Landfill Lateral Expansion

Consultation has concluded

Image of landfill with the text landfill lateral expansion

The Squamish Landfill is on track to reach capacity in late 2028 to early 2029. To ensure that residents and businesses continue to have a local waste disposal option, the District of Squamish is working to expand the Landfill laterally to the east of the current Landfill.

The land identified for the lateral expansion, is unceded land claimed by the Crown, which lies within the traditional territory of the Skwxwú7mesh Úxwumixw (Squamish Nation). The District is working closely with Skwxwú7mesh Úxwumixw as part of this process.

A map of the current landfill and proposed expansion site can be found here.

The lateral landfill expansion project aims to:

Ensure local waste disposal for the next 25+ years
Be innovative and flexible to be more than "just a landfill" in the future
Integrate smoothly with existing infrastructure to provide environmentally sound operations
Upgrade the transfer station to provide increased waste diversion opportunities
Reduce the impact of leachate on the District’s sewer system
Utilize the unused future landfill area to temporarily support circular economy and reuse initiatives

Engagement Process and Next Steps:

From May 18 - September 16, 2022 the District engaged the community to provide information, collect feedback, and answer questions about the proposed landfill later expansion. A summary of what we heard during the engagement is available here.

A report detailing the feedback heard during the engagement, as well as the proposed language for the focused amendment, will be shared with the Squamish Lillooet Regional District (SLRD) in early 2023. It will then be submitted to the Province for approval. It is anticipated to take a least a year for Provincial approval. This complete report can be found here.

Background:

The Squamish Landfill services residents and businesses of the District of Squamish, Skwxwú7mesh Úxwumixw, Britannia Beach, Furry Creek, as well as the Squamish and Paradise Valleys.

Solid waste in Squamish is managed according to the SLRD Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan (SWRMP), which was published in 2016. The SWRMP provides a long-term vision for how the region will handle solid waste, as well as waste reduction, diversion, and disposal activities. The Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy (MOECCS) oversees the SWRMP.

The District of Squamish is working with the SLRD to add a focused amendment to the existing SWRMP that will allow for the lateral expansion of the Squamish Landfill. View the proposed amendment wording here.

While not the preferred option, the District of Squamish is also working with the SLRD to add a clause to the SWRMP that will allow for waste to be exported out of the region as an alternative, through the focused amendment process. It is not anticipated, but if a lateral expansion is not possible for any reason, or a temporary waste disposal solution is needed, the District will move forward with waste export.

Both amendments to the SWRMP will be sent to the MOECCS for approval.

Image of landfill with the text landfill lateral expansion

A map of the current landfill and proposed expansion site can be found here.

The lateral landfill expansion project aims to:

Ensure local waste disposal for the next 25+ years
Be innovative and flexible to be more than "just a landfill" in the future
Integrate smoothly with existing infrastructure to provide environmentally sound operations
Upgrade the transfer station to provide increased waste diversion opportunities
Reduce the impact of leachate on the District’s sewer system
Utilize the unused future landfill area to temporarily support circular economy and reuse initiatives

Engagement Process and Next Steps:

Background:

The Squamish Landfill services residents and businesses of the District of Squamish, Skwxwú7mesh Úxwumixw, Britannia Beach, Furry Creek, as well as the Squamish and Paradise Valleys.

Both amendments to the SWRMP will be sent to the MOECCS for approval.

Consultation has concluded

Do you have a question about this project? Please ask us here.

Your question will be public once we have answered it. If your question contains personal information we may not make your question public and may respond privately.
Your username and question may appear in reports to Council and reports to the Squamish Lillooet Regional District and the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy as part of engagement reporting.
Questions that do not contribute to a safe and respectful space for others, or are unrelated to this topic, will not be answered. Please review our moderation policy.

Share Who are the consultants for this project? on Facebook Share Who are the consultants for this project? on Twitter Share Who are the consultants for this project? on Linkedin Email Who are the consultants for this project? link

Who are the consultants for this project?

