Restructuring of the electric utility industry has received much attention in the national media as higher electric rates have been experienced this year in major population centers such as San Diego, CA and Westchester County, NY. Further, the lack of adequate electric capacity (and/or the ability to transmit the electricity) has continued to plague major metropolitan areas such as Detroit, MI and Silicon Valley. What role does waste to energy have in helping solve these problems? This paper will discuss the real life experience of a waste to energy project (Bristol, CT Resource Recovery Facility) in the rapidly changing world of electric deregulation. When Connecticut passed its restructuring legislation in 1998 (Public Act 98-28), no one realized how much effort would have to be spent at the agency level to preserve and protect existing power purchase agreements, especially those with “above market” pricing structures. In a state such as Connecticut where the adopted legislation was considered very favorable to private power producers such as waste to energy, many surprises have occurred during the implementation of the legislation. Understanding how Connecticut’s electric restructuring legislation has been implemented will help those with interests in any waste to energy, landfill gas, biomass or other renewable power source be better prepared to manage similar state and federal legislative initiatives.

Recent attention in the North American market has focused on managing food waste biologically using anaerobic digestion (AD) technology, which produces a biogas that can be used to generate electricity and a digestate or residue that can be used as a fertilizer, or composted and used as a soil amendment. The increased focus on AD is driven by the desire to increase waste diversion rates and a perception that AD is a “greener” approach to managing food waste than landfilling or conventional waste-to-energy (WTE) technology. Policy makers in some cases have already concluded that AD of source separated organics is preferable to landfilling and WTE. While the environmental benefits of AD over landfilling are obvious, especially for landfill sites without active gas collection systems, the benefits are less clear when compared to conventional WTE technology since relatively little analysis has been performed to date. Two environmental considerations often associated with being a “green technology” are energy recovery potential and greenhouse gas generation. This paper examines the amount of energy that can be produced by treating food waste biologically using AD compared to treating the same material thermally using mass burn WTE, which is the most commonly used WTE technology. The impact on net greenhouse gas emissions, namely carbon dioxide generation, from each technology is also compared taking into account a variety of factors including differences in the percentage of the feedstock carbon converted to carbon dioxide, the amount of fossil fuel avoided as a result of power generation, and the amount of vehicle emissions associated with collection and transportation of source separated food waste. This paper also compares other important considerations such as capital and operating costs, residuals management, and odor control.

Currently, there are 86 communities in the U.S. which employ waste-to-energy (WTE) facilities as a means of high quality solid waste disposal. The WTE process beneficially produces electricity while reducing the volume of landfill waste by up to 90 percent, thereby extending the remaining life of a community’s landfill more than ten-fold. However, the traditional WTE process requires a significant volume of water. This interdependency is often referred to as the “water-energy nexus.” An innovative approach was needed to optimize water conservation for a new 3,000-ton-per-day (TPD) mass burn WTE facility in Palm Beach County (PBREF2). With this in mind, a cascading water management system (CWMS) was developed that uses alternative water supply sources and a cascading hierarchy of water systems that maximize reuse to meet the new facility’s water needs. The selection of an air-cooled condenser to be used for cooling purposes, instead of the wet cooling systems traditionally in place at these facilities will also significantly reduce the amount of water needed in the overall process. The WTE facility will be constructed adjacent to an existing 2,000-TPD refuse-derived fuel facility (PBREF1), allowing beneficial reuse of some of the cooling tower blowdown from the RDF facility as a source of supply water in the new facility. The reuse of this process wastewater will conserve clean water sources that otherwise would have to be used as a source of makeup to the new facility, as well as reduce the amount of wastewater disposed through deep-well injection from the RDF facility. Harvested rainwater and industrial supply well water will also be used as alternative sources of supply to the new facility. The innovative CWMS will maximize reuse and reduce the amount of makeup water needed to the system. As water conservation continues to be of high concern in all areas of the globe, this concept can be applied to other WTE and industrial facilities. This paper will provide an overview of the innovative CWMS that has been designed for the PBREF2 facility.

