United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
(5306W)
EPA530-N-95-006
September 1995
&EPA WasteWiSe Update
WASTE
-------
WasteWi$e Update
Making Gents
of Waste
As part of the WasteWi$e program, partner compa
nies measure success in preventing waste, recy-
cling, and buying or manufacturing products
made with recycled content. WasteWi$e partners'
1994 achievements will be highlighted in the
WasteWi$e First-Year Progress Report to be published this
fall (see notice on page 9). While most partners have
launched recycling programs and un-
derstand how to measure results in this
area, many of the methods used to
quantify waste prevention benefits are
not well developed or documented.
This issue of the Waste Wi$e Update
is dedicated to sharing information about
techniques and tools for measuring the
effectiveness of waste prevention. Waste
prevention is using less material
to get a job done, creating
less waste before recy-
cling. For compa-
resources.
By measuring our progress
and sharing results, we:
I Document and better understand
our accomplishments
~\ Generate pride, participation,
and momentum
I Identify areas for improvement
Justify the need for additional
nies, this can involve cutting waste that goes into their own
dumpsters as well as eliminating materials that can become
waste for customers. Waste prevention offers opportunities to
conserve materials and reduce costs. Because it encompasses
many different types of activities (substituting or reusing mate-
rials and purchasing in bulk, for example), there's no "one size
fits all" measurement technique.
Nonetheless, more and more companies are gauging the
results of their waste prevention efforts. Many are using this
information to improve their programs and to invest scarce
resources in the most effective waste prevention efforts. In
this issue, we share the experiences of several WasteWi$e
partners and report on the results they've achieved.
WasteWi$e charter partners General Motors and the
Eastman Kodak Company, for example, explain the value
that measurement adds to their waste reduction activities.
You'll see how companies tailor measurement approaches and
tools to fit their own structure, operations, and WasteWi$e
goals. And you'll discover a wide array
of measurement systems currently being
used by companies.
WasteWi$e partners measure waste
prevention for a variety of reasons. First,
measuring progress helps partners dis-
tinguish between efforts that work and
those that don't. It allows companies to
replicate successes, set realistic goals for
future projects, and invest their efforts
in initiatives that work. Measuring the
amount of waste prevented also helps
companies determine how much money
these initiatives save each year.
Reporting these figures to upper man-
agement and employees helps build mo-
mentum for waste prevention.
Promoting waste prevention achieve-
ments to stockholders, customers, and the general public
also can enhance a company's image. In most cases, pre-
cision is not necessary; reasonable estimates can be very
useful for gauging progress.
Voluntary programs like WasteWi$e depend on
measurement of partners' progress to demonstrate that
creative, nonregulatory approaches to environmental
protection deliver tangible results. Measurement also
enables us to showcase the successful efforts of our
WasteWi$e partners and to identify high-impact waste
prevention actions from which others can benefit.
Waste prevention measurement is a relatively new and
evolving field. WasteWi$e will continue to look for more
effective ways to measure results and will share them with our
partners and endorsers. We would also like to hear from you
about your successes in measuring solid waste reduction.
—Larry Long, Manager of
safety and environmental
initiatives, Anheuser-Busch Company
C
t
f-
C
-------
WasteWi$e Update
GM Meets tKe Measurement
General Motors (GM), headquartered in Detroit,
Michigan, is one company that has worked hard
over the past few years to measure its waste reduc-
tion progress more accurately. The company's re-
sulting benefits include cost savings, increased
efficiency, and a heightened sense of corporate responsibility.
"We look at waste reduction as one big cost-savings opportu-
nity," says Sandra Brewer of GM headquarters' Worldwide
Facilities Group, Environmental Regulatory Support.
"Measuring helps us manage our business better by showing
us where we're saving money and where we're not."
With 330,000 employees, several divisions, and 125 man-
ufacturing and assembly plants nationwide, however, mea-
surement has not been easy. "Until recently, we've been a few
years behind with the numbers," said Brewer. "We're so big
that it takes a long time to pull information together. There
were always initiatives taking place somewhere within the
company, like a change in packaging or manufacturing, that
we didn't know about."
When GM's waste reduction program began in 1990,
measurement was an inexact science. The company had only
a "rudimentary" waste reduction survey form that a limited
number of plants filled out (on paper) and returned to head-
quarters. When the waste reduction program went corpo-
ra tewide in 1991, the company revised the survey to better
focus on measurement.
"Assembly and manufacturing plants generally hate sur-
veys," Brewer said, "so we knew we had to keep it simple."
