June 19, 2025

The Summer 2025 issue of PLENTY features an in‑depth article by SCA President Steven Findlay on the new solar law, which goes into effect July 1. The piece explores how the legislation streamlines approvals for large-scale (2+ MW) solar projects—shifting them to state oversight—while still preserving up to 95 % of farmland in Priority Preservation Areas. It also explains new protections for smaller systems (1–2 MW) and how local jurisdictions must now fast‑track compliant projects .

This timely feature not only breaks down the law’s mechanics but also highlights its impact on agricultural land use and renewable‑energy development—making it essential reading for landowners and solar stakeholders.

Updated June 9, 2025

Note: Below is an updated report on the status of Montgomery County’s waste management overhaul project. We will be updating this piece frequently in coming months. This link will take you to an article in the Spring 2025 issue of PLENTY magazine on the County’s trash overall plans. That article was written by SCA President Steven Findlay and Vice President Lauren Greenberger several months ago and contains relevant information and background on this issue.

Montgomery County continues to deliberate over the best way to: (a) reduce the volume of its trash; (b) recycle more; (c) divert food scraps to compost; and (d) shutter its aging and polluting trash incinerator.

SCA supports this initiative. But we’re frustrated with how long it’s taking to develop a coherent plan and implement it. Discussion and analyses have been underway for almost 2 years.

Granted, it’s a complex project. Many cities and counties struggle with disposing of their trash in an environmentally sound and cost-effective way. Montgomery County has the added burden of its incinerator, situated in Dickerson. Most of the county’s trash is transported there and burned.

Since 1980, 160 incinerators in the U.S. have been shuttered; only 63 remain in operation. The Dickerson incinerator is now 30 years old and requires constant costly maintenance. Most incinerators get decommissioned at around their 25 th year unless local officials close them down sooner—which is not uncommon.

The Dickerson incinerator is the worst single source of air pollution and greenhouse gases in the county—emitting toxic pollutants and some 600,000 tons per year of CO2 equivalent 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 respiratory ailments, cardiovascular diseases, and cancer.

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 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 dirty landfills while producing needed energy.

The technology did get better during those decades. 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 they are among the dirtiest forms of energy production, even worse than coal plants. Incinerators are also initially expensive to build and, as they age, they become more polluting and less efficient.

Pressured by environmental groups (including SCA) over the past 15 years, Montgomery County leaders pledged numerous times to shutter the incinerator as soon as possible. So, it was a bit of a shock when county officials announced last November they had extended the contract with the organization that operates the incinerator for another 5 years—from April 2026 to April 2031 since the current contract is in force until April 2026.

Notably, and relevant to what follows, the county has an option for early termination of the new contract.

County officials say the main reason for extending the contract is that trash incineration cannot be terminated until (a) waste reduction strategies, (b) technological enhancements, and (c) alternatives means of trash disposal are substantially built-out and fully implemented. The county’s Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has emphasized to county lawmakers that would take a minimum 5 years (after the end of the current contract, so in 2031).

SCA has pushed for an alternative path that could close the incinerator sooner, even as the waste system is modernized and the volume of trash reduced. Namely, we have suggested the following:

• Make no major investments in an incinerator that will be decommissioned

• Issue an RFP (request for proposal) to identify potential contractors and the costs to send the county’s trash by rail or truck (or both) to landfills that meet the highest environmental standards

• Issue a second RFP for a contractor to recycle all our construction and demolition waste

• Aggressively and urgently pursue waste reduction through enhanced recycling, food scrap composting and a county-wide effort (with financial incentives) to compel citizens to recycle more and reduce what they throw away

• Allow the Dickerson yard trim composting facility to incorporate food scraps, after the plans and impact of this change are fully vetted with SCA and the local community (See more about this below.)

• Modernize and renovate the existing waste processing facilities in Derwood and Dickerson as needed.

Incineration vs. Landfills

Studies dating back years show that incineration is more hazardous and harmful to human health than landfilling as practiced today in most locations, even when the negative impact of long-haul trucking is taken into consideration. In addition, the Dickerson incinerator’s continued operation adversely affects a majority Black community near Richmond Virginia where 150,000 tons of toxic ash from the incinerator are dumped every year.

But, not unexpectedly, some county officials and citizens have concerns about landfilling. It’s beyond the scope of this web post to explore in depth the pros and cons of trash landfills versus trash burning. That’s complex and there’s lots of research and commentary online. Every community’s choice is dependent on its own situation. For example, in some small and densely populated northern European countries, incineration remains popular because landfill space is very limited.

In Montgomery County, some elected officials are worried that sending trash outside the county is a bad thing to do. We understand the concern but think it’s misplaced. Their primary concern should be the continued risk to human health posed by the incinerator. Also:

• As mentioned above: the county already sends approximately 150,000 tons of toxic incinerator ash out-of-state

• Sending unburned trash to well-managed landfills in less populated communities would be safer for any community (usual rural areas) receiving it than toxic ash.

• Most landfills today are much better regulated and operated than even 5 years ago.

