Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-10-01 SWAB MeetingNEW HANOVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE ADVISORY BOARD OCTOBER 1, 2008 MEETING PAGE 1 ASSEMBLY The New Hanover County Solid Waste Advisory Board met on Wednesday, October 1, 2008, at 4.05 p.m. in the Lucie F Harrell Conference Room, Room 601, at the New Hanover County Government Center, 230 Government Center Dnve, Wilmington, North Carolina. Members present were• Martin J Michaelson, Robert W Mitchell, John Richard Newton, David Sims, Deputy County Attorney Kemp P Burpeau and Deputy Clerk to the Board of Commissioners Kymberleigh G Crowell. Chairman Claud "Buck" O'Shields, Jr was absent. Others present: Assistant County Manager David F Weaver and Environmental Management Director John Hubbard. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER Robert W Mrtchell called the meeting to order and welcomed everyone to the meeting of the New Hanover County Sohd Waste Advisory Board. Mr Mitchell presided over the meeting in Chairman O'Shields' absence. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr Mitchell asked the members to review the draft meeting minutes of September 17, 2008 for any needed corrections and/or changes. Heanng no comments, Mr Mitchell called for a motion to approve the meeting minutes of September 17, 2008 Motion. Mr Sims MOVED, SECONDED by Mr Mitchell, to approve the meeting minutes as presented. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED 4-0 DISCUSSION AND REVIEW OF DRAFT RECOMMENDATION LETTER AND DRAFT RESOLUTION Deputy Attorney Burpeau presented the updated draft recommendation letter and draft resolurion. After a brief discussion, the Board asked Deputy Attorney Burpeau to include a portion of Director Hubbard's handout The 2007 IWSA Directory of Waste-to-Energy Plants as background information for Commissioners. If resolution is adopted, background information will also be provided to the local legislators along with the resolution. Mr Michaelson indicated that he would be available to attend the October 16~` agenda review and the October 20~' Board of Commissioners meeting either with Chairman O'Sh~elds or as the Board's representative. Mr Mitchell called for a motion to approve the draft recommendarion letter and draft resolution for amending North Carolina Senate Bil] 3 as presented by Deputy County Attorney Burpeau and asked that he proceed with fmahzing the letter for Chairman O'Shields signature and forwarding to the Board of Commissioners. Motion. Mr Sims MOVED, SECONDED by Mr Newton, to approve the draft recommendatron letter and draft resolution for amending North Carolina Senate Bill 3 as presented and asked that Deputy County Attorney Burpeau proceed with fmahzing the letter for Chairman O'Shields signature and forwarding to the Board of Commissioners. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED 4-0 Discussion was held regarding how quickly the power company's response may be and potenrial rate increase expected if legislation amendment passed. Director Hubbard also reported his discussion with representative of Montenay Charleston Resource Recovery, Inc. in Charleston, South Carolina noting the following: • The Charleston operation is currently going through the same contract procedure as New Hanover County facility; • Operation is not recognrzed as green in South Carolina, and • The representative feels a shorter power purchasing contract, m five year increments, rather than a longer contract with a power company is better NEW HANOVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE ADVISORY BOARD OCTOBER 1, 2008 MEETING PAGE 2 PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF ASSUMPTION INFORMATION FOR WASTEC PROJECTED FIVE YEAR MAINTENANCE PLAN Director Hubbard reported that the spreadsheet is still being prepared. Once ready, he will provide the members with a soft copy that will contain core operating cost information. This format will allow members to work with the document and see how changes in a specific budget year affect the tipping fee. In response to questions, Director Hubbard clarified the numbers would reflect the effect on information for a specific year and confirmed the information will be ready by the October 15 2008 meeting, if not before. METHANE GAS COLLECTION UPDATE AND SUMMARY OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY LANDFILL, WASTEC, DATA/CONCLUSIONS Methane Gas Collection Update Du-ector Hubbard provided copies of the draft Request for Proposals for Development of a Landfill Gas to Energy and Greenhouse Gas Project at the New Hanover County Landfill and commented on meeting held with GE- Hitachi. In response to questions, he explained that GE-Hitachi would like to enter into a partnership for methane gas collection, meetings will be held with other companies in addition to GE-Hitachi, hence