This paper is based on data compiled in the course of developing, for InterAmerican Development Bank (IDB), a WTE Guidebook for managers and policymakers in the Latin America and Caribbean region. As part of this work, a list was compiled of nearly all plants in the world that thermally treat nearly 200 million tons of municipal solid wastes (MSW) and produce electricity and heat. An estimated 200 WTE facilities were built, during the first decade of the 21st century, mostly in Europe and Asia. The great majority of these plants use the grate combustion of as-received MSW and produce electricity. The dominance of the grate combustion technology is apparently due to simplicity of operation, high plant availability (>90%), and facility for training personnel at existing plants. Novel gasification processes have been implemented mostly in Japan but a compilation of all Japanese WTE facilities showed that 84% of Japan’s MSW is treated in grate combustion plants. Several small-scale WTE plants (<5 tons/hour) are operating in Europe and Japan and are based both on grate combustion and in implementing WTE projects. This paper is based on the sections of the WTE Guidebook that discuss the current use of WTE technology around the world. Since the beginning of history, humans have generated solid wastes and disposed them in makeshift waste dumps or set them on fire. After the industrial revolution, near the end of the 18 th century, the amount of goods used and then discarded by people increased so much that it was necessary for cities to provide landfills and incinerators for disposing wastes. The management of urban, or municipal, solid wastes (MSW) became problematic since the middle of the 20 th century when the consumption of goods, and the corresponding generation of MSW, increased by an order of magnitude. In response, the most advanced countries developed various means and technologies for dealing with solid wastes. These range from reducing wastes by designing products and packaging, to gasification technologies. Lists of several European plants are presented that co-combust medical wastes (average of 1.8% of the total feedstock) and wastewater plant residue (average of 2% of the feedstock).

ecomaine manages solid waste for its member communities through an integrated strategy that includes a single sort recycling center, a waste-to-energy (WTE) power plant and a 250 acre landfill for residual ash. The public organization has over 40 member communities in Maine which equates to over 24% of the State’s population. Established as a non-profit in the 1970’s with a mission to address trash disposal for future generations, a comprehensive waste system has emerged. The method of balefilling municipal solid waste (MSW) was replaced by a state-of-the-art WTE facility in 1988 and the multiple-sort recycling system was upgraded to a single-sort advanced system in 2007. Roughly 170,000 tons of MSW are processed through the WTE facility each year. This results in an average of 83,000–105,000 megawatt-hours of electricity generated annually. Since 2005, recycling tonnage has increased 71% from 21,000 to 36,000 tons. The State of Maine established a “Solid Waste Management Hierarchy” in 2007 cascading in disposal preference from Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, Compost, Waste-to-Energy to Landfilling MSW. ecomaine is researching the feasibility of implementing an organics recovery system that would include food waste to further advance the Solid Waste Hierarchy and State’s recycling goal of 50%. ecomaine continues to manage its resources through innovation that highlight the resiliency of an integrated waste management system. For example, ecomaine has adapted to periods of waste shortages through strategies of caching MSW during times of higher waste generation and storing that waste until it is needed. ecomaine selects cover material for temporary use that is combustible so that it can efficiently be processed through the WTE facility. When fuel is scarce, the cached material is returned to the WTE as a fuel input. Another example, of matching a waste to a beneficial reuse is ecomaine ’s ash metals mining project for the recovery of both ferrous metals and valuable non-ferrous material from screened ash. ecomaine strives to sustainably treat residual waste streams after enhanced resource recovery, re-use and recycling efforts and embrace an integrated waste management system. While challenges face many waste disposal operations such as changing regulations, ecomaine communities believe an integrated system with a good design and forward-looking plant management allow for a robust and effective service, as the ecomaine example shows.

