United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Air and Radiation
6202J
EPA 430-B-96-030
June 1996
oEPA
Opportunities for Landfill
Gas Energy Recovery in
Washington
Draft Profiles of Candidate Landfills
and Current Projects
LANDFILL
OUTRtAjCH
-------
-------
Opportunities for
Landfill Gas Energy Recovery in
Washington
Draft Profiles of Candidate Landfills
and Current Projects
Prepared for:
Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Prepared by:
ICF Incorporated
Under Contract Number 68-D4-0088
June 1996
-------
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
PREFACE
ACRONYMS AND TERMS
1. Introduction 1-1
1.1 Purpose 1-1
1.2 Summary of State Landfill Profiles 1-2
1.3 Background Information 1-2
1.3.1 Landfill Gas Generation 1-2
1.3.2 Landfill Gas Collection 1-3
1.3.3 Landfill Gas Utilization 1-3
1.4 Benefits 1-6
1.4.1 General Benefits 1-6
1.4.2 Benefits to Specific Groups 1-7
1.5 Opportunities for Project Participants 1-10
1.6 References 1-11
2. Instructions for Evaluating Landfill Profiles 2-1
2.1 Landfill Location and Status 2-1
2.2 Waste Collection Information 2-2
2.3 Gas Collection and Control Data 2-5
2.4 Gas Utilization Data 2-6
2.5 Site Potential 2-7
2.6 Environmental Benefits of Utilization 2-13
2.7 Contact Information 2-17
2.8 Comment Field 2-17
2.9 References 2-18
3. Data Collection Methods and Evaluation Processes 3-1
3.1 Methodology Used to Collect Data from State and Local Agencies 3-1
3.2 National Databases Used to Complete Profiles 3-1
3.3 Data Interpretation Issues 3-5
3.4 Landfill Candidacy Screening Process 3-5
3.5 References 3-8
Working Draft - June 1996
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Section Page
4. Profiles of Candidate Landfills 4-1
5. Profiles of Current Projects 5-1
6. Index of Landfill Profiles 6-1
Working Draft -- June 1996
-------
PREFACE
EPA Landfill Methane Outreach Program
The EPA Landfill Methane Outreach Program, a key component of President Clinton's
Climate Change Action Plan, encourages the use of landfill gas (LFG) as an energy resource.
EPA assists utilities, municipal and private landfill owners and operators, tribes, and state
agencies in reducing methane emissions from landfills through the development of profitable
landfill energy recovery projects. Methane captured from landfills can be transformed into a
cost-effective fuel source for electricity, heat, boiler and vehicular fuel, or sale to a pipeline. The
goals of the Program are to promote cost-effective projects at U.S. landfills and remove barriers
to their development. There are currently about 130 landfill methane recovery projects in the
U.S., although EPA estimates that up to 750 landfills could install economically viable landfill
energy projects by the year 2000.
The Landfill Methane Outreach Program includes three important components: the
State Ally, Utility Ally, and Industry Ally programs. EPA establishes separate alliances with
state agencies, utilities (including investor-owned, municipal and other public power utilities and
cooperatives), and members of the landfill gas development community (including developers,
engineers, equipment vendors, and others) through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU).
By signing the MOU, each Ally acknowledges a shared commitment to the promotion of landfill
gas-to-energy recovery at solid waste landfills, recognizes that the widespread use of landfill gas
will reduce emissions of methane and other emissions, and commits to certain activities to
enhance development of this resource. In return, EPA agrees to provide landfill gas-to-energy
project assistance and public recognition of the Allies' participation in the program.
Working Draft -- June 1996
-------
ACRONYMS AND TERMS
Acronym
Btu
cf
CH4
C02
CRER
DOE
EPA
GW
GWh/yr
GWP
hr
1C
IRS
kW
kWh
LFG
LMOP
m3
mmBtu
mmcf/d
mmcf/yr
MOU
MSW
MW
NA
NARUC
NOx
PUC
REPI
RFP
SO2
VOCs
WIP
yd3
yr
Term
british thermal unit
cubic feet
methane
carbon dioxide
Conservation and Renewable Energy Reserve
U.S. Department of Energy
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
gigawatt (1 billion watts)
gigawatt hours/year
Global Warming Potential
hour
internal combustion
Internal Revenue Service
kilowatt (1,000 watts)
kilowatt hour
landfill gas
Landfill Methane Outreach Program
cubic meters
million Btu
million cubic feet per day
million cubic feet per year
Memorandum of Understanding
municipal solid waste
megawatt (1 million watts)
not available
National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners
nitrogen oxides
Public Utility Commission
Renewable Energy Production Incentive
request for proposals
sulfur dioxide
volatile organic compounds
waste-in-place
cubic yards
year
Working Draft -- June 1996
-------
o
Q
I
O
-------
-------
1. Introduction
1.1 Purpose
In the United States there are over 130 fully operational landfill gas energy recovery
projects. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that up to 750 economic
landfill gas energy recovery projects could be developed; these potential projects are
constrained by informational, regulatory, and other barriers. Through the Landfill Methane
Outreach Program (LMOP), EPA is working to remove these barriers and encourage the
environmentally and economically beneficial development of landfill gas-to-energy projects. The
LMOP encourages the economic use of landfill gas generated by waste deposited in landfills
over the last few decades and from waste that continues to be deposited after implementation of
source reduction and reuse-recycling practices.1 A key component of the LMOP is to provide
landfill owners and operators, developers of landfill gas-to-energy projects, utilities, and other
potential project participants with information on landfills that may offer attractive energy
development opportunities. EPA has developed a series of documents that identify and profile
landfills in each of the following 31 states: Alabama, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida,
Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts,
Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio,
Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, and
Wisconsin.
This document in the first step in identifying and profiling landfills in Washington that are
candidates for landfill gas-to-energy recovery projects. Candidate landfills have been chosen
based on specific criteria (see Chapter 3). This document also contains profiles of current
landfill gas recovery and utilization projects, as well as a list of landfills for which the data
gathering efforts are still in progress ("profiles in progress"). Existing landfill projects have been
included to illustrate the wide range of successful project development options, and also
because they may have considerable potential for expansion. Landfills for which EPA has
incomplete information have been included because many of these landfills are likely to be
candidates for the development of energy recovery projects; ongoing research efforts conducted
by EPA in cooperation with relevant state agencies will clarify the status of these landfills.
This document is a first step in determining the potential for developing landfill gas
recovery projects and can also serve to address informational barriers by providing details about
specific candidate landfills to organizations that may be interested in the development of such
projects. It does not, however, include a detailed technical and economic analysis of each site,
a critical step in determining whether the development of a landfill gas-to-energy recovery
project at a particular site is feasible.
Profiles are available from EPA's Landfill Methane Outreach Program, Atmospheric
Pollution Prevention Division, Office of Air and Radiation. For information call 1-888-STAR-YES
(782-7937).
1 This is consistent with the principles of EPA's integrated waste management hierarchy, which places
landfilling of waste after source reduction and reuse/recycling.
Introduction Working Draft -- June 1996 Page 1-1
-------
1.2 Summary of State Landfill Profiles
Chapter 4 of this report contains profiles of landfills that are potential candidates for
energy recovery projects and Chapter 5 contains profiles of landfills with projects in place. The
preliminary results of the evaluation of landfills in Washington are summarized below.
In Washington, EPA has collected information on 5 landfills that currently have energy
recovery projects in place or in planning. EPA estimates that another 10 landfills have the
potential to support economically viable gas-to-energy recovery projects. Chapter 6 of this
report contains an index of landfills profiled, a list of profiles in progress and a list of additional
landfills that might be candidates for energy recovery projects in the future (dependent on their
continued operation). The landfills in this last group were selected based on their annual
acceptance rate and the amount of waste landfilled (i.e., landfills that have between 500,000 and
999,999 tons of waste landfilled and landfills with less than 500,000 tons of waste landfilled with
an annual acceptance rate greater than 75,000 tons).
As discussed in Chapter 3 of this report, the data used to produce the landfill profiles
were assembled from state and local sources as well as various national solid waste
publications. Thus, the accuracy of information contained in this report depends upon the
accuracy of information contained in these sources and publications. Some landfills may have
been missed during data collection efforts; their omission from this report does not automatically
exclude them as potential candidates for landfill gas recovery and utilization projects. EPA plans
to update these profiles periodically. Please report any new information or corrections to the
LMOP hotline at 1-888-STAR-YES (782-7937).
1.3 Background Information
This section provides general background information on landfill gas generation,
collection, and utilization. For more detailed information, a number of additional sources are
available, including Turning a Liability into an Asset: A Landfill Gas-to-Energy Handbook for
Landfill Owners and Operators (U.S. EPA, 1994) and Opportunities to Reduce Anthropogenic
Methane Emissions in the United States: Report to Congress (EPA 430-R-93-012).
1.3.1 Landfill Gas Generation
Landfill gas is produced through the natural process of anaerobic (i.e., without oxygen)
decomposition of organic wastes. Typically, landfill gas is composed of about 50 percent
methane, 45 percent carbon dioxide, and 5 percent of other gases including hydrogen sulfides
and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Since methane is the primary constituent of natural
gas, landfill gas can be used as a fuel. Characteristics of the landfill gas, such as quantity of
methane per unit of landfill gas and amount of landfill gas generated per unit of waste, are a
function of the quantity arid type of waste-in-place, climate, and several other site-specific
factors.
Landfill gas generation is thought to begin from six months to two years after waste is
placed in a landfill. Gas generation rates vary depending on moisture content and other site-
specific factors. Generally, the generation rate will increase until landfill (or cell) closure, when
Page 1-2 Working Draft -- June 1996 Introduction
-------
it will decline relatively rapidly. However, the gas profile for an individual landfill may vary
considerably from this trajectory; for example, landfill gas generation may continue at a
significantly higher rate than expected for many years after landfill closure depending on site
conditions.
A first order decay model is often used to predict landfill gas generation, following the
profile described above. However, a simpler model was used for the profiles contained in this
report. This model assumes a constant rate of landfill gas generation, unlike the first order
decay model which accounts for changing gas generation over the life of the landfill. Therefore,
it may predict a lower or higher gas generation rate than the first order decay model (depending
on the age of the landfill). The model used is explained in greater detail in Chapter 2 of this
report.
1.3.2 Landfill Gas Collection
Landfill gas can be collected using a relatively simple system of vertical wells drilled into
the landfill at selected points. Well spacing depends on site-specific variables, but typically
ranges from 150 to 300 feet. Horizontal trenches can also be used in place of, or in addition to,
vertical wells. Horizontal trenches tend to be less durable than vertical wells because refuse
added to the top of the trenches can weaken the pipes and cause breakage. All of the wells (or
trenches) are connected by horizontal piping to a central point where a motor/blower provides a
vacuum to remove the gas from the landfill. In an effectively designed and constructed system,
methane recovery efficiencies in excess of 85 percent can be achieved (Maxwell, 1990).
Collection systems are usually operated as part of an overall landfill gas control system.
In many cases, a collection system is necessary because of the potential safety hazard posed
by the explosive potential of landfill gas, as well as to suppress landfill gas odors. Accidents
involving landfill gas have resulted in explosions and landfill fires that have caused death, injury,
and extensive property damage.
1.3.3 Landfill Gas Utilization
Once collected, landfill gas can be used as an energy source for many different
applications, including electricity generation, space heating and cooling, industrial processes,
and vehicle fuels. In addition, landfill gas can simply be flared when a cost-effective utilization
option cannot be developed. Exhibit 1-1 illustrates various landfill gas-to-energy recovery
systems. In each of these options, the methane contained in the recovered landfill gas is
consumed, either through combustion (i.e., use as a fuel, including upgrading to pipeline quality
gas and flaring) or conversion to a non-greenhouse gas (i.e., production of industrial chemicals),
thereby reducing emissions of methane to the atmosphere. Moreover, using landfill gas to
generate electricity can displace other fossil fuel use, thereby further reducing carbon dioxide
emissions, as well as reduce emissions of local air pollutants.
As mentioned previously, there are over 130 fully operational landfill gas recovery and
utilization projects in the U.S., with over 90 additional projects under development (GAA, 1994).
Landfill gas-to-energy projects have established a track record that demonstrates the reliability
and economic viability of landfill gas recovery and utilization technology. Electric power
generation is the most common gas utilization method for landfill gas recovery projects. In fact,
more than 70 percent of the planned or operational landfill energy projects generate electricity,
while about 24 percent sell medium-Btu gas to a direct user, and 4 percent upgrade
Introduction Working Draft -- June 1996 Page 1-3
-------
Exhibit 1-1
SCHEMATIC OF VARIOUS LANDFILL
GAS-TO-ENERGY RECOVERY SYSTEMS
GASENGINE&
ALTERNATOR
DISTRICT
BOILER
their gas to pipeline quality (Thomeloe, 1995). The electricity generating capacity of landfill gas
projects typically ranges between 0.5 and 4 megawatts (MW), with the largest operational facility
generating almost 50 MW. Total U.S. operational capacity fired by landfill gas is roughly 400
MW, with an additional 245 MW of capacity planned or under construction.
The following is a brief summary of landfill methane utilization options. Fror more
information on these technologies and their costs, see EPA's Turning a Liability into an Asset: A
Landfill Gas-to-Energy Handbook for Owners and Operators (U.S. EPA, 1994).
Page 1 -4
Working Draft -- June 1996
Introduction
-------
Electricity Generation
For landfills that generate significant amounts of landfill gas (i.e., more than 1.3 million
cubic feet per day), electric power generation can be a cost-effective method of utilization.
Several proven technologies can be used to generate electricity from landfill gas.
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (1C). These engines have proven to
be cost-effective in many applications, and, in the case of small landfills, may be
the only available, proven generating option. 1C engines are currently in use at
about 73 sites (Thorneloe, 1995), with typical engine sizes ranging from 250
kilowatts (kW) to 1 MW in size (more than one engine can be installed at a single
site, and a typical project's total generating capacity is 3 to 4 MW). The three
primary manufacturers of these engines have modified their designs and
operating procedures to make the engines "landfill-gas-adapted."
Gas Turbines. Gas turbines have higher capital costs than 1C engines per
kilowatt of installed capacity, but at larger landfills they have a lower cost of
electricity (i.e., 0/kWh). Turbines require a reliable gas flow of approximately 2
million cubic feet per day (mmcf/d) in order to be economically feasible, which
corresponds to a generating capacity of at least 3 to 4 MW. Although they
require higher gas flows, gas turbines have a number of advantages over 1C
engines. Because of the large quantities of excess air, NOX emissions are
considerably lower than from 1C engines. In addition, gas turbines have
continuous combustion which better adjusts to fluctuations in heat values of the
landfill gas fuel. Furthermore, the alloys used in turbines tend to be more
resistant to corrosion from impurities within the gas supply. There are about 26
landfill gas projects in the U.S. using gas turbines (Thorneloe, 1995).
Rankine Cycle (Steam) Turbines. In rare cases where gas flow rates are
extremely high, a rankine cycle turbine may be used. If the scale of the operation
will support a rankine cycle turbine, high electrical efficiencies can be achieved
with lower emissions of air pollutants and lower costs per kWh of output. Steam
turbines also produce large amounts of high temperature water that can be easily
utilized for thermal co-generation activities. The smallest facilities usually
generate at least 8 to 9 MW of power. Currently, rankine cycle turbines are only
used at a handful of landfills in the U.S., the largest being a 47 MW facility at
Puente Hills, California.
Gas Delivery Systems
Gas processing and delivery systems process landfill gas so it can be sold as a gaseous
fuel. The fuel can be delivered directly to a customer via dedicated pipes or to the natural gas
pipeline network. The two main options include:
Sale as a Medium-Btu Fuel. Landfill gas can be used for a variety of industrial
and commercial applications, such as firing boilers and space heating, and can
also be co-fired with other fuels. Medium-Btu gas can be economically
transported via dedicated pipelines to one or more industrial facilities. An ideal
medium-Btu gas customer is located within 5 miles of the landfill and has
constant demand for gas.
Introduction Working Draft - June 1996 Page 1-5
-------
Sale as a High-Btu Fuel. Landfill gas can be upgraded to a high-Btu fuel and sold
directly to natural gas companies. The cost to upgrade the gas to pipeline quality
is generally very high, as the process involves the removal of water, carbon
dioxide (CO2), hydrogen sulfide (H2S), hydrocarbons, and on some occasions,
nitrogen. In addition, sale as a high-Btu fuel to a pipeline usually requires that a
natural gas pipeline be located within close proximity of the site.
Emerging Utilization Options
Other less conventional utilization options for landfill gas are also available or may soon
become available. Some of these options, such as fuel cells, are currently in the demonstration
phase to determine their operational and economic viability. Other options, such as the use of
landfill gas to produce alternative vehicle fuels are underway at several landfills. Recently, a
small number of landfills have used recovered gas to incinerate soil contaminated with
hazardous waste (GAA, 1994).
1.4 Benefits
This section discusses the many benefits of recovering energy from landfill gas. Section
1.4.1 discusses general benefits of landfill gas-to-energy recovery projects and Section 1.4.2
discusses benefits realized by specific groups.
1.4.1 General Benefits
Recovery of energy from landfill gas conveys many important global and local
environmental benefits as well as energy and economic benefits. For example, landfill gas-to-
energy improves the global environment by reducing methane emissions, and provides local
environmental benefits by reducing VOC emissions, as well as displacing other pollutants
associated with fossil fuel use. In addition, it provides a secure, low-cost energy supply (an
energy supply that is currently wasted) that can reduce dependence on fossil fuels. These
benefits are discussed in more detail below.
