United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
5305W
EPA530-R-95-023
August 1995
Decision-Makers' Guide
To Solid Waste
Management, Volume II
-------
EPA/600/
Decision Maker's Guide to Solid Waste Management, Volume II
Project Co-Directors:
Philip R. O'Leary
Patrick W. Walsh
Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center
University of Wisconsin-Extension
and
Department of Engineering Professional Development
University of Wisconsin-Madison
432 North Lake Street
Madison, Wl 53706
Cooperative Agreement No. CX-817119-01
Office of Solid Waste (5306)
Municipal and Industrial Solid Waste Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20468
1995
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
Page ii
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.
The Decision Maker's Guide to Solid Waste Management, Vol. II has
been developed particularly for solid waste management practi-
tioners, such as local government officials, facility owners and op-
erators, consultants, and regulatory agency specialists. The Guide
contains technical and economic information to help these practi-
tioners meet the daily challenges of planning, managing, and op-
erating municipal solid waste (MSW) programs and facilities.
The Guide's primary goals are to encourage reduction of waste at
the source and to foster implementation of integrated solid waste
management systems that are cost-effective and protect human
health and the environment.
Because the infrastructure and technology for handling MSW
are rapidly changing, the information presented should help deci-
sion makers consider the numerous factors associated with suc-
cessful implementation of new solid waste management solu-
tions. Readers are encouraged to carefully evaluate all of the ele-
ments in their waste-handling systems and implement source re-
duction, recycling, and environmentally sound disposal.
Communities are encouraged to coordinate their goals for
waste reduction and management, environmental protection,
community development, and employment. Communities, busi-
nesses, institutions, and individuals should apply their creativity
and ingenuity in drafting policies and designing programs that
prevent the generation of waste in the first place. When waste
generation is unavoidable, the materials can be viewed as a re-
source from which reusable materials, raw feedstock, minerals,
organic matter, nutrients, and energy can be recovered for benefi-
cial uses. Residual materials requiring disposal must be carefully
managed to protect human health and the environment.
We encourage all individuals involved with MSW manage-
ment to expand their professional skills and to help other practi-
tioners and community members better understand the chal-
lenges we face and the opportunities available to us. It is prima-
rily through such cooperative enterprises that governments, com-
munities, and businesses can make the best possible decisions for
the reduction and management of municipal solid waste.
4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.
From: Decision Maker's Guide to Solid Waste Management, Volume II, (EPA 530-R-95-023), 1995.
Project Co-Directors: Philip R. O'Leary and Patrick W. Walsh, Solid and Hazardous Waste Education
Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison/Extension. This document was supported in part by the
Office of Solid Waste (5306), Municipal and Industrial Solid Waste Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency under grant number CX-817119-01. The material in this document has been
subject to Agency technical and policy review and approved for publication as an EPA report.
Mention of trade names, products, or services does not convey, and should not be interpreted as
conveying, official EPA approval, endorsement, or recommendation.
Page ill
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
(continued)
A Note on Using This Guidebook
For a quick overview of the issues covered in each chapter, readers are en-
couraged to review the highlights presented at the beginning of each chapter
and the margin notes appearing throughout the Guide.
Disclaimer
This document was supported in part by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency under grant number CX-817119-01. The material in this document
has been subject to Agency technical and policy review and approved for
publication as an EPA report. Mention of trade names, products, or services
does not convey, and should not be interpreted as conveying, official EPA
approval, endorsement, or recommendation.
Page iv
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-
The Decision Maker's Guide to Solid Waste Management, Volume II was
prepared under agreement between the Wisconsin Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and the Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center at the
University of Wisconsin-Madison/Extension. The authors and their
University of Wisconsin campus affiliations are shown below:
Philip R. O'Leary
Patrick W. Walsh
Robert K. Ham
Sherrie G. Cruder
Mary G Kohrell
Holly J. Johnson
Wayne Pferdehirt
Aga S. Razvi
Engineering Professional Development, UW-Madison
Agricultural Engineering, UW-Madison
Civil and Environmental Engineering, UW-Madison
Cooperative Extension, UW-Madison
Natural and Applied Science, UW-Green Bay
Natural Resources, UW-Stevens Point
Engineering Professional Development, UW-Madison
Solid Waste Management, UW-Stevens Point
Gary L. Boley authored Chapter 8, "Combustion." Additional materials were
prepared by Andrew Swartz and Sue Waite. The document was edited and
placed in camera ready-form by Christina Komadina. Jill McCulley and Meredith
Mclntosh assisted in proofreading the final document. Kris Winneke provided
program support. The document was reviewed by staff of the Municipal and
Industrial Solid Waste Division (MISWD.)
EPA and the authors wish to acknowledge the assistance of the following
solid waste experts who served as a peer review team or prepared written reviews
of individual chapters:
Kathy Berg Moeger
Jan Beyea
Frank Cross
Diana Gale
Robert Glebs
Francis R. Gouin
Richard Hays
Timothy Hunt, Jr.
Ronald Lofy
William P. Moore
John Nutter
Ron Poland
Paul Relis
Tom Richard
Gary Sondermeyer
Robert L. Spencer
Minnesota Office of Waste Management, St. Paul, MN
National Audubon Society, New York City
Cross/Tessitore & Associates, P.A., Orlando, FL
Seattle Solid Waste Utility, Seattle, WA
Costain Resource Management, Inc., Madison, WI
University of Maryland at College Park, College Park, MD
Waste Management Department, City of San Diego, CA
Solid Waste Authority of Palm Beach County, FL
Lockman and Associates, Monterey Park, CA
Paper Recycling International, Norcross, GA
American Recovery Corporation, Washington, D.C.
Laidlaw Waste Systems, Burlington, Ontario
Community Environmental Council, Santa Barbara, CA
Cornell University, Ithaca, NY
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection,
Trenton, NJ
Environmental Planning Consultants, Dalton, MA
Page v
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
Page vi
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
Preface iii
Acknowledgments v
Contents vii
Figures xix
Tables xxii
Introduction xxv
EMERGING ISSUES xxvi
REFERENCES xxvii
Chapter 1: Public Education and Involvement
INTRODUCTION 1-1
HIGHLIGHTS 1-2
A PUBLIC EDUCATION PLAN 1-3
Awareness 1-4
Interest 1-5
Evaluation 1-6
Trial 1-6
Adoption 1-8
Maintenance 1-9
INTRINSIC INCENTIVES 1-9
EXTRINSIC INCENTIVES 1-10
THE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PLAN 1-10
THE ISSUE EVOLUTION-EDUCATIONAL INTERVENTION (IEEI) MODEL 1-10
REFERENCES 1-13
Chapter 2: Facility Siting
INTRODUCTION
HIGHLIGHTS
THE SITING PROCESS
Creating a Siting Strategy ...
Who Is the Public?
Including the Public in the Process
Techniques for Involving the Public
Communicating Risks More Effectively
Building Credibility for Technical Information
Addressing Negative Impacts, Both Perceived and Real.
Evaluating the Effectiveness of the Siting Strategy
Page vii
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
(continued)
THE PERMITTING PROCESS 2-15
The Structure and Goals of the Permitting Process 2-15
Solid Waste Management Activities Requiring Permits 2-16
Source Reduction Programs 2-16
Recycling 2-16
Com posting 2-16
Waste-to- Energy 2-17
Landfilling 2-17
Collection and Transport 2-17
REFERENCES 2-17
Chapter 3: Factors to Consider
INTRODUCTION
HIGHLIGHTS
DEVELOPING THE NECESSARY INFORMATION BASE
Identify Goals and Scope of the Program
Characterize Quantity and Composition of Material
MODELLING TECHNIQUES
Generic Weight Generation Data
Generation Rates For Specific Waste Types
Landfill Volume Estimates
PHYSICAL TECHNIQUES
Sampling Techniques
DIRECT MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES
ESTIMATING THE PERCENTAGE OF MATERIAL THAT MUST BE MANAGED .
Legal Control Over Waste Materials
Personal Waste Management
ESTIMATING FUTURE WASTE GENERATION
Gauging Program Participation and Effectiveness
ORGANIZING A WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
Planning
Price
Publicity
Politics
Perseverance
REFERENCES
Chapter 4: Collection and Transfer
INTRODUCTION 4-1
HIGHLIGHTS 4-2
DEVELOPING A SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND TRANSFER SYSTEM 4-5
DEFINING COMMUNITY GOALS AND CONSTRAINTS 4-5
CHARACTERIZING WASTE TYPES, VOLUMES, AND THE SERVICE AREA 4-6
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE COLLECTION/TRANSFER: DETERMINING OPTIONS 4-6
Page viii
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
(continued)
DETERMINING THE SYSTEM FUNDING STRUCTURE 4-7
IDENTIFYING WASTE PREPARATION AND COLLECTION PROCEDURES 4-10
Solid Waste Set-Out Requirements 4-10
Storage Container Specifications 4-10
Solid Waste Separation Requirements 4-11
Frequency of Collection 4-11
Pick-up Points for Collection 4-11
DETERMINING COLLECTION EQUIPMENT AND CREW SIZE 4-13
Selecting Collection Equipment 4-13
Equipment Types 4-13
Criteria for Equipment Selection 4-14
Crew Size 4-14
EVALUATING TRANSFER NEEDS AND OPTIONS 4-14
Evaluating Local Needs for Waste Transfer 4-16
Types of Transfer Stations 4-16
Small to Medium Transfer Stations 4-16
Larger Transfer Stations 4-17
Direct-Discharge Noncompaction Stations 4-17
Platform/Pit Noncompaction Stations 4-18
Com paction Stations 4-19
Transfer Station Design Considerations 4-19
Site Location and Design Criteria 4-19
Building Design 4-20
Transfer Station Sizing 4-20
Additional Processing Requirements 4-23
Transfer Vehicles 4-24
Trucks and Semitrailers 4-24
Rail Cars 4-24
EVALUATING COLLECTION AND TRANSFER ALTERNATIVES 4-26
Defining System Alternatives 4-26
Comparing Alternative Strategies 4-26
Analyzing Crew and Truck Requirements 4-26
Estimating Time Requirements 4-27
Loading Time Requirements 4-27
Hauling Time and Other Travel Time Requirements 4-27
Overall Time Requirements 4-28
Analyzing Transfer Elements 4-28
Selecting A Collection and Transfer Alternative 4-28
DEVELOPING COLLECTION ROUTES AND SCHEDULES 4-30
Heuristic Route Development: A Manual Approach 4-31
Computer-Assisted Routing 4-32
IMPLEMENTING THE COLLECTION AND TRANSFER SYSTEM 4-32
Finalizing and Implementing the System Management Plan 4-32
Purchasing and Managing Equipment 4-33
Equipment Purchasing 4-33
Equipment Maintenance 4-33
Equipment Replacement 4-34
Hiring and Training Personnel 4-34
Safety 4-34
Comfort 4-35
Training 4-35
Page ix
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
(continued)
Worker Incentives 4-35
Developing and Managing Contracts with Labor Unions and Private Collectors 4-36
Providing Public Information 4-36
MONITORING SYSTEM COSTS AND PERFORMANCE 4-37
REFERENCES 4-37
Chapter 5: Source Reduction
INTRODUCTION 5-1
HIGHLIGHTS 5-2
UNDERSTANDING AND FOSTERING SOURCE REDUCTION 5-5
Defining Source Reduction 5-5
Source Reduction as a First-Choice Approach 5-6
Measuring Source Reduction 5-6
SOURCE REDUCTION POLICY 5-7
Regulation 5-7
Economic Incentives and Disincentives 5-9
GOVERNMENT SOURCE REDUCTION 5-10
Facility Source Reduction Programs: Performing Waste Audits 5-10
Purchasing 5-11
COMMERCIAL (INDUSTRIAL AND BUSINESS) SOURCE REDUCTION 5-13
Source Reduction Implementation Guidelines For Industries 5-14
Manufacturing Redesign 5-14
Product Redesign 5-14
Other Industrial Source Reduction Strategies 5-15
Designing for Durability 5-15
Designing for Reuse 5-15
Designing Products to Facilitate Repair 5-15
Source Reduction Implementation Guidelines For Businesses 5-15
Other Examples of Source Reduction and Reuse by Businesses 5-17
SOURCE REDUCTION BY RESIDENTS 5-18
Local Source Reduction Economic Incentives: Unit-Based Garbage Fees 5-18
Yard Material Reduction 5-19
Consumer-Based "Precycling" or "Eco-Shopping" 5-20
REFERENCES 5-22
Chapter 6: Recycling
INTRODUCTION 6-1
HIGHLIGHTS 6-2
DEVELOPING A RECYCLING PROGRAM: A SYSTEMS APPROACH 6-6
USING EXISTING RESOURCES 6-6
Cooperative Recycling 6-7
DESIGNING AND IMPLEMENTING A RECYCLING PROGRAM 6-7
Assess Markets and Market Development Strategies for Recyclables 6-8
STRUCTURE OF THE RECYCLABLES MARKET 6-8
Market Structure 6-9
Page x
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
(continued)
Collectors/Haulers 6-9
Processors 6-9
Brokers 6-9
Converters 6-9
End-Use Markets 6-9
Transportation Companies 6-10
Material-Specific Market Structure 6-10
Paper 6-10
Glass 6-11
Plastic 6-11
Metals 6-12
Tires 6-12
ASSESSING MARKETS 6-13
Identifying Buyers 6-14
Contacting Buyers 6-14
Selecting Buyers 6-15
Contracting with Buyers 6-15
ANTICIPATED CHANGES IN U.S. AND EXPORT MARKETS 6-16
ASSESSING MARKET DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES 6-17
Legislative Options 6-17
Economic Incentives 6-19
Technology Developments and Improvements 6-20
Transportation Networks 6-21
Business Development 6-22
Education Strategies 6-23
Cooperative Marketing 6-24
ASSESSING AND CHOOSING COLLECTION AND PROCESSING TECHNOLOGIES 6-24
Ways to Collect Recyclables 6-24
Residential Waste Drop-Off and Buy-Back Collection 6-24
Curbside Collection Options 6-25
Source Separation 6-25
Mixed-Waste Collection 6-25
Wet/Dry Collection 6-27
Combined Collection Options 6-27
Collection Schedule 6-28
Business and Buiky Waste 6-28
Waste from Retail Businesses 6-28
Waste from Restaurants and Bars 6-29
Institutional Waste 6-29
Wood and Construction/Demolition Material 6-30
Appliances 6-30
OPERATIONAL ISSUES 6-30
Collecting Recyclables 6-30
Collecting Residential and Commercial Waste 6-32
Special Collection Problems 6-33
PROCESSING/STORAGE CENTER DESIGN 6-33
Site Location 6-34
Area 6-35
Scale 6-35
Building Design: Outside-Inside Interface 6-35
Tipping or Unloading Area 6-35
Pagexi
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
(continued)
Storage Area 6-39
Building Structure 6-39
Employee and Education Facilities 6-39
Hazardous Materials Area 6-39
Building Layout and Equipment Choices: Manpower Versus Machines 6-40
Conveyor Line 6-41
Processing and Densifying Equipment 6-41
Handling Equipment 6-43
Redundancy 6-44
DEVELOPING AN ORGANIZATIONAL PLAN AND BUDGET 6-44
Organization 6-44
Budget 6-45
Financing 6-45
ADDRESSING LEGAL SITING ISSUES 6-45
Zoning and Land Use Considerations in Siting 6-47
Building Codes 6-47
Permits 6-47
Contracts 6-47
General Business Regulation 6-47
Ordinances 6-48
DEVELOPING A START-UP APPROACH 6-48
Pilot Programs 6-49
Voluntary Recycling 6-49
Mandatory Recycling 6-50
IMPLEMENTING THE EDUCATION AND PUBLICITY PROGRAM 6-50
BEGINNING PROGRAM OPERATION 6-51
CONTINUING SUPERVISION, LONG-TERM PUBLICITY AND EDUCATION 6-51
REVIEWING AND REVISING PROGRAMS TO MEET CHANGING NEEDS 6-52
REFERENCES 6-52
Chapter 7: Composting
INTRODUCTION 7-1
HIGHLIGHTS 7-2
WHAT IS COMPOSTING? 7-8
Composting as a Biological Process 7-8
Composting as a Component of Integrated Solid Waste Management 7-9
The Benefits of Composting 7-9
Composting Challenges 7-10
THE BIOLOGICAL, CHEMICAL, AND PHYSICAL COMPOSTING PROCESSES 7-10
Biological Processes 7-11
Chemical Processes 7-11
Carbon/Energy Source 7-12
Nutrients 7-12
Moisture 7-12
Oxygen 7-13
pH 7-13
Physical Processes 7-14
Page xii
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
(continued)
Particle Size 7-14
Temperature 7-14
Mixing 7-15
AN OVERVIEW OF COMPOSTING APPROACHES 7-15
Grasscycling and Backyard Composting 7-15
Grasscycling 7-15
Backyard Com posting 7-15
Source-Separated Organics Composting Programs 7-16
Mixed Municipal Solid Waste Composting 7-17
DEVELOPING A COMPOSTING PROGRAM 7-17
Evaluating Waste Management Alternatives 7-17
Planning the Program 7-17
Identifying Composting Project Goals 7-18
Obtaining Political Support for a New Waste Management Approach 7-19
Identifying Potential Compost Uses and Markets 7-19
Inventorying Potential Sources of Compostable Materials 7-19
Initiating Education and Information Programs 7-20
Choosing a Composting Approach 7-21
Compatibility with Existing Programs 7-21
Selecting Appropriate Technologies and Systems 7-21
COMPOSTING TECHNOLOGIES 7-22
Windrow Com posting 7-22
Aerated Static Pile Composting 7-23
In-Vessel Composting Systems 7-24
Anaerobic Processing 7-25
Screening 7-26
Curing 7-26
MARKETING COMPOSTS 7-27
Marketing Strategies 7-27
Education, Research, and Public Relations 7-28
Potential Com post Uses 7-28
Compost Quality—Impacts on Uses and Markets 7-31
Quality Control 7-33
Manufacturing Multiple Products 7-33
Inventorying Potential Markets 7-33
Distributing Compost 7-34
Pricing 7-34
Finalizing Market Arrangements 7-35
COMPOSTING APPROACHES IN DETAIL 7-35
Grasscycling 7-35
Backyard Residential Composting 7-37
Process Description 7-37
Implementation 7-37
Public Education 7-37
Financial Support 7-37
Yard Trimmings Composting Programs 7-39
Collection 7-39
Drop-Off Sites 7-39
Curbside Collection 7-40
Combined Approaches 7-41
Preparing Yard Trimmings for Composting 7-42
Page xiii
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
(continued)
Applicable Composting Technologies 7-42
Processing for Markets 7-43
Product Characteristics of Yard Trimmings Compost 7-43
Direct Land-Spreading of Yard Trimmings 7-44
Source-Separated Organics Composting 7-45
Waste Collection 7-45
Preparing Materials for Composting 7-47
Applicable Composting Technologies 7-47
Processing for Markets 7-47
Product Characteristics of Source-Separated Organics Compost 7-47
Mixed MSW Composting Systems 7-47
Collection 7-47
Preparing Materials for Composting 7-48
Applicable Composting Technologies 7-49
Processing for Markets 7-51
Product Characteristics of Mixed MSW Compost 7-51
OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS AND CONCERNS 7-52
Housekeeping 7-52
Leachate 7-52
Odor Control 7-52
Personnel 7-53
Monitoring 7-53
Record Keeping 7-54
Public Information 7-54
Complaint Response Procedure 7-55
FACILITY SITING 7-55
GOVERNMENT APPROVALS, PERMITS, AND ORDINANCES 7-56
PROJECT FINANCING 7-56
REFERENCES 7-57
Chapter 8: Combustion
INTRODUCTION 8-1
HIGHLIGHTS 8-2
THE IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS 8-7
Project Development Team 8-8
PROJECT DEFINITION: IDENTIFYING GOALS 8-8
ASSESSING PROJECT FEASIBILITY 8-9
Assess Political and Citizen Support 8-9
Evaluate Waste Sources 8-9
Waste Composition 8-9
Coordination with Other Waste Management Practices 8-10
Waste Reduction 8-10
Source Separation of Nonrecyclable and Hazardous Materials 8-10
Recycling 8-11
Composting 8-11
Landfilling 8-12
What Area Will Be Served? 8-12
ENERGY AND MATERIAL MARKETS 8-12
Page xiv
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
(continued)
Energy Market Options 8-12
Electricity Only 8-13
Steam 8-13
Co-Generation 8-14
Refuse-Derived Fuel (RDF) 8-14
Energy Contract Issues 8-16
Price 8-16
Service and Schedule 8-16
Reliability 8-16
Material Markets 8-16
THE COMBUSTION PROCESS AND TECHNOLOGIES 8-17
Technology Options 8-17
Modular Systems 8-17
Mass-Burning Systems 8-22
Refuse-Derived Fuel (RDF) Systems 8-23
Shred-and-Burn Systems 8-24
Simplified Process Systems 8-24
RDF Combustors 8-25
Incinerator System Components 8-27
Storage and Handling Area 8-28
Waste Combustion System 8-28
Energy Conversion and Use 8-28
Residue Control 8-28
Emission Controls 8-28
Volatile Organic Controls 8-29
Nitrous Oxide (NOX) Controls 8-29
Acid Gas Controls 8-29
Particulate Controls 8-29
Secondary Volatile Organic and Mercury Control 8-31
Emission Monitoring
ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING
Air Permit Regulations
New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)
Best Available Technology
Operator Certification
Co-Fired Facility
"Prevention of Significant Deterioration" (PSD) Determination 8-33
New Source Review (NSR) Permit 8-34
Lowest Achievable Emission Rate 8-34
Offsets 8-34
State Implementation Plan (SIP) 8-34
Federal Emission Standards 8-35
Residual Disposal 8-35
Water Discharge 8-36
Surface Water Concerns 8-36
Groundwater Concerns 8-36
Local and Other Federal Program Requirements 8-36
Public Utilities Regulatory and Policy Act (PURPA) 8-36
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 8-37
Other Environmental Issues 8-37
Land-Retained Pollutants 8-37
Noise Pollution 8-37
Page xv
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
(continued)
Aesthetic Impacts 8-37
Land Use Compatibility 8-37
Environmentally Sensitive Areas 8-38
Health Risk Analysis 8-38
Role of the Contractor in the Permitting Process 8-38
Regulatory Approval Summary 8-38
SITE SELECTION 8-38
Map Overlay Technique For Potential Sites 8-39
Detailed Site Evaluation 8-40
RESPONSIBILITY FOR FACILITY OPERATION 8-40
Public Operation 8-41
Private Operation 8-41
METHOD OF FINANCING 8-41
General Obligation (G.O.) Bonds 8-42
Municipal (Project) Revenue Bonds 8-42
Leverage Leasing 8-42
Private Financing 8-42
RISK-TAKING POLICY 8-43
PROCUREMENT APPROACHES 8-43
The Architect/Engineer Approach 8-43
The Turnkey Approach 8-44
The Full-Service Approach 8-44
CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION PHASE 8-44
REFERENCES 8-44
Chapter 9: LAND DISPOSAL
INTRODUCTION 9-1
HIGHLIGHTS 9-2
LANDFILLING—AN OVERVIEW 9-9
NEW LANDFILLS 9-11
EXISTING OR CLOSED LANDFILLS 9-11
DEVELOPING AN INFORMATION BASE AND MAKING INITIAL SITE DECISIONS 9-12
Estimate Landfill Volume Requirements 9-12
Conduct Initial Investigation and Select Potential Sites 9-14
Starting the Project 9-15
Fulfilling Land Use Goals 9-15
Using Soil Maps in Selecting Potential Sites 9-16
Tabulating Site Identification Data 9-17
Determine Applicable Federal, State, and Local Requirements 9-18
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RC RA) 9-18
State and Local Requirements 9-19
Additional Concerns 9-19
Assess Landfill Options for Energy and Materials Recovery 9-19
Consider Final Site Use 9-20
Determine Suitability of Sites 9-21
Conducting Site Characterizations—Information Collection and Review 9-21
Conducting Site Characterizations—Field Investigations 9-21
Page xvi
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
(continued)
DEVELOPING THE FACILITY DESIGN 9-24
Preliminary Considerations 9-24
Selecting the Type of MSW Landfill 9-24
The Design Process 9-25
Public Participation in the Site Selection Process 9-26
Meeting Regulatory Standards 9-26
General Design Considerations 9-28
Plans and Specifications 9-28
Design Report 9-28
Public Involvement 9-28
State-Level Approval Process 9-28
Additional Requirements 9-28
Developing the Site Layout 9-28
Preparation of Drawings 9-29
Operating Plans 9-30
Determining Working Face and Phase Dimensions 9-30
Phase Diagrams 9-31
Leachate Management 9-32
Factors Affecting Leachate Generation 9-33
Predicting Leachate Production Rates 9-34
Regulatory Controls for Leachate Management 9-36
Landfill Liner System Components 9-37
Clay Liners 9-37
Flexible Membrane Liners 9-37
Leachate Collection Systems 9-38
Leachate Treatment Processes 9-39
The Natural Attenuation of Leachate 9-41
Groundwater Quality Assessment 9-41
Monitoring Wells 9-41
Groundwater Monitoring and Corrective Action 9-41
Gas Management 9-43
Why Gas Control is Needed 9-43
The Mechanics of Gas Movement 9-44
Controlling Gas 9-45
Gas Probes 9-45
Gas Control Systems 9-46
Passive Gas Control Systems 9-46
Active Gas Collection Systems 9-46
Collecting Gas for Beneficial Use 9-47
Methods of Energy Recovery 9-48
Final Cover System 9-49
Design Considerations 9-50
Erosion Control 9-50
Vegetation 9-50
Other Design Considerations 9-51
Roads 9-51
Storm Water Drainage 9-52
Utilities 9-52
Scales 9-52
Regulatory Approvals 9-52
OPERATING THE LANDFILL 9-53
Providing Financial Assurance 9-53
Program to Detect and Exclude Hazardous Waste 9-53
Page xvii
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
(continued)
Inspections 9-54
Alternative Methods for Detection and Prevention 9-54
Cover Material Requirements 9-54
Air Criteria 9-54
Access Control 9-55
Run-on and Runoff Control Systems 9-55
Small Vehicles and Safety 9-55
Additional Controls 9-55
Landfill Equipment 9-56
Waste Handling and Compaction 9-58
Waste Shredding 9-58
Baling Solid Waste 9-59
Landfill Handling and Compaction Equipment 9-59
Earth Movers 9-59
Equipment Maintenance and Backup 9-59
Adverse Weather 9-59
Personnel and Safety 9-60
Quality Control and Record Keeping 9-60
Community Relations 9-61
CLOSING THE LANDFILL AND PROVIDING POST-CLOSURE CARE 9-61
Financial Assurance for Closure and Post-Closure Care 9-61
Procedures for Site Closure 9-62
Post-Closure Care 9-63
General Upkeep 9-63
Road and Drainage Structure Repairs 9-63
Leachate Treatment 9-63
Groundwater Quality Monitoring 9-64
Landfill Gas Monitoring 9-64
REFERENCES 9-64
Appendix A: Glossary A-1
Appendix B: Municipal Solid Waste Publications B-1
Page xviii
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
Introduction
Figure Number Page
1-1 Hierarchy of Integrated Solid Waste Management xxvii
Chapter 1: Public Education and Involvement
1-1 Household Hazardous Materials Program 1-4
1-2 Dinosaur Symbol Used on Recycling Materials to Enhance Appeal of Mandatory Programs 1-5
1-3 Example of Public Education Flyer 1-7
1-4 Sample Education Program 1-8
1-5 Example of Material Encouraging Feedback on a Recycling Program 1-9
1-6 Issue Evolution/Educational Intervention Model 1-12
Chapter 2: Facility Siting and Permitting
2-1 The Three-Phase Siting Framework
2-2 Levels of Involvement by Various Segments of the Public
Chapter 3: Developing a Waste Management Program—Factors To Consider
3-1 Landfill Volume of Materials in MSW, 1990 3-7
Chapter 4: Collection and Transfer
Chapter 4 has no figures
Chapter 5: Source Reduction
5-1 Cartoon 5-12
Chapter 6: Recycling
6-1 Uses of Scrap Tires 6-13
6-2 Examples of Stickers Indicating Why Waste Was Not Picked Up 6-25
6-3 Office Paper Recycling Containers 6-29
6-4 Material Flow Chart for Wood Waste Management 6-30
6-5 Newspaper Rack for Rear-Loading Collection Vehicle 6-32
6-6 Source Separation Collection Truck 6-32
6-7 Rural Container Station 6-34
6-8 Recycling Center, Toledo, Ohio 6-36
6-9 Recycling Revetments 6-36
6-10 Material Recycling Facility Site Plan and Traffic Flow 6-37
Page xix
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
(continued)
Figure Number Page
6-11 Facility Layout, Dupage County, North Intermediate Processing Facility 6-40
6-12 Medium and High Technology Processing 6-42
Chapter 7: Composting
7-1 The Com posting Process 7-8
7-2 Windrow Composting With an Elevating Face Windrow Turner 7-23
7-3 Aerated Static Pile for Composting Municipal Solid Wastes 7-24
7-4 Anaerobic Digestion With Aerobic Compost Curing 7-25
7-5 Grass Being Mowed and Returned to the Lawn for Grasscycling 7-36
7-6 Yard Trimmings Composting Units 7-38
7-7 Example of Yard Trimmings Composting Facility Site Layout 7-44
7-8 Example of Source Separated Organics Composter Material Flow and Mass Balance 7-48
7-9 Example of Mixed MSW Composter Material Flow and Mass Balance 7-50
7-10 Lead Concentrations in Various Types of Compost 7-51
Chapter 8: Combustion
8-1 Project Definition and Development Plan 8-7
8-2 Typical Monthly Waste Generation and Energy Demand Patterns 8-11
8-3 Incinerator and Electrical Generation System 8-13
8-4 Co-generation System for Producing Electricity and Steam 8-15
8-5 Combustion Excess Air Versus Combustion Gas Temperature 8-17
8-6 Typical Mass-Burn Facility Schematic 8-22
8-7 Typical Simplified RDF Facility Schematic 8-25
8-8 Typical RDF Stocker and Boiler 8-26
8-9 Typical Mass-Burn System Design Basis 8-27
8-10 Spray-Dry Scrubber and Baghouse 8-30
8-11 Baghouse Schematic 8-30
8-12 Waste-to-Energy Facility Siting Map Overlay Exam pie 8-39
Chapter 9: LAND DISPOSAL
9-1 Schematic of a Typical Municipal Solid Waste Landfill 9-10
9- 2 Exam pies of Map Overlays 9-17
9-3 Exam pie of Soil Boring Logs 9-23
9-4 Example of Groundwater Contour Map 9-24
9-5 The Area Method of Sanitary Landfilling 9-25
9-6 Subsurface Conditions Along a Cross Section of a Landfill Under Construction 9-29
9-7 Solid Waste Placement and Compaction 9-31
9-8 Landfill Construction Plan: Intermediate Phase 9-32
9-9 Phases of Solid Waste Decomposition 9-32
9-10 Water Balance Equation 9-34
9-11 Types of Landfill Liners 9-38
9-12 Typical Leachate Collection System Showing Access to Pipes for Cleaning 9-39
9-13 Leachate Treatment Options 9-40
9-14 Example of a Groundwater Remediation System 9-42
9-15 Factors Affecting Landfill Gas Generation and Recovery Rates 9-44
Page xx
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
(continued)
Figure Number Page
9-16 Example of a Gas Monitoring Probe 9-45
9-17 Typical Arrangements for Passive Gas Venting 9-46
9-18 Active Gas Control Systems 9-47
9-19 Gas Collection Systems with Wells 9-48
9-20 Examples of Final Covers 9-49
9-21 Waste Densities 9-58
Page xxi
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
Introduction
Table Number Page
1-1 Municipal Solid Waste Generated in 1990 xxvi
Chapter 1: Public Education and involvement
1-1 Methods of Publicity 1-3
Chapter 2: Facility Siting and permitting
2-1 The Elements of a Public Involvement Plan 2-7
2-2 The Objectives of a Public Involvement Plan 2-8
2-3 Public Information Techniques 2-9
2-4 Participation Techniques 2-10
2-5 Seven Cardinal Rules of Risk Communication 2-11
2-6 Examples of Risk Communication Objectives 2-12
2-7 Risk Management Checklist 2-12
2-8 Key Characteristics of Public Risk Perceptions 2-13
Chapter 3: Factors to Consider
3-1 Projected Per Capita Generation of Municipal Solid Waste by Material, 1988-2010 3-6
3-2 Recyclable Household Waste 3-6
3-3 Advantages and Disadvantages of Bar-Code Monitoring 3-9
3-4 Recyclable Material in the Commercial Waste Stream 3-10
3-5 Projections of Products Generated in the Municipal Waste Stream, 1955 to 2010 3-12
3-6 New Jersey Statewide Recycling Projections: Five-Year Rate 3-13
Chapter 4: Collection And Transfer
4-1 Key Steps in Developing or Modifying a Waste Collection and Transfer System 4-5
4-2 Advantages and Disadvantages of Alternative Funding Mechanisms 4-8
4-3 Advantages and Disadvantages to Alternative Pick-Up Points for Collecting Solid Wastes 4-12
4-4 Factors to Consider in Selecting or Specifying Solid Waste Collection Equipment 4-15
4-5 Advantages and Disadvantages of Transfer Station Types 4-18
4-6 Transfer Station Site Design Considerations 4-21
4-7 Transfer Station Building Components: Design Considerations 4-22
4-8 Formulas for Determining Transfer Station Capacity 4-23
4-9 Transfer Truck and Trailer Systems: Design Considerations 4-25
4-10 Calculations for Waste Collection System Design 4-27
4-11 Steps for Conducting a Time Study 4-29
4-12 Transfer System Costs 4-30
4-13 Rules for Heuristic Routing 4-31
Page xxii
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
(continued)
Chapter 5: Source Reduction
Table Number Page
5-1 Results of the Feather River Company's Polystyrene Peanut Reuse Program 5-16
5-2 Results of Nicolet's Reusable Mug Program 5-16
Chapter 6: Recycling
6-1 A 12-Component Recycling Program Plan 6-7
6-2 1992 Tonnages of Selected Recyclables 6-8
6-3 Waste Paper in Thousand Tons, 1992 6-10
6-4 Plastics Packaging Recycling: 1990-1992 6-12
6-5 Selected Organizations Providing Market Listings 6-14
6-6 Commonly Used Price-Setting and Tracking Publications 6-16
6-7 Exam pies of Recycled Content Mandates 6-18
6-8 Creating Demand for Recyclables: Purchasing Recycled Products 6-20
6-9 Costs and Participation Rates by Container Type 6-26
6-10 Selected Mixed Waste Processing Operations 6-27
6-11 Recovery Levels for Selected Mixed Waste Processing Operations 6-28
6-12 Collection Characteristics 6-31
6-13 Sample Weight to Volume Conversion Factors for Recyclables 6-38
6-14 Model Budget 6-46
Chapter 7: Composting
7-1 Advantages and Disadvantages of Source-Separated Versus Commingling of MSW 7-16
7-2 Ceiling Concentrations for Biosolids 7-27
7-3 Potential Users and Uses of Compost 7-30
7-4 Examples of Compost Quality Guidelines Based on End Use 7-31
7-5 Common Sources of Contaminants in MSW 7-32
7-6 Heavy Metals in Yard Trimmings Compost 7-45
7-7 Pesticide Analysis of Portland, Oregon, Yard Trimmings Compost 7-46
7-8 Examples of Inorganic Constituents in Compost 7-49
Chapter 8: Combustion
8-1 Waste Management Practices 1960-2000 8-1
8-2 Heating Value of Typical Solid Waste Components 8-10
8-3 Waste-to-Energy Facilities Operating in the United States (Mid-1991) 8-18
8-4 RDF Production and Co-Firing Experience 8-23
8-5 Dedicated RDF Boiler Facilities 8-24
8-6 NSPS Emission Standards for All Types of Waste Combustors 8-32
8-7 Minimum Carbon Monoxide Standards for Various Combustion Technologies 8-32
8-8 PSD Significant Emission Rates 8-33
8-9 National Ambient Air Quality Standards 8-35
Page xxiii
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
(continued)
Chapter 9: Land Disposal
Table Number Page
9-1 Typical Densities of Solid Wastes 9-13
9-2 Summary of Density Factors for Landfill Materials 9-14
9-3 Sanitary Landfill Design Steps 9-27
9-4 Changes in Leachate Composition in Different Stages of a Landfill 9-33
9-5 Impact of Soil Surface on Water Runoff 9-34
9-6 Output from HELP Model 9-35
9-7 Groundwater Protection Performance Standards 9-37
9-8 Wisconsin Clay Liner Specifications 9-38
9-9 Typical Landfill Gas Composition 9-43
9-10 Steps for Planting and Maintaining Vegetation on Landfills 9-51
9-11 Site Preparation and Construction Steps 9-53
9-12 Equipment Needs by Daily Tonnage 9-57
9-13 Safety Suggestions for Sanitary Landfill Equipment Operators 9-60
9-14 Procedures for Site Closure 9-62
Page xxiv
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.
Volume I of the Decision Maker's Guide to Solid Waste Management
cites estimates by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) that 160 million tons of municipal solid waste were
generated in the United States in 1989. Since Volume I was
published, the estimated annual generation rate has risen to
nearly 195.7 million tons (see Table 1-1), and it appears that
America's propensity for producing waste is not diminishing.
Volume I described a better way of dealing with the
growing municipal solid waste problem. That solution, called
integrated solid waste management (see Figure 1-1), involves a
combination of techniques and programs to manage the
municipal waste stream. Using the integrated approach, a
community can tailor its own unique system to prevent and
handle various components of the waste stream in the most
economical and environmentally sound manner. In Volume I,
readers were introduced to the concept of developing a
community integrated waste management system.
Volume II expands the information provided in Volume I. It
offers decision makers more detailed information so they can
help communities successfully implement integrated solid waste
management programs. This volume will assist decision makers
and technical professionals who must understand the key
technical, legal, economic, political, and social issues that must
be addressed to develop effective waste management programs.
Volume II focuses on municipal solid waste management
issues. It does not address management of other important
waste types, including hazardous waste, municipal sewage
sludge, or agricultural residues.
4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.
Page xxv
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
EMERGING ISSUES
Technical requirements
for facility siting and
operating are becoming
more stringent.
Waste management practices in the United States are continually changing.
Public and private activities at the local, state, federal, and even international
levels are having major impacts on community waste management programs.
Following are just a few examples of emerging issues that will greatly affect
waste management decision making.
Technical requirements for siting and operating waste management fa-
cilities are becoming more stringent. Federal and state laws require that land-
fills have engineered safeguards such as liners, leachate collection systems, gas
management, and environmental monitoring. New laws require that waste-
to-energy facilities have special technology for capturing emissions and that
ash residues be specially managed. Standards for work place safety and
working conditions are likely for waste management facilities such as recy-
cling centers and composting operations. These new technical requirements
will probably increase the cost and the public scrutiny of proposed methods
for managing waste.
New state and federal guidelines requiring that governments procure
products made from recycled materials are stimulating development of recy-
cling markets. Procurement laws should spur the development of new capac-
ity for recycling a variety of products, especially paper. Market development
is expected to increase worldwide, since the sale of recyclable material consti-
tutes a major international market, especially for communities on America's
east and west coasts.
In contrast, the true cost of alternative waste collection, processing and
disposal options is not yet well understood by most communities and citizens.
As these costs become clearer, source reduction and recycling efforts are likely
to be more attractive options. Establishing and operating successful solid
waste management programs requires the existence of steady markets for re-
cycled products, compost, and the energy produced from WTE plants. This in
turn may require increasing the demand for such products. Communities
may also need to consider looking for alternative funding sources to support
source reduction, recycling, and other programs. How much voters and waste
generators are willing to pay for integrated waste management programs has
not yet been widely determined.
Government
procurement policies are
stimulating recycling
markets.
The cost of integrated
waste management
programs is stimulating
interest in source
reduction and recycling.
Table 1-1
Municipal Solid Waste Generated in 1990 (in millions of tons)
6.7%* Glass
6.7% Food scraps
8.3% Plastics
8.3% Metals
14.6% Rubber, leather, textiles, wood
17.9% Yard trimmings
37.5% Paper and paperboard
TOTAL WEIGHT:
13.2
13.2
16.2
16.2
28.6
35.0
73.3
195.7
"Percent of total waste generated.
Source: USEPA, Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1992 Update
Page xxvi
-------
INTRODUCTION
Despite major uncertainties facing decision makers in the United States,
there will be a continuing need to address solid waste management issues in a
timely manner. Decision makers and technical professionals considering how
best to manage community waste must be aware of changing conditions and
emerging issues, but they should not be deterred from developing waste man-
agement projects. This volume of the Decision Makers' Guide will help these
persons understand the issues and develop successful integrated waste man-
agement programs.
EPA's hierarchy of
integrated solid waste
management includes:
• Source reduction
• Recycling
• Waste combustion and
landfilling.
Figure 1-1
Hierarchy of Integrated Solid Waste Management
Source Reduction
Source reduction tops the hierarchy because of its potential to reduce system
costs, prevent pollution, consume resources, and increase efficiency. Source
reduction is discussed in more detail in Chapter 5. Source reduction programs are
designed to reduce both the toxic constituents in products and quantities of waste
generated. Source reduction is a front-end waste avoidance approach that
includes strategies such as designing and manufacturing products and packaging
with minimum volume and toxic content and with longer useful life. Businesses,
institutions, and citizens may also practice source reduction through selective
buying and the reuse of products and materials.
Recycling
Recycling (including composting) is the second step in the hierarchy. It involves
collecting materials, reprocessing/remanufacturing, and using the resulting
products. Recycling and composting can reduce the depletion of landfill space,
save energy and natural resources, provide useful products, and provide economic
benefits. These options are discussed in more detail in Chapters 6 and 7.
Waste Combustion and Landfilling
Waste combustion and landfilling are at the bottom of the hierarchy—USEPA does
not rank one of these options higher than the other, as both are viable components
of an integrated system. Waste combustion, discussed in Chapter 8, reduces the
bulk of municipal waste and can provide the added benefit of energy production.
State-of-the-art technologies developed in recent years have greatly reduced the
adverse environmental impacts associated with incineration, and although waste
combustion is not risk-free, many communities are relying on this waste
management alternative.
Landfilling, discussed in Chapter 9, is necessary to manage nonrecyclable and
noncombustible wastes, and is the only actual waste "disposal" method. Modern
landfills are more secure and have more elaborate pollution control and monitoring
devices than earlier landfills. Environmental concerns at properly managed landfills
are greatly reduced. Also, many new landfills are using methane recovery
technologies to develop a marketable product.
Source: USEPA
REFERENCES
USEPA. 1992. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States:
1992 Update. Washington, D.C. EPA/530-R-92-019 (July).
USEPA. 1989. Decision Makers Guide to Solid Waste Management. Washington
D.C. EPA/530 SW-89-072 (November).
Page xxvii
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
Page xxviii
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
D
4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.
Developing integrated solutions for waste management problems
requires public involvement. To economically and efficiently operate
a waste management program requires significant cooperation from
generators, regardless of the strategies chosen—buying products in
bulk, separating recyclables from nonrecyclables, dropping off yard
trimmings at a compost site, removing batteries from materials sent
to a waste-to-energy facility, or using designated containers for
collecting materials. To maintain long-term program support, the
public needs to know clearly what behaviors are desired and why.
Involving people in the hows and whys of waste management
requires a significant educational effort by the community.
Ineffective or half-hearted education programs may confuse the
public, reduce public confidence, or elicit hostility toward the
program. Successful education programs must be consistent and
ongoing.
Public education stimulates interest in how waste management
decisions are made. And, when citizens become interested in their
community's waste management programs, they frequently demand
to be involved in the decision-making process. Communities should
anticipate such interest and develop procedures for involving the
public. When the public is involved in program design, it helps
ensure that programs run smoothly.
This chapter provides suggestions for public education and
involvement programs. Chapter 2 addresses public involvement in
facility siting.
4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.
From: Decision Maker's Guide to Solid Waste Management, Volume II, (EPA 530-R-95-023), 1995.
Project Co-Directors: Philip R. O'Leary and Patrick W. Walsh, Solid and Hazardous Waste Education
Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison/Extension. This document was supported in part by the Office of
Solid Waste (5306), Municipal and Industrial Solid Waste Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
under grant number CX-817119-01. The material in this document has been subject to Agency technical
and policy review and approved for publication as an EPA report. Mention of trade names, products, or
services does not convey, and should not be interpreted as conveying, official EPA approval,
endorsement, or recommendation.
Page 1-1
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
Public education and
involvement are
crucial.
(p. 1-3)
A successful waste management program requires wide-spread public participation.
Such participation can best be obtained through early and effective public education
programs, which must continue even after the program is in full swing.
Planning and research
form the basis for
successful education.
(p. 1-3)
Communities comprise different mixes of home owners, apartment dwellers, busi-
ness people, students (from college-level to preschool), age groups, income levels,
and cultures. Planners must first know their own communities well enough to de-
sign programs that meet their specific needs.
An effective education The six stages of a successful education program include the following:
1' Awareness: At this stage, people are learning about something new. The goal
is to let people know that a different way of handling waste may be preferable.
(p. 1-4 — 1 -9) Table 1 -1 lists low-cost, medium-cost, and high-cost education methods.
2. interest: After people have been made aware of waste management issues,
they seek more information. Program planners must use a variety of methods to
inform people. Voluntary programs require strong emphasis on promotion;
mandatory programs should make clear what is required.
3. Evaluation: At this stage, individuals decide whether to participate or not. For
even well-promoted programs, initial participation is about 50%. Making
program requirements clear and easy to comply with increases participation.
4. Trial: Individuals try the program at this stage. If they encounter difficulty, they
may opt not to continue participating. Well-publicized hot lines and
clearinghouses provide additional instruction and information.
5. Adoption: Participation should continue to grow. Ongoing education programs solicit
constructive feedback and provide new program information when necessary.
6. Maintenance: Ongoing incentives and education keep participation rates high.
Following this eight-
stage plan facilitates
public involvement.
(p. 1-10 — 1-13)
Effective waste management is a continuing process of public education, discussion,
implementation and evaluation. All options should be continually investigated and
actively debated, moving the community toward a consensus on the proper mix of
source reduction and waste management programs.
Concern: Waste management is put on the public agenda.
involvement: Representatives of various interest groups (regulatory officials, individuals
from neighboring communities, local waste management experts, representatives from
environmental and business groups) are encouraged to participate.
issue Resolution: Interest groups make their points of agreement and
disagreement clear to each other and to program planners.
Alternatives: Groups should make a list of available alternatives, including "no action."
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Consequences: Economic and environmental consequences of each alternative
are discussed.
6. Choice: Alternatives are decided upon.
7. Implementation: The steps necessary to carry out the program are described
and potential adverse impacts are mitigated, if possible.
8. Evaluation: The community should continually evaluate the program and solicit input.
Page 1-2
-------
CHAPTER 1: PUBLIC EDUCATION AND INVOLVEMENT
D
v/
A PUBLIC EDUCATION PLAN
In many ways, public education is similar to developing public support in an
election. Motivating the public to support a particular solid waste manage-
ment program is similar to the aggressive and highly interpersonal way in
which a particular candidate pursues votes. The same methods that are used
to gain political support can be used to educate the public about the need for a
waste prevention and management program and to enlist public participation
in such a program. The education plan must begin by introducing people to
waste management needs and concepts, explaining clearly how to participate,
and then effectively encouraging them to adopt the desired waste manage-
ment behavior. Once people are participating in the program, incentives and
reinforcements can be used to maintain and increase participation rates.
Developing an effective education program requires planning and re-
search. Program developers must use different strategies for different groups,
such as home owners, apartment dwellers, business people, and school chil-
dren. They must carefully consider the diversity of the local culture. Focus
groups can help identify the community's level of understanding, so that
achievable goals can be set. For communities with limited budgets, they must
target key participant groups and apply resources to reach them. Communi-
ties should be realistic about the costs of promotional efforts and the benefits
they yield (see Table 1-1). Always deliver a positive message.
Planning and research
are essential for
developing effective
education plans.
Table 1-1
Methods of Publicity
Low Cost
News releases
News advisories
Public service announcements
Community calendar announcements
Letters to the editor
News articles
Newsletter articles
Speeches
Guest spots on radio, T.V.
Poster contests
Church bulletin notices
Source: Hansen, Z. Sensible Publicity, A
Medium Cost
Flyers
Posters
Fact sheets
Briefing papers
Media events
Slide show
Guide. Ramsey Co.
High Cost
Commercials, T.V
Billboards
Media events
Calendars
Advertisements
, radio
Public relations firm
Minn. Health Department,
1983
Page 1-3
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Grounded on a sound information base, an effective education program
moves people through the following stages: (1) awareness, (2) interest, (3)
evaluation, (4) trial, (5) adoption, and (6) maintenance. Each of the stages is
discussed below.
Awareness
At the awareness stage, people encounter a new idea or a new way of doing
things. At this stage, they do not possess enough information to decide
whether a change in behavior is a good idea or whether they should be con-
cerned. The goal of the
awareness stage is to let
people know that a differ-
ent way of handling waste
may be preferable to the
historical way and that
good reasons for consider-
ing a change in their waste
management practices do
exist.
A variety of methods
can increase awareness (see
Table 1-1). Low-cost meth-
ods include news articles
and public service an-
nouncements or shows on
radio and television. High-
cost efforts include televi-
sion commercials or bill-
boards. Nationwide events
such as Earth Day also help
stimulate public aware-
ness.
For example, the City
of San Diego has devel-
oped a program informing
its citizens about proper
management of household
hazardous materials (see
Figure 1-1). The materials
define household hazard-
ous waste, provide recom-
mendations on proper dis-
posal and purchasing, and
practices to limit genera-
tion. A phone number is
listed for those seeking ad-
ditional information.
Over the long term,
education in schools is the
best way of raising aware-
ness. Many states now
have curricula introducing
school children from
grades K through 12 to the
concepts of source reduc-
tion, recycling, composting,
and other waste manage-
Figure 1-1
Household Hazardous Materials Program
,.
[ {ffiK& •'
jlMlm Put Toxic Waste
iili» In Its Place.
^l tfrfrP^^™*^"'*' Household Hazardous Materials Program
Every day San Diegans unknowingly • Check storage areas at least twice a year.
threaten our environment by throwing out and dispose of products which will not
tons of household hazardous waste with the be used again
regular trash or pouring it down the sewer . Make sure containers are tightly sealed
or storm drain. When improperly disposed, an(j upright
these products can destroy our environment . Keep ,nxic materia|s ln lhejr orjgjna|
hy polluting the air, water and .soil containers and out of reach f.om
It is dangerous, and illegal, to children
dispose of household hazardous waste
improperly Refuse collectors and landfill HOW ShOUW HOUSthold
operates can be blinded, seriouslv burned Hazardous Materials Be Disposed?
or overcome with ftimes when adds, corro- "^ leftover and unused P°-tions rf
sives or flammables are carelessly thrown in household hazardous materials should
the garbage. Improper storage and handling never ^ thrown " ^ msh or P°ured
of household hazardous waste can result in down "* dam- tosKild- ^ UP me m2fe"al
fires, poisonings and explosions "" * was intended, careftilly following label
^^ directions, or ask others if they could use
What Is Household ^ remaining portion. Also, you can take
Hazardous Waste? your household hazardous waste to a
Household hazardous waste is the scheduled community collection event or
discarded, unused or leftover portions of contact ^ Household Hazardous Matenals
household products containing toxic Program for other recycling and disposal
chemicals. Any product which is labeled options
WARNING, CAimON, POISONOUS, TOXIC,
FLAMMABLE, CORROSIVE, REACUVE or „ The Household
EXPLOSIVE is considered hazardous. Hazardous Materials Program.
Today, hazardous materials can be ^ Household Hazardous Matenals
found in almost every house and come in Pr°Sram wants y°u to know about ^P0™'
many forms, including household cleaners, nlties to reduce *e araoljnl of household
auiomo jve products, paints and solvents, hazardous waste in your home. The pro
and pesticides. ^m Provides ^ ^P05*1 °P°ons for
hazardous waste from households through-
HOW Can YOU Control out 5^ Diego County. Through community
Household Hazardous Matenals? educate, programs and collection events
When shopping for, using or ^ program Ls working to keep San Diego's
storing household products, keep the fol- environment safe. Tor farther information
lowing lips in mind. on houseno|d hazardous materials, the
• Buy only what you need community education program or future
• Choose the least-toxic product collection events, please call the Household
• Select water-based products over Hazardous Matenals Program.
solvent-rased products (619) 338-2267.
• Avoid aerosol sprays ih, HwsebuU /$&&>. .^^
,-, , i . . Hazardous Materials ff^RSKS\ <^SiU.c^t
• \X) not mix cleaning products containing program is funded by RrjW&IKro tT5lAl3B
chlorine with ammonia or acid-based J/'to'So"'""'*' ^SSli' ^tPip
cleaners
Source: City of San Diego, California
Common
household
hazardous
materials
include:
Aerosols
All-purpose cleaners
Ammonia
Anti-freeze
Batbecue lighter fluid
Batteries
Brake fluid
Chlorine bleach
Cosmetics
Deteigents
Disinfectants
Drain opener
Fumituie polish
Gasoline
Glass cteaner
Herbicides
Insecticides
Mothballs
Motor oil
Oven cleaner
Paint
Paint thinner
Pesticides
Rodent poison
Rubber cement
Rug & upholstery cleaner
Scouring powder
Silver polish
Snail and slug killers
Toilet bowl cleaner
Traa^masion fluid
Tub and tile cleaner
Turpentine
Varnish
Water seal
Wood finish
Page 1-4
-------
CHAPTER 1: PUBLIC EDUCATION AND INVOLVEMENT
ment techniques. The Town of blip, New York, uses a dinosaur symbol, always
popular with children, to promote and explain its recycling program (see Figure
1-2). Besides educating the next generation of citizens, school programs indirectly
help make parents aware of waste issues, because children frequently take home
information they have learned and discuss it with their parents.
Figure 1-2
Dinosaur Symbol Used on Recycling Materials to Enhance Appeal of Mandatory Programs
Promotional contributions made by
The Council for Solid Waste Solutions
Printed on Recycled Paper
Recycle more
so there's
even less!
Just a reminder...
Islip now recycles plastics—
soft drink bottles, milk jugs and
water and cider bottles—so you
can help reduce (slip's trash
by simply...
1) removing
their caps,
2) rinsing,
and
3) tossing them into
your container.
If you've already begun,
thank you! Please give
this card to a friend.
In Islip, We Recycle
America, and Proudly!
Supervisor Frank R. Jones
Council Members:
Norman DeMott.
Anne Pfifferiing,
Brian Ferruggiari,
and Peter McGowan
A message from (slip's WRAPasaurus
This remindei is courtesy ol the
Council for Solid Waste Solutions,
and was no! paid for at taxpayers' expense
• Printed on Recycled Paper
Source: WRAP (We Recycle America...and Proudly) Islip, New York
Programs aimed at children should be sensitive to cultural diversity. For
example, in some cultures it is considered disrespectful for children to tell
their parents how to conduct themselves. For these citizens, use alternative
approaches.
Interest
In the second stage, individuals who are now aware of waste management is-
sues seek additional information. Individuals may seek one-to-one exchanges
with waste management professionals, political officials, or educators, or they
Page 1-5
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Using a variety of
methods to explain the
program may be helpful.
may seek information about how they are involved in implementing a waste
management initiative or an effective public policy. Making changes in re-
quired local waste management practices, such as mandatory recycling or
yard trimmings disposal bans, will clearly stimulate interest, sometimes in the
form of political opposition.
At this stage, program developers may need a variety of methods to ex-
plain the program. Voluntary programs need a strong emphasis on promo-
tion. A mandatory program must clearly explain required behavior, as well as
promote program benefits. Fact sheets prepared and distributed by state and
federal regulatory agencies, local governments, university extension services,
and waste-related business associations can provide clear and concise informa-
tion for interested citizens. Making public speeches, offering tours of waste
management facilities, creating exhibits for fairs, and preparing written mate-
rial such as newsletters can help stimulate public interest in the program. Es-
tablishing and promoting a telephone hot line has been effective in a number
of communities. In Onondaga County, New York, a promotion on two million
milk cartons advertised a telephone hot line.
To promote newspaper recycling in San Francisco, residents received a
paper grocery bag with newspapers delivered to homes. Printing on the bags
gave instructions for recycling newspapers and a phone number for informa-
tion. One survey concluded that information delivered to each residence,
sometimes with utility bills, is a highly effective means of education.
Evaluation
Participation
increases when
program
requirements are
easy to follow.
At the evaluation stage, individuals decide whether to go along with the pro-
gram. Even if the law requires specific behavior, achieving voluntary compli-
ance is easier administratively and politically than strong enforcement. An
easily understandable and convenient program will have the best chance of
success.
Research has shown that for even well-promoted programs, initial par-
ticipation is about 50 percent. Another third will participate as the program
becomes established. Initial high participation rates should, therefore, not be
expected.
Even for mandatory programs, convenience is a major factor in determin-
ing participation (see Figure 1-2). For example, the convenience of curbside
pickup normally makes participation in waste management programs higher
than for drop-off programs. As a result, some communities only provide
drop-off service for yard trimmings, so that it becomes more convenient to not
collect grass clippings or to home compost. A combined curbside and drop-off
program may be the most convenient. At this stage (see Figure 1-3) education
should stress what each citizen's role in the program is, their contribution to
its success, and the most convenient level of participation.
Trial
The trial stage is
decisive for participants.
By the fourth stage, individuals have decided to participate in the new activ-
ity. This is a crucial step for every program. If individuals try back yard com-
posting or a volume-based system and encounter difficulty, they may choose
not to adopt the desired conduct, and the program could lose political and
public support.
By this stage in the educational program, everyone should have the in-
formation describing exactly what they are expected to do (see Figure 1-4).
The community program must then provide the promised service in a highly
reliable fashion. An adequately staffed and properly trained clearinghouse or
hot line is a useful tool to answer questions and provide additional informa-
tion. If appropriate, the hot line should be multilingual.
Page 1-6
-------
CHAPTER 1: PUBLIC EDUCATION AND INVOLVEMENT
Figure 1-3
Example of Public Education Flyer
IwttiWBuHlM^Sr
... make your own
reduction deductions!
6i£ts that help others
make a difference:
cloth napkins with matching tablecloth
cloth or string shopping bags
compost bin
gift certificates to resale shops
library card
lunch box/bag
party dishes that are durable and reusable
picnic basket cups, plates, & utensils
push mower
rechargeable alkaline batteries /charger
recycling bins
refillable pen & pencil set 1 \
reusable storage containers ..?"
stationery made from recycled paper i -
Gifts that save '
and energy:
bus passes
compact fluorescent light bulbs
insulated bed pads for waterbeds
pool & hot tub blankets
waterheater blanket
water-saving faucets & showcrheads
Living gifts:
house plants
potted evergreens
seeds for spring planting
your time — for childcare, cooking a meal, etc.
More reduction deductions:
make edible ornaments & write holiday
greetings on cookies
make origami ornaments from used
wrapping paper
place gifts in decorative tins, baskets,
or bags
reuse greeting card picture for a post card
or gift tag
reuse wrapping paper, boxes, ribbons,
& bows
use old jewelry to make new jewelry, art,
& decorations
I PRINTED
ON RECYCLED
PAPER
These steps brought to you by...
The Wisconsin Waste Reduction Coalition:
Citizens for a Better Environment
City of West Allis
Godfrey Company
Keep Greater Milwaukee Beautiful
University of Wisconsin Cooperative Extension
Wisconsin Depts. of Natural Resources
and Agriculture, Trade & Consumer Protection
Wisconsin Grocers Association
Wisconsin Merchants Federation
Source: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
Page 1-7
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
At the trial stage of a volunteer program, a pilot project can also help
stimulate participation. Program organizers should assure citizens that the
pilot project's goal is to evaluate various strategies, respond to public feed-
back, and make any changes required to improve program efficiency and reli-
ability. Citizens may be more willing to try a project if they know that the
project is short term and that any concerns they may have will be taken into
account in developing a long-term effort. During the trial stage, public hear-
ings may be helpful by giving citizens an opportunity to voice their opinions
about the project. A focus group effort prior to initiation of the trial will help
pinpoint important participant concerns and issues.
Adoption
Education should focus
on reinforcing program
participation at this
stage.
If the education program has been well-planned and implemented, public
support and participation should grow. Educational efforts at the fifth stage
focus on providing citizens with positive feedback concerning program effec-
tiveness (see Figure 1-5). A newsletter or other regular informational mailing
can help inform citizens about the program's progress and any program
changes. Community meetings can serve to reward and reinforce good be-
havior and answer questions. Local officials should be informed of program
participation rates to generate political support for program budgets and per-
sonnel needs. At this stage, it can be helpful to target additional educational
efforts at program nonparticipants.
Figure 1 -4
Sample Education Program
CURB
WASTE...
SEATTLE'S
WAY
HERE ARE THE WAYS YOU CAN REDUCE WASTE
Variable Can Rate:
Trash Tags:
Yard Waste:
Allofthe lushirreeneryin the Pacific
Northwest meansthat il you have a yard or Bar
den. you will have yard waste City ordinance
Sartre. The gwid news is thai Seattle has ;hn
way; for you ;o dispose of your yard waste
lion, call the Compos: Hotline at fV.« f!224
• Vition SIKTI up tor the Ltilitv'scerb 'alley *ai
waste pick-i:pproKrar forjisl $2 per --.'nth
N.ith transfer station, for ins.! S1 a cat .oad
Transfer Stations:
Curb/alley Recycling:
:rrvc!iriH by calling 684 7600 Yo'acanjenr!.
Klass tin, niiirnirini. PET plajtsc w>d;i pop ;n
iw;"-1: 'e.g tnajidzi:ieH.advcniiin}(mail -jard-
bt,aid. (-LC.I Ydur recycling C'-.lleclinn cunf
-------
Maintenance
CHAPTER 1: PUBLIC EDUCATION AND INVOLVEMENT
At the sixth stage, the program is up and running. Using a variety of intrinsic
and extrinsic incentives will maintain and increase participation. Intrinsic in-
centives are largely informational. They are designed to induce citizens to
perform the desired conduct for its own sake and because they provide a per-
sonal sense of well being and satisfaction. Extrinsic incentives are tangible re-
wards for performing desired conduct, such as reduced fees or monetary pay-
ments. A maintenance program may employ both types of incentives. Basic
education must also continue.
INTRINSIC INCENTIVES
Intrinsic incentives seek to support the desired behavior as the right thing to do.
Some studies, for example, have shown that the ideals of frugality, resource con-
servation, and environmental protection over the long run were strong intrinsic
motivators for those participating in recycling and reuse programs.
Issuing routine press releases and reports describing the progress of the
program, providing awards for exemplary services, publishing newsletters for
participating citizens and residences, and creating special events, such as "re-
cycling week" or "master composter programs," all provide positive support
for community waste management activities. An aggressive school education
program will provide intrinsic incentives over the long term.
It is important for
individuals to view
participating as "the
right thing to do."
Figure 1-5
Example of Material Encouraging Feedback on a Recycling Program
i-merica,
you have another
reason to be proud
of Islip...
we recycle
plastic bottles!
\ s of November 1989,
J,i V Islip's WRAP program
| recycles Plastic Bottles!
Plastics recycling is easy:
> Toss them into your
' • WRAP container
along with your
other recyclables
We take these types
of plastic bottles:
I soft drink containers —
all colors and all sizes
(PET)
I milk jugs (HOPE)
I water and juice bottles
(HOPE)
1 bleach, detergent and
shampoo bottles (HOPE)
Bottles need not be crushed.
WRAP • a • saur • iis\in
mitted to the conservation of
our natural resources; dedi-
cated to the recycling of
glass, metal newspaper —
and now plastic bottles in
the Town of Islip.
What are some benefits
of recycling plastics for
Islip?
• We reduce Islip's waste disposal
needs. If yours is an average-sized
household, it generates approxi-
mately 23 pounds a year of these
types of plastics: HOPE (milk jugs,
water and juice bottles) and PET
(soft drink containers.) Thai's almost
900 tons for the entire Town, or
enough to fill over 120,000 shopping
carts]
I We help control disposal costs.
Future estimates for off-Island
hauling our garbage to disposal sites
run $150 per ton.
I We are supplying the raw materials
to make everything from new deter-
gent bottles to lumber. Recycling
saves valuable resources.
Source: WRAP (We Recycle America...and Proudly) Islip, New York
Page 1-9
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
EXTRINSIC INCENTIVES
Extrinsic incentives provide direct rewards for desired activities. Volume-
based fees are a form of extrinsic incentive: the smaller the waste volume gen-
erated, the less the generator must pay for waste management. Another well-
known example of extrinsic incentives is the Rockford, Illinois, "cash for
trash" campaign. This program involved weekly, random checks of a
household's refuse with $1,000 rewards given to households that properly
separated their recyclables from nonrecyclables.
Careful analysis of extrinsic incentives is important. For example, a vol-
ume-based fee system encourages both source reduction and recycling. But a
volume-based collection system could actually reduce participation in recy-
cling if minimum volumes are large. It is important that the public does not
connect the desired activity only with a reward. If that happens, if the incen-
tive program is terminated or changed, some people may stop or reduce par-
ticipation in the program. The public must see the program as a way to pro-
mote proper conduct, not merely as a way to make money.
Nonmonetary social incentives can also be effective. Many communities
use block captains or community leaders to help boost neighborhood participa-
Participation can be tion. These local leaders remind neighbors that the problem is, in part, local and
encouraged through that local people can help solve it. Linking social and monetary incentives may
rewards and also be possible. For example, the proceeds from a neighborhood-run collection
public recognition. center could help support a neighborhood project or local recreational programs.
Organizers should carefully consider extrinsic incentives. Payback in
terms of increased participation in the program and improved awareness and
understanding of issues should offset the cost of the incentive. The extrinsic
incentive should always be seen as an adjunct to the program, not the sole rea-
son for participating. Extrinsic incentives can help get people interested in
participating while intrinsic values are being developed through education.
THE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PLAN
Public involvement is too frequently confined to the facility siting process (see
Chapter 2). Participation of local residents should begin earlier, when pro-
gram developers are deciding which overall waste management strategy will
best meet the community's economic and environmental needs. The strategy
should consider source reduction and other options in addition to the facility
being proposed. Allowing public involvement only at the facility-siting stage,
and not before, may engender public opposition; residents may view the siting
process as a fait accompli, because other decisions (which waste management
option to use) were made without their participation.
Choosing a site without input from residents and then weathering in-
Public involvement tense opposition has been called the "decide-announce-defend" strategy. Al-
should start early, before though this strategy has been used extensively in the past, the increasing so-
s/t/ng process phistication of groups opposed to certain waste management alternatives
e9lns- makes this approach more difficult. The public is demanding meaningful par-
ticipation in making waste management decisions. But the public must also
accept responsibility for its role in implementing sound and cost effective
waste management solutions.
THE ISSUE EVOLUTION-EDUCATIONAL INTERVENTION (IEEI) MODEL
Although some communities still use the "decide-announce-defend" strategy,
many now realize that, while there will probably always be opposition to pro-
posed waste management strategies, investigating alternatives and building a
consensus are likely to result in more efficient decision making.
Page 1-10
-------
CHAPTER 1: PUBLIC EDUCATION AND INVOLVEMENT
Developing a written plan for seeking public involvement is important.
Written procedures help insure the inclusion of all important interests and le-
gal requirements. The plan will show involved citizens and groups at which
points in the process they can express opinions and how to be most effective
in communicating their views. A written, publicly available plan lends cred-
ibility to the program.
The "Issue Evolution-Educational Intervention" (IEEI) model provides
public involvement throughout the decision-making process. It comprises an
eight-stage process for developing and implementing public policy:
Stage 1—Concern Stage 5—Consequences
Stage 2—Involvement Stage 6—Choice
Stage 3—Issue Resolution Stage 7—Implementation
Following the IEEI Model
helps elicit public Stage 4—Alternatives Stage 8—Evaluation
participation. -pj^ jggj process ensures that the public will have a meaningful voice in
deciding how best to manage solid waste. The process is not simple and re-
quires a commitment from the community of time and resources. Each of the
stages is briefly discussed below (also see Figure 1-6).
1. Concern: In the first IEEI stage, an event puts waste management on the
public agenda. Perhaps the local landfill is nearing capacity and is about
to close. Perhaps the legislature has just enacted a mandatory recycling
bill. The public begins to ask questions.
At this stage, a procedure for providing accurate, reliable information to
the public is important. Eliminating misconceptions and establishing a
firm educational base for public discussion is the key. County and
university extension offices, governmental associations, and regulatory
agencies can provide information. Education programs should target
local officials, as well as the public. Showing concern and a willingness
to take proper action is most important. A focus group can help define
important public issues. Community service organizations can provide a
forum for discussion.
2. Involvement: As discussion of the issue begins, regulatory officials,
persons from neighboring communities, local waste management
experts, environmental and business groups, and others should be
encouraged to participate. Bringing representatives of interest groups
together and providing a forum for communication is a valuable activity.
Cultural diversity is another consideration when seeking input from the
broadest possible spectrum of the community.
3. Issue Resolution: Interest groups should make clear their points of agree-
ment and disagreement. The various groups should then attempt to
understand and resolve points of conflict. Determining what people can
agree on is also important. All parties need to understand the motivation
and circumstances of the other community interests in the process.
4. Alternatives: The participants should develop a list of available alterna-
tives; the list should include taking no action. Each alternative should
have a list of potential sites for facilities.
At this stage participants should use the same criteria to analyze com-
parative economics, environmental impacts, and other aspects of each
alternative. Each interest group should scrutinize carefully the analyses
prepared by all others. Results of analyses of various alternatives should
be communicated to local officials and input sought from the public and
others.
5. Consequences: Involved parties should then determine and compare
the economic and environmental effects of each alternative. They should
Page 1-11
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
also evaluate consequences in light of community resources and goals.
The public must understand the results of choosing one alternative over
another. All involved interest groups should acknowledge the benefits
and costs associated with each alternative.
Choice: At this stage, the decision-making body must decide which
alternative or group of alternatives to implement. In addition to publi-
cizing the chosen alternative or alternatives, the decision makers should
clearly communicate the reasons behind each choice by explaining the
necessary tradeoffs, the efforts made to consider the interests of each
affected group, and the anticipated impact of the chosen alternative or
alternatives on the community.
Not all interest groups will support the chosen alternative or alterna-
tives. Some may oppose the option(s) chosen and seek to force reconsid-
eration of other alternatives through legal and political challenges. The
process outlined here does not guarantee success, but it will help de-
velop a broad community consensus, enabling the community to better
withstand legal and political challenges.
Implementation: At this stage, the decision makers should describe the steps
necessary to implement the chosen strategy. They should also try to mitigate
potential adverse impacts which the chosen alternative or alternatives may have
on relevant interest groups. Chapter 2 discusses this issue in more detail.
Evaluation: The community should continually evaluate the model and
solicit input from affected groups. The impact of decisions should be
communicated routinely to the public and to local officials. Ongoing
evaluation helps provide an information base for making future waste
management decisions. Existing programs will continually improve if
they respond to changing conditions and public input.
Figure 1-6
Issue Evolution/Educational Intervention Model
Help monitor and evaluate policies
Inform people about formal
evaluations and their results.
Help stakeholders participate
in formal evaluations.
7. Inform people about new
policies and how they
and others are affected.
Explain how and why
the polices were
enacted. Help people
understand how to
ensure proper
implementation.
6. Explain where and
when decisions will
be made and who will make
them. Explain how decisions
are made and influenced.
Enable audiences to design
realistic strategies.
Help audiences understand existing conditions.
Show how different groups are affected. Help
people look beyond symptoms. Help separate
facts and myths and clarify values.
2. Identify decision makers and others
affected. Stimulate communication
among decision makers, supporters,
and opponents.
3. Help clarify goals or interests. Help
understand goals or interests of
others and points of disagreement.
Help get the issue on the agenda.
4. Identify alternatives, reflecting
all sides of the issue and including
"doing nothing." Help locate or invent
additional alternatives.
5. Help predict and analyze consequences,
including impacts on values as well as
objective conditions. Show how consequences
vary for different groups. Facilitate comparison of
alternatives.
House, V., "Issue Evolution and Educational intervention," Working With Our Publics, Module 6: Education for Public Decisions, 1988
Page 1-12
-------
CHAPTER 1: PUBLIC EDUCATION AND INVOLVEMENT
REFERENCES
De Young, R. 1984. "Motivating People to Recycle: The Use of Incentives,"
Resource Recycling (May-June).
Folz, D., and Hazlett, J. 1990. "A National Survey of Local Government
Recycling Programs," Resource Recycling (December).
Hansen, Z. 1983. Sensible Publicity, A Guide. Ramsey County Health
Department, 1910 W. County Rd. B., Roseville, MN (November).
House, V. 1988. "Issue Evolution and Educational Intervention," Working
With Our Publics, Module 6: Education for Public Decisions. North Carolina
Agricultural Extension Service and Department of Adult and
Community College Education, North Carolina State University,
Raleigh, NC.
Kashmanian, R., et al. 1990. "Source Reduction and Recycling: Promotion
Strategies," Resource Recycling 0uly).
Lueck, G. W. 1990. "Elementary Lessons in Garbage Appreciation,"
Waste Age (September).
O'Rorke, M., and Hely, B. 1989. "Creating a Public Information Program that
Works," Resource Recycling (May-June).
Rickmerss-Skislak, T. 1987. "How to'Sell'Recycling Programs,"
Biocyde (October).
Page 1-13
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Page 1-14
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Facility siting and permitting have become the most contentious
and difficult aspects of the solid waste management process.
Public officials are challenged to find sites that are technically
and environmentally sound and socially acceptable. The intense
political conflicts in local communities center on important
questions of the appropriate use of technology, acceptable levels
of risk, and the distribution of decision-making power in a
democratic society.
This chapter summarizes the detailed discussion of facility
siting issues set forth in the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency document Sites for Our Solid Waste: A Guidebook for
Effective Public Involvement The USEPA siting guide provides a
detailed procedure for effectively siting a solid waste facility.
Readers needing more detail than this guidebook provides are
encouraged to thoroughly review Sites for Our Soiid Waste.
This chapter also briefly addresses permitting solid waste
management facilities. Although specific regulatory
requirements for proposed alternatives vary from state to state,
there are general guidelines that should be followed to
successfully implement a project. A proper approach to securing
permits is essential, since the decision to seek a facility permit
requires a significant expenditure of community resources and
time.
4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.
From: Decision Maker's Guide to Solid Waste Management, Volume II, (EPA 530-R-95-023), 1995.
Project Co-Directors: Philip R. O'Leary and Patrick W. Walsh, Solid and Hazardous Waste Education
Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison/Extension. This document was supported in part by the
Office of Solid Waste (5306), Municipal and Industrial Solid Waste Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency under grant number CX-817119-01. The material in this document has been
subject to Agency technical and policy review and approved for publication as an EPA report.
Mention of trade names, products, or services does not convey, and should not be interpreted as
conveying, official EPA approval, endorsement, or recommendation.
Page 2-1
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
Facility siting and
permitting is a
potentially contentious
process.
(p. 2-1)
Facility siting and permitting has become the most contentious and difficult part of
the solid waste management process. Finding sites that are both technically feasible
and environmentally and socially acceptable can be difficult. Many communities have
experienced intense political conflicts centered on uses of technology, acceptable
levels of risk, and distribution of decision-making power.
When creating a siting
strategy, consider
lessons from
experience.
(p. 2-4)
Use the political/technical expertise of public officials and citizens.
Consult with the relevant public sector at every stage.
Provide accurate, useful information about all aspects of the project, including
risks, and maintain a dialogue with the public.
Keep the process flexible and negotiable.
Use only accurate and truthful information (written or spoken) at all times.
Successful siting may involve compensation for real or perceived local impacts.
Developing a public
involvement plan early
is crucial.
(p. 2-4-2-7)
Behind-the-scenes decision making, called the "decide-announce-defend" model, is
likely to be unacceptable today. The public must be given an opportunity to partici-
pate in every phase of the siting process. Developing a public involvement plan is
crucial; Table 2-1 outlines the elements of such a plan.
Clearly identifying the different segments (or publics) in the community is the first
step. The reasons people get involved include their proximity to possible sites, eco-
nomic impact, usefulness of the facility, personal values, legal mandates.
Program organizers and officials should inform the public of the following:
possible site-related and broadly based socioeconomic issues
possible consequences of choosing not to have a facility
how individuals can get involved (in what types of tasks and projects)
how to get information about the proposed project and how to contact relevant officials
how to make their opinions known to decision makers.
Several techniques for
involving the public are
available.
(p. 2-8 — 2-10)
Public involvement should be a dialogue—two-way communication in which clearly
stated and objective information is provided and the public's concerns, opinions, and
ideas are solicited and considered. Table 2-3 describes major techniques for communi-
cating with the public; Table 2-4 provides techniques for soliciting public input.
Communicating risk is
essential.
(p. 2-8 — 2-12)
Risk communication emphasizes a two-way information exchange in which risk manag-
ers listen to and learn from the public. Table 2-5 presents USEPA's "Seven Cardinal
Rules of Risk Communication." Risk managers should provide accurate, objective infor-
mation early in the process so citizens can form accurate conclusions about the pro-
posed project when risk-related questions arise. Some risk-related cautions include:
Do not assume that a risk management program will solve all siting-related problems.
Be aware that developing an effective risk-communication program is not easy.
Do not assume that developing a risk-communication plan ensures community
acceptance of the risks (real or perceived) associated with the proposed project.
Page 2-2
-------
CHAPTER 2: FACILITY SITING AND PERMITTING
Follow these six steps
when developing a risk
communication plan.
(p. 2-11 —2-12)
1. Identify the risk communication objectives for each step in the siting process (see
Table 2-6).
2. Know what information should be exchanged at each stage. A "risk
management checklist" is provided in Table 2-7.
3. Identify the groups with whom information must be exchanged.
4. Develop appropriate risk messages for each targeted audience.
5. Identify the appropriate channels for communicating risks to various segments of
the public.
6. Evaluate your efforts and modify the approach as needed.
Building credibility for
technical information
is essential.
(p. 2-13)
Public mistrust of technical information is a major siting issue. Communicating accu-
rate technical information is crucial. The following can help build credibility:
Anticipate issues likely to emerge.
Involve the public in planning and in selecting technical consultants.
Use an "outside," jointly chosen impartial expert to review technical studies.
Present technical information in language for nontechnical audiences.
Openly discuss uncertainties and assumptions.
Address possible
negative impacts (real
or perceived) early in
project development.
(p. 2-14)
Common concerns about solid waste facilities that may require some form of mitiga-
tion include process issues, health risks, environmental issues, and local impacts.
Basic steps in planning for impacts include the following:
1. Outline a decision-making process for mitigation issues.
2. Identify issues that are likely to arise.
3. Identify concerned segments of the public for each issue.
4. Identify forums for resolving mitigation issues with those affected.
5. Integrate required mitigation activities into the public involvement plan.
The permitting
process requires
knowledge and
technical expertise.
(p. 2-15 — 2-17)
Federal, state, and local governments enact laws to ensure that proposed projects
meet minimum technical and legal criteria. The number of permits required depends
on the type of facility being planned and local, state, and federal laws. Permitting en-
sures that a proposed project will not unduly affect the health and environment of the
community and that it will be consistent with local public policy.
After an internal review that includes public input, the reviewing agency must produce
a written decision awarding a permit or disallowing the project.
It is crucial to accurately determine which permits will be required for the proposed
facility: a permitting oversight can paralyze a project. To determine permit needs
consult with appropriate local, state, and federal agencies, such as state/tribe and lo-
cal environmental planning agencies.
Page 2-3
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
THE SITING PROCESS
The traditional siting process, sometimes called the "decide-announce-de-
fend" model, placed decision-making power in the hands of a few key indi-
viduals. But citizens have demonstrated that they will not accept behind-the-
scenes decisions on solid waste management, and a new approach to siting is
being tried around the country; it consists of three related phases—planning,
site selection and facility design, and implementation. Any stage of the siting
process may be subjected to intense public debate (see Figure 2-1).
Public involvement in
the siting process is
crucial to a program's
success.
Creating a Siting Strategy
Consider these tips
from previous siting
experiences.
Most experts agree that no perfect siting model exists. Even so, lessons from
successful sitings do offer insight into which strategies should be pursued and
how public officials can resolve particularly difficult issues. The following les-
sons have been drawn from actual sitings.
• Successful siting efforts require the political and technical expertise of
both public officials and citizens.
• Appropriate sectors of the public should be consulted at every stage of
the decision-making process.
• Successful sitings require an informed and thorough analysis; a good
risk-communication program establishes an exchange of information
among various participants.
• Credible and accurate technical information is crucial to resolving
conflicts in the siting process.
• The siting process must be flexible; all characteristics are negotiable.
• Careful planning and effective management are essential for successful siting.
• The state plays an important role in supporting an effective siting
process.
• All information, written or oral, must be honest at all times.
• Siting a waste management facility must be only one part of an inte-
grated waste management strategy. No one facility is the answer.
• Siting may involve compensation for real and perceived local impacts.
Who Is the Public?
The first step in designing a public involvement program is to stop and think:
Who is the public? The public is not a single entity—many interests and
Page 2-4
-------
CHAPTER 2: FACILITY SITING AND PERMITTING
Figure 2-1
The Three-Phase Siting Framework
Phase I: Planning
Identifying the problem Recognizing the growing waste
stream, rising costs, and capacity
v shortfall.
Designing the siting strategy Planning and integrating public
involvement, risk communication,
^ mitigation and evaluation activities.
Assessing alternatives Researching, debating, and choosing
among the options: recycling, source
^ reduction, incineration, and land
disposal.
Choosing site feasibility criteria Studying population densities, hydro-
geological conditions, and
^ socioeconomic characteristics.
Phase II: Site selection and facility design
Selecting the site Performing initial site screening and
designation; acquiring land;
^ conducting permit procedures;
performing initial environmental
review; developing environmental
impact statement if necessary.
Designing the facility Choosing technologies, dimensions,
safety characteristics, restrictions,
^ mitigation plans, compensation
arrangements, and construction.
Phase III: Implementation
Operation Monitoring incoming waste; managing
waste disposal; performing visual and lab
^ testing; controlling noise, litter and odor.
Management Monitoring operations and safety
features; performing random testing
^ of waste; enforcing permit conditions.
Closing and future land uses Closing and securing the facility;
deciding on future land uses; and
performing continued monitoring.
USEPA, Sites for Our Solid Waste: A Guidebook for Effective Public Involvement, 1990
groups make up the various segments of the public. Some interests or groups
are well established, such as professional associations, political parties,
churches, some social groups, and home owners' associations. Others are
newly established because their members have a common, continuing interest
in the proposed community action.
Community members might become involved in siting for several reasons:
• Proximity: People who live in the immediate vicinity of a facility may
feel that their health and environment are threatened.
Page 2-5
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
Different segments of
the public have different
rates of involvement in
waste management
programs.
Involvement also
differs over time.
Officials have several
obligations to the public.
• Economic impact: People are concerned about effects waste problems
might have on municipal services and on economic development.
• Users: Prospective users of a facility may become involved if the use is
threatened.
• Social/environmental issues: People may become involved in siting as a
result of larger community issues such as air and water pollution or a
desire to force a community to initiate waste reduction or recycling
programs.
• Values: When questions of health or safety reach a high level of polar-
ization, citizens often discuss waste issues in terms of ethics or moral
values.
• Legal mandates: Governmental agencies at the local and state levels
play the most significant roles in facility sitings; however, federal agen-
cies may become participants depending upon the issues involved.
The various segments of the public will have different levels of involve-
ment based on different roles, technical expertise, and willingness to commit
time, energy, and in some cases money. Different types of public involvement
may be necessary to reach different groups (see Figure 2-2).
Different kinds of public involvement may be required depending upon
the group. A steering committee or technical advisory committee can be use-
ful in helping to design studies that need to be conducted, perform technical
reviews, rank consulting firms, and review rankings for sites. Because indi-
viduals and groups will differ in the amount of time and energy they are will-
ing to invest, a variety of opportunities for public participation should be of-
fered to accommodate varying levels of interest and expertise.
The size and composition of the involved public will also change over
time. Different groups and interests will be represented at different stages of
the siting process. The size of the interested public for a particular issue will
increase with controversy, and public involvement will increase as the siting
process progresses.
In developing a siting program, officials have several obligations to the
general public:
• Inform the public of the likely consequences of a proposed action, so that
people can choose whether to participate; the consequences should
encompass site-related issues and more broadly based socioeconomic
issues.
Figure 2-2
Levels of Involvement by Various Segments of the Public
USEPA, Sites for Our Solid Waste: A Guidebook for Effective Public Involvement, 1990
Page 2-6
-------
CHAPTER 2: FACILITY SITING AND PERMITTING
Inform the public of the consequences of not taking a proposed action.
Tell people how they can participate so those who are interested can get
involved.
Provide all segments of the public equal access to information and to
decision makers.
Seek the full spectrum of opinions within the community.
Including the Public in the Process
Experience from successful sitings shows that involving the public is as im-
portant to success as performing good technical studies. Effective public in-
volvement requires integrating public concerns and values at every stage of
the siting process. Token participation will not buy credibility and may even
offend the public more than if there had been no consultation at all.
Most experienced practitioners prepare a formal public involvement
plan at the beginning of any decision-making process. There are three major
reasons for developing a public involvement plan:
Developing a plan for
involving the public is
advisable.
1. Preparing a plan forces careful analysis of how the public fits into the
siting process.
2. Preparing a plan provides a mechanism for consultation among the
various agencies and entities that have a stake in the program.