In 1989, United Power Association (now Great River Energy) and Northern States Power (now Xcel Energy) formed a partnership and entered a 20 year contract with five local counties to turn MSW (municipal solid waste) into RDF (Refuse Derived Fuel) and combust the RDF in converted grate-fired boilers in Elk River, MN. Great River Energy owned and operated the Energy Recovery Station (ERS) and Xcel Energy operated the Resource Processing Plant (RPP) a few miles away. The Resource Processing Plant processed 400,000 tons/year of MSW into RDF for the Energy Recovery Station and other RDF plants owned by Xcel Energy. The project was successful, but required significant subsidies from the counties to maintain competitive tipping fees. At the end of the original 20 year contract, a number of the counties wanted to reduce or end any subsidies and restructure the contracts. In the fall of 2009, lack of contracted MSW created difficult financial conditions that threatened to end the project and divert 400,000 tons/year of MSW to area landfills. In May of 2010, Great River Energy purchased the Resource Processing Plant and reorganized the project to be able to better control operating costs and maintain competitive electric rates for its customers. In 2011, Great River Energy restructured processing contracts with three of the original counties and also directly contracted with the regional MSW haulers while implementing sweeping changes in the processing of MSW. A cleaning system was installed to increase the value of the ferrous material collected during the production of RDF. The installation of a bulky waste shredder and processing changes increased the efficiency of converting MSW to RDF. In addition, the recovery of non-ferrous materials from the MSW and heavy residue was optimized. In one year of operation, the Resource Processing Plant has increased RDF production from 84% to over 95% and decreased landfilling to near zero while increasing the revenue from recovered materials. County subsidies have been significantly reduced and will phase out after 2015, tipping fees have been adjusted to be competitive with local landfills, and electric costs have been stabilized at comparable renewable energy rates.

Created in 1978, the Solid Waste Authority of Palm Beach County (Authority) has developed an “award winning” solid waste management system that includes the following facilities to service the residents and businesses in Palm Beach County, Florida: • North County Resource Recovery Facility (NCRRF); • Residential and Commercial Recovered Materials Processing Facility; • Six Transfer Stations; • Class I Landfill; • Class III Landfill; • Biosolids Processing Facility; • Ferrous Processing Facility; • Woody Waste Recycling Facility; • Composting Facility; and • Two Household Hazardous Waste Facilities. The Authority has proactively planned and implemented an integrated program to provide for the long term, reliable, economically sound and environmentally sustainable management of solid waste in Palm Beach County. The County’s anticipated growth necessitated that the Authority evaluate several options for long-term processing and disposal capacity. This resulted in a decision to expand its WTE capacity with a new mass burn facility, the first facility of its kind to be constructed in the US in almost two decades, reaffirming its commitment to waste-to-energy. The planned 3,000 TPD facility will provide the Authority with a total disposal capacity of 5,000 TPD generating approximately 150MW of renewable energy. The decision to proceed with the expansion was approved by the Authority’s Board in October 2008. The Authority, with its Consulting Engineer, Malcolm Pirnie/ARCADIS, has since made significant progress in the implementation of this landmark project including the completion of the preliminary design, securing environmental permits, procuring a full service vendor, issuance of nearly $600 million revenue bonds for signing an electrical sales contract, and ongoing extensive public outreach efforts. This presentation will focus on the ongoing development of the new mass burn facility and an update of the status of activities conducted to date such as: • Environmental Permitting – Issuance of the PPSA Conditions of Certification and submittal of the Post Certification/Pre Construction requirements; • Vendor Procurement – Iterative procurement process designed to obtain vendor input through final selection and contract award of a full service vendor (Design, Build and Operate); • Preliminary Design – Innovative design features such as the utilization of SCR technology for control of NOx emission and incorporation of rainwater harvesting and water reuse; • Public Outreach – the Authority’s efforts to keep the public informed through mass mailings, community meetings, television commercials and educational materials for all audiences; and • Financing – Approach designed to preserve alternative minimum tax benefits.

Energy-from-Waste plants using grate-based systems have gained world-wide acceptance as the preferred method for the sustainable treatment of waste. Key factors are not only the reduction of waste volume and mass and the destruction or separation of pollutants but also the efficient production and use of energy (electricity, district heating/cooling, process steam), compliant disposal and the recovery of resources from combustion residues (e.g. metals, rare earths). International requirements relating to energy efficiency and materials recovery by means of thermo-recycling in Energy-from-Waste plants call for the continuing development and optimization of existing technologies and concepts. The technologies and processes for the recovery of reusable materials from dry-discharged bottom ash and from filter ash point to the key role that Energy-from-Waste plants are able to play in the efficient conservation of resources. It is primarily thermal treatment with dry discharge and subsequent processing of the bottom ash fractions that enables Energy-from-Waste plants to justify their status as universal recyclers. In addition to recovery of the energy inherent in the waste, the treatment of dry-discharged bottom ash is an important contribution to compliance with raw material and climate policies and to the promotion of closing the material cycle in general. Furthermore, dry bottom ash discharge represents a further step towards waste-free operation and “after-care-free” landfills. This paper documents the potential of Energy-from-Waste plants for the recovery of resources and provides examples of recent developments and large-scale implementations of innovative recovery technologies in Europe.