The new survey continued to ask for figures on waste gener-
ation, waste types, and management methods. But to better
measure the company's waste reduction progress, the survey
also requested basic information on recently implemented
waste reduction projects, including type and amount of
waste prevented, cost savings, and initial capital outlay for
the projects. The survey now picks up on most of the new
initiatives that previously went unde-
tected by headquarters. Brewer said,
i however, that a large company
rj) shouldn't worry about discovering
every last initiative that could be re-
ducing waste. "If it's successful
enough, you'll hear about the activi-
ty sooner or later."
GM began computerizing the sur-
vey in 1993 to streamline the data
collection and management
process. More than 100 GM envi-
ronmental engineers across the
GM Drives Home Waste
Prevention Message
Here are some of the waste prevention activities
measured and reported through GM's waste reduction
survey:
0 Eliminating printing of 1.5 million service parts cat-
alogues a year by converting to a paperless system
that provides auto parts information to GM dealers
across the nation on microfiche. This action con-
serves nearly 2 billion pages of paper annually.
GM has also found that microfiche is cheaper to
update and distribute than the printed catalogs.
• Supplying Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) to
dealers through a computer network that connects
GM dealers across the country. Instead of updating
and redistributing the binders whenever product
changes are made, dealers now have "up to the
minute" MSDS information at their fingertips. This
initiative eliminates the need for 8,000 printed
binders and 2.3 million pages of paper annually.
0 Increasing the use of reusable/returnable shipping
and packaging containers and adopting environ-
mental guidelines for expendable packaging sup-
pliers. Several major GM divisions are even
working toward zero-landfill goals
- for packaging wastes. GM assem-
~ bly plants, for example, achieved
a 50 percent reduction in
packaging wastes between
1993 and 1994 through
redesigning packaging,
using returnable packag-
ing, and recycling.
country now update and return data to headquarters on disk,
saving time and labor for data entry and minimizing data
inconsistencies.
The key to measuring successful waste reduction efforts
for a big company like GM? Simplicity. "We ultimately plan
to utilize a corporatewide computer system to transfer all
survey data electronically to headquarters. This would mean
no paper," Brewer said. "We're constantly seeking more effi-
cient ways to collect and analyze our waste reduction data,
and an important part of that is keeping the survey quick
and simple, no matter how far our waste reduction program
has evolved."
-------
WasteWiSe Update
Measuring Waste Reduction:
A Spotlight
on Our
Partners
Each company encounters its own
unique challenges in measuring
waste reduction. Large organiza-
tions often struggle to identify and
quantify a range of waste reduc-
tion activities spread out over a number of facili-
ties. Smaller companies sometimes lack
resources to collect data. Those companies that
have risen to the challenge, however, will tell
you that measurement is worth the effort. Many
WasteWiSe partners use measurement informa-
tion to keep employees motivated, announce re-
sults to stockholders and customers, and
evaluate and improve their efforts.
The methods used to measure progress are
as diverse as the companies that make up the
WasteWiSe roster and range from examining
purchasing records to using computerized
tracking tools. Here's a sampling of how some
WasteWiSe partners are measuring their
progress.
Banking on Waste Prevention
Boston-based State Street Bank & Trust Co. con-
served the equivalent of 10,000 corrugated boxes
in 1994 by renting reusable plastic crates for in-
teroffice relocations and moving. Invoices from
the crate rental agency indicated that plastic
crates were used for 25,000 trips during the moving process.
To determine how many corrugated boxes would be needed
to make the same number of trips, State Street Bank and its
moving consultants estimated that a single corrugated box
could be used an average of 2.5 times. With this informa-
tion, State Steet Bank made the following calculation to de-
termine the quantity of boxes not consumed by renting
reusable plastic crates:
Total number of trips
made by plastic crates
Average number of trips
made by a single
corrugated box
25,000 trips
2.5 trips/corrugated box
= Total number of corrugated
boxes not used
= 10,000 corrugated
boxes eliminated
This is a conservative figure because the volume of a
plastic crate is 30 percent larger than the corrugated boxes
previously used in the moving process.
State Street Bank also has found a useful home for sal-
vaged building materials. This past year, the company sent
two truckloads, or 70,000 pounds, of reusable materials
from a construction and demolition project to a United
Way agency for reuse in a housing project. State Street cal-
culated the weight of material available for reuse using the
hauler's estimate that each truckload contained 35,000
pounds of material.
Perkin-Elmer Packs Savings in
Return Program
The Perkin-Elmer Corporation, a leading manu-
facturer of analytical, environmental, and life
science systems, has developed an innovative
program that enables its customers to return
packing materials to the company for reuse. As a
result of this program, the company, based in Norwalk,
Connecticut, saved $95,000 and reused 62 tons of corru-
gated and foam packaging material.
