EPA-530-R-92-019
                           CHARACTERIZATION OF
                          MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
                           IN THE UNITED STATES
                                 1992 UPDATE

                                 Final Report

                                   July 1992
                                  Prepared for

                      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                   Municipal and Industrial Solid Waste Division
                              Office of Solid Waste
                             Franklin Associates, Ltd.
                             Prairie Village, Kansas

                                Printed on racyclcd piper

-------
          CHARACTERIZATION OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
                   IN THE UNITED STATES: 1992 UPDATE

                            TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter                                                                    Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

  1   INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY
      Background                                                           ].}
      How this report can be used                                              j.j
      New features of this report                                               \.\
      Municipal solid waste in perspective                                       ].2
      Methodologies for characteiizkkg^uuucipal solid waste                        14
      Materials and products not included in these estimates                         1-5
      Projections                                                            ]_$
      Overview of this report                                                  \.j
      References                                                            i_g

  2   CHARACTERIZATION OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE BY WEIGHT          2-1
      Introduction                                                           2-1
      Materials in municipal solid waste                                         2-1
         Paper and paperboard                                                2-1
         Glass                                                              2-7
         Ferrous metals                                                      2-9
         Aluminum                                                         2-10
         Other nonferrous metals                                              2-11
         Plastics                                                           2-12
         Other materials                                                     2-14
         Food wastes                                                       2-16
         Yard trimmings                                                     2-16
         Miscellaneous inorganic wastes                                        2-17
         Summary of materials in mum r t?al solid waste                            2-17
      Products in municipal solid waste                                         2-19
         Durable goods                                                     2-19
         Nondurable goods                                                  2-28
         Containers and packaging                                            2-33
         Summary of products in municipal solid waste                            2-42
                                                                          2-45
      MANAGEMENT OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE                          3-1
      Introduction                                                          3-1
      Summary of historical and projected MSW management                       3-1
      References                                                           3-5

      PROJECTIONS OF MSW GENERATION AND MANAGEMENT              4-1
      Introduction                                                          4-1
      Overview of this chapter                                                4-1
      Materials generation in municipal solid waste                               4-1
      Product generation in municipal tottd waste                                4-7
      Projections of MSW recovery                                           4*12
                                      itt

-------
                           LIST OF TABLES (continued)

Table                                                                          Page

      Projections of Product* Generated in MSW, 1990 to 2000
  28   Durable goods                                                             4-8
  29   Nondurable goods                                                          4-9
  30   Containers and packaging                                                  4-11

  31   Projected generation and ranges of recovery, 1995                              4-14
  32   Projected generation and ranges of recovery, 2000                              4-15
  33   Projections of materials discarded in MSW, 1990 to 2000                        4-17
  34   Generation, recovery, combustion, and disposal of municipal solid waste,
         1990 to 2000                                                            4-18

  35   Per capita generation, materials recovery, combustion, and discards of
          municipal solid waste, 1960 to 2000                                        5-2
  36   Per capita generation of MSW by material, 1960 to 2000                          5-2
  37  Classification of MSW into residential and commercial fractions, 1990              5-4
  38   Composition of MSW discards  by organic and inorganic fractions, 1960 to 2000      5-4

  39   Summary of density factors for landfilled materials                             6-4
  40   Volume of products discarded  in MSW, 1990                                   6-6
  41   Summary of volume of products discarded in MSW, 1990                        6-8
  42  Volume of materials discarded  in MSW, 1990                                   6-9

  43  Comparison of the 1990 and the 1992 estimates for  1988 materials generation        7-2
  44  Comparison of the 1990 and the 1992 projections of materiab generation in 2000     7-3
  45  Comparison of MSW discards by material flows and sampling methodologies       7-5

-------
                                 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure                                                                          Page

   1   Municipal solid waste in the universe of Subtitle D wastes                         1-2

      Materials Generated and Recovered in Municipal Solid Waste
   2   Paper and paperboard generated, 1990                                          2-6
   3   Paper generation and recovery, 1960 to 1990                                     2-7
   4   Glass generated, 1990                                                         2-8
   5   Glass generation and recovery, 1960 to 1990                                      2-8
   6   Metals generated, 1990                                                      2-10
   7   Metals generation and recovery, 1960 to 1990                                   2-11
   8   Plashes generated, 1990                                                     2-13
   9   Plastics generation and recovery, 1960 to 1990                                  2-13

  10   Generation of materials in MSW, 1960 to 1990                                  2-18
  11   Materials recovery and discards of MSW, 1960 to 1990                           2-18
  12   Materials recovery, 1990                                                    2-19
  13   Materials generated and discarded in MSW, 1990                               2-20
  14   Generation of products in MSW, 1960 to 1990                                   2-42
  15   Nondurable goods generated and discarded in MSW, 1990                       2-43
  16   Containen and packaging generated and discarded in MSW, 1990                2-44

  17  Municipal solid waste management, 1960 to 1990                                3-4

  13  Materials generated in MSW, 1990 and 2000                                     4-3
  19  Products generated in MSW, 1990 and 2000                                     4-7
  20  Municipal solid waste management, 1960 to 2000                               4-18

  21   Landfill  volume of MSW product categories, 1990                                6-7
  22   Landfill  volume of materials in MSW, 1990                                     6-9
                                         vtf

-------
                      TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

Chapter                                                                     Pag«

      Projections of MSW discards after recovery                                   4-16
      Projections of MSW combustion                                            4-16
      Summary of projected MSW management                                   4-17

   5   ADDITIONAL PERSPECTIVES ON MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE              5-1
      Introduction                                                            5-1
      Discards by individuals                                                  5-1
      Residential and commercial generation of MSW                               5-3
      Organic / inorganic fractions of MSW                                        5-4

   6   CHARACTERIZATION. OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE BY VOLUME         6-1
      Introduction                                                            6-1
      Methodology and experimental program                                    6-2
      Density factors for landfilled materials                                      6-3
      Volume of products discarded                                             6-5
      Volume of materials                                                     6-8
      Validity of results                                                      6-10
      References                                                            6-11

   7   COMPARISON OF MSW ESTIMATES                                    7-1
      Introduction                                                           7-1
      Comparison with previous material flows studies                              7-1
      Comparison with estimates made by sampling studies                          74
      References                                                             7-7

 Appendix

   A  Material Flows Methodology                                             A-l
   B  Recovery Scenario*, 1995 and 2000                                          B-l
   C  Residential/Commercial Fractions of MSW                                 C-l
                                       hr

-------
                                  LIST OF TABLES

Table                                                                             Page

      Materials in the Municipal Solid Waste Stream, 1960 to 1990
   1   Generated                                                                   2-2
   2   Recovery                                                                    2-3
   3   Discarded                                                                   2-4

      Products in Municipal Solid Waste, 1990
   4  Paper and paperboard                                                        2-5
   5  Glass                                                                       2-7
   6  Metals                                                                       2-9
   7  Plastics                                                                     2-12
   8  Rubber and leather                                                          2-14

      Categories of Products in the Municipal Solid Waste Stream, 1960 to 1990
   9  Generated                                                                  2-21
   10  Recovery                                                                   2-22
   11  Discarded                                                                  2-23

      Products in MSW with Detail on Durable Goods
   12  Generated                                                                  2-24
   13  Recovery                                                                   2-25
   14  Discarded                                                                  2-26

      Products in MSW with Detail on Nondurable Goods
   15  Generated                                                                  2-29
   16  Recovery                                                                   2-30
   17  Discarded                                                                  2-31

      Products in MSW with Detail on Containers and Packaging
   18  Generated (by weight)                                                      2-35
   19  Generated (by percent)                                                      2-36
   20  Recovery (by weight)                                                       2-37
   21  Recovery (by percent)                                                       2-38
   22  Discarded (by weight)                                                      2-39
   23   Discarded (by percent)                                                      2-40

   24   Generation, materials recovery, composting, combustion, and discards
          of municipal solid waste, 1960 to 1990                                       3-2

   25   Projections on materials generated in the municipal waste stream,
          1990 to 2000                                                              4-2

   26   Average annual rates of increase (or decrease) of generation of
          materials in MSW                                                        4-6

   27   Projections of categories of products generated in the
          municipal waste stream, 1990 to 2000                                        44

-------
         CHARACTERIZATION OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
                IN THE UNITED STATES: 1992 UPDATE

                          Executive Summary
      Many areas of the United States currently face serious problems in
safely and effectively managing the garbage they generate. As a nation, we are
generating more trash than ever before. At the same time, we are finding that
there are limits to traditional trash management practices. As the generation
of municipal solid waste (MSW) continues to increase, the capacity to handle
it is decreasing. Many landfills and combustors have closed, and new disposal
facilities are often difficult to site.

      As a result of these problems, many communities face hard choices
when weighing trash  management options. Some communities end up
paying premium prices to transport their garbage long distances to available
facilities. Others try to site facilities nearby and encounter intense public
conflict. Of course, not all communities face such problems; numerous
communities have found creative solutions through source reduction and
recycling programs, and have been able to work with the public to site new,
environmentally acceptable disposal capacity. Still, for much of the nation,
the generation and management of garbage present problems that require our
focused attention.

      Identifying the  components of the waste stream is an important step
toward addressing the problems associated with the generation and
management of garbage. MSW characterizations, which analyze the quantity
and composition of the municipal solid waste stream, involve estimating
how much MSW is generated, recycled, combusted, and disposed of in
landfills. By determining the makeup of the waste stream, waste
characterizations also provide valuable data for setting waste management
 goals, tracking progress toward those goals, and supporting planning at the
 national, state, and local levels. For example, waste characterizations can be
 used to highlight opportunities for source reduction and recycling and
 provide information on any special management issues that should be
 considered.

 Features of This Report

       This report is the most recent in a series of reports released by the US
 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to characterize MSW in the United
 States. It characterizes the national waste stream based on data through 1990
 and includes:
                                  ES-l

-------
       •  Information on MSW generation from 1960 to 1990.
       •  Information on MSW management—recovery for recycling and
         composting, combustion, and landfilling—from 1960 to 1990.
       •  Information characterizing MSW by volume as well as by weight.
       •  Projections for MSW generation to the year 2000.
       •  Projections for MSW combustion through 2000.
       •  Projections (presented in three recovery scenarios) for materials
         recovery for recycling and composting through 2000.

       Recent rapid changes in materials recycling and composting make it
difficult  to predict the  future of municipal solid waste management. By
presenting three possible scenarios for recovery in 1995 and 2000, this report
illustrates how various recovery rates (e.g., 25 percent recovery in 1995) could
be achieved. States and local communities can set their own goals and
recovery scenarios depending upon their local situations.

       Readers should  note that this report characterizes the municipal solid
waste stream of the nation as a whole. The  information presented  here may
not, therefore, correlate with individual state or local estimates of waste
generation and management because of local variations in MSW generation
or because state or local estimates may include wastes other than MSW.
                                    DEFINITIONS

       Municipal solid waste includes wastes such as durable goods, nondurable goods,
       containers and packaging, food scraps, yard trimmings, and miscellaneous inorganic
       wastes from residential, commercial, institutional, and industrial sources. Examples of
       waste from these   .egories include appliances, newspapers, clothing, boxes, disposable
       tableware, office and classroom paper, wood pallets, and cafeteria wastes. MSW does
       not include wastes from other sources, such as construction and demolition wastes,
       municipal sludges, combustion ash, ar d industrial process wastes that might also be
       disposed of in municipal waste landfills or incinerators.

       Generation refers to the amount (weight, volume, or percentage of the overall waste
       stream) of materials and products as they enter the waste stream and before materials
           wy, composting, or combustion takes place.
       Recovery refers to material* removed from the waste stream for the purpose of recycling
       and/or composting. Recovery does not automatically equal recycling and composting,
       however. For example, if markets for recovered materials an not available, the
       materials that were separated from the waste stream for recycling may simply be
       stored or, in some cases, sent to a landfill or combustor.

       Discards include the municipal solid waste remaining after recovery for recycling and
       composting. These discards are usually combusted or disposed of in landfills, although
       some MSW is littered, stored, or disposed of on site, particularly in rural areas.
                                     ES-2

-------
Methodology

      There are two primary methods for conducting a waste characterization
study. The first is a source-specific approach in which the individual
components of the waste stream are sampled, sorted, and weighed. Although
this method is useful for defining a local waste stream, extrapolating from a
limited number of studies can produce a skewed or misleading picture if used
for a nationwide characterization of waste. Any errors in the sample or
atypical circumstances encountered during sampling would be greatly
magnified when expanded to represent the nation's entire waste stream.

      The second method, used in this report to estimate the waste  stream on
a nationwide basis,  is called the "material flows methodology." EPA's Office of
Solid Waste and its predecessors in the Public Health Service sponsored work
in the 1960s and early 1970s  to develop the material flows methodology. This
methodology is based on production data (by weight) for the materials and
products in the waste stream, with adjustments for imports, exports, and
product lifetimes.

Report Highlights

      This report underscores the problems we face in municipal solid waste
management: the generation of MSW continues to increase steadily, both in
overall tonnage and in pounds per capita.  Nevertheless, the report indicates
that the combustion of MSW and materials recovery for recycling have
increased in recent  years, while discards to landfills have decreased. Major
findings include  the following:

       •  In 1990,195.7 million tons, or 4.3 pounds per person per day of MSW
         were generated. After materials recovery for recycling and
         composting, discards were 3.6 pounds per person per day. Virtually
         all of these discards were combusted or sent to a landfill.

       •  Without additional source reduction, the amount of waste generated
         in 1995 is expected to reach 208 million tons. By 2000, generation is
         projected to reach 222 million tons, or 4.5 pounds per person per day.
         The per capita figure for the year 2000 is a 5 percent increase over
         1990 levels.

       • Scenarios of 20 percent, 25 percent, and 30 percent recovery were
         used for 1995. Based on current trends, projected recovery will fall
         within this range.

       • Recovery of MSW materials for recycling and composting was 17
         percent in 1990. Combustion was 16 percent of total generation, and
                                  ES-3

-------
        the remaining 67 percent of the municipal solid waste stream was
        sent to landfills or otherwise disposed.

      •  MSW was also characterized by volume. The results indicate which
        materials in MSW occupy the greatest proportion of volume in
        landfills, and compare these percentages to those by weight. For
        example, paper and paperboard products make up 32 percent of the
        discards (after recovery) by weight and 32 percent by volume; plastics
        account for 10 percent by weight and 21 percent by volume; and yard
        trimmings make up 19 percent by weight and 10 percent by volume.

      •  For the first time in this  series of reports/ estimates of the fraction of
        MSW generated by residential and commercial sources were made. It
        was estimated that 55 to 65 percent of MSW comes from residential
        sources, and that 35 to 45 percent comes from commercial sources.

Municipal Solid Waste in 1990

      In 1990, generation of municipal solid waste totaled 195.7 million tons.
Figure ES-1 provides a breakdown by weight of the materials generated in
MSW in 1990. It shows that paper and paperboard products are the largest
component of municipal solid waste by weight (37 percent of generation) and
yard trimmings are the second largest component (roughly 18 percent of
generation). Five of the remaining materials in MSW—glass, metals,  plastics,
wood and food wastes—range between 6 and 9 percent each by weight of total
MSW generated. Other materials in MSW include rubber, leather, textiles,
and small amounts of miscellaneous wastes, which each made up less than 4
percent of MSW in 1990.
              Figure IS-1. Material* generated In MSW by weight, 1990
                       (Total weight • 198.7 million tone)
                                            Olaee «.7%
                                          13*2 IWNHOU tOfM
                                      	   Metafe t.J%
           a. •oaerfeeortf 3T.I%/"          438^L^L^. 1C2 million tone
          TW                        	
                                                  •leetiee  ».»%
                                                 112
                                                   Weed «.3%
                                                     MMaon tone

                                                    i.7%
                                  ES-4

-------
              Figure ES-2. Management of MSW  In  U.S.
                     (Total weight  - 195.7  million tone)
        1990
       Landfill, other, 68.6%
        130.4 million ton*
                                                  Recovery, 17.1%
                                                  33.4 million tons
                                                   Combustion,  16.3%
                                                    31.9 million tons
      The breakdown of how much waste went to recycling, combustion, and
landfills is shown in Figure ES-2. Recovery of materials for recycling and
composting was an estimated 17 percent in 1990. That amount varied
significantly according to the type of waste (Table ES-1). For example, over 28
percent of paper generation was recovered in 1990, while about 2 percent of
plastics in MSW were recovered.

      The broad categories of materials in MSW are made up of many
individual products. The products are grouped into major product categories
as shown in Figure ES-3. In 1990, containers and packaging were the largest
               Figure ES-3.  Products generated In MSW by weight, 1990
                        (Total weight • 198.7 million tone)
           Nondurable* 2t.7%
            S&3 mNHen tern
            Durable*) 14.3%
           27.9 million tone
  Containers A Packaging 32.9V
       94.4-million ton*
                   Pood, Other 12%
                  1B.1
Yard Trimming* 17.9%
      million tone
                                    ES-5

-------
                                  Table ES-1

                 GENERATION OF MSW, RECOVERY OF MATERIALS
AND COMPOSTING OF YARD TRIMMINGS, 1990
Weight
Generated
(in Millions
of Tone)
Paper and Paperboard
Glass
Metals
Ferrous
Aluminum
Other Nonferrous
Total Metals
Plastics
Rubber and Leather
Textiles
Wood
Other
Total Material* in Products
Other Waste*
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous inorganic Wastes
Total Otter W«S*M
TOTAL MSW
73.3
13.2

12.3
2.7
1.2
16.2
16.2
4.6
5.6
12.3
3.2
144.6

13.2
35.0
2.9
51.1
195.7
Weight
Recovered
(in Millions
of Tons)
20.9
2.6

1.9
1.0
0.8
3.7
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.8
29.2

Neg.
4.2
Neg.
4.2
33.4
Percent of
Generation
of Each
Material
28.6%
19.9%

15.4%
38.1%
67.7%
23.0%
2.2%
4.4%
4.3%
3.2%
23.8%
20.2%

Neg.
12.0%
Neg.
8.2%
17.1%
Neg. * Negligibk Otn than 005 percent or 50,000 torn).
the totaL Nondurable goods (such as newspapers and disposable food service
items) were the second largest category, at 27 percent of the total Yard
trimmings were approximately 18 percent and durable goods (such as
furniture and tires) were 14 percent of total generation in 1990.
                                  ES4

-------
MSW Volume Estimates

      Although solid waste is usually characterized by weight, information
about volume is important for such issues as determining how quickly
landfill capacity is being filled and identifying the rate at which the volumes
of various materials in the waste stream are changing.

      Volume estimates of solid waste, however, are far  more difficult to
make than weight estimates. A pound of paper is a pound of paper whether it
is in flat sheets, crumpled into a wad, or compacted into a bale, but the
volume occupied  in each case will be very different. The  estimates presented
here represent the relative volume of materials as they would typically be
found if compacted individually in a landfill (a significant amount of
compaction occurs in a landfill). These estimates are based largely on
empirical data that are then used to estimate density factors (pounds per cubic
yard) for components of solid waste under simulated  landfill conditions, with
corroboration from actual landfill studies. It should be noted, however, that
individual component density measurements serve only to compare
component volume requirements, one to another. The component
measurements should not be  used to estimate landfill densities of mixed
municipal solid waste.

      Figure ES-4 shows the materials in MSW by volume as a percent of
total MSW discards (after recovery) in 1990. The paper and paperboard
category ranks first in volume of MSW discarded (32 percent). Plastics rank
second in volume, at 21 percent of the total, and yard trimmings are third, at
10 percent. Paper and plastics combined account for over  one-half of the
volume of MSW discarded in 1990.
               Figure ES-4.  Landfill velum* of material* In MSW, 1990
                             (In p«re«nt of total)
                     121%
                                                   11%
                                                  Rubber 4 LM*wr0%
                                    Ohm 9%
                                  ES-7

-------
                                Table ES-2

               VOLUME OF MATERIALS DISCARDED IN MSW, 1990

Paper and Paperboard
Plastics
Yard Trimmings
Ferrous Metals
Rubber and Leather
Textiles
Wood
Food Wastes
Other
Aluminum
Class
TOTALS
1990
DUcardt
(mil tons)
52.4
15.9
30.8
10.4
4.4
5.3
11.9
13.2
5.7
1.6
10.6
162.3
Weight
(%ofMSW
total)
32.3%
9.8%
19.0%
6.4%
2.7%
3.3%
7.3%
8.1%
3.5%
1.0%
6.5%
100%
Volume
<%ofMSW
total)
31.9%
21.1%
9.8%
8.9%
6.1%
6.4%
6.8%
3.2%
1.4%
2.2%
2.2%
100%
Ratio
(volume %/
weight %)
1.0
2.2
0.5
1.4
2.2
1.9
0.9
0.4
0.4
2.1
0.3
1.0
      Table ES-2 compares 1990 volume and weight estimates for materials
in MSW contained in the report The right-hand column shows the ratio of
volume to weight for each material. A ratio of '' .0 means that the material
occupies the same proportion by volume as by weight Values greater than 1.0
mean that the material occupies a larger proportion of volume than weight

      Four materials stand out as having ratios of approximately 2.0 or
greater plastics, rubber and leather, textiles, and aluminum. By contrast, yard
trimmings, food, and glass each have ratios of 0.5 or less, indicating that these
materials are  quite dense and occupy proportionately less volume in landfills.

      Figure  ES-5 shows the product categories that make up MSW by
volume of total discards in 1990. Containers and packaging (at about 33
percent) and nondurable* (at about 30 percent) occupy similar shares of MSW
by volume. Durables goods are an estimated 23 percent of MSW discards
volume.
                                 ES-S

-------
                 CS-C.  Landfill volum* of MSW product categories, 1990
                             (In p«rc«nt of total)
Trends in MSW Generation, Recovery, and Discards

      Generation of municipal solid waste grew steadily between 1960 and
1990, from 88 million to over 195 million tons per year. Per capita generation
of MSW increased from 2.7 pounds per person per day in 1960 to 4.3 pounds
per person per day in 1990. By 2000, projected per capita MSW generation is
4.5 pounds per person per day (222 million tons). This projection suggests a
substantial slowing in the rate of increase of MSW generation. Actually
achieving the projected decline hinges on diverse variables that are difficult
to predict. They range from demographic changes, economic factors, and
consumer preferences such as those for lighter packaging materials, to social
trends such as the decline in newspaper readership, as well as efforts in source
reduction such as backyard composting, packaging reduction, and production
of more durable projects.

      Recovery has increased gradually from about 7 percent of MSW
generated in 1960 to 17 percent in 1990. Projected scenarios for recovery are
between 20  and 30 percent in 1995 and 25 and 35 percent in 2000. To achieve
these recovery rates, some products will have to be recovered at rates of 50
percent or more, and there will have to be substantial composting of yard
trimmings.

       Combustors handled an estimated 30 percent of MSW generated in
1960, most of them with no energy recovery and no air pollution controls. In
the 1960s and 1970s, combustion dropped steadily as the old incinerators were
dosed, reaching a low of less than 10 percent of MSW generated by 1980. More
recently, combustion of MSW has been  increasing again (to 32 million tons,
or roughly  16 percent of generation, in 1990). All major new facilities have
energy recovery and are designed to meet air pollution standards.
                                   ES-9

-------
      The report projects that about 35 million tons of MSW will be
combusted in 1995, and 46 million tons will be combusted in 2000. Estimates
of combustion projections are based on an assumption that the facilities will
operate at 80 percent of capacity.

      Landfill use fluctuates with changes in the use of alternative solid
waste management methods. For example, when the use of combustion for
MSW management declined and recovery rates were low, the MSW
percentage sent to landfills increased (Figure ES-6). Alternatively, when
recovery and combustion of MSW increased, the percentage of MSW
discarded to landfills declined. In 1960, approximately 62 percent of MSW was
sent to landfills. This increased to 81 percent in  1980, then decreased to 67
percent in 1990 due to changing trends in municipal solid waste
management.

      Recovery for recycling at the 25 percent scenario for 1995 and the 30
percent scenario for 2000 will keep total national discards of MSW after
recovery at about the current level of 162 million tons or less, considering
projected rates of generation. Composting and combustion are required to
substantially decrease the amounts landfilled (Figure ES-6).

       As we approach the twenty-first century, integrated waste management
with a focus on source reduction and recycling  is clearly the solution to our
growing waste management needs. Through source reduction, recycling, and
composting, we  can reduce generation and increase recovery, and, in turn,
reduce the quantities of waste that must be managed by combustors and
landfills.
             Figure ES-t. Municipal wild w«at« management, 1960 to 2000

                                  ES-10

-------
                               Chapter 1

                INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY
BACKGROUND
      This report is the most recent in a 20-year series of reports sponsored by
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to characterize municipal solid
waste (MSW) in the United States. Together with the previous reports, this
report provides a historical database for a 30-year characterization (by weight)
of the materials and products in MSW, with projections through the year
2000.

HOW THIS REPORT CAN BE USED

      The data in this report are best suited for providing a nationwide
picture of municipal solid waste generation and management. The historical
perspective is particularly useful in establishing trends and highlighting the
changes that have occurred over the years, both in types of wastes generated
and in the ways they are managed. A common error in using this report is to
assume that all nonhazardous wastes are included. As shown later in this
chapter, municipal solid waste as defined here does not include construction
and demolition wastes, industrial process wastes, or a number of other wastes
that may well go to a municipal waste  landfill.

      Because local data on generation and management of municipal solid
waste are often lacking, state and local  planners frequently use the data in this
report to make local estimates. That is, data on generation of MSW per person
on a national basis may be used to estimate generation in a city or county
based on its population. While this method may yield an acceptable
"ballpark" estimate, it should be used with caution because there are many
local  variations in climate, commercial activity, and waste management
practices that affect municipal solid waste generation and disposal. (See
Chapter 7 for more discussion on how  the estimates in this report compare
with  local sampling studies.)

NEW FEATURES OF THIS REPORT

       In addition to the data series that have been previously published by
EPA  in these MSW characterization reports, the following information and
features have been added:

       • Separate line items have been added to the products list for carpets
         and rugs; books; magazines; telephone books; third class mail; plastic
         trash bags; and towels, sheets and pillowcases. These items were
                                  l-l

-------
              SuMftto 0 Waste*
            Municipal Solid Wast*
               Municipal (Judge
          Industrial nonhazardous waste
          Small Quantity Generator waste
          Construction & demolition waste
               Agricultural waste
               ON and gae waste
                 Mining waste
                                           Municipal Solid Waste
    Durable; Goods

  Nondurable Goods

Containers & Packaging

     Pood Wastes

   Yard Trimmings
                 Figure 1. Municipal solid waste In the universe
                 of Subtitle D wastes.
        already totally or partially accounted for in aggregated line items, so
        only a small net addition to total MSW was made (Chapter 2).

      • An estimate of the distribution of MSW to residential and
        commercial sources was made for the first time in this report
        (Chapter 5).

      • Additional research was done on wood wastes, with the result that
        estimates of wood packaging were increased substantially (Chapter 2).

      More information on the differences between this report and previous
reports is included in Chapter 7.

MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE IN PERSPECTIVE

Municipal Solid Waste Defined

      Municipal solid waste includes durable goods, nondurable goods,
containers and packaging, food wastes and yard trimmings, and
miscellaneous inorganic wastes  (Figure 1). EPA's 1989 Agenda for Action
report states that municipal solid wastes come from residential, commercial,
institutional, and industrial sources. Some examples of the types of MSW
that come from each of the broad categories of sources are:
                                   1-2

-------
      Source                      Example Products

      Residential                  Appliances, newspapers, clothing,
                                  disposable tableware, food packaging,
                                  cans and bottles, food scraps, yard
                                  trimmings

      Commercial                 Corrugated boxes, food wastes, office
                                  papers, disposable tableware, paper
                                  napkins, yard trimmings

      Institutional                 Cafeteria and restroom trash can wastes,
                                  office papers, classroom wastes, yard
                                  trimmings

      Industrial                   Corrugated boxes, plastic film, wood
                                  pallets, lunchroom wastes, office papers.

      The material flows methodology used in this report does not lend itself
to the quantification of wastes according to their source. For example,
corrugated boxes may be unpacked and discarded from residences,
commercial establishments such as grocery stores, institutions such as
schools, or from factories. The methodology estimates only the total quantity
of such boxes disposed, not their places of discard or recovery for recycling.
(For this report, estimates were made of the residential /commercial
distributions of MSW, but they were not made by the material flows
methodology.)

Other Subtitle D Waste

      Some people assume that "municipal solid waste" must include
everything that is landfllled in Subtitle D landfills. (Subtitle D of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act deals with wastes other than the hazardous
wastes covered under Subtitle C.) As shown in Figure 1, however, many
kinds of wattes are included under Subtitle D. It has been common practice to
landfill wastes such as municipal sludge, nonhazardous industrial wastes,
fluff from automobile salvage operations, and construction and demolition
wastes along with MSW, but these other kinds of wastes are not included in
the estimates presented in this report.

The Solid Waste Management Hierarchy

       EPA's Agenda for Action endorsed the concept of integrated waste
management, by which municipal solid waste is reduced or managed through
                                   1-3

-------
several different practices, which can be tailored to fit a particular
community's needs. The components of the hierarchy are:

      • Source reduction (including reuse of products and backyard
        composting of yard trimmings)
      • Recycling of materials (including composting)
      • Waste combustion (preferably with energy recovery) and landfilling.

      With the exception of source reduction, this updated characterization
report includes estimates of the quantities of MSW managed by each practice
in the hierarchy.

METHODOLOGIES FOR CHARACTERIZING MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE

The Two Methodologies

      There are two basic approaches to estimating quantities of municipal
solid waste. The first method, which is site-specific, involves sampling,
sorting, and weighing the individual components of the waste stream. This
method is useful in defining a local waste stream, especially if large numbers
of samples are taken over several seasons. Results of sampling also increase
the body of knowledge about variations due to climatic and seasonal changes,
population density, regional differences, and the like. In addition, quantities
of MSW components such as food and yard trimmings can only be estimated
through sampling and weighing studies.

      A disadvantage of sampling studies based on a limited number of
samples is that they may be skewed and misleading if, for example, atypical
circumstances were experienced during the sampling. These circumstances
could include an unusually wet or dry season, delivery of some unusual
wastes during the sampling period, or errors in the sampling methodology.
Any errors of this kind will be greatly magnified when a limited number of
samples are taken to represent a community's entire waste stream for a year.
Magnification of errors could be even more serious if a limited number of
samples was relied upon for making the national estimates of MSW. Also,
extensive sampling would be prohibitively expensive for making the
national estimates. An additional disadvantage of sampling studies is that
they do not provide information about trends unless they are performed in a
consistent manner over a long period of time.

      The second approach to quantifying and characterizing the municipal
solid waste stream—the method used for this report—utilizes a material
flows approach to estimate the waste stream on a nationwide basis. In the late
1960s and early 1970s, EPA's Office of Solid Waste and its predecessors at the
Public Health Service sponsored work that began to develop this
                                  1-4

-------
methodology/ and this report represents the latest version of this database
that has been evolving for over 20 years.

      The material flows methodology is based on production data (by
weight) for the materials and products in the waste stream. Adjustments are
made for imports and exports and for diversions from MSW (e.g., for
building materials made of paperboard). Adjustments are also made  for the
lifetimes of products. Finally, food wastes and yard trimmings and a  small
amount of miscellaneous inorganic wastes are accounted for by compiling
data from a variety of waste sampling studies.

      A detailed description of the material flows methodology is included as
Appendix A.

Definition of Terms

      The material flows methodology produces an estimate of total
municipal solid waste generation in the United States, by material categories
and by product categories.

