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. ------- ------- ------- |