PB-234 944
STUDY OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
IN THE PULP AND PAPER INDUSTRY
GORHAM INTERNATIONAL, INCORPORATED
PREPARED FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
FEBRUARY 1974
DISTRIBUTED BY:
nn
National Technical Information Service
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
-------
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA
SHEET
1. Report No.
EPA/530/SW-80c
PB 234 944
4. Tulo and Subtitle
Study of Solid Waste Management
Practices in the Pulp and Paper Industry
5- Report Date
February 1974
6.
7. Author(s)
•Gorham International, Inc.
8- Performing Organization Rc_pr
No.
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
Gorham International, Inc.
Gorham, Maine 04038
10. Projecr/Tdsk/W'ork Unit N
11. Contract/Grant No.
EPA 68-03-0207
I I 2, Sponsoring Organization Name and Address
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs
Washington, D.C. 20460
13. Type of Report & Period
Covered
Final Report
14.
15. Supplementary Notes
16. Abstracts
This report investigates and identifies present solid waste
management practices, examines alternatives, and develops strategies
for future pulp and paper industry waste management. It examines
waste management in five major segments of the pulp and paper ""
industry; pulp mills, paper mills, paper board mills, and de-inking
mills. Data is presented on pulp and paper industry solid waste
generated since 1960. A case study for each of the five major
pulp and paper manufacturing segments is presented.
17. Key U'orus and Document Analysis. 17o. Descriptors
Papers, Pulps, Waste papers, Paper mills, Paper industry,
Waste disposal, Waste treatment, Pulping
17b. HemitL-rs 'Ope n-Fnded Tur
Solid Waste Management
t-pf./ouceu by
NATION^.,. TfOMMCA!
INFORMATION SErtViCE
U S Gep.srtrrient ut Cuimm '<_<-
Sj.iic.K"«id VA Mli.1
17c. (..USA 1 I i-'i<_ id/Group
18. Availability State ineni
19. Sv i uritj C 1 is:, ( I'hp-
Report)
UNCLASSH-IKLJ
- 1 /'!-• I
| 21. No. o(
20. Security i"l.iss (Tin ,
N TIS- i* ( n-7 ' •
-------
STUDY OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
IN THE PULP AND PAPER INDUSTRY
This final report (SW-80a) on work performed under
Federal solid waste management contract no. 68-03-0207
to GORHAM INTERNATIONAL, INC.
is reproduced as received from the contractor
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
197*
-------
This report has been reviewed by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and approved for publication. Approval does not signify
that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of EPA,
nor does mention of commercial products constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use by the U.S. Government.
An environmental protection publication (SW-80c) in the solid waste
management series.
ii
-------
2.33111
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter ,
Page
I
II
III
IV
Preface
Introduction 1
Summary 3
Pulp And Paper Industry Structure 12
Product Categories 12
Pulps Used For Papermaking
Production Processes 14
Pulping
Pulp Bleaching
Papermaking
Paper Products 17
Industry Production 17
Solid Waste Generation Points And Characteristics 20
Wood Processing 20
Power Generation 21
Personnel Activity 22
Manufacturing Services 22
Wastewater Treatment 23
Wastepaper Reclamation 25
Chemical Pulping 26
Specialty Products 27
Groundwood Production 27
Residuals Handling Loss 28
Summary - 28
ii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
Chapter Page
V Solid Waste Management Practices 29
Storage 29
Collection 34
Processing 36
Disposal 37
Resource Recovery 40
Summary 44
VI Solid Waste Quantities 45
Wood Processing Solid Waste 45
Power Generation Solid Waste 52
Personnel Activity Solid Waste 58
Wastewater Treatment Solid Waste 60
Manufacturing Services Solid
Waste - 69
Wastepaper Reclamation 69
Chemical Pulping Solid Waste 72
Groundwood Pulping Solid Waste 73
Residuals Handling Solid Waste 76
Specialty Paper Products Manu-
facturing Solid Waste 76
Summary 79
VII Solid Waste Management Economics 83
Resource Recovery Economics 87
Bark Combustion
Secondary Materials Sales
Fiber Reclamation
Resource Recovery Economics
Summary
iv
-------
TABLE OP CONTENTS
(Continued)
Chapter Page
VIII Environmental Legislation Impact On Solid
Waste Management . 97
Present Legislation And Trends 97
Federal Legislation
State And Local Legislation
Legislative Impact On Solid Waste
Categories 104
Wastewater Treatment Solid
Waste
Wood Yard Solid Waste
Air Pollution Control Solid
Waste
All Other Solid Waste Cate-
gories
Legislative Impact On Solid Waste
Management Systems 111
Impact On Technology
Impact On Economics
IX Technology Assessment 117
Collection And Storage 117
Processing 122
Compaction
Size Reduction
Thermal Reduction
Resource Recovery
Disposal 129
Technology Alternatives 132
Potential Impact Of New Industry
Technology 137
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
Chapter Page
X Conclusions And Recommendations 139
References
APPENDIX
Case Study Summary 1
Case Study Mill Descriptions 5
Solid Waste Generation 14
Material Balances 14
Solid Waste Management Systems 34
Case Study Mill "A" 34
Case Study Mill "B" 35
Case Study Mill "C" 36
Case Study Mill «D" 36
Case Study Mill "E" 37
Economic Considerations 37
v i
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table , Paqt
1 Industry Production 18
2 Estimated Primary Wastewater Treatment
Sludge Handling And Disposal Practices 39
3 Energy Usage Of Pulp And Paper Industry
- 1971 41
4 Regional Distribution 46
5 Bark Generation - 1971 48
6 Disposition Of Bark - 1971 50
7 Coal And Bark Ash - 1971 53
8 Regional Fuel Consumption - 1971 54
9 Estimated Fuel Consumption - 1975 56
10 Personnel Activity Solid Waste - 1971 59
11 Estimated Effluent Discharges 61
12 Wastewater Treatment Sludge - 1971 63
13 Total Primary Wastewater Treatment Solid
Waste - 1971 65
14 Secondary Wastewater Treatment Sludge
Solids - 1971 68
15 Manufacturing Services Solid Waste - 1971 70
16 Wastepaper Reclamation Solid Waste - 1971 71
17 Chemical Pulping Solid Waste - 1971 74
18 Groundwood Pulping Solid Waste - 1971 75
19 Residuals Handling Solid Waste - 1971 77
20 Specialty Paper Production Solid Waste - 1971 78
21 Regional Solid Waste Quantities - 1971 80
22 Total Solid Waste Quantities - 1958 Thru 1980 81
vii
-------
LIST OF TABLES
(Continued)
Table Page
23 National Solid Waste Quantities To
Disposal 82
24 Average Solid Waste Management Costs 84
25 Solid Waste Management Costs - 1971 85
26 Mill Data For Bark Combustion Examples 89
27 Bark Combustion Examples 90
28 Bark Combustion Economics - 1971 92
29 Secondary Materials Sales Examples - 1972 93
30 Fiber Recovery Economics - 1971 95
31 Recommended Effluent Limitations For The
Pulp And Paper Industry 101
32 Best Practicable Treatment Guidelines For
The Pulp And Paper Industry 102
33 Estimated Quantities Of Ash And Sulfur
Products For Pulp And Paper Industry Coal
Fired Boilers If Equipped With Flue Gas
Desulfurization Systems 109
34 Increased Sludge Handling And Disposal
Costs 113
35 Increased Disposal Costs - 1980 116
36 Estimated Primary Sludge Deposition 131
37 Conventional Vs Improved Solid Waste
Management System 135
APPENDIX
1 Case Study Categories 1
2 Case Study Plan 2
VIII
-------
LIST OF TABLES
(Continued)
Table Page
3 Solid Waste Generation - 1972 15
4 Total Solid Waste To Disposal 18
5 Approximate Material Balance - 1972
Case Study Mill "A" 19
6 Approximate Material Balance - 1972
Case Study Mill "B" 23
7 Approximate Material Balance - 1972
Case Study Mill "C" 25
8 Approximate Material Balance - 1972
Case Study Mill "D" 28
9 Approximate Material Balance - 1972
Case Study Mill "E" 31
10 Solid Waste Management System Total
Costs - 1972 39
11 Solid Waste Management Costs On Production
Basis 42
IX
-------
LIST OF FIGURES %
Figure Page
1 Solid Waste Quantities - 1958 6
2 Solid Waste Quantities - 1963 • 6
3 Solid Waste Quantities - 1967 7
4 Solid Waste Quantities - 1971 7
5 Solid Waste Quantities - 1975 8
6 Solid Waste Quantities - 1980 8
7 Solid Waste Quantities To Disposal - 1971 9
8 Solid Waste Cost Distribution - 1971 10
9 "Atlas" Storage And Feed System 30
10 Convertainer Hoist Specifications 120
11 Sample Containers Handled By Convertainer
System 121
12 Copeland Fluidized Bed Process Applied
To Solid Waste Combustion 124
13 Sludge Incineration System 126
-------
PREFACE
This report on solid waste management practices in the pulp
and 'paper industry was prepared by Gorham International Inc.
pursuant to Environmental Protection Agency contract 68-03-0207.
The statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and
data in this report are not necessarily those of the Environmental
Protection Agency, nor does mention of commercial products imply
endorsement by the U. S. Government.
Gorham International Inc. wishes to express its appreciation
to the EPA project officer, Alfred E. Lindsey, Hazardous Waste
Management Division, Office of Solid Waste Management Programs,
for his valuable suggestions, review advice, and encouragement
throughout the contract efforts. We also wish to express our
thanks to the pulp and paper industry companies, associations,
and institutions that willingly supplied data, information, and
comments relative to our study objectives.
Specifically, we want to acknowledge the following companies
that cooperated fully with our personnel in carrying out the case
study efforts:
Alton Box Board Company
Alton, Illinois
American Can Company
Naheola, Alabama
Great Northern Paper Company
Millinocket, Maine
Mead Corporation, Mead Papers Division
Chillicothe, Ohio
Owens-Illinois, Forest Products Division
Valdosta, Georgia
This study was performed with generous cooperation from the
pulp and paper industry to provide an overall review of the
industry's solid waste management systems and problems. It is
intended as a guide for everyone interested in pulp and paper
industry solid waste management activities. It is hoped that it
will be of assistance to the industry in its continued efforts
to improve solid waste management operations.
