SW-785
SO LID WASTE
MANAGEMENT
Abstracts from the Literature
1975-1978
-------
-------
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
Abstracts from the Literature, 1975--1978
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
This publication (SW-785) was prepared
by the Office of Solid Waste
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
1979
-------
An environmental protection publication (SW-785) in the solid
waste management series. Minor typographic errors and format
inconsistencies in computer printouts herein are not corrected,
in the interest of expeditious availability of this information.
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Introduction 1
Section 1. General 3
2. Economics 7
3. Laws and Regulations 12
4. Analysis, Research and Development 27
5. Recycling 35
6. Energy 45
Appendix A. Abbreviations 49
B. Quantitative Measurements 51
C. Language Codes 52
D. Hierarchic Terms 53
E. Geographic Terms 64
F. Document Category Codes 66
i i i
-------
-------
INTRODUCTION
This document makes available in printed form one of the eleven
major subject categories of the solid waste management literature
abstracted and stored on computer by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. A decision to close the computerized abstracting activities
of the Solid Waste Information Retrieval System (SWIRS) in 1979 was
influenced by rising costs and moderate growth of requests from users.
However, EPA's Office of Solid Waste has undertaken to publish the
1975 through 1978 data; abstracts from earlier years may appear in
some sections. The SWIRS monthly abstracts series formerly published
are no longer available.
User Requests
The basic documents listed in the abstracts as "Retained in SWIRS
library" may be requested via interlibrary loan through recognized
libraries.
This abstracts series will not cover publications of EPA's Office
of Solid Waste. Instead, users may request the catalog Solid Waste
Management: Available Information Materials, which covers the years
1966 to present. Address the request to: Solid Waste Information, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 26 West Saint Clair Street, Cincinnati,
Ohio 45268. The above catalog includes indexes by subject, author,
and title, with order blanks.
Format, Abbreviations, and Typographic Errors
In the interest of making the data available expeditiously, the com-
puter printout is being reproduced without change of minor typographic
errors. Main abbreviations and acronyms are listed in the appendixes.
-------
-------
Section 1
GENERAL
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO.: 048490
(2) DOMESTIC: U (2) CATEGORY: 20 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Recycling aluminum energy and cost advantages.
(4) AUTHOR: Hodson R
(6) JOURNAL TITLE: Recycling Today
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) SEO. AREA: 1EU/2UK; 1US (10) PUb. YEAH:
1978
(11) ABSTRACT: Energy and cost advantages associated with aluminua
recycling are delineated. It the aluminum industry is to continue to
produce competitively and to enjoy growth markets for its products, it
»ust employ recycling as one way of reducing total energy costs.
Aluminum can be recycled lor about 15 cents a Ib. In England, recycling
has primarily been confined to recirculating metal among producers and
large sources ot aluminum scrap trom merchants, fabricators, and
aluminum using factors. Secondary aluminum plants in England have an
output of 187,000 t/yr, compared with primary production of the Beta!
at 330,000 t/yr and total consumption of about 600,000 t/yr. 1'ha
recycling of beverage cans and litter reduction in the U.S. are
discussed. The trend in the secondary metals industry id toward the
pretr eat merit, of scrap destined for secondary smelters. Secondary
smelting and recycling art developing together. The need to recycle
foil and its associated coatings is forcing secondary smelters to
conduct research on pretreatmont and melting methods.
(12) KEYWORDS: ALUMINUM; CONTAINER; iCONOMICS; ENERGY; CHEAP
BRITAIN; RECLAMATION; SCRAf; US
(14) HIEEARCH TERMS: 1KK/2AM; 1 SD
(15) STIBS ACC.NO.: 00347544
(16) CITATION: 16 (3): 24, 26, 26, Mar. 1978.
(1) StdiS ACC.NO.: 047832
(2) DO;ihSTIC: F (2) GREGORY: 20 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: T
(3) Aiii-lCLE TITLE: Atervinning av burkskrot mojlig i stor skala.
(Recovery or tin scraps is possible on a large scale).
(4) nUPiiOfi: Jonsson T
(6) JOURl.Ai. TITLE: Teknisk Tidskrirt
(10) LANGUAGE: SD (1U) GhO. AREA: 15iU/2SR (10) i>UB. YhAK: 1976
(11) iUSS'h/iCr: Scrap iron Iron used food ana beer cans is an energy
rich material. Each ton that can be recovered diminishes the need to
import energy corresponding to 200-600 1 oil. The difference is due to
the atount of energy consuaed when the scrap iron is recovered. More
than 100,000 t of tin plate is destroyed each year in Swedish dumps.
This corresponds to 3S,000 t/yr or oil. Since 1972, the tin plate
fraction of the cinder froa central refuse combustion stations has been
exaained Q etailurgicaliy a t Gulispangjj Elektrokemiska AB. It has proven
to be an excellent raw Ldttarial tor the production ot steel ingot and
for 45ft silicon iron. The steel ingot from Gullspang that is of
reinf orceacnt bar quality ia rolled into steel bars at uuarnhaomars
Iron Hill. The hot rolling or crude iron that contains tin has usually
caused problems at the steel mills, because cracks are easily formed.
Crack formation doec not occur with the Gullspang method even when
there is as much tin as 0. Si», waich is ten times more than is usually
tolerable at the traditional steel a ills, ate tin of the Bullspang
steal ingot serves as an alloy aetal. -The 45X silicon iron does not
contain tin or lead and it is used as an alloy metal at the steel
ailis. To proauce crude steel by way ot low percent silicon iron is
probaoy th e most energy saving nay of reusing tin plate. (Original text
in Swedisn).
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
(12) KEYWORDS: IRON; METAL; RECLAMATION; SCRAP; SWEDEN; UTILIZE
(lit) HIERAkCH TEkMS: 1WI/21S/3UT; 1MK/2TI; 1RG
(15) ST2IS ACC.NO.: 00b46885 (15) SECONDARY AUTHORS: Larsson P
(16) CITATION: 106(7) :23, ipr. 8. 1976.
J) SHIRS AtC.NO.: 046097
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATbGOHY: 14 (2) SUbJ.TYPE: G
(J) ARTICLE TITLE: The national perspective.
(1*) AUTHOR: Deuel P
(6) BOOK TITLF: In Pilcher, K., el. TalKiug Trash: Proceedings of
the Meeting oe the National Coalition on Solid Waste, Mar. 4-6, 1977.
(9) GRANT HO,: T93551-01-0
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) GriO. AREA: HJS/^Kft; 1US/2MJ (10) PUB.
YEAR: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: A national perspective is given on the beverage
container issue as a part oi ttie total .solid waste proliferation and
disposal problem. Deposit legislation was passed in 1976 in Michigan
and Maine, EPA promulgated guidelines calling for deposits on all
beverage containers sold on federal property, aiid the media has begun
to devote more attention to tat issue in response, to growing public
consciousness. National beverage container legislation has been
introduced in the Senate and tioase with many cosponsors, but hearings
have not yet been scheduled. The Environmental Action foundation is
setting up a clearinghouse on deposit legislation to expedite state and
local efforts to control Leverage container disposal, (nctained in
SiiTRS library) .
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLf; OWAINlitf; ENVIRONMENT; LA*; MAINE;
MICHIGAN; PACKAGING; RECLAMATION; KiiSOUHCE; STATE
(14) HIEHARCH TERMS: 1CI/2DV; 1LB/2LD; 1LB/2LG
(11>) STIMS ACC.NO.: 0 OS 43 147
(16) CITATION: Washington, DC, i. hvircnmenta 1 Action Foundation,
1977. p.53.
(2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
resource recovery?
1977
(1) SWIR3 ACC.NO. :
(2) DOMESTIC: 0 (2) CATEGORY: 20
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Bottle bills or
(4) AUTHOR: Heinberg HS
(6) JOURNAL TITLE: frrewfts Digest
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) PUli. YhAR:
(11) ABSTRACT: Issues related to rtcyclaule bottles and resource
recovery are discusse-1 in ter:us of litter, energy, solid waste, and
prices. A spokesman for tne nrewery industry claims that returnable
bottle bill proponents art making exaggerated claims of return rates
and energy savings in older to justify their suggestions. For example,
a 10-trip returnable bottle ultimately conserves mostly coal and some
natural gas, but it uses more petroleum than a nonreturnable steel can
because of the petroleum consumed in returning the bottle tnrougn the
chain of distribution. 1'tie proportion for ^.olid waste represented by
beverage cans {20 percent) is not certified as large enough to let
arguments against litter justify bottle bills. The spokesman also says
that claims for lower prices for beverages under mandatory deposit
legislation arc a myth, oe-cause incie.-ises in shipping, handling, and
display costs lor wholesalers arid retailers alon^ witn new investment
required of brewers will nora than offset any savings. A program called
positive litter reduction wiiioh nas been provtn eirective in multiple
C.S. locations is recottiaiended by the t-poxesmaiu
QOTTLt; tSRiiWERY; ECOLOGY; ECONOMICS; r'USL; INDUSTRY;
(12)
IITTEB ;
(14)
(15)
(t6)
KEYWORDS:
RESOURCE
STIMS AwC
CITATION:
-liaMS: 1KC,; 1S
NO.: UOS4U536
52(10) : 1
-------
GENERAL
(1) SWIte ACC.NO.: 04473U
(2) DOrtfcETlC: U (2) CATEGORY: 20 (2) SUW-IYPl.: ti
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Cities mine sojud waste piles in searcn lor
wasted profits.
(6) JOUlwAL TITLE: i.ng ineeriny News Record
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) PUii. YtAK: 1b77
(11) Aa Sl'hiiCI': Interest iu resource recovery is growing throughout
the world. About 300 U.S. cornounities have taken at least one of three
possicle steps to increase recovery, iaome states enacted waste
reduction iaws which inpose packaging restrictions or beverage
container deposits to lower the ait >unt of solid waste generated and
thereby reduce collection and disposal costs. Another possibility is
source separation, where localities separate recyclable wastes from
other wastes and sell tho recyclables for reuse, other cities have
chosen to build mixed waste recovery plants. Resource recovery has been
prompted by little landfill space aud a aiantet for recovered materials
and energy produced. The Resource Conservation and Hecovery Act of 1976
phases out open dunps by 1'J83 oivu putt, landtills under strict federal
regulations, the harvest from & resource recovery plant can be great.
By 1985, the U.S. could be recovering energy equivalent to 500,000 bbl
of oil a day. However, some plants have had problems in turning a
profit due to fluctuations in marketing the fuel or recyclables; a
higher plant cost resulted thau originally planned; variable amounts of
waste produced variable amounts of tuel; and equipment shakedowns
ensued, ine EPA is offering grants for planning, research and
development, uarket studies, feasioxlity studies and the like to
encourage states in developing their own resource recovery programs.
(1z) KEYWORDS: ECONOMICS; EH ERGi ; KUNICIPALITY; PACKAGING;
RECLAMATION; KltfOSE; JsEFUSi DKKLVtD FUEL; RESOURCE; SEPARATION
(14) HItEARCri TER'HS: 1Eft; 1EC/2L1'; 1MJ/2NA; 1SB
(1-5) STIrtS ACC.NO.: 00o43779
(16) CIttTION: 199 (11) :20-2U, Sept. T977.
(1) SWIRS RCC.NO.: 0«a610
(2) DOfiESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 20 (2) SOBJ.TTPF: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Yoseaite concessionaire runs successful
recycling progran; public relations is the key.
(6) OOURHAL TITLE: Solid Waste Systems
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) GBO. AREA: 10S/2CA/3TO (10) FOB. YEAR:
1977
(11) ABSTRRCT: Solid waste management in Tosemite National Park is
outlined. Two views are given for handling the waste produced by the
park's 2.5 million visitors annually. A five cent deposit is required
on all soft drink and beer containers sold in the park. 73 percent were
returned. Partial credit for the success is continuing the public
information activity of a park newspaper distributed free to visitors.
A truck collects containers every day from well marked refuse recycling
locations. The cans are sold uncompacted to Reynolds Aluminum for $300
per week*s haul. One ton of baled cardboard is also collected and sold
daily, along with other refuse. The program is breaking even
financially. Yosemite is a unique self contained community with an
environmentally conscious client. EPA has ordered all National Parks to
begin similar programs soon .
(12) KEYWORDS: ALOHINUM; CALIFORNIA; CAN-FOOD; FCONOHICS; PUBLIC
RBLS.TI08S; RECLAHATION; RECREATION AREA
(10) HIERARCH TERMS: 1ME/2HW; 1HJ/2H8; 1PJ; 1RC; 1SB
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS43655
(16) CITATION: 6(H):5-6, Aug. 1977.
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
(1) SHIRS ACC.HO.: 0E: T (10) PUB.
YEAB: 1975
(11) ABSTRACT: An indepth analysis was perrormed by the Michigan
Public Service Commission which tocused on the possible effects of
employment and energy savings duo to a shift to a refillable beverage
container system and the employ merit and energy effects of deposit
regulations ror nonreturnable beverage containers, with particular
reference to Michigan House UJ.11 No. 4296. The basic purpose of the
study was to provide an objective evaluation of the problems involved
in a nonreturn able beverage container system versus a reiillable system
and to enlighten the public and governmental decision makers so as to
enable them to make rational -judjaents in the majcisiizat ion of social
welfare. Chapter I of the analysis study focuses on national solid
waste problems and on Michigan's solid .laste generation and management
problems. Chapter II discusses the nature and dimensions of the
beverage industry and presents information on historic growth rates and
tro-jections of glass and metal beverage container use. Chapter III
examines direct and indirect employment effects of deposit regulations
en nonreturnable beverage containers. Chapter IV comparatively analyzes
energy savings due to a returnable system versus the present
nonreturnable systea. Chapter V discusses the economic and energy
implications of solid waste resource recovery, with particular
reference to the recycling of beverage containers, and Chapter fl
presents summary findings and policy recommendations.
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLK; Bimtffii; CANNING; CCWTAINSfi; ECONOMICS;
INDUSTRY; MANAGEMENT; MICHIGAN; PACKAGING; PErtSONNET; PBOJECTION;
RECLAMATION; fiEGULATIONS; UTILISE
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOSJ50JO
(18) DOC.CIT.: Rao, G. b. Michigan Department of Commerce. AD
economic analysis of energy ana employment effects of deposit
regulation on non-returnaule oeverage containers in Hichigan - a
systems approach. Lansing, nichigan Department of commerce, Oct. 1975.
M38 p.
-------
Section 2
ECONOMICS
(1) 3HIRS ACC.NO.: 04d119
(2) DOMESTIC: U (2) CATEGORY: 20 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: I
(3) \RTICLE TITLE: optimal recycling of aluminum beverage cans: an
tBipiricdl approach.
(4) AUTHOR: Ogbudinkpa Hfi
(6) JOfJHNAL TITLE: J Environ Systems
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) PJu. YEAR: 1976
(11) ABSTRACT: The cecyc.Li.ng of aluminum beverage cans as a method
cf solid waste disposal in the ligut of the growing importance of
teverage cans in solid waste is surveyed in order to find economic
•justification for recycling, which, if found, will be evoked to
complement ecological reasons for better disposal or solid wastes. The
analysis employed tho Simplex rtettiod, which illustrated that, of the
nain products from recycling the ueverage cans, copper is the most
important, followed by aluminum and zinc.
(12) KEYWORDS: ALUMINUM; CONTAINS; RECLAMATION
(14) HIEKARCH f3H»S: 1C^; 1MK/2AM; 1 KG
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS47172
(16) CITATION: 7(4):343-354, 1978.
(1) 3WIKS ACC.NO.: OU7676
(2) DOMESTIC: F (2) CATEGORY: 20 (2) SUEJ.TYfK: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Tho buybj.cn. strategy: an alternative to
container deposit legislation.
(4) AUTHOR: Ear due h h:
(6) JOURNAL TITLE: Hesource Kecovery Conserv
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) f'JB. YEAfe: 1978
(11) AriSTBACT: A programmatic alternative to legislation that
mandates the imposition of deposits on beer and soft drink beverage
containers is described and defended. This program is essentially a
consumer financed and privately administered "buybacK" recycling systea
that utilizes the government d.s a rinancial intermediary. This system,
like the deposit system, can achieve any desired level of container
recovery and reuse. Unique characteristics of tiiis buyuack system
include: it can bt phased in gradually; it can minimize the economic
cost of the "backhaul" industry (i.e., collection, storage,
transportation) ; and it can alter t tie long run mix of container
naterials Ln accordance xitn economic common sense. It offer;; a
superior alternative to the je posit system frooi nearly every point of
view.
(12) KEYWORDS: CONTAINED; GUV^KNM^NT; KECLAKATiON; SYSTEM
(14) HIFSAfiCa THHKS: 1Ci; InU
(15) STIMS ACC.MO.: 00i46729 (15) SECONDARY AUTHORS: Gibbs C;
Marseille E
(1h) CITHTICN: 3 (2) : 1i>1-1o4, day 1978.
(1) SWIRS ACC.NJ. : 045BdO
(2) DOCitSTIC: D (2) CATiiJOia: 13 (2) SUriJ.TYPf: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Voluint II. basic conversion factors. Glass
tottles.
(i) AUTHOR: Hunt SG
(b) BOOK TITLri: In tt source and Environmci: tdl t>rotile Analysis ol
Nine tieverage Container Alt^c natives. final t;p|jort. (8) KEPOrtl NO.;
EPA/53 0/SW- 91c (9) CONTRACT :,O. : 68-01-1848
(10) LANGUAGL: E;j (10) PJD. YEAR: 1974
(11) A3STHACT: tiasic convorsion factors used to convert raw fuel
and electric energy input Vdluf -s into oorresj/ondinj t nvironmt nta 1
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
inpact parameters (mobile and stationary sources, electric energy,
transportation, and conversion from conventional to Metric units) and
calculations made to determine the resource and environ mental profiles
of glass beverage containers are detailed. It was concluded that
reusable glass beverage containers (particularly toe 19-trip on-premise
glass bottle) produce less environmental impact than single use glass
containers, even after the additional weight needed for structural
integrity, additional processing, and transportation is taken into
account for returnable systems. Ttte potential for waste glass recycling
is also considered as an asset in reducing environmental impact of the
use of glass containers. (Retained in SHIRS library).
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLE; CONTAINER; ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENT; GLASS;
BECLAMATION
(1t») HIE HAH CK TSHflS: 1CI/2DV; l£D; 1GB/2GB/33D; 1PA/2PC; 136
(15) STIflS ACC.NO.: OOS44929 (15| SECONDARY AUTHORS: Cross JA;
tielch RO
(16) CITATION: Washington, DC, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 1974. p.44-92.
(2) SUbJ.TYPE: G
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO.: 04534b
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY 18
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Introduction.
(4) AUTHOR: Goen RL
(5) CORPORATE AUTHOR: Stanford Research Institute
(6) BOOK TITLE: In Potential tor Reusable Homogeneous Containers,
Interim fieport
(8) NTIS NO.: PB 265 100 (8) iEPOKT NO.: NSF/uA-770030
(9) GRANT NO. : A EH 7b-02396
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) PUB. YEAfi: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: The rationale for reusable packaging in the food
service industry is discussed, with particular emphasis on the use of
returnable beverage containers. Strategies for reducing resource
consumption and solid waste production associated with packaging have
been proposed, including the recovery of materials from solid waste
streams and the use of solid waste to produce energy through combustion
cr pyrolysis. One ma-jor impediment to a reusable packaging system is
the difficulty of sorting used containers according to product and
manufacturer and returning them to the origianl packager. Various
studies dealing with reusable beverage containers are cited.
Alternatives to reusable packages tiiat might accomplish the same
objectives as reusable beverage container systems are discussed. Three
alternatives are identified: containers that require less energy and
materials, recycling of container materials atter use, and energy
recovery from combustible container materials.
(12) KEYWORDS: CONTAINED; FOOD; INDUSTRY; PACKAGING; SYSTEM
(14) HIERARCH TERMS: 1CI; 1PA/2PC
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS44J9J (15) SECONDARY AUTHORS: Somogyi LP:
Steele KV
•(16) CITATION: Washington, DC, National Science Foundation, Feb.
1977. p.1-6.
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO.: 044261
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 08 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: The impact of source separation and waste
reduction on the economics of resoui.ee recovery facilities.
(U) AUTHOR: Skinner Jh
(6) JOURNAL TITLE: Resource Recovery and Energy Review
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) PUB. YEAK: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: Estimates are uaae of the effect paper separation
programs and beverage container reduction programs could have on the
economics of mixed waste recovery facilities. Such programs could cause
8
-------
ECONOMICS
significant reductions in the quantity of recyclable materials. These
materials provide a source of supporting revenue and their removal
could adversely effect plant economics. Economic estimates are based
upon assumptions concerning the composition of the waste stream,
technology performance and costs, and recovered material aarKet prices.
Analysis showed that the impact of paper separation on plant disposal
charges could range from a few cents per ton to several dollars per
ton, (the likely increase would be less than $1). For plants recovering
cnly ferrous metals, the reaoval of beverage container materials could
reduce net revenues by about j. 50 per ton of solid waste processed.
Plants recovering aluminum and glass could suffer reduced revenues by
an additional $.35 to $1.15 per ton of solid waste processed. (For Host
plants, the likely impact of beverage container reduction programs
would be less than $1 per ton.)