China has the largest population (1.33 billion) on Earth and a 2010 GDP of $5.4 trillion. This nation has experienced rapid economic growth in the last decade that has been accompanied by the generation of an enormous amount of municipal solid wastes. From 2000 to 2009, the reported MSW increased by 33% to 157 million tons. This paper presents the current situation in MSW generation, characterization, and means of disposal, based on the results of studies by WTERT (www.wtert.org) in China. The landfills serving the large cities of China are reaching or have already reached full capacity and there is strong government support for the waste to energy (WTE) alternative, resulting in over 90 WTE plants built or under construction. The thermal treatment technologies are based mostly on imported or domestic grate combustion technologies and on fluid bed combustion of shredded wastes. Of particular interest to the WTERT studies have been the Air Pollution Control systems used in Chinese plants and their performance, in particular the dioxin and furan levels attained, in view of continuing public opposition to WTE in Beijing and some other cities. The cities of Guangzhou, Shanghai, and Beijing were visited to examine any obstacles to further expansion of the WTE industry in China. There are extreme differences in the composition of MSW as well as waste management from region to region. It is believed that one of the reasons for public opposition to WTE projects is inadequate transparency as to the emissions of WTE plants. Also, it appears that some WTE facilities tend to cut down costs at the expense of adequate emission control. The paper concludes with discussion of the economics of Chinese WTE plants built in the last six years.

Landfills are the second-largest source of anthropogenic methane emissions in the U.S., accounting for 22% of CH 4 emissions. Landfill gas (LFG) is primarily composed of CH 4 and CO 2 , and currently only 18% of this is used for energy. Because landfills will continue to be used for the foreseeable future, complete utilization of LFG is becoming more important as the demand for energy increases. Catalytically reforming LFG produces syngas (H 2 and CO) that can be converted to liquid fuels or mixed into the LFG stream to produce a more reactive, cleaner burning fuel. It has been demonstrated that injecting 5% syngas into a simulated LFG mixture prior to engine combustion decreases CO, UHC, and NO x emissions by 73%, 89%, and 38%, respectively. One barrier to using LFG in a catalytic system is the contaminant content of the LFG, including chlorine and sulfur compounds, higher order hydrocarbons, and siloxanes that have the potential to poison a catalyst. Chlorinated compounds are present in LFG at 10–100ppm levels and are often found as chlorocarbons. This research explores the effect of methyl chloride on the activity of a Rh/γ-Al 2 O 3 catalyst while dry reforming LFG to syngas. It has been found that methyl chloride acts as a reversible poison on the dry reforming reaction, causing a loss in dry reforming activity, decrease in syngas production, and increase in H 2 /CO ratio while CH 3 Cl is present in the feed. CH 3 Cl exposure also decreases the acidity of the catalyst which decreases carbon formation and deactivation due to coking.

Most communities use curbside recycling and yard waste composting programs to reduce the amount of solid waste that needs to be disposed in a waste-to-energy (WTE) facility or landfill. Communities with well established programs have come to realize that there is a practical limit to the amount of solid waste that can be diverted using these methods. To increase waste diversion rates further, some communities have begun to target other materials. One material that is receiving increased attention is food waste. Food waste represents a significant portion of the remaining waste stream and several alternative options are available to manage this material, including composting and anaerobic digestion. In some cases, communities have already begun to implement separate residential food waste collection programs—commonly referred to as the “green bin.” In addition, several jurisdictions have already enacted regulations to promote the diversion of food waste from commercial generators such as food processors, restaurants and supermarkets. Since food waste has a relatively high moisture content, removal of this high-volume component can significantly affect the composition and characteristics of the remaining waste, most notably the heat content. It is important that current and future WTE facility owners understand the potential impacts to their WTE project should they implement a food waste diversion program. This paper evaluates the potential outcome of food waste diversion on the heating value of the remaining waste based on recent waste characterization data collected by Metro Vancouver. Metro Vancouver represents a good case study since they currently own a WTE facility and are considering constructing a second one. Metro Vancouver’s long-term solid waste management plan also includes implementing a food waste diversion program in order to increase their overall waste diversion rate from 55 to 70 percent by 2015. The potential effect of food waste diversion on the capacity of Metro Vancouver’s existing WTE facility as well as the capacity and cost of a new WTE facility is also examined.

