201: Compost and Landfill Issues Stephanie Young, CIWMB Sally - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1

201: Compost and Landfill Issues

Webinar # 2

West Coast Webinars on Climate Change, Waste Prevention, Recovery, and Disposal

July 16, 2008

Stephanie Young, CIWMB Sally Brown, Univ. of Washington Brenda Smyth, CIWMB Gary Liss, Gary Liss & Associates

2

Disclaimer

This presentation is part of the U.S. EPA’s Climate Change Webinar Series.

• This document does not constitute EPA policy.
• Mention of trade names or commercial products does not

constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.

• Links to non-EPA web sites do not imply any official EPA

endorsement of or a responsibility for the opinions, ideas, data, or products presented at those locations or guarantee the validity of the information provided.

• Links to non-EPA servers are provided solely as a pointer to

information that might be useful to EPA staff and the public.

3

Landfills and Climate Change

Stephanie Young, PE California Integrated Waste Management Board West Coast Webinar on Climate Change, Waste Prevention, Recovery & Disposal July 16, 2008

• Overview of Science
• Methods of Controlling Emissions
• California’s Approach to Landfill Methane

4

Why Landfills?

• Landfills Produce Methane
• Largest Source of Anthropogenic Methane Emissions in California

(CEC 2002, http://www.energy.ca.gov/2005publications/CEC-500-2005-097)

• Accounted for approximately 23% of the total U.S. anthropogenic

methane emissions in 2006 (EPA 2008,

http://epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/usinventoryreport.html)

• Methane is a Greenhouse Gas
• Methane absorbs terrestrial infrared radiation (heat) that would
• therwise escape to space.
• Methane is 21x more powerful at warming the atmosphere than

CO2 .

• Chemical lifetime in the atmosphere is 12 years, as such, makes it

a good candidate for mitigation efforts over the near term.

5

How Does A Landfill Produce Methane?

• Complex Anaerobic Biological Process
• Depends on Waste Quantity, Type, Moisture, Climate, and Age
• Anaerobic Decomposition of Biogenic Waste (i.e. paper, food

scraps, and yard trimmings)

• Landfill Gas Composition
• Methane (45 to 60%)
• Carbon Dioxide (40 to 60%)
• N2 (2-5%), O2 (0.1-1%), NH3 (0.1-1%), Sulfides (0-1%),

H2 (0-0.2%), CO (0-0.2%)

• Non-Methane Organic Compounds (NMOCs) 0.01-0.6%,
• ther non-NMOC HAPs/TACs (e.g., Hg)

6

TYPICAL LANDFILL GAS GENERATION PATTERN

6

7

Methane Pathways

CH4 Generated = CH4 Emitted + CH4 Oxidized + CH4 Recovered/Flared

8

Methane Recovered

Directly

Actual Landfill Gas Collection and Control System Data

Indirectly

Used to estimate potential methane recovery when designing

systems

Models (i.e. LandGEM, IPCC, proprietary consultant models)

and an assumed collection efficiency

9

Methane Oxidation

Directly

Stable Carbon Isotope Technique

More information http://jeq.scijournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/30/2/369

titled “Methane Oxidation in Two Swedish Landfill Covers Measured with Carbon-13 to Carbon-12 Isotope Ratios (Börjesson, Chanton and Svensson, 2001)

Indirectly

Using Case Studies

10

Methane Oxidation

Source: Technologies and Management Practices for Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Landfills, CIWMB Publication 200-08-001, 2008

11

Methane Generated

Directly

Baro-pneumatic Method – developed by Hydro Geo Chem, Inc. More information www.hgcinc.com/landfill.htm

Indirectly

Back calculation using actual recovery data and assumed

collection efficiency

First-Order Decay Models

Basics EPA’s Landfill Gas Emissions Model (LandGEM) http://www.epa.gov/landfill/res/index.htm#5) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/vol5.html

12

Methane Emitted

Dependent upon the following factors:

Total amount of municipal solid waste in the landfill Characteristics of the landfill receiving waste

Composition of Waste In Place Climate Structure (liner and cover systems)