-------
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
f
The pulp and paper industry occupies an important position
in the United States society. Paper products are widely used in
all sectors of the economy on a daily basis.
Because of the industry's large production (50 million metric
tons - 55 million tons in 1971), it was included as one of the
industries to be studied relative to solid waste management
practices and procedures. Prior to this time, the industry's solid
waste management activities had not been viewed as a single entity,
and the small amount of available information dealt with specific
cases and was scattered throughout the trade literature. Thus,
this report brings together a body of knowledge on pulp and paper
industry solid waste management activities for the first time.
Many specific areas have been dealt with on an abstract basis
simply because quantitative data is not available, even within the
industry. Operating mills maintain their cost accounting systems
consistent with production activities and not to pinpoint waste
management data. Also, because no value is traditionally assigned
to solid waste, many solid waste material flows are unmeasured and
must be determined by calculating losses based on known inputs and
outputs. However, by conducting five case studies of representative
integrated pulp and paper mills, much valuable background data was
accumulated. Additionally, industry contacts and representatives
provided available data and observations on the industry's solid
waste management practices.
The basic project objectives which this report addresses are:
1. To provide a comprehensive assessment of the solid
waste management practices and problems associated
with the pulp and paper industry.
2. To evaluate and assess the legal and economic impact
that present and proposed Federal, state, and local
environmental regulations and legislation may have
on pulp and paper industry solid waste management.
3. To identify, analyze, and evaluate alternatives to
those pulp and paper industry solid waste management
practices that are currently insufficient or that
may become inadequate as a result of tightening
environmental regulations and legislation.
-------
4. To provide recommendations of alternative
strategies and techniques for improved solid
waste management planning, implementation, and
operations in the pulp and paper industry.
- 2 -
-------
CHAPTER II
SUMMARY
Based on its important role in the U. S. economy and its
large tonnage production, the pulp and paper industry was
selected as a subject industry for the Environmental Protection
Agency's solid waste management studies.
The study was designed to provide background informatior;
to estimate past, present, and future solid wastce quantities; to
evaluate the impact of environmental legislation; to evaluate
the industry's solid waste management technology; and to provide
recommendations for alternative management techniques.
To provide sufficient background and understanding of the
industry, the pulp and paper industry structure, major product
categories, production processes, and production data were compiled.
Actual solid waste generation within the pulp and paper
industry results from a limited number of specific sources.
Several of these sources are common to most industry facilities
with other sources being specific to particular industry segments
or production processes. The sources common to mucn of the
industry are wood processing; power generation, personnel activity,
manufacturing services, and wastewater treatment. The more specific
sources are wastepaper reclamation, chemical pulping, specialty
products, groundwood production, and residuals handling loss.
Wood processing is the largest single source consisting
primarily of bark and associated wood wastes. Power generation
results in major solid waste quantities where coal is burned while
bark ash adds smaller solid waste quantities where energy recovery
from bark is practiced. Personnel activity solid waste consists
primarily of lunchroom, cafeteria, and general work area waste
while manufacturing services solid waste comes from shops,
warehouses, shipping/receiving departments, garages, and other
industry support services. Wastewater treatment is d rapidly
growing solid waste category consisting of primary and secondary
wastewater treatment sludges.
-------
Wastepaper reclamation generates solid waste consisting of
the large variety of contaminants present in incoming wastepaper
supplies. Chemical pulping solid waste comes primarily from the
recovery operations where inert material and nonreacted chemicals
are removed during cooking liquor preparation. Minor specific
sources of primarily wood waste result from shives generated
during groundwood production and from screening and handling
forest product residuals prior to pulping. Additional solid
waste is generated in the form of trim and nonsalable broke from
manufacturing specialty products (glassine, parchment, solvent
coated papers, etc.).
The industry's solid waste management practices have developed
over the years with few specific plans or development efforts.
Storage generally consists of bulk containers or on the ground
piles for major sources with small containers of various
configuration being used for minor sources. The primary concern
is providing sufficient size storage containers between collection
pickups. Very few storage problems occur because of the simple
systems used. Very little labor is utilized to perform solid
waste storage related duties.
Collection is generally provided by a combination of dump
trucks and container hauling vehicles. Compactor trucks are
seldom used except in small paper mills with limited solid waste
quantities.
Processing is limited to specific applications of size
reduction equipment to prepare combustible materials for burning
and to limited use of stationary compactors for bulky wastes
(often specialty papers or finishing areas and miscellaneous
sources).
Disposal consists primarily of land disposal sites on property
adjacent to the mills. Minimal planning and design of these
sites have led to the industry's most pressing solid waste problems,
Upgrading of disposal sites will require considerable effort over
the next decade. Also, the increasing quantities of wastewater
treatment sludge requiring disposal will rapidly utilize available
disposal site space.
Resource recovery activities have received the bulk of the
industry's solid waste management attention. Major energy recovery
from bark wastes plus broke recovery and sale of salvageable
materials provide significant economic returns to the industry.
- 4 -
-------
Total solid waste quantities have been steadily on the
increase since 1958 even though weight per unit weight of
production has decreased. Similar patterns are projected through
1980 (Figures 1 thru 7). Solid waste to disposal has increased
from the range of 9.8 to 10.2 million metric tons (10.8 to 11.3
million tons) in 1958 to the range of 14.3 to 16.2 million metric
tons (15.8 to 17.8 million tons)"in 1971. Quantities for 1980
are expected to reach the range of 18.6 to 22.5 million metric
tons (20.6 to 24.8 million tons).
The cost of managing these solid waste quantities ($61.0 to
$68.8 million in 1971) represents a significant expense to the
pulp and paper industry. The main portion of this cost results
from external collection operations with internal collection and
disposal representing lesser portions (Figure 8).
Resource recovery activities undertaken by the industry
contribute substantial solid waste management savings. Energy
production from bark provided a 1971 savings betv.'een $46.9 and
$56.4 million. Secondary materials sales were estimated to
provide an additional income of nearly $5 million. Routine process
operations that can be considered as partially resource recovery
operations (chemical and broke recovery) are essential to the
industry's economic structure.
Future solid waste generation and management activities will
be influenced by existing and proposed environmental legislation.
Increasingly stringent liquid effluent discharge limits will
produce more wastewater treatment plant sludge (both primary and
secondary). Additionally, increased attention to site requirements
for lagoons and landfill sites will make sludge dewatering and
combustion for energy value more prevalent. Emphasis on energy
shortages plus increased disposal costs will encourage the industry
to investigate the combustion possibilities for all combustible
solid waste sources. Increased air pollution control solid waste
may result from power generation equipment, but material recovered
from the chemical recovery area generally can be returned to
recovery process streams. Potential major solid waste quantities
could result from flue gas desulfurization if required to meet air
quality standards. However, this technology is still in the infant
stages and only long term implementation could be envisioned for
the pulp and paper industry. Another potential long term solid
waste quantity increase could result from effluent color removal
requirements. However, it is expected that systems employing
chemical recovery or regeneration with combustion of the removed
contaminants will keep this solid waste source small.
-------
SOLID WASTE QUANTITIES - 1958*
Wood Processing
69%
Kraft Pulping
FIGURE 2
SOLID WASTE QUANTITIES - 1963*
Wood Processing
Kraft Pulping
< 2%
Primary Sludge
-c 2%
Deinking
1%
*From Gorham International Inc.
-------
SOLID WASTE QUANTITIES - 1967=
Wood Processing
68%
Kraft Pulping
2%
einking
1%
FIGURE 4
SOLID WASTE QUANTITIES - 1971*
Wood Processing
63%
Deinking
1%
Bark Ash
1%
'From Gorham International Inc
-------
SOLID WASTE QUANTITIES - 1975*
Wood Processing
54%
Secondary Sludge
2%
ark Ash
1%
FIGURE 6
SOLID WASTE QUANTITIES - 1980*
Primary
Sludge
Wood Processing
39%
1 Ofrhpr 3%
raft Pulpin
Coal Ash
13%
Wastepaper
(Other Than
Deinking)
14%
*Frora. Gorham International Inc.
-------
400
300
200
100
FIGURE 7
SOLID WASTE QUANTITIES TO DISPOSAL - 1971*
Kg/Metric Ton Of Production
m
1956
1963
1967
1971
1975
1980
Lb/Ton Of Production
80
70
600
500.
40Q,
300,
200,
100-
1956
1963
1967
1971
1975
198C
'From Gorham International Inc.
Maximum
Minimum
-------
FIGURE 8
SOLID WASTE COST DISTRIBUTION - 1971*
Internal Collection
'internal Collection
Equipment
2%
*From Gorham International Inc.
10
-------
The principal operational changes caused by legislation or
regulations will be improved disposal site operation. State
permit programs plus local ordinances will require mills to meet
sanitary landfill criteria thus increasing disposal costs
significantly. While the industry spent from $4.7 to $5.3 million
to dispose of from 14.3 to 16.2 million metric tons (15.8 to 17.8
million tons) of solid waste in 1971, the 1980 cost to dispose
of 18.6 to 22.5 million metric tons (20.6 to 24.8 million tons)
is estimated to be between $30.8 and $37.1 million .
Basically, environmental legislation and regulations will
increase some waste quantities and increase associated disposal
costs. Thus, thare will be greater economic incentive to increase
raw material utilization, to increase resource recovery activities,
and to make solid waste management operations more efficient.
To minimize the economic impact of increased solid waste
quantities and disposal costs, individual mills can make more
efficient use of labor and equipment while increasing resource
recovery activities. Combustion of a greater percentage of bark
is expected to actually reduce the total bark transported to
disposal by 1980. Smaller reductions can also be achieved by
making provisions to recover the energy value from other combustible
solid waste. Primary wastewater treatment sludge also represents
resource recovery potential for low grade paperboard products,
structural products, agricultural products, and other secondary
products.
For collection operations, the use of large versatile container
hauling vehicles with different type containers for different waste
sources can increase equipment and labor utilization. Combined
with better planning and collection scheduling, internal changes
can help offset the increased operating costs of state approved
disposal operations.
To successfully meet the challenge of rising solid waste
quantities and costs, the pulp and paper industry will investigate
process alterations, resource recovery technology, and improved
management approaches. While no single answer will satisfy all
situations, technology tailored to specific mills' needs will
provide improved solid waste management practices through the next
decade.
