HIGHLAND VALLEY LANDFILL An Innovative and Sustainable Landfill Solution

1. HIGHLAND VALLEY LANDFILLAn Innovative and Sustainable Landfill Solution Presentation to: CWMA Conference “What’s Next in Waste” Victoria, BC March, 30th 2007 Presented by Dr. Tony Sperling, P.Eng. and Scott Ferraro, B.Eng

2. Overview • Overview of Highland Valley Landfill • GVRD Cache Creek Replacement • Cost Comparison • GHG Emissions • GHG Emission Reductions • Conclusions & Questions

3. 1. OVERVIEW OF HIGHLANDVALLEY LANDFILL

4. Ashcroft Ranch Site • 200 Ha greenfield site • Rare bunch grass habitat • Working cattle ranch • 58 sites significant toFirst Nations Highland Valley Landfill • 125 Ha brownfield site • Barren overburden plateau • Currently used as mined overburden dump site • Small part of 6,000 Ha disturbed area

5. HVC Objectives • To maintain jobs and economic activity in region after mine closure • Provide new revenue source for District of Logan Lake to offset loss of $800k in taxes • To generate limited revenue from site that will help offset long term costs at mine site • To create opportunity for green house gas emission reduction

6. Environmental Controls • Commitment to state-of-the-art environmental management • Triple lining system (HDPE, GCL, 1 m clay) • Full leachate recirculation • Aggressive landfill gas collection (75%) • Biocap control of fugitive methane • Full LFG utilization, 18 MW of green power • Comprehensive monitoring program • Lowest GHG emissions • Lowest smog emissions

7. Advantages of HVC Site • Brownfield site already disturbed. • No known endangered species. • Not in Agricultural Land Reserve. • Water table is 90 m deep. • Virtually unlimited soil and rock resources stock piled. • Heavy equipment will be available to move materials for many years. • Nearest domestic drinking water wells 19 km away.

8. Regional Landfill Model • Small landfills are inefficient and typically operate with lower level of environmental protection (unlined, no gas collection, etc.) • Washington and Oregon have developed regional landfill facilities at Columbia Ridge and Rabanco Landfills that each receive over two million tonnes per year • Highland Valley Landfill will enable all interested municipalities to close existing landfills and divert MSW residuals to this state-of-art facility • Co-Operative management model proposed as possible method of ensuring price stability

9. 2. GVRD CACHE CREEK REPLACEMENT

10. GVRD Expression of Interest • Request for EOI issued by GVRD July 11, 2006 to replace 500,000 TPY Cache Creek landfill • Cache Creek Landfill to close 2008 or 2009 • 23 proponents responded • 9 incinerator proposals • 6 landfill proposals • 6 gasifier / pyrolysis proposals • 2 other technologies • Options being reviewed by GVRD Advisory Panel and consultants

11. 3. COST COMPARISON

12. Disposal Cost per Tonne • HVL expected to be lowest cost option for regional waste management solution, once transfer station, transport and revenue from energy sales considered.

13. Maximizing Sustainability Dividend on Capital Invested • Investment for HVL: $85 million • Power Production: 18 MW • Project Life: 83 years • Investment for Incinerator: $435million • Power Production: 34 MW • Project Life: 50 years • If goal is to produce power, what is the best solution? • Incinerator, OR • Bioreactor landfill and $15 million, 15 MW power upgrade at GVRD’s Capilano Reservoir • GVRD can produce 34 MW of GREEN power with $335 million savings and less emissions. • Get additional 33 years of SWM without further capital investment

14. Social and Environmental Considerations • Waste disposal options need to be evaluated with triple bottom line approach for all of southwest B.C. • What is annual CO2E emission? • Does project provide a solution for small municipalities requiring waste disposal option? • Does project provide opportunities for First Nations? • How many jobs are created? • How much will project impact air quality in Fraser Valley?

15. 4. GHG EMISSIONS

16. Global Climate Change

17. BC’s GHG Emissions

18. Emissions from Incinerator Total Emissions • For 500,000 TPY MSW CO2E average emissions of approx 450,000 TPY or 0.9 tonnes CO2E per tonne MSW • Equivalent GHG emissions of almost 100,000 cars per year • Significant NOx and SOx emissions in Fraser Valley air shed

19. Total Emissions For 500,000 TPY MSW CO2E average emissions of approx 200,000 TPY or 0.4 tonnes CO2E per tonne MSW Equivalent to emissions of almost 45,000 cars per year Average emissions based over operational lifespan (approx 90 yrs) and post closure (25 yrs) Emissions from Conventional Landfill

20. Emissions from HVL Bioreactor Total Emissions • For 600,000 TPY MSW CO2E average emissions of approx 260,000 TPY or 0.43 tonnes CO2E per tonne MSW • Equivalent to emissions of almost 60,000 cars per year • Average emissions based over operational lifespan (approx 90 yrs) and post closure (25 yrs) Source: USEPA, http://www.epa.gov/garbage/landfill/facultative.htm

21. Trucking Emissions

22. 5. GHG EMISSION REDUCTIONS

23. Landfill Gas Capture & Utilization • HVL aims for 85% capture, achievable with well designed LFG collection system and geomembrane closure • Utilization via CAT ICE to produce 18MW • Investigating purifying LFG to pipeline grade CH4 or as fuel source for landfill fleet with QuestAir’s PSA technology

24. Fugitive Emission Reduction • Large volumes of fugitive emissions from landfills occur during operational stages • Difficult / impossible to collect LFG from an operational lift • LFG that isn’t collected vents to atmosphere through intermediate cover • Biocover can be used as intermediate cover to oxidize CH4 to CO2 • CH4 has 21 times the global warming effect as CO2

25. Biocover • Fugitive methane can be oxidized by methanotrophic bacteria living in Biocover • Biocover is comprised of fully stabilized compost mixed with bulking agent (wood chips, soil etc) • Compost can be made from greenwaste, food waste or biosolids • Biocover 0.3m thick can oxidize 80%+ of fugitive methane emissions • Used in place of or added to intermediate cover

26. Emission Summary Total CO2E Emissions for 600,000 TPY MSW Bioreactor Vs Incinerator

27. 6. CONCLUSIONS& QUESTIONS

28. Key Conclusions • Highland Valley Landfill will provide a long term solution for managing MSW residuals in B.C. • HVL will provide a higher level of environmental protection than Ashcroft Project and will be on a brownfield site • System costs will be low, about $50/tonne with transfer and trucking included • Coupled with Capilano hydro upgrade, project can deliver 33 MW of GREEN power while saving $335 million in capital relative to incinerator • GHG emissions in B.C. can be reduced by more than 300,000 tonnes if GVRD elects HVL rather than incineration

29. Playing Devil’s Advocate • Major advances in landfill technology with bioreactor, biocover and horizontal collectors • Directing organics to the landfill realizes the following benefits • biodecomposition produces methane • methane is captured to produce energy or fuel • presents alternative solution for managing enormous amounts of organics in major metropolitan centres (e.g. half million tonnes in GVRD) • Is incineration the right solution? • Bioreactor landfills produce 50% less GHG’s • Bioreactor landfills require 75% less capital • Bioreactors sequester fossil fuel carbon

30. Thank you from Sperling Hansen Associates “Engineering Better Solid Waste Management Systems Today for a Cleaner Tomorrow”

31. Factoring in Energy Recovery Offsets Net CO2E Emissions Per MW Net CO2E Emissions for 600,000 TPY MSW