Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
(5306)
                           ' contains at least 50 percent recycled fiber.

-------
                             DISCLAIMER

      The  mention  of  commercial  products  or  composting  vendor
systems in this report does not indicate endorsement or approval of
use by the U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.

-------
             MARKETS  FOR COMPOST
              Project Manager:
        Richard M. Kashmanian, Ph.D.
  OFFICE  OF POLICY,  PLANNING AND EVALUATION

OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE AND  EMERGENCY RESPONSE

    U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY
                November 1993

-------
                         ACKNOWLEDGEMENT S
      This report was prepared under U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Contract Nos.  68-01-7310  and 68-C8-0036, at the direction of
Richard Kashmanian,   EPA  Work  Assignment  Manager.   It was prepared
in conjunction with  CalRecovery,  Inc.  and Franklin Associates, Ltd.
The study benefitted from comments by EPA's Hope Pillsbury,  Truett
DeGeare,   Robert Bellinger, and  Terry Grogan, from  the  Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency  Response.

      EPA would also like to acknowledge  the assistance  of the
following  reviewers,  who  commented  on previous  drafts  of this
document  and   provided  suggestions   for  improvements.     These
individuals include:
     Pegi Ballister-Howells
     Patrick Kennedy
     Geoffrey  Kuter

     John McCabe

     Percival  Miller
     Nancy  Vandenberg
     N.C. Vasuki
Scat  Engineering
Alternate Disposal Systems,
  Inc.; and
American Soil,  Inc.
International Process Systems,
  Inc.
Michigan Department of Natural
  Resources
New York Legislative
  Commission on Solid Waste
  Management
Markets for Recycled Products
Delaware Solid Waste Authority

-------
                              FOREWORD

     The status of composting as a method of managing  leaves, grass
clippings,  brush,  and other municipal organic materials  is  changing
rapidly.   New  programs  continue to be  implemented.

     This compost  market study was  conducted  primarily during  the
Fall  of  1989.    At  that  time,   there  were   651  yard trimmings
composting  facilities  i.n the  U.S.   There were over  1,400 and 2,200
of  these facilities  in  1990  and  1991,  respectively,  and nearly
3,000  at the end  of  1992.   Growth  also  took place  in municipal
solid  waste  composting,  with the  number of  operational  programs
increasing  from  7  in   1989  to  18  in  1991  and   21  in  1992.
Furthermore,   the  number  of  States that  have  established  landfill
disposal bans  for some  or  all  components of  their yard trimmings
jumped from  10  in 1989  to  17  in  1991,  22 in  1992,  and 23  by mid-
1993.  The  States added to the list are Arkansas, Georgia,  Indiana,
Maryland, Massachusetts,  Maine,  Michigan, Missouri,  Nebraska,   New
Hampshire,  South Carolina, South Dakota, and West  Virginia.  Tables
A and B  summarize  the  status  of composting programs as  of  1991  are
provided as part  of  this foreword.

     Although the  basic  principles of compostinq remain unchanged,
the  types of  technologies employed and,  'more  importantly to this
report,  the  market  development tools  utilized have  evolved sig-
nificantly.    Again,  the  reader  is reminded that  the research  for
this report was primarily conducted  in  1989.   Although  some of  the
facts  may  not  be  current,   particularly   with  regard  to   the
individual program descriptions,  the concepts  presented are still
accurate.

-------
                        TABLE  OF  CONTENTS

                                                             Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION                                                ES- 1
EXISTING COMPOST PROGRAMS AND  MARKETS                       ES- 2
     Yard Trimmings Composting                             ES- 2
     Municipal Solid Waste Composting                       ES- 6
CHARACTERISTICS AND BENEFITS OF COMPOST                    ES- 6
CHARACTERISTICS AND BENEFITS OF COMPETING/
  COMPLEMENTARY PRODUCTS                                    ES-10
COMPOST USES AND MARKETS                                    ES-10
     Agriculture                                            ES-12
     Landscape Industry                                     ES-12
     Nursery Industry                                       ES-12
     Public Agencies                                        ES-12
     Residential                                             ES-13
FACTORS PERTINENT TO DEVELOPING COMPOST MARKETS            ES-13
     Compost  Specifications                                 ES-13
     Compost Testing Requirements                           ES-13
     Compost Distribution                                   ES-13
     Compost Policies                                       ES-14
BARRIERS TO DEVELOPING COMPOST MARKETS                      ES-17
     Economic  Barriers                                      ES-17
     Noneconomic Barriers                                   ES-17
STRATEGIES TO MITIGATE/OVERCOME BARRIERS TO
  DEVELOPING COMPOST MARKETS                                ES-17
     Overcoming Economic Barriers                           ES-17
     Overcoming Noneconomic Barriers                        ES-18

Chapter 1 - INTRODUCTION

STUDY  OBJECTIVE                                              1- 1
ROLE OF COMPOSTING IN MUNICIPAL SOLID  WASTE MANAGEMENT      1- 2
     Composting Yard Trimmings                              1- 2
     Composting Other Municipal Organic Materials           1- 3
NEED FOR DEVELOPING COMPOST MARKETS                          1- 5
SCOPE  OF REPORT                                              1- 6
REFERENCES                                                    1- 9

Chapter 2 - CHARACTERISTICS AND BENEFITS OF COMPOST
              AND COMPETING/COMPLEMENTARY PRODUCTS

CHARACTERISTICS AND BENEFITS OF COMPOST                     2- 1
     Physical/Chemical Characteristics                       2- 3
          Carbon/Nitrogen  Ratio                              2-3
          Nutrients                                          2- 3
          pH                                                 2- 5
          Heavy Metals                                       2-5
          Herbicides, Pesticides,  and  Other Potential
            Toxics                                           2- 7

-------
           Pathogens                                           2-  7
           Soluble  Salts                                       2-  7
CHARACTERISTICS AND  BENEFITS  OF COMPETING/
  COMPLEMENTARY PRODUCTS                                     2-  8
     Soils                                                    2-12
     Bark  Mulch and  Wood Chips                               2-14
     Potting  Soils                                            2-18
     Livestock Manure  and Manure Compost                     2-18
     Peat                                                     2-21
     Livestock Bedding and Litter                            2-25
           Dairy Cattle Bedding                               2-25
           Poultry  Litter                                     2-30
     Others                                                   2-31
           Perlite                                             2-31
           Vermiculite                                         2-31
           Vermicompost                                       2-33
REFERENCES                                                    2-34

Chapter 3  -  COMPOST  USES AND MARKETS

COMPOST USES                                                  3_  l
COMPOST MARKETS                                               3_  2
     Agriculture                                              3-3
     Landscape Industry                                       3-4
     Nursery  Industry                                         3-4
     Public  Agencies                                          3-5
     Residential                                              3_  5
REFERENCES                                                    3_  7

Chapter 4  -  FACTORS  PERTINENT TO DEVELOPING
              COMPOST  MARKETS

INTRODUCTION                                                  4_  ]_
COMPOST SPECIFICATIONS                                       4_  l
     Organic  Matter  Content                                  4-4
     Water-holding Capacity                                  4-4
     Bulk  Density                                             4-4
     Size  Distribution                                       4_  4
     Nutrient Content                                         4-8
     Level of Non-toxic  Substances                            4-8
     Level of Potentially Toxic Substances                   4-8
     Concentration of  Weed Seeds                             4-20
     Seed  Germination  and Root Elongation                    4-20
     Soluble  Salts                                            4-20
     Ratio of Available  Carbon/Nitrogen                      4-20
     PH                                                       4-20
     Color                                                    4_20
     Odor                                                     4_21
     Specifications for  Bark  Products                        4-21
     Examples  of  Compost  Standards                            4-21
COMPOST TESTING REQUIREMENTS                                  4_23
COMPOST DISTRIBUTION                                          4_23
                                 11

-------
     Motor Carrier                                           4-27
          Bagged Compost                                     4-27
          Bulk Compost                                       4-27
     Railroad                                                4-27
     Shipping                                                4-30
          Containerized Cargo                                4-30
          Bulk Cargo                                         4-30
COMPOST POLICIES                                             4-31
     Environment and Public Health and  Safety               4-31
          Facility Control                                   4-31
          Compost  Quality                                    4-32
     Composting Program Implementation                       4-33
     Distribution  and Use of the  Compost  Product            4-34
REFERENCES                                                   4-38

Chapter 5 -  ECONOMIC AND  NONECONOMIC  BARRIERS
               TO  DEVELOPING COMPOST  MARKETS

ECONOMIC  BARRIERS                                            5- 1
     Failure to Identify Potential Markets                   5~ !
     Cost Pressures from Competing Products                 5~ !
     Post-processing Costs                                   5~ 2
     Transportation Costs                                    5~ 2
     Impacts of Competing Product Capital Investment        5~ 2
NONECONOMIC BARRIERS                                         5- 2
     Compost Quality Assurance                              5~ 2
          Horticulture                                       5~ 3
          Field-grown  Crops                                  5~ 3
          Land Reclamation/Landfill  Cover                   5- 3
     Compost User  Attitudes                                  5- 4
     Locations of  Markets with Respect  to Compost
        Operations                                            5~ 4
     Access  to Transportation  Routes                         5~ 5
     Comparative Availability  of  Compost                     5~ 6
     Procurement Policies  for  Compost                       5~ 7
     Restrictions  on Compost Use                             5~ 7
     Legal Constraints                                       5~ 8
REFERENCES                                                   5-10

Chapter 6  -  STRATEGIES TO MITIGATE/OVERCOME  BARRIERS
               TO  DEVELOPING  COMPOST  MARKETS

OVERCOMING ECONOMIC BARRIERS                                 6- 1
      Identifying  Potential  Compost Markets                  6- 1
     Overcoming  Cost  Pressures from Competing Products      6-2
     Recovering  Post-processing Costs                       6- 2
     Mitigating  Transportation Costs                        6- 3
     Overcoming  Impacts of  Competing Product Capital
        Investment                                            6-4
OVERCOMING NONECONOMIC BARRIERS                             6- 5
      Providing Compost Quality Assurance                    6- 5
      Improving  Compost User Attitudes                       6-5
      Identifying Locations of Compost  Producers and Users   6- 7
      Gaining Access  to Transportation  Routes                6- 7

                                  i i i

-------
     Increasing  Comparative  Availability  of Compost          g-  7
     Establishing  Procurement Policies for Compost           g-  8
     Complying with  Restrictions on Compost Use              6-  8
     Recognizing Legal  Constraints                           g_  9
REFERENCES                                                    6-10

Appendix A -  EXAMPLES OF  EXISTING PROGRAMS AND MARKETS

INTRODUCTION                                                  A_  -]_
     Yard Trimmings  Composting                               A-  1
     Municipal Solid Waste  Composting                        A-  2
     Composting  Other Organic Materials                      A-  5

EXAMPLES OF COMPOSTING  PROGRAMS  BY REGION                    A_  5
     Central                                                  A-  5
          Boulder,  Colorado                                   A-  5
          Lincoln,  Nebraska                                   A-  5
          Omaha,  Nebraska                                     A-  6
     Industrial                                               A-  6
          Wilmington, Delaware                               A-  6
          Montgomery County,  Maryland                        A-  7
          Traverse City, Michigan                            A-  7
          Essex  County, New  Jersey                           A-  8
          Franklin Township,  New Jersey                      A-  8
          Parlin, New Jersey                                 A-  9
          Wrightstown,  New  Jersey                            A-  9
          Cleveland,  Ohio                                     A-ll
          Toledo,  Ohio                                        A-ll
          Allegheny  County,  Pennsylvania                      A-12
     Midlands                                                 A-12
          Chicago,  Illinois                                   A-12
          Urbana and Champaign,  Illinois                      A-13
          Will and Lake Counties,  Illinois                   A-13
          Afton,  Minnesota                                    A-13
          Carver County, Minnesota                           A-14
          Fillmore County,  Minnesota                         A-15
          Hennepin County, Minnesota                         A-15
          Swift  County, Minnesota                            A-16
          Monroe,  Wisconsin                                   A-16
          Portage,  Wisconsin                                 A-16
     Northeast                                                A-17
          Wellesley,  Massachusetts                           A-17
          Fort Fairfield,  Maine                               A-17
          Thomaston,  Maine                                    A-18
          Brookhaven and Holtsville,  New  York                A-18
          Islip,  New York                                     A-18
          Saratoga Springs,  New  York                         A-19
          Scarsdale,  New York                                A-19
     Pacific                                                  A-20
          Davis,  California                                   A-20
          Palo Alto,  California                               A-20
          San Mateo,  California                               A-21
          Portland,  Oregon                                    A-21

                                  iv

-------
          King County,  Washington                            A 22
          Seattle,  Washington                                A-22
     South                                                    A~23
          Gentry,  Arkansas                                    A 23
          Ft.  Lauderdale,  Florida                            A~23
          Perry,  Florida                                     A-23
          Sumter  County,  Florida                             A-24
          Mecklenburg  County,  North Carolina                 A-24
SUMMARY                                                       A~24
REFERENCES                                                    A"28
                                   v

-------
                          LIST OF TABLES

Table                                                        Page

ES- 1     Characteristics of  the  Six  Study Regions          ES- 4
ES- 2     Status of MSW Composting/Co-Composting
            Facilities in the U.S.  (Fall 1989)              ES- 7
ES- 3     Operational MSW Composting/Co-Composting
            Facilities in the U.S.  (Fall 1989)              ES- 8
ES- 4     Competing/Complementary Products Identified      ES-11
ES- 5     Municipal Solid Waste Management Policies
            in  the  Six  Study  Regions                        ES-15

 1- 1     State Bans  on Landfilling  Yard  Trimmings  (1989)  1- 4

 2- 1     C/N Ratio of  Various  Municipal  Organic Materials  2- 4
 2-2     Competing/Complementary Products Identified       2-9
 2-3     Competing/Complementary Products With Compost     2-10
 2- 4     Average Prices for  Topsoil  and Fill  Dirt  (1989)    2-13
 2- 5     Average Nutrient Composition of  Wood              2-15
 2- 6     Average Bulk Density and  Particle Size of
            Various Growth Media                             2-16
 2-7     Average Prices for  Bark Mulch and
            Wood Chips  (1989)                                 2-17
 2- 8     Average Prices for  Various  Soil  Amendments (1989)  2-19
 2- 9     Average Characteristics of  Livestock Manures      2-22
 2-10     Chemical  Characteristics  of Different Peat Types  2-24
 2-11     Moisture  Absorbing  Capacities (MACs)  of Several
            Livestock Bedding and Litter Materials           2-26
 2-12     Water Absorption Capacity of Livestock
            Bedding Materials                               2-29
 2-13     Bedding Use Per Poultry Management  Scheme          2-32

 4- 1     Level of  Importance of  Compost Quality
            Parameters  for Various  Uses                     4-2
 4-2     Water-holding Capacity  of Various Soil Amendments 4-5
 4-3     Bulk  Densities and  Moisture Contents of
            Various Soil Amendments                         4-6
 4-4     Size  Distribution of Yard Trimmings Compost       4- 7
 4- 5     Examples  of Nutrient Content Levels in Composts
            and Selected  Other  Soil Amendments              4-9
 4-6     Examples  of Concentrations  of Total Metals
            in  Composts                                      4-12
 4-7     Examples  of Concentrations  of Herbicides,
            Pesticides,  PCBs, and PCP in Composts           4-14
 4-8     Examples  of Compost Standards for Various  States  4-16
 4-9     Categories  and Nomenclature of Bark and Soil
            Products                                         4-22
 4-10     Council of  European Communities'  (CEC'S)
            Proposed  Physical and Chemical Parameters for
            MSW Compost Applied  to  Agricultural Soils       4-24
 4-11     Municipal Solid Waste  Management Policies
            in  the  Six  Study  Regions  (July 1989)             4-35

                                 vi

-------
A- 1     Status  of  MSW Composting/Co-Composting
            Facilities  in  the  U.S.  (Fall 1989)                A-  3
A- 2     Operational  MSW  Composting/Co-Composting
            Facilities  in  the  U.S.  (Fall 1989)                A-  4
A- 3     Test  Results - Middlebush Compost,  Inc.,
            Franklin Township, New Jersey                    A-10
A- 4     Characteristics  of the Six Study Regions
            (July  1989)                                       A-26
                                v i  i

-------
                          LIST  OF FIGURES

Figure                                                       Page

ES- 1     Regions of the  United  States  as defined for the
            study                                           ES- 3

 1- 1     Regions of the  United  States  as defined for the
            study                                            1- 7

 2-1     pH scale  showing  the general  range  of finished,
            stabilized  compost                               2- 6

 4- 1     Intrastate motor  carrier rates for bagged compost
             (point  of  origin:  Portland,  Oregon)             4-28
 4-2     Interstate motor  carrier rates for bagged compost
             (point  of  origin: Portland,  Oregon)             4-29
                                 Vlll

-------
                        EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION

     Reducing the volume of municipal solid waste  (MSW) that must
be disposed of  is  a priority  for many  communities  around the
country.   Generally, MSW  generation  is  increasing while landfill
disposal capacity is decreasing and new landfills  are  becoming more
difficult  and  expensive to site.   The  U.S.  Environmental  Protection
Agency  (EPA)  established a national goal  of reducing  the MSW
requiring disposal  by  25 percent through source reduction and
recycling   ( including  composting)  as a  means  of reducing the
nation's dependence  on  landfills.   Composting  the  organic  portions
of the  MSW  stream  is  one management  technique that is  being
employed to help attain the EPA goal.

     Composting  is  a biological  process  of  stabilizing organic
matter under controlled conditions into a product that  is rich_in
humus and provides  organic  matter and nutrients.   The  composting
process achieves both volume and  weight reduction. Composting can
divert  yard trimmings  (including leaves, grass  clippings, and
brush),  'food scraps (from residential,  commercial, institutional,
and industrial sources)  ,   and  other  easily  decomposable organic
materials from disposal facilities and convert them  into valuable
soil  amendment products.    Therefore,   composting  can conserve
considerable  landfill space,  save  on  MSW disposal costs,  and
produce useful end products.    However,  as  composting activity
expands,  there also needs to be greater attention to  stimulating
markets for compost in order  to avoid possible  oversupplies of
compost.    This is  particularly  important  as markets for compost
become more competitive with increased composting  activity.

     A key element  in designing a market development strategy for
compost is to determine the quantity of the product  which will be
available.    However,   there is  currently  a  lack of accurate
information nationally from which to  draw  firm conclusions.   Data
is sketchy for determining the percent contribution  of  leaves,
grass clippings,  brush,  etc. to the total amount  of yard trimmings
generated, the current and projected composting levels  and compost
supplies,  the future quality of the  compost product,  etc.

     The  greatest potential uses for compost products  in a  given
locale  depend on the identified  local  markets.    Therefore, the
compost products offered should  be  designed to meet the quality
specifications and quantity demands of the  intended markets.   There
is,  therefore, no single  "best" compost product.

     Likewise, there is no  single  "best"  compost  market.  Markets
for compost must be  identified and developed since the economics of
composting improve with demand for the finished product.  If  little
or no demand exists for the compost,  the cost of  storage increases

                              E S - 1

-------
and disposal  costs  may be incurred.   Primary markets  have  been
municipal applications and use by local residents.   if increased
amounts of compost are to be produced,  additional markets must be
secured.

     The objective of this  study is to provide information to
expand markets  for  compost.    The  information will be  useful to
producers,  marketers, and  users of compost,  as well  as  to all
levels of government officials.

     The study is based primarily  on  a review in 1989  of the
appropriate  literature  and information obtained from informal
discussions with  compost marketing  experts,  compost users,  and
potential compost  users.   The nationwide compost market study was
conducted on  a regional basis,  as  shown  in Figure  ES-1.   The
definition  of the six regions defined  was not based on size in
terms  of land area.   Rather,  criteria such as MSW management
activities and characteristics, geographic  region, and population
density were considered in determining  the  regions.


EXISTING COMPOST PROGRAMS AND MARKETS

Yard Trimmings composting

     composting yard trimmings has been practiced  for many years in
the U.S.    However,  this practice  has  attained a much greater
popularity recently.   Although the  quantities of yard  trimmings
generated vary from region to region,  their contribution  to a
community's solid waste  stream is  significant.    At  the national
level, yard trimmings contribute  approximately 20  percent annually
to the MSW  stream.  The relative ease with which yard trimmings can
be  source  separated  and diverted   from landfills has prompted
hundreds of  yard trimmings composting programs  to  be implemented in
the United States.  Many different  approaches  have been taken in
these  composting programs,  from  low-technology to  high-technology
composting.

     Table ES-1 presents certain characteristics of the six study
regions.   The  data in the table show that there  seems to  be  a rough
correlation between the tipping fee for landfill disposal and the
number of operational composting programs.

     The results of the assessment  of existing  composting programs
and markets  show  that  there  is  a  considerable  interest  in
composting,  driven primarily by landfill  capacity  pressures  and the
consequent need to reduce the amount of materials  disposed of.   The
markets  for  the  finished  products vary  from  uses  by  public
entities, to wholesale  and retail sale,  to  private  individuals and
residents,   to commercial markets.   The majority of  the existing
programs have found adequate markets for the volumes of compost
currently produced.

                              E S - 2

-------
   PAC
M
CO
         Figure  ES-1. Regions of the  United States as defined  for the study.

-------
    Number  of States
    Population in 1987
      (millions)
    Population density
      (population/square  mile)
    Average  landfill  tipping
      fee  ($/ton)  1 /
    Number  of yard trimmings
      composting  programs
n   Number  of operational
M     MSW  composting programs
I
j*.   List  of  States
                                                 Table ES-1

                                 CHARACTERISTICS  OF  THE SIX STUDY REGIONS
Central
14
39
26
9
7
0
AZ
CO
ID
KS
MT
NE
NV
NM
ND
OK
SD
TX
UT
WY
Industrial
8
52
235
28
354
1
DE
IN
MD
MI
NJ
OH
PA
WV






Midlands
5
29
91
20
135
4
IL
IA
MN
MO
WI









Northeast
7
31
278
58
134
0
CT
ME
MA
NH
NY
RI
VT







Pacific
3
35
110
29
15
1
CA
OR
WA











South
11
56
110
14
5
1
AL
AR
FL
GA
KY
LA
MS
NC
SC
TN
VA



                                                 (continued)

-------
                                        Table ES-1  (cont.)

1 /   Average of  tipping fees reported in  Pettit,  C.L.    "Tip  Fees  Up More Than 30% in
     Annual NSWMA  Survey."  w?gte Agg. pp.  101-106.   March 1989.

Sources:   Glenn, J.  and D. Riggle.   "Where Does the Waste Go?  --  Part  I."   Biocycle.
          30(4):34-39.   April 1989.

          Goldstein,  N.    "Solid Waste Composting in the U.S."   BioCycle.  30 (11):32-37.
          November 1989.

-------
Municipal Solid Waste Composting

     Following a decline in interest  in MSW composting in the U.S.
during  the  1960s,  it  is  currently receiving a substantial amount of
attention  for reasons  similar to the growth in yard  trimmings
composting.    This type  of  composting is typically  more  capital
intensive  than yard  trimmings Composting,   and  is capable  of
composting  these materials  with food scraps,   and  non-recycled
paper.

     Composting source  separated MSW refers  to the processing of
only organic  materials  suitable  for composting which  have been
segregated at the point of generation.    Mixed MSW  composting
involves the processing  of  the entire MSW stream without  separation
at the point of generation, but rather separation at the  composting
facility with varying  degrees  of effectiveness.    The  type of
collection  system  selected  should  consider and carefully balance
costs and  equipment  needs for collection as  well  as processing,
quality,  marketability,  and value of  the  recovered products  (i.e.,
compost  and recyclable),  total  diversion rates from disposal
facilities,  the public perception toward  composting and recycling,
etc.

     Table  ES-2 outlines  the  status  of MSW composting  by region.
The seven full-scale  MSW composting facilities  in operation  in the
U.S.  as of  Fall 1989 are listed in Table  ES-3.  Capacities  of the
facilities  range from about  ten to  a few hundred tons per day.
Very little detailed  information  is  available on the quantity or
quality of  the finished compost.   Their output of compost has not
been sufficient to permit a long-term definition of the market for
their  respective products.


CHARACTERISTICS AND BENEFITS OF COMPOST

     Compost   is   a   valuable   soil   amendment.      Some  of  the
improvements in soil  properties  that  can  result from  using compost
are:

          improved soil porosity;
     -    improved water retention;
     -    improved soil  infiltration;
          improved resistance to erosion;
          enhanced storage and release of nutrients;
          decreased soil crusting;
          improved soil  tilth; and
          plant disease  suppression.

     Due mainly  to its  organic  matter and humus content,  compost
helps  to reduce   erosion and improve plant growth,   which can
substantially reduce  nutrient  transport in runoff to  surface
waters.   Therefore,  the  addition  of compost to  soil  not only

                              E S - 6

-------
                            Table ES-2

              STATUS OF MSW COMPOSTING/CO-COMPOSTING
                FACILITIES IN THE U.S.  (FALL  1989)

Region          Consideration Planning I/    Operational     Total

Central               0               404
Industrial            3               418
Midlands             10              16              4           30
Northeast             7               8              0           15
Pacific               2               316
South                 4.              6.              1           11

Totals               26              41              7           74
1 /   Includes planning,   design,   permitting,   and   construction
     stages,  as  well  as pilot-scale or research  facilities.

Source:    Goldstein,  N.    "Solid Waste  Composting  in the U.S."
          BioCvcle.  30(11)  :32-37.   November 1989.
                               E S - 7

-------
                            Table ES-3

             OPERATIONAL MSW COMPOsTING/CO-COMPOSTING
                FACILITIES IN THE U.S.  (FALL  1989)
Location
Delaware
  Wilmington

Florida
  Sumter  County

Minnesota
  Fillmore County
  Lake of the Woods
   County
  St. Cloud

Washington
  Skamania County

Wisconsin
  Portage
Type of System



In-vessel


Windrow


Windrow

Windrow
In-vessel/drum


Windrow


In-vessel/drum
Material Added
    to MSW
Biosolids
None
None

None
Biosolids
None
Biosolids
Source:    Goldstein,  N.  and B. Spencer.   "Solid Waste  composting
           Facilities ."   BioCycle.  31(1)  :36-39.  January 1990.
                               E S -

-------
  reduces erosion and recycles  nutrients,  but  also can provide
  important  water quality benefits.

       Compost  usually  does  not  contain  nutrients  in amounts
  necessary to be a one-for-one substitute for inorganic fertilizer
  due to its generally low content of the macronutrients:  nitrogen,
  phosphorus,  and potassium  (NPK)  .  However,  it has the advantage of
  releasing nutrients slowly to plants so that the nutrients may be
  used over a  period of  years; therefore,   annual applications of
  compost can build up nutrient  reserves.     Precautions  should be
  taken so  that build-up of excessive levels of nutrients or unwanted
  substances does not  also occur.   Compost  also can be a good source
  of micronutrients which plants  likewise need,  but in smaller
  amounts compared to macronutrients.

       Some composts  exhibit plant  disease suppression  traits by
  reducing the incidence  of certain plant diseases which can plague
  the nursery industry,  for example.  This can  lead  to the reduced
  use of fungicides for fighting plant diseases.

       Feedstocks for composting  may exhibit  high  carbon-to-nitrogen
  ratios,  but  these  will  generally be lowered to a  suitable range
  during  the  composting process.     The  composting process is
  relatively insensitive  to the pH of feedstocks,  and stable, cured
  compost tends to have a pH around neutral.

       Tests performed on yard  trimmings  compost  indicate heavy
  metals  are not normally  a concern.   Depending on  the quality of the
  feedstocks and the degree  of  materials  separation performed, mixed
  MSW compost  may contain  heavy metals above  levels acceptable under
  current regulations.

       Herbicides,   pesticides,   and  other  potential  toxics  are
  generally not a  concern  with yard trimmings  compost.    Tests
  performed have  tended to find these to be  within acceptable levels.
  Toxic organics diminish over time during  the composting process.
  Pesticides  that may be present  in grass  clippings  also  undergo a
  dilution effect  when grass clippings  are mixed with leaves and
  other organic materials.

       A properly  maintained composting process  should  eliminate
  dangers of  pathogens.    Temperatures  maintained  at 55 degrees
  Celsius for  three  days ensure adequate pathogen destruction for in-
  vessel and  aerated static pile  composting methods.    Using the
windrow  composting  method,   temperatures must  attain at  least 55
  degrees Celsius over at least 15 days,  with a minimum of  five
  turnings during  the high temperature  period  to ensure  adequate
  pathogen  destruction.   Periodic  turning and mixing is important to
  assure  all materials  are  subjected to such  temperatures to achieve
  pathogen  destruction  throughout  the  compost.
                                E S - 9

-------
     Soluble  salts should be tested for in composts,  since high
salinity  can  adversely   affect plants  and  crops,   especially
seedlings.   Tests performed have  generally  found total soluble salt
concentrations to be at safe levels,  which would not be harmful to
plants.


CHARACTERISTICS  AND BENEFITS OF  COMPETING/COMPLEMENTARY PRODUCTS

     The competing/complementary  products that have  been identified
are  listed  in Table ES-4.   They have  a  long  history of  use in
agriculture,    horticulture,    construct ion,    landscaping,    and
residential  gardening.   Some of  the uses of these  products include:

     -    soil amendment;
          soil aeration;
          moisture  retention;
          soil  stabilization;
          erosion  control  and repair;
          growing  medium;
          decorative cover;  and
          land reclamation.

The  prices of competing/complementary products vary depending upon
location,  availability, and  season.

     The nutrient  content of the  competing  products  is generally
low,   but  these products  may   be  fortified with additions of
nitrogen,  phosphorus,  and potassium prior to retail  sale.   Other
physical and  chemical  characteristics  of competing/complementary
products are  acceptable  for the uses for which  the  products are
intended.   These products  have a  reputation and  proven track  record
which enhances their desirability.


COMPOST USES  AND MARKETS

     Five primary  market  segments with significant potential uses
for  compost were identified.  They are:

          agriculture;
           landscape  industry;
          nursery  industry;
          public agencies;  and
          residents.

     Uses of  different types of  compost (e.g.,  yard trimmings or
MSW)  in each market are affected by  each  market's needs as to
quality,   composition,   and appearance,   as well  as by  applicable
regulations.
                              ES - 10

-------
                            Table ES-4

           COMPETING/COMPLEMENTARY PRODUCTS IDENTIFIED

Soils

          Topsoil
          Pulverized  topsoil
          Screened  topsoil
          Fill dirt
          River-bottom  silt

Wood Products

          Bark mulch
          Wood chips

Other  Products

          Potting  soils
          Custom  soil mixes
          Livestock manure and manure compost
          Peat
          Livestock bedding  and litter
          Perlite
          Vermiculite
                              ES - 11

-------
Agriculture

     The agriculture  industry  is  the  largest  potential  market  for
compost although  it  is the most difficult to penetrate.   Studies
have shown that the  sustained application of compost to soil  has
many beneficial effects.    Some of the problems 'that  need to be
overcome  to develop  the market are availability of compost,
consistency  in composition and  nutrient content,  ensuring  low
levels of potentially toxic  substances,  the  effectiveness  of bulk
application,   distribution  methods,  effect on  yields,  cost,  and
acceptance by farmers.

Landscape Industry

     The   landscape    industry,   which   includes   residential
landscapers,  uses  large amounts of soil amendments.  Soil with poor
physical properties  can be significantly improved by the  correct
use of compost.    Areas  of  new  planting could  benefit  from  the  use
of  compost  to improve  the quality of existing soil rather than
replacing  the soil  with topsoil  at  a potentially  higher cost.
However,  landscapers have expressed concern that compost from yard
trimmings  may contain harmful amounts  of  viable  seeds, herbicides,
and pesticides.    Making results of laboratory tests  demonstrating
the safety of yard  trimmings  compost available  to landscapers
should alleviate  these  concerns.   Other  factors important to  the
utility   of   compost  in   the   landscaping   industry   include
availability,  distribution channels,  and  "cost  .

Nursery Industry

     The potential  for using  compost  in the nursery industry is
greatly dependent on the economy and the housing  industry.  Home
sales have  a direct   effect  on the demand for  nursery products.
Quality,   availability,  distribution  channels,  and cost 'are also
important to  the  utility  of compost  in the nursery industry.

Public Agencies

     Public agencies have the potential to use large quantities of
both high-quality and low-quality  composts.   High-quality  compost
can be used  in areas  where humans  and/or animals  may come in
contact  with the compost.     Lower-quality,   relatively   stable
composts may be suitable  for land reclamation,  fill  material,  and
landfill cover.    Other  uses  by public  agencies  include:

          landscaping  and  redevelopment;
          weed abatement on  public lands;
          land upgrade;  and
          roadway maintenance  and median strip  landscaping.
                              ES  -  12

-------
Residential

     The residential  segment represents a  substantial  market for
soil amendments.    The  amount of  compost that  the residential
segment will use in the  future is largely dependent on the ability
to   consistently   produce   a   quality   product,    regulations,
distribution  channels and form,  availability, public  education,
cost ,  as well  as  population growth, the economy,  and the housing
industry.


FACTORS PERTINENT TO  DEVELOPING COMPOST MARKETS

Compost Specifications

     Quality,  which is  very important  for  developing markets for
compost,  can  be  defined by a  set of  specifications.    However,
specifications have not  been uniformly  developed for composts and
other soil amendments.   Specifications  for soil  amendments could
include a  number of  parameters from  the following  list,  some of
which overlap:

          organic matter  content;
          water-holding  capacity;
          bulk density;
          size distribution  (i.e.,  particle size);
          nutrient  content;
          level of  contaminants;
          concentration  of  potentially  toxic  compounds;
          concentration of weed seeds;
          seed germination  and  root elongation;
          soluble salts;
          ratio of  available carbon/nitrogen;
          pH  ;
          color;  and
          odor.

Compost Testing Requirements

     Although procedures for testing the above parameters exist,  a
standard procedure  for testing composts has  not  been established
across the  U.S.     Some  public  and private producers of  compost
conduct their own tests and guarantee  levels of  nutrients and other
constituents.  Positive test results can enhance the  marketability
of compost products,  although testing adds  to costs.

Compost Distribution

     The method and cost  of  transporting compost from the compost
processing facility to  the  distribution center or user can play a
critical  role in the cost-effectiveness  of the composting facility.
Compost can be expensive to  transport over  long distances relative

                              ES  -  13

-------
to its economic  value.   Bulk  transportation,  in some  cases, may be
feasible by  rail  (trips of several hundred  miles)  or ship  (when
there  is  access   to   navigable   waterways)  .     However,    local
distribution will usually be the most  desirable,  with bulk or
bagged compost carried primarily by truck.

Compost Policies

     Policies regarding compost  use  can  be implemented on the
Federal,  State,  or  local  level and can be in the form  of  guidelines
or regulations.   Most compost  use  policies  have  only  recently been
developed or are still in  the developmental  stages.   Policies and
regulations can  affect:

     -     environment;
           public health and safety;
           program implementation; and
           distribution,  cost,  and use of the product.

     Examples of  environmental and public  health and safety
policies are those that  regulate the  siting and  operation of
composting facilities and those  that  affect compost quality.  Yard
trimmings  compost is regulated less stringently than  composts from
mixed  MSW or biosolids  (also  referred to as municipal sewage
sludge) because the  compost typically contains  a much lower  level
of contaminants  and poses less  potential to harm the environment
and  public health.    Efforts to  regulate  compost  quality have
focused  on the  process and the finished product.    These  efforts
include   controlling  the   feedstock  to    avoid  contamination,
maintenance of high temperature  levels  to ensure pathogen and weed
seed   destruction,    and developing  compost quality standards.
Labeling standards  can  also be developed so that users are aware of
the  product  content  and  quality.

     Policies encouraging the  implementation  of composting programs
have resulted  in greater quantities of  compost  produced and
marketed.  Programs have been both voluntary and mandatory.   Table
ES-5 summarizes  policies in the study regions which affect compost
program  implementation.

     Policies that  affect  the distribution and  use of the product
are  probably the least  developed.   Policies that  give  purchasing
preference  to  compost  could do  much to  encourage use of the
product.    Also, policies that give compost a lower-transportation
rate,  and policies  regarding  bid specifications for  materials
needed by  governmental agencies,  would  have a beneficial effect on
compost  market  development.
                              ES  -  14

-------
                                                 Table ES-5
                    MUNICIPAL  SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT POLICIES  IN THE SIX STUDY REGIONS
                                                  (July 1989)
M
cn
in
Number of  States
Number with MSWM I. /plans
 currently  in  place
Number planning to have MSWM
 MSWM I/ plans  in  place within
 two years
Number of MSWM  I/  plans
 providing  mandatory guidelines
Number of MSWM  I/  plans
 providing  voluntary guidelines
Number which  gave  composting
 higher priority  than
 combustion
Number which  ban  landfilling
 of yard trimmings
tral Industrial
14
1
2
0
3
3
0
8
7
1
1
7
6
3
Midlands
5
5
0
1
4
4
4
Northeast
7
7
0
4
3
3
1
Pacific
3
2
1
0
3
3
0
South
11
4
4
1
7
6
2
                                                  (continued)

-------
w
en
                                              Table ES-5  (cont.)

    List Of States                    AZ           DE             IL          CT           CA       AL
                                      CO           IN             IA          ME           OR       AR
                                      ID           MD             MN          MA           WA       FL
                                      KS           MI             MO          NH                    GA
                                      MT           NJ             WI          NY                    KY
                                      NE           OH                         RI                    LA
                                      Nv           PA                         VT                    MS
                                      NM           WV                                               NC
                                      ND                                                           SC
                                      OK                                                           TN
                                      SD                                                           VA
                                      TX
                                      UT
                                      WY
    i /    MSWM = municipal solid  waste management.