3. A plan communicates to the public what to expect, helping to establish
the credibility of the sponsoring agencies.
When developing a plan, identify organized groups likely to have an in-
terest in the siting issue. Develop the plan using expertise from a variety of
departments and agencies, including the one siting the solid waste facility.
Also, involve private-sector representatives who can or will be affected by the
siting. Have one member designated as the leader of the group to help move
people through the thought process for developing the plan.
The plan should ultimately be a summary of the group's thinking, rather
than a plan imposed on the group. Table 2-1 sets forth the elements of a pub-
lic involvement plan. The plan can vary in length, but it should be a flexible
document that will provide a structure for analyzing the requirements of the
situation. The objectives of the plan (see Table 2-2) can be used to measure the
adequacy of preliminary drafts. The plan must be dynamic and be updated as
circumstances change. Planning should include periodic review to evaluate
program effectiveness.
Table 2-1
The Elements of a Public Involvement Plan
Describe any early consultation (e.g. interviews
with interest group leaders) that led to the
development of the plan.
Describe the major issues likely to emerge in the
course of the siting process.
Estimate the level of public interest likely to be
generated by the decision under consideration.
List the agencies, groups and key individuals
most likely to be interested in the siting process.
List the major stages in the siting process.
Outline a sequential plan of public involvement
activities for each stage in the siting process.
List key points when the public involvement plan
will be reviewed, and if necessary, revised.
Provide, for internal discussion, a staff and
budget estimate and an analysis of the support
services required to implement the plan.
USEPA, Sites for Our Solid Waste: A Guidebook for Effective Public Involvement, 1990
Page 2-7
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
Establishing two-way
communication with
the public is crucial.
Techniques for Involving the Public
Public involvement is a dialogue, a two-way communication that involves
both getting information out to the public and getting back from the public
ideas, issues, and concerns. For convenience, it is easier to divide the public
involvement process into two categories: information techniques (getting in-
formation to the public) and participation techniques (getting information
from the public). Some major techniques for communicating to the public are
described in Table 2-3.
Once the public has been informed, the next step is to provide forums or
mechanisms by which the public can express issues or concerns. Table 2-4
provides a number of techniques available for seeking public input. Advan-
tages and disadvantages of each technique are described.
No one public involvement program meets the needs of all circum-
stances. It is important to clearly define the goals of public participation and
which segments of the public should be addressed at various stages in the sit-
ing process.
In developing a public involvement plan, a few cautions should be
observed:
• Advisory groups can be very helpful, but be aware of their limitations—
members must be certain about the group's charter and should not
spend so much time agreeing on procedures that people concerned with
substance become alienated.
• Public information materials should provide useful, objective informa-
tion. They should not be public relation pieces aimed at selling a par-
ticular point of view.
• Play it straight with the media. Provide all information objectively and
factually.
• Get back to people promptly in response to comments. Without feed-
back, you provide no rewards to stimulate further public participation.
• Never surprise elected officials. Never announce a site has been selected
in an official's district without briefing him or her first.
Successful risk
communica tion
involves listening to
and learning from
the public.
Communicating Risks More Effectively
Risk communication is the exchange of information between risk managers
and the general public about a particular issue. Risk communication empha-
sizes a two-way information exchange in which risk managers also listen and
learn from the public. This information exchange is crucial to a responsive,
participatory siting process.
Table 2-2
The Objectives of a Public Involvement Plan
Include enough detail so that everyone involved in implementing the plan
knows what he or she is expected to do, and when.
Include enough detail to permit development of budget, staff, and schedule
estimates.
Allow agency management or policy boards to assess the adequacy of the
activities planned in relationship to the anticipated public interest.
Clearly communicate to the public how and when they will have opportunities
to participate.
USEPA, Sites for Our Solid Waste: A Guidebook for Effective Public Involvement, 1990
Page 2-8
-------
CHAPTER 2: FACILITY SITING AND PERMITTING
Table 2-3
Public Information
Technique
Briefings
Feature stories
Mailing out key
technical reports
or environmental
documents
News conferences
Newsletters
Newspaper inserts
News releases
Paid
advertisements
Presentations
to civic and
technical groups
Press kits
Techniques
Features
Personal visit or phone call to
key officials or group leaders to
announce a decision, provide
background information, or
answer questions.
In-depth story about the siting
study in newspapers or on radio
and television.
Mailing technical studies or
environmental reports to other
agencies and leaders of
organized groups or interests.
Brief presentation to reporters,
followed by question-and-
answer period, often
accompanied by handouts of
presenter's comments.
Brief description of what is
going on in the siting study,
usually issued at key intervals
for all people who have shown
an interest in the study.
Much like a newsletter, but
distributed as an insert in a
newspaper.
A short announcement or news
story issued to the media to get
interest in media coverage of
the story.
Advertising space purchased in
newspapers or on radio or
television.
Deliver presentations, enhanced
with slides or viewgraphs, to
key community groups.
A packet of information
distributed to reporters.
Advantages
Provide background information.
Determine reactions before an issue
"goes public." Alert key people to
issues that may affect them.
Provide detailed information to stimulate
interest in the siting study, particularly at
key junctures such as evaluating alternative
sites or selecting a preferred site. Often
used prior to public meetings to stimulate
interest.
Provides full and detailed information to
people who are most interested. Often
increases credibility of studies because
they are fully visible.
Stimulate media interest in a story. Direct
quotes often appear in television/radio.
Might draw attention to an announcement
or generate interest in public meetings.
Provide more information than can be
presented through the media to those who
are most interested. Often used to provide
information prior to public meetings or key
decision points. Also maintain visibility
during extended technical studies.
Reach the entire community with important
information such as project need and
alternative sites being considered. Is one of
the few mechanisms for reaching everyone
in the community through which you can
tell the story your way.
May stimulate interest from the media.
Useful for announcing meetings or major
decisions or as background material for
future media stories.
Effective for announcing meetings or key
decisions. Story presented the way
you want.
Stimulates communication with key
community groups. Can also provide
indepth feedback.
Stimulates media interest in the story.
Provides background information which
reporters use for future stories.
Public service Short announcement provided Useful for making announcements such
announcements free of charge by radio and as for public meetings.
television stations as part of
their public service obligations.
USEPA, Sites for Our So/id Waste: A Guidebook for Effective Public Involvement 1 990
Disadvantages
Requires time.
Newspaper will present the story as
editor sees fit — project proponent
has no control over how the story is
presented, except to provide full
information.
Costs money to print and mail. Some
people may not even read the
reports.
Reporters will only come if the
announcement/ presentation is
newsworthy. Cannot control how the
story is presented, although some
direct quotes are likely.
Requires staff time and costs money
to prepare, print, and mail. Stories
must be objective and credible or
people will react to newsletters as if
they were propaganda.
Requires staff time to prepare insert,
and distribution costs money. Must
be prepared to newspaper's layout
specifications. Potential negative
reaction to use of public funds for
this purpose exists.
May be ignored or not read. Cannot
control how the information is used.
Advertising space can be costly.
Radio and television may entail
expensive production costs to
prepare the ad. Potential negative
reaction to use of public funds for
this purpose exists.
Few disadvantages, except some
groups may be hostile.
Has few disadvantages, except may
be ignored. Cannot control how the
information is used.
Many organizations compete for the
same space. Story may not be aired
or may be aired at hours when there
are few listeners.
Page 2-9
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
Table 2-4
Participation Techniques
Technique
Advisory
groups/task
forces
Focus groups
Hotline
Interviews
Hearings
Meetings
Workshops
Plebiscite
Polls
Features
A group of represen-
tatives of key interested
parties is established.
May be a policy technical
or citizen advisory group.
Small discussion groups
established to give
"typical" reactions of the
public. Conducted by
professional facilitator.
Several sessions may be
conducted with different
groups.
Widely advertised phone
number handles questions
or provides centralized
source of information
about the siting.
Face-to-face interviews
with key officials interest
group leaders or key
individuals.
Formal meetings where
people present formal
speeches and
presentations.
Less formal meetings
for people to present
positions, ask questions,
and so forth.
Smaller meetings
designed to complete
a task.
City-wide election to
decide where or whether
a facility should be built.
Carefully designed
questions are asked of
a portion of the public
selected as represen-
tative of public opinion.
Advantages
Provide oversight to the siting
process. Promote communi-
cation between key consti-
tuencies. Anticipate public
reaction to publications or
decisions. Provide a forum
for reaching consensus.
Provide in-depth reaction
to publications ideas or
decisions. Good for
predicting emotional
reactions.
Gives people a sense that they
know whom to call. Provides a
one-step service of
information. Can handle
two-way communication.
Can be used to anticipate
issues or anticipate the
reactions of groups to a
decision. Can also be used to
assess "how are we doing."
May be used as a "wrap-up
meeting" prior to final decision.
Useful in preparing a formal
public record for legal
purposes.
Highly legitimate form for the
public to be heard on issues.
May be structured to permit
small group interaction —
anyone can speak.
Very useful for tasks such as
identifying siting criteria or
evaluating sites. Permits
maximum use of dialogue,
good for consensus-building.
Provides a definite, and usually
binding, decision on where or
whether a facility should be
built.
Provides a quantitative
estimate of general
public opinion.
TJSLHA, Sites tor Our Solid Waste: A Guidebook tor Lttective Public Involvement
Disadvantages
Potential for controversy
exists if "advisory"
recommendations are
not followed. Requires
substantial committment
of staff time to provide
support to committees.
Get reactions, but no
knowledge of how many
people share those
reactions. Might be
perceived as an effort to
manipulate the public.
Is only as effective as the
person answering the hotline
phone.
Can be expensive.
Requires extensive
staff time.
Exaggerates differences.
Does not permit dialogue.
Requires time to organize
and conduct.
Unless small-group
discussion format is used,
permits only limited dialogue.
May get exaggerated
positions or grandstanding.
Requires staff time to
prepare for meeting.
Limitations on size may
require several workshops in
different locations. Is
inappropriate for large
audiences. Requires staff
time for multiple meetings.
Campaign is expensive and
time-consuming. General
public may be susceptible to
uninformed emotional
arguments.
Provides a "snapshot" of
public opinion at a point
in time — opinion may
change. Assumes all view-
points count equally in
decision. Costs money
and must be professionally
designed.
1990
Page 2-10
-------
CHAPTER 2: FACILITY SITING AND PERMITTING
Inform the public
honestly about
potential risks and
precautions.
The primary goal of risk communication in the siting process is to help
participants, and even observers who may become participants, make in-
formed contributions to the decision-making process. As stated by the Na-
tional Research Council, "Risk communication is successful only to the extent
that it raises the level of understanding of relevant issues or actions and satis-
fies those involved that are adequately informed within the limits of available
knowledge" (USEPA 1990).
In siting solid waste facilities, communicators need to tell the public
what is known about environmental and health risks associated with the facil-
ity and what precautions are being taken to manage those risks.
Officials need to consider these precautions to avoid pitfalls in develop-
ing a risk-communication program:
1. Do not assume that developing a risk-management communication
program will solve all the problems with the siting process.
2. Do not assume that developing an effective risk-communication pro-
gram is an easy task.
3. Do not assume that developing a risk-communication program guaran-
tees public acceptance of the risks.
Developing a risk-communication program at the beginning of the siting
process will increase the likelihood that the public has access to useful infor-
mation when it is most needed. USEPA's Seven Cardinal Rules of Risk Com-
munication provides a guide (see Table 2-5). Risk communication should be
integrated into the public involvement plan. Keep a written plan or record of
risk-communication activities to provide a data base for evaluating the effec-
tiveness of the program.
The six steps to follow in developing a risk-communication program are
as follows:
Make information
easily accessible
to the public.
1. Identify the risk-communication objectives for each step in the siting
process (see Table 2-6).
2. Determine the information exchange needed to complete each step in the
siting process. Table 2-7 is a typical risk message checklist.
3. Identify the groups with whom information must be exchanged.
Table 2-5
Seven Cardinal Rules of Risk Communication
There are no easy prescriptions for successful risk communication. However,
those who have studied and participated in recent debates about risk generally
agree on seven cardinal rules. These rules apply equally well to the public and
private sectors. Although many of the rules may seem obvious, they are
continually and consistently violated in practice. Thus, a useful way to read
these rules is to focus on why they are frequently not followed.
1. Accept and involve the public as a legitimate partner.
2. Plan carefully and evaluate your efforts.
3. Listen to the public's specific concerns.
4. Be honest, frank and open.
5. Coordinate and collaborate with other credible sources.
6. Meet the needs of the media.
7. Speak clearly and with compassion.
USEPA, Seven Cardinal Rules of Risk Communication, 1988
Page 2-11
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
4. Develop appropriate risk messages for each targeted audience. Some
key characteristics of public risk perceptions are set forth in Table 2-8.
5. Identify the appropriate channels for communicating risks to various
segments of the public.
6. Evaluate efforts and modify approach as needed.
Table 2-6
Examples of Risk Communication Objectives
Include enough detail so that everyone involved in implementing the plan
knows what he or she is expected to do, and when.
Include enough detail to permit development of budget and staff and to
schedule estimates.
Allow agency management or policy boards to assess the adequacy of the
activities planned in relationship to the anticipated public interest.
Clearly communicate to the public how and when they will have opportunities
to participate.
USEPA, Sites for Our Solid Waste: A Guidebook for Effective Public Involvement, 1990
Table 2-7
Risk Management Checklist
Information about the nature of risks
1. What are the hazards of concern?
2. What is the probability of exposure to each
hazard?
3. What is the distribution of exposure?
4. What is the probability of each type of harm
from a given exposure to each hazard?
5. What are the sensitivities of different popula-
tions to each hazard?
6. How do exposures interact with exposures to
other hazards?
7. What are the characteristics of the hazard?
8. What is the total population risk?
Information about the nature of benefits
1. What are the benefits associated with the
hazard?
2. What is the probability that the projected ben-
efit will actually follow the activity in question?
3. What are the characteristics of the benefits?
4. Who benefits and in what way?
5. How many people benefit and how long do
benefits last?
6. Which groups get disproportionate shares of
the benefits?
7. What is the total benefit?
Source: National Research Council, Improving Risk Communication, 1989
Information about alternatives
1. What are the alternatives to the hazard in
question?
2. What is the effectiveness of each alternative?
3. What are the risks and benefits of each alter-
native and of not acting?
4. What are the costs and benefits of each alter-
native and how are they distributed?
Uncertainties in knowledge about risks
1. What are the weaknesses of available data?
2. What are the assumptions on which estimates
are based?
3. How sensitive are the estimates to changes in
assumptions?
4. How sensitive is the decision to changes in the
estimates?
5. What other risk and risk control assessments
have been made and why are they different
from those now being offered?
Information about management
1. Who is responsible for the decision?
2. What issues have legal importance?
Page 2-12
-------
CHAPTER 2: FACILITY SITING AND PERMITTING
Public skepticism about
technical information
must be addressed.
Building Credibility for Technical Information
Public mistrust of technical information is a major siting issue. Communicat-
ing accurate technical information is a crucial part of the process. Two of the
most important goals for risk communicators are building the credibility of
technical information in the eyes of the public and improving the relevance of
technical studies to public concerns.
People assume that once an issue is controversial, all sides are using
technical information in an effort to "win," or to convince the public. Mistrust
seems to be characteristic of political conflict. If the credibility of technical
information is to be protected and maintained throughout the siting process,
steps must be taken early in the siting process before a situation becomes
controversial. If a siting issue becomes polarized, and program developers are
seen as advocates, restoring credibility is difficult. When a final choice is
made, advocacy is expected. The following can help build credibility for
technical information:
• Anticipate the issues that will emerge.
• Solicit public participation in developing the study plan.
• Validate methodological assumptions.
• Invite public involvement in selecting consultants.
• Provide technical assistance to the public.
• Use an outside jointly chosen impartial expert to review technical studies.
Table 2-8
Key Characteristics of Public Risk Perceptions
Voluntary risks are accepted more readily than those that are imposed. Communities react angrily if they feel coerced into
accepting a new solid waste facility. This reaction against the siting process and the agency personnel ultimately leads to a
greater perception of risk.
Risks under individual control are accepted more readily than those under government control. In contrast to a risk such as
driving without a seat belt, neighbors of potential sites have little control over risks from the site other than the extreme case of
selling their homes and moving elsewhere.
Risks that seem fair are more acceptable than those that seem unfair. If the benefits and negative impacts are spread unevenly
over the community or county, people will perceive the risks of the facility as being unfair and less acceptable. For example, they are more
likely to feel it is fair to be responsible for their own waste disposal, but unfair to accept wastes from another community.
Risk information that comes from trustworthy sources is more believable than information from untrustworthy sources. If the
public perceives a communicator as untrustworthy, then the information will be dismissed as biased, misleading, or otherwise
unbelievable. Officials and individuals with vested interests in the outcome of the process will be seen as less credible, though
some of the animosity can be diffused by admitting the biases up front.
Risks that are "dreaded" are less acceptable than those that carry less dread. For example, groundwater contamination will be
feared by the community more than risks from driving without seat belts, even when the former poses a lower risk to individuals.
Because groundwater contamination is associated with cancer, which is dreaded more than a traffic accident, the perceived
risks will be more serious.
Risks that are undetectable create more fear than detectable risks. As an experienced war correspondent said at Three Mile
Island, "at least in a war you know you haven't been hit yet." Similarly, risks with effects that take years to detect will be more
likely to be feared.
Physical distance from a site influences the acceptability of risk. Recent research found that people living near hazardous waste
landfills were willing to pay between $200 and $500 per mile to move the landfill away from their neighborhood.
Rumor, misinformation, dispute and the sheer volume of information all may interact to give an incorrect perception of risk. This
"social amplification" is made worse by incomplete or inaccurate information, poor timing, and other social and political dynamics
in the community.
USEPA, Sites for Our Solid Waste: A Guidebook for Effective Public Involvement, 1990
Page 2-13
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
Planning for
controversy and
mitigation is crucial.
• Present technical information in language for a nontechnical audience.
• Discuss uncertainties and assumptions openly.
Although following these suggestions can help protect the credibility of techni-
cal information, it will not remove all challenges. If you are talking only to a leader-
ship group, do not leave out any key interests. They will come back to haunt you later.
Addressing Negative Impacts, Both Perceived and Real
Some public policy positions in communities, no matter how sensitive to the
concerns for residents, are bound to make some people feel they will be
negatively impacted. Their concerns may be real or perceived. Few projects
today are undertaken without some level of public controversy. If a solid
waste facility is to be successfully sited today, it is necessary to find an imme-
diate and direct means of resolving controversial issues. Planning for mitiga-
tion is a practical component of any solid waste project. Here are a few
principles to follow in thinking about mitigation:
• The affected people want equivalent benefits—the people who experience
impacts expect the attention of local government and may demand an
equivalent share of the benefits of the project to offset the impact.
• The present level of risk is assumed to be zero. Any change in risk will
be perceived as a potentially negative impact because people assume the
present situation is without risk, or at least that risk has already been
taken into account.
• Many mitigation issues are about procedure. When people are not sure
of the impact of a project, they are very concerned with procedural
protection and the credibility of decision makers.
Common concerns about solid waste facilities that may require some
form of mitigation include process issues, health risks, environmental issues,
and local impacts, both perceived and real. Process issues include immediate
access to facility management; representation on the facility's governing
board; funds for independent review of technical studies; funds for a monitor-
ing program. Environmental issues include air pollution, odor/litter, ground
water, noise, dust, visual impact, wetlands protection, and waste flow reduc-
tion. Local impacts include negative neighborhood image/property values,
traffic safety/congestion, and access/safety. There is often debate concerning
whether local impacts, such as the effect of a landfill on property value, are
real or only perceived. The economic impact on the project of funding addi-
tional technical studies or monitoring should be considered and discussed.
Developing an effective program to address impacts on the community
requires careful planning. By carefully planning to address concerns, public
controversy can be reduced significantly, which in turn increases the chances
of successful siting. The basic steps in planning for impacts are
1. Identify the decision making-process for mitigation issues.
2. Identify the mitigation issues likely to arise.
3. Identify concerned segments of the public for each issue.
4. Identify forums for resolving mitigation issues with affected people.
5. Integrate required mitigation activities into the public involvement plan.
Common concerns
requiring mitigation
include
• process issues
• health risks
• environmental impacts
• community impacts.
Evaluating the Effectiveness of the Siting Strategy
Project leaders make important decisions throughout the siting process based
upon their judgment of the effectiveness of specific siting activities. Although
there is no substitute for good judgment, evaluation can be a useful manage-
Page 2-14
-------
CHAPTER 2: FACILITY SITING AND PERMITTING
ment tool to provide timely, cost-effective information that will improve the
effectiveness of major siting activities.
Evaluation is not an easy task. Many of the effects of the siting strategy
Evaluating the process will be difficult to measure; the strategy may succeed for one objective while
helps identify and failing on another. Evaluation may not be able to provide all of the answers,
address problems. but it can provide important feedback.
Evaluation strategies can take different forms, depending on the type of
information collected, the scope of the issues addressed, and the measurement
techniques used. It is important to identify points in the siting process where
evaluation can be most cost effective. People often form opinions at the begin-
ning of the siting process, so it makes sense to pay careful attention to early
siting activities.
Evaluations have different objectives, and several different evaluation
designs are available. Despite differing evaluations, however, the six-step
process outlined below will help develop a solid foundation for improving
most siting strategies.
1. Set goals and objectives.
2. Determine information needs for the evaluation.
3. Collect the information.
4. Analyze the data.
5. Draw conclusions.
6. Review and adjust goals and objectives.
THE PERMITTING PROCESS _
The last step in the facility siting process should be a decision to seek the nec-
essary permits to construct and operate the facility. At this stage, the commu-
Permitting holds nity must seek the approval of regulatory authorities, including one or more
facilities accountable federal, state, and local agencies required by law to insure that proposed
for protecting human projects meet minimum technical and legal criteria. The number of permits
health and the needed for a solid waste management project is determined by local laws and
environmment. the type of waste management facility being planned.
Federal and state agency reviews usually focus on direct facility impacts
such as emissions to air and water, although many states also require an envi-
ronmental impact statement or assessment considering all potential project
impacts. Indirect impacts, such as the project's effect on land use planning or
property values, are normally considered at the local level. In some states, a
local decision or ordinance denying a permit for a solid waste management fa-
cility can be overridden by the state.
The Structure and Goals of the Permitting Process
Permitting ensures that a proposed solid waste management project will not
unduly affect the health and environment of the community and that it will be
consistent with local public policy. To meet this goal, regulatory agencies
must review detailed technical analyses developed and submitted by the
Permitting also project sponsor. Agency reviews compare the details of a proposed project
ensures compliance with minimum criteria set forth as rules in an administrative code or local or-
In addition to internal agency review, the permitting process normally
allows for public input through hearings and submittal and receipt of written
comments. The type and extent of public hearing rights are usually deter-
mined by the law governing the review process. Options range from a limited
right to comment about a proposed activity to the right to request a trial-type
Page 2-1 5
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
The entire permit
proceeding is normally
subject to review by a
court. Completing a
credible technical record
from the inception of the
project is crucial.
proceeding at which evidence is presented and recorded and witnesses testify
under oath and are cross-examined by attorneys.
After internal review with the benefit of public input, the reviewing
agency must develop a written decision awarding a permit or disallowing the
project. Reasons for the decision must be stated. Often, the issuing agency
may grant a permit contingent upon compliance with a set of stated operating
directives attached as permit conditions.
The entire permit proceeding is normally subject to review for correct-
ness by a court. Opponents will usually use court review procedures to at-
tempt to stop the project. To have the best chance of defeating legal chal-
lenges, it is important that a complete and credible technical record be devel-
oped from the inception of the project for presentation before the reviewing
agency and that all procedural requirements and schedules be followed to the
letter. Even successful permitting efforts can take many years and a signifi-
cant commitment of project resources to complete.
Solid Waste Management Activities Requiring Permits
When planning a solid waste management project, it is essential to accurately
determine which permits will be needed for the project. This point cannot be
overemphasized. An oversight concerning a permit can stop a project dead in
its tracks. A schedule for applying for and obtaining permits must be devel-
oped and closely followed to guarantee the best chance of success.
To determine permit needs, consult federal and state regulatory agencies
and local planning agencies early in the siting process. Contact other commu-
nities that have developed similar programs to seek advice. Employing legal
counsel with special expertise in solid waste facility siting and permitting can
also help avoid delays or problems.
It is essential to
accurately determine
which permits are
needed—a permitting
oversight can stop a
project dead in its
tracks.
Efforts at source
reduction may require
new permits or permit
revisions.
Source Reduction Programs
Efforts at source reduction may require new permits or permit revisions for
equipment installed to reduce or capture emissions. If waste formerly emitted
is now collected and stored, a waste storage permit may be needed. Make
sure that the program meets regulations for employee and community right-
to-know and emergency planning.
Recycling
Constructing a materials recovery facility (MRF) will normally require zoning
approvals. To avoid problems, the facility should be characterized as a pro-
cessing center, not a salvage yard or junk yard. A building permit and com-
pliance with local building codes are required. For special circumstances,
such as staffing by developmentally challenged workers, additional permits
may apply.
Trucks transporting recyclable materials may need transport permits. If
materials are to be transported across state lines, the Interstate Commerce
Commission (ICC) should be contacted to determine if permits are needed.
Some states may require permits for operating a recycling center or for certain
facility operations involving emissions to the air or water or requiring solid
waste storage. (Also see Chapter 6, "Recycling.")
Composting
Some states require compost operations to be permitted, especially municipal
solid waste composting and large yard trimmings composting projects. Local
zoning restrictions may also apply. Permits may also be needed for land applica-
tion of yard trimmings or finished compost. (Also see Chapter 7, "Composting.")
Page 2-16
-------
CHAPTER 2: FACILITY SITING AND PERMITTING
WTE plants usually
require a variety of
permits and zoning and
building approvals.
Waste-to-Energy
Like a large materials recovery facility, a waste-to-energy plant is a major con-
struction project, usually requiring a variety of zoning and building approv-
als. Air emissions, solid waste storage, and water pollution discharge permits
may be needed depending upon facility type and design. Permits for hauling
ash may also be required. (Also see Chapter 8, "Combustion.")
Landfilling
States now require that landfills be permitted. A zoning variance or rezoning
may also be necessary. Some local governments also have permitting require-
ments for landfills. (Also see Chapter 9, "Land Disposal.")
Collection and Transport
Solid waste haulers usually need a permit from either the state or local gov-
ernment, or from both.
REFERENCES
National Research Council. 1989. Improving Risk Communication. Washington,
D.C.: National Academy Press.
USEPA. 1990. Sites for Our Solid Waste: A Guidebook for Effective Public
Involvement. March.
USEPA. 1988. Seven Cardinal Rules of Risk Communication. April.
Page 2-17
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
Page 2-18
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.
No matter which waste management approach, or combination of
approaches, a community decides to adopt, a variety of data must be
collected and analyzed before the program can be implemented.
The community's goals and the scope of the program must be set.
The community must also understand its current and future waste
generation profile in order to plan and finance an efficient and
economical program.
Reliable information will allow the community to accurately
budget for program needs, make it possible to design appropriately
sized program facilities, and allow the community to better assess
the program's success after it is implemented.
This chapter discusses techniques for applying all of the
accepted options for preventing the generation of municipal waste
or properly managing the materials that are generated.
4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.
From: Decision Maker's Guide to Solid Waste Management, Volume II, (EPA 530-R-95-023), 1995.
Project Co-Directors: Philip R. O'Leary and Patrick W. Walsh, Solid and Hazardous Waste Education
Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison/Extension. This document was supported in part by the
Office of Solid Waste (5306), Municipal and Industrial Solid Waste Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency under grant number CX-817119-01. The material in this document has been
subject to Agency technical and policy review and approved for publication as an EPA report.
Mention of trade names, products, or services does not convey, and should not be interpreted as
conveying, official EPA approval, endorsement, or recommendation.
Page 3-1
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
Determining goals is Communities should begin planning for new or continuing source reduction and
the first step—source waste management programs by first discussing the goals it is trying to achieve. A
reduction should key goal should be source reduction which will eliminate the need to manage corn-
always be included. munity waste. There are also many other valid goals; these include complying with
, 2 *•, state and federal law, protecting the environment, providing local business and job
^' ' opportunities, and saving resources. By defining goals, the community can better
determine the type of program it wants.
Characterizing the Developing a successful waste management program requires accurate up-to-date
community's waste is a information about the community's waste profile—what types of waste are gener-
crucial step. ated, in what quantities, and how much of it can realistically be prevented through
/ 24 35) source reduction and collected for recycling.
The type of waste management program being considered will help determine the
degree of detail needed in the waste characterization study. Source reduction and
landfill projects require only gross waste volume from estimates. Recycling and
waste-to-energy projects require accurate predictions of waste quantities and com-
position.
Several methods for
characterizing waste
are available.
(p. 3-5 — 3-9)
Modelling Techniques: Modelling techniques use generic waste generation rates
and other information. They are inexpensive but provide only a general idea of waste
volumes and types. Three aspects of modelling techniques are described in this
chapter: generic weight generation data, generation rates for recyclables, and landfill
volume estimates.
Physical Separation Techniques: Physical techniques are more accurate than mod-
elling techniques, but are also more expensive and time-consuming. Such tech-
niques sample the community's waste stream to develop a waste profile. Three
sampling techniques are discussed in this chapter: quartering, block, and grid.
Direct Measurement Techniques: If done correctly, pilot studies can provide accu-
rate volume estimates. Some communities are also weighing and characterizing the
actual waste stream as it is collected. Bar code monitoring is another technique that
provides highly accurate estimates of recyclable materials; such systems, however,
are costly.
Estimating the amount
of waste generation
that can be prevented
through source
reduction or recycling
is essential.
(p. 3_g_3_io)
It is unrealistic to assume that a community can completely prevent waste generation
or recycle all the waste in its program. Even when waste characterization studies
yield highly accurate information, some further estimate must be made of the actual
percentage of material that the community can expect to collect. A variety of factors
must be considered:
Does your community have public or private collection?
Does your community have businesses or industries that use private collection?
Are there large numbers of residents who recycle on their own? Are there bottle
deposit laws?
Are there local ordinances (allowing residential burning, etc.) that may impact
volumes?
Page 3-2
-------
CHAPTERS: DEVELOPING A WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM: FACTORS TO CONSIDER
The U.S. Supreme
Court struck down a
local flow control
ordinance in May 1994.
(p. 3-10)
In May 1994, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a local flow control ordinance
that required all solid wastes to be processed at a designated transfer station before
being sent out of the municipality. In C&A Carbone, inc. v. Town ofClarkstown, the
Court found that the flow control ordinance violated the Commerce Clause of the
Constitution because it deprived competitors, including out-of-state businesses, of
access to the local waste processing market.
The flow control debate
has caused many cities
to use alternative
financing methods.
(p. 3-10)
As a result of the continuing debate over the use of flow control, many cities are us-
ing alternative methods to finance programs. Methods include the following:
municipal collection in which the city can set tipping fees at publicly owned or
financed facilities at noncompetitive prices
taxes (property, income, sale of goods or services)
user fees or surcharges.
Estimating future waste
generation is also
crucial.
(p. 3-11)
Some waste management alternatives, such as waste-to-energy, rely on a steady
supply of material over long periods of time, up to 20 years or more. The two most
important trends to investigate are population and public policy changes. Legisla-
tively mandated recycling and composting programs can reduce waste volumes sig-
nificantly. Caution is essential in sizing facilities—an oversized facility can bring eco-
nomic disaster. Waste composition changes are also important.
Consider the following
factors when
organizing a waste
management program.
(p. 3_14_3_16)
Establishing a waste management program is a lengthy and complex process; the
following considerations are crucial to long-term success.
formulating and following a well-devised and comprehensive plan
basing decisions on sound economic analysis
keeping public participation rates high over a number of years requires an
ongoing education and publicity plan
acquiring and maintaining political support should be an ongoing effort
many waste management projects take from five to ten years to implement. The
ultimate key to success is the will to persevere—the thousands of successful
programs underway nationwide attest to this.
Page 3-3
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
DEVELOPING THE NECESSARY INFORMATION BASE
Identify Goals and Scope of the Program
Defining goals early
facilitates later decision
making.
Every community should begin planning for new or continuing source reduc-
tion and waste management programs by first discussing the goals it is trying
to achieve. A key goal should be source reduction which will eliminate the
need to manage community waste. There are also many other valid goals;
these include complying with state and federal law, protecting the environ-
ment, providing local business and job opportunities, and saving resources.
By defining goals, the community can better determine the type of program it
wants.
For example, if a community is interested only in the economic benefits
of a recycling program, it may choose to recycle only the most cost-effective
items, such as aluminum. Items that are more costly to collect or have low
market prices such as plastic may be excluded from the program. On the
other hand, if a community's goal is to preserve landfill space and conserve re-
sources, the community may decide to strongly support source reduction and
to collect a larger variety of items, even if collecting some materials results in
higher unit costs. Defining community goals up front will make later deci-
sions about program scope and degree of economic commitment easier.
Once goals are determined, the scope of the intended program must be
defined. Will the program be community wide? Will a regional approach
cover all sectors, including residential, commercial, and industrial sectors? By
answering these questions, the proposed program will be put into focus. De-
fining program scope will help develop program organization and ensure
waste characterization analyses are useful and cost effective.
Characterize Quantity and Composition of Material
Successful program
planning depends on
reliable information
about quantities, types,
and how much material
can be captured.
The cornerstone of successful planning for a waste management program is
reliable information about the quantity and type of material being generated
and how much of that material collection program managers can expect to
prevent or capture. Without a good idea of the quantities that can be ex-
pected, decisions about equipment and space needs, facilities, markets, and
personnel cannot be reliably made. This also identifies large weight and vol-
ume waste items to target for source reduction and recycling programs and
gives baseline data for assessing whether goals were achieved.
Depending on the size of the program and the resources available to the
community, there are a variety of waste characterization techniques that can
Page 3-4
-------
CHAPTER 3: DEVELOPING A WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM: FACTORS TO CONSIDER
To plan successfully,
know your community's
waste stream:
• types of waste
• amounts of each
• "capturable"
quantities.
be used. First, there are modelling techniques that apply generic waste gen-
eration rates and other community features to predict the waste quantities and
types. These techniques are inexpensive and can provide a general idea of the
quantities and types of waste expected for a program just starting up.
More accurate in describing the waste stream, but also more expensive
and time consuming to implement, are the physical separation techniques.
These techniques sample the community waste stream itself, using statistically
significant sampling techniques to determine a community waste generation
profile. Depending on community goals, both have a place in developing an
effective waste management program. Some form of waste characterization
estimate is crucial to program success, because later decisions will be based on
this information.
The waste management option being considered will help determine the
degree of detail needed from the waste characterization study. For a landfill
project, only gross waste volume estimates are needed to help determine
space needs. This is also true of estimating yard waste volumes for a windrow
composting program. For these types of management strategies, generic and
historically based waste generation rates may provide acceptable accuracy.
For other alternatives accurate predictions of waste volumes and compo-
sition are crucial to long-term program success. Accurate characterization will
allow certain waste to be targeted for source reduction efforts. Many facets of
a recycling program, including the size of a material recovery facility, the vol-
ume of recyclable material to be sold, and equipment and personnel require-
ments for collection are dependent on accurate characterization of the waste
stream. For a waste-to-energy project, both sizing the facility and calculating
the quantity of energy that the facility will generate are based on characteriz-
ing waste volume and type. In the long term, the quantity of waste available
for the facility will be affected by other options, including source reduction,
recycling and composting. Inaccuracies in waste characterization studies for
these alternatives can severely and negatively impact the economic viability of
the program.
When determining which composition technique to use, the costs of gather-
ing the necessary data should be compared with the limits of precision needed to
make reliable estimates. Future community trends, such as population growth,
must also be considered in developing a waste characterization profile.
MODELLING TECHNIQUES
Generic Weight Generation Data
Recent USEPA
projections suggest that
Americans generate 4
pounds/person/day (see
Table 3-1).
For residential waste, the multiplier is usually pounds of waste generated per per-
son per day. This can be estimated from previous records if the population and
weight of refuse are known. If not, a weighing program may be necessary to de-
termine if refuse weights can be obtained for a known population. Typical figures
for the United States are 2.5 to 3.5 pounds/person/day for residential waste.
More recent USEPA projections suggest that Americans generate 4 pounds/per-
son/day with the generation rate expected to increase (see Table 3-1). Once the
multiplier is developed, population projections can be used to project tonnages.
However, projections of waste volume using average rates should not be used for
planning specific facilities.
The trend in the per capita generation rate is not clear: Table 3-1 predicts
that the rate is increasing at about 5 percent per year, while other projections
indicate no increase. Many communities are making significant efforts at
waste reduction. Unless there is information to the contrary, it is best to as-
sume no change in the generation rate and to develop future projections based
on population projections alone.
Page 3-5
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Table 3-1
Projected Per Capita Generation of Municipal Solid Waste by Material,
(in pounds per person per
day — generation
before materials
or energy
1980-2000*
recovery)
Material
Paper and paperboard
Glass
Metals
Plastics
Rubber and leather
Textiles
Wood
Other
Total nonfood products
Food scraps
Yard trimmings
Miscellaneous inorganic wastes
Total MSW generated
1980
1.32
0.36
0.35
0.19
0.10
0.06
0.16
0.07
2.62
0.32
0.66
0.05
3.65
1990
1.60
0.29
0.36
0.39
0.13
0.13
0.27
0.07
3.23
0.29
0.77
0.06
4.35
1993
1.65
0.29
0.36
0.43
0.13
0.11
0.29
0.07
3.34
0.29
0.70
0.06
4.39
2000
1.77
0.28
0.38
0.47
0.15
0.10
0.32
0.07
3.54
0.28
0.44
0.07
4.32
'"Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: USEPA. Characterization of Municipal Solid
Waste in the United States: 1994 Update
Generation Rates For Specific Waste Types
Generation rates used
must correspond to the
community.
For specific waste types a general estimate of the tonnage available can be ob-
tained by multiplying the local community population by a generic generation
rate (see Table 3-2). Care must be taken to determine that the generic rate is
applicable to the community. If available, use composition data from a study
of a community located in the same region as the target community. Even
when using generic data, unique local features, such as a community being lo-
cated in a tourist area with many restaurants and bars and a higher seasonal
population, should be taken into account. Seasonal variations in waste gen-
eration and the contribution of commercial and institutional facilities should
also be considered.
Table 3-2
Recyclable Household Waste
Recyclable Household Wastes (pounds per
Newspaper
Metal
Appliances
Clear glass
Colored glass
Plastic containers
Motor oil
Food scraps & yard trimmings
Leaves
Reindl, J. "Source Separation Recycling'
Urban
75-125
60-75
20-25
40-60
25-40
6
1/2 Gallon
100-250
Unknown
(unpublished, 1983)
person per year)
Rural
50
50-75
20-25
40
25
6
1/2 Gallon
100-250
Unknown
Page 3-6
-------
CHAPTER 3: DEVELOPING A WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM: FACTORS TO CONSIDER
Getting accurate
estimates requires
knowledge of local and
regional conditions.
Where the community is served by a landfill with a scale, generic waste
composition data can be applied to determine the amounts of recyclables
available (see Figure 3-1). This estimate too must be carefully scrutinized to
take into account local conditions. For small- or medium-sized communities,
where a percent or two of difference either way is not important, using actual
weight data and multiplying by percentage data may provide a good initial
estimate. With this method as well, special regional characteristics should be
noted and taken into account to help fit the estimate to local conditions. For
this method, it is important to know the types of waste accepted at the landfill.
If the landfill accepts special large-volume wastes, such as power plant ash or
foundry sand, the accuracy of weight-based estimates may be questionable,
since the waste profile of the landfill will not reflect the generic averages.
Figure 3-1
Landfill Volume of Materials in MSW, 1993 (in percent of total)
food
glass
aluminum 2.2% others
2.4%
1.4%
Source: USEPA. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1994 Update
Landfill Volume Estimates
For landfills lacking a
scale, only rough
estimates can be
obtained by counting
trucks arriving at the
landfill and estimating
the volume in each truck.
For a community with a landfill that lacks a scale, a very rough estimate of the
total volume of waste generated can be obtained by counting the number of
trucks arriving at the landfill and multiplying the number by an estimate of
the volume in each truck. This figure can then be multiplied by composition
data to further estimate the expected quantity of various waste types, if neces-
sary. The uncertainty inherent in this technique is great, because of the hetero-
geneous nature of municipal solid waste. Also, to take into account the vari-
ability of the waste stream throughout the year, the volume analysis would
have to be performed a number of times during the year to improve its reli-
ability. For specific projects, this approach would not provide an acceptable
degree of accuracy.
Page 3-7
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
PHYSICAL TECHNIQUES
Sampling Techniques
Sampling techniques use statistical methods to predict total waste stream
quantity and composition by analyzing small volumes. Each technique at-
Sampling techniques use tempts to obtain a representative, random sample of the waste stream. For
statistical methods to full-scale characterization, the physical techniques should be performed at
predict total waste least four times over the course of a year, to take into account seasonal varia-
s ream quan i y an ^Qn Lj^ewise for eacn sarrlpiing point, care should be taken to ensure that
analvzina small results are not skewed by seasonal events. For example, the week after Christ-
volumes mas, the percentage of paper from wrapping is much higher than normal.
• Quartering technique: This technique can be used to sample a truck
load or a group of truck loads of waste. When sampling a community, it
is useful to choose a group of refuse trucks from various neighborhoods.
By sampling a representative grouping of trucks, the community as a
whole can be characterized better.
For each truck, unload an agreed upon quantity of waste in a cleared
area at the disposal site or transfer station. Mix the various collections of
waste thoroughly with a front end loader. Rake the sample into quarters
For accurate estimates, anc| j^^ agajn thoroughly. Continue quartering the sample and mixing
samp e our imes in a until a representative sample weighing greater than 200 pounds is
year, avoidinq seasonal , , r™ , , ,,,, u-uj j * j • ± -^
„ ,-, .X. - generated. 1 he sample should then be weighed and separated into its
events like Christmas. & ^ , , ,, , , ,, , , ,
components, hach recyclable category should be weighed and compared
with the total.
• Block technique: The block technique can be used instead of the quar-
tering technique when mixing a group of samples might be difficult.
Using this technique, the load samples of refuse are dumped in a clear
area, but rather than mixing the loads, the sampling team chooses what it
deems to be a representative sample from the loads. The representative
sample is then separated and characterized. The accuracy of this tech-
nique is highly dependent on the ability of the sampling team to define a
representative sample.
• Grid technique: In this technique, the floor of a transfer station or a
cleared area of a landfill is divided into equal size squares, with each
square assigned a number and letter code for identification. Waste is
unloaded onto the grid and mixed with approximately equal quantities
of waste placed in each square. Waste characteristics are then deter-
mined for a set number of grid squares and compared with the weight or
volume of the entire load.
DIRECT MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES
Conducting a pilot study can provide information concerning the type and
volume of material generated in the community. Different collection methods
A pilot study can provide can ^e testec[ to determine comparative participation and generation rates.
information about the ^ , ,, , , ,. ,, ., , .V , ,. , ,.,, ,
, , , Data collected Irom the pilot may provide an accurate estimate ol the volume
type and volume of . ^ •<- -A -t • ,- r ,- A
material Generated in the material expected Irom a community-wide program il care is taken to de-
community s^8n the program to represent the demographics of the community and to
publicize the program in the target neighborhood.
Increasingly, communities are also developing methods of weighing and
characterizing the actual waste stream collected from a community. A num-
ber of American communities with volume-based fee systems now use bar-
Page 3-8
-------
CHAPTER 3: DEVELOPING A WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM: FACTORS TO CONSIDER
Several communities
with volume-based fee
systems use bar-code
monitoring to determine
the weight and type of
materials collected from
each generator.
code monitoring to determine the weight and type of materials collected from
each generator in the community for billing purposes. The city of Seattle is ex-
perimenting with the bar-code system and hopes to initiate a weight-based
charge system for its waste management program. Other programs, including
St. Louis Park, Minnesota, and Fitchburg, Wisconsin, are using the bar-code
system to determine the types of materials collected and participation rates.
In recycling programs bar-code systems yield highly accurate waste character-
ization information, but have been criticized for being costly, slow to imple-
ment, and unnecessary (see Table 3-3). If more large communities move to
weight-based charging systems, bar-code monitoring may become a more ac-
cepted method for determining waste characterization.
Table 3-3
Advantages and Disadvantages of Bar-Code Monitoring
Advantages
Disadvantages
Provides more reliable participation
figures than route auditing with hand
counters.
• Can be cost efficient, over the long term.
Helps increase participation when used
with reward system; can also be used
with penalty system.
Enables targeting of nonparticipants for
education and promotion programs.
• Gauges effectiveness of advertising.
• Allows crews to enter additional informa-
tion, such as types of materials.
• Allows managers to keep better track of
crews.
• Makes efficient routing easier.
Source: T. Watson
Capital costs can be significant.
Implementation is often difficult.
Can increase collection time.
Possible resistance from crews be-
cause of increased hassle, reduced
freedom.
Possible resistance from customers
because of "Big Brother is watching
me" perception.
ESTIMATING THE PERCENTAGE OF MATERIAL THAT MUST BE MANAGED
It would be unrealistic to assume a community can capture or prevent all the
waste in its program. This is especially true for recycling. Even when waste
characterization studies yield highly accurate information, some further esti-
mate must be made of the actual percentage of material that the community
can expect to collect. A variety of factors must be considered.
Legal Control Over Waste Materials
Private collection and
other factors affect
amounts of recyclables.
For communities that have public collection, control of waste materials may
not be a problem. However, many communities are served by private haulers
who usually control the waste after it is collected. Even in communities with
public pickup, businesses and institutions may be served by private haulers.
Some of these businesses, such as restaurants and food stores, may produce
large volumes of high-quality recyclables or combustibles that the community
may want to capture for its program (see Table 3-4). Unless legal control can
be obtained over a certain waste type, it should not be included in the
community's plans.
Page 3-9
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
The U.S. Supreme Court
struck down a local flow
control ordinance, which
required all waste to be
sent to a designated
facility.
Many cities are using
alternative methods of
financing as a result of
the flow control
controversy.
Some private haulers are happy to use a local community facility because
using a local facility reduces transport costs or means the hauler does not have
to find acceptable markets for the recoverable materials. However, many
hauling companies around the country are now offering waste processing ser-
vices to customers and are constructing recycling centers and compost sites of
their own. Or, a community considering a recycling or waste-to-energy pro-
gram may already have a nonprofit or private recycling operation in its area.
If the community attempts to take over the waste stream, the viability of the
existing public and private programs may be jeopardized. Exploring coopera-
tive arrangements with existing recycling programs is recommended.
On May 16, 1994, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a local flow con-
trol ordinance that required all solid wastes to be processed at a designated
transfer station before being sent out of the municipality. In C&A Carbone, Inc.
v. Town of Clarkstown, the Court found that the flow control ordinance violated
the Commerce Clause of the Constitution because it deprived competitors, in-
cluding out-of-state businesses, of access to the local waste processing market.
As a result of the continuing debate over the use of flow control, a num-
ber of cities have opted for alternative methods to finance their solid waste
systems. Methods include municipal collection in which the city can set tip-
ping fees at publicly owned or financed facilities at a noncompetitive price
and thereby subsidize other municipal solid waste programs and services,
taxes (property, income, sale of goods or services), and user fees or surcharges.
In considering alternative financing mechanisms, local governments
should carefully weigh options against the adequacy of revenue in terms of
revenue-raising potential and consistency and in terms of reliability over time,
equity, political feasibility, administrative ease, and impact on innovation.
Table 3-4
Recyclable Material in
Waste component
Paper
Newspaper
Corrugated
High grade white
Mixed recyclable
Nonrecyclable
Plastic
PET(1)
HOPE (2)
Other
Glass
Container
Nonrecyclable glass
Metal
Aluminum cans
Tin/steel cans
Other ferrous
Other non-ferrous
Organics
Food waste
Yard debris and wood
Other
Totals
Source: Washington State
and Waste Stream Survey,
the Commercial Waste Stream
Retail trade
41.5
2.9
22.0
1.4
10.3
4.9
12.0
0.1
0.0
11.9
2.5
2.3
0.2
20.5
0.2
0.2
19.5
0.6
18.8
8.1
10.7
4.7
100.0
Department of Ecology.
1987
Restaurant
36.6
2.5
15.6
0.0
4.4
14.1
13.7
0.0
0.1
3.6
5.9
5.9
0.1
4.9
0.5
3.8
0.4
0.2
36.6
36.0
0.6
2.3
100.0
(by type
Office
64.2
3.6
11.5
0.6
29.0
9.5
4.3
0.1
0.0
4.2
3.9
2.9
1.0
2.9
0.5
0.2
2.2
0.0
10.8
3.0
7.8
13.9
100.0
of business,
School
47.8
3.3
11.6
6.3
21.6
5.0
5.1
0.1
0.0
5.0
3.2
1.0
2.2
5.8
0.8
0.2
3.7
1.1
35.0
14.0
21.0
3.1
100.0
in percent)
Gov't
53.8
6.7
8.4
7.2
25.0
6.5
3.5
0.1
0.0
3.4
2.7
2.4
0.3
9.8
0.5
0.4
8.6
0.3
23.2
32.0
20.0
7.0
100.0
Best Management Practices for Solid Waste: Recycling
Page 3-10
-------
CHAPTER 3: DEVELOPING A WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM: FACTORS TO CONSIDER
Personal Waste Management
For some recyclables, especially aluminum cans, personal recycling may sig-
nificantly reduce the volume available to the community program. A state
beverage container deposit law will also reduce available volumes of alumi-
num, glass, and perhaps plastic. For other recyclables, such as newsprint, per-
sonal recycling may not be a factor.
As costs rise, many rural residents may manage wastes using burn bar-
rels. Some residents may choose to not pick up grass clippings or other yard
waste. Local ordinances may influence these practices.
To determine volumes, In determining program volumes, therefore, the impact of personal
consider carefully the source reduction and recycling on the quantity of materials economically
impact of personal available to the community should be considered. Because price paid to indi-
source reduction and viduals for recyclables can impact personal recycling to a significant degree,
" "' some prediction of market conditions for recyclables should be made in mak-
ing this determination.
ESTIMATING FUTURE WASTE GENERATION
As alternatives for managing or preventing waste are investigated, it is impor-
tant to make an attempt to accurately predict future trends in community
waste generation. While this may be difficult, it is crucial to long-term pro-
gram viability. Some alternatives, such as constructing a waste-to-energy fa-
cility, are financed based on a 20-year facility life. A drastic drop in waste de-
livered to a facility of this type could have severe economic consequences for
the community that owns it.
The two most important trends that should be investigated are popula-
tion and public policy changes. Population trends are usually monitored care-
fully. Some realistic prediction of the rate at which the community population
is changing should be made.
Accurate estimates of Public policy shifts can quickly change the quantity and type of waste
population trends and materials available to support a given option. For example, constructing a
future public policy landfill or waste-to-energy facility without considering the possible impact of
decisions are crucial. a trend toward legislatively mandated source reduction, recycling and com-
posting programs could be risky. If there is great uncertainty, conservatism in
sizing the facility is warranted. Facilities can usually be expanded. Oversizing
a waste-to-energy facility, on the other hand, can be an economic disaster.
Changes in the composition of the waste stream should also be noted. Esti-
mates developed by Franklin and Associates for the USEPA predict growth in
plastics packaging and a decline in glass packaging between the years 1995 and
2010 (see Table 3-5). While generic estimates are difficult to apply locally, these
predictions should be considered when planning the program.
Statewide waste composition projections can also assist future planning.
Table 3-6 sets forth recycling projections for the state of New Jersey through
the year 1995. New Jersey communities can use this information to set goals
and perform planning to keep pace with statewide waste management efforts.
Gauging Program Participation and Effectiveness
Determining waste prevention rates participation rates, diversion percentages,
c I t- ff (- waste energy values, and other program parameters over the long term is nec-
is crucial especially in essary to properly evaluate program progress. Some states now require corn-
states with source munities to meet specified percentages for source reduction and recycling. Re-
reduction and recycling liably calculating these parameters is difficult, however.
mandates. Defining which materials to count in the calculation can present a major
problem. Some states include junked autos and yard trimmings in waste di-
verted for recycling. Others do not. The first step in developing a procedure
Page 3-11
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Table 3-5
Projections of Materials Generated* in the Municipal Waste Stream, 1 993
(In thousands of tons and percent of total generation)
Thousands of Tons
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
Lood Wastes
Yard Trimmings
1993
77,840
13,670
12,930
2,970
1,240
77,740
19,300
6,220
6,130
13,690
3,300
757,290
13,800
32,800
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes 3,050
Total Other Wastes
Total MS W Generated
49,650
206,940
2000
89,340
14,020
14,220
3,425
1,395
79,040
22,490
7,610
6,200
16,010
3,540
178,250
14,000
22,200"
3,300
39,500
277,750
and 2000
% of Total Generation
1993
37.6%
6.6%
6.2%
1.4%
0.6%
8.3%
9.3%
3.0%
3.0%
6.6%
1.6%
76.0%
6.7%
15.9%
1.5%
24.0%
700.0%
2000
41 .0%
6.4%
6.5%
1.6%
0.6%
8.7%
10.3%
3.5%
2.8%
7.4%
1.6%
81.9%
6.4%
10.2%
1.5%
18.1%
700.0%
'Generation before materials recovery or combustion
"This scenario assumes a 32.3% reduction of yard trimmings.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: USEPA, Characterization
of Municipal Solid
Waste in the United States:
7994 Update
Page 3-12
-------
CHAPTER 3: DEVELOPING A WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM: FACTORS TO CONSIDER
Table 3-6 New Jersey Statewide Recycling Projections: Five-Year Rate (in thousands of tons/year)
Materials
Yard waste
Food waste
Newspapers
Corrugated
Office paper
Other paper
Plastic containers
Other plastic packaging
Other plastic scrap
Glass containers10
Other glass
Aluminum cans'
Foils and closures
Other aluminum scrap12
Vehicular batteries
Other non-ferrous scrap
Tin and bi-metal cans
White goods and sheet iron
Junked autoslj
Heavy iron
Wood waste
Asphalt, concrete and
masonry
Tires
Other municipal and
vegetative
Other bulky and
constructive demolition
Totals
Total %
Waste
Stream1
10%
5%
5%
6%
2%
10%
1%
1%
3%
3%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
1%
2%
4%
7%
9%
16%
1%
4%
7%
100%
Total
1990
Generation2
1,420
681
717
841
359
1,484
169
177
457
366
79
43
22
60
40
55
122
340
625
1,037
1,232
2,311
141
631
946
14,355
Current Status
Rate
(%)3 Tonnage4
49% 699
9% 63
66% 472
50% 417
59% 210
0% 0
1% 2
0% 0
0% 2
53% 193
0% 0
44% 1 9
0% 0
55% 33
93% 37
60% 33
1 8% 22
62% 211
99% 619
100% 1033
1 1 % 1 33
82% 1 ,884
13% 18
4% 27
0% 0
43% 6,128
Total
1995
Generation5
1,458
700
737
864
368
1,525
174
182
469
376
81
44
22
62
41
56
125
349
642
1,071
1,265
2,374
145
648
972
14,750
Projected '95 Goal
Rate
(%)6 Tonnage7
90% 1,312
10% 70
85% 626
85% 734
85% 313
20% 305
60% 104
25% 45
1 0% 47
90% 338
0% 0
90% 40
0% 0
80% 49
95% 39
95% 54
85% 1 06
90% 314
99% 636
99% 1 ,061
75% 949
90% 2,136
30% 43
1 0% 65
10% 97
64% 9,485
1995 Residue
Tonnage8 % Total9
146 3%
630 12%
110 2%
130 2%
55 1%
1 ,220 23%
69 1 %
136 3%
422 8%
38 1%
81 2%
4 0%
22 0%
1 2 0%
2 0%
3 0%
1 9 0%
35 1%
6 0%
1 1 0%
316 6%
237 4%
101 2%
583 11%
875 17%
5,265 100%
Footnotes
(1) Calculated by dividing the 1 991 generation tonnage for each material by the total tonnage figure of 1 4,355.
(2) Tonnages derived following the estimation of the percent of the waste stream made up by each material. These percentage estimates were
taken from national figures prepared by Franklin Associates Ltd. from the report entitled "Export Markets for Post Consumer Secondary
Materials," from values of the 1 8 waste characterization studies done by the New Jersey counties or from the values of four bulky waste
analysis studies performed by New Jersey counties. These percentages were then multiplied by the municipal and/or bulky waste stream totals
from the Baseline 1 991 Generation Table. In some cases, tonnage estimates were obtained directly from industry sources.
(3) Current recycling rates, which represent documented activity for calendar year 1 989, were calculated by dividing the reported tonnage figure by
the total 1991 generation estimates of each material.
(4) Most current tonnages were actual documented figures from the 1 989 Recycling Tonnage Grants Program. In a few cases, particularly with glass
containers, the metals categories, and asphalt, concrete and masonry, numbers were received directly from industry sources documenting activity in 1 989.
(5) 1 995 generation estimates based exclusively on projected overall population of 4.7% by county from the New Jersey Department of Labor
economic demographic model. No per capita change or source reduction assumed.
(6) Projected 1 995 recycling percentages represent the goals or targets established by material from the Emergency Solid Waste Assessment Task
Force and presented within their August 6, 1990, Final Report.
(7) Projected 1 995 tonnage calculated by multiplying the est mated recycling percentage of the total 1 995 generation figure by material.
(8) 1 995 residue calculated by subtracting the projected 1 995 recycling tonnage from the 1 995 total generation figure by material.
(9) This column represents an estimate of the percentage of 1 995 generation residue made up by each material. The calculation was derived by
dividing the 1 995 residue tonnage of each material by the total residue tonnage of 5,265.
(1 0) Glass containers figures derived primarily from the Glass Packaging Institute container generation estimates for 1 989.
(1 1) Based on ALCOA generation estimate of 1 1 Ibs. per capita per year.
(1 2) Based on NJ Auto and Metal Recycling Association generation estimate.
(1 3) Junked autos recycling rates are exclusive of shredder fluff. Source; New Jersey Department of Environmenta| Protection
Page 3-13
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
An overly broad
definition of
participation rates can
result in cost
inefficiency and lower-
than-predicted volumes.
for judging program progress is to develop program definitions and stick with
them. Contact your state for guidance.
Participation rates should be carefully defined, because they can be mis-
leading. For example, some recycling programs claim high participation rates,
but some residents included in those rates contribute only one type of recy-
clable or participate infrequently. While high participation rate calculations
are politically attractive, an overly broad definition of participation can result
in cost inefficiency and lower-than-predicted volumes of material collected. A
participation rate that counts regular participation in the entire collection pro-
gram could provide a more accurate estimate for program assessment pur-
poses.
Using defined parameters, a data collection system can be devised. For
most communities, simply weighing waste loads at the landfill may not pro-
vide enough information. Simple data collection using log sheets or mechani-
cal counters can be used if set-out rate, number of loads, and material weight
are the only types of information wanted. Some communities use a computer-
ized data collection system consisting of a hand-held computer and personal
computer with spreadsheet software to collect more detailed program infor-
mation. As stated earlier, pilots using bar coding and weighing waste from in-
dividual generators are in progress around the country.
The data collected can then be used to develop a profile consisting of
participation rates, wastes types and volumes generated, quantities and per-
centages of compostables, recyclables and burnables actually captured, and
other important information source reduction can be tracked. Cost efficiency
of collection and processing and educational needs can also be assessed.
ORGANIZING A WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
The process of establishing a waste management program is lengthy and com-
plex. As the process moves along and problems arise, it is easy to get bogged
down in the everyday details of program implementation. Frequently, an im-
mediate problem can take precedence and seemingly overshadow all other
considerations. Although the need to break a complex problem into small,
workable units is human nature, the "big picture" must always be kept
in focus.
As a community moves toward program implementation, managers
must constantly remind themselves to keep the overall program in perspec-
tive. By viewing the project as a whole, no individual element will be given
too much or too little attention. Program momentum will be sustained at a
slow, but steady, pace. Issues that can delay or derail a program will be recog-
nized and dealt with. Public support will be fostered and confidence in the
ability of the community to successfully implement a program will grow.
To keep a waste management program in its proper perspective, atten-
tion must be given to the five "Ps"; that is, planning, price, publicity, politics,
and perseverance. By always remembering the five Ps, program developers
will give their programs the greatest chance of succeeding. Conversely, if any
one of the Ps is ignored or forgotten, the program has a great chance of failing.
Each of these issues is discussed briefly below.
Successful organization
focuses on the 5 "Ps":
• Planning
• Price
• Publicity
• Politics
• Perseverence
Planning
Although it may seem obvious that planning is needed to implement a suc-
cessful program, in practice, the need to formulate and follow a well-devised
and comprehensive plan is sometimes forgotten. A leaking landfill or other
waste management problem may pressure a community to act quickly; hasty
actions cause mistakes, which in turn result in delays and wasted resources.
While all possible situations cannot be anticipated, many good models based
Page 3-14
-------
CHAPTER 3: DEVELOPING A WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM: FACTORS TO CONSIDER
Planning is especially
important because of the
large number of actors
involved with a waste
management program.
on successful programs do exist, and program developers are encouraged to
use them when possible to formulate their own programs.
For example, in waste-to-energy projects, a number of communities have
run into trouble because financing expertise was not brought into the planning
process early enough. After significant resources were committed to technical
analysis, the capital markets were consulted only to reveal that the technical
information compiled and recommendations made were inadequate to pro-
vide proper support to obtain capital financing. As a result, the technical
analysis had to be redone, which added cost and delay to the project.
Planning is especially important because of the potentially large number
of actors in the waste management process. Political bodies, waste generators,
waste haulers, regulatory agencies, construction contractors, plant operators,
energy and material buyers, landfill site owners, and citizens must all be in-
cluded for a program to be successful. Each group has the potential for delay-
ing or derailing a project. By formulating and continually reviewing a project
plan, program managers can minimize the chances that a major component of
the program will be missed.
Price
Each management
approach carries a price
tag. Comparing costs
and benefits before
acting is essential to
long-term success.
Decisions regarding the adoption of alternative strategies for managing waste
must continually be based on sound economic analysis that considers the re-
sources of the community and the anticipated environmental impacts and
benefits. The community is usually willing to support higher cost waste man-
agement options as long as there is confidence that the program is well run,
economically efficient, and environmentally sound. Each management ap-
proach carries a price tag. Comparing costs and benefits before action is es-
sential to long-term success.
Publicity
Program support can
erode quickly. Ongoing
publicity efforts to
maintain strong, positive
public support are
crucial.
Successfully implementing a waste management program can take a number
of years and a commitment of community resources worth many millions of
dollars. While the decision to pursue a certain option is often met with great
fanfare, support for a program can erode quickly unless attention is given to
keeping the program on the public agenda and maintaining strong and posi-
tive public support. A plan for informing the public about the program's
progress should be developed and implemented as the program proceeds.
Special effort should be made to generate public support before public bodies
vote on program expenditures. The program must be seen by the public as
something to be proud of, as an example of the progressiveness of the commu-
nity and its commitment to a clean environment.
Politics
Political support is
crucial to obtain
financing and ensure the
program gets the
resources needed to
construct facilities and
operate them efficiently.
As with publicity, sustaining political support during the long and costly
implementation process is vital to the program's ultimate success. When local
government budgets are tight, a program may not survive the budget cutter's
knife unless there is continuing, strong political support. Political support is
often crucial to obtaining financing and ensuring that the program gets the re-
sources needed to construct facilities and operate them efficiently. Political
leaders should also be kept informed of the program's progress on a regular
basis so that political support for the program grows as the decision-making
body reaches the point of actually committing its public or private resources to
implementing the long-term program. Newly elected political officials must
also be educated concerning the community effort.
Page 3-15
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Perseverance
Finally, a community considering a waste management program must be pre-
pared for the long term. Some projects can take five to ten years to implement.
Such programs are complex, expensive, and often frustrating. A community
choosing to implement a program must be willing to commit the necessary re-
sources to see the program through. The ultimate key to success is the will to
persevere until the program is in place; the thousands of successful programs
underway nationwide attest to this.
REFERENCES
USEPA. 1990. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States:
1990 Update.
USEPA. 1992. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States:
1992 Update.
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1987. Best Management Practices for
Solid Waste: Recycling Waste Stream Survey.
Page 3-16
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
D")
4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.
Efficient, sanitary, and customer-responsive collection
of solid wastes is at the heart of a well-run waste man-
agement system. Collection services are provided to
residents in virtually all urban and suburban areas in
the United States, as well as some rural areas, either by
private haulers or by municipal governments.
The types of collection services have expanded in
many communities in recent years to include the spe-
cial collection or handling of recyclables and yard
wastes. Even though disposal costs continue to grow
rapidly across the United States, the costs of collecting
wastes continue to outpace disposal as a percentage of
overall service costs for most communities.
This chapter addresses issues to consider when
planning a new collection system or when evaluating
changes to an existing system.
4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.
From: Decision Maker's Guide to Solid Waste Management, Volume II, (EPA 530-R-
95-023), 1995. Project Co-Directors: Philip R. O'Leary and Patrick W. Walsh, Solid
and Hazardous Waste Education Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison/Extension.
This document was supported in part by the Office of Solid Waste (5306), Municipal
and Industrial Solid Waste Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under grant
number CX-817119-01. The material in this document has been subject to Agency
technical and policy review and approved for publication as an EPA report. Mention of
trade names, products, or services does not convey, and should not be interpreted as
conveying, official EPA approval, endorsement, or recommendation.
Page 4-1
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
The community should
define its goals and
constraints.
(p. 4_5_4_6)
Each community should clearly define the goals for its collection system, periodically
review the system's performance in meeting those goals, and regularly review and
adjust the system's goals to conform to the community's changing needs.
To define collection system goals, consider the following issues:
the level/quality of service your community needs
the roles to be played by the public and private sectors
the community's long-term waste management and source reduction goals
preferences for and constraints on available funding mechanisms
existing labor/service contracts that may affect decision making.
Both public and private
operation should be
considered and
evaluated.
(p. 4_6 —4-7)
The municipality should determine appropriate roles for the public and private sec-
tors. The collection system may be operated by (1) a municipal department, (2) a
contracted private firm or firms, or (3) a combination of public and private haulers.
Regardless of the management options chosen, a clear organizational structure and
management plan should be developed.
Explore alternative
funding methods to
determine which is
appropriate.
(p. 4_7_4_10)
Explore alternative mechanisms for funding collection services. The two most com-
mon funding methods are property taxes and special solid waste service fees. How-
ever, communities are turning more to user-based fees, which can stimulate waste
reduction efforts and reduce tax burdens. Economic incentives can be used to re-
duce waste generation by charging according to the amount of waste set out. When
selecting a funding method, considering waste reduction and management goals is
important. Table 4-2 lists advantages/disadvantages of alternative funding mechanisms.
Waste preparation and Decisions about how residents prepare waste for pickup and which methods are
collection procedures used to collect it affect each other and must be coordinated to achieve an efficient,
should be coordinated. effective system. Decisions about the following must be made:
(p. 4-10 — 4-13) . solid waste set-out requirements: guidelines and ordinances specify how residents
should prepare solid waste and recyclables for collection should be developed.
Point and frequency of collection, how often to collect waste and from what points
(curbside, backyard, etc.) must be decided.
Collection equipment
must be carefully
chosen.
(p. 4_13_4_15)
Numerous types of collection vehicles and optional features are available. For spe-
cific equipment design information, contact equipment vendors and review existing
equipment needs. Table 4-4 presents criteria for choosing the most appropriate
equipment. Cost information and expected service life should be gathered and
evaluated.
Page 4-2
-------
CHAPTER 4: COLLECTION AND TRANSFER
Is a transfer facility
appropriate for your
community?
(p. 4-16)
To determine if a transfer system is appropriate for your community, compare the
costs and savings associated with the construction and operation of a transfer facility.
Benefits:
lower collection costs
reduced fuel and maintenance costs for collection vehicles
increased flexibility in selecting disposal facilities
the option to separate and recover recyclables or compostables at the transfer site
the opportunity to shred or bale wastes before disposal.
Possible drawbacks:
difficulty with siting and permitting, particularly in urban areas
construction and operation costs may make them undesirable for some communities
(especially for communities less than 10 or 15 miles from the disposal site).
Consider these crucial
factors when selecting
a collection and
transfer alternative.
(p.
— 4-30)
The following factors are usually important to public officials when evaluating
collection and transfer alternatives:
costs of required new equipment and ability of community to obtain financing for it
costs to operate collection system and transfer facilities
compatibility of total costs with budget available for solid waste services
differences in levels of service provided by alternative systems
ability of system to meet public's demands or expectations for service
proposed methods for financing system costs and public acceptability of those
methods
the system's effects on efforts to meet the community's waste reduction and
management goals
compatibility of proposed roles for public and private sectors with political
support for them
public's interest or disinterest in changing present arrangements for collecting
solid waste and recyclables.
Developing efficient
routes and schedules
decreases costs.
(p. 4-30 — 4-32)
Detailed route configurations and collection schedules should be developed for the
selected collection system. Efficient routing and rerouting of solid waste collection
vehicles can decrease labor, equipment, and fuel costs.
Page 4-3
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
(continued)
Implementing the
collection and transfer
system involves several
steps.
(p. 4-32)
Implementing a collection and transfer system involves the following activities:
finalizing and modifying the system management plan
purchasing and managing collection and transfer equipment
hiring and training personnel
developing and managing contracts with labor unions and private collection companies
providing information to the public
constructing and operating transfer, administrative, and maintenance facilities.
Good personnel
management is
crucial.
(p. 4_34_4_36)
As in all organizations, good personnel management is essential to an efficient, high-
quality waste collection system; hiring and keeping well-qualified personnel is crucial.
Because collection jobs are physically demanding, carefully assess each applicant's
physical condition. To retain employees, management should provide a safe working
environment that emphasizes career advancement, participatory problem solving,
and worker incentives.
Safety is a crucial
concern.
(p. 4_34_4_35)
Safety is especially important because waste collection employees encounter many
hazards during each workday. As a result of poor safety records, insurance costs for
many collection services are high. Frequently encountered hazards include:
busy roads and heavy traffic
rough- and sharp-edged containers that can cause cuts and infections
exposure to injury from powerful loading machinery
heavy containers that can cause back injuries
household hazardous wastes such as herbicides, pesticides, solvents, fuels,
batteries, and swimming pool chemicals.
Maintaining good
public communication
is crucial.
(p. 4-36 — 4-37)
Maintaining good communications with the public is important to a well-run collection
system. Residents can greatly affect the performance of the collection system by co-
operating with set-out (how waste is presented for collection) and separation require-
ments, and by keeping undesirable materials, such as used oil, from entering the col-
lected waste stream.
Successful
management requires
monitoring the
system's costs and
performance.
(p. 4-37)
Collection and transfer facilities should develop and maintain an effective system for
cost and performance monitoring. Just as the goals of a collection program guide
its overall directions, a monitoring system provides the short-term feedback neces-
sary to identify the course corrections needed to achieve those goals.
Page 4-4
-------
CHAPTER 4: COLLECTION AND TRANSFER
DEVELOPING A SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND TRANSFER SYSTEM
Collection programs in different communities vary greatly depending on the
waste types collected, the characteristics of the community, and the prefer-
ences of its residents. Often, different collection equipment, methods, or ser-
vice providers are required in the same community to serve different custom-
ers (single-family, multi-family and commercial) or to collect different materi-
als (solid waste and recyclables) from the same customers.
Collection and transfer systems are often complex and difficult to design be-
cause many factors must be considered and a wide range of collection and transfer
options are available. To simplify system design and modifications, this section
presents an 11-component process for developing or modifying a collection sys-
tem to best meet a community's needs. Table 4-1 provides an outline of the pro-
cess, which can be adapted to meet a community's specific needs. Suggested pro-
cedures for completing each step is provided in the following sections.
This chapter presents an
11-component process
(see Table 4-1) for
developing a collection
system to meet a
community's needs.
Table 4-1
Key Steps in Developing or Modifying a Waste Collection and Transfer System
1. Define community goals and constraints.
2. Characterize waste generation and service area.
3. Determine public and private collection and
transfer options.
4. Determine system funding structure.
5. Identify waste preparation and collection
procedures.
6. Identify collection equipment and crew size
requirements.
7. Evaluate transfer needs and options.
8. Evaluate collection and transfer alternatives.
9. Develop collection routes and schedules.
10. Implement the collection system.
11. Monitor system performance; adjust as necessary.
Source: W. Pferdehirt, University of Wisconsin-Madison Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center, 1994
DEFINING COMMUNITY GOALS AND CONSTRAINTS
Each community should clearly define the goals for its collection system, peri-
odically review the system's performance in meeting those goals, and regu-
larly review and adjust the system's goals to conform to changes in the
community's needs. Similarly, constraints should be identified and incorpo-
rated in the decision-making process. Some constraints, such as funding, can
possibly be adjusted to meet changing needs.
Page 4-5
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Identifying goals, objectives, and constraints can help guide the planning
process. Issues that should be considered include the following:
• Level of service: What level of services is required to meet the
community's needs? What materials need to be collected and what are
the requirements for separate collection of these materials? What needs
and expectations exist with respect to the frequency of pickup and the
convenience of set-out requirements for residents?
Evaluating program • Roles for the public and private sectors: Is there a policy preference
goals and constraints is regarding the roles of the public and private sectors in providing collec-
an ongoing process tion services for wastes and recyclables? If collection is to be performed
in uence y many . private haulers, should the municipality license, franchise, or contract
issues. .T , , 0
with haulers!
• Waste reduction goals: What are the community's waste reduction
goals and what strategies are necessary or helpful in achieving those
goals? For example, source reduction and recycling can be facilitated by
charging customers according to the volume of wastes discarded, by
providing convenient collection of recyclables, and by providing only
limited collection of other materials such as yard trimmings and tires.
• System funding: What preferences or constraints are attached to
available funding mechanisms? Are there limits on the cost of service
based on local precedence, tax limits, or the cost of service from alterna-
tive sources?
• Labor contracts: Are there any conditions in existing contracts with
labor unions that would affect the types of collection equipment or
operations that can be considered for use? How significant are such
constraints and how difficult would they be to modify?
CHARACTERIZING WASTE TYPES, VOLUMES, AND THE SERVICE AREA
Data concerning waste generator types, volumes of wastes generated, and
Gather data to determine waste composition should be gathered so that community collection needs can
your community's ^e determined. Estimates of generation and composition can usually be devel-
collection needs oped through a combination of (1) historical data for the community in ques-
tion, (2) data from similar communities, and (3) published "typical" values.
Adjust data as necessary to correspond as closely as possible to local and cur-
rent circumstances. See Chapter 3 for further discussion of techniques for esti-
mating waste generation.
City street and block maps should also be obtained to determine infor-
mation on specific block and street configurations, including number of
houses, location of one-way and dead-end streets, and traffic patterns.
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE COLLECTION/TRANSFER: DETERMINING OPTIONS
Before or while the technical aspects of the solid waste collection and transfer
system are being developed, a municipality should evaluate alternative roles
Study alternative roles ^or tne Public and private sectors in providing collection services. The collec-
tor the public and private tion system may be operated by a municipal department, a contracted private
sectors. firm, one or more competing private firms, or a combination of public and pri-
vate haulers.
The following terms are commonly used when referring to these differ-
ent collection systems:
• Municipal collection: A municipal agency uses its own employees and
equipment to collect solid waste.
Page 4-6
-------
CHAPTER 4: COLLECTION AND TRANSFER
Each community should
carefully evaluate which
type of collection
system, or combination
of systems, will best
meet their needs.
• Contract collection: A municipal agency contracts with a private
collection firm to collect waste. Larger communities may issue multiple
collection contracts, each for a different geographic area, type of cus-
tomer (single-family versus multi-family units), or material collected
(recyclables versus refuse).
• Private collection: Residents directly engage the services of private
collection firms. Some communities using this approach give residents the
complete freedom to choose haulers and the level of service provided; some
require that all haulers obtain a license to operate from the municipality.
This system relies on competition to control prices and quality of service.
Other communities, wishing to reduce truck traffic and the costs of service
through eliminating duplication of service, allow haulers to competitively
bid to provide a specified level of service to residents within a defined
"franchise" area. Residents then contract directly with the designated
hauler for their area for the price and level of service specified in the
hauler's franchise agreement with the municipality.
The collection system that is most appropriate for a particular commu-
nity depends on the needs of the community and availability of qualified pri-
vate collection firms. No single system type is best for all communities. In
fact, one community may wish to consider the use of different systems for dif-
ferent customer types or different areas of the community. For example, many
municipalities provide municipal service to single-family residences, small
apartment buildings and small commercial customers, but require that larger
apartment buildings and commercial and industrial customers arrange sepa-
rately for their collection services.
In addition, municipalities may wish to explore options for working with
other nearby communities to provide collection service on a regional basis.
Development of a regional collection system can be particularly cost-effective
if several small communities are located close to each other and use the same
disposal site.
DETERMINING THE SYSTEM FUNDING STRUCTURE
Selecting the funding
method is a key step.
Selecting the method of funding is a key step in developing a solid waste col-
lection system. The goal of a funding plan is to generate the money necessary
to pay for collection services. In addition, a well-designed funding method
can also help a community achieve its waste reduction and management
goals.
The three principal alternatives for funding solid waste services are (1)
property tax revenues, (2) flat fees, and (3) variable-rate fees. These three
methods and their relative advantages and disadvantages are summarized in
Table 4-2.
• Property taxes: A traditional way of funding solid waste collection is
through property taxes, especially in communities where collection has
been performed by municipal workers. A principal attraction of this
method is its administrative simplicity; no separate system is necessary
to bill and collect payments, since funds are derived from moneys
received from collection of personal and corporate property taxes.
Despite its ease of administration, however, communities are increas-
ingly moving away from this funding method, at least as their sole
funding source. Many municipalities have shifted to covering part or all
of their costs through user fees, largely because of statutorily or politi-
cally imposed caps on property tax increases. In addition, municipal
officials realize that funding from property taxes provides no incentives
to residents to reduce wastes through recycling and source reduction.
Page 4-7
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Table 4-2
Advantages and Disadvantages of Alternative Funding Mechanisms
Property Taxes
Variable-Rate Systems
Under this approach, a portion of property tax revenues is used to
fund waste collection. Although the tax revenues are collected by
the municipality, the funded collection services may be provided by
either municipal crews or by a private hauler under contract.
Advantages
• Collection of funds is relatively easy to administer; collected as
part of taxes.
Everyone pays for the system; less incentive for improper dis-
posal by dumping wastes along roadsides or in other people's
containers.
• Can be argued that costs are generally distributed according to
ability to pay, since owners of expensive properties pay most.
Disadvantages
• Generators have no direct incentive for waste reduction.
Revenues are hard to adjust to unexpected budget increases,
for example, to cover higher tipping fees or fuel costs.
• Generators are unable to reduce their cost of service through
waste reduction.
• Actual, total costs of waste services may be difficult to track
because personnel, equipment and facilities funded from prop-
erty taxes may be used for multiple purposes. Often results in
understatement of actual costs, and perhaps demand for
higher level of service than if costs were apparent.
• Can lead to equity-related objections if commercial and large, multi-
family properties are not served by municipal waste collection, but
are levied taxes to support it. Similar concerns may arise if tax- ex-
empt property owners receive municipal waste collection.
Flat-Fee Systems
Under flat-fee systems, residents pay a set monthly fee for waste
collection. The fee may be collected by the municipality or by a
private hauler.
Advantages
Relatively easy to administer; same fee for all.
Usually easier to adjust fees than change tax assessments.
If collection is by private sector, local government does not
need to get involved in collection of service fees.
• Cost of waste collection is not counted against property tax limits.
Disadvantages
Fees are often earmarked for a separate fund used exclusively
for solid waste services. Moneys in such funds are less often
subject to re-appropriation by elected officials than property tax
revenues.
If fees are set to recover full cost of waste services, elected offi-
cials and the public can make more informed choices about
services to be provided.
• Some residents may try to evade cost of service by dumping
wastes along roads, streams, alleys, etc.
Fees can be more difficult than taxes to collect.
Flat fees do not reward waste reduction.
Fee-based systems generally require poorer residents to pay
more than they would under systems funded by property taxes.
Under a variable-rate system, residents are charged on a sliding
scale, depending on how much waste they set out for collection.
Charges can vary by the week, depending on the amount set out
by a resident for that particular collection day, or residents can
"subscribe" fora selected level of service (e.g., one 30-gallon can
per week).
Advantages
Provide direct economic incentives that motivate residents to
generate less waste.
Let generators choose the amount of service they purchase.
Usually increase participation rates and collected quantities for
recycling collection programs.
Usually lead to greater level of awareness among residents
when making purchasing decisions that affect waste genera-
tion.
• Typically result in more on-site management of yard trimmings
through composting and leaving clippings on lawns.
Except for relative ease of administration, have all other advan-
tages of flat-fee systems.
Disadvantages
• Can be complicated to administer; must have method of com-
puting charges, or distributing bags or stickers.
• When rates are based on volume customers sometimes com-
pact wastes excessively, which can cause overweight contain-
ers and higher bag breakage.
• Contaminants in recyclables can increase as residents try to
minimize waste collection charges. Recycling workers should
diligently prevent wastes from being collected with recyclables.
• Often require enforcement programs, at least initially, to prevent
illegal dumping.
• Can be difficult to project anticipated revenues; if contracting
with a hauler for service, municipality may need to guarantee
minimum level of revenues from fees.
Under a pure variable-rate system, large families will typically
pay more than under flat fee or property-tax-funded systems.
Can be especially hard on poorer, large families. Effects can be
decreased through a payment assistance plan or through a hy-
brid funding approach that covers part of collection costs from
taxes or a flat fee.
Hybrid Funding Methods
Hybrid approaches use a combination of the above methods to
fund collection services. For example, variable-rate systems often
pay for a portion of costs through a base rate or taxes. Advan-
tages and disadvantages depend on the specific components of
the selected funding approach.
Source: W. Pferdehirt, University of Wisconsin-Madison Solid and
Hazardous Waste Education Center, 1994
Page 4-8
-------
CHAPTER 4: COLLECTION AND TRANSFER
Communities can
combine elements from
different funding
methods to meet their
specific needs.
Accurately tracking the
full costs of waste
collection services is
crucial.
Whereas this was generally tolerated when disposal was relatively
cheap, the increased cost to properly manage wastes has caused many
communities to find ways to give meaningful pricing signals and incen-
tives to residents.
• Flat fees: Flat fees are a common method for funding collection in many
communities served by private haulers and in many municipalities
where a separate authority or special purpose fund is used for solid
waste services. Although this method does a better job than property
taxes in communicating the real cost of solid waste services, it still does
not provide an incentive for reducing wastes.
• Variable-rate fees: With a variable-rate fee system, generators pay in
proportion to the amount of wastes they set out for collection. Variable
rates are also called unit rates and volume-based rates. Variable-rate
systems typically require that residents purchase special bags or stickers,
or they offer generators a range of service subscription levels. When
bags or stickers are used, their purchase price is set high enough to cover
most or all program costs, including costs for bags and stickers and for
an accounting system.
Systems that offer generators a range and choice of subscription levels
have less administrative complexity than systems that use bags and
stickers. However, when generators use bags and stickers, they may be
more aware of how much waste they are producing and, therefore, have
more incentive to reduce it. In addition, by using smaller or fewer bags
or fewer stickers, generators can realize savings from their source
reduction efforts immediately.
Sometimes communities combine various elements of the above funding
methods to form a hybrid system specially tailored for their communities.
Many variable-rate programs are adapted to mute the potential negative im-
pacts of such systems. For example, a basic level of service offering a certain
number of bags or one can per week could be provided to all residents and
paid for from property taxes. Generators could then be required to place any
additional wastes in special bags sold by the municipality.
Municipalities that choose to provide collection, either on their own or
through a municipal contract with a hauler, might find it advantageous to seg-
regate solid waste funds in an enterprise account. With this method, costs and
revenues for solid waste services are kept separate from other municipal func-
tions, and mangers are given authority and responsibility to operate with
more financial independence than when traditional general revenue depart-
ments are used. Some local governments have found that this approach in-
creases the accountability and cost-effectiveness of their solid waste opera-
tions.
The importance of accurately tracking the full costs of waste collection
services cannot be overstated. For most communities, the costs of collecting
wastes or recyclables are significantly higher than the costs of disposal or pro-
cessing. Accurate cost accounting can provide managers with the information
necessary to compare performance with other similar communities and the
private sector and to identify opportunities for improving efficiency. Some
states, including Florida, Indiana, and Georgia, have enacted laws requiring
"full-cost accounting" of waste services by municipalities. Full-cost account-
ing provides residents and decision makers with more complete information
on waste collection by including indirect costs, such as administration, billing,
and legal services along with such direct costs as labor, equipment, tipping
fees, and supplies. In communities where garbage collection is funded from
property taxes, this information helps residents understand that "free" gar-
bage collection is, in reality, not possible. Using full-cost accounting, many
communities have demonstrated that the costs of recycling collection and pro-
cessing are less than those for solid waste collection and disposal. However,
Page 4-9
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
even when the costs of recycling are shown to be greater, the information
helps communities better understand and weigh the cost/benefit tradeoffs of
the alternative systems being considered.
IDENTIFYING WASTE PREPARATION AND COLLECTION PROCEDURES
Decisions about how residents prepare waste for pickup and which methods
are used to collect it affect each other and must be coordinated to achieve an
efficient, effective system. For example, a community may decide to use self-
loading compactor trucks in certain neighborhoods. As a result, residents will
have to prepare wastes by placing them in containers that fit the trucks' con-
tainer-lifting mechanisms. These decisions about vehicle and container types
would affect the selection of crew size, allowing a smaller crew than manual
systems would.