(12) KEYWORDS: ALUMINUM; ANALYSIS; CHARGING; CONTAINER; DISPOSAL;
ICONOH1CS; FACILITY; GLASS; IRON; PAPES; RECLAMATION; RESOURCE;
SEPARATING
(14) HIERARCH TERMS: 1EA/2EA; 1 KG
(15) SUMS ACC.NO.: OGS4J305
(16) CITATION: 4(2):5p, Har./Apr. 1977.
(1) SVilKS ACC.NO.: OU3540
(2) DONE STIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 03 (2) SUB J. TYPE: G
(5) CORPORATE AUTHOR: Research Triangle inst., Franklin Assoc
(6) BOOK TITLE: Energy and Economic Impacts of Mandatory Deposits.
(8) REPORT NO.: FE4/D-76/406 (9) CONTRACT NO.: CO-04-50175-00
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) PUB. YEAB: 1976
(11) ABSTRACT: This study examines the energy, capital and labor
impacts that would be caused by a live cent deposit on beer and soft
drink containers. The study examines the range of potential impacts
that could occur given various market responses to a nationwide
mandatory deposit law. Appendices include projected beverage
consumption, packaging, energy utilization requirements, analysis
methodology, and public opinion survey. (Retained in SHIRS library).
(12) KEYWORDS: ALUMINUM; CAN-fOUD; CONTAINED; COST REDUCTION ;
ECONOMICS; ENERGY; GLASS; METAL; PACKAGING; PLASTIC; RECLAMATION
(14) HIEBARCH TERMS: 1EA; 1EC/2KV; 1RG
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS4258J
(16) CITATION: Wash. D.C., federal Energy Administration, Sept.
1976. 740 p.
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO.: 039556
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 08 (2) SUiiJ. T Yt E: G (10) ±>UB.
YEAR: 1976
(11) ABSTRACT: Reasons for tne discrepancy in pricing ol soft
drinks, especially carbonated beverages, are examined. Bottling
companies offer a lower price to stores on returnable packages and
stores in turn offer a lower price to the consumer. During the sugar
shortage, prices of soft drinks soared but sales did not decline
drastically. And, sales of powdered drink mixes picked up. Bottlers
feel that as long as they c
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
(1) SW1BS ACC.NO.: 03U9t>7
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEiiOKY: 16 (Z) SUBJ.TYPi.: G (10) PUB.
SEAR: 1975
(11) ABSTRACT: The roie oi nonreturnaole packages in the solid
waste problem is examined. Pacxagxng beer and soft, drinks consumes 2S
billion cans per year in the United States. Returnable containers are
considered as one solution to the solid waste problem, although
attempts to initiate their use nave aet wita little success, ihe scrap
value of metals in waste cans is estimated at $200 million. Less than 4
percent is recovered, rmt technology is available to recover and
recycle more than 90 percent, 'ine deterrent to recovery in municipal
waste is that scrap metal represeats less than 5 percent in a typical
eoamunity. Sucn a small fraction of total waste, even thougn it is
valuable, cannot support tae cost or processing all waste material it
the other 95 percent is discarded in an open dump or sanitary landfill.
Metal cans typically represent j to 5 percent 01 total household waste.
Or this, a puroximately 95 percent are steel cans and the other 5
percent are aluminum cans. The ideal system for .subsequent processing
is considered to be segregation of cans by the householder into
separate gjroage cans before pickup. The most simple £ora ot recovery
is magnetic separation of oncoaiiny refuse after coarse shredding. Haste
reprocessing systems can rtsuit in a clean, finely divided metallic
traction. In some com a unities, solid waste is incinerated before any
attempt is made to separate feixous fractions. It is concluded that
citizens pay £4 billion foi scrap and refuse collection and that an
investment of up to 50 percent of this figure may be necessary to fully
recover valuable elements in solid waste.
(12) KEYWORDS: CAN-JOOD; OONTAlWEK; DOMESTIC; ECONOMICS; MAGNET;
HkRKET; HETAL; PACKAGING; HfcCL CATION; SEP AH AUNG; VOLUHL
(1b) STIttS ACC.NO.: OOSJ8U11
(18) DOC.CIT.: Nonreturnabie packages. In Hanteil, C. L. , ed.
Solid Wastes: origin, u>llecticn. Processing, and Disposal. New York,
John Wiley ana Sons, 1975. p. 915-919.
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO.: 0359U5
(2) IiObLSi'IC: D (2) CATEGORY: 14 (2) SUBJ.TYPL: T (10) PUB.
YEAR: 1975
(11) ABSTRACT: An indepth analysis was perforaed oy the Michigan
Public Service Commission w.ncn. rocused on the possible erfects of
employment and energy savings due to a shift to a refillable beverage
container i>ysteia anJ the e i-piojiaent and energy effects of deposit
regulations for norireturnacle Leverage containers, with particular
reference to Michigan House Bill i.o. H296. The casic purpose of the
study was to provide an objective evaluation of the problems involved
in a nonreturnable beverage container system versus a refillaole system
and to enliyhten tnt puolic aim governmental decision makers so as to
enable them to make rational judgments in tne maximization of social
welfare. Chapter I of the analysis EtJdy focuses on national solid
waste problems and on Michigan'.d uolid waste generation and management
problems. Chapter II discutk^s the nature and dimensions of the
beverage industry and presents information on historic growth rates and
projection a of glass and metal beverage container use. Chapter III
examines direct and indirect employment effects 01 deposit regulations
on nonretunuible beverage containers. Chapter IV comparatively analyzes
energy savings due to a returnable system versus the present
nonreturna nie systeai. Cnapter V discusses the economic and energy
implications of solid waste resource recovery, vith particular
reference to the recycling of Beverage containers, and Chapter VI
presents summary findings and policy recommendations.
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLE; BRFKLKY; CANNING; CONTAINED; ECONOHICS;
INDOSTRY; KANAGEKENx; HICHIiiAii; PACKAGING; PERSONKEL; PROJECTION;
10
-------
ECONOMICS
BKCLAHAIIOfc; REGULATIONS; UTILIZE
(15) STBiS ACC.NO.: OOS35030
(18) DOC.CIT.: Rao, G. B. Michigan Department of Connerce. An
economic analysis of energy and employment effects oi deposit
regulation on non-returnable beverage containers in Michigan - a
systems approach. Lansing, Michigan Department of Connerce, Oct. 1975.
438 p.
11
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
Section 3
LAWS AND REGULATIONS
(1) SWISS ACC.NO.: G4b1u1
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 14 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(3) ART.ICLF TITLE: The beverage container issue & resource
conserve ti on .
(4) AUTHOR: Stern Ci,
(6) BOOK TITLE: In Fiicher, K., ed. Tallcing Trash: Proceedings o±
the fleeting of the National Coalition on Solid Waste, Mar. 4-6, 1977.
(9) GHAUT NO.: 1'90551-01-U
(10) LANt,UAG5: EN (10) PUb. YEAR: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: A technical analysis o± the issues and requirements
for passing effective legislation for beverage container control to
etfect real resource conservation is presented. There appears to i>e a
choice between soft legislation (requiring container deposits) and hard
legislation (specifying rtrilicujle containers), with unknown longter*
consequences. The most thorougn stuuy of long term economics of these
two approaches (by the Federal Energy Administration) is criticized on
the grounds that while materials processing and use were followed and
analyzed f uo» source tnrougn recycling, including energy resources and
labor required, the capital involved was not considered as thoroughly.
It was concluded tnat including the capital requirements of the
container Baker, mining coapanit-s, ana energy facilities would
contradict the FEA*s conclusion that the deposit system is acre capital
intensive. (Retained in SrflfiS library).
(12) KEYWORDS: ANALYSIS; uOTILJi; CONTAINER; ECONOttlCS; tNVlRONME NT;
LAH; RECLAHATION; RESOURCE
(14) HIERA8CH TERMS: IAN; 1Ci,/2i)P; 1L*1
(15) ST121S ACC.NO.: 001*45151
(1b) CITATION: Washington, DC, Environmental Action Foundation,
1977. p.67-69.
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO.: 046100
(2) DOMESTIC; D (2) CATEGORY: 14 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: The ueverage container issue: the Michigan
story.
(4) AUTHOR: Rustea b
(6) BOOK TITLE: In Piicuer, K., ed. Talking Trash: Proceedings of
the Meeting of the National Coalition on Solid Waste, Mar. 4-6, 1977.
(9) GBANT NO.: T90551-01-0
(10) LANGUAGE: EN -(10) GEO. ARjiA: 1US/2MJ (10) PUD. YEAH: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: A description is given of tht successful 197b
beverage container legislation campaign in Michigan. Since legislative
bills aimed at beverage container control had repeatedly railed despite
strong statewide public support, a.n initiative petition was circulated
to give the voters the cuance to decide the issue in a general
election. Over 400,000 voter signatures were collected in five weeks so
that the issue could be put on the November ballot. The issue was
supported by a wide coalition of governmental and public service
groups, including the Michigan Farm Bureau, the League oi Women Voters,
federated Garden Clubs, and individual citizens. Opponents of the
legislation attempted to keep the referendum off the ballot but were
defeated in court. Media efforts to defeat the- issue concentrated on
rising prices, consumer inconvenience, degraded sanitation,
unemployment, and continued litter. The environmental coalition
concentrated on grass roots support, information dissemination, and
public media, emphasizing the t«o week period just before the election.
It was reported that citizen participation, rather than expenditures,
*as the key to success. (Retained in SWIRS library).
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLK; COdTilNth; ECONOMICS; ENVIRGNHEMT; LA«;
12
-------
LAWS AND REGULATIONS
BICHIGiH; RECLAMATION; RESOURCE
(14) HIEBABCH TEBHS: 1C2; 1LF/2SH
(15) STIHS ACC.NO.: 00345150
(16) CITATION: Washington, DC, Environmental Action Foundation,
1977. p.62-66.
C1) SBIBS ACC.NO.: 046099
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 14 (2) SUBJ.TY.PE: G
(3) ABTICLE TITLE; The beverage container issue: Massachusetts.
(4) AUTHOB: Duxbury D
(6) BOOK TITLE: In Pilchec, K., ed. Talking Trash: Proceedings of
the Meeting of the National Coalition on Solid Baste, Mar. 4-6, 1977.
(9) GRANT NO.: T90551-01-0
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) GEO. ABEA: 10S/2MH (10) PUB. YEAR: 1977
(11) ABSTBACT: An evaluation is given of the unsuccessful 1976
effort to pass beverage container control legislation in Massachusetts.
the measure was brought up to the legislature on an initial signature
of 100,000 persons, but was defeated in Hay, so than an additional
20,000 signatures were required to qualify for the November referendum.
Coalition endorsements by various civic, community, and state groups
were sought, including the Massachusetts Public Interest Research
group, Massachusetts Audubon, and the League of Women Voters. The
opposition spent 35 times as much money as the coalition, which
depended more on public media and grass roots information
dissemination. Although the opposition had about three times the media
coverage, the use of articulate and knowledgeable spokespersons to
present the conservationist issues and viewpoints was felt to be
offsetting during the campaign. It was concluded that the principal
reason for failure of the referendum was the number of referenda on the
ballot (nine), which served to split the interest and resources of
groups who would otherwise have been stronger supporters of the
beverage container referendum. (Retained in SHIES library).
(12) KEIWOBDS: BOTTLE; CONTAINER; ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENT; LAW;
MASSACHUSETTS; RECLAMATION; RESOURCE
(14) HIEBAfiCH TERMS: 1CZ; 1LF/2SB
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS45149
(16) CITATION: Washington, DC, Environmental Action Foundation,
1977. p.60-61.
(1) SHIBS ACC.NO.: 046098
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CA'fEGOKY: 14 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(3) ABTICLE TITLE: Maine's bottle bill: a history from 1940 to
1977.
(4) AOTHOB: Ginn W
(6) BOOK TITLE: In Pilcher, K., ed. Talking Trash: Proceedings of
the Meeting of the National Coalition on Solid Baste, Mar. 4-6, 1977.
(9) GRANT NO.: T90551-01-0
(10) LANGUAGE: EH (10) GSO. AfiEA: 10S/2ME (10) FOB. TEAK: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: A historical account is given of Maine's bottle
bill effort from 1940 to 1977. Returnable container legislation was
introduced (but not passed) in Maine in 1940, with the major motivation
cf commercial protectionism. A citizens' association was formed in 1973
after several legislative defeats so that money could be collected and
intensive lobbying could be carried out. The support of individuals and
existing environmental groups was solicited, and a letter writing
campaign to the legislature and newspapers was initiated. Legislation
was finally passed in 1976 requiring deposits on beer and soft drink
containers, approving redemption centers to handle empties, setting
deposits on all one way beverage containers, and providing the grocer a
13
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
handling fee. Problem areas in the legislation are identified as lack
cf provision for final disposal of containers, ambiguous
administration, passing on handling charges, the inefficiency of the
redemption centers, and the wording of the referenda* in Maine is
outlined in terms of planning, targeting, simplification, media,
soliciting grass roots support, speaker circulation, using fairness
doctrine media time, soliciting commercial endorsements, maintaining
press relations, and budgeting. (Retained in SWIRS library).
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLE; CONTAINER; ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENT; LAH;
BAINE; PROBLEMS; RECLAMATION; RESOURCE
(14) HIERARCH TERMS: 1CZ; 1LF/2SW
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS45148
(16) CITATION: Washington, DC, Environmental Action Foundation,
1977. p.54-59.
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO.: 046097
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 14 (2) SOBJ.TYPE: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: The national perspective.
(4) AUTHOR: Deuel P
(6) BOOK TITLE: In Pilcher, K., ed . Talking Trash: Proceedings of
the Meeting of the National Coalition on Solid Waste, Har. 4-6, 1977.
(9) GRANT NO.: T90551-OT-0
(10) LABGUAGE: EN (10) GKO. AREA: 1US/2MA; 10S/2MJ (10) PUB.
YEAR: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: A national perspective is given on the beverage
container issue as a part oi the total solid waste proliferation and
disposal problem. Deposit legislation was passed in 1976 in Michigan
and Maine, EPA promulgated guidelines calling for deposits on all
beverage containers sold on federal property, and the media has begun
to devote nore attention to the issue in response to growing public
consciousness. National beverage container legislation has been
introduced in the Senate and House with many cosponsors, but hearings
have not yet been scheduled. The Environmental Action Foundation is
setting up a clearinghouse on deposit legislation to expedite state and
local efforts to control beverage container disposal . (Retained in
SBIRS library) .
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLE; CO N TA18 ER ; ENVIRONMENT; LAS; MAINE;
MICHIGAN; PACKAGING; RECLAMATION; RESOURCE; STATE
(14) HIEKABCH TERMS: 1CI/2DV; 1LB/2LD; 1LB/2LG
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS45147
(1t>) dlATION: Washington, TtC, Environmental Action Foundation,
1977. p.bX
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO.: 045541
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 14 (2) SOBJ.TYPE: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: All in a week's work.
(6) JOURNAL TITLE: Modern Packaging
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) PUB. YEAR: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: The virtual impossibility of keeping up with all
federal, state, and local actions which effect packaging is
illustrated. To prove this point, just the rulings and proposals
initiated on the state level in one week are listed; the week at the
end of February and the beginning of March, 1977 being the period
investigated. 14 state legislatures worked on bills that could pose
potential problems for packagers. Some examples are: (1) Minnesota's H.
400 prohibiting pull tabs; (2) Ohio's H. 288 requiring a tax on
nonreturnable containers; (3) California's S. 342 requiring recyclable
nondeposit glass and aluminum Beverage containers to be identified as
14
-------
LAWS AND REGULATIONS
such- and (4) Oregon's S. 674 requiring that all, excluding glass,
b"TirK«K£r\s^
BEGOLATIONS; RESEARCH; STATE; TAXES
(14) HIERAECH TEBBS: 1LB/2LG; 1HA/2J1G, 1BE
(15) STIHS ACC.NO.: OOS44S89
(16) CITATION: 50(4) :12, Apr. 1977.
(1) SHIHS ACC.NO.: 045484
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 20 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: The whys behind a bottle bill.
(4) AUTHOR: Selby E
(6) JOURNAL TITLE: Reader's Digest
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) GEO. AREA: 1US/20R; 1US/2VT (10) PUB.
YEAR: 1976
(11) ABSTRACT: The popularity of returnable bottle bills is
explained by its appeal to public pride and economic incentives being
offered by commercial waste collectors and private and local government
bodies. Experience with the bills in Version t and Oregon has reportedly
reduced littering (66 percent in Oregon and 76 percent in Vermont). The
beverage and container industries have opposed such bills by financing
the Keep America Beautiful (KAB) campaign uring stricter enforcement of
antilitter lavs, more litter collections, and no cutbacks in containers
comprising litter. A KAB roadside litter survey showing that containers
•ere only 20 percent of the solid waste problem is challenged on the
grounds that the survey was limited to a snail area and to certain
types of litter. KAB litter reduction programs in various sites have
claimed success, but documentation is not available. Bottle bills are
recommended on the grounds of saving materials and energy and reducing
pollution.
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLE; BBEWERY; CONTAINEK; ENVIRONMENT; INDUSTRY;
UTTER; RECLAMATION
HIERARCH TEEMS: 1LB/2LC; 1 LD/2 LH ; 1 SB
STIHS ACC.NO.: OOS44532 (15) SECONDARY AUTHORS: Selby H
CITATION: 109 (651) : 169-174, Jul. 1976.
(15)
(16)
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO.: 045252
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 20 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: The case for mandatory beverage deposits.
(4) AUTHOR: Jeffords J«
(6) JOURNAL TITLE: Beverage Industry
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) GEO. ASEA: 1US/20E; 1US/2VT (10) PUB.
YEAR: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: Since beverage container deposit legislation is
unavoidable, industry's best strategy is to cooperate in the
development of the most acceptable legislation. Even if national
legislation is delayed by opposition, state-level initiatives will
continue to be successful. Although, a single national system would be
easier to deal with than a mixed bag of state and municipal deposit
lavs. Deposit legislation cat provide substantial benefits while
significant savings can be realized by reclaiming cans. National
benefits include savings of energy, steel, and aluminum and
preservation of space in sanitary landfills. The Vermont and Oregon
deposit laws have been successfully received by the public. H.R. 936
would allow consumers freedom of choice as to the type of beverage
container they prefer. It would require a deposit of at least 5 cents
on each container. If the bill was passed, cans would retain roughly
their present share of the market and the bill would minimize adverse
effects on the industry. A Federal Energy Administration study which
15
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
determined impacts of a beverage container deposit system is examined.
The FEA anticipates consumer savings from the use of refillables would
range froa $1.8 billion to $2.6 billion a year.
(12) KEYWORDS: ALUMINUM; CONTAINER; ENERGY; INDUSTRY; IRON; "»!
IOCAL; NATIONAL; OSEGON; RECLAMATION; SANITARY LANDFILL; STATL; VERMONT
(14) HIEBiRCH TERHS: 1CI; 1LB/2LG; 1SB
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS44299
(16) CITATION: 62(6) :14, 18, 20, 20A, 24, Bar. 18, 1977.
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO. : 045044
(2) DOHESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 14 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Canadian federal and provincial solid waste
legislation.
(4) AUTHOR: Hillis Li,
(6) JOURNAL TITLE: APHA Reporter
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) G£0. AREA: 1CD (10) PUB. YEAR: 1975
(11) ABSTRACT: Canadian federal and provincial solid waste
legislation is exanined. The federal government has no constitutional
legislating base and can only act by leadership to influence the
situation in noafederal areas. The government has proposed so»e short
ter« solid waste legislation out thera is considerable potential for
the federal government to enact legislation relating especially to
freight rates, tax incentives, market development, and standardization
of. containers and packaging, before this can occur, many basic programs
and information gathering projects must be completed. Hultijurisdiction
between federal, provincial, ana municipal agencies complicates
decision making reguired to initiate good solid waste management.
Legislation and regulations controlling solid waste management are in
the hands of the respective provincial governments. Recent provincial
legislation has emphasized reduction of unauthorized open dumps and
better control of authorized landfills. Three provinces have legislated
litter acts or beverage container regulations affecting the use of
carbonated beverage bottles.
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLE; CANADA; DUMP; FEDERAL; *'£E; INCENTIVE; LAH;
UTTER; LOCAL; MANAGEMENT; MARKET; MUNIC! PALITY; REFUSE; REGIONAL;
BEGULATIONS; STANDARD; TAXES; TRANSPORT
(14) HIERARCH TERKS: 10F/2DU; 1LB/2LD; 1LD; 1HA/2ME
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS44090
(16) CITATION: 42(3): 16-17, Mar. 1975.
(1) SilRS ACC.NO.: 044005
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 14 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(5) CORPORATE AUTHOR: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(6) BOOK TITLE: Yosemite National Park Beverage Container Deposit
Experiment Final Report. (9) CONTRACT NO.: 68-01-2981
(10) LANGUAGE: BN (10) GEO. AREA: 1US/2CA/2YO (10) PUB. YEAR:
1977
(11) ABSTRACT: On May 17, 1976 the Yosemite Park and Curry ;o. with
the support of the National Park Service and the Environaental
Protection Agency voluntarily instituted a 5 cent deposit on all beer
and soft drink containers, both retail and vended, sold in Yostaite
National Park, California. Prior to the promulgation of Beverage
Container Guidelines applicable to Federal installations in September
1976, the Yosemite Park and Curry Co. decided to make the deposit
system a permanent operating reature. The purpose of the deposit is to
provide consumers with a monetary incentive to return empty containers
for a deposit refund. Beverage containers are returned to the beverage
distributor if they are refillable bottles or sold as scrap if they are
nonrefillable bottles or cans. Environmental benefits are obtained when
recycled materials are substituted for virgin materials at the
production level. The purpose of this report is to present the results
16
-------
LAWS AND REGULATIONS
or impacts of the deposit experiment over its first summer of
operation. (Betained in SKIES library) .