-------
BARRIERS TO DEVELOPING  COMPOST MARKETS

     Economic   and   noneconomic   barriers  to  developing  and/or
expanding compost markets  have been identified.   At least some of
these barriers  may be  faced in establishing a composting program.

Economic Barriers

     Economic barriers  that can  hinder  developing  and/or  expanding
compost markets are:

          failure to identify potential markets;
          cost  pressures  from competing products;
          post-processing  costs;
          transportation  costs;  and
          impacts of competing product capital investment.

Noneconomic Barriers

     Noneconomic  barriers  that can  adversely affect  developing
and/or expanding compost markets have also been identified.  These
noneconomic  barriers are:

          compost quality  assurance;
          user  attitudes;
          location of  markets with respect  to compost
          operations;
          access  to  transportation routes;
          comparative availability of compost;
          product procurement policies;
          restrictions  on  compost  use;  and
          legal constraints.

     Economic and noneconomic  barriers must be avoided or overcome
to enhance the  marketability  of  compost products.


STRATEGIES TO MITIGATE/OVERCOME BARRIERS TO
  DEVELOPING COMPOST MARKETS

Overcoming Economic  Barriers

     Diversification of compost products can increase their overall
market opportunities.  Identifying  the potential compost markets is
important  to determine  their desired quantity  and quality of
compost.   This  allows post-processing and other production factors
 (e.g., quantities of different grades of compost) to be adjusted to
meet the markets'  needs.

     Compost must be shown to be  of  equal  or greater benefit and
value to compete successfully with other products.   Compost can be
offered  free  or at   a reduced price to attract users  and markets

                              ES -  17

-------
though this  may lower its perceived value.   Compost  can  also be
promoted as an  ingredient  or  source  of input material  to
manufacturers and suppliers of  competing or complementary products.

     Post-processing costs can be  recovered  if the  post-processing
sufficiently increases the value of the compost,  and,  in doing so,
satisfies a  market  demand.   Therefore,  this potential barrier is
avoidable by recognizing when and to  what  extent  post-processing is
necessary.

     The barrier of transportation costs  can be  mitigated  by one,
or a combination of  several,  measures,  including:

          modifying  transportation rate structures to be  more in
          favor  of  the  compost product;
          obtaining lower backhaul rates where available or taking
          advantage of  backhaul  routes;
          increasing the value  of  compost  (e.g., by  screening
          and/or bagging) so that it  is better able  to  economically
          bear  the  cost of  transportation;
          locating the composting facility at, or close  to, the
          primary users'  location(s);  and
          finding and developing markets in the immediate local
          area  in which the  compost  is produced.

     Overcoming the impacts of competing product  capital  investment
can be  difficult.    One  method is through  the use of  financial
incentives,   such as consumption tax credits,  sales and  property tax
exemptions,   grants, and low  interest loans.  Also,  lower bulk-rate
prices may be offered to potentially large users of compost.

Overcoming Noneconomic  Barriers

     Measures that would  mitigate  or overcome noneconomic barriers
include:

          formulating  an   acceptable   set  of   standards   and
          specifications;
          providing  product  guarantees;
          enhancing  the product's recognition factor;
          providing  information  on  the benefits and uses  of
          compost;
          working with  university  agricultural and  cooperative
          extension  services   and  soil   and water   conservation
          districts  to  develop and expand compost markets;
          providing  the public with technical assistance;
          meeting with professional groups to  influence  product
          acceptance;
          establishing distribution centers  at  strategic  locations;
          satisfying user demands for compost;   and
          modifying or  removing  conflicting or restrictive  legal
          and regulatory constraints.

                              ES - 18

-------
Also ,    developing   and  maintaining   favorable  user   attitudes
 (especially  as  concerns mixed MSW compost), and  replacing  biased
procurement policies with unbiased or  favorable  ones  would help  to
overcome these  barriers.   A telephone hotline  for information  on
compost availability would also be beneficial.

     Each  of these strategies  acts upon  one  or  more of the
identified noneconomic  barriers.   Quality assurance (by testing,  if
need be) and compost or labeling specifications appear to be two  of
the more favorable  strategies that would be beneficial  to  aid  in
mitigating many noneconomic barriers.   Likewise,  they  may  also
contribute to overcoming at  least some of the economic  barriers.
However,   different markets  require different  quality material.
Consistency  and uniformity of a lower grade product may meet the
demand  of  some  markets,  while a  higher quality,  higher  grade  of
compost is  required  by  other  markets.  This stresses the importance
of  developing  quality compost products that  meet  the  needs  of
specific markets.
                              ES -  19

-------
                            Chapter  1

                           INTRODUCTION


     Municipal solid waste  (MSW)  generation in the United States is
increasing.   An estimated 196  million tons of MSW were generated in
1990 and  generation is  expected  to  increase to over  220  million
tons per  year by the year 2000  (1).   At the same  time,  landfill
disposal capacity is decreasing  and new  landfills are becoming more
difficult  to site.   Approximately  one-third of the MSW landfills in
1989 are  expected  to  be closed  by  1993 (2).    Also ,   as  overall
landfill  capacity  decreases,  disposal fees are rising  (3) .   As a
result,  officials at all  levels  of government are looking to source
reduction and recycling  (including  composting) to  help alleviate
their MSW disposal  problems.

     Composting yard trimmings  (including leaves,  grass clippings,
and brush)  and other organic  materials  from  the MSW stream is one
management  technique with  considerable promise for many  areas of
the country.   However,  as composting activity expands,  greater
attention is needed to  develop  and expand  markets for  finished
compost in order to make  composting a more effective MSW management
tool  and avoid possible oversupplies  of  compost.     This  is
particularly   important as   markets   for   compost   become  more
competitive with  increased composting  activity.


STUDY OBJECTIVE

     The  objective  of  this study  is  to provide  information to help
stimulate markets for compost, including yard trimmings compost and
MSW compost.  This involves  identifying  and evaluating existing and
potential markets for compost  and, also,  the products that compete
with,  or  complement,  compost  in  those markets.   In addition, the
economic  and noneconomic barriers to developing  and/or expanding
compost markets must  be recognized and strategies developed to
mitigate or overcome those  barriers.  Thus, the  markets and compost
products  that will  allow the  greatest potential for increased uses
of  compost  can be  more effectively pursued.

     The  information contained in this report will be  useful to
producers,  marketers,    and   users   of   compost,  as  well  as  to
municipal,  State,   and Federal  solid waste  management  officials.
Persons considering development  of new  markets  for compost  (perhaps
through increased production of  compost or  upgrading  its product
quality)  or analyzing  the feasibility of a new  composting facility
should  also find this  information helpful.

-------
ROLE OF COMPOSTING IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

     Reducing the volume  of  MSW that must be combusted or  buried
has become a priority for many communities around the country.  The
Us.   Environmental Protection Agency  (EPA)  has  established  a
national goal of reducing  the MSW disposed of by 25 percent through
source  reduction   and   recycling    (including   composting)     (2).
Composting is a  process  which can divert organic materials,  such as
yard trimmings  and  food scraps,  from MSW disposal  facilities  and
convert  them into  useful products.   Therefore,  composting  can
conserve landfill space,  save on MSW disposal  costs,  and produce  a
valuable soil amendment product.

     Composting is  a biological  process of  stabilizing organic
matter under controlled conditions  into a product that is  rich in
humus and provides organic matter  and nutrients,  as  well as  carbon
dioxide, water,   and heat  as  by-products.   The composting process
achieves both volume and weight  reduction.   The  composting  process
can range from  low  technology, where the material is  piled  or  put
into windrows and left  to break down with infrequent turning,  to
high technology, which  involves frequent  turning with specialized
machinery and/or more  controlled aeration and moisture levels using
a variety of  specialized  equipment.

Composting Yard Trimmings

     Yard trimmings, which include  grass  clippings,  leaves,  brush,
and tree prunings,  are estimated to comprise  19  percent  of  the
annual MSW discarded nationally.   This amounts  to about  31  million
tons of yard trimmings discarded per year  nationwide  (1). However,
according  to numerous  MSW characterization  studies, individual
locales have demonstrated a wide range  in  the amount  of yard
trimmings generated  (as  a percentage of their MSW) .

     Yard trimmings exhibit a great deal of seasonal  and regional
variations   due   to climatic   and  other  influences,    such as
topography,  population density,  vegetation,  and  soil  types.   Grass
clippings  are generated  in  greatest volume from late  spring to
early fall.   Leaves are  generated  in relatively shorter periods
during the fall.  However, areas of  the country  with a year-round
growing  season  often generate  large amounts of  yard trimmings
throughout the  year.   Seasonal  peaks of yard trimmings can place
hardships on  traditional  collection and disposal methods.

     Landfilling and combustion  (through  incineration or waste-to-
energy facilities) are not ideally suited to the management  of yard
trimmings.     Landfilling of  yard trimmings   occupies   rapidly
dwindling disposal  space  and can be inefficient.   Also,  as yard
trimmings  decompose in a landfill  they  contribute to release of
methane gas  (a  potential  problem if  uncollected  for  energy
generation),   and acidic leachate,  as well as uneven  settling (4) .
Yard trimmings  are generally undesirable  for  combustion  due to

                              1 - 2

-------
their high moisture content which may inhibit complete combustion
and result  in very little net  usable energy for power  or steam
generation.    Burning  yard trimmings may  also  contribute greater
nitrogen oxide and carbon dioxide emissions.   The seasonal nature
of yard trimmings generation poses problems  for the design of
combustors  to  ensure  that   they  not  be oversized or  operate
inefficiently  (4) .    Composting can be an efficient method for
dealing with  yard trimmings  since it may be more  cost-effective
than disposal,  treats these materials as  a resource, and produces
a humus product which can provide organic matter and nutrients to
the soil.

     Landfill  capacity  pressures   and  the  common practice of
household  separation of  yard trimmings   have  helped to  prompt
hundreds of municipalities to implement yard trimmings composting
programs.    It has been estimated there  were  at least  986 yard
trimmings composting  facilities as of  the  end of  1989 operating in
the United States,  an increase of over  50  percent in  just one  year
 (5) .    The trend is encouraged by  legislative measures,  some of
which ban disposal  of  yard trimmings in landfills.   Ten States  (and
the District of Columbia) had passed legislation as of the end of
1989 prohibiting the disposal  of  some or all yard trimmings in
landfills  (see Table  1-1) .     In  addition,  various States are
addressing composting  in  their MSW management  plans  or anticipating
legislative initiatives regarding composting  (6) .

Composting Other Municipal Organic Materials

     Other organic materials,  such  as food scraps and non-recycled
paper,   also lend themselves  to  composting.    For  example,  food
scraps generated by residential,  commercial (e.g.,  restaurants)  ,
institutional (e.g.,  school  cafeterias), and industrial  (e.g.,
factory lunchrooms)  sources are  estimated  to be about 8 percent of
the nation's MSW stream, or more than 13 million tons  annually  (1).
Food scraps also vary by locale as  to percentage  of  MSW,  depending
on such factors as economics,  lifestyle,  season,  etc.

     Furthermore,  food scraps  are generally not separated from the
remainder  of  the MSW  stream as  yard  trimmings  tend to  be.
Therefore,  they  are  not as readily available  for  composting. If
not properly dealt with during the  composting process, food  scraps
may also attract  vermin  and insects,  and create  odor  problems  since
they tend to decompose rapidly.

     MSW composting,  though currently not  very common in the U.S.,
is a  method of managing the  compostable  organic portion of MSW.
Besides yard  trimmings,   other components of  MSW,  such as  food
scraps  and non-recycled paper,   are also decomposable.     Other
components  of  the MSW  stream  do  not  readily decompose,  are
noncompostable,  or are undesirable  in the compost,  and are  usually
removed either  before or after the composting process.   if  not,
presence  of household hazardous  waste,   for   example,    could

                               1-3

-------
                             Table  1-1
             STATE  BANS  ON LANDFILLING YARD
                            (as of 1989)
State

Connecticut  1 /

Florida



Illinois
Iowa

Minnesota
New Jersey

North Carolina

Ohio



Pennsylvania

Wisconsin
Date Effective

1/1/91

1/1/92  (from  lined
  landfills only)


7/1/90
1/1/91

1/1/90  (7-county
  metro area)
1/1/92  (rest of State)

8/89

1/1/93

1/1/93



9/26/90

1/1/93
TRIMMINGS


 Yard Trimmings Banned

 Leaves  only

 Vegetative  matter
    including stumps
    and  branches

 All landscaping
    trimmings,  grass,
    leaves,  and
    trimmings

 Not yet specified

 Yard  trimmings
    including
    clippings,  boughs,
    etc.


 Leaves  only

 All yard trimmings

 Leaves,  grass,
    brush,  and other
    wood  bits

 Leaves  only

 Leaves,  grass, and
    small woody bits
    under 6  inches
I/   Leaves  are included in  the State's list  of  recyclable items
     and  therefore  must be  recycled.

Source:   Glenn, J.  "Regulating Yard Waste  Composting."  BioCYcle.
          30(12) :38-41.   December 1989.
                                   1-4

-------
contribute  toxic constituents  to the finished  compost product,
lowering its marketability.

     MSW composting can  generally process up to 30-60  percent  of
the MSW stream with the  remainder being recovered for  recycling,
composting a segregated component, combustion, or landfilling (7)  .
The method  is typically  capital  intensive,  requiring  construction
of a physical plant and  the  dedicated use  of heavy  equipment.

     Composting  source separated MSW refers to the processing  of
only organic materials  suitable for composting which have  been
segregated  at the point of generation.    Mixed  MSW  composting
involves the processing of  the entire MSW stream without separation
at the point of  generation, but  rather separation at the composting
facility  with varying degrees  of  effectiveness.     The type  of
collection selected should  consider  and carefully balance costs and
equipment  needs for collection as well as  processing, quality,
marketability,  and value of the recovered  products (i.e. , compost
and recyclable)   ,  total  diversion  rates  from disposal  facilities,
the public  perception toward composting  and  recycling,  etc.  (8).

     Livestock  manure from farms  and  animal feedlots  (including
poultry operations) can  be composted with  yard  trimmings or other
organic materials.   Due to  its relatively high nutrient levels,
livestock  manure can be a desirable additive  to the  composting
mixture,  or  composted separately with a  bulking  agent.   Livestock
manure is typically generated at farms  and animal feedlots  and not
included in the  MSW stream.  However, livestock manure generated by
feedlots and other concentrations of livestock can be  a source  of
surface or  ground water pollution.   Therefore,  livestock  manure
collected for composting from feedlots may  lead to water  quality
benefits.

     Biosolids (also referred to as  municipal sewage  sludge)   ,  which
can also be composted,  is not covered in  this report because it has
been extensively covered in other  reports.


NEED FOR DEVELOPING COMPOST  MARKETS

     Markets for compost  must be identified and developed since,  if
no demand for the compost exists,  the cost for storing the  compost
increases and disposal  costs may be incurred.   Therefore,  it  is
essential  that  a market be  found  for the anticipated supply  of
compost products.  Whether  the compost  is sold or given away, it is
important  to identify and secure  end  users to have  a  successful
composting  program.

     Also important in developing a market  development strategy for
compost is  determining  its present and  future  supply .   However,
                               1 -  5

-------
this  study has  not attempted to estimate existing and  future
compost supplies for the nation due  to  the  following:

           lack of  accurate   (or  reliable)  estimates  for  the
           composition  of  the yard trimmings  (i.e.  ,   the  percent
           contribution of  leaves,  grass  clippings,  brush,  etc.);
           which  yard  trimmings and  remaining municipal organics
           will be composted (or mulched)  ;
           existing  and projected  composting levels;  and
           the  quality  of the  compost.

It is estimated that approximately 12 percent of the nation's yard
trimmings  (i.e.,  4.2 million  tons) were  composted in 1988   (1). To
estimate the amount of compost produced from this feedstock, there
is roughly an average 50-percent weight reduction  by composting
yard  trimmings  (4) (9)  .   However,  it is  expected that in  at least
some  cases, mulch was  produced rather  than  compost.

      Diversification  of  compost products can  increase  overall
market  opportunities.    Compost has been  successfully marketed in
bulk  or bag. Therefore, there is  no  single  "best" method to market
a compost  product.

      Primary markets for yard trimmings compost have thus  far been
municipalities and  local  residents.    Markets beyond  these users
have  been  more difficult to develop and maintain.   However,  yard
trimmings compost has  also  been marketed to soil amendment  dealers,
landscapers, nurseries, farmers,  greenhouses,  land developers,  and
others.     Markets for MSW compost  are still being established
because the product is relatively new in the United States. Market
development obstacles  include competitive pricing of other  related
products,   a lack of uniform user specifications,  inconsistent or
lack   of   regulations,    maintenance  of   consistent   quality,
contaminants in the finished  product,  and transportation  distance
and costs.
SCOPE OF REPORT

     This study is based primarily  on  a  review of the appropriate
related   literature   and   information  obtained   from   informal
discussions with  compost  marketing experts and  compost  users,  as
well  as  others   potentially  involved  in using compost   (e.g.,
horticulture,    agriculture,    land   reclamation,    and   other
applications)  .

     This  nationwide  compost  market study was  conducted on a
regional basis.   As shown in Figure  1-1,  the following six regions
were defined:   Central,  Industrial,  Midlands,   Northeast,  Pacific,
and South.   As demonstrated  by  Figure  1-1,  the definition was  not
based on size in terms  of  land area.   Rather,  criteria such as  MSW
management activities and characteristics,  geographic region,  and

                               1-6

-------
PACFIG

      ii>
      V. - .'.-.
r-i\x ,'" !v 1 t'1 u!n\  i!
                                                                              m
OE
MO
       Figure 1-1-  Regions of the United States as defined for  the  study.

-------
population  density were given  consideration  in  determining the
regional definitions.

          Characteristics and benefits  of compost and competing/
complementary  products are  discussed in Chapter  2.    Chapter 3
identifies potential  uses  and markets  for compost.   in Chapter 4,
factors pertinent  to  developing and/or expanding compost markets
are presented,  including specifications and testing requirements.
Economic and noneconomic barriers to  increased development and/or
expansion of compost  markets  are identified  in  Chapter 5.  Chapter
6 presents  strategies  to  mitigate or overcome these barriers. An
overview of existing  composting  programs  and their  compost markets
is contained in Appendix A.    This study  should  provide useful
information and direction which can lead to expanded markets for
compost and increased composting activity.
                              1 -

-------
                       Chapter  1

                       REFERENCES

U.S.   Environmental  Protection  Agency.   Characterization of
Municipal  Solid Waste in the United States: 1992  Update.
Executive Summary.   EPA/530-R-92-019.   July 1992.

United States  Environmental Protection  Agency.    The Solid
Waste Dilemma:   An Agenda for Action.   Municipal  Solid Waste
Task Force.   Office of Solid Waste.   September 1988.

Pettit, C.L.    "Tip Fees Up More Than  30% in Annual NSWMA
Survey."   Waste Age.  20(3) :101-106.   March 1989.

Taylor, A.C. and R.M.  Kashmanian.   Yard Waste Composting:  A
Study of  Eight  Programs.     United States  Environmental
Protection Agency.   Office of Policy,  Planning  and Evaluation;
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.  EPA/530-SW-89-
038.

Glenn, J.     "The State  of Garbage  in America:  Part 1."
BioCycle.  31(3)  :48-53.   March 1990.

Glenn, J.    "Regulating Yard Waste Composting."    BioCycle.
30(12) :38-41.  December 1989.

United States  Environmental Protection  Agency.    The Solid
Waste Dilemma:   An Agenda  for Action,   Background  Document.
Municipal  Solid Waste Task Force.    Office  of  Solid Waste.
September 1988.

M.M.   Dillon and  Cal  Recovery Systems,  Inc.   Composting;  A
Literature  Study.     Prepared for Ontario Ministry of the
Environment.    1989.

Smith, W.H.   "Organic Waste  Management in Florida."  BioCycle.
31(4) :52-55.    April  1990.
                          i  - 9

-------
                            Chapter 2

           CHARACTERISTICS AND  BENEFITS  OF  COMPOST AND
                 COMPETING/COMPLEMENTARY PRODUCTS


     This chapter examines the  characteristics and benefits of yard
trimmings compost and MSW compost,  as  well  as the characteristics
and benefits  of competing/complementary products.    Appendix A
includes  information for developing markets for primarily yard
trimmings compost.   Together, this information is important to
producers  and users  of  compost since  their product must  be a
suitable replacement for other products or create a new demand, to
gain acceptance and successfully  compete.


CHARACTERISTICS AND BENEFITS OF COMPOST

     Compost   is a  valuable   soil   amendment.      For  example,
improvements  in physical properties of  soil  that  can  result from
using compost  include:

           improved  soil  porosity;
           improved  water retention;
           improved  soil  infiltration;
           improved  resistance  to  erosion;
           enhanced  storage and slow release of  nutrients;
           decreased soil crusting;
           improved  soil  tilth;  and
           plant  disease  suppression (1) -(7) .

     The greatest improvements in the  physical  properties of soil
occur at the extremes  of soil  texture;  that  is, with  light or  sandy
soils at  one  extreme  and heavy or clay soils at  the  other.    The
addition of compost to  sandy  or light  soils, due to  the organic
matter in the  compost,   increases  their ability to  retain water  and
lessens the effects  of drought  and  heavy rain.    Added organic
matter loosens clay soils, increases their  permeability to air  and
water,   and improves their water retention (3)  (4) .

     Due  mainly to  its  organic matter and  humus content, compost
also helps to reduce  erosion and  improve plant  growth.   This  can
substantially  reduce nutrient  transport  in  surface runoff to  water
systems, since sediment  is a major transport vehicle  for phosphorus
and nitrogen (8)  .   Thus ,  the  addition of compost to soil not only
reduces erosion and recycles nutrients,  but  also  provides  important
water quality  and economic benefits.

     Research and experience  have also shown that  some  composts
will inhibit  soil-borne  pathogens,  reducing the  incidence of  plant
diseases  in   nurseries,  gardens,   and  specialized   commercial
cultivation of plants.    Bark  composts and  certain other composts

                               2  - 1

-------
display the ability to suppress certain soil-borne plant  diseases,
although the mechanism by which this works is not fully understood
at present.   Not  all composts exhibit  this disease  suppression
trait.      Nevertheless,   the  use   of  these   composts  by  the
horticultural  industry has all but  ended certain plant  diseases
that used to  sweep through  the nursery industry  routinely.  A
related benefit is  the reduced use of  fungicides  that had been used
to fight plant  diseases  (1) (2) (5)- (7) .

     It should  be recognized that  characteristics and, therefore,
benefits  of  compost  depend on several  factors.   These  factors
include  the  materials used as feedstocks,  the  effectiveness  of
source-   and   facility-separation   techniques,    the   level  of
contamination by foreign material (e.g., noncompostables)  ,  chemical
residues,   or  heavy  metals  that  may  be present,   the  chosen
composting technology,  and the level of expertise  and  quality
control measures applied during the  composting process.

     The soil benefits of adding mulch derived from yard trimmings
should also be  considered.   These benefits  include:

           increased moisture  retention in  the  soil;
           reduced  evaporation;
           reduced  soil spattering from rainfall;
           reduced  soil compaction;
           reduced  soil erosion;
           suppressed weed growth;
           reduced  use of pesticides;  and
          moderated soil temperature.

     Feedstocks  for MSW  composting will likely  be different than
those  for  yard trimmings  composting.    Essentially, the entire
organic portion of  the MSW  stream is  a  potential  feedstock to mixed
MSW composting,  depending the  effectiveness of facility separation.
This includes non-recycled  paper,  and  food scraps, as  well as yard
trimmings.   Also,  it becomes more likely  that other materials, such
as pieces of metal, glass,  and plastics,  may be  mixed in with the
feedstocks during mixed MSW  composting.    Not  only is  quality
control more difficult,  but  end  uses may also  be more limited.
However,  a number  of  separation systems are offered  to  overcome
these  problems.    These processes vary by degree of materials
separation before,  during,  and after  the  composting process and the
resulting compost  product quality varies  accordingly.

     The uses of mixed MSW compost may be more  limited  than yard
trimmings compost  due  to potentially higher heavy metal  content,
the presence of glass,  metal, and plastic objects,  and possible
negative public perceptions.   However,  MSW and mixed MSW composting
have the capability of  composting a larger portion of the municipal
stream than yard trimmings composting  alone.   Frequent testing  of
mixed MSW compost  is needed to determine  its  heavy metal  content,
                               2  - 2

-------
other  potential toxics,   presence  of pathogens and,   thereby,
identify acceptable uses of the end product.

     Physical and  chemical characteristics, including  carbon-to-
nitrogen ratio,  nutrient value,  pH,  heavy metals,  presence  of
potentially  toxic  substances,  and soluble  salts,  are described
below.

     Physical/Chemical  Characteristics.     Mature  compost  is  a
relatively stable humus product.   Uncured,  or unstable,  compost  is
still  volatile  and can  compete with plants  for nitrogen in the
soil.   This can be  avoided by using mature,  stabilized compost,  so
that this reaction does not occur  after  application.

     Stable,   mature   compost  would be   expected  to   exhibit
characteristics  as  discussed below.

          Carbon/Nitrogen Ratio. Mature,  stabilized compost should
have an available  carbon  to nitrogen  (C/N)  ratio of about 15-20:1
 (weight/weight  ratio) .    Compost having an excessively  high C/N
ratio  can lead to nitrogen deprivation for plants as discussed
above  (9) .   Achieving  a compost with  a C/N  ratio near 15-20:1  can
be  achieved  with the  right  combination of  feedstocks and time.
Table  2-1 shows the C/N ratios  of  various possible  yard trimmings
feedstocks.

     Carbon/nitrogen ratios above  30:1 for feedstocks mean a slower
composting process  initially because microbial growth is limited by
the amount of  nitrogen available.   As  carbon is metabolized  and
released as  carbon dioxide,   the C/N  ratio  improves  and the
composting process  speeds up.   The ideal C/N ratio  for composting
is  approximately 25-30:1.  This is seldom achieved  initially with
leaves unless they can be mixed with a nitrogen source  (e.g.,  with
grass  clippings) to produce the  ideal C/N ratio  (9) (10) .

          Nutrients.      Yard  trimmings   compost   is   low   in
macronutrients  (nitrogen, phosphorus,  and potassium  --  NPK)  and
therefore is not a  one-for-one  substitute for inorganic fertilizer.
Generally,  the  percentage of  each of the elements N,  P,  and  K  is
less than one or two percent  dry  weight  (10) .

     One  of the most comprehensive testing programs  for yard
trimmings compost is performed by the  Metropolitan Service District
 (Metro) in Portland,  Oregon.   An analysis on yard  trimmings compost
produced in Portland found total NPK to vary between 1.39  and 1.78
percent dry weight  (11).   A  similar analysis on  mixed MSW compost
found  the nitrogen, phosphorus,  and potassium  contents  were  1.08,
0.35,  and  0.76  percent dry weight,  respectively  (11).

     Although  its  NPK is generally low,  compost, because of  its
organic nutrient content,  has the  advantage of releasing nutrients
slowly to the plants so that  the  nutrients  may  be  used  over  a

                               2  - 3

-------
                             Table 2-1

         C/N RATIO OF VARIOUS  MUNICIPAL ORGANIC MATERIALS

Material                                 C/N  Ratio

Grass  clippings                            12-20:1 1/2./2./4./

Food  scraps                                   15:1 4 /

Fruit  scraps                                  35:1 2  / 3. / 4_ /

Leaves                                     40-80:1 2  L 1 1 I

Bark                                     100-130:1   4/

PaPer                                    150-200:1  3.  / i /

Sawdust                                  200-510:1 1/2./1/4./

Wood                                     700-725:1   3/i/

Wood chips                                  800:1 2. /
Sources:   1
Golueke,
Wastes.
1977.
          C.G.     Biological  Reclamation  of  Solid
           Rodale  Press.     Emmaus,   Pennslyvania.
          II
          II
          i/
May,  J.H.  and T.W. Simpson.   The Virginia Yardwaste
Management Manual.  Virginia Polytechnic Institute
and State University.    Prepared for the Virginia
Department of Waste Management.   1990.
Poincelot,  R.P.
of  Composting.
                  The Biochemistry  and Methodology
     .  _     -      The  Connecticut   Agricultural
Experiment  Station,   New  Haven.     Bulletin  754
September 1975.
Richard,  T.L.; N.M.   Dickson;  andS.J.
Yard Waste  Management :  A Planning  nu
                                           Rowland.
                                           for
               York State.   Co-Sponsored by New York State Energy
               Research   and   Development   Authority,   Cornell
               University  Cooperative  Extension,   an(j New  York
               State  Department  of  Environmental  Conservation.
               June 1990.
                               2  - 4

-------
period of years.   Annual  applications can build  up reserves of
nutrients,  possibly providing a greater fertilizing  effect  than the
NPK measurement  would indicate  (10) (12) .    However,  precautions
should be  taken  to  prevent the  nutrients  or unwanted substances
from being accumulated to undesirable or unacceptable levels.

     Compost  is   often a good  source  of micronutrients  (trace
elements such as  iron, manganese copper, zinc, boron, molybdenum,
chlorine,   and cobalt) which plants  also need,  but  in smaller
amounts compared  to macronutrients.   Except for iron, and  in some
cases manganese,  trace elements  are found sparingly in most  soils,
and their availability to plants is often very low.

     Portland's quarterly testing program of yard trimmings compost
also  indicates  calcium in the range  of  0.25-0.47 percent and
magnesium in  the range of  0.06-0.09  percent.   Traces of copper,
manganese,  iron,  and boron  are  also indicated  (13)  .

          pH.     The  acidity  or alkalinity of  a  substance  is
represented by a number on  a logarithmic scale from 0 to  14,  which
is called pH  (see Figure  2-1)  .   Numbers below 7 are increasingly
acidic,   7 is neutral,  and  numbers  above  7 are   increasingly
alkaline.

     The composting process is relatively  insensitive to  the pH of
its feedstocks (9) .    Finished  compost generally ends up  with a pH
around  neutral,   usually between   6  and  8,  according to tests
performed on  finished,   stable compost  (9)  (11)- (14).   Therefore,
properly  cured  compost  is  suitable for  most plants,   although
certain  acid-loving  plants  may need a lower pH  (which can be
attained by the addition  of a supplement, such as sulfur)  .

          Heavy  Metals.  Several areas  of the United States have
tested  yard  trimmings compost  for heavy  metal content.    In two
years  of  sampling for lead,   average high concentrations  ranged
between 92 and  128 milligrams  per kilogram in Minnesota.   The
highest  recorded sample was  380  milligrams  per  kilogram  in the
heart of St.  Paul.   This was attributed to vehicle  exhaust along
roadways from leaded  gasoline.   These  concentrations were within
limits  considered safe by  the  State  (15)  .   In analysis  conducted
by Cornell University,   heavy  metal concentrations found  in leaf
compost were  significantly lower than State  standards  for Class  I
compost (see Table  4-8)  (16) .    Research performed  at a leaf
composting site  in  Newton,  Massachusetts  found lead levels that
ranged between 130 and 190  milligrams per kilogram  (17)   .   Tests
conducted in  Portland, Oregon found relatively low concentrations
of heavy metals (11)  (13).  These results  are  presented  in Chapter
4, Table 4-6, along  with  the  test results for mixed MSW compost
from  Minnesota and mixed MSW  and biosolids  compost  from  Delaware.
These data suggest that heavy metal concentrations are normally not
a concern in yard trimmings compost  due to their low levels  of
concentration.   However,  they  are  a greater  concern in  mixed  MSW

                               2-5

-------
                   INCREASING
                     ACIDITY
                                   NEUTRAL
                                  INCREASING
                                  ALKALINITY
                                      T
CO
I
23456789      10      11      12
                                 M
                   General range of properly  cured  compost
                 Figure 2-1. pH scale showing  the general range  of
                            finished,  stabilized compost

-------
compost due to higher concentrations in the feedstock of some heavy
metals such as lead, mercury, and cadmium.

          Herbicides. Pesticides,  and Other Potential  Toxics.  Some
of  the most  extensive  testing of  yard  trimmings  compost  for
potential toxic contamination  has  probably occurred in Portland,
Oregon.   Nineteen  compounds are tested for, including commonly used
pesticides and herbicides.   Four compounds were found at extremely
low levels  and were determined to be of no concern as  they would
not be toxic to seed germination  or plant  growth  (11)  (13).

     A  study  by  Cornell  University on  leaf compost reported
pesticide residue  analysis results  that indicated  presence  of
captan,   chlordane,   lindane,  and 2,4-D.    Of these,  all  except
chlordane were found in concentrations well below the United States
Department of  Agriculture  (USDA)  food tolerance level.   The study
states  the USDA  food tolerance level  provides   a  conservative
indicator of  compost safety  and,  since  the chlordane-related
compounds are  low relative to background  levels in suburban soils
and are  tightly bound to the compost itself,  these residues should
not constrain the use of compost (16). Also,  the presence of toxic
organics  is diminished over time due to their breakdown during the
composting process.

     Toxic  substances,  such  as  household  hazardous wastes,  should
be  removed from  MSW prior to composting (e.g.,  through  source
separation,   household  hazardous waste collection,  and up-front
separation at the composting  facility) to minimize contamination of
the compost product.

          Pathogens.    A properly maintained composting  process
should eliminate  the concern  for pathogens.  Temperatures in excess
of 55 degrees Celsius are needed  over  at least  three days to ensure
adequate pathogen destruction using in-vessel or aerated static
pile  composting  methods.   Using the windrow composting method,
temperatures must attain  55 degrees Celsius or  greater  over at
least  15 days during the composting period.   There must  be a
minimum of five turnings of the windrow during  the high temperature
period  (18).   These procedures  should assure complete pathogen
destruction throughout  the windrow.

     Portland, Oregon has tested for human and animal pathogens in
yard  trimmings compost.   Pathogens  were  either not detected or
found  in low  concentrations.   The  only  pathogens  found were those
normally  found in soils.  The pathogens  were  at acceptable  levels,
and concluded to  be due to reintroduction into the  compost after
composting  (11)(13).

           Soluble Salts.   Total soluble salts  (also  expressed as
electrical conductivity level)  is a measure of water soluble salts
 (or salinity)  present  in soil or compost to which plant roots will
be exposed.   An exceedingly high  salinity  (above 8-10 millimhos per

                               2  -  7

-------
centimeter) may  adversely affect the growth of plants  and crops,
especially that of seedlings.   The  electrical conductivity  level of
compost  intended for  application to plants  or crops  should not
exceed  two millimhos  per centimeter.    Compost  with a  greater
conductivity  level may be diluted with a low-salinity medium to
lower the  overall conductivity to  a safe level. Tests in  Portland
on  yard  trimmings    compost   have   found  total   soluble  salt
concentrations  to be  at safe levels   (0.17-1.9 millimhos per
centimeter) (13).   Tests performed by Cornell  University on yard
trimmings compost have  also found levels  far below what would cause
harm to plants  (16) .   A test performed  on mixed MSW compost also
found  an  acceptable   conductivity   level   (1.95  millimhos  per
centimeter) (19)- (21) .


CHARACTERISTICS  AND  BENEFITS  OF COMPETING/COMPLEMENTARY PRODUCTS

     Potential markets for compost produced from the above organic
materials  are   primarily  those  which  competing/complementary
products already satisfy.   Therefore, successful market development
and  distribution  of   compost  depends  upon  the   ability  to
consistently provide a similar or superior product  at a reasonable
price,  when compared to  existing products.

     An  informal survey of vendors was conducted for this  study to
determine the  types,  demand,  quality, and cost of yard trimming and
MSW compost,  and their competing" (and  complementary)  products.
Information that could  not be  obtained by this method was collected
from  available   literature.     A  listing  of   the   competing/
complementary  products  identified is included  in Table 2-2.  Table
2-3 provides  information on  the bases  by which compost  competes
with,  or complements,  these products.   These  products have a long
history of   use  in  agriculture,  construction,    horticulture,
landscaping,  and  residential  gardening.   Some  of  the uses for the
materials  include the  following:  soil  amendment, soil  aeration,
moisture retention,  soil stabilization,  erosion  control and repair,
growing medium,  decorative cover,  and  land reclamation.

     The products are  sold in bulk or in bag either by weight or
volume.   Bulk  materials generally are sold in  quantities greater
than 2 cubic yards.   Bagged products typically range  from one to
four cubic  feet in size.   Sources of  these materials range  from the
immediate vicinity of the market to national distributors,  as well
as importation from  Canada.   AS such,  the price of  each  of these
products varies depending upon location,  availability,  and season.

