United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste
and Emergency Response
(5305W)
EPA530-R-01-014
July 2001
www.epa.gov
Municipal Solid Waste in
The United States:
1999 Facts and Figures
G e n e r
Reduction
Disposal
Printed on paper that contains at least 30 percent postconsumer fiber.
-------
CHARACTERIZATION OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
IN THE UNITED STATES: 1999 UPDATE
Table of Contents
Chapter Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
Overview 1
What is Included in Municipal Solid Waste 4
Municipal Solid Waste in Perspective 4
Trends over Time 4
Municipal Solid Waste in 1999 6
Residential and Commercial Sources of MSW 11
Management of MSW 11
Overview 11
Source Reduction 12
Recycling 14
Disposal 15
Perspective for the Nation 17
For Further Information 17
1 INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY 18
Introduction 18
Background 18
The Solid Waste Management Hierarchy 18
New for this Year's Characterization Report 18
Overview of the Method 19
How this Report Can Be Used 20
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste: in Perspective 21
The Two Methodologies for Characterizing MSW: Site-Specific
Versus Materials Flows 21
Municipal Solid Waste Defined in Greater Detail 22
Other Subtitle D Wastes 24
Materials and Products Not Included in These Estimates 24
Overview of this Report 24
-------
Table of Contents
Chapter Page
2 CHARACTERIZATION OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE BY WEIGHT 28
Introduction 28
Municipal Solid Waste: Characterized by Material Type 32
Paper and Paperboard 32
Glass 37
Ferrous Metals 37
Aluminum 38
Plastics 41
Other Materials 44
Food Wastes 46
Yard Trimmings 47
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes 48
Summary of Materials in Municipal Solid Waste 48
Products in Municipal Solid Waste 51
Durable Goods 56
Nondurable Goods 61
Containers and Packaging 67
Summary 76
MSW Generation 76
MSW Recovery 77
3 MANAGEMENT OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE 92
Introduction 92
Source Reduction 92
Source Reduction Through Redesign 93
Modifying Practices to Reduce Materials Use 95
Reuse of Products and Packages 95
Management of Organic Materials 96
Recovery for Recycling (Including Composting) 97
Recyclables Collection 97
Recyclables Processing 100
Combustion 103
Residues from Waste Management Facilities 104
Landfills 105
Summary of Historical and Current MSW Management 107
4 SOURCE REDUCTION OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE 112
Introduction 112
Measuring Source Reduction 112
Source Reduction Facts 113
Source Reduction Benefits 115
Factors Impacting Source Reduction 117
-------
Table of Contents
Appendix Page
A Material Flows Methodology 118
Domestic Production 118
Converting Scrap 118
Adjustments for Imports/Exports 118
Diversion 118
Adjustments for Product Lifetime 121
Municipal Solid Waste Generation and Discards 121
B Source Reduction/Expansion for Individual Components of MSW - 1999 122
C Consumer Electronics in Municipal Solid Waste 124
Introduction 124
Consumer Electronics Products Included in this Report 125
Methodology 126
Definition of Terms 127
Data Collection and Research 127
Generation 127
Recovered for Recycling 130
Discards after Recovery 131
Results 131
Composition of Consumer Electronic Products 131
References 135
111
-------
List of Tables
Table Page
ES-1 Generation, Materials Recovery, Composting, and Discards of Municipal Solid Waste, 1960 to
1999 (In millions of tons) 2
ES-2 Generation, Materials Recovery, Composting, and Discards of Municipal Solid Waste, 1960 to
1999 (In pounds per person per day) 2
ES-3 Generation, Materials Recovery, Composting, and Discards of Municipal Solid Waste, 1960 to
1999 (In percent of total generation) 3
ES-4 Generation and Recovery of Materials in MSW, 1999 6
ES-5 Generation and Recovery of Products in MSW, 1999 9
ES-6 Tons Source Reduced 13
ES-7 1999 Source Reduction by Major Material Categories 14
Materials in the Municipal Solid Waste Stream, 1960 to 1999
1 Generated 29
2 Recovery 30
3 Discarded 31
Products in Municipal Solid Waste, 1999
4 Paper and Paperboard 32
5 Glass 35
6 Metal 39
7 Plastics 42
8 Rubber and Leather 46
Categories of Products in the Municipal Solid Waste Stream, 1960 to 1999
9 Generated 53
10 Recovery 54
11 Discarded 55
Products in MSW with Detail on Durable Goods, 1960 to 1999
12 Generated 57
13 Recovery 58
14 Discarded 59
Products in MSW with Detail on Nondurable Goods, 1960 to 1999
15 Generated 62
16 Recovery 63
17 Discarded 64
IV
-------
List of Tables (continued)
Table Page
Products in MSWwith Detail on Containers and Packaging, 1960 to 1999
18 Generated (by weight) 68
19 Generated (by percent) 69
20 Recovery (by weight) 70
21 Recovery (by percent) 71
22 Discarded (by weight) 72
23 Discarded (by percent) 73
Management of Municipal Solid Waste
24 Selected Examples of Source Reduction Practices 94
25 Number and Population Served by Curbside Recyclables Collection, Programs, 1999 99
26 Materials Recovery Facilities, 1999 101
27 Municipal Waste-to-Energy, 1999 104
28 Landfill Facilities, 1999 106
29 Generation, Materials Recovery, Composting, Combustion, and Discard of Municipal
Solid Waste, 1960 to 1999 108
Source Reduction of Municipal Solid Waste
30 1999 Source Reduction by Major Material Categories 113
31 Significant Source Reduction and source Expansion Within MSW 114
32 Source Reduction/(Expansion) for Functional Categories - 1999 115
Appendix B on Source Reduction
B-l Source Reduction/Expansion for Individual Components of MSW - 1999 122
Appendix C: Characterization of Selected Consumer Electronics in the United States
C-l Selected Consumer Electronics 126
C-2 Consumer Electronics Data Collection 127
C-3 Estimated Life of Selected Consumer Electronics 129
C-4 Total Generation of Consumer Electronics by Material in the Municipal
Waste Stream 131
C-5 Generation, Recovery, and Discards of Consumer Electronics in the Municipal Waste Stream,
1999 133
C-6 Selected Consumer Electronics as a Percentage of Total Miscellaneous Durable Goods and
Total MSW, 1999 134
-------
List of Figures
Figure Page
ES-1 Waste generation rates From 1960 to 1999 4
ES-2 Waste recycling rates From 1960 to 1999 5
ES-3 Total Waste Generation, 1999 7
ES-4 Products generated in MSW, 1999 8
ES-5 Number of Landfills in the U.S 15
ES-6 Management of MSW in the U.S, 1999 16
1 Municipal Solid Waste in the Universe of Subtitle D Wastes 23
1 -A Definition of Terms 25
Materials Generated and Recovered in Municipal Solid Waste
2 Paper and paperboard products generated in MSW, 1999 33
3 Paper generation and recovery, 1960 to 1999 34
4 Glass products generated in MSW, 1999 36
5 Glass generation and recovery, 1960 to 1999 36
6 Metal products generated in MSW, 1999 38
7 Metals generation and recovery, 1960 to 1999 40
8 Plastics products generated in MSW, 1999 44
9 Plastics generation and recovery, 1960 to 1999 45
10 Generation of materials in MSW, 1960 to 1999 49
11 Recovery and discards of MSW, in 1960 to!999 50
12 Materials recovery, 1999 50
13 Materials generated and discarded in MSW, 1999 52
Products Generated and Recovered in Municipal Solid Waste
14 Generation of products in MSW, 1960 to 1999 77
15 Nondurable goods generated and discarded in MSW, 1999 78
16 Containers and packaging generated and discarded in MSW, 1999 79
Management of Municipal Solid Waste
17 Diagram of solid waste management 93
18 Population served by curbside recycling, 1999 98
19 States with deposit/redemption legislation 99
20 MRF throughput, 1999 100
21 Mixed waste processing throughput, 1999 102
22 MSW composting capacity, 1999 102
23 Yard trimmings composting programs, 1999 103
24 MSW waste-to-energy capacity, 1999 105
25 Number of landfills in the U.S., 1999 106
26 Municipal solid waste management, 1960 to 1999 107
vi
-------
List of Figures (continued)
Figure Page
Appendix A: Material Flows Methodology
A-1 Material flows methodology for estimating generation of products and materials
inMSW 119
A-2 Material flow methodology for estimating discards of products and materials in
MSW 120
Appendix C: Characterization of Selected Consumer Electronics in the United States
C-1 Selected Consumer Electronics 125
C-2 Life Cycle for Consumer Electronics 132
vu
-------
Executive Summary
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
IN THE UNITED STATES: 1999 FACTS AND FIGURES
Executive Summary
OVERVIEW
This report describes the national municipal solid waste (MSW) stream based on data collected
from 1960 through 1999. The historical perspective is useful for establishing trends in types of MSW
generated and in the ways it is managed. In this Executive Summary, we briefly describe the
methodology used to characterize MSW in the United States, and provide the latest facts and figures
on MSW generation, source reduction, recycling, and disposal. Details regarding the characterization of
municipal solid waste are presented in Chapters 2 through 4.
In this report, we are providing estimates for source reduction (waste prevention) for the first
time. Also, we are providing additional detail on generation, recycling, and disposal of consumer
electronics products. This consumer electronics information is briefly summarized in the Executive
Summary and in Chapter 2, with additional detail in Appendix B.
In the United States, we generated approximately 229.9 million tons of MSW in 1999 - an
increase of 6.9 million tons from 1998. This is about a 3 percent increase in waste generation from
1998. Excluding composting, the amount of MSW recycled increased to 50.8 million tons, an increase
of 2.4 million tons. This is a 5 percent increase in the tons recycled since 1998. The tons recovered for
recycling (including composting) rose to 64 million tons in 1999, up from 62 million tons in 1998. The
recovery rate for recycling (including composting) was 27.8 percent in 1999, up from 27.6 percent in
1998. (See Tables ES-1 and ES-2 and Figures ES-1 and ES-2).
* Data shown for 1998 has been adjusted to reflect the latest revisions to the data and methodology and, therefore,
may differ slightly from the same measure reported previously. For instance, the recycling rate for 1998 was revised
from last year's report, to equal 27.6 percent.
-------
Executive Summary
Table ES-1
GENERATION, MATERIALS RECOVERY, COMPOSTING,
AND DISCARDS OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, 1960-1999
(In millions of tons)
Millions of Tons
Generation
Recovery for recycling
Recovery for composting*
Total Materials Recovery
Discards after Recovery
1960
88.1
5.6
Neg.
5.6
82.5
1970
121.1
8.0
Neg.
8.0
113.0
1980
151.6
14.5
Neg.
14.5
137.1
1990
205.2
29.0
4.2
33.2
172.0
1994
214.4
42 2
8.5
50.6
163.7
1995
211.4
45.3
9.6
54.9
156.5
1997
219.1
47.3
12.1
59.4
159.8
1998
223.0
48.4
13.1
61.6
161.5
1999
229.9
50.8
13.1
63.9
166
* Composting of yard trimmings and food wastes. Does not include mixed MSW composting or backyard composting.
Source: Franklin Associates
Table ES-2
GENERATION, MATERIALS RECOVERY, COMPOSTING,
AND DISCARDS OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, 1960-1999
(In pounds per person per day)
Pounds per
Generation
Recovery for recycling
Recovery for composting*
Total Materials Recovery
Discards after Recovery
Population (thousands)
1960
2.68
0.17
Neg.
0.17
2.51
179,
979
1970
3.25
0.22
Neg.
0.22
3.04
203,98
4
1980
3.66
0.35
Neg.
0.35
3.31
227,25
5
Person per Day
1990
4.50
0.64
0.09
0.73
3.77
249,90
7
1994
4.51
0.89
0.18
1.06
3.44
260,68
2
1995
4.40
0.94
0.20
1.14
3.26
263,16
8
1997
4.49
0.97
0.25
1.22
3.27
267,64
5
1998
4.52
0.98
0.27
1.25
3.27
270,56
1
1999
4.62
1.02
0.26
1.28
3.33
272,69
1
*Composting of yard trimmings and food wastes. Does not include mixed MSW composting or backyard composting.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates
MSW generation in 1999 rose to 4.62 pounds per person per day, up from 4.52 pounds per
person per day in 1998. This is an increase of 0.1 pounds per person per day compared to 1998. The
recycling rate in 1999 was 1.28 pounds per person per day, up from 1.25 in 1998. Discards after
recycling rose to 3.33 from the 1998 value of 3.27 pounds per person per day (Table ES-3).
-------
Executive Summary
Table ES-3
GENERATION, MATERIALS RECOVERY, COMPOSTING,
AND DISCARDS OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, 1960-1999
(In percent of total generation)
Percent of Total Generation
Generation
Recovery for recycling
Recovery for composting*
Total Materials Recovery
Discards after Recovery
1960
100.0
%
6.4%
Neg.
6.4%
93.6%
1970
100.0
%
6.6%
Neg.
6.6%
93.4%
1980
100.0%
9.6%
Neg.
9.6%
90.4%
1990
100.0%
14.2%
2.0%
16.2%
83.8%
1994
100.0%
19.7%
4.0%
23.6%
76.4%
1995
100.0%
21.5%
4.5%
26.0%
74.0%
1997
100.0%
21.6%
5.5%
27.1%
72.9%
1998
100.0%
21.7%
5.9%
27.6%
72.4%
1999
100.0%
22.1%
5.7%
27.8%
72.2%
*Composting of yard trimmings and food wastes. Does not include mixed MSW composting or backyard composting.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates
The state of the economy has a direct impact on consumption and waste generation. With the
strong economic growth that has occurred throughout the 1990s, waste generation has continued to
increase. Source reduction efforts have helped to dampen the increases in waste generation. On-site
yard waste composting, use of mulching mowers, and reductions in the weight of beverage containers
have been the main reasons for this success.
Using a baseline year of 1990, and comparing the actual waste generation to what the waste
generation would have been without source reduction, in 1999 about 50 million tons of waste was
prevented, or source reduced. In 1999 229.9 million tons of MSW were generated. Therefore, had this
level of source reduction not occurred, 22 percent more MSW would have been generated.
-------
Executive Summary
g
"ro
-------
Executive Summary
Executive Summary
Waste generation rates would be even higher, if not for waste prevention practices such as on-
site composting, leaving grass clippings on the lawn, and lightweighting of packaging materials.
Generation of yard trimmings during 1999 is estimated at 27.7 million tons, down from 35 million tons in
1990 (Table ES-4). Source reduction of MSW increased from 630,000 tons in 1992 to 50 million tons
in 1999. This is explained further at the end of this Executive Summary and in Chapter 4.
Over time, recycling rates have increased from 10 percent of the MSW generated in 1980 to
16 percent in 1990, to the current 28 percent. Disposal has decreased from 90 percent of the amount
generated in 1980 to 72.2 percent of MSW in 1999. This compares to 72.4 percent in 1998.
g
E
"o
>,
o
U)
ro
Figure ES-2: Waste Recycling Rates From 1960 to 1999
r
1960
1970
1980
1990
Total Waste Recycling (Y1)
Percent Recycling (Y2)
50.0%
40.0%
TI
CD
30.0% 8
^
zi
CD
O
*<
a_
5'
CQ
0.0%
1999
-------
Executive Summary
Table ES-4
GENERATION AND RECOVERY OF MATERIALS IN MSW, 1999
(In millions of tons and percent of generation of each material)
Paper and paperboard
Glass
Metals
Steel
Aluminum
Other nonferrous metals*
Total metals
Plastics
Rubber and leather
Textiles
Wood
Other materials
Total Materials in Products
Other wastes
Food, other**
Yard trimmings
Miscellaneous inorganic wastes
Total Other Wastes
TOTAL MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
Weight
Generated
87.5
12.6
13.3
3.1
1.4
17.8
24.2
6.2
9.1
12.3
4.0
173.6
25.2
27.7
3.4
56.3
229.9
Weight
Recovered
36.7
2.9
4.5
0.9
0.9
6.3
1.4
0.8
1.2
0.7
0.9
50.8
0.6
12.6
Neg.
13.1
63.9
Recovery
as a Percent
of Generation
41.9%
23.4%
33.6%
27.8%
66.9%
35.2%
5.6%
12.7%
12.9%
5.9%
21.4%
29.3%
2.2%
45.3%
Neg.
23.3%
27.8%
ncludes Wastes from residential, commercia , and institutional sources.
*Includes lead from lead-acid batteries.
**Includes recovery of paper for composting.
Neg.= Less than 50,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE IN 1999
EPA has two ways of analyzing the 229.9 million tons of MSW generated in 1999. The first is
by material (paper and paperboard, yard trimmings, food scraps, plastics, metals, glass, wood,
rubber, leather and textiles, and other), and the second is by several major product categories. The
product-based categories are containers and packaging; nondurable goods (e.g.,
-------
Executive Summary
newspapers); durable goods (e.g., appliances); yard trimmings; food scraps; and other materials.
Materials in MSW
Figure ES-3 provides a breakdown, by weight, of the MSW materials generated in 1999.
Paper and paperboard products made up the largest component of MSW generated (38 percent), and
yard trimmings comprised the second-largest material component (12 percent). Glass, metals, plastics,
wood, and food wastes each constituted between 5 and 11 percent of the total MSW generated.
Rubber, leather, and textiles combined made up about 7 percent of MSW, while other miscellaneous
wastes made up approximately 2 percent of the MSW generated in 1999.
A portion of each material category in MSW was recycled or composted in 1999. The
highest rates of recycling were achieved with yard trimmings, metals and paper. About 45 percent
(12.6 million tons) of yard trimmings were recovered for composting in 1999. This represents more
than a three-fold increase since 1990. About 42 percent (37 million tons) of paper and paperboard
were recovered for recycling in 1999. Recycling of these organic materials alone diverted over 21
percent of municipal solid waste from landfills and incineration.
Figure ES-3:1999 Total Waste Generation - 230 Million Tons
(Before Recycling)
Rubber, Leather, & Textiles 6.6%
Percent of total generation and millions of tons generated in 1999
-------
Executive Summary
In addition, about 6.3 million tons of metals were recovered for recycling, or 35 percent. Table ES-4
lists the recycling rates for 1999 for all of the materials categories.
Products in MSW
Figure ES-4 shows the breakdown, by weight, of product categories generated in 1999.
Containers and packaging comprised the largest portion of products generated, at 33 percent (76
million tons) of total MSW generation. Nondurable goods were the second-largest fraction, comprising
about 27 percent (62 million tons). The third-largest category of products is durable goods, which
comprised 15.4 percent (35 million tons) of total MSW generation.
Figure ES-4: Products Generated in MSW -1999
(Total Weight = 230 million tons)
Containers and Packaging 33.1%
Food Waste 10.9% |
Percent of total generation and millions of tons generated in 1999
Table ES-5 shows the generation and recovery of the product categories in MSW. This table
shows that recovery of containers and packaging was the highest of the three product categories - 37
percent of containers and packaging generated in 1999 was recovered for recycling. About 44 percent
of aluminum packaging was recovered (mostly beverage cans), while 57 percent of steel packaging
(mostly cans) was recovered. Paper and paperboard packaging recovery was estimated at 51 percent;
corrugated containers accounted for most of that figure.
-------
Executive Summary
Table ES-5
GENERATION AND RECOVERY OF PRODUCTS IN MSW
BY MATERIAL, 1999
(In millions of tons and percent of generation of each product)
Durable goods
Ferrous metals
Aluminum
Other non-ferrous metals
Total metals
Glass
Plastics
Rubber and leather
Wood
Textiles
Other materials
Total durable goods
Nondurable goods
Paper and paperboard
Plastics
Rubber and leather
Textiles
Other materials
Total nondurable goods
Containers and packaging
Steel
Aluminum
Total metals
Glass
Paper and paperboard
Plastics
Wood
Other materials
Total containers and packaging
Other wastes
Food wastes
Yard trimmings
Miscellaneous inorganic wastes
Total other wastes
TOTAT ivnnvrriPAT
-------
Executive Summary
Overall recovery of nondurable goods was 26.8 percent in 1999. The increase in recovery of
paper and paperboard products has been due to increases in recovery, over time, from all categories.
Newspapers constituted the largest portion of this recovery, with 59 percent of newspapers generated
being recovered for recycling. Fifty-three percent of high-grade office papers and 23 percent of
magazines were recovered in 1999.
Also within the nondurable goods, paper and paperboard category, key products whose
recovery rose the most from 1997 to 1999 include directories, standard (A) mail*, and newspapers. In
1997, 12.8 percent of directories were recovered, which increased to 16.2 percent in 1999 (100,000
tons per year in 1999). Recovery of standard (A) mail has increased from 18.1 percent in 1997, to
22.1 percent in 1999 (1.2 million tons in 1999). Recovery of newspapers increased from 54 percent of
newspapers in 1996 to 59 percent in 1999 (8.2 million tons in 1999.)
This year, selected consumer electronics, a new subcategory within nondurable goods, was
measured for the first time. The "selected consumer electronics" category consists of video products
such as TVs, VCRs and camcorders; audio products such as radios and some stereo systems; and
information products such as telephones, personal computers, and computer monitors and printers. This
"selected consumer electronics" category probably contains a major portion of consumer electronics,
but it may underestimate generation of this category, because of data limitations**.
*Standard (A) mail was formerly called 3rd class mail by the U.S. Postal Service.
** "Selected consumer electronics," as a subset of nondurable goods, may be an underestimation because certain
types of consumer electronics such as stereo systems made of components, were not included due to lack of sales
data. In addition, there was limited data on consumer electronic products shipped directly from manufacturers (or
their representatives) to large consumers. These products, though not included in "selected consumer electronics,"
are still included in the nondurable goods category.
10
-------
Executive Summary
In 1999, more than 400 million units of "selected consumer electronics" were shipped, up from
less than 150 million units shipped in 1984. "Selected consumer electronics," compared with all MSW,
resulted in 0.8 percent of the MSW generation; 0.3 percent of the recovery, and 1 percent of the
discards. Recovery, which could be overestimated, was 0.1 percent for video products, 21 percent for
information products, and negligible for audio products.
The nondurable category also includes clothing and other textile nondurable products - 15.2
percent of these were recovered for recycling in 1999.
Overall, durable goods were recovered at a rate of 16.6 percent in 1999. Nonferrous metals
had one of the highest recovery rates, at 67 percent, due to the high rate of lead recovery from lead-
acid batteries. Twenty-seven percent of ferrous metals were recovered from appliances and
miscellaneous durable goods. Excluding retreads and tire-derived fuel use, more than 26 percent of
tires also were recovered for recycling.
One of the products with particularly high recovery rates was lead-acid batteries, at 96.9
percent. Other products with particularly high recovery rates were corrugated boxes (65.1 percent),
steel in major appliances (52.2 percent), steel cans (56.1 percent), aluminum beverage cans (54.5
percent) and newspapers (59 percent).
RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL SOURCES OF MSW
Sources of MSW, as characterized in this report, include both residential and commercial
locations. We estimated residential waste (including waste from multi-family dwellings) to be 55 to 65
percent of total MSW generation. Commercial waste (including waste from schools, some industrial
sites where packaging is generated, and businesses) constitutes between 35 and 45 percent of MSW.
Local and regional factors, such as climate and level of commercial activity, contribute to these
variations.
MANAGEMENT OF MSW
Overview
EPA's integrated waste management hierarchy includes the following three components,
11
-------
Executive Summary
listed in order of preference:
Source reduction (or waste prevention), including reuse of products and on-site, or backyard
composting of yard trimmings.
Recycling, including off-site or community composting.
Disposal, including waste combustion (preferably with energy recovery) and landfilling.
Although EPA encourages the use of strategies that emphasize the top of the hierarchy
whenever possible, all three components remain important within an integrated waste management
system.
Source Reduction
EPA has been measuring recycling rates for many years. When EPA established its waste
management hierarchy in 1989, it emphasized the importance of reducing the amount of waste created,
reusing whenever possible, and then recycling what is left. When municipal solid waste is reduced and
reused, this is called "source reduction" - meaning the material never enters the waste stream. It is
managed at the source of generation.
Source reduction, also called waste prevention, includes the design, manufacture, purchase, or
use of materials, such as products and packaging, to reduce their amount or toxicity before they enter
the MSW management system. Some examples of source reduction activities are:
Designing products or packaging to reduce the quantity or the toxicity of the materials used, or
to make them easy to reuse.
Reusing existing products or packaging; for example, refillable bottles, reusable pallets, and
reconditioned barrels and drums.
Lengthening the lives of products such as tires to postpone disposal.
Using packaging that reduces the amount of damage or spoilage to the product.
Managing nonproduct organic wastes (e.g., food scraps, yard trimmings) through on-site
composting or other alternatives to disposal (e.g., leaving grass clippings on the lawn).
EPA recently has been able to estimate source reduction for the nation based on national
12
-------
Executive Summary
production and disposal data. This has demonstrated some major successes in this area. In 1999, the
U.S. prevented more than 50 million tons of municipal solid waste from entering the waste stream.
Containers and packaging represent approximately 24 percent of the materials source
reduced in 1999, in addition to nondurable goods (e.g., newspapers, clothing) at 18
percent, durable goods (e.g., appliances, furniture, tires) at 11 percent, and other
MSW (e.g., yard trimmings, food scraps) at 47 percent.
As the nation has begun to realize the value of its resources, both financial and material, greater
efforts have been made to reduce waste generation. Table ES-6 shows that steady progress has been
made in waste prevention since 1990.
Table ES-6
Year
1992
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
Tons Source
Reduced
630,000
7,974,000
21,418,000
23,286,000
32,019,000
40,319,000
50,042,000
Table ES-7 shows that almost half of the total waste prevented since 1990 comes from organic
waste materials such as yard trimmings and food wastes. This is likely the result of many locally enacted
bans on the disposal of yard waste from landfills around the country, as well as successful campaigns
promoting backyard composting and mulching lawn mowers.
13
-------
Executive Summary
Table ES-7
1999 Source Reduction by
Major Material Categories
Waste Stream Tons
Durable Goods (e.g. appliances, furniture)
Nondurable Goods (e.g. newspapers & clothing)
Containers & Packaging (e.g. bottles & boxes)
Other MSW (e.g. yard trimmings & food scraps)
Total Source Reduction (1990 baseline)
Source Reduced
5,289,000
8,956,000
12,004,000
23,793,000
50,042,000
But there also have been several materials within the categories, above, whose disposal rates
have increased. In particular, clothing and footwear show significant increased disposal rates, as do
plastic containers. Some of the rise in plastics use can be attributed to the long-term trend of
manufacturers substituting their glass packaging with plastic.
However, not all of these increases are due to material substitution. Much of this nation's
increased waste generation is due to the booming economy of the 1990s. Americans now find
themselves with a growing amount of discretionary spending dollars in their pockets after paying the
mortgage or rent. As a result of this growth in Personal Consumption Expenditure (PCE) dollars,
otherwise referred to as consumer spending, we have increasingly become a nation of consumers. The
result is an increasing need for the disposal of municipal solid waste. Still, the United States has made
progress in the area of waste reduction and reuse, as indicated by the 50 million tons of source
reduction in 1999 (1990 baseline).
Recycling
Recycling (including community composting) recovered 27.8 percent (63.9 million tons) of
MSW in 1999.
There were more than 9,300 curbside recycling programs in the United States in 1998. This is
up from about 8,900 curbside recycling programs in 1997.
About 3,800 yard trimmings composting programs were reported in 1998. This compared to
about 3,500 yard trimmings composting programs reported in 1997.
14
-------
Executive Summary
Disposal
An estimated 14.8 percent of MSW was combusted in 1999, down from 15.4 percent in
1998.** During 1999, about 57.4 percent of MSW was landfilled. Figure ES-5 shows that the number
of municipal solid waste landfills decreased substantially over the last 10 years,
from nearly 8,000 in 1988 to 2,314 in 1998 to 2,216 in 1999 - while the average landfill size
increased. At the national level, capacity does not appear to be a problem, although regional
dislocations sometimes occur.
Figure ES-5: Number of Landfills in the U.S.
OUULT
ynnn-
/ \j\j\j
finnn-
ouuu^
cnnn-
ouuu^
ACtCtCt-
'HJUU^
onnrv
oUULr
2000-
1000-
n
u
79
8
24
8
7379
I
89
6326
I
90
i i
i i
5812
I
91
i i
i i
53
9
86
2
44
\i
82
13
35
9
58
4
31 9^
I
95
3091
I
96
2514 i 1
231^...221£
I I
97 98 99
Source: BioCycle magazine, 1989-2000
**Data shown for 1998 has been adjusted to reflect the latest revisions to data and methodology and therefore may
differ slightly from the same measure reported previously. For instance the combustion fraction for 1998 was revised
downward from last year's report, to equal 15.4 percent.
15
-------
Executive Summary
As recovery rates have remained stable, and combustion decreased slightly, the percentage of
MSW discarded to landfills increased slightly from 1997 to 1999. Over the long term, the
tonnage landfilled rose from 123.4 million tons in 1980 to 131.9 million tons landfilled in 1999.
The net per capita discard rate (after recovery for recycling) was 3.33 pounds per person per
day in 1999, up slightly from 3.27 pounds per person per day in 1998 (Table ES-2).
Figure ES-6 shows MSW recovered for recycling (including composting) and disposed of by
combustion and landfilling in 1999. In 1999, 63.9 million tons (27.8 percent) of MSW was recycled,
34 million tons was combusted (14.8 percent) and 131.9 million tons (57.4 percent) was landfilled.
(Relatively small amounts of this total undoubtedly were littered or illegally dumped rather than
landfilled.)
Figure ES-6: Management of MSW in the U.S.
Land Disposal
57%
Combustion
15%
Recovery
28%
16
-------
Executive Summary
PERSPECTIVE FOR THE NATION
As economic growth results in more products and materials being generated, there will be an
increased need to invest in source reduction activities such as lightweighting of products and packaging,
reuse of products, grasscycling, and backyard composting. Also important, will be utilizing existing
recycling and composting facilities, further developing this infrastructure, and buying recycled products,
to conserve resources and minimize our dependence on disposal through combustion and landfilling.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
This report and related additional data is available on the Internet at www.epa.gov/osw.
Additional information on source reduction is available in National Source Reduction
Characterization Report for Municipal Solid Waste in the United States., EPA530-R-99-034,
November 1999.
17
-------
Chapter 1: Introduction and Methodology
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY
INTRODUCTION
This report is the most recent in a series of reports sponsored by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency to characterize municipal solid waste (MSW) in the United States. Together with the
previous reports, this report provides a historical database for a 39-year characterization (by weight) of
the materials and products in MSW.
Management of the nation's MSW continues to be a high priority for communities as we enter
the 21st century. The concept of integrated solid waste management - source reduction of wastes
before they enter the waste stream, recovery of generated wastes for recycling (including composting),
and environmentally sound disposal through combustion facilities and landfills that meet current
standards - is being used by communities as they plan for the future.
In this chapter, background is provided on integrated waste management and this year's
characterization report, followed by a brief overview of the method. Next, is a section on the variety of
uses for the information in this report. Then, more detail on the method is provided, followed by a
description of the contents of the remainder of the report.
BACKGROUND
The Solid Waste Management Hierarchy
EPA's 1989 Agenda for Action endorsed the concept of integrated waste management, by
which municipal solid waste is reduced or managed through several different practices, which can be
tailored to fit a particular community's needs. The components of the hierarchy are:
Source reduction (including reuse of products and backyard composting of yard trimmings).
Recycling of materials (including composting).
Waste combustion (preferable with energy recovery) and landfilling.
New for This Year's Characterization Report
For the first time, this characterization report includes estimates of the amount of waste
prevented, or source reduced, along with the quantities of MSW recycled, combusted, and landfilled.
The report, therefore, now addresses waste and materials managed by each practice in the hierarchy.
Because the method for estimating source reduction expands on the method used to develop the
information on recycling and disposal, the recycling and disposal data are presented first, in Chapters 2
and 3, and the waste prevention, or source reduction, information is presented in Chapter 4. Another
addition this year is detailed information on selected consumer electronics, which is provided in Chapter
2 and in Appendix C.
18
-------
Chapter 1: Introduction and Methodology
Overview of the Method
Readers should note that this report characterizes the municipal solid waste stream of the
nation as a whole. This data can be used to at the national level. It can also be used to address state,
regional, and local situations, where more detailed data is not available or would be too expensive to
gather. More detail on uses for the information in this report for both national and local uses is provided
later in this chapter.
The report is based on a material flows method. Often at the state or local level, recycling
rates are developed by counting and weighing all the recyclables collected, and aggregating this data at
the county or state level, yielding a recycling rate. At the national level, instead we use a material flows
method, which relies heavily on a mass balance approach. From data gathered from trade associations,
key businesses and industries, and supported by government data from sources such as the Department
of Commerce and the U.S. Census Bureau, we estimate tons of materials and products generated,
recycled, or discarded. Other sources of data, such as waste characterizations and surveys performed
by governments, industry, or the press, supplement these data.
Information on amounts disposed, whether by combustion or landfilling, also is important - this
comes from national sources as well. The data is adjusted by imports and exports from the U.S., where
necessary. Allowances are made for the average life spans of different products.
Important in any estimation of municipal solid waste generation, is defining what is and is not
included in municipal solid waste. EPA includes those materials which historically have been handled in
the municipal solid waste stream - those materials from municipal sources, sent to municipal landfills. In
this report, MSW includes wastes such as product packaging, newspapers, office and classroom
paper, bottles, boxes, wood pallets, food scraps, grass clippings, clothing, furniture, appliances,
automobile tires, consumer electronics, paint, and batteries.
