Materials Management and Rural America, Part 2

October 2, 2018

October 2, 2018


Last week’s article, Materials Management and Rural America, Part 1, presented a broad overview of some of the issues facing rural and small towns in America. As found in a Wall Street Journal analysis of rural America, based upon a number of key measures of socioeconomic, the decline in our rural and small communities is accelerating.


An ongoing series posted on CityLab, however, points out that economic growth and opportunity is “not only uneven and unequal between urban and rural places; it is also uneven within them.” Thus, some rural and small communities are flourishing, just as some urban areas are growing and thriving, while other communities, rural and urban, are on the decline.


Working in a range of small and rural communities over the past decade, I’d tend to concur with CityLab’s conclusion.


Materials Management presents Opportunity


In a September 2018 Resource Recycling article, Looking Farther Afield, Natasha Duarte (Director of the Composting Association of Vermont) and I discuss food scrap diversion efforts in small towns and rural jurisdictions in Maine, Massachusetts and Vermont.

As presented in the article, effective strategic planning, dedication on the part of local stakeholders, and a focus on resident education and involvement has helped make food scrap diversion successful in a number of rural and small town communities. Similarly, just as in urban areas, small and rural communities can benefit greatly from effective implementation of source reduction, reuse, and recycling.

Beyond the potential economic benefits, materials management can help to build communities, bring citizens together, promote public participation, and help to spur a sense of community pride.


Vermont, a state comprised primarily of rural and small town communities, has become a national leader in materials management. To conserve space in its only landfill and reduce its carbon footprint, the Vermont Legislature adopted Act 148, the Vermont Universal Recycling Law, in 2012. Through a phased in time-line, the law bans disposal of the following major types of waste materials: “blue bin" recyclables, leaf and yard debris, clean wood, and food scraps.


Additionally, all towns were required by 2015 to adopt pay-as-you-throw waste collection systems. The ban on food scraps began in 2014 with the largest generators (greater than 104 tons per year), if the generator is located within 20 miles of a processing facility. The threshold has been lowered each subsequent year. By 2020, all food scrap generators, including residents, will be required to divert food scraps from disposal.


As noted in last week’s article, I live and work in Brattleboro, Vermont (population 12,000). The town is a mecca for those of us in materials management. Curbside recycling was started in the town long before I arrived. In 2013, with the urging of Triple T Trucking, the town’s contracted waste and recycling hauler, Brattleboro initiated a pilot curbside food scraps collection program.


The pilot went town-wide in 2014 with free curbside food scrap collection offered to all 5,300 households (including multi-family properties with up to four units). With the adoption of pay-as-you-throw trash disposal in July 2015, collection of food scraps more than doubled to 9.5 tons per week.


In 2016, the town became one of the few communities, small or large, to adopt every-other-week trash collection. Now Brattleboro is diverting 64 percent of its waste stream through recycling and organics diversion. Moreover, the Town of Brattleboro saves about $35,000 a year in reduced tip fees (landfill-tipping charges locally are $105 per ton).


Keeping organics local has also benefited the community. The Windham Solid Waste Management District compost facility (located in Brattleboro) processes 605 tons per year of food waste (and soiled paper) from the Brattleboro curbside collection, along with 627 tons per year of commercial and institutional food waste. The facility is a cash-positive operation. Residents can purchase compost at a relatively low cost; schools and other entities around the region have benefited from the District’s generous donation of compost.

Around Vermont, small and rural communities have certainly been aided in their waste diversion efforts by the formation of “waste management districts.” Utilizing fees paid by their member communities, as well as grants and fee-for-service programs, the districts help communities to reduce and divert waste, and provide information about trash, recycling, composting, and hazardous waste, including hauling services, drop-off centers, and more. The districts also provide technical assistance and training for businesses, schools, events, and residents in accordance with Vermont’s Universal Recycling Law.


For example, with support from a U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Utilities Services grant, the Central Vermont Solid Waste Management District helped establish two community food scrap composting sites. They are located at Quarry Hill, a low-income housing complex with 36 units in Barre and Franklin Street Home Owners Association, a condominium complex with 10 units in Montpelier.


In Massachusetts, another waste management district has become a leader in materials management in that state. The Franklin County Solid Waste Management District consists of 21 member towns in the less-populated western part of the state. The towns’ populations range from 378 to 8,455.


Twenty-five public schools in Franklin County, including seven high schools, have comprehensive recycling and cafeteria and kitchen food scrap composting programs. Additionally, eight other schools in the county collect food waste for animal feed at local farms. Only two schools in the county remain without food scrap diversion programs.


