FOREWORD

City of Chicogo Harold Washington. Mayor

Deportment of Planning Elizabeth L. Hollonder Commissioner City Hall, Room 1000 121 North LaSalle Street Chicogo Illinois 60602 (312) 744-4471

Four fifths (80%) of the garbage generated in the City of Chicago is disposed of in sanitary landfills located on the Southeast Side. While still the cheapest method of waste disposal, primary reliance on landfills has become unacceptable t adjacent neighborhood residents, results in environmental degradation, and is of limited physical capacity. The time has come for the City to seriously pursue alternative waste disposal methods which balance the concerns of affected neighborhoods, the fiscal constraints of the City, the business needs of commerce and industry and the jobs they generate for all Chicagoans. The choices to be made are not easy ones. All solutions to waste disposal are fraught with constraints and impediments. Still, it is the responsibility of the City to face these issues squarely and honestly, fully to examine the options available and the impacts of each, and to chart a new course for managing Chicagos wastes. Waste Management Options for Chicago was prepared by the Department of Planning during the oneyear moratorium new on waste facility siting and operation which expired on January 31, 1985. The Department was assisted by an interdepartmental Task Force consisting of the Departments of Consumer Services, Economic Development, Fire, Law, Public Works, and Streets and Sanitation. Input from interested community, environmental, and industry groups, and other public agencies was also incorporated into this effort. As a result of this study, Mayor Washington has submitted to City Council a set of draft ordinances which will ban the creation of any new sanitary landfills in Chicago, strengthen environmental review criteria for expanding existing landfills, ban the disposal of hazardous wastes in landfills, and legitimize private recycling centers. I encourage your critical review of this study. My staff stands ready to brief you, openly discuss your concerns and work with you to solve the Citys waste management problems. For more information, please contact Paul Borek at 7448572. Sincerely,

ELI ABETH L. HOLLANDER Commissioner

CONTENTS Page
Executive Summary.. ..................... ................ ...

.1

Chapter I

Solid Waste Generation

Introduction ...............................................1
Waste Catagories... ........ .. .. ....................

Mu n I ci pal Soli d Waste ( MSW ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 1. Low Density Household Refuse........................3 2. High Density Household Refuse.. .. ... ... ......... ... .4 3. Commercial Institional Refuse.. ................ ... . .6 Other (NonMSW) Wastes and Refuse.. .......,. .... ....... ... 1 . Bu 1 1 di n g Demo ii t i on Deb ri s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.PowerandSteel PlantResidue.......................8 3. Manufacturing and Industrial Wastes.................8 Sludge....... . . . .. . . .. . . . . ........ .. ... ........... .9 4. Waste Generation Trends for Chicago.... ............ .. .... .. .9 Findings...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............. . .12 Footnotes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
..

Chapter II

Hazardous Waste .14 .1 5 . 17

Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 ye r vi ew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fl nd . . . . .

ng s

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . .

. . . . . . . . .

Chapter III

Waste Collections and Handling Procedures

Introduction..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . .21 City MSW Collection Procedures...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22 Private MSW Collection Procedures...... . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 PubliclyUsed Transfer Stations........................... .24 Private Transfer Stations.... ........ .... .. .. ..., Other Waste (NonMSW) Processing Procedures ...............29 Alternative Processing and Transportation Methods..........30 F i ndi ngs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33 Footnotes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35

Chapter IV

Sanitary Landfills

Introduction... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a a . .36 Current Landfill Operations.... .... .. ... .. .. ... .. .. . . ..... .36 Regulation and Licensing............................ ... ... .39 Operation and Site Preparation............................ .40 Soil Condi tdi ons and Geology...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41 Environmental Analysis................. ........... ........ .42 EndUse Considerations.... .......... ............. .. ..... ...45 Capacity and Site Life...... . . . . . . . . . . . .46 F i ndi ngs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47 Footnotes. . . , . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50

Chapter V

Resource Recovery/Incineration
. . . . . . .