To encourage customers to return product packaging,
Perkin-Elmer offers free return shipping and donates $1 to
environmental and wildlife organizations for each package
-------
WasteWi$e Update
received. While staff members were initially
optimistic, the program has surpassed every-
one's expectations by achieving a 28 percent re-
turn rate since its inception in 1992.
Measuring cost savings and waste prevention
progress resulting from the program is relative-
ly easy for Perkin-Elmer. Because the company
pays the shipping cost of all packing materials returned, it re-
ceives shipping invoices that identify the number and weight
of packages returned. The company enters the data into a
spreadsheet to calculate the total weight and number of pack-
ages. To calculate cost savings, the company estimated how
much new packaging it would need to purchase if no pack-
ages were returned. This was done by using the net number
of returned (undamaged) packages to calculate the cost of
buying an equal amount of new packaging.
The cost of return shipping $100,000
(from invoices)
The cost of refurbishing some $1 5,000
of the corrugated boxes
Total cost $115,000
Cost to purchase equivalent amount $210,000
of new packaging
Thus, the net savings of the package return program is
$95,000.
Perkin-Elmer plans to work with its offices overseas to
design uniform packaging so that packaging return can be
implemented worldwide.
Measuring Waste Reduction
A Spotlight
on Our Partners
Cleaning Up with
Pallet Reuse
Maytag Corporation, a major manufacturer of
home appliances, floor care products, and
vending machines, has effectively measured
waste prevention associated with its wood pal-
let reuse program. Participating Maytag facili-
ties (located in Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, Tennessee, and
Indiana) send worn pallets to vendors that remanufacture
them. Some facilities also send their wood pallets to sister
plants for reuse. Combining the efforts of four facilities,
Maytag reused or sent for remanufacture more than 90,000
pallets in 1994.
Maytag derived this number from company purchasing
records and reports from the pallet remanufacturer. From
these records, the company estimated that at 45 pounds per
pallet, it eliminated more than 4 million
pounds of wood waste. In a similar manner,
the Maytag-Galesburg Refrigeration
Products facility, located in Galesburg,
Illinois, estimated that it recovered more than
3 million pounds of wood pallets.
The Maytag-Herrin Laundry Products
facility also measured the amount of waste it prevented by
switching to returnable plastic containers for shipments of
washer timers.
To calculate the waste prevented, the facility multiplied
the weight of one of the previously used corrugated cartons
[42 pounds] by the number of units delivered from the facili-
ty over a six-month period [390]. Thus, this change eliminat-
ed more than 16,000 pounds of corrugated material.
Measuring Waste
Generated by
Reusables
The switch to reusable packaging can reduce vast
amounts of waste. Even reusables, however, gener-
ate some waste over time. For example, reusable
containers will eventually wear down, at which time
they must be refurbished (if possible), recycled, or
discarded. Containers also can be damaged and re-
quire repair or replacement. In most cases, however,
the amount of waste from reusable containers is
negligible in the first year or two of use and, over
time, is many times smaller than the amount of
waste from single-use containers.
But how do you calculate the amount of
reusables that must ultimately be recycled or dis-
posed of? If you know the average life expectancy
of the reusable container, waste generation can be
amortized for the life of the container. One simple
way to make this estimate is to divide an individual
container's weight by its life expectancy. If a
reusable container weighs 50 pounds and is ex-
pected to last 10 years, about 5 pounds of waste
will be generated per container
per year. This amount can
then be subtracted from
total annual waste
prevention figures^,
for the reusable
container.
-------
WasteWi$e Update
Waste Reduction Pays
Dividends
In 1994, BankAmerica, headquartered in
San Francisco, California, conserved
750,000 pounds of paper and saved
more than $ 1 million through three
paper reduction initiatives. How would you measure
such an achievement?
For starters, the company reviewed warehouse distribution
records to determine the effects of a 1994 paper waste reduc-
tion campaign. As part of this campaign, BankAmerica en-
couraged employees to make double-sided copies, carefully
format documents, and pare down distribution lists. To cal-
culate the difference in paper purchases between 1993 and
1994, the bank examined its own warehouse distribution
records for past paper requests from company departments.
In doing so, the company discovered that photocopy and
computer paper supply requests declined by 13 percent and
18 percent, respectively, from 1993 to 1994 —a total reduc-
tion of 200,000 pounds. At the same time, the number of em-
ployees remained approximately the same.
The company reduced the amount of paper used an-
nually by 40,000 reams. At 5 pounds and 500 sheets per
ream, the corporation saved approximately 200,000
pounds, or 20 million sheets, of paper.
