Barnstable County CommissionersBarnstable County Commissioners

Summary ReportSummary ReportMunicipal Solid Waste Disposal Alternatives AnalysisMunicipal Solid Waste Disposal Alternatives Analysis

April 7, 2010April 7, 2010

Outline for Today’s Presentation Outline for Today’s Presentation

Provide overview of study prepared for Barnstable County Solid Waste Advisory Committee (SWAC) of long-term alternatives for disposal of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Background Review of proposed SEMASS Memorandum of

Understanding (MOU) Evaluation of future alternatives Regional options Conclusions and recommendations

Solid Waste Stream EvaluatedSolid Waste Stream Evaluated

Study focused on the portion of solid waste collected by towns through their transfer stations and town-operated curbside collection programs and sent out-of-town for disposal.

Future study proposed for evaluation of recyclable portion of municipal solid waste stream.

Massachusetts Solid Waste ManagementMassachusetts Solid Waste Management

Solid Waste Disposal (2006) 6.6 million tons combusted or landfilled 1.4 million tons disposed of out of state MassDEP estimates 2.5 to 4.1 million tons will be

exported by 2014

Source: MassDEP, November 2008

Background - Cape Municipal Solid Background - Cape Municipal Solid Waste DisposalWaste Disposal

Fourteen Cape towns currently have long-term disposal agreements with SEMASS waste-to-energy plant in Rochester, MA Current disposal tipping fees well below

market ($18 to $37 per ton) Approximately 164,000 tons of MSW per year Existing disposal contracts end around 2015 Bourne landfills their MSW

At current below-market disposal tip fees, the 14 Cape communities pay a total of over $6 million per year for disposal of their solid waste at SEMASS

Current Hauling Methods to SEMASSCurrent Hauling Methods to SEMASS

Yarmouth Barnstable Regional Transfer Station

Upper Cape Regional Transfer Station

SEMASS Facility

Breakdown of Tonnages Currently Breakdown of Tonnages Currently Hauled to SEMASS by Cape Hauled to SEMASS by Cape CommunitiesCommunities

Proposed SEMASS MOUProposed SEMASS MOU

Negotiated over past 2 ½ years by Steering Committee selected from Council of SEMASS Communities

Extends term of existing Waste Acquisition Agreements (WAA) by 15 Years (until 2030)

Offered to 14 Cape Communities in 2009 Increases current below market disposal tipping

fee by $40 or $45 per ton over last 5 years of existing term

Impact of Proposed MOU on Near-Impact of Proposed MOU on Near-Term Per Ton Disposal CostsTerm Per Ton Disposal Costs

Year

Comparison of MOU at $90/ton 2015 Comparison of MOU at $90/ton 2015 Market Market

ROI - Requires approximately 11 years to reclaim present value of upfront payment

Results of present value analysis on Results of present value analysis on payback of MOU upfront paymentspayback of MOU upfront payments

Years to Payback Proposed MOU Upfront Payments

Communities$80/ton Market

$90/ton Market

$100/ton Market

13 Cape Communities currently paying $37/ton

15 yrs 11 yrs 4 yrs

Wellfleet – currently paying $18/ton

6 yrs 4 yrs 3 yrs

CDM Comparison of MOU Tip Fees to CDM Comparison of MOU Tip Fees to Anticipated MarketAnticipated Market Return on “up front” investment depends on tip

fees being significantly below market rates With exception of Wellfleet, projected 2015 tip

fees do not appear to be below market rate $80- $90/ton range of projected 2015 tip fee $74-$78/ton projected as market rate based on

similar recently signed WTE agreements Bourne quoting $71/ton for municipal contracts –

low to mid $80/ton in 2015 with CPI

Future Alternative MSW Disposal FacilitiesFuture Alternative MSW Disposal Facilities

SEMASS Waste-to-Energy Facility Bourne Landfill Rochester Environmental Park Transfer Station

Disposal at Southbridge MA Landfill or MERC Waste-to-Energy Facility, Biddeford, ME

Out-of-State through rail transfer stations Crapo Hill Landfill, New Bedford – 20,000 TPY Middleborough Landfill – limited tonnage Future Technologies?

