The term “final storage quality” was first defined twenty years ago by Baccini and Henseler and other members of a Swiss working group on landfills. In the meantime, the definition has been modified by several authors in various published papers.

In essence, final storage quality is used to imply an “environmentally sound flux/load for short, medium and long term periods”, to use one of the academic versions that I rather like for its brevity.

Which criteria should be used to determine when the “Final Storage Quality” has been reached, is being debated.

What will be the final contaminating parameter of the large number of potential pollutants in a landfill at the end of that that long awaited transition from active aftercare management to passive aftercare?

Which contaminant will be the most critical in the long term, which when it is dissipated, we can all stop concerning ourselves that what was once a landfill no longer has a potential to harm the environment which surrounds it?

Well, having I hope now wetted your curiosity, I am going to disappoint you by saying that I don’t think that academia really yet knows for certain the answer to that. Given the huge number of sanitary (lined and capped landfills) now being filled around the world as I write this, I think we should all think hard and get a little worried for our offspring.

However, two aspects of long term landfill which are of direct economic importance and about which more can be said, are:

1. The longevity of economic landfill gas production for energy production,
2. And, (for those tasked with landfill aftercare duties) it is from the point of economic aftercare, how the escape of the remaining methane to atmosphere without first oxidising it, can be achieved.

It is important to achieve “final storage quality” while consistently burning/flaring the methane in landfill gas, or in another way oxidising the methane to prevent serious climate change implications.

We can be sure that in the long-term, gas produced by landfills will be characterized by low methane content.

The methane content and rate of gas production will be so low that there will be scarcely any possibility for its use in economically-sound energy recovery procedures and yet it will still amount to a significant discharge due to the very long period of its slow discharge.

There is no escaping that the gas produced in the long tail of the “elk” requires treatment due to its global warming potential.

New low-cost technologies must be found, either to extend the phase of profitable landfill gas utilization, or methods developed to, if possible, reduce the landfill gas aftercare phase and mitigate long-term emissions.

At our sister landfill gas web site we have started to look at possible aftercare strategies with respect to dwindling landfill gas, and we have written about:

• The proportion of total Active Landfill Gas Recovery that can be economically utilised by active landfill gas extraction
• The developing concept of bio-oxidation of landfill gas instead of flaring, either in specially designed vessels or within modified landfill caps during landfill aftercare.

Click on the linked text in the above lines to read more.

The company said that it had received written consent from the council to initiate the appeal proceedings, following March’s initial refusal of the application, which saw 20 out of 22 members of the council’s planning committee voting against the plans (see letsrecycle.com story).

Lodging an appeal means that the final decision on whether or not the plans are given the go-ahead will now be made by the government’s planning inspectorate through a public inquiry, which is expected to be held in the first half of 2010.

The company’s plans to develop the plant, known as the Cornwall Energy Recovery Centre (CERC), represented the centrepiece of the 30-year PFI-funded waste treatment contract that it signed with Cornwall county council in October 2006 (see letsrecycle.com story).

And the company’s project director, David Buckle, claimed that its proposals to develop the CERC to treat the county’s residual household waste continued to be the best option.

“There is an urgent need for this facility to avoid a waste management crisis and to provide a modern waste management solution for the whole county in which we produce energy from non-recycled waste, rather than landfill it,” he said.

If built, SITA UK has said the CERC would produce enough electricity to power the equivalent of 21,000 homes, as well as producing heat which could be provided to local businesses, and in particular the china clay industry.

Waste management firm Viridor has expressed its disappointment at East Lothian council’s decision to reject planning permission for its Dunbar combined heat and power plant despite “strong recommendation” for approval from the council’s planning officers.

East Lothian’s planning committee yesterday (September 1) voted unanimously against the company’s proposal to build a 300,000 tonnes-a-year capacity energy-from-waste facility on land at its existing Oxwellmains landfill site, which lies 40km east of Edinburgh.

Another EfW Plant Rejected

This was despite the planning documents containing a recommendation from planning officers to approve the project subject to a number of conditions – including beginning operations within three years of approval being granted.

