Calif California Or Organics nics Regula gulations tions Or - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Calif California Or Organics nics Regula gulations tions

Or Organics nics Di Diversion Reduces duces GHG GHG Footprin

• otprint

Re Recovery Or Organi nics cs Fr From

• m All

All Wa Waste Str Stream ams

SSO

75% Food Waste

Commercial Waste

29% Food Waste

Residential Waste

30% Food Waste

The Challenge is in Extracting Clean Food Waste

St Staff Ef Efforts to to Da Date

MOU with SVCW

• conduct a technical & financial feasibility study

SBWMA Long Range Plan

• Organics to Energy system design and capital costs included in Plan

approved by Board.

• Project CapEx included in subsequent Budgets

MOUs with EBMUD & SL‐WWTP approved by Board CalRecycle Grant funding for SBWMA Organics to Energy Pilot Pending – Landfill and Organics RFP

• (Will establish future waste handling costs)

SB SBWMA Pr Project to to Com Comply ly wi with Or Organics nics Di Diversion Requir quirements

Pilot Organics Recycling Project

• CapEx: ~$1.8M (Total of $3M with $1.2 covered by CalRecycle grant)
• OpEx: ~$68 per ton (equal to current composting)
• Infeed Materials: 75 tpd SSO & MSW on test basis
• Output Material: 50 tpd Organic Slurry to EBMUD for anaerobic digestion to

green electricity

Full Organics Recycling Project

• CapEx: Estimated at $15M
• OpEx: Goal to be equal to future landfill disposal
• Infeed Materials: 750 tpd MSW & 75 tpd SSO
• Output Material: 250 tpd Organic Slurry to various local WWTP for anaerobic

digestion to green electricity or vehicle fuel

SB SBWMA Or Organi nics cs to to Ener Energy gy Pi Pilot lot Pr Project

Organics Extraction (OREX) Organics Extraction (OREX) Dry Fraction Landfill Anaerobic Digestion Anaerobic Digestion EBMUD Biomethane to green Power Infeed SSO MSW Bag Opener Bag Opener MRF MRF Recyclables Recovery Wet Fraction 50 tpd

EBM EBMUD/R D/Recology logy Pilo ilot Pr Project

SSO MSW

SB SBWMA Full Full‐Sc Scal ale Pr Project

OREX Press 500

SAN FRANCISCO, CA OREX

Or Organics nics Ex Extr tract acted fr from

• m SF

SF MSW MSW

11

Broad Expansion of SSO Can be Costly for Some Communities

Centralized Organics Recovery is More Cost Effective Than SSO

SSO Collection, Processing, and Transfer to WWTP or Compost Site

$/ton Diverted

CAPEX 31 OPEX for Processing 21 Collection and transfer 210 Outreach, education, enforcement 16 Composting Tip Fee Less Current T&D to Landfill 3

282

MSW Centralized Processing, Organics Recovery to WWTP

$/ton Diverted

CAPEX 21 OPEX for Processing 34 WWTP Tip Fee Less Current T&D to Landfill 3

58

Source: Third party study by Golder Associates Inc. for Northern California Solid Waste Hauler

Source Separated Organics Centralized Processing

Removal of Contaminants

Residual Contaminants After Organics Extraction Need to Be Removed

Clean Organic AD Feedstock from MSW

16

(1) OREX (2a) DYNAMIC CYCLONE (2b) HYDROCLYCONE (3) DIGESTERS

Wet fraction

Dry fraction Floatable Film Grit Clean Digestate MSW

Wet

Organics Polishing Organics Extraction Anaerobic Digestion

MSW Wet Fraction

Polished Wet Fraction