends.

Born and raised in Stevensville, Rick was a coach and a board member with the Greater Fort Erie Minor Hockey Novice A.E. Team. He worked as the Director of Raw Materials Inc. and will be sadly missed by founder Wayne Elliott and the entire staff.

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 June/July 2012

swr j-j 2012 upfront pg 06-07.indd 6

20/06/12 11:27 AM

UPFRONT

REGION HONOURS NYLE LUDOLPH

O

n April 19, 2012 in Waterloo Region, family, friends, and dignitaries gathered to honour Nyle Ludolph, who was instrumental in creating the first blue box recycling program. The Region of Waterloo held a special ceremony to name the materials recycling centre, the Nyle Ludolph Materials Recycling Centre and unveiled a memorial photo. Ludolph, who passed away last year at the age of 84, was known locally as the “Father of the Blue Box.” In 1981, a recycling program was piloted to 1,100 households in Kitchener, and 250 homes were given a test container to hold recyclables in the home and set out at the curb: a little blue box. In the first month alone, 16,379 kilograms (36,000 pounds) was collected, triple the amount expected.

MPP Elizabeth Witmer (far left) was on hand for the unveiling of Lyle Nudolph’s portrait in at the Waterloo recycling plant, and provided the region with a commemorative certificate.

Contact Kathleen Barsoum, Waste Management Coordinator at kbarsoum@regionofwaterloo.ca

Covanta joins OWMA

David McRobert author and latest SWR blogger

S

olid Waste & Recycling magazine welcomes well-known environmental lawyer, university lecturer and waste policy analyst David McRobert to the magazine’s growing roster of online columnists (bloggers) at www.solidwastemag.com Watch for regular updates in the blog area of the magazine home page, as well as occasional contributions to the print magazine.

McRobert, who has held prominent policy development positions in previous Ontario provincial governments and with the office of the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario, has also written numerous books on matters related to environment and waste.

His most recent tome is entitled My Municipal Recycling Program Made Me Fat and Sick: How well-intentioned McRobert’s latest book environmentalists teamed up with the soft drink industry to promote obesity and injure workers (CreateSpace/An Amazon.com company, May 2012). The book examines how the soft drink industry gamed the environmental policy process in the 1980s to re-brand its throwaway packaging “recyclable” and externalize its packaging waste costs onto taxpayers and the environment, with additional impacts on people’s health, especially in aboriginal communities.

Learn more by reading McRobert’s blog at www.solidwastemag.com

Joey Neuhoff

C

ovanta Energy Corporation (Covanta) is pleased to announce the appointment of Joey Neuhoff to the Ontario Waste Management Association’s (OWMA) board of directors. Neuhoff, Covanta’s Vice-President of Business Development, was appointed to a two-year term on the board at the OWMA’s annual general meeting in Toronto. The OWMA represents over 300 private sector companies, municipalities and individuals involved in the waste services sector in Ontario.

Covanta, the world’s largest waste-to-energy (WTE) operator, has been selected to design, build and operate the Durham York Energy Centre. The facility, slated to open in Clarington in the latter half of 2014, will provide an efficient way of disposing 140,000 tonnes of post recycled waste annually while producing power.

Visit durhamyork.covantaenergy.com June/July 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 7

swr j-j 2012 upfront pg 06-07.indd 7

19/06/12 9:09 AM

COVER STORY

Growing Waste, Stalled Diversion The state of waste in Canada

The Regional Municipalities of Durham and York are developing a waste-to-energy facility in the Municipality of Clarington, the first in Ontario in over 20 years. Covanta Energy Corporation has been retained to design, build and operate the facility, which is known as the Durham-York Energy Centre. This facility will be an integral component of the Regions of Durham and York’s waste management system. The facility has a maximum capacity of 140,000 tonnes per year of post-diversion municipal solid waste. Using mass burn technology, the municipal solid waste is thermally treated, producing high-pressure steam to generate electricity, which is then fed to the grid, sufficient to power an estimated 10,000 homes. The Durham York Energy Centre is expected to be operational in 2014.

8 www.solidwastemag.com June/July 2012

swr j-j 2012 cvr sty pg 08-15.indd 8

19/06/12 9:10 AM

by Paul van der Werf & Michael Cant “In 1940 Canada’s estimated waste generation rate was about 300 kg/capita. Now it’s about 1,000 kg/capita.”

I

t’s difficult to pinpoint the exact year that our society shifted from mere subsistence to affluence. Maybe there has never been a precise time — just an ebb and flow, like waves on a beach. Regardless, a large shift in how we consume occurred as our material wealth rose over the past century, and a corresponding change in our waste generation, disposal, and diversion, which we can explore using data from Statistics Canada and other sources.

In 1940 Canada’s estimated waste generation rate was about 300 kg/capita. Now it’s about 1,000 kg/capita. Even when discounting for June/July 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 9

swr j-j 2012 cvr sty pg 08-15.indd 9

19/06/12 9:10 AM

COVER STORY

evolving and improved methods for quantifying waste generation, a more than threefold increase in just 70 years is staggering.

Waste Generation vs GNP 1940-2010

Per Capita Waste Generation 1940-2010 Our prosperity has had consequences: abundance has encouraged greater and greater consumption, along with a willingness to throw things away.

Gross National Product (GNP) is one way to measure a country’s economic output (although GDP is the current favoured method). Since 1940, both the country’s GNP and waste generation has grown significantly.

It’s clear that there’s a very strong relationship between GNP and per capita waste generation (with the correlation coefficient of R=0.96). It appears that the rate of waste generation is starting to slow, but this is likely in part due to the economic slow down. The trend is similar for GDP. (See charts.)

Consumerism and results The last 40 years have seen the greatest increase in waste generation; even with the introduction of a remarkable number of ways to recycle or otherwise divert waste, waste generation and disposal continues to outpace waste diversion.

In early 1990s when the authors started in the waste management

we consume in our daily lives. Purchasing has clambered to the top of Maslow’s triangle; we’ve been taught to extract personal validation from our purchases no matter how mundane.

So it’s not surprising that waste diversion in Canada has vacillated between 18 and 24 per cent since 1996. The high waste generation rates and grim waste diversion rate belies what we see around us. Most of us have access to a plethora of waste diversion programs in our daily lives, so why are we stalled?

One clue is that municipal diversion schemes only target 35 per cent of the overall waste stream, if we factor in industrial, commercial and institutional (IC&I) waste.

Looking across the country there’s considerable disparity when it comes to waste diversion. For instance, Nova Scotia has shown a steady upward trend since 1998. In 1999 that province banned organics from landfill and this has clearly had an impact. Ontario’s waste diversion rate vacillates around 20 per cent. Provinces whose IC&I sector generates a greater proportion of overall waste, such as Alberta and Saskatchewan, have lower waste diversion rates of 10-15 per cent.

There are stark differences between the residential and IC&I sectors.

Waste disposal in the residential sector has increased by about 10 per cent; IC&I waste has increased by 15 per cent since 1998.

More telling is that diversion has increased by 70 per cent in the residential sector while it’s actually decreased by about 15 per cent in the IC&I sector. Waste diversion on a per capita basis is now greater from the residential sector, which has seen strong growth, than the IC&I sector whose efforts have dwindled.