      The term generation as used in this report refers to the weight  of
materials and products as they enter the waste stream from residential,
commercial, and institutional sources and before materials recovery or
combustion takes place. (In earlier reports in this series, the term "gross
discards'' is the same as generation.)

      Recovery  of materials as estimated in this report includes materials or
yard trimmings  removed from the waste stream for the purpose of recycling
or composting, although recovery does not automatically equal recycling.
Recycling or composting processes generally leave some residues (e.g., sludges
from deinking paper), but estimation of these residues is beyond the scope of
this study.

       Combustion of MSW was estimated with and without energy recovery.
Combustion with energy recovery is often called "waste-to-energy" or
incineration with heat recovery.

       Discards  include the MSW remaining after recovery for recycling and
composting. These discards would presumably be combusted or landfilled,
although some MSW is littered, stored or disposed oil-site, or burned  on-site,
particularly in rural areas. No good estimates for these other disposal practices
are available, but the amounts of MSW involved are presumed to be small.
                                   1-5

-------
MATERIALS AND PRODUCTS NOT INCLUDED IN THESE ESTIMATES

      As noted earlier, other Subtitle D wastes (illustrated in Figure 1) are not
included in these estimates, even though some may be managed along with
MSW (e.g., by combustion or landfilling). Household hazardous wastes, while
generated as a part of other residential wastes, are not treated separately in
this report.

      One problem with the material flows methodology is that product
residues associated with other items in  MSW (usually containers) are not
accounted for. These residues would include, for example, food left in a jar,
detergent left in a box or bottle, dried paint in a can, etc. Some household
hazardous wastes, e.g., pesticide left in a can, are also included among these
product residues.

      Certain other materials associated with products in  MSW are often not
accounted for because the appropriate data series have not yet been
developed. These include, for example,  inks and other pigments and some
additives associated with plastic resins.  Considerable additional research
would be required to estimate these materials, which constitute a relatively
small percentage of the waste stream.

      Some adjustments are made in this report to account for packaging of
imported goods, but there is no documentation of these amounts.

 PROJECTIONS

      The projections of MSW generation to the year 2000 were not based on
 total quantities, but were aggregated from separate projections for each
 product and material. Thus, while most products are projected to grow in
 tonnage, this is not universally true, and some are projected to decline.

       The projections are based on trend analysis of the 30-year historical
 database developed for each product, from information in government
 sources such as the Industrial Outlook published by the Department of
 Commerce, ami in some cases, best professional judgment.

        It should be emphasized that projections are not predictions.
 Projections are based on an assumption that  there will be  no unforeseen
 changes in current trends. Thus, the economy is assumed to remain stable
 and population trends are assumed to be as projected by the Bureau of the
 Census. Additional discussions of projection assumptions are included in
 Chapter 4.
                                   1-6

-------
OVERVIEW OF THIS REPORT

      Following this introductory chapter, Chapter 2 presents the results of
the municipal solid waste characterization (by weight). Estimates of MSW
generation, recovery, and discards are presented in a series of tables, with
discussion. Detailed tables and figures summarizing 1990 generation,
recovery, and discards of products in each material category are included.

      In Chapter 3 of the report, estimates of MSW management by the
various alternatives are summarized. These include recovery for recycling
and composting, combustion, and landfilling.

      Projections of municipal solid waste generation and management to
the year 2000 are included in Chapter 4. Projections are made by material and
by product. A discussion of assumptions and trends is included.

      Chapter 5 of the report provides some additional perspectives on the
MSW characterization. Information is included on per capita generation and
management of MSW, on residential and commercial sources of MSW, and
on organic and inorganic  fractions of MSW.

      In Chapter 6, a characterization of MSW discards in 1990 by volume
(cubic yards) is presented.

      The final chapter of this report provides an overview comparison of
the results of MSW characterization by the material flows methodology with
the results of a number of field sampling studies. Also, the differences
between the current update  and previous material flows reports are
explained.
                                  1-7

-------
                             Chapter 1

                           REFERENCES
1.  Darnay, A., and W.E. Franklin, The Role of Packaging in Solid Waste
   Management, 1966 to 1976. Public Health Service Publication No. 1855.
   U.S. Government Printing Office. 1969.

2,  Franklin, W.E., and A. Darnay. The Role of Nonpackaging Paper in Solid
   Waste Management, 1966 to 1976. Public Health Service Publication No.
   2040. U.S. Government Printing Office. 1971.

3.  Darnay, A., and W.E. Franklin. Salvage Markets for Materials in Solid
   Wastes. Environmental Protection  Publication SW-29c. U.S.
   Government Printing Office. 1972.

4.  Franklin, W.E., et al. Base Line Forecasts of Resource Recovery 1972 to
   1990. Midwest Research Institute for the U.S. Environmental Protection
   Agency. March 1975.

5.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste
   Management Programs. Second Report to Congress: Resource Recovery
   and Source Reduction (SW-122). 1974.

6.  Smith, F.L., Jr. A Solid Waste Estimation Procedure: Material Hows
   Approach. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (SW-147). May 1975.

7.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste
   Management Programs. Third  Report to Congress: Resource Recovery
   and Source Reduction (SW-161). 1975.

8. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste
   Management Programs. Fourth Report to Congress: Resource Recovery
   and Waste Reduction (SW-600). 1977.

9. Franklin Associates, Ltd. Post-consumer Solid Waste and Resource
   Recovery Baseline. Prepared for the Resource Conservation Committee.
   May 16,1979.

10. Franklin Associates, Ltd. Poet-consumer Solid Waste and Resource
   Recovery Baseline: Working Papers. Prepared for the Resource
   Conservation Committee. May 16,1979.

11. Resource Conservation Committee. Choices for Conservation: Final
   Report to the President and Congress (SW-779). July 1979.

-------
12.  Franklin Associates, Ltd. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in
    the United States, 1960 to 2000. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
    July 11,1986.

13.  Franklin Associates, Ltd. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in
    the United States, 1960 to 2000 (Update 1988). U.S. Environmental
    Protection Agency. March 30,1988.

14.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal
    Solid Waste in the United States: 1990 Update. EPA/SW-90-042. June
    1990.

15.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Municipal Solid Waste Task
    Force, Office of Solid Waste. The Solid Waste Dilemma: An Agenda for
    Action. February 1989.

16.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste. Subtitle D
    Study Phase I Report (EPA/530-SW-054). October 1986.
                                   1-9

-------
                               Chapter 2

    CHARACTERIZATION OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE BY WEIGHT


INTRODUCTION

      The tables and figures in this chapter present the results of the update of
EPA's municipal solid waste characterization study through 1990. The findings
are presented in two ways: a breakdown of municipal solid waste (MSW) by
material, and a breakdown by product (both by weight and by percentage).
While some products, e.g., newspapers, are made up of a single material-
paper—other products, e.g., rubber tires, contain more than one material, such
as rubber, ferrous metals, and textiles. Thus the materials summary tables
represent an aggregation of the materials that go into all the products in MSW.
(Note that the totals for the materials and the products tables are the same.)

      The summary  tables and figures provide information on the generation
of each material and product, and the recovery for recycling and composting (if
any). Tables and figures displaying discards of materials and products after
recovery for recycling and composting follow. Recovery means that the
materials have been removed  from  the waste stream. Recovery does not
always equal materials recycling, and some residues may result from the
recycling, although these are not accounted for in this report.

      Additional detail is provided for some of the materials and products in
MSW that are of the most interest to planners: paper, glass, metals,  plastics,
and rubber and leather.

MATERIALS IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE

      Generation, recovery, and discards of materials in MSW, by weight and
by percentage, are summarized in Tables 1 through 3. Following these tables,
each material is discussed in detail.

Paper and Paperboard

      By any measure, the many products  made of paper and paperboard,
taken collectively, are the largest component of MSW. The wide variety of
products that comprise the paper and paperboard materials total is illustrated
in Table 4 and Figures 2 and 3. In this report,  these products are classified as
either nondurable goods or as containers and packaging, with nondurable
goods being the larger category.
                                  2-1

-------
                                  Table 1

MATERIALS GENERATED*  IN  THE  MUNICIPAL. WASTE STREAM,  1960 TO  1MO
             (In million* of ton* and p«re«nt of total generation)

Materials
Paper and Paperooard
Glaas
Metal*
Ferrou*
Aluminum
Other Nonferroua
Total M*aia
Plastic*
Rubber and Leather
Textile*
Wood
Other
Total Matariala in Product*
Other Waetee
Food Waste*
Yard Trimming*
Miscellaneous Inorganic Waste*
Total Otner Waataa
Total MSW Generated • Wiight

Material*
Paper and Paperboard
Qlaea
Metal*
Ferrou*
Aluminum
Other Nonferrou*
Total M#aia
Plastic*
Rubber and Leather
Textile*
Wood
Other
Total Uattriala In P-odueta
Other W**tee
Food Waste*
IYsrd Trhrwninga
Miscellaneous Inorganic Waetee
Total Otter Mfeafee
Million* of Ton*
1 960
29.9
6.7

9.9
0.4
0.2
10.5
0.4
2.0
1.7
3.0
0.1
P 54.3

12.2
20.0
1.3
33.5
87.8
1965
38.0
8.7

10.1
0.5
0.5
11.1
1.4
2.6
1.9
3.5
0.3
67.5

12.7
21.6
1.6
35.9
103.4
1970
44.2
12.7

12.6
0.8
0.7
14. 1
3.1
3.2
2.0
4.0
0.8
84,1

12.8
23.2
1.8
37.8
121.9
Percent of
1960
34.1%
7.6%

11.3%
0.5%
0.2%
12.0%
0.5%
2.3%
1.9%
3.4%
0.1%
81.8%

13.9%
22.8%
1.5%
34.2%
1968
36.8%
8.4%

9.8%
0.5%
0.5%
10. 7%
1.4%
2.5%
1.8%
3.4%
0.3%
65.3%

12.3%
20.9%
1.5%
34.7%
1970
36.3%
10.4%

10.3%
0.7%
0.6%
11.6%
2.5%
2.6%
1.6%
3.3%
0.7%
89.0%

10.5%
19.0%
1.5%
31.0%
1975
43.0
13.5

12.3
1.1
0.9
14.3
4.5
3.9
2.2
4.4
1.7
87.5

13.4
25.2
2.0
40.6
128.1
Total Q
1975
33.6%
10.5%

9.6%
0.9%
0.7%
11.2%
3.5%
3.0%
1.7%
3.4%
1.3%
88.3%

10.5%
19.7%
1.6%
31.7%
1960
54.?
15.0

11.6
1.8
1.1
14.i
7.8
4.3
2.8
8.7
2.9
108.5

13.2
27.5
2.2
42.9
151.4
1985
' 61.5
13.2

10.9
2.3
1.0
1-4.2
11.8
3.8
2.8
8.2
3.4
118.7

13.2
30.0
2.5
45.7
164.4
eneratlon
1960
36.1%
9.9%

7.7%
1.2%
0.7%
9.6%
5.2%
2.8%
1.7%
4.4%
1.9%
71.7%

8.7%
16.2%
1.5%
28.3%
1986
37.4%
8.0%

6.6%
1.4%
0.6%
8.6%
7.1%
2.3%
1.7%
5.0%
2.1%
72.2%

8.0%
18.2%
1.5%
27.8%
1990
713
13.2

12.3
2.7
1.2
18.2
16.2
4.6
5.6
12.3
3.2
144 6

13.2
35.0
2.9
51.1
195.7

1990
37.5%
8.7%

6.3%
1.4%
0.6%
8.3%
8.3%
2.4%
2.9%
6.3%
1.6%
73.9%

8.7%
17.9%
1.5%
26.1%
| •*m*m»'; i M'~r;77rr^^i^a*wKma**vmn*itKmiK^^^^^ |
           i recovery or combuetan. OOM not indue* construction ft femcelcfl debris, industrial
              > 0 VMM*. Detail* may not add » Mat* due »reunotag.
                                2-2

-------
                                          Table 2
               RECOVERY*  OF  MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE,  1MO TO 1990
           (In HtMUone  of ton* and percent of total gon«ratton of Men  product)
) Million* of Ton*
Material*
Paper and Papertoard
Gfess
Metals
Ferroua
I Aluminum
Other Nonferroua
Total M**J3
Plastics
Rubber and Leather
Textiles
Wood
Other-
Tor*/ Umtmriml* In Product*
Other Wastee
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
fof«/ Qth»r Wittit
Total USW Recovered • Weight

Materiale
Paper and Paperooard
GU«
Q Metals
1 Ferrous
| Aluminum
| Other Nonferrous
| Total Mrtals
Plastics
Rubber and Leather
Taxfciee
Wood
Total Material* in Product*
Other Wastee
Food Wastee
Yard TibiMiinQB
ft JlA4»^JlAMA4te M bMMV^A*^^. UfAfl^^A
Total 0fter Wait**
Tool IUW /recovered • %
1960
$.4
0.1
0.1
Neg.
Neg.
0.1
Nog.
0.3
Nog.
Neg.
Neg.
5.9
Neg.
Nog.
Neg.
NM.
5.9
196S
5.7
0.1
0.1
Neg.
0.3
0.4
Neg.
0.3
Neg.
Nea.
0.3
S.8
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Nea.
6.8
1 970
7.4
0.2
0.1
Neg.
0.3
0.4
Nog.
0.3
Neg.
Neg.
0.3
8-fl
Neg.
NO*.
Neg,
Nea.
8.6
1 975
.2
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.4
0.7
Neg.
0.2
Neg.
Neg.
0.4
9-9
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Nea.
9.9
1980
11.9
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.5
1.2
Neg.
0.1
Neg.
Neg.
0.5
14.5
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Nea.
14.5
1 985
13.1
1.0
0.4
0.6
0.5
1.5
0.1
0.2
Neg.
Neg.
0.5
16.4
Neg.
Neg.
Nea,
Nea.
16.4
1 990
20.9
2.6
1.9
1.0
0.8
3.7
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.8
292
Neg.
4.2
Neg.
42
33.4
Percent of Generation of Each Material
"fiW
18.1%
1.5%
1.0%
Neg.
Neg.
1.0%
Nea.
15.0%
Neg.
Neg.
Nea.
10.9%
Meg.
Neg.
Nea.
Neo,
6.7%
1984
15.0%
1.1%
1.0%
Neg.
60.0%
5.6%
Neg.
11.5%
Neg.
Neg.
100.0%
10.1%
Neg.
Neg.
Neo,
Neo,
6.6%
1*70
18.7%
1.6%
0.8%
Neg.
42.9%
2.8%
Neg.
9.4%
Neg.
Neg.
37.5%
10.2%
Neg.
Neg.
Nea.
Neg.
7.1%
1973
19.1%
3.0%
1.6%
9.1%
44.4%
4.9%
Neg.
5.1%
Neg.
Neg.
23.5%
11.3%
Neg.
Neg.
Neo.
Neg.
7.7%
1980
21.8%
5.3%
3.4%
16.7%
45.5%
3.3%
Neg.
2.3%
Neg.
Neg.
17.2%
13.4%
Neg.
Neg.
, "•*

9.6%
196S
21.3%
7.6%
3.7%
26.1%
50.0%
10.6%
0.9%
5.3%
Neg.
Neg.
14.7%
13.8%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.

10.0%
1990
28.6%
19.9%
15.4%
38.1%
87.7%
23.0%
2.2%
4.4%
4.3%
3.2%
239%
20.2%
Neg.
12.0%
Neg^

17.1%
B«x»ery at yotnvmtnu weem tor recyceng end eempceeng; doe* net Indude uui*rUryTH>riciBen icrep.
Recovery of •lecMlyies in beeviec; preoooly not recycled.
Dots** mey not add to wato due ID founding.
Neg.. NegdgMe fleet ftan 0.08 percent or 90.000 lone).
Source:  Frertem 'iinrlam, Ud.
                                          2-3

-------
                                  TaMe 3
MATEAIALS DISCARDED* IN THE MUNICIPAL  WASTE STREAM,  1960 TO 1990
               (In millions of tone and percent of total discards)
Millions of Tons
Materials
Paper and Paperboard
Glass
Mstats
Ferrous
Aluminum
Other Nonferrous
Tbta/Mstatt
Plastics
Rubber and Leather
1 Textiles
Wood
Otfiar
Tottl U*t*rlal* In Products
Other Wsstss
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous inorganic Wastes
Tottl Ofner wt»t»t
Tottl MSW Dlsctrdtd • Wtlaht

Materials
Paper and Paperboard
Glass
Metals
Ferrous
Aluminum
Other Nonferrous
Tbta/Mstsft
Plastics
Rubber end Leather
Textiles
Wood
Other

Other Wastes
Food Wsstss
Yard Trimnwigs

Tatmt OU^ ItttftM
1 960
.24.5
6.6

9.8
0.4
0.2
10.4
0.4
1.7
1.7
3.0
0.1
48.4

12.2
20.0
1.3
33.*


1960
2*9.9%
8.1%

12.0%
0.5%
0.2%
12.7%
0.5%
2.1%
2.1%
3.7%
0.1%
49.1%

14.9%
24.4%

40.9%
1 968
32.3
8.6

10.0
0.5
0.2
10.7
1.4
2.3
1.9
3.5
0.0
60.7

12.7
21.6
1.6
34.9

1 970
36.8
12.5

12.5
0.8
0.4
13.7
3.1
2.9
2.0
4.0
0.5
75.5

12.8
23.2
1.8
37.8"
113.3
Percent <
196S
33.4%
8.9%

10.4%
0.5%
0.2%
1 1.1%
1.4%
2.4%
2.0%
3.6%
0.0%
62.8%

13.1%
22.4%


1970
32.5%
11.0%

11.0%
0.7%
0.4%
12.1%
2.7%
2.6%
1.8%
3.5%
0.4%
64.6%

11.3%
20.5%


1 97S
34.6
13.1

12.1
1.0
0.5
13.8
4.5
3.7
2.2
4.4
1.3
77.6

13.4
25.2
2.0
40.6
118.2
9f Total
1978
29.4%
11.1%

10.2%
0.8%
0.4%
11.5%
3.8%
3.1%
1.9%
3.7%
1.1%
65.7%

11.3%
21.3%


1960
42.8
14.2

11.2
1.5
0.6
13.3
7.8
4.2
2.6
6.7
2.4
94.0

13.2
27.5
2.2
TEST
136.9
1 968
48.4
12.2

10.5
1.7
0.5
12.7
11.5
3.6
2.8
8.2
2.9
1Q.2.-3.

13.2
30.0
2.5
JBTF
148.0
pisesrds
1980
"37!%""
10.4%

8.2%
1.1%
0.4%
9.7%
5.7%
3.1%
1.9%
4.9%
1.8%
68.7%

9.6%
20.1%


1965
32.7%
8.2%

7.1%
1.1%
0.3%
3.0%
7.8%
2.4%
1.9%
5.5%
2.0%


8.9%
20.3%


1990
52.4
10.6

10.4
1.8
0.4
12.5
15.9
4.4
5.3
11.9
2.4
115.4

13.2
30.8
2.9
46T9
162.3

1990
32.3%
6.5%

6.4%
1.0%
0.2%
7.7%
9.8%
2.7%
3.3%
7.3%
1.5%


8.1%
19.0%


               end oompoet rnowery. Doss not Include conevuctton 4
                    0 MMS. Duetto may not add to
                   Ltd.
             deMs, MustrW
duetoroundkio.
                                    2-4

-------
                                        Table 4

                    PAPER AND PAPERBOARD PRODUCTS IN MSW, 1990
                         On million* of ton* and percent of generation)
          Product Category
Generation
 (Million
   ton*)
                                                  Recovery
(Million
 tons)
          Nondurable Good*
            Newspapers
            Books
            Magazines
            Office Papers
            Telephone Books
            Third Class Mail
            Other Commercial Printing
            Tissue Paper and Towels
            Paper Plates and Cups
            Other Nonpackaging Paper*
            Total Paper and Paperboard
            Nondurable Good*
          Container* and Packaging
            Corrugated Boxes
            Milk Cartons
            Folding Cartons
            Other Paperboard Packaging
            Bags and Sacks
            Wrapping Papers
            Other Paper Packaging
            Total Paper and Paptrboard
            Container* and Packaging
   40.7


   23.9
    0.5
    4.3
    0.3
    2.4
    0.1
    1.0

   32.6
   8.9
            Total Paper and Paperboard  73.3
  12.0
  20.9
(Percent of
generation)


  42.5%
  10.3%
  10.7%
  26.5%
   9.3%
   5.2%
  19.4%
  Neg.
  Neg.
  Neg.

  21.9%


  48.0%
  Neg.
   7.9%
  Neg.
   8.2%
  Neg.
  Neg.

  36.9%

  28.6%
Discards
(Million
  tons)
   7.4
   0.9
   2.5
   4.7
   0.5
   3.6
   4.5
   3.2
   0.7
   3.8

  31.8
 20.6

 52.4
           • Include* tissue in disposable diapers, paper in games and novelties, cards, etc
            Neg. * Negligible fleas than 0.06 percent or 50,000 tons).
            Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
            Source; Franklin Associates, Ltd.

      The nondurable paper products include newspapers, books, magazines,
office papers, telephone books, third class mail, other commercial printing/
tissue paper and towels, paper plates and cups, and other nonpackaging paper
such as that used in cards, games, posters and other pictures, etc. The
containers and packaging category includes paper in the form of corrugated
boxes, milk cartons, other folding cartons (e.g.,  cereal boxes), bags and sacks,
wrapping papers, and other paper and paperboard packaging. (These products
are discussed in more detail under the report section on products in MSW.)

       Generation. Total generation of paper and paperboard in MSW has
grown steadily from nearly 30 million tons in  1960 to over 73 million tons in
1990 (Table 1). As a percentage of total MSW generation, paper represented
                                      2-5

-------
about 34 percent in 1960 (Table 1). The percentage has varied over time, but
has generally increased, to 37.5 percent of total MSW generation in 1990.

      (The sensitivity of paper products to economic conditions can be
observed in Figure 3. The tonnage of paper generated in 1975—a severe
recession year—was actually less than the tonnage in 1970, and the percentage
of total generation was also less in 1975.  Similar but less pronounced declines
in paper generation can be seen in other  recession years.)
                   Figure 2. Paper and paperboard products generated In MSW,  1990
       Corrugated boxee
          Newspaper*
          Office pepere
      Conwnefoai
'SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS/SSSSSSSSSSJW'SS/7'SSSSSSAfSSirSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS.
   FoWng and m* carttne \
          Other pepem
         Third daaema4
   Tiiaue paper and loweta
            Mapaimaa
        Bags and Mcka
        Other packaging
              Booka
     Paper piatee and cupa ' 3
        Talephona booka ' \
                     '"""
                                        10
                                15
20
       Recovery. Recovery of paper and paperboard for recycling is at the
 highest rate overall compared to all other materials in MSW. As Table 4
 shows, an estimated 48 percent of all corrugated boxes were recovered for
 recycling in 1990. Newspapers were recovered at a rate of 42.5 percent and
 office papers at 263 percent with lesser percentages of other papers being
 recovered also. About 21 million tons of postconsumer waste paper were
 recovered in 1990  nearly 29 percent of total generation.

       Discard* after Recovery. After recovery of paper and paperboard for
 recycling, discard* were over 52 million tons in 1990, or 32 percent of total
 MSW discards.
                                      2-6

-------
                Ptyire 3.  Paper generation and recovery,  1960 to 1990
 Mwion toon
1960
               1966
1970
1975
1960
1965
                                             1990
Glass
      Glass is found in MSW primarily in the form of containers (Table 5 and
Figures 4 and 5), but also in durable goods like furniture, appliances, and
consumer electronics. In the container category, glass is found in beer and soft
drink bottles, wine and liquor bottles, and bottles and jars for food, cosmetics,
and other products.  More detail on these products is included in the later
section on products  in MSW.

       Generation. Glass accounted for 6.7 millions tons of MSW in 1960, or
over 7 percent of total generation. Generation of glass continued to grow
over the next two decades, but then glass containers were widely displaced by

                                   Table 5
                       GLASS PRODUCTS IN MSW, 1990
                   On million* of ton* and percent of generation)
       Product Category
      Generation
       (Million
         torn)
          1.3
         Beer and Soft Drink Bottles      5.7
         Wine and Liquor Bottle*        2.1
         Food and Other Bottles and Jan  4.1
         Total Gloss GmteiNsra        ITT
         Total Gfess
         13.2
          Recovery        Discards
     (Million  (Percent of  (Million
       tons)    generation)    tons)
       Neg.       Neg.       1.3
                            3.8
                            1.9
                            3.6
                          -5T
                           10.6
         Glass is a component of appHanoat, nunititfe«
         Neg. • NegUcfMe Oeas then 0.08 percent or 50,000 torn).
         Debute may not add to totak due to rounding.
         SOU/UK Fnuuufai Aeiociateft Ltd
1.9
0.2
0.5
TT
2.6

33.2%
10.0%
12.7%
22.0%
19.9%
electronics, tte.
                                      2-7

-------
                               4. QlM« product* generated In MSW, 1990

                             	I	I         I         I
   BMT A ion drinfc bone*
  Food, offer botte«
      Wrw ft liquor boMe>
          Our** goods
                                           Miiltontortt
other materials, principally aluminum and plastics. Thus the tonnage of glass
in MSW declined in the 1980s, from 15 million tons in 1980 to 13.2 million
tons in 1985. Beginning about 1987, however, the decline in generation of glass
containers reversed (Figure 5), and glass container generation in 1990 was 13.2
million tons, the same as the estimate for 1985. Glass was 9.9 percent of MSW
generation in 1980, declining to less than 7 percent in 1990.

       Recovery. In 1990 an estimated 22 percent of glass containers was
recovered for recycling, with a 20 percent recovery rate for all glass in MSW.

       Discards after Recovery. Recovery for recycling lowered discards of glass
to 10.6 million tons in 1990 (6.5 percent of total MSW discards).
 MWontm
                       ft. Otaee generation and recovery.lMO to 1MO
                                     2-a

-------
Ferrous Metals

       By weight, ferrous metals are the largest category of metals in MSW
(Table 6 and Figure 6). The largest quantities of ferrous metals in MSW are
found in durable goods such as appliances, furniture, tires, and other
miscellaneous durables. Containers and packaging are the other source of
ferrous metals in MSW. Large quantities of ferrous metals are found in
construction materials and  in transportation products such as automobiles,
locomotives, and ships, but these are not counted as MSW in this report.

       Generation and recovery of all metals in MSW are shown in Figure 7.

                                   Table 6
                        METAL PRODUCTS IN MSW, 1990
                    (In millions of ton* and percent of generation)
     Product Category
Generation
 (Million
   ton*)
                                                  Recovery
(Million   (Percent of
 tons)     generation)
     Durable Goods
         Ferrous Metals*
         Aluminum**
         Leadt
         Other Nonferrous Metalsf
         Total Metal* at Durable Goods

     Nondurable Goods
         Aluminum

     Containers and Packaging
         Steel
         Beer and soft drink cans
         Food and other cans
         Other steel packaging
         Total Steel Packaging
         Beer and soft drink cans
         Food and other cans
         Foil and closures
         Tattl Aluminum Packaging

         Total Mtfaisfe
         Contaiiurt and Packaging

         Total Mttal*
    9.4
    0.6
    0.8
    0.4
  ITT


    0.2
    0.1
    2.5
    0.2
  TT
    1.6
    0.0
    0.3
  TT
    4.8
  ToT
   1.3
 Neg.
   0.8
 Neg.
 ~TT
 Neg.
 Neg.
   0.6
   1.0
 Neg.
   1.7

 IT
13.3%
 Neg.
96.3%
 Neg.
18.5%


 Neg.
24.7%
23.4%
Neg.
22.1%
63.2%
Neg.
Neg.
53.3%
34.5%

23.0%
         Ferrous metals in appiiaiKesTrurniture, tires, and miseeUaiMOiis durables.
         Aluminum in appliances, furniture, and miscellaneous durable*.
         lead in lead-edd batteries.
         Other uuufenuus metals in appUances and miscellaneous durables.
         Neg. • Negligible Osss man OJ06 percent or 50,000 tons).
         Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
         Source Franklin Associates, Ltd.
Discards
(Million
  tons)


   8.2
   0.6
  Neg.
   0.4
 ~9T


   0.2
  0.1
  1.9
  0.2
  0.6
 Neg.
  0.3
 TT

  3.1
 nr
                                       2-9

-------
                          «. U«UI product* g«n«rat*d In MSW, 1990

                                   • Packaging
    F«nou«
   Aluminum
  NonfcrrotM
                                   a       a
                                     Minion ton*
10
12
                                                                     14
      Generation. About 10 million tons of ferrous metals were generated in
1960. Like glass, the tonnages grew during the 1960s and 1970s, but began
to drop as lighter materials like aluminum and plastics replaced steel in many
applications. Generation of ferrous metals did, however, increase to 12.3
million tons in 1990. The percentage of ferrous metal generation in MSW has
declined from over 11 percent in 1960 to 6.3 percent in 1990.

       Recovery. Recovery of ferrous metals from MSW has generally not
been well documented in the past. The renewed emphasis on recovery and
recycling in recent years has, however, included ferrous metals. Recovery of
ferrous metals from major appliances ("white goods") was estimated to be
about  40 percent in 1990. Overall recovery of ferrous metals from durable
goods (large and small appliances, furniture, and tires) was estimated to be
about  13 percent in 1990.

       An estimated 25 percent of steel beverage cans was recovered in 1990,
although the tonnage of these cans in MSW is not large. About 23 percent of
food and other steel cans was estimated to be recovered in 1990.

       Discards after Recovery. Discards of ferrous metals after recovery were
over 10 million ton* in 1990, or 6.4 percent of total discards.

 Aluminum

       The largest source of aluminum in MSW is aluminum cans and other
 packaging (Table 6 and Figure 6). Relatively small amounts of aluminum are
 also found in durable and nondurable goods.

       Generation. In 1990,1.9 million tons of aluminum were generated as
 containers and packaging, while a total of about one million tons was found in
                                   2-10

-------
durable and nondurable goods. The total—2.7 million tons—represented 1.4
percent of total MSW generation in  1990. Aluminum generation was only
about 400,000 tons (0.5 percent) in 1960.

      Recovery. About 53 percent of all aluminum containers and packaging
was recovered for recycling in 1990. Nearly all of this recovery was beer and
soft drink cans; they were estimated to be recovered at a 63 percent rate in 1990.

      Discards after Recovery. In 1990,1.6 million tons of aluminum were
discarded in MSW after recovery, which was one percent of total discards.

Other Nonferroua Metals

      Other nonferrous metals (e.g., lead, copper, zinc) are found in durable
products such as appliances, consumer electronics, etc. Lead in lead-acid
batteries is the most prevalent nonferrous metal  (other than aluminum) in
MSW.

      Generation. Generation of other nonferrous metals in MSW totaled
about 1.2 million tons in 1990. Lead in batteries accounted for over 800,000  tons
of this amount. Generation of these metals has  increased slowly, from about
200,000 tons in 1960. As a percentage of total generation, nonferrous metals
have never exceeded  one percent.

       Recovery. Recovery of the other nonferrous metals was over 800,000
tons in 1990, with most of this being lead recovered from batteries. It was
estimated that about 96 percent of battery lead was recovered in 1990.

       Discards after Recovery. An estimated 400,000 tons of nonferrous metals
were discarded in MSW in 1990. Percentages of total remained less than one
percent over the entire period.
                     7. Metala generation and recovery, 1MO to 1MO
                                   2-11

-------
Plastics

       Plastics are a rapidly-growing segment of MSW. Plastics are found in
durable and nondurable goods and in containers and packaging, with the latter
being the largest category of plastics in MSW (Table 7 and Figure 8).

