1. Jeremy O’Brien, P.E.
Director of Applied Research
Solid Waste Association of North America
The economic development and landfill disposal benefits of waste-to-energy systems

2. SWANA Applied Research Foundation
Founded in 2001
35 Local Government and Corporate Subscribers
Conducts applied research on topics submitted by and voted on by Subscribers
Four Research Groups – WTE, Disposal, Recycling and Collection
The research that I am presenting in this presentation is based on reports developed by the SWANA Applied Research Foundation over the past ten years.
Formed in 2001 – 35 member organizations.
Supports SWANA’s mission of “Advancing the Practice
Each organization contributes a penny per ton of waste managed
Conducts applied research on topics submitted by and voted on by Subscribers.
Four Research groups

3. SWANA Applied Research Foundation – FY2012 WTE Group Subscribers
This slide presents a listing of our WTE group subscribers.
These are the organizations that define our research topics as well as financially support and participate in our research
I want to publicly acknowledge and thank them and encourage more of you to join and participate in our group.

4. ARF WTE Research Year Report 2005
Generating Electricity from Municipal Solid Waste or Coal: Comparison of Air Emissions
2006
Comparison of Air Emissions from Waste-to-Energy Facilities to Fossil Fuel Power Plants
2008
Waste-to-Energy and the Solid Waste Management Hierarchy
2009
WTE as a Green Solid Waste Management Option for Non-Recycled Waste
2010
The Landfill Disposal Rates of Waste-to-Energy Communities
2011
The Economic Development Benefits of Waste-to-Energy Systems
Since the foundation was started in 2002, we have published a total of 6 publications on WTE.
The objective of these publications is to document the environmental and economic benefits of WTE.
A secondary goal is to counter the erroneous claims regarding WTE that are made by certain environmental groups that oppose this technology.
There has been a lot of interest in our 2010 publication that compares the landfill disposal rates of WTE communities to other systems such as the zero waste systems being implemented in San Francisco and Seattle. In this report we document the fact that the landfill disposal rates of WTE communities are about 50% lower than the disposal rates of the San Francisco and Seattle systems.

5. Covanta Burnaby Renewable Energy, Inc. Burnaby, British Columbia (BC)
Today’s Topics
The Economic Development Benefits of Waste-to-Energy Systems
The Landfill Disposal Benefits of WTE Systems
Covanta Burnaby Renewable Energy, Inc. Burnaby, British Columbia (BC)

6. WTE Systems and Economic Development
The economic development benefits of WTE systems are local, proven and significant
These benefits need to be documented and communicated to:
local elected officials
city and county managers, and
chambers of commerce.
I have two major points that I’d like to cover in my presentation.
The first is that the local economic development benefits of WTE systems are local, proven and significant
The second point is that these benefits need to be further documented and clearly communicated at the local level to local elected officials, city and county managers and local chambers of commerce.

7. MSW Management and Economic Development
Proper MSW management is needed by every community for:
Public health and sanitation
Community aesthetics
Economic development
To spur economic development, MSW systems must be:
Cost-effective
Reliable
Sustainable over the long term
Naples, Italy – November 2010
I believe that it is important to remind every audience we come in contact with the MSW management is an essential need of every community.
The primary reasons to ensure that MSW is properly managed are public health and sanitation and community aesthetics.
MSW systems are also needed for economic development. This is because all economic activity results in some level of solid waste generation.
To encourage economic development, MSW systems must be cost-effective, reliable and sustainable over the long term.

8. Economic Development Benefits of WTE Systems
Long-term savings in waste disposal costs
Retention of disposal dollars in the local economy
Creation of high quality jobs that cannot be
outsourced
There are three economic development benefits associated with waste-to-energy systems that I would like to cover with you today.
First, we now have solid evidence that WTE systems, while initially more expensive, can actually save communities waste disposal costs over the long term.
More importantly, WTE systems enable communities to keep their waste disposal dollars in the local community.
Finally, these systems create high quality jobs that cannot be outsourced.

9. Long-Term Savings in Waste Disposal Costs
2009 average U.S. tipping fees (Biocycle Magazine)
Landfills - $44.09 per ton
WTE Facilities - $67.93 per ton
WTE costs can be lower than landfills over the long run due to:
Repayment of facility bonds before end of service life.
Control over capital and operating costs through long-term contracts.

10. Over the long run, WTE costs are lower
Repayment of facility bonds before end of service life.
Average age of U.S. Facilities – 23 years
Many have paid off - or will soon pay off - original bond financing.
40-year or more facility life appears likely.
Control over capital and operating costs
Annualized capital costs are fixed
Operating costs controlled through contract.
Not true for contracted landfill disposal.