In recent years, factors including limited landfill capacity, increasing costs of fossil fuels, and increased pressure to actively recover value from waste in the form of materials and energy have encouraged municipalities throughout North America to advance waste management strategies that utilize waste-to-energy (WTE) technologies as an alternative to landfilling. Currently, utilization of alternative conversion technologies, including gasification, is limited to small-scale or pilot municipal solid waste (MSW) to energy facilities in North America. Though limited history of environmental performance when using MSW as a primary feedstock has delayed public acceptance of facility proposals, municipalities are now moving forward with alternative conversion technology applications. In Florida, two entities have received permits from the Department of Environmental Protection to proceed with construction of gasification facilities — Geoplasma, Inc. in St. Lucie County, and INEOS New Planet BioEnergy in Vero Beach. In Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, Enerkem GreenField Alberta Biofuels has received a permit from Alberta Environment to begin construction of a gasification facility that will produce bioethanol from post-recycled MSW. Since 1996, no new greenfield MSW-processing mass burn facility has been constructed in the U.S., though facilities in Hillsborough County, FL; Lee County, FL; and Olmstead County, MN have undergone expansions, and in Honolulu, FL, a 900 TPD unit is currently under construction. In recent years, two municipalities have received permits to proceed with construction of mass burn WTE facilities and have made significant progress toward implementation: The municipalities of Durham and York, Ontario, Canada and The Solid Waste Authority of Palm Beach County, Florida. This paper will provide a direct comparison of the expected environmental performance of the recently permitted gasification facilities to the expected environmental performance of the recently permitted mass burn WTE facilities, as established by permit applications and emissions modeling studies. Comparison of emissions of particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds, and hydrogen chloride will be performed on the basis of one ton of feedstock processed. Emission of these pollutants at the recently permitted facilities discussed above will be contrasted with emissions experienced at currently operating WTE facilities within North America.

The United States is the largest generator of municipal solid waste (MSW) in the world. It also landfills the largest amount of MSW. In this article, the authors present a comprehensive argument for implementing a more sustainable approach to the management of MSW. This approach includes the significant expansion of energy recovery from MSW, both to avoid burying massive amounts of waste and to expand generation of renewable, carbon-efficient electricity.

Created in 1978, the Solid Waste Authority of Palm Beach County (Authority) has developed an “award winning” solid waste management system that includes franchised solid waste collections and the following facilities to service the residents and businesses in Palm Beach County, Florida: • North County Resource Recovery Facility (NCRRF); • Residential and Commercial Recovered Materials Processing Facility; • Five Transfer Stations; • Class I Landfill; • Class III Landfill; • Biosolids Pelletization Facility; • Ferrous Processing Facility; • Woody Waste Recycling Facility; • Composting Facility; and • Household Hazardous Waste Facility. The Authority has proactively planned and implemented its current integrated solid waste management program to ensure disposal capacity through 2021. However, like many communities, the Authority anticipates continued population growth and associated new development patterns that will significantly increase demands on its solid waste system, requiring it to reevaluate and update its planning to accommodate future growth. The NCRRF, the Authority’s refuse derived fuel waste-to-energy facility, has performed very well since its start up in 1989 processing over 13 million tons of MSW, saving valuable landfill space and efficiently producing clean, renewable energy. As the NCRRF approached the end of its first 20 year operating term, it became necessary to complete a comprehensive refurbishment to ensure its continued reliable service for a second 20 year term and beyond providing for continued disposal capacity and energy production for the Authority’s customers. The Authority renegotiated and extended its operating agreement with the Palm Beach Resource Recovery Corporation (PBRRC), a Babcock & Wilcox Company, for an additional 20-year term. The Authority selected BE&K Construction Company (BE&K) and entered into an Engineering, Procurement, and Construction contract (EPC Contract) to perform the refurbishment. The Authority, with assistance from its Consulting Engineer, Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., developed the minimum technical requirements and negotiated the EPC Contract with BE&K. The design and procurement efforts were completed in early 2009 and on-site construction refurbishment activities commenced in November 2009. The refurbishment has a total estimated cost of $205 million. The refurbishment work is sequenced with the intent that one boiler train will remain operational to reduce the impact to the Authority’s landfill and maximize electrical production and revenues during the refurbishment period. This presentation will focus on the improvements to operations as a result of the refurbishment and its positive effects on the Authority’s integrated solid waste management system.