Environmental Benefits
Landfill gas projects provide both direct and indirect environmental benefits. Direct
environmental benefits from utilizing landfill gas include: reducing VOC emissions; reducing risk
of global warming; and reducing pungent decaying waste odor. Landfill gas contains VOCs,
which contribute substantially to ground-level ozone and include air toxics. Without control
systems, these compounds are released to the atmosphere as waste decomposes. When
landfill gas is collected and burned through flaring or in an energy recovery system, VOCs are
destroyed. However, since energy recovery projects try to optimize gas recovery for the
economic benefit, they minimize emissions to the atmosphere relative to flaring. Combusting
landfill gas also destroys methane, which is a principle greenhouse gas. Landfill gas is the
single largest source of methane emissions in the U.S., contributing almost 40 percent of annual
methane emissions. Because of methane's potency and its rapid cycling through the
atmosphere, reducing methane emissions is crucial in slowing global warming; a ton of methane
emitted into the atmosphere is 24.5 times more damaging than a ton of carbon dioxide, over a
100 year time frame (IPCC, 1994). Furthermore, landfill gas-to-energy recovery projects also
substantially reduce the odor of landfills.
Page 1-6 Working Draft -- June 1996 Introduction
-------
The primary indirect environmental benefit of landfill gas-to-energy recovery projects is
the displacement of fossil fuels. Generating electricity from oil and coal leads to the emission of
several pollutants, including sulfur dioxide (SO2), which is a major contributor to acid rain. By
generating electricity from landfill gas, instead of fossil fuels, these emissions are avoided.
Moreover, displacing fossil fuels substantially reduces the production of ash and scrubber
sludge.
Energy Benefits
There are several energy benefits associated with utilizing landfill gas. First, because
decomposing organic waste continuously produces landfill gas, landfill gas-to-energy recovery
projects are a nearly constant source of energy. For example, a landfill that has two million tons
of landfilled municipal solid waste (MSW) produces on average 1.8 mmcf/day of landfill gas and
can generate 2.5 MW of electricity. Second, landfill gas has a variety of applications such as
electricity generation and direct use. Third, landfill energy projects add to a community's and
utility's fuel diversity, as well as provide valuable experience in renewable energy. Finally,
landfill projects can provide important distributive generation benefits typical of demand-side
management options; since electricity generated from landfill gas is typically directed to local
users, transmission losses from the point of generation to the point of consumption are
negligible.
The value of landfill gas as an energy source has been recognized by the National
Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC). In March of 1994, NARUC adopted
a resolution "urging regulators to focus their regulatory attention on the landfill gas resources in
their states to determine the role that energy from landfill gas can play as an energy resource for
utilities and their customers."
Economic Benefits
Landfill gas provides a low-cost source of renewable energy. In addition, more
widespread use of landfill gas as an energy source will create jobs related to the design,
construction, and operation and maintenance of these systems and lead to advancements in
U.S. environmental technology.
1.4.2 Benefits to Specific Groups
Traditionally, landfill gas has been viewed as a safety hazard and a general nuisance.
However, there is now an increasing awareness on the part of landfill owners and operators,
project developers, utilities, state and local governments, and others, of the environmental,
energy, and economic benefits that can result from recovering the energy value of this gas.
Some of the principle benefits for different groups and their potential roles in the development
process are highlighted below.
Utilities
There are many ways in which electric utilities can benefit from the development of
landfill gas-to-energy. Examples include:
Stronger Relations With Key Customer Groups: Landfill gas-to-energy recovery
projects enable utilities to enhance long-term relationships with a variety of
customer groups. A utility can add significant value to their service
Introduction Working Draft--June 1996 Page 1-7
-------
offerings through direct or indirect involvement in landfill gas-to-energy
development. Some innovative approaches a utility may wish to consider include
participation in projects that directly supply landfill gas as a medium-Btu fuel to
industrial or commercial end-users, offering project development assistance to a
municipality, or initiating a residential or commercially-oriented green marketing
program.
Diversified Resource Base: Landfill gas-to-energy projects offer utilities the
opportunity to add dispersed base-load capacity to their current system and to
diversify their fuel mix. They also offer a competitive source of renewable energy
to utilities.
Contribution to Environmental Protection: By participating in landfill gas-to-
energy projects, utilities help prevent local and global air pollution. The EPA
Landfill Methane Outreach Program recognizes utilities that work with EPA to
identify, explore, and act on the best project opportunities. These utilities gain
recognition from EPA as well as greenhouse gas reductions that satisfy Climate
Challenge commitments.
Landfill Owners and Operators
Benefits of participating in landfill gas-to-energy recovery projects for landfill owners and
operators include:
Revenue Creation/Reduction of Regulatory Costs: Landfill gas projects may be a
significant source of revenue generation for landfill owners/operators, depending
on the size of the landfill, energy costs, and other site specific factors. Even
where projects do not generate profits, they may offset the cost of regulatory
compliance. EPA's New Source Performance Standards and Emission
Guidelines were promulgated on April 12, 1996 and require many landfill owners
and operators to collect and combust their landfill gas. States are already
requiring collection and flaring of landfill gas. Utilizing the collected landfill gas as
an energy resource, instead of flaring it, will offer many owners and operators an
opportunity to recover some of the regulatory costs, and may generate profit.
Reduction of Risk: Even in low concentrations, methane is explosive and can
result in fires and explosions that can imperil both people and property.
Regulations promulgated under Subtitle D of the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act require owners and operators of landfills to monitor their facilities
for methane levels to reduce the risk of landfill gas explosions. If methane
concentrations exceed specified limits, owners and operators are required to take
necessary steps to ensure protection of human health. Landfill gas-to-energy
recovery projects offer the opportunity to virtually eliminate the risk of injury and
property damage by collecting and combusting landfill gas before it can
accumulate to dangerous concentration levels within the landfill.
Financial Incentives: Developers of landfill gas-to-energy recovery projects may
qualify for a number of financial incentives. The Renewable Energy Production
Incentive (REPI), mandated under the Energy Policy Act of 1992, provides a cash
subsidy of up to $0.015 per kWh to publicly owned facilities that generate
Page 1-8 Working Draft -- June 1996 Introduction
-------
electricity from renewable energy sources, such as landfills, for the period
October 1993 through September 2002. Also, developers of landfill gas-to-
energy projects who sell to an unrelated third party may qualify for a tax credit
under Section 29 of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) tax code. The credit is
worth $3.00 per barrel of oil-equivalent (on a mmBtu basis) and is adjusted
annually for inflation. Currently, the credit is worth $0.979 per mmBtu, about
$0.012/kWh for a typical landfill gas electricity project.
Industrial and Other End-Users
Industrial and other potential landfill gas end-users can benefit from landfill gas-to-energy
recovery projects. Facilities with constant energy needs that are located near landfills can lower
their fuel costs, improve environmental quality, and enhance their public image by using landfill
gas in place of traditional fuels.
Lower Fuel Costs: For industrial end-users, a nearby landfill that is collecting its
landfill gas can be an inexpensive source of medium Btu fuel or steam.
Environmental Benefits: By using landfill gas, industrial end-users contribute to
environmental protection by displacing local air emissions associated with fossil
fuel use and reducing emissions of methane.
Public Image Enhancement: Through participation in the development of landfill
energy recovery projects, industrial end-users can enhance their public image by
mitigating the threat of global warming and contributing to improvements in the
local economy and environment.
Municipalities/Communities
Municipalities and local communities can also benefit from landfill gas-to-energy recovery
projects. Benefits include:
Increased Tax Base: Municipalities or communities that have a landfill gas
project in their area increase their tax base, as well as create new job
opportunities.
Attract New Industries: A local energy source may attract new industry to the
area. For example, industrial producers that could use large quantities of
medium Btu gas might want to locate a plant near the landfill since the landfill
could provide a cheap source of energy.
Reduction of Air Pollution Emissions and Odors: VOCs emitted from landfill
waste decomposition can endanger human health, particularly for those who work
on or live near landfills without a collection system. Landfill gas recovery projects
offer an opportunity to greatly reduce this health risk by collecting and destroying
these harmful compounds before they escape into the atmosphere. In addition,
collection and combustion of landfill gas reduces noxious odors.
Introduction Working Draft - June 1996 Page 1-9
-------
1.5 Opportunities for Project Participants
As mentioned above, there are numerous benefits from participating in a landfill gas-to-
energy project. For each potential project participant, a brief discussion of how to assess
opportunities is provided below.
Utilities
Utilities should assess how, in light of rapid restructuring in the energy industry,
participating in landfill gas projects can enhance critical business objectives. These business
objectives include building stronger relationships with key customer groups, broadening utility's
resource base, and realizing substantial environmental benefits. This document can help
utilities determine the best opportunities for using landfill gas to help achieve these company
objectives. Innovative approaches to consider include: assistance to municipalities that must
install gas collection systems to comply with regulations or that have candidate landfills ready for
project development; participation in projects that directly provide landfill gas as a medium-Btu
fuel to targeted industrial or commercial end-users; and development of new marketing
programs, such as green pricing, with landfill gas as part of the energy mix to meet customer
demands for cleaner, renewable energy sources. These "value-added" services are effective
mechanisms to build stronger, more responsive relationships with key customer groups, while
acquiring a competitive renewable resource. Moreover, utilities should consider how landfill gas-
to-energy furthers their environmental objectives. By participating in landfill gas-to-energy
projects, utilities help improve local and global air quality; receive national recognition from the
EPA; and fulfill commitments under the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Climate Challenge
Program.
Landfill Owners and Operators
Landfill owners and operators can assess conditions at their sites to determine whether
their landfill can support an economically attractive project. If it appears that the landfill has
potential for energy recovery, owners and operators can take active roles in determining what
project configuration is right for the landfill, identifying potential energy customers, and seeking
potential development partners. As necessary during each stage of this process, landfill owners
and operators can work with project development experts for guidance in designing a successful
and profitable project.
Industrial End-Users
Potential industrial commercial, or other end-users should assess the potential for
reducing energy expenses by using landfill gas in their facilities. These industrial customers can
assess project potential by examining conditions at the local landfill and evaluating their current
and future energy requirements. If it appears that there is a match between the end-user and
the landfill, they can work as partners in project development, potentially involving additional
project developers as well,
Page 1-10 Working Draft -- June 1996 Introduction
-------
1.6 References
GAA 1994. 1994-5 Methane Recovery from Landfill Yearbook, Governmental Advisory
Associates.
IPCC 1994. The 1994 Report of the Scientific Assessment Working Group of IPCC,
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Landfill Control Technologies, 1994. "Landfill Gas System Engineering Design Seminar."
Maxwell 1990. Will Gas-to-Energy Work at Your Landfill? Solid Waste & Power.
Thorneloe 1992. Landfill Gas Recovery/Utilization - Options and Economics. Presented at the
Sixteenth Annual Conference by the Institute of Gas Technology on Energy from
Biomass and Wastes, Orlando, Florida, March 15, 1992.
Thorneloe and Pacey, 1994a. Database of North American Landfill Gas-to-Energy Projects.
Presented at the 17th Annual International Landfill Gas Symposium by the Solid Waste
Association of North America, Long Beach, California, March 22-24, 1994. Published in
Conference Proceedings.
Thorneloe and Pacey, 1994b. Landfill Gas Utilization - Technical and Non-Technical
Considerations. Presented at the 17th Annual International Landfill Gas Symposium by
the Solid Waste Association of North America, Long Beach, California, March 22-24,
1994. Published in Conference Proceedings.
Thorneloe and Pacey, 1995. Database of North American Landfill Gas-to-Energy Projects.
Presented at the 18th Annual International Landfill Gas Symposium by the Solid Waste
Association of North America, New Orleans, Louisiana, March 27-30, 1995. Published in
Conference Proceedings.
U.S. EPA 1993. Opportunities to Reduce Anthropogenic Methane Emissions in the United
States: Report to Congress, United States Environmental Protection Agency. EPA 430-
R-93-012.
U.S. EPA 1994. Turning a Liability into an Asset: A Landfill Gas-to-Energy Handbook for
Landfill Owners and Operators, United States Environmental Protection Agency.
Introduction Working Draft -- June 1996 Page 1-11
-------
-------
C
^
C
tf
-------
-------
2. Instructions for Evaluating Landfill Profiles
This chapter provides instructions for interpreting the profiles contained in Chapters 4
and 5. A landfill profile has been prepared for each of the current projects (which include both
operational and planned landfill gas-to-energy projects) and candidate landfills (landfills
potentially generating enough landfill gas to make recovery economical). The information in
each profile is grouped into eight sections:
Landfill Location and Status;
Waste Collection Information;
Gas Collection and Control Data;
• Gas Utilization Data;
Site Potential;
• Environmental Benefits of Utilization;
• Contact Information; and
Comments Relating to Landfill Gas Recovery Projects.
The current projects profile sheet has all of the above sections, while the candidate landfill profile
omits the gas utilization data section. In addition, the contact information for the candidate
landfill does not include information on an energy recovery system owner or operator, as these
fields do not apply.
Information contained in the profiles has been compiled from a number of sources, the
most important of which was state and local sources, such as permits and annual acceptance
reports, supplemented by: the 1994-5 Methane Recovery from Landfill Yearbook (GAA, 1994);
Implementation Guide for Landfill Gas Recovery Projects in the Northeast: Draft Final Report
(SCS, 1994); Survey of Landfill Gas Generation Potential: 2 MW Molten Carbonate Fuel Cell
(EPRI, 1992); and Landfill Gas-to-Energy: 1994-1995 Activity Report (SWT, 1994).
A detailed description of each entry on the landfill profile sheet is presented below.
When no information was available for a value, the data field is reported as not available (N.A.).
The accuracy of the data depends on the quality of the information contained in the documents
reviewed (further information on data collection activities and data interpretations is provided in
Chapter 3).
Data marked with a single asterisk (*) indicates that default values were used. For
example, if the number of days per week waste is accepted at a landfill is not known, a default
value of 5.5 days is used and an asterisk appears next to the value. It should also be noted that
numbers within a profile may not add correctly due to rounding. The remainder of this section is
organized by sub-section of a landfill profile.
2.1 Landfill Location and Status
The first section of each profile provides a brief overview of the landfill site, including its
physical location, operating status, and the status of gas collection and energy recovery
activities. This overview section also lists any alternate names for the landfill. Specific items
included are:
Instructions for Evaluating Working Draft -- June 1996 Page 2-1
Landfill Profiles
-------
Location: The physical location of the site, including city, county, and state. More
information is included in the Contact Information section of the profile, such as
owner, operator, contact names, and telephone numbers.
Status: The current operational status of the landfill. Standard entries are Open
(active) or Closed (inactive). Landfills that were reported as temporarily closed in
state documents were considered closed.
Year Opened: The year that waste was first accepted at the landfill. In cases in
which the open year was not available, the year the first (or oldest) permit was
issued was assumed to be the open year.
Year Closed: The year the landfill stopped accepting waste (closed landfills), or
is scheduled to stop accepting waste (open landfills). For open landfills, if a
reported year of closing is not available, the year is estimated by dividing the
remaining landfill capacity by the annual waste acceptance rate, and adding the
result to the current year. (Remaining capacity is estimated as the difference
between the design capacity and the current waste-in-place.)
Gas Collection: The status of gas collection at the landfill; standard responses
include operational, planned, shutdown, none, or N.A. (Not Available). Additional
detail on gas collection activities is provided in the Gas Collection and Control
Data section of the profile.
Gas Utilization: The status of gas utilization at the landfill; standard responses
include operational, planned, shutdown, none, or N.A. (Not Available). Gas
utilization is synonymous with energy recovery; flaring and venting are not
considered utilization in the context of the landfill profiles. Additional detail on gas
utilization activities is provided in the Gas Utilization Data section of the profile.
Primary Contact: The name and telephone number of the primary contact for the
landfill. More detailed contact information is provided in the Contact Information
section at the end of the profile.
Alternative Name(s): Any identified name for the landfill that is significantly
different from the main landfill name. Many landfills have operated under different
names at different times in their history.
2.2 Waste Collection Information
This section presents important waste collection information that can affect the suitability
of a site for landfill gas recovery. The information includes the design capacity, the estimated
current waste-in-place and waste acceptance rate, the waste types and percent MSW, acreage,
average depth, and tipping fee.
Types of Wastes Accepted: The types of wastes accepted at the landfill; possible
entries include MSW, yard waste, paper mill waste, sewage sludge, other sludge,
commercial solid waste, industrial solid waste, ash, construction and demolition
debris, and other waste. Some of these wastes contain
Page 2-2 Working Draft - June 1996 Instructions for Evaluating
Landfill Profiles
-------
inorganic material and therefore will generate no methane; others, such as
sludges and yard waste, have a lower methane generation potential due to
excess moisture and other factors.
Percent of Waste that is MSW: If known, the percent of the total waste-in-place
at the landfill that is MSW. If the percentage of MSW in the total waste-in-place is
unknown, the percentage of MSW in annual waste accepted was used. Currently
this value is not used in the methane generation equations described later in this
section. The percentage of MSW in the landfilled waste is an indication of the
potential suitability of the landfill for gas recovery.
Tipping Fee: The standard fee charged for the disposal of MSW, in $/ton. This
value has been converted from $/cubic yards to $/tons where necessary, using
an assumed density of 1 ton/1.667 cubic yards.2 In some cases the tipping fee
varies by waste type or origin of the waste. The entry reflects, to the extent
possible, the average fee levied on the waste accepted.
Design Capacity: The total amount of waste that the landfill is designed to
accept, reported in tons. This information is also called current permitted
capacity. Values reported in cubic yards have been converted to tons, by
assuming a density of 1 ton/1.667 cubic yards.
