<ul><li>Produces green energy from organic waste. </li></ul><ul><li>Reduces greenhouse gas emissions. </li></ul><ul><li>Sa...
Palo Alto’s dump will close soon
Our composting operation will cease Palo Alto’s yard waste would get trucked to Gilroy, generating 1,200 tons of carbon di...
<ul><li>The Z-Best composting facility near Gilroy is 53 miles from Palo Alto. </li></ul><ul><li>Further than: </li></ul><...
Zero Waste Initiative 90% diversion by 2021 Vs. Climate Protection Plan 15% CO2 reduction by 2020
Local Threats from Climate Change <ul><li>Bay Rise/Flooding </li></ul><ul><li>Water/Food Shortages </li></ul><ul><li>Wildf...
Palo Alto should be concerned about climate change Without levee improvements, much of Palo Alto would be under-water in t...
San Francisquito Creek Floodplain Approximation based on FEMA and 1998 flood maps Menlo Park East Palo Alto Palo Alto 1/2 ...
Palo Alto established a Blue Ribbon Task Force on Composting <ul><li>The BRTF recommended anaerobic digestion, a process u...
Three Sources of Organic Waste 60,000 Tons Per Year Composition of Disposed Organics
Each year Palo Alto’s organics could fill a football field the height of City Hall 130,000 Cubic Yards
Palo Alto has one of only two sewage sludge incinerators in CA <ul><li>Impacts </li></ul><ul><li>6,000 tons of CO2 produce...
Yard & Food Biosolids Generator 13,500 tons garden & farm compost 5,600 tons commercial compost 21,000 tons  Yard Trimming...
The Potential for Anaerobic Digestion <ul><li>60,000 Tons of Waste Processed </li></ul><ul><li>Yard trimmings </li></ul><u...
Locally-generated energy would be available even when the grid goes down East Palo Alto Plane Crash - February 2010
The only possible site is at the landfill next to the Wastewater Treatment Plant
The facility would require undedication of 10 acres (8%) of the 126-acre landfill
 
 
 
 
 
 
An equal amount of parkland could be dedicated elsewhere in Palo Alto Former Los Altos Water Treatment Plant site
Savings from an AD facility could help maintain our world-class parks Foothills Park
Or complete 92% of Byxbee Park (no funds currently exist)
To qualify the Initiative for the ballot we needed 4,356 valid signatures We submitted 6,023 signatures, 5,128 were valid
  Pros of Initiative   Cons <ul><li>Reduces citywide greenhouse gas emissions by more than 12,000 tons per year. </li></ul...
What We Learned from the Study <ul><li>Anaerobic digestion produces fewer greenhouse  </li></ul><ul><li>gases than the alt...
Alternative   Electricity  Natural Gas 1a   11,533   11,280 2   23,329   26,194 3   22,716   22,716 AD would reduce greenh...
Flaws with the Feasibility Study <ul><li>Underestimated the cost of the Alternatives </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Didn’t include ...
20-Year Cost  Case   Project/Financing Option $91 million   1a  Dry Anaerobic Digester   private financing/private operati...
Wet Anaerobic Digestion <ul><li>Could process food scraps with sewage sludge </li></ul><ul><li>Digestate could be: </li></...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Palo Alto Green Energy and Compost Initiative Presentation

1,481 views

Published on

This is a copy of the presentation for the initiative for a local site for a green energy and compost facility.

