Town Square

Post a New Topic

Palo Alto to weigh differing visions for composting

Original post made on Feb 6, 2014

More than a year after Palo Alto voters approved a plan to set aside 10 acres in the Baylands for a possible composting plant, the future of waste management remains very much up in the air, with three companies proposing three disparate visions for disposing of local food scraps, yard trimmings and biosolid waste.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Thursday, February 6, 2014, 9:58 AM

Comments (15)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Mry
a resident of Midtown
on Feb 6, 2014 at 1:06 pm

What about the predictions of sea level rise? The 10 acres at Byxbee Park could be under water in 30-50 years.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Craig Laughton
a resident of College Terrace
on Feb 6, 2014 at 1:50 pm

The term "biosolids" is a euphemism for human sewage sludge. It was chosen by the EPA via a national contest, where it was looking for a more marketable term for the sludge. For Gennady Sheyner to use the term in his reporting suggests that he has bought into the EPA/local greenies propaganda. Reporters should the tell raw truth, even if it is uncomfortable.

Human sewage sludge, after anaerobic digestion, contains most of the toxins of the incoming stream. None of the RFPs address this issue. Toxins in... then toxins out...to be slowly spread over our lawns and farms and golf courses. Let's not forget those bags of soil "compost" that contain "biosolids". Human sewage sludge "compost" is being rejected in many places, and this rejection will probably grow. The bottom line issue is: How will Palo Alto get rid of the end product?

Although there are many serious issues involved in this fiasco, perhaps the worst is " The new staff reports also suggests that the city might benefit from owning and operating the new waste facility." If one likes the Mitchell Park library, one will love the city-owned/operated anaerobic digestion industrial plant in our parklands.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Remember the vote was to STUDY
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Feb 6, 2014 at 1:58 pm

As usual, it appears many have forgotten that the vote was to allow time to STUDY the possibility of having this facility on this site, not a green light to build one -- many voters for the measure responded to the way it was crafted, and agreed that a small delay in the long-awaited opening of a large new area of Byxbee Park would be worth it IN CASE it was determined that it made sense (not a foregone conclusion) to have a composting factory there. For those who may think that Byxbee Park (if they even know that name) is merely an old landfill, haven't visited the park and considered the additive beauty, recreation, and ecosystem for wildlife, which would be lost were such a factory built... and the rare opportunity to preserve planned parkland as the population (remember all that new housing being built?!) of Palo Alto grows.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cedric de La Beaujardiere
a resident of Barron Park
on Feb 6, 2014 at 2:49 pm

Cedric de La Beaujardiere is a registered user.

Genady, a small correction: the Compost Task Force was not in 2011 but 2009 from March to September.

I also push back a bit on your opening statement, "...the future of waste management remains very much up in the air, with three companies proposing three disparate visions..." Of the proposals received, Synagro was the only one to propose hauling everything "away". All the other proposals (including those disqualified) proposed Anaerobic Digestion (AD) for food and sewage. The main difference between Cambi and Harvest Power is that the former precedes their AD with a thermo-hydrolysis process which breaks up cell walls, allowing the AD bacteria to get in there and release more energy.

The RFP was intentionally broad to allow for the diversity of potential technologies, yet was stringent enough to generate viable bids by stable companies, not just pie-in-the-sky concepts. It is interesting to me that all the energy options were forms of AD, and that we didn't get proposals for other technologies like Plasma Arc, Gasification, Biochar, etc. It is likely that these other technologies are too nascent and not yet widely deployed by established companies that could handle the needs of a medium-sized municipality.

So, for food and sewage, the general technology direction is clear, and the only question is private versus public ownership. The private ownership concept was to protect the city from risks of innovative technologies that in the end were not proposed. For well known and low-risk AD, public ownership represents considerable long-term savings for the city. A private operator needs to turn a profit for their investors, whereas a public operator just needs to pay off the capital and operational costs, and can invest in longer-lasting infrastructure.

The staff report gives a pretty clear set of phased next steps (from page 2 of the report):
1. A biosolids dewatering and truck load-out facility. This would allow for the earliest decommissioning of the existing incinerators and would serve as a back-up option for biosolids handling in emergency situations and increase the reliability and resiliency of the RWQCP;
2. A thermal hydrolysis, anaerobic digestion facility at the RWQCP initially for biosolids, and then for food scraps, when component three (below) is completed;
3. A food preprocessing system, either offsite or onsite compatible with the anaerobic digester at the RWQCP; and
4. A yard trimmings technology, consisting of either the current Aerobic Composting technology, or a more advanced technology which would include energy production.

