DOCSLIB.ORG

Technical Document on Municipal Solid Waste Organics Processing Technical Document on Municipal Solid Waste Organics Processing

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Technical Document on Municipal Solid Waste Organics Processing Technical Document on Municipal Solid Waste Organics Processing. Cat. No.: En14-83/2013E ISBN: 978-1-100-21707-9 Information contained in this publication or product may be reproduced, in part or in whole, and by any means, for personal or public non-commercial purposes, without charge or further permission, unless otherwise specified. You are asked to: Exercise due diligence in ensuring the accuracy of the materials reproduced; Indicate both the complete title of the materials reproduced, as well as the author organization; and Indicate that the reproduction is a copy of an official work that is published by the Government of Canada and that the reproduction has not been produced in affiliation with or with the endorsement of the Government of Canada. Commercial reproduction and distribution is prohibited except with written permission from the Government of Canada’s copyright administrator, Public Works and Government Services of Canada (PWGSC). For more information, please contact PWGSC at 613-996-6886 or at [email protected]. © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, represented by the Minister of the Environment, 2013 Aussi disponible en français sous le titre : Document technique sur la gestion des matières organiques municipales Preface Solid waste management is unquestionably an essential service that local governments provide their citizens. They have an important responsibility to make decisions regarding collection services, disposal infrastructure, waste diversion and recycling programs that are cost-effective and respond to their communities’ needs. Even in communities with long-established programs and infrastructure, the management of waste continues to evolve and require informed decisions that take into consideration a complex set of environmental, social, technological, and financial factors. Communities are considering options for processing organic waste and need more detailed, objective technical guidance and reliable information on the available processing technologies. In recent years, there has been increasing attention to managing the organic fraction of the municipal waste stream. Biodegradable material such as food waste constitutes approximately 40% of the residential waste stream, therefore diversion of organic materials is essential to reach high diversion targets. The environmental benefits of diverting organic materials from landfill include reduced methane emissions (a potent greenhouse gas), and decreased leachate quantities from landfills. From a life-cycle perspective, other benefits, such as the production of valuable compost and renewable energy, can also be derived from the diversion of organic materials from disposal depending on the processing method selected. While the science of processing leaf and yard waste at open windrow sites is well understood, and facilities are successfully operating at numerous sites across the country, the knowledge and experience of processing food waste in Canada is less well established. Opinions differ on the effectiveness of various technologies for the processing of organics. Canadian experience has been a mix of successes and setbacks. It is important that lessons learned be shared. Objective and reliable technical information is needed so that local governments choosing an approach to the processing of organics are doing so in a well-informed way that best meets their local needs. Optimization of resource allocation and the economic value of waste materials are important aspects of the sustainability of integrated waste management. This Technical Document on Municipal Solid Waste Organics Processing was developed to meet this need by providing science-based, objective and user-friendly information on the various aspects of organic waste management planning and operation for organics processing of different capacities and in different locations. The most applicable and relevant proven composting and anaerobic digestion treatment approaches for implementation in Canada and the considerations applicable to their implementation are also discussed. Treatment technologies still at the research level, that are not yet commercially available, or that have not fully demonstrated technical feasibility in the Canadian context are not covered in this Technical Document. i Preface As many municipalities across Canada are considering options for processing organic wastes, this document can be used as a resource by government officials and stakeholders as they engage with consulting firms and service and technology providers to discuss and assess potential options, prepare tender documents, and evaluate proposals. Users are encouraged to carefully read and interpret the information based on their specific local conditions and regulatory requirements. This document draws on lessons learned and expert knowledge of professionals, practitioners and academics in the field of organics management across North America. The extensive and varied experience of all contributors and reviewers is brought together in 18 comprehensive chapters describing the technical aspects and key considerations involved in processing organic wastes. The document covers a wide range of topics from the science and principles of composting and anaerobic digestion, to the description of proven processing technologies, biogas utilization, facility design, odor control, and compost quality, as well as other related issues such as procurement approaches and system selection. It is hoped that readers will benefit from this compendium of knowledge and lessons learned to support further efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and optimize the value of municipal solid waste organics under an integrated waste management approach. ii Contents Preface . i Acknowledgements . ix Acronyms and Abbreviations . x 1 . Introduction to Municipal Solid Waste Organics . 1-1 1.1 Composition of MSW Organics .............................................1-1 1.1.1 Food Waste .....................................................1-1 1.1.2 Leaf and Yard Waste ..............................................1-2 1.2 Estimating the Quantities of MSW Organics ...................................1-3 1.3 Common Issues and Challenges ............................................1-4 2. Benefits of Organic Waste Diversion . 2-1 2.1 Environmental Benefits ...................................................2-1 2.1.1 Greenhouse Gas Reduction .........................................2-1 2.1.2 Compost Products Uses ............................................2-2 2.2 Social Benefits ..........................................................2-3 2.3 Economic Benefits .......................................................2-4 3 . Science and Principles of Aerobic Processing (Composting) . 3-1 3.1 Steps of the Composting Process ...........................................3-1 3.2 Compost Microbiology ....................................................3-5 3.2.1 Bacteria ........................................................3-6 3.2.2 Fungi ...........................................................3-6 3.2.3 Actinomycetes ...................................................3-6 3.3 Key Process Management Parameters .......................................3-7 3.3.1 Oxygen Concentration .............................................3-7 3.3.2 Free Air Space, and Particle Size and Structure ........................3-10 3.3.3 Carbon to Nitrogen Ratio .......................................... 3-11 3.3.4 Moisture Content ................................................3-12 3.3.5 Temperature ....................................................3-13 3.3.6 pH Level .......................................................3-15 iii Contents 4 . Science and Principles of Anaerobic Processing (Anaerobic digestion) . 4-1 4.1 Overview of the Anaerobic Digestion Process ..................................4-1 4.2 Typical Mass Balance. 4-5 4.3 Anaerobic Digestion Chemistry and Microbiology ...............................4-6 4.4 Key Process Management Parameters .......................................4-8 4.4.1 Moisture Content .................................................4-8 4.4.2 pH, Alkalinity, and Volatile Fatty Acids .................................4-9 4.4.3 Temperature .....................................................4-9 4.4.4 Solids Retention Time .............................................4-10 4.4.5 C:N Ratio and Ammonia Toxicity ....................................4-10 4.4.6 Sulphide Concentration ...........................................4-10 4.5 Digestate Characteristics, Quantities, and Processing .......................... 4-11 4.5.1 Digestate Characteristics and Processing ............................. 4-11 4.5.2 Digestate Quantities .............................................. 4-11 4.6 Biogas Characteristics and Quantities .......................................4-12 4.6.1 Biogas Characteristics ............................................4-12 4.6.2 Biogas Quantities ................................................4-13 4.6.3 Energy Potential of Biogas .........................................4-14 5 . Aerobic Processing Technologies . 5-1 5.1 General Feedstock Preparation Steps ........................................5-4 5.1.1 Particle Size Reduction ............................................5-4 5.1.2 Mixing and Blending ...............................................5-4 5.1.3 Ferrous Metal Removal ............................................5-4 5.1.4
Recommended publications
  • Energy from Waste

