Solid Waste Management Strategy – Draft for Discussion City of Thunder Bay Monday , February 3, 2014
Agenda 1. Recommended system – Phase 1 2. Recommended system – Phase 2 3. Financial considerations 4. Waste diversion implications 5. Administering the strategy 6. Next steps
Recommended System - Phase 1 Enhanced Waste, Reuse, & Recycling Programs & New Recycling Infrastructure Within the City’s mandate from a • regulatory perspective Includes those that are relatively easy to • implement Programs proposed are strongly • supported by residents as indicated through the public consultation process
Phase 1- Enhanced Waste, Reuse, & Recycling Program Highlights • Enhanced leaf & yard waste program • Bulky waste collection • Enhance recycling depots – including access to small commercial generators • Landfill ban on cardboard • Reuse centre and Take-it-Back programs • Additional Household Hazardous Waste collection events
Phase 1- New Recycling Infrastructure Surveys: • indicated residents have a • A need for processing capacity to strong desire for support the collection and an expanded processing of Additional Recyclable household recycling program Materials • residents want to • Options include: retrofit existing recycle more plastics (this Material Recycling Facility (MRF) or option was construct a new regional MRF selected by residents as the • Transfer option evaluated but not first preference viable by comparison the City should consider implementing)
Phase 1- New Recycling Infrastructure Single-stream vs. continued dual – Focus Groups: stream recycling: • Single stream recycling was Convenient - can result in additional • identified as the material capture preferred system Appropriate for automated cart • for multi-family collection stakeholders who Greater efficiencies in collection • have material Accommodates co-collection • handling, Greater participation in multi-residential • segregation and and commercial sectors storage issues Accommodates a regional recycling • system
Phase 1- Enhanced Waste Reuse & Recycling Programs Clear Garbage Bag Program Clear bags cost the same as conventional garbage bags and • are less expensive than the cost of a bag tag No limit to the number of bags that can be placed at the • curb. This addresses issues raised during consultation with respect to young families (diapers etc.) and larger families who can generate higher volumes of garbage than average Program is highly complementary to many other programs • recommended to be implemented as part of this Solid Waste Management Strategy (SWMS) Based on the Satisfaction Survey results, 67% supported some • kind of enforcement program to provide incentives to reduce garbage set out at the curb. The remaining 33% wanted no reduction in limits from the status quo. The clear garbage bag program achieves both objectives.
Phase 1- Enhanced Waste Reuse & Recycling Programs Automated Garbage & Recycling Collection • Public support for collection of recyclables in containers • The benefits of a cart-based program outweigh a blue box collection program • Weekly collection of recyclables • Surveys indicate residents have a strong desire for recycling collected in containers or carts • 69% of residents favour either a cart or box for collection as opposed to the current blue bag program
Recommended System - Phase 2 Expanded Waste Reduction & Diversion Programs & Additional Infrastructure Initiatives that raise the bar beyond • currently mandated programs Can be phased in over the lifetime of • the SWMS Require more rigorous planning and • funding Prepares the City for regulatory change •
Phase 2 – Expanded Waste Reduction & Diversion Program Highlights • Additional Landfill Bans • Differential tipping fees • Expanded multi-residential diversion programs • Construction & demolition waste diversion for IC&I sector • Green Park – entrepreneurial opportunities at landfill shingles wood bricks & concrete tires
Phase 2 – Additional Infrastructure • Consideration for processing capacity to support a Source Separated Organic (SSO) Waste collection program • Implementation of this program requires investment in collection containers, promotion & education, and processing infrastructure • Takes programming to estimated 68% waste diversion
Financial Considerations Waste and recycling programs are currently funded by landfill tipping fees, Provincial funding & tax base funding Implementation of the SWMS will require additional funding: • Tipping fee revenue will decrease with increased waste diversion • Additional capital and operating costs System Financing Options: • Flat rate per household to support Phase 1 & 2 programs (possible utility based option) • Tax based
Summary of Larger System Cost Impacts New Municipal Regional MRF – Single Stream Capital - $9,388,000; Operating - $2,300,000 annually Retro-fit Existing MRF – Single Stream Capital - $5,000,000; Operating - $1,858,000 annually Transtor System Capital - $2,548,000; Operating - $2,749,000 annually Komar System Capital - $3,238,000; Operating – $2,577,860 annually MRF Infrastructure Options Gross Cost Per Tonne 14,500 TPY New Municipal Regional MRF $161.00 Retrofit Existing MRF $128.00 Transtor System $183.00 Komar System $201.00
Summary of Larger System Cost Impacts Automated Cart Program Carts Garbage ~ $234,000 annually (amortized over 10 years) Recycling ~ $212,500 annually (amortized over 10 years) Collection Garbage ~ ($575,000) annually Recycling ~$1,573,600 annually Revenue Recycling ~ $1,160,000 annually SSO Collection Carts ~ $130,000 annually (amortized over 10 years) Collection ~ $1,640,000 annually Composting Operations ~$1,280,000 annually Processing Facility - $2.5 million capital (~ $300,000 amortized over 15 yrs) Would result in decreased garbage collection costs with move to bi- weekly garbage collection ~ $902,800 annually
Utility Based Model (garbage collection & waste diversion programs only) Equivalent Flat Rate Base Program Costs (2014 draft budget): Recycling Programs = $1,523,600 Garbage Collection = $3,222,800 Recycling Capital = $60,000 Total Programs = $4,806,400 Total Single Family Households = 34,765 Cost per household per year = $138 Equivalent Flat Rate Charge per Single Family Dwellings: $12 per month
Utility Based Model (garbage collection & waste diversion programs only) Equivalent Flat Rate Base Program Costs (2014 draft budget): Single Family Dwellings: $12 per month Addition of Phase 1 programs: Single Family Dwelling: increase $4-10/month Flat fee $16-22/month Addition of Phase 2 programs: Single Family Dwellings: increase $4-22/month Flat fee $16-34/month
Programming Impacts on Residential Diversion
Phase 1 Implementation Schedule
Phase 2 Implementation Schedule
Administering the Strategy
Administering the Strategy Complete waste audits – 2014 as first benchmark • Report progress on a regular basis • Stakeholder engagement • SWMS review and update • Proper monitoring & measuring serves a number of functions, including the ability to: • Adhere to currently accepted best practices; • Identify issues with the system & effectively mitigate these issues; • Adjust implementation schedules if necessary; • Secure highest degree of external funding; and, • Identify opportunities for cost savings & increased effectiveness of the system.
Next Steps City • Engineering assessment of existing MRF • Issue Expression of Interest for processing & collection • Discussion with Waste Diversion Ontario & Continuous Improvement Fund regarding program funding Stantec • Incorporate comments/feedback from Council, any additional public feedback into final SWMS document for presentation to Council in April 2014
Recommend
More recommend