- 11 -
-------
CHAPTER III
PULP AND PAPER INDUSTRY STRUCTURE
The pulp and paper industry is believed to have started when
the Chinese discovered the art of papermaking about 100 A.D. Prior
to that time, parchment from animal skins and papyrus served as
medium for written works. The first machine made paper in America was
established in 1690^ . From that time to the present, the u. S.
pulp and paper industry has spread from the Northeast to all sections
of the nation possessing sufficient fiber resources. Additionally
some nonintegrated paper mills and wastepaper mills have located
near urban areas to be close to areas with high demand levels and
wastepaper supplies.
Paper has been used in increasing quantities in the United
States. Annual per capita consumption has risen from 161 kilograms
(354 Ib) per capita in 1958 to 242 kilograms (534 Ibs) per capita
in 1971. Everyday uses include sanitary products, communications,
structural products, packaging, plus many others. The use of paper
in various applications has become so common that people think more
about the end use than the fact they are using a paper product.
This chapter will briefly describe the characteristics and structure
of the United States paper industry. If additional detail is sought,
the reader may consult any of the pulp and paper technology publications
listed in the report bibliography.
Product Categories
Paper is a general term used to describe a variety of fibrous
matted or felted sheets formed on a screen from an aqueous suspension.
"Paper" is one of three general subdivisions and is used in a
specific sense to distinguish itself from the other subdivisions as
the lighter, thinner, and more flexible products. The second general
subdivision is paperboard and the third subdivision is designated
as construction paper. Paperboard is heavier and less flexible.
Construction paper, made of both paper and paperboard, is used in
making construction products such as roofing felts.
Qualities characterizing paper are its weight and thickness,
strength, optical properties, and the type of raw materials from
which it is made (mechanical or chemical pulp).
1 , v.2, p.298.
- 12 -
-------
Pulps Used for Papermaking. Groundwood pulp is used for
newsprint and printing papers. It is the lowest quality raw
stock and is produced by mechanical grinding to separate wood
fibers from resinous residues. Groundwood pulp is produced by
forcing logs (normally 4 feet long) against a power driven
abrasive stone to separate fibers. Refiner groundwood pulp is
produced by passing wood chips through moving plates in equipment
known as refiners.
Sulfite or acid pulp is used commercially for most printing
papers and in tissue grades. Chemical cooking methods using
sulfurous acid and a salt base are utilized to produce this pulp.
Sulfate or kraft pulp, the most important pulp product, is usea
mainly in paperboard and coarse paper grades. Unbleached kraft
is used in packaging while bleached grades are used in packaging
boards and also in a number of paper grades such as printing
grades and tissue products. Sulfate pulp is chemically produced
by using a basic solution of caustic soda and sodium sulfide. It
is the most economical chemical pulp while also producing the
strongest fibers. Pine and Douglas fir as welo. as a wide variety
of other trees with a high resin content may be utilized with
both the type of wood and degree of cooking affecting the yield
(40 to 60 percent by weight). Semichemical pulp is used principally
in corrugating medium for paperboard boxes. It is produced by a
mild chemical treatment on wood chips followed by a mechanical
separation of the fibers. Though not as strong as kraft pulp.
semichemical pulp gives a relatively high yield (70 to 80%)^2).
Wastepaper is principally used in the making of paperboard.
The fibers are separated from the original product by mechanical
agitation in a water slurry. Deinking may also take place,
particularly for higher grade wastepaper products. In recent years,
the use of deinked newsprint to produce additional newsprint has
been increasing^). Rag pulp and bagasse (sugar cane stock)
constitute a small portion of raw materials for products such as
high quality writing papers, types of paperboard, and wrapping
paper.
The actual production of pulp and paper requires extensive
manufacturing facilities and employs large amounts of labor and
equipment to achieve the end result seen by consumers. This
basic technology will be described in the next section.
2 , v.2, p.334.
- 13 -
-------
Production Processes
The actual operations encountered in the conversion of
fibrous raw materials (primarily wood) to paper vary from mill
to mill, but basic processes discussed below account for the
most significant portions of output.
To prevent deterioration and maintain constant moisture
content, logs are often stored under water or piled and sprayed
intermittently. The latter practice has become more common
than' the former because of its lower cost. Also, increasing use
of lumber industry residuals has led to more wood storage in
chip form. Wood stored in roundwood form normally undergoes
debarking prior to chipping.
In both wet and dry debarking processes the logs are frequently
washed before debarking by a water shower to remove silt. In
most cases the water discharge is activated by weight of the log
itself on the conveyer. The suspended solids content of the
effluent from the log washing is largely silt and is generally
disposed of on the land along with grit from the pulp mill and
ashes from the boiler plants. This effluent is increasingly
being combined with the general mill discharge to the effluent
treatment system.
Dry debarking methods are principally used in the United
States, and wet debarking operations are declining. Dry debarking
is accomplished using a slotted debarking drum equipped with
internal staves which knock the bark from the log as the drum
rotates. Ring debarkers are also used for dry debarking. In
that process, one log at a time goes through the debarker which
adjusts to the diameter of the ioq. Knifelike projections on
the inside of the drum cut and remove the bark. The bark is then
removed to bark boilers or to a solid waste disposal site.
Wet debarking is usually accomplished by one of three methods.
The wet drum debarker is similar to the dry debarking drum mentioned
previously. The basic difference is that the wet debarking drum
rotates in a pool of water and the bark falls through the slots
to be removed wirh the water overflow. Wet pocket barkers are
stationary machines which remove bark from logs by rotating a
confined wood stack against a chainbelt fitted with projections
which raise the wood pile to allow bark to pass between the chains.
Water is sprayed through holes in the side of the pocket to
remove bark trapped in the wood stack or chainbelt. Hydraulic
barkers use high pressure water jets to remove the bark from the
logs as they move past the jets.
-------
Once the bark is removed, the wood is normally chipped to
provide small pieces required for pulping operations. Only
conventional groundwood mills utilize wood in roundwood for in
for pulp production.
Pulping. Pulping can be broken down into two major methods,
mechanical and chemical.
There are two methods used to produce groundwood pulps.
The older of these is stone grinding, and is accomplished by
grinding pulpwood on large grindstones. The other method, chip
refining, converts pulpwood chips to groundwood pulp by using
rotating disc or plate equipment known as refiners. Basically
all groundwood pulp is produced from softwood raw materials.
Chemical pulping, the second major method, is accomplished
using various chemical processes to dissolve undesirable
constituents of the timber. In the kraft or sulfate process a
water solution of sodium sulfide and sodium hydroxide is utilized
to dissolve the lignin and pentosan fractions of wood while
leaving the cellulose area less degraded. The cooking process
occurs either in high temperature batches or in continuous
digesters after which the pulp is separated from the cooking liquor.
The waste liquor is fed to a kraft recovery system which provides
for burning of the dissolved organic chemicals and recovery of
the sodium sulfide and sodium hydroxide for recycle to the pulping
process.
The sulfite process utilizes a cooking liquor containing
sulfur dioxide, sulfurous acid, and bisulfite. Until the advent
of the kraft process, sulfite pulping was the most important
chemical pulping process. With pollution control legislation
allowing limited effluent discharges, the sulfite pulping process
has been modified to enable easier cooking chemical recovery and
to minimize effluent discharges. Sulfite pulping processes are
in use with bases including calcium, sodium, ammonium, and magnesium,
Sulfite pulps are used in many final paper products including
tissue and many printing and publishing grades.
There is a special sector of the sulfite industry known as
the neutral sulfite semi-chemical (NSSC) process. Hardwood is
converted into pulp for the manufacture of corrugating medium.
A two stage process is used in which wood chips are softened in
a cook with a neutral sodium or ammonium sulfite solution and
then defibered in a refiner. This method brings a higher yield
than conventional sulfite pulping (70 to 80 percent on a bone dry
basis).
- 15 -
-------
The pulping process followed by washing and screening
produces a fiber slurry that can be used to manufacture paper
and paperboard products.
Pulp Bleaching. For production of paper grades with high
brightness, the pulp must undergo bleaching to remove color
components present in the raw material.
Chlorine is the principle agent involved in pulp bleaching.
The use of chlorine is followed by extraction of the solubilized
materials in sodium hydroxide solutions. The chlorination and
extraction steps are followed by a series of steps containing
treatment with chlorine dioxide or sodium hypochlorite with
additional extraction steps as required.
Bleaching steps are usually conducted at near atmospheric
pressure in large stirred containers. There must be washing
operations between adjacent bleaching steps to separate the pulp
from the spent bleaching chemicals. In cases of pulp bleaching,
there is a development of substantial quantities of waste water
for which no inexpensive disposal or recovery system is now
available. At the present time, much activity is focused on
bleaching with oxygen and developing a closed chlorine bleaching
system to reduce liquid effluent treatment costs.
Papermaking. The papermaking process consists of dewatering
a dilute aqueous slurry of pulp fiber through a continuous screen
moving at high speeds.
Fourdrinier paper machines are utilized in making most paper
and board. The pulp slurry is poured on top of a continuous
filtering screen (the wire). Water drains through the screen,
leaving the paper on the top. The sheet is removed from the
screen and passed through wet presses and a series of drum dryers
to evaporate the water remaining after the draining process and
wet pressing. Fourdrinier machines produce products from lightweight
materials to relatively heavy board.
A cylinder machine forms the paper on a rigid cylindrical
screen immersed in a stock bath as opposed to the travelling
flexible screen of the fourdrinier. Cylinder machines are used
primarily in the production of high caliper board that involve
multi-ply lamination from several cylinders. After drying, the
paper is removed from the machine and formed into large rolls
to be rewound and slit into smaller rolls, sold directly to the
consumer, or to be converted to other end products.
- 16 -
-------
Once the bark is removed, the wood is normally chipped to
provide small pieces required for pulping operations. Only
conventional groundwood mills utilize wood in roundwood form
for pulp production.
Pulping. Pulping can be broken down into two major methods,
mechanical and chemical.
There are two methods used to produce groundwood pulps.
The older of these is stone grinding, and is accomplished by
grinding pulpwood on large grindstones. The other method, chip
refining, converts pulpwood chips to groundwood pulp by using
rotating disc or plate equipment known as refiners. Basically
all groundwood pulp is produced from softwood raw materials.