Solid Waste Set-Out Requirements
To establish uniform and efficient collection, communities normally develop
guidelines and enact ordinances that specify how residents must prepare solid
waste and recyclables for collection. Although the requirements vary from one
community to another, set-out requirements usually address the types of con-
tainers to be used, separation of recyclables or other wastes for separate collec-
tion, how frequently materials are collected, and where residents are to set
materials out for collection.
How residents prepare
waste for collection
affects program costs.
Table 4-3 describes
different set-out options.
Storage Container Specifications
Many municipalities enact ordinances that require using certain solid waste
storage containers. Most important, containers should be functional for the
amount and types of materials they must hold and the collection vehicles
used. Containers should also be durable, easy to handle, and economical, as
well as resistant to corrosion, weather, and animals.
In residential areas where refuse is collected manually, either plastic bags
or standard-sized metal or plastic containers are typically required for waste
storage. Many cities prohibit the use of other containers, such as cardboard
boxes or 55-gallon drums, because they are difficult to handle and increase the
chance of worker injury.
If cans are acceptable, they should be weatherproof, wider at the top
than bottom, fitted with handles and a tightly fitting lid, and maintained in
good condition. Many municipalities limit cans to 30-35 gallons or to a maxi-
mum specified total weight. Some municipalities also limit the total number
of containers that will be collected under normal service; sometimes additional
fees are charged for additional containers.
If plastic bags are acceptable, they must be in good condition and tied
tightly. Some communities require that bags meet a specified minimum thickness
(for example, 2 mils) to reduce the propensity for tearing during handling. Some
programs require the use of bags because they do not have to be emptied and re-
turned to the curb or backyard and are therefore quicker to collect than cans.
Some communities require that residents purchase metered bags or stick-
ers so that residents pay fees on a per-container basis. The price of the bags or
stickers usually includes costs for waste collection and disposal services. A re-
lated option is to charge different rates for various sizes of cans or other con-
tainers. Communities that also collect recyclables usually do so at no, or re-
duced, cost to residents as a financial incentive for recycling instead of disposal.
When automatic or semiautomatic collection systems are used, solid
waste containers must be specifically designed to fit the truck-mounted load-
ing mechanisms. Waste-storage containers used in such systems typically
Page 4-10
-------
CHAPTER 4: COLLECTION AND TRANSFER
range from 1 to 30 cubic yards in size. Automatically loading compactor
trucks are commonly used to pick up waste from apartment buildings and
commercial establishments.
Automatic and semiautomatic collection systems are also being used in-
creasingly in single-family neighborhoods to reduce costs. For example, the com-
munity of Sarasota, Florida switched from manual collection to semiautomatic
collection. Under the manual collection system, the city provided backyard and
curbside service using 8-cubic-yard packer bodies, which were emptied at a trans-
fer station. Under the new semiautomatic system, the community provides cus-
tomers with 90-gallon carts which they wheel to the curb. The carts are then emp-
tied automatically into 17-cubic-yard trucks. The trucks transport wastes directly
to the disposal site; this eliminates the need for a transfer station. As a result of
this process modification, Sarasota has reduced the number of crew members per
truck from 3 to 2 and the total number of routes from 14 to 11.
Recycling programs
usually require residents
to separate waste for
collection.
Solid Waste Separation Requirements
Communities may wish to collect some portions of solid waste separately,
which requires that residents separate wastes before the collection. As more
communities implement recycling programs, mandatory separation of recy-
clable materials such as paper, cardboard, glass, aluminum, tin, and plastic is
also increasing. Communities may also require residents to separate yard
trimmings, bulky items, and household hazardous wastes for separate collec-
tion or drop-off by residents. Bulky items are usually placed at the same point
of collection as other solid wastes. Recently, some U.S. communities have be-
gun to test wet/dry collection systems, in which "wet" organic wastes accept-
able for composting are collected separately from "dry" wastes, which will be
sorted for the recovery of recyclables. Phoenix, Arizona is the first large U.S.
city to experiment with a city-wide wet/dry collection system.
Frequency of Collection
Many factors together
determine the
appropriate frequency of
collection for each
community.
Communities can select the level of services they wish to provide by choosing
how often to collect materials and the point from which materials will be col-
lected at each residence. The greater the level of service, the more costly the
collection system will be to operate.
Factors to consider when setting collection frequency include the cost, cus-
tomer expectations, storage limitations, and climate. Most municipalities offer
collection once or twice a week, with collection once a week being prevalent.
Crews collecting once per week can collect more tons of waste per hour, but are
able to make fewer stops per hour than their twice-a-week counterparts. A
USEPA study found that once-a-week systems collect 25 percent more waste per
collection hour, while serving 33 percent fewer homes during that period. Per-
sonnel and equipment requirements were 50 percent higher for once-a-week col-
lection (USEPA 1974a). Some communities with hot, humid climates maintain
twice-a-week service because of health and odor concerns.
Pick-up Points for Collection
In urban and suburban areas, refuse is generally collected using curbside or al-
ley pickup. Backyard service, which was more common in the past, is still
used by some communities. Table 4-3 describes these collection methods and
the advantages and disadvantages of each.
As shown in the table, curbside/alley service is more economical but re-
quires greater resident participation than backyard service. In fact, according
to Hickman (1986), the productivity of backyard systems is about one-half that
of curbside or alley systems. Therefore, as municipal budgets have tightened
and service costs increased, most municipalities have chosen or switched to
Page 4-11
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Table 4-3
Advantages and Disadvantages of Alternative Pick-Up Points for Collecting Solid Wastes
Curb-side/Alley Collection
Residents place containers to be emptied at curb or in alley on collection day. Collection crew empties containers into collection
vehicle. Resident returns containers to their storage location until next scheduled collection time.
Advantages:
Crew can move quickly.
Crew does not enter private property, so fewer accidents and trespassing complaints arise.
This method is less costly than backyard collection because it generally requires less time and fewer crew members.
Adaptable to automated and semi-automated collection equipment.
Disadvantages:
On collection days, waste containers are visible from street.
Collection days must be scheduled.
Residents are responsible for placing containers at the proper collection point.
Backyard Set Out - Set Back Collection
Containers are carried from backyard to curb by a special crew and emptied by the collection crew. The special crew then transports
the containers back to their original storage location.
Advantages:
Collection days need not be scheduled.
Waste containers are not usually visible from street.
Use of additional crew members reduces loading time as compared to backyard carry method.
Disadvantages
Because crews enter private property, more injuries and trespassing complaints are likely.
The method is more time-consuming.
Residents are not involved and requires more crew members than curb-side/alley collection.
This is more costly than curb-side/alley collection because additional crews are required.
Backyard Carry Collection
In this method, collection crews enter property to collect refuse. Containers may be transported to the truck, emptied and returned to
their original storage location, or emptied into a tub or cart and transported to the vehicle so that only one trip is required.
Advantages:
Collection days need not be scheduled.
Waste containers are not usually visible from street.
Residents are not involved with container setout or movement.
This method requires fewer crew members than set out/ set back method.
Disadvantages:
Because crew enters private property, more injuries and trespassing complaints are likely.
This approach is more time-consuming than curb-side/alley or set back method.
Spills may occur where waste is transferred.
Drop Off at Specified Collection Point
Residents transport waste to a specified point. This point may be a transfer station or the disposal site.
Advantages:
Drop-off is the least expensive of methods.
Offers reasonable strategy for low population densities.
This method involves low staffing requirements.
Disadvantages:
Residents are inconvenienced.
There is increased risk of injury to residents.
If drop-off site is unstaffed, illegal dumping may occur.
Source: American Public Works Association, Institute for Solid Wastes. 1975. Solid Waste Collection Practice. 4th ed., Chicago
Page 4-12
-------
CHAPTER 4: COLLECTION AND TRANSFER
Pick-up strategies must
be carefully planned.
curbside/alley collection. However, some municipalities have traditionally
offered backyard service to residents and decide to continue offering this service.
Rural areas face special challenges because of low population densities
and limited budgets for solid waste operations. When pick-up service is of-
fered in rural areas, residents usually are required to place bags or containers
of wastes near their mailboxes or other designated pick-up points along major
routes. Other municipalities prefer a drop-off arrangement, such as that de-
scribed in Table 4-3. In such cases, wastes are dropped off at a smaller transfer
station (described below). Drop-off service is much less expensive than a col-
lection service but also less convenient for residents.
Some municipalities also offer collection service to larger apartment build-
ings and commercial establishments. In other communities, service to these cus-
tomers is provided by private collection companies. In general, wastes from such
buildings are stored in dumpsters or roll-off containers and collected using either
front-loading compactors or roll-off hoist trucks, respectively.
DETERMINING COLLECTION EQUIPMENT AND CREW SIZE
Selecting Collection Equipment
Regulations, crew
preferences, and many
other factors must be
considered.
Equipment Types
Numerous types of collection vehicles and optional features are available.
Manufacturers are continually refining and redesigning collection equipment
to meet changing needs and to apply advances in technology. Trends in the
collection vehicle industry include increased use of computer-aided equip-
ment and electronic controls. Now, some trucks even have onboard comput-
ers for monitoring truck performance and collection operations.
Truck chassis and bodies are usually purchased separately and can be
combined in a variety of ways. When selecting truck chassis and bodies, mu-
nicipalities must consider regulations regarding truck size and weight. An
important objective in truck selection is to maximize the amount of wastes that
can be collected while remaining within legal weights for the overall vehicle
and as distributed over individual axles. Also, because they are familiar with
equipment, collection crews and drivers should be consulted when selecting
equipment that they will be using.
Compactor trucks are by far the most prevalent refuse collection vehicles in
use. Widely used for residential collection service, they are equipped with hy-
draulically powered rams that compact wastes to increase payload and then push
the wastes out of the truck at the disposal or transfer facility. These trucks vary in
size from 10 to 45 cubic yards, depending on the service application. Compactor
trucks are commonly classified as front-loading, side-loading, or rear-loading, de-
pending on where containers are emptied into the truck.
Before compactor trucks were developed, open and closed noncompacting
trucks were used to collect solid waste. Although these trucks are relatively inex-
pensive to purchase and maintain, they are inefficient for most collection applica-
tion because they carry a relatively small amount of waste, and workers must lift
waste containers high to dump the contents into the truck. Noncompacting
trucks are still used for collecting bulky items like furniture and appliances or
other materials that are collected separately, such as yard trimmings and recy-
clable materials. Noncompacting trucks can also be appropriate for small com-
munities or in rural areas. Recently, many new types of noncompacting trucks
have been designed specifically for collecting recyclable materials.
Waste set-out requirements, waste quantities, and the physical character-
istics of the collection routes are likely to be key considerations in the selection
Page 4-13
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Establishing written
criteria makes selecting
appropriate equipment
easier.
of collection vehicles. For example, suburban areas with wide streets and little
on-street parking may be ideally suited to side-loading automatic collection
systems. Conversely, urban areas with narrow alleys and tight corners may
require rear loaders and shorter wheelbases.
For large apartment buildings and complexes, and for commercial and
industrial applications, hauled-container systems are often used. The roll-off
containers used with these systems have capacities of up to 50 cubic yards.
They are placed on the waste generator's property, and when full, are trans-
ported directly to the transfer/disposal site. Special hoisting trucks and a
cable winch or hydraulic arm are required to load the containers.
Criteria for Equipment Selection
To determine specific equipment design information, hauling companies or
departments should contact vendors and review existing equipment records.
Table 4-4 provides criteria that should be used to determine the most appro-
priate collection equipment. Municipalities can use these criteria to outline
the requirements that equipment must meet and select general equipment
types that will be considered.
In addition to the technical requirements listed in Table 4-4, the follow-
ing cost data should be compared for each truck being considered: initial
capital cost, annual maintenance and operation costs, and expected service
life. Life-cycle costs should be computed using this information to compare
total ownership costs over the expected life of the required vehicles.
Crew Size
Crew size greatly affects
program costs. Optimum
crew size depends on
• labor/equipment costs
• collection methods/routes
• labor union contracts.
The optimum crew size for a community depends on labor and equipment
costs, collection methods and route characteristics. Crew sizes must also re-
flect conditions in contracts with labor unions. As previously mentioned,
crew size can have a great effect on overall collection costs.
As collection costs have risen, there has been a trend toward (1) decreas-
ing frequency of collection, (2) increasing requirements on residents to sort
materials and transport them to the curb, and (3) increasing the degree of au-
tomation used in collection. These three factors have resulted in smaller crews
in recent years. Generally, a one-person crew can spend a greater portion of
its time in the productive collection of wastes than a two- or three-person crew
can. Multiple-person crews tend to have a greater amount of nonproductive
time than do single-person crews because nondriving members of the crew
may be idle or not fully productive during the haul to the unloading point.
Some communities address this problem by requiring that nondrivers perform
other duties, such as cleaning alleys, while the driver hauls collected wastes to
the disposal or transfer facility.
Although the one-person crew has the greatest percentage of productive
time, many municipalities use larger crews, mainly for three reasons: some
trucks (for example, rear-loading packers) do not readily support use of a
single-person crew, the municipality wants to provide a higher level of service
than one-person crews can provide, or labor contract provisions require more
than one person on each crew. These multi-person crews can be efficient if
properly trained and provided with suitable performance incentives. In more
efficient multiple-person crews, the driver helps with waste loading and the crew
carries some containers to the truck instead of driving to each pick-up location.
EVALUATING TRANSFER NEEDS AND OPTIONS
Sometimes, for efficiency or convenience, municipalities find it desirable to
transfer waste from collection trucks or stationary containers to larger vehicles
Page 4-14
-------
CHAPTER 4: COLLECTION AND TRANSFER
Table 4-4
Factors to Consider in Selecting or Specifying Solid Waste Collection Equipment
Loading Location
Compactor trucks are loaded in either the side, back, or front.
Front-loading compactors are often used with self-loading
mechanisms and dumpsters. Rear loaders are often used for
both self and manual loading. Side loaders are more likely to be
used for manual loading and are often considered more efficient
than back-loaders when the driver does some or all of the loading.
Truck Body or Container Capacity
Compactor capacities range from 10 to 45 cubic yards. Con-
tainers associated with hauled systems generally have a capac-
ity range of 6 to 50 cubic yards. To select the optimum capacity
for a particular community, the best tradeoff between labor and
equipment costs should be determined. Larger capacity bodies
may have higher capital, operating, and maintenance costs.
Heavier trucks may increase wear and tear, and corresponding
maintenance costs for residential streets and alleys.
Design Considerations:
• The loading speed of the crew and collection method used.
Road width and weight limits (consider weight of both
waste and vehicle).
Capacity should be related to the quantity of wastes col-
lected on each route. Ideally, capacity should be an inte-
gral number of full loads.
• Travel time to transfer station or disposal site, and the
probable life of that facility.
Relative costs of labor and capital.
Chassis Selection
Chassis are similar for all collection bodies and materials
collected.
Design Considerations:
Size of truck body. Important for chassis to be large
enough to hold truck body filled with solid waste.
Road width and weight limitations (also need to consider
waste and truck body weight).
• Air emissions control regulations.
Desired design features to address harsh treatment (e.g.,
driving slowly, frequent starting and stopping, heavy traffic
and heavy loads) include the following: high torque engine,
balanced weight distribution, good brakes, good visibility,
heavy duty transmission, and power brakes and steering.
Loading Height
The lower the loading height, the more easily solid waste can be
loaded into the truck. If the truck loading height is too high, the
time required for loading and the potential of injuries to crew
members will increase because of strain and fatigue.
Design Considerations:
• Weight of full solid waste containers.
If higher loading height is being considered, consider an
automatic loading mechanism.
Loading and Unloading Mechanisms
Loading mechanisms should be considered for commercial and
industrial applications, and for residences when municipalities wish
to minimize labor costs over capital costs. A variety of unloading
mechanisms are available.
Design Considerations—Loading:
Labor costs of collection crew.
• Time required for loading.
Interference from overhead obstructions such as telephone
and power lines.
• Weight of waste containers.
Design Considerations—Unloading:
Height of truck in unloading position. Especially important
when trucks will be unloaded in a building.
Reliability and maintenance requirements of hydraulic un-
loading system device.
Truck Turning Radius
Radius should be as short as possible, especially when part of
route includes cul-de-sacs or alleys. Short wheelbase chassis are
available when tight turning areas will be encountered.
Watertightness
Truck body must be watertight so that liquids from waste do not escape.
Safety and Comfort
Vehicles should be designed to minimize the danger to solid waste
collection crews.
Design Considerations:
• Carefully designed safety devices associated with compac-
tor should include quick-stop buttons. In addition, they
should be easy to operate and convenient.
• Truck should have platforms and good handholds so that
crew members can ride safely on the vehicle.
• Cabs should have room for crew members and their belongings.
Racks for tools and other equipment should be supplied.
• Safety equipment requirements should be met.
• Trucks should include audible back-up warning device.
Larger trucks with impeded back view should have video
camera and cab-mounted monitor screen.
Speed
Vehicles should perform well at a wide range of speeds.
Design Considerations:
Distance to disposal site.
Population and traffic density of area.
Road conditions and speed limits of routes that will be used.
Adaptability to Other Uses
Municipalities may wish to use solid waste collection equipment for
other purposes such as snow removal.
Source: W. Pferdehirt, University of Wisconsin-Madison Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center, 1994
Page 4-15
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
before transporting it to the disposal site. This section discusses how to decide
if a transfer facility is necessary to serve the waste collection needs of a com-
munity. The section also discusses factors to consider when designing a trans-
fer station and selecting equipment for it.
Communities that provide curbside collection of recyclables may find it
necessary to develop a material recovery facility (MRF) to sort and densify
materials before they are shipped to markets. MRF siting and design require-
ments are discussed in Chapter 6.
Evaluating Local Needs for Waste Transfer
To determine whether a transfer system is appropriate for a particular com-
munity, decision makers should compare the costs and savings associated
with the construction and operation of a transfer facility. Benefits that a trans-
fer station can offer include lower collection costs because crews waste less
Transfer station cost- time traveling to the site, reduced fuel and maintenance costs for collection ve-
effectiveness depends hides, increased flexibility in selection of disposal facilities, the opportunity to
on distance of disposal recover recyclables or compostables at the transfer site, and the opportunity to
site from the generation shred or bale wastes prior to disposal. These benefits must be weighed
area- against the costs to develop and operate the facility. Also, transfer facilities
can be difficult to site and permit, particularly in urban areas.
70-75 miles is usually the Obviously, the farther the ultimate disposal site is from the collection
minimum cost-effective area, the greater the savings that can be realized from use of a transfer station.
distance. The minimum distance at which use of a transfer station becomes economical
depends on local economic conditions. However, most experts agree that the
disposal site must be at least 10 to 15 miles from the generation area before a
transfer station can be economically justified. Transfer stations are sometimes
used for shorter hauls to accomplish other objectives, such as to facilitate sort-
ing or to allow the optional shipment of wastes to more distant landfills.
Types of Transfer Stations
The type of station that will be feasible for a community depends on the
following design variables:
• required capacity and amount of waste storage desired
• types of wastes received
• processes required to recover material from wastes or prepare it (e.g.,
Many factors influence shred or bale) for shipment
transfer station design. . ,, ... . ,,-.,.
• types of collection vehicles using the facility
• types of transfer vehicles that can be accommodated at the disposal facilities
• site topography and access.
Following is a brief description of the types of stations typically used for three
size ranges:
• small capacity (less than 100 tons/day)
• medium capacity (100 to 500 tons/day)
• large capacity (more than 500 tons/day).
Small to Medium Transfer Stations
Typically, small to medium transfer stations are direct-discharge stations that
provide no intermediate waste storage area. These stations usually have drop-
off areas for use by the general public to accompany the principal operating
areas dedicated to municipal and private refuse collection trucks. Depending
Page 4-16
-------
CHAPTER 4: COLLECTION AND TRANSFER
The type of station
determines operator
needs.
The advantages and
disadvantages of
transfer station types
are provided in
Table 4-5.
on weather, site aesthetics, and environmental concerns, transfer operations of
this size may be located either indoors or outdoors.
More complex small transfer stations are usually attended during hours of
operation and may include some simple waste and materials processing facilities.
For example, the station might include a recyclable materials separation and pro-
cessing center. Usually, direct-discharge stations have two operating floors. On
the lower level, a compactor or open-top container is located. Station users dump
wastes into hoppers connected to these containers from the top level.
Smaller transfer stations used in rural areas often have a simple design
and are often left unattended. These stations, used with the drop-off collec-
tion method, consist of a series of open-top containers that are filled by station
users. These containers are then emptied into a larger vehicle at the station or
hauled to the disposal site and emptied. The required overall station capacity
(i.e., number and size of containers) depends on the size and population den-
sity of the area served and the frequency of collection. For ease of loading, a
simple retaining wall will allow containers to be at a lower level so that the
tops of the containers are at or slightly above ground level in the loading area.
Larger Transfer Stations
Larger transfer stations are designed for heavy commercial use by private and
municipal collection vehicles. In some cases, the public has access to part of
the station. If the public will have access, the necessary facilities should be
included in the design. The typical operational procedure for a larger station
is as follows:
1. When collection vehicles arrive at the site, they are checked in for billing,
weighed, and directed to the appropriate dumping area. The check-in
and weighing procedures are often automated for regular users.
2. Collection vehicles travel to the dumping area and empty wastes into a
waiting trailer, a pit, or onto a platform.
3. After unloading, the collection vehicle leaves the site. There is no need to
weigh the departing vehicle if its tare (empty) weight is known.
4. Transfer vehicles are weighed either during or after loading. If weighed
during loading, trailers can be more consistently loaded to just under
maximum legal weights; this maximizes payloads and minimizes
weight violations.
Several different designs for larger transfer operations are common, de-
pending on the transfer distance and vehicle type. Most designs fall into one
of the following three categories: (1) direct-discharge noncompaction stations,
(2) platform/pit noncompaction stations, or (3) compaction stations. The fol-
lowing paragraphs provide information about each type, and Table 4-5 pre-
sents the advantages and disadvantages of each.
Direct-Discharge Noncompaction Stations
Direct-discharge noncompaction stations are generally designed with two
main operating floors. In the transfer operation, wastes are dumped directly
from collection vehicles (on the top floor), through a hopper, and into open-
top trailers on the lower floor. The trailers are often positioned on scales so
that dumping can be stopped when the maximum payload is reached. A sta-
tionary knuckleboom crane with a clamshell bucket is often used to distribute the
waste in the trailer. After loading, a cover or tarpaulin is placed over the trailer
top. These stations are efficient because waste is handled only once. However,
some provision for waste storage during peak time or system interruptions
should be developed. For example, excess waste may be emptied and tempo-
rarily stored on part of the tipping floor. Facility permits often restrict how long
wastes may be stored on the tipping floor (usually 24 hours or less).
Page 4-17
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Platform/Pit Noncompaction Stations
In platform or pit stations, collection vehicles dump their wastes onto a floor
or area where wastes can be temporarily stored, and, if desired, picked
through for recyclables or unacceptable materials. The waste is then pushed
into open-top trailers, usually by front-end loaders. Like direct discharge sta-
tions, platform stations have two levels. If a pit is used, the station has three
levels. A major advantage of these stations is that they provide temporary
storage, which allows peak inflow of wastes to be leveled out over a longer pe-
riod. Although construction costs for this type of facility are usually higher
because of the increased floor space, the ability to temporarily store wastes al-
Table 4-5
Advantages and Disadvantages of Transfer Station Types
Direct Dump Stations
Waste is dumped directly from collection vehicles into waiting
transfer trailers.
Advantages:
Because little hydraulic equipment is used, a shut-
down is unlikely.
Minimizes handling of wastes.
Relatively inexpensive construction costs.
Drive-through arrangement of transfer vehicles can be
easily provided.
Higher payloads than compactor trailers.
Disadvantages:
Requires larger trailers than compaction station.
Dropping bulky items directly into trailers can damage
trailers.
Minimizes opportunity to recover materials.
Number and availability of stalls may not be adequate
to allow direct dumping during peak periods.
Requires bi-level construction.
Pit or Platform Noncompaction Stations
Waste is dumped into a pit or onto a platform and then loaded into
trailers using waste handling equipment.
Advantages:
Convenient and efficient waste storage area is
provided.
Uncompacted waste can be crushed by bulldozer in
pit or on platform.
Top-loading trailers are less expensive than
compaction trailers.
Peak loads can be handled easily.
Drive-through arrangement of transfer vehicles can be
easily provided.
Simplicity of operation and equipment minimizes
potential for station shutdown.
Can allow recovery of materials.
Disadvantages:
Higher capital cost, compared to other
alternatives, for structure and equipment.
Increased floor area to maintain.
Requires larger trailers than compaction station.
Hopper Compaction Station
Waste is unloaded from the collection truck, through a hopper,
and loaded into an enclosed trailer through a compactor.
Advantages:
Uses smaller trailers than non-compaction
stations uncompacted.
Extrusion/log" compactors can maximize
payloads in lighter trailers.
Some compactors can be installed in a manner
that eliminates the need for a separate, lower level
for trailers.
Disadvantages:
If compactor fails, there is no other way to load
trailers.
Weight of ejection system and reinforced trailer
reduces legal payload.
Capital costs are higher for compaction trailers.
Compactor capacity may not be adequate for
peak inflow.
Cost to operate and maintain compactors may be
high.
Push Pit Compaction Station
Waste is unloaded from the collection truck into a push pit, and
then loaded into an enclosed trailer through a compactor.
Advantages:
Pit provides waste storage during peak periods.
Increased opportunity for recovery of materials.
All advantages of hopper compaction stations.
Disadvantages:
Capital costs for pit equipment are significant.
All other disadvantages of hopper compaction
stations.
Source: W. Pferdehirt, University of Wisconsin-Madison Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center, 1994
Page 4-18
-------
CHAPTER 4: COLLECTION AND TRANSFER
lows the purchase of fewer trucks and trailers, and can also enable facility op-
erators to haul at night or other slow traffic periods. These stations are usually
designed to have a storage capacity of one-half to two days' inflow.
Compaction Stations
Compaction transfer stations use mechanical equipment to densify wastes before
they are transferred. The most common type of compaction station uses a hy-
draulically powered compactor to compress wastes. Wastes are fed into the com-
pactor through a chute, either directly from collection trucks or after intermediate
use of a pit. The hydraulically powered ram of the compactor pushes waste into
the transfer trailer, which is usually mechanically linked to the compactor.
Other types of equipment can be used to compact wastes. For example,
wastes can be baled for shipment to a balefill or other disposal facility. Baling
is occasionally used for long-distance rail or truck hauling. Alternatively,
some newer compactors produce an extruded, continuous "log" of wastes,
which can be cut to any length. Bales or extruded wastes can be hauled with a
flat-bed truck or a trailer of lighter construction because, unlike with a tradi-
tional compactor, the side walls of the trailer do not need to restrain the
wastes as the hydraulic ram pushes them.
Compaction stations are used when (1) wastes must be baled for ship-
ment (e.g., rail haul) or for delivery to a balefill, (2) open-top trailers cannot be
used because of size restrictions such as viaduct clearances, and (3) site topog-
raphy or layout does not accommodate a multi-level building conducive to
loading open-top trailers. The main disadvantage to a compaction facility is
that the facility's ability to process wastes is directly dependent on the oper-
ability of the compactor. Selection of a quality compactor, regular preventive
maintenance of the equipment, and prompt availability of service personnel
and parts are essential to reliable operation.
Transfer Station Design Considerations
This section discusses factors that should be considered during station design.
In general, these factors were developed for designing large stations, but
many also apply to smaller transfer stations.
Goals of transfer station ^e main objective in designing a transfer station should be to facilitate
esign s ou me u e. efficient operations. The operating scheme should be as simple as possible; it
• efficient waste should require a minimum of waste handling, while offering the flexibility to
nanaling modify the facility when needed. Equipment and building durability are es-
• equipment and sential to ensure reliability and minimize maintenance cost's. With modifica-
building durability tk)n {he facility should be capable of handling all types of wastes.
• simple operating
scheme _. . . _ . _ .
c, ...,. .., Site Location and Design Criteria
• flexibility to modify **
"' Local residents are most likely to accept the facility if the site is carefully
selected, the buildings are designed appropriately for the site, and landscap-
Table 4-6 provides ing and other appropriate site improvements are made. These design features
transfer station design should be accompanied by a thorough plan of operations. When selecting a
considerations. site, municipalities should consider the following factors:
• Proximity to waste collection area: Proximity to the collection area
helps to maximize savings from reduced hauling time and distance.
• Accessibility of haul routes to disposal facilities: It should be easy for
transfer trucks to enter expressways or other major truck routes, which
reduces haul times and potential impacts on nearby residences and
businesses. When considering sites, determine if local road improve-
ments will be necessary, and if so, whether they will be economically and
technically feasible. Accessibility to rail lines and waterways may allow
use of rail cars or barges for transfer to disposal facilities.
Page 4-19
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
• Visual impacts: The transfer station should be oriented so that transfer
operations and vehicle traffic are not readily visible to area residents. To
a great extent, visibility can be restricted if the site is large enough. The
area required will depend on vehicle traffic and storage needs, necessary
buffer areas, and station layout and capacity.
• Site zoning and design requirements: Municipalities should confirm
that the proposed use meets the site zoning requirements. In addition,
the local site plan ordinance should be reviewed to identify restrictions
that could affect design, such as building height and setback, and
required parking spaces.
• Proximity to utility tie-ins: The transfer station may require the follow-
ing utility services: electricity and gas, water (for domestic use and fire
fighting), telephone, and sanitary and storm sewers. Station designers
should determine the cost of connecting to these utilities and the con-
tinuing service charges associated with them.
In some cases, municipalities may wish to consider the construction of more
than one transfer station. For example, two transfer stations may be economically
preferable if travel times from one side of the city to the other are excessive.
One of the most time-consuming aspects of transfer facility design is site
permitting. The permitting process should, therefore, be started as soon as a
suitable site is selected.
States usually require permits, and some local governments may require
them as well. The project team should work closely with regulatory agency
staff to determine design and operating requirements, and to be sure that all
submittal requirements and review processes are understood. Table 4-6 sum-
marizes additional considerations for site design.
Site permitting for a
transfer station can be
time-consuming—begin
the process as soon as a
site is selected.
Building Design
Whenever putrescible wastes are being handled, larger transfer stations
should be enclosed. Typically, transfer station buildings are constructed of
concrete, masonry or metal. Wood is not generally desirable because it is diffi-
cult to clean, is less durable, and is more susceptible to fire damage. Key con-
siderations in building design include durability of construction, adequate
size for tipping and processing requirements, minimization of column and
overhead obstructions to trucks, and flexibility and expandability of layout.
Table 4-7 provides a summary of factors that should be considered as part of
the building design.
Transfer Station Sizing
The transfer station should have a large enough capacity to manage the wastes
that are expected to be handled at the facility throughout its operating life.
Factors that should be considered in determining the appropriate size of a
transfer facility include:
• capacity of collection vehicles using the facility
• desired number of days of storage space on tipping floor
• time required to unload collection vehicles
• number of vehicles that will use the station and their expected days and
hours of arrival (design to accommodate peak requirements)
• waste sorting or processing to be accomplished at the facility
• transfer trailer capacity
• hours of station operation
• availability of transfer trailers waiting for loading
Page 4-20
-------
CHAPTER 4: COLLECTION AND TRANSFER
Table 4-6
Transfer Station Site Design Considerations
Office Facilities
Space should be adequate for files, employee records, and operation and maintenance information.
Office may be in same or different building than transfer operation.
Additional space needed if collection and transfer billing services included.
Employee Facilities
Facilities including lunchroom, lockers, and showers should be considered for both transfer station and vehicle personnel.
Weighing Station
Scales should be provided to weigh inbound and outbound collection vehicles and transfer vehicles as they are being loaded or after
loading.
Number of scales depends on traffic volume. Volume handled by one scale depends on administrative transaction time, type of equip-
ment installed, and efficiency of personnel. A rough rule-of-thumb estimate for collection vehicle scales is about 500 tons/day. An-
other estimate that can be used for design purposes is a weighing time of 60 to 90 seconds/vehicle.
Length and capacity of scales should be adequate for longest, heaviest vehicle. Different scales can be used for collection and trans-
fer vehicles. Typical scale lengths are 60 to 70 feet. Typical capacities are 120,000 to 140,000 pounds.
Computerized scale controls and data-recording packages are becoming increasingly common. Computerized weighing systems
record tare weight of vehicle and all necessary billing information.
On-site Roads and Vehicle Staging
If the public will use the site, separate the associated car traffic from the collection and transfer truck traffic
Site roads should be designed to accommodate vehicle speed and turning characteristics. For example, pavement should be wider
on curves than in straight lanes and have bypass provision on operational areas.
Ramp slopes should be less than 10 percent (preferably 6 percent max. for up-ramp) and have provisions for de-icing, if necessary.
The road surface should be designed for heavy traffic.
Minimize intersections and cross-traffic. Use one-way traffic flow where possible.
Assure adequate queue space. For design purposes, assume that 25 to 30 percent of vehicles will arrive during each of two peak
hours, but check against observed traffic data for existing facilities.
Site Drainage and Earth Retaining Structures
Drainage structures should be sized to handle peak flow with no disruption in station operation.
Provide reliable drainage at bottom of depressed ramps.
For most transfer station designs, earth retaining structures will be required. Elevation differences will vary depending on station design.
Site Access Control
A chain-link fence, often with barbed wire strands on top, is usually required for security and litter control.
Consider installing remote video cameras and monitoring screens to watch access gates.
A single gate is best for controlling security and site access.
Signs stating facility name, materials accepted, rates, and hours of operation are usually desirable and often required. Ordinances may
specify the size of such signs.
Buffer and Landscaping Areas
Landscaped barriers (berms or shrub buffers) provide noise and visual buffers, and are often required by local ordinance.
Fast-growing trees that require minimal maintenance are the best choice. Evergreens provide screening throughout the year. Design
berms and plantings to meet site-specific screening requirements.
Fuel Supply Facilities
Fuel storage and dispensing facilities are often located at transfer stations.
Adequate space to accommodate transfer vehicles is very important.
Water Supply and Sanitary Sewer Facilities
Water must generally be supplied to meet the following needs: fire protection, dust control, potable water, sanitary facilities use, irriga-
tion for landscaping.
Fire protection needs usually determine the maximum flow.
Sanitary sewer services are usually required for sanitary facilities and wash-down water.
A sump or trap may be required to remove large solids from wash-down water.
.Electricity and Natural Gas
Electricity is necessary to operate maintenance shop, process and other auxiliary equipment and provide building and yard lighting.
Natural gas is often required for building heat.
Source: Adapted, in part, from Peluso et al., 1989
Page 4-21
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Consider tradeoffs
between capital and
operating costs.
• time required, if necessary, to attach and disconnect trailers from trac-
tors, or to attach and disconnect trailers from compactors
• time required to load trailers.
Table 4-8 provides formulas for estimating the required capacity of vari-
ous types of transfer stations. These formulas should be adapted as necessary
for specific applications. The formulas in Table 4-8 do not reflect the effects of
using the tipping floor to store wastes.
When selecting the design capacity of a transfer station, decision makers
should consider tradeoffs between the capital costs associated with the station
and equipment and the operational costs. The optimum capacity will often be
a compromise between the capital costs associated with increased capacity
and the costs associated with various operational parameters (for example,
collection crew waiting time and hours of operation).
Facility designers should also plan adequate space for waste storage and,
if necessary, waste processing. Transfer stations are usually designed to have
one-half to two days of storage capacity. The collection vehicle unloading
area is usually the waste storage area and sometimes a waste sorting area.
When planning the unloading area, designers should allow adequate
space for vehicle and equipment maneuvering. To minimize the space re-
quired, the facility should be designed so that collection vehicles back into the
unloading position. For safety purposes, traffic flow should be such that
trucks back to the left (driver's side). Adequate space should also be available
for offices, employee facilities, and other facility-related activities.
Table 4-7
Transfer Station Building Components: Design Considerations
Building Construction
Usually constructed of concrete masonry or metal.
If prefabricated metal, building will typically be constructed of
multiples of 20- to 25-foot bays.
Clear-span construction is desirable so that vehicles and equip-
ment do not need to maneuver around columns. Typically, frame
will be steel for smaller buildings and steel truss for larger ones.
Collection vehicles must be able to unload within the building.
Generally, most vehicles require 25 to 30 feet clearance. More
than 25 to 30 feet may be required for dump trailers.
Design for flexibility and expendability.
Doors
Number of openings depends on number of trucks unloading
per hour at a peak or compromise time.
Door placement should minimize effects of wind in contributing
to litter and odor problems. Door placement should also mini-
mize visual exposure of tipping operations to neighbors and
passersby.
Door supports should be protected by bollards.
If possible, doors should be high enough that trucks can be
driven through door openings while in full-unloading position.
Typically, this requires 25 feet or more of vertical clearance. If
damage is possible, provide driver-warning mechanism (e.g.,
hanging pipe that will hit truck before door).
Wide doors (min. 16 ft.) improve operations and limit damage to
door jambs.
To eliminate door damage, leave one side of building open.
Floors
Floors receive considerable wear from various transfer
operations.
To control wear, floors are often topped with a granolithic
topping (1 to 2 inches). A less expensive, but less durable
option is to use a shake-on metallic hardener for the
concrete floor.
Material Recovery
Include space and equipment for recovery of recyclables.
Address needs for receiving and storing special materials
like household hazardous wastes, appliances, used oil, or tires.
Dust Control
Dust control should be provided.
Typical systems include wet-spray systems, dust collec-
tion equipment and good ventilation.
Safety Equipment
The necessary safety equipment, equipment shut-off switches,
and emergency exit signs should be included.
Maintenance and Clean Up Access
Provide high-pressure hoses for wash-down. Drains should have
screens that can be easily cleaned.
Source: Adapted partially from Pelusoetal., 1989
Page 4-22
-------
CHAPTER 4: COLLECTION AND TRANSFER
Additional Processing Requirements
Waste transfer stations
can include additional
functions, including
• waste shredding and
baling
• recovery of recyclable
and compostable
materials.
Solid waste transfer facilities can be designed to include additional waste pro-
cessing requirements. Such processes can include waste shredding or baling,
or the recovery of recyclable or compostable materials.
At a minimum, transfer facilities should provide a sufficient area for the
dump-and-pick recovery of targeted recyclables. For example, haulers servic-
ing businesses usually reserve an area of the floor where loads rich in old cor-
rugated containers can be deposited. Laborers then pick through the materials
to remove the corrugated containers for recycling. Dump-and-pick operations
are a low-capital way to begin the recovery of recyclables, but they are hard on
workers' backs and inefficient for processing large volumes of materials.
Newer transfer facilities often include mechanically assisted systems to
facilitate the recovery of recyclables. Some facilities use only conveyors to
move the materials past a line of workers who pick designated materials from
the conveyor and drop the sorted material into a bin or onto another con-
veyor. Other facilities use mechanical methods to recover certain materials;
for example, a magnetic drum or belt can be used to recover tin cans and other
ferrous metals, and eddy current separators can be used to remove aluminum.
Shredders or balers are sometimes used to reduce the volume of wastes
requiring shipment or to meet the requirements of a particular landfill where
wastes are being sent. Shredders are sometimes used for certain bulky wastes
like tree trunks and furniture. Solid waste facilities using shredders must take
special precautions to protect personnel and structures from explosions
caused by residual material in fuel cans and gas cylinders. Commonly used
measures include inspecting wastes before shredding, explosion suppression
systems, wall or roof panels that blow out to relieve pressure, and restricted
access to the shredder area. If considering a combined recyclable material pro-
cessing and transfer station, municipalities should also refer to Chapter 6.
Table 4-8
Formulas for Determining Transfer Station Capacity
Pit Stations
Based on rate at which wastes can be unloaded from
collection vehicles:
C = Pc x (L/W) x (60 x HW/TC) x F
Based on rate at which transfer trailers are loaded:
C = (Pt x N x 60 x Ht)/(Tt + B)
Direct Dump Stations
C = (Nn x Pt x F x 60 x HJ/ |((Pt/Pc) x (W/Ln)) x Tc + B]
Hopper Compaction Stations
C = (Nn x Pt x F x 60 x HJ/|(Pt/Pc x Tc) + B]
Push Pit Compaction Station
C= (Np x Pt x F x 60 x HW)/[(P/PC x W/Lp x Tc) + Bc + B
where:
C = Station capacity (tons/day)
Pc = Collection vehicle payload (tons)
L = Total length of dumping space (feet)
W = Width of each dumping space (feet)
Hw = Hours per day that waste is delivered
Tc = Time to unload each collection vehicle (minutes)
F = Peaking factor (ratio of number of collection vehicles re-
ceived during an average 30-minute period to the num-
ber received during a peak 30-minute period)
Pt = Transfer trailer payload (tons)
= Number of transfer trailers loading simultaneously
= Hours per day used to load trailers (empty trailers must be available)
= Time to remove and replace each loaded trailer (minutes)
= Time to load each transfer trailer (minutes)
= Number of hoppers
= Length of each hopper (feet)
= Length of push pit (feet)
= Number of push pits
= Total cycle time for clearing each push pit and compacting
waste into trailer
Source: Schaper, 1986
Page 4-23
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Transfer Vehicles
Carefully consider the
community's needs
when selecting transfer
vehicles.
Although most transfer systems use tractor trailers for hauling wastes, other
types of vehicles are sometimes used. For example, in collection systems that
use small satellite vehicles for residential waste collection, the transfer (or
"mother") vehicle could simply be a large compactor truck. At the other ex-
treme, some communities transport large quantities of wastes using piggy-
back trailers, rail cars, or barges.
The following discussion presents information on truck and rail transfer
vehicles. Although smaller vehicles may also be used for transfer, their use is
more typically limited to collection.
Trucks and Semitrailers
Trucks and semitrailers are often used to carry wastes from transfer stations to
disposal sites. They are flexible and effective waste transport vehicles because
they can be adapted to serve the needs of individual communities. Truck and
trailer systems should be designed to meet the following requirements:
• Wastes should be transported at minimum cost.
• Wastes must be covered during transport.
• The vehicles should be designed to operate effectively and safely in the
traffic conditions encountered on the hauling routes.
• Truck capacity should be designed so that road weight limits are not
exceeded.
• Unloading methods should be simple and dependable, not subject to
frequent breakdown.
• Truck design should prevent leakage of liquids during hauling.
• The materials used to make the trailers and the design of sidewalk, floor
systems, and suspension systems should be able to withstand the abusive
loads innate to the handling and hauling of municipal solid wastes.
• The number of required tractors and trailers depends on peak inflow,
storage at the facility, trailer capacity, and number of hauling hours.
Most direct-discharge stations have more trailers than tractors because
empty trailers must be available to continue loading, but loaded trailers
can, if necessary, be temporarily parked and hauled later.
It is important to select vehicles that are compatible with the transfer sta-
tion. There are two types of trailers used to haul wastes: compaction and
noncompaction trailers. Noncompaction trailers are used with pit or direct-
dump stations, and compaction trailers are used with compaction stations.
Noncompaction trailers can usually haul higher payloads than compaction
trailers because the former do not require an ejection blade for unloading.
Based on a maximum gross weight of 80,000 pounds, legal payloads for com-
paction trailers are typically 16-20 tons, while legal payloads for open-top live-
bottom trailers are 20-22 tons. Possum-belly trailers (which must be tilted by
special unloaders at the disposal site) can have legal payloads up to 25 tons.
Transfer vehicles should be able to negotiate the rough and muddy con-
ditions of landfill access roads and should not conflict with vertical clearance
restrictions on the hauling route. Table 4-9 discusses additional factors to con-
sider when selecting a transfer trailer.
Rail Cars
Railroads carry only about five percent of transferred wastes in the U.S. (Lueck,
1990). However, as the distance between sanitary landfills and urban areas in-
Page 4-24
-------
CHAPTER 4: COLLECTION AND TRANSFER
The use of rail haul is
increasing.
creases, the importance of railroads in transporting wastes to distant sites also
grows. Rail transfer is an option that should be considered, especially when a
rail service is available for both the transfer station and the disposal facility,
and when fairly long hauling distances are required (50 miles or more). Cities
that have recently developed rail transfer systems include Seattle, Washington;
Portland, Oregon; and the southeastern Massachusetts region.
Rail transfer stations are usually more expensive than similarly sized
truck transfer stations because of costs for constructing rail lines, installing
special equipment to remove and replace roofs of rail cars for loading or to
bale wastes, and installing special equipment to unload rail cars at the dis-
posal facility. Transfer trailers, however, can usually transport a payload of
only 20-25 tons of waste, whereas a 60-foot boxcar can transport approxi-
mately 90 tons of waste. Rail transfer becomes more economically attractive as
hauling distances increase, but some communities, such as Cape Cod, Massachu-
setts, have found short-haul dedicated rail transfer to be economically viable.
Wastes can be transported via rail using either dedicated boxcars or con-
tainerized freight systems. Most facilities use boxcars to transport baled
wastes. Rail cars with removable roofs can be directly loaded in a rail direct-
discharge station. This latter arrangement, which is used at a transfer station
Table 4-9
Transfer Truck and Trailer Systems: Design Considerations
Trailer Type
Trailers are classified as either compaction or noncompaction. Typi-
cally, compaction trailers are rear-loading, enclosed and equipped
with a push-out blade for unloading. In noncompaction trailers, the
entire top is usually open for loading. After loading, top doors or
tarps cover waste.
Design Considerations:
• Transfer station design usually determines whether to use a
compaction or noncompaction trailer.
Compaction trailers must endure the pressure of the compac-
tion process; therefore they are usually enclosed and rein-
forced. As a result, they are often heavier than
noncompaction trailers.
Noncompaction trailers are larger and lighter than compaction
trailers. They are usually made of steel or aluminum. These
trailers usually have a walking floor or a conveyor floor, or they
are tipped by a hydraulic platform at the disposal facility.
Trailer Capacity
Typically, capacities range 65 cubic yards for compaction trailers to
125 cubic yards for noncompaction trailers.
Design Considerations:
• Waste densities are usually 400 to 600 pound/cubic yard for
compacted wastes, and 275 to 400 pounds/cubic yard for
noncompacted wastes.
• Trailers are typically sized to meet legal payload and dimen-
sion requirements. Specific requirements vary depending on
local regulations.
• Weight depends on degree of compaction and composition
of the material.
• Trailers are often sized to be higher than legal height require-
ments when empty, but lower when full.
Unloading Mechanisms
Some trailers are self-emptying, and others require additional equip-
ment to help with the unloading process. The most common
mechanisms are the following:
Push-Out Blade
Push-out blades are usually used in compaction trailers
and sometimes used in noncompaction trailers.
In compaction trailers, the same blade that is used to
compact wastes is used to eject them.
The blade is relatively simple to operate and can be pow-
ered by tractor hydraulic system or by a separate engine.
However, items such as tree limbs can wedge under the
blade, causing it to jam.
Moving Floor
Moving floors are common in noncompaction trailers.
Floor usually has two or more movable sections that ex-
tend across the entire width of the trailer; therefore, even if
one section breaks, another can empty wastes.
Floor can typically empty wastes in 6 to 10 minutes.
Rear of trailer may be larger to expedite unloading.
Hydraulic Lift
A lift located at the disposal site tips the trailer to an angle
that allows discharge of the wastes.
Time required for unloading operation is about 6 minutes.
One disadvantage is a possible wait for use of lift. Break-
down of lift seriously impedes ability to receive wastes.
Pull-Off System
A movable blade or cable slings are placed in front of the
load. To empty load, auxiliary equipment (e.g., landfill
dozer) pulls the waste out of the trailer.
The system may require more time than self-unloading trailers
because there may be a wait for auxiliary equipment.
Source: W. Pferdehirt, University of Wisconsin-Madison Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center, 1994
Page 4-25
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
in Yarmouth, Massachusetts, requires special equipment to lift and rotate the
rail car at the unloading facility. Containerized systems require double-han-
dling of wastes because wastes must first be loaded into the containers and the
containers then loaded onto rail cars; this process must be reversed at the des-
tination. Therefore, handling costs usually prohibit the use of containerized
shipment unless the transfer station or disposal facility is not accessible by rail.
If the transfer facility or disposal facility is not served by rail, trucks must be
used to transport either containers or noncontainerized bales. In this situation,
containers are usually less expensive to handle than are bales; also, bales be-
come susceptible to breakage with increased handling.
When evaluating a potential rail transfer system, decision makers should
consider environmental impacts and potential opposition from towns between
the transfer facility and the disposal facility. Rail cars should be covered and
kept clean, and shipment should be scheduled to minimize en-route delays.
EVALUATING COLLECTION AND TRANSFER ALTERNATIVES
Defining System Alternatives
After appropriate options for collection, equipment, and transfer have been
identified, various combinations of these elements should be examined to
After options are define system-wide alternatives for further analysis. Each alternative should
identified, further be a unique configuration of all collection and transfer elements. For example,
evaluation of system- a proposed system might consist of the following elements:
wide alternatives is . ., „ . . , ... on ,. ,
. . • A weekly collection ol mixed solid wastes using 30-cubic-yard rear-
loading compactors and two-person crews. Wastes would be trans-
ported directly to the disposal site.
• A monthly collection of bulky items using an open truck and a one-person
crew. Collection would be the same day as regular waste collection.
• A weekly curbside collection of mixed recyclables (newspaper, tin cans,
plastic, glass, and aluminum) on the same day as regular waste collection.
Materials would be collected in a noncompacting truck by a one-person
crew and transported to a recycling facility for separation and processing.
• A drop-off facility for collection of tires, used motor oil and batteries.
Comparing Alternative Strategies
Decision makers should evaluate each candidate for its ability to achieve the
identified goals for the collection program. Economic analysis will usually be
a central focus of the system evaluations. However, to the extent that the al-
ternatives differ in their level of service or other performance parameters, it is
important to note such differences so that decision makers understand the
economic tradeoffs involved. This initial evaluation will lead to several itera-
tions, with the differences between the alternatives under consideration be-
coming more narrowly focused with each round of evaluations.
Analyzing Crew and Truck Requirements
The community can use the number of houses per block or route, along with
waste density and quantity information, to determine an average quantity of
waste generated (in pounds or cubic yards) for all or portions of the service
area. This average waste quantity can be used to estimate the number of stops
to be serviced per vehicle load (N) as shown in Table 4-10, item 1. The num-
ber of services per load and other block configuration data will be used to de-
Page 4-26
-------
CHAPTER 4: COLLECTION AND TRANSFER
velop collection routes and schedules. Seasonal variations in generation rates
should be considered when estimating staff and equipment needs.
Estimating Time Requirements
Making accurate time
estimates is essential.
Loading Time Requirements
For each collection method and crew size being considered, a loading time
should be estimated using data from another, similarly configured system, or,
if necessary, using a time study of proposed collection procedures. Time stud-
ies are usually performed only if historic data is not available for comparable
systems and when the potential cost impacts of the decisions at hand warrant
the cost of a time study. Table 4-11 lists procedures for a time study. Esti-
mates of the loading time and average generation per household can be used to
determine the average time required to fill a truck (see Table 4-10, item 2).
If distances between stops vary significantly, different loading times and
total vehicle filling times should be estimated for each area. These estimates
and block configuration data are used to determine collection routes.
Hauling Time and Other Travel Time Requirements
To estimate hauling times for collection vehicles, consider the following:
• travel time from the garage to the route at beginning of day
Table 4-10
Calculations for Waste Collection System Design
1. Number of Services/Vehicle Load (N)
N = (C x D)/W; where,
C = Vehicle Capacity (cubic yards)
D = Waste Density (pounds/cubic yard)
W = Waste Generation/Residence (pounds/service)
2. Time Required to Collect One Load (E)
E = N x L; where,
L = Loading Time/Residence, including on-route travel
3. Number of Loads/Crew/Day (n)
The number of loads (n) that each crew can collect in a day can
be estimated based in the workday length (T), and the time spent
on administration and breaks (T1), hauling and other travel (T2),
and collection routes (T3).
A) Administrative and Break Time (T1):
T1 = A + B; where,
A = Administrative Time (i.e., for meetings, paperwork, un-
specified slack time)
B = Time for Breaks and Lunch
B) Hauling and Other Travel Time (T2):
T2 = (n x H) - f + G + J; where,
n = Number of Loads/Crew/Day
H = Time to travel to disposal site, empty truck, and return
to route
Source: Adapted from Tchobanoglous et al., 1977
5.
f = Time to return from site to route
G = Time to travel from staging garage to
route
J = Time to return from disposal site to ga-
rage
C) Time Spent on Collection Route (T3):
T3 = n x E
where variables have been previously defined.
D) Length of Workday (T):
T = T1 + T2 +T3
where T is defined by work rules or policy and
equations A through D are solved to find n.
Calculation of Number of Vehicles and Crews (K)
K = (S x F)/(N x n x M); where,
S = Total number of services in the collection
area
F = Frequency of collection (numbers/week)
M = Number of workdays/week
Calculation of Annual Vehicle and Labor Costs
Vehicle Costs = Depreciation + Maintenance +
Consumables + Overhead + License +
Fees + Insurance
Labor Costs = Driver Salary + Crew Salaries +
Fringe Benefits + Indirect Labor + Supplies +
Overhead
Page 4-27
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Time estimates for each
option should be
computed.
• travel time from the route to the disposal site (include daily traffic fluctuations)
• time spent queuing, weighing, and tipping at the disposal/transfer site
• travel time to the collection route from the site
• travel time returning to the garage at end of day.
To the extent that different alternatives being considered affect collection
or transfer time requirements, the impacts on labor, equipment and operating
costs should be quantified. Detailed delineation of individual collection
routes can wait until after the specific alternative system is selected.
Overall Time Requirements
The loading and hauling times can be used to calculate the number of loads
that each crew can collect per day. To make this calculation, managers will
need to estimate administrative and break time, hauling route and other travel
time, and actual collection time. Table 4-10, item 3, presents methods for esti-
mating these times.
Labor and equipment costs should be estimated for each collection sys-
tem being considered. First, using the total quantity of waste that will be gen-
erated and number of loads that can be collected each day, collection manag-
ers should calculate the number of vehicles and crews that will be required to
collect waste (see Table 4-10, item 4). Then, these numbers, along with equip-
ment and cost information, can be used to calculate the annual cost of each
collection alternative (see Table 4-10, item 5).
Analyzing Transfer Elements
For alternatives that include a transfer component, waste transfer costs should be
analyzed and included as part of the overall system costs. Table 4-12 presents a
list of capital and operating and maintenance costs for transfer systems.
Alternatives that include transfer systems should show reduced collec-
tion costs to offset some or all of the transfer costs. There are several ways to
reduce collection costs; three examples are given below:
• Vehicle operating costs can be reduced if collection vehicles travel fewer
miles to empty wastes.
• Nonproductive time during hauls and personnel costs can be reduced if
crews spend more time on collection routes; this may also reduce the
number of collection crews required.
• Vehicle maintenance costs from flat tires and damage to axles and other
undercarriage parts can be reduced if vehicles deliver wastes to a trans-
fer facility rather than directly to a landfill.
Selecting A Collection and Transfer Alternative
Appropriate public officials must eventually select a preferred system for
implementation. Usually the authority for final approval rests with a body of
elected officials, such as town board, city council, or county board. The type
of solid waste collection services provided and their associated costs usually
evoke considerable debate when establishing a new service or modifying an
existing service. Issues that are usually important to elected officials in
evaluating collection and transfer alternatives, and which staff should be
prepared to address in their recommendations, include the following:
• costs of required new equipment and ability of community to obtain
financing for it
• costs to operate collection system and transfer facilities
Decision makers must
carefully consider many
factors.
Page 4-28
-------
CHAPTER 4: COLLECTION AND TRANSFER
Table 4-11
Steps for Conducting a Time Study
1. Select crew(s) representative of average level and skill level.
2. Determine the best method (series of movements) for conducting the work.
3. Set up a data sheet that can be used to record the following information: date,
name of crew members and time recorder, type of collection method and
equipment (including loading mechanism), specific area of municipality, and
distance between collection points.
4. Divide loading activity into elements that are appropriate for the type of collec-
tion service. For example, the following elements might be appropriate for a
study of residential collection loading times:
• time to travel from last loading point to next one
• time to get out of vehicle and carry container to the loading area
• time to load vehicle
• time to return container to the collection point and return to the vehicle.
5. Using a stop watch, record the time required to complete each element for a
representative number of repetitions. Time may be measured using one of the
following two methods:
• Snapback method: The time recorder records the time after each element
and then resets watch to zero for measurement of the next element.
• Continuous method: The time recorder records the time after each element
but does not reset the watch so that it moves continuously until the last ele-
ment is completed.
Because the continuous method requires the time recorder to perform fewer
movements and no time is lost for watch resetting, the continuous method is
usually recommended.
The number of repetitions that will be representative depends on the time re-
quired to complete the overall activity (cycle). The following numbers of repeti-
tions have been suggested as sufficient :*
Number of Minutes Number of Minutes
Repetitions Per Cycle
60 0.50
40 0.75
30 1.00
Repetitions Per Cycle
20 2.0
15 5.0
10 10.5
6. Determine the average time recorded (T0) and adjust it for "normal" conditions.
In the case of waste collection, adjustments should be made for delays and
for crew fatigue. These adjustments are typically in terms of the percent of
time spent in a workday. The delay allowance (D) should include time for
traffic conditions, equipment failures and other uncontrollable delays. Crew
fatigue allowance (F) should include adequate rest time for recovery from
heavy lifting, extreme hot and cold weather conditions, and other circum-
stances encountered in waste collection. The allowance factors (D and F)
along with the average observed time (T0), can be used to estimate the "nor-
mal" time (Tn):
Tn = fT0)x[1 +(F + D)/100]
This "normal" time is the loading time required for the particular area, and
collection system.
For other activities, adjustments are also made for personal time (bathroom
breaks). In this case, adjustment for personal time is made when calculating
the number of loads/crew/day.
Sources: (1) Miller and Schmidt, 1984: *(2) These values only, from Presgrave, 1944
Page 4-29
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
compatibility of total costs with budget available for solid waste services
differences in levels of service provided by alternative systems
ability of system to meet public's demands or expectations for service
proposed methods for financing system costs and public acceptability of
those methods
the system's effects on efforts to meet the community's waste reduction goals
compatibility of proposed roles for public and private sectors with
political support for them
public's interest or disinterest in changing present arrangements for
collecting solid waste and recyclables.
Efficient routing
decreases program
costs by reducing labor
expended in collection.
DEVELOPING COLLECTION ROUTES AND SCHEDULES
Detailed route configurations and collection schedules should be developed
for the selected collection system. Efficient routing and rerouting of solid
waste collection vehicles can decrease costs by reducing the labor expended
for collection. Routing procedures usually consist of two separate compo-
nents: microrouting and macrorouting.
Macrorouting, also referred to as route balancing, consists of dividing
the total collection area into routes sized so they represent one day's collection
for one crew. The size of each route depends on the amount of waste collected
per stop, distance between stops, loading time, and traffic conditions. Barri-
ers, such as railroad embankments, rivers, and roads with heavy competing
traffic, can be used to divide route territories. As much as possible, the size
and shape of route areas should be balanced within the limits imposed by
such barriers.
For large areas, macrorouting can be best accomplished by first dividing
the total area into districts, each consisting of the complete area to be serviced
by all crews on a given day. Then, each district can be divided into routes for
individual crews.
Using the results of the macrorouting analysis, microrouting can define
the specific path that each crew and collection vehicle will take each collection
day. Results of microrouting analyses can then be used to readjust
macrorouting decisions. Microrouting analyses should also include input and
review by experienced collection drivers. Microrouting analyses and planning
can do the following:
Table 4-12
Transfer System Costs
Capital Costs
Land
Buildings
Utilities
Site development
(on- and off-site)
Material handling and
processing equipment
Transfer vehicles
Design and permitting
Legal and financing fees
Operating and Maintenance Costs
Labor for station operation and
vehicle hauling
Utility service charges
Station and vehicle maintenance
Insurance
Taxes
Vehicle license
Facility permit
Vehicle operation (tires, oil, fuel)
Host community benefits
Renewal and replacement
Reserve on contingencies
Source: W. Pferdehirt, University of Wisconsin-Madison Solid and Hazardous Waste
Page 4-30
-------
CHAPTER 4: COLLECTION AND TRANSFER
Routes may need
seasonal adjustments.
• increase the likelihood that all streets will be serviced equally and consistently
• help supervisors locate crews quickly because they know specific routes
that will be taken
• provide theoretically optimal routes that can be tested against driver
judgment and experience to provide the best actual routes.
The method selected for microrouting must be simple enough to use for
route rebalancing when system changes occur or to respond to seasonal variations
in waste generation rates. For example, growth in parts of a community might ne-
cessitate overtime on several routes to complete them. Rebalancing can perhaps
consolidate this need for increased service to a new route. Also, seasonal fluctua-
tions in waste generation can be accommodated by providing fewer, larger routes
during low-generation periods (typically winter) and increasing the number of
routes during high-generation periods (typically spring and fall).
Heuristic Route Development: A Manual Approach
The heuristic route development process is a relatively simple manual (i.e., not
computer-assisted) approach that applies specific routing patterns to block con-
figurations. USEPA developed the method to promote efficient routing layout and
to minimize the number of turns and dead space encountered (USEPA, 1974).
When using this approach, route planners can use tracing paper over a
fairly large-scale block map. The map should show collection service garage
locations, disposal or transfer sites, one-way streets, natural barriers, and areas
of heavy traffic flow. Routes should then be traced onto the tracing paper us-
ing the rules presented in Table 4-13.
Table 4-13
Rules for Heuristic Routing
1. Routes should not be fragmented or overlap-
ping. Each route should be compact, con-
sisting of street segments clustered in the
same geographical area.
2. Total collection plus hauling times should be
reasonably constant for each route in the
community (equalized workloads).
3. The collection route should be started as close to
the garage or motor pool as possible, taking into
account heavily traveled and one-way streets (see
rules 4 and 5).
4. Heavily traveled streets should not be col-
lected during rush hours.
5. In the case of one-way streets, it is best to
start the route near the upper end of the
street, working down it through the looping
process.
6. Services on dead-end streets can be consid-
ered as services on the street segment that
they intersect, since they can only be col-
lected by passing down that street segment.
To keep left turns at a minimum, collect the
dead-end streets when they are to the right of
the truck. They must be collected by walking
down, backing down, or making a U-turn.
Source: American Public Works Association, 1975
7. Waste on a steep hill should be collected, when
practical, on both sides of the street while ve-
hicle is moving downhill. This facilitates safety,
ease, and speed of collection. It also lessens
wear of vehicle and conserves gas and oil.
8. Higher elevations should be at the start of the
route.
9. For collection from one side of the street at a
time, it is generally best to route with many
clockwise turns around blocks.
Note: Heuristic rules 8 and 9 emphasize the de-
velopment of a series of clockwise loops in order
to minimize left turns, which generally are more
difficult and time-consuming than right turns.
Especially for right-hand-drive vehicles, right
turns are safer.
10. For collection from both sides of the street at
the same time, it is generally best to route with
long, straight paths across the grid before loop-
ing clockwise.
11. For certain block configurations within the route,
specific routing patterns should be applied.
Page 4-31
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Computer-Assisted Routing
Computer programs can be helpful in route design, especially when routes are
rebalanced on a periodic basis. Programs can be used to develop detailed
The use of computer- microroutes or simpler rebalances of existing routes. To program detailed
assisted routing is microroutes, planners require information similar to that needed for heuristic
growing. routing. This information might include block configurations, waste genera-
tion rates, distance between residences and between routes and disposal or
transfer sites, topographical features, and loading times. Communities that al-
ready have a geographic information system (GIS) database are in an espe-
cially good position to take advantage of computerized route balancing.
Municipalities can also use computers to do simple route rebalancing.
For example, the city of Wilmington, Delaware, used a spreadsheet program,
average generation rates, and block configuration data to balance the weight
of waste collected on each route. The city assumed that loading times were
equal in all areas and altered the boundaries of existing routes. Specific collec-
tion vehicle paths were left to drivers. As a result of this simple rebalancing,
the city was able to reduce its waste collection crew and save collection costs.
For smaller communities, rebalancing can be accomplished using manual
methods.
IMPLEMENTING THE COLLECTION AND TRANSFER SYSTEM
Implementing a collection and transfer system involves the following activi-
ties, which are described in more detail in the paragraphs below:
• finalizing and modifying the system management plan
• purchasing and managing collection and transfer equipment
• hiring and training personnel
• developing and managing contracts with labor unions and private
collection companies
• providing public information
• constructing and operating transfer, administrative, and maintenance
facilities.
Finalizing and Implementing the System Management Plan
Whether a municipality provides collection services or manages the efforts of
a private or regional group, a clear organizational structure and management
The management plan plan are needed. The management plan and structure should be reviewed pe-
should be concise, easy riodically as implementation of collection services proceeds and continues.
to follow, and well- The organizational structure should be simple, with a minimum of ad-
organized, ministrative and management layers between collection crews and top man-
agement. Structures should be clear, but kept sufficiently flexible to readily
adapt to changing performance requirements. All workers in the department
should clearly understand the department's mission and their own roles in
achieving that mission. Through training, incentives, and reinforcement by
management, workers should be encouraged to be customer-oriented and
team contributors.
Details about system funding, accounting, billing, and performance
monitoring should be developed and periodically reviewed. Feedback mecha-
nisms to help crews review their performance and to help managers monitor
the performance of crews, equipment, and the overall organization should be
developed and used to achieve continuous improvement.
Page 4-32
-------
CHAPTER 4: COLLECTION AND TRANSFER
Purchasing and Managing Equipment
A well-designed
preventive maintenance
program
• keeps repair costs
down
• makes vehicles more
reliable.
Equipment Purchasing
To purchase equipment most municipalities issue bid specifications, which are
to be the basis of contractors' bids. Such specifications may either give detailed
equipment requirements or be based on more general performance criteria.
Detailed specifications include exact requirements for equipment sizes and ca-
pacities, power ratings, etc. Performance specifications often request that
equipment be equivalent to certain available models, and meet standards for
capacity, speed, maneuverability, etc.
Equipment Maintenance
Municipalities may either perform equipment maintenance themselves, con-
tract with a local garage, or in some cases, contract with the vehicle vendor at
the time of purchase. Usually, municipal collection agencies elect to maintain
vehicles using municipal facilities.
When equipment is maintained by the municipality, maintenance facili-
ties may be under the authority of either a central municipal service or a spe-
cialized maintenance service for waste collection vehicles only. There is no
consensus as to which form of organization is more effective. The advantages
of a single-department maintenance service are that the maintenance facility is
likely to be located closer to the garage or disposal facilities operated by the
collection department, the maintenance personnel will usually be more re-
sponsive to the needs of collection department staff and vehicles, and the me-
chanics are likely to be better acquainted with the needs of the collection
fleet's vehicles.
Centralization of all fleet services may allow a municipality to realize
some cost savings by minimizing duplication of some costs for labor, build-
ings, equipment, and spare parts. Often smaller communities have combined
municipal fleet services, and larger cities have multiple, specialized fleet ser-
vices.
Regardless of the organizational location of the maintenance facility, its
efficiency can be increased by developing a well-defined organizational struc-
ture and good reporting procedures. In many vehicle maintenance organiza-
tions it is most efficient to have a diagnostician and mechanics who specialize in
certain areas such as routine maintenance, compaction equipment repair, etc.
A well-designed preventive maintenance program is essential to control-
ling repair costs and sustaining high reliability for fleet vehicles. Without an
effective preventive maintenance program, vehicles are more likely to experi-
ence on-route breakdowns, which are particularly expensive because of
towing costs, lost labor, and overtime. As part of the preventive maintenance
program, the collection crew should check the vehicle chassis, tires, and body
daily, and report any problems to maintenance managers. In addition, each
vehicle should have an individual maintenance record that includes the
following items:
• a preventive maintenance schedule
• a current list of specific engine or packer problems
• for each maintenance event, a description of repairs and a list including
repair date, mechanic, cost, type and manufacturer of repair parts, and
the length of time the truck was out of service.
Management personnel should periodically review this information to refine
maintenance plans for individual vehicles and to identify improvements to the
overall maintenance program.
Page 4-33
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Plan for equipment
replacement.
Equipment Replacement
Some municipalities or hauling companies replace their trucks at a pre-speci-
fied mileage or time interval. Although this rule-of-thumb approach is easy to
administer, it often results in "lemons" being kept longer than they should
and some good trucks being replaced earlier than economically justifiable.
A truck replacement strategy that is based on the actual costs of owning
and maintaining individual trucks is likely to result in a more effective use of
resources. Using this approach, costs are tracked for each truck, and each
truck is replaced as the costs of continuing to own that particular truck exceed
the costs of purchasing and operating a replacement truck. Annual costs that
should be tracked for existing trucks include the following:
• parts and labor for repair and maintenance
• costs for towing and lost crew time due to breakdowns
• capital loss based on actual decrease in resale value (not book depreciation)
• vehicle operating costs (fuel, insurance, tires, etc.).
Recorded costs should be compared with estimated costs for new trucks,
and individual trucks replaced as their individual maintenance records war-
rant. Replacements of all trucks may nevertheless be required when changes
to the entire fleet are needed to accommodate changes to collection proce-
dures. Collection trucks retired from active service can either be used as
standby vehicles, for replacement parts, or deployed for other types of service
(for example, using old compactor trucks to collect yard materials).
Hiring and Training Personnel
As in all organizations, good personnel management is essential to an effi-
cient, high-quality waste collection system. Management should therefore
strive to hire and keep well-qualified personnel for solid waste management.
To hire qualified people, many municipalities use a civil service system.
If a civil service system is not used, municipalities should develop a system
that minimizes political favoritism in the hiring process. The recruitment pro-
gram should assess applicants' abilities to perform the types of physical labor
required for the collection equipment and methods used. To retain employ-
ees, management should provide a safe working environment that emphasizes
career advancement, participatory problem solving, and worker incentives.
Safety
Concern for safety is
crucial, and an ongoing
safety program is a
must.
Safety is especially important because waste collection employees encounter
many hazards during each workday. As a result of poor safety records,
insurance costs for many collection services are high. Collection personnel
frequently encounter the following hazards:
• busy roads and heavy traffic
• rough- and sharp-edged containers that can cause cuts and infections
• exposure to injury from powerful loading machinery
• heavy containers that can cause back injuries
• dangers from discarded household hazardous wastes such as herbicides,
pesticides, solvents, fuels, batteries, and swimming pool chemicals.
To minimize injuries, haulers should have an ongoing safety program.
This program should outline safety procedures and ensure that all personnel
are properly trained on safety issues. The safety program should include, at a
minimum, the following items:
Page 4-34
-------
CHAPTER 4: COLLECTION AND TRANSFER
An adequate safety
program includes
• training
• record keeping
• protective clothing
• refresher sessions.
Concern for employee
comfort and providing
worker incentives
encourage safer work.
• procedures and training in proper lifting methods, material handling,
equipment operation, and safe driving practices
• a reporting and record-keeping procedure for accidents
• requirements for protective clothing such as hard hats, gloves, goggles,
safety shoes, high-visibility vests, etc.
• frequent refresher sessions to remind workers of safe working habits and
department requirements.
Collection managers should closely monitor worker accident and injury
reports to try to identify conditions that warrant corrective or preventive mea-
sures. For example, some municipalities now offer their collection staff the
use of lifting belts to help prevent lower-back injuries. Similarly, during hot
weather some municipalities offer workers free beverages that replace electro-
lytes. The cost of an aggressive, preventive safety program is almost certain to
be offset by savings from lost work time and injuries.
Comfort
Appropriate work place comfort reduces the potential for injuries and enhances
employee morale. To make working conditions comfortable, haulers should pro-
vide adequate equipment, clothing, and rest facilities. Many haulers furnish
clean, comfortable uniforms for employees; doing so, they note, benefits employ-
ees and improves the public image of the hauler. In addition, many haulers fur-
nish rain gear, boots, and other special clothing for inclement weather.
Haulers should also provide adequate facilities to meet employees'
needs. These facilities should include nearby space for rest rooms, showers,
lockers and lunchrooms.
Training
Haulers should develop an employee training program that helps employees im-
prove and broaden the range of their job-related skills. Such training underscores
the importance of each individual's contribution to the hauler's overall perfor-
mance and helps foster a sense of professionalism. The haulers benefit from im-
proved performance and increased flexibility in assigning work to staff.
Training opportunities should also be developed to address safety and
liability concerns. Education should address such subjects as driving skills,
first aid, safe lifting methods, identification of household hazardous wastes,
avoidance of substance abuse, and stress management.
Worker Incentives
Incentives should be developed to recognize and reward outstanding perfor-
mance by employees. Ways to accomplish motivation include merit-based
compensation, awards programs, and a work structure that emphasizes task
completion rather than "putting in your time."
Compensation should provide managers with flexibility to reward good
performance. Feedback on employee performance should be regular and fre-
quent, however, and not just at annual evaluation time. Award programs ac-
knowledge an employee's accomplishments in the presence of his or her peers.
Such programs can be internal (e.g., "employee of the month" award) or through
professional organizations such as the Solid Waste Association of North America
(SWANA) and the National Solid Waste Management Association (NSWMA).
To improve the efficiency of collection crews, many municipalities use a
task system. Under this approach, crew members may go home after their daily
collection responsibilities have been completed, rather than wait around until a
specified quitting time. This approach provides a built-in motivation for crews to
work efficiently and usually reduces the amount of overtime required.
Page 4-35
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Task system design must ensure a high quality of service; it must also
ensure that crews do not compromise safety to complete their work. Routes
should be carefully drawn up so that each represents a balanced and reason-
able workday. Also, crews should be trained to work at a pace that discour-
ages poor-quality service and minimizes safety hazards or injuries. However,
if a task system is used, it is important to ensure that crews do not sacrifice
safety or customer satisfaction in the interest of finishing early.
Customer complaints ^° encourage high-quality service, crew supervisors should field cus-
should be handled by tomer complaints and then have the crew receiving the complaint address
crew supervisors, and problems associated with it. In some cities, a separate crew addresses com-
crews should address plaints, but this system requires other feedback mechanisms to help crews
the problems raised. learn from their mistakes.
Developing and Managing Contracts with Labor Unions and Private Collectors
Labor unions are common in much of the solid waste collection industry. It is
therefore likely that municipal collection departments will be required to bargain
collectively with labor unions. If this is the case, the department should usually
designate a labor management relations group to handle collective bargaining. In
addition, as part of the labor management relations process, the department
should set a formal procedure for managing employee grievances. This proce-
dure should be designed to allow employees to file grievances without concern of
reprisal. Grievances should be handled quickly and fairly.
If a municipality decides to contract for collection services, selection of
the contractor will usually require the issuance of service specifications and
evaluation of contractors' bids. The municipal department responsible for
overseeing collection should work with municipal purchasing groups to re-
quest, evaluate, and award bids for waste collection. The municipality should
ensure that it has adequate resources to monitor the performance of collection
contractors in meeting contract requirements.
Providing Public Information
Maintaining good communications with the public is important to a well-run
collection system. Residents can greatly affect the performance of the collec-
tion system by cooperating with set-out and separation requirements, and by
keeping undesirable materials, such as used oil, from entering the collected
waste stream.
Collection system managers should creatively use available communica-
" . . ,, . tion methods and materials to remind customers of set-out requirements, in-
mamtain effective f , f , , . ., , ?, ,
communication with form them ol changes to those requirements, provide them with names and
the public at every telephone numbers of key contacts, and provide them with helpful feedback
stage of the process on system performance. Commonly used methods of communicating informa-
tion include brochures, articles in community newsletters, newspaper articles,
announcements and advertisements on radio and television, informational at-
tachments to utility bills, and school handouts. These materials should be de-
signed to communicate new information, but also to remind customers of ser-
vice requirements; this is particularly important in communities with highly
transient populations such as university students.
Communication materials should be used to help residents understand
community solid waste management challenges and the community's
progress in meeting them. For example, residents should be regularly updated
on how well the community's recycling program is doing in meeting waste re-
duction goals and any recurring problems, such as contamination of materials
set out for collection. Residents should also be kept informed about issues
such as the availability and costs of landfill capacity so that they develop an
understanding of the issues and a desire to help meet their community's solid
waste management needs.
Page 4-36
-------
CHAPTER 4: COLLECTION AND TRANSFER
In San Diego, collection workers go door-to-door to explain new programs.
This approach gives crews an opportunity to meet their customers and develop
greater personal awareness and pride in meeting their customers' needs.
MONITORING SYSTEM COSTS AND PERFORMANCE
Collection and transfer facilities should develop and maintain an effective
system for cost and performance reporting. Each collection crew should
complete a daily report that includes the following information:
• total quantity hauled (tons or cubic yards)
• total distance and travel times to and from the disposal site
• amounts delivered to each disposal, transfer, or processing facility (if
there is more than one site)
• waiting times at sites
• number of loads hauled
• vehicle or operational problems needing attention.
In addition, transfer stations should collect vehicle and weight informa-
tion. If a scale is used at the transfer station, waste quantities, vehicle origins,
and delivery times can be collected using a computerized logging system.
Collected data should be used to forecast workloads, track costs, identify
changes in the generation of wastes and recyclables, trace the origin of prob-
lematic waste materials, and evaluate crew performance. Managers should
use such information to identify changes in service needs and to evaluate the
effectiveness of the collection system in meeting its goals and objectives. To be
effectively used by managers for such purposes, reports must provide concise
summaries that track the status of identified key performance parameters,
while allowing optional access to more detailed data that can be used to more
thoroughly investigate a particular problem or issue.
Just as the goals of a collection program set its overall directions, a
monitoring system provides the short-term feedback necessary to identify the
course corrections needed to achieve those goals.
System costs and
performance in light of
program goals should be
continually monitored.
Short-term feedback is
necessary for accurate
program evaluation and
planning to meet new
needs.
REFERENCES
American Public Works Association, Institute for Solid Wastes. 1975. Solid
Waste Collection Practice, 4th edition. Chicago, IL: APWA.
Hickman, H. L. 1986. "Collection of Residential Solid Waste." In The Solid
Waste Handbook: A Practical Guide, ed. by W. D. Robinson. NY: John
Wiley & Sons.
Lueck, G.W. 1990. "Elementary Lessons in Garbage Appreciation," Waste Age
(September).
Peluso, R. A. and E. H. Ruckert, III. 1989. "Designing for Smooth Transfer
Operations." Waste Age, April.
Presgrave, R. 1944. The Dynamics of Time Study. Toronto: Univ. of Toronto Press.
Schaper, L. T. 1986. "Transfer of Municipal Solid Waste." The Solid Waste
Handbook. NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Tchobanoglous, G.; H. Theisen; and R. Eliassen. 1977. SoJid Wastes:
Engineering Principles and Management Issues. NY: McGraw-Hill.
USEPA. 1974. Heuristic Routing for Solid Waste Collection Vehicles.
DSW/SW-1123.
USEPA. 1974a. Residential Collection Systems, Volume 1:-ReportSummary. SW-97c.l.
Page 4-37
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Page 4-38
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.
According to estimates made by the Congressional
Office of Technology Assessment (OTA), the
appropriate technology and adequate economic
conditions already exist to reduce solid waste
generation by 50 percent in the next few years. This
chapter describes options for establishing source
reduction programs in the government, commercial
and public sectors, and for householders. It illustrates,
by example, how to measure the success of such
programs. It also lists references and sources that can
provide decision makers with more details about
designing and implementing specific source reduction
programs.
4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.
From: Decision Maker's Guide to Solid Waste Management, Volume II, (EPA 530-R-
95-023), 1995. Project Co-Directors: Philip R. O'Leary and Patrick W. Walsh, Solid
and Hazardous Waste Education Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison/Extension.
This document was supported in part by the Office of Solid Waste (5306), Municipal
and Industrial Solid Waste Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under grant
number CX-817119-01. The material in this document has been subject to Agency
technical and policy review and approved for publication as an EPA report. Mention of
trade names, products, or services does not convey, and should not be interpreted as
conveying, official EPA approval, endorsement, or recommendation.
Page 5-1
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
Source reduction
implies reducing
waste at its
original source.
(p. 5-5)
In this chapter source reduction implies reducing the volume or toxicity of waste at
the source by changing the material-generating process; it includes incorporating re-
duction in the design, manufacture, sale, purchase, and use of products and pack-
aging. Other terms are often used to mean source reduction, including waste reduc-
tion, waste prevention, waste minimization, pollution prevention, and precycling.
Source reduction
includes several
strategies.
(p. 5-6)
Source reduction reduces the amount of materials we produce and the harmful envi-
ronmental effects associated with producing and disposing of them. It includes:
reduced material use in product manufacture
increased useful life of a product through durability and repairability
decreased toxicity
material reuse
reduced/more efficient consumer use of materials
increased production efficiency resulting in less production waste.
Source reduction offers
several opportunities
for cost savings.
(p. 5-7)
direct savings
avoided waste collection, transportation, and disposal costs
decreased pollution control, liability, and regulatory compliance costs
reduced product and material use and disposal costs
Source reduction
legislation often
focuses on establishing
the following:
(p. 5_7_5_g)
specific goals
government procurement and purchasing requirements
packaging requirements and guidelines
labeling guidelines
business planning and reporting requirements
banning yard trimmings from disposal
banning specific chemicals and types of packaging
Both economic
incentives and
disincentives can be
used to encourage
source reduction.
(p. 5_g_5_io)
Economic incentives include the following:
funding research and development of source reduction and education programs,
developing source reduction measurement standards, and improved product designs
funding waste exchanges
funding other materials reuse programs and businesses
subsidizing repair businesses
providing tax credits or exemptions to industries that meet set goals or design criteria.
Economic disincentives include the following:
creating taxes that reflect disposal costs of packaging
placing taxes on use of virgin materials when recycled materials would work
taxing disposal products
instituting volume-based rates for waste collection programs.
Page 5-2
-------
CHAPTERS: SOURCE REDUCTION
Waste audits are a key to
establishing source
reduction programs.
(p. 5-10 — 5-11)
Waste audits are the key to establishing a successful source reduction program.
They involve assessing the material flow through an institution and preparing ac-
counting for the amount of materials purchased, used, recycled, and disposed of.
A waste audit includes the following steps:
describing current purchases, use and disposal requirements and methods
identifying amounts and types of materials generated, including those to target
for source reduction
estimating cost savings
implementing and monitoring the program.
Selective purchasing is
another strategy for
source reduction.
(p. 5-11 —5-12)
Organizations, institutions, and individuals can preferentially purchase products that
are durable, reusable, and repairable; buy in bulk; and avoid purchasing single-use
products. They can also consider a product's solid waste and toxicity production,
recycled content, packaging, resource use, and ultimate disposal. Shifting purchas-
ing priorities toward source reduction might entail rewriting purchasing codes and re-
viewing and updating material classifications based on new product developments.
It is important for solid waste, environmental, and purchasing officials at all levels of
government to work together in planning, implementing, and monitoring source re-
duction programs.
Source reduction
programs for businesses
and other institutions
may include several
elements.
(p. 5-13 — 5-14)
support and policy directives from management
a waste reduction team or coordinator
accounting of materials purchased and waste produced
reduction plan targeting materials and production practices
employee education
feedback and reevaluation
produce or sell products designed to be reusable and more durable
Source reduction
strategies for industries
include the following:
(p. 5_14_5_15)
manufacturing redesign
product redesign
designing products with durability, reuse, and ease of repair in mind
initiating "in-house" source reduction programs at company facilities
Page 5-3
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
(continued)
Businesses and other
institutions can also
implement a number of
source reduction
strategies.
(p. 5_15_5_16)
Copy double sided.
Use electronic mail.
Circulate only one copy of printed material (memos, documents); use routing
slips indicating who should read it and who has already seen it.
Establish central document and file areas.
Reuse paper that has been printed on only one side.
Reuse and return corrugated boxes.
Purchase cooperatively; order supplies in bulk with other businesses or
institutions (for example, cleaning products).
Establish a waste exchange with other nearby businesses (for example,
merchants sharing a mall).
Sell items in reusable containers.
Provide items in bulk and encourage shoppers to buy in bulk.
Provide shoppers with incentives to reuse store packaging.
A focus on packaging is
another source reduction
strategy.
(p. 5-16)
Packaging should protect products from chemical and physical damage. Once this
goal is achieved, source reduction decision-making guidelines for packaging profes-
sionals should be followed to evaluate each type of package design. Source reduc-
tion considerations should be incorporated into all packaging to the extent possible.
To assess packaging, the following should be considered.
Evaluate the need for any package at all.
Decide if any of the package components can be eliminated.
Assess the use of toxic chemicals and replace them with less harmful chemicals
using the smallest amount possible.
Design a package that is reusable.
Find ways to reduce the package size or use of materials.
Source reduction
programs aimed at
consumers and
residents can
achieve significant
benefits.
(p. 5-18 — 5-22)
An aggressive source reduction campaign for the residential/consumer sector in-
volves using a variety of approaches, in addition to regulatory tools. Decision makers
can consider using the following:
economic incentives, such as unit-based garbage fees
education, technical assistance, and promotions aimed at increasing
participation in source reduction activities like yard material reduction programs
and precycling
investment in source reduction tools such as materials exchange databases or
providing backyard composting bins
regulations and legislation.
Page 5-4
-------
CHAPTERS: SOURCE REDUCTION
UNDERSTANDING AND FOSTERING SOURCE REDUCTION
Defining Source Reduction
The USEPA considers
source reduction the
highest priority method
for addressing solid
waste issues.
Source reduction
implies reducing waste
at the source by
changing the material-
generating process, and
also includes
incorporating reduction
in the design,
manufacture, sale,
purchase, and use of
products and packaging.