HDR partnered with the Lancaster County Solid Waste Management Authority (Authority) to use the Carbon Assessment Planning Tool (CAPT) to evaluate GHG emissions in their solid waste system. The Authority owns three primary facilities, which comprise the Authority’s solid waste processing and disposal system (the System). The primary facilities in the System are the Transfer Station (TS), the Frey Farm Landfill (FFLF) and the Lancaster County Resource Recovery Facility (RRF). The Authority has recently added wind turbines to its energy portfolio and is considering other changes within its system. The model will be used to evaluate the net effect of the changing system characteristics on the Green House Gas emissions from the system. Reduction in the waste landfilled, changes in Landfill Gas production and increases in energy production will all be evaluated. The paper will review the model assumptions and parameters and will discuss system characteristics. The paper will also discuss a methodology for monetization of additional “green benefits” associated with the GHG emissions reductions through the sale of emission offsets.

New Hanover County, NC, hired Gershman, Brickner & Bratton, Inc. (GBB) to help prepare a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the management and long-term operations of the County’s solid waste disposal facilities, which include a secure landfill with more than 40 years of remaining life, a 20+ year old waste-to-energy (WTE) plant, and seven recycling drop-off sites receiving over 200,000 tons per year. The RFP requested a single-service provider to provide all of the services currently being undertaken by the County under a single contract going forward. During the course of the procurement, GBB’s Project Manager made three presentations to the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners (County Board), advancing the RFP process from eight vendor proposals, to interviews of five firms and performing a technical and economic review of each, to short-listing two firms, to the final recommendation of going forward with high-tech start-up R3 Environmental LLC (R3). In September 2010, the County Board signed a landmark contract with R3 for the management of the County’s waste system that was intended to position the County as a world leader in innovative disposal, according to County officials. Under the agreement, R3 was to implement a modern Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) processing facility pulling out recyclables and making a low-ash, high-BTU Refused-Derived Fuel (RDF) biomass product, refurbishing the current mass-burn WTE facility into an RDF biomass-fired system, and implementing a new construction waste and demolition debris recycling (C&D) processing system. The new solid waste sorting facility, with advanced machinery, dubbed a “Smart MRF,” was expected to be in operation in two years, extracting recyclables and converting the organic waste stream into fuel. R3 guaranteed to divert over 80% of the incoming solid waste from the landfill. This paper provides a unique behind-the-scenes look at the procurement process used to select this “innovative technology proposal” from R3 as it pertained to recycling potential, carbon credits and renewable energy credits, and significant long-term cost benefits to the County. It will also provide a review of the vendor evaluation process that led to this landmark contract, from the RFP preparation, proposals evaluation, technical/economic reviews, short-listing, recommendations, and technical contract negotiation.

This study aims at estimating the energy and environmental performances of a new cogenerative configuration of the waste to energy (WTE) plant in Piacenza. At present, the plant is authorized to treat 120,000 t/y of waste, but this limit does not represent the full treatment capacity of the facility. To exploit the plant potential and, at the same time, to reduce total equivalent emissions of the WTE process, a cogenerative configuration has been proposed. In this new scenario a back pressure turbine would be installed in parallel to the existing one, in order to supply heat to the district heating network of Piacenza and the total amount of waste treated per year by the facility would be increased to 134,100 t. The increase of 14,100 t should be satisfied by industrial and commercial waste, which would otherwise go to landfill. To compare the cogenerative scenario with the current situation, the environmental impact for the two cases has been evaluated by means of a life cycle assessment methodology. The results of the analysis show that the new configuration can ensure significant energy and environmental benefits.

