Waste Management

Phase 1, Task 1:
Waste Generation Rates

& Facility Sizing
An analysis of waste generation rates and the potential waste quantities and composition of
waste available that could potentially be managed by an Energy-from-Waste (EFW) facility in
Southern Alberta

INSUPPORTOF:
SouthernAlbertaEnergyFromWasteAlliance
VulcanInnovationProject
VulcanCounty
102CenterStreet,Box180
Vulcan,AlbertaT0L2B0
PREPAREDBY:
4838RichardRoadSW,Suite140
WestMountCorporateCampus
Calgary,ABT3E6L1
INPARTNERSHIPWITH
FourthFloor,3292ProductionWay
Burnaby,BC,CanadaV5A4R4
Approved by SAEWA Board: January 27, 2012

Phase 1, Task 1: Waste Generation Rates & Facility Sizing
Southern Alberta Energy-from-Waste Alliance i
Energy-from-Waste Research Project
February 17, 2011
Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................................1
2.0 WASTEGENERATIONOVERVIEW............................................................................................................3
2.1MSWFROMSAEWAMEMBERS................................................................................................................................3
2.2MSWFROMNONSAEWAMEMBERS.........................................................................................................................5
2.3OTHERWASTESOURCES............................................................................................................................................6
2.3.1Institutional,CommercialandIndustrial(ICI)SectorWaste........................................................................7
2.3.2AgriculturalWaste.......................................................................................................................................8
2.3.3MunicipalWastewaterResiduals(biosolids)...............................................................................................8
2.3.4HydrocarbonContaminatedSoil..................................................................................................................8
2.3.5OilfieldWasteResidue.................................................................................................................................9
2.3.6RailwayTies.................................................................................................................................................9
2.3.7SpecifiedRiskMaterials.............................................................................................................................10
2.4SUMMARYOFTOTALANDAVAILABLEWASTEQUANTITIES.............................................................................................11
3.0 DISPOSALANDTRANSFERSTATIONFACILITIES......................................................................................11
4.0 TIPPINGFEES........................................................................................................................................13
5.0 SEASONALVARIATIONS........................................................................................................................13
6.0 WASTECOMPOSITION..........................................................................................................................16
7.0 ENERGYCONTENT.................................................................................................................................17
8.0 FUTUREWASTEDIVERSION...................................................................................................................18
9.0 LONGRANGEPROJECTIONS..................................................................................................................19
10.0 TASK1CONCLUSION.............................................................................................................................20
List of Figures
Figure1: SAEWAMembership................................................................................................................................2
Figure2: MapofSouthernAlbertalandfillsandtransferstation.........................................................................12
Figure3: GraphofAverageSeasonalVariationsinDisposal................................................................................13
Figure4: DailyDisposalRatewithaConstantFlowofnonMSWmaterial..........................................................14
Figure5: DailyDisposalRatewithaTopupofRailwayTiestoBalanceWasteFlows..........................................15
Figure6: TypicalWasteCompositionforSmallTowns.........................................................................................16
Figure7: LongRangeWasteProjectionsforSAEWA............................................................................................20
List of Tables
Table1: AverageAnnualMSWDisposalRatesfromSAEWAMembers...................................................................4
Table2: SummaryofMSWDisposedfromNonSAEWAMembers..........................................................................6
Table3: SummaryofICISectorWasteDisposedatNonSAEWALandfills...............................................................7
Table4: BiosolidsDisposal/Generation....................................................................................................................8
Table5: SummaryofWasteRailwayTiesforDisposal.............................................................................................9
Table6: SummaryofTotalandAvailableWasteQuantities...................................................................................11
Table7: WasteCompositionsofWasteStreams....................................................................................................17
Table8: EstimatedHigherHeatingValueforComingledWasteStream................................................................17
Table9: SummaryofAvailableWasteforEnergyRecovery...................................................................................21

Southern Alberta Energy-from-Waste Alliance 1
February 17, 2011
1.0 Introduction
TheSouthernAlbertaEnergyfromWasteAlliance(SAEWA)isacoalitionofwastemanagement
jurisdictionscommittedtoresearchingandrecommendingforimplementation,technological
applicationsforrecoveringenergyfromwastematerials,andreducingrelianceonlandfills.
ThemembershipofSAEWAconsistsof16wasteauthoritieslistedbelowandincludedinFigure1:
BowValleyWasteManagementCommission
FoothillsRegionalServicesCommission
MDofRanchlandsNo.66
Crowsnest/PincherCreekLandfillAssociation
WillowCreekRegionalWasteManagementServicesCommission
WheatlandCounty
VulcanDistrictWasteCommission
LethbridgeRegionalWasteMgmtServicesCommission
TownofCoalhurst
TownofCoaldale
ChiefMountainRegionalSolidWasteAuthority
NewellRegionalSolidWasteMgmtAuthority
Taber&districtRegionalWasteManagementAuthority
NorthFortyMileRegionalWasteMgmtCommission
SouthFortyWasteServicesCommission
SpecialAreasBoard(BigCountry)
InJuly2010,withtheassistanceofagrantfromRuralAlbertaDevelopmentFund,theteamofHDRand
AECOMwereretainedtoassistSAEWAinfurtherexploringtheopportunitiestodevelopanEnergy
fromWaste(EFW)facilityinSouthernAlberta.Thisresearchprojectconsistsoffour(4)phases,each
withaseriesoftasksasfollows:
Phase1(CurrentPhase)
ProjectInitiation
TASK1:WASTEGENERATIONRATESANDFACILITYSIZING
TASK2:COMBUSTIONTECHNOLOGIES
ThecompletionofPhase1activitieswillresultintheidentificationofwastequantitiespotentially
availabletobemanaged,thesizeofthefacilityrequiredtomanagethesematerials;andthe
applicabletechnologiescapableofmanagingthequantityandcompositionofavailablewaste
streams.
Phase2
ThecompletionofPhase2activitieswillresultintheidentificationofwastecollection,
transportationandhandlingimplicationswithassociatedsitingopportunities;heatrecoveryand
cogenerationoptions,includingpotentialmarket/sitingopportunities;anadditionallevelofdetail
withrespecttotheenvironmentalimplications(nowincludingtransportationimpactsfromTask3),
andthefacilitypermittingandsitingrequirements.Thisphasealsoincludesthedevelopmentofa
February 17, 2011
Figure 1: SAEWA Membership
February 17, 2011
futureprojectdevelopmentschedule.Eachofthetaskscompletedinthisphasewillthenbeutilized
inPhase3toassesstheeconomicandfinancialimplications.
Phase3
ThecompletionofPhase3activitieswillresultintheidentificationoftheeconomicandfinancial
implicationsofmovingforwardwiththedevelopmentofafacilityandrequiredsupporting
infrastructure.
Phase4
ThecompletionofPhase4activitieswillincludeavisitto,andreviewof,operationalfacilitiesby
SAEWAmembers.Thisphasewillbeconcludedwiththedevelopmentofasummaryreport
documentingtheresultsofallstudytasksandrecommendationsfornextsteps.
ThefollowingreportdocumentstheresultsofPhase1,Task1WasteGenerationRatesandFacility
Sizing.
2.0 Waste Generation Overview