In its Agenda for Action (1989), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency gave
source reduction the highest priority as a method for addressing solid waste
issues. Because it minimizes the creation of materials and toxics, source re-
duction is the only practice that is preventative. This proactive approach also
reduces material and energy use. Recycling, composting, waste-to-energy,
and landfilling are reactive methods for recovering and managing materials
after they are produced.
The USEPA defines source reduction as the design, manufacture, pur-
chase or use of materials to reduce their quantity or toxicity before they reach
the waste stream. The National Recycling Coalition (NRC) adopted a some-
what different definition in its "Measurement Standards and Reporting
Guidelines." They define source reduction as "any action that avoids the cre-
ation of waste by reducing waste at the source, including redesigning of prod-
ucts or packaging so that less material is used; making voluntary or imposed
behavioral changes in the use of materials; or increasing durability or re-us-
ability of materials." NRC adds that source reduction "...implies actions in-
tended to encourage conservation of materials." Others have added to the
definition the caution that source reduction should not increase the net
amount or toxicity of wastes generated throughout the life of a product. Al-
though national policy denotes that it is the highest priority waste manage-
ment technique, currently there is no universally accepted definition of source
reduction.
Several terms are often used to mean source reduction. These include
waste reduction, waste prevention, waste minimization, pollution prevention,
and precycling. The precise meanings may depend on the context in which
the terms are used. USEPA often uses the term "waste prevention" in lieu of
source reduction. Source reduction as used in this chapter implies reducing
waste at the source by changing the material-generating process, and also in-
cludes incorporating reduction in the design, manufacture, sale, purchase, and
use of products and packaging. Source reduction programs can be targeted to
reach consumers (often known as "precycling") as well as manufacturers.
Waste reduction is a broader term encompassing all waste management meth-
ods, i.e., source reduction, recycling, and composting, that result in reduction
of waste going to the combustion facility or landfill. Waste minimization re-
fers to activities specifically designed to reduce industrial hazardous and toxic
wastes as they affect land disposal as well as contribute to air and water pollu-
tion. Pollution prevention includes input optimization, the reduction of
nonproduct outputs, and production of low-impact products. Precycling re-
fers to the decision-making process that consumers use to judge a purchase
Page 5-5
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
based on its waste implications; criteria used in the process include whether a
product is reusable, durable, and repairable; made from renewable or nonre-
newable resources; over-packaged; or in a reusable container.
Source Reduction as a First-Choice Approach
Source reduction
reduces the amount of
materials produced and
the harmful
environmental effects
associated with
producing and
disposing of them.
Life cycle analysis details
all resources used and
the products and by-
products generated
throughout a product's
entire life.
Promoting source reduction is important because it conserves resources, re-
duces disposal costs and pollution, and teaches conservation and prevention.
It should, therefore, be given first consideration. Focusing only on recycling
might promote the impression that recycling will take care of our waste prob-
lems. Source reduction and recycling, while important to distinguish from
each other, can be promoted simultaneously. Source reduction is becoming
recognized as a key component of integrated waste management. While its
implementation is in its infancy, creative source reduction strategies are being
developed and applied across the nation.
Source reduction is a practical approach to reducing the amount of
materials we produce and the harmful environmental effects associated with
producing and disposing of them. The basic elements of source reduction
include the following:
• reduced material use in product manufacture
• increased useful life of a product through durability and repairability
• decreased toxicity
• material reuse
• reduced/more efficient consumer use of materials
• increased production efficiency resulting in less production waste.
Tradeoffs between source reduction, durability, recyclability, use of re-
cycled material, and other environmental benefits can occur. If known, these
should be noted and analyzed. The process resulting in the greatest overall
environmental benefit should be chosen.
Ideally, to assess and quantify these tradeoffs, a life cycle analysis would be
performed. Life cycle analysis is a detailed look at all resources used and the
products and by-products generated throughout the entire life of a product or
process. The cradle-to-grave analysis (1) starts with raw materials and energy ac-
quisition, (2) then examines manufacturing and product fabrication; filling, pack-
aging, and distribution; and consumer use and reuse; and (3) ends with analysis
of waste management. Currently, life cycle analysis procedures are being devel-
oped to assess the overall environmental impact of products and their packages.
Until there are standardized methods for performing a life cycle analysis, results
from such studies may not be comparable or reliable. USEPA is working on
guidelines for a more consistent approach to life cycle analysis. Even when the
guidelines are complete, however, conducting a life cycle analysis will still be too
complex and expensive for most local solid waste managers.
Measuring Source Reduction
Monitoring should be an integral part of source reduction programs. Al-
though standardized methods to measure source reduction have yet to be de-
veloped, tracking the costs associated with source reduction and integrating
them into the decision-making process is essential to developing accountabil-
ity. Monitoring also facilitates evaluating programs for efficiency and identi-
fying possible source reduction measures and program revisions. Tracking
the effectiveness of source reduction initiatives is also important for obtaining
funding and resources for these programs.
Source reduction is more difficult to measure on a broad scale than other
methods of solid waste management. It is difficult to measure what hasn't
Page 5-6
-------
CHAPTERS: SOURCE REDUCTION
Quantifying source
reduction program
results is in the early
stages of development.
The technology and
economics exist for
industry to reduce solid
waste by 50 percent.
been produced, and to discern which reductions are due to prevention and which
are due to other factors such as the economy, business cycles, or seasonal changes.
When several waste reduction techniques are used simultaneously, it is not easy
to determine which portion of the diversion was due to source reduction, for ex-
ample, separating it from recycling or composting. However, on a company-by-
company and product-by-product basis, measurements such as the savings
achieved by substituting one product with another are obtainable.
Quantifying program results through accepted measurement techniques
is in the early stages for most types of waste reduction practices and to a
greater extent, for source reduction. A small amount of source reduction data
has been collected, but without established measurement tools, the accuracy of
some reports is questionable. This chapter presents examples of programs
that have measured source reduction success.
Source reduction often results in substantial and measurable cost savings.
These include avoided collection, transportation, and disposal costs, and direct
savings. In addition, source reduction is cost efficient in decreasing pollution con-
trol, purchase, use, and regulatory compliance costs. It also reduces product and
material use and disposal costs in the manufacturing process, making business
operations more efficient overall. There is some concern that source reduction
might reduce economic growth by decreasing consumption. However, source re-
duction offers opportunities for economic gain. Many businesses are becoming
more competitive through source reduction practices and others are finding that
products designed for source reduction achieve significant sales.
According to Congressional Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) es-
timates, the technology and economics exist for industry to reduce solid waste
by 50 per cent within the next few years. This chapter describes options for
establishing source reduction programs in the government, commercial, and
public sectors, and illustrates, by example, how to measure their success. It
also provides references which can provide decision makers with more details
about designing and implementing specific source reduction programs.
SOURCE REDUCTION POLICY
Regulation
Legislation and
regulation governing
source reduction
programs are
increasing.
Legislation and regulation governing source reduction programs are increas-
ing. Source reduction legislation often focuses on establishing the following:
• specific goals
• government procurement and purchasing requirements
• packaging requirements and guidelines
• labeling requirements and guidelines
• business planning and reporting requirements
• yard material bans
• specific chemical and packaging bans.
Education, including promotion, technical assistance, planning and report-
ing, and economic incentives are key elements of such legislation. To achieve a
comprehensive policy approach, decision makers can focus on four strategies:
• "command and control" regulations
• economic incentives and disincentives
• education and technical assistance
• government financial support for source reduction practices (i.e., supply-
ing bins for home composting of yard trimmings).
Page 5-7
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
States may require local
governments to institute
specific source
reduction practices.
Well-conceived labeling
requirements and
guidelines for products
and packaging may help
prevent waste.
Local governments might be required by state laws to institute specific
source reduction practices. In many cases, decision makers can model local
policy after state directives to promote source reduction in their own institu-
tions and in commercial and residential sectors.
Some states, including Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Maine, New Jersey,
New York, Massachusetts, and Michigan, have set source reduction goals that
specify the percent of reduction to be achieved in designated years. To be
most effective, the goals also include a baseline year to measure from and
measurement procedures. Establishing source reduction goals can be impor-
tant in ensuring that source reduction programs are established and funding
and staff are allocated.
Wisconsin and Connecticut statutes direct state agencies to modify pur-
chasing to discourage buying single-use, disposable products and encourage
purchasing multiple-use, durable products. Connecticut's model establishes
specific goals and deadlines for achieving reduction. Local governments can
apply such policies as well.
Acts in Minnesota and Wisconsin target the elimination of excess pack-
aging. New packaging can be reviewed to assess its potential impact on solid
waste disposal and the availability of markets for recycling it. If it is deter-
mined to be "problem" packaging, it can be banned from sale in the state.
The Coalition of North East Governors (CONEG), which includes nine
northeastern states, formed a Source Reduction Task Force in 1988. To achieve
source reduction, they recommended voluntary source reduction by industry,
establishment of consistent goals and standards, coordinated education, and
incentives and disincentives. In addition, a Northeast Source Reduction
Council was formed comprising members from government, industry and
nonprofit groups. The council developed a set of "Preferred Packaging Guide-
lines." The guidelines recommend a hierarchy of packaging practices: no
packaging; minimal packaging; consumable, returnable, or refillable {refill at
least five times) reusable packaging; and recyclable packaging or recycled ma-
terial in packaging.
Labeling requirements and guidelines for products and packaging can
help prevent waste if they encourage consumers to choose products that gen-
erate less waste and if they encourage labels that are specific and accurate. In
1992, the Federal Trade Commission adopted guidelines for the use of labels
which give examples of deceptive and non-deceptive claims, including source
reduction claims. Some states, such as California, New York and Rhode Is-
land, have established requirements for specific labels such as those for prod-
ucts with recycled content.
Legislation can also include limits on toxic content of products, review of
new and existing products for undesirable components and characteristics,
conditional bans on product sale or use based upon design criteria, and re-
quirements for manufacturers to submit source reduction plans.
Some municipalities have also adopted source reduction legislation.
They have set goals and banned certain packaging and disposable products
from sale. Seattle, Washington has set a 1.9 percent source reduction goal and
a 0.6 percent backyard composting goal.
Rhode Island requires businesses to submit detailed source reduction
(and recycling) plans to the state. This was phased in for larger (500 or more
employees) to smaller businesses (100 plus employees) between 1989 and 1990
and for small (less than 50 employees) businesses in 1991. They must conduct
a waste audit and submit a detailed analysis, submit proposals for effective re-
duction and recycling, and prepare an annual report quantifying results. Busi-
nesses have 60 days to activate the plan before inspection by the state. Busi-
nesses totaling one third of Rhode Island's work force have submitted plans
and have already realized large savings in avoided disposal costs.
The source reduction techniques used most frequently by 274 Rhode Is-
land companies include double-sided copying (52 percent), reuse of shipping
Page 5-8
-------
CHAPTERS: SOURCE REDUCTION
Fourteen states ban
yard trimmings from
landfills.
Decision makers
considering bans should
be aware of their
controversial nature and
anticipate possible legal
ramifications.
materials (31 percent), reuse of assorted materials (28 percent), and asking
suppliers to reduce packaging (26 percent).
The Rhode Island study also found that materials exchanges were
underused but that there is great potential for their use. A majority (63 per-
cent) of businesses were interested in using this tool, with wood pallets and
plastics the most likely possibilities for feasible exchanges.
New York City is considering requiring businesses of targeted sizes to
perform and submit waste audits and to meet reduction goals according to a
specific timetable.
Yard material, excluding grass left on the lawn and backyard compost
materials, constitutes a significant portion of the waste stream: it comprised 18
percent of the 180 million tons of municipal solid waste generated in the
United States in 1990. Fourteen states have adopted legislation banning yard
material from landfills. Some programs include bans on leaves only, while
others include garden debris and grass.
Banning items such as excess packaging is another source reduction
tool. A Minneapolis/St. Paul ordinance bans any packaging that does not
meet the test of "environmentally acceptable," which is defined as (1) reusable
at least five times, (2) biodegradable (except plastic), or (3) recyclable in the
city's recycling program.
Packaging bans, however, are not source reduction legislation unless
they encourage reusable packaging or packaging with lesser amounts of mate-
rials. Replacing disposable packaging with recyclable or compostable packag-
ing would not qualify as source reduction unless the new package created less
waste at the source. Decision makers considering bans should be aware of the
difficulties associated with this controversial tool and should thoroughly re-
search the legal ramifications before imposing a ban. Problems with interstate,
regional, or local commerce laws might arise.
Economic Incentives and Disincentives
There are many ways
that state and local
governments can
promote source
reduction.
There are many ways that state and local governments can promote source reduc-
tion. Governments can fund research and development of source reduction pro-
grams, education programs, measurement standards, and product design. Fund-
ing materials exchanges is another method. The Minnesota Public Interest Re-
search Group (MPIRG) operates the BARTER program, an information exchange
for reuse of shipping and packing materials for small businesses. The New York
City departments of Sanitation and Cultural Affairs together operate a reuse pro-
gram, "Materials for the Arts," which matches business donations with the needs
of nonprofit arts organizations. They pick up tax-deductible contributions of
goods and equipment from businesses and individuals and take them to a ware-
house for free pick-up by nonprofit organizations.
Subsidies for repair businesses or reuse organizations can be provided.
Also, repair training programs at technical colleges can be supported. Local
governments can sponsor programs or create opportunities for volunteer pro-
grams such as neighborhood repair centers or neighborhood tool banks. Gov-
ernments can also provide incentives to manufacturers in the form of materi-
als tax credits. Tax credits or exemptions can be given to industries that meet
set goals or design criteria.
Taxes that reflect the disposal costs of packaging material can be applied
at the manufacturing or the consumer levels. These are financial disincen-
tives. At the manufacturing level, a tax can be placed on products with exces-
sive packaging. A tax on each package produced regardless of its contribution
to the waste stream is another method used. Such taxes are used in Florida
and can be costly and cumbersome to administer in the initial years.
Taxes also can be placed on single-use products. The advantages of such
taxes are that they include at least some of the true cost to society of the prod-
uct and its package and, like the variable container rate on refuse, are fair in
Page 5-9
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
charging the generators responsible for producing the waste. The CONEG
Task Force recommended adoption of a per-container charge system to en-
courage consumers to purchase less packaging.
Wisconsin mandates unit-based rates or user-fee collection programs for
More than 2,000 ajj munjcjpaijtjes anc[ counties that do not achieve a 25 percent landfill diver-
communities have unit- . . y ,,.,. . ., . , . . . ... j , .
, , , sion rate. In addition to the inherent economic incentive to reduce waste in a
based garbage rates, . , , .... __ ... . ,
which encouraae unit-based system, Wisconsin oners additional grant monies to communities
manufacturers and ^at implement the fee system. Although the legislation doesn't go into effect
consumers to reduce until 1995, more than 200 communities had instituted rate-based rates at the
reuse, and refill. local level by 1993.
Minnesota required by January 1993 that all municipalities make the pro-
rated share of garbage collection and disposal costs for each generator visible and
obvious to the operator. Licenses must require that charges increase with the vol-
ume or weight of waste collected after a base unit size of service is provided.
More than 2,000 communities have instituted unit-based garbage rates.
This kind of rate system provides manufacturers and consumers with an eco-
nomic incentive to reduce, reuse, and refill.
Mandating minimum lengths for service warranties is another policy tool.
This encourages the development and production of longer-lasting products.
GOVERNMENT SOURCE REDUCTION
Local government leaders can implement source reduction programs at three
levels in their communities: (1) at the institutional level—local government of-
fices and other facilities, such as schools, parks, city works garages, libraries,
etc., (2) at the business/industry level, and (3) at the residential level. By
implementing source reduction programs in their own offices and facilities, lo-
cal governments not only reduce their own waste but also show their commit-
ment to such programs. They can use their own source reduction experiences
to illustrate the benefits of source reduction when developing similar pro-
grams in the commercial and residential sectors of their communities.
Facility Source Reduction Programs: Performing Waste Audits
Guidelines for establishing source reduction programs in local government in-
stitutions are similar to those for establishing commercial source reduction
programs. This section describes the components of a successful program at
the institutional level.
The key to establishing a successful source reduction program is the
waste audit or assessment. Local government managers can perform a waste
audit by following the methods detailed below. Some cities have staff who
Waste audits or perform waste audits for local businesses or for government facilities.
assessmen s are e ^ waste audit is an assessment of material flow through an institution. It
-^ , .. is a detailed accounting of the amount of materials purchased, used, recycled,
source reduction , ,. ™ , .- .-,,,
oroarams a disposed of. Because a waste audit forces a scrutiny of the path each ma-
terial takes through a facility, it clarifies an otherwise complicated morass of
materials that can differ from department to department within a facility. Au-
dits help identify the points at which changes in purchasing, consumption,
and use can reduce or eliminate material.
A waste audit includes the following steps: quantifying current disposal
costs and discarded material; identifying and quantifying materials that are
unnecessary, reusable and recyclable; estimating cost savings; and implement-
ing and monitoring the program.
Waste audits include the . Describe current disposal: Examine size of refuse containers, percent
steps described here. filled, volume contained, density, frequency of collection and costs of
collection. Published generation rates by type of facility such as restau-
Page 5-10
-------
CHAPTERS: SOURCE REDUCTION
Work sheets can help
guide waste audits and
are available from many
local and state
government agencies.
rant, office, and schools, are available from industry and government
documents. These provide estimated pounds generated per person per
month. Multiply the rates by number of employees or residents.
• Identify materials to target for source reduction: Determine material
composition in a facility by listing each type of material that enters it and all
materials and waste it generates, such as paper, aluminum cans, metal
shavings, plastic bags, corrugated boxes, and chemicals. List where they are
stored or used (facility-wide or in a particular department) and estimate the
amount of each recycled or discarded per month. Note the availability of
alternatives or ability to reduce or reuse items in the facility.
• Estimate cost savings: Include avoided disposal costs, avoided material
purchase costs, avoided replacement costs, and costs of reused alternatives
and revenues from marketing scrap. Determine costs of backhauling,
transportation for refilling, etc., and processing equipment, if the costs apply.
• Implement and monitor the program: Choose which measures to imple
ment, keep records of material purchased, scrapped, reused, backhauled,
and disposed of. Measure savings over the long term; estimated savings
will not be realized immediately. Refine and adjust the program.
Work sheets to assist in performing an audit are available as part of com-
mercial recycling handbooks produced by many local and state government
agencies. Some of these include Rhode Island, (OSCAR), 1988, "Handbook for
Reduction and Recycling of Commercial Solid Waste"; The Alaska Health
Project, 1988, Profiting from Waste Reduction in Your Small Business: A Guide to
Help You Identify, Implement, and Evaluate an Industrial Waste Reduction Program;
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, 1988, Possibilities and Practicalities of
Business Waste Recycling; and Seattle, Washington, 1989, Commercial Waste Re-
duction Audit Manual.
USEPA publications are also available as resources to help businesses.
For example, the Business Guide for Reducing Solid Waste (EPA/530-K-92-004)
offers step-by-step instructions designed to assist medium and large busi-
nesses, governments and other organizations establish waste reduction pro-
grams. It also includes work sheets. This publications and others are avail-
able free from the USEPA RCRA/Superfund Hotline: 800/424-9346.
Purchasing
Government
procurement policies
emphasizing source
reduction can
significantly impact the
waste stream.
Government procurement policies that make source reduction a priority can
achieve a significant impact on the waste stream. Collectively, government
represents approximately twenty percent of the gross national product (GNP)
of the United States. As a result, the purchasing power of government can in-
fluence manufacturing practices towards implementing source reduction
goals. Also, by implementing source reduction practices, government sets an
example for business, industry and the public.
As is done in consumer source reduction programs, state and municipal
governments can preferentially purchase products that are durable, reusable,
and repairable; buy in bulk; and avoid purchasing single-use disposable prod-
ucts. Also, governments can consider a product's solid waste and toxicity pro-
duction, packaging, resource use, and ultimate disposal. Shifting purchasing
priorities toward source reduction might entail rewriting purchasing codes
and reviewing and updating material classifications based on new product de-
velopments. It is important for solid waste, environmental and purchasing of-
ficials at all levels of government to work together in source reduction pro-
gram planning, implementation and monitoring.
When government personnel evaluate proposals for equipment and fur-
niture purchases, they can include source reduction criteria in the decision-
making process. Those products that offer extended warranties can receive
Page 5-11
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
In addition to changing
procurement
procedures, local
governments can
consider implementing
other source reduction
activities.
extra points based on the number of years covered beyond the industry stan-
dard. ASTM standards for quality and durability of products can also be
used. In a request for proposal (RFP), a guaranteed buy back for equipment
and furniture can be requested. Also, consider costs of maintenance and sup-
plies needed for equipment as part of the bid evaluation. Purchases can also
be evaluated based upon the methods available for disposal of the item at the
end of its useful life. Those methods ranked the highest based upon a source
reduction priority are: trade-in for a newer model, resale, and salvage of com-
ponents for repair or maintenance of like items.
Intergovernmental arrangements for bulk purchasing enhance the eco-
nomics of source reduction programs. Cooperative purchasing can occur be-
tween states or municipalities, or municipalities can piggyback off state pur-
chasing. Municipalities can co-purchase and share equipment (such as a tub
grinder) on a scheduled basis.
Purchasing products made with recycled content helps to make recycling
a viable process by creating and sustaining markets for used materials, but it is
not a source reduction practice. Although recycled products keep otherwise
usable materials out of the waste stream, there is a difference between using
fewer products overall and using the same or greater amounts of recycled
products (see Figure 5-1).
In addition to changing procurement procedures, local governments can
consider implementing other source reduction activities, including decreasing
yard material at municipal facilities, changing office procedures and employee
behavior (for example, implementing two-sided copying), and ordering only
the amount of printed materials needed (print on demand), as well as other
measures, which are described in the section below on commercial source re-
duction programs.
Figure 5-1
(Released by Kirk Anderson, Cartoonist)
Page 5-12
-------
CHAPTERS: SOURCE REDUCTION
As a large consumer of paper and materials, the government sector can
decrease material use considerably by implementing such measures. For ex-
ample, Itasca County, Minnesota installed reusable stainless steel furnace and
air conditioning filters in 60 units in their garages. Annually, this measure
saves 3,120 disposable filters or 53 cubic yards of waste weighing 1,040
pounds. It also saves the county approximately $4,700 per year.
COMMERCIAL (INDUSTRIAL AND BUSINESS) SOURCE REDUCTION
In addition to government source reduction efforts, significant opportunity ex-
ists for developing source reduction programs in the commercial, business,
and consumer sectors of each community.
Decision makers can encourage individuals and organizations in their commer-
cial sectors to adopt source reduction programs by providing the following:
• model source reduction programs in government facilities
• technical support such as a hot line, waste assessments or training
materials, workshops for targeted generators, and resource information
• education about the economic benefits of source reduction
• public/private partnerships
• awards for source reduction.
A source reduction program for businesses might include the components
described below:
Source reduction
programs should also
be adopted in the
commercial, business,
and consumer sectors.
A source reduction
program for businesses
might include the
components listed here.
1. Support and policy directives from management: Such directives
indicate commitment and allow company staff the time and resources to
measure for and plan a source reduction program, and then to integrate
it into company procedures. Incorporate source reduction achievement
standards into individual employee job duties, evaluations and/or
bonuses.
2. A waste reduction team or coordinator: This team or individual devel
ops the source reduction plan, explores alternative materials and op-
tions, works with employees to brainstorm for new ideas, implements
and monitors the program, and researches new source reduction devel-
opments in order to improve or expand the program.
3. Accounting of materials purchased and waste produced: A waste
assessment will provide information about the types and quantities of
materials purchased, used, reused, recycled, composted or discarded,
where and how often they originate and are discarded within the
business, and the costs associated with them. This information is critical
for identifying cost-effective and practical source reduction actions a
company can take.
4. Reduction plan targeting materials and production/practices: With
information from the waste assessment, formulate a plan to do the following:
• reduce inefficiencies in material and equipment purchasing and use
by buying in bulk
• buy durable products and equipment
• identify and incorporate alternative materials that are less toxic or
less wasteful
• identify items that can be reused often
• identify sources of over packaging and avoid or return the packag-
ing or packing material for reshipment
• offer alternatives to disposables and indicate costs associated with each.
Page 5-13
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Many guidelines for
business source
reduction programs are
similar to those for
recycling programs.
5. Employee education: Inform employees of source reduction goals and
teach them what they can do to help achieve them. Provide incentives.
6. Feedback and reevaluation: Through newsletters, memos, handbooks,
bulletin boards, meetings or awards, inform employees of successes as
well as areas where more source reduction can be achieved. Inform
them of any additions, restructuring, or modifications to the programs.
7. Produce or sell products designed to be reusable, more durable and
recyclable: Also attempt to incorporate recycled materials as feedstock
into products and purchase recycled materials (although this is not
source reduction by definition, it is an integral part of a materials man-
agement program).
Many of the guidelines for establishing a source reduction program for
businesses are similar to those for setting up a recycling program. Source re-
duction should be the initial focus of business waste management plans with
other materials management methods tailored to the resultant smaller (re-
duced) waste stream. Developing monitoring systems for material, product,
and equipment quality and quantity will help to improve production effi-
ciency. This will allow businesses to measure source reduction, monitor pro-
gram progress, and increase the likelihood that they achieve source reduction
goals.
Source reduction plans
can encourage industry
representatives to do
several things.
Source Reduction Implementation Guidelines For Industries
To implement a source reduction plan, local governments can teach and
encourage industry representatives to do the following:
• recover plant materials such as solvents, scrap metal, plastic, paper and
other scrap, cooling waters, and oil
• reduce plant scrap by increasing production efficiency
• produce only what is needed to fill an order
• reuse pallets and have damaged ones rebuilt
• reuse and refill containers, such as Gaylord boxes, plastic bags, and drums
• return packing materials and pallets, back-haul via trucker, train, barge,
or airplane
• reuse packing material
• redesign products to achieve source reduction in packaging and manu-
facturing materials
• use materials obtained through a materials exchange program in place of
virgin feedstock.
Making changes in the
manufacturing process
and product redesign
are important source
reduction strategies.
Manufacturing Redesign
Making changes in the manufacturing process itself is an important strategy
for achieving source reduction, which industry representatives should be en-
couraged to consider. An example of manufacturing redesign that success-
fully achieved source reduction is provided by Ciba-Geigy Corporation,
based in Ardsley, New York. The company's Mclntosh, Alabama plant pro-
duced 2.5 pounds of industrial waste material for every pound of additive, or
twenty million pounds of waste a year. The corporation changed each step of
the production process and was able to completely eliminate generation of
this waste material. The corporation factors disposal costs into production
costs; therefore, each department must account for use and disposal of mate-
rial and has an incentive to reduce.
Page 5-14
-------
CHAPTERS: SOURCE REDUCTION
When considering
product redesign, be
aware of the frequent
tradeoffs resulting from
the ultimate waste
produced by the
product.
Product Redesign
Product design changes are another important element of source reduction. Ben-
efits to industry from product redesign include additional cost savings in reduced
shipping weight or space, less water usage (from concentrates), and reduced
packaging materials and shelf space. Procter and Gamble provides an example of
successful product redesign that resulted in source reduction. Changing the con-
figuration of the wheel and cap of two brands of roll-on deodorant made stacking
possible, which eliminated the need for additional shelf-stabilizing boxboard
packaging containers. The new design uses 80 million fewer cartons, which re-
sults in 3.4 million fewer pounds of waste per year and reduces handling costs.
When considering product redesign, it is important to be aware of and
carefully evaluate the frequent tradeoffs resulting from the ultimate waste
produced by the product. Assess whether a product can be redesigned into a
smaller or more concentrated form, since smaller items are produced with
fewer materials. Source reduction is not necessarily achieved, however, if the
smaller item is less durable or not repairable, or it is intended for short-term
use (unless it is made of the same material as a larger version).
Concentrated products require less packaging material, but if the pack-
aging for the concentrate is neither recyclable, nor significantly different in
weight from the packaging for the nonconcentrated product, it might result in
as much discarded material. When the source-reduced nonrecydabJe package
results in less overall material in the waste stream, source reduction is
achieved. An example is a concentrated fabric softener packaged in a wax-
coated paper carton versus the nonconcentrate in a recyclable (HOPE) plastic
container. The single-use paperboard container contains 75 percent less mate-
rial than the recyclable plastic container. In this case the nonrecyclable pack-
aging should be given priority over a larger, recyclable package. The ideal op-
tion would be a source reduced product packaged minimally in a package
made of recycled material that is also recyclable.
Other Industrial Source Reduction Strategies
Designing for Durability
Longer lasting, energy efficient light bulbs are an example of this. Steel belted
tires are more durable than tires without steel reinforcement and therefore need
to be replaced less often. In addition, they can be retread for reuse. This results in
source reduction. A trade-off occurs, however, because it is currently difficult to
recycle steel-belted tires and many end up in the waste stream.
Designing for Reuse
A reusable, collapsible plastic shipping container is one example. These con-
tainers nest to save space, are lightweight but strong enough for stacking to
save warehouse space, and are recyclable at the end of their useful life. Al-
though the initial costs are high as compared with shorter-lived corrugated
shipping boxes and wooden pallets, cost savings can be realized over time
from space efficiency and avoided disposal and purchasing costs.
Designing Products to Facilitate Repair
Modular components that can be selectively removed from items for repair
increase the cost effectiveness of repair over replacement.
Source Reduction Implementation Guidelines For Businesses
To help businesses implement source reduction programs, local governments
can encourage business representatives to adopt a number of source reduction
strategies, including the following:
Page 5-15
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Copy double sided.
Use electronic mail.
Circulate only one copy of printed material (memos, documents); use
routing slips indicating who should read it and who has already seen it.
Establish central document and file areas.
Reuse paper by making it into scratch pads.
Reuse and return corrugated boxes.
Purchase cooperatively; order supplies in bulk with other businesses (for
example, cleaning products).
Establish a materials exchange among other surrounding businesses (for
example, merchants in the same mall).
Sell items in reusable containers.
Provide items in bulk and encourage shoppers to buy in bulk.
Provide shoppers with incentives to reuse store packaging.
A California company's
polystyrene peanut
reuse program is a
successful incentive
program for reducing
packaging.
A Wisconsin company
targeted several
materials for source
reduction and realized
significant savings.
Table 5-1
Results of the Feather River Company's Polystyrene Peanut Reuse
Program
No. of Bags Reused Volume
21/week 11 cu/yd
1092/year 572 cu/yd
Source: Feather River Company
Cost Savings
$ 320
$16,640
An excellent example of the latter strategy is provided by the Feather
River Company of Petaluma, California, which distributes body care products
packed with polystyrene peanuts. Commercial customers save the peanuts
and return them to the truck driver at the next delivery. Feather River Com-
pany does not purchase any new polystyrene peanuts. (See Table 5-1).
Another company, Nicolet Instrument Corporation, which produces
high tech instruments in Fitchburg, Wisconsin, targeted several materials for
source reduction. Based on the results of a waste assessment, they switched
Table 5-2
Results of Nicolet's Reusable Mug Program
Materials No. of Cups/yr
Single-use cups 216,000
Reusable mugs 950
Source: Nicolet Instrument Corporation
Cost
$7,103 annually
$2,707 one time
to reusable thermal mugs. Nicolet purchased the mugs for employees and
had them imprinted with its own recycling logo. The cost savings in materials
used and waste generated are provided in Table 5-2 . Other measures adopted
by Nicolet include reusing solder and solvents; rebuilding pallets; and purchasing
recharged toner cartridges and returning empty ones for refilling.
Different types of businesses can use source reduction strategies that are
appropriate for their specific materials use and waste streams. For example, restaurant
managers can include the following strategies, in addition to those listed above:
Page 5-16
-------
CHAPTERS: SOURCE REDUCTION
A Rhode Island
restaurant's source
reduction program saves
$2,900 annually and
reduces disposal by 700
cubic yards.
Source reduction
considerations should
be incorporated into all
packaging design.
A Texas company saved
360 of 750 tons per year
of previously landfilled
scrap wood and
purchased 300 tons less
of virgin wood.
• Use reusable utensils, dinnerware, napkins and place mats in restaurants
for in-store serving.
• Sell beverages on tap, in bulk dispensers and in returnable bottles.
• Buy in bulk.
• Reduce single-serving packages for condiments by providing dispensers.
• Ask diners if they want a glass of water, condiments, straw and napkins.
• Evaluate shipping packaging to identify items that could be eliminated
or reduced.
One restaurant that benefited from such measures is the Brick Alley Pub
and Restaurant in Newport, Rhode Island, which formerly served beer in
nonreturnable bottles. Their source reduction program consisted of installing
a tap as well as purchasing beer only in returnable bottles. These measures
resulted in cost savings of $2,900 and disposal reduction of 700 cubic yards annually.
Packaging should protect products from chemical and physical damage.
Once this goal is achieved, source reduction decision-making guidelines for
packaging professionals should be followed to evaluate each type of package
design. Source reduction considerations should be incorporated into all
packaging design. To assess packaging, the following should be considered.
• Evaluate the need for any package at all.
• Decide if any of the package components can be eliminated.
• Assess the use of toxic chemicals and replace them with less harmful
chemicals using the smallest amount possible.
• Design a package that is reusable.
• Find ways to reduce the package size. For example, by using the same type
of packaging material, but in smaller amounts (by weight); by reducing the
size or volume of the package relative to the product it contains; or by
substituting a different, recyclable material that weighs less.
Successful source reduction involving packaging materials was achieved
by PPG Industries, Inc. of Wichita Falls, Texas, which manufactures float glass
that they package with wood. Their source reduction program decreases
disposal and purchasing of wood and promotes local small business develop-
ment. They created a storage area for some of the wood packaging for later
reuse and arranged for a local company to rebuild packaging for company
use. In the first year, PPG saved 360 of 750 tons per year of previously land-
filled scrap wood and purchased 300 tons less of virgin wood. The resulting
economic benefits for PPG Industries include the following:
• avoided disposal costs on 360 tons per year
• decreased packaging costs by 15 percent per year on recycled containers
over virgin
• market revenues from wood of $2,400.
In addition, the company rebuilding the wood packaging for PPG realized in-
creased earnings of $4,000 monthly and added 2.5 new jobs.
Ideally, it would be economically and technically feasible to recycle
packaging when it reaches the end of its reduced and reused life. Packaging
designed for reduction and reuse would ideally meet both these criteria, thus
helping to achieve further overall waste reduction.
Other Examples of Source Reduction and Reuse by
Businesses
• A laser printer service business, Shadow Fax in Madison, Wisconsin
encourages reuse through cost incentives and reduction through longer
Page 5-17
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Other companies have
also realized savings
from source reduction
programs.
product life. Shadow Fax gives customers a cost credit for return of a
laser printer toner cartridge for refilling. The cartridge is disassembled,
any worn parts are replaced and it is refilled with new toner. They also
rebuild cartridges with more durable parts, increasing their service life
more than six times. Although the rebuilt cartridges are the same price
as new ones, they are sold 90 percent more often. Cost credit incentive
structure: New, in box $89; rebuilt, increased durability $89; recharged
without core returned $59; recharged with core for reuse $49.
Safety-Kleen, the world's largest recycler of contaminated fluids, oper-
ates automotive solvents recycling firms throughout the United States.
Safety-Kleen developed a container to further reduce and reuse its
business material which, in addition, is recyclable when it can no longer
be reused. The plastic container for antifreeze, made with recycled
plastic resin, was developed for reuse. When antifreeze is brought in for
reclaiming, the container is refilled. When the container is at the end of
its useful life, it is recycled into another reusable antifreeze container.
Safety-Kleen also developed a reusable and returnable dry-cleaning bag
to replace disposable plastic dry-cleaning bags. More than one billion
plastic dry-cleaning bags are landfilled each year. The average cost
savings for switching to reusable bags for 125,000 to 150,000 garments
per year, or 500 customers per month, is four to six thousand dollars
annually. This program also includes hanger reuse and recycling
resulting in a 40 percent cost decrease for hangers or up to three thou-
sand dollars annually.
Goodwill Industries of America is a nonprofit business that accepts and
collects donations of used items such as clothing, small appliances, and
furniture, some of which they repair or rebuild. A UCLA-Extension
study developed methods to quantify diversion resulting from thrift
stores and garage sales. They determined that 11,600 tons were diverted
from thrift stores and 57,700 tons from approximately 164,900 garage
sales in Los Angeles, California in 1990.
SOURCE REDUCTION BY RESIDENTS
An aggressive source reduction campaign for the residential/consumer sector
involves using a variety of approaches, in addition to the regulatory tools de-
scribed earlier in this chapter. Decision makers can consider using the following:
Source reduction
campaigns for the
residential/consumer
sector use a variety of
approaches.
• economic incentives
• education, technical assistance, and promotions
• investment in source reduction tools such as materials exchange data-
bases or providing composting bins.
To illustrate how local decision makers implement these approaches, details of
specific source reduction programs targeting the residential sector are provided.
Local Source Reduction Economic Incentives: Unit-Based Garbage Fees
Unit pricing or unit-
based garbage
collection fees
encourage residents to
produce less waste.
Unit pricing or unit-based garbage collection fees are economic tools that encour-
age residents to produce less waste. Municipalities institute a fee for each bag or
can of refuse set out for collection. There are a variety of ways to design a pay-
per-container system. All require that users pay for the amount of refuse they
generate. In such systems, individual residents can reduce refuse collection costs
by producing less refuse. This provides an economic incentive for source reduc-
tion, recycling and composting. A range of 25-50 percent reduction, primarily
due to increased recycling and yard material diversion, has been reported by
Page 5-18
-------
CHAPTERS: SOURCE REDUCTION
Unit-based container
rates make the true
cost of solid waste
management apparent
to consumers.
By 1994, more than
2,000 communities had
implemented some type
of unit-based rate
program.
some communities in the first year unit-based rates are implemented. It is difficult
to separate the smaller percent that is attributable specifically to source reduction.
Unit-based container rates help the resident understand the true cost of
solid waste management. The rates usually incorporate the cost of refuse col-
lection and disposal and, in some programs, subsidize recycling collection as
well. There is often no extra charge to the resident for increasing amounts of
recyclables collected. A flat fee for unlimited amounts of garbage collection
and disposal is removed from taxes where is was often hidden under the gen-
eral tax levy. Or a fee can be charged as a special assessment on taxes or
placed on a utility bill to cover a base amount of service only.
Variable rates can be used for both curb-side and drop-off refuse and
yard material collection programs. In addition, unit-based rate programs can
be either publicly or privately operated. There are a variety of mechanisms for
charging fees to residents. These include residents purchasing special trash
bags, buying tags or stickers to affix to their own bags and containers, signing
up for a specific size and number of cans, and paying by weight of garbage. A
variation on these unit-based rate systems is a base rate system. Users all pay
a set fee (base rate) for a given amount of service, and then pay per container
for any garbage disposed of above the base amount. Limits to the size and
weight of bags need to be set to prevent over-stuffing, and illegal dumping
provisions in ordinances need to be enforced.
By 1994, more than 2,000 communities had implemented unit-based rate
programs. The City of Seattle, Washington instituted unit-based fees in 1981.
They used a variable can rate or charge based on the size of can each house-
hold signed up for with a mini-can of 19 gallons as the lowest option. Seattle
has tested, on a pilot-program basis, a system in which each can is weighed at
the truck and the weight recorded with bar code scanning for exact billings.
Because the amount of refuse produced can be reduced by source reduc-
tion, recycling, and composting, residents who "pay by the container" have an
incentive to choose the products they purchase with each item's waste poten-
tial in mind. Pay-per-container systems encourage source reduction by pro-
viding additional economic incentives to buy items with minimal packaging
or in reusable containers.
Utica, New York uses unit-based rates for municipal refuse collection.
Collection costs for refuse decreased from $1.4 million to $806,000 in one year.
Recycling collection costs were an additional $103,000. With the pay-per-con-
tainer program, the volume of material at the landfill decreased by one third.
(Note: the portion of landfill diversion attributable directly to source reduction
as opposed to recycling is unquantified.)
Decision makers can learn more about volume-based rates in Variable
Rates in Solid Waste: Handbook for Solid Waste Officials, Volumes I and II (USEPA
Documents) and Wisconsin Volume-Based Rate Collection Guide (UW-Exten-
sion). USEPA will have a new unit pricing guide by June 1994.
Yard Material Reduction
Managing yard
material at home can
significantly reduce
solid waste.
Local solid waste program managers can encourage residents to promote
waste reduction by managing yard material at home. Although in this case
the production of grass and leaves is not being reduced, using the material
where it is produced rather than adding it to the waste stream is a form of
source reduction. Residents should understand that leaving grass on the lawn
is beneficial for the lawn. Backyard composting, leaving grass clippings on
the lawn, and mulching are all source reduction measures. (These are de-
scribed further in Chapter 7.) The "Don't Bag It" campaign created by Piano,
Texas has been adopted in eight states including Iowa, Missouri, and Louisi-
ana. Milwaukee, Wisconsin uses a "Just Say Mow" program. Other states use
master composter programs, demonstration compost sites, publications, ex-
hibits, and posters to educate the residential and commercial sectors.
Page 5-19
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Master composting
programs that teach
residents how to build
compost bins and make
compost can be
developed.
Assessing the overall
environmental effects of
waste reduction
strategies is important.
Local managers should emphasize the importance of using correct methods
of backyard composting so that composting is not perceived as a public nuisance.
Distributing guidelines to the public so they can learn how to avoid attracting ani-
mals and creating odors will help them to become successful composters.
Local solid waste program officials can organize master composting pro-
grams that teach residents how to build compost bins and make compost. The
City of San Francisco contracts with a nonprofit, community-based group
(SLUG—San Francisco League of Urban Gardeners) to provide composting in-
formation to residents. They provide educational literature, conduct work-
shops, and staff a "rotline." The village of Skokee, Illinois provided tax re-
bates on mulching mowers for $25 toward purchase of a new mower or one
third the cost of a mulching attachment. Seattle, Washington distributes re-
cycled plastic compost bins free to residents. They expect to recoup the costs
of the bins within fifteen years due to avoided disposal costs. Keeping yard
material at home can be more efficient for home owners, because it means less
work than bagging yard material for collection or hauling it themselves to a
drop-off or composting site.
Grasses have been developed that are slow growing and that stop grow-
ing at a particular height. Planting these grasses preferentially is an effective
source reduction tool for yard material. Planting ground cover and spreading
shrubs is another method of reducing the amount of grass produced. These
practices can be used by local governments on municipal properties and dem-
onstrated to the public.
Removing trees or not planting trees to eliminate leaves and branches is not
a viable source reduction strategy. It is important to assess the overall environ-
mental effects of waste reduction strategies under consideration. In the case of
trees, their positive environmental effects (for example, carbon dioxide intake and
oxygen production) outweigh possible problems associated with the waste mate-
rial they produce. Source reduction measures should not substitute one environ-
mental problem for another or create different, but equally harmful effects.
Consumer-Based "Precycling" or "Eco-Shopping"
"Precycling," or "eco-
shopping," refers to the
decisions consumers use
to judge purchases
based on the products'
waste implications.
Local governments can promote source reduction in the residential sector by
developing a strong education program. They can also create directories of re-
use services such as rental outlets, repair shops, and outlets for used goods in
their community; Seattle's Use It Again, Seattle directory and Los Angeles' Put
it to Good Use are good examples.
Local programs should also publicize the consumer's role in source
reduction efforts, which might include basing decisions about purchases, not
only on product attributes and costs, but also on packaging and alternatives to
disposal. "Precycling," or "eco-shopping," refers to the decision-making
process that consumers use to judge a purchase based on its waste implica-
tions. Criteria used in the process include whether a product is
• reusable, durable, and repairable
• made from renewable or nonrenewable resources
• over-packaged
• in a reusable container
• in a recyclable container (though not source reduction, this is part of eco-
shopping education).
The impact that consumer behavior can have on source reduction is sig-
nificant. For example, if 70 million Americans each bought one half gallon of
milk in half-gallon containers, they would use 41 million pounds Jess paper
and 6 million pounds Jess plastic in one year than if the same number of people
bought the same quantity of milk in two, one-quart containers. Additional sav-
ings would include $146 million in packaging and one trillion Btu's of energy.
Page 5-20
-------
CHAPTERS: SOURCE REDUCTION
Some local education campaigns promoting precycling and source re-
duction were developed by Berkeley, California; New York City; and Seattle,
Washington. Education efforts teach consumers to follow the 5R/C model: re-
ject, reduce, reuse, repair, recycle and compost. Packaging makes up approxi-
mately thirty percent by weight and fifty percent by volume of municipal
solid waste. For this fraction of the solid waste stream alone, consumer ac-
tions have enormous potential to reduce waste.
A local precycling and source reduction education campaign should
include strategies that consumers can easily implement to purchase products
based on how the product and packaging will be disposed of after use.
Several such strategies are described below.
• Bring reusable shopping bags: The first step in precycling is arriving at
the store with one or more reusable, durable shopping bags. An alterna-
tive is to take back paper or plastic grocery and shopping bags for reuse.
• Buy concentrates: Buying concentrates when available reduces packaging.
• Buy in bulk: Buying in bulk reduces packaging and is often preferable.
However, buying in bulk achieves reduction only if the item purchased
will be used before it spoils and becomes a waste. Consumers should,
therefore, purchase items with unlimited shelf life in bulk and perishable
items according to the rate of use.
A local precycling and
source reduction
education campaign
should include
strategies that are easy
to implement.
Purchase reusable products: Consumers should have the option of
choosing reusable items instead of single-serving or single-use dispos-
ables. Reusable items include cloth napkins, wipes and tablecloths, china
plates and reusable cups, silverware, rechargeable batteries, refillable
razors and pens. Beverages purchased in bulk can be used as individual
servings by pouring them into a reusable thermos. Nonrecyclable single-
use drink containers result in considerably more waste than using a
thermos. Plastic produce bags can be reused at the store. Plastic contain-
ers (that are not recyclable as yet), and steel coffee cans are packaging
items that can be reused as storage containers in place of new items that
might be purchased specifically for that function.
Purchase durable and repairable products: Preferential purchase of
durable and repairable products is another source reduction strategy.
Evaluating product quality will result in both materials and cost savings
over a product's lifetime. Energy-efficient, longer-lasting and replace-
able light bulbs are everyday items that are more durable. Larger items
such as appliances, cars, clothes and retread tires should be purchased
for durability, maintained, and then repaired, rather than discarded.
Maintaining items in good working condition, for example, keeping tires
properly inflated, will extend their useful lives.
Buy secondhand items: Purchasing secondhand items and donating
other items to outlets for resale or reuse achieves source reduction.
Shopping at garage sales is an excellent source reduction practice. Some
items from Goodwill Industries and similar organizations, such as
mattresses and small appliances, in addition to being used, have been
repaired and refurbished. This is also true for items such as sports
equipment, bicycles, lawn mowers and furniture.
Borrow or rent items when possible: Borrowing or renting items, rather than
purchasing them at all, achieves source reduction. If the item will be used only
once or for a short time, avoid purchasing it. By borrowing or renting,
consumers can test products and brands for efficient purchasing later.
Avoid over-packaged items: Not purchasing products with excessive
packaging is another strategy. Although the packaging was produced (and
therefore not reduced at the source), when consumers reject excess packag-
ing, it encourages manufacturers to adopt source reduction practices.
Page 5-21
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Several strategies exist
to reduce the amount
and toxicity of materials
purchased.
Labeling programs in
grocery stores are
another precycling
strategy to encourage
source reduction.
• Be aware of products containing hazardous ingredients: Consumer
source reduction (precycling) education should also include information
about the hazard level of products. One of the most significant con-
sumer impacts comes from teaching consumers how to substitute
alternative products that do not contain hazardous chemicals, how to
identify such products, and how to use fewer of them.
Source reduction can occur when one product is substituted with an-
other that has multiple purposes. If a product containing hazardous chemicals
must be used, use one that contains fewer hazardous ingredients and a
smaller amount of them.
Teach consumers to purchase only the amount necessary to accomplish a
task so no or minimal hazardous waste materials are left over. Common
household purchases containing hazardous materials include some types of
cleaners, disinfectants, polishes, motor oil, solvents and garden pesticides and
herbicides. Seattle distributes "safe cleaning kits" to residents in the region as
part of its participation in a Regional Hazardous Waste Management Plan.
Another strategy to reduce the amount and toxicity of materials pur-
chased is to encourage consumers to make a shopping list and a plan. This
can help to eliminate impulse buying of items not really needed or of over-
packaged, single-serving, convenience products. The plan should include esti-
mates of the amount of an item needed; consumers can then avoid acquiring
excess product that may become discarded. Comparison shopping can also
achieve source reduction.
Labeling programs in grocery stores represent another precycling strat-
egy that encourages source reduction. Champaign-Urbana, Illinois' model su-
permarket and Boulder, Colorado's "Stop Waste Before It Happens" campaign
at grocery stores both use shelf labeling systems. Such programs can also con-
sist of in-store signage, source reduction information booths, and letter writing
campaigns aimed at manufacturers.
The materials from programs described above are resources available to
local decision makers for use in modeling consumer source reduction educa-
tion programs.
REFERENCES
Alderden, J. 1990. "Volume Based Rates, Dream or Nightmare?" Recycling
Today (November).
Bell, Carole. July 1991. Rhode Island Department of Environmental
Management, personal communication.
Bracken, Robert. 1992. "North Carolina County Institutes Sticker System,"
BioCyde (February).
Bregar, Bill. 1991. "Shipping Container Market's Growth Slow," Plastics News
(September 19).
Brown, Kenneth. 1990. Examples of Waste Source Reduction For County
Government. Minnesota Office of Waste Management.
Chertow and Cal Recovery Systems. 1991. Draft FinaJ Report: Waste Prevention
in New York City, Analysis and Strategy (March).
CONEG Policy Research Center, Inc. 1989. FinaJ Report of the Source Reduction
Task Force.
CONEG Policy Research Center, Inc. 1990. First AnnuaJ Report.
Fishbein, B. and Caroline Gelb. 1992. "Making Less Garbage: A Planning
Guide for Communities," Inform.
Cruder, Sherrie. 1993. "Matchmakers: Materials Exchange," Resource
Recycling (December).
Page 5-22
-------
CHAPTERS: SOURCE REDUCTION
Cruder, Sherrie. 1993. Wisconsin Volume-Based Rate Collection Guide: Economic
Incentives for Source Reduction and Recycling, (November). UW-Extension
Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center.
Guerrero, Roland. 1991. PPG Industries, Safety, Health and Environmental
Control, personal communication.
Harrison, E. & Angell, R. December 1992. Waste Prevention TooJ KitforLocaJ
Governments. Cornell Waste Management Institute.
Institute of Packaging Professionals. 1990. Packaging Reduction Recycling &
Disposal Guidelines.
Kashmanian, Ferrand, et al. 1990. "Source Reduction and Recyclability:
Recent Market Place Activities," Resource Recycling 0uly).
Lerner, Rosie. 1990. Response to Yard Waste Resources Survey. Purdue University.
Minnesota Office of Waste Management. 1989. Examples of Source Reduction by
Commercial Business.
National Recycling Coalition. 1989. NationaJ Recycling CoaJition Measurement
Standards and Reporting Guidelines.
New York City Departments of Cultural Affairs and Sanitation. May 1993.
Starting a Materials Donation Program: A Step by Step Guide.
Office of Technology Assessment (OTA). 1989. Facing America's Trash: What
Next for Municipal SoJid Waste. OTA-0-424.
Ohio Department of Natural Resources. 1990. Waste Reduction Guide for Ohio's
Business and Industry.
"Redesigning Packaging to Cut Costs and Waste," Wall Street Journal. July 31,1991.
Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management and Brown
University Center for Environmental Studies. September 1992.
Mandatory Commercial Solid Waste Recycling: Rhode Island Case Study.
Rubin, Powers, et al. 1990. Industry, Environment Harmonize Through Pollution
Prevention, ENR Construction 2000.
Safety-Kleen. Form 91528.
Skumatz, L. 1991. "Garbage by the Pound: The Potential of Weight-Based
Rates," Resource Recycling 0uly).
Skumatz, L. and Breckinridge, C. 1990. Executive Summary, VoJ. I and Detailed
Manual, Decision Maker's Guide To Solid Waste Management—VoJ. II (June).
NTIS Document Number EPA 910/9-90-102a.
UCLA-Extension. 1991. Non-Profit Thrift Store and Garage Sale Diversion Study
(June).
USEPA. 1989. Agenda for Action.
US EPA. 1990. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1990
Update.
USEPA. 1992. The Consumer's Handbook for Reducing Solid Waste. August.
USEPA. 1993. Waste Prevention Pays Off: Companies Cut Waste in the
Workplace. September. EPA/530-K-92-005.
USEPA. 1993a. Business Guide for Reducing Solid Waste. September. EPA/530-
K-92-004.
USEPA. 1994. Pay-as-You-Throw: Lessons Learned About Unit Pricing. EPA
530-R-94-004.
World Wildlife Fund and the Conservation Foundation. 1991. Getting At The
Source, Strategies for Reducing Municipal SoJid Waste.
Page 5-23
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Page 5-24
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.
Recycling, the process by which materials otherwise destined
for disposal are collected, processed, and remanufactured or
reused, is increasingly being adopted by communities as a
method of managing municipal waste. Whether publicly or
privately operated, a well-run recycling program can divert a
significant percentage of municipal, institutional, and business
waste from disposal and can help to control waste manage-
ment costs by generating revenue through the sale of recy-
clable materials. Public support for establishing recycling pro-
grams continues to grow and some states now require commu-
nities to recycle.
Successful recycling is not guaranteed, however. Program
managers must give special attention to making the program
economically efficient and maximizing public participation.
Establishing an effective recycling program presents a major
administrative and political challenge to a community. In suc-
cessful programs, procedures are continually reviewed and ad-
justed according to changing conditions.
Program managers should continually strive to provide a
consistent stream of high-quality (free of contaminants) recov-
ered materials that meet the standards of the marketplace.
4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.
From: Decision Maker's Guide to Solid Waste Management, Volume II, (EPA 530-R-95-023),
1995. Project Co-Directors: Philip R. O'Leary and Patrick W. Walsh, Solid and Hazardous
Waste Education Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison/Extension. This document was
supported in part by the Office of Solid Waste (5306), Municipal and Industrial Solid Waste
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under grant number CX-817119-01. The
material in this document has been subject to Agency technical and policy review and approved
for publication as an EPA report. Mention of trade names, products, or services does not
convey, and should not be interpreted as conveying, official EPA approval, endorsement, or
recommendation.
Page 6-1
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
Program design and
revision are ongoing
efforts.
(p. 6-1)
Establishing an effective recycling program presents major administrative and political
challenges to a community. In successful programs, procedures are continually re-
viewed and adjusted according to evolving conditions and changing community
needs.
Design programs as
coherent systems that
involve the public in
every step.
(p. 6-6)
An efficient recycling program requires a systems approach—all program compo-
nents are interrelated; decisions about one must be made with other components in
mind. Successful recycling also requires enthusiastic public participation, and pro-
grams must be designed with public convenience and support in mind.
This 12-component
plan provides an
outline for successful
program design.
(p. 6-7)
Following a sequential approach can ensure adequate planning and successful pro-
gram implementation.
1. Identify goals.
2. Characterize recyclable volume and accessibility.
3. Assess and generate political support.
4. Assess markets and market development strategies for recyclables.
5. Assess and choose technologies for collection and processing.
6. Develop budget and organization plan.
7. Address legal and siting issues.
8. Develop start-up approach.
9. Implement education and publicity program.
10. Commence program operation.
11. Supervise ongoing program and continue publicity/education.
12. Review and adjust program.
Successful marketing
of recyclables requires
• accurate market
knowledge
• shared decision
making.
(p. 6-13 — 6-16)
Securing stable, reliable markets requires (1) basing marketing decisions on a clear
understanding of the recyclables market system, and (2) sharing decision making
among recycling program planners, government officials, the public, and the private
sector. Assessing markets involves the following:
Identifying buyers: Names, phone numbers and addresses are available from
state recycling offices (many produce recycling markets directories).
Contacting buyers: Ask about the price they will pay, specifications for how the
materials must be prepared, and amount of contamination that is acceptable.
Selecting buyers: The buyer's abilities must closely match the recycling
program's needs. Some program planners interview prospective buyers.
Contracting with buyers: A written contract specifying what is expected of all
parties should be made. During market downturns some buyers will only service
customers who have contracts.
Page 6-2
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
Understanding current
U.S. and foreign market
trends is crucial.
(p. 6-16 — 6-17)
Successful marketing requires an understanding of current trends and changes in
domestic and foreign markets. Current trends include the following:
More communities are developing MRFs (materials recovery facilities).
Expanding and adding new recyclers as intermediate processing services is
becoming more common.
The improving quality of recyclables makes processing larger quantities more
cost-effective and serving markets at greater distances possible.
Export markets for recyclables are expanding, and direct marketing strategies for
exporting recyclables are helping spur the expansion.
Several options for
market development
can be pursued.
(p. 6-17 — 6-24)
Market development requires balancing supply of recyclables with demand for prod-
ucts made from them. This chapter discusses the following strategies and tools:
legislative options
economic incentives
technology developments and improvements
transportation networks
business development
education strategies
cooperative marketing.
Program design will be
based on answers to
these questions.
(p. 6-24)
What form will the waste be in when it is provided to the collector?
How will the waste be collected?
What type of processing/storage facility is best?
Several options exist
for preparing
recyclables for
collection.
(p. 6-24 — 6-28)
Many options exist for preparing recyclables for collection—individual community
needs and circumstances determine which is appropriate. These options include the
following:
residential drop-off centers
residential buy-back programs
curbside collection
source separation
mixed waste collection
wet/dry collection.
Page 6-3
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. I
(continued)
Options for collecting
recyclables include
both public and private
collectors.
(p. 6-30 — 6-32)
Options for collecting recyclables may include the following:
using existing public sanitation workers for waste and recyclables
using private haulers for recyclables only
using private haulers for waste and recyclables.
Inner cities and multiple-
family dwellings have
special collection needs.
(p. 6-33)
Inner-city neighborhoods and multiple-family dwellings pose special problems; edu-
cation programs and buy-back centers may improve participation.
Processing and storage Small communities or groups of communities may develop small drop-off centers
centers can benefit that feed a larger processing facility (see Figure 6-7); each small community, then,
both small and large benefits from a convenient, low-cost collection point and the economies of scale that
communities. a large facility provides.
To manage large urban recycling programs, many communities use MRFs (material re-
covery facilities), which process large volumes of material in the most efficient and cost-
effective manner.
MRF designs must
consider
• space needs
• safety
• accessibility.
(p. 6-33 — 6-34)
There are three crucial considerations in designing a MRF:
The site must accommodate buildings, traffic and storage.
Layout and equipment must facilitate efficient and safe materials processing,
movement, and storage in compliance with local building codes.
Design must allow efficient and safe external access and internal traffic flow.
Program organization
and budgets.
(p. 6-44 —6-46)
Organization: To be successful, every recycling program must be run like a business,
rely on trained personnel, and have an institutionalized structure within the commu-
nity. Programs can be purely public (run by public works departments and city coun-
cils), public and private (run by sanitary district or recycling commission), or purely
private (nonprofit or for profit).
For any program, a paid manager and staff with broad business and organizational
skills is necessary.
Budget: The budget should estimate personnel, equipment, building, and other ex-
penses; indicate capital and operating costs for a MRF or collection center; and pre-
dict revenues and other sources of income (see Table 6-14).
Financing: Revenue from the sale of recyclables may be inadequate to cover all pro-
gram costs. Most communities budget additional tax monies or develop alternative
strategies for program financing.
Page 6-4
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
Program planners must
address legal and
siting issues.
(p. 6-45 — 6-48)
Resolving legal and siting issues during the planning and implementation process is
crucial. Overlooking a legal requirement can halt the entire project if a legal challenge
arises. Five categories of legal/siting issues are discussed:
zoning and land use considerations in siting
permits
contracts
general business regulation
ordinances.
"Start-up plans" help
communities adjust to
new programs.
(p. 6-48 — 6-49)
All new recycling programs involve major changes in the way citizens handle waste; a
start-up plan is, therefore, a must. Communities can start with a voluntary or pilot
program, and use information and experience gained from it to plan for a larger-scale
recycling program.
Program options can
be evaluated during
pilot programs.
(p. 6-49)
In these programs, materials are collected using prescribed methods for a set period
of time; the program's efficiency is then evaluated. Such programs allow communi-
ties to test the appropriateness of different strategies to meet their needs.
Starting with a
voluntary program
helps education.
(p. 6-49 — 6-50)
Voluntary programs allow an educational period in which the benefits and strategies
of a recycling program are taught. A subsequent change to a mandatory program
will be more easily accepted and complied with.
Education and
publicity programs
should be ongoing
efforts.
(p. 6-51 —6-52)
The long-term success of any recycling program depends on public participation.
Citizens and local officials must be constantly reminded of the environmental, eco-
nomic, and social reasons for reducing landfill waste. Program publicity, promotion,
and education must be ongoing.
Page 6-5
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
DEVELOPING A RECYCLING PROGRAM: A SYSTEMS APPROACH
In cost-effective and
efficient programs,
decisions are made with
all other program
components in mind.
Designing an efficient recycling program requires a systems approach. Deci-
sions about collecting, marketing, and processing recyclables are interrelated.
Making a decision about one component of a recycling program without tak-
ing into account the impact of that decision on other components may lead to
an inefficient and overly expensive program, prone to public criticism and
meager participation. Since the public (citizens, families, and businesses)
must be relied on to participate by separating a high percentage of uncontami-
nated recyclable materials, the program must be designed with public conve-
nience and support as a primary objective.
To ensure success, a community recycling program must be developed
in a coordinated fashion. First, communities should decide which materials
will be recycled. This decision should be based on an analysis of the volume
of the community's recyclable material that can be diverted to the recycling
operation and the marketability and economics of handling such materials.
Once it is known which materials will be collected and in what volume, deci-
sions can be made concerning how to collect the material, what processing
will be needed, and how much processing and storage space will be required.
The needs of potential buyers will help determine what types of equipment
for processing and storage will provide better marketability.
A well-designed recycling operation should have minimal environmen-
tal impacts. However, as with any material processing operation, land use
and siting issues must be considered and any conflicts resolved. Significant
effort must also be made to operate the facility as a good neighbor and keep
nuisance conditions, such as noise, from developing.
Finally, a recycling program must be designed to meet the requirements
of state recycling legislation. This chapter discusses the key issues involved in
developing and operating a recycling program. Steps and procedures are ex-
plained within the context of a system with interrelated components.
USING EXISTING RESOURCES
In many communities, private businesses or public agencies may be able to
Drawing on local provide the services necessary for planning and implementing a recycling pro-
resources can save time gram. For example, a local hauler may own or have access to an existing recy-
and money. cling processing facility, which would eliminate the need for the community
_ , .. i t h t to Provide its own processing capability. Similarly, recycling consultants can
local public and private provide expert planning advice, which is especially important for small corn-
sectors can offer munities lacking environmental or public works staff.
Page 6-6
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
The extent of outside involvement will depend on community resources
and goals and the availability of qualified service providers. The inefficiency
and cost of duplicating services should also be considered. The community
must make an effort to develop an effective program, but may not need to per-
form every task internally. Recycling often provides an excellent opportunity
for developing partnerships between the public and private sectors.
Cooperative Recycling
Cooperation among communities can benefit a recycling program, and oppor-
tunities for such cooperation should always be pursued. Processing recyclable
materials from more than one community creates economies of scale for
equipment purchase and program administration. Joint marketing of recy-
clable material can enhance marketability by increasing the volume of material
available to buyers.
DESIGNING AND IMPLEMENTING A RECYCLING PROGRAM
Decision making
should be well
organized and
coordinated.
Designing an effective recycling program requires a careful analysis of the va-
riety of technical options available in light of the resources and goals specific
to a community. Each community is unique; others can provide ideas, but
each community or regional cooperative should develop its own program.
Community decision making should follow a coordinated process. Fol-
lowing a sequential approach reduces the likelihood of overlooking an essen-
tial issue or giving it insufficient attention. The long-term success of a pro-
gram can be jeopardized by inadequate planning or poor implementation.
Regardless of whether or not state recycling legislation is in place, devel-
oping and implementing a recycling program should involve a 12-component
process, which is outlined in Table 6-1. Components 1,2, and 3 (identify
goals; characterize recyclable quantity, composition and accessibility; assess
and generate political support) focus on gathering information and develop-
ing the political base needed to determine the scope of the program; they are
addressed in detail in Chapters 1, 2, and 3.
Components 4 through 8 (discussed in this chapter) focus on markets
and the technical details of the program. Components 9 through 12 (also dis-
cussed in this chapter) address implementing the program in the community.
By following this systematic approach, program managers will improve the
likelihood of program success.
Table 6-1
A 12-Component Recycling Program Plan
1. Identify goals. 7.
2. Characterize recyclable quantity, compo- 8.
sition, and accessibility. g
3. Assess and generate political support.
4. Assess markets and market development 10.
strategies for recyclables. -| -|
5. Assess and choose technologies for
collection and processing.
6. Develop budget and organization. 12.
Address legal and siting issues.
Develop start-up approach.
Implement education and
publicity program.
Begin program operation.
Supervise ongoing program
and continue publicity and
education.
Review and adjust program.
Source: P.Walsh. 1993. University of Wisconsin-Extension, Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center
Page 6-7
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Assess Markets and Market Development Strategies for Recyclables
It is frequently said that the ultimate success of recycling depends on stable,
reliable markets for recyclables. Unless a community has markets for the ma-
terials it collects, it may end up temporarily storing some materials and later
landfilling some or all of them. If citizens are asked to separate materials for
recycling and some are subsequently landfilled because markets are depressed
or nonexistent, a negative political backlash may result; community support
for recycling could fall and the program may be jeopardized. Unless state law
requires that certain materials be collected, it may be wise to start by collecting
only readily marketable materials for the community collection program.
Securing stable, reliable markets for recyclables is a twofold process.
First, it requires marketing decisions based on a clear understanding of the in-
frastructure of recycling. Second, it demands that recycling program planners,
government officials, and the public share responsibility with the private sec-
tor in adopting and implementing market development strategies.
STRUCTURE OF THE RECYCLABLES MARKET
The following sections discuss recycling markets and market development
strategies from domestic (U.S.) and global perspectives. They also discuss re-
cycling markets and market development trends currently being used and
studied, as well as potential barriers to those techniques. After reviewing
these sections, the reader should understand how local marketing and pur-
chasing decisions affect, and are affected by, the global marketplace.
The tonnage of municipal solid waste recovered for use by U.S. and ex-
port markets has increased dramatically over the past several decades. Ac-
cording to the USEPA, almost 6 million tons of materials were recycled in
1960. That figure grew to nearly 30 million tons by 1992. The amount of recy-
clables available to markets is expected to increase even faster in coming years
as recycling programs around the country continue to grow. These significant
growth rates will require accelerated attitudinal changes that recognize recy-
clable materials not as waste, but as raw materials or feedstock for industries
with a great potential to affect local, national and international commerce.
Recycling collection and marketing are not new phenomena. Recyclables
have been collected from non-municipal sources, especially industry, for a
very long time, exceeding one or two hundred years in some cases. Thus, the
tonnages of materials separated for recycling are higher from these sources.
Table 6-2 reports the 1992 tonnages of recyclables collected from all sources
(for which data are available) and marketed to domestic and export users. As
shown, nearly 1 billion tons of materials were collected.
Competing in the global
recyclables market
requires knowledge of
handling strategies and
their changes.
Table 6-2
1992 Tonnages of Selected Recyclables
Category
Export Market
Domestic Market
Scrap Paper and Paper Products 6,448,000
Metals: Ferrus/Nonferrous 10,563,000
Plastics 202,000
Glass2 n/a
Total 17,213,000
27,299,000
52,378,000
401,OOO1
n/a
80,078,000
7 Includes tonnage of bottles only.
2Tonnages of recovered glass are not tracked.
Sources: Resource Recycling, April 1993: Scrap Processing and Recycling, May/June 1993
Page 6-£
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
As the quantity of recyclables increases, it will affect the established ma-
terial-handling network for recyclables in the United States. An understand-
ing of existing material-handling strategies and probable changes to these
strategies is important to recycling program planners who want to remain
competitive in this emerging global marketplace.
Market Structure
Markets link buyers
and sellers for a
particular good.
Brokers can switch
materials from one
market to another,
depending on demand
and other factors.
A market is an institution that serves as a link between buyers and sellers of a
particular good. In recycling, the market infrastructure includes two tiers: in-
termediate markets and end-use markets. Intermediate markets are com-
monly categorized as collectors, processors, brokers, and converters. End-use
markets use recovered material as feedstock to manufacture a new product.
Companies can serve one or more of these functions simultaneously.
Collectors/Haulers
Collectors are companies that collect recyclables or are waste haulers who have
expanded their business to include collecting recyclables from residents and busi-
nesses. Most collectors accept unprocessed recyclables, either source-separated or
commingled. These materials are commonly marketed to another intermediate
materials handler or domestic market; collectors usually do not export materials.
Processors
Processors accept and modify recyclables from residential or business sources by
sorting, baling, crushing, or granulating. Processors include local, private buy-
back centers, and privately or publicly operated material recovery facilities (also
referred to MRFs, pronounced "murf"). These buyers sell to other intermediate
buyers or domestic end-use markets and do not generally use export markets.
Processors may be material-specific (e.g., processing mixed paper into various goods).
Brokers
Brokers buy and sell recyclable materials, often arranging to have them
shipped from one location to another by collectors or processors. The broker
receives a fee for this service. Depending on the situation, some brokers pro-
vide processing services, while others only move preprocessed recyclables.
Brokers generally sell to converters or to end-use markets and commonly ex-
port materials to foreign countries. The advantage of brokering is that brokers
have a variety of markets available to them and can switch materials from one
market to another depending on demand and other factors. Sometimes bro-
kers are able to quickly market a slightly contaminated load for a lower price
through other market contacts. Brokers may require all materials collected to
be marketed through them so that they receive the more lucrative materials as
well as materials with higher levels of marketing risk.
Converters
Converters are companies that take recyclable materials in a raw form and alter
them so they are readily usable by a manufacturer. An example of a converter is a
company that produces pulp from paper; the pulp is then used by a paper mill.
End-Use Markets
End-use markets are public- or private-sector entities that purchase recovered
materials from a number of sources and use those materials as feedstock to
manufacture new products. Although historically the majority of private-sec -
Page 6-9
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
With direct marketing to
end users, communities
can avoid market price
swings and benefit local
manufacturers.
tor markets for U.S. recyclables were in this country, export markets are be-
coming stronger. Communities may want to market some materials directly
to end-use markets. Although direct marketing eliminates the need to pay a
broker, the community assumes the risk if the buyer rejects a slightly contami-
nated load and there is no alternative market readily available. If, however, a
community has a well-run program producing high-quality recyclable mate-
rial, direct marketing can work well. Many communities around the country
have established lucrative and stable markets by direct marketing baled news-
print for newsprint. Direct marketing to end users can relieve the community
of broad swings in market prices and provide benefits to local manufacturers.
As with any product, local marketing must be carefully developed and the
materials' value well publicized.
Transportation Companies
Transportation companies nationwide are developing strong business rela-
tionships with a variety of industries that market products made from recy-
clable materials. These transport businesses may be able to guarantee to the
community that materials collected by the hauler will be marketed by the
hauler. The community and the hauler should negotiate issues such as who
will own the recyclables and who will receive revenue for the materials sold.
Often communities and haulers share risks and benefits by agreeing to split
revenues.
Material-Specific Market Structure
The list of potentially recyclable materials is long, and it continues to grow as
technological developments enable more materials to be recycled into more
products. To simplify a discussion of these commodities, the list of materials
can be grouped into five major categories of postconsumer recyclables: paper,
glass, plastics, scrap metals, and waste tires.
Recovered paper and
paper products are
bought and sold through
well-established local
processors and brokers
who sell to domestic and
export paper mills.
Paper
Recovered paper and paper products are bought and sold through a well-es-
tablished network of local processors and brokers who typically bale these
materials for sale to domestic and export paper mills. Increasingly, mills are
also buying directly from collectors as well. Table 6-3 presents tonnages of
wastepaper recycled by domestic and export markets in 1992. Paper and pa-
perboard represented a significant contribution to export trade in the 1970s,
when fiber-poor nations like Japan and South Korea began to add new paper-
making capacity and the output of Scandinavian countries (once leading ex-
Table 6-3
Waste Paper in Thousand Tons, 1992
Grade
Domestic Use1
Export
Total
Newspaper
Corrugated grades
Mixed grades
High grades
5,856
12,614
3,145
5,684
1,285
2,765
875
1,490
7,141
15,379
4,020
7,174
1. Consumption by U.S. paper and paperboard mills, including producers of molded pulp and
other products.
Source: American Forest and Paper Association, 1993
Page 6-10
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
The paper industry has
set a recovery goal of 40
percent by 1994. The
current recovery rate is
38 percent.
Recovered glass markets
allow very little
contamination.
Recycling program
planners must address
this concern for high-
quality recovered glass
and other commodities.
porters) began to decline. Recovered paper is classified as newsprint, corru-
gated cardboard, mixed paper (including magazines, junk mail, and box-
board) , high-grade de-inking (white office paper), and pulp substitute (usually
mill scrap).
Paper mills, the most common end users of recovered paper, use the ma-
terial as a feedstock to manufacture recycled paper and paper products, such
as newsprint, chipboard, kraft linerboard, corrugating medium, and tissue
products. Other uses of recovered paper include roofing felt and chipboard.
Shredded paper can be used to make animal bedding, hydromulch, molded
pulp products, and cellulose insulation. The paper industry is making a sig-
nificant investment in manufacturing capacity for making paper and paper
products with recycled content, and has set a recovery goal of 40 percent by
1994. The current recovery rate is 38 percent.
Foreign mills continue to add recycling capacity as well. In fact, the rate
of growth in the export of recovered paper has exceeded domestic growth,
due in part to the tremendous economic growth and prosperity in the Pacific
Rim nations. From 1970 to 1986, the American Paper Institute (now called the
American Forest and Paper Association) estimated that U.S. exports of waste-
paper rose from 408,000 tons to 3.75 million tons, an increase of 818 percent in
just 16 years. Furthermore, it should be noted that fiber-poor countries like Ja-
pan and South Korea have some of the most advanced paper-making mills in
the world; hence exports of wastepaper should continue to surpass the growth
rate of domestically remanufactured paper.
Glass
Glass manufacturers purchase glass containers recovered in the United States
for reprocessing into new clear, green, and brown glass jars and bottles. The
majority of recovered glass is remanufactured in this country. According to
the Glass Packaging Institute and representatives from Owens-Brockway, a
small percentage is exported from west-coast and northeast states to Canada
and Mexico. Glass is typically broken for size reduction or crushed into cullet
and ultimately sold to glass manufacturers as furnace-ready cullet after metal
caps and rings, labels, and other contaminants are removed. The glass indus-
try has pledged to increase the percentage of cullet in its manufacturing opera-
tions from the present rate of 31 percent up to 70 or 75 percent, given consis-
tent supplies. Alternative markets for glass include glassphalt, art glass, sand-
blasting, and from postindustrial window pane glass, fiberglass insulation.
The state of California recently passed legislation mandating the use of post-
consumer container glass in fiberglass insulation.
Markets for recovered glass have been strong and stable for brown and
clear containers. Green glass, however, is seldom used to package goods do-
mestically, so fewer companies produce this color and demand is more spo-
radic. Although the glass industry has made a commitment to increase the de-
mand for recovered glass overall, there is an important and pervasive market
concern about the quality of material being produced by collection programs
and at processing facilities. Recovered glass markets usually require very
little contamination. Recycling program planners must address this concern
for high-quality recovered glass as well as for other commodities.
Plastic
Postconsumer plastic-resin recycling technology has developed more rapidly
than technologies for any other recovered material in the last half century.
(Note that postindustrial plastics have been successfully recycled for years.)
Whereas only five to ten years ago postconsumer high-density polyethylene
(HOPE) and polyethylene terephthalate (PET) plastics were vaguely consid-
ered recyclable, these two resins, especially HOPE milk jugs and clear PET
Page 6-11
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
The market structure for
plastics is the least
developed among
recyclables because of
the recency of recycling
capabilities.
Ferrous and nonferrous
metals can be prepared
for sale through some
combination of
processing by flattening,
baling, and shredding.
Tires represent a special
challenge to solid waste
and recycling program
managers.
plastics, now hold a stronger place in the market. However, according to many in
the plastics industry, the outlook for colored PET and HOPE is uncertain because
demand is presently not keeping pace with supply. The recyclability of other res-
ins, such as polystyrene, polyvinyl chloride, low-density polyethylene, polypro-
pylene and mixed plastic resins is making strides but much remains to be done.
Table 6-4 provides data on plastics recycling from 1990 to 1992.
The market structure for plastics is the least developed among recy-
clables because of the recency of recycling capabilities. However, most plas-
tics are densified locally by flattening, baling, or granulating, and sold either
to converters, where the resins are turned into pellets, or directly to domestic
or export end users for remanufacture into such products as soda bottles, lum-
ber, carpet and carpet backing, flower pots, and insulation.
Metals
Ferrous and nonferrous metals have been bought and sold through a well-estab-
lished network of processors and brokers and shipped to domestic and export
markets throughout the last century. With few exceptions, this long-standing
track record makes ferrous and nonferrous metal markets among the most stable
of the recyclable materials. Ferrous scrap includes autos, household appliances,
equipment, bridges, cans, and other iron and steel products. Nonferrous scrap
metals include aluminum, copper, lead, tin, and precious metals.
Both ferrous and nonferrous metals can be prepared for sale to markets
through some combination of processing by flattening, baling, and shredding
of the material. In some cases, processors melt the metal into ingots before
selling it to end-use markets. Concern over polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)
in capacitors and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) in appliance cooling systems has
caused changes in appliance handling systems since the late 1980s and may
continue to do so for some time.
The development in 1988 of the Steel Can Recycling Institute, now called the
Steel Recycling Institute, has helped strengthen demand for postconsumer steel
cans. Since that time, several foundries and steel mills have begun or expanded
recycling efforts; steel mini-mills also appear to be increasing their use of recov-
ered steel in regions which typically lack large mills. However, the strength of the
postconsumer steel can market will vary regionally into the future.
Tires
Tires represent a special challenge to solid waste and recycling program man-
agers. In the past most tires were retreaded, but with the advent of steel-
belted radials and cheaper new tires, fewer tires are being retreaded.
Table 6-4
Plastics Packaging Recycling
Item
PET
HPDE
LDPE/LLDPE
PS
PVC
PP
Source: R.W. Beck and Associates,
1990-1992
1990
226.7
160.2
42.5
12.9
1.5
0.4
(in millions of pounds)
1991
292.8
277.2
41.8
23.9
1.6
5.2
1992
402.1
416.7
63.5
31.6
10.2
15.2
1993; Plastics News, July 5, 1993
Page 6-12
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
Scrap tire recycling and
disposal has tripled from
1990 to 1992 and may
exceed the annual
supply of scrap tires
generated by 1997.
In the United States, recycling and disposal of scrap tires has tripled
from 1990 to 1992 and is expected to exceed the annual supply of scrap tires
generated by 1997.
The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991 re-
quires states to meet minimum utilization requirements for asphalt containing
recycled rubber in federally funded transportation projects; states not meeting
the minimum requirements will lose a portion of the federal highway funding.
By 1994, 5 percent minimum recycled rubber content is required, rising to 20
percent by the year 1997.
As Figure 6-1 shows, using chipped or shredded tires as a fuel source is
also growing. Electricity-generating facilities, pulp and paper mills, and ce-
ment kilns are the most common processes using these scrap tires.
ASSESSING MARKETS
Over time, the ability to
consistently sell
materials to a buyer may
be more important than
the price they offer.
When assessing markets for recovered materials remember that, over time, the
ability to move materials to a buyer on a regular basis may be more important
to the success of the program than the price paid. Developing a relationship
with a buyer who will attempt to provide a stable market for customers dur-
ing poor market conditions is essential to the success of the program. Some
communities sell to "spot" markets, jumping from buyer to buyer depending
on which company is giving the best price at the time. While this method may
increase revenues in the short run, a community with no loyalty to its buyers
can expect no loyalty in return from its buyers during downturns in the mar-
ket. For the marketing of most materials, communities are better served by es-
tablishing long-term relationships with reputable buyers.
There is no simple way to determine the best market situation for a given
material. This task requires a four-step process which includes identifying,
contacting, selecting, and contracting with buyers.
Figure 6-1
Uses of Scrap Tires
350 -
300 -
250 -
(/)
c
1 200 -
>
150 -
100 -
50 -
0 -
24.5
1990
64
1992
328
141
1994 1997
^ Civil Engineering
D Rubber-Modified
Asphalt
Q Fuel
Source: Scrap Tire Management Council 1992
Page 6-13
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Identifying Buyers
For each commodity, a
range of available buyers
must be identified and
contacted.
Sufficient time and
resources should be
devoted to identifying
markets.
For each commodity under consideration, a range of available buyers must be
identified and contacted. This is tedious but extremely important work.
There are numerous methods for finding out which buyers might be willing to
purchase or accept your recyclables. Three common methods which have
proven successful include company phone calls, visits, and requesting written
information or proposals from potential buyers.
The names, phone numbers, and addresses of recycling buyers willing to
provide service to communities can be found in a number of places. Many
state recycling offices produce a recycling markets directory which can be ob-
tained at little or no cost. Other sources of market information include talking
to other recycling program operators, or contacting national industry organi-
zations, such as the American Forest and Paper Association, the American
Plastics Council, or the Steel Recycling Institute, as well as privately produced
recycling market listings. Names and addresses for these contacts are in-
cluded in Table 6-5.
Sufficient time and resources should be devoted to identifying markets
for recovered materials. In communities without recycling coordinators or
solid waste managers, the task of collecting market information may best be
assigned to a committee, with each committee member agreeing to obtain in-
formation for a given material. By dividing up the work, the information can
be collected efficiently, without burdening any individual.
Contacting Buyers
Know the specifications
for presenting the
material to the buyer and
the acceptable degree of
contamination—cleaner
materials are more
valuable.
When each potential marketing representative is contacted, in addition to ask-
ing what price the marketer is willing to pay for the material, other essential
information should be solicited. Most important are specifications for how the
material must be presented to the buyer and what degree of contamination
Table 6-5
Selected Organizations Providing Market Listings (free of charge)
Glass
Glass Packaging Institute
1801 K Street, NW, Suite 1105L
Washington, DC 20006
202/887-4850
Plastics
American Plastics Council
1275 K Street, NW, Suite 400
Washington, DC 20005
800/2HELP-91
Paper
American Forest and Paper Association's
"PaperMatcher"
260 Madison Avenue
New York, NY 10016
800/878-8878
Metals
Aluminum Association
900 19th Street, NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20006
202/862-5100
Steel Recycling Institute
Foster Plaza 10, 680 Anderson Drive
Pittsburgh, PA 15220
800/876-SCRI
General Information
Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries
1325 G Street, NW, Suite 1000
Washington, DC 20005
202/466-4050
Most state recycling agencies maintain a markets directory. Also, statewide nonprofit
recycling organizations often perform a similar service.
NOTE: This listing is not intended to be comprehensive. Inclusion on this list does not
indicate an endorsement by the USE PA or the document's authors.
Source: M. Kohrell. 1993. University of Wisconsin-Extension, Solid and Hazardous Waste
Education Center
Page 6-14
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
As competition
increases, programs
meeting buyers'
specifications will have
more secure and stable
markets.
Transportation costs are
extremely important, so
ask company
representatives if buyers
will provide transport if
materials must be
delivered.
Check references and
past records of buyers
and market
representa lives.
(i.e., foreign material) is acceptable. In the case of newsprint, many marketers
will pay a different price depending on whether the material is baled or loose.
Also, material that is wet from rain or snow or discolored by the sun may be
unacceptable to the buyer. In general, the cleaner the material, the more valu-
able it is, both in terms of price and marketability. Information concerning
price and specifications will determine other program components such as
storage space needed and whether processing equipment needs to be pur-
chased. These are important decisions with potentially significant financial
impact and they should only be made with complete information. As market
competition increases, those recycling programs able to effectively and regu-
larly meet buyers' specifications will be assured a more secure and stable mar-
ket for the collected materials.
Transportation costs are extremely important in the economics of recy-
cling, so company representatives should be asked whether buyers will pro-
vide transport for collected materials or whether the materials must be deliv-
ered. If the buyer will provide a vehicle to collect recyclables, it is important
to clarify who pays for the hauling, what tonnage is required, and who loads
the collection truck. Some marketers will provide containers, such as semi-
trailers or Gaylord boxes (heavy corrugated boxes open at the top, measuring
4 feet by 4 feet by 4 feet) for storage, and will pick up the materials when a full
semitrailer load is collected. Some buyers will also have equipment to process
the materials and will recover these costs by paying a lower price for the mate-
rials. If the buyer does not provide transportation services, recycling program
planners must make arrangements with an alternative hauling service.
It is important to determine whether marketing representatives will pay
higher prices for higher volumes of materials. Often, if a buyer can be guaran-
teed a high volume of quality recyclable material on a regular basis, the buyer
will pay a premium price. Likewise, communities should determine whether
there are minimum quantities that the market will accept.
Market representatives should also be asked to provide references for other
programs they have serviced. Also, discuss buyers' reputations with other recy-
cling programs in the area. Ask about buyers' track records for providing prompt
pick-up and payment, how well they adhere to contracts they have signed, how
long they have been in business, and their financial viability.
The revenue offered or charge assessed by a potential buyer should only
be considered in relation to the criteria discussed above; revenue cannot be
considered as the only or most important criteria. Quoted prices can be com-
pared with general price and trend information provided by industry publica-
tions. See Table 6-6 for a listing of price-tracking publications.
