MRC considers Virginia company Fiberight for post-PERC solid waste plan
ROCKLAND — On Aug. 13, the Municipal Review Committee (MRC) held an information meeting for the public on its plan for municipal solid waste processing after current power purchase agreements between Emera Maine, formerly Bangor-Hydro Electric Co., and the PERC facility in Orrington expire in 2018.
The MRC represents 187 towns across Maine that send waste to PERC. It is a regional organization that deals with municipal waste disposal issues. The organization was formed to help negotiate a restructuring when PERC experienced financial difficulties in the late 1980s and early 1990s. MRC is now a limited 23 percent partner in PERC and holds a note from Emera Maine.
MRC’s attorney Dan McKay and Executive Director Greg Lounder laid out the reasons the MRC thinks PERC will not be a viable option after 2018.
The biggest issue is the cost of electricity produced by PERC’s waste-burning system.
Under the power purchase agreements between Emera Maine and PERC, Emera Maine is buying electricity for a little under $170 per megawatt hour (MWh). According to the MRC, market rates are about $50-$60 per MWh.
If this gap continues into 2018, when the power purchase agreements expire, PERC will have to start selling electricity at the lower market price.
The MRC Board maintains that PERC will not be able to sustain that loss of revenue, particularly since the facility already has to pay to import out-of-state trash to make up the difference between the tonnage the plant needs and the amount of waste municipalities in Maine provide. MRC says that the only place PERC could make up the loss in revenue would be through raising tipping fees over $100 dollars.
At the same time that the power purchase agreements expire, town and city contracts with PERC expire. So does PERC’s contract with the landfill where it disposes of ash and residual waste.
Since they began planning for the contract expirations in 2011, the MRC reached out to the managing partner company that controls PERC, but, Louder said, the private partners expressed no interest in retrofitting the facility to better recycle and reuse waste, which the MRC thinks is necessary since the technology at PERC is outdated.
Louder said that PERC is too small to maintain itself as a refuse derived fuel waste-burning plant in the current market, and too large for MRC towns to meet its supply needs.
Another waste-to-energy plant, MERC in Biddeford, closed in 2012.
While much of the introduction was spent identifying the reasons the MRC believes PERC is not the answer after 2018, both McKay and Lounder acknowledged that a final alternative plan is still down the road.
However, the MRC has already filed a preliminary application for a Determination of Public Benefit with the DEP for a new landfill site, either in Argyle or Greenbush.
If the public benefit determination is positive, the MRC can move on to applying for a landfill license.
McKay explained that the process for trying to get a landfill has to start now because of how long it takes to go through all the steps.
Denis St. Peter, a technical consultant for the MRC, went over the list of municipal, state, and commercial landfills in Maine that could take trash from MRC communities after the PERC agreement expires. Most of these facilities are at capacity and would need to expand to take new waste streams.
St. Peter and Lounder emphasized that, if the MRC opens a publicly owned landfill, the communities would have control. They would be able to site it next to a new processing facility and control fees, environmental impact and transport.