ThefirststepincompletingtheEFWResearchProjectistoestablishabaselineforpotentialquantities
andcompositionofwastematerialsthatcouldbeavailabletobemanagedatafutureSouthernAlberta
EFWfacility.
Thebaselinequantitiesidentifiedinthisreporthavebeencategorizedasfollows:
MunicipalSolidWaste(MSW)fromSAEWAmembers;
MSWfromnonSAEWAmembers;and
Otherwastesourceswithin,orwithincloseproximityto,SouthernAlberta.
Thisinitialcategorizationofwastestreamsisimportantaseachwastestreamhasitsownuniquewaste
characteristics.Inaddition,themanagementresponsibilitiesandthereforefutureavailability
considerationsforeachofthesewastestreamsisdifferentandthereforeneedstobeconsideredand
evaluatedseparately.
Thefollowingsectionsofthisreportdocumentthecurrentwastestreamsidentifiedaspotentially
availablebothwithintheRegionandoutsidetheRegionandthenexaminesthecompositionofthis
materialandprojectsthelongtermquantitiesthatcouldrequire,andbeavailablefor,managementin
thefuture.
Toconcludethistask,anassessmentofthecalorificvalue(i.e.energycontentofthewaste)hasbeen
developedandthepotentialfacilitysizeisdetermined.
2.1 MSW from SAEWA Members

TodevelopwastedisposalprofilesforeachoftheSAEWAmembermunicipalities,representativesfrom
eachSAEWAmemberwerecontactedindividuallytodeterminetheirannualsolidwastedisposalrates.
Approximatelyhalfofthesewasteauthoritiesownandoperatetheirownlandfill,andtheresttransfer
February 17, 2011
anddisposeoftheirwasteinneighbouringwasteauthoritiesthatoperatetheirownlandfill.SixSAEWA
wasteauthoritiessendtheirwastetononSAEWAmemberlandfills.
Forthispurposesofthisproject,MSWincludeswastefromresidentialsources,constructionand
demolition(C&D)sitesandinstitutional,commercialandlightIndustrial(ICI)facilities.ICIwasteincludes
wastefrombusinesses,restaurants,foodprocessingplants,schools,hotelsandnonbiomedicalwaste
fromhospitals.Generally,thewastefromthesethreesourcesiscomingledattransferstationsand
disposalsites.Onlyasmallnumberofwasteauthoritiesactuallycategorizethethreewastestreams
separately.
Table1summarizesthewastedisposalquantitiesfromeachoftheSAEWAmembers.Thesefigures
representanaveragedisposalrateforthepastthreetofouryears,dependingontherecordsthatwere
submittedbytheSAEWAwasteauthorities.Thesenumbershavebeenpresentedasaveragesto
minimize,totheextentpossible,annualshiftsinwastegenerationanddisposalthatcanoccurfora
varietyofreasonsincluding,populationgrowth,economicconditions,etc.
Table 1: Average Annual MSW Disposal Rates from SAEWA Members

SAEWAWasteAuthorities
Residenti
alMSW
(tonnes/
year)
ICISolid
Waste
(1)
(tonnes/
year)
C&D
Waste
(1)
(tonnes/
year)
Total
tonnes/
year)
CurrentMethodOf
Management
BowValleyWaste
ManagementCommission
11,400 12,000 23,400
TransfertoCalgary
LandfillforResidential
MSWandlocallandfill
disposalforC&Dwaste
FoothillsRegionalServices
Commission
30,100 6,800 36,900 Locallandfilldisposal
MDofRanchlandsNo.66 20 20
TransfertoFoothills
Landfill
Crowsnest/PincherCreek
LandfillAssociation
10,500 700 5,100 16,300 Locallandfilldisposal
WillowCreekRegionalWaste
ManagementServices
Commission
3,700 2,900 6,600 Locallandfilldisposal
WheatlandCounty 1,410 1,410
TransfertoDrumheller
Landfill
VulcanDistrictWaste
Commission
5,700 5,700
TransfertoLethbridge
Landfill
LethbridgeRegionalWaste
MgmtServicesCommission
2,200 50,000 52,200
Landfill
TownofCoalhurst 550 550
Landfill
TownofCoaldale 3,000 3,000
Landfill
ChiefMountainRegional
SolidWasteAuthority
10,300 10,300
Locallandfilldisposal
plustransferto
LethbridgeLandfill
NewellRegionalSolidWaste
MgmtAuthority
12,700 6,500 2,950 22,150 Locallandfilldisposal
February 17, 2011
SAEWAWasteAuthorities
Residenti
alMSW
(tonnes/
year)
ICISolid
Waste
(1)
(tonnes/
year)
C&D
Waste
(1)
(tonnes/
year)
Total
tonnes/
year)
CurrentMethodOf
Management
Taber&districtRegional
WasteManagement
Authority
6,300 6,300
Transfertotwo
neighbouringlandfills
NorthFortyMileRegional
WasteManagement
Commission
1,500 1,500 Locallandfilldisposal
SouthFortyWasteServices
Commission
1,480 1,480
TransfertoNorthForty
MileLandfill
SpecialAreasBoard(Big
Country)
9,040 9,040 LocalLandfilldisposal
TOTAL 109,900 7,200 79,750 196,850
Notes: (1) Where separate volumes are known. Where blank, these categories are included with the residential quantities.
TheaverageannualMSWdisposalrateforthepastthreeyearsfromSAEWAmembersisestimatedto
be196,850tonnesperyear.Thisestimatetakesintoconsiderationfluctuationsthatwereexperienced
duringthedownturnintheeconomy.
WastedisposalratesfromtheresidentialandICIsectorsarerelativelyconsistentandgenerallydonot
fluctuatebymorethan10%eachyear.Thesetwowastestreamsareconsideredreliableandare
primarilycontrolledbytherespectiveSAEWAwasteauthorities.Therearesubstantialadditional
quantitiesofwastethatarecollectedbyprivatehaulerssuchasBFIandWasteManagementwithinthe
Region.Privatesectorwastehaulerswerecontactedandwerenotopentosharingtheirwastevolumes
withSAEWA.Moreinformationonprivatesectorwastecollectionanddisposalcompaniesisprovidedin
section2.3.1.
ConstructionandDemolitionwasterepresentsalargeportionofthematerialsdisposed.C&Dwaste
disposalquantitieswereobservedtofluctuatebyasmuchas50%fromyeartoyear.Thiscanbe
attributedtolocaleconomicconditions.Thelackofreliabilityofthiswastestreamshouldbetakeninto
considerationwhensizingafutureEFWfacility.
ConclusionOnanaverageannualbasis,theSAEWAmembersareresponsibleforthemanagementof
approximately196,850tonnesofresidualwasterequiringdisposal.Therefore,196,850tonnesofMSW
willbecarriedforwardfurtherinthestudyaswasteavailabletobemanagedatafutureSouthern
AlbertaEFWfacility.
2.2 MSW from non-SAEWA Members