£12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLE; CALIFORNIA; CLEANUP; CONTAINER; FEDERAL;
INCENTIVE
(14) HIEEAHCH TERHS: 1CI; 1ED; 1LD/2LJ; 1 EC
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS4304U
(16) CITATION: Washington, DC, U.S. Environmental Protection
agency, 1977. 45 p.
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO.: 043884
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 14 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Legislation, policy, and guidelines.
(6) BOOK TITLE: In Improving Military Solid Waste Management:
Economic and Environmental Benefits, Department of Defense.
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) PUB. YEAE: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: Federal legislation and Department of Defense (DOD)
guidelines pertaining to tne solid waste problem are reviewed.
Particular attention is given to the Solid Haste Disposal Act of 1965,
the Resource Recovery Act or 1970, the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1970, and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976.
Guidelines issued by the Environmental Protection Agency are noted.
They concern incineration, landfills, source separation systems,
resource recovery facilities, and beverage containers. The overall
policy of DOD is to comply with environmental laws and regulations and
demonstrate leadership in controlling environmental pollution. DOD's
policy for solid waste is to design, use, store, handle, and ultimately
dispose of all Materials to minimize the possibility of pollution;
conserve resources; and dispose or waste to the extent practicable by
reprocessing, recycling, and reuse. Requirements embodied in DOD
Directive 6050.3 and DOD Directive 4165.60 for the military services to
fulfill in reprocessing, recycling, and disposing of solid waste are
outlined. Guidelines issued oy ttie- Navy in 1975 which provide a
systematic approach for evaluating solid waste management alternatives
are noted.
(12) KEYWORDS: CAN-FOOD; CONSERVATION; DISPOSAL; INCINERATION; LAW;
HASAGEMENT; MILITARY; B ECLA.IAi'ION; REGULATIONS; SANITARY LANDFILL;
SEPARATING; STORAGE
(14) HIEHARCH TERMS: 1DD; 1MA; 1RG
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS42927
(1h) CITATION: Washington, DC, U.S. General Accounting Office, June
2, 1977. p.3-6.
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO.: 04
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
how Senators from those states voted on the national deposit bill.
Three courts (in Maryland, New York, and Virginia) have addressed
thenselves to specific restrictive container legislation. Host af the
bills introduced recently have rescabled the Oregon bottle bill.
Variations on the theme are noted. A state by state legislation and
regulation breakdown is presented which notes: population; plants (sort
drink and beer); bills introduced 1974-1976; 1976 bills accordiny to
litter, container, recycle, local; and comments. Another table shows
how U.S. Senators voted on the national deposit bill.
(12) KEYHOBDS: BOTTLE; CALIFORNIA; CONTAINER; FEDERAL; LEGAL;
LEGISLATION; LITTER; LOCAL; MARYLAND; MINNESOTA; NEW YOBK; OBEGON;
SOOTH DAKOTA; STATE; VERMONT; VIRQINIA
(14) HIERARCH TEBMS: 1LB/2LD; 1 LB/2LG
(15) STIHS ACC.NO.: 00341994
(16) CITATION: 95(1234) :25-29, «64, Sept. 1976.
(1) SWIBS ACC.NO.: 042736
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 20 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Congress report asks deposits.
(4) AUTHOR: Hickox B
(6) JOURNAL TITLE: Food and Drug Packaging
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) GEO. AfiEA: 10S/20R (10) PUB. YEAH: 1977
(11) ABSTBACT: Mandatory deposits on beverage cans and bottles,
excise taxes on nonreturnable containers, and product disposal charges
on other consumer product packaging have been recommended by a
Congressional commission as the best method for recycling precious
resources. The National Commission on Supplies and Shortages' report
nrqes Congress to step up recycling efforts. Among its arguments for
greater materials recycling, the Commission notes energy savings,
reduced demand for virgin resources, development of domestic materials
sources, and reduced cost or handling solid waste. As guides for future
deposit legislation, the Commission offered the Oregon bottle bill
which has greatly stimulated recycling and reduced roadside litter
while leaving beverage prices essentially unchanged. Positions of the
U.S. Department of Commerce, the Environmental Protection Agency, and
the Federal Energy Administration are noted and findings of their
studies discussed.
(12) KEYWORDS: AUTHOhlTX; BOXl'LE; CAN-FOOD; CONTAINED; DISPOSAL;
EOC; ENERGY; EPA; FEDEEAL; FEE; LAW; LITERATURE; OREGON; PACKAGING;
RECLAMATION; TAXES
(14) HIEBARCH TERMS: 1CI/2DV ; 1GB/2GB/3GF; 1SB
(15) STIHS ACC.NO.: OOS41779
(16) CITATION: 36(4) :4,31, Feb. 24, 1977.
(1) SWIBS ACC.NO.: 042023
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATiSGOtfY: 14 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Here's what they're saying or. both sides of the
non-returnable beverage container controversy.
(6) JOURNAL TITLE: Resource Recovery and Energy Review
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) PUB. YEAR: 1976
(11) ABSTRACT: Opposing views on the topic of regional as well as a
national ban on the manufacture and sale of disposacle drinking
containers are presented. Those in favor of such a ban claim that a)
our enviornment would be cleaner, b) minerals now in short supply would
be conserved, and c) a profitable recycling industry would be created.
Those against feel that a) people would avoid the ban by crossing
jurisdictional districts, b) the canning and bottling industries would
suffer financially, creating greater unemployment, and c) there would
not be any noticeable improvement in the environment. Further research
18
-------
LAWS AND REGULATIONS
is needed to verify either party's claims.
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLh; CAMPAIGN; ENERGY; ENVIHOHHENT; EPA; FOOD;
IAH; LITTER; RECLAflATION
(14) HIEHARCH TEBHS: 1LB/2LG; 1LD/2LH; 1PA/2PA
(15) STIBS ACC.HO.: OOS41067
(16) CITATION: 3 (5): 10-13, Sept./Oct. 1976.
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO. : 041824
(2) DOMESTIC: F (2) CATEGORY: 15 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G (10) GEO.
AREA: 1CD/20N (10) PUB. YEAK: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: A new nlffl contends that restrictive beverage can
legislation is ineffective in dealing witn garbage disposal problems
and that solid waste disposal can only be dealt with by a vigorous
program of resource recovery through recycling. The film was made by
the Metal Container Manufacturers1 Advisory Council which represents
the can producing companies and major metal suppliers in Ontario.
litter is seen as a behavioral problem which will continue until people
change their ways. The Council recommends adoption of Keep America
Eeautiful's Clean Community System, an anti litter program based on
behavioral reprogramoing. The Council anticipates that banning
nonrefillable cans could increase tue garbage load. Banning
nonrefillable cans in Ontario would also mean the loss of nore than
1,000 -jobs. Conversely, solid waste management generates jobs.
(12) KEYWORDS: AUDIO-VISUAL; BOTTLE; CAMPAIGN; CAN-FOOD; CANADA;
DISPOSAL; INDUSTRY; LAW; LITTER; ONTARIO; PACKAGING; PSYCHOLOGICAL;
EUBLIC RELATIONS; RECLAMATION
(14) HIERAHCH TERMS: 1CI/2DV; 1EB/2ED; 1Lb; 1LD
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS40368
(18) DOC.CIT.: New film deals with solid waste. Canadian Packaging,
30 (1):126-127, Jan. 1977.
14 (2) SUBJ.TYPE:
AREA: 1CD/20N (10)
G
PUB.
YEAB:
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO.: 041125
(2) DOMESTIC: 0 (2) CATEGORY:
(4) AUTHOR: Topka G (10) GflO.
1976
(11) ABSTRACT: Ontario legislation calls for mandatory deposits on
all returnable soft dririK and beer containers, with the stipulation
that the retailer must refund the consumer's deposit in cash.
Advertising must show that a returnable version of any promoted
uonreturnable container is available. And, equal suelf space must be
given to returnable versions of nonreturnable packages. Canadian
bottlers commenting on the law agree that tor most major brand
bottlers, the success of a return system would be beneficial; small
bottlers were less enthusiastic. The retailers are seen as the ones who
•ust bear most of the impact of tue law. A Coca Cola spokesman said
that because there has been a progressive changeover to refillables in
Ontario there has been no disruption of soft drink operations.
Potential enforcement problems were noted. The Canadian Ministry of the
Environment is studying tue feasibility of standardizing soft drink
containers. Beer is currently packaged in standard containers
throughout Canada.
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLE; CANADA; CONTAINER; FOOD; LAW; ONTARIO;
EACKAGING
(14) HIERARCh TERMS: 1LB/2LG; 1PA
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS40169
(18) DOC.CIT.: Topka, G. dottier reaction varies as Ontario adopts
restrictions. Beverage Industry, 1, 4, 5, 14, Dec. 17, 1976.
19
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO.: 040926
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 14 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(4) AUTHOH: Futch H (10) GEO. AREA: 10S/2CO; 10S/2HA (10) PUB.
YEAB: 1976
(11) ABSTRACT: Beverage container legislation in several States is
reviewed. Voters in Michigan and Maine approved a law to require
nandatory deposits on soft drink and beer containers. In Michigan, the
law is to become effective in November 1978. The law calls for a
deposit of at least 10 cents on each beverage container, with a deposit
cf 5 cents on certified containers or those which aay be used by more
than one bottler or brewer. Pull tab closures will be prohibited. The
law in flaine will prohibit pull tab closures, an well as plastic loop
carriers, and calls for a minmua deposit of 5 cents on all beverage
containers. The law will become effective on January 1, 1978. Beverage
container legislation that did not pass in Colorado, New York,
Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania is noted. The debate over beverage
container legislation among industry, environaental, and governmental
groups is discussed.
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLE; BRIBERY; COLORADO; DISCUSSION; EFFECT;
ENVIRONMENT; INDUSTRY; LA«; HAINE; ttASSACHOSETTS; MICHIGAN; NEH YORK;
EACKAGING; PENNSYLVANIA
(1U) HIERARCH TEEMS: 1GB/2GB/3GD; 1 PA
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS39970
(18) DOC.CIT.: Futch, M. Relerendua: ballot box attack on
convenience packaging. Beverage Industry, 61 (11):4A-4B, 26A-26C, Dec.
3, 1976.
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO.: 040502
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 14 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G (10) GEO.
AREA: 1US/2NY (10) PUB. YEA.K: 1975
(11) ABSTRACT: A report on local, State, and Federal action related
to beverage container legislation is presented. On the State level, 575
container bills have been under consideration sinse 1974. Over 1,000
have been introduced in State legislatures since 1969. Six communities
and one State have held referenda on proposals to restrict beverage
containers. In every case (one in 1975, three during 1974, and three
earlier), the proposals wtre defeated by popular vote. In two
communities, restrictive ordinances were overturned or enjoined in
courts during 1974. Bills in the District of Colurabia; Montgomery
County, Maryland; Bowie, Maryland; Howard County, Maryland; Loudouu
County, Virginia; and Oberlin, Ohio are noted. In 1974, restrictive
beverage container legislation was introduced in virtually every State
legislature which convened during the year. In 1975, restrictive
beverage container legislation was introduced in 42 States. State
legislative action in South Dakota, Vermont, Minnesota, and Oregon is
discussed, and proposed Federal beverage container legislation
centering or a national two level deposit system is examined. Also
provided is information on resource recovery, litter, the Oregon bottle
bill, and the recycling of aluminum cans. (Retained in SKIRS library)
(12) KEYWORDS: ADMINISTRATION; ALUMINUM; CONTAINER; CONTROL;
COUNTY; DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA; FEDERAL; LAW; LITTER; LOCAL; MARYLAND;
MINNESOTA; MUNICIPALITY; OHIO; OREGON; RECLAMATION; SOUTH DAKOTA;
STATE; VERMONT; VIRGINIA
(14) HIERARCH TEKM3: 1CI; UB/2LG
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS39546
(18) DOC.CIT.: Beverage container legislation ... a status
report. New York, NY, The Aluminum Association, Inc. , Aug. 1975. 5 p.
20
-------
LAWS AND REGULATIONS
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO.: 040501
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 14 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G (10) GEO.
AREA: 1US/20R (10) PUB. YEAH: 1975
(11) ABSTRACT: The impleaentation of Oregon's 1972 beverage
container legislation is detailed. Oregon's bill requires beverage
distributers and retailers to charge consumers a deposit even on
convenience containers. Dtposits range from 2 to 24 cents but must be
at least 5 cents unless the container is reusable by more than one
itanufacturer. The bill also requires beverage makers to stamp, emboss,
cr label containers with refund in torn a to. on and requires stores and
distributors to accept the containers and pay the refunds. Any metal
beverage container with a closure that can Be removed without the aid
cf a can opener is prohibited. Data are provided on litter reductions
resuling from implementation uf the legislation. It is estimated that
litter was reduced by 20 percent from 1973 to 1974. The economic: inpact
of the bottle bill is assessed. Alternatives to the oottle bill are
discussed, including an action research model (ARM), reclamation, and
resource recovery. (Retained in SWIitS library)
(12) KjSWORDS: AiaHINUfl; JOTTLX; CAN-FOOD; CONTROL; DATA;
ECONOMICS; EFFECT; FEE; LAW; L1TTEK; OREGON; RECLAMATION; REGULATIONS
(14) HIERAHCH TERMS: 1CI; 1LB/2LG
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS39545
(18) OUC.CIT.: Report on the Oregon bottle bill. Pittsburgh, PA,
Aluminum Company of America, Oct. 1975. 1 p.
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO. : 040207
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 15 (2) SUBJ.Ty.PE: G
(4) AUTHOR: tlhrhammer J (10) GEO. AREA: 1US/2CA/3YO (10) PUB.
YEAR: 1976
(11) ABSTSACT: An experiment in California's Yosemite National Park
is described that concerns returnable bottles. A park concessionaire
tegan charging a five cent deposit on every beverage container sold.
The purpo.se was to encouragt consumers to collect cans and bottles
rather than toss them away as litter. As a result of the experiment,
the return rate reached 75 percent and the amount of litter in the park
was greatly reduced. In 1971, tne Ortgon legislature passed a law
requiring deposits on all beer and soft drinx containers and banning
the pull tab bottle. The return rate for bottles averaged 90 percent.
It is concluded that tiie nign return rates achieved in Yosemite and
Oregon strongly suggest ttiat the deposit system may be the answer to
litter Leduction problems. Opposition to and proponents of returnable
Lottie legislation are noted.
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLt; CALIFORNIA; CAN-FOOD; EFFECT; FEE; l\ H ;
UTTER; OREGON ; PUBLIC RELATIONS; hECREATION AR£A; REDUCTION
(14) HIERARCti TERMS: 1C1; 1Lo/2LG; 1BC
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOSJ9251
(18) DOC.CIT. : Uhrhaiumer, J. The point ol no returns. Sports
Illustrated, 42, 44-45, Aug. 2, 1976.
(1) SHIES ACC.NO. : 040157
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATuGGtY: 15 (2) SUBJ.TYfE: T
(4) AUTHOR: Waggoner D (10) 3EO. AREA: 1US/20H (10) PUB. XEA.C
1976
(11) ABSTRACT: The Oregon Bottle Bill, which requires that i rerund
fce paid by the retailor tor a.npty neer and soft drink containers, is
examined with reference to tht, problem of waste reduction. A minimum
two cent refund is reguired on all bottles which are reuseable but all
ether beverage containers (cans included) require a five cent minimum
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
refund. Beverage sales do not seem to be affecttd by the refund policy.
There has been a 20 percent decrease in roadside litter in a test area
in the two years following enactment of the law. Opposition to the law
froa the aluminum industry ace detailed. It is suggested that the type
of legislation passed in Oregon should be copied by other states since
it has proved that a financial incentive to return a container results
in increased sales in refillable containers and it helps bring the
container back. The people of the state saved 1. 4 trillion BTUs in one
year which is enough energy savings to provide for the annual hone
heating needs for 45,000 Oregonians heating with natural gas.
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLE; BIU; CAN-FOOD; ENERGY; ENVIRONMENT; LAH;
CHEGON; RECLAHATION
(114) HIERASCH TERMS: 1CI; 1DO/20N; 1GB/2GB/3GD
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS39201
(18) DOC.CIT. : Waggoner, u. The Oregon Bottle Bill—facts and
fancies. Environmental Action uulletin, 7(18):2-3, Sept. 4, 1976.
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO.: 040134
(2) DOMESTIC: 0 (2) oATEGOKY: 1b (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G (10) GKO.
ABEA: 1US/2CO; 1U3/2BA; 1US/2HE; 1US/2MI (10) PUB. YEA8: 1976
(11) ABSTRACT: It is reported that mandatory beverage container
deposit proposals have been rejected by Massachusetts and Colorado but
approved in Maine and Michigan. In the latter two States, a five cent
deposit on refillable bottles is now required, pull tab cans ara
outlawed, and the refund value is to be stamped on the container. The
Maine referendum measure also bans uonbiodegradable six pack carriers.
In Michigan, battles must be .state certified as refillat)le and the
State's name must be stamped on returnablcs alongside the refund value.
It is estimated that orewers and bottlers spent almost SI million to
defeat the bill in Massacnusetts.
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLE; CAMPAIGN; COLORADO; CONTAINER; FOOD;
INDUSTRY; LAH; MAINE; MASSACilUSETi'S ; MICHIGAN; PACKAGING
(14) HIEHARCH TERMS: 1CI/2DV; 1LB/2LB
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOSJ917d
(18) DOC.CIT,: State scores: rtich. , He. yea, Colo. , Ma. nay. Food
and Drug Packaging, 35(10): 1, 14, NOV. 18, 1976.
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO.: 040133
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 18 (2) SUL.J.TYPE: G
(4) AUTHOR: futch M (10) GfcU. AREA: 1C1/2DV (10) PUB. YE^E:
1976
(11) ABSTRACT: The campaign against restrictive container
legislation and the upcoming reftrt'flduai in four Stated is reported.
Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, and Michigan voters have the
opportunity to accept 3r reject measures which call either for
nandatory deposits on all oeverage containers or baa pull tau closures
and plastic retainers. Enactment of restiictive container legislation
is anticipated to have extensive raiaificatior.s on beverage and
container manufacturers, superKciirkets, and the consumer. The massive
compaigns which have been mounted in the effected States to educate the
consumer as to the repercussions of restrictive legislation are
described.
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLt; CnflPAIGN; CANNING; COLOHAOO; CONTAINS;
E-FFECI; FOOD; INDUSTRY; t. AW ; .1AINE; MASSACHUSETTS; MICHIGAN; PACKAGING;
tUBLIC &EL&TIONS
(1U) hIEEARCH TER1S: 1Lo/2Lt.
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS39177
(18) DOC.CIT.: Futch, A. Jevei-iye manufactuLerr, await referendum
results. Beverage Industry, o 1 (8) : 1,3,4-5, Oct. 22, 1976.
22
-------
LAWS AND REGULATIONS
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO.: 040042
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 18 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: 6
(4) AUTHOR: Downey H (10) GEO. AREA: 1LB (10) PDB. YEAR: 1976
(11) ABSTRACT: The beverage industry's problem of public and
legislative pressure to ban nonreturnable bottles is anticipated as
accelerating unless the public can be better informed of the
disadvantages of such legislation. It is suggested that this light be
accomplished by an industry wide committee. Advertising in the national
press is suggested as a way to inform the public. The franchise system,
which is also under attack, is commented upon. Franchises are said to
be good for local connunities, small and big businesses alike, and the
consumer. Those in the industry who consistently sell below cost price
destroy the economic vitality of many bottling companies and should be
stopped in those areas where below cost statutes are the law.
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLE; CONTAINER; ECONOMICS; INDUSTRY; INFORMATION;
LAW; LITTER; PACKAGING; PUBLIC; RECLAMATION
(14) HIEBAHCH TERMS: 1CI/2DB
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS39086
(18) DOC.CIT.: Downey, H. Fighting container laws. Beverage
Industry, 61(9):28, 96, Nov. 5, 1976.
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO.: 040041
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 18 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(4) AUTHOR: Winter WE (10) GEO. AREA: 1LB (10) PUB. YEAH: 1"76
(11) ABSTRACT: Challenges besetting the beverage industry are
intensifying. The FTC's threat to the present franchise distribution
system, the trend increasing general government over regulation of all
free enterprise, and efforts to enact restricting packaging legislation
are named. It is anticipated that unless the beverage industry mounts
effective programs to communicate their views of the packaging and
solid waste litter problem legislation will be passed banning
nonreturnable containers. The recently enacted ban on red dye no. 2 is
considered an example of government's tendency to regulate for the sake
of regulating. The industry's bend towards widespread price promotions
is discouraged and the responsibilities of the franchise companies are
enumerated. Bottlers are considered as having indispensable marketplace
information and companies are urged to communicate more with them.