Per Capita Waste Generation 1940-2010

industry, the term “consumer society” was used, along with calls that we should become a “conserver” society. Today we generate more and divert about the same. In some ways our up-sell and planned obsolence nation has turned into a “hyper consumer” society. While it may be pointless to yearn for simpler times, understanding our past may help cast a better future.

On the surface, increased waste generation is a function of what 10 www.solidwastemag.com June/July 2012

swr j-j 2012 cvr sty pg 08-15.indd 10

20/06/12 8:29 AM

The Waste-to-Biofuel Production Facility in Edmonton, Alberta is a collaborative effort between the City of Edmonton, the Government of Alberta (via Alberta Innovates — Energy and Environment Solutions), and Enerkem Inc. This facility will convert an estimated 100,000 tonnes of non-recyclable or compostable municipal solid VC2336 wastes into biochemicals advanced biofuels Walinga 6/11/07 and 2:36 PM Page 1 using Enerkem’s proprietary technology. The facility will initially produce 38 million litres of ethanol per year. This facility will enable Edmonton to significantly increase its residential waste diversion rate. Operation at the facility is expected to start in 2013.

N O W

O N L I N E !

Recycler

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

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

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

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

June/July 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 11

swr j-j 2012 cvr sty pg 08-15.indd 11

19/06/12 9:10 AM

COVER STORY

Residential vs IC&I Diversion 1998-2008

“Front” vs “back” of the house It’s difficult to rationalize the poor IC&I diversion rate given what we see at our places of work, restaurants, our children’s schools, and (occasionally) hospitals. Arguably many organizations across the country have some sort of green program; there must be a lot that we don’t see.

We see the “front of the house” but not the “back of the house.”

Residential waste diversion programs have become much more successful because they’re publically funded. Municipalities have been willing to look at factors beyond costs, such as the environment, in making decisions. It’s doubtful there would be any recycling or green bin programs without this thinking.

The IC&I sector has little incentive to divert wastes. While there has been pressure from clients to be “greener,” for many facilities this still represents just “front of the house” waste diversion’ the invisible “back of the house” waste iceberg still goes to landfill.

It comes down to the bottom line: waste diversion is more expensive than waste disposal, so disposal wins. This is perfectly understandable and is how businesses work. To wish otherwise is not very realistic.

One key “back of the house” waste stream is construction and demolition wastes. While notable exceptions exist, much of this waste finds

12 www.solidwastemag.com June/July 2012

swr j-j 2012 cvr sty pg 08-15.indd 12

20/06/12 8:30 AM

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

November 14 - 15, 2012 International Centre, Toronto, ON Canada its way into landfill. This is likely true in the resource extraction industry. For instance, in resource rich provinces such as Alberta, where the IC&I generates 76 per cent of all wastes, the non-residential waste generation rate of 855 kg/capita is double that of Nova Scotia’s total per capita waste generation.

It appears we’re focussing 90 per cent of our diversion effort trying to divert 35 per cent of the waste stream. A closer look reveals that most of this focus is on single family homes, which probably represent something like 25 per cent of total wastes generated.

So, to make real progress in waste diversion we need to focus on IC&I (including C&D) wastes, and properly incentivize organizations to make changes. Somehow we must shift the marketplace and tip the economic drivers in this direction.

“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

Reach Your Target Market!

85% of Canadian Waste & Recycling Expo attendees plan to

purchase products from exhibiting companies up to $250,000.*

Solutions

*2011 Canadian Waste & Recycling Expo Attendee Survey

A different approach is needed. Using the word “resource” and catchy aphorisms like “Zero Waste” have had some resonance but traction has been slippery.

Ultimately we need to make some new decisions. At the residential level we may be prepared to pay more for waste diversion than straight disposal; we pay because it’s the right thing to do. What leap is required to get company CEOs and institutional managers to think the same way? (That is, to practice what they already do at home.)

Unfortunately, it’s likely that more government regulation and enforcement is required. Perhaps just the threat of changes could get things moving; industry sometimes reacts to minimize government intervention.

A number of solutions could be effective in reducing and diverting IC&I waste: 1. Pick a Realistic Waste Diversion Goal It’s clear that nation-wide and even provincial waste diversion goals of 50 per cent are not realistic, at least not immediately. Zero waste, while fine as an aspiration, is completely off the map in the foreseeable future. A better goal, with some realistic chance of attainment, might be to start at 30 per cent and then raise the bar in five per cent increments. (And allow no fudging of numbers.)

2. Landfill Bans Nova Scotia led the way by banning organic waste from landfill back in 1999. This resulted in the highest level of waste diversion in the country. Quebec is poised to enact landfill bans of its own, starting with such simple-to-recycle items such as cardboard and eventually organics. For maximum impact, landfill bans should target organics, paper fibre, and (especially) construction and demolition (C&D) wastes.

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

3. Landfill Taxes Economic drivers currently lead the IC&I to choose the least expensive form of waste management (landfill). Some jurisdictions (e.g.,

12/11SWR

June/July 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 13 CWRE12 SWR Ad 3.375 x 11.indd 1

swr j-j 2012 cvr sty pg 08-15.indd 13

12/5/2011 3:56:19 PM

19/06/12 9:10 AM

Waste-to-Biofuel Production Facility in Edmonton, Alberta

Europe) have effectively used landfill taxes to alter the economic landscape and make diversion more attractive. The taxes raised can be used to fund waste diversion programs. This approach will result in increased waste management costs, but help get the job done.

4. Recognize the Energy Value in Waste In a perfect world everything would be diverted at source but we all know how well that is working. Waste embodies energy. Diverting wastes reduces energy usage associated with using virgin materials. What’s left over and not

diverted contains energy. This energy can be captured using anaerobic digestion (AD) and/ or waste-to-energy (WTE) technologies. AD and WTE could divert at a greater proportion of IC&I waste (as well as multi-residential waste). Incineration with energy recovery

Waste Diversion for Selected Provinces 1998-2008

14 www.solidwastemag.com June/July 2012

swr j-j 2012 cvr sty pg 08-15.indd 14

19/06/12 9:10 AM

Guelph’s new state of the art Organic Waste Processing Facility (OWPF) opened in September of 2011. The OWPF uses aerobic, invessel composting technology to process Guelph’s wet waste stream (organic waste) into clean, nutrient-rich compost. The OWPF is permitted to process a maximum of 60,000 tonnes of organic feedstock per year. Processing Guelph’s organic waste at the OWPF allows the city to divert waste from disposal and is critical in helping the Guelph achieve the diversion targets set out in its 2008 solid waste management master plan. The OWPF is estimated to increase Guelph’s diversion rate by approximately 10 per cent.

should be considered within the context of the 4Rs (with the fourth R being recovery) and counted as diversion as it is in other jurisidictions whose waste diversion we admire.

5. Develop IC&I Waste Diversion Strategies Require the IC&I sector to recycle and divert more waste. Enforce existing regulations and introduce new ones. This should include significant consideration of C&D wastes. These

are just a few ideas that could put Canada on the path to powerfully improve its waste diversion results across the country and across both the residential and IC&I sector.

Some decisions need to be made if we want to alter the current mix of waste disposal versus waste diversion. Otherwise we will continue to chase what are almost impossible to attain waste diversion goals.

If bold steps aren’t taken we’ll be looking

at the same if not worse results a decade from now. That would be a shame given the efforts of many and the participation of some.