Cliff Jennings asked over 1 year ago

Hi, Thank you for your question. The Lateral Expansion of the Squamish Landfill has many different project components, and consultants vary depending on the objective. To-date, Sperling Hansen & Associates have been retained for the Preliminary Design (2019) and the Concept Design (2022/3), Ecoinspire Planning Services has been retained to write up the Engagement Summary for the focused amendment to the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District’s Solid Waste & Resource Management Plan (2022), and BGC Engineering to complete a review of debris flow risk in relation to the proposed landfill expansion (2022).
Edit: As well, ECOLOGIC Consultants have been retained to conduct the Archaeological Impact Assessment.
Share I had another follow-up question, or rather a request for further clarification after the answer you provided to my question below. Since I have not heard from you, I must assume that my message did not reach you, so I try again: We know that solid waste production is 560kg/capita/year in Squamish, but that the Province sets a target of 350kg/capita/year before giving approval for an incinerator (a Waste-to-Energy facility). Whatever the reason for this requirement may be, it does not answer the key question of what tonnage/kg is required to make a WTE financially viable. You also mention higher energy prices in Europe giving a boost to the viability of WTEs there. I assume this relates to net output of energy from the facility, and which would be competitive as an alternate source of energy in a high price environment. There is, of course, also the fact that lower overall energy prices lower the input costs, never mind attempting to market the energy output of the facility, and is a WTE facility not built foremost with the goal to eliminate/reduce waste to the smallest volume possible rather than as a source for energy production? Furthermore, you state in your answer that lateral landfill expansion would still be needed to deal with waster residue after incineration. What about toxic ash left after the process? Surely, our lateral landfill should not be the place to put that? on Facebook Share I had another follow-up question, or rather a request for further clarification after the answer you provided to my question below. Since I have not heard from you, I must assume that my message did not reach you, so I try again: We know that solid waste production is 560kg/capita/year in Squamish, but that the Province sets a target of 350kg/capita/year before giving approval for an incinerator (a Waste-to-Energy facility). Whatever the reason for this requirement may be, it does not answer the key question of what tonnage/kg is required to make a WTE financially viable. You also mention higher energy prices in Europe giving a boost to the viability of WTEs there. I assume this relates to net output of energy from the facility, and which would be competitive as an alternate source of energy in a high price environment. There is, of course, also the fact that lower overall energy prices lower the input costs, never mind attempting to market the energy output of the facility, and is a WTE facility not built foremost with the goal to eliminate/reduce waste to the smallest volume possible rather than as a source for energy production? Furthermore, you state in your answer that lateral landfill expansion would still be needed to deal with waster residue after incineration. What about toxic ash left after the process? Surely, our lateral landfill should not be the place to put that? on Twitter Share I had another follow-up question, or rather a request for further clarification after the answer you provided to my question below. Since I have not heard from you, I must assume that my message did not reach you, so I try again: We know that solid waste production is 560kg/capita/year in Squamish, but that the Province sets a target of 350kg/capita/year before giving approval for an incinerator (a Waste-to-Energy facility). Whatever the reason for this requirement may be, it does not answer the key question of what tonnage/kg is required to make a WTE financially viable. You also mention higher energy prices in Europe giving a boost to the viability of WTEs there. I assume this relates to net output of energy from the facility, and which would be competitive as an alternate source of energy in a high price environment. There is, of course, also the fact that lower overall energy prices lower the input costs, never mind attempting to market the energy output of the facility, and is a WTE facility not built foremost with the goal to eliminate/reduce waste to the smallest volume possible rather than as a source for energy production? Furthermore, you state in your answer that lateral landfill expansion would still be needed to deal with waster residue after incineration. What about toxic ash left after the process? Surely, our lateral landfill should not be the place to put that? on Linkedin Email I had another follow-up question, or rather a request for further clarification after the answer you provided to my question below. Since I have not heard from you, I must assume that my message did not reach you, so I try again: We know that solid waste production is 560kg/capita/year in Squamish, but that the Province sets a target of 350kg/capita/year before giving approval for an incinerator (a Waste-to-Energy facility). Whatever the reason for this requirement may be, it does not answer the key question of what tonnage/kg is required to make a WTE financially viable. You also mention higher energy prices in Europe giving a boost to the viability of WTEs there. I assume this relates to net output of energy from the facility, and which would be competitive as an alternate source of energy in a high price environment. There is, of course, also the fact that lower overall energy prices lower the input costs, never mind attempting to market the energy output of the facility, and is a WTE facility not built foremost with the goal to eliminate/reduce waste to the smallest volume possible rather than as a source for energy production? Furthermore, you state in your answer that lateral landfill expansion would still be needed to deal with waster residue after incineration. What about toxic ash left after the process? Surely, our lateral landfill should not be the place to put that? link

I had another follow-up question, or rather a request for further clarification after the answer you provided to my question below. Since I have not heard from you, I must assume that my message did not reach you, so I try again: We know that solid waste production is 560kg/capita/year in Squamish, but that the Province sets a target of 350kg/capita/year before giving approval for an incinerator (a Waste-to-Energy facility). Whatever the reason for this requirement may be, it does not answer the key question of what tonnage/kg is required to make a WTE financially viable. You also mention higher energy prices in Europe giving a boost to the viability of WTEs there. I assume this relates to net output of energy from the facility, and which would be competitive as an alternate source of energy in a high price environment. There is, of course, also the fact that lower overall energy prices lower the input costs, never mind attempting to market the energy output of the facility, and is a WTE facility not built foremost with the goal to eliminate/reduce waste to the smallest volume possible rather than as a source for energy production? Furthermore, you state in your answer that lateral landfill expansion would still be needed to deal with waster residue after incineration. What about toxic ash left after the process? Surely, our lateral landfill should not be the place to put that?