Potential Future AlternativesPotential Future Alternatives

Comparative Evaluation Criteria - CostComparative Evaluation Criteria - Cost

Local Residential CollectionLocal Transfer Station

Curbside Collection

Hauling from Towns to Disposal FacilitiesRegional Transfer Stations

Rail or TruckDirect Haul

Tipping Fee at Disposal Facility

Total Costs for

MSW Disposal

Same for all options evaluated

Summary of Relative Transportation Summary of Relative Transportation Costs for Cape Communities (2015)Costs for Cape Communities (2015)

Total MSW Disposal Cost SummaryTotal MSW Disposal Cost Summary

Transportation Costs Bourne least expensive for Cape communities SEMASS rail haul less expensive than REP truck

haul for two Cape regional transfer station Differences in hauling cost differential can be

offset by lower tipping fees for all alternatives Tipping Fees

Only firm proposal is SEMASS MOU Will require RFP or negotiations process to

determine firm pricing

Other Comparative Evaluation CriteriaOther Comparative Evaluation Criteria

Environmental Impacts and Benefits

Truck traffic around and over Canal bridges

Total Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Energy Generation

Average Weekly Round Truck TripsAverage Weekly Round Truck Trips

113,019 TPY Currently Hauled by Rail

Greenhouse Gas Generation ComparisonGreenhouse Gas Generation Comparison

Total emissions

from disposal site

Total emissions to

transport MSW

Avoided emissions

for electricity generation

Total greenhouse

gas emissions

Landfillor

Waste-to-energy

Truckor

Rail

All components calculated as metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents

Total estimated GHG emissions for Total estimated GHG emissions for each alternativeeach alternative

Emissions from hauling Rail less than truck Based on mileage MSW is hauled

Disposal Alternatives Landfill generates methane – typically flared Waste-to-energy generates carbon dioxide Credit for avoided emissions from energy

generation Regulatory agencies accounting of GHG versus

total emissions

Energy Generation – Landfill and WTEEnergy Generation – Landfill and WTE

Alternative Disposal MethodElectricity

Generated Per Ton MSW

Waste-to-Energy Facility 550 kwh/ton

Landfill with active gas collection and electricity generation 256 kwh/ton

Note that the Bourne and Southbridge Landfills do not currently have landfill gas to energy facilities

Regional OptionsRegional Options

Example – Greater New Bedford Refuse District New Bedford and Dartmouth regional landfill since

1993 Operated by appointed Board Estimated total operating cost for disposal - $40 per

ton Subsidizes costs with commercial waste at higher

tipping fees Limit debt and maintain cash reserves

All or a group of the towns have an ability to implement a similar regional district using the Bourne landfill site.

Regional OptionsRegional Options

Example – Communities utilizing the Millbury waste-to-energy facility (Worcester area) Communities joined together to negotiate a new

long-term agreement with plant operator Collectively retained legal and technical

professionals to negotiate new agreement Improved contractual conditions

– Price escalation

– Change-in-law

Towns can utilize a regional RFP to minimize costs and potentially negotiate better conditions and prices.

Conclusions and RecommendationsConclusions and Recommendations

All communities paying approximately $37 per ton should not sign the SEMASS MOU

Prepare RFP for disposal of MSW when current SEMASS agreements expire Evaluate alternative methods for transportation –

regional rail transfer stations Review individual communities collection and

transportation practices Confirm guaranteed annual tonnages Establish typical contractual terms

– Change in Law

– Price Escalation

Conclusions and RecommendationsConclusions and Recommendations

In the near future, conduct initial discussions with Bourne to determine viability of regional district Review other potential

models for combining efforts and districts

Evaluate interest for District

Consider other waste disposal and recycling potential uses of Bourne Site

Conclusions and RecommendationsConclusions and Recommendations

Evaluate recycling programs and impact on tonnages and costs Future Commission report

Evaluate emerging technologies Composting Incorporating wastewater residuals

Monitor MassDEP solid waste planning efforts Incinerator moratorium Greenhouse gas and emissions limitations

QuestionsQuestions