Same trip, very different impressions.
When Sacramento city officials recently traveled to Japan to tour a plant that disintegrates garbage with superheated plasma, they came away eager to push forward with a proposal to build a similar plant back home. Yet county officials on the same study mission concluded there were too little data and too many warning signs.
"This particular type of technology in our opinion is not ready for prime time," said Paul Hahn, who heads Sacramento County's Municipal Services Agency. "Maybe more importantly, we have questions about the economics and whether this makes sense."
The city spent $9,512 to send City Manager Ray Kerridge on the trip, but he didn't tour the plant in the northern city of Utashinai. When the delegation visited another waste-to-energy plant in Tokyo featuring a different technology, members said Kerridge skipped that, too.
"For personal reasons, Ray didn't take the same flight as everyone else, so he arrived after the tour of the Utashinai plant," said city spokeswoman Amy Williams in an e-mail. "He did meet with the general manager of the facility and his staff that evening as well as in the morning."
Kerridge spoke to The Bee about some details of the proposal this week, but, through Williams, said he would not be available to discuss the trips. Some written questions from The Bee were answered; others weren't.
Asked why Kerridge did not visit the Tokyo plant, Williams responded that he "went to a presentation about the Tokyo plant technology."
The plasma arc gasification process Kerridge has backed is "the opportunity for the city of Sacramento to be global leaders in this technology," Kerridge said earlier this week.
Hahn, however, said he was more impressed with the technology used at the Tokyo plant. City representatives didn't seriously consider that option and the only mention of the Tokyo plant came at the end of a July 15 council meeting, when Councilman Robbie Waters read a short report of the trip: "We also toured other municipal solid waste gasification plants in Tokyo to see how these plants operate in urban environments," he said.
Council members also said there was no public airing of reservations voiced by air quality officials following the trip in private meetings with city staff members.
These omissions are the latest example of inadequate "due diligence" by city staff members regarding the proposed waste-to-energy plant, council members said. The Bee previously reported that two of the independent experts who testified before the council had financial ties to the company proposing the plan.
"This is the 1,001st nail in the coffin," said Councilman Kevin McCarty. "It seems our staff is stuck justifying plasma arc."
City Councilman Steve Cohn was even more blunt.
"Our staff was sold a bill of goods," Cohn said. "This whole process has bothered me. We made a decision so quickly, settling on one technology and one company."
Asked about this concern via e-mail, Kerridge's spokeswoman said the city is at the beginning of the process. "We believe we have taken all the steps necessary to preserve the city's and citizens' interest," she wrote.
The city manager is pushing for the council to sign a binding agreement soon with U.S. Science & Technology, the local firm proposing the "plasma arc gasification" plant. But now, a growing number of council members are saying Sacramento needs to take a look at other technologies and proposals, according to McCarty, Cohn and Lauren Hammond, who has been the chief proponent for plasma arc.
Trying to find ways to stop trekking garbage to Reno and filling up landfills, the city last year put out a call for waste-to-energy proposals. A committee of city employees and academics – without council input – chose the plan from U.S. Science & Technology.
With plasma arc technology, company officials say electrified gas reaching temperatures of the sun's surface vaporizes trash, producing a synthetic fuel that can be sold to energy companies.
Call The Bee's Terri Hardy, (916) 321-1073.