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

June/July 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 15

swr j-j 2012 cvr sty pg 08-15.indd 15

19/06/12 9:10 AM

CLEANTECH: WASTE INNOVATION

by Wes Muir “The OGG has a portfolio of nearly 40 acquisitions, joint ventures and investment projects at various stages of development.”

Driving Change Waste Management Inc’s Organic Growth Group

W

aste Management Inc. has quietly evolved in recent years from being a traditional waste recycling and disposal company into an increasingly high-tech firm. An industry leader, the company has been making strategic investments in both Canada and the United States that can help broaden its business. The company’s Organic Growth Group (OGG), its venture investing arm, has been expanding its portfolio of investments in companies working on leading-edge technologies for creating renewable energy, expanding recycling, or managing waste.

Since its inception in 2005, the OGG has grown dramatically, advancing projects it has in development as well as embarking on exciting and ambitious new ventures. Today, the OGG has a portfolio of nearly 40 acquisitions, joint ventures and investment projects at various stages of development. To support Waste Management’s (WM) growth strategy of extracting the highest value from the materials it manages, OGG is focused on four platforms for growth: •R enewable Energy: Utilizing the entire waste stream or converting landfill gases to valuable energy sources; •C onversion Technologies: Converting segments of the waste stream into valuable energy sources; •R ecycling Technology: Repurposing segments of the waste stream; •C onsumer Facing & Sustainability Models: Promotion of the WM brand, green messaging and sustainability through various retail and/or consumer focused business models.

Some notable investments that Waste Management has announced include:

Enerkem’s gasification facility in Westbury, Quebec.

Genomatica: A joint development agreement research and advance their proprietary technology and manufacturing processes to enable production of intermediate and basic chemicals from syngas derived from municipal solid waste.

16 www.solidwastemag.com June/July 2012

swr j-j 2012 CT Waste Innov pg 16-18,23.indd 16

19/06/12 9:11 AM

InEnTec’s plasma gasification facility at Waste Management’s Columbia Ridge Landfill in Arlington, Oregon. Waste materials are fed into a first phase gasification chamber that operates at approximately 1,500 degrees Fahrenheit. After the first phase, the waste materials flow into a second closed chamber where they’re superheated to temperatures between 10,000 and 20,000 degrees Fahrenheit using electricity-conducting plasma gas. The intense heat rearranges the molecular structure of the waste, transforming organic (carbon-based) materials into an ultra-clean, synthesis gas (syngas) that may then be converted into transportation fuels such as ethanol and diesel, or industrial products like hydrogen and methanol. In a secondary stage of the PEM process, inorganic (non-carbon-based) materials are transformed into environmentally inert products.

Agilyx: WM has made an investment in this alternative energy company that converts low-value, difficult-to-recycle industrial and consumer plastics as well as contaminated and recycling residual plastics into a high-value synthetic crude oil, which can be converted into ultra-lowsulfur diesel and other transportation fuels and petroleum products.

Enerkem: WM has invested in this Canadian company, which, through proprietary thermal-chemical technology, helps convert waste materials into advanced biofuels such as ethanol , as well as renewable chemicals.

Enerkem’s technology is able to process diverse carbon-based feedstocks, including sorted municipal solid waste, construction and demolition wood, and agricultural and forest residues.

Harvest Power: WM has invested in Harvest Power, a company that generates high quality compost with proprietary technology that controls odours and potential emissions. WM is providing the raw materials for Harvest Power’s composting, biogas and syngas operations and

helping the company expand its operations. It’s also working with them to develop high-solids aerobic and anaerobic digestion and composting technologies, which accelerate the decomposition or organic materials to produce renewable energy.

High Mountain Fuels: WM formed a joint venture company with Linde North America to create a facility at WM’s Altamont landfill near Livermore, California, to convert landfill gas (LFG) into liquefied natural gas (LNG) to power its collection fleet. This plant — the world’s largest LFG to LNG facility — has a design capacity to produce up to 13,000 gallons per day. Using bio-methane LNG results in 90 percent fewer greenhouse gas emissions compared to natural gas from fossil fuels. The US EPA’s Landfill Methane Outreach Program selected the facility as its 2009 Project of the Year.

InEnTec: WM invested InEnTec, to develop projects to process nonhazardous waste such as medical waste and other segregated industrial June/July 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 17

swr j-j 2012 CT Waste Innov pg 16-18,23.indd 17

19/06/12 9:11 AM

CLEANTECH: WASTE INNOVATION

In late 2009 Waste Management commissioned the largest landfill gas (LFG) to liquefied natural gas (LNG) plant in the world at the Altamont Landfill and Resource Recovery Facility near Livermore, California. The facility produces enough LNG to power 300 of WM’s nearly 500 LNG vehicles in the state. The 18 million litres of Altamont biofuel produced each year reduces greenhouse gas emissions by 27,000 tonnes annually; the fuel has a carbon density 85 per cent lower than gasoline or diesel, according to the California Air Resources Board.

In order to convert waste plastics into crude oil for fuels and chemicals, Waste Management invested in Agilyx with other partners.

... continues on page 23

18 www.solidwastemag.com June/July 2012

swr j-j 2012 CT Waste Innov pg 16-18,23.indd 18

19/06/12 9:11 AM

CLEANTECH: WASTE INNOVATION

... continued from page 18

Fermentation area at Terrabon pilot facility in Bryan, Texas.

and commercial waste streams. Using InEnTec’s plasma enhanced melter/gasification technology, waste is converted into renewable energy and environmentally beneficially fuels and industrial products. The first project has been built at WM’s Columbia Ridge landfill in Arlington, Oregon.

Fulcrum: Waste Management has made an equity investment in Fulcrum BioEnergy that uses a gasification technology to produce ethanol. The investment also includes a loan agreement and a master project development agreement to jointly develop Fulcrum projects in various locations throughout the United

States using municipal solid waste supplied by subsidiaries of WM under long-term feedstock agreements.

Terrabon: WM has invested in Terrabon, which, through its MixAlco™ technology (an acid fermentation process) converts biomass into organic salts. The organic salts can be converted into a high-octane gasoline that can be blended directly into s refiner’s fuel pool, avoiding many of the blending and logistics challenges presented by ethanol.

“The intent is to develop a suite of options to help WM’s customers more effectively and efficiently

WM is investing in gasification technologies such as Agnion Energy.

manage their waste streams.” These investments underpin WM’s commitment to innovative technologies that extract the value in waste and convert it into clean renewable energy, chemicals and other beneficial reuses.

Wes Muir is Director of Communications for Waste Management Inc. in Brampton, Ontario. Contact Wes at wmuir@wm.com

Waste Diversion Ontario Director of Oversight and Operations Waste Diversion Ontario (WDO) is a non-crown corporation created by the Waste Diversion Act, 2002 and is responsible for developing, and monitoring the effectiveness and efficiency of waste diversion programs for designated materials.

WDO is replacing its Director of Operations due to the retirement of the incumbent. An experienced professional with at least 10 years in a management position, you will report to the CEO and will be responsible for WDOs primary technical functions which include leading a team responsible for oversight of waste diversion programs for blue box materials, municipal hazardous or special wastes, waste electronic and electrical equipment and used tires.

In addition to the oversight role, you will provide ongoing support to the CEO on the operation of WDO including financial management.

An excellent communicator with the ability to influence outcomes and work collaboratively with all stakeholders, your business or program management experience will enable your success in the role. A degree in business, engineering or related fields is an asset as is knowledge of waste diversion programs currently operating in Ontario.