ThelargestcitiesinSouthernAlbertaarenotSAEWAmembers.ThesecitiesincludeCalgary,Lethbridge
andMedicineHat.Thesecitiesoperatetheirownlandfills,andtheiraveragedisposalratesare
summarizedinTable2below.
Inadditiontowastefromthesethreecities,therearealsoanumberofsmallmunicipalitieswithinthe
boundariesoftheSAEWAthatarenotmembersofSAEWA.TheTownofStrathmore,forexample,is
withinWheatlandCountybutisnotpartofSAEWAoranysolidwasteauthority.Thistownhas12,000
February 17, 2011
residentsandcurrentlydisposesanaverageof5,300tonnesperyearofresidualwasteatDrumheller
Landfill.Inaddition,asubregionoftheRegionalDistrictofEastKootenay(RDEK)inBritishColumbia
alsodisposesoftheirwastetoSouthernAlbertalandfills.Becauseofgeographicandtransportation
issues,theRDEKwilllikelycontinuedisposingoftheirwasteinSouthernAlberta.Theamountofwaste
disposedfromnonSAEWAmembersislistedinTable2.
Table 2: Summary of MSW Disposed from Non-SAEWA Members

NonSAEWAMembers
MSWDisposed
(tonnes/year)
CityofCalgary 710,000*
CityofLethbridge 110,000*
CityofMedicineHat 56,000
DrumhellerRegionalLandfill 30,000
RDEK(Fernie,SparwoodandElkford) 8,000
TownofStrathmore 5,300
TOTAL 919,300
*ThewastequantitiesfromSAEWAmembersmanagedattheabovenonSAEWAfacilitieshavebeenremovedtopreventthe
potentialfordoublecountingofwastequantities.
Thethreecitiesabove(Calgary,Lethbridge,andMedicineHat)areunlikelytocontributetheirwastetoa
SAEWAEFWfacilityunlesstheybecomepartoftheSAEWAcollectiveandhaveavestedinterestin
pursuingthisinitiative.TheCityofLethbridgeiscentrallylocatedandoperatesaregionallandfillthat
alsoreceiveswastefromfiveSAEWAmembers,including:LethbridgeCounty,VulcanDistrict,Townof
Coalhurst,TownofCoaldaleandChiefMountain(overflowonly).AsperthenoteonTable2,the
quantityofmaterialfromtheSAEWAmemberssendingmaterialtotheLethbridgeLandfillareincluded
inTable1accordingtotherespectivewasteauthorityandhavebeenexcludedfromTable2toprevent
thedoublecountingofwastequantities.TheCityofCalgarygeneratessignificantquantitiesofwaste
suchthattheycouldestablishtheirownEFWfacility,shouldtheychoosetodoso.
TheRDEKandTownofStrathmorearetwosizableentitiesthatarenotpartofSAEWA.Thesetwo
organizationsworkwithlandfillownersinSouthernAlbertatoestablishcontractsforwastedisposal
capacity.Thesecontractsaretypicallydrivenbyeconomicconsiderationssuchastippingfeesand
transportationcosts.
ConclusionOnanaverageannualbasis,thenonSAEWAmembersidentifiedaboveareresponsiblefor
themanagementofapproximately919,300tonnesofresidualwasterequiringdisposal.Ofthistotal
materialdisposed,basedonourassessment,weconservativelyestimatethatapproximately13,300
tonnesofmaterialannuallycouldbeavailabletoaSouthernAlbertaEFWfacility.
2.3 Other Waste Sources

ThereareotherwastesourcesthatcouldcontributesignificantquantitiesofwastetoafutureSouthern
AlbertaEFWfacility.Thefollowingwastesourceswereinvestigatedtodeterminepotentialquantities
thatmightbeavailableandthelikelihoodofacquiringthatwastestreamforapotentialSAEWAfacility.
Thewastesourcesincludeavarietyofwastematerialtypes,energyvalues,aswellascollectionand
managementimplications.Someofthematerialsidentifiedbelowwillalsoneedtobeconsidered
February 17, 2011
carefullyinTask6withrespecttopermittingimplicationsgiventhecompositionofthesewastestreams
andthedefinitionofnonhazardousvs.hazardouswaste.
2.3.1Institutional, Commercial and Industrial (ICI) Sector Waste
Institutional,CommercialandIndustrial(ICI)wasteconsistsofmaterialsfromcommercialsourcessuch
asbusinesses,restaurants,foodprocessingplants,schools,hotels,shops,nonbiomedicalwastefrom
hospitals.Thesematerialsareeither:
1) BroughttolocaltransferstationsandmanagedbySAEWAmembersystems(quantitiesincluded
inTable1above);or,
2) ThesematerialsarecollectedbyprivatesectorhaulerssuchasBFIandWasteManagement.BFI
ownsandoperatesalandfilloutsideCalgaryandoperatestheLethbridgeRegionalLandfillon
behalfoftheCityofLethbridge.ThelandfilloutsideCalgaryhasbeenrumoredtocloseinafew
yearsalthoughofficialinformationisnotavailableastothetimingofthisclosureorany
considerationforreplacingthisdisposalcapacity.
Inadditiontoprivatesectorlandfills,publicallyownedlandfillsalsoreceivewastefromtheICIsector.
ThethreeCityofCalgaryownedlandfillsreceiveapproximately510,000tonnesperyearofwastefrom
nonresidentialsources,ofwhich25%isC&Dwaste.TheLethbridgeLandfillalsoreceivesapproximately
79,000tonnesofwastefromtheICIsector.
AcommonpracticeinSouthernAlbertaisforICIfacilitiesandsmallsubdivisionstorentcontainersand
binsfromwastehaulersfordisposingofwastefromtheirpremises.Table3listsnonSAEWAlandfills
thatreceiveICIsectorwasteandthequantitydisposedfromthatsector.
Table 3: Summary of ICI Sector Waste Disposed at Non-SAEWA Landfills.

