This message is from our well respected and long time solid waste lobbyist
for Sierra Club California (SCC) Bill Magavern (Bill is now SCC's
Director).
Bill sent this out to the Sierra Club California/Nevada Energy and Global
Warming Committee who in cooperation with the national ZWCom on waste issues,
has been working on comments to the Calif Air Board on global warming actions
and greenhouse gas reduction recommendations.
I am posting this to the national group as we might expect these concerns
to pop up in any region that has poor air quality.
The
article below explains why I don’t want us taking sides in the composting vs.
clean-air battle until we’ve heard from our air quality comm. (and I have
contacted the chairs about this).
ARB INTERVENES IN AIR
DISTRICT, CIWMB FLAP OVER COMPOST RULES
INSIDE
Cal/EPA - www.InsideEPA.com - May 2, 2008
An interagency
conflict between the waste board and the San Joaquin Valley air district over a
proposed district
rule to cut
emissions from composting facilities has prompted the state air board to
intervene in an attempt to reach a
compromise. The
district’s forthcoming rule to help fight smog in the region is seen as
conflicting with the waste
board’s vision
of increasing composting to help meet the state’s greenhouse gas (GHG)-reduction
targets.
The rule may
also create a divide between environmental groups that advocate for more
recycling and
composting and
those that believe protecting local air quality is more important.
The potential
controversy underscores the difficulties different state and local agencies have
in pursuing
environmental
regulations that may conflict with each other. While the California Integrated
Waste Management
Board is under
pressure to divert more organics from dumps through composting to address
global
warming, this
priority may conflict with the air district’s mandate to reduce smog-forming
emissions in the
valley.
The valley air
district is advancing proposed Rule 4566, which seeks to cut volatile organic
compound (VOC)
emissions from
composting facilities. The district committed to seek the rulemaking in its 2007
ozone plan, which is
a component of
the Air Resources Board’s larger statewide implementation plan (SIP). The SIP
outlines how
regions will
attempt to meet federal and state air quality standards.
The district
April 10 and April 17 held public workshops in Fresno to discuss its proposed
rule, which it plans
to consider for
adoption in early 2009. A copy of a district staff report is available at
InsideEPA.com. See page 4 for
details.
San Joaquin
officials are seeking to reduce up to 9 tons per day of VOCs from “green waste”
composting
facilities in
the region. Green waste refers to organic wastes such as food, wood, food
processing by-products, and
plant
materials.
Due to the
valley’s abundant agricultural markets, the region has been seen as a prime
location for composting
facilities.
CIWMB late last
year began raising concerns about the district’s rule and how it may interfere
with CIWMB’s
efforts to
reduce organics that are landfilled, thereby reducing GHG emissions.
CIWMB last year
adopted a “strategic directive” aiming to reduce the amount of organics in the
waste stream
by 50% by 2020.
This is seen as significantly reducing GHG emissions by avoiding decomposition
of waste in
dumps.
To address this
potential conflict between the two agencies, one ARB staffer at an April 22
CIWMB meeting
indicated that
ARB is “currently looking to take a more proactive role” to help CIWMB and the
district find a way
to address both
the valley’s emission reduction needs and CIWMB’s efforts to reduce GHG
emissions through
increased
composting.
“We are getting
ready to send out a notice to air pollution control officers to work with your
staff on a
composting
technical working group to find out what are common sense ways to approach
this,” the ARB staffer
said.
Earlier in the
meeting, CIWMB member Wes Chesbro said he attended the valley district’s
workshops on
the rule, at
which district officials expressed a strong desire to work with CIWMB. However,
he added that the
district is
still proceeding with many “unanswered questions,” referring to a dispute
between the two agencies
over the
science behind estimates of VOC emissions from composting, as well as the GHG
benefits of more
composting.
A copy of
CIWMB comments to the district is available at InsideEPA.com. See page 4 for
details.
Earlier this
year, CIWMB staff released a new study analyzing composting emissions, in hopes
of convincing
valley air
officials that VOCs are actually lower than emissions that would result from
organics going into a landfill.
“I do think the
message is getting across, [but] we need to do more with ARB and Cal/EPA,”
Chesbro said at
the meeting.
Cal/EPA “was created for the purpose of mediating these cross-medium
conflicts.”
A district
source confirmed that a new working group consisting of ARB, the district,
CIWMB, and various
stakeholders
will begin meeting in May to attempt to “get consensus on what the science
really is.”
The source
added that the compost emissions data that CIWMB cites is drastically different
than previous VOC
emissions
studies that the district is basing the rule on. Specifically, CIWMB is citing a
new emissions factor from a
Modesto study
conducted last year, the district source said. “We want to look at that.
Compared to previous emission
factors, this
one was way off.”
The source
added that the district still believes composting facilities could be very
significant sources of VOC
emissions,
noting that community groups at the recent workshops urged the district to
strengthen the proposed rule
to protect air
quality.
Environmentalists have been critical of
air pollution impacts from composting in the Central Valley,
especially
because the
district is currently designated as in “serious non-attainment” of the federal
8-hour ozone standard.
An
environmentalist said groups strongly support VOC reductions from composting in
this rulemaking,
however, they
are open to discussing with CIWMB opportunities to ensure that composting
operations do not cease
in
California.
Meanwhile, the
environmental group Californians Against Waste, which actively lobbies CIWMB to
promote
recycling and
composting, is siding with CIWMB in the VOC science debate. The group is also
raising concerns
that the
district’s rule may shut down existing compost facilities and prevent the siting
of new operations in the
region.