A common error in using this report is to assume that all nonhazardous wastes are included. As
shown later in this chapter, municipal solid waste as defined here does not include construction and
demolition debris, biosolids (sewage sludges), industrial process wastes, or a number of other wastes
that may well go to a municipal waste landfill. These materials, over time, have tended to be handled
separately and are not included in the totals in this report. EPA has addressed several of these materials
separately, for instance in Biosolids Generation, Use, and Disposal in the United States, EPA 530-
R-99-009 September 1999 and Characterization of Building-Related Construction and
Demolition Debris in the United States, EPA530-R-98-010, May 1998. Recycling (including
composting) is encouraged for these materials as well.
In addition, the source of municipal solid waste is important. EPA's figures include municipal
solid waste from homes, institutions such as schools and prisons, commercial sources such as
restaurants and small businesses, and occasional industrial sources. MSW does not include wastes of
other types or from other sources such as automobile bodies, municipal sludges, combustion ash, and
industrial process wastes that also might be disposed of in municipal waste landfills or incinerators.
19
-------
Chapter 1: Introduction and Methodology
HOW THIS REPORT CAN BE USED
Nationwide. The data in this report provide a nationwide picture of municipal solid waste
generation and management. The historical perspective is particularly useful in establishing trends and
highlighting the changes that have occurred over the years, both in types of wastes generated and in the
ways they are managed. This perspective on MSW and its management is useful in assessing national
solid waste management needs and policy. The consistency in method and scope aids in the use of the
document for reporting over time. The report is, however, of equal or greater value as a solid waste
management planning tool for state and local governments and private firms.
Local or state level. At the local or state level, the data in this report can be used to develop
approximate (but quick) estimates of MSW generation in a defined area. That is, the data on generation
of MSW per person nationally may be used to estimate generation in a city or other local area based on
the population in that area. This can be of value when a "ballpark" estimate of MSW generation in an
area is needed. For example, communities may use such an estimate to determine the potential viability
of regional versus single community solid waste management facilities. This information can help define
solid waste management planning areas and the planning needed in those areas. However, for
communities making decisions where knowledge of the amount and composition of MSW is crucial,
e.g., where a solid waste management facility is being sited, local estimates of the waste stream should
be made.
Another useful feature of this report for local planning is the information provided on MSW
trends. Changes over time in total MSW generation and the mix of MSW materials can affect the need
for and use of various waste management alternatives. Observing trends in MSW generation can help in
planning an integrated waste management system that includes facilities sized and designed for years of
service.
While the national average data are useful as a checkpoint against local MSW characterization
data, any differences between local and national data should be examined carefully. There are many
regional variations that require each community to examine its own waste management needs. Factors
such as local and regional availability of suitable landfill space, proximity of markets for recovered
materials, population density, commercial and industrial activity, and climatic and groundwater
variations all may motivate each community to make its own plans.
Specific reasons for regional differences may include:
Variations in climate and local waste management practices, which greatly influence generation
of yard trimmings. For instance, yard trimmings exhibit strong seasonal variations in most
regions of the country. Also, the level of backyard composting in a region will affect generation
of yard trimmings.
Differences in the scope of waste streams. That is, a local landfill may be receiving construction
and demolition debris in addition to MSW, but this report addresses MSW only.
20
-------
Chapter 1: Introduction and Methodology
A variance in the per capita generation of some products, such as newspapers and telephone
directories, depending upon the average size of the publications. Typically, rural areas will
generate less of these products on a per person basis than urban areas.
The level of commercial activity in a community. This influences the generation rate of some
products, such as office paper, corrugated boxes, wood pallets, and food wastes from
restaurants.
Variations in economic activity, which affect waste generation in both the residential and the
commercial sectors.
Local and state regulations and practices. Deposit laws, bans on landfilling of specific products,
and variable-rate pricing for waste collection are examples of practices that can influence a
local waste stream.
While caution should be used in applying the data in this report, for some areas, the national
breakdown of MSW by material may be the only such data available for use in comparing and planning
waste management alternatives. Planning a curbside recycling program, for example, requires an
estimate of household recyclables that may be recovered. If resources are not available to adequately
estimate these materials by other means, local planners may turn to the national data. This is useful in
areas that may have typical MSW generation or in areas where appropriate adjustments in the data can
be made to account for local conditions.
In summary, the data in this report can be used in local planning to:
Develop approximate estimates of total MSW generation in an area.
Check locally developed MSW data for accuracy and consistency.
Account for trends in total MSW generation and the generation of individual components.
Help set goals and measure progress in source reduction and recycling (including composting).
CHARACTERIZATION OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE: IN PERSPECTIVE
The Two Methodologies for Characterizing MSW: Site-Specific versus Materials Flows
There are two basic approaches to estimating quantities of municipal solid waste at the national
level.
Site-specific studies. In the first method, which is site-specific, sampling, sorting, and
weighing the individual components of the waste stream could be used. This method is useful in defining
a local waste stream, especially if large numbers of samples are taken over several seasons. Results of
sampling also increase the body of knowledge about variations due to climatic and seasonal changes,
population density, regional differences, and the like. In addition, quantities of MSW components such
as food and yard trimmings can only be estimated through sampling and weighing studies.
21
-------
Chapter 1: Introduction and Methodology
A disadvantage of sampling studies based on a limited number of samples is that they may be
skewed and misleading if, for example, atypical circumstances were experienced during the sampling.
These circumstances could include an unusually wet or dry season, delivery of some unusual wastes
during the sampling period, or errors in the sampling methodology. Any errors of this kind will be
greatly magnified when a limited number of samples are taken to represent a community's entire waste
stream for a year. Magnification of errors could be even more serious if a limited number of samples
was relied upon for making the national estimates of MSW. Also, extensive sampling would be
prohibitively expensive for making the national estimates. An additional disadvantage of sampling
studies is that they do not provide information about trends unless performed in a consistent manner
over a long period of time.
Of course at the state or local level, sampling may not be necessary - many states and localities
count all materials recovered for recycling, and many weigh all wastes being disposed, to generate state
or local recycling rates from the "ground up." To use these figures at the national level would require all
states to perform these studies, and perform them in a way conducive to developing a national
summary, which so far has not been practical.
Materials flow. The second approach to quantifying and characterizing the municipal solid
waste stream - the method used for this report - utilizes a material flows approach to estimate the
waste stream on a nationwide basis. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, EPA's Office of Solid Waste
and its predecessors at the Public Health Service sponsored work that began to develop this
methodology. This report represents the latest version of this database that has been evolving for more
than 20 years.
The material flows methodology is based on production data (by weight) for the materials and
products in the waste stream. Generation data is the result of making specific adjustments to the
production data by each material and product category. Adjustments are made for imports and exports
and for diversions from MSW (e.g., for building materials made of plastic and paperboard).
Adjustments also are made for the life spans of various products. Finally, food wastes and yard
trimmings and a small amount of miscellaneous inorganic wastes are accounted for by compiling data
from a variety of waste sampling studies.
One problem with the material flows methodology is that product residues associated with other
items in MSW (usually containers) are not accounted for. These residues would include, for example,
food left in ajar, detergent left in a box or bottle, dried paint in a can, etc. Some household hazardous
wastes, e.g., pesticide left in a can, also are included among these product residues.
Municipal Solid Waste Defined in Greater Detail
As stated earlier, EPA includes those materials which historically have been handled in the
municipal solid waste stream - those materials from municipal sources, sent to municipal landfills. In this
report, MSW includes wastes such as product packaging, newspapers, office and classroom paper,
bottles, boxes, wood pallets, food scraps, grass clippings, clothing, furniture, appliances, automobile
tires, consumer electronics, paint, and batteries. For purposes of analysis, these products and materials
22
-------
Chapter 1: Introduction and Methodology
are often grouped in this report into the following categories: durable goods, nondurable goods,
containers and packaging, food wastes and yard trimmings, and miscellaneous inorganic wastes.
Municipal solid wastes characterized in this report come from residential, commercial,
institutional, or industrial sources. Some examples of the types of MSW that come from each of the
broad categories of sources are (Figure 1):
Sources and Examples Example Products
Residential (single-and Newspapers, clothing, disposable
multi-family homes) tableware, food packaging, cans and
bottles, food scraps, yard trimmings
Commercial (office buildings, Corrugated boxes, food wastes, office
retail and wholesale estab- papers, disposable tableware, paper
lishments, restaurants) napkins, yard trimmings
Institutional (schools, Cafeteria and restroom trash can wastes,
libraries, hospitals, prisons) office papers, classroom wastes, yard
trimmings
Industrial (packaging and Corrugated boxes, plastic film, wood
administrative, not process pallets, lunchroom wastes, office papers.
wastes)
The material flows methodology used in this report does not readily lend itself to the
quantification of wastes according to their source. For example, corrugated boxes may be unpacked
and discarded from residences, commercial establishments such as grocery stores, institutions such as
schools, or factories. The methodology estimates only the total quantity of such boxes generated, not
their places of disposal or recovery for recycling.
Figure 1. Municipal Solid Waste in the Universe of Subtitle D Wastes
Subtitle D Wastes
The Subtitle D Waste included in this report is Municipal Solid Waste, which
includes: containers & packaging such as soft drink bottles and cardboard boxes; durable
goods such as furniture and appliances, nondurable goods such as newspapers and clothing;
scrap tires, food scraps, and yard trimmings.)
Subtitle D Wastes not included in this report are:
Municipal sludges Agricultural wastes
Industrial nonhazardous wastes Oil and Gas wastes
Construction and Demolition Debris Mining wastes
23
-------
Chapter 1: Introduction and Methodology
Other Subtitle D Wastes
Some people assume that "municipal solid waste" must include everything that is landfilled in
Subtitle D landfills. (Subtitle D of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act deals with wastes
other than the hazardous wastes covered under Subtitle C.) As shown in Figure 1, however, RCRA
Subtitle D includes many kinds of wastes. It has been common practice to landfill wastes such as
municipal sludge, nonhazardous industrial wastes, residue from automobile salvage operations, and
construction and demolition debris along with MSW; but these other kinds of wastes are not included in
the estimates presented in this report
Materials and Products Not Included in these Estimates
As noted earlier, other Subtitle D wastes (illustrated in Figure 1) are not included in these
estimates, even though some may be managed along with MSW (e.g., by combustion or landfilling).
Household hazardous wastes, while generated as MSW with other residential wastes, are not identified
separately in this report. Transportation equipment (including automobiles and trucks) is not included in
the wastes characterized in this report.
Certain other materials associated with products in MSW often are not accounted for because
the appropriate data series have not yet been developed. These include, for example, inks and other
pigments and some additives associated with packaging materials. Considerable additional research
would be required to estimate these materials, which constitute a relatively small percentage of the
waste stream.
Some adjustments are made in this report to account for packaging of imported good, but there
is little available documentation of these amounts.
OVERVIEW OF THIS REPORT
Following this introductory chapter, Chapter 2 presents the results of the municipal solid waste
characterization (by weight). Estimates of MSW generation, recovery, and discards are presented in a
series of tables, with discussion. Detailed tables and figures summarizing 1999 MSW generation,
recovery and discards of products in each material category are included.
In Chapter 3 of the report, estimates of 1999 MSW management by the various alternatives are
summarized. These include recovery for recycling (including composting), combustion, and landfilling.
Also presented is a discussion of source reduction practices. Summaries of the infrastructure currently
available for each waste management alternative also are included in Chapter 3.
Chapter 4, for the first time, incorporates an estimate of source reduction for the nation.
A brief discussion of the material flows methodology, for estimating generation, recycling, and
disposal is presented in Appendix A. Appendix B provides the methodology and detailed results for
source reduction. Appendix C provides the methodology and first cut at estimating selected consumer
electronics.
24
-------
Chapter 1: Introduction and Methodology
Figure 1-A
Definition of Terms
The material flows methodology produces an estimate of total municipal solid waste
generation in the united states, by material categories and by product categories.
The term generation as used in this report refers to the weight of materials and products as
they enter the waste management system from residential, commercial, institutional, and industrial
sources and before materials recovery or combustion takes place. Preconsumer (industrial) scrap is
not included in the generation estimates. Source reduction activities (e.g., backyard composting of
yard trimmings) take place ahead of generation.
Source reduction activities reduce the amount or toxicity of wastes before they enter the
municipal solid waste management system. Reuse is a source reduction activity involving the recovery
or reapplication of a package, used product, or material in a manner that retains its original form or
identity. Reuse of products such as refillable glass bottles, reusable plastic food storage containers, or
refurbished wood pallets is considered source reduction, not recycling.
Recovery of materials as estimated in this report includes products and yard trimmings
removed from the waste stream for the purpose of recycling (including composting). For recovered
products, recovery equals reported purchases of postconsumer recovered material (e.g., glass cullet,
old newspapers) plus net exports (if any) of the material. This, recovery of old corrugated containers
(OCC) is the sum of OCC purchases by paper mills plus net exports of OCC. If recovery as
reported by a data source includes converting or fabrication (preconsumer) scrap, the preconsumer
scrap is not counted towards the recovery estimates in this report. Imported secondary materials are
also not counted in recovery estimates in this report. For some materials, additional uses, such as
glass used for highway construction or newspapers used to make insulation, are added into the
recovery totals.
Combustion of MSW was estimated with and without energy recovery. Combustion with
energy recovery is often called "waste-to-energy," while combustion without energy is called
incineration in this report. Combustion of separated materials-wood, rubber from tires, paper, and
plastics-is included in the estimates of combustion in this report.
Discards include the MSW remaining after recovery for recycling (including composting).
These discards would presumably be combusted or landfilled, although some MSW is littered,
stored or disposed on-site, or burned on-site, particularly in rural areas. No good estimates for these
other disposal practices are available, but the total amounts of MSW involved are presumed to be
small.
-------
Chapter 1: Introduction and Methodology
Chapter 1
REFERENCES
Darnay, A., and W.E. Franklin, The Role of Packaging in Solid Waste Management, 1966
to 1976. Public Health Service Publication No. 1855. U.S. Government Printing Office.
1969.
Franklin, W.E., and A. Darnay. The Role of Nonpackaging Paper in Solid Waste
Management, 1966 to 1976. Public Health Service Publication No. 2040. U.S. Government
Printing Office. 1971.
Darnay, A., and W.E. Franklin. Salvage Markets for Materials in Solid Wastes.
Environmental Protection Publication SW-29c. U.S. Government Printing Office. 1972.
Franklin, W.E., et al. Base Line Forecasts of Resource Recovery 1972 to 1990. Midwest
Research Institute for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. March 1975.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste Management Programs.
Second Report to Congress: Resource Recovery and Source Reduction (SW-122). 1974.
Smith, F.L., Jr. A Solid Waste Estimation Procedure: Material Flows Approach. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (SW-147). May 1975.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste Management Programs. Third
Report to Congress: Resource Recovery and Source Reduction (SW-161). 1975.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste Management Programs.
Fourth Report to Congress: Resource Recovery and Waste Reduction (SW-600). 1977.
Franklin Associates, Ltd. Post-consumer Solid Waste and Resource Recovery Baseline.
Prepared for the Resource Conservation Committee. May 16, 1979.
Franklin Associates, Ltd. Post-consumer Solid Waste and Resource Recovery Baseline:
Working Papers. Prepared for the Resource Conservation Committee. May 16, 1979.
Resource Conservation Committee. Choices for Conservation: Final Report to the
President and Congress (SW-779). July 1979.
Franklin Associates, Ltd. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States,
1960 to 2000. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. July 11, 1986.
26
-------
Chapter 1: Introduction and Methodology Chapter 1: Introduction and Methodology
Franklin Associates, Ltd. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States,
1960 to 2000 (Update 1988). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. March 30, 1988.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United States: 1990 Update. (EPA/SW-90-042). June 1990.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United States: 1992 Update. (EPA/530-R-92-019). July 1992.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United States: 1994 Update. EPA/530-R-94-042. November 1994.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United States: 1995 Update. EPA/530-R-945-001. March 1996.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United States: 1996 Update. EPA/530-R-97-015. June 1997.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United States: 1997 Update. EPA/530-R-98-007. May 1998.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United States: 1998 Update. EPA/530-R-99-021. September 1999.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Municipal Solid Waste Generation, Recycling and
Disposal in the United States: Facts and Figures for 1998. EPA/530-F-00-024. April 2000.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Municipal Solid Waste Task Force, Office of Solid
Waste. The Solid Waste Dilemma: An Agenda for Action. February 1989.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste. Subtitle D Study Phase I
Report (EPA/530-SW-054). October 1986.
27
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Chapter 2
CHARACTERIZATION OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE BY WEIGHT
INTRODUCTION
The tables and figures in this chapter present the results of the update of EPA's municipal solid
waste characterization report through 1999. The data presented also incorporate some revisions to
previously reported data for 1997 and 1998 and, in some instances, to data for earlier years. The
revisions are generally due to revisions and improvements in the data available from data sources used
in developing this report.
This chapter discusses how much municipal solid waste (MSW) is generated, recovered, and
disposed. First, an overview presents this information for the most recent years, and for selected years
back to 1960. This information is summarized in Tables 1 to 3 and Figures 10 to 13. Then, throughout
the remainder of the chapter, MSW is characterized in more detail. Findings are presented in two basic
ways: the first portion of the chapter presents data by material type. Some material types of most use
to planners (paper and paperboard, glass, metals, plastic and rubber and leather) are presented in detail
in Tables 4 to 8 and Figures 3 to 9, while data on others is also summarized in Figures 12 and 13.
The second portion of the chapter presents data by product type. Tables 9 to 23 and Figures
14 to 16 provide this information. Products are classified into durables (appliances, furniture, tires);
nondurables (newspapers, clothing, sheets and towels); and containers and packaging (bottles, cans,
corrugated boxes). A fourth major category includes other wastes, consisting of miscellaneous inorganic
wastes, food wastes, and yard trimmings. Yard trimmings and food wastes are both products and
materials, so this data appears in both the sections on material type and product type.
This chapter provides data on generation of MSW, recovery, and disposal. (See Chapter 1 for
definitions of these terms.) Recovery, in this report, means that the materials have been removed from
the municipal solid waste stream. Recovery of materials in products means that the materials are
reported to have been purchased by an end-user or exported. For yard trimmings, recovery includes
estimates of the trimmings delivered to a composting facility (not backyard composting). Under these
definitions, residues from a materials recovery facility (MRF) or other waste processing facility are
counted as generation (and, of course, discards), since they are not purchased by an end-user.
Residues from an end-user facility (e.g., sludges from a paper deinking mill) are considered to be
industrial process wastes that are no longer part of the municipal solid waste stream.
Additional detail is provided for some of the materials and products in MSW that are of the
most interest to planners. These are paper, glass, metals, plastics, and rubber and leather (the latter
includes rubber in tires and clothing and footwear.)
28
-------
Chapter 2: Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Table 1
MATERIALS GENERATED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 1999
(In thousands of tons and percent of total generation)
Materials
Paper and Paperboard
Glass
Metals
Ferrous
Aluminum
Other Nonferrous
Total Metals
Plastics
Rubber and Leather
Textiles
Wood
Other **
Total Materials in Products
Other Wastes
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Generated - Weiqht
Materials
Paper and Paperboard
Glass
Metals
Ferrous
Aluminum
Other Nonferrous
Total Metals
Plastics
Rubber and Leather
Textiles
Wood
Other **
Total Materials in Products
Other Wastes
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Generated - %
Thousands of Tons
1960
29,990
6,720
10,300
340
180
70,820
390
1,840
1,760
3,030
70
54.620
12,200
20,000
1,300
33,500
88,120
1970
44,310
12,740
12,360
800
670
13,830
2,900
2,970
2,040
3,720
770
83.280
12,800
23,200
1,780
37,780
121,060
1980
55,160
15,130
12,620
1,730
1,160
15,510
6,830
4,200
2,530
7,010
2.520
108.890
13,000
27,500
2,250
42,750
151,640
1990
72,730
13,100
12,640
2,810
1,100
16,550
17,130
5,790
5,810
12,210
3.190
146.510
20,800
35,000
2,900
58,700
205,210
1995
81,670
12,830
11,640
2,960
1,260
15,860
18,900
6,030
7,400
10,440
3.650
156.780
21,740
29,690
3,150
54,580
211,360
1997
83,290
12,010
12,330
3,010
1,270
16,610
21,470
6,590
8,240
11,570
3.760
163.540
24,620
27,730
3,250
55,600
219,140
1998
84,160
12,450
12,380
3,080
1,380
16,840
22,370
6,860
8,600
11,930
3.900
167.110
24,910
27,730
3,290
55,930
223,040
1999
87,470
12,560
13,320
3,130
1,390
1 7, 840
24,170
6,220
9,060
12,250
4.010
173.580
25,160
27,730
3,380
56,270
229,850
Percent of Total Generation
1960
34.0%
7.6%
1 1 .7%
0.4%
0.2%
12.3%
0.4%
2.1%
2.0%
3.4%
0.1%
62.0%
13.8%
22.7%
1.5%
38.0%
100.0%
1970
36.6%
10.5%
10.2%
0.7%
0.6%
11.4%
2.4%
2.5%
1 .7%
3.1%
0.6%
68.8%
10.6%
19.2%
1 .5%
31 .2%
100.0%
1980
36.4%
10.0%
8.3%
1.1%
0.8%
10.2%
4.5%
2.8%
1 .7%
4.6%
1 .7%
71 .8%
8.6%
18.1%
1 .5%
28.2%
100.0%
1990
35.4%
6.4%
6.2%
1.4%
0.5%
8.1%
8.3%
2.8%
2.8%
6.0%
1.6%
71 .4%
10.1%
17.1%
1.4%
28.6%
100.0%
1995
38.6%
6.1%
5.5%
1 .4%
0.6%
7.5%
8.9%
2.9%
3.5%
4.9%
1 .7%
74.2%
10.3%
14.0%
1 .5%
25.8%
100.0%
1997
38.0%
5.5%
5.6%
1 .4%
0.6%
7.6%
9.8%
3.0%
3.8%
5.3%
1 .7%
74.6%
11.2%
12.7%
1 .5%
25.4%
100.0%
1998
37.7%
5.6%
5.6%
1 .4%
0.6%
7.6%
10.0%
3.1%
3.9%
5.3%
1 .7%
74.9%
1 1 .2%
12.4%
1 .5%
25.1%
100.0%
1999
38.1%
5.5%
5.8%
1.4%
0.6%
7.8%
10.5%
2.7%
3.9%
5.3%
1.7%
75.5%
10.9%
12.1%
1.5%
24.5%
100.0%
Generation before materials recovery or combustion. Does not include construction & demolition debris, industrial
process wastes, or certain other wastes.
Includes electrolytes in batteries and fluff pulp, feces, and urine in disposable diapers.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates
29
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 2
RECOVERY* OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, 1960 TO 1999
RECOVERY* OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, 1960 TO 2000
Materials
Paper and Paperboard
Glass
Metals
Ferrous
Aluminum
Other Nonferrous
Total Metals
Plastics
Rubber and Leather
Textiles
Wood
Other **
Total Materials in Products
Other Wastes
Food, OtherA
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Recovered - Weiaht
Materials
Paper and Paperboard
Glass
Metals
Ferrous
Aluminum
Other Nonferrous
Total Metals
Plastics
Rubber and Leather
Textiles
Wood
Other **
Total Materials in Products
Other Wastes
Food, OtherA
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inoraanic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Recovered - %
Thousands of Tons
1960
5,080
100
50
Neg.
Neg.
50
Neg.
330
50
Neg.
Nea.
5.610
Neg.
Neg.
Nea.
Nea.
5,610
1970
6,770
160
150
10
320
480
Neg.
250
60
Neg.
300
8.020
Neg.
Neg.
Nea.
Nea.
8.020
1980
1 1 ,740
750
370
310
540
1,220
20
130
160
Neg.
500
14.520
Neg.
Neg.
Nea.
Nea.
14.520
1990
20,230
2,630
2,230
1,010
730
3,970
370
370
660
130
680
29.040
Neg.
4,200
Nea.
4.200
33.240
1995
32,700
3,140
4,130
930
810
5,870
990
540
900
450
750
45.340
570
9,000
Nea.
9.570
54.910
1997
33,580
2,920
4,730
950
830
6,510
1,110
770
1,060
590
760
47.300
580
1 1 ,490
Nea.
12.070
59.370
1998
34,360
3,180
4,320
860
930
6,110
1,210
860
1,110
720
860
48.410
580
12,560
Nea.
13.140
61.550
1999
36,670
2,940
4,480
870
930
6,280
1,350
790
1,170
720
860
50.780
550
12,560
Nea.
13.110
63.890
Percent of Generation of Each Material
1960
16.9%
1 .5%
0.5%
Neg.
Neg.
0.5%
Neg.
17.9%
2.8%
Neg.
Nea.
10.3%
Neg.
Neg.
Nea.
Nea.
6.4%
1970
15.3%
1 .3%
1 .2%
1 .3%
47.8%
3.5%
Neg.
8.4%
2.9%
Neg.
39.0%
9.6%
Neg.
Neg.
Nea.
Nea.
6.6%
1980
21.3%
5.0%
2.9%
17.9%
46.6%
7.9%
0.3%
3.1%
6.3%
Neg.
19.8%
13.3%
Neg.
Neg.
Nea.
Nea.
9.6%
1990
27.8%
20.1%
17.6%
35.9%
66.4%
24.0%
2.2%
6.4%
11.4%
1.1%
21.3%
19.8%
Neg.
12.0%
Nea.
7.2%
16.2%
1995
40.0%
24.5%
35.5%
31.4%
64.3%
37.0%
5.2%
9.0%
12.2%
4.3%
20.5%
28.9%
2.6%
30.3%
Nea.
17.5%
26.0%
1997
40.3%
24.3%
38.4%
31.6%
65.4%
39.2%
5.2%
11.7%
12.9%
5.1%
20.2%
28.9%
2.4%
41.4%
Nea.
21.7%
27.1%
1998
40.8%
25.5%
34.9%
27.9%
67.4%
36.3%
5.4%
12.5%
12.9%
6.0%
22.1%
29.0%
2.3%
45.3%
Nea.
23.5%
27.6%
1999
41 .9%
23.4%
33.6%
27.8%
66.9%
35.2%
5.6%
12.7%
12.9%
5.9%
21 .4%
29.3%
2.2%
45.3%
Nea.
23.3%
27.8%
* Recovery of postconsumer wastes; does not include converting/fabrication scrap.
** Recovery of electrolytes in batteries; probably not recycled.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
A Includes recovery of paper for composting.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates
30
-------
Chapter 2: Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Table 3
MATERIALS DISCARDED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 1999
(In thousands of tons and percent of total discards)
Materials
Paper and Paperboard
Glass
Metals
Ferrous
Aluminum
Other Nonferrous
Total Metals
Plastics
Rubber and Leather
Textiles
Wood
Other"
Total Materials in Products
Other Wastes
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Discarded - Weiqht
Materials
Paper and Paperboard
Glass
Metals
Ferrous
Aluminum
Other Nonferrous
Total Metals
Plastics
Rubber and Leather
Textiles
Wood
Other"
Total Materials in Products
Other Wastes
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Discarded - %
Thousands of Tons
1960
24,910
6,620
10,250
340
180
70,770
390
1,510
1,710
3,030
70
49,010
12,200
20,000
1,300
33.500
82.510
1970
37,540
12,580
12,210
790
350
13,350
2,900
2,720
1,980
3,720
470
75,260
12,800
23,200
1,780
37.780
113.040
1980
43,420
14,380
12,250
1,420
620
14,290
6,810
4,070
2,370
7,010
2.020
94,370
13,000
27,500
2,250
42.750
137.120
1990
52,500
10,470
10,410
1,800
370
12,580
16,760
5,420
5,150
12,080
2.510
117,470
20,800
30,800
2,900
54.500
171.970
1995
48,970
9,690
7,510
2,030
450
9,990
17,910
5,490
6,500
9,990
2.900
1 1 1 ,440
21,170
20,690
3,150
45.010
156.450
1997
49,710
9,090
7,600
2,060
440
10, 100
20,360
5,820
7,180
10,980
3.000
116,240
24,040
16,240
3,250
43.530
159.770
1998
49,800
9,270
8,060
2,220
450
10,730
21,160
6,000
7,490
11,210
3.040
118,700
24,330
15,170
3,290
42.790
161.490
1999
50,800
9,620
8,840
2,260
460
11,560
22,820
5,430
7,890
1 1 ,530
3.150
122,800
24,610
15,170
3,380
43.160
165.960
Percent of Total Discards
1960
30.2%
8.0%
12.4%
0.4%
0.2%
13.1%
0.5%
1.8%
2.1%
3.7%
0.1%
59.4%
14.8%
24.2%
1.6%
40.6%
100.0%
1970
33.2%
11.1%
10.8%
0.7%
0.3%
11.8%
2.6%
2.4%
1.8%
3.3%
0.4%
66.6%
1 1 .3%
20.5%
1.6%
33.4%
100.0%
1980
31.7%
10.5%
8.9%
1 .0%
0.5%
10.4%
5.0%
3.0%
1 .7%
5.1%
1 .5%
68.8%
9.5%
20.1%
1 .6%
31.2%
100.0%
1990
30.5%
6.1%
6.1%
1 .0%
0.2%
7.3%
9.7%
3.2%
3.0%
7.0%
1 .5%
68.3%
12.1%
17.9%
1 .7%
31 .7%
100.0%
1995
31 .3%
6.2%
4.8%
1.3%
0.3%
6.4%
1 1 .4%
3.5%
4.2%
6.4%
1.9%
71 .2%
13.5%
13.2%
2.0%
28.8%
100.0%
1997
31.1%
5.7%
4.8%
1.3%
0.3%
6.3%
12.7%
3.6%
4.5%
6.9%
1.9%
72.8%
15.0%
10.2%
2.0%
27.2%
100.0%
1998
30.8%
5.7%
5.0%
1 .4%
0.3%
6.6%
13.1%
3.7%
4.6%
6.9%
1 .9%
73.5%
15.1%
9.4%
2.0%
26.5%
100.0%
1999
30.6%
5.8%
5.3%
1 .4%
0.3%
7.0%
13.8%
3.3%
4.8%
6.9%
1 .9%
74.0%
14.8%
9.1%
2.0%
26.0%
100.0%
Discards after materials and compost recovery. Does not include construction & demolition debris, industrial
process wastes, or certain other wastes.
Includes electrolytes in batteries and fluff pulp, feces, and urine in disposable diapers.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates
31
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE: CHARACTERIZED BY MATERIAL TYPE
Generation, recovery, and discards of materials in MSW, by weight and by percentage of
generation and discards, are summarized in Tables 1 through 3. Figures 10 and 11 illustrate this data
over time. Figures 12 and 13 provide a snapshot, by material, for 1999. Following these tables and
figures, each material is discussed in detail.
Paper and Paperboard
Paper and paperboard products, as a group, constitute the largest component of MSW taken
collectively, and the largest component of MSW. Paper and paperboard includes materials such as
paper and cardboard, used in products such as office paper, newspaper, corrugated boxes, milk
cartons, tissue paper, and paper plates and cups.
Table 4
PAPER AND PAPERBOARD PRODUCTS IN MSW, 1999
(In thousands of tons and percent of generation)
Generation
(Thousands
Product Category
Nondurable Goods
Newspapers
Newsprint
Groundwood inserts
Total Newspapers
Books
Magazines
Office Papers
Telephone Directories
Third Class Mail
Other Commercial Printing
Tissue Paper and Towels
Paper Plates and Cups
Other Nonpackaging Paper*
Total Paper and Paperboard
Nondurable Goods
Containers and Packaging
Corrugated Boxes
Milk Cartons
Folding Cartons
Other Paperboard Packaging
Bags and Sacks
Other Paper Packaging
Total Paper and Paperboard
Containers and Packaging
Total Paper and Paperboard
tons)
11,330
2,630
13,9(50
1,120
2,310
7,670
680
5,560
5,940
3,360
930
4,790
46,320
31,230
490
5,780
290
1,690
1,670
41,150
87,470
Recovery
Discards
(Thousands (Percent of (Thousand
tons)
6,800
1,430
8,230
200
530
4,040
110
1,230
1,360
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
15,700
20,340
Neg.
400
Neg.
230
Neg.
20,970
36,670
generation)
60.0%
54.4%
59.0'%
17.9%
22.9%
52.7%
16.2%
22.1%
22.9%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
33.9%
65.1%
Neg.
6.9%
Neg.
13.6%
Neg.
51.0%
41.9%
tons)
4,530
1,200
5,730
920
1,780
3,630
570
4,330
4,580
Neg.
930
4,790
30,620
10,890
Neg.
5,380
290
1,460
1,670
20,180
50,800
Includes tissue in disposable diapers, paper in games and novelties, cards, etc.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates.
32
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Figure 2. Paper and paperboard products generated in MSW, 1999
Corrugated boxes
Newspapers
Office papers
Commercial printing
Folding and milk cartons
Standard (A) mail
Other papers
Tissue paper and towels
Bags and sacks
Magazines
Other packaging
Paper plates and cups
Books
Directories
I
I
I
I
I
Zl
n
n
P
|
D 5 10 15 20 25 30 3
million tons
Total generation of paper and paperboard in MSW has grown from 30 million tons in 1960 to
87.5 million tons in 1999 (Table 1). As a percentage of total MSW generation, paper represented 34
percent in 1960 (Table 1). The percentage has varied over time, but increased to 38.1 percent of total
MSW generation in 1999. As Figure 3 illustrates, paper generation increased over the last three years.
The sensitivity of paper products to economic conditions can be observed in Figure 3. The
tonnage of paper generated in 1975 - a severe recession year - was actually less than the tonnage in
1970, and the percentage of total generation was also less in 1975. Similar but less pronounced
declines in paper generation can be seen in other recession years.
The wide variety of products that comprise the paper and paperboard materials total is
illustrated in Table 4 and Figures 2 and 3. In this report, these products are classified as either
nondurable goods or as containers and packaging, with nondurable goods being the larger category.