       In durable goods, plastics are found in appliances, furniture, casings  of
lead-acid batteries, and other products. Plastics are found in such nondurable
products as disposable diapers, trash bags, cups, eating utensils, shower
curtains, etc. Plastics are also used in a variety of container and packaging
products, e.g., condiment and beverage containers, bags, protection for
electronic equipment and computers, etc.
                                         Table 7

                            PLASTIC PRODUCTS IN MSW, 1990
                         (In millions of tons and percent of generation)

                                  Generation       Recovery          Discards
                                    (Million   (Million   (Percent of   (Million
        Product Category              tons)      tons)    generation)     tons)

        Durable Goods*                 4.9       0.1        2.0%        4.8

        Nondurable Goods
           Plastic Plates and Cups       0.3      Neg.      Neg.        0.3
           Trash Bags                 0.8      Neg.      Neg.        0.8
           Disposable Diapers-        0.3      Neg.      .Weg.        0.3
           Clothing and Footwear       0.2      Neg.      Neg.        0.2
           Other Misc Nondurablest     2.7      Neg.      Neg.        2.7
           Total Plastic*
           ttoiuferofcb Goo*            4.2      Neg.      Neg.        4.2

         Containers and Packaging
           Soft Drink Bottles*          0.4       0.1       31.5%        0.3
           Milk Bottles                0.4      Neg.       6.9%        0.3
           Other Containers            1.8      Neg.       1.1%        1.8
           Bags and Sacks              0.9      Neg.      Neg.        0.9
           Wrap*                     1.5      Neg.      Neg.        1.5
           Other Plastic Packaging      2.0      Neg.      Neg.        2.0
                                       7.1        0.3        3.7%        6.8

            Total Pfsvtfa               16.2        0.4        2.2%       15.9

          1 Plastics as a eosncMnent of appliances, furniture, lead-acid batteries and
            miscellaneous durables.
         •• Does not indude other materials in diapers.
          t Eating utensils and straws, shower curtains, etc
          t Includes bottles and base cups.
            Meg.» NefUfMe Osss then 008 percent or 50,000 torn).
            Details nay sat add to totals due to rounding.
            Source: FrankUn Associates, Lid.
                                        2-12

-------
                      Figure I. PHatlce products generated In MSW, 1990

                   j	I	|	I	I	i	I
       Ourattea
43?%%%?%^^
w//MwMP///r///.
      \
W//7/P/////
              «%^%%^^
             0.0
0.5    1.0
2.0    2.5   3.0
 MWontona
                                       3.5
           4.0
                                                                 45
            5.0
      Generation. Plastics comprised an estimated 400,000 tons of MSW
generation in 1960. The quantity grew steadily to over 16 million tons in 1990
(Figure 9). As a percentage of MSW generation, plastics were less than one
percent in 1960, increasing to over 8 percent in 1990.

      Recovery for Recycling. While overall recovery of plastics for recycling
is small—365,000 tons, or about two percent of generation in 1990—an
estimated 31.5 percent of plastic (polyethylene terephthalate) soft drink bottles
and their base cups were recovered that year. Significant recovery of plastics
from lead-acid battery casings  and from some other containers was also
reported.
               Figure t.  Pleetlce generation and recovery, 1940 to 1MO
                                    2-13

-------
      Discards after Recovery. Discards of plastics in MSW after recovery were
15.9 million tons, or almost 10 percent of total discards.

Other Materials

      Rubber and Leather. The predominant source of rubber in MSW is
rubber tires (Table 8). Other sources of rubber and leather include clothing and
footwear and other miscellaneous durable and nondurable products. These
other sources are quite diverse, including such items as gaskets on appliances,
furniture, and hot water bottles, for example.
                                   Table 8

                 RUBBER AND LEATHER PRODUCTS IN MSW, '.990
                    On millions of ton* and percent of generation)

                              Generation      Recovery	   Discards
                               (Million   (Million   (Percent of  (Million
         Product Category          tons)      tons)    generation)    tons)

         Durable Good*
           Rubber Tires*           1.6       0.2       13.0%        1.4
           Other Durables-        2.0      Meg.       Neg.        2.0
           Total Rubber & Utthtr
           Durable Good*          3.6       0.2        5.8%        3.4

         Nondurable Goods
           Clothing and Footwear    0.8      Neg.       Neg.        0.8
           Other Nondurable      0.3      Neg.       Neg.        0.3
           Total Rubber & U*ther
           Nondurable Good*       1.1      Neg.       Neg.        1.1
           Tottl Rubber & U*ther   4.6       0.2        4.4%        4.4
           Do« not include other material* in tire*.
           Includes carpets and nigs and other miscellaneous durables.
           Neg. > Negligible (less than 0.05 percent or 50,000 tons).
           Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
           Source: Franklin Associates, Ltd.
              Generation. Generation of rubber and leather in MSW has
 shown slow growth over the yean, increasing from 2 million tons in 1960 to
 over 4 million tons in 1990. One reason for the relatively slow rate of growth
 is that tires have been made smaller and longer-wearing than in past years.

              As a percentage of total MSW generation, rubber and leather
 have ranged between 2 and 3 percent of the total over the historical period.

              Recovery for Recycling. The only recovery identified in this
  category is rubber from tires, and that was estimated to be about 200,000 tons

                                      2-14

-------
(13 percent of rubber in tires in 1990) (Table 8). This means that about 4.4
percent of all rubber and leather in MSW was recovered in 1990.

            Discards alter Recovery. Discards of rubber and leather after
recovery were over 4 million tons in 1990 (2.7 percent of total discards).

      Textiles. Textiles in MSW are found mainly in discarded clothing,
although other sources were identified to be  furniture, tires, footwear, and
other miscellaneous nondurables.

             Generation. An estimated 5.6 million tons of textiles were
generated in 1990. These products have exhibited slow growth over the study
period.

             Recovery for Recycling and Discards. A significant amount of
textiles is recovered for reuse, but the reused garments and wiper rags re-enter
the waste stream eventually, so this is considered a diversion rather than
recovery for recycling. Since data on elapsed  time from recovery of textiles for
reuse to final discard is limited, it was assumed that reused textiles re-enter the
waste stream the same year that they are first discarded. It was estimated that
about 5 percent of textiles in clothing and items such as sheets and pillowcases
was recovered for export in 1990 (about 200,000 tons). This means that about 4
percent of total textiles was recovered, leaving discards of 5.3 million tons of
textiles in 1990.

       Wood. The sources of wood in MSW  include furniture, miscellaneous
durables (e.g., cabinets for electronic equipment), wood packaging (crates,
pallets), and some other miscellaneous products.

             Generation. About 12.3 million  tons of wood were generated in
 MSW in 1990 (6.3 percent of total generation). For this report, wood packaging
 generation was re-examined carefully, and it was determined that wood
 packaging (primarily wood pallets) had been underestimated in previous
 reports for the decade of the 1980s. Previous estimates of wood packaging
 generation in 1960 and 1985 as shown in Table 1 have been revised upward
 accordingly.

             Recovery for Recycling and Discards. Recovery of wood pallets
 (usually by chipping) has been increasing along with recovery of other
 materials. It was estimated that nearly 400,000 tons of wood waste were
 recovered in 1990, leaving wood discards of 11.9 million tons (73 percent of
 total discards).

       Other Products. Generation of "other product" waste is mainly
 associated with disposable diapers, which are discussed under the section on
 Products in Municipal Solid Waste. The only other  significant source of

                                    2-13

-------
materials in this category is the electrolytes and other materials associated with
lead-acid batteries that are not classified as plastics or nonferrous metal.

Food Wastes

      Food wastes included here consist of uneaten food and food preparation
wastes from residences, commercial establishments (restaurants, fast food
establishments), institutional sources such as school cafeterias,  and industrial
sources such as factory lunchrooms.

      Generation. As noted earlier, the only source of data on food wastes is
on-site sampling studies. As many sampling studies as possible—representing
a long time frame—were scrutinized. Sampling studies are generally
performed on mixed wastes as received at a transfer station or landfill, and the
results are reported by material as a percentage of the total sample. Therefore,
the sampling study results for food wastes were integrated into  the discards
(after recovery) of the other materials in MSW. In addition, an adjustment
was made for the moisture transfer that occurs when wastes are mixed prior to
sampling. As a check on the sampling methodology, per capita  generation of
food wastes over the historical period was also calculated.

       The sampling studies over a long time frame show food wastes to be a
declining percentage of the waste stream, down from almost 15 percent of
discards after recycling in 1960 to 8.1 percent in 1990. Generation of food wastes
was estimated to be 13.2 million tons in 1990. On a per capita basis, discards of
 food wastes are declining. This can be attributed to more use of garbage
 disposals, which send food wastes to the sewer systems rather than MSW, and
 increasing use of prepared foods both at home and in food service
 establishments. (When foods are prepared and packaged off-site, the food
 preparation wastes are categorized as industrial wastes rather than MSW.)

       Recovery and Discards. While recovery of food wastes for composting
 or animal feed has been practiced in some locations, no significant recovery of
 food wastes was identified in 1990.

 Yard Trimmings

       Yard trimmings include grass, leaves, and tree and brush trimmings
 from  residential, institutional, and commercial sources.

       Generation. Generation of yard trimmings was estimated in exactly the
 same manner described above for food wastes, based on sampling studies. As a
 percentage of the waste stream,  yard trimmings have been exhibiting a slow
 decline, although in terms of per capita generation, they have been increasing
 slightly. An estimated 35 million tons of yard trimmings were generated in
 MSW in 1990.

                                   2-16

-------
      Recovery for Composting and Discards. Quantitative national
information on composting of yard trimmings is difficult to obtain, but
estimates were based on a literature search and telephone contacts with state
agencies to determine state policies on removal of yard trimmings from MSW
(e.g., by banning leaves from landfills), and estimates of the amounts of waste
that might be affected. Removal of yard trimmings for composting was
estimated to be about 12 percent of generation in 1990 (4.2 million tons),
leaving about 31 million tons of yard trimmings to be discarded.

      (It should be noted that these estimates do not account for backyard
composting by individuals or practices such as less bagging of grass wastes;
since the yard trimming estimates are based on sampling studies at the landfill
or transfer station, they are based on the quantities received there.)

Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes

      This relatively small category of MSW is also derived from sampling
studies. It is not well defined and often shows up in sampling reports as
"fines" or "other." It includes soil, bits of concrete, stones, and the like.

      Generation. This category contributed an estimated  2.9 million tons of
MSW in 1990.

      Recovery and Discards. No recovery of these products was identified;
discards are the same as generation.

Summary of Materials in Municipal Solid Waste

       Generation. Changing quantities and composition of municipal solid
waste generation are illustrated in Figure 10. Generation of MSW has grown
steadily, from 87.8 million tons in 1960 to 195.7 million tons in 1990. Over the
years, paper and paperboard has been the dominant material generated in
MSW. Yard trimmings have been the second largest component of MSW.
Metals have remained fairly constant as a source of MSW, while glass
increased until the 1980s and has since declined or shown a slower rate of
increase. Food wastes have remained fairly constant in terms of MSW
 tonnage.

       Plastics have been a rapidly growing component of MSW. In terms of
 tonnage contributed, they ranked third in 1990 (behind yard trimmings and
 approximately equal to metals).

       Recovery and Discards. The effect of recovery and composting on MSW
 discards is illustrated in Figure 11. Recovery of materials for recycling grew at a
 rather slow pace during most of the historical period covered by this data

                                  2-17

-------
          ffgwv 10. Oanaratlen of matariala In MSW,  1960 to 1 MO
MMiontorw
  200
    1960
1968
series, increasing only from 9.6 percent of generation in 1980 to 10 percent in
1985. Renewed interest in recycling and composting as solid waste
management alternatives has occurred in the late 1980s, and the recovery rate
in 1990 was estimated to be 17.1 percent of generation.

      Estimated recovery and composting of materials are shown in Figure 12.
In 1990, recovery of paper and paperboard dominated materials recovery at
about 63 percent of total tonnage recovered. Recovery of other materials, while
generally increasing, contributes much less tonnage.
             11. Material* raeovary and dlaearda of MSW, 1940 to 1MO
    160
    140
    120
    100
    ao
    60
    40
    ao
     0
       _iJ^HI_.
                         1670
                   167S
                                    2-18

-------
                       Flgur* 12.  y«t«ri«l» r*cov*ry*, 1990
                                              Ywd Trtmrtng«
                                                 tarCompo«i2.S%
             in pcmnt by w«ight of total recovery.
      Figure 13 illustrates the effect of recovery of materials for recycling,
including composting, on the composition of MSW  discards. For example,
paper and paperboard were over 37 percent of MSW generated in 1990, but
after recovery, paper and paperboard were about 32 percent of discards.
Materials that have little or no recovery exhibit a larger percentage of MSW
discards compared to generation. For instance, food  wastes were less than 7
percent of MSW generation in 1990, but about 8 percent of discards.

PRODUCTS IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE

      Generation, recovery, and discards of products in municipal solid waste
are shown in a series of tables in this section. (Note  that the totals for these
tables are the same as the previous series of tables for materials in MSW.) The
products in MSW are categorized as durable goods, nondurable goods, and
containers and packaging. Generation, recovery, and discards of these products
are summarized in Tables 9 through 11. Each product category is discussed in
more detail below, with detailed tables highlighting  the products in each.

Durable Goods

      Durable goods generally are defined as products having a lifetime of
three yean or more, although there are some exceptions. In this report,
durable goods include major appliances, furniture and furnishings, rubber
tires, lead-acid automotive batteries, and miscellaneous durables (e.g., small
appliances, consumer electronics) (see Tables 12 through 14). These products
are often called "oversize and bulky" in municipal solid waste management
practice, and they are generally handled in a somewhat different manner than
                                   2-19

-------
Figure 13.  Materials generated and discarded In MSW, 1990
                                          Ota* 8.7%
     Yw«TrtmMngii79%
                        Qanaratlon
                         Oiaaarda
                            2-20

-------
                                      TaWs 9

                     CATEGORIES  OF  PRODUCTS GENERATED*
                 IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1MO TO 1900
                  (In millions of ten* and psrcsnt of  total gsnsration)

Products
DurabU Goods
(Dew in Table 12)
Nondurabla Goods
(Detail in Table 15)
Containers and Packaging
(Data* /n Tat* 18)
Total Product" Waataa
Othsr Wastss
Food Wastas
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inoroanic Wastes
Total Other Waataa
Total USW Ganaratad • Weight

Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 12)
Nondurabis Goods
(Detail in Tat* 15)
Containers snd Packaging
(Detail in Table 19)
Total Product*^ Waetee
Other Wastss
Food Wastss
VAJB4 Y^MMMMW^
Tera i nfTwiWiyB
MiscsMsnsoua Inorganic Wastss
Total Other Waatea
Total USW Generated • %
Mill)
1960
9.4
17.8
27.3
54.3
12.2
20.0
1 3
33.5
87.8
1988
11.1
22.2
34.2
67.5
12.7
21.8
1 8
35.9
103.4
1970
15.1
25.5
43.5
94.1
12.8
23.2
1 9
37.8
121.9
ons of T
1978
17.5
25.6
44.4
87.5
13.4
25.2
2.0
40.6
128.1
ons
1980
19.7
36.5
52.3
108.5
13.2
27.5
22
42.9
151.4
1985
21.5
42.6
54.6
118.7
13.2
30.0
2 5_
45.7
164.4
1990
27.9
52.3
64.4
144.6
13.2
35.0
2.9
51.1
195.7
Psrcsnt of Total Qsnsratlon
1980
10.7%
20.0%
31.1%
81.8%
13.9%
22.8%
1.5%
38.2%
100.0%
1968
10.7%
21.5%
33.1%
65.3%
12.3%
20.9%
1.5%
34.7%
100.0%
1970
12.4%
20.9%
35.7%
69.0%
10.5%
19.0%
1.5%
31.0%
100.0%
1978
13.7%
20.0%
34.7%
68.3%
10.5%
19.7%
1.6%
31.7%
100.0%
1960
13.0%
24.1%
34.5%
71.6%
8.7%
18.2%
1.5%
28.3%
100.0%
1988
13.1%
25.9%
33.2%
72.2%
8.0%
18.2%
1.5%
27.8%
100.0%
1990
14.3%
28.7%
32.9%
73.9%
8.7%
17.9%
1.5%
28.1%
100.0%
                                    DOM not indud*
                             Oetatfa may not add to totals due to roundng.
ictton & dsfnoSlon debris, induslital precsei
Source:
                                     2-21

-------
                                         Table  10
                 RECOVERY* OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE. 1MO  TO  1990
               (In million* of ton*  and p«re«nt  of  generation  of each  product)

Product*
Durable Qooda
(DttUlinTat)*13)
Nondurable Good*
(DttaM in Tab* 16)
Container* and Packaging
(Datalir Tib* 20)
Total Product" Waataa
Other Waata*
FoodWaatea
Yard Trimming*
Mi*eeU*neou* inoraanic Wa*ta*
Total Oth»r Waataa
Total MSW Recovered • Wtlght

Product*
Durable Qooda
(09*1 in Tab* 13)
Nondurable Qood*
(Data* in Tab* 18)
Container* and Packaging
(Detail to Tab* 21)
Total Product" Waataa
Other Waatea
FoodWaatee
Yard TiferaiNng*
Total Othor Waataa

Minion* of Tone
1»«0
0.4
2.4
3.1
5.9
Nag.
Neg.
Nea.
Neg.
5.9

1960
4.3%
13.6%
11.4%
10.9%
Meg.
N*g.
NM.
"•£

196S
0.9
2.8
3.1
6.8
Neg.
Nag.
N«a
Neg.
6.8
1970
0.9
3.8
3.9
8.6
Neg.
Neg.
Nea.
Neg.
8.6

1965
8.1%
12.6%
9.1%
10.1%
Neg.
NM.
NML
*•£•

1970
6.0%
14.9%
9.0%
10.2%
Neg.
"•g.
W"f

197S
1.0
3.8
5.1-
9.9
Neg.
Neg.
Nea.
Neg.
9.9
1980
1.3
4.8
8.4
14.5
Neg.
Neg.
Nea.
Neg.
14.5
1985
• 1.4
5.6
9.4
18.4
Neg.
Neg.
Nea
Neg.
16.4

197S
5.7%
14.8%
11.5%
11.3%
Neg.
Neg.
N«L
*&

1980
6.6%
13.2%
16.1%
13.4%
Neg.
N»g.
NM.

1985
6.5%
13.1%
17.2%
13.8%
Neg.
N*g.
NM.
Neg.

1990
3.1
9.2
16.9
29.2
NM.
4.2
Nea.
4.2
33.4

1990
11.2%
17.5%
26.3%
20.2%
Neg.
12.0%
Nea.
8.2%

•  n«cp¥eiy of i
                               i not indudi
eerie.
  0«u*» may not edd to Matt due to mundng,
  Other then food praductt.
  Neg. • Neg»gM* 0*e> ften 0.06 pemnt or 80.000 lone).
                        I ejA
                       * UB»
                                         2-22

-------
                                        Tabta 11

                        CATEGORIES  Of PRODUCTS  DISCARDED'
                     IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO  1090
                      (In million* of ton* and percent of total di*carda)

Product*
Durable Good*
(DtttH in TaUt 14)
Nondurable Gooda
(DttariinTaUtiT)
Container* and Packaging
fDttmU in Tab* 22)
rota/ Product" Wi»tt»
Other Waataa
Food Wastaa
Yard Trimming*
Miacailaneous Inoraanic Wast**
Total Othmr Wittt*
Tottl MSW 0/acardetf • Mfe/o/tt

Product*
Ourablo Gooda
(CM* in Tatta MJ
Nondurable Good*
(0**inTaUt 17)
Container* and Packaging
(DfOul to Ttt* 23)
Total Product" IVa*fe«
Other Waat**
Food Wa*t*a
Yard Trimming*
Mi*c*llan*ou* Inorganic WaatM
rota/ othtr w»»t»»
ToM MSW 0/acaro-etf • %
Million* of Ton*
1960
9.0
15.2
24.2
48.4
12.2
20.0
1.3
33.5
81.9
196S 1970
10.2
19.4
31.1
60.7
12.7
21.6
1.6
35.9
96.6
14.2"
21.7
39.6
75.5
12.8
23.2
1.8
37.8
113.3
1975
16.5
21.8
39.3
77.6
13.4
25.2
2.0
40.6
118.2
1980
18.4
31.7
43.9
94.0
13.2
27.5
2.2
42.9
136.9
1985
20.1
37.0
45.2
102.3
13.2
30.0
2.5
45.7
148.0
1990
24.8
43.2
47.4
115.4
13.2
30.8
2.9
46.9
162.3
Percent of Total Diacard*
1960
11.0%
18.6%
29.5%
59.1%
14.9%
24.4%
1.6%
40.9%
100.0%
1965
10.6%
20.1%
32.2%
62.8%
13.1%
22.4%
1.7%
37.2%
100.0%
1970
12.5%
19.2%
35.0%
66.6%
11.3%
20.5%
1.6%
33.4%
100.0%
1975
14.0%
18.4%
33.2%
85.7%
11.3%
21.3%
1.7%
34.3%
100.0%
1960
13.4%
23.2%
32.1%
68.7%
9.6%
20.1%
1.6%
31.3%
100.0%
1985
13.6%
25.0%
30.5%
89.1%
8.9%
20.3%
1.7%
30.9%
100.0%
1990
15.3%
26.6%
29.2%
71.1%
8.1%
19.0%
1.8%
28.9%
100.0%
                         ncevery. Ooaanotinc
                            Oetaria may not add » waft due to roundng.
Source
                                    2-23

-------
                                    Table  12
       PRODUCT* GENERATED' IN  THE MUNICIPAL WASTE  STREAM, 19«0  TO 1990
                        (WITH DETAIL ON DURABLE GOODS)
                   (M million* of ten* and percent of total generation)



Furniture and FumiaNnga
Carpeta and Ruga**
Rubber TirM
Batten**, lead add
MlaceUaneoua Durable*
Total Durable Qooda
Nondurable Qoode
(Detail in TaUoiS)
Container* and Packaging
(D**linTaUal8)
Total Product WaataaT
Other Waata*
Food Waste*
YaidTrimmmga
MiaceUaneoua Inorganic Waatea
Total Othor Waataa
Total MSW Generated1 • Woloht

Product*
Durable Qoode
Major Appliances
Furniture and Fumiehinga
Carpet* and Ruga
Rubber Tirea
Batten**. l*ad-Acid
MiaceUaneoua Ourablea
Total Ourablo Oooda
Nondurable Qoode
(Data* in Tab* 15)
Contalnera and Packaging
(Data* in Tab* 19)
Total Product Waataaf
Other Waatee
Food Waatae
Ytfd TnRVfllnQB
Totai Otter WteftM
Million* of Ton* I
I960

TT
2.1
1.1
Nea.
4.7
9.4
17.6
27.3
54.3
12.2
20.0
T.3
33.5
37.8
19«S

IT
2.7
1.4
0.7
5.4
11.1
22.2
34.2
67.5
12.7
21.6
1.6
35.9
103.4
Pi
I960

1.7%
2.4%
1.3%
Nag.
5.4%
10.7%
20.0%
31.1%
61.8%
13.9%
22.6%
1.3%
36.2%
1968

1.0%
2.6%
1.3%
0.6%
5.2%
10.8%
21.5%
33.1%
66.3%
12.3%
20.9%
1.5%
34.7%
1970

T^
3.4
1.9
0.8
6.3
15.1
25.5
43.5
84.1
12.8
23.2
1.8
37.8
121.9
ircent 01
1970

2.2%
2.8%
1.6%
0.7%
5.2%
12.4%
20.9%
3S.7%
60.0%
10.5%
19.0%
1.5%
31.0%
197*

2.6
4.1
2.5
1.2
7.1
17.5
25.6
44.4
87.5
13.4
25.2
2.0
40.6
128.1
19*6

2.6
5.1
2.6
1.5
7.7
19.7
36.5
52.3
108.5
13.2
27.5
2.2
42.9
151.4
198*

2.7
5.8
1.9
1.5
9.6
21.5
42.6
54.6
118.7
13.2
30.0
2.5
45.7
164.4
1 f99-ll'V:«iI':'f'V:»lI'>f't:« |
 •• Newlnati
  t Oner nan toed
   Souree: FranU
                                   DOM not includ* oonauuceon • eenolaon d*Dna»
                                    not add to Mato dut to reundno.
other components of MSW. That is, they are often picked up separately, and
may not be mixed with other MSW at the landfill, combustor, or other waste
management facility. Durable goods are made up of a wide variety of
materials. In order of tonnage in MSW in 1990, these include: ferrous metals,
plastics, wood, rubber and leather, textiles, glass, other nonferrous metals (e.g.,
lead, copper), and aluminum.
                                    2-24

-------
                                     Teble  13
         RECOVERY* Of  PRODUCTS IN  MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, 1960 TO
                         (WITH DETAIL ON DURABLE GOODS)
               (In  million* of tone and percent of generation of Mch product)
                                                     1990
1
Products
Millions of Tons
1960 1965 1970 1973 1960 198S 1990
Durable Goods
Major Appliances
Furniture and Furnishings
Carpets and Rugs"
Rubber Tires
Batteries, lead acid
Miscellaneous Durables
Total Durabla Goods
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Tat* 16)
Containers snd Psekaging
(Detail in Tatito XO)
Tot*/ Product Waataaf
Other Wsstss
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Waatea
Total MSW Recovered • Weight

Products
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
0.4
Neg.
Neg.
0.4
2.4
3.1
5.9
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
N«g.
5.9

1960
Neg.
Neg.
Meg.
0.3
0.6
Neg.
0.9
2.8
3.1
6.8
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
6.8
Percent
1966
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
0.3
0.6
Neg.
0.9
3.8
3.9
8.6
Neg.
Neg,
Neg.
Neg.
8.6
of Gem
1970
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
0.2
0.8
Neg.
1.0
3.8
5.1
9.9
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
9.9
ration o
1975
0.1
Neg.
Neg.
0.1
1.0
0.1
1.3
4.8
3.4
14.5
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
'14.5
0.2
Neg.
Neg.
0.1
1.0
0.1
1.4
5.6
9.4
16.4
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
16.4
Each Product
1980
1988
0.9
Neg.
Neg.
0.2
1.6
0.4
3.1
9.2
16.9
29.2
Nee.
4.2
Neg.
4.2
33.4

1 990
Durable Goods
Major Appliances
I Furniture and Furnishings
Carpets and Rugs
Rubber Tires
Batteries. Lead-Acid
Miscellaneous Durables
Total Durable Good*
Nondursble Goods
(Data* in Tab* 16)
Containers and Packaging
(DetaMtn Table 21)
Total Product Waateaf
Other Wastes
Food Waste*
Ywd T rannvnQB
Miscellaneous Inorganic Waste*
Total Other Waetee

Neg.
Neg.
36.4%
Neg.
*t
4.3%
13.6%
11.4%
10.9%
Neg,
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.

Neg.
Neg.
21.6%
86.6%
*fr
d.1%
12.6%
9.1%
10.1%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
N«Q.

Neg.
Neg.
15.8%
75.0%
Neg.
.0%
14.9%
9.0%
10.2%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.

Neg.
Neg.
8.0%
66.7%
"t
5.7%
14.6%
11.5%
11.3%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
7.7%
3.6%
Neg.
3.8%
66.7%
1.3%
6.6%
13.2%
18.1%
13.4%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.

7.4%
Neg.
5.3%
86.7%
1.0%
.5%
13.1%
17.2%
13.8%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.

32.4%
Neg.
0.2%
11.6%
96.6%
3.0%
11.2%
17.5%
26.3%
20.2%
Neg.
12.0%
Neg.
8.2%
17.1%
   Recovery of
   New toe ISM
hit
            \ not include converting^ebrtcaticn •crap.
   Neg.« NegfgUe (lees tan 0.06 percent or 90.000 tons)
   Source:  FrerMn -
      Generation of durable goods in MSW totaled 27.9 million tons in 1990
(over 14 percent of total MSW generation). After recovery for recycling, 24.8
million tons of durable goods remained as discards in 1990.
      Major Appliances. Major appliances in MSW include refrigerate
                                                     nra,
washing machines, water heaters, etc. They are often called "white goods" in
                                    2-25

-------
                                      Table 14
       PRODUCTS DISCARDED*  IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO  1990
                         (WITH DETAIL ON  DURABLE GOODS)
                   (In million*  of tons and percent of total generation)

Products
Dursble Goods
Major Appliances
Furniture and Furnishings
Carpets and Rugs"
Rubber Tires
Batteries, lead acid
Miscellaneous Durables
Total Durable Goods
Nondursble Goods
(Detail in Table 17)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail m Table 22)
Total Product Waateat
Other Waatee
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganc Wastes
Total Other Waatea
Total USW Discarded • Weight

Produeta
Durable Goods
Major Appliances
Furniture and Furnishings
Carpets and Rugs
Rubber Tires
Batteries, Lead-Acid
Miscellaneous Durables
Total Durable Good*
Nondursbie Good*
(Detain Table 17)
Containers snd Packaging
(DetalinTaUe23)
Total Product Waateat
Other Weetee
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Total Otiter Waatea
Millions of Tons
1966
1965
1970
1974 1986 1984 •f99'6"

1.5
2.1
0.7
Neg.
4.7
9.0
15.2
24.2
48.4
12.2
20.0
1.3
33.5
81.9
1.0
2.7
1.1
0.1
5.4
10.2
19.4
31.1
60.7
12.7
21.6
1.6
35.9
96.6
2.7
3.4
1.6
0.2
6.3
14.2
21.7
39.6
75.5
12.8
23.2
1.8
37.8
113.3
2.6
4.1
2.3
0.4
7.1
16.5
21.8
39.3
77.8
13.4
25.2
2.0
40.6
118.2
2.7
5.1
2.5
0.5
7.6
18.4
31.7
43.9
94.0
13.2
27.5
2.2
42.9
136.9
2.5
5.8
1.8
0.5
9.5
20.1
37.0
45.2
102.3
13.2
30.0
2.5
45 7
148.0
1.9
7.4
1.7
1.6
0.1
12.1
24.8
43.2
47.4
115.4
13.2
30.8
2.9
46 9
162.3
Percent of Total Discards
I960 1968 1970 1978 1 98~5

1.8%
2.6%
0.0%
0.9%
Neg,
5.7%
11.0%
18.6%
29.5%
59.1%
14.9%
24.4%
1.6%
40.9%
1.0%
2.8%
0.0%
1.1%
0.1%
5.6%
10.6%
20.1%
32.2%
62.8%
13.1%
22.4%
1.7%
37.2%
2.4%
3.0%
0.0%
1.4%
0.2%
5.8%
12.5%
19.2%
35.0%
66.8%
11.3%
20.5%
1.6%
33.4%
2.2%
3.5%
0.0%
1.9%
0.3%
6.0%
14.0%
18.4%
33.2%
68.7%
11.3%
21.3%
1.7%
2.0%
3.7%
0.0%
1.8%
0.4%
5.6%
13.4%
23.2%
32.1%
68.7%
9.6%
20.1%
1.6%
31.3%
1988
1990

1.7%"
3.9%
0.0%
1.2%
0.3%
6.4%
13.6%
25.0%
30.5%
69.1%
8.9%
20.3%
1.7%
1.2%
4.6%
1.0%
1.0% 1
Neg. 1
7.5% 1
15.3%
26.6%
29.2%
71.1%
8.1%
19.0%
1.8%
28.9%
TotaJ HUW Otacarded • % [100.0% 1 100.0% 1 100.0% 1 100.0% 11 00.0% |100.0% [100.0% 1
                                          dud*
                                               metr
     Newlne
     Oftertie
   and oompost recovery. Dote not In
   SuMHe D wastes. Oetato may not add to tots* due to reurajng.
> toed pi
to 1980.
ducto.
     Neg. • Negtgfeto (toes ften 0.06 percent or 90,000 torn)
     Source:
the trade. Generation of these products in MSW has increased very slowly; it
was estimated to be 2.8 million tons in 1990 (less than 2 percent of total). In
general, appliances have increased in quantity but not in average weight over
the yean. Ferrous metals are the predominant materials in major appliances,
but other metals, plastics, glass, and other materials are also found.
                                     2-26

-------
      Some ferrous metals are recovered from shredded appliances, although
this quantity is no* well documented. Recovery was estimated to be 900,000
tons in 1990, leaving 1.9 million tons of appliances to be discarded.