The spokesman said that, under new planning controls, the councillors would now have a “few weeks” to formulate a document outlining the reasons why they refused permission.

Commenting on the rejection, Steve Don, Viridor’s Scottish regional manager, said: “Despite a recognition of need, SEPA describing the proposal as the ‘best practical environmental option’ and a strong recommendation for approval from East Lothian council professional officers, Viridor is disappointed that councillors chose to refuse our application.

Proposal
Under the proposal, the Dunbar facility would have been used to process 150,000 tonnes-a-year of municipal residual waste collected from Edinburgh and East and Mid-Lothian councils, and 150,000 tonnes-a-year of commercial and industrial residual waste from the surrounding region.

Viridor had previously revised its planning application for the proposed Dunbar facility in May 2008 following a public consultation, which saw its initial 450,000 tonne-a-year capacity proposal scaled-down to “reflect local need” (see letsrecycle.com story).

Mr Don added: “With ambitious Scottish and European Zero Waste targets we need both increased recycling and smarter ways of managing residual waste. Whilst this decision will inevitably delay our journey to sustainability, we will be reviewing in due course.”

The spokesman for East Lothian said that he expected Viridor to appeal against the decision, which would “probably be subject to a public inquiry”. More here.

The organisers of the top Waste and resource management conference are once again seeking papers from experts in their fields. To write a good quality paper and present it at the conference is the very best self publicity for yourself and your company. Now is your chance to start by submitting your abstract for consideration.

Get started now – there is not much time!

SYMPOSIUM THEMES

The Symposium will last five days and will deal with municipal and commercial solid waste, hazardous waste and special waste including the following topics:

A. Waste policy and legislation National and regional guidelines; regulation and planning
requirements; role of scientific and technical bodies as well as associations.
B. Waste management strategies Integrated waste management; national and local strategies; zero waste management; future perspectives.
C. Public participation and education
Public involvement; NGO activities; mediation; education; communication; training in waste management and operation, public and occupational health impacts of waste management.
D. Waste management assessment and decision tools
Life cycle analysis; risk assessment; environmental impact assessment; EMAS; quality control procedures; cost benefit analysis; multi-criteria analysis; auditing.
E. Waste characterisation as a tool for waste management
strategies
Standardisation; analytical procedures.
F. New concepts for waste collection
Cost optimisation; on-demand collection; separate collection;subsurface systems; case studies.
G. Waste minimisation and recycling
Waste avoidance; waste logistics and recycling; new recycling technologies; material quality after recycling; packaging material; electronic waste; construction and demolition waste; batteries; end of life vehicles; market waste.
H. Biological treatment
New developments in composting and anaerobic digestion; emissions from processing facilities; product quality.
I. Thermal treatment and advanced conversion technologies
Technology and experiences; new technologies; production and use of RD F; emission control; reatment of residues; beneficial use of combustion ash.
L. Mechanical biological treatment prior to landfilling
Mechanical pretreatment (separation, shredding, RD F-production, etc.); technology and experience; new technology, testing and landfill acceptance; off gas treatment; emission control.
M. Sanitary landfilling
Sustainable landfill concepts for municipal and special waste; processes and emissions; leachate and gas management; landfill design and construction; barrier design and long-term performance; waste mechanics; landfill operation; administrative and financial aspects;
landfilling under specific conditions (tropical, islands, mountains, etc.); aftercare and reuse; landfill remediation; cost studies; cases.
N. Integrated wastewater and solid waste management
Decentralized systems; closed substance cycles; future perspectives; cases.
O. Waste management and climate change
Minimisation of greenhouse gases from waste management activities and landfills, waste – CDM projects, minimisation of energy consumption, landfills as geological sinks for carbon and other elements.
P. Waste management in developing and low income countries
Appropriate technologies, experiences, international cooperation, financing, education.
Q. Special sessions
BAT – Best Available Technologies; IPPC regulations.

Due to their relevance, all these subjects will be presented in general sessions, specialised sessions, workshops and poster sessions. Offers of papers for workshops are also welcome.

An extended abstract (at least one but no more than two full pages) should reach the Organization no later than January 30th 2009.

