Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solid Waste Options topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Phase 1 of 'Beyond the South Wake Landfill' study weighs four disposal options; waste‑to‑energy environmentally favorable but currently costly
Summary
Consultants presented Phase 1 results evaluating four options — new in‑county landfill, regional hauling, alternative disposal technologies, and waste‑to‑energy — and found similar greenhouse‑gas outcomes across options, higher vehicle‑miles for regional hauling, fewer local air pollutant exposures for waste‑to‑energy, but challenging economics for incineration under current energy pricing.
Caroline Luke, deputy director of community services, and John Boyer of CDM Smith presented Phase 1 results of the county’s 'Beyond the South Wake Landfill' study, laying out four options for post‑South Wake disposal: build a new in‑county landfill, haul to regional landfills, pursue alternative (emerging) disposal technologies, or build a publicly owned waste‑to‑energy facility.
Boyer said the team used a life‑cycle assessment to compare environmental, economic and social performance. He reported greenhouse‑gas emissions for the three main scenarios were broadly similar, with the regional haul option producing more emissions because of greater vehicle miles. Criteria air pollutant exposure modeled with dispersion was lowest for the waste‑to‑energy scenario because a tall stack disperses emissions; however, waste‑to‑energy is significantly more expensive under current market conditions and the 'avoided cost' energy pricing used for power sales to Duke Energy is volatile. Boyer noted waste‑to‑energy reduces waste volume ~90% but still generates ash that requires disposal.
On costs, Boyer presented per‑ton ranges: a new in‑county landfill averaged roughly $45/ton, regional disposal about $65/ton (additional hauling), and waste‑to‑energy scenarios were significantly higher in modeled cost given current avoided‑cost rates — though costs could improve if Wake County self‑consumes thermal energy, secures long‑term off‑takers, or if regulatory changes allow renewable‑energy credits. He also pointed to social impacts: the regional‑haul scenario increases truck miles and modeled annual collisions (roughly double relative to keeping disposal in county), and staff emphasized the planning lead time — a chosen disposal approach typically requires 7–10 years to become operational, so the county needs to proceed now for capacity expected to be constrained as South Wake nears 2045 capacity limits.
The study team will continue outreach, launch a project webpage and public survey in coming weeks, and refine scenarios (including more detailed site screening and targeted community engagement for any shortlisted in‑county options). Commissioners discussed regional partnerships and asked the consultant to model collaborative options with neighboring counties and the possibility of Wake County owning or contracting for capacity outside county lines.