Days Open per Week: The reported number of days per week the landfill is
open. When both a daily acceptance rate and annual acceptance rate were
given in a single source, the number of days open per week was calculated by
dividing the annual acceptance rate by the daily acceptance rate and by 52
weeks per year. Where not available, a default of 5.5 days per week was used,
consistent with typical industry operating experience.
Annual Acceptance Rate: The amount of waste received and landfilled for a
reported year, including all waste types, reported in short tons (tons). Values
reported in units other than tons per year have been converted using an assumed
density of 1 ton/1.667 cubic yards. If only a daily acceptance rate was available,
an annual acceptance rate has been calculated by multiplying the daily
acceptance rate by 52 weeks and the days open per week. When multi-year
annual acceptance rate data were available, the most recent year's acceptance
rate is presented in the profile.
Total Landfill Acreage: The number of acres that have been landfilled. Where
possible, this has been made distinct from permitted or site acreage.
Average Depth: The average depth of the landfilled waste, reported in feet.
Where a breakdown is available, this value includes any buried soil cover and
landfill cap material.
2 NSWMA (1985), page 5, presents the density of refuse in landfills as a range. The lower end of this
range, 1,200 Ib/cubic yard was used in the profiles.
Instructions for Evaluating Working Draft - June 1996 Page 2-3
Landfill Profiles
-------
Estimated Current Waste-in-Place: The total amount of waste that has been
landfilled since the landfill opened. All waste types have been included, and units
other than tons have been converted using landfill specific information where
available, or by assuming a density of 1 ton/1.667 cubic yards. The following
methods are used, in the order presented, to estimate WIP:
1.
For landfills where the estimated current year WIP is not known, it has
been estimated from the most recent available estimates of waste-in-
place (WIP) and acceptance rate.
Equation 1:
Estimated WIP (tons) =
Reported WIP (tons) + (Annual
Acceptance Rate (tons/yr) x ((Current or
Closed Year) - Year WIP Reported))
2.
If no estimate of the reported WIP was available for any year, then the
estimated current WIP was estimated from the Year Opened, ancl the
Acceptance Rate, as follows:
Equation 2:
Estimated WIP (tons) =
Annual Acceptance Rate (tons/yr) x (((Current
or Closed Year) + 1) - Year Opened)
When multi-year annual acceptance rates were available, the average
value of the reported acceptance rates was used in the above equations.
3. If acceptance rate data were not available, the reported WIP was used as
the estimated current WIP.
4. If acceptance rate data and reported WIP were not available, the
estimated current WIP was estimated from the landfilled acreage, the
average depth, and an assumed MSW density of 1 ton/1.667 cubic yards.
Page 2-4
Working Draft -- June 1996
Instructions for Evaluating
Landfill Profiles
-------
Equation 3:
Estimated WIP
or
Estimated WIP (tons) =
Landfill Area Used x Average Depth x
Density of Waste
Area (acres) x Depth (ft) x 1613.33
(yd3/acre-ft) x (1 ton/1.667 yd3)
2.3 Gas Collection and Control Data
This section presents information on current and planned gas collection activities,
including the type of collection equipment, its operational status and initial year of operation, the
percentage of waste welled and the collection efficiency, and the amount of gas collected. Many
landfills without gas utilization systems still collect landfill gas for safety reasons. Note that many
landfills are in the planning stages of developing a collection system, in which case data
presented in this section represents the anticipated characteristics of the system. In other
cases, landfills have collection systems in place which have been shutdown. In these cases the
data reflect the characteristics of the collection system when it was operating. Gas collection
and control information was obtained from: GAA, 1994; SCS, 1994; SWT, 1994; EPRI, 1992;
and state lists.
Collection System Status: The status of gas collection activities at the landfill.
Standard entries are: operational, planned, shutdown, none, or N.A. (Not
Available). Note that this entry is also printed at the top of the Landfill Location
and Status section of the profile.
Collection System Type: The type of landfill gas collection systems used at the
landfill; standard entries are wells, trenches, wells & trenches, none, or N.A. (Not
Available).
Collection Efficiency: The efficiency of the gas collection system, expressed in
percent. The efficiency will be less than 100 percent due to a number of potential
factors, including: poor well placement and air infiltration through the landfill
cover, the wellhead, or lateral pipe connections. Collection efficiency can range
from 50 percent or lower at existing landfills to 95 percent at newer, well-designed
landfills. Unless an estimate is provided by the landfill, a default value of 85
percent is used.
Instructions for Evaluating
Landfill Profiles
Working Draft -- June 1996
Page 2-5
-------
Methane Concentration: The concentration of methane in the collected gas,
which may vary due to differences in waste type, other landfill specific factors,
and collection system inefficiencies. The methane concentration directly affects
the heat value of the recovered gas. A default value of 50 percent methane is
used in the absence of reported data.
Year Gas Collection Began: The year that the landfill gas collection system
became operational. If in planning or construction stages, the date of anticipated
operation is used.
Estimated Percent of Landfill Area Welled: The portion of the landfill supporting
the landfill gas collection system, expressed in percentage. Landfills sometimes
do not install gas collection systems over the entire landfill area. Reasons for this
include: the collection system is a demonstration project or the first phase of a
larger planned system; there are diminishing returns on gas production in some
areas of the landfill; some areas may be too far from the central collection point;
continued landfilling has expanded the landfill acreage; or installing wells or
trenches would interfere with ongoing operations. If not reported, the percentage
of waste welled is calculated by dividing the welled acreage by landfill acreage.
Landfill Gas Collected: The reported volume of landfill gas (i.e., not only
methane) flowing through the collection system, in million cubic feet per day
(mmcf/d) and million cubic feet per year (mmcf/yr). Values reported in units other
than mmcf/d or mmcf/yr have been converted.
Methane Gas Collected: The estimated volume of methane in the collected
landfill gas. Unless reported, this is calculated by multiplying the amount of
landfill gas collected by the reported methane concentration or a default value of
50 percent.
2.4 Gas Utilization Data
This section presents information on the current or planned use of collected landfill gas,
including the portion of the collected gas that is used, the utilization option, its operational status
and first year of operation, the size of the project, and any expansion plans. This section is only
included in the profiles of landfills with current projects. Note that some landfills are in the
planning stages of developing a gas utilization system, in which case data presented in this
section represents the anticipated characteristics of the system. In other cases, landfills have
utilization systems in place which are no longer operating. Utilization data for landfills with a
shutdown utilization system reflect the characteristics of the utilization system when it was
operating. Gas utilization status was obtained from a number of sources, including: GAA, 1994;
SCS, 1994; SWT, 1994; EPRI, 1992; and state data sources.
Utilization System Status: The status of gas utilization activities at the landfill.
Standard entries are: operational, planned, shutdown, none, or N.A. (Not
Available). Note that this entry is also printed at the top of the Landfill Location
and Status section of the profile.
Page 2-6 Working Draft -- June 1996 Instructions for Evaluating
Landfill Profiles
-------
Year Project Initiated: The year that the landfill gas recovery project began using
collected gas, or, if in planning or construction stages, the date of anticipated
operation.
End-Use of Collected Gas: The percentage of gas utilized, flared, or vented.
Collected gas may be utilized as fuel for power generation or in other energy
applications, in addition to being flared or vented. Where known, the percentage
of each option is provided; otherwise N.A. (Not available) is entered.
Utilization System Type: The type of energy utilization system. Standard entries
include: electricity generation, electricity generation/direct gas sales, high Btu
gas production, medium Btu gas, on-site use, other, to be determined, or N.A.
(Not Available).
System Description: Additional available information on the utilization system.
For example, the type of equipment used to generate electricity is included here
when available or appropriate. Standard entries include: 1C Engines, Gas
Turbines, 1C Engines/Gas Turbines, Steam Turbines, Combined Cycle, and gas
upgrade equipment.
Energy Purchaser(s): The name of the utility or gas customer(s).
2.5 Site Potential
This section presents information on landfill gas generation and collection potential,
power generation potential, and other gas utilization options. The information includes:
estimates of the total volume of methane generated in the landfill, current and potential landfill
gas collection, additional gas available for use, and possible energy utilization options for the
additional collection potential.
Estimated Total Methane Generation
Methane (CH4) is generated in landfills as the organic content of the waste decomposes.
Estimated Methane Generation in million cubic feet per day (mmcf/d) is based on an equation
adapted from U.S. EPA 1993b, Opportunities to Reduce Anthropogenic Methane Emissions in
the United States. The equation was derived from statistical analyses of existing projects.3 The
equation, valid for landfills with over 1 million tons of waste-in-place, is:
3 Equation 4 was adapted from:
CH4 (rrrVmin) = 8.22 + 5.27 WIP (million metric tons),
found on page 4-25 of U.S. EPA 1993b, Opportunities to Reduce Anthropogenic Methane Emissions in
the United States: Report to Congress.
Instructions for Evaluating Working Draft - June 1996 Page 2-7
Landfill Profiles
-------
Equation 4:
CH4 generation (mmcf/d) = 0.05085 x [8.22+(4.78x106 x WIP (tons))]
where WIP best reflects the current amount of waste in the landfill, as described in
Section 2.2.
The result of this equation is also presented in the profile in mmcf/yr, which is obtained
by multiplying mmcf/d by 365 days per year.
Equation 4a:
CH4 generation (mmcf/yr) = CH4 generation (mmcf/d) x 365 days/yr
One limitation of this methane generation model is its use of national averages to
estimate individual landfills' gas generation rates. While such a model may provide a useful
indication of potential gas flow, site specific factors not included in such a model, such as
percent MSW, age, moisture content, temperature, pH, and density of waste, may diminish the
accuracy of the predicted gas flow. Since such models can generate estimates with potentially
large uncertainties, site monitoring is extremely important in order to verify gas flows.
Landfill Gas Collection and Utilization Potential
The following data and estimates for gas collection and use are presented in terms of
landfill gas volume, not methane volume. This conforms with typical industry practice. All of the
entries are reported in both mmcf/d and mmcf/yr.
Estimated Total LF:G Collection Potential: The estimated maximum volume of
landfill gas that can feasibly be recovered from the landfill. Because landfill gas
contains other gases in addition to methane, the volume of landfill gas generated
will typically be about twice the volume of methane generated (i.e., the methane
concentration is typically 50 percent). The estimates of gas collection and
utilization potential are presented in terms of landfill gas, as opposed to pure
methane, to conform with industry practice.
Equation 5:
Estimated Total LFG Collection Potential
= Estimated Methane Generation x Collection Efficiency x
1/Methane Concentration
Page 2-8 Working Draft - June 1996 Instructions for Evaluating
Landfill Profiles
-------
where:
Collection Efficiency represents the amount of gas generated in the landfill
that can be recovered by a gas collection system. A default value of 85
percent is used (U.S. EPA, 1993b); and
Methane Concentration represents the percentage of methane contained
in the landfill gas. This value is based on the reported value from the Gas
Collection and Control section, if available, or a default value of 50
percent (U.S. EPA, 1993b).
When default values are used:
Equation 5a:
Estimated Total LFG Collection Potential (mmcf/d)
= CH4 generation (rnmcf/d) x 0.85 x 2
or, substituting equation 4,
Equation 5b:
Estimated Total LFG Collection Potential (mmcf/d)
{0.05085 x [8.22 + (4.78x106 x WIP (tons))]} x 0.85 x 2
The result of this equation is also presented in the profile in million cubic feet per
year (mmcf/yr):
Equation 5c:
Estimated Total LFG Collection Potential (mmcf/yr)
Total LFG Collection Potential (mmcf/d) x 365 days/yr
Instructions for Evaluating Working Draft--June 1996 Page 2-9
Landfill Profiles
-------
However, if the Current or Planned Reported LFG Collection Volume exceeds the
value estimated using Equation 5, the Current or Planned Reported LFG
Collection Volume is used as the Estimated Total LFG Collection Potential.
Current Reported LFG Collection Volume: This is the average volume of landfill
gas currently being collected each day. This value is typically obtained from GAA
(1994) and SWT (1994). If this reported value exceeds the Total LFG Collection
Potential estimated above, then the value reported here will also be used as the
Estimated Total LFG Collection Potential.
Planned Reported LFG Collection Volume: This is the planned volume of landfill
gas that will be collected each day. Planned LFG Collection may represent the
installation of a new collection system or the expansion of an existing collection
system. This value is typically obtained from GAA (1994) and SWT (1994). If this
reported value exceeds the Total LFG Collection Potential estimated above, then
the value reported here will also be used as the Estimated Total LFG Collection
Potential.
Estimated Additional LFG Collection Potential: This value represents the
additional volume of landfill gas that can be collected, assuming a default
collection efficiency of 85 percent. This includes the volume of gas that could be
collected if the entire landfill acreage had a collection system. It is estimated as
the Estimated Total LFG Collection Potential less the Current and Planned
Landfill Gas Collection Volume (described above).
Equation 6:
Estimated Additional LFG Collection Potential (mmcf/d)
Total LFG Collection Potential (mmcf/d) - Current LFG Collection
Volume (mmcf/d) - Planned LFG Collection Potential (mmcf/d)
The additional collection potential will be zero if the sum of the Current and
Planned LFG Collection Volumes equals or exceeds the Estimated Total LFG
Collection Potential, even though additional potential may exist.
Estimated Total LFG Utilization Volume Potential: The total amount of landfill gas
that could be utilized for energy recovery; this value is equal to the Estimated
Total LFG Collection Potential.
Current Reported Volume of LFG Utilized: This is the amount of landfill gas that
is currently collected and used for power generation or another energy
application. It does not include that fraction of the collected gas that is flared or
vented into the atmosphere. The value is calculated as the product of the Current
LFG Collection Volume and the Percent Utilized value reported in the Gas
Utilization Data section, which are typically obtained from GAA (1994),
Page 2-10 Working Draft -- June 1996 Instructions for Evaluating
Landfill Profiles
-------
SWT (1994), or state data. If the percent utilized is not available, the Current
Reported Volume of LFG Utilized is N.A. (Not Available).
Planned Reported Volume of LFG Utilized: This is the planned volume of landfill
gas that will be used for power generation or another energy recovery operation.
This value is calculated as the product of the Planned LFG Collection Volume
and the Percent Utilized value reported in the Gas Utilities Data section, which
are typically obtained from GAA (1994), SWT (1994), or state data. If the percent
utilized is not available, the Planned Reported Volume of LFG Utilized is N.A.
(Not Available).
Estimated Additional LFG Available for Use: This is the amount of landfill gas
that is potentially available for use in power generation or other energy
application. This includes any additional gas to be collected as well as gas
currently being collected that is currently vented or flared. Thus:
Equation 7:
Estimated Additional LFG Available for Use (mmcf/d)
Estimated Total Utilization Potential (mmcf/d) - Current Utilization
Volume (mmcf/d) - Planned Utilization Volume (mmcf/d)
If either Current LFG Utilization Volume or Planned Utilization Volume is N.A. (Not
Available), then the above equation is not evaluated and N.A. (Not Available) is entered
in the profile.
Power Generation Potential
Entries in this section are presented both as capacity (MW) and energy generation
(GWh/yr). Assuming an availability (load) factor of 85 percent (7446 operational hours/yr), the
capacity can be converted to energy by multiplying by the number of hours in a year that the
equipment is operational, and then dividing by 1000 (i.e., to convert from MWh to GWh).
Estimated Total Electric Potential: This value represents the total installed
electricity generation capacity that could be supported by the landfill site,
assuming that all uncollected and unutilized landfill gas is collected and used for
power generation. The equation for generation capacity assumes the use of 1C
engines with a heat rate of 13,000 Btu per kWh:
Instructions for Evaluating Working Draft -- June 1996 Page 2-11
Landfill Profiles
-------
Equation 8:
Estimated Total Electrical Potential (MW)
Estimated Total LFG Utilization Potential (mmcf/d) x %CH4 x
(1 day/24 hr) x (1000 Btu/cf) x (1,000,000 cf/mmcf) x
(1 kWh/13,000 Btu) x (1 MW/1000 kw)
or
Equation 8a:
Estimated Total Electrical Potential (GWh/yr)
= Estimated Total Electrical Potential (MW) x 7446 hours/yr x
1 GW/1000MW
Current Generation: This value, typically obtained from either GAA (1994) or
SWT (1994), is the reported installed generation capacity of landfills for existing
utilization projects. If a landfill gas project is currently selling, or is planning, to
sell gas directly to a nearby customer, then this entry is entered as zero. For
planned electricity generation projects, this value will be zero. For candidate
landfills, this value will be N.A. (Not Available).
Planned Generation: If a landfill gas project is in the planning stages, the
Planned Generation is presented here. This value is typically obtained from
either GAA (1994) or SWT (1994). For current electricity generation projects, this
value will be zero. For candidate landfills, this value will be N.A. (Not Available).
Estimated Additional Generation Potential: The estimated installed generating
capacity, in MW, that could be supported by the Estimated Additional LFG
Available for Use (i.e., the currently uncollected and unutilized volume of landfill
gas).
Equation 9:
Estimated Additional Generation Potential (MW)
= Estimated Total Electrical Potential (MW) - Current Electrical
Potential (MW) - Planned Electrical Potential (MW)
or
Page 2-12 Working Draft -- June 1996 Instructions for Evaluating
Landfill Profiles
-------
Equation 9a:
Estimated Additional Generation Potential (GWh/yr)
= Estimated Additional Generation Potential (MW) x 7446 hours/yr x
1 GW/1000MW
For landfills for which either the current or planned electrical potential is N.A. (Not
Available), the additional generation potential will also be N.A. (Not Available).
