RENSSELAER — A New Jersey entrepreneur is proposing a $100 million project that, if approved and built, would take dredging sediment from the Hudson River and other coastal areas and process it into aggregate that could be used in construction.
Rensselaer project would turn dredged Hudson River sediment into construction aggregate.
Plant would process river sediment into building blocks using a kiln, similar to what Norlite does with shale rock; mayor and others are opposed though.
By ,Staff Writer
Former BASF site in Rensselaer seen 2018 in Albany. In 2024, a businessman wants to propose a new plant for the site that would make Hudson River dredging sludge into aggregate that could be resold to construction companies.
Lori Van BurenAnd instead of using hazardous waste that Norlite collects to fire their kiln, this operation would use natural gas.
The company has had some talks with the Port of Albany, which owns the land next to the old BASF chemical plant on the west side of the Hudson River, for a possible location of the operation. Port officials say they are supportive of the concept, but they stressed talks have been very preliminary.
Otto, who has consulted for ports and recycling operations, said the economics of his plan make sense. While it now costs about $130 to dispose of each cubic yard of sediment, he believes he could charge half of that. And the company would also make money by selling the finished aggregate.
“It’s a double revenue stream,” he said, adding that most sediment is now landfilled and it’s getting harder to find space to bring the sediment along the congested East Coast.
The facility would employ about 65 people including engineers and mechanics, Otto said.
Government agencies in New York and New Jersey dredge about 4 million yards of river sediment per year, he added.
Otto said he has investors lined up in Europe and has worked with Danish engineering firm FL Smidth on design of the kiln and processing equipment that would have to be built.
There are some big obstacles though, including environmental concerns, especially given the controversy that the Norlite aggregate plant has created in Cohoes.
“This is a sludge incinerator proposal,” said Judith Enck, a former EPA regional administrator and local environmental activist. “This is the last thing the city of Rensselaer needs.”
She vowed to oppose the facility if it goes forward, due to concerns about emissions from the kiln, especially in Rensselaer, where some residents have long criticized the S.A. Dunn construction and demolition debris landfill and gas-burning power plant that is also in this small blue collar riverfront city. The landfill borders the city school campus.
Enck has been instrumental in the battles against Norlite as well as the Dunn landfill. Norlite is currently seeking updated air emission permits but the plant has since March been on what they called a temporary shutdown of most operations.
Also opposed is Rensselaer Mayor Mike Stammel, who believes Rensselaer already struggles with enough pollution.
“It’s not something that environmentally I believe is going to benefit the air quality of the community,” said Stammel. He said he asked them a number of questions during a meeting with the company and Port of Albany officials last Spring but hasn’t heard back with the answers yet.
Otto said he realizes there are worries about the kiln, which would heat river sludge that could contain harmful PFAS chemicals as well as PCBs. But he believes the kiln operating at 2,000-degree Fahrenheit would break down the toxins.
He does, though, admit that the site’s status as an EPA Superfund could pose a problem. “We’re a little concerned about environmental issues with BASF,” he said referring to the chemical plant that was previously at the site. Plans by another company, which had looked at the site for a potential waste-to-energy plant, have apparently faded away.
The biggest obstacle, though, is financial. To make sense, the project would have to have at least a 20-year life span and, more importantly, the business needs firm long-term commitments from potential supplier/sellers of sediment. That would mean reaching agreements with the Army Corps of Engineers as well as the Port Authority.
“These are bureaucratic institutions and it’s hard to get commitments and contracts especially for something that’s not up and running and proven,” Otto said. “We can’t just build it and hope they show up.”
(Source: https://www.timesunion.com/business/article/100m-proposal-recycle-hudson-river-sediment-19837508.php)