Solid Waste & Recycling October/November 2012

—

: s TS am SI gr a PO pro ad DE t on Can 18 r s e po os ag p Re acr

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

DREAM MRF

Emterra’s Winnipeg Recycling Plant— page 8

CPMP No. 40069240

An EcoLog Group Publication

COMPACTORS: CIF study shows benefits of compaction — page 42 swr o-n 2012 nl cvr pg 01.indd 1

12-11-09 2:18 PM

NECESSITY IS THE MOTHER OF VERSATILITY.

Wherever there’s a job to do, there’s a Mack truck built to handle it. And then there’s the Mack® TerraProTM—the truck that adapts to the needs of the job and the driver.

TerraPro accommodates front, side and rear loader applications. It also comes with a range of horsepower options, three door configurations, and diesel or natural gas engines. Whether the job calls for the Cabover or Low Entry, TerraPro is the versatile workhorse the industry relies upon most.

LIVE BY THE CODE. DRIVE BY THE CODE.

Mack_REF_02_November.indd 1 swr o-n 2012 Mack ad pg 02.indd 2

MackTrucks.com

10/9/12 5:37 PM 12-10-30 12:59 PM

Solid Waste & Recycling

CONTENTS October/November 2012 Volume 17, Number 5

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

COVER STORY When Emterra decided to upgrade and expand its single-stream recycling plant in Winnipeg, Manitoba, it consulted with existing supplier Van Dyke Baler to boost efficiency to the max.

by Barb McConnell

FEATURES

DEPARTMENTS

DIVERSION: DEPOSITS Beverage container programs across Canada.

by Clarissa Morawski

18

CLEANTECH 1: WASTE BUSINESS Vancouver’s WTEC mobile gasification in the Yukon.

by John Nicholson 25

CLEANTECH 2: WASTE-TO-ETHANOL Companies that turn food waste into ethanol.

by John Nicholson

27

TRANSPORTATION: DASHBOARDS

Editorial Up Front Organic Matters IC&I Waste Regulation Roundup OWMA Report Equipment Obituary Ad Index Blog

4 6 30 32 35 38 39 44 45 46

NEXT EDITION:

Dashboard technology for managing fleets.

by Martin Demers

40

COLLECTION: COMPACTORS CIF study shows compaction improves efficiency.

by Mike Birett

Diversion, page 18

8

Cover art by Charles Jaffe

DREAM RECYCLING PLANT

42

December 2012/January 2013 Supplement: Annual Buyer’s Guide edition Editorial: Efficiencies in curbside recycling. MRF technology.

Rural case study. P&E program design. CWRE show report.

Roll-off containers & bins.

Space closing: November 19, 2012.

Artwork required: November 21, 2012.

Cleantech: Waste to ethanol, page 27

Collection, page 42

October/November 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 3

swr o-n 2012 contents pg 03.indd 3

12-10-30 12:55 PM

EDITORIAL

by Guy Crittenden “RDKB has budgeted for the elimination of all recycling program costs for packaging and printed paper.”

Kootenay Boundary’s Line in the Sand

T

o my mind, there’s no more interesting story in the waste manimplemented in the industrial, commercial and institutional (IC&I) secagement business these days than developments related to British tor, which generates much more waste than the residential sector.

Columbia’s requirement to make industry responsible for the recycBut the union may be over-reaching when it asks for a “right of first ling of its printed-paper and packaging waste by May 2014 — materirefusal” for providing stewardship services. The UBCM states, “This als currently managed by municipalities either in “blue box” recycling option would minimize and/or prevent any disruption to existing serviprograms and drop-off centres, or landfilled. ces, employment and service contracts, and community expectations.”

Programs in which industry pays for the end-of-life management of These are legitimate concerns, but miss the point of EPR. its products — extended producer responsibility (EPR) — are gaining Industry can, of course, choose to contract collection and/or recyctraction across Canada (and more tentatively in the US) for such things ling services to a municipality; but the “right of first refusal” sounds like as household hazardous waste, fluorescent lightbulbs, scrap tires, used a stakeholder group protecting its vested interests. oil, and so on. BC is the only jurisdiction extending the list to “blue It’s in this context that a three-part article by Raymond Gaudart and box”-type materials.

Alan Stanley published in September by the Product Policy Institute When implemented, BC will be (once again) a (www.productpolicy.org) is intriguing. Gaudart is leader in waste reduction. The province was the first the former Director of Environmental Services for in North America to introduce mandatory deposits the Regional District of Kootenay Boundary (RDKB) on soft-drink containers, and already has EPR-type — the position currently held by Stanley. (Both men programs for 12 product categories. The EPR prohave been involved with the Recycling Council of gram for packaging and printed paper was anBC, and Gaudart is a former PPI board member.) nounced in May 2011 when Schedule 5 of BC’s ReIn their article, Gaudart and Stanley outline RDcycling Regulation came into force; it supports a KB’s bold position, which is that “true EPR should federal goal of full EPR for manufactured discards not involve local government in any aspect of stewby 2018. ardship program delivery. To be involved constitutes The three-year consultation and planning proan ongoing subsidy to industry since the true costs of cess is (unsurprisingly) hitting some speed bumps. being involved can never be completely quantified.”

One is from the members of the not-for-profit Consequently, the authors write, RDKB has alKootenay Boundary Multi Material BC, the agency established under the ready budgeted for the elimination of all recycling British Columbia Society Act that represents “stewprogram costs for packaging and printed paper maards” whose materials will soon be subject to EPR. MMBC members terials included in the provincial regulation, beginning in 2014. include the trade associations for restaurants, retailers, newspapers, gro“Elected officials and their staff envision the $1.4 million presently cers and others. allocated to recycling programs being shifted to the provision of organPeople close to the process say the first steps towards establishing a ics collection and diversion, the next big step to achieving the Zero program have faltered largely because the reps from the different assoWaste goal RDKB adopted in 2000,” they write. ciations are, for the most part, government affairs types and not experts The RDKB plans to put into effect a vision that environmentalists in waste diversion program design or implementation. Other than asking have promoted in BC (and in PPI policy papers) for some time: that the ministry for an extension to the November 19, 2012 deadline, municipalities should collect and process organic waste, and industry MMBC has been silent about its intentions in developing a workable should manage everything else, as an incentive to adopt “cradle-toprogram. cradle” design and distribution systems.

Those cats are going to have to herd themselves into action before How this will all play out between now and the May 2014 deadline the deadline gets much closer.

— and whether other municipalities will adopt the RDKB stance — reAnother speed bump has come from the Union of British Columbia mains unknown, but it will be interesting to watch.

Municipalities (UBCM), which circulated a policy paper on September Stay tuned.

26 outlining various recommendations to members. The 10-page UBCM The Recycling Regulation can be download here: paper makes some important points about the transition to a new provwww.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/ ince-wide program, including the need for industry to maintain high freeside/449_2004 service levels for residents, especially in rural areas. The UBCM states (rightfully) that municipalities should be financially compensated for Guy Crittenden is editor of this magazine. Contact Guy at materials that end up in municipal landfills. The group also wants EPR gcrittenden@solidwastemag.com

4 www.solidwastemag.com October/November 2012

swr o-n 2012 editorial pg 04.indd 4

12-10-30 12:55 PM

Exclusive Sales and Service for BOLLEGRAAF, LUBO and TITECH

t e visit us a m o c e s a Ple o!

Waste Exp n ia d a n a the C 9 Booth 152

Solutions for sorting

• Single Stream • Commercial Waste • Construction & Demolition • Municipal Solid Waste

• Waste to Energy/Fuel • Balers • Presorted Plastics • E-Waste

Selecting a recycling system requires trust. Since 1984 VAN DYK Recycling Solutions has led the North American Market by building over 1,780 highly efficient and profitable plants.

Van Dyk Baler Corp. and Lubo USA, DBA:

VDRS.com ● 203-967-1100 ● info@vdrs.com W E O R I G I N AT E , O T H E R S I M I TAT E

Exclusive North American Sales & Service for Bollegraaf, Lubo & TITECH Recycling Machinery

swr o-n 2012 Van Dyk ad pg 05.indd 5

12-10-30 12:55 PM

Solid Waste & Recycling

UPFRONT

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

Guy Crittenden Editor gcrittenden@solidwastemag.com Brad O’Brien Publisher bobrien@solidwastemag.com 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.

New WDO team member

W

aste Diversion Ontario (WDO) to collaborate on the development of prodwelcomes Jodi Tomchyshyn Lon- uct stewardship programs and regulations. don as its new ManLondon’s work with Alberta ager of Policy and Planning, Environment included leading effective November 19, 2012. project teams on many initiaLondon has extensive experitives, including developing ence researching, developing Alberta’s Greening Governand reassessing waste manment Strategy, amendments to agement policy in Canada and the Tire Designation Regulaabroad, most recently working tion, conducting a review of as a consultant in Alberta asthe Lubricating Oil Recycling sisting various organizations & Management Regulation, with policy reviews. and negotiating an MOU for In her career, she has reducing plastic bags at retail. worked as a senior policy adLondon has a Master of Envisor in the Waste Management vironmental Design (EnvironPolicy Branch of Ontario’s Min- Jodi Tomchyshyn London mental Science) from the Univeristry of the Environment, and sity of Calgary and a Bachelor of was seconded from Alberta Environment to Science from the University of Alberta.

New Zealand’s Ministry for the Environment Visit www.wdo.ca

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

Surrey, BC adopts CNG trucks

T

he City of Surrey, BC is transforming its waste collection process to reduce emissions and divert waste from the landfill. The city manages the collection of residential curb side garbage, recycling and yard waste for approximately 97,000 single-family dwellings each week.

Under a new contract, residential waste will be collected using new state-of-the-art automated compressed natural gas (CNG) trucks; these emit 23 per cent less carbon emissions and 90 per cent less air particulates, compared to traditional diesel trucks. Studies show that replacing one diesel truck with a CNG truck is the equivalent to taking 475 cars off the road each year.

The new services will help residents separate kitchen and yard waste from other waste by collecting organics separately from garbage, which will help the City meet its 70 per cent waste diversion objective before 2015. In the future, the organic waste will be delivered to the city’s proposed organics biofuel facility, which will process it into fuel to power the waste trucks.

The new CNG refuse trucks — purchased by Progressive Waste Solutions — incorporate a number of new technologies aimed at reducing carbon emissions and increase productivity. All trucks are equipped with Vigia tire pressure system, allowing Progressive to further increase fuel economy and reduce tire costs.