CommercialSectorWaste
MSWDisposed
(t/yr)
CityofCalgaryLandfills(3landfills) 510,000*
BFILandfill(Calgary) 290,000**
LethbridgeRegionalLandfill 79,000*
DrumhellerLandfillWheatlandCounty 7,400*
*QuantityaccountedforinTable2.
**AverageofreportquantitiesfromAlbertaEnvironment.
ConclusionThemanagementofprivatesectorwastematerialsislargelydrivenbyeconomicand
financialconsiderations.Theavailabilityofthesewastestreamswillbedependantontheproposed
tippingfeethatwouldbechargedataSouthernAlbertaEFWfacilitywhichwillbeestimatedlaterinthis
studyaspartofTask7:CapitalandOperatingCosts.Tobeconservative,andgiventheunwillingnessof
privatesectoroperatorstoprovidedata,wehaveassumedthatnoneofthematerialswillbeavailableto
afutureSouthernAlbertaEFWfacility.Thisassumptionshouldbereconsideredonceadditional
economic/financialinformationispreparedaspartoftheresearchproject.

February 17, 2011
2.3.2Agricultural Waste
SouthernAlbertahassomeofthelargestconfinedanimalfeedlotoperationsinCanada.Thesefacilities
producelargequantitiesoforganicresidualssuchasmanure,strawandlivestockprocessingwaste.
Commonlanduseandwastemanagementpracticesallowagriculturalwastetobedisposedthroughlow
costlandapplication.ThelikelihoodofagriculturalwastebeingapotentialfeedstockforafutureEFW
facilityislowespeciallyifthemanagementofthatwastestreamhasacosttothefarmer.
Wastethatisnotappliedtolandfromagriculturaloperationsisplasticwrapandgarbagefromthe
operation.ThismaterialisdisposedinlandfillsalongwithresidentialandotherICIsectorwastestreams.
Thesequantitieshavebeenaccountedforinthedisposalfiguresforlandfills.
ConclusionAgriculturalwastesthatcouldbeavailabletobemanagedataSouthernAlbertaEFW
facilityincludeplasticwrapandotherresidualsfromtheagriculturaloperations.Thesequantitieshave
beenincludedintheICItonnagespresentedinthetablesabove.
2.3.3Municipal Wastewater Residuals (biosolids)
Wastewaterresiduals(orbiosolids)aregeneratedthroughoutSouthernAlbertaandthesematerials
whendriedhavegoodheatingvalue.ForsmallcommunitiessuchasthoseinSouthernAlberta,the
availabilityofbiosolidsforthermalprocessingissmall.Wastewatertreatmentsystemsforsmall
communitiestypicallyconsistoflagoons.Thebiosolidsnormallyaccumulateintheselagoonsandare
usuallycleanedoutonceevery2030years.Septicsystemstypicallyarecleanedoutonceortwiceper
year.Thismaterialisdisposedattheregionallandfillsidentifiedbelow.
BiosolidsfromlargerwastewatertreatmentplantscanbeareliablefeedstockforEFWfacilities.
ReportedbiosolidsdisposalfiguresatSouthernAlbertalandfillsaresummarizedinTable4below.
Table 4: Biosolids Disposal/Generation

BiosolidsGenerationRate DisposalMethod
CityofCalgary 20,000tonnes/year Landapplied(Calgro)
CityofLethbridge 1,000tonnes/year DisposedatRegionalLandfill
Crowsnest/PincherCreekLandfill 725tonnes/year Disposedatlandfill
FoothillsRegionalLandfill 500tonnes/year Disposedatlandfill
DrumhellerRegionallandfill 7tonnes/year Disposedatlandfill
TOTAL 22,232tonnes/year
ConclusionOnanaverageannualbasis,weestimatethatapproximately1,232tonnesofmaterial
annuallycouldbeavailabletoaSouthernAlbertaEFWfacility.
2.3.4Hydrocarbon Contaminated Soil

HydrocarboncontaminatedsoilisacceptedatsomeSouthernAlbertalandfills.Basedonthelistof
landfillsbelow,thereismorethan66,500tonnesperyearofhydrocarboncontaminatedsoilthatis
disposed.
CityofLethbridgeRegionalLandfill 17,800t/yr
February 17, 2011
Crowsnest/PincherCreekLandfill 28,700t/yr
DrumhellerRegionalLandfill 20,000t/yr
Theheatingvalue(dependantonthetypeofcontamination)andthelongtermavailabilityofthesesoils
canvarysignificantlyandtherefore,thesequantitiesshouldnotbeincludedasaconsistentavailable
feedstockforfacilitysizing,butratherasapotentiallyavailablefeedstockthatcouldbeutilizedona
casebycasebasis.Inaddition,theabilitytomanagethesetypesofmaterialsisverytechnologyspecific
andtheequipmentmaintenanceimplicationscanbeadeterrenttoprocessingthismaterial.
ConclusionContaminatedsoilsshouldbeconsideredonacasebycasebasisandshouldnotbeincluded
asconsistentavailablefeedstockforfacilitysizingpurposes.
2.3.5Oilfield Waste Residue

Oilfieldwasteresiduesincludecombustiblewastesuchasfilters,absorbentsandrags.Thesematerials
aremanagedprimarilybytwocompanies,HazcoinCalgaryandRBWilliamsinEdmonton,andare
collectedandprocessedintoanonhazardousmaterialbeforetheyareshippedtoafinaldestinationfor
disposal.Thefollowingprovidesanoverviewofhowthesecompaniesmanageoilfieldwasteresidues:
HazcocurrentlytruckstheirprocessedmaterialstoafacilityinBuffalo,NewYorkortoLafargein
Kamloops,BC.Tippingfeesare$440pertonneand$100pertonne,respectively.Hazco
managesapproximately1,000tonnesperyearofoilfieldwasteresidue.
RBWilliamssendstheirprocessedwastetotheWainwright,ABEFWfacility.RBWhasindicated
interestinfindinganalternativefacilityastheWainwrightfacilityisnotalwaysableto
accommodatethiswastestream.RBWmanagesapproximately1,500tonnes/yearofoilfield
wasteresidue.
annuallycouldbeavailabletoaSouthernAlbertaEFWfacility.
2.3.6Railway Ties
CanadianPacificRail(CPRail)andCanadianNationalRail(CNRail)werecontactedwithregardto
spent/wasterailwayties.Bothcompaniesindicatedtherearelimiteddisposaloptionsforrailwaytiesin
WesternCanadaandtheywouldsupportanEFWfacilitythatprocessestheirwasteinWesternCanada.
Thetworailwaycompaniesestimate800,000railwaytiesperyearrequiredisposalinWesternCanada
(i.e.,westofManitoba).Therearealsolargestockpilesofwasterailwaytiesthatareestimatedto
exceed6.5millionrailwayties.Consideringrailwaytiestypicallyweigh0.09tonnespertie,thepotential
feedstockfromrailwaytiesaresummarizedinTable5below.
Table 5: Summary of Waste Railway Ties for Disposal