Chemical pulping, the second major method, is accomplished
using various chemical processes to dissolve undesirable
constituents of the timber. In the kraft or sulfate process a
water solution of sodium sulfide and sodium hydroxide is utilized
to dissolve the lignin and pentosan fractions of wood while
leaving the cellulose area less degraded. The cooking process
occurs either in high temperature batches or in continuous
digesters after which the pulp is separated from the cooking liquor.
The waste liquor is fed to a kraft recovery system which provides
for burning of the dissolved organic chemicals and recovery of
the sodium sulfide and sodium hydroxide for recycle to the pulping
process.
The sulfite process utilizes a cooking liquor containing
sulfur dioxide, sulfurous acid, and bisulfite. Until the advent
of the kraft process, sulfite pulping was the most important
chemical pulping process. With pollution control legislation
allowing limited effluent discharges, the sulfite pulping process
has been modified to enable easier cooking chemical recovery and
to minimize effluent discharges. Sulfite pulping processes are
in use with bases including calcium, sodium, ammonium, and magnesium,
Sulfite pulps are used in many final paper products including
tissue and many printing and publishing grades.
There is a special sector of the sulfite industry known as
the neutral sulfite semi-chemical (NSSC) process. Hardwood is
converted into pulp for the manufacture of corrugating medium.
A two stage process is used in which wood chips are softened in
a cook with a neutral sodium or ammonium sulfite solution and
then defibered in a refiner. This method brings a higher yield
than conventional sulfite pulping (70 to 80 percent on a bone dry
basis).
- 15 -
-------
The pulping process followed by washing and screening
produces a fiber slurry that can be used to manufacture paper
and paperboard products.
Pulp Bleaching. For production of paper grades with high
brightness, the pulp must undergo bleaching to remove color
components present in the raw material.
Chlorine is the principle agent involved in pulp bleaching.
The use of chlorine is followed by extraction of the solubilized
materials in sodium hydroxide solutions. The chlorination and
extraction steps are followed by a series of steps containing
treatment with chlorine dioxide or sodium hypochlorite with
additional extraction steps as required.
bleaching steps are usually conducted at near atmospheric
pressure in large stirred containers. There must be washing
operations between adjacent bleaching steps to separate the pulp
from the spent bleaching chemicals. In cases of pulp bleaching,
there is a development of substantial quantities of waste water
for which no inexpensive disposal or recovery system is now
available. At the present time, much activity is focused on
bleaching with oxygen and developing a closed chlorine bleaching
system to reduce liquid effluent treatment costs.
Papermaking. The papermaking process consists of dewatering
a dilute aqueous slurry of pulp fiber through a continuous screen
moving at high speeds.
Fourdrinier paper machines are utilized in making most paper
and board. The pulp slurry is poured on top of a continuous
filtering screen (the wire). Water drains through the screen,
leaving the paper on the top. The sheet is removed from the
screen and passed through wet presses and a series of drum dryers
to evaporate the water remaining after the draining process and
wet pressing. Fourdrinier machines produce products from lightweight
materials to relatively heavy board.
A cylinder machine forms the paper on a rigid cylindrical
screen immersed in a stock bath as opposed to the travelling
flexible screen of the fourdrinier. Cylinder machines are used
primarily in the production of high caliper board that involve
multi-ply lamination from several cylinders. After drying, the
paper is removed from the machine and formed into large rolls
to be rewound and slit into smaller rolls, sold directly to the
consumer, or to be converted to other end products.
- 16 -
-------
The paper and paperboard produced from the industry's mills
is marketed in a definite structure based upon various product
groupings and geographical production characteristics.
Paper Products
The breakdown of the industry production is into three major
divisions; paper products, paperboard products, and construction
paper and paperboard products. The three major classifications
are again broken down into subcategories, including: newsprint;
coated printing, writing, and fine papers; unbleached industrial
and converting papers; bleached industrial and converting papers;
tissue papers; containerboard; bleached board; bogus board;
construction paper; insulating board; hardboard; and saturating
felt.
Essentially all the kraft linerboard is produced in the South
and Pacific Northwest. This is also true of unbleached kraft
paper and bag paper. The Southern area produces most sack kraft
paper. A large percentage of coated and fine paper is produced
in the paper mills of the Northeast and Midwest as is much of the
tissue paper. Bogus and building paper are produced mostly in
or near urban centers where the principal raw material, waste
fiber, is more readily available.
The older mills of the Northeast and Midwest have become
producers of low volume specialty products commanding higher
prices and levels of customer service. The large southern mills
focus on low price commodity products because of the necessity to
limit their products and thereby achieve maximum manufacturing
efficiency.
The large manufacturers such as the southern kraft and
linerboard mills are the most capital intensive sector of the
industry. The small fine paper, tissue, and boxboard mills of
the Northeast and Midwest are usually independent companies with
relatively low production volumes.
Industry Production
The pulp and paper industry has experienced reasonable growth
over the last fifteen years (Table 1 ). Their growth has maintained
this industry as one of the largest in the United States. Variations
between pulp and paper production result from the interaction of
several variables. The most important contributing factors are use
of recycled fiber, imported pulp, exported paper, and the addition
of coatings during papermaking.
- 17 -
-------
H
r^
cr>
r-{
o
o
o
CO
ws
00
o
o
o
•s
oo
oo
CO
o
o
o
r»
CO
i£>
CTi
**
CTi
•xf
O
O
O
»\
CM
CTi
O
«s
in
uo
cn
H
o
o
o
CM
00
OO
O
O
O
t-
U)
O
o
o
CM
00
LT>
*>
CM
o
o
o
CM
a\
rH
w
m
o
H
H
O
P
Q
O
00
{Q
CTv
H
O
O
O
fr>
H
O
!>
^
CM
O
O
O
•^
CTi
00
CTi
CTi
CM
O
0
O
*v
CM
CO
LD
in
OO
o
0
o
*v
o
00
CM
a\
oo
m
-P
m
Q
CO
B
S
H
CO
uo
CTi
H
O
0
O
»v
CTl
U)
[>-
r.
(J\
H
O
0
O
»*
{Q
(Ti
f^
r»
H
CM
O
O
O
*^
<-£>
IT,
CTi
»»
f^.
CM
o
o
o
»•
•ro
CM
CO
•*
o
CO
C
C
•H
-P
O
in
M
-P
0)
ex
ft
w
C
o
a,
H
3
rd
o
rd
w
C
CM O
G O
rd -rl
M
M -P
as
ft
M
rd
O
0
a,
rd
ft
G
rd -—
M C
(U O
CXH
rO -^
-------
While increased environmental awareness has contributed to
growing waste quantities, production growth has also increased
waste volumes requiring management. The development of solid
waste, problems and industry solutions compiled with an evaluation
of future trends and technology are the major concern of this
report and will be covered in detail by subsequent chapters.
The total production data based on United States Department
of Commerce census years plus 1971 data will be used as data base
numbers throughout this report. Thus, all solid waste generation
quantities and rates will be related to these standard production
numbers.
- 19 -
-------
CHAPTER IV
SOLID WASTE GENERATION POINTS AND CHARACTERISTICS
The pulp and paper industry's solid waste generation is
characterized by several major sources common to all types of
mills, plus individual sources confined to specific industry
segments. The common sources include wood processing, power
generation, wastewater treatment, manufacturing services, and
personnel activity. Major individual solid waste sources include
wastepaper reclamation, chemical pulping, and specialty products
manufacturing. The generation points and general solid waste
characteristics will be presented. This background information
is important when considering management and technological
alternatives.
Wood Processing
The largest single solid waste source is the incoming wood
supply. Bark is removed from the incoming wood during handling
and storage and is accumulated as general wood yard refuse. The
remaining bark and a portion of the wood is removed during
debarking operations that are used to prepare the wood for either
chemical or mechanical pulping. An additional amount of bark and
grit is deposited in the log flume water where flumes are used
for wood transportation.
Bark is a highly complex heterogeneous material from a
chemical viewpoint. It has a thin, active inner layer and a
relatively inert outer layer. Different species exhibit various
layer thicknesses and appearances. Analytical data on bark
samples exhibits wide variations in detailed composition even
within a single species depending on age, growth location, and
sample size.
Native bark tissue contains a maximum of only about one
percent inorganic material (equivalent to wood). However, normal
bark samples contain up to twenty percent ash that results from
windborne particles and logging methods(4).
- 20 -
-------
A large number of organic compounds can be extracted from -
bark by a variety of solvents. Terpenes, fats, waxes, resins,
tannins, sugars, starch, gums, pectins, and many other organic
constituents make bark a solid waste requiring careful disposal
attention. Leaching of water soluble components plus anaerobic
degradation can lead to color, COD, BOD, bacterial, and dissolved
oxygen changes in ground and surface waters^'.
Bark's properties and generation rates also make it an
excellent candidate for resource recovery activities that will
be discussed later in this report.
Power Generation
Power generation in the pulp and paper industry represents
a significant solid waste generation point in areas that utilize
large quantities of coal and bark for fuel. The noncombustible
ash may be collected as bottom ash, clinkers, or fly ash depending
on furnace design, air pollution control devices, fuel preparation,
and operating conditions. With continually increasing use of
air pollution control devices, the proportion of fly ash collected
continues to increase.
Coal ash has ten major constituents that are tested for by
the United States Bureau of Mines. These ten chemical compounds
are Si02, Al2°3» Fe2°3> TiC>2> P2°5> Ca°> M9° > Na2°> K2°> and
SCU. The average analysis for the three main constituents
Al2C>3, and Fe203) are approximately 46, 26, and 18 percent
respectively, thus making up about 90 percent of ash from
bituminous coal(6).
While the above major constituents are present as oxides,
they actually occur in the ash as a mixture of silicates, oxides,
and sulfates with small quantities of phosphates and otiier
compounds.
The physical characteristics of coal ash generated as clinker
and bottom ash will vary in size and shape depending on actual
furnace design and operation. Flyash consists of finely divided
spheroids of siliceous glass with diameters from one to fifty
microns. Carbon is found in flyash in the form of irregularly
- 21 -
-------
shaped coke particles. Under optimum operating conditions, the
carbon content will be negligible (less than one percent):
however, some samples have possessed up to twenty percent' .