(12) KEYSOBDS: BOTTLE; CONTAINEK; FEDERAL; FOOD; GOVERNMENT;
INDUSTRY; INFORMATION; LAH; LITTER; PACKAGING; PROGRAM; PUBLIC
(14) HIERASCH TBRMS: 1CI/2CB
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS39085
(18) DOC.CIT.: Winter, W. E. Industry challenges become more
intense. Beverage Industry, 61(9):16, 108, Nov. 5, 1976.
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO.: 039098
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 14 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G (10) PUB.
YEAR: 1976
(11) ABSTRACT: Oregon legislation on beverage containers is noted
that requires the payment of a refund by retailers for empty beer and
soft drink bottles. In order to encourage the use of standard reusable
containers, a minimum two cent refund is reguired on all bottles which
are certified as being used by more than one manufacturer. For all
other beverage containers, a five cent minimum refund is required. The
law was passed in 1971. As ot September 1976, the beer can moved from
33 to 40 percent of the beverage container market. The nonreturn able
beer bottle which held 31 percent of the market has been virtually
eliminated and the returnable, refillable beer bottle has increased
from 36 to 96 percent of the market. A similar pattern has occurred for
23
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
soft drinks. Cans held 40 percent of the market prior to enactment of
the law. They moved to 9 percent of total sales during the second year
after the law's effective date. Litter reduction is the primary
ob-jective of Oregon's legislation on beverage containers. Lobbying
against the law's passage is discussed. Economic aspects of the law are
considered, as well as its. impact on recycling.
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLE; CONTROL; ECONOMICS; LAW; LITTER; MARKET;
CfiEGON
(15) STIBS ACC.HO.: OOS38142 u * • *
18 DOC.CIT.: Waggoner, D. The Oregon bottle bill - what it means
to recycling. Compost Science, 17(4):10-13, Sept. /Oct. 1976.
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO.: 037237
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 18 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G (10) PUB.
YEAR: 1975
(11) ABSTRACT: Based on national averages, it is estimated that
about 42 percent of all individually packaged soft drinks and 22
percent of beer consumed in Pennsylvania are sold in refillable
bottles. The remaining beverage packages consist of one-way no-deposit
cans and bottles. Based on experience in Oregon and Vermont, it is
expected that if mandatory legislation were enacted in Pennsylvania,
the percentage of beverage units sold in refillable bottles would
increase to about 80 percent. This study indicates that there would be
two major economic effects of enacting mandatory deposit legislation in
Pennsylvania, first, it is ptedicted that an increase in refillaule
teverage containers will cause a decrease of about $2. 2 million in the
labor costs incurred by the beverage industry in delivering packaged
beer and soft drinks to consumers. Second, mandatory deposit
legislation is expected to cause the loss of about 3,000 jobs ia the
bottle and can manufacturing industries, and at the same tiae cause a
gain of about 3,800 jobs in tnose industries engaged in the bottling,
distribution, and sale of packaged Beverages. The net effect of the
state-wide legislation on employment would be to provide about 300
additional jobs to Pennsylvania in Beverage-related industries. Also it
is indicated that mandatory deposit legislation would also reduce
litter, solid waste, and energy utilization in Pennsylvania. (Autnor
Abstract Modified) (Document retained in SWISS library)
(12) KEYWORDS: BENEFIT; BOTTLE; BHEKEttY; CAN-FOOD; CANNING;
ECONOMICS; EFFECT; ENEHGY; GLASS; LAW; LITTER; MARKET; METAL;
PACKAGING; PENNSYLVANIA; PERSONNEL; PROJECTION; REDUCTION
(15) STIKS ACC.NO.: OOS36282
(18) DOC.CIT.: Merrimau, J. , and S. Rebuck. The impact of
eandatory deposit legislation for beverage containers on employment in
Eensylvania. Dickinson College Senior Research Project. Harrison, PA,
Pennsylvania Alliance for Keturnables, Inc. , June 1975, 20 p.
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO.: 037014
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 14 (2) SUBJ.TTPE: G (10) PUB.
YEAR: 1976
(11) ABSTRACT: The legislative approach taken in Oregon to solve
problems associated with disposable beverage containers is described.
The following legislative goals of beverage container legislation are
identified: litter reduction, solid waste reduction, energy and
resource conservation, and safety. Potential legislation approaches to
the control of beverage container disposal include a container tax and
a selective container ban. Oregon's legislative efforts to minimize
problems in the disposal of beverage containers are discussed, with
eaphasis on the economic impact of legislation requiring a deposit on
24
-------
LAWS AND REGULATIONS
all containers. Businesses directly affected by container legislation
are considered to include container manufacturers, brewers, beer
distributors, soft drink cottiers and canners, and retailers. It is
pointed out that the most direct potential impact o£ container
leqislation on consumers is its ettect on beverage prices. Indirect
effects relate to product choices, competition, inconvenience,
deposits, and utility and interest losses. The effect of Oregon
leqislation on the market is assessed. Legislative techniques for
dealinq with the impact ot container regulation are proposed. It is
concluded that a mandatory deposit on beverage containers in dragon has
been effective in promoting tnvironmental goals while not being
detrimental to the beverage industry itself. The major impact of such
leqislation is felt by the container industry.
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLE; rituSH 2HK ; CAN-FOOD; CANNING; COMMERCIAL;
CONSERVATION; CONTAINER; ECONOMICS; LAH; LITTER; OREGON; PERSONNEL;
EBOBLEHS; REDUCi'ION; SAFETY; TAXES
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS36059
(18) DOC.CIT.: Gudger, C. «. , and K. D. Walters. Beverage
container regulation: economic implications and suggestions for model
leqislation. Ecology Law quarterly, 5(2):265-290, 1976.
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO.: 036813
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: m (2) SUEJ.TYPE: G (10) PUB.
YEAR: 1976
(11) ABSTRACT: The trend in court decisions has been to uphold
legislation restricting tnrowawdy beverage containers. Major examples
discussed include the Vermont supreme Court decision of 1954, ttte
Oregon Court of Appeals decision of 1973, and the Maryland Court
decision of 1975. An exception to tnis trend is the Michigan decision
that struck down an Ann Arbor mandatory deposit ordinance in 1974. If
too many states enact laws restri-ting throwaway containers, the
eractment of federal controls may become necessary, due to the erfects
on interstate commerce and compliance by bottles. The economic impact
of the legislation in Oregon uas oecn job reduction and profit losses
by sort drink, beer, and packaging industries and higher prices for
consumers. Total litter was reduced bv about 10. 6 percent two years
after the Oregon law went intj efrect.
(12) KEYhORDS: BOTTLE; CONTAINED; ECONOMICS; INDUSTRY; LAW; LEGAL;
LITTER; MARYLAND; MICHIGAN; MUNICIPALITY; OREGON; PACKAGING;
REGULATIONS; STATE; VERMONT
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS35358
(18) DOC.CIT.: McCord, J. How tuc courts vitw restrictions on
throwaway beverage containers. Solid Wastes Management, 19(2):46-47,
54, 56, Feb. 1976.
(1) i>*li& ACC.NO.:
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) cwi'EtoUKY: za (2) suaj.TYft: T (10) PUB.
YEAR: 197t
(11) ABSTRACT: This article presents the views of the President of
tae Glass usntalner Mauur actuiers Institute on compulsory deposits on
beverage containers. The basic position of the Institute is that the
choice oetween convenience packaging and returnable or refilxable
packaging must be made by the containers rataer than by Federal
legislation. It is suggest«u that neither energy nor resource
conservation considerations are substantial factors in the decision to
recycle glass containers.. Aitnougu all glass represents aoout 9 percent
of municipal solid waste, only about ^ percent is nonreturnable
beverage containers. It is claimed that wnere solid waste is deposited
in laadrills, glass presents no problem, investigations indicate that
25
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
glass containers coup rise about 6 percent of highway litter, and that 3
percent of this litter is non-returnable containers. It is suggested
that people do not nake the decision to litter based on tne refund
value of the container. Source reduction would induce high unemployment
and severe economic and huhan dislocation, according to the Institute.
(12) KEYWORDS: CAN-FOOD; DISPOSABLES; DISPOSAL; ECONOMICS; FEDERAL;
GENERATION; GLASS; INCENTIVE; LftlJ; LITTER; PACKAGING; PROBLEMS; PUBLIC;
RECLAMATION; REDUCTION
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS33605
(18) DOC.CIT.: Returnables vs. no-returns: GCM1 upholds free
choice. An eric an Glass Review, 96(3):7-tt, 1975.
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO.: 032965
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY.: 14 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G (10) PUB.
YEAR: 1975
(11) ABSTRACT: Four "bottle bills" of the type in effect in Oregon
have been introduced in tne House, and eventually forgotten. Now a
fifth is scheduled for introduction by Senator Hark O. Hatfield of
Oregon, which has started the controversial ball rolling again. The
Eill, S. 613, calls for a 3-year phase-in period for a ban on
non-returnable bottles with a 1-year phase-in for a prohibition on
detachable ends. EPA is working on its own version of a bottle bill.
There are problems in initiating such a legislative step, however, not
least among then an economic disruption to several parts of the
country. EPA is reviewing suggested guidelines tor a test, to be run at
federal facilities, on a r.on-returnable bottle ban, with a 0. 05 dollar
deposit of all beer and carbonated beverage containers. The packaging
industry has been asked to take a look, at: (1) reusable or retillable
packages (2) larger sizes where appropriate (3) low energy-consuming
materials (U) easy-to-recycle packages (S) elimination of materials
whose production creates note pollution than acceptable and (6)
elinination of potentially hazardous package materials.
(12) KEYWORDS: CONTAINER; INOUSTKY; LAW; PACKAGING; PROBLEMS;
RECLAMATION; RESEARCH
(15) STIHS ACC.NO.: 003J2009
(18) DOC.CIT.: Tempers tlare over Federal ban-the-bottle proposals.
Modern Packaging, 48 (3): 9, 15, 16, 19, Bar. 1975.
26
-------
Section 4
ANALYSIS, RESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO.: 04B285
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 14 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Conservation comaittee deposits beverage
container issue on Carter's desk.
(6) JOURNAL TITLE: Solid Wastes ttgmt/RRJ
(10) LANGUAGE: EB (10) PUB. YEAH: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: The Resource Conservation Conmittee provided for by
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 is described
in terms of its intendea functions and criticized for its failure in
performing them. The committed.- is supposed to investigate ways to aake
resource conservation work in the U.S. The slow start of the committee
in this investigation is attributed to changing administrations void of
leadership in EPA and other agencies oecause of the transition, and
EPA's continued narrow interpretation oi RCRA with emphasis on
regulatory functions in hazardous wastes and land disposal. The initial
studies of the coaraittee concern beverage containers and product
charges, with EPA's and the Executive Office's viewpoints and
commitments ou these issues still unKuown. It was concluded that the
committee's efforts will be perceived as more oriented and productive
in whatever policy steps and piograas are formulated.
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLE; CONTAINER; DISPOSAL; EPA; GOVERNMENT;
INVESTIGATION; LAM; RECLAMATION; REGULATIONS
(14) HIERARCH TERMS: 1LF/2DP; 1LF/2FF
(li) STiMS ACC.NO.: OOS47339
(16) CITATION: 20 (11) : 52-54, Nov. 1977.
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO. : 047359
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 08 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(4) AUTHOR: Olson JA
(5) CORPORATE AUTHOR: Research Triangle Institute
(6) BOOK TITLE: Preliminary Estimates of the Transitional Price
Impacts of Mandatory Beverage container Legislation. (9) CONTRACT NO.:
68-01-2981
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) P'IB. YEAR: 1976
(11) ABSTRACT: A theoretical model and an empirical specification
are used to derive preliminary estimates of the transitional price
impact of mandatory beverage container deposit legislation. A simple
model ot price and output determination in beverage markets with
nandatory deposit legislation is outlined. It is divided into two
parts: long term equilibrium and short term equilibrium. Critical
variables in the empirical estimation are: beverage demand, long term
supply, short term supply, anu the rapidity with whicn short term
supply curves can be shirted outward. Procedures used to incorporate
these variables in the empirical projection model are discussed.
Assumptions inherent in the development of the model are listed. Data
en the impact of mandatory beverage container deposit legislation ou
beer and sort drink prices are provided. (Retained in SHIRS library).
(12) KEYWORDS: CONTAINED; ECONOMICS; MARKET
(14) HIERARCH TERMS: 1Ci; 1EC/2C6; 1EC/2MG
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS46412
(16) CITATION: Washington, DC, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Jun. 1976. 22 p.
27
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
(2) SOBJ.TYPE: G
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO. : 047194
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 21
(4) AUTHOR: Rogoff JT
(5) CORPORATE AUTHOR: fiesearca Triangle Institute
(6) BOOK TITLE: Case Studies of the Potential, impact of Guidelines
Mandating Beverage Container Deposits at Federal Installations.
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) PUB. YEAR: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: This report is concerned with the impact of
guidelines mandating beverage container deposits at federal
installations. The guidelines, proposed in 1976 by the Environmental
Protection Agency, reguire that all carbonated beverages sold in one
way containers at federal installations carry a minimum deposit of five
cents. Due to the number and significance of military installations,
investigations were conducted at various military sites to determine
the impact of the guidelines. The severity of alleged impacts appeared
to depend, to a large extent, upon regional characteristics of the
installation and the dependence of the local community (in particular,
producers and distributors of beverages) on the federal installation
for jobs and revenues. Information collected from specific military
installations is compiled, along with information dealing with the
labeling aspect of the guidelines. (Retained in SHIRS library).
(12) KEYWORDS: CONTAINER; EPA; FEDERAL; HILITARY; REGULATIONS;
BESEABCH; SITES
(14) HIEHARCH TEEMS: 1CZ; 1LF/2FF; IBP
(15) STIBS ACC.NO.: OOS46248
(16) CITATION: Washington, DC, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Jun. 1977. 61 p.
(9) GRANT NO. :
(10) LANGUAGE:
(11) ABSTRACT:
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO.: 046101
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 14 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: The beveraga container issue & resource
conservation.
(4) AUTHOR: Stern CD
(6) BOOK TITLE: In Pilcher, K., ed. Talking Trash: Proceedings of
the Ueeting of the National Coalition on Solid Haste, Mar. 4-6, 1977.
T90551-01-0
EN (10) PUB. YEAR: 1977
A technical analysis of the issues and requirements
for passing effective legislation for beverage container control to
effect real resource conservation is presented. There appears to be a
choice between soft legislation (reguiring container deposits) and hard
legislation (specifying refillable containers), with unknown longterm
consequences. The most thorough study of long tt-rm economics of these
two approaches (by the Federal Energy Administration) is criticized on
the grounds that while materials processing and use were followed and
analyzed from source through recycling, including energy resources and
labor reguired, the capital involved was not considered as thoroughly.
It was concluded that including the capital reguirements 'of the
container maker, raining companies, and energy facilities would
contradict the FEA's conclusion that the deposit system is more capital
intensive. (Retained in SHIRS library) .
(12) KEYWORDS: ANALYSIS; BOTTLE; CONTAINER; ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENT;
LAH; RECLAMATION; RESOURCE
(14) HIERAHCH TERMS: 1AN; 1C2/2DP; 1LF
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS45151
(16) CITATION: Washington, DC, Knvironmental Action Foundation,
1977. p.67-69.
28
-------
ANALYSIS, RESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT
(1) SHIRS AOC.NO.: 046096
(2) DOHiSTIC: 1> (2) CA1EGORY: 16 (2) SOBJ.TYPB: G
(3) AHTICLE TITLE: EPA *s involvement in waste reduction.
(4) AUTHOR: Canfield It*
(6) BOOR TITLE: In tilcher, K., ed. Talking Trash: Proceedings of
the Heeting of the National Coalition on Solid Waste, Har. 4-6, 1977.
(9) GRANT NO.: T90551-01-0
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) PUB. YEAH: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: The involvement of the Environmental Protection
Agency in taste reduction is described as primarily supporting studies
on waste generation, milK containers, disposables, packaging growth,
product life extension, and resource use and environmental impacts for
all products. A special ef tort has been Bade with regard to developing
beverage container guidelines applicable to Federal facilities and
implementing the program. EPA is also authorized to carry out resource
conservation actions under the new Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act in developing guidelines, providing technical aid, providing
guidance fcr state planniny, and funding implementation programs.
(Retained in SHIRS library).
(12) KBYBOkDS: BOTTLE; CONSERVATION; CONTAINER; ESDISOUBENT; EPA;
FEDERAL; LAW; MANAGEMENT; RECLAMATION; REDUCTION; RESOURCE
(14) HliSARCH TERMS: 1CZ; 1MA/2FF; 1PB
(15) STIBS ACC.NO.: OOS451U6 (15) SECONDARY AUTHORS: Butler HP
(16) CITATION: Hashinyton, 1>C, Evironmental Action Foundation,
1977. p.46-52.
(') SHIRS ACC.NO.: 01*6092
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 16 (2) SUBJ.TYPB: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: International approaches to waste redaction.
{<») AUTHOR: Conn HD
(5) BOOK TITLE: In Pilchec, K.f e3. Talking Trash: Proceedings oE
the fleeting of the Rational Coalition on Solid Haste, »ar. «-6, 1977.
(9) GRANT HO. : T90551-01-0
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) 6EO. AREA: 1EU/2FR; 1EU/2GN; 1EO/2SF;
1ED/2SR; 1EU/2S0 (10) PUB. TEA8: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: Findings on international policy approaches to waste
reduction were reviewed in terms of taxes and fiscal instruments,
government regulation, industry-government cooperation, and deposits,
bounties, or bay-back approaches. Sweden, Norway, and Finland use taxes
and charges on beverage containers to control thair disposal and
discourage the usa of noursfillable containers. Sweden, Norway, and
Trance regulate produstion and distribution of certain products (i.e.,
packaging thereof), while proposals for such legislation are pending in
other European sountriss, Valaatacy industry-government cooperation is
noted in Denmark, Germany, and Norway. Incentive packaging return
programs are being operated in Denmark, Finland, Germany, The
Netherlands, Norway, and Switzerland, with mixed packaging practices in
other countries. It is ronsluied that, although packaging is only a
portion of the solid waste disposal problem, it is important because of
its visibility and symbolism for more extensive conservation efforts.
(Retained in SHIRS library).
(12) KEYHORDS: CONSERVATION; ECONOMICS; ENVIRONHEST; EUROPE;
FRANCE; GERMANY; INTERNATIONAL; MANAGEMENT; NEPHEBLANDS; PACKASIMS;
RECLAMATION; REDUCTION; RESOURCE; SWEDEN; SWITZERLAND; TAXES
(1U) HTERARCR TERMS: 1EC/2TX; 1LF/2IB; 1MA/2IB; 1PB
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS451U2
OO CITATION: Washington, DC, Environmental Action Foundation,
1977. p.27-31.
29
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
(1) SWIBS ACC.HO. : 046086
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 27 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(4) AUTHOR: Pileher K ed
(6) BOOK TITLE: Talking Trash: Proceedings of the Meeting of the
Rational Coalition on Solid Haste, Bar. 4-6, 1977.
(9) GRANT NO.: T90551-01-0
(10) LAHGUAGE: EH (10) PUB. IEAB: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: Twenty-five papers given at the neeting of the
National Coalition on Solid Haste, held Harch 4-7, 1977, Hashington,
DC, are presented. The focus of the neeting was on citizen involvement
in solid waste issues such as resource conservation. Topics of papers
included aspects of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976,
waste reduction concepts and programs, the beverage container issue,
fource separation, rural solid waste, resource recovery, and economics
and solid waste. (Retained in SHIRS library).
(12) KETHOHDS: BOTTLE; CONSERVATION; ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENT;
PROCESS; PUBLIC RELATIONS; RECLAMATION; REDUCTION; RESOURCE
(14) HIERABCH TERMS: 1DP/2LF; 1DP/2MX; 1PT; 1PV; 1BH
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS45136
(16) CITATION: Hashington, DC, Environmental Action Foundation,
1977. 1t2 p.
18 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(1) SHIBS ACC.NO.: 045878
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY:
(4) AUTHOB: Hunt RG
(6) BOOK TITLE: Resource and Environmental Profile Analysis of Nine
Final Report. (8) REPORT NO.:
Beverage Container Alternatives.
Ef A/530/SH-91C (9) CONTRACT NO.
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) PUB.
68-01-1848
YEAR: 1974
(11) ABSTRACT: A resource and environmental profile analysis was
performed for nine beverage container options concerning four basic raw
materials: glass, steel, aluminum, and plastic. The analysis
encompassed parameters or virgin raw materials use, energy use, water
use, industrial solid wastes, post-consumer solid wastes, air pollutant
emissions, and water pollutant effluents assessed for each
manufacturing and transportation step in the life cycle of a container.
Containers were ranked according to environmental impact. Manufacturing
systems are over viewed for each of the containers studied. The
potential for recycling and reusing the various types of beverage
containers is also discussed. (Retained in SHIRS library).
(12) KEYHOSDS: ALUMINUM; UOTTLE; CAN-FOOD; CONTAINER; ECONOMICS;
ENVIRONMENT; GiASS; METAL; PLASTIC; RECLAMATION; RESEARCH
(14) HIERAHCH TERMS: 1CI/2DV; 1EA/2EA; 1ED; 1PA/2PC; 1Sb
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS44927 (15) SECONDARY AUTHORS: franklin HE;
Helch RO
(16) CITATION: Hashington, DC, U.S. Environmental protection
Agency, 1974. 178 p.