    Energy from Waste

    Guideline: Energy from waste Publication 1559.1* July 2017. *This publication replaces 1559 released December 2013. Introduction As outlined in Getting Full Value: the Victorian Waste and Resource Recovery Policy, (‘Getting Full Value Policy’) the Victorian Government is committed to an integrated, statewide waste and resource recovery system that protects the environment and public health, maximises the productive value of resources, and minimises the long-term costs to households, industry and government. The Victorian Government also outlined that it welcomes investments in energy from waste and other alternative technology that can convert waste into useful products, if it can be demonstrated that investment will deliver strong environmental, public health and economic outcomes. This guideline outlines how the Environment Protection Act 1970 (‘the Act’) and associated statutory policies and regulations are applied to the assessment of proposals that recover energy from waste. The document provides high- level guidance for industry, government and the community on EPA Victoria’s (EPA) expectations and requirements for the siting, design, construction and operation of such facilities. Efficient recovery of energy from the thermal or biological processing of waste is considered a resource recovery as opposed to a waste disposal option. Recovery of energy should not compete with avoidance, reuse or recycling. Legal status of this guideline This guideline provides a summary of the Act’s key principles and environment protection requirements as well as subordinate legislation. The technical details in this guideline describe measures to assist in meeting these requirements. The guideline does not represent a comprehensive statement of the law as it applies to either particular problems or individuals or serves as a substitute for legal advice.
  • The Landfill Disposal Rates of Waste-To-Energy Communities

