WET/DRY COMPOSTING OF ORGANIC MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE

CURRENT STATUS IN CANADA

Lambert Otten
Director & Professor
School of Engineering
University of Guelph
Guelph ON N1G 2W1

519-824-3712
Fax 519-836-0227
lotten@uoguelph.ca

Abstract: Source separation of MSW into wet and dry streams is proving to be an attractive alternative in dealing

with solid waste and achieving provincial and national waste diversion objectives. The system provides important

flexibility in the number of waste streams, collection methods, collection frequency, and waste processing. In the

past few years experience has been obtained with two-, three-, and four-stream source separation and collection,

composting of the organic waste fraction, and recycling of the valuable dry waste. The systems used in Guelph, ON,

Lunenburg, N.S., and Caledon, ON, are presented.

Public interest and participation has been high, especially when a two-stream, mandatory system is used. Thus, the

City of Guelph has reported a 98% participation rate in its two-stream system which means that the public accepted

the two-stream approach. Experience has shown that as the number of streams increase there is a greater chance of

putting waste in the wrong stream.

There is a strong demand for compost at a bulk price of about $30/t FOB the plant. The processing cost of the three

plants varied from $50 to $80/t of waste received without allowing for credits derived from extended landfill life or

reduction in environmental impact.

Key words: municipal solid waste, organic, source-separation, composting

Introduction

An examination of the composition of municipal solid waste (MSW) in Ontario shows that the kitchen and yard

fractions comprises the largest component, amounting to about 45% of residential waste collected annually (Otten et

al., 1993). This organic fraction of MSW deserves special attention because it is responsible for most of the leachate

and landfill gas problems. Removal of the organic fraction from landfilled waste would assist in the control of those

problems. Many industrialized countries are planning to divert organic waste from landfills either by implementing a

total ban or a partial ban on the landfill of biodegradable wastes.

Recovery and processing of the organic fraction are essential if landfill diversion objectives set by the provincial and

federal governments are to be achieved. Organic wastes can be treated either aerobically or anaerobically. Aerobic

composting is a self-heating, thermophilic, aerobic, biological process in which complex organic compounds are

partially oxidized while releasing heat, water vapour, carbon dioxide, ammonia, and trace quantities of other gases.

The non-mineralized component is humified to form a stable end product. Anaerobic digestion takes place in sealed

vessels with the objective to produce, recover, and use biogas. Anaerobic digestion is not yet widely used to treat

MSW in North America but is of greater interest in Europe where energy costs are much higher (Noakes, 1994).
The first two commercial anaerobic digestion plants to operate in Canada will be in Newmarket, Ontario and

Toronto. Both plants use the German BTA process with the Newmarket plant designed to treat 180,000 t/y and the

Toronto plant 160,000 t/y. The Newmarket plant is under construction and is expected to come on-line later this

year (Blanchard, 1999). A pilot plant using the SUBBOR technology was constructed in Guelph at its wet/dry

facility (Holbein, 1999, 2000). Both plants are presently being commissioned.

A recent survey by the Composting Council of Canada showed that in 1988 Canadians turned more than 1,650,000 t

of wet organic waste into compost (Antler, 1999). About 845,000 t of finished compost was used in gardening,

horticulture, agriculture, landscaping, land reclamation, slope stabilization, wetland restoration and landfill cover.

The Council estimated that there are 344 centralized composting facilities in Canada. These facilities compost leaf

and yard waste (182), food waste from the ICI and residential sectors (54), animal manures (39), paper materials,

including sludge, box board, and soiled paper products (34), biosolids (33), and hydrocarbon contaminated soil (2).

Responses from 244 composting operations showed that 93 privately-owned plants processed annually about

1,280,000 t of waste, and 151 publicly-owned plants handled about 370,000 t. In general, the facilities were

operating at only 51% of the total design capacity. At present there are still 5,300,000 t of organic material being

landfilled annually but a significant number of new composting initiatives are expected to start up in the next few

years (Antler, 2000).

