Advertisement

The Army Net Zero Waste Program and Its Implications for Energy

A Comparison of Waste Diversion to Landfilling and Waste to Energy
  • V. F. Medina
  • M. Wynter
  • S. Waisner
  • S. Cosper
  • G. Rodriguez
Conference paper
Part of the NATO Science for Peace and Security Series C: Environmental Security book series (NAPSC)

Abstract

Net Zero Waste is one of three Net Zero Goals (the other two being energy and water) that the U.S. Army has implemented for various test installations that it operates. The Net Zero Waste program focuses on diversion of the wastes, which means that it seeks to reduce wastes first, then focuses on finding useful repurposing and recycling of materials currently managed as wastes. The ultimate goal of the Net Zero Waste program is to achieve a complete elimination of wastes managed by landfilling, although it is more likely that the end result will have a small amount that will have to be managed in this manner. This contrasts with current practice, which largely promotes landfilling wastes. Equations were derived and presented that allow for the calculation of net energy savings (or possible losses in some cases) by applying the Net Zero hierarchy to wastes currently managed by landfilling. Reviewing the range of wastes commonly found in municipal wastes indicates that most can be repurposed, reused, recycled or composted in some form or another. Another management option would focus on promoting waste to energy, and these are discussed in the document. A waste to energy focus maybe a very effective approach for forward operating bases, which are temporary bases used by the Army (and other services) for expeditionary operations.

