Making our physical environment more

sustainable

Presented at 3rd Massachusetts Sustainable Communities Conference

April 24, 2013 Robert L. Moylan Jr., P.E

Commissioner of Public Works and Parks Worcester MA

Overview

§  What is sustainability? §  How do we evaluate sustainability? §  Case studies of sustainable practices §  Examples of non-sustainable practices §  Guidance for going forward

Sustainability What is it???

Sustainability in public works, in the broadest sense, means delivering our services in a manner that ensures an appropriate balance between the environment, the community and our ability to pay. It means making smart, thoughtful decisions by spending the publics money to get the best return for the environment and the community

Responsibilities of Public Works Directors or City Managers §  We are problem solvers and practitioners of

sustainability §  Stewards of our community’s resources §  Advocates for and protectors of the environment §  Managers of complex infrastructure systems §  Responsible for the prudent expenditure of the

public’s money §  Visionaries for our communities §  And if we are really good, we not only

do more with less, we do almost everything with nothing!!!!

How Do We Evaluate a Sustainable Concept? §  Triple bottom line

•  Needs to be good for the environment •  Needs to be good for people/community •  Needs to be economically justified & viable

How Do We Evaluate a Sustainable Concept? §  Sustainability cannot be achieved if one of the

requirements is missing; it should not be forced

§  Economics is often the most challenging of the 3 requirements to satisfy

§  The Holy Grail: Identifying a practice that achieves environmental improvement by promoting good behavior that costs less than bad behavior

Some of sustainability’s many forms

§  Fleet operations §  Vehicle idling policy §  Vehicle fuel policy

§  Recycling opportunities §  MSW §  Construction Materials §  Vehicle re-use

§  Energy and Street Lighting §  Smart offices §  LED lighting

Case Study #1: Making Solid Waste Management in Worcester Sustainable

§  Worcester’s Historical Solid Waste Collection Program (prior to 1993)

§  Traditional waste collection – tax levy funded §  Weekly collection (50,000 household units) §  Over 40,000 tons/yr collected (WTE facility) §  Bagged waste collected at curbside (36

employees) §  Recycling strongly promoted at drop-off centers

(2% of waste stream recycled)

Making Solid Waste Management Sustainable

§  Conclusion: •  Traditional program was not sustainable •  >40,000 tons/yr incinerated •  Only 2% of waste stream recycled •  36 city employees needed to collect waste •  The city’s solid waste program was not

satisfying the economic requirement of TBL ….therefore program not sustainable

Worcester’s Current PAYT Solid Waste System

§  Developed in 1993 during budget crisis

§  Required purchase of special yellow bags at 50 cents each

§  Benefits §  Weekly curbside trash and

recycling §  Recycling is “free”

§  Created monetary incentive to recycle; promoted good behavior vs. bad

Worcester’s Current PAYT Solid Waste System

§  Results:

•  Worcester recycle rate increased from 2% to 38% in one week….12,000 tons/yr

•  We now recycle > 50% of our waste stream with leaf and yard waste

•  City’s MSW waste reduced from 40,000 tons/yr to 23,000 tons/yr…savings > $1M/yr

•  Workforce reduced from 36 persons to 16

•  Program is successful because it satisfies the triple bottom line...created new behavior that improves environment and costs less

Case Study #2: Composting Worcester’s

Leaf and Yard Waste

§  Historical Practice: §  Landfill leaves and yard waste collected on

city streets (75,000 cy) during fall season § Residential properties managed their own

leaf and yard waste during other months

Case Study #2: Composting Leaf and Yard

Waste §  New Program:

§  Leaf waste collected by city equipment from all city streets over a 5 week period in fall

§  Yard waste collected from residential properties during growing months

§  All waste is composted and screened and then made available for residents at no charge

§  Some compost material sold to landscape companies

Case Study #2: Composting

§  New Program (cont) § One of largest municipal composting

programs in the state § Operation fully managed within city limits by

city forces § Reuses a material that once took up

valuable landfill space and now provides a beneficial use to residents

§  Annually provides 25,000 cy of “black gold” §  Program is fully embraced by public