Salary is commensurate with experience and includes a competitive benefit package. For further information, and to submit your resume, please contact Geoff Love of HRLogic at (647)-248-2500 or at loveenvironment @routcom.com

June/July 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 23

swr j-j 2012 CT Waste Innov pg 16-18,23.indd 23

19/06/12 9:11 AM

CLEANTECH: WASTE-TO-ENERGY

Plasco’s Trail Road facility in Ottawa, Ontario.

Plasco Trail Road commercial-scale demonstration facility

A

ccording to the Ottawa-Ontario-based Plasco Energy Group, Plasco Trail Road is the only operating commercial-scale conversion facility in the world that converts post-recycled municipal solid waste into a consistent syngas than runs GE Jenbacher engines to generate electricity.

Plasco entered into a partnership with the City of Ottawa in April 2006 for the construction of the commercial-scale demonstration facility.

Plasco Trail Road was constructed to: demonstrate the company’s proprietary technology at a commercial scale to customers and investors; produce environmental performance data that is significantly lower

than existing emission standards in leading jurisdictions; and, to validate Plasco’s operating costs and net energy production efficiency.

Plasco says the plant has successfully demonstrated electricity production using its syngas-to-fuel GE Jenbacher engines. Plasco says its superior environmental performance has been validated by the Ontario Ministry of Environment and that the economic viability of Plasco waste conversion facilities has been demonstrated based on revenues from net electricity produced and fees for accepting waste for processing.

Plasco Energy Group worked collaboratively with local and provincial levels of the Canadian government to develop rules for permitting

24 www.solidwastemag.com June/July 2012

swr j-j 2012 CT Waste2Energy pg 24-26.indd 24

19/06/12 9:12 AM

CLEANTECH: WASTE-TO-ENERGY

the innovative technology. This process also involved an extensive public outreach program and government agency consultation. Through this approach, Plasco Trail Road was granted temporary demonstration permits that specified more stringent air emission regulations than existing standards.

After completion of the demonstration period and an Environmental Assessment Screening Process mandated by the province, Plasco was issued permanent operation permits for the Trail Road Facility on October 24, 2011. In December 2011, Ottawa’s City Council approved a 20-year contract with Plasco for a commercial waste conversion facility. This facility will have capacity to convert 150,000 tonnes per year of Ottawa’s postrecycled waste into green power and other valuable products. Throughput is expected to be 128,000 tonnes per year.

The facility received permanent operation permits in October, 2011.

June/July 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 25

swr j-j 2012 CT Waste2Energy pg 24-26.indd 25

19/06/12 9:12 AM

CLEANTECH: WASTE-TO-ENERGY

Ottawa Mayor, Jim Watson, was quoted on December 15, 2011 saying, “Back in 2005 Plasco set out to prove its potential with a demonstration plant... they also set out to prove to the Ministry of the Environment that very low emission levels could be achieved.

Finally, they set out to prove that they could get investors to build a full commercial plant without a capital contribution from the city.

Today, Plasco has grown from eight people to more than 150 employees all here in Ottawa.

This company has attracted more than $250 million in new investment in Ottawa since the city first sat down to consider a joint venture opportunity.”

Written by Guy Crittenden, editor of this magazine. Contact Guy at gcrittenden@solidwastemag.com

Control room of Plasco’s Trail Road facility.

Canada’s most advanced indoor Construction & Demolition Recycling Facility 8 min from QEW in Hamilton (off Red Hill Valley Parkway) l Up to 80% recycled l LEED reporting l Municipal opportunities l We source separate wood, cardboard, plastic, metal, aggregate l Tipping is inside our 60,000 sq. ft. plant l We can handle any size truck on our clean floors (no flat tires) l Competitive pricing l Construction bins l Walking floor trailers l We do demolitions l

CaLL For a Tour!!

900 Nebo Road, Hamilton, Ontario We want your Construction Waste and Demolition Waste!!!

Toll Free 1-855-293-7499 Local 905-679-7499

Like us on face book

www.countrywiderecycling.ca 26 www.solidwastemag.com June/July 2012

swr j-j 2012 CT Waste2Energy pg 24-26.indd 26

19/06/12 9:12 AM

I C & I WA S T E

Cut a Rug

by Diane Blackburn “McCaig dreams of ‘recycling plazas’ where different material processors work adjacently.”

A look at CarpetCycle Canada

(left to right): Kelly McCaig, Mathilde Beluze, Darrell Goodman, Alif Rabbil, Horatio Glaves, Trevor Griffith, Mason Chisholm, Luis Correa and Bill Evans.

Not pictured: Ryder MacDonald, Jason Edmunds.

W

hat do competitive windsurfing and old carpets have in common? They’re both passions for Kelly McCaig, V.P. and General Manager of CarpetCycle Canada. CarpetCycle Canada is an energized start up carpet recycler that processes locally in Toronto.

McCaig and his team occupy a section of the former stockyards industrial space at 500 Keele Street in the city’s “Junction” district. It may be just basic concrete walls and floors, but the “can do” enthusiasm infuses this small team: the staff demonstrate enormous pride in doing things right, which McCaig learned from his grandfather back in rural Manitoba.

McCaig discovered his path of environmentalism in young adulthood. As a Canadian windsurfing champion (he won Gold in the 1993 Canada Games) he spent his early years on and around the waters of Lake Winnipeg and came to appreciate the beauty and power of Canada’s most abundant natural resource. How waste and pollution can destroy that most resource became apparent when, at the Barcelona Olympics in 1992, Kelly observed debris chunks floating on the city’s scenic waterfront — pollution that could only get worse if left unchecked. So, returning to Canada, he set his path to make the environment part of his life and career path.

It’d be tough to find a more upbeat and committed environmentalist than Kelly McCaig. He has the passion and the vision of what environmental sustainability could be. He surveys his surroundings and dreams of “recycling plazas” where different material processors work adjacently, enabling a client to truck in a load of mixed materials and have it all serviced in one industrial space. He looks at how an hourly-rate “picking and processing” job can develop into something more meaningful for his employees, as green jobs become something everyone can build a life upon.

After seven years in the electronics recycling industry, McCaig struck out on his own to tackle a material that takes up three to four per cent of the municipal waste stream. He took an equity stake in a private company, CarpetCycle L.L.C. (New Jersey), and brought it home to Canada.

“Efficiency of process is how you make this business work,” McCaig says. “The three main challenges carpet recycling face aren’t much different than in other budding recycling streams: behavior change on the

part of consumers, end-users and government; sustainable, local endmarkets; “greenwashing” and lack of awareness regarding environmentally sound options.

CarpetCycle Canada strives for better solutions to help its customers’ triple-bottom line. Since the bulk of installed carpeting is in urban centres, establishing local processing facilities not only helps create social awareness and jobs, but also decreases costs and the overall carbon footprint.

Carpet recycling involves several steps to ensure maximum environmental performance. Upon arrival, carpets are sorted by polymer type (nylon, polypropylene, polyethylene terephthalate, wool, etc.). The carpets are then processed in “batch” loads and sheared to separate the fibre from the backing. This fibre must be extruded and pelletized before being re-manufactured into new carpet fibres or other products, thereby replacing the use of virgin resins. The backing is further processed to separate the remaining fibre from the rigid scrim. The backing is made of polypropylene, glues and calcium carbonate. The majority of these materials can be recycled into new products such as under-the-hood auto parts, plastic components and other industrial items. The foam padding is also recycled into new foam padding and products (shredded and reprocessed). CarpetCycle Canada is proud to say they have sent zero residue to landfill since opening the Canadian operations in the summer of 2011.