Secondly, the bank discovered that by eliminating compa-
ny procedure manuals in branch offices, it conserved 25 mil-
lion sheets of paper in one year. Instead of distributing paper
copies, the company set up a centralized reference library and
a telephone support center to provide procedural information.
To measure this effort, the bank compared the total number
of manuals printed in 1993 to the number printed in 1994.
The difference between the two years' totals times the number
of pages per manual equalled the amount of paper reduced.
The company determined that limiting the number of manuals
reduced paper use by approximately 250,000 pounds in 1994.
Estimated decrease in the pounds of paper used: (25
million sheets of paper/500 sheets per ream) x 5
pounds/ream = 250,000 pounds
BankAmerica also began double-sided printing of the ac-
count reconciliation section of customer checking
account statements. Based on warehouse
iistribution records, the branch respon-
sible for generating and sending these
statements requested approximately
300,000 fewer pounds of paper in
1994 as a result of this change. This
reduction occurred even though the
number of accounts remained approxi-
mately the same.
Measuring Waste Reduction:
A Spotlight
on Our Partners
Estimated decrease in the pounds of paper
used: (30 million sheets of paper/500
sheets per ream) x 5 pounds/ream =
300,000 pounds
The combined paper savings realized through
these three initiatives totals 750,000 pounds.
Easier than you thought, right?
A Drumroll Please...
:f you have a standard delivery system established with a
vendor, your company might find measurement as easy
as Southern Mills did with its drum take-back pro-
gram. One of the finishing plants of this textile manu-
facturer, based in Atlanta, Georgia, established a
purchasing contract with its dye and chemical vendor. The
contract requires the vendor to take back empty metal and
fiber drums for reuse. Prior to the take-back program,
Southern Mills landfilled the drums.
Southern Mills receives a standard shipment of 883 metal
drums and 334 fiber drums per year to accommodate its pro-
duction schedule. The same number of drums is now re-
turned to the vendors. An empty 55-gallon metal drum
weighs approximately 40 pounds; a similar fiber drum
weighs approximately 22 pounds. To determine the amount
of waste prevented, Southern Mills performed the following
calculations:
883 metal drums
40 Ibs/drum
35,320 Ibs of
metal drums
334 fiber drums
22 Ibs/drum
7,348 Ibs of
fiber drums
By adding these two figures, Southern Mills found that it
prevented 42,668 pounds of metal and fiber waste in 1994.
To promote safe packaging reduction, the Institute of
Packaging Professionals (loPP) has prepared Guidelines
for Responsible Chemical Packaging Management and
Guidelines for Disposition of Used Packaging. This guide
helps companies determine the best strategy for manag-
ing containers that have been used to store hazardous
materials. The guide includes sections on:
• Residue minimization
• Recycling
• Reconditioning
• Returnable packaging
• Consumable chemical packaging
Each section contains an introduction, a description of
the strategy, its pros and cons, and specific examples.
The guide is available from loPP for a fee of $25. To
order, contact loPP at 703 318-8970.
-------
WasteWi$e Update
Wood-Be Alternatives to
Landfilling
Some disposal facilities and haulers
provide (or require) weight informa-
tion on recycling collection and waste
loads. If your company has a waste
reduction baseline such as disposal or hauler
records, measuring waste prevention could be just a simple
calculation away.
Measuring the success of its 1994 wood waste preven-
tion and recycling efforts revealed significant savings for
Ingersoll-Rand Company—an industrial equipment manu-
facturer headquartered in New Jersey. In 1994, 16 of
Ingersoll-Rand's 46 facilities located across the nation ex-
plored waste reduction opportunities for wood, using landfill
records as a baseline for measuring. To reduce the generation
of wood waste, all but one of these facilities switched to
reusable totes instead of wood pallets and skids where possi-
ble. The majority of these totes are collapsible plastic shipping
containers with built-in handles.
One of Ingersoll-Rand's facilities, located in
Shippensburg, Pennsylvania, took a different
approach and sent 1.2 million pounds of
wood skids and pallets to a private land-
fill—but not for disposal. Rather, the land-
fill chipped the wood and sold the chips as
landscaping material or used them as road
cover at the facility. The Shippensburg facili-
measured the amount of wood chipped by
placing the pallets and skids in designated hop-
pers and weighing them prior to chipping.
Measuring the amount of wood conserved by switching
to reusable totes required a different approach. With consis-
tent production levels in the 16 facilities for 1993 and 1994,
Ingersoll-Rand assumed that it would have generated and
disposed of roughly the same amount of wood in both years.