Visit www.vigia.ca

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 October/November 2012

swr o-n 2012 upfront pg 06-07.indd 6

12-10-30 12:54 PM

UPFRONT

WIDE WORLD OF WASTE

International Waste Panel: Carey McIver, Kellie Walters, Nia Owen, and Robert Haley.

Board member Kevin Kernaghan with two Scottish wenches from NEAT (Tammi Hrab and Kayla Boyd).

Grant Cameron (Alberta Plastics Recycling Association) leads the Out of This World session with speakers Art Johnston, Joseph Hall and Jon Angin.

A group of revelers enjoy the Ceilidh.

RCA 2012 CONFERENCE

T

he Recycling Council of Ontario (RCA) 25th anniversary was celebrated with its largest-ever conference, with well over 300 delegates attending a packed program in Jasper, Alberta. Speakers from as far away as Australia and the United Kingdom covered a wide range of topics, from baler twine recycling, to Zero Waste and EPR. In addition to a high caliber of speakers, delegates were treated to extensive networking opportunities, including an enjoyable social program consisting of the RCA’s version of the Highland Games, as well as a Ceilidh and Kitchen Party.

From the opening plenary that informed attendees of the evolution of programs across Canada, to a riveting keynote presenter from Yellowstone National Park who reminded us of the importance of

environmental protection, and the enthralling range of presenters covering programs and topics from around the world, delegates left with both knowledge and inspiration. A fitting closing day reminded everyone that programs are not all created equal, and that accurate measurement is our ultimate indicator of success as we strive towards our waste reduction goals. As closing keynote speaker, publisher Jerry Powell suggested we need to broaden our perspective from recycling to sustainable materials management. Sage advice on which to end the conference.

Mark Your Calendars: Next year’s RCA conference will be in Calgary at the Palliser Hotel, October 2-4, 2013.

Visit www.recycle.ab.ca

October/November 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 7

swr o-n 2012 upfront pg 06-07.indd 7

12-10-30 12:54 PM

COVER STORY

by Barbara McConnell “Winnipeg employs screens studded with star-shaped, circular disks to facilitate material separation by size.”

”Resources in — resources out” principle drives upgrade at Emterra’s Winnipeg MRF

The “Dream” Recycling Plant

A

sk anyone what important leaps in technology have occurred in the last decade and few would point to material recovery facility (MRF) conveyor belts, star screens and optical sorters as life changing. But to a handful of Canadians who keep millions of tonnes of recyclables out of landfill, that’s exactly what they are.

To Emmie Leung, founder and CEO of Emterra Group — which owns 14 MRFs across Canada — the Holy Grail of MRF design is finding the right mix between automation and manual sorting to deliver the best possible end-product quality at the lowest cost.

“When referring to our MRFs, the idiom ‘garbage in-garbage out’ is antithetical to our business goals. Our mantra is ‘resources in — resources out’,” she says. “As a private sector company, we look for ways to tease out more quality products from our processes without adding cost.”

Her attention has recently been focused on the company’s singlestream MRF in Winnipeg, Manitoba.

Commissioned in 2003 to process 45,000 tonnes of recyclables, its original mechanical bones were state-of-the-art Bollegraaf equipment.

Leung is upgrading the MRF now to a capacity of 100,000 tonnes

because the City of Winnipeg is converting its recycling program, which serves about 190,000 households, from a manual blue box system to a cart-based, automated system that will substantially increase the amount of materials captured for recycling. The facility will also process recyclables from the industrial, commercial and institutional (IC&I) sector.

According to Leung, the original Bollegraaf equipment still operates efficiently, so it makes sense to retrofit the plant with modern Bollegraaf and TITECH technology.

Don Holliday, representing Van Dyk Recycling Solutions (the distributor for Bollegraaf and TITECH optical sorting equipment in North America), had helped Leung design and execute the original plant, and is back on the job.

“Our challenge now is to create a state-of-the-art MRF with additional capacity... on an existing 10-year-old frame,” Holliday says.

“This is a classic situation in today’s MRF world,” he adds. “After a decade of processing recyclables, many MRFS are ready for upgrades, not only because of basic wear and tear but also because the technology has evolved so far so fast.”

8 www.solidwastemag.com October/November 2012

swr o-n 2012 cvr sty pg 08-17.indd 8

12-10-30 12:45 PM

COVER STORY

Emterra Group CEO and Founder, Emmie Leung, at her company’s Winnipeg recycling plant that she’s upgrading as part of the city’s shift to automated cart recycling.

Emterra photo

Leung and Holliday isolated four areas for upgrades: installing a Bollegraaf drum feeder (to provide a consistent flow of material to the in-feed belts); upgrading the star screens (for improved material separation); repositioning the existing eddy current for aluminum and adding a second machine; and, topping off the new system with two near-infrared spectroscopy (NIR) optical sorters.

“Emmie focuses on simplicity of design in a small footprint,” Holliday says. “A huge challenge we faced in designing the retrofit was integrating new equipment into the nice, tight, original design.”

Holliday adds that he enjoys working with Leung because she has a “good grasp of the breakdown of materials, what goes with what, and how the mechanical separation aids overall performance.”

He credits her as the architect of many of the new design features, including the idea of moving the tipping floor into a new, nearby building, thus creating more room for large trucks to manoeuvre and offload. The extra tipping floor space also allows for greater flexibility in managing contingencies such as equipment breakdown.

t

TIPPING FLOOR Van Dyk is installing a Bollegraaf Drum Feeder at the tipping floor. Unlike traditional metering drums that pull materials under them, the Bollegraaf system drives material over the top of the drum, eliminating what in industry vernacular is called “black belt” (meaning the belt is empty).

The Drum Feeder resembles a 40-yard container with a conveyor belt in the bottom and a five-foot diameter drum at one end. A October/November 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 9

swr o-n 2012 cvr sty pg 08-17.indd 9

12-10-30 12:45 PM

COVER STORY

Don Holliday represents Van Dyk Recycling Solutions (the distributor for Bollegraaf and TITECH optical sorting equipment in North America); he worked closely with Leung on the plant upgrades to boost performance while controlling costs.

frontend loader fills the container. The conveyor belt inside feeds a regulated, controllable amount of material against the rotating drum. The drum drives materials over the top while it de-clumps and tears bags, ensuring a constant load on the belt leading to the first pre-sort. This will permit Emterra’s frontend loader to do other things for about 20 minutes before the next load is needed.

As long as the container has material in it, the conveyor belt is never empty.

“In a 20-tonne per hour system, if the loader gets busy elsewhere and isn’t feeding materials from the tipping floor, productivity drops to zero,” Holliday says, adding, “historically, that’s a minimum of 15 to 20 per cent productivity loss.”

SEPARATOR SCREENS Another area that can significantly impact plant productivity is the paper/container separator screens. Holliday says that ineffective screens can reduce plant performance by over 30 per cent.

When screens are overloaded or set at a low angle, they function like a conveyor. The capability of the screens to separate paper from containers dictates the number of manual sorters required to quality control the mechanically-separated materials to meet market requirements.

Leung points out that marketing a #8 old newspaper (ONP) grade

verses a #6 grade can result in about a $25/tonne difference. Since ONP #8 is about 50 per cent of the material stream, that equates to a $250 an hour difference when running a 20-tonne per hour system. Leung wants high speed for productivity and effective separation for quality.

“Stars” that achieve higher angles are the stars of this show.

Like other MRFs, Winnipeg employs screens studded with starshaped, circular disks to facilitate material separation by size. The angle of the star deck, spacing of the stars and rotation speed of the star-shafts determine how efficiently containers and other small objects drop to a lower conveyor, while larger items (cardboard, boxboard and paper) are driven over the top of the screen.

The greater the star deck angle, the better the mechanical separation of the system. Inefficient angles allow container contamination in the paper stream and paper in the container stream. Contamination in either stream requires manual quality-control sorting and adds labour costs.

“Losing containers in the paper stream kills you, particularly when they’re high-value aluminum, PET and HDPE,” Holliday says. “You’re losing your highest value commodities in your lowest value commodity!”

Leung is upgrading Winnipeg’s screens to use Lubo “StarScreen®” stars.

Lubo is the originator of Starscreen® technology. Holliday says ... main article continues on page 14

10 www.solidwastemag.com October/November 2012

swr o-n 2012 cvr sty pg 08-17.indd 10

12-10-30 12:45 PM

COVER STORY

A TITECH optical sorter in action sorting 3D plastics.

Degradable Nonreusable Geosynthetic Alternative Daily Cover

Utmost PERFORMANCE and EFFICIENCY of any ADC System!

EPI Environmental Products Inc. Suite 801, 1788 W. Broadway, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6J 1Y1 Tel: (604)738-6281 Toll Free: (866)738-6281 Email: envirocover@epi-global.com

www.envirocoversystem.com October/November 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 11

swr o-n 2012 cvr sty pg 08-17.indd 11

12-10-30 12:45 PM

COVER STORY

4 1. Frontend loader fills the Bollegraaf Drumfeeder on the tipping room floor which sends commingled materials over the feeder drum and up a conveyor to pre-sort.

2. Commingled material enters a Starscreen速 to separate old corrugated cardboard.

1

3. Emterra is replacing the stars in its Starscreens速 which, along with of the star deck, spacing of the stars and rotation speed of the star-shafts determine the efficiency and effectiveness of a separator screen. This screen is separating corrugated cardboard from other materials.

4. Starscreen速 for corrugated cardboard.

3

12 www.solidwastemag.com October/November 2012

swr o-n 2012 cvr sty pg 08-17.indd 12

12-10-30 12:45 PM

COVER STORY 2

October/November 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 13

swr o-n 2012 cvr sty pg 08-17.indd 13

12-10-30 12:46 PM

COVER STORY

Originally designed and built in 2002, the existing commingle container line at the Emterra Winnipeg MRF uses manual labour to conduct a positive sort for commodities. When the upgrades are completed in the next few weeks, the container line will include TITECH optical sorters, multiple Eddy Current machines, and a magnet to sort container commodities. Emterra photo

... continued from page 10 that Lubo stars lead the industry in performance. While some screens achieve a maximum angle of 38 to 40 degrees, the Lubo design allows the stars to operate from 38 to 48 degrees (the highest in the industry), which increases separation quality and throughput.