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,481
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
82
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Palo Alto Green Energy and Compost Initiative Presentation

  1. 1. <ul><li>Produces green energy from organic waste. </li></ul><ul><li>Reduces greenhouse gas emissions. </li></ul><ul><li>Saves Palo Alto millions of dollars. </li></ul><ul><li>Energy available during power outages. </li></ul>
  2. 2. Palo Alto’s dump will close soon
  3. 3. Our composting operation will cease Palo Alto’s yard waste would get trucked to Gilroy, generating 1,200 tons of carbon dioxide per year.
  4. 4. <ul><li>The Z-Best composting facility near Gilroy is 53 miles from Palo Alto. </li></ul><ul><li>Further than: </li></ul><ul><li>Santa Cruz </li></ul><ul><li>San Francisco </li></ul><ul><li>Marin Headlands </li></ul><ul><li>Walnut Creek </li></ul><ul><li>Martinez </li></ul><ul><li>Tracy </li></ul>
  5. 5. Zero Waste Initiative 90% diversion by 2021 Vs. Climate Protection Plan 15% CO2 reduction by 2020
  6. 6. Local Threats from Climate Change <ul><li>Bay Rise/Flooding </li></ul><ul><li>Water/Food Shortages </li></ul><ul><li>Wildfire Hazards </li></ul>
  7. 7. Palo Alto should be concerned about climate change Without levee improvements, much of Palo Alto would be under-water in the not-too-distant future.
  8. 8. San Francisquito Creek Floodplain Approximation based on FEMA and 1998 flood maps Menlo Park East Palo Alto Palo Alto 1/2 mile
  9. 9. Palo Alto established a Blue Ribbon Task Force on Composting <ul><li>The BRTF recommended anaerobic digestion, a process using microorganisms in enclosed vessels to break down organic waste into methane and compost. </li></ul>
  10. 10. Three Sources of Organic Waste 60,000 Tons Per Year Composition of Disposed Organics
  11. 11. Each year Palo Alto’s organics could fill a football field the height of City Hall 130,000 Cubic Yards
  12. 12. Palo Alto has one of only two sewage sludge incinerators in CA <ul><li>Impacts </li></ul><ul><li>6,000 tons of CO2 produced per year. </li></ul><ul><li>$1,000,000 worth of energy used per year. </li></ul><ul><li>$200,000/year paid to dispose of waste ash. </li></ul>
  13. 13. Yard & Food Biosolids Generator 13,500 tons garden & farm compost 5,600 tons commercial compost 21,000 tons Yard Trimmings & up to 22,000 tons Food & Compostables 16,000 tons Wastewater Biosolids Methane Green electricity for 1,400 homes Usable heat For wastewater processes Anaerobic Digestion Waste Transformation AD would reduce our greenhouse gases by 12,000 tons/year
  14. 14. The Potential for Anaerobic Digestion <ul><li>60,000 Tons of Waste Processed </li></ul><ul><li>Yard trimmings </li></ul><ul><li>Food scraps </li></ul><ul><li>Sewage sludge </li></ul><ul><li>Non-recyclable paper </li></ul><ul><li>12,000 Tons of Greenhouse Gas Reductions </li></ul><ul><li>Eliminates sewage sludge incineration </li></ul><ul><li>Converts waste to renewable energy </li></ul><ul><li>Reduces landfill methane </li></ul><ul><li>Eliminates waste hauling </li></ul><ul><li>Savings & Revenue </li></ul><ul><li>$1.4 million/year in green energy </li></ul><ul><li>$1,000,000/year in energy from incineration </li></ul><ul><li>$200,000/year from eliminating waste ash </li></ul><ul><li>Tipping fee </li></ul><ul><li>Carbon dioxide offsets </li></ul>
  15. 15. Locally-generated energy would be available even when the grid goes down East Palo Alto Plane Crash - February 2010
  16. 16. The only possible site is at the landfill next to the Wastewater Treatment Plant
  17. 17. The facility would require undedication of 10 acres (8%) of the 126-acre landfill
  18. 24. An equal amount of parkland could be dedicated elsewhere in Palo Alto Former Los Altos Water Treatment Plant site
  19. 25. Savings from an AD facility could help maintain our world-class parks Foothills Park
  20. 26. Or complete 92% of Byxbee Park (no funds currently exist)
  21. 27. To qualify the Initiative for the ballot we needed 4,356 valid signatures We submitted 6,023 signatures, 5,128 were valid
