Wading Through the Waste: A look into the failure of American landfills and how plasma gasification can fix it

WADING THROUGH THE WASTE: A LOOK INTO THE FAILURE

Wading Through the Waste:
A look into the failure of American landfills and how plasma gasification can fix it

Joshua A. Valdez
ITT-Tech Jacksonville, Fl
GE117
Chambers
Abstract
America, a “throw away” society, is facing a tragic consequence of its lifestyle. Even with increased recycling efforts Americans are running out of space to put their trash. With stricter regulations and public policies, the number of landfills has significantly dropped; replaced by what are called “megafills.” Although safer, since the EPA’s introduction of strict regulations in 1988, environmental dangers still exist. That danger, amplified with the high operation costs of landfills, an alternative disposal method is needed. Plasma Gasification provides a cleaner and more efficient way of disposing waste while having the added benefit of producing energy.
Wading Through the Waste:
A look into the failure of American landfills and how plasma gasification can fix it
“Did you know that the average person produces three pounds of trash a day? I would really like to know where it all goes,” a woman asks her therapist in the 1989 movie Sex, Lies, and Videotapes. Since 1989 our trash production has increased to 4.6 pounds per individual, based on a 2007 EPA study. America, a “throw away” society, is facing a tragic consequence of its lifestyle. Even with increased recycling efforts, Americans are running out of space to put their trash. Traditional storage of waste in landfills has seen developments in technology to reduce the environmental impacts; however, the technology still poses threats to the environment. An alternative to traditional waste management is needed to meet growing populations. Plasma gasification provides a solution to the growing pile of waste by basically eliminating the need for waste storage, can provide a better economic alternative to shipping waste to landfills and plasma gasification produces cleaner byproducts than traditional waste management while providing a good source of clean and renewable energy.
During World War II, the United States government massively promoted recycling to help the war effort. When the war ended in 1945 recycling tapered off until the 1970’s when an energy crisis called for energy savings through recycling, since recycling metals is much less energy intensive than creating virgin material. In the early 1980’s, the clean air act closed many waste incinerators increasing the need for better waste management. During that same time, the United States Environmental Protection Agency was formed whom highly promoted recycling and coined the term “Reduce, Reuse, Recycle.” In 1985 only 10.1% of municipal solid waste (MSW) – which does not include hazardous, medical or construction waste – was recycled. In 2010, the amount of MSW recycled grew to 34.1%, a steep increase when compared to the numbers from 1960 thru 1985, a 3.7% increase. The increase in recycling efforts has helped to reduce the amount of MSW placed in landfills. However, 164.8 million tons of MSW was still produced in 2010 and ended up in landfills. In 1988 the EPA created the first regulations for landfills – subtitle D under the Resource, Conservation and Recovery Act – creating building codes for landfills to promote protection of ground water and air quality. These regulations, and the increase amount of MSW, lead a movement from 10,000 smaller local landfills to 3,500 newer megafill sites; some of the larger sites take in waste that is beyond the local and state boundaries.
The operation logistics and associated costs of subtitle D landfills, is not within the budget for most municipalities leading to privatization of waste management.
As a result of these new costs of running a landfill – installing and maintaining pit liners and monitoring wells, and providing additional training for landfill operators – have risen dramatically. In order to be economical, landfill operators must distribute these costs over a larger client base by taking in a larger volume of solid waste.
There are benefits for communities allowing fill sites to be located within their municipalities. In Queens County, Virginia county executives decided that the additional money they would receive from allowing operation of a fill site in their county would offset the potential environmental impacts and the increase of commercial transportation. In the Environmental Health Perspective journal Taylor, in the article Talking Trash: the economic and environmental issues of landfills, quoted Robert Rodgers a Queen County board chairman, “We built the new courthouse, a new administration building, and have been able to increase the budget for our schools. It’s been a big, big blessing.” Similarly in Charles City County, Virginia their tipping fees equaled nearly a third of the county’s total operating budget. Although there are budgetary benefits for having megafill operations, landfills do not solve the problems with waste management. One risk with older landfills is groundwater contamination; however, at the time of the enactment of subtitle D, the EPA’s risk showed an extremely low risk of contamination to groundwater for sites using proper liners. However, there are some experts that are skeptical about this claim. A former professor of groundwater quality studies at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, G Fred Lee, conducted research on the required liners. Lee believes that the EPA did not accurately model the risk of liner failure over time. Although subtitle D sites are less likely to leak as broadly as older unlined landfills, the new liners will eventually leak through individual punctures in the plastic liner, which are unlikely to be detected by monitoring wells according to Lee. Bioreactors, a technology developed to help to control the growing amount of MSW, uses microbiological processes to speed up decomposition. Bioreactors can break down MSW in 5-10 years allowing waste to settle faster and produce less leachate – a leeched solution that contains environmentally harmful substances – whereas unlined landfills can produce leachate for many decades. The use of bioreactors can offer added economic advantages to fill sites. “The faster decomposing process of