the scheduling of INVISTA meeting. Mr Mitchell provided copies of the September 24 2008 meeting summary held with GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy representatives, John Hubbard, Mr Michaelson and himself Mr Mitchell stated that in practical terms, GE- Hitachi and INVISTA are the only companies within reasonable mileage able to pipe the methane. Mr Michaelson reported that GE-Hitachi. • Was very forthcoming with information and presented portion of internal presentarion and some proprietary information, • Envisions aturn-key operation wherein, all expenses are on their end and will pay County for the methane; • They will provide all needed technology to pipe methane to their facility on this side of North Cape Fear River; • They will generate electrcity from the methane, and • Has a corporate commitment to reduce their COz footprnt. A copy of Mr Mitchell's September 24, 2008 meeting summary is included as Attachment 1 Summary of New Hanover County Landfill WASTEC Data/Conclusions Mr Mitchell reported that based on a discussion with Chauman O'Shields, he has started a working draft to summarize group's understandings to date. He feels this is an unportant step in moving forward in such areas as receiving alternate proposals. He will provide the Board a working draft to allow everyone the opportunity to add information. DISCUSSION OF INCINERATION OPERATIONS IN OTHER STATES Director Hubbard recognized the arrival of and introduced Lee Bazzle, Veolia Environmental Services Facility Manager for Montenay Charleston Resource Recovery, Inc. in Charleston, South Carolina and explained that Mr Bazzle asked if he could attend the meeting to listen to the discussion. He asked Mr Bazzle to provide information on operations and discuss overall waste-to-energy information. In response to questions, Mr Bazzle reported. • Charleston plant was built in late 1980s and is working through similar contract situation as New Hanover County facility; • AT&T is the facility owner and Montenay runs it; • Capacity is 700 tons per day; Making electncity instead of power company and selling power to Progress Energy; • Operation is not classified as green, • Federal guidelines do not mandate that municipal solid waste or power from municipal solid waste is a green source of power; and NEW HANOVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE ADVISORY BOARD OCTOBER 1, 2008 MEETING PAGE 3 • There are 15 states which recognize waste from municipal solid waste as green energy/renewable resource within the boundaries of respective states, South Carolina is on the fence, included loosely m regulation. Mr Bazzle discussed the variety of operating and power purchase contracts held by various facilities and stated the twenty year power purchase contract, which includes escalations, between Progress Energy and Charleston facility, will expire in 2009 His company is exploring renewing long term operating contracts while entering short term (five year) power purchase agreements. Company is taking this approach because it expects a significant positive shift over the next five years in the industry in regards to how power from municipal solid waste is viewed. He explained that for qualified facilities, due to type of fuel source burned, there are several options available in negotiating power purchase agreements and are not limited only to avoided cost trade agreements. Due to country's energy situation and as this is a maturing industry, company thinks that over the next five years there may be a lot of synergies created between federal and state mandates about including municipal solid waste as a source of renewable energy In response to questions, Mr Bazzle confirmed that Montenay manages ten plants in the U S. and approximately sixty-six m Europe. In response to questions, Mr Bazzle stated that it is difficult to ascertain costs per ton at Charleston facility versus New Hanover County facility, as it is a much diluted process. Facility is owned by AT&T, operated by Montenay, has an operating contract with Charleston County since they hold a portion of the bond debt, and then has the operating costs of facility itself. Operating entity does not have direct access to the County's and AT&T's financial records. Mr Sims reported on incinerator project in Mississippi. Project would be developed in Tunica area with two operations being discussed. Facilities would use German equipment, managed by a management team and would sell the electricity He was unable to ascertain costs but parties involved are seeking grant money to help offset the capital expense. Mr Bazzle commented that new construction costs are very expensive, prices range approximately $200,000 to $250,000 per ton per day for new construction costs. After a brief discussion about construction costs, Staff confirmed that New Hanover County facility is at 500 