vote no to liberty energy

1

Biosolids Incinerator Proposals for the City of Hamilton

Ray Fullerton BSc. Retired ArclelorMittal Dofasco Research Engineer

Presented at the General Issues Committee Meeting on May 9, 2011

Thursday, May 12, 2011

2

38 Years of Experience - Manufacturing Processes

• process improvement/product development

• cokemaking

• environmental

• Baycoat prepaint

• tinplate

• galvanizing

• line trials & lab process simulation


3

Historical Timeline - Incinerator

• UNSOLICITED Proposal from Liberty Energy

• 1st Peer Review requested

3

Fall 2009


4

Historical Timeline - Incinerator

• Black & Veatch Peer Review paid by City ($50K)

• Staff Report recommends City Incinerator

• Presentations by Black & Veatch and Liberty

• Staff Report rejected by Public Works and Council

• Council requests 2nd Peer Review (Joe Rinaldo)

Spring 2010


5

•staff report Business Review - Liberty Proposed Incinerator (PW07047c)

•attended the Public Works Committee meeting on April 19, 2010 and listened to the presentations of :

•CEO Wilson Nolan and Controller Peter Bloom of Liberty Energy

•James Welp of Black and Veatch who prepared the first independent peer review

•attended passionate City Council Meeting on April 28,2010

Information sources


6

Liberty Energy Centre Website

Biosolids 1089 tonnes/day

Biomass 417 tonnes/day

Liberty Energy Centre will be a nominal 11.6 MW power plant with a plant load of 1.6 MW, allowing up to 10.0 MW to be exported to the grid. Under normal operating conditions this facility will use up to 1506 tonnes per day of Waste Biomass consisting of 1089 tonnes per day of biosolids and 417 tonnes per day of biomass as fuel1. Biosolids are the solids recovered from wastewater treatment plants, also known as sewage sludge. The facility is designed to accommodate both undigested and digested sewage sludge. Biomass used by this facility will include urban green waste (grass, brush and tree clippings), clean dimensional lumber, urban forestry waste and horticultural waste.

Information sources


7

Questions you should ponder?•Do you want the City of Hamilton to be known as a Regional Biosolids Centre for the Province of Ontario by treating the biosolids of 3,745,000 people of Ontario, that is 29% of the population of Ontario at the Liberty Energy incinerator?

•Do you want an additional 26,000 trucks annually entering the City of Hamilton due to transporting biosolids and biomass to the Liberty Energy incinerator?


8

Questions you should ponder?•Do you want a LARGE capacity incinerator to

be built by Liberty Energy? (note: the Liberty Energy incinerator is TEN times larger than the City incinerator)

•Do you want the City to assume a large financial risk; since Liberty Energy has no customers (fuel supply contracts) ?

•Do you want the image/city rank to be downgraded.


9

Triple Bottom Line Assessment

• Environmentally Responsible

• Financially Sustainable

• Socially Accountable


10

ParameterCity

IncineratorLiberty

Incinerator

Triple Bottom Line

Concern

Ontario Population

Treated

Municipal500,000

Regional3,745,000

EnvironmentalSociety (image)

Biosolids Capacity

(tonnes/year)53,000 397,000 Environmental

(air emissions)

Biomass Capacity

(tonnes/year)0 153,000 Environmental

(air emissions)

Total Capacity

(tonnes/year)53,000 550,000 Environmental

(air emissions)

TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE COMPARISON


11

Parameter City Incinerator

Liberty Incinerator

Triple Bottom Line

Concern

Truck traffic per year

(18 wheeler load capacity is ~ 21 tonnes)

0 (conveyor

system on site)

26,00071/DAY3/HR

Environment(odour, noise, air

pollution)

Image no change Woodward WWTP “stool”city Society ( image,

city rank)

Customers(Fuel SupplyContracts)

confirmed pending Financial

TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE COMPARISON


12

Incinerator Recommendation

The proposed City incinerator is the green solution to biosolids management


13

Stewardship decision?Your Decision on Biosolids Management will impact the Triple Bottom Line

1. Environment (air emissions, truck traffic)2. Financial (customer risk)3. Society (image & city rank)

of the City of Hamilton for the next 30 Years!


14

Citizens Against Toxic Sludge

• California Attorney Ben Goldstein, in a letter to the Banning City Council pointed out that Liberty Energy misrepresented their project to the City of Banning as a “power plant” while in reality it is a feces burning toxic sludge incinerator

• Liberty Energy incinerator will emit carcinogenic materials into the air that the people of Banning breath


15

Liberty Energy Proposal HistoryDate Location Status Comment2003 Imperial ,California Rejected Planning Commission rejected application as a “green power plant”;

circumventing proper approval process for an incinerator

2005 Hamilton, Ontario Pending Peer Review 2

2006 Brawley, California Rejected community opposition to an incinerator

2008 Niland, California Rejected Measure X, an ordinance that bans the importation of sewage sludge with the intent to dispose of it in Imperial County

2008 Banning, California Rejected Ordinance No. 1410 Prohibit the burning, thermal conversion, or partial thermal conversion of any class of sewage sludge or biosolids to ash

2009 Lost Hills, California Pending proposal to build an incinerator adjacent to an existing Liberty composting facility; draft Environmental Impact Review completed


16

Vote NO to Liberty Energy• NO fuel contracts/customers to supply biosolids /biomass

• UNPROVEN fuel technology 72% biosolids & 28% biomass

• UNCONFIRMED FIT eligibility - requires biomass as a fuel

• UNHEALTHY due to Environmental Risks (stack & trucks)

• DETRIMENTAL to the City Image/Rank

• REJECTED by 4 California cities


17

Any Questions or Comments?

THANK YOU!

[email protected]


mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

vote no to liberty energy

News & Politics