@Craig: your objection rests upon the idea that our sewage is full of toxins, but the data does not bear this out. The city has a vigorous program to reduce or eliminate toxins at their sources before they go down the drain, and it monitors toxins at the input to the plant and publishes those reports. annually (in one or more of our prior PA Online exchanges on this point I link to such a report, I don't have the time to search for it now.) In addition, the current sewage incineration would concentrate toxins in the ash (at least any not destroyed by the fire), but the ash is only considered a hazardous waste because of its copper content, from copper water pipes. I know you are a fan of Plasma Arc, but no companies proposed that. So for the sewage, it's either AD in Palo Alto or composting it 100 miles away.

@STUDY: Well, it has been studied and shown to be economically and environmentally viable to do local AD. Plus, AD will be done on the existing sewage treatment plant site, without touching the former landfill/Byxbee Park. That may come into play again in the future when the city takes another look at an alternative to composting yard wastes 53 miles away, but for now you're safe. Even the community panelists from the "No on E" side support AD at the RWQCP.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by curmudgeon
a resident of Downtown North
on Feb 6, 2014 at 3:20 pm

This is the classic bait and switch. People voted to take 10 acres out of Byxbee Park for a garbage to energy facility that would do wondrous things for our city and its image. This is nothing of the sort.

We been deceived. Again. This time by a formerly respectable "environmentalist" group.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Craig Laughton
a resident of College Terrace
on Feb 6, 2014 at 4:38 pm

If one wants to see how the organic growers community sees human sewage sludge, see this:

Web Link

It is a growing movement, and one that is not going away. If Palo Alto moves forward with this anaerobic digestion fiasco, we will face the possibility of a major financial obligation, because we will be stuck with the stuff...maybe even civil legal liabilities.

@Cedric: "I know you are a fan of Plasma Arc, but no companies proposed that". Why would they bother, since your group has promised to do everything possible to defeat such rational approaches. Palo Alto is not a good political environment to protect the environment.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Midtown
a resident of Midtown
on Feb 6, 2014 at 8:01 pm

Residents in a Somerset village in England have said more needs to be done to tackle a "sewage-like smell" coming from a waste plant.

Cannington Bio Energy's anaerobic digestion plant was built to process farm waste but, since 2011, has dealt with food from outside the county.
Locals said the change in use had caused an odour described as a mixture of "dog's muck and burnt plastic".

New measures to tackle the problem have been approved by the county council.

'Constant' traffic

Rene Taylor, who runs Currypool Mill campsite near the plant, said an increase in traffic from the plant had also made life very difficult for her guests. "They are huge tractors with tankers on the back, and the lane is tiny," she added. "When they are moving the digestate into this area, then every few minutes they are up and down, all day long, from early morning to late at night - just constant.

"And the odours can be very, very bad, especially if the wind's in this direction. Even inside the house, you get this sickly odour which is almost like a combination of dog's muck and burnt plastic."

So this is what we want in the baylands?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Resident 1
a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Feb 6, 2014 at 8:09 pm

We have other facilities directly in the area - golf course with soccer fields (planned), airport, proposed hotel at Mings, and Baylands refurbishment. We also have a high tide which will increase the bay encroachment inland. How do these proposed facilities fit into the space provided? Are the buildings too high for the incoming airplanes? We are talking processes - need to see how big the buildings are that house these processes.

That whole area needs to be mapped out for the different projects being discussed. There is also a project for upgrading the creek flood control directly in that area which I believe has already been funded.
Are trucks going to be continually traveling Embarcadero filled with "stuff"? What is the impact of each of these ideas on the general area and other projects in this area? There needs to be an impact report for how all of the other projects in that specific area fit together.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Craig Laughton
a resident of College Terrace
on Feb 7, 2014 at 8:57 am

Whole Foods has agreed to no longer sell produce grown in soils contaminated with human sewage sludge. This concern is growing, which means that Palo Alto could get stuck with the stuff...then what? Back to incineration? How much will this fiasco cost PA?