One of the largest co-composting facilities was officially opened in the Edmonton plant last March. This plant is a

public-private venture between the City of Edmonton and TransAlta, an Alberta energy company. The $80 million

plant is designed to handle 1,980,000 t of residential waste and 22,500 t of digested sewage sludge, producing about

125,000 t of compost per year (Paddison and Chaw, 2000; Boyce, 2000).

The purpose of this paper is to provide the operating results of the source-separated, central MSW composting plants

located in Guelph ON, Lunenburg N.S. and Caledon ON, which were the first three such plants in Canada. The

paper does not intend to provide a critical review of the results because several years of addtional operating results

are required to evaluate the the operating costs of the collection systems and the plants.
Benefits of Composting

The benefits of removing and composting the organic fraction from the waste stream can be considerable; namely,

1. Backyard and mid-size composting at source reduce the amount of waste to be collected and transported to

the landfill.

2. Composting reduces the harmful environmental effects of landfilling organic waste, such as leachate and

landfill gas production.

3. Composting increases landfill life.

4. Composting the organic fraction and recycling other waste results in a relatively inert residual waste stream

so that landfills require less daily cover, equipment and labour during operations, and reduced monitoring

after closure.

5. Composting produces a useful end product with positive environmental characteristics. It is an excellent

soil conditioner with some fertilizer value; in some applications the microorganisms present in compost

have demonstrated an ability to suppress certain fungal plant diseases. The application of stable, mature

compost to agricultural land has all of the benefits of direct application of sludges and food processing

wastes but none of the potential odour and plant response problems (Otten, 1992a).

6. Composting is one of the least expensive alternative methods of dealing with organic solid waste, with the

possible exception of re-using organic waste as animal feed which is only applicable to a small fraction of

the organic stream and often requires extensive handling and collection.

7. Composting can assist municipalities to achieve their waste diversion objectives.

Compost Quality

To market compost it is essential that the quality is high and that application of compost will not result in adverse

environmental effects. Therefore, about a decade ago, when the compost quality standards were developed for

Ontario and the Canada Choice Program, it was clear from the available data that only source-separated municipal

organic waste would produce a material with heavy metal contents lower than found in the Ontario soils (Otten,

1992b). Hence, there would be no adverse effect due to use of compost on the heavy metal concentration in the
soil. This decision essentially forced municipalities in Ontario into source-separation programs if they wanted to

compost organic waste as a diversion alternative. At the same time there are few alternatives if the 50% diversion

objective set by the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) is to be reached.

Source-Separation

Separation of MSW at source involves either a two-, three- or four-stream approach along with a ban on all

household hazardous waste. The remaining waste basically consists of organics, recyclables and residues. In a

typical two-stream system, all food wastes, yard wastes, contaminated paper fibres (napkins, paper towels, tissue

paper, waxed cardboard, disposable diapers, sanitary napkins), pet feces and litter, animal and human hair are

considered wet waste. Recyclables (paper fibres, metals, glass containers, and plastics) and all other residual wastes

(textiles, leather, other glass, ceramics, etc.) make up the dry waste stream. Some items, such as disposable diapers

and vacuum catchings, are accepted in some municipalities as part of the wet waste but not in others. With the

exception of vacuum cleaner debris, which tends to be high in heavy metals, there are no really good reasons to

exclude any of the non-recyclable organic wastes from the composting process (Otten et al., 1993). In a three-

stream system, the dry waste is further divided into recyclables and residues. This approach retains the well-

established Blue Box concept and reduces contamination of recyclables. Some municipalities, such as Lunenburg,

N.S., have added a fourth stream consisting of paper fibres, mainly newspapers and magazines, only.