“Replacement stars are a hugely expense,” Leung says, “but that’s offset by the cost associated with decreased productivity and revenues, and increased labour costs. And if we have to add another one-third shift to process leftover materials, then there’s added labour and overhead.

“The economies of scale come into sharp focus.”

Holliday says the upgrade to the latest Lubo star designs and setting the optimum angles and shaft speeds will make Winnipeg’s original Starscreens operate as if they were new, increasing container capture by about 15 per cent.

EDDY CURRENT & OPTICAL SORTERS

The Bollegraaf equipment originally installed in the Emterra Winnipeg MRF in 2002 continues to operate efficiently leading Emterra to the decision to upgrade by adding state-of-the-art Bollegraaf and TITECH equipment. This ONP#8 is on its way to the baler. Emterra photo

Winnipeg is currently operating a two-fraction container screen. This is being converted to a three-fraction screen: “overs”, “unders” and “throughs.” (The throughs are the two-inch minus mix that will be dealt with separately.)

The unders are three-dimensional containers with some fibre mixed in — typically three-dimensional paper such as rolled cereal boxes and telephone books. The “3D” containers will pass under a Bakker Magnet to capture ferrous, and over a large, newly-positioned Bakker eddy current to get aluminum out before the line moves on to a new TITECH NIR optical sorter (set to take off the paper). Taking aluminum early is important because the aluminum reflection signature in the NIR is very similar to paper, which can lead to contamination and lost aluminum value. ... continues on page 16

14 www.solidwastemag.com October/November 2012

swr o-n 2012 cvr sty pg 08-17.indd 14

12-10-30 12:46 PM

COVER STORY

Upgrades at the Emterra Winnipeg MRF will add silos to facilitate recovery of more container commodities. Emterra photo

“Changing the face of waste�

Minimizing costs and maximizing diversion is the essence behind creating a sustainable environmental solution. We create innovative programs that lead the industry and provide a partnership approach to your waste and recycling needs.

Head Office location: 322 Horner Ave. Toronto, Ontario M8W 1Z3 Ph: (416) 253-0400

www.canadafibersltd.com October/November 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 15

swr o-n 2012 cvr sty pg 08-17.indd 15

12-10-30 12:46 PM

COVER STORY

“Optimum angles and shaft speeds will make Winnipeg’s original Starscreens operate as if they were new, increasing container capture by about 15 per cent.”

Holliday says TITECH is the only optical sorter that can sort paper and, further, that it’s now capable of sorting groundwood-based paper; “A real advancement in NIR technology,” he says.

The second optical sorter removes PET from mixed containers and sends it to manual quality control where non-PET and clamshells are separated from bottle PET. Holliday says using an optical sorter to remove high-value PET ensures there’s little of it left in the mix. (He claims TITECH guarantees a capture and purity rate of over 90 per cent.)

Randy Park, Winnipeg’s supervisor of waste diversion, is encouraged by the planned upgrade of Emterra’s MRF. “The City of Winnipeg is optimistic that the MRF upgrade will increase the quality and quantity of the sellable products while increasing Walinga VC2336 6/11/07 PM Page 1 city achieving the plant’s overall capacity.

This is a 2:36 key component in the

N O W

its goal of 50 per cent diversion by 2020,” he says.

The MRF re-design also considered how to save energy; for example, horsepower-hungry pneumatic transport systems have been deleted.

Leung and Holliday worked closely with Van Dyk installers to minimize downtime in the current production. Commissioning is expected before the end of the year.

Editor’s note: Emterra Environmental is one of three Emterra Group family companies. The others are Emterra Tire Recycling and Canadian Liquids Processors Limited. Their website is www.emterra.ca Barbara McConnell, APR, is Principal of McConnell Weaver Strategic Communication located in Milford, Ontario. Contact Barbara at mcweav@kos.net

O N L I N E !

Recycler

S E t w o M f

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

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

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

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

16 www.solidwastemag.com October/November 2012

swr o-n 2012 cvr sty pg 08-17.indd 16

12-10-30 12:46 PM

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 o-n 2012 cvr sty pg 08-17.indd 17

12-10-30 12:46 PM

DIVERSION

Who Pays What Used-beverage container recycling across Canada

T

en years ago, CM Consulting published the first version of Who Pays What, which documents the collective efforts in beverage container recycling in Canada. Since then, much has changed.

Improving container recovery programs goes well beyond keeping cans and bottles out of landfill; measuring the performance of container programs will provide useful insights for end-of-life management of other materials in the many “product stewardship” programs springing up across the country.

Beverage container recycling programs are varied in Canada — each has specific design features that address unique program goals. In assessing these initiatives, we must acknowledge how varied the data are, despite some common aspects.

Together, Canadian provinces collect approximately 73 to 75 per cent of their aluminum cans, 80 to 83 per cent of non-refillable glass, and 58 to 62 per cent of PET plastic beverage bottles. (All data is based on calendar or fiscal year 2010.)

In total, including all the other container types (such as other plastic bottles, juice boxes, gable top containers, pouches, and bi-metal cans),

by Clarissa Morawski

“Canadian provinces collected approximately 67 per cent of all the nonrefillable beverage containers sold in 2010.”

Canadian provinces collected approximately 67 per cent of all the nonrefillable beverage containers sold in 2010.

If we include refillable beer bottles, which continue to be collected at a rate of 98 per cent, the total collection rate for all beverage containers goes up to 72 per cent.

Measuring performance As collection methods expand to include a wider variety of materials, so too does the range of quality of the collected material. The increasing contamination in certain materials necessitates new ways of evaluating performance measurements.

18 www.solidwastemag.com October/November 2012

swr o-n 2012 diversion pg 18-24.indd 18

12-10-30 12:46 PM

InIt org

InItIated and organIzed by

swr o-n 2012 diversion pg 18-24.indd 19

Supported by

12-10-30 12:46 PM

DIVERSION

Provincial collection rates: all beverage containers (2010).

Total beverage container collection rates for deposit vs non-deposit programs.

Measuring beverage container recycling is not an exact science.

When a deposit is paid, the refund systems offer an opportunity to track sales and collection to the last unit. In general, the material collected is sorted by type and colour early on, so contamination plays a minor role.

In multi-material collection systems, accurate measurement is more difficult because beverage containers are mixed with other containers (e.g., peanut butter jars). It’s impossible to know exactly how many were collected. In addition, because multi-material systems measure based on weight versus unit, any contaminant mixed in with the material further weakens the precision of measurements.

The unintended consequences of mixed-collection and weightbased systems are that more non-recyclables are collected; paper and containers contaminate each other, resulting in primary and secondary processors having to deal with greater costs, lower yield rates, more material to dispose of, and increased equipment downtime and maintenance. These downstream losses necessitate rethinking how we measure recycling performance.

Who Pays What 2012 attempts to provide transparent performance

measurements that identify not only how many containers are collected but also what percentage are recycled.

The collection rate typically used usually represents the number of units collected versus the number of units sold in a jurisdiction. In multimaterial programs, however, the collection rate typically represents the weight of beverage containers shipped from the primary processor or sorter to the recycler (e.g., to PET reclaimers, glass beneficiators, or aluminum smelters).

This weight-based reporting will also include the weight of contaminants that have found their way into the load as a result of mixed collection. These contaminants include contents (left-over liquids in the container) and other materials, such as rocks, other plastics, and metal bits.

To determine a recycling rate, CM Consulting applies the processing efficiency rate (PER) to the collection rate. This procedure is required only for reported collection rates measured in weight (Manitoba, Ontario, and non-carbonated beverage containers in Quebec). Collection rates reported per unit will remain the same.

To determine reasonable PER estimates, recently published rates from industry were considered and interviews were conducted with beverage-container recyclers from central Canada.

The PER is important because it identifies weaknesses in the system, showing (for example) when beverage container material is counted as recycled when, in fact, it is not. (What was actually measured was

20 www.solidwastemag.com October/November 2012

swr o-n 2012 diversion pg 18-24.indd 20

12-10-30 12:46 PM

DIVERSION

“If the containers are clean, most will remain in Canada to be used by Canadian secondary processors and manufacturers.”

the weight of unusable contaminants that were sent to disposal after secondary processing.)

Applying the “low contamination” range of PER rates (i.e., high PER) to collection allows derivation of the recycling rate. The table on page 20 shows that the recycling rate for glass, PET, and (to a lesser extent) aluminium cans in the Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec multi-material systems is reduced from the collection rate by a low level of contamination in the reported tonnes. The recycling rates in deposit-return programs are not affected by processing efficiency because these rates are based on a unit count.

Evolution, benefits and the future Our deposit-refund programs have evolved by gaining efficiencies from on-site and on-truck October/November 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 21

swr o-n 2012 diversion pg 18-24.indd 21

12-10-30 12:47 PM

DIVERSION Contamination rates from multi-material collection (by weight).

compaction, accounting system streamlining, anti-fraud measures, reduced sortation, and greater levels of automation, all of which support cost reductions.

Residential curbside programs are also expanding to accept a wider variety of containers and to offer recycling in more public spaces.

Recycling efforts that focus on away-fromhome container discards are being launched in Manitoba, Quebec, and Ontario.

Canada gains economic benefits derived from our success in beverage container recycling. In 2010 alone, approximately $143 million worth of revenue was generated from nearly

“ In 2010, $143 million was generated from nearly 1.4 million tonnes of empty beverage containers sold to recyclers in Canada or abroad.�

1.4 million tonnes of empty beverage containers sold to recyclers in Canada or abroad.

Canadian jobs are also directly linked to our success in collection and recycling. For each tonne of container material collected, processed, and recycled, labour is required.

If the containers are clean, most will remain in Canada to be used by Canadian secondary processors and manufacturers. The benefits for these industries and Canadians include reduced energy required in manufacturing processes, lower emissions, and consistent access to Canadian-sourced raw material.

As programs further increase collection, special attention should be placed on ensuring that the quality of material collected is not

22 www.solidwastemag.com October/November 2012

swr o-n 2012 diversion pg 18-24.indd 22

12-10-30 12:47 PM

Volume of recycled milk cartons triples Environment

Over 15 Million milk empties recycled at Return-It Depots in 2011 British Columbians get top marks for their milk carton recycling efforts as over 15 million milk containers were returned to participating Return-It Depots last year.

