1. Strategies for Charter Municipalities To Minimize MSW Disposal After 2018 Presented to the Board of Directors of the Municipal Review Committee, Inc. 24 October 2012

2. Strategies to Minimize MSW Disposal After 2018: MRC Board meeting on 24 October 2012 Composition of Maine MSW after recycling 43.3% Organics (food, cat litter, diapers, yard waste) 25.6% Paper (towels/plates, composites, OMG, ONP, OCC) 13.4% Plastic (film, composites, durables) 3.3% Metal (tin/steel, foil) 2.7% Glass (containers, composites, flat) 25.2% Other (textiles, C&D, HHW, electronics) 100.0% Total Source: Criner, G.K. and T.L. Blackmer. “MSW Maine: a 2011 residential waste characterization study.” Waste Age, August 2012, pages 48 to 54. 2

3. Composition of Maine MSW after recycling by major categories 39.9% waste (materials not recoverable) 21.7% recyclables (unrecovered materials) 38.4% compostable (organic materials) 100.0% total 3 Strategies to Minimize MSW Disposal After 2018: MRC Board meeting on 24 October 2012

4. Composition of Charter Municipality MSW assuming major categories per the Criner Study 4 Strategies to Minimize MSW Disposal After 2018: MRC Board meeting on 24 October 2012 Category%Charter tons per year Waste39.9%72,000 tpy Recyclables21.7%39,000 tpy Compostable38.4%69,000 tpy Total100.0%180,000 tpy

5. Collection of Charter Municipality MSW: Results of MRC survey data with 100/133 Charter Munis reporting (75% of Charter Munis and 85% of the MSW) Potential bias: smaller towns were less likely to respond  MSW collection is about evenly split between curbside collection and drop-off center collection  Charter Munis with drop-off centers tend to be slightly smaller than the average Charter Muni 5 Strategies to Minimize MSW Disposal After 2018: MRC Board meeting on 24 October 2012

6. Collection of Charter Municipality MSW: Results of MRC survey data 6 Strategies to Minimize MSW Disposal After 2018: MRC Board meeting on 24 October 2012 MSW collection method Number of Charter Munis Share of MSW tons per year Muni curbside710% Private curbside3939% Drop-off centers5451% Total reporting100100%

7. Collection of Charter Municipality recyclables: Results of MRC survey data 7 Strategies to Minimize MSW Disposal After 2018: MRC Board meeting on 24 October 2012 Recyclables collection method Number of Charter Munis Muni curbside2 Private curbside29 Drop-off centers69 Total reporting100

8. Collection of Charter Municipality recyclables: Results of MRC survey data  Every Charter Muni has access to some sort of recycling program – if one includes private or out-of- Town drop-off centers  Private haulers perform almost all curbside collection of recyclables  There is an unknown amount of private subscription curbside and/or containerized recycling 8 Strategies to Minimize MSW Disposal After 2018: MRC Board meeting on 24 October 2012

9. Collection of Charter Municipality recyclables: Results of MRC survey data  Only 6/100 Charter Munis reported offering single- stream recycling  Only 23/100 Charter Munis reported having a pay-as- you-throw program  Towns make separate arrangements to collect and manage Unacceptable Waste --- C&D waste, automotive wastes, brush, bulky, electronics, etc. 9 Strategies to Minimize MSW Disposal After 2018: MRC Board meeting on 24 October 2012

10. 10 Strategies for Maine MSW Major Categories Strategies to Minimize MSW Disposal After 2018: MRC Board meeting on 24 October 2012 CategoryStrategy Waste Waste reduction Pay-as-you-throw Product bans Recyclables Enhanced education and promotion Single-stream recycling Mixed waste processing Compostable organics Back yard / residential composting Local composting (farm/yard waste) Centralized processing into compost, fuels, electricity, etc.

11. 11 Regional vs. local facilities: general When does the added value of central regional facilities justify the transportation costs? The value of the product (e.g., 14 c/kWh electricity, liquid fuels) exceeds the extra haul cost Preferred technology can only be implemented at a regional scale The impacts of local management (e.g., unlined dumps, uncontrolled electronic and automotive wastes) are unacceptable Strategies to Minimize MSW Disposal After 2018: MRC Board meeting on 24 October 2012

12. 12 Strategies to Minimize MSW Disposal After 2018: MRC Board meeting on 24 October 2012 Advantages of single-stream recycling Disadvantages of single-stream recycling Higher recovery ratesHigher residuals rates Easier collection; fewer material streams to haul and transport Less control of materials quality; reduced access to certain higher value markets Scale economies for material processing and product marketing Processing facility supported by volume commitments

13. 13 Regional vs. local facilities: recycling Can a regional single-stream recycling facility be developed for the Charter Municipalities? The Charter Municipalities generate roughly 75,000 tpy of recyclable materials (based on 36,000 tpy @ 20% recovery and 39,000 tpy unrecovered recyclables ) ecomaine Portland processes 36,000 tpy and had a cost of $3.7 M for equipment (in an existing building ) Casella is proposing a $4 M 25,000 tpy facility in Lewiston (rather than haul to Charlestown or Auburn, MA) Strategies to Minimize MSW Disposal After 2018: MRC Board meeting on 24 October 2012

14. 14 Strategies to Minimize MSW Disposal After 2018: MRC Board meeting on 24 October 2012 Advantages of regional organics management Disadvantages of regional organics management Scale economies for material processing and marketing of energy products Higher hauling costs to make low-value organics products; risk of product contamination Ability to justify capital expenditures on equipment Regional organics facility would need minimum materials commitments

15. 15 Regional vs. local facilities: composting Can a regional organics management facility be developed for the Charter Municipalities? Is it feasible for the Charter Municipalities to compost organics at multiple local facilities? In combination with yard waste? In combination with sewage sludge? Does compost (or bio-gas) have enough value to justify facility and haul costs for source-separated organics? What value? How far? Existing composting facility at Hawk Ridge; numerous smaller institutional programs Strategies to Minimize MSW Disposal After 2018: MRC Board meeting on 24 October 2012

16. 16 Regional vs local facilities: emerging technologies Can a regional facility using emerging technology be developed for the Charter Municipalities?  Can products be developed having a higher per-unit value than compost or electricity?  What are the real risks, performance levels and capital and operating costs?  Early-stage MSW-to-biofuel proposal for Augusta Strategies to Minimize MSW Disposal After 2018: MRC Board meeting on 24 October 2012

17. 17 Regional vs. local facilities: timing 1.Are Charter Munis making commitments on recycling and organics management now that preclude preferred options after 2018? If not now, when? 2.If a new processing technology emerges later, could a centralized facility still be developed? Strategies to Minimize MSW Disposal After 2018: MRC Board meeting on 24 October 2012