1 / 17

BENEFICIAL USE OF COAL COMBUSTION WASTE & OTHER INDUSTRIAL MATERIALS: How States Can Make A Difference

BENEFICIAL USE OF COAL COMBUSTION WASTE & OTHER INDUSTRIAL MATERIALS: How States Can Make A Difference. ECOS Spring Meeting March 22 – 24, 2009 Suzanne Bangert Deputy Administrator Air & Waste Division Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.

Olivia
Télécharger la présentation

BENEFICIAL USE OF COAL COMBUSTION WASTE & OTHER INDUSTRIAL MATERIALS: How States Can Make A Difference

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. BENEFICIAL USE OF COAL COMBUSTION WASTE & OTHER INDUSTRIAL MATERIALS: How States Can Make A Difference ECOS Spring Meeting March 22 – 24, 2009 Suzanne Bangert Deputy Administrator Air & Waste Division Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

  2. ECOS Resolution 08-14The Regulation of Coal Combustion Products • Supports the safe, beneficial reuse of CCW, including for geotechnical fill & civil engineering • Calls upon USEPA: collaborative dialogue with states to develop & promote a national framework for beneficial use of CCW including use principles and guidelines, and to accelerate markets development • CCP & Other Industrial Byproducts  Material • Many State Beneficial Use Programs • US EPA Partnerships

  3. ASTSWMO Beneficial Use Surveys: 1999 & 2006 • 80% of the 40 respondent states have programs • 64 waste materials • Multiple uses: fertilizer, soil amendment, raw material substitute, fill material…… • States implementing improved programs • Effective Management w/ regulatory oversight (categories, generic, case-by-case, risk-based) • Sparse State Resources • Few Measurements • Specific 2009 Survey – Coal Ash Management

  4. Wisconsin Beneficial Use Program: Key NR 538 Elements • Self implementing/Case-by-Case Approval • Five categories of industrial byproducts • Beneficial uses allowed for each category • Testing requirements & standards for each category • Notification of WDNR for larger projects • Annual reports on use to the WDNR • Property owner notification for geotechnical fill projects

  5. Establishment of Industrial Byproduct Categories and Types of Beneficial Uses in NR538

  6. Wisconsin Uses • Raw Material for Manufacturing • Cold Weather Road Abrasive • Confined & Unconfined Geotechnical Fill • Bonded & Un-bonded Surface Course • Waste Stabilization/Solidification • Supplemental Fuel Source • Decorative Stone • Re-burn of Landfilled Ash • Encapsulated Embankment • Capped Embankment • Landfill Daily Cover • Asphalt Roads

  7. System Sand Confined Geotechnical Fill (NR 538: Category 1 -4)

  8. Foundry System Sand ~ 50,000 yds. Industrial Park

  9. Flowable Fill Fly Ash - System Sand Mix

  10. WI Beneficial Use Rate • COAL ASH (2006) 1 86% 1,131,105 yds3 available • FGD – GYPSUM (2008) 90% 100,000 yds3 available FOUNDRY SAND & SLAG (2003) 45% 848,186 yds3 available • PAPERMILL SLUDGE (2003) 66% 1,730,000 yds3 available 1 Nationally Ash (2005) : 41% - 43% American Coal Ash Assoc. (2005)

  11. FGD Gypsum

  12. Fly Ash in Soil Cement Road Application

  13. Benefits of Use • Greenhouse gas emission reductions • Foundry Sands: 14 – 26 tons CO2/1000yds3 used* • Fly Ash: 0.70 tons CO2/ton as Portland Cement Sub.* • FGD gypsum: 0.09 tons CO2/ton in Wallboard* • Energy savings • Foundry Sands: 146 – 293 mBTUs/1000yds3 used* • Fly Ash: 4mBTUs/ton as Portland Cement Sub.* • FGD gypsum: 11.9mBTUs/ton in Wallboard* • Water Conservation • Conserves Landfill Space • Economic (generator and end-user) * Source: USEPA, February, 2008

  14. Federal Collaboration & Partnerships • US EPA Resource Conservation Challenge Program • C2P2 • Industrial Materials Recycling • Life Cycle Analysis • Risk Assessment Development • Recycled Materials Research Centers • Green Highways Partnership • By-product Synergy • US Business Council • US Dept. of Transportation

  15. Foundry Sands Collaboration • Multi-stakeholder Action Plan • Strategic effort to increase reuse and coordinate resources across all stakeholder groups • Establishes an industry goal to achieve 50% reuse by 2015 • ASTSWMO’s Beneficial Use Task Force helping to identify key challenges and action items • Builds on existing resources, including the EPA “State Toolkit for Developing Beneficial Reuse Programs for Foundry Sand” • Potential for ECOS involvement

  16. Challenges • Business Case for Industry & End-user • Sustainable Markets: local, regional, national • Infrastructure • Changing “Materials” (ex. Air emission controls) • Measurements • Public Acceptance/Perception • Resources • Regulatory Processes

  17. Future Considerations… • Continue collaboration amongst States, & with USEPA: • CCP Resolution Framework • Foundry Sands Action Plan • Larger Beneficial Use Framework • Risk Assessments, Life Cycle Analysis, Decision Tools • Connections with other federal agencies(Transportation, Commerce, Business Council) • Sustainable Markets Development including Public/Private Partnerships

More Related