     The uses  and characteristics of the competing/complementary
products   mentioned   above   are  discussed  in   the   following
subsections.    With  the exception of the nutrient  content  levels,
manufacturers  rarely report or  display  the  characteristics (i.e.,
particle size,  pH , elemental analysis) of their  product, especially
when sold in bulk form.   Thus,  characteristics  presented  in  this

                               2  -  8

-------
                              Table 2-2

           COMPETING/COMPLEMENTARY PRODUCTS IDENTIFIED

soils

           -Topsoil
           -Pulverized topsoil
           -Screened  topsoil
           -Fill  dirt
           -River-bottoms!It

Wood  Products

           -Bark  mulch
           -Wood  chips

Other  Products

           -Potting  soils
           -Custom soil mixes
           -Livestock manure  and manure  compost
           -Peat
           -Livestock bedding  and  litter
           -Perlite
           -Vermiculite
                                2 - 9

-------
to
I
M
O
                                             Table 2-3

                           COMPETING/COMPLEMENTARY PRODUCTS  WITH  COMPOST
Material

Top Soil



Fill Dirt


Bark Mulch  and
 Wood Chips


Potting Soils



Manures


Peat
   Livestock  Bedding
    and  Litter
                        Degree of Competition  1  /
                        Compete       Complement
                           xx
                           XX
                           XX
                           X
                           XX
                        X
                                          X
                                          X
                                          X
                                          XX
                                          X
                                      X
    Basis of
   Competition

Organic matter
Porosity
Moisture  retention
Moisture  retention
Weed control
Erosion  prevention

Moisture  retention
Porosity
Organic matter

Porosity
Organic matter

Moisture  retention
Porosity
                                               Moisture  retention
       Use as
     Complement

Mixed with topsoil
for specific
applications

Compost placed on
top of fill dirt
Mixed for  special
needs
May be mixed with
manure

Mixed with peat  and
other amendments in
potting soil blend

Mixed with other
bedding materials
                                             (continued)

-------
                                         Table  2-3  (cont.)

   Perlite                             x            --                    Mixed with perlite
                                                                           and other amendments
                                                                           as potting soil
                                                                           blend

   Vermiculite                         X                                Mixed with
                                                                           vermiculite  and
                                                                           other amendments as
                                                                           potting soil blend
   1  /   X  indicates one particular  use
        XX  indicates  multiple  uses.
to
I

-------
report are based on average  compositions.  The  characteristics, of
course,  vary depending upon the region and source of materials.

Soils

     The types and characteristics  of  soils  sold nationwide  depend
upon  the  predominant  local soil type  and its expected use. In
general, three types of soils have been identified: topsoil,  fill
dirt, and river silt.   Topsoil may be pulverized and/or screened
depending upon the range of particle size, uniformity, and  degree
of purity from contamination required  by the buyer.

      Information  regarding nutrient content,  particle size, and
soil  types was  either  unknown  or not  provided by compost vendors
contacted during the study.   Several  vendors indicated that  this
information  may  not be necessary since   large users  of  soils
visually inspect the product before sale.

      Soils are sold in all  areas.   Soils  are typically  required by
the construction industry and landscapers to increase the  elevation
of an" area,  to minimize erosion, as a  growth medium,  or as  fill
material.     Screened topsoil   is more readily available  in the
Industrial and Northeast  regions  of  the country.   Individual
vendors can experience fluctuations  in  availability depending  upon
their source of supply.  Some  vendors  located  within  metropolitan
areas  obtain soils for resale  from excavation companies.    When
regional excavation  activity is low,  vendors  may not be able to
meet the demand for  soils.

      Based upon qualitative  information supplied by vendors,  demand
for  soils  depends  upon two critical factors:   time of year, and
economic development activity.   Demand for soils is greatest  during
spring and autumn,  which tend  to be the most active construction
and  landscaping seasons.  Seasonal  demand becomes  more pronounced
as one  moves north and east across the United  States.   Economic
development  activity,  as measured by construction  and commercial
improvement  activity,   was  mentioned by  all vendors  as another
primary barometer  of soil sales.   Vendors  in Georgia and  Louisiana
stated that the demand  for  soil was low.

      The prices of  soils, by region,  are presented in Table 2-4.
Prices  vary  depending upon the distance  from the site where the
soils are extracted, the amount of  physical  processing desired by
the  purchaser,   and the quantity  of  soils purchased.     Prices
indicated  in Table  2-4 generally  reflect  local delivery of  bulk
quantities (6 to 20  cubic yards) of soil.

      It  is unlikely that  compost will replace soils  in every
possible application.   Compost  can  be used  to prepare  specialized
soil mixtures  and  thus displace  only  a  fraction of  the soil
typically used.   Compost may be able  to replace up to 20 percent
 (by  weight)  of the soil.

                              2 - 12

-------
                             Table 2-4
         AVERAGE PRICES  FOR  TOPSOIL AND FILL DIRT  (1989)
Region

Northeast
Product
Price I/  Delivery 2/
Boston, MA
Hartford, CT

Industrial
Pittsburgh, PA




South
Atlanta, GA

Birmingham, AL

Little Rock, AR

New Orleans, U

Richmond, VA
Midlands
Chicago, IL

Cleveland, OH
St. Paul, MN


Central
Boise, ID
Kansas City, MO

Phoenix, AZ


Pacific
San Diego, CA

Santa Cruz, CA


Screened topsoil
Screened topsoil
Topsoil

Topsoil
Screened topsoil
Shredded & screened
topsoil
Screened topsoil

Fill dirt
Topsoil
Topsoil

Fill dirt
Topsoil
Topsoil

Topsoil

Topsoil
Screened topsoil
Topsoil
Topsoil
Pulverized topsoil
Topsoil

Topsoil
Topsoil
Pulverized topsoil
Fill dirt
Screened topsoil
River silt

Screened topsoil
Amended topsoil
Topsoil blend
w/compost
Fill dirt
$17.00
$15.00
$ 9.50

$10.00
$12.50

$15.00
$12.00

$10.00
$12.00
$17.50
$ 3.99 3j_
$ 2.50
$ 3.00
$17.00
$ 2.00 3j_
$12.00

$ 4.00
$18.00
$19.00
$ 9.50
$ 9.50
$ 2.99 3j_

$ 5.00
$ 8.90
$12.00
$ 9.95 I/.
$13.50 4j_
$13.95 4j_

$11.50
$14.00

$27.95
$11.00
1 / All prices are per cubic yard unless otherwise
2 / D= local delivery (generally
P = picked up
3 / Price is for
4/ Price is for
at site.
40 -pound bag.
one ton of material.
less than



D
P
P

P
P

P
P

P
P
P

P
P
D
P
D

P
D
D
D
D
P

D
D
D
P
P
P

P
P

P
P
indicated.
10 miles;



                               2  -  13

-------
Bark Mulch and Wood Chips

     Competing wood products include  bark mulch,  sawdust,  and  wood
chips.    Wood products  are used  extensively by  landscapers and
homeowners to conserve  moisture and  for decorative purposes.  In
addition,  wood chips and bark mulch are  used in stabilizing steep
slopes and for rejuvenating soils severely disturbed by mining  or
construction  activities.   Wood chips  and bark  mulch reduce erosion
from raindrop splash and protect new  seedlings.  Lastly, using  wood
chips as  a garden mulch is reported  to  suppress  plant diseases,
reducing the  damage from nematodes (1) .

     The  average  composition  of hardwood and softwood sawdust  is
provided in Table 2-5.   As  shown in the  table, the  nutrient value
of wood is relatively low.   These materials should not be tilled
into the soil since significant  amounts of nitrogen would  be needed
to supplement that used by microorganisms during decomposition and
this may  tie  up  otherwise  available nitrogen.   Most barks tend  to
be acidic with  a pH between  4  and 5,  although the pH increases
during the aging process.   The cation exchange capacity  (CEC)  of
bark also  increases  during decomposition.  The CEC is the total
amount of exchangeable  cations that a soil (or  soil amendment) can
sorb and  is  measured in milliequivalents per  100  grams  of soil.
Among the exchangeable cations are  some of the  required plant
nutrients.    In  addition,   the soil  can also sorb nonessential
cations and  in  essence retain  heavy  metals.    Sawdust,   which  is
generally recommended to  be composted  and aged  prior to its use  in
potting soils,  has adequate  CEC for sorption of cations.   The
average bulk  density and particle  size of various  growth media are
presented in  Table 2-6.

     Sources  of  bark mulch include cedar, cypress,  and pine.   Bark
mulch  can be marketed  in various sizes  to  accommodate  the
preference of the consumer.   Depending on the type and quantity,
retail prices for bagged bark mulch can  range  from  $1.70  to $5.00
per cubic  foot.   Bulk prices for bark  mulch  and wood chips can
range from $12 to $30 per  cubic yard  (see Table 2-7) .

     Based upon  comments received during this study,  the use  of
wood chips by office park developers  and residents  is now  in vogue
and has become  an important retail market  in  regions  where  soil
sales have suffered due to an economic  downturn.   Wood chips are
used as a protective mulch  cover for  the  existing soil.

     A percentage of the  compost  made  from yard trimmings  will
compete directly with mulches  and wood  chips.   The exact amounts
will depend upon  the type  and degree  of processing.  Coarse  size
reduction will result in the production  of a  material suitable for
either use as mulch and wood  chips or a  composting  feedstock.
                              2  - 14

-------
                             Table 2-5

               AVERAGE NUTRIENT COMPOSITION OF WOOD
Woody Plant  Group

Hardwoods

Softwoods
Nitrogen
 (Percent
  wet
 weight)

  0.20

  0.10
Phosphorus
  (Percent
   wet
  weight)

   0.03

   0.03
Potassium
 (Percent
   wet
 weight)

  0.15

  0.10
Source:    Follet,  R.H.;  L.S.  Murphy; and R.L. Donahue. Fertilizers
           and Soil  Amendments.     Prentice-Hall,   Inc.    England
           Cliffs,  New Jersey.    1981.
                               2  - 15

-------
                             Table 2-6

 AVERAGE BULK DENSITY AND PARTICLE  SIZE OF VARIOUS GROWTH MEDIA

                          Bulk Density
Material                  (Dry g/ml)            Particle  Size

Pine Bark                 0.12                 2to5mm
                          0.21                 0.5  to 1  mm
                          0.30                 < 0.5  mm
                          0.25 to 0.27         Mixed

Peat Moss
     Fine                 0.03                 <10 mm;  90% <6 mm
     Medium               0.10                 <38 mm;  80% <6 mm
     Coarse               0.14                 19  to 38  mm

Perlite                   0.21                 2to5mm

Vermiculite               0.11                 1  to  2 mm
Source:    Handrick,  K.  and  N.  Black.   Growing Media for Ornamental
           Plants and Turf.   New  South Wales  University  Press.
           Kensington,  NSW,  Australia.
                               2-16

-------
                             Table 2-7

       AVERAGE  PRICES  FOR BARK MULCH AND WOOD CHIPS  (1989)

Region                    Product        Price  1 /    Delivery 2. /

Northeast
  Boston, MA              Bark mulch     $20.00          D
                          Wood chips     $30.00          D

Industrial
  Pittsburgh, PA         Bark mulch     $14.00          P

South
  Atlanta, GA             Bark mulch     $12.00          P
  Birmingham, AL         Bark mulch     $20.00          P
                                         $ 3.99 3. /       P
  New Orleans,  LA         Bark mulch     $20.00          D
  Richmond, VA            Bark mulch     $16.00          D

Midlands
  St. Paul,   MN            Bark mulch     $ 4.99 i /       P
                          Cedar chips    $ 4.95 i /       P

Central
  Dallas, TX              Bark mulch     $25.00          P

Pacific
  Portland, OR            Bark mulch     $13.00          D
                          Wood chips     $12.00          D
!/   All  prices   given  are  per  cubic  yard  unless  otherwise
     indicated.
2.  /   D=  local  delivery   (generally   less   than   10    miles)  ;
     P =  picked up at site.
I/   Price stated  is  for one cubic foot.
i/   Price stated  is  for three cubic feet.
                               2  -  17

-------
Potting Soils

     Because of difficulties experienced  in obtaining natural soils
that meet detailed specifications,  the horticulture industry began
seeking alternative mixtures for potting soils 40  years  ago (22) .
The first feedstocks developed  were  based on mixtures  of peat and
sand.    Today,  a variety of  materials are  used,  including  soils,
peat,   clay,  compost,  perlite,  sand, sawdust,  vermiculite,  and
vermicompost  (which is made by worms)  .  Compost may not be able to
compete directly with potting soils.   However,  compost  can become
an  ingredient  in  some  potting soils, e.g., used as an ingredient
comparable to peat in potting soils.

     A variety  of  potting soils are  commercially  available using
different mixtures of  these materials.   As such,  the  price for
potting soils depends upon  the composition of the mixture, grade of
materials used,  location,  and manufacturer.  The current  retail and
bulk prices  for  a  variety of potting soils  and soil mixtures are
provided in Table 2-8.

Livestock Manure and Manure  Compost

     Manures produced  by confined  domestic livestock  (including
poultry) were estimated at  990  million tons  (dry weight)  per year
in the mid- to late-1970s  (23) .    It  was  estimated that approximate
ely 47 million  tons  (dry weight)  of the manure were available for
cropland  application:   Quantities  and types of livestock manures
used for application on croplands  in the  U.S. were  estimated to be
as follows:   dairy  cattle,  17 million tons; beef cattle,  13 million
tons;  swine,  11 million tons; broilers,  4 million tons;  and laying
hens,  3 million tons (24) .

      There may be some competition between compost and  manures.
The competition depends  upon the compost  feedstock  and  the type of
manure.    Increased use of manures  for  agricultural purposes is
presently hampered because  large feedlots  generally  may  not be
located in the  vicinity  of croplands.     Compared  to  chemical
fertilizers,  any cost advantage for  livestock manure is eliminated
if long distance transport is required.   Furthermore, most large
feedlots  are located  in arid and  semi-arid  regions of the  U.S.,
where  insufficient  croplands or  pasturelands  are  available for the
appropriate   application  of  manure  (e.g.,  excess loadings  of
nitrogen can affect ground or surface water)  .   if the  level of
nitrogen  added to the  soil  is  excessive,   surface and/or  ground
water  may be  negatively  affected if runoff and/or leaching problems
ensue.

     Because of  its nutrient value and organic matter content,
livestock manures  enhance plant  growth and crop production.
Manures may be applied  wet  or dry.   Direct  application  of  wet or
dry manures should be done  carefully in  order to prevent negative
                              2 - 18

-------
Region

Northeast
  Boston,  MA
  Hartford,  CT

Industrial
  Newark,  NJ
  Pittsburgh,  PA

South
  Atlanta,  GA
  Birmingham,  AL
Midlands
  Chicago,  IL
  St.  Paul,  MN
Central
  Phoenix,  AZ
                      Table 2-8

 AVERAGE PRICES FOR VARIOUS  SOIL AMENDMENTS  (1989)

Product                    Price      Unit
Peat
Potting soil  2. /
Soil mix  3. /
Mushroom  manure  compost
Manure  compost
Potting  soil
Manure  compost
Peat moss
Peat humus
Potting  soil
Manure  compost  4. /
Manure  compost  5. /
Peat moss
Potting  soil
Soil mix   /
Soil mix  1 I
$12.00
$20.00
$18.00
$20.00
$10.00
$30.00
$ 3.99
$
99
  1
$ 9.95
$ 1.69
$ 2.59
  1.99
$ 3.99
$ 5.49
$ 2.99
$
$14.95
$15.95
      6 cu  ft  bale
      1 cu  yd
      1 cu yd
      1 cu yd
      1  cu yd
      1  cu yd
      40  Ib bag
40 Ib bag
4 cu yd bale
40 Ib bag
40 Ib bag
45 Ib bag
45 Ib bag
1 cu ft
40 Ib bag
       1  cu  yd
       1  cu  yd
                               Delivery  1. /
                                     P
                                     P
                                    P
                                    P
                                     P
                                     P
                                     P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
                                     P
                                     P
                                          (continued)

-------
                                          Table  2-8  (cont.)

    Pacific
      San Diego,  CA     Manure  compost           $12.75     1 CU yd                   P
                        Screened  manure compost  $14.00     1 CU yd                   P
      Santa  Cruz,  CA    Proprietary  mix          $27.50     1 CU yd                   D
                        Mushroom  compost         $12.95     1 CU yd                   D
                        Potting  soil             $ 2.00     1-1/2 Cu ft               D
                        Planting  mix             $ 2.00     1-1/2 Cu ft               D
   I/    D = local delivery  (generally less than 10 miles) ;  P  =  picked up at    site.
   2 /    Mixture includes soil, peat,  and leaf compost.
   I/    Mixture includes soil and  leaf  compost.
   4_/    Steer  manure.
M  5/    Sheep  manure.
 I  /    Mixture includes soil, leaf  mulch,  and sand.
M  I /    Mixture includes soil, river  silt,  and manure.
o

-------
impacts on water quality.   Studies  comparing equivalent nitrogen,
phosphorus,  and potassium applications from livestock manures and
chemical fertilizers have demonstrated more  favorable results with
manure in terms  of  yields  (23),  as well as  reduced  nitrate  leaching
 (25) (26).   It is explained that the addition of manure to  the soil
increases  its  concentration  of organic  matter,   increases  its
infiltration rate,   and  decreases  its  bulk  density.

     The composition of  livestock manures  varies according to its
origin.    In  addition,  the diet,  type,  and age  of  the animal, and
storage conditions  will affect  the composition of the  manures.  The
characteristics  of  manures from six types  of livestock animals are
presented in Table  2-9.   As shown in the table,  the density of the
manures is approximately 63  pounds  per cubic foot.   Total solids
range from 8.6 percent  for swine to  25 percent  for sheep.   Values
for volatile solids, biochemical oxygen demand  (BODS), and  chemical
oxygen demand (COD)are  also presented.  Total kjeldahl nitrogen  (a
method to determine the concentration of nitrogen)  varies  from 2.9
percent  for  horse  manure  to  7.5  percent  for  swine  manure.
Phosphorus ranges  from  0.49  to 2.5  percent, as  a percent  of total
solids;  potassium ranges  from 1.8 to  4.9 percent.   Approximately  70
percent of  the  nitrogen  in  uncomposted manure is water soluble.
This is important for-water quality reasons  since  the nitrogen may
be more leachable  to ground  water and could negatively affect the
water quality.

     The  livestock manure  sold at  retail stores,   or  used   by
landscapers and horticulturists,  is usually composted,  relatively
dry, and free  of  odors.   Prices reported for composted manure  range
from  $1.99 to $3.69 for a 45-pound bag.   These composted manures
have nitrogen, phosphorus,  and potassium  contents of 0.5 percent
 (wet  weight)  each.   Average prices  for livestock manure  composts
are included in Table 2-8.

      Compost, particularly that produced  from yard trimmings, can
compete  with composted or uncomposted livestock manures.    The
displacement can be on  a one-to-one  ratio or in  some instances only
a  portion  of the  manures  in  order  to  take advantage of the
beneficial properties of  both  materials.

Peat

     Peat  is used  extensively  by  horticulturists,  greenhouse
operators,  and  to  a lesser degree by  landscapers  and homeowners.
In 1988,  1.468 million tons of peat were sold and used in  the U.S.
 (including  .59 million tons imported).   The average sales price was
$18.14 per ton in bulk  and  $24.68 per  ton  in package or bale (27)

      One of the most important features of peat  is its  capacity  to
absorb  and  retain water, and  at the  same time  maintain  adequate
quantities of oxygen. It  is  valued  as  a substrate for the rooting


                               2  - 21

-------
                                              Table 2-9



                           AVERAGE  CHARACTERISTICS OF  LIVESTOCK MANURES
NJ
NJ
Characteristics
Density (Ib/cu ft)
Total solids
(% of raw manure)
Volatile solids
(% of total solids)
BOD 5.
(% oftotal solids)
COD
(%of total solids)
Kjeldahl nitrogen
(total)
Phosphorus as P
(% of total solids)
Potassium as K
(% of total solids)
NA = no data available
Source: Acrricultural
Dairy
62.7
10.8-12.7

82.5

16.6
68.1

3.4-3.9
6.7-3.9
2.6
Encrineers
Beef
63.0
11.6-12.8

85.0

23.0
95.0

3.5-4.9
1.6
3.6
Yearbook 1981.
Swine
63.0
8.6-9.2

75.0-80.0

30.0-33.0
90.0-95.0

7.5
2.5
4.9

Sheep
NA
25.0

85.0

9.0
118.0

4.5
0.66
3.2

Poultry
65.5
25.2

70.0

27.0
90.0

5.4-6.8
1.5-2.1
2.1-2.3

Hors
NA
20.5

80.0

NA
NA

2.9
0.49
1.8


-------
of slippings because it is free of weeds, diseases,  and pests,  and
it is readily penetrated by plant roots  (22) .

      Peat is found in swampy areas  in cool climatic zones.   It is
produced by  incomplete   decomposition of   plant  matter   by
microorganisms  under wet,  anaerobic  conditions  (22) .

     Peat is divided into  the  following  main categories  (23) :

          Peat moss--mainly sphagnum and hypnum mosses. The fibers
          aereadily  identifiable  because  they  have  not been
          noticeably  decomposed.  This  is the most acid, the most
          expensive, and the most desirable  of  the  peat  mosses.

          Reed-sedge peat--a mixture of  residues from reeds, sedge
          grasses,  and cattails.

          Humus peat--produced  from  the  advanced decomposition of
          hypnum moss  and  reed-sedge peat.

          Muck soil--highly decomposed peat of any source, usually
          mixed with mineral soil, often sold as "topsoil."

     The physical and chemical properties of peat depend  on  the
species, degree of decomposition,  and proportion of mineral matter.
As shown in Table  2-6,  the  average bulk density of peat is 0.1 gram
per milliliter.   Peat is  divided into  three main  grades:    fine
 (with particle size less than 38 millimeters  and  90  percent less
than 6  millimeters) ,   medium  (with particle size  less than  38
millimeters  and 80 percent less  than  6  millimeters), and  coarse
 (with  particle size  greater than  38 millimeters).     As  stated
earlier,  one of the most important physical  properties of peat is
its ability to absorb water.    Commercially available peat  can
absorb 15 to 20 times  its  weight  in  water.

     Table  2-10 presents  the  chemical  characteristics of  four
different types of peat.   As shown,  peat has a low pH (3.8 to 4.6)
and an  ash content  no  greater  than  8 percent.   Concentrations  of
nitrogen, phosphorus,  potassium, and calcium are also presented in
the table.    An ultimate  analysis of peat  indicates  the  following
characteristics:     carbon,   56.8 percent;  hydrogen, 5.6  percent;
sulfur,   0.3 percent; and oxygen, 34.6 percent (28)  .

     Peat is usually distributed in  bales or bags.   The sizes of
the bags range from 1  to 4 cubic  feet  (compressed) .   Commercially
available peat is often pH balanced  (5.0  to 6.0) and is  guaranteed
to be 98 percent root-free.   Sphagnum peat  moss  is reported to have
a retail cost  between  $2 and $5 per cubic foot,  depending  on the
grade (see Table 2-8).
                              2-23

-------
                            Table  2-10

         CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS  OF DIFFERENT PEAT TYPES
                  (Percentages on oven dry basis)
Peat Type
Sphagnum

Sphagnum"
Eriophorum
(cotton-grass )
Trichophorum
(deer-grass)
Sedge-grass

Ash N
1-2 0
1
1-3 1
1

1-4 1
2
2-8 1
2

.8-
.2
.0-
.6

.5-
.0
.5-
.5
P
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0

.01-
.04
.01-
.05

.01-
.05
.04-
.07
K
Ca
trace-
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
.03
.01-
.03

.01-
.05
.02-
.07
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
.07-
.21
.14-
.25

.14-
.21
.14-
.36
pH
3
4
3
4

4
4
4
4
.8
.2
.9
.6

.0
.5
.2
.6
Source:    Robinson,  D.W.  and J.G.  Lamb.    Peat  in Horticulture.
          Academic  Press.   New York.   1975.
                               2  -  24

-------
     A high quality compost made  from yard trimmings,  for example,
or some of its  components,  can be very competitive with peat, based
on moisture retention and porosity.

Livestock Bedding and Litter

     The  increasing  demand  for animal products and  by-products,
along with  the  marginal  nature of certain  types  of  agricultural
operations,   and diminishing  availability of  land for  siting
livestock operations, have resulted  in a growing  dependence upon
high density animal housing facilities  in  which  the animals are
closely confined.    This  dependence  is  especially widespread in
poultry and dairy  cattle operations.    The confinement and high
density trends have engendered a heavy demand for bedding and
litter  materials  -- a demand  that  is increasingly  difficult to
meet.    The  industries and activities that generated the residues
and other materials conventionally used as bedding  have experienced
a  sharp  decline.     Dwindling  Supply ,   competition   for these
materials, and  transportation  requirements  combine  to render the
monetary cost  of these materials  prohibitively high in many cases.
Accordingly,  there  is a  search  for new  materials worthy  of  serious
consideration  for use as   livestock bedding   (e.g.,   recovered
newspapers and phone  books) .

     A  suitable bedding  material  is one that is easy  to  handle and
has a high moisture holding  capacity.   It must  either be devoid of
pathogens and toxic  inorganic and organic substances or have them
at or  below acceptable concentrations.     It must be  reasonably
available and priced.   Additionally,   the moisture content of the
material  should not be so high  as  to cause it to  adhere to the
animal  or so  low as to  make the material a source of dust.   The
moisture holding capacities  of  several  potential bedding materials
are listed in Table 2-11.   Other  materials  that can  supplement the
list  in  the table  are various composts,  whether  derived from
livestock  manure,  yard trimmings  (see Table 4-2 for  its water-
holding capacity),  or almost any other  organic material  (obvious
exceptions are  hazardous wastes)   .

     At present,  two uses of compost  in animal husbandry are as
poultry litter and  as  dairy cattle bedding.    Although use as
bedding in  commercial  horse stables  (renting and/or boarding
horses) could  be  a third use,  findings made in an unpublished
survey reveal  that  the strong concern on the  part  of the stable
operators over the possibility  of the exposure  of  the horses to
 disease transmission and/or  toxic contaminants  is  a  major  obstacle
to the  realization of that potential  (29) .

     Dairy Cattle Bedding.  In  addition to having been a  feature of
long  standing  in  dairy  cattle  husbandry,  bedding  has become a
necessity  in free stall dairy housing facilities to keep the
animals clean and  comfortable.    Bedding  absorbs urine and renders
manure  easier to handle.   As  stated above,  the  absorption  function

                              2  - 25

-------
                                        Table 2-11

MOISTURE ABSORBING  CAPACITIES  (MACs)  OF SEVERAL LIVESTOCK  BEDDING AND LITTER  MATERIALS
Material

Peat Moss

Oat Straw, Baled,
  and  Chopped

Mill Sawdust,
  Stored  Uncovered

Hay, Baled

Recycled Manure,
  Wood  Shavings
  Bedding

Light  Coarse
  Sawdust,  Stored
  Under Cover

Wood Shavings,
  Kiln-Dried

Peanut Hulls,
  Unground

Heavy  Fine
  Sawdust,  Stored
  Under Cover
                         Saturated
                      Moisture  Content
                        (% dry basis)

                           1,195.0
                              537.4


                              532.1

                              410.9



                              394.6



                              338.4


                              299.6


                              291.3



                              282.2
MAC units/
unit total
  solids

   11.9
    5.4


    5.3

    4.1



    3.9



    3.4


    3.0


    2.9
Typical  As-Stored
Moisture  Content
   (%  dry basis)

       13.6
     309.8

        8.7



       12.4



       38.5


        4.7


       10.4



       38.5
MAC

10.4


 4.5


 0.5

 3.7



 3.4



 1.8
 2.5
                                      1.
                                        (continued)

-------
                                        Table 2-11  (cont.)

   Source:    Sobel,  A.T.;  B.C.    Ludington;   and   Kim-Van   Yow .    "Altering  Dairy  Manure
             Characteristics for Solid Handling by the Addition of  Bedding."  Paper No. NA77-410
             presented  at 1977 Annual  Meeting,  North Atlantic  Region, American  Society of
             Agricultural  Engineers.  University of New Brunswick, Canada.  July 31   August   3,
             1977.
NJ

I

-------
makes  water  absorption   capacity a  key   factor in  evaluating
candidate bedding  materials.    Table 2-12  lists the  absorption
capacities  of  a more extensive  collection of potential  bedding
materials than  listed in  Table 2-11.

     The reasons given above  regarding  the  search for sources of
bedding material are particularly applicable  to  the dairy cattle
industry.   Hence,   it is  not  surprising  that compost has become a
leading  candidate.    Use of  compost  as  bedding  material  was
seriously explored as early as 1971 in a  study on the  role of
composting in a comprehensive study of management and utilization
of manure from  high-density cow  housing facilities  (30)   (31). An
interesting feature of this study was the  gradual replacement of
the  original bedding material with  composted manure,  such that
eventually composted  manure became the sole  bedding material.  The
forced  air  (static pile)  composting method  was used.    it  was
determined essential that the  manure bedding  be  removed from the
stalls  as soon as its moisture content reached 70 percent. In
addition,  70 percent  is  the  highest moisture  level  at which the
forced aeration system  could  be successfully used.

     In recent years, hydraulic manure management (i.e., periodic
flushing  and transport)  has  become commonplace  in  dairy housing
sanitation.   Solids  separated from  the  resulting manure slurries
can be composted and  the  liquids  either  are  ponded or subjected to
treatment.    Separation  generally is done mechanically,  i.e.,  by
means of  screens  (32) .    composting usually  is  by one  of three
methods,  namely, forced  aeration  ("static pile")  , turned windrow,
or  "natural  aeration"   (33)  (34).    ("Natural aeration" involves
stacking  the material in windrows  and allowing air  to  diffuse
without  assistance  into  the  piles.)

     The possibility of transmission of  disease-causing organisms
between animals  through the use of composted manure as bedding was
investigated by Clemson  University  in 1978  to determine survival
rates of pathogenic organisms  and the temperature  increases in the
composting piles (34).    The  piles were sampled  every  four days.
Results indicated a sharp decrease in numbers of  streptococci and
salmonella.    The drop  in pseudomonades and  coliforms  was less
steep,  and the  number of  staphylococci remained fairly  constant at
an infectious  level  (i.e.,   10,000  staph/gram)  after  an initial
drop.  In all cases,  temperature  played  a significant part.

     A major question is the effect of compost bedding on the
incidence of udder infections, especially mastitis.   The authors
state that  it  is generally believed that   bedding  materials  are
second  to the  milking  machine   in terms  of exerting  a  major
influence on the type of  bacteria  infections that  are found in the
udder.   Past data justify the conclusion that the type of bedding
may affect the  bacterial populations  on the  teat skin.   The  authors
found no  significant difference  in  bacteria counts  between teats
and  milk of animals bedded on composted dairy  manure and clean

                              2  - 28

-------
                                       Table 2-12
               WATER ABSORPTION CAPACITY OF  LIVESTOCK BEDDING MATERIALS
Bedding Material

Barley straw
Cocoa shells
Corn stover  (shredded)
Corncobs  (crushed  or  ground)
Cottonseed hulls
Flax straw
Hay  (mature, chopped)
Leaves (broadleaf)
   (pine needles)
Oat hulls
Oat straw (long)
   (chopped)
Peanut hulls
Peat moss
Rye straw
Source:
Pounds of
Water Per
Pound of
Bedding
2.10
2.70
2.50
a) 2.10
2.50
2.60
3.00
2.00
1.00
2.00
2.80
3.75
2.50
10.00
2.10
Dairv Cattle



Bedding Material
Sand
Sugar cane bagasse
Vermiculite
Wheat straw (long)
(chopped)
Wood
Dry fine bark
Tanning bark
Pine chips
Sawdust
Shavings
Needles
Hardwood chips
Shavings
Sawdust
Science. Interstate Prini
Pounds of
Water Per
Pound of
 Bedding

     .25
   2.20
   3.50
   2.20
   2.95
   2.
   4.
   3.
   2.
   2.
   1.
   1,
   1,
50
00
00
50
00
00
50
50
   1.50
           Publishers,  Danville,  Illinois.  1990.

-------
rubber mats.   Thus,  there appeared to be no direct  relation  between
bedding  and  udder   infection.    The  critical  factor is  good
management.    If cows  are well cared for,  if  the  milking  process  is
performed properly  with effective sanitation practices and teats
dipping,  and if  free stalls are  cleaned periodically, mastitis
infection would be minimal.     In general,   the type  of  bedding
appears  to have  no  direct relationship to  incidence of udder
infections,   if good management practices are observed (34)   .

     Poultry Litter.  The use of compost as a poultry litter can  be
traced back to the 1950s  (35) . At  that  time,  the "deep  litter"  (or
"thick  litter")   approach   in  poultry  husbandry  was strongly
recommended by its users and was fairly  widely used in the U.S. and
the Netherlands.

     In the deep litter method, hens  and chicks are left  on  a 12-to
20-inch thick layer of  organic  matter  such as  straw,  corn cobs,
wood   shavings,   horse  manure,  peat bedding, or  Compost.   The birds
spend  their  entire  life  on this bedding.    Provided  that  an
intensive bacterial  flora generating heat develops in  the layer,
and the layer  is  properly maintained,  the bedding may be used for
3 to 4 years without renewal.    If  necessary,   the bedding layer can
be turned  (aerated)  or  fresh  organic  matter  may be mixed with it.
Among the several  advantages attributed  to the use  of this approach
are a  healthier  flock  and  somewhat  greater gain  in body weight.
Apparently,  the birds develop an immunity against  coccidiosis.

     In the years that followed,  the  use of litter  (not  necessarily
the deep litter approach) has continued to be  an important  feature
in the production  of broilers  and  turkeys.    Sawdust and wood
shavings became the  material most commonly used because  it is clean
and,   until  recently,   it was  the cheapest  in most  situations.
However,  the dwindling availability of bedding and  litter materials
and search for other  materials discussed above have brought about
a renewed interest in the use of compost for poultry litter.

     In three experiments involving a total of 33,920 broilers, the
utility of composted municipal garbage  (CMC)  as broiler  litter was
evaluated  (36)  .  The  compost was  obtained  from  two  sources, namely
aerobically digested CMC and windrow  processed CMC.   They were  each
compared  to a wood  shavings  control.     Broilers  reared  on CMG
compost were  respectively 31,  12, and 44 grams heavier  than those
reared on the wood shavings  control.   Feed  efficiency was also
improved.   However,  the  type of  litter  treatments had little or  no
effect upon other production  or carcass characteristics.   Judging
from the few published reports,  select trace  elements and pesticide
levels in CMG litter  and tissue as compared with wood base litter
were generally within previously reported levels.   Exceptions  were
high mercury,  lead,  chromium,  and nickel in CMG litter.   Additional
research would be necessary for quantifying the significance of the
high levels.
                              2-30

-------
     If the  views of one study  are taken as being typical, the
outlook for compost  as  litter material for turkey houses  had  become
much less  hopeful by 1990  (37).   Their  objection is that birds
produced  on  litter were somewhat dirtier  than those grown on
shavings.     This dirtiness  would  add more  production   costs  .
Moreover,   recycled  litter could  not be   expected to satisfy
completely the bedding requirement for  a given operation, because
of a 15-20 percent  loss  in  volume during  the composting process.
This study concludes that more work must be done before compost can
be recommended for use as bedding material.

     An idea  of  the dimensions  of the bedding use  for  compost in
various poultry management  schemes may  be gained  from the data in
Table 2-13.

Others

     Among the other soil amendments available in  the  market are
vermiculite,  perlite,  and vermicompost.  These materials  are  mainly
used as additives for potting mixes,  although  they  are  relatively
expensive.   A brief description of each of  these materials   is
provided below.

     Perlite.  Perlite is a porous  siliceous material produced by
the  rapid heating  of natural volcanic  glass to  1,200 degrees
Celsius.    It  is  completely  inert, without any  buffering capacity,
and  no nutrients.    Perlite is used primarily  in potting mixes,
because it has a  similar water-holding  capacity to  peat. As shown
in  Table  2-6,  the bulk density of  perlite is  relatively low.
Compost can be used with perlite  and  other amendments for special
potting soil  blends.   Perlite retails  for approximately $7.20 for
a 4-cubic  foot bag.   In 1988,  49.3 thousand tons of  perlite were
sold and  used as horticultural aggregates   (includes  fertilizer
carriers)   ,  at an average price of  $30.65 per ton  of all perlite
sold  (27).

     Vermiculite.  Vermiculite  is  a  flaky mineral with a  plate-like
structure that  occurs naturally.    The raw mineral  is crushed,
graded, and  then rapidly heated to 1,000  degrees Celsius.   Rapid
heating  results   in particle expansion  (exfoliation)  to several
times its  original size.  The density  of the exfoliated vermiculite
is   similar  to  peat  (see Table 2-6)  .    Compared  to perlite,
vermiculite has  a greater capacity  to hold water,  but has a lower
air-filled porosity  (i.e.,   the space  between the  particles)   (38).
This is due to its plate-like  structure.  Vermiculite provides  some
magnesium and potassium to plants.    Compost can be  used with
vermiculite and  other  amendments  for  special potting  soil blends.
It  is  reported by those  interviewed that vermiculite costs between
$5.75 and $6.75  for  a  4-cubic foot bag, depending on the grade.  In
1988,  71.4 thousand tons of exfoliated vermiculite were sold and
used in agricultural applications  (i.e.,  for  horticulture, soil


                              2 - 31

-------
                               Table  2-13

               BEDDING USE PER POULTRY MANAGEMENT  SCHEME
System Type

Broiler - System  1
Broiler  - System 2
System Description

     - 5.5 Flocks per  Year
     - Annual  Cleanout

     - 6.0 Flocks per  Year
     - 1/3 Cleanout  Annually
     - Complete  Cleanout
       Every 2 Years
Turkey  -  System  1    Hen
                     Tom
Turkey - System 2    Hen
                     Tom
Pounds of Shavings
  Used Per Bird
     Produced

               0.6
                0.26
     - 5.2 Flocks  per  Year
     - Brooder House
       Cleaned After
       Every Flock
     - Growout House
       Cleaned Annually

     - 4 Flocks per Year
     - Brooder House
       Cleaned After
       Every Flock
     - Growout House
       Cleaned Annually

     - 5 Flocks Annually
     - Brooder House
       Cleaned After
       Every Flock
     - Growout House
       Cleaned Annually

     - 4 Flocks Annually
     - Brooder House
       Cleaned After
       Every Flock
     - Growout House
       Cleaned Annually
Brooder House   2.33
Growout House   1.33
                3.66
Brooder  House 3.5
Growout  House 2.5
               6.0
Brooder House   5.33
Growout House   2.67
                8.00
Brooder House
Growout House
8.00
                                                                  13.00
Source:    Safley, L.M.,  Jr.  and T.A. Carter.  "Use  of Composted Litter
          as Bedding Materials  for Broilers  and  Turkeys."  Chapter 6 in
          Composting Poultry Litter  - Economics and Marketing Potential
          of  a  Renewable  Resource.     North  Carolina Agricultural
          Research  Service,  North Carolina  State University,  Raleigh,
          North  Carolina.  1990.
                                 2  -  32

-------
conditioning, and as a  fertilizer carrier)  at an average price of
$221 per ton of  all  exfoliated vermiculite  sold (27) .

