Zero Waste inZero Waste inMassachusetts?Massachusetts?MassRecycleMassRecycleR3R3April 1, 2013April 1, 2013Thomas A. Mackie...
22
Q. 1: Do you define zero-waste as zero-waste in theQ. 1: Do you define zero-waste as zero-waste in thestate, or does shipp...
Q. 2: If you mean zero-waste in the state, how do weQ. 2: If you mean zero-waste in the state, how do wedeal with the pend...
55
Projected Capacity ShortfallProjected Capacity ShortfallTellus/MassDEP projectionsTellus/MassDEP projections66Tellus Proje...
Q. 2: Continued/Tellus ReportQ. 2: Continued/Tellus ReportExcerptsExcerpts While MA waste-to-energy incineration capacity...
Q. 2: ContinuedQ. 2: Continued Tellus Institute Report projects that in 2020,Tellus Institute Report projects that in 202...
99
1010
Solid Waste Master PlanSolid Waste Master Plan Action Item:Action Item: MassDEP will modify the moratorium on municipal ...
1212Statutory Authority for Partial Lifting of MoratoriumStatutory Authority for Partial Lifting of Moratorium Authority:...
Q. 3: Do you count alternative energy as a part ofQ. 3: Do you count alternative energy as a part ofzero waste strategy?ze...
Tellus Institute ReportTellus Institute Report1)1) From a lifecycle environmental emissions and energyFrom a lifecycle env...
Tellus Report Con’t.Tellus Report Con’t. 2)2) After maximizing diversion through source reduction, recycling andAfter max...
Proposition 2 ½ Not a BarrierProposition 2 ½ Not a Barrier Myth that Proposition 2 ½ restrains MassDEP’s ability toMyth t...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Zero Waste in Massachusetts?

244 views
188 views

Published on

Thomas A. Mackie from Mackie, Shea, O'Brien's presentation on 'Zero Waste' in Massachusetts.

Published in: Business, News & Politics
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
244
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Zero Waste in Massachusetts?

