5.4. SR 09-14-2009 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ms. Deb Walters Waste Management August 28, 2008 Page 2 in The Climate Registry guidance, General Reporting Protocol, version 1.1, May 2008, p.86) • All trucks have a capacity of 22-tons and carry a full load on all trips. • Based on information contained in the October 2005 Draft Environmental Impact Statement, 348,911 tons of MSW will be redirected. For purposes of this analysis, the Burnsville Sanitary Landfill is the designated alternative landfill: o Transfer Station Change ^ 191,089 tons of MSW currently delivered from the existing transfer station will travel an additiona120 miles per trip (round trip, each leg is an extra 10 miles) to the Burnsville Sanitary Landfill. o Direct Haul Change (assumes new transfer station constructed in general vicinity of the Elk River Landfill) ^ 75,428 tons of direct haul material will travel an additional 104 miles per trip to the Burnsville Sanitary Landfill. ^ 15,000 tons of direct haul material will travel an additional 16 miles per trip to the Elk River Resource Recovery Facility. ^ 15,000 tons of direct haul material will travel an additiona190 miles per trip to the Newport Resource Recovery Facility. o Processing Facility Change ^ 52,394 tons of direct haul material will travel an additional 104 miles per trip to the Burnsville Sanitary Landfill. • Emission Factors: o Carbon Dioxide -10.15 kg/gallon (based on Table 13.1 from The Climate Registry General Reporting Protocol, version 1.1, May 2008) o Methane - 0.0048 g/mile (based on Table 13.4 from The Climate Registry General Reporting Protocol, version 1.1, May 2008) o Nitrous Oxide - 0.0051 g/mile (based on Table 13.4 from The Climate Registry General Reporting Protocol, version 1.1, May 2008) • Global Warming Potentials o Carbon Dioxide - 1 (from IPCC Second Assessment Report) o Methane - 21 (from IPCC Second Assessment Report) o Nitrous Oxide - 310 (from IPCC Second Assessment Report) T:\0742\I406\Elk River GHG Impactdoc