Thus, the company started with a baseline of 4,718,000
pounds of wood landfilled in 1993 by all 16 facilities. The
15 facilities switching to reusable totes landfilled 2,740,000
pounds of wood in 1994; the Shippensburg facility chipped
1,200,000 pounds of wood in 1994. Subtracting the 1994
chipping and landfilling amounts from the 1993 baseline re-
veals that 778,000 pounds of wood waste were prevented by
switching to reusable totes. The table below displays the fig-
ures used in this calculation.
Measuring Waste Reduction:
A Spotlight
Our Partners
4,718,000 Ibs
(15
2,740,000 Ibs
(S
pped
.is urg only
1,200,000 Ibs
Ingersoll-Rand plans to continue its efforts
to conserve wood in 1995. Other facilities are
evaluating the use of reusable totes, and facili-
ties will reuse and rebuild pallets as much as
possible and continue to work with vendors
on pallet take-back programs.
Reducing Steel Scrap Through
Equipment Changes
ne of the benefits of measurement is being able to
pinpoint inefficiencies in work practices or produc-
tion. One company that used its knowledge of
waste generation rates to make changes in its pro-
duction process is Virco Manufacturing of
Conway, Arkansas. Through a measurement tracking system,
Virco discovered that old equipment was generating too
much scrap steel. By investing in new equipment, the com-
pany not only reduced waste generation but cut costs as well.
The company's steel scrap tracking system depends on a
small group of employees in the inspection department.
These employees prepare monthly scrap reports that are
used to measure production efficiency and to compare the
reports obtained from the scrap recyclers. Basically, this en-
tails tracking the weight of raw materials bought, the
weight of these same materials in the furniture produced,
and the weight of scrap materials. The weight of the mate-
rials in the furniture and the weight of the scrap materials
should add up to the weight of the materials purchased. In
this manner, scrap generation is monitored as an indicator
of production efficiency.
In 1993, Virco's tracking system revealed a steadily rising
scrap rate. Old equipment was identified as the culprit, and
Virco decided to invest in new fabrication equipment. Thus,
by tracking its steel scrap generation so precisely, the compa-
ny was able to make an educated choice about improving its
production process.
Besides saving money over the long term, the switch has
increased employee safety, saved energy, improved product
quality, and curtailed steel scrap generation. Comparing the
1993 and 1994 scrap reports, Virco found that it had elimi-
nated more than 680,000 pounds of steel scrap thanks to
the new equipment. This translates into a savings of approx-
imately $270,000 in material costs alone. These reductions
are significant, especially in light of
the fact that Virco's production
rate increased by more than 10
percent in 1994. Virco expects fur-
ther reductions in its scrap steel
rate in 1995.
-------
WasteWi$e Update
Measuring Waste Reduction:
Slimming Down
Waste by Reducing
Bulk Mail
Sometimes the best way to measure waste preven-
tion is to go to the source. That's the approach
the Northeast Utilities Service Company took
when it launched a pilot program at its corpo-
rate center to reduce nonessential and duplicate
pieces of bulk mail. By measuring the amount of incom-
ing mail, Northeast Utilities estimated that between July
1, 1994, and December 31, 1994, the company reduced
the amount of third-class (bulk) mail by 39,000 pounds
and advertising by 3,000 pounds.
Prior to initiating the program, Northeast Utilities de-
termined that its corporate center received approximately
3,200 pounds of mail per week. To arrive at this number,
employees at the corporate center mail room weighed
daily mail deliveries and recorded the results for
a week. While sorting mail for regular inter-
nal delivery, these employees also re-
moved nonessential mail such as
consumer products catalogs, brochures,
flyers, and pamphlets; mail addressed to
employees who had left the compa-
ny; and duplicate pieces of bulk mail.
They placed this mail in separate
containers for weighing. To the com-
pany's surprise, this nonessential,
duplicate, and outdated mail con-
stituted 42 percent of all mail re-
ceived. This percentage was
consistent with measurements
conducted at three other com-
pany facilities.
To reduce its mail waste,
Northeast Utilities initiated a pro-
gram to remove employee names
from bulk mail lists. The compa-
ny contacted hundreds of trade
associations and product suppliers
directly by phone and letter ask-
ing them to update their mailing
lists. The company also distributed
i
kits to employees to help them remove
their names from mailing lists. The kits
included a supply of preprinted labels to
make it easy for employees to request removal of their
A Spotlight
Our Partners
names. Northeast Utilities estimates that over a six-month
period, the company requested that more than 15,000 em-
ployee names be removed from nonessential mailing lists.
Several months into the mail waste reduction program,
the company repeated the mail measurement process to
determine whether progress had been made. The compa-
ny found that it was receiving an average of 1,500 fewer
pounds per week of nonessential bulk mail.