    The Landfill Disposal Rates of Waste-To-Energy Communities

    The Landfill Disposal Rates of Waste-to-Energy Communities Photo Courtesy of Miami-Dade County Resource Recovery Facility - Ash Disposal DECEMBER 2010 CH SEAR FO E UN R D D A IE T L IO P P N A A N P P O I L T I E A SOLID WASTE ASSOCIATION D D of North America R N E U S O E F A R H C www.swana.org The Landfill Disposal Rates of Waste-to-Energy Communities Ash Disposal – Miami-Dade County Resource Recovery Facility Prepared for: SWANA Applied Research Foundation FY2010 Waste-to-Energy Group Subscribers December 2010 © Solid Waste Association of North America 2010 The Landfill Disposal Rates of Waste-to-Energy Communities TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 1 2.0 THE LANDFILL DISPOSAL INDEX (LDI) ................................................................... 2 3.0 THE LANDFILL DISPOSAL INDICES OF WTE COMMUNITIES ............................... 3 4.0 LANDFILL DISPOSAL INDICES FOR ZERO WASTE COMMUNITIES ..................... 5 5.0 SHORTCOMINGS OF THE MSW DIVERSION RATE METRIC .................................. 5 6.0 THE BIODEGRADABLE MSW-LDI ............................................................................ 7 7.0 CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................................... 8 LIST OF TABLES TABLE TITLE PAGE 1 SWANA ARF FY2010 WTE Group.............................................................................................................................2
  • GHOST GEAR: the ABANDONED FISHING NETS HAUNTING OUR OCEANS Sea Turtle Entangled in Fishing Gear in the Mediterranean Sea © Marco Care/Greenpeace CONTENTS

    GHOST GEAR: the ABANDONED FISHING NETS HAUNTING OUR OCEANS Sea Turtle Entangled in Fishing Gear in the Mediterranean Sea © Marco Care/Greenpeace CONTENTS

    GHOST GEAR: THE ABANDONED FISHING NETS HAUNTING OUR OCEANS Sea turtle entangled in fishing gear in the Mediterranean Sea © Marco Care/Greenpeace CONTENTS 4 Zusammenfassung 5 Executive summary 6 Introduction 8 Main types of fishing – Nets – Lines – Traps & pots – FADs 11 Ghost gear impacts – Killing ocean creatures – Damaging habitats – Economic and other impacts 13 Current regulations – International agreements and recommendations – Other programmes and resolutions – A cross-sector approach – The need for a Global Ocean Treaty 16 References 2019 / 10 Published by Greenpeace Germany November 2019 Stand Greenpeace e. V., Hongkongstraße 10, 20457 Hamburg, Tel. 040/3 06 18 - 0, [email protected] , www . greenpeace . de Authors Karli Thomas, Dr. Cat Dorey and Farah Obaidullah Responsible for content Helena Spiritus Layout Klasse 3b, Hamburg S 0264 1 Contents 3 DEUTSCHE ZUSAMMENFASSUNG DER STUDIE GHOST GEAR: THE ABANDONED FISHING NETS HAUNTING OUR OCEANS → Rund 640.000 Tonnen altes Fischereigerät inklusive Geisternetzen, Bojen, Leinen, Fallen und Körbe landen jährlich als Fischereimüll in den Ozeanen. → Weltweit trägt altes Fischereigerät zu etwa zehn Prozent zum Plastikeintrag in die Meere bei. → 45 Prozent aller Arten auf der Roten IUCN-Liste hatten bereits Kontakt mit Plastik im Meer. → Sechs Prozent aller eingesetzten Netze, neun Prozent aller Fallen und 29 Prozent aller Langleinen gehen jährlich auf den Ozeanen verloren und enden als Meeresmüll. → Treibnetze, Fallen und Fischsammler (Fish Aggregating Devices, FADs) gehen weltweit am häufigsten als Müll auf den Ozeanen verloren und bergen die meisten Risiken für Meereslebewesen. → Durch FADs sterben 2,8 bis 6,7 Mal mehr Tiere - darunter bedrohte Arten wie Haie – als Beifang als die Zielarten, für die sie eingesetzt werden.
  • Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Operation and Management Workbook

    Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Operation and Management Workbook

    MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE LANDFILL OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT WORKBOOK Revised April 2018 Preface In many ways, constructing, operating and maintaining a municipal solid waste landfill is similar to constructing, operating, and maintaining a highway, dam, canal, bridge, or other engineered structure. The most important similarity is that landfills, like other engineered structures, must be constructed and operated in a manner that will provide safe, long-term, and reliable service to the communities they serve. Proper design, construction, operation, monitoring, closure and post-closure care are critical because after disposal the waste can be a threat to human health and the environment for decades to centuries. This workbook is intended to provide municipal landfill operators and managers in Wyoming with the fundamental knowledge and technical background necessary to ensure that landfills are operated efficiently, effectively, and in a manner that is protective of human health and the environment. This workbook contains information regarding basic construction and operation activities that are encountered on a routine basis at most landfills. The basic procedures and fundamental elements of landfill permitting, construction management, monitoring, closure, post-closure care, and financial assurance are also addressed. The workbook includes informative tips and information that landfill operators and managers can use to conserve landfill space, minimize the potential for pollution, reduce operating costs, and comply with applicable rules and regulations. In addition to this workbook, operators and managers need to become familiar with the Wyoming Solid Waste Rules and Regulations applicable to municipal solid waste. The DEQ also provides numerous guidelines that may help understand regulatory requirements in more detail.
  • Section 5.21: Solid Waste

    Section 5.21: Solid Waste

    General Plan Update Section 5.21: Solid Waste This section analyzes the potential solid waste impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed General Plan 2035. Specifically, this section compares the solid waste generation of the proposed General Plan 2035 with the capacity of the existing landfills that accept solid waste from the City of Murrieta. The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939) requires every city and county in the state to prepare a Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) to its Solid Waste Management Plan, that identifies how each jurisdiction will meet the mandatory state waste diversion goal of 50 percent by and after the year 2000. Subsequent legislation changed the reporting requirements and threshold, but restated source reduction as a priority. The purpose of AB 939 is to “reduce, recycle, and re-use solid waste generated in the state to the maximum extent feasible.” The term “integrated waste management” refers to the use of a variety of waste management practices to safely and effectively handle the municipal solid waste stream with the least adverse impact on human health and the environment. AB 939 established a waste management hierarchy as follows: . Source Reduction; . Recycling; . Composting; . Transformation; and . Disposal. Local governments have an ongoing obligation to meet a 50 percent diversion goal, as mandated by AB 939. While Murrieta’s recycling program is voluntary, residents and businesses are strongly encouraged to make full use of these services. Recycling and reuse of materials extends the life of landfills, results in less use of natural resources and improves the environment.
  • The Potential of Digestate and the Liquid Fraction of Digestate As Chemical Fertiliser Substitutes Under the RENURE Criteria

    The Potential of Digestate and the Liquid Fraction of Digestate As Chemical Fertiliser Substitutes Under the RENURE Criteria

    agronomy Article The Potential of Digestate and the Liquid Fraction of Digestate as Chemical Fertiliser Substitutes under the RENURE Criteria Gregory Reuland 1,2,* , Ivona Sigurnjak 1 , Harmen Dekker 2, Evi Michels 1 and Erik Meers 1 1 Department of Green Chemistry and Technology, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University, Coupure Links 653, 9000 Gent, Belgium; [email protected] (I.S.); [email protected] (E.M.); [email protected] (E.M.) 2 European Biogas Association, Rue d’Arlon 65, 1050 Brussels, Belgium; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: This study assessed how digestate and the liquid fraction (LF) of digestate would perform as candidate RENURE fertilisers (recovered nitrogen from manure) in nitrate vulnerable zones under the proposed criteria of the Joint Research Centre, namely, (i) a mineral nitrogen to total nitrogen ratio ≥ 90% (Nmin:TN ≥ 90%) or a total organic carbon to TN ratio ≤ 3 (TOC:TN ≤ 3); (ii) limits of ≤300 copper (Cu) mg kg−1 and ≤800 Zinc (Zn) mg kg−1. These criteria were applied to unpublished data (n = 2622) on digestate compositional properties, further amended with data from the literature (n = 180); digestate analysis from seven full-scale biogas facilities (n = 14); and biogas industry stakeholders (n = 23). The results showed that Cu and Zn mostly met the criteria, with compliance rates of 94.7% (of 1035 entries) and 95.0% (of 1038 entries), respectively. Just above 5% (of 1856 entries) met the Nmin/TN ≥ 90% criterion, while 36% (of 1583 entries) met the TOC/TN ≤ 3 criterion, while total compliance was 32% (of 1893 entries).
  • Solid Waste Management Plan Operational Services Division – Sanitation