WolfgangW asked over 1 year ago

Hello, thank you for this question. We apologize on the delay in our response, which is due to several key staff being out of the office.
With regards to your question about the kg/capita/year needed to make a WTE feasible, we do not have that level of information. The 2019 analysis that was conducted was based on two production scenarios for waste tonnage (Squamish-only and the entire SLRD region), using the status quo waste disposal rate, as well as a high-diversion waste projection. The primary purpose of completing the waste projections was to determine a design tonnage for the WTE facility and provide information on proven WTE technologies that would suitable for the tonnages identified in these scenarios.
As to your question about the goal of a WTE facility, yes you are correct about the ultimate goal being to eliminate or reduce waste to the smallest volume. Energy production is a by-product output that we would consider in the analysis, but is not the main function of the facility.
With regards to the question about the management of the ash that is produced by a WTE, and ultimately requires proper disposal. Yes, while WTE significantly reduces the volume of residuals requiring disposal, it does not eliminate the need for a landfill, hence a small lateral expansion of the Squamish Landfill would still be required if the District was to pursue a WTE. If a regional WTE was to be established, the Squamish Lateral Landfill Expansion would be a possible location to dispose of the final product (with the proper provincial approvals in place).
Share Thanks again for answering my follow-up question so quickly. If I interpret your answer correctly, Squamish has to reduce its current rate of 560kg/capita of waste per year to 350kg/capita to obtain provincial approval for a WTE facility, not because it is not financially feasible at the current disposal rates, which appear to be sufficient when reading your answer under 'Expense' to my first question, but because of what must be some arbitrary provincial target, namely the 350kg/capita/year. You state that this is "so that we don't have to rely on continued waste production to ensure that a WTE facility remains viable". Since your answer suggests that this number must be above the 350kg per year, it then begs the question of how many kilograms of waste production are needed to make a WTE facility financially viable? That, to me, is the key question here. You raised another question by your comment about lateral landfill expansion, even with a WTE facility, to handle the end product from the process. According to what I know, waste processed by efficient incinerator facilities produce highly concentrated residue, but which is also to some extent toxic, so that it has to be disposed/stored in a proper manner. That would certainly have to exclude 'sprinkling' on top of a lateral landfill, wouldn't it? Lastly, your reference to space constraints and higher energy prices in Europe as prime reasons for WTE facilities being common in Europe: It seems to me that greater abundance of space in Canada should not be a license to treat that space with any less reference. As to energy pricing, I suppose you refer to the price of net surplus energy produced by the WTE facility, but isn't that a 'bonus', the main purpose of the whole operation being the elimination of as much solid waste as possible? on Facebook Share Thanks again for answering my follow-up question so quickly. If I interpret your answer correctly, Squamish has to reduce its current rate of 560kg/capita of waste per year to 350kg/capita to obtain provincial approval for a WTE facility, not because it is not financially feasible at the current disposal rates, which appear to be sufficient when reading your answer under 'Expense' to my first question, but because of what must be some arbitrary provincial target, namely the 350kg/capita/year. You state that this is "so that we don't have to rely on continued waste production to ensure that a WTE facility remains viable". Since your answer suggests that this number must be above the 350kg per year, it then begs the question of how many kilograms of waste production are needed to make a WTE facility financially viable? That, to me, is the key question here. You raised another question by your comment about lateral landfill expansion, even with a WTE facility, to handle the end product from the process. According to what I know, waste processed by efficient incinerator facilities produce highly concentrated residue, but which is also to some extent toxic, so that it has to be disposed/stored in a proper manner. That would certainly have to exclude 'sprinkling' on top of a lateral landfill, wouldn't it? Lastly, your reference to space constraints and higher energy prices in Europe as prime reasons for WTE facilities being common in Europe: It seems to me that greater abundance of space in Canada should not be a license to treat that space with any less reference. As to energy pricing, I suppose you refer to the price of net surplus energy produced by the WTE facility, but isn't that a 'bonus', the main purpose of the whole operation being the elimination of as much solid waste as possible? on Twitter Share Thanks again for answering my follow-up question so quickly. If I interpret your answer correctly, Squamish has to reduce its current rate of 560kg/capita of waste per year to 350kg/capita to obtain provincial approval for a WTE facility, not because it is not financially feasible at the current disposal rates, which appear to be sufficient when reading your answer under 'Expense' to my first question, but because of what must be some arbitrary provincial target, namely the 350kg/capita/year. You state that this is "so that we don't have to rely on continued waste production to ensure that a WTE facility remains viable". Since your answer suggests that this number must be above the 350kg per year, it then begs the question of how many kilograms of waste production are needed to make a WTE facility financially viable? That, to me, is the key question here. You raised another question by your comment about lateral landfill expansion, even with a WTE facility, to handle the end product from the process. According to what I know, waste processed by efficient incinerator facilities produce highly concentrated residue, but which is also to some extent toxic, so that it has to be disposed/stored in a proper manner. That would certainly have to exclude 'sprinkling' on top of a lateral landfill, wouldn't it? Lastly, your reference to space constraints and higher energy prices in Europe as prime reasons for WTE facilities being common in Europe: It seems to me that greater abundance of space in Canada should not be a license to treat that space with any less reference. As to energy pricing, I suppose you refer to the price of net surplus energy produced by the WTE facility, but isn't that a 'bonus', the main purpose of the whole operation being the elimination of as much solid waste as possible? on Linkedin Email Thanks again for answering my follow-up question so quickly. If I interpret your answer correctly, Squamish has to reduce its current rate of 560kg/capita of waste per year to 350kg/capita to obtain provincial approval for a WTE facility, not because it is not financially feasible at the current disposal rates, which appear to be sufficient when reading your answer under 'Expense' to my first question, but because of what must be some arbitrary provincial target, namely the 350kg/capita/year. You state that this is "so that we don't have to rely on continued waste production to ensure that a WTE facility remains viable". Since your answer suggests that this number must be above the 350kg per year, it then begs the question of how many kilograms of waste production are needed to make a WTE facility financially viable? That, to me, is the key question here. You raised another question by your comment about lateral landfill expansion, even with a WTE facility, to handle the end product from the process. According to what I know, waste processed by efficient incinerator facilities produce highly concentrated residue, but which is also to some extent toxic, so that it has to be disposed/stored in a proper manner. That would certainly have to exclude 'sprinkling' on top of a lateral landfill, wouldn't it? Lastly, your reference to space constraints and higher energy prices in Europe as prime reasons for WTE facilities being common in Europe: It seems to me that greater abundance of space in Canada should not be a license to treat that space with any less reference. As to energy pricing, I suppose you refer to the price of net surplus energy produced by the WTE facility, but isn't that a 'bonus', the main purpose of the whole operation being the elimination of as much solid waste as possible? link