“The volume of milk containers returned to participating Return-It Depots has tripled since 2006.” says Mike Dick, president of the BC Dairy Council.

No deposit = no refund This image is a simulation

Last year, 15 million milk jugs and cartons were recycled by British Columbians. If you were to stand them upright and side by side, they would reach from Vancouver to Prince George – and back!

(More than 1500 kilometers.)

Prince George

And did you know:

“The volume of milk containers returned to Return-It Depots has tripled since 2006.”

– Mike Dick, president of the BC Dairy Council.

“The amount of cartons and jugs that we have saved from landfills is quite significant,” says Dick. “It is hard to visualize the amount, but if you were to align 15 million jugs and cartons upright and side-by-side, the distance would cover from Vancouver to Prince George – and back. That’s over 1,500 kilometers!”

Over the past five years, the volume of milk containers returned to participating Return-It Depots has tripled.

Last year’s total volume returned: 630,000 kilograms.

Rinse and crush milk containers for recycling Preparing milk containers for recycling is easy; simply rinse them out and crush them. This stops the cartons and jugs from smelling and Since the company was makes them more compact first contracted to service to store and carry. It also the voluntary milk re- facilitates the recycling cycling program in 2006, process. Don’t forget to the number of Return-It remove and bring in the Depots that accept milk caps too, because they get empties has more than recycled separately. doubled from 70 to 166.

British Columbians can The growing network of bring their milk empties participating Return-It to participating Return-It Depots has made it easier Depots along with their for British Columbians deposit-bearing bottles and to do the right thing cans. It’s easy and convenient. and recycle responsibly.

Research shows that the To find the Return-It Depot average BC household nearest you, call 1-800-330-9767 empties 6.5 milk containers or visit www.return-it.ca/milk every month and that there are more than 1.8 million households in B.C., so the potential impact on the environment is significant.

Vancouver

kilograms from 2010 and a trend that the Dairy Council hopes will continue.

Number of participating Return-It Depots more than doubled

The voluntary recycling program provided by Return-It Depots allows consumers to drop off empty milk containers, at no charge, The 15 million containers to participating depots weighed in at 630,000 kiloand it is proving to be a grams (380,000 kilograms huge success. of milk cartons and 250,000 kilograms of plastic milk Services are provided by jugs). Year over year, the Encorp Pacific, which weight of recovered milk manages the Return-It containers has increased Depots throughout the by eight per cent – that’s province that accept milk an increase of 47,000 more containers for recycling.

swr o-n 2012 diversion pg 18-24.indd 23

There’s no refund on milk empties (because you didn’t pay a deposit), but you’ll have the satisfaction of knowing you are doing the right thing. Plastic jugs are the most popular form of packaging for milk in BC, polycoat milk cartons are also commonly used.

Although polycoat cartons are not usually accepted through curbside bluebox programs, milk carton recycling is offered at 166 participating Return-It Depots across the province.

All milk, cream, and milk substitute (soy, almond and rice) beverage containers are recyclable and accepted.

12-10-30 12:47 PM

DIVERSION Comparing collection and recycling rates from multi-material collection systems.

compromised to the point it’s no longer valuable domestically. Indeed, recycling must be organized to make sense both environmentally and economically.

Quality standards in sorting and processing should be set high enough by program operators and regulators to: maintain a competitive secondary commodity marketplace for the supply of containers; reduce the risk associated with commodity trading; and, to provide an opportunity for Canadian manufacturers to increase their use of recycled-content plastic, glass, and aluminum.

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

For a detailed technical look at a state-of-the-art recycling plant, read our Cover Story on page 8 in this edition. — ed.

Some footprints are bigger than others

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

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

For more information, visit CovantaEnergy.com.

24 www.solidwastemag.com October/November 2012

swr o-n 2012 diversion pg 18-24.indd 24

12-10-30 12:47 PM

CLEANTECH: WASTE BUSINESS

by John Nicholson “Scavenging is so popular at the City of Yellowknife landfill that is there’s a five dollar admission fee.”

Rural and Remote Communities Mobile waste-to-energy units for unique challenges.

Artist rendering of WTEC mobile unit onsite in a desert environment.

C

anadians living in urban communities sometimes don’t realize the vastness of the country they live in. Less than 20 percent of the population of Canada live in rural areas, yet these account for over 90 percent of the nation’s land mass.

For Canadians living in rural and remote communities, successful waste management methods are far different than those in heavily populated urban areas. Communities in the far north face further unique challenges.

The 3Rs approach to waste management in rural and remote communities may sound like a waste of time. A sparse population spread over a large geographic area means high transportation costs, small volumes of recoverable materials, and lack of local markets. A focus on reuse and reduction of waste is paramount in such places.

Reuse has taken on a new meaning in the Town of Norman Wells in the Northwest Territories. Whereas landfill scavenging is forbidden in most of Canada, the Town of Norman Wells set up a separate area at its landfill to allow for material segregation of incoming waste and the promotion of scavenging as a means of reuse. The scavenging program extended the life of the town’s landfill by several years.

Scavenging is so popular at the City of Yellowknife landfill that is there’s a five dollar admission fee. Locals consider scavenging as a form of shopping. There’s a dedicated area at the landfill where residents drop off material they deem reusable. (A city employee evaluates the material dropped off to ensure improper material is not placed in the salvage area.)

In general, it’s still profitable to recycle scrap metal in rural communities. In the Northwest Territories scrap metal may be stockpiled for years or decades before there’s sufficient volume for haulage to British Columbia or Alberta for processing. A 2007 survey of communities in NWT estimated that over 30,000 tonnes of ferrous/non-ferrous scrap metal stockpiled.

Mobile solutions Mobile solutions may be the answer to the waste management challenge in rural and remote communities. Recently, the Town of Old Crow in the Yukon awarded a contract to Vancouver-based Waste to Energy Canada (WTEC) to utilize its mobile gasification system for the town’s waste.

Old Crow has 300 residents and is located north of the Arctic Circle and inaccessible by road. The mobile gasification system supplied by October/November 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 25

swr o-n 2012 CTC waste bus pg 25-26.indd 25

12-10-30 12:47 PM

CLEANTECH: WASTE BUSINESS

Artist renderings of mobile WTEC units on trucks and on site in a winter environment.

WTEC is used to gasify the amount of waste generated daily and is also used to help mine an existing landfill. (Gasification is different from incineration in that the waste is heated in the absence of oxygen to produce synthetic gas [“syngas”] which can be used as fuel.)

The gasification system was designed by WTEC for remote locations such as isolated communities and remote operations such as and mining camps. They system can handle approximately 1.5 tonnes of waste per day.

The system is permanently housed in two 40-ft shipping containers.

These feature allows for easy deployment anywhere in the world with set-up and operation taking only hours.

A Burlington-based waste-to-energy company, Eco Waste Solutions, specializes in providing mobile systems to military and mining camps. This past summer the company announced it was awarded a contract to supply the Canadian forces with one of its mobile waste incineration systems. The entire system can be containerized in 20-foot shipping containers.

Eco Waste Solutions has an 18-year track record of successfully supplying mobile incineration systems. Communities that have benefited from the mobile system have included the Cree Nation of Wemindji in the James Bay area of Northern Quebec (population of 1200, three tonnes per day unit) and the City of Skagway in Alaska (which has an eight tonne per day mobile system).

There has been much progress across Canada in the management of waste in rural and remote areas. The days of open dumps and open burning are gone and modern waste management practices are being adopted. Although the waste hierarchy still applies in rural areas, the unique attributes of population and geography means a different set of solutions are necessary for an environmentally sound and economically feasible waste management system.

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

There’s a Story Behind It...

Env Cat bleed ad-may2010-B.qxd

5/25/10

12:49 PM

Page 1

The Italian Ministry for the Environment, Land and Sea, Department for Sustainable Development, Climate Change, and Energy, promotes the protection of the environment through the realization of projects aimed at developing new technologies with high environmental efficiency and through activities around the world in cooperation with numerous international organizations.

MINISTRY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT LAND AND SEA - ITALY

Italy:

your partner in clean technology

..It’s Deep.

Together, the Italian Ministry for the Environment, Land and Sea and the Italian Trade Commission aim to promote the use of Italian technologies and the involvement of Italian companies in the NAFTA region by encouraging scientific and commercial collaboration, and the exchange of best practices and know-how.

Visit us at Booth #1249.

The Italian Trade Commission is the official trade development and promotional agency of the Italian Government. Its mission is to support the internationalization of Italian firms and their consolidation in foreign markets. Headquartered in Rome, the ITC maintains a network of over 115 branch offices in more than 86 countries, including the United States, Canada and Mexico.

For further information: toronto@ice.it

www.italiancleantechnology.com

www.molokna.com | 1-877-558-5576

Made in Canada

26 www.solidwastemag.com October/November 2012 SWR_ad.indd 1

swr o-n 2012 CTC waste bus pg 25-26.indd 26

16/10/12 8:08 AM

12-10-30 12:47 PM

CLEANTECH: WASTE-TO-ENERGY

by John Nicholson “The cost of producing ethanol from waste is much higher than using corn.”

Waste to Ethanol New technology competes with corn-to-ethanol systems

(LtoR) Stephen Mandel, Mayor of Edmonton, holds refuse to be turned to ethanol, Vincent Chornet, President and CEO of Enerkem and Donald Pierce, President of GreenField Ethanol’s Advanced Biofuels Group, hold flasks representing the thermochemical process, and Doug Horner, Alberta Minister of Advanced Education and Technology, holds a gas can representing the final product during a photo op at Edmonton’s Waste Management Centre June 26, 2008. The site will become the world’s first industrial scale municipal waste-to-ethanol facility.

T

he production of ethanol and its utilization as a fuel in vehicles has been touted as a means of lessening the world’s dependence on fossil fuel while paying farmers for the excess corn they produce.

North American laws currently require ordinary gasoline to contain five per cent ethanol. Almost all the ethanol used in gasoline comes through the fermentation of corn. The utilization of corn to produce ethanol has received harsh criticism from environmentalists and economists with claims that it drives up the cost of food, damages the environment, and is economically unsustainable because of government subsidizes.

The conversion of waste to ethanol appears to have very few, if any critics, provided it’s not subsidized by the government. Residues from

the food, agriculture, and forestry industries can all be feedstock in the production of ethanol. The organic portion of municipal solid waste can also be used to produce ethanol.