One limitation of the electric potential estimates is their derivation from the current
waste-in-place. For landfills that are still accepting waste, as are most of those
profiled, the waste-in-place and associated gas flow will be increasing over time.
Depending on the anticipated closure date, the generating capacity may be
significantly underestimated.
Utilities in County: The electric utilities that are located in or serve the county in
which the landfill is located. The majority of the electric utilities listed are located
in the same county as the landfill. These data are based on DOE's Energy
Information Administration's publication Electricity Trade in the United States in
1992 and supporting databases (U.S. DOE, 1992). The rest of the utilities listed
serve the county in which the landfill is located and supplement the utilities listed
in DOE's database. They are provided by the Utility Data Institute's Electric Utility
Demographic Database (UDI, 1995). Note that utilities in nearby counties that do
not serve the county in which the landfill is located, are not listed, even though
they could be closer to the landfill then the utilities located in the same county.
2.6 Environmental Benefits of Utilization
This section presents data on both the current environmental benefits of landfill gas
collection and utilization, as well as the additional environmental benefits that can be achieved
by further utilizing landfill gas. For landfills where the breakdown between percent flared,
percent vented, and percent utilized is not available, only the Estimated Total Potential Methane
Reductions are presented, and N.A. is reported for Current and Planned Methane Reductions,
as well as Estimated Potential (Additional) Methane Reductions.
Estimated Total Potential Methane Reductions: The sum of the current, planned,
and additional methane reductions, in mmcf/yr. This value differs from Estimated
Total Methane Generation because it incorporates the collection efficiency. For
landfills where these values are not available, the following equation can be used.
Instructions for Evaluating Working Draft - June 1996 Page 2-13
Landfill Profiles
-------
Equation 10:
Estimated Total Potential Methane Reductions (mmcf/yr)
= Estimated Total LFG Collection Potential (mmcf/d) x Methane
Concentration x 365 days/yr
The estimate of Methane Emissions Reduction Potential presented here is likely
to be an overestimate because in the absence of the gas recovery system, a
portion of the methane produced in the landfill would be oxidized as it migrates
out of the landfill. The portion of the methane that is oxidized is not emitted to the
atmosphere, and therefore does not contribute to landfill methane emissions.
Withdrawing the gas with a collection system prevents this oxidation step, so that
more methane is recovered than would otherwise have been emitted. The extent
of oxidation that will occur can vary greatly depending on local conditions, and an
estimate is not incorporated here.
Current and Planned Methane Reductions: The amount of methane that is not
being released to the atmosphere because it is being collected and either utilized
or flared. It is calculated in mmcf/yr, using the following equation:
Equation 11:
Current and Planned Methane Reductions (mmcf/yr)
((Current LFG Collection Volume + Planned LFG Collection
Volume (mmcf/d) x Methane Concentration) x (100 - percent
vented)) x 365 days/yr
where:
Methane concentration is reported in the Gas Collection and
Control Data section of the profile (Default value of 50 percent.)
Percent Vented is reported in the Gas Utilization Data section of
the profile.
If Percent Vented is not available, this equal is not evaluated and N.A. (Not
Available) is entered in the profile.
Estimated Potential (Additional) Methane Reductions: The amount of methane
that could be reduced by collecting and either flaring or utilizing gas that is
currently being emitted. The additional methane reduction potential is estimated
using the following formula:
Page 2-14 Working Draft -- June 1996 Instructions for Evaluating
Landfill Profiles
-------
Equation 12:
Estimated Additional Methane Reduction Potential (mmcf/yr)
= {((Estimated Additional LFG Collection Potential) x Methane
Concentration) + ((Current + Planned LFG Collection Potential) x
Methane Concentration x Percent Vented)} (mmcf/d) x 365
days/yr
or, substituting equation 6,
Equation 12a:
Estimated Additional Methane Reduction Potential (mmcf/yr)
{[(Estimated Total LFG Collection Potential - Current LFG
Collection Volume - Planned LFG Collection Volume) x Methane
Concentration] + [((Current + Planned LFG Collection) x Methane
Concentration) x Percent Vented]} (mmcf/d) x 365 days/year
where:
Methane concentration is reported in the Gas Collection and
Control Data section of the profile (Default value of 50 percent.)
• Percent Vented is reported in the Gas Utilization Data section of
the profile.
If Percent Vented is not available, this equal is not evaluated and N.A. (Not
Available) is entered in the profile.
CO3 Equivalent of Methane Emission Reductions: The magnitude of the methane
emissions that could potentially be reduced through increased landfill gas
collection, expressed in thousand tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year.
The Emissions Reduction Potential, presented in thousand tons per year, is
converted to thousand standard tons of CO2 equivalent per year using a Global
Warming Potential of methane equal to 24.5:4
4 The Global Warming Potential (GWP) is an expression of the radiative forcing of one mass unit of
methane relative to one mass unit of carbon dioxide. Thus, one gram of methane has 24.5 times the
radiative forcing of one gram of carbon dioxide over a 100 year timeframe. For additional information see
IPCC1994.
Instructions for Evaluating
Landfill Profiles
Working Draft -- June 1996
Page 2-15
-------
Equation 13:
Annual CO2 Equivalent of CH4 Emission Reductions (thousand tons/yr)
= Estimated CH4 Reduction Potential (mmcf/yr) x 21.12 tons/mmcf x
24.5 tons CCytons CH4 x 1 thousand tons/1000 tons
where the CH4 Reduction Potential can be either Total, Current and Planned, or
Additional, assuming the density of methane at 15°C and 1 atmosphere is 21.12
ton/mmcf.
Estimated Acid Rain "Bonus Allowances": Under Title IV of the Clean Air Act (the
EPA Acid Rain Program), the Conservation and Renewable Energy Reserve
(CRER) allocates a pool of SO2 allowances for renewable energy technologies.
These allowances are available to utilities for landfill energy recovery projects, at
the rate of one for every 500 MWh/yr generated (i.e., one for every 0.5 GWh/yr
generated). These bonus allowances can be earned each year between 1994
and 2000 by applying to the CRER. The allowance is rounded down to a whole
number.
Equation 14:
Total EARBA == Total Electric Potential (GWh/yr) x 1 EARBA/0.5 GWh/yr
Equation 15:
Current or Planned EARBA = (Current + Planned Generation (GWh/yr)) x
(1 EARBA/0.5 GWh/yr)
Equation 16:
Additional EARBA = Additional Generation Potential (GWh/yr) x 1
EARBA/0.5 GWh/yr
Emissions Avoided through Fuel Displacement: Landfill gas utilization projects
can result in avoided emissions not only of methane, but also of CO2 and SO2.
The collection of landfill gas and its subsequent use as a fuel for generating
electricity (or other energy application) will displace the use of fuel by other
generating units, and thereby avoid the emissions associated with the displaced
generating units (in addition to the reduced methane emissions).
Page 2-16 Working Draft - June 1996 Instructions for Evaluating
Landfill Profiles
-------
The magnitude of the emissions avoided in this manner depends on the
difference between the emission characteristics of the landfill generating unit and
those of the displaced utility unit. These marginal emission characteristics are
highly dependent on the exact type of fuel (especially the sulfur content of coal),
the equipment type, and emission control technologies in place. While the
emission characteristics for individual projects should be estimated using regional
or local values, national averages have been used for illustrative purposes in the
profiles.
Equation 17:
Total Emissions Avoided (tons/yr) =
Total Electrical Potential (GWh/yr) x
Incremental Emission (tons/GWh)
The annual incremental emissions per GWh generated are presented in the table
below.
Displaced Fuel
Coal (High/Med S) - Steam
Oil - Steam
Incremental Emissions (tons/GWh)
C02
379.58
174.38
S02
11.126
9.481
2.7 Contact Information
This section presents, where available and applicable, the following contact information:
landfill owner, landfill operator, energy utilization system developer, and the energy utilization
system operator. For each contact, a name, position, organization name, mailing address, city,
state, zip, phone, and fax are included. This section also states whether the landfill owner and
operator are public or private entities. In addition, the appropriate site contact name and number
are indicated.
2.8 Comment Field
The information in this field, taken from GAA (1994), Solid Waste Technologies'
Bimonthly Periodical, and/or state data provides additional information on gas collection or gas
utilization activities. In addition, comments related to the potential impacts of each landfill's
operating status on its gas generation rate are also included.
Instructions for Evaluating
Landfill Profiles
Working Draft -- June 1996
Page 2-17
-------
2.9 References
EPRI 1992. Survey of landfill Gas Generation Potential: 2 MW Molten Carbonate Fuel Cell,
Electric Power Research Institute.
GAA 1994. 1994-5 Methane Recovery from Landfill Yearbook, Governmental Advisory
Associates.
IPCC 1994. The 1994 Report of the Scientific Assessment Working Group of IPCC,
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
NSWMA 1985. Basic Data: Solid Waste Amounts, Composition and Management Systems,
National Solid Waste Management Association, Technical bulletin #85-6, October 1,
1985.
SCS 1994. Implementation Guide for Landfill Gas Recovery Projects in the Northeast: Draft
Final Report, SCS Engineers.
Solid Waste Technologies 1994. Landfill Gas-to-Energy 1994-1995 Activity Report, HCI
Publications.
U.S. DOE Energy Information Administration 1992. Electricity Trade in the United States in 1992
and supporting Data Bases.
U.S. EPA 1993a. Anthropogenic Methane Emissions in the United States: Estimates for 1990,
Report to Congress, United States Environmental Protection Agency. EPA 430-R-93-
003.
U.S. EPA 1993b. Opportunities to Reduce Anthropogenic Methane Emissions in the United
States: Report to Congress, United States Environmental Protection Agency. EPA 430-
R-93-012.
Utility Data Institute 1995. U.S. Electric Utility Demographics from the Electrical World Directory.
UDI, Washington, DC.
Page 2-18 Working Draft -- June 1996 Instructions for Evaluating
Landfill Profiles
-------
-------
-------
3. Data Collection Methods and Evaluation Processes
This chapter describes the methodology used to collect data from state and local
sources, the national databases used to complete profiles, data interpretation issues, and the
landfill candidacy screening process.
3.1 Methodology Used to Collect Data from State and Local Agencies
In general, a top-down approach was used to gather data, by obtaining the maximum
amount of information on all landfills from state records, and then filling in data gaps with
information from records at the regional, county, or municipal levels, as well as from published
national reports.
In many cases, states did not have data available in a consolidated format (e.g., a
database). In these situations, discrete data sources that provided essential data were
gathered. When state documents did not provide the level of detailed information necessary to
determine candidate landfills, regional offices located within each state and/or county or
municipal offices were contacted to assess the types of information in their files.
3.2 National Databases Used to Complete Profiles
In addition to data collected from state, regional, or local offices, data was drawn from
several national data sources. These sources include:
• Government Advisory Associates (GAA, 1994), which provides
information on current and planned LFG Energy Recovery Projects;
Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI, 1992), which examines the
potential to use fuel-cells at large landfills;
• SCS Engineers (SCS, 1994), which examines the potential for landfill
energy recovery projects in the Northeast;
Solid Waste Association of North America (SWANA, 1992), which lists all
landfills in the U.S.;
• Solid Waste Technologies (SWT, 1994), which reports on landfill gas-to-
energy facilities throughout North America; and
Solid Waste Atlas (SWA, 1994), which lists all solid waste landfills in the
U.S., transfer stations, incinerators, and waste-to-energy facilities.
Exhibit 3-1 provides a detailed description of the types of information available from each data
source. The data obtained from the national databases was used mainly to supplement or verify
data received from state or local offices. One exception is the Government Advisory Associates
(GAA, 1994) data, which provides information on current and planned landfill gas recovery
projects. Because data on landfill gas recovery projects were difficult to obtain from
Data Collection Methods and Working Draft--June 1996 Page 3-1
Evaluation Processes
-------
n
4^
!a
'E
x
UJ
lary of National Databases
e
E
3
(/>
in
(0 4->
"~ fh
SCS
Implementation Guide for Landfi
Recovery Projects in the North
V
_ 3
o tj-
.2 „,
EPRI
Survey of Landfill Gas Generat
Potential; 2 MW Molten Carbonati
Cell
GAA
Methane Recovery from Landfill
Yearbook
Z^l
Report examines polenlial for landf
energy recovery projects in the
Northeast
JO
o
Report examines potential to use fue
at large landfills
Report provides information on current and
planned LFG energy recovery projects
(Purpose of
Report
c m1
re -S
MSW landfills with 20 or more acre
daily waste receipts of 100 tons pe
or more
CD iU
^ *J
O !^
CO !>
Large MSW landfills with a minimum
life of 15 years and an aveiaye suiiu
delivery rate of 72,000 tons per year
MSW landfills that have current or planned
energy recovery projects
c
1 Types of
Landfills
Discussed
the Report
13
c
•0 >. CO
Northeastern states (Connecticut,
Delaware, Massachusetts, Marylan
Maine, New Hampshire, New Jerse
New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Is
Vermont)
c
o c
All states, but more detailed informal
provided for Minnesota and Wiscons
CO
0>
re
^n
•a
eu
•o
CO CL
0) V
ISO:
85 =
m ® - c
Jr -° ^ re
^ m P "D
Identifies 207 candidate landfills in
northeast, and provides: landfill sit
name, location, address, phone nur
contact person, and ownership; Ian
acreage; estimated in-place refuse
waste flow; estimated closure year;
landfill gas features
•o
- c
c re ^ CD -_j- CO
-£j L: *^ *" p- O)
Identifies 749 candidate landfills in a
states, and provides: site name, loc;
waste flow, years remaining, maximi
ten year gas flows, and number of 2f
units. For Minnesota and Wisconsin
above information includes year ope
contacl name and phone, utility, and
controls
Detailed information on more than 120 fully
operational LFG energy recovery projects
and over 90 in development, including
general landfill data, landfill gas collection
system, landfill gas processing/energy
generation system, institutional
arrangements, operating issues, and costs
CO
w .E
°||JE
0^30
n c ^ Q-
03"
Q)
CO =
re *_
Contacted solid waste regulatory
agencies; reviewed Solid Waste At
SWANA Directory, and SCS Projec
and incorporated EPRI data
< 1
•z. <"
< F
Data gathered from Cambridge
Environmental Group, GAA, and SW
Data on landfills in Minnesota and
Wisconsin were obtained directly fro
agencies and from landfill operators
Listing of sites compiled through GAA's
contacts in the public and private sector as
well as a review of articles. A detailed
questionnaire was administered by phone,
in several cases the contact person
provided supplementary written materials
T>S
co 3 c
(A IA O
_f I-. Q fl)
1I°5
03
03
CM
O3
03
CO
'co
re
.a
re
o
re
c
o
w
re
•o
a
O3
O3
T—
•D
ss %
£ - 3
5 £ o
III
Data used to supplement missing
information
Data used to supplement missing
information
Data used to supplement missing
information
tin
1 How Data f
1 National Re
1 is Used in 1
| Profiles Re
Page 3-2
Working Draft -- June 1996
Data Collection Methods and
Evaluation Processes
-------
Exhibit 3-1 (continued)
Summary of National Databases
SWANA
U.S. Landfill Directory
SWT
Landfill Gas-to-Energy 1994-1995
Activity Report
SWA
Directory and Atlas of Solid Waste
Disposal Facilities
Purpose of
Report
Report lists all landfills in the U.S.; goal of
report not linked to energy recovery
A comprehensive status report on landfill
gas-to-energy facilities throughout North
America
Report lists all landfills in the U.S.,
transfer stations, and incinerators and
waste-to-energy facilities
Types of
Landfills
Discussed in
the Report
MSW landfills
214 landfill gas recovery facilities; 143
operational, 14 under construction, and 57
planned
MSW disposal facilities
States Included
in Report
All states with the exception of Montana
35 states with operating facilities, and
under construction and planned facilities.
Includes landfills in Canada
All states
Types of
Landfill Data
Included in
Report
The Directory is comprised of over 4,300
facility names and addresses with most
referencing the contact name and telephone
number
Information includes the capital cost of
each facility, the current gas generation of
the landfill, megawatt capacity for projects
producing electricity, and the identity of
electricity or direct gas sales customers
Directory contains 4,500 public and
private disposal facilities. Provides
names and locations, with corresponding
names, addresses, and phone numbers
for both owners and operators, average
daily intake, and the expected or
permitted closure dates
Methods and
Sources Used
for Data
Collection
Directory information obtained by contacting
each state using the "Directory of Solid
Waste Management Program Officials"
Community personnel and owners of
landfills and landfill gas-to-energy projects
Publisher's solid waste database, state
agencies, trade associations, and
facilities
Year When
Landfill Data
Was Collected
1993; Pin Point Technologies now collects
this data, which is updated daily
1994
1994
-------
Exhibit 3-1 (continued)
Summary of National Databases
SWANA
U.S. Landfill Directory
SWT
Landfill Gas-to-Energy 1994-1995
Activity Report
SWA
Directory and Atlas of Solid Waste
Disposal Facilities
How Data from
National Report
is Used in EPA
Profiles Report
Data used to supplement missing
information
Data on operating facilities and under
construction and planned facilities is used
Confirmation of owner/operator contact
data
EPRI = Electric Power Research Institute
GAA = Government Advisory Associates
SCS = SCS Engineers
SWA = Solid Waste Atlas
SWANA = Solid Waste Association of North America
SWT = Solid Waste Technologies
-------
the states, GAA data was used as the primary source of information on current and planned
energy recovery projects.
3.3 Data Interpretation Issues
During the data collection and key entering processes, certain data interpretation
questions arose. To ensure consistency across all states, the following guidelines were
established for interpreting data:
• For landfills where open years were either unavailable or extremely
difficult to obtain, initial permit dates were used when available.