Thanks again for answering my follow-up question so quickly. If I interpret your answer correctly, Squamish has to reduce its current rate of 560kg/capita of waste per year to 350kg/capita to obtain provincial approval for a WTE facility, not because it is not financially feasible at the current disposal rates, which appear to be sufficient when reading your answer under 'Expense' to my first question, but because of what must be some arbitrary provincial target, namely the 350kg/capita/year. You state that this is "so that we don't have to rely on continued waste production to ensure that a WTE facility remains viable". Since your answer suggests that this number must be above the 350kg per year, it then begs the question of how many kilograms of waste production are needed to make a WTE facility financially viable? That, to me, is the key question here. You raised another question by your comment about lateral landfill expansion, even with a WTE facility, to handle the end product from the process. According to what I know, waste processed by efficient incinerator facilities produce highly concentrated residue, but which is also to some extent toxic, so that it has to be disposed/stored in a proper manner. That would certainly have to exclude 'sprinkling' on top of a lateral landfill, wouldn't it? Lastly, your reference to space constraints and higher energy prices in Europe as prime reasons for WTE facilities being common in Europe: It seems to me that greater abundance of space in Canada should not be a license to treat that space with any less reference. As to energy pricing, I suppose you refer to the price of net surplus energy produced by the WTE facility, but isn't that a 'bonus', the main purpose of the whole operation being the elimination of as much solid waste as possible?

WolfgangW asked over 1 year ago

Hi, Thank you for the follow-up. As mentioned in the other response, we apologize for the delay in responding. Yes, the province has set the target of 350 kg/capita for their approvals for a WTE facility, and the District of Squamish is currently at 507 kg per person (2021).
With regards to your question about the kg/capita/year needed to make a WTE feasible, we do not have that level of information. The 2019 analysis that was conducted was based on two production scenarios for waste tonnage (Squamish-only and the entire SLRD region), using the status quo waste disposal rate, as well as a high-diversion waste projection. The primary purpose of completing the waste projections was to determine a design tonnage for the WTE facility and provide information on proven WTE technologies that would suitable for the tonnages identified in these scenarios. While expense is a key component, time is a powerful constraint to the pursuit of a WTE facility at this point in time, as the current landfill is on-track to reach capacity in 2028/2029, and due to the time associated with the land acquisition and regulatory requirements (provincial and regional), it is not feasible to pursue WTE as a solution for the current situation.