There are several container combinations generally used to separate the waste fractions at the home. For example,

in a two-stream system the organic waste fraction may be placed in a 120- or 240-litre, wheeled, aerated (green)

container, while the dry fraction is placed in a 240-litre, wheeled (blue) container or in bags. In a three-stream

system the same containers are used for the wet and recyclables, while the residue is placed in a regular garbage

container or bags. Caledon, ON, which is mainly a rural/suburban area, has found that the use of a wheeled

container for the wet fraction is advantageous in reducing problems with odours and rodents. Many other

municipalities prefer to use coloured or clear plastic bags to separate the waste fractions.
In 1988, the City of Guelph started an extensive, three-year pilot study to evaluate the two-stream and three-stream

systems, and the use of wheeled containers versus bags (Otten et al., 1993). The results indicated that the two-

stream system yielded a capture rate of organics of 97% as compared with 85% for the three-stream system, and

94% versus 79% for the recyclables. Thus, even with extensive education of the participants and frequent feedback

visits, about 60% of the residue stream in the three-stream system consisted of compostable organics or recyclables.

Participants considered bins to be more convenient than bags but cited problems with odours, snow banks, waste

sticking to the wet bin, and difficulties of cleaning the wet bin. Waste collection personnel preferred bags which

were much easier to handle than bins, especially in the winter, while the curb-side time was also shorter for bags.

An important advantage of a two-stream system is the possibility of collecting residential waste with a single, dual

compartment vehicle. Guelphs co-collection system reduced the number of trucks from thirteen to nine. The trucks
3
have a capacity of 28 m , split 1:3 for wet and dry waste, respectively. The wet material is compacted to a density
3 3
of 0.35t/m , and the dry waste to 0.17 t/m . Three-stream systems require two vehicles, or multiple passes, and/or

alternate week collection. Table 1 shows the current practices in Guelph, Caledon, Lunenburg, and Halifax. All four

municipalities have reported general satisfaction with their respective systems and public participation is high.

Participation in the wet/dry program is estimated to be 98% in Guelph, which means that almost all residents

separate the waste (Arndt, 1999) . This success is mostly attributed to an outstanding educational program and the

fact that the residents have no garbage residue option. All waste must go into one bag or the other. Part of the

educational program was to have eight curbside advisors work with collection crews for the first months to resolve

problems. Halifax has reported a participation rate of 90% and an estimated organic diversion rate of 41% in the

first year of operation (Anon. 1999). No participation rate is available for Lunenburg.

The Caledon program is voluntary and it is not known how many of the 7500 households actually participate. It is

estimated that between 45 and 50% set out the green cart for pick up on collection day (Conrad, 1999).

Design and Operation of Three MSW Composting Plants

At present there are only a few centralized facilities that compost MSW, and even fewer that handle source-

separated waste and have a sufficient track record to be useful to review at this time. The three plants selected for

this paper have been operating for several years and produce saleable compost obtained from source-separated

MSW. They are located in Guelph, ON, Caledon, ON and Lunenburg, NS. As noted in Table 2, each of the three

plants is different in design - Guelph system uses a channel composting process, Lunenburg a wide-bed process, and

Caledon a batch process. Halifax was not included because the data are not available at this time. Since the author

was involved in the design, pilot studies, evaluations of the plants, and has visited them on numerous occasions,

especially the Ontario ones, he has a detailed knowledge of their design and operations.

The Guelph Wet/Dry facility has been the focus of numerous articles, such as Gies (1998), because it was the first

such facility in North America. There was considerable public opposition to the concept even though extensive pilot

studies had clearly demonstrated the feasibility of source-separation and subsequent processing of the wet and dry

streams. Much of the opposition was the result of the elimination of the familiar Blue Box program in the two-

stream approach. Siting the plant in a industrial park proved to be difficult and time consuming. Even after the site

was selected, it took almost another year for the Public Advisory Committee to review the proposals. The

committee, which consisted of neighbouring property owners, environmentalists, city personnel, and waste

management experts (including the author) submitted two reports - a majority report opposing the concept and the

site, and a minority report recommending immediate construction of the facility to alleviate a critical landfill

problem. None of the long list of concerns, including odours, groundwater and surface water contamination, seagull

congregation with the potential of collisions with small aircraft from an adjacent airport, has materialized.