Generation. Estimates of paper and paperboard generation are based on statistics published
by the American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA). These statistics include data
on new supply (production plus net imports) of the various paper and paperboard grades that go into
the products found in MSW. The AF&PA new supply statistics are adjusted to make products such as
envelopes or boxes. Converting scrap rates vary from product to product; the rates used in this report
were developed as part of a 1992 report for the Recycling Advisory
33
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Council with a few more recent revisions as new data became available. Various deductions are also
made to account for products diverted out of municipal solid waste, such as gypsum wallboard facings
or toilet tissue.
Recovery. Estimates of recovery of paper and paperboard products for recycling are based
on annual reports of recovery published by AF&PA. The AF&PA reports include recovery of paper
and paperboard purchased by U.S. paper mills, plus exports of recovered paper, plus a small amount
estimated to have been used in other products such as animal bedding. Recovery as reported by
AF&PA includes both preconsumer and postconsumer paper.
Figure 3. Paper generation and recovery, 1960 to 1999
100
90
80
70
60
o
.1 5°
I
30
Generation
Reuuveiy
10
0 I
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
34
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 5
GLASS PRODUCTS IN MSW, 1999
(In thousands of tons and percent of generation)
Generation
(Thousand
Product Category tons)
Durable Goods*
Containers and Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Bottles
Wine and Liquor Bottles
Food and Other Bottles and Jars
Total Glass Containers
Total Glass
1,510
5,450
1,830
3,770
11,050
12,560
Recovery
(Thousand
tons)
Neg.
1,560
440
940
2,940
2,940
(Percent of
generation)
Neg.
28.6%
24.0%
24.9%
26.6%
23.4%
Discards
(Thousand
tons)
1,510
3,890
1,390
2,830
8,110
9,620
Glass as a component of appliances, furniture, consumer electronics, etc.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates.
To estimate recovery of postconsumer paper products for this EPA report, estimates of
recovery of converting scrap and returned overissue newspapers (newspapers that were not solid) are
deducted from the total recovery amounts reported by AF&PA. In earlier versions of this EPA report,
a simplifying assumption that all converting scrap is recovered was made. For recent updates, various
converting scrap recovery rates ranging from 70 percent to 98 percent were applied to the estimates
for 1990 through 1999. The converting scrap recovery rates were developed for a 1992 report for the
Recycling Advisory Council. Because converting scrap and overissue are deducted, the paper recovery
rates presented in this report are always lower than the total recovery rates published by AF&PA.
When recovered paper is repulped, and often deinked, at a recycling paper mill, considerable
amounts of sludge are generated in amounts varying from 5 percent to 35 percent of the paper
feedstock. Since these sludges are generated at an industrial site, they are considered to be industrial
process waste, not municipal solid waste; therefore they have been removed from the municipal waste
stream.
Recovery of paper and paperboard for recycling is at the highest rate overall compared to most
other materials in MSW. As Table 4 shows, 65.1 percent of all corrugated boxes were recovered for
recycling in 1999. Newspapers were recovered at a rate of 59 percent, and high grade office papers at
52.7 percent, with lesser percentages of other papers being recovered also. Approximately 36.7 million
tons of postconsumer paper were recovered in 1999 - 41.9 percent of total paper and paperboard
generation.
Discards After Recovery. After recovery of paper and paperboard for recycling, discards
were 50.8 million tons in 1999, or 30.6 percent of total MSW discards.
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Figure 4. Glass products generated in MSW, 1999
Beer & soft drink bottles*
Food, other bottles & jars
Wine & liquor bottles
Durable goods
* Includes carbonate
drinks and non-carbona
red drinks.
234
million tons
Figure 5. Glass generation and recovery, 1960 to 1999
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985
1990 1995
36
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Glass
Glass is found in MSW primarily in the form of containers (Table 5 and Figures 4 and 5), and
also in durable goods like furniture, appliances, and consumer electronics. In the container category,
glass is found in bottles for beer, soft drinks, wine and liquor, and in bottles and jars for food,
cosmetics, and other products. More detail on these products is included in the later section on
products in MSW.
Generation. Glass accounted for 6.7 million tons of MSW in 1960, or 7.6 percent of total
generation. Generation of glass continued to grow over the next two decades, but then glass containers
were widely displaced by other materials, principally aluminum and plastics. Thus the tonnage of glass in
MSW declined in the 1980s, from approximately 15.1 million tons in 1980 to 13.2 million tons in 1985.
Since 1987 glass generation has gone up and down but has remained within the 12 million to 14 million
ton range. Most recently, in 1999, 12.6 million tons were generated. Glass was 10 percent of MSW
generation in 1980, declining to 5.8 percent in 1999.
Recovery. Published estimates indicate that 2.9 million tons of glass containers were recovered
for recycling in 1999. Based on 1999 glass generation, an estimated 26.6 percent of glass containers
was recovered for recycling, with a 23.4 percent recovery rate for all glass in MSW. Most of the
recovered glass went into new glass containers, but a portion went to other uses such as fiberglass and
glasphalt for highway construction. The Glass Packaging Institute reported a recovery rate of 34.8
percent for glass containers in 1998; this recovery rate includes an allowance for refilling of bottles.
Since this EPA report classifies refilling as reuse (source reduction) rather than recovery for recycling,
the recovery rate estimated for this report is 26.6 percent of glass containers.
Discards After Recovery. Recovery for recycling lowered discards of glass to 9.6 million
tons in 1999 (5.8 percent of total MSW discards).
Ferrous Metals
By weight, ferrous metals (iron and steel) are the largest category of metals in MSW (Figure 6
and Table 6). The largest quantities of ferrous metals in MSW are found in durable goods such as
appliances, furniture, and tires. Containers and packaging are the other source of ferrous metals in
MSW. Large quantities of ferrous metals are found in construction materials and in transportation
products such as automobiles, locomotives, and ships, but these are not counted as MSW in this
report.
Total generation and recovery of all metals in MSW from 1960 to 1999 are shown in Figure 7.
Generation. Approximately 10.3 million tons of ferrous metals were generated in 1960. Like
glass, the tonnages grew during the 1960s and 1970s, but began to drop as lighter materials like
aluminum and plastics replaced steel in many applications. Generation of ferrous metals did, however,
increase to 12.7 million tons in 1991, drop to 12.3 million tons in 1997, but rose again to 13.3 million
tons in 1999. The percentage of ferrous metals generation in MSW has declined from 11.7 percent in
1960 to 5.3 percent in 1999.
37
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Figure 6. Metal products generated in MSW, 1999
JDPurables DPackaging DNondurables|
Ferrous metals
Aluminum
Other nonferrous
10
12
14
million tons
Recovery. The renewed emphasis on recovery and recycling in recent years has included
ferrous metals. Based on data from the Steel Recycling Institute, recovery of ferrous metals from
appliances ("white goods") was estimated to be 1.9 million tons of the total ferrous in appliances in
1999. Overall recovery of ferrous metals from durable goods (large and small appliances, furniture, and
tires) was estimated to be 26.9 percent (2.8 million tons) in 1999 (Table 6).
Steel food cans and other cans were estimated to be recovered at a rate of 56.1 percent (1.5
million tons) in 1999. Approximately 170,000 tons of other steel packaging, mostly steel barrels and
drums, was estimated to have been recovered for recycling in 1999.
Discards After Recovery. Discards of ferrous metals after recovery were 8.8 million tons in
1999, or 5.3 percent of total discards.
Aluminum
The largest source of aluminum in MSW is aluminum cans and other packaging (Table 6 and
Figure 6). Other sources of aluminum are found in durable and nondurable goods.
Generation. In 1999, nearly 2 million tons of aluminum were generated as containers and
packaging, while approximately 1 million tons were found in durable and nondurable goods. The total -
3 million tons - represented 1.4 percent of total MSW generation in 1999. Aluminum generation was
only 340,000 tons (0.4 percent of MSW generation) in 1960.
38
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Recovery. Aluminum beverage containers were recovered at a rate of 54.5 percent of
generation (0.8 million tons) in 1999, and 44.2 percent of all aluminum in containers and packaging was
recovered for recycling in 1999.
Discards After Recovery. In 1999, about 2.3 million tons of aluminum were discarded in
MSW after recovery, which was 1.4 percent of total MSW discards.
Table 6
METAL PRODUCTS IN MSW, 1999
(In thousands of tons and percent of generation)
Generation
(Thousand
Product Category tons)
Durable Goods
Ferrous metals*
Aluminum**
Lead!
Other nonferrous metalsl
Total Metals in Durable Goods
Nondurable Goods
Aluminum
Containers and Packaging
Steel
Food and other cans
Other steel packaging
Total Steel Packaging
Aluminum
Beer and soft drink cans
Food and other cans
Foil and closures
Total Aluminum Packaging
Total Metals in
Containers and Packaging
Total Metals
Ferrous
Aluminum
Other nonferrous
10,390
960
970
420
12,740
200
2,690
240
2,930
1,540
50
380
1,970
4,900
17,840
13,320
3,130
1,390
Recovery
(Thousand
tons)
2,800
Neg.
930
Neg.
3,730
Neg.
1,510
170
1,680
840
Neg.
30
870
2,550
6,280
4,480
870
930
(Percent of
generation)
26.9%
Neg.
95.9%
Neg.
29.3%
Neg.
56.1%
70.8%
57.3%
54.5%
Neg.
7.9%
52.0%
35.2%
33.6%
27.8%
66.9%
Discards
(Thousand
tons)
7,590
960
40
420
9,010
200
1,180
70
1,250
700
50
350
2,350
11,560
8,840
2,260
460
Ferrous metals in appliances, furniture, tires, and miscellaneous durables.
Aluminum in appliances, furniture, and miscellaneous durables.
Lead in lead-acid batteries.
Other nonferrous metals in appliances and miscellaneous durables.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates.
39
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Figure 7. Metals generation and recovery, 1960 to 1999
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
Other Nonferrous Metals
Other nonferrous metals (e.g., lead, copper, zinc) are found in durable products such as
appliances, consumer electronics, etc. Lead in lead-acid batteries is the most prevalent nonferrous
metal (other than aluminum) in MSW. Note that only lead-acid batteries from passenger cars, trucks,
and motorcycles are included. Lead-acid batteries used in large equipment or industrial applications are
not included.
Generation. Generation of other nonferrous metals in MSW totaled 1.4 million tons in 1999.
Lead in batteries accounted for 970,000 tons of this amount. Generation of these metals has increased
slowly, up from 180,000 tons in 1960. As a percentage of total generation, nonferrous metals have
never exceeded one percent.
Recovery. Recovery of the other nonferrous metals was 930,000 tons in 1999, with most of
this being lead recovered from batteries. It was estimated that 95.9 percent of battery lead was
recovered in 1999, up from 94.3 percent in 1997.
Discards After Recovery. In 1999, 460,000 tons of nonferrous metals were discarded in
MSW. Percentages of total discards remained less than one percent over the entire period.
40
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Plastics
Plastics are a rapidly growing segment of MSW. The largest category plastics are found in is
containers and packaging; they are also found in durable and nondurable goods. (Table 7 and Figure
8).
In durable goods, plastics are found in appliances, furniture, casings of lead-acid batteries, and
other products. (Note that plastics in transportation products generally are not included in this report.)
As shown in Table 7, a wide range of resin types is found in durable goods. While some detail is
provided in Table 7 for resins in durable goods, there are hundreds of different resin formulations used
in appliances, carpets, and other durable goods; a complete listing is beyond the scope of this report.
Plastics are found in nondurable products such as disposable diapers, trash bags, cups, eating
utensils, sporting and recreational equipment, medical devices, household items such as shower
curtains, etc. The plastic food service items are generally made of clear or foamed polystyrene, while
trash bags are made of high-density polyethylene or low-density polyethylene. A wide variety of other
resins are used in other nondurable goods.
Plastic resins also are used in a variety of container and packaging products such as
polyethylene terephthalate (PET) soft drink bottles, high-density polyethylene (HDPE) bottles for milk
and water, and a wide variety of other resin types used in other plastic containers, bags, sacks, wraps,
lids, etc.
Generation. Production data on plastics resin use in products is taken from the Modern
Plastics annual statistical issue and the American Plastics Council's (APC) annual plastic recovery
survey. The basic data are adjusted for product service life, fabrication losses, and net imports of
plastic products to derive generation of plastics in the various products in MSW.
Plastics made up an estimated 390,000 tons of MSW generation in 1960. The quantity has
increased relatively steadily to 24.2 million tons in 1999 (Figure 9). As a percentage of MSW
generation, plastics were less than one percent in 1960, increasing to 10.5 percent in 1999.
Recovery for Recycling. While overall recovery of plastics for recycling is relatively small -
1.4 million tons, or 5.6 percent of plastics generation in 1999 (Table 9) - recovery of some plastic
containers has generally increased. PET soft drink bottles were recovered at a rate of 40 percent in
1999. Recovery of high-density polyethylene milk and water bottles was estimated at about 31.9
percent in 1999. Significant recovery of plastics from lead-acid battery casings and from some other
containers also was reported. The primary source of data on plastics recovery is the annual survey
conducted for APC.
Discards After Recovery. Discards of plastics in MSW after recovery were 22.8 million
tons, or 13.8 percent of total MSW discards.
41
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
PLASTICS IN
(In thousands of tons,
Product Category
Durable Goods
PET
HDPE
PVC
LDPE/LLDPE
PP
PS
Other resins
Total Plastics in Durable Goods
Nondurable Goods
Plastic Plates and Cups
LDPE/LLDPE
PS
Subtotal Plastic Plates and Cups
Trash Bags
HDPE
LDPE/LLDPE
Subtotal Trash Bags
All other nondurables*
PET
HDPE
PVC
LDPE/LLDPE
PP
PS
Other resins
Subtotal All Other Nondurables
Total Plastics in Nondurable Goods,
PET
HDPE
PVC
LDPE/LLDPE
PP
PS
Other resins
Total Plastics in Nondurable Goods
Plastic Containers & Packaging
Soft drink bottles
PET
HDPE
Subtotal Soft Drink Bottles
Milk and water bottles
HDPE
Table 7
PRODUCTS IN MSW, 1999
and percent of generation by resin)
Generation Recovery
(Thousand (Thousand (Percent
tons) tons) of Gen.)
390 30 7.7%
530 50 9.4%
420 Neg.
630 0 0.0%
1,160 90 7.8%
610 0 0.0%
3,440 100 2.9%
7,180 270 3.8%
20
890 Neg.
910
250
700
950
190
380
550
1,440
800
530
80
3,970
by resin
190
630
550
2,160
800
1,420 Neg.
80
5,830 0 0.0%
900 360
Neg. Neg.
900 360 40.0%
690 220 31.9%
Discards
(Thousand
tons)
360
480
420
630
1,070
610
3,340
6,910
20
890
910
250
700
950
190
380
550
1,440
800
530
80
3,970
190
630
550
2,160
800
1,420
80
5,830
540
Neg.
540
470
HDPE = High density polyethylene
LDPE=Low density polyethylene
LLDPE = Linear Low density polyethylene
Source: Franklin Associates.
PET=Polyethylene terephthalate PS = Polystyrene
PP = Polypropylene PVC = Polyvinyl chloride
42
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 7 (continued)
PLASTICS IN
(In thousands of tons,
Product Category
Plastic Containers & Packaging, cont.
Other plastic containers
PET
HDPE
PVC
LDPE/LLDPE
PP
PS
Other resins
Subtotal Other Containers
Bags, sacks, & wraps
HDPE
PVC
LDPE/LLDPE
PP
PS
Other resins
Subtotal Bags, Sacks, & Wraps
Other Plastics Packaging**
PET
HDPE
PVC
LDPE/LLDPE
PP
PS
Other resins
Subtotal Other Packaging
PRODUCTS
and percent
Generation
(Thousand
tons)
820
1,390
150
50
140
70
30
2,650
670
70
2,830
590
80
4,240
130
1,430
260
350
370
100
40
2,680
IN MSW, 1999
of generation by resin)
Recovery
(Thousand (Percent
tons) of Gen.)
80
190
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
10
280 10.6%
130
10
140 3.3%
Neg.
20
Neg.
Neg.
30
10
10
70 2.6%
Discards
(Thousand
tons)
740
1,200
150
50
140
70
30
2,370
670
70
2,700
590
80
4,100
130
1,430
260
350
340
90
40
2,610
Total Plastics in Containers & Packaging, by resin
PET
HDPE
PVC
LDPE/LLDPE
PP
PS
Other resins
Total Plastics in Cont. & Packaging
Total Plastics in MSW, by resin
PET
HDPE
PVC
LDPE/LLDPE
PP
PS
Other resins
Total Plastics in MSW
1,850
4,180
480
3,230
1,100
250
70
11,160
2,430
5,340
1,450
6,020
3,060
2,280
3,590
24,170
440
440
Neg.
130
30
10
30
1,080 9.7%
470
490
Neg.
130
120
10
130
1,350 5.6%
1,410
3,740
480
3,100
1,070
240
70
10,080
1,960
4,850
1,450
5,890
2,940
2,270
3,460
22,820
HDPE = High density polyethylene PET=Polyethylene terephthalate PS = Polystyrene
LDPE = Low density polyethylene PP = Polypropylene PVC = Polyvinyl chloride
LLDPE = Linear Low density polyethylene
All other nondurables include plastics in disposable diapers, clothing, footwear, etc.
Other plastic packaging includes coatings, closures, caps, trays, shapes, etc.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent. Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates.
43
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Figure 8. Plastics products generated in MSW, 1999
Durable goods
Nondurable goods
Bags, sacks and wraps
Other packaging
Other containers
Soft drink, milk, and water
containers
4 5
million tons
Other Materials
Rubber and Leather. The predominant source of rubber in MSW is rubber tires from
automobiles and trucks (Table 8). Other sources of rubber and leather include clothing and footwear
and other miscellaneous durable and nondurable products. These other sources are quite diverse,
including such items as gaskets on appliances, furniture, and hot water bottles, for example.
Generation. Generation of rubber and leather in MSW has shown slow growth over the years,
increasing from 1.8 million tons in 1960 to 6.2 million tons in 1999. One reason for the relatively slow
rate of growth is that tires have been made smaller and longer-wearing than in earlier years.
As a percentage of total MSW generation, rubber and leather has been about 3 percent for
many years.
Recovery for Recycling. The only recovery for recycling identified in this category is rubber
from tires, and that was estimated to be 790,000 tons (26.5 percent of rubber in tires in 19999) (Table
8). (This recovery estimate does not include tires retreaded or energy recovery from tires.) Overall,
12.7 percent of rubber and leather in MSW was recovered in 1999.
Discards After Recovery. Discards of rubber and leather after recovery were 5.4 million
tons in 1999 (3.3 percent of total discards).
Textiles. Textiles in MSW are found mainly in discarded clothing, although other sources were
identified to be furniture, carpets, tires, footwear, and other nondurable goods such as sheets and
towels.
44
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Figure 9. Plastics generation and recovery, 1960 to 1999
1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
Generation. An estimated 9.1 million tons of textiles were generated in 1999 (3.9 percent of
total MSW generation).
Recovery for Recycling and Discards. Significant amounts of textiles are recovered for
reuse. However, the reused garments and wiper rags re-enter the waste stream eventually, so this is
considered a diversion rather than recovery for recycling and, therefore, not included in the recovery for
recycling estimates. Since data on elapsed time from recovery of textiles for reuse to final discard is
limited, it was assumed that reused textiles re-enter the waste stream the same year that they are first
discarded. It was estimated that 12.9 percent of textiles in clothing and items such as sheets and
pillowcases was recovered for export or reprocessing in 1999 (1.2 million tons) leaving discards of 7.2
million tons of textiles in 1999.
Wood. The sources of wood in MSW include furniture, miscellaneous durable goods (e.g.,
cabinets for electronic equipment), wood packaging (crates, pallets), and some other miscellaneous
products.
Generation. Generation of wood in MSW was 11.5 million tons in 1999 (6.9 percent of total
MSW generation).
Recovery for Recycling and Discards. Wood pallet recovery for recycling (usually by
chipping for uses such as mulch or bedding material, but excluding wood combusted as fuel) was
estimated at 720,000 in 1999.
Accounting for pallet reuse and recovery for recycling, wood discards were 11.5 million tons in
1999, or 6.9 percent of total MSW discards.
45
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Other products. Generation of "other products" waste is mainly associated with disposable
diapers, which are discussed under the section on Products in Municipal Solid Waste. The only other
significant sources of materials in this category are the electrolytes and other materials associated with
lead-acid batteries that are not classified as plastics or nonferrous metal.
Table 8
RUBBER AND LEATHER PRODUCTS IN MSW, 1999
(In thousands of tons and percent of generation)
Generation Recovery Discards
(Thousand (Thousand (Percent of (Thousand
Product Category
Durable Goods
Rubber in Tires*
Other Durables**
Total Rubber & Leather
Durable Goods
Nondurable Goods
Clothing and Footwear
Other Nondurables
Total Rubber & Leather
Nondurable Goods
Containers and Packaging
Total Rubber & Leather
tons)
2,980
2,430
5,410
540
250
790
20
6,220
tons)
790
Neg.
790
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
790
generation)
26.5%
Neg.
14.6%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
12.7%
tons)
2,190
2,430
4,620
540
250
790
20
5,430
Automobile and truck tires. Does not include other materials in tires.
** Includes carpets and rugs and other miscellaneous durables.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates.
Food Wastes
Food wastes included here consist of uneaten food and food preparation wastes from
residences, commercial establishments such as restaurants and fast food establishments, institutional
sources such as school cafeterias, and industrial sources such as factory lunchrooms. Food waste
generated during the preparation and packaging of food products is considered industrial waste and
therefore not included in MSW food waste estimates.
Generation. No production data are available for food wastes. Food wastes from residential
and commercial sources were estimated using data from sampling studies in variousparts of the country
in combination with demographic data on population, grocery store sales, restaurant sales, numbers of
employees, and numbers of prisoners and students in institutions. Generation of food wastes was
estimated to be nearly 25.2 million tons in 1999, up from 24.6 million tons in 1997.
46
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Recovery for Composting and Discards. Beginning in 1994 for this series of reports, a
significant amount of food waste composting from commercial sources was identified. As the data
source (a survey published by BioCycle magazine) has improved, it has become apparent that other
composted materials (e.g., paper and industrial food processing wastes) have been included with food
wastes classified as MSW in the past. For the 1999 estimate, a more careful separation of MSW food
composted resulted in an estimate of approximately 235,000 tons.
Another BioCycle survey yielded an estimate of approximately 315,000 tons of MSW
composted. The total - 550,000 tons* of food wastes and other organic materials composted - is
shown in the recovery tables on the line where only food waste recovery was shown in previous
reports.
Yard Trimmings
Yard trimmings* include grass, leaves, and tree and brush trimmings from residential,
institutional, and commercial sources.
Generation. In earlier versions of this report, generation of yard trimmings was estimated using
sampling studies and population data. While in past years generation of yard trimmings had been
increasing steadily as population and residential housing grew (i.e., constant generation on a per capita
basis), in recent years there has been a new trend, local and state legislation discouraging yard
trimmings disposal in landfills.
Legislation affecting yard trimmings disposal in landfills was tabulated, using published sources.
In 1992, 11 states and the District of Columbia - accounting for more than 28 percent of the nation's
population - had legislation in effect that bans or discourages yard trimmings disposal in landfills. The
tabulation of existing legislation also shows that by 1999, 23 states and the District of Columbia,
representing more than 50 percent of the nations's population, had legislation affecting disposal of yard
trimmings. This has led to an increase in backyard composting and the use of mulching mowers to allow
grass trimmings to remain in place.
Using these facts, it was estimated that the effect of this legislation was no increase in yard
trimmings generation (i.e., entering the waste management system) between 1990 and 1992 (i.e., the
increase in yard trimmings due to natural population increases was offset by source reduction efforts).
Furthermore, with 50 percent of the population having yard trimmings legislation in 1997, it was also
estimated that yard trimmings generation declined approximately 6 percent annually between 1992 and
1997, and since then has remained stable. An estimated 27.7 million tons of yard trimmings were
generated in MSW in 1999 (this compares to an estimated 35 million tons of yard trimmings generated
in 1992).
* Although there are limited data available on the composition of yard trimmings, it is estimated that the average
composition by weight is about 50 percent grass, 25 percent brush, and 25 percent leaves. These are "ballpark"
numbers that will vary widely according to climate and region of the country.
47
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Recovery for Composting and Discards. Recovery for composting of yard trimmings was
estimated using a previous survey which estimated tonnages composted by facilities along with updated
information on numbers of yard waste composting facilities. Data compiled by BioCycle magazine
indicates that there were about 3,000 composting facilities for yard trimmings in 1992, increasing to
3,800 facilities in 1999.*
Removal of yard trimmings for composting was estimated to be 45.3 percent of generation in
1999 (12.6 million tons), leaving 15.2 million tons of yard trimmings to be discarded. (It should be
noted that the estimated 12.6 million tons recovered for composting does not include yard trimmings
used for landspreading disposal.)
It also should be noted that these recovery estimates do not account for backyard composting
by individuals and practices such as less bagging of grass clippings. These are source reduction
activities which take place on-site. The yard trimming estimates are based on material recovered and
sent off-site. The information source is sampling studies which estimate the quantities received at
landfills and transfer stations. Source reduction activities are estimated in Chapter 4.
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
This relatively small category of MSW is also derived from sampling studies. It is not well
defined and often shows up in sampling reports as "fines" or "other." It includes soil, bits of concrete,
stones, and the like.
Generation, Recovery, and Discards. This category contributed an estimated 3.4 million
tons of MSW in 1999. No recovery of these products was identified; discards are the same as
generation.
Summary of Materials in Municipal Solid Waste
Generation. Changing quantities and composition of municipal solid waste generation are
illustrated in Figure 10. Generation of MSW has grown relatively steadily, from 88.1 million tons in
1960 to 229.9 million tons in 1999.
Over the years, paper and paperboard has been the dominant material generated in MSW,
accounting for 38.1 percent of generation in 1999. Yard trimmings, the second-largest material
component of MSW (12.1 percent of MSW generation), have been declining as a percentage of MSW
in recent years due to state and locally legislated landfill bans and increased emphasis on backyard
composting and other source reduction measures such as the use of mulching mowers.
*Based on the April 1999 issue of BioCycle, which provides data on the amount of MSW composted and the
number of yard trimmings composting facilities in 1998.
48
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Metals account for 7.8 percent of MSW generation and have remained fairly constant as a
source of MSW. Glass generation increased until the 1980s, but decreased somewhat in the 1990s.
Glass generation was 12.6 million tons in 1999, 5.5 percent of MSW generated. Food wastes have
remained fairly constant in terms of MSW tonnage (10.9 percent of generation in 1999). Plastics have
increasingly been used in a variety of products and thus have been a rapidly growing component of
MSW. In terms of tonnage contributed they ranked fourth in 1999 (behind paper, yard trimmings, and
food waste), and account for 10.5 percent of MSW generation.
Figure 10. Generation of materials in MSW, 1960 to 1999
250
200
150
100
* All other includes primarily wood, rubber and leather, and textiles
DAN Other*
DYard
DFood
D Plastics
DMetals
DGIass
DPaper
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
Recovery and Discards. The effect of recovery on MSW discards is illustrated in Figure 11.
Recovery of materials for recycling and composting grew at a rather slow pace from 1960 to the
1980s, increasing only from 6.4 percent of generation in 1960 to 10.9 percent in 1985. Renewed
interest in recycling (including composting) as waste management alternatives came about in the late
1980s, and the recovery rate in 1990 was estimated to be 16.2 percent of generation, increasing to
27.8 percent in 1999.
49
-------
250
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Figure 11. Recovery and discards of MSW,* 1960 to 1999
* Generation - recovery + discards.
1/1/60 1/1/65 1/1/70 1/1/75 1/1/80 1/1/85 1/1/90 1/1/95
Figure 12. Materials recovery,* 1999
Glass
Allother
Plastics 6%
2%
Yard trimmings
20%
Paper & paperboard
57%
* In percent by weight of total recovery
50
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Estimated recovery of materials (including composting) is shown in Figure 12. In 1999,
recovery of paper and paperboard dominated materials recovery at 57 percent of total tonnage
recovered. Recovery of other materials, while generally increasing, contributes much less tonnage,
reflecting in part the relatively smaller amounts of materials generated in those categories.
Figure 13 illustrates the effect of recovery of materials for recycling, including composting, on
the composition of MSW discards. For example, paper and paperboard were 38.1 percent of MSW
generated in 1999, but after recovery, paper and paperboard were 30.6 percent of discards. Materials
that have little or no recovery exhibit a larger percentage of MSW discards compared to generation.
The section of the chapter above, gave a breakdown of municipal solid waste by material. It
described how the 229.9 million tons of MSW was generated, recycled (including composted), and
disposed of. The following section breaks out the same 229.9 million tons of MSW by product.
PRODUCTS IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
The purpose of this section is to show how the products that make up municipal solid waste are
generated, recycled (including composting), and discarded. For ease of analysis, products are divided
into three basic types: durable, non-durable, and containers and packaging. These three types were
developed by the U.S. Department of Commerce, one of EPA's data sources, and were chosen based
on differences in length of product life and type of use. Durables, such as major appliances, last the
longest; non-durables, such as books, office paper, and plastic utensils, have a shorter life; and
containers and packaging, such as beverage containers and plastic bags, presumably have the shortest
life.
The following 15 tables (Tables 9 through 23) show generation, recycling (including
composting) and discards of municipal solid waste, by durables/non-durables/containers and
packaging. Within these 3 categories, products are listed by type - for instance office paper or
magazines. The material the product is made of may be stated as well (for instance, glass beverage
containers or aluminum beverage containers), or may be obvious (for instance, magazines are made of
paper.) Some products may be composites, such as tires or appliances, made of several different
material types.
At the bottom of each of these 15 tables (Tables 9 through 23), there is a section titled "Other
Wastes." This contains information on food wastes, yard trimmings, and miscellaneous inorganic
wastes. This information is the same as the information already provided in Tables 1 to 3, earlier in this
chapter, in the section where MSW is analyzed by material. This is because wood wastes and yard
trimmings are both a material and a product. Miscellaneous inorganic wastes also are handled this way.
51
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Figure 13. Materials generated and discarded
in municipal solid waste, 1999
(In percent of total generation and discards)
Other wastes
15%
Yard trimmings
12%
Food wastes
11%
Paper & paperboard
38%
Plastics
11%
Metals
8%
Generation
Other wastes
19%
Yard trimmings
9%
Food wastes
15%
Paper & paperboard
31%
Metals
7%
Plastics
14%
Discards
52
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Within Tables 9 through 23, the first three tables, Tables 9 to 11, serve as an index to the other
tables. Table 9 shows what tables to consult for detailed information on generation; Table 10 shows
what tables to consult for detailed information on recovery; and Table 11 does the same for detailed
information on discards. The tables on generation all have the same "bottom line," which is 229.9
million tons - but detail is provided in different areas - either durables, non-durables, or containers and
packaging. For Table 10, the "bottom line" is how much MSW is recovered; and for Table 11, the
"bottom line" is how much MSW is discarded.
Table 9
CATEGORIES OF PRODUCTS GENERATED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 1999
(In thousands of tons and percent of total generation)
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 12)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 15)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 18)
Total Product** Wastes
Other Wastes
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Generated - Weiaht
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 12)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 15)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 19)
Total Product** Wastes
Other Wastes
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Generated - %
Thousands of Tons
1960
9,920
17,330
27,370
54.620
12,200
20,000
1,300
33.500
88 120
1970
14,660
25,060
43,560
83.280
12,800
23,200
1,780
37.780
121 060
1980
21,800
34,420
52,670
108.890
13,000
27,500
2,250
42.750
151 640
1990
29,810
52,170
64,530
146.510
20,800
35,000
2,900
58.700
205210
1995
31,140
57,250
68,390
156.780
21,740
29,690
3,150
54.580
211 360
1997
33,220
59,280
71,040
163.540
24,620
27,730
3,250
55.600
219 140
1998
34,370
60,310
72,430
167.110
24,910
27,730
3,290
55.930
223 040
1999
35,370
62,200
76,010
173.580
25,160
27,730
3,380
56.270
229 850
Percent of Total Generation
1960
1 1 .3%
19.7%
31.1%
62.0%
13.8%
22.7%
1 .5%
38.0%
100.0%
1970
12.1%
20.7%
36.0%
68.8%
10.6%
19.2%
1.5%
31.2%
100.0%
1980
14.4%
22.7%
34.7%
71 .8%
8.6%
18.1%
1 .5%
28.2%
100.0%
1990
14.5%
25.4%
31 .4%
71 .4%
10.1%
17.1%
1 .4%
28.6%
100.0%
1995
14.7%
27.1%
32.4%
74.2%
10.3%
14.0%
1.5%
25.8%
100.0%
1997
15.2%
27.1%
32.4%
74.6%
1 1 .2%
12.7%
1 .5%
25.4%
100.0%
1998
15.4%
27.0%
32.5%
74.9%
11.2%
12.4%
1.5%
25.1%
100.0%
1999
15.4%
27.1%
33.1%
75.5%
10.9%
12.1%
1 .5%
24.5%
100.0%
Generation before materials recovery or combustion. Does not include construction & demolition debris, industrial
process wastes, or certain other wastes.
Other than food products.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates
53
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 10
RECOVERY* OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, 1960 TO 1999
(In thousands of tons and percent of generation of each category)
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 13)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 16)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 20)
Total Product** Wastes
Other Wastes
Food, OtherA
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Recovered - Weiaht
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 13)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 16)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 21)
Total Product** Wastes
Other Wastes
Food, OtherA
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Recovered - %
Thousands of Tons
1960
350
2,390
2,870
5,610
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Nea.
5,610
1970
940
3,730
3,350
8,020
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Nea.
8.020
1980
1,360
4,670
8,490
14,520
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Nea.