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO. : 045347
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CAXEGOBY: Id
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Food packaging.
(4) AUTHOR: Goen ML
(5) CORPORATE AUTHOR: Stautord Research Institute
(6) BOOK TITLE: In Potential for Reusable Homogeneous Containers,
Interim Report
(8) NTIS NO.: PB 265 100 (8)
(9) GRANT NO.: AER 76-02396
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) PUB. YEAR: 1977
(2) SUUJ.TYPE: G
REPORT NO.: NSF/fcA-770030
30
-------
ANALYSIS, RESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT
(11) ABSTRACT: The food packaging share of the packaging Backet and
the generation of packaging waste are examined in relation to the
feasibility of reusable containers. Food packaging accounts for nearly
half of the dollar volume or packaging in the United States. Containers
and packaging contribute to 35 percent of residential and commercial
solid waste, or 55 percent of nonfood product waste. Food containers
account for 23 percent of packaging waste. The potential reduction in
solid waste through the use of reusable food containers is considered
to be comparable to that £or reusable beverage containers. Cans for
fruits, vegetables, and juices account for nearly half of all cans used
for food. A survey of the rood service industry by the Department of
Agriculture in 1969 is reported. It is shown that the food service
industry accounted for one sixth ot the total quantity of food used in
the United States.
(12) KEYWORDS: CONTAI»EK; FOOD; INDUSTRY-, BASKET; PACKAGING
(14) HIERARCii TERMS: 1CI; 1PA/2PC
(15) STIKS ACC.NO.: OOS44394 (15) SECONDARY AUTHORS: Somogyi LP;
Steele RV
(16) CITATION: Washington, DC, National Science foundation, Feb.
1977. p.7-17.
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO.: 044553
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 13 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Continuing the container controversy.
(4) AUTHOR: Bate R
(6) JOURNAL TITLE: New Scientist
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) GEO. AREA: 1EU/2UK (10) PUB. YEAR: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: The debate between advocates of nonreturnable
beverage containers and those who favor returnable recycling measures
poses public interest problems. Written by two members of Friends of
the Earth (an environmentalist conservationist citizens action group),
this article reviews the lack ot action in months following the
publication of an FOE study on container recycling. With specific
application to British policy, tew official previous reports are
useful; they are either desk studies or relate to North American
experience which is not transteraule. Little original work had been
done in Europe in the authors' opinion. In light of the FOE report a
subseguent study has advanced a more precise method of handling the
problem. The study, presented to WMAC, concentrates on a total system
model, from extraction ot ran materials through manufacture, filling,
retailing, consumption, to disposal or reclamation. Process design
includes not only economic costs but also energy consumption, raw
naterial usage, pollution generation and solid waste disposal aspects.
This is the first attempt to apply a systems analysis model to
determine the most acceptable mix 01 socially and environmentally
acceptable actions.
(12) KEYWORDS: ANALYSIS; CONTAINER; DISPOSABLES; ECOLOGY;
ICONOMICS; ENVIRONMENT; GREAT BRITAIN; PACKAGING; PLANNING;
RECLAMATION; SYSTEM; SYSTEMS ANALYSIS
(14) HIERARCH TERMS: 1CI/2DV; 1ED; 1MA/2HH; IRQ; 1SB; 1SP
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOSH3598 (15) SECONDARY AUTHORS: burke T
(16) CITATION: 75 (106 1) : 1 71, July 21, 1977.
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO.: 044062
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATb^OtiY: 08 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: T
(5) CORPORATE AUTHOR: Research Triangle Inst/Franklin Assoc
(6) aOOK TITLE: Energy and Economic Impacts of Mandatory Deposits.
Executive Summary.
(8) NTIS NO.: PB 258 637 (S) iUPORT NO.: FEA/D-76/405 (9)
CONTRACT NO.: CO-04-50175-00
31
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
(10) LANGUAGE: iiN (10) PUB. YEAfi: 1976
(11) ABSTRACT: Executive summary of a study that examines the
energy, capital and labor impacts tuat would be caused by a proposed
nandatory national beverage container deposit legislation putting a
five cents deposit on beer and soft drink containers. Three major areas
cf potential impact are examined. Changes in annual energy consumption,
changes in capital investment requirements (in terms of fixed plant and
equipment, and changes in laoor reyuiremtnts (in terms of jobs, and
earning). These impacts are developed for those industries in t&e total
beverage system that would oe most affected by changes caused by a
mandatory deposit. Results are reported for a 1982 steady state
situation. (Retained in ShIHS library) .
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLE; CONTAINED; ECONOMICS; ENERGY; INDUSTRY;
EACKAGING; RECLAMATION
(14) HIEHARCH TERMS: 1CI; 1EA/2ii; 1EC/2EV; 1SB
(15) STIHS ACC.NO.: OOS43I05
(16) CITATION: Washington, DC, r'ederal Energy Administration, Sept.
1976. 15 p.
A Systems Approach to
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO.: 043744
(2) DOMESTIC: 0 (2) CATEGOHY: 06 (2) SUbJ.TYPE:
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Solid waste and litter.
(4) AUTHOR: Ackoff hi
(6) BOOK TITLE: In Redesigning the Future:
Societal Problems.
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) PJB. YEAR: 1974
(11) ABSTRACT: Litter is viewed as a social problem, and a program
of action is proposed to control litter and solid waste. It is noted
that beverage containers contribute to litter and solid waste. Litter
is defined as improperly disposed ot solid waste. Beverage containers
constitute about 3.5 percent jt tiie weight of domestically produced
solid waste. The impact ot a oan on one-way containers on the litter
problem and on the solid wastu problem is assessed. It is felt that a
beverage container ban is not an efficient way 01 minimizing litter and
solid waste. Consideration is given to tie use or deposits on one way
containers and to voluntary reclamation programs. It is believed that
these alternatives are also rnefttctive in reducing litter and solid
waste. Other approaches to litter reduction and solid waste disposal
are examined. The penny per pound tax on nonconsumables proposed iu
Senate Bill 3058 is uiscussfd. The statement is made that such a unit
tax would encourage the use- or larger containers and would reduce the
amount of material used in containers. Procedures to follow in the
development, financing, and administration or improvement programs are
outlined. It is proposed that tne cost o± preventing or correcting
damage to the environment J)e added to the cost of goods, services, and
activities that produce sucii aamagc and that positive incentives be
provided to encourage individual;; and organizations to seek
environmentally constructive actions.
(12) KEYWORDS: ADMINIoTHAfI0a; CAMPAIGN; CONTAINER; CONTriOL;
ECONOMICS; FEDERAL; INCENTIVE; LA*; LITTER; PrfOGKAM; RECLAMATION;
SOLID; TAXES
(14) HIERAHCH TERMS: 1EA/2tA; 1EA/2EC; 1LB/2LD; 1LD/2LH
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.; 00342787
(16) CITATION: New YorK, NY, John rfiley and Sent, 1974. p.173-192.
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO.: 041604
(21 DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORT: 27 (2) SOBJ.TYPE: 6
(4) AUTHOR: Cellar ES (10) 6EO. AREA: 1EB/2ED (10J PUB. YEAR:
1975
32
-------
ANALYSIS, RESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT
(11) ABSTRACT: A field application of behavior Modification studied
the relative effectiveness of different prompting procedures for
increasing the probability that customers entering a grocery store
would select their soft drinks in returnable rather than nonreturnable
containers. Six different 2 hr experimental conditions daring which
bottle purchases were recorded were (1) No Prompt (i. e. , control),
(2) one student gave incoming customers a handbill urging the purchase
of soft drinks in returnable bottles, (3) distribution of the handbill
by one student and public charting of each customer's bottle purchases
by another student, (4) handbill distribution and charting by a five-
•ember group, (5) handbills distributed and purchases charted by three
females. The variant prompting techniques were equally effective, and
in general increased the percentage of returnable bottle customers by
an average of 25 percent.
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLE; COHHBRC1AL; CONTAINER; CONTROL; DISPOSABLES;
LITTER; PSYCHOLOGICALj SDRTBT
(14) HIBHARCH TERMS: 1LD/2LH
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS«0648 (t5) SECONDARY AUTHORS: Farris JC;
Post DS
(18) DOC.CIT.: Geller, E. S. , J. C. Farris, and D. S. Post.
Prompting a consumer behavior for pollution control. Journal of Applied
Behavior Analysis, 6 (3):367-3?6. 1975.
(1) SHI 16 ACC.NO.: 037680
(2) DOH1STIC: D (2) CATEOOtt*: 1u (2) SUBO .TYPE: G (10) PUB.
YEAB: 1976
(11) ABSl'RACT: Packaging techuiiiues adopted by the Fred Kocn
Brewery Inc. in Dunkirk., New i crk are detailed. Studies were made by
the brewery to develop a package that would meet their market area's
consumer needs and thus in create the brewery's share of the market, '.the
decision was made to ^witcn from the production or standard 24 bottle
returnable cases to a light ana more attractive pacKage with 12
returnable oottles. Criteria estaolished for any new package required
that it serves as a shipper, retail box, aiid venicle tor returning tue
empty bottles and that it help sell the beer at the local supermarket.
The brewery consulted with St. Ketjii, paper Company wnose Corrugated
Container ttlvision recommended its nev Structur-pak system, a
corrugated box with up to 30 percent greater stacking strength than
conventional boxes. Advantages or the 1^ bottle package are discussea
in terms ot cost, space, a ad marketing advantages such as its easiness
to carry a HI its stacking stability. The Fred Koch brewery can deliver
12 bottles at a cost ranging rroai $*.. ly to $2. 2S, excluding the one
tine $1. 00 deposit for the Dottles wuich is eventually returned.
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLE; BKEWjiRY; MAKKET ; PACKAGING; ttBCLAMATION
(15) S'PMS ACC.NO.: 003369^4
(18) LGC.CIT.: Twelve pacK. of returnacles. Brewers Digest,
51(15):4G, 43, May 197fa.
(1) SHI8S ACC.NO.: 035140
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEoOfitf: 14 (2) SUBJ.TfPE: G (10) PUB.
YEAR: 1975
(11) ABSTRACT: A receut study oy the Midwest Research Institute
Kansas City, Missouri, showed that the use ot returnable Dottles would
lead to 21 percent less virgin material use, 30 percent less water
pollution, 60 percent less air pollution, and 60 percent le£.s energy
use. The U. S. hnvironnental protection Agency (EPA) does recommend
bottle legislation at the Federal level. At present the EPA is working
en guidelines calling for tue use ot returnable containers at all
Federal agencies, unless a particular agency can solidly justify
33
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
Boncompliance. Bottle legislation has been left to the States. Oregon
has the oldest Bottle Law. The dire predictions presented by the
anti-Bottle Bill spokesman did not Happen in that State. Beverage sales
did not go down and neither did the number of jobs in the marketplace.
Bore -jobs were actually created by the reusing of bottles. (Vermont and
South Dakota now have laws similar to the Oregon law. ) Reynolds is
trying to blunt tie forces tor bottle tills by recycling aluminum.
(12) KEYWORDS: ALUMINUM; BOTTLE; DISPOSABLES; ECONOMICS; ENEBGY;
BPA; FEDERAL; LAW; OREGON; POLLUTION; RECLAMATION; REGULATIONS; SOUTH
DAKOTA; STATE; VERMONT
(15) STIHS ACC.NO.: 00334185
(18) DOC.CIT.: How is the battle of the bottle going? Environmental
Science and Technology, 9(10):90t>, Oct. 1975.
(1) SSIBS ACC.NO.: 034561
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATBUORI: 20 (2) SUbJ.TY.PE: T (10) PUB.
IEAR: 1975
(11) ABSTRACT: This article presents the views ot the President of
the Glass Container Manufacturers Institute on compulsory deposits on
teverage containers. The basic position of the Institute is that the
choice between convenience packaging and returnable or refillable
packaging must be made by the consumers rather than by Federal
legislation. It is suggested that neither energy nor resource
conservation considerations are substantial factors in tiie decision to
recycle glass containers. Although ctli glass represents about 9 percent
cf municipal solid waste, only about 2 percent is nonreturnable
beverage containers. It is claimed that where solid waste is deposited
in landfills, glass presents no problem. Investigations indicate that
glass containers comprise about 6 percent of highway litter, and that 3
percent of this litter is non-returnable containers. It is suggested
that people do not make the decision to litter based on the refund
value of the container. Source reduction would induce high uneoployaent
and severe economic and human dislocation, according to the Institute.
(12) KEIfBOfiDS: CAN-FOOU; DISPOSABLES; DISPOSAL; ECONOMICS; FEDERAL;
GENERATION; GLASS; INCENTIVE; LAH; LITTER; PACKAGING; PROBLEMS; PUBLIC;
RECLAMATION; REDUCTION
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS33t>05
(18) DOC.CIT.: Returnable vs. no-returns: GCMI upholds free
choice. American Glass Kevituf, 96(3) :7-8, 1975.
34
-------
Section 5
RECYCLING
(1) SWIRS ACC.HO.: 047832
(2) DOHESTIC: F (2) CATEGORY: 20 (2) SUBJ.TTPB: T
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Atervinning av burkskrot mojlig i stor skala.
(Recovery of tin scraps is possible on a large scale).
(4) AUTHOR: Jonsson T
(6) JOURNAL TITLE: Teknisk Tidskrift
(10) LAHGOAGE: SD (10) GEO. ABEA: 1EO/25R (10) FOB. TEAR: 1976
(11) ABSTRACT: Scrap icon from used food and beer cans is an energy
rich material. Each ton that can be recovered diminishes the need to
import energy corresponding to 200-600 1 oil. The difference is doe to
the amount of energy consused when the scrap iron is recovered. More
than 100,000 t of tin plate is destroyed each year in Swedish damps.
This corresponds to 35,000 t/yr of oil. Since 1972, the tin plate
fraction of the cinder from central refuse combustion stations has been
examined metallnrgically at Gullspangs Elektrokemiska AB. It has proven
to be an excellent raw material for the production of steel ingot and
for 45X silicon iron. The steel ingot from Gullspang that is of
reinforcement bar quality is rolled into steel bars at Quarnhammars
Iron Hill. The hot rolling of crude iron that contains tin has usually
caused problems at the steel mills, because cracks are easily formed.
Crack formation does not occur with the Gullspang method even when
there is as much tin as 0.5X, which is ten times more than isusually
tolerable at the traditional steel mills. The tin of the Bullspang
steel ingot serves as an alloy metal. The 45X silicon iron does not
contain tin or lead and it is used as an alloy metal at the steel
mills. To produce crude steel by vay of low percent silicon iron is
probaby the most energy saving way of reusing tin plate. (Original text
in Swedish) .
(12) KEYWORDS: IHOH; IJBTAL; RECLAMATION; SCRAP; SWEDES; OTILIZB
(14) HIERARCH TERHS: 1HI/2IH/30T; 1BK/2TI; 1RG
(15) STIRS ACC.HO.: OOS46885 (IS) SECONDARY AUTHORS: Larsson P
(16) CITATIOH: 106(7):23, Apr. 8. 1976.
(1) SWIHS ACC.NO.: 04759B
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) SUBJ.TJfPE: T
(3) ABTICLE TITLE: Can slittinc) device.
(4) AUTHOfi: Torres L
(7) PATENT DATA: U.S. Patent No. U, 030,392
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) PUD. ItAB: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: A device tor tiie cutting o± cans is described. The
device nay be used to cut slits in cans, such as beverage cans, to
produce ornamental objects. The apparatus consists of a vertical aenber
supported on a base. A cylindrical support extends from the vertical
•enber and is configurated to extend into and support a can. A lever is
pivotally mounted on the vertical member. A blade on the lever cuts the
can upon the urging of the lever toward the cylinder. The cylindrical
support has at least one narrow axially extending peripheral slot
adapted to receive the blade as the can is cut. The outer peripheral
surface of the cylindrical support abuts an inner peripheral surface of
the can, the slot is generally axial of the can and the lever is
positioned to engage the can surface at such an anyle that the blade
cuts the can in a shearing action as the blade is received in the slot.
(12) KEIHORDS: CONTAiNEH; EQUIPMENT; INDUSTRY; PATENT; PROCESS;
EECLAMATION
(14) HIERARCH TERHS: 1ET/2SK; 1IN/2HP; 1SD
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS46651
(16) CITATION: filed Jan. 29, 1976 issued Jun. 21, 1977. 4CAT: 12
35
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
(1) SWIRS ACC.SO. : 047304
(2) DOMESTIC: 0 (2) CATEGORY: 18 (2) SUBJ.TYPfi: G
13) ARTICLE TITLE: Beturnableo vtrsus nonreturnables.
(4) AUTHOR: Samtur HR
(6) BOOK TITLE: In Glass Recycling and fleuse.
(9) GfiANT NO. : GI-29731
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) PUB. YEAfi: 1974
(11) ABSTRACT: Returnable versus nonreturnable beverage container
production and related problems are addressed. Data on returnable and
nonreturnable beverage containers between 1955 and 1970 are tabulated.
To examine the overall impact of leturnable versus nonreturnable
beverage containers, it is necessary to consider the impact on the use
of metal cans. A ban on nonreturnables could not discriminate between
netal and glass containers. Glass manufacturers have promoted thfc use
cf nonreturnables as a means of increasing their volume of shipments.
Sone of the claims made in support of returnable containers include:
their use saves scarce resources; the cycle ot returnable production,
filling, refilling, and ultimate disposal requires less input of energy
per filling; the deposit on returtidbles reduces litter; the consumption
of less glass means less solid waste to collect and dispose of; and
returnables are more economical tor both bottlers and consumers. Litter
and solid waste are discussed in detail, and economic aspects of
returnable versus nonreturnable beverage containers are considered.
legislation enacted or proposed to encourage the use of returnables or
to completely ban one way containers is reviewed. (Retained in 3W1RS
library) .
(12) KEYWORDS: CONTAINED; DATA; ECONOMICS; LAW; LITTER; METAL;
PACKAGING
(14) HIERARCH TERMS: 1CZ; 1EC/2C6; 1LH; 1PB
(15) STIKS ACC.KO.: OOS4635B
(16) CITATION: Madison, Wi, University of Wisconsin, Mar. 197U.
p.74-82.
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO. : 047019
(2) DOMESTIC: 0 (2) CATfcvJOHK: 19 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: T
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Can crusher.
(4) AUTHOR: Kaminski SH
(7) PATENT DATA: U.S. Patent No. 4,062,283
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) t>UB. 1 EAR: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: A manually operate! wall mountable, beverage can
crusher is detailed. The crusher consists of a hollow housing tor the
wall mounting, a baseplate for supporting the can to be crushed, a ram
aounted for sliding movement within the housing and a lever ara
pivotally mounted in the housing. A thrust link is pivotally connected
to the ram and to the lower am to transmit force to the ram on
novement of the lever arm. A can elector operates as the ram is raised
to eject the can from the housing. The lever arm has a hollow channel
section which in part surrounds tnc thrust link as the arm is lowered
to a closed position, for increased compactness of construction. The
device is lightweight, compact and inexpensive.
(12) KEYWORDS: COrtPICTIUN; COtU'AIHER; ECONOMICS; EQUIPMENT; METAL;
EATENT; PROCESS; REDUCTION
(14) HIERARCH TERMS: 1CO/2Er; 1CZ; 1EC/2C6; 1ET/2CO; 1PT; 1BH
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS46072
(16) CITATION: filed Apr. 26, 1976 issued Dec. 13, 1977.
36
-------
RECYCLING
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO.: OU5563
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 20 (2) SUBJ.TYtE: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Arizona recycling program wins approval of
consumers, legislators.
(6) JOURNAL TITLE: Food Drug Pkg
(10) LANGUAGE: EH (10) GEO. AREA: 10S/2AZ (10) PUB. YEAS: 1977
(11) ABSTRACTS The successes of the Beverage Industry Recycling
Program (BIRP), a state-wide voluntary effort in Arizona, in the field
of reclamation are reported. Foregoing legislative measures involving
laws and taxes, BIRP has cone far in solving litter and packaging
problems by appealing directly to the people. Without government
intervention, Arizona has a recovery rate of aluminum cans that is
almsot twice the national average. The program was started in 1971 by
Arizona bottlers and distributors; it was subsidized by them in the
first year of operation, but has been completely self-sustaining since.
BIBP success is attributed to its broadly based nature. It created a
•arket for everything the Beverage industry generates (tin, glass,
aluminum) ; it operates one-stop recycling centers; extensive public
relations, via the media, is used to reach the general public. BIfiP
saves the Arizona cities an estimated $25 for every ton of material it
collects (2.1 million Ibs were collected in Dec. 1976 alone). Food cans
and newspapers have recently been added to the list of materials BIRP
handles.
(12) KEYWORDS: ALUMINUM; ARIZONA; CONTAINER; COST REDUCTION; GLASS;
INDUSTRY; MARKET; PUBLIC RELATIONS; RECLAMATION
(14) HIERARCH TERMS: 1GB/2GB/3GF; 1MC; 1PJ; 1SB
(15) STIHS ACC.NO.: OOSU4611
(16) CITATION: 36(7):8, Apr. 7, 1977
(1) SBIRS ACC.SO.: 045451
(2) DOMESTIC: F (2) CATEGOSY: 20 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Reclamation will be vital in meeting world metal
needs to 2000 and beyond.