The Guelph plant waste preprocessing consists of passing the large green bags through a screw bag breaker in which

a single helix rim pushes the bags toward a narrow opening where cutting claws open the bags. The unit opens the

larger bags satisfactorily; however, about 25% of the organic waste is contained in small plastic bags which are

sometimes placed inside the larger green bags. Many smaller bags are not opened and the organic material is

rejected as overs. Furthermore, the lack of a shredder causes all organic waste with particle size >75 mm (e.g.

grapefruits, potatoes, pumpkins, disposable diapers, etc.) to be rejected as overs. An interesting point is that the
Guelph pilot composting project had clearly shown that only 44% of the inbound waste was <75 mm in size and

would leave the system as overs (Otten and Stuparyk, 1994). The results also showed that a slow speed

shredder/trommel combination captured 90% of the inbound waste. The recommended design was not used and the

present plant has confirmed the original observations.

As shown in Table 3, Guelph receives most of the inbound organic waste from its weekly collection program; while

the second largest source is yard waste delivered to the site by the citizens and landscapers. It should be noted that

Guelph only collects yard waste on a weekly basis but has a special collection in the spring, summer and fall. The

citys fall leave collection program contributes the thrid largest amount of organic waste. With a market for

shredded yard waste, the plant does not compost this waste stream and hence tends to operate with a low C/N ratio.

Although some chipped wood is added to alleviate this problem, the cost of the chips is high. The city has an

agreement with the University of Guelph to take manure from the Veterinary College as a carbon source (the

university has its own channel composting system that has processed manures for about 20 years but does not have

sufficient capacity).

In Table 3, controlled compost in 1996 refers to the material that exceeded the Ontario copper limits for heavy

metals as the result of using shredded pallets as a bulking agent. Similarly, the 424 t of controlled compost in 1998

was also due to high copper levels. This time it was traced to the use of grey water from the compost storage pad. In

both instances, the compost was used as cover material at the landfill. It should be noted that the Ontario standards

for unrestricted use of compost are the most stringent ones in the country. Extensive work by Halet et al. (1994) has

demonstrated that uncertainties in sampling and analytical procedures plus the normal background concentration of

copper and mercury make it impossible to guarantee that source-separated MSW compost will meet the Ontario

standards at all time.

There is a strong demand for the compost from landscapers and developers. The price has increased from $10/t to as

high as $30/t during the past few years. The compost was presold in 1998 at a discount.
The organic diversion rate was in excess of 70% for the past two years; however, this includes the sale of shredded

yard waste. There is no direct correlation between incoming waste and the amount marketed because at any time

there is a large amount of maturing or stored compost on hand, as well as stock-piled yard waste . For example, at

the end of 1998, this amounted to about 6,000 t.

Lunenburg

A description of the Lunenburg facility was presented by Shamess (1996). As shown in Table 2, the system consists

of a wide-bed, in-vessel composter equipped with a paddle-wheel type mixing machine. An unusual aspect of the

plant is that it has both source-separated and mixed-waste receiving/processing capabilities because Lunenburg

wanted to give its citizens the option of participating in the source-separation initiative. This led to major collection

and processing problems, not the least of which was the production of an unacceptable compost from the mixed-

waste stream. At present the mixed-waste line is being dismantled because of the problems it has created and the

fact that the participation rate in source separation is in excess of 80%. The overall diversion rate has climbed to

67%.

The plant has been in operation for several years but operating data are are limited. However, according to available

data compost quality meets the Nova Scotia Standards and compost is sold at $15/t with 50% being sold in bulk to

landscapers and the rest is bagged for the local market.

Caledon

The Caledon composting system is based on the Herhof Biocell TM which is a batch system approach (Dennison et al.

1998; Roulston, 2000) developed in Germany. The system was installed at the landfill in 1994 and has a rated

capacity to process 40 t of waste per week. The organic waste is shredded to a particle size <75mm and mixed

before being placed into the concrete, insulated, sealed reactor. The high-rate composting phase is computer

controlled to optimize temperature, oxygen and carbon dioxide levels. Air is continuously circulated until the

carbon dioxide level reaches the set point of 4% (by mass). At that point process air is exhausted through a
vertically-stacked, three-stage biofilter and fresh air is preheated in a heat exchanger. The process takes about one

week.