    Solid Waste Management Plan Operational Services Division – Sanitation

    Solid Waste Management Plan Operational Services Division – Sanitation October 2007 Table of Contents Table of Contents............................................................................................................2 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................3 Introduction .....................................................................................................................4 Solid Waste Diversion in Manitoba ..................................................................................5 Manitoba Product Stewardship Supported Recycling...................................................7 Household Hazardous Waste Generation in Manitoba.................................................9 Extended Producer Responsibility .............................................................................10 National Waste Diversion ..............................................................................................13 Avenues to Waste Diversion......................................................................................15 Trends for Manitoba ...............................................................................................22 Solid Waste Diversion as a System...............................................................................24 Solid Waste Management in Brandon ...........................................................................25 Landfill License..........................................................................................................25
  • Processing (Composting) Facility Guidance and Checklists for Tier II and Tier III Processing Facilities

    Processing (Composting) Facility Guidance and Checklists for Tier II and Tier III Processing Facilities

    Processing (Composting) Facility Guidance and Checklists for Tier II and Tier III Processing Facilities State of Idaho Department of Environmental Quality July 2013 Printed on recycled paper, DEQ June 2013, PID 9170, CA 87067. Costs associated with this publication are available from the State of Idaho Department of Environmental Quality in accordance with Section 60-202, Idaho Code. Processing Facility Guidance and Checklists Contents 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 2 Composting Process................................................................................................................. 1 2.1 Windrow Composting ...................................................................................................... 1 2.2 Aerated Static Piles ........................................................................................................... 2 2.3 In-Vessel Composting ...................................................................................................... 3 3 Applicable Regulations ............................................................................................................ 3 3.1 Idaho’s Solid Waste Management Rules and Facility Classifications ............................. 4 Below Regulatory Concern ...................................................................................................... 4 Tier I Composting Facility ......................................................................................................
  • Upcycling Wastes with Biogas Production: an Exergy and Economic Analysis

    Upcycling Wastes with Biogas Production: an Exergy and Economic Analysis

    Venice 2012, Fourth International Symposium on Energy from Biomass and Waste Upcycling wastes with biogas production: An exergy and economic analysis M. Martin*, A. Parsapour* *Environmental Technology and Management, Linköping University, 581 83, Linköping, Sweden SUMMARY: The massive consumption of finite resources creates high economical and environmental costs due to material dispersion and waste generation. In order to overcome this, by-products and wastes may be used, to avoid the use of virgin materials and benefit from the useful inherent energy of the material. By adding value to the material, economic and environmental performance can be improve, which is called upcycling. In this paper, an exergy and economic analysis of a biogas process is examined. In order to investigate if biogas production from wastes can upcycle materials, biogas production from a by- product from the brewing process is examined. From the analysis, the process is found to upcycle the by-product with an increase in exergy and economic benefit due to the generation of biomethane and biofertilizer. This analysis thus shows that by using by-products as such, the sustainability of the system may improve. 1. INTRODUCTION Given the concerns for sustainable development, the availability of energy from fossil sources and their environmental effects continues to produce problems for nations worldwide. With the current availability of alternative energy sources, our dependence on fossil sources can thus be questioned. Among these, bioenergy and biofuels have great potential for development and improvement. However, many experts have criticized the environmental performance and energy efficiency of biofuel production (Wibe, 2010; Akinci, 2008; Searchinger, 2008).
  • Urbanization As a Threat to Biodiversity: Trophic Theory, Economic Geography, and Implications for Conservation Land Acquisition

    Urbanization As a Threat to Biodiversity: Trophic Theory, Economic Geography, and Implications for Conservation Land Acquisition