The District recognizes that technology in this area is continually evolving and Staff have recommend assessing the viability of new WTE technologies on an ongoing basis as they become proven in other jurisdictions with similar waste compositions and working with the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District to contemplate WTE as well as material recovery in the next Solid Waste & Resource Management Plan update (see below for further information on how to be a part of that discussion).
Additionally, as you identified, while WTE significantly reduces the volume of residuals requiring disposal, it does not eliminate the need for a landfill. Therefore, if a regional WTE was to be established, the Squamish Lateral Landfill Expansion would be a possible location to dispose of the final product (with the proper provincial approvals in place). The lateral expansion of the Squamish Landfill is a medium-term solution for waste management in the community.
If you want to be a part of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District’s update to the Solid Waste & Resource Management Plan (starting in 2024), please contact utilities@slrd.bc.ca or call (604)894-6371 ext. 236.
Share I'm a waste management and recycling specialist and the only question I have is: Why? We can expand and expand forever - there is a lot of space in Canada - but eventually we just make waste mountains out of valleys. For a small municipality like Squamish, incineration and energetic use is the only viable and sustainable option. I have mentioned this multiple times at the district. Canada is 30 years behind European counterparts and landfill at this rate is no sustainable. We can talk Zero waste (or as call it 'greenwashing') all the time, but the minuscule solutions are not bringing the results needed. Squamish, and every other municipality and city in this country, needs serious sorting and incineration facilities. Regards, Falk on Facebook Share I'm a waste management and recycling specialist and the only question I have is: Why? We can expand and expand forever - there is a lot of space in Canada - but eventually we just make waste mountains out of valleys. For a small municipality like Squamish, incineration and energetic use is the only viable and sustainable option. I have mentioned this multiple times at the district. Canada is 30 years behind European counterparts and landfill at this rate is no sustainable. We can talk Zero waste (or as call it 'greenwashing') all the time, but the minuscule solutions are not bringing the results needed. Squamish, and every other municipality and city in this country, needs serious sorting and incineration facilities. Regards, Falk on Twitter Share I'm a waste management and recycling specialist and the only question I have is: Why? We can expand and expand forever - there is a lot of space in Canada - but eventually we just make waste mountains out of valleys. For a small municipality like Squamish, incineration and energetic use is the only viable and sustainable option. I have mentioned this multiple times at the district. Canada is 30 years behind European counterparts and landfill at this rate is no sustainable. We can talk Zero waste (or as call it 'greenwashing') all the time, but the minuscule solutions are not bringing the results needed. Squamish, and every other municipality and city in this country, needs serious sorting and incineration facilities. Regards, Falk on Linkedin Email I'm a waste management and recycling specialist and the only question I have is: Why? We can expand and expand forever - there is a lot of space in Canada - but eventually we just make waste mountains out of valleys. For a small municipality like Squamish, incineration and energetic use is the only viable and sustainable option. I have mentioned this multiple times at the district. Canada is 30 years behind European counterparts and landfill at this rate is no sustainable. We can talk Zero waste (or as call it 'greenwashing') all the time, but the minuscule solutions are not bringing the results needed. Squamish, and every other municipality and city in this country, needs serious sorting and incineration facilities. Regards, Falk link

I'm a waste management and recycling specialist and the only question I have is: Why? We can expand and expand forever - there is a lot of space in Canada - but eventually we just make waste mountains out of valleys. For a small municipality like Squamish, incineration and energetic use is the only viable and sustainable option. I have mentioned this multiple times at the district. Canada is 30 years behind European counterparts and landfill at this rate is no sustainable. We can talk Zero waste (or as call it 'greenwashing') all the time, but the minuscule solutions are not bringing the results needed. Squamish, and every other municipality and city in this country, needs serious sorting and incineration facilities. Regards, Falk