(6) JOUENAL TITLE: Materials Reclamation Weekly
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) FOB. YEAR: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: U.S. Bureau of Mines studies show the steadily
growing importance of recycling in meeting the metal demands of the
future. In 1976, about two million pounds sterling worth of old scrap
was recovered in the U.S. Amounts of copper, ferrous, and lead scrap
used in 1976 are noted. The Bureau forecasts world demand in tha year
2000 for primary and secondary copper, nickel, and chromium and
predicts the probable average annual growth rate. Greater recovery of
old copper scrap and possibly significant exploitation of ocean nodules
•ay augment terrestial copper mining. The increased level of recycling
of aluminum beverage cans is an efficient use of limited resources and
an environmental benefit. No difficulty is foreseen in meeting primary
nickel demands to the year 2000. A particularly high rate of growth in
reclamation of chromium is forecast to meet the projected demand.
fiecovery from industrial waste is envisioned as a possible means of
leeting secondary chromium needs.
(12) KEYWORDS: ALOMINUH; BU MINES; CAN-FOOD; CHROMIUM; IRON; METAL;
HINE; NON-FERROUS; OCEAN; RECLAMATION; RESEARCH; US
(14) HIEHARCH TERMS: 1ME/2MH; 1 ME/2 MX; 1KB; 1SB
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS44499
(16) CITATION: 130(16):22-23, Oct. 15, 1977.
37
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
(1) SHIES ACC.NO.: 045345
(2) DOHESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 18 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(4) AUTHOR: Goen Rl
(5) CORPORATE AUTHOB: Stanford Besearch Institute
(6) BOOK TITLE: Potential tor Reusable Homogeneous Containers,
Interia Report.
(8) NTIS NO.: PB 265 100 (8) REPORT NO.: NSF-RA-770030
(9) GRANT NO.; AER 76-02396
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) PUB. YEAB: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: The feasibility of reusable containers for food
products, excluding beverages, is explored. Five objectives of the
study are to identify product areas with potential for reusable
packaging, to formulate concepts and requirements associated with
reusable packaging, to formualte concepts for a reusable packaging
return system, to estimate energy and materials consumption for
reusable packaging, and to estimate the relative costs of a reusable
packaging system. Various studies on reusable beverage containers are
cited. The food packaging share of the packaging market is examined.
Consideration is given to the signiiicance of food packaging in solid
waste generation and to quantities of food used in the food service
industry. Glass and plastic reusable food containers are discussed, rwo
types of return systems ate evaluated, a deposit system and a
nondeposit system. Total energy use for both glass and plastic reusable
container systems is estimated. (Hetained in SW1RS library).
(12) KEYWORDS: COSTAINEK; ECONOMICS; ENERGY; FOOD; GLASS;
PACKAGING; PLASTIC; RECLAMATION; SYSTEM
(U) HIE6A8CH TERMS: 1EA/2EA; 1PA/2PC
(15) STIHS ACC.NO.: OOS44392 (15) SECONDARY AUTHORS: Somogyi LP;
Steele RV
(16) CITATION: Washington, DC, National Science Foundation, Feb.
1977. 48 p.
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO. : 045253
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 20 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Miller reclamation nets 7.8 million pounds of
aluminum cans in 1976.
(6) JOURNAL TITLE: Beverage Industry
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) PUB. YEAR: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: Miller Brewing Company's Aluminum Reclamation
Program has reclaimed over 7.8 million pounds of aluminum since it was
launched in 197b. The company is promoting reclamation as a way of
saving energy and as an alternative to container legislation. Company
distributors run the program. Tney pay between 15 and 17 cents a pound
for 100 percent aluminum beverage containers. Distributors set up their
own reclamation centers and make arrangements with scrap dealers or
with aluminum companies. Miller supports the distributors with
advertisements, promotional material, and a reclamation handbook. The
handbook shows distributors now to organize and run the operation,
gives advice on how to plan a reclamation center opening, and suggests
ways for getting local civic and other groups involved in the recycling
effort.
(12) KEYWORDS: ALUMINUM; CAMPAIGN; COMMUNITY; CONTAINER; ENERGY;
IACILITY; LAW; LITTER; MANAGEMENT; MARKET; PUBLIC RELATIONS;
DECLAMATION; SCRAP
(14) HIERAKCH TERMS: 1i1ci/2MW ; U'J; 1 SB
(15) STI MS ACC.tiO.: OOS44300
(16) CITATION: 62(7) :3, 32, Apr. 1, 1977.
38
-------
RECYCLING
(1) SBIBS ACC.HO.: 045205
(2) DOMESTIC: F (2) CATEGORY.: 20 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Recycling of glass.
(4) AUTHOR: Hillerup OH
(6) JOURNAL TITLE: Conservation and Recycling
(10) LANGUAGE: EM (10) GEO. AREA: 1EO/2DN; 1EU/2SB; 1EU/20K (10)
POB. TEAR: 1976
(11) ABSTRACT: The recycling of glass in some European countries is
examined. In Denmark, household refuse contains 5 to 10 percent glass.
Per capita production of refuse is about 300 kg per annum, of which an
unusually low percentage compromises beer and soft drink bottles, vhich
are returnable. Government legislation permits brewers to sell only up
to four percent of their total consumption in nonreusable bottles.
Arguments for and against nonreturnable beverage containers are
discussed. In some countries a continuing decline in the return rates
of returnable bottles and their retreat from the marketplace is seen to
be due to population affluence rather than bottle fragility. A Swedish
study reports the energy consumption required for returnable bottles,
nooreturnable PVC bottles; nonreturnable steel cans, and nonreturnable
glass bottles. Studies of British, Danish and Swedish test collections
of paper, glass, and metal are reported. Reuse procedures for collected
glass are described.
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLE; COLLECTION; CONTAINER; DOMESTIC; ENERGY;
EUROPE; GLASS; GREAT BRITAIN; LAW; LITTER; HETAL; PAPER; RECLAMATION;
REFUSE; RESEARCH; SCANDINAVIA
(14) HIEBARCH TBRHS: 1GB/2GB/3GD; 1SB
(15) STI8S ACC.HO.: OOS44252
(16) CITATION: 1 (1) : 149-159, 1976.
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO. : OU1369
(2) DOMESTIC: F (2) CATEGORY: 20 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(4) ADTHOR: Hillerup OH (10) GEO. AREA: 1EU/2DN (10) PUB. YEAH:
1976
(11) ABSTRACT: Household refuse generally contains 5 to 10 percent
of glass. Per capita production of refuse in Denmark is about 300 kg
per annum of which an unusually low percentage comprises beer and soft
drinks bottles in a country where the tradition persists of using
returnable containers. Further, government legislation permits brewers
to sell only up to 4 percent o£ tkair total consumption in nonrenewable
bottles. The arguments for and against nonreturnable beverage
containers are discussed and a continuing trend towards shorter
trippage noted in some countries.
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLE; BHEHEHY; COLLECTION; DOMESTIC; GLASS;
RECLAMATION; REGULATIONS; SCANDINuVIA
(14) HIERARCH TERMS: 1CI; 1GB/2GB/3GF
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS40413
(18) DOC.cn.: Millet up, 0. H. Recycling of Glass. Conservation and
Recycling, 1(1):149-159, 1976.
(1) SWISS ACC.NO.: 041095
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 20 (2) SOBJ.TTP1: T
(«) AUTHOR: Hontagna D (10) GEO. AREA: 1SB (10) PUB. YF.AB: 1976
(11) ABSTRACT: The flnxless recovery of Metallic aluminum from
wastes is described. Dross, beverage can scrap and the like is heated
in a closed furnace to a temperature above the Belting point of
39
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
aluminum under an inert gaseous atmosphere. The dross is gently
agitated by stirring to agglomerate the metallic aluminum contained in
the dross and to physically separate metallic altminnm from aluminum
oxide and other nonmetallic constituents of the dross. The aluminum is
tapped from the furnace leaving a solid residue which Bay be farther
processed. Argon is the preferred inert gas atmosphere, tritrogen and
carbon dioxide are not as satisfactory. Beverage cans contain fro* two
to four percent of organic materials such as linings, inks, labels and
the like. When heated, these uaterials pyrolize and decompose to fora
flammable and explosive gases, provisions Host be made to properly
disoose of these gases by controlled burning while the scrap charge
within the furnace is heated.
(12) KEYWORDS: ALOBINUH; EXPLOSION; GASSES; HEAT; BETAL; PATENT;
PROCESS; PYROLYSIS; RECLABATION; SCBAP
(14) HIERARCH TERMS: 1BE/2P1W
(15) STIHS ACC.NO.: 005*0139
(18) DOC.C1T.: nontagna, D. (The United States of America,
Secretary of the Interior). Fluxless recovery of Metallic aluminum froi
wastes. D. S. Patent No. 3,999,980; filed Bay 9, 1975; issued Dec. 28,
1976.
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO.: 040213
(2) DOHESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 20 (2) SOBJ.TTPF: T (10) 6EO.
AREA: 1HE/2HB (10) P0B. YEAR: 1976
(11) ABSTRACT: National Coapactor/Aaerican Baler's introduction of
an aluminum scrap baler is reported. The Bodel NA-1450 aluminua scrap
baler was introduced in an effort to improve scrap handling systems and
is intended to be used primarily for the recycling of aluminum and tin
cans. Increased eaphasis on the recycling of cans, both by the beer and
beverage companies as well as aluminum mills, prompted the new aluminum
scrap baler's development. The Model NA-1«50 baler is an automatic
horizontal closed door baler. It is activateyd by an electric eye to
eliminate guess work and reduce labor. Uniform bale density, acceptable
for both shipping and recycling purposes, has been achieved through the
use of a balanced hydraulic system, the machine features heavy duty
components, and an extra large feed opening allows for easy feeding
either manually or by a conveyor chute automatic feed.
(12) KEYWORDS: ALUPIIStlB; BALING; BENEFIT; COMPACTION; DESIGN;
EQOTPBEHT; INDUSTRY; RECLAHATION; SCRAP; SPECIFICATION; TECHNOLOGY
(1«») HIERARCH TERBS: 1EE/2EG
(15) STIBS ACC.NO.: OOS39257
(18) DOC.CIT.: National Compactor introduces its Hodel NA-1450
aluminum scrap baler. Scrap Age, 33(9) :162, Sept. 1976.
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO. : 040132
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATfiiJOKlf: 13 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: T (10) PUB.
YEAR: 1976
(11) ABSTRACT: A revitw la presented of the National Soft Drink
Association's technical Bulletin on eliaiination of crown dust in soft
drinks. Several methods ac* delineated which bottles can use to lessen
or eliminate particle contamination. Factors found to be of
significance as causes of excessive dusting art cited. Bottlers should
pay special attention to the observation that crown dust accumulates
faster in the hopper and down chutes at high speeds and that vacuum and
forced air combinations on naahines can significantly reduce number of
particles, can reduce frequency o± cleaning needed, and oay provide the
plant operator with a semiijuautitdtive basis of evaluatiny closures. A
prototypical capper modincation .iesigned tor such an air vacuum system
is outlined. For crowners, a vacuum system fitted to the crown
40
-------
RECYCLING
and warns equipment operators not to leave cartons
BOPPER! LIGATURE;RPACKAG^
(1U) HIERARCH TERMS: 1CI
M5> STIMS ACC.HO.: 00539176
18 DOC.CIT.: NSDA releases bulletin on crown dust. Beverage
industry, 61(1):2,29, July 9, 1976.
(1) SWIHS ACC.NO.: 039872
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 20 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G (10) PUB.
YEAR: 1976
(11) ABSTBACT: EPA activities in the field of municipal resaurce
recovery are reviewed. The reasons why resource recovery is becoming
urgent are outlined together with progress made in the field. EPA helps
with demonstration projects, aiding cities that are willing to
experisent. Two completed projects are mentioned, one where solid waste
is processed to produce a fuel substitute that can be fired in
suspension with pulverized coal and another that wet processes solid
waste producing low quality fiber. Two incomplete projects are
cutlined. Source separation and collection of waste may facilitate
reclamation and EPA has awarded grants to two municipalities to
demonstrate the feasibility of separate collection of paper, glass, and
cans. Smaller grants have been made to other agencies. Technical
information gathered from study results is disseminated by EPA, while a
few communities committed to resource recovery are aided by technical
teams. EPA is required to publish guidelines in the Federal Register,
and Federal government is expected to comply. Source separation
guidelines should have significant results in the paper industry.
Guidelines for beverage containers have been published aiming to impose
a returnable deposit and thus reduce litter and make savings. Military
iistallations are testing this proposal as well as a limited test in
Yosemite National Park. Guiuelines encouraging use of recycled material
in products purchased by Federal agencies have been published. Tax
policies and freight rates saould be reviewed to ensure no
discrimination against recycled materials. The Solid Haste Disposal Act
requires EPA to investigate methods to stimulate markets for recycled
materials. Waste prevention id another aspect of resource conservation,
and EPA's efforts have concentrated on returnable beverage containers
and voluntary waste reduction. Prohibition of unacceptable land
disposal of waste would encourage resource recovery and EPA has issued
guidelines for incineration and landfillicg.
(12) KEYWORDS: COLLECTION; CONTAINED DEMONSTRATION; DISPOSAL;
ECONOMICS; EPA; GRANT; INFOKHAriON; MAfiKET; MUNICIPALITY; PHGGRAH;
RECLAMATION; REGULATIONS; aKSEASCH
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS33916
(18) DOC.CIT.: Meyers, S. EPA and municipal resource recovery. NCBR
Bulletin, VI(3):62-65, Summer 197&.
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO.: 038362
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CAIE30HY: 20 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G (10) PUB.
YEAB: 1976
(11) ABSTRACT: Recycling activities in the city of flillburn. New
Jersey are reported. Efforts are directed toward three types of
material: paper, glass, and aluminum. There are four different bins at
the recycling center in the city where residents bring their materials.
The paper area accepts only newsprint, the aluminum bin accepts only
beverage cans, and two glass bins take clear ylass in one and a mixture
41
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
of green and amber glass in the other. A processor from another city
picks up material from the recycling center. Equipment involved in the
recycling program is described, as well as equipment associated with
the city's sanitation system. Landfill operations for the city are
noted, in addition to a leaf composting program.
(12) KEYWORDS: ALUHINUH; EQUIPMENT; GLASS; MANAGEMENT;
JJOlflCIPALITY; NEW JERSEY; PAPER; RECLAMATION; SEPARATING; SYSTEM
(15) STIHS ACC.HO.: OOS37406
(18) DOC.CIT.: N. J. town recycles - for recycling's sake. Solid
Hastes Management, 19 (6): 14-15, June 1976.
(1) SHI IS ACC.NO.: 037B81
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: W (2) SUBJ.TYPfc: G (10) PUB.
TEAR: I97t>
(11) ABSTRACT: The use of returnable bottles by ttxe Lone Star
Brewing Company in San Antonio, Texas is discussed. In 1940, the
company was a 38,000 barrel brewery. AS of 1976, its production
capacity is 1. 2 Billion barrels. During the period between 1970 and
1974, the sales volume of its bottle beer, in both returnable and
nonreturnable containers, declined at a much greater rate than could be
•ade up by gains in canned beer sales. In 197b, however, the company
scored a sales increase of 750,000 cases. This increase was
accomplished by a marketing emphasis on the 12 ounce returnable bottle,
adoption of a nostalgic name for the traditional container with which
many of the younger beer drinkers were unfamiliar, increased promotion
and involvement with on~preaise accounts, a marketing program aimed at
the youth market, and a company identification with Texas music and
lore.
(12) REWORDS: BOTTLE; BREWERY; MARKET; RECLAMATION
(15) STD1S ACC.NO.: OOS36925
(18) DOC.CIT.: Sullivan, B.C. Lone Star turns it around with
returnables, youth emphasis. Brewers Digest, 51(5):28-30, Hay 1976.
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO.: 037509
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 29 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G (10) PUB.
TEAR: 1975
(11) ABSTRACT: The impact of solid waste generation on the natural
resource supply in the United States, environmental quality, and the
management of solid waste in Minnesota is explored. Historical trends
in the generation of solid waste are reviewed, and the U. S. standard
of living is reviewed in relation to consumption patterns. Solutions to
the problems of solid waste generation in Minnesota are suggested, with
emphasis on source reduction. Source reduction benefits are considered
to include the conservation of natural resources, environmental quality
benefits, and solid waste management savings. Two source reduction
strategies in Minnesota are discussed is in detail: (1) packaging
regulatory authority; and (2) beverage container legislation. Source
reduction goals are identified as follows: reuse containers rather than
immediately disposing of thei, reduce the consumption of energy and
materials per product, extend product life, and decrease product
consumption. Consideration is given to materials and energy recovery
from solid waste, and the impact of energy recovery from solid waste on
Eource reduction and paper recycling is assessed.
(12) KEYWORDS: BENEFIT; BOTTLE; CAN-FOOD; EFFECT; ENVIRONMENT;
GLASS; LAH; MANAGEMENT; METAL; MINNESOTA; NON-FERROUS; PACKAGING;
PLASTIC; PROBLEMS; RECLAMATION; SEDUCTION; STATE; US
(15) STIflS ACC.NO.: 00336593
(18) DOC.CIT.: Hendt, K. A. Damning the solid waste stream: the
beginning of source reduction in Minnesota. Rosevilie, Minnesota,
Hionesota Pollution Control Agency, Jan. 1975, 159 p.
42
-------
RECYCLING
(1) SWIRS ACC.HO.: 037342
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 20 (2) S0BJ.TYPE: T (10) FOB.
TSAR: 1976
(11) ABSTRACT: Ths aluminum can recycling program of the Pearl
Brewing Company in San Antonio, Texas is described. The coapany
operation is unique in that the recycling center, can manufactuc ing
plant, and can filling lines are ill part of a single complex located
on the grounds of the brewery. Collection centers are maintained by tha
company which pay the public 15 cants per pound for returned aluminum
cans Between Harch 1973 and October 1975, the brewery paid out $1. 4
million for slightly ovar 9 million Ibs of aluminum which constituted
in excess of 208 million individual cans. In 1974, about 82. 5 Billion
cans were returned. During the first 10 months of 1975, 108 Billion
cans were reclaimed, compared to 161 Billion cans of beer sold. This
represented a return rate of aearLy 67 percent. Operation of tha
recycling center and the can manufacturing plant is detailed, and the
ultraviolet curing process of the brewery is described. It is estimated
that about $400,000 has been saved by adopting the ultraviolet curing
system, Economical aspects of aluminum can use and recycling ara
discussed.
(12) KEYWORDS: ALUMINUM; BREWEBY; CANNING; COLLECTION; COMMERCIAL;
COST REDUCTION; ECONOMICS; FACILITY; PROGBAB; RECLAMATION
(15) STIHS ACC.NO.: OOS36387
(18) DOC.CIT. : Kuhnsr, J. G. Pearl's total aluninum can program.
Brewers Digest, 51 (1) : 45-48, 60, Jan. 1976.
(2) SOBJ.TYPE: G (10) PUB.
(1) SSIRS ACC.HO.: 335498
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 20
YflAR: 197S
(11) ABSTRACT: Coors is reporting the best year ever for its
cash-for-cans recycling campaign. Reports from the 1167 independent
Coors distributors in 11 States show that for the first 5 months of
1975, about 480 million aluminum beer and soft drink containers were
traded for cash. This is 155 million more than for the same period last
year. Around 2.9 million dollar was paid our for the cans. The
redemption rate is 0. 15 dollar par Ib. The returns this year are
equivalent to 48 parcent of. all the cans Coors sells, since the start
of the program In Jan. 1970, over 150 million Ib of cans have baen
collected,
(12) KEYWORDS: ALUMTNU«; "AHPAI3N; CAN-FOOD; COLLECTION; ECONOMICS;
PETAL; NON-FERROUS; RECLAMATION
(1-) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS3U543
(""3) DOC, CIT. : Coors reports record can recycling rate. Modsrn
«ptals, 31 (10) :92-93, Nov. 1975.
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO.: 034264
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CA1 KSUiiZ : 20 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: T (10) PUB.
YEAH: 1975
(11) ABSTRACT: These articles discuss efiorts being made to
establish a wastes exchange Among companies j.n the St. Louis, Missouri
area and the anticipated ban on non-recyclable beverage bottles and
cans sold on federal property. Jkemical process companies with
operations in the St. Louis acea dre workiny with State and Federal
agencies to develop an industrial waste exchange among tne companies.
The exchange would serve as a clearinghouse, providing lists of
43
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
available waste materials and solicitations tor materials that eight be
found in waste streams. Current efforts are directed at finding a
sponsor who would could bt trusted to keep waste figures and
information confidential. The U. S. Environmental Protection Agsncy is
considerinq a regulation banning the sale of non-returnable beverage
containers on Federal property, botii private industry and other
governmental agencies are opposed to the ban on the basis that it would
increase costs and reduce jobs.
(12) KEYWORDS: BOTTLE; CAN-FOOD; CHEMICAL; DISPOSABLES; ECONOMICS;
IPA; FEDERAL; INDUSTRY; MISSOURI; PROBLEMS; RECLAMATION; REGIONAL;
REGULATIONS; SI LOUIS; UTILIZE
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS33306
(18) DOC.CIT.: Top of the news: wastes exchange sought; no-deposits
a no-no? Chemical Week, 117 (12): 17, Sept. 17, 1975.