Selecting Buyers
The process of selecting buyers begins with evaluating information collected
during the waste characterization effort. The objective should be to select
buyers whose abilities most closely resemble the needs of the recycling pro-
gram. Information gathered from potential buyers can be informally evalu-
ated by a recycling employee or planning committee, or a formal evaluation
process can be designed. Some recycling program planners schedule inter-
views with potential buyers to ask specific questions of each. The results are
analyzed and the best buyers are selected. Another option is to establish a
scoring system that assigns to each buyer a certain number of points based on
a set of criteria. The buyers with the highest score are then selected.
Contracting with Buyers
Once buyers have been selected for one or more recyclables, an agreement is
commonly negotiated so that each party (the seller and the buyer) knows what
is expected of them. While many sellers and buyers have traditionally done
Page 6-15
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
business with a "hand-shake" agreement, a written buyer/seller agreement is
necessary to protect the relationship with the buyer as competition for markets
continues to escalate. Contracts can be particularly useful documents when
markets take a downturn because buyers may only service customers with
written contracts. Types of written agreements offered by buyers include let-
ters of intent to purchase material and formal contracts.
Provisions included in a written agreement may include tonnage and vol-
ume requirements, material quality specifications, provisions for delivery or pick-
up, termination provisions, length of commitment, and the pricing basis.
ANTICIPATED CHANGES IN U.S. AND EXPORT MARKETS
Many private recyclers have been in business for generations and understand
all too well the intricacies of the recycling market. Conversely, involvement in
operating a recycling program is, for the most part, a relatively new enterprise
for the public sector.
Using MRFs and A recent trend in the United States is the development of hundreds of
intermediate processing processing facilities, called material recovery facilities (MRFs) or intermediate
act i IBS is increasing processing centers (IPCs), which accept commingled (mixed) recyclables and
nationwide. ^ '_ , ,'.->,.. T 1 in™ i / u ,, ,,
process them to market specifications. In early 1990, close to one hundred
such facilities had been established; by the mid-1990s, more than a thousand
could exist. These facilities are financed with public or private funds, and op-
eration is provided by some combination of the public and private sectors.
MRFs and IPCs provide large governments and groups of smaller govern-
ments with cost-effective mechanisms to control their own processing strate-
gies, as well as an opportunity to sell materials directly to end-use markets.
A second trend is the expansion of existing capacity and the addition of
new private recyclers to provide intermediate processing services. It is a re-
Table 6-6
Commonly Used Price-Setting and Tracking Publications
PAPER PLASTIC METAL
Fibre Market News Modern Plastics American Metal Market
GIE Inc. Publishers McGraw-Hill Publishers Co. 825 7th Avenue
4012 Bridge Avenue P.O. Box 602 New York, NY 10019
Cleveland, OH 44113 Heightstown, NJ 08520 212/887-8560
216/961-4130 609/426-7070
800/456-0707 800/257-9402 Iron Age
Hitchcock Publishing Co.
Official Board Markets Plastics News 191 S. Gary Avenue
"The Yellow Sheet" Grain Communications, Inc. Carol Stream, IL 60188
1 E. 1st Street 965 E. Jefferson Avenue 708/665-1000
Duluth, MN 55802 Detroit, Ml 48207
218/723-9355 313/446-6000 MULTI-MATERIALS
800/346-0085 800/678-9595 Materials Recycling Markets
P.O. Box 577
The Paper Stock Report Ogdensburg, NY 13669
McEntee Media Corp. 800/267-0707
13727 Holland Road
Cleveland, OH 44142 Waste Age's Recycling Times
216/362-7979 5615 W. Cermak Road
Cicero, IL 60650
202/861-0708
800/424-2869
Most state recycling agencies maintain a markets directory. Also, statewide nonprofit recycling organizations often perform a similar service.
NOTE: This listing is not intended to be comprehensive. Inclusion on this list does not indicate an endorsement by the USEPA or others.
Source: M. Kohrell. 1993. University of Wisconsin-Extension, Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center
Page 6-16
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
Selling materials
to distant U.S. and
foreign markets will
become more
commonplace.
sponse to two factors: (1) the growing number of municipal programs and re-
tail businesses without the capability or desire to become involved in material
processing, and (2) the need to consistently meet material quality specifica-
tions required by markets. Additional processing capacity will be particularly
popular for commodities such as glass and plastics, for which tightening qual-
ity requirements make beneficiation necessary before the material can be used
by the end-use market.
Growth in the quantity of available recyclables will offer both the public
and private sectors the ability to accumulate and cost-effectively process
greater tonnages of these materials. This trend will allow materials to be
transported to markets at greater distances than in the past. Thus, selling ma-
terials to distant markets in the United States and other countries will become
more commonplace than is already the case in many locations. An analysis of
export data for recyclables indicates that markets in Canada and Mexico are
relying more heavily on U.S. recyclables as raw feedstocks than in years past.
In addition to these two border countries, the Pacific Rim will continue to
dominate the marketplace for west-coast exports. However, as European
countries continue to increase their recovery rates, the United States will be
forced to compete for Pacific Rim markets.
While private-sector brokers have historically marketed wastepaper and
scrap metal to export markets, exports will include more materials, such as
glass and plastic. In addition, big-city public-sector recycling staff near east-
and west-coast ports of export, such as those in San Francisco, the Washington
D.C. area, New York City, and Los Angeles, have made efforts to establish a
rapport with export markets to explore the possibilities of direct marketing.
ASSESSING MARKET DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES
Market development involves the attempt to create an even balance between
the supply of recyclables and demand for products manufactured from those
materials. Just as each recyclable material has unique marketing characteris-
tics, so market development initiatives vary by material. Depending on the
material, strategies can be demand-directed, supply-directed, require more
stringent material specifications, or be a combination of two or more types of
strategies.
While material-specific actions are an important factor in market devel-
opment, such actions need to be carried out in the framework of broader cat-
egories of market development tools. An understanding of strategies being
undertaken at federal and state levels is important, along with knowledge of
local activities that can favorably impact market development. This section
provides information on seven categories of actions currently being under-
taken by the public and private sectors at the national, regional, state, and lo-
cal levels. It also suggests effective strategies to implement at the local level.
After reviewing the information in this section, the reader should understand
that a philosophy of "think globally, act locally," is essential to market devel-
opment for recyclables and recycled products.
Market development for
recyclables involves
balancing
• the supply of
recyclable materials
• the demand for
products made from
them.
Legislative Options
Legislative activities being considered or undertaken by federal, state, and lo-
cal governments to promote market development are a combination of sup-
ply-driven and demand-driven initiatives.
A study conducted for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency by
Franklin Associates Ltd. found that very few local and state recycling program
managers know with any certainty the tonnage of recyclables being collected
in those programs. Until a structured tracking system is in place, there will be
a twofold problem: (1) recycling markets may hold back expansions until
Page 6-17
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Supply-side legislation,
particularly mandatory
recycling laws and
disposal bans, was in
effect in 39 states and
the District of Columbia
in 1992.
Careful attention should
be given to keeping
detailed records for
tracking the supply of
each commodity sold to
buyers.
knowledge of guaranteed tonnages is available, and (2) the impact of addi-
tional quantities of recyclables on the marketplace cannot be projected.
Supply-side legislation, particularly mandatory recycling laws and dis-
posal bans, was in effect in 39 states and the District of Columbia in 1992.
Twenty states require preparation of recycling plans, seven states and the Dis-
trict of Columbia mandate source separation of one or more materials, and 12
states take an intermediate approach. These laws included numeric recycling
rates mandating that between 25 and 70 percent of state wastes be recycled,
with deadlines ranging from 1991 to 2010. In many cases, local government
goals surpass state-mandated levels.
The ability to guarantee private-sector processors and manufacturers re-
liable supplies of quality recyclables will promote market development. As
local recycling program planners and government officials implement recy-
cling programs, careful attention should be given to keeping detailed records
for tracking the supply of each commodity sold to buyers. Tonnage informa-
tion can be added to state and federal tracking systems, when they exist, to in-
form private-sector businesses of the supply they can expect. Local govern-
ments can also pass legislation mandating certain percentage goals or banning
disposal of certain items.
Regulatory initiatives designed to encourage increased demand for recy-
clable materials include recycled content mandates, environmental standards, re-
cycled product labeling laws, and requirements to procure recycled products.
Legislation mandating recycled content in consumer products has been
popular in recent years. As a result of certain economies of scale attainable at
the state level, the focus of such legislation has rested with state governments
or coalitions of state governments. Table 6-7 shows that laws mandating re-
cycled content in newsprint had been passed in at least 11 states by 1992. Re-
cycled content mandates have also been passed for trash bags, glass contain-
ers, plastic containers, and telephone books, among other items. National or-
ganizations, such as the National Recycling Coalition and the American Soci-
ety for Testing and Materials, have focused efforts on devising nationwide
voluntary standards for recycled content in various products. Adoption of
such standards aids manufacturers in making products that meet broadly ac-
cepted recycled content levels.
An environmental regulation related to demand for recycled products is
the federal Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) prohibition against using
recycled plastic resins in new food containers. Continued investigation into
Table 6-7
Examples of Recycled Content Mandates
Newsprint
Glass
Containers
Plastic
Containers
Trash
Bags
Telephone
Books
Arizona
California
Connecticut
Dist. of Columbia
Illinois
Maryland
Missouri
N. Carolina
Oregon
Rhode Island
Wisconsin
by 2000
by 2000
by 2000
by 1998
by 1993
by 1998
by 2000
by 1998
by 1995
by 2001
by 2001
10.0% by 1995
1. The 10% goal applies to bags 1.0 mil thick; the 30% goal applies to bags . 75 mil thick.
Source: National Solid Wastes Management Association, 1992; Resource Recycling, 1993
Page 6-18
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
Recycled-product
labeling regulations can
help create demand, but
inconsistent state
standards create
interstate marketing
problems.
Government
procurement of recycled
products can affect the
demand for such
products.
It also serves as a
positive example to
consumers.
USEPA has published
procurement guidelines
for purchasing several
types of recycled
products.
safety issues by the FDA has opened this market avenue. Several companies
have received certifications of "no objection" from the FDA to use recycled
plastic content in food containers. For example, several companies are now
manufacturing new PET soda bottles from recycled PET. While not a direct
approval, this type of environmental regulation is a step toward improved
markets for some materials.
Recycled-product labeling regulations can help to create demand for re-
cycled products. However, different standards for such labeling in different
states creates an inherently complex problem because most products are sold
across state boundaries. The Coalition of Northeast Governors (CONEG) and
the Northeast Recycling Council (NERC) organized ten states in an attempt to
coordinate labeling efforts on a regional basis. Other notable, moderately
compatible, actions have been taken by Rhode Island, New York, and Califor-
nia to define standards for labeling recycled products.
According to a study by the National Institute of Governmental Purchas-
ing, state and local government purchasing makes up 12 to 13 percent of the
nation's GNP. With this much purchasing power, government procurement
of recycled products can indeed affect the demand for such products. In addi-
tion, procurement of recycled products by federal, state, and local govern-
ments can serve as a positive example to consumers. Several state purchasing
programs provide cooperative purchasing programs that local governments
and other public entities can access.
Virtually every state has legislation requiring recycled product purchase.
Many states require certain percentages of recycled content; some allow for
price preferences. Numerous local governments have laws with goals sur-
passing their states' laws. Printing and writing papers are often the focus of
much of this legislation, since so much of it is used in the office setting. Coop-
erative purchasing agreements, mainly focusing on paper products, have been
implemented by numerous multi-state entities.
On May 1, 1995, the Environmental Protection Agency issued the "Com-
prehensive Guideline for Procurement of Products Containing Recoverable
Materials" (CPG) (60 Federal Register 21370) and its companion piece, the "Re-
covered Materials Advisory Notice" (RMAN) (60 Federal Register 21386). The
CPG designates 24 recycled-content products in seven product categories. The
RMAN provides recommendations for purchasing the products designated in
the CPG. Through use of these guidelines, the federal government hopes to
expand its use of products with recovered materials, and to help develop mar-
kets for them in other sectors of the economy. By May 1, 1996, all government
agencies and government contractors that use appropriated federal dollars to
purchase the designated items will be required to purchase them with re-
cycled content. For information, call the RCRA Hotline, 1 (800) 424-9346.
There are several legislative mechanisms that local governments can use
to positively influence the demand for recyclables. First, local governments
can pass legislation showing voluntary or mandatory preference for products
with recycled content. Governments can also effectively promote the use of
recycled product labeling standards that are consistent with those at the state
level. Finally, local governments can lead with their actions by adopting pur-
chasing specifications that favor the purchase of recycled products, and fol-
lowing through on those specifications. A list of suggested methods for locat-
ing recycled product suppliers is included in Table 6-8.
Economic Incentives
There are economic benefits for using virgin materials in the U.S. that distort the
value/cost of these materials. In some cases an advantage is given to virgin mate-
rials, for example, through depletion allowances in the tax code and tax credits for
virgin materials. Altering these existing economic incentives might involve more
readily providing recyclers with tax incentives, rebates, and grants and loans.
Page 6-19
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Nearly half of all states
offer some form of tax
credits that can assist
recycling.
Approximately two-
thirds of all states offer
grants and loans to help
improve recycling
market economics.
Nearly half of all states offer some form of tax credits that can assist recy-
cling. Property tax exemptions are provided for buying new recycling equipment
in Indiana, Kentucky, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Sales tax ex-
emptions are given in Iowa, Illinois, New Jersey, and Wisconsin to help proces-
sors or manufacturers purchase new recycling equipment. Individuals and cor-
porations in Oregon receive income tax credits for capital investments in recycling
equipment and facilities; Arkansas, California, Maine, New Mexico, and Dela-
ware also provide income tax credits. Tax-exempt bond financing for building
processing and manufacturing facilities has been used by many local govern-
ments. Transportation tax credits or exemptions for carriers of recyclables are be-
ing used in Washington and Maine to help make hauling materials to market cost
effective. Local governments can offer property tax exemptions to recycling-re-
lated businesses wanting to locate or expand locally. Another incentive is to sell
or lease land or equipment to recyclers at no or low cost.
Approximately two-thirds of all states offer grants and loans to help im-
prove recycling market economics. Rebate programs to reimburse companies for
the recyclables they use or the money invested in recycling equipment can be
very effective market stimulators. In Wisconsin, manufacturers who use second-
ary materials can qualify for rebates of several hundred thousand dollars. Utah
pays tire recyclers $21 per ton for tires made into new products or energy.
Grants, loans, and loan guarantees provide new or existing businesses
with necessary capital at no or low cost. These incentives are quite popular
with private industry. For example, grant programs in Minnesota, Michigan,
New York, and Wisconsin will fund demonstration projects or established
technologies. Indiana gives priority to the recycling industry for state eco-
nomic development grants. Loans and loan guarantees—used in Minnesota,
New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, and Vermont—can provide low-interest
capital for businesses. Such loans may be especially helpful for small and mi-
nority business enterprises.
Technology Developments and Improvements
Technology developments, more than any other market development initiative
category, tend to be material specific. This section provides an overview of some
recent developments that have assisted or may assist recycling markets.
Table 6-8
Creating Demand for Recyclables: Purchasing Recycled Products
To ensure a market outlet for your recyclables, purchase products made from those materials. This table outlines three possible methods.
1) Talk to potential markets. Is there a recycled product they make that you could purchase? If so, such reciprocal arrangements are a great
way to stimulate your market. Examples: government purchase of recycled plastics curbside recycling bins from the company it will sell
plastic to: convincing the local newspaper publisher to buy recycled newsprint from a paper mill who will, in turn, buy your recyclable
newsprint.
2) Check listings of recycled products to learn what products are available. Many office supply catalogues now contain a recycled product section.
Other listings:
Buy Recycled Paper Products Guide
National Office Paper Recycling Project
U.S. Conference of Mayors
1620 I St., NW, 4th Floor
Washington, DC 20006
202/293-7330
Guide to Buying Recycled
Printing and Office Paper
Californians Against Waste
Foundation
926 J Street, Suite 606
Sacramento, CA95814
916/443-8317
The Official Recycled
Products Guide
P.O. Box 577
Ogdensburg, NY 13669
800/267-0707
3) Talk to the "Buy Recycled" Program Director with the National Recycling Coalition at 202/625-6406. Or talk to the Procurement Coordinator
for Recycled Products at your local state agency. Many state coordinators maintain lists of recycled product suppliers under state contract.
Source: M. Kohrell. 1992. University of Wisconsin-Extension, Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center
Page 6-20
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
Several technological
breakthroughs are
encouraging additional
demand for fibers.
Recent developments
among manufacturers
have created
competition between
detinners, foundries, and
mills, and have
strengthened markets.
Public/private
partnerships providing
funding and guaranteeing
supplies of recyclables
spur technology
developments.
Local governments can
encourage businesses to
adopt new technologies.
Markets for fibers have had several technological breakthroughs that will
encourage additional demand. While most markets prohibited magazine recov-
ery until as recently as mid-1991, industry analysts predict that demand will out-
strip supply for the foreseeable future, thanks to a flotation de-inking technology,
developed in Europe about 10 years ago and recently adopted in the United
States, that requires a mix of 10 to 30 percent magazines with old newsprint. Sev-
eral new and converted paper mills in the United States and other countries, nota-
bly Canada, should create a stable market for magazines. In another fiber tech-
nology development, manufacture of recyclable self-adhesive sticky labels will
create a more stable market for office wastepaper. The new technology would
eliminate machine-gumming and paper-tearing contamination problems encoun-
tered when attempting to recycle self-adhesive labels now in use. Finally, new
rules for designs of corrugated containers will allow production of lighter weight
containers with an increased content of recycled fibers.
The work of the Steel Can Recycling Institute (SCRI) in 1988, now called
the Steel Recycling Institute (SRI), has assisted in boosting market capacity for
tin-plated steel and bimetal cans at detinning facilities, foundries, and steel
mills. While the development of detinning facilities capable of handling post-
consumer cans was an initial focus of SRI, recent developments among manu-
facturers have created unanticipated competition between detinners, found-
ries, and mills, and have strengthened markets. In response to an SRI promo-
tion, the steel industry, which historically considered the tin plating on steel
cans a contaminant, conducted highly successful pilot efforts to use steel and
bimetal cans in the remanufacture of steel. Such technological developments
will continue to expand across the country.
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, plastic recycling technology develop-
ments led other material market developments. Mixed-plastic resin recycling
applications have seen some growth recently with the development of the
plastic lumber. With the new technology, resins are extruded into various
lumber and lumber-like products. The success of these products now depends
on the development of standards for plastic lumber, the ability of producers to
market the lumber, and on consumers' willingness to purchase the lumber or
products made of this material. Problems with contamination of PET bottles
by similar-looking polyvinyl chloride (PVC) bottles have jeopardized some
plastic recycling programs. The recent development of an improved flotation
system designed to remove PVC from the PET recycling stream, along with
high-tech developments using x-ray fluorescence and computer scanning,
should help advance plastic recycling. Finally, collection and processing
equipment developments aiding the recycling of resins such as polystyrene
and high- and low-density polyethylene bags will encourage plastic markets.
Part of an ongoing continuum, technology developments such as those
described above depend on effective public/private partnerships that provide
funding opportunities and guarantee supplies of recyclables. Consumer de-
mand, government research and regulations, and private-sector initiatives will
necessitate continuing these efforts.
Local governments can work with businesses to encourage them to
adopt new technologies that will advance local recycling markets; providing
financial assistance when possible will be an additional incentive. Guaranteed
supplies of recyclables, along with guarantees from local governments or busi-
nesses to purchase products manufactured with local recyclables, can also be
an incentive. Use of a local linkage principle as a market strategy will con-
tinue to grow in importance.
Transportation Networks
Development of better truck, rail, and overseas transportation networks to
move recyclables to domestic and export markets may strengthen markets for
many recyclables.
Page 6-21
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
As tonnages available
and distances traveled
grow, a better truck
transport infrastructure
is needed.
Local recycling program
planners should try to
understand and
accommodate haulers'
needs.
Loads of recyclables have long been hauled in open-top dump trailers,
box trailers, and other long-distance, over-the-road vehicles. However, as ton-
nages available and distances traveled grow, a better truck transport infra-
structure is needed. In addition, haulers must be given access to containers
and scales outside of traditional business hours. Recycling program planners
and transportation coordinators are making concerted efforts to arrange for
backhauls to move recyclables; these efforts should continue. (A backhaul is
the return leg of a distance-carrier's journey, so named because it is a load
hauled on the way back to the point of origin.) Backhauling provides more
cost-effective transportation because recyclers only pay for a return trip; the
other commodity being hauled pays the freight in the opposite direction.
Shipment of recovered materials via rail has long been used for moving
certain recyclable materials to domestic markets. To make rail hauling more
competitive, however, several rail lines are creating tariffs expressly for ship-
ping secondary materials. Along that same line, trade organizations like the
Institute for Scrap Recycling Industries (ISRI) have asked Congress to consider
deregulating the railroads with respect to the movement of recyclables.
Temporary shortages of overseas export containers creates a barrier to
transporting recyclables overseas. Although exported scrap metals do not re-
quire the use of overseas containers, they are usually required for paper and
other recyclables. A container shortage in 1990 and 1991 caused problems for
export brokers. Ongoing monitoring is necessary to alleviate such shortages.
In terms of transportation networks, local recycling program planners can
be most supportive by attempting to understand and accommodate haulers'
needs. This means having recyclables ready to load on schedule (never keep a
driver waiting), allowing pick-ups during non-business hours if necessary, and
shipping only full loads of recyclables. Finally, considering the use of rail trans-
port and backhauls will help strengthen the national transportation network.
Business Development
Most businesses want to
know that sufficient
demand for their
products exists to make
their operation financially
viable.
Encouraging large
companies to locate in a
region by providing
incentives is a traditional
approach to recycling
market development.
Three primary approaches to developing new markets for recyclables are gener-
ally associated with business development: (1) attracting an established recycling
industry to locate a manufacturing facility, (2) encouraging existing local manu-
facturers to use or increase their use of recyclables, and (3) assisting local entrepre-
neurs with the start-up of small-scale manufacturing businesses. However, it is
important to note that most legitimate businesses will not be attracted or encour-
aged by a supply of recyclables alone; they need to know that sufficient demand
for their products exists to make their operation financially viable.
The most traditional approach to recycling market and economic devel-
opment has been to encourage large companies to locate a plant in a given re-
gion by providing incentives. This method has been used successfully to de-
velop recycling markets in many areas of the United States. For instance, for
years, paper and steel mills have solicited competitive requests from potential
suppliers of recyclables when deciding to locate new facilities; large suppliers
along the east and west coasts, such as the cities of Boston, New York, or San
Diego, are often competitors for such facilities. However, as the number of
communities in need of markets continues to grow, the number of large recy-
cling industries capable of locating and building new facilities does not. This
is evidenced by the fact that more recently announced industry expansions are
adding capacity to existing facilities rather than locating new facilities.
More recent business development concepts for encouraging market
growth focus on establishing local "linkages." Linkage studies identify the
flow of goods and services in a specified region. Conducting a linkage study
is one of the first steps toward eventually encouraging existing industries to
use recovered materials generated locally and to encourage new business
start-ups to do the same. This market development concept also lends itself
well to local economic development.
Page 6-22
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
Local officials, economic
development staff, and
recycling program
planners should
cooperate to determine
optimum local
opportunities.
Opportunities for working with existing industries or entrepreneurs are
unique to each location. In using this type of market-development strategy, it is
important that local elected officials, economic development staff, and recycling
program planners work together to determine the optimum local opportunities.
In investigating the potential for local interindustry linkages, it is important that
an accurate determination be made of the amounts and suppliers of raw feed-
stock consistently available to manufacturers. In addition, opportunities to in-
clude existing intermediate processors should be investigated. A study prepared
by Gainer & Associates on behalf of the Arcata (California) Community Recycling
Center provides a good model for determining linkages and assessing the feasibil-
ity of working with existing businesses or entrepreneurs.
Education Strategies
Education is vital to
fostering market
development between
the public and private
sectors.
The public is another
vital link to market
development.
Education is one of the most vital components to help foster market development
among the public and private sectors. Educational programs must involve every
sector of the population, including government officials; industry representatives;
collectors, haulers and processors of recyclables; and the general public.
Government officials responsible for setting solid waste policy at the lo-
cal, state, and federal levels must be educated to understand the impact of
policy decisions. Whether procurement of recycled products is mandatory or
voluntary, government employees should be educated to pursue procurement
practices favorable to recycled products whenever possible.
Industry officials need to be made aware of the importance of recycling
at their facilities and of using recycled products. Perhaps even more impor-
tant, industry managers should be provided with information regarding local
legislation, available supplies of recyclables, developing recycling technolo-
gies, and funding sources. Creating a working group including industry and
government officials is an important mechanism to facilitate such information
sharing. Some industry groups themselves have created education cam-
paigns geared toward other population sectors. The Institute for Scrap Recy-
cling Industries' "Design for Recycling" program, which promotes mandatory
and voluntary efforts to assist recyclability of materials, especially metals, is
one such noteworthy effort.
The collecting and processing sector is a vital link to market develop-
ment, since it is through this sector that a reliable supply of quality recyclables
is generated. Education programs geared toward helping collectors under-
stand the importance of quality control at the curb or drop-off site are vital.
Likewise, educating public- and private-sector processing facility employees is
important to ensure that manufacturers' specifications will be met.
The general public may be one of the most vital links to market develop-
ment, and educational programs for this sector are, therefore, of utmost im-
portance. The public must be educated to understand the importance of par-
ticipating in recycling programs and following local requirements regarding
contaminants and acceptable materials. In addition, efforts must be made to
increase public awareness of recycled products sold at retail outlets. Finally,
information about standardized definitions for "recycled" products needs to
be disseminated to the public so individuals can understand and assess the en-
vironmental and recycled claims made by manufacturers. "Buy Recycled"
campaigns coordinated by state governments in Michigan and Minnesota
have successfully promoted procurement of recycled products by the public.
To implement an effective local education program, it is useful to ap-
point an education committee to work with recycling staffer volunteers. Com-
mittee members should include representatives from local government, manufac-
turing industries, the commercial sector, recyclers (collectors/processors), and the
public. The committee should devise a comprehensive local education strategy.
The members will also educate the other members of their respective interest
groups, for example, the Chamber of Commerce or the City Council.
Page 6-23
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Cooperative Marketing
Regional marketing
cooperatives help
maintain reliable markets
and improve bargaining
power.
To maintain more reliable markets and to improve bargaining power, communi-
ties around the country have formed regional marketing cooperatives. By identi-
fying and negotiating with buyers, the cooperative acts as the agent for member
communities. For example, in New Hampshire more than 100 small communities
participate in the New Hampshire Resource Recovery Association cooperative
marketing program, a nonprofit organization that provides marketing, technical,
and education services. Such programs are also being initiated in upstate New
York, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Arizona, among other states.
The benefits of cooperative marketing include the ability to amass
greater recyclable volumes for sale and economies of scale for processing and
program administration. The challenges facing communities following a co-
operative approach include maintaining quality control of recyclables col-
lected by members, adopting an appropriate legal structure, and developing
equitable means for sharing program costs and revenues. A marketing coop-
erative can be designed to have both public- and private-sector membership.
Local recycling program planners wishing to investigate the feasibility of co-
operative marketing can contact communities in their county, solid waste dis-
trict, or region. Since planning commissions, nonprofit organizations and
state recycling offices often track interest in such programs, contacting one of
those agencies may also be useful. The National Cooperative Marketing Net-
work has recently compiled data on cooperative marketing programs in the
U.S. and Canada to help those interested in these programs.
ASSESSING AND CHOOSING COLLECTION AND PROCESSING
TECHNOLOGIES
After deciding what materials will be recycled and estimating the quantities of
each, the community is ready to develop a basic program design. For most com-
munities, developing a design will involve making three important decisions.
First, the community must decide what collection method(s) to use. Second, the
community must decide how the mechanics of the collection system will work.
Third, the community must decide what type of processing and storage facility is
needed to prepare materials for marketing. To develop a unified, efficient pro-
gram, each decision must be made in relation to the others.
When analyzing available collection and processing arrangements, the
interaction between the public and private sectors should be carefully consid-
ered. Even where public pickup of refuse is conducted, some communities are
opting for private collection of recyclables. Private businesses are also provid-
ing waste processing services. A thorough analysis of potential collection and
processing options should include an analysis of the benefits and costs associ-
ated with all public- and private-sector alternatives, including a combined ap-
proach. Of course, recycling collection and processing systems must be de-
signed to incorporate state recycling legislation.
Choosing appropriate
technologies requires
making three preliminary
decisions:
• which methods to use
for collecting
recyclables
• how the collection
system will operate
• what type of facility is
needed for
processing materials.
Ways to Collect Recyclables
Deciding how
recyclables will be
collected is important.
Residential Waste Drop-Off and Buy-Back Collection
At the outset, collection program developers must decide the best way for citi-
zens, institutions, and businesses to prepare recyclables for collection and the
best way to collect the materials. Local conditions should be taken into ac-
count when designing a collection program. For a small rural community that
does not provide curbside pickup, educating and encouraging citizens to de-
Page 6-24
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
liver materials to a drop-off site may be all that is needed. A recycling center
can be established at the same location where residents deliver waste. Mobile
recycling drop-off trailers can also be used. Drop-off recycling, however, is
less convenient than curbside pickup. In order to promote high public partici-
pation, communities saving on the cost of collection by instituting a drop-off
program must make special efforts at promoting the cost benefits of the re-
duced service to local residents. If a thorough educational and promotional
effort is not made, drop-off programs tend to have lower participation rates
than curbside collection.
Establishing a buy-back center (a place where recyclables are purchased)
may help induce citizens to recycle. Some buy-back centers purchase some
materials and accept others, depending on current market conditions. Private
or public mobile buy-back operations can serve some areas of the country,
purchasing recyclables in small communities or in neighborhoods of large
metropolitan areas on a regular schedule.
Drop-off programs
require thorough
education and promotion
to achieve participation
rates similar to those of
curbside collection.
Curbside Collection Options
To maximize recyclable collection, many communities, large and small, are es-
tablishing curbside collection programs. There are a variety of approaches be-
ing tried; most are seeking the optimal balance among citizen and business
participation and transport needs versus material processing requirements.
Many communities provide both drop-off and curbside pick-up centers.
Drop-off centers work well for items such as waste oil that are hard to pick up
at the curb.
In source separated
programs, recyclables
picked up at curbside
are kept separate from
the waste.
Figure 6-2
Examples of Stickers
Indicating Why Waste
Was Not Picked Up
Outage •
Source: Prairie du Sac,
Wisconsin
Source Separation
Many communities now provide curbside pickup of recyclables kept separate
from other waste. There are a variety of options used, depending on commu-
nity resources and goals. Some communities are providing rigid and stable
containers for collection of recyclables. Bins and buckets are most popular.
Programs using bins and buckets have been very successful; the social pres-
sure that results when neighbors can see who is and isn't complying with the
program helps to spur high participation rates. Although using bins and
buckets means higher initial cost for each community, many communities feel
that the visibility of the program and the high participation rates make the in-
vestment worth it (see Table 6-9). Communities have experienced some prob-
lems with theft of bins and the materials they contain. Another approach uses
plastic bags, with all recyclable materials placed in one bag and all nonrecy-
clables in another bag. Pick-up crews are instructed to leave at the curb any
waste that is put in improper bags. They affix stickers (see Figure 6-2) to the
bags indicating why they were not picked up. Because neighbors can see if a
resident's waste has not been collected, compliance with such a program is
generally high because of social pressure. Using plastic bags also allows exist-
ing collection equipment to be used, although care must be taken to ensure
that the mixed recyclables do not contaminate one another (for example, bro-
ken glass contaminating plastic and paper).
For both bin and bag collection, issues of privacy have been raised. Some
citizens have stated that it is an invasion of privacy to be forced to allow refuse
collectors, or anyone walking by, to know the types of garbage that a resident
generates. This type of opposition could cause problems for some communities.
Mixed-Waste Collection
This approach requires the least change in generators' habits. Communities
collect waste unsorted as usual in one truck, and waste processing to remove
recyclables is done later. This approach is obviously most convenient for resi-
Page6-25
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Mixed-waste collection
is convenient and
requires few changes in
habits and minimal
education efforts.
But mixing refuse can
contaminate otherwise
recyclable materials.
dents and eliminates the need for most education. For some commodities,
such as cardboard from food stores, so-called "dump and pick" operations
have been successful. Because the cardboard makes up a large fraction of the
total collected refuse and wastes that might otherwise contaminate it are ab-
sent, the cardboard remains relatively clean and easy to separate.
But mixing municipal refuse can result in contamination of waste that
would otherwise be recyclable. Paper can become covered with wet food de-
bris and glass can be broken. For some of the first mixed-waste processing fa-
cilities, upwards of 25 percent (by weight) of incoming recyclable material was
contaminated and thus unmarketable.
However, because of the convenience for both citizens and collectors,
many communities, especially large urban centers, are developing mixed-
waste processing projects. Known also as full-stream processing, mixed-waste
processing to remove recyclables is usually performed in conjunction with
compost or refuse-derived fuel (RDF) production (see Table 6-10). Manual
and mechanical separation to remove recyclables is performed at the front end
of the process. Although the total volume of recyclables marketed from these
facilities may be lower than the volume recovered when source separation is
required at curbside, communities and businesses operating these plants point
out that the total percentage of waste diverted from landfilling through pro-
duction of RDF and compost is significant (see Table 6-11). Some of the
Table 6-9
Costs and Participation Rates by Container Type
Blue Boxes Stacking
Sacks
Buckets
Participation rates
Average weekly set out rate (percent)'1'
Overall participation rate (percent)'2'
Average pounds per set out
Average pounds per week per household
Average number of set outs per household
Frequency of set outs per household
(1 set out/# weeks)
Container handling time (seconds/set out)'3'
Driver
Collector
Driver and collector average
Container costs'4'
Capital cost per household
Capital cost for 38,000 homes
Approximate container lifetime '5'
Percent containers replaced annually'6'
Annual replacement cost
Annual amortization costs'7'
Total annual cost
56
88
14.40
8.11
6.42
1.40
23.52
32.39
27.95
$5.50
$209,000
10 years
5
$10,450
$34,014
$44,464
42
62
18.46
7.90
6.16
1.46
24.17
15.78
19.97
$17.00
$646,000
5 years
5
$32,300
$170,000
$202,713
36
55
13.94
5.09
6.24
1.44
26.78
31.65
29.21
$32,680
1 year
100
$32,680
$
$32,680
40
78
16.47
6.69
5.18
1.74
25.00
22.04
23.52
$3.80
$144,000
3 years
5
$7,220
$58,065
$65,285
(1) The average percentage of homes placing a set out on the curb in any given week.
(2) The percentage of homes participating at least twice during the nine-week study.
(3) Measured as the time from first touching the container(s), sorting the material into the truck bins, and replacing the container(s)
on the ground. The highest and lowest of 25 measurements for driver and collector were dropped.
(4) These prices are offered for comparative purposes only and may vary due to the percentage of recycled plastic used, quantities
ordered, and customization of the container. For current prices, contact the manufacturers directly.
(5) The lifetimes are based on manufacturers' claims and may vary with extremes of heat and cold, exposure to sunlight, and abuse of the
containers.
(6) The 5 percent figure is based on the experience of many communities and accounts for loss and container theft, and people moving and
taking their containers. The 100 percent figure in the Sack neighborhood includes the factors stated above and sacks wearing out.
(7) Amortization figures are based on a 10 percent annual interest rate.
Source: Gitlitz, J. 1989. "Curbside Collection containers: A Comparative Evaluation," Resource Recycling January/February
Page 6-26
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
When considering
mixed-waste processing,
the experience and
reputation of the
technology vendor is
important.
mixed-waste facilities process source-separated materials (see Table 6-10).
New technologies are increasing recovery efficiency. When investigating the
potential for mixed-waste processing, the experience and reputation of the
technology vendor is a key consideration.
Wet/Dry Collection
In this variation of mixed-waste collection, wet materials—yard trimmings, food
scraps, disposable diapers, soiled paper, and animal waste—are separated from
other materials for collection. The wet stream is composted. Other materials, in-
cluding recyclables, form the dry portion. Some communities collect all of their
dry waste mixed and separate recyclables during processing. Others require fur-
ther separation of dry materials into recyclable and nonrecyclable fractions. In
Some programs require generators to bundle newsprint or take glass bottles to a
drop-off site to reduce contamination and breakage. In this approach, a separate
collection vehicle is usually used for each container type.
Combined Collection Options
Many communities provide a combination of drop-off, buy-back, and curbside
collection. Often some collection is publicly provided, with other collection pro-
vided by local businesses. Especially in large communities, a combination of op-
tions may lead to higher participation and result in a more effective overall program.
Table 6-10
Selected Mixed Waste Processing Operations
Type of
waste (1)
Throughput (2)
(tons/day)
Recycled
materials (3)
Products
Source
separation
Delaware
Reclamation
R-90%,
C-10%,
sludge
1,000(R,C),
260 (sludge)
F, NF, G/M
Compost,
pellets
None
Fillmore
County
R, C
8, also
3 SS
ONP, F, P,
NF, G/S
Compost
Curbside,
drop-offs,
household
hazardous
waste
Future
Fuel
R, C
45
OCC, F,
NF, P
Compost
Pellets
None
Rabanco
SC
150-200,
100SS
OCC,
MP, G/S,
F, NF
None
Curbside,
drop-off,
buy-back
Recomp
R, C
100
OCC, F
Compost
Curbside,
buy-back,
drop-off,
commer-
cial
Refuse
Resource
Recovery
Systems
R-80%
C-20%
300-400
start-up,
600+ design
ONP, OCC,
MP, F, NF, P
Compost
Bagged
recyclables
collected
with garbage
Reuter
County
R
400
OCC, F,
NF, P
Pellets
Curbside
Sumter
R-80%,
C-20%
60
F, NF, P
Compost
Pilot
curbside
Wastech
SC
48, also
60 SS
OCC, MP,
F, NF
None
Curbside,
drop-off,
commer-
cial
XL
Disposal
R
376 start,
400 design
ONP, OCC,
F, NF, P
Grit/glass,
Pellets in
start-up
None
(1) R = mixed residential solid waste, C = mixed commercial solid waste with a paper-rich fraction, SC=selected commercial waste with a paper-
rich fraction.
(2) SS = source-separated curbside materials are also processed by this facility but with a different processing line of equipment. Design
capacities are shown for facilities operating less than a year.
(3) ONP = old newspapers, OCC = old corrugated containers, MP = mixed waste paper, F = ferrous, NF = non-ferrous,
G/M = mixed color glass containers, G/S = color- sorted glass containers, P = container plastics (e.g. HOPE, PET).
Source: Resource Recycling, 1990; 1990-91 Materials Recovery and Recycling Yearbook
Page 6-27
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Stating clearly how each
citizen and business is to
take part in the program
is necessary.
Collection Schedule
Collection scheduling is another important consideration. Generally, pro-
grams that collect recyclables weekly on the same day as regular trash is
picked up experience the highest participation rates. However, the same-day
pickup may involve additional equipment and personnel; this may make
same-day pickup beyond the economic resources of some communities. De-
creasing the collection frequency may result in lower participation. Collection
options are discussed in the next section.
Citizens must know what is expected of them. A clear statement by the
community of how each citizen and business is to take part in the program is a
necessity. This can be accomplished through the use of an ordinance. For
communities that may experience theft of recyclables, a strong antiscavenging
ordinance should also be considered. The structure for model ordinances is
discussed in this chapter in the Ordinances section.
Business and Bulky Waste
Many businesses
generate large volumes of
recyclables — always
consider this source
when developing a
program.
Many businesses generate large volumes of clean, homogeneous wastes.
Highly effective recycling programs can be developed to collect these wastes
from a variety of similar businesses on a routine basis. In many communities
around the country, there are successful programs recovering these high-qual-
ity waste streams. Business and institutional recycling should be considered
during program development. Different programs are described below.
Waste from Retail Businesses
Many consumer-oriented businesses, especially retail stores, produce large
quantities of corrugated cardboard. If this material is kept separate from other
waste streams, it is easily and economically recycled. However, cardboard
must be sorted carefully because it can easily be contaminated with food
Table 6-11
Recovery Levels for Selected Mixed Waste Processing Operations
Location
% Recyclable
materials
% Other
products'1'
% Landfilled
Delaware Reclamation
Fillmore County
Future Fuel
Rabanco
Recomp
Refuse Resource
Recovery Systems
Reuter <3>
Sumter County
Wastech
XL Disposal
New Castle, DE
Preston, MN
Thief River Falls, MN
Seattle, WA
St. Cloud, MN
Omaha, NE
Eden Prairie, MN
Sumterville, FL
Portland, OR
Crestwood, IL
(2)
7
7
50
14
N.A.
73
N.A.
55
(2)
38
76
0
20
N.A. = Not available.
(1) Such as refuse-derived fuel and compost.
(2) Refuse Resource Recovery Systems must recover, as recyclable materials or compost, 20 percent of
the wastes delivered by the city, which represents 65 percent of the stated throughput. This diversion
goal increases two percentage points per year until 30 percent is reached. A separate yard waste
collection program will start in April 1991. Omaha estimated diversion in 1991 to be 44 percent.
(3) Two-thirds of the RDF is stored because Reuter has been unable to sell it.
Source: Resource Recycling, 1990; 1990-91 Materials Recovery and Recycling Yearbook
Page 6-28
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
Bars and restaurants
produce large quantities
of glass and aluminum.
wastes. Weather (precipitation, wind, etc.) can also damage the quality of cor-
rugated cardboard. Retail businesses also frequently produce large volumes
of office paper, wood, glass, and plastic.
Waste from Restaurants and Bars
Bars and restaurants produce large quantities of glass and aluminum. Glass
can become a storage and safety problem and its marketability can be affected
by contamination. Metal tabs, for example, if mixed with glass, can signifi-
cantly reduce the value of the glass. Glass should also be separated by color
unless a processing center performs this task.
High staff turnovers in the bar and restaurant business can also create prob-
lems with ensuring that workers properly separate the materials. A continuing
effort at working with cooperating businesses is necessary for glass recycling.
Many restaurants and grocery stores with butcher shops create a regular
supply of used cooking oil, grease, and animal fat. These materials can be ren-
dered into a variety of useful products, including animal feed, soap, lard, and
cosmetics. Storing such materials must be carefully planned to avoid generat-
ing objectionable odors or attracting vermin.
Institutional Waste
Figure 6-3
Office Paper Recycling Containers
COLLECTION BOX
DB5KTPW.V
RECYC L^
BECAUSE
ONCE E
NOT
ENOUGH
I—12 h.-
34in
Source: The Resource Recovery Section, Waste Management Division,
Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Government offices and businesses such as
banks and insurance companies generate
quantities of used paper, much of which is
high quality, including tab cards, computer
printout paper, and ledger paper. To success-
fully create a program to collect and recycle
such paper, a system must be developed for
bringing wastepaper normally generated by
individuals a few pages at a time to a central
location where the paper can be collected.
Some systems make use of individual desk
collecting bins, while others have central
boxes or collection points.
Employee education is a key: workers
must be told which types of office paper can
or cannot be mixed together. Figure 6-3
shows an example of office paper recycling
containers used by the Michigan Depart-
ment of Natural Resources. Also, some ef-
fort must be made at predicting office paper
volumes. Overflowing waste bins or boxes
will create a potential for fire or accident, as
well as opposition from those being asked
to cooperate.
In addition to recycling office paper,
many businesses want to shred corporate
documents before disposal and will pay a pre-
mium to have documents rendered unread-
able. Shredding requires an investment in
processing equipment, but could prove eco-
nomically attractive for recyclers working
with proprietary businesses. The shredded
material, properly segregated, can be re-
cycled.
Page 6-29
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Contamination by din,
metals, or masonry
decreases the
recyclability of wood.
Also avoid
contamination from
asbestos, PCBs, and
other hazardous
materials.
Wood and Construction/Demolition Material
Wood recycling is on the rise. Many businesses generate pallets, which can ei-
ther be repaired and reused, chipped into fuel or plant bedding material, or re-
constructed into other secondary products. Demolition projects can also be a
source of high quality wood wastes for recycling (see Figure 6-4).
Contamination by dirt, metals, or masonry can significantly decrease the
recyclability of wood. Care must be taken to ensure that hazardous materials,
such as asbestos and PCBs, do not become mixed with recovered items.
Figure 6-4
Material Flow Chart for Wood Waste Management
hoomrig material
I
Truck safe
Woodvaste
Clean wood Rough wood
*
Yard warts
Grirdnq
CNppirig VYoodfewars
market Landscape materials
Source: Schroeder, R. 1990. "Operating a wood waste recycling facility," BioCycle, December
Some states require
removal of PCBs, and
federal law requires
recovery of
chlorofluorocarbons
(CFCs) before
appliances are recycled.
Appliances
Communities have recycled appliances (refrigerators, stoves, washers, dryers) for
many years. Most provide for or require a separate pickup, and some charge gen-
erators for the special service. Appliances are delivered to metal scrap recyclers.
In recent years, scrap recyclers have become wary of shredding appliances
that may have capacitors containing PCBs, a hazardous material. Although PCBs
are no longer manufactured in the United States and only a small percentage of
all appliances contain PCB capacitors, some scrap recyclers refuse to accept any
appliances containing capacitors, and others are charging a per-appliance fee to
pay for capacitor removal. The local market situation should be monitored so
that the economics of appliance recycling can be accurately determined. Some
states require removal of PCBs before recycling. Federal law requires recovery of
chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) before any appliance is recycled.
OPERATIONAL ISSUES
Collecting Recyclables
The next question that must be addressed is how to most efficiently move re-
cyclable material from each generator to the processing facility. Depending on
community resources and desires, this question, too, has a variety of answers
Page 6-30
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
Either public or private
collectors can be used.
Recycling collection is
sometimes subject to
public bidding, with the
winning bidder receiving a
contract for the entire
community.
(see Table 6-12). As previously stated, the choice of collection method(s) will
influence how the entire collection system will operate.
An initial decision is who should collect recyclables for the community.
One approach is to use existing public sanitation workers. Another is to use
public workers for collection of waste and contract with private haulers for
collection of recyclables. Many private haulers now offer full-service collec-
tion. The level of recyclable collection service which will be provided to the
commercial and institutional sector should be determined and clearly commu-
nicated, so that these entities can make alternative arrangements if necessary.
For first-time collection programs in large cities served by private haul-
ers, the number of haulers is a key consideration. In some communities, recy-
clable collection is subject to public bidding, with the winning bidder receiv-
ing a contract for the entire community. This procedure can be administra-
tively efficient for the community, but can displace smaller haulers already
serving the community who may be unable to bid on a large contract.
Other communities have opted to allow existing trash haulers the oppor-
tunity to also provide recycling collection services to the neighborhoods and
businesses they serve. This procedure protects existing small haulers, but it
must be closely monitored to ensure that all haulers follow program guide-
lines and are actually recycling the materials collected. Some communities re-
quire haulers to obtain permits and to file reports showing participation rates
and volumes collected.
Table 6-1 2
Collection Characteristics
Community Frequency
Barrington, IL Weekly
Blaine, MN Weekly
Boulder, CO Weekly
Champaign, IL Weekly
East Greenwich, Rl Weekly
East Providence, Rl Weekly
Franklin, PA Monthly
Irvine, CA Weekly
Ithaca, NY Weekly
Jersey City, NJ Weekly
Lafayette, LA Weekly
New London, CT Weekly
Olympia, WA Weekly
Ontario, CA Weekly
Orlando, FL Weekly
Oyster Bay, NY Weekly
Saint Louis Park, MN Weekly
Seattle (North), WA Weekly
Seattle (South), WA Monthly
Shakopee, MN Weekly
Trenton, NJ Bi-Monthly
Whitehall Twp, PA Weekly2
P — Paper; M — Metal; G — Glass; PI
MP — Mixed Paper (Separate); I.M. —
Same Day
as Trash
No
Yes
65%
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Partial
No
Yes
No
60%
Provide
Container
Yes
Yes
Yes1
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Household
Separation
Three
Three
Three
N/S
Two
Two
Three
Three
Separate
Two
Three
Two
Three
Four
Two
Two
Three
Three
One
Three
Two
Three
How
P-M-G
P-M-G
P-M-G
N/A
P-C
P-C
P-M-G
P-M/PI-G
I.M.
P-C
P-M-G/PI
P-C
P-MP-C
P-M-G-PI
P-C
P-C
P-M-G
P-MP-C
All
P-M-G
P-C
P-M-G
— Plastics; C — Mixed Containers;
Individual Materials
1 . Container for newspaper only.
2. Newspaper collected one week, containers collected the next.
Source: Glenn, J., "Curbside Recycling
Reaches 40 Million," BioCycle,
July 1990
Page 6-31
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Structure private
collection programs to
avoid anti-competition
claims from competing
firms.
Regardless of whether one private hauler or a variety of private haulers
are used, the program should be carefully structured to avoid claims that the
program violates anti-competition laws. A hauling business that loses cus-
tomers or one that is unable to gain new customers may blame the community
for illegally restricting business opportunities. The attorney serving the com-
munity should be consulted to develop proper bidding and permit proce-
dures.
Collecting Residential and Commercial Waste
Figure 6-5
Newspaper Rack for Rear-Loading Collection Vehicle
Source: Adapted from City of Madison
Figure 6-6
Source Separation Collection Truck
Cdltrfon vshide in operation
Pap
Colec(cn i*hicle unloadng
Source: P. O'Leary &P. Walsh. University of Wise.-Extension,
Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center, reprinted from
Waste Age Correspondence Course articles 1988
In the initial planning stages, communities usually have two choices: they can
use existing equipment to collect recyclables, or they can invest in new equip-
ment. Private haulers have the same options and often ask a community to
help finance new equipment
purchases. Many communities
begin with existing equipment
and expand the program to in-
clude more specialized vehicles
when the program has had
some operating experience.
For programs starting up,
existing community or private
equipment, such as refuse col-
lection trucks, pickup trucks,
and dump trucks, is often used
to collect recyclables. Refuse
trucks can be converted to al-
low paper collection (see Figure
6-5). Using existing equipment
saves money at the outset, but
can be inefficient if recyclables
cannot be kept separated. In
addition, existing equipment
may present a hazard to workers, who may be forced to lift re-
cyclable containers high in the air to drop materials into a
dump truck or pickup truck without a lift gate. Attaching a
trailer to an existing dump truck to collect both recyclables
and waste together may work. However, this technique has
caused problems in communities with alleys and cul-de-sacs,
which make turning difficult for long collector vehicles. Some
haulers are collecting separated, bagged recyclables along with
other bagged waste in the same truck.
Increasingly, compartmentalized vehicles to transport and
keep recyclables separate are being developed (see Figure 6-6).
These trucks are low to the ground and allow workers to keep a
variety of recyclables separated in the truck. Where communities
use bin systems, vehicles with two or more compartments are
usually used for collection. Collection personnel may take longer
to collect material at each residence because they must throw
separated material into each compartment. However, the con-
tamination rates for these collection schemes are lower and pro-
cessing time at the processing facility may be shorter.
Selecting trucks with compartments must be done care-
fully; it is very important to consider the ratio of the volume of
different commodities to be collected. Ignoring or miscalculat-
ing the ratios can result in costly expenditures of time and
fuel. Prematurely filling one compartment will force a truck
off its route to off load materials. Off loading a truck filled to
Page 6-32
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
only 1 /4 or 1 /2 of its capacity dramatically increases labor costs and overall
fuel consumption. Recyclable collection trucks are now available with mov-
able partitions, allowing adjustments based on space needs.
Special Collection Problems
Many large urban
communities choose to
collect waste
commingled from multi-
family dwellings and
inner city areas.
Siting processing
centers in urban areas
and hiring local residents
can help link recycling
with local economic
benefits.
Obtaining high participation rates and quality control for recycling programs
has been a problem in both multi-family dwellings and in inner-city urban
neighborhoods. Some speculate that high resident turnover in these housing
areas results in less understanding of the requirements of the source separa-
tion program. Others feel that neither multi-family nor inner-city dwellers
share the sense of responsibility for community well being that spurs residen-
tial families to recycle. Whatever the reason, a number of large urban centers
have given up on requiring multi-family dwelling and urban source separa-
tion and have chosen to collect such waste commingled, even if other areas of
the city practice source separation. This approach requires different process-
ing (sometimes different processing facilities) for each type of collection.
Other communities feel that special efforts at improving education,
monitoring, convenience, and motivation are needed. Information, including
newsletters, flyers, or posters, is provided on a regular basis, perhaps
monthly. The program is personally explained to new tenants or neighbor-
hood residents. At multi-family dwellings, managers or caretakers provide
active oversight to ensure compliance and quality control. In urban areas, a
block captain or neighborhood recycling committee may fulfill the role of edu-
cator and motivator.
Residential and commercial waste recycling programs are designed with
convenience in mind. Recycling containers are placed in areas convenient for
both residents and haulers (for example, basements may be avoided because
they can be dirty and may attract vermin). Each container is well marked and
can be reached by children. Pickup is regular, to help alleviate storage prob-
lems that can make recycling difficult for apartment dwellers. Fire codes may
also affect storage options.
Motivating people in multi-family dwellings and the inner-city is also
necessary. Some success has been achieved by establishing buy-back centers
in inner-city areas to spur economic interest in recycling, especially among
children. Some suggest that siting processing centers in urban areas and hir-
ing local residents are crucial to linking recycling with local economic benefits.
Providing some portion of recyclable sales revenue to a neighborhood group
or a tenants' association may also provide a valuable economic incentive to
improve participation and quality control, although these economic incentives
must be balanced against the increase in program costs, which may have to be
borne by other parts of the community.
PROCESSING/STORAGE CENTER DESIGN
Collected recyclables are normally delivered to a processing facility, where the
recyclables are either stored until large enough volumes are collected to be
marketable or are processed to meet the specifications of recycling markets.
Obviously, the manner in which waste is collected will help to determine the
processing/storage facility design.
Small communities or groups of communities may develop small drop-
off centers that feed a larger processing facility (see Figure 6-7). The drop-off
center/large processing facility approach provides each small community
with the benefits of a convenient, low-cost collection point, as well as the
economies of scale and higher volumes that a large processing facility can pro-
vide. Each drop-off center can be serviced by a transporter on a regular basis,
or transporters can be called when the center has reached capacity. Who pays
How waste is collected
helps determine the
processing/storage
facility design.
Page 6-33
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
MRFs should be
designed to receive,
sort, process, and store
recyclable material
efficiently and safely.
for recycling transportation and how the material should be transported must
be decided.
To manage large urban recycling programs, many communities consider
implementing MRFs, which are designed to process large volumes of recy-
clable material in the most efficient and cost-effective manner; some can
handle thousands of tons of material and many types of recyclables.
The design goal for a MRF is to receive, sort, process, and store recy-
clable material efficiently and safely. Although most recyclable material will
be trucked to the facility, some facilities provide for citizen drop off or buy
back. Depending on whether materials are delivered to the facility as mixed
waste, mixed recyclables, or separated recyclables, there are a variety of op-
tions and tradeoffs involving equipment and personnel.
There are three major issues that must be addressed when building and
designing a MRF. First, a site must be found that can accommodate the build-
ing and its associated features for traffic and storage, and be consistent with
local land use. Second, the building layout and equipment must be designed
to accommodate efficient and safe materials processing, movement, and stor-
age, in compliance with local building codes. Third, the building must be de-
signed to allow efficient and safe external access and to accommodate internal
flow. Each of these design issues is discussed below and special consider-
ations are highlighted.
Figure 6-7
Rural Container Station
OyciooQ1 in«sncji'""8'i irijdhi
3f X3tf
FoUttxttfngfWrigty
Source: Northwest Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission
Site Location
The ideal MRF location is
a large piece of clear,
uncontaminated land in
an industrial area close
to the source of material
production.
The ideal location for a MRF is a large piece of clear, uncontaminated land
close to the source of material production and located in an industrial area.
Industrial areas normally have access to utility services and to different modes
of transportation, including rail, barge, and highway. Moreover, neighbors
are accustomed to the volume of truck traffic that would be received by a recy-
cling center. Also, noise associated with operation of processing and storage
equipment at the recycling center should not create the type of problems that a
Page 6-34
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
Manufacturing sites
must be evaluated for
possible hazardous
materials/waste
problems.
center located in a more residential area may create. A site in an industrial
area would also be properly zoned, which would obviate the need to seek re-
zoning or a variance as part of the site approval process. Finding and obtain-
ing such an ideal site could be extremely expensive or even impossible for
many communities.
Communities can consider various options, such as locally owned gov-
ernment property or used industrial property (warehouses, manufacturing fa-
cilities, etc.). However, if a site has been used for manufacturing, be sure that
no hazardous waste or hazardous material problems exist at the site. Leaking
underground storage tanks, crumbling asbestos insulation, or contaminated
soil could turn a low-cost piece of property into a fiscal nightmare. Perform-
ing an environmental audit before acquiring the property is recommended. If
a large enough property with a building is available, an investigation should
determine if the building can be retrofitted to house the recycling facility or if it
should be razed. More details on siting a facility can be found in Chapter 2.
Area
Review local land use
regulations to determine
if setback regulations
exist.
The site must be large enough to accommodate the recycling building, safe
and efficient traffic flow for several vehicles, and have buffer space for fenc-
ing, landscaping, signs, and other incidentals (see Figure 6-8). If possible, en-
trances and exits for trucks should separate from those used by automobiles.
There should be enough room for tractor/trailers of 55 feet and over to park
and turn safely and easily. Also consider outdoor storage needs for revet-
ments, pallets, baled materials, or appliances (see Figure 6-9). If possible, in-
clude an area for expansion.
Local land use regulations should be consulted to determine if setback
regulations exist. Likewise, some space should be set aside for fencing, signs,
and landscaping. Adding trees or shrubs to the site design can provide a
buffer zone, cut down on noise, and provide an aesthetically pleasing appear-
ance to neighbors and to citizens using the site's drop-off center.
Scale
The site should have a scale that can be used to weigh both incoming and outgo-
ing materials. Typical scale lengths are from 60 to 70 feet. The site should also ac-
commodate a queuing area for trucks from the entrance to the scale and from the
scale to the recycling facility. To determine the queuing area, some predictions
must be made of the peak vehicle traffic times, as well as the time necessary to
weigh and unload an incoming vehicle. Try to minimize the number of intersec-
tions and amount of cross traffic in the site design (see Figure 6-10).
Building Design: Outside-Inside Interface
The facility's outside walls should be designed to allow safe and easy access for
incoming and outgoing vehicles. It is important to design doors wide and high
enough to accommodate vehicles unloading inside the building. Door damage
has been a problem at many MRFs because of collisions caused by empty, but still
open, trucks backing out. There should be enough doors to accommodate the ex-
pected number of trucks at normal peak times. The same is true for areas where
materials will be loaded onto trailers for transport to markets.
Tipping or Unloading Area
The tipping or unloading area should be designed to accommodate at least
two days' expected volume of material, although even more space would be
preferable because insufficient area to handle incoming waste is a common
Page 6-35
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Figure 6-8
Recycling Center, Toledo, Ohio
END ELEVATION OF A RECYCLING CENTER
SIDE ELEVATION OF A RECYCLING CENTER
I 1
2W -V
LAYOUT FOR A RECYCLING CENTER
Source: The Complete Guide to Planning, Building and Operating a Multi-Material Theme Center, Glass Packaging Institute, 1984
Figure 6-9
Recycling Revetments
Source: Manitowoc County, Wisconsin Ad Hoc Committee on Recycling
Page 6-36
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
Larger MRFs often
accept both source-
separated and
commingled materials.
problem for MRFs. The tipping floor can be unheated, but the design should
ensure that cold air does not infiltrate the processing area.
Larger MRFs are usually expected to accept both source-separated and com-
mingled materials. Although all recyclable material could be accommodated on
one large tipping floor, designing the facility with separate areas for separated
and commingled recyclables may be best. This facilitates more efficient process-
ing in the building, since processing equipment may be different for each. Signs
should clearly indicate to each driver the proper location for material delivery.
A MRF can be designed to run more than one shift. With this option,
sufficient storage space on the tipping floor is essential to allow for processing
during the second shift. One approach is to process all separated material
during the first shift and all commingled material during the second shift. Us-
ing multiple shifts may allow for an overall smaller facility design, although
the tipping floor may need to be larger.
The tipping or unloading floor should be designed to handle heavy
weights, withstand the wear caused by pushing and moving recyclables, and
to provide efficient drainage for liquids brought in by trucks. Wet floors pose
safety hazards for employees and create difficult working conditions. The de-
sign must also minimize glass breakage, which poses safety hazards and cre-
ates a large percentage of nonrecyclable volume at many MRFs. If possible,
use a sloped tipping pit or ramp to minimize jarring. Corrugated cardboard
can also be placed on the tipping floor as a cushion. Reducing the number of
times each load must be handled also reduces breakage.
The area needed for the tipping or unloading floor can be estimated by
using the material characterization data collected and converting the antici-
pated recyclable weights to loose volumes (see Table 6-13). Remember to ac-
count for slopes at the ends of stored material piles. By adding up the ex-
pected daily volumes of the commodities to be processed, the daily through-
put for the facility can be estimated.
Figure 6-10
Material Recycling Facility Site Plan and Traffic Flow, DuPage County, Illinois
North Intermediate Processing Facility
FuuiffiiPN AVENUE
Source: Camp Dresser and McKee, Inc. 1991
Page 6-37
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Table 6-13
Sample Weight to Volume Conversion Factors for Recyclables
Material
Volume
Weight in pounds
Newsprint, loose
Newsprint, compacted
Newsprint
Glass, whole bottles
Glass, semi crushed
Glass, crushed (mechanically)
Glass, whole bottles
Glass, uncrushed to manually broken
PET, soda bottles, whole, loose
PET, soda bottles, whole, loose
PET, soda bottles, baled
PET, soda bottles, granulated
PET, soda bottles, granulated
Film, baled
Film, baled
HPDE (dairy only), whole, loose
HPDE (dairy only), baled
HPDE (mixed), baled
HPDE (mixed), granulated
HPDE (mixed), granulated
Mixed PET and dairy, whole, loose
Mixed PET, dairy and other rigid, whole, loose
Mixed rigid, no film or dairy, whole, loose
Mixed rigid, no film, granulated
Mixed rigid and film, densified by
mixed plastic mold technology
Aluminum cans, whole
Aluminum cans, flattened
Aluminum cans
Aluminum cans
Ferrous cans, whole
Ferrous cans, flattened
Corrugated cardboard, loose
Corrugated cardboard, baled
Leaves, uncompacted
Leaves, compacted
Leaves, vacuumed
Wood chips
Grass clippings
Used motor oil
Tire — passenger car
Tire — truck
Food waste, solid and liquid fats
one cubic yard
one cubic yard
12" stack
one cubic yard
one cubic yard
one cubic yard
one full grocery bag
55 gallon drum
one cubic yard
gaylord
30"x 62"
gaylord
semi-load
30" x 42" x 48"
semi-load
one cubic yard
32"x 60"
32"x 60"
gaylord
semi-load
one cubic yard
one cubic yard
one cubic yard
gaylord
one cubic foot
one cubic yard
one cubic yard
one full grocery bag
one large plastic grocery bag
one cubic yard
one cubic yard
one cubic yard
one cubic yard
one cubic yard
one cubic yard
one cubic yard
one cubic yard
one cubic yard
one gallon
one
one
55 gallon drum
360-800
720-1,000
35
600-1,000
1,000-1,800
800-2,700
16
125-500
30-40
40-53
500
700-750
30,000
1,100
44,000
24
400-500
900
800-1,000
42,000
average 32
average 38
average 49
500-1,000
average 60
50-74
250
1.5
300-500
150
850
300
1,000-1,200
250-500
320-450
350
500
400-1,500
7
12
60
412
Source: DRAFT National Recycling Coalition Measurement Standards and Reporting Guidelines, presented to the NRC Membership,
(October 31, 1989)
Page 6-38
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
Storage Area
Table 6-13 can be used
to estimate storage
needs.
Table 6-13 can be used to estimate storage needs. After determining the types
of equipment that will be used to process and compact the recyclables, a gen-
eral estimate can be made of space requirements to store this material. It is
important not to underestimate storage space needs. Enough storage space
should be available to store materials for sufficient periods to gain high-vol-
ume prices or to account for the inability to sell some materials during market
downturns. Some materials can be stored outside or in trailers, depending on
market specifications.
Building Structure
The building should have as few interior columns as possible. This will allow
the maximum flexibility for placing equipment and accommodating future
needs to rearrange the layout. The floor should be strong enough in all places
to accommodate both vehicles and heavy, stationary processing equipment.
The floor should also be designed to allow for anchoring equipment. Al-
though there may be a need to design in some recyclable pits to hold various
materials, keeping a flat floor space will allow for easier moving or changing
of equipment.
The ceiling should also be high enough to accommodate equipment
specifications. Especially for larger MRFs, conveying lines, air classifiers,
shredders, and other processing equipment can be as tall as forty feet. For
flexibility, it is just as important to have enough space vertically as horizon-
tally (see Figure 6-11).
Employee and Education Facilities
Locker rooms,
bathrooms, showers, a
first aid station, an
administrative office, a
weighing station and
public education facilities
should be considered.
In addition to estimating space for material drop off, processing, and storage,
the design must include space for employee facilities. Locker rooms, bath-
rooms, showers, a first aid station, an administrative office, and a weighing
station should all be considered. For facilities that operate a buy-back center
along with the MRF, space for a cashier and an area for accepting recyclables
from the public should be provided. Large facilities often have rooms where
the operation can be explained to public tour groups or for use as a lunch
room. The rooms have windows overlooking the processing floor, and educa-
tional programs can be conducted safely and quietly.
Depending on the site's geographic location, radiant heating units or
space for furnace or air conditioning equipment should be part of the design.
Local building codes should be consulted to determine work place minimum
environmental standards. If employees are to be drawn from a specialized
work force, such as developmentally disabled individuals or the handicapped,
special regulations may apply. A shop for housing tools and maintaining
equipment could also be part of the design.
Hazardous Materials Area
MRFs accepting
household hazardous
waste or waste oil should
include a special area
designed according to
local, state, and federal
requirements.
A MRF may or may not be designed to accept household hazardous waste or
waste oil. If the MRF is intended to accept household hazardous waste or
waste oil, a special area should be designed according to local, state, and fed-
eral requirements. Even if household or other forms of hazardous waste will
not be accepted as part of the recycling program, some area should be set
aside for storing the hazardous materials that will no doubt be received at
some time during the MRF operation. Hazardous waste, medical waste, low-
level radioactive waste, and other hazardous chemicals may be found in in-
coming loads. A protocol for handling this material should be established.
Page 6-39
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Employees should be carefully trained to reduce risk of injury or exposure. Ac-
cepting hazardous waste can complicate siting and permitting requirements.
Building Layout and Equipment Choices: Manpower Versus Machines
Manual sorting is the best way to get high-quality, low-contamination loads of
recyclables and experience less downtime. For some commodities, such as
mixed colored glass, manual sorting is the only proven feasible alternative.
However, manual sorting can also be dirty, dusty, dangerous, and expensive,
especially when large volumes of material must be handled.
Increasingly, mechanized sorting equipment is becoming available,
which may provide improved handling efficiency at an acceptable quality.
This equipment is designed to receive commingled recyclables and separate
the total volume into its component parts, such as aluminum cans, plastics,
glass, and ferrous metals. Classifiers, using air or mechanical methods, sepa-
rate light materials from heavier. Eddy currents separate aluminum cans.
Magnetic belts or drums can pick off ferrous metals. Proprietary technology,
Manual sorting yields
high-quality, low-
contamination loads of
recyclables and
minimizes downtime.
Mechanized sorting
equipment providing
improved handling
efficiency at an
acceptable quality is
available.
Figure 6-11
Facility Layout, DuPage County, Illinois, North Intermediate Processing Facility
1. Commingled Infeed Pit
2. Flow Control Sensors
3. Pre-Sort Station
4. Overhead Electromagnet
5. Reject and Residue Collection
6. Ferrous Baler
7. Vibrating Screen
8. Inclined Sorting Table
9. Vibrating Screen/Eddy Current
10. Aluminum Baler
11. Head-on Plastics Sorting
Stations
12. PET Plastics Baler
13. HOPE Plastics Baler
14. Glass Sorting Station
15. Glass Crushers and Storage
Bunkers
16. Paper Infeed Pit
17. Paper Sorting Station
18. Paper Storage Bunkers
19. Paper Baler
Source: Camp Dresser and McKee, Inc. 1991
COMMINGLED PROCESSING
EQUIPMENT
I
LQWUMa DOORS
L^fl u u u u u
D D D E
a
Page 6-40
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
Several factors affect the
decision to use manual
or mechanical sorting
methods.
such as the BRINI system, is available. New techniques include the Bezner
system, which uses moving chain curtains to trap light materials like plastic
and aluminum cans, while allowing denser materials, such as glass, to move
through the hanging chains. Optical scanners are also being developed to sort
glass by color. More technology for sorting recyclables is expected to come on
the market in the near future.
In designing a MRF, decisions about whether to rely on manual sorting
or mechanical sorting must be based on the volume and types of materials to
be handled; the economics of purchasing, operating, and maintaining the
equipment versus the cost of hiring additional employees; and market require-
ments concerning the degree of acceptable contamination. High-volume fa-
cilities should probably be designed to use mechanical sorting if efficient
equipment is available, supplemented with manual sorting for quality control
(see Figure 6-12). A primary design goal should be minimizing the number of
times that material must be handled as it moves through the facility.
Conveyor Line
To achieve very low
contamination levels, a
positive sorting system
should be used.
Handling efficiency for a MRF is greatly enhanced by using conveyor lines to
move waste from the tipping area through processing. Conveyor lines can be
used merely for transporting materials to mechanical equipment or can act as
moving lines that allow workers to separate various commodities. Conveyor
lines are an integral part of any well-designed MRF.
A conveyor line should be designed to allow an employee to be standing
upright or seated while separating materials. If an employee must bend over
or stand in an uncomfortable position, injuries will result. Likewise, the line
should be designed to keep employees from snagging clothes or receiving in-
juries while sorting. Emergency shut-off cords and palm-size panic buttons
should be included with conveyor systems.
If very low contamination levels will be accepted by markets, a positive
sorting system should be used. In positive sorting, recyclables are picked
from the conveyor and placed in storage containers; with negative sorting,
contaminants are picked off the conveyor, but everything else ends up in the
same storage bin. Negative sorting allows a greater percentage of contami-
nants to slip through the process.
Processing and Densifying Equipment
Decisions about buying
processing equipment
depend on the volume of
material and market
requirements.
For small operations, collected recyclables can be stored loose in Gaylord
boxes and marketed directly. The feasibility of this option depends on local
markets and transportation costs. Most recycling centers use some processing
and densification equipment in order to increase the price paid by a market or
to lower unit transportation costs by maximizing the volume in each load. De-
cisions about buying processing equipment depend on the volume of material
that will be handled and especially on the requirements of the markets. Some
markets want to receive material baled, some shredded, others loose. Some
markets will accept waste in a variety of forms, but will pay different prices
for each. Processing equipment should be selected carefully for each facility to
meet its particular processing requirements. The capital and operating costs,
along with space requirements, must be balanced against the improved mar-
ketability and revenue that processing will bring.
Balers are usually the most versatile piece of processing equipment that re-
cycling centers use. Balers can be used to densify many types of materials includ-
ing paper, cardboard, plastic, and cans. Using a baler facilitates stacking bales,
which improves space utilization and reduces material transportation costs. Bal-
ers come in a variety of sizes and prices. For industrial markets, large bales (600-
1200 pounds, 30-40 inches wide) are the norm. For animal bedding from news-
print, small bales, on the order of 70 pounds each, are preferred by farmers.
Page 6-41
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Figure 6-1 2
Medium and High Technology Processing
Paper Processing
1 Line
Corrugated Newspaper Commingled Materials
1 1
Paper Magnetic D , Baled
Picking *~ Out-Throws Separator *" Baler ^ rerrous/Bimetal
Cans
t
Baler
Baled or Ba|er or
Granulated -* Granulators
Plastics
Baled Aluminum Cans -
Medium Technology
Processing
t
^ Baled Paper
Plastics f *• GntM/aste
Sort Plastic
"* HUPb&Pbl "* Picking
Aluminum t
•^ =crccn •« Aluminum
"~ "~ Picking
t r
Drt&Grit Trash _ Trash
DlbPubal PicWng *" Disposal
T
Glass ^
Picking T T ? T
Amber Green Flint Mixed Glass
& Fines
V t t V
\ Storage / \ Storage / \ Storage / \ Storage /
V^ t T t
Paper Processing
1 Line
Corrugated Newspaper Commingled Materials
High Technology T f
PrOCeSSJna Paper ^~ n,,tThm,.,c Magne c ^_ Flattener, Slit er Processed
noi-t^lliy pickjng ^ Out-Throws Sepyarator -^ Nuggetizeror Bater >~ Ferrous/Bime al
, Cans
T t
Baler -^- Baled Paper Screen ^- Fines/Waste
Crusher and Crus
Screen Sc
t
Amber G
\Storage / \ stc
t
Source: Pferdehirt, W. "Planning Bigger,
T
SerSr - EdsdeYpSr *> ~
t t t
ier and Crusher and Crusher and ^ Glass Plastic Processed
reen Screen Screen "^~ Picking Picking Aluminum
f t t t
Flint Mixed Glass Sor NEPD
& Fines HOPE & PET ^ Granulated
t f I If
rage/ \Storage/ Air PETUnTCXed Granulated
/ \ , / Cleaner MUKt HOPE
tlF^ Perforator
? t V
\Sto^e/ Baler
^ t
Baled PET & Mixed HOPE
raster, More Flexible MRFs," Solid Waste and Power, October 1990
Page 6-42
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
Glass crushing improves
densification and makes
for more cost-efficient
loads.
The market will
determine whether a
shredder is needed or, in
the case of plastics,
acceptable.
Higher-volume facilities typically require balers with continuous-feed
(rather than batch) capability, and with an automatic tying mechanism.
Larger processing facilities typically have one heavy-duty baler for all paper
materials and one or more medium-duty baler for cans and plastics. A baler
to be used for PET bottles can be fitted with a perforator, thereby eliminating
the need to manually remove caps from the bottles before baling. Balers for
paper materials should be equipped with a swing-out ruffler that can be en-
gaged when baling newspapers to increase bale density.
Glass crushing improves densification and makes for more cost-efficient
loads. Glass-crushing equipment can be as simple as a sledge hammer used to
crush glass through a hole in the top of a 55 gallon drum of glass. A hammer
mill can also be used, if large volumes must be crushed. Some recycling op-
erations simply drop glass from the top of a long conveyer onto other glass
piled in a revetment, using gravity as the breaking force. Equipment to crush,
screen, and store glass must be designed to accommodate the highly abrasive
nature of crushed glass; well-designed glass processing equipment often in-
cludes wear plates that can be routinely replaced. Marketing requirements,
volume needs, and resources will help determine which type of glass-crushing
equipment is feasible.
Shredders and chippers can be used for newsprint (for animal bedding),
mixed paper, plastic bottles, and confidential documents. The market will de-
termine whether a shredder is needed or, in the case of plastics, acceptable.
Shredders and chippers should be equipped with safety protections, including
dust control.
Other specialty equipment like can flatteners can also provide improved
densification. Frequently in the past, processing equipment that was devel-
oped for other uses was converted and used for recycling. Recently, industry
has begun developing processing and densification equipment especially for
recycling operations. Improvements in equipment design and operation are
expected in the future.
Handling Equipment
The MRF layout should
allow sufficient aisle
space for efficient and
safe movement of
materials.
When choosing
processing, handling,
and densification
equipment, it is
important to consider
equipment life cycle
costs.
Even small recycling operations will need some methods of moving materials
from the tipping area to storage and from storage to transport vehicles. When
55 gallon drums are used, hand trucks or dollies may be sufficient. However,
for 55 gallon drums of glass, handling with a hand truck can be dangerous
and difficult.
For larger operations, fork-lift trucks to move baled material are a must.
Front-end loaders are also used to move loose materials such as paper, glass,
and cans. For air quality purposes, propane or electric fork-lift models should
be used inside. Diesel or gas models are fine for outside work.
In developing the layout for the MRF, it is important to allow sufficient
aisle space for efficient and safe movement of materials. Handling equipment
must have sufficient room to move from processing to storage areas, prefer-
ably without the need to make tight turns or to cross flow paths used for mov-
ing other materials. The traffic pattern should also allow for rapid loading
and unloading of vehicles.
When making decisions about processing, handling, and densification
equipment, it is important to consider the life cycle cost for this equipment. In
addition, factors such as the capacity of the machine, whether it is continuous
feed or batch feed, its reliability record or servicing needs, and energy require-
ments are all important. Likewise, the space needed for equipment and the re-
quired loading and unloading areas should be noted. Also, reinforced con-
crete slabs should be designed to withstand the weight of loaded collection trucks
and tractor trailers and to properly support equipment and stored materials.
Page 6-43
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Redundancy
Including redundancy in
equipment processing
capability is important.
When laying out the overall design of the MRF and making equipment
choices, it is important to include redundancy in equipment processing capa-
bility where possible. Equipment failure in one area of the MRF should not
cause the entire operation to shut down. Although cost and space require-
ments may prevent having two of everything, developing multiple sorting
lines and alternative handling methods will make the system less prone to
shut down. Likewise, equipment should be placed so that both routine and
special maintenance can be performed easily and without disruption to other
MRF functions. Having an operator from an existing MRF on the new
facility's design team can help avoid future operational problems.
DEVELOPING AN ORGANIZATIONAL PLAN AND BUDGET
To be successful
recycling operations
must be run like
businesses.
Whether the recycling operation is public or private, to be successful it must
be run h^e a business. In the past, many community programs were run with
mostly volunteer labor. Although some volunteers may still be used, success-
ful recycling programs rely on trained personnel and have an institutionalized
structure within the community. The program must be designed to run
smoothly despite changing conditions and personnel turnover.
Organization
Recycling programs can
be designed to be purely
public, public and
private, or purely
private.
Regardless of the legal
structure, the
organization should have
clear delineation of
responsibility.
Recycling programs can be designed to be purely public, public and private,
or purely private. The legal organization of the recycling program will de-
pend on local circumstances and the desire for allocating risk and control.
Special attention should be given to legal requirements in deciding on the pro-
gram organization.
For a purely public program, the operation could be run by the public
works department and overseen by the city council or county board. For multi-
jurisdictional programs, a sanitary district or recycling commission could be
formed, depending on local laws. For these operations, intergovernmental agree-
ments stating clearly the duties and responsibilities of each municipal member
should be signed. A system for sharing expenses and revenues, an enforcement
policy, and other programmatic details should be clearly stated.
For private programs, a decision needs to be made whether the operation
should be for profit or nonprofit. Nonprofit corporations are tax exempt, but
have greater government scrutiny of financial operations. Deciding whether
to become a for-profit or nonprofit corporation is a major decision that should
be discussed thoroughly with a qualified attorney.
Regardless of the legal structure, the organization should have clear de-
lineation of responsibility. For any recycling program to succeed over the
long term, someone must be directly responsible for ensuring that the pro-
gram is properly managed. Without this clear responsibility, inefficiencies
will develop, maintenance will be ignored, education and promotion efforts
will slip, and downturns in the market could threaten the program's viability.
A recycling program will not run itself. For any large program, a paid
manager or staff is necessary. The staff should have broad business and orga-
nizational skills. Personnel must have the ability to operate and supervise use
of a variety of expensive and often dangerous machines. The manager should
also be an effective promoter of the recycling program; he or she must be able
to conduct public education and awareness programs and work with the local
press. Other support personnel—office workers, cashiers, bookkeepers, ac-
countants, and maintenance and cleaning personnel—should be planned as
part of the organization. Paying a fair wage is crucial to attracting and keep-
ing qualified employees.
Page 6-44
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
Budget
The budget should
estimate as accurately
as possible personnel,
equipment, building, and
other expenses.
Using the information developed in the previous steps, a detailed budgetary
breakdown should be prepared. The budget should estimate as accurately as
possible personnel, equipment, building, and other expenses. It should indi-
cate anticipated capital and operating costs for a MRF or a collection center
and predict revenues and other income sources. Because recycling markets
are volatile, revenues from recyclable sales should be conservatively esti-
mated. Budgets should include any program-related expenses, such as the
cost of publicity and promotion, insurance, utilities, office equipment, and
maintenance (see Table 6-14). The availability of state and local grants or
loans should also be considered.
When several scenarios are considered, a budget should be prepared for
each. For example, a large community might compare building one very large
MRF versus two or three smaller ones. Establishing transfer points to move
smaller quantities of material to a central MRF can also be considered. Like-
wise, purchasing a costly piece of processing equipment can be compared to
costs for additional manual processing without the equipment. While cost is
not the driving force behind most recycling programs, comparing costs and
discussing goals can help a community choose from a variety of options.
Financing
Revenue from selling
recyclables is usually
inadequate to cover all
program costs.
Most communities
budget additional tax
moneys or develop
alternative financing
strategies.
Revenue from the sale of recyclables is usually inadequate to cover all program
costs. Most communities need to budget additional tax moneys or develop alter-
native strategies for program financing. Some also use program financing meth-
ods as incentives to recycle, for example, charging for waste collection on a vol-
ume-based standard. Such "user-fee" or "generator-pay" systems internalize the
cost of waste production for each generator, thereby encouraging them to de-
crease the amount of waste they discard by changing buying habits, reusing ma-
terials, and increasing recycling. To encourage recycling, recyclable collection is
often provided free or at low rates and its costs rolled into the nonrecyclable rate base.
These programs have improved recycling rates and decreased overall waste volumes.
In some rural communities, an increase in littering or home disposal has
occurred when a volume-based system was instituted. In urban areas, resi-
dential waste may be dumped in commercial dumpsters. Additional educa-
tion and publicity may be necessary to explain program benefits when such
problems develop.
Many private haulers will work with communities to share the benefits
and risks of recycling. Some haulers provide a rebate to communities based
on the volume of recyclables collected and the volume of waste diverted from
the landfill. Careful negotiations during contracting can provide a strong in-
centive for both the hauler and the community to work hard to make recycling
a success. A contract that shares benefits and risks should also provide a pro-
cedure for sharing costs during slow market periods.
Communities owning a landfill, MRF, waste-to-energy plant, compost op-
eration, or transfer station may be able to help underwrite recycling program
costs by including within its tipping fee a portion for recycling. Private haulers
and other communities would then be supporting community recycling efforts.
The tipping fee increase can also be seen as an incentive to recycle.
ADDRESSING LEGAL SITING ISSUES
A variety of legal issues must be addressed in developing an effective recy-
cling program. Resolving these issues as part of the planning and implemen-
tation process is crucial. Forgetting or ignoring a legal requirement could stop
the entire program in its tracks because of a legal challenge. To keep program
Page 6-45
Addressing legal issues
during the planning and
implementation stage is
crucial.
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
A detailed budgetary
breakdown including all
program-related
expenses should be
prepared.
Table 6-14: Model Budget
Budget Categories:
• Personnel
• Equipment
• Supplies
• Contractual
Budget Categories
Personnel
Salary and fringes
Overtime
Subtotal
Equipment
Floor scale
Portable scales (2)
Truck, hydraulic lift tailgate
PET grinder
Forklift Truck
Can crushers
Aluminum and steel sorter
3 chain-flail glass crushers
Belt conveyor
Wooden steps (paper trailer)
Self-dumping hoppers
Bulk cullet containers
Push carts (1 0)
Pallets (50)
Miscellaneous signs
Glass storage bins
Subtotal
Office Equipment
Cash register
Furniture
Typewriter
Calculator
Phone answering machine
Subtotal
Supplies
Contractual
Professional fees
Physical plant layout and design
Subtotal
Leasehold and site improvements
Grading and paving
Building construction
Outside lighting
1 20/1 40 volt power
460 volt power
Subtotal
Other Operating Expenses
Utilities
Advertising
Repairs and maintenance
Trash and snow removal
Insurance
Phone
Gas and oil
Other
Subtotal
Space Rental
Grand Total
Source: The Complete Guide to Planning,
Theme Center, Glass Packaging Institute,
Total
$00,000
0,000
$00,000
$0,000
0,000
0,000
00,000
00,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
$000,000
$0,000
0,000
000
000
$0,000
$000
$0,000
$0,000
$00,000
$00,000
$0,000
0,000
0,000
000
000
000
00
000
$0,000
$0,000
$000.000
• Leasehold and site
improvement
• Other operating expenses
• Space rental
Donated
$0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
000
$00,000
$0,000
000
$0,000
$000
$0,000
$0,000
$00,000
00, 000
0,000
0,000
0,000
$00,000
$00,000
Building and Operating a Multi-Material Recycling
1984
Page 6-46
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
development on schedule then, attention to legal issues is crucial. Some legal
issues may result from legislative mandates at the state level.
Zoning and Land Use Considerations in Siting
When possible, it is best
to look for a site already
zoned for recycling
processing.
A proposal to site a MRF may be opposed by neighbors. When possible, it is
best to look for a site already zoned to allow recycling processing. If the best
site available needs a zoning change or a variance, procedures to obtain the
approvals should be initiated immediately. Some opponents may try to con-
vince local officials that a recycling operation is a glorified junk or scrap yard.
It will be important to show clearly that this is not the case.
As discussed in Chapters 1 and 2, plans for public involvement during pro-
gram development should be implemented. By providing for public education
and input, issues that could create opposition can be recognized and resolved.
Public support for the community planning effort will be fostered. A well-con-
ceived public involvement program will assist decision makers in generating a
broad consensus in favor of the proposed community approach to recycling.
Building Codes
Follow local building
codes carefully.