Bark ash yields a somewhat different chemical analysis than
does coal ash. To determine chemical makeup bark ash samples
have been tested for the same ten constituents as coal ash plus
CaC03 and MnO. The calcium oxide content is the largest single
component averaging at least fifty percent. Silicone dioxide
is the next largest component (3 to 25 percent) while unlike
coal, very little Al-CU or Fe^O.-. are present^).
Ash from coal and bark ash is normally free of any biological
activity, but as seen from the diverse chemical structure, it
is subject to further chemical activity. The primary consideration
in managing power generation ash is the potential leaching of the
chemical constituents that could lead to ground or surface -water
contamination.
personnel Activity
Additional solid waste is generated by the manufacturing
and support personnel employed within the pulp and paper industry.
This generation appears to be quite constant from mill to mill
and includes lunch wrappings, newspapers, cafeteria wastes (if
applicable), office wastepaper, etc.
This solid waste contains components similar to municipal
solid waste. The combustible portion (primarily paper) normally
exceeds fifty percent. Putrescible wastes from lunchrooms and
cafeterias (food wastes) present most difficult to manage solid
waste for this source because they can create nuisance conditions
and attract pests if not properly handled.
Manufacturing Services
Various service functions required to support pulp and paper
industry manufacturing operations also generate solid waste. The
major solid waste producing services include shipping, receiving,
shops, rail car cleaning, and warehouse activities. This solid
waste source will vary significantly from mill to mill and from
v.2, p.410 .
- 22 -
-------
time to time. Mills shipping products in roll form will generate
less shipping room solid waste than a mill shipping products in
reams or sheet form. Solid waste from the other mill services
will vary depending on mill type and internal practices.
The following examples indicate the solid waste types for
common manufacturing services:
Shipping: packaging scraps, wrapping
Receiving: corrugated boxes, packing material
Garage: broken parts, packaging materials
Shops: wood scraps, replaced parts
Rail car
cleaning: paper, steel strapping, wood scraps
As seen above, manufacturing services solid waste contains
a high percentage of paper and wood with other components being
generally slow to degrade (metal, plastic, styrofoam, etc.).
Potential contaminants could result from specific sources (such
as oil and grease from garage wastes), but generally special
provisions are made for difficult to handle materials.
Wastewater Treatment
Solid waste generation from wastewater treatment represents
a significant source and one of a complex nature. The general
category includes solid or semi-solid residuals resulting from
either primary or secondary wastewater treatment operations.
However, the actual form of the sludge will vary extensively and,
coupled with local conditions, will result in a variety of
optimum disposal techniques.
Sludge from primary wastewater treatment consists of settlable
materials present in the mill wastewater including lost fiber.
Actual components will vary depending on the manufacturing processes
and practices used in the mill.
Normal sludge analyses determine the ash content as an
indicator of reuse possibilities and disposal alternatives. High
percentages of ash generally result from mills utilizing extensive
coating facilities and from wastepaper mills (particularly deinking
- 23 -
-------
mills). Losses of clay, TiC>2' and other coating or filler materials
often result in ash values in the area of 25 percent^8). Ink,
fillers, and other contaminants removed from wastepaper can
produce sludges having an ash content of fifty percent(9 ^.
Routine materials that occur as ash in the sludge include sand
and grit entering the wastewater treatment system from wood yard
washing areas, pulp cleaning, and general mill floor drains and
housekeeping activities.
The combustible portion of primary sludge consists of mainly
organic compounds from the incoming wood. Lost fiber plus various
other organic components from the wood possess significant BOD
and can create water contamination if not properly managed during
disposal operations. Physically, primary sludge is normally
removed from the clarifier in slurry form at only a few percent
consistency. Depending on the dewatering techniques used, the
final solids content will be up to 35 percent. At the higher
solids contents, primary sludge appears like a solid material and
will hold a general shape even though it is not stable when
subjected to pressure.
Secondary wastewater treatment sludge consists primarily of
biological solids. It has essentially no fiber content and is
generally of a gelatinous nature. It is removed from secondary
clarification units as a low consistency slurry (generally lower
consistency than primary sludge).
Sludge from domestic sewage generated within paper mills may
be intermixed with primary and secondary sludges if process and
sanitary wastewaters receive joint treatment. However, this
practice either has been or is being eliminated in most mills to
prevent fecal contamination of the large volume process water
effluent by a small quantity of sanitary effluent. In joint
systems little difference can be detected in sludge characteristics.
The principal change is the possible presence of fecal organisms
(possible pathogenic organisms) that complicate disposal from a
public health viewpoint.
With the common practice of either septic tank or joint
municipal treatment for sanitary wastewaters, the associated
solid waste generation is removed from the industry's internal
solid waste handling systems.
-------
Sludges from water treatment plants contribute to additional
solid waste generation when introduced into the wastewater
treatment plant. The primary contributions to the normal sludge
are additional grit and settlable matter from the fresh water
supply and some iron and aluminum salts resulting from the water
purification chemicals. Normally, only small quantities of
organic material are present in the water treatment sludge, thus
having little effect on secondary wastewater treatment sludge
generation or characteristics.
Wastepaper Reclamation
One industry segment that has a unique solid waste generation
factor is the wastepaper reclamation sector. Contaminants present
in the wastepaper must be removed before new paper and paperboard
products can be manufactured from the available fiber. These
contaminants include wire, strapping, tramp metal, glass, plastics,
dirt, and other foreign substances plus coatings, ink, fillers,
etc. that were included as part of the paper product when
manufactured for its original use. The degree of contamination
and the amount of cleaning required will vary with each batch of
wastepaper and with the specific end use.
This solid waste is a heterogeneous material consisting of
the kind of items mentioned above. Depending on the actual
process stage during which it is removed, the physical appearance
will differ. Some material, particularly rag, string, wire, tape,
and other stringy-type material is removed in a continuous rope
with all the materials intertwined. Much of the other material
that will break into small pieces, such as glass, plastic, and
heavy, dense contaminants, will be removed as a mixture of these
small pieces.
Mills using mixed wastepaper to produce lower grade products
will generate more solid waste than mills using high grade
segregated wastepaper. However, the general type of contaminants
will remain similar. For example, mills using waste newspaper
will find fewer large pieces of scrap metal and nylon tape than
a waste corrugated user. But the diversity of foreign objects
found in the wastepaper supply will be similar. The primary
distinction in generation rates is made between mills operating
deinking mills and all other types of operation.
- 25 -
-------
Chemically, most of the wastepaper reclamation solid waste
is stable and will not present contamination problems. However,
depending on the wastepaper source, it is possible for nearly
anything to enter the wastepaper stream. Consequently, this
generation point can yield a great variety of contaminants and
requires that solid waste characteristics be carefully observed
to prevent any unnecessary contamination or personnel injury.
Chemical Pulping
During chemical pulping to produce cellulose fiber suitable
for various paper-making processes, nearly all the solid material
removed is in a dissolved state with the majority entering the
chemical recovery processes and the remaining portions entering
wastewater treatment systems. For the portion entering wastewater
treatment systems, any solid waste generated is covered by the
discussion of wastewater treatment sludge.
Concerning chemical recovery in the kraft pulping industry,
some material does exit from the process as solid waste. The
two principal sources are rejects from slakers and unburned lime
rejects from the lime kilns. Also, some mills dewater dregs from
the green liquor clarifier and discharge these as solid waste.
The solid waste removed at the slakers appears to be little
lumps or pebbles. The actual components will depend on the
slaking operation's efficiency. The waste will be a mixture of
inert particles in the chemical recovery system and calcium
carbonate. The material from the lime kiln consists of inert
contaminants in the lime and a small amount of unburned lime
that will vary with kiln operation.
The dregs from the green liquor clarifier consist of inert
materials such as iron compounds, carbon, grit, and refractory
material. Depending on the completeness of the dregs washing
operation, some sodium salts will be removed with the
In sulfite pulping chemical recovery systems, inert materials
plus some oxide of the base cooking chemical will be removed in
a solid form. The actual generation point will vary with mill
design but is commonly at the ash washer or the cooking liquor
filter^ 10'.
10 , . ,
, p.3-17a .
10, p.3-65a.
-------
Removal of inert contaminants from the cooking liquor is the
objective of the chemical recovery washing and cleaning systems.
However, some of the active chemicals are normally removed wich
the inert fractions indicating the need for caution in disposing
of these solid waste materials.
Specialty Products
Specialty product manufacturing requires the additioii of
nonpulpable, noncellulosic materials that lead to the generation
of solid waste materials that cannot be reused in the same i~:i shion
as most trim and processing broke. Products such as glassine,
zinc oxide coated papers, solvent coated papers, high wet-strength
grades, plastic coated papers, and certain types of industrial
packaging materials are the major examples of this solid waste
category.
These solid wastes are normally combustible and the chemicals
added during manufacture are in a stable condition. Physically,
the material consists of scraps and pieces of the final product
that are too small or contaminated for sale. All specialty products
solid waste is generated in paper mills and is not mixed with
wastes from pulp mill areas. They are normally generated at one
process location making them easy to manage as a separate source.
Groundwood Production
Mechanical pulp production represents another individual
process solid waste source. In the grinders, small pieces of wood
called shives will not grind properly and must be removed from the
grinding pocket for disposal.
The material consists of small wood fragments witn no external
contaminants added. Again, this source is generated at a General
process point making collection simple.
-------
Residuals Handling Loss
. Another small solid wasre source results from the handling
of residuals (chips, sawdust, and shavings) used for wood pulp
production. Losses occur during chip screening, conveying, and
feeding to the digester.
This source consists of wood material that is not of the
proper size for the intended use. Also, magnets are often placed
in chip or sawdust lines to remove nails, wire, and other ferrous
material that is present in the wood. These sources generate
small amounts of material that do not present any significant
problems.
Summary
The various solid waste generation points, waste types, and
general characteristics have been presented in this chapter. This
discussion indicates that different potential problems exist for
different generation points. From a waste characterization
viewpoint, solid waste from the wood processing, wastewater
treatment, power generation, and chemical pulping generation
points present the most potential disposal problems if not
properly managed.
Subsequent presentations of existing solid waste practices
and total quantities will more clearly define the major solid
waste problems deserving industry attention.