To estimate the amount of nonessential bulk mail re-
duced in the first six months of the program, the company
extrapolated the average amount of bulk mail reduced dur-
ing a week of the program (1,500 pounds). Working from
this figure, the company estimated that it prevented nearly
40,000 pounds of nonessential bulk mail waste over a six-
month (25-week) period. Because the second round of
measurements took place relatively early on in the pro-
gram, additional reductions may have taken
place that are not accounted for. In addi-
tion, Northeast Utilities is con-
sidering remeasuring the bulk
mail to determine more accu-
rately the long-term reduc-
tions and account for seasonal
fluctuations.
Because of the initial suc-
cess and employee support
of the program, the com-
pany plans to expand it to
additional facilities.
Northeast Utilities concluded
that the avoided disposal and
x handling costs far outweigh the
costs of measuring and program
management.
For companies interested in
reducing the amount of
third class or bulk mail received,
one good place to start is the Mail Preference
Service, Direct Marketing Association, P.O.
Box 9008, Farmingdale, NY 11735-9008.
Companies can request the Direct
Marketing Association to remove names
from mailing lists or limit receipt of
bulk mail.
-------
WasteWi$e Update
Many software packages are available
to help companies measure waste reduc-
tion progress. While EPA does not endorse any particular prod-
uct, two software packages are profiled briefly here.
PackTrack®,developed by Johnson & Johnson, tracks,
measures, and reports on a company's waste reduction activi-
ties. PackTrack® can monitor the waste reduction results
from alterations in thousands of products or packaging mate-
rials simultaneously. A companion software program called
PackTrack Corporate® has the ability to analyze and summa-
rize the data PackTrack® has created. At Johnson & Johnson
alone, the software has tracked savings of more than 57 mil-
lion pounds of materials worth more than $50 million.
Accounting Software Application for Pollution
Prevention (ASAPP), developed by Electric Power
Research Institute, allows a company to track both haz-
ardous and nonhazardous waste generation, management,
and reduction activities (e.g., reuse and recycling), as well as
costs. For example, by using ASAPP one Baltimore Gas &
Electric facility discovered it could reduce its solid waste by
35 percent and reap an estimated $17,000 in annual savings.
For more information, call the WasteWi$e helpline at
1-800-EPA-WISE.
\A£iste\A!$e Measures Up:
More Than One Million
Tons Reduced in 1994
By measuring their waste reduction
efforts, WasteWi$e partners were able to
report nearly a quarter of a million
tons of waste prevented and close to
one million tons of materials collected
for recycling in 1994. In total, that's
enough material to fill the Houston
Astrodome more than five times! In
addition, WasteWi$e partners helped
create stronger markets for collected
recyclables by purchasing 23 different
kinds of products made from recycled materials.
These impressive results were compiled from the 1994
Annual Reporting Forms submitted by 170 WasteWi$e part-
ners. They demonstrate the power of voluntary actions to re-
duce waste and indicate the enormous potential of individual
companies to prevent waste and recycle.
EPA congratulates WasteWi$e partners for the leadership
and hard work that is making business waste reduction a suc-
cess. To order the report, or for more information, call the
WasteWi$e helpline at 1-800-EPA-WISE.
APPROACHES TO
COLLECTING DATA
Here are a few methods that can be used to collect data
for establishing a baseline and tracking progress in reducing
materials and waste.
Hauler records
Strengths: Hauler records can provide accurate data on the
weight or volume of waste collected at your facility, especially
if the hauler provides records of weight as recorded at the
landfill or only picks up when the company has verified that
the containers are full.
Limitations: Hauler records provide less accurate data if they
simply record the number and volume of containers emptied,
without noting the degree to which each container was full. They
also do not provide information on specific waste components
or reduction activities, nor do they account for materials (e.g.,
shipped products) that are disposed of outside the company.
Purchasing records
Strengths: Company purchasing records can provide data
on amounts of specific materials and products used, giving
an indication of potential waste generated. Reviewing records
can require less time and effort than reviewing specific activi-
ties that generate waste. Other records that may provide in-
formation are inventory, maintenance, and operating logs, as
well as supply, equipment, and raw materials invoices.
Limitations: If company purchasing is not centralized, the
records may be incomplete or require substantial effort to col-
lect and analyze. Comparisons of purchases from year to
year can be skewed by changes in the number of employees,
level of business, number of products manufactured, etc.
Employee surveys
Strengths: Surveys can be especially useful for measuring
specific waste prevention activities that involve many partici-
pants or materials that can be reduced through more than
one waste prevention activity (e.g., conservation of paper by
two-sided copying, reusing paper, and other actions).
Limitations: Unless they carefully record their use of a mate-
rial, employees may not always assess their waste reduction
activities accurately.
