Updated Dec. 19, 2024

Montgomery County officials on November 25, 2024 released an update on the County’s plans to overhaul its waste management systems over the next decade. The plans include enhanced recycling, food waste composting, and new processes and technologies to reduce the amount of garbage being burned in the trash incinerator in Dickerson. 

SCA strongly supports the intent of this initiative and County leaders’ focus on making Montgomery County a national model of responsible and sustainable waste management—aiming for a “zero waste” (or at least a “much-less-waste”) system. 

Regrettably, however, the County’s announcement included a plan to continue trash incineration in Dickerson for up to eight more years—rather than shutting the incinerator down in April 2026 as previously scheduled. County officials said they have authorized the Northeast Maryland Waste Disposal Authority (an entity that manages the County’s waste disposal) to extend for five years (from April 2026 to April 2031) its contract with the private company Reworld (formerly known as Covanta), which operates the incinerator. 

The announcement states that the County has the “option for early termination” of the contract. A planning timeline on the county website indicates, however, that decommissioning would not begin until 2030.

County officials say the reason for extending the contract is that trash incineration cannot be terminated until waste reduction strategies are substantially built-out and fully implemented. 

We believe an alternative path exists, one that would allow the incinerator to be shuttered much sooner. This alternative path involves pivoting to hauling trash to an approved out-of-state landfill that meets strict environmental standards—even as the County more aggressively pursues trash volume reduction. According to two reports commissioned by the County Executive in recent years, such an approach would be less harmful and likely less costly.  

In response to requests from SCA and other groups, the County Council will convene a briefing in January 2025 on the contract extension. The Council could choose to hold a public hearing on the contract after that briefing. It has until mid-March 2025 to hold a vote to nullify the contract. If it chooses not to do so, the extension goes into effect.

Brief History

The Dickerson trash incinerator has been operating for nearly 30 years (since 1995). It is the worst single source of pollution and greenhouse gases in the County—emitting toxic pollutants and some 600 metric tons per year of CO-2 and other greenhouse gases into our region and the planet’s air. The pollutants—dioxin, furans, lead, mercury, arsenic, sulfur dioxide, and fine particulate matter—are associated with various forms of cancer, respiratory ailments, and cardiovascular diseases. (See also here.) A report issued by the Montgomery County Department of Health in 2018 found higher levels of cancer and respiratory illness in two census tracts surrounding the Dickerson incinerator, though the data do not constitute proof that the incinerator was responsible.

In the 1970s, 80s, and 90s burning trash to produce energy seemed like a great idea. Landfills deservedly had a bad reputation and landfill space was thought to be limited. New companies, branded as “waste-to-energy,” promised clean operating facilities. Many state and local politicians and environmental advocates bought into the concept. The lure of killing two birds with one stone was strong—diverting trash from landfills while producing energy.

As a result, some 230 trash incinerators were built in the United States between 1975 and 1995. The technology did get better over those 20 years. But in subsequent years, evidence accumulated that the concept and designs of incinerators had inherent flaws. For one, incinerators never produced substantial amounts of energy and are among the dirtiest form of energy production, often worse than burning coal. Incinerators are also expensive to build and operate, and, as they age they become more polluting and less efficient.

Since 1980, 160 incinerators have been shuttered as a direct result of such problems. Sixty-three remain in operation. The average age at closure of the 53 incinerators shuttered since 2000 is 26. The Dickerson facility was the second-to-last new incinerator built in the U.S. The lone exception built after 1995: an incinerator in Southern Florida where landfill space is sparse and groundwater problems are challenging.

What happened? Simply put, communities and counties no longer want or accept trash incinerators. Instead, they have shifted to well-run landfills operating with new technologies that have reduced adverse environmental impacts.

The Dickerson facility also has been plagued by poor maintenance. It has had more fires than any other Covanta/Reworld facility and would need an estimated $50 to $100 million in investments if the County keeps it operating past 2026.

The County’s Evolving Policy

Pressured by environmental groups (including SCA) over the past decade, Montgomery County leaders have pledged numerous times to shutter the incinerator as soon as possible. In particular, County Executive Marc Elrich made such promises while serving on the County Council from 2006 to 2018, while campaigning for the County’s top government job in 2017, and during his first term in office (2018-2022). (See Elrich’s 2018 letter on closing the incinerator in 12 to 18 months here.)

With the Nov. 25, 2024 press release, Elrich and his administration have formally modified—many would say reneged on—his pledge to shutter the incinerator as planned.     

We believe the Elrich administration has changed its position without an acceptable explanation. Neither the press release nor information posted online by the County’s Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) provide comprehensive data and reasoning to justify this action. DEP simply states that the new contract is “necessary” while the County identifies, builds out, and implements new waste strategies.

We fully understand and accept that the County’s waste management overhaul is complex and challenging.  But complexity is neither a rationale nor a justification for continuing to burn trash for up to eight more years in an aging and inefficient facility that pollutes, poses health risks to human beings, and contributes to climate change.  

The alternative path SCA and other local groups (such as Zero Waste Montgomery County) have urged the County to fully evaluate is to:

1. Aggressively enhance recycling and reduce trash volume

2. Compost food scraps, which make up one quarter of the county trash by volume

3. Switch to landfilling all residual trash in one or more regional landfills that meet the highest standards and environmental justice criteria, and

4. Accomplish these goals concurrently.     

In contrast, County officials now assert that they must reduce the volume of trash—we have heard various targets, from 30% to 60%—before considering shutting down the incinerator.

We believe that inertia, including bureaucratic inertia, may be one strong force in the County’s decision. 