WasteRailwayTies Quantity
AnnualGeneration 72,000tonnes/yr
Stockpiled/Legacy 585,000tonnes

February 17, 2011
Thestockpiledorlegacyrailwaytiesareestimatedtobedisposedatarateof10%peryear.That
equatestoasupplyof58,500tonnesperyearfora10yearperiod.Therefore,thetworailway
companiescanpotentiallysupply130,500tonnesperyearofwasterailwaytiesfordisposalforupto10
years.
TherailwayfirmsalsonotedthefollowingconsiderationsforafutureEFWfacility:
TheEFWfacilityshouldbelocatedalongtherailwaysystemsothatwasterailwaytiescouldbe
deliveredeconomically(thiswillbeincludedintheTask3analysis)
1
;
Asmallproportionofthestockpiledrailwaytiesarecoatedwithpentachlorophenol(PCP).PCP
coatedrailwaytiesmakeup510%ofexistingwasteinventory.ThefutureEFWfacilitymustbe
certifiedtobeabletodestroycreosoteandPCPinanenvironmentallysafemannerbeforeany
railwaytieswouldbedelivered.
AccordingtoCPRail,disposalcostsforrailwaytiesareunder$50pertonnewhenthermally
treatedintheUnitedStates.
PCPcoatedrailwaytiesrequireadditionalpollutioncontrolworksthatwillescalatethecapitalcostfor
anEFWfacility.Duetothesmallquantityofthismaterial,itisrecommendedthatPCPtiesnotbe
includedasavailablefeedstockandthattheavailablestockpiledrailwaytiesbereducedby10%andthat
theavailabilityofrailwaytiesisadjustedto124,650tonnesperyear.
annuallycouldbeavailabletoaSouthernAlbertaEFWfacilityforthefirsttenyearsofoperation.Once
thecurrentstockpilesofmaterialshavebeenreduced,thisannualquantitywouldbereducedto72,000
tonnes/year.
2.3.7Specified Risk Materials

SpecifiedRiskMaterials(SRM)areregulatedthroughtheCanadianFoodInspectionAgency(CFIA)
becauseofconcernsassociatedwithBovineSpongiformEncephalopathy(BSE)orMadCowDisease.
SRMconsistoftheskull,brain,trigeminalganglia(nervesattachedtothebrain),eyes,tonsils,spinal
cordanddorsalrootganglia(nervesattachedtothespinalcord)ofcattleaged30monthsorolder;and
thedistalileum(portionofthesmallintestine)ofcattleofallages.Italsoincludescarcassesof
condemnedcattleandcattledeadstock,ofanyage.AnyinediblematerialthatismixedwithSRM,such
asfloorwasteorrecoveredsolidsfromwastewater,mustalsobetreatedasSRM.
DisposalmethodsforSRMmustbeapprovedbytheCFIA.Currently,SRMfromAlbertaandBritish
ColumbiaarerenderedbyWestCoastReductioninCalgarybeforebeingdisposedinasecurelandfillin
Alberta.Therenderingprocessremoves60%ofthemoistureandproducestwotypesofmaterial,Tallow
andMeatandBoneMeal(MBM).Tallowisfatextractsfreeofproteinthathasahighmarketablevalue.
MBMistheconcentratedproteinproductthatisfreeoffatandmoisture.TheMBMisdisposedina
securelandfill.Thesecurelandfillreportsreceivingbetween25,000and30,000tonnes/yearofMBM.
1
Note:IncorporatingrailhaulintotheEFWfacilitycouldsignificantlyexpandtheserviceareaofthefacility
beyondwhatiscurrentlyassessedinthisreport.ThiswillbeinvestigatedfurtheraspartofTask3:Waste
Collection,TransportationandHandling.
February 17, 2011
couldbeavailabletoaSouthernAlbertaEFWfacility.
2.4 Summary of Total and Available Waste Quantities

TheamountofwastethatcouldpotentiallysupplyaSouthernAlbertaEFWfacilityissummarizedin
Table6below.ThetableidentifiesbothtotalquantitiesandpotentiallyavailablequantitiesforanEFW
facilityinSouthernAlberta.
Table 6: Summary of Total and Available Waste Quantities

WasteStream
TotalWasteQuantities
(Tonnes/year)
PotentiallyAvailable
WasteforSAEWA
(Tonnes/year)
MSWfromSAEWAMembers 196,850 196,850
MSWfromNonSAEWAMembers 919,300 13,300
OtherWasteSources:
ICISectorWaste 290,000* 0**
AgriculturalWaste 0*** 0
Biosolids 22,232 1,232
ContaminatedSoils 66,500 0
CombustibleOilfieldWaste 2,500 2,500
RailwayTies 124,650 124,650
SpecifiedRiskMaterialsMBM 27,500 27,500
TOTAL 1,649,532 366,032
*OnlyincludesquantitiesdestinedtotheBFIlandfill
**Thesecannotbedefinedatthistime,andwouldlikelyonlybeavailableonthebasisoflowertippingfeesandtransportationcosts.This
representsquantitiesthatgotononSAEWAmemberlandfillsorprivatelandfills.
***IncludedinMSWfromSAEWAmemberscategory
3.0 Disposal and Transfer Station Facilities

ThereareanumberofwastedisposalfacilitiesandtransferstationsthroughoutSouthernAlberta,both
withinthejurisdictionofSAEWAmembersaswellasincloseproximitytotheRegion.Figure2below
illustratesthelocationsofknownfacilitiesatthispointinthestudy.Aswecontinuetheresearch
project,thisfigurewillbeupdatedtoreflectnewfacilitiesandtheclosureofoldfacilities.