.51 .51 .53 Existing Facilities............ Technology Assessment............ ..........................55 .59 Previous Technology Studies...... Technology 1. LargeScale MassFired Waterwall..........60 Technology 2: SmallScale MassFired.................., .62 .64 Technology 3: Spreader Stoker (RDF).......... Market Pssessment..,....................,................. .66 .67 .68 .70 .70 ..... Fluctuations. Seasonal Demand .....71 ........... Potential Sites......................... .73 Economic Assessment....................... Capital and Operating Costs.............................74 .75 ..79 Ownership and Financing Options........ Environmental Aspects of Resource Recovery Facilities......80 Regulation and Performance Guidelines for Criteria .82 1. New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)............82 2. Attainment/NonAttainment Status...................83 3. Designation of Facilities..........................83 4. Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) or Best Available Control Technology (BACT)...........83 5. Lowest Achievable Emission Rate (LAER).............84 N onCriteria Pollutants.. .85 1. Metals... .86 Trace Organic Compounds... 2 .9U ..93
Introduction... Background.

..

.,

....

.....

...................

........

..........

Electricity. Thermal

Energy............ Fuel

...............

.........

Refuse

Derived

.......l.............l.....l. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

...............

Disposal

Cost......

..

..

..

..

a..

1 . ..

..

..

..

.....

P ol

utant

........

............a... ....... .

.........

...,...

....... . . . . .

l.a......

. .

Findings.

a.

a.

.. .

Footnotes.

Chapter VI

Recycling
...... .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . a . a . .1 .

.94 .9b . .................... Waste Composition.................... .101 .101 ...102 Deposit Recycling................ .103 Collection Recovery...... Post .104 Ct ion. .105 Household Collections.....,................ 1. Separate Collection of One Material...............105 2. Collection of One Material Together with Combined .105 06 Materials....1 3. Collection of Two or More Recyclable .106 Recycling Collection Centers .107 Collection Equipment..........
Introduction...... Separation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Source Separation...... . . . . ......... . . a a.... . .. . . ............ . . ......

....... . . . . . .

C ol

...........

Refuse.

1l

a.

.......

...a...a..

a.

a.....

........................ ..

Processing

.a

...a.

1111

aa...la

llllalla . ,

.11.107

Market for Material.

Al umi num . . . . . . . . . . , , . . . . .

........ . . .

......... . . . . . . .

. .

1al

.108 .108

CHAPTER III HASTE COLLECTIONS AND HANDLING PROCEDURES

Introduction Analysis four of waste collection with and handling procedures and short identifies equipment distance

distinct

steps

specific are refuse

operating pickup,

characteristics. hauTing, transfer,

These

and longdistance hauling.

Collection

includes

refuse

pickup

from

source

household, vehicle which in

business or institution and its hauling by the collection to are a disposal widely or transfer facility. a

Transfer facilities, step in the

used, is

constitute transferred vehicles.

separate from

process to

which larger

refuse

collection entails

vehicles longer to a

much

hauling of as

Hauling by transfer or area a

distance disposal In

transportation facility locations facility, extension such

refuse an the is

vehicles sanitary is and close

incinerator collection not

landfill. to a

where

disposal an and

transfer of the

necessary

hauling Both

becomes

collection

procedure.

municipal

private collection services operate in Chicago.

Some

discarded solid and

materials waste

are

by and

definition entail

not or

included

as

municipal collections

(MSW)

special

particular demolition

handling

procedures. sludge,

This

includes

rubble, junked vehicles,

ash and slag.

21

City
is

MSW Collection Procedures

Collection the

of

low density Municipal of the

Solid Waste (MSW) Department of

in Chicago and are

responsibility (DSS), homes to Bureau and

Streets services or

Sanitation provided units to

of Sanitation.

Collection with A

residential public

buildings

four of

fewer

and

various

facilities. are served.

total

680,000

households

and 577

public

schools

Approximately 1.1

million tons of MSW are collected annually by the DSS.

MSW the

is

collected 50 with

in

enclosed yards. average

compactor trucks, A of total 8-10 has a fleet trucks

based of 400

in

each

of is

Citys

ward an

trucks to

maintained Ward.

assigned of 5

each or 20

A typical

compactor

truck

capacity

tons

cubic yards and costs $80,000. gal lon steel drums and alley

Commonly used receptacles are 55 or curbside col lect ions are made

once weekly.

Typical and

collection laborers. as

crews In

consist of early 1984,

four workers,

a truck driver light carts

three

some wards began using mechanicaHy, these

weight

carts

receptacles.

Loaded

permit reduction of truck crews for expansion of costs this system

to three men. project

Current plans call savings in are

and

substantial

collection amortized.

after

initial

equipment

expenses

At

one

time

the Bureau top dump

of Sanitation trucks were

also provided used to

separate bulk bulky items

pickup.