• Because several data sources were used, many landfills had multiple data
for some fields. In some cases, data from one source conflicted with data
from another source. For example, two different sources may report
completely different names for a landfill owner. To resolve problems with
conflicting data, each data source was ranked according to its probable
reliability. When data from all sources was collapsed to form one record
for each landfill, a computer program scanned for data from the highest
ranking source first, filling in as many fields as possible with that data, and
then scanned for the next highest ranking data source, filling in fields with
data from this source. Fields that already contained data from a higher
ranking source were skipped. This procedure continued until all data
sources had been scanned and all data fields with information from at
least one data source were filled.
3.4 Landfill Candidacy Screening Process
After the landfill data was collected, interpreted, and key-entered, the database was
analyzed to evaluate each landfill's probability of supporting a landfill gas-to-energy project.
Landfills were categorized into one of the following groups:
The landfill is a current project (i.e., the landfill has participated, is
participating or is planning to participate in a gas recovery project);
The landfill is a candidate (i.e., the landfill has a high probability of
generating enough methane to make a landfill gas recovery project
economical);
The landfill is a profile in progress (i.e., more data is required to determine
the status of the landfill);
• The landfill is not a candidate, but may be a candidate in the future (i.e.,
the landfill has between 500,000 and 1,000,000 tons of waste-in-place; or
the landfill has less than 500,000 tons waste-in-place, but is receiving
more than 75,000 tons of waste annually); or
• The landfill is not a candidate and is not likely to be a candidate in the
future.
Data Collection Methods and Working Draft -- June 1996 Page 3-5
Evaluation Processes
-------
This categorization scheme is based on the premise that a landfill must be capable of generating
a certain amount of methane to make a gas recovery project desirable. The generation of
methane is a function of many factors, the most critical being the amount of waste-in-place and
the number of years the waste has been in the landfill. Peak methane generation occurs soon
after closure. Therefore, the longer a landfill has been closed, the less attractive it becomes for
methane recovery. For the purposes of determining candidate landfills, those landfills that
ceased accepting waste prior to 1989 were eliminated because they have a low probability of
generating enough methane to make a gas recovery project economical. By modelling the
relationship between waste-in-place and methane generation, a cut-off of 1,000,000 tons of
waste was established; landfills having at least 1,000,000 tons of waste-in-place were
considered candidate landfills.
The following four steps describe the landfill candidacy screening process:
Step 1: The first step in the process involves determining if a landfill has
a current project ~ is the landfill already participating in a landfill
gas-to-energy recovery project or planning to do so? Those
facilities that are already participating, are classified as
"operational." Facilities that are planning landfill gas (LFG)
recovery projects are classified as "planned." When readily
available, additional data were gathered for operational and
planned facilities in order to present a more complete landfill
profile.
Step 2: The next step is to determine whether the landfill is receiving
municipal solid waste. If a landfill receives MSW, the landfill then
underwent additional screening. Landfills that do not receive
MSW are not considered potential candidates, since they may
not generate enough landfill gas to support a utilization project.
Page 3-6
Working Draft -- June 1996
Data Collection Methods and
Evaluation Processes
-------
Step 3: If gas utilization is neither planned nor occurring at a facility, the
landfill's operating status (i.e., open or closed) is determined.
Landfills closed prior to January 1, 1989 were not candidates;
landfills that have closed after January 1, 1989 were potential
candidates and underwent additional screening before their
candidacy could be confirmed. Open landfills were all
considered potential candidates in this stage of the screening
process. If the operating status of a landfill was not available, the
landfill's candidacy could not be determined.
Step 4: In the next step of the screening process, waste-in-place data
were examined for all active landfills and inactive landfills that
stopped receiving waste after 1988. Landfills with waste-in-place
in excess of 1,000,000 tons were considered candidate landfills.
Some states do not collect the total amount of waste-in-place at
each landfill. Instead, the state may have on file annual
acceptance rates, open years, landfill acreage and depth, daily
acceptance rates, and number of days operating per week. From
different combinations of these data elements, a value for the
landfill's waste-in-place could be estimated in some cases. If the
estimated waste-in-place exceeded 1,000,000 tons, the landfill
was considered a candidate.
Landfills which did not meet the candidacy criteria, but have between 500,000 and
999,999 tons of waste-in-place are also listed in Chapter 6. These landfills have been included
for two reasons: (1) it is likely, if they remain operational, they will reach 1 million tons WIP within
a few years; and (2) landfills with this amount of WIP may generate enough landfill gas for direct
gas sales to industries or other end-users with smaller energy requirements.
Landfills which had less than 500,000 tons of waste-in-place but accept at least 75,000
tons per year of waste are also listed in Chapter 6, because they also may become candidates
within a few years. Finally, Chapter 6 also lists the landfills for which waste-in-place could not be
estimated (i.e., profiles in progress). Therefore, their candidacy could not be determined, and
they could not be eliminated from this analysis.
Data Collection Methods and
Evaluation Processes
Working Draft -- June 1996
Page 3-7
-------
3.5 References
Chartwell 1994. Directory and Atlas of Solid Waste Disposal Facilities 1994, Chartwell
Information Publishers.
EPRI 1992. Survey of landfill Gas Generation Potential: 2 MW Molten Carbonate Fuel Cell,
Electric Power Research Institute.
GAA 1994. 1994-5 Methane Recovery from Landfill Yearbook, Governmental Advisory
Associates.
SCS 1994. Implementation Guide for Landfill Gas Recovery Projects in the Northeast: Draft
Final Report, SCS Engineers.
SWANA 1992. U.S. Landfill Directory, Solid Waste Association of North America.
Solid Waste Technologies 1994. Landfill Gas-to-Energy 1994-1995 Activity Report, HCI
Publications.
Page 3-8 Working Draft -- June 1996 Data Collection Methods and
Evaluation Processes
-------
-------
-------
Summary of Statewide Collection Potential and Benefits for Candidate Landfills
Number of Candidate Landfills: 10
Estimated Total LFG Collection Potential (mmcf/day): 27.9
Estimated Total Generation Potential (MW): 44.8
CO Equivalent Available (tons/yr):1 2,638,045 - 2,764,577
1 - The range of values are the total annual carbon dioxide equivalent of methane reductions (low range) and
the total annual carbon dioxide equivalent of methane reductions plus the annual carbon dioxide reductions
realized from coal displacement (high range).
-------
Updated: June 1996
Centralia LF
Landfill Location and Status
Location
City: N.A.
County: Lewis
State: WA
Operating Status
Status: Closed
Year Open: 1958
Year Closed: 1993
Primary Contact (see contact information): Robert Berg
Alternate Landfill Name(s): N.A.
Gas Utilization
Gas Collection?: Operational
Gas Utilization?: N.A.
Phone: (206)740-1371
Waste Collection Information
Types of Waste Accepted: Construction Demolition; Municipal Solid Waste; Other Landfill
Wastes; Yard Waste
% of Waste that is MSW: 83%
Days Open Per Week: 5.5
Annual Acceptance Rate (tons): 49,160
Year Reported: 1993
Waste-in-Place (tons):!1/ 1,769,760
Tipping Fee ($/ton): N.A.
Design Capacity (tons): N.A.
Acres Currently Landfilled: N.A.
Average Depth (feet): 25
Gas Collection and Control Data
Collection System Status:
Collection System Type:
Collection Efficiency:
Methane Concentration:
Operational
N.A.
85%*
50%*
Year Gas Collection Began: N.A.
Est. Percentage of LF Acres Welled: N.A.
LF Gas Collected (mmcf/d): N.A.
CH4 Gas Collected (mmcf/d): . N.A.
* - Default value.
a/ - WIP calculated from acceptance rate and open year.
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Centralia LF (continued)
Site Potential
EST. TOTAL METHANE GENERATION
(Estimated from Waste-in-Place):
LF GAS COLLECTION AND UTILIZATION POTENTIAL
Est. Total LF Gas Collection Potential:
Current Reported LF Gas Collection Volume:
Planned Reported LF Gas Collection Volume:
Est. Additional LF Gas Collection Potential:
Est. Total LF Gas Utilization Volume Potential:
Current Reported Volume of LF Gas Utilized:
Planned Reported Volume of LF Gas to be Utilized:
Est. Additional LF Gas Available for Use:
POWER GENERATION POTENTIAL
Est. Total Electric Potential:
Current Reported Generation:
Planned Reported Generation:
Est. Additional Generation Potential:
Utilities in County: Bonneville Power Admin; Centralia Light
Environmental Benefits of
Total
Est. Potential CH Reduction (mmcf/yr): 263.1
CO Equivalent of CH Reduction ('000 tons/yr): 136.2
Estimated Acid Rain Bonus Allowances: 34
mmcf/d
0.8
mmcf/d
1.4
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
1.4
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Capacity
(MW)
2.3
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Dept; PUD No 1 of
Utilization
Current &
Planned
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
mmcf/vr
309.6
mmcf/vr
526.3
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
526.3
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Energy
(GWh/vrt
17.2
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Lewis County
Additional
Potential
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Total Emissions Avoided
Emissions Avoided through Fuel Displacement: CO-
Displacement of Coal (tons/yr): 6,531
Displacement of Oil (tons/yr): 3,000
SP_2
191
163
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Centraiia LF (continued)
Contact Information
LANDFILL OWNER
Organization Name: N.A.
Contact Name: N.A.
Phone Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: N.A.
City: N.A.
Fax Number: N.A.
State: N.A. Zip Code: N.A.
LANDFILL OPERATOR
Organization Name: Lewis County Public Services
Contact Name: Robert Berg
Phone Number: (206)740-1371 Fax Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: 350 North Market Boulevard
City: Chehalis State: WA Zip Code: 98532
Comments Relating to LFG Recovery Projects
Note: This landfill is closed. Therefore, the gas generation may be declining.
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Cheyne Road LF
Location
City: N.A.
County: Yakima
State: WA
Primary Contact (see contact information): Ron Pepper
Alternate Landfill Name(s): N.A.
Landfill Location and Status
Operating Status Gas Utilization
Status: Open Gas Collection?: N.A.
Year Open: 1968 Gas Utilization?: N.A.
Year Closed: N.A.
Phone: (509) 454-2230
Waste Collection Information
Types of Waste Accepted: Municipal Solid Waste; Other Landfill Wastes; Sewage Sludge
% of Waste that is MSW: 55%
Days Open Per Week: 5.5
Annual Acceptance Rate (tons): 41,344
Year Reported: 1993
Waste-in-Placeflons):3/ 1,198,976
Tipping Fee ($/ton): N.A.
Design Capacity (tons): N.A.
Acres Currently Landfilled: N.A.
Average Depth (feet): N.A.
Collection System Status:
Collection System Type:
Collection Efficiency:
Methane Concentration:
Gas Collection and Control Data
N.A. Year Gas Collection Began: N.A.
N.A. Est. Percentage of LF Acres Welled: N.A.
85%* LF Gas Collected (mmcf/d): N.A.
50%* CH4 Gas Collected (mmcf/d): N.A.
* - Default value.
a/ - WIP calculated from acceptance rate and open year.
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Cheyne Road LF (continued)
Site Potential
EST. TOTAL METHANE GENERATION mmcf/d mmcf/vr
(Estimated from Waste-in-Place): 0.7 258.9
LF GAS COLLECTION AND UTILIZATION POTENTIAL mmcf/d mmcf/vr
Est. Total LF Gas Collection Potential: 1.2 440.2
Current Reported LF Gas Collection Volume: N.A. N.A.
Planned Reported LF Gas Collection Volume: N.A. N.A.
Est. Additional LF Gas Collection Potential: N.A. N.A.
Est. Total LF Gas Utilization Volume Potential: 1.2 440.2
Current Reported Volume of LF Gas Utilized: N.A. N.A.
Planned Reported Volume of LF Gas to be Utilized: N.A. N.A.
Est. Additional LF Gas Available for Use: N.A. N.A.
Capacity Energy
POWER GENERATION POTENTIAL (MW) (GWh/vr)
Est. Total Electric Potential: 1.9 14.4
Current Reported Generation: N.A. N.A.
Planned Reported Generation: N.A. N.A.
Est. Additional Generation Potential: N.A. N.A.
Utilities in County: Benton Rural Electric Assn; Bonneville Power Admin; Pacificorp; PUD No 1 of
Benton County; PUD No 1 of Klickitat County
Environmental Benefits of Utilization
Est. Potential CH_ Reduction (mmcf/yr):
4
CO_ Equivalent of CH Reduction ('000 tons/yr):
Estimated Acid Rain Bonus Allowances:
Emissions Avoided through Fuel Displacement:
Displacement of Coal (tons/yr):
Displacement of Oil (tons/yr):
Total
220.1
113.9
28
Current &
Planned
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Total Emissions Avoided
co2
5,462
2,509
SO,
160
136
Additional
Potential
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Cheyne Road LF (continued)
Contact Information
LANDFILL OWNER
Organization Name: N.A.
Contact Name: N.A.
Phone Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: N.A.
City: N.A.
Fax Number: N.A.
State: N.A. Zip Code: N.A.
LANDFILL OPERATOR
Organization Name: Yakima County Solid Waste Division
Contact Name: Ron Pepper
Phone Number: (509)454-2230 Fax Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: 128 North 2nd Street, Room 408 Courthouse
City: Yakima State: WA Zip Code: 98901-2644
Comments Relating to LFG Recovery Projects
Note: This landfill is open. Therefore, the gas generation may be increasing.
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Cowlitz County LF-B
Landfill Location and Status
Location
City: N.A.
County: Cowlitz
State: WA
Operating Status
Status: Open
Year Open: 1974
Year Closed: 2014
Gas Utilization
Gas Collection?: N.A.
Gas Utilization?: N.A.
Primary Contact (see contact information): Martin Carty
Alternate Landfill Name(s): N.A.
Phone: (206) 577-3030
Waste Collection Information
Types of Waste Accepted: Commercial Solid Waste; Construction Demolition; Industrial Solid
Waste; Municipal Solid Waste; Other Landfill Wastes
% of Waste that is MSW: 60%
Days Open Per Week: 5.5
Annual Acceptance Rate (tons): 86,294
Year Reported: 1993
Waste-in-Place (tons):Jl/ 1,984,762
Tipping Fee ($/ton): N.A.
Design Capacity (tons): N.A.
Acres Currently Landfilled: N.A.
Average Depth (feet): N.A.
Collection System Status:
Collection System Type:
Collection Efficiency:
Methane Concentration:
Gas Collection and Control Data
N.A. Year Gas Collection Began: N.A.
N.A. Est. Percentage of LF Acres Welled: N.A.
85%* LF Gas Collected (mmcf/d): N.A.
50%* CH4 Gas Collected (mmcf/d): . N.A.
*- Default value.
a/ - WIP calculated from acceptance rate and open year.
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Cowlitz County LF-B (continued)
Site Potential
EST. TOTAL METHANE GENERATION
(Estimated from Waste-in-Place):
LF GAS COLLECTION AND UTILIZATION POTENTIAL
Est. Total LF Gas Collection Potential:
Current Reported LF Gas Collection Volume:
Planned Reported LF Gas Collection Volume:
Est. Additional LF Gas Collection Potential:
. Est. Total LF Gas Utilization Volume Potential:
Current Reported Volume of LF Gas Utilized:
Planned Reported Volume of LF Gas to be Utilized:
Est. Additional LF Gas Available for Use:
POWER GENERATION POTENTIAL
Est. Total Electric Potential:
Current Reported Generation:
Planned Reported Generation:
Est. Additional Generation Potential:
mmcf/d
0.9
mmcf/d
1.5
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
1.5
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Capacity
(MW)
2.5
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
mmcf/vr
328.6
mmcf/vr
558.7
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
558.7
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Energy
(GWh/vr)
18.3
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Utilities in County: Bonneville Power Admin; PUD No 1 of Cowlitz County
Environmental Benefits of
Total
Est. Potential CH Reduction (mmcf/yr): 279.4
CO Equivalent of CH Reduction ('000 tons/yr): 144.5
Estimated Acid Rain Bonus Allowances: 36
Utilization
Current &
Planned
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
. Additional
Potential
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Total Emissions Avoided
Emissions Avoided through Fuel Displacement: CCu
Displacement of Coal (tons/yr): 6,933
Displacement of Oil (tons/yr): 3,185
so2
203
173
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Cowlitz County LF-B (continued)
Contact Information
LANDFILL OWNER
Organization Name: N.A.
Contact Name: N.A.
Phone Number: N.A. Fax Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: N.A.
City: N.A. State: N.A. Zip Code: N.A.
LANDFILL OPERATOR
Organization Name: Cowlitz County Public Works Department
Contact Name: Martin Carty
Phone Number: (206)577-3030 Fax Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: 207 North 4th Avenue
City: Kelso State: WA Zip Code: 98626-4189
Comments Relating to LFG Recovery Projects
Note: This landfill is open. Therefore, the gas generation may be increasing.
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Greater Wenatchee LF
Location
City: N.A.
County: Douglas
State: WA
Landfill Location and Status
Operating Status Gas Utilization
Status: Open Gas Collection?: N.A.
Year Open: 1975 Gas Utilization?: N.A.
Year Closed: N.A.
Primary Contact (see contact information): Eldon Richardson
Alternate Landfill Name(s): N.A.
Phone: (509) 662-4591
Waste Collection Information
Types of Waste Accepted: Municipal Solid Waste; Other Landfill Wastes; Sewage Sludge
% of Waste that is MSW: 99%
Days Open Per Week: 5.5
Annual Acceptance Rate (tons): 91,284
Year Reported: 1993
Waste-in-Placeflons):^ 2,008,248
Tipping Fee ($/ton): N.A.