     Vermicompost.   Vermicompost  is produced from the castings of
earthworms  that feed on  organic  materials.    Historically,  only
limited quantities of vermicompost have been available. Increased
quantities  of the product are expected for the  future. Analysis of
vermicompost produced from swine manure  contained the  following  (on
a dry weight basis):   4 percent nitrogen,  3.9 percent phosphorus,
0.9 percent potassium,   6.3 percent  calcium,  2.0  percent magnesium,
and 2.3 percent  iron  (38).
                               2  -  33

-------
                             Chapter  2

                            REFERENCES

1.    Hoitink, H.A.J.;  W. Chen; M.I.  Trilas-Gay; and  Y.R.  Chung.
     "compost   for   Control of   Plant  Diseases,"  in  Compost
     Production. QualitY. and Use.  M. de Bertoldi,  M.P. Ferranti,
     P. Hermite, and F.  Zucconi,  eds.   Elsevier  Applied Science.
     pp. 414-419.    1986.

 2.   Hoitink,   H.A.J.   and G.A.   Kuter.     "Role  of Composts in
     Suppression  of   Soilborne   Plant  Pathogens  of  Ornamental
     Plants."   BioCYcle.   25(4):40-42.   May/June  1984.

 3.   Hornick,  S.  "Organic Wastes for Revegetating  Marginal Lands. "
     B-ioCYcle.  23(4):42-43.    July/August  1982.

 4.   Illinois   Department  of   Energy  and  Natural   Resources.
     Landscape  Waste    Compost:	Distribution   and  Marketing
     Strategies  for Centralized Municipal  Composting Operations.
     Office of  Solid Waste and  Renewable  Resources.   March 1989.

 5.   Logsdon, G.    "Compost  for  Pathogens."  BioCYcle.  29(9):28.
     October 1988.

 6.   Logsdon, G.     "New Sense  of  Quality  Comes  to  Compost."
     BioCycle.  30(12)  :48-51.   December 1989.

 7.   Logsdon, G.   "Plant protection  Through Compost.  "   BioCYcle.
     31(l):52-54.    January 1990.

 8.   North Carolina State University.   "Best  Management Practices
     for Agricultural  Nonpoint Source Control, Volume  I,  Animal
     Waste."   Biological and Agricultural  Engineering Department.
     Raleigh, North Carolina.  August  1982.

 9.   Willson, G.B.     "Combining  Raw Materials  for composting.tl
     BioCYcle.   30(8):82-85.    August  1989.

10.   Michigan   Department of  Natural   Resources.     Yard  Waste
     Composting:   Guidebook  for  Michigan Communities.   Resource
     Recovery Section.  1989.

11.   Golueke, C.G;  L.F.  Diaz;   and S.  Gurkewitz.     "Technical
     Analysis of Multi-Compost  Products."  BioCYcle,  30(6):55-57.
     June 1989.

12.   Logsdon, G.   "A Business-Like Approach  to Leaf composting."
     BioCYcle.  30(3):22-24.    March 1989.

13.   Portland Metropolitan Service District.   A User's Guide to
     Yard Debris Compost.  Portland,  Oregon.   June  1989.

                              2  - 34

-------
14.   U.S.   Environmental  Protection Agency, U.S.  Food and  Drug
     Administration, and  U.S.  Department  of Agriculture.    "Land
     Application of Municipal Sewage  Sludge  for  the Production of
     Fruits  and Vegetables." U.S.   Government  Printing  Office.
     Washington,  D.C.    1981.

15.   Schumacher, N.    Compost/Co-compost  Research Project  Final
     Resort.       Minneapolis-St.    Paul   Metropolitan   Council.
     Minneapolis,  Minnesota.   1987.

16.   Richard,  T.  and M.  Chadsey.     "Croton Point Compost Site,
     Environmental  Monitoring Program."  Department of Agriculture
     and Biological Engineering,  Cornell University.  Prepared for
     Westchester County Solid Waste Division, Department of public
     Works.   white Plains, New York.   November 1989.

17.   Fulford, B. and J. Quinney.   Leaf Composting Projects in the
     Commonwealth of Massachusetts:    Final  Report.   New Alchemy
     Institute.  Falmouth,  Massachusetts.   1987.

18.   40 Code of Federal  Regulations.     Chapter 1  - Part  257,
     Appendix II.   July 1,  1988  edition.

19.   Woods End Research Laboratory.    Compost  Standards:   Towards
     Uniform Guidelines for  Identification,  Labeling and Testing.
     Working document presented to the American Composting Council.
     Washington,  D.C.    Undated.

20.   Zucconi,  F.  and  M. de Bertoldi.    "specifications for Solid
     Waste Compost."   BioCycle.  28(5):56-61.   May/June 1987.

21.   Fitzpatrick,  G.E.   "Solid Waste Composts as Growing Media."
     BioCycle.   30(9):62,64.   September 1989.

22.   Robinson,  D.W. and G.  Lamb.   Peat in  Horticulture.   Academic
     Press.  New York.    1975.

23.   Follet, R.H.; L.S. Murphy;  and  R.L.Donahue.   Fertilizers and
     Soil  Amendments.   Prentice-Hall,  Inc.    England Cliffs, New
     Jersey.   1981.

24.   Frere,  M.H.   "Nutrient Aspects  of  Pollution from Cropland."
     Control of  Water Pollution  from Cropland:    Volume  II:  An
     Overview.     USDA Agricultural Research Service and  U.S.
     Environmental  Protection  Agency.   1975.

25.   Maynard,  A.A.    "Agricultural  composts  as  amendments reduce
     nitrate leaching  from  soil."  Frontiers of Plant Science, pp.
     2-4.    Fall 1989.
                              2  - 35

-------
26.   Brinton,  W.F., Jr.   "Nitrogen Response of Maize to  Fresh  and
     Composted Manure."   Biological  Agriculture and Horticulture.
     3:55-64.   1985.

27.   U.S Department of the Interior.  Minerals Yearbook.  Volume  I:
     Metals and Minerals  1988.   Bureau of Mines.    1990.

28.   Punwani,  D.V.  "Peat as an  Energy Alternative:  An Overview, tl
     in symposium papers.   Peat  as an Alternative.  December 1-3,
     1980.

29.   Cal Recovery,  Inc.  Private  communication with various  stable
     owners.   1982.

30.   Senn,  C.L.      A comprehensive   study  of  management   and
     utilization  of waste from high-density cow-housing  facilities.
     Report to the  Public Health Service. December 1971.

31.   Senn,  C.L.  "Role of Composting in Waste  Utilization." Compost
     Science.  15  (4):  24-29.  September 1974.

32.   Safley,   L.H.,  Jr.  &  W.C.    Fairbanks.    "Separation   and
     Utilization  of Manure  Solids." Dairy Housing  II.  Proceedings
     of the Second  National Dairy  Housing Conference.  Published by
     American Society of  Agricultural  Engineers.   March  1983.  pp.
     77-91.

33.   Emerton,  B.L.; C.R.  Mote; H.H. Dowlen; J.S. Allison;  and W.L.
     Sanders.    "Comparison of   Forced   and   Naturally Aerated
     Composting of Dairy Manure Solids".  American Soc.  Agricultural
     Engineers.  4  (2):  159,160.  June  1988.

34.   Bishop,  J.R.;  J.J.  Janzen;  and A.B.  Bodine.  "Composted  solids
     from  manure  can  be used in free  stalls."  Hoard's  Dairyman,
     125 (19): 1320-1321.  Oct.  10,  1980.

35.   Teensma, B.      "Refuse   Compost   in  Poultry   Husbandry."
     Information  Bulletin No.4,   International Research Group on
     Refuse Disposal  (IRGRD),  March 1958.

36.   Malone,   G.W.;  G.W.  Chaloupka;  and  R.J.  Eckroade."Composted
     Municipal Garbage  for Broiler Litter."   Poultry  Science.  62
      (3):  414-419.  March 1983.

37.   Safley,  L.M.,  Jr. and T.A. Carter.  "Use of Composted Litter as
     Bedding  Materials for Broilers  and Turkeys."   Chapter 6 in
     Composting Poultry  Litter - Economics  and Marketing  Potential
     of a  Renewable Resource.   North Carolina  Agricultural Research
     Service,   North  Carolina State  University,   Raleigh,   North
     Carolina. 1990.
                               2  -  36

-------
38.   Handrick,  K.  and N.  Black.    Growing  Media for Ornamental
     Plants  and   Turf.     New  South  Wales  University   Press.
     Kensington,  NSW, Australia.
                              2-37

-------
                             Chapter 3

                     COMPOST USES AND MARKETS


     Successful market development of  compost includes three main
requirements:    1)  producing a consistent quality  and quantity of
compost; 2)  identification of a use or  uses for the  product;  3)
identification of   potential  users   (i.e.,   markets)  ;   and  4)
acquainting prospective  users with the  compost and its uses.   This
chapter discusses the first two of these requirements, namely uses
and markets for the  compost  products.


COMPOST USES

     The utility of  compost as  a  soil amendment has  long been
recognized.  The greatest benefit of compost is its organic matter
content.    Following  its incorporation into  the soil,  compost can
improve the soil's  texture,  water  retention,  and aeration capacity.
Compost  also  contains nutrients that  can be  helpful in  plant
production.    The effects  of  compost  use on the  biological,
chemical,   and physical properties  of soil,  as  well as  on crop
yields, are summarized below  (1)-(10):

     Compost enhances the  biological properties  of  soil  by:

           enhancing  the development of  fauna and microflora;
           rendering plants less vulnerable to attack by parasites;
           and
           promoting  faster  root  development  of  plants.

     Compost enhances the  chemical properties of  soil by:

           increasing  nutrient  content;
           turning  mineral  substances  in soil into forms available
           to plants;
           regulating  mineral   input,    particularly  nitrogenous
           compounds;
           serving as  buffer  in making  minerals  available to
           plants;  and
           providing  a  source of micronutrients.

     Compost enhances the  physical properties of  soil by:

           improving  soil  texture;
           increasing  water retention  capacity;
           improving  soil  infiltration;
           improving  resistance  to wind and water erosion;
           improving  aeration capacity;
           improving  structural  stability;  and
           stabilizing  soil temperatures.

                               3-1

-------
     Compost enhances crop yields by:

          producing higher yields; and
          inhibiting weed growth.

     Although serving as  a  soil  amendment is a principal use for
compost,  it  can  also  be used in other applications including:  1) as
a mulch to  lessen evaporation and inhibit weed growth;  2) as a top
dressing  to improve the  appearance  of soil and discourage weed
growth; 3)   in hydromulching  for use  in  erosion control and
reforestation projects;  4) as bedding for dairy cattle and poultry
litter;  and 5) as a landfill cover.

     Composts from different types  of organic materials  (e.g., yard
trimmings,  other  municipal  organics,  and livestock manures) have
different characteristics and,  therefore,  the uses  for  these
products  can differ.   Typically,   segregated  yard  trimmings have a
more consistent  composition  than  mixed MSW.   Consequently, compost
from yard trimmings  generally has a  more consistent quality than
that from mixed MSW.
COMPOST MARKETS

     Consistent product quality is generally considered to be the
most  important of  the factors   affecting  the  marketability of
compost.    Regardless  of  the type  of composting  operation, the
quality of the product is a  function  of  the biological, chemical,
and physical  characteristics of  the  product.   Biologically; the
product should be  sufficiently mature; have a high concentration of
organic matter;  be  free  from pathogenic organisms;  and should
contain no  active weed and  plant  seeds.   Examples of desirable
chemical characteristics  are:  available nutrients  (NPK); minimal
levels of heavy metals, PCBs, PCP, and  pesticides  and  herbicides;
and low salinity.    Examples of pleasing physical  characteristics
are  uniform  particle size;  absence  of visually  identifiable
unwanted substances  (e.g., glass shards,   bits of plastic,  pieces of
metal)  ;  a moisture  content  less than  50  percent; a dark color;  and
a pleasant earthy  odor.

     In the absence  of a complete nationwide survey, no attempt was
made to quantify the full market potential for compost since this
would depend  on:  type and  amount of materials  composted;  type,
number,   and  size of  compost  users;   existing and  new compost
markets;  compost  quality;  etc.   Information on current levels of
uses for some of the competing/complementary products  is provided
in Chapter 2.    These  figures are  not available for all of  these
products  since they may be produced and  marketed locally.

     Because  of  the beneficial  characteristics of compost, the
product  can  be used  for many different  applications-.     'These
include:   agriculture,  grounds maintenance  (e.g., golf courses,

                              3 - 2

-------
cemeteries,    and  athletic  fields) ,    highway  construction   and
maintenance,   hydromulching,   industrial  and commercial property
landscaping,  bare  roots  nurseries (i.e.,  only deal with a dormant
stock and sold without growing medium)  ,  forest  seedling nurseries
and reforestation,  sod farming,  land  reclamation,  landfill cover,
parks  and recreational  areas,  and  residential  landscaping  and
gardening.

     These applications  can  be broadly grouped into the following
five primary  market  segments:

          agriculture;
          landscape  industry;
          nursery  industry;
          public agencies; and
          residential.

     Various  local and national  organizations  and  groups represent
these users,  e.g.,  agricultural  extension services,  farm bureaus,
soil and water  conservation districts,  landscape  architect  and
contractor  institutes,  bark and  soil  supply associations, public
works officials,  and garden  clubs.   These  types of organizations
represent key target groups  to involve  to stimulate compost use by
their members.

     Uses of  different types of  compost in  each  market  segment  are
constrained by  that  market's particular requirements  for quality,
composition,  and appearance,  as  well  as by  applicable regulations.

Agriculture

     The  agriculture industry  is the  largest potential market  for
compost.    Agriculture,  however,  remains  the most difficult  to
penetrate.   In  general,  given  their experience and widespread  use
of chemical fertilizers,  farmers would need  to be convinced through
field  demonstrations and  tests  of the benefits  of  using compost
 (e.g.,   affects on   costs  ,  crop yields,   soil   structure,   soil
fertility,  soil erosion) as well  as  the  quantities of compost to
apply,  and the  timing  and method  of application.   However,  in some
parts  of the country there  are agricultural  communities  whose
farming traditions differ and where large  amounts of organic matter
are incorporated into the soil.  Also,  there is an increasing  trend
to organic methods of  farming  which should  increase the  demand  for
organic-based   soil   amendments,    such as   compost,   for  use  in
agriculture.   In addition,   there  is  an increasing awareness that
soil fertility is dependent upon maintaining a sufficient amount of
organic  matter  in the soil.    Compost is  an  excellent source of
organic matter  for maintaining soil fertility  and  reducing erosion
 (10) (11) .

     Studies  have shown  that the sustained application  of compost
has beneficial  effects that  include favorable  soil pH,  higher crop

                               3  - 3

-------
yields,   increased  organic  matter,   increased water   retention,
increased cation  exchange  capacity (i.e.,  ability of the soil  to
sorb nutrients,  as well as  heavy  metals  and other substances)  ,
enhanced supply of plant nutrients,  and improved  tilth.  Primary
and secondary  plant  nutrient levels were increased  significantly
due to  the  long-term  application of mixed  MSW compost to field
plots in Johnson  City, Tennessee  (3).   Some of the problems  that
need to be overcome to develop the agriculture market for compost
are its  availability,   consistency  in composition  and nutrient
content,   ensuring low levels of  potentially toxic  substances,
effectiveness  of  bulk  application,  effectiveness of distribution
methods,  information on  its  contribution to crop yields and  soil
fertility,  cost,   and acceptance by farmers.

Landscape Industry

     The landscape industry,  including landscape  service  companies,
uses  large  amounts  of   soil   amendments:   bark  or   barkdust,
particularly in the Pacific Northwest,  is frequently  used as a top
dressing; topsoil  is  used for new planting; and compost  is used  as
a soil  amendment.   Soil  with poor physical properties  can  be
significantly  improved by  the correct use of compost.   Research
conducted by the USDA and by Rutgers University has shown that the
use of compost combined with chemical fertilizers produces better
turfgrass than  when using  the fertilizers alone  (10) .

     Compost is not expected to completely displace bark as a top
dressing because  of the decorative  appearance of  bark.   Areas  of
new planting could benefit from the use of compost to improve the
quality of  existing  soil rather  than  replacing the  soil  with
topsoil  at  a potentially higher cost.   The results of previous
studies show that landscapers are aware  of  the benefits  of compost
produced from  organic  materials  (2) .   However,   landscapers  have
expressed concern that compost  from yard trimmings may contain
harmful  amounts  of  viable  seeds,   herbicides,   and pesticides.
Following   proper  composting  procedures,    making   results  of
laboratory tests demonstrating the safety of yard trimmings compost
available to landscapers should  alleviate  these  concerns.   Other
factors  affecting the use of compost  in  the landscaper industry
include product availability, distribution channels,  and cost.

     The commercial landscape industry  operates such that the
materials used  should,  at a minimum, meet the specifications of the
landscape architect or inspector.

Nursery Industry

     Similar to  the  landscape industry,  the potential   for using
compost in the  nursery  industry is greatly dependent on the economy
and the housing industry.   Home  sales have a direct effect on the
demand  for  nursery products  (2) .    in addition,   quality  of the
compost product,  as  well  as  its  availability,  distribution

                              3  - 4

-------
channels,  and cost,  can have  an  impact on the utility of  compost  in
the nursery industry.

     Use of compost  in potting mixes helps to retain water,  improve
soil  texture,   and  provide  nutrients.     Relatively inexpensive
compost could  be  a  favorable alternative  to  the  more expensive,
oftentimes imported,  peat currently used in many  areas of the
country.   To  displace  peat in any quantity,  laboratory analyses and
field tests would  need to be  conducted to demonstrate  the  benefits,
safety,  and reliability of  compost for use in potting mixes.

     Bare roots nurseries offer  excellent potential  for the  use  of
compost.   Other potential markets in the nursery  industry  include
forest seedling nurseries,  greenhouses,  and Christmas tree  farms.

Public Agencies

     Public agencies  have the potential to use both  high-quality
and low-quality composts.    High-quality   compost can be used in
areas where  humans  and/or animals  may come  in contact with the
materials  (e.g.,  parks and  playing fields).   A lower-quality,
relatively stable compost  may be suitable  for  land reclamation,
fill material,  and landfill  cover.

     A study conducted by the  City of San Jose  identified uses
where the demand for  compost could be increased or created  by the
City  (12) .   Among the uses  are:

          parks and redevelopment;
          weed abatement on  public lands;
           land upgrade; and
          roadway maintenance and median strip landscaping.

     The use of compost in parks  is mainly as a  turf builder and
maintainer.   Compost helps maintain proper turf conditions on lands
of  high  use such as  recreation  areas.    Weed abatement can  be
achieved by  using coarse compost  that has low water retention.
Vacant  public lands can   be  upgraded  with  the addition of high-
quality compost.   Upgraded land requires less water to irrigate,
has an increased  resale value,   and the quality of  the soil  is
increased.   The land  can then be used for community gardening  or
leased to commercial nurseries.  Compost may be used in landscaping
to  control weeds and  improve  soil  conditions,  and also as  a
landfill cover.   An  additional use can be in  landspreading for
reclamation  programs.     Some   of   the  beneficial  effects  of
landspreading  include  a  more  favorable  soil  pH and  increased
organic matter  and  nutrient  levels (3).

Residential

     The residential  segment represents a substantial market for
soil amendments.   In  order  to market compost successfully  to the

                              3   - 5

-------
residential sector,  the public needs to be informed about the uses
and benefits of compost,  especially with the  growing  interest in
organic  gardening  (13)   .  A  marketing  study  conducted  in Portland,
Oregon showed that people are concerned about  the safety of using
compost  (2).   Some of the concerns most frequently mentioned were:

           disease transmission;
           contamination, chemicals, hazardous  waste;
           harmful to children  or  pets;
           harmful to plants;
           dislike of garbage  in yard;
           odors;
           insects;
           health  concerns;  and
           appearance.

To the extent  that  these types of  concerns  or perceptions hamper
compost  market development  efforts,  they should be addressed  (see
Chapters 5 and 6).

     Results of the Portland marketing survey showed that of those
individuals not currently using compost,  more  would be willing to
use compost made  from  yard  trimmings  (45 percent)  than from mixed
MSW (38  percent)   (2) .    The  amount of  compost that the residential
segment indicated they would use would  be  largely dependent upon
public  education and  the ability of the  facility to produce a
product that was  of consistently  high quality.  Other factors that
can affect the quantities  of  soil amendments used are their use
regulations,   distribution channels,  distribution form  (bulk or
bag),  availability, cost, population  growth,  the economy,  and the
vitality of the housing industry.   Additionally,  areas with a large
percentage of single-family homes generally have a greater demand
for soil  amendments  than areas of high-density housing.   Public
awareness  of  the  benefits and limitations  of  compost  will affect
how much compost  the residential  sector  will use.
                               3  -  6

-------
                            Chapter 3

                            REFERENCES

 1.   de Lauzanne,  R.   "Methodologies and  Technologies in Compost
     Production:     The French  Experience."    Presented at  the
     International  Symposium on  Compost  Production and Use.  S.
     Michele  All'Adige (Trento),   Italy.   June  1989.

 2.   Cal Recovery Systems,  Inc.    Portland Area  Compost Products
     Market Study.    Prepared for Portland Metropolitan Service
     District.   Portland,  Oregon.    1988.

 3.   Mays,  D.A.  and  P.M.  Giordano.   "Landspreading Municipal  Waste
     Compost."   BioCvcle.  30(,3) :37-39.    March  1989.

 4.   Kubota,  H. and K. Nakasaki.    "State of  the Art  of Compost
     Systems:   The Current Situation and Future Outlook in Japan."
     Presented  at  the International Symposium on Compost  Production
     and Use.   S.  Michele All'Adige  (Trento),  Italy.   June 1989.

 5.   Shimell, P.   "Refuse Derived  Compost  Boosts  Vineyard  Yields. "
     World Wastes.  26(11):8-9.  November 1983.

 6.   Levasseur,  J.P.    "Household  Refuse  Recycling  in  France."
     BioCycle.  29(6):32-33.    July  1988.

 7.   Porter,  C.     "French  Farmers  Favor  Cordon Bleu  Compost."
     Surveyor.  pp.  14-16.  September  1981.

 8.   L'Hermite,  P.   "State-of-the-Art  of Compost Systems:  Current
     Situation  in Europe  and Future  Outlook."   Presented  at   the
     International Symposium on Compost  Production  and Use.  S.
     Michele  All'Adige (Trento),   Italy.   June  1989.

 9.   Robotti,  A.; G.  Ramonda;  A. Nassisi; A. Rattotti; and A.
     Barilli.   "Optimization of  Composting Process Utilizing Urban
     and Agricultural  Wastes."  Compost:   Production.  Quality  and
      Use,  pp.   666-675.     M.   de Bertoldi;  M.P.   Ferranti;  P.
     1'Hermite; and F. Zucconi,  eds.    Elsevier  Applied Science.
     1987.

10.   M.M.   Dillon  and Cal Recovery Systems, Inc.    Composting: A
     Literature Study.    Prepared for Ontario  Ministry of  the
     Environment.    1989.

11.   Cal Recovery Systems,  Inc.   Composting Technologies,  costs .
     Programs,  and Markets.    Prepared  for  U.S.  Congress Office  of
     Technology Assessment.    Washington,  D.C.   1989.

12.   Yard Waste Composting  Implementation  Plan.   City of San Jose.
     Office of Environmental  Management.   1988.

                              3 - 7

-------
13.   Derr,  D.A.; M.C.   Varner;  and G.J.   DiLalo.     "Marketing
     Potential of Organic Based Fertilizers." BioCycle,  25(3):  42-
     45.   April 1984.
                              3  -

-------
                             Chapter  4

         FACTORS PERTINENT TO DEVELOPING COMPOST MARKETS
INTRODUCTION

     This chapter  examines  factors that should be considered when
developing and/or expanding compost markets. Pertinent factors  are
specifications   for  compost   labeling,    testing   requirements,
distribution   methods,   and   policies   such  as   guidelines  or
regulations,   which  affect developing and/or expanding compost
markets.
COMPOST SPECIFICATIONS

     Composting research and  experience gained  in producing and
developing markets for compost  show that  consistent  quality  is very
important to its marketability.  Compost quality  can be defined by
a set of specifications.   However,  rigorous sets  of  specifications
have not been uniformly developed for  composts and soil amendments,
in general.   A  few  State  agencies,  the U.S. Government, and other
countries have developed  or proposed regulations to  control  the use
of  soil  amendments   for  specific   applications  produced  from
different composted organic  materials.

     Relevant experience  and information  found  in the literature
demonstrate  that  specifications  for soil amendments could  include
a number of  parameters from the  following list,   some of which are
overlapping:

          organic matter  content;
          water-holding capacity;
          bulk  density;
          size  distribution  (i.e.,  particle size)  ;
          nutrient  content;
          level of  non-toxic substances;
          level of  potentially toxic contaminants;
          concentration of  weed  seeds;
          seed  germination  and root  elongation;
          soluble salts;
     -    ratio of  available carbon/nitrogen;
          pH  ;
          color;  and
          odor.

The level of importance  of these parameters  to  the major  compost
market users discussed in Chapter  3  is  provided  in Table 4-1.
                               4-1

-------
                                    Table  4-1
     LEVEL OF  IMPORTANCE OF COMPOST QUALITY  PARAMETERS FOR VARIOUS USES 1 /
Parameter          Agriculture  Landscaping Nursery        Public      Residential
                                                        Agencies 2. /
Organic Matter
 Content                221             2              3
Water-Holding
 Capacity               222             2              2
Moisture
 Content
Bulk  Density
Porosity
Particle Size
Nutrient Content
Non-toxic
 Substances
Heavy Metals
Toxic Substances
Pathogens
Weed  Seeds
Soluble  Salts
Maturity
pH
Color
Odor
3
2
1
2
2
3
2
3
2
1
3
2
2
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
3
2
3
3
3
3
2
1
3
2
1
1
2
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
3
2
3
2
2
2
2
1
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
2
3
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
3
I I    Ranking:     i   less  important;  2--important;  3--very important.
21    These  may  change depending upon end use, e.g.,  athletic field versus
      landfill cover.
                                   (continued)
                                     4  - 2

-------
                               Table 4-1  (cont.)

Sources:     Cal  Recovery Systems,  Inc.    Feasibility  Evaluation of Municipal
            Solid Waste  Composting for Santa Cruz County, CA.  December  1983.

            Cal  Recovery Systems,  Inc.    Portland Area Compost Products  Market
            Study .    Prepared  for  the  Portland Metropolitan  Service District.
            Portland, Oregon.   October  1988.
            Cal Recovery Systems,  Inc. in association with Wilsey & Ham Pacific,
            Inc.; C. Henry; Thomas/Wright, Inc.  compost  Classification/Qualit
            Standards  for  the  State  of Washington.   September 1990.
            de  Lauzanne,  R.     "Methodologies   and Technologies   in Compost
            Production:  The  French Experience."  Presented at the International
            Symposium on  Compost Production and Use,  S. Michele  All'Adige.
            Trento,  Italy.   June  1989.

            Inbar,  Y.  and  H.  A.  J.  Hoitink.    "Growth  Media  for Container-Grown
            Plants."   Ohio State  University,  Ohio.   Undated.

            Maine  Department of  Agriculture.   Standards for Compost  Products.
            Food  and Rural Resources.   April 1990.

            Warncke, D.  D.,  and  D.  M.  Krauskopf.    "Greenhouse Growth Media:
            Testing  and  Nutrition  Guidelines."  MSU Ag Facts, Extension Bulletin
            E-1736.   September 1983.
                                         4  -  3

-------
Organic Matter Content

     One  of  the keys  to soil  fertility is  its organic  matter
content.   As a result,  plant growth is improved.   As discussed in
Chapter 2,  adding organic matter  to the soil also  improves its
ability to retain moisture and  withstand droughty conditions.

Water-holding Capacity

     The  structure  and  texture  of  a  soil  amendment play  an
important role in the capacity of the soil to retain moisture.  The
water-holding  capacity of a soil  is primarily a function of the
concentration of organic matter  and clay content  of  the soil.

     The  water-holding   capacity  of   compost   and  other  _ soil
amendments is  indicated by  the  data in Table 4-2.   Increasing a
soil's water-holding capacity can  promote plant growth and help it
withstand drought conditions.

Bulk Density

     Bulk density of material is a measure of its weight per unit
volume,   e.g.,  pounds  per cubic yard.   The bulk density of soil
amendments  should  not  be  specified  without referring  to the
moisture  content at which the  measurement  was made.   Listed in
Table 4-3 are the bulk  densities of some soil amendments reported
in  the  literature.   If soils  are too dense,  i.e., too  compacted,
seedlings may not emerge and  root growth  will  be  impaired.  Adding
organic  matter will reduce the soil's bulk  density and improve
plant growth.

Size Distribution

     The  size distribution  of soil amendment particles  has an
impact on the storage,  packaging,  distribution, and utility Of the
product.   The  size  distribution of the individual particles that
constitute  a particular type of  soil  defines  the  texture  and,
therefore,   affects the productivity of  the  soil.      Texture
determines porosity, permeability,   and other parameters that are
important for plant production.

     The  size  distribution of  the particles  that make up a soil
amendment depends upon  whether,  and to  what extent, the  material is
subjected to size reduction,   as well  as  the type  or degree of
processing   (including  pre-  and  post-processing).     This  is
especially  true  with an  amendment  produced  from yard  trimmings,
MSW, or forest by-products.   Size distribution is important to the
user -- some users demand smaller particle  sizes  than others.  The
results of size  distribution  analyses  conducted  on yard  trimmings
compost are presented in  Table  4-4.
                               4  - 4

-------
                             Table 4-2

        WATER-HOLDING CAPACITY OF VARIOUS SOIL AMENDMENTS
Amendment

Quartz sand
Clay loam  soil
Yard trimmings  compost
Yard trimmings  compost
Peat moss
Water-holding Capacity
  (percent dry weight)

         28 \J_
         44 \L
        110 I/  2/
    115-138 I/
       1,057
2/ Results  of  Portland's  quarterly testing program.

Sources:   I/    Portland Metropolitan Service  District.    A User's
                Guide to Yard  Debris  Compost.   Portland,  Oregon.
                June  1989.

          3/    Sound Resource  Management Group, Inc.   Cedar Grove
                Compost:  User's Guide for  Landscape  Professionals.
                Prepared for Seattle Solid Waste Utility.   1991.
                               4 - 5

-------
                             Table 4-3

               BULK DENSITIES AND MOISTURE  CONTENTS
                    OF VARIOUS SOIL AMENDMENTS

                          Bulk Density     Moisture Content
Material                    (Ib/cu yd)            (percent)

Redwood sawdust            200-   350               10-15
Wood chips                 400-   600               15-20
MSW compost                500-   700               25-35
Yard trimmings compost     700-   800               30-50
Biosolids compost          900-1,100               25-35
                               4  - 6

-------
                             Table 4-4

          SIZE DISTRIBUTION OF YARD TRIMMINGS COMPOST  \J_

Screen Size:          1/3"   1/4"    1/5"    1/10"    1/25"    1/50"

Percent Passing:       95    85      78      60      34       20
I/ Results  of  Portland's quarterly  testing  program.

Source:    Portland  Metropolitan Service  District.   A  User's  Guide
          to Yard Debris Compost.    Portland,  Oregon.   June 1989.
                                4  -  7

-------
Nutrient Content

     A top quality compost contains  appropriate  concentrations of
nutrients for  a  given use.    The  nutrients must be  in  a chemical
form so that they can  be  used  by plants.  Major plant nutrients are
nitrogen,   phosphorus,   and potassium  (N, P, K) .    Minor  plant
nutrients (i.e.,  micronutrients)   include copper,  manganese,  iron,
and boron.   Examples  of  the concentrations of nutrients  found in
compost and in some competing/complementary products are presented
in Table 4-5.    Nutrient levels  can be supplemented by blending
compost with higher  nutrient sources  (e.g.,  dried blood,  bone meal,
and inorganic  fertilizer)   .

Level of Non-toxic Substances

     The presence of  some non-toxic  substances  may be  considered
contaminants.   These substances can be objectionable due  to reasons
of public health  and  safety  (e.g.,  glass shards)  ,  environmental, or
aesthetics   (e.g., bits of plastic).   The level of these  substances
considered acceptable  will depend on applicable  compost standards
and compost uses and users.

Level of Potentially  Toxic Substances

     Composted yard trimmings, municipal organics,  mixed MSW, and
biosolids  may contain substances that can be  toxic  to plants,
animals,  and humans.   Some of these  substances  are toxic in very
small concentrations.    On  the other hand,  certain elements and
compounds not only are tolerated,  but also are required by plants.

     Examples  of the  concentrations  of heavy  metals  and  other
potentially toxic compounds found in composts from yard trimmings
and mixed MSW  (including  with  biosolids) are presented in Tables 4-
6 and 4-7.

     The data  in Table 4-6 show  that,  with minor exceptions, the
yard trimmings compost  tested had  the lowest concentrations of
heavy metals.  Although  the information for  mixed  MSW  compost is
the  result of only one  test,   it  shows  that  the material had
relatively higher concentrations  of  some metals.   In  particular,
mixed MSW compost had  the highest  concentrations  of cadmium,  lead,
magnesium,  calcium,  sodium,  iron,  and aluminum.  The concentrations
of metals  in  compost  made from mixed MSW  and biosolids were, for
the most part,  higher than  the  concentrations  in  yard trimmings
compost  (see  Table 4-8 for a  list  of various State standards on
heavy metal and  PCB  concentrations for  compost  uses).

     Information on pesticides, herbicides,  and other  potentially
toxic compounds is shown  in  Table  4-7.   The data  show that the yard
trimmings  compost contained  some organophosphorus  compounds and
chlorinated hydrocarbons.  As  compared to  yard trimmings compost,
relatively high concentrations of  PCBs were found in composts made

                               4  - 8

-------
                                       Table 4-5
EXAMPLES  OF  NUTRIENT CONTENT  LEVELS  IN COMPOSTS AND  SELECTED OTHER SOIL AMENDMENTS
                                 (Percent  dry weight )
Nutrient

Nitrogen
  Nitrate
  Ammonium
Phosphorus
Potassium
Sulfur
Calcium
Magnesium
Copper
Manganese
Iron
Boron
Zinc
Peat I/  Sawdust  I/   Bark I/
                       0.004
                    Leaf
                   Compost
                  (Westchester
Vermiculite  I/  County,  NY)  2/
0.01
0.11
0.04
0.18
0.06
0.006
0.09
0.12
0.01
0.011
0.11
0.52
0.01
     0.02
     0.00
     0.06
     0.23
                                                    0.62
                                                    0.04
                                                    1.11
                                                    0.23
                                                    1.84
                                                    0.59
                                                     ND
                                                    0.0374
                                                    2.67
                                                    0.0015
                                                    0.0082
                                      (continued)

-------
                                       Table 4-5  (cent.
 I
r-
O
Nutrient

Nitrogen
  Nitrate
  Ammonium
Phosphorus
Potassium
Sulfur
Calcium
Magnesium
Copper
Manganese
Iron
Boron
Zinc
    Yard
  Trimmings
   Compost
  (Portland,
 Oregon)  1 /
0.0002-0.0008
0.0003-0.0052
                                          Yard
                                       Trimmings
                                        Compost
                                      (Twin  Cities,
                                     Minnesota) 4. /

                                       0.57-2.14
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.0085
.2062
.2504
.0566
.0002
.0066
.0100
.0000
.0016
-0
-0
-0
-0
-0
-0
-0
-0
-0
.0171
.3756
.4726
.0920
.0006
.0300
.0412
.0001
.0042




0
0
0
0
0
0.08
0.06
1.36
0.20
.0008
.0289
.1327
.0018
.0052
-0
-0
-4
-1
-0
-0
-0
-0
-0
.44
.88
.51
.16
.0018
.0583
.3848
.0082
.0167
     Yard
  Trimmings
   Compost
   (Seattle,
Washington)  5/

    1.3-1.5
       2.1
       I/
   0.35-0.50
   0.53-0.72

   0.74-1.15
   0.15-0.19
 0.0004-0.0006
 0.0144-0.0158
 0.0288-0.0310

 0.0078-0.0094
    Mixed
     MSW
   Compost
 (Fillmore Co.,
Minnesota) 6. /

     1.08
                                                        0.35
                                                        0.76
                                                          .49
                                                        7.60
                                                        0.58
                                                        0.02
                                                        0.03
                                                        1.32

                                                          .10
2.L   Average  of  five samples.
I/   Results  of  Portland's quarterly  testing program.
i/   Based  on two sample sets  taken  at 11 sites  in  each of two years.
5/   Tested at 30-day intervals  from  initial curing  through  maturity
]_]   Soluble  nitrogen ranged between  0.3-0.8%.
-:   Indicates tests were not  conducted.
                                                       190 days)
                                        (continued)

-------
                                   Table 4-5  (cont.)


