victor valley materials strategy
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Victor Valley Materials Strategy

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 30

Victor Valley Materials Strategy - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

Victor Valley Materials Strategy. John Davis Mojave Desert and Mountain Recycling Authority. ‘Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here ?’ ‘That depends a good deal on where you want to get to,’ said the Cat . ‘I don’t much care where –’ said Alice

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Victor Valley Materials Strategy' - chanton

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
victor valley materials strategy

Victor Valley Materials Strategy

John Davis

Mojave Desert and Mountain

Recycling Authority

‘Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?’

‘That depends a good deal on where you want to get to,’ said the Cat.

‘I don’t much care where –’ said Alice

“Then it doesn’t matter which way you go,’ said the Cat.

Alice in Wonderland

  • In September 2008, the JPA contracted with Gershman, Brickner & Bratton, Inc., (GBB), in association with RRT Design & Construction, Inc. (RRT), identifying opportunities to increase recycling performance
  • Final Report received April 27, 2009
Victor Valley Materials and

Resource Management Strategy

Prepared for:

Prepared by:



RRT Design & Construction, Inc.

April 27, 2009

project goals
Project Goals
  • Maximum feasible recycling and composting
  • Greenhouse gas reduction
  • Materials management system based on reduction, reuse, recycling, composting and energy recovery
  • Enhanced collection, MRF processing and marketing
  • Generators
  • Source Reduction
  • Collection
  • Pre-processing
  • Characterization
  • MRF Operations Assessment
  • Energy Recovery
  • Residue Handling (Landfill)
recovery characterization chapter 5
Recovery Characterization (Chapter 5)
  • Characterize and identify types and quantities of landfilled waste
  • Present diversion estimates
  • 5 day visual characterization at Victorville Landfill (Fall 2008)
  • 265 “controllable” loads analyzed
  • Front and side loaders, transfer trailers
recovery characterization
Recovery Characterization
  • Analyzed residential and commercial waste loads received from:
    • Victorville
    • Apple Valley
    • Adelanto
    • Unincorporated San Bernardino County
    • Victor Valley MRF
recovery characterization9
Recovery Characterization
  • 12,000 tons per month of currently landfilled material is potentially recoverable
  • This represents 85.7% of materials that were suitable for processing (about 80% of the total)
  • Some of the remaining un-processed material also could be recovered through composting and recycling
  • Goal: obtain an in-depth understanding of generators’ current perceptions, attitudes and behavior about recycling and waste reduction
  • Input from key stakeholders: residents, business leaders, elected officials, environmental leaders, school representatives, and local waste industry officials
  • Public information recommendations follow generator focus group and stakeholder discussions
  • Targeted and coordinated information, including website and hard copy materials especially are emphasized
  • Assess Apple Valley and Victorville collection systems
  • Identify system improvements
  • Consider potential to separately collect food and landscape debris
  • Assess customer service management
collection recommendations
Collection Recommendations
  • Set-out study to identify residential participation levels
  • Expanding commingled recycling commercial collection
  • Reducing residential dirt and gravel disposal
collection recommendations18
Collection Recommendations
  • Focusing on drop-off opportunities at County transfer stations
  • Continuing compost or anaerobic digestion efforts for commercial and residential organic materials
  • Considering landscape capture options
collection recommendations19
Collection Recommendations
  • Carrying out a pilot residential food and landscape collection program
  • Scale up commercial food discard collection
pre processing system
Pre-Processing System
  • Identify a system to process material now landfilled, separating and recovering materials for market
  • Three alternatives
    • Existing MRF
    • Modifications to existing
    • Addition to existing, including transfer station
pre processing system21
Pre-Processing System
  • A pre-processing system, including a transfer station, is feasible using current technology matched to the existing commingled system
  • The expanded system would cost about $30 million, and about $4.8 million annually to operate and maintain
pre processing system22
Pre-Processing System


Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF)

Paper recycling

Bottle and can recycling

Construction material*

Reuse and resale*

existing mrf enhancements
Existing MRF Enhancements
  • Increasing daily run time efficiency
  • Focusing on residue reduction
  • Improving paper recovery efforts
  • Reducing pre sort down-time
  • Considering facility operational improvements
source reduction strategies
Source Reduction Strategies
  • Source reduction strategies focus:
  • Household hazardous waste facilities locations, hours and information
  • Emphasizing non-toxic alternatives for household products
  • Grasscycling outreach and promotion for residents and landscapers
energy recovery
Energy Recovery
  • Energy recovery (about 45 tons per day) includes a conceptual system to produce fuel for local cement kilns
  • Another 18 tons per day of wood and tree limbs could be ground for biomass fuel, mulch or compost bulking material
  • The Residue chapter presents summary tables showing disposal tonnage with alternative recycling and composting performance
  • Recommends in-county disposal as the most economically viable option at today’s rates
next steps
Next Steps
  • Share results with Apple Valley and Victorville
  • Undertake preliminary financial analysis
  • Begin collection, public information, source reduction improvements
  • Discuss Victorville Landfill role, including self-haul vehicle handling