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO.: 03<*077
(2) DOMESTIC: 0 (2) CAi'EGOKK: 20 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G (10) PUB.
YEAH: 1975
(11) ABSTRACT: Highway and traffic safety in Texas includes the use
cf aluninum beer cans as crasli cushions. All-aluminum beverage cans
play an essential role in installing crash attenuator barrels before
interchanges and hazardous areas on Highway 69. The barrels were
positioned to till the gaps left in the J ft retaining wall. Tha
barrels themselves serve as a barrier in the crash of lightweight
automobiles, and filling the remaining barrels with the aluminum cans
provides an added protection needed in crashes involving much htavier
vehicles. Aluminum cans were used because they do not rust, although
the Texas Department of Highways did not specity that they be used.
(12) KEYWORDS: ALUMINUM; AUTOHOblLE; CONTAINER; HIGHWAY; SAFETY;
TEXAS; UTILIZE
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS3J121
(18) DOC.CIT.: Can-filled carrels provide crash cushion. Roads and
Streets, 118(5):13U, «ay 1975.
(1) SfcihS ACC.MO.:
(2) DGHJ-S'fIC: f (2) CATEGORY: 20 (^) SOBJ.TYPt: G (10) HJri.
YEAR: 1976
(11) /iBblHACT: A club has it-en loruied by three major iiritisn
companies lor the purpose ot ruciuini.ii
-------
Section 6
ENERGY
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO. : 047305
(2) DOMESTIC: i) (2) CATEGORY: 20 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Energy and the glass cycle.
(4) AUTHOR: Samtur Hfi
(6) BOOK TITLE: In Glass Recycling and Reuse.
(9) GRANT NO. : GI-29731
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) PUB. YEAR: 1974
(11) ABSTRACT: Energy consumption in glass manufacture, cullet
collection from the public, and tae separation of glass from municipal
solid waste is analyzed. Consideration is also given to the consumption
of energy in the mining of raw materials. The manufacturing segment of
the glass cycle accounts for most glass related energy consumption.
Energy consumption for the manufacture of glass containers is less than
the energy required for making metal cans, for a given volume of
containers. The higher energy consumption for nonrtturnable ylass
containers, as compared to returnables, is due almost entirely to the
higher weight of the container per gallon of beverage flowing through
the cycle. Volunteer or public collections of cullet for reuse are
noted, and energy requirements for the transport of cullet are
enumerated. Energy is required to operate systems ror the separation of
postconsumer glass waste. FroiU an energy standpoint, it is felt that
there is little justification ror drastic governmental action to
require the recycling of disposed glass products but that beverage
container production should be regulated. (Hetainad in SHIRS Liflrary).
(12) KEYWORDS: COLLECTION; CONTAINER; ENERGY; GLASS; SEPAtUriNG;
TRANSPORT
(14) HIERARCH TERMS: 1EN/2EC; 1GL/2IN/3PT
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS46359
(16) CITATION; Madison, HI, University of Wisconsin, Mar. 197U.
c.83-91.
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO.: 045350
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 10 (2) StlBJ.TYPK: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Eneryy use.
(4) AUTHOR: Goen RL
(5) CORPORATE AUTHOR: Stanford Research Institute
(6) BOOK TITLE: In Potential tor Reusable Homogeneous Containers,
Interim Report
(8) NTIS NO.: PB 265 100 (8) KEPORT NO.: NSF/RA-770030
(9) GRANT NO.: AES 76-02396
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (iu> PUB. YEAR: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: Energy savings data from studies of returnable
beverage containers are used as a basis to estimate the consumption of
energy by alternative reusable packaging systems in the food service
industry. Material and energy requirements for 1,000 Ib of Cycopac 920
containers are listed in terra.i of processing steps for acrylonitrile,
styrene, and butadiene. It is suovn that about half the energy
requirement for container production is made up of the eneigy content
cf crude oil and natural gas xhich serve as raw matt-rials for the
production of a container's chemical constituents. In addition to
Banuiacturing the basic container, energy requirements for
manufacturing soue type of closure must be considered. A conceptual
system for the production, distribution, use, and return or reusable
containers is constructed to calculate the energy requirements tor
reusable Cycopac 920 containers. Tue overall energy requirement tor a
reusable container system based ou Cycopac 920 io 1,460 BTtl per
filling, assuming 10 return trips per container.
(12) KEYWORDS: CONTAINER; ENEKGY; PACKAGING; UTILIZL
(14) HIEHAPLH TERMS: 1CI; 1UC/2EU; lPA/2fC
45
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
(15) SILKS ACC.NO.: OOS44397 (15) SECONDARY AUTHORS: Somogyi LP;
Steele BV
(16) CITATION: Washington, DC, National Science Foundation, Feb.
1977. p.39-46.
(1) SSIRS ACC.NO. : 044425
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 20 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: The cage lor keeping throwaways.
(4) AUTHOR: King Hfl
(5) CORPORATE AUTHOR: U.S. Brewers Assoc., Inc
(6) JOURNAL TITLE: The Washington Post
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) GfiO, AREA: 1US/2DC (10) PUB. YEAR: 1977
(11) ABSTRACT: In the opinion ot the author, eneigy cannot be saved
by implementing a returnable only beverage container system. The latest
figures from EPA suow that beverage containers constitute only six
percent of total municipal waste, leaving 94 percent to be dealt with
otherwise. When consideration is given to the amount of petroleun used
to return the containers through the.1 chain of distribution, the energy
saved in coal and natural gas is later burned up in petroleum use. The
author believes that the oa-jor reduction of containers fron the solid
waste stream will danpen recycling efforts, even though the brewing
industry is concerned about resource conservation and energy.
(12) KEYWORDS: BTU; CONTAINER; ECONOMICS; ENERGY; RECLAMATION
(14) HIERARCH TERMS: 1CI/2DV; 1EA/2EA; 1GB/2GB/3GE; 1 SB
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS43469
(16) CITATION: 100 yr (243) : A20, 1977.
(1) S«IRS ACC .NO.: 043541
(2) DOMESTIC: U (2) CATEGORY: 30 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(3) ARTICLE TITLE: Energy utilization requirements of beverage
containers.
(5) CORPORATE AUTHOR: Research Triangle Inst., Franklin Assoc
(6) BOOK TITLE: In Energy and Economic Impacts of Mandatory
Deposits. (8) REPORT NO.: F iiA/ D- 7 b/4 0 6 (9) CONTRACT NO.:
CO-04-50175-00
(10) LANGUAGE: EN (10) PUB. YEAR: 1976
(11) ABSTRACT: This appendix contains the data, calculations, and
documentation used for the determination of ti.e energy requirements of
total beverage container systems. The container systems are plastic
bottles, aluminum cans, steel cans, and glass bottles. The analysis
includes industrial operations such as mining of raw materials;
nanufacturinq; filling and distribution operations; final disposal of
containers; and raanuracture of associated materials such as closures,
labels, and paper packaging. (Retained in SHIRS library).
(12) KEYWORDS: ALUMINUM; CAN-FOOD; ENERGY; GLASS; METAL; PACKAGING;
ELASTIC; RECLAMATION
(14) HIEbARCH TEEMS: 1CI; 1EC/2EV; 1HG
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: 00342584
(16) CITATION: wash. 0.c., Fedecal Energy Administration, Sept.
1976. p.D-1 thru D-155.
(1) SWIRS ACC.NO.; 040135
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATliJORl: 18 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G
(4) AUTHOR: Hickox B (10) GEO. A8EA: 1CI (10) PUB. YEAR: 1976
(11) ABSTRACT: An FEA (iederai Energy Administration) study on
container deposits is reported which anticipates that a decrease in
energy consumption, a ntt gain in jobs, and hundreds of millions in
capital requirements whicn would be triggered by a mandatory five cent
container deposit. The report concedes the unpredictability of accurate
sarket response which would determine the precise impact of a national
"bottle law. " A set of possible scenarios are offered by the report,
all dependent upon the whims ot consumers. The report says that if no
deposit law is passed, beverage production and distribution will
consume about one half of 1 percent of the nation's total energy use,
46
-------
ENERGY
another $7. 3 billion in capital investment would be required, and sone
369,000 jobs would be created.
(12) KETWORDS: BOTTLE; CONTAINER; EFFECT; ENERGY; FEDERAL; FOOD;
LAW; BASKET; PACKAGING; PERSONNEL
(14) HIEBARCH TERMS: 1LB/2LB
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS39179
(18) DOC.CIT.: Hickox, B. PEA study on container deposit looks at
effect on energy, -jobs. Food and Drug Packaging, 35(10):1, 10, Nov. 18,
1976.
(1) SHIRS ACC.NO.: 035985
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 14 (2) SOBJ.TTPE: T (10) FOB.
TEM: 1975
(11) ABSTRACT: An indepth analysis vas performed by the Michigan
Public Service Commission which focused on the possible effects of
employment and energy savings doe to a shift to a refillable beverage
container system and the employment and energy effects of deposit
regulations for nonreturn able beverage containers, with particular
reference to Michigan House Bill No. 4296. The basic purpose of the
study was to provide an objective evaluation of the problems involved
in a nonreturnable beverage container system versus a refillable system
and to enlighten the public and governmental decision makers so as to
enable them to make rational judgments in the maximization of social
welfare. Chapter I of the analysis study focuses on national solid
waste problems and on Michigan's solid waste generation and management
problems. Chapter II discusses the nature and dimensions of the
beverage industry and presents information on historic growth rates and
projections of glass and metal beverage container use. Chapter III
examines direct and indirect employment effects of deposit regulations
on nonreturnable beverage containers. Chapter IT comparatively analyzes
energy savings due to a returnable system versus the present
nonreturnable system. Chapter T discusses the economic and energy
implications of solid waste resource recovery, with particular
reference to the recycling of beverage containers, and Chapter VI
presents summary findings and policy recommendations.
(12) KETWORDS: BOTTLE; BREWER?.; CANNING; CONTAINER; ECONOMICS;
IND0STRT; MANAGEMENT; MICHIGAN; PACKAGING; PERSONNEL; PROJECTION;
RECLAMATION; REGULATIONS; DTILIZE
(15) STIMS ACC.NO.: OOS35030
(18) DOC.CIT.: Rao, G. B. Michigan Department of Commerce. An
economic analysis of energy and employment effects of deposit
regulation on non-returnable beverage containers in Michigan - a
systems approach. Lansing, Michigan Department of Commerce, Oct. 1975.
438 P.
(1) SHIRS &CC.NO. : 035984
(2) DOMESTIC: D (2) CATEGORY: 30 (2) SUBJ.TYPE: G (10) PUB.
YEAR: 1975
(11) ABSTRACT: Sources and inputs of energy used in the production,
processing, delivery, and marketing of selected food ittms are
examined. The amount of energ/ needed to produce and deliver meat
products is particularly emphasized, in this quantification, special
efforts were made to draw distinctions between the sources of neat
products (whether from forage-fed or grain-fed sources) and the type of
livestock. For all food items, it *as found that a considerable portion
cf the energy expended in food production occurs in packaging. Higu
energy users include such processed food items as aerosolized cooking
cil, flavorings and spreads, IV dinners, frozen prepared roods, and
canned beverages. Several practices are identified for reducing energy
47
-------
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND REUSE
consumption while preserving nutrition standards at current levels or
Kith anticipated improvement in the United States. These are increased
bone gardening and fruit growing, shift from animal protein, to
vegetable, reduced use ot overprocessed foods, avoidance of
nonreturnable beverage containers, and increased purchase of bulk and
unpackaged foods.
(12) KEYWORDS: AEHOSOLS; CAN-FOOD; CONTAINER; DOMESTIC; ENERGY;
JOOD; FOOD PROCESSING; FREEZING; MARKET; PACKAGING; PROCESS; PBOTEIH;
BESIDENTIAL; TRANSPORT; VEGETABLE
(15) STIHS ACC.HO.: OOS35029
(13) DOC.CIT.: Fritsch, A. J. , L. N. Dujack, D. A. Jimerson.
Energy and food: energy used in production, processing, delivery and
Marketing of selected food itens. Washington, DC, Center for Science in
the Public Interest, 1975. 74 p. CSPI Energy series VI.
48
-------
Appendix A
ABBREVIATIONS
Administration
Agrarie
Agricultural
Agriculture
America(n)
Annals, Annali, Annales
Applied
Archiv (e, es)
Association (cion)
Australasian
Berichte
British
Buildings
Bulletin
Canada(ian)
Chemical, Chemistry
Company
Communication(3)
Control
Conservation Development
Deutschen
Corporation
Department
Division
Energy
Engineer (s)
Engineering
Environment
Environmental
Experimental
Government
Highway(s)
Incorporated
Indian
Industrial
Industry
Institute
Institution
International
Izvestiya
Japan
Japanese
Journal
Laboratory
Limited
Management
Manufacture(r)
Materials
Metallurgical, Metallurgy
Microbiology (ical, ia)
Mining
National
New
Number
Organization
Packaging
Pollution
Proceedings
Production
Admin
Agra
Agr ic
Agri
Amer
Ann
Appl
Arch
Assoc
Austral
Ber
Brit
Bldg(s)
Bull
Can
Chem
Co
Comm
Contr
Conser Devt
Deutsch
Corp
Dept
Dlv
Ener
Engr (3)
Engring
Env
Environ
Eptl
Govt
Hgwy(s)
Inc
Indn
Indus
Ind
Inst
Instit
Inter
Izv
Jpn
Jpnse
J
Lab
Ltd
Mgmt
Manuf
Mater
Metall
Micro
Mng
Natl
N
No.
Org
Pkg
Poll
Proc
Prod
49
-------
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT
Professional Prof
PubHcation(s) Pub(s)
Reclamation Redan
Report(s) Rpt(s)
Research Rsch
Resource Res
Review(s), Revue, Revlsta Rev
Service(s) Svc(s)
Science(s) Sci
South S
Technological Technol
Technology, Technische, Techn- Tech
ica, etc.
Toxicology Toxicol
Transactions Trans
Treatment Trtmt
University and variations Univ
United States U.S.
Water Wtr
Wissenschaftllchen Wissen
Zeitschrlft Zeit
Zentrallblatt Zent
Zhurnal Zh
50
-------
Appendix B
QUANTITATIVE MEASUREMENTS
acre (acre) millimeter (mm)
acre-foot (acre-ft) mile (mile)
centimeter (cm) newton (N)
cubic centimeter (cu cm) one kilogram force (kgf)
cubic foot (cu ft) one pound force (Ibf)
cubic inch (cu in) pascal (Pa)
cubic meter (cu m) pound (Ib)
cubic meters per minute pounds per square foot (psf)
(cu m/min)
pounds per square inch (psi)
cubic yard (cu yd)
square centimeter (sq cm)
ft (ft)
square foot (sq ft)
gallon (gal)
square inch (sq in)
gallons per minute
(gal/min) square kilometer (sq km)
hectare (ha) square meter (sq m)
inch (in) square mile (sq mile)
kilogram (kg) square yard (sq yd)
meter (m) ton (ton)
yard (yd)
Months of the Year
Jan.
Feb. ,
Mar. ('
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug .
Sep.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec .
-------
Appendix C
LANGUAGE CODES
Language Code
Mixed AA
Afrikaans A?