Waste sort
Strengths: By physically collecting, sorting, and weighing a
representative sample of waste material (often from company
dumpsters), waste sorts can provide quantitative information
about specific types of material generated.
Limitations: Waste sorts can require significant time and ef-
fort to conduct, especially to get a representative sample of
waste. They do not provide information on materials shipped
or mailed out of the facility or on specific waste-generating
practices.
-------
WasteWi$e Update
10
Measuring the effect of solid waste reduction ef-
forts can be particularly challenging for large
companies. Numerous initiatives across many
facilities can be difficult to track. Departments
often have different measuring techniques, and
separate divisions of the company sometimes have competing
priorities that make measurement more difficult.
The Eastman Kodak Company's Kodak Park facility in
Rochester, New York, has risen to the challenge of waste re-
duction measurement. With 20,000 employees in 200 build-
ings spanning 1,900 acres of land, the facility has found that
combining several measurement techniques, taking advantage
of existing data, and keeping employees informed about re-
sults have helped measurement initiatives succeed.
Many large companies facing the problem of prioritizing
environmental activities might feel that measuring waste pre-
Taking Advantage of
Existing Data
Large companies often find that gathering waste re-
duction measurement information can be challenging.
Kodak's advice? Tap into information that's already
been collected for other purposes, such as internal
records and reports to local governments. For example,
Kodak is required by law to report to Monroe County of-
ficials how much solid waste is disposed of, recycled,
and prevented at the facility. The county then reports the
data to New York State to help the state as-
sess the impact of its solid waste man-
agement plan. Because Kodak had
already determined how to collect
quality data from within the com-
pany and how to avoid double
counting and other pitfalls, the com-
pany didn't have to start measuring
from scratch.
vention is not as high a priority as, say, monitoring regulated
activities. But Kodak, which spends a lot of resources track-
ing its progress in other environmental areas, has come to the
conclusion that it pays to measure solid waste reduction.
"We measure our solid waste reduction activities to see if
they work and to see if they can save us money," says George
Thomas of Kodak's Health, Safety, and Environmental
Division and coordinator of the company's solid waste mea-
surement program.
Measurement Systems
In 1994, Kodak formed a team of employees to evaluate
and monitor the company's solid waste reduction mea-
surement initiatives. Team participants include building
service staff and representatives from various manufac-
turing operations that generate large amounts of waste.
The team relies on a variety of measurement techniques to
gauge the success of individual initiatives as well as facility-
wide achievements.
Snapshots
Kodak uses two common measurement techniques
to gauge the success of individual waste reduction
initiatives. In doing so, the company is able to
identify its successes and reassess those initiatives
with room for improvement.
The first method takes a project-specific approach to esti-
mating waste reduction and is based on a series of simple
calculations. Managers of individual waste reduction projects
report on a regular basis to the Health, Safety, and
Environment Department, supplying a steady stream of cur-
rent measurement statistics.
For example, Kodak redesigned its shipping pallets to use
less wood in each pallet. To measure waste prevented, Kodak
consulted purchasing records a year after the redesign to cal-
culate how much less wood (2 x 4s) was purchased for pallet
construction in 1994 than 1993. It turned out the company
purchased 1.1 million fewer board feet for pallet construction
in 1994, even though a similar number of pallets was used.
To translate this into pounds, the company multiplied this
number by five—the number of pounds in one board foot.
This works out to be a total savings of approximately 5.5
million pounds.
Using a second method known as extrapolation, Kodak
gauges how much waste could be reduced if individual pilot
waste reduction projects were implemented on a company-
wide basis. To do this, the company calculates the weight of
the material being reduced by the pilot project on a per per-
son basis. These weights are then multiplied by the total
number of employees company-wide.
-------
11
WasteWi$e Update
For example, to assess the recycling potential of commin-
gled paper, transparencies, newspapers, and magazines, the
facility initiated a two-month pilot study involving about
300 people. Collectors weighed the recyclable materials on a
daily basis during the study. The study revealed that the re-
cycling program diverted 2.2 pounds per person per month
(pppm) of commingled paper, 0.25 pounds pppm of trans-
parencies, and 4.4 pounds pppm of newspapers and maga-
zines. Kodak then multiplied these figures by the total
number of employees (20,000) to determine the potential
amount of material that could be recy-
cled if these actions were implemented
throughout the facility. It turns
out the company could divert
nearly 137,000 pounds of materi-
als if these recycling activities were
implemented facilitywide.
