From BioCycle Magazine
April 1999, Pages 6-12

RECYCLING AND COMPOSTING IN RUSSIA

Annual generation of “solid domestic waste” (SDW) is expected to reach 200 million tons by 2005, notes Alexander Mirny, editor of the Russian magazine Clean City. (This is a rough estimate, since there is no reliable system for evaluating SDW volume.) Mirny sends the following report on recycling and composting developments in Russia:

“The first Russian plant for mechanized recycling of SDW began operating in St. Petersburg in 1971, designed and staffed at the Academy of Municipal Engineering at the ‘Giprokommunstroy’ Institute. Later, nine similar plants were put into operation in Tashkent, Minsk, Alma-Ala, Baku, Tbilsi, Mogliev, Nizhni Novgorod, St. Petersburg (second site), and last year in Togliatty.

“The following operational sequence is used at these facilities. Waste collection vehicles are weighed and unloaded into receiving (or reserve) hoppers equipped with apron feeder bins. Feeders transfer waste in an even layer to a belt conveyor, moving under a ferrous separator. Then the conveyor takes SDW to the loading head of the biothermal drum. At some plants, direct loading of the biodrum takes place; in this case, metals are not extracted before the drum.

“The first stage (and the major decontamination stage) of the SDW aerobic biothermal composting is carried out in horizontal rotating drums. The second stage takes place in piles for ‘ripening.’ Temperatures of 50° C to 55° C are reached in the drum. SDW decontamination requires at least 12 hours at those temperatures. All of the waste recycling plants are equipped with biothermal drums with a four-foot diameter and 36 or 60 meters long. After two days in the drum, materials are screened at 45 to 60 mm. The oversize fraction is sent to a landfill or incinerator, while the compostable fraction goes through secondary screening before being windrowed.” (Additional details of Russian composting facilities will be published in the June, 1999 issue.)

VERMICOMPOSTING, COMPOSTING AT CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES IN THE CAROLINAS

“Correctional facility officials throughout the Carolinas are expanding projects with on-site composting and vermicomposting of organic residuals as they examine ways to reduce the amount of garbage they send to landfills,” notes Rhonda Sherman of the Biological and Agricultural Engineering staff at North Carolina State University. She sends these capsule descriptions of projects; more details will be published in a future issue:

In 1995, Caledonia Correctional Institution in Halifax County was the first prison in North Carolina to implement on-site composting. They initially set up a windrow operation that handled 16 32-gallon containers of food residuals/ day. At the end of 1996, work began on an in-vessel composting system that was ready for use in May, 1998. The system is 53 feet long by 16 feet wide and consists of 12 composting bins that each contain 16 bioplates to handle forced air and leachate.

In May, 1998, a vermicomposting system was implemented at the Broad River Correctional Institution in Columbia, South Carolina. The prison purchased a bin manufactured by Vermitechnology Unlimited that is 30 feet long, five feet wide and 18 inches high. Manure from hogs raised at the prison are fed to the worms along with food scraps from the cafeteria. These materials are covered with a thin layer of compost from their yard trimmings composting operation.

Near the North and South Carolina border in Anson County (NC), the Brown Creek Correctional Institution implemented a comprehensive waste reduction program that includes composting and vermicomposting. From October, 1997 to October, 1998, the prison reduced its garbage disposal by 110 tons (from 333 to 223 tons/year), saving the state more than $4,000 in disposal fees. Inmates constructed a three-compartment composting bin from wood and wire measuring four feet long by 12 feet wide by five feet high, in addition to a smaller single compartment wire and concrete bin. These bins received about five tons/month of organic materials, consisting of food scraps, shredded confidential paper, dryer lint, and hair clippings from the barber shop. Plans are underway to construct nine additional three-compartment composting bins.

COST AND BENEFITS OF COMPOST APPLICATION

A recent study by Mohammad Rahmani, Alan W. Hodges and Clyde Kiker of the Food and Resource Economics Department of the University of Florida in Gainesville examined costs and benefits of compost application in Florida’s sandy soil for crops such as vegetables, turfgrass, citrus and ornamentals.

Yard trimmings are the most common feedstock used at composting facilities in Florida, followed by MSW, biosolids and livestock manure. End users include landscapers, ornamental growers, homeowners, highway departments, golf courses, citrus growers, and farmers. Compost production costs ranged from $4 to $13/cubic yard (cy) depending upon the type and quality of the feedstock. The price of compost sold at the site ranged from $6 to $15/cy, and $9 to $19/cy delivered. Factors affecting the pricing were type of compost, volume, fineness and delivery distance. Applications ranged from three to 35 acres/ton.

The primary material analyzed was a biosolids/yard trimmings compost from the Solid Waste Authority of Palm Beach County. Total cost of compost application included fees for compost, transportation and spreading. Delivered compost ranged from $9.50 to $29/ton; where the transportation costs were quoted separately, the cost ranged from $6 to $18/ton. Reported benefits of the compost application included yield increases, less fertilizer usage and a decrease in irrigation, however, no measured irrigation savings were indicated. The study determined that, in all cases where sufficient data was available, monetary benefits exceeded the total cost of compost application. Dr. Rahmani will speak about the study at the 29th Annual BioCycle National Conference in Albuquerque, New Mexico May 17-19, 1999.