Sources:   I/    Portland  Metropolitan Service District.   A User's Guide  to  Yard Debris
                Compost.   Portland,  Oregon.   June  1989.

          2/    Richard,  T.  and M. Chadsey.   Croton  Point  Compost Site:  Environmental
                Monitoring  Program.    Cornell University.    Prepared  for  Westchester
                County  Solid Waste Division.  November  1989.

          3/    Portland  Metropolitan Service District.   Yard Debris Compost Handbook.
                circa  1989.

          4/    Schumacher,  N.;  M. DuBois;  M. Martindale;  C.  Clapp;  and J.  Molina.
                "Composition of  Yard  Waste  Composts  Produced at  Twin Cities Metropolitan
                Area Centralized Composting  Sites."  Soil  Series  #124.   Department  of
                Soil Science,  University of  Minnesota,  St.  Paul,  Minnesota.   1987.

          5/    Sound Resource Management Group,  Inc.  Cedar Grove  Compost:  User's Guide
                for Landscape  Professionals.   Prepared for  Seattle Solid Waste Utility.
                1991.

          6/    Cal Recovery Systems,  Inc.   Portland Area  Compost Products  Market  Study.
                Prepared  for  the  Portland  Metropolitan  Service  District.    Portland,
                Oregon.   1988.

-------
                                              Table 4-6
                      EXAMPLES  OF CONCENTRATIONS  OF  TOTAL METALS  IN COMPOSTS
                                         (Parts per million)
M
Compound

Cyanide
Mercury
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Nickel
Lead
Magnesium
Calcium
Sodium
Iron
Aluminum
Manganese
Copper
Zinc
   Leaf
 Compost
(Westchester
Co.,  NY)  1 /

      0.08
      ND
    10.46
    10.08
    31.70
 5,900
18,400
 2,300
26,700
33,800
   373.76
    19.14
    81.60
                              Yard Trimmings
                                 Compost
                                 (Portland,
                              Oregon)  2/ 3/
A
0.15
0.05
4.80
0.80
24.20
21
72.90
2,500
10,500
200
13,500
7,800
396
25
160
B
0.08
0.08
5.20
0.80
21.60
22.70
71.50
2,600
10,300
200
15,000
7,000
3,390
42
160
                                   Yard Trimmings
                                      Compost
                                   (Twin Cities,
                                   Minnesota) 4. /
                                        0.2-
                                        2.5-
                                        3.5-
                                         10-
                                     2,000-
                                    13,600-
                                         61-
                                     1,327-
                                     1,179-
                                        289-
                                          8-
                                         52-
0.6
14.1
14.1
128
11,600
45,100
563
3,848
3,198
583
18
167
  Mixed MSW
   Compost
(Fillmore,  Co.,
Minnesota)  3_ /

       0.49
       3.70
       1.10
       4.80
      56
      32.80
     913
  5,800
 76,000
  4,700
 13,200
  5,400
     340
     190
  1,010
 Mixed MSW
and Biosolids
  Compost
(Delaware)  5.  /

        2.5
        4.1
        7.4
        3.2
      240.0
      296.0
      508.0
    3,200
   17,000
    2,142
   11,900

      490
      300
    1,039
   I/   Average  of  5 samples.
   2 /   One  sample;  A and  B  represent composts  from  two separate composting  facilities.
   4/   Based  on two sample  sets taken  at  11 sites  in  each of two  years.
   5. /   Average  of  32 samples.
   NO.-  Not  detected.
   -:   Indicate tests were  not  conducted.
                                              (continued)

-------
                                         Table 4-6  (cont.)

    Sources:   !/.    Richard, T.  and M.  Chadsey.    "Croton Point Compost  Site,   Environmental
                   Monitoring  Program."   Cornell  University.   Prepared  for  Westchester County
                   Solid Waste Division,  Department  of  Public  Works.   White  Plains,  New York.
                   November 1989.

              3/    Cal Recovery Systems,  Inc.   Portland Area Compost Products Market  Study.
                   Prepared for the Portland  Metropolitan Service District.   Portland,  Oregon.
                   1988.

              !/.    Schumacher,  N. ; M.   DuBois; M.   Martingale; C.   Clapp;  and  J.   Molina.
                   "Composition of Yard Waste  Composts Produced at Twin Cities Metropolitan Area
                   Centralized  composting Sites."    Soil Series #124.    Department of  Soil
                   Science,  University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota.   1987.

*             5 /    Delaware Solid Waste Authority.    "The Delaware Reclamation Plant."    1988.
i                  Fairfield Service Company.    "Fairgrow Easy  Reference  Chart."   1989.

-------
                                        Table 4-7

                  EXAMPLES OF CONCENTRATIONS  OF HERBICIDES,
                                PCBs, AND  PCP IN COMPOSTS
                                    (Parts per million)
                                                      PESTICIDES,
HERBICIDE/
PESTICIDE

Chlordane
p'p'DDE
p'p'DDT
O'p'DDT
Toxaphene
Aldrin
Dieldrin
Dursban
Endrin
Lindane
Malathion
Parathion
Diazinon
Trifluralin
Casoron
Dalapon
Dicamba
MCPD
MCPA
Dichloprop
2,  4-D
Silvex
2,4,5-T
2,4-DB
Dinoseb
Captan

PCBs
PCP
                    Leaf
                  Compost
              (Westchester Co.,
                New York)  I/
             0.0932
             0.1810
             0.0025
             0.0052
                           Yard Trimmings
                              compost
                              (Portland,
                           Oregon) 21 31
                           A            B
0.324
0.014
0.019
0.004
0.300
ND
ND
ND





Present
Present
<0.50
0.5-12.9
<0.5
0.5-7.1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.152
0.005
0.008
ND
0.300
0.007
0.019
0.039
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Present
Present
<0.50
<0.50
<0.50
<0.5-2.4
<0.5-1.2
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
                         <0.5-1.0 <0.5-1.0
            Mixed MSW
             compost
           (Fillmore Co.,
          Minnesota) 1 /
              ND
              ND
              ND
              ND
              ND
              ND
              ND
              ND
              ND
              ND
              ND
              ND
              ND
              ND
              ND
              Mixed MSW
            and  Biosolids
               Compost
             (Delaware) i /
                  ND
                  ND
                  ND
                  ND
                  ND
                  ND
                  ND
                  ND
                  ND
                  ND
                  ND
                  ND
                  ND
                  ND
                  ND
                         ND
                         0.210
ND
0.120
2.53
0.016
1.0-6.0
ND = not  detected/below  detection limit.
Hyphens indicate  tests were  not conducted.
PCBs  =      Polychlorinated  biphenyls
PCP   =      Pentachlorophenol
I/
II
i/
Average of 12  samples.
One sample; A  and  B represent composts from two separate  facilities
Average of 32  samples.

                                  (continued)
                                         4-14

-------
                               Table  4-7  (cont.)

Sources:     I/     Richard,  T.   and M.  Chadsey.    "Croton  Point Compost  Site,
                   Environmental   Monitoring  Program."     Cornell   University.
                   Prepared   for  Westchester   County  Solid   Waste  Division,
                   Department of Public  Works.  White  Plains,  New York. November
                   1989.

            3/     Cal Recovery  Systems,  Inc.    Portland Area  Compost Products
                   Market  Study.   Prepared for  the Portland Metropolitan Service
                   District.   Portland,  Oregon.  1988.

            4 /     Delaware  Solid Waste Authority.    "The  Delaware Reclamation
                   Plant."   1988.
                   Fairfield  Service Company.   "Fairgrow  Easy Reference Chart."
                   1989.
                                     4  -  15

-------
                    Table  4-8

EXAMPLES OF  COMPOST STANDARDS FOR  VARIOUS STATES
                (Parts  per  Million)
State:
Feedstock:
Use: 1 /
Mercury
Cadmium
Nickel
Lead
Chromium
Copper
Zinc
PCS
Part, size (mm)
Foreign Material
Maturity

Florida
YT/LM
U 2/

<15
<50
<500

<450
<900

< 25
<2%
Mature or
Semi -mature
Florida
MSW
u

15
<50
<500

<450
<900

< 1 0
< 21
Mature

Florida
MSW
L2

<30
<100
<1,000

<900
<1,800

< 15
< 41
Mature or
Semi -mature
Florida
MSW
L2 1 /

100
500
1,500

3,000
10,000

< 25
< 10%
Mature or
Semi -mature
Florida
YT/LM/MSW
L4

100
500
1,500

3,000
10,000

< 25
< 10%
Fresh

Florida
MSW
L5

>100
>50
>1,500

>3,000
>10,000





                    (continued)

-------
State:
Feedstock:
Use : i /
Mercury
Cadmium
Nickel
Lead
Chromium
Copper
Zinc
PCB
Minne
MSW
U
5
10
100
500
1,000
500
1,000
1
                                                      Table 4-8  (cont.)

                                      New  Hampshire           New  Hampshire     New  Hampshire

                                      YT                       MSW                MSW
                                      U 2/
Part,  size  (mm)    < 10 ;   < 16;   < 25
Foreign  Material   1.0%; 2.0%;  4.0%
Maturity          Mature             Mature
     LI, L2 L3, L4 i /  L4  5/
10
10
200
500
1,000
1,000
2,500
1
10
10
200
500
1,000
1,000
2,500
1
     i/

(continued)
U

-------
State:
Feedstock:
Use: l /

Mercury
Cadmium
Nickel
Lead
Chromium
Copper
Zinc
PCB
New York
Msw
LI, L2, L3, L4
i/
10
10
200
250
1,000
1,000
2,500
1
New York
MSW
LI

10
25
200
1,000
1,000
1,000
2,500
10
Part,   size  (mm)    <. 10
i    Foreign Material
M  Maturity           !
oo
Table 4-8 (cont.)
North Carolina
MSW
U
10
10
200
250
1,000
800
1,000
2

North Carolina
MSW
L2
15
25
500
1,000
2,000
1,200
2,500
10

North Carolina
MSW
LI, L4
15
25
500
1,000
2,000
1,200
2,500
10
< 25
 (if >10 and <. 25,
then Use  = L4 )

11
                                                               25.(
Mature or
Semi-mature
                                                              (continued)
                   < 25.f
Mature or
Semi-mature
                   < 25.f
                                                                                                Mature,
                                                                                                Semi-mature,
                                                                                                or Fresh

-------
                                                     Table 4-8  (cont. )

   l/    Use:  U  =  Unrestricted  distribution
                L=  Limited distribution:
                1)     Non-food chain  crops
                2)     Commercial,  agricultural,  institutional,  or  governmental  agencies
                3)     Public  distribution
                4)     Land reclamation or  landfill  uses
                5)     Disposed 9f unless demonstrated  that  use does not endanger  the  public  or the environment.
   21    Not subjected  to testing;  yard trimmings  compost  is  assumed to meet  limits  for contaminants.
   I/    Cannot be  used where contact with  the  general public is  likely.
   4/    Cannot be  applied to crops  grown  for direct  human consumption.
   s/    This  "off-spec"  compost can be used as a  landfill cover  if the only  difference between this compost and the
         higher grade is  that the particle size is  >  10 mm.
         However if  any of  the  contaminant  levels is exceeded,  then  the compost must be disposed of,  even if the
         particle size  <. 10 mm.
   6/    Must  be  produced from a composting  process with a minimum active composting and  curing  period  of 90 days.
   ?/    Must  be  produced from a composting  process with a minimum active composting and  curing  period  of 50 days.

    YT = Yard  Trimmings
*"   LM = Livestock  Manure
 i  MSW = Municipal  Solid Waste
   -=     Not included in the  standards
vo

-------
from  mixed  MSW  and from mixed  MSW  with biosolids.    Small
concentrations  of PGP  were  found in  composts  made  from yard
trimmings and mixed MSW.

Concentration of Weed Seeds

     Prospective users of compost,  particularly of yard trimmings
compost, invariably are concerned  about  the  presence of  weed
seeds.   Even  though,  theoretically,  weed seeds should be killed by
the heat generated during the composting process, composts should
be tested  periodically  for viable weed  seeds, and the  results
reported.

Seed Germination and Root Elongation

     Seed germination and root elongation are used as indications
of the  stability of  the soil amendment.    Generally,  seeds of
timothy or water cress are used in  this test.

Soluble Salts

     Excessive levels  of  soluble salts can deteriorate the soil and
be harmful to  many types  of plants,  especially if  the salts
accumulate in the soil.    On the  other hand,  the leaching of
excessive amounts of  salt  may be a  concern to local ground water
supplies.

Ratio of Available Carbon/Nitrogen

     As discussed in Chapter 2,  the ratio of  available  carbon-to-
nitrogen of  15-20:1  generally indicates  a stabilized  compost,
although the significance of this ratio  is  dependent  on  the
material (s) composted  and the C/N ratio prior to composting.

pH

     In a composting operation,  it is not necessary to  adjust the
pH level of the  composting material.   Generally,  the  pH level drops
at the beginning of the composting process, at times to as low as
4.5 to  5.0.     After a  few days,   the  pH begins  to  rise,  and
eventually  reaches  levels of 8.0 to  9.0.   Unless  the  material being
composted is  unusual,  the pH of the finished compost  will be in the
range of 6.0  to 8.0-9.0.

Color

     The composting of practically every type of organic material
results in a  darker  color as the process advances.   The organic
component of  MSW,  for  example, changes  from grayish green to black.
Similarly,  wood  chips, sawdust, and yard trimmings are darkened due
to the adsorption of the heavily  pigmented humic acids.    In some
                              4  -  20

-------
cases,  producers of soil amendments  add a compound specifically
designed to darken the finished product.

     A deep, dark material is typically associated with  stability,
maturity, and a high concentration of-organic matter.

Odor

     Odor is a crude but  effective means of  monitoring  the  status
of  the  composting  process.     In   a   well-run   operation,   the
characteristic  odor of  the material being composted generally
disappears  after a few days.   The sequence of odors generated by
composting yard trimmings  and MSW  can  often begin  with  foul  odors,
which are followed by  a  period of aromatic smells, and ends  with
earthy odors.   Sometimes  the earthy odors are preceded  by the  odor
of ammonia.   The persistent  presence  of  a strong  earthy odor  is a
good (but not absolute) indication that  the  composting  process is
completed,   and that the compost is mature.

Specifications for Bark Products

     The National Bark and Soil Producers Association  (NBSPA)  was
established in 1971.   The NBSPA is a  non-profit organization  that
was established to represent professional processors  and packagers
of bark mulch and soil  products.   One  of the primary objectives of
the NBSPA is to assist the industry and  its  customers  in defining
quality products.  As such,   the  organization  developed  categories
and product nomenclature  for bark and soil.   The categories  and
nomenclature  are presented  in Table  4-9.   As  indicated by  the
table,  the  specifications are limited to the definition of  size
distribution and concentration of cambium  and wood.   In addition,
the Association has  developed its  own  logo.  Permission  to use the
logo on packaged products is granted  only to those processors who
comply with the  specifications listed in  the table.

     Shredding woody materials can produce various grades  (e.g.,
fine and coarse)  of mulch.   The composting process can  be used to
prepare woody and vegetative  materials into a better mulch product,
and in less time,  than it would  take to produce  a humus  product
 (i.e., a mature compost).   With the high temperatures  achieved in
composting,  weed seeds and  plant  diseases can be inactivated or
killed.    In addition,  the decomposition will darken the color of
the  mulch  produced,   and   more   closely  resemble   commercially
available grades of mulch (1).

Examples of Compost Standards

     To  protect public   health and  reduce potentially harmful
environmental  impacts,  some  States  and Federal agencies,  as well as
other  countries,   have established  regulations  and guidelines
controlling the use of composts.   Examples of  the regulations and
guidelines  are given  in  Table 4-8 for  five States  in the U.S.

                              4 - 21

-------
                             Table  4-9
      CATEGORIES AND NOMENCLATURE OF BARK AND SOIL PRODUCTS
     Decorative Bark  Products:
A.
c.

D.
A.

B.

C.
     Southern Pine Bark Nuggets:


     Southern Pine Mini -Nuggets :


     West Coast Large Bark:

     West Coast Medium Bark:


     West Coast Pathway Bark:



     Bark Mulch Products:




     Southern Pine Mulch:

     West Coast Bark Mulch:

     Hardwood Bark Mulch:
     Cypress Mulch A:
     Cypress Mulch:
Consisting   of     Products
mechanically    screened    for
uniform   size  and   containing
cambium  or wood content  equal
to 15 percent of less  of  total
product weight.
Particle  size  ranging from 1.25
inches   to  3.50   inches   in
diameter.
Particle size  ranging from one-
half  inch to  1.5   inches   in
diameter.
Particle  size  ranging from 1.75
inches to 3 inches  in diameter.
Particle size  ranging from one-
half   inch to   2    inches   in
diameter.
Particle size  ranging from one-
fourth inch to one-half inch in
diameter.

Consisting   of     products
mechanically     screened     or
shredded with cambium or wood
content  limited in accordance
to the terms set forth, below:
Particle  size  less  than  1.5
inches in  length.
Particle  size  less  than  one
inch in length.
Particle    size   less  than 3
inches in length with cambium
and wood content equal to  15
percent   or  less   of   total
product weight.
Particle    size   less  than 3
inches  in  length  with  wood
fiber  content   equal  to   15
percent   or  less   of   total
product weight.
Particle    size   less  than 3
inches in  length.
Source:    National Bark and Soil  Producers  Association.
          Nomenclature for Bark  Products."   1989.
                                                          "Uniform
                              4  - 22

-------
The Council of European Communities! compost regulations are listed
in Table 4-10.
COMPOST TESTING REQUIREMENTS

     Developing compost markets, particularly those produced from
yard trimmings,  MSW,  and biosolids,  is  also  affected by the type of
product testing  program established.   The type,  frequency,  and
results of the tests can afford a certain degree of comfort to the
user.   On the other hand,  numerous  and excessively frequent  tests
can be financially prohibitive.

      Although procedures for  testing  the parameters listed  above
exist,  a  standard procedure   for  testing  composts has not  been
established across  the U.S.     Some  government  agencies  that
encourage  composting,  such as  the Metropolitan Service District in
Portland,  Oregon,  have established and are  financing a  testing
program.   Tests are conducted  on a  quarterly  basis.   Some private
organic material processors  and producers  of compost conduct  their
own tests  and guarantee  levels  of nutrients and other constituents.

     The tests that are  most commonly conducted are those developed
for  determining   the  concentration  of   plant   nutrients   and
potentially  toxic compounds  to plants,   humans,  and animals.   Some
entities  also are testing for  maturity  by using growth germination
tests and root length.  Tests  are  also conducted for the  presence
of viable weed  seeds.   The methods followed for conducting the
tests  are those that have been developed  over the years in the
wastewater treatment,  soil,  and  agricultural  industries.

     In most cases,  the tests are carried out  by independent
laboratories typically paid for by  the  compost  producer.


COMPOST DISTRIBUTION

     The method and  cost  of  transporting the  compost from the
composting facility to  the distribution center or  to the  user can
play a critical  role  in the cost-effectiveness  of the composting
facility.   Consequently,  it  is important to understand the various
factors that influence transportation.   Some of the terms commonly
used in the  transportation industry and that  will  be used in this
section include:

     Consignor:           the  party  that has something to  ship;
     Carrier:            the  hauler (trucking company, railroad,
                           barging  company,  etc.)  ;
     Consignee:           the  individual to whom the  material or
                           goods are shipped;
     TL :                  truck load;
                              4 - 23

-------
                             Table 4-10

             COUNCIL  OF EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (CEC'S)
     PROPOSED PHYSICAL  AND CHEMICAL  PARAMETERS FORtfSW COMPOST
                   APPLIED TO AGRICULTURAL SOILS

                                 Recommended          Mandatory
Element                         (mg/kg dry wt.  )       (mg/kg dry wt.)

Mercury                                  5                     5
Cadmium                                  5                     5
Nickel                                  50                  100
Chromium                               150                  200
Copper                                 300                  500
Lead                                   750                1,000
Zinc                                 1,000                1,500


                                  1987  Values          Target  Values

Minimum Organic Matter
   (% drywt.) 1 /                        30                   40
Maximum Particle Size  (mm)  1/24                   24
Minimum Detention (days)  1 /     Variable             Variable
Maximum Moisture Content (%) 1/40                   40
Maximum Inerts
   (% of drywt.)  1 /
      Glass                               4                     2
      Plastic                           1.6                  0.8


                                            Minimum
Minimum Mineral Content                 Admissible
   (% of dry wt.)                            Levels

      Nitrogen                                  0.6
      Phosphorus                                0.5
      Potassium                                0.3
      Calcium Oxide                             2.0
      Calcium  Carbonate                        3.0
      Magnesium Oxide                           0.3

Carbon/Nitrogen Ratio                         <22 2. /
Conductivity                          <2  g  salt/liter (NaCl)
pH                                             5.5-8.0

Allowable Uses                                3 /


                             (continued)
                               4-24

-------
                        Table 4-10 (cont.)

Note:      This  is  a partial summary.    Refer to regulations  for
          additional or  complete  requirements.

I I   Data reported represent 1987 values for medium grade compost;
     other grades  include very  fine,  fine,  and  coarse.

I I   Applicable when starting materials have C/N ratio of 35-40 or
     slightly above.

3.7   Allowable uses depend  on the stage of stabilization,  ranging
     from fresh organic  matter  (e.g.,  unsuitable for agricultural
     use, but  possible substrate for composting, preparation of
     mushroom  compost,   etc.)  to cured compost (e.g., safe  for
     agricultural use)   .

Source:    Zucconi, F.  and  M. de Bertoldi.    "Specifications  for
          Solid Waste  Compost."  BioCycle.   28 (5) :56-61.  May/ June
          1987.
                              4  - 25

-------
     LTL :                  less  than truck load;  and
     STN :                  short tons  (2,000 pounds)  .

     Freight rates are commonly based on two major criteria:  cost
and value  of service.    Cost is  influenced by several  factors
including:

          distance;
          shipping weight;
          propensity to be  damaged;
          insurance costs;
          potential to damage  other commodities;
          propensity for  combustion or  explosion;
          ease or  difficulty in  loading and unloading;
          stowability;
          excessive weight;
          excessive length  of  trip; and
          frequency and regularity of  shipment.

     Once these factors are  assessed as  to  how they affect  the cost
of transporting,  the  carrier considers  the value  of  service.   The
demand  for the transportation  service   is assessed and priced
accordingly.

     Transporting  recycled materials,   in particular compost,
introduces  additional complexities.     Concern for  the  cost  of
shipping a  low economic value material arises.   in some cases, the
shipping costs may exceed the economic value of the material being
shipped.   Also,  since recycled materials often compete with virgin
materials  for markets,  the freight  rate  structure could inhibit the
efforts of  this and other  types  of recycling  by charging more.
Furthermore,  classifications  stemming  from  a  definition of the
nature and  composition of the material can  complicate rate  setting
and can serve as a barrier  to  developing compost  markets.

     For motor freight, a commodity is classified according to the
National  Motor  Freight  Classification (Classification Description)  .
According to this  classification,   compost  is classified  as soil,
implying a  low value.    There  are two  class  rates for  compost:
Class  50  LTL and  Class  35  TL.  The  minimum  weight used to determine
rates  for the material is 40,000 pounds.

     A few  States,  such as Minnesota and North Carolina, have given
compost exempt status from  standard classifications,  deregulating,
and thereby reducing,  the cost of  transporting compost.   Reduced
transportation costs will expand  compost market development.

     Rates  for  the  transportation  of compost and  other  soil
amendments  via motor  carrier  generally are  filed at the Public
Utilities Commission  (PUC)  or similar entity of each  State.
                              4 - 26

-------
Motor Carrier

     Bagged Compost.   The rates usually are flat rates for a 24-  to
25-ton truckload.  Additional  stops  are  charged at $25-$70 each.
The rates  also  include a certain amount  of  time for loading and
unloading   (about  one  hour for  each task) .     Additional time
requirements for loading or unloading are  charged at  about  $50 per
hour.   There is  a  fee on the order of $25 per load for placing  a
tarp over  the vehicle's  contents.

     Typical costs for intra- and  inter-State transportation  of
bagged compost  are  presented in Figures 4-1 and 4-2.  The  graphs  in
the figures show that the cost for  the  intra-State transport  is
slightly lower than that  for  inter-State  transport.   Furthermore,
as expected, the rates are relatively high for  short  trips,  on the
order of $0.13-$0.70 per  ton-mile for trips from  6-50 miles.  The
rates decrease to  about  $0.05 per ton-mile for hauls  on  the order
of 300 miles or longer.

     Bulk Compost.   Tariffs for the transportation of  bulk  compost
have not been established in most States.  Estimates  of  the rates
for transporting bulk compost  can be made by  using rates  charged
for transporting topsoil  or  composted biosolids as  a proxy for
transportation  rates  for  compost.

     Topsoil or composted biosolids  often are  transported in large
dump trucks or in transfer trailers.   These vehicles  can  haul  from
20 to  50  cubic yards  of material.    Charges  are assessed on  an
hourly basis,   and range from  $35-$60  per  hour.    A cursory
nationwide  study of rates for transporting compost show that the
rates vary from about  $0.08-$0.47  per ton-mile  for  hauls of  50
miles or less.    The rates fluctuate from $0.60 to $0.32 per ton-
mile for distances of 20  to 100 miles and decrease to about $0.05
per ton-mile for distances over 150  miles.

Railroad

     Commodities shipped by rail are described in  the Federal
Standard   Transportation  Commodity   Code.      Compost  is  not
specifically listed in the Code,  but  potting  media and peat are
listed.

     There are not  many documented instances  when potting media  or
any other  similar  material have been transported  by rail.   In one
particular case,  bagged  material was transported  about 200 miles.
The rate  was $47 per ton for  a  minimum  load  of 20  tons,  a rate
equivalent  to about $0.24 per ton-mile.    This rate is more than
four times  as high as the cost of shipping a  similar distance  by
motor carrier.

     Estimates  for shipping 60-ton  loads in  box cars and  90-ton
loads in hopper cars range from $11-$17 per ton.   These estimates

                              4  -  27

-------
      3.5
c
o
\
o
o
0.3


02
                                            l
                      100            200
                              Trip Distance (miles)
                                             300
400
     Figure 4-1.
             Intrastate  motor carrier  rates for  bagged compost
              (point  of origin:  Portland,  Oregon)
     Source:   Cal  Recovery Systems,  Inc.   Portland Area Compost
              Products  Market Study.   Prepared  for Portland
              Metropolitan Service  District.   Portland,  Oregon.
              1988.
                                    4-28

-------

\
a
o
O
      02
                   100
 200         300

Trip Distance miles)
                                                     400
500
     Figure 4-2.   Interstate  motor carrier  rates  for bagged  compost
                    (point  of origin:  Portland,  Oregon)
     Source-   Cal Recovery  Systems,  Inc.   Portland Area  Compost
               Products Market  Study.    Prepared for Portland
               Metropolitan  Service District.   Portland,  Oregon.
               1988.
                                     4-29

-------
do  not   include   loading   and  unloading or   any  additional
transportation  that  may be required at either end of the trip.

     Representatives of railroad corporations have indicated  that
it is unlikely that rail  transport would be more competitive  than
trucks  for  trips  under  100  miles.    Generally, a  railroad
corporation must  have a serious  commitment from the  customer  before
it  files with the PUC  for  a  new  intrastate  commodity  rate.
Railroad class rates for materials for which a commodity rate has
not been filed typically are  higher than  those for motor carriers.

Shipping

     In some instances, it may be possible to transport compost by
ship.   The shipping can take place in containers or  in bulk.

     Containerized  Cargo.    If compost were  to  be shipped by
container,  it would likely be placed  in a 20 by 8 by 8 foot  ("20-
foot")  container  with  a 20.5  ton weight  limit. Although 40 by  8 by
8 foot containers are  also available,  the compost would exceed the
weight  limit before the  container was  full.    Assuming a bulk
density of  800 pounds  per cubic yard for compost,  about 19 tons
would fit into a 20-foot  container.

     An official  from  the Port of Portland (OR)  estimated that the
cost of  shipping compost would likely be  more than  $1,100 per
container to Korea and possibly  more than $2,000  per  container for
other  destinations such as  India and Saudi Arabia.    This is
equivalent to $58-$107.50  per ton.   These costs  do  not  include any
inland transportation,   loading  and unloading charges, or possible
"congestion surcharges" at the destinations  (2)  .

     Bulk Cargo.    The alternative  to using  containers  is to
transport the compost  in bulk in the hold of a ship.  This  method
appears to be less expensive than containerized  shipping,  although
there are many variables which  affect the cost.   Assuming a  total
of 50,000 tons shipped annually in  three equal shipments from the
West Coast to Korea  under  current conditions  , one steamship  company
estimated the  cost  at  approximately $30 per ton  (2) .   This  rate
assumes  current  market conditions and  fuel prices.    The  rate
includes loading  and unloading,  and assumes a loading capability of
about 8,800 tons  per day and  a discharge capability  of almost 2,800
tons per day.  It does not include  any  inland transport.

     The  steamship  transport market  is  highly volatile.    Rates
decreased approximately 50 percent between  April and December of
1988.   Backhaul rates on steamships are unlikely  to  be obtained for
compost because   little bulk cargo originates in  the  Far East
destined for the  U.S.

     Based  on current regulations,  the present  status  of the
transportation industry,  and the value of compost, it is expected

                              4  - 30

-------
that transportation for bulk  or bagged compost  will  be  carried  out
primarily by truck.   Proximity to waterways may allow the use of
barges for U.S. transport.   Transport of  compost  by rail may be
competitive in cases where:   1) both the composting facility  and
the users are close to a railway; and 2) the distance between  the
facility and the users is more  than 100 miles.


COMPOST  POLICIES

     In  this section,  the various  types of policies  and  regulations
that have been developed pertaining  to compost  purchase or use  are
grouped into  three  broad areas:  1) those affecting  the  environment
and  'public  health and safety;    2)  those  affecting  composting
program implementation; and 3)  those affecting distribution and  use
of the compost product.  Many of the policies have only recently
been developed (as of 1989) or  are  still in the  developmental
stages.

     Policies that protect  the environment and public health  and
safety are necessary to ensure a compost  is  safe to  use.  Policies
that  affect  composting program implementation  are needed to
continue to   encourage   it  as   a  municipal-level  management
alternative.   Policies-that affect compost distribution  and use  are
important  to encourage market development  of composts  that  are
produced.

Environment and Public Health  and Safety

     When policies and regulations pertaining to  composting  are
discussed,  those that  affect  the environment and  public  health  and
safety are  particularly important.   Examples of  these types of
policies would be  those that  regulate the  siting and operation of
composting  facilities  and  those that affect compost  quality.
Environmental and  public health and safety  regulations related to
the composting of  yard trimmings and MSW generally have been  the
responsibility of   State and  municipal governments.

     Facility  Control.    Environmental   and  health and  safety
requirements  for  composting  facilities  are often covered by  the
regulations  in  effect for  MSW  disposal  facilities.   The primary
foci of  the requirements  are that the facility be located in  a
environmentally suitable  area,  operated in  a  safe manner to protect
the environment and public  health  and  safety, and that nuisance
control  measures be taken when appropriate.   Safety  regulations in
the U.S.  include fire  safety  procedures,  such  as the provision of
hoses and extinguishers around  the piles and equipment.  Nuisance
control measures generally  include vermin and vector control,  noise
and odor control,   dust mitigation,  and  litter  control procedures.
The length of time  that noncompostables are allowed to be  stored on
the  facility  grounds  is  often limited.     Health  and  safety
requirements at yard trimmings composting sites are  less  stringent

                              4 - 31

-------
and specific  than those  for  mixed MSW  composting since  these
facilities  involve  less  machinery  and  handle  generally  less
putrescible materials.   Also, they have  a  much  less  likelihood  of
receiving household hazardous wastes.

     Compost  Quality.    Compost  quality  is a  function  of the
biological,  chemical,  and physical characteristics  of  the product.
Efforts to regulate compost quality have approached the task in two
broad ways:   1)  regulating  the  process; and  2)  regulating the
finished product.

     Control  of the composting process begins  with regulations
pertaining to   acceptable   feedstocks.   "Incoming  materials
contaminated  with  hazardous  materials are not generally accepted
 (nor desired)  at  facilities  designed to  compost  yard trimmings  or
MSW for use as an organic soil amendment  (3).  Source  separation  of
feedstocks, household hazardous waste collection programs,  public
education,   monitoring  of  feedstocks,   and preprocessing of the
incoming materials  are  methods  that can be utilized  to limit  the
potentially hazardous  materials  entering the  composting process.

     Legislation passed by the  States  of Florida  and New York
provide examples of two approaches to controlling  the feedstocks.
The State of Florida has legislated that household hazardous  waste,
used oil, and  materials  containing asbestos should not be processed
into MSW compost except for  small quantities  which might normally
be found in household discards.    It  is the responsibility of plant
operators  to reject  any  loads  found containing the household
hazardous waste  materials  (4).  Regulations have  been developed  by
the State of  New York to limit  the amounts of household hazardous
wastes  entering mixed MSW compost by requiring that a household
hazardous waste collection  system be in place in  any residential
area serviced by a mixed MSW composting  facility.   The household
hazardous waste  collection  system  must be approved by the New York
Department of  Environmental  Conservation  and operated according  to
the State's Solid  Waste  Management  Facility  Regulations.

     Utilization  of    proper  composting   methods,    especially
maintenance of high temperature  levels, has been demonstrated to be
effective in  destroying pathogens.   Similarly,  maintaining proper
temperatures  during composting  destroys  weed seeds.    At present,
most  regulations  pertaining to composting methods  have  been
developed  for  facilities handling  biosolids.    Some  of  these
regulations have also been adapted  to MSW composting facilities.

     A  number of  States have developed  compost  quality  standards
which regulate compost  products  intended  for distribution.   Most  of
the standards  were  originally developed for biosolids compost,  and
adapted to yard trimming and MSW composts,  although some are being
developed specifically for  this latter group  of  products.  In
addition,   labeling standards could be  developed so that  users
become  aware  of the product  content  and  quality.

                              4  - 32

-------
     Regulations regarding the use of composted organic materials
have primarily  centered  around the  public health concern  of
possibly  introducing potentially toxic  compounds into  the food
chain.    Heavy metals,  PCBS, pesticides,  herbicides, and other
potentially toxic  substances   are  present  in  some MSW  and,
consequently, can be present in  the compost.   If this compost is
applied to the  land or used as a growing medium in  containers, some
amounts of the  potentially toxic  compounds could be assimilated by
plants and  could possibly be transmitted to animals  and humans
consuming the crops.

     Most compost standards, therefore,  limit the concentrations of
potentially  toxic materials  in the compost product. Regulations in
some States  (e.g., Florida) provide different sets of limitations
depending upon the  intended use for the  product.   Composts not
meeting  the most stringent limits  for  toxic  materials  may be
restricted to use in non-food chain crops, or  for  land  reclamation
or landfill  uses.

     The State  of Florida,  in its draft regulations,  has  developed
guidelines for  compost products from yard trimmings, MSW,  livestock
manures,   and biosolids.   In addition  to  establishing  limits for
toxic  materials,  the State  is setting standards  for  compost
maturity,  maximum particle size,  and foreign material  content.
Standards for composts from yard trimmings and livestock manures in
Florida are  less stringent than those for  composts  from MSW and
biosolids.   It is assumed in the State that the concentrations of
heavy metals in  yard  trimmings  compost will be  within the limits
specified.

     Although the kinds  of policies discussed  above were  developed
to protect the  environment and public health and  safety,  they can
also be a factor in the marketability of the compost  product. A
product that can be  demonstrated  to meet  limits  for concentrations
of heavy metals,  PCBS, herbicides,  pesticides, etc.,  will be more
readily  accepted by  potential users  than  one with  unknown
concentrations  of these substances.

Composting Program Implementation

     Policies encouraging  the implementation  of composting programs
have had a major  impact on the increase in the number  of composting
facilities.   Examples of ways  by  which government  agencies can
increase the number  of facilities and thus the volume of materials
being  composted are  through the development of MSW  management
plans,  by giving preference  in the  plans  to  composting over
combustion  and landfilling,   by developing recycling goals,  by
banning disposal of  yard trimmings in landfills,  fostering siting
of composting facilities,  providing financing and tax breaks, and
compost procurement guidelines.    As  a result of  these programs,
greater quantities of composts  are  produced  and marketed.


                              4  - 33

-------
     An evaluation of  the  various  policies and programs that  can
have an impact on composting has  been  carried  out.   The  results of
this 1989 evaluation  are presented  in  Table  4-11.   As  shown  in  the
table,  most of the States  in  the  Industrial,  Midlands,  Northeast,
and Pacific regions have MSW  management plans currently in  place.
In the Central region,  only  one State  out  of 14 currently has  a
plan,  and  in  the  Southr only four out  of 11.  The  method utilized
to enforce recycling goals established by each State  also varies.
In the Northeast,  most of  the guidelines are mandatory and carry
with them penalties for noncompliance.   Conversely,  in the other
regions,   the  guidelines are  mostly voluntary.    The table also
presents  information  regarding the  regions  in  which composting, as
a method to manage municipal  organics,  is  higher on the municipal
solid waste management  hierarchy  than combustion.  Not noted  in  the
table  is  the  EPA hierarchy,  where  composting is higher  in  the
hierarchy than combustion and  landfilling.  Although relatively  few
composting programs   are   in operation   in  the  South  region,
composting is higher  on the  hierarchy than  combustion as a  MSW
management method in over one-half of the States.