      Furniture and Furnishings. Generation of furniture and furnishings in
MSW has increased from 2.1 million tons in 1960 to 7.4 million tons  in 1990
(almost 4 percent of total MSW). No significant recovery of materials from
furniture was identified.

      Wood is the largest material category in furniture, with ferrous metals
second. Plastics, glass, and other materials are also found.

      Carpets and Rugs. For the first time, carpets and rugs were broken out as
a line item for this report. Carpet pads and backing had previously been
included along with other plastics in "Miscellaneous Durables," while the
carpet fiber was not specifically accounted for in previous reports. An
estimated 1.7 million tons of carpets and rugs were generated in MSW in 1990,
which was about one percent of total generation.

      A small amount of recycling of carpet fiber was identified—less than
one percent recovery in 1990.

      Rubber Tires. About  70 percent of the rubber used in the United States is
used in the manufacture of rubber tires. Generation of rubber tires increased
from about one million tons in 1960 to 1.8 million tons in 1990 (about one
percent of total MSW). Generation was higher in the 1970s and early 1980s, but
the trend to smaller and longer-wearing tires has lowered their quantities.
Rubber recovery from tires has been small, but increasing in recent years. In
1990,13 percent of tire rubber generated was recovered (Table 8).

      In addition to rubber, tires include relatively small amounts of  textiles
and ferrous metals. When all materials in tires are included, tire recovery in
1990 is estimated at 11.6 percent (Table 13).

      Lead-Add Batteries*  An estimated 1.7 million tons of lead-acid batteries
 were generated in MSW in 1990 (less than one percent of total generation).

       Recovery of batteries  for recycling has fluctuated between 60 percent and
 90 percent or  higher; recovery has been increasing as a growing number of
 communities have restricted batteries from disposal at landfills or combustors.
 In 1990 an estimated 96 percent of the lead in these batteries was recovered for
 recycling as well as substantial quantities of the polypropylene battery casings,
 so discards after recycling of these batteries were decreased to less than 100,000
 tons in 1990. (Electrolytes and other materials remaining when lead and
 polypropylene from batteries are recycled were classified as industrial wastes
 rather than MSW.)

                                   2-27

-------
      Miscellaneous Durables. Miscellaneous durable goods include small
appliances, consumer electronics such as television sets and video cassette
recorders, and the like. An estimated 12.5 million tons of these goods were
generated in 1990, amounting to over 6  percent of MSW generated. Small
amounts of ferrous  metals are estimated to be recovered from this category,
decreasing discards to 12.1 million tons.

      In addition to ferrous metals, this  category includes plastics, glass,
rubber, wood, and other metals.

Nondurable Goods

      The Department of Commerce defines nondurable goods as those
having  a lifetime of le:s than three years, and this definition was followed for
this report to the extent possible.

      Products made of paper and paperboard comprise the largest portion of
nondurable  goods. Other nondurable products include papier and plastic plates,
cups, and other disposable food service products; disposable diapers; clothing
and footwear; and other miscellaneous products. (See Tables 15 through 17.)

      Generation of nondurable goods in MSW was 52.3 million tons in 1990
(26.7 percent of total generation). Recovery of paper products in this category is
quite significant, resulting in over 9 million tons of recovery in
1990 (17.5 percent of generation). This meant that 43.2 million tons of
nondurable  goods were discarded in 1990 (26.6 percent of discards).

       Paper and Paperboard Products. Paper and paperboard products in
nondurable goods are summarized in Tables 15  through 17. A summary for
1990 was shown earlier in Table 4. For this updated report, new categories of
paper and paperboard nondurables were added.  The previous category of
books and magazines was separated jito its two components. The former
categories of office papers and commercial printing were separated into office
papers, telephone books, third class mail, and other commercial printing. This
additional detail has the effect of lowering estimates of office papers and
commercial printing if they are compared to previous estimates that were not
disaggregated to the same extent

       Newspapers are the largest single  component of this category, at 12.9
 million tons generated in  1990 (6.6 percent of total MSW). Over 42 percent of
 newspapers generated  were recovered for recycling in 1990, leaving about 7.4
 million tons discarded (4.6 percent of MSW discarded).
                                   2-28

-------
                          Tap* 19
•HOOUCn QeNCRATKr M THI HUMORAL WASTE STREAM, I960 TO 1990
             (WITH OCTAL ON NONDURABLE GOODS)
          (hi mlHtona of torn and pareant of total ganaratton)

Products
DurabtoQooda
fD#tarf in rao* 12)
MiUlona of Tona
1960
9.4
1968
11.1
1970
15.1
1978
17.5
1960
19.7
1968
21.5
1990
27.9
Nondurabkt Gooda
Nawapapara
Booka and Magaanaa
Booka"
Magazmaa"
OffteaPapara
Tataphona Booka"
Third Oaaa Mar*
Otnar Commaroaj rtmnng
Tiaaua Papar and Towaia
Papar Ptataa and Cupa
P*ast
-------
                          Table 16

RECOVERY* QT PRODUCTS IN IMJMOPAL SOUO WASTE, 19CO TO 1900
            (WTTM OCTAtt. ON NONDURABLE QOOOS)
    (In mMMone of tone and percent of generation of each product)

Products
Hiirahle flooda
fOetatfin rabto 12)
Millions of Tone
1960
04

1968
09

1970
09

1975
1 0

1980
1 3

1988
1 4

1990
3.1

Nondurable Goode
Newspapers
Bookaand Magazines
Books-
Magazmee**
Office Papers
Telephone Books**
Third Class Mar*
Other ComrnerciaJ Printing
Tleaue Paper and Toweie
Paper Platee and Cupa
Plastic Plate* and Cuprf
Trash Baga-
Disposable Diaper*
Other Nonpackagmg Paper
Clothing and Footwear
Toweia. Sheets and PMowcasee"
Other Miecellaneom Nondurabtea
Toes/ Nondurable Goods
Containers and Packaging
Tote* Product MTssteat
Other Weatee
Total USW Recovered • W*gt*
rroductl 	
Durable Ooode
1.8
0.1


0.3


0.1
Neg.
Neg.


Nag.
0.1
Neg,

Neg.
2.4
3.1
5.9
N*O.
5.9
1980
4.3%
2.0
0.1


0.4


0.2
Neg.
N*0.


Neg.
0.1
Neg.

Neg.
2.8
3.1
6.8
Neo,
6.8
Pern
1988
8.1%
2.3
0.3


0.7


0.3
Neg.
Neg.


Neg.
0.2
Neg.

Neo.
3.8
3.9
8.6
Neo,
8.6
1970
6.0%
2.4
07


0.7


0.3
Neg.
Neg.


Neg.
07
Neg.

Nea
3.8
5.1
9.9
Nea
9.9
1979
5.7%
3.0
0.4


1.0


0.4
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.

Neg.
Neg.
Neg.

Nea
4.8
8.4
14.5
Nea
14.5
Each Pro
6.8%
3.5
0.5


1.1


0.5
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.

Neg.
Neg.
Neg.

Nea
5.6
9.4
16.4
Nea
16.4
duct
64%
5.5

0.1
0.3
1.7
0.1
07
1.1
Neg.
Neg.
Nea
Nea
Neg,
Nea
07
Nea
Nea
9.1
18.9
297
47
33.4
1990
117%
Nondurable Goods
Newspaper*
Book* and Magazine*
Books"
Maga-jnea-
Office Papera
Telephone Books-
Third daasksajr
Other Commercial Pih
Nag.

Neg.
Nag.
Nag.


16.1%

13.4%


28.0%
10.6%


19.3%


15.6%
Neg.
Nea
Neg.

Neg,
Neg.
Nea


177%

13J%


42.5%

10.3%
10.7%
26.5%
9.3%
57%
19.4%
Nea
Neg.
Neg.
Nea
Nea
Nea
54%
Nea

28J%

207%


                                           prMng,and
      tian 
-------
                          T«M*17

PflOOOCTS DISCARDED' IN THC MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM. 19W TO 1990
             (WTTM DETAIL ON NONDURABLE GOODS)
          (to mWions of toils and psrcsnt of total gsnarstlon)
                             2-31

-------
     Other paper products in nondurable goods include:

     • Books (about 0.5 percent of total MSW generation in 1990)

     • Magazines (1.4 percent of total MSW generation in 1990)

     • Office papers—copier paper, computer printout, stationery, etc.
       (3.3 percent of total MSW generation in 1990)

     • Telephone books (about 0.3 percent of total MSW in 1990)

     • Third class mail—catalogs and other direct bulk mailings (2 percent of
       MSW generation in 1990)

     • Other commercial printing—newspaper inserts, brochures, menus,
       etc. (2.8 percent of total MSW  generation in 1990)

     • Tissue paper and towels—facial and sanitary tissues, napkins, but not
       toilet tissue, which is diverted from MSW (less than 2 percent of total
       MSW generation in 1990)

      • Paper plates and cups—paper  plates, cups, bowls, and other food
       service products used in homes, commercial establishments like
       restaurants, and in institutional settings such as schools (about 0.3
       percent of total MSW generation in 1990)

      • Other nonpackaging papers—including posters, photographic papers,
        cards and games, etc. (about 2 percent of total MSW generation in
        1990).

      Overall, generation of paper and paperboard products in nondurable.
goods was over 40 million tons in 1990 (about 20.8 percent of total MSW
generation). While newspapers were recovered at the highest rate, other paper
products such as books, magazines, and office papers were also recovered for
recycling, and the overall recovery rate for paper in nondurables was about 22
percent in 1990 (Table 4). Thus 32 million tons of paper in nondurables were
discarded in 1990.

      Plastic Plates and Cups. This category includes plastic plates, cups,
glasses, dishes and bowls, hinged containers, and other containers used in food
service at home, in restaurants and other commercial establishments, and in
institutional settings such as schools. Over 300,000 tons of these products were
generated in  1990, or about 0.2 percent of total MSW (see Tables 15 through 17).
                                  2-32

-------
      Disposable Diapers. This category includes estimates of both infant
diapers and adult incontinence products. An estimated 2.6 million tons of
disposable diapers were generated in 1990, or 1.4 percent of total MSW
generation. (This tonnage includes an adjustment for the urine and feces
contained within the discarded diapers.) The materials portion of the  diapers
includes  wood pulp, plastics (including the superabsorbent materials  now
present in most diapers)/ and tissue paper.

      There has been some investigation of recycling/composting of
disposable diapers, but no significant recovery was identified for 1990.

      Clothing and Footwear. Generation of clothing and footwear was
estimated to be 3.7 million  tons in 1990 (about 2 percent of total MSW). This
category has shown a gradual  increase in tonnage over the years. Textiles,
rubber, and leather are the  major materials components of this category, with
some plastics present as well.

      It  is estimated that about 25 percent of these products are recovered,
mostly for reuse as clothing or as wiper rags. Since data on elapsed time from
recovery of textiles for reuse to final discard is limited, it was assumed that
reused textiles re-enter the  waste stream the same year that they are first
discarded. It was estimated that about 5 percent of textiles in clothing and
footwear was recovered for export in 1990 (about 200,000 tons), leaving discards
of about 3.6 million tons.

       Towels, Sheets, and  Pillowcases. These textile items are included as a
 line item for the first time in this report. (Previously they were estimated
 under "Other Miscellaneous Nondurables.") An  estimated 1 million tons of
 these textiles were generated in 1990. An estimated 5 percent of these textiles
 were recovered for export, leaving discards of about 950,000 tons in 1990.

       Other Miscellaneous Nondurables. Generation of other miscellaneous
 nondurables was estimated to  be 3.2 million tons in 1990 (1.6 percent of MSW).
 (Note that this category is smaller than in previous estimates because some
 textile items are counted elsewhere.)

       The primary material component of miscellaneous nondurables is
 plastics, although some aluminum, rubber, and textiles are also present
 Typical  products in miscellaneous nondurables include  shower curtains and
 other household items, disposable medical supplies, novelty items, and the
 like.

 Containers and Packaging

       Containers and packaging are a major portion of MSW, amounting to
 64.4 millions tons of generation in 1990 (about 33 percent of total generation).

                                   2-33

-------
Generation, recovery, and discards of containers and packaging are shown in
detail in Tables 18 through 23.

      While the weight of containers and packaging generated has increased
steadily over the study period, the percentage by weight has actually declined
since the early 1970s (Table 19). Substitution of relatively light packaging
materials—plastics and aluminum—for heavier glass and steel has accounted
for this trend.

      Containers and packaging in MSW are made of several materials: paper
and paperboard, glass, ferrous metals, aluminum, plastics, wood, and small
amounts of other materials. Each materials category is discussed separately
below.

      Paper and Paperboard Containers and Packaging. Corrugated boxes are
the largest single product category of MSW at almost 24 million tons
generated, or 12.2 percent of total generation in 1990. Corrugated boxes also
represent the largest single category of product recovery, at 11.5 million tons of
recovery in 1990 (about 48 percent of boxes generated were recovered). After
recovery, 12.5 million tons of corrugated boxes were discarded, or 7.7 percent of
MSW discards in 1990.

       Other paper and paperboard packaging in MSW includes milk cartons,
 folding boxes (e.g., cereal boxes, frozen food boxes, some department store
 boxes), bags and sacks, wrapping papers, and other paper and paperboard
 packaging. Overall, paper and paperboard containers and packaging totaled
 32.6 million tons of MSW generation in 1990, or 16.7 percent of total
 generation.

       While recovery of corrugated boxes is by far the largest component of
 paper packaging recovery, small amounts of other paper packaging products
 are recovered (about 500,000 tons in 1990). The overall recovery rate for paper
 and paperboard packaging in 1990 was about 37 percent Recovery of other
 paper packaging like folding boxes and sacks is mostly in the form of mixed
 papers, a low grade of waste paper.

        Glass Container*. Glass containers and packaging include beer and soft
 drink bottles, wine and liquor bottles, and bottles and jars for food, cosmetics,
 and other products. Generation of these  glass containers was nearly 12 million
 tons in 1990, or 6.1 percent of MSW generation (Tables  18 and 19). Production
 of glass containers had been declining in the 1980s, but increased in recent
 years.
                                    2-34

-------
                                       Table  18
     PRODUCTS GENERATED* IN THE  MUNICIPAL  WASTE  STREAM, 1960  TO 1990
                  (WITH DETAIL ON  CONTAINERS  AND PACKAGING)
                                  (In million* of tons)

Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Tab* 12)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Tabta 15)
Containers and Packaging
Glass Packaging
I Beer and Soft Drink Botties
Wine and Liquor Bottles
Food and Other Bottles & Jars
Total Glaaa Packaging
S*eel Packaging
Beer and Sort Drink Cans
Food and Other Cans
Other Steel Packaging
Total Staal Packaging
Aluminum Psckaging
Beer and Sort Drink Cans
Other Cans
Foii and Closures
Total Aluminum Packaging
Paper ft Psperboerd Pkg
Corrugated Boxes
Milk Cartons"
1 Folding Cartons"
1 Other Paperboard Packaging
D Bags and Sacks"
H Wrapping Papers'*
| Other Paper Packaging
Total Papar t Board Pkg
Plastics Psckaging
Soft Drink Bottles**
MilK OOICWev
Other Containers
Bags and Sacks"
Wraps"
Other Plastics Packaging
Total Ptaattca Packaging
Wood Packaging


Total PrSJuct Waataaf
Other Waetee
IFoodWaetas
Yard TrtmmlngB
Total Othar Waatam


1960
9.4

17.8



1.4
1.1
3.7
6.2

0.6
3.8
0.2
4.6

0.1
Neg.
0.1
0.2

7.3


3.8


2.9
14.0



0.1


0.1
0.2
2.0
0.1
27.3
54.3

12.2
20.0
1 3
1 .M
33.5


1965
11.1

22.2



2.6
1.4
4.1
8.1

0.9
3.6
0.3
4.8

0.1
N«fl.
0.2
0.3

10.0


4.5


3.3
17.8



0.3


0.7
1.0
2.1
0.1
34.2
67.5"

12.7
21.6
1 A
1 .W
35.9

Milli<
1970
15.1

25.5



5.6
1.9
4.4
11.9

1.6
3.5
0.3
5.4

0.3
0.1
0.2
0.6

12.7


4.8


3.8
21.3



0.9


1.2
2.1
2.1
0.1
43.5
84.1

12.8
23.2
1.8
37.8

)ns of T<
1975
17.5

25.6



6.3
2.0
4.4
12.7

1.3
3.4
0.2
4.9

0.5
N*0-
0.3
0.8

13.5


4.4


3.3
21.2



1.3


1.4
2.7
2.0
0.1
44.4
"~87T~

13.4
25.2
2 0
Sk«W
40.6

3ns
1980
19.7

36.5



6.7
2.5
4.8
14.0

0.5
2.9
0.2
3.6

0.9
N«9.
0.3
1.2

17.0
0.6
3.7
0.3
3.4
0.2
0.8
26.0

0.3
0.2
0.9
0.4
0.8
0.8
3.4
3.9
0.2
52.3
108.5

13.2
27.5
2.2
42.9


1985
21.5

42.6



5.7
2.2
4.2
12.1

0.1
2.6
0.2
2.9

1.3
N«g.
0.3
1.6

19.0
0.5
4.0
0.4
3.1
0.1
1.3
28.4

0.4
0.3
1.2
0.6
1.0
1.0
4.5
4.9
0.2
54.6
118.7

13.2
30.0
2.5
45.7


1990
27.9

52.3



5.7
2.1
4.1
11.9

0.1
2.5
0.2
2.9

1.6
N«g.
0.3
1.9

23.9
0.5
4.3
0.3
2.4
0.1
1.0
32.6

0.4
0.4
1.8
0.9
1.5
1.9
7.0
7.9
0.2



13.2
35.0
2.9
51.1

                      i rooovvwy of oowtomboo.
  Details may not add to
" Not esematad prior to I9aa
 t Otter then toad product*.
  Nea. - Negagfeto (leisthenO.08 psrcent or SOJ300 tons).
  SOUflM* FfMMbl AMOdsttM* LJO*
                                       2-35

-------
                                   Table 19

  PRODUCTS  GENERATED*  IN  THE  MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM,  1960 TO  1990
               (WITH  DETAIL ON CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING)
                         (In percent of  total generation)

Products
Durable Goods
(Dei** in Tat* 12)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 15)
Containers and Packaging
Glass Psckaging
Beer and Soft Drink Bottles
Wine and Liquor Bottles
Food and Other Bottles & Jars
Total Glaea Packaging
Steel Packaging
Beer and Soft Orink Cans
Food and Other Cans
Other Steel Packaging
rota/ Steel Packaging
Aluminum Packaging
Beer and Soft Onnk Cans
Other Cans
Foil and Closures
Total Aluminum Packaging
Paper .ft Psperboerd Pkg
Corrugated Boxes
Milk Cartons-
Folding Cartons-
Other Paperooard Packaging
Bags and Sacks-
Wrapping Papers-
Other Paper Packaging
Total Paper 4 Board Pkg
Plastics Psckaging
Soft Orink Bottles-
Milk Bottles-
Other Containers
Bags snd Sacks-
Wraps-
l*~MfciM« niAallnA nmntomf^nn
other Plastics racugmg
Total Pleatica Packaging
Wood Packaging

Total Container* A Pkg
Total Product Waateef
Other WaetM
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings

Total USW Generated • %

1960
10.7%

20.0%



1.6%
1.3%
4.2%
7.1%

0.7%
4.3%
0.2%
5.2%

0.1%
N*0-
0.1%
0.2%

8.3%


4.3%


3.3%
15.9%



0.1%


01 •£.
.1^1
0.2%
2.3%
0.1%
31.1%
61.8%

13.9%
22.6%
1 S%
1 t9^9
38.2%
100.0%
Pt
1965
10.7%

21.5%



2.5%
1.4%
4.0%
7.8%

0.9%
3.5%
0.3%
4.6%

0.1%
N«g.
0.2%
0.3%

9.7%


4.4%


3.2%
17.2%



0.3%


07<£
. / ^
1.0%
2.0%
0.1%
33.1%
65.3%

12.3%
20.9%
1 S%
1 *9 /9
34.7%
100.0%
ircent of
1970
12.4%

20.9%



4.6%
1.6%
3.6%
9.8%

1.3%
2.9%
0.2%
4.4%

0.2%
0.1%
0.2%
0.5%

10.4%


3.9%


3.1%
17.5%



0.7%


i r\*L
1 .U?»
1.7%
1.7%
0.1%
35.7%
69.0%

10.5%
19.0%
1 5%
1 cw ^B>
31.0%
100.0%
Total G
1975
13.7%

20.0%



4.9%
1.6%
3.4%
9.9%

1.0%
2.7%
0.2%
3.8%

0.4%
N*0.
0.2%
0.6%

10.5%


3.4%


2.6%
16.5%



1.0%


1 lit
I.I ^B
2.1%
1.6%
0.1%
34.7%
68.3%

10.5%
19.7%
1 6%
f «W f9
31.7%
100.0%
ieneratlo
1980
13.0%

24.1%



4.4%
1.7%
3.2%
9.2%

0.3%
1.9%
0.1%
2.4%

0.6%
Neg.
0.2%
0.8%

11.2%
0.4%
2.4%
0.2%
2.2%
0.1%
0.5%
17.2%

0.2%
0.2%
0.6%
0.3%
0.6%
05%
.9^
2.2%
2.6%
0.1%
34.5%
71.7%

8.7%
18.2%
1.5%
28.3%
100.0%
1
1985
13.1%

25.9%



3.5%
1.3%
2.6%
7.4%

0.1%
1.6%
0.1%
1.8%

0.8%
N«g.
0.2%
1.0%

11.6%
0.3%
2.4%
0.2%
1.9%
0.1%
0.8%
17.3%

0.2%
0.2%
0.7%
0.4%
0.6%
08%
• O f9
2.7%
3.0%
0.1%
33.2%
72.2%

8.0%
18.2%
1.5%
27.8%
100.0%

1990
14.3%

28.7%



2.9%
1.1%
2.1%
8.1%

0.1%
1.3%
0.1%
1.5%

0.8%
N«9.
0.2%
1.0%

12.2%
0.3%
2.2%
0.1%
1.2%
0.1%
0.5%
16.7%

0.2%
0.2%
0.9%
0.5%
0.8%
1 0%
1 . W ^
3.6%
4.0%
0.1%
32.9%
73.9%

8.7%
17.9%
1.5%
26.1%
100.0%
Generation before metsriita recovery or combuston.
OeMto mey not add to ttato due to roundng.
t Ofter th
          d products.
Nea. • Negsgtte (toss than 0.06 perasnt or 50.000 tons).
                                   2-36

-------
                                Table  20

 RECOVERY* OF PRODUCTS IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, 1960 TO 1990
            (WITH  DETAIL ON CONTAINERS  AND PACKAGING)
                           (In million*  of tone)

Product*
Durable Good*
(Detail in Tabto 13)
Nondurable Good*
(Detail in Tab* 16)
Mill!
1960
0.4

2.4

Container* and Packaging
Glaaa Packaging
Beer and Son Drink Botttee
Wine and Liquor Bottle*
Food and Other Botttee & Jan
Tote/ G/«M Packaging
Steel Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cana
Food and Other Cane
Other Steel Packaging
Total Staal Packaging
Aluminum Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cane
Other Cana
Foil and Closure*
Total Aluminum Pkg
Paper.* Paperboerd Pkg
Corrugated Boxee
Milk Carton***
I Folding Carton***
I Other Paperboard Packaging
Bag* and Sack*"
Wrapping Papers-
Other Paper Packaging
Total Paoar * Board Pkg
Plaatic* Packaging
Soft Drink Bottle*"
Milk Bottle*"
Other Container*
Bag* and Sack*"
Wrap*"
Other Plactfc* Packaging
Total Plaatica Packaging

wood racxagng

Totml Cantmintrm A Pita
Total Pimtuiit Waataat
Other WaeAee
Food Waem
YeVu Ti rvwninQV

Total Qthae Waataa
— Total USW /recovered • Walght

0.1
Nea
Nea
0.1

Nea
Nea
Neg,
Nea

Neg,
Nea
Neg.
Neg.

2.5


0.3


0.2
3.0



Meg-


Nea
Neg.
Neg.
Nea
3.1
5.9

Neg.
Neg.
I^ML
rl*»
Nea
TT^
1965
0.9

2.8

1970
0.9

3.8



0.1
Neg.
Neg.
0.1

Neo,
0.1
Neg.
0.1

Neg.
Neg.
Nea
Nea

2.2


0.4


0.3
2.9



Neg.


N«0.
Neg.
Neo.
Net
3.1
6.8

Neg.
Neg.
I^HL
r^^
Neo.
•fT"

0.1
Neg.
Neg.
0.2

Neg.
0.1
Neg.
0.1

Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.

2.7


0.5


0.4
3.6



Neg.


Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neo.
3.9
8.6

Neg.
Neg.
NML
r^).
Nea.
sr
on* of Ton*
1975
1.0

3.8

1980
1.3

4.8

1985
1.4

5.6

1990
3.1

9.2



0.4
Neg.
Neg.
0.4

Neg.
0.1
Neg.
0.1

0.1
Neg.
Neg.
0.1

3.6


0.5


0.4
4.5



Neg.


Neg.
Nea.
Neg.
Nea,
5.1
9.9

Neo.
Neg.
Nea
r^qp
""I
51T

0.8
Neg.
Neg.
0.8

0.1
0.1
Neg.
0.2

0.3
Neg.
Neg.
0.3

6.3
Neg.
0.5
Neg.
0.3
Nea
Neg.
7.1

Neg.
Nea
Nea
Nea
Nea
Nea
Nea
Nea
Nea.
8.4
14.5

Nea
Nea
Nea
.-wjp.
Nea
TitT

1.0
0.1
Neg.
1.1

Nea
0.1
Nea
0.1

0.6
Nea
Nea
0.6

7.2
Nea
0.2
Nea
0.1
Nea
Nea
7.5

0.1
Nea
Nea
Nea
Nea
Nea
0.1
Nea
Nea
9.4
16.4

Nea
Nea
Nea
• -*wy*
Nea
TK4

1.9
0.2
0.5
2.6

Nea
0.6
Nea
0.6

1.0
Nea
Nea
1.0

11.5
Neg.
0.3
Neg.
0.2
Nea
Neg.
12.0

0.1
Nea
Nea
Nea
Nea
Nea
0.3
0.4
Nea
16.9
29.2

Nea
4.2
Neo.
• w
4.2
33.4
                         doe* not hdude convertno/Htortcatton scrap.
          prior to 19ta
          ti product*.
     mey not edd to Mel* due to raundng,
Neg,« Negftgtte (lee* tien OJ» percent or SO.OOO ton*).
Not
Oth
then to
                                2-37

-------
                                    Table 21
    RECOVERY*  OF PRODUCTS IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE,  1960 TO  1990
                (WITH DETAIL ON CONTAINERS AND  PACKAGING)
                    (In  percent of generation  of each  product)

Product!
Durable Gooda
(Oetol in Tat* 13)
Nondurable Gooda
(Detail in Ta&a 16)
Containera and Packaging
Glaaa Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Botttea
Wine and Liquor Botttea
Food and Other Botttea ft Jam
Total Glaaa Packaging
Steel Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cana
Food and Other Cana
Other Steel Packaging
Total Staol Packaging
Aluminum Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cana
Other Cana
Foil and Closures
Total Aluminum Pkg
Paper ft Paperboard Pkg
Corrugated Boxea
Milk Cartons-
Folding Cartons"
Other Paperboard Packaging
Bags and Sacks-
Wrapping Papers-
Other Paper Packaging
Total Paper A Board Pkg
Plaatica Packaging
Soft Drink Bottles"
Milk Botttea"
Other Containera
Bags and Sacks-
Wraps-

Other Plastics racugng
1 Total Plamtlca Packaging
Wood Packaging

Total CwiMiMrv a> Pkg
Total Product Waataaf
Other Waate*
FoodWatfM



1 rate* OffMr Wmmtmm

Percent of Generation of Each Product
1 960
4.3%

13.6%

1965
8.1%

12.6%



7.1%
Nag.
Neg.
1.6%

Nag,
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.

Neg.
Neg.
Nag.
Nag.

34.2%


7.9%


6.9%
21.4%



Ncg.


Neg.
Neg,
Neg.

11.4%
iu.9%

Neg,
Nea.
Nea
r^^p
Nea


3.8%
Nag.
Neg.
1.2%

Nea
2.8%
Neg.
2.1%

Neg.
Nea.
Neg.
Neg.

22.0%


8.9%


9.1%
16.3%



Nag.


Neg.
Neo.
Neg.


"To7T%~"

Neg.
Neg.
Nea
'*^W
NM.
6.6%
1 970
6.0%

14.9%



2.6%
Neg.
Neg.
1.3%

Nag,
2.9%
Neg.
1.9%

Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.

21.3%


10.4%


10.5%
16.9%



Neo.


Neg.
Neg.
Neg.


ifl.3%

Nag.
Nag.
Neg.
^^^r
"•a
7.1%
1975
5.7%

14.8%



6.3%
Nag.
Neg.
3.1%

Neg.
2.9%
Neg.
2.0%

20.0%
Neg.
Neg.
12.5%

26.7%


11.4%


12.1%
21.2%



Neo.


Nag.
Neg.
Nag.


H.3*

Nag.
Nag.
Neg.
Naa
7.7%
1 960
6.6%

13.2%



11.9%
Neg.
Neg.
5.7%

10.0%
3.4%
Neo.
4.2%

32.4%
Neg.
Neg.
23.6%

37.1%
Neg.
13.5%
Nag.
8.8%
Neg.
Neg.
27.3%

0.0%
0.0%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Nen.