Continuously updated information is available on the web page http://www.sardiniasymposium.it

The conference is relevant to:

- waste management experts
- government organisations involved in planning and waste management policy
- waste management companies
- researchers and scientists involved in life cycle assessment
- academics
- consultancies
- technology providers.

This conference is supported by the Greater London Authority, the London Development Agency, London Councils, Defra and CIWM. More…

A landfill gas-to-energy project in Baltimore County is receiving the first tax credit available through the Maryland Clean Energy Production Tax Credit Program.

The project developed by Pepco Energy Services, at Baltimore County´s Eastern landfill, was awarded a $770,661 tax credit under the program that began last year. The project creates up to three megawatts of electricity at the 200-acre landfill. “Pepco Energy Services is proud to be the first company to receive clean energy tax credits from the state of Maryland, but we are also excited by the possibilities that landfill gas offers for a cleaner environment and additional electricity supplies,” said David Weiss, president of the company´s energy services division. More…

Policy, Economy & Technology

CONFERENCE STREAMS

1. Energy for Sustainable Development
2. Technology Options
3. Markets & Policy Issues
4. Actors & Stakeholders

SPONSORSHIP OPPORTUNITIES NOW AVAILABLE

For more information, please click here or contact the Official Congress Secretariat.

ONLINE REGISTRATION

Register quick and easy online!
Secure online Registration now available:
Energex 2008 

For more information, please or contact the Official Congress Secretariat. Register quick and easy online!Secure online. Registration now available.

The Bio Group, which formed this May as a joint venture between in-vessel specialists Cambridge Recycling Services (CRS), composting machinery providers Global Recycling Solutions as well as green waste and wood processors Material Change; has begun construction for a 30,000 tonne per annum facility in the village of Helmdon in the south of the county. (see letsrecycle.com story)

The “hybrid” system: Steve Sharratt, chief executive of the Bio Group, explained that having both technologies in one facility will allow the company to simultaneously treat source segregated food waste in the IVC and food waste in paper, cardboard or plastic packaging in the AD.

The building to be converted to the Waste Reception Building AD Process Building with the area for the IVC tunnels on the left.

The system will also mean that the solid digestate – one of the end products of the AD process which needs treating before it can be safely spread onto land- can be treated onsite in the IVC, then composted in windrows.

The Bio Group revealed it has “agreements in place to ensure the compost produced by both processes will be used to improve local farmland” and that it is looking at how the site can achieve the quality standard, PAS100 for the compost.

As for the energy produced by the AD process, Bio Group has confirmed that it will be used to power the site and that the surplus will be fed into the national grid. See more at Let’s Recycle.

It appears that two facilities are to be built in the town. The EfW incinerator and an anaerobic digestion plant, wth the anaerobic digestion plant due to open first in 2009, followed by the Incinerator by 2011.

 STRATEGY: Specific material type landfill bans on agenda

The first three chapters of Waste Strategy 2007 contain a number of key areas of interest including the suggestion of radical future approaches to the landfilling of biodegradable and recyclable waste.

Landfill bans
The document points to experiences on the Continent where a number of countries, such as Germany, France and Swdedn, have imposed strict bans on what can be landfilled.

The strategy said that Defra wil be “consulting, subject to further analysis, on the introduction of further restrictions on the landfilling of biodegradable wastes and recyclable materials.”

Explaining the thinking behind this, the strategy says that other EU states “have found that imposing legal restrictions on the types of waste that can be landfilled has encouraged higher rates of recycling and recovery.”

The Department also noted how these have been introduced with significant lead-times, as in Germany.

Hierarchy
The strategy repeats the waste hierarchy which has five levels. These are (the best) waste prevention; reuse; recycle/compost; energy recovery; disposal (the worst).

The hierarchy is described as remaining as “a good general guide to the relative environmental benefits of different waste management options but that there will be exceptions to this for particular materials and in particular circumstances. The use of the waste hierarchy should be informed by life-cycle thinking and the broader sustainable consumption and production agenda.”

This is part of just one of the Waste Strategy 2007 News items at Let’s Recycle.