All twenty District transfer stations accept recyclables, eight of these accept food scraps and soiled paper from residents at no cost. Several also have swap sheds. Three "Super Sites" are permitted (and open year-round) to accept automotive products such as used motor oil, oil filters, transmission fluid, and anti-freeze; mercury-containing devices such as fluorescent lamps, button batteries, fever thermometers and thermostats; oil-based paints, thinners, lacquers, and other paint-related items; rechargeable nickel-cadmium batteries; and fluorescent lamp ballasts. The district also lends its special event signage and recycling and compost bins to over 40 special events each year.


These are just a few examples of how small and rural communities can offer comprehensive materials management programs. Many of these efforts, including reuse and food scrap diversion, can draw upon the strengths inherent in these communities. For example, diversion of food scraps for animal feed in agricultural areas. More on this topic in Part 3.



By Athena Lee Bradley

Share Post

Maine, Maryland pursue PFAS biosolids remedies amid landfill capacity concerns

By Megan Quinn | Waste Dive • March 26, 2026
Northeastern states concerned with contamination from per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in sewage sludge are moving forward with new projects and proposed legislation meant to better manage the material in 2026 and beyond. During a Northeast Recycling Council webinar on Wednesday, officials from the Maine Department of Environmental Protection and the Maryland Department of the Environment offered updates on how their states are managing PFAS in sludge. They also offered perspectives on how looming landfill capacity issues, proposed infrastructure projects and state legislation could influence how these states — and neighboring states — handle this material in the immediate term. Disposal capacity concerns prompt infrastructure plans in Maine Maine has been in the spotlight for several years for how it handles PFAS in sludge and in landfill leachate in the state. It was the first state to ban the land application of sewage sludge in 2022, and several projects are moving forward in 2026 that are meant to manage regional disposal capacity for the material as landfill space dwindles. That pressure on disposal capacity is expected to build as more Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic states consider similar sludge fertilizer prohibitions due to PFAS concerns, said Susanne Miller, Maine DEP’s director of the bureau of remediation and waste management. “Right now, everything’s going to a landfill because there’s nowhere else to put it in Maine, and this is a big problem,” she said. Casella Waste, which operates the state’s Juniper Ridge Landfill, has been seeking a landfill expansion for several years, but that matter has been tied up in court. “Without an expansion, it’s going to be running out of capacity in about 2028 which is just around the corner.” One project to address capacity issues is the state’s first biosolids dryer , which is being built at WM’s Crossroads Landfill to reduce liquid volume of the material. That project, originally expected to come online sometime in 2025, is now expected to open in the second quarter of 2026, Miller said. It has a capacity of up to 200 tons a day and up to 73,000 tons a year. That project could handle up to 83% of Maine’s municipally generated biosolids, she said. The dryer is meant to help create a closed-loop system, she said. Sludge from wastewater plants will be treated in the dryer, and landfill leachate and dryer liquids will be treated onsite via a foam fractionation system that is already in operation at the landfill, she said. Treated water goes to a nearby wastewater plant, and sludge from that wastewater plant then returns to the dryer. Another proposed PFAS management project, a sludge processing plant by Aries Clean Technologies, could also be in the works in coming months. It aims to use a gasification and oxidization process to remove PFAS from sewage material and significantly reduce biosolids volumes in the process. The company built a similar facility in New Jersey in 2024. The project is currently under permit review, which Miller said will likely include a DEP review, public comment period and public hearing. The proposal has faced some public pushback over potential traffic, odor and pollution concerns, Maine Public reported . “With any kind of new technology relating to waste or that takes in a waste stream, there’s controversy and concern about it, and so we need to go through the entire permitting process to get to the point where the department is able to determine if an application can be granted,” Miller said. Meanwhile, the Portland Water District, which Miller says is Maine’s largest wastewater treatment facility, is also exploring its own treatment system for sludge. It’s an effort to reduce reliance on limited landfill capacity and unpredictable disposal costs, she said. The water district is considering a few different technologies like anaerobic digestion, drying and thermal treatments such as pyrolysis to reduce the amount of biosolids for disposal. “With the prices going up to go to landfill and the space at landfills shrinking, they want to take destiny into their own hands,” she said. According to DEP, several other sewer districts are working on similar projects. York Sewer District is planning a 2028 pilot project meant to use supercritical water oxidation technology to help destroy PFAS and reduce wastewater sludge volume. Meanwhile, landfill operators in the state have been subject to new PFAS leachate testing rules since September. A new law requires operators to test for PFAS in landfill leachate and report results annually to DEP. Wastewater dischargers that accept leachate must also maintain leachate records to report to DEP each year. Though these projects hold promise, Miller emphasized that source control efforts are just as important to reduce the amount of PFAS-containing materials entering landfills and being treated at wastewater treatment plants. The state has already passed laws that phase out intentionally added PFAS in certain products, with the list of applicable products expanding through the next few years to include artificial turf and outdoor gear by 2029 and most types of products by 2032. Maryland moves forward with biosolids ban bill Maryland is focusing on its own efforts related to PFAS in biosolids through new regulations and state legislation, said Thomas Yoo, chief of MDE’s biosolids division. The state generates about 600,000 wet tons of sewage sludge a year, and about 56% of that is hauled out of state for either land application or landfilling, mainly to Virginia and Pennsylvania, he said. Maryland has about 250 agricultural sites that are permitted to take sewage sludge, but in 2023 the state put a hold on issuing any new land application permits. It also began requesting PFAS data from out-of-state permittees bringing biosolids into the state and terminated permits for those that did not provide that data, he said. Maryland also requires all wastewater treatment plants where land applied biosolids originate to sample for PFOS and PFOA . About 50 biosolids generators are submitting this data, he said. The state already has recommended limits for PFAS in land applications , but a bill moving through the state legislature, SB 719 , would set enforceable limits starting in 2027. The bill calls for prohibiting land application for sludge that has a total concentration of PFOA and PFOS above 50 parts per billion and calls for other source tracking and mitigation plan measures. The neighboring state of Virginia passed a set of bills on March 11 with a similar intent. If signed by the governor, the bills would regulate the levels of PFAS in biosolids and would prevent the use of biosolids as fertilizer beginning in 2027 if levels of PFOA and PFOS are too high. Yoo says Maryland will continue to focus on state-level options for managing PFAS in biosolids as it awaits U.S. EPA guidance on the matter. The EPA released a draft risk assessment in January 2025 that found farmers who used the sludge may be at risk of exposure, but consumers who eat food from those sources may face less risk. The draft report says certain PFAS may leach from sludge when it’s land applied, disposed of in a landfill, or incinerated. The agency has not yet finalized the assessment. Read the article of Waste Dive