February 17, 2011
Figure 2: Map of Southern Alberta landfills and transfer station

February 17, 2011
4.0 Tipping Fees
ThetippingfeesfordisposalofwasteintheSAEWAcommunitiesrangefrom$30pertonneto$95per
tonne,andhaveamedianrateof$55pertonne.Thesefeesdonotincludetransportationcosts.
AdetailedfinancialanalysiswillbeconductedatalaterdateinTask7ofthisresearchproject.Each
wastecommissionappliesitsownratestructurethatisnotcomparablebetweenSAEWAmembers.The
financialanalysiswillcomparethecostsandbenefitsofafutureEFWfacilitywhencomparedtothe
statusquo.
5.0 Seasonal Variations

Municipalsolidwastedisposalquantitiesandcompositionvarythroughouttheyear.Theseseasonal
variationsaretypicallyassociatedwithincreasedactivityinyardwork,gardeningandhomerenovations.
Threewasteauthorities,includingBowValley,BigCountryandLethbridgeLandfill,providedmonthly
disposalrates.Thisinformationwasusedtoassessandprojectseasonalvariationsthatwilllikelybe
experiencedinthewastedisposalsystem.Figure3illustratestheseasonalvariationsindisposalrates
forthesampleSAEWAcommunities.
Figure 3: Graph of Average Seasonal Variations in Disposal.
0.00%
2.00%
4.00%
6.00%
8.00%
10.00%
12.00%
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
o
f
A
n
n
u
a
l
D
i
s
p
o
s
a
l
AverageSeasonalVariationinDisposal
February 17, 2011
SeasonalvariationscansignificantlyaffectthedailythroughputforEFWfacilities.Totakeintoaccount
seasonalvariations,twoscenarioswereexaminedwhenconsideringfacilitysizethatassumedthe
following:
Scenario1DailyMSWprocessingratesbasedonseasonalvariationsforMSWandaconstant
throughputfornonMSWmaterials.
Scenario2DailyMSWprocessingratebasedonseasonalvariationsforMSW,constantthrough
putforbiosolidsandSRMmaterial,andtopupquantitiesforrailwaytiestobalance
wasteflows.
ThedailydisposalratesforScenarios1and2areillustratedinFigures4and5.

Figure 4: Daily Disposal Rate with a Constant Flow of non-MSW material.
Theabovefigureillustrateshowthedisposalratecanfluctuatebyasmuchas500tonnesperday
dependingontheseason.
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
T
o
n
n
e
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
DailyDisposalRate Scenario1
February 17, 2011
Figure 5: Daily Disposal Rate with a Top up of Railway Ties to Balance Waste Flows.
Theabovefigureillustrateshowrailwaytiescouldbeusedtosupplementthefeedstocktomaintaina
constantprocessingrate.Basedonpotentiallyavailablewastestreams,thetargetEFWprocessingrate
isapproximately1,000tonnes/day.
TargetEFWProcessingRate=366,032tonnes/year=1,003tonnes/day
365days/year
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
T
o
n
n
e
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
DailyDisposalRate Scenario2
Railway MSW
February 17, 2011
6.0 Waste Composition
ThecommunitiesintheSAEWAaregenerallylessthan10,000people.Thewastecomposition
2
forsmall
townsinAlbertaisillustratedinFigure6below.
Figure 6: Typical Waste Composition for Small Towns
WiththeinclusionofnonMSWmaterialssuchasrailwayties,SRMandbiosolids,thecompositionofthe
wastethatcouldfueltheEFWfacilitywouldsignificantlychange.Belowisatablethatsummarizesthe
wastecompositionforScenarios1and2.Asyouwillnote,theoverallmixofmaterialswillvaryinthe
Scenario2examplesduetoseasonalvariationsintheMSWstreamandtheincreaseintonnageofnon
MSWmaterialstooffsetthesechanges.

2
Provincial Waste Characterization Framework, A J oint Project of Alberta Environment, Government of Canada, Action Plan 2000
on Climate Change (Enhanced Recycling Program) and the Recycling Council of Alberta, dated October 2005.
Organics
23%
Paper
21%
Plastic
8%
Glass
2%
Metal
4%
Misc.
3%
Garbage
6%
C&DWaste
14%
YardWaste
19%
February 17, 2011
Table 7: Waste Compositions of Waste Streams
Scenario1 Scenario2(Summer) Scenario2(Winter)
Organics 13% 15% 11%
Paper 12% 14% 10%
Plastic 4% 5% 4%
Glass 1% 1% 1%
Metal 2% 3% 2%
Misc. 2% 2% 1%
Garbage 3% 4% 3%
C&DWaste 8% 9% 7%
YardWaste 11% 12% 9%
Biosolids 1% 1% 1%
SRMMBM 7% 7% 7%
RailwayTies 37% 27% 45%
AsshowninScenario2,thewastecompositionchangesbetweenthesummerandwintermonths.
7.0 Energy Content
Oncetheoverallcompositionofthewastefeedstockwasdetermined,theenergycontentorHigher
HeatingValue(HHV)ofindividualmaterials,andthewastestreamasawhole,wasdetermined.These
heatingvalueswereidentifiedthroughvariousliteraturesourcesidentifiedbelow
3
4
.Table8belowlists
theidentifiedwastecategoriesandtheirrespectivehigherheatingvaluesinkilojoulesperkilogram.
Table 8: Estimated Higher Heating Value for Comingled Waste Stream

Materials HigherHeatingValue,kJ/kg
Low High Typical
FoodWaste 3,489 6,978 4,652
Paper 11,630 18,608 16,747
Cardboard 13,956 17,445 16,282
Plastic 27,912 37,216 32,564
Textiles 15,119 18,608 17,445
Rubber 20,934 27,912 23,260
Leather 15,119 19,771 17,445
YardWaste 2,326 18,608 6,513
Wood 17,445 19,771 18,608
Glass 116 233 140
Ferrousandnonferrousmetal 233 1,163 698
Dirt,Ash&Brick 2,326 11,630 6,978
MSW 9,304 15,119 10,467
3 Methodology for Allocating Municipal Solid Waste to Biogenic and Non-Biogenic Energy dated, May 2007 Energy Information
Administration, Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC 20585
4
GrahamKissack Director, Environment, August 2003, Crofton Division, #4 Power Boiler Alternative Fuels Trial Plan, Norske Canada.