McCaig acknowledges the support for carpet recycling demonstrated by the following companies that actively promote recycling efforts in Canada: Belletile (100 per cent Canadian), Milliken Carpet, Kraus Carpet & Flooring and Mohawk Flooring.

Team CarpetCycle comprises: Operations Manager, Luis Correa, Darrell Goodman, Ryder MacDonald, Jason Edmunds, Mason Chisholm, Trevor Griffith, Alif Rabbil, Horatio Glaves, Bill Evans and Mathilde Beluze — future recycling champions, one and all.

Diane Blackburn is Events Manager for the Recycling Council of Ontario (RCO) in Toronto, Ontario. CarpetCycle Canada is an RCO member and applicant in the RCO’s 2012 Ontario Waste Minimization Awards. Contact Diane at events@rco.on.ca June/July 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 27

swr j-j 2012 ic&i waste pg 27.indd 27

19/06/12 9:13 AM

DIVERSION

by Clarissa Morawski “In one year the Orange Drop program doubled its collection sites and collects more per site than other programs.”

Zap! Benchmarking battery recycling in Canada

A

s extended producer responsibility (EPR) programs for various byproducts proliferate across Canada, government, industry and the public should be asking stewards: How well are you doing, and can you do better?

Unfortunately, it often seems that the data, supporting methodologies and presentation of that data make the answers opaque and ambiguous.

In a game of “fun with numbers,” masters of the data can manipulate numerators and denominators, including this and excluding that, while complying with broad definitions in the supporting laws.

This spring, CM Consulting released the first report of its kind to measure battery collection and recycling in Canada. The work involved independently assessing the transparency and certainty of data in order to present objective findings on the basis of compatible results. It serves to benchmark performance of battery collection and recycling programs.

Mandated collection growing fast By the end of this fall, more than two thirds of Canadians (those in BC, MB, ON, QB) will have mandatory collection and recycling programs

for primary portable batteries in their province. Three of these provinces (BC, MB, QB) also mandate the recycling of rechargeable batteries.

Stewards are required to provide estimates of sales and collection as part of their annual reporting requirements. Collectively, the reports are inconsistent with each other; they derive sales using different methodologies, and may lack third-party oversight and detail. Managing Canada’s Waste Batteries, 2012 provides transparent performance measurements by identifying not only how many batteries are collected but also what happens to them (how they’re recycled, and what they’re made into).

Canada-specific parameters help define the methods needed to review performance. For example, should the weight of waste batteries used as waste-to-energy (WTE) be considered as recycling? Similarly, should slag collected from the bottom of a thermal treatment facility and used as fill in construction projects be considered recycling? Given these complexities, five separate performance rates are defined (see Definitions table).

The recycling efficiency rate (RER) is the amount of material recycled into a raw material for future application by manufacturers com-

28 www.solidwastemag.com June/July 2012

swr j-j 2012 diversion pg 28-31.indd 28

19/06/12 9:13 AM

DIVERSION

pared to the amount of material that was processed (a measure of inputoutput efficiency). Not all stakeholders define the RER the same way.

Specifically, some choose to accept the weight of material burned for energy as recycling; others the weight of slag from thermal treatment for construction projects (and some include both).

The consultant decided to exclude slag use as recycling, but include it as diversion from landfill. This decision is guided by the methodology used by the European Commission for its own determination which incorporated the social, economic and ecological impacts to compare

options. It can be applied to the Canadian context, where existing recycling capacity enables Canada to exceed the mandated RER in Europe, as well as the targets in Canadian provinces without the inclusion of the weight of the slag or WTE in the recycling rate.

Recycling efficiency should be based on high metal recovery rates and elements to be used as substitutes for virgin materials, thereby achieving the maximum environmental benefit. Avoiding virgin metals extraction is the most significant factor in the LCA. If a process has a high RER, it will likely also have a favourable environmental profile.

June/July 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 29

swr j-j 2012 diversion pg 28-31.indd 29

19/06/12 9:14 AM

DIVERSION

except lithium primary batteries, which are sent to Toxco in Trail, BC, where they are recycled using a cryogenic (freezing) process. This program also voluntarily collects rechargeable batteries, which are recycled

by RMC, and Ni-Cd batteries, which are sent to Toxco in Ohio for recycling.

Batteries collected in British Columbia are sent to Toxco in Trail, BC where they’re sorted and sent to different processors depending on battery chemistry. Lithium primary and secondary batteries stay with Toxco for processing. The largest portion of BC and MB batteries are sent to Inmetco in Pennsylvania, where they’re put through a pyrometallurgical (thermal) process.

Comparing programs Battery recycling in Canada Canada is fortunate in having recycling capacity for all the battery types available in North America. The recycling industry is making investments to continue to improve and expand its capacity to recycle batteries, and boost battery diversion and recovery.

Most of the primary batteries collected in Ontario are sent to Raw Materials Company (RMC) in Port Colborne, Ontario. RMC uses a hydrometallurgical (aqueous) process to recycle all primary batteries

Program comparison is slightly tricky because different programs may use different methodologies to provide their best estimate of what’s available for collection (i.e., the denominator). Indeed understanding the exact number of primary and rechargeable batteries available for collection (i.e., that will be discarded) is not an exact science. For example, the per capita available for collection estimate for primary batteries in Ontario is 17 per cent higher than in British Columbia, and 60 per cent higher than in Manitoba, which leads to the question, why do Ontarians buy so many more batteries than other Canadians?

On the collection side in 2011, British Columbia (Call2Recycle) collected 0.063 kgs of primary batteries per capita, and 0.011 Kgs in MB (yr1). Ontario (Stewardship Ontario) collected 0.079 kgs of primary batteries per capita — 25 per cent more than in BC. When the RER is applied to collected batteries by program, a clearer picture begins to emerge. (See bar chart.) Specifically, both BC and ON programs have improved significantly since their first year (or half-year) of operation.

However, after processing, the recycling rates in British Columbia and Manitoba decline considerably due to their lower recycling efficiencies. Ontario’s rate drops from 14.2 per cent (collection) to 12 per cent (recycling), and British Columbia’s rate drops from 13.9 per cent (collection) to 5.7 per cent (recycling); losses which are a result of thermal treatment, a technology able to recover approximately 41 per cent of metals and elements.

Reports on secondary (rechargeable) battery collection and recycling offers less information, because the types of batteries collected (Ni-Cd, NiMH, Li-ion etc.) are not disclosed by stew-

30 www.solidwastemag.com June/July 2012

swr j-j 2012 diversion pg 28-31.indd 30

19/06/12 9:14 AM

DIVERSION

ards, making it impossible to provide a recycling rate. (See chart for collection rates.)

How well are you doing?

The 2011 data suggests there’s considerable room for improving battery collection and recycling rates. Both ON, BC, and MB have set ambitious collection targets for the third year of the program of 30 per cent, 25 per cent and 18 per cent respectively; this means effectively doubling the existing collection performance over one year.