Web Link


 +   Like this comment
Posted by resident 1
a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Feb 7, 2014 at 1:32 pm

A few years ago we could go get compost at the PA dump. I of course went and I somehow then got a fungus growth that is appearing all over my yard that I had to take to the Sunset campus for them to identify. I thought it was a sea creature. My neighbors also got compost for their garden and got strange results.
If any of the results from this project are used on the golf course, parks, or soccer fields then it is unclear what the results will be for the people that are using those facilities. It should be noted that there is a lot of news on Valley Fever which is the result of fungus in the soil.
Is this another project we should vote on so that we are not throwing money away on unintended consequences?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton
on Feb 7, 2014 at 1:45 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

"Residents in a Somerset village in England have said more needs to be done to tackle a "sewage-like smell" coming from a waste plant.

Interestingly today the entire community of Somerset in underwater.

A spokesman for Avon and Somerset Police said: "Earlier this morning local flood defences were breached and the water level in Moorland began rising.
"We are have been informing local residents and strongly advising them to leave the area.
"The Royal Marines and search and rescue volunteers are assisting us with this."


 +   Like this comment
Posted by resident 1
a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Feb 7, 2014 at 10:50 pm

Something to think about - when this subject originally came up we did not have the pressure we do now to increase housing and amenities for the city.
In a number of other subjects requiring city input it has been suggested that a hotel and other amenities could fit into the Embarcadero area to add more attractions. We are building up more soccer fields now, Mings wants to build a hotel, and we could fit in an apartment complex in that area on East Bayshore. Also a convention center such as seen at Shoreline Park - Michaels restaurant.
Creating a bio-tech dump no longer looks like such a great idea now that we have other options that require us to create a destination center for the city. There is a lot more we can do with that property now since we are being squeezed for buildable property. There are a lot of negatives noted above on putting a dump in that area.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cedric de La Beaujardiere
a resident of Barron Park
on Feb 7, 2014 at 11:19 pm

Cedric de La Beaujardiere is a registered user.

There is no proposal to put in a dump. The landfill is full and closed and pending final conversion to Byxbee Park. The AD facility would be within the footprint of the existing sewage treatment plant and would replace the current sewage incinerator, generating energy instead of wasting it.

From the ~120 acre former landfill, Measure E rezoned 10 acres immediately adjacent to the sewage plant for an energy/compost (E/C) facility. If the city decides to pursue local composting of its yard trimmings (the contents of your green bins), the good news is that it looks like this can be done within ~4 acres.

It is currently highly improbable to use the former landfill for anything other than parkland or E/C, as it would require a vote of the people to change the zoning, it would be next to the smelly sewage plant (undesirable location), within the flight path of the airport (height limits), and there would be significant push back from the regulatory agencies which oversee the landfill.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by resident 1
a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Feb 8, 2014 at 3:06 pm

One of the problems we have in this city - and others - is that a project is evaluated on it's own without an analysis on the impact on the surrounding area. Other project are being initiated - tearing trees out on the golf course, creating soccer fields which will increase traffic and parking in that area, others that want to expand the role of the airport, Build a gym near the baseball park, more people who want to expand the baylands trails - all of which are independently reviewed as "good ideas" irrespective of the impact on the other projects in the approval cycle.
I personally do not want any part of compost that includes human waste.
I think the Planning Department needs to create a full plan of all of the projects before money is spent.
Shoreline Amphitheatre is built on a "dump - fill" as is Shoreline Golf Course so that should not prohibit a creative use of the available land.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by resident 1
a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Feb 9, 2014 at 11:01 am

The San Jose Mercury News has a good article on this subject today in the Sunday paper. It clearly lays out the choices - one of which is to do nothing. It helps frame the discussion with no spin included.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Steins, sausage and spaetzle: Mountain View hosts second Oktoberfest
By Elena Kadvany | 3 comments | 2,776 views

Men Are Good For Three Things
By Laura Stec | 31 comments | 2,727 views

Two creative lights depart Palo Alto, leaving diverse legacies
By Jay Thorwaldson | 2 comments | 1,458 views

Reducing Council Size? Against
By Douglas Moran | 13 comments | 1,107 views

Storytime is Full
By Cheryl Bac | 5 comments | 988 views