By Jordan Meadows
Staff Writer
Last Tuesday morning, the Energy Advisory Commission met at the Wake County Administrative Building. Government officials, engineers, and industry representatives gathered to discuss the future of waste management and energy planning as the county prepares for the eventual capacity limits of the South Wake Landfill.
John Roberson, P.E., Solid Waste Division Director, opened the discussion by presenting findings from the Beyond the South Wake Landfill Study alongside John Boyer, P.E., of CDM Smith, and attorney Gray Styers of Fox Rothschild.
Roberson highlighted that “the South Wake landfill has been a very successful option for the last 25 years, one of the lowest cost landfills in the state.” However, with the site projected to reach capacity around 2040, the county must begin long-term planning now. Roberson noted that landfill planning “usually takes upwards of a decade.”
A significant portion of the meeting focused on the regional landfill network and its limitations. Currently, seven surrounding counties send their waste to regional facilities—Durham and Orange to Sampson County, and Franklin to Person County, for example.
Of the five regional landfills outside Wake County, four are projected to reach capacity around the same time as Wake’s. Only Great Oak in Randolph County, the newest, is expected to have remaining space. This creates a snowball effect of capacity issues across the region as more municipalities and counties must send their waste to the same landfills, expounding the limitations.
The study aims to determine whether Wake County residents and leadership would support building a regional landfill within the county or pursuing other options, such as waste-to-energy (WTE) technology.
Roberson detailed the county’s exploration of waste-to-energy solutions, noting there are about 2,800 facilities worldwide, including 1,000 in Japan, but fewer than 60 in the U.S.
“There’s about 60 operating, but none have been built in the US since 1996, except for one in West Palm Beach, Florida, in 2015,” Roberson said. He added that such facilities “do not require the same proximity and environmental considerations as landfills,” citing successful examples operating in Europe, like England and Copenhagen, without major issues.
While waste-to-energy reduces but does not eliminate waste, it does recover metals and can extend landfill life.
“Part of this option includes keeping the South Wake landfill open with some remaining airspace to accommodate the disposal of the ash,” Roberson explained.
However, costs remain a significant factor. Tipping fees—the charge per ton for waste disposal—currently range between $35 and $90 at regional facilities such as the East Carolina landfill in Bertie County. The cost of waste-to-energy plants varies from $120 to $200 per ton of daily processing capacity, depending on plant size.
Roberson emphasized that “none of the emerging or alternative technologies demonstrate the ability to process mixed-use municipal solid waste at scale for Wake County.” Still, the commission discussed adaptive strategies for changing energy prices, new regulations, and technological innovations.
Energy markets and regulation were also on the agenda. North Carolina remains a vertically integrated regulated energy market, where a single utility—typically Duke Energy—controls generation, transmission, and distribution. The NC Utilities Commission sets the avoided cost rate every two years, which fluctuates based on natural gas prices. The state’s Clean Energy and Energy Efficiency Portfolio Standards (CEPS) require utilities to meet mandatory renewable energy targets.
Commission members also discussed how the pending merger of Duke Energy, combined with the surging power demand from AI and data centers, could reshape the energy landscape. Roberson noted that Virginia has reached out to collaborate with Wake County on studying the most cost-effective ways to generate the additional power these centers will require.
Beyond the technical discussions, the meeting also touched on community engagement and inclusion. The commission proposed using surplus funds to sponsor around 10 students for summer energy programs in partnership with N.C. State University, potentially making it an annual initiative funded through donations.
“We want to make sure, in the selection process, that we are inclusive and diverse, maybe considering underserved communities throughout the county,” said Daniel Pate, Director of Engagement for the NC Sustainable Energy Association. Though he was quickly reminded by another member that identity cannot be a factor in the selection process.
Despite this focus, diversity in the meeting itself was notably lacking. This absence is especially relevant given that Black, Hispanic, and Native American households face a disproportionately high energy burden—spending significantly more of their income on energy costs than white households in North Carolina. A 2025 report on the southern U.S. found that Black households spend 43% more, Native American households 45% more, and Hispanic households 20% more on energy costs. These disparities are even greater in northeastern and southern regions of North Carolina.
As Wake County evaluates its waste and energy future, officials acknowledged that community buy-in will be crucial. Public opposition from skeptics of new construction—NIMBYs—and environmental groups is expected, especially toward large infrastructure projects. The commission agreed that it will need to convince residents that advanced waste-to-energy systems may be a better alternative than constructing another massive landfill, but that one of the options will need to be implemented.
Finally, Roberson reminded attendees that the state’s evolving energy terminology and regulatory framework reflect the growing role of nuclear energy alongside renewables. This shift has prompted the General Assembly to adjust policies and processes for generation and transmission—a sign of how rapidly North Carolina’s energy landscape is changing.