With the introduction of the Battery Incentive Program (BIP) in February 2011, Stewardship Ontario (SO) now offers a financial incentive for collection and processing of batteries. The incentive is designed

to support privately-initiated collection channels. In one year alone the Orange Drop program (run by SO) nearly doubled its collection sites and also collects significantly more per site compared with the other programs.

Finally, there are clear environmental dif­­ ferences in the recycling technology (py­ ro­metallurgical vs hydrometallurgical).

Investi­gation of the life cycle impacts of these technologies and each facility (including downstream processing) would be a useful tool for governments or quasi-government Boards when assessing the right standards to put in law.

Clarissa Morawski is Principal of CM Consulting in Peterborough, Ontario. Contact Clarissa at clarissa@cmconsultinginc.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

June/July 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 31

swr j-j 2012 diversion pg 28-31.indd 31

19/06/12 9:14 AM

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

by John Nicholson “Located in Burnaby, the company recycles over 400 mattresses per day.”

Sleep Country Mattress Recycling in Canada

B

est known for being the home of Yale University, Connecticut may soon be able to lay claim to being the first jurisdiction in North America to require mattress recycling. One of the main reasons for the legislation is that government officials estimate that Connecticut taxpayers are paying about $1.2 million a year to get rid of the 176,000 mattresses thrown out in that state annually.

If enacted, the legislation will require mattress manufacturers to form a stewardship organization and come up with a plan for recycling mattress by July 2013.

With over four million mattress and box springs being disposed in the United States every year (and a comparable 400,000 in Canada), a waste management issue is also a business opportunity. Perhaps the biggest driver in the growth in mattress recycling will be landfill bans. For example, Metro Vancouver banned the disposal of mattresses from landfills beginning in January, 2011.

An average mattress consumes 23 cubic feet (0.65 m3) of space in a landfill. High volume/low weight items like mattresses aren’t good for a landfill operator wanting to make money; landfill revenue is based on weight, and preserving volume (commonly referred to as “air space”) is the name of the game in landfills.

Technologies & companies Almost any mattress, whether it’s spring-based, foam, or a futon, can be recycled. Likewise, practically any box spring, sofa, or couch can be recycled.

Typically a mattress is disassembled by hand into its component parts: wood, metal springs, cotton, and foam. Some of the more sophisticated recycling operations have mechanical shredders to shred the foam.

Virtually every part of a mattress can be sent to manufacturers who can reprocess the products into something new. Wood is typically sold to wood chippers which can use it make any number of products (e.g., mulch for gardens) or as fuel. The cotton and felt are sold to companies that use the materials for insulation. Quilting and foam can be turned into carpet underlay. The springs are sold to metal recyclers or directly to steel companies.

The mattress recycling companies in Canada are located within the three largest municipalities: Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver.

Vancouver: There are three mattress companies located in the Metro Vancouver area. The establishment of the companies is in direct relation to the fact that Metro Vancouver municipalities now charge $20 for the disposal of a mattress.

Mattressrecycling.ca claims to be the first and largest mattress recycler in British Columbia. Located in Burnaby, the company recycles over 400 mattresses per day. It charges a residential rate of $12.50 for each mattress or box spring. To have a couch or arm chair recycled costs $38.

Canadian Mattress Recycling Inc., located in just south of Vancouver, charges a fee for recycling of mattresses at half the rate the city charges for disposal ($12). The plant employs 14 people.

The third Vancouver-based mattress recycler, Recyc-Mattresses Inc., also has facilities in Toronto and Montreal as well as in France and Florida.

Recover Canada has been in operation since 2008. Recover Canada specializes in rebuilding mattress for resale. The Toronto-based dismantles mattresses and heat treats all the cushioning as well as the steel components by dry convection heat to destroy all bed bugs and their eggs. After processing, Recover’s mattress components are suitable for reuse in rebuilt bedding. Approximately 80 percent of the all mattress components are reused with 20 percent destined for disposal.

Recover Canada charges $15 for a single mattress and offers a discount rate of $10 per mattress for six or more.

Matt Canada: If you’re looking for a deal for recycling your used mattress, Matt Canada, based in Montreal, only charges $10. In operation since 2004, Matt Canada has over 30 regular clients from various sectors including manufacturers, hotels, municipalities, universities, and environmentally-conscious individuals.

It’s clear that mattress recycling is a growing business. Landfill bans and legislation requiring extended producer responsibility of mattress manufacturers will only serve to increase the number of companies in the business.

To augment the revenue generated from mattress recycling, some companies also recycle other furniture and offer free recycling of other items that are profitable (i.e., metal-containing items).

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

32 www.solidwastemag.com June/July 2012

swr j-j 2012 waste bus pg 32.indd 32

19/06/12 9:14 AM

EVENTS

T

MWA spring workshop

his year’s spring workshop and AGM of the Municipal Waste Association (MWA) was held, as per usual, at the sumptuous Hockley Valley Resort near Orangeville, Ontario, May 15-17, 2012. The excellent lineup of speakers included a co-presentation by this magazine’s contributing editors Paul van der Werf and Michael Cant on waste management across Canada — also the topic of the cover story of this edition, which is based on the same research. Another highlight was a speech by Ontario Minister of the Environment Jim Bradley, who outlined some of the measures his government is taking to improve the province’s system for approving stewardship programs under Waste Diversion Ontario (WDO).

Visit www.municipalwaste.ca Phil Zigby (left), chair of the MWA’s committee for recycled commodities markets, presents outgoing MWA Executive Director Vivian de Giovanni with a bouquet of flowers as part of a ceremony thanking her for her years of service to the association. De Giovanni has taken a management position in the City of Guelph’s recycling department.

SWANA symposium a success Waste Expo 2012

(Left to right) Beth Goodger, SWANA Ontario Chapter President; Stephanie Myre, Reseau Réseau Environnement (who is working on forming a Quebec Chapter); and, Allan Lynch, SWANA Canadian Representative.

Photo by Ralph Bischoff, Executive Director, SWANA Pacific Chapter.

T

The Labrie exhibit booth featured this vintage garbage truck from the company’s Leach division. Leach is celebrating its 125th anniversary and also distributed at the show a reproduction of the original brochure for the truck, which was the first enclosed refuse vehicle in the United States.

Inset: Arnie Gess (left), Show Manager of the Canadian Waste & Recycling Expo at the magazine exhibit booth with Solid Waste & Recycling magazine Publisher Brad O’Brien.

T

he staff of Solid Waste & Recycling magazine were in attendance in the magazine display booth and working the showroom floor of this year’s Waste Expo in Las Vegas, Nevada. The show well-attended event took place May 1-3 at the Las Vegas Convention Centre and featured hundreds of exhibitors, this year appearing on two levels that were organized so there was plenty of traffic upstairs as well as below.

Next year’s Waste Expo will be held May 20-23 at the Ernest N. Morial Convention Center in New Orleans, Louisiana.

Visit www.wasteexpo.com

he Solid Waste Association of North America (SWANA) 6th Canadian Waste Symposium recently held in Niagara Falls brought over 300 attendees from eight provinces and four states. The event, held April 22-25, 2012, offered a comprehensive program of speakers and tours on all aspects of waste management.

SWANA International President Jim Warner and Executive Director John Skinner provided updates at the opening plenary. Ecologist Stephen Apfelbaum was the keynote speaker sharing his innovative experiences in large scale ecological restoration projects, including landfill remediation.