14.520
1990
3,460
8,800
16,780
29,040
Neg.
4,200
Neg.
4.200
33.240
1995
5,010
13,610
26,720
45,340
570
9,000
Neg.
9.570
54.910
1997
5,660
14,020
27,620
47,300
580
11,490
Neg.
12.070
59.370
1998
5,720
14,980
27,710
48,410
580
12,560
Neg.
13.140
61.550
1999
5,880
16,640
28,260
50,780
550
12,560
Neg.
13.110
63.890
Percent of Generation of Each Category
1960
3.5%
13.8%
10.5%
10.3%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Nea.
6.4%
1970
6.4%
14.9%
7.7%
9.6%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Nea.
6.6%
1980
6.2%
13.6%
16.1%
13.3%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Nea.
9.6%
1990
1 1 .6%
16.9%
26.0%
19.8%
Neg.
12.0%
Neg.
7.2%
16.2%
1995
16.1%
23.8%
39.1%
28.9%
2.6%
30.3%
Neg.
17.5%
26.0%
1997
17.0%
23.7%
38.9%
28.9%
2.4%
41.4%
Neg.
21.7%
27.1%
1998
16.6%
24.8%
38.3%
29.0%
2.3%
45.3%
Neg.
23.5%
27.6%
1999
16.6%
26.8%
37.2%
29.3%
2.2%
45.3%
Neg.
23.3%
27.8%
* Recovery of postconsumer wastes; does not include converting/fabrication scrap.
** Other than food products.
A Includes recovery of paper for composting.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates
54
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 11
CATEGORIES OF PRODUCTS DISCARDED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 1999
(In thousands of tons and percent of total discards)
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 14)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 17)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 22)
Total Product** Wastes
Other Wastes
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Discarded - Weight
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 14)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 1 7)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 23)
Total Product** Wastes
Other Wastes
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Discarded - %
Thousands of Tons
1960
9,570
14,940
24,500
49.010
12,200
20,000
1,300
33,500
82.510
1970
13,720
21,330
40,210
75.260
12,800
23,200
1,780
37,780
113.040
1980
20,440
29,750
44,180
94.370
13,000
27,500
2,250
42,750
137.120
Pe
1960
1 1 .6%
18.1%
29.7%
59.4%
14.8%
24.2%
1.6%
40.6%
100.0%
1970
12.1%
18.9%
35.6%
66.6%
11.3%
20.5%
1.6%
33.4%
100.0%
1980
14.9%
21.7%
32.2%
68.8%
9.5%
20.1%
1.6%
31.2%
100.0%
1990
26,350
43,370
47,750
117.470
20,800
30,800
2,900
54,500
171.970
1995
26,130
43,640
41,670
111.440
21,170
20,690
3,150
45,010
156.450
1997
27,560
45,260
43,420
116.240
24,040
16,240
3,250
43,530
159.770
1998
28,650
45,330
44,720
118.700
24,330
15,170
3,290
42,790
161.490
1999
29,490
45,560
47,750
122.800
24,610
15,170
3,380
43,160
165.960
cent of Total Discards
1990
15.3%
25.2%
27.8%
68.3%
12.1%
17.9%
1.7%
31.7%
100.0%
1995
16.7%
27.9%
26.6%
71.2%
13.5%
13.2%
2.0%
28.8%
100.0%
1997
17.2%
28.3%
27.2%
72.8%
15.0%
10.2%
2.0%
27.2%
100.0%
1998
17.7%
28.1%
27.7%
73.5%
15.1%
9.4%
2.0%
26.5%
100.0%
1999
17.8%
27.5%
28.8%
74.0%
14.8%
9.1%
2.0%
26.0%
100.0%
Discards after materials and compost recovery. Does not include construction & demolition debris,
industrial process wastes, or certain other wastes.
' Other than food products.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates
55
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Durable Goods
Durable goods generally are defined as products having a lifetime of three years or more,
although there are some exceptions. In this report, durable goods include large and small appliances,
furniture and furnishings, carpets and rugs, rubber tires, lead-acid automotive batteries, and
miscellaneous durable goods (e.g., luggage, consumer electronics) (see Tables 12 through 14). These
products are often called "oversize and bulky" in municipal solid waste management practice, and they
are generally handled in a somewhat different manner than other components of MSW. That is, they are
often picked up separately, and may not be mixed with other MSW at the landfill, combustor, or other
waste management facility. Durable goods are made up of a wide variety of materials. In order of
tonnage in MSW in 1999, these include: ferrous metals, plastics, ruber and leather, wood, textiles,
glass, other nonferrous metals (e.g., lead, copper), and aluminum.
Generation of durable goods in MSW totaled 35.4 million tons in 1999 (15.4 percent of total
MSW generation). After recovery for recycling, 29.5 million tons of durable goods remained as
discards in 1999.
Major Appliances. Major appliances in MSW include refrigerators, washing machines, water
heaters, etc. They are often called "white goods" in the trade. Data on unit production of appliances are
taken from the Appliance Manufacturer Market Profile. The unit data are converted to weight using
various conversion factors developed over the years, plus data on the materials composition of the
appliances. Adjustments also are made for the estimated life spans of the appliances, which range up to
20 years.
Generation of these waste products in MSW has increased very slowly; it was estimated to be
3.7 million tons in 1999 (1.6 percent of total MSW). In general, appliances have increased in quantity
but not in average weight over the years. Ferrous metals are the predominant materials in major
appliances, but other metals, plastics, glass, and other materials also are present.
Data on recovery of ferrous metals from major appliances are taken from a survey conducted
by the Steel Recycling Institute. Recovery of ferrous metals from shredded appliances was estimated to
be 1.9 million tons in 1999, leaving 1.8 million tons of appliances to be discarded.
Small Appliances. This category includes items such as toasters, hair dryers, electric
coffeepots, and the like. Information on shipments of small appliances was obtained from U.S.
Department of Commerce data. Information on weights and materials composition of discarded small
appliances was obtained through interviews. It was estimated that 940,000 tons of small appliances
were generated in 1999. A small amount of ferrous metals in small appliances is recovered through
magnetic separation.
Furniture and Furnishings. Data on sales of furniture and furnishings are provided by the
Department of Commerce in dollars. These data are converted to tons using factors developed for this
study over the years. Adjustments are made for imports and exports, and adjustments are made for the
lifetimes of the furniture.
56
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 12
PRODUCTS GENERATED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 1999
(WITH DETAIL ON DURABLE GOODS)
(In thousands of tons and percent of total generation)
Products
Thousands of Tons
1960
1970
1980
1990
1995
1997
1998
1999
Durable Goods
Major Appliances
Small Appliances**
Furniture and Furnishings
Carpets and Rugs**
Rubber Tires
Batteries, lead acid
Miscellaneous Durables
Selected Consumer Electronics***
Other Miscellaneous Durables
Total Miscellaneous Durables
Total Durable Goods
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 15)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 18)
Total Product Wastes}
Other Wastes
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Generated - Weight
Products
1,630
2,150
1,120
Neg.
5,020
9,920
17,330
27,370
54,620
12,200
20,000
1,300
33,500
88,120
2,170
2,830
1,890
820
6,950
14,660
25,060
43,560
83,280
12,800
23,200
1,780
37,780
121,060
2,950
4,760
2,720
1,490
9,880
21,800
34,420
52,670
108,890
13,000
27,500
2,250
42,750
151,640
3,310
460
6,790
1,660
3,610
1,510
12,470
29,810
52,170
64,530
146,510
20,800
35,000
2,900
58,700
205,210
3,420
710
7,170
2,230
3,770
1,810
12,030
31,140
57,250
68,390
156,780
21,740
29,690
3,150
54,580
211,360
3,600
830
7,510
2,330
4,260
1,780
12,910
33,220
59,280
71,040
163,540
24,620
27,730
3,250
55,600
219,140
3,650
890
7,600
2,410
4,510
1,940
13,370
34,370
60,310
72,430
167,110
24,910
27,730
3,290
55,930
223,040
3,680
940
7,710
2,470
4,650
1,940
1,760
12,220
13,980
35,370
62,200
76,010
173,580
25,160
27,730
3,380
56,270
229,850
Percent of Total Generation
1960
1970
1980
1990
Durable Goods
Major Appliances
Small Appliances**
Furniture and Furnishings
Carpets and Rugs**
Rubber Tires
Batteries, Lead-Acid
Miscellaneous Durables
Selected Consumer Electronics***
Other Miscellaneous Durables
Total Miscellaneous Durables
Total Durable Goods
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 15)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 19)
Total Product Wastes}
Other Wastes
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Generated - %
1.8%
2.4%
1.3%
Neg.
5.7%
11.3%
19.7%
31.1%
62.0%
13.8%
22.7%
1.5%
38.0%
100.0%
1.8%
2.3%
1.6%
0.7%
5.7%
12.1%
20.7%
36.0%
68.8%
10.6%
19.2%
1.5%
31.2%
100.0%
1.9%
3.1%
1.8%
1.0%
6.5%
14.4%
22.7%
34.7%
71.8%
8.6%
18.1%
1.5%
28.2%
100.0%
1.6%
0.2%
3.3%
0.8%
1.8%
0.7%
6.1%
14.5%
25.4%
31.4%
71.4%
10.1%
17.1%
1.4%
28.6%
100.0%
1995
1997
1998
1999
1.6%
0.3%
3.4%
1.1%
1.8%
0.9%
5.7%
14.7%
27.1%
32.4%
74.2%
10.3%
14.0%
1.5%
25.8%
100.0%
1.6%
0.4%
3.4%
1.1%
1.9%
0.8%
5.9%
15.2%
27.1%
32.4%
74.6%
11.2%
12.7%
1.5%
25.4%
100.0%
1.6%
0.4%
3.4%
1.1%
2.0%
0.9%
6.0%
15.4%
27.0%
32.5%
74.9%
11.2%
12.4%
1.5%
25.1%
100.0%
1.6%
0.4%
3.4%
1.1%
2.0%
0.8%
0.8%
5.3%
6.1%
15.4%
27.1%
33.1%
75.5%
10.9%
12.1%
1.5%
24.5%
100.0%
* Generation before materials recovery or combustion. Does not include construction & demolition debris, industrial process
wastes, or certain other wastes. Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
** Not estimated separately prior to 1990. *** Not estimated separately prior to 1999.
t Other than food products.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Source: Franklin Associates.
57
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 13
RECOVERY* OF PRODUCTS IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, 1960 TO 1999
(WITH DETAIL ON DURABLE GOODS)
(In thousands of tons and percent of generation of each product)
Products
Thousands of Tons
1960
1970
1980
1990
1995
1997
1998
1999
Durable Goods
Major Appliances
Small Appliances**
Furniture and Furnishings
Carpets and Rugs**
Rubber Tires
Batteries, lead acid
Miscellaneous Durables
Selected Consumer Electronics***
Other Miscellaneous Durables
Total Miscellaneous Durables
Total Durable Goods
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 16)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 20)
Total Product I/Vastest
Other Wastes
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Recovered - Weight
Products
10
Neg.
330
Neg.
10
350
2,390
2,870
5,610
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
5,610
50
Neg.
250
620
20
940
3,730
3,350
8,020
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
8,020
130
Neg.
150
1,040
40
1,360
4,670
8,490
14,520
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
14,520
1,070
10
Neg.
Neg.
440
1,470
470
3,460
8,800
16,780
29,040
Neg.
4,200
Neg.
4,200
33,240
2,070
10
Neg.
20
670
1,620
620
5,010
13,610
26,720
45,340
570
9,000
Neg.
9,570
54,910
2,320
10
Neg.
30
950
1,660
690
5,660
14,020
27,620
47,300
580
11,490
Neg.
12,070
59,370
1,940
10
Neg.
30
1,060
1,880
800
5,720
14,980
27,710
48,410
580
12,560
Neg.
13,140
61,550
1,920
10
Neg.
30
1,230
1,880
160
650
810
5,880
16,640
28,260
50,780
550
12,560
Neg.
13,110
63,890
Percent of Generation of Each Product
1960
1970
1980
1990
1995
1997
1998
1999
Durable Goods
Major Appliances
Small Appliances**
Furniture and Furnishings
Carpets and Rugs**
Rubber Tires
Batteries, Lead-Acid
Miscellaneous Durables
Selected Consumer Electronics***
Other Miscellaneous Durables
Total Miscellaneous Durables
Total Durable Goods
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 16)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 21)
Total Product Wastesf
Other Wastes
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Recovered - %
0.6%
Neg.
29.5%
Neg.
0.2%
3.5%
13.8%
10.5%
10.3%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
6.4%
2.3%
Neg.
13.2%
75.6%
0.3%
6.4%
14.9%
7.7%
9.6%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
6.6%
4.4%
Neg.
5.5%
69.8%
0.4%
6.2%
13.6%
16.1%
13.3%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
9.6%
32.3%
2.2%
Neg.
Neg.
12.2%
97.4%
3.8%
1 1 .6%
16.9%
26.0%
19.8%
Neg.
12.0%
Neg.
7.2%
16.2%
60.5%
1 .4%
Neg.
0.9%
17.8%
89.5%
5.2%
16.1%
23.8%
39.1%
28.9%
2.6%
30.3%
Neg.
17.5%
26.0%
64.4%
1.2%
Neg.
1 .3%
22.3%
93.3%
5.3%
17.0%
23.7%
38.9%
28.9%
2.4%
41.4%
Neg.
21.7%
27.1%
53.2%
1.1%
Neg.
1.2%
23.5%
96.9%
6.0%
16.6%
24.8%
38.3%
29.0%
2.3%
45.3%
Neg.
23.5%
27.6%
52.2%
1.1%
Neg.
1.2%
26.5%
96.9%
9.1%
5.3%
5.8%
16.6%
26.8%
37.2%
29.3%
2.2%
45.3%
Neg.
23.3%
27.8%
* Recovery of postconsumer wastes; does not include converting/fabrication scrap.
** Not estimated separately prior to 1990. *** Not estimated separately prior to 1999.
t Other than food products.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Source: Franklin Associates.
58
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 14
PRODUCTS DISCARDED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 1999
(WITH DETAIL ON DURABLE GOODS)
(In thousands of tons and percent of total discards)
Products
Thousands of Tons
1960
1970
1980
1990
1995
1997
1998
1999
Durable Goods
Major Appliances
Small Appliances**
Furniture and Furnishings
Carpets and Rugs**
Rubber Tires
Batteries, lead acid
Miscellaneous Durables
Selected Consumer Electronics***
Other Miscellaneous Durables
Total Miscellaneous Durables
Total Durable Goods
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 1 7)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 22)
Total Product Wastes^
Other Wastes
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Discarded - Weight
Products
1,620
2,150
790
Neg.
5,010
9,570
14,940
24,500
49,010
12,200
20,000
1,300
33,500
82,510
2,120
2,830
1,640
200
6,930
13,720
21,330
40,210
75,260
12,800
23,200
1,780
37,780
113,040
2,820
4,760
2,570
450
9,840
20,440
29,750
44,180
94,370
13,000
27,500
2,250
42,750
137,120
2,240
450
6,790
1,660
3,170
40
12,000
26,350
43,370
47,750
117,470
20,800
30,800
2,900
54,500
171,970
1,350
700
7,170
2,210
3,100
190
11,410
26,130
43,640
41,670
111,440
21,170
20,690
3,150
45,010
156,450
1,280
820
7,510
2,300
3,310
120
12,220
27,560
45,260
43,420
116,240
24,040
16,240
3,250
43,530
159,770
1,710
880
7,600
2,380
3,450
60
12,570
28,650
45,330
44,720
118,700
24,330
15,170
3,290
42,790
161,490
1,760
930
7,710
2,440
3,420
60
1,600
11,570
13,170
29,490
45,560
47,750
122,800
24,610
15,170
3,380
43,160
165,960
Percent of Total Discards
1960
1970
1980
1990
1995
1997
1998
1999
Durable Goods
Major Appliances
Small Appliances**
Furniture and Furnishings
Carpets and Rugs**
Rubber Tires
Batteries, Lead-Acid
Miscellaneous Durables
Selected Consumer Electronics***
Other Miscellaneous Durables
Total Miscellaneous Durables
Total Durable Goods
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 1 7)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 23)
Total Product Wastes^
Other Wastes
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Discarded - %
2.0%
2.6%
1 .0%
Neg.
6.1%
1 1 .6%
18.1%
29.7%
59.4%
14.8%
24.2%
1 .6%
40.6%
100.0%
1 .9%
2.5%
1 .5%
0.2%
6.1%
12.1%
18.9%
35.6%
66.6%
1 1 .3%
20.5%
1 .6%
33.4%
100.0%
2.1%
3.5%
1 .9%
0.3%
7.2%
14.9%
21.7%
32.2%
68.8%
9.5%
20.1%
1 .6%
31 .2%
100.0%
1 .3%
0.3%
3.9%
1 .0%
1 .8%
0.0%
7.0%
15.3%
25.2%
27.8%
68.3%
12.1%
17.9%
1 .7%
31 .7%
100.0%
0.9%
0.4%
4.6%
1.4%
2.0%
0.1%
7.3%
16.7%
27.9%
26.6%
71.2%
13.5%
13.2%
2.0%
28.8%
100.0%
0.8%
0.5%
4.7%
1 .4%
2.1%
0.1%
7.6%
17.2%
28.3%
27.2%
72.8%
15.0%
10.2%
2.0%
27.2%
100.0%
1.1%
0.5%
4.7%
1 .5%
2.1%
0.0%
7.8%
17.7%
28.1%
27.7%
73.5%
15.1%
9.4%
2.0%
26.5%
100.0%
1.1%
0.6%
4.6%
1 .5%
2.1%
0.0%
1 .0%
6.9%
7.9%
17.8%
27.5%
28.8%
74.0%
14.8%
9.1%
2.0%
26.0%
100.0%
* Discards after materials and compost recovery. Does not include construction & demolition debris, industrial process wastes,
or certain other wastes. Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
** Not estimated separately prior to 1990. *** Not estimated separately prior to 1999.
t Other than food products.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Source: Franklin Associates.
59
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Generation of waste furniture and furnishings in MSW has increased from 2.2 million tons in
1960 to 7.7 million tons in 1999 (3.4 percent of total MSW). No significant recovery of materials from
furniture was identified. Wood is the largest material category in furniture, with ferrous metals second.
Plastics, glass, and other materials also are found in furniture.
Carpets and Rugs. An industry publication, Carpet and Rug Industrial Review, publishes
data on carpet sales. These data, originally in square yards, are converted to tons using various factors
developed for this report. An estimated 2.5 million tons of carpets and rugs were generated in MSW in
1999, which was 1.1 percent of total generation.
A small amount of recycling of carpet fiber was identified - estimated to be about 1 percent
recovery in 1999.
Vehicle Tires. The methodology for estimating generation of rubber tires for automobiles and
trucks is based on data on replacement tires purchased and vehicles deregistered as reported by the
U.S. Department of Commerce. It is assumed that for each replacement tire purchased, a used tire
enters the waste management system, and that tires on deregistered vehicles also enter the waste
management system. Retreaded tires are treated as a diversion out of the waste stream; they are
assumed to re-enter the waste stream after two years of use.
The quantities of tires in units are converted to weight and materials composition using factors
developed for this series of reports. In addition to rubber, tires include relatively small amounts of
textiles and ferrous metals. Generation of rubber tires increased from 1.1 million tons in 1960 to 4.7
million tons in 1999 (2 percent of total MSW).
Data on recovery of tires in recent years are based on data from the Scrap Tire Management
Council. Rubber recovery from tires has been increasing in recent years. In 1999, an estimated 26.5
percent of the weight of tires generated was recovered for recycling, leaving 3.4 million tons to be
discarded. (Tires going to combustion facilities as fuel are included in the combustion estimates in
Chapters.)
Lead-Acid Batteries. The methodology for estimating generation of lead-acid batteries is
similar to the methodology for rubber tires as described above. An estimated 1.9 million tons of lead-
acid batteries from automobiles, trucks, and motorcycles were generated in MSW in 1999 (less than 1
percent of total generation).
Data on recovery of batteries has been provided by the Battery Council International.
Recovery of batteries for recycling has fluctuated between 60 percent and 98 percent or higher;
recovery has increased since 1980 as a growing number of communities have restricted batteries from
disposal at landfills or combustion facilities. In 1999, 96.9 percent of the lead in these batteries was
estimated to be recovered for recycling as well as substantial quantities of the polypropylene battery
casings; so discards after recycling of these batteries decreased to 60,000 tons in 1999. (Some
electrolytes and other materials in batteries are removed from the municipal solid waste stream along
with recovered lead and polypropylene; these materials are counted as "recovered" along with the
recyclable materials.)
60
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Miscellaneous Durable Goods. Miscellaneous durable goods include consumer electronics
such as television sets, video cassette recorders, personal computers, luggage,
sporting equipment, and the like. An estimated 14 million tons of these goods were generated in 1999,
amounting to 6.1 percent of MSW generated. An estimated 1.8 million tons of selected consumer
electronics were generated. Of this, approximately 160,000 tons of selected consumer electronics were
recovered for recycling. Additional information on consumer electronics, a subset of miscellaneous
durable goods, can be found in Appendix C.
The miscellaneous durable goods category as a whole, includes ferrous metals, and also
plastics, glass, rubber, wood, and other metals. An estimated 810,000 tons of ferrous metals were
recovered from this category through pre-combustion and post-combustion magnetic separation at
MSW combustion facilities in 1999, decreasing discards to 13.2 million tons.
Nondurable Goods
The Department of Commerce defines nondurable goods as those having a life span of less than
three years, and this definition was followed for this report to the extent possible.
Products made of paper and paperboard comprise the largest portion of nondurable goods.
Other nondurable products include paper and plastic plates, cups, and other disposable food service
products; disposable diapers; clothing and footwear; linens; and other miscellaneous products. (See
Tables 15 through 17.)
Generation of nondurable goods in MSW was 62.2 million tons in 1999 (27.1 percent of total
generation). Recovery of paper products in this category is quite significant, resulting in 16.7 million tons
of nondurable goods recovered in 1999 (26.8 percent of nondurables generation). This means that 45.6
million tons of nondurable goods were discarded in 1999 (27.5 percent of total MSW discards).
Paper and Paperboard Products. Generation, recovery, and discards of paper and
paperboard products in nondurable goods are summarized in Tables 15 through 17. A summary for
1999 was shown earlier in Table 4. Since 1997, generation of nondurable paper products has
increased. Each of the paper and paperboard product categories in nondurable goods is discussed
briefly below.
Newspapers are by far the largest single component of the nondurable goods category, at 14
million tons generated in 1999 (6.1 percent of total MSW). In 1999, 59 percent of newspapers
generated were recovered for recycling, leaving 5.7 million tons discarded (3.5 percent of total
MSW discarded). Estimates of newspaper generation are broken down into newsprint (the
majority of the weight of the newspapers) and the groundwood* inserts (primarily advertising)
that are a significant portion of the total weight of newspapers. This breakdown is shown in
Table 4.
Books amounted to approximately 1.1 million tons, or 0.5 percent of total MSW generation, in
1999. Recovery of books is not well documented, but it was estimated that approximately
200,000 tons of books were recovered in 1999. Books are made of both groundwood and
chemical pulp.
* Groundwood papers, like newsprint, are made primarily from pulp prepared by a mechanical process. The nature of
the pulp (groundwood vs. chemical) affects the potential uses for the recovered paper.
61
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 15
PRODUCTS GENERATED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 1999
(WITH DETAIL ON NONDURABLE GOODS)
(In thousands of tons and percent of total generation)
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 12)
Thousands of Tons
1960
9,920
1970
14,660
1980
21,800
1990
29,810
1995
31,140
1997
33,220
1998
34,370
1999
35,370
Nondurable Goods
Newspapers
Books and Magazines
Books**
Magazines**
Office Papers
Directories**
Standard (A) Mail***
Other Commercial Printing
Tissue Paper and Towels
Paper Plates and Cups
Plastic Plates and Cupsf
Trash Bags**
Disposable Diapers
Other Nonpackaging Paper
Clothing and Footwear
Towels, Sheets and Pillowcases**
Other Miscellaneous Nondurables
Total Nondurable Goods
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 18)
Total Product Wastes}
Other Wastes
Total MSW Generated - Weight
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 12)
7,110
1,920
1,520
1,260
1,090
270
Neg.
2,700
1,360
100
17,330
27,370
54,620
33,500
88,120
9,510
2,470
2,650
2,130
2,080
420
350
3,630
1,620
200
25,060
43,560
83,280
37,780
121,060
11,050
3,390
4,000
3,120
2,300
630
190
1,930
4,230
2,170
1,410
34,420
52,670
108,890
42,750
151,640
13,430
970
2,830
6,410
610
3,820
4,460
2,960
650
650
780
2,700
3,840
4,010
710
3,340
52,170
64,530
146,510
58,700
205,210
13,140
1,150
2,530
6,640
490
4,620
6,770
2,970
970
780
780
3,010
4,270
5,070
740
3,320
57,250
68,390
156,780
54,580
211,360
13,490
1,120
2,160
6,930
470
4,850
7,000
3,120
970
860
810
3,140
4,390
5,770
750
3,450
59,280
71,040
163,540
55,600
219,140
13,630
1,140
2,260
7,040
740
5,200
6,580
3,100
890
890
840
3,200
4,420
6,040
750
3,590
60,310
72,430
167,110
55,930
223,040
13,960
1,120
2,310
7,670
680
5,560
5,940
3,360
930
910
950
3,310
4,740
6,250
780
3,730
62,200
76,010
173,580
56,270
229,850
Percent of Total Generation
1960
1 1 .3%
1970
12.1%
1980
14.4%
1990
14.5%
1995
14.7%
1997
15.2%
1998
15.4%
1999
15.4%
Nondurable Goods
Newspapers
Books and Magazines
Books**
Magazines**
Office Papers
Directories**
Standard (A) Mail***
Other Commercial Printing
Tissue Paper and Towels
Paper Plates and Cups
Plastic Plates and Cupsf
Trash Bags**
Disposable Diapers
Other Nonpackaging Paper
Clothing and Footwear
Towels, Sheets and Pillowcases**
Other Miscellaneous Nondurables
Total Nondurables
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 19)
Total Product Wastes}
Other Wastes
Total MSW Generated - %
8.1%
2.2%
1 .7%
1 .4%
1.2%
0.3%
Neg.
3.1%
1 .5%
0.1%
19.7%
31.1%
62.0%
38.0%
100.0%
7.9%
2.0%
2.2%
1 .8%
1 .7%
0.3%
0.3%
3.0%
1 .3%
0.2%
20.7%
36.0%
68.8%
31.2%
100.0%
7.3%
2.2%
2.6%
2.1%
1 .5%
0.4%
0.1%
1 .3%
2.8%
1 .4%
0.9%
22.7%
34.7%
71.8%
28.2%
100.0%
6.5%
0.5%
1 .4%
3.1%
0.3%
1 .9%
2.2%
1 .4%
0.3%
0.3%
0.4%
1 .3%
1 .9%
2.0%
0.3%
1 .6%
25.4%
31.4%
71.4%
28.6%
100.0%
6.2%
0.5%
1.2%
3.1%
0.2%
2.2%
3.2%
1.4%
0.5%
0.4%
0.4%
1.4%
2.0%
2.4%
0.4%
1.6%
27.1%
32.4%
74.2%
25.8%
100.0%
6.2%
0.5%
1 .0%
3.2%
0.2%
2.2%
3.2%
1 .4%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
1 .4%
2.0%
2.6%
0.3%
1 .6%
27.1%
32.4%
74.6%
25.4%
100.0%
6.1%
0.5%
1 .0%
3.2%
0.3%
2.3%
3.0%
1 .4%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
1 .4%
2.0%
2.7%
0.3%
1 .6%
27.0%
32.5%
74.9%
25.1%
100.0%
6.1%
0.5%
1 .0%
3.3%
0.3%
2.4%
2.6%
1 .5%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
1 .4%
2.1%
2.7%
0.3%
1 .6%
27.1%
33.1%
75.5%
24.5%
100.0%
* Generation before materials recovery or combustion. Does not include construction & demolition debris, industrial process wastes,
or certain other wastes. Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
** Not estimated separately prior to 1990.
"** Not estimated separately prior to 1990. Formerly called Third Class Mail by the U.S. Postal Service.
t Not estimated separately prior to 1980.
j Other than food products.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Source: Franklin Associates.
62
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 16
RECOVERY* OF PRODUCTS IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, 1960 TO 1999
(WITH DETAIL ON NONDURABLE GOODS)
(In thousands of tons and percent of generation of each product)
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 13)
Thousands of Tons
1960
350
1970
940
1980
1,360
1990
3,460
1995
5,010
1997
5,660
1998
5,720
1999
5,880
Nondurable Goods
Newspapers
Books and Magazines
Books**
Magazines**
Office Papers
Directories**
Standard (A) Mail***
Other Commercial Printing
Tissue Paper and Towels
Paper Plates and Cups
Plastic Plates and Cupsf
Trash Bags**
Disposable Diapers
Other Nonpackaging Paper
Clothing and Footwear
Towels, Sheets and Pillowcases**
Other Miscellaneous Nondurables
Total Nondurable Goods
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 20)
Total Product Wastes}
Other Wastes
Total MSW Recovered - Weight
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 13)
1,820
100
250
130
Neg.
Neg.
40
50
Neg.
2,390
2,870
5,610
Neg.
5,610
2,250
260
710
340
Neg.
Neg.
110
60
Neg.
3,730
3,350
8,020
Neg.
8,020
3,020
280
870
350
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
150
Neg.
4,670
8,490
14,520
Neg.
14,520
5,110
100
300
1,700
40
200
700
Neg.
Neg.
10
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
520
120
Neg.
8,800
16,780
29,040
4,200
33,240
7,010
220
650
3,040
60
710
1,120
Neg.
Neg.
10
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
660
130
Neg.
13,610
26,720
45,340
9,570
54,910
7,340
160
440
3,500
60
880
750
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
760
130
Neg.
14,020
27,620
47,300
12,070
59,370
7,210
160
470
3,550
100
980
1,580
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
800
130
Neg.
14,980
27,710
48,410
13,140
61,550
8,230
200
530
4,040
110
1,230
1,360
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
810
130
Neg.
16,640
28,260
50,780
13,110
63,890
Percent of Generation of Each Product
1960
3.5%
1970
6.4%
1980
6.2%
1990
11.6%
1995
16.1%
1997
17.0%
1998
16.6%
1999
16.6%
Nondurable Goods
Newspapers
Books and Magazines
Books**
Magazines**
Office Papers
Directories**
Standard (A) Mail***
Other Commercial Printing
Tissue Paper and Towels
Paper Plates and Cups
Plastic Plates and Cupsf
Trash Bags**
Disposable Diapers
Other Nonpackaging Paper
Clothing and Footwear
Towels, Sheets and Pillowcases**
Other Miscellaneous Nondurables
Total Nondurables
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 21)
Total Product Wastes}
Other Wastes
Total MSW Recovered - %
25.6%
5.2%
16.4%
10.3%
Neg.
Neg.
1.5%
Neg.
Neg.
13.8%
10.5%
10.3%
Neg.
6.4%
23.7%
10.5%
26.8%
16.0%
Neg.
Neg.
3.0%
Neg.
Neg.
14.9%
7.7%
9.6%
Neg.
6.6%
27.3%
8.3%
21.8%
11.2%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
13.6%
16.1%
13.3%
Neg.
9.6%
38.0%
10.3%
10.6%
26.5%
6.6%
5.2%
15.7%
Neg.
Neg.
1.5%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
13.0%
16.9%
Neg.
16.9%
26.0%
19.8%
7.2%
16.2%
53.3%
19.1%
25.7%
45.8%
12.2%
15.4%
16.5%
Neg.
Neg.
1 .3%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
13.0%
17.6%
Neg.
23.8%
39.1%
28.9%
17.5%
26.0%
54.4%
14.3%
20.4%
50.5%
12.8%
18.1%
10.7%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
13.2%
17.3%
Neg.
23.7%
38.9%
28.9%
21.7%
27.1%
52.9%
14.0%
20.8%
50.4%
13.5%
18.8%
24.0%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
13.2%
17.3%
Neg.
24.8%
38.3%
29.0%
23.5%
27.6%
59.0%
17.9%
22.9%
52.7%
16.2%
22.1%
22.9%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
13.0%
16.7%
Neg.
26.8%
37.2%
29.3%
23.3%
27.8%
* Recovery of postconsumer wastes; does not include converting/fabrication
** Not estimated separately prior to 1990.
*** Not estimated separately prior to 1990. Formerly called Third Class Mail by
t Not estimated separately prior to 1980.
t Other than food products.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Source: Franklin Associates.
scrap.
the U.S. Postal Service.
63
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 17
PRODUCTS DISCARDED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 1999
(WITH DETAIL ON NONDURABLE GOODS)
(In thousands of tons and percent of total discards)
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 14)
Nondurable Goods
Newspapers
Books and Magazines
Books**
Magazines**
Office Papers
Directories**
Standard (A) Mail***
Other Commercial Printing
Tissue Paper and Towels
Paper Plates and Cups
Plastic Plates and Cupsf
Trash Bags**
Disposable Diapers
Other Nonpackaging Paper
Clothing and Footwear
Towels, Sheets and Pillowcases**
Other Miscellaneous Nondurables
Total Nondurable Goods
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 22)
Total Product Wastes?
Other Wastes
Total MSW Discarded - Weight
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 14)
Nondurable Goods
Newspapers
Books and Magazines
Books**
Magazines**
Office Papers
Directories**
Standard (A) Mail***
Other Commercial Printing
Tissue Paper and Towels
Paper Plates and Cups
Plastic Plates and Cupsf
Trash Bags**
Disposable Diapers
Other Nonpackaging Paper
Clothing and Footwear
Towels, Sheets and Pillowcases**
Other Miscellaneous Nondurables
Total Nondurables
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 23)
Total Product Wastes?