13.4%

Neg.
Nag.
Neg.
Neg,
9.6%
1 985
6.5%

13.1%



17.5%
4.5%
Neg.
9.1%

10.0%
4.3%
Neg.
3.8%

46.2%
Neg.
Neg.
37.5%

37.9%
Neg.
5.0%
Neg.
3.2%
Neg.
Neg.
26.4%

25.0%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
2.2%
Nag.
Nfft



Nag.
Neg.
Neg.
Nea
10.0%
1990
11.2%

17.5%



33.2%
10.0%
12.7%
22.0%

24.7%
23.4%
5.0%
22.1%

63.2%
4.0%
7.1%
53.3%

48.0%
Neg.
7.9%
Neg.
8.2%
Neo.
Neg.
36.9%

31.5%
6.9%
1.2%
3.1%
2.0%
0.9%
3.7%
5.0%




Neg.
12.0%
Nea
8.2%
17.1%
                             not mduda uj^angftaMcaBon scrap.
" Not
 t Of*
ttd
          prior to 19Bfl.
           products.
     mey not add to totals due to njundng.
Neg.. NaglgUa (lees then 0.06 percent or 50,000 tons).
Source:  PfmfclnJjicelalii.ua.
                                     2-38

-------
                                     Table  22

   PRODUCTS  DISCARDED* IN THE  MUNICIPAL WASTE  STREAM, 1960 TO  1990
                (WITH DETAIL ON CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING)
                                (In million*  of tona)

Products
Durable Gooda
(Detail in Ta&e 14)
Nondurable Goods
[(Detail in Tab* 17)
Millions of Tone
1 960
9.0

15.2

1 965
10.2

19.4

1970
14.2

21.7

1 975
16.5

21.8

1 980
18.4

31.7

Containers and Packaging
Glee* Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Bottles
Wine and liquor Bottles
Food and Other Bottles & Jan
Total Glaaa Packaging
Steel Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cana
Food and Other Cans
Other Steel Packaging
Total Slaal Packaging
Aluminum Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cana
Other Cana
Foil and Closures
Total Aluminum Pkg
Paper ft Paperboard Pkg
Corrugated Boxes
Milk Cartons"
Folding Cartons"
Other Paperboard Packaging
(Bags and Sacks"
Wrapping Papers"
Other Paper Packaging
Total Paper a Board Pkg
Plastics Packaging
Soft Drink Bottles"
Milk Bottles"
Other Containers
Bags and Sacks"
Wraps"

Total Plaatica Packaging
Wood Packaging
Total Pra+iat Waataat
Other WaeftM
Food Wastes

Illn clananiM kvwMf^" Wa^M
Total Otter Waatam


1.3
1.1
3.7
6.1

0.6
3.8
0.2
4.6

0.1
NSfl.
0.1
0.2

4.8


3.5


2.7
11.0



0.1


0.1
0.2
2.0
0.1
48.4

12.2
20.0
1.3
33.5


2.5
1.4
4.1
8.0

0.9
3.5
0.3
4.7

0.1
Nsg.
0.2
0.3

7.8


4.1


3.0
14.9



0.3


0.7
1.0
2.1
0.1
60.7

12.7
21.6
1.6
35.9


5.5
1.9
4.4
11.7

1.8
3.4
0.3
5.3

0.3
0.1
0.2
0.6

10.0


4.3


3.4
17.7



0.9


1.2
2.1
2.1
0.1
75.5

12:8
23.2
1.8
37.8


5.9
2.0
4.4
12.3

1.3
3.3
0.2
4.8

0.4
Neo.
0.3
0.7

9.9


3.9


2.9
16.7



1.3


1.4
2.7
2.0
0.1


13.4
28.2
2.0
40.6


5.9
2.5
4.8
13.2

0.5
2.8
0.2
3.5

0.6
N*0r
0.3
0.9

10.7
0.6
3.2
0.3
3.1
0.2
0.8
18.9

0.3
0.2
0.9
0.4
0.8
0.8
3.4
3.9
0.2


13.2
27.5
2.3
42.9

1 985
20.1

37.0



4.7
2.1
4.2
11.0

0.1
2.5
0.2
2.8

0.7
N*0-
0.3
1.0

11.8
0.5
3.8
0.4
3.0
0.1
1.3
20.9

0.3
0.3
1.2
0.6
1.0
1.0
4.4
4.9
0.2


13.2
30.0
2.8
46.7

1990
24.8

43.2



3.8
1.9
3.6
9.3

0.1
1.9
0.2
2.3

0.6
Neg.
0.3
0.9

12.5
0.5
4.0
0.3
2.2
0.1
1.0
20.6

0.3
0.4
1.8
0.9
1.5
1.9
8.7
7.5
0.2


13.2
30.8
2.9
46.9

Not
 tte
thsnto
prior to 1910.
>d products.
                  and compost recovery. Doss not Muds construction ft <
                  Subtts 0 wests*. Deals rnsy not sdd to totals dus » munolng.
Nsa. - Nsflftgfeto (Isss twn O.OB percsnt or 50.000 tons).
Source:  Frank*).
                                      2-39

-------
                                   Table  23

  PRODUCTS  DISCARDED*  IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 1990
               (WITH  DETAIL ON  CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING)
                          (In percent of total discard*)

Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Ta&« 14)
Nondursble Goods
(Detail in Table 171
Percent of Total Dlacards
1960
11.0%

18.6%

Contsiners snd Packaging
Glaaa Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Bottles
Wine and Liquor Bottles
Food and Other Bottlea & Jars
Total Qlaaa Packaging
Steel Psckaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Food and Other Cans
Other Steel Packaging
Total Staal Packaging
Aluminum Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Other Can*
Foil and Closure*
Total Aluminum Pkg
Paper ft Paperboard Pkg
Corrugated Boxes
Mik Cartons"
Folding Canons'*
Other Paperboard Packaging
1 Bags and Sacks"
Wrapping Papers"
Other Paper Packaging
Total Paper A Board Pkg
Plaatics Packaging
Soft Drink Bottles"
Milk Bottles"
Other Containers
1 Bags and Sacks"
Wraps"
Other Plastics Packaging
Total PlaaUca Packaging
Wood Packaging


Total Product Wmataat
Other Waetee
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings;
Mliceianenia Inorganic Wastes
Total Othar Waatam

1.6%
1.3%
4.5%
7.4%

0.7%
4.6%
0.2%
5.6%

0.1%
N40,
0.1%
0.2%

5.9%


4.3%


3.3%
13.4%



0.1%


0.1%
0.2%
2.4%
0.1%
29.5%
59.1%

14.9%
24.4%
1.6%
40.9%
1 965
10.6%

20.1%



2.6%
1.4%
4.2%
8.3%

0.9%
3.6%
0.3%
4.9%

0.1%
Nso,
0.2%
0.3%

8.1%


4.2%


3.1%
15.4%



0.3%


0.7%
1.0%
2.2%
0.1%
32.2%
62.8%

13.1%
22.4%
1.7%
37.2%
1970
12.5%

19.2%

1975
14.0%

18.4%

1 98o
13.4%

23.2%



4.8%
1.7%
3.9%
10.4%

1.4%
3.0%
0.3%
4.7%

0.3%
0.1%
0.2%
0.5%

8.8%


3.8%


3.0%
15.6%



0.8%


1.1%
1.9%
1.9%
0.1%
35.0%
66.6%

11.3%
20.5%
1.6%
33.4%

5.0%
1.7%
3.7%
10.4%

1.1%
2.8%
0.2%
4.1%

0.3%
Neo.
0.3%
0.6%

8.4%


3.3%


2.5%
14.1%



1.1%


1.2%
2.3%
1.7%
0.1%
33.2%
65.7%

11.3%
21.3%
1.7%
av:*k.-«

4.3%
1.8%
3.5%
9.6%

0.3%
2.0%
0.1%
2.5%

0.5%
Neo,
0.2%
0.7%

7.8%
0.4%
2.3%
0.2%
2.3%
0.1%
0.6%
13.8%

0.2%
0.2%
0.6%
0.3%
0.6%
0.8%
2.5%
2.8%
0.1%
32.1%
68.7%

9.6%
20.1%
1.7%
BVklft/Tl
1 985
13.6%

25.0%



3.2%
1.4%
2.8%
7.4%

0.1%
1.7%
0.1%
1.9%

0.5%
Neo,
0.2%
0.7%

8.0%
0.3%
2.6%
0.3%
2.0%
0.1%
0.9%
14.1%

0.2%
0.2%
0.8%
0.4%
0.7%
0.7%
3.0%
3.3%
0.1%
90,5%-
69.1%

8.9%
20.3%
1.7%
BM»J! »/•
1990
15.3%

27.6%



2.3%
1.2%
2.2%
5.7%

0.1%
1.2%
0.1%
1.4%

0.4%
N«a.
0.2%
0.5%

7.7%
0.3%
2.4%
0.2%
1.4%
0.1%
0.6%
12.7%

0.2%
0.2%
1.1%
0.6%
0.9%
1.2%
4.1%
4.6%
0.1%
29.2%
71.1%

8.1%
19.0%
«*M ftmt
mr-t-n *.^m i
maamcrg'[>'---irT^~^<—ammuzxmU'rX'**lK^^^^
Not
0
star mattrisls snd comport recovery. Doss net Muds oonswedqn » dewoWon dsbrts, l«»*rtal piocse.
   tain otter SuMMe 0 waste*. Detato may not add to totals due t» rounotoo,
   prior to 19M.
    ) product*.
•tank
Neo. • Negftgfeto (toss Hen 0.06 peresnt or 50.000 tons).
Souro*:  FrarMbt AssodetM. Lid.
                                     2-40

-------
      An estimated 2.6 million tons of glass containers were recovered for
recycling in 1990, or 22.0 percent of total generation. Glass beer and soft drink
containers were estimated to be recovered at a 33 percent rate in 1990.
After recovery for recycling, glass container discards were 9.3 million tons in
1990, or 5.7 percent of total discards.

      Steel Containers and Packaging. Steel beer and soft drink cans, food and
other cans, and other  steel packaging (e.g., strapping), totaled 2.9 million tons
in 1990 (less than 2 percent of total generation), with most of that amount
being "tin" cans for food (Tables 18 and 19). An estimated 640,000 tons of steel
packaging were recovered in 1990, or 22 percent of generation. Generation of
steel containers and packaging had been declining in the 1980s, but has been
stable in recent years.

       Aluminum Containers and Packaging. Aluminum  containers and
packaging, a growth segment of MSW, include beer and soft drink cans, other
cans, and foil and closures. Total aluminum container and packaging
generation in 1990 was 1.9 million tons, or one percent of total generation.

       Aluminum beer and soft drink cans (including aluminum lids on steel
cans) were recovered  at an estimated 63.2 percent rate in 1990. Recovery of all
aluminum packaging was estimated to be 53.3 percent of total generation in
1990. After recovery for recycling, less than one million tons of aluminum
packaging were discarded in 1990. This represented less than one percent of
MSW  discards.

       Plastic Container* and Packaging. Many different plastic resins are used
 to make a variety of packaging products. Some of these include polyethylene
 terephthalate (PET) soft drink bottles—some with high-density polyethylene
 (HOPE) base cups, HOPE  milk jugs, film products (including bags and sacks)
 made of low-density polyethylene (LDPE), and containers and other packaging
 (including coatings, closures, etc.) made of polyvinyl chloride, polystyrene, and
 other  resins.

       Plastic containers and packaging have exhibited rapid growth in MSW,
 with generation increasing from about 200,000 tons in 1960 (less than one
 percent of generation) to  7.0 million tons in 1990 (3.6 percent of generation).
 (Note: plastic packaging does not include the single service plates and cups and
 the trash bags classified as nondurables.)

       Plastic soft drink bottles and base cups were  estimated to have been
 recovered at a 31J5 percent rate in 1990. Recovery of plastic milk bottles was
 estimated to have been about 7 percent of generation. Overall recovery of
 plastic containers and packaging was estimated to be 3.7 percent in 1990.
 Discards of plastic containers and packaging were thus 6.7 million  tons in 1990,
 or 4.1 percent of total discards.

                                   2-41

-------
\     Other Packaging. Estimates are included for wood packaging and some
other miscellaneous packaging like bags made of textiles, small amounts of
leather, and the like. These latter quantities are not well documented.

      Wood packaging, which includes wood crates and pallets, was
investigated more intensively for this update than for recent reports. It was
determined that wood packaging (mostly pallets) had been underestimated for
the decade of the 1980s. Nearly 8 million tons of wood packaging were
estimated to have been generated in  1990, compared to the previous estimate
of about 2 million tons in 1988. Wood packaging was thus about 4 percent of
total generation in 1990. Estimates of wood packaging in previous years were
also revised upward to make the data series consistent.

      There is increasing recovery of wood pallets, mostly by chipping to
make products like mulch. It was estimated that nearly 400,000 tons of wood
were recovered in this manner in 1990, or about 5 percent of generation. This
left 7.5 million tons discarded in 1990, or 4.6 percent of total discards.

Summary of Products in Municipal Solid Waste

       Changing quantities and composition of municipal solid waste
generation by product category are illustrated in Figure  14. This figure shows
graphically that generation of durable goods has increased very gradually over
the years. Nondurable goods and containers and packaging have accounted for
 the large increases in MSW generation.
        Flgur* 14. QMMratlon of products In MSW, 1960 to 19M
                                                      • Otter Wi

                                                      Q YMTrtmringi
                                                      Bcbnktimn 4 Packaging

                                                      • Nondunfeto floods
                                   2-42

-------
                Flgur* 11.  Nondurable good* generated end discarded
                                in MSW, 1MO
                                                        L«atf*r 2.0%

                                                   T«xfll«« 7 4%
                                                   OtWT4.7%
                                  Generation
                                                   OherS.a%
                                   Oiacarda
      The materials composition of nondurable goods in 1990 is shown in
Figure 15. Paper and paperboard made up 77.8 percent of nondurables in MSW
generation/ with plastics contributing over 8 percent, and textiles 7.4 percent
Other materials contributed lesser percentages. After recovery for recycling,
paper and paperboard were 73.6 percent of nondurable discards, with plastics
being 9.8 percent, and textiles 8.4 percent

      The materials composition of containers and packaging in MSW in 1990
is shown in Figure 16. Paper and paperboard products made up about half of
.containers and packaging generation, with glass second at 18.5 percent of
containers and packaging generation by weight Recovery for recycling makes a
                                   2-43

-------
            It. C««iUUn«r« and  packaging ganaratad  and  dlacardad In USW, 1MO
                                                           74%
                                                           11 C%
                                            0«W12.S%
                                  Qanaratlon
                                               OI*M19.«%
                                                        8.8%
                                                           14.3%
                                   Olteardt
significant change, with paper and paperfooard being 43.4 percent of containers
and packaging discards after recovery takes place. Glass was 19.6 percent of
discards of containers and packaging, with other materials making up lesser
amounts.
                                     2-44

-------
                              Chapter 2

                            REFERENCES

GENERAL

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid
Waste in the United States: 1990 Update. EPA/530-SW-9G-042. June 1991.

Franklin, M.A. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States, 1960 to 2000 (Update 1988). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
EPA/530-SW-88-033. NTIS PB88-232780/WEP. March 1988.

Franklin, M.A. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States, 1960 to 2000. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. REPT-15-3490-00.
NTIS PB87-178323/WEP. July 1986.

ALUMINUM CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING

The Aluminum Association. Aluminum Statistical Review. Various years.

Can Manufacturers Institute. Can Shipments Report. Various years.

U.S. Department  of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial
Reports. "Closures for Containers." MQ34H. Various  years.

CARPETS AND RUGS

The Carpet and Rug Institute. Carpet & Rug Industry Review 1991.

 Personal communication with a representative of the Carpet and Rug
 Institute. February 14,1992.

 Personal communication with a representative of Big Bob's Used Carpet,
 Kansas City, MO. January 1992.

 Rauch Asaodates, Inc. The Ranch Guide to the U.S. Adhesive* and Sealants
 Industry. ISBN O-932157-050C

 U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial
 Reports. "Carpets and Rugs." MA22Q. Various years.

 FERROUS METAL CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING

 Can Manufacturers Institute. Can Shipments Report. Various yearn.
                                 2-45

-------
Smith, F.L. A Solid Waste Estimation Procedure: Material Flows Approach,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/530-SW-147. May 1974.

Steel Can Recycling Institute. "1990 Steel Can Recycling Rate Increases 37%
from 1989 Rate." November 1990.

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial
Reports. "Closures for Containers." MQ34H. Various years.

FURNITURE AND FURNISHINGS

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Census of Manufactures
and Annua.1 Survey of Manufactures. Various years.

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial
Reports.  "Average Weight and Width of Broadwoven Fabrics (Gray)." MC-
221.  November. 1977.

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial
Reports.  "Office Furniture." MA-25H. Various years.

Smith, F.L. A Solid Waste Estimation Procedure: Material Flows Approach.
U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/530-SW-147. May 1974.

GLASS CONTAINERS

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial
Reports.  "Glass Containers." M32G. Various years.

U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Imports for Consumption. FT 247.

U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Exports, Schedule B Commodity by
Country - Domestic Merchandise. FT 447.

Brewers  Almanac. Various years.

Lang, Nancy A. "A Touch of Glass." Beverage World. June 1990.

LEAD-ACID BATTERIES

Apotheker, Steve. "Batteries Power Secondary Lead Smelter Growth.*
 Resource Recycling. February 1990.

 Apotheker, Steve. "Does Battery Recycling Need a Jump?" Resource Recycling.
 February 1990.
                                2-46

-------
Apotheker, Steve. "Get the Lead Out." Resource Recycling. April 1991.

Battery Council International. Industry Statistics: 1987.

Cook, David F.  "Lead Recycling: Opportunity Knocks on Primaries' Doors."
Scrap Processing and Recycling. September/October 1990.

Franklin Associates, Ltd. Characterization of Products Containing Lead and
Cadmium in Municipal Solid Waste in the United States, 1970 to 2000. U.S.
Environmental  Protection Agency. EPA/530-SW-89-015A.  NTIS PB89-
151039/WEP. January 1989.

U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Industrial Outlook 1992. "Metals." Also
earlier editions.

MAJOR APPLIANCES

Appliance Magazine. Corcoran Communications. September 1983.

Appliance Manufacturer. March 1991 and Annual Industry Marketing Guide,
various years.

Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers. Trends and Forecasts. 1971 to
1988.

Electrical Merchandising. January 1951.

Gas Appliance  Manufacturers Association. Statistical Highlights. Various
years.

National Industrial Pollution Control Council. The Disposal of Major
Appliances. June 1971.

 Personal communication  with a representative of Amana, Inc. November
 1991.

 Purchasing Magazine. (Tanner's Publications. January 15,1987 and March 9,
 1989.

 U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Census of
 Manufactures. Various yean.

 U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial
 Reports.  "Major Household Appliances." MA36F. Various yean.
                                  2-47

-------
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of
the United States. Various years.

PAPER AND PAPERBOARD

American Paper Institute, Paper Recycling Committee. 1990 Annual Statistical
Summary Waste Paper Utilization. June 1991.

American Paper Institute. 1991 Statistics of Paper/ Paperboard & Wood Pulp.
September 1991.

Franklin Associates, Ltd. Supply of and Recycling Demand for Office Waste
Paper, 1990 to 1995. National Office Paper Recycling Project. July 1991.

Franklin Associates, Ltd. Evaluation of Proposed New Recycled Paper
Standards and  Definitions. Special Task Force on Standards and Definitions,
Recycled Paper Committee, Recycling Advisory Council. January 27,1992.

U.S. Postal Service. Annual Report of the Postmaster General: Fiscal Year 1990.

PLASTICS

 "Resins 1991: Trouble in the Pipeline." Modem Plastics. January 1991.

 R.W. Beck and Associates. "Postconsumer Plastics Recycling Rate Study for the
 Council for Solid Waste Solutions (Calendar Years 1989 and 1990)." 1991.

 RUBBER

 Franklin, M.A., et al. Post-consumer Solid Waste and Resource Recovery
 Baseline. Resource Conservation Committee. May 1979.

 Personal communication with a representative of the Rubber Manufacturers
 Association. November 1991.

 Personal communication with a representative of the American Retreaders
 Association. May 6,1986 and October 22,1991.

 Retreaders Journal. April 1987.

 Smith, F.L A Solid Waste Estimation Procedure: Material Flows Approach.
 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/530-SW-147. May 1974.

 U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Census of
  Manufactures. Various yean.
                                  2-48

-------
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial
Reports. "Rubber Mechanical Goods." MA30C. Various years.

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial
Reports. "Rubber Production, Shipments, and Stocks." MA30A. Various years.

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of
the United States. Various editions.

U.S. Department of Commerce. 1991 U.S. Industrial Outlook. "Plastics and
Rubber." Also earlier editions.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Markets for Scrap Tires. EPA/530-SW-
90-074A. October 1991.

TEXTILES AND FOOTWEAR

National Association of Hosiery Manufacturers. Fact Sheets. Various years.

Riggle, David. 'Tapping Textile Recycling." BioCycle. February 1992.

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current  Industrial
Reports. "Apparel." MQ23A. Various years.

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current  Industrial
 Reports. "Sheets, Towels and Pillowcases." MQ23X. Various years.

 U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current  Industrial
 Reports. MA31A, MA23E, MA23G, and MA23A. Various years.

 U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of
 the United States. Various years.

 WOOD PACKAGING

 Personal communication  with representative of the National Wooden Pallet
 and Container Association. December 1991.

 Personal communication  with representative of the U.S. Forestry Service
 Laboratory, Princeton, WV. December 1991.

 Eshbach, Ovid, Ed Handbook of Engineering Fundamentals. Second Edition.
 John Wiley fc Sons, Inc.

 Personal communication with representative of Virginia Polytechnical
 Institute. December 1991.

                                 2-49

-------
Personal communication with representative of U.S. Department of
Agriculture Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory. December 1991.

Misner, Michael.  "Cutting into Wood Waste Markets." Waste Age. August
1991.

U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Industrial Outlook 1991. "Wood
Products."

U.S. Department  of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory.
Wood Used in U.S. Manufacturing Industries, 1977. December 1983.
                                 2-50

-------
                               Chapter 3

            MANAGEMENT OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
INTRODUCTION

      EPA's tiered integrated waste management strategy includes the
following components:

      1.  Source reduction (including reuse of products and backyard
         composting of yard trimmings)
      2.  Recycling of materials (including composting)
      3.  Waste combustion (preferably with energy recovery) and landfilling.

Characterization of historical municipal solid waste (MSW) management is a
component of this report. Estimates of historical recovery of materials and yard
trimmings for recycling and composting are presented in Chapter 2. Estimates of
MSW combustion are presented in this chapter, and quantities of waste landfilled
are estimated by subtracting combustion and recovery for recycling and
composting from total MSW generation as estimated in Chapter 2.

      Source reduction is not quantified as a line item in this report; there is as
yet no generally-accepted methodology for measuring source reduction on a
national level. Source reduction activities have the effect of reducing MSW
generation, while the other management alternatives deal with MSW once it is
generated.

 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED MSW MANAGEMENT

       The data presented in this chapter and Chapter 2 make possible a
 comprehensive summary of historical municipal solid waste management.
 The study results are summarized in Table 24 and Figure 17. Municipal solid
 waste generation has grown steadily (except for occasional decreases during
 recession years) from 87.8 million tons in 1960 to 195.7 million tons in 1990.

 Recovery for Recycling and Composting of Yard Trimmings

       Recovery for recycling and composting had little effect on the total waste
 stream until the 1980s. Recovery was less than 10 percent of generation in the
 1960s and 1970s. A strong emphasis on recovery for recycling, including
 composting, developed in the latter part of the 1980s, and recovery reached an
 estimated 17.1 percent of generation in 1990.
                                   3-1

-------
                                    Table 14

            GENERATION, MATERIALS RECOVERY, COMPOSTING, COMBUSTION,
                AND DISCARDS OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, 1960 TO 1990
                     (In million* of ton* and percent of total generation)

                                            Million* of Tone

Generation
Recovery for Recycling
Recovery for Composting
Total M*trri*U Recovery
Discards after Recovery*
Combustion with Energy Recovery
Combustion without Energy Recovery
Total Combustion
Discards to Landfill,
Other Disposal"
1960
878
5.9
0.0
5.9
81.9
0.0
27.0
27.0

54.9
1965
103.4
6.8
0.0
6.8
96.6
0.2
26.8
27.0

69.6
lyyv
121.9
3.6
0.0
8.6
113.3
0.4
24.7
2S.1

38.2
\ytt
128.1
9.9
0.0
9.9
118.2
0.7
17.8
18.5

99.7
1980
151.5
14.5
0.0
14.5
137.0
17
11.0
13.7

1233
1985
164.4
16.4
0.0
16.4
148.1
7.6
4.1
11.7

136.4
1990
195.7
29.2
4.2
33.4
1623
29.7
12
31.9

130.4
Percent of Total Generation

1960
Generation 100.0%
Recovery for Recycling
Recovery for Composting
Total M*ttri*li Recovery
Discards after Recovery*
Combustion with Energy Recovery
Combustion without Energy Recovery
Total Combuttio*
Discards to Landfill,
Other Disposal"
6.7%
0.0%
6.7%
933%
0.0%
30.8%
30.8%

615%
1965
1970
100.0% 100.0%
6.6%
0.0%
6.6%
93.4%
0.2%
25.9%
26.1%

673%
7.1%
0.0%
7.1%
92.9%
0.3%
20.3%
20.6%

72.4%
1973
100.0%
7.7%
0.0%
7.7%
9X3%
0.5%
13.9%
14.4%

77.8%
1980
100.0%
9.6%
0.0%
9.6%
90.4%
1.8%
7.3%
9.0%

81.4%
1985
100.0%
9.9%
0.0%
9.9%
90.1%
4.6%
15%
7.1%

82.9%
1990
100.0%
14.9%
11%
17.1%
82.9%
151%
1.1%
163%

66.6%
• Oom not include imxtom (root recydtoc/coaipoMIng JJIUCUMJ,
  DetaifcaMy not add to lotah due to rounding.
  Source Franklin AMOdam Ud.
Mixed MSW Composting

      Composting of yard trimmings is well established in many communities
and was found to be increasing rapidly due to state-wide bans of yard trimmings
in landfills and other local initiatives. Composting of mixed municipal wastes
(e.g., by in-vessel units) is a developing technology in the United States. It was
estimated that one-half million tons of mixed MSW were recovered for
composting in 1990. Insufficient data were available to make projections for the
future of this technology, however.
                                     3-2

-------
Combustion of Municipal Solid Waste

      Most of the municipal solid waste combustion currently practiced in this
country incorporates recovery of an energy product (generally steam or
electricity); sale of the energy helps to offset the cost of operating the facility. In
past years, it was common to burn municipal solid waste in incinerators as a
volume reduction practice; recovery of energy started to become more prevalent
in the 1970s.

      When municipal solid waste is combusted, a residue (usually called ash) is
left behind. Years ago this ash was commonly disposed of along with municipal
solid waste, but combustor ash is not counted as MSW in this report. As a
general "rule of thumb," MSW combustor ash amounts to about 25 percent (dry
weight) of unprocessed MSW input. This percentage will vary from facility to
facility depending upon the types of waste input and the efficiency and
configuration of the facility.

      Previous estimates of combustion with energy recovery were updated and
expressed as a percent of MSW generation  (Table 24). Surveys by EPA and other
organizations were used as references. In addition, a literature search updated
lists of facilities that were operational, under construction, or in planning in 1990.

       In most cases the facilities have a stated daily capacity, but they normally
operate at less than capacity over the course of a year. When information on
actual throughputs of MSW was unavailable for a facility, it was assumed for this
report that throughput over a year of operation is 80 percent of rated capacity.
While this is a more conservative assumption than those often used, it has
proven to be reasonably accurate over the years. (While new facilities are
reporting operation at very high utilization rates, other facilities do not meet the
same standards for annual throughput as compared to rated capacity.)

       The surveys revealed that combustion of MSW has increased rapidly since
 1985, with numerous new facilities coming into operation. It was estimated that
 29.7 million tons of MSW were combusted with energy recovery in 1990.

       To provide a complete picture of historical MSW management, updates of
 the estimates of combustion without energy recovery were also made (Table 24).
 The estimates indicate that MSW combustion without energy recovery dropped
 steadily throughout the entire study period, to about 22 million tons in 1990.

       Adding estimates of combustion without energy recovery to the
 previously estimated combustion with energy recovery brings some interesting
 insights. It appears that over 30 percent of MSW was burned in 1960. This
 percentage declined steadily as the old incinerators were dosed down due to air
 pollution regulations. Combustion with energy recovery grew very slowly until
 the 1980s, with about 15 percent of MSW being combusted in 1990.

-------
Historical Perspective

      This summary provides some perspective on why a landfill crisis
developed in the 1980s. In the 1960s and early 1970s a large percentage of MSW
was burned. The remainder was not usually landfilled as we define landfill in the
1990s; that is, it was not compacted and buried in cells with cover material added
daily. In fact, much of this waste was "dumped" and often it was burned at the
dump to reduce its volume.

      As the old incinerators were closed down and landfills became more
difficult and expensive to site, waste generation continued to increase. Materials
recovery rates increased very slowly in this time period, and the burden on the
nation's landfills grew dramatically. As Figure 17 graphically shows, discards of
MSW to landfill or other disposal apparently peaked in the 1986-1987 period,
then began to decline as materials recovery and combustion increased.
            Flgura 17. Municipal solid waste manaoamant, 1960 to 1990

                                                   R«cyamg,y
                                                ' BUTOTngt ootnportog
                                                               Conttutfton
                                                                   1990

-------
                              Chapter 3

                            REFERENCES

GENERAL

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Municipal Solid Waste Task Force, Office
of Solid Waste. The Solid Waste Dilemma: An Agenda for Action. February
1989.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid
Waste in the United States: 1990 Update. EPA/530-SW-90-042. June 1991.

COMBUSTION

Kiser, Jonathan V.L. "A Comprehensive Report on the Status of Municipal Waste
Combustion." Waste Age. November 1990.

Levy, Steven J. Municipal Waste Combustion Inventory. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, Municipal & Industrial Solid Waste
Division. November 22,1991.

"1991-1992 Energy-from-Waste Report." Solid Waste & Power. HCI
Publications. October 1991, December 1990.

"The 1991 Municipal Waste Combustion Guide." Waste Age. November 1991.
                                 3-5

-------
                               Chapter 4

      PROJECTIONS OF MSW GENERATION AND MANAGEMENT
INTRODUCTION

      This chapter presents projections of municipal solid waste generation
and management to the year 2000. It should be emphasized that these
projections are not predictions. Recent efforts at source reduction are difficult
to measure, but almost certainly are affecting MSW generation. No one can
foresee with accuracy changes in the economy (e.g., booms and recessions),
which also affect the municipal waste stream. In addition, it is difficult to
predict which innovations and new products will affect the amounts and
types of MSW discards. For example, there have long been predictions of the
"paperless office" due to improvements in electronic communications, but in
fact, facsimile machines, high-speed copiers, and personal computers have
generated unexpectedly large amounts of office papers.

      In spite of the limitations, it is useful to look at projections
characterizing MSW based on past trends, since it is clear that the
composition of the waste stream does change over time. New products (e.g.,
disposable products) are used, and materials are used in new ways (e.g.,
composite materials replace simpler products). Planners thus may choose to
use different projections than those presented here, but anyone assuming that
the current mix of materials in the waste stream will remain constant is
disregarding the experience of the past.

 OVERVIEW OF THIS CHAPTER

       This chapter includes projections of municipal solid waste generation,
 recovery for recycling and composting, combustion, and landfill through the
 year 2000. Projections of total MSW recovery for recycling and composting  are
 presented in three scenario*—20 percent, 25 percent, and 30 percent in 1995
 and 25 percent 30 percent, and 35 percent in 2000.

       A summary table showing  projected MSW generation, recovery at the
 mid-range scenario, and discards  of MSW to combustion and landfill in 1995
 and 2000 is included at the end of the chapter.