Durham Chair Roger Anderson also spoke about his municipality’s progress in the development of its energy from waste facility. There were 24 technical sessions, including a Waste Educator’s forum and two sessions delivered by the Ontario Public Works Association. The sold out trade show provided an excellent opportunity for attendees to get the latest information from companies that support the waste management industry. Environmental Commissioner Gord Miller discussed the lack of progress in waste diversion in Ontario and encouraged collaboration by the various environmental organizations to facilitate support from the provincial government to move forward on the points of clear agreement. The final afternoon featured tours of 11 facilities in Niagara, Hamilton, Halton and New York State.

The next biennial symposium will be held in 2014 in Richmond, British Columbia.

Visit www.swanaon.org June/July 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 33

swr j-j 2012 events pg 33.indd 33

19/06/12 9:14 AM

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

by Rosalind Cooper “The fixed rate approach has been criticized by many service providers for being artificially low.”

Product Stewardship Reform in Ontario A special report

A

lot has been happening in Ontario recently with respect to reforming the province’s somewhat beleaguered process for approving product stewardship programs and establishing eco fees for them. We’ll therefore focus on these this time to bring everyone up to speed.

Action plan Ontario has released a new action plan for diverting waste from landfills and for implementing changes to programs and policies established under the Waste Diversion Act, 2002 (WDA). The action plan is intended to address several objectives including ensuring that: waste diversion targets for Ontario are achieved; that retailers understand their role and take responsibility for fair and accurate pricing; and, that businesses have clear, consistent guidelines for diverting the maximum amount of waste possible.

(Additional objectives are to ensure that municipalities are not burdened with additional costs and that the interests of consumers are protected.)

Under the WDA, stewards pay fees to industry funding organizations to develop, implement and operate waste diversion programs for designated wastes. The amount that stewards pay into the system will be changing so that it’s based on reported market share. Costs related to the operation of the Municipal Hazardous or Special Waste (MHSW) program will be recovered to ensure producers pay the actual cost of waste disposal instead of a projected cost. As part of the action plan, Waste Diversion Ontario (WDO) has been directed to undertake a detailed audit and review of Stewardship Ontario’s (SO) budgets and expenditures.

The Ontario Minister of the Environment and the Vice-Chair of WDO have approved amendments to the operating agreement between the ministry and WDO with respect to the structure of the board of directors of WDO. The new board is intended to reflect modern governance practices and to assist in improving WDO’s oversight of programs established under the WDA.

MHSW program fee review The environment minister also directed Waste Diversion Ontario to undertake separate reviews on the development and implementation of financial incentives that are paid to service providers by Stewardship Ontario under the MHSW Program, to Ontario Electronic Stewardship (OES) under the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) program and to Ontario Tire Stewardship (OTS) under the used tires program. The minister also asked WDO to determine: whether the development and implementation of these financial incentives are effective in achieving waste diversion targets and program objectives; and, the impact of incentive programs on municipalities and waste diversion services.

In response to the minister’s direction, WDO has released a report entitled Review of MHSW Program. The report focuses on the MHSW program operated by Stewardship Ontario, and the ministry is now in the

process of reviewing the report and requesting feedback on the report and its recommendations.

Fixed rate rejected by processors In recent times Stewardship Ontario has taken contracts for waste haulage and processing away from municipalities and has been directly paying waste haulers and processors of hazardous waste a fixed rate for their work, and issuing incentive payments based on the type and volume of waste hauled and processed. (For industry comment, see page 38.)

Previously, municipalities were responsible for negotiating contracts with service providers, who would pick up and process hazardous waste, and then submit bills to SO. SO would pay the service providers from the fees collected from manufacturers and retailers of the products.

The fixed rate approach has been criticized by many service providers for being artificially low. In fact, one of the largest paint recyclers in Ontario has pulled out of the program and Ontario’s largest propane tank processor announced it would stop picking up propane tanks due to the new fee structure. As a result, the environment minister has directed WDO, which oversees SO, to conduct a full financial audit of the corporation and review the impact of its new pricing model.

National standards for auto recycling

The Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) has launched a study to examine the end-of-life vehicle recycling management sector in Canada. The study is intended to determine the size, scope and diversity of the vehicle-recycling sector, and assess potential industry costs and socio-economic benefits associated with a national approach to environmental management of end-of-life vehicles in Canada.

The study was prompted by a report from the Automotive Recyclers of Canada, which was submitted to the CCME in July, 2011. The Automotive Recyclers of Canada believe that it is essential to have a national approach to managing end-of-life vehicles.

They have cautioned that governments considering this issue, in the context of waste management policy initiatives, need to ensure that they address the unique features of the existing recycling market for end-of-life vehicles which is different than other recycling markets.

The Automotive Recyclers of Canada are advocating for the implementation of a common decommissioning standard for processors of end-of-life vehicles. The objective of a national approach is to ensure a consistent, effective and efficient end-of-life vehicle management program in Canada.

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

34 www.solidwastemag.com June/July 2012

swr j-j 2012 regrndup pg 34.indd 34

19/06/12 9:15 AM

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

Ecological cab cooler for high-roofed trucks The new back-mounted VIESA Internal II cab cooler maximizes its cooling performance being mounted at the back of the truck’s cab. Away from the sun’s rays, VIESA Internal II optimizes cooling conditions allowing it to operate the system day and night without the need to run the truck’s engine.

VIESA Internal II is especially designed for high-roof trucks, transforming the truck’s cab into a comfortable, quiet environment with lots of fresh and cool air. The economical and maintenance-free cooler eliminates idling costs and expensive A/C repairs. It features programmable on-off operation. Automatic operation allows the system to self-adjust to exterior temperature conditions. Its exclusive automatic vent opening and closing system prevents dirt and dust from entering the cab.

VIESA delivers cool air to the cab without running the truck’s engine; it consumes only water and makes no use of chemical coolants nor emits gases into the atmosphere. VIESA is totally ecological and provides the driver with a healthier rest and comfortable driving condition, increasing driver satisfaction and retention rates.

Truck engine idling consumes significant amounts of fuel to provide cooling. Eliminating idling saves much of this fuel and reduces CO2 emissions and operation costs. According to the Center for Transportation Research (USA), a typical Class 8 truck idles 218 days for cooling at 4.5 hours/day consuming 1 gal/h, which translates into an estimated expense of $2,700 per year. And truckers find no alternative when anti-idling laws threaten hefty fines for running the truck’s main engine.

Air conditioning maintenance is a growing expense in all fleets; industry estimates put the cost of maintaining A/C units in $800 per truck per year. Because VIESA works even with the engine stopped, it also decreases wear and tear on engine parts. VIESA operates from the truck’s existing battery with low amperage draw. The system automatically shuts-off on low battery and incorporates polarity and surge protection.

VIESA is offered in different versions for diverse applications.

For more information and images, please contact Roberto Rivela at r.rivela@vigia.ca or visit www.viesa.ca

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

June/July 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 35

swr j-j 2012 trans tech pg 35.indd 35

19/06/12 9:15 AM

COLLECTION

Niagara Residents Recycle More to Fight Cancer Project1

11/13/06

10:28 AM

E

mterra Group is encouraging Niagara Region residents to recycle more as a mechanism for raising money to support NiagPage ara’s 1 new Walker Family Cancer Centre, now under construction in St. Catharines, Ontario.

