Great Lakes Environmental Directory Great Lakes Great Lakes environment Great Lakes grants exotic species water pollution water export drilling environment Great Lakes pollution Superior Michigan Huron Erie Ontario ecology Great Lakes issues wetlands Great Lakes wetlands Great Lakes Great Lakes environment Great Lakes watershed water quality exotic species Great Lakes grants water pollution water export oil gas drilling environment environmental Great Lakes pollution Lake Superior Lake Michigan Lake Huron Lake Erie Lake Ontario Great Lakes ecology Great Lakes issues Great Lakes wetlands Great Lakes Resources Great Lakes activist Great Lakes environmental organizations Great Lakes Aquatic Habitat air pollution alien species threatened rare endangered species ecological Great Lakes information Success Stories Great Lakes Directory Home/News Great Lakes Calendar Great Lakes jobs/volunteering Search Great Lakes Organizations Take Action! Contact Us Resources/Links Great Lakes Issues Great Lakes News Article About Us Networking Services

Great Lakes Article:

How much trash is too much?
Proposed landfill regulations spark debate over height of piles, length of waste pipes
By Lee Bergquist
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
Published January 5th, 2005

Landfills could be getting bigger in Wisconsin.

New rules proposed by the state Department of Natural Resources would allow operators to build landfills that rise nearly 67% higher.

These and other measures are viewed by the DNR as a way to keep landfills operating longer, and to put off the inevitable and controversial task of finding new places to build them.

But smaller landfills worry about added costs. Environmentalists also say the rules embrace flawed technology that could cause polluted groundwater.

Environmentalists complain as well that the DNR flip-flopped last year on a key issue that would have provided more money to care for landfills long after their dumping days are over.

The rules are bound to affect southeastern Wisconsin - the home of five municipal landfills.

One controversial change would let landfills use longer pipes to carry away polluted landfill water called "leachate." Pipes could have a maximum length of 2,000 feet - a 67% increase over the current limit of 1,200 feet.

Factored in with other regulations, that means the tops of landfills could rise from a maximum of 150 feet high to 250 feet high - a prospect that environmentalists derisively call "Mount Trashmores."

Another important change requires operators to come up with plans to stabilize landfills more quickly. That means landfills could recirculate leachate or add other liquids to speed decomposition and reduce potential pollution.

Rules worry operators
In comments to the DNR, small-landfill operators worried that the rules favored large landfills.

"By allowing landfills to grow larger, the proposed rule permitting 2,000-foot leachate lines could have a monumental negative impact on small municipal landfills," said Meleesa Johnson, solid waste administrator for Portage County.

Major landfill operators said they liked most of the proposal.

"If we don't allow landfills to get bigger at one site, that would mean that we have more landfills," said Gerard Hamblin, regional engineer for Waste Management Inc., the largest landfill operator in southeast Wisconsin.

"The question should be, 'How do we manage waste in the best way?' "

That jibes with the thinking of the DNR.

"(These rules) draw us into a bigger policy question," said Al Shea, administrator of the Air and Waste Division. "We are eventually going to run out of landfill space. There are basically two options - either expand at existing sites or develop new greenfield sites."

There are still years of space in landfills in southeastern Wisconsin, according to the DNR. But new sites can take years to be approved, and local opposition is virtually guaranteed.

The home of Barbara Witt of Menomonee Falls has a well and is adjacent to Waste Management's Orchard Ridge landfill. She lives with a transplanted kidney and has a suppressed immune system. Witt plans to sell her house this year because of the landfill and the odor, dust and constant ebb and flow of gulls looking for a meal.

She is against extending leachate lines to 2,000 feet. A bigger landfill, she says, means "a greater chance of those lines clogging or breaking" and polluting groundwater.

More waste could be trucked in
Another concern of environmentalists, and something that the DNR agrees could happen, is that bigger landfills might mean additional waste trucked in from outside of Wisconsin.