Case Study #3: Complete Streets Program

§  $20 M Street Improvement Program (27 miles) §  Work includes coordination of infrastructure

improvements of all utilities §  Water & Sewer §  Gas & Electric & Cable

§  Includes: §  Street & Sidewalk Improvements §  Tree Planting §  Traffic signals & signage §  Hydrant painting

Be cautious of the “Green” tag

§  Not all “Green” initiatives are worthy of adoption…evaluate against the TBL §  Bio-Fuels §  Tree Pits to control P § Clean Water Act

§ Stormwater § NPDES permits

Bio-Fuels for Municipal Equipment Fleets

§  Bio-fuels: fuels made from organics that are mixed with other fuels to reduce GHGs

§  Avoided by City for many reasons: §  Fuel is very problematic < 40°F § Reduces engine efficiency and life § Unreliable § Costly even though subsidized

Tree Pits to remove phosphorous from runoff

§  “Green” Infrastructure to improve stormwater quality

§  Placed on residential streets to collect runoff and pass it through a medium to reduce P loadings

§  Average cost to install = $8k/ea §  Equivalent number of trees = 27 §  Which choice is preferred?

Is the Clean Water Act Sustainable?

§  CWA passed in 1972 §  Noble goal is to make all

waters fishable and swimmable

§  Law passed at a time when nations waters were very contaminated, many posed a health hazard and were unusable

Is the Clean Water Act Sustainable?

§  EPA’s NPDES Permits System •  Stormwater: controls

discharge from urban drainage systems

•  Wastewater: controls point sources from POTW’s

Stormwater Management

§  EPA’s Historical Approach •  Maximum Extent Practicable = statutory

municipal stormwater treatment standard •  Best Management Practices + Public

Education + Implement within your means = MEP

•  Seek continuous Improvement •  Sustainable because it satisfied the TBL

Stormwater Management §  EPA’s New Approach

•  MEP is insufficient; specific water quality standards must now be achieved

•  Standards are unachievable with good behavior •  Meeting standards far more costly…treatment

needed §  Cost to treat an impervious urban acre is

$150,000 (estimate from EPA) §  Statewide = $21 Billion §  Triple bottom line remains unmet because

economic requirement is not satisfied

Does anyone in MA think that we have a $21B stormwater problem?????

NPDES Permit for Wastewater Treatment

§  NPDES permits require removal of pollutants to assure uses of water are protected or restored

§  Gross pollutants (toxins, metals) are under control

§  Focus is now nutrients: namely P and N §  UBWPAD not yet completed $200M upgrade to

meet 2001 permit and are hit with new permit costing $200M

Wastewater Treatment UBWPAD NPDES Permit

§  Current plant discharge is •  TP = 0.3 mg/l •  TN = 6 mg/l

§  New Discharge Permit (2008) now under appeal •  TP = 0.1 mg/l •  TN = 5 mg/l

§  To meet new permit will require a 50% increase in the carbon footprint of the plant

Wastewater Treatment UBWPAD NPDES Permit

§  Conclusion: The CWA does not consider “sustainability”

§  It focuses on improving water quality at the expense of energy consumption, air quality degradation and other environmental impacts

§  It does not satisfy the TBL criteria

Wastewater Treatment

§  EPA’s Historical Approach •  Federal and state cost sharing to lessen the

financial burden •  EPA very conscious of costs and cost-

benefit when they have money in the game •  Incredibly successful at restoring nation’s

waters •  Sustainable because it produces clear

environmental and societal benefits and considers economics

Wastewater Treatment §  EPA’s New Approach

•  No more federal or state grants •  Assistance limited to loans (SRF) •  Sorry, we can’t consider costs •  Any perceived improvement is good, no

matter how marginal •  Science is weak and disputed

§  Triple bottom line remains unmet because environmental benefits and social benefits are unproven and economic leg is not satisfied

Going Forward

§  Triple Bottom Line is the method by which we must measure or evaluate a sustainable initiative

§  The most challenging variable of the TBL is economic

§  Technology and innovation will drive the economic variable

§  Be wary of adopting “green” solutions simply because they come with a “green” tag