 MATERIALS GENERATION IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE

       Projections of materials generated in MSW (by weight) are
 summarized in Table 25 and Figure 18, and a discussion of each material
 category follows.
                                   4-1

-------
                                   Table 25
                   PROJECTIONS OF MATERIALS GENERATED*
                 IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1990 TO 2000
                  (In million* of toiu and percent of total generation)
Material*
Paper and Paperboard
Glass
Metals
  Ferrous
  Aluminum
  Other Nonferrous
  Total Metals
Plastics
Rubber and Leather
Textiles
Wood
Other
  Total Material! in Product*
Other Wastes
  Food Wastes
  Yard Trimmings
  Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
  Total Other Wattet
  Total MSW Generated
                                Millions of Tons
% of Total Generation
1990
73.3
13.2
12.3
2.7
1.2'
16.2
16.2
4.6
5.6
12.3
3.2
144.6
13.2
35.0
2.9
51.1
195.7
1995
79.2
13.6
12.0
3.1
1.4
16.5
20.0
5.9
5.9
13.5
3.4
"TJMUT
13.2
33.7
3.0
49.9
IbTT
2000
84.7
13.5
12.1
3.6
1.5
17.2
24.3
6.5
6.7
16.0
3.7
~172T
13.2
32.9
3.1
49.2
222.1
1990
37.5%
6.7%
6.3%
1.4%
0.6%
3.3%
8.3%
2.4%
2.9%
6.3%
1.6%
73.9%
6.7%
17.9%
1.5%
26.1%
100.0%
1995
38.1%
6.5%
5.8%
1.5%
0.7%
7.9%
9.6%
2.8%
2.9%
6.5%
1.7%
76.0%
6.3%
16.2%
1.4%
24.0%
100.0%
2000
38.1%
6.1%
5.4%
1.6%
0.7%
7.7%
11.2%
2.9%
3.0%
7.2%
1.6%
77.8%
5.9%
14.8%
1.4%
22.2%
100.0%
   Generation before materials recovery or combustion.
   Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
   Sourer Franklin Aswdatn, Ud.
Paper, and Paperboard
      Projections of paper and paperboard generation were based on past
trends, with some slowing of growth projected for newsprint corrugated
containers, and paper packaging. These grades of paper are showing the effects
of decreased newspaper readership and (perhaps) some source reduction in
packaging.
      Paper and paperboard is projected to continue to be the dominant
material in MSW, reaching a generation of almost 85 million tons in 2000.
The paper and paperboard grades are projected to remain at about 38 percent
of MSW generation for the next decade.
                                     4-2

-------
              Figure 11.  Materials ganarata* In MSW, 1990 and 2000

                                        QtawS.7%
                                      Fooo«.7%-
                                  1990
                                                   7.7%
                                                      11.2%
                                                Wood 7.2%
                                          an* 9.0%
Glass

      Glass products have been a declining percentage of municipal solid
waste, and this trend is projected to continue, with tonnage of glass in MSW
remaining fairly constant Glass generation is projected to be about 13.5
million tons in 2000, or about 6 percent of the total.

Ferrous Metals

      Cans made of steel have been declining as a component of MSW. On
the other hand, more ferrous metals enter MSW as a component of durable
goods than as containers. Since durable goods are an increasing component of
MSW, ferrous metals in MSW were projected to remain nearly constant, at
                                   4-3

-------
about 12 million tons per year. The percentage of ferrous metals in MSW is
projected to decline from 6.3 percent of total generation to 5.4 percent in 2000.

Aluminum

      Containers and packaging represent the primary source of aluminum
in MSW, although some aluminum is present in durables and nondurabies.
Aluminum in MSW has grown rapidly, and the  growth is projected to
continue, to 3.6 million tons in 2000, Because of  its light weight, aluminum
represents a small percentage of MSW generation—1.4 percent in 1990 and 1.6
percent in 2000.

Other Nonferrous Metals

      Other nonferrous metals (e.g., lead, copper, and zinc) are found in
durable goods like appliances, furniture, and batteries. Lead-acid (automotive)
batteries comprise the majority of this category. Generation of lead-acid
batteries is projected to continue to increase, along with small increases in
other nonferrous metals. Other nonferrous metals were estimated to be 1.2
million tons in 1990 and are projected to be 1.5 million tons in 2000. These
metals are expected to continue to be less than one percent of MSW
generation.

Plastics

       Generation of plastics in MSW has grown  very rapidly in the past three
decades, but the rate of increase has been slowing/ which is typical of products
that achieve sizable market penetration. Plastics in MSW are projected to
continue to increase both in tonnage (from 16.2 million tons in 1990 to 24.8
million tons in 2000) and in percentage of total generation (from 8.3 percent
of total in 1990 to over 11 percent in 2 00).

Wood Wastes

       Wood wastes (in furniture and other durables and in pallets) have
 been increasing in MSW. The tonnage of wood wastes generated is projected
 to grow from 123 million tons in 1990 to 16 million tons in 2000. The
 percentage of wood wastes is projected to increase from 63 percent in 1990 to
 7.2 percent of total in 2000.

 Other Materials

       Other materials in MSW—rubber, leather, and textiles—are projected
 to have modest growth in tonnage and nearly "flat* percentages of total  .
 generation. The apparent growth between 1990 and 2000 for "All Other

-------
Materials" is largely due to the addition of rubber in carpet backing (a new
category added for this report).

Food Wastes

      Sampling studies over a long period of time show food wastes to be a
declining percentage of the waste stream. Per capita discards of food wastes
have also been declining over time, which cart be explained by the increased
use of preprocessed food in homes, institutions, and restaurants, and by the
increased use of garbage disposals, which put food wastes into waste water
systems rather than MSW. In making the projections of food wastes, it was
assumed that per capita discards will decline slightly up to the year 2000. This
means that the tonnage of food wastes remains constant, and their percentage
of total MSW continues to decline, to 5.9 percenc in 2000 compared to 6.7
percent in 1990.

Yard Trimmings

      Based on sampling studies, yard trimmings have been declining as a
percentage of MSW, although they have been remaining about constant on a
per capita basis. In making projections, it was assumed that per capita discards
of yard trimmings would decline after 1990 due to bans on yard trimmings in
landfills in many states, accompanied by an increasing practice of backyard
composting and leaving grass clippings on lawns  instead of bagging them.

       As a result of these assumptions, yard trimmings are projected to
decline in tonnage, from 35 million tons in 1990 to about 33 million tons in
2000. As a  percentage of the total,  yard trimmings are projected to decline
from about 18 percent in 1990 to about 15 percent in 2000. In spite of this
decline, yard trimmings are still projected to be the second largest component
of MSW by weight in  2000.

Projected Growth Rates for Materials in MSW

       Projected growth rates for the various materials generated in MSW are
shown in Table 26. Projected population growth rates (from the Bureau of the
Census) are included a* welt and  it is important to note that the rates of
population increase are projected  to continue to decline between 1990 and
2000. Paper and paperboard, plastics, wood, and some miscellaneous materials
are all projected to increase faster than population, while glass and metals are
projected to increase more slowly than population. Food wastes are projected
to show no increase, and yard trimmings are projected to decline. Overall,
municipal  solid waste generation is projected to increase at a rate of 13
 percent annually between 1990 and 2000.
                                   4-3

-------
                                   Table 26
         AVERAGE ANNUAL RATES OF INCREASE (OR DECREASE)*
                  OF GENERATION OF MATERIALS IN MSW
                         On annual percent by weight)
                            1960-1970  1970-1980    1980-1990    1990-2000
      Paper 
-------
            Figure 10. Product! g«n«rat«d In MSW,  1990 and 2000
                                                  Conwwnl
                                2000
PRODUCT GENERATION IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE

      Projected generation of the products in municipal solid waste is
summarized in Table 27 and Figure 19. All categories (except for "other
wastes") are projected to grow in tonnage. Containers and packaging are
projected to remain the  largest single category at between 33 and 34 percent of
generation, with nondurabks being the second largest category of generation
at 29 percent of total in 2000. More detailed observations on the projected
growth in the individual product categories follow.
                                  4-7

-------
Durable Goods

       Overall, durable goods are projected to increase in both tonnage and
percent of total generation (Table 28). The trends in generation of major
appliances, carpet and rugs, and furniture and furnishings are well
established by production numbers, since lifetimes of up to 20 years are
assumed. Generation of rubber tires, lead-acid batteries, and miscellaneous
durables are projected based on historical trends, which are generally "flat" or
exhibiting low rates of growth.

       Substitution  of relatively light materials like aluminum and plastics
for heavier materials like steel has occurred in durables like appliances and
furniture as well as other products. Also, cars have become smaller and tires
have been made longer-wearing, which tends to reduce the rate  of increase at
which tires are generated. It was projected that these trends will continue.

                                     Table 28
                      PROJECTIONS OF PRODUCTS GENERATED*
                    IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM. 1990 TO 2000
                        (WITH DETAIL ON DURABLE GOODS)
                     (In millions of tons and p«ictnt of total generation)
                                  MfflionsofTons
                         % of Total Generation
  Products
  Durable Goods
    Major Appliances
    Furniture and Furnishings
    Carpets and Rugs
    Rubber Tires
    Batteries,  Lead-Acid
    Miscellaneous Durables
    Tote/ Durable Goods
  Nondurable Goods
    (Dettti in TtMc 29)
 1990   1995
        2000
        1990
           1995
2000
2.8
7.4
1.7
1.8
1.7
12.5
27.9
52.3
3.2
7.7
2.3
2.3
2.0
12.8
30.3
58.6
3.4
9.1
2.8
2.4
2.2
13.9
33.8
64.4
1.4%
3.8%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
6.4%
14.3%
26.7%
1.5%
3.7%
1.1%
1.1%
1.0%
6.2%
14.6%
28.2%
1.5%
4.1%
1.3%
1.1%
1.0%
6.3%
15.2%
29.0%
   Containers*
     (Detail m Tel* 30)
     Total
   Other W
     FoodWi
     Yard Trimmings
     Miscellaneous Inorgsnk W;
     Total Otter Wkstas
     Total MSWGewnrts**
  64.4


144T


  13.2
  35.0
   2.9
"5TT
 69.1    74.7

"T3ST  "TTJT
 13.2
 33.7
  3.0
~49"T
TSJT
13.2
319
 3.1
 32.9%    33.2%    33.6%

 73.9%    76.0%    77.8%

 6.7%     6.3%    5.9%
 17.9%    16.2%    14.8%
 1.5%     1.4%    1.4%
 24.1%    24.0%  "23%"
106,6%   1333%"   100.0%
                        \ focowy oc
     Other than food products.
     Details may not add to totals due to touadinf.
           pp— _. i \tmt As^w4fls)sM t ^4

-------
Nondurable Goodf

       As noted above, generation of nondurable goods has been increasing
rapidly, and this trend is projected to continue (Table 29). About 64 million
tons of nondurable goods are projected to be generated in 2000, or 29 percent
of total generation.
                                        Table 29

                        PROJECTIONS OF PRODUCTS GENERATED*
                     IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1990 TO 2000
                        (WITH DETAIL ON NONDURABLE GOODS)
                       (In million* of ton* and percent of total generation)
    Products

    Durable Good*
      (Detail m Table 28)

    Nondurable Good*
      Newspapers
      Book*
      Magazines
      Office Papers
      Telephone Book*
      Third Class Mail
      Other Commercial Printing
      Tissue Paper and Towel*
      Paper Plates and Cup*
      Plastic Plates and Cup*
      Trash Bags
      Disposable Diapers
      Other Nonpackaging Paper
      Clothing and Footwear
      Towels,  Sheets, * Pillowcases
      Other Mi»c Nondurable*
      Totml NbwbreJrt* Goomt
      (Detail m ttftfe 30)
      Total A0efac*We*<**~
     Other Wi
      Food Waste*
      Yard Trimming*
      Mi*ceUaneou* Inorganic Waste*
      Totml Other Mute*
                                     Million* of Ton*
                        % of Total Generation
 1990

 27.9
 1995

 30.3
2000

33.8
 1990

14.3%
 1995

14.6%
 2000

15.2%
12.9
1.0
2.8
6.4
0.5
3.8
55
3.2
0.7
0.3
0.8
2.6
3.8
3.7
1.0
3.2
"SIT
14.1
1.1
3.3
7.5
0.6
4.2
5.9
3.5
0.7
0.5
1.1
2.8
3.9
3.9
1.1
4.4
"35T
15.1
1.2
3.8
8.1
0.7
4.6
6.5
3.8
0.7
0.6
1.3
2.9
4.1
4.5
1.2
5.5
~64T
6.6%
0.5%
1.4%
3.3%
0.3%
2.0%
2.8%
1.6%
0.3%
0.2%
0.4%
1.4%
1.9%
1.9%
0.5%
1.6%
26.H
6.8%
0.5%
1.6%
3.6%
0.3%
2.0%
2.8%
1.7%
0.3%
0.2%
0.5%
1.3%
1.9%
1.9%
0.5%
2.1%
28.2%
6.8%
0.5%
1.7%
3.6%
0.3%
2.0%
2.9%
1.7%
0.3%
0.3%
0.6%
1.3%
1.9%
2.0%
0.5%
2.5%
29.0%
                                   64.4    69.1    74.7    319%    33.2%    33.6%
      1353T  T7E5"    73.9%    76.0%   77.8%
 13.2
 35.0
  2.9
  1.1
195.7
 13.2   13.2     6.7%
 33.7   32.9    17.9%
  3.0    3.1     1.3%
"T5T  "T5T   26.1%
207.9  2211   100.0%
                6.3%     5.9%
                16.2%    14.8%
                1.4%     1.4%
                24.0%    22.2%
               100.0%   100.0%
      Generation before materials ncovenr or combustion.
      Other than food products.
      Detail* w*y not add to totals due to rounding.
      Source,  Prankltai,
                                        4-9

-------
      In 1990, paper products were about 78 percent of nondurables
generated. Paper products will continue to be the largest share of nondurables,
but most paper products will maintain about the same percentage of total
generation throughout the decade.

      Based on historical trends, paper plates and cups were projected to
show no increase in tonnage or percentage; plastic plates and cups were
projected to show growth in tonnage, although not much change in
percentage of total generation. (The plates and cups categories include hinged
containers and other foodservice items, and it was assumed that there will be
no widespread bans of disposable foodservice items.)

      Because of declining birth rates and processes that make individual
diapers smaller and lighter, disposable diapers began to shown a decline in
weight generated after 1985, and generation of disposable diapers was
projected to remain rather "flat," which means that they remain about
constant as a percentage of total generation. (It was assumed that there will be
no widespread bans of disposable diapers.)

      Clothing and footwear and other textiles are projected to stay at about
the same percentage of total throughout the decade.

      Finally, other miscellaneous nondurables, which include many items
made of plastics, have been growing historically and the growth is projected
to continue, causing this category to continue to increase as a percentage of
MSW generation.

Containers and Packaging

       Containers and packaging is the largest single category of MSW, and
this is projected to continue through the decade (Table 30). Generation was
64.4 million tons in 1990, with an increase to 74.7 million tons in 2000. In
percentage of total MSW, containers and packaging were about 33 percent in
1990, with a projected increase to 33.6 percent in 2000.

       Tonnage of glau packaging generated has been in decline since  the
early 198Q§ at glaw was displaced by lighter materials like aluminum and
plastics (although that* has been some increase in the recent past). Glass
containers are projected to continue to be a declining percentage of MSW
generation (5.4 percent of total generation in 2000).

       Steel packaging generation has also been declining for much the same
 reasons as glass, and steel packaging » also projected to be a declining
 percentage of MSW generation (Just over one percent of total generation in
 2000).
                                   4-10

-------
                                          TabU 30
                         PROJECTIONS OF PRODUCTS GENERATED*
                      IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM. 1990 TO 2000
                     (WITH DETAIL ON CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING)
                        dm Billion* at tons and percent of total generation)
Product*

DooMs Goods
  (Dttiil in Ttblt 28)
NonduobU Goods
  /Detail in Tablt 29)
          and Packaging
  Glass Packaging
    Beer and Soft Drink Bottle*
    Win« and Liquor Bottle*
    Food and Other Bottle* it Jan
      Total GUi*
  Steei Packaging
    BMT and Sort Drink Cam
    Food and Other Cam
    Other Stetl Packaging
      TotMi Start P
  Aluninum Packaging
    Beer and Soft Drink Cam
    Other Can*
    Foil and Closures
      TotMl Aluimtutm Pkg

  Paper «t Paperboard Pkg
    Corrugated Boxes
    Milk Cartons
    Folding Cartons
    Other Paperboard Packaging
    Bags and Sacks
    Wrapping Papers
    Other Paper Packaging
     Soft Drink
     Milk Bottles
     Other Containers
     Bags and Sacks
     Wrap*
     --   -   -   Packaging
   Wood
   T«*sf
       Was
   FoodWs
   T««*J
               Inorganic W«
                                       Minions of Tons
                              % ol Total Generadon
 19W
 27.9

 52.3
   5.7
   2.1
   4 1
  11.9


   0.1
   2.5
   0.2
—TT


   1.6
   0.0
   0.3
  0.4
  0.4
  1.8
  0.9
  1J
  1.9
7.9
0.2
 13-3
 310
  2.9
        30J

        58.6
         5.7
         2.2
         42
        12.1

         0.1
         2.4
         0.2
      —IT

         1.7
         0.1
         0.4
        0.6
        OJ
        2.8
        1.2
        1.7
        2.1
                                  —To"   -3T
2000

33.8

64.4
  5.6
  2.2
  41
 0.1
 2.3
 0.2
  2.0
  O.I
  0.4
  1990

 14.3%


 26.7%
  1995

 14.6%


 28.2%
   2000

  15.2%

  29.0%
  0.1%
  1.3%
  0.1%
  0.3%
  0.0%
  0.2%
 0.1%
 1.1%
 0.1%
 1.3%


 0.8%
 0.0%
 0.2%
 0.7
 OJ
 3.5
 1.4
 2.0
 2.6
 0.2%
 0.2%
 0.9%
 0.5%
 0.8%
 1.0%
           8.9     10.6
           OJ      01
                "TIT
         ISU    17219
         4.0%
         0.1%
0.3%
0.2%
1-3%
0.6%
OJ%
1.0%
4.2%
4-3%
0.1%
       13-2
       33-7
        34
13J
3X9
 3.1
 6.7%
17.9%
 1-5%
1.4*
  0.1%
  1.0%
  0.1 %_
  0.9%
  0.0%
  0.2%
23.9
0.5
4.3
0.3
2.4
0.1
1.0
"32T
25J
0.5
4.5
0.3
2.3
0.1
1.0
27.0
0.5
4.7
0.3
2.3
0.1
1.0
12.2%
0.3%
2.2%
0.1%
1.2%
0.1%
0.5%
16.7%
12.2%
0.2%
2.2%
0.1%
1.2%
0.1%
0.5%
16.3%
12.2%
0.2%
2.1%
0.1%
1.1%
0.1%
0.5%
15.3%
 0.2%
 1.6%
 0.6%
 0.9%
 1.2%
                     4J%
                     0.1%
 5.9%
14J%
 1.4%
                                         4-11

-------
      Tonnage of aluminum packaging has been increasing steadily over the
historical period, and this trend is projected to continue. Because of its light
weight, however, aluminum stays at just over one percent of total generation
in the projections.

      Like other paper and paperboard products, overall generation of paper
and paperboard packaging has been increasing rapidly. The increase is almost
all in corrugated boxes, which are mainly used for shipping other products.
Continued increases in generation of corrugated boxes are projected; tonnage
of these boxes is projected to be 27 million tons in 2000, or about 12 percent of
total MSW generation. All paper and paperboard packaging is projected to be
16.3  percent of total generation in 2000 (a slight decline from the category7s
percentage in 1990).

      Generation of other paper and paperboard packaging has not exhibited
the same growth, generally due to displacement by plastic packaging. Thus
generation of milk cartons, other folding cartons, paper bags and sacks, and
other paperboard packaging is projected to be almost "flat" over the decade.

      Plastics packaging has exhibited rapid historical growth, and the trends
are projected to continue. Soft drink bottles, milk bottles, other containers,
bags and sacks, wraps, and other packaging are all projected to follow the
increasing trends. Generation of all plastics packaging is projected to be 10.7
million tons in 2000, or 4.8 percent of total generation.

PROJECTIONS OF MSW RECOVERY

       Prior to the 1980s,  rates of recovery for recycling increased slowly and
thus projections were relatively easy to make. At this time, however, there is
 a high level of interest in municipal solid waste management in general, and
 in recycling and composting in particular. Government agencies at all levels
 are  seeking ways to stimulate materials recc  ery. Local communities are
 adding materials recovery and recycling programs rapidly, but there is no
 accurate nationwide accounting system. In response to the demand for more
 recovery and more markets for recovered products, industry associations and
 individual companies have invested large amounts  of money and effort in
 developing new recycling programs and products containing recovered
 materials.

       Because of the rapidly changing situation and uncertainty in the
  available data, projection! of materials recovery were made in scenarios that
  could achieve different rates of recovery in 1995 and 2000. Scenario* were
  developed for 20,25, and 30 percent recovery rates in 1995, and for 25,30, and
  35 percent recovery rate* in 2000. These scenarios are based on recovery of
  postconsumer MSW and do not include industrial scrap. Also, composting of
                                   4-12

-------
only yard trimmings is included in these scenarios; estimates of composting
of mixed MSW were not made for this report.

      The recovery scenarios developed for this report describe sets of
conditions that could achieve the selected range of recovery rates. The
scenarios are not intended to predict exact recovery rates for any particular
material; there are many ways in which a selected overall recovery rate could
be achieved.

Discussion of Assumptions

      Some general assumptions and principles were used in making the
recovery estimates:

       •  Recovery includes both recovery for recycling and for composting.
         Recovery does not always equal recycling/ however, and residues left
         after composting or recycling are not accounted for.

       •  It was assumed that local, state, and federal agencies will continue to
         emphasize recycling and composting as MSW management
         alternatives.

       •  It was assumed that there will not be a nationwide deposit law for
         beverage containers, but that the present state deposit laws will
         remain in place.

       •  It was assumed that affected industries will continue to emphasize
         recovery and recycling programs, and will make the necessary
         investments to achieve higher recycling rates.

       • It was assumed that the current trend toward banning certain yard
         trimmings in landfills will continue,  providing stimulus for
         composting programs and for source reduction of yard trimmings by
         citizens.

               on the preceding assumptions, most U.S. citizens will have
               to recovery options in 1995, which will often, in fact, be
         mandated. These options will include curbside collection, dropoff
         and buyback centers, and, in some instances, mixed waste processing
         facilities. Recovery will continue to increase between 1995 and 2000
          as more recovery systems come on-line.

       •  In spite of the factors encouraging more recovery as enumerated
          above, many area* of the VS. are thinly populated and/or remote
          from ready markets for recovered materials; many of these areas also
          have adequate landfill capacity. Therefore, the overall recovery rate
                                   4-13

-------
         for the entire country may not reflect the rates achieved in
         communities where conditions are favorable for recycling and
         composting.

Scenarios for 1995

      The ranges of recovery assumptions for the various materials in MSW
are shown in Table 31. Assumed recovery rates for both 1995 and 2000 were
based on existing recovery rates in 1990, with projected growth that seemed
reasonably achievable nationwide. (Details of the assumptions for individual
products in MSW are in Appendix B.) Assumptions as to the projected
recovery rates for specific products and materials were made in ranges. It is
certainly possible (indeed, probable) that any given material will be recovered
at higher or lower rates than those given here, but the scenarios illustrate
how the selected recovery rates could be reached.
                                 Table 31

          PROJECTED GENERATION AND RANGES OF RECOVERY/1995
             (In million* of ton* and percent of generation of each material)
                                             Recovery
     Material*
     Paper and Paperboard

     Glass
     Metals
       Ferrous
       Aluminum
       Other Nonferrous
       Tottl Metal*

     Plastic*
Million ton*
c


enention
79.2
13.2
20%
23.3
2.7
25%
27.1
3.5
30%
30.4
4.3
% of generation
20%
29.4%
20.3%
25%
34.2%
26.5%
30%
38.4%
32.6%
     doth**, Other TtxtflM
     Wood
     Yard Trimmings
     Other Materials'*
       ToUU
12.0
3.1
1.4
16.5
20.0
5.9
5.9
13.5
33.7
20.0
207.9
2.4
1.1
1.0
4.5
0.6
0.2
0.3
0.4
8.8
0.7
ITT
3.2
1.2
1.0
5.4
0.9
0.3
0.4
0.9
11.1
23
1TT
3.9
1.3
1.0
6.2
1.4
0.4
0.8
U
15.2
1.1
6ZJ
20.0%
35.5%
69.5%
27.1%
3.0%
3.4%
5.1%
3.0%
26.1%
3.5%
204)%
26.7%
38.7%
71.0%
32.6%
4.5%
5.1%
6.8%
6.7%
32.9%
11.5%
25.0%
32.5%
41.9%
71.7%
37.6%
7.0%
6.8%
13.6%
9.6%
45.1%
5.5%
30.0%
     ••Food
                              does not tedude cmvtrtmf/bMcaHoB scrap.
                         far «tod MSW coaipmrtng.
        Drtsfls my not add to totals due to rouadint>
                                    4-14

-------
       To reach a recovery rate of 25 percent in 1995, recovery of virtually
every  material in MSW will need to increase, although products already
recovered at high levels (such as aluminum  cans and automotive batteries)
will show less of an increase.  In particular, a dramatic increase in recovery of
yard trimmings for composting is projected, due in large part to  bans on
landfilling of yard trimmings in  many states.

Scenarios for 2000

       The range of projected  recovery rates for materials in MSW under
three recovery scenarios in the year 2000 is shown in Table 32. (Details of the
assumptions for individual products in MSW are in Appendix B.) Continued
increases in recovery in every category will be required to reach  the scenarios
shown. To reach a recovery rate of 35 percent nationwide in 2000, nearly half
Million ton*
Generation
84.7
13.5
25%
28.0
3.8
30%
33.8
4.7
35%
36.2
5.3
% of generation
25%
33.1%
28.1%
30%
39.9%
34.8%
35%
42.7%
39.3%
                                  Tablt 32

           PROJECTED GENERATION AND RANGES OF RECOVERY,* 2000
             (In million* of ton* and percent of genera don of each material)

                                   	Recovery
                                      Million toni
     Material*
     Paper and Paperboard

     Glass
     Metals
       Ferrous
       Aluminum
       Other Nonferrou*"*
       Total Metalf

     Plastics
     Rubber* Leather

     dothta* Other Textiles
     Wood
     Yard TrinBBin*ja

     Other Materials*
       Total*
12.1
3.6
1.5
"I9T
24.8
6.5
6.7
16.0
319
19.9
15T
3.3
1.4
1.1
1.9
0.3
0.4
1.1
13.2
1.0
15T
3.8
1.5
1.1
6.4
2.5
0.4
0.6
1.6
15.8
1.0
loT
4.4
1.6
1.1
2.9
0.2
0.9
2.1
21.1
1.8
"777
27.3%
38.9%
71.0%
33.7%
7.7%
4.6%
6.0%
6.9%
40.1%
5.0%
25.0%
31.4%
41.7%
73.3%
37.4%
10.1%
6.2%
9.0%
10.0%
48.0%
5.0%
30.0%
36.4%
44.4%
73.3%
41.5%
11.7%
3.1%
13.4%
13.1%
64.1%
9.0%
35.0%
     ^Recovery of
       Does not indude
                              notindu*
                    • for mixed MSW composting.
*• Indudea some nonfarrous metal* other than battery lead.
 t Food ureatos, maKeOaneou* inorganic *a*toj, odwr.
rting/fabrication scrap.
       Detail* may not add to total* doe to rounding.
       Source FrankUn Aeaodatea, Lad.
                                     4-15

-------
of all paper and paperboard would be recovered, nearly 40 percent of all glass,
over 40 percent of metals, and nearly 12 percent of all plastics in MSW. Sixty-
four percent of all yard trimmings would be recovered for composting under
this scenario (not including backyard  composting).

PROJECTIONS OF MSW DISCARDS AFTER RECOVERY

      Discards of municipal solid waste as defined for this report are those
wastes remaining after recovery of materials for recycling and composting of
yard trimmings. The remaining discards must be managed by mixed MSW
composting, combustion, landfilling, or some other means. The effects of
projected recovery rates on the amounts and characteristics of municipal solid
waste discards are illustrated in Table 33. (A 25 percent recovery scenario for
1995 and a 30 percent recovery scenario for 2000 are shown as examples.)

      One interesting observation that can be made from the results in Table
33 is that under the selected scenarios, discards  of MSW will  decline between
1990 and 1995, then decline only slightly between 1995 and 2000. In other
words, the projected recovery will about equal the projected increase in
generation of  MSW during that time frame (Table 25).

       Another interesting observation is that materials that are recovered at
relatively high rates will comprise a smaller percentage of discards than they
do of generation. For example, paper and paperboard were projected to be
about 38 percent of total MSW generation in 2000, but about 33 percent of
discards in 2000 under the projected scenario. Plastics, which  are projected to
have a lower recovery rate, are shown to be about 11 percent  of generation in
 2000, but about 14 percent of discards. Other materials show similar patterns.

 PROJECTIONS OF MSW COMBUSTION

       As described in Chapter 3, surveys of municipal solid waste
 combustion facilities were used to develop historical combustion estimates.
 These same survey* were used to identify facilities that are under
 construction or in the planning stages. The surveys indicate that new facilities
 are scheduled to come into operation in the 1990s, although implementation
 has often been delayed for a variety of reasons. Using this information, it was
 projected that 35.4 million tons of MSW will be combusted in 1995 and about
 46 million tons in the year 2000 (Table 34). This amounts to about 17 percent
 of MSW generation in 1995 and about 21 percent in 2000.

       While  substantial amounts of MSW were burned without energy
 recovery in past years, most of these older facilities have been closed due  to
 air pollution  requirements. It is projected that all major facilities for
 combustion of MSW will have energy recovery in the future.
                                   4-16

-------
                                   Table 33

          PROJECTIONS OF MATERIALS DISCARDED* IN MSW, 1990 TO 2000
                   (In million* of ton* and percent of total discards)
  Material*

  Paper and Paperboard

  Glass

  Metals
     Ferrous
     Aluminum
     Other Nonferrous
     Total Metals

  Plastics

  Rubber & Leather

  Clothing, Other Textiles

  Wood
  Food Wastes

  Yard Trimmings

  Other Materials

     Totals
Million ton*
1990
52.4
10.6
10.4
1.6
0.4
12.5
15.9
4.4
5.3
11.9
13.2
30.8
5.3
162.3
199S ••
52.1
9.7
8.8
1.9
0.4
II. 1
19.1
5.6
5.5
12.6
13.2
22.6
4.5
156.0
2000 t
50.9
8.8
8.3
2.1
0.4
10.8
22.3
6.1
6.1
14.4
13.2
17.1
5.7
155.4
% of discard!
1990
32.3%
6.5%
6.4%
1.0%
0.2%
7.7%
9.8%
2.7%
3.3%
7.3%
8.1%
19.0%
3.3%
100.0%
1995
33.4%
6.2%
5.6%
1.2%
0.3%
7.1%
12.2%
3.6%
3.5%
8.1%
8.5%
14.5%
2.9%
100.0%
2000
32.8%
5.7%
5.3%
1.4%
0.3%
6.9%
14.3%
3.9%
3.9%
9.3%
8.5%
11.0%
3.7%
100.0%
    * Discards after recovery for recycling and composting of yard trimmings.
   •* Recovery scenario at 25 percent (Table 31).
    t Recovery scenario at 30 percent (Table 32).
     Details may not add to total* due to rounding.
     Source: Franklin Associate*, Ltd.
SUMMARY OF PROJECTED MSW MANAGEMENT

      A summary of the 1995 and 2000 projections is presented, with similar
figures lor 1990 included for contrast (Table 34). For the summary, mid-range
recovery scenarios were used for 1995 and 2000.

      From 1990 to 2000, generation of MSW is projected to increase by 13
percent per year compared to 2.8 percent per year between 1980 and 1990. The
effect of the mid-range scenarios for materials recovery for recycling and yard
trimmings composting causes the discards of MSW to 'level off between
1995 and 2000. Continued increases in MSW combustion further reduce the
amounts of MSW remaining to be landfllled from about 130 million tons in
1990 to about 109 million tons in 2000. (The projected amounts of MSW to be
landfilled could be higher or lower under other recovery scenarios.)