bioreactors can increase a landfill’s capacity while it is active, because bioreactor landfills require shorter periods of stabilization (the cessation of gas production under normal operating conditions), the long-term costs of monitoring closed fills can be reduced by 15-20 years after it is closed.” There also can be a benefit of extracting energy from a bioreactor. In Kane County, Illinois bioreactor operators recover gas for a facility that generates enough energy to service nearly 10,000 households. However beneficial bioreactors seem, not everyone is convinced. Lee believes that bioreactors do not properly address the risk of groundwater contamination. “Most MSW is not shredded because it is expensive to do so… The un-shredded waste remains trapped in plastic garbage bags, beyond the reach of bioreactors, and thus will remain in the fill with potential to leak.” Landfills use natural processes to break down MSW; however, there is a quicker and less environmentally dangerous alternative. Plasma arc gasification is a type of waste management that uses electrical energy and high temperatures to turn MSW into usable byproducts. Plasma gasification does not burn the MSW instead a high voltage arc converts organic waste into gas and inorganic waste is turned into an inert vitrified glass similar to obsidian. Like any other incinerator there are byproducts but it’s the quantity and type of byproduct that allows plasma gasification to stand out. Instead of producing unusable toxic ash and gasses like a traditional incinerator, the plasma gasification unit produces clean byproducts.
Syngas (the gas byproduct), is a mixture of hydrogen and carbon monoxide. Many waste materials, including plastics, contain high amounts of these elements, and the conversion rate into syngas can exceed 99 percent. Before the syngas can be used for power, it must be cleansed of harmful materials such as hydrogen chloride. Once cleaned, the syngas can be burned like natural gas, with a portion going to power the plant and the remainder sold to utility companies.
The solid obsidian-like byproduct, after being cleaned of contaminants such as mercury and cadmium, can be processed into bricks, synthetic gravel, or materials that are usually mined. Although landfills produce methane, which can be used as a fuel source, the MSW still sits underground and can potentially damage ground water. Conversely, Plasma gasification instantly breaks down into its usable byproducts.
The problem with the current waste management services is where to put the trash. Since plasma gasification can breakdown 99 percent of MSW it can solve this problem. Since most waste disposal services tend to truck their loads to a landfill, the cost attributed to waste management is extremely high. Because most landfills are closing in highly populated regions, governments have to transport their trash to sites that are slowly reaching their limits. New York, in 2007, was spending $400 million a year transporting their trash to Virginia and Pennsylvania because their local landfills closed and traditional incinerators have been banned. A Startech plasma gasification unit costs about $250 million and can handle 2000 tons of unsorted trash a day, the equivalent of what a city of a million people can produce. In a city with an average tipping fee of $35, the plasma gasification unit could pay for itself in ten years; not including what the municipality can make from selling the excess electricity and byproducts.
This profitability has been one of the main attractors for plasma gasification. St. Lucie County, Florida, plans to erect a $425 million processing plant that will not only handle the daily load of trash but also be able to incinerate the waste that currently resides in a nearby landfill. However, there are antagonists to the technology that say the solid waste, containing heavy metals, can break down if exposed to water and leech those metals into the ground water if not properly treated. This does not dissuade St. Lucie County officials or the others saying that they can produce 160 megawatts of power a day and that their landfill will be gone in 20 years. The high costs of fossil fuels and the inherent benefits tend to outweigh the possible environmental concerns.
It is my belief that traditional waste management, the use of landfills, to handle our growing waste cannot sustain itself. There is only so much trash that can be stuffed into the ground before we ruin our environment. Our consumerism has crippled our environment. I recently read that between Thanksgiving and Christmas Americans tend to throw away an extra 5 million tons of trash of mainly wrapping paper and shopping bags. Isn’t it time that we turn our waste into a boon? Plasma gasification provides this opportunity by basically eliminating the need for waste storage, providing a better economic alternative to shipping waste to megafill sites, produces cleaner byproducts than traditional waste management and provides a good source of clean and renewable energy There have been several proposals for plasma gasification sites, but none have yet been built. This technology needs to be expedited to not only save our environment but also our economy.

References
Behar, M. (2007). The Prophet of Garbage. Popular Science , 56.
EPA. Municiple Solid Waste Generation, Recycling, and Disposal in the United States: Facts

and Figures for 2010. Washington, DC: United States Enviromental Protection Agency.

Hosansky, D. (2011). Plasma Arc Gasification Technology. In D. Mulvaney, & P. Robbins,

Green Technology: An A-to-Z Guide (pp. 325-327). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Reference.

Taylor, D. (1999). Talking Trash: the economic and enviromental issues of landfills.

Enviromental Health Perspectives , A404-A409.

References: Behar, M. (2007). The Prophet of Garbage. Popular Science , 56. EPA. Municiple Solid Waste Generation, Recycling, and Disposal in the United States: Facts and Figures for 2010. Washington, DC: United States Enviromental Protection Agency. Hosansky, D. (2011). Plasma Arc Gasification Technology. In D. Mulvaney, & P. Robbins, Green Technology: An A-to-Z Guide (pp. 325-327). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Reference. Taylor, D. (1999). Talking Trash: the economic and enviromental issues of landfills. Enviromental Health Perspectives , A404-A409.