Rapid economic development and also population growth of urban centers in developing island nations have resulted in the generation of large amounts of MSW that in the past were dumped at uninhabited areas indiscriminately. Also, islands have very limited space for new, sanitary landfills. This study examines islands where WTE has been implemented successfully (Bermuda, Martinique, St. Barth) and several others (Jamaica, Mauritius, Rhodes) where WTE has been considered and is in various stages of implementation. The study showed that the per capita generation of MSW increases as GDP per capita increases. Also, it is usually recommended that the waste management system be improved one step at a time, that is, to go from dumps to sanitary landfills, to waste to energy; it is interesting to note that the three islands examined in this study went directly from dumps to WTE. This phenomenon can be partly attributed to the scarcity of land for new landfills, but may also be due to the desire to develop a local and renewable energy source.

Most ash generated by waste-to-energy (WTE) facilities in the U.S. is landfilled. Studies undertaken in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s indicated no significant environmental concerns associated with ash landfilling. However, in 2001, policy-makers at the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MA DEP) became concerned that the “cumulative” impacts of landfills, including ash landfills, might pose a risk to human health. To address this concern, we performed an in-depth assessment of impacts to air quality, and theoretical risks to health, from fugitive emissions associated with an ash landfill. Nine sources of fugitive ash emissions were modeled using methods that coupled detailed information about the site operations, ash properties, and meteorological conditions on an hour-by-hour basis. The results of these assessments, combined with ambient air data collected by others, demonstrated that the impacts from fugitive emissions of the ash were no more than negligible. Accordingly, in 2006, MA DEP revised its policy, exempting ash disposal landfills from the requirement to demonstrate no significant impact, effectively granting presumptive certainty to ash landfills that employ best management practices. Detailed analyses such as described herein, combined with robust data sets, can form the basis of more efficient regulatory policies.

Created in 1978, the Solid Waste Authority of Palm Beach County (Authority) has developed an “award winning” solid waste management system that includes franchised solid waste collections and the following facilities to service the residents and businesses in Palm Beach County, Florida: • North County Resource Recovery Facility (NCRRF); • Residential and Commercial Recovered Materials Processing Facility; • Five Transfer Stations; • Class I Landfill; • Class III Landfill; • Biosolids Pelletization Facility; • Ferrous Processing Facility; • Woody Waste Recycling Facility; • Composting Facility; and • Household Hazardous Waste Facility. The Authority has proactively planned and implemented its current integrated solid waste management program to ensure disposal capacity through 2021. However, even in consideration of the current economic climate, the Authority anticipates continued population growth and associated new development patterns that will significantly increase demands on its solid waste system, requiring it to reevaluate and update its planning to accommodate future growth. The NCRRF, the Authority’s refuse derived fuel waste-to-energy facility, has performed very well since its start up in 1989 processing over 13 million tons of MSW, saving valuable landfill space and efficiently producing clean renewable energy. As the NCRRF has reached the end of its first 20 year operating term, it became necessary to complete a comprehensive refurbishment to ensure its continued reliable service for a second 20 year term and beyond providing for continued disposal capacity and energy production for the Authority’s customers. Separately, the Authority also recognized that the refurbishment alone will not provide any additional disposal capacity for the County. The County’s anticipated growth necessitated that the Authority evaluate several options for long-term processing and disposal capacity, resulting in a decision to expand its WTE capacity with a new mass burn facility, the first facility of its kind to be constructed in Florida in more than a decade, reaffirming its commitment to waste-to-energy. The planned 3,000 TPD expansion will provide a total disposal capacity of 5,000 TPD generating approximately 150MW of renewable energy. The decision to proceed with the expansion was approved by the Authority’s Board in October 2008. The Authority, with its Consulting Engineer, Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., has since made significant progress in the facility’s implementation including the completion of the preliminary design, submittal of environmental permit applications, ongoing procurement of a full service vendor, issuance of revenue bonds for project financing, and commencing extensive public outreach. This paper will focus on the development of the new mass burn facility and an update of the status of activities conducted to date including, permitting, financing, vendor procurement, design, and public outreach, as well as will highlight several innovative design, procurement, permitting, and financing features of this landmark project for the Authority, such as: • Utilization of SCR technology for control of NOx emission; • Incorporation of rainwater harvesting and water reuse; • Utilization of iterative procurement process designed to obtain vendor input in a competitive environment; and • Financing approach designed to preserve alternative minimum tax benefits.