    Proceedings of a Symposium at the Society for Conservation Biology 2004 Annual Meeting URBANIZATION AS A THREAT TO BIODIVERSITY: TROPHIC THEORY, ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY, AND IMPLICATIONS FOR CONSERVATION LAND ACQUISITION Brian Czech1 ABSTRACT—Habitat loss is often cited as the primary cause of species endangerment in the United States, followed by invasive species, pollution, and direct take. Urbanization, one type of habitat loss, is the leading cause of species endangerment in the contiguous United States and entails a relatively thorough transformation from the “economy of nature” to the human economy. Principles of economic geography indicate that urbanization will continue as a function of economic growth, while principles of conservation biology indicate that the most thorough competitive exclusion occurs in urban areas. These findings suggest the need for an ecologically macroeconomic approach to conservation land acquisition strategies. “Habitat loss” is often cited as the primary cause of species these types of habitat loss are considered separate causes of endangerment in the United States, followed by invasive species endangerment, invasive species are identified as the species, pollution, disease, and direct take. However, vari- leading cause of species endangerment in the United States, ous types of habitat loss are readily identified, such as log- including Hawaii and Puerto Rico (Czech et al. 2000). On ging, mining, agriculture, and urbanization (table 1). When the mainland United States, however, urbanization is the Table 1.— Causes of endangerment for the first 877 (of the current 1,262) species in the United States and Puerto Rico classified as threatened or endangered by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (from Czech et al.
  • Solid Waste Program Landfill Diversion Update

    Solid Waste Program Landfill Diversion Update

    Landfill Diversion Update County of Maui Department of Environmental Management October 14, 2013 October 14, 2013 County of Maui Landfill Diversion Update Solid Waste Program • $6.6 million of General Fund subsidy (26%) • -$100/ton landfill cost, $75/ton LF revenue • $40/mo refuse cost, $18/mo refuse revenue • Residential landfill tip fee is zero • Residential green waste tip fee is zero • Recyclable materials markets are overseas Disposal alternatives prevent self-sufficiency. October 14, 2013 2 County of Maui 6///4/ RECEIVED AT MEETING ON / 1 vi/fr&4"94.4.,.//e(a*e_WA.,,7t. /5,7 —/1 /c Xtc.-7-c,tof Landfill Diversion Update C Why divert? • Landfilling leads to fugitive methane, wasted resources, high costs, trash-filled saina • Reduce, reuse, recycle, and repurpose - Landfilling - "re-nothing" • Recycling — strive for the highest and best use of materials and preserve natural resources - Plastic4plastic, metal metal, paper paper, etc. Cost of diversion versus landfill impacts. October 14, 2013 3 County of Maui Landfill Diversion Update -,-, Maui County Solid Waste Flows County grants EKO Compost / dropboxes 155,578 tons 22% Residential 7 > 1.7% 17.3% County of Maui Landfills 53% Commercial --> 14.9% 9.0% Recyclables, Metal and 58,489 tons \ food waste, concrete metals, etc. Maui Demolition Const. & and 25% Demolition Construction 42.9% Countywide Diversion Rate Landfill (Private) Maui County total solid waste -375,000 tons/yr. October 14, 2013 4 County of Maui 2 Landfill Diversion Update 0 Maui County Landfill Diversion Food waste 1.4% Compost 0.2% C&D 9.0% Metals 7.5% Tires, etc.
  • Benefits of Composting Digestate

    Benefits of Composting Digestate

    Zero Waste Energy Turns Waste to Profit Composting of Anaerobically Digested Organics (Digestate) is the actively managed process of further decomposing the organic residuals from the Anaerobic Digestion process. A range of composting systems are designed to manage this decomposition process to yield a high quality compost product without creating negative public or environmental impacts. Benefits of Composting Digestate Characteristics Operational Savings & Benefits High moisture content Reduced water commodity charges, less water application time, lower labor cost Low odor generation Reduction in impacts to surrounding receptors Homogeneous Consistent compost pile structure Easy to blend with bulking agent Reduced loader and labor time High anaerobic microbial activity Reaches temperature quickly Reaches thermophilic temperatures swiftly Reduced resident time for more efficient use of space High weight to volume ratios Higher revenue to footprint ratios Produces higher nitrogen values in compost than Enhanced value to end user markets green waste compost Consistent residual ratios Predictable cost to manage residual The following are three composting methodologies used in North America. Historically, windrow, static pile and in-vessel composting have been viewed as the most simplistic and least costly approaches to processing municipal organics. Each has tradeoffs in terms of overall costs (e.g., a windrow system may have less upfront investment in equipment and structures. This can create higher operating and management costs to address environmental impact and public nuisance factor considerations). Therefore, each methodology must be evaluated considering the following factors: • Maximizing control of public health/nuisance factors • Optimizing throughput to yield positive project economics • Producing a high quality compost product From Waste, Nothing is Wasted.