February 17, 2011
Materials HigherHeatingValue,kJ/kg
RailwayTie 15,119 19,073 17,445
MeatandBoneMeal 16,900
Biosolids(digested) 12,000
Definition: Higher Heating Value The amount of heat produced by a specific material type when combusted under specific
conditions. Higher Heating Value is usually expressed in Calories or Kilojoules per kilogram (i.e., Cal/Kg or KJ/Kg).
ConclusionTheenergycontentofthewastestreamsforthetwoscenarioswerecalculatedusingthe
wastecompositionsandthetypicalHigherHeatingValues.Theresultingaverageheatingvaluesare
summarizedbelow:
Scenario1: 14,447KJ/Kg
Scenario2(summer): 13,970KJ/Kg
Scenario2(winter): 14,954KJ/Kg
8.0 Future Waste Diversion

MostcommunitiesinSAEWAarerelativelysmall,andwastediversionprogramsconsistprimarilyof
voluntarydropoffdepotsratherthancurbsiderecyclingcollection.Forprogramsofthisnature,
maximumresidentialwastediversionratesexperiencedislikelytobeinthe15to20%range.ICIand
C&DwastediversionwilldependmoreontheeconomicsofrecyclingandonFederalandProvincial
initiativesandlegislation.
AlbertaEnvironmentswastediversiongoalistoreducethedisposalrateto500kgpercapitaperyear.
ThisisinstarkcontrasttotheSAEWAdisposalratewhichiscalculatedtobeover1,000kgpercapitaper
year.TheAlbertaEnvironmentgoalandtheSAEWAdisposalratebothincluderesidential,ICIandC&D
waste.Currently,theaveragedisposalratefortheProvinceofAlbertais750kgpercapitaperyearand
thisisachievedthroughcomprehensivewastediversionmeasuresaturbancommunities.
AlbertaEnvironment'swastediversiontargetof500kgpercapitayearrequirescomprehensivewaste
reductionmeasuressuchascurbsiderecycling,materialdisposalbans,organicwaste(foodandyard)
collectionandC&Dwastediversionprograms.Theseprogramswouldtarget85%ofthewastestream.
Wastereduction,reuseandrecyclinginitiatives,alongwithExtendedProducerResponsibility(EPR)and
morestringentpackaginglawsareimportantconsiderationswhensizingafutureEFWfacility.The
effectivenessoftheseprogramswillinpartreducetheneedforexpansionofanEFWfacilityinthe
future,butwillnotintheforeseeablefutureresultinashortageofwastetobemanaged.
Itisimportanttonote,andwillbediscussedfurtherinTask2,thatthetypesofEFWfacilitiesbeing
consideredhavetheabilitytoincreasewastediversionthroughtherecoveryofrecyclablematerials
eitherthroughfrontendprocessingand/orthroughtherecoveryofmetals(ferrousandnonferrous)
fromtheash/charproducedbythefacility.Itisalsoawelldocumentedfactthatwhensizedproperly,
EFWfacilitiesdonotcompetewithwastediversionefforts,butratherprovideanotheroptionfor
February 17, 2011
additionalmaterialsrecovery.Whenlookingtootherjurisdictions,itiswelldocumentedthat
municipalitieswithEFWfacilitiestomanageresidualwaste,alsohavethehighestwastediversionrates.
9.0 Long Range Projections

Municipalsolidwastegrowthislinkedtopopulationgrowth.Asageneralruleofthumb,MSWincreases
inalinearpathwithpopulation.Thatmeansevenintheeventthatthepercapitadisposalrateof500kg
perpersonperyearwereachieved,theabsolutetonnageofMSWwouldincreaseasthepopulation
increases.Inotherwords,eachpersonmaybeproducinglesswaste,buttherearemorepeople
producingwaste.
AccordingtotheStatisticsCanada,mediumgrowthscenarioforAlberta,thepopulationisexpectedto
grow5.4%between2011and2015,thefirstyearwhenafutureEFWfacilitycouldbeginoperations.
After2015,populationcouldgrowanadditional12%by2026,andafurther10%by2036.Thisgrowth
canbeusedtoprojecttheincreaseinMSWexpected.Itshouldbenoted,however,thatStatistics
Canadaonlylookedattheprovinceasawhole,andtheactualgrowthrateofruralareascouldbelower.
Furthermore,ruralareasmakeup19%ofthepopulationinAlberta.TheAlbertaMunicipalAffairs
profileofmanytowns,villagesandmunicipaldistrictsshowsverylittlerecentgrowth,butmakesno
projectionsintothefuture.Therefore,forplanningpurposes,itwouldbeprudenttouseamore
conservativegrowthrate.
Wastedisposalratesareexpectedtoremainconsistentthroughouttheplanningperiod.Althoughthere
willbeaslightpopulationgrowthinSouthernAlberta,itisexpectedthatanyincreaseinMSW
generationwillbeoffsetbynewwastediversioninitiatives.Factorsthatcaninfluencewastedisposal
rates,capacitiesandneedsarelistedbelow.
IncentivesforeachwasteorganizationandICIsupplierstomeettheirplannedwastediversion
targets;
Implementationofpackaginglegislationandextendedproducerresponsibility;
Identificationofadditionalwastestreams,notcurrentlyknowntodaythatcouldbemanagedby
theSAEWAfacility;
Shiftsinthecurrentdisposalmarketplace(i.e.landfillclosures,limitedaccesstocurrentdisposal
markets,etc.);and
Economicgrowthfactorsasshownfromnewresearchshowswastegenerationisdirectly
relatedtoeconomicprosperity.
Railroadtiesupplywillbegenerousuntiltheexistingstockpileisusedwhichisestimatedtobe10to12
years.Afterthat,onlythestatedreplacementamountfromtherailwaycompanieswillbeavailable.
SRMmaterialisdependentoneconomicactivityinthefoodindustry.Forstudypurposes,supplyhas
beenassumedtoremainconsistentyearoveryear.
Eachofthesefactorshastheabilitytoimpactthequantityandcompositionofwastebeinggenerated
andthereforethequantityofwastepotentiallyavailabletobemanagedatthefacility.Figure7
illustratesthelongrangewasteprojectionsforaSAEWAfacility.