     The State of New  Jersey  is  an example  of the  effect policies
can have on composting program  implementation.   It was the first
State to ban leaves from landfills  in  1988.   The State now has  the
largest number of leaf composting facilities.  Since then,  a  number
of  other States  have passed similar  laws,   many of  which  are
scheduled for implementation over the  next  few years (see  Table 1-
1) .   Some  States  have  enacted laws that  require  source  separation
of yard trimmings (e.g.,  New Jersey and  Pennsylvania)

Distribution and  Use of the Compost Product

     The  need to protect  the environment  and  public  health  and
safety has resulted  in  policies  being  developed to regulate
composting facilities  and  the  quality of the finished product.   The
growing problem and expense with siting  MSW management  facilities
has prompted policies aimed at increasing the  number of composting
facilities  in operation   and the volumes of organic materials
composted.  Among the three  groups of  policies being  discussed,
those  affecting the distribution  and use  of  the product are  the
least developed thus far.

     As  mentioned previously,   because of  its  relatively   low
economic  value and its low bulk density,  the method and cost of
transporting  compost  from  the processing facility  to the user is
critical to the marketability  of  the product.  Giving exempt  status
to compost for transportation can  deregulate  the rate charged  for
shipment, that,  as explained  previously in this  Chapter,  leads to
reduced shipping  costs.
                              4 - 34

-------
CO
en
                                             Table 4-11

                MUNICIPAL  SOLID  WASTE MANAGEMENT POLICIES
                                             (July 1989)
                                                        IN THE SIX  STUDY  REGIONS
    Category
Number of  States
Number with MSWM I  /
 plans currently
 in place
Number planning to
 have MSWM 1 / plans
 in place  within
 two years
Number of MSWM 1 /
 plans providing
 mandatory
 guidelines
Number of MSWM  1 /
 plans providing
 voluntary
 guidelines
Number which  give
 composting
 higher  priority
 than combustion
Number which  ban
 landfilling  of
 yard trimmings
                     Central   Industrial
                            14
Midlands   Northeast
Pacific

    3


    2
South
                                      11
                                             (continued)

-------
                                        Table  4-11  (cont.)
   List of  States
AZ
CO
ID
KS
MT
NE
NV
NM
ND
OK
SD
TX
UT
WY
DE
IN
MD
MI
NJ
OH
PA
WV
IL
IA
MN
MO
WI
CT
ME
MA
NH
NY
RI
VT
CA
OR
WA
AL
AR
FL
GA
KY
LA
MS
NC
SC
TN
VA
U)
   1_;   MSWM  = municipal  solid waste management.

-------
     Procurement policies that would  give  preference  to purchasing
or using compost, or recycled materials  in general,  in government-
funded projects  could  significantly  encourage  use of  the product.
For some States,  compost  is considered a recycled  material.  In
California,  a State mandate was issued requiring all State agencies
and departments  to  try to  buy compost products if  they meet  State
specifications and  needs.

     Policies regarding bid  specifications  for  materials needed by
governmental agencies can also have an effect  on developing compost
markets.   For example,  recent acceptance of yard  trimmings  compost
as a soil additive  by  the  New Jersey Department  of Transportation
increases the potential uses for the product by the State (e.g.,  in
highway maintenance  activities).
                               4  -  37

-------
                        Chapter 4

                       REFERENCES

Lehmann, T.R. and  J.P.  Bradshaw,  "Over  200,000  Tons  Diverted
Each Year."  BioCYcle.  31(2):56-58.   February 1990.

Cal Recovery Systems,  Inc.    Portland  Area Compost  Products
Market  Study.    Prepared for  Portland  Metropolitan  Service.
Portland, Oregon.   1988.

Zucconi,  F.  and M.  de Bertoldi.   "specifications for  Solid
Waste  Compost."   BioCvcle.  28(5):56-61.  May/June  1987.

Criteria for the Production and TT.qe of Compost Made from Sol i d
Waste.     Florida   Department of  Engineering   Regulations.
Workshop No.  2,  Draft  Regulations.   May 1989.
                          4 - 38

-------
                            Chapter 5

                ECONOMIC AND  NONECONOMIC  BARRIERS
                  TO DEVELOPING COMPOST MARKETS
     While it  is  important to understand  the  characteristics of
compost and the benefits from using compost, it is also necessary
to recognize the  barriers  to developing and/or expanding markets
for using compost.  This chapter categorizes these  impediments  into
economic and noneconomic barriers.   By addressing these barriers
 (as discussed  in Chapter 6) ,  the benefits from using compost  can be
realized more  easily.


ECONOMIC BARRIERS

Failure to Identify Potential Markets

     Identifying potential markets for  the compost product  should
be a  top priority and ideally should occur prior  to actually
producing it.    Identifying the markets  is  important because:

          quality requirements for the  compost can be  determined;
          multiple markets  may require production of several  grades
          of compost;
          projected amounts  of  various grades of compost  can be
          estimated;
          pricing  structures for  various  grades  of  compost and
          purchase levels can be established;  and
          distribution strategies will help determine if bagging is
          needed.

     Failure to identify markets  may result in overproduction or
underproduction of certain grades  of compost.    This can lead to
excessive  stockpiling  and   shortages of  storage   space,  or,
conversely,  the inability to  fulfill demand  for certain grades of
compost.

Cost Pressures from Competing Products

     Compost  must  be priced  competitively  (or cheaper) than
competing products.    Manufacturers  and  retailers  of competing
products are   likely  to reduce  the cost  of their products, if
necessary,  to  maintain their  market share.   In  addition,  competing
products have  a reputation  for  consistency and  quality and are
generally readily available.   Therefore, if  compost  is  not  priced
competitively with competing products,  not demonstrated to be of
equal or greater quality,  and not  available  when  needed, then its
ability to penetrate existing markets will  be  impaired.
                              5 - 1

-------
Post-processing Costs

     Post-processing of  compost  (shredding,  screening,  blending/
mixing, bagging,  etc.)  ,  although intended to increase  the value of
the product,  is a potential  economic barrier to penetrating  certain
markets  if  it  cannot be done  cost-effectively.   Post-processing
increases  production costs  which must  be  recovered  through
increased  revenues.    It may  not be necessary to post-process
compost if the primary  market is  for  land reclamation  or as a
landfill cover.  On the other hand,  if  the market is nursery use,
for example,   then very specific post-processing steps  may be
desirable to remove unsightly,  unwanted substances  (e.g.,  plastic
film) .    Other  favorable  attributes of  a  compost  for nursery use
include  freedom  from potentially toxic substances,  and suitable
particle  size distribution,   maturity,  water-holding  capacity,
organic matter concentration,  etc.

Transportation Costs

     The cost of transporting compost  from  the composting  facility
to the user has an important influence on successfully developing
markets  for  compost.    This is  because compost  has a low bulk
density,   and is a  relatively low  value material.    Therefore,
transporting compost over long distances  may not  be economically
viable.   Consequently,  if prospective markets  are far  away from the
composting  facility,   the cost of  transportation could  inhibit
successful   market  development  of   compost.     (For a detailed
discussion  of   transportation  costs,   refer  to  the subsection
"Distribution"  in Chapter 4.)   This relationship between distance
and economic  feasibility is a major  and decisive  factor  in the
market  development  of compost.   The longer the distance a product
must be transported,  the  greater  is  the  cost  of  doing  so.
Ultimately,  a Point is reached  beyond  which  it is not  economically
feasible to transport the product.

Impacts of Competing Product Capital Investment

     Not all equipment used for  applying competing  products is
suitable for applying compost.    Consequently, potential users of
compost who currently use its competing products may have to make
capital investments  for equipment suitable  for applying  compost.


NONECONOMIC BARRIERS

Compost Quality Assurance

     Although it  could  be argued  that, theoretically, a demand for
compost exists  and  only awaits  to be tapped,  the reality is that a
sizeable part of this  potential  demand  is  for a grade of  product
higher than that of  the  "raw compost product."   (The terms "raw
product"  and "raw  compost" pertain  here to yard trimmings or

                               5 - 2

-------
municipal  organics  that have been fully composted  in  the absence of
special control measures and have  not  been post-processed,  e.g.,
screened,  for final disposition.   This  section deals with the "raw
product,"  because  most serious  shortcomings  are  mitigated by the
use  of   special   separation   and  control  measures  and  post-
processing.)   The  key  factor that prevents "raw compost"  (both yard
trimming  and MSW  compost)  from meeting  the  requirements for the
full  spectrum of  potential uses,  and hence   its full  market
potential,  is  insufficient quality assurance.    Because  yard
trimmings  typically make a better feedstock  than do other municipal
organics,  this shortcoming is less serious with "raw  yard trimmings
compost" than it is with "raw mixed MSW  compost."

     Meeting  the  full compost  market potential  demands  that the
quality requirements  established  for three levels of use  be met.
Listed in  order of  diminishing quality needs,  the  three levels are:
1)   horticulture   (container nurseries, landscape contractors,
greenhouses,   home  gardeners) ;   2)  field-grown crops  (row crops,
field-grown nursery  plants,  sod);  and 3) land reclamation and
landfill  cover.    See Table 4-1  for the  importance of  compost
quality parameters to  the needs of these three markets.

     Horticulture.   The  following  is  an example of the  list  of
needs in the quality assurance category to be met  in  the production
of  a compost  suitable  for utilization  in horticulture:    1)
consistency  in physical  characteristics and chemical composition
and concentration,  and pH levels  within  the  range of  6.5-7.5;  2)
absence of particles  larger than about one-half  inch,  weed seeds,
substances inhibitory  to plant growth, microorganisms pathogenic to
plants and animals  (including humans); and 3)  presence of essential
micronutrients,  and C/N ratios between 10/1 and 25/1  (nitrate-
nitrogen,  N03-N, is preferable to ammonium-nitrogen,  NH4-N) .  These
three groups of needs  may not always be satisfied  simultaneously in
typical composting operations.

     Field-grown Crops.  Although the  needs of field-grown crops
are  less  rigorous than  those for horticulture,  they  may not
generally be met in typical composts. Reasons for the lower needs
can be  traced to  the  fact  that soil serves as  a buffer between
plant roots and compost.   There are three  examples  of needs which
the typical  composting process might not  always be able to meet
simultaneously.  These are:   1) particle size less  than one inch;
2) pH  at  6.0-7.5;  and 3)  absence of toxic  metals  and resistant
toxic organics.

     Land Reclamation/Landfill Cover.    Despite the  relatively
potential low quality and lack  of quality assurance needs  of
compost for land  reclamation  and for covering  landfills,  these
markets together  may  provide only a small fraction of the total
market needed.
                               5-3

-------
Compost User Attitudes

     The  attitude  toward yard trimmings  compost  expressed  in
previous market development efforts and  studies  is  generally more
favorable  than toward mixed MSW compost.   An  important  factor  is
the  perception   that   yard  trimmings  contain  no  harmful  or
objectionable  components , and also tend to be source  separated (see
Tables  4-6,  7,  8  and 10).  This  favorable attitude also is fostered
by the collective knowledge of  experienced home gardeners.  Concern
about  plant  pathogens  is minimal  because  of  the perception that
they are inactivated or destroyed in the composting  process.  There
is some concern about pesticide  residues.  The  concern is minimized
because legal  constraints  have  significantly  reduced the use  of
persistent  or  particularly   hazardous   pesticides.     Time  and
composting conditions effectively  reduce  and may even destroy the
permitted pesticides.    With  respect to  the possibility of weed
seeds,  most  users are  not aware of the  fact that weed  seeds are
typically  inactivated by the  composting process and by routine
product quality control  (e.g.,  compost product testing).

     Among large-scale  consumers (e.g., agriculture,  horticultural
and  greenhouse enterprises,   and local and State agencies)   ,  and
among  some small-scale  users (e.g.  ,  home gardeners)  , the present
attitude toward mixed MSW compost may be characterized by a strong
hesitancy.    The hesitancy  is  the  result of:    1)  the collective
justified and unjustified negative  feelings of  the public regarding
mixed  MSW composting;   and  2)  a  considerable  skepticism  and
uncertainty about the compost.   The skepticism and uncertainty are
due  in part  to the general lack of  experience with  the product.
Because of this lack of experience,  a  record  of  continuity  of
supply and reasonable  uniformity of  quality  currently is not
available.   The  skepticism  is  further  aggravated by the presently
insufficiently   defined quality  assurance.     As   one  example,
skepticism leads to fear of  losses  from crop  failure if the compost
quality is inferior.

     Worries   and  doubts  are  traceable  to  the nature  of  the
feedstock used in mixed MSW  composting  and to the public perception
that the material  is likely to  have harmful  components that would
become a  part of  the  compost  product.    Only  a long record  of
satisfactory   experience  can   convert   skepticism   into  one  of
neutrality, and then of a positive  attitude.   Considerable time may
pass before  that record is developed,  especially with  regard to
large-scale users.

Locations of Markets with Respect  to Compost Operations

     The nature  and characteristics of urban areas  are such  that,
with some  exceptions,   the  distance between potential  users and
composting facilities may be sufficiently  great to exert a negative
effect on  compost  use  and  the  attendant  market development.   This
situation arises,  in part,  from the logical tendency to site MSW

                               5 -  4

-------
management operations,  such as  composting facilities,  as closely  as
is feasible to the generators.   The  situation with yard  trimmings
may be  one of the few exceptions, especially those materials
generated from landscaping activities and  light  agriculture  (e.g.,
nurseries  and truck farms)  .   In this case,  if composting facilities
are located close to these generators,  potential compost  users are
likely to be in the vicinity.

     Distance exerts two totally different  types of effects  on the
use of compost.   The first  effect  involves  product acceptance and
recognition.   Acceptance  and recognition of composting  and using
compost  are necessary preludes  to developing markets for the
compost   product.     The   second   effect  is   intertwined  with
transportation --  bringing  the product to the user.

     proximity promotes  awareness  and  recognition.     Thus,   a
potential user is more  likely to know of a compost product produced
in his  or her area than  of one produced many  miles away.   This
awareness is a very positive factor favoring the market development
of the product, provided the composting facility is not associated
with unpleasant  factors,  such as  bad  odors,  traffic  congestion,
etc.

     For  the second type of  effect,  distance  affects availability
of the compost product.    The  greater  the distance,  the  more the
number of   uncertainties.      The  number  and   seriousness  of
interferences and  interruptions between production of  the compost
product and its delivery to  the user increases with distance. More
importantly,   distance may determine  the size  of  the potential
compost market area and greatly influence  the  ability for  market
expansion.   The  greater the market area,  the longer  time  it may
take to reach  the  saturation point,  i.e.,  the absorption capacity
of the compost market increases.   Furthermore,  the larger the
market area,  the  greater is the  potential diversity of compost
users and uses.

       In  addition, there may be  an incompatibility  between  the
urban area generation of organic materials and the oftentimes rural
nature of potential large compost markets.    The difficulty is  in
the fact  that feed materials for the composting  facility may mostly
be of  urban origin,  whereas large  users  of the compost product
often  may be  in  a rural  or agricultural  setting.

Access to Transportation  Routes

     As stated earlier, access  to  transportation routes can become
a barrier  to developing compost  markets because  users  of  the
product  are  not  always   in close proximity  to  the composting
facility.   Therefore,  before the  compost  product can be marketed,
 it may need  to  be moved to distribution points that either  are
close,  or are readily  accessible,  to the prospective users.


                               5-5

-------
     In keeping with the three applicable modes of transport,  the
transport  routes  for developing compost  markets  in bulk  are
highway, rail,  and water.    As described  in Chapter 4,  serious
competition  of rail  with  truck  transport could only occur  if
changes were made to existing rail transportation  policy.   As  for
water transport,  it may be viable only for communities sufficiently
near  navigable  waters.     Consequently,  of  the  three routes,
currently the highway is perhaps the most available and practical
transportation route on a nationwide basis.  Furthermore, with  few
exceptions,  the product would have to be hauled from the  composting
facility to the railway or waterway by  truck.    The  volume  of
product per shipment and whether it is shipped in bulk or package
will determine the  type  and  size of vehicle.

      The barrier  may be further magnified  by  doing  the post-
processing step(s)  at a separate facility.  This is more likely to
be done if  post-processing  is  expanded  to  include converting  the
compost product into various  fractions designed to  meet  particular
specifications  for users   in  different areas  (i.e.,  markets).
Moreover,  such an expansion may be more useful for broadening  the
market  base  of yard  trimmings compost by providing  more flexibility
in the products and their markets.

     The impact of  this  transportation barrier on the market
development of MSW compost  is much greater than  that On  the
developing markets  for yard trimmings compost, simply because  the
volumes  of  MSW compost  involved are  potentially much larger.
However,  in contrast to  the  greater potential  production volume of
MSW compost  relative to yard trimmings compost, the actual current
production  of yard  trimmings  compost greatly surpasses that of  MSW
compost.   Moreover,  site restrictions  and  requirements for yard
trimmings composting facilities are generally less extensive than
MSW composting due to the  different feedstocks  and processing
steps, and  they may be easier  to site closer to  transportation
routes.

      Distribution  of the MSW compost will most likely be confined
to bulk deliveries   and involve  large-volume transportation.  AS a
result,  as   stated  earlier,   access  to adequate  transportation
becomes a decisive factor and, accordingly,  lack of access  can
become a substantial barrier to  the  developing markets  for  MSW
compost.

Comparative Availability of Compost

     Although the number of  yard  trimmings  composting  operations
far  exceeds  that   of MSW   composting  operations,  most of  the
individual  facilities  are  comparatively  smaller  in  Size  and
somewhat seasonal in  operation.    Currently,   the  availability  of
yard trimmings compost is  highly localized.    At present,  the
availability of compost satisfies  its demand  in many areas.   The
reason is that the  extent of where yard trimmings  are generated,

                              5-6

-------
and of  gardening activity  and associated use  of composted yard
trimmings,  are somewhat interdependent.   Long-term availability  of
compost is as yet  somewhat  uncertain,  and will remain so until  a
sufficient number of composting facilities have been  in  operation
for a reasonable length of time.

     At present,  the  quantity of MSW  compost on the market  is
extremely limited  and  the continuity of  supply  (i.e.,  long-term
availability)  is uncertain.   This  uncertainty reflects the  current
status  of MSW composting in the U.S.    That  is,  no  existing  MSW
composting  (excluding MSW co-composting)  facility  has been  in
continuous operation longer  than a  few years.   As  a result  of  this
uncertainty,  the long-term availability  of MSW compost is far  less
assured than that of competing products, unless and until  the  MSW
composting situation becomes better  established.

      Availability could also become  a problem if  use of high
quality compost products was  more vigorously promoted  without  a
comparable increase  in their production.   On the other hand,  an
oversupply of compost could also develop,  such as  if large  amounts
of low  quality compost were made and  there  were not enough  low
quality markets  (e.g.,   landfill cover)  available.

Procurement Policies for  Compost

     Procurement policies  relative to markets  for yard trimming and
MSW  composts  are usually  associated  with those divisions  of
Federal,   State,    and   local   agencies,   public   and  private
institutions,   large  business  enterprises, and other organizations
that use  and  procure soil amendments in the  performance of  their
landscaping and planting  projects.   These projects may range  from
planting, landscaping,  and  highway  right-of-way maintenance,  to
land restoration and reclamation.

     Usually the procurement  policies applied are simple  --  namely,
buy those soil  amendments that are  least expensive,  most  readily
available, have the most  attractive  and consistent properties,  are
most convenient to apply,  and are  under no apparent  public  or
private prohibition.   At  present,   compost may not be  available in
many areas to completely  satisfy the soil amendment needs of these
procurement  agencies.  However, with  increased composting activity,
compost will become more available.   What needs to  be  determined is
whether the compost  will  satisfy  the other factors (e.g., users'
quality requirements) .

Restrictions  on Compost Use

     Various  government restrictions on use  of yard  trimming and
MSW compost products are  based on their potential impact on public
health  and the environment.   Particular  restrictions are  based upon
the level of contaminants, the potential  impact on  soil,  water,  and
air  resources.   Restrictions  may be in the  form  of  regulations,

                               5-7

-------
specifications, and standards imposed by Federal, State, or local
agencies,  or  simply may  be those  dictated by sound resource
management and by plant needs.   The current Federal restrictions
pertain mainly to biosolids compost. Restrictions act as barriers
to compost use by way  of  placing limitations on the  amount of
individual application  rates,  frequency of application, and time
span of an application program.   Application limitations may also
be established for a  substance  introduced  by  way of  the product.
Limitations  on application rates based on the potential adverse
impact  on a  water resource may be determined by  the relation
between the concentration of an available fertilizer element  (e.g.,
N, P, K)  in  a  soil plus that added  by way of  the compost and the
amount  required by a crop.  Generally,  fertilizer elements not used
by a crop or otherwise  immobilized in the  soil  are leached to the
ground water, run off to the  surface water, or  volatilize.

Legal Constraints

     Other than  a  general  prohibition  against false advertising
 (e.g.,  unfortified leaf compost marketed as a  fertilizer), legal
constraints are those  that  prohibit the production and distribution
of any product which will  exert an unduly  adverse impact upon the
environment  and public safety  and  well being.     It is  only
relatively recently that specific legal constraints  have begun to
be imposed by  individual States.   These constraints have been in
the   form  of   regulations   regarding   maximum   permissible
concentrations of certain  heavy metals and persistent potentially
toxic organic chemicals  in  biosolids compost.   Standards  regarding
weed seed content and  degree of maturity are beginning to be  set by
government  agencies  and private  entities.    However,   State and
Federal  agencies have  been  directing their attention  mostly to
pathogen,  heavy  metal,   and  potentially toxic organic  substance
concentrations.

     Constraints that have posed the most serious  barriers upon
compost  use,  and  perhaps, thereby,  compost  market  development, are
those  relating to heavy  metals  and  resistant toxic  organics.
Because   pathogens   are   substantially   eliminated   during  the
composting process,  the  possibility  of  pathogens being present has
not constituted an  insurmountable legal barrier.  Federal biosolids
regulations regarding  pathogen kill should be satisfied by adhering
to legal stipulations  regarding attainment and  duration of the high
temperatures during the composting stage (1) .

     Legal constraints  regarding  heavy metals and toxic organics
have  restricted the  use  and consequent  market development of
biosolids compost.   Mixed  MSW compost  use may be restricted to  a
lesser extent because it too  can potentially contain heavy metals
and potentially  toxic organics,  although generally to a lesser
degree  than  does biosolids compost.    Because  contamination with
heavy metals  and persistent  toxic   organics  is   practically


                              5 - 8

-------
nonexistent in typical yard trimmings, very  few  legal  constraints
currently exist regarding the use of  yard  trimmings compost.

     Another legal constraint occurs  during  inter-State  marketing
of compost.   The  problem  is the lack of a uniform  legal  code  (e.g.,
uniform definitions) .   As of now, regulations may vary from State
to State.     Because of  distribution  limits  associated with
transportation  (e.g.,  distance -- discussed in  Chapter 6), this
constraint  presently is not  a great barrier, except perhaps  in
regions along State boundaries and in relatively small States.

     Strategies  to overcome  economic and noneconomic  barriers  to
increased compost market  development are discussed in the  following
chapter.
                               5-9

-------
                             Chapter 5

                            REFERENCES

1.    40  Code  of  Federal  Regulations.    Chapter  1  -  Part  257,
     Appendix II.   July 1,  1988 edition.
                               5-10

-------
                            Chapter 6

             STRATEGIES  TO MITIGATE/OVERCOME BARRIERS
                  TO DEVELOPING  COMPOST  MARKETS


     In order to take advantage of the potential  benefits  of using
compost (e.g.,  improving the  soil,   enhancing plant growth,  and
protecting water resources),  economic and  noneconomic  strategies
will likely need to be fostered and institutionalized at  the  local,
State,  and Federal  levels  (1)  .   For example,  with  passage  of  the
1990 Farm Bill  ("Food,  Agriculture,  Conservation,  and Trade  Act of
1990"), there  will  be a greater  role for the U.S.  Department of
Agriculture  (USDA)  in promoting  the use  of  compost,  especially by
farmers and the public.

     The  Farm  Bill's  section  1456    ("composting Research  and
Extension Program")  recognizes  the potential soil,  crop,  and water
quality benefits from using compost.   According to  section 1456,
USDA will:

      (1)   make  information  on  the  potential  uses of  compost
          available  to  appropriate   Federal,   State,    private
          authorities, and the general  public;
      (2)    identify  and  compile information on State,   local,  and
           foreign   government   definitions   and   standards   for
          processing, handling, and using  compost;
      (3)   conduct research and an assessment  of  potential  uses of
          composts produced  "on" and  "off" the  farm, and markets
           for  the compost;
      (4)    inform farmers and  the general  public  on benefits of
          using, and methods  for applying compost;  and
      (5)   consider  designating composting  as  a  farm conservation
          practice eligible for  cost-sharing.

     While  considering  that  economic and noneconomic barriers to
developing  compost  markets may  exist,   the  experience of many
communities  indicates  that  these potential barriers can  often be
overcome.    This chapter discusses strategies to overcome these
barriers,  that will  help to build successful  programs  to develop
and/or expand  compost markets.


OVERCOMING  ECONOMIC  BARRIERS

Identifying  Potential Compost  Markets

      Identifying potential  compost markets requires surveying the
local  area for those interested  in its  use and  determining their
potential    needs    as    to    compost   quality    and   quantity.
Diversification of  compost products  can increase  overall  market
opportunities.   This allows  post-processing  and  other  compost

                               6-1

-------
production factors  (e.g.,  quantities  of different grades of
compost) to be adjusted  to meet  the  markets'  needs.   Compost has
been  successfully marketed in  bulk and bag.    Bulk  sales are
typically for large volume users, and bag  sales  are  typically for
small volume-users. Therefore, there is no single "best"  method to
market a compost product.

     All potential markets should be  considered.   In  addition, new
uses and applications  may be found within  a  community that were
previously ignored for various reasons,  including the expense of
purchasing  suitable  soil  amendments.  Also,  by identifying uses of
compost on public grounds and projects, communities  can  avoid the
costs of purchasing other soil  amendment  products.  Experience has
shown that  there  are many beneficial applications for  suitable  soil
amendment products within  a community that compost can satisfy  with
very little  (if any)  additional  cost and labor needed after it is
produced.

     Also ,  compost marketers can promote compost  to  producers and
suppliers of competing/complementary products as  a source of  "raw
material"  or an  ingredient  for their  products.    For example,
topsoil and potting soil  producers  can  mix compost  in with their
products to improve the organic content and provide a  modest  supply
of nutrients in  the product.   Properly  cured compost would be  a
suitable ingredient for many competing/complementary products. In
many cases,  it  may also be a cheaper input material.   In  many parts
of the  country,   topsoil is essentially a seasonally  available
product.  In other areas,  adequate  topsoil  is  simply  not  available
nearby.     Therefore,   mixing  compost into topsoil  could extend
existing supplies of topsoil and reduce the expense and need for
transporting topsoil  from relatively distant sources.

Overcoming Cost Pressures from Competing Products

     Some  communities have  offered compost  free or at reduced
prices  initially  to attract users and markets. However,  others in
the composting industry feel this tends to devalue the product in
the customers'  mind (making it difficult to later charge a price)
and recommend that it be  sold at  a positive price to cover at  least
some of the processing  and/or transportation costs (2) .  Whether or
not a price  is charged may also  depend on whether the composting
facility is a  public or  private operation (3).   If  a price is
charged, a pricing structure  can be established to reflect the
purchase quantity and distribution method  (3)  (4) .  For  example,  a
lower price can  be charged to  encourage customers to purchase
greater quantities  of compost  or pick  up  the compost  at the
composting  facility.

Recovering Post-processing Costs

     Post-processing  is generally performed  to improve the  quality
and/or increase the value  of the  compost.  This may be done  to  meet

                               6-2

-------
the quality  needs of a specific  market,  increase the  compost's
ability to bear  the  cost  of transportation,  or simply to  improve
its salability.    Post-processing costs are a possible  barrier,  but
a potentially avoidable  one if they are recovered  through a higher
selling price  for the  compost product.   The key,  here, is to
recognize when and  to what extent  post-processing is necessary.
This requires an  understanding of specific markets'  needs  as to  the
characteristics  of   the   compost  (e.g.  ,  particle size,  pH,
distribution  method,  etc.).

     If bagging is being considered,  an evaluation of the  increased
cost versus  expected additional revenue  should be  performed.   (As
a rough guide,  the average price in 1988  for  peat  sold in bulk  was
$18.14 per ton;  for peat  sold  in  packages or bales,  the  average
price was $24.68  per ton  [5]).  Wholesale  and  retail  distributors
should be  identified.    Distribution networks  may have to be
established.     Transportation  modes  and  costs   must   also be
considered.

     Also,  the effectiveness of source separation,  the composting
technology used,  and the quality  control employed  will likely
affect  the  need for,  or level  of,   post-processing.     Public
education,  separate  collection  containers, inspection of incoming
compostable  materials,   and effective up-front  facility separation
can prove useful  here.

Mitigating Transportation  Costs

     Various  means  are   available   for   reducing  the   cost  of
transporting the  compost  product  from the composting facility to
its potential users.   Favorable  transportation  rate structures  for
compost would potentially  reduce its  cost barriers and  increase  its
use.   Thus ,  adjusting transportation rate structures,  such  that if
any rate inequities  exist  they are eliminated (or modified in favor
of the compost product) ,  could  have  a  significant  impact on
increasing compost use.

     Shipping  compost at  lower backhaul rates is another method
that can lower transportation costs. Generally,  backhaul  rates  are
set very  low in many areas  in order to  utilize  otherwise empty
return trips,   attract freight  for return trips,   rather than
allowing vehicles to return empty  to points of  origin.  Similarly,
if compost feedstocks  (more appropriate  for  source separated yard
trimmings)  are transported to  a  composting  facility  (especially  one
in a  rural site),  finished  compost could  be  returned to urban
markets or outlets in the  same  vehicles  provided  the  vehicles  are
cleaned as appropriate  (e.g.  ,  to reduce transmittal of weed seeds
to the compost).

     It is also possible  to increase the  value of  compost  through
post-processing  (e.g.,  by shredding, screening, blending,  and/or
bagging)    so that   it  is better   able  to  bear the   cost  of

                               6  - 3

-------
transportation.     This is  currently done  with many competing/
complementary products such as peat and potting soil.   The bagged
compost can be given  a brand  name  to develop  product identity and
user loyalty.   Benefits, uses,  and  instructions for the compost can
be printed on the bag.

     Another means to reduce transportation  costs  is  to locate the
composting facility at, or  near, the primary  users'  location (s)  .
This is a viable  alternative  if a  user (e.g., a nursery or farm)
has suitable  land area for the composting facility  and  this  area
complies with composting  facility  siting requirements.    Various
advantageous  arrangements may then also be possible regarding
provision of  labor, equipment, and  land.

     Finally, most transportation  costs can be  avoided if  markets
are found and developed in  the immediate local area.  Often, one of
the best markets  for  compost  is within  the community in which the
yard trimmings or other municipal  organics are generated.   This
includes uses in parks, landscaping, home gardens, etc.

Overcoming Impacts of  Competing Product Capital Investment

     This  potential   barrier  may  be  difficult  to  overcome.
Fortunately,   it is not applicable to many of the potential  markets
for compost.   The problem  is  that  even  with various  incentives to
purchase necessary compost  application  equipment,  a capital outlay
is required,   possibly idling some already purchased equipment  that
was used for  applying the competing product(s)  .    However,  the
equipment used with the competing product(s)  may have other  uses or
resale  value  which allows  some of the capital investment to be
recovered.

     Many States  have enacted incentives  to encourage the use of
recycled materials,  which may (or should)  apply to the use of
compost.   These  include consumption  tax credits,  sales and property
tax exemptions, grants,  and low interest loans.   Tax incentives
generally apply  to  local and/or State taxes.     They  are  an
inducement  to invest  in new  capital but, by themselves,  do not
fully compensate  for the cost  of investment.  The same is true  with
low interest  loans.   Grants will generally cover some or all of the
cost for application  equipment.

      In addition, since this potential barrier typically  applies
to certain, perhaps  large,  users  of compost,  lower  prices may be
offered for substantial purchases of compost.
                               6  - 4

-------
OVERCOMING NONECONOMIC BARRIERS

Providing Compost Quality Assurance

     Two of  the  more important tasks,  not only for developing  a
market for the compost product, but also for maintaining it,  are to
establish an acceptable  set  of  compost standards and specifications
and to ensure that  the  product unfailingly meets  those  standards
and specifications.   The  latter task  is  particularly  important
because,  as  discussed in Chapter 5,  deviations  in  quality  lead to
user frustration,  and, with  commercial users, possibly to financial
losses.   Moreover,  it is the only way to build a favorable  record.

     Progress in identifying and  implementing measures that improve
compost  quality  assurance  can be made by  actively seeking
involvement from potential users  on  their specific needs  and
biological,  chemical,   and physical qualities they believe  are
important or essential.   Compost  users that should be  consulted
include  agronomists,  farmers,  home  gardeners,  horticulturists,
nurserymen,  landscape architects  and specialists, municipal  and
State park officials, and university  agricultural extension agents.
However,    the  gardening   market  is   strongly    influenced   by
developments  in  horticulture-oriented  industries.   In  addition to
the users listed above,  public health and  environmental protection
agencies   and  associated    professionals   should be   included.
Arbitrary    decisions    should  be    avoided  in   establishing
specifications,  standards,  and directives.

     Improving the  quality of  the  "raw  compost"  product by
screening is accompanied by  an  increase  in  the size of the rejected
fraction and a lowering  of  the volume of marketable product.   This
problem could be  resolved by grading  and developing markets for the
product  into  two or  more quality levels,   e.g., into top quality,
medium,  and general or noncritical use.  Another gradation could be
on the basis of unrestricted use (for all uses except perhaps food
crop  production);   and  restricted   use   (e.g.,   use  only  for
reclamation  of disturbed land  areas  or only as landfill cover)  .
Several States have established at least one grade  for  compost,  as
well as  standards and specifications  to be met  by  each grade (see
Table 4-9) .

Improving Compost User  Attitudes

     To  compete  successfully with other soil amendment  products,
compost must be shown to be of equal  or greater  benefit and  value.
It is  important to  stress  the benefits of using  compost  (e.g.,
plant growth improvement,    erosion  reduction  and water quality
benefits,  and plant  disease  suppression)  .   If a quality compost is
consistently  produced,  over time it  will  be able to  establish  a
positive  reputation,  such  as that currently enjoyed by many
competing products.
                                 -  5

-------
     The prevailing attitude  toward most composts  is generally
favorable.    Not  only have  the many  "virtues" of  good quality
compost been widely recognized and publicized,  they have  also  been
convincingly demonstrated  in many areas.    Compost  demand can be
further increased by educating  new users on the benefits of using
compost and providing  application information (6)  (7) .   For the
present,  once good quality compost has  been  assured,  the  next  step
will be to  expand the magnitude of compost  production so large
quantities  of compost are readily available and used.

     There  are two important  aspects of developing markets for  yard
trimmings  compost.  The first  is  to maintain  a  favorable attitude
toward it.    An example of an  action  that  could adversely impact
users'  attitudes would be  the addition  to yard trimmings  of street
sweepings  that have been contaminated by glass shards,  metals, and
a variety  of other objectionable items.   This  could adversely
affect product quality and cause users  to  react unfavorably to the
use of the  contaminated product.    A favorable  attitude can be
strengthened by applying quality assurance measures as discussed in
Chapter 4.   Furthermore,  working  with  university  agricultural and
cooperative  extension  services  and  professional groups  (e.g.,
landscapers,  agronomists,  and farm bureaus)  to develop  markets and
providing  the public  and others  with technical  assistance can
greatly influence compost product acceptance  (4) .

     The second is to expand the production of yard trimmings
compost to  the highest level possible,  while still  ensuring the
continued  availability of,  and  markets  for,  the  product.  In
addition to  assuring  a continuous supply,  lists of  suppliers and
their addresses,  compost  delivery  arrangements  (if  any)  ,  and  price
could  be made available  to  the public,  landscapers, government
agencies,  and others  who  would use the product.   For example,
establishing a  local  telephone hotline to provide information on
availability,  location,  price,  and use  of  compost  would be  helpful
in informing potential users.

     Some users  of  mixed  MSW compost have positive  attitudes and
others have negative attitudes  towards its use.   Generally,  there
currently  seems  to be  more  acceptance  for  its  use  for   land
reclamation or as a landfill  cover than for higher grade uses.  For
marketers of compost  to  increase acceptance of the  product,  they
need to ensure:   1)  the product meets  specifications/guidelines
appropriate for the intended  use ; and 2)  that  sufficient quantities
of the product are available for the  intended  use.   This may be
followed by  an intensive  educational program and the best use of
promotion  techniques  (6) (7) .   Refinements to the  product,   when
needed,  must also be convincingly demonstrated  so potential users
are sufficiently  reassured as  to the improvements.   Finally, the
feasibility of making such a demonstration ultimately depends  upon
the guaranteed availability of  a mixed MSW compost product  that
meets all  specifications and  standards.


                               6-6

-------
Identifying Locations  of Compost Producers and Users

     Compost  producers   should  take  full   advantage  of  the
recognition factor  that accompanies proximity to the composting
facility and which is  so  essential to successful market development
of any compost product.   This can be done by properly operating the
composting facility  so it does  not  become  a  source  of  nuisances or
adversely impact the quality of   the environment in any way.
Recognition can  be furthered through the use of demonstration plots
showing the beneficial  effects of compost on plant growth and
production.   Another means  is  to arrange tours  of  the  facility for
the surrounding citizenry.