  1. 1. Zero Waste inZero Waste inMassachusetts?Massachusetts?MassRecycleMassRecycleR3R3April 1, 2013April 1, 2013Thomas A. MackieThomas A. Mackie
  2. 2. 22
  3. 3. Q. 1: Do you define zero-waste as zero-waste in theQ. 1: Do you define zero-waste as zero-waste in thestate, or does shipping out of state qualify?state, or does shipping out of state qualify? No, zero waste should not be governed by politicalNo, zero waste should not be governed by politicalboundaries. Zero waste should focus on whetherboundaries. Zero waste should focus on whethermaterials with a potential beneficial reuse arematerials with a potential beneficial reuse aredisposed of regardless of location.disposed of regardless of location.33
  4. 4. Q. 2: If you mean zero-waste in the state, how do weQ. 2: If you mean zero-waste in the state, how do wedeal with the pending capacity shortfall. If not, doesdeal with the pending capacity shortfall. If not, doesit matter how materials shipped out of state areit matter how materials shipped out of state arehandled?handled? Like any other part of essential infrastructure,Like any other part of essential infrastructure,Massachusetts should take responsibility for its ownMassachusetts should take responsibility for its ownmaterials (waste) management. Although the industrymaterials (waste) management. Although the industryopposes barriers to interstate commerce, changes in flowopposes barriers to interstate commerce, changes in flowcontrol law may put teeth in state boundaries.control law may put teeth in state boundaries. UnitedUnitedHaulers Assoc. v. Oneida-Herkimer Solid Waste Mngt.Haulers Assoc. v. Oneida-Herkimer Solid Waste Mngt.Auth.,Auth., 550 US 330 (2007) (local ordinance forcing solid550 US 330 (2007) (local ordinance forcing solidwaste companies to dispose waste to local public facilitywaste companies to dispose waste to local public facilitydoes not violate interstate commerce clause.)does not violate interstate commerce clause.) If flow control is lawful, Massachusetts could be faced withIf flow control is lawful, Massachusetts could be faced withprohibition on export of waste.prohibition on export of waste.44
  5. 5. 55
  6. 6. Projected Capacity ShortfallProjected Capacity ShortfallTellus/MassDEP projectionsTellus/MassDEP projections66Tellus Projections for 2020 Assuming Increased Generation (2%/yr.)and Increased Diversion from 47% to 62% (2006 Baseline)*Waste Generation 18,300,000Diversion at 62% (11,400,000)Residual for Disposal 6,900,000Projected Landfill Capacity (630,000)Projected MWC Capacity (3,100,000)Export or otherwise manage 3,170,000*Assessment of Material Management Options for the Massachusetts Solid Waste Master Plan Review,Tellus Institute December 2008.
  7. 7. Q. 2: Continued/Tellus ReportQ. 2: Continued/Tellus ReportExcerptsExcerpts While MA waste-to-energy incineration capacity isWhile MA waste-to-energy incineration capacity isexpected to remain at about 3.1 million tons per yearexpected to remain at about 3.1 million tons per yearthrough 2020, MA permitted landfill capacity is expected tothrough 2020, MA permitted landfill capacity is expected todecline precipitously from 2.5 million tons per year in 2006decline precipitously from 2.5 million tons per year in 2006to about 630,000 tons per year by 2020. The assumedto about 630,000 tons per year by 2020. The assumedgrowth in waste generation, combined with the loss of in-growth in waste generation, combined with the loss of in-state landfill capacity, means that significant additionalstate landfill capacity, means that significant additionalprocessing/disposal capacity will be required inprocessing/disposal capacity will be required inMassachusetts and/or significant increases in net wasteMassachusetts and/or significant increases in net wasteexports will occur.exports will occur.77
  8. 8. Q. 2: ContinuedQ. 2: Continued Tellus Institute Report projects that in 2020,Tellus Institute Report projects that in 2020,after increased waste reduction,after increased waste reduction,Massachusetts will have a capacity shortfallMassachusetts will have a capacity shortfallof 3.1 M tons/year, compared to currentof 3.1 M tons/year, compared to currentshortfall or about 1M tons/yr.shortfall or about 1M tons/yr. Rather than approaching zero waste, this isRather than approaching zero waste, this isa projected net increase in the amount ofa projected net increase in the amount ofwaste to be managed (presumably exportedwaste to be managed (presumably exportedfor landfilling).for landfilling).88
  9. 9. 99
  10. 10. 1010
  11. 11. Solid Waste Master PlanSolid Waste Master Plan Action Item:Action Item: MassDEP will modify the moratorium on municipal solid waste combustion to encourageMassDEP will modify the moratorium on municipal solid waste combustion to encouragethe development of alternative technologies (e.g., gasification and pyrolysis) forthe development of alternative technologies (e.g., gasification and pyrolysis) forconverting municipal solid waste to energy or fuel on a limited basis. The moratorium willconverting municipal solid waste to energy or fuel on a limited basis. The moratorium willremain in place for new capacity for traditional combustion of municipal solid waste. Totalremain in place for new capacity for traditional combustion of municipal solid waste. Totalnew capacity for gasification or pyrolysis of municipal solid waste will be limited statewidenew capacity for gasification or pyrolysis of municipal solid waste will be limited statewideto 350,000 tons per year. This limit is set at ½ of the projected in-state capacity shortfallto 350,000 tons per year. This limit is set at ½ of the projected in-state capacity shortfallof approximately 700,000 tons if our disposal reduction goals are met, ensuring that weof approximately 700,000 tons if our disposal reduction goals are met, ensuring that wedo not overbuild long-term disposal capacity. These technologies will be used for thosedo