Download
1 / 39
390 likes | 584 Views
County of Simcoe, Waste Management Strategy Special Meeting of County Council Solid Waste Management Strategy Draft Report. Date: June 29, 2010. Development of the Strategy. About the Strategy. Purpose: To provide direction for the County’s waste management system.
E N D
County of Simcoe, Waste Management Strategy Special Meeting of County Council Solid Waste Management Strategy Draft Report Date: June 29, 2010
About the Strategy • Purpose: • To provide direction for the County’s waste management system. • To make progress towards zero waste. • To address processing disposal needs for the next twenty years. • Results: • The selection of a long-term waste management system. • A recommended approach to implement the system.
About the Strategy Continued • The Strategy is intended to: • Identify programs and approaches to improve diversion. • Determine if the County should build recycling or composting facilities or ship materials to an outside processor. • Select the best approach to collect and transfer waste to support the waste system. • Address garbage disposal (and/or processing) requirements and approaches for the short and long-term. • The Strategy was not intended to identify specific processing or disposal technologies.
Problem Statement • Lack of secure, cost effective long-term processing capacity for recyclables and organics. • Need to improve effectiveness and efficiency of current diversion programs. • Need for additional strategies to incrementally improve diversion. • Need to maximize use of existing disposal capacity. • Lack of disposal capacity over the long-term.
Guiding Principles Used in the Strategy • General principles of Zero Waste. • Principles for waste management planning (Provincial Policy Statement June 2007). • Triple bottom line/sustainable approach. • Waste management hierarchy.
Current Solid Waste System • Three active landfills for regular garbage • One landfill for inert materials • Four transfer stations / depots • Enhanced blue box program • Drop-off depots • One small Material Recovery Facility • Most recyclables processed outside of County • Green bin organics program • Organic material processed outside of County • Progressive waste policies (one-bag limit) for garbage • Household Hazardous Waste and Waste Electronics Services • Diversion of various materials at depots Achieving diversion success, one of ‘best’ Ontario municipalities
Current Solid Waste System • Curbside Collection: • Garbage, weekly collection, one bag limit. • Blue Box recycling, weekly collection, containers and fibres. • Kitchen Organics, weekly collection, co-collected with garbage. • Leaf and Yard Waste, in some municipalities. • Bulky Waste, in some municipalities. • Scrap Metal, in some municipalities. • Brush / Christmas Trees, in some municipalities.
Current Performance (2009) • Approximately 115,000 tonnes of residential waste handled by the County. • Majority of residential waste handled by County programs with some materials diverted through on property management such as backyard composting, grasscycling, etc. (approximately 7,000 tonnes) • Simcoe managed approximately 12,000 tonnes of IC&I waste through curbside collection and drop-off depots.
Current Performance (2009) Continued • Residential waste generation rate (County System) = 392 kg/person/year. • Residential diversion rate (County System) = 55%. • Residential diversion rate (County plus other programs) = 57%. • Overall County diversion rate for residential and IC&I waste = 52%.
Waste Projections: Status Quo Estimated Tonnes of Waste Diverted and Disposed (2011-2030)
Recommended SWMS The priority: movement of materials generated by residents and the IC&I sector that participate in County programs, through the diversion components of the system.
Recommended SWMS: Diversion • Enhance reduction and re-use programs. • Per capita waste reduction target. • Re-use centres and programs. • Green procurement strategy. • Extended Producer Responsibility and waste minimization. • Enhance waste diversion. • Restrict curbside garbage collection. • Increase recycling container capacity. • Enhance promotion and education. • Public open space recycling. • Special events recycling. • Diversion of IC&I materials (e.g., schools, hospitals, long-term care facilities, etc.). • Mandatory diversion by-law.
Recommended SWMS: Recycling • Processing of up to 50,000 tonnes per year. Long-Term Short-Term • Process recyclables within the County. • Develop a new Material Recovery Facility. • Potential for economies of scale (Barrie and Orillia). • More flexible approach. • Process recyclables outside the County. • Upgrade transfer capabilities. • Flexible option should changes to regulations remove responsibility for managing recyclables from municipalities. • Only option for short-term. • Potential for significant changes to Blue Box recycling based on the proposed changes to the Waste Diversion Act. • Decision to build a new MRF should be made in 2012/2013 when the proposed changes are known.
Recommended SWMS: Organics • Processing of up to 25,000 tonnes per year of household organics. • Potential to add materials to the green bin, which could add approximately 4% to the diversion rate. • Export and secure processing capacity outside the County • Additional capacity may not available if diversion increases occur in the County. • Additional haulage of material. • Less control. Long-Term Short-Term • Develop processing capacity within the County • Development of a new processing facility. • Could reduce transfer/haul costs. • Potential for partnering with Barrie and Orillia. • More flexible approach.
Recommended SWMS: Transfer • Existing Transfer Capabilities: • Use 40 yd3 bins to haul organics from the three landfills to the City of Hamilton. • Majority of other divertible materials are collected / transferred by private sector contractors. • Recommended Transfer (at least in the short-term): • Continue current transfer approach for organics; • Develop transfer capacity for recyclables; and, • Develop transfer capacity for garbage.
Recommended SWMS: Short-term Garbage Disposal • Modifications to current operating landfills: • Already remediated and effective practices are in place to conserve landfill capacity. • May be some additional measures to enhance operations. • Use of garbage disposal facilities outside the County. • Includes municipal and/or private sector landfills. • Potential to export to existing Energy-from-Waste (incinerator) or other processing facilities
Recommended SWMS: Long-term Garbage Disposal • Continue use of existing operating landfills (Sites 2, 10, 11, and 13). Examine potential for expansion of Sites 10 and 11. • Secure approval of Design and Operations plans for Sites 9 and 12. • Continue to export to facilities outside the County, preferably to processing facilities. • Consider partnerships to implement garbage processing.