Other Wastes
Total MSW Discarded - %
Thousands of Tons
1960
9,570
1970
13,720
1980
20,440
1990
26,350
1995
26,130
1997
27,560
1998
28,650
1999
29,490
5,290
1,820
1,270
1,130
1,090
270
Neg.
2,660
1,310
100
14,940
24,500
49,010
33,500
82,510
7,260
2,210
1,940
1,790
2,080
420
350
3,520
1,560
200
21,330
40,210
75,260
37,780
113,040
8,030
3,110
3,130
2,770
2,300
630
190
1,930
4,230
2,020
1,410
29,750
44,180
94,370
42,750
137,120
8,320
870
2,530
4,710
570
3,620
3,760
2,960
650
640
780
2,700
3,840
3,490
590
3,340
43,370
47,750
117,470
54,500
171,970
6,130
930
1,880
3,600
430
3,910
5,650
2,970
970
770
780
3,010
4,270
4,410
610
3,320
43,640
41,670
111,440
45,010
156,450
6,150
960
1,720
3,430
410
3,970
6,250
3,120
970
860
810
3,140
4,390
5,010
620
3,450
45,260
43,420
116,240
43,530
159,770
6,420
980
1,790
3,490
640
4,220
5,000
3,100
890
890
840
3,200
4,420
5,240
620
3,590
45,330
44,720
118,700
42,790
161,490
5,730
920
1,780
3,630
570
4,330
4,580
3,360
930
910
950
3,310
4,740
5,440
650
3,730
45,560
47,750
122,800
43,160
165,960
Percent of Total Discards
1960
11.6%
1970
12.1%
1980
14.9%
1990
15.3%
1995
16.7%
1997
17.2%
1998
17.7%
1999
17.8%
6.4%
2.2%
1 .5%
1 .4%
1 .3%
0.3%
Neg.
3.2%
1 .6%
0.1%
18.1%
29.7%
59.4%
40.6%
100.0%
6.4%
2.0%
1 .7%
1 .6%
1 .8%
0.4%
0.3%
3.1%
1 .4%
0.2%
18.9%
35.6%
66.6%
33.4%
100.0%
5.9%
2.3%
2.3%
2.0%
1.7%
0.5%
0.1%
1.4%
3.1%
1.5%
1.7%
21.7%
32.2%
68.8%
31.2%
100.0%
4.8%
0.5%
1 .5%
2.7%
0.3%
2.1%
2.2%
1 .7%
0.4%
0.4%
0.5%
1 .6%
2.2%
2.0%
0.3%
1 .9%
25.2%
27.8%
68.3%
31.7%
100.0%
3.9%
0.6%
1.2%
2.3%
0.3%
2.5%
3.6%
1.9%
0.6%
0.5%
0.5%
1.9%
2.7%
2.8%
0.4%
2.1%
27.9%
26.6%
71.2%
28.8%
100.0%
3.8%
0.6%
1.1%
2.1%
0.3%
2.5%
3.9%
2.0%
0.6%
0.5%
0.5%
2.0%
2.7%
3.1%
0.4%
2.2%
28.3%
27.2%
72.8%
27.2%
100.0%
4.0%
0.6%
1.1%
2.2%
0.4%
2.6%
3.1%
1.9%
0.6%
0.6%
0.5%
2.0%
2.7%
3.2%
0.4%
2.2%
28.1%
27.7%
73.5%
26.5%
100.0%
3.5%
0.6%
1.1%
2.2%
0.3%
2.6%
2.8%
2.0%
0.6%
0.5%
0.6%
2.0%
2.9%
3.3%
0.4%
2.2%
27.5%
28.8%
74.0%
26.0%
100.0%
Discards after materials and compost recovery. Does not include construction & demolition debris, industrial process wastes,
or certain other wastes. Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Not estimated separately prior to 1990.
Not estimated separately prior to 1990. Formerly called Third Class Mail by the U.S. Postal Service.
Not estimated separately prior to 1980.
Other than food products.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Source: Franklin Associates.
64
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Magazines accounted for an estimated 2.3 million tons, or 1 percent of total MSW generation,
in 1999. Like books, recovery of magazines is not well documented. It was estimated that 530,000
tons of magazines were recovered in 1999. Magazines are predominately made of coated groundwood,
but some uncoated groundwood and chemical pulps are also used.
Many different kinds of papers are generated in offices. For this report, office-type paper
estimates include the high-grade papers such as copier paper, computer printout, stationery,
etc. Generation of these office papers was 7.7 million tons, or 3.3 percent of total MSW
generation in 1999. These papers are almost entirely made of uncoated chemical pulp, although
some amounts of groundwood are also used. It should be noted that some of these office-type
papers are generated at locations other than offices, including homes and institutions such as
schools. Also, other kinds of papers (e.g., newspapers, magazines, and packaging) are
generated in offices, but are accounted for in other categories. An estimated 4 million tons of
office-type papers were recovered in 1999, up from 3.6 million tons in 1997.
Directories were estimated to generate 680,000 tons (0.3 percent of total MSW) in 1999.
These directories are made of groundwood. It was estimated that 110,000 tons of directories
were recovered in 1999, a 10 percent increase over 1998 recovery. The Yellow Pages
Publishers Association (YPPA) publishes data on paper use in directories.
Standard (A) mail* includes catalogs and other direct bulk mailings; these amounted to an
estimated 5.6 million tons, or 2.4 percent of MSW generation, in 1999. Both groundwood and
chemical pulps are used in these mailings. It was estimated that 1,230,000 tons were recovered
in 1999, up from 880,000 tons in 1997. The program by the U.S. Postal Service to increase
recovery of bulk mail appears to be showing results.
Other commercial printing includes a wide range of paper items: brochures, reports, menus,
invitations, etc. Both groundwood and chemical pulps are used in these varied items.
Generation was estimated at 5.9 million tons, or 2.6 percent of MSW generation, in 1999, with
recovery estimated at 1.1 million tons.
Tissue paper and towels generation includes facial and sanitary tissues and napkins, but not
bathroom tissue, which is nearly all diverted from MSW into the wastewater treatment system.
Tissue paper and towels (not including bathroom tissue) amounted to 3.4 million tons (1.5
percent of total MSW generation) in 1999. No significant recovery of tissue products was
identified for recycling, although there is some composting of these items.
Paper plates and cups include paper plates, cups, bowls, and other food service products used
in homes, in commercial establishments like restaurants, and in institutional settings such as
schools. Generation of these products was estimated at 930,000 (0.4 percent of total MSW
generation) in 1999. No significant recovery for recycling of these products was identified.
Standard (A) mail was formerly called Third Class mail by the U.S. Postal Service.
65
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Other nonpackaging papers - including posters, photographic papers, cards and games, etc. -
accounted for 4.7 million tons (2.1 percent of total MSW generation) in 1999. No significant
recovery for recycling of these papers was identified.
Overall, generation of paper and paperboard products in nondurable goods was 46.3 million
tons in 1999 (Table 4). While newspapers were recovered at the highest rate, other paper products,
such as books, magazines, and office papers, also were recovered for recycling, and the overall
recovery rate for paper in nondurables was 33.9 percent in 1999. Thus 30.6 million tons of paper in
nondurables were discarded in 1999.
Plastic Plates and Cups. This category includes estimates of both infant diapers and adult
incontinence products. Generation was estimated using data on sales of the products along with
information on average weights and composition. An estimated 3.3 million tons of disposable diapers
were generated in 1999, or 1.4 percent of total MSW generation. (This tonnage includes an adjustment
for the urine and feces contained within the discarded diapers.) The materials portion of the diapers
includes wood pulp, plastics (including the super-absorbent materials now present in most diapers), and
tissue paper.
No significant recycling or composting of disposable diapers was identified in 1999.
Clothing and Footwear. Generation of clothing and footwear was estimated to be 6.3 million
tons in 1999 (2.7 percent of total MSW). Textiles, rubber, and leather are major materials components
of this category, with some plastics present as well. Generation estimates for these products are based
on sales data from the Department of Commerce along with data on average weights for each type of
products included. Adjustments are made for net imports of these products based on Department of
Commerce data.
The Council for Textile Recycling has reported on recovery of textiles for exports,
reprocessing, and reuse. Based on their data, it was estimated that 810,000 tons of textiles in clothing
were recovered for export or recycling in 1999. (Reuse is not counted as recycling and is included in
the estimates in Chapter 3.)
Towels, Sheets, and Pillowcases. An estimated 780,000 tons of towels, sheets, and
pillowcases were generated in 1999. Generation was estimated using a methodology similar to that for
clothing. An estimated 130,000 tons of these textiles were recovered for export or recycling in 1999.
Other Miscellaneous Nondurables. Generation of other miscellaneous nondurables was
estimated to be 3.7 million tons in 1999 (1.6 percent of MSW). The primary material component of
miscellaneous nondurables is plastics, although some aluminum, rubber, and textiles also are present.
Typical products in miscellaneous nondurables include shower curtains and other household items,
disposable medical supplies, novelty items, and the like.
Generation of plastic products in miscellaneous nondurables is taken from resin sales data
published annually in Modern Plastics. Generation of other materials in these nondurable products is
estimated based on information in past reports in this series.
66
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Containers and Packaging
Containers and packaging make up a major portion of MSW, amounting to 76 million tons of
generation in 1999 (33.1 percent of total generation). Generation, recovery, and discards of containers
and packaging are shown in detail in Tables 18 through 23.
There is a substantial recovery of many container and packaging products, especially
corrugated containers. In 1999, 37.2 percent of containers and packaging generated was recovered for
recycling. Because of this recovery, containers and packaging comprised 28.8 percent of total MSW
discards in 1999.
Containers and packaging in MSW are made of several materials: paper and paperboard,
glass, steel, aluminum, plastics, wood, and small amounts of other materials. Material categories are
discussed separately below.
Glass Containers. Glass containers include beer and soft drink bottles (which includes
carbonated drinks and non-carbonated waters, teas, and flavored drinks containing not more than 10
percent fruit juice), wine and liquor bottles, and bottles and jars for food, cosmetics, and other
products. Generation of glass containers is estimated using Department of Commerce data.
Adjustments are made for imports and exports of both empty glass containers and containers holding
products, e.g., imported beer.
Generation of these glass containers was 11.1 million tons in 1999, or 4.8 percent of MSW
generation (Tables 18 and 19). This is a slight increase in generation compared to 1997.
The Glass Packaging Institute's reported recovery rate for glass containers includes reuse of
refillable bottles. Since refilling is defined as reuse rather than recycling in this report, the refilled bottles
are not counted as recovery here. An estimated 2.9 million tons of glass containers were recovered for
recycling in 1999, or 26.6 percent of generation. Glass container discards were 8.1 million tons in
1999, or 4.9 percent of total MSW discards.
Steel Containers and Packaging. Steel food and other cans, and other steel packaging (e.g.,
steel barrels and drums), totaled 2.9 million tons in 1999 (1.3 percent of total MSW generation), with
most of that amount being cans for food products (Tables 18 and 19). Generation estimates are based
on data supplied by the Steel Recycling Institute, the Reusable Industrial Packaging Association, and
the Can Manufacturers Institute. Estimates include adjustments for net imports.
Recovery data for steel containers and packaging were provided by the Steel Recycling
Institute. An estimated 1.7 million tons of steel packaging were recovered in 1999, or 57.3 percent of
generation. The Steel Recycling Institute estimates include recovery from residential sources, pre-
combustion and post-combustion magnetic separation of steel cans and other ferrous products at MSW
combustion facilities, and recycling of drums and barrels not suitable for reconditioning.
Aluminum Containers and Packaging. Aluminum containers and packaging include beer and
soft drink cans (including all carbonated and non-carbonated soft drinks, tea, tonic, water, and juice
67
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 18
PRODUCTS GENERATED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 1999
(WITH DETAIL ON CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING)
(In thousands of tons)
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 12)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 15)
Thousands of Tons
1960
9,920
17,330
1970
14,660
25,060
1980
21 ,800
34,420
1990
29,810
52,170
1995
31,140
57,250
1997
33,220
59,280
1998
34,370
60,310
1999
35,370
62,200
Containers and Packaging
Glass Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Bottles
Wine and Liquor Bottles
Food and Other Bottles & Jars
Total Glass Packaging
Steel Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Food and Other Cans
Other Steel Packaging
Total Steel Packaging
Aluminum Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Other Cans
Foil and Closures
Total Aluminum Packaging
Paper & Paperboard Pkg
Corrugated Boxes
Milk Cartons**
Folding Cartons**
Other Paperboard Packaging
Bags and Sacks**
Wrapping Papers**
Other Paper Packaging
Total Paper & Board Pkg
Plastics Packaging
Soft Drink Bottles**
Milk Bottles**
Other Containers
Bags and Sacks**
Wraps**
Other Plastics Packaging
Total Plastics Packaging
Wood Packaging
Other Misc. Packaging
Total Containers & Pkg
Total Product Wastesf
Other Wastes
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Generated - Weight
1,400
1,080
3,710
6,190
640
3,760
260
4,660
Neg.
Neg.
170
170
7,330
3,840
2,940
14,110
60
60
120
2,000
120
27,370
54,620
12,200
20,000
1,300
33,500
88,120
5,580
1,900
4,440
1 1 ,920
1,570
3,540
270
5,380
100
60
410
570
12,760
4,830
3,810
21 ,400
910
1,180
2,090
2,070
130
43,560
83,280
12,800
23,200
1,780
37,780
121,060
6,740
2,450
4,780
13,970
520
2,850
240
3,610
850
40
380
1,270
17,080
790
3,820
230
3,380
200
850
26,350
260
230
890
390
840
790
3,400
3,940
130
52,670
108,890
13,000
27,500
2,250
42,750
151,640
5,640
2,030
4,160
1 1 ,830
150
2,540
200
2,890
1,550
20
330
1,900
24,010
510
4,300
290
2,440
110
1,020
32,680
430
530
1,430
940
1,530
2,040
6,900
8,180
150
64,530
146,510
20,800
35,000
2,900
58,700
205,210
5,120
1,790
4,620
1 1 ,530
Neg.
2,690
210
2,900
1,590
40
350
1,980
28,800
510
5,310
260
1,980
70
1,150
38,080
650
620
1,180
1,200
1,710
2,220
7,580
6,170
150
68,390
156,780
21 ,740
29,690
3,150
54,580
21 1 ,360
4,960
1,820
3,830
10,610
Neg.
2,860
240
3,100
1,530
50
360
1,940
29,530
460
5,410
240
1,870
1,230
38,740
760
670
1,540
1,520
2,130
2,810
9,430
7,030
190
71 ,040
163,540
24,620
27,730
3,250
55,600
219,140
5,350
1,770
3,880
1 1 ,000
Neg.
2,690
250
2,940
1,540
50
370
1,960
29,760
470
5,550
230
1,680
1,420
39,110
820
700
2,330
1,480
1,980
2,580
9,890
7,310
220
72,430
167,110
24,910
27,730
3,290
55,930
223,040
5,450
1,830
3,770
1 1 ,050
Neg.
2,690
240
2,930
1,540
50
380
1,970
31 ,230
490
5,780
290
1,690
1,670
41,150
900
690
2,640
1,690
2,550
2,680
11,150
7,540
220
76,010
173,580
25,160
27,730
3,380
56,270
229,850
* Generation before materials recovery or combustion.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
** Not estimated separately prior to 1980. Paper wraps not reported separately after 1996.
t Other than food products.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Source: Franklin Associates
68
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 19
PRODUCTS GENERATED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 1999
(WITH DETAIL ON CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING)
(In percent of total generation)
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 12)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 15)
Percent of Total Generation
1960
1 1 .3%
19.7%
1970
12.1%
20.7%
1980
14.4%
22.7%
1990
14.5%
25.4%
1995
14.7%
27.1%
1997
15.2%
27.1%
1998
15.4%
27.0%
1999
15.4%
27.1%
Containers and Packaging
Glass Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Bottles
Wine and Liquor Bottles
Food and Other Bottles & Jars
Total Glass Packaging
Steel Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Food and Other Cans
Other Steel Packaging
Total Steel Packaging
Aluminum Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Other Cans
Foil and Closures
Total Aluminum Packaging
Paper & Paperboard Pkg
Corrugated Boxes
Milk Cartons**
Folding Cartons**
Other Paperboard Packaging
Bags and Sacks**
Wrapping Papers**
Other Paper Packaging
Total Paper & Board Pkg
Plastics Packaging
Soft Drink Bottles**
Milk Bottles**
Other Containers
Bags and Sacks**
Wraps**
Other Plastics Packaging
Total Plastics Packaging
Wood Packaging
Other Misc. Packaging
Total Containers & Pkg
Total Product Wastesf
Other Wastes
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Generated - %
1 .6%
1 .2%
4.2%
7.0%
0.7%
4.3%
0.3%
5.3%
Neg.
Neg.
0.2%
0.2%
8.3%
4.4%
3.3%
16.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
2.3%
0.1%
31.1%
62.0%
13.8%
22.7%
1 .5%
38.0%
100.0%
4.6%
1 .6%
3.7%
9.8%
1 .3%
2.9%
0.2%
4.4%
0.1%
Neg.
0.3%
0.5%
10.5%
4.0%
3.1%
17.7%
0.8%
1 .0%
1 .7%
1 .7%
0.1%
36.0%
68.8%
10.6%
19.2%
1 .5%
31 .2%
100.0%
4.4%
1 .6%
3.2%
9.2%
0.3%
1 .9%
0.2%
2.4%
0.6%
Neg.
0.3%
0.8%
1 1 .3%
0.5%
2.5%
0.2%
2.2%
0.1%
0.6%
17.4%
0.2%
0.2%
0.6%
0.3%
0.6%
0.5%
2.2%
2.6%
0.1%
34.7%
71 .8%
8.6%
18.1%
1 .5%
28.2%
100.0%
2.7%
1 .0%
2.0%
5.8%
0.1%
1 .2%
0.1%
1 .4%
0.8%
Neg.
0.2%
0.9%
1 1 .7%
0.2%
2.1%
0.1%
1 .2%
0.1%
0.5%
15.9%
0.2%
0.3%
0.7%
0.5%
0.7%
1 .0%
3.4%
4.0%
0.1%
31 .4%
71 .4%
10.1%
17.1%
1 .4%
28.6%
100.0%
2.4%
0.8%
2.2%
5.5%
Neg.
1 .3%
0.1%
1 .4%
0.8%
Neg.
0.2%
0.9%
13.6%
0.2%
2.5%
0.1%
0.9%
0.0%
0.5%
18.0%
0.3%
0.3%
0.6%
0.6%
0.8%
1.1%
3.6%
2.9%
0.1%
32.4%
74.2%
10.3%
14.0%
1 .5%
25.8%
100.0%
2.3%
0.8%
1 .7%
4.8%
Neg.
1 .3%
0.1%
1 .4%
0.7%
Neg.
0.2%
0.9%
13.5%
0.2%
2.5%
0.1%
0.9%
0.6%
17.7%
0.3%
0.3%
0.7%
0.7%
1 .0%
1 .3%
4.3%
3.2%
0.1%
32.4%
74.6%
1 1 .2%
12.7%
1 .5%
25.4%
100.0%
2.4%
0.8%
1 .7%
4.9%
Neg.
1 .2%
0.1%
1 .3%
0.7%
Neg.
0.2%
0.9%
13.3%
0.2%
2.5%
0.1%
0.8%
0.6%
17.5%
0.4%
0.3%
1 .0%
0.7%
0.9%
1 .2%
4.4%
3.3%
0.1%
32.5%
74.9%
1 1 .2%
12.4%
1 .5%
25.1%
100.0%
2.4%
0.8%
1 .6%
4.8%
Neg.
1 .2%
0.1%
1 .3%
0.7%
Neg.
0.2%
0.9%
13.6%
0.2%
2.5%
0.1%
0.7%
0.7%
17.9%
0.4%
0.3%
1.1%
0.7%
1.1%
1 .2%
4.9%
3.3%
0.1%
33.1%
75.5%
10.9%
12.1%
1 .5%
24.5%
100.0%
* Generation before materials recovery or combustion.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
** Not estimated separately prior to 1980. Paper wraps not reported separately after 1996.
t Other than food products.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Source: Franklin Associates
69
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 20
RECOVERY* OF PRODUCTS IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, 1960 TO 1999
(WITH DETAIL ON CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING)
(In thousands of tons)
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 13)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 16)
Thousands of Tons
1960
350
2,390
1970
940
3,730
1980
1,360
4,670
1990
3,460
8,800
1995
5,010
13,610
1997
5,660
14,020
1998
5,720
14,980
1999
5,880
16,640
Containers and Packaging
Glass Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Bottles
Wine and Liquor Bottles
Food and Other Bottles & Jars
Total Glass Packaging
Steel Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Food and Other Cans
Other Steel Packaging
Total Steel Packaging
Aluminum Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Other Cans
Foil and Closures
Total Aluminum Pkg
Paper & Paperboard Pkg
Corrugated Boxes
Milk Cartons**
Folding Cartons**
Other Paperboard Packaging
Bags and Sacks**
Wrapping Papers**
Other Paper Packaging
Total Paper & Board Pkg
Plastics Packaging
Soft Drink Bottles**
Milk Bottles**
Other Containers
Bags and Sacks**
Wraps**
Other Plastics Packaging
Total Plastics Packaging
Wood Packaging
Other Misc. Packaging
Total Containers & Pkg
Total Product Wastesf
Other Wastes
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Recovered - Weight
90
10
Neg.
100
10
20
Neg.
30
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
2,520
220
2,740
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
2,870
5,610
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
5,610
140
10
Neg.
150
20
60
Neg.
80
10
Neg.
Neg.
10
2,760
350
3,110
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
3,350
8,020
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
8,020
730
20
Neg.
750
50
150
Neg.
200
310
Neg.
Neg.
320
6,390
Neg.
520
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
300
7,210
10
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
10
Neg.
Neg.
8,490
14,520
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
14,520
1,890
210
520
2,620
40
590
60
690
990
Neg.
20
1,010
1 1 ,530
Neg.
340
Neg.
200
Neg.
Neg.
12,070
140
20
20
30
30
20
260
130
Neg.
16,780
29,040
Neg.
4,200
Neg.
4,200
33,240
1,670
470
1,000
3,140
Neg.
1,510
50
1,560
900
Neg.
30
930
18,480
Neg.
1,080
Neg.
340
Neg.
Neg.
19,900
300
190
150
40
40
20
740
450
Neg.
26,720
45,340
570
9,000
Neg.
9,570
54,910
1,550
440
930
2,920
Neg.
1,730
160
1,890
910
Neg.
30
940
19,800
Neg.
370
Neg.
290
Neg.
20,460
270
210
200
40
50
50
820
590
Neg.
27,620
47,300
580
1 1 ,490
Neg.
12,070
59,370
1,680
480
1,020
3,180
Neg.
1,510
170
1,680
830
Neg.
30
860
19,790
Neg.
230
Neg.
290
Neg.
20,310
290
220
250
10
120
70
960
720
Neg.
27,710
48,410
580
12,560
Neg.
13,140
61 ,550
1,560
440
940
2,940
Neg.
1,510
170
1,680
840
Neg.
30
870
20,340
Neg.
400
Neg.
230
Neg.
20,970
360
220
290
10
130
70
1,080
720
Neg.
28,260
50,780
550
12,560
Neg.
13,110
63,890
* Recovery of postconsumer wastes; does not include converting/fabrication scrap.
** Not estimated separately prior to 1980. Paper wraps not reported separately after 1996.
t Other than food products.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Source: Franklin Associates
70
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 21
RECOVERY* OF PRODUCTS IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, 1960 TO 1999
(WITH DETAIL ON CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING)
(In percent of generation of each product)
Percent of Generation of Each Product
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 13)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 16)
1960 1970 1980 1990
3.5%
13.8%
6.4%
14.9%
6.2%
13.6%
1 1 .6%
16.9%
1995 1997
16.1%
23.8%
17.0%
23.7%
1998 1999
16.6%
24.8%
16.6%
26.8%
Containers and Packaging
Glass Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Bottles
Wine and Liquor Bottles
Food and Other Bottles & Jars
Total Glass Packaging
Steel Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Food and Other Cans
Other Steel Packaging
Total Steel Packaging
Aluminum Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Other Cans
Foil and Closures
Total Aluminum Pkg
Paper & Paperboard Pkg
Corrugated Boxes
Milk Cartons**
Folding Cartons**
Other Paperboard Packaging
Bags and Sacks**
Wrapping Papers**
Other Paper Packaging
Total Paper & Board Pkg
Plastics Packaging
Soft Drink Bottles**
Milk Bottles**
Other Containers
Bags and Sacks**
Wraps**
Other Plastics Packaging
Total Plastics Packaging
Wood Packaging
Other Misc. Packaging
Total Containers & Pkg
Total Product Wastesf
Other Wastes
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Recovered - %
6.4%
Neg.
Neg.
1 .6%
1 .6%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
34.4%
7.5%
19.4%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neq.
10.5%
10.3%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
6.4%
2.5%
Neg.
Neg.
1 .3%
1 .3%
1 .7%
Neg.
1 .5%
10.0%
Neg.
Neg.
1 .8%
21 .6%
9.2%
14.5%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neq.
7.7%
9.6%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
6.6%
10.8%
Neg.
Neg.
5.4%
9.6%
5.3%
Neg.
5.5%
36.5%
Neg.
Neg.
25.2%
37.4%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
35.3%
27.4%
3.8%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neq.
16.1%
13.3%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
9.6%
33.5%
10.3%
12.5%
22.1%
26.7%
23.2%
30.0%
23.9%
63.9%
Neg.
6.1%
53.2%
48.0%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
36.9%
32.6%
3.8%
1 .4%
3.2%
2.0%
1 .0%
3.8%
1 .6%
Neq.
26.0%
19.8%
Neg.
12.0%
Neg.
7.2%
16.2%
32.6%
26.3%
21 .6%
27.2%
Neg.
56.1%
23.8%
53.8%
56.6%
Neg.
8.6%
47.0%
64.2%
Neg.
20.3%
Neg.
17.2%
Neg.
Neg.
52.3%
46.2%
30.6%
12.7%
3.3%
2.3%
0.9%
9.8%
7.3%
Neq.
39.1%
28.9%
2.6%
30.3%
Neg.
17.5%
26.0%
31 .3%
24.2%
24.3%
27.5%
Neg.
60.5%
66.7%
61 .0%
59.5%
Neg.
8.3%
48.5%
67.1%
Neg.
6.8%
Neg.
15.5%
Neg.
52.8%
35.5%
31 .3%
13.0%
2.6%
2.3%
1 .8%
8.7%
8.4%
Neq.
38.9%
28.9%
2.4%
41 .4%
Neg.
21 .7%
27.1%
31 .4%
27.1%
26.3%
28.9%
Neg.
56.1%
68.0%
57.1%
53.9%
Neg.
8.1%
43.9%
66.5%
Neg.
4.1%
Neg.
17.3%
Neg.
51 .9%
35.4%
31 .4%
10.7%
0.7%
6.1%
2.7%
9.7%
9.8%
Neq.
38.3%
29.0%
2.3%
45.3%
Neg.
23.5%
27.6%
28.6%
24.0%
24.9%
26.6%
Neg.
56.1%
70.8%
57.3%
54.5%
Neg.
7.9%
44.2%
65.1%
Neg.
6.9%
Neg.
13.6%
Neg.
51 .0%
40.0%
31 .9%
1 1 .0%
0.6%
5.1%
2.6%
9.7%
9.5%
Neq.
37.2%
29.3%
2.2%
45.3%
23.3%
27.8%
* Recovery of postconsumer wastes; does not include converting/fabrication scrap.
** Not estimated separately prior to 1980. Paper wraps not reported separately after 1996.
t Other than food products.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Source: Franklin Associates
71
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 22
PRODUCTS DISCARDED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 1999
(WITH DETAIL ON CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING)
(In thousands of tons)
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 14)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 17)
Thousands of Tons
1960
9,570
14,940
1970
13,720
21 ,330
1980
20,440
29,750
1990
26,350
43,370
1995
26,130
43,640
1997 1998
27,560
45,260
28,650
45,330
1999
29,490
45,560
Containers and Packaging
Glass Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Bottles
Wine and Liquor Bottles
Food and Other Bottles & Jars
Total Glass Packaging
Steel Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Food and Other Cans
Other Steel Packaging
Total Steel Packaging
Aluminum Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Other Cans
Foil and Closures
Total Aluminum Pkg
Paper & Paperboard Pkg
Corrugated Boxes
Milk Cartons**
Folding Cartons**
Other Paperboard Packaging
Bags and Sacks**
Wrapping Papers**
Other Paper Packaging
Total Paper & Board Pkg
Plastics Packaging
Soft Drink Bottles**
Milk Bottles**
Other Containers
Bags and Sacks**
Wraps**
Other Plastics Packaging
Total Plastics Packaging
Wood Packaging
Other Misc. Packaging
Total Containers & Pkg
Total Product Wastesf
Other Wastes
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Discarded - Weight
1,310
1,070
3,710
6,090
630
3,740
260
4,630
Neg.
Neg.
170
170
4,810
3,840
2,720
1 1 ,370
60
60
120
2,000
120
24,500
49,010
12,200
20,000
1,300
33,500
82,510
5,440
1,890
4,440
1 1 ,770
1,550
3,480
270
5,300
90
60
410
560
10,000
4,830
3,460
18,290
910
1,180
2,090
2,070
130
40,210
75,260
12,800
23,200
1,780
37,780
113,040
6,010
2,430
4,780
13,220
470
2,700
240
3,410
540
40
380
950
10,690
790
3,300
230
3,380
200
550
19,140
250
230
890
390
840
790
3,390
3,940
130
44,180
94,370
13,000
27,500
2,250
42,750
137,120
3,750
1,820
3,640
9,210
110
1,950
140
2,200
560
20
310
890
12,480
510
3,960
290
2,240
110
1,020
20,610
290
510
1,410
910
1,500
2,020
6,640
8,050
150
47,750
117,470
20,800
30,800
2,900
54,500
171,970
3,450
1,320
3,620
8,390
Neg.
1,180
160
1,340
690
40
320
1,050
10,320
510
4,230
260
1,640
70
1,150
18,180
350
430
1,030
1,160
1,670
2,200
6,840
5,720
150
41 ,670
1 1 1 ,440
21,170
20,690
3,150
45,010
156,450
3,410
1,380
2,900
7,690
Neg.
1,130
80
1,210
620
50
330
1,000
9,730
460
5,040
240
1,580
1,230
18,280
490
460
1,340
1,480
2,080
2,760
8,610
6,440
190
43,420
116,240
24,040
16,240
3,250
43,530
159,770
3,670
1,290
2,860
7,820
Neg.
1,180
80
1,260
710
50
340
1,100
9,970
470
5,320
230
1,390
1,420
18,800
530
480
2,080
1,470
1,860
2,510
8,930
6,590
220
44,720
118,700
24,330
15,170
3,290
42,790
161,490
3,890
1,390
2,830
8,110
Neg.
1,180
70
1,250
700
50
350
1,100
10,890
490
5,380
290
1,460
1,670
20,180
540
470
2,350
1,680
2,420
2,610
10,070
6,820
220
47,750
122,800
24,610
15,170
3,380
43,160
165,960
* Discards after materials and compost recovery. Does not include construction & demolition debris, industrial process wastes,
or certain other wastes. Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
** Not estimated separately prior to 1980. Paper wraps not reported separately after 1996.
t Other than food products.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Source: Franklin Associates
72
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 23
PRODUCTS DISCARDED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 1999
(WITH DETAIL ON CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING)
(In percent of total discards)
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 14)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 17)
Percent of Total Discards
1960
1 1 .6%
18.1%
1970
12.1%
18.9%
1980
14.9%
21 .7%
1990
15.3%
25.2%
1995 1997 1998 1999
16.7%
27.9%
17.2%
28.3%
17.7%
28.1%
17.8%
27.5%
Containers and Packaging
Glass Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Bottles
Wine and Liquor Bottles
Food and Other Bottles & Jars
Total Glass Packaging
Steel Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Food and Other Cans
Other Steel Packaging
Total Steel Packaging
Aluminum Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Other Cans
Foil and Closures
Total Aluminum Pkg
Paper & Paperboard Pkg
Corrugated Boxes
Milk Cartons**
Folding Cartons**
Other Paperboard Packaging
Bags and Sacks**
Wrapping Papers**
Other Paper Packaging
Total Paper & Board Pkg
Plastics Packaging
Soft Drink Bottles**
Milk Bottles**
Other Containers
Bags and Sacks**
Wraps**
Other Plastics Packaging
Total Plastics Packaging
Wood Packaging
Other Misc. Packaging
Total Containers & Pkg
Total Product Wastesf
Other Wastes
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Discarded - %
1 .6%
1 .3%
4.5%
7.4%
0.8%
4.5%
0.3%
5.6%
Neg.
Neg.
0.2%
0.2%
5.8%
4.7%
3.3%
13.8%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
2.4%
0.1%
29.7%
59.4%
14.8%
24.2%
1 .6%
40.6%
100.0%
4.8%
1 .7%
3.9%
10.4%
1 .4%
3.1%
0.2%
4.7%
0.1%
Neg.
0.4%
0.5%
8.8%
4.3%
3.1%
16.2%
0.8%
1 .0%
1 .8%
1 .8%
0.1%
35.6%
66.6%
1 1 .3%
20.5%
1 .6%
33.4%
100.0%
4.4%
1 .8%
3.5%
9.6%
0.3%
2.0%
0.2%
2.5%
0.4%
Neg.