not overbuild long-term disposal capacity. These technologies will be used for thoseportions of the waste stream for which reuse or recycling are not an option. Proposedportions of the waste stream for which reuse or recycling are not an option. Proposedprojects will have to meet stringent emissions, energy efficiency, and upfront recyclingprojects will have to meet stringent emissions, energy efficiency, and upfront recyclingstandards. New facilities will be subject to the same site assignment rules as otherstandards. New facilities will be subject to the same site assignment rules as otherfacilities. MassDEP will seek stakeholder input while developing performance standardsfacilities. MassDEP will seek stakeholder input while developing performance standardsfor municipal solid waste conversion facilities. Any new facilities will be required tofor municipal solid waste conversion facilities. Any new facilities will be required toemploy state of the art processing technologies focused on removing recyclableemploy state of the art processing technologies focused on removing recyclablematerials to the greatest extent possible so that these facilities do not supplant recyclingmaterials to the greatest extent possible so that these facilities do not supplant recyclingor re-use options.or re-use options.1111
  12. 12. 1212Statutory Authority for Partial Lifting of MoratoriumStatutory Authority for Partial Lifting of Moratorium Authority: “to determine [the solid waste facilities]Authority: “to determine [the solid waste facilities]necessary and convenient to the disposal ofnecessary and convenient to the disposal of[Massachusetts] waste in a manner which protects public[Massachusetts] waste in a manner which protects publichealth, safety and the environment.” 1995 Master Planhealth, safety and the environment.” 1995 Master PlanRevision citing G.L. c. 16,Revision citing G.L. c. 16, § 21§ 21 Question: After how many years does a “moratorium”Question: After how many years does a “moratorium”become a “ban” and should there be a regulation?become a “ban” and should there be a regulation?
  13. 13. Q. 3: Do you count alternative energy as a part ofQ. 3: Do you count alternative energy as a part ofzero waste strategy?zero waste strategy? Zero waste should be defined as not allowing materials toZero waste should be defined as not allowing materials togo to waste that otherwise have the potential for beneficialgo to waste that otherwise have the potential for beneficialuse. Beneficial uses should include recycling, composting,use. Beneficial uses should include recycling, composting,and energy recovery.and energy recovery.1313
  14. 14. Tellus Institute ReportTellus Institute Report1)1) From a lifecycle environmental emissions and energyFrom a lifecycle environmental emissions and energyperspective, source reduction, recycling and composting are theperspective, source reduction, recycling and composting are themost advantageous management options for allmost advantageous management options for all(recyclable/compostable) materials in the waste stream. (See(recyclable/compostable) materials in the waste stream. (SeeTables ES-1 and ES-2, below.) This finding confirms the traditionalsolid waste management hierarchy that has guided MA DEP’s SolidWaste Master Plan to date.1414
  15. 15. Tellus Report Con’t.Tellus Report Con’t. 2)2) After maximizing diversion through source reduction, recycling andAfter maximizing diversion through source reduction, recycling andcomposting, it is appropriate for DEP to continue to monitorcomposting, it is appropriate for DEP to continue to monitordevelopments regarding alternative waste management technologies thatdevelopments regarding alternative waste management technologies thatproduce energy – gasification, pyrolysis, and anaerobic digestion. Inproduce energy – gasification, pyrolysis, and anaerobic digestion. Inevaluating conventional and alternativeevaluating conventional and alternative management options for themanagement options for theremaining waste stream, the competing needs of energy generation andremaining waste stream, the competing needs of energy generation andprevention of climate change come into play, given that materials with highprevention of climate change come into play, given that materials with highfossil fuel energy content, such as plastics and rubber, also emit high levels offossil fuel energy content, such as plastics and rubber, also emit high levels ofgreenhouse gases when they are combusted or processed for energy.greenhouse gases when they are combusted or processed for energy.Expected federal regulation of carbon emissions, or market mechanisms suchExpected federal regulation of carbon emissions, or market mechanisms suchas cap-and-trade systems, may place additional focus on solid wasteas cap-and-trade systems, may place additional focus on solid wastemanagement facilities as emission sources, making greenhouse gases anmanagement facilities as emission sources, making greenhouse gases anincreasingly important consideration in future waste management decision-increasingly important consideration in future waste management decision-making.making.1515
  16. 16. Proposition 2 ½ Not a BarrierProposition 2 ½ Not a Barrier Myth that Proposition 2 ½ restrains MassDEP’s ability toMyth that Proposition 2 ½ restrains MassDEP’s ability tomandatemandate Town of Norfolk v. DEQE, 407 Mass. 233, 238 (1990).Town of Norfolk v. DEQE, 407 Mass. 233, 238 (1990).– ““DEQE argues that G.L. c. 29, Sec. 27C, does notDEQE argues that G.L. c. 29, Sec. 27C, does notexempt municipalities from laws or regulations ofexempt municipalities from laws or regulations ofgeneral applicability governing activities engaged in bygeneral applicability governing activities engaged in byprivate businesses, when the municipality voluntarilyprivate businesses, when the municipality voluntarilyengages in such activities. We agree.”engages in such activities. We agree.”1616

×