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

Celebrating Emterra’s pledge of $500,000 to the Niagara Region Walker Family Cancer Centre are (from the left) Niagara Health Systems (NHS) Medical Director of Oncology, Dr. Janice Giesbrecht; Emterra CEO Emmie Leung; Emterra Business Development Manager, Paulina Leung; NHS Interim President and CEO, Dr. Sue Matthews; and Niagara Regional Chair Gary Burroughs.

(Photo courtesy of Niagara Health Systems Foundation)

Emterra, the collection contractor for the region, has pledge up to $500,000 over seven years to the Niagara Health System Foundation’s (NHSF) It’s Our Time Campaign, which is the fundraising body for the new facility.

“We came up with the idea of matching the amount of the contribution to the tonnage residents recycle, and encouraging them to recycle even more,” says Emterra Founder and CEO, Emmie Leung.

At a NHSF gift recognition event held during Earth Week, Emterra announced the pledge and christened the program Make Your Contribution at the Curb!™ Working with the Region of Niagara and the NHSF to develop the campaign, Emterra committed that for every tonne recycled, the company will donate $1 to the hospital fund.

And it won’t stop there. Emterra is setting up “Eco Depot” events in Niagara to collect scrap tires, and perhaps other recyclable materials. For every tire collected, Emterra will donate another dollar.

“The more people recycle, the more we will donate. Potentially, the fund could surpass half a million dollars,” Leung says.

Niagara Region recently announced that in 2011, it saw a 13 per cent increase in recycling and a 13 per cent decrease in the amount of garbage sent to landfill. Emterra made the Make Your Contribution at the Curb! campaign retroactive to the beginning of 2011, when its contract with the region began. So, to kick-start the campaign, it forwarded a cheque for $36,500, the number of tonnes recycled last year, to the NHSF campaign.

Emterra has launched a sister campaign in Courtenay and Comox, BC and is developing this program with other municipalities, as well.

36 www.solidwastemag.com June/July 2012

swr j-j 2012 collection pg 36.indd 36

19/06/12 9:16 AM

Advertisers’ Index Company

Page #

Company

June/July 2012

Page #

Al-Jon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

OWMA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

AMRC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Paradigm Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Borden Ladner Gervais . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Paul Van der Werf (2CG) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Canadian Waste & Recycling Expo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Canadian Waste Symposium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Recycling Council of Alberta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Trux Route Management Systems Inc . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Countrywide Recycling Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Environmental Business Consultants (J. Nicholson) . . . 36 Eriez Magnetics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Integrated Municipal Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 OWMA AD

Van Dyk Baler Corp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Walinga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Waste Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Mack Trucks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

WasteQuip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Molok . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

WDO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

6/5/07

7:33 AM

Page 1

Ontario Waste Management Association

Who’s standing up for Your Business?

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

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

Contact: Michele Goulding (905) 791-9500 www.owma.org June/July 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 37

swr j-j 2012 ad idx pg 37.indd 37

20/06/12 10:39 AM

BLOG

by Peter Hargreave “Many stewards have begun to receive steep deficitrecovery bills that they have not anticipated in their business plans.”

Efforts in Futility?

The on-going review of waste diversion in Ontario

A

lmost two years ago, the “eco fee fiasco” broke in Ontario over tion has been chronically under-resourced and lacks an understanding fees charged for end-of-life management of household hazardof what its roles and duties are under the current legislative framework. ous and special waste products and containers. With the fiasco It also lacks accountability. dissolved any movement toward reforming the Waste Diversion Act The first report delivered to the minister on the MHSW incentive (WDA). The opposition political parties saw blood in the water and program is most revealing in what is not said. The report refers to the pounced, leaving the waste diversion file about as appealing as working changes of the incentive program as a “transformative change for serat Ornge (the province’s beleaguered air ambulance service). vice providers and municipalities” that caused “significant upheaval for There were major consultations in 2009 on reform of the WDA, numeconomic participants” and the need for “change management.” It refererous reports by the Auditor General, the Environmental Commissioner, ences new risks and burdens that service providers and municipalities and Statistics Canada, and acknowledgement by all political parties that faced and mentions potential issues with Stewardship Ontario’s divermajor changes are needed; despite this, Ontario’s waste diversion prosion numbers. The question throughout all these observations is: why grams continue to limp from one crisis to another with overall diverdidn’t WDO exercise any oversight over these changes when numerous sion numbers stagnating. (See Editorial, page 4) This is certainly not warnings were provided before implementation? to suggest that progress has not been made The recommendations brought forin certain areas and that our current waste ward by the report are vague, provide no diversion programs have not had important "The recommendations brought clear path forward, and fail to identify the some successes. However, there’s general responsible party to take action. As a reagreement by stakeholders involved that the forward by the report are vague, sult, the blame game ensues. The Ministry current framework isn’t working. of Environment points to WDO, which in provide no clear path forward, turn points to Stewardship Ontario, which On February 9, 2012 Environment Minister Jim Bradley waded into the onand fail to identify the responsible points back at the ministry. No wonder going issues with Ontario’s waste diversion service providers are seeking business opprograms; at that time there was optimism portunities elsewhere and companies are party to take action." from stakeholders that the government was stalling investments and new hires! There’s preparing to tackle some of the fundamental little confidence in the future stability of problems. Minister Bradley’s review was a bold attempt to begin to adthese programs or in the ability of any of the responsible parties to take dress underlying WDA problems and should be commended for taking action and effect real change. leadership in an area where few wanted to tread.

While service providers struggle, so too do many stewards who have In retrospect, it does however seem ironic that the review was placed begun to receive steep deficit-recovery bills that they have not anticiin the hands of Waste Diversion Ontario (WDO), an organization that pated in their business plans. They too seek stability in how these prowas the main contributor to the latest round of turmoil. The issues of grams operate. stability emanating from both the household hazardous waste and the Hope remains that as the evidence of the systematic failures of waste electronics stewardship programs result from the inability or the WDA mounts, changes will finally come. The government has unwillingness of WDO to perform its oversight obligations under the many tools it can use including regulation under the Environmental WDA. Based on Section 5 of the WDA, WDO has an obligation to: Protection Act and moving Waste Diversion Ontario under a Delegated Administrative Authority. If the politics are too risky, the government • develop, implement and operate waste diversion programs for can also seek consensus on changes through a legislative committee. designated wastes in accordance with this Act and monitor the efThe status quo is only be a recipe for continued problems. fectiveness and efficiency of those programs; and to • seek to ensure that waste diversion developed under this Act affect Peter Hargreave is Director, Policy & Strategy, for the Ontario Waste Ontario’s marketplace in a fair manner.

Management Association (OWMA) in Brampton, Ontario.

Let’s be clear, the staff at WDO are professionals who don’t deserve Contact Peter at phargreave@owma.org personal criticism; instead, the problems are systemic. This organiza-

38 www.solidwastemag.com June/July 2012

swr j-j 2012 blog pg 38.indd 38

19/06/12 9:17 AM

TO NEVER SLOW YOU DOWN

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

®

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

MCKTRK_6446_BltTPrCbOv_SWRM.indd 1 swr j-j 2012 ad pg 39.indd 39

1/24/11 10:52 AM 19/06/12 10:44 AM

LI

BLE T

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 j-j 2012 ad pg 40.indd 40

4/12/11 2:45:08 PM 19/06/12 10:44 AM