In order to evaluate the performance of the system and the source-separation process, forty-nine inbound and

outbound batches were sampled and analyzed between October 1995 and December 1996 (Dennison et al., 1998).

An analysis of the screened mature compost showed that the Ontario Ministry of the Environment Quality

Guidelines for unrestricted use were met. The study also included eight sampling events of the biofilters to

determine the potential for odour problems. Exhaust sampling and analysis for dimethyl disulphide and dimethyl

sulphide indicated concentrations that were either below human detection limits or sufficiently low to be of no

concern. After completion of the study the system was expanded by adding another two cells. The present capacity

is 6,000 t per year with source-separated waste collection available to 8,000 homes. The plant currently operates at

56% capacity.

One disadvantage of the Herhof process is that it provides no mixing and that water addition is not uniform. As a

result, the material tends to dry out and form large chunks. This has led Herhof to develop a process to produce

refuse derived fuel (RDF) rather than compost from organic waste (Brooks, 1999). The waste is composted and

allowed to dry to a moisture content of about 15% using the heat generated in the decomposition process. The

Caledon site has been expanded to pursue this option.

The organic diversion rate for Caledon could not be obtained because source-separation is a voluntary program. As

discovered in the Guelph pilot project, when residents are not certain in which stream a certain waste goes, it

normally ends up in the garbage stream. It has been estimated that even participating homeowners only put between

25 and 30% of the organic waste into the green cart with the balance going into the garbage stream (Conrad, 1999).

Cost and Revenue Data

The cost and revenue data obtained from the three plants are limited and at best provide estimates. Each of the

operations calculate the values differently and allocate certain costs to different parts of the operation. This is

especially true for the facilities that have both a composting plant and a material recovery facility.

One of the problems with municipal decisions is that they generally do not consider true cost accounting involving

credits derived from reduced environmental costs or the global need to work toward sustainable systems. For

example, the removal of organic waste from landfills has a significant impact on the cost of operating the landfill.

Not only is landfill life extended but the reduction in the generation of leachate and landfill gases should lead to

significant credits.

Conclusions

On a national scale source-separation and processing of the organic fraction is still in the initial stages. However,

there is now sufficient experience with the Guelph, Caledon and Lunenburg systems to conclude that

1. public participation is high and effective when appropriate educational programs are used to provide the essential

information;

2. organic diversion rates of about 70% were attained by Guelph and Lunenburg where source-separation is

mandatory;

3. there is a growing demand for compost in all three municipalities discussed in this paper and in Guelph and

Caledon compost is readily sold in bulk at $30/t to landscapers and developers;

4. with a variety of accounting systems, it is difficult to compare the collection and processing costs of the three

plants, especially as the plants are operating at about 50 to 60% of the design capacity; and

5. Ontarios stringent compost quality criteria for unrestricted use has forced Guelph to use compost for landfill

cover while the same compost would pass the standards of all other Canadian jurisdictions, including the Canadian

Committee of Ministers of the Environment standards.

References

Anon. 1999. The Waste Less Exchange. Waste Resources Section, Halifax. N.S.
Antler, S. 1999. Composting Grows Stronger. Solid Waste & Recycling. 4(6): 10-13.

Antler, S. 2000. Canadian Composting Industry on the Grow. BioCycle. 41(3):41-42.

Arndt, W. 1999. Private Communications. Manager Guelph Wet-Dry Plant. Guelph, ON.

Boyce, C. 2000. Edmonton Opens North Americas Largest Co-composting Facility. Recycling Products News.

8(4):10.

Conrad, L. 1999. Private Communications. Manager of Landfill Operation, Regional Municipality of Peel.

Brampton, ON.