Keywords

Municipal Solid Waste Food Waste Fiscal Year Military Installation Waste Pick 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Installations, Energy and Environment) (ODASA) (2010) Army Vision for Net ZeroGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2011) Municipal solid waste generation, recycling, and disposal in the United States: facts and figures for 2010. EPA-530-F-11-005. Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Medina VF, Waisner SA (2011) Military solid and hazardous wastes – assessment of issues at military facilities and base camps. In: Letcher T, Vallero D (eds) WASTE: a handbook of waste management and recycling. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp 358–376Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Concurrent Technologies Corporation (CTC) (2012) Material flow analysis survey results. Fort Polk, JamestownGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pretz T, Julius J (2011) Metal waste. In: Letcher T, Vallero D (eds) WASTE: a handbook of waste management and recycling. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp 89–99Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Butler JH, Hooper P (2011) Glass waste. In: Letcher T, Vallero D (eds) WASTE: a handbook of waste management and recycling. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp 151–165Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Scott GM (2011) Recovered paper. In: Letcher T, Vallero D (eds) WASTE: a handbook of waste management and recycling. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp 137–149Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bartle A (2011) Textile waste. In: Letcher T, Vallero D (eds) WASTE: a handbook of waste management and recycling. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp 167–179Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lettieri P, Al-Salem SM (2011) Thermochemical treatment of plastic solid waste. In: Letcher T, Vallero D (eds) WASTE: a handbook of waste management and recycling. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp 233–242Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shulman VL (2011) Tyre recycling. In: Letcher T, Vallero D (eds) WASTE: a handbook of waste management and recycling. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp 297–320Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Campbell AG, Folk RL, Tripepi RR (1997) Wood as an amendment in municipal sludge and yard waste composting processes. Compost Sci Util 5:62–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Epstein E (1997) The science of composting. Technomic Publishing Company, LancasterGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Haug RT (1993) The principal handbook of compost engineering. Lewis Publishers, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Komilis DP, Ham RK (2000) A laboratory method to investigate gaseous emissions and solids decomposition during composting of municipal solid wastes. Compost Sci Util 8:254–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Komilis DP, Ham RK (2004) Life-cycle inventory of municipal solid waste and yard waste windrow composting in the United States. J Environ Eng 130:1390–1400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Liang Y, Leonard JJ, Feddes JJR, McGill WB (2006) Influence of carbon and buffer amendment on ammonia volatilization in composting. Bioresour Technol 97:748–761CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Renkow M, Charles S, Chaffin J (1994) A cost analysis of municipal yard trimmings composting. Compost Sci Util 2:22–34Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Renkow M, Rubin AR (1998) Does municipal solid waste composting make economic sense? J Environ Manage 53:339–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Abbe TB, Montgomery DR (1996) Large woody debris jams, channel hydraulics and habitat formation in large rivers. Regul Rivers: Res Manage 12:201–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Channell M, Graves M, Medina VF, Morrow AB, Nestler CC (2009) Enhanced tools and techniques to support debris management in disaster response missions. In: U.S. Army Engineer Research & Development Center Report, ERDC/EL TR-09-12Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Brandon DL, Medina VF, Morrow AB (2011) A case history study of the recycling efforts from the United States Army Corps of Engineers Hurricane Katrina debris demoval Mission in Mississippi. Advances in Civil Engineering, 2011, Article ID 526256, 9 pages. doi: 10.1155/2011/526256
  22. 22.
    Adhikari BK, Barrington S, Martinez J, King S (2009) Effectiveness of three bulking agents for food waste composting. Waste Manag 29:197–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bernstad A, la Cour Jansen J (2012) Separate collection of household food waste for anaerobic degradation – comparison of different techniques from a systems perspective. Waste Manage, In press article published online: www.elsevier.com/locate/wasman
  24. 24.
    Bonhotal J, Schwarz M, Feinland G (2011) In-vessel composting options for medium-scale food waste generators. Biocycle 52:49–54Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chang JI, Hsu TE (2008) Effects of compositions on food waste composting. Bioresour Technol 99:8068–8074CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Donahue DW, Chalmers JA, Stores JA (1998) Evaluation of in-vessel composting of university postconsumer food wastes. Compost Sci Util 6:75–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kim JD, Joon-Seok P, Byung-Hoon I, Dim D, Namkoong W (2008) Evaluation of pilot scale in-vessel composting for food waste treatment. J Hazard Mater 154:272–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    United States Composting Council (USCC) (2009) Best management practices for incorporating food residuals into existing yard waste composting operations. Ronkonkoma, NYGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2006) Putting surplus food to good use. Report Number EPAS30-F-06-004Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2009) Generators of food waste. www.epa.gov/epawaste/conserve/materials/organics/food
  31. 31.
    Garg P, Gupta A, Satya S (2006) Vermicomposting of different types of waste using Eisenia foetida: a comparative study. Bioresour Technol 97:391–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Nair J, Sekiozoic V, Anda M (2006) Effect of pre-composting on vermicomposting of kitchen waste. Bioresour Technol 97:2091–2095CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NBARD) (2007) Vermi-composting units under agri-clinics. Web-Werks Model Bank Projects, MumbaiGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Suthar S (2007) Vermicomposting potential of Perionyx sansibaricus (Perrier) in different waste materials. Bioresour Technol 98:1231–1237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Slack R, Letcher TM (2011) Chemicals in waste: household hazardous waste. In: Letcher T, Vallero D (eds) WASTE: a handbook of waste management and recycling. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp 181–195Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Li Y, Richardson J, Yuan P-C (2006) TCLP heavy metal leaching of personal computer components. J Environ Eng 132:497–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Thibodeau P (2002) Handling E-Waste: the challenges of computer disposal Recycle? Resell? Destroy? IT managers grapple with multiple legal issues when they dispose of old PCs, Computerworld, November 18. Available online: http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleTOC&specialReportId=120&articleId=75937. Accessed 27 Aug 2008
  38. 38.
    Genaidy A, Sequeira R (2011) Battery waste. In: Letcher T, Vallero D (eds) WASTE: a handbook of waste management and recycling. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp 321–328Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Reinhart DR, Townsend TG (1998) Landfill bioreactor design and operation. Lewis Publishers, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Mullaney T (2012) U.S. energy independence is no longer just a pipe dream, USA Today. Available online: http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/story/2012-05-15/1A-COV-ENERGY-INDEPENDENCE/54977254/1
  41. 41.
    Zaman AU (2010) Comparative study of municipal solid waste treatment technologies using life cycle assessment method. Int Environ Sci Technol 7:225–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Garcia-Pena EI, Parameswaram P, Kang DW, Canul-Chan M, Krajmalnik-Brown R (2011) Anaerobic digestion and co-digestion processes of vegetable and fruit residues: process and microbial ecology. Bioresour Technol 102:9447–9455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Karagiannidis A, Perkoulidis G (2009) A multi-criteria ranking of different technologies for the anaerobic digestion for energy recovery of the organic fraction of municipal solid wastes. Bioresour Technol 100:2355–2360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Concurrent Technologies Corporation (CTC) (2012) Net Zero waste – mass balance analyses and evaluation of waste treatment technologies. In: Final Small-Scale Technology Evaluation Report. JamestownGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Arena U (2011) Process and technological aspects of municipal solid waste gasification. A review. Waste Manag 32:625–639CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. F. Medina
    • 1
  • M. Wynter
    • 1
  • S. Waisner
    • 1
  • S. Cosper
    • 2
  • G. Rodriguez
    • 2
  1. 1.U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center – Environmental LaboratoryVicksburgUSA
  2. 2.U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center – Construction Engineering Research LaboratoryChampaignUSA

Personalised recommendations