Picture
Besides looking at individual initiatives, Kodak uses
a sophisticated method to measure facilitywide
waste reduction progress. Kodak began measuring
overall solid waste reduction in 1994 by adapting
an existing tool called production indexing. A
team of company specialists developed the tool in 1990 to
track hazardous waste generation and reduction. Kodak has
found that the technique also effectively measures solid waste
reduction. The company now uses this technique to track the
overall percentage of improve-
ment in waste reduction from
year to year. In 1994, for exam-
ple, the company determined
that it had reduced its solid
waste generation by 11.8 percent
over 1993 levels.
How does the system work?
First, the company determines
the total annual solid waste gen-
eration for each of its operations
categories (office waste, produc-
tion waste, etc.). These figures are
obtained in part from the compa-
ny's Solid Waste Information
Management System
(SWIMS)—a computerized data-
base system originally developed
to track hazardous waste. The
database is accessed and updated
continuously over a facilitywide
network by dozens of employees
who generate or handle most of
Employee Participation:
Crucial to Measurement
Participation of employees
is critical to gathering infor-
mation for measurement. "At
Kodak, we try to make it as
painless as possible for em-
ployees to participate," ex-
plains George Thomas.
One way that Kodak has
been able to elicit the co-
operation of employees
is by sharing results.
"People are less likely to
want to help if they
think the information
they gave you just went into a black hole," said
Thomas. "They want to hear what useful and in-
teresting things have come from the information
they provided. The key to getting cooperation is
creating a dialogue with people."
the company's solid waste. The system tracks type and
amount of waste, how and where it is generated, and its
method of management.
To supplement SWIMS information, the company uses a
variety of other sources to compile waste generation figures,
including:
0 Production records.
0 Waste hauling records.
0 Records of recyclables collected.
0 Mandatory waste generation reports to the county's solid
waste management division.
Once waste generation figures are determined for each
operations category, they are divided by a common de-
nominator such as "production levels" or "dollars spent" to
arrive at an "indexed" waste rate for each category. This al-
lows the company to view its waste generation in relation
to an operations budget or how much product was pro-
duced—a much more informative number than flat waste
generation figures. Using this method, Kodak knows how
much waste it generates for every roll of film produced or
for every dollar spent on a certain operation. These "in-
dexed" waste rates can then be compared to waste rates
from previous years to determine the percent of waste re-
duction progress being made.
Using a production index affords several benefits. First,
fluctuating levels of production are accounted for from year
to year, making indexing a consistent measurement tool
over time. For example, the company might produce less
waste one year merely because it is simultaneously produc-
ing less product. Indexing ac-
counts for such variations.
Additionally, the system pro-
vides flexibility because waste
reduction can be measured in
relation to any kind of unit,
such as pounds of product pro-
duced or units of energy ex-
pended. And because this
method uses the previous year
as a baseline, it demands that
companies keep striving to re-
duce waste. "Even if you make
progress in the previous year,
you're back to square one as
soon as a new year rolls
around," says Thomas. "You
can't sit back and rest on your
laurels."
For more information on
Kodak's measurement methods,
contact George Thomas of
Kodak at 716 722-5264.
-------
WasteWi$e Update
12
Polaroid Reduces Waste Frame
by Frame
The Polaroid Company, based in Boston, Massachusetts,
has designed an efficient system for shipping and receiving
photographic materials that minimizes waste. For prepack-
aged products being sent back and forth between the com-
pany and its suppliers, Polaroid uses reusable corrugated
shipping "totes." These topless boxes, which are the same
size as the single-use boxes they replaced, contain
no recycled materials to ensure maximum
strength. (Boxes shipped by Polaroid to its cus-
tomers do have recycled content because they
will not be reused again and don't have to be as
durable.) Empty totes are easily folded and com-
pacted for return trips and are used an average of
20 times before they are recycled.
By using reusable totes, the company avoided
the use of more than 160,000 boxes and con-
served nearly 100 tons of corrugated in 1994.
Reusable totes also helped Polaroid's vendors
keep prices down on the various components
they send to the plant. Overall, the company saved more
than $70,000 in 1994 through reusables.
In addition, the company decided to standardize the size
of its reusable shipping "skids" (pallets) to accommodate all
of its shipping needs, including: incoming boxes packed
with products; outgoing, folded down empty boxes; and
outgoing boxes of consumer-ready products. This measure
conserved more than 4,000 pallets (80 tons of wood) and
saved Polaroid and its vendors $32,000 in 1994.
Like to
WasteWi$e would like to hear about your efforts to measure waste
prevention, whether they apply to specific waste prevention activities
or to your company's overall program. Also, if you have experience
with any tools or software we haven't covered in this issue, contact us
at 1-800-EPA-WISE.
wEPA
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
(5306W)
Washington, DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
------- |