COM 0272.002 1996-1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

r contaminants in even the best of products, the potential for contamination by household hazardous wastes, and the fact that higher grade "clean green" composts are available at competitive prices have combined to significantly reduce the "marketability" of MSW compost products. Most mainland solid waste managers recommend that when evaluating composting alternatives that any proposal to engage in MSW composting include fillri commitments to purchase the product from potential users. ECONOMICS: A prime factor, when selecting a waste processing alternative, is the required capacity and capital equipment costs. Asa "Clean MRF" is limited to processing only that material which has been pre-segregated, normally a clean MRF is only a quarter of the size of a mixed waste facility. The significantly lower capacity and the reduced equipment requirements can result in substantially lower capital and operating costs. On the other hand a Dirty MRF must be built to handle the entire waste stream rather than just those particular elements being targeted far diversion, resulting in higher capital and operating costs. In addition, heavy duty equipment must be specified to handle the more abrasive impacts of mixed waste and a mixed waste facility's maintenance costs are substantially higher. The high tipping fees required to support mixed waste processing and MSW composting tend to encourage the diversion of cardboard and greenwaste to lower cost options, resulting in the loss of a considerable portion of the projected project's revenues (up to 35% of the total waste stream in Hawaii) and removing some of the most valuable raw materials from the compost process. Simultaneously, the diversion of the source separated greenwaste insures a considerable supply of a higher grade product in direct competition with the MSW compost. Since the demand for organic soil amendments in Hawaii is limited and can most likely be filled by maximizing the diversion of source separated organics, the development of an MSW composting project is often self defeating. An element in any Dirty MRF contract is the necessity of a "put or pay" agreement with the County guaranteeing a minimum quantity of waste. What happens to the County if the commercial sector diverts a significant segment of its waste generation (commercial cardboard and greenwaste -some 20% of the waste streaml? The County could end up paying the difference at a higher per ton cost under a "put or pay" agreement. How can the County guarantee the delivery of the quantities of waste agreed to under such a put or pay agreement? The Supreme Court has invalidated "flow control" requirements as violations of inter-state commerce, and even without the Supreme Court decision, Hawaii State Law specifically excludes "source separated recyclables" from control by local governments. WASTE DIVERSION GOALS /RECYCLING !MATERIAL PROCESSING: Too often communities get caught up in meeting waste diversion rates and goals rather than evaluating a project based on the quality of the material diverted, the project's overall impact on local economics and flexibility in meeting future needs. From the standpoint of