Amount of landfill gas that is recovered/controlled Amount of methane oxidized in cover soils

13

Methane Emitted (con’t)

Directly

Many techniques “Research Roadmap for Greenhouse Gas Inventory

Methods,” California Energy Commission Publication CEC-500-2005-097 : Comparisons

14

15 Source: Research Roadmap for Greenhouse Gas Inventory Methods, Publication CEC-500-2005-097, 2005, California Energy Commission

16

Methane Emitted (con’t)

Directly

Flux Chambers

More Information: M. 1986. Measurement of Gaseous Emissions

Rates from Land Surfaces using an Emission Isolation Flux Chamber, User's Guide, EPA Users Guide, (EPA 600/8-86/008)

Optical Remote Sensing/Radial Plume Mapping

More information: http://www.clu-

in.org/conf/tio/ors_022207/prez/ORS_RPMppt-Thorneloebw.pdf

17

Direct Measurement Techniques

Opposite RPM Detectors Radial Flux Chambers Wellhead Penetration Flux Chamber Radial Plume Mapping (RPM) Mirror RPM Detectors Climate Station Scissor Lift

18

Flux Chamber

Source: M. 1986. Measurement of Gaseous Emissions Rates from Land Surfaces using an Emission Isolation Flux Chamber, User's Guide, EPA Users Guide, (EPA 600/8-86/008)

19

Methane Emitted (con’t)

Indirectly

Models (i.e. LandGEM, IPCC, proprietary consultant models) 75% collection efficiency or other default efficiency

• Capture efficiency is controversial and a key measure of performance in

reducing emissions.

• Estimated based on modeled gas generation and measured gas that is flared
• r recovered.
• Default capture efficiencies based on USEPA are 75% (with control) and 10%

for natural oxidation. Actual capture may be higher or lower.

• Active projects to reduce uncertainty (CEC Study).

20

Methods of Controlling Landfill Emissions

Divert Organics

Compost Anaerobic Digestion Segregation of Organic Waste into Dedicated Cells

Increase Gas Collection/Recovery

Early Installation of a System Landfill Gas System Well Field Design

• Using horizontal collectors; tighter well spacing; leachate collection system hook-up

Landfill Gas System Operation & Maintenance

• Redundant blower systems; barometric control

Enhanced Monitoring: Migration and Surface Emissions Landfill Operational Practices

• Bioreactor Landfills; fill sequence planning; LFG Master Planning

Increase Oxidation

Cover Systems, including Biocovers

21

California’s Approach to Landfill Methane

Landfill Methane Capture Strategy

• 1. Install new methane control systems at landfills currently without

control systems.

• ARB Landfill Methane Control Measure (AB32)
• 2. Maximize landfill methane capture efficiencies by optimizing

landfill design, operation, and closure/postclosure practices.

• CIWMB Technologies and Management Options Guidance Document

(http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Publications/default.asp?pubid=1268)

• CIWMB Long-term Performance of Biocovers on Landfills to Mitigate Methane
• Research on Methane Emissions
• California Energy Commissions Study: “Improved Methods for Landfill Methane

Emissions in California”

• Waste Management’s Radial Plume Mapping Research
• Los Angeles County Technique for Determining Collection Efficiency

22

California’s Approach to Landfill Methane

Landfill Methane Capture Strategy (con’t)

• 3. Increase recovery of landfill gas for use as a biomass renewable energy

source to replace energy from nonrenewable fossil fuel sources.

• CIWMB and ARB LFG to LNG Grant Projects
• CEC Projects under PIER Renewables Program
• CPUC: AB1969 and Waste Technology Grants

23

Questions?

