AG 1994 08 15 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Section 8-- Evaluation and Recommendations All facility size estimates in this study are preliminary and for planning purposes only. They were selected to provide an appropriate range of facility sizes and evaluation factors. 8.3 System Evaluation Each o[ the evaluation criteria is discussed below. Many of the criteria are interrelated, where applicable, this is pointed out. 8.3.1 Demonstrated or proven technology The technology must be demonstrated in commercial operation at domestic fackllties, with a process unit size in a range applicable the that required by Cabarrus County. Pilot size projects do not establish viability since scale-up can result in unforeseen problems. Technologies demonstrated abroad may not be commercial feasible in the U.S. Social differences abroad may include significant variations tn waste stream composition, labor availability and costs, and public acceptance of various factors. In Table 2-5 a significant number of facilities tn this size range are needed by · Cabarrus County and larger have closed. It is questionable whether MSW composting technology can be considered sucesssfully commercially proven. 8.3.2 On-line mechanical reliability The technology must have proven on-tine mechanical reliability which allows for continuous management of MSW generated 365 days per year. Mechanically, the system works, but system control has been the achilles heel. -- 8.3.3 Sizing requirements The t:echnology must: be available at the wale and size requirements necessary -- to meet the needs of the s[-udy area economically. Technology is available at the size needed. 8.3.4 Environmental Impacts The technology must use environmentally acceptable refuse disposal techniques. It must be able to comply with air quality, noise, and odor regulations as part of the overall facility design. Based on problems at similar facilities it is questionable whether the facLlity could comply with odor regulations. CDM Camp Dresser & McKee 8-2