      A graphical illustration of these trends is shown in Figure 20.


                                    4-17

-------
                                        Table 34

              GENERATION, RECOVERY, COMBUSTION, AND DISPOSAL
                      OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, 1990 TO 2000
                    (In millions of ton* and percent of total generation)
                                    Million! of Ton*
                                                  % of Generation
Generation
Recovery for Recycling
Composting of Yard Trimmings
   Total  Materials  Recovery*
Discards after Recovery**
Landfill, Other  Disposalt
1990
195.7
29.2
4.2
33.4
162.3
31.9
130.4
1995
207.9
40.8
11.1
51.9
156.0
35.4
120.6
2000
222.1
50.9
15.8
66.7
155.4
46.2
loTT
1990
100.0%
14.9%
2.1%
17.1%
82.9%
16.3%
66.6%
1995
100.0%
19.6%
5.3%
25.0%
75.0%
17.0%
58.0%
2000
100.0%
22.9%
7.1%
"300%"
70.0%
20.8%
49.2%
  1 Total recovery"rates of 17.1% in 1990,25% in 1995, and 30% in 2000.
 ** Does not include residues from recycling/ composting processes.
  t Docs not include residues from recycling, composting, or combustion processes.
   Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
   Source:  Franklin Associates, Ltd.
Ft«yr«  20. Municipal  «o!W wute
                                                            1MO to 2000
                                          4-li

-------
                               Chapter 5

      ADDITIONAL PERSPECTIVES ON MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
INTRODUCTION

      In this chapter, the municipal solid waste (MSW) characterization data
summarized in the previous chapters are presented again from different
perspectives. These are:

      • Historical and projected MSW generation and management on a
        pounds per person per day basis

      • Historical and projected MSW generation by material on a pounds
        per person per day basis

      • A classification of 1990 MSW generation into residential and
        commercial components

      • Historical and projected discards of MSW classified into organic and
        inorganic fractions.

DISCARDS BY INDIVIDUALS

      Municipal solid waste planners often think in terms of generation and
discards on a per capita basis. Data on MSW generation and management are
presented on the basis of pounds per person per day in Table 35. The top line
shows a steady increase in per capita generation of MSW, from 2.7 pounds per
person per day in 1960 to 43 pounds per person per day in 1990, with a
projection of 4.5 pounds per person per day in 2000.

      This projection indicates a substantial slowing in the rate of increase of
per capita MSW generation in the 1990s. The projected decline hinges on
diverse variables that are difficult to predict. They range from demographic
changes, economic factors, and consumer preferences such as for lighter
packaging materials to social trends such as the decline in newspaper
readership, as well as efforts in source reduction such as backyard composting,
packaging reduction, and production  of more long-lasting products.

       After recovery for recycling and composting, discards were reduced to
3.6 pounds per person per day in 1990. Of these discards, an estimated 0.7
 pounds per person per day were combusted and 2.9 pounds per person per day
 were disposed by landfilling or some other method in 1990.
                                   5-1

-------
                                        Table 35
               CAPITA GENERATION, MATERIALS RECOVERY, COMBUSTION,
              AND DISCARDS OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, 1%0 TO 2000
                   On pound* per person per day; population in thousands)

Generation
Recovery for Recycling fc Composting*
Discards after Recovery**
Combustion
Discards to Landfill, Other Disposalt
Population (thousands)
1960
2.7
0.2
2.5
0.8
1.7
180,671
1970
3.3
0.2
3.0
0.7
2.4
203,984
1980
3.7
0.4
3.3
0.3
3.0
227,255
1990
4.3
0.7
3.6
0.7
2.9
249,924
2000
4.5
1.4
3.2
0.9
2.2
268,266
 * Overall recovery rate of 30% in 2000.
•• Does not include residues from recycling/ composting processes.
 t Does not include residues from recycling, composting, or combustion processes.
  Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
  Source: Tables 24 and 34. Population from Bureau of the Census, Current Populahon Reports.
                                       Table 36
              PER CAPITA GENERATION* OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE,
                              BY MATERIAL, 19<0 TO 2000
                              On pound* per person per day)
       Materials                     I960       1970     1980     1990    2000
       Paper and Paperboard          0.9         1.2      1.3      1.6      1.7
       Glass                         0.2         0.3      0.4      0.3      0.3
       Metals                        0.3         0.4      0.3      0.4      0.3
       Plastics                       Neg.        0.1      0.2      0.4      0.5
       Rubber and Leather            0.1         0.1      0.1      0.1      0.1
       Textiles                       0.1         0.1      0.1      0.1      0.1
       Wood                        0.1         0.1      0.2      03      0.3
       Other                        Neg.       Neg.     0.1      0.1      0.1
         Trttf Mshi f«fr fa ProAxtt    1.6         2-2      2.6      3.2      3.5
       Food Waste*                  0.4         03      03      03      03
       Yard Trimmings               0.6         0.6      0.7      0.8      0.7
       Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes Nes>       N«g.     0.1      0.1      0.1
                                      2.6         3.2      3.7      43      43
          Details may not add to totals due to roandfaif,
          Meg, « NefUctt* Osss than 005 pounds per person per day).
          Source TaUe 1. Population bom Bureau of the Camus, Current Population Reports.
                                         5-2

-------
      In Table 36, per capita generation of each material category
characterized in this study is shown. Paper, plastics, and wood in
MSW have grown on a per capita basis. Glass has declined on a per capita
basis, while metals, textiles, rubber and leather, and food wastes have been
relatively constant. Yard trimmings have been increasing on a per capita
basis, but this is projected to decline if current trends to promote backyard
composting and leaving grass cuttings on lawns continue and increase.

RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL GENERATION OF MSW

      The  sources of MSW generation are of considerable interest to
management planners. The material flows methodology does not lend itself
well to a distinction as to sources of the materials because the data used are
national in scope. Nevertheless, an attempt has been made in this report to
classify the MSW product generation in 1990 (Chapter 2) into residential and
commercial components. The classification should be considered a first effort
and subject to later revision as more data become available.

      For purposes of this classification, residential waste was considered to
come from both single family and multi-family residences. This is somewhat
contrary to a common practice in MSW management to classify wastes
collected from apartment buildings as commercial. The rationale used for this
report is that the nature of residential waste is basically the same whether it is
generated in a single or multi-family residence. (Yard trimmings are probably
the primary exception, and this was taken into account.) Because of this
approach, the percentage of residential waste shown here is higher than that
often reported by waste haulers.

       Commercial wastes for the purpose of this classification include MSW
from retail and wholesale establishments; hotels; office buildings; airports
and train stations; hospitals, schools, and other institutions; and similar
sources. No industrial process wastes are included, but normal MSW such as
packaging, cafeteria and washroom wastes, and office wastes from industrial
sources are included. As is the case for the data in Chapter 2, construction and
demolition wastes, sludges, ashes, automobile bodies, and other Subtitle D
 wastes an not included.

       The classification of MSW generation  into residential and commercial
 fractions was made on a product-by-product basis, as shown in Appendix C.
The 1990 tonnage generation of each product was allocated to residential or
 commercial sources on a "best judgment* basis; then the totals were
 aggregated. Sampling studies were consulted where applicable, although
 available data on residential/commercial sorting of waste are limited. The
 results are summarized in Table  37. These are estimates for the nation as a
 whole, and should not be taken as representative of any particular region of
 the country.
                                   5-3

-------
                                 Table 37
                CLASSIFICATION OF MSW GENERATION INTO
              RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL FRACTIONS, 1990
                                  Range             Range
                               (Million toiu)      (Percent of total)
            Residential Wastes     106-127           55-65
            Commercial Wastes     68-88           35-45
            Source: Franklin Associates, Ltd. (Appendix C).

      Based on this analysis, a reasonable range for residential wastes would
be 55 to 65 percent of total MSW generation, while commercial wastes
probably range between 35 to 45 percent of total generation.

ORGANIC/INORGANIC FRACTIONS OF MSW

      The composition of MSW in terms of organic and inorganic fractions  is
of interest to planners of waste management facilities and others working
with MSW. This characterization is shown in Table 38. The organic fraction
of MSW has been increasing steadily since  1970, from 75 percent organics in
1970 to 84 percent in 1990.

      These changes are readily explained by the changing composition of
MSW. The percentages of paper, plastics, and wood have been increasing
steadily, while the percentages of glass and metals have been decreasing.

                                  Table 38
                      COMPOSITION OF MSW DISCARDS*
                  BY ORGANIC AND INORGANIC FRACTIONS,
                                 1MOTO2000
                           da percent of total discards)
                  Year        Organks          Inotfanks"
                  1940          77.6               22.4
                  19tf          78.4               21.6
                  1970          73.2               24.8
                  1975          75.5               24.5
                  1980          78.1               21.9
                  198S          81-3               18.7
                  1990          84.0               16.0
                  2000          85.1               14.9
                           rmfttariak racowy his taken place,

                                               iaorgwks.
                       «y not add to totals dm to rouadtafl.
                        TaMel
                                    5-4

-------
                               Chapter 6

   CHARACTERIZATION OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE BY VOLUME


INTRODUCTION

      Solid waste is generally characterized by weight, either in pounds or
tons. Most statistics are compiled by weight landfill operators generally
charge fees by weight, estimates of quantities are stated in tons, and the
remainder of this report uses tons or millions of tons to specify the quantity
of MSW. Weight can be readily and rapidly measured with a set of scales.
People agree that properly calibrated scales will accurately measure weight,
but there is no agreed-upon method for measuring volume.

      It has been realized for many years, however, that the space occupied by
waste is also important. Landfills do not get overweight, their space fills up. It
is useful to quantify MSW by cubic yards of space occupied, but volume
measurements are far more complex to make than weight measurements.
Volume measurements are  very contextual. A pound of paper is a pound of
paper no matter whether it is in flat sheets, crumpled into a wad, or
compacted into a bale. However, the volume occupied will be very different
in each case. Perhaps the one-pound wad of paper will occupy as much as ten
times the volume of a pound of baled paper.

       Another problem with volume measurement of MSW is the difficulty
in establishing a typical set of environmental conditions to serve as a basis for
comparison. We may agree that volumes of MSW in landfills are of interest,
but the difficulty arises as to how to define typical landfill conditions. Every
waste management system treats waste differently, and achieves different
levels of compaction and therefore different  volumes for different materials.
The waste also degrades with time. As waste remains in a landfill, the
surroundings may become  more acidic, and the gases in the  landfill convert
 from air to other chemicals, perhaps changing the strength and other physical
characteristics of materials. The moisture conditions will also change with
 time. This makes it extremely difficult to devise a set of standard
 environmental conditions to serve as a basis for volume measures.

       To initiate the process of determining a scientific basis for decision-
 making, a set of volume factors for MSW has been developed. While it is
 difficult to attain a high degree of accuracy in volume measurements because
 of the complexity of the problem, a reasonable approach can shed light on
 these issues.

       Because of the desirability of establishing a national consensus on solid
 waste volumes, a series of measurements was taken in 1989 to present for the
                                   6-1

-------
first time a methodology for measuring volumes and to generate a
preliminary set of data (1). This chapter is based in part on the results reported
in that reference.

METHODOLOGY AND EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM

      As described in the previous EPA MSW characterization  report (2), the
basic approach was to set up an experimental program to develop a set of
density factors for solid waste components, measured in pounds per cubic
yard. The MSW  weight data reported in millions of tons (from Chapter 2 of
this report) were converted to millions of pounds, and the MSW volume in
millions of cubic yards was calculated by dividing the weight values by the
density (in pounds per cubic yard).

       The experimental program was developed in cooperation with The
Garbage Project, administered as a part of the Department of Anthropology,
Bureau of Applied Research in Anthropology, The University of Arizona,
located in Tucson. They are experienced in landfill sampling and in volume
measurement. They use a specially constructed machine that can compact
MSW samples so as to replicate landfill conditions.

       For purposes of conducting experiments, paper was separated into four
 broad categories based on similarities of compaction behavior. Plastics were
 also separated into four categories, with another category for composite
 mixtures of paper and plastics. The nine categories are listed below (no other
 materials categories were segregated):

        • Nonpackagjng paper (paper plates, tissues, towels, mail, newspapers,
         magazines, books, forms, greeting cards, etc.)

        • Corrugated boxes

        •  Paperboard boxes (food boxes, detergent boxes, milk cartons, six-pack
          wrap*, etc.)
                     and paperboard packaging (bags, wrapping paper, towel
          roils, molded pulp egg cartons, cups, hinged fast food containers,
          cigarette wrappers, etc.)

        • Plastic film packaging (bags, wrappers, food wrap films, wet-wipes
          packs, bubble packaging, condiment packs, etc)

        • Plastic rigid containers (bottles, jars, tubs and lids, microwave trays,
          hard cosmetic cases, bottle basecups, etc.)
                                    6-2

-------
      • Other plastic packaging (cookie trays, six-pack ring holders, flexible
        tubes, polystyrene foam packaging, etc.)

      • Nonpackaging plastic (cups, tumblers, eating utensils, pens, razors,
        toys, food serving trays, hangers, Easter grass, sponges, etc.)

      • Composite mixtures of paper and plastic (blister packs, juice
        concentrate containers, composite cans, diapers, etc.)

      A central part of the methodology  was to retrieve materials from
landfills after they had experienced the actual conditions of the solid waste
system. Landfill excavations were made at the Los Reales landfill in Tucson
in June 1989. Samples were sorted and compressed, and density
measurements were recorded by The Garbage Project staff. The results of these
experiments and analysis of the data resulted in a set of density factors for the
paper and plastic products.

DENSITY FACTORS FOR LANDFILLED  MATERIALS

Data Sources

       Best estimates of the density of 24 important categories of waste,
reported in pounds per cubic yard as compacted in landfills, are summarized
in Table 39. The paper and plastic densities are the result of the experimental
efforts described above. The values for other materials are based on prior
work by The Garbage Project, other literature sources, and other experiments
performed at Franklin Associates. In some cases, estimates were made based
on behavior of similar materials. References for the origins of each density
value  are included in Table 39.

Uncertainties in Density Factor Estimates

       Durable Good*. Densities of durable goods present a particular problem,
 since no experimental values are available. Where it was necessary to include
 densities of durable products, they were assigned the average density of other
 wastes. A composite density is shown in Table 39.

       Plastic Coatings. Plastic coatings applied to packaging and other
 products present another special case. These coatings do not act as materials in
 their own right, but take on the characteristics of the products on which they
 are applied. Their density was also assumed to be the same as the average
 density of other products.

       Disposable Diapers. At the time (1989) these landfill density
 experiments were being conducted at the University of Arizona, disposable
                                   6-3

-------
                                    Table 39
          SUMMARY OF DENSITY FACTORS FOR LANDFILLED MATERIALS
                                            Density
                                           Ub/cu yd)        References*
        DURABLE GOODS**                     520             12
        NONDURABLE GOODS
           Nondurable paper                     800             3
           Nondurable plastic                    315             3
           Disposable diaperst
             Diaper materials                   795             4
             Urine and feces                   1,350             13
           Rubber                              345             5
           Textiles                             435             6
           Misc. nondurable (mostly plastics)       390             11
        PACKAGING
           Glass containers
                Beer fc soft drink bottles         2,800            5, 9
                Other  containers               2,800            5,9
           Steel Containers
                Beer & soft drink cans             560             5
                Food cans                       560             5
                Other  packaging                 560             5
           Aluminum
                Beer IE soft drink cans             250            9,10
                Other  packaging                 550             9
           Paper and Paperboard
                Corrugated                      750             3
                Other  paperboard                820             3
                Paper  packaging                 740             3
           Plastics
                Film                           670             3
                Rigid containers                  355             3
                Other packaging                 185            3,11
           Wr xl packaging                      800             6
           Other miscellaneous packaging        1,015             3
         FOOD WASTES                       2,000             5
         YMBDTVIMM1NGS                   1,500            7,8
                     are listed at the end of this chapter.
                           iiiin taken for durable goods or plastic coatings.
          t Dtaper density factor has been increased from 400 Ib/cu yd in the 1990
           Update CO. Sec section on Density Factors for discussion.
diapers were included with other composite products as described above. A
density of 400 pounds per cubic yard was determined for this category, and
this density factor was used for disposable diapers in the 1990 update of this
MSW characterization report (2).
                                      6-1

-------
      Since the 1990 update was completed, additional analyses of disposable
diaper density have been conducted. Based on an analysis of the densities of
the individual components of the diapers (fluff pulp, tissue, and plastics), a
density factor of 795 pounds per cubic yard was derived. This factor does not,
however, account for the urine and feces that are discarded with the diapers,
and that are included in the weight of disposable diapers shown in previous
chapters. A density factor of 1,350 pounds per cubic yard was assumed for the
urine and feces based on data for sewage sludge of similar moisture content
(13). It should be noted that the density factors used are somewhat theoretical,
and that experimental data for diapers as compacted in a landfill might yield a
different density factor.

VOLUME OF PRODUCTS DISCARDED

      The volume of product discards in cubic yards (Table 40) was derived
from Chapter 2 and Table 39.  (It is necessary to characterize the volume of
MSW discards rather than generation because the weight discard estimates
most closely match  the wastes received at a landfill, where the experimental
data were derived. Discards include the waste left after materials recovery and
composting and before combustion, landfilling, or other
disposal.) The weight values from Tables 14,17, and 22 are shown in the first
column of Table 40, with the volumes being calculated by taking the weight
values, converting to pounds, and dividing by the density (in pounds per
cubic yard) from Table 39. The results are reported in Table 40 as volume in
millions of cubic yards of waste on a landfill volume basis for the individual
products.

      The data in Table 40 may be useful in comparing the relative volume
of each product in a landfill. It is not, however, recommended that total
landfill volume requirements be calculated using the  individual product
densities shown. Waste materials are mixed together when disposed and the
 materials become intermingled. This intermingling tends to reduce void
 space that occurs in a single material. Thus, mixed MSW in a landfill would
 be expected to have greater density than that calculated by using the
 individual density measurements.

       The data in Table 40 are summarized in Figure 21 and Table 41. The
 three categories of nondurable goods, containers and packaging, and durable
 goods account for over 86 percent of the waste by volume, while the same
 three categories account for 71 percent of MSW by weight Containers and
 packaging and nondurable goods occupy similar shares of MSW volume.

-------
                                       Table 40
                   VOLUME OF PRODUCTS DISCARDED IN MSW, 1990
                                    1990     Weight   Landfill    Landfill
                                                      Density*'  Volume*"
                                                      (Ib/cu yd)  (mil cu yd)
DURABLE GOODS
NONDURABLE GOODS
   Newspapers
   Books
   Magazines
   Office papers
   Telephone books
   Third class mail
   Other commercial printing
   Tissue paper and towels
   Paper plates and cups
   Plastic plates and cups
   Trash bags
   Disposable diapers
      Diaper materials
      Urine and feces
      Subtotal diapers
   Other nonpackaging paper
   Clothing and footwear
   Towels, sheets & pillowcases
   Other misc nondurables
   Total Nondurable Good*
 CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING
    Glut Packaging
    Beer and soft drink
    Wine and liquor
    Food and other bottles «< jars
     Total Clou Packaging
    StMi Packaging
    Beer and soft drink can*
    Food and other CUM
    Other steel packaging
      Total S**Pa£lcagi*g
    Beer and toft drink CUM
    Other cam
    Foil and closures
      Total Ahtmimim Pig
    Paper at Paperboard Pk§
    Corrugated boxes
    Milk carton*
    Folding carton*
    Other paperboard packaging
    Bags and sack*
    Wrapping paper
    Other paper packaging
      Total Paper* Beard P*g
Discards*
(mil tons)
24.8
7.4
0.9
2.5
4.7
0.5
3.6
4.5
3.2
0.7
0.3
0.8
0.9
1.7
2.6
3.8
3.6
0.9
3.2
43.1
3.8
1.9
3.6
9.3
0.1
1.9
0.2
2.3
0.6
0.0
0.3
0.9
115
OJ
4.0
0.3
12
0.1
1.0
206
(%of
total)
15.396
4.6%
0.5%
1.5%
2.9%
0.3%
2.2%
2.7%
2.0%
0.4%
0.2%
0.5%
0.5%
1.1%
1.6%
2.3%
2.5%
2.5%
2.0%
26.6%
2.3%
1.2%
2.2%
5.7%
0.1%
1.2%
0.1%
1.4%
0.4%
<0.1%
0.2%
0.7%
7.7%
0.3%
2.4%
0.2%
1.4%
0.1%
0.6%
14.0%
  520


  300
  800
  800
  800
  800
  800
  800
  800
  800
  355
  670

  795
1450

  800
  435
  435
  390
  688
2^00
2,800
2,800
2,800

  560
  560
  560
  560

  250
  250
  550
  304

  750
  820
  820
  820
  740
  800
  740
  764
 95.3


 18.6
  2.2
  6.3
 11.8
  1.2
  9.1
 U.I
  8.0
  1.6
  1.8
  2.3

.  2.2
  2.5
  4.8
  9.5
 16.4
  4.3
 16.4
125.3
  2.7
  1.3
  2.6
  6.6

  0.4
  7.0
  0.7
  8.0

  4.6
  0.2
  1.0
  5.9

 33.2
  1.2
  9.7
  0.7
  6.0
  0.3
  17
 53.9
Volume
 (%of
 total)
 23.1%
  4.5%
  0.5%
  1.5%
  2.9%
  0.3%
  2.2%
  2.7%
  1.9%
  0.4%
  0.4%
  0.6%

  0.5%
  0.6%
  1.2%
  2.3%
  4.0%
  1.0%
  4.0%
 30.4%
 0.7%
 0.3%
 0.6%
 1.6%

 0.1%
 1.7%
 0.2%
 1.9%

 1.1%
<0.1%
 0.3%
 1.4%

 8.1%
 0.3%
 14%
 0.2%
 1.5%
 0.1%
 0.7%
13.1%
                                  (cDattaied on next pace)
                                         6-4

-------
                                    Table 40 (continued)
                   VOLUME OF PRODUCTS DISCARDED IN MSW, 1990
   Plastics Packaging
   Soft drink bottles
   Milk bottles
   Other containers
   Bags and sacks
   Wraps
   Other plastics packaging
     Total Plashes Packaging
   Wood packaging
   Other misc. packaging
   Total Containers & Packaging
   Total Product Waster
Other  Wastes
   Food wastes
   Yard trimmings
   Miscellaneous inorganics
   Total Other Wastes
TOTAL MSW DISCARDED
                                      1990
                                   Discards*
                                   (mil tons)
115.3


 13.2
 30.8
  2.9
 46.9
         Weight
          (%of
          total)
71.1%


 8.1%
20.0%
 1.8%
28.9%
162.2     100.0%
         Landfill
        Density**
        (Ib/cu yd)
0.3
0.3
1.8
0.9
1.5
1.9
6.7
7.5
0.2
47.4
0.2%
0.2%
1.1%
0.6%
0.9%
1.2%
4.1%
4.6%
0.1 7o
29.2%
355
355
355
670
670
185
326
800
1,015
704
  649


2,000
1,500
2,500
1,651
  787
           Landfill
          Volume*"
          (mil cu yd)
355.4


 13.2
 41.3
  2.3
 56.8
412.2
          Volume
           (%of
           total)
1.7
1.9
10.2
2.7
4.5
20.3
41.2
18.7
0.4
134.8
0.4%
0.5%
2.5%
0.7%
1.1%
4.9%
10.0%
4.5%
0.1%
32.7%
 86.2%

  3.2%
 10.0%
  0.6%
 13.8%
100.0%
   From Tables 14,17, and 22. Discards after materials recovery and composting, before combustion
   and landfllling.
   From Table 39.
   This assumes that all waste is landfilled, but some is combusted and otherwise disposed.
   Other than food products.
   This density factor and volume are dehved by adding the individual factors. Actual landfill density
   may be considerably higher (see discussion in text).
   Source: Franklin Associates, Ltd.
              Figure 21.  Landfill volume) of MSW product  categories, 1990
                                  (In percent of total)
                                          6-7

-------
                                  Table 41

         SUMMARY OF VOLUME OF PRODUCTS DISCARDED* IN MSW, 1990
                              (In percent of total)

                                         Percent by       Percent by
                                         Weight*       Volume"
           Durable Goods                    15.3%           23.1%

           Nondurable Goods                 26.6%           30.4%

           Containers and Packaging           29.2%           32.7%

           Food Wastes                      8.1%           3.2%

           Yard Trimmings                   20.0%           10.0%

           Other                            1.8%           0.6%

             Total Discard*                100.0%          100.0%
            • Discards after materials recovery and composting before
             combustion and landfllling.
           •* From Table 40.
             Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
             Source: Franklin Associates, Ltd.
VOLUME OF MATERIALS

      These same data are reported by material rather than by product in
Table 42 and Figure 22. The values are ranked by landfill volume occupied,
with the most voluminous products listed first. Paper occupies the most
volume, representing about one-third of the total. This is followed by plastics,
at about one-fifth of the total. Those two product categories account for over
one-half of the volume occupied by solid  waste.

      The right-hand column of Table 42 presents the ratio of volume
percent to weight percent for each material category. A ratio of 1.0 means that
the material occupies the same proportion of volume as weight Values
greater tha* 1.0 mean that a larger proportion of volume is occupied than
weight Four materials stand out as having ratios of approximately 2.0 or
greater plastics, rubber and leather/ textiles, and aluminum. On the other
hand, yard trimmings, food, and glass each have ratios of 0J or less,
illustrating that these materials are quite dense and occupy proportionately
less volume in landfills.  .

-------
                                        Table 42
                VOLUME OF MATERIALS DISCARDED IN MSW, 1990
                                               Landfill
                                              Density*'
                                              (Ib/cu yd)
                                                   784
                                                   359
                                                 1,500
                                                   560
                                                   346
                                                   400
                                                   340
                                                 2,000
                                                 2,000
                                                   366
                                                 2,268
                                                   776



Paper & Paperboard
Plastics
Yard Trimmings
Ferrous Metals
Rubber & Leather
Textiles
Wood
Food Wastes
Othert
Aluminum
Glass
Totals
1990
Discards*
(mil tons)
52.4
15.9
30.8
10.4
4.4
5.3
11.9
13.2
- 5.7
1.6
10.6
162.3
Weight*
(% of MSW
total)
32.3
9.8
19.0
6.4
2.7
3.3
7.3
8.1
3.5
1.0
6.5
Tooo~
Landfill
Volume***
(mil cu yd)
133.6
88.5
41.1
37.2
25.6
26.7
28.4
13.2
5.7
9.0
9.3
418.3 t
Volume
(%ofMSW
total)
31.9
21.1
9.8
8.9
6.1
6.4
6.8
3.2
1.4
2.2
2.2
100.0 $
 Ratio
(vol %/
 wt%)

   1.0
   2.2
   0.5
   1.4
   2.2
   1.9
   0.9
   0.4
   0.4
   2.1
   0.3
   1.0
    From Table 3. Discards after materials recovery and landfilling, before combustion and landfilling.
 *•  Composite factors derived by Franklin Associates, Ltd.
***  This assumes that all waste is landnlled, but some is combusted and otherwise disposed.
  t  Found by difference to obtain total to match products table. Note Results in this table and Table 40
    are not identical due to rounding differences.
  $  This density factor and volume are derived by adding the individual factors. Actual landfill density
    may be considerably higher (see discussion in text).
    Source: Franklin Associates, Ltd.
                           32.   Landfill  velum* of material* in MSW,  1990
                                     (In p«rc«nt of total)
                                                  Van Trimmings 10%
                                                                  11%
                                             6-9

-------
VALIDITY OF RESULTS

      These volume data should not be interpreted as highly accurate. The
results reported here represent an initial attempt to use this method for
analyzing solid waste. While bringing an important perspective to solid
waste, the results should be viewed as approximate and not definitive. As
discussed before, volume measurements of solid waste are quite complex at
best, and will never accurately represent particular situations. For example,
individual materials just entering a landfill will occupy more volume than
the same materials after substantial settling and compaction have occurred.

      The density values in Table 39 are based on sorted MSW categories, but
later tests conducted by The Garbage Project indicate that mixing wastes
results in a higher than expected density. For example, mixing one cubic yard
of paper with one cubic yard of plastic results in less than two cubic yards of
material. This is because the intermingling of two or more different materials
with different .characteristics results in a filling of more air spaces than occurs
with a single material. This effect is apparently enhanced when materials are
compacted in landfills because of the shaking or vibration created by the
movement of heavy equipment on the MSW.

      These observations suggest  that if all wastes are mixed together, the
total volume may  actually be less than when the wastes are separated. There
is no suggestion, however, that this effect would significantly change the
relative measures recorded in the tables, such as the various percentages and
ratios calculated. Therefore,  these results do show in a general way which
components of waste are the most voluminous, and which occupy less
volume than average. It is dear that this perspective needs to be used in solid
waste policy decisions.
                                   6-10

-------
                              Chapter 6

                            REFERENCES

1.   Hunt R.G., Sellers, V.R., Franklin, W.E., Nelson, J.M., Rathje, W.L.,
    Hughes, W.W., and Wilson, D.C. Estimates of the Volume of MSW and
    Selected Components in Trash Cans and Landfills. Franklin Associates,
    Ltd. (with The Garbage Project) for The Council for Solid Waste
    Solutions, Washington, D.C. February 1990.

2.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal
    Solid Waste in the United States: 1990 Update. EPA/530-SW-90-042.
    June 1990.

3.   Darnay, A., and W.E. Franklin. The Role of Packaging in Solid Waste
    Management, 1966 to 1976. Public Health Service Publication No. 1855.
    U.S. Government Printing Office. 1969. Appendix B, Table 20.

4.   Derived from the densities of individual components of disposable
    diapers.

5.  Reference 3, Appendix B, Table 21.

6.  Estimates based on very limited experimental data with landfill
    samples.

 7.  Taylor, A.C.,  and Kashmanian, R.M. Study and Assessment of Eight
    Yard Waste Composting Programs Across the United States. U.S.
    Environmental Protection Agency. December 1988.

 8.  John Christopher Madole Associates. Yard Waste Management Action
    Plan for San  Jose, California. Final Draft Report. March 1988.

 9.  Franklin Associates estimates based on experiments with nonlandfilled
    material.

10.  Ranttn, S. Recycling Plastics in Municipal Solid Wastes. Center for
    Plastics Recycling Research at Rutgers. The State University of New
    Jersey. January 1989.

11.  Based on densities from Reference 3 as applied to a detailed profile of
     this category.

12.  No measurements were taken for durable goods. The value shown
     assumes that durable products have the same landfill density as
     nondurable products made of the same materials.
                                 6-11

-------
13.   Welch, R.O., et al. Study of Environmental Impacts of Disposables
     versus Reusables. Midwest Research Institute and Franklin Associates,
     Ltd. for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. April 1, 1977.
                                 6-12

-------
                               Chapter 7

                  COMPARISON OF MSW ESTIMATES
INTRODUCTION
      As explained in Chapter 1, there are two basic methodologies for
estimating quantities and composition of MSW:

      • The material flows approach used in this report

      • Sampling/ sorting, and weighing of waste on-site.

Both methodologies  have validity; both must be used with care if they are to
be effective for solid waste management purposes.

      This chapter compares the MSW estimates in this report with other
estimates from two perspectives. First, the estimates in the current report are
compared with previous material flows estimates. Second, the estimates in
the current report are compared with some of the estimates made by on-site
sampling studies.