Albanian AL
Amharic AR
Arabic AR
Armenian AE
Belorussian BE
(White Russian)
Bulgarian BU
Burmese BR
Cambodian CA
Cantonese CH
Chinese CH
Croatian CR
Czech CZ
Danish DA
Dutch DU
English EN
Estonian ES
Finnish FI
Flemish FL
French FR
Georgian GE
German GM
Greek GR
Gujarat! GU
Hebrew HE
Hindi HI
Hindustani HI
Hungarian (Magyar) HU
Icelandic 1C
Indonesian MI
Italian IT
Japanese JA
Javanese JV
Kashmiri KA
Khmer CA
Kirundl KI
Korean KO
Latin LA
Latvian LN
Lithuanian LI
Language
Lingala
Macedonian
Malayan
Malayalam
Malay-Indonesian
Malagasy
Maltese
Mandarin
Marathi
Mongolian
Nepali
Ngala
Norwegian
Papuan
Persian
Polish
Portugese
Punjabi
Pustu
Romanian
Russian
Rwanda
Servian
Sinhalese
Slovak
Slovene
Somali
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Tagalog
Tamil
Telugu
Thai
Tibetan
Turkish
Ukrainian
Urdu
Vietnamese
White Russian
Yiddish
Code
NG
MC
ML
MA
MI
MS
MT
CH
MR
MO
NE
NG
NO
PA
PE
PO
PR
PU
PS
RO
RU
RW
SE
SI
SL
SV
SO
SP
sw
so
TA
TM
TE
TH
TI
TU
UK
UR
VI
BE
YI
-------
Appendix D
HIERARCHIC TERMS
1AC ACCIDENT
(See also PETROCHEMICALS)
LAG AGRICULTURAL WASTES
(See also ANIMALS, MANURE, FOOD PROCESSING)
2C8 CROP RESIDUE
2LW LOGGING WASTES
2PT PROCESSING
2UT UTILIZATION
1AI AIR POLLUTION
2AN ANALYSIS
2C2 CONTROL EQUIPMENT
2DU DUMPS
2FD FEEDLOTS
2IC INCINERATOR
2IN INDUSTRY
2LF LAWS
2SQ SMOKE CONTROL
LAL ALGAE
CSee MICROORGANISM)
1AM ANALYSIS
1AQ ANIMALS
(See also MANURE)
2CD CARCASS
2FD FEEDLOTS
2VC VECTOR CONTROL
1AS ASH
2CN COMPOSITION
2DP DISPOSAL
2UT UTILIZATION
1AU AUTOMOBILES
2BU BURNING
2CL COLLECTION
2C6 COSTS
2DP DISPOSAL
21C INCINERATION
2LF LAWS
2QU QUANTITY
2RT RAIL TRANSPORT
2TT TRANSPORT
2UT UTILIZATION
2VR VOLUME REDUCTION
1AY AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
(See also AUTOMOBILES)
2DP DISPOSAL
2PT PROCESSING
2UT UTILIZATION
53
-------
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT
1BC
1BL
1BU
BACTERIA
(See MICROORGANISMS)
ic*
1CH
BALING
2ET
2PD
2SC
BULKY WASTES
2CL
2DP
2TT
2OT
2VR
CELLULOSE
CHEMICALS
2 IN
EQUIPMENT
PAPER
SCRAP METAL
COLLECTION
DISPOSAL
TRANSPORT
UTILIZATION
VOLUME REDUCTION
2PC
INDUSTRIAL WASTES
3DP DISPOSAL
3PT PROCESSING
3UT UTILIZATION
POST CONSUMER WASTES
3DP DISPOSAL
3PT PROCESSING
3UT UTILIZATION
1CL
ICO
1CP
ICQ
COLLECTION
CSee also
2CJ
2CM
2CZ
2C1
2C6
2ET
2FR
2 IN
2IW
2LF
2MY
2PH
2PQ
2RO
2RW
2TU
COMPACTION
2ET
COMPOST
2 AN
2 HE
2MG
2UT
COMPOSTING
2CC
2CF
2C6
2DP
2ET
2HE
2IC
2 IT
2LF
2MX
CONTAINERS)
CHUTE SYSTEMS
COMMERCIAL WASTES
CONTAINERS
CONTRACTORS
COSTS
EQUIPMENT
FREQUENCY
INDUSTRIAL WASTES
INSTITUTIONAL WASTES
LAWS
MUNICIPAL WASTES
PERSONNEL
PNEUMATIC
ROUTES
RURAL AREAS
TRUCKS
EQUIPMENT
ANALYSIS
HEALTH AND SAFETY
MARKETS
UTILIZATION
TANNERY WASTES
CELLULOSE
COSTS
DISPOSAL
EQUIPMENT
HEALTH AND SAFETY
INCINERATION
INSTALLATIONS
LAWS
METHODS
54
-------
HIERARCHIC TERMS
2PO PAPER
2PS PROBLEMS
2SI SEPARATION OF NON-ORGANICS
2SP SLUDGE
1CT COMPUTER
(See MANAGEMENT AND PLANNING)
IOC CONSTRUCTION
CSee also DEMOLITION WASTES)
2XN INDUSTRIAL HASTES
3DP DISPOSAL
3PT' PROCESSING
3OT UTILIZATION
2PC POST CONSUMER WASTES
3DP DISPOSAL
3PT PROCESSING
3DT UTILIZATION
1CZ CONTAINERS
2DP DISPOSAL
IDA. DAIRY (.INDUSTRY)
IDE DEEP WELL STORAGE
1DH DEMOLITION WASTES
(See also CONSTRUCTION)
1DP DISPOSAL
(See also INDIVIDUAL METHODS)
2AG AGRICULTURAL WASTES
2CM COMMERICAL WASTES
2C6 COSTS
2DG DREDGING
2PC FACILITIES
2HC HAZARDOUS WASTE
2HE HEALTH AND SAFETY
2IN INDUSTRIAL WASTES
2IW INSTITUTIONAL WASTES
2LF LAWS
2MX METHODS
2MY MUNICIPAL WASTES
2RP RESEARCH
2RV RURAL AREAS
1DR DRUGS
(See also PHARMACEUTICAL WASTES)
1DU DUMPS
2EL ELIMINATION
2HE HEALTH AND SAFETY
2LF LAWS
1EC ECONOMICS
2C6 COSTS
2MG MARKETS
2TX TAXES
1EI EDUCATION
2PH PERSONNEL
2PO PROFESSIONAL
2PV PUBLIC
55
-------
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT
1EN
1EP
1ET
ENERGY
2EC
2RD
2UT
ECONOMICS
REFUSE DERIVED FUELS
UTILIZATION
1PE
1FI
1FL
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
EQUIPMENT
2AN ANALYSIS
2BR BALERS
2CL COLLECTION
2CO COMPACTION
2C3 CONVEYOR
2HM HAMMERMILLING
2MB MATERIALS HANDLING
2SD SALVAGE AND RECLAMATION
2SG SANITARY LANDFILL
2SI SEPARATORS - FITTERS
2SK SHEARING
2SL SHREDDING
2SU SPREADING
2TT TRANSPORTATION
2WT WASTEWATER TREATMENT (CONTROL EQUIPMENT)
FERTILIZER
(See also COMPOST, HAZARDOUS)
2DP DISPOSAL
2RF REFUSE DERIVED FERTILIZER
FIRE
FLY ASH
2AN
2DP
2MS
2RC
2SS
2UT
ANALYSIS
DISPOSAL
MINE STABILISATION
RECOVERY OF CONSTITUENTS
SOIL CONDITIONER
UTILIZATION
3AR AGGREGATE
1FO
irv
1GA
FOOD PROCESSING WASTES
2BG BAGASSE
2BK BAKERY
2BP BIOLOGICAL PROCESSTW«
2BW BREWERY
2CC CANNERY
2CI CHEMICAL PROCESSING
2CK COFFEE
2DA DAIRY
2DP DISPOSAL
2FR FRUITS
2GF GRAIN AND FEED CROPS
2MF MEAT PACKING PLANTS
2MP MECHANICAL PROCESSING
2MU MOLASSES
2PA POULTRY
2SE SEAFOOD
2SO SLAUGHTERHOUSE
2SX SUGAR
2UT UTILIZATION
2VG VEGETABLE
FUNGI
CSae MICROORGANISMS)
GARBAGE GRINDING
56
-------
HIERARCHIC TERMS
1GL GLASS
2IN INDUSTRIAL PASTES
3DP DISPOSAL
3PT PROCESSING
30T UTILIZATION
2PC POST CONSUMER WASTES
3DP DISPOSAL
3PT PROCESSING
3UT UTILIZATION
1GR GRANTS
1GW GROUND HATER
1HC HAZARDOUS WASTES
(See also RADIOACTIVE WASTES, HOSPITALS, PESTICIDES)
2AN ANALYSIS
2DP DISPOSAL
2PT PROCESSING
1HE HEALTH ANC SAFETY
1HH HEAT RECOVERY
(See INCINERATION)
1HO HOG FEEDING
1HS HOSPITALS
(See also INSTITUTIONAL WASTES; HAZARDOUS WASTES)
2CL COLLECTION
2DI DISPOSABLE ITEMS
2DP DISPOSAL
2HE HEALTH AND SAFETY
2IC INCINERATION
1IC INCINERATION
(See also SPECIFIC WASTES)
2AI AIR POLLUTION
2CM COMMERCIAL WASTES
2CQ COMPOSTING
2C6 COSTS
2EM EMISSIONS
2ET EQUIPMENT
2IN INDUSTRIAL WASTES
2IW INSTITUTIONAL WASTES
2LF LAWS
2MC MANAGEMENT AND PLANNING
2MY MUNICIPAL WASTES
20S ON SITE
2PE PLANT DESIGN
2PG PLANT OPERATION
2 PS PROBLEMS
2RS RESIDUE
2SD SALVAGE AND RECLAMATION
2WA WASTE HEAT UTILIZATION
2WE WATER POLLUTION
HE INCINERATOR
2FB FLUIDIZED BED
20P OPEN PIT
2RK ROTARY KILN
2SP SLUDGE
2ST SPECIAL PURPOSE
57
-------
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT
INDUSTRIAL WASTES
(See also SPECIFIC INDUSTRY, SPECIFIC TREATMENT METHODS)
2AN ANALYSIS
2BP BIOLOGICAL PROCESSING
2C6 CENTRALIZED DISPOSAL PLAMT5
2CI CHEMICAL PROCESSING
2C6 COSTS
2EF EFFLUENT CHARGES
2LF LAWS
2MP MECHANICAL PROCESSING
2MY MUNICIPAL WASTES
2PY PYROLYSIS
2SJ SEWAGE
2TT TRANSPORTATION
20T UTILIZATION
IIS INSECTS
1IW INSTITUTIONAL WASTES
2DP DISPOSAL
2PT PROCESSING
20T OTILIZATION
1LC LAGOONS
1LD LAND RECLAMATION
CSee also MINES, SANITARY LANDFILL)
1LF LAWS
2CL COLLECTION
2DP DISPOSAL
2ER ENFORCEMENT
2FF FEDERAL
2IB INTERNATIONAL
2MB MUNICIPAL
2SW STATE
1LH LEACHATE
CSee also SANITARY LANDFILL, WATER POLLUTION)
1LR LITTER
2C3 CAMPAIGNS
2C6 COST OF REMOVAL
2RJ RECREATION AREAS
1LU LUMBER
2IN INDUSTRIAL WASTES
3DP DISPOSAL
3PT PROCESSING
3UT UTILIZATION
2PC POST CONSUMER WASTES
3DP DISPOSAL
3PT PROCESSING
3UT UTILIZATION
IMA MANAGEMENT AND PLANNING
2C7 COUNTY
2JF FEDERAL
2ZB INTERNATIONAL
2MB MUNICIPAL
2RI REGIONAL
2BH RURAL
2SW STATE
2TQ TECRNIQUCS
58
-------
HIERARCHIC TEPMS
IKE MANURE
(See also ANIMALS)
2CE CATTLE
2BE HEALTH AND SAFETY
2PA POULTRY
2PT PROCESSING
2SL SHEEP
2SN STORAGE
2SZ SHINE
2UT UTILIZATION
IMG MARKETS
1MI METAL, FERROUS
2EC ECONOMICS
2IN INDUSTRIAL WASTES
3DP DISPOSAL
3PT PROCESSING
3UT UTILIZATION
2PC POST CONSUMER WASTES
3DP DISPOSAL
3PT PROCESSING
3UT UTILIZATION
2SC SCRAP
2SN SLAG
2SY SWARF
1MK METAL, NON-FERROUS
2AM ALUMINUM
2C4 COPPER
2EC ECONOMICS
2HV HEAVY
2LB LEAD
2NI NICKEL
2PK PRECIOUS METALS
2TI TIN
2ZI ZINC
1MM MICROORGANISMS
1MO MINERALS
1MR MINES
CSee also LAND RECLAMATION)
1MT MINING INDUSTRY
2DP DISPOSAL
2PT PROCESSING
2UT UTILIZATION
1MV MONITORING
1MY MUNICIPAL WASTES
(See also REFUSE)
2CO COMPACTION
2DP DISPOSAL
2SH SEPARATION
2TT TRANSPORT
2UT UTILIZATION
1NO NOISE
IOC OCEAN DISPOSAL
2AG AGRICULTURAL WASTES
2CM COMMERCIAL WASTES
2IN INDUSTRIAL WASTES
59
-------
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT
2IW INSTITUTIONAL WASTES
2IX INTERNATIONAL CONTROL
2MY MUNICIPAL WASTES
2SP SLUDGE
10F ODOR CONTROL
10L OIL
1PB PACKAGING WASTES
2DP DISPOSAL
2PT PROCESSING
2UT UTILIZATION
1PD PAPER AND PULP
2IN INDUSTRIAL WASTES
3DP DISPOSAL
3PT PROCESSING
3UT UTILIZATION
2NE NEWSPAPERS
2PC POST CONSUMER WASTES
3DP DISPOSAL
3PT PROCESSING
3UT UTILIZATION
1PF PATHOGENIC WASTES
1PH PERSONNEL
1PJ PESTICIDES
1PL PETROCHEMICALS
2IN INDUSTRIAL WASTES
3DP DISPOSAL
3PT PROCESSING
3UT UTILIZATION
201 OIL SPILLS
2PC POST CONSUMER WASTES
3DP DISPOSAL
3PT PROCESSING
3UT UTILIZATION
1PN PHARMACEUTICAL WASTES
1PP PLANNING
1PR PLASTICS
2IN INDUSTRIAL WASTES
3DP DISPOSAL
3PT PROCESSING
3UT UTILIZATION
2PC POST CONSUMER WASTES
3DP DISPOSAL
3PT PROCESSING
3UT UTILIZATION
1PT PROCESSING
1PV PUBLIC RELATIONS
(See EDUCATION)
1PY PYROLYSIS
(See also INCINERATION)
1RD RADIOACTIVE WASTES
(See also HAZARDOUS WASTES)
60
-------
HIERARCHIC TERMS
2DP
2SW
DISPOSAL
STORAGE
1RG
1RJ
IBM
1RN
1RR
1RU
RECLAMATION
(See SALVAGE AND RECLAMATION)
RECREATIONAL AREAS
(See also LAND RECLAMATION)
REDUCTION
REFUSE
(See also SPECIFIC TYPES)
2CA CALORIFIC VALUE
2CO COMPOSITION
2QU QUANTITY
RESEARCH
(See SPECIFIC TOPICS; GRANT)
RESOURCE RECOVERY
RUBBER
2 IN
2PC
2TS
INDUSTRIAL WASTES
3DP DISPOSAL
3PT PROCESSING
3UT UTILIZATION
POST CONSUMER WASTES
3DP DISPOSAL
3PT PROCESSING
3UT UTILIZATION
TIRES
1SB
ISO
1SF
1SG
SAFETY
(See HEALTH AND SAFETY)
SALVAGE AND RECLAMATION
(See also SPECIFIC TYPES)
SAND
SANITARY LANDFILL
CSee also LAND RECLAMATION; SPECIFIC WASTES)
2CQ
2C6
2 DC
2DS
2ET
2GS
2GW
2MC
2OE
2RL
2SL
2SO
COMPOSTING
COSTS
DECOMPOSITION
DESIGN
EQUIPMENT
GASSES
GROUND WATER
MANAGEMENT AND PLANNING
OPERATIONS
REGULATIONS
SHREDDING
SITES
IS I
1SJ
SEPARATION
2CH CHEMICAL
2LS LIQUID-SOLID
2MD MECHANICAL
2ML METAL
2MX METHODS
2RN REFUSE
SEWAGE
(See also SLUDGE)
2AN ANALYSIS
61
-------
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT
2BP BIOLOGICAL PROCESSING
2CI CHEMICAL PROCESSING
2C6 COSTS
2HE HEALTH AND SAFETY
2IP IRRADIATION PROCESSING
2MP MECHANICAL PROCESSING
2TT TRANSPORTATION
1SL SHREDDING
1SN SLAG
CSee METAL, FERROUS)
ISO SLAUGHTERHOUSE
CSee FOOD PROCESSING WASTES)
ISP SLUDGE
CSee also INDUSTRIAL WASTES)
2AN ANALYSIS
2BP BIOLOGICAL PROCESSING
2CI CHEMICAL PROCESSING
2C6 COSTS
2DP DISPOSAL
2ET EQUIPMENT
2HS HEALTH AND SAFETY
2HP HEAT PROCESSING
2IP IRRADIATION PROCESSING
2MP MECHANICAL PROCESSING
2TT TRANSPORTATION
2UT UTILIZATION
1SR SNOW REMOVAL
1ST SOIL
1SU SOURCES OF INFORMATION
1SW STORAGE
2CZ CONTAINERS
2C6 COSTS
2LF LAWS
2MX METHODS
2SO SITES
1SX STREET CLEANING
1SY SURVEYS
1SZ SYSTEMS ANALYSIS
CSee MANAGEMENT AND PLANNING)
1TB TANNERY WASTES
1TE TEXTILES
2IN INDUSTRIAL WASTES
3DP DISPOSAL
3PT PROCESSING
3UT UTILIZATION
2PC POST CONSUMER WASTES
3DP DISPOSAL
3PT PROCESSING
3UT UTILIZATION
1TM TOXIC MATERIALS
(See also HAZARDOUS WASTES)
62
-------
HTERAKCHIC TERMS
1TR TRANSFER STATIONS
(See also COLLECTION)
ITT TRANSPORTATION
(See also SPECIFIC WASTES)
2C6 COSTS
2MX METHODS
2PM PIPELINES
2PQ PNEUMATIC
2RB RAILROADS
2SN SHIPS
2TK TRUCKS
1TV TREATMENT
(See PROCESSING)
1TY TREES
(See BULKY WASTES; LUMBER)
1VC VECTOR CONTROL
(See ANIMALS; INSECTS)
1VG VEGETATION
1VR VOLUME REDUCTION
1MB WATER POLLUTION
(See also GROUND WATER)
2AG AGRICULTURAL WASTES
2AN ANALYSIS
2CM COMMERCIAL WASTES
2C2 CONTROL EQUIPMENT
2EC ECONOMICS
2HE HEALTH AND SAFETY
2IN INDUSTRIAL WASTES
2LF LAWS
2MY MUNICIPAL WASTES
2SJ SEWAGE
1WO WOOD
(See LUMBER)
63
-------
Appendix E
GEOGRAPHIC CODES
1AF Africa
IAN Antarctica
IAS Asia
1AU Australia
1CA Canada
1CB Caribbean
lEU Europe
IMA Marshall Islands
1ME Mexico
1MI Middle East
1NZ New Zealand
ISA South America
1SU Soviet Union
1US United States
2AA Alabama
2AC Alaska
2AE Alberta
2AG American Samoa
2AI Arizona
2AN Argentina
2AR Arkansas
2AS Austria
2BE Belgium
2BI Brazil
2BR British Columbia
2CA California
2CH China (Mainland)
2CI China (Taiwan)
2CO Colorado
2CT Connecticut
2CZ Czechoslovakia
2DE Delaware
2DN Denmark
2DT District of Columbia
2FI Finland
2FL Florida
2FR France
2GB Gabon
2GE Georgia
2GM Germany (East)
2GN Germany (West)
2GU Guam
2HI Hawaii
2HK Hong Kong
2HU Hungary
2IA Idaho
211 Illinois
2IL India
2IN Indiana
210 Indonesia
2IQ Iowa
2IR Ireland
2IS Israel
2IT Italy
2JM Jamaica
2JP Japan
2KS Kansas
2Ky Kentucky
2LE Lebanon
2LI Libya
2LT Lithuania
2LU Louisiana
2MA Maine
2MD Maryland
2MH Massachusetts
2MI Melbourne
2MJ Michigan
2MN Minnesota
2MF Mississippi
2MR Missouri
2MT Montana
2NB Nebraska
2NE Nepal
2NF Netherlands
2NG Nevada
2NH New Hampshire
2NJ New Jersey
2NM New Mexico
2NQ New York
2NR North Carolina
2NT North Dakota
2NY Norway
2OH Ohio
2OK Oklahoma
2ON Ontario
2OR Oregon
2PC Pakistan
2PE Pennsylvania
2PJ Peru
2PL Poland
2PR Puerto Rico
2RI Rhode Island
2SA Saskatchewan
2SF South Africa
2SI South Carolina
2SK South Dakota
2SP Spain
2SR Sweden
2SU Switzerland
2SY Sydney
2TA Tasmania
2TE Tennessee
2TK Texas
2TN Thailand
2UG Uganda
2UK United Kingdom
2UT Utah
2VA Venezuela
2VE Vermont
2VI Victoria
2VN Virginia
2VR Virgin Islands
2WA Washington
2WR West Virginia
2WW Wisconsin
2WY Wyoming
2YU Yugoslavia
3AI Aiken
3AK Akron
64
-------
GEOGRAPHICAL
3AL Albany
3AM Ames
3AS Amsterdam
3AT Atlanta
3BA Baltimore
3BC Bangkok
3BI Basel
3BK Barking
3BL Bavaria
3BN Berkeley
3BR Berlin
3BS Birmingham
3BT Boston
3BV Bridgeport
3BW Broward
3CA Calumet
3CD Caraden
3CF Casteljaloux
3CI Cheshire
3CJ Chicago
3CN Cincinnati
3CP Cleveland
3CT Clinton
3CU Columbus
3CY Cook
3CZ Czestochowa
3DE Denver
3DI Detroit
3DN Dublin
3DT Duluth
3DU Dusseldorf
3EB Ebingen
3ED Edinburgh
3EK Elk Creek
3EM Elmira
3EY Ely
3FB Fairbanks
3FI Finham
3FL Flagstaff
3FN Frankfort
3FR Franklin
3SA St. Croix
3SC St. Joseph
3SD St. Louis
3SE St. Paul
3SG St. Petersburg
3SI San Diego
3SN San Francisco
3SO Santa Ana
3SP Santa Barbara
3SR Savannah
3ST Stockholm
3SU Stuttgart
3TA Tel Aviv
3TC Tocki Island
3TK Tokyo
3TN Toronto
3TO Trenton
3TR Tripoli
3TU Tucson
3VC Venice
3GA Gainesville
3GE Geneva
3GL
3 HA
3HF
3HG
3HJ
3HL
3HM
3 HO
3HR
SHU
3 IT
3JE
3JH
3JP
3 KG
3KH
3KN
3KS
3KW
3LC
3LI
3LL
3LO
3LS
SLY
3MA
3MD
3MH
SMI
3 ML
3MM
3MO
3MP
3MR
3MT
3MU
3MY
SNA
3ND
3NL
3NO
3NR
3NU
3OC
SOT
3PA
3 PC
3PH
3PN
3PS
3PW
3RC
3RD
3VE
3VI
SWA
3WE
3WK
3WM
3WY
3YO
3ZU
Glasgow
Hague
Haifa
Hamburg
Hanford
Harlem
Hartford
Honolulu
Hopewell
Houston
Ithaca
Jerusalem
Johanne sbur g
Joplin
Kansas City
Karlsruhe
Knox
Kosovo
Kracow
Lancaster
Lima
Liverpool
London
Los Angeles
Lycoming
Madras
Madrid
Manchester
Maui
Melbourne
Miami
Milwaukee
Minneapolis
Mobile
Montgomery
Munich
Muskegon
Nashville
New Delhi
New Orleans
New York City
Niagara
Nurnberg
Ochtrup
Ottawa
Paris
Passaic
Philadelphia
Phoenix
Pinellas
Piscataway
Rochester
Rocky Flats
Ventura
Virginia Beach
Walcheretv
Weidenau-Geisweid
West Nyack
Willamette River
Winnebago
Yosemite
Zurich
Go
-------
Appendix F
DOCUMENT CATEGORY CODES
01 AGRICULTURAL WASTES
Crop residues
Manure
Timber/other vegetation
02 ANALYSIS OF SOLID HASTE
Data
03 AUTOMOBILES
04 BULKY WASTES
05 COLLECTION
06 COMPOST
07 DISPOSAL
08 ECONOMICS
Disposal costs
Financing facilities
Pollution control costs
Marketing information
Taxes and incentives
09 HAZARDOUS WASTES
10 HEALTH/SAFETY
11 INCINERATION
12 INDUSTRIAL WASTES
13 INSTITUTIONAL WASTES
14 LAWS/REGULATIONS
15 LITTER
16 MANAGEMENT
Municipal
Regional
Rural
State
17 OCEAN DISPOSAL
18 PACKAGING
19 PROCESSING/REDUCTION
20 RECYCLING
Incinerator residue
Industrial wastes
Mining wastes
Municipal refuse
Scrap metal
21 RESEARCH
22 SANITARY LANDFILL
23 SEPARATION
24 SLUDGE
25 STORAGE
26 STREET CLEANING
27 TRAINING, EDUCATION,
PUBLIC RELATIONS
28 TRANSPORT
29 SOURCE REDUCTION
30 ENERGY
Demand, for solid waste
management
Fuel from wastes
Heat utilization from
incineration
uo1787e
SW-785
66
» U S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1:79 f.20-007763)9
-------
EPA REGIONS
U S. EPA. Region 1
Solid Waste Program
John F Kennedy Bldg.
Boston, MA 02203
617-223-5775
U.S. EPA, Region 2
Solid Waste Section
26 Federal Plaza
New York, NY 10007
212-264-0503
U.S. EPA. Region 3
Solid Waste Program
6th and Walnut Sts.
Philadelphia PA 19106
215-597 9377
U.S EPA, Region 4
Solid Waste Program
345 Courtland St.. N.E.
Aitanta GA 30308
404-881 3016
U.S. EPA, Region 5
Solid Waste Program
230 South Dearborn St
Chicago, IL 60604
312-353-2197
U.S. EPA, Region 6
Solid Waste Section
1201 Elm St
Dallas, TX 75270
214-767-2734
U S. EPA, Region 7
Solid Waste Section
1735 Baltimore Ave.
Kansas City, MO 64108
816-374-3307
U.S. EPA, Region 8
Solid Waste Section
1860 Lincoln St,
Denver, CO 80295
303-837-2221
U S EPA, Region 9
Solid Waste Program
215 Fremont St,
San Francisco, CA 94105
415-556-4606
U S. EPA, Region 10
Solid Waste Program
1200 6th Ave
Seattle. WA 98101
206-442 1260
------- |