• Almost all are private businesses managed for profit. Indeed, interstate hauling of trash is a common practice and a big business throughout the U.S.

In case you missed it, an article published in The Washington Post on Monday June 2 covers machinations around the Dickerson incinerator. SCA is quoted. Read the full article: Maryland county may spend $57 million on incinerator it wants to close. For those who may not have access to The Washington Post, click here to read a PDF of the full article.

April 10, 2025

Maryland lawmakers enacted legislation on April 7 ending Maryland’s classification of trash incineration as “renewable energy.”

It’s been considered that since 2011, as part of the state’s “renewable portfolio standard” program. As such, the energy generated in “waste-to-energy” (or “refuse-derived fuel) facilities, such as the one in Dickerson, was treated the same as energy produced by solar and wind facilities. That included subsidies to help promote renewable energy sources.

Thus, incinerators effectively took money out of the pockets of solar, wind and other clean energy companies—even as incinerators polluted the air and generated greenhouse gases. Since 2011, Maryland consumers have supported the Dickerson incinerator to the tune of around $30 million.

The new law is a huge win for environmental, civic and energy justice groups—includingSCA—which have been pushing this outcome for years.

Maryland is now the second state, after California, to delete trash incineration from its renewable energy portfolio.

“It’s about time,” said Lauren Greenberger, SCA’s vice president and main advocate on the issue. “It’s been such a ‘waste’ of money—pun intended—and has helped prop up the remaining incinerators in the state, which are too old, inefficient, and produce dirty energy.”

Added Jennifer Kunze, Maryland Program Director with Clean Water Action: “This action will help support the development of zero waste infrastructure by making it easier for composting, reuse and recycling, and other healthier solid waste management practices to compete without fighting uphill against state subsidies supporting the worst solid waste management option.”

Updated February 7, 2025

On Jan. 28, SCA shared its perspective on the County’s waste management plans at a briefing before the County Council.  At the invitation from the Council’s new president, Kate Stewart, we shared the floor with the County’s Department of Environmental Protection (DEP).  

It was a welcome opportunity to again state our opposition to the County Executive’s and DEP’s plan, announced on Nov. 25, 2024, to continue burning trash at the County’s incinerator in Dickerson for up to eight more years—rather than shutting the incinerator down in April 2026 as has been pledged for some years.

At the same time, we restated our strong support for DEP’s overall initiative to remake its waste management systems over the next decade.  That initiative includes enhanced recycling, an effort to compost all the county’s food scraps (commercial and home), a simultaneous roll out of unit pricing for residential trash (pay only for what you throw away), and new processes and technologies to reduce the amount of garbage currently being burned in the trash incinerator in Dickerson. 

On Nov. 25, County officials said they have authorized the Northeast Maryland Waste Disposal Authority (an entity that manages the County’s waste disposal) to extend for 5 years (from April 2026 to April 2031, and on an “emergency” basis) 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 with full closure not until 2031 or even 2032.  DEP officials on Jan 28 affirmed that timeline to the Council. (SCA has not been granted access to the terms of the contract or the clause/section that would allow early termination.)  

County officials say the main reason for extending the contract is that trash incineration cannot be terminated until (a) waste reduction strategies, (b) technological enhancements and (c) alternatives means of trash disposal, such as landfilling are substantially built-out and fully implemented.  DEP claims that would take a minimum 5 years and more likely 6 to 7 years. 

At the Jan 28 Council briefing, Lauren Greenberger, SCA’s Vice President, presented an alternative path that could allow the incinerator to be shuttered in 3 years (by the end of 2027).  (See Lauren’s statement here.)  We recommend the following:

• Flesh out the County's contingency plan for incinerator closure. This would focus on immediate hauling of trash from Shady Grove to an acceptable landfill, and rolling out the infrastructure improvements as recommended by the County consultants over time.

• Make no major investments in the incinerator that will soon be decommissioned.

• Allow a one- to two-year contract extension and follow the timeline that Zero Waste Associates provided to meet all contractual and legal obligations to change from incineration to landfilling.

• Issue an RFP as soon as possible to identify potential contractors and the costs to long-haul from Shady Grove to specified acceptable landfills under long-term contracts.

• Set a firm date for closure that will allow the Dickerson Yard Trim Composting Facility to be expanded to receive food scraps quickly and in the most cost-effective manner.

In addition, and in tandem, set up a system over the next 3 years to:

• Aggressively pursue waste reduction through enhanced recycling, food scrap composting and a county-wide effort (with financial incentives) to compel citizens to recycle more and reduce what they throw away 

• Onboard new waste separation and recycling technologies on an emergency basis, with dedicated funding from the Council

• Modify, modernize and renovate the existing waste processing facilities in Derwood and Dickerson as needed, with dedicated funding from the Council

According to two reports commissioned by the County Executive in recent years, such an approach would be less harmful to human health and likely less costly over time. (See Beyond Incineration report here.)

According to those and other studies, incineration is more hazardous than landfilling as practiced today, even when the negative impact of trucking is taken into consideration.  In addition, the incinerator’s continued operation adversely affects a majority Black community in Virginia where 150,000 tons of toxic ash from the incinerator is dumped every year.  