Stephanie Young, P.E. Waste Management Engineer California Integrated Waste Management Board 1001 I Street, 10th Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 PH (916) 341-6357 FAX (916) 319-7543 EMAIL syoung@ciwmb.ca.gov

24

Climate Change and Organics: Compost Issues

Sally Brown Slb@u.washington.edu University of Washington Brenda Smyth CIWMB

25

Behavior of organics

• Under anaerobic conditions

– Uncontrolled- landfill – Controlled - anaerobic digestion

• Under aerobic conditions

– Composting

• In a soil system- use of compost

26

What life is like in a sanitary landfill Uncontrolled anaerobic conditions

• Pretty hot- always summertime

(LeFebvre et al., 2000)

27

Hard to breath, and a little damp (160-310 g H2O kg)

(LeFebvre et al., 2000; Bäumler and Kögel-Knabner, 2008)

28

Perfect conditions for decomposition for CERTAIN feedstocks

Yes No

Food scraps are high in H2O and nutrients Paper is too dry and too high in carbon

29

When you have anaerobic decomposition

• Fixed carbon will transform to CH4

(23 x) and CO2 (0 x)

• Organic nitrogen has the potential to

form N2O (296 x) during de- nitrification reactions [transformation of nitrate to nitrogen gas]

30

When you remove highly putrescible materials from landfills- GHG credits

• Chicago Climate Exchange methane avoidance protocol

=Θ (1-f)GWPCH4 (1-OX)16/12F*DOCf*MCF*∑y

x=1∑Wj,x*DOCj*e-kj(y-x)*(1-e-kj)

Two key components of this equation

• F= methane collection efficiency of landfill
• K = first order decay constant for specific waste types

31

f = gas collection efficiency

• EPA default = 75% over life of

landfill

• IPCC = 40-50% over life
• Actual ?

CH4 Gas collection Landfill closure Collection efficiency

32

f = gas collection efficiency

• CCX protocol= 0%
• Focus on period prior to collection
• CH4

Gas collection Landfill closure Collection efficiency

33

k = first order decay for individual components of MSW - Food Waste

• EPA = single k value for all

MSW

• IPCC = individual k values

vary by ambient temperature and moisture

– k = 0.231

• CCX = used anaerobic

digestion studies with ‘retardation factor’

– k = 1.0-1.4

34

1 dry Mg food waste

• CO2 equivalent per year
• Total for 4 years= 4 Mg CO2

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Anaerobic Digestion Technology (AD) as a GHG Reduction Strategy

Presentation Outline: Introduction to Anaerobic Digestion Benefits of AD Technologies AD policy issues- impacts to entities CA AD facilities CIWMB AD projects & activities Climate Change Protocols Carbon Offsets

USEPA Climate Change Webinar - July 16, 2008 Brenda Smyth, California Integrated Waste Management Board

35

Process of Anaerobic Digestion

36

37

AD System & End-Use of Products

38

Environmental Benefits of AD

39

AD Technologies

39

40

Examples of AD Technology

41

Examples of AD Technology

42

Examples of Energy Production (Biogas)

43

Who will be impacted by widespread implementation of AD?

Landfill Operators Composters Biosolids Processors/POTWs Manure/Agricultural Livestock Operators MRFs/Processors Other entities that dispose of organic materials

44

AD in California

• Predominantly at wastewater treatment plants (137 plants use AD in CA)
• UC Davis Pilot Plant – only stand alone facility processing only organic waste
• Dairy Digesters
• Prior to 2002 – fewer than 5
• 2002 – 10 additional dairies (CEC establishes Dairy Power Production

Program administered by Western United Resource Development)

• 2006 – 9 additional dairies funded through 2nd round of CEC grant funding
• April 2008 – only 1 of 9 additional dairies constructed due to cost
• January and March 2008 – Central RWB issued WDRs for 7 facilities

EXAMPLES

• Inland Empire Utilities Agency, San Bernardino
• Valley Fig Growers, Fresno
• East Bay Municipal Utility District - Main Wastewater Treatment Plant

45

What can be done to increase AD in California?

Regulatory changes Increase energy market penetration Increase landfill tipping fees Carbon credits Increase waste management programs that promote AD

Premise: The wide-scale use of AD technology in California can significantly reduce GHG emissions. However regulatory, policy, and economic barriers exist that must be overcome to widely deploy AD in California.