Design Capacity (tons): N.A.
Acres Currently Landfilled: N.A.
Average Depth (feet): N.A.
Collection System Status:
Collection System Type:
Collection Efficiency:
Methane Concentration:
Gas Collection and Control Data
N.A. Year Gas Collection Began: N.A.
N.A. Est. Percentage of LF Acres Welled: N.A.
85%* LF Gas Collected (mmcf/d): N.A.
50%* CH4 Gas Collected (mmcf/d): . N.A.
*- Default value.
a/ - WIP calculated from acceptance rate and open year.
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Greater Wenatchee LF (continued)
Site Potential
EST. TOTAL METHANE GENERATION
(Estimated from Waste-in-Place):
LF GAS COLLECTION AND UTILIZATION POTENTIAL
Est. Total LF Gas Collection Potential:
Current Reported LF Gas Collection Volume:
Planned Reported LF Gas Collection Volume:
Est. Additional LF Gas Collection Potential:
Est. Total LF Gas Utilization Volume Potential:
Current Reported Volume of LF Gas Utilized:
Planned Reported Volume of LF Gas to be Utilized:
Est. Additional LF Gas Available for Use:
POWER GENERATION POTENTIAL
Est. Total Electric Potential:
Current Reported Generation:
Planned Reported Generation:
Est. Additional Generation Potential:
Utilities in County: Bonneville Power Admin; Nespelem Valley
Douglas County; Waterville Light Utility
mmcf/d mmcf/vr
0.9 330.7
mmcf/d mmcf/vr
1.5 562.2
N.A. N.A.
N.A. N.A.
N.A. N.A.
1.5 562.2
N.A. N.A.
N.A. N.A.
N.A. N.A.
Capacity Energy
(MW) (GWh/vr)
2.5 18.4
N.A. N.A.
N.A. N.A.
N.A. N.A.
Elec Coop Inc; PUD No 1 of
Environmental Benefits of Utilization
Total
Est. Potential CH Reduction (mmcf/yr): 281.1
CO Equivalent of CH Reduction ('000 tons/yr): 145.5
Estimated Acid Rain Bonus Allowances: 36
Current & . Additional
Planned Potential
N.A. N.A.
N.A. N.A.
N.A. N.A.
Total Emissions Avoided
Emissions Avoided through Fuel Displacement: CCX,
Displacement of Coal (tons/yr): 6,977
Displacement of Oil (tons/yr): 3,205
SQ2
205
174
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Greater Wenatchee LF (continued)
Contact Information
LANDFILL OWNER
Organization Name: N.A.
Contact Name: N.A.
Phone Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: N.A.
City: N.A.
Fax Number: N.A.
State: N.A. Z'PCode: N.A.
LANDFILL OPERATOR
Organization Name: Waste Management of Washington
Contact Name: Eldon Richardson
Phone Number: (509)662-4591 Fax Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1440
City: Wenatchee State: WA Zip Code: 98807-1440
Comments Relating to LFG Recovery Projects
Note: This landfill is open. Therefore, the gas generation may be increasing.
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Hawks Prairie LF
Landfill Location and Status
Location
City: N.A.
County: Thurston
State: WA
Operating Status
Status: Open
Year Open: 1970
Year Closed: 1997
Primary Contact (see contact information): Jeff Sternhagen
Alternate Landfill Name(s): N.A.
Gas Utilization
Gas Collection?: Operational
Gas Utilization?: N.A.
Phone: (206)786-5136
Waste Collection Information
Types of Waste Accepted: Municipal Solid Waste; Other Landfill Wastes
% of Waste that is MSW: 99%
Days Open Per Week: 5.5
Annual Acceptance Rate (tons): 89,467
Year Reported: 1993
Waste-in-Place (tons):*7 2,415,609
Tipping Fee ($/ton): N.A.
Design Capacity (tons): N.A.
Acres Currently Landfilled: 65
Average Depth (feet): 60
Gas Collection and Control Data
Collection System Status:
Collection System Type:
Collection Efficiency:
Methane Concentration:
Operational
N.A.
85%*
50%*
Year Gas Collection Began: N.A.
Est. Percentage of LF Acres Welled: N.A.
LF Gas Collected (mmcf/d): N.A.
CH4 Gas Collected (mmcf/d): N.A.
* - Default value.
a/ - WIP calculated from acceptance rate and open year.
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Hawks Prairie LF (continued)
Site Potential
EST. TOTAL METHANE GENERATION
(Estimated from Waste-in-Place):
LF GAS COLLECTION AND UTILIZATION POTENTIAL
Est. Total LF Gas Collection Potential:
Current Reported LF Gas Collection Volume:
Planned Reported LF Gas Collection Volume:
Est. Additional LF Gas Collection Potential:
Est. Total LF Gas Utilization Volume Potential:
Current Reported Volume of LF Gas Utilized:
Planned Reported Volume of LF Gas to be Utilized:
Est. Additional LF Gas Available for Use:
POWER GENERATION POTENTIAL
Est. Total Electric Potential:
Current Reported Generation:
Planned Reported Generation:
Est. Additional Generation Potential:
mmcf/d
1.0
mmcf/d
1.7
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
1.7
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Capacity
(MW)
2.7
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Utilities in County: Bonneville Power Admin; PUD No 1 of Lewis County; Puget
Light Co
Environmental Benefits of
Total
Est. Potential CH Reduction (mmcf/yr): 311.8
CO Equivalent of CH. Reduction ('000 tons/yr): 161.4
Estimated Acid Rain Bonus Allowances: 40
Utilization
Current &
Planned
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
mmcf/vr
366.9
mmcf/vr
623.7
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
623.7
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Energy
(GWh/vr)
20.4
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Sound Power &
Additional
Potential
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Total Emissions Avoided
Emissions Avoided through Fuel Displacement: CO2
Displacement of Coal (tons/yr): 7,740
Displacement of Oil (tons/yr): 3,556
so2
227
193
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June199(
Hawks Prairie LF (continued)
Contact Information
LANDFILL OWNER
Organization Name: N.A.
Contact Name: N.A.
Phone Number: N.A. Fax Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: N.A.
City: N.A. State: N.A. Zip Code: N.A.
LANDFILL OPERATOR
Organization Name: Thurston County Solid Waste Division
Contact Name: Jeff Sternhagen
Phone Number: (206)786-5136 Fax Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: 2000 Lakeridge Drive SW
City: Olympia State: WA Zip Code: 98502-6045
Comments Relating to LFG Recovery Projects
Note: This landfill is open. Therefore, the gas generation may be increasing.
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Hidden Valley LF
Location
City: N.A.
County: Pierce
State: WA
Landfill Location and Status
Gas Utilization
Operating Status
Status: Open
Year Open: 1959
Year Closed: 1996
Primary Contact (see contact information): Harvey Doman
Alternate Landfill Name(s): N.A.
Gas Collection?: Operational
Gas Utilization?: N.A.
Phone: (206) 847-7555
Waste Collection Information
Types of Waste Accepted: Commercial Solid Waste; Construction Demolition; Municipal Solid
Waste; Other Landfill Wastes
% of Waste that is MSW: 56%
Days Open Per Week: 7
Annual Acceptance Rate (tons): 458,560
Year Reported: 1993
Waste-in-Place (tons): a/ 17,425,280
Tipping Fee ($/ton): N.A.
Design Capacity (tons): N.A.
Acres Currently Landfilled: 65
Average Depth (feet): 110
Collection System Status:
Collection System Type:
Collection Efficiency:
Methane Concentration:
Gas Collection and Control Data
Operational Year Gas Collection Began: N.A.
N.A. Est. Percentage of LF Acres Welled: N.A.
85%* LF Gas Collected (mmcf/d): N.A.
50%* CH4 Gas Collected (mmcf/d): . N.A.
* - Default value.
a/ - WIP calculated from acceptance rate and open year.
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 199(
Hidden Valley LF (continued)
Site Potential
EST. TOTAL METHANE GENERATION mmcf/d mmcf/vr
(Estimated from Waste-in-Place): 4.7 1,698.5
LF GAS COLLECTION AND UTILIZATION POTENTIAL mmcf/d mmcf/vr
Est. Total LF Gas Collection Potential: 7.9 2,887.5
Current Reported LF Gas Collection Volume: N.A. N.A.
Planned Reported LF Gas Collection Volume: N.A. N.A.
Est. Additional LF Gas Collection Potential: N.A. N.A.
Est. Total LF Gas Utilization Volume Potential: 7.9 2,887.5
Current Reported Volume of LF Gas Utilized: N.A. N.A.
Planned Reported Volume of LF Gas to be Utilized: N.A. N.A.
Est. Additional LF Gas Available for Use: N.A. N.A.
Capacity Energy
POWER GENERATION POTENTIAL (MW) (GWh/vr)
Est. Total Electric Potential: 12.7 94.4
Current Reported Generation: N.A. N.A.
Planned Reported Generation: N.A. N.A.
Est. Additional Generation Potential: N.A. N.A.
Utilities in County: Alder Mutual Light Co Inc; Bonneville Power Admin; Eatonville Power & Light
Dept; Elmhurst Mutual Power & Light Co; Fircrest Public Light Utility;
Lakeview Light & Power Company; Milton Electric Dept; Chop Mutual Light
Company; Parkland Light & Water Company; Peninsula Light Company; PUD
No 1 of Lewis County; Puget Sound Power & Light Co
Est. Potential CH Reduction (mmcf/yr):
CO Equivalent of CH Reduction ('000 tons/yr):
Estimated Acid Rain Bonus Allowances:
Emissions Avoided through Fuel Displacement:
Displacement of Coal (tons/yr):
Displacement of Oil (tons/yr):
Environmental Benefits of Utilization
Current &
Planned
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Total
1,443.7
747.0
188
Total Emissions Avoided
CO0 SO,
£. '.I
35,831 1,050
16,461 895
Additional
Potential
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Hidden Valley LF (continued)
Contact Information
LANDFILL OWNER
Organization Name: N.A.
Contact Name: N.A.
Phone Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: N.A.
City: N.A.
Fax Number: N.A.
State: N.A. Zip Code: N.A.
LANDFILL OPERATOR
Organization Name: Land Recovery Incorporated
Contact Name: Harvey Doman
Phone Number: (206)847-7555 Fax Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 73057
City: Puyallup State: WA Zip Code: 98373-0057
Comments Relating to LFG Recovery Projects
Note: This landfill is open. Therefore, the gas generation may be increasing.
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Leichner LF
Landfill Location and Status
Location
City: N.A.
County: Clark
State: WA
Primary Contact (see contact information): N.A.
Alternate Landfill Name(s): N.A.
Operating Status
Status: Closed
Year Open: 1939
Year Closed: 1991
Gas Utilization
Gas Collection?: Operational
Gas Utilization?: N.A.
Phone: N.A.
Waste Collection Information
Types of Waste Accepted: Municipal Solid Waste; Other Landfill Wastes
% of Waste that is MSW: N.A.
Days Open Per Week: 5.5*
Annual Acceptance Rate (tons): N.A.
Year Reported: N.A.
Waste-in-Place(tons):a' 5,750,000
Tipping Fee ($/ton): N.A.
Design Capacity (tons): N.A.
Acres Currently Landfilled: 80
Average Depth (feet): 38
Collection System Status:
Collection System Type:
Collection Efficiency:
Methane Concentration:
Gas Collection and Control Data
Operational Year Gas Collection Began: N.A.
N.A. Est. Percentage of LF Acres Welled: N.A.
85%* LF Gas Collected (mmcf/d): N.A.
50%* CH4 Gas Collected (mmcf/d): N.A.
* - Default value.
a/ - Unadjusted Reported WIP (1991) value.
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Leichner LF (continued)
Site Potential
EST. TOTAL METHANE GENERATION
(Estimated from Waste-in-Place):
LF GAS COLLECTION AND UTILIZATION POTENTIAL
Est. Total LF Gas Collection Potential:
Current Reported LF Gas Collection Volume:
Planned Reported LF Gas Collection Volume:
Est. Additional LF Gas Collection Potential:
Est. Total LF Gas Utilization Volume Potential:
Current Reported Volume of LF Gas Utilized:
Planned Reported Volume of LF Gas to be Utilized:
Est. Additional LF Gas Available for Use:
POWER GENERATION POTENTIAL
Est. Total Electric Potential:
Current Reported Generation:
Planned Reported Generation:
• Est. Additional Generation Potential:
mmcf/d
1.8
mmcf/d
3.1
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
3.1
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Capacity
(MW)
4.9
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
mmcf/yr
662.7
mmcf/vr
1,126.6
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
1,126.6
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Energy
(GWh/yr)
36.8
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Utilities in County: Bonneville Power Admin; PUD No 1 of Clark County
Environmental Benefits of
Total
Est. Potential CH Reduction (mmcf/yr): 563.3
CO Equivalent of CH Reduction ('000 tons/yr): 291.5
Estimated Acid Rain Bonus Allowances: 73
Utilization
Current &
Planned
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Additional
Potential
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Total Emissions Avoided
Emissions Avoided through Fuel Displacement: CO2
Displacement of Coal (tons/yr): 13,980
Displacement of Oil (tons/yr): 6,422
so2
410
349
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Leichner LF (continued)
Contact Information
LANDFILL OWNER
Organization Name: N.A.
Contact Name: N.A.
Phone Number: N.A. Fax Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: N.A.
City: N.A. State: N.A. Zip Code: N.A.
LANDFILL OPERATOR
Organization Name: N.A.
Contact Name: N.A.
Phone Number: N.A. Fax Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: N.A.
City: N.A. State: N.A. Zip Code: N.A.
Comments Relating to LFG Recovery Projects
Note: This landfill is closed. Therefore, the gas generation may be declining.
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Olympic View LF
Landfill Location and Status
Location
City: N.A.
County: Kitsap
State: WA
Operating Status
Status: Open
Year Open: 1960
Year Closed: 2004
Primary Contact (see contact information): Scott Daniels
Alternate Landfill Name(s): Olympic View SLF
Gas Utilization
Gas Collection?: Operational
Gas Utilization?: N.A.
Phone: (206) 674-2331
Waste Collection Information
Types of Waste Accepted: Commercial Solid Waste; Construction Demolition; Industrial Solid
Waste; Municipal Solid Waste; Other Landfill Wastes; Sewage Sludge;
Yard Waste
% of Waste that is MSW: 34%
Days Open Per Week: 5.5
Annual Acceptance Rate (tons): 189,304
Year Reported: 1993
Waste-in-Place(tons):a/ 7,004,248
Tipping Fee ($/ton): N.A.
Design Capacity (tons): N.A.
Acres Currently Landfilled: 65
Average Depth (feet): 100
Collection System Status:
Collection System Type:
Collection Efficiency:
Methane Concentration:
Gas Collection and Control Data
Operational Year Gas Collection Began: N.A.
N.A. Est. Percentage of LF Acres Welled: N.A.
85%* LF Gas Collected (mmcf/d): N.A.
50%* CH4 Gas Collected (mmcf/d): . N.A.
* - Default value.
a/ - WIP calculated from acceptance rate and open year.
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Olympic View LF (continued)
Site Potential
EST. TOTAL METHANE GENERATION
(Estimated from Waste-in-Place):
LF GAS COLLECTION AND UTILIZATION POTENTIAL
Est. Total LF Gas Collection Potential:
Current Reported LF Gas Collection Volume:
Planned Reported LF Gas Collection Volume:
Est. Additional LF Gas Collection Potential:
Est. Total LF Gas Utilization Volume Potential:
Current Reported Volume of LF Gas Utilized:
Planned Reported Volume of LF Gas to be Utilized:
Est. Additional LF Gas Available for Use:
POWER GENERATION POTENTIAL
Est. Total Electric Potential:
Current Reported Generation:
Planned Reported Generation:
Est. Additional Generation Potential:
mmcf/d
2.1
mmcf/d
3.6
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
3.6
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Capacity
(MW)
5.8
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Utilities in County: Bonneville Power Admin; PUD No 3 of Mason County; Puget
Light Co
Environmental Benefits of
Total
Est. Potential CH Reduction (mmcf/yr): 657.9
CO Equivalent of CH. Reduction ('000 tons/yr): 340.4
Estimated Acid Rain Bonus Allowances: 86
Utilization
Current &
Planned
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
mmcf/yr
774.0
mmcf/vr
1,315.7
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
1,315.7
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Energy
(GWh/vr)
43.0
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Sound Power &
Additional
Potential
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Total Emissions Avoided
Emissions Avoided through Fuel Displacement: CCX,
Displacement of Coal (tons/yr): 16,328
Displacement of Oil (tons/yr): 7,501
so2
479
408
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Olympic View LF (continued)
Contact information
LANDFILL OWNER
Organization Name: N.A.
Contact Name: N.A.
Phone Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: N.A.
City: N.A.
Fax Number: N.A.
State: N.A. Zip Code: N.A.
LANDFILL OPERATOR
Organization Name: Kitsap County SLF Incorporated
Contact Name: Scott Daniels
Phone Number: (206)674-2331 Fax Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 438
City: Bremerton State: WA Zip Code: 98312
Comments Relating to LFG Recovery Projects
Note: This landfill is open. Therefore, the gas generation may be increasing.
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Roosevelt Regional LF
Location
City: N.A.
County: Klickitat
State: WA
Landfill Location and Status
Operating Status Gas Utilization
Status: Open Gas Collection?: Operational
Year Open: 1990 Gas Utilization?: N.A.
Year Closed: 2030
Primary Contact (see contact information): Rick Morck
Alternate Landfill Name(s): N.A.