0.3%
0.7%
7.8%
0.6%
2.4%
0.2%
2.5%
0.1%
0.4%
14.0%
0.2%
0.2%
0.6%
0.3%
0.6%
0.6%
2.5%
2.9%
0.1%
32.2%
68.8%
9.5%
20.1%
1 .6%
31 .2%
100.0%
2.2%
1.1%
2.1%
5.4%
0.1%
1.1%
0.1%
1 .3%
0.3%
Neg.
0.2%
0.5%
7.3%
0.3%
2.3%
0.2%
1 .3%
0.1%
0.6%
12.0%
0.2%
0.3%
0.8%
0.5%
0.9%
1 .2%
3.9%
4.7%
0.1%
27.8%
68.3%
12.1%
17.9%
1 .7%
31 .7%
100.0%
2.2%
0.8%
2.3%
5.4%
Neg.
0.8%
0.1%
0.9%
0.4%
Neg.
0.2%
0.7%
6.6%
0.3%
2.7%
0.2%
1 .0%
0.0%
0.7%
1 1 .6%
0.2%
0.3%
0.7%
0.7%
1.1%
1 .4%
4.4%
3.7%
0.1%
26.6%
71 .2%
13.5%
13.2%
2.0%
28.8%
100.0%
2.1%
0.9%
1 .8%
4.8%
Neg.
0.7%
0.1%
0.8%
0.4%
Neg.
0.2%
0.6%
6.1%
0.3%
3.2%
0.2%
1 .0%
0.8%
1 1 .4%
0.3%
0.3%
0.8%
0.9%
1 .3%
1 .7%
5.4%
4.0%
0.1%
27.2%
72.8%
15.0%
10.2%
2.0%
27.2%
100.0%
2.3%
0.8%
1 .8%
4.8%
Neg.
0.7%
0.0%
0.8%
0.4%
Neg.
0.2%
0.7%
6.2%
0.3%
3.3%
0.1%
0.9%
0.9%
1 1 .6%
0.3%
0.3%
1 .3%
0.9%
1 .2%
1 .6%
5.5%
4.1%
0.1%
27.7%
73.5%
15.1%
9.4%
2.0%
26.5%
100.0%
2.3%
0.8%
1 .7%
4.9%
Neg.
0.7%
0.0%
0.8%
0.4%
Neg.
0.2%
0.7%
6.6%
0.3%
3.2%
0.2%
0.9%
1 .0%
12.2%
0.3%
0.3%
1 .4%
1 .0%
1 .5%
1 .6%
6.1%
4.1%
0.1%
28.8%
74.0%
14.8%
9.1%
2.0%
26.0%
100.0%
* Discards after materials and compost recovery. Does not include construction & demolition debris, industrial process wastes,
or certain other wastes. Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
** Not estimated separately prior to 1980. Paper wraps not reported separately after 1996.
t Other than food products.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Source: Franklin Associates
73
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
beverages), other cans, and foil and closures. Aluminum can generation has been estimated based on
can shipments data from the Can Manufacturers Institute and can weight data from the Aluminum
Association, while data on other aluminum packaging is based on Department of Commerce data.
In 1996, the Can Manufacturers Institute began publishing data on consumption of beverages in
cans. The consumption data are adjusted for imports and exports of beverages in cans, and therefore
are more accurate for generation calculations than shipments alone. Total aluminum container and
packaging generation in 1999 was 2 million tons, or 0.9 percent of total MSW generation.
Aluminum can recovery data has been obtained from the Aluminum Association. For this
report, the aluminum can recovery methodology has been revised to account for imports of used
beverage cans (UBC); these imports have been increasing in recent years. The imported UBC were
subtracted from the tonnage of UBC reported by the Aluminum Association to have been melted by
U.S. end-users and recovered for export.* The effect of this change is to lower the aluminum beverage
can recovery rate.
Recovery of aluminum beverage cans in 1999 was 0.8 million tons, or 54.5 percent of
generation. Recovery of all aluminum packaging was estimated to be 44.2 percent of total generation in
1999. After recovery for recycling, 1.1 million tons of aluminum packaging were discarded in 1999.
Paper and Paperboard Containers and Packaging. Corrugated boxes are the largest single
product category of MSW at 31.2 million tons generated, or 13.6 percent of total generation, in 1999.
Corrugated boxes also represent the largest single category of product recovery, at 20.3 million tons of
recovery in 1997, (65.1 percent of boxes generated were recovered). After recovery, 10.9 million tons
of corrugated boxes were discarded, or 6.6 percent of MSW discards in 1999.
Other paper and paperboard packaging in MSW includes milk cartons, folding boxes (e.g.,
cereal boxes, frozen food boxes, some department store boxes), bags and sacks, wrapping papers,
and other paper and paperboard packaging. Overall, paper and paperboard containers and packaging
totaled 41.2 million tons of MSW generation in 1999, or 17.9 percent of total generation.
While recovery of corrugated boxes is by far the largest component of paper packaging
recovery, smaller amounts of other paper packaging products are recovered (estimated at 630,000
tons in 1999). The overall recovery rate for paper and paperboard packaging in 1999 was 51 percent.
Other paper packaging such as folding boxes and sacks is mostly recovered as mixed papers.
*Note, however, that the imported UBC do contribute to recycled aluminum content in can sheet and other aluminum
products.
74
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Plastic Containers and Packaging. Many different plastic resins are used to make a variety
of packaging products. Some of these include polyethylene terephthalate (PET) soft drink bottles, high-
density polyethylene (HOPE), and containers and other packaging (including coatings, closures, etc.)
made of polyvinyl chloride, polystyrene, polypropylene, and other resins. Estimates of generation of
plastic containers and packaging are based on data on resin sales by end use published annually by
Modern Plastics, a trade publication, and the most recent American Plastics Council annual plastic
recovery survey.*
Plastic containers and packaging have exhibited rapid growth in MSW, with generation
increasing from 120,000 tons in 1960 (0.1 percent of generation) to 11.2 million tons in 1999 (4.9
percent of MSW generation). (Note: plastic packaging as a category in this report does not include
single-service plates and cups and trash bags, which are classified as nondurable goods.)
Estimates of recovery of plastic products are based on data published annually by the American
Plastics Council. Plastic soft drink bottles were estimated to have been recovered at a 40 percent rate
in 1999 (360,000 tons). Recovery of plastic milk and water bottles was estimated to have been
220,000 tons, or 31.9 percent of generation. Overall, recovery of plastic containers and packaging was
estimated to be 1.1 million tons, or 9.7 percent in 1999. Discards of plastic packaging were thus 10.1
million tons in 1999, or 6.1 percent of total MSW discards.
Wood Packaging. Wood packaging includes wood crates and pallets (mostly pallets). Data on
production of wood packaging is from the Wooden Pallet and Container Association, as well as other
studies on the pallet industry (Busch, Reddy, Araman). In 1999, 7.5 million tons of wood pallets and
other wood packaging were estimated to have been generated, or 3.3 percent of total MSW
generation.
Wood pallets recovery for recycling (usually by chipping for uses such as mulch or bedding
material, but excluding wood combusted as fuel) was estimated at 720,000 tons in 1999.
Accounting for pallet reuse and recovery for recycling, wood packaging discards were 6.8
million tons in 1999, or 4.1 percent of total MSW discards.
Other Packaging. Estimates are included for some other miscellaneous packaging such as
bags made of textiles, small amounts of leather, and the like. These latter quantities are not well
documented, but were estimated to amount to 220,000 tons generated in 1999.
Summary of Products in Municipal Solid Waste
Changing quantities and composition of municipal solid waste generation by product category
are illustrated in Figure 14. This figure shows graphically that generation of durable goods has increased
very gradually over the years. Nondurable goods and containers and packaging have accounted for the
large increases in MSW generation.
*Data source was the American Plastics Council annual plastic recovery survey published in 1999, using 1998 data.
75
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
The materials composition of municipal solid waste generation by product category are
illustrated in Figure 14. This figure shows graphically that generation of durable goods has increased
very gradually over the years. Nondurable goods and containers and packaging have accounted for the
large increases in MSW generation.
The materials composition of nondurable goods in 1999 is shown in Figure 15. Paper and
paperboard made up 75 percent of nondurables in MSW generation, with plastics contributing 9
percent, and textiles 10 percent. Other materials contributed lesser percentages. After recovery for
recycling, paper and paperboard were 66 percent of nondurable discards, with plastics being 13
percent, and textiles 12 percent.
The materials composition of containers and packaging in MSW in 1999 is shown in Figure 16.
By weight, paper and paperboard products made up 54 percent of containers and packaging
generation, with glass and plastic tied for 15 percent, each, of containers and packaging generation.
Wood was 10 percent of containers and packaging generation, while metals were 6 percent.
After recovery for recycling takes place, the percentages of these different materials in MSW
from containers and packaging is affected. After recovery for recycling, paper and paperboard is only
42 percent of the MSW containers and packaging discarded. Glass containers accounted for 17
percent of discards of containers and packaging, plastics were 21 percent, wood was 15 percent, and
metals were 5 percent.
SUMMARY
The data presented in this chapter can be summarized by the following observations:
MSW Generation
Total generation of municipal solid waste in 1999 was 229.9 million tons. This is up from 1998,
when 223 million tons was generated. This compares to 1990, when total generation of MSW
was 205.2 million tons.
Paper and paperboard products made up the largest percentage of all the materials in MSW. In
1999, 87.5 million tons of paper and paperboard products were generated, up from 84.2
million tons in 1998. In 1999, paper and paperboard accounted for 38.1 percent of total
generation. This figure has remained steady around the 38 percent level for the past four years.
Yard trimmings comprised the second-largest material category, estimated at 27.7 million tons,
or 12.1 percent of total generation, in 1999. This compared to 35 million tons (17.1 percent of
total generation) in 1990. This decline is largely due to state legislation discouraging yard
trimmings disposal in landfills, including source reduction measures such as backyard
composting and leaving grass trimmings on the yard.
76
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Plastic products increased to 24.2 million tons in 1999, up from 22.4 million tons in 1998.
Plastics used for containers and packaging accounted for the majority of this increase. Plastics
accounted for 10.5 percent of MSW generated in 1999, up from 10 percent in 1998 and 4.5
percent in 1980.
Figure 14. Generation of products in MSW, 1960 to 1999
250
200
150
100
50-
Yard trimmings
^
Food wastes
1/1/60
1/1/65
1/1/70
1/1/75
1/1/80
1/1/85
1/1/90
1/1/95
MSW Recovery
Recovery of materials in MSW increased from 61.6 million tons in 1998 (27.6 percent) to 63.9
million tons (27.8 percent) in 1999.
Recovery of products in MSW increased by 2.4 tons since 1998. Recovery of paper and
paperboard products accounted for most of this increase by growing 2.3 million tons since
1998. Recovery of paper and paperboard was up from 41 percent in 1998 to 42 percent in
1999.
The increase in recovery of paper and paperboard products has been due to increases in
recovery, over time, from all categories: newspapers, books, magazines, directories, standard
(A) mail (advertisements, circulars, etc.), and other commercial printing. Key categories whose
recovery rose from 1998 to 1999, are newspapers, and standard (A) mail. Newspapers
increased from 7.2 million tons recovered in 1998 to 8.2 million tons recovered in 1999. This is
an increase from 52.9 percent of newspapers recovered in 1998, to 59 percent of newspapers
recovered in 1999. (There was a slight dip for newspaper recovery rates in 1998, but the
overall trend has been up.) Recovery of standard (A) mail has increased substantially, from
77
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Figure 15. Nondurable goods generated and discarded
in municipal solid waste, 1999
(In percent of total generation and discards)
Textiles
10%
Rubbers leather
1%
Plastics
9%
Paper & paperboard
75%
Generation
Rubber & leathe
2%
Paper & paperboard
Discards
78
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Figure 16. Containers and packaging generated and discarded
in municipal solid waste, 1999
(In percent of total generation and discards)
Wood
10%
Plastics
15%
Metals
6%
Paper & paperboard
54%
Generation
Wood
15%
Plastics
21%
Paper & paperboard
42%
Metals
5%
Glass
17%
Discards
79
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
200,000 tons recovered in 1990 to 1,230,000 tons in 1999. Percent of standard (A) mail
recovered has risen from 5.2 percent in 1990 to 22.1 percent in 1999. In addition, recovery of
directories rose from 60,000 tons in 1997 to 110,000 tons in 1999.
Containers and packaging led the major product categories in tonnage and percentage
recovery, increasing from 27.7 million tons in 1998 to 28.2 million tons million tons (37.2
percent of generation) in 1999. Nondurable goods had the second-highest tonnage recovery in
1999 - 16.6 million tons, or 26.8 percent of generation.
Measured by tonnage, the products and materials with the highest tonnages recovered in 1999
were corrugated boxes (20.3 million tons), yard trimmings (12.6 million tons), newspapers (8.2
million tons), high-grade office papers (4 million tons), glass containers (2.9 million tons), and
steel from large appliances (1.9 million tons). Collectively, these products accounted for nearly
80 percent of total MSW recovery in 1999.
Measured by percentage of generation, products with the highest recovery rates in 1999 were
lead-acid batteries (96.9 percent), corrugated boxes (65.1 percent), newspapers (59 percent),
steel cans (56.1 percent), aluminum beverage cans (54.5 percent), and steel in major
appliances (52.2 percent).
Long-Term Trends
Generation of MSW has increased (except in recession years), from 88.1 million tons in 1960
to 229.9 million tons in 1999.
Generation of paper and paperboard, the largest material component of MSW, has increased in
almost every year. Yard trimmings, the second largest component, has remained stable during
recent years. State legislation affecting yard trimmings disposal in landfills and source reduction
measures at residences, has helped contain the generation of yard trimmings. Generation of
other materials is generally on an upward trend.
In percentage of total MSW generation, recovery for recycling (including composting) did not
exceed 15 percent until 1990. Growth in the recovery rate to current levels (27.8 percent)
reflects a rapid increase in the infrastructure for recovery starting in the late 1980s.
80
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Recovery (as a percentage of generation) of most materials in MSW has increased dramatically
over the 39 years for which statistics have been tabulated. Some examples:
1960 1980 1999
Paper and paperboard 17% 21% 42%
Glass 2% 5% 23%
Metals 1% 8% 35.2%
Plastics -- <1% 6%
Yard trimmings 45%
81
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Chapter 2
REFERENCES
GENERAL
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Municipal Solid Waste Generation, Recycling and
Disposal in the United States: Facts and Figures for 1998. EPA/530-F-00-024. April 2000.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United States: 1998 Update. EPA/530-R-99-021. September 1999.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United States: 1997 Update. EPA/530-R-98-007. May 1998.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States: 1996 Update. EPA/530-R-97-015. June 1997.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United States: 1995 Update. EPA/530-R-96-001. November 1995.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United States: 1994 Update. EPA/530-R-98-007. November 1994.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States: 1992 Update. EPA/530-R-92-019 July 1992.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United States: 1990 Update. EPA/530-SW-90-042. June 1991.
Franklin, M.A. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States, 1960 to 2000
(Update 1988). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/530-SW-88-033. NTIS PB88-
232780/WEP. March 1988.
Franklin, M.A. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States, 1960 to 2000.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. REPT-15-3490-00. NTIS PB87-178323AVEP. July 1986.
ALUMINUM CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING
The Aluminum Association, Aluminum Statistical Review. Various years.
Can Manufacturers Institute. Can Shipments Report. Various years.
Resource Recycling's Container Recycling Update. Various issues.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. "Closures for
Containers." MQ34H. Various years.
82
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Merchandise Trade (7602.00.0030 -
Aluminum Used Beverage Container Scrap SEC 9100).
CARPETS AND RUGS
The Carpet and Rug Institute. Carpet & Rug Industry Review. Various years.
Personal communication with a representative of the Carpet and Rug Institute. February 14,
1992.
Rauch Associates, Inc. The Ranch Guide to the U.S. Adhesives and Sealants Industry.
ISBNO-932157-05-X
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. "Carpets
and Rugs." MA22Q. Various years.
FOOD WASTE
California Integrated Waste Management Board. "Waste Disposal Rates for Business Types."
www. ciwmb. ca. gov/.
Food Manufacturers Institute. "Reducing Waste Disposal Costs: How to Evaluate the
Benefits of Composting in the Supermarket Industry." Composting Workbook. 1994.
Glenn, Jim and Dave Block. "MSW Composting in the United States." BioCycle. November 1999.
Goldstein, Nora. "National Trends in Food Residuals Composting Part I." BioCycle. July
1997.
Goldstein, Nora and Dave Block. "Nationwide Inventory of Food Residuals Composting Part
H" BioCycle. August 1997.
Goldstein, Nora, Jim Glenn, and Kevin Gray. "Nationwide Overview of Food Residuals
Composting." BioCycle. August 1998.
Grocery Committee on Solid Waste. Composting Task Force Report. October 24, 1991.
Ffinshaw, Jane, and Ivan Braun. "Targeting Commercial Businesses for Recycling."
Resource Recycling. November 1991.
Kunzler, Conni, and Molly Farrell. "Food Service Composting Projects Update." BioCycle.
May 1996.
Kunzler, Conni, and Rebecca Roe. "Food Service Composting Projects on the Rise."
BioCycle. April 1995.
83
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Luboff, Christine, and Karen May. "Measuring Generation of Food Residuals." July 1995.
Marion, James, New York State Department of Corrections. Presentation at the BioCycle
conference. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 1994.
Newell, Ty, Elizabeth Markstahler, and Matthew Snyder. "Commercial Food Waste from
Restaurants and Grocery Stores." Resource Recycling. February 1993.
Savage, George M. "The Flistory and Utility of Waste Characterization Studies." MSW
Management. May/June 1994.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. "Estimating and Addressing America's Food Losses."
Economic Research Service, www.econ.ag.gov/. July 1997.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. "Food Consumption, Prices, and Expenditures, 1996."
Economic Research Service. Judith Jones Putnam. April 1996.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. "Combined Annual and Revised
Monthly Retail Trade." Current Business Reports. BR/95-RV.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. "Monthly Retail Trade." Current
Business Reports. April 1997.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Population Reports. Various
years
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of the United
States. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce. "Trends and Forecasts: Retail Sales." U.S. Industrial
Outlook 1994.
Walsh, Patrick, Wayne Pferdehirt, and Phil O'Leary. "Collection of Recyclables from
Multifamily Housing and Businesses." Waste Age. April 1993.
FURNITURE AND FURNISHINGS
Smith, F.L. A Solid Waste Estimation Procedure: Material Flows Approach. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/530-SW-147. May 1974.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Census of Manufactures and Annual
Survey of Manufactures. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. "Average
Weight and Width of Broadwoven Fabrics (Gray)" MC-22T. November 1977.
84
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. "Office
Furniture." MA-25H. Various years.
GLASS CONTAINERS
Egan, Katherine. "Glass Recycling Rate Drops Seven Percent in 1997." Waste Age's
Recycling Times. June 1, 1998.
Brewers Almanac. Various years.
Resource Recycling. Container Recycling Update. Various issues.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Report?,. "Glass
Containers." M32G. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Exports, Schedule B Commodity by Country -Domestic
Merchandise. FT 447.
U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Imports for Consumption. FT 247.
U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Imports of Merchandise for Consumption. FT 110 and
FT 125.
LEAD-ACID BATTERIES
American Automobile Manufacturers Association. AAMA Motor Vehicle Facts and
Figures. Various years.
Battery Council International. Industry Statistics. Various years.
Battery Council International. National Recycling Rate Study. March 1995.
Battery Council International. National Recycling Rate Study. December 1996.
Franklin Associates, Ltd. Characterization of Products Containing Lead and Cadmium in
Municipal Solid Waste in the United States, 1970 to 2000. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. EPA/530-SW-89-015A NTIS PB89-151039/WEP. January 1989.
Motorcycle Industry Council, Inc. Motorcycle Statistical Annual. Various years.
U. S. Department of Commerce. Statistical Abstract of the United States. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Imports By Commodity. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Industrial Outlook "Metals." Various years.
85
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
MAJOR APPLIANCES
American Iron and Steel Institute Annual Statistical Report. Various years.
Appliance Magazine. Corcoran Communications. September 1983.
Appliance Manufacturer. Annual Industry Marketing Guide, March issue of various years.
Appliance Manufacturer. Market Profile. Various years.
Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers. Trends and Forecasts. 1971 to 1988.
Electrical Merchandising. January 1951.
Gas Appliance Manufacturers Association. Statistical Highlights. Various years.
National Industrial Pollution Control Council. The Disposal of Major Appliances. June 1971.
Personal communication with a representative of Amana, Inc. November 1991.
Personal communication with a representative of Steel Recycling Institute. August 1997.
Sears, Roebuck and Co. Spring and Fall Retail Catalogs. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Census of Manufactures. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. "Major
Household Appliances." MA36F. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of the United
States. Various years.
PAPER AND PAPERBOARD
American Forest & Paper Association, Paper Recycling Group. 1998 Annual Statistical
Summary Waste Paper Utilization. June 1998.
American Forest & Paper Association, Paper Recycling Group. 1997 Annual Statistical
Summary Waste Paper Utilization. April 1997.
American Forest & Paper Association, Paper Recycling Group. 1996 Annual Statistical
Summary Waste Paper Utilization. April 1996.
American Forest & Paper Association. 1998 Statistics of Paper, Paperboard & Wood Pulp.
October 1998.
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
American Forest & Paper Association. 1997 Statistics of Paper, Paperboard & Wood Pulp.
November 1997.
American Forest & Paper Association. 1996 Statistics of Paper, Paperboard & Wood Pulp.
November 1996.
American Forest & Paper Association. Paper, Paperboard, Pulp Capacity and Fiber
Consumption, 1995-1999. December 1996.
American Forest & Paper Association. Monthly Statistical Report. Various issues.
Franklin Associates, Ltd. Evaluation of Proposed New Recycled Paper Standards and
Definitions. Special Task Force on Standards and Definitions, Recycled Paper Committee,
Recycling Advisory Council. January 27, 1992.
U.S. Postal Service. Annual Report of the Postmaster General: Fiscal Year 1995.
U.S. Postal Service. 1996 Annual Report of the United States Postal Service. 1997.
U.S. Postal Service. 1997 Annual Report of the United States Postal Service. Web Site.
Yellow Pages Publishers Association. Yellow Pages Publishers Environmental Network:
Progress Report for the Year 1996 March 1997.
PLASTICS
Modern Plastics. Resin Statistics. January issue, various years.
R.W. Beck and Associates. "Postconsumer Plastics Recycling Rate Study." American
Plastics Council. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce. 1994 U.S. Industrial Outlook.
RUBBER
American Automobile Manufacturers Association. AAMA Motor Vehicle Facts and
Figures. Various years.
International Tire and Rubber Association, Inc. formerly American Retreader's Association,
Inc. Louisville, Kentucky.
McRee, Robert E. "Recap - Recapture: Incineration of Rubber for Energy Recovery"
Presented at the Joint NTDRA/RMA International Symposium. Washington, DC. October
22, 1982.
National Petroleum News Market Facts. Mid-June issue. Various years.
87
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Personal communication with the Scrap Tire Management Council. September 1996.
Retreader's Journal. April 1987.
Scrap Tire Management Council. 1994 Scrap Tire Use/Disposal Study. Results published in
Scrap Tire News. March 1995.
Scrap Tire Management Council. Scrap Tire Use/Disposal Study 1996 Update. April 1997.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Census of Manufactures. Industry
series 30A-30. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. "Rubber
Mechanical Goods." MA30C. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. "Rubber:
Production, Shipments, and Stocks." MA30A. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of the United
States. Various editions.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. U.S. Imports for Consumption. FT
247. Table 1. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Industrial Outlook. "Plastics and Rubber." Also earlier
editions. Various years.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Markets for Scrap Tires. EPA/530-SW-90-074A.
October 1991.
International Tire and Rubber Association, Inc. The Tire Retreading/Repair Journal. April
1997.
STEEL CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING
American Iron and Steel Institute. Annual Statistical Report. Various years.
Can Manufacturers Institute. Can Shipments Report. Various years.
Personal communication with a representative of the Association of Container
Reconditioning. June 1994.
Personal communication with a representative of the Steel Recycling Institute. April 1996.
Personal communication with a representative of the Steel Recycling Institute. July 1997.
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Personal communication with a representative of the Steel Recycling Institute. November 1998.
Smith, F.L. A Solid Waste Estimation Procedure: Material Flows Approach. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/530-SW-147. May 1974.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports.
"Closures for Containers." MQ34H. Various years.
TEXTILES AND FOOTWEAR
Council for Textile Recycling. Textile Recycling Fact Sheet.
J.C. Penney's Catalog. 1990.
National Association of Hosiery Manufacturers. Fact Sheets. Various years.
Riggle, David. "Tapping Textile Recycling." BioCycle. February 1992.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports.
"Apparel." MA23A, MA23E, MA23G. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. "Sheets,
Towels and Pillowcases." MQ23X. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. MA31A,
MA23E, MA23G, and MA23A. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of the United
States. Various years.
Spiegel Catalog. Fall/winter 1997.
WOOD PACKAGING
Araman, Phillip, and Robert Bush. "An Update on the Pallet Industry." Brooks Forest
Products Center.
Araman, Phillip, and Robert Bush. "Use of New Wood Pallets, Containers is Stagnant to
Declining." Pallet Enterprise. September 1997.
Eshbach, Ovid, Ed. Handbook of Engineering Fundamentals. Second Edition. John Wiley
& Sons, Inc.
Personal communication with representative of the National Wooden Pallet and Container
Association. September 1996.
89
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Personal communication with representative of the U.S. Forestry Service Laboratory,
Princeton, WV. December 1991.
Personal communication with representative of U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest
Service, Forest Products Laboratory. December 1991.
Personal communication with representative of Virginia Polytechnic Institute. December
1991.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory. Wood Used in
U.S. Manufacturing Industries, 1977. December 1983.
U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Industrial Outlook. "Wood Products." Various years.
YARD TRIMMINGS
Composting Council Research and Education Foundation. "1995 Compost Capacity Survey."
James Butler and Associates. October 1996.
Franklin Associates, Ltd. The Role of Recycling in Integrated Solid Waste Management to
the Year 2000. Appendix J and Appendix K. Keep America Beautiful, Inc. September 1994.
Franklin Associates, Ltd. Survey of Selected State Officials. September 1997.
Glenn, Jim. "The State of Garbage in America Part I." BioCycle. April 1998.
Goldstein, Nora and Celeste Madtes. "The State of Garbage in America Part U." BioCycle.
November, 2000.
Goldstein, Nora.. "The State of Garbage in America Part I." BioCycle. April 2000.
Goldstein, Nora and Jim Glenn. "The State of Garbage in America Part I." BioCycle.
April, 1997.
Goldstein, Nora and Jim Glenn. "The State of Garbage in America Part U." BioCycle. May,
1997.
Raymond Communications. "State Recycling Laws Update." 1994.
Raymond Communications. "State Recycling Laws Update." Year-end Edition 1996.
Raymond Communications. "State Recycling Laws Update." Year-end Edition 1998.
90
-------
Chapter 2: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Savage, George M. "The History and Utility of Waste Characterization Studies." MSW
Management. May/June 1994.
Steuteville, Robert. "The State of Garbage in America, Part I." BioCyde. April 1995.
Steuteville, Robert. "The State of Garbage in America, Part H." BioCyde. May 1995.
Steuteville, Robert. "The State of Garbage in America, Part H." BioCyde. May 1996.
"Yard Waste Legislation: Disposal Bans and Similar Bills as of July, 1993." Composting
Council. Fact Sheet. July 1993.
91
-------
Chapter 3: Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Chapter 3
MANAGEMENT OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
INTRODUCTION
EPA's tiered integrated waste management strategy includes the following components:
1. Source reduction (including reuse of products and backyard composting of yard trimmings).
2. Recycling of materials (including composting).
3. Waste combustion (preferably with energy recovery) and landfilling.
These three components are put into context in Figure 17.
This chapter addresses how source reduction activities are included within an integrated waste
management system. Source reduction activities have the effect of reducing MSW generation, while
other management alternatives deal with MSW once it is generated. National estimates of source
reduction can be found in Chapter 4.
Estimates of the historical recovery of materials for recycling including yard trimmings for
composting are presented in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 presents estimates of MSW combustion. It also
presents the estimates for quantitities of waste landfilled, which are obtained by subtracting the amounts
recovered for recycling (including composting) and the amounts combusted from total MSW
generation.
Also included in this chapter is a discussion of the current MSW management infrastructure.
Current solid waste collection, processing, and disposal programs and facilities are highlighted with
tables and figures.
SOURCE REDUCTION
Source reduction is gaining more attention as an important solid waste management option.
Source reduction, often called "waste prevention," is defined by EPA as "any change in the design,
manufacturing, purchase, or use of materials or products (including packaging) to reduce the amount or
toxicity before they become municipal solid waste. Prevention also refers to the reuse of products or
materials." Thus, source reduction activities affect the waste stream before the point of waste
generation. In this report, MSW is considered to have been generated if it is placed at curbside or in a
receptacle such as a dumpster for pickup, or if it is taken by the generator to another site for recycling
(including composting) or disposal.
Source reduction encompasses a very broad range of activities by private citizens, communities,
commercial establishments, institutional agencies, and manufacturers and distributors. Examples of
source reduction actions are shown in Table 24 and include:
Redesigning products or packages so as to reduce the quantity of materials or the toxicity of the
materials used, by substituting lighter materials for heavier ones and lengthening the life of
products to postpone disposal.
92
-------
Chapter 3: Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Using packaging that reduces the amount of damage or spoilage to the product.
Reducing amounts of products or packages used through modification of current practices by
processors and consumers.
Reusing products or packages already manufactured.
Managing non-product organic wastes (food wastes, yard trimmings) through backyard
composting or other on-site alternatives to disposal.
Figure 17. Diagram of solid waste management
Chang
pack
des
A
es in
age
gn
k.
Backyard
composting,
grasscycling
Generation
of waste for
management
Changes in Changes in Recovery for
purchasing industrial recycling (incluc
habits practices composting)
I 1
Increased Other
reuse changes in
use patterns
ing
Combustion
disposal
Landfill
disposal
SOURCE REDUCTION
WASTE REDUCTION
Source: Franklin Associates
Source Reduction Through Redesign
Since source reduction of products and packages can save money through reducing materials
and energy costs, manufacturers and packaging designers have been pursuing these activities for many
years. Combined with other source reduction measures, redesign can have a significant effect on
material use and eventual discards. Design for source reduction can take several approaches.
Materials substitution can make a product or package lighter and cheaper to transport. For
example, there has been a continuous trend of substitution of lighter materials such as plastics and
aluminum for materials such as glass and steel. The substitution also may involve a flexible package
instead of a rigid package. A product or package can be redesigned to reduce weight or volume. Toxic
materials in products or packaging can be replaced with non-toxic substitutes. Considerable efforts
have been made in this area in the past few years.
93
-------
Chapter 3: Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Lengthening product life delays the time when the products enter the municipal waste stream.
The responsibility for lengthening product life lies partly with manufacturers and partly with consumers.
Products can be designed to last longer and be easier to repair. Since some of these design
modifications may make products more expensive, at least initially, manufacturers must be willing to
invest in new product development and consumers must demand the products and be willing to pay for
them to make the goal work. Consumers and manufacturers also must be willing to care for and repair
products.
Table 24
SELECTED EXAMPLES OF SOURCE REDUCTION PRACTICES
Source Reduction Practice
MSW Product Categories
Durable
Goods
Nondurable
Goods
Containers &
Packaging
Organics
Redesign
Materials reduction
Materials substitution
Lengthen life
Downgauge metals in
appliances
Use of composites
in appliances and
electronic circuitry
High mileage tires
Electronic components
reduce moving parts
Paperless purchase
orders
Regular servicing
Look at warranties
Extend warranties
Concentrates
Cereal in bags
Coffee brick
Multi-use products
Design for secondary
uses
Xeriscaping
Consumer Practices
Purchase long lived
products
Repair
Duplexing
Sharing
Reduce unwanted
mail
Purchasing:
products in bulk,
concentrates
Reuse
By design
Secondary
Modular design
Borrow or rent for
temporary use
Give to charity
Buy or sell at
garage sales
Envelopes
Clothing
Waste paper
scratch pads
Pallets
Returnable secondary
packaging
Loosefill
Grocery sacks
Dairy containers
Glass and plastic jars
Reduce/Eliminate Toxins
Eliminate PCBs
Soy ink, waterbased
Waterbased solvents
Reduce mercury
Replace lead foil on
wine bottles
Reduce Organics
Food wastes
Yard trimmings
Backyard composting
Vermi-composting
Backyard composting
Grasscycling
Source: Franklin Associates
94
-------
Chapter 3: Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Modifying Practices to Reduce Materials Use
Businesses and individuals often can modify their current practices to reduce the amounts of
waste generated. In a business office, electronic mail can replace printed memoranda and data. Reports
can be copied on both sides of the paper (duplexed). Modifying practices can be combined with other
source reduction measures to reduce generation and limit material use.
Individuals and businesses can request removal from mailing lists to reduce the amount of mail
received and discarded. When practical, products can be purchased in large sizes or in bulk to minimize
the amount of packaging per unit of product. Concentrated products also can reduce packaging
requirements. Some of these products, such as fabric softeners and powdered detergent, are designed
to be used with refillable containers.
Reuse of Products and Packages
Similar to lengthening product life, reuse of products and packages delays the time when the
items must finally be discarded as waste. When a product is reused, presumably purchase and use of a
new product is delayed, although this may not always be true.
Many of the products characterized for this report are reused in sizable quantities (e.g.,
furniture, wood pallets, clothing, etc.). The recovery of products and materials for recycling (including
composting) as characterized in Chapter 2 does not include reuse of products, but reuse is discussed in
this section, and estimated in Chapter 4.