WRAP

By Sophie Leone • March 25, 2026
WRAP is a global environmental action NGO with a mission to "embed Circular Living in every boardroom and every home". Established in the UK in 2000, it has since expanded to offices in Europe and the USA, with live projects in over 30 countries. There are four main priorities driving their work: future-proofing food, preventing problematic plastics and packaging, accelerating the circular economy, and transforming textiles. Textiles, food, and manufactured products account for nearly half of the climate problem, and WRAP has acknowledged that a new approach is needed to mitigate the climate crisis. Their new approach, "Circular Living" — detailed as "design-make-reuse" — targets the root causes of this crisis across the entire product lifecycle. Their website offers diverse resources, including successful case studies on housing, farming, food waste, waste collection, and much more. Along with these case studies, WRAP offers webinars, resources guides, campaign tools, reports, and more. Their dedicated work has allowed them to expand their reach globally, impact the industry on all levels, and produce critical information materials. "Everyone I meet in this field is someone who looks at an object and says, "I can make something with that" - and they built a career on solution-seeking. In a time of supply chain disruptions and market volatility, the recycling industry's can-do (pun intended) mindset is critical for recovering value and reducing demand for resource extraction. WRAP is excited to join NERC and connect with members supporting this vital component of the circular economy." Sarah Morley – Strategic Engagement Manager at WRAP Americas NERC is excited to welcome WRAP to our impactful team of NGO’s. We look forward to supporting their mission and the incredible work they do around the world. For more information on WRAP visit.

University of Vermont Casella Center for Circular Economy and Sustainability

By Sophie Leone • March 24, 2026
The University of Vermont (UVM) launched the Casella Center for Circular Economy and Sustainability in 2025, with support from a large gift by Casella Waste Systems, Inc. The Center is a “research hub developing sustainable solutions for waste and materials management that reduce pollution and create economic opportunities.” The work done in the UVM Casella Center builds on three decades of collaboration between Casella Waste Systems and UVM. The Casella Center is a part of the Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources. The Rubenstein School has “prepared environmentally and socially responsible leaders, scientists, practitioners, and advocates” for 50 years. While based in the Rubenstein School, the Casella Center includes UVM faculty affiliates and students spanning multiple disciplines and Colleges, including engineering, agriculture, life sciences, and policy. “At the UVM Casella Center, we are focused on the intersection of rigorous scholarship and practical solutions. This requires us to work collaboratively with many stakeholders, including those in the public and private sectors working hard daily to improve our materials management systems. Joining NERC will help us stay connected to the Northeast sustainable materials management community.” – Dr. Eric Roy, Director, UVM Casella Center for Circular Economy and Sustainability NERC is excited to welcome The University of Vermont Casella Center for Circular Economy and Sustainability to our growing group of academic institutions. We look forward to supporting their students and ongoing efforts to make lasting environmental impacts. For more information on UVM Casella Center for Circular Economy and Sustainability visit .