- 28 -
-------
CHAPTER V
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
The solid waste management practices presently utilized in
the pulp and paper industry have not changed drastically over the
past years. The use of large specialized solid waste collection
vehicles (container-hauling vehicles and compaction equipment)
plus increasing use of incineration and energy recovery have been
the most prominent changes of the recent past. With the large
solid waste quantities generated from essentially point sources,
the storage and collection practices tend toward bulk material
handling methods rather than toward methods commonly used for
residential solid waste systems. With regard to specific solid
waste sources, industry practices tend to be similar from mill
to mill with minor differences dependent upon local conditions.
Based on the previous chapter's discussion of solid waste generation
points, emphasis will now focus on the industry practices used to
manage the solid waste generated.
Storage
Solid waste materials must undergo storage until sufficient
quantities have been generated to justify collection. Actual
storage practices depend on the solid waste characteristics, the
generation area, and the ultimate resource recovery or disposal
methods to be employed.
Bark and related wood yard solid wastes are normally handled
and stored by one of two methods, depending on their final use.
The bark from debarking equipment that is going to be utilized for
fuel value normally is placed in some type of enclosed storage
bin unless it is conveyed directly to the boilers. Current
practices are to provide a storage system that will even out the
feed rate to the boilers and eliminate the surges associated with
direct feed systems. The storage facilities that are currently
most popular are the automatically unloading or feeding bins that
continuously remove stored bark for conveyance to the boiler. A
popular storage system illustrating this general design is produced
by Atlas Systems Corporation (Figure 9 ). Other bark and wood
yard solid waste normally collects at the generation point and
accumulates until removed by front end loaders and dump trucks.
In some instances, it may be bulldozed into piles to await collection
but generally no storage equipment or facilities are provided.
- 29 -
-------
CTi
*
S
p
u
w
&H
p
u s
04 <
P
O W
H O
O
EH
CO
oo
a
Reproduced from
available copy
c
O
•H
-4J
re)
S-l
O
o
u
g
OJ
-p
w
>l
to
td
H
-p
o
M
-------
Ash from pulp and paper industry boilers is stored in several
ways with the type of combustion unit and air pollution control
devices being prime considerations in selecting proper storage
methods. For ash collected as bottom ash in coal fired units,
an ash hopper that can be easily discharged into a truck positioned
under a gravity fed chute is the most common storage technique.
This type of bottom ash collection is often combined with the
air pollution control devices when mechanical dust collectors or
other dry particulate collection methods are used. For boilers
with wet scrubbers or other wet particulate collection equipment,
the wet flyash is normally placed in a flyash pond, tank, or
lagoon for settling and storage. This storage may be short term
with periodic removal of settled material to a disposal site,
or the storage lagoon may act as the final disposal site. Removal
of settled ash is normally accomplished by using a clamshell
bucket on a crane to load the dump trucks used for transportation.
Another method commonly used is to employ a two section lagoon
and alternately pump to each section. After one section has been
allowed to settle, the water on top is pumped to the other lagoon
and settled ash is removed with a front-end loader.
Boilers burning little or no coal may use removable containers
to store ash resulting from small percentages of coal, oil, or
bark used as furnace fuel. Depending on the boiler capacity of
a mill, the fuel mix, required air pollution control equipment,
and operating conditions, ash may range from an insignificant
solid waste source to one of the major solid waste problems faced
by the mill. Overall, dry ash is a homogeneous solid waste that
is generally stored in bulk storage systems to facilitate truck
loading and unloading with wet ash being placed in settling type
storage areas, either for partial dewatering or for final disposal.
Industry practices for wastewater treatment solid waste
(sludges) are quite diverse and difficult to determine based on
available information. For purposes of this study, it was
considered sufficient to estimate actual industry practices while
noting the trends and predicting the future impact of such wastes
on the industry's solid waste management systems.
Primary wastewater treatment sludge may be handled in several
ways. As removed from primary clarification units it is essentially
a liquid (1-5 percent solids) and can be pumped. Mills with
sufficient land area normally prepare lagoon areas where this
- 31 -
-------
sludge can be placed to undergo additional natural dewatering.
However, mills without available land, or that can not provide
proper lagoon sites, are faced with seeking alternative solutions.
These alternative solutions employ various processing steps
that are discussed later in this chapter.
Sludge pumped from the clarifiers is not normally stored
prior to dewatering unless it is placed in lagoons. Dewatered
sludge is handled by conveyor and can be stored in outdoor piles
to await collection if necessary.
Secondary wastewater treatment sludge is more difficult to
dewater than primary treatment sludge, thus prompting storage
in lagoons. Existing secondary wastewater treatment in the pulp
and paper industry greatly favors either natural or aerated
lagoons with no secondary clarification. Thus, solid material
generated by secondary treatment undergoes natural sedimentation
with some ultimate deposition in the treatment lagoons, while
the remainder leaves the lagoon with the treated mill effluent.
Mills with limited space that have installed activated sludge or
modified activated sludge secondary treatment systems are faced
with disposing of a difficult to dewater sludge material. Some
mills simply lagoon this sludge while others have attained more
successful dewatering by mixing the primary and secondary sludge
together, thus using the fibrous primary sludge as a filter or
dewatering aid. Secondary sludge dewatering is normally undertaken
only when incineration is employed or when lagooning is impossible.
The impact of both primary and secondary sludge on the industry's
solid waste management systems will be discussed in more detail
later in this report.
Solid waste resulting from wastepaper reclamation facilities
is much different from that generated by any other operations.
It contains a high percentage of metal and other foreign matter
that enters the mill with the wastepaper. The material is actually
removed at several points during the wastepaper reclamation
process. Rags, wire, filament tape, and other long, stringy-type
materials are often removed during the pulping process by what is
called a ragger. Heavy materials and dense metals are often
removed in the pulping unit by being collected in a junk box.
Following the pulping of the wastepaper, cleaning equipment
similar to that used in processing virgin wood pulp is utilized
to remove contaminants. It also undergoes storage in a larger
- 32 -
-------
variety of storage containers than any other solid waste category.
Many small wastepaper mills have developed storage systems unique
to their individual requirements. Various sized wheeled carts,
dollies, and other containers (that can be transported manually,
by small in-mill vehicles, by overhead crane, or by conveyors)
are utilized to store this industry sector's solid waste. Final
storage containers are normally containers that must be handled
by mechanical methods due to this solid waste material's high
unit weight.
Solid waste materials generated in the chemical pulping and
recovery areas are predominantly stored in an outside area where
they can be conveniently picked up by a front end loader. While
sometimes deposited into a removable container, this solid waste
tends to corrode the common metal containers thus shortening their
useful life. Because of this problem, most mills resort to
on-the-ground storage with provisions for front end loader pickup.
The other solid waste sources (personnel, manufacturing
services, specialty product manufacturing, etc.) represent only
a small portion of the industry's solid waste, but do represent
a large number of generation points. Thus they usually receive
combined storage in containers placed to receive solid waste from
several sources. Small containers (usually salvaged drums) may
be used at the generation points with periodic transfer to
larger, centrally located removable containers. Whether the mill
operates its own collection system or hires a contractor, large
containers (0.8 to 31 cubic meters; 1 to 40 cubic yards) are the
common storage method.
Very little direct labor is associated with storage functions.
Most of the effort required to place solid waste into storage
facilities is part of the production workers' job where the solid
waste is generated. For high volume solid wastes that are generated
on a nearly continuous basis, transfer from generation point to
storage facilities is generally automatic. The only significant
labor input results from the emptying of solid waste drums,
wastebaskets, etc. and transporting this solid waste to the outside
storage containers.
Also, since very little putrescible solid waste is generated
within the mills, very few problems concerning sanitary conditions
exist. Only lunch room and cafeteria solid waste normally require
precautions to prevent unsanitary conditions.
33
-------
Storage is generally quite efficient with minimal solid waste
scattered in mill production areas. Naturally some mills are
better kept than others, but the emphasis on general housekeeping
and prevention of unsafe clutter has increased substantially over
the past few years.
Collection
Solid waste collection functions in the pulp and paper
industry vary according to solid waste type and other local
conditions. However, most mills employ some type of container
collection system for general mill solid waste, with other special
collection vehicles for specific solid waste sources.
The container collection systems used in the industry include
nearly every type offered on the equipment market. Many mills
use the haul away type container that is hydraulically hoisted
to a secure position on the rear of the truck. Other mills with
large solid waste volumes use the roll-on, roll-off containers.
This system is also often used in conjunction with stationary
compactors at points of high solid waste generation.
The use of containers that are emptied into compactor trucks
(primarily over-the-cab) are used most often by private contractors
who service small mills. This method is also more prevalent in
nonintegrated mills not producing pulp. Pulp mill solid wastes
tend to be wetter and of a more noncompactable nature than paper
mill solid wastes, making the use of compaction collection
equipment of limited value.
Noncompaction collection trucks are used extensively for
wood yard refuse, chemical pulping and recovery solid waste,
boiler ash, dewatered sludge, and miscellaneous noncompactable
mill solid waste generated either continually or intermittently
in large quantities. Large dump trucks (7.6 to 10 cubic meters;
10 to 13 cubic yards) are the predominant open collection vehicles.
Also 3.8 cubic meter (5 cubic yard) dump trucks are used for minor
source collection duties. These open trucks are normally loaded
/jith front end loaders that are assigned to solid waste handling
duties.
- 34 -
-------
Collection labor is normally provided by the yard crew or
service crew. Their responsibility begins when the solid waste
is deposited in the proper storage container or area and generally
carries through disposal. In some instances the special solid
waste sources will be the responsibility of men assigned from
the waste generating department. For example, the power plant
or wastewater treatment plant may provide equipment and labor
to transport ash and sludge to the mill disposal site.
The use of private collection companies is very limited among
the large integrated pulp and paper mills that produce the major
percentage of the industry's products. In these mills, contractor
service is generally limited to specialized solid waste sources,
particularly those containing putrescible waste, such as lunch
room or cafeteria solid waste. Smaller nonintegrated paper mills
do use contractor services to a significant degree. This practice
is based primarily on these mills' more urban locations and lack
of land for disposal sites. Also, the small paper mills do not
have many of the large quantity generation points found in
integrated mills, thus greatly altering the economics of internal
systems versus contractor services.