46

CIWMB Projects & Activities Related to AD

Research Development & Demonstration

• UCD Davis AD pilot
• Yolo County Landfill in-situ AD project

Regulatory guidance (Multi-media Coordination)

• CIWMB AD guidance document
• Multi-agency guidance document

Planning/Outreach

• Membership in CA Biomass Collaborative
• Participation on State’s Bioenergy Action Plan

(http://www.energy.ca.gov/bioenergy_action_plan/index.html)

• Host of CBC’s ’07 Forum (http://biomass.ucdavis.edu/f2007.html
• CT web site (http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/organics/conversion/)

47

Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions

Three ways that GHG emission reductions are realized through AD:

1.

Avoided landfill methane emissions

2.

Net renewable energy production

3.

GHG emission reductions associated with use of digestate as compost which provides beneficial

• ffsets of fertilizer, pesticide, herbicide, and water

reductions

48

Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) and California Climate Action Registry (CCAR)

The Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) Launched in 2003, the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX), is the world’s first and North America’s only active voluntary, legally binding integrated trading system to reduce emissions of all six major greenhouse gases (GHGs), with offset projects worldwide. The California Climate Action Registry (CCAR) California State Legislature established the California Registry in 2000. CCAR is a non- profit public/private partnership that serves as a voluntary greenhouse gas registry to protect, encourage, and promote early actions to reduce GHG emissions.

49

Development of AD Climate Change Protocol

CCX

• Agricultural Methane Gas Project Guidelines

CCAR

• Livestock Project Reporting Protocol and Livestock

Project Verification Protocol

50

CA Project Selling Carbon Offsets

Joseph Gallo Farms (AKA Gallo Cattle)

• located in Atwater, Merced Co
• built in 2005
• 7-acre anaerobic covered lagoon generates biogas for electricity
• 2 power generators: 300 KWH, 400KWH
• 80% of power to operate cheese plant is supplied by the digester
• PG&E partner with Joseph Gallo Farms, Microgy, Inc. & other digester

companies to deliver biogas into gas transmission pipelines for delivery to power generators as a renewable energy resource

51

Thank You!

For more information: Brenda Smyth California Integrated Waste Management Board bsmyth@ciwmb.ca.gov (916) 341-6605

52

Controlled aerobic decomposition: AKA Composting

Mechanics of Composting

• Composting on a commercial scale will require the

use of heavy equipment

– Transport – Pile management

• Equipment uses fuel and there are GHG emissions

associated with the use of fuel

• Landfilling also requires fuel

53

54

Estimates of GHG emissions for equipment with yard waste windrows (Recycled Organics Unit, UNSW, EPA)

• Set up piles with a

loader

• Piles maintained for 16

weeks

• Turned 5 times
• Total 5-6 kg of fuel

per wet Mg feedstock

• 20 kg CO2

55

CCX default emissions factors

Air Biofilter Air Air Pump

• Windrow- 5 kg fuel per wet Mg feedstock
• Aerated static pile

– Quantity of air required/power associated with aeration

• 0.24 m3 min−1 ton−1 low range
• 0.94 m3 min−1 ton−1 high range
• Mechanical systems

– Quantity of power associated with processing

• 90 kWh per dry Mg

Fugitive emissions- Composting Process

• During composting CH4 (23 x CO2) and N2O (296 x

CO2) may be formed within a pile

• They may be released to the atmosphere either

during turning or by migrating to the pile surface

• Conditions within the pile will increase/decrease

the potential for formation

56

57

Hao et al., 2001

Methane and Nitrous Oxide in a Compost Pile

58

Fugitive Emissions

• Potential for GHG emissions⇓ as

aeration status of pile ⇑

• Use of EPA time and temperature

requirements to assure aerobic conditions

– 55º C 3 days x 5 turns (for windrows)

59

Fugitive emissions

• Supplemental water

– If supplemental water is added to pile to maintain sufficient moisture for composting potential for CH4 and N2O release is discounted

60

Fugitive emissions

• Biofilter or odor control system

– If an odor control system is in place it will oxidize reduced compounds to eliminate odors – CH4 will also be oxidized

61

C:N ratio

(Stuczynski and McCarty, 2007)