Wisconsin law limits the ability of localities to veto a landfill. In addition, Wisconsin's proximity to major markets in northern Illinois and Minneapolis and St. Paul could spur more trash into the state, the DNR says.

The new rules were proposed at the urging of Onyx Waste Services Inc., a landfill operator, after the DNR placed limits on the maximum length of leachate lines in 1996, and landfills were forced to petition the agency for a variance to lay down longer lines.

The lines are hardened plastic pipes - 6 inches in diameter - and are buried in stone atop a high-density plastic liner. Rainwater trickles through buried debris and picks up pollutants along the way. Water is collected in the spaces between the stone and in the perforated pipe and is carried off the sloped site and into sewers.

The DNR had concerns that the lines - which can become clogged - might not get properly cleaned out.

With newer technology and more experience by the industry using the lines, the DNR thinks clogged pipes can be cleaned, said Suzanne Bangert, director of the Bureau of Waste Management at the DNR.

Big 'bathtubs'
Until now, Wisconsin landfills have been designed as "basically a bathtub," Bangert said. "If you get water in it, you try to remove it and send it to a sewage treatment plant."

The new rules could change that by allowing landfills to recirculate the leachate. That would let organic material in the trash decompose more quickly.

"We are now suggesting that the bathtub design is a long-term liability," Bangert said. "That's a pretty significant change."

Environmentalists oppose both longer leachate lines and the process of sending water back to the landfill.

Regardless of what regulators and the industry say, technology has not improved - longer lines are still subject to clogging, said one opponent, Peter Anderson, president of RecycleWorlds Consulting in Madison.

"It's not that someone had a eureka in the bathtub and made things better," Anderson said.

Landfills, he said, always are said to be built with "state of the art" technology, but some sites eventually have problems. He noted the former Refuse Hideaway Landfill in Middleton in Dane County, which operated from 1974 to 1988, needed government cleanup after volatile organic compounds were found in monitoring wells.

As for adding leachate back to landfills, Anderson said it would turn them into the "consistency of wetlands" and make them more prone to collapse or failure.

The DNR rejects those claims. It also says that longer lines are used in surrounding states.

As for the effect on smaller landfills, the DNR agreed that some smaller landfills have closed in the past decade, and others have banded into regional operations to economize.

Some say rules fall short
The rules also rankle environmentalists for what's not in them.

After more than a year of meetings between the DNR and the garbage industry and environmentalists, the agency decided not to consider whether to establish a new way to underwrite the cost of fixing a pollution problem at a landfill 40 years after it shuts down.

Landfill operators are currently required to care for a site forever. But the way regulations are written, their responsibility is unclear if, 40years after a landfill is closed, problems crop up and require remediation.

The DNR for a time considered language that would have required new upfront payments by the landfills to cover these problems. But officials dropped it last year and put the matter off for now.

Environmentalists are embittered by that, and say the DNR caved into industry demands.

The Sierra Club issued a news release last fall and said that political appointees of the DNR overrode warnings of the staff and capitulated to demands by landfill companies to loosen regulations.

"The decision was pretty straightforward to me," said Shea, the air and waste regulator who signed off on the rule.

There were many unanswered questions and industry officials and environmentalists were divided on the payment issue, said Shea, who was appointed by DNR Secretary Scott Hassett. He also emphasized that state regulations on long-term care of landfills were already stricter than federal law.

As for caving to industry or political pressure, Shea said he never met with landfill representatives or environmental groups on the matter, and no one above him at the agency or the governor's office pressured him.

Added Lynn Morgan, a lobbyist and spokeswoman for Waste Management:

"I would say that this allegation of political hanky-panky is issued from the lofty and isolated peak of the Mount Nonsense."

This information is posted for nonprofit educational purposes, in accordance with U.S. Code Title 17, Chapter 1,Sec. 107 copyright laws.
For more information go to: If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for
purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use," you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Great Lakes environmental information

Return to Great Lakes Directory Home/ Site Map