I believe that we, as a nation, have an opportunity to change the direction of our policies that determine how we handle our MSW. Currently, we employ a landfill-based infrastructure to dispose of the waste that remains after we compost and recycle. We bury reactive waste in landfills located all over the country. The reactive waste rots and produces methane gas, thus these landfills are a MAJOR source for methane emissions. Recent studies by the EPA and the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP) show the extent of the problem (https://environmentalintegrity.org/reports/greenhouse-gas-emissions-from-marylands-landfills/). The levels of methane emissions have been under-reported for decades. There is a movement towards capturing the methane gas being released from the landfills, but the estimates for successfully capturing the gas are approximately 45-50%.
As someone who has championed the fight against global warming and supported the Green New Deal, you know that we don’t have much time left to prevent a climate catastrophe. The report recently released by the IPCC stated it bluntly: “To avoid mounting loss of life, biodiversity and infrastructure, ambitious, accelerated action is required to adapt to climate change, at the same time as making rapid, deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.” There is no question now that we have been too slow, and too cautious, in our collective efforts.
The USEPA has made methane, a potent greenhouse gas at least 25 times more harmful than carbon dioxide, a target of opportunity and necessity, and identified three sectors as the major contributors of methane in the US: energy (chiefly leaking natural gas pipelines), agriculture, and waste management (chiefly methane from landfills, even those with landfill gas capture systems). The EPA has also stated recently that estimates of methane from landfills have been understated by a factor of two. That alone would make landfills a good target for reducing greenhouse gasses. There are many other reasons, however, why moving away from landfilling to an integrated waste management system makes sense, from a financial as well as an environmental perspective. The effectiveness of this approach has been well documented in several European countries, including Denmark, Sweden, Germany, Austria and Switzerland, and would likely be equally successful here.
That brings me to my second point: It is critical not only to require reductions of methane from landfills but to move a step further and phase out landfilling of reactive waste, such as Municipal Solid Waste, altogether, achievable by June 1st, 2030.
The benefits are far reaching:
– Significant Methane reductions
– Recover of high-quality resources
– Creation of substantial amounts of sustainable jobs
– Removal of overall toxic impacts to air, soil and water
– $Billions in savings to the taxpayer (vs. forever care as landfills are modestly engineered structures that fail sooner or later)
– Retaining millions if not billions in revenues
Dear Senator Cardin: I received my Ph.D. in May 2021 from UMBC’s School of Public Policy at the age of 71. My dissertation focused on municipal solid waste (MSW) in the U.S. I’ve been busy since receiving my degree. I met with Mayor Brandon Scott and his Department of Public Works leadership team to present my findings and offer my suggestions for Baltimore City. This meeting was facilitated by UMBC’s President Freeman Hrabowski. I joined…
We have reviewed your response to our challenge to you, which we submitted on November 20, 2021, and frankly, we find it not only inadequate and misinformed but condescending as well. Let me point out some obvious examples.
…
“Finally, I want to emphasize that King County is open to looking at new technologies for regional waste management, and future updates to our Comp Plan will explore landfilling alternatives, including a waste-to-energy option.” This statement is nothing short of laughable. You have had several studies done over the past decade, at least one of which recommended a waste-to-energy facility as the least-cost, best environmental solution, yet you chose to continue to expand the landfill. How much has this cost the King County taxpayer? How much will it cost our children, and their children, both financially and from an environmental and public health perspective?
…