The advantages of using waste to produce ethanol are many, with perhaps the largest one being that it solves a waste management problem while helping solve an energy problem.

Innovation A great deal of research and development is being poured into wasteto-ethanol technologies. For example, researchers at the University of Windsor are examining a microbial battery as a means of converting October/November 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 27

swr o-n 2012 CTC w-to-e pg 27-28.indd 27

12-10-30 12:42 PM

View of the Johnstown plant, Prescott Grain Terminal and St. Lawrence Seaway. (Inset: Greenfield’s Chatham, Ontario plant.)

municipal solid waste into ethanol. If commercialized, the system would combine anaerobic digestion with microbial battery technology.

Elsewhere, a Bioconversion Network of researchers from six Canadian universities is researching ways and means to more efficiently breakdown waste and produce ethanol. The key breakthrough for the Bioconversion Network will come when a means is found to produce ethanol fuel at a cost that competes with conventional gasoline.

Several Canadian-based companies are focused on the commercialization of waste-to-ethanol technologies, and are at various stages of development.

GreenField is Canada’s largest ethanol producer and has been doing this work for 20 years. Besides producing ethanol from corn, GreenField is also working on developing processes to make biofuel from waste.

The company’s Cellulosic Ethanol Division, established in 2007, is working on developing commercial-scale ethanol facilities through either biochemical or thermochemical conversion.

Biochemical research and development undertaken by GreenField is currently focused on achieving a simplified mechanical pre-treatment system with new fermentation techniques and enzyme technologies.

Research achievements have included the development of genetically modified yeast that can increase ethanol yield, and investigation of new enzyme technologies to reduce energy costs and optimize the continuous bio-refinery process.

GreenField partnered with Enerkem in the development of a thermochemical conversion method for the production of ethanol. Enerkem, based in Quebec, has been working on its proprietary technology for the past 11 years. It recently began producing cellulosic ethanol from waste

materials at its demonstration facility in Westbury, Quebec.

Enerkem’s thermochemical process, used to produce ethanol, consists of four steps: preparation, gasification, cleaning and conditioning of syngas, and catalytic synthesis. The key difference between Enerkem and its gasification technology competitors is the final step — the conversion of syngas to methanol and ethanol. Most other gasification companies utilize the syngas as fuel.

Enerkem is building a commercial-scale waste-to-ethanol facility in Edmonton that will use 100,000 tonnes per year of post-sorted municipal solid waste as feedstock. Operations are scheduled to start in early 2013. When fully operational the facility is expected to produce 38 million litres per year of methanol/ethanol.

Considerable government funding has helped keep the Enerkem afloat as it tested its proprietary technology. The Westbury plant received funding from the Quebec Ministry of Natural Resources and Wildlife and Sustainable Development Technology Canada.

The challenges will be considerable for new companies looking to build and operate a waste-to-ethanol facility. For starters, the cost of producing ethanol from waste is much higher than using corn. Therefore, it’s important to get adequately paid for taking the waste feedstock.

The other challenge for waste-to-ethanol companies is the consistency of the feedstock. Using corn to produce ethanol means a fairly consist chemical composition of feedstock. This may not always be the case if a company is relying on waste for its feedstock.

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

28 www.solidwastemag.com October/November 2012

swr o-n 2012 CTC w-to-e pg 27-28.indd 28

12-10-30 12:42 PM

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 o-n 2012 organic matters pg 29-31.indd 29

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

12-10-30 12:48 PM

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

by Paul van der Werf “Things have not gotten worse. It’s just that expectations have changed.”

Odour

Zero tolerance for zero tolerance

Installation of process piping for the aerated tunnel floor at the City of Guelph’s compost plant, built by Maple Reinders. Guelph’s composting facility passed odour testing requirements related to its C of A conducted this summer under full capacity conditions using organic waste from Guelph, Waterloo Region and Hamilton. After odour complaints last November, the city stopped taking organic waste into the plant. Maple Reinders reviewed the facility’s odour management and air containment systems, developed an action plan and made changes before the facility reopened in February. Some odour complaints have been received since then by the environment ministry, which investigated and concluded the odours were not traceable to the facility. As part of the initial stage of a three-year phase-in, a third of city households will get carts for curbside waste collection this fall. (INSET: Air exhaust stack at the plant.)

L

et’s face it: organic waste smells. The organic fraction of waste is dynamic — a microbial nation in constant motion. It breathes and emits halitosis-like plumes in the path of least resistance. We know that ever more in summer when the heat and (in some parts of the country) stifling humidity sets in like an irritated grandmother at a flea market. When it’s collected and consolidated it becomes ever less pleasant and can create critical masses that could, like hurricanes, become a named storm hurtling with stinky intensity from its point of generation.

Odour is a peculiar thing. It can evoke qualitative and dramatic responses from those subjected to its buffeting when the wind is right but the day becomes wrong. The peculiar thing is that it can’t easily and quickly be measured. Sure you can run around with a plastic teddler bag and submit this to an Odour Panel, but this is not exactly in real time. There are a few odour sniffer devices out there, and they offer little more.

Until the advent of the mass use of the automobile, the separation between odour and where we live was literally and figuratively much less pronounced than it is today. Many more of us lived in rural areas and were associated with rural life rather than commuting to some idyllic rural paradise where the hills are rolling but the cows and pigs are “odorless.”

Those of us living in urban areas understood that if you lived beside

a brewery or rendering plant that from time to time (and maybe all the time!) you were going to be impacted. Wise planners of the day made sure sufficient buffer zones were in place to keep the industrial away from the homesteads.

Today this is less so. Housing developments sprout up in the shadow of landfills, rendering plants and compost facilities. Where buffers for the inevitable once existed, houses now sit. There is a parallel in the decline species due to loss of habitat. The habitats of facilities that handle organic materials are its first line of defence against odour, with buffer zones as the fail safe mechanism.

Sometimes there’s not enough disclosure from real estate agents or proper due diligence from the prospective homeowner about where they are going to live. This is frustrating for organics processing facility operators, who may face nearby populations with unreasonable expectations that their facilities will never (ever!) impact on the community. The community tends to be naively shocked that such a thing could happen.

The shock stems in part from unreasonable expectations of technology providers that their systems will be lily white and smell like baby powder.

People have been taught that they have to tolerate very little. It’s not clear who exactly to blame for this but it falls within the larger umbrella of general victimhood and entitlement practiced by our society. We expect to

30 www.solidwastemag.com October/November 2012

swr o-n 2012 organic matters pg 29-31.indd 30

12-10-30 12:48 PM

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

live in some hermetically sealed bubble where we are never impacted by the world. We want all of the benefits but won’t accept any impact.

People protest something as obviously good as wind turbines; this is pure quixotic folly! This mindset has everyone out on a constant collision course where unreasonable expectations never get met. Facility operators are always on the defensive; the public is always on the offensive.

Yes, there are some legitimate concerns, but many times people just have a dull axe to grind.

The City of Vancouver, as detailed by Tristan Hopper in an article in the National Post (August 16, 2012), is considering codifying odour into a by-law as a result of odours from a large rendering plant in operation since 1994. Tellingly (and astutely), Ray Robb — Metro Vancouver’s manager of regulation and enforcement — was quoted as saying, “Things have not gotten worse. It’s just a matter that expectations have changed.”

Unreasonable odours are unreasonable. However, the expectation of no odour is also unreasonable. Somehow the rules and expectations need to be changed to allow people to enjoy their homes in peace, but understand that if they live around a facility that manages organic material and/or waste (including a rendering plant, composting facility, or fast food restaurant, etc.) that they’re going to smell it sometimes.

While it’s crucial that those who operate facilities that process organic materials have the appropriate abatement measures and procedures on place, it’s also reasonable to assume that the buffer zones will sometimes not be enough. The “zero tolerance” approach practiced today sets facilities up for failure and the people around them for disappointment, like the child who unwraps a present only to find something different than what they expected.

Paul van der Werf is President of 2cg Inc. in London, Ontario. Contact Paul at 2cg@sympatico.ca

Think of the Guardian as insurance for your compactor Only Wastequip offers fail-safe Watch Dog timers™ with our Guardian compactor power units • Watch Dog timers automatically shut down the compactor in the event of unintended continuous operation, preventing catastrophic failure • Automatic Maintenance Scheduler (AMS) alerts you when important preventative maintenance is required Protecting your investment through product innovation...

That’s Wastequip.

wastequip.com/guardian » 877-468-9278 or sales@wastequip.com

October/November 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 31

swr o-n 2012 organic matters pg 29-31.indd 31

12-10-30 12:48 PM

I C & I WA S T E

by Diane Blackburn “Since 1994 the company has diverted more than one million mattresses and box springs from Canadian landfills.”

Under the Mattress Recover Canada recycles a challenging product

I

t’s one of the sad ironies of our time that those with the greatest ability to protect the planet are those who wreak the most havoc upon it. Consider a single piece of furniture, common to every modern, middle-class household. Each inhabitant of the home (generally speaking) has their own and it’s not the flat screen TV or the cell phone (yet!).

Of course, it is the bed, a pricey piece of padded paradise to which retire nightly, laying our weary bones down in the hope of enjoying blissful, restorative rest.

Now beds haven’t always been the sumptuous places of repose with which we’re familiar today. Consider if you will the following chronology.

Neolithic Period: Humankind starts sleeping on primitive beds.

Ancient Egypt: Pallets are raised off the earth, at least for Pharaohs.

Ancient Rome: Ramps things up with the first mattresses filled with reeds, hay, wool or feathers. (Oh, the luxury!)

Renaissance: Mattresses with pea shucks, straws, some feathers stuffed into coarse ticks and covered with sumptuous brocades, vel-

vets and silks. Again, for the ruling class; peasants are still on straw close to or on the ground.

18th Century: Cast iron beds and cotton mattresses (attractive to bugs). Up until then even royalty had to share their sleep space with vermin … creepy!

19th Century: First coil spring construction for bedding patented (1865) but rope beds on wood frames are common. In the late 19th century the box spring is invented.

Fast forwarding through the 20th century we have innerspring mattresses and upholstered foundations, futons in the 1940s (who knew!), foam rubber, waterbeds (who can forget those), air-beds and, finally, pocket coils with multiple layers of soy memory foam, padding and pillow toppings in a variety of thicknesses with price tags north of $1,500.

We’re now closing in on the 21st century (1994) where 3Rs is the rallying cry for environmentalists.