Scheduling of collection pickups is generally a random system
based on operator's experience and operating conditions. While
collection scheduling is not as important as in normal residential
collection, it would be advantageous to attempt improved scheduling,
While some areas will produce more solid waste during process
upsets or other abnormal conditions, most generation points follow
predictable patterns.
Definite route schedules based on a study of the individual
mill's solid waste generation would insure adequate collection
under normal conditions and would provide better equipment
utilization to make collection of unpredicted solid waste less
troublesome.
Overall, collection represents the most costly component of
solid waste management in the pulp and paper industry. The
physical collection and transportation of large volumes of solid
waste material requires extensive expenditures for both equipment
and labor. Later report sections will discuss the economic
factors related to collection as well as other solid waste
management functions.
- 35 -
-------
Processing
. Solid waste processing is limited in the pulp and paper
industry. Use of stationary compactors, incinerators, shredders,
etc. is normally confined to specific solid waste sources and
most often is used when the material is to be utilized for
resource recovery purposes. The major nonresource recovery
processing activity is compaction of bulky solid waste material
thus reducing the required collection frequency. These operations
are becoming more common in specialty paper mills that produce
significant quantities of nonpulpable broke, in shipping and
receiving areas where large quantities of packaging material and
wrapping trim are generated, and in integrated converting operations
that generate waste packaging material. The other primary use
of compaction equipment is to bale wastepaper that is not reusable
within the mill, but that does have value on the secondary materials
market. Other high volume solid wastes such as bark, ash,
chemical recovery solid waste, etc. are of a dense nature and do
not undergo significant compaction to justify the costs.
Size reduction is used primarily to reduce the particle size
of combustible solid waste so that it may be burned to recover
its heat value. Bark hogs or shredders are used extensively to
reduce the bark particle size prior to entering the bark boilers.
Size reduction equipment is also utilized on a minor scale to
prepare other combustibles (wood, paper, etc.) for use in hog
fuel boilers.
The other common operation that may be classified as size
reduction is the pulping of broke and wastepaper to prepare it
for reuse in the papermaking process. Nearly every mill in the
nation has some type of facility capable of pulping broke and/or
purchased wastepaper into slurry form. If this normal process
step is considered as a solid waste processing technique it is
easily the most prevalent processing activity in the pulp and
paper industry.
Incineration is limited to a small number of mills that use
this method to reduce the solid waste volume prior to final
disposal or to handle special solid waste sources. The major
increase in thermal processing is the use of incinerators to
reduce the large wastewater treatment sludge volumes that must
be hauled to normal disposal sites.
- 36 -
-------
Bark consumption in steam and power boilers represents the
largest use of potential solid waste as a fuel source. This
activity will be discussed further as a resource recovery alternative.
Wastewater treatment sludge processing to lessen the quantity
requiring disposal or to provide a material suited for combustion
is practiced by some mills. Vacuum filters, centrifuges, belt
and coil filters, and various presses have been applied to sludge
dewatering. Also, sludge incineration is becoming an increasingly
popular technique to reduce solid waste volumes and to recover
energy value. The use of sludge processing techniques relative
to sludge disposal will be discussed later in this chapter.
Disposal
Fulp and paper industry solid waste disposal is primarily
characterized by land disposal sites. For the most part, these
sites are partially controlled but do not meet sanitary landfill
criteria. Most sites do undergo some degree of covering and in
many instances dumping of specific solid waste materials is
confined to designated areas. However, little or no site
preparation or planning is normally evident, with most sites
occupying land as near as possible to the mill site and simply
spreading out from the mill's original disposal site.
Because of the nonputrescible nature of most of the industry's
solid waste, solid waste management agencies have been quite
lenient in providing operating licenses or permits for these
industry's disposal site operations. Rather than apply sanitary
landfill regulations, licenses are issued for industrial solid
waste sites or other modifications of truly satisfactory disposal
operations. Some agencies require separate disposal of any food
wastes in order to satisfy industrial site classification criteria,
but most have not required this activity to date.
Very little, if any actual testing has been done at most
mill sites with regard to leachate contamination of ground or
nearby surface waters. From visual observations, this problem
does exist in some areas, particularly where bark or other
organic solid wastes are placed in low lying areas subjected to
standing groundwater. Also, chemical pulping or other active
chemical solid wastes that come in contact with runoff or standing
water can easily contribute to groundwater or surface water
- 37 -
-------
contamination. Primarily because of the usually remote location
of large integrated pulp and paper mills plus strong emphasis on
more obvious water pollution problems, this area of groundwater
pollution has not received much attention either from regulatory
authorities or mill officials.
Solid waste from mills using private contractors probably
receive no better disposal than is received by mills with internal
disposal operations. While municipal and private contractor's
sites are 'being updated and forced to meet improved operational
standards, the majority of disposal sites still fail to meet
sanitary landfill criteria. Thus, whether the pulp and paper
industry's solid waste is presently disposed of on-site or at
private or municipal facilities, significant improvement will
be required in the next decade to meet recommended guidelines.
Disposal of wastewater treatment plant sludge is a separate
area that requires an increasing degree of industry attention.
A detailed accounting of the industry's sludge disposal practices
was not included in this study, but a review of previous EPA
studies on wastewater treatment facilities, equipment manufacturers'
installation data. Council of Economic Priorities report on the
paper industry^ H , and industry experience provided a basis for
approximating sludge disposal practices (Table 2 ).
The trend in primary sludge handling and disposal methods
is toward dewatering and land disposal or incineration because
of the large land requirement for lagooning as well as the short
life of lagoons. The lack of land close to mill production areas
increases transportation charges thus making additional dewatering
and/or incineration more economically attractive alternatives.
Secondary wastewater treatment sludge generation has been
increasing, but it has not yet manifested itself as an industry
wide solid waste problem. Most of the industry's existing
secondary treatment operations employ aeration lagoons or other
long detention time methods. Historically, these methods have
not required secondary clarification to meet settlable solids
guidelines, thus not creating a solid waste requiring collection
and disposal. However, with new effluent guidelines, it is
expected that secondary clarification and the related solid waste
will become more prevalent in the industry. Because of the
higher capital and operating costs, only a few activated sludge
secondary treatment systems have been installed in the pulp and
paper industry.
- 38 -
-------
TABLE 2
ESTIMATED PRIMARY WASTEWATER TREATMENT SLUDGE
HANDLING AND DISPOSAL PRACTICES*
Disposal 1958 1963 1967 1971 1975 1980
Method (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
Lagoon 90.0 80.0 70.0 62.0 50.0 40.0
Landfill** 9.5 18.0 25.5 24.0 30.0 30.0
Thermal
Processing** 0.5 2.0 4.5 14.0 20.0 30.0
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
*From Gorham International Inc. and Industry Data
**Landfill Plus Thermal Processing Is That Amount Dewatered
- 39 -
-------
The few mills currently providing secondary clarification
generally lagoon the resulting sludge. However, dewatering in
conjunction with primary sludge for combustion is being successfully
accomplished. At the present time, dewatering of secondary sludge
and 'handling it as a solid waste for disposal is an essentially
nonexistent practice.
Sludge disposal will receive increasing industry attention
as wastewater treatment facilities expand, and major efforts will
be undertaken to find new disposal techniques or feasible
alternatives.
Resource Recovery
The degree of resource recovery practiced within the pulp
and paper industry is significant. Several potential solid waste
sources are routinely returned to the manufacturing process thus
reducing the virgin raw material requirements.
The first point in the manufacturing process where a sizable
amount of material enters a resource recovery stream is in the
wood yard and wood room activities. Bark and associated wood
wastes are diverted to a variety of boilers for use as fuel. This
fuel source is continually becoming an increasing segment of the
industry's energy supply. On an overall industry basis, energy
from bark recovery accounts for about five percent of the total
energy consumed (Table 3). This assumes the BTU value of bark at
about 2.9 million kilocalories per metric ton (10.5 million BTU's
per short ton). Actual bark quantities for this resource recovery
function will be presented in the chapter discussing solid waste
quantities (Chapter VI). Bark utilization activity entails major
equipment installations designed to prepare the bark for combustion,
to physically store and transport the bark to the boilers, and to
provide boilers designed and equipped to provide adequate bark
combustion. Important combustion variables and alternative designs
will be discussed in the technology assessment chapter.
- 40 -
-------
cn
r-l
ro
U
J
CQ
<
EH
P
g
H
a.
P
O
to
P
w
u
M
OJ
CU
H
rd
-P
O
u->
ro
0
H
0
0
CO
ro
CTi
l> •sf H U3
CM CM OO
•xf CM
rH
00
r^
O
•
CO
CM
LO
t
LO
CTi
r-H
CO
IX)
in
CO
rH
in
CM
O O i£> rO CM
CM l> 00 CO CTi O "^
rH CM I> CD en
^ OO LO
U3
U3
CO
^
rH
c- o
t •
H t>
rH ^D
r-i U)
CO
ro
CM
CM
CO
iH
(D
;3
PM
H
rd
G
^
0)
-P
X
Ed
CO
*
**
LT)
*
1
rH
•H
O
CM
*
1
•H
H rd w
•H o ro
QUO
rH
CD
PT,
T3
QJ
01
01
O
OJ
G
rd
a
o
SH
•H
U
•H
£_l
-P
U
01
H
Ed
T3
0)
CO
rd
r;
u
S_l
p
D4
rH
rd
-P
O
4-)
X!
CO
en
rH
0)
^j
fe
rH
rd
j^
(U
-P
c
H
rd
O
P rH
CT rd
•H -P
^ O
4J Q
CU CO
EH
O
EH
OJ
,c
EH
G
H
O
G
o
•H
4->
rd
CO
•rH
H
•H
-P
P
G
rd
CO
0) Ch
tf rH
(U -
u
SH
rd
-P
•rl
-P
en
G
H
(U -P
a w
tfl 3
CU T3
C
d H
rd
U M
•H (M
M £X
0) ro
g a,
•d c
a) rd
•H
m a
•H H
•d P
o QJ
e
o
-------
Despite the prominence of bark burning in the pulp and paper
industry, little technical information has been compiled and
published concerning the design, operation or financial aspects
of such operations. Individual companies and equipment suppliers
are'the two major sources of information, but even they have a
surprisingly limited view of the overall operation. Equipment
suppliers are generally involved in supplying only components of
the overall system (boiler, storage bin, shredder, conveyors,
etc.) and have little knowledge of exactly how their equipment
meshes with other equipment or how it is actually being operated
once it has been sold. Likewise, individual companies either
engineer the total system or hire a design firm to provide the
layout, and once in operation, few operating records or evaluations
are made on the system as long as the bark is being consumed.