Projected SWMS Diversion Performance • A reasonable diversion rate target = 71% by 2020. • A maximum diversion rate = 77% by 2030. Recommended SWMS: Estimated Tonnes of Waste Diverted and Disposed (2011-2030)
SWMS Cost Projections Financing Processing Landfill Capacity
SWMS Cost Projections Continued • Implementation of the SWMS varies from $37/hhld less to $16/hhld more than Status Quo and $22/hhld less to $31/hhld more than Status Quo 2.
Strategy Financing • Considerations regarding the general sources of financing used to recover costs include: • Bag tag revenues (varies based on option for curbside garbage restriction chosen, full user pay has advantages) • Tipping fee revenues (consider uniform tipping fee) • The Waste levy (consider change to uniform levy/unit served) • The County levy (cease to recover costs from County levy) • The waste management reserve (consider development of reserve for new infrastructure financing)
Strategy Financing Continued • Tipping Fees: • Difficult to predict effect of change in minimum charge. • Removal of scrap metals fee reduces revenue by $100,000 or more. • Ban on disposal could generate fines but could also reduce revenues • Revenue reduction of $500,000/year (fee of $155 versus $115 per tonne). • Bag tags: • Fee for tags was not set to cover all waste management costs. • Assumed portion of net costs should continue to be recovered through the levy. • Full-user pay has advantages (lower additional costs, flexibility)
Strategy Financing Continued • Waste Levy: • Recommend use waste levy not county levy • Change methodology, consider move to uniform levy. • Average levy over planning period for SWMS would range from $125 to $266 per unit. • Reserves: • Analyze options and need for reserves in 2011 when deciding on measures for curbside garbage restrictions • Annual contribution to reserves over the planning period equivalent to 10% of annual operating budget (Strategy V1) would increase the annual waste levy by an average of $38/hhld/year and generate $105 million. • Reserve financing for infrastructure has benefits, e.g. reduce cost per tonne for new MRF from $84 to $53/tonne
Overview of Implementation Considerations – Diversion Initiatives • Community-based social marketing approach. • Progressively more stringent restrictions on curbside garbage. • Necessary to increase diversion rates and reduce waste generation rates in the County.
Overview of Implementation Considerations – Recycling • Separate the contractual arrangements for collection and processing. • A separate processing Request for Proposals (RFP) should be developed and issued. • In the short-term, continue to export recyclables. • If the County decides to develop a MRF in 2012/2013, it could be developed for 2017.
Overview of Implementation Considerations – Organics • Composting technologies can support processing of additional tonnage if desired. • Assess the options of siting a composting facility. • Accommodate additional materials (e.g., pet waste and diapers). • If the County decides to proceed with a composting facility in 2012, it could be developed for 2017.
Overview of Implementation Considerations – Collection • Evaluate change in container types with consideration to costs. • Sufficient time must be given for the development and award of a collection contract. • Ensure an adequate fleet size. • Promotion and education campaign for uniform level of collection service in 2012.
Overview of Implementation Considerations – Transfer • Determine if there are suitable areas to develop Transtor units. • Complete procurement processes for recyclables processing and garbage export.
Overview of Implementation Considerations – Garbage Disposal • Assess remaining capacity of current operating landfills. • Implement options to extend life of current operating landfills. • Issue RFQ/RFP seeking pricing and terms for short-term export of garbage outside County. • Review partnership options through a formal process (e.g., REOI). • Implementation of recommended long-term disposal options would generally be scheduled beyond Year 5.
Monitoring and Plan Review • Monitor key system performance indicators, such as costs, recovery and residue rates; and, tonnes of material collected and marketed. • Data collected will be used in reports to ensure the performance of the system and in order to track progress in implementing the SWMS. • Annual report on the Strategy which should: • Provide an overview of the proposed objectives for the year and how the County reached these goals; • Include a list of issues that arose during the year and how these issues were mitigated; and, • Include a section on the plan for implementation in the following year.
Monitoring and Plan Review Continued • As part of the Strategy review, adjustments would be made to: • Per capita waste reduction targets. • Waste diversion targets. • Review should report on trends associated with the consumption of landfill airspace. • The need for pursuing garbage processing and/or development of Landfill Sites 9 or 12 will be determined through the success in minimizing the consumption of landfill airspace. • Recommended schedule for review is:
Public Education Strategy • A range of media types are proposed to engender behaviour change based on adoption of community based social marketing. • Examples of the type of P&E methods proposed:
Communications Plan • Ensures a coordinated approach for the implementation of the reduction, diversion and disposal initiatives. • Effective communications plans contain four primary elements: design, funding, deployment, and monitoring / evaluation. • A dedicated staff resource in the form of a “Promotion and Education Coordinator” will be essential for the successful implementation of the P&E activities.
Public Consultation on the SWMS • Opportunities to obtain information and provide comments included: • Solid Waste Management Strategy Steering Committee. • Posting of information on the County’s website. • Media releases. • Notices in local newspapers, advertisements on local radio stations, and in the Managing Your Waste newsletter. • On-line comment form and workbook to solicit feedback. • Public meetings held in February and May 2010. • Stakeholder meeting held in May 2010. • The feedback from these sessions and meetings have been incorporated into the Strategy and documented in the Records of Consultation.