Open

collect

22

(white

goods) etc.

such

as These

refrigerators, items were

ranges, then

washers,

tubs, to

furniture, disposal. present

shredded

prior

Pickup service typically was provided monthly. bulk by

Under

procedures trucks extra

goods together with MSW are collected in crews. it While results this in eliminates operational the and

compactor need for

regular

collections,

disposal

problems due to the bulk and

size of these items.

Each

crew

collects on

two

loads

(10+

tons) it

of to

MSW

per the

day

and,

depending

location,

transports

Northwest

incinerator, a sanitary landfill

or a transfer station.

The Bureau of Sanitations 1984 budget for MSW collection was million, figure which does averages include cost total of out to $50+ cost per of ton. vehicle If However, purchase equi pment be an

$55 this and

not nor the the

the

mai ntenance

final

disposal. cost

costs

are

included,

collection

would

estimated
further

$60+ per ton. in this

Disposal

and transfer costs are considered

chapter.

In

addition

to

their

regular collections

noted

above,

the

Bureau various

of

Sanitation

also

processes such as

smaller plant

quantities materials,

of street

municipal

discardables debris, at

dirt,

construction and deposited for

etc.,

which or

are collected by other agencies facilities. City (This factor and

transfer

disposal

accounts disposal

some

discrepancies

between

collection

volumes.)

23

Private MSW Collection Procedures

Private per

scavengers They

collect make

approximately 1.3 million tons collections as from

of MSW and

year.

forfee

business

industrial factories,

establishments, offices, etc.

such Also,

stores, collect from

restaurants, residential

they

buildings containing more than four dwelling units including many condominiums. In all, it is estimated that private scavengers

collect from 490,000 households and 50,000 businesses.

Neither rates nor areas of operation are regulated. scavenger can operate anywhere in the City and in

Any

licensed areas

some

numerous collectors compete.

Private

collectors

also

use

transfer All

stations

for

shortterm

waste storage and

consolidation.

privately collected MSW is

disposed of at sanitary landfills within and outside the City.

PubliclyUsed Transfer Stations Chicago, like most large cities, points final uses transfer that sites. stations are At as

intermediate in

consolidation distant from

for

wastes

collected transfer

communities

disposal

stations MSW is deposited by collection loaded into large transfer trailers of the for MSW

vehicles and subsequently transport collected to by a disposal the Bureau

facility.

Approximately

60%

of Sanitation is processed through transfer stations.

24

w
At are present the City uses and seven transfer stations. two are City-owned and Of these, but two City-owned and operated, are privately Table 3.1

operated

three

privatelyowned

operated.

provides key information relating to these facilities.

typical

modern enter at the

transfer the

station level

has and are

two dump

levels. refuse In

Collection into the chutes case of

vehicles beneath older dump the

upper

which

transfer trailers such areas as from those which in

parked.

facilities, at storage

Chicago, is a

collection loaded by

vehicles into are

waste at

crane station

trailers.

All

wastes

received

transfer

removed the same day.

Generally, each transfer trailer can carry

the equivalent of 45 collection vehicle loads or 20-25 tons.

The

judicious

use

of

transfer

stations

can in

decrease

the

cost

of

waste need

disposal. to be

However, balanced

the benefits against Waste use the

hauling cost cost of

reduction transfer concluded collection to a

added

operations. that

The

Chicago station

Transfer

Station

Study if

transfer have

becomes than

economical 25 minutes

vehicles disposal

to

travel

more

(one-way)

. 1 facility

The above-cited study also concluded that a need currently exists for a new transfer may soon be station needed on on the Citys the southwest side to side. A new the

station

northwest

replace

aging Medill

facility.

25

Tabel 3.1 Transfer Stations Used By the Bureau of Sanitation

Name

Location

Owner

Operator

1982 Volume

Calumet Laramie

E. 103rd St. & Doty Ave. W. 38th St. & Laramie Ave. Sti ckney 1633 W. Meclill St. 1400 W. Pershing Rd. W. 34th St. & Hamlin Ave. 2464 S. Laflin St

City Private

Private Private

162,000 34,600

Tons

Medill Southwest SSFPF IX Disposal

City City City Private

Private City City Private

248,000 189,000 127,800 21,400

Total

782,800

Tons

*Volume includes refuse deposited by City agencies other than the Bureau of Sanitation

27

Table 3.2 Private Transfer Stations (Not Used By Bureau Of Sanitation)

Location

Owner or Operator

360 West Green Street 1220 West Carroll Street 2750 West 35th Street 6833 North Elmhurst Road 1300 North Hooker Street 11834 South Ewing Avenue 1800 West Carroll Street

Speel man Hoving & Son Metro Groot Waste Management South Chicago Disposal Nati onal D & D (Pending)

22852401 South Laflin Street

28

Other Waste (NonMSW) Processing Procedures

In

addition

to

municipal accumulate include

solid and

waste require

(MSW),

other

substantial and

waste

streams

special rubble,

processing junked

disposal. sludge,

These

demolition

vehicles,

ash and slag.