• Increasing the C:N ratio will decrease

N2O formation

C/N ratio 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 N2O produced (mg N 100g-1 soil) 1 2 3 4

62

Moisture content

(Sommer and Moller, 2000)

• Manure + low straw
• C:N 12.8:1
• % dry matter 24
• Emissions of both CH4

and N2O

• Manure + high straw
• C:N 16.3:1
• % dry matter 65
• No CH4 minimal N2O

Moisture content < 55 %, C:N > 30:1 Potential for fugitive GHG release discounted

63

http://www.ipic.iastate.edu/

Default values for GHG release

• 2.5% of initial C
• 1.5% of initial N
• Both in line with IPCC recommended values
• Both will be minimal in relation to GHG

credit from methane avoidance if appropriate feedstocks are used in composting

64

In a soil system: Use of compost

• EPA Warm model use of compost

– On field corn at low application rates

• Considered potential C sequestration
• ROU UNSW

– On wine grapes as a mulch – On cotton incorporated into the soil

• Considered C sequestration, water holding capacity,

nutrient value, herbicide/pesticide value, yield increase, erosion control benefits

65

% Improvement/Savings/Benefit with use of compost in vineyards

2 5 5 0 7 5 1 0 0

Water Nitrogen Phosphorus Herbicide Erosion ( averted tons) Yield increase

Matt Cotton/ Sally Brown Road trip

66

67

Sampled compost/control soils in CA

• Orchard crops (mango, lemon,

avocado, almond, grape)

• Row crops

– Organic and conventional growers – Till and no till systems

Similar study underway in WA (Craig Cogger, Kate Kurtz)

10 years of compost application in table grapes

Frank Shields logs in the samples

71

Bulk Density

Bruce Rucker, Indio CA Lemons and grapes

0 .5 1 1 .5 Com post Control

72

Talking to growers

• Produce quality a prime consideration
• Organic growers use as sole source of

fertilizer

• Erosion control
• Water savings
• Pandol “When I stopped using compost, the

vines just crashed”

73

Conclusions

• Primary GHG- methane avoidance

– Applicable to limited feedstocks

• Process emissions

– Minimal and can be controlled

• Benefits

– Some intangibles – Others being quantified

74

Questions?

Climate Change and Organics: Compost Issues

Sally Brown Slb@u.washington.edu University of Washington Brenda Smyth CIWMB

75

Zero Waste: Zero Waste: To Cool the Planet To Cool the Planet

Presented to USEPA on July 16, 2008, “Western Webinar on Climate Change, Waste Prevention, Recovery and Disposal” by Gary Liss Gary Liss & Associates

Reduce Reuse Recycle = Zero Waste Reduce Reduce Reuse Reuse Recycle Recycle = Zero Waste = Zero Waste

76

77

Definition of Zero Waste Definition of Zero Waste* *

Zero Waste is a goal that is both pragmatic and

visionary, to guide people to emulate sustainable natural cycles, where all discarded materials are resources for others to use.

Zero Waste means designing and managing

products and processes to reduce the volume and toxicity of waste and materials, conserve and recover all resources, and not burn or bury them.

Implementing Zero Waste will eliminate all

discharges to land, water or air that may be a threat to planetary, human, animal or plant health.

* www.zwia.org/standards.html

Zero Waste & Climate Change Zero Waste & Climate Change

EPA WARM Model says

Recycling & composting all discards in CA = eliminating all auto exhaust in CA

Wasteberg 71 tons upstream

78

Landfills are one of the largest sources

• f Greenhouse Gases (GHG)

Methane is 21 x more potent than CO2

Climate Action Plans Climate Action Plans

Cool Cities and Counties Programs

are doing Emission Inventories and Climate Action Plans

ICLEI is providing support to over

800 cities worldwide

Urban Environmental Accords

includes Zero Waste by 2040

79

Zero Waste Communities Zero Waste Communities

Canberra, Australia Over 70% of NZ Cities Buenos Aires, AR Seattle, WA Olympia, WA Boulder, CO Summit Co., CO Telluride, CO Austin, TX Logan County, OH Central Vermont San Luis Obispo, CA Fresno, CA Del Norte County, CA San Francisco, CA Oakland, CA Santa Cruz County, CA Berkeley, CA Palo Alto, CA Marin County, CA Los Angeles, CA Burbank, CA Chicago, IL Halifax, Nova Scotia Toronto, Ontario Nelson, British Columbia (BC) Regional Districts in BC Matanuska-Susitna, Alaska

80

81

Is Zero Waste Attainable ? Is Zero Waste Attainable ?