Durable Goods. There is a long tradition of reuse of durable goods such as large and small
appliances, furniture, and carpets. Often this is done informally as individuals pass on used goods to
family members and friends. Other durable goods are donated to charitable organizations for resale or
use by needy families. Some communities and other organizations have facilitated exchange programs
for citizens, and there are for-profit retail stores that deal in used furniture, appliances, and carpets.
Other goods are resold by individuals at garage sales, flea markets, and the like. Borrowing and sharing
items like tools also can reduce the number of products to be discarded ultimately. There is generally a
lack of data on the volume of durable goods reused in the United States, and what the ultimate effect on
MSW generation might be.
Nondurable Goods. While nondurable goods by their very nature are designed for short-term
use and disposal, there is considerable reuse of some items classified as nondurable. In particular,
footwear, clothing, and other textile goods often are reused. Much of the reuse is accomplished through
the same types of channels as those described above for durable goods. That is, private individuals,
charitable organizations, and retail outlets (consignment shops) all facilitate reuse of discarded clothing
and footwear. In addition, considerable amounts of textiles are reused as wiping cloths before being
discarded.
Another often-cited waste prevention measure is the use of washable plates, cups, napkins,
towels, diapers, etc. instead of the disposable variety. (This will reduce solid waste but will have other
environmental effects, such as increased water and energy use.) Other reusable items are available, for
example: reusable air filters, reusable coffee filters, reconditioned printer cartridges, etc.
95
-------
Chapter 3: Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Containers and Packaging. Containers and packaging can be reused in two ways: they can
be used again for their original purpose, or they can be used in other ways.
Glass bottles are a prime example of reuse of a container for its original purpose. Refillable
glass beer and soft drink bottles can be collected, washed, and refilled for use again. Some years ago
large numbers of refillable glass soft drink bottles were used, but these have largely been replaced by
single-use glass bottles, plastic bottles, and aluminum cans. Considerable numbers of beer bottles are
collected for refilling, often by restaurants and taverns, where the bottles can easily be collected and
returned by the distributor. The Glass Packaging Institute estimates that refillable glass bottles achieve a
rate of 8 trips (refillings) per bottle.
Another example in this category is the use of refurbished wood pallets for shipping palletized
goods. The national Wood Pallet & Container Association estimates that more than 60 percent of new
wood pallets produced are reusable. It also is common practice to recondition steel drums and barrels
for reuse.
Many other containers and packages can be recycled but are not often reused. Some refillable
containers (e.g., plastic laundry softener bottles) have been introduced: the original container can be
refilled using concentrate purchased in small packages. This practice can achieve a notable source
reduction in packaging. As another example, some grocery stores will allow customers to reuse grocery
sacks, perhaps allowing a refund for each sack brought back for reuse. Also, many parcel shippers will
take back plastic packaging "peanuts" for reuse.
Many ingenious reuses for containers and packaging are possible in the home. People reuse
boxes, bags, jars, jugs, and cans for many purposes around the house. There are no reliable estimates
as to how these specific activities affect the waste stream.
Management of Organic Materials
Food wastes and yard trimmings combined made up about 23 percent of MSW generation in
1999, so source reduction measures aimed at these products can have an important effect on waste
generation. Composting is the usual method for recovering these organic materials. As defined in this
report, composting of organic materials after they are taken to a central composting facility is a waste
management activity comparable to recovery for recycling. Estimates for these off-site composting
activities are included in this chapter.
There are several types of source reduction that take place at the point of generation (e.g., the
yard of a home or business). Estimates for these practices are provided in Chapter 4. The practice of
backyard composting of yard trimmings and certain food discards has been growing. There also is a
trend toward leaving grass clippings on lawns, sometimes through the use of mulching mowers. Other
actions contributing to reduced organics disposal are: establishing variable rates for collection of wastes
(also known as unit-based pricing or pay-as-you-throw), which encourage residents to reduce the
amount of wastes set out; improved technology (mulching mowers); xeriscaping (landscaping with
plants that use minimal water and generate minimal waste); and certain legislation such as bans on
disposal of yard trimmings in landfills.
Part of the impetus for source reduction of yard trimmings is the large number of state
regulations discouraging landfilling or other disposal of yard trimmings. The Composting
-------
Chapter 3: Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Council and other sources report that in 1992, 12 states, amounting to more than 28 percent of the
nations's population, had in effect legislation affecting management of yard trimmings. By 1998, 23
states plus the District of Columbia (amounting to about 50 percent of the nation's population) had
legislation discouraging the disposal of yard trimmings.
RECOVERY FOR RECYCLING (INCLUDING COMPOSTING)
Recyclables Collection
Before recyclable materials can be processed and recycled into new products, they must be
collected. Most residential recycling involves curbside recyclables collection, drop-off programs, buy-
back operations, and/or container deposit systems. Collection of recyclables from commercial
establishments is usually separate from residential recyclables collection programs.
Curbside Recyclables Collection. In 1998, more than 9,000 curbside recyclables collection
programs were reported in the U.S. As shown in Table 25 and Figure 18, the extent of residential
curbside recycling programs varies tremendously by geographic region, with the most extensive
curbside collection occurring in the Northeast.
In 1998 slightly over one-half (54 percent) of the U.S. population, or 140 million persons, had
access to curbside recyclables collection programs. The Northeast region had the largest population
served - 43 million persons. In the Northeast, about 83 percent of the population had access to
curbside recyclables collection, while in the South, 39 percent of the population had access to curbside
recycling programs. Most of the programs were located in the Northeast and Midwest regions of the
country.
Drop-off Centers. Drop-off centers typically collect residential materials, although some
accept materials from businesses. They are found in locations such as grocery stores, sheltered
workshops, charitable organizations, city-sponsored sites, and apartment complexes. Types of
materials collected vary greatly; however, drop-off centers can usually accept a greater variety of
materials than a curbside collection program.
It is difficult to quantify drop-off centers in the U.S. It is estimated that there were 12,694
programs in 1997, according to aBioCycle survey (Goldstein 1998). In some areas, particularly those
with sparse population, drop-off centers may be the only option for collection of recyclable materials.
In other areas, they supplement other collection methods.
Buy-Back Centers. A buy-back center is typically a commercial operation that pays
individuals for recovered materials. This could include scrap metal dealers, aluminum can centers, waste
haulers, or paper dealers. Materials are collected by individuals, small businesses, and charitable
organizations.
Deposit Systems. Nine states have container deposit systems: Connecticut, Delaware, Iowa,
Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, Oregon, and Vermont (Figure 19). In these programs,
the consumer pays a deposit on beverage containers at the point of purchase, which is
97
-------
Chapter 3: Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Figure 18. Population served by curbside recycling, 1999
100 1
90
80
70
I 60
3
CL
o
50
§
30
10
0
NORTHEAST
Source: BioCycle 1999 (1998 data).
SOUTH
MIDWEST
WEST
redeemed on return of the empty containers. In addition, California has a similar system where
containers can be redeemed, but the consumer pays no deposit. With the exception of California, no
new deposit laws have been enacted since the early 1980s, due in part to the convenience and
economics of curbside recycling.
Deposit systems generally target beverage containers (primarily beer and soft drink containers),
which account for less than 4 percent of total MSW generation. It is estimated that about 35 percent of
all recovery of beverage containers comes from the 9 traditional deposit states mentioned above, and
an additional 20 percent of recovered beverage containers comes from California. (Note: These
recovery estimates reflect not only containers redeemed by consumers for deposit, but also containers
recovered through existing curbside and drop-off recycling programs. Containers recovered through
these programs eventually are credited to the distributor and counted towards the redemption rate.)
Commercial Recyclables Collection. The largest quantity of recovered materials comes from
the commercial sector. Old corrugated containers (OCC) and office papers are widely collected from
commercial establishments. Grocery stores and other retail outlets that require corrugated packaging
are part of an infrastructure that brings in the most recovered material. OCC is often baled at the retail
outlet and picked up by a paper dealer.
-------
Chapter 3: Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Figure 19.
States with Bottle Deposit Rules
states With Bottle Bills
The Container Recycling [njWute, 1999
Table 25
NUMBER AND POPULATION SERVED BY
CURBSIDE RECYCLABLES COLLECTION PROGRAMS, 1999
Number of Population
Population Served
Region
NORTHEAST
SOUTH
MIDWEST
WEST
U.S. Total (1)
Programs
3,414
1,581
3,477
877
9,349
(in thousands)
51,830
96,468
63,242
59,965
271,505
(in thousands)
43,162
37,914
30,106
28,644
139,826
(%)
83%
39%
48%
48%
52%
(1) Percent of population served by curbside programs was calculated using
population of states reporting data.
Source: Statistical Abstract 1999, Bureau of Census 1999, BioCycle 1999 (1998 data).
99
-------
Chapter 3: Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Office paper (e.g., white, mixed color, computer paper, etc.) is part of another commercial
recyclables collection infrastructure. Depending on the quantities generated, businesses (e.g., banks,
institutions, schools, printing operations, etc.) can sort materials and have them picked up by a paper
dealer, or self deliver the materials to the recycler. It should be noted that commercial operations also
make recycling available for materials other than paper.
Multi-family residence recycling could be classified as either residential or commercial
recyclables collection. Multi-family refuse is usually handled as a commercial account by waste haulers.
These commercial waste haulers may handle recycling at multi-family dwellings (typically 5 or more
units) as well.
Recyclables Processing
Processing recyclable materials is performed at materials recovery facilities (MRFs), mixed
waste processing facilities, and mixed waste composting facilities. Some materials are sorted at the curb
and require less attention. Other materials are sorted into categories at the curb, such as a paper
category and a container category, with additional sorting at a MRF. Mixed waste also can be
processed to pull out recyclable and compostable materials.
Figure 20. Estimated MRF Throughput 1999
(Throughput in tons per day per million population)
300 T
c250--
= 200
E
150 -
100--
50--
Northeast
South
Midwest
West
Materials Recovery Facilities. Materials recovery facilities vary widely across the U.S.,
depending on the incoming materials and the technology and labor used to sort the materials. In 1999,
480 MRFs were operating in the U.S., with an estimated total daily throughput of 55,000 tons per day
(Table 26). The most extensive recyclables processing throughput occurs in the Northeast (Figure 20).
100
-------
Chapter 3: Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Table 26
MATERIALS RECOVERY FACILITIES, 1999
Estimated
Throughput
Region
Northeast
South
North Central
West
U.S. Total
Number
119
138
118
105
480
(tpd)
14,903
18,162
11,523
10,779
55,367
Source: Governmental Advisory Associates, Inc.
2000 report release pending.
The majority of MRFs are considered low technology, meaning the materials are predominantly
sorted manually. MRFs classified as high technology sort recyclables using eddy currents, magnetic
pulleys, optical sensors, and air classifiers. As MRFs change and grow, many low-technology MRFs
add high-tech features, and high-technology MRFs include manual sorting, reducing the distinction
between high- and low-technology MRFs.
Mixed Waste Processing. Mixed waste processing facilities are less common than
conventional MRFs, but there are several facilities in operation in the U.S., as shown in Figure 21.
Mixed waste processing facilities receive waste just as if it were going to a landfill. The
mixed waste is loaded on conveyors and, using both mechanical and manual (high and low technology)
sorting, recyclable materials are removed for further processing. In 1997, there were reported 58
mixed waste processing facilities in the U.S., handling about 34,800 tons of waste per day
(Governmental Advisory Associates, 1998). The Western region of the U.S. has the largest
concentration of these processing facilities.
Mixed Waste Composting. Mixed waste composting starts with unsorted MSW. Large items
are removed, as well as ferrous and other metals, depending on the type of operation. Mixed waste
composting takes advantage of the high percentage of organic components of MSW, such as paper,
food wastes and yard trimmings, wood, and other materials. In 1999, there were 19 mixed waste
composting facilities, up from 14 in 1997. In 1999, 12 of these were located in the Midwest. The
greatest throughput, however, was in the South, as shown in Figure 22. Nationally, mixed waste
composting facilities handled about 813 tons per day in 1999, up from 670 tons per day in 1997.
101
-------
Chapter 3: Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Figure 21. Mixed Waste Processing Estimated Throughput, 1999
(tons per day per million population)
c
0
wocn -
0
Q_
c
0
0
Q_
'o
ro
Q_
ro
°i nn
>100 -
ro
Q
^/>
I I ,
i
i
Northeast South Midwest West
Source: Governmental Advisory Associates, Inc. 2000 and U.S. Bureau of Census.
12.00 -r
10.00 --
8.00 --
6.00 --
2- 4.00 --
-g 2.00 --
0.00
Figure 22. MSW Composting Capacity, 1999
(Throughput in tons per day per million population)
Northeast South Midwest
Source: BioCycle 1999 and U.S. Bureau of Census.
102
West
-------
Chapter 3: Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Yard Trimmings Composting. Yard trimmings composting is much more prevalent than
mixed waste composting. On-site management of yard trimmings is not included in this section, but is
discussed in the source reduction section in Chapter 4. In 1998, 3,807 yard trimmings composting
programs were reported (BioCycle 1999). About 78 percent of these programs are in the Northeast
and Midwest regions, as shown in Figure 23. Based on 12.6 million tons of yard trimmings recovered
for composting in the United States (Table 2, Chapter 2), yard trimmings composting facilities handled
approximately 34,400 tons per day in 1999.
COMBUSTION
Most of the municipal solid waste combustion currently practiced in this country incorporates
recovery of an energy product (generally steam or electricity). The resulting energy reduces the amount
needed from other sources, and the sale of the energy helps to offset the cost of operating the facility. In
past years, it was common to burn municipal solid waste in incinerators as a volume reduction practice;
energy recovery became more prevalent in the 1980s.
Total U.S. MSW combustion with energy recovery, referred to as waste-to-energy (WTE)
combustion, had a 1999 design capacity of 95,700 tons per day. There were 102 WTE facilities in
1999 (Table 27). The Northeastern and Southern regions had most of the MSW combustion capacity
in 1999 (Figure 24) In addition to facilities combusting mixed MSW (processed or unprocessed),
there is a small but growing amount of combustion of source-separated MSW. In particular, there is
considerable interest in using rubber tires as fuel in dedicated facilities or as fuel in cement kilns. In
addition, there is combustion of wood wastes and some paper and plastic wastes, usually in boilers that
already burn some other type of solid fuel. For this report, it was estimated that about 2.6 million tons
of MSW were combusted in this manner in 1999, with tires contributing a majority of the total.
Figure 23. Yard Trimmings Composting Programs, 1999
(In number of programs)
1,800 y
1,600 --
E 1,400--
§) 1,200 --
£ 1,000 --
Is 800--
E 600--
c 400--
200 --
0 --
Northeast
South
Midwest
West
Source: BioCycle 1999 (1998 data).
103
-------
Chapter 3: Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Table 27
MUNICIPAL WASTE-TO-ENERGY 1999
Region
NORTHEAST
SOUTH
MIDWEST
WEST
US. Total (1)
WTE
Number
Operational
40
34
21
7
102
(D(2)
Design
Capacity
(tpd)
44,865
34,115
12,198
4,559
95,737
(1) Projects on hold or inactive were not included.
Facilities in Hawaii and Alaska not included.
(2) WTE includes MB, MCU, RDF-Combustion.
Source: "The IWSA Directory of Waste-To-Energy Plants."
Integrated Waste Services Association, 2000.
In most cases the facilities have a stated daily capacity, but they normally operate at less than
capacity over the course of a year. It was assumed for this report that throughput over a year of
operation is 90 percent of rated capacity. The total throughput of MSW through all combustion facilities
was an estimated 34 million tons, or 14 percent of MSW generation, in 1999.
RESIDUES FROM WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES
Whenever municipal wastes are processed, residues will remain. For the purposes of this
report, it is assumed that most of these residues are landfilled. MRFs and compost facilities generate
some residues when processing various recovered materials. These residues include materials that are
unacceptable to end users (e.g., broken glass, wet newspapers), other contaminants (e.g.,products
made of plastic resins that are not wanted by the end user), or dirt. While residue generation varies
widely, 5 to 10 percent is probably typical for a MRF. Residues from a MRF or compost facility are
generally landfilled. Since the recovery estimates in this report are based on recovered materials
purchased by end users rather than materials entering a processing facility, the residues are counted
with other disposed materials.
104
-------
Chapter 3: Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Figure 24. Municipal Waste-To-Energy Capacity, 1999
(Capacity in tons per day per million population)
1,000 T
800
E 600 - .
>, 400 -
200
0
Northeast South Midwest West
Source: Integrated Waste Services Association 2000 and U.S. Bureau of Census.
When municipal solid waste is combusted, a residue (usually called ash) is left behind. Years ago, this
ash was commonly disposed of along with municipal solid waste, but combustor ash is not counted as
MSW in this report because it generally must be managed separately.* (There are a number of efforts
under way to reuse ash.) As a general "rule of thumb," MSW combustor ash amounts to about 25
percent (dry weight) of unprocessed MSW input. This percentage will vary from facility to facility
depending upon the types of waste input and the efficiency and configuration of the facility.
LANDFILLS
Athough the number of landfills is decreasing, the total available capacity for landfilling in the
United States has remained relatively constant. In 1999, approximately 2,300 municipal solid waste
landfills were reported in the contiguous U.S. New landfills are now much larger than in the past.
Table 28 and Figure 25 show the number of landfills in each region. The Southeast and West
had the greatest number of landfills. Thirty-one states had more than 10 years of capacity left, down
from 1997, in which 42 states had more than 10 years of capacity left. Two states reported having less
than 5 years of capacity remaining.
*Note that many combustion facilities do magnetic separation of residues to recover ferrous metals, e.g., steel cans
and steel in other miscellaneous durable goods. This recovered steel is included in the total recovery of ferrous
metals in MSW reported in Chapter 2.
105
-------
Chapter 3: Management of Municipal Solid Waste
1,000 T
800 --
^
3 600 +
M
O
10 yr
6
12
7
9
34
5 to 10 yr
2
3
5
2
12
<5yr
1
1
0
0
2
Source: BioCycle April 2000.
106
-------
Chapter 3: Management of Municipal Solid Waste
SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL AND CURRENT MSW MANAGEMENT
This summary provides some perspective on historical and current municipal solid waste
management practices in the U.S. The results are summarized in Table 29 and Figure 26.
Historically, municipal solid waste generation has grown relatively steadily from 88 million tons
in 1960 to 229.9 million tons in 1999. In the 1960s and early 1970s, a large percentage of MSW was
burned, with little recovery for recycling. Landfill disposal typically consisted of open dumping, often
accompanied with open burning of the waste for volume reduction. Through the mid-1980s,
incineration declined considerably landfills became difficult to site, and waste generation continued to
increase. Materials recovery rates increased very slowly in this time period, and the burden on the
nation's landfills grew dramatically.
As Figure 26 shows, discards of MSW to landfill or other disposal apparently peaked in the 1986-
1987 period, then began to decline as materials recovery and combustion increased.
More recently, tons of waste landfilled have been growing again, to accommodate increased
generation, while since 1997 combustion declined slightly and recycling rose slightly. Although there
now are fewer MSW landfills, their average size has increased, and capacity at the national level does
not appear to be a problem. It should be noted that there are fewer years of landfill capacity available
than there were two years ago. Compared to two years ago, more states have less than a decade of
capacity left. In addition, regional dislocations sometimes occur.
Recovery of products and yard trimmings increased steadily. Combustion has decreased
slightly from 17 percent of generation in 1997 to 15 percent of generation in 1999. Although MSW
discards to landfills have generally decreased in the 1990s, about 132 million tons of MSW were
landfilled in 1999, up from 127 million tons in 1998. As a percentage of total MSW generation,
landfilling has consistently decreased - from 83 percent of generation in 1986 to 57 percent in 1999.
Figure 26. Municipal solid waste management, 1960 to 1999
200
100
50-
Recovery for the composting
component of recyclin
107
-------
Chapter 3: Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Table 29
GENERATION, MATERIALS RECOVERY, COMPOSTING, COMBUSTION,
AND DISCARDS OF MUNICIPAL SOLD) WASTE, 1960 TO 1999
(In thousands of tons and percent of total generation)
Thousands of Tons
Generation
Recovery for recycling
Recovery for composting*
Total Materials Recovery
Discards after recovery
Combustion**
Discards to landfill,
other disposalf
1960
88,120
5,610
Neg.
5,610
82,510
27,000
55,510
1970
121,060
8,020
8,020
113,040
25,100
87,940
1980
151,640
14,520
14,520
137,120
13,700
123,420
1990
205,210
29,040
4,200
33,240
171,970
31,900
140,070
1994
214,360
42,150
8,480
50,630
163,730
32,490
131,240
1995
211,360
45,340
9,570
54,910
156,450
35,540
120,910
1997
219,140
47,300
12,070
59,370
159,770
36,700
123,070
1998
223,040
48,410
13,140
61,550
161,490
34,410
127,080
1999
229,850
50,780
13,110
63,890
165,960
34,040
131,920
Pounds per Person per Day
Generation
Recovery for recycling
Recovery for composting*
Total Materials Recovery
Discards after recovery
Combustion**
Discards to landfill,
other disposalf
Population (thousands)
Generation
Recovery for recycling
Recovery for composting*
Total Materials Recovery
Discards after recovery
Combustion**
Discards to landfill,
other disposal!
1960
2.68
0.17
Neg.
0.17
2.51
0.82
1.69
179,979
1970
3.25
0.22
0.22
3.04
0.67
2.36
203,984
1980
3.66
0.35
0.35
3.31
0.33
2.98
227,255
1990
4.50
0.64
0.09
0.73
3.77
0.70
3.07
249,907
1994
4.51
0.89
0.18
1.06
3.44
0.68
2.76
260,682
1995
4.40
0.94
0.20
1.14
3.26
0.74
2.52
263,168
1997
4.49
0.97
0.25
1.22
3.27
0.75
2.52
267,645
1998
4.52
0.98
0.27
1.25
3.27
0.70
2.57
270,561
Percent of Total Generation
1960
100.0%
6.4%
6.4%
93.6%
30.6%
63.0%
1970
100.0%
6.6%
6.6%
93.4%
20.7%
72.6%
1980
100.0%
9.6%
9.6%
90.4%
9.0%
81.4%
1990
100.0%
14.2%
2.0%
16.2%
83.8%
15.5%
68.3%
1994
100.0%
19.7%
4.0%
23.6%
76.4%
15.2%
61.2%
1995
100.0%
21.5%
4.5%
26.0%
74.0%
16.8%
57.2%
1997
100.0%
21.6%
5.5%
27.1%
72.9%
16.7%
56.2%
1998
100.0%
21.7%
5.9%
27.6%
72.4%
15.4%
57.0%
1999
4.62
1.02
0.26
1.28
3.33
0.68
2.65
272,691
1999
100.0%
22.1%
5.7%
27.8%
72.2%
14.8%
57.4%
* Composting of yard trimmings and food wastes. Does not include mixed MSW composting or backyard composting.
* * Includes combustion of MSW in mass bum or refuse-derived fuel form, and combustion with energy
recovery of source separated materials in MSW (e.g., wood pallets and tire-derived fuel)
f Discards after recovery minus combustion.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates
108
-------
Chapter 3: Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Chapter 3
REFERENCES
GENERAL
Franklin Associates, Ltd. Solid Waste Management at the Crossroads. December 1997.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Municipal Solid Waste Task Force, Office of Solid
Waste. The Solid Waste Dilemma: An Agenda for Action. February 1989.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United States: 1990 Update. EPA/530-SW-90-042. June 1991.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United States: 1992 Update. EPA/530-R-92-019. July 1992.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United States: 1994 Update. EPA/530-R-94-042. November 1994.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United States: 1995 Update. EPA/530-R-96-001. March 1996.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United States: 1996 Update. EPA/530-R-97-015. June 1997.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United States: 1997 Update. EPA/530-R-98-007. May 1998.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United States: 1998 Update. EPA/530-R-99-021. September 1999.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Municipal Solid Waste Generation, Recycling and
Disposal in the United States: Facts and Figures for 1998. EPA/530-F-00-024. April 2000.
SOURCE REDUCTION
Congress of the United States, Office of Technology Assessment. Green Products by
Design: Choices for a Cleaner Environment. OTA-E-541. October 1992.
Council on Packaging in the Environment. "COPE Backgrounder: Source Reduction." March 1995.
Franklin Associates, Ltd. Materials Technology: Packaging Design and the Environment.
Congress of the United States, Office of Technology Assessment. April 1991.
Franklin Associates, Ltd. The Role of Recycling in Integrated Solid Waste Management to
109
-------
Chapter 3: Management of Municipal Solid Waste
the Year 2000. Keep America Beautiful, Inc. 1994.
Rattray, Tom. "Source ReductionAn Endangered Species?" Resource Recycling. November
1990.
Raymond Communications Inc. State Recycling Laws Update Year-End Edition 1998.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The Consumer's Handbook for Reducing Solid
Waste. EPA/53O-K-92-003. August 1992.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Waste Wise: Second Year Progress Report.
EPA/530-R-96-016. September 1996.
RECOVERY FOR RECYCLING AND COMPOSTING
Governmental Advisory Associates. The Materials Recycling and Processing Industry in
the United States: 1995-96 Yearbook, Atlas, and Directory. 1995.
Governmental Advisory Associates. 1997 Update to the Materials Recycling and
Processing Industry in the United States. 1991.
Governmental Advisory Associates. Communications with Franklin Associates. 1998.
Kreith, Frank. Handbook of Solid Waste Management. McGraw-Hill, Inc. 1994.
Glenn, Jim. "The State of Garbage in America." BioCycle. April 1998.
Glenn, Jim. "MSW Composting in the United States." BioCycle. November 1997.
Glenn, Jim and Dave Block. "MSW Composting in the United States." BioCycle. November 1999.
Goldstein, Nora and Celeste Madtes. "The State of Garbage in America Part II." BioCycle.
November 2000.
The Composting Council. "MSW Composting Facilities." Fall 1995.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of the United
States. 1997.
COMBUSTION
"1991-1992 Energy-from-Waste Report." Solid Waste & Power. HCI Publications. October
1991, December 1990.
Integrated Waste Services Association. "High Court Rules Ash Not Exempt from Subtitle C
Regulation." Update. Summer 1994.
110
-------
Chapter 3: Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Kiser, Jonathan V.L. "A Comprehensive Report on the Status of Municipal Waste
Combustion." Waste Age. November 1990.
Kiser, Jonathan V.L. "Municipal Waste Combustion in North America: 1992 Update." Waste
Age. November 1992.
Kiser, Jonathan V.L. "The 1992 Municipal Waste Combustion Guide." National Solid
Wastes Management Association. February 1992.
Kiser, Jonathan V.L. "The IWSA Municipal Waste Combustion Directory: 1993." Integrated
Waste Services Association. February 1994.
Kiser, Jonathan V.L., and John Menapace. "The 1995 IWSA Municipal Waste Combustion
Directory Of United States Facilities." Integrated Waste Services Association. March 1995.
Kiser, Jonathan V.L., and John Menapace. "The 1996 IWSA Municipal Waste Combustion
Directory of United States Facilities." Integrated Waste Services Association. March 1996.
Rigo, Greg and Maria Zannes. "The 1997-1998 IWSA Waste-to-Energy Directory of United
States Facilities." Integrated Waste Services Association. November 1997.
Levy, Steven J. Municipal Waste Combustion Inventory. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Solid Waste, Municipal & Industrial Solid Waste Division. November 22,
1991.
National Solid Wastes Management Association. "The 1992 Municipal Waste Combustion
Guide." Waste Age. November 1992.
"The 1991 Municipal Waste Combustion Guide." Waste Age. November 1991.
LANDFILL
Franklin Associates. Unpublished data and estimates.
Repa, Edward and Allen Blakey. "Municipal Solid Waste Disposal Trends: 1996 Update."
Waste Age. May 1996.
Glenn, Jim. "The State of Garbage in America." BioCycle. April 1998.
Goldstein, Nora. "The State of Garbage in America Part I." BioCycle. April 2000
111
-------
Chapter 4: Source Reduction of Municipal Solid Waste
Chapter 4
SOURCE REDUCTION OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
INTRODUCTION
During the past 40 years, the amount of waste each person creates has almost doubled, from
2.7 to 4.62 pounds per day. The most effective way to stop this trend is by preventing waste from
being generated in the first place.
Source reduction, also known as "waste prevention," is the practice of designing,
manufacturing, purchasing, or using materials (such as products and packaging) in ways that reduce the
amount or toxicity of trash created. Reusing items is another way to stop waste at the source because it
delays or avoids that item's entry into the waste collection and disposal system.
Source reduction means consuming and throwing away less. It includes things like purchasing
durable, long-lasting goods and seeking products and packaging that are as free of excessive packaging
and toxins as possible. It can be as complex as redesigning a product to use less raw material in
production, have a longer life, or be used again after its original use is completed. Because source
reduction actually prevents the generation of waste in the first place, it is the most preferable method of
waste management and goes a long way toward protecting the environment.
MEASURING SOURCE REDUCTION
Although source reduction has been an increasingly important aspect of municipal solid waste
programs since the late 1980s, the goal of actually measuring how much source reduction has taken
place - how much waste prevention there has been - has proved elusive. Early attempts by localities
and states often consisted of measuring a single waste stream in a single community. In time, additional
research enabled proxy, or estimated values, to be developed for specific waste streams, to use on a
statewide or national level. EPA's Source Reduction Program Potential Manual and planning
packet, published in 1997 (EPA530-E-97-001) provides an example of this approach. Unlike
recycling, where there are actual materials to weigh all through the process, measuring source reduction
means trying to measure something that no longer exists.
As a reminder, in this chapter, as well as this report, MSW includes wastes such as durable
goods, nondurable goods, containers and packaging, food scraps, yard trimmings, and miscellaneous
inorganic wastes from residential, commercial, institutional, and industrial sources. MSW does not
include sewage, hazardous wastes, nonhazardous industrial waste, construction and demolition debris,
or automobile bodies.
To measure the absence of waste at the national level, a factor had to be found - something in
the population or economy that has most closely followed the pattern of waste generation and disposal.
Factors such as population increases or decreases of course have an impact, but EPA's study showed
that population is not the best indicator of waste generation.
112
-------
Chapter 4: Source Reduction of Municipal Solid Waste
The Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which measures the value of goods and services produced in the
U.S., had a relatively good correlation to waste generation. But, going all the way back to 1960, what
ended up having the best relationship with waste generation was Personal Consumption Expenditures
(PCE) - commonly referred to as "Consumer Spending." Fortunately, this makes perfect sense since
consumer spending reflects the goods and products, including food, and their packaging, which are
purchased, used, and ultimately discarded as municipal solid waste.
Over the last several decades, there has been a measured steep and steady increase in waste
generation in the United States. If that same rate of generation remained constant through 1999, then
almost 280 million tons of waste would have been generated. But in 1999, only 230 million tons of
waste were actually generated. That's 50 million tons of waste that never made it to the waste stream.
Source reduction is measured as the difference between the amount of MSW that was projected to be
generated in 1999 and the actual amount of MSW that was generated in 1999.
The November 1999 National Source Reduction Characterization Report for Municipal
Solid Waste in the United States (EPA530-R-99-034) explains the methodology that was used to
generate the source reduction estimates presented in this report. Further detail on the chosen
methodology, including an explanation of the significance of PCE as a predictor of waste is provided in
that report. Please also note that updates to previously published data have been reflected in this report.
These data adjustments are a result of recent revisions of national economic data and indicators from
the U.S. Department of Commerce. Current and historical source reduction data have been adjusted to
correctly reflect these updates.
SOURCE REDUCTION FACTS
More than 50 million tons of MSW were source reduced in the United States in 1999 - EPA
estimates come to 50,042,000 tons.
Table 30 shows containers and packaging represent approximately 24 percent of the materials
source reduced in 1999, in addition to nondurable goods (e.g., newspapers, clothing) at 18 percent,
durable goods (e.g., appliances, furniture, tires) at 11 percent, and other MSW (e.g., yard trimmings,
food scraps) at 47 percent.
Table 30: 1999 Source Reduction by
Major Material Categories
Waste Stream
Durable Goods (e.g. appliances, furniture)
Nondurable Goods (e.g. newspapers & clothing)
Containers & Packaging (eg bottles & boxes)
Other MSW (e.g. yard trimmings & food scraps)
Total Source Reduction (1990 baseline)
Tons Source Reduced
5,289,000
8,956,000
12,004,000
23,793,000
50,042,000
Percentage
11%
18%
24%
47%
100%
113
-------
Chapter 4: Source Reduction of Municipal Solid Waste
Table 31 lists items that showed significant decreases (source reduction) and increases (source
expansion) in waste generation in 1999. The top chart shows 7 major contributors to source reduction.
These 7 accounted for 76 percent of the nation's entire 1999 waste reduction, while the bottom 4
account for 67 percent of the increases in waste generation. A detailed listing of individual MSW
components can be found in Appendix B.
As a word of caution, individual materials should not necessarily be analyzed without giving
careful consideration to other related materials that may have impacted either the reduction or increased
use of that material. For example, as shown below, glass containers have contributed significantly to
source reduction. However, it is clear that plastic containers may have been substituted for glass in
many instances as reflected by the significant source expansion of plastic containers in this study.
Therefore, there may not have been as much container packaging reduction as there was container
material substitution - plastic for glass.
In order to better reflect the impact of this type of material substitution, Table 3 shows source
reduction and expansion for "functional" categories so that individual materials are not taken out of
context. For example, Table 32 shows that source reduction for "Bags and Sacks" is 1,230,000 tons.
This is a result of the decrease in paper bags and sacks (1,638,000 tons) and the increase in plastic
bags and sacks (408,000 tons).