  22. 28. Pros of Initiative Cons <ul><li>Reduces citywide greenhouse gas emissions by more than 12,000 tons per year. </li></ul><ul><li>Saves Palo Alto millions of dollars. </li></ul><ul><li>Keeps Palo Alto’s composting operation local. </li></ul><ul><li>Enables Palo Alto to compost food waste. </li></ul><ul><li>Allows Palo Alto to retire its sewage sludge incinerator. </li></ul><ul><li>Generates enough green energy to power 1,400 homes. </li></ul><ul><li>Energy will be available during emergency blackouts. </li></ul><ul><li>Revenues could be used to complete 92% of Byxbee Park (no funds currently exist). </li></ul><ul><li>Provides an excellent educational opportunity for school groups and others. </li></ul><ul><li>Serves as a model for other communities, reinforcing Palo Alto’s status as an environmental leader. </li></ul>Byxbee Park would be slightly smaller.
  23. 29. What We Learned from the Study <ul><li>Anaerobic digestion produces fewer greenhouse </li></ul><ul><li>gases than the alternatives. </li></ul><ul><li>DAD is questionable for biosolids, leading to a high </li></ul><ul><li>contingency and a focus on private financing. </li></ul><ul><li>Yard waste has less energy value than food waste </li></ul><ul><li>or sewage sludge. </li></ul><ul><li>Anaerobic digestion gets cheaper over time, </li></ul><ul><li>whereas the alternatives get more expensive. </li></ul>Alternative Year 1 Cost Year 20 Cost Total Cost 1a $112/ton $106/ton $91 million 2 $72/ton $118/ton $76 million 3 $68/ton $111/ton $71 million
  24. 30. Alternative Electricity Natural Gas 1a 11,533 11,280 2 23,329 26,194 3 22,716 22,716 AD would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 12,000 tons per year Figures are in metric tons per year. One metric ton = 2,200 pounds.
  25. 31. Flaws with the Feasibility Study <ul><li>Underestimated the cost of the Alternatives </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Didn’t include the cost of rebuilding the incinerator or </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>building a wet anaerobic digester. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Didn’t include a contingency for the San Jose project. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Didn’t include a CO2 adder. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Low and high estimates for DAD are flawed </li></ul><ul><ul><li>It’s an either/or, not a range. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Low should be $86/ton and high $112/ton. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Focused too much on private financing and not </li></ul><ul><li>enough on public financing. </li></ul><ul><li>Didn’t study wet anaerobic digestion for sewage </li></ul><ul><li>sludge and food waste on the 10-acre site. </li></ul>
  26. 32. 20-Year Cost Case Project/Financing Option $91 million 1a Dry Anaerobic Digester private financing/private operation $67 million 1a #3 Dry Anaerobic Digester public financing/private operation $76 million 2 Incinerate sewage sludge/truck yard waste to Gilroy/food waste to San Jose $105 million 2* Incinerate sewage sludge/truck yard waste to Gilroy/food waste to San Jose $71 million 3 Incinerate sewage sludge/truck yard and food waste to Gilroy $97 million 3** Incinerate sewage sludge/truck yard and food waste to Gilroy *Includes 15% contingency for San Jose facility, $20 million capital cost for incinerator, and $20/ton CO2 adder. **Includes $20 million capital cost for incinerator, and $20/ton CO2 adder.
  27. 33. Wet Anaerobic Digestion <ul><li>Could process food scraps with sewage sludge </li></ul><ul><li>Digestate could be: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Turned into energy pellets </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Turned into biochar </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Composted aerobically with yard waste </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Everyone agrees WAD should be studied </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Park proponents want it studied for sewage sludge </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>only at the WTP </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Sustainability advocates want it studied for sewage </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>sludge and food waste using the 10 acre site -- </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>this process would likely produce the most green </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>energy, reduce the greatest amount of greenhouse </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>gas emissions, and cost the least per ton. </li></ul></ul>

×