FalkB asked over 1 year ago
Hello Falk, Thank you for your question. We apologize for the delayed response, it is due to key staff being out of the office. The Lateral Expansion of the Squamish Landfill is a medium-term solution for the waste management of our community. An analysis was conducted in 2019 about the viability and cost of a waste-to-energy (WTE) facility for Squamish, and while the findings concluded that a WTE facility is not feasible at this point in time, Staff recommend assessing the viability of new WTE technologies on an ongoing basis as they become proven in other jurisdictions with similar waste compositions and working with the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District to contemplate WTE as well as material recovery in the next Solid Waste & Resource Management Plan update (see below for further information on how to be a part of that discussion).
As to why a WTE facility is not being considered for as a short to medium term solution for waste disposal in Squamish, some of the reasons why are:
Expense:
- Our 2019 analysis of WTE indicates it is not financially feasible at the current disposal rates, even at a regional level.
Provincial Approvals:
- Squamish is currently at a solid waste disposal rate of around 560kg/capita/year. For the Ministry to approve a WTE facility, we need measurable interim targets set and met, to get the community to 350 kg/capita/year.
Timing:
We are currently extremely tight on time due to the limited lifespan of the current Landfill, and the following would all make the process longer:
- WTE is not supported in the Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan (SWRMP), so to include it now would require a longer and more in-depth consultation period.
- Squamish Council passed a motion at the December 15, 2015 Regular Business Meeting that Staff ‘recommend changes to the draft SWRMP that eliminate the option for waste incineration (also known as waste to energy) of mixed municipal solid waste’. To rescind this motion would take time and resources.
- The timeframe required to implement this would be ~6 years, with additional time for land acquisition.
If you want to be a part of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District’s update to the Solid Waste & Resource Management Plan (starting in 2024), please contact utilities@slrd.bc.ca or call (604)894-6371 ext. 236.
Share Why are we not pursuing any waste to energy options? on Facebook Share Why are we not pursuing any waste to energy options? on Twitter Share Why are we not pursuing any waste to energy options? on Linkedin Email Why are we not pursuing any waste to energy options? link

Why are we not pursuing any waste to energy options?

Juvarya8 asked over 1 year ago
Thank you, this is a great question. We apologize for the delay in responding, responses were held up due to staff being out of the office. A waste-to-energy (WTE) facility is not being considered for as a short to medium term solution for waste disposal in Squamish, and some of the reasons why are:
Expense:
- Our 2019 analysis of WTE indicates it is not financially feasible at the current disposal rates, even at a regional level.
Provincial Approvals:
- Squamish is currently at a solid waste disposal rate of around 560kg/capita/year. For the Ministry to approve a WTE facility, we need measurable interim targets set and met, to get the community to 350 kg/capita/year.
Timing:
We are currently extremely tight on time due to the limited lifespan of the current Landfill, and the following would all make the process longer:
- WTE is not supported in the Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan (SWRMP), so to include it now would require a longer and more in-depth consultation period.
- Squamish Council passed a motion at the December 15, 2015 Regular Business Meeting that Staff ‘recommend changes to the draft SWRMP that eliminate the option for waste incineration (also known as waste to energy) of mixed municipal solid waste’. To rescind this motion would take time and resources.
- The timeframe required to implement this would be ~6 years, with additional time for land acquisition.
If you would like to be a part of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District’s update to the Solid Waste & Resource Management Plan, which addresses everything to do with waste management, diversion and reduction in the region and should begin in 2024, please contact utilities@slrd.bc.ca or call (604)894-6371 ext. 236.
Share Has there been any consideration to the affect that an expansion of the landfill towards the Cheekye river may have on potential debris torrents? I know some of the geotech torrent models predicted material escaping at "the Dogleg" the 90 degree bend in the river by the dump. Would building a 400m wide berm towards the river prevent material evulsion and direct flows towards the Cheekye and IR11 communities? on Facebook Share Has there been any consideration to the affect that an expansion of the landfill towards the Cheekye river may have on potential debris torrents? I know some of the geotech torrent models predicted material escaping at "the Dogleg" the 90 degree bend in the river by the dump. Would building a 400m wide berm towards the river prevent material evulsion and direct flows towards the Cheekye and IR11 communities? on Twitter Share Has there been any consideration to the affect that an expansion of the landfill towards the Cheekye river may have on potential debris torrents? I know some of the geotech torrent models predicted material escaping at "the Dogleg" the 90 degree bend in the river by the dump. Would building a 400m wide berm towards the river prevent material evulsion and direct flows towards the Cheekye and IR11 communities? on Linkedin Email Has there been any consideration to the affect that an expansion of the landfill towards the Cheekye river may have on potential debris torrents? I know some of the geotech torrent models predicted material escaping at "the Dogleg" the 90 degree bend in the river by the dump. Would building a 400m wide berm towards the river prevent material evulsion and direct flows towards the Cheekye and IR11 communities? link

Has there been any consideration to the affect that an expansion of the landfill towards the Cheekye river may have on potential debris torrents? I know some of the geotech torrent models predicted material escaping at "the Dogleg" the 90 degree bend in the river by the dump. Would building a 400m wide berm towards the river prevent material evulsion and direct flows towards the Cheekye and IR11 communities?