Dennison, L., Otten, L. and Conrad, L. 1998. A Study of the Herhof Biocell Composting System at Caledon,

Ontario. Proceedings of the 8th Annual Composting Conference, The Composting Council of Canada., Ottawa, ON,

pp. 198-210 .

Gies, G. 1998. Two stream sort - Ontarios wet/dry experience. BioCycle. 39(1):33-36.

Halet, G., Otten, L., and Allen, B. 1994. How Achievable are the Metals Limits for Urban Compost and How

Should it be Sampled? Proceedings of the 4th Annual Meeting, The Composting Council of Canada, Toronto, ON,

pp. 9-24.

Holbein, B. 2000. Demo Project at Guelphs Wet-Dry Plant. Solid Waste & Recycling. 4(6):40-41.

Holbein, B. 1999. SUBBOR Technology for Recycling Unsorted MSW. Proceedings of the 9 th Annual Composting

Conference of The Composting Council of Canada, Toronto, ON, pp. 23.

McGarrity, M. 2000. Ontario City Makes Wet-Dry Work. BioCycle. 41(3):60-61.

Noakes, D. 1994. Anaerobics -effective harnessing of energy from solid waste. Proceedings Institution Civil

Engineers. Municipal Engineer. 103:31-37.

Otten, L. 1992a. MSW composting and its impact on agriculture. Keynote Paper. Northeast Agr/Bio-Engineering

Conference, ASAE, Canaan Valley Conference Centre, Davis, West Virginia

Otten, L. 1992b. Composting in Canada. Proceedings of the International Solid Wastes and Public Cleansing

Association (ISWA) Annual Meeting -Incineration and Biological Waste Treatment. Amsterdam, The Netherlands,

pp. 8-17.

Otten, L., Birkett, S.H. and Hoornweg, D. 1993. An Integrated Waste Management System - Data and

Recommendations for Guelph, Ontario. Wellington Applied Sciences Ltd., Guelph, ON, 109 p.
Otten, L. and Stuparyk, R. A. 1994. Determining the Optimum Up-front Processing Scheme for the City of Guelph

Pilot Composting Facility. Proceedings of the 4th Annual Meeting of The Composting Council of Canada. Toronto,

ON, pp 249-258.

Otten, L., Halet, G., Voroney, R.P., Winter, J., Andrews, S.A., Lee, H. and Trevors, J.T. 1998. Metro Toronto

Composting Project. Proceedings of the 8th Annual Conference, The Canadian Composting Council of Canada.

Ottawa, ON, pp. 366-385.

Paddison, L. and Chaw, D. 2000. Composting on All Fronts in Alberta. BioCycle. 41(3): 44-48.

Roulston, L. 2000. In-Vessel Composting of Organics. BioCycle. 41(3):32-34.

Shamess, A. 1996. Beating the Targets in Lunenburg. Solid Waste Management. October/November, pp. 20-23.

Voroney, R.P., Otten, L. Halet, H. and Winter, J. 1994. Environmental Evaluation of Composting Process and

Compost Quality. Report prepared for The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, ON, 170 p.

Table 1. Summary of wet/dry collection systems.

Guelph Lunenburg Caledon Halifax

Streams 2 4 2 4
Containers
Wet green bag green cart green cart green cart
Recyclables blue bag blue bag blue bag
grocery bag1) grocery bag1)
Residue garbage bag/can garbage bag/can

Collection
Wet weekly green week biweekly biweekly
Recyclables weekly blue week weekly weekly
blue week1)
Residue green week weekly biweekly

Vehicle
Passes single single three single
Compartments dual dual single dual
Population Base 95,000 38,000 40,000 350,000
Households Served 35,000 2) 13,333 7,500 110,000
Businesses 1,007
1)
paper fibre only

2)
25,000 single-family homes and 10,000 multi-family units

Table 2. General information of the wet/dry facilities in Guelph, Lunenburg and Caledon.