Rubble

resulting is by

from

demolition

of

commercial by

and

residential firms To and

structures transported degrees some

generally dump truck or

cdllected

private landfills. structural

dumpster to as brick,

various and

materials

such

members

decorative features are salvaged for reuse.

Junked by

or

abandoned

vehicles

are usually

collected and on public

processed are

private by

operators.

Vehicles

abandoned

streets

removed one of

the Department of Streets pounds.

and Sanitation and towed to are ultimately scrap

nine City auto to private

Unclaimed vehicles To the

conveyed yard scrap

scrap yards. usable

extent practical, remnants parts are is

operators metal. any old

salvage Demand

parts and and

recylced as

for

scrap metal of

sufficient to in the City. steel

prevent However,

large tires

accumulation cause

junked

vehicles

disposal

problems,

particularly

belted types which are difficult to process.

Sludge

produced

at

sewage (MSD)

treatment is an is

plants

by

the

Metropolitan which is

Sanitary disposed

District of on

earthlike dried by

material or

land.

Sludge

natural

mechanical

29

w
methods dumped and and then spread transported over land. located to a A disposal major site where site it is is a disposal

reclaimed between sludge

City

landfill

at the and

north end Island

,

of Lake Calumet Avenue. sites Since are

the is

Calumet an

Expressway rich

Stony

organically and

material for

disposal or

vegetated, purposes.

landscaped

used

park

recreational

At

one

time

the

MSD where

transported it was used

sludge as

by

barge of a

to

strip-mined reclamation due to

downstate process.

areas

part have

land

However,

these

operations

been

terminated

community opposition and relatively high costs.

Some large

heavy

industries of

and ash

electric and

generating These in

stations

produce are Area of are more and

quantities located

slag.

enterprises the Calumet

generally

along

navigable

waterways

or along the Sanitary and Ship Canal. ash and slag of on is managed land and Some by the

Processing and disposal These wastes to

producers. are be sometimes used for

disposed distant

barges slag can

barged

locations.

construction

land structuring purposes.

Alternative Processing & Transporation Methods

Alternative

methods

and

procedures

have

been

developed

and

are

used in some locations which can and transportation cost and

result in reducing refuse volume final disposal operations.

improve

30

Such

procedures and

include barge

shredding, and

grinding, might be

sorting, for

baling, future

compacting application

hauling;

suitable

in Chicago.

Shredding material to remove

and

grinding

refer

to

mechanical

cutting

up is

of

refuse

into small large

pieces. hard

Sometimes, objects.

prior sorting Heavy duty

required are

and/or for

grinders

also and

available large

white at

goods time

(refrigerators, used in Chicago.

bathtubs,

etc.) and

items were can

one

Shredding

grinding facility.

be done at a transfer station or at a final It enables greater refuse or, compaction, improving

disposal thereby

minimizing efficiency at

landfill

requirements

combustion

resource recovery

plants.

Baling density which bales is

refers bales. best

to

the

compaction systems in

of are

refuse available

into for

uniform this The by

high

Various

process

accomplished 2000-5000

a transfer arid per can be

station. handled can

resulting forklifts. In and more there

weigh of

pounds

Density

up to bailing

1500 pounds
improves

cubic yard

be obtained, efficiency and and

practice, landfill orderly, are due fewer to

refuse

transportation becomes

operations. less equipment with

Landfilling is needed, and of

neater

odors

are minimized debris. landfill

problems

vermin

blowing bails,

Furthermore, life can be

the

greater

density

extended by 30-50%.

31

In

some

municipalities out materials

refuse suitable as or

is

sorted for

after

collection such as

to

separate cans, place

recycling

paper,

bottles, etc., as well at a transfer system station

reusable goods. a the landfill. waste

Sorting can take This is and a labor

intensive

that

reduces

stream

generates

economic activity.