COMPARISON WITH PREVIOUS MATERIAL ROWS STUDIES

      The material flows methodology has been evolving for about 20 years.
Over the years increasing levels of detail have been added as new data became
available and as new funding from public and private sources allowed more
complete analyses of the materials and products in MSW. For example, the
current report includes line items for some products—e.g., disposable diapers
and plastic soft drink bottles—that were insignificant in the early 1970s when
the methodology was first being developed. Many new types of packaging
have come into common use in the past two decades, and the current
estimates indude more detailed information on paper and plastic packaging
than was available previously.

      When changes have been made in the database, e.g., to account for
additional products, the changes were generally—to the extent data were
available—carried backward in the data series as well as being added to the
recent yean. This has been done to preserve the integrity of the data series by
avoiding discontinuities in the database. (There are, however, some
discontinuities introduced by the information sources.)
                                  7*1

-------
Companion of Current and Previous Estimates Based on Historical Data

      The last year for which MSW was characterized in the 1990 study
update was 1988. To highlight changes that have been made in this 1992
update, Table 43 was prepared. Overall, the estimate of generation  of MSW in
1988 has been increased by less than 3 percent, from 179.6 million tons of
MSW to 184.2  million tons.  This increased estimate is almost entirely due to
an upward revision of wood packaging generation.
                               Table 43
              COMPARISON OF THE 1990 AND THE 1992 ESTIMATES
                    FOR 19M MATERIALS GENERATION*
                       On millions o< tons and percent)
Materials
Paper and paperboard
Glass
Metals
Ferrous
Aluminum
Other nonfcrrous
Plastics
Rubber and leather
Textiles
Wood
Other*
Tata/ ProdMCt Witts*
Food wastes
Yard trimmings
Miscellaneous inorgank wasass
ToUl MSW Gtmrmtt*
PMMSS swr Pino* per Day
Preview
Estimate"
71.8
12.5
11.6
2.5
1.1
14.4
4.6
3.9
6.5
3.1
1311
13.2
31.6
17
179.6
4.00
Ciimnt
Estimate***
71.7
12.5
11.6
15
1.1
14.4
4.6
3.9
11.2
3.1
136.7
13.2
31.6
17
184.2
4.11
Difference
<1.0%
—
—
—
—
+713%
—
+3.5%
—
—
—
+16%
+17%
                       ivcjpdlBf And cDQtpntiftf.
    Free* Table 1 of *» *BM 19» if A MSW dunctjrtza*» report
                 prepared far tea report.
                    ta lUeymabh diapers «nd lead-add batteries.
                                                      Revisions in data source.
                                                      No change.

                                                      No change.
                                                      No change.
                                                      No change.
                                                      No change.
                                                      No change.
                                                      No change.
                                                      Previous estimates too low.
                                                      No change.
                                                      Differences due to wood wastes.
                                                      No change.
                                                      No change.
                                                      No change.
                                                      Differences due to wood wastes.
 Comparison of Current and Previous Projections ol MSW Generation

       As discussed in earlier chapters of this report projection* of MSW
 generation are done on a material-by-material and product-by-product basis.
 The projections are made using trend analysis, available reports from
 government (Department of Commerce) sources, industry sources, and in
 some instances, best professional judgment on the industries involved.
                                     7-2

-------
Projections were updated for this 1992 report based on an additional two years
of historical data.

      A comparison of projections of MSW generation for the year 2000 as
made for the 1990 update and for this report is shown in Table 44, with results
discussed below.

      Paper and Paperboard. While generation of paper and paperboard has
continued to grow, growth is unevenly distributed among  the grades. Thus,
growth of printing-writing papers, tissue papers, and newsprint  is projected to
stay on present trends, but growth in generation of corrugated boxes,
boxboard, and paper packaging is projected to slow. Overall, less rapid growth
for paper and paperboard is projected as compared to projections made in
1990.
                                   Tabk44
                COMPARISON OF THE 1990 AND THE 1992 PROJECTIONS
                       OF MATERIALS GENERATION* IN 2000
                           (In millions of tons and percent)
 Material*
                                         report
                           Estimate"  Estimate***  Difference
Paper and paperboard
Glau
Metals
Ferrous
Aluminum
Other nonferrout
Plastics
Rubber and leather
Textiles
Wood
Other*
Total Pmfac*W«te*
Food waMM
Yard tnnniBie^
MisceiluMOQV taofvjvuc WMeaa
TotMlMSWC 	 ilii
P*-**«r !*«••» ft*
96.1
10-3
1X0
3.5
1.5
21.1
5.3
43
8.4
3.0
165.4
13.3
34.4
2.9
2160)
4.41
84.7
13.5
12.1
3.6
1.5
24.8
6.5
6.7
16.0
3.7
172.9
13.2
3X9
3.1
222.1
4.54
-11.9%
+31.1%
<1.0%
+2.8%
+17.5%
+26.4%
+55.8%
+90.5%
+23-3%
+4.5%
<1.0%
-4.4%
+6.9%
+2.8%
+2.9%
  Aw Tabto 27 of te JMM 1910IPA MSW <
•- PVDBTaUeBofthfenport
 t Indndes part of natertak la dtapoatbto dUpera and laad^dd beMeite.
                                                         Growth less rapid than in past.
                                                         Decline in containers has slowed.


                                                         Minor adjustment
                                                         No change.
                                                         Trends reevaluated.
                                                         Trends reevaluated.
                                                         Added carpet fiber, sheets.
                                                         Wood packaging added; growth item.
                                                         Trends reevaluated.
                                                         Soww reduction practices*
                                                         Treads reevaluated.
             t add to
                                      7-3

-------
      GlaM. Generation of glass has been in decline in the past decade. Since
the last update/ however, there has been some increase in generation of glass
containers. Therefore, projections of glass generation for 2000 were increased.

      Plastics. Continued growth in miscellaneous nondurable plastic
products and in certain plastic containers led to an increased projection of
plastic generation in 2000.

      Rubber and Leather. Projected generation in this category was adjusted
upward somewhat based on trends since the 1990 update.

      Textiles. Carpet fibers, which had previously not been accounted for,
were added  for the 1992 update. In addition, sheets, towels, and pillowcases
were added  as a line item; these were not fully accounted for previously.
Projections were adjusted upward accordingly.

      Wood. Estimated generation of wood packaging was increased
considerably for this update, and projections were revised as well. Wood
packaging has been growing more rapidly than previously anticipated.

      Yard  Trimmings. Since the last update, many states have banned yard
trimmings from landfills, and many communities are taking measures to
reduce generation of yard trimmings. Previous projections of yard trimmings
generation were therefore revised downward to account for these recent
source reduction practices.

COMPARISON WITH ESTIMATES MADE BY SAMPLING STUDIES

       Comparison of estimates made by the material flows methodology
with estimates made by sampling and weighing MSW are of interest, but
must be approached with caution. For one thing, the waste stream sampled in
any particular study may not be comparable to the mix of products included
 in the material flows methodology. For example, industrial waste is often
 included in waste received and sampled at a landfill or transfer station.
 Seasonal variations in the waste stream may also affect the results of a
 sampling study.

       Another important factor to consider when comparing results is
 moisture transfer among materials in wastes as they are collected. The
 material flows methodology characterizes wastes in their as-generated
 condition. That is, moisture in disposable diapers is accounted for, and
 estimates of food wastes and yard trimmings have been adjusted to include
 the moisture inherent in the discards. Wastes as sampled, however, have
 been mixed together prior to sampling, and the moisture in the wastes has
 been transferred among products. For example, paper products in MSW
 absorb large quantities of moisture from food wastes and yard trimmings, and
                                   7-4

-------
the latter wastes thus contain less moisture than they did in their as-
generated condition. This moisture transfer may significantly affect the
relative weight percentages of the materials in MSW.

      Municipal solid waste composition estimated by the material  flows
methodology is compared with composition estimated by sampling studies in
Table 45. The sampling study results are presented in ranges; the first set
represents the results of 16 studies as compiled by Franklin Associates, the
second set is taken from a recent Office of Technology Assessment report on
MSW, and the third set is a more recent compilation made by Franklin
Associates. For each material category, the percentage estimated by the
material flows methodology falls within the range found in the sampling
studies. (The sole exception is an "other" category, which is not well  defined.)
                                 Table 45

            COMPARISON OF MSW DISCARDS BY MATERIAL FLOWS
                      AND SAMPLING METHODOLOGIES
                         (In percent of total by weight)

1990
Material
Flow*
Material Estimate*
Paper and paperboard
Glass
Metals
Plastics
Rubber, leather, textiles
Wood
FOQjWMtM
V«»J liltmmmilii m*
IOT IllUUIUIini
Other
32.3
6.5
7.7
9.8
6.0
7.3
8.1
19.0
3.3
PW !•*!!• II


Range of
16 Sampling
Studies**
14.4
18
4.3
4.9
1.9
0.8
5.1
3J
NA
M» »f*A t
•54.2
• 19.9
-11.5
- 9.7
- 5.9
-12.9
-19.3
•30.9
NA
nnevivtne^ii


Range of
9 Sampling
Studiest
29.9
3.6
1.5
5.3
1.1
0.7
1.3
0.0
3.8
nm
-45.9
-119
- 9.4
-116
- 7.2
- 8.2
-28.8
-39.7
-16.6


Range of
8 Sampling
Studiest
29.1
3.3
4.4
6.3
3.2
4.5
6.5
5.1
NA
- 43.8
- 5.9
- 8.8
- 10.2
- 5.6
- 15.1
- 9.8
- 19.8
NA
        •• Compiled by Frankta Aasodatss from a variety of sources. 1984-1988
          tine (now.
        t Office ot Tcchnoiogjr Assessment.
        * Compiled by Fnaldta Associates from a variety of sources. 1987-1990
          time frame.
        NA-Not available.
                                   7-9

-------
      Another interesting comparison of the material flows and sampling
methodologies was made by Dr. Edwin Korzun and others at Florida Institute
of Technology. >s part of a study for the State of Florida, they did a careful
analysis of waste received at landfills in Brevard County, Florida. They were
particularly careful to sort out wastes that are not classified as MSW, e.g.,
construction, demolition, and industrial wastes. As a result of their research,
they concluded that:

      The comparison of the broad categories indicates that the sum of the subcategories
      from Franklin [for EPA] and those obtained locally, known to be site specific for a
      particular Florida county, do not vary widely. Since no major differences were observed
      it was concluded that the Franklin [for EPA) subcategories of the percentage of
      materials in the United States municipal solid waste stream could be utilized to
      estimate those same components in the state of Florida with reasonable accuracy."

      It seems clear that both the material flows and sampling methodologies
have valid uses in estimating municipal solid waste generation and discards.
Whatever methodology is used, it is most important to be very clear as to
what wastes are being measured and at what point in the solid waste
management system the measurements are being taken.
                                     7-6

-------
                             Chapter 7

                           REFERENCES

1.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal
   Solid Waste in the United States: 1990 Update. EPA/530-SW-90-042. June
   1990.

2.  Congress of the United States, Office of Technology Assessment. Facing
   America's Trash: What Next for Municipal Solid Waste? (OTA-O-424).
   October 1989.

3.  Korzun, E.A., et al. "The Impact of Increased Recycle Rates on Markets
   for Recycled Paper, Plastic, Metals, Glass, and Rubber in Florida." Florida
   Institute of Technology, Melbourne, Florida. Undated.
                                7-7

-------
          Appendix A



MATERIAL FLOWS METHODOLOGY

-------
                              Appendix A

                  MATERIAL FLOWS METHODOLOGY
      The material flows methodology is illustrated in Figures A-l and A-2.
The crucial first step is making estimates of the generation of the materials
and products in MSW (Figure A-l).

DOMESTIC PRODUCTION

      Data on domestic production of materials and products are compiled
for 1970 through 1988, using published data series. U.S. Department of
Commerce sources are used where available, but in several instances more
detailed information on production of goods by end use is available from
trade associations. The goal is to obtain a consistent historical data series for
each product and/or material.

CONVERTING SCRAP

      The domestic production numbers are then adjusted for converting or
fabrication scrap generated in the production processes. Examples of these
kinds of scrap would be dippings from plants that make boxes from
paperboard, glass scrap (cullet) generated in a glass bottle plant, or plastic scrap
from a fabricator of plastic consumer products. This scrap typically has a high
value because it is clean and readily identifiable, and it is almost always
recovered and recycled within the industry that generated it. Thus,
con verting/ fabrication scrap  is not counted as part of the postconsumer
recovery of waste.

ADJUSTMENTS FOR IMPORTS/EXPORTS

      In some instances imports and exports of products are a significant part
of MSW, and adjustments are made to account for this.

DIVERSION

      Various adjustments are made to account for diversions from MSW.
Some consumer products are permanently diverted from the  municipal
waste stream because of the way they are used. For example/ some paperboard
is used in building materials, which are not counted as MSW. Another
example of diversion is toilet tissue, which is disposed in sewer systems
rather than becoming MSW.
                                  A.-1

-------
      In other instances, products are temporarily diverted from the
municipal waste stream. For example, textiles reused as rags are assumed to
enter the waste stream the same year the textiles are initially discarded.

ADJUSTMENTS FOR PRODUCT LIFETIME

      Some products (e.g., newspapers and packaging) normally have a very
short lifetime; these products are assumed to be discarded in the same year
they are produced. In other instances (e.g., furniture and appliances), products
have relatively long lifetimes. Data on average product lifetimes are used to
adjust the data series to account for this.

MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE GENERATION AND DISCARDS

      The result of these estimates and calculations is a material-by-material
and product-by-product estimate of MSW generation, recovery, and discards.
                                  A-2

-------
                Domestic Production
                        of
                 llatarlala/Producta
     Imports
        of
Materials/Products
                Conversion/
                fabricating
                   Scrap
     Exporta
       of
Matarlala/Producta
                                       Diversion
                                           of
                                   Matarlala/Producta
                          Permanent
                          Diversion
                       Municipal
                      Solid Waata
                       Generation
          Temporary
           Diversion
           iA-1. Material flows methodology for estimating
   pM»aUun of products and matarlala in municipal eoMd waate.
                                 A-3

-------
                      MSW
                   Generation
       f
  Recovery for
   Recycling
   Recovery for
   Composting
                  Discard* aftsr
                  Recycling snd
                   Composting
  Recovery for
Combustion with
Energy Recovery
   Rscovsryfor
Combustion without
 Ensrgy Rscovsry
                     Discards
                   to Landfill and
                   Othar Disposal
Figure A-2. UMarlal flows msthodotogy for astbnaUng
   rscovsry and discards of municipal solid waste.
                       A-4

-------
           Appendix B
RECOVERY SCENARIOS, 1995 AND 2000

-------
                               Appendix B

                 RECOVERY SCENARIOS, 1995 AND 2000
      Because of the rapidly changing situation and uncertainty in the available
data, projections of materials recovery were made in scenarios that could achieve
different rates of recovery in 1995 and 2000. Scenarios were developed for total
MSW recovery rates of 20,25, and 30 percent in 1995, and for 25,30, and 35
percent recovery rates in 2000. These scenarios are based on recovery of
postconsumer MSW and do not include industrial scrap. Also, composting of
only yard wastes is including in these scenarios; estimates of composting of
mixed MSW were not made for this report.

      The recovery scenarios developed for this report describe sets of
conditions that could achieve the selected range of recovery rates. The scenarios
are not intended to predict exact recovery rates for any particular material; there
are many ways in which a selected overall recovery rate could be achieved.

Discussion of Assumptions

      Some general assumptions and principles were used in making the
recovery estimates:

       •  Recovery includes both recovery for recycling and for composting.
         Recovery does not always equal recycling, however, and residues left
         after composting or recycling are not accounted for.

       •  It was assumed that local, state, and federal agencies will continue to
         emphasize recycling and composting as MSW management
         alternatives.

       • It was assumed mat there will not be a nationwide deposit law for
         beverage containers, but that the present state deposit laws will remain
         in place.

       • It was assumed that affected industries will continue to emphasize
               ry and recycling programs, and will make the necessary
         investments to achieve higher recycling rates.

       • It was assumed that the current trend toward banning certain yard
         wastes in landfills will continue, providing stimulus for composting
         programs and for source reduction of yard wastes by citizens.

       • Based on the preceding assumptions, most US. citizens win have
         to recovery options in 1995, which will often, in feet be mandated.
                                   B4

-------
        These options will include curbside collection, dropoff and buyback
        centers, and, in some instances, mixed waste processing facilities.
        Recovery will continue to increase between 1995 and 2000 as more
        recovery systems come on-line.

      • In spite of the factors encouraging more recovery as enumerated above,
        many areas of the U.S. are thinly populated and/or remote from ready
        markets for recovered materials; many of these areas also have
        adequate landfill capacity. Therefore, the overall recovery rate for the
        entire country may not reflect the rates achieved  in communities where
        conditions are favorable for recycling and composting.

      The ranges of recovery assumptions for the various materials in MSW are
shown in Table B-l for 1995 and Table B-2 for 2000. Assumed recovery rates for
both 1995 and 2000 were based on existing recovery rates in 1990, with projected
growth that seemed reasonably achievable nationwide. Projections for each
product in MSW were made separately, and the results were aggregated, with
some minor adjustments to achieve the three selected scenarios for each year.
Assumptions as to the projected recovery rates for specific products and
materials were made in ranges. It is certainly possible (indeed, probable) that any
given material will be recovered at higher or lower rates than those given here,
but the scenarios illustrate how the selected recovery rates could be reached.

-------
                                          TabtoB-1
                       SCENARIOS FOR RECOVERY* OF MSW, 1996
                       (In millions of tone and percent of generation)
                                         20%H«covefy     26% Recovery     30% Recovery
                             Oenerrton   T551*      Ton*     %~~    Tons    —%
OuraMoOoode
 MejorAcp*tncei(ferrmMrnei»ftonly)
 Rubber TVe» (rubber only)
 Qtflertei.
  Miee. OuraUet (fenous metato orty)
  OttterOuraetM
   rottf OureoM Ooodt
  Newe?ep«nj
  Books
  Office Papem
  T*epftorw Sook*
  Otter Corwnerael Prtnang
  TiinHii. Footww
  Otter Nondunbtei
   Tot* MondumM* flood
Container! end Packaging
  OleM Contatnan
   Sear 4 Soft Drink aoetaa
   Otter OUaaContamni
   TMaf Otaaa Pec*»fl*ig
  Steal Contetneni
   Beer 4 Son Oftnk Cena
   Food and Otter Cera
   Otter Steal Packagmg
    Total i
  Alumlnuml
    Seer 4 Son Onr* Cena
    Otter Cena
    Otter Mumnum Paokaalng
    Tot* ******* PacfcJBtoa-
  Paper 4 Paperttoartf Pertraalng
    ConueaMd Comamara
    Otter Packaging
24
2.0
1.0
0.1
4.4 .
204
"srr
14.1
1.1
3.3
7.5
0.6
44
5.9
5.0
164
584
5.7
U
12.1
0.1
2.4
M
2.7
1.7
0.1
0.4

264
-&
0.6
04
24
4.9

84
-rff
ISF
33.7
164
•SoTT
1.1
04
1.0
0.1
04
0.9
-IT
6.3
0.1
0.8
2.8
0.1
0.2
0.6
04
0.0
11.0
ZO
_2I_
2.7
0.1
1.1
-42-
1.1
1.0
0.0
0.0
TT
12.1
-&
04
0.0
ai
0.1
-aT
0.4
*
324
84
04
TIT
46.0
10.0
96.0
92.0
10
4.4
11.5
46.0
10.0
25.0
36.0
15.0
4.0
10.0
5.0
0.1
164
36.0
11.3
22.4
46.0
464
3.0
42.1
00.0
15.0
5.0
49.0
48.0
20.0
38.0
36.0
10.0
5.0
3.0
8.1
5.0
ao
28.4
20.7
284
04
204
1.5
04
1.0
at
a4
1.0

7.1
04
1.0
3.0
04
0.4
1.2
0.4
0.0
73T
2.3
-&
0.1
14
-M.
14
1.2
0.0
0.0
-rr
134
-ii.
15.4
04
at
04
04
—
04
-Aft,
23.1
43T
11.1
04
6iT
00.0
15.0
97.0
96.0
10.0
4.9
14.2
50.0
18.0
30.0
40.0
25.0
10.0
20.0
7.0
0.3
22.9
40.0
184
28.5
50.0
50.0
5.0
46.6
07.0
X.O
10.0
56.9
52.0
25.0
44.9
40.0
20.0
10.0
54
94
10.0
04
33.4
264
334
04
264
1.8
0.4
1.0
0.1
0.7
1.1
-5T
78
0.3
1.2
3.4
04
0.8
1.5
0.8
0.1
15.9
2.6
1.7
44
0.1
1.3
_2£.
1.4
1.2
0.0
0.1
-rr
13.9
_&L
16.6
04
0.1
0.4
04
14
14
_ifl_
264
47.1
164
04
"o£T
70.0
20.0
98.0
96.0
15.0
5.5
16.6
55.0
25.0
36.0
46.0
36.0
20.0
25.0
15.0
0.4
274
46.0
26.6
364
56.0
56.0
10.0
51.8
70.0
30.0
15.0
58.1
56.0
30.0
464
46,0
26.0
154
104
144
164
04
374
2*4
464
04
304

-------
                                              TftbtoB-2
                         SCENARIOS FOR RECOVERY* OF MSW, 2000
                          (In million* of ton* and porcont of g*n«r*tlon)
0%*«cewy       36%Raeov«fy
T5Hs^   %       135^™""'""%™
                                ^ ____ __
Products                        QsnacaUon
Durabia Qfmrt
 Ma^ A«*anc«« (farrcua rnatato only)    2.7'       1.7     86.0         1.9     70.0         2.1     90.0
 Rubbar Tlraa (njfibar only)              2.1        0.3     15.0         0.4     20.0         0.2     10.0
 Bananas, toad add
                                               1.1     96.0         1.1     96.0         1.1     96.0
                                               0.1     96.0         0.1     96.0         0.1     96.0
 Mlac. OuHbies (farrous mats* only)      4.0        0.4     10.0         0.6     15.0         0.6     20.0
 Ottwr Ourafilas                      23.6        1.0      4.4         1.3      5.6         2.1      6.9
    Total OursoM Good*               33.6        4.6     134         14     16.1         6.5     19-2
Nondunbta Qeods
 m«apapim                        15.1        7.1     47.0         7.9     52.0         8.5     56.0
 Books                              1.2        0.2     15.0         0.3     25.0         0.4     36.0
 Magaz*«4                           3.8        1.1     30.0         1.3     36.0         1.5     40.0
 OWca Papa*                        8.1        2.8     35.0         3.4     42.0         4.2     524
 Tttapnona Books                     0.7        0.2     38.0         0.3     40.0         0.3     46.0
 TOcd Oass Mai                      4.6        0.5     12.0         0.9     20.0         1.1     23.0
 0«Mr Comnwrcui PrtnUng              8.5        1.3     20.0         2.0     30.0         2.6     40.0
         Footwaar                    5.7        0.4      7.0         0.6     10.0         0.9     154
  Otfwr Nondurablas                   18.9       Q.Q      0.1        0.1     0.4        0.1      0.8
    rot* MondursM* Goods           84.4      13.7     21.3       164    28.6        19.6    30.4
Conlsifwr* and Ptcksglng
    Baar 4 Soft Ortnk BoMaa             5.6       2.2     40.0        2.8    50.0        3.1     564
    Onar Qlass Contsjnars              6.4       16     24.8        1.9    29.6        2.2     344
    Total Glass •scfcsgfry           "THT    ~TT    31.9       ~T7"   394       ~TT    444
  Stsoi Containers
    Baar 4 Soft Ortnk Cane              0.1       0.1     564        ai    80.0        0.1     664
    Food and Oner Cans                2.3       1.1     504        14    56.0        1.4     804
    OWer Steal Packaging               0.2       0.0      1.0        0.0     5.0        0.0     104
    rots* 9tort Paduofri0              2.1     ~TT    464       ~"TT   51.7       TT    56.7
  Aluminum Packaging
    Baar 4 Soft Ortnk Cans              2.0       1.3     86.0        1.4    70.0        1.5     754
    Other Cans                        0.1       0.0     30.0        0.0    364        0.0     404
    Otter Aluminum Packaging           0.4       0.0     10.0        0.1    154        0.1     204
    rot*4A«*iumflM*sg*if          2-5       1.4     544        1.5    594        1.6     644

                                                                 15.4    57.0       164     604
                                                                  2.3    264        1.4     164
                                                                 17.7    464       17.6     464

                                                                  04    504        04     564
                                                                  04    364        04     404
                                                                  14    364        1.4     404
                                                                  0,7    114        04     14.4
                                                                         999.        H     7f f
                                                                  14    1X0        1.7     164
                                                                          04      ^fljfl.  •  04
                                                                         364      "SOT   404
                                                                         264        564    32.7
                                                                 164    464       21.1
                                                                  04      04        04     04
                                                      284        667"   304       JfT

-------
            Appendix C
RESIDENTIAUCOMMERaAL FRACTIONS
                OF
      MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE

-------
                               Appendix C

             RESIDENTIAL/COMMERCIAL FRACTIONS OF
                       MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE

      The material flows methodology does not lend itself well to a distinction
as to sources of the materials because the data used are national in scope. For this
report, however, a first effort to classify municipal solid waste into residential
and commercial fractions was made. The classifications are subject to later
revision as more data become available.

      For purposes of this classification, residential waste was considered to
come from both single family and multi-family residences. This is somewhat
contrary to a common practice in MSW management to classify wastes collected
from apartment buildings as commercial. The rationale used for this report is
that the nature of residential waste is basically the same whether it is generated
in a single or multi-family residence. (Yard trimmings are probably the primary
exception, and this was taken into account.) Because of this approach, the
percentage of residential waste shown here is higher than that often reported by
waste haulers.

      Commercial wastes for the purpose of this classification include MSW
from retail and wholesale establishments; hotels; office buildings; airports and
train stations; hospitals, schools, and other institutions; and similar sources. No
industrial process wastes are included, but normal MSW such as packaging,
cafeteria and washroom wastes, and office wastes from industrial sources are
included. Construction and demolition wastes, sludges, ashes, automobile
bodies, and other Subtitle D wastes are not included.

       The classification of MSW generation into residential and commercial
fractions was made on a product-by-product basis, as shown in Table C-l. The
1990 tonnage generation of each product (from Chapter 2) was allocated to
residential or commercial sources on a "best judgment* basis; then die totals
were aggregated. Sampling studies were consulted where applicable, although
available data on residential/commercial sorting of waste are limited. These are
estimate* for tht nation as a whole, and should not be taken as representative of
any particular region of the country.

       Also, while this appendix contains estimates for each component of MSW
by source, there is substantial uncertainty associated with the individual
estimates. For this reason, the report provides final estimates for commercial and
residential MSW in a range, and encourages the use of this range rather than a
point estimate. A reasonable range for residential wastes would be 55 to 65
percent of total MSW generation, while commercial wastes probably range
between 35 to 45 percent of total generation.
                                   CM

-------
                                        Table C-1
                          WORKSHEET FOR ESTIMATES Of
               RES10EHT1AL/COMMERCIAL FRACTIONS Of 1ISW, 1990
Durable Goods
   Major Appliances
   Furniture and Furnishing*
   Carpets and Rugs
   Rubber Tires
   Batteries, lead add
   Miscellaneous Durable*
   Total Ourabto Good*
Nondurable Qooda
   Newspapers
   Book*
   Magazines
   Office Papers
   Telephone Books
   Third Class Mail
   Other Commercial Printing
   Tissue Paper and Towels
   Paper Plates and Cups
   Plastic Plates and Cups
   Trash Bags
    Disposable Diapers
    Other Nonpackaging Paper
    Clothing and Footwear
    Towels, Sheets and PfHowcases
    Other Miscellaneous Nondurables
    Total Nondunbh Oeodg
 Containers and Packaging
    Glass Packaging
       Beer and Soft Drink Bottles
       Wine and Liquor Botdea
       Food and Otter Botdee ft Jars
   1990
Generation
Million ton*


      2.8
      7.4
      1.7
      1.8
      1.7
     12.5
    27.9

     12.9
      1.0
      2.8
      6.4
      0.5
      3.8
      5.5
      3.2
      0.7
      0.3
      0.8
      2.6
      3.8
      3.7
      1.0
      3.2
    52J
       Olhef8*s< Packaging
       Beer and Soft Drink Can*
       Other Cans
       Foi and Qoeure*
       To* Aluminum Pieiaglng
      5.7
      2.1
      4.1
                                                 Residential
      0.1
      2.5
      0.2
      2J

      1.6
      0.0
      03
      IJ)
                                    (eonenued on nert page)
'ercent
95
80
80
5
5
80

90
80
65
25
60
65
65
60
20
20
96
90
50
60
90
50

80
80
86

80
86
5

80
50
90

Tone
2.7
5.9
1.4
0.1
0.1
10.0
20.1
11.6
0.8
1.8
1.8
0.3
2.5
3.6
1.9
0.1
0.1
0.8
2.3
1.9
2.2
0.9
1.6
34.0
4.6
1.7
3.5
9.7
0.1
23
0.0
2.3
1.3
0.0
0.3
1.5
Commercial
Percent
5
20
20
95
95
20

10
20
35
75
40
35
35
40
80
80
5
10
50
40
10
50

20
20
15
20
15
96

20
50
10

Tone
0.1
1.5
0.3
1.7
1.6
2.5
7.8
1.3
0.2
1.0
4.8
0.2
1.3
1.9
1.3
0.6
0.2
0.0
0.3
1.9
1.5
0.1
1.6
18.2
1.1
0.4
0.6
0.0
0.4
0.2
0.6
03
0.0
0.0
0.4
                                       G2

-------
                                 Table C-1 (continued)
                          WORKSHEET FOR ESTIMATES Of
               RESIDENTIAL/COMMERCIAL FRACTIONS OF USW, 1990
   Paper ft Paperbo*/d Pkg
     Corrugated Boxes
     Milk Cartons
     Folding Carton*
     Other Paperboard Packaging
     Bags and Sack*
     Wrapping Papers
     Other Paper Packaging
      Total Paper 4 Board Pkg
   Plastics Packaging
     Son Drink Bottles
     Milk Bottles
     Other Containers
     Bags and Sacks
     Wraps
     Other Plastics Packaging
      Total Plastic* Packaging
   Wood Packaging
   Other Misc. Packaging
   Total Contairvrt A P*g
   Total Product Waataa
Other Wastes
   Food Wastes
   Yard Trimmings
   Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
   Total Othar Waataa

   Total MSW Generated
   1990
Generation
Million ton*

     23.9
      0.5
      4.3
      0.3
      2.4
      0.1
      1.0
    32.6

      0.4
      0.4
      1.8
      0.9
      1.5
      1.9
      7.0
      7.9
      0.2
    64.4
   144.5

     13.2
     3S.O
      2.9
    51.1

   196.7
                                                Residential
^ercent
10
50
60
50
90
90
70

80
95
80
90
80
80

0
70


50
90
50

62
55-68
Tons
2.4
0.3
2.6
0.1
2.2
0.1
0.7
8.4
0.3
0.3
1.5
0.8
1.2
1.5
5.7
0.0
0.1
27.9
82.0
6.6
31.5
1.5
39.6
121J

Commercial
Percent
90
50
40
50
10
10
30

20
5
20
10
20
20

100
30


50
10
50

36
35-46
Tone
21.5
0.3
1.7
0.1
0.2
0.0
0.3
24.2
0.1
0.0
0.4
0.1
0.3
0.4
1.2
7.9
0.1
36.6
62.5
6.6
3.5
1.5
11.6
74.1

Source: FranMin Associates, Ltd.
                                               1) S. Environment! ^enacti
                                               n.-»von 5, Library (PL-12J)
                                               ~: J West Jackson Boulevard,
                                               Chicago,  !L  60604-3590
                                          Agenc)
                                        12lh Floor

-------