Guelph Lunenburg Caledon

Facility Size
Site (ha) 10 4.9 1
Dry (m2) 7250 2370 N/A
Wet (m2) 1760 530
- Organic Processing 1050
- Composting Building 5750
Preprocessing
Size Reduction none slow-speed slow-speed
Screen type trommel trommel none
Substrate particle size (mm) <75 <50 <75
High-Rate Composting System
Type channels wide bed biocells
Aeration upward downward upward
Odour control biofilter biofilter biofilters
Mixing system high speed flail paddle wheel none
Supplier Longwood Ebara Herhof
Residence time (days) 28 21 7
Low-Rate Composting System
Type aerated pile windrow windrow
Mixing weekly weekly weekly
Residence time 4 weeks 8 to 13 weeks 5 weeks
Maturing System
Type windrow windrow windrow
Residence time 6 months < 6 months > 6 months
Refining Process
Screen type trommel trommel trommel
Compost size (mm) 12 9 12
Design Capacity (t/y)
Dry 91,000 36,000 N/A
Wet 44,000 14,000 6,000
Capital Cost (million $)
Dry 12.1 2.32 N/A
Wet 2.66 3.02
- Organic Processing 1.5
- Composting 5.5
Design/Engineering/Land Costs (million 11.6
$) 4.05
Buildings & Site Infrastructure (million $)
 Government Subsidy (million $) 11 1.7 0.24
Operating Costs (million $/y) 4.9 1.16 0.134 1)
Employees 3 3 3
Tipping Fees ($/t) 40 variable 2) 80
Startup
Dry 11/95 12/95 N/A
Wet 2/96 5/95 12/94

1)
1999 budget
2)
Varies from $30 per truck load exceeding two tonne to $50/t for asbestos.

Table 3. Quantity and source of incoming wet waste, compost and yard waste marketed, diversion rate.

Guelph Lunnenburg Caledon

1996 1997 1998 1998 1996 1997 1998
Incoming waste (t/y)
Municipally collected 7234 8975 9078 2830 16651) 20621) 23131)
Public drop-off 14 36 43 0 3422) 11812)
Commercial 351 313 187
Institutional 0 539 268
Industrial 255 318 356
Manure 0 504 874
Township 0 4 2
Yard waste 863 3279 3410 104
Brush 568 104 0 0 0 215
Leaves 91 171 0 54 28 44 67
Vacuum-collected leaves 190 1970 1970
Chipped wood 888 557 476
Saw dust 100
Wood sludge 500
Sewage sludge 210
Fish waste 10
Total 12165 16769 16782 3828 16933) 2448 3776

Marketed (t/y)
Compost 2383 931 3204 0 2704) 11044)
Shredded yard waste 2477 2003
Landfilled residue (t/y)
Wet incoming waste 908 3316 3009
Screened compost 171 809 1461 1275) 1895)
Contaminated compost 0 280 0
Controlled compost 915 0 424
Organic diversion rate (%) 67 757) 71 67
Collection cost ($/t) -- 1238) 130 47 106
Processing cost ($/t)
Compost -- 509) 6710) 8011)
Revenue ($/t)
Compost 30 30 20-25 15 30 35

1) Includes yard waste from participating households.

2)
1997 - Organic waste from Britannia Landfill drop-off; 1998 - 868t from Britannia and 313t from

Caledon drop-off.
3)
Compost was used as landfill cover in 1996.
4)
Assuming a 5% rejection rate (Conrad, 1999).
5)
Compost was used as landfill cover.
6)
Some compost was used on-site, some carried over to 1998, and some given away at special events;

ditto for 1999 (Conrad, 1999).

7)
Diversion was increased by reprocessing of the residue stream to open more small bags.
8)
Collection cost is averaged for dry and wet waste and includes new fleet, amortization, replacement,

collection labour (10th truck was purchased in 1997 for population growth).
9)
Net operating costs, including overhead, revenues from sales, residue disposal at $53/t, but excluding
capital cost.
10)
Includes annual debt, annual interest, net operating, and sinking fund costs.
11)
Includes operating, capital, maintenance, and administrative costs at design capacity of 6000 t/y.