tons per day and estimate to rebuild is approximately $125 million. Duector Hubbard gave a beef overview of the Integrated Waste Services Association's The 2007 IWSA Directory of Waste-to-Energy Plants handout which includes a list of U S waste-to-energy plants, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers' white paper on waste-to-energy as a renewable energy source from municipal solid waste and explained the updated Cost to Landfill spreadsheet. TOPICS FOR UPCOMING MEETINGS General consensus of Board is for October I5, 2008 meeting to be focused on developing conclusions on information received to date; October 22, 2008 meeting will have an agenda item for presentations by outside companies. Brief discussion held on having presentations from two companies and the handling of the presentations, Board wants presentations to be more factual with question and answer period, further discussion on this topic will be held during October 15, 2008 meeting. In addition, Director Hubbard and Mr Mitchell reiterated they will have their respective information ready for discussion during October 15, 2008 meeting. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mr Mitchell adjourned the meeting at 4 50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, j, ~ ~y~as~v~-~ mberleigh ~i Crowell Deputy Clerk to the Board NEW HANOVER COUNTY SOLID WASTE ADVISORY BOARD OCTOBER 1, 2008 MEETING PAGE 4 ATTACHMENT 1 Meeting, September 24, 2008 GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy Representatives Re: Methane Gas Recovery Project Attendees. Marty Michaelson, Bob Mitchell, (both of the Solid Waste Advisory Board) and John Hubbard, Director, Department of Environmental Management, NHC, and GE Hitachi Representatives. Todd Best, Facilities Manager (for all of GE's facilities on the East Coast), Billy Hines (former point person for the project), Gary Gardner (Facilities Manager for Wilmington), and Drew Halbrook (engineer who replaces Billy Hines on the project.) The purpose of the meeting was to get a feel for GE Hitachi's interest m the project m general, understand the options they were thinking about, and, if appropriate, agree on the next steps m the process m general. GE Hitachi representatives indicated a keen interest m exploring the Methane Gas Recovery Project with NHC The General Electric Company as a whole is firmly committed (specific targets identified) to reducing CO2 emissions. As a large user of electncrty here, they could reduce their unphed CO2 emissions (from buying electricity from Progress) by generating electncrty from the methane gas emitted by the NHC landfill. In addition to these "credits", the electricity generated would reduce their costs of purchasing electricity, and support their initiative to procure "green" energy GE Hitachi is wilting to consider the full range of project structures, and General Electric Company has experience m sunilar projects. For this project to go forward and be successful, GE Hitachi needs to understand the County's priorities. They presented a PowerPomt presentation regarding potential approaches to the project and the modular nature of the generation source (which could provide risk reduction to all parties) Before any potential partner could develop a specific proposal they would need to better understand NHC's commitment of resources and plan for the gas supply contract. Additionally, GE Hitachi offered to set up a visit with a South Carolina facility m Horry County which employs the technology which might be used for NHC's project. John Hubbard indicated that an outside consultant is preparing a draft RFP for the project. It is apparent that there is a tremendous amount of work to develop a specific proposal and that further discussions need to take place to narrow alternatives the County would entertain. The SWAB members indicated that they do not represent NHC, but believed that two key priorities were no debt be incurred by the County and that a positive revenue stream be evident. It was noted that the CO2 "credits" will disappear when the methane emission levels exceed the lumts and thereby become a REQUIRED NHC investment, estimated to be m 2020 They acknowledged this and noted that the power generation was still a plus for them. It was recognized that to develop an RFP appropriate to the county's priorities, the Commissioners would need to provide input. GE Hitachi is willing to continue discussions to "brainstorm" potential project structures. GE Hitachi was clear that to move forward on this project all parties will need to conduct further research and investigation before any commitments can be made. The NHC representatives will be checking with Legal and Finance regarding questions as to how to precede investigations in compliance with statues and current practices. Bob Mitchell Solid Waste Advisory Member September 28, 2008