11. Lancaster County Resource Recovery Facility
1,200 TPD (36 MW) mass-burn facility
Began operations in 1991
Financed by $135.6 million in tax-exempt revenue bonds
Issued in 1990
Will be retired in 2015

12. Long-Term Savings in Waste Disposal Costs
Analysis of Lancaster County RRF Costs
Based on historical performance and cost data for
Estimated costs for waste disposal in remote regional landfill (2011$)
Modern Landfill (Republic) – 22 miles from Lancaster
Gate rate - $58 per ton.
Assumed transfer cost - $3.50 per ton
Assumed haul costs - $1.50 per truck mile/20 ton payload

13. Long-Term Savings in Waste Disposal Costs
Lancaster County Resource Recovery Facility
1991
2001
2011
2021
2030
Capital Costs
$29 $0
Operating Costs
$41
$49
$57
$67
$77
Energy Revenues
$(34)
$(32)
$(31)
$(30)
$(28)
Metal Revenues
$(2)
Net Costs
$34
$44
$53
$35
$47
Remote Regional Landfill
Transfer $2 $3 $4 $5
Haul $6
Disposal
$32
$43
$58
$78
$102
Total Costs
$36
$64
$86
$113
3% inflation
LCRRF – Energy Revenues = -0.53%/year
Operating Costs = 1.6%/year

14. Long-Term Savings in Waste Disposal Costs

15. Long-Term Savings in Waste Disposal Costs (2011$)
LCSWMA RRF Costs
$17 million per year
$673 million (40 years)
Remote landfill disposal Costs
$21 million per year
$952 million (40 years)
Savings
$279 Million

16. Retention of Disposal Dollars in the Local Economy

17. Creation of High-Paying Jobs That Can’t Be Outsourced
Facility
Size (TPD)
Construction Jobs
Permanent Jobs
No.
Salary
Lancaster County
1,200 48
$33,000 - $83,000
Honolulu H-Power - Expansion
900
400
Palm Beach County – Expansion
3,000
600
$23/hour
60-70
$40,000 (ave.)
Industry Ave. 58

18. WTE and Economic Development in Clark County, Idaho
Closure of Idaho Potato Plant
Loss of 60% of private sector employment
Clark County WTE Facility
250 tpd gasification facility
Creation of 35 jobs
Salary range of $42k-$85k
Total annual employee compensation - $1.5 million.
Total economic development benefits over 25 years- $976 million.

19. WTE and Economic Development in Clark County, Idaho
"The EIRSWD and its Commissioners have an extraordinary vision for a 21st Century economic development engine fueled by our Waste-to-Energy Technology."
EBR_EBdaily. "Waste-to-Energy Plant Coming to Idaho.” Energy Business Daily, February 21, 2011.

20. The Landfill Disposal Benefits of WTE Systems
WTE landfill disposal rates are low
A significant portion of the landfilled waste has been stabilized.

21. The Landfill Disposal Index
"Waste management performance should be based on "tons landfilled" per capita (i.e. the fewer tons landfilled per capita the more sustainable the solid waste system.)“
Dr. Nicholas Themilis, Columbia University
Need for new metric – recognized by others
Columbia University

22. MSW-LDI’s for WTE Communities1
Parameter %
Tons/Person/Yr
MSW Materials Recycled
33%
0.46
MSW Converted to Energy or Recycled at WTE Facilities
42%
0.58
MSW Disposed (LDI)
25%
0.35
MSW Generated
100%
1.39
Biodegradable MSW Disposed
15%
0.21
Stabilized MSW Disposed
10%
0.14
Total MSW Disposed
Based on data from 66 communities with WTE systems serving 37.2
million people.
Performance of WTE communities
66 communities – 37 million people
Read data
Biodegradable MSW disposed.

23. Per Capita Disposal Rates for Selected Zero Waste Communities
By way of reminder – LDI for SF

24. Using the MSW Landfill Disposal Index
Parameter
Data Source
WTE Communities
San Francisco
Seattle
Tons/Person/Year
MSW Disposed in Landfills
Scalehouse Data
0.35
0.68
0.58
Key slide of presentation
Data vs estimates
Compare MSW-LDIs – WTE is much lower
Zero waste – lot of work to do to minimize LDI
WTE MSW – stabilized – potential for ash reuse
Compare sums of WTE and MSW LDIs – Zero Waste is lower
Compare WTE and Biocycle numbers – compare well
Questionable Numbers – Diversion and Generation
Scalehouse data versus estimates.

25. WTE-Based SWM System – Other Environmental Benefits
Waste Stabilization
Metals Recycling From WTE Ash
Avoidance of Long-Haul Transport
Reduced Fuel Usage
Reduced Accidental Risks
Reduced Road Wear and Tear
Displacement of Non-Renewable Fossil Fuels

26. In summary
The local economic development benefits of WTE systems are proven and significant.
The landfill disposal rates of WTE systems are very low on a per-capita basis.
A significant port (40%) of the landfilled waste has been stabilized.
The Local Economic Development Benefits of WTE Systems are Proven and Significant
Provide long-term savings in waste disposal costs
Keep disposal dollars in the local economy
Create high-paying jobs that cannot be outsourced
Produce base-load renewable electricity.
The WTE industry needs to document and communicate these benefits
Local elected officials
Local city and county managers
Local chambers of commerce.

27. The economic development benefits of waste-to-energy systems
Jeremy O’Brien, P.E.
Director of Applied Research
Solid Waste Association of North America
The economic development benefits of waste-to-energy systems