• Inertia around changing course from a system (incineration) that has been operable for almost 30 years, however bad that system is  

• Inertia around the logistics of building a new system with new contracts

• Inertia around altering the County’s arrangements with the Northeast Maryland Waste Disposal Authority, which has a vested interest in incineration  

• Inertia around dealing with a different set of costs

• Inertia around getting approvals from the County Council for big changes in how the County deals with its trash

In addition, some DEP officials and perhaps some County Council members appear to be worried that sending trash outside the County would be a bad thing to do. We understand that concern but believe it is misplaced given the facts.  Montgomery County already sends approximately 150,000 tons of hazardous incinerator ash out-of-state—causing potential harm to another community for the past 30 years. Sending unburned trash to a well-managed landfill would be much safer for any community receiving it. Plus, landfills are private businesses managed for profit and such interstate hauling of trash is common throughout the U.S.  

SCA’s Role

SCA has been a part of the county’s deliberations on this issue for many years. At the request of the County Executive in 2020, we funded a study on alternatives to incineration. That report— Beyond Incineration—concluded that long-haul trucking to one or more landfills would be safer than continuing to burn trash and truck toxic ash to Virginia.   

(See a synopsis of the report findings at the end of this web post.)

Legal agreements SCA reached in the 1990s with the County (following several lawsuits) grant SCA oversight of the county’s 100-acre compost facility in Dickerson. We are pleased to be a partner in this well-managed operation.  

In 2023, the County approached SCA for approval to expand the compost facility to include food scraps, which comprise almost one quarter of the county’s total volume of garbage. Initial work would begin on the expansion in 2025, County officials told us. Food scraps would start being shipped to the facility in late 2026 or early 2027. The scraps would be mixed with existing yard trim (now some 58,000 tons a year) that is efficiently collected and composted. The mix would be made into a nutrient-rich soil additive—an enhancement to Leafgro, the County’s current popular commercial product made from leaves and yard trim.

SCA fully supports the idea of composting rather than burning or burying food waste. The County has also proposed putting 30 to 40 acres of ground-based solar panels on the compost facility property. We support this initiative as well. We have offered to modify our Settlement Agreement with the County and allow an expansion of the compost facility to include food scraps if the County was willing to close the incinerator sooner rather than later. We saw this as a win-win for both parties, and we offered to help educate the public about food waste composting.   

In meetings throughout 2024 SCA has worked to compromise with the County on the date of incinerator closure in exchange for the compost facility expansion.  On Oct. 14, we formally proposed a closure date of Dec. 31, 2027.  As of this writing, we have received no response from the County on that proposed timeline. 

In the wake of the county’s Nov. 25 announcement, we have requested from County officials a full explanation for its decision to keep the incinerator operating until 2032 (and possibly beyond). And we have asked for negotiations to commence again. 

Specifically, we have requested results to date from reports commissioned by the County over the past year from three research and consulting firms on the County’s waste management overhaul plans. (*see note below.) The cost to taxpayers for the reports and consulting work is around $1,000,000. 

On Dec. 12 we sent letters to all 11 County Council members requesting that the Council convene a public hearing on the incinerator contract extension before the expiration of a 120-day period allowed for review.  The Council has proposed instead to hold a briefing in late January at which DEP and SCA would testify and take questions from Council members. After that session, the Council could still choose to have a public hearing and then vote up or down on the contract extension. It would have to do so before mid-March at which point the contract extension automatically goes into effect. 

We will keep you apprised and updated on this important set of issues for our community and the entire county.   

NOTE: One firm, Arcadis, is charged with identifying new technologies the county could build out to draw more waste out of our waste stream. The second group, Barton and Loguidice, was hired to manage the implementation of these strategies. The third firm, EA Engineering, was charged with advising the County on best practices for managing organics. A report on managing food scraps is available on the County’s website.

 

The findings of the 99-page Beyond Incineration report, released in March 2021, remain relevant today.  The report concluded:  

• Greenhouse gas emissions from the incinerator are 50 times greater than DEP estimates.

• If built in the last decade, the Dickerson incinerator would not be legal to operate without extensive and expensive pollution control upgrades. Bringing the incinerator up to modern standards would cost $75 million to $100 million.  That money would be better spent on Zero Waste alternatives.

• Any development of a landfill at the county’s “in-reserve” site in Dickerson (usually referred to as “Site 2”) would threaten regional drinking water and the sole-source aquifer in the county’s Ag Reserve. The land is currently farmed.  That money, too, would be better spent on Zero Waste infrastructure. (County officials have pledged in the past never to use Site 2 for a landfill due largely to strong community opposition.)  

• The 150,000 tons per year of toxic incinerator ash (what’s left over after burning) that is transported to a majority-Black community in Virginia violates the county’s stated ethical principles for waste management. 

• Incineration is 2.5 to 5 times worse in terms of adverse environmental and health impacts than landfilling at one or more of 10 sites identified in Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Ohio—accounting for hauling by truck or rail, global warming impact, emissions of nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, acid gases, toxic chemicals, and chemicals that form smog.  (Extensive detail can be found in the report.  On top of the basic tipping fee ($70-$100 per ton) the monetized health and environmental costs per ton are $259 for our incinerator versus approximately $80 for the vetted landfills cited above, in 2021 dollars.

• An aggressive Zero Waste strategy could cut the volume of waste substantially in just a few years. That should include a “Pay as You Throw” or “Save as You Throw” program.  Some 10,000 communities have shown that such programs reduce waste generation by an average of around 40%. When combined with efficient curbside food scrap collection, the diversion can reach as high as 70%.  (Montgomery County is already successfully testing such programs, including food scrap collection for aerobic composting.) 

• The County should pursue Material Recovery and Biological Treatment (MRBT) technologies, which further extract organics and recyclables from the trash before it is shipped to landfill.