Phone: (206) 646-2400
Waste Collection Information
Types of Waste Accepted: Ash; Construction Demolition; Municipal Solid Waste; Other Landfill
Wastes; Sewage Sludge; Yard Waste
% of Waste that is MSW: 45%
Days Open Per Week: 5.5
Annual Acceptance Rate (tons): 1,018,032
Year Reported: 1993
Waste-in-Place (tons):!1/ 7,126,224
Tipping Fee ($/ton): N.A.
Design Capacity (tons): N.A.
Acres Currently Landfilled: 72
Average Depth (feet): 180
Collection System Status:
Collection System Type;:
Collection Efficiency:
Methane Concentration:
Gas Collection and Control Data
Operational Year Gas Collection Began: N.A.
N.A. Est. Percentage of LF Acres Welled: N.A.
85%* LF Gas Collected (mmcf/d): N.A.
50%* CH4 Gas Collected (mmcf/d): . N.A.
* - Default value.
a/ - WIP calculated from acceptance rate and open year.
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Roosevelt Regional LF (continued)
Site Potential
EST. TOTAL METHANE GENERATION
(Estimated from Waste-in-Place):
LF GAS COLLECTION AND UTILIZATION POTENTIAL
Est. Total LF Gas Collection Potential:
Current Reported LF Gas Collection Volume:
Planned Reported LF Gas Collection Volume:
Est. Additional LF Gas Collection Potential:
Est. Total LF Gas Utilization Volume Potential:
Current Reported Volume of LF Gas Utilized:
Planned Reported Volume of LF Gas to be Utilized:
Est. Additional LF Gas Available for Use:
POWER GENERATION POTENTIAL
Est. Total Electric Potential:
Current Reported Generation:
Planned Reported Generation:
Est. Additional Generation Potential:
mmcf/d
2.2
mmcf/d
3.7
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
3.7
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Capacity
(MW)
5.9
IM.A.
N.A.
N.A.
mmcf/vr
784.8
mmcf/vr
1,334.1
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
1,334.1
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Energy
(GWh/vr)
43.6
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Utilities in County: Bonneville Power Admin; PUD No 1 of Klickitat County
Environmental Benefits of
Total
Est. Potential CH Reduction (mmcf/yr): 667.1
CO Equivalent of CH. Reduction ('000 tons/yr): 345.2
Estimated Acid Rain Bonus Allowances: 87
Utilization
Current &
Planned
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
. Additional
Potential
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Total Emissions Avoided
Emissions Avoided through Fuel Displacement: CCu
Displacement of Coal (tons/yr): 16,556
Displacement of Oil (tons/yr): 7,606
so.
485
414
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Roosevelt Regional LF (continued)
Contact Information
LANDFILL OWNER
Organization Name: N.A.
Contact Name: N.A.
Phone Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: N.A.
City: N.A.
Fax Number: N.A.
State: N.A. Zip Code: N.A.
LANDFILL OPERATOR
Organization Name: Regional Disposal Company
Contact Name: Rick Morck
Phone Number: (206) 646-2400 Fax Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: 200 112th Avenue NE, Suite 300
City: Bellevue State: WA Zip Code: 99004
Comments Relating to LFG Recovery Projects
Note: This landfill is open. Therefore, the gas generation may be increasing.
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Terrace Heights LF
Location
City: N.A.
County: Yakima
State: WA
Primary Contact (see contact information): Ron Pepper
Alternate Landfill Name(s): N.A.
Landfill Location and Status
Operating Status Gas Utilization
Status: Open Gas Collection?: N.A.
Year Open: 1974 Gas Utilization?: N.A.
Year Closed: 2012
Phone: (509) 454-2230
Waste Collection Information
Types of Waste Accepted: Municipal Solid Waste; Other Landfill Wastes; Sewage Sludge; Yard
Waste
% of Waste that is MSW: 89%
Days Open Per Week: 5.5
Annual Acceptance Rate (tons): ' 162,053
Year Reported: 1993
Waste-in-Place(tons):a/ 3,727,219
Tipping Fee ($/ton): N.A.
Design Capacity (tons): N.A.
Acres Currently Landfilled: N.A.
Average Depth (feet): N.A.
Collection System Status:
Collection System Type:
Collection Efficiency:
Methane Concentration:
Gas Collection and Control Data
N.A. Year Gas Collection Began: N.A.
N.A. Est. Percentage of LF Acres Welled: N.A.
85%* LF Gas Collected (mmcf/d): N.A.
50%* CH4 Gas Collected (mmcf/d): N.A.
* - Default value.
a/ - WIP calculated from acceptance rate and open year.
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Terrace Heights LF (continued)
Site Potential
EST. TOTAL METHANE GENERATION mmcf/d mmcf/yr
(Estimated from Waste-in-Place): 1.3 483.2
LF GAS COLLECTION AND UTILIZATION POTENTIAL mmcf/d mmcf/vr
Est. Total LF Gas Collection Potential: 2.3 821.5
Current Reported LF Gas Collection Volume: N.A. N.A.
Planned Reported LF Gas Collection Volume: N.A. N.A.
Est. Additional LF Gas Collection Potential: N.A. N.A.
Est. Total LF Gas Utilization Volume Potential: 2.3 821.5
Current Reported Volume of LF Gas Utilized: N.A. N.A.
Planned Reported Volume of LF Gas to be Utilized: N.A. N.A.
Est. Additional LF Gas Available for Use: N.A. N.A.
Capacity Energy
POWER GENERATION POTENTIAL (MW) (GWh/vr)
Est. Total Electric Potential: 3.6 26.9
Current Reported Generation: N.A. N.A.
Planned Reported Generation: N.A. N.A.
Est. Additional Generation Potential: N.A. N.A.
Utilities in County: Benton Rural Electric Assn; Bonneville Power Admin; Pacificorp; PUD No 1 of
Beriton County; PUD No 1 of Klickitat County
Environmental Benefits of Utilization
Est. Potential CH. Reduction (mmcf/yr):
4
CO2 Equivalent of CHL Reduction ('000 tons/yr):
Estimated Acid Rain Bonus Allowances:
Emissions Avoided through Fuel Displacement:
Displacement of Coal (tons/yr):
Displacement of Oil (tons/yr):
Total
410.8
212.5
53
Current &
Planned
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Total Emissions Avoided
CQ2
10,194
4,683
sa,
299
255
Additional
Potential
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Candidate Landfills
-------
Updated: June 1996
Terrace Heights LF (continued)
Contact Information
LANDFILL OWNER
Organization Name: N.A.
Contact Name: N.A.
Phone Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: N.A.
City: N.A.
Fax Number: N.A.
State: N.A. Zip Code: N.A.
LANDFILL OPERATOR
Organization Name: Yakima County Solid Waste Division
Contact Name: Ron Pepper
Phone Number: (509)454-2230 Fax Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: 128 North 2nd Street, 408 Courthouse
City: Yakima State: WA Zip Code: 98901-2644
Comments Relating to LFG Recovery Projects
Note: This landfill is open. Therefore, the gas generation may be increasing.
Candidate Landfills
-------
-------
-------
-------
Summary of Statewide Collection Potential and Benefits for Current Projects
Number of Current Projects: 5
Estimated Total LFG Collection Potential (mmcf/day): 25.6
Estimated Total Generation Potential (MW): 57.0
CO Equivalent Available (tons/yr):1 2,415,613 - 2,576,626
1 - The range of values are the total annual carbon dioxide equivalent of methane reductions (low range) and
the total annual carbon dioxide equivalent of methane reductions plus the annual carbon dioxide reductions
realized from coal displacement (high range).
-------
Updated: June 1996
Cathcart LF
Landfill Location and Status
Location
City: Snohomish
County: Snohomish
State: WA
Operating Status
Status: Closed
Year Open: 1980
Year Closed: 1992
Primary Contact (see contact information): Jeff Kelly-Clarke
Alternate Landfill Name(s): N.A.
Gas Utilization
Gas Collection?: Operational
Gas Utilization?: Planned
Phone: (206) 388-3425
Waste Collection Information
Types of Waste Accepted: Municipal Solid Waste; Other Landfill Wastes
% of Waste that is MSW:
Days Open Per Week:
Annual Acceptance Rate (tons):
Year Reported:
Waste-in-Place (tons):a/
N.A.
5.5*
314,600
N.A.
3,258,989
Tipping Fee ($/ton): N.A.
Design Capacity (tons): N.A.
Acres Currently Landfilled: 56
Average Depth (feet): 110
Collection System Status:
Collection System Type:
Collection Efficiency:
Methane Concentration:
Gas Collection and Control Data
Operational Year Gas Collection Began: 1989
Trenches; Wells Est. Percentage of LF Area Welled: 100%
85%* LF Gas Collected (mmcf/d): 5.18
50%* CH4 Gas Collected (mmcf/d): 2.59
Utilization System Status:
End-use of Collected Gas:
Utilization System Type:
System Description:
Energy Purchaser(s):
Gas Utilization Data
Planned Year Project Initiated: N.A.
100% utilized; 0% flared; 0% vented
1C Engine
N.A.
PUD No 1 of Snohomish County
* - Default value.
a/ - Unadjusted Reported WIP (1992) value.
Current Projects
-------
Updated: June 1996
Cathcart LF (continued)
Site Potential
EST. TOTAL METHANE GENERATION
(Estimated from Waste-in-Place):
LF GAS COLLECTION AND UTILIZATION POTENTIAL
Est. Total LF Gas Collection Potential:^
Current Reported LF Gas Collection Volume:
Planned Reported LF Gas Collection Volume:
Est. Additional LF Gas Collection Potential:07
Est. Total LF Gas Utilization Volume Potential:
Current Reported Volume of LF Gas Utilized:
Planned Reported Volume of LF Gas to be Utilized:
Est. Additional LF Gas Available for Use:c/
POWER GENERATION POTENTIAL
Est. Total Electric Potential:
Current Reported Generation:
Planned Reported Generation:
Est. Additional Generation Potential:0'
mmcf/d
1.2
mmcf/d
5.2
5.2
0.0
0.0
5.2
0.0
5.2
0.0
Capacity
(MW)
8.3
0.0
6.6
1.7
mmcf/vr
441.7
mmcf/vr
1,892.2
1,892.2
0.0
0.0
1,892.2
0.0
1,892.2
0.0
Energy
(GWh/vr)
61.9
0.0
49.1
12.7
Utilities in County: Bonneville Power Admin; PUD No 1 of Snohomish County
Environmental Benefits of Utilization
Current &
Total Planned
Est. Potential CH Reduction (mmcf/yr): 946.1
4
COn Equivalent of CH A Reduction ('000 tons/yr): 489.5
2 4
Estimated Acid Rain Bonus Allowances: 123
946.1
489.5
98
Additional
Potential
0.0
0.0
25
Total Emissions Avoided
Emissions Avoided through Fuel Displacement: CO9
Displacement of Coal (tons/yr): 23,480
Displacement of Oil (tons/yr): 10,787
S00
£.
688
586
c/ - This value is calculated from other estimated values and is particularly sensitive to the following factors:
(1) whether the landfill is open or closed and (2) portion of landfill that is welled.
d/ - The Current Reported LF Gas Collection Volume exceeded the Estimated Total LF Gas Collection Potential.
Therefore, the Estimated Total LF Gas Collection Potential was set to the Current Reported LF Gas Collection
Volume. Consequently, no value for Estimated Additional LF Gas Collection Potential is calculated, although
Additional Potential may exist.
Current Projects
-------
Updated: June 1996
Cathcart LF (continued)
Contact Information
LANDFILL OWNER
Organization Name: Snohomish County
N.A.
N.A. Fax Number: N.A.
Contact Name:
Phone Number:
Mailing Address: N.A.
City: N.A.
State: N.A.
Zip Code: N.A.
LANDFILL OPERATOR;
Organization Name: Snohomish County Solid Waste Division
Contact Name: Jeff Kelly-Clarke
Phone Number: (206)388-3425 Fax Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: 2930 Wetmore Avenue
City: EEverett State: WA Zip Code: 98201-4017
ENERGY RECOVERY SYSTEM DEVELOPER
Organization Name: F'UD No 1 of Snohomish County
N.A.
N.A. Fax Number: N.A.
N.A.
N.A. State: N.A. Zip Code: N.A.
Contact Name:
Phone Number:
Mailing Address:
City:
ENERGY RECOVERY SYSTEM OPERATOR
Organization Name: F*UD No 1 of Snohomish County
Contact Name: N.A.
Phone Number: N.A. Fax Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: N.A.
City: N.A. State: N.A. Zip Code: N.A.
Comments Relating to LFG Recovery Projects
Gas-to-electricity project tabled & later revived; now economically viable. However, gas
generation curve on downside; need to do something soon. Public Utility District No 1 will
probably develop energy recovery. Condensate analyzed & can be treated with leachate.
Removes cost risk for County. Gas currently flared.
Note: This landfill is closed. Therefore, the gas generation may be declining.
Current Projects
-------
Updated: June 1996
Cedar Hills LF
Landfill Location and Status
Location
City: Maple Valley
County: King
State: WA
Operating Status
Status: Open
Year Open: 1964
Year Closed: 2022
Primary Contact (see contact information): Rodney Hansen
Alternate Landfill Name(s): N.A.
Gas Utilization
Gas Collection?: Operational
Gas Utilization?: Planned
Phone: (206) 296-4385
Waste Collection Information
Types of Waste Accepted: Municipal Solid Waste; Other Landfill Wastes
% of Waste that is MSW: 97%
Days Open Per Week: 5.5*
Annual Acceptance Rate (tons): 919,857
Year Reported: 1993
Waste-in-Place (tons): a/ 21,839,714
Tipping Fee ($/ton): N.A.
Design Capacity (tons): N.A.
Acres Currently Landfilled: 200
Average Depth (feet): 150
Collection System Status:
Collection System Type:
Collection Efficiency:
Methane Concentration:
Gas Collection and Control Data
Operational Year Gas Collection Began: 1989
Trenches; Wells Est. Percentage of LF Area Welled: 47%
85%* LF Gas Collected (mmcf/d): 10.00
50%* CH4 Gas Collected (mmcf/d): 5.00
Utilization System Status:
End-use of Collected Gas:
Utilization System Type:
System Description:
Energy Purchaser(s):
Gas Utilization Data
Planned Year Project Initiated: 1996
N.A. utilized; N.A. flared; N.A. vented
Combined Cycle
Electricity
Puget Sound Power & Light Co
* - Default value.
a/ - Reported WIP (1994) adjusted to current year.
Current Projects
-------
Updated: June 1996
Cedar Hills LF (continued)
EST. TOTAL METHANE GENERATION
Site Potential
(Estimated from Waste-in-Place):
LF GAS COLLECTION AND UTILIZATION POTENTIAL
Est. Total LF Gas Collection Potential:d/
Current Reported LF Gas Collection Volume:
Planned Reported LF Gas Collection Volume:
Est. Additional LF Gas Collection Potential:c/
Est. Total LF Gas Utilization Volume Potential:
Current Reported Volume of LF Gas Utilized:
Planned Reported Volume of LF Gas to be Utilized:
Est. Additional LF Gas Available for Use:
POWER GENERATION POTENTIAL
Est. Total Electric Potential:
Current Reported Generation:
Planned Reported Generation:
Est. Additional Generation Potential:c/
mmcf/d
5.7
mmcf/d
10.0
10.0
0.0
0.0
10.0
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Capacity
(MvV)
32.0
0.0
32.0
0.0
mmcf/yr
2,090.1
mmcf/yr
3,650.0
3,650.0
0.0
0.0
3,650.0
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Energy
(GWh/vr)
238.3
0.0
238.3
0.0
Utilities in County: Bonneville Power Admin; PUD No 1 of Snohomish County; Puget Sound
Power & Light Co; Seattle City Light; Tanner Electric Cooperative
Environmental Benefits of Utilization
Est. Potential CH Reduction (mmcf/yr):
4
CO,, Equivalent of CH A Reduction ('000 tons/yr):
2 4
Estimated Acid Rain Bonus Allowances:
Emissions Avoided through Fuel Displacement:
Displacement of Coal (tons/yr):
Displacement of Oil (tons/yr):
Total
1,825.0
944.3
476
Current &
Planned
N.A.
N.A.
476
Additional
Potential
N.A.
N.A.
0
Total Emissions Avoided
CQ2
90,443
41,550
—2
2,651
2,259
c/ - This value is calculated from other estimated values and is particularly sensitive to the following factors:
(1) whether the landfill is open or closed and (2) portion of landfill that is welled.
d/ - The Current Reported LF Gas Collection Volume exceeded the Estimated Total LF Gas Collection Potential.
Therefore, the Estimated Total LF Gas Collection Potential was set to the Current Reported LF Gas Collection
Volume. Consequently, no value for Estimated Additional LF Gas Collection Potential is calculated, although
Additional Potential may exist.
Current Projects
-------
Updated: June 1996
Cedar Hills LF (continued)
Contact Information
LANDFILL OWNER
Organization Name:
Contact Name:
Phone Number:
Mailing Address:
City:
King County
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Fax Number: N.A.
State: N.A.
Zip Code: N.A.
LANDFILL OPERATOR
Organization Name: King County Solid Waste Division
Contact Name: Rodney Hansen
Phone Number: (206) 296-4385 Fax Number:
Mailing Address: 400 Yesler Way, Room 600
City: Seattle State: WA
N.A.
Zip Code: 98104-2637
ENERGY RECOVERY SYSTEM DEVELOPER
Organization Name: Laidlaw, Inc.
Contact Name: N.A.
Phone Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: N.A.