Local building codes should be carefully followed when designing a MRF. Ba-
sics such as the number of bathrooms, minimal working space per employee,
and other requirements may be specified. Working condition rules such as
minimum and maximum temperatures, air changes, and required ventilation
may also influence design. Note that the standards may be higher if develop-
mentally disabled workers will be employed.
Permits
All permits should be
obtained before
beginning the recycling
program operation.
All necessary permits should be obtained before beginning the recycling pro-
gram operation. Contact regulatory authorities to determine if permits are
needed for air and water quality or solid and hazardous waste storage. Per-
mits may also be needed for both intrastate and interstate transportation of re-
cyclables, especially for overweight loads. Local governments may also have
a variety of operating permits and other restrictions. Federal and state rules
regarding employee and community right to know and employee safety
should be studied. Protocols for meeting these criteria and protecting employ-
ees from injury should be established.
Contracts
Depending on the type of program, a variety of contracts may be needed. All
aspects of recyclable operation, including collection, processing, and market-
ing, may be covered by contract. Construction of a MRF may also be covered
by local bidding laws, and it may be necessary to negotiate a variety of con-
tracts. Specifications for equipment purchases must also be developed.
General Business Regulation
Procedures for
insurance, worker's
compensation, tax
withholding, and social
security should be
developed.
Procedures for business operation, such as adequate insurance, worker's com-
pensation, tax withholding, and social security should be developed. If the
operation of a public recycling program involves unionized employees, union
contracts should be investigated to determine if problems could arise. This is
an important consideration. Some cities have signed expensive contracts with
private haulers only to find that the contracts violated union agreements. Spe-
cial attention should be given to insurance, labor, and other issues in pro-
grams that will use volunteer help.
Page 6-47
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Ordinances
In general, ordinances
should have these
components.
As part of a recycling program, a variety of ordinances may be needed. If
mandatory recycling is chosen by state or local government, some programs
may require local government enforcement to induce broad compliance. To
ensure that people understand what is required of them, many communities
use recycling ordinances that have the force of law.
While there is no all-encompassing model for a source recycling ordi-
nance, in general each ordinance should have the following components:
1. Statement of purpose: reasons recycling is being imposed, such as
saving landfill space or protecting the environment.
2. Applicability of the ordinance: who must separate the waste? Does the
ordinance apply to both citizens and private businesses? How will
apartment houses be handled? Is anyone exempt?
3. Items that must be separated: not all communities want to recycle the
same items. A definition section in the ordinance may be advisable to
clarify which items must be recycled. Also, state which items—such as
grass clippings or leaves—will not be accepted.
4. Material processing: processing requirements, such as crushing, clean-
ing, cap removal, bundling, or stacking in bins, should be clearly stated.
5. Collection procedure: some communities have separate pick-up days for
recyclables and nonrecyclables. Others require drop off at recycling centers.
The local situation will dictate how this is handled. For a recycling center,
the hours of operation should normally be included in the ordinance.
6. Penalties: some communities impose fines for noncompliance. Others
will not pick up unseparated waste.
It may be a good idea to enact an antiscavenging ordinance, too, in com-
munities that will impose curbside pickup. The ordinance would make it un-
lawful for unauthorized persons to pick up recyclables from curbside. Fines
for scavenging should be large enough to act as a deterrent. If a community's
sole aim is to reduce the waste stream, scavenging may not be considered a
problem. However, if program revenue is important, efforts at discouraging
scavenging should probably be undertaken.
DEVELOPING A START-UP APPROACH
A recycling program involves a major change in handling waste for most citi-
zens. A curbside collection program may require of a community large expen-
ditures for new equipment and personnel. For recycling programs to be suc-
cessful, citizens must know what is expected of them and must help make the
program a success. If a program gets off to a poor start because collection is
inconvenient or inefficient for local citizens, the long-term program may never
achieve the success desired.
Expect unusually large amounts of recyclables for the first week or two
weeks of collection. Citizens and businesses tend to save recyclables in antici-
pation of the beginning of the program. If not anticipated, this initial response
can inundate collection vehicles and the MRF. Collections could slow and
residents may be unhappy. Asking residents to set out recyclables over a
number of collection days will help avoid problems. This request should be
made during preprogram educational and publicity efforts.
Therefore, even with a well-designed program, a careful start-up plan
should be devised. Although some communities successfully go from no recy-
cling to mandatory curbside recycling, a better approach may be to devise a
smaller scale or less compulsory start-up approach. The approach can be used to
Most programs benefit
from devising and
following a careful start-
up plan.
Page 6-48
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
develop information that will help the community make decisions about how best
to collect material and about which type of collection strategy works the best.
Once the program is running at full scale, it may be difficult to make changes. Us-
ing a pilot start-up approach allows the community to try a number of ideas prior
to making full-scale, expensive, and perhaps irreversible decisions. Phasing in the
system, starting with the residences, then adding apartments and then businesses,
has also been successful for some communities.
Pilot Programs
In pilot programs,
recyclables are collected
through a specific period
using prescribed
methods. The efficiency
of the approach is then
evaluated.
In a pilot program, recyclables are collected using prescribed methods for a
certain period of time. The efficiency of the approach is then evaluated. Of-
ten, pilots are run using different methods in different neighborhoods so that
results can be compared.
A pilot program serves a variety of needs. First, it allows the community
to try an approach, such as clear bag collection or bin collection, without the
expense of going community wide. Second, if coupled with a strong educa-
tion and publicity program, the pilot program can begin public discussion and
understanding of the recycling program and generate community support for
source separation. Third, the pilot can provide a good estimate of the quantity
of recyclables that can be expected. This information can be used to refine ad-
justments made earlier as part of waste characterization. Some communities
have conducted pilot studies in place of waste characterization, feeling that an
actual recycling program will yield better estimates of expected volumes than
statistical studies.
The structure of the pilot can be fitted to the needs of the community. In
a large city, a recycling program could be instituted in a few neighborhoods at
first; eventually, the program could be extended to the whole city. Recycling
could also be conducted only at a specific type of residence, such as single
family homes, with the expectation that harder to reach citizenry, such as
multi-family dwellers, would be added later.
Voluntary Recycling
Beginning programs with
voluntary recycling may
be beneficial, even for
communities planning
for mandatory recycling.
Communities can
provide strong economic
incentives to recycle by
internalizing the cost of
waste generation.
Beginning the program with voluntary recycling may be a good idea, even for
communities in which mandatory recycling is anticipated. A voluntary pro-
gram can be used to educate people concerning the requirements and benefits
of recycling without the coercive enforcement of a mandatory recycling ordi-
nance. Once citizens are used to the voluntary program and many are already
participating, a shift from voluntary to mandatory will not seem such a large
step. Changes in procedures can also be made more easily when the program
is voluntary than when enforcement is associated with noncompliance. If a
curbside program is being developed, voluntary drop-off centers can provide
an option for those who are separating recyclables. The drop-off centers can
also provide publicity for recycling in the community.
For many communities, the high participation rates achieved with a
well-run and well-publicized voluntary program have eliminated the need for
a mandatory program. Since it is always better for community well-being to
seek cooperation rather than require it, an effort at voluntary source separa-
tion should probably be made at the outset. If a voluntary program does not
achieve high participation rates, the local government then has a good politi-
cal reason to move toward a mandatory program.
Another approach is to provide a strong economic incentive to recycle by
"internalizing the cost of waste generation"—making recycling pay at the lowest
level, for the user. For example, some communities charge variable rates for col-
lecting recyclables and nonrecyclable waste, with the rate for recyclable collection
being lower or free. This system provides a strong incentive to reduce overall
waste costs by reducing waste generation and encouraging recycling.
Page 6-49
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
In addition, many communities now charge for pickups of special items,
such as white goods, tires, or furniture, which in the past were picked up as
part of refuse collection. Along with encouraging recycling, these efforts at in-
ternalizing the costs of waste generation have also encouraged waste reduc-
tion at the source.
Mandatory Recycling
Curbside pickup is the
most common type of
mandatory source
separation program.
Some state recycling
laws and communities
that operate landfills
serving other
municipalities require
source separation as a
prerequisite for using the
landfill.
Among the various mandatory recycling programs now underway in the United
States, each involves a different degree of community and citizen involvement.
Curbside pickup is the most common type of mandatory source separation
program. There is an important difference between a voluntary curbside pick-
up program and one that is mandatory. In many mandatory programs a resi-
dent who has not set recyclables out separately will not have his or her trash
picked up. Many programs use stickers to indicate why waste was left at the
curb (see Figure 6-2). Some mandatory programs impose fines for noncom-
pliance, but to achieve compliance, most programs rely on the social pressure
of having neighbors see that one's garbage was not picked up.
In rural areas and for some types of waste in urban areas, ordinances re-
quire residents to take materials to drop-off centers. Some rural communities
have recycling centers at their landfills, with bins for recyclables.
Mandatory drop-off programs appear to work best when an attendant
ensures that people dropping off waste have first separated recyclables. In ur-
ban areas where mandatory drop-off is used, it usually applies only to yard
trimmings which are composted at a central site.
Ten states and a number of communities in the United States have de-
posit legislation for beverage containers. Generally, states with deposit legis-
lation recover more of the targeted material than states using other collection
schemes. New beverage container deposit legislation is now highly controver-
sial. Some recyclers are concerned that a beverage deposit system may dis-
rupt the many curbside collection programs as valuable materials, such as alu-
minum, are diverted from the curbside program. However, many communi-
ties with beverage container deposit laws also have successful curbside collec-
tion. Some states have enacted deposit legislation for pesticide containers and
auto and other batteries to keep these products from going into landfills.
Some state recycling laws and communities that operate landfills serving
other municipalities have recently imposed source separation as a prerequisite
for using the landfill. Fellow municipalities are required to enact recycling
programs or look elsewhere for a disposal site. Waste that arrives at the land-
fill unseparated is rejected.
Note that this approach places a heavier burden on the waste hauler.
Problems with compliance are especially difficult for haulers who serve
sources like apartment complexes, where separation is hard to enforce. For
these programs, haulers and client municipalities need to work closely to-
gether to develop an effective program.
IMPLEMENTING THE EDUCATION AND PUBLICITY PROGRAM
Long-term success will be achieved by a recycling program only if the reasons
for participating are understood and accepted by the public. The public and
local officials must be regularly reminded of the environmental, economic,
and social reasons for reducing the amount of wastes taken to a landfill. They
should receive regular feedback concerning amounts recovered and participa-
tion. To accomplish this, a plan must be developed—and implemented—pro-
viding publicity and promotion on a routine basis.
How can recycling be promoted? Some communities have Boy Scouts
and Girl Scouts deliver flyers to local residences. Others have included pro-
Page 6-50
-------
CHAPTER 6: RECYCLING
Programs achieve long-
term success if the
public understands and
accepts the reasons for
participating.
Accomplishing this
requires a plan for
providing publicity and
promotion on a routine
basis.
Education is the key to a
recycling program's
long-term success.
motional literature with water bills, tax bills, or weekly shoppers. Many have
prepared public service announcements for radio and TV, and some have
used special promotions. However, special promotions should be carefully
considered, because some programs have experienced significantly decreased
participation when the promotions ended.
Many citizens and businesses will have questions about new programs.
A phone-in customer information service will smooth program implementa-
tion. Surveying community attitudes or conducting focus group sessions can
also help determine which educational approach will work best.
Developing a recycling logo, which is placed on all community recy-
clable collection vehicles, is an effective method of publicizing the program.
Recycling vehicles will be routinely seen by community residents during col-
lection. The vehicles can also be used for publicity at public events such as
fairs or sports competitions.
Although publicity and promotion are important ongoing needs, educa-
tion is the key to long-term success. Children, who will one day be adults,
will help determine whether recycling will become established, stable, and
widely practiced in this country in the future. A number of curricula for
teaching children about the need to recycle are now available. Children learn,
through exercises specially designed for their grade level, how waste is pro-
duced, how much each person generates, where the waste goes, the environ-
mental problems that can develop, and the benefits of limiting disposal needs
through prevention recycling.
Besides educating the children, these programs often educate their par-
ents. Many otherwise reluctant parents will participate if their children enlist
their interest. While changing school curricula to include recycling education
may take some time, a recycling program's chance of long-term success will be
greatly enhanced if local educators become involved.
Plans should include a long-term schedule for promotion and education.
Many recycling programs start with high participation rates during the first
few months, only to see operations fail in the end because community out-
reach and education programs were neglected. The promotion plan should
include periodic reports to local government officials concerning how the pro-
gram is progressing. Local officials who are kept informed will be more ame-
nable to providing both financial and legislative support for the program,
should that become necessary.
BEGINNING PROGRAM OPERATION
If the program has been carefully planned and developed, program imple-
mentation should run smoothly. However, with new personnel, new equip-
ment, and new rules for citizens, some problems will certainly develop. With
patience and perseverance, the program can be fine tuned during its initial
shakedown phase to make it run smoothly and efficiently. If the program is
managed by an experienced recycling coordinator, the learning curve should
be relatively short. A pilot program can help work the bugs out of a new sys-
tem before the program is instituted throughout the community.
CONTINUING SUPERVISION, LONG-TERM PUBLICITY AND EDUCATION
Programs should be
carefully supervised to
maintain citizen and
local government
support.
Especially for a large community, a recycling program will be a significant in-
vestment of community resources. Recycling programs often start with great
fanfare but are quickly forgotten as other community problems are faced. Un-
less the program is carefully supervised, citizen support could wane and prob-
lems could develop. Likewise, continuing local government support, such as
for maintenance for the MRF, could decrease.
Page 6-51
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
A program to inform
local officials about
program benefits and
costs should be
implemented.
The key to long-term success for the program will be planning and edu-
cation. An operational plan should provide for timely maintenance and re-
placement of equipment and for continuing publicity. Program expansion,
new technology, and variable markets must all be expected and planned for.
Both management and operating personnel must be willing to change and im-
prove skills to keep ahead of new developments in the field.
Likewise, changes in the processing technology that will affect the collec-
tion program must be communicated to the public. For example, if a com-
modity that was not collected before is now collected, the public should be ad-
equately informed. Periodically, "how to" literature should be redistributed
to educate new residents and to reinforce program parameters to the commu-
nity. If a former requirement, such as removing the label from a steel can, is
no longer required, the public should be informed. A well-developed pro-
gram will generate community pride as well as keep the program from en-
countering unnecessary contamination.
A program should also be implemented to keep local officials informed
about program benefits and costs. If future expenditures by the community
are needed, the program will have the support base necessary to explain the
requirements and generate political support for budget requests. It will be
hard to convince an uninformed governing body that additional equipment or
operating moneys will be needed for a recycling program.
REVIEWING AND REVISING PROGRAMS TO MEET CHANGING NEEDS
All programs should be
constantly reviewed and
adjustments made when
necessary.
Even managers of successful programs must constantly review their pro-
grams' progress and make necessary adjustments. Recycling is a fast-moving
field with new technology, fluctuating market conditions, changing consumer
waste generation patterns, and changing regulations as federal and state envi-
ronmental legislation is enacted. An effective program must be flexible
enough to adapt as conditions change.
REFERENCES
Gitlitz, J. 1989. "Curbside Collection Containers: A Comparative Evaluation,'
Resource Recycling January/February.
Glass Packaging Institute. 1984. The Complete Guide to Planning, Building and
Operating a Multi-Material Theme Center.
Glenn,]. 1990. "Curbside Recycling Reaches 40 Million," BioCycle. July.
Gorino, R. J. 1992. "Commodity Wrap Up," Scrap Processing.
National Recycling Coalition. 1989. National Recycling Coalition Measurement
Standards and Reporting Guidelines: Draft.
Pferdehirt, W. 1990. "Planning Bigger, Faster, More Flexible MRFs," SoJid
Waste and Power, October.
Powell,]. 1993. "How Are We Doing? The 1992 Report," Resource Recycling,
April.
Schroeder, R. 1990. "Operating a Wood Waste Recycling Facility," BioCycle.
December.
Steuteville, R., N. Goldstein and K. Grotz. 1993. "The State of Garbage in the
America," BioCycle. June.
USEPA. 1992. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States,
1992 Update. EPA/30-R-92-019. July.
USEPA. 1990. Procurement Guidelines for Government Agencies. EPA/530-
SW-91-011. December.
Page 6-52
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
c>
Composting involves the aerobic biological decomposition of organic
materials to produce a stable humus-like product (see Figure 7-1).
Biodegradation is a natural, ongoing biological process that is a
common occurrence in both human-made and natural environments.
Composting is one component in USEPA's hierarchy of
integrated solid waste management, which is discussed in the
introduction to this guidebook (see Figure 1-1 in the introduction).
Source reduction tops the hierarchy of management options, with
recycling as the next preferred option. Grasscycling and backyard
composting are forms of source reduction or waste prevention
because the materials are completely diverted from the disposal
facilities and require no municipal management or transportation.
Community yard trimmings composting programs, source-separated
organics composting, and mixed MSW composting are considered
forms of recycling.
It is important to view compost feedstock as a usable product,
not as waste requiring disposal. When developing and promoting
a composting program and when marketing the resulting
compost, program planners and managers should stress that the
composting process is an environmentally sound and beneficial
means of recycling organic materials, not a means of waste
disposal.
This chapter provides information about methods and
programs for composting yard trimmings (leaves, grass clippings,
brush, and tree prunings) or the compostable portion of mixed
solid waste (MSW), including yard trimmings, food scraps, scrap
paper products, and other decomposable organics.
4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.
From: Decision Maker's Guide to Solid Waste Management, Volume II, (EPA 530-R-95-023), 1995.
Project Co-Directors: Philip R. O'Leary and Patrick W. Walsh, Solid and Hazardous Waste Education
Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison/Extension. This document was supported in part by the
Office of Solid Waste (5306), Municipal and Industrial Solid Waste Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency under grant number CX-817119-01. The material in this document has been
subject to Agency technical and policy review and approved for publication as an EPA report.
Mention of trade names, products, or services does not convey, and should not be interpreted as
conveying, official EPA approval, endorsement, or recommendation.
Page 7-1
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
Composting is an Composting involves the aerobic biological decomposition of organic materials to
environmentally sound produce a stable humus-like product. Compost feedstock should be viewed as a
recycling method. usable product, not as waste requiring disposal. Program planners should stress
/ 7 g\ that the composting process is an environmentally sound and beneficial means of re-
cycling organic materials, not a means of waste disposal.
Composting can
significantly reduce
waste stream volume.
(p. 7_g_7_io)
Up to 70 percent of the MSW waste stream is organic material. Yard trimmings
alone constitute 20 percent of MSW. Composting organic materials can significantly
reduce waste stream volume and offers economic advantages for communities when
the costs of other options are high.
Developing and
operating successful
composting programs
presents several
challenges.
(p. 7-10)
These challenges include the following:
developing markets and new end uses
inadequate or nonexisting standards for finished composts
inadequate design data for composting facilities
lack of experienced designers, vendors, and technical staff available to many
municipalities
potential problems with odors
problems controlling contaminants
inadequate understanding of the biology and mathematics of composting.
The feedstock
determines the
chemical environment
for composting.
(p. 7-10 — 7-11)
Several factors determine the chemical environment for composting, especially: (a)
the presence of an adequate carbon (food)/energy source, (b) a balanced amount of
sufficient nutrients, (c) the correct amount of water, (d) adequate oxygen, (e) appro-
priate pH, and (f) the absence of toxic constituents that could inhibit microbial activity.
The ratio of carbon to
nitrogen affects the
rate of decomposition.
(p. 7-12)
The ratio must be established on the basis of available carbon rather than total car-
bon. An initial ratio of 30:1 carbon:nitrogen is considered ideal. To lower the
carbon:nitrogen ratios, nitrogen-rich materials (yard trimmings, animal manures, bio-
solids, etc.) are added.
Moisture content must
be carefully monitored.
(p. 7-12 — 7-13)
Because the water content of most feedstocks is not adequate, water is usually
added to achieve the desired rate of composting. A moisture content of 50 to 60
percent of total weight is ideal. Excessive moisture can create anaerobic conditions,
which may lead to rotting and obnoxious odors. Adding moisture may be necessary
to keep the composting process performing at its peak. Evaporation from compost
piles can also be minimized by controlling the size of piles.
Maintaining proper pH
levels is important.
(p. 7-13)
pH affects the amount of nutrients available to the microorganisms, the solubility of
heavy metals, and the overall metabolic activity of the microorganisms. A pH be-
tween 6 and 8 is normal.
Page 7-2
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
Source reduction tops
USEPA's composting
methods hierarchy.
(p. 7-15)
Communities and individuals are encouraged to follow the hierarchy as listed below
in order of preference: Grasscycling and home backyard composting completely di-
vert materials from the MSW stream and should be adopted whenever possible.
Source-separated programs offer several advantages over mixed MSW programs,
including: reduced handling time, less tipping space, and less pre-processing equip-
ment. Mixed MSW composting offers fewer advantages over the long term.
1. Grasscycling (source reduction)
2. Backyard composting (source reduction)
3. Yard trimmings programs (recycling)
4. Source-separated organics composting (recycling)
5. MSW composting programs (recycling)
Planning a composting
program involves these
steps.
(p. 7_17_7_18)
1. Identify goals of the composting project.
2. Identify the scope of the project—backyard, yard trimmings, source-separated,
mixed MSW, or a combination.
3. Get political support for changing the community's waste management approach.
4. Identify potential sites and environmental factors.
5. Identify potential compost uses and markets.
6. Initiate public information programs.
7. Inventory materials available for composting.
8. Visit successful compost programs.
9. Evaluate alternative composting and associated collection techniques.
10. Finalize arrangements for compost use.
11. Obtain necessary governmental approvals.
12. Prepare final budget and arrange financing.
13. Construct composting facilities and purchase collection equipment, if needed.
14. Initiate composting operation and monitor results.
Short- and long-term
waste management
needs determine
composting program
goals.
(p. 7-18)
Program goals may include one or more of the following:
achieving mandated waste reduction goals through increased recycling.
diverting specific materials, such as yard trimmings, biosolids, or any high-
moisture organic waste, from landfills and incinerators.
using compost as a replacement for daily cover (soil) in a landfill. In this case only
a portion of the material may be composted to meet the daily cover needs, and
the quality of compost generated is not critical.
use for erosion control on highways, reservoirs, etc.
Political support for a
composting project is
critical.
(p. 7-19)
It is important to inform elected officials and government agencies of the project's
goals and the developer's plans for implementing the project. Winning approval from
an informed public can also be important for obtaining public funding. Without public
approval, composting programs are difficult to successfully implement.
Page 7-3
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
(continued)
Assess the amounts
and quality of
feedstock available.
(p. 7-19 — 7-20)
Successful planning must be based on accurate data about quantities and sources
of available feedstocks. This data helps determine the size and type of equipment
needed and space requirements.
Two-way
communication with
the public is critical.
(p. 7-20)
An effective education program is crucial to winning full public support. New waste
management practices require substantial public education. Providing information
about the nature of composting may help dispel any opposition to siting the com-
posting facility. Potential problems such as odor should be openly and honestly dis-
cussed and strategies for addressing such problems developed.
The composting
method chosen should
be compatible with
existing systems.
(p. 7-21 —7-22)
The composting option chosen must be compatible with existing processing sys-
tems. Communities should consider these factors:
preferences of the community
collection and processing costs
residual waste disposal costs
markets for the quality of compost produced
markets for recyclables
existing collection, processing and disposal systems.
There are four types of
technologies for
composting.
(p. 7-22 — 7-26)
The four composting technologies are windrow, aerated static pile, in-vessel, and
anaerobic composting. Supporting technologies include sorting, screening, and cur-
ing. The technologies vary in the method of air supply, temperature control, mixing/
turning of the material, and the time required for composting. Their capital and oper-
ating costs also vary considerably.
Compost is screened
to meet market
specifications.
(p. 7-26)
One or two screening steps and possibly additional grinding are used to prepare the
compost for markets. For screening to successfully remove foreign matter and re-
cover as much of the compost as possible, the compost's moisture content should
be below 50 percent.
Final compost use and
markets are crucial for
program planning.
(p. 7-27 — 7-28)
A well-planned marketing approach ensures that all compost will be distributed. Ac-
complishing this requires producing a consistently high-quality compost to satisfy
market needs. The quality and composition required for a compost product to meet
the needs of a specific market depend on a mix of factors, including intended use of
the product, local climatic conditions, and even social and cultural factors.
Several states are
considering regulating
composts.
(p. 7-27)
One approach for establishing regulations is to rely on the federal standards for land
application of biosolids. Metals content of the applied material is an important con-
cern. Table 7-2 shows the maximum metals content for land application of biosolids.
Page 7-4
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
Consider marketing to
large-scale compost
users.
(p. 7-28)
Large-scale users of composts include the following:
farms
landscape contractors
highway departments
sports facilities
parks
golf courses
office parks
home builders
cemeteries
nurseries
growers of greenhouse crops
manufacturers of topsoil.
Marketing success
depends on a number
of factors.
(p.
— 7-29)
Understanding the advantages and limitations of a given compost is important for
marketing success. Marketers should focus on the qualities of the specific compost
products, how they can meet customer needs, and what the compost can and can-
not do. To target the right markets, you must know the potential uses of compost.
Major U.S. compost
markets include those
listed here.
(p. 7-28 — 7-30)
Major U.S. compost markets include the following (see Table 7-3):
landscaping
topsoil
bagged for retail consumer use (residential)
surface mine reclamation (active and abandoned mines)
nurseries (both container and field)
sod
silviculture (Christmas trees, reforested areas, timber stand improvement)
agriculture (harvested cropland, pasture/grazing land, cover crops).
The quality of a
compost product
directly impacts its
marketability.
(p. 7_31 —7-33)
Quality isjudged primarily on particle size, pH, soluble salts, stability, and the pres-
ence of undesirable components such as weed seeds, heavy metals, phytotoxic
compounds, and undesirable materials, such as plastic and glass. (Table 7-4 sum-
marizes compost quality guidelines based on end use.) The marketability of a com-
post can be controlled by selectively accepting feedstock materials. Feedstock ma-
terial should be carefully controlled to ensure consistent compost quality.
Backyard composting
programs can
significantly reduce the
volume of MSW.
(p. 7_35_7_3Q)
In some communities, 30 or more percent of the MSW generated during the growing
season is yard trimmings. Grasscycling and backyard composting programs reduce
the need for collecting, processing, and disposing of the composted materials. Yard
trimmings can be composted in piles or containers located in yards. Effective educa-
tion and appropriate incentives are necessary to successfully implement community-
wide backyard composting programs.
Page 7-5
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
(continued)
Community-wide yard
trimmings composting
programs are another
option.
(p. 7-39 — 7-42)
Community-wide yard trimmings composting programs divert significant quantities of
materials from land disposal facilities. Grass and leaves make up the bulk of yard
trimmings produced. Other materials include tree limbs, trunks and brush; garden
materials such as weeds and pine needles; and Christmas trees. Both drop-off and
curbside collection are possible.
Direct land-spreading of
yard trimmings is an
alternative.
(p. 7-45)
This approach bypasses the need to site and operate composting facilities. Direct
land-spreading programs do have advantages, but they require careful management
to avoid soil fertility problems if the carbon:nitrogen ratio is too high.
Source-separated
organics composting
programs are
increasing.
(p. 7_45_7_46)
The definition of source-separated organics can include food scraps, yard trimmings,
and sometimes paper. The advantage of source-separated organics composting is
the ability to produce relatively contaminant-free compost. Accomplishing this de-
pends on the conscientious efforts of generators and an effective collection program.
A contaminant-free feedstock is important for producing a high-quality compost.
Mixed MSW
composting also
diverts materials from
landfills.
(p. 7-47)
The source of feedstock for mixed MSW composting is usually residential and com-
mercial solid waste. These programs do not require additional education and are
more convenient for residents since special handling is not needed. The quality of
the feedstock and consequently the compost product is enhanced when potential
contaminants, such as household hazardous wastes, are segregated from the input
stream through household hazardous waste programs (at the curb or facility).
Several technologies
are available for
composting mixed
MSW.
(p. 7-47 — 7-51)
A two-stage process is often used: aerated static pile, in-vessel, or aerobic processes
are usually the first stage and turned windrow or aerated static pile is the second-stage
curing technology. The combination of technologies depends on the process selected,
space and odor considerations, economics, and operating preferences.
Concerns about mixed
MSW compost must be
addressed.
(p. 7-51)
One of the primary concerns is the presence of heavy metal compounds (particularly
lead) and toxic organic compounds in the MSW compost product. Measures, includ-
ing source separation, can be taken to prevent problems and produce a high quality
compost. Testing for chemical constituents must be carefully planned and executed
to ensure production of a consistently high-quality product.
Leachate at
composting facilities
must be contained and
treated.
(p. 7-52)
Even well-managed facilities generate small quantities of leachate. The facility's de-
sign should include a paved floor and outdoor paved area equipped with drains lead-
ing to a leachate collection tank or collection pond. For outdoor compost piles, at-
tempts must be made to minimize leachate production by diverting any surface-wa-
ter runoff from the up-slope side of the piles.
Page 7-6
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
Odor and dust control
are crucial when
operating a compost
facility.
(p. 7-52 — 7-53)
The source and type of odor should be identified. The degree of odor control needed
depends in part on the facility's proximity to residences, businesses, schools, etc.
Siting a facility at a remote location provides a large buffer zone between the facility
and any residents and helps to alleviate odor-related complaints.
Operators should be aware of Aspergillus fumigatus, a fungus naturally present in de-
caying organic matter. Workers susceptible to respiratory problems or with impaired
immune systems are not good candidates for working in composting facilities.
Routine testing and
monitoring is an
essential part of any
composting operation.
(p. 7-53)
At a minimum the following should be monitored:
compost mass temperatures
oxygen concentrations in the compost mass
moisture content
particle size
maturity of the compost
• pH
soluble salts
ammonia
organic and volatile materials content.
Keeping records is
essential.
(p. 7-54)
Periodically evaluating records helps identify where improvements are needed and
provides information necessary for making the operation more efficient. All employ-
ees should understand the importance of keeping good records. Records should be
kept on employee safety training, facility and employee safety procedures, and health
monitoring at the facility.
Communication with
community leaders and
facility neighbors
should be ongoing.
(p. 7-54 — 7-55)
To ensure good relations, the public should be informed of the types of materials ac-
cepted and prohibited and the collection schedules. Periodically remind residents
that composting is an effective management tool. A complaint response procedure
is also important. Document and respond to complaints promptly.
Composting facilities
may require approvals
or permits.
(p. 7-56)
The requirements for permitting composting facilities may vary among states. In ad-
dition to state-level permits, local permits may be required, such as building permits,
zoning variances, or special land use permits.
Financing is an integral
part of planning a
composting project.
(p. 7-56)
The most common methods of financing a large-scale composting project (e.g., to
service a municipality) are through bond sales or bank loans. A financing profes-
sional should be consulted.
Page 7-7
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
WHAT IS COMPOSTING?
Composting as a Biological Process
Composting involves the aerobic biological decomposition of organic materials to
produce a stable humus-like product (see Figure 7-1). Biodegradation is a natu-
ral, ongoing biological process that is a common occurrence in both human-made
and natural environments. Grass clippings left on the lawn to decompose or food
scraps rotting in a trash can are two examples of uncontrolled decomposition. To
derive the most benefit from this natural, but typically slow, decomposition pro-
cess, it is necessary to control the environmental conditions during the compost-
ing process. Doing so plays a significant role in increasing and controlling the
rate of decomposition and determining the quality of the resulting compost.
Figure 7-1
The Composting Process
Water
Heat
CO,
Organic matter
(including carbon,
chemical energy,
protein, nitrogen)
Minerals (including
nitrogen and other
nutrients)
Water
Microorganisms
\
Raw Materials
Organic matter (including carbon,
chemical energy, nitrogen, protein,
humus), minerals, water,
microorganisms.
Finished Compost
The carbon, chemical energy, protein, and water in the finished compost is less than that in the raw materials. The
finished compost has more humus. The volume of the finished compost is 50% or less of the volume of raw material.
Source: Reprinted with permission from Rynk, et al., On Farm Composting Handbook, 1992 (NRAES-54)
Page 7-£
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
Compost is the end product of the composting process, which also pro-
duces carbon dioxide and water as by-products. Composts are humus, which
Good-quality compost is *s dark in color, peat-like, has a crumbly texture and an earthy odor, and re-
devoid of weed seeds sembles rich topsoil. The final product has no resemblance in physical form to
and pathogenic the original waste from which the compost was made. Good-quality compost
organisms, relatively is devoid of weed seeds and organisms that may be pathogenic to humans,
stable and resistant to animals, or plants. Cured compost is also relatively stable and resistant to fur-
further rapid ther rapid decomposition by microorganisms.
decomposition by Composting and co-composting are two commonly used terms. Com-
microorganisms. posting is a broader term that includes co-composting. While composting re-
fers to the decomposition of any organic materials (also referred to as "feed-
stocks"), co-composting is the composting of two or more feedstocks with dif-
ferent characteristics—for example, the co-composting of biosolids in liquid/
dewatered form with yard trimmings and leaves.
It is important to view compostable materials as usable, not as waste requir-
ing disposal. When developing and promoting a composting program and when
marketing the resulting compost, program planners and managers should stress
that the composting process is an environmentally sound and beneficial means of
recycling organic materials, not a means of waste disposal.
In the broadest sense, any organic material that can be biologically de-
composed is "compostable." In fact, humans have used this naturally occur-
ring process for centuries to stabilize and recycle agricultural and human
wastes. Today, composting is a diverse practice that includes a variety of ap-
proaches, depending on the types of organic materials being composted and
the desired properties of the final product.
Composting as a Component of Integrated Solid Waste Management
Composting is one component in USEPA's hierarchy of integrated solid waste
Comoostina is one management, which is discussed in the introduction to this guidebook (see Figure
component in USE PA's ^ m ^e introduction). Source reduction tops the hierarchy of management op-
integrated solid waste tions, with recycling as the next preferred option. Grasscycling and backyard
management hierarchy. composting are forms of source reduction or waste prevention because the mate-
rials are completely diverted from the disposal facilities and require no manage-
ment or transportation. Community yard trimmings composting programs,
source-separated organics composting, and mixed MSW composting are consid-
ered forms of recycling. Each of these approaches to composting is discussed in
the section later in this chapter titled "Composting Approaches in Detail."
This chapter provides information about methods and programs for
composting yard trimmings (leaves, grass clippings, brush, and tree prunings)
or the compostable portion of mixed solid waste (MSW), including yard trim-
mings, food scraps, scrap paper products, and other decomposable organics.
The Benefits of Composting
Municipal solid wastes contain up to 70 percent by weight of organic materi-
als. Yard trimmings, which constitute 20 percent of the MSW stream, may
contain even larger proportions of organic materials. In addition, certain in-
„ . . dustrial by-products—those from the food processing, agricultural, and paper
Compostmq orqanic , J * , , r * f ° > r r
materials can industries—are mostly composed ol organic materials. Composting organic
siqnificantlv reduce materials, therefore, can significantly reduce waste stream volume. Diverting
waste stream volume such materials from the waste stream frees up landfill space needed for mate-
rials that cannot be composted or otherwise diverted from the waste stream.
Composting owes its current popularity to several factors, including in-
creased landfill tipping fees, shortage of landfill capacity, and increasingly re-
strictive measures imposed by regulatory agencies. In addition, composting is
indirectly encouraged by states with recycling mandates that include compost-
ing as an acceptable strategy for achieving mandated goals, some of which
Page 7-9
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
The benefits of reducing
disposal needs through
composting may be
adequate to justify
choosing this option
even if the compost is
used for landfill cover.
reach 50-60 percent (Apotheker, 1993). Consequently, the number of existing or
planned composting programs and facilities has increased significantly in recent years.
Composting may also offer an attractive economic advantage for com-
munities in which the costs of using other options are high. Composting is
frequently considered a viable option only when the compost can be mar-
keted—that is, either sold or given away. In some cases, however, the benefits
of reducing disposal needs through composting may be adequate to justify
choosing this option even if the compost is used for landfill cover.
Composts, because of their high organic matter content, make a valuable
soil amendment and are used to provide nutrients for plants. When mixed into
the soil, compost promotes proper balance between air and water in the resulting
mixture, helps reduce soil erosion, and serves as a slow-release fertilizer.
Composting Challenges
The failure to control the
quality of the compost
directly impacts its
marketability.
Despite the growing popularity of composting, communities face several
significant challenges in developing and operating successful composting
programs. These include the following:
• developing markets and new end uses
• inadequate or nonexisting standards for finished composts
• inadequate design data for composting facilities
• lack of experienced designers, vendors, and technical staff available to
many municipalities
• potential problems with odors
• problems controlling contaminants
• inadequate understanding of the biology and mathematics of composting
• inadequate financial planning.
Many existing mixed MSW composting facilities have an over-simplified
design that focuses primarily on the production aspects of composting and in-
adequately addresses factors crucial to producing a high-quality, marketable
product. For example, many facilities have limited capabilities to separate
compostable materials from the non-compostable fraction before the compost-
ing process is begun. Because the quality of the end product is determined by
the type of materials that are being composted, inadequate separation of mate-
rials can adversely affect compost quality. Similarly, processing to remove
physical contaminants is sometimes ignored or done inadequately. The fail-
ure to control the quality of the compost directly impacts its marketability. As
a result, market development has not kept pace with compost production,
which in turn has led to under-capitalized projects.
Inadequate storage space for curing compost to maturity has also been a
problem at some facilities. Designing adequate storage space should be an impor-
tant part of planning and developing facilities. Odors associated with storing or-
ganics before composting and odors produced during composting pose a signifi-
cant challenge for many facilities. The inability to adequately deal with potential
or existing odor problems can and has contributed to the closure of some facilities.
THE BIOLOGICAL, CHEMICAL, AND PHYSICAL COMPOSTING PROCESSES
Many factors contribute to the success of the composting process. This section
provides a technical discussion of these factors and gives readers who lack a
technical background a more in-depth understanding of the basic composting
processes. Understanding these processes is necessary for making informed
decisions when developing and operating a composting program.
Page 7-10
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
Biological Processes
Peak performance by
microorganisms
requires that their
biological, chemical,
and physical needs be
maintained at ideal
levels throughout all
stages of composting.
The composting process
should cater to the
needs of the
microorganisms and
promote conditions that
will lead to rapid
stabilization of the
organic materials.
Peak performance by microorganisms requires that their biological, chemical,
and physical needs be maintained at ideal levels throughout all stages of com-
posting. Microorganisms such as bacteria, fungi, and actinomycetes play an
active role in decomposing the organic materials. Larger organisms such as
insects and earthworms are also involved in the composting process, but they
play a less significant role compared to the microorganisms.
As microorganisms begin to decompose the organic material, the carbon
in it is converted to by-products like carbon dioxide and water, and a humic
end product—compost. Some of the carbon is consumed by the microorgan-
isms to form new microbial cells as they increase their population. Heat is re-
leased during the decomposition process.
Microorganisms have preferences for the type of organic material they con-
sume. When the organic molecules they require are not available, they may be-
come dormant or die. In this process, the humic end products resulting from the
metabolic activity of one generation or type of microorganism may be used as a
food or energy source by another generation or type of microorganism. This
chain of succession of different types of microbes continues until there is little de-
composable organic material remaining. At this point, the organic material re-
maining is termed compost. It is made up largely of microbial cells, microbial
skeletons and by-products of microbial decomposition and undecomposed par-
ticles of organic and inorganic origin. Decomposition may proceed slowly at first
because of smaller microbial populations, but as populations grow in the first few
hours or days, they rapidly consume the organic materials present in the feedstock.
The number and kind of microorganisms are generally not a limiting en-
vironmental factor in composting nontoxic agricultural materials, yard trim-
mings, or municipal solid wastes, all of which usually contain an adequate di-
versity of microorganisms. However, a lack of microbial populations could be
a limiting factor if the feedstock is generated in a sterile environment or is
unique in chemical composition and lacks a diversity of microorganisms. In
such situations it may be necessary to add an inoculum of specially selected
microbes. While inocula speed the composting process by bringing in a large
population of active microbes, adding inocula is generally not needed for com-
posting yard trimmings or municipal solid wastes. Sometimes, partially or to-
tally composted materials (composts) may be added as an inoculum to get the
process off to a good start. It is not necessary to buy "inoculum" from outside
sources. A more important consideration is the carbon:nitrogen ratio, which is
described in a later section.
Microorganisms are the key in the composting process. If all conditions
are ideal for a given microbial population to perform at its maximum poten-
tial, composting will occur rapidly. The composting process, therefore, should
cater to the needs of the microorganisms and promote conditions that will
lead to rapid stabilization of the organic materials.
While several of the microorganisms are beneficial to the composting pro-
cess and may be present in the final product, there are some microbes that are po-
tential pathogens to animals, plants, or humans. These pathogenic organisms
must be destroyed in the composting process and before the compost is distrib-
uted in the market place. Most of this destruction takes place by controlling the
composting operation's temperature, a physical process that is described below.
Chemical Processes
The chemical environment is largely determined by the composition of mate-
rial to be composted. In addition, several modifications can be made during
the composting process to create an ideal chemical environment for rapid de-
composition of organic materials. Several factors determine the chemical envi-
ronment for composting, especially: (a) the presence of an adequate carbon
Page 7-11
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
How easily
biodegradable a material
is depends on the
genetic makeup of the
microorganism present
and the makeup of the
organic molecules that
the organism
decomposes.
An initial ratio of 30:1
carbon:nitrogen is
considered ideal.
(food)/energy source, (b) a balanced amount of nutrients, (c) the correct
amount of water, (d) adequate oxygen, (e) appropriate pH, and (f) the absence
of toxic constituents that could inhibit microbial activity.
Carbon/Energy Source
Microorganisms in the compost process are like microscopic plants: they have
more or less the same nutritional needs (nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, and
other trace elements) as the larger plants. There is one important exception,
however: compost microorganisms rely on the carbon in organic material as
their carbon/energy source instead of carbon dioxide and sunlight, which is
used by higher plants.
The carbon contained in natural or human-made organic materials may
or may not be biodegradable. The relative ease with which a material is bio-
degraded depends on the genetic makeup of the microorganism present and
the makeup of the organic molecules that the organism decomposes. For ex-
ample, many types of microorganisms can decompose the carbon in sugars,
but far fewer types can decompose the carbon in lignins (present wood fibers),
and the carbon in plastics may not be biodegradable by any microorganisms.
Because most municipal and agricultural organics and yard trimmings contain
adequate amounts of biodegradable forms of carbon, carbon is typically not a
limiting factor in the composting process.
As the more easily degradable forms of carbon are decomposed, a small
portion of the carbon is converted to microbial cells, and a significant portion
of this carbon is converted to carbon dioxide and lost to the atmosphere. As
the composting process progresses, the loss of carbon results in a decrease in
weight and volume of the feedstock. The less-easily decomposed forms of car-
bon will form the matrix for the physical structure of the final product—compost.
Nutrients
Among the plant nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium), nitrogen is
of greatest concern because it is lacking in some materials. The other nutrients
are usually not a limiting factor in municipal solid waste or yard trimmings
feedstocks. The ratio of carbon to nitrogen is considered critical in determin-
ing the rate of decomposition. Carbon to nitrogen ratios, however, can often
be misleading. The ratio must be established on the basis of available carbon
rather than total carbon. In general, an initial ratio of 30:1 carbon:nitrogen is
considered ideal. Higher ratios tend to retard the process of decomposition,
while ratios below 25:1 may result in odor problems. Typically, carbon to ni-
trogen ratios for yard trimmings range from 20 to 80:1, wood chips 400 to
700:1, manure 15 to 20:1, and municipal solid wastes 40 to 100:1. As the com-
posting process proceeds and carbon is lost to the atmosphere, this ratio nar-
rows. Finished compost should have ratios of 15 to 20:1.
To lower the carbon:nitrogen ratios, nitrogen-rich materials such as yard
trimmings, animal manures, or biosolids are often added. Adding partially
decomposed or composted materials (with a lower carbon:nitrogen ratio) as
inoculum may also lower the ratio. Attempts to supplement the nitrogen by
using commercial fertilizers often create additional problems by modifying
salt concentrations in the compost pile, which in turn impedes microbial activ-
ity. As temperatures in the compost pile rise and the carbon:nitrogen ratio
falls below 25:1, the nitrogen in the fertilizer is lost in a gas form (ammonia) to
the atmosphere. This ammonia is also a source of odors.
Moisture
Water is an essential part of all forms of life and the microorganisms living in
a compost pile are no exception. Because most compostable materials have a
Page 7-12
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
A moisture content of 50
to 60 percent of total
weight is considered
ideal.
The compost pile should
have enough void space
to allow free air
movement so that
oxygen from the
atmosphere can enter
the pile.
lower-than-ideal water content, the composting process may be slower than
desired if water is not added. However, moisture-rich solids have also been
used. A moisture content of 50 to 60 percent of total weight is considered
ideal. The moisture content should not be great enough, however, to create
excessive free flow of water and movement caused by gravity. Excessive
moisture and flowing water form leachate, which creates a potential liquid
management problem and potential water pollution and odor problems. Ex-
cess moisture also impedes oxygen transfer to the microbial cells. Excessive
moisture can increase the possibility of anaerobic conditions developing and
may lead to rotting and obnoxious odors.
Microbial processes contribute moisture to the compost pile during de-
composition. While moisture is being added, however, it is also being lost
through evaporation. Since the amount of water evaporated usually exceeds
the input of moisture from the decomposition processes, there is generally a
net loss of moisture from the compost pile. In such cases, adding moisture
may be necessary to keep the composting process performing at its peak.
Evaporation from compost piles can be minimized by controlling the size of
piles. Piles with larger volumes have less evaporating surface/unit volume
than smaller piles. The water added must be thoroughly mixed so all portions
of the organic fraction in the bulk of the material are uniformly wetted and
composted under ideal conditions. A properly wetted compost has the consis-
tency of a wet sponge. Systems that facilitate the uniform addition of water at
any point in the composting process are preferable.
Oxygen
Composting is considered an aerobic process, that is, one requiring oxygen.
Anaerobic conditions, those lacking oxygen, can produce offensive odors.
While decomposition will occur under both aerobic and anaerobic conditions,
aerobic decomposition occurs at a much faster rate. The compost pile should
have enough void space to allow free air movement so that oxygen from the
atmosphere can enter the pile and the carbon dioxide and other gases emitted
can be exhausted to the atmosphere. In some composting operations, air may
be mechanically forced into or pulled from the piles to maintain adequate oxy-
gen levels. In other situations, the pile is turned frequently to expose the mi-
crobes to the atmosphere and also to create more air spaces by fluffing up the pile.
A 10 to 15 percent oxygen concentration is considered adequate, al-
though a concentration as low as 5 percent may be sufficient for leaves. While
higher concentrations of oxygen will not negatively affect the composting pro-
cess, they may indicate that an excessive amount of air is circulating, which
can cause problems. For example, excess air removes heat, which cools the
pile. Too much air can also promote excess evaporation, which slows the rate
of composting. Excess aeration is also an added expense that increases pro-
duction costs.
PH
A pH between 6 and 8 is considered optimum. pH affects the amount of nu-
trients available to the microorganisms, the solubility of heavy metals, and the
overall metabolic activity of the microorganisms. While the pH can be ad-
justed upward by addition of lime or downward with sulfur, such additions
are normally not necessary. The composting process itself produces carbon
dioxide, which, when combined with water, produces carbonic acid. The car-
bonic acid could lower the pH of the compost. As the composting process
progresses, the final pH varies depending on the specific type of feedstocks
used and operating conditions. Wide swings in pH are unusual. Because or-
ganic materials are naturally well-buffered with respect to pH changes, down
swings in pH during composting usually do not occur.
Page 7-13
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Physical Processes
The optimum particle
size has enough surface
area for rapid microbial
activity, but also enough
void space to allow air to
circulate for microbial
respiration.
The optimum
temperature range is
32°-60°C.
The physical environment in the compost process includes such factors as
temperature, particle size, mixing, and pile size. Each of these is essential for
the composting process to proceed in an efficient manner.
Particle Size
The particle size of the material being composted is critical. As composting
progresses, there is a natural process of size reduction. Because smaller par-
ticles usually have more surface per unit of weight, they facilitate more micro-
bial activity on their surfaces, which leads to rapid decomposition. However,
if all of the particles are ground up, they pack closely together and allow few
open spaces for air to circulate. This is especially important when the material
being composted has a high moisture content. The optimum particle size has
enough surface area for rapid microbial activity, but also enough void space to
allow air to circulate for microbial respiration. The feedstock composition can
be manipulated to create the desired mix of particle size and void space. For
yard trimmings or municipal solid wastes, the desired combination of void
space and surface area can be achieved by particle size reduction. Particle size
reduction is sometimes done after the composting process is completed to im-
prove the aesthetic appeal of finished composts destined for specific markets.
Temperature
All microorganisms have an optimum temperature range. For composting
this range is between 32° and 60° C. For each group of organisms, as the tem-
perature increases above the ideal maximum, thermal destruction of cell pro-
teins kills the organisms. Likewise, temperatures below the minimum re-
quired for a group of organisms affects the metabolic regulatory machinery of
the cells. Although composting can occur at a range of temperatures, the opti-
mum temperature range for thermophilic microorganisms is preferred, for
two reasons: to promote rapid composting and to destroy pathogens and
weed seeds. Larger piles build up and conserve heat better than smaller piles.
Temperatures above 65° C are not ideal for composting. Temperatures can be
lowered if needed by increasing the frequency of mechanical agitation, or us-
ing blowers controlled with timers, temperature feedback control, or air flow
throttling. Mixing or mechanical aeration also provides air for the microbes.
Ambient air temperatures have little effect on the composting process,
provided the mass of the material being composted can retain the heat gener-
ated by the microorganisms. Adding feedstock in cold weather can be a prob-
lem especially if the feedstock is allowed to freeze. If the feedstock is less than
5° C, and the temperature is below freezing, it may be very difficult to start a
new pile. A better approach is to mix cold feedstock into warm piles. Once
adequate heat has built up, which may be delayed until warmer weather, the
processes should proceed at a normal rate.
Pathogen destruction is achieved when compost is at a temperature of
greater than 55° C for at least three days. It is important that all portions of
the compost material be exposed to such temperatures to ensure pathogen de-
struction throughout the compost. At these temperatures, weed seeds are also
destroyed. After the pathogen destruction is complete, temperatures may be
lowered and maintained at slightly lower levels (51° to 55° C).
Attaining and maintaining 55° C temperatures for three days is not diffi-
cult for in-vessel composting systems. However, to achieve pathogen destruc-
tion with windrow composting systems, the 55° C temperature must be main-
tained for a minimum of 15 days, during which time the windrows must be
turned at least five times. The longer duration and increased turning are nec-
essary to achieve uniform pathogen destruction throughout the entire pile.
Page 7-14
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
Care should be taken to avoid contact between materials that have achieved
these minimum temperatures and materials that have not. Such contact could
recontaminate the compost.
Compost containing municipal wastewater treatment plant biosolids
must meet USEPA standards applicable to biosolids pathogen destruction.
. . This process of pathogen destruction is termed " process to further reduce
.. t-?. t -t -j pathogens" (PFRP). States may have their own minimum criteria regulated
air evenlv through permits issued to composting facilities. A state's pathogen destruc-
tion requirement may be limited to compost containing biosolids or it may ap-
ply to all MSW compost.
Mixing
Mixing feedstocks, water, and inoculants (if used) is important. Piles can be
turned or mixed after composting has begun. Mixing and agitation distribute
moisture and air evenly and promote the breakdown of compost clumps. Ex-
cessive agitation of open vessels or piles, however, can cool the piles and re-
tard microbial activity.
AN OVERVIEW OF COMPOSTING APPROACHES
USEPA emphasizes the following hierarchy of composting methods in order
of preference. A detailed discussion of each approach can be found in the
"Composting Approaches in Detail" section later in this chapter.
1. Grasscycling (source reduction)
2. Backyard Composting (source reduction)
3. Yard Trimmings Programs (recycling)
4. Source-Separated Organics Composting (recycling)
5. MSW Composting Programs (recycling)
Grasscycling and Backyard Composting
In 1990, yard trimmings constituted nearly 18 percent of the total MSW waste
stream in the United States (USEPA, 1992). Because grasscycling and home
backyard composting programs are source reduction methods, that is they
completely divert the materials from entering the municipal solid waste
stream, USEPA encourages communities to promote these composting ap-
proaches whenever possible.
Grasscycling
Grasscycling is a form of source reduction that involves the natural recycling
of grass clippings by leaving the clippings on the lawn after mowing. In one
study, researchers found that grasscycling reduced lawn maintenance time by
38 percent. In addition, leaving grass clippings on the lawn reduces the need
Labor and the amount (O fertilize by 25 to 33 percent, because nutrients in the grass clippings are sim-
of fertilizer required pjy bejng recycled. A 25 to 33 percent fertilizer savings can normally be
decrease with achieved. Grasscycling also reduces or eliminates the need for disposal bags
" " "' and for pick-up service charges, as well.
Backyard Composting
Many communities have established programs to encourage residents to com-
post yard trimmings and possibly other organic materials in compost piles or
containers located on their property. Because the materials are used by resi-
Page7-15
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Backyard recycling is
increasing in popularity.
dents and never enter the waste stream, this method is also considered source
reduction. Backyard composting is increasing as more communities recognize
its potential for reducing waste volumes which may be as much as 850 pounds
of organic materials per household per year, according to one estimate
(Roulac, J. and M. Pedersen, 1993).
Source-Separated Organics Composting Programs
Source separation
minimizes the amount of
handling time, tipping
space and pre-
processing equipment
required in mixed MSW
composting.
Source-separated composting programs rely on residents, businesses, and
public and private institutions to separate one or more types of organic mate-
rials and set them out separately from other recyclables and trash for collec-
tion. Source separation of organics can offer several advantages over mixed
MSW composting. For example, source separation minimizes the amount of
handling time, tipping space and pre-processing equipment that is usually re-
quired in mixed MSW composting. In addition, source-separated composting
produces a consistently higher-quality compost because the feedstock is rela-
tively free of noncompostable materials and potential chemical and heavy
metal contaminants (Gould, et al., 1992). Table 7-1 shows the comparative
benefits and disadvantages of source-separated organics composting pro-
grams and mixed MSW composting.
Several approaches to source-separated composting exist. In general,
some mix of the following materials are included, depending on the design of
the specific program (Gould, et al., 1992):
• yard trimmings (which can include grass, leaves, and brush)
• food scraps (from residential, industrial or institutional sources)
• mixed paper (which may or may not be included because it requires
shredding and must be mixed with other materials)
• disposable diapers (like paper, require special treatment, and may or
may not be included)
• wood scraps
The number of source-separated composting programs and facilities in
the United States is steadily increasing. For example, in early 1994, New York
state alone had more than 20 institutional food and yard trimmings facilities
located at prisons, colleges, campuses and resorts; two pilot residential source-
separated facilities; and one full-scale facility.
Table 7-1
Advantages and Disadvantages of Source Separation versus
Commingling MSW
Source-Separated Materials
Advantages:
Less chance of contamination. This can re-
sult in a higher-quality compost product.
Less money and time spent on handling and
separating materials at the composting facility.
Provides an educational benefit to residents
and might encourage waste reduction.
Disadvantages:
Can be less convenient to residents.
Might require the purchase of new equipment
and/or containers.
Might require additional labor for collection.
Commingled Materials
Advantages
Usually collected with existing
equipment and labor resources.
• Convenient for residents because
no separation is required.
Disadvantages:
Higher potential for contamination,
which can result in a lower-quality
compost product.
Higher processing and facility costs.
Source: USEPA, 1994
Page 7-16
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
Nationwide, in 1994 there were approximately 3,000 yard trimmings compost-
ing programs in the United States. State and local bans on landfilling and
combusting yard trimmings have contributed to the growing number of such
programs. In 1994, 27 states and Washington DC banned all or some compo-
nents of yard trimmings from land disposal.
Mixed Municipal Solid Waste Composting
USEPA places mixed
MSW composting at
the bottom of the
composting hierarchy.
Some MSW composting programs in the U.S. use a commingled stream of or-
ganic materials. In such programs, mixed MSW is first sorted to remove recy-
clable, hazardous, and noncompostable materials, and the remaining organic
materials are then composted. As mentioned above, USEPA places mixed
MSW composting at the bottom of its hierarchy of composting approaches.
Although mixed MSW composting programs may offer some advantages (see
Table 7-1)—for example, materials can usually be collected with existing
equipment, residents do not have to separate materials themselves and only
need one container—home recycling, yard trimmings, and source-separated
composting are increasingly being seen as offering more advantages, espe-
cially over the long-term.
DEVELOPING A COMPOSTING PROGRAM
Evaluating Waste Management Alternatives
Wo single solid waste
management option
can solve all of a
community's waste
problems.
Communities faced with the task of selecting any solid waste management al-
ternative should consider both monetary and intangible environmental factors
in evaluating the various solid waste management alternatives available to
them.
Often there is disagreement among citizens, planners, and decision mak-
ers about the best alternative for the community. According to the principles
of integrated waste management, no single solid waste management option
can solve all of a community's waste problems. To achieve their specific solid
waste management goals, communities often combine approaches and alter-
natives. The options a community selects should complement each other, and
the justifications used to select alternatives should be defensible not only dur-
ing planning, but also during the implementation and operational periods for
each alternative chosen.
Selecting the best solid waste management option must be based on
goals and evaluation criteria that the community adopts early in the planning
process. Any and all options should be given equal consideration initially.
Frequently, when communities choose alternatives without considering all of
the available options, extensive modifications to the hastily chosen alternative
are eventually needed. The result is soaring costs and sometimes total aban-
donment of the facility and the equipment acquired for the failed project.
Planning the Program
If a community decides that composting is a viable and desirable alternative,
there are several steps involved in planning a composting program. A well-
planned program and facility will pose few operational difficulties, keep costs
within projected budgets, consistently produce a good-quality compost,
identify and keep adequate markets for the amount of compost produced, and
have continuing support from the community. Below is an outline presenting
14 steps for developing and implementing a successful composting program.
Page 7-17
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Well-planned programs
pose few operational
difficulties, follow
budgets, produce a
good-quality compost
and market all of it, and
maintain community
support.
1. Identify goals of the composting project.
2. Identify the scope of the project (backyard, yard trimmings, source-
separated, mixed MSW, or a combination).
3. Gather political support for changing the community's waste
management approach.
4. Identify potential sites and environmental factors.
5. Identify potential compost uses and markets.
6. Initiate public information programs.
7. Inventory materials available for composting.
8. Visit successful compost programs.
9. Evaluate alternative composting and associated collection techniques.
10. Finalize arrangements for compost use.
11. Obtain necessary governmental approvals.
12. Prepare final budget and arrange financing, including a contingency fund.
13. Construct composting facilities and purchase collection equipment, if needed.
14. Initiate composting operation and monitor results.
Identifying Composting Project Goals
Base goals on the
community's short- and
long-term solid waste
management needs.
Goals should be clearly
defined.
The goals of any composting project must be clearly identified during the ear-
liest planning stages of the project. Some goals may be further evaluated and
redefined during the course of the project, but the project's core goals (for ex-
ample, reducing the volume of material landfilled, reducing collection costs,
or augmenting other reduction efforts) should remain intact because such
goals determine how subsequent decisions are made throughout much of the
program's development and implementation.
Goals must be determined based on the community's short- and long-
term solid waste management needs. The project may have multiple goals:
• achieving mandated waste reduction goals by increasing the amount of
material recycled.
• diverting specific materials, such as yard trimmings, biosolids, or any
high-moisture organic waste, from landfills and incinerators.
• using compost as a replacement for daily cover (soil) in a landfill. In this
case only a portion of the material may be composted to meet the daily
cover needs, and the quality of compost generated is not critical.
• using compost for erosion control on highways, reservoirs and other
applications. (U.S. Department of Transportation regulations provide for
use of compost under certain conditions.)
Producing a marketable product (compost) and recovering revenues by
selling the compost is another possible goal. In this case, the composting
project should be viewed as a commercial production process. Selling com-
post on the open market requires that the compost meet high standards and be
of a consistent quality. A detailed market evaluation should be made when
considering this goal (see the "Marketing" section below). No matter what the
program's goals are, they should be clearly defined to garner political support for
the project. Such goals should be compatible with the community's overall solid
waste management plan, including collection and landfilling.
Finally, clearly defining the project's goals saves time during the plan-
ning and implementation process. Clearly defined goals help focus activities
and resources and prevent wasting efforts on activities that do not contribute
to reaching those goals.
Page 7-18
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
Obtaining Political Support for a New Waste Management Approach
Most composting projects, whether municipally or privately operated, will re-
quire some governmental support or approval. This may be as simple as local
government financing of advertising and education materials. Larger govern-
ment expenditures may be needed, depending on the composting technique
selected. Private programs require siting and perhaps other permits.
Political consensus and ^Q gam pOij(ica[ support, it is crucial to inform elected officials and gov-
support is critical. eminent agencies of the project's goals and the developer's plans for imple-
menting the project. It is also important to solicit input during the early stages
of project development from government officials and agencies, especially
those responsible for solid waste management.
To elicit support, it may be helpful to arrange for decision makers to visit
successful composting facilities. Seeing a successful project in operation pro-
vides decision makers with first-hand information that may be useful in evalu-
ating and planning a similar program in their own community.
Engage the officials and concerned members of the public in an open
dialogue and do not be surprised if objections are raised. Such objections
should be answered without deviating from the project's goals.
Positive media coverage of such projects helps put them on the public
agenda, which is usually required to gain widespread community support.
Winning approval from an informed public can also be important for obtain-
ing public funding.
If political support is not forthcoming, get a clear picture of the concerns
that decision makers have about the proposed project and work to address
those concerns. Visits to well-managed facilities in the region may help to as-
sure decision makers that some of their concerns can be successfully ad-
dressed. It may also be helpful to consider modifying the project's goals to ad-
dress some concerns. If support is still lacking or if there is strong opposition
to the project, planners should consider abandoning the project.
Identifying Potential Compost Uses and Markets
A useful purpose must be found for the materials recovered from the com-
posting process. In general, the uses for compost include agricultural applica-
tions, nurseries and greenhouses, surface mine reclamation, forestry applica-
tions, as a topsoil, landscaping, soil remediation, roadside landscaping man-
agement, and as final cover in landfill operations. Marketing compost prod-
ucts is crucial to the success of any program and is discussed in detail in the
"Marketing" section of this chapter.
Inventorying Potential Sources of Compostable Materials
The planning process should include an accurate assessment of the quantities of
materials available for processing and their composition and sources. Chapter 3
provides a detailed discussion of methods for estimating feedstock quantities and
Conduct a waste composition. Such data can help determine the size and type of equipment the
quantity characterization planned facility will need and also the facility's space requirements. The quantity
study to get an accurate of feedstock processed and the equipment selected will in turn help determine the
assessment. program's labor needs and the economics of operation.
Although quantity and composition data may be available from waste haul-
ers, landfills, or other sources, data from such sources may not be reliable for sev-
eral reasons. The sources from which such data were compiled may not be
known or may be incomplete; furthermore, recent increases in recycling and
changes in technology make anything but the most recent information irrelevant.
Published data should, therefore, be used cautiously. It is far better to obtain as much
original data as possible (see Chapter 3 for a discussion of data collection methods).
Page 7-19
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Consider the major long-
term trends and
changes in management
strategies already
underway.
Composition data should be obtained for each source separately. Data
should be collected for at least one year, so as to represent seasonal fluctua-
tions in composition. Although projecting waste stream composition for fu-
ture years is especially difficult, it is essential to know the compostable pro-
portion of the current waste stream and how much of this material can be real-
istically separated from the non-compostable fraction before composting. This
will help identify the need for any modifications of the collection system.
Program developers must also decide whether to include industrial or
commercial materials in the composting program. If such materials are in-
cluded, they must be carefully evaluated for their compostable fraction, and
methods for segregating and collecting them should be developed.
If the community does not already have a household hazardous waste
collection program, then planners should consider whether to institute one. In
addition to diverting hazardous materials from landfills and combustion fa-
cilities, household hazardous waste programs help eliminate contaminants
from composting feedstock, which in turn can contribute to producing a con-
sistently higher quality compost product.
When planning a program or facility, it is also crucial to consider the ma-
jor long-term trends and changes in management strategies already under-
way. For example, the USEPA and many state governments have made
source reduction their highest priority waste management strategy. As men-
tioned earlier in this chapter, source reduction programs and strategies aim at
reducing the volume of discarded materials generated by sources (including
residents, industries, and institutions) and changing production and con-
sumption patterns, all of which may have long-term impacts on waste vol-
umes and composition. It is essential that such measures be considered when
determining long-term estimates of a community's waste stream volume and
composition. It is also crucial to consider the community's own long-term
waste management plans, given current, and possibly future, local, state, and
federal regulations and programs.
Initiating Education and Information Programs
Education programs
should provide factual
information about the
composting process and
potential problems.
Establishing an effective two-way communication process between project de-
velopers and the public is crucial, and public involvement in the project must
begin during the planning stages. Concerns voiced by public representatives
should be addressed as early in the project's development as possible.
Any new approach to waste management will be questioned by some
sectors of the community before it is fully embraced, and an effective educa-
tion program is crucial to winning full public support. In addition, new waste
management practices require substantial public education efforts because
they usually require some changes in the public's waste management behav-
ior. For example, new source-separated programs require residents to change
the way they sort discarded materials. In some composting programs, resi-
dents are also required to separate out household hazardous wastes. As re-
quirements for input from generators increase, so does the importance of pub-
lic education for ensuring a high rate of compliance.
The education program should provide objective, factual information
about the composting process and potential problems that may be associated
with composting facilities. Often, residents equate a composting facility with
a waste disposal facility and oppose siting such a facility in their area for that
reason. Similarly, some residents may view drop-off sites (for yard trim-
mings) as disposal sites and oppose them. Providing information about the
nature of composting may help dispel such opposition. At the same time, po-
tential problems such as odor should be openly and honestly discussed and
strategies for addressing such problems developed. Public education pro-
grams and the importance of public involvement in any waste management,
recycling, or composting program are discussed in Chapter 1.
Page 7-20
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
Choosing a Composting Approach
Examine the costs of
various options and the
level of generator
involvement required for
each.
The option chosen must
also be compatible with
existing processing
systems.
Compatibility with Existing Programs
Whichever approach is chosen, it should be compatible with existing collec-
tion, processing, and disposal systems. All composting facilities require some
degree of material separation, which can take place at the source (as with
source-separated programs) or at the processing facility (as with mixed MSW
composting programs). Some communities already require generators to
separate recyclable from nonrecyclable materials (two-stream collection pro-
grams). Others require a three-stream separation into a compostable fraction,
a recyclable but noncompostable fraction, and nonrecyclable fraction. Yet
other communities choose to collect mixed waste and attempt to separate com-
postable, recyclable and nonrecyclable materials at the composting facility.
The costs of the various collection options should be carefully examined,
as should the level of generator involvement required for each. For example,
mixed MSW composting may have economic advantages during collection
compared to source-separated programs, which may require more intensive
education (because of higher generator involvement) and, possibly, separate
collection. Mixed MSW composting has increased capital and labor costs,
however, which may offset the savings in collection costs. In addition, source-
separated programs may offer other benefits, such as a consistently higher-
quality compost product and lower daily operating expenses because less
complicated machinery is required (Hammer, S., 1992).
The option chosen must also be compatible with existing processing sys-
tems, for example, waste combustion systems. When "wet" organics (food,
grass, leaves, wet paper), in addition to recyclables, are separated from the
waste stream, the remaining noncompostable, nonrecyclable fraction (some-
times referred to as "dry" waste) usually has a high Btu value and burns well
in waste-to-energy (WTE) systems. Because yard trimmings have a high wa-
ter content and should be separated from WTE feedstock, operating a yard
trimmings composting program in conjunction with a WTE facility works
well. Composting programs and incineration programs can also be mutually
beneficial, as is the case in Dayton, Ohio, where a composting facility is lo-
cated next door to an incinerator. If the incinerator is not operating, it may be
possible to divert some of the organic matter to the composting facility. Likewise,
if the composting facility receives a surplus of organic material that is also suitable
for combustion, it may be diverted to the incinerator facility as a last resort.
Finally, if composting is chosen, some of the residual materials must be
disposed of in a landfill. It is critical, therefore, that a landfill be considered as
part of an overall plan in any composting program.
Communities should consider the following factors when deciding
which composting method is most appropriate to meet their needs and goals
(taken in part from Gould, et al., 1992):
• preferences of the community
• collection and processing costs
• residual waste disposal costs
• markets for the quality of compost produced
• markets for recyclables
• existing collection, processing and disposal systems.
Selecting Appropriate Technologies and Systems
Once a specific approach has been selected, program developers must choose
technologies and equipment specific to that approach. The composting systems
Page 7-21
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Experienced staff should
be on the selection
team.
available may either be proprietary or generic, labor intensive or capital intensive.
Several vendors have proven technologies to offer. In all cases, additional equipment
and buildings may be needed that are not supplied by a single system supplier.
Selecting a vendor and a technology for composting early in the plan-
ning process is critical. Vendors interested in offering their technology should
be asked to provide their qualifications, process technology, appropriate costs
and references for consideration. Selection of a single system requires consid-
erable engineering time to evaluate each vendors' qualifications; product de-
sign, ease of operation, and maintenance requirements; and the economics of
each vendor's system as it relates to local conditions. Consultants should be
part of the evaluation team if the community does not have in-house special-
ists to do the technical evaluation of the technologies under consideration.
Hiring an outside professional may make the selection process more objective.
Preliminary assessment of alternative technologies should be made to nar-
row the choice to a short list of vendors. A customized non-proprietary system
may also be compared to the proprietary information provided by vendors. Engi-
neers should work with equipment vendors to evaluate each technology. In addi-
tion, the collection system in use should be evaluated for its compatibility and
cost, relative to the composting technology to be selected. At the same time, com-
post markets should be evaluated to determine the cost of developing a market.
A detailed technical discussion is provided for each of the composting
approaches in the "Composting Approaches in Detail" section.
COMPOSTING TECHNOLOGIES
Technologies for composting can be classified into four general categories:
windrow, aerated static pile, in-vessel composting, and anaerobic processing.
Supporting technologies include sorting, screening, and curing. Several com-
posting technologies are proprietary. Proprietary technologies may offer pre-
processing and post-processing as a complete composting package. The tech-
nologies vary in the method of air supply, temperature control, mixing/turn-
ing of the material, and the time required for composting. Their capital and
operating costs may vary as well.
Windrow Composting
Machines equipped with
augers, paddles, or tines
are used for turning the
compost windrows.
A windrow is a pile, triangular in cross section, whose length exceeds its
width and height. The width is usually about twice the height. The ideal pile
height allows for a pile large enough to generate sufficient heat and maintain
temperatures, yet small enough to allow oxygen to diffuse to the center of the
pile. For most materials the ideal height is between 4 and 8 feet with a width
from 14 to 16 feet.
Turning the pile re-introduces air into the pile and increases porosity so
that efficient passive aeration from atmospheric air continues at all times. An
example of a windrow composting operation is shown in Figure 7-2. As noted
above, the windrow dimensions should allow conservation of the heat gener-
ated during the composting process and also allow air to diffuse to the deeper
portions of the pile. The windrows must be placed on a firm surface so the
piles can be easily turned. Piles may be turned as frequently as once per week,
but more frequent turning may be necessary if high proportions of biosolids
are present in the feedstock. Turning the piles also moves material from the
pile's surface to the core of the windrow, where it can undergo composting.
Machines equipped with augers, paddles, or tines are used for turning
the piles. Some windrow turners can supplement piles with water, if neces-
sary. When piles are turned, heat is released as steam to the atmosphere. If
inner portions of the pile have low levels of oxygen, odors may result when
this portion of the pile is exposed to the atmosphere.
Page 7-22
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
Any leachate or runoff
created must be
collected and treated or
added to a batch of
incoming feedstock.
Equipment capacities and sizes must be coordinated with feedstock volume
and the range of pile dimensions. Operations processing 2,000 to 3,000 cubic
yards per year may find using front-end loaders to be more cost effective than
procuring specialized turning equipment (Rynk et al., 1992).
Piles may be placed under a roof or out-of-doors. Placing the piles out-of-
doors, however, exposes them to precipitation, which can result in runoff or
leachate. Piles with an initial moisture content within the optimum range have a
reduced potential for producing leachate. The addition of moisture from precipi-
tation, however, increases this potential. Any leachate or runoff created must be
collected and treated or added to a batch of incoming feedstock to increase its
moisture content. To avoid problems with leachate or runoff, piles can be placed
under a roof, but doing so adds to the initial costs of the operation.
Figure 7-2
Windrow Composting with an Elevating Face Windrow Turner
Source: Reprinted with permission from Rynk, et al., On Farm Composting Handbook, 1992
(NRAES-54)
Aerated Static Pile Composting
The piles are placed
over a network of pipes
connected to a blower,
which supplies the air
for composting.
Aerated static pile composting is a nonproprietary technology that requires
the composting mixture (of preprocessed materials mixed with liquids) to be
placed in piles that are mechanically aerated (see Figure 7-3). The piles are
placed over a network of pipes connected to a blower, which supplies the air
for composting. Air can be supplied under positive or negative pressure.
When the composting process is nearly complete, the piles are broken up for
the first time since their construction. The compost is then taken through a se-
ries of post-processing steps.
The air supply blower either forces air into the pile or draws air out of it.
Forcing air into the pile generates a positive pressure system, while drawing
air out of the pile creates negative pressure. The blowers are controlled by a
timer or a temperature feedback system similar to a home thermostat. Air cir-
culation in the compost piles provides the needed oxygen for the composting
microbes and also prevents excessive heat buildup in the pile. Removing ex-
cess heat and water vapor cools the pile to maintain optimum temperatures
for microbial activity. A controlled air supply enables construction of large
Page 7-23
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Aerated static pile
composting requires
less land than windrow
composting.
piles, which decreases the need for land. Odors from the exhaust air could be
substantial, but traps or filters can be used to control them.
The temperatures in the inner portions of a pile are usually adequate to
destroy a significant number of the pathogens and weed seeds present. The
surface of piles, however, may not reach the desired temperatures for destruc-
tion of pathogens because piles are not turned in the aerated static pile tech-
nology. This problem can be overcome by placing a layer of finished compost
6 to 12 inches thick over the compost pile. The outer layer of finished compost
acts as an insulating blanket and helps maintain the desired temperatures for
destruction of pathogens and weed seeds throughout the entire pile.
Aerated static pile composting systems have been used successfully for
MSW, yard trimmings, biosolids, and industrial composting. It requires less
land than windrow composting. Aerated static pile composting can also be
done under a roof or in the open, but composting in the open has the same
disadvantages as windrows placed in the open (see previous section on wind-
rows). Producing compost using this technology usually takes 6 to 12 weeks. The
land requirements for this method are lower than that of windrow composting.
In-Vessel Composting Systems
In-vessel composting systems enclose the feedstock in a chamber or vessel that
provides adequate mixing, aeration, and moisture. There are several types of
in-vessel systems available; most are proprietary. In-vessel systems vary in
their requirements for preprocessing materials: some require minimal prepro-
cessing, while others require extensive MSW preprocessing.
Drums, silos, digester bins, and tunnels are some of the common in-ves-
sel type systems. These vessels can be single- or multi-compartment units. In
some cases the vessel rotates, in others the vessel is stationary and a mixing/
agitating mechanism moves the material around. Most in-vessel systems are
continuous-feed systems, although some operate in a batch mode. All in-ves-
sel systems require further composting (curing) after the material has been
discharged from the vessel.
Figure 7-3
Aerated Static Pile for Composting MSW
Yard Trimmings,
Source Separated Organics, or
Mixed MSW
4-8 ft
Blanket of Finished Compost,
6-12 Inches
Finished Compost
Perforated Aeration
Pipe
Odor Filter x Blower
Source: P. O'Leary, P. Walsh and A. Razvi, University of Wisconsin-Madison Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center, reprinted
from Waste Age Correspondence Course 1989-1990
Page 7-24
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
All environmental
conditions can be
carefully controlled in an
in-vessel system.
A major advantage of in-vessel systems is that all environmental conditions
can be carefully controlled to allow rapid composting. The material to be com-
posted is frequently turned and mixed to homogenize the compost and promote
rapid oxygen transfer. Retention times range from less than one week to as long
as four weeks. The vessels are usually placed in a building. These systems, if
properly operated, produce minimal odors and little or no leachate.
In addition the air supply can be precisely controlled. Some units are
equipped with oxygen sensors, and air is preferentially supplied to the oxy-
gen-deficient portion of the vessel. In-vessel systems enable exhaust gases
from the vessel to be captured and subjected to odor control and treatment.
Anaerobic Processing
Anaerobic systems
generate sufficient
energy to operate the
process and have
excess energy to sell.
Anaerobic processes have been used extensively for biologically stabilizing
biosolids from municipal sewage treatment plants for many years. Research
projects by Pfeffer and Liebman (1976), Wujcik and Jewell (1980), and more re-
cently Kayhanian and Tchobanoglous (1992), and Richards et al. (1991) have
demonstrated that similar biological processes can be used to stabilize munici-
pal solid wastes. Several commercial systems have been developed and
implemented to a limited extent.
In anaerobic processes, facultative bacteria break down organic materials in
the absence of oxygen and produce methane and carbon dioxide. Anaerobic sys-
tems, if configured efficiently, will generate sufficient energy in the form of meth-
ane to operate the process and have enough surplus to either market as gas or
convert to electricity. Conventional composting systems, on the other hand, need
significant electrical or mechanical energy inputs to aerate or turn piles.
Several approaches are available for anaerobic digestion of feedstocks.
Single-stage digesters contain the entire process in one air-tight container. The
feedstock is first shredded, and before being placed in the container, water
and possibly nutrients are added to the previously shredded material. The
single-stage digester may contain agitation equipment, which continuously
stirs the liquified material. The amount of water added and the presence or
absence of agitation equipment depends on the particular research demonstra-
tion or proprietary process employed.
Two-stage digestion involves circulating a liquid supernatant from a first-
stage digester containing the materials to a second-stage digester (see Figure 7-4).
This circulation eliminates the need for agitation equipment and also provides the
system operator with more opportunity to carefully control the biological process.
Figure 7-4
Anaerobic Digester with Aerobic Compost Curing
Mixer
x-~T~-N
Organic kj^
Fraction ^ ••
ofMSW ^T^^
^~ '
Blend
Tank
^-
\
Thermal Ener
t
Biogas
. t
High-Solids Anaerobic
Digester
Plug Flow
Reactor
3y
Air
^-
Source: Tchobanoglous, 1994
} <
Aerobic
Composter
'
Humus
Aerobic
Reactor
Soil Amendment
Page 7-25
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
As digestion progresses, a mixture of methane and carbon dioxide is pro-
duced. These gases are continuously removed from both first- and second-
stage digesters and are either combusted on-site or directed to off-site gas con-
sumers. A portion of the recovered gas may be converted to thermal energy
by combustion which is then used to heat the digester.
A stabilized residue remains when the digestion process is completed.
The residue is either removed from the digester with the mechanical equip-
ment, or pumped out as a liquid. The residue is chemically similar to compost
but contains much more moisture. Conventional dewatering equipment can
reduce the moisture content enough to handle the residue as a solid. The di-
gested residue may require further curing by windrow or static pile composting.
Screening
Compost is screened
to meet market
specifications.
The moisture content of
the compost being
screened should be
below 40 percent.
Compost is screened to meet market specifications. Sometimes this processing
is done before the compost is cured. One or two screening steps and possibly
additional grinding are used to prepare the compost for markets. Screens are
used to separate out the compost from the noncompostable fraction. During
the composting operation, the compostable fraction undergoes a significant
size reduction. The noncompostable fraction undergoes little or no size re-
duction while being composted. This helps to screen the noncompostable
fraction from the compost. Depending on the initial shredding process and
the size of screen used, some larger compostable particles may enter the
noncompostable stream during screening. One or more screens may be used
with the usual configuration being a coarse screening followed by a fine
screening step. Screening can be done before or after the curing process. The
noncompostable fraction retained on the coarse screen is sent to the landfill.
Compostable materials retained on finer screens may be returned to the begin-
ning of the composting process to allow further composting.
For screening to successfully remove foreign matter and recover as much
of the compost as possible, the moisture content of the compost being
screened should be below 50 percent. Drying should be allowed only after the
compost has sufficiently cured. If screening takes place before curing is com-
plete, moisture addition may be necessary to cure the compost. The screen
size used is determined by market specifications of particle size.
The screened compost may contain inert particles such as glass or plas-
tics that may have passed through the screen. The amount of such inert mate-
rials depends on feedstock processing before composting and the composting
technology used. Sometimes, screening alone is not adequate to remove all
foreign matter. This may result in diminished market acceptance of the product.
Curing
Cooling indicates
reduced microbial
activity and may occur
before curing is
complete.
By the end of the rapid phase of composting, whether in windrows, aerated
static pile, in-vessel, or anaerobic digestion, a significant proportion of the eas-
ily degradable organic material has been decomposed and a significant
amount of weight has been lost. Organic materials remaining after the first
phase decompose slowly. Microbial activity, therefore, continues at a much
slower rate, despite ideal environmental conditions. The second phase, which
is usually carried out in windrows, usually takes several weeks to six months,
depending on outdoor temperatures, the intensity of management, and mar-
ket specifications for maturity. With some system configurations, a screening
step may precede the curing operation.
During curing the compost becomes biologically stable, with microbial
activity occurring at a slower rate than during actual composting. Curing
piles may either be force-aerated or use passive aeration with occasional turn-
ing. As the pile cures, less heat is generated by the microorganisms and the
pile begins to cool. When the piles cool, it does not always mean that the cur-
Page 7-26
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
ing is complete. Cooling is a sign of reduced microbial activity, which can result
from a lack of moisture, inadequate oxygen within the pile, a nutrient imbalance,
or the desired result—completing the compositng process. Curing may take from
a few days to several months. The cured compost is then prepared for markets.
MARKETING COMPOSTS
A well-planned
marketing approach
ensures that all the
compost will be
distributed.
The final use of the compost product and its potential markets are crucial is-
sues that must be addressed early in the planning stages of the compost pro-
gram and facility. A well-planned approach ensures that all the compost will
be distributed; accomplishing this goal, however, requires producing a consis-
tently high-quality compost in order to satisfy the needs of most markets.
A number of state regulatory agencies are considering regulating com-
post. They usually consider a variety of approaches for regulating the land
application of municipal solid
waste compost. One possible ap-
proach is to rely on the federal
standards for land application of
biosolids to establish a framework
within which to derive the state
MSW compost spreading stan-
dards. An important consideration
is the metals content of the applied
material. Table 7-2 shows the
maximum metals content for land
application of biosolids. A proto-
col is provided to limit the maxi-
mum cumulative amount of metals
in biosolids that may be spread on
a particular site. If a biosolid has
metal content that is less than
shown in Table 7-2, the sludge may
be sold or given away provided that
specified annual cumulative rates
for the same list of metals is not ex-
ceeded. The federal standards for
the use and disposal of biosolids are
contained in 40 CFR Part 503.
There is limited regulation of properly processed yard trimmings com-
post. Where state guidelines do exist, the parameters of interest are often as-
sociated with measuring the completeness of the composting process. The
land spreading operations are monitored to insure that the yard trimmings
compost is being spread, not dumped into piles.
The available nitrogen content of the compost and the soil may be a de-
termining factor for deciding the allowable amount of compost that may be
spread onto agricultural land. With biosolids applications, the allowable
amount is determined by crop uptake. Similar approaches have been used to
establish compost application levels.
Table 7-2
Ceiling Concentrations
for Biosolids
Pollutant Concentrations
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
'Dry weight basis
Source: USEPA, 1994
(mg/kg)*
75
85
3000
4300
840
57
75
420
100
7500
Marketing Strategies
Quality and composition
factors specific to the
targeted markets must
be carefully assessed.
In marketing composts, there are no set guidelines that apply to all compost-
ing facilities—every facility and the markets it seeks to serve are somewhat
different. Factors specific to the targeted markets must be carefully assessed.
The quality and composition required for a compost product to meet the
needs of a specific market depend on a mix of factors, including the intended
use of the product, local climatic conditions, and even social and cultural fac-
Page7-27
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
tors. The criteria that best fit the specific market should be incorporated in the
marketing plan. For example, meeting the needs of agricultural applications
requires minimizing the potential uptake of metal contaminants and the pres-
ence of glass and plastic, and satisfying other feed/food safety concerns. Sat-
isfying the needs of horticultural nurseries requires ensuring the maturity of
the compost, pH, nutrient content, soluble salts, particle size, shrinkage, and
moisture-holding potential (Buhr, et. al. 1993).
Marketing efforts should be continuous—before, during, and after the
compost production. Two major objectives should guide marketing plans:
One is selling or otherwise distributing all of the compost that is produced.
The second is optimizing revenues and minimizing costs.
Market developers should also be aware of potential large-scale users of
composts and consider targeting such users in their areas or regions. Potential
large-scale users include the following (LaGasse, 1992):
Consider targeting
large-scale users. ' tarms
• landscape contractors
• highway departments
• sports facilities
• parks
• golf courses
• office parks
• home builders
• cemeteries
• nurseries
• growers of greenhouse crops
• manufacturers of topsoil
• land reclamation contractors.
Adopting the right marketing attitude is also critical. Compost should
be viewed as a usable product—not a waste requiring disposal. Composting
should be portrayed as an environmentally sound and beneficial means of re-
cycling organic materials rather than a disposal method for solid wastes.
