article tools
Increase Text Size Increase Text Size Decreate Text Size Decrease Text Size
Share Email This Story Share Share This Story Reader comments Reader Comments (9) Add to favorites Add to Bookmarks Printer friendly version Printer Friendly Version
Article Tool Sponsor:

Advertise with us

More Jobs
0 ratings - Sign-in to rate this article
February 4, 2009

Waste Management To Build 55-MW Waste-to-Energy Plant in Maryland

New Hampshire, United States [RenewableEnergyWorld.com]

The Northeast Maryland Waste Disposal Authority (NMWDA), in conjunction with the Frederick County Division of Utilities and Solid Waste Management and Carroll Country Department of Public Works, has selected Wheelabrator Technologies Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Waste Management Inc., as the preferred vendor to construct and operate a new, regional waste-to-energy facility that will serve the solid waste disposal and energy needs of Frederick and Carroll Counties.

"We believe Wheelabrator will help the counties move toward a more fully integrated waste disposal system that also includes the roll-out of a single-stream recycling program with an ambitious recycling goal of 60 percent."

-- Robin Davidov, Executive Director, Northeast Maryland Waste Disposal Authority

The facility, which will be the first new greenfield waste-to-energy plant to be constructed in the U.S. in more than a decade, will be located in Frederick County Maryland. The plant will be capable of processing up to 1,500 tons per day of municipal solid waste with an electric generating capacity of 55 megawatts.

Upon a positive vote from both counties’ Board of Commissioners, the permitting and approval phase will begin this spring and will take approximately two years, followed by a 3-year engineering and construction period. Waste Management said that the projected completion date for the facility is 2014. At the height of construction, the project is expected to employ 1,000 workers engaged in excavation, concrete work, electrical work, fabrication and steelwork. Once completed, Wheelabrator expects to employ approximately 50 full-time employees to operate the plant.

“We conducted an extensive search of proven technologies to help us recover the energy in the counties’ non-recycled municipal solid waste. The new facility, if approved, will provide 100 percent of the counties’ governmental electricity needs, making the two counties among the first in the nation to achieve energy independence while significantly reducing carbon emissions,” said Robin Davidov, executive director of the NMWDA. “We believe Wheelabrator will help the counties move toward a more fully integrated waste disposal system that also includes the roll-out of a single-stream recycling program with an ambitious recycling goal of 60 percent.”

Reader Comments (9)
 
No image available
February 6, 2009
Bravo, Maryland!

This is the kind of thing we need in a stimulus bill - how about two or three or more in every state!?

Imagine - stimulus that would actually provide a return on the investment!
Comment 1 of 9
No image available
February 6, 2009
America indeed should have been building 2-3 in every state but the environmental extremists and NIMBY's continue to oppose Energy-From-Waste by invoking nihilistic and frightful terms like "INCINERATOR" to scare the general public. Also, as the highest density waste flows always occur in urban areas, the confluence of Environmental Justice legal theory and practical realities of air emissions involved with even the cleanest combustion/post-combustion environmental controls leaves the local politician, when faced with voter/taxpayer anxiety, with little choice but to oppose. Time will tell if this proves out in Frederick MD.
Comment 2 of 9
No image available
February 7, 2009
To All: Bad idea. Their design includes a combustion unit that emits thousands of tons of carbon dioxide. We do need any more carbon dioxide green-house gas generating systems. To put a carbon dioxide capture unit on their combustion system would cost them tens of millions or more dollars.
Comment 3 of 9
No image available
February 7, 2009
I agree with Warren Reynolds. Incineration just exacerbates the CO2 problem. Davidov has been educated to the technology that produces high cetane, NO sulfur diesel with NO emissions from the manufacturing process using MSW as the feedstock. The cost of the carbon neutral Fischer Tropsche process is millions less. The plant also is capable of reconfiguration, to produce DME-likely a fuel of the future, at a very small cost. It's a pity big money companies are able to seduce this type of business. Incineration and landfill are the "bury and burn" anachronisms left to the 20th century. We have a transportation fuel crisis in this country. What better way to help ameliorate that problem than to use a renewable in a responsible fashion.
Comment 4 of 9
No image available
February 9, 2009
Guys guys, we have the technology to move the garbage now with efficient vehicles that use low emissions diesel or electrical.

We can't be buried in our own filth and gargage; that's a simple fact. Build the facilities using scrubber sequestering technologies; pay the price, and stay clean in "little pink houses" for you and me,...ahhh ain't that America.

All the Best,..
Comment 5 of 9
No image available
February 9, 2009
The analogy of "little pink houses" by F. Berry is sobering. Ever see a human face after the person has been exposed to high levels of CO2? Very pink. The sequestration of CO2 is highly controversial. Just moving it somewhere else to let posterity take care of it. Incineration as espoused by Wheelabrator is incineration. Something like the pig in lipstick. Still a pig. Isn't it time to think outside the box? There exists technology on a commercial level that is carbon neutral and will produce a sulfur free diesel with MSW as the origin.
Comment 6 of 9
No image available
February 11, 2009
So, to those opposed, you'd rather build yet another non-sustainable coal-fired power plant than combust something we're just going to throw away and bury anyway? Yes, this technology emits CO2, NOx, etc., but it's far less than coal. What this article fails to mention is this statement from a similar story in MSW Management:
"By replacing fossil fuels in the generation of electricity, waste-to-energy facilities actively reduce the buildup of greenhouse gases. The Frederick waste-to-energy facility is expected to offset the release of approximately 500,000 tons of greenhouse gases per year. In fact, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has stated that waste-to-energy plants produce electricity with 'less environmental impact than almost any other source of electricity.'"
Calling the process "incineration" is misleading because it neglects the fact that energy is being recovered from the combustion process rather than being wasted.
Comment 7 of 9
No image available
February 13, 2009
Calling it anything other than an "incinerator" is misleading as it is combustion technology. Incinerators do recover energy, but only a small portion and especially when taking into account the energy and resources put into the products that later become "waste" and are burned. Let's try to broaden our scope to include the whole process. 55MW is hardly that much energy - and more than CO2 will be emitted from the stack including, but not limited to Dioxin (one of the most deadly toxics known) and Furans.

Seems like some people here would benefit from watching the short video called The Story of Stuff
http://www.storyofstuff.com/

As for the EPA comment - I would love to see where and when that is from as there is ample scientific evidence that would expose the twisted logic of that environmental impact statement.
Comment 8 of 9
No image available
June 26, 2009
I understand all the issues related to CO2 but I would like to seel less emotion and more facts. Wheelabator has a facility in Baltimore, MD. What are the CO2 levels around this plant. What about other plants, such as the much maligned plant in Dickerson, MD? What about SO2?
Cut the NIMBY and PC posturing and present some facts about existing facilities?
Comment 9 of 9
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In
Featured Total Access Partners
Click company logos to learn more
Trina Solar Ltd. martinHerzfeld BP Solar Biomass Thermal Energy Council (BTEC) Spire Corporation POWER-GEN India and Central Asia
WORLD'S #1 RENEWABLE ENERGY NETWORK
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network Logo