Barge

transportation refuse

is

available method barges mode able trailer or in

in for

Chicago longer

and

could As

be

an

alternative above,

hauling

trips. haul

noted

at one time MSD used locations. a single of are as 50 barge This is

extensively to offers to

sludge to of scale or the

downstate because

economies 1000 All of to tons

carry

equivalent landfills waterways transfer though

transfer to

loads. close

the

Citys

adjacent is the

proximity

navigable new Even of

Medill be

Transfer located

Station. the

Similarly, waterways.

stations

might

along

additional

handling

costs would be

involved,

this mode

hauling could be cost effective under some conditions.

Source refuse

separation materials new of the

and

recycling can be

are

methods as

aimed raw in

at

recovering to

that

reused can

materials

manufacture reductions extends activity. Chapter VI.

products. waste life

This

result waste

substantial costs,

stream, and

minimizes generates

disposal

landfill

significant is

economic found in

A detailed discussion of

these procedures

32

V
Findings

The total

Citys MSW

Bureau

of

Sanitation

collects

nearly

half

of

the

generated in Chicago,

or an

average annual

volume of

1.1 to 1.3 million tons. density households schools

Collections are made

from 685,000 low

(buildings with 4 units or less), 577 public

and other public facilities.

Private tons of

scavengers MSW

collect from

approximately 490,000 and high

1.2

to

1.3

million units,

annually

density

housing

including commercial

65,000

condominiums,

from

various

businesses,

establishments and private institutions.

More

than

half

of

Chicagos trucks material to a to is

MSW

(60%) or

is

transported private

by

collection/compactor stations trailers sanitary where for the

public

transfer transport (i.e., 40% is

transferred final

to

large

hauling or

disposal The directly

facility remaining to the

landfill in

incinerator). trucks

transported

compactor

Citys

Northwest Waste-to-Energy incinerator or to sanitary

landfills.

The Bureau of Sanitation collects MSW in compactor trucks which are based in system is each of the Citys 50 ward yards. combined wastes

The collection organic and

whereby including

mixed paper,

household metal, together

inorganic yard

glass, with

plastics, large bulk

wastes,

etc.,

are

collected

items such as refrigerators, sinks,

and bathtubs.

33

 Traditionally,

City collection crews have consisted of four (4) Beginning in 1984, the Bureau of Sanitation (3)

workers per truck. began using three

man

crews

in

some

wards

on

trial

basis as a costcutting measure.

The an

Citys average

1984 of

budget

for

waste

collection was $Q per ton

$55 mu

lion

approximately

collected

or

approximately $70 per household per year.

34

1
Disposal, chemical state vital and treatment methods federal and and recycling of hazardous currently continued wastes by by are incineration and are be regulated as they

laws,

should

to business,

industry and the Citys economic base.

Users

of

hazardous on the

materials and

should of

be

required used

to and

report their

regularly provisions

type

volume

materials

for disposal

or storage.

Severe

penalties

should

be

institutedfor

hazardous

waste

dumping at unlicensed locations.

Collection Systems

Department feasibility bulk item

of and

Streets cost

and

Sanitation of

should

evaluate

the

effectiveness

reinstituting the bulk

separate

collections This

and reactivating simplify

processing improve

shredder.

could

collections,

incineration and reduce the Citys

landfill

tipping fees.

*
Department feasibility vehicles pickup Limited of and Streets cost and Sanitation of effectiveness racks to with of inexpensive

should

evaluate

the

modifying source as

collection separated newspapers. also be

permit such

some

recyclable of methods

materials and

testing

equipment

should

initiated.

139

Exclusive should City, be

area

franchi sing

or

licensing could

of

private scavengers revenues user for costs the and

evaluated.

This

produce

improve

collect ion

efficiency,

reduce

reduce traffic congestion

Licensed annual

private

scavengers

should

be

required

to

file

an

report on their collection volume.

detailed

study of be

should

be MSW

undertaken so recycling targeted

to and

determine

the

composition programs operated. can

Chicago more

incineration effectively

precisely

and

The City

should

proceed

with

plans

for

construction

of

new

transfer station to be located in the Southwest Area.

Sanitary Landfills

Mimimize banning

the the

Citys creation

dependence of new

on

sanitary by

landfills ordinance to

by and

landfills

restricting

additional

landfill

capacity

controlled

expansion of existing facilities on an as needed basis.

Strengthen environmental expansion of existing

review criteria for the operation and landfills, to include buffer zones,

erosion and drainage controls, environmental

assessments on

140