For years, we have been told that we are running out of landfill space and that new methods for waste management are needed to reduce environmental impact. Recycling and waste conversion technologies that can reduce waste volumes received by landfills are universally recommended to minimize environmental impact, and there are plenty of capital providers looking to invest in this space.
Using waste as a feedstock to generate electricity, heat, soil amendments, and new products is not a new concept. The agricultural community has used organic waste for centuries. Pyrolysis dates back to Biblical times. A system to generate heat from waste was implemented in New York City based on European practices in the late 1800s. In the 1970’s the Department of Energy funded a proof-of-concept municipal waste anaerobic digester to recover methane gas in Pompano Beach, Florida.
There are less than 10% of landfills today than in the 1970s. More waste is being generated than ever before. Through controlled collection waste feedstock is readily available. Many technologies are proven. The investment community is poised to invest where a capital return can be made. So, what is the impediment to implementing alternate technologies in landfills?
The answer lies within the technology’s inability to process waste feedstock at a cost that provides a satisfactory return on investment. The costs associated with cleaning the feedstock and applying the technology are substantially higher than the alternative of landfilling. These costs are well recognized by elected local officials with the responsibility to manage waste, and it goes without saying that an increase in taxes is rarely popular.
Landfill externalities and associated costs are often raised as the rationale for why new technologies should be considered cost-competitive. However, if we look at the capital and operating costs of new technology, we note that energy and resource consumption surely must drive higher costs. This raises the question of whether externalities related to the new technologies are being fairly assessed.
We are not running out of landfill space. Many landfills are built to last for 50 or more years. Nor have we tapped out our hydrocarbon resources. New landfills, built pursuant to regulations promulgated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, capture greenhouse emissions using gas collection systems. Impacts on groundwater are controlled through a liner system designed to remove contaminated waters from within the landfill itself. There is nothing wrong with recycling or other applied technologies, particularly where the resources represent good value. The public prefers these waste management methods despite their cost impact. So, why is it so hard to change how we manage waste? Follow the money, and you will have your answer.
For over 25 years, Lee Enterprises Consulting has assisted companies and investors with issues relating to bioenergy, biofuels, biomaterials and chemicals, biotechnologies, and feedstocks. With over 150 consultants, we have the diverse expertise and geographical reach to assist in virtually any bioeconomy project worldwide. These seasoned professionals average over 30 years of industry experience. Our ability to assemble these professionals into multidisciplinary teams allows us to fully integrate the technical, scientific, and regulatory aspects of a project and combine them with years of hands-on experience. Take a look at our experts and the services we provide. You will note that most of our experts are also available for ancillary engagements and advice for specialty engagements like serving as expert witnesses in litigation matters. Call us at 1+ (501) 833-8511 or email us for more information.
