I am receiving conflicting information regarding landfill diversion documentation and the ability to count materials that are used as a "fuel product" (paid for by waste-to-energy plant), versus burning waste at a cost to owner. Is a fuel product permitted to be counted as recycling? Currently, there are many recycling facilities counting this as recycling in their landfill diversion docs, and if it is not permitted, they will likely send it to a landfill.
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Tristan Roberts
RepresentativeVermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
11477 thumbs up
July 21, 2011 - 10:46 am
Jeff, USGBC gives the intent for MRc2 (see credit language above) as diverting materials from landfills or incineration. The point about whether you are being paid for the waste, or paying to dispose of it, is interesting, but I don't think it affects how LEED sees the material: it doesn't meet the credit requirement for diversion in any case.Beyond MRc2 consideration, if your choices are landfill or incinerate in a modern facility, I would go with the latter.
Jeff Jones
OwnerAccountable Recycling Options
42 thumbs up
July 21, 2011 - 11:14 am
Tristan, thanks very much and this is what I expected. The issue then becomes how will this be addressed with recyclers, and that is what I am trying to help them with. Recyclers will have to weigh the benefit of processing materials to meet specs for becoming a fuel product for sale, or simply the cost to place it in a landfill.
Jeff Jones
OwnerAccountable Recycling Options
42 thumbs up
July 21, 2011 - 11:27 am
Tristan, as I read the language further in the Credit Language in the Potential Technologies & Strategies, it makes this statement - Construction debris processed into a recycled content commodity that has an open market value (e.g., wood derived fuel [WDF], alternative daily cover material, etc.) may be applied to the construction waste calculation. Can you please clarify how a fuel product (for sale) would not meet this requirement? My understanding is in LEED 2012 ADC will not be permitted, will this be the same for wood derived fuel? Thanks in advance for clarifying this.
Tristan Roberts
RepresentativeVermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
11477 thumbs up
July 21, 2011 - 12:00 pm
Jeff, you raise a good point that I had forgotten about. I think this reverses my opinion here. The key difference is between an incineration facility which burns everything it takes in, and a recycling facility which sorts waste and directs it to its highest use. It appears that USGBC accepts incineration of material if it goes through such a process.
Jeff Jones
OwnerAccountable Recycling Options
42 thumbs up
July 21, 2011 - 12:39 pm
Thanks Tristan. Personally, I believe there should be some sort of incentive for recycling facilities to send materials to end-use destinations that are not incinerators. It appears the USGBC places the same reward for grinding old carpet up with wood and sending to an incinerator versus baling and sending scrap carpet to Shaw to be manufactured into new carpet. Recyclers operate on cost/benefit, so if grinding is less expensive, then we can imagine where it goes. Thanks again
Kathy Trejo
Garmann Miller4 thumbs up
January 23, 2012 - 1:03 pm
Due to conflicting opinions found here and having a project that has the ability to benefit (or not) from a local waste-to-energy plant I decided to check the CIR library for clarification. The request to count waste-to-energy as diversion has been made 4 times and denied 4 times. I reviewed rulings from 3/24/2004, 5/25/2008, 6/25/2008, & 5/9/2011. Reasons? There are several given, but a statement from the 6/25/2008 ruling pretty much sums it up: "Energy-from-waste facilities may have virtues compared to landfills, but they are not equivlant to salvage and recycling with regards to the intent and requirements of this credit."