Education, Research, and Public Relations
Marketers must thoroughly understand the advantages and limitations of a given
compost for a given use. Based on its advantages and limitations, the compost's
value to the user should be a focus of the marketing strategy. To attract potential
Marketers must customers who have successfully used other soil amendments, marketers should
thorouqhly understand design an education program focusing on the qualities of the specific compost
the advantages and products and how they can meet customer needs. The challenge is to convince po-
limitations of a given tential customers that there is a compost product to meet specific needs.
compost. A successful marketing program should focus on what the compost can and
cannot do. Marketers should emphasize any testing programs that are applicable
and uses that are compatible with the compost. Give users specific instructions;
they may not have used your compost or a similar product before. If the compost
is sold in bags, their labels should describe the contents, its potential uses, any
precautions/warnings, and how to use the material. Provide bulk users with writ-
ten instructions for using and storing the compost.
Potential Compost Uses
A study conducted by the Composting Council (Buhr, et. al.) identified nine
major potential markets for compost in the U.S.; these include the following:
Page 7-28
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
Knowing the many
potential uses of a
compost is required for
targeting appropriate
markets.
Composts are a good
source of plant nutrients
and in some applications
may have advantages
over fertilizers.
• landscaping
• topsoil
• bagged for retail consumer use (residential)
• surface mine reclamation (active and abandoned mines)
• nurseries (both container and field)
• sod
• silviculture (Christmas trees, reforested areas, timber stand improvement)
• agriculture (harvested cropland, pasture/grazing land, cover crops).
The leading markets are agriculture, silviculture (trees grown for har-
vest), and sod production (Buhr, et al.). Some of these major markets have
several different potential compost applications. In agriculture, for example,
compost can be used as a soil conditioner, fertilizer, and for erosion control
and plant disease suppression. In the residential retail market, compost can be
used as potting soil, topsoil, mulch and in soil amendments (Buhr, et al. or
Slivka, et al.). Compost is also used as a soil amendment to establish vegeta-
tion on disturbed lands (for example at mining sites).
Knowing the many potential uses of compost is an important prerequisite
for targeting appropriate markets. Table 7-3 lists compost markets and specific
uses for different types of compost. In evaluating potential uses, however, mar-
keters should also recognize the practical limitations of some applications.
Traditionally, the role of compost as a soil additive/soil conditioner has
been widely recognized. As a conditioner composts can do the following:
• improve water drainage
• increase water-holding capacity
• improve nutrient-holding capacity
• act as pH buffering agent
• help regulate temperature
• aid in erosion control
• aid air circulation by increasing the void space
• improve the soil's organic matter content
• aid in disease suppression
• slowly release nutrients into the soil
• correct deficiencies in minor elements
• reduce bulk density
• increase cation exchange capacity of sandy soils.
Composts are also a good source of plant nutrients and in some applications
may have advantages over fertilizers. For example, the plant nutrients in com-
posts, unlike fertilizers, are released over an extended period of time. In addition,
composts supply important micronutrients that fertilizers lack. On the other
hand, composts supply fewer amounts of macronutrients than fertilizers.
Certain types of composts can successfully control soil-borne diseases, par-
ticularly for container crops. A number of research studies have demonstrated
that stable composts made from bark and other materials can be effective in sup-
pressing diseases such as Pythiumand Phytophthora (Hoitink, Boehm and Hadar,
1993; Logsdon, 1989). The disease-controlling qualities of the compost result
mainly from the presence of beneficial microorganisms that are antagonists of
plant pathogens. Composts from tree barks have been used successfully, and
tests are being done with composts made from other materials. The use of com-
posts specifically for suppressing disease have been limited primarily to nursery
operators. Technology needs to be developed to manufacture products with de-
fined and consistent properties for use with vegetable and agronomic crops.
Page 7-29
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Table 7-3
Potential Users of and Uses for Compost
User Group
Primary Uses for Compost
Products
Compost Products
Packaging
Agricultural and Residential Users
Forage and field crop growers
Fruit and vegetable farmers
Homeowners
Organic farmers
Turf growers
Commercial Users
Cemeteries
Discount stores, supermarkets
Soil amendment, fertilizer supplement,
top dressing for pasture and hay crop
maintenance
Soil amendment, fertilizer supplement,
mulch for fruit trees
Soil amendment, mulch, fertilizer
supplement, and fertilizer replacement
for home gardens and lawns
Fertilizer substitute, soil amendment
Soil amendment for establishing turf,
top dressing
Top dressing for turf, soil amendment
for establishing turf and landscape
plantings
Resale to homeowners
Unscreened and screened Bulk
compost
Unscreened and screened Bulk
compost
Screened compost, high-nutrient Primarily bags,
compost, mulch small-volume
bulk
Unscreened and screened Primarily bulk
compost, high-nutrient compost
Screened compost, topsoil blend Bulk
Garden centers, hardware/lumber Resale to homeowners and
outlets small-volume users
Golf courses
Screened compost
General screened compost
product
Screened compost, mulch
Screened compost, topsoil blend
Greenhouses
Top dressing for turf, soil amendment
for greens and tee construction,
landscape plantings
Potting mix component, peat substitute, High-quality, dry, screened
soil amendment for beds
Land-reclamation contractors Topsoil and soil amendment for
disturbed landscapes (mines, urban
renovation)
Landscapers and land developers Topsoil substitute, mulch, soil
amendment, fertilizer supplement
Unscreened compost, topsoil
blend
Screened compost, topsoil
blend, mulch
Nurseries
Municipal Users
Landfills
Public works departments
Schools, park and recreation
departments
Soil amendment and soil replacement Unscreened and screened
for field-grown stock, mulch, container compost, composted bark,
mix component, resale to retail and mulch
landscape clients
Bulk
Bags
Primarily bags,
small-volume
bulk
Bulk
Bulk and bag
Bulk
Bulk
Primarily bulk,
some bags
Landfill cover material, primarily final
cover
Unscreened low-quality compost Bulk
Topsoil for road and construction work, Unscreened and screened Bulk
soil amendment and mulch for compost, topsoil blend
landscape plantings
Topsoil, top dressing for turf and ball Screened compost, topsoil Bulk
fields, soil amendment and mulch for blend, mulch
Source: Reprinted with permission froml|Qtf3<;ajtea|t)la(jljififsrm Composting Handbook, 1992 (NRAES-54)
Page 7-30
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
Compost Quality—Impacts on Uses and Markets
The quality of a particular compost product and the consistency with which
that quality is maintained directly impact the product's marketability. Table
7-4 summarizes compost quality guidelines based on end use of the compost.
Quality is judged primarily on particle size, pH; soluble salts, stability, and the
Table 7-4
Examples of Compost Quality Guidelines Based on End Use*
End Use of Compost
Potting Grade
Potting Media
Amendment Grade (a)
Top Dressing Grade
Soil Amendment
Grade (a)
Recommended As a growing medium For formulating growing Primarily for top-dressing
Uses: without additional media for potted crops with turf
blending a pH below 7.2
Improving agricultural
soils, restoring disturbed
soils, establishing and
maintaining landscape
plantings with pH
requirements below 7.2
Characteristic
Color:
Odor:
Particle Size:
pH:
Soluble Salt
Concentration:
(mmhos per cm)
Foreign
Materials:
Heavy Metals:
Respiration Rate:
(mg per kg per
hour) (b)
Should have good,
earthy odor
Less than 1/2 inch
(13 mm)
5.0-7.6
Less than 2.5
Should not contain
more than 1% by dry
weight of combined
glass, plastic, and
other foreign particles
1/8-1/2 inch (3-13
cm)
Should not exceed
EPA standards for
unrestricted use (c)
Less than 200
Should have no
objectionable odor
Less than 1/2 inch
(13 mm)
Range should be
identified
Less than 6
Should not contain more
than 1 % by dry weight of
combined glass, plastic,
and other foreign particles
1/8-1/2 inch (3-13 cm)
Should not exceed EPA
standards for unrestricted
use (c)
Less than 200
Dark brown to black
Should have no
objectionable odor
Less than 1/4 inch
(7 mm)
Range should be
identified
Less than 5
Should not contain more
than 1 % by dry weight of
combined glass, plastic,
and other foreign particles
1/8-1/2 inch (3-13 cm)
Should not exceed EPA
standards for unrestricted
use (c)
Less than 200
Dark brown to black
Less than 1/2 inch
(13 mm)
Range should be
identified
Less than 20
Should not contain more
than 5% by dry weight of
combined glass, plastic,
and other foreign
particles
Should not exceed EPA
standards for
unrestricted use (c)
Less than 400
* These suggested guidelines have received support from producers of horticultural crops.
(a) For crops requiring a pH of 6.5 or greater, use lime-fortified product. Lime-fortified soil amendment grade should have a soluble
salt concentration less than 30 mmhos per centimeter.
(b) Respiration rate is measured by the rate of oxygen consumed. It is an indication of compost stability.
(c) These are EPA 40 CFR Part 503 standards for sewage biosolids compost. Although they are not applicable to MSW compost,
they can be used as a benchmark.
Sources: Reprinted with permission from Rynk, et al., On Farm Composting Handbook, 7992(NRAES-54); and USEPA, 1994
Page 7-31
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Many markets will also
look at the uniformity of
the product for
assessing quality.
Concentrations of heavy
metals and PCBs will
make marketing a
compost difficult.
Compost quality is also
affected by the aging
process and storage
conditions.
Compost markets and
end uses dictate what
types of tests are
necessary and how
frequent they should be
made.
presence of undesirable components such as weed seeds, heavy metals, phyto-
toxic compounds, and undesirable materials, such as plastic and glass. Many
markets will also look at the uniformity of the product from batch to batch
and sources of the raw materials used to make it. Quality and consistency be-
come more important when compost is used for high-value crops such as pot-
ted plants and food, when it is applied to sensitive young seedlings, and when
it is used alone, without soil or other additives. Tolerance levels for factors
such as particle size, soluble salt concentrations, foreign inert materials, and
stability are usually higher when compost is used as a soil amendment for ag-
ricultural land, restoration of disturbed soils, or other similar uses.
Concentrations of heavy metals and PCBs that exceed USEPA or state
standards for unrestricted use will make compost marketing considerably
more difficult or even impossible to undertake. Although regulations differ
among states, composts are generally classified according to concentrations of
certain pollutants such as heavy metals and PCBs. Markets buying or accept-
ing composts that exceed government standards for unrestricted use often
have to limit the application rates or cumulative amount applied. Because
heavy metals and PCBs pose dangers to human and animal health, these mar-
kets may also have to keep written records, apply for special land-spreading
permits, and follow specific management practices such as soil incorporation
or observe a waiting period before grazing is allowed.
Composting facility operators can increase the marketability of their com-
posts by selectively accepting feedstock materials. Raw materials used in the
composting process influence the physical and
chemical properties of the compost. Clean, source-
separated materials are sometimes preferred as
feedstocks over mixed solid waste, particularly
when used for high-value crops or retail sale.
Facilities designed to accept MSW as a feedstock
often have less control over the materials they
receive. Table 7-5 lists common sources of chemi-
cal contaminants in MSW. A front-end processing
system that effectively removes contaminants and
a permanent household hazardous waste disposal
program serving generators may help improve
the quality of MSW compost.
Compost quality is also affected by the aging
process and storage conditions. Compost that has
cured for 3 to 4 months will typically have a finer
texture and a lower pH. In addition, most of the
nitrogen available in compost converts from ammo-
nium-nitrogen to nitrate-nitrogen during that time period. High concentrations of
ammonium-nitrogen can cause temporary stunting and burning of the foliage of
sensitive species. Storage methods can impact quality because finished compost
continues to slowly biodegrade until all sources of available carbon are depleted.
Compost should be stored in a dry location and in sufficiently small piles to allow
aerobic respiration to continue. Without enough air, compost will become anaerobic
and develop odors, alcohols, and organic acids that are damaging to plants.
The quality of a compost can be measured through periodic testing. Com-
post markets and end uses usually dictate what types of tests are necessary and
the frequency for conducting them. Federal and state environmental regulations
require specific tests for composts made from mixed solid waste, biosolids, and
certain source-separated commercial and industrial wastes. Regular testing is es-
sential for producing a quality product on a consistent basis. Some of routine
tests for composts include moisture content, density, pH, soluble salts, particle
size, organic matter content, carbon:nitrogen ratio and level of foreign inerts e.g.,
glass, plastics. Many independent and state-operated labs also conduct tests for
micro-nutrients, respiration rate, heavy metals, pathogen levels, and chemical
Table 7-5
Common Sources of
Contaminants in MSW
Batteries
Consumer electronics
Motor oil
Solvents
Cleaning products
Automotive products
Paints and varnishes
Cosmetics
Source: USEPA, 1994
Page 7-32
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
Compost maturity is an
important quality
measure.
contaminants. A few labs can perform tests specifically for compost maturity or
phytotoxicity. Compost maturity can be defined as the degree of decomposition
of organic matter during composting. Definitions of maturity are based on the
potential uses of the compost (Chen and Inbar, 1993). A number of analytical
methods are used to determine compost maturity, but no single method has yet
been identified as consistently reliable. Many researchers and compost facility
operators are using a combination of tests to determine maturity. Some of the
methods being used include bioassays, starch content, cation exchange capacity,
concentration of humic substances, cellulose content, carbon:nitrogen ratio,
carbon:nitrogen ratio in water extracts of composts, respiration rate, and spectro-
scopic analyses (Chen and Inbar, 1993; Inbar et al., 1990).
Quality Control
The compost feedstock
affects product quality.
Whatever goes in as compost feedstock will be reflected in the compost pro-
duced. Because changes in the compost feedstock also change the compost
quality, feedstock material should be carefully controlled to ensure consistent
compost quality. This may mean that some noncompostable materials should
be rejected at the compost site if the product from these materials will be diffi-
cult or impossible to market. If accepted, attempts should be made to segre-
gate these feedstocks and market the resulting compost separately.
The compost should be of a consistent quality. This is important to all
sectors of the market, but especially to repeat customers who expect a certain
quality product. This may not be as important to the one-time buyer. How-
ever, if the quality of the compost is good, the one-time buyer could become a
repeat customer. The marketer must understand the risk that some users
(businesses) may be taking if product quality is unreliable. In addition, if
some composts are extremely poor in quality, customers' confidence in all
composts may be reduced. Quality control assurances for consistently pro-
ducing a high-quality compost are a necessity for compost marketing.
Facility managers should establish a testing program backed by mini-
mum quality standards. Tolerances for quality variations should be set and
adhered to. Managers should stand behind their products and address cus-
tomer complaints by promptly taking corrective action. Maintaining a high
degree of credibility and integrity is essential.
Manufacturing Multiple Products
Being able to make
different products is a
good marketing
strategy.
A successful marketing strategy should include the ability to offer more than
one grade of product. Such a strategy could increase the revenues earned and
the amount of compost sold. This could also alleviate some of the peak de-
mand periods, improve distribution, and require less storage space.
Most composting facilities attempt to make one compost from a mixture
of a variety of feedstock types. To meet the needs of specific customers, con-
sider segregating a portion or portions of the feedstocks to produce composts
that are significantly different in chemical, physical, or biological properties.
Different grades of compost can also be made from a single feedstock. For ex-
ample, the compost could be supplemented with plant nutrients to enhance
the nutrient properties. The pH of the compost can be adjusted to suit different
plant needs. Composts can be mixed with different mineral or organic materials
to produce potting soil mixes. Varying the particle size by using coarser or finer
screens produces a rough-grade and a fine-grade compost respectively.
Inventorying Potential Markets
Who are the potential users of the compost? What are they currently using?
Can the compost be a satisfactory substitute for products currently being
Page 7-33
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Marketers should
determine if there are
potential users who
could benefit from their
product.
used? Marketers should determine if there are users who could benefit from
using the compost, especially those who have not considered using compost
in the past. The marketing plan should include an inventory of those users
and marketers should focus on the innovators, those entrepreneurs who are
looking for alternatives that can lower their costs. The goal is to develop tar-
get markets and focus on them.
Municipalities that manufacture composts should look at in-house mar-
kets. Determine the annual dollars spent on fertilizers, topsoil and other soil
amendments used by governmental units in the region. Can the compost
serve as a substitute for these products? A fair amount of demand can often
be created within the municipality.
Marketers should try to project the total demand for compost in a given
market and relate this to the production capacity of the composting facility.
They should determine the demand pattern through the year. Is the peak de-
mand seasonal? If the demand is seasonal, plans for storing the compost at
the site or at the buyer's location should be made. Compromises in price may
have to be made if the compost has to be purchased and stored by the user.
Who provides the transportation? Unless properly planned, transportation
could be a bottleneck in meeting buyer's needs on time. This could jeopardize
credibility of the marketing program.
What products, if any, are competing with the compost? Marketers
should answer this question and stress the positive characteristics of the com-
post as a substitute for peat in potting soil mixes, for fertilizer, and for pine
bark or peat in landscaping.
Distributing Compost
Compost distribution is
an important
consideration.
While many municipalities choose to market their own products, others rely
on private marketing firms that specialize in marketing composts and related
products. It may be appropriate to take the former approach if a small quan-
tity of compost is produced, although some large facilities market their own
compost. The self-marketing approach adds administrative costs and may re-
quire personnel with special expertise in marketing.
Marketing firms offer many advantages. They may be able to do more if
they are serving more than one community by using the resources available to
them in a more efficient manner. Private marketers can also expand the range
of publicity and advertising by attending trade shows, field demonstration
days, etc. They can also develop professional public relations campaigns,
suggest appropriate equipment for handling the compost, and competitively
price the compost. While all of these functions can be performed by a munici-
pality as well, doing so puts a significant burden on the resources available.
One method of distribution adopted by some facilities that compost yard
trimmings is to rely on home owners to remove the compost from the compost
site by bagging their own. This approach has been successful for some com-
munities. Most home owners want good-quality compost in small quantities,
and many prefer to purchase it already bagged because they lack containers or
the means to transport loose compost. Bagging composts, however, requires
additional investment in capital and manufacturing costs. If the compost is
bagged, it should be sold through local retail outlets. A successful marketing
program for bagged compost requires intensive advertising and a good-qual-
ity product. This marketing approach is likely to return a greater amount of
revenues as well.
Pricing
Pricing any product depends on supply and demand, the price structure of
competing products, the quality of the product, transportation costs, produc-
tion costs, research and development costs, marketing costs, the volume of
Page 7-34
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
material purchased by a single customer. The pricing structure should be in-
dividually established for each composting operation.
The goal of marketing should be to sell all the compost that has been pro-
duced. The price of the compost should facilitate this goal. Revenues alone
should not be expected to offset the cost of producing the compost, but prices
Decide early on a pricing should be set to offset as much of the production costs as possible.
strategy. Price the product modestly at first, then increase the price based on de-
mand. If the compost is given away for free, the user attaches very little value
to it. Pricing should be adjusted based on quantity purchased, and large vol-
ume buyers should get a significant discount.
One of the most sensitive factors in pricing and marketing compost is the
cost of transportation. Compost is bulky and bulky products can be very ex-
pensive to transport. Transportation costs must be carefully evaluated while
the facility is being planned, and the distance between potential markets and
the manufacturing facility should be minimized.
First-time users of the compost should be charged for the compost or its
transportation. This helps customers see compost as a valuable product. More-
over, if customers like the compost, they will be willing to pay for the next shipment.
Compost can be sold at lower prices during low-demand periods. Doing so
means the manufacturer does not have to use up valuable storage space. It also
helps the users because they will have the compost when they are ready to use it.
Finalizing Market Arrangements
A composting program's ultimate success depends on the marketing arrange-
ments for the processed products. A technical evaluation conducted during
_ ., , , ... , the planning stages should provide quantity and quality data, which can be
Both formal and informal , r 7 , ^ J
contracts have used to fmallze marketing agreements.
advantaqes Contracts between compost facility operators and product buyers will state
the quality specifications, price, quantity, delivery arrangements, use restrictions,
and payment procedures. All legal contracts should be reviewed by an attorney.
Most contracts are made with large-quantity buyers. If compost is to be
supplied to a large number of small users, contract agreements may be less
formal. The agreement must at least specify the minimum quantity and how
the compost will be used.
Informal contracts are probably more appropriate when the compost is
being given away. Nevertheless, the informal contract is an important com-
munication vehicle.
COMPOSTING APPROACHES IN DETAIL
Composting options available to communities range from the low-capital-in-
vestment methods of backyard residential composting to the more capital-in-
tensive mixed municipal solid waste composting, requiring advanced-teach-
ing high-technology processing plants. Each approach has specific benefits
and limitations. The approach or mix of approaches that a community
chooses depends on that community's characteristics and particular needs.
Grasscycling
During the growing season, 30 or more percent of the MSW generated in some
communities is yard trimmings. An aggressive program of "grasscycling" can
Grasscycling can significantly reduce the amount of yard trimmings and, hence, the need for
significantly reduce the processing and disposing of those materials.
amount of yard Grasscycling is the natural recycling of grass clippings by leaving the
trimmings in the waste clippings on the lawn after mowing (see Figure 7-5). Contrary to widely ac-
stream. cepted misconceptions, leaving grass clippings on a lawn after mowing is not
Page 7-35
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Most residents need to
be told of the benefits of
grasscycling.
detrimental to maintaining a good lawn if several simple guidelines are fol-
lowed. Studies have shown that total lawn maintenance time is reduced when
clippings are mulched and left on the lawn, despite the fact that the lawn may
need to be mowed slightly more often. For example, a Texas study (Knoop
and Whitney, 1993) found that grasscycling reduced lawn maintenance time
by 38 percent. In addition, leaving grass clippings on the lawn reduces the
need to fertilize by 25 to 33 percent, because nutrients in the grass clippings
are simply being recycled. A 25 to 33 percent fertilizer savings can normally
be achieved. In addition, grasscycling reduces or eliminates costs for disposal
bags and possibly pick-up service charges are eliminated.
When establishing a grasscycling program, residents should be told
about the benefits described above and how to best maintain grass so that clip-
pings can be left on the lawn. Turf management experts recommend cutting
when the grass is dry. A maximum of one inch should be removed during
each mowing and no more than one-third of the length should be removed.
U.S. Department of Agriculture studies have shown that when these cutting
guidelines are followed thatch does not build up in the lawn. If grass is not
wet most lawn mowers can cut it into small enough pieces so that the clip-
pings will simply be recycled into the lawn. Simple attachments are also
available for converting standard mowers into mulching mowers.
The key to a successful grasscycling program is public education. To
build awareness, support, and participation, the cooperation of lawn and gar-
den supply stores and other businesses that provide lawn maintenance equip-
ment and supplies should be sought. Such businesses can post announce-
ments and distribute informational materials to their customers. Government
agencies, such as the local parks department, can serve as a good example. To
help residents overcome skepticism, demonstration plots can be established in
high-visibility locations. All recommendations should accurately reflect local
growing conditions and address any concerns that residents may have.
More information is rapidly becoming available about successful
grasscycling programs. Detailed information is available from the American
Horticultural Society in Alexandria, Virginia.
Figure 7-5
Grass Being Mowed and Returned to the Lawn for Grasscycling
Source: University of Wisconsin-Madison Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center, 1994
Page 7-36
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
Backyard Residential Composting
Simply constructed
boxes make a residential
compost pile easy to set
up and maintain.
Many communities have established programs to encourage residents to com-
post yard trimmings and possibly other organic materials in compost piles or
containers located on their property.
Process Description
Yard trimmings, which include grass clippings, leaves, garden materials, and
small twigs, are ideally suited for composting. Although materials can be
composted in a small heap, simply constructed boxes can make a residential
compost pile easier to set up and maintain. Figure 7-6 shows several yard
trimmings composting containers. Waste is placed in the containers to a
depth of about four feet and turned every few weeks or months. Depending
on weather conditions, the addition of water may be necessary. Aerobic con-
ditions are generally sustained, and decomposition is faster than would natu-
rally occur if the yard trimmings were left on the ground. As decomposition
takes place, the frequency of turning can be reduced to every few months.
Significant settling will occur as compost is formed. Complete stabilization
and production of finished compost can take from four months to two years
with longer times being associated with colder climates and little or no turn-
ing. Residents can produce compost at a higher rate by more frequently stir-
ring the contents and moving the material through a series of containers.
More detailed information about grasscycling is available in "Composting to
Reduce the Waste Stream" (1991).
The education program
must describe how to do
backyard composting
and its benefits.
Implementation
An effective educational program and appropriate incentives must be provided to
successfully implement on a community-wide basis. Chapter 1, "Public Educa-
tion and Involvement," deals in depth with public education programs and read-
ers are encouraged to review it along with the information provided below.
Public Education
Developing a backyard composting program begins with an awareness pro-
gram explaining why backyard composting is needed and providing informa-
tion about various options and methods. More detailed information is then
presented to encourage participation. Once backyard composting has been
adopted, a continuing community relations program must report benefits, an-
swer questions or concerns, inform new or nonparticipating residents, and en-
courage ongoing composting activities.
Some communities have found that working through schools or commu-
nity groups can facilitate implementation of backyard composting. These
groups provide a forum establishing communication channels. Some of these
groups are already committed to environmental improvement as part of their
mission. A variety of manuals have been prepared for backyard composting
education programs. Contact your state's environmental agency or your local
solid waste program for such publications.
Financial Support
A community that is serious about implementing backyard composting as
part of an integrated solid waste management program must appropriately
support the program. Backyard composting can divert significant quantities
of organic material and save money that otherwise would be spent on waste
collection, processing, or disposal. Consequently, allocating funds to support
a backyard composting program can prove cost-effective. In addition, divert-
ing yard trimmings from the MSW stream can save landfill space.
Page 7-37
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Figure 7-6
Yard Trimmings Composting Units
Residential Yard Trimmings Composting
Holding units like these are used for composting
yard trimmings and are the least labor- and time-
consuming ways for residents to compost. Some
units are portable and can be moved to the most
convenient location. Non-woody yard materials
are best to use. As you collect weeds, grass
clippings, flowers, leaves and harvest remains
throughout the year, place them in the bins.
It can take four to six months or as long as two
years to produce a good-quality compost using
such units. Chopping or shredding the materials,
mixing in high-carbon and high-nitrogen materials,
and providing adequate moisture and aeration
speeds the process.
Sod can also be composted, with or without a
composting structure, by piling it upside down (roots
up, grass down), providing adequate moisture, and
covering it with black plastic to eliminate light.
Leaf mold can be made by placing autumn leaves
in a holding unit for a year or more.
Holding units can be constructed from circles of
wire fencing, from old wooden pallets, or from
wood and wire.
Backyard composting of food scraps is regulated
or prohibited in some communities. Residents
should check with their local and state environ-
mental agencies before attempting to compost
food scraps.
B. Wire Bin
A. Portable Wood and Wire Unit
C. Wooden-Pallet Unit
(Made from wooden pallets or pressure-treated lumber)
Sources: Home Composting Handbook 1992. A and B Reproduced by permission of the Seattle Engineering Department's Solid
Waste Utility and the Seattle Tilth Association, Seattle, WA; C reprinted with permission from Composting to Reduce the Waste Stream
(NRAES-43), N.E. Regional Agricultural Engineering Service, Cooperative Extension, Ithaca, NY 14853, 1991
Page 7-38
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
Financial incentives may
be needed.
Communities will need to provide financial support for public education
programs. In addition, to further encourage participation, some communities have
provided containers for composting. This represents a nominal per-household cost.
Some communities also provide incentives to encourage backyard compost-
ing or reduction in the generation of yard trimmings. For example, the City of Se-
attle allows home owners who do not generate yard trimmings to avoid paying a
$2-per-month fee for yard trimmings pickup. Likewise, some communities
charge for yard trimmings pickup separately, often by the bag, in an effort to in-
duce home owners to reduce the quantity of yard trimmings produced.
Yard Trimmings Composting Programs
Off-site composting of
yard trimmings is
another alternative.
Composting yard trimmings is another very effective means of diverting sig-
nificant quantities of materials from land disposal facilities. The challenge lies
in managing the yard trimmings stream and the composting process in the
most economic, nuisance-free manner. This challenge is formidable, since
new material management techniques often require individual residents to do
more than simply put bags of waste at the curb and may require communities
to devise methods of handling materials that have already begun to decom-
pose by the time they are picked up or delivered to a composting facility. Un-
less the benefits of composting are carefully explained to a community's resi-
dents, intense opposition to even the best-designed program can occur.
Grass and leaves make up the bulk of yard trimmings produced. Other
materials include tree limbs, trunks and brush; garden materials such as
weeds and pine needles; and Christmas trees.
Different types of yard trimmings decompose at a different rates and
mixing them can affect the quality, marketability, and composting time of the
finished product. To maximize system efficiency, it may be better to deter-
mine separately the proper handling method for each type of material. For ex-
ample, rather than composting woody materials such as trees and brush, these
materials may be better handled by chipping for the purpose of producing
mulch. Wood chips are often in demand for use in community parks or highway
projects. Likewise, tree trunks or large limbs can be cut and used as firewood.
Collection
Obviously, the most expedient and cost-effective option is not to collect yard trim-
mings in the first place. And for an increasing number of communities and states,
barring or restricting the collection and disposal of yard trimmings is the option
of choice. For many rural communities, a prohibition on disposing of yard trim-
mings at the local landfill can significantly reduce land disposal quantities. Refus-
ing to accept yard trimmings may be enough of an incentive for local residents to
change their habit of collecting and bagging leaves and grass.
Drop-Off Sites
For more urbanized communities, however, the "no collection" approach may
create problems. For example, piles of leaves and grass may begin to show up
in ditches and in open areas, where they pose local eyesores or nuisances.
People may rake yard trimmings into roadways, creating transportation haz-
ards, blocking sewer systems, or polluting local lakes and streams. For small
or medium-sized communities, establishing a drop-off site may be the pre-
ferred method of collecting yard trimmings. Establishing a drop-off site al-
lows a community to avoid yard trimmings collection costs by requiring that
residents deliver the waste to a designated site. The site can be the compost
facility or, for a larger community, a drop-off point where yard trimmings are
collected and transported to a central composting location.
The drop-off approach gives people the option of removing the material
from their yards, but requiring them to move it, still providing an incentive for
Page 7-39
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
The method of collection
depends on many
factors unique to the
community.
Different materials may
need to be set out
differently.
them to handle the material at home. A community can provide the compost-
ing service without having to worry about collection. Some small communi-
ties operating drop-off sites find that no additional personnel, equipment, or
administrative costs are needed to run a successful site. If supervision is nec-
essary, one person can usually oversee drop-off site operations.
The key to the success of a drop-off site is convenience. If drop-off sites
are easy for most residents to get to (within a few miles of their homes), most
will support the program. The proximity of the composting site always needs
to be balanced against the chance of causing an odor nuisance in the commu-
nity. Support for a drop-off program can often be increased by allowing local
residents to take the finished compost for their own use. People can drop off a
load of fresh yard trimmings and pick up a load of finished compost during
one visit to the site.
Drop-off programs can present some problems for some residents. Often,
elderly residents or those with physical problems are unable to carry the yard
trimmings to the site without assistance. Others may also feel that transporting
wet yard trimmings in plastic bags in a passenger vehicle is risky, because bags
break. To avoid the costs and headaches involved in establishing a curbside col-
lection program, it is worthwhile for a small or medium-sized community to
work through these problems in order to make a drop-off site workable.
Curbside Collection
Some communities find that the drop-off approach does not satisfy their needs
and decide to operate separate curbside collection programs. Collecting yard
trimmings presents a variety of challenges. Because yard trimmings make up
a significant portion of most municipal waste streams, handling it separately
requires that decisions be made concerning pickup schedules and handling
equipment. Revising pickup schedules to handle yard trimmings may require
changing an existing route pattern and negotiating with unions or other labor
representatives for increased staffing or overtime. If the community is served
by a number of private haulers, the scheduling problems can become complex.
In either case new equipment may be needed.
A major decision when establishing a curbside yard trimmings collection
program is how residents should place the materials at the curb for pickup.
The method of setting out yard trimmings will determine what equipment the
community will need to efficiently pick it up. Different materials may need to
be set out differently. A uniform policy should be made and enforced so resi-
dents know what is expected of them.
One method for setting out yard trimmings is to require that residents rake
leaves, grass, or brush into piles to be collected at the curb. The material should
either be placed between the sidewalk and the curb or in the street close to the
curb. Different pieces of equipment are designed to collect the material in differ-
ent locations. For example, a vacuum truck to collect leaves usually requires only
that leaves be placed between the curb and the sidewalk. Other collection equip-
ment, such as sweepers, may require that the material be in the street.
Yard trimmings piled in the street can cause other problems. Cars may
run into and scatter the piles or children may play in them, creating a safety
hazard. Precipitation can wash some of the piles into sewers, creating a flood-
ing hazard or adding to the pollution load in the wastewater system.
Noncontainerized piling may work best for leaves and brush. Leaves
tend to be light and dry and easily collected. Piled brush is fairly easily
chipped and transported. Grass, on the other hand, is often dense and wet,
and can create objectionable odors if left piled for more than a few hours.
For ease in handling yard trimmings, bags are often used. Frequently
the bags used are made of materials that must be segregated from the yard
trimmings. Removal steps can be costly, requiring either extra labor time or
special processing equipment. Odors may also be a problem when emptying
bags containing highly decomposable grass clippings.
Page 7-40
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
Whether yard trimmings
are collected loose, in
bags, or in bins
determines the type of
collection equipment
needed.
A combination of
collection approaches
may be best.
Significant efforts have been made to eliminate the need to debag yard
trimmings by developing biodegradable bags or by using paper bags. Each
have shown promise, but reliability and cost constraints have limited their
implementation. Ideal bags have the following features: they securely hold
the yard trimmings until the bag has reached the composting site, are easily
punctured or broken open so air can enter the materials, and they biodegrade
in the compost as the materials are stabilized.
Rather than using bags, some communities use permanent bins for stor-
ing yard trimmings. For example, in a pilot program, the city of Omaha, Ne-
braska, has provided a group of residents with a 90-gallon, plastic, wheeled
cart for storing yard trimmings. The carts are wheeled to the curb where they
are lifted by special hoists and the contents dumped into a packer truck. Us-
ing these covered carts has reduced problems with odors and has generally
been well accepted by Omaha's residents. Conventional garbage cans should
not be used for yard trimmings because they are very heavy when full and can
cause injury to workers when the cans are lifted into packer trucks.
The decision to collect yard trimmings loose, in bags, or in bins will help
determine the equipment that will be needed to efficiently collect the yard
trimmings. Yard trimmings collection equipment can be divided into two cat-
egories: gathering devices and transport vehicles. Gathering devices move the
yard trimmings from the street to the transport vehicle, which takes the trim-
mings to the compost site. Some equipment performs both functions. Still
others are general purpose vehicles that handle yard trimmings using special
attachments.
The types of gathering devices needed will depend on material types to
be collected and how residents store the material at the curb. For leaves stored
between the sidewalk and the curb, vacuum leaf collectors are popular. These
collectors suck the leaves into a shredder, which blows the leaves into a collec-
tion vehicle. For some units the leaves are compacted as well. These units can
be damaged if snow and ice are present in the leaf pile. Vacuum collectors
may be used to collect grass, but materials with a higher moisture content are
more difficult to handle with a vacuum truck.
A number of collection options are available for yard trimmings piles
placed in the street near the curb. Front-end loaders are the most popular,
since most communities already have one. Front-end loaders can pick up the
yard trimmings and place them in a dump truck. For tight spaces or small
piles, a dust or leaf pan can be attached to a jeep for similar collection. Street
sweeper-type broom collectors are also becoming popular. These gathering
vehicles sweep the yard trimmings into a processor where they are shredded
and transported to a collection vehicle. The problem with this type of collec-
tion is that the curb must normally be free of vehicles for the broom system,
which is normally quite long, to have free access to the curb.
Most communities use tree chippers to collect brush and wood. The chipper
processes the material at the curb, and trucks transport the chips to a re-use site or
disposal site. Some communities also run larger, high-volume chippers at the
compost site, and transport unprocessed wood there to be chipped.
Combined Approaches
Many communities use a combined approach to manage yard trimmings. For
example, Madison, Wisconsin, offers curbside pickup of leaves for limited pe-
riods in the spring and fall. Grass is not picked up, to encourage grasscycling
and home management, but a number of drop-off sites have been established
for those residents still desiring to remove grass or other greenery such as
weeds from their property. Brush is picked up and chipped on a monthly
schedule. Local private haulers offer pickup service as well. By looking at
each type of yard trimming material separately, the most economic, efficient,
and politically acceptable management approach can be chosen for each.
Page 7-41
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
The windrow method is
the most commonly
used technology for
composting yard
trimmings.
For communities with
large areas of sparsely
inhabited land available
to them, the "low-effort"
composting approach
may be the most
economical.
Preparing Yard Trimmings for Composting
If the drop-off or curbside collection program is managed to limit the inclu-
sion of undesirable materials, a minimum of effort is needed to prepare yard
trimmings for composting. Bags must be emptied or somehow punctured to
allow air to pass through. When contamination is a problem, special steps
must be taken to segregate and separately dispose of the undesirable materi-
als, which can be very time-consuming and costly.
Pre-shredding of yard trimmings can speed up the rate of decomposition.
However, besides increasing operational and equipment costs, pre-shredding will
also increase the oxygen demand of the windrow, and require more pile turning
or the use of forced aeration to avoid odor problems. For most yard trimmings
composting programs, pre-shredding is probably not necessary.
Applicable Composting Technologies
There are a variety of methods for processing yard trimmings. In deciding
which option or options to employ, the best approach is to try to adopt the
simplest method available.
The most common method for yard trimmings composting is the windrow.
With this method the material is placed in piles, which are turned periodically.
By carefully choosing the pile sizes, the rate of decomposition can be optimized.
Windrow composting works especially well with leaves, which break
down more slowly than grass clippings. This makes management easier and
the creation of nuisance conditions less of a problem. Where both leaves and
grass are to be composted in the same pile, it is suggested that leaves be com-
posted first and grass added later. Mixing the new grass with the already par-
tially composted leaves reduces the potential for odor problems to develop.
Grass decomposes quickly, sometimes even in the bag, and often will begin to
emit objectionable odors associated with anaerobic decomposition very
quickly unless the leaves are mixed with dryer, more stable materials as soon
as possible. A 1:1 weight ratio (3:1 to 5:1 by volume) of leaves to grass clip-
pings is desirable to provide an optimum carbon-to-nitrogen ratio, but a
higher ratio of leaves to grass may be necessary to reduce odor potential.
When the leaves and grass are collected also influences the ratio. If only
leaves are collected, supplemental nutrients may be necessary.
For communities with large areas of sparsely inhabited land available to
them, the "low-effort" composting approach may be the most economical. In the
low-effort approach, windrows are formed and usually turned only once a year.
Because infrequent or no turning creates anaerobic conditions in the windrow
pile, the low-effort approach can be associated with strong odors when the pile is
turned. If this approach is used, it is suggested that a large buffer zone be avail-
able. The low-effort approach usually takes about three years to make usable
compost. Its advantage is that it takes only a few days per year of the
community's personnel and equipment to operate the entire program.
Scientists at Rutgers University developed an effective method for com-
posting leaves. In this approach, windrows are made large enough to con-
serve the heat of decomposition, but not so large as to overheat the piles,
which adversely affects the microorganisms. The goal is to maintain an opti-
mal temperature in the pile throughout the composting time period.
The Rutgers process is to receive leaves in a staging area rather than dump-
ing them on the ground and immediately forming windrows. By using a staging
area, the materials are better distributed in the windrow pile. Contamination of
the feedstock can also be kept to a minimum. The leaves are formed into piles us-
ing a front-end loader, which moves the material from the staging area to the
composting area. One acre can handle about 3,000 cubic yards of material.
As the front-end loader breaks the masses of leaves apart in preparation for
creating the windrow, water is sprayed on the leaves. A rule of thumb is that 20
Page 7-42
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
After approximately a
month, the windrow
piles should be about
half their original size.
Facilities developed for
yard trimmings
composting must be
carefully planned.
gallons of water are required per cubic yard of leaves collected. The need to add
water can also be reduced by forming a flat or concave top on each windrow to
catch rain or other precipitation, which then filters down through the material.
Once each windrow is formed, the piles should be monitored for tem-
perature and moisture content. Any odor inside the windrow should be in-
vestigated to determine if an area of anaerobic decomposition is present in the
pile (the largest volume of leaves is generated in the fall).
After approximately a month, the windrow piles should be about half
their original size. Two piles should then be combined to form one pile of ap-
proximately the original size. Combining the piles will add needed oxygen to
the process, as well as help conserve heat during the oncoming colder
weather. The combined piles can be allowed to sit during the winter, but
should be turned as soon as practical in the spring. Additional turnings
throughout the spring and summer will enhance the rate of decomposition
and ensure that pathogens and weed seeds present in the compost pile are de-
stroyed. By late summer, the pile can be moved to the outer perimeter of the
compost site and allowed to cure until the following spring.
Another approach initiated by Ramsey County, Minnesota can be used
to compost both leaves and grass even during the cold winters in northern ar-
eas. First, windrows are built from leaves collected in the fall. The windrows
are constructed with flat tops to retain water, but no additional water is
added. The windrow is left in place during the winter to conserve the carbon.
During the following spring and summer, new materials, including about 25
percent by volume grass clippings, are mixed into the existing pile. The wind-
row is turned by rolling it over into an adjacent area where it remains until the
following spring, when it is rolled again and left for final curing. This com-
posting process takes about 18 months to produce a finished compost.
Aerated static pile composting is also a possibility for yard trimmings.
The advantage is that piles do not need to be moved, a premium where space
is limited. The effectiveness of forced aeration may, however, decline if air
channels develop in the pile. A similar approach is used in Maryland (Gouin,
1994). In the fall, the leaves are placed in windrows 6'-8' high and 10'-15'
wide at the base. The windrows are left undisturbed all winter long. In the
spring, as soon as the grass clippings are received, they are applied to the
windrows at a 1:1 ratio by volume and mixed. This is accomplished by plac-
ing a windrow of grass clippings, of equal size, adjacent to the windrow of
leaves and blending them together. This technique makes maximum use of all
the available carbon from the leaves and minimizes odor problems from the
composting of grass clippings. When there is an insufficient amount of leaves
to dilute the grass clippings, ground brush is used at the same 1:1 ratio by vol-
ume. However, when using ground brush as a bulking agent, the piles can be
recharged at 4 to 5 week intervals at the same 1:1 ratio (Gouin, 1994).
Facilities developed for yard trimmings composting must be carefully
planned. The facility should be designed to efficiently receive yard trimmings
from both large and small vehicles. Adequate space must be available for
composting windrowing, curing, and storage. An example layout for yard
trimmings composting is shown in Figure 7-7.
Processing for Markets
It may be necessary to shred and screen finished yard trimmings compost to satisfy
market specifications. Sticks, twigs, other woody materials, or stones may make the
compost unattractive to potential users. If the compost might be used in parks for a
highway project, additional shredding and screening may not be necessary.
Product Characteristics of Yard Trimmings Compost
Yard trimmings compost has fewer plant nutrients than municipal wastewater
treatment plant biosolids, livestock manure, or MSW-derived compost.
Page 7-43
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
The compost's
characteristics
should be
monitored.
Samples of the finished yard trimmings compost should be analyzed for plant
nutrients. On the other hand, heavy metal and pesticide contaminants are de-
tected less often or are at lower concentrations in yard trimmings compost
than in compost made from mixed MSW. Table 7-6 shows heavy metal con-
centrations found in two yard trimmings compost programs. The heavy metal
contents varied, but remained below levels of soil concentrations toxic to
plants, as well as below maximum levels established in Minnesota and New
York for co-composted MSW and municipal sludge biosolids. Pesticide con-
centrations are shown in Table 7-7. Studies by Roderique and Roderique
(1990) and Hegberg et al. (1991) indicate that under normal conditions heavy met-
als and pesticide residues detected in yard trimmings compost have generally
been insignificant. Periodic testing should be done to determine if unanticipated
concentrations of metals or pesticides are present in the finished compost.
Direct Land-Spreading of Yard Trimmings
Rather than compost yard trimmings, some communities and private haulers
are directly land-spreading yard trimmings with agricultural or specially
adapted distribution equipment. This approach bypasses the need to site and
Page 7-44
Figure 7-7
Example of Yard Trimmings Composting Facility Site Layout
Vegetative screening or fencing
Site Boundary—Additional Buffer Area May Be Provided
Source: University of Wisconsin-Madison Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center, 199
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
Table 7-6
Heavy Metals in Yard Trimmings
Heavy Metal
Cadmium (ppm)
Nickel
Lead
Copper
Chromium
Zinc
Cobalt
Manganese
Beryllium
Titanium(%)
Sodium
Ferrous
Aluminum
Croton Point,
New York
NDC
10.1
31.7
19.1
10.5
81.6
4.2
374.0
15.0
0.09
1.51
2.67
3.38
Compost
Montgomery Co.,
Maryland3
<0.5
NAd
102.7
35.5
33.6
153.3
NA
1,100.0
NA
NA
0.02
0.96
0.66
Standard13
10
200
250
1000
1000
2500
NSe
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
(a) Average of 11 samples 1984-1985.
(b) For pesticides, standards are derived from USDA tolerance levels for pesticided in food (40
CFR Chapter 1 , Part 1 80). For metals, standards are Class 1 Compost Criteria for mixed
MSW compost, 6 NYCRR Part 60-5-3.
(c) ND = not detectable (d) NA = not available (e) NS = no standards
Source: J. 0. Roderique and D. S. Roderique, 1990
Some communities
directly land-spread
yard trimmings.
operate composting facilities. The yard trimmings may be directly incorpo-
rated into the soil or left for later incorporation.
Direct land-spreading programs do have advantages, but they require care-
ful management for several reasons to avoid soil fertility problems if the
carbon:nitrogen ratio is too high. First, the available nitrogen in the soil may be-
come tied up in the yard trimmings decomposition process and not be available
to the crop. In addition, weed seeds, excessive runoff of organic materials, and
odors may pose problems if the spreading site is poorly managed. Some state
regulatory authorities may view spreading as a disposal practice and require spe-
cial permits. Research is underway to better characterize the special challenges
associated with higher-rate land-spreading of yard trimmings and the benefits of
introducing additional organic matter into the soil profile.
Source-Separated Organics Composting
Source-separated organics composting is a relatively new approach being
implemented, in part, to overcome some of the limitations of mixed MSW
composting. The definition of source-separated organics is somewhat vari-
able: food scraps are common to all definitions, yard trimmings may be in-
cluded, and some programs handle small quantities of paper.
Waste Collection
In source-separated composting programs, organics are collected separately
from other materials, such as recyclables and noncompostable material. The
source-separated material is collected from residences and selected businesses,
such as restaurants. Because these materials have a high moisture content,
special liquid-tight containers are necessary for transporting them.
In European programs, specially made metal or plastic containers are
provided to residents for their organic materials. A demonstration project in
Page 7-45
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Composting organic
materials that have been
kept separate from other
materials reduces
quality and production
problems.
Connecticut collected the materials in conventional garbage bags onto which the
residents placed brightly colored stickers indicating "Compostable Materials."
The stickers helped the collection vehicle operators identify the organics and also
helped remind the residents to carefully separate out their organic materials.
Given the innovative nature of this approach, special educational pro-
grams should accompany implementation. The primary advantage of source-
separated organics composting is the ability to produce compost that is essen-
tially free of contaminants. Accomplishing this depends on the conscientious
efforts of generators and an effective collection program.
Preparing Materials for Composting
Depending on the material types collected, shredding may be necessary to re-
duce particle size for the particular compost technology being used. A bulk-
ing agent such as wood chips may also be necessary.
Table 7-7
Pesticide Analysis of Portland, Oregon, Yard Trimmings Compost
Number Samples Above
Pesticide of Detection Meanc
Classification Residue Samples3 Limitb (mg/kg)
Chlorophenoxy
Herbicides
Chlorinated
Hydrocarbons
Organophosphates
Miscellaneous
2,4-D 16 0
2,4-DB 16 0
2,4,5-T 16 0
Silvex 1 6 0
MCPA 16 0
MCPP 16 0
Dichloroprop 14 0
Dicamba 16 0
Pentachlorphenal 1 4 9
Chlordane 19 17
DDE 14 3
DDT 8 0
opDDT 14 2
ppDDT 14 4
Aldrin 1 6 1
Endrin 16 0
Lindane 16 0
Malathion 1 4 0
Parathion 1 4 0
Diazinon 14 0
Dursban 1 5 1
Dieldrin 13 1
Trifluralin 10 Oe
Dalapon 4 0
Dinoseb 5 1
Casoron 8 Oe
PCBs 8 0
NDd
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.229
0.187
0.011
ND
0.005
0.016
0.007
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.039
0.019
-
ND
0.129
-
ND
(a) The number of samples is the combined total for 2 sources of compost sampled in June and
July and October 1 989. The number of samples taken was not uniform (mostly 2 per period
and 1 per period per source in 1 989).
(b) The minimum detection
(d) Not detectable (ND) (e
limit is 0.001 ppm for pesticides and 0.01
Residue detected but not measurable
Range0
(mg/kg)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0.001-0.53
0.063-0.370
0.005-0.019
-
0.004-0.006
0.002-0.035
0.007
-
-
_
-
-
0.039
0.019
-
-
0.129
-
-
October 1988; April,
per source in 1 988
ppm for PCBs. (c) Dry basis
Source: Hegberg et al., 1991
Page 7-46
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
New technologies are
becoming available for
source-separated
organics composting.
Applicable Composting Technologies
Each of the technologies applicable to mixed MSW composting is also appro-
priate for source-separated organics. Special attention, however, must be
given to nutrient balances. In-vessel systems with windrow or aerated static
pile for curing are the most commonly used technologies. Methods for apply-
ing anaerobic digestion technology to this type of material are currently under
study (Tchobanogous, 1993). Researchers have found that using an anaerobic
digester followed by an aerobic digester composted almost all the biodegrad-
able fraction of the organic matter in the feedstock.
Processing for Markets
In one Connecticut study, source-separated organics compost was screened twice:
first after agitated bay composting and a second time after windrow curing (see
Figure 7-8). Approximately 4 percent of the collected material was screened out
by the first 2-inch screen and defined as non-compostable. The remaining cured
compost was then passed over a 3/8-inch screen. Approximately 12 percent of
this material was retained on the second screen and sent to a landfill. The dis-
carded material included wood chips, brush, and some plastic film.
Product Characteristics of Source-Separated Organics
Compost
Published studies to date of cured compost have found heavy metals and
other chemicals to be in concentrations far below levels of concern. The
chemical analysis is summarized in Table 7-8, which also shows heavy metal
concentration in a mixed MSW compost for comparison.
Mixed MSW Composting Systems
Mixed MSW composting
has been successful in a
number of communities
but has failed in several
others.
Because a significant portion of residential and commercial solid waste is
compostable, MSW composting programs can divert a substantial portion of a
community's waste stream from land disposal. Composting, which requires
sophisticated technology and specially designed facilities, has been success-
fully implemented in a number of communities but has failed, with rather dire
financial repercussions, in several others.
Collection
The source of feedstock for a mixed MSW composter is usually conventionally
collected residential and commercial solid waste. The type of collection con-
tainer does not significantly impact the mixed MSW composting system, but
bags must be opened before or during the process. A variety of materials that
must be removed by screens later enter the composter.
The quality of the feedstock and consequently the compost product is en-
hanced when potential contaminants are segregated from the input stream. For
example, a recycling program that diverts glass reduces the amount of glass in the
compost. A program for source segregating household hazardous wastes has
similar benefits. Careful supervision of materials collected from commercial fa-
cilities may forestall entry of potential contaminants from those sources.
Preparing Materials for Composting
As a first step a mechanical device may open the garbage bags. After the bags
are opened some composting systems have conveyor lines, which move the
materials past workers who manually remove recyclables. It is also inspected
to detect undesirable materials. The waste is then shredded. This is usually
Page 7-47
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Waste preparation is a
critical step.
accomplished by a low-speed shredder or by the grinding action that occurs in
the first stage of an in-vessel composter.
At some mixed MSW composting facilities the feedstock, after shred-
ding, is more extensively processed through screens and trommels to segre-
gate plastics, dirt, and other materials that are not suitable for composting.
Magnetic and eddy current separation can be used to recover ferrous and alu-
minum. The recent trend appears to more aggressively process the waste
stream before composting to improve its quality and to capture recyclables.
Applicable Composting Technologies
Typically, a two-stage process is used for composting mixed MSW. The first
stage promotes rapid stabilization of the feedstock and the second stage
achieves final curing. Aerated static pile, in-vessel, or anaerobic processes are
Figure 7-8
Example of Source-Separated Organics Composter Material Flow and Mass Balance
Visual Inspection
Source-Separated Organics -
16,000 Ib
Non-Compostable Material
Tub Grinder With
4-Inch Screen
Water
Yard Trimmings — added to equal 25%
of total feedstock
Moisture Content 50%
Agitated Bay Composter —
30 days processing time
110 Ib removed (0.6% of source separated organics)
Water
3/8-Inch Screen
12% Screen Rejects
Windrow Curing — 42 days
Experimental Additional Windrow
Curing —14 days
I
Cured Compost
approximately 37 cu. yd.
Source: Wet Bag Compost Demonstration Project, Greenwich and Fairfield, Connecticut, 1993
To Landfill —
Approximately 640 Ibs.
Page 7-48
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
Compare the various
technologies before
selecting a mixed MSW
composting system.
usually the first stage, and turned windrow or aerated static pile is the second-
stage curing technology. The combination of technologies depends on the
proprietary process selected, space considerations, and operating preferences.
No single technology has an outright advantage over another but recent
experience has shown that a system must be carefully developed and operated
to achieve success. Several large mixed MSW composting facilities have
closed as result of operational problems, principally odors. Often, inadequate
financial support is a contributing factor, as it precludes solving odor and
other problems.
Aerated static piles are best suited to sites which have suitable land
available for the piles and a buffer area. The shredded MSW is placed in piles
that are 5 to 8 feet high and 10 to 16 feet wide. A critical design factor is to
achieve uniform distribution of air through the length of the pile. A 6 inch
cover of cured compost is initially placed over the pile to control odors. In the
negative pressure mode, air is drawn into the pile by blowers that then dis-
charge into a biofilter of cured compost. The cured compost acts as an odor
filter. A positive pressure aeration system involves blowing air into the com-
post pile. This approach is simpler to set up but is more susceptible to odor
problems. The pile's internal temperature is monitored to assess process per-
formance. Compost is ready for final curing in 6 to 12 weeks.
Table 7-8
Examples of Inorganic Constituents in Compost
Inorganic
Constituents
(ppm)
Wet-Bag
Compost3
Source Separated
Organicsb
Mixed MSWC
Regulated Elements
Arsenic 2.1
Cadmium 1.2 0.8
Chromium 20.0 29.0
Copper 173.0 43.0
Lead 92.0 76.0
Mercury 1.7 0.2
Molybdenum <22.0
Nickel 17.0 7.0 110.0
Selenium <1.0
Zinc 395.0 235.0 1700.0
Other Elements
Aluminum 5700.0
Antimony <140.0
Barium 172.0
Beryllium 0.26
Boron <29.0
Calcium 19000.0
Chloride 4400.0
Cyanide <1.0
Iron 9600.0
Magnesium 3600.0
Manganese 440.0
Silver <6.0
Sodium 1800.0
Titanium 230.0
Sources: (a) D. Stilwell, 1993 (b) U. Krogmann, 1988 (c) J. Oosthnoek and J. P. N. Smit, 1987
Page 7-49
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Several alternative configurations are available for the aerated static pile.
The pile may be periodically turned to ensure more uniform compost production.
Feedstock placed in piles may be located between retaining walls. Air is distrib-
uted through the floor and the stabilizing compost is periodically agitated.
Currently the most common type of in-vessel systems are an inclined rotat-
ing drum into which MSW is loaded in time periods ranging from every few min-
utes to hours. The MSW may not have been previously shredded depending on
the particular proprietary process being used. The waste moves gradually down
the inclined drum towards a discharge hatch. The hatch, when open, allows com-
post to be discharged. The detention time in the drum ranges from 3 to 15 days.
After the mixed MSW compost exits the drum it may be screened to remove large
objects that did not biologically decompose or were not mechanically broken
down in the drum. The material passing through the screens is ready for further
composting or final curing if the drum has a long detention time. The waste re-
tained by the screens is usually landfilled. A material flow and mass balance for
an in-vessel composter is shown in Figure 7-9. Other configurations of in-vessel
systems are produced by various manufacturers. Each design should be carefully
evaluated when selecting equipment.
Odor problems occurring with aerated static pile and in-vessel mixed
MSW composting have been the principle operating problem. Operating con-
trols must be carefully managed to insure that aerobic conditions are main-
tained throughout the entire system. Various types of odor control equipment
have been installed to filter or mask odors. An experienced technical special-
ist should be consulted for incorporating odor control methods in the process.
Figure 7-9
Example of Mixed MSW Composter Material Flow and Mass Balance
2000 Pounds of Mixed MSW
(unprocessed)
'All weights dry basis.
14 Pounds of Biosolids
389 Ib
1/2 -Inch screen
Feedstock
Mixed MSW
Biosolids
Total
Source: Razvi and Gildersleeve, 1992
Cured Compost
328 Ibs
Output
Cured Compost
Landfilled Residue
Weight Lost to Atmosphere
Total
To Landfill
867 Ibs
328 Ibs
867
819
16 %
43
41
"100
Page 7-50
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
Anaerobic processes have been studied extensively for mixed MSW but
there is only limited full-scale operating experience. Higher capital costs and op-
erating problems during testing appear to be the principle factors that have
slowed using anaerobic processes for mixed MSW. These systems are totally en-
closed and therefore less subject to odor problems than aerobic systems. Methane
is produced as a by-product so that the net energy balance is positive.
Once the feedstock has completed first-stage composting it is ready to be
cured. Curing is a continuation of the composting biological process but at a
slower rate and is less equipment- and cost-intensive. Windrows that are peri-
odically turned, aerated static piles, or a combination of the two, are the nor-
mal curing method. Curing usually takes 3 to 9 months.
Processing for Markets
When curing is completed, the mixed MSW compost is ready for final processing.
This usually involves a one- or two-stage final screening to remove inert materials
and possibly an intermediate grinding step to reduce particle size. The final pro-
cessing depends greatly on the needs and specifications of the compost users.
Product Characteristics of Mixed MSW Compost
In order to market mixed MSW compost to many end users, concerns about
potential threats to plants, livestock, wildlife, and humans must be addressed.
One of the primary concerns is the presence of heavy metal compounds (par-
ticularly lead) and toxic organic compounds in the MSW compost product. To
date, where problems have occurred with mixed MSW compost, they have re-
sulted from immature composts, not metals and toxic organics (Chaney and
Ryan, 1992; Walker and O'Donnell, 1991). Manganese deficiency in soil and
boron phytotoxity as a result of mixed MSW compost application can be po-
tential problems. Measures, including further separation by generators or at
the facility, can be taken to prevent problems and produce a high quality com-
post. Figure 7-10 shows the variations in lead concentrations which have been re-
ported in different types of compost. The influence of source separation on lead
content is readily apparent. The composition of mixed MSW compost is influ-
enced by feedstock characteristics, collection method, processing steps, and
composter operating procedures.
The composition of
mixed MSW compost is
influenced by feedstock
characteristics,
collection methods,
processing steps, and
composter operating
procedures.
Figure 7-10
Lead Concentrations in Various Types
1000 ^
800 _
Lead 600
mg/kg
(ppm) _
400 _
200 _
0 _
Of
Compost
[JJIMI
Source Wet/
Separated Dry
Source: T. Richard and P. Woodbury, 1993
-
-
r-i
-
-
-
Mixed MSW Mixed MSW Final
Central Screen
Separation
Page 7-51
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Testing compost for chemical constituents must be carefully planned and
executed. Wide variations in metal concentrations within the same compost
pile have been reported. Woodbury and Breslin (1993) found only small
variations in copper concentration at one compost facility. However, ten
samples collected at a second facility had copper concentrations ranging from
300 to 1180 parts per million. Sampling and testing programs for mixed MSW
compost must be carefully planned and executed. The program must recog-
nize the inherent variations that will influence test results. See Cornell Waste
Management Institute MSW Composting Fact Sheet #7, "Key Aspects of Com-
post Quality Assurance," for more detailed information regarding sampling
and testing protocols.
OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS AND CONCERNS
Housekeeping
The appearance of the compost facility should be appealing from the outside.
Any wind-blown paper near the site should be picked up routinely. Streets,
parking areas, and weighing areas should be free of dust and mud. Use as
much compost as needed to provide landscaping for the site.
Indoors, the floors and equipment should be cleaned periodically and
maintained in a dust-free manner. Areas where compost or other recovered
materials are likely to spill should be cleaned immediately when spills occur.
The cause of the spill should be taken care of immediately.
Leachate
Poor water management at
a compost site can lead to
water pollution and odor
problems.
Leachate is the free liquid that has been in contact with compost materials and
released during the composting process. Even well-managed composting op-
erations will generate small quantities of leachate. Leachate pools are a result
of poor housekeeping and may act as a breeding place for flies, mosquitoes,
and odors. Leachate can also contaminate ground- and surface-water with ex-
cess nitrogen and sometimes other contaminants. For these reasons, leachate
must be contained and treated. It is advisable for the composting facility de-
sign to include a paved floor and outdoor paved area equipped with drains
leading to a leachate collection tank. Leachate may be transported and treated
at a wastewater treatment plant or mixed as a liquid source with the incoming
material. Leachate may contain pathogens, and therefore must not be re-
turned to material that has been through the pathogen destruction stage.
Piles left outdoors (without a roof) will be exposed to rain, which will
generate leachate. Attempts must be made to minimize leachate production
by diverting any surface-water runoff from the up-slope side of the piles. An-
other method is to shape the peak of the pile concave, so the rain water will
soak into the pile rather than shed off the pile.
Odor and Dust Control
Offensive odors may be generated during the active stage of composting. The in-
tensity of odors increases if composting conditions are not controlled within nar-
row tolerance limits from the ideal. Process air should be routed through filters,
deodorizers, or scrubbers before it is exhausted to the atmosphere. If there are
odors, the specific source and type of odor should be identified; this may be diffi-
cult to do with mixed MSW. Masking agents are specific to certain types of odors
and have worked with a limited degree of success. Scrubbers are efficient in re-
moving a significant portion of odors, but they do not remove all odors.
Page 7-52
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
Odor and dust control
require careful attention
to a number of
operational factors.
The use of "biofilters" in composting to treat odorous compounds and
potential air pollutants is expanding. Biofiltration involves passing odorous
gases through a filtration medium such as finished compost, soil, or sand. As
the gases pass through the medium, two removal mechanisms occur simulta-
neously: adsorption/absorption and biooxidation (Naylor et al. 1988, Helmer,
1974). The biofilter medium acts as a nutrient supply for microorganisms that
biooxidize the biodegradable constituents of odorous gases.
The degree of odor control needed depends in part on the facility's prox-
imity to residences, businesses, schools, etc. For example, some facilities lo-
cated in remote areas have operated without any odor control devices.
Odors can also be generated if unprocessed or processed feedstock con-
taining putrescible materials has been stored for an extended period. Every
attempt should be made to process the feedstock as soon as possible after it is
received, while it is in optimal condition for composting.
Air from the tipping floor and material processing and separation areas
and exhaust air from the actively composting materials should be captured
and treated or diluted with large amounts of fresh air before it is dispersed
into the atmosphere. Exhaust air from composting materials is generally
warm and almost always contains large amounts of moisture. This air may be
corrosive and could affect equipment and buildings. During winter months, if
ambient temperatures are cool, exhaust gases can fog up the work area, affect-
ing visibility; the resulting condensate can affect the electrical system. This is
common in northern climates where piles are placed indoors and turned.
The ventilation system must be able to remove the humidity and dust
from the air. Adequate fresh air must also be brought into the buildings
where employees are working. In such work areas, the air quality should
meet minimum federal standards for indoor air quality.
In addition, operators should be aware of Aspergillus fumigatus, a fungus
naturally present in decaying organic matter. It will colonize on feedstocks at
composting facilities. Spores from the fungus can cause health problems for
some workers, particularly if conditions are dry and dusty. Workers suscep-
tible to respiratory problems or with impaired immune systems are not good
candidates for working in composting facilities.
Siting a facility at a remote location so as to provide a large buffer zone be-
tween the composting facility and any residents should help alleviate odor-re-
lated complaints.
Personnel
Composting facility personnel are responsible for operating the plant efficiently
and safely. Personnel must be trained so they understand all aspects of the com-
posting process. Employees should appreciate the public relations impact the fa-
cility may have, and they should be taught to portray a positive image at all times.
Employees should be trained in safety, maintenance, monitoring, and record
keeping at the facility. Employees should also understand the environmental im-
pacts of the finished compost and liquid/gas release to the atmosphere.
Monitoring
Routine testing and monitoring is an essential part of any composting operation.
Monitoring the composting process provides information necessary to maintain a
high-quality operation. At a minimum the following should be monitored:
• compost mass temperatures
• oxygen concentrations in the compost mass
• moisture content
• particle size
Page 7-53
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
maturity of the compost
PH
soluble salts
ammonia
organic and volatile materials content.
Record Keeping
Good record keeping
can result in better
decision making in the
long run.
Record keeping is an essential part of any operation. Maintaining detailed
records provides a historical record of the operation and the improvements made
over the years. Good records also provide a basis for building political support.
Periodically evaluating records helps identify where improvements are needed
and provides information necessary for making the operation more efficient.
Records are the basis for quality control, safety, and minimizing down time in any
operation. Records should be kept on employee safety training, facility and em-
ployee safety procedures, and health monitoring at the facility.
The importance of keeping good records should be understood by all
employees. They should be trained in accurate record-keeping methods and
should know that they will be held accountable for keeping accurate records.
At a minimum the following records should be maintained:
• incoming materials (solid and liquid) weights and types
• recyclables recovered and shipped
• noncompostable fraction recovered and shipped to landfill
• amount of compost made/shipped in different forms (buyer/client lists)
• amount of residence time required to make the compost (time, material
received, placed into windrows, turning frequency, etc.)
• inventory of supplies/equipment
• maintenance record of equipment
• routine monitoring data
• marketing and distribution
• permits and approvals
• monitoring and testing
• accidents
• personnel (training, evaluation, health)
• expenses and revenues
• major problems and how they were corrected
• complaints and how they were resolved
• public information and education activities
• health and safety training, procedures, and precautions.
Public Information
Objective, factual
information should be
continuously distributed
to the public.
Open, positive, communication with community leaders and neighbors should be
ongoing. Good communication is critical if there is a problem at the site. Bro-
chures describing the facility and its operations should be printed and distributed
throughout the community. Neighbors, civic organizations, and school groups
should be invited to take educational tours of the facility. Well-trained employees
who understand the facility and its impact on the community can also contribute
to public relations.
Page 7-54
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
To ensure good relations, the public should be periodically informed of
the types of materials accepted, those that are not accepted, and the collection
schedules. If the finished compost is to be made available for public distribu-
tion, a distribution policy (costs, potential uses, when and where to pickup,
risks, etc.) should be developed and publicized in the community. A well-
planned and executed public information program can build significant sup-
port for the facility. The community needs to be periodically reminded that
composting is an effective management tool and that having such a facility is
evidence that the community is progressive and environmentally conscious.
Complaint Response Procedure
Complaints should be
promptly responded to.
A complaint and response procedure must be developed. For all complaints,
the names, time, date, nature of complaint, and the response made by facility
personnel should be recorded. Any action taken must be communicated to
the person complaining and recorded.
The most common complaint is about odors. These complaints normally
come from those most likely to be exposed—neighbors. Individuals' sensitiv-
ity and tolerances to odor varies and some neighbors may call more frequently
than others. Take all complaints seriously and attempt to resolve the situation
as soon as possible after the complaint.
FACILITY SITING
One of the most important issues in selecting a composting site is its potential
to generate odors. Odors from a facility can be strong enough to cause public
opposition. When odors become a problem, public pressure may be intense
enough to force the facility to close.
Every attempt should be made to minimize the impact of odors to local
residents. It is best to avoid sites that may be located close to populated areas
of a community. A thorough evaluation of the microclimatology (local
weather conditions such as prevailing wind direction) of a potential site is
critical to avoid future complaints from neighbors. Odor control devices
should be installed, but their installation may add significantly to costs, and
alone may not guarantee complete odor removal.
Other nearby odor sources should be evaluated. Locating a composting
facility in a comparable land use zone such as at a landfill or wastewater treat-
ment plant site may be one option. The neighboring land use may somewhat
influence the sizing of the odor control equipment installed at the composting
facility. In addition, zoning requirements may allow the composting facility
and landfill wastewater treatment plant to be sited together.
Construction of a composting facility at an existing landfill has its ben-
efits. One of the major advantages is the savings in transportation costs for the
noncompostable and nonrecyclable wastes. A second advantage is that the
difficulty of acquiring a site is significantly reduced. In addition, the neigh-
bors are accustomed to the traffic patterns of the waste hauling trucks.
If composting biosolids is a project objective, locating the facility at the
wastewater treatment plant should be considered. If a composting facility should
be sited independent from an existing wastewater treatment facility, an isolated
site where odors may not cause problems should be seriously considered. Other
considerations for siting a composting facility include the following:
Many factors must be
considered when
selecting a
composting site.
potential for release of contaminants to surface and ground waters
potential for airborne dissemination of contaminants (dust, litter, spores, etc.)
distance from where feedstock materials were generated to the compost
facility
Page 7-55
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
The size of the site
needed will depend on
the composting system
selected.
• distance to compost markets
• distance to landfill
• traffic patterns/roads to and from the facility
• buffer zones for visual/noise screening and odor dilution
• availability of appropriate utilities
• appropriate soil types and geotechnical conditions
• drainage patterns
• flood hazard
• past ownership and usage
• zoning limitations
• room for future expansion of the facility
• anticipated growth and development near the facility.
The size of the site needed will depend on the composting system selected. For
example, an in-vessel system requires less land space than a static pile or windrow sys-
tem. Site size will also depend on the amount of storage that will be provided. At a
minimum four months of storage space must be available at the site. Sizing should be
based on projections of anticipated feedstocks and increase in generation of existing
feedstocks. A large buffer zone should be planned around the facility to minimize
odor-related complaints from neighbors.
Public participation is crucial in the siting and planning process. Encour-
aging the public to participate during the planning process is both time-con-
suming and expensive. In the long run public participation will pay off be-
cause it will provide greater political support for the project, help promote in-
terest in the compost product, and help develop local markets, which in turn will
reduce transportation costs. In addition, as participants in the program, local resi-
dents may tolerate and even overlook some minor problems in the future.
GOVERNMENT APPROVALS, PERMITS, AND ORDINANCES
Composting facilities may need approvals/permits from the state before they
can begin operating. The requirements for permitting composting facilities
may vary among states. Submittal requirements as a prerequisite for permit-
ting may include detailed facility design, operating plans, a description of in-
coming materials, the amount and types of residue to be generated in the
plant, monitoring plans, potential environmental releases, landfills to be used,
potential markets for the compost, etc.
State agencies may also issue public notices offering interested citizens
an opportunity to have input and comment relative to the request for permit.
In addition to a state-level permit, there may be additional local-level permits
required, such as building permits, zoning variances, or special land use.
Sometimes new ordinances are required for compost facility siting, op-
eration, and management. These ordinances may focus on centralized com-
munity yard trimmings facilities, mixed MSW composting facilities. Flow
control agreements may be required for the facility to operate with a mini-
mum amount of waste (see Chapter 3 for a discussion of flow control). Supply
agreements should broadly define the types of feedstocks that will be accepted
and the service area from which they will be accepted.
Make a list of necessary
permits and approvals
before starting a
compost facility
development project.
PROJECT FINANCING
Obtaining the necessary financing is an integral part of planning a composting
project. The most common methods of financing a project are through bond
Page 7-56
-------
CHAPTER?: COMPOSTING
sales or bank loans. A financing professional should be consulted for advice
and assistance to coordinate necessary transactions and obtain favorable inter-
A variety of financing est rates and payment terms. Some communities have budgeted for and used
methods may be ^ax revenues to construct a composting facility. In such cases project construc-
available. tjon j-oyij ^e Spread over two or more years. Approval of any financing may
be contingent on review of a detailed budget for the construction and opera-
tion of the facility, all necessary regulatory approvals, and details of marketing
arrangements for the compost.
REFERENCES
Apotheker, Steve. 1993. Resource Recycling. April 1993.
Buhr, A.R., McClure, T., Slivka, and R. Albrecht. 1993. "Compost Supply and
Demand," BioCycle (January).
Chaney, R. L. and J. Ryan. 1992. "Heavy Metals and Toxic Organic Pollutants
in MSW Composts," cited in Hoitnik et al., eds. Proceedings of the
International Composting Research Symposium (in press).
Chen, Yona and Yoseph Inbar. 1993. "Chemical and Spectorscopical Analyses
of Organic Matter Transformations During Composting in Relation to
Compost Maturity," Science and Engineering of Composting, Renaissance
Publications, Worthington, Ohio.
Composting Council. 1992. Potential U.S. Applications for Compost The Composting
Council, 114 S.Pitt St., Alexandria, VA 22314. Phone: 800/457-4474.
Dickson, et al. 1991. Composting to Reduce the Waste Stream (NRAES-43). This
publication is available from NRAES, Cooperative Extension, 152 Riley-Robb
Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853-5701, (607) 255-7654.
Dane County, University of Wisconsin- Extension, Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources, and Dane County Public Works. 1992. Home
Composting Handbook.
Gould, Mark, et al. 1992. "Source Separation and Composting of Organic
Municipal Solid Waste," Resource RecycJing, July 1992.
Hammer, S. 1992. "Garbage In/Garbage Out: A Hard Look at Mixed MSW
Composting," Resource RecycJing (February).
Hegberg, B.A., W.H. Hallenbeck, G.R. Brenniman, and R.A. Wadden. 1991.
"Setting Standards for Yard Waste Compost," Biocyde. February.
Helmer, R. 1974. "Desodorierung von geruchsbeladener abuft in bodenfiltern.
Gesundheits-Ingenieur 95(1):21. As cited in Williams and Miller. 1992.
"Odor Control Using Biofilters, Part I," BioCyde (October).
Hoitink H.A.J., M.J. Boehm and Y. Hadar. "Mechanisms of Suppression of
Soilborne Plant Pathogens in Compost- Amended Substrates," Science and
Engineering of Composting, Renaissance Publications, Worthington, Ohio.
Inbar Y., Y. Chen, Y. Hadar, and H.A.J. Hoitink. 1990. "New Approaches to
Compost Maturity," BioCycJe (December).
Jewell, W. J. 1979. "Future Trends in Digester Design," in D. A. Stafford et al.
ed., Proceedings of the First Internationa] Symposium on Anaerobic Digestion.
Cardiff, Wales. London: Applied Science Publishers, Ltd.
Jewell, W.J., R.J. Cummings, and B. K. Richards. 1993. "Methane
Fermentation of Energy Crops: Maximum Conversion Kinetics and In
Situ Biogas Purification." Biomass and Bioenergy 5 (4) .
Page 7-57
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Kayhanian, M. and G. Tchobanoglous. 1992. "Pilot Investigations of an
Innovative Two-Stage Anaerobic Digestion and Aerobic Composting
Process for the Recovery of Energy and Compost from the Organic
Fraction of MSW," paper presented at the International Symposium on
Anaerobic Digestion of Solid Waste, Venice, Italy, April 15-17.
Knoop, W. and B. Whitney. 1993. Don't Bag It Lawn Care Guide. Texas
Agricultural Extension Service, 17360 Colt Road, Dallas, TX 75252.
Krogmann, Uta. 1988. "Separate Collection and Composting of Putrescible
Municipal Solid Waste in W. Germany," ISWA Proceedings, Copenhagen.
LaGasse, R. C. 1992. "Marketing Organic Soil Products," BioCycle (March).
Logsdon, Gene. 1989. " New Sense of Quality Comes to Compost," BioCycle (December).
Naylor, L.M., G.A. Kuter, and P.J. Gormsen. 1988. "Biofilters for Odor
Control: the Scientific Basis," Compost Facts. Hampton, NH:International
Process Systems, Inc.
Oosthnoek, J. and J.P.N. Smit. 1987. "Future of Composting in the
Netherlands," Biocycle 0uly).
Pfeffer, J. T. and J. C. Liebman. 1976. "Energy from Refuse by Bioconversion,
Fermentation and Residue Disposal Processes," Resource Recovery and
Conservation.
Razvi, Aga S. and Melissa Gildersleeve. 1992. Physical/Chemical Mass Balance
During Composting at the Portage, Wisconsin Facility. Solid Waste
Management Center, College of Natural Resources, University of
Wisconsin-Stevens Point.
Richard, T.L. 1992. "The Key to Successful MSW Compost Marketing,"
BioCycle (April).
Richard, T. L. and P. Woodbury. 1993. Strategies for Separating Contaminants
from Municipal SoJid Waste. MSW Composting Fact Sheet No. 3. Cornell
Waste Management Institute.
Richards, B.K., R.J. Cummings, W.J. Jewell, F.G. Herndon, and W.J. Jewell.
1991. "High Solids Anaerobic Methane Fermentation of Sorghum and
Cellulose." Biomass and Bioenergy. 1(1): 47-53.
Richards, B.K., R.J. Cummings, W.J. Jewell, and T.E. White. 1991. "Methods
for Kinetic Analysis of Methane Fermentation in High Solids Biomass
Digesters." Biomass and Bioenergy. 1(2): 65-73.
Richards, B.K., R.J. Cummings, and W.J. Jewell. 1991. "High Rate Low Solid
Anaerobic Methane Fermentation of Sorghum, corn and Cellulose."
Biomass and Bioenergy. 1 (5): 249-260.
Roulac, J. and M. Pedersen. 1993. "Home Composting Heats Up," Resource
Recycling (April).
Rynk R. et al. 1992. On Farm Composting Handbook. Northeast Regional
Agricultural Engineering Service. Available from NRAES, Cooperative
Extension, 152 Riley-Robb Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853-5701, (607) 255-7654.
Slivka, D.C.; T.A. McClure; A.R. Buhr; and R. Albrecht. 1992. "Compost:
National Supply and Demand Potential," Biomass and Bioenergy.
Stilwell, D. 1993. Compost Science and Utilization. Connecticut Agricultural
Experiment Station (in press).
Walker, J. M. and M.J. O'Donnell. 1991. "Comparative Assessment of MSW
Compost Characteristics," BioCycJe (August).
Woodbury P. and V. Breslin. 1993. Key Aspects of Compost Quality Assurance.
MSW Composting Fact Sheet No. 7. Cornell Waste Management Institute.
Wujcik, W.J. and W.J. Jewell. 1980. "Dry Anaerobic Fermentation."
Biotechnology and Bioengineering Symposium. No. 10, pp. 43-65.
Page 7-58
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
444444444444444444.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.4.
A decision many communities face is determining whether a waste-to-
energy (WTE) system might be a feasible component of their
integrated solid waste management program. The amount of waste
combusted or expected to be handled by combustion systems through
the year 2000 is shown in Table 8-1.
For some communities, developing a WTE project can be a
lengthy and expensive process that requires making decisions
which have long-term consequences. It is necessary, therefore, to
follow a step-by-step process for evaluating the feasibility of
constructing and operating a WTE facility. It is also crucial to
acquire adequate information to understand the legal, technical,
financial, and regulatory issues that must be addressed when
considering a WTE system. This chapter describes the issues that
communities should consider when evaluating the feasibility and
appropriateness of including a WTE facility as part of their
integrated solid waste management plan.
fable 8-1
Generation, Recovery, Combustion, and Disposal of Municipal Solid Waste, 1993 and 2000 (At
a 30 Percent Recovery Scenario in 2000; In thousands of tons and percent of total generation)
Thousands of tons
1993 2000
% of generation
1993 2000
Generation
206,940
217,750
100.0%
100.0%
Recovery for
Recycling
Recovery for
Composting*
Total Materials Recovery
38,490
6,500
44,990
54,245
11,175
65,420
18.6%
3.1%
21.7%
24.9%
5.1%
30.0%
Discards after Recovery
161,950
152,330
70.0%
Combustion**
32,920
34,000
15.9%
15.6%
Landfill, Other
Disposal
62.4%
54.3%
* Composting of yard trimmings and food wastes. Does not include backyard composting.
" Combustion of MSW in mass-burn or refuse-derived form, incineration without energy recovery, and combustion with energy
recovery of source-separated materials in MSW.
Note: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding
Sources: USEPA. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1994 Update
From: Decision Maker's Guide to Solid Waste Management, Volume II, (EPA 530-R-95-023), 1995. Project Co-Directors: Philip R.
O'Leary and Patrick W. Walsh, Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison/Extension. This
document was supported in part by the Office of Solid Waste (5306), Municipal and Industrial Solid Waste Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency under grant number CX-817119-01. The material in this document has been subject to Agency technical and policy
review and approved for publication as an EPA report. Mention of trade names, products, or services does not convey, and should not
be interpreted as conveying, official EPA approval, endorsement, or recommendation.
Page 8-1
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
Evaluate the project's
usefulness and
feasibility.
(p. 8-7)
Developing a WTE (Waste-to-Energy) project is often a lengthy and expensive pro-
cess, lasting several years. It is crucial to carefully evaluate whether WTE is appropri-
ate for your community.
Figure 8-1 diagrams a systematic evaluation and development procedure for commu-
nities to follow.
Establishing a project
development team
should be the first
step.
(p. 8-8)
The technological, legal and other complexities involved in developing a WTE facility
will require a range of professional expertise over an extended time. Creating a
project development team in the initial stage is crucial. The team should include at
least the following:
project engineer
financial advisor
attorney
operator
regulatory officials.
Is WTE right To determine if an energy recovery facility is feasible and desirable for your commu-
foryour nity, the following questions must be answered. If the answer is "no" to even one,
community? WTE will probably not be appropriate.
(P1 8-9) • Is the waste stream sufficient after waste reduction, composting, recycling, etc.
are considered? Will this be true for the foreseeable future?
Is there a buyer for the energy to be produced?
Is there strong political support for a WTE facility?
What area will the
facility serve?
(p. 8-12)
The governmental body planning the WTE system should determine the region it will
serve. The amount of waste generated in an area will be a determining factor. The
area may include one or more municipalities, a single county, or several counties. A
study can determine which of several possibilities is most appropriate. Some ex-
amples include the following:
building one large facility serving the entire region
building several facilities located strategically to serve the entire region
constructing one or more units to serve only the region's more populated areas.
WTE facilities must produce
significant income.
(p. 8-12)
WTE facilities have high capital and operating costs. This means finding buyers >
ing and able to sign long-term contracts for purchasing energy or power.
Finding buyers
requires marketing
initiative.
(p. 8-16)
Page 8-2
To successfully market WTE energy requires knowledge of buyers' needs and the
ability to convince potential buyers that the facility will be able to meet their needs.
Marketers must consider these three factors crucial to all buyers: price, service and
schedule, and reliability of energy supply.
-------
CHAPTERS: COMBUSTION
Several WTE
technology options
are available.
(p. 8-17 — 8-27)
Modular incinerators (15-100 tons-per-day): These are usually factory-
assembled units consisting of a refractory-lined furnace and waste heat boiler,
both of which can be preassembled and shipped to the construction site.
Capacity is increased by adding units.
Mass-burning systems (200-750 tons-per-day per unit): Mass-burn systems
usually consist of a reciprocating grate combustion system, refractory-lining on the
bottom four feet, and water-walled steam generator. These systems produce a
higher quality of steam (pressure and temperature) than modular systems.
Refuse-derived fuel (RDF) systems: Two types of RDF systems are currently
used. Shred-and-burn systems require minimal processing and removal of
noncombustibles; and simplified process systems, which remove a significant
portion of the noncombustibles.
Controlling emissions
is a crucial concern.
(p. 8-28 — 8-31)
WTE technology has recently seen tremendous improvements in emission controls.
This chapter discusses controls for the following emissions:
volatile organics
acid gas
particulates
secondary volatile organics and mercury.
CEM equipment is
required for all new
facilities.
(p. 8-31)
CEM (Continuous Emission Monitoring) systems monitor stack emissions of NOx,
carbon monoxide, oxygen, particulate via opacity meters, and acid gases via moni-
toring sulfur dioxide. Gas temperatures are also monitored to control the scrubber
process and to ensure baghouse safety.
Facilities must acquire the
appropriate permits and
licenses.
(p. 8-31 —8-35)
Permitting and licensing are complex technical processes. Ensuring that the facility is
successfully permitted requires enlisting an experienced and qualified consulting firm
to prepare the necessary studies and documents.
Facilities must meet
federal and state
regulations.
(p. 8-31 —8-34)
The project team must become familiar with both federal and state regulations. Keep
in mind that state regulations may be more stringent than federal. The following fed-
eral requirements are discussed in this chapter.
New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
Prevention of Significant Air Quality Deterioration (PSD) review process for
attainment areas
New Source Review (NSR) for non-attainment areas
Operating Permit Review and periodic renewal.
Page 8-3
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
(continued)
"SIPs" are required in
every state.
(p. 8-34)
SIPs (State Implementation Plans) are a set of state air pollution emission regulations
and controls designed to achieve compliance with the NAAQS. SIPs must contain
requirements addressing both attainment and nonattainment areas.
Disposal of residual
materials is another
crucial concern.
(p. 8-35 — 8-36)
WTE facilities produce a variety of residues: bottom ash constitutes the largest quan-
tity, fly ash is a lighter emission. Constituents in ash and scrubber product vary de-
pending on the materials burned. The major constituents of concern are heavy met-
als (lead, cadmium, mercury).
On May 2, 1994, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that ash which exhibits a hazardous
waste characteristic is a hazardous waste and must be so managed. States may also
have special requirements for MSW combustion ash, and readers are urged to check
with state environmental programs, because such requirements may impact the fea-
sibility of WTE for some communities.
WTE facility
wastewater is another
special concern.