Enter Simon Zysman, entrepreneur and disciple of sustainability,

If all you see is a cart, you’re missing the big picture.

Let Rehrig show you a Complete Asset Management Solution Route Number: 238 Account Address: 3492 Oak St. C.A.R.T.S. Identified: Two containers collected with only one container on billing record.

Providing Measurable Value Since 1913

©2012 Rehrig Pacific Company

Route Number: 238 Account Address: 6939 Maple Dr. C.A.R.T.S. Identified: Missing container #95G000231, located at non-paying account.*

Route

Monthly Recy Number: 238 -

cling Participa

tion Rate = 53%

Rehrig Pacific’s C.A.R.T.S. Program manages and tracks every container asset in inventory to deliver measurable results to your bottom line. Visit our website or scan the QR code and download our white paper, “There is More to Collection than Just Carts” to see how.

Phone: (800) 421-6244 Email: info@rehrigpacific.com Web: www.rehrigpacific.com

Come see us at Canadian Waste & Recycling Expo Booth #1363

Container Management Programs • Asset & Service Tracking • Route Auditing & Reporting • Premium Waste & Recycling Containers *C.A.R.T.S. customers have reported a 90% retrieval rate on lost/stolen containers

A FAMILY TRADITION OF GROWTH, SERVICE AND INNOVATION

32 www.solidwastemag.com October/November 2012

Date: 09/26/12

Client: Rehrig Pacific

swr o-n 2012 ic&i waste pg 32-34.indd 32

Account Director: Henry Artime

Job #: 04102012

File Name: 0410_RPC_ENV_SWR_Oct12

Editor:

Designer:

Revised By: ov

Page 1 of 1 Production: ov

12-10-30 12:48 PM

I C & I WA S T E

who establishes the first mattress recycling enterprise known anywhere: Recycle Canada. And so the gauntlet is thrown down. For the preceding 50 or more years, bedding has gone to the “dump” without a thought as to how all the textile and metal components would break down — who at that time gave it a second thought?

But mattresses are bulky and use up large quantities of landfill space.

So slowly, it starts to matter how used bedding is going to its final rest.

The heart of Zysman’s sustainability model is reuse. Recycle Canada reuses virtually all components to safely and legally rebuild mattresses for the working poor. Not just a socially-conscious path, but one that ensures the preservation of a significant portion of the original component value.

Not all other recyclers follow the reuse model. The most common process is to tear down and then direct components to secondary markets. The original component value is destroyed, reducing the value to below processing cost. This results in a non-sustainable fee structure that is greater than the cost to landfill.

Recycle Canada’s long-term strategy is continuous improvement of the process technology to reduce unit labour costs and add value to components in reuse, thereby enabling mattress recycling to “spring up” in regions of the world where landfill costs are still relatively low. In these regions, without a sustainable Recycle-Canada-type of solution and without political will or means to subsidize non sustainable alternatives,

mattress recycling does not and will not happen.

In August 2012, Simon Zysman’s leadership in the development of a sustainable reuse/recycling model resulted in Recover Canada winning the City of Toronto’s multi-year, 4,500 tonnes per annum mattress recycling contract. Recover Canada takes pride in its collaboration with Toronto in the development and implementation of this unique program where Toronto collects the materials from single and multifamily dwellings in a dedicated soft goods pickup program. Zysman’s hopes this sustainable model will be adopted by municipalities world-wide.

Since 1994 the company has diverted more than one million mattresses and box springs from Canadian landfills (over 27,000 tonnes) and has served not only Toronto but also major retailers. Recover Canada has developed markets for its mattress renewal services with the Canadian military, numerous Canadian universities and colleges, and has partnered with Correctional Services Canada to set up mattress renewal facilities inside of its facilities.

Sleep tight Canada, this is one recycling program that can put your mind to rest.

Diane Blackburn is Events Manager for the Recycling Council of Ontario (RCO) and produces the RCO’s annual Waste Minimization Awards. This column regularly profiles finalists and winners from that awards program. Contact Diane at events.rco.on.ca

October/November 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 33

swr o-n 2012 ic&i waste pg 32-34.indd 33

12-10-30 12:49 PM

swr o-n 2012 ic&i waste pg 32-34.indd 34

12-10-30 12:49 PM

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

by Rosalind Cooper, L.L.B. “Provisions that were considered unnecessarily onerous by facility operators were made more flexible.”

Ontario Revises Composting Framework Long-awaited new quality categories arrive

O

n September 24, 2012, Ontario’s environment ministry released its proposed Guideline for Composting Facilities and Compost Use in Ontario — as well as the proposed regulatory amendments — for a sixty-day comment period that expires on January 23, 2013. The guideline replaces the former compost guideline originally developed in 1991 (and then updated in 2004), and is the result of consultations on proposed revisions to the original document that started back in 2009.

The previous compost framework primarily addressed low-tech outdoor leaf-and-yard waste composting, and did not support composting of certain types of organic wastes.

Previous guideline

and B. Category AA is considered to have the highest quality standards, similar to standards under the previous guideline, but with some modifications. This category may not contain sewage bio-solids, pulp and paper bio-solids, or septage as feedstock. It also requires the use of zinc and copper standards that are more stringent than Category A compost. Category AA may be used without restrictions or approvals both on and off farm.

Category A is consistent with the Category A quality guidelines found in the CCME compost standards. It allows for slightly higher concentrations of zinc and copper and may use bio-solids, pulp and paper bio-solids, or septage as feedstock (maximum 25 per cent of total feedstock), but must still meet metal standards on input feedstock. Category A must include: labelling information that provides for maximum application rates; identification of any bio-solids and domestic septage used

Ontario’s former compost guideline had one compost standard, whereas the other nine provinces have adopted compost standards similar to those endorsed by the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). Compost practitioners said this inconsistency needed rectification to even the playing field and remove competitive barriers for Ontario compost for cross-provincial boundary sales.

The new compost framework does several things. It intends to improve the operation of composting facilities by providing detailed guidance on facility location, design, and operation and maintenance in order to reduce potential off-site impacts. The new framework also sets out guidance for municipal managers on organics collection program design.

Two documents form part of the guideline: The first is the Ontario Compost Quality Standards; and the second is the Guideline for the Production of Compost in Ontario. The new compost framework is supported by amendments to Regulation 347 under the Environmental Protection Act (which deals with waste) and Ontario Regulation 267/03 under the Nutrient Management Act, 2002.

Compost standards The document containing the standards includes three new compost standards: Category AA, A October/November 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 35

swr o-n 2012 regrndup pg 35-37.indd 35

12-10-30 12:49 PM

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

as feedstock; and, a warning that the product should not be used on soils with elevated copper or zinc concentrations. (These requirements ensure that generators inform end-users about proper compost application, and the composition of the compost.) Category A compost may be used without an approval both on and off farm.

Category B is consistent with the Category B quality guidelines found in the CCME compost standards. It has less restrictive metals and foreign matter standards than categories A and AA. Category B may use bio-solids as feedstock, but must still meet the same metal standards for feedstock as Category A. Category B requires government approval for use and transportation.

The standards document also contains other requirements. For example, quality standards (for metals, pathogens, maturity and foreign

matter) are included for each category of compost that reflects the quality of the compost and a risk-based approach to public health and environmental protection. There are also new feedstock standards for metals concentrations for each category.

Regulatory amendments The amendments to Regulation 347 provide exemptions from the otherwise applicable approval requirements. The amendments exempt Category AA compost that meets the quality standards and Category A compost that meets both the quality standards and labeling requirements. Category B compost is not exempt from approval requirements, but subject to approvals; Category B compost may be used in a variety of regulated applications, such as on agricultural land as a “nutrient” or as a soil conditioner on non-

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

36 www.solidwastemag.com October/November 2012

swr o-n 2012 regrndup pg 35-37.indd 36

12-10-30 12:49 PM

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

“Compost practitioners said this inconsistency needed rectification to even the playing field and remove competitive barriers for Ontario compost for cross-provincial boundary sales.

agricultural land (pursuant to an organic soil conditioning site environmental compliance approval).

Amendments have also been made to O. Reg. 267/03 under the Nutrient Management Act, 2002 and to documents referenced by this regulation. The amendments ensure consistency with the new standards and the amendments to Regulation 347. Since both Category AA and A compost are required to meet stringent metal, pathogen, maturity and foreign matter content requirements, these materials are excluded from testing requirements and application restrictions under the Nutrient Management Act, 2002.

Most of the key concepts in this document are consistent with the original proposed document that was posted on the Environmental Registry in November 2009. The guideline includes best practices guidance for composting facilities, including: land-use planning and site selection; site and

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

ZES ODOU ALI R TR

S

NE U

Conclusion

facility design considerations; operations procedures, feedstock management; and, prevention and control of potential adverse effects, such as odour. In addition, those provisions that were considered unnecessarily onerous by facility operators were made more flexible but, in some cases, provisions were strengthened to decrease risks.

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

October/November 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 37

swr o-n 2012 regrndup pg 35-37.indd 37

12-10-30 12:49 PM

OWMA REPORT

by Peter Hargreave “OES is unable to continue to pay recyclers for recovering and recycling materials.”

E-Waste Program Jeopardized OES program cuts planned

W

aste Diversion Ontario (WDO), the overseer of the Ontario’s recycling programs, is at a stand-off with Ontario Electronic Stewardship (OES) — a private recycling agency appointed by the Ontario Ministry of Environment to operate an electronic waste recycling program in the province.

At the heart of the dispute is OES’ refusal to adopt a financial cost recovery model as directed by the environment minister. As a result, OES is headed for unsustainable program deficits.

On February 9, 2012, the environment minister directed OES to work with WDO to develop a financial model for OES that would stabilize its finances. The approach would ensure that OES would run neither financial deficits nor surpluses, have sufficient revenue to pay for environmentallysound recycling, and eliminate consumer fees charged at the point-of-sale.

Seven months later, no progress has been made on OES’ sustainable funding formula. It appears that OES is refusing to adopt any financing approach that would prevent electronic product manufacturers from passing program costs on to consumers as “eco fees.” OES’ preferred approach is simply to increase existing electronics eco-fees to consumers.

The impasse has destabilized the program to the point that OES is unable to continue to pay recyclers for recovering and recycling materi-

als, and will cut Processor Incentives (recycling payments) drastically on October 1, 2012.