J F asked over 1 year ago

Thank you for this question. We apologize for the delay in the response. The District has retained BGC Engineering to complete a review of debris flow risk in relation to the proposed landfill expansion. BGC has developed the existing Cheekeye Fan debris flow model and are knowledgeable subject matter experts. They will review the impacts of landfill expansion to ensure there is no appreciable transfer of risk that would result from the expansion and to ensure the landfill expansion is safe from both a life safety and an environmental perspective. The review is in its initial stages and the District will share further information once available.
Share Thank you for your quick answer regarding my question about a regional incineration facility. I am a bit confused about such a project not being financially feasible because of current disposal rates: You state under the heading 'Provincial Approvals' that the current solid waste disposal rate of Squamish is around 560kg/capita/year, but that for the Ministry to approve a WTE facility, the community has to get to 350kg/capita/year. Would we, according to these numbers, not already vastly exceed that provincial requirement? Furthermore timing: How do we expect to get to 'net zero' by 2030, when we have difficulty even to accommodate a relatively simple solid waste management strategy? This last one is a rhetorical question, and I am not expecting you to have an answer for it. on Facebook Share Thank you for your quick answer regarding my question about a regional incineration facility. I am a bit confused about such a project not being financially feasible because of current disposal rates: You state under the heading 'Provincial Approvals' that the current solid waste disposal rate of Squamish is around 560kg/capita/year, but that for the Ministry to approve a WTE facility, the community has to get to 350kg/capita/year. Would we, according to these numbers, not already vastly exceed that provincial requirement? Furthermore timing: How do we expect to get to 'net zero' by 2030, when we have difficulty even to accommodate a relatively simple solid waste management strategy? This last one is a rhetorical question, and I am not expecting you to have an answer for it. on Twitter Share Thank you for your quick answer regarding my question about a regional incineration facility. I am a bit confused about such a project not being financially feasible because of current disposal rates: You state under the heading 'Provincial Approvals' that the current solid waste disposal rate of Squamish is around 560kg/capita/year, but that for the Ministry to approve a WTE facility, the community has to get to 350kg/capita/year. Would we, according to these numbers, not already vastly exceed that provincial requirement? Furthermore timing: How do we expect to get to 'net zero' by 2030, when we have difficulty even to accommodate a relatively simple solid waste management strategy? This last one is a rhetorical question, and I am not expecting you to have an answer for it. on Linkedin Email Thank you for your quick answer regarding my question about a regional incineration facility. I am a bit confused about such a project not being financially feasible because of current disposal rates: You state under the heading 'Provincial Approvals' that the current solid waste disposal rate of Squamish is around 560kg/capita/year, but that for the Ministry to approve a WTE facility, the community has to get to 350kg/capita/year. Would we, according to these numbers, not already vastly exceed that provincial requirement? Furthermore timing: How do we expect to get to 'net zero' by 2030, when we have difficulty even to accommodate a relatively simple solid waste management strategy? This last one is a rhetorical question, and I am not expecting you to have an answer for it. link

Thank you for your quick answer regarding my question about a regional incineration facility. I am a bit confused about such a project not being financially feasible because of current disposal rates: You state under the heading 'Provincial Approvals' that the current solid waste disposal rate of Squamish is around 560kg/capita/year, but that for the Ministry to approve a WTE facility, the community has to get to 350kg/capita/year. Would we, according to these numbers, not already vastly exceed that provincial requirement? Furthermore timing: How do we expect to get to 'net zero' by 2030, when we have difficulty even to accommodate a relatively simple solid waste management strategy? This last one is a rhetorical question, and I am not expecting you to have an answer for it.