(p. 8-36)
Some facilities also generate wastewater. Those considering a WTE facility should
anticipate and acquire all permits that are needed for wastewater treatment and dis-
posal. WTE facility wastewater may affect both ground and surface waters.
Local permits are
usually required.
(p. 8-36)
The construction and operation of a WTE facility also requires several other permits,
many of which satisfy local requirements, such as those for zoning or traffic.
Other environmental
concerns must be
addressed.
Noise pollution: Truck traffic, plant operations and air handling fans associated
with the combustion and emissions control equipment may produce
troublesome noise. Most states have standards for noise levels from industrial
facilities. Walls, fences, trees, and landscaped earthen barriers may reduce
noise levels.
Aesthetic impacts: Negative aesthetic impacts can be prevented or minimized
by proper site landscaping and design of facility buildings.
Land use compatibility: WTE plants should be located where they will be
considered a compatible or nondisruptive land use. Construction in an
industrially zoned area is an example of siting in a compatible land use area.
Undeveloped land around the facility will mitigate undesirable impacts.
Environmentally sensitive areas: Impacts of WTE operations on environmentally
sensitive areas should be thoroughly documented in environmental impact
statements. Ambient air levels of metals and other substances should be
established downwind and in the vicinity of the facility to use as a baseline for
measuring future impacts on environmentally sensitive areas.
Page 8-4
-------
CHAPTERS: COMBUSTION
Final site selection is
based on a detailed
environmental and
technical evaluation.
(p. 8-38 — 8-40)
The final selection criteria should be based on facility design requirements, including
adequate land area
subsoil characteristics to structurally support the facility
access to water supplies for the process and cooling
access to required utilities
access to the energy market.
Sites should also be evaluated for their social and environmental compatibility for the
specific facility type:
compatibility with other land use types in the neighborhood
evaluation of the area's flora and fauna
existence of any archaeological sites or protected species at the site.
Deciding how the
facility will be managed
and by whom is crucial.
(p. 8-40 — 8-41)
Facilities can be managed by public employees or a private contractor. There are
several issues to consider when choosing among management options.
WTE facility management requires a properly trained and well-managed team.
Daily and annualized maintenance using specialized services and an
administrative staff to procure and manage such services are required.
To be financially successful, a WTE facility must be kept online. The cost to the
service area when a facility is out of service can be great; quick action to
re-establish service is essential.
The advantages and
disadvantages of
public vs. private
operation must be
evaluated.
(p. 8-41)
Public operation—advantages:
The municipality fully controls the facility's day-to-day operation.
The municipality gains all the facility's economic revenues from the operation.
Public operation—disadvantages:
The municipality bears all of the facility's day-to-day problems, costs, and liabilities.
When deciding about
public operation,
consider these needs.
(p. 8-41)
The following needs should be considered when making a decision about public
operation:
attracting and adequately paying a trained and qualified operating staff
procuring emergency outage repair services quickly
maintaining sufficient budgetary reserves to make unexpected repairs
accepting financial damages from the energy buyer if the facility is unable to
provide power according to the energy sales agreement
assuring bond holders that investments will be well maintained and the facility
will operate for the term of the bonds
finding qualified experts to meet the day-to-day operating demands.
Page 8-5
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. II
(continued)
Private operation also
has special
considerations.
(p. 8-41)
Private operation offsets some of the major operating risks posed by WTE facilities,
and there may be a long-term advantage to using the services of a private operating
company to operate and maintain the facility.
In choosing a private operator, the municipality relinquishes some of the day-to-day op-
erating control and decisions in plant operations. However, the municipality will gain fi-
nancial security because the operator will be obliged to pay for the cost of failing to
meet specific contract performance obligations between the municipality and the energy
buyer.
Financing methods
affect project
execution.
(p. 8-41 —8-42)
Project financing can be a very complex process requiring detailed legal and tax is-
sues that need to be carefully reviewed and understood. After deciding to develop a
facility, the team should add qualified financial advisors to their staff. Financing alter-
natives include the following:
general obligation (G.O.) bonds
municipal (project) revenue bonds
leverage leasing
private financing.
Project execution risks
must be properly
evaluated.
(p. 8-43)
Constructing and operating a WTE facility requires the participants to carefully con-
sider project execution risks. Major risk issues include the following:
availability of waste
availability of markets and value of energy and recovered materials
facility site conditions
cost of money (i.e., bond interest rate)
compliance with environmental standards (short- and long-term)
waste residue and disposal site availability
construction cost and schedule
operating cost and performance
strikes during construction and operation
changes in laws (federal, state, and local)
long-term environmental impact and health risks
unforeseen circumstances (force majeure)
long-term operating costs
long-term performance.
Page 8-6
-------
CHAPTERS: COMBUSTION
THE IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS
When contemplating a WTE system, following a systematic evaluation and
development procedure is critical to success. Figure 8-1 diagrams such a pro-
cess. Community leaders considering WTE in-
cineration as part of their integrated waste
management plan need to answer several
questions: Is WTE a necessary part of their in-
tegrated waste management plan? Is energy
recovery feasible for the community? If so,
how can a project be implemented success-
fully?
These questions and many others need to
be answered as program developers work
through a step-by-step procedure that ad-
dresses each major issue involved in facility sit-
ing and implementation. Following such a
plan will help ensure that important elements
are not overlooked and will likely save time
and money if issues are addressed at the opti-
mum point in the process. It is important as
well to recognize that a WTE project involves
developing business-like relationships with
several key players, including system vendors,
waste producers, haulers, energy buyers, and
citizens.
Also, remember that the project will take
a number of years to implement, even if no
stumbling blocks are encountered. The time
frame may be as follows: one year for prelimi-
nary planning, including identification of
waste sources, energy markets, most appropri-
ate technology and best site; one year to iden-
tify the contractor/operator and the financing
method; two to three years for development,
including negotiating contracts, gaining regu-
latory agency approval and obtaining financ-
ing; and two to three years for facility construc-
tion and start up. A small facility may require
less time, but many projects have taken even
longer to complete than the six to eight years
described here.
Figun
Projec
Source
58-1
;t Definition and Development Plan
Establish project development team.
^^f
Define solid waste goals.
'^^
Assess project feasibility (preliminary).
'^^
Identify potential energy markets,
technologies and sites.
'^^
Select alternatives for detailed evaluations.
Environmental assessment
Economic assessment
'^P'
Select best alternative.
'^^
Define execution plan.
Design and construction approach
Public or private operation
Contractor selection process
Contractor/municipality execution and
risk-taking responsibility
Project finance approach
'^^
Authorization to proceed.
"^^
Proceed with project execution.
G. L. Boley
Page 8-7
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Project Development Team
The project
development team
provides a broad
spectrum of specialized
skills over an extended
period.
Developing and implementing a waste-to-energy project will probably be one
of the largest and most complex projects that a municipality undertakes. Mak-
ing decisions about complex technologies, facility operations, financing, and
procurement methods requires assembling a project team whose members can
provide many different skills over an extended time.
Selecting the development team members is one of the most crucial deci-
sions that program organizers will make. Decisions made at this point will
impact the project throughout its development and even into the facility's op-
erating future. Team members should represent all sectors of the community
and provide the mix of necessary skills required by a complex and highly tech-
nical project. Team members may be municipal officials from government
public works, finance, legal, and administrative departments, or they may be
elected officials. The team can be augmented with experienced consultants
who specialize in WTE technologies and project development. The following
team members, however, are essential:
• Project engineer: Waste-to-energy projects involve many complex
technical issues from the initial project evaluation through execution.
The first project team member should therefore be a qualified engineer
with adequate technical expertise, including facility operations.
• Financial advisor: Most WTE projects will require special funding. The
financial analyst can assess the most appropriate approach for the
community to take. He or she should be involved in the project at the
early stages so that the technical work will be coordinated with the
financing needs.
• Attorney: Contracts must be negotiated between the WTE generator and
the participating vendors, waste producers and haulers, energy buyers,
and the system operators. The attorney will prepare contracts and work
with the engineer and financial analyst to ensure that the legal require-
ments for permits and bonding are satisfied.
• Operator: System design should allow for simple and efficient operation
in conjunction with the community's other solid waste management
activities. An experienced operations manager involved at the earliest
stages of the project can help the team avoid expensive planning and
implementation mistakes.
• Regulatory officials: While regulatory officials are not formally part of
the project team, they should be kept informed of progress from the
beginning. Regulatory permits will be required for air pollution, waste-
water disposal, ash disposal, and zoning. Since regulatory requirements
may drastically affect facility design and operation, regulatory officials
should review design proposals and provide advice on a regular basis.
When putting the project team together, keep in mind that having quali-
fied and experienced people will enhance the chances of a successful project.
In addition, a well-conceived and well-designed project is essential for secur-
ing attractive financing rates. Putting together a good team is well worth the
effort it takes.
PROJECT DEFINITION: IDENTIFYING GOALS
Before taking any action regarding a WTE facility, a community should take
the time to answer the most important question: What are the goals? By an-
swering this question at the start, managers can plan the project to meet those
goals and avoid unnecessary complexities in the process. Deciding which
goals are most important is crucial to defining the scope of the project. Deter-
Page 8-8
-------
CHAPTERS: COMBUSTION
mining early on why waste-to-energy is the technology of choice will give the
project direction and can head off potential problems as the project unfolds.
ASSESSING PROJECT FEASIBILITY
To determine whether an energy recovery project is a feasible waste management
alternative for the community, the following questions should be addressed:
• When source reduction, reuse, recycling, composting, and waste-stream
growth patterns are taken into account, is the remaining waste stream
Is a WTE facility sufficient to support an energy recovery facility operating at or near
appropriate for your capacity over the life of the project?
community?
• Is there a buyer for the energy produced by the energy recovery facility?
• Is there strong political support for a WTE facility?
If the answer to any of these questions is "no," WTE incineration probably will
not work, and other options should be considered.
Assess Political and Citizen Support
Developing a waste-to-energy system involves a great number of technical deci-
sions. Political decisions, however, often dictate whether a project is successful.
Political leaders and the public must understand the reasons for pursuing this ap-
proach to solid waste disposal. Frequently, the cost of a WTE system will exceed
current landfilling costs. Explaining why this alternative was chosen is important
Political support is in order to build a base of political support. Without this political base, energy
essential. markets will be more difficult to find, financing will be more expensive or un-
available, and the overall potential for success will diminish.
Political support is important for other reasons, too. First, siting a WTE
facility is a long, complicated, and usually expensive undertaking. Unless the
community is strongly behind the project from the beginning, its chances of
failing are high. Second, a project may involve private partners as energy
buyers. Industrial managers may be reluctant to become involved in a project
that does not appear to have community support or is controversial. Finally,
strong leadership is needed to bring together all of the diverse parties who are
involved in a WTE project.
Evaluate Waste Sources
The community's long-term solid waste generation rates will directly affect
the project's viability and the willingness of local waste haulers to cooperate
with the project. To determine if sufficient waste is available to support a re-
source recovery project, the long-term effects of waste management practices
like source reduction, recycling, yard trimmings composting, and also changes
The fuel value of the m materials use (for example, from glass to plastic bottles) on waste volumes
waste must be anc[ composition should be considered.
determined. Once the type and quantity of waste have been identified, the amount of
recoverable energy can be estimated. This is a preliminary projection, since
the particular waste-to-energy technology has not yet been determined. Later,
a solid waste composition survey that includes tests for heating value to ob-
tain a more accurate projection may be necessary. See Table 8-2 for heating
values of typical solid waste components.
Waste Composition
Any form of solid waste management that alters the waste stream available to
a WTE project (by reducing/increasing volumes, removing high- or low-Btu
Page 8-9
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Table 8-2
Heating Value of
Material
(BTU)
Paper
Food Wastes
Yard Wastes
Plastic
Glass
Metal
Miscellaneous
Total
Typical Solid Waste Components
Composition
(in %)
50%
10%
15%
2%
8%
7%
8%
1 00%
Energy Content
(per pound)
7,700
1,800
4,200
17,000
--
--
1,000
5,080
Source: P. O'Leary, P. Walsh and F. Cross, Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison Solid and Hazardous
Waste Education Center, reprinted from Waste Age Correspondence Course articles, 1 987
Changes in waste
quantity and
characteristics must
be anticipated.
materials, etc.) must be evaluated for its present and future effects on the
project. WTE developers should be aware of any planned or anticipated statu-
tory changes in the regional and local waste handling scheme. An evaluation
of changes in the waste stream may include the following:
• annual range of waste quantities (minimum/maximum waste volumes
in a year)
• moisture content
• waste analysis (i.e., heat value, chlorine and sulfur content, etc.)
• quantity of bulky items
• percent of noncombustible materials.
Coordination with Other Waste Management Practices
A significant advantage of waste reduction, regardless of the technique, is that
a smaller WTE facility may result. A WTE facility is a long-term investment
and the development of that facility should take into consideration other exist-
ing or future waste management practices in the service area.
Waste Reduction
"Source reduction" and "reuse" encompass a wide range of techniques for re-
ducing the amount of solid waste that require recycling, incineration, or land-
filling. The two basic types of source reduction techniques are those affecting
the quantity of waste and those affecting the toxicity of the waste. Both types
of source reduction ultimately affect WTE feedstocks.
Waste management
practices can affect
the volume of available
waste — anticipate
long-term trends before
proceeding.
Source Separation of Nonrecyclable and Hazardous Materials
Some municipal WTE facilities have had problems when certain ash samples
failed to pass the USEPA toxicity test (TCLP), which determines the material's
likelihood for leaching potentially hazardous components. Ash samples have ex-
ceeded allowable concentrations of certain metals, like lead or mercury.
Bulky items are generally prevented from entering the combustion pro-
cess by the crane operator of the WTE facility. The crane operator, however,
Page 8-10
-------
CHAPTERS: COMBUSTION
Coordinate recycling
and composting
planning with
combustion system
development.
cannot always remove every microwave, dryer, or freezer from the tipping
floor. The problems and associated dangers that bulky items present are
minimized in municipalities that collect these bulky items separately.
Recycling
Recycling benefits the incineration process by removing some noncombus-
tibles (including ferrous, aluminum, and glass) and by allowing a reduction
in planned facility size due to reduced waste quantity. Recycling can also in-
crease the average heat value of the WTE feedstock. Nationally, recycling
levels for all materials may increase over the next decade. This could impact
the availability of feedstock for WTE operations. However, some of the ef-
fects of recycling may be offset if the annual increase in per capita solid waste
generation continues.
Composting
Municipal yard and food waste composting programs can significantly ben-
efit WTE projects. For example, increases in alternative yard trimmings man-
agement programs can reduce seasonal peaks in wet organic matter, which in
turn may alter the moisture content and heat value of the feedstock. A de-
crease in moisture content increases fuel quality by reducing the amount of
energy used to vaporize moisture. Thus, by separating or removing wet
wastes, the likelihood of creating conditions for optimal boiler temperature
and efficiency of energy recovery is increased.
Yard trimmings volumes fluctuate seasonally in temperate zones, with
peak quantities occurring from spring to fall. By eliminating or leveling these
peaks through other waste management practices, the boiler capacity can be
smaller, thereby reducing capital and operation costs (see Figure 8-2).
Figure 8-2
Typical Monthly Waste Generation and Energy Demand Patterns
Summer peakirg
steam
1 I I r
AS O N D
Source: P. O'Leary, P. Walsh and F. Cross, Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison Solid and Hazardous
Waste Education Center, reprinted from Waste Age Correspondence Course articles, 1987
Page 8-11
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Landfilling
The WTE facility siting plan should account for proximity to a landfill and
Landfill availability current and projected capacity and tipping fees at that landfill. Hauling costs
must be determined. and tipping fees are essential factors in an accurate cost forecast of the WTE fa
cility development process when comparing it to other options. Information
on the life span of the landfill, as well as any planned future expansions,
should be obtained. Municipal solid waste landfills are necessary for mass-
burn as well as RDF processing plants. Incineration can achieve 80 to 90 per-
cent volume reduction in MSW sanitary landfill needs.
What Area Will Be Served?
The area served by the WTE system may be established by the governmental
body planning the system. For example, a county considering an incinerator
to extend landfill life most likely would see the whole county as the service
Establishing the service area. The county might also allow limited use by hauling companies that may
area is important. pjck up household wastes just across county lines in normal route operations.
In less populated areas, waste generated within one county may be inad-
equate to build a facility of a workable size. In such cases, officials may con-
sult with a regional-level authority to assess the feasibility of a facility serving
a multi-county area.
In addition, there may be many unanswered questions regarding re-
gional development. In this case, several counties may together fund a study
identifying a preliminary plan for developing WTE systems in the region. The
study's results could include proposals for the following:
• building one large facility serving the entire region
• building several facilities located strategically to serve the entire region
• building one or more units serving only the region's more populated areas.
A waste inventory for the region to be served is usually the first step.
Questions regarding issues such as inter- and intrastate waste transport that
may influence communities and waste transporters must then be settled.
Then quantity and geographical distribution of wastes available to the facility
can be estimated. Taken together, these efforts will provide information on lo-
gistics and related costs associated with transporting solid waste to potential
facility sites.
ENERGY AND MATERIAL MARKETS
Because WTE facilities have high capital and operating costs, most need to
produce significant income from energy sales to be economically viable. A
buyer must be willing and able to enter into a long-term contract to purchase
The facility's economic energy at a competitive rate. Low revenues from energy sales must be offset
viability depends on by higher waste tipping fees. When several disposal options are available, the
significant energy sales. one wj(n the lowest overall life cycle net cost per ton, including transportation
and ultimate disposal, usually will be chosen.
Energy Market Options
A WTE facility may generate steam, electricity, super-heated water, or a combina-
tion of these. The form of energy produced depends on the energy buyer's needs.
WTE facilities usually generate and sell the following marketable products:
• electricity only
• steam only
Page 8-12
-------
CHAPTERS: COMBUSTION
co-generation of steam and electricity
refuse- derived fuel (RDF).
Electric utilities are
attractive markets for
power produced by
WTE facilities.
Electricity Only
Electricity is the most common form of energy produced and sold from WTE
facilities constructed today. By directing the WTE system steam through a
turbine generator, electricity can be produced and sold. A process flow dia-
gram is shown in Figure 8-3. Since electric utilities can receive power 24 hours
a day, seven days a week, and are usually very stable financially, public utili-
ties are very attractive markets for power produced from WTE systems. Un-
der the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978, known as PURPA, pub-
lic utilities must purchase electric power from small power producers and co-
generators (those producing both steam and electricity). Section 210 of
PURPA exempts small power producers from certain federal and state laws.
It also mandates that electric utilities permit small power producers to inter-
connect and requires utilities to supply back-up power to such facilities at or-
dinary metered rates.
PURPA's most important requirement covers the price utilities must pay
to small producers. The law stipulates that utilities must pay such producers
at the rate (cents per kilowatt hour) that it would cost the utility to generate
the same quantity of electricity, including the avoided cost of any added facili-
ties or equipment. This payment rate, called "avoided cost," is the cost benefit
to the utility for receiving electricity from the energy seller. Avoided cost con-
sists of a capital investment component and an operating cost component.
Due to local or regional electrical generation practices and electrical demand
growth, the avoided cost can vary widely from region to region.
Steam
Steam is used widely in a variety of industrial applications. It can be used to
drive machinery such as compressors, for space heating and generating elec-
tricity. Industrial plants, dairies, cheese plants, public utilities, paper mills,
Figure 8-3
Incinerator and Electrical Generation System
Hue gases
Exhaust go
waste
Source: P. O'Leary, P. Walsh and F. Cross, Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison Solid and Hazardous
Waste Education Center, reprinted from Waste Age Correspondence Course articles, 1987
Page 8-13
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Marketing steam
requires matching
available supplies
with customers'
needs.
Co-generation
provides greater
energy efficiency,
although overall
output may be less.
tanneries, breweries, public buildings, and many other businesses use steam
for heating and air conditioning. The challenge is to match the available sup-
ply with prospective customers' needs. Where industrial customers are not
available, the use of steam at institutional complexes (a university, hospital, or
large office complex) with year-round steam energy needs may be an option.
District heating systems, which provide heat to homes, apartment build-
ings, and commercial facilities, may also be prime steam customers. A princi-
pal disadvantage is that facilities may not be able to efficiently use the energy
throughout the entire year since district heating/cooling systems usually have
low periods in the spring and fall.
When assessing potential markets for steam, it is important to consider a
market's proximity to the WTE facility and the quantity of steam produced.
Proximity is important because steam cannot usually be economically trans-
ported more than one or two miles; the WTE facility, therefore, should be as
close as possible to the potential market. The advantages of transmitting
steam over a longer distance to an end user must be weighed against energy
losses that will occur in transmission. Installation of a pipeline connecting the
facility and the customer can also be prohibitively expensive in certain circum-
stances. High-temperature hot water may be an option for overcoming the
transmission limitation for steam.
Anticipated steam quantity and quality are interrelated parameters, and
must be carefully projected when assessing steam markets. The prospective
user will most likely have an existing process requiring steam at a specific
temperature and pressure. The quantity of steam produced from a given
amount of waste will decline as the steam temperature and pressure increases,
but the equipment using the steam will also operate more efficiently. To en-
sure the continuing availability of a high quantity and quality of steam,
supplementary fuels, such as natural gas, may occasionally be used, and as a
result operating costs may increase.
If the steam price is greater than the cost of energy (i.e., from gas, oil, coal,
wood, etc.), and the steam demand is greater than the amount of energy that can
be generated from the available waste stream, there may be an economic advan-
tage to increasing the plant size to generate the steam needed by the energy customer.
Co-Generation
In co-generation, high-pressure steam is used first to generate electricity; the
steam leaving the turbine is then used to serve the steam users. Co-generation
(See Figure 8-4) provides for greater overall energy efficiency, even though the
output of the major energy product, whether electricity or steam, may be less
than could be generated by producing one type of energy alone.
Co-generation allows flexibility, so that seasonal variations in steam de-
mand can be offset by increases in electricity production. In addition, PURPA
requires that public utilities purchase electricity from co-generators at the
utility's avoided cost.
Constructing a multimillion dollar WTE facility to produce only steam
for an industrial plant that goes out of business will result in serious financial
problems for the WTE facility. Bonding and financing authorities will care-
fully evaluate the financial health of the energy buyer before agreeing to pro-
vide money for the project, and it is important that the energy customer's
long-term financial health be assessed early in the energy market analysis.
Co-generation can provide the project a financial base by selling electricity
should the steam customer become unavailable.
Refuse-Derived Fuel (RDF)
Another form of energy that can be produced and sold is refuse-derived fuel
(RDF). RDF is the product of processing the municipal solid waste to separate
Page 8-14
-------
CHAPTERS: COMBUSTION
RDF is produced from
combustible waste and
burned in specially
designed boilers.
RDF can be transported
to other locations for use
in boilers.
the noncombustible from the combustible portion, and preparing the combustible
portion into a form that can be effectively fired in an existing or new boiler. Own-
ers of a WTE facility intending to sell RDF should consider the following:
• nature of the facility that will buy the fuel (i.e., boiler type, fuel fired, etc.)
• projected life and use of that facility by the owner
• facility modifications necessary to accommodate the fuel (including
emission control)
• the value of the RDF as a supplemental fuel
RDF can be produced at a facility some distance from the RDF buyer and
transported by truck to the boiler facility. Depending upon the type of com-
bustion facility (i.e., large utility, industrial boiler, etc.) the RDF can be pro-
duced in the form of fluff or as densified RDF (D-RDF).
RDF quality (how free the RDF product is of grit, glass, metals, and other
noncombustibles) will directly affect a potential user's desire to burn RDF.
Where a high-quality RDF product has been developed, burning RDF fuel as a
supplemental fuel in existing coal-fired boilers has not created major opera-
tional problems.
Coal-burning electric power plants, if appropriately designed or modi-
fied, can be a major market for fluff RDF. RDF burned as a replacement for up
to 10 percent of the coal in existing utility boilers has been demonstrated to be
successful in small projects; higher rates of replacement have been demon-
strated in industrial stoker coal-fired steam generators.
Figure 8-4
Co-generation System for Producing Electricity and Steam
Exhaustgwts
Stern
1
seem ^
tirbine •<
^
^T-l
Mediuri
- pressure
( steam
user
P 1
r*
H1
*J
"*^
Ccrideriscf
Stan
Source: P. O'Leary, P. Walsh and F. Cross, Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison Solid and Hazardous
Waste Education Center, reprinted from Waste Age Correspondence Course articles, 1987
Page 8-15
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Energy Contract Issues
Customers must be
assured that using
waste-produced
energy is equal to
or better than using
energy from other
sources.
Timing and reliability are
important.
In general, finding a market for energy requires initiative. Many opportuni-
ties are available for energy sales, but they must be sought out carefully and
identified. The prospective customer must be convinced that using energy
produced from solid waste is equal to or better than using energy from con-
ventional sources, such as coal, oil, or gas.
Price
The price must be very competitive, usually at a discount compared to the
customer's current energy costs. Unless there is some long-term price incen-
tive, the customer may be unwilling to go to the trouble of participating in the
project; this is especially true for steam or RDF buyers. The potential energy
customer is likely to have a reliable energy source already. Also, the potential
customer must somehow recover the administrative costs incurred while be-
coming involved in a WTE system. Such costs can become substantial when
the project is complex or controversial.
Service and Schedule
Energy must be available when the customer needs it. Steam and electricity con-
tracts are normally negotiated to be either guaranteed (uninterruptible service) or
"as needed or available" (interruptible service). The price received varies accord-
ing to the type of service. The daily and seasonal demand fluctuations of the cus-
tomer and the WTE facility must be estimated and taken into account in prepar-
ing an agreement. Figure 8-2 shows how waste generation and steam demands of
potential users may vary seasonally. In the situation shown, the "Summer Peak-
ing Industrial Steam Load" roughly correlates with the waste generation pattern.
However, in the example, the "Institutional Heat Load" is highest when waste
generation is the lowest. If waste quantities are insufficient to generate the re-
quired steam under an uninterruptible service plan, then the incinerator operator
must generate steam with supplemental fuel or pay a penalty. Electrical contracts
are usually negotiated on the basis of providing "on-peak" or "off-peak" power.
"On-peak" power will be of greater value to the buyer.
Reliability
Anticipated system reliability is also important in developing energy markets.
The customer must be assured that the facility can meet its commitments, es-
pecially for uninterrupted service. Contracts must state contingency plans for
facility shutdown periods.
Material Markets
Sales of recovered
materials can be an
important revenue
source.
In certain situations, more than one market may be available for the recovered
products produced by the WTE plant. While these markets alone may not be
sufficient to provide enough revenues to make a plant feasible, they can pro-
vide valuable additions to plant revenue. For example, sale of recyclable ma-
terials may be a source of additional revenue for a WTE project.
Where a vigorous recycling or source-separation program is employed, a
plant should be downsized to avoid the additional capital cost of installing ex-
tra capacity. WTE facilities that separate paper also have the option of using
some of the stored paper to make up for temporary waste volume shortfalls if
a guaranteed energy demand must be satisfied, if the paper market is de-
pressed, or if paper is unavailable for a period of time.
Ferrous materials are usually recovered in RDF facilities by magnetic
separators as part of the RDF preparation process from mass-burn systems
Page 8-16
-------
CHAPTERS: COMBUSTION
through magnetic separation from the ash. The economic benefit of metal re-
covery can be two fold: There is the revenue potential from the sale of the
product and the avoided cost of hauling and disposing of that material.
THE COMBUSTION PROCESS AND TECHNOLOGIES
Combustion is a chemical reaction in which carbon, hydrogen, and other ele-
ments in the waste combine with oxygen in the combustion air, which gener-
ates heat.
Usually, excess air is supplied to the incinerator in order to ensure com-
plete mixing and combustion. The combustion principle gas products include
carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, water, oxygen, and oxides of nitrogen.
Excess air is also added to the incinerator to regulate operating temperature
and control emissions. Excess air requirements will differ with waste moisture
contents, heating values, and the type of combustion technology employed.
Many incinerators are designed to operate in the combustion zone at
1,800° F to 2,000° F. This
temperature is selected to
ensure good combustion,
complete elimination of
odors, and protection of
the walls of the incinera-
tor. A minimum of 1,500°
F is required to eliminate
odor. As more excess air
is supplied to the incin-
erator, the operating tem-
perature is lowered (see
Figure 8-5).
Waste-to-energy sys-
tems are designed to maxi-
mize waste burn out and
heat output while minimiz-
WTE systems must be
carefully designed to
handle a wide range of
waste input conditions.
Figure 8-5
Combustion Excess Air Versus Combustion
Gas Temperature
ffi-
11
i
g.
I
1 waste: 6S% com bubble
10%rion-Qombus
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Table 8-3
Municipal Waste Combustion and Tires-To-Energy Facilities in the U.S.
State/Plant Name/
Location
Technology Design
Type Capacity*
State/Plant Name/
Location
Technology Design
Type Capacity
Alabama
Huntsville WTE Facility/Huntsville
Alaska
Fairbanks
Fairbanks (RDF Market)/
Area Markets (incl. U. of AK)
Juneau
Shemya/Air Force Base
Sitka/Sheldon Jackson College
Arkansas
Batesville WTE Facility/Batesville
Blytheville
Osceola
Stuttgart
California
Commerce/Los Angeles Co.
Long Beach (SERRF)/Long Beach
Stanislaus/Modesto
Southern California Edison/
San Bernardino Co.
Susanville
Modesto Energy Project/Westley
Colorado
Yuma Co./ N/D
Conecticut
Bridgeport
Bristol Resource Recovery Facility/
Bristol
MID-Connecticut RRF/Hartford
New Cannan
Southeastern/Preston
Stamford
Wallingford
Lisbon
Exeter/Sterling
'Tons per day
MB
RDF-P
RDF-C
INCIN
MOD
MOD
MOD
INCIN
MOD
INCIN
MB
MB
MB
RDF
MB
TTE
N/D
MB
MB
RDF
INCIN
MB
INCIN
MOD
MB
TTE
690
50
50
70
20
50
100
70
50
60
380
1,380
800
150
20
170
N/D
2,250
650
2,000
125
600
360
420
600
300
Delaware
Delaware Reclamation/Newcastle
Pigeon Point/Wilmington
Florida
Bay Co./Panama City
Broward Co. North/Pompano Beach
Broward Co. South/Ft. Lauderdale
Dade Co./Miami
Hillsborough Co. Resource
Recovery Facility/Tampa
Key West/Monroe Co.
Lake Co./Okahumpka
Lakeland
Mayport Naval Station/Mayport
McKay Bay Refuse to Energy
Facility/Tampa
Miami International Airport/Miami
Pasco Co./Hudson
Pinellas Co./St. Petersburg
West Palm Beach Co./
West Palm Beach
Lee Co./Fort Meyers
Dade Co. (Expansionj/Miami
Polk Co./Winter Haven
Polk Co. TTE Project/Polk Co.
Georgia
Savannah
Atlanta (Tire Market)/
Various Area Markets
Atlanta Waste Recovery/Atlanta
Hawaii
Honolulu Resource Recovery
Venture (H-Power)/Honolulu
RDF-P
MOD
MB
MB
MB
RDF
MB
MB
MB
RDF
MOD
MB
MOD
MB
MB
RDF
MB
RDF
N/D
TTE
MB
TIRE-C
TIRE-P
RDF
- Table 8-3 continued on following pages -
1,000
60
1,050
3,000
2,000
1,200
1,500
N/D
100
500
165
165
2,160
Technology Abbreviations
INCIN = MWC with no energy recovery.
MB = Mass burn (MWC typically with a single combustion chamber, constructed on-site, with energy recovery).
MOD = MWC typically with two-stage combustion, shop fabrication, field erection, and with energy recovery.
MWC = Municipal waste combustor; includes both WTE plants and incinerators.
RDF = Facility with extensive front-end waste processing and dedicated boiler for combusting prepared fuel on site.
RDF-P = Municipal waste processing facility generating a prepared fuel for off-site combustion.
RDF-C = Combustion facility typically capable of burning more than one fuel (e.g., RDF and coal).
TTE = Tires-to-energy. Tire waste combustor with energy recovery.
TIRE-P = Tire waste processing facility generating a prepared fuel for off-site combustion.
TIRE-C = Combustion operation typically capable of burning more than one type of fuel.
WTE = Waste-to-energy. (Municipal waste combustor with energy recovery. In this table, WTE includes MB, MOD, RDF, and
RDF Combustion systems.)
Source: IWSA (Integrated Waste Services Association), The IWSA Municipal Waste Combustion Directory: 1993 Update of
US. Plants, 1993
Page 8-18
-------
CHAPTERS: COMBUSTION
Table 8-3 — continued from previous page
Municipal Waste Combustion and Tires-To-Energy Facilities in the U.S.
State/Plant Name/ Technology
Location
Illinois
Chicago NW/Chicago
Crestwood (USA Waste RDF
MarketJ/Crestwood
USA Waste of IL, Inc./Crestwood
Beardstown/Cass Co.
Havana WTE Facility/Havana
Rantoul
Robbins
West Suburban Recycling and
Energy Center/Village of Summit
Ford Heights
Indiana
Indianapolis
Monroe Co./Bloomington
Sullivan Co./Fairmount
Iowa
AG Processing (Iowa Falls RDF
Marketj/Eagle Grove
Ames
Ames Municipal Electric Utility
(RDF Market)/Ames
Iowa Falls
Kentucky
Kentucky Energy Associates/Corbin
Maine
Harpswell/South Harpswell
Maine Energy/Biddeford - Saco
Mid-ME Waste/Auburn
Penobscot Energy Recovery
Company/Orrington
Portland
Easton
Maryland
Hartford Co./Aberdeen Proving
Grounds (Army)
Pulaski/Baltimore
Southwest Resource Recovery
Facility (BRESCOj/Baltimore
Montgomery Co./Dickerson
Baltimore Co./Cockeysville
Carroll Co./Westminster
Fort Meade/Anne Arundel Co.
Hartford Co. (Expansion)/
Aberdeen Proving Grounds (Army)
Massachusetts
Central Mass. Resource Recovery
Project/Millbury
Fall River
Haverhill (MB)/Haverhill
Haverhill (RDF)/Haverhill
Haverhill (RDF market)/Lawrence
Mass. Refusetech/North Andover
Pittsfield Resource Recovery
Facility/Pittsfield
Saugus RESCO/Saugus
Type
MB
RDF-C
RDF-P
RDF
RDF
N/D
RDF
RDF
TTE
MB
MB
RDF
RDF-C
RDF-P
RDF-C
RDF-P
MB
INCIN
RDF
MB
RDF
MB
N/D
MOD
INCIN
MB
RDF-P
RDF-P
N/D
N/D
MOD
MB
INCIN
MB
RDF-P
RDF-C
MB
MOD
MB
Design
Capacity
1,600
125
125
1,800
1,800
N/D
1,600
1,800
200
2,362
300
3,000
75
200
150
75
500
14
750
200
1,000
500
N/D
360
1,200
2,250
1,200
1,200
N/D
N/D
125
1,500
600
1,600
900
710
1,500
240
1,500
State/Plant Name/ Technology
Location
Massachusetts, cont'd
SEMASS/Rochester
Springfield RRF/Agawan
Mass. Regional Recycling
Facility/Shirley
Michigan
Central Wayne Co. /Dearborn Heights
Greater Detroit Resource
Recovery/Detroit
Jackson Co. Resource Recovery
Facitliy/Jackson
Kent Co. /Grand Rapids
Oakland Co. /Auburn Hills
Southeast Oakland Co./
Madison Heights
Michigan TTE Project/Albion
Minnesota
Eden Prairie/Hennepin Co.
Elk River Resource Recovery
Facility/Anoka Co.
Fergus Falls RRF/Fergus Falls
Hennepin RRF/Minneapolis
Olmstead Co. WTE Facility/
Rochester
Perham Renewable Resource
Facility/Perham
Polk Co. Solid Waste Recovery
Facility/Fosston
Pope- Douglas Solid Waste/Alexandria
Ramsey- Washington/Newport
Ramsey-Washington (Newport
RDF Market)/Red Wing
Red Wing Solid Waste Boiler
Facility/Red Wing
Richard's Asphalt/Savage
Thief River Falls
Thief River Falls (TRF RDF Market)/
Northwest Medical Center
Western Lake Superior Sanitary
District (WLSSD)/Duluth
Wilmarth Plant (Eden Prairie and
Newport RDF MarketJ/Mankato
Mississippi
Pascagoula ERF/Moss Point
Missouri
St. Louis
Montana
Livingston/Park Co.
Nevada
Moapa Energy Project/Moapa
New Hampshire
Auburn
Candia
Claremont
Type
RDF
MOD
MB
INCIN
RDF
MB
MB
MB
MB
TTE
RDF-P
RDF
MOD
MB
MB
MOD
MOD
MOD
RDF-P
RDF-C
MOD
MOD
RDF-P
RDF-C
RDF
RDF-C
MOD
RDF
INCIN
TTE
INCIN
INCIN
MB
Design
Capacity
2,700
360
243
500
3,300
200
625
2,000
600
N/A
560
1,500
94
1,200
200
100
80
72
1,200
720
72
80
100
100
400
720
150
1,200
72
N/D
5
15
200
- Table 8-3 continued on following pages -
Page 8-19
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Table 8-3 — continued from previous page
Municipal Waste Combustion and Tires-To-Energy Facilities in the U.S.
State/Plant Name/ Technology
Location
New Hampshire, cont'd
Concord Regional Solid Waste
Recovery Facility/Concord
Durham/University of New Hampshire
Lincoln
Litchfield
Nottingham
Pelham
Plymouth
Wilton
Wolfeboro
New Jersey
Camden Resource Recovery
Lacility/Camden
Essex Co. Resource Recovery
Lacility/Newark
Lort Dix
Gloucester Co./Westville
Warren RRL/Oxford Township
Union Co./Rahway
Mercer Co. /Duck Island
New York
Albany Steam Plant
(ANSWERS RDF Market)/Albany
ANSWERS Project/Albany
Babylon Resource Recovery
Facility/Babylon
Dutchess Co./Poughkeepsie
Hempstead/Westbury
Henry Street, Brooklyn/NY City
Huntington RRF/E. Northport
Islip (MacArthur Energy Recovery)/
Ronkonkoma
Kodak/Rochester
Long Beach Recycling and
Recovery Corp. /Long Beach
Niagara Falls
Oneida Co. /Rome
Oswego Co./Fulton
Saltaire/Fire Island
Washington Co. /Hudson Falls
Westchester Co./Peekskill
Onondaga Co.
Albany Port Ventures/Port of Albany
Bay 41st St., Brooklyn SW/NY City
Brooklyn Navy Yrd/NY City
Capital District/Green Island
Cattaraugus Co. /Cuba
Glen Cove
Islip (MER Expansionj/Ronkonkoma
West Finger Lakes/Four Area Counties
North Carolina
New Hanover Co. /Wilmington
University City RRF/Mecklenburg Co.
BCH Energy Limited/Fayetteville
Arrowood/Mecklenburg Co.
Carolina Energy/Chatam Co.
Type
MB
MOD
INCIN
INCIN
INCIN
INCIN
INICN
INCIN
INCIN
MB
MB
MOD
MB
MB
MB
MB
RDF-C
RDF-P
MB
MB
MB
INCIN
MB
MB
RDF
MB
RDF
MOD
MOD
INCIN
MB
MB
MB
MB
INCIN
MB
MB
MOD
MB
MB
N/A
MB
MB
RDF
MB
RDF
Design
Capacity
50
108
24
22
8
24
16
30
16
1,050
2,505
80
575
400
1,440
1,450
600
800
750
506
2,505
1,000
750
518
150
200
2,000
200
200
12
450
2,250
990
1,300
1,050
3,000
1,500
112
250
350
550
450
235
1,200
600
1,200
State/Plant Name/
Location
Ohio
Akron
Columbus
Montgomery Co. North/Dayton
Montgomery Co. South/Dayton
Mad River Energy Recovery/
Springfield
Stark Recycling Center/Canton
Oklahoma
Miami
W.B. Hall Resource Recovery
Facility/Tulsa
Oregon
Coos Bay/Coquille
Marion Co. /Brooks
Portland
Portland (Tire Market)/
Various Area Markets
Pennsylvania
Delaware Co. /Chester
Harrisburg
Lancaster Co. RRF/Bainbridge
Montgomery Co./Conshohocken
Westmoreland Co./Greensburg
York Co. /Manchester Township
Falls Township- Wheelabrator/
Falls Township
Falls Township-fechnochem/
Morrisville
Glendon
West Pottsgrove/Berks Co.
Puerto Rico
San Juan
South Carolina
Chambers Development/Hampton
Charleston/Charleston Co.
Tennessee
Nashville
Robertson Co. Recycling Facility/
Springfield
Springfield (RDF Market)/
Various Area Markets
Sumner Co./Gallatin
Texas
Carthage Co.
Cass Co. /Linden
Cass Co. (Linden RDF Market)/
International Paper
Center
Cleburne
Baytown
Baytown (Tire Market)/
Various Area Markets
Utah
Davis Co./Layton
Technology
Type
RDF
RDF
MB
INCIN
MB
RDF-P
MOD
MB
INCIN
MB
TIRE-P
TIRE-C
MB
MB
MB
MB
MOD
MB
MB
MOD
MB
MB
MB
MOD
MB
MB
RDF-P
RDF-C
MB
MOD
RDF-P
RDF-C
MOD
MOD
TIRE-P
TIRE-C
MB
Design
Capacity
1,000
2,000
300
900
1,750
N/A
108
1,125
100
550
100
100
2,688
720
1,200
1,200
50
1,344
1,600
70
500
1,500
1,200
270
600
1,120
50
50
200
40
-200
-120
40
115
165
165
400
- Table 8-3 continued on following page -
Page 8-20
-------
CHAPTERS: COMBUSTION
Table 8-3—continued from previous page
Municipal Waste Combustion and Tires-To-Energy Facilities in the U.S.
State/Plant Name/
Location
Technology Design
Type Capacity
Vermont
Readsboro INICN 13
Stamford INCIN 10
Rutland MOD 240
Virginia
Alexandria - Arlington/Alexandria MB 975
Arlington/Pentagon INCIN 50
Fairfax Co./Lorton MB 3,000
Galax MOD 56
Hampton MB 200
Harrisonburg Resource Recovery
Facility/Harrisonburg MB 100
Salem MOD 100
Southeastern Public Service Authority
of Virginia/Portsmouth RDF 2,000
Fort Eusits/Newport News
Prince William Co./Prince William MB 1,700
Washington
Bellingham/Ferndale MOD 100
Skagit Co. Resource Recovery
Facility/Mt. Vernon MB 178
State/Plant Name/
Location
Technology Design
Type Capacity
Washington, cont'd
Spokane Regional Solid Waste
Disposal Facility/Spokane MB
Tacoma (City Landfillj/Tacoma RDF-P
Tacoma (RDF Marketj/Tacoma RDF-C
Fort Lewis MB
Wisconsin
Barren Co./Almena MOD
LaCrosse Co./French Island RDF
St. Croix WTE Facility/New Richmond MOD
Madison RDF-P
Madison (Power Plant - RDF Market)/
Madison Gas & Electric RDF-C
Marathon Co./Ringle RDF-P
Marathon Co. (Ringle RDF Market)/
Area Paper Mills RDF-C
Muscoda MOD
Waukesha MB
Winnebago Co. N/D
400
200
500
120
175
500-
1,000
* End of Table 8-3 '
Source: IWSA (Integrated Waste Services Association), The IWSA Municipal Waste Combustion Directory: 1993 Update of
U.S. Plants, 1993
Modular systems may be
more cost-effective for
smaller-sized facilities.
Pre-fabrication and
assembly can lower
construction costs.
sembled and shipped to the construction site, which minimizes field installa-
tion time and cost.
Modular systems are typically in the 15 to 100 ton-per-day capacity range.
Facility capacity can be increased by adding modules, or units, installed in paral-
lel to achieve the facility's desired capacity. For example, a 200 ton-per-day facil-
ity may consist of four, 50-ton-per-day units or two, 100 ton-per-day units. The
number of units may depend on the fluctuation of waste generation for the ser-
vice area and the anticipated maintenance cycle for the units.
Combustion is typically achieved in two stages. The first stage may be
operated in "starved air" or in a condition in which there is less than the theo-
retical amount of air necessary for complete combustion. The controlled air
condition creates volatile gases, which are fed into the secondary chamber,
mixed with additional combustion air, and under controlled conditions, com-
pletely burned. Combustion temperatures in the secondary chamber is regu-
lated by controlling the air supply, and when necessary, through the use of an
auxiliary fuel. The hot combustion gases then pass through a waste heat
boiler to produce steam for electrical generation or for process or heating pur-
poses. The combustion gases and products of combustion are processed
through air emission control equipment to meet the required federal and state
emission standards.
In general, modular combustor systems are a suitable alternative and
may, for smaller-sized facilities, be more cost-effective than other combustor
alternatives. Because of the nature of these facilities, energy production per
Page 8-21
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Mass-burning systems
have larger capacities
and higher thermal
efficiencies.
million Btu of heat input or plant efficiency will likely be lower than alterna-
tive combustion technologies. Because of their relative size, modular combus-
tors and waste heat boilers can be factory-assembled or fabricated and deliv-
ered, minimizing field erection time and cost.
Mass-Burning Systems
A mass-burn WTE facility typically consists of a reciprocating grate combus-
tion system and a refractory-lined, waterwalled, steam generator. Today a
typical facility consists of two or more combustors with a size range of 200 to
750 tons-per-day each. Because of the larger facility size, the combustor is
more specially designed to efficiently combust the waste to recover greater
quantities of steam or electricity for export as a revenue source (see Figure 8-6).
To achieve this greater combustion and heat recovery efficiency, the
larger field-erected combustors are usually in-line furnaces with a grate sys-
tem. The steam generator generally consists of refractory-coated waterwall
Figure 8-6
Typical Mass-Burn Facility Schematic
1. Receiving Pit
2. Charging Crane
3. Feed Hopper
4. Grate System
5. Steam Generator
6. Heat Exchanger
7. Acid Gas Spray Dry Scrubber
8. Paniculate Collection
9. Stack
10. Ash Quench/Removal
Source: Combustion Engineering, Inc., Windsor, Connecticut, 1990
Page 8-22
-------
CHAPTERS: COMBUSTION
Mass-burn systems
generate a higher-
quality steam,
allowing for higher
revenues per ton of
waste.
RDF technology has
benefitted from past
experience and is now
considered a "proven
technology."
systems with walls comprised of tubes through which water circulates to ab-
sorb the heat of combustion. In a waterwall system, the boiler is an integral
part of the system wall, rather than a separate unit as is in a refractory system.
Mass burning of waste can also be achieved by the use of a rotary kiln.
Rotary kilns use a turning cylinder, either refractor or waterwall design, to
tumble the waste through the system. The kiln is declined, with waste enter-
ing at the high elevation end and ash and noncombustibles leaving at the
lower end. Rotary combustors may be followed by a traveling or reciprocat-
ing grate to further complete combustion.
A typical facility consists of two or more combustors that are sized to
properly fire or burn the area's municipal solid waste during its peak genera-
tion period. Typically, at least two combustor units are included to provide a
level of redundancy and to allow waste processing at a reduced rate during
periods of scheduled and unscheduled maintenance.
Mass-burn facilities today generate a higher quality steam, (i.e., pressure
and temperature) compared to modular systems. This steam is then passed
through a once-through turbine generator to produce electricity or through an ex-
traction turbine to generate electricity and provide process steam for heating or other
purposes. Higher steam quality allows the use of more efficient electrical generating
equipment, which, in turn, can result in a greater revenue stream per ton of waste.
Refuse-Derived Fuel (RDF) Systems
The early RDF projects, developed in the 1970s, were intended to produce a fuel to
be used in existing utility or industrial steam generators with little or no modifica-
tions to the fuel com-
bustor or its auxil-
iary equipment. Sev-
eral projects were de-
veloped, but few of
those projects are op-
erating today (see
Table 8-4).
The predomi-
nate RDF systems
operating today
have incorporated
the lessons from the
earlier projects and
are now considered
a proven technology.
There are two pri-
mary types of sys-
tems in operation:
the shred-and-burn
systems with mini-
mal processing and
removal of noncom-
bustibles, and sim-
plified process sys-
tems that remove a
significant portion of
the noncombustibles.
Each of these systems
uses a dedicated com-
bustor to fire the RDF
to generate steam (see
Table 8-5).
Table 8-4
RDF Production and Co-Firing Experience
Process Plan
Location
Design
Capacity
(tons/day)
Average RDF
Production
(tons/day)
Status
Ames
Baltimore
Bridgeport
Chicago
Lakeland
Madison
Milwaukee
Rochester
St. Louis
200
1200
1800
2000
300
200
1200
2000
200
175
58a
N/Ad
300
270
120b
480-880
400
185
Operating
Operating6
Closedc
Closedc
Operating
Closedf
Closed0
Closed30
Closedc
a =
b =
c =
d =
e =
f =
Process operated for short term. RDF was not fired.
RDF markets have not been able to utilize full production.
Closed after limited operation.
Consistent operation not achieved.
Burning discontinued in 1989.
Closed 12/31/92; RDF market for electrical generating
demand significantly reduced.
Source: June, 1988 EPRI Report, Updated by ABB-RRS June, 1991
Page 8-23
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Table 8-5
Dedicated RDF Boiler Facilities
Shred-and-Burn Systems
Akron, OH*
ANSWERS (Albany, NY)
Hooker Chemical (Niagara Falls, NY)*
SEMASS (Rochester, MA)
'Process modified to shred-and-burn technology
Daily
Capacity
Simplified Process Systems
Coal
Co-firing
Daily
Capacity
Started
Operation
1979
1981
1981
1988
Started
Operation
Dade County, FL Nc
Columbus, OH Ye
Duluth, MN Nc
MERC (Saco/Biddeford, ME) Nc
Ramsey/Washington City, MN Nc
LaCrosse County, Wl Nc
Mid-Connecticut (Hartford, CT) Ye
PERC (Orrington, ME) Nc
Palm Beach County, FL Nc
Anoka County, MN Nc
H-POWER (Honolulu, HI) Nc
Greater Detroit, Ml Nc
Tacoma, WA Nc
" Process system modified
"" RDF and wood; fluidized bed combustor
3000
2000
400
600
1000
400
2000
1000
2000
1500
2160
3300
300
1982/1989*
1982
1985***
1987
1987
1987****
1988
1988
1989
1989
1990
1990
1990***
*** Used fluidized bed combustors
Source: G. L. Boley. "Refuse-Derived Fuel (RDF)—Quality Requirements for Firing in Utility,
Industrial, or Dedicated Boilers," International Joint Power Generation Conference, San Diego,
CA. October, 1991
Shred-and-burn systems
require minimal removal
of noncombustible
waste.
With simplified process
systems, a significant
portion of
noncombustibles
is removed.
Shred-and-Burn Systems
Shred and burn systems are the simplest form of RDF production. The pro-
cess system typically consists of shredding the municipal solid waste to the
desired particle size, magnetic removal of ferrous metal, with the remaining
portion delivered to the combustor. There is no attempt to remove other non-
combustible materials in the municipal solid waste before combustion. The
municipal solid waste is shredded to a particle size that allows effective feed-
ing to the combustor. Most systems operate the process system continuously,
i.e., there is minimal RDF storage before being fed to the combustor.
Simplified Process Systems
A simplified process system involves processing the municipal solid waste to
produce an RDF with a significant portion of the noncombustibles removed
before combustion. The municipal solid waste process removes more than 85
percent of the ferrous metals, a significant percentage of the remaining non-
combustibles (i.e., glass, nonferrous metals, dirt, sand, etc.), and shreds the
material to a nominal particle top size of 4 to 6 inches to allow effective firing
in the combustion unit.
Page 8-24
-------
CHAPTERS: COMBUSTION
RDF fuel is conveyed,
transported, and stored
more readily than waste
itself.
Early RDF process systems relied on air classification as the means to sepa-
rate the combustible fraction from the noncombustibles. Recent systems rely on
screening or trommeling to separate the noncombustibles from the fuel portion.
Depending on the type of combustor to be used, a significant degree of separa-
tion can be achieved to produce a high-quality RDF (i.e., low ash), which typically
results in the loss of a higher percentage of combustibles when compared to sys-
tems that can produce a low-quality fuel (i.e., slightly higher ash content) for fir-
ing in a specially designed combustor. These types of systems recover over 95
percent of the combustibles in the fuel fraction (see Figure 8-7).
RDF Combustors
Because the municipal solid waste is transformed into a fuel that can be handled
(conveyed, transported, temporarily stored, etc.) more readily than municipal
solid waste itself, there are several possible combustor options, including the
following.
• Dedicated Combustor. This is the most common type of combustor; it is
in use at several facilities in the United States. A dedicated RDF combus-
tor consists of a stoker-fed traveling grate and a waterwall steam genera-
tor. Unlike the mass-burn combustor, there is no refractory in the lower
combustion zone of the combustor. The waterwall tubes are exposed to
the combustion gases and radiant heat. The lower furnace is subject to
corrosive attack, which can be controlled by using special corrosion
resistant metal coatings. The RDF is fired through an air-swept spreader
above the traveling grate and is partially burned in suspension with the
larger and heavier particles burned on the grate. Combustors range in
size from 500 tons-per-day of RDF to as large as 1500 tons-per-day. This
Figure 8-7
Typical Simplified RDF Facility Schematic
F«rous material
Seaondaiji
strcdder
Source: Combustion Engineering, Inc., Windsor, Connecticut, 1990
Page 8-25
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
System options must be
carefully considered.
technology is comparable to systems used to combust many biomass
fuels such as wood, waste, bark, bagasse, and others (see Figure 8-8).
Fluidized Bed Combustion. Fluidized bed combustors for RDF are a
relatively new approach involving the firing of the RDF into a bed of
fluidized inert noncombustible, high melting-point material (sand) that
substitutes for a grate. The RDF is combusted in the suspended sand
bed. This improves the combustion reaction by bringing the waste in
direct contact with the bed of material. Above the fluidized bed is a
waterwall boiler where the heat is transferred to produce steam. Fluid-
ized bed combustion can be an attractive alternative because a wide
variety of materials can be burned, including high-moisture content
materials such as sludge. In addition, because the units should operate
at lower excess air conditions, they can be relatively smaller in size when
the emission control equipment is included. This type of combustor has
been used less to burn RDF than the dedicated stoker-fired combustors.
Co-firing RDF with Coal or Other Biomass Fuels. Dedicated RDF
combustors can co-fire coal, wood waste, or other solid fuels. This may
be an advantage if the waste generation rates vary widely by season or as
a result of other waste management practices (recycling, waste reduction,
pollution prevention, etc.). The facility can remain a stable source of steam
or electricity if other fuels can be fired along with or independent of waste.
Figure 8-8
Typical RDF Stoker and Boiler
Two-stage
super heater
Furnace
RDF
surge bin
Over fire
air (OFA)
Pneumatic
distributor
Boiler
tank
Economizer
Refuse
combustor
stoker
Source: Combustion Engineering, Inc., Windsor, Connecticut, 1990
Page 8-26
-------
CHAPTERS: COMBUSTION
Densified RDF (D-RDF). D RDF is a fuel produced by compressing
already processed RDF into cubes or pellets. The increased cost of
processing may be offset by allowing for more cost-effective transporta-
tion and temporarily storing the fuel product. This fuel type may also be
more cost effectively fired into an existing industrial-type boiler firing
stoker coal or other solid fuels.
Incinerator System Components
The components must
be carefully integrated
into a system.
Modular and mass-burn systems receive, store, and fire municipal solid waste
without preprocessing or preseparation before firing into the combustor. RDF
systems include a level of preprocessing and/or separation of noncombus-
tibles before firing into the RDF combustor. Each of these options have many
common components or design features to properly receive and process the
municipal solid waste and the resulting products and residues.
Waste-burning facilities with energy recovery generally have the follow-
ing components: waste storage and handling equipment, combustion system,
steam/electrical generator, emission control system, and residual control sys-
tem. Figure 8-9 shows an example design for a large-scale mass-burning WTE facility.
Figure 8-9
Typical Mass-Burn System Design Basis
Charging
area
Feed chute aridtof
drying grats
Auxiiier y burners
com busmen
lew per "Stipe
Ar
Primary chamber
...
20^000 to-K^QOQ BnJUOv
fcmpsralu'**
1600* F bo COO* F
Secondary combustion
chamber encVor
radiant section of bdler
•I SCO* F to 2000^
Energy recovery
Source: P. O'Leary, P. Walsh and F. Cross, Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison Solid and Hazardous
Waste Education Center, reprinted from Waste Age Correspondence Course articles, 1987
Page 8-27
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Tipping facilities for
handling and storing
waste must be sized
correctly.
Storage and Handling Area
The solid waste storage and handling area consists of either a large tipping floor
or tipping pit onto which waste is discharged directly from collection vehicles.
The tipping floor and tipping pit are usually enclosed in a building to
control wind and odor problems, as well as to keep precipitation from increas-
ing the moisture content of the waste. This area should be large enough to
handle at least three to five days' waste generation volume. This additional
space allows for waste storage during weekends, plant outages, and periods of
heavy precipitation, when incinerator loadings may need to be reduced to al-
low for proper burning of wet waste.
A large waste-tipping floor or pit also facilitates the operator in mix-
ing the waste (i.e., dry stored waste may be mixed with incoming wet waste
after a rainfall). This results in a more uniform heat feed rate into the furnace.
For facilities with a tipping floor, waste is normally pushed into the furnace using
a small tractor. At a facility with a tipping pit, a crane lifts the waste from the pit
and drops it into a hopper. When loading the furnace, plant operators normally re-
move large, bulky noncombustible items from the furnace feedstock.
Waste Combustion System
After being fed into the charging system or hopper, the waste is moved into
the furnace either by gravity or with a mechanical feeder. Primary combus-
tion occurs in this first chamber. Within the furnace, the waste is agitated and
moved to the discharge end by grates, rams, or other equipment and is con-
currently mixed with air to achieve maximum burn out.
During incineration, energy is released in the form of heat. Burned ma-
terial and noncombustibles move downward through the furnace for removal
by the ash handling system.
Energy Conversion and Use
Heat released during incineration is transferred to water that is circulated in the
boiler tubes, where the energy is absorbed and steam produced. A variety of boil-
ers, heat exchangers, and superheaters are available. The selection of specific units de-
pends on the quality (temperature/pressure) and use of the steam. The steam tem-
perature and pressure produced must satisfy the energy customer's needs and be able
to efficiently produce its marketable products: steam and electricity.
Residue Control
The products of combustion include the combustor bottom ash and fly ash.
The bottom ash includes the heavy noncombustible materials (i.e., ferrous and
nonferrous metals, glass, ceramics, etc.), and ash residues from the combus-
tible material. Bottom ash is normally cooled by quenching in water and then
moved by a conveyor system to a temporary storage and truck load-out area.
The lighter products of combustion and products collected in the emission
control equipment are collected and transported in totally enclosed conveyors
to a water-conditioning area to moisten the fly ash residue products and then
discharged onto the bottom ash conveyor for truck load-out. Depending on
the facility's size and other economic factors, the ferrous metals in the bottom
ash can be removed for recycling by magnetic separation. Some new systems
can recover nonferrous metals as well.
Ash handling is an
important design
element.
Emission Controls
In the last 10 years, significant advancements have been achieved in control-
ling emissions from WTE facilities, including improved combustion controls
Page 8-28
-------
CHAPTERS: COMBUSTION
Controls for particulates
and acid gas are
required — heavy metal
controls may be
required in the future.
Air emission controls are
an integral system
element.
and advanced acid gas and particulate emission controls. In the past, incinera-
tor emission control was achieved with electrostatic precipitators to collect
particulates. At the time, no other controls were anticipated. Today, however,
WTE facilities incorporate not only particulate controls, but also acid gas, or-
ganics, and nitrous oxide (NOx) controls. These new controls have resulted
from a better understanding of the potential environmental impacts of waste
combustor emissions; municipal solid waste composition; and the effects of
uncontrolled emissions of acid gas constituents (i.e., sulfides and chlorides),
organics and heavy metals.
Volatile Organic Controls
Volatile organics can be controlled with good combustion practices (i.e., con-
trolling combustion air, municipal solid waste feed rate, and combustion tem-
perature and residence time). The advancements in interactive control instru-
mentation have made it possible to more closely monitor the combustion pro-
cess and adjust the municipal solid waste feed rate and combustion air to en-
sure volatile organic containment (VOC) destruction.
Nitrous Oxides (NOx) Controls
NOx (gaseous oxides of nitrogen) can be controlled in the combustion process
or by adding additional controls. Selective Noncatalytic Reduction (SNCR) is
now the most common method for controlling NOx from waste combustors.
With SNCR, ammonia is injected into the combustor's boiler bank above the
fire zone. The ammonia reacts with the nitrogen in the combustion gases to
form nitrogen dioxide and water. Another method of controlling NCHs with
staged combustion, in which the combustion temperatures are controlled to
minimize thermal NOx generation. Either or both of these options may be ap-
propriate depending on the combustion technology to be used.
Acid Gas Controls
Acid gas emissions can be controlled by scrubbing acidic gases from the combus-
tor exhaust gas. The products of scrubbing can be recovered either as a dry pow-
der residue or as a liquid. The most common acid gas scrubber technology used
in the U.S. is the spray-dry scrubber (Figure 8-10). The flue gas from the combus-
tor is ducted into a reactor vessel, where the incoming flue gas is sprayed with a
lime slurry. The lime particles react with the acid gases to form a calcium precipi-
tate. The slurry water cools the incoming combustor exhaust and the water is va-
porized; the lime is chemically combined with the chlorides and sulfates and con-
densed. Lower temperatures are used to promote the chemical reaction with the
lime, to promote condensation of most heavy materials in the gas stream, and to
control the flue gas temperature in the particulate control device.
Particulate Controls
Using fabric filters or baghouses has become the most common method of
controlling particulates. Baghouses control particulate emissions by channel-
ing flue gases through a series of tubular fabric filter bags. The bags are set to-
gether in an array through which particulates are directed then trapped. Due
to the fineness of the fabric mesh and the resulting build up of fine particu-
lates on the bag, the recovered particulates act as an additional medium to fur-
ther filter out particulates (see Figure 8-11). The collected particulates with the
precipitated end products from the scrubber are removed from the bag by
various mechanical methods, including reversing the gas flow of cleaned flue
gas through the bags by shaking or pulsing the bags.
Page 8-29
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol. I
Figure 8-10
Spray-Dry Scrubber and Baghouse
Source: P. O'Leary, P. Walsh and F. Cross, Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison Solid and Hazardous
Waste Education Center, reprinted from Waste Age Correspondence Course articles, 1987
Figure 8-11
Baghouse Schematic
To stack
Gas enters
•fabric bag
Source: P. O'Leary, P. Walsh and
F. Cross, Univ. of Wisconsin-
Madison Solid and Hazardous
Waste Education Center, reprinted
from Waste Age Correspondence
Course articles, 1987
Page 8-30
-------
CHAPTERS: COMBUSTION
An inherent advantage of the baghouse systems is that the filtering pro-
cess also acts as a secondary acid gas scrubber. The collected particles include
the unreacted calcium from the scrubber, which also builds up on the bags
and will react with any untreated acid gases.
Secondary Volatile Organic and Mercury Control
A developing control technology is the use of activated carbon as an additive
to the scrubber process. The carbon is injected into the flue gas before it enters
the baghouse to provide additional control of volatile organics and for control-
ling mercury. Another option is the addition of a carbon filter after the baghouse.
Emission Monitoring
To assist the operator in the proper operation of the combustion process and
the emission control equipment, Continuous Emission Monitoring (CEM)
equipment has become a requirement for any new or existing waste combus-
tor. CEM systems typically monitor stack emissions of NOX, carbon monox-
ide, oxygen, particulate via opacity meters, and acid gases via monitoring sul-
fur dioxide. Gas temperatures are also monitored to control the scrubber pro-
cess and to ensure baghouse safety.
ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING
Air Permit Regulations
Permitting is a complex
technical and legal
process requiring an
experienced, qualified
consultant.
Developing and implementing a WTE facility involves an analysis of the
region's air quality, use of the maximum achievable control technology, a de-
tailed projection of the likely emissions from combustion of the waste, and an
analysis of the potential impacts those emissions will have on regional air
quality, human health and the environment.
Successful facility air permitting requires adhering to new federal and
state source emission standards and using the best available control technolo-
gies for emission control. Permits are granted on a case-by-case basis through
a licensing process, which, in part, involves demonstrating compliance with
federal or state standards and showing that plant emissions will cause no sig-
nificant deterioration of local air quality. It also includes conducting a site-
specific health risk assessment. Because permitting and licensing are complex
technical processes, it is important to select a qualified, experienced consulting
firm to prepare the necessary studies and documents to ensure that the facility
is successfully permitted.
Following is a summary of the federal standards and requirements for
WTE facilities. The project team must also become familiar with applicable
state and local requirements, which may be more stringent than the federal re-
quirements. Federal regulations that will affect the construction and operation
of new MSW combustors include the following:
• New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)
• National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
• Prevention of Significant Air Quality Deterioration (PSD) review process
for attainment areas
• New Source Review (NSR) for nonattainment areas
• Operating Permit Review and periodic renewal.
Page 8-31
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
NSPS standards
apply to all new WTE
units greater than 250
tons/day capacity.
Operator training and
certification are
required.
New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)
The USEPA established "new source performance standards" for new solid
waste combustors on February 11, 1991. These standards apply to all new
WTE facilities with individual units greater than 250 tons per day (225 Mg/
day) in waste combustion capacity. When establishing the facility's maximum
capacity, the regulations assume the municipal solid waste has a higher heat-
ing value of 4,500 Btu's per pound. Should the service area's waste stream
have a heating value greater than 4,500 Btu's per pound, these standards
would apply to a facility that was intended to fire a lesser tonnage. NSPS
emission standards for all types of waste combustors is provided in Table 8-6.
The metals emission standard is measured as particulate and is equivalent to
the particulate emission standard.
In addition, NSPS established carbon monoxide emission limits for each
type of combustor. Because of differing operating characteristics, waste com-
bustors will exhibit slightly varying carbon monoxide emissions. Table 8-7
shows minimum standards established for various combustion technologies.
Best Available Technology
The USEPA minimal emission standards are based on the use of SNCR (selec-
tive noncatalytic reduction) technology for NOx control and spray-dry scrub-
ber and a fabric filter for acid gas and particulate control. The NSPS also es-
tablished "good combustion practices" (GCP) for controlling organic emis-
sions. Although the emission standards are based on the emission control
technologies described above, alternative technologies can be used to meet the
emissions performance standards.
Operator Certification
Another integral part of the NSPS is the American Society of Mechanical Engi-
neers (ASME) Standardized Test Program for the "Qualification and Certifica-
tion of Resource Recovery Operators." This is a standardized operator testing
procedure administered by the ASME. The test verifies that the chief operator
and the shift supervisors of WTE facilities are properly trained and, therefore,
qualified to operate a municipal waste combustor. In addition, the facility
owner or operator must ensure that on-site training is available and reviewed
with all employees involved in the operation of the municipal waste combustor.
Co-Fired Facility
Facilities that fire RDF in combination with coal are subject to the NSPS regu-
lations for waste combustors if that facility fires RDF at a rate greater than 30
Table 8-6
NSPS Emission Standards for All Types
of Waste Combustors
Paniculate
S02
HCI
NOX
Dioxin/Furan
Source: USEPA
0.015 GR/DSCF@ 7% 02
30 ppmv @ 7 % 02 ,
or 80% reduction
25 ppmv @ 7% 02,
or 95 % reduction
180 ppmv @ 7% 02
30 ng/Nm3 @ 7% 02
Table 8-7
Minimum Carbon Monoxide Standards for Various
Combustion Technologies
Combustion Technique (CO @ 7% O2)
Mass-burn (water-wall and refractory) 100 ppmv
Mass-burn (rotary) 100 ppmv
Modular (starved and excess air) 50 ppmv
RDF Stoker 150 ppmv
Fluidized bed 100 ppmv
RDF/coal co-fired 150 ppmv
Source: USEPA
Page 8-32
-------
CHAPTERS: COMBUSTION
percent on a weight basis. Facilities firing RDF at a rate less than 30 percent
by weight are subject to the environmental emission standards for utility or
industrial coal combustors.
PSD review and
permitting requirements
apply to facilities with
emissions above those
shown in Table 8-8.
"Prevention of Significant Deterioration" (PSD) Determination
Each new facility, depending on its size and the amount of pollutants that may
be emitted on an annual basis, is subject to the requirements for the "preven-
tion of significant air quality deterioration" (PSD) process and federal PSD
permit requirements. In addition, depending on the status of the state's air
quality program, the PSD permitting process may be delegated to the state
permitting agency. Some states are not fully delegated to administer the PSD
program, in which case the permitting process is administered jointly with the
regional USEPA office. Obtaining a PSD permit can be a lengthy process. A
variety of environmental and technical experts will be needed to make an ac-
curate analysis of the existing air quality and the potential impacts the pro-
posed facility will have on it and to properly prepare the necessary documentation.
If a facility's projected annual emission rate is greater than the amounts
listed in Table 8-8 for any one of the potential pollutants, the facility will be
subject to the requirements of a PSD review and permitting process. The PSD
process includes the following requirements:
• Existing Air Quality Analysis: A detailed analysis of the existing
ambient air quality of the area surrounding the facility is necessary.
Depending on the availability of existing air quality data and the poten-
tial facility emissions and their impact, there may be a need to establish
ambient air monitoring sites to collect data for a period of as long as a
year prior to submission of the final PSD permit application.
Best Available Control Technology (BACT) Analysis: The PSD appli
cation must include an analysis of alternative control technologies that
might be used to control facility emissions through a process called "top-
down" technology review. All relevant control technologies must be
identified by the applicant and each option analyzed for its economic,
energy, and environmental costs to determine which option will provide
the best control at an acceptable cost. The control technology meeting
the specified criteria will then be selected as the facility's BACT. Such a
review can require emission limits based on control technologies beyond
those for which the NSPS standards are based.
• Emission Dispersion Modeling: A detailed analysis of the impact that
the facility's emissions are likely to have on the ambient air quality must
be performed by modeling the expected emissions using local meteoro-
logical data over a five-year period to demonstrate that the proposed
Table 8-8
PSD Significant Emission Rates
Pollutant
Annual Emission (tons per year)
Paniculate matter
Carbon dioxide
NOX
Acid gases (S02 and HCI)
MWC metals (measured as PM)
MWC organics (measured as dioxins and furans)
Source: USEPA
100.0
100.0
100.0
40.0
15.0
3.5 *(10)-6
Page 8-33
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
facility will not exceed the ambient air quality standards. Again, if
sufficient data is not available, ambient monitoring may be required.
The allowable increase (increments) in ambient air quality will vary with
the existing air quality and the location of the facility. Allowable incre-
ments are given on a first-come, first-served basis, so it is incumbent for
the project team to seek and secure those increments on a timely basis.
Facility Plans and Specifications: The PSD permit application requires
that the applicant provide general information about the facility to be
constructed. Such information includes a facility description outlining
the nature, location, design, and typical operating schedule, and includ-
ing specifications and drawings showing the relevant design and plant
layout; a detailed construction schedule; and a detailed description of the
emission control technologies to be used and their effectiveness in
controlling emissions. The latter are necessary for providing a detailed
emissions estimate.
Public Comment and Hearings: A critical part of the PSD process is
providing the public with an adequate opportunity to participate in the
decision-making process. Such participation can include public notifica-
tion, public comment periods, and public hearings on the proposed
facility and the facility's likely environmental impacts.
PSD requirements
apply to facilities that are
located in nonattainment
areas and that have
emissions equal to or
greater than those listed
for PSD review (see
Table 8-8).
New Source Review (NSR) Permit
A "new source review permit" is required for any proposed facility that will
be located in a nonattainment area and that will result in an emission increase
equal to or greater than those listed for a PSD review. If the proposed facility
is located in a nonattainment area for one or more of the regulated pollutants,
the facility can be subject to further potential controls. The level of control will
depend on the classification of nonattainment (i.e., the greater the level of
nonattainment, the more stringent the level of control). The NSR require-
ments must be met for any pollutant that is not in compliance; for all other
regulated pollutants, the PSD requirements would apply. In addition, an NSR
applicant must comply with the following two requirements.
Lowest Achievable Emission Rate
To ensure that the facility will not result in a decrease in the region's air qual-
ity, the facility must be equipped with emission control technologies that will
achieve emission rates that meet either the strictest emission rate achieved in
practice by an existing facility or the strictest limitation in the State Implemen-
tation Plan.
Offsets
The facility emission rate of nonattainment pollutants needs to be offset by the
reduction of that pollutant from an existing source times a factor that is depen-
dent on the severity of the level of nonattainment of that pollutant.
State Implementation Plan (SIP)
The Federal Clean Air Act requires each state to adopt a state implementation
plan (SIP) that provides for the implementation, maintenance, and enforce-
ment of primary and secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) for each air quality control region of that state (see Table 8-9). State
implementation plans are usually a set of state air pollution emission regula-
tions and controls designed to achieve compliance with the NAAQS. SIPs must
contain requirements addressing both attainment and nonattainment areas.
Page 8-34
-------
CHAPTERS: COMBUSTION
Federal Emission Standards
The current National Ambient Air Quality Standards, as written in the 1990 Clean Air
Act Amendments, are provided in Table 8-9.
Table 8-9
NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
Pollutant
Primary Standards
Averaging Time
Secondary Standard
Carbon Monoxide
9ppm (lOMg/m3)
35ppm (40Mg/m3
8-houra
None
Lead
Quarterly average
Same as primary
Nitrogen dioxide
0.053 ppm (100 mg/mj
Annual (arithmetic mean) Same as primary
Paniculate Matter
(PM-io)
50mg/rrr
150mg/md
Annual (arithmetic meanjb
24-hourc
Same as primary
I jui I iy/111 ^t-i luui
0.12 ppm (235 mg/rrr)1-hourd Same as primary
0.03 ppm (80mg/rrr) Annual (arithmetic mean)
0.14 ppm (365mg/m3)
Ozone
Sulfur oxides
(S02)
24-houra
3-houra
0.5 ppm (1300mg/m3)
a Not to be exceeded more than once per year
b The standard is attained when the expected annual arithmetic mean concentration
is less than or equal to 50mg/m , as determined in accordance with Appendix K.
c The standard is attained when the expected number of days per calendar year with
a 24-hour average concentration above 150 mg/m^ is egual to or less than 1,
as determined in accordance with Appendix K.
d The standard is attained when the expected number of days per calendar year with
maximum hourly average concentrations above 0.12 ppm is egual to or less than 1,
as determined in accordance with Appendix H.
* Note EPA Regulations 40 CFR Part 50
Residual Disposal
Constituents of bottom
and fly ash vary,
depending on the
materials burned.
A WTE facility and its emission control system produce a variety of residues. By
far, the largest quantity is bottom ash, the unburned and nonburnable materials
discharged from the combustor at the end of the burning cycle.
The process also produces a lighter emission known as fly ash. Fly ash con-
sists of products in particulate form which are produced either as a result of the
chemical decomposition of burnable materials or are unburned (or partially
burned) materials drawn upward by thermal air currents in the incinerator and
trapped in pollution control equipment. Fly ash includes what is technically re-
ferred to as air pollution control residues.
Fly ash normally comprises only a small proportion of the total volume of
residue from a WTE facility; the quantity ranges from 10 to 20 percent of the total
ash. Distribution of bottom and fly ash is largely influenced by the type of com-
bustion unit. Excess air systems produce the most fly ash; controlled air units
produce the smallest amounts.
Constituents in both ash and scrubber product vary, depending on the ma-
terials burned. In systems burning a homogeneous fuel such as coal, oil, or tires,
levels of pollutants in residuals may be relatively constant. Systems burning a
more heterogeneous mixture, such as municipal, industrial, or medical waste,
may experience wide swings in the chemical composition of residuals.
The major constituents of concern in municipal waste combustion ash
are heavy metals, particularly lead, cadmium, and mercury. These metals
may impact human health and the environment if improperly handled,
stored, transported, disposed of, or reused (for example, using stabilized ash
in construction materials such as concrete blocks).
Solid waste is regulated by two major programs under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The RCRA Subtitle C program regu-
Page8-35
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
Hazardous waste
standards may apply to
ash disposal.
lates the disposal of solid waste that is hazardous, while the RCRA Subtitle D
program regulates nonhazardous solid waste. WTE facilities must determine
if their ash is a hazardous waste. This is usually done by testing. Ash classi-
fied as hazardous must be handled under RCRA Subtitle C regulations as a
hazardous waste. Testing and possible hazardous waste treatment/disposal
costs must be considered in economic evaluations of municipal waste combus-
tion. Ash not classified as hazardous must be disposed of in accordance with
Subtitle D and state regulations. Many states have their own special require-
ments for managing municipal waste combustion ash. Readers are urged to
check with their state environmental program to determine the current regula-
tory status of municipal waste combustion ash.
Water Discharge
WTE facilities may also
require water discharge
permits.
While ash is usually the major residue problem at WTE facilities, some plants
also generate wastewater. Those considering construction of a WTE facility
should anticipate and acquire all permits necessary for wastewater treatment
and disposal.
Surface Water Concerns
Wastewater at a WTE facility can be generated in various forms. These in-
clude tipping floor runoff system wash water, ash quench water, and water
from pollution control systems. These systems also must deal with normal
problems experienced by all large industrial facilities, including sanitary
wastewater disposal and surface-water runoff. For most WTE facilities, waste-
water can be recycled in a closed-loop system. In these systems, water from
floor drains, ash dewatering, water softener recharge, and other process
wastewaters are collected and stored in a surge tank. This water is then re-
used for ash quenching. Sanitary waste can be directed to municipal sewer
systems.
For most facilities, the quantity of water used amounts to a few gallons
per ton of refuse burned. Usually this effluent can be discharged to a local
sewer system. In some cases, regulatory authorities may require that the
waste stream be pretreated before discharge. State regulatory agencies and lo-
cal sanitation officials should be consulted to determine the best method of
handling wastewater.
Groundwater Concerns
Groundwater contamination at WTE facility sites has proven to be unlikely.
Proper management and handling of surface waters and proper ash disposal
will minimize potential contamination of groundwaters.
Local and Other Federal Program Requirements
Be careful to review and
comply with all pertinent
regulations.
The construction and operation of a WTE facility also requires several other per-
mits, many of which satisfy local requirements, such as those for zoning or traffic.
There are, however, two permits that are administered by federal agencies.
Public Utilities Regulatory and Policy Act (PURPA)
The Public Utilities Regulatory and Policy Act was established to encourage
the development of co-generation facilities to support existing electrical gener-
ating capacity. PURPA requires utilities to purchase electricity from produc-
ers at the utilities' "avoided cost," that is, the cost of building that capacity or
the cost of operating at a higher capacity. The application for certification of
added capacity is administered by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
Page 8-36
-------
CHAPTERS: COMBUSTION
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
The FAA controls the height of structures in the flight path of air traffic and
the marking of structures that may be of excessive height. The purpose is to
ensure that structures (for example, the stack) are not constructed in the direct
flight path of any landing strip and that they are properly marked and lighted
to warn air traffic of their existence. In some instances, stack height is restricted.
Other Environmental Issues
Each potential
environmental issue
must be carefully
evaluated.
Land-Retained Pollutants
Land-retained pollutants originating as stack or fugitive emissions are of in-
creasing concern. Bio-accumulation and subsequent ingestion from food is an
indirect exposure route resulting from land-retained emissions. To provide
better understanding of land-retained pollutants, it may be desirable to estab-
lish baseline contaminant levels before plant construction so changes in those
levels throughout the plant's operating lifetime can be monitored.
Noise Pollution
Truck traffic is the greatest source of noise pollution resulting from WTE plant
operations. Well-maintained and responsibly operated trucks will help mini-
mize this problem. Local ordinances may restrict truck traffic to certain hours
of the day and to specified truck corridors. Under these conditions, noise pol-
lution should not be a significant factor.
Noise resulting from plant operations and air handling fans associated
with the combustion and emissions control equipment is also a potential prob-
lem. Noise levels are likely to be highest in front of waste tipping floor doors,
ash floor doors, and in the vicinity of the air emissions stacks. Most states
have standards for noise levels from industrial facilities of this type. Walls,
fences, trees, and landscaped earthen barriers can serve to reduce noise levels.
Aesthetic Impacts
Negative aesthetic impacts can be prevented or minimized by proper site
landscaping and building design. Such impacts are much less problematic if
the facility is sited in an industrial area and not adjacent to residential or com-
mercial districts. Local zoning ordinances may ensure that aesthetic pollution
does not occur. Environmental impact assessments should discuss potential
aesthetic effects from a WTE project.
Keeping the process building at negative pressure can prevent undesir-
able odors from escaping outside of the building. Using air internal to the
process building for combustion air in the plant processes will destroy most
odors. Visible steam or vapor plumes can be emitted by some facilities.
Smoke resulting from improper conditions in the combustion chamber can
also be problematic. Air emissions stacks and cooling towers may also be
unappealing anomalies in the skyline of some areas. If external lights on
buildings prove objectionable to neighbors, perimeter lights on stands di-
rected toward the plant may be preferable.
Land Use Compatibility
Ideally, a WTE plant will be located where it is considered a compatible or
nondisruptive land use. Choosing an incompatible site can serve as a catalyst
for any existing public opposition to siting a facility. Construction in an industrially
zoned area may be considered an example of siting in a compatible land use area.
Page 8-37
-------
DECISION MAKER'S GUIDE TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT—Vol.
The availability of undeveloped land around the facility will mitigate
any unexpected and undesirable impacts by the facility. Having additional
land available is also desirable for future expansion and the installation of ad-
ditional energy recovery or emission controls as conditions change over the
life of the facility.
Environmentally Sensitive Areas
An environmental impact statement should thoroughly document the impacts of
WTE operations on environmentally sensitive areas. Contaminant levels of met-
als and other substances should be established downwind and near the facility to
use as a baseline for measuring future impacts on environmentally sensitive areas.
Health Risk Analysis
A health risk assessment
may be necessary.
Humans can be exposed to air emissions from WTE incinerators through direct
and indirect pathways. The most common direct pathway is inhalation of pollut-
ants; indirect pathways can include ingestion of contaminated food or water.
Both direct and indirect pathways through which pollutants enter humans and
ecosystems should be documented and accounted for in WTE risk assessments.
Land- and water-retained fallout is a growing concern for risk assessments.
Traditionally, risk assessment calculations have focused on air emissions.
Potential problems associated with storage, handling, and disposal of ash
should also be identified. Risk assessments should provide a full comparison
of alternative waste management options and their associated risks.
Role of the Contractor in the Permitting Process
Implementing an energy
recovery project will
require strict compliance
with state and local
regulations.
An environmental permit application must be consistent with the performance
characteristics of the technology and operations procedures that will be em-
ployed. If the applications are not consistent with the performance character-
istics, it may be necessary to reapply for some permits if there are technologi-
cal changes requiring permits. Depending on the negotiated positions taken
in the contracting process, either the contractor or the municipality will have a
significant role in negotiating the permit language outcome.
Regulatory Approval Summary
Implementing an energy recovery project will require strict compliance with
state and local regulations. State permits must be acquired for air and water
emissions and solid/hazardous waste disposal. Local governments may re-
quire special land-use approval or variances for land use impacts, including
nonconforming zoning and overweight loads.
Obtaining permits for waste-to-energy facilities can be controversial, es-
pecially when community concerns are not appropriately addressed. Project
progress depends upon anticipating these concerns throughout the siting pro-
cess. Project development can be more effective when information is freely
provided to the public during facility siting. The information in Chapter 2 on
siting facilities should be carefully reviewed.
SITE SELECTION
As the project team identifies the geographic area to be served, the quality and
quantity of solid waste available, and the viable energy markets, they can be-
gin focusing on potential facility sites and identifying the technologies that
will be required to meet the needs of specific markets.
Page 8-38
-------
CHAPTERS: COMBUSTION
The choice of site
affects the technology
needed.
For example, if one major steam buyer is available who can accept all the en-
ergy produced by a facility, a mass-burn facility or an RDF system with a dedi-
cated boiler may be the best alternative. On the other hand, if a variety of indus-
tries are present in an area, but are miles apart, an RDF facility to provide these in-
dustries with supplemental fuel may be an alternative worth exploring.
However, depending on the local public utility's payment rate for the elec-
tricity produced, either a mass-burn or an RDF unit with a dedicated boiler may
prove to be the most feasible. The mix of markets that provides the best eco-
nomic outlook for the developer will provide the basis for choosing the technol-
ogy that will be used to burn the waste and produce the desired energy.
Map Overlay Technique For Potential Sites
Overlay mapping helps
eliminate sites based on
predetermined criteria.
Figure 8-12
Waste-to-Energy Facility Siting Map Overlay Example
I I
I I- I
MAPI
MAP 2
Waste supply, energy market, and land use information can be displayed in
several different formats, including overlay maps, manually tabulated sum-
maries, and computer-assembled tables. Mapping helps narrow down poten-
tial sites through a process of elimination based on predetermined criteria.
The preferred approach is to list all possible customers and the type of
energy useful to them. For example, a hospital complex could heat and cool
buildings with low-pressure steam; a manufacturing plant could use high-
pressure steam; or an electric power plant could burn RDF. Note that selec-
tion in advance of a particular technology may limit potential energy custom-
ers to some degree.
As energy markets are being identified, an inventory should be con-
ducted of land use in the service area. This will identify potential facility sites.
The inventory should take into account highway system characteristics, sensi-
tive environmental settings, land use compatibility, and zoning or regulatory
constraints.
An example of map
overlays is shown in Figure
8-12. Each area's available
waste quantity is shown as
a solid black circle (see Map
#1, Figure 8-12); areas with
relatively high waste gen-
eration rates have larger
circles and the concentra-
|