Having just achieved recovery of 50 per cent of the electronic waste generated in the province annually, OES will now effectively be gutting the program.

“OES’ cuts undermine the progress made to ensure e-waste is recycled by legitimate processors and hazardous materials diverted from disposal,” says Rob Cook, CEO of the Ontario Waste Management Association (OWMA). “In acquiescing to significant reductions to processors, WDO has undermined the very principles on which it was established — to increase waste diversion, protect the environment, and ensure stability in the recycling industry.”

Cook emphasizes the need to increase waste diversion and ensure stable recycling markets for both public and private collection and processing.

The OWMA was founded in 1977 and speaks for nearly 300 private and public sector members who provide the products and services for the proper management of waste and recyclable materials.

Peter Hargreave is Director, Policy & Planning, of the Ontario Waste Man­ agement Association (OWMA). Contact Peter at phargreave@owma.org

If You’re not

Moving Forward

You’re aLreadY behInd. Our customers lead the industry.

What’s next.

Bulk Handling SySteMS eugene, oregon uSa | 866.688.2066

By investing in the most innovative technology and plant design available, our customers are leaving their competition behind.

They’re reaping the rewards through lower labour costs, higher recovery rates and minimal downtime. This can only be achieved with the best equipment for the job. You want to know just how profitable the right system can be? Let the global leader show what we can do for you. www.bulkhandlingsystems.com

38 www.solidwastemag.com October/November 2012

swr o-n 2012 owma report pg 38.indd 38

12-10-30 12:49 PM

EQUIPMENT

FIELD EXPERTS

HEAVY DUTY ELECTROMAGNETIC VIBRATORY FEEDER

application requirements. Feeders can be arranged for either base or suspension mounting.

Eriez’ electromagnetic feeders require minimal maintenance. They feature an electromagnetic design that has no moving parts such as shafts, cams or bearings, thus eliminating the need for lubrication. The units’ advanced AC feeders can be wired to any AC line and do not require a control to operate.

For precise, instantaneous feed adjustment, frequent cycling of feeder or automated operation, Eriez offers rugged solid-state controls.

Controls come standard in NEMA 12 enclosures for dusty environments, with other enclosures available.

EDDY CURRENT NONFERROUS METAL SEPARATORS

duce eddy currents into nonferrous metals.

This produces repelling forces that separate the nonferrous metals from non-metallics, providing a cleaner product for further processing.

Removal of nonferrous metals is selective and product loss is minimized.

The Eddy Current Rotor is the heart of the separator. Eriez builds four different rotor designs: Extreme Concentric, Rare Earth arched Concentric (REA), LT 2 Eccentric and ST 2 Eccentric, for a multitude of applications.

Rotors are available as separate items. All Eriez rotors use patented Kevlar/ceramic tile surface shells and grease retainer chambers.

They typically are balanced to operate at 3000 RPM. Visit www.eriez.com

Eriez Heavy Duty Electromagnetic Vibratory Feeders are ideal for handling coal, ore, aggregates, slag or wherever high volume, controlled feeding is required. With their energysaving intermeshed AC/permanent magnet drive, these feeders are the workhorses in Eriez’ huge stable of Vibratory Feeders and Conveyors.

The feeders are available in nine models with capacities to 850 tons (765 MT) per hour.

Feeders are available with overhead drives, multiple drive arrangements, grizzlie decks and dust covers to meet customers’ unique

Eriez Eddy Current Nonferrous Metal Separators feature improved permanent magnetic circuits with Rare Earth Erium 3000, which is five times stronger than conventional permanent magnets, for stronger eddy currents and matchless separation of nonferrous materials.

Eriez Eddy Current Separators (ECS) remove nonferrous metallics from plastics, glass cullet, electronic scrap, automobile shredder residue (ASR), boiler bottom ash, spent foundry core sand, municipal solid waste, co-mingled recyclables, urban wood waste and mixed metals.

In operation, these nonferrous separators utilize permanent Rare Earth magnets to in-

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

www.liebherr.ca

October/November 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 39

swr o-n 2012 new products pg 39.indd 39

12-10-30 12:50 PM

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

by Martin Demers “You get a dynamic and interactive display of fleet operations that saves time over running multiple reports.”

Fleet Dashboards A clear view into fleet operations

R

unning an efficient waste or recycling fleet means staying on top of every aspect of the fleet operations and having answers to a myriad of critical questions.

Questions like: • Where are my trucks right now?

• What is the collection status of each route?

• When was each customer or cart serviced?

• Are my drivers driving safely?

• How can I reduce overtime costs?

• Am I spending too much on fuel because of unnecessary idling?

• Are my routes optimized for maximum efficiencies?

• How do I improve response times for customer service issues?

• Are customer billings accurate?

Getting answers to these questions traditionally meant spending hours pouring over countless reports and data to identify trends and anomalies for better decision-making. It also meant getting anecdotal information or opinions that might not be objective or strictly factual.

For the most part, this was simply too time-consuming to undertake effectively. While big companies have the resources to conduct broadbased data gathering, research and analysis, smaller companies typically don’t.

Enter digital or executive “dashboards.”

40 www.solidwastemag.com October/November 2012

swr o-n 2012 trans tech pg 40-41.indd 40

12-10-30 12:50 PM

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

Newer technologies have brought this Fortune 500 concept to companies of all sizes. For waste executives, dashboards deliver immediate visibility into all aspects of fleet operations to help them manage their organization more effectively. These dashboards are increasingly becoming a part of waste fleet management solutions and are typically designed to track key fleet and driver performance indicators (KPIs) to flag any potential problem areas.

With a fleet management dashboard, KPIs are proactively tracked and presented to you for immediate review, regardless of your company size. You no longer have to pull the data from multiple sources, analyze it and extrapolate key findings. A fleet management dashboard can easily track and distil the information you need and display it in real-time.

How fleet dashboards work

braking, break times, delayed starts, idle times; 2. Customer related: such as service times, average yards per lift, average lbs. per yards; 3. Route related: such as drive time between stops, time to first stop, number of stops.

Reporting capabilities should include fleet reports that allow you to assess overall fleet efficiencies (driver performance, fuel consumption, fleet performance) and vehicle reports that let you monitor vehicle usage (for accidents, alarms, fuel tax).

The benefits of a fleet management dashboard are wide-ranging. You can make much better-informed decisions; a visual presentation of performance measures lets you identify trends in driver behaviour, track vehicles and service performance, and measure efficiencies. You get a complete and real-time view.

By working from a universal set of metrics and a single view into these, all internal functions

can track organizational goals and performance.

You get a dynamic and interactive display of fleet operations that saves time over running multiple reports, lets you better manage routes and drivers, and enables faster responses and resolution to customer service issues. By being able to detect and identify problem areas, you can better manage exceptions, deal with driver or vehicle issues, and ensure route efficiencies.

Dashboards can be your window into your entire fleet operations. When implementing a fleet management or reporting solution, be sure to take advantage of a dashboard component. You will be sure to see the positive impact on business intelligence and overall efficiencies.

Martin Demers is CEO of FleetMind in Montreal, Quebec. Contact Martin at mdemers@fleetmind.com

Fleet management dashboards bring together onboard computing, GPS technologies and ECM connections to provide you with a single-view interface into your fleet operations and performance.

Dashboard and related reporting capabilities are typically customized and let you check on fleet and driver activity and trends at a glance. You can view everything from weekly or monthly high-level trends, or track detailed and individual performance data.

You can set thresholds that are positive, cautionary or negative to automatically highlight key results. From excess speeding to customer stop times to idle times, you can track virtually every aspect of daily fleet and driver activity to understand the problems and respond effectively.

For example, if your goal is to reduce excessive overtime hours, you no longer need to follow up information from manual or other disparate sources. You can now set the dashboard to proactively track time-sensitive KPIs to flag problem areas that will identify potential changes to achieve your time reduction goal.

A dashboard typically works seamlessly with reporting software to monitor performance metrics that are important to your business. These could be: 1. Driver related: such as excess speeds, hard October/November 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 41

swr o-n 2012 trans tech pg 40-41.indd 41

12-10-30 12:50 PM

COLLECTION

by Mike Birett “Compaction systems are about more than just transporting more material per load.”

Compaction Study shows big savings to rural depots

Compaction unit at the rural Township of McKellar, Ontario.

C

ommunities throughout rural and northern Ontario are confronted with unique waste management issues such as seasonally fluctuating populations, limited access to markets, and long hauling distances. These obstacles present significant operational and economic challenges to communities like the Township of McKellar, Ontario.

McKellar, located on Highway 124 approximately 20 kms northeast of Parry Sound, has a year round population of only 927 persons (with approximately 66 per cent of the 1,526 households in the municipality being seasonal).

Like many municipalities in the area, the McKellar hauled two-stream recyclables from its public depot one-way to the nearest material recovery facility (MRF) located in Bracebridge, in rented twenty-eight-yard loosefilled roll-off bins — a distance of 112 kilometres. The loose-filled rolloffs held an average of 0.53 tonnes of mixed recycling and 1.26 tonnes of mixed fibre, resulting in 3.25 trips/month for mixed containers loads, and 3.33 trips/month for mixed fibre loads. Low load weights, in conjunction

with the high number of monthly trips to the recycling facility, caused costs at the transfer station to come under scrutiny.

With $76,000 in funding from the Continuous Improvement Fund, the township purchased and installed two RJ 225 VL Stationary Solar Compactors (solar-powered compactors) and four forty-yard roll-off bins at the town’s transfer station. The results were immediate; over a typical three-month window prior to installation of the compactors and new bins, the town’s costs for shipping recyclables averaged $2,600/ month. In the first three months after installation of the new equipment, McKellar’s hauling costs were reduced to below $900/month, for a net savings of approximately $1,700 per month.

Compared with the 2009 hauling costs utilizing 28-yard roll-offs, the savings from the new compaction units averaged over $30,000/yr. With a capital and installation cost of approximately $123,000, the system — which was commissioned in November of 2011 — has a projected payback of just over four years, after which time the savings will continue.

42 www.solidwastemag.com October/November 2012

swr o-n 2012 collection pg 42-43.indd 42

12-10-30 12:57 PM

COLLECTION

CIF#280 Pre and Post Compaction Cost Comparison

Lifts

Tipping Fees

Shipping Fees

Pre Compaction

79

$2,733.90

Post Compaction

15

$2,733.90

Site staff has experienced little or no impact on their workload as a result of the new system and maintenance has not been a problem (other than minor commissioning issues such as optimization of the compression rate).