February 17, 2011
Figure 7: Long Range Waste Proj ections for SAEWA.
10.0 Task 1 Conclusion

Thedatacollectedtodateindicatesthattherearelargequantitiesoffeedstockwithadequateheating
valuewhicharesuitablefor,andavailableto,afutureSouthernAlbertaEFWfacility.Thechallengeis
thecontrolofthewastestream,sothattheminimumamountrequiredforthefinancing,buildingand
operationofanEFWfacilitycanbesecuredforthelongterm(30plusyears).Thisisgenerallypossible
fortheresidentialwastethatthemunicipalitiesareresponsibleforandcontrol.Itisusuallypossiblefor
selectindustrialwastescomingfromasinglesource,wherecontractscanbesignedwiththeoriginator
ofthewaste.ItbecomesverychallengingwiththeprivatehaulerscollectingICIandC&Dwaste,which
willusuallytakeittothefacilityofferingthelowesttippingfee.Asecondchallengeliesinthevariability
ofthewastestream.Someofthewastewillbesubjecttoseasonalvariations,andmuchofitto
economicfluctuations.Thismustbeaccountedforduringfacilitysizing.Thethirdchallengeliesin
predictinghowmuchwastewillbedivertedthroughrecyclingandorganicsmanagementprogramsin
thefuture.Forthisstudyithasbeenassumedthatthisaffectsthelargerurbanmunicipalitiesmorethan
thesmallerruralcommunities.
SinceEFWplantsneedtobeoperatedatnear100%capacityallthetime,initialsizingmusttakeinto
considerationthewastestreamsthatcanbeconsideredreasonablysecure.Other,moredifficultto
securewastematerialscollectedbytheprivatesectorcanbeconsideredforfacilitysizingifinitial
calculationsshowthattheEFWfacilitystippingfeeiscompetitivewithlandfilling.Shouldthisnotbe
thecase,thesematerialsmaybecomeavailableinthefutureiflandfillcostsriseabovethoseforEFW.
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
Year
1
Year
3
Year
5
Year
7
Year
9
Year
11
Year
13
Year
15
Year
17
Year
19
Year
21
Year
23
Year
25
Year
27
Year
29
T
o
n
n
e
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
LongRangeWasteProjections
MunicipalSolidWaste Biosolids&OilfieldWaste SpecifiedRiskMaterials
RailwayTies TotalWasteStream
February 17, 2011
InTable9,thewasteasfeedstockispresented,alongwithasummaryofwhatisrealisticallyavailable,
whatcarriesarisk,andwhatmightbeavailableforfutureexpansion.
Table 9: Summary of Available Waste for Energy Recovery

Waste
Sector/
Category
Total
Waste
Tonnage
Waste
tonnage
realistically
available
Responsibili
ty/source
Confidencein
volumesandData
Gaps
Risks Comments
MSWfrom
SAEWA
members
196,850 196,850 Municipality
/Waste
Authorities
High Increased
diversion,
seasonal
fluctuations
OnlySAEWA
memberwasteis
firm
MSWfrom
nonSAEWA
members
919,300 13,300 Municipaliti
es
High Largercities
haveown
facilities
WastefromBCand
Strathmore
reasonablyavailable
Institutional
Commercial
andIndustrial
waste
290,000 0
Somelocal
ICIwaste
includedin
above
totals
Private
haulers
Moderate,basedon
population
estimatesanddata
fromlandfills.
Privatehaulerswill
notprovideICIdata
Wastecanbe
obtainedbased
onpriceonly.
Needto
competewith
landfill
Landfilltippingfees
arerising,butnot
actualdisposal
costs,socompeting
onpriceisrisky
C&Dwaste 127,500*
Notpartof
totalbelow
0
Somelocal
C&Dwaste
includedin
above
totals
Private
haulers
Moderate,
dependenton
economicactivity
andpopulation.
Privatehaulerswill
notprovidedata
Provincemay
imposeC&D
recycling
targets
Volumesandtypes
ofwastehighly
dependenton
economicactivity
Biosolids 22,232 1,232 Wastewater
facilitiesand
septic
haulers
Moderate.Will
needtoworkwith
septichaulingfirms
toconfirmnumbers
andinterest
Tippingfeeand
Provincial
directionfor
biosolids
Couldbemanaged
bySAEWAwaste
commissions
Contaminate
dSoil
66,500 OilFields Moderate.
Quantities
dependentonoil
andgasindustry
andfluctuate
annually
Competitive
pricing
Canhavespecial
requirementsfor
disposal
OilfieldWaste 2,500 2,500 Hazcoand
RBWilliams
High Competitive
pricing
Generators
welcomealocal
option
SRM 27,500 27,500 WestCoast
Reduction
High Competitive
pricing
Mustmakefinancial
sense
Railwayties 124,650 124,650
(year1)
72,000
(year12)
CNand
CPRail
High Competitive
pricing
Generators
welcomealocal
option
TOTAL 1,649,532 366,032
*25%ofnonresidentialwastefromCityofCalgarylandfillswhichisaccountedforinnonSAEWAmembersMSW.
Thewastetonnagerealisticallyavailableisapproximately365,000tonnesperyear.Thisisanadequate
amountformassburncombustion,whichisthemostcommontechnologyforEFWfacilities.This
February 17, 2011
volumeofwasteisalsoadequateformanyofthealternateoremergingtechnologiesforenergy
recoveryfromwaste.Thetype(s)oftechnologiesbestsuitedforthesubjectwastestreams,quantities
andcompositionsarefurtherexploredinTask2CombustionTechnologies.Thisincludesalookatinitial
sizingandfutureexpansionpotential.

Waste Management

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Waste Management

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Phase 1, Task 1:

Waste Generation Rates

Approved by SAEWA Board: January 27, 2012

Phase 1, Task 1: Waste Generation Rates & Facility Sizing

2.0 Waste Generation Overview

2.1 MSW from SAEWA Members

Table 1: Average Annual MSW Disposal Rates from SAEWA Members

2.2 MSW from non-SAEWA Members

Table 2: Summary of MSW Disposed from Non-SAEWA Members

2.3 Other Waste Sources

Table 3: Summary of ICI Sector Waste Disposed at Non-SAEWA Landfills.

Table 4: Biosolids Disposal/Generation

2.3.4Hydrocarbon Contaminated Soil

2.3.5Oilfield Waste Residue

Table 5: Summary of Waste Railway Ties for Disposal

Phase 1, Task 1: Waste Generation Rates & Facility Sizing

2.3.7Specified Risk Materials

2.4 Summary of Total and Available Waste Quantities

Table 6: Summary of Total and Available Waste Quantities

3.0 Disposal and Transfer Station Facilities

Phase 1, Task 1: Waste Generation Rates & Facility Sizing

5.0 Seasonal Variations

Figure 3: Graph of Average Seasonal Variations in Disposal.

Figure 6: Typical Waste Composition for Small Towns

Table 8: Estimated Higher Heating Value for Comingled Waste Stream

Phase 1, Task 1: Waste Generation Rates & Facility Sizing

8.0 Future Waste Diversion

9.0 Long Range Projections

Phase 1, Task 1: Waste Generation Rates & Facility Sizing

10.0 Task 1 Conclusion

Table 9: Summary of Available Waste for Energy Recovery

You might also like