Table 31: Significant Source Reduction and Source Expansion Within MSW
(Thousands of Tons)
Waste Stream
Showing Significant
Source Reduction or Source
Expansion
Significant Source Reduction
Yard Trimmings
Glass Containers & Bottles
Newspapers
Wood Packaging
Food Scraps
Miscellaneous Durable Goods
Paper Bags & Sacks
Total
Significant Source Expansion
Clothing and Footwear
Plastic Containers & Bottles
Plastic Wraps
Plastic Bags & Sacks
Total
Source Reduction/Source Expansion
20,008
5,085
4,358
3,617
3,210
3,028
1,638
39,306
(781)
(971)
(463)
(408)
(2,623)
Net source reduction is determined by subtracting total source expansion (4 million tons)
from total source reduction (54 million tons).
114
-------
Chapter 4: Source Reduction of Municipal Solid Waste
SOURCE REDUCTION BENEFITS
Source reduction, which includes material reuse, can help reduce waste disposal and handling
costs, because it avoids the costs of recycling, municipal composting, landfilling, and combustion.
Source reduction also conserves resources such as water and energy and reduces pollution, including
greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming.
Source reduction saves natural resources. Waste is not just created when consumers throw
items away. Throughout the life cycle of a product - from extraction of raw materials to
transportation to processing and manufacturing facilities to manufacture and use - waste is generated.
Reusing items or making them with less material decreases waste dramatically. Ultimately, less materials
will need to be recycled or sent to landfills or waste combustion facilities.
Reduces toxicity of waste. Selecting nonhazardous or less hazardous items is another
important component of source reduction. Using less hazardous alternatives for certain items (e.g.,
cleaning products and pesticides), sharing products that contain hazardous chemicals instead of
throwing out leftovers, reading label directions carefully, and using the smallest amount necessary are
ways to reduce waste toxicity.
Table 32: Source Reduction/(Expansion) for Functional Categories - 1999
(Thousands of Tons)
Product
Durables
Miscellaneous Durables
Furniture/Furnishings
Major Appliances
Tires
Batteries, Lead Acid
Small Appliances
Carpets/Rugs
Subtotal
Source
Reduction/Expansion
(based on consumer
spending & change in
waste generation rate)
3,028
1,551
835
274
120
(313)
(206)
5,289
(continued on next page)
115
-------
Chapter 4: Source Reduction of Municipal Solid Waste
{continued from previous page)
Non-Durables
Publications
Office Paper
Tissue Paper/Towels
Miscellaneous Nondurables
Other Nonpackaging Paper
Towels, Sheets, Pillowcases
Trash Bags
Disposable Diapers
Third Class Mail
Plates and Cups
Clothing/Footwear
Other Commercial Printing
Subtotal
Packaging
Wood Packaging
Beverage Containers
Food Containers
Bags and Sacks
Wrapping
Miscellaneous Packaging
Paper Boxes
Subtotal
Other MSW Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Food Scraps
Miscellaneous Inorganics
Subtotal
Grand Total
6,263
1,073
677
826
497
188
114
373
(350)
(67)
(781)
143
8,956
3,617
3,885
2,678
1,230
(766)
(243)
1,603
12,004
20,008
3,210
575
23, 793
50,042
* Parentheses denote negative numbers, or source expansion. Positive numbers indicate source reduction
Reduces costs. The benefits of preventing waste go beyond reducing reliance on other forms
of waste disposal. Preventing waste also can mean economic savings for communities, businesses,
schools, and individual consumers.
Communities. When these households reduce waste at the source, they dispose of less trash,
resulting in lower trash disposal fees and longer landfill life.
Businesses. Industry also has an economic incentive to practice source reduction. When
businesses manufacture their products with less packaging, they are buying less raw material. A
decrease in manufacturing costs can mean a larger profit margin, with savings that can be
passed on to the consumer. Add decreased waste disposal costs to this, and significant savings
can be achieved.
116
-------
Chapter 4: Source Reduction of Municipal Solid Waste
Consumers. Consumers also can share in the economic benefits of source reduction. Buying
products in bulk, with less packaging, or that are reusable (not single-use) frequently means a
cost savings. What is good for the environment can be good for the pocketbook as well.
FACTORS IMPACTING SOURCE REDUCTION
Since 1990, source reduction has continued to occur at an impressive rate in the United States
- nearly doubling in the last three years alone. This is due, in large part, to the nation's continued
economic prosperity the last half of this decade. That, combined with improvements in
materials/resource management, has resulted in more than 50 million tons of waste prevented in 1999.
A fundamental business principal asserts that waste is an indicator of inefficiency. Therefore,
when an organization becomes more efficient in their use of resources, they generate less waste. So it
only makes sense that if a company were to look at eliminating, or at least reducing, the amount of
waste they generate, they would, as a result, become more efficient. And in the business world,
increased efficiency translates to increased profits. The recent prosperity that the United States has
experienced has afforded many companies the opportunity to invest in operational efficiencies, thus
generating less waste material. This can be seen in the reduction of wood packaging waste due to
wooden pallets being reused multiple times instead of being sent to the landfill after just one use.
Newspapers also have made large gains in waste reduction. They are being made lighter and slightly
smaller than in prior years. It's also probably safe to say that the increased use of the Internet has
contributed to the reduction in newspaper waste.
Unfortunately, economic prosperity does not necessarily translate to better waste management
in residential applications. As a matter of fact, it looks to be just the opposite. It appears that as
individuals are more prosperous and have greater discretionary spending, they become more wasteful.
This can be seen in the data that is commonly attributed to home waste disposal such as clothing,
footwear, disposable products, and packaging. There's also a significant increase in the use of plastic
bags/sacks.
So the good news is that more products are being made with less waste and Americans are
recycling more. The bad news is - we're also consuming more and generating more waste.
117
-------
Appendix A: Material Flows Methodology
Appendix A
MATERIAL FLOWS METHODOLOGY
The material flows methodology is illustrated in Figures A-l and A-2. The crucial first step is
making estimates of the generation of the materials and products in MSW (Figure A-l).
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION
Data on domestic production of materials and products were compiled using published data
series. U.S. Department of Commerce sources were used where available, but in several instances
more detailed information on production of goods by end use is available from trade associations. The
goal is to obtain a consistent historical data series for each product and/or material.
CONVERTING SCRAP
The domestic production numbers were then adjusted for converting or fabrication scrap
generated in the production processes. Examples of these kinds of scrap would be clippings from plants
that make boxes from paperboard, glass scrap (cullet) generated in a glass bottle plant, or plastic scrap
from a fabricator of plastic consumer products. This scrap typically has a high value because it is clean
and readily identifiable, and it is almost always recovered and recycled within the industry that
generated it. Thus, converting/fabrication scrap is not counted as part of the post consumer recovery of
waste.
ADJUSTMENTS FOR IMPORTS/EXPORTS
In some instances imports and exports of products are a significant part of MSW, and
adjustments were made to account for this.
DIVERSION
Various adjustments were made to account for diversions from MSW. Some consumer
products are permanently diverted from the municipal waste stream because of the way they are used.
For example, some paperboard is used in building materials, which are not counted as MSW. Another
example of diversion is toilet tissue, which is disposed in sewer systems rather than becoming MSW.
In other instances, products are temporarily diverted from the municipal waste stream.
For example, textiles reused as rags are assumed to enter the waste stream the same year the
textiles are initially discarded.
118
-------
Appendix A: Material Flow Methodology
Figure A-l. Material flows methodology for estimating generation of products and materials
in municipal solid waste.
Domestic Pt
of
Imports 1
of 1
oduction Conversion/
Exports
of
IJHUSMU Permanent
°* Diversion
^^^^^^^^_
1
1
I
Municipal mmm .. ^J
Solid Waste Temporary
Diversion
119
-------
Appendix A: Material Flows Methodology
Figure A-2. Material flows methodology for estimating discards of products and materials in
municipal solid waste.
1
MSW
Generation
\
Recovery
fb
Recovery
for\
\
1
Discards After
Recycling
\
Recovery for
Combus tion with
Recov>
Combustu
ryfor
n without
Discards to
Landfill and other
120
-------
Appendix A: Material Flows Methodology
ADJUSTMENTS FOR PRODUCT LIFETIME
Some products (e.g., newspapers and packaging) normally have a very short lifetime; these
products are assumed to be discarded in the same year they are produced. In other instances (e.g.,
furniture and appliances), products have relatively long lifetimes. Data on average product lifetimes are
used to adjust the data series to account for this.
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE GENERATION AND DISCARDS
The result of these estimates and calculations is a material-by-material and product-by-product
estimate of MSW generation, recovery, and discards.
121
-------
Appendix A: Material Flow Methodology
Appendix B
Table B-l Source Reduction/Expansion for Individual Components of MSW - 1999
(Thousands of Tons)
Waste Stream by Commodity
Components
Durable Goods
Miscellaneous Durables
Furniture/Furnishings
Major Appliances
Tires
Batteries, Lead Acid
Small Appliances
Carpets/Rugs
Source Reduction Subtotal for Durable Goods
Source Expansion Subtotal for Durable Goods
Net Value Subtotal for Durable Goods
Nondurable Goods
Newspapers
Magazines
Office Paper
Tissue Paper/Towels
Miscellaneous Nondurables
Other Nonpackaging Paper
Telephone Directories
Books
Towels, Sheets, Pillowcases
Trash Bags
Disposable Diapers
Plastic Plates/Cups
Third Class Mail
Paper Plates/Cups
Clothing/Footwear
Other Commercial Printing
Source Reduction Subtotal for Nondurable Goods
Source Expansion Subtotal for Nondurable Goods
Net Value Subtotal for Nondurable Goods
Source Reduction
/ Expansion
(based on consumer
spending & change
in waste generation
rate)
3,028
1,551
835
274
120
(313)
(206)
5,808
(519)
5,289
4,357
1,550
1,073
677
826
497
152
203
188
114
373
(23)
(350)
(43)
(781)
143
10,153
(1,197)
8,956
122
-------
Appendix B: Source Reduction/Expansion for Individual Components ofMSW
Containers and Packaging
Wood Packaging
Glass Beer/Soft Drink Bottles
Glass Food/Other Bottles & Jars
Paper Bag/Sacks
Glass Wine/Liquor Bottles
Plastic-Other Containers
Aluminum Beer/Soft Drink Cans
Steel Beer/Soft Drink Cans
Milk Cartons
Other Paperboard Packaging
Wrapping Papers
Steel Food/Other Cans
Steel-Other Packaging
Other Misc. Packaging
Plastics-Other Packaging
Aluminum-Foils/Closure
Aluminum-Other Cans
Plastic Milk Bottles
Plastic Wraps
Other Paper Packaging
Plastic Soft Drink Bottles
Plastic Bags/Sacks
Folding Cartons
Corrugated Boxes
Source Reduction Subtotal for Containers & Packaging
Source Expansion Subtotal for Containers & Packaging
Net Value Subtotal for Containers and Packaging
3,616
2,243
1,904
1,638
939
(690)
574
205
206
106
150
774
33
(15)
102
70
(23)
33
(463)
(279)
(314)
(408)
85
1,518
14,196
(2,192)
12,004
Other Components of MSW Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Food Scraps
Miscellaneous Inorganics
Source Reduction Subtotal for Other MSW Wastes
Source Expansion Subtotal for Other MSW Wastes
Net Value Subtotal for Other MSW Wastes
Source Reduction Total for MSW
Source Expansion Total for MSW
Net Value Total for MSW
20,008
3,210
575
23,793
0
23,793
53,950
3,908
50,042
-------
Appendix C: Consumer Electronics in Municipal Solid Waste
Appendix C
CONSUMER ELECTRONICS IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
INTRODUCTION
Consumer electronic products (electronics) are a fast growing segment of the municipal solid
waste (MSW) waste stream, with increasing opportunities for recycling. Generation of these products is
increasing from both residences and commercial establishments. This year, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) has studied consumer electronics to estimate generation, recovery and
disposal of these products.
In previous editions of the EPA report, Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United States, EPA has included electronics under the category "Miscellaneous Durables," along with
other products such as toys, toasters, dishes, and luggage. This year, EPA has broken out consumer
electronic products as a separate subcategory under the miscellaneous durables category. The
methodology EPA used to collect and analyze data for this appendix on electronics takes into account
the lack of national information on this subject. Additionally, this appendix does not have information on
all categories of electronic products because of data limitations. Those electronics that are not covered
specifically in this appendix are included in the main body of this report in Chapter 2.
Consumer electronic products include electronic products used by residences and commercial
establishments such as businesses and institutions. Consumer electronics include video and audio
equipment and information age products. Video products are products such as standard televisions
(TV), projection TV, high density TV, liquid crystal display TV, videocassette players, VCR decks,
camcorders, laserdisc players, digital versatile disc players, TV/personal computer (PC), and video
games. Audio products include rack audio systems, compact audio systems, portable compact discs
(CD), portable headset audio, total CD players, and home radios. Information products include
cordless/corded telephones, wireless telephones, telephone answering machines, facsimile (fax)
machines, personal work processors, personal computers, computer printers, computer monitors,
modems, and fax modems. Certain other electronics products such as separate audio components are
not included because of data limitations.
The rapid growth of consumer electronic sales over the last 15 years, and the relatively short
life of these products, has led to their increasing numbers in the waste stream. Management of these
wastes is a concern to those governmental officials responsible for the safe handling of solid waste.
Additionally, electronics contain valuable components which can be reused and valuable materials
which can be recycled. To give an idea of the growth in electronics, Figure 1 depicts the growth of
selected consumer electronic product sales since 1984 based on units shipped by manufacturers to
retailers. In 1984, less than 150 million units were shipped. The number of units shipped increased to
more than 400 million by 1999.
124
-------
Appendix C: Consumer Electronics in Municipal Solid Waste
.ts
1
.ts
s
&
Figure C-l:
Selected Consumer Electronics:
SELECTED CONSUMER ELECTRONICS:
Total Units Shipped 1984 - 1999
n ,11(1(1 nnito
/
/
^^
^^^
^r^
^ ' ""
«-^-^
1984 1987 1990 1993 1996 1999
Year
| * Units Shipped |
The information on consumer electronics in this report is presented by: (1) material composition (metals,
glass, plastic); (2) total generation; (3) total recovery; and (4) total discards for the year 1999. The
generation findings are based on 1999 data on sales by manufacturers. As stated earlier, the consumer
products quantified in this report include video, audio, and information products. Below, we list the
specific electronic products included in this appendix, followed by a discussion of the methodology and
data limitations.
CONSUMER ELECTRONICS PRODUCTS INCLUDED IN THIS REPORT
Although the category consumer electronics includes video, audio, and information products,
only select electronic products from these categories were included in this appendix due to the
limitations in the data. The specific products included in the consumer electronics designation for this
appendix were chosen because we were able to obtain data on sales of these products by
manufacturers to retailers and large quantity buyers. For example, pagers and radar detectors were not
included because the data available were not complete. Some additional items excluded due to
inadequate data were: separate audio components, home theater-in-a-box, digital cameras, electronic
accessories, and electronic games. For those consumer electronics that are not listed separately within
this Appendix, estimates are contained in the "Miscellaneous Durables category in the main body of this
report, and in the subcategory, "Other Miscellaneous Durables." Tables 12 to 14 in Chapter 2 of the
main report provide this information. Table C-l below shows the selected consumer electronics
addressed in this appendix.
125
-------
Appendix C: Consumer Electronics in Municipal Solid Waste
Table C-l
Selected Consumer Electronics
Video Products
Audio Products
TVs
Projection TV
HDTV*
LCD TV
TV/VCR Combinations*
Videocassette Players
VCR Decks
Camcorders
Laserdiscs players
Digital Versatile Disc Players*
TV/PC Combinations*
Rack Audio Systems
Compact Audio Systems
Portable CD
Portable Headset Audio
Total CD Players
Home Radios
Information Products
Cordless/Corded Telephones
Wireless Telephones
Telephone Answering Machines
Fax Machines
Personal Word Processors
Personal Computers
Computer Printers
Computer Monitors
Modems/Fax Modems
*Items not expected to enter the municipal waste stream until after 1999.
METHODOLOGY
Research was conducted to develop a consistent method for estimating generation, recovery for
recycling, and discards of consumer electronics on an annual basis. The method relies on data regarding
shipments of consumer electronics from manufacturers (adjusted for imports and exports) to retail
outlets. The number of units shipped is combined with estimated life span and the average weight of
each product entering the municipal waste stream, to estimate generation. Average weights for
consumer electronics were estimated after collecting information from catalogs, consumer electronic
magazines, and weighing available items. This information was then compared to information from retail
shops, repair shops, demanufacturers, recyclers, organizations, and governments to arrive at the figures
for composition of the waste after retail sales, recovery for recycling, and discards.
126
-------
Appendix C: Consumer Electronics in Municipal Solid Waste
Definition of Terms
The term generation as used in this appendix refers to the weight of products as they enter the
waste management system from residential and commercial sources and before materials recovery
takes place. Primary and secondary life (reuse) takes place ahead of generation. In other words, waste
is generated only after the first and any subsequent users of the product are through using the equipment
for its original purpose.
Recovery for recycling as estimated in this appendix includes products removed from the
waste stream for the purpose of recycling. Product recovery for overseas markets is considered
recovery for recycling.
Discards include those consumer electronics or their components that remain after the materials
for recycling have been removed. These discards presumably would be incinerated or landfilled in
MSW or hazardous waste facilities, although some products are placed into storage.
Data Collection and Research
In addition to the initial manufacturers' shipment data, information was collected regarding the
weight, expected life span, and the composition for each type of consumer electronic product analyzed.
Numerous research and case study reports were reviewed. Additional information sources included
manufacturers, retailers, repair shops, demanufacturers, recyclers, industry organizations and
governmental agencies. Table C-2 lists the types of information received from each of these entities.
Table C-2
Consumer Electronics Data Collection
(Information Requested
Manufacturers
letail Shops
lepair Shops
Demanufacturers
lecvclers
Organizations
Government
Product weights, composition, and life span
Product weights
Product composition and life span
Product composition and life span
Product composition and life span
Information on units shipped
Product weights, composition, and life span
Source: Franklin Associates
Generation
The first step in estimating generation of consumer electronics is to combine the number of units
shipped from the manufacturers to retailers, with the estimated life span and the average weight of each
product entering the municipal waste stream. The retail sales for the years 1984 through 1999 were
obtained from the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA). These data estimate the number of units
shipped, adjusted for imports and exports, to U.S. retailers.
Note that the products shipped directly to large consumers from manufacturer or
127
-------
Appendix C: Consumer Electronics in Municipal Solid Waste
manufacturers' representatives are not estimated in the CEA data. Therefore, the consumer electronic
generation in this report may be underestimated for some products, such as telephones, fax machines,
personal word processors, and modems used by large commercial establishments. Additional research
did allow for an estimate of the direct sales to large commercial establishments of computers, printers,
and monitors. As stated previously, consumer electronics not included in the consumer electronic
subcategory have been accounted for in the miscellaneous durables category in the main body of this
report, in Tables 12 to 14 in Chapter 2.
All consumer electronics included in this study have an estimated life span. This estimate
includes primary and when applicable, secondary use of the product. Reuse of consumer electronic
products is taken into account in the methodology and is referred to as secondary use of the product.
Consumer electronics repair shops provided estimates on life span of all audio and video products.
Telephone repair shops provided estimates for cordless/corded telephones and wireless telephones.
Computer and computer monitor life spans were taken from the estimates found in the
Electronic Product Recovery and Recycling Baseline Report of the National Safety Council. EPA
estimated life spans for all other computer peripherals such as personal work processors, printers, and
fax/fax modems, based on data gathered from trade associations and businesses.
Table C-3 shows the various life span ranges for the selected consumer electronics. Televisions
have the longest expected life span of 13 to 15 years. Wireless telephones have the shortest life span,
estimated from two to four years. The methodology for this report assumed an average life span, which
was arrived at by taking an average of the range of life expectancy given by manufacturers over a
number of years for the number of units shipped and their average weights.
Consumer electronics are categorized as durable products. Consumer electronic life
expectancies vary from two years for wireless telephones to 15 years for televisions. In the material
flows methodology, generation of consumer electronics is based on shipment data, adjusted for the
individual life span of individual products. For example, assuming a 13 to 15 year life expectancy for
televisions, 1985 to 1987 shipment data are the basis for 1999 generation of televisions into the waste
stream. The generation estimate is based on the average number of shipments recorded in those three
years. The generation of other consumer electronics is estimated similarly based on the expected life of
the individual products. Generation of consumer electronics in the waste stream is the summation of the
individual product estimates.
The ranges shown in Table C-3 represent both the primary and secondary uses of the products.
As previously described, the secondary life or reuse of a product takes place before a product enters
the solid waste stream.
128
-------
Appendix C: Consumer Electronics in Municipal Solid Waste
Table C-3
Estimated Life Of Selected Consumer
Electronics
(in years)
Video Products
Direct View Color TV
Projection TV
LCD Color TV
Videocassette Players
VCR Decks
Camcorders
Laserdisc Players
Audio Products
Rack Audio System
Comrjact Audio System
Portable CD
Portable Headset Audio
Total CD Players
Home Radios
Information Products
Cordless/Corded Telephones
Wireless Telephones
Telephone Answering Machines
Fax Machines
Personal Word Processors
Personal Computers
Computer Printers
Computer Monitors
Modem/Fax Modems
Range of Primary and Secondary
Use (Reuse) Life Expectancy
13 to 15
13 to 15
13 to 15
7 to 10
7 to 10
7 to 10
7 to 10
3 to 15
3 to 15
3 to 15
3 to 15
3 to 15
3 to 15
3 to 6
2 to 4
3 to 6
3 to 6
3 to 6
3 to 6
3 to 5
6 to 7
3 to 6
Source: Franklin Associates
The average weights for the selected consumer electronics were estimated for the years 1984
through 1999. This series was developed to account for those products with a life span of 15 years.
Since consumer electronics sold in 1999 do not represent the consumer electronics currently entering
the waste stream, a time series must be developed based on expected life spans.
Average weights for consumer electronics were estimated after collecting information from
catalogs, consumer electronic magazines, and weighing available items. If weights for a specific product
and year were not found, average weights were extrapolated from existing estimates. For example,
camcorder weights were found for the years 1985, 1990, 1995, and 1998. Camcorder weights for the
other years were estimated from these weights.
129
-------
Appendix C: Consumer Electronics in Municipal Solid Waste
The average weights for 1999 were based on information from retail outlets and retail
manufacturers' Web sites.
Retail sources also provided national market data on the number of each size of television sold.
Due to the wide range of sizes, a weighted average was developed from retail sources for televisions
using weight information for each size of television adjusted for market share.
All other average weights were estimated after collecting as many weights as possible from the
sources listed above for each size and style of product. Market share data were not available for the
other products.
Data received from the various information sources were combined to estimate the material
composition of the selected consumer electronic products. The primary sources used to estimate
composition data included:
The Recycling and Demanufacturing of Computers and Electronic Equipment in
Pasco County, Florida;
End-of-Life Electronic Equipment Pilot Program Summary Report - Alachua
County, Florida;
Information provided by the Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance;
Analysis of Five Community Consumer/Residential Collections End-Of-Life
Electronic and Electrical Equipment;
Information provided by the National Recycling Coalition; and
Discussions with repair shop personnel, recyclers, and demanufacturers.
Information on composition for the selected consumer electronics included products from
several different years. Since the composition estimates were developed from recovery data, it was
assumed that the data represented a mix of products from various years. Therefore the composition for
each specific consumer electronic product was assumed to be the same for the entire data series.
Recovered for Recycling
Once consumer electronics have gone through their primary use and secondary use (reuse),
they can be recovered through a collection program and transported to a demanufacturer to be
dismantled in order to retrieve their reusable components to be recycled into new products. Figure C-2
is a flow chart of electronics from use through recycling. Recovery may occur through a local collection
program, such as a one-day collection event or ongoing collection at a permanent site. Some generators
may have the option of taking consumer electronics directly to a demanufacturer or a private recycler.
Other consumer electronic products are left at repair shops or traded for new products through retailers
or manufacturers. Repair shops will typically remove any usable parts before recycling and/or
discarding. Demanufacturers recycle the products into raw material and into salvaged parts for repair.
Those parts that cannot be recycled are to be disposed of by the demanufacturer in accordance with
federal, state, and local environmental laws and regulations.
130
-------
Appendix C: Consumer Electronics in Municipal Solid Waste
Table C-4
Total Generation of Consumer Electronics by Material
In the Municipal Waste Stream
Type of Consumer
Electronics
Video Products
Audio Products
Information Products
Total
Steel
22%
21%
29%
25%
Copper &
Brass
3%
0%
5%
3%
Alumi-
num
0%
0%
5%
2%
Lead
7%
0%
2%
4%
Other
Metals
10%
30%
5%
11%
Glass
27%
0%
7%
14%
Wood
20%
3%
0%
9%
Plastic
11%
46%
45%
31%
Other
0%
0%
2%
1%
Source: Franklin Associates
According to System Service Industry, a demanufacturer in Illinois, 95 to 100 percent of the
consumer electronics collected could be recycled. However, it is contended that in order for this high
recovery to be cost effective, 40 to 50 percent of the products, including low-grade material and
plastics, must be sent overseas for further processing, due to lower labor costs overseas. All recycling
operations could occur in the United States but at a higher cost.
Although there has been an increase in collection programs throughout the country that divert
old and outdated consumer electronics from disposal, there is no central repository and no systematic
collection of recovery data. The recovery estimates in this appendix are therefore first-cut estimates. In
this appendix, recovery estimates rely upon the information in the National Safety Council's Electronic
Product Recovery and Recycling Baseline Report; Recycling of Selected Electronic Products in
the United States for TVs, computers, and monitors. For these products, as well as for word
processors and printers, data from written reports is supplemented by personal communication with
state government experts, representatives of trade associations, and representatives of businesses, for
word processors and printers.
Discards After Recovery
Since recycling of consumer electronics is in its infancy, the majority of the consumer electronic
waste generated will be discarded to landfills and incinerators. Some electronics, however, at least
temporarily are placed into storage in warehouses, closets, basements, and garages. Storage of
consumer electronics is something that exists but is difficult to quantify. This
storage could affect the final discard figures. This methodology assumes consumer electronics are
leaving storage at the same rate they are entering storage. Discard estimates in this analysis are derived
by subtracting the recovery rates from the generation rates.
RESULTS
Composition of Consumer Electronic Products
The composition by material of the selected consumer electronic products generated is
summarized in Table C-4.
131
-------
Appendix C: Consumer Electronics in Municipal Solid Waste
Video Products: Video products are composed of 21 percent steel, 27 percent glass, and 23
percent plastic. Televisions make up a large portion of this category. The Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) is
the major source of the glass and steel. Plastic is the major component in the frame housings of video
products. Lead, which accounts for 8 percent of the material generated from video products, comes
from the CRTs. The source of the remaining material is from the circuit board, wiring and other small
miscellaneous items.
Audio Products: Audio products contain 50 percent steel and other metals, 35 percent plastic,
and 15 percent wood. Usually, the audio products are cased in plastic frame housings that contain the
steel and other metals.
Information Products: About 45 percent of the plastic in information products is in the frame
housings; however, in many cases, this percentage can be much higher. For example corded/cordless
telephones, wireless phones, and answering machines were reported to composed primarily of plastic.
Steel is estimated at 29 percent of the information products. Steel plus all of the other metals except
lead equals 44 percent. Lead, from the computer monitors, makes up 2 percent of total generation.
Total selected consumer electronic products: have an estimated composition of 24 percent
steel, 21 percent other metals, 14 percent glass, 6 percent wood, 34 percent plastic, and 1 percent
other material.
Table C-5 summarizes total generation, recovery for recycling and discards of video, audio,
and information products. Here are the highlights:
Figure C-2: Life Cycle for Consumer Electronics
Primary use of
Consumer
Electronics
Secondary use
(reuse) of
Consumer
Electronics
Demanufac-
turing
Disposal
Raw Materials
Whole Parts
for Repair
132
-------
Appendix C: Consumer Electronics in Municipal Solid Waste
Table C-5
Generation, Recovery, And Discards Of Consumer
Electronics In The Municipal Waste Stream 1999
(in tons)
Tvoe of Consumer Electronics
Video Products
Audio Products
Information Products
Total
Total
Generation
725.400
302.000
730.700
1.758.100
Total
Recovery
1.050
Nee.
156.300
157.350
%
Recovered
0.1%
Nea.
21%
9%
Total
Discards
724.350
302.000
574.400
1.600.750
Source: Franklin Associates
Generation: In 1999, it is estimated that 1,758,100 tons of these selected consumer electronic
products were generated. Included in this total are 725,400 tons of video products, 302,000 tons of
audio products, and 730,700 tons of information products.
Recovery: Table C-5 shows that recovery for recycling is estimated to be 1,050 tons of video
products and 156,300 tons of information products. Less than one percent of the video products is
estimated to be recovered. The information products recovery is estimated at 21 percent of generation.
Recovery of audio products is assumed to be negligible. Total recovery of the selected consumer
electronic products is estimated at 157,350 tons or nine percent of total generation.
Discards: Final discards of the three categories is 1,600,750 tons or 91 percent of generation.
The EPA report Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1998
Update and earlier editions have included consumer electronics as part of the larger category
"Miscellaneous Durables." Table C-6 separates the selected consumer electronic product category
from the miscellaneous durables category. Generation of the selected consumer electronics is estimated
at 13 percent of total miscellaneous durables generation, 20 percent of the recovery for recycling and
12 percent of the discards.
Generation of selected consumer electronic products is estimated at less than one percent of
total MW generation and less than one half of one percent of recovery. Selected consumer electronics
is estimated to be 1 percent of total MSW discards.
133
-------
Appendix C: Consumer Electronics in Municipal Solid Waste
Although the weight of the selected consumer electronics that enter the waste stream is only
estimated at 1 percent of total MSW discards, some of these products do present a problem.
Television CRTs and monitors, which contain lead, are, for the most part, discarded into U.S. landfills.
Besides lead, other hazardous materials that may be found in consumer electronics include cadmium,
hexavalent chromium, mercury and brominated flame-retardant materials.
Table C-6
Selected Consumer Electronics
As a Percentage of Total Miscellaneous Dureable Goods
and Total MSW, 1999
(1,000 Tons)
Selected Consumer Electronics
Miscellaneous Durable Goods
Total Miscellaneous Durable
Goods
Consumer Electronics as %
of Misc. Durable Goods
Total MSW
Consumer Electronics as %
of Total MSW
Generation
1,760
12,220
13,9890
13%
229,850
0.8%
Recovery
160
650
810
20%
63,890
0.3%
Recovery
%of
Generation
9%
5%
6%
28%
Discards
1,600
11,570
13,170
12%
165,960
1.0%
Source: Franklin Associates
134
-------
Appendix C: Consumer Electronics in Municipal Solid Waste
REFERENCES
Alster, Norm. "Are Old PCs Poisoning Us?" Business Week. June 2000.
"Annual and Monthly Buying Guide." Consumer Reports. Various Issues, 1984-1995.
Dann, Carolyn. End-of-Life Electronics Equipment Pilot Collection Program Summary Report -
Alachua County, Florida. October 1999. Center for Environmental Communications.
Franklin County Solid Waste Management District Consumer Electronics Collection Report DEP
Technical Assistance Grant. October 1998. Franklin County, MA. For average age of products
recovered.
Jun Fujimoto, Tetsuya Tamura, et al. NEC Corporation A New Era Computer Product Focused on
Environmentally Relevant Factors. 1995 IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the
Environment. May 1995. For composition of notebook-type computers.
Lehman, Richard L., Reggie Caudill, Julian Kliokis. Processes and Products for Utilization of
Reclaimed CRT Glass. Presentation at Demanufacturing of Electronic Equipment for Reuse and
Recycling [DEER2] Information Exchange. October 26-27, 1999. Center for Ceramics Research.
Rutgers University.
Matthews, H. Scott, Francis C. McMichael, et al. Disposition and End-of-Life Options for Personal
Computers. Green Design Initiative Technical Report #97-10. Carnegie Mellon University.
Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance. Management of Waste Electronic Appliances.
August 1995.
National Recycling Coalition. Electronics Recycling Initiative. Contracting for Proper Recovery and
Recycling of Electronic Products. March 2, 2000.
National Recycling Coalition. Electronics Recycling Initiative. Proper Management of End-of-Life
Electronic Products (other than CRTs). January 27, 2000.
National Recycling Coalition. Electronics Recycling Initiative. State and Local Policy Initiative and
Voluntary Programs. December 2, 1999.
< www.nrc-recycle.org/programs>
National Recycling Coalition. Electronics Recycling Initiative. Trends in Electronics Recycling in the
United States. November 3, 1999.
National Safety Council. Electronic Product Recovery and Recycling Baseline Report. May 1999.
135
-------
Appendix C: Consumer Electronics in Municipal Solid Waste
Pasco County and Center for Environmental Communications. The Recycling and Demanufacturing
of Computers and Electronic Equipment in Pasco County, Florida. April 2000.
Personal Communication with Chris Beling, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, (July
and August 2000)
Personal Communication with Curt Seaberg, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, (July
and August 2000)
Personal Communication with Laura Macpherson, Morris County, New Jersey, (July and August
2000)
Personal Communication with Candice Levitt, National Safety Council, (July and August 2000)
Personal communication with Brooke Nash, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection,
(July and August 2000)
Personal communication with a representative of Secure Environmental Electronic Recycling (SEE),
Demanufacturing Representative (July and August 2000).
Pitts, Greg. Computer and Electronics Disposition Eco-Industrial Park. Presentation at
Demanufacturing of Electronic Equipment for Reuse and Recycling [DEER2] Information Exchange.
October 26 - 27, 1999.
Southern Waste Information eXchange, Inc. (SWIX). Used TV & Computer Recycling &
Management in Florida: A Resource Guide. September 1999.
U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration. 1997
Economic Census, Industry Series: Audio and Video Equipment Manufacturing. EC97M-3343A.
For employment and value in dollars data.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Analysis of Five Community Consumer/Residential
Collections; End-Of-Life Electronic andElectrical Equipment. April 1999. EPA-901-R-98-003.
136
------- |