While the new system has not reduced labour requirements, the system does allow site staff to monitor when the compactor bins are reaching capacity. This feature allows them to eliminate unnecessary scheduled pickups while still ensuring there is sufficient capacity to handle weekend spikes in traffic.

Compaction systems are about more than

Container Rental

Fuel Surcharge

$26,824.76

$2,197.38

$5,742.01

$1,874.94

$39,372.99

$5093.25

$0.00

$1,090.20

$445.87

$9,363.22

just transporting more material per load; they also allow municipalities to haul further at lower unit costs, enabling them to reach out to previously inaccessible markets. This potential to access other processors increases the opportunity for improved competition and lower processing costs — a key challenge for many rural and remote municipalities.

To date, the CIF has invested more $2.8 million in over 17 compaction and transfer systems throughout Ontario, with all but one project generating significant savings. With fuel costs continuing to rise, municipalities

Taxes

Total

will need to pay even more attention to optimization of load weights and the role compaction plays in doing so.

This article was drawn from the final report of CIF Project 280 written by Paul Shipway, who managed the project while at McKellar Township. The report can be found at www.wdo.ca/ cif/projects/projects.htm Mike Birett is Director of the Continuous Improvement Fund in Barrie, Ontario.

Contact Mike at mbirett@wdo.ca

Wide Area Coverage | Zone de couverture étendue *Seamless Communication - Anytime, Anywhere | *Contact continu, n’importe quand, n’importe où Connecting you from Québec City to Windsor | Couverture de la Ville de Québec – à Windsor Cost Effective | Rentable SEAMLESS

Mobile Business Communications Greater Toronto Area Golden Horseshoe 800-637-1977 416-443-9555 www.mobilebusinesscom.com

COMMUNICATION

Metrocom Canada Montreal Trois-Rivières 877-733-3400 www.metrocom.com

Québec City

October/November 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 43

swr o-n 2012 collection pg 42-43.indd 43

12-10-30 12:58 PM

OBITUARY

A Tribute to Pat Franklin

P

atricia Farrell Franklin — a well-known Franklin, children, Kimberly (Steve) Trundle person in the recycling industry — pass­ of Falls Church, and Devin (Michelle Apland) Franklin, Lebanon, NY. Her first child, Dennis ed away October 14, 2012 at Ruby MeFranklin, passed away in 2008. She had morial Hospital in Morgantown, West Virfour grandchildren: Claire, Scott and Wyatt ginia. She was critically injured the day before Trundle, and Cedar Franklin. when struck by a pickup truck while crossing In addition to being a schoolteacher while an intersection in Oakland, Maryland. her children were young, Pat was active in Pat was born May 11, 1941 in Washington, northern VA politics and community matDC where she grew up, graduating from ters, including the League of Women Voters.

Falls Church (VA) High School in 1959 and Drawing on her passion as a civic activist, from William and Mary College in 1963. She is Project1 11/13/06 10:28 AM Page 1 her basement in 1991 founded the Container survived by her husband of 48 years, Jay D. Pat Franklin

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

www.municipalwaste.ca

Recycling Institute (CRI), a non-profit organization that supports beverage-container deposit laws and recycling programs.

Pat worked tirelessly to grow CRI from a shoestring operation to an internationallyrecognized source of original information and analysis on beverage-container recycling in the United States and Canada. She spearheaded a series of Bottle Bill Summits, spoke at scores of recycling conferences, and gave hundred of media interviews. Pat was instrumental in getting then-Senator Jim Jeffords of Vermont to sponsor a National Bottle Bill initiative, testifying before the Committee on the Environment and Public Works on Capitol Hill. She wrote important policy papers and founded two significant recycling websites.

Although Pat retired as Executive Director of CRI in 2007, her work lives on in the passage of a bottle bill in Hawaii and in bottle bill expansions in Connecticut, New York, and Oregon.

A month before her death, Pat was the oldest participant the 2012 SavageMan Triathlon at Deep Creek Lake State Park. Riding the 40k bicycle segment, she finished eleven minutes faster than she did in 2011.

Contributions in Pat Franklin’s memory may be made to either the Flying Deer Nature Center, http://flyingdeernaturecenter. org/contact.html , the Joanna M. Nicolay Melanoma Foundation, Oakland, MD http://www.melanomaresource.org/index. php/site/content/donatetothefoundation/ or to the Container Recycling Institute, Culver City, CA http://www.containerrecycling.org/

44 www.solidwastemag.com October/November 2012

swr o-n 2012 obituary pg 44.indd 44

12-10-30 12:51 PM

Advertisers’ Index Company

OWMA

Page #

Americana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Bulk Handling Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Canada Fibers Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Canadian Business Press . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 City of Toronto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Clean Energy Fuels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Covanta Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 CP Group, The . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Ecolo Odour Control Technologies Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Emterra Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Encorp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Environmental Business Consultants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 EPI Environmental Products Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Eriez . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Glad . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 AD Italian 6/5/07 Trade .7:33 . . . . AM . . . .Page . . . . .1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Keith Walking Floors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Liebherr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Company

October/November 2012

Page #

Machinex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Mack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Mobile Communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Molok . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Municipal Waste Association . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Ontario Waste Management Association . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Paradigm Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Paul Vander Werf/2cg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Rehrig Pacific Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 The Curotto-Can . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Trux Route Management Systems Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Vulcan On-Board Scales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Van Dyk Balers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Walinga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Walker Environmental Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Walker Magnetics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Wastequip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

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 October/November 2012 www.solidwastemag.com 45

swr o-n 2012 ad idx pg 45.indd 45

12-10-30 1:04 PM

BLOG

by David McRobert “The current trend to automate operations should reduce back injuries.”

Health & Safety and the Waste Industry

O

n August 17, Ellen Moorhouse, a columnist with the Toronto a very high price for their service to our communities. They sustain serStar, wrote a very flattering review of my new book, My Muious back injuries — among other shocks — partly due to people overnicipal Recycling Program Made Me Fat And Sick: How Well loading their waste containers.

Intentioned Environmentalists Teamed Up With The Soft Drink Industry Recently, as reported by the Windsor Star, a worker collecting muTo Promote Obesity And Injure Workers. nicipal waste in Windsor, Ontario managed to get his arm caught in a Since the article was published, I’ve been contacted by dozens of crushing mechanism. He somehow coaxed the local neighbours to majournalists, academics, experts, activists and others. My thanks to all of nipulate the various levers and mechanisms and free his arm before the them for their comments. paramedics arrived.

I want to discuss issues related to occupational health and safety This fellow seems to have gotten off lightly, but not everyone is so (OHS) analyses of our approaches to waste management. My research fortunate. For example, in November 2011, BFI Canada Inc. was fined is based on a thorough review of literature and Ontario Worker Safety $150,000 for a violation of the Ontario Occupational Health and Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) data. I worked in the Policy Branch at the Act (OHSA) after a worker’s foot was run over by a collection truck.

Ministry of Labour in 1989 and then I worked for Workplace Health While performing his duties on May 28, 2009, the poor fellow got and Safety Agency (WHSA) in 1993 out of the truck while it was still moving, and 1994, so unlike many waste policy and the truck ran over his foot. A labour wonks perhaps I know enough to be ministry investigation found the comdangerous, to paraphrase Alexander pany had safety procedures prohibiting Pope’s observation. workers from exiting a moving vehicle, Back in the 1970s my mom and but that the temporary worker was not teachers would sing from the same properly trained. hymnbook: if you don’t work hard in Waste and recycling workers who school, you could end up collecting sustain serious injuries face precarious garbage. As if to spite them, I ended situations afterward. If they’re employed up becoming a waste management and by a large municipality, the workers may environmental lawyer. And I have spent initially feel secure because their munidozens of days inspecting garbage and cipal employers have to accommodate recyclables and pondering the conunthem under worker compensation rules. drums associated with sustainable waste Workers from GFL use automated equipment to load recyclables and In theory, injured private sector emsystems. residual waste into a truck, as part of the City of Toronto’s cart-based waste ployees are similarly accommodated.

On the OHS front, the story is com- management system. Use of this automated equipment boosts collection But often there are no other jobs that an plex. Collecting garbage and recyclables efficiency while reducing workplace injuries from repetitive stress, back injured worker can do and the employer strain, etc. Photo by Guy Crittenden in trucks on our streets is dangerous. finds a way to get rid of the non-unionInjury rates are high, as indicated in the 1993 WHSA report on the topic ized worker after a relatively short period. This is one reason why there’s included in my book. Garbage workers are regularly exposed to extreme pressure to privatize garbage pick-up. weather conditions and hazardous waste.

To the credit of public and private haulers, the current trend is to Recyclable materials sent to material recovery facilities (MRFs) have automate operations, which reduces lifting hazards and should reduce to be sorted. This work causes much higher rates of repetitive strain injurback injuries. ies (RSIs) compared to those at container depots (such as those of the In future articles, I will examine the crackdown on various aspects of Liquor Control Board of Ontario [LCBO]), because the MRF conveyor garbage and 3Rs operations in the past couple of years. belts move very fast. (For up-to-date information about deposit-refund systems for used beverage containers in Canada, see article on page 18.)

David McRobert is an Ontario-based environmental and energy Research I conducted for Ontario’s Ministry of the Environment in lawyer and an online columnist for this magazine. Contact David at 1993 demonstrated that sanitary engineers (a.k.a. garbage workers) pay mcrobert@sympatico.ca

46 www.solidwastemag.com October/November 2012

swr o-n 2012 blog pg 46.indd 46

12-10-30 12:56 PM

The CP Group is your complete MRF provider.

• Single Stream Recycling • Municipal Solid Waste • Front-End Waste to Energy

• Construction & Demolition • Commercial & Industrial • eWaste & more...

One powerful team for all your equipment needs.

Team up w i t h t h e C P G r o u p t o d a y !

CALL 888.837.5065 OR VISIT www.theCPgrp.com

G ET TH E P OWE R

swr o-n 2012 CPG ad pg 47.indd 47

12-10-30 12:41 PM

ng at Fueli an 80 th more s across n o i t loca America h t Nor

CESolutionsSolidWaste-Canada-7-17-12.indd 1 swr o-n 2012 clean energy ad pg 48.indd 48

7/17/12 9:39 AM 12-10-30 12:56 PM