Nature Is The Model Zero Waste, Or Darn

Close

Businesses Have

Achieved Over 90% Waste Reduction

Picture: Methane Earth; Credit: GISS, NASA

Zero Waste Businesses are Zero Waste Businesses are Leading the Way Leading the Way (

(>90% Waste Diversion)

>90% Waste Diversion)

Anheuser-Busch, Fairfield, CA * Apple Computer, Elk Grove, CA * Epson, OR * Fetzer Vineyards * Frankie’s Bohemian Café, SF * Greens Restaurant, SF * Hewlett-Packard, Roseville, CA * Mad River Brewery, CA * New Belgium Brewery, Fort

Collins, CO *

NUMMI, Fremont, CA * Pillsbury * Playa Vista, LA, CA, * San Diego Wild Animal Park * Scoma’s Restaurant, SF * Vons-Safeway * Xerox Corp * Ricoh Electronics Toyota 2800 Businesses in Japan

*From: http://www.grrn.org/zerowaste/business/profiles.php For more ZW Biz info: www.earthresource.org/zerowaste.html

82

83

Why Businesses adopt ZW Why Businesses adopt ZW

Policies (requests, mandates, bans,

regulations, continuous improvement)

Economics (savings, fees, deposits,

incentives, efficiency)

Avoid liabilities and penalties Green marketing (customer and

employee loyalty; greenest of all)

Activist pressure (shareholder

resolutions and consumer actions)

Good Will (right thing to do)

84

Expand, attract, and support green

businesses and green collar jobs

Reserve sufficient land for Zero

Waste infrastructure

Buy green goods and

services Recycling Industry = Size of Auto Industry

10,000 tons Landfilled- 1 job Composted – 4 jobs Recycled – 10 jobs Reused – 75 –250 jobs

Source: www.ilsr.org

84

Green Businesses and Jobs

85

AB32 and Zero Waste AB32 and Zero Waste

Economic and Technology Advancement

Advisory Committee (ETAAC) Final Report (pages 105-112 address Waste reduction, Recycling and Resource Management): http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/etaac/ETAACFinal Report2-11-08.pdf

AB 32 Scoping Plan ARB/CCAR/ICLEI Development of Local

Government Protocols

ARB Draft Landfill GHG Regs

86

Climate Change Groups Climate Change Groups

Compostable Organics Out of Landfills

(COOL) 2012: www.cool2012.com/

Garbage is Not Renewable Energy:

www.grrn.org/landfill/notrenewableenergy/ index.html

Stop Trashing the Climate:

www.stoptrashingtheclimate.org

Zero Waste for Zero Warming Campaign

www.zerowarming.org/

Sierra Club Zero Waste Committee:

www.sierraclub.org/committees/zerowaste/

87

Zero Waste Resources Zero Waste Resources

GrassRoots Recycling Network:

www.grrn.org/zerowaste

www.stoptrashingtheclimate.org Earth Resource Foundation:

www.earthresource.org/zerowaste.html

Zero Waste International Alliance: www.zwia.org Zero Emissions Research & Initiatives:

www.zeri.org

Zero Waste Communities Yahoo Group:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZeroWasteCommunities/

Zero Waste Business Yahoo Group:

http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/ZWBusiness/

Eco-Cycle: http://www.ecocycle.org/zero/index.cfm

88 88

89

Questions? Questions?

Gary Liss Gary Liss & Associates 916-652-7850, gary@garyliss.com www.garyliss.com

2 Surveys:

(1) webinar effectiveness (via pop-up window immediately) (2) additional climate change feeback (by email following the webinar)

90