November 15, 2024

This month, Montgomery County launched the latest phase of its initiative to reduce food waste by encouraging businesses and residents to compost instead of discarding food scraps in the trash. (See a short video later in this article.)

Food scraps account for about one-quarter of the county's total trash volume. In 2023, the county estimates that approximately 90,000 tons of food waste ended up in the trash, most of which was incinerated at the county's facility in Dickerson.

Composting food scraps is an environmentally beneficial practice (and thus, a no-brainer), but it requires significant changes in behavior for households and businesses, as well as adaptations to the county’s waste management systems. The county has been running a pilot composting program for several years and now plans to increase participation and enhance its infrastructure.

Part of this effort includes allowing residents to “recycle” food scraps at the curbside, just as they do with glass, plastic, paper, and cardboard. The collected scraps would be transported to a central location, likely the Dickerson yard trim compost facility.

Click “Read More” to go to the full article and watch a short YouTube video of the County’s recent ceremony on the composting initiative.

“Our aquifer is the bloodstream for all farmers in the Agricultural Reserve. It’s what sustains us.” Gene Kingsbury, Kingsbury’s Orchard

This article is excerpted from the Spring 2024 issue of Plenty Magazine.  We present the initial portion of the article. You may then link to Plenty’s website to read the remainder of the piece, and see the charts and photos that accompany it.

“Our aquifer is the bloodstream for all farmers in the Agricultural Reserve. It’s what sustains us.”
Gene Kingsbury, Kingsbury’s Orchard

More often than not, when asked, folks in the D.C. metro region do not really have a fix on where the water that flows from their faucets comes from. Sure, residents and businesses know that they pay mWashington Suburban Sanitary Commission (WSSC) for their water and sewage service, and they may know that the origin of their water is the mighty Potomac River. But as to the details—filtration plant operations, the infrastructure that delivers the water from plants to homes and businesses, what happens when there is prolonged drought, these bits are hardly known.

More mysterious to many is where roughly 25-30,000 homes, businesses and farm enterprises get their water from in the nearly one-third of Montgomery County that is wholly outside the WSSC service area by design. nd that if the story I aim to share in two parts.

A class of toxic chemicals called PFAS can contaminate water, farmland, wells, and crops.  These chemicals have been linked to cancer and other diseases and do not break down in the environment.  An organization called PEER (Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility) is leading an effort to probe whether PFAS chemicals are present—and if so, to what degree—on Ag Reserve land and in water sources.  

Testing to date has yielded concerning results. Levels of several forms of PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances of which there are thousands) are substantially higher than EPA recommended quantities in drinking water in Poolesville. As a result, the town closed two of its 12 wells. These concerning results also led SCA and Montgomery Countryside Alliance (MCA) to join PEER in January in calling on Montgomery County officials to prohibit the use of certain PFAS-containing fertilizers, called biosolids, on county agricultural land—to prevent further contamination of ground and surface waters.  

January 5, 2024

“Agrivoltaics,” is a new buzzword in solar energy circles. The term applies to land used for agriculture (“agri”) and for generating solar energy (“voltaics”) by solar panels. Agrivoltaics can refer to just a few solar panels mounted on ground-based structures (as opposed to rooftops) or a whole field of them, with crops or animals grazing underneath.

A successful agrivoltaic project has some type of farming thriving adjacent to or under the panels, with the panels generating sufficient power to justify the economics of constructing and installing them. That can be a tall order—but not an impossible one. Agrivoltaics projects are very much in the research phase. The approach is not a fully proven yet, though it’s being viewed as workable under the right circumstances. For now, much of what’s known about agrivoltaics has come from research in dry areas in the western U.S. Some of these areas are sunnier and hotter than the Mid-Atlantic region in the summer and colder in the winter. Thus, agrivoltaic projects that are successful out west aren’t necessarily relevant to the Mid-Atlantic.

Other concerns and potential downsides are emerging. Ground solar panels can disturb and compact soil. They also decrease the amount of sun that reaches plants, affecting photosynthesis. And ground panels can adversely affect how much rain reaches plants and in what pattern. For example, run-off from panels can cause water to pool in some areas. Another practical concern is how farmers get equipment in and around ground panels. All these issues, and others, are being studied. 

Agrivoltaic proposals for the Ag Reserve

In 2020, Montgomery County adopted a zoning change that allowed solar arrays on land zoned for agriculture in Montgomery’s County’s Ag Reserve. The measure was a compromise. It recognized the need to generate more renewable energy in the county while at the same time preserving farming, especially on the county’s best soils. The measure also encouraged more production of rooftop solar. It increased the allowable amount of solar production for landowners from 120% of their personal use to 200%. That meant people could sell any excess solar electricity they generated back into the electricity grid. Community solar arrays, which are smaller than “utility scale” arrays, are also allowed under the measure. They can produce up to 2 megawatts of electricity, and generally require 10 to 12 acres of land. Importantly, placing solar arrays on farming soils designated class 1 or class 2 (high quality soils) is prohibited.