A proposal to build a waste-to-energy plant was met by opposition from Bethlehem residents after an initial presentation on the project was made to the Town Board.
During the presentation at the Town Board meeting on Wednesday, April 25, representatives from Kentucky-based Recycling Solutions Technology provided information about its waste gasification process and the types of recycled end materials that are created as a result. So far, only one other plant exists in the country using the company’s technology.
“This could be such an opportunity for the town, but it’s really something that has to be vetted,” said the town’s Director of Economic Development and Planning Michael Morelli. “The proposal is so early that they haven’t even formally submitted an application yet. The company just wanted to explain the process in general terms before the board.”
The proposal calls for the plant to be built on a parcel of land near the port of Albany owned by a real estate company run by Victor Gush, a local developer. In previous years a recycling center and a riverfront development called Harbor at Beacon Pointe have been proposed for the site.
Lee Bazzle, an RST director of technology, summarized the gasification process. He also fielded questions from residents and members of the board.
The new technology patented by RST uses a single-stream method to clean and feed waste into a kiln that slowly rotates as it is heated. Metals are picked out of the material with magnets. According to the company, the reusable byproduct ash is sifted through a screen and gases are transported to a separate reduction chamber to produce power that is then fed back to the grid. The remaining fumes are passed through a pollution control unit to remove contaminants before being released into the air.
The company argues that it design is different from a typical incineration plant, a fact that was questioned by many residents who spoke out about the proposal.
The gases and ash created from the waste materials are reusable, according to RST. The company claims 25 percent of materials (the resulting ash) is usually sent back to a landfill. The new gasification process was touted by RST as the “technology of the future” that will one day replace landfills altogether, since the byproducts can be used to create concrete and recyclable tin and aluminum.
The facility could potentially process 1,500 tons of waste per day using two lines and produce 50 megawatts of power per hour.
All waste would be transported to the facility by train and river. For the project to move forward the town would need to change a zoning law to allow the plant to be built in the heavy industrial use area and also change an existing law prohibiting the import of industrial waste.
In 2011, a similar waste-to-energy facility said to be using different technology was proposed by a company in Connecticut to the City of Albany to be built on land in the port of Albany. The city’s Department of Development and Planning said the project is no longer being considered.
According to Morelli, an Environmental Impact Statement would be needed for the Bethlehem project with a review from local and state agencies. Public hearings would need to be set in the future and approval from the Army Corps of Engineers would also be needed.
“They said they would like to see the review completed in a year, but that’s a pretty optimistic timeline,” he said. “The process could take years.”
As an incentive, the town would receive not only property taxes but a “community host fee” similar to a tipping fee at landfills.
The town board told Bazzle it would like to see the environmental impact study and any other information associated with building the company’s facility in Kentucky. Bazzle said that could be arranged.
Residents and environmental activists at the Wednesday meeting were concerned about aesthetics, environmental safety and the safety of employees who could one day work at the plant. Some were also concerned that after recycling is accounted for, the waste fed into the plant would not have enough material to be turned into renewable aggregate.
Jim Travers, a Ravena resident and member of the Citizens Environmental Coalition, Selkirk Coeymans Ravena Against Pollution and the Coalition Against Riverfront Pollution said the site interferes with the natural course of the Normanskill and the structure could be unstable because of the soil.
“This is not something I would want in my town,” he said. “We’re not hearing a whole lot. This is a very superficial overview, what we’re seeing … I would have to tell you there isn’t really enough in host benefits for this to profit the town in any way.”
Travers told the board there is no known ventilation system that can clean 100 percent of toxins before they are filtrated into the air and every baby born today is born with 200 chemicals in their bodies that didn’t exist 100 years ago.
“Most us don’t call these waste-to-energy plants but wasted energy plants,” he said.
Resident Linda Jasinski said although she is undecided on the project, it is something the town should continue to research. She said residents were also opposed to a recycling center being placed on the site out of fear that materials sent to the facility, like plastic bags, would fly into the town.
“They went a couple hundred feet and set up shop in Albany so if there are any problems we still had them, but now we don’t have the tax income from it, the benefits from it and we don’t have the control over it and that kind of thing. … We have to have an open mind, we can’t just shut it down,” Jasinski said.
Supervisor John Clarkson said the board would consider forming another citizen’s committee to help study the proposal while more informational meetings and public hearings would be held in the future.
“The proposal really still needs to be properly vetted,” said Morelli. “The board will look at all of the facts and do the right thing. Right now, they just can’t make an informed decision without all of the information.”