WolfgangW asked over 1 year ago

Thanks for following up with this question. The community of Squamish is working hard to increase waste diversion, meaning that as a community we put less into our landfill. Currently, each resident produces on average 560 kg of waste per year. This is an improvement over past years, however there is more work to do. To meet Provincial requirements for a waste-to-energy (WTE) facility, we must continue to reduce the amount of waste produced per resident down to 350kg per year. We need to reduce our waste production prior to approval of a WTE facility so that we don’t have to rely on continued waste production to ensure that a WTE facility remains viable.
The District’s long-term goals are ultimately waste reduction and supporting a circular economy (directed in part by the Community Climate Action Plan (CCAP) and the Zero Waste Strategy), while responsibly managing the residual waste. As mentioned, a WTE facility has been assessed and will continue to be considered as a long-term waste management solution. A regional WTE facility will be considered during the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District’s update to the Solid Waste & Resource Management Plan. If you want to be a part of that conversation and process (starting in 2024), please contact utilities@slrd.bc.ca or call (604)894-6371 ext. 236.
Even with a WTE facility, a lateral landfill expansion would still be required to handle the end product that results from the WTE process.
While WTE facilities are common in places such as Europe, it is important to remember that the context is different in Canada. We don’t face the same space constraints, and our energy prices are cheaper, which must be considered when evaluating the viability of a WTE facility.
In terms of our net zero goals, the District’s Community Climate Action Plan (CCAP) is the roadmap to achieve this. In line with the CCAP, as a community we are aiming to reduce our emissions by at least 45% from 2010 levels by 2030, which will have us on track to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. You can see the progress the District has made towards these goals since adopting the CCAP here: https://squamish.ca/climateaction/see-our-progress-on-climate-action/#-b
Share Should we not also look at another option, the one used extensively in densely populated Western Europe: A regional incineration facility? on Facebook Share Should we not also look at another option, the one used extensively in densely populated Western Europe: A regional incineration facility? on Twitter Share Should we not also look at another option, the one used extensively in densely populated Western Europe: A regional incineration facility? on Linkedin Email Should we not also look at another option, the one used extensively in densely populated Western Europe: A regional incineration facility? link

Should we not also look at another option, the one used extensively in densely populated Western Europe: A regional incineration facility?

WolfgangW asked over 1 year ago
Thank you, this is a great question. An incinerator, also known as a waste-to-energy (WTE) facility is not being considered for as a short to medium term solution for waste disposal in Squamish. Some of the reasons why are:
Expense:
- Our 2019 analysis of WTE indicates it is not financially feasible at the current disposal rates, even at a regional level.
Provincial Approvals:
- Squamish is currently at a solid waste disposal rate of around 560kg/capita/year. For the Ministry to approve a WTE facility, we need measurable interim targets set and met, to get the community to 350 kg/capita/year.
Timing:
We are currently extremely tight on time due to the limited lifespan of the current Landfill, and the following would all make the process longer:
- WTE is not supported in the Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan (SWRMP), so to include it now would require a longer and more in-depth consultation period.
- Squamish Council passed a motion at the December 15, 2015 Regular Business Meeting that Staff ‘recommend changes to the draft SWRMP that eliminate the option for waste incineration (also known as waste to energy) of mixed municipal solid waste’. To rescind this motion would take time and resources.
- The timeframe required to implement this would be ~6 years, with additional time for land acquisition.
Regional waste to energy will be considered during the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District’s update to the Solid Waste & Resource Management Plan. If you want to be a part of that conversation and process (starting in 2024), please contact utilities@slrd.bc.ca or call (604)894-6371 ext. 236.
Share Where will the exported waste go if such is needed. What will be the fate of specific categories of waste? on Facebook Share Where will the exported waste go if such is needed. What will be the fate of specific categories of waste? on Twitter Share Where will the exported waste go if such is needed. What will be the fate of specific categories of waste? on Linkedin Email Where will the exported waste go if such is needed. What will be the fate of specific categories of waste? link

Where will the exported waste go if such is needed. What will be the fate of specific categories of waste?

Dave Colwell asked almost 2 years ago

Thank you for this question. Our apologies for a slow response, there was an error in our notification system and we missed this. The error has now been corrected.
A location to export waste has not been determined. There are sites in British Columbia, Washington and Oregon that could potentially receive the exported waste from Squamish. The waste material would go to these sites as “exported garbage." It would include the categories of waste that go into the Squamish Landfill currently, such as residential, multi-family, institutional and industrial (including construction) waste.
Recyclables would continue to be separated and managed in a responsible manner.

Landfill Lateral Expansion

Who are the consultants for this project?

Expense:

Provincial Approvals:

Timing:

Why are we not pursuing any waste to energy options?

Expense:

Provincial Approvals:

Timing:

Should we not also look at another option, the one used extensively in densely populated Western Europe: A regional incineration facility?

Where will the exported waste go if such is needed. What will be the fate of specific categories of waste?

Signup Banner

Who's Listening

What We Heard: Engagement Summary

Key Dates

Watch the June 8 Online Information Session Recording

Project Timeline

Council Decision to Move Forward with Lateral Expansion

Public Engagement on focused amendments to SWRMP

SWRMP Amendments Presented to SLRD Committee

SWRMP Amendment Submitted to Provincial Government for Approval

Construction of Transfer Station Upgrades

Begin Using Upgraded Transfer Station

Begin Filling in Landfill Expansion Area

Frequently Asked Questions

Important Links

Documents