     The  negative   effects of  distance  on  availability can be
mitigated by establishing a strategic network of  distribution
centers where an adequate  inventory of compost is maintained. An
additional recourse  may be  to  expand the demand for the product to
the fullest extent possible within the market  area allowed  by the
distance between the site of the composting facility  and the
location of the  users.   Compost demand  can be increased by finding
additional  uses for the product or by modifying  it  to  meet new
uses.

     Near some of  the larger urban areas,   sufficiently large
markets  for compost may be further away in the  rural areas. If
this distance  is too great, the cost for  transporting  the  compost
may impede the development of markets in  these areas.  As  a rough
guide, compost may be marketed within  40-50  miles  from the compost
processing facility  (8) (9) .    However,   the  actual distance would
depend on the  quality  and value of the compost,  form of  sale  (i.e.,
bag or  bulk), access  to  transport  arteries,  and type and size of
transport vehicles.

Gaining Access to Transportation Routes

     One  approach to gain access to transportation routes is to
site  composting  facilities at, or  close  to,  the primary  compost
users,  especially long-term,  large  users.   Such locations  could be
near farms, nurseries,  parks,   landfills,  etc.   Siting must  also
take  into account transport  of the materials to be composted, as
well as  the relative  costs of  land to be used for  the composting
facility.    As  discussed  above,   strategically  located compost
distribution   centers   may   be   cost-effective  in   reducing
transportation costs.

Increasing Comparative Availability of Compost

      If  the full potential use of yard trimmings  compost  could be
realized,   matching  product availability with  the  seasonal  demand
for soil  amendments  could well  become  a problem.   For  the  present,
availability of  yard trimmings  compost in some cases is inadequate,
at  least  as far as certain users  are  concerned;  other areas are

                               6  - 7

-------
experiencing over-supplies of the compost.  Very few retail  outlets
offer yard trimmings compost,  whereas  the potential  demand  for the
product  may be large.    However,   no such  dearth of  competing
products  exists.   For example, cow manure, enriched bark compost,
and peat may be available year-round.

     Until  more  MSW composting  facilities come  into  operation,
availability will  continue  to  be  one  of the barriers to  developing
markets for MSW compost.  Since the characteristics of  the products
are  likely to  vary between facilities,   it  is difficult to make
general predictions as to quality  and utility.  One would expect
that quantities would  be  greatest in highly urbanized areas  because
of  the  proportionally  greater volumes of   organic  materials
generated   and   consequently   larger   composting   facilities.
Unfortunately,  the  potential use of  the compost product in such
areas may be able  to accommodate  only a small fraction of the  total
production capacity.  Although it follows  that unavailability  would
no longer be a problem, over- availability could  become a  serious
one.    Near relatively small cities,  generation of  the organic
materials  and  the production  of  compost could be more  compatible
with that of demand.

Establishing Procurement Policies  for Compost

     procurement policies,  public or private,  that  are biased
against  composts   should  be  revised  by policies unbiased or
favorable  to their  use.   Procurement policies  can  be implemented
that mandate equal or preferential treatment of composted yard
trimmings and municipal organics  in the purchase of soil  amendments
and  mulches.   This type of  policy generally provides that the
compost  in question be purchased and  used if  it is  no more costly
than   competitive  materials  and  if   it   meets   all   product
specifications deemed  essential.

Complying  with Restrictions on Compost Use

     The barriers   "restrictions on  compost  use"   and   "legal
constraints" are  closely intertwined.    Consequently, many of the
statements made in  this  section  could be applied to the following
section  and vice versa.

     There  are several State laws that restrict compost  use (e.g.,
see  Table 4-9) .    In addition,   the EPA and many  States have
regulated the use  of biosolids  compost.   These restrictions  on
compost  use were generally  imposed  to prevent  potential  impacts
upon soil,  water,   and air  resources  that could  adversely affect
public health, crop production,   and overall environmental quality.
Because with  few  exceptions these  restrictions are based  on
demonstrated tests,  first-hand experience, and objective analysis,
any  attempt to lessen them  to facilitate  market  development for the
compost  product must  be  examined and  evaluated with extreme  care.
It  should be emphasized, however,   that this does not  preclude  a

-------
continuing evaluation and critical examination of the restrictions
by pursuing a program of careful research and reassessment  of past
experience and findings.

Recognizing Legal Constraints

     As the state of  knowledge  regarding  compost  use  advances,
adjustments to compost  use  restrictions may be needed over  time.
Legal  constraints on the use of  a product or material should be
based solely on the  characteristics of that product and not whether
it is  a  recycled  product or virgin material.
                               6  -  9

-------
                            Chapter 6

                           REFERENCES

1.   Kashmanian,  R.M.;  H.C. Gregory;  and S.A. Dressing.    "Where
    Will All the Compost  Go?".   BioCYcle.  31 (10) :38-39,  80,  82-83.

2.   BioCvcle   Staff.     "The   Present   and  Future of   Compost
    Marketing."   BioCYcle.   26(5):34-36.   July/August 1985.

3.   Cox,  K.     "Expanding  Markets  for  Yard  Waste   Compost."
    BioCvcle.  29(10):64-65.   October 1989.

4.   Goldstein,  N.    "Marketing  Strategy  for Sludge  Compost."
    BioCvcle.   29(5)   :42-43.   May/June 1988.

5.   Us .   Department of Interior.   Minerals  Yearbook,  Volume  I:
    Metals and  Minerals,  1988.   1990.

6.   Derr,  D.A.;  M.C.   Varner;  and G.J.   DiLalo.     "Marketing
    Potential of  Organic Based  Fertilizers."  BioCycle,  25(3):42-
    45.   April  1984.

7.   Goldstein,  N.    "He  Brings New Life  to  Compost."   BioCYcle.
    26(5):37-38.  July/August  1985.

8.   Alexander,  R.     "Expanding   Compost  Markets.'!     BioCYcle.
    31(8):54-59.  August 1990.

9.   Cal Recovery Systems,  Inc.    Portland  Area Compost  Products
    Market  Study.    Prepared for  Portland  Metropolitan  Service.
    Portland,  Oregon.   1988.
                              6-10

-------
                            Appendix A

            EXAMPLES OF EXISTING PROGRAMS AND  MARKETS
INTRODUCTION

     Composting  has become  an attractive method in the U.S.  to
divert organic materials (especially yard trimmings)  from disposal
facilities  and produce  valuable end  products.    The number  of
facilities in operation,  or  in  the planning or construction stages,
is growing rapidly.   The general status of yard  trimming and MSW
composting in the U.S.  is discussed in the following paragraphs.
Following that,   information  on the  development  of compost markets
is presented  for a number of  existing composting programs.   The
information  is divided  by  region,   and  is  intended  only to  be
representative  of   the  many  composting   programs   and   their
corresponding compost  markets.   The  discussions are presented as an
overview of the types of compost market development efforts  in the
Us .

Yard Trimmings composting

     Composting yard trimmings  has been practiced  for many years in
the U.S.   However,  it  was not until the late  1980s that  this
practice began  to attain widespread application.    The following
factors are particularly responsible for the growing interest:  1)
recovery and utilization  of  yard trimmings is an effective means of
diverting  substantial   quantities of  organic   materials   from
dwindling numbers of,  and increasingly more  expensive,  landfills;
2) the material is easily composted;  3) the required technology can
be minimal;   4)  the regulatory requirements have  not been too
demanding;  and 5) the value  of the  compost product.

     Quantities  of  yard trimmings  generated  vary among  regions.
The size of  the  contribution  of yard  trimmings to a community's
discards  into disposal   facilities.    Results  obtained in MSW
composition studies show  that yard trimmings may comprise from 5-30
percent (by weight) .  The relative  contribution of yard trimmings
is  also  a   function of   season,    climate,   vegetation,   soils,
population density,  and affluence.   Typically,  the output of grass
clippings and brush is greatest from late spring until  mid-autumn.
On the other hand,  approximately 70  percent of the annual output of
leaves is typically collected  in the autumn.

     Composting  leaves collected in the autumn  is currently the
most frequent type of composting program in the U.S. (1)  .   These
types  of composting programs  generally utilize  a low-technology
composting process.  Market  development efforts for leaf composting
programs are  usually  conducted during a short  time  period  in the
spring and fall,  because  of  the greater need for soil amendments at
those times.

                               A - 1

-------
     A trend in yard trimmings  composting  is  towards implementation
of more programs that process a mixture of yard  trimmings  (e.g.  ,
leaves and grass clippings)  during the year.   These yard trimmings
composting programs generally  require higher levels of processing
technology and more comprehensive  compost  market  development
programs.   Tree trimmings and brush require chipping or shredding.
In addition,  improper composting of grass  clippings can lead to the
generation of offensive  odors.

     The compost product is a valuable soil  amendment, provided it
is free of  objectionable,  unwanted substances.   It is a source of
organic matter and a  modest  supply of nutrients.

Municipal Solid Waste Composting

     MSW composting was  given consideration as  a  management process
in the U.S.  as early as the 1950s.  However,  in  the 1960s, several
factors combined  to discourage the prospects  for  MSW composting.
The primary factors  included:   1)  an absence  of a market for the
compost product;  2)  the very low  cost of landfill ing;  and 3)  the
high carbon/nitrogen ratio of MSW  in  the  U.S.

     Composting municipal  organics,  as well as  co-composting MSW
with biosolids,  currently is receiving  a substantial  amount of
attention in this  country.   As of Fall 1989,  seven full-scale MSW
composting or  co-composting  facilities were  in operation  (2)   .In
addition,  approximately  40 other  facilities  were in the planning,
design, permitting,  construction,  or pilot-scale operation stage.
Table  A-l presents  a  summary of  these facilities by region.

     With the  current high degree  of  interest in  MSW composting,
institutions  or   agencies   should   also  be   cautious   before
implementing   these  programs.      If a   composting   program is
implemented without a full understanding  of  the  MSW stream and the
process itself,  problems can be  encountered during operation, in
producing  a  high-quality  product,   and in  developing compost
markets.  The  quality of the  finished product  greatly  depends  upon
the type, efficiency,  and thoroughness of  the separation process
 (including source separation),  as  well as process  and product
guidelines or  regulations.

     The seven full-scale MSW composting facilities in operation in
the U.S.   in  1989 are  listed in  Table A-2.    Capacities of the
facilities range from about ten to  a  few  hundreds of tons per day.
Little detailed information  is currently  available on  the  quantity
or quality of the  finished compost produced  at most  of  these
facilities.    Their  output  of  compost  has  typically  not  been
sufficient to permit a long-term definition of  the  market  for their
respective  products.
                               A-2

-------
                             Table A-l

              STATUS OF MSW COMPOSTING/CO -COMPOSTING
                FACILITIES IN THE U.S.  (FALL  1989)
Region

Central
Industrial
Midlands
Northeast
Pacific
South

Totals
Consideration  Planning  1  /
 0
 3
10
 7
 2
 4.

26
                      4
                      4
                     16
                      8
                      3
                      6.

                     41
Operational

      0
      1
      4
      0
      1
      1
                                                              Total

                                                                 4
                                                                 8
                                                                30
                                                                15
                                                                 6
                                                                11

                                                                74
I/   Includes planning,   design,   permitting,   and  construction
     stages,  as  well  as  pilot-scale  or research  facilities.

Source:    Goldstein,  N.     "Solid Waste  Composting  in the U.S."
          BioCycle.  30 (11) :32-37 .   November 1989.
                               A - 3

-------
                             Table A-2

             OPERATIONAL MSW COMPOSTING/CO-COMPOSTING
                FACILITIES IN THE U.S.  (FALL 1989)
Location
Delaware
  Wilmington

Florida
  Sumter  County

Minnesota
  Fillmore County
  Lake of the Woods
   County
  St. lCloud

Washington
  Skamania County

Wisconsin
  Portage
Type of System



In-vessel


Windrow


Windrow

Windrow
In-vessel/drum


Windrow


In-vessel/drum
Material Added
    to MSW
Biosolids


None


None

None
Biosolids


None


Biosolids
Source:    Goldstein,  N. and B. Spencer.    "Solid  Waste composting
           Facilities ."   BioCYcle.  31(l):36-39.    January 1990.
                               A  - 4

-------
Composting Other Organic Materials

     In addition to programs  that compost yard trimmings and the
other  municipal   organics,  a   number  of  programs  have  been
established throughout the U.S. to compost other organic materials.
Examples of  these  materials include horse manure,  dairy manure,
chicken  manure,    potato   processing  by-products,   and  seafood
processing  by-products.  These types of programs are generally more
limited in  number and tend  to be much more dependent upon  the types
of  local  industry and the  types  of  organic  materials  these
industries  produce.


EXAMPLES OF COMPOSTING PROGRAMS BY REGION

Central

     The Central region consists  of  the largest number of States
 (14) and has a total  population of approximately  39,000,000. The
States  which comprise  this region are:   Arizona,  Colorado, Idaho,
Kansas,   Montana,   Nebraska,  Nevada,   New Mexico,   North Dakota,
Oklahoma,  South Dakota,  Texas, Utah,  and Wyoming.

     The States in the Central region  have  the fewest  active
composting  projects.   This may be due to the fact  that the region
covers  a  large area of land that is  not densely populated.  In
addition,  the landfilling  cost is relatively  inexpensive  and there
is  an  absence of  legislative measures  discouraging landfilling.
The Central region  has a sizeable  agricultural industry  which could
absorb  compost products.

     Boulder.  Colorado.    Boulder County  and the City of Boulder
have supported a wood chipping project since 1985. Woody material
is  collected during the regular  "spring cleanup" program.   The
material is  processed  through a  tub grinder and reduced to wood
chips from one to  three inches in size.   During  1986,  the project
diverted 9,000 cubic yards  of woody material from the landfill, and
produced 3,250 cubic yards of wood chips  (3)  (4) .

     Lincoln, Nebraska.  A  program was  begun in June 1988 to use
"biodegradable" cornstarch plastic bags in the collection of yard
trimmings for  composting.   The compost  from the program's first
year was unmarketable  due  to the presence  of  nondecomposed bag
pieces,  so  it was  spread  on a closed  landfill  and disked in.

     The City has  an agreement with  the University of Nebraska to
conduct tests  on the bags and the compost.   The series of tests
also include an  analysis  of pesticides  and herbicides in the
leachate.    Local   nurserymen,   landscapers,  and  sod farmers have
expressed an interest in using the compost  (5)  .
                              A - 5

-------
     Omaha, Nebraska.  The City of Omaha  is  using  a  closed  landfill
as a site  for a pilot-scale  yard  trimmings  composting program. In
1987, the  breakdown  of  the yard trimmings accepted was 60 percent
leaves and 40 percent tree trimmings  and other yard trimmings. In
1989, most of the  material collected  was grass clippings.

     In the past,  the material has been  stockpiled at the  landfill
from April to November.    Then  in November,   the materials  are
shredded and  put  into  windrows.   The windrows are  turned twice
during the composting process  with  front-end  loaders.

     In 1987,   all  of the compost product was used by  the City's
Parks Department.    Currently,  the finished compost  is  taken to a
central park in bulk form,  where residents can pick up the product
free of charge.  The material is used  primarily as a mulch  and soil
amendment (6) .

Industrial

     The Industrial region consists  of eight States and, except for
the South,  has  the largest population of the  regions defined for
the study  -- 52,000,000.  The eight  States are:  Delaware,   Indiana,
Maryland,   Michigan,   New Jersey,   Ohio,   Pennsylvania,  and West
Virginia.

      The  MSW  management  policy   for   the  State  of  Michigan
establishes a  range of  8 to 12 percent as a  goal for diverting yard
trimmings   from  disposal  by   composting.     In   early  1989,
approximately  one  percent of  Michigan's  MSW was being composted in
about 100  leaf and/or yard trimmings composting programs throughout
the State  (7).

     The State of New Jersey has  the  largest number  of  leaf
composting  facilities in  operation.   As  of March 1988,  there were
175 operational leaf composting facilities  in  the  State  (8) .   The
primary  end uses  for leaf compost are:    residential  gardening,
topsoil  companies,   nurseries,   and  public  works   and  parks
departments.    Other uses include land  reclamation  and  landfill
cover.   Most  municipalities  in New Jersey  are giving the compost
away to residents  and charging a nominal  fee to bulk users  (9)  .

     Wilmington.  Delaware.     The Delaware Reclamation Plant in
Wilmington is owned by  the Delaware Solid Waste Authority and has
been operational since  1984.    The facility is designed to process
about 1,000 tons of  mixed MSW per day.    Processing includes size
reduction,  air  classification,  magnetic  separation,  and screening
to recover metals  and glass  and to  produce  a  refuse-derived fuel.
In addition, the process  also generates  about 225 tons of residue
 (primarily paper and plastic).  The residue is mixed with  an equal
amount  of  biosolids (about 20 percent total  solids)  and then
introduced  into one of  four reactors for composting.   The  material
is held in the reactor  for five to seven days  during which time it

                               A - 6

-------
is mixed and  aerated.   The  humus  from the reactors  is  dried to
approximately a 15 percent moisture  content  and then screened to
remove plastic,  glass,  and metallic  particles.     The  screened
product is pelletized for marketing.

     Early  analysis  of the compost  produced by the  facility
indicated that the material  contained PCBS  in the  range  of  4 to 5
parts per million.   These concentrations  ruled out  the original
plan to market  the product  as poultry litter.    Present markets
being  developed   include  horticulture,   lawn   fertilizer,   and
hydroseeding operations.

     The product  was brought  to market in  1989 under  the name
"Fairgrow."   The facility has received a permit from the Department
of Natural Resources  and Environmental  Control to sell the compost
to   landscapers,   nurserymen,    and   groundskeepers at    large
corporations,  cemeteries,  golf  courses,  schools, etc.   The product
is not permitted  for sale to  the  general  public  in  Delaware and
cannot be used on  vegetable gardens because  of regulations on  heavy
metal content in the compost.

     The selling price for the  compost  in 1989 was  $4.50 per  cubic
yard;  delivery cost  is provided  at an additional  cost.  To
encourage  first-time  users,  the  operator,  Fairfield  Service
Company,  offers the first  truckload (up to  20  cubic yards) free of
charge.   Printed  materials are provided to users which include a
description of the product, its  properties, uses,  application
rates, and  restrictions  (10)- (15) .

     Montgomery  County.   Maryland.    Montgomery County received
18,200 tons  of leaves  for  composting in  windrows in  1989. A
windrow turning machine is used to  turn the piles.  The compost is
screened and is  tested for weed  seeds and heavy metals.    The
finished compost  is  sold  mainly to landscapers and nurseries for
$7.50 per cubic yard,  in minimum  loads of 10 cubic  yards.    Peak
market demand for the  compost occurs in  the  spring.   The  fall
season is the  second  highest demand  period.   Compost not sold in
the  spring may need to be stored at the composting  facility  for up
to six months to be sold through the fall.

      In  summer  1989,  the  County undertook  a pilot program  to add
grass clippings to its leaf  composting program.  With  the  inclusion
of grass  clippings,  the County will monitor the finished compost
for  pesticide content  (16).

     Traverse City.  Michigan.    After  an ordinance was passed in
1986  which  banned  the  burning  of combustibles within  City limits,
a leaf composting  program was  started  in 1987.   Loose leaves are
collected and  formed into  windrows.    Traverse City  plans to
incorporate grass  clippings  and  possibly fruit  processing by-
products  into  its  composting program.  The  City plans to sell  the


                               A  -  7

-------
compost to the public in bulk form  (by the cubic yard, the bushel,
or pickup truck load)  (7)  (17).

     Essex County. New Jersey.  In  1987,  Essex County,  New Jersey
set up a leaf composting program  to process the leaves generated by
approximately 12 towns  in the County.   In addition to the central
site,   9  or 10  municipal sites are also operated  in the  area.

     Incoming  loads  are monitored at a gate,  and only clean loads
are accepted.   Plastic bags are not  allowed,  although  paper bags
are.   During the  1988-89 season, approximately 60,000 cubic yards
of leaves were brought  in,   and  15,000 cubic  yards of compost were
produced.

     The County composts the leaves  in windrows.   During the first
year of operation, the  piles  were turned  with a front-end loader.
A windrow turner was purchased during the second year.  The leaves
undergo 12 to 16 months of  processing, and are turned  three to five
times during this period. No  screening or other  post-processing is
done.

     Prior to  beginning the program, the County and towns agreed
that each town would  be responsible  for taking their  "share" of the
finished compost.   The share was  estimated to  be  approximately one-
third of the volume of  leaves dropped off  at  the site.  This ratio
was later changed to one-fourth because a  larger  reduction in
volume was experienced  than originally anticipated.

     The towns are provided with  a list of approximately 15 markets
that would take the  compost for free (or at  a nominal  cost of $1
per ton)  if delivered.   Most  of  the markets on  the list  are
farmers.    The list  also includes  an urban  gardening program h
Newark and use by the  landfill  for revegetation  and landscaping
 (not cover) .    A large  share  of  the compost  is  used  by the towns
themselves.   According to the County,  the  problem is not in finding
a market for the  material;  the problem is in getting each town to
transport its share  to  the  available  market.

     No  laboratory analyses have been conducted on the product. No
restrictions are  placed by the  County on the use of the  product
because they feel  the compost belongs to  each of the  towns, rather
than to  the  County.   According  to  a County  representative,  if a
higher quality compost was  produced,  it could  be  more  attractive to
residents and would be easier to  market  (18)  (19).

     Franklin  Township.  New Jersey.   Middlebush Compost,  Inc.  has
been  composting  leaves in  Franklin Township  since early  1987.
Because  of  restrictions   imposed  by  the   State Department of
Environmental  Protection,  the facility is only  allowed to accept
leaves as feedstock  for the composting operation.   TO  maintain a
quality  end-product  and keep processing  costs  down,  the facility


                              A  - 8

-------
does not accept leaves in plastic bags.   The finished compost is
passed through a three-eighth to half-inch screen.

     The  leaf compost is  subjected  to a  range of  laboratory
analyses  including  pH,   organic matter content,  and  a  range of
nutrients  (see Table A-3).    These results are published and made
available  to  prospective buyers.    Middlebush Compost  has also
developed instructions  for the application of the product  and makes
this  information  available to  buyers  as   well.     Recommended
application rates and instructions vary depending on the intended
use of the product.

     Middlebush Compost,  Inc. was selling compost  at  $10  per cubic
yard screened and $6 per cubic  yard unscreened in 1989.  About 20
percent  of the compost was used by a  landscaper who combined it
with soil  to make topsoil.   The remaining 80 percent was sold to
other  landscapers,   developers,  nurseries,  garden  centers,  and
homeowners for use  as a potting  soil, a soil amendment,  or as mulch
for water retention and weed control,  and  was  also used  to cap
landfills.    In order to establish  markets,  at first  the company
gave the product away and conducted a  full marketing campaign. By
the end of 1989,  they  were  able to  sell all of their  product. In
order  to  fully meet market demand,   the company would like to
increase  production  (20)- (22) .

     Parlin, New Jersey.  Alternate Disposal Systems,  Inc.   (ADSI)
shreds tree  stumps  and other woody materials  from  over  100
communities.   Following its shredding process,  ADSI Sells  fine
mulch for  $12 per cubic yard,  coarse mulch for $10 per  cubic yard,
and  topsoil  (attached  to  the  stumps)  for $10 per  cubic   yard,
primarily  to  landscapers.    ADSI also  sells fill material  (from
crushed rock)  (23) .

     Wrightstown. New Jersey. Woodhue,  Ltd.,  operates  a privately-
run facility in Wrightstpwn,  New Jersey to compost various mixes of
leaves,  brush,  tree trimmings,   food processing by-products,  and
livestock  manures.   Unwanted substances are hand-picked from  the
incoming  material.   The feedstocks  are placed in windrows where
temperature is monitored to  determine  the  turning  frequency.

     Laboratory  analyses are conducted at the beginning, middle,
and  end of the  composting process.    On-going analyses  include
testing for  pH,   heavy metals,  and nutrient  content.     Other
analyses,  such as  for herbicides and pesticides, are conducted
periodically.

     The  compost is  passed through a trommel screen to improve  the
quality  of the product.  The finished  compost  was being  sold  for
$12  per cubic yard in bulk,  excluding cost of delivery in 1989.
Markets   were  agriculture,   residential   home   gardening,   and
commercial  users  (nurseries, landscapers,  etc.)  .   The New Jersey
Department  of  Transportation  has recently accepted the compost

                              A - 9

-------
                             Table A-3
             TEST  RESULTS - MIDDLEBUSH  COMPOST,  INC.,
                   FRANKLIN TOWNSHIP, NEW JERSEY
  Soil
Properties

Color
pH
Organic matter  (percent)
Specific conductance  (CEC),
  micromhos/cm

Texture I /
   (USDA Classification)
      % Sand  (2.0-0.05  mm)
      % Silt  (0.05-0.002  mm)
      % Clay  (<0.002 mm)

Available nutrients:
   (Ib per acre)
      Nitrogen  (N03 and NH4)
      Phosphorus
      Potassium
      N03
      NH4
      Ca
      Mg
      Zn
      Fe
      Mn
      B
    S04
      Cl
      cu

      Total carbon

      Total nitrogen

      C/N ratio
 Leaf  Compost
Mixed with Sand

Dark gray brown
7.3
18.0

300
Sandy  loam
76
20
4
51  (medium)
33  (medium)
205  (high)
15.7
35.3
2,255
42
29
107
19
7
19
14
7

10.1

0.75

13.5/1
 Leaf
Compost

Black
7.8
51.0

730
Organic soil
60  (medium)
36 (medium)
150 (medium)
26.8
33.2
2,290
19
20
59
33
16
30
39
3

28.3

1.66

17/1
I I   The  texture was  tested by the  hydrometer method.   The soil
     separates    (particles)  listed "here    reflect    the   size
     distribution  of  the  inorganic  as well  as  the  organic
     fractions.

Source:    Middlebush  Compost,  Inc.
                               A - 1 0

-------
product as a soil additive.   Use  by counties  and municipalities  in
the area  is being explored  (24) (25) .

     Cleveland.  Ohio.  The Greater  Cleveland Ecological Association
serves 16 communities,  operates six composting  sites,  and  composts
approximately 250,000  cubic  yards  of  leaves in  windrows each year.
Laboratory  analyses  have  been  conducted  on  cation  exchange
capacity,  pH,  heavy metals (lead and cadmium)  ,  and nutrient content
 (nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium)  by the Ohio State University.

     The  Association sells compost in four ways:

     1.   Bag and bushel--people  bring  their own containers;  cost
          is  $0.75 per bushel.

     2.   Bulk  load pickup--customers'  trucks are  loaded for
          $13.50 per cubic yard.

     3.   Home  delivery--2  cubic yard minimum,   10 cubic  yard
          maximum, sold at $55.10  for 2  cubic yards and $178.30 for
          10  cubic yards including delivery and taxes.   For out-of-
          County delivery, there  is  an  added $20 charge.

     4.   Bagged  in plastic  one-cubic yard bags.   These  are  sold
          through distributors  who  deal with  the  nursery  and
          landscaping industries.

     A discount   is given   for  semi-truckloads  delivered  to
 landscapers and commercial growers to encourage the  use of compost
 on lawns and in potting media  for  nursery stock.    All of the
 compost has sold out every year.

     The  Association has plans to begin a pilot  program to compost
mixtures of   wood   chips   and   grass   clippings.     Prior  to
 implementation of  the  program,   they will  subject the_ grass
 clippings to laboratory analysis for pesticides.    The  finished
 compost  will also be tested to  determine  how  the chemicals are
 broken down  during  the  composting process (26) (27) .

     Toledo. Ohio.  In 1987, the City disposed  of 40 percent of its
 leaves,  used 10 percent  unprocessed,  and gave away 50 percent
 unprocessed.   In order  to  conserve  landfill  space,  a full-scale
 effort to  obtain users  for all  of the  unprocessed leaves was
 launched.   As a  result,  in  1988,  100 percent of the  300,000 cubic
 yards  of  loose  leaves collected  were given away. Approximately 90
 percent of that amount was delivered  to  a  quarry  under an agreement
 with the  City to take at least two-thirds of the leaves collected
 during the  three-year period,   1988 to  1990.    The quarry has
 purchased  a  shredder  and  is composting  the leaves  for  land
 application.
                              A - 1 1

-------
     The City  offers to deliver  leaves free of  charge to large
users near Toledo.    In  addition to the quarry,  users include a
large greenhouse operation that composts the leaves  and uses  them
as a soil amendment.   A  large canning operation located in Toledo
has also agreed to accept leaves for agricultural use  (28) (29) .

     Allegheny  County. Pennsylvania.  Mount Lebanon,  in Allegheny
County,  has been  composting  leaves  for 17 years.    The  leaf
composting operation  averages  over 10,000 cubic  yards per year.
Compost produced is used in  parks  and  on the City's golf course,
and is sold to residents for approximately $.50 per  bushel.

     Allegheny County is planning  to set  up  a  series of  composting
areas in City parks.   Finished compost  would be made available to
municipalities  and  Parks  Departments.  Municipalities  could use the
compost or sell it to residents  (30)-(32)  .

Midlands

     Illinois,  Iowa,  Minnesota,  Missouri,  and  Wisconsin are  the
States comprising  the Midlands  region.    The five  States have a
combined population of approximately 29,000,000.

     In the State  of  Illinois, composting is one of the alternative
methods for dealing with MSW that  is being encouraged.   A report
issued by the Illinois Department of Energy and Natural Resources
states that an estimated 70  percent of the State's  MSW stream is
compostable.     The  following components are  included:     yard
trimmings,  other municipal  organics, biosolids,  livestock  manures,
and agricultural residues (33) .

     Chicago.   Illinois.   During 1987,   Chicago experimented  with
approaches   to  composting  yard trimmings by windrowing various
combinations  of grass  clippings,  leaves, and brush.   in  the fall of
1988, 700 tons  of leaves were collected  and composted in windrows.
During  1989,  the  City expanded  its  pilot testing to  include:  grass
collection tests,   paper  bag  collection and processing,   and
"biodegradable"   plastic bag  collection  and  processing.    The
feedstocks to the test programs   have been brush  chips,  grass
Clippings  from early spring 1989, and leaves  from Fall  1988.

     Laboratory analyses  of the compost  from the test programs  have
been conducted  by the University  of  Illinois.   Tests  include  heavy
metals,  herbicides,  pesticides,  and nutrients.    In addition to
these analyses,  growth tests  will be undertaken  by the University.

     On July 1,  1990, State  regulations went into effect  that ban
yard trimmings from  landfills  and require source  separation of
these materials by homeowners.   The City planned to implement a
full-scale  program  to compost grass  clippings and tree trimmings by
that time  (34)- (36) .
                              A - 1 2

-------
     Urbana and Champaign.  Illinois.   An Intergovernmental  Solid
Waste Disposal  Association  has been  formed by  the neighboring
cities  of  Urbana and Champaign,   and  by Champaign County.    The
Association agreement  requires  that the three member agencies fund
and operate a yard  trimmings recovery facility that was  begun in
1986 by the City of Urbana.

     In 1987,   the facility  received and processed 5,200 tons  of
yard trimmings from residents  and  landscapers  from the  two  cities
and the County.   The  facility processes incoming  brush into wood
chips,  heavy wood into firewood,   and  leaves and  grass clippings
into compost.    The incoming brush is  shredded by a tub  grinder.
The resulting  wood chips  are  sold retail  to individual customers or
wholesale to landscapers,  nurseries, and  greenhouses.  Large pieces
of wood (more  than  6  inches in diameter) are  split  into firewood
and sold to the public.

     The leaves  and grass  clippings are placed  in windrows  and
composted  for use as mulch.   The  City of Champaign also collects
bagged  leaves  during the fall and  Christmas  trees  for inclusion in
the composting operation.  The compost is available free of charge
to the  public,  cities,  and parks.    It  is  sold  to wholesalers,
landscapers,  and  nurseries.  During the  fall of  1988,  the City of
Urbana  introduced a curbside  yard trimmings collection program
using cornstarch plastic  bags (37)  (38).

     Will  and Lake Counties. Illinois.   Land and  Lakes  Company is
currently  operating three  leaf composting sites using the results
of a Rutgers University leaf composting research project as a basis
for its operations.   About 300 cubic yards of leaves are processed
each week  in windrows.   The windrows are  turned often, and moisture
is added to accelerate  the  composting  process.

     The  finished compost  product is named "Compsoil."    It is
available  free of charge to residents,  and is also used  as landfill
cover.   The County plans to implement a program  in which compost
will be available free to residents who drop off yard trimmings at
the landfill,  at  a  ratio of 4-to-l by volume.

      Some  preliminary laboratory  analyses have been completed on
the  leaf  compost.   Included  in  the  tests  were  pH and nutrient
content.   To  further market  the  product,  the  County feels the
chemical content  of curbside collected yard trimmings needs to be
analyzed  (30) (39) .

     Afton. Minnesota.    Composting Concepts  in  Afton, Minnesota
currently  operates a  20-acre  site to  compost  leaves  and grass
clippings  for  residents of  Woodbury,  North  St.  Paul,  and various
small  communities.

     A program using "biodegradable" corn-starch  plastic bags that
are  clear  in  color was  begun  in April 1989.  Since the bags are

                               A - 1 3

-------
clear,  unwanted substances can be  seen before yard trimmings are
added to the composting operation.   Consequently,  they experience
very  little contamination  in  the process  itself  (except  for
remaining plastic  bag  shreds which are screened out)  .

     The  test  phase  for  the cornstarch bags is  being  run in
cooperation with various public agencies including the University
of Minnesota,  Minnesota Department  of  Agriculture,  and Minnesota
Pollution Control Board.   No laboratory  results  on the  finished
compost were available at the time of this  study.   No compost could
be moved off-site  until May 1990.   Local nurseries  and  growers have
expressed interest in buying the bulk product (40).

     Carver County.   Minnesota.     A  number of  yard trimmings
composting  sites   are  operating  in  Carver  County.     In rural
locations,   the yard trimmings   are   dropped off  at community
composting sites/ These materials are  collected at curbside in the
more urban  areas of  the  County and composted at a  centralized
facility.    The sites accept only  leaves,  grass  clippings,  and
garden residues.   No brush,   woody tree parts, or  other organic
materials are  permitted as a normal practice.

     At the  rural  drop-off  sites,  the yard trimmings are  composted
in windrows.   The compost is generally given back  to the area's
residents.

     The central composting facility is located at the University
of Minnesota's  landscape arboretum.   The  10,000  cubic yards per
year of yard trimmings received at the site are processed using a
relatively  low-technology  windrow composting method.    Water is
added occasionally and  the windrows are turned on the average of
two to three times during  the  composting process.   Composting time
ranges  from 12-18  months.    The product  is   screened before
distribution.

     In  return  for  the use of the site,  the University  receives
about one-half  of the  finished compost  product  for use  at the
arboretum.   During 1989, approximately 500 cubic   yards of  compost
were sold by the County to one landscaper and two-golf courses in
the area.   The selling price was $12 per  cubic  yard,  including
delivery.

     Carver County has  conducted  laboratory analyses  of  nutrient
content,   pH,  heavy metals,  and C/N ratio.   The University of
Minnesota has also conducted plant growth  studies.    Weed seeds
initially were a  problem,   but it  has  been alleviated by altering
the composting procedure.   After composting is completed, the top
six inches of the windrows are removed and composted again.

     Beginning  January 1,   1990,  yard trimmings  (leaves,  grass
clippings,   prunings,   and  garden trimmings)  were  banned  from
landfill  disposal  in  the  seven-County   metropolitan  area  of

                              A - 1 4

-------
Minneapolis-St.  Paul.   Experiments are currently being  conducted
with larger quantities  of grass clippings  in the composting  medium
in order to allow for the increased amounts of grass clippings  that
will be  collected as a  result of the ban.    The  County is  also
experimenting with other materials including shredded  newspaper  in
the compost  feedstock  (41)(42).

     Fillmore County.  Minnesota.    The Fillmore County Resource
Recovery Center  in Preston,  Minnesota was built  in  1987 and  is
composting  the  municipal organics.   Because  there are separate
programs in the  area already composting their yard trimmings,  these
materials are not typically received at the Fillmore MSW composting
facility.   Recyclable and oversized material are removed prior  to
composting.   Approximately  15  tons  per  day are composted  in
windrows.   After composting,  approximately  40 to 50  percent  of the
material is screened out  as rejects.  Various laboratory tests  have
been conducted by the University of  Minnesota on the finished
product.

     The primary  purpose  for implementing the  MSW composting
program  was  to reduce the County's reliance on landfilling.
Therefore,  the operators do not have  a plan to  sell the product  at
this time.   Most  likely it  will be available free of  charge  to
users who are willing to pick it up.   Orchards  and  agriculture are
markets that have expressed an  interest  in  using the product.   The
operators of the facility are recommending  that  the compost be used
in conjunction with commercial  fertilizers  and be applied at  a rate
of about 20-25 tons per  acre.

     Due to  the very wet weather during  the 1988-89 winter,  the
compost was  not  ready  to distribute  for spring planting in 1989  as
planned (10)  (43)  (44)  .

     Hennepin County.  Minnesota.   In Hennepin  County, Minnesota,
yard trimmings  from residents and  landscapers are  formed  into
windrows up  to 12  feet  in height.  A mechanical turner is used to
aerate and grind the material.

     During  the  period  April through November  1989, 146,000 cubic
yards of  yard trimmings were  collected.   Of  this, approximately
52,000  cubic yards  were processed into compost at the County's
site.   After screening  through a  quarter-inch  screen,  the compost
is either used by the County's  Parks  Department  or redistributed to
municipalities.   The municipalities then make the compost available
to residents free  of charge, picked up in  bulk  form.