City: N.A.
Fax Number: N.A.
State: N.A.
Zip Code: N.A.
ENERGY RECOVERY SYSTEM OPERATOR
Organization Name: N.A.
Contact Name: N.A.
Phone Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: N.A.
City: N.A.
Fax Number: N.A.
State: N.A.
Zip Code: N.A.
Comments Relating to LFG Recovery Projects
Laidlaw, Inc. will finance this project. This facility is expected to have a generating capacity
greater than 20 MW.
Note: This landfill is open. Therefore, the gas generation may be increasing.
Current Projects
-------
Updated: June 1996
Kent Highlands LF
Landfill Location and Status
Location
City: Kent
County: King
State: WA
Operating Status
Status: Closed
Year Open: 1968
Year Closed: 1986
Primary Contact (see contact information): N.A.
Alternate Landfill Name(s): N.A.
Gas Utilization
Gas Collection?: Operational
Gas Utilization?: Planned
Phone: N.A
Waste Collection Information
Types of Waste Accepted: Other Landfill Wastes; Yard Waste
% of Waste that is MSW:
Days Open Per Week:
Annual Acceptance Rate (tons):
Year Reported:
Waste-in-Place (tons):a/
N.A.
5.5*
N.A.
N.A.
8,000,000
Tipping Fee ($/ton): ISI.A.
Design Capacity (tons): N.A.
Acres Currently Landfilled: 60
Average Depth (feet): 110
Collection System Status:
Collection System Type:
Collection Efficiency:
Methane Concentration:
Gas Collection and Control Data
Operational Year Gas Collection Began: 1986
Trenches; Wells Est. Percentage of LF Area Welled: 100%
85%* LF Gas Collected (mmcf/d): 3.67
50%* CH 4 Gas Collected (mmcf/d): 1.84
Utilization System Status:
End-use of Collected Gas:
Utilization System Type:
System Description:
Energy Purchaser(s):
Gas Utilization Data
Planned Year Project Initiated: N.A.
0% utilized; 100% flared; 0% vented
1C Engine
N.A.
Seattle City Light
*- Default value.
a/ - Unadjusted Reported WIP (1994) value.
Current Projects
-------
Updated: June 1996
Kent Highlands LF (continued)
Site Potential
EST. TOTAL METHANE GENERATION mmcf/d mmcf/vr
(Estimated from Waste-in-Place): 2.4 862.3
LF GAS COLLECTION AND UTILIZATION POTENTIAL mmcf/d mmcf/vr
Est. Total LF Gas Collection Potential: 4.0 1,465.9
Current Reported LF Gas Collection Volume: 3.7 1,340.3
Planned Reported LF Gas Collection Volume: 0.0 0.0
Est. Additional LF Gas Collection Potential:07 0.3 125.6
Est. Total LF Gas Utilization Volume Potential: 4.0 1,465.9
Current Reported Volume of LF Gas Utilized: 0.0 0.0
Planned Reported Volume of LF Gas to be Utilized: 0.0 0.0
Est. Additional LF Gas Available for Use:c/ 4.0 1,465.9
Capacity Energy
POWER GENERATION POTENTIAL (MW) (GWh/vr)
Est. Total Electric Potential: 6.4 47.9
Current Reported Generation: 0.0 0.0
Planned Reported Generation: 3.0 22.3
Est. Additional Generation Potential:07 3.4 25.6
Utilities in County: Bonneville Power Admin; PUD No 1 of Snohomish County; Puget Sound
Power & Light Co; Seattle City Light; Tanner Electric Cooperative
Environmental Benefits of Utilization
Est. Potential CH Reduction (mmcf/yr):
4
CO Equivalent of CH Reduction ('000 tons/yr):
Estimated Acid Rain Bonus Allowances:
Emissions Avoided through Fuel Displacement:
Displacement of Coal (tons/yr):
Displacement of Oil (tons/yr):
Total
733.0
379.3
95
Current &
Planned
670.1
346.8
44
Additional
Potential
62.8
32.5
51
Total Emissions Avoided
co2
18,191
8,357
S0_2
533
454
c/ - This value is calculated from other estimated values and is particularly sensitive to the following factors:
(1) whether the landfill is open or closed and (2) portion of landfill that is welled.
Current Projects
-------
Updated: June 1996
Kent Highlands LF (continued)
Contact Information
LANDFILL OWNER
Organization Name: City of Seattle
Contact Name:
Phone Number:
Mailing Address:
City:
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Fax Number:
State:
N.A.
N.A.
Zip Code:
N.A.
LANDFILL OPERATOR
Organization Name: N.A.
Contact Name: N.A.
Phone Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: N.A.
City: N.A.
Fax Number: N.A.
State: N.A.
Zip Code: N.A.
ENERGY RECOVERY SYSTEM DEVELOPER
Organization Name: N.A.
Contact Name: N.A.
Phone Number:
Mailing Address:
City:
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Fax Number:
State: N.A.
N.A.
Zip Code: N.A.
ENERGY RECOVERY SYSTEM OPERATOR
Organization Name: Energy Tactics, Inc. (in discussion)
Contact Name: N.A.
Phone Number: N.A. Fax Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: N.A.
City: N.A. State: N.A. Zip Code: N.A.
Comments Relating to LFG Recovery Projects
In discussion phase with Energy Tactics (energy portion of project). Problem: low energy
prices. Interior wells are drilled but not yet hooked up. Former passive vents hooked up to gas
extraction system. Landfill in final closure; HOPE cover system. Condensate piped to leachate
collection system.
Note: This landfill is closed. Therefore, the gas generation may be declining.
Current Projects
-------
Updated: June 1996
Northside LF
Landfill Location and Status
Location
City: Spokane
County: Spokane
State: WA
Primary Contact (see contact information): Dennis Hein
Alternate Landfill Name(s): N.A.
Operating Status
Status: Closed
Year Open: 1968
Year Closed: 1993
Gas Utilization
Gas Collection?: Operational
Gas Utilization?: Planned
Phone: (509) 625-7878
Waste Collection Information
Types of Waste Accepted: Municipal Solid Waste
% of Waste that is MSW:
Days Open Per Week:
Annual Acceptance Rate (tons):
Year Reported:
Waste-in-Place (tons): a/
N.A.
5.5*
N.A.
N.A.
4,000,000
Tipping Fee ($/ton): N.A.
Design Capacity (tons): N.A.
Acres Currently Landfilled: 350
Average Depth (feet): 100
Collection System Status:
Collection System Type:
Collection Efficiency:
Methane Concentration:
Gas Collection and Control Data
Operational Year Gas Collection Began: 1993
Trenches; Wells Est. Percentage of LF Area Welled: 44%
85%* LF Gas Collected (mmcf/d): 2.88
50%* CH4 Gas Collected (mmcf/d): 1.44
Utilization System Status:
End-use of Collected Gas:
Utilization System Type:
System Description:
Energy Purchaser(s):
Gas Utilization Data
Planned Year Project Initiated: 1995
0% utilized; 100% flared; 0% vented
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
* - Default value.
a/ - Unadjusted Reported WIP (1994) value.
Current Projects
-------
Updated: June 1996
Northside LF (continued)
Site Potential
EST. TOTAL METHANE GENERATION mmcf/d
(Estimated from Waste-in-Place): 1.4
LF GAS COLLECTION AND UTILIZATION POTENTIAL mmcf/d
Est. Total LF Gas Collection Potential:^ 2.9
Current Reported LF Gas Collection Volume: 2.9
Planned Reported LF Gas Collection Volume: 0.0
Est. Additional LF Gas Collection Potential: c/ 0.0
Est. Total LF Gas Utilization Volume Potential: 2.9
Current Reported Volume of LF Gas Utilized: 0.0
Planned Reported Volume of LF Gas to be Utilized: 0.0
Est. Additional Lfr Gas Available for Use:c/ 2.9
Capacity
POWER GENERATION POTENTIAL (MW)
Est. Total Electric Potential: 4.6
Current Reported Generation: N.A.
Planned Reported Generation: N.A.
Est. Additional Generation Potential: N.A.
Utilities in County: Bornneville Power Admin; Cheney Light Dept; Inland Power &
Kootenai Electric Coop Inc; Modern Electric Water Company;
Power; Washington Water Power Company
Environmental Benefits of Utilization
Current &
Total Planned
Est. Potential CH Reduction (mmcf/yr): 525.6 525.6
4
CO,, Equivalent of CH t Reduction ('000 tons/yr): 272.0 272.0
2 4
Estimated Acid Rain Bonus Allowances: 68 N.A.
Total Emissions Avoided
Emissions Avoided through Fuel Displacement: CO? SO?
Displacement of Coal (tons/yr): 13,045 382
Displacement of Oil (tons/yr): 5,993 326
mmcf/yr
507.4
mmcf/vr
1,051.2
1,051.2
0.0
0.0
1,051.2
0.0
0.0
1,051.2
Energy
(GWh/vr)
34.4
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Light Company;
Vera Water &
Additional
Potential
0.0
0.0
N.A.
c/ - This value is calculated from other estimated values and is particularly sensitive to the following factors:
(1) whether the landfill is open or closed and (2) portion of landfill that is welled.
d/ - The Current Reported LF Gas Collection Volume exceeded the Estimated Total LF Gas Collection Potential.
Therefore, the Estimated Total LF Gas Collection Potential was set to the Current Reported LF Gas Collection
Volume. Consequently, no value for Estimated Additional LF Gas Collection Potential is calculated, although
Additional Potential may exist.
Current Projects
-------
Updated: June 1996
Northside LF (continued)
Contact Information
LANDFILL OWNER
Organization Name: City of Spokane
Contact Name:
Phone Number:
Mailing Address:
City:
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Fax Number:
State:
N.A.
N.A.
Zip Code:
N.A.
LANDFILL OPERATOR
Organization Name: Spokane Solid Waste Management
Contact Name: Dennis Hein
Phone Number: (509) 625-7878 Fax Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: East 1225 Marietta
City: Spokane State: WA Zip Code: 99201-2751
ENERGY RECOVERY SYSTEM DEVELOPER
Organization Name: N.A.
Contact Name: N.A.
Phone Number:
Mailing Address:
City:
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Fax Number:
State: N.A.
N.A.
Zip Code:
N.A.
ENERGY RECOVERY SYSTEM OPERATOR
Organization Name: N.A.
Contact Name: N.A.
Phone Number:
Mailing Address:
City:
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Fax Number:
State: N.A.
N.A.
Zip Code:
N.A.
Comments Relating to LFG Recovery Projects
Feasibility study being done by Bovay Northwest. Looking at electricity generation, direct gas
sales or upgrade to high Btu pipeline quality gas. Gas currently collected & flared from wellfield
& perimeter systems. Thus far, tipping fees have paid for LFG collection system.
Note: This landfill is closed. Therefore, the gas generation may be declining.
Current Projects
-------
Updated: June 1996
Tacoma LF
Landfill Location and Status
Location
City: Tacoma
County: Pierce
State: WA
Primary Contact (see contact information): Phillip Ringrose
Alternate Landfill Name(s): City of Tacoma LF
Operating Status
Status: Open
Year Open: 1960
Year Closed: 2014
Gas Utilization
Gas Collection?: Operational
Gas Utilization?: Planned
Phone: (206)591-5543
Waste Collection Information
Types of Waste Accepted: Municipal Solid Waste; Other Landfill Wastes
% of Waste that is MSW:
Days Open Per Week:
99%
5.5*
Tipping Fee ($/ton):
IM.A.
Annual Acceptance Rate (tons): 55,378
Year Reported: 1993
Design Capacity (tons): IM.A.
Acres Currently Landfilled: 130
Average Depth (feet): 50
Waste-in-Place (tons): a/
5,610,756
Collection System Status:
Collection System Types:
Collection Efficiency:
Methane Concentration:
Gas Collection and Control Data
Operational Year Gas Collection Began: 1986
Wells Est. Percentage of LF Area Welled: 82%
85%* LF Gas Collected (mmcf/d): 3.50
50%* CH4 Gas Collected (mmcf/d): 1.75
Utilization System Status:
End-use of Collected Gas:
Utilization System Type::
System Description:
Energy Purchaser(s):
Gas Utilization Data
Planned Year Project Initiated: 1995
N.A. utilized; N.A. flared; N.A. vented
1C Engine
Electricity
N.A.
* - Default value.
a/ - Reported WIP (1994) adjusted to current year.
Current Projects
-------
Updated: June 1996
Tacoma LF (continued)
EST. TOTAL METHANE GENERATION
Site Potential
(Estimated from Waste-in-Place):
LF GAS COLLECTION AND UTILIZATION POTENTIAL
Est. Total LF Gas Collection Potential:0"
Current Reported LF Gas Collection Volume:
Planned Reported LF Gas Collection Volume:
Est. Additional LF Gas Collection Potential:c/
Est. Total LF Gas Utilization Volume Potential:
Current Reported Volume of LF Gas Utilized:
Planned Reported Volume of LF Gas to be Utilized:
Est. Additional LF Gas Available for Use:
POWER GENERATION POTENTIAL
Est. Total Electric Potential-
Current Reported Generation:
Planned Reported Generation:
Est. Additional Generation Potential:0'
mmcf/d
1.8
mmcf/d
3.5
3.5
0.0
0.0
3.5
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Capacity
(MW)
5.6
0.0
3.0
2.6
mmcf/vr
650.3
mmcf/vr
1,277.5
1,277.5
0.0
0.0
1,277.5
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Energy
(GWh/vrt
41.8
0.0
22.3
19.4
Utilities in County: Alder Mutual Light Co Inc; Bonneville Power Admin; Eatonville Power & Light
Dept; Elmhurst Mutual Power & Light Co; Fircrest Public Light Utility;
Lakeview Light & Power Company; Milton Electric Dept; Ohop Mutual Light
Company; Parkland Light & Water Company; Peninsula Light Company; PUD
No 1 of Lewis County; Puget Sound Power & Light Co
Environmental Benefits of Utilization
Est. Potential CH Reduction (mmcf/yr):
4
CO,, Equivalent of CH A Reduction ('000 tons/yr):
2 4
Estimated Acid Rain Bonus Allowances:
Emissions Avoided through Fuel Displacement:
Displacement of Coal (tons/yr):
Displacement of Oil (tons/yr):
Total
638.8
330.5
83
Current &
Planned
N.A.
N.A.
44
Additional
Potential
N.A.
N.A.
38
Total Emissions Avoided
co2
15,853
7,283
SQ2
465
396
c/ - This value is calculated from other estimated values and is particularly sensitive to the following factors:
(1) whether the landfill is open or closed and (2) portion of landfill that is welled.
d/ - The Current Reported LF Gas Collection Volume exceeded the Estimated Total LF Gas Collection Potential.
Therefore, the Estimated Total LF Gas Collection Potential was set to the Current Reported LF Gas Collection
Volume. Consequently, no value for Estimated Additional LF Gas Collection Potential is calculated, although
Additional Potential may exist.
Current Projects
-------
Updated: June 1996
Tacoma LF (continued)
Contact Information
LANDFILL OWNER
Organization Name: City of Tacoma, Refuse Utility Division
Contact Name: N.A.
Phone Number: IM.A. Fax Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: N.A.
City: IM.A. State: N.A. Zip Code: N.A.
LANDFILL OPERATOR
Organization Name: City of Tacoma, Refuse Utility Division
Contact Name: Phillip Ringrose
Phone Number: (206)591-5543 Fax Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: 3510 South Mullen Street
City: Tacoma State: WA Zip Code: 98409-2200
ENERGY RECOVERY SYSTEM DEVELOPER
Organization Name: Energy Tactics, Inc.
Contact Name: Stan Drake
Phone Number: (516)924-5300 Fax Number: (516)924-5627
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 7
City: Yaphank State: NY Zip Code: 11980
ENERGY RECOVERY SYSTEM OPERATOR
Organization Name: E-nergy Tactics, Inc.
Contact Name: N.A.
Phone Number: N.A. Fax Number: N.A.
Mailing Address: N.A.
City: N.A. State: N.A. Zip Code: N.A.
Comments Relating to LFG Recovery Projects
Project has been delayed due to low electricity prices. Energy Tactics, Inc. (developer)
negotiating with several utilities for better rates. Landfill operating under consent decree
(Superfund site).
Note: This landfill is open. Therefore, the gas generation may be increasing.
Current Projects
-------
Profile Index
-------
F
-------
Landfill Index
Washington
Candidate Landfills
Centralia LF
Cheyne Road LF
Cowlitz County LF-B
Greater Wenatchee LF
Hawks Prairie LF
Hidden Valley LF
Leichner LF
Olympic View LF
Roosevelt Regional LF
Terrace Heights LF
Current Projects
Cathcart LF
Cedar Hills LF
Kent Highlands LF
Northside LF
Tacoma LF
Profiles in Progress
Carnation LF
Delano LF
Enumclaw LF
Ephrata LF
Fort Lewis LF #5
Gibralter LF
Holden Village LF
Inmari LF
Manson LF
New Waste Inc. LF
North County LF
Odessa LF
Okanogan LF
Olalla LF
-------
Landfill Index
Washington
Pasco SLF
Point Roberts LF
Port Angeles SLF
Rainbow Valley LF
Richland LF
San Juan County LF
Snipes Mount LF
South County LF
Stevens County LF
Sudbury Road LF
West LF
Whitman County LF
Yakima Firing Center
WIP* 500,000 to 999,999 tons
Asotin County LF
Cowlitz County LF(A)
Hansville LF
Mason County LF
* WIP = Waste-in-Place. Profiles for landfills with WIP between 500,000 and 999,999 tons are not included in
this report.
-------
-------
------- |