     The  remaining  94,000  cubic yards of yard  trimmings  were
distributed  as  follows:   66,000  cubic yards to private companies
interested in producing compost; 18,000 cubic yards to County parks
for  landscaping;  and  10,000   cubic  yards  to a  local farm for
landspreading.  Laboratory tests  are conducted annually for heavy


                              A -  1 5

-------
metals  (lead, cadmium, mercury), pesticides,  and nutrient content
 (45) .

     Swift  County.  Minnesota.    A  20 ton-per-day MSW  composting/
recycling facility is  currently  under construction in Swift County,
Minnesota.   When  the  facility began  operation in May 1990,  source
separated  MSW was tipped  at the facility  in the form  of  either
recyclable,   compostables,   or  nonprocessibles.

     Initially,  compost use will be limited  to  landfill final cover
and selected  County projects until environmental and plant growth
studies are completed  (46).

     Monroe. Wisconsin.  In  Monroe,  Wisconsin, grass clippings are
composted with  leaves.   According to the City,  the  two  materials
composted  together produce  a higher quality compost  than either
composted  separately.

     Between 6,000 and 12,000 pounds  per day of grass clippings are
collected  during  the  summer months.    They are piled  on land the
City owns  adjacent to the  airport  runway and  later mixed with
leaves  for  composting.   No laboratory  tests are  conducted.

     Truckloads  of the finished  compost are  delivered to users free
of charge.    The compost is  used by  the Parks Department,  and is
distributed to  landscapers,  a golf course,  and farmers.  According
to the  City,  the  current demand for the product  "far  exceeds the
supply."

     The City is  currently experimenting with composting the yard
trimmings  with dewatered  biosolids  from the  local  wastewater
treatment plant.   The compost  would be added  to  fields  as  a soil
amendment  (47)(48).

     Portage.  Wisconsin.    A  mixed MSW/biosolids  co-composting
facility has  been in operation  in Portage since September  1986.
The facility processes 30 tons per day  of mixed MSW in an in-vessel
operation.   After  composting, the product undergoes fine screening,
resulting in 15 to 20  percent of the material  being  rejected.

     The primary purpose for composting the  mixed MSW and biosolids
is to conserve landfill  space.  No commercial markets are currently
being pursued.  The compost is used as landfill cover.   Previous
testing has shown  the product suitable for  this  use.

     The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources has required the
facility to conduct field  studies for  landspreading.  In compliance
with these  requirements, the compost currently is being  spread on
test plots  at several  concentrations.   During 1990,  crops will be
grown and  tests will be conducted on metal  uptake and  leachate
 (10) (49) (50) .
                              A - 1 6

-------
Northeast

     The  Northeast  region  has a  population  of approximately
31,000,000 and  is  comprised  of  the  following  seven  States:
Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts,  New Hampshire, New York, Rhode
Island,  and Vermont.

     In Massachusetts,  approximately 200,000 tons of leaves were
estimated to  be composted  from the autumn  1988 season.   Still
another  700,000  tons  of  leaves  reportedly  were disposed at
landfills and waste-to-energy plants (28) .

     Wellesley.   Massachusetts.     The   City  of  Wellesley,  in
cooperation with the  City of  Newton,  operates two yard trimmings
composting  facilities.     One  of  the  facilities   accepts yard
trimmings from landscapers.   Approximately 3,000 cubic yards per
year of compost are produced  at this site. The compost is used by
the highway division  for  landscaping.

     The  second composting facility is  at  the City's  Recycling and
Disposal   Facility.   At this site,   the general public may  drop off
yard trimmings at  no charge.    The  4,500  cubic  yards per year of
compost produced at  this site are marketed  as  a soil amendment.
The City  is currently pursuing various methods of advertising the
compost.   Advertisements  are  being placed in local newspapers in
the early fall and spring.   In addition,  the City is planning to
broadcast advertisements on cable  television.

     Laboratory  testing  currently  is being  conducted by  the
University  of  Massachusetts.   The  analyses will  determine the
presence  of heavy metals,  NPK,  trace elements,  and the organic
content of the compost.   A pH of approximately 7  has  been  reported
 (51) .

     Fort  Fairfield.  Maine.   A project  was begun  by the Maine
Department of Agriculture to  demonstrate the composting of  potato
processing by-products  and cull potatoes.    Local  farmers and
industry  Provided equipment and feedstocks.   The  compost  feedstock
is comprised of the cull potatoes and by-products,  wood ash, paper
mill biosolids,  and  sawdust.

     During the demonstration program in 1989,  484  tons  of compost
were produced.   According to Al  Dixon, Town Manager,  the product is
a  "nice organic product, smells like dirt,  and is pretty  as  peat."
The  compost  is being  tested  by  a  local  farm on oats,  peas,
potatoes,   and  broccoli  crops at various  application  rates.  The
same crops  are being  grown  on fields without  compost.   Tests  will
be conducted on  the  compost product, soil samples, and the crops
over a period of three years.
                              A - 1 7

-------
     The town plans  to expand the program  to produce over 2,000
tons of compost  in  1990.   Future plans are to market the compost  in
bulk to the  farming  community  (52) (53) .

     Thomas ton,   Maine.    The  State  Department  of Environmental
Protection  has  permitted a  23-acre  site in  Thomaston,  Maine  to
compost fish processing by-products.   North Atlantic  Products has
been involved with pilot composting programs since  1987,  and began
operation in Thomaston  in June 1989.   The material is mixed with
sawdust and mechanically turned.   The company expects to produce
500  tons  of  finished compost  by November.    The  product   is
undergoing  laboratory analysis  for NPK and trace elements.   The raw
materials  are being tested for  heavy  metals.    North Atlantic
Products is actively  seeking  more  markets  for  both  bagged and bulk
sales,  and plans to  market the product under  the name  "Sea Green"
 (54) (55) .

     Brookhaven and  Holtsville.  New York.    The Department  of
Highways in Brookhaven composts approximately 200,000  cubic yards
of leaves annually, using  windrows,  at the Holtsville  Ecology site
and Manorville Transfer Station.

     During  initial  operations,   plastic bags had been creating
problems in the  composting operation, both  in clogging processing
equipment  and reducing the  quality  of the finished product.   In
1987,   the  Highway Department purchased 400,000  paper bags and
offered them  free  to residents.    According to the operator,  the
pilot program demonstrated that curbside collection of paper bags
was more convenient and efficient  than with  plastic bags, and that
the  paper  bags   decomposed  as  quickly and   inexpensively  as
composting  loose leaves.

     Laboratory  analyses were  conducted by  Cornell University for
heavy metal contamination during  the paper  bag pilot study.   All
test results were acceptable  according to the  standards established
by the U.S.  EPA for  biosolids  composting.   Currently,  only pH  is
tested for  at the  Ecology site.

     Approximately 50-75 percent  of  the compost  produced is given
away to residents for use  in  gardens  and  on  lawns.   Small bags are
given to Girl Scout troops and other  groups  for potted plants. The
compost  is used by  the local garden club and  in the community
garden.   The remainder  is used  for municipal  projects  (35) (52) (56) .

     Islip,  New York.   In September  1988, Islip  expanded its yard
trimmings composting program to a full-size operation.  The town
anticipates  processing at  least  70,000  tons per year  of grass
clippings,  leaves,  and  tree  trimmings.

     Yard trimmings are collected  at  curbside, and  are received  at
the facility primarily  in plastic bags.   They are then shredded,
trommel screened,  windrowed,  and  turned periodically.  The trommel

                              A - 1 8

-------
has recently been added  to  the  process and is expected to be able
to remove approximately 90 percent  of  the plastic in the feedstock.

     Laboratory  analyses conducted on the  compost  have been very
favorable.   The finished compost is usually given away. Currently,
it is available to residents and local landscapers on  a  first-come,
first-serve basis.  The  town is  in  the process of providing  25,000
cubic yards to develop a golf course  in  the area.   At  the present
time, market demand exceeds  the available  supply.

     The town  is exploring potential commercial markets such as
turfgrass growers,  landscapers,  and other users of soil  amendment
products.   It  is uncertain  at  this time as to whether  the product
will be marketed in bag as well  as bulk form  (54)  (57).

     Saratoga Springs. New York.  The  horse manure and bedding  from
the  Saratoga Springs  Raceway are  composted and  sold as  "Saratoga
Organic."  The  Saratoga Springs  Raceway houses over  1,000  horses on
the  premises,  which  generate  150  to 200  cubic yards  per day of
manure and bedding material.  The composting operation is  conducted
inside a building over a two-week  period.   Forced aeration,
controlled via computer, is used to maintain  proper oxygen levels.
The  flow of oxygen is controlled  by  computer,  based on  data  from
temperature probes inserted  in the piles.   Laboratory  analyses  have
been conducted by Cornell  University.   The  finished compost is
shredded, but  not  screened.   It is bagged and sold to  both  retail
and wholesale markets  (58)  (59) .

     Scarsdale.  New York.   Yard trimmings have  been composted in
the  City of Scarsdale since the mid-1960s.   Currently,  the  City
works with  a local nursery to  compost approximately 35,000 cubic
yards per year of  yard trimmings and  distribute  the  product.  The
yard trimmings are  delivered throughout  the year.

     Leaves  are  composted   (aerobically)  in windrows.    Grass
clippings,   shrubs ,  and tree  trimmings are composted  (anaerobically)
in cells for five years.

     In  return for a  share of  the finished  product, the nursery
assists  in  turning the windrows  and provides  storage  space for the
finished compost.  The City uses as much of the screened compost as
it needs.    Twice a  year  (spring  and autumn) the  City sponsors
giveaway weekends, during which time bulk compost  is available  free
of charge to residents.   The remaining compost is marketed  by the
nursery  as  mulch and  is  also blended  in potting soil and topsoil.
The  nursery sells the compost products both  in  bulk and in bags.
Laboratory  testing  is conducted by the nursery  (60) (61) .
                               A - 1 9

-------
Pacific

     The Pacific region has  the  fewest States of any of the regions
defined for  the study.   It consists of California, Oregon,  and
Washington,  with a combined  population of approximately 35,000,000.

     Davis.   California.   The Davis  Waste Removal  Company has been
composting  yard trimmings  generated in the  City of Davis  since
December  1981.     During  the  first five years of  operation,
approximately 10,500 tons (225,000 cubic yards)  of loose brush and
leaves  were  collected and  processed.    Approximately  4,875  tons
 (15,600 cubic yards) of compost were produced.  Of  this,  1,175 tons
were sold and the remaining 3,700 tons  were given to residents of
Davis.   Of the compost that  was  sold,  the primary  market was local
landscapers.

     The yard trimmings are collected at curbside using a "claw."
Unwanted  substances are  removed,  and  the material is shredded,
formed into  windrows,   and turned  every  two weeks.

     The  company has  had laboratory  analyses conducted on the
compost.   The results  during the first   five years  showed that they
were  unable to  produce a consistent product.    The average
composition  analysis   of  the compost during those years was  as
follows:

          Moisture  (%)                        60
          Total solids  (%)                    40
          Volatile solids (%)                  34
          Carton/nitrogen ratio              45:1
          Carbon  (%)                          22
          Nitrogen  (%)                         0.48
          Phosphorus  (%)                       0.16
          Potassium (%)                        0.24

     The  finished  compost product currently is available  in bulk
form at no cost to  residents.   According to  a representative from
the company,  problems  with the quality of the finished compost have
been  encountered,   primarily  due  to a lack  of   control  of  the
incoming  feed  stream  and the high  C/N  ratio.    Because  of  these
problems,  the facility now composts primarily leaves  (62)(63).

     Palo Alto.  California.   The City of Palo Alto's yard trimmings
composting program began full scale  in 1979.  in 1988, 22,000 cubic
yards of  material  were received at the  facility,   and 8,799  cubic
yards of compost were  produced.  The  type of materials accepted are
clean plant  trimmings.    The material  is processed  through  a tub
grinder and  then formed  into windrows.   Turning is done with a
bulldozer at least once per month.

     The  product is  produced  for  eventual cover of a 146-acre
landfill to  convert  it  into  a park.   The compost will be mixed with

                              A - 2 0

-------
dirt at a ratio of l-to-2.  Use  of  the  compost  for landfill  cover
will displace material  that would need to be purchased at a cost  of
approximately $15 per  cubic yard  (64)-(66).

     San Mateo. California.  The City of  San  Mateo began its yard
trimmings  composting  program  in April   1982.     Yard  trimmings
composted included garden and tree  trimmings.   Incoming loads were
checked for  conformance  with a published  list of acceptable
materials.     The site attendants  had the  authority to reject
unsuitable materials  such  as food scraps,   rotten or odorous
materials,  plastic or paper containers, pet animal manure, diseased
or  infected materials,   and poisons  or hazardous  wastes.

     The materials were then  size reduced and formed into windrows.
The windrows were then  aerated.  During the 1986-1987  fiscal  year,
41,000  cubic yards  of raw materials  were processed to produce
27,000  cubic  yards  of  compost.   Some  laboratory  analyses of  the
product have been conducted,  including organic content and nitrogen
content.   Approximately 150  cubic  yards  per year of  the  product
were  used  by  the  Parks  Department  as  a  soil  amendment with
favorable  results.   Most of the compost  was stockpiled with  the
intention of using it in the  development of a 35-acre landfill site
into the Shoreline Park.

     As of  September 1989, San Mateo was  no  longer accepting yard
trimmings for composting.  The site had accumulated a stockpile  of
compost in excess  of  its needs for  the  Shoreline Park, and  is
selling the excess  at  $6.50  per cubic yard to customers who will
pick it up  at the site.   Topsoil providers and  the general public
are the primary customers.  Approximately 3,000 cubic yards were to
be  used by the  Parks Department  in  municipal  projects during 1989
 (67)-(69).

     Portland.  Oregon.    There are  two major producers of yard
trimmings  compost in  the  Portland area:   Grimm's Fuel Co.  and
McFarlane's Bark,  Inc.   In addition, East  County  Recycling Co. size
reduces  through shredding yard trimmings into a  mulch.

     At  the Grimm's  facility,  yard  trimmings  are size reduced and
piled.    The  shredded  product  is   aerated during the  composting
period,   screened,  and  the oversized material is  shredded again.
Grimm's markets the compost alone  and also blends it  with  sandy
loam and barkdust.

     The yard trimmings received at McFarlane's  are stockpiled in
preparation  for  processing.   The material is shredded and heaped
into piles, and allowed to compost for three  to  six months.   Prior
to  selling  the product, the material is shredded and screened.  The
compost  is  blended with sawdust  in  a  9-to-l  ratio before selling.

     Both  Grimm's   and McFarlane's  have targeted  three  major
markets:    residential  customers,   landscapers,   and  nurseries.

                              A - 2 1

-------
Grimm's  has  been  actively  trying  to produce a  material  of
consistent,  reliable quality to  be  used  as  a  potting medium in the
nursery industry.   The shredded yard trimmings  produced by East
County Recycling are given free of charge  to residents  (70)- (72) .

     Kina County,  Washington.    Pacific Topsoils, near Seattle,
composts grass clippings, leaves, and prunings from various parts
of King County.   Incoming yard trimmings  are visually  inspected for
plastics, rocks, etc.,  shredded to accelerate the  composting
process,  and formed  into  windrows.  Some of the  compost  is screened
and sold as  a decorative  ground  cover to be used in place of bark.
It is  marketed under the name  "Pacific Garden Mulch."   Pacific
Topsoils also blends the compost  with  the company's  other soil
amendment products and in its topsoil.   The  company concentrates on
the commercial landscaping market,  although  other markets  are
targeted as  well.

     Laboratory analyses for organic content, soil fertility,  and
macronutrients and  micronutrients  are  conducted  quarterly.   The
company  recommends  that the  compost  be applied to the soil  in a
three- to six-inch  layer  (22) (73)- (75) .

     Seattle.   Washington.   A Seattle city ordinance states that
yard trimmings must be  source separated.    The City's composting
programs are  designed to handle 75  percent of  the yard  trimmings
typically disposed  of.    In 1989,   Seattle implemented a three-
pronged  approach  to diverting yard trimmings:    1)  backyard
composting;  2) curbside  collection  City-wide; and  3)   self-haul for
a discounted tipping fee.

     The City  is encouraging backyard composting of yard  trimmings
by giving  composting bins  to homeowners.    in its first  year,
starting  in  September 1989,  the  program planned  to  distribute 6,000
composting bins to  Seattle residents.    The bin is delivered by a
composting  instructor  who provides the resident  with a one-hour
home  consultation  explaining  how  to  use the bin,  helping  the
resident set  the bin up  for use,  assessing  their yard  trimmings
generated.

     Another facet  of Seattle's  backyard composting program is the
Master Composter Program,  which  was  begun in 1985.  Since then, 75
master  composers  have  received  training  and  four  backyard
composting demonstration sites have been  developed  around  the City.
The program  is projected  to  reach 70,000 households over  a span of
seven years.

     Seattle's curbside collection program for yard trimmings was
implemented   City-wide   in January  1989.    Yard trimmings  are
transported to a centralized composting site.    AS  of September
1989,   no saleable product  had  been produced  at  that  composting
site.   The  anticipated current market value for  the compost end
product was  $2.00 per cubic  yard.

                              A  - 2 2

-------
     The self-haul program began operation in January 1989,  and is
available at both of Seattle's  transfer  stations.  During the first
seven months of 1989,  residents  and  businesses  dropped off almost
7,000 tons of yard  trimmings at  the  sites (35) (76)-(79) .

South

     The South is the largest region  in this  study  in  terms of
population.   The eleven States  in the region, which have a combined
population  of  approximately 56,000,000  are:   Alabama,  Arkansas,
Florida,  Georgia,  Kentucky,  Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina,
South Carolina, Tennessee,  and Virginia.

     Gentry. Arkansas.  In  Gentry, manure  from broiler chickens is
composted in windrows.    The finished product is marketed to sod
farmers,  landscapers,  and golf courses  (80) .

     Ft. Lauderdale.   Florida.     The City of Ft. Lauderdale, in
Broward County, operates  a  composting plant  to  process biosolids,
using trimmings from commercial  tree surgeons  and  wood  chips as
bulking agents.   The facility is designed to process 35  tons per
day  (250 cubic yards per day) of biosolids cake in reactors and
accepts 1,000 to  1,500 cubic yards per  week  of  yard trimmings.

     Small  amounts  of the compost have  been used by nurseries and
the  general public.   The Soil and Water Conservation District is
currently  considering use  of  the product.   Local  environmental
restrictions have made landspreading  very difficult   (81)  (82).

     Perry.  Florida.  America's largest blue crab scrap composting
project receives most of  the crab processing residues  generated in
the  Florida panhandle.    The  crab scrap  deliveries,  averaging 13
tons per day,  are mixed with sawdust,  pine bark,  shredded leaves,
brush,    other   yard   trimmings,    and   other   locally  available
carbonaceous  materials.     The  material  is placed in  windrows
outdoors and turned frequently  over a two-month period, followed by
curing for  two  months.

     The  crab compost is  screened  and then marketed under the
"Suwanee River Natural Organics"  label for  $25 per cubic yard bulk,
or $3 per  40-pound  bag wholesale to  local nonprofit groups (e.g.,
4-H, garden clubs)  for use  as  a  fund raiser.   The compost is  also
sold as  high-quality potting  soil which is  sold  at retail for $6
per  40-pound bag.

     The  University  of  Florida  is  conducting field trials and
growth  studies,  and  the  seven local Soil and  Water Conservation
Districts  are  helping to introduce  the  compost  to  local farmers
 (83)  .

     Sumter County.   Florida.   A windrow composting facility to
process mixed  MSW has been on-line  since mid-1988  in the County.

                               A - 2 3

-------
The facility is  operated by U.S. Waste Recovery.  Information from
the  County  and  the  operators   indicates  that 50-70  tons  of
residential  and  commercial  discards  are  received each day.

     The  composting process  is begun  by passing the material
through a flail  mill designed to break open bags and packages, thus
allowing  their  contents  to  mix with the remainder of the  MSW
stream.    The incoming material  is  then subjected to magnetic
separation  to remove  ferrous  metals.   Aluminum and other inert
matter are  removed  manually.    The  remainder  of the material  is
size-reduced to  an approximate  two by two-inch particle  size.

     The shredded product  is transferred to a  composting pad where
it is stacked in windrows,  and a bacterial implant  is added.   The
finished product is  being tested for organic matter, pathogens,  and
heavy metals.

     As of October 1989,  no compost had been marketed.   Plans  are
to sell the material  to nurseries as an  alternative to peat,  to
soil amendment  dealers,  and to contractors  for landscaping near
roadways.    Market development  efforts  were being delayed until
State  guidelines  for  compost  are  finalized by  the Florida
Department of Environmental  Regulation (84) (85) .

     Mecklenburg County.  North Carolina.   The  County is currently
conducting  a yard  trimmings   recycling  program in which woody
material is shredded into mulch.   Approximately 200-300  tons  per
day of the materials are received at  the  facility.   The mulch is
used by the Board of Education,  Public  Works Department,  and  the
Parks and Recreation Department.   Additionally,  over one-half of
the mulch is sold to the public  at  $6  per  cubic yard,  picked up at
the site.

     In  1990,  the  County plans to implement a full-scale yard
trimmings composting program at  two sites.  Approximately   375,000
cubic  yards per  year of yard  trimmings will be  processed.  In
addition to continuing to  shred  woody  materials into  mulch,  leaves
and grass clippings  will be composted in windrows.

     Mecklenburg  County is currently exploring markets for  the
compost.   The County hopes to market the product in bulk to large
end-users such as nurseries and greenhouses (86) (87).
SUMMARY

     The results of the assessment  of  existing  composting programs
and markets  show  that  there  is  a  considerable  interest  in
composting in the United States.   The interest seems to be driven
largely by economic and  regulatory  factors,  as  well as  for
environmental  reasons.   The markets for the finished  product vary


                              A - 2 4

-------
from uses  by public entities,  to wholesale  and retail sale,  to
residents and commercial markets.

     A summary of the characteristics of this study is presented in
Table A-4.    The  data in the table  show  that  there seems to be  a
rough correlation between the tipping fee for landfill disposal  and
the number of operational  composting programs.  The highest  average
tipping fee was $58 per ton in  the  Northeast  region.   This  region
had one of the highest number of composting projects.  On the other
hand, the lowest  average tipping fees  were $9 and $14  per  ton in
the Central and South regions,  respectively. As of April 1989,  the
Central  region had only seven yard trimmings or MSW  composting
projects, and the South had six.

     Another  factor that  plays a critical role in the number of
composting programs is regulating materials  to be  disposed  of.
Several  States in the Industrial, Midlands, and Northeast  regions
have passed  legislation to  ban the disposal of  yard  trimmings in
landfills.   A discussion of  the regulatory factor was presented in
the section entitled Policies in Chapter 4.
                              A - 2 5

-------
                                                  Table A-4
                                 CHARACTERISTICS  OF THE SIX  STUDY REGIONS
                                                 (July  1989)
I
to
Number  of  States
Population  in  1987
  (millions)
Population  density
  (population/square  mile)
Average  landfill tipping
 fee ($/ton)  1  /
Number  of yard trimmings
 composting  programs
Number  of  operational
 MSW composting  programs

List of  States
Central
14
39
26
9
7
0
AZ
CO
ID
KS
MT
NE
NV
NM
ND
OK
SD
TX
UT
WY
Industrial
8
52
235
28
354
1
DE
IN
MD
MI
NJ
OH
PA
WV






Midlands
5
29
91
20
135
4
IL
IA
MN
MO
WI









Northeast
7
31
278
58
134
0
CT
ME
MA
NH
NY
RI
VT







Pacific
3
35
110
29
15
1
CA
OR
WA











South
11
56
110
14
5
1
AL
AR
FL
GA
KY
LA
MS
NC
SC
TN
VA



                                                 (continued)

-------
                                          Table A-4 (cont.)

i/   Average of  tipping fees reported in  Pettit,  C.L.    "Tip  Fees  Up More Than 30% in
     Annual NSWMA  Survey."  Waste Aae.  20(3):34-39.   March 1989.

Sources:   Glenn, J.  and D. Riggle.   "Where  Does the Waste Go?  --  Part  I."   BioCycle.
          30(4) :34-39.   April 1989.

          Goldstein,  N.    "Solid Waste Composting  in the U.S."   BioCycle.  30 (11):32-37.
          November  1989.

-------
                            Appendix A

                            REFERENCES

 1.   Glenn, J.     "The  State  of Garbage in America:   Part  1."
     BioCvcle.  31(3):48-53.   March 1990.

 2.   Goldstein,  N.     "Solid  Waste   Composting  in  the  U.S.."
     BioCYcle.  30(11) :32-37.  November  1989.

 3.   Solid Waste Management in  the Denver Region.   Prepared by the
     Solid Waste Task Force.   1986.

 4.   Personal communication with Trish  Kenney,  City  of  Boulder.
     1989.

 5.   Personal communication with Gene Hanlon,  City  of  Lincoln.
     1989.

 6.   Personal communication with Dan  Slattery (1987 and 1989)  and
     Marty Crater  (1989).

 7.   Goldstein,  J.   "10  Percent  'Off the Top'   for Composting."
     BioCYcle.  30(2):26-27.  February 1989.

 8.   "Operating Leaf Compost Facilities  in New Jersey."  Prepared
     by the New Jersey Department of  Environmental  Protection.
     March 22,  1988.

 9.   "Options for Municipal Leaf  Composting." BioCvcle.  29(9)  :38-
     43.   October 1988.

10.   Diaz,  L.F.  and C.G. Golueke.   "Compost Experience  in the USA."
     Presented at the International Symposium on Compost Production
     and Use.   Italy.   June 1989.

11.   "The  Delaware  Reclamation  Plant."     Delaware  Solid Waste
     Authority.    1988.

12.   "Fairgrow Easy  Reference  Chart."   Fairfield  Service  Company.
     1989.

13.   "Giving Nature  a Hand."   NCC Business.   October 1989.

14.   Personal  communication with John Neyman, Delaware Solid Waste
     Authority.    1989.

15.   Personal communication with Rebecca Roe, Fairfield Service
     Company.   1989.

16.   Personal    communication   with   Doreen   Cantor,   Montgomery
     County.   1990.

                              A - 2 8

-------
17.   Personal  communication  with  representatives  from Traverse
     City.   1989.

18.   "N. J. County Seeks Ways  to Get Rid of  Compost."   Recycling
     Times.   May9 ,   1989."

19.   Personal  communication  with Paul  Petto, Essex County,  New
     Jersey.    1989.

20.   Meade,  K.     "Waiting   for the Leaves to  Fall."     Waste
     n-n-o-K-r^n^oo   pP  34-38,  March  1989.

21.   Personal   communication   with  Matthew  Vastano,   Middlebush
     Compost,  Inc.    1989.

22.   Taylor,  A.C.  and R.M. Kashmanian.   Yard Waste  Composting:  A
     Study  of  Eight Programs.     Us .  Environmental  Protection
     Agency.   Office  of Policy,  Planning and  Evaluation;  Office of
     Solid Waste and Emergency Response. EPA/530-SW-89-038.  April
     1989.

23.   Personal   communication   with   Patrick   Kennedy,   Alternate
     Disposal Systems,  Inc.   1990.

24.   Salimando,  J.    "Woodhue  Compost. . .or  Wouldn't  You?"   Waste
     Age, 20(5):63-64.   May 1989.

25.   Personal communication with Joe Hayes,  Woodhue,  Ltd.   1989.

26.   Logsdon,  G.   "A Business-like  Approach to Leaf  composting."
     BioCycle.   30(3):22-24.   March 1989.

27.   Personal communication with Edward Janesz, Greater Cleveland
     Ecological  Association.   1989.

28.   "News  Breaks.  "   Waste Aae.  20(3) :28.   March 1989.

29.   Personal  communication with  Steven Hayden, City of Toledo.
     1989.

30.   " Slants and Trends."   Solid Waste Report. 20(14) :105.   April
     3,   1989.

31.   Personal  communication  with Don Berman, Allegheny County.
     1989.

32.   Personal communication with Jim Caine,  Mount Lebanon.   1989.

33.   Illinois   Department of   Energy  and   Natural    Resources.
     Composting  Municipal  Solid  Waste.  Undated.

34.   "Regional  Roundup."   BioCycle.   29(3) :11.  March 1988.

                               A  - 2  9

-------
35.   O'Brien, J.K.     "Prospects  for  Year-Round Composting of
     Municipal  Yard  Waste."     Resource   Recovery,  pp.   26-27.
     February 1989.

36.   Personal communication  with Doug Ziesemer,  City of Chicago.
     1989.

37.   Darling, J.S.     "Twin Cities  Tackle Their Waste Problems
     Together."   World Wastes.   Undated.

38.   Personal communication with Laura Marshall,  Intergovernmental
     Solid Waste Disposal  Association.   1989.

39.   Personal communication with Harry Morris  and Jim  Embroso,  Land
     and Lakes Company.   1989.

40.   Personal communication  with  Richard Eisinger,   Composting
     Concepts.   1989.

41.   Personal communication with Michael Lein, Carver  County.  1987
     and 1989.

42.   "Yard Waste Disposal  is Banned in Metro Area."   Carver County
     Solid Waste Newsletter.   October 1989.

43.   Personal communication with Neil  Bremseth,  Fillmore County
     Resource Recovery Center.   1989.

44.   Fillmore County Resource Recovery Center. Agricultural Use of
     Solid Waste Compost.   1988.

45.   Personal communication  with Bill Brenna  (1987 and 1989) and
     Paul Kroening  (1989), Hennepin  County.

46.   Cal Recovery Systems,  Inc.   Pilot  source separation program
     for Swift County, Minnesota.   1989.

47.   "Composting  Projects  for  Grass   Clippings"     BioCycle.
     29(5) :47.   May/June  1988.

48.   Personal communication  with Nate  Klassy,   City of  Monroe.
     1989.

49.   Personal communication with Surgit  Saini,  Wisconsin Department
     of Natural Resources.   1989.

50.   Personal communication with Tom  Pinion, Portage  Department of
     Public Works.   1989.

51.   Personal communication  with David  Pilkington, Department of
     Public Works.   1989.
                              A - 3 0

-------
52.   "Regional Roundup."  BioCvcle.   30(6):13,15.   June  1989.

53.   Personal communication with Al  Dixon, Town  Manager.   1989.

54.   "Regional Roundup."  BioCycle.  30(4) :19.  April  1989.

55.   Personal communication with  Ron Jackson,   North  Atlantic
     Products.  1989.

56.   Personal  communication  with Timothea   Nalepa,   Holtsville
     Ecology Site.    1989.

57.   Personal communication with Dr.  Stewart  Bruckner,  Department
     of Environmental Control.   1989.

58.   Personal communication  with personnel from  Saratoga Springs
     Raceway.  1989.

59.   Logsdon, G.     "Racetracks Bet  on Composting."    BioCycle.
     29(3):38-39.    March 1988.

60.   Personal communication with  Jim Rice,   City of Scarsdale.
     1989.

61.   Rice, J.E.   "Leaf Bagging vs.  Curb Collection."   BioCycle.
     29(2):30-31.    February 1988.

62.   Gertman, R.    Davis Waste Removal Company Compost  Program.
     Undated.

63.   Personal communication with  Paul Geisler  (1987) and Ken
     Sheppard (1989), Davis Waste  Removal  Company.

64.   Personal communication with Russ  Reisierer, City of  Palo Alto.
     1987 and 1989.

65.   "Municipal Recycling Programs:   Potential  for  Waste Management
     and  Energy Savings."    Energy   Task  Force  of  the  Urban
     Consortium  for Technology  Initiatives.    Denver,   Colorado.
     1985.

66.   "City of Palo  Alto Composting Program."   February  1989.

67.   Department of Public Works,  City of San Mateo.    Compost
     Material Guide.  1984.

68.   Bergeron, A.T.    "6,000 Tons Diverted:     Recycling Plant
     Materials."   BioCycle.  29(2):29-31.   February 1989.

69.   Personal communication with Vernon  Ficklin, City of  San Mateo.
     1989.
                              A - 3 1

-------
70.   Cal Recovery  Systems,  Inc.   Portland Area Compost Products
     Market Study.   Prepared for the  Portland  Metropolitan  Service
     District.   Portland, Oregon.   1988.

71.   Personal communication  with Rod Grimm,  Grimm's  Fuel  Co.   1988.

72.   Personal communication with representatives from McFarlane's
     Bark Co.   1988.

73.   Johnson, B.    "Kirkland Recycling  Program Gets   Unexpected
     Success."   World Wastes.  32(2):  26-27. xFebruary 1989.

74.   Personal communication with Dave Foreman,  Pacific  Topsoils.
     1987.

75.   Personal communication with Dorran McBride, Pacific Topsoils.
     1989.

76.   Johnson, B.  "Public Participation Helps  Seattle  Set Recycling
     Goal."  World  Wastes.  32(2):  20,  22.   Undated.

77.   Personal communication with  Carl Woestendiek,  Seattle  Solid
     Waste Utility.   1989.

78.   "Seattle's  Backyard Composting Program.  "   Seattle Solid  Waste
     Utility.   1989.

79.   "Yard Waste Program Update  - August  1989."   Seattle  Solid
     Waste Utility.   1989.

80.   Personal   communication   with  Les   Hileman,   University of
     Arkansas  (retired)  .   1989.

81.   Personal  communication with John Jackson,  Ft.   Lauderdale
     Compost Plant.   1989.

82.   "Private  Role Grows  in Yard Waste  Composting."   BioCYcle.
     28(9):36-38.   October  1987.

83.   Personal   communication   with   Clark  Gregory,    Woods   End
     Laboratory.   1990.

84.   Personal communication with  Mike Olson,  U.S.  Waste Recovery.
     1989.

85.   Personal  communication with  Gary Breeden  and Tommy Hearst,
     Sumter  County.   1989.

86.   "New  Emphasis on  Yard Waste."    BioCycle.   28(8)  :42-46.
     September  1987.
                              A - 3 2

-------
87.   Personal communication  with Allen Giles and Brenda  Bardner,
     Mecklenberg County.   1989.
                              A - 3 3

-------
                                           Table A
                    CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SIX  STUDY REGIONS (Fall 1991)

                          Central    Industrial      Midlands   Northeast
Number of  States
Population in  1987
  (millions)
Number of  yard trimmings
 composting  programs
Number of  operational
 MSW  composting
 programs
Number of  States  that
  ban yard trimmings
  from landfills
Number of  States  with
  recycling  laws
List of States
 14

 39

35-45


  3


  0

  3
 AZ
 CO
 ID
 KS
 MT
 NE
 Nv
 NM
 ND
 OK
 SD
 TX
 UT
 WY
 53

524


  1


  5

  8
 DE
 IN
 MD
 MI
 NJ
 OH
 PA
 WV
  5

 29

341


  9


  5

  5
 IL
 IA
 MN
 MO
 WI
  7

 31

432


  0


  3

  7
 CT
 ME
 MA
 NH
 NY
 RI
 VT
Pacific

    5

   39

   35


    2


    0

    3
   AL
   CA
   HI
   OR
   WA
South

  11

  57

  40


   3


   4

   6
  AL
  AR
  FL
  GA
  KY
  LA
  MS
  NC
  SC
  TN
  VA
                                          (continued)

-------
                                    Table A (cont.)
Sources:   Goldstein, N.   Personal communication.   October  1991.

          Glenn,  J.  and D. Riggle.    "The State  of Garbage  in America:  Part I"
          BioCvcle.    32(4):34-38.   April 1991.

          Howson,  C.   "Recycling  Laws  Impacting at State Level."  Waste Tech News.
          October 1991.

          Kashmanian, R.   Personal communication.   March  1992.

-------
                                           Table B

        OPERATIONAL MSW  COMPOSTING/CO-COMPOSTING FACILITIES IN THE  U.S.  (Fall 1991]

                          Type of  System                 Capacity   (TPD)
Location

Arizona
  Pinetop-Lakeside

Delaware
  Wilmington
Florida
  Escambia  County
  Pembroke  Pines
  Sumter  County

Iowa
  Des Moines
Kansas
  Coffeyville

Minnesota
  East Central  Solid
    Waste  Commission
  Fillmore  County
  Lake of  the Woods
    County
  Pennington  County
  Prairieland
  St. Cloud
  Swift  County
                          Eweson
                          Fairfield
                          Windrow
                          Buhler
                          Windrow
                          Windrow
                          Windrow Raw MSW
                          Daneco
                          Windrow

                          Windrow
                          Lundell w/ windrows
                          OTVD w/ agitated bed
                          Eweson w/ agitated bed
                          Windrow
12 MSW; 5 biosolids
250-350 processed MSW;
70 biosolids  (dry)
130MSW;  septage
660 MSW
120 design (50 actual)
192 MSW; 115 biosolids
 (wet);  38 yard  trimmings
80 MSW
250 MSW
18 MSW

10 MSW
10  (RDF residuals)
100 MSW
100 MSW
25 MSW
                                          (continued)

-------
                                       Table B (cont. )

Oregon
  Portland                Dano w/  windrows               600 MSW

Texas
  Hidalgo  County         Windrow                        150 MSW

Washington
  Ferndale                Eweson w/  agitated bed        300 MSW

Wisconsin
  Portage                 Digester w/  windrows           16 MSW; biosolids
Sources:   Goldstein,  N.  and R. Spencer.   "Solid Waste Composting in  the
          United  States."   BioCycle. 31(11):  46,  48-50,  November 1990.

          Goldstein, N.   Personal communication.   October 1991.

-------