Because of the many variables involved, some mills encounter
great difficulty in burning their bark while another seemingly
similar mill will have essentially no difficulty. Despite this
lack of common knowledge and standard design or operational
procedures, energy recovery from bark represents a resource
recovery technique that diverts large quantities of material from
routine disposal operations ' ^ ) .
The most significant resource recovery technique in an
economic sense for the industry's sulfate pulping segment is the
use of recovery boilers to reclaim both heat and chemicals.
While this process step is an essential portion of the manufacturing
operation, it deserves mention because of the large quantity of
dissolved organic solids that are burned for energy value (Table
3 ), thus allowing recovery of the valuable cooking chemicals
that can then be reprocessed to produce cooking liquor to produce
additional kraft pulp. If not consumed in this manner, the
organic matter dissolved from the incoming wood would require
treatment as wastewater resulting in additional sludge generation.
Thus, indirectly, the recovery furnace operation does have an
identifiable positive impact on total solid waste generation.
Other chemical pulping processes (sulfite, NSSC, etc.) also
utilize recovery boiler operations to reclaim energy and chemical
values, but not as extensively as do the kraft mills. Where more
than one type of pulping operation is combined in a single mill,
additional resource recovery operations are possible. Rejects
from one system may be usable by introduction into a different
p.10-14.
- 42 -
-------
type of chemical or mechanical pulping system. For example,
groundwood tailings and bull screen rejects can be introduced
to a sulfite cooking process. Similarly, screening rejects can
sometimes be diverted to a refiner groundwood pulping operation.
Also, within any pulping system, screening and cleaning rejects
are normally recycled to receive additional refining, cooking,
or other processing to enable maximum fiber yield. Because most
of these recycle steps are automatic, no quantity data are kept
concerning actual recycle rates. Only ultimate yields are of
sufficient interest for most mills to determine on a routine
basis.
In the papermaking area, another type of essential resource
recovery is broke recovery. Broke pulpers to recover trim and
other unsalable or off-specification paper are utilized in all
types of papermaking operations. This equipment is routinely
acquired as part of the capital expenditures for any new mill.
Most operating duties and functions are part of the normal
production crew's responsibilities with actual resource recovery
costs intermingled with all the production costs. Depending
upon the product being produced and actual operating conditions,
up to 20 percent of the gross paper production may be recycled
internally. Obviously, this quantity fluctuates greatly during
periods of poor operation, order changes, start-ups, etc.
However, even at the cited order of magnitude, loss of this
material would disrupt the entire pulp and paper industry's economic
structure.
The wastepaper sector of the pulp and paper industry is
routinely involved in wastepaper utilization from many sources.
One of these sources is virgin paper mills that generate broke
that cannot be economically reused internally. This applies
principally in the manufacture of highly coated papers. Mills
making highly coated publication papers find it uneconomical to
remove all the coating, fillers, etc. to reclaim the basic fiber
for reuse. However, wastepaper mills producing various paperboard
grades can use the highly coated broke without removing all the
materials added by the coated paper manufacturers. Thus, assuming
an economical transportation distance, highly coated broke may
be reused in the secondary fiber industry.
43
-------
Summary
This chapter has presented narrative describing the most
commonly utilized solid waste management practices in today's
pulp and paper industry. Basically, practices have focused on
the most economical and conventional collection method to remove
solid waste to a land disposal site. Disposal sites tend to be
open dumps, at best partially controlled dumping grounds.
Fortunately, because of the nature of the common solid waste
materials and usually remote locations, pulp and paper industry
solid waste disposal sites have not caused extensive pollution
problems. However-, increasing environmental legislation and
continuing progress in control of more pressing industry pollution
problems will bring increased pressure to bear on the industry's
solid waste management activities.
The area of most significant pulp and paper industry solid
waste management achievement is recovery of materials with economic
value in overall production operations. Normal industry practices
include recovery of energy from bark wastes, chemical and energy
recovery from spent cooking liquors, fiber recovery from internal
broke, and recovery of highly coated broke for use in secondary
fiber mills.
- 44 -
-------
CHAPTER VI
SOLID WASTE QUANTITIES
This chapter presents the estimated solid waste quantities
for major generation activities. The total quantities presented
in this chapter are based on estimates made by correlating solid
waste generation with known industry production or raw material
consumption data.
The 1971 data have been prepared on a regional basis to
enable reporting all information on available industry production
statistics. The four Department of Commerce regions (Table 4)
for the pulp and paper industry have been used to provide
correlation with the government statistics. The Department of
Commerce's Southern region has been divided into South Atlantic
and South Central subregions because of the large production in
the Southern region.
Based on 1971 solid waste generation, industry growth, and
projected industry patterns, both historical solid waste generation
and projected generation are presented in this chapter. National
totals have been compiled for the years 1958, 1963, 1967, 1971,
and projected for the years 1975 and 1980. Historical production
and consumption data published by the Bureau of Census, Department
of Commerce, and the American Paper Institute were used to calculate
totals. The same sources have published forecasts for the industry
and these were used to generate projected values.
Wood Processing Solid Waste
The total quantity of bark generated varies depending on wood
species, tree size, logging conditions, and mill operating conditions,
Even within individual mills much confusion exists concerning bark
generation quantities. However, based on actual studies conducted
at different U. S. locations by individual mills, an average bark
generation quantity of 50.1 to 56.4 bone-dry kilograms per cubic
meter (400 to 450 bone-dry pounds per cord) of incoming roundwood
represents a reasonable average. Up to about 25 percent of this
waste can be made up of wood slivers and chunks removed during the
actual debarking operation. Bark generation rates of up to 68.9
bone-dry kilograms per cubic meter (550 bone-dry pounds per cord)
have been used for bark boiler design. However, this rate appears
to be derived from design safety factor considerations rather than
from actual bark generation studies. Regional and national bark
- 45 -
-------
TABLE 4
REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION*
.Northeast
Maine
New Hampshire
Vermont
Massachusetts
Rhode Island
Connecticut
New York
New Jersey
Pennsylvania
North Central
Ohio
Indiana
Illinois
Michigan
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Iowa
Missouri
North Dakota
South Dakota
Nebraska
Kansas
South Central
Kentucky
Tennessee
Alabama
Arkansas
Mississippi
Louisiana
Texas
Oklahoma
South Atlantic
Delaware
Maryland
District of Columbia
Virginia
West Virginia
North Carolina
South Carolina
Georgia
Florida
West
Montana
Idaho
Wyoming
Colorado
New Mexico
Arizona
Utah
Nevada
Washington
Oregon
California
Hawaii
Alaska
*From Department of Commerce
- 46 -
-------
generation quantities (Table 5 ) were based on either 50.1 or 56.4
kilograms per cubic meter (400 or 450 pounds per cord) depending
on experience within each region. The Southern regions have the
higher generation rates. This was attributed to the smaller
diameter sticks plus the amount of heavy foreign material (soil,
grit, etc.) brought into the mill with the wood.
The regional bark generation rates were applied to American
Pulpwood Association statistics for roundwood usage to estimate
total bark generation (Table 5 ).
The disposition of bark is continually changing and is
difficult to quantify. Current emphasis within the industry is
toward the use of bark as fuel, thus recovering available energy
value (Table 6 ). A recent American Paper Institute survey of
the U. S. pulp and paper industry energy sources indicated that
9,648,122 metric tons ^12) (10,637,400 tons) of bark were utilized
for fuel in 1971. Regional fluctuations in bark boiler utilization
are rapidly diminishing with the installation of bark boiler
equipment by most large bark generators. Difficulty in accurately
determining bark consumption in boiler facilities arises from
lack of measuring devices, fluctuating feed rates, and varying
operational procedures. Thus, the API energy report represents
the most extensive effort to date to estimate total bark boiler
consumption for a specific time period.
Other uses of bark include compost, mulch, and other
agricultural or horticultural products. Also, chemical extraction
from bark and use as a structural product present potential resource
recovery opportunities. However, most bark recovery processes
are currently connected with the lumber industry with only a small
percentage of the pulp and paper industry's bark flow reaching
such resource recovery operations. Thus, these uses represent a
negligible total on an overall industry basis.
Bark not utilized as fuel or other uses must be transported
from the wood yard area to a disposal site. Even at most mills
with bark burning equipment, a significant quantity of bark and
grit is removed from the wood storage areas and from the log flume
water clarifiers. That bark generally has a higher ash content
and is more abrasive to conveying and combustion equipment than
is bark direct from the debarking drums. However, some mills are
building bark burning systems to remove contaminants and handle
this general wood yard refuse that may contain up to 25 to 30
percent of the incoming bark.
- 47 -
-------
TABLE 5
BARK GENERATION - 1971*
Roundwood Consumption
Region
Northeast
North
Central
South
Atlantic
South
Central
West
Total
Softwood
Cu Meters
(Cords)
10,.723,000
(2,958,000)
5,068,000
(1,398,000)
47,506,000
(13,105,000)
42,964,000
(11,852,000)
12,818,000
(3.536,000
Hardwood
Cu Meters
(Cords)
6,634,000
(1,830,000)
9,806,000
(2,705,000)
13,032,000
(3,595,000)
15,279,000
(4,215,000)
1,272,000
(351,000)
Bark Generation
Rate
Kg/Cu Meters
(Dry Lb/Cord)
50
(400)
50
(400)
56
(450)
56
(450)
50
(400)
119,079,000
(32,849,000)
46,023,000
(12,696,000)
(Continued On Next Page)
- 48 -
-------
TABLE 5
(continued)
Bark Generation
Region
Northeast
North
Central
South
Atlantic
South
. Central
West
Total
Softwood
Metric Tons
(Tons)
536,581
(591,600)
253,597
(279,600)
2,674,403
(2,948,625)
2,418,697
(2,666,700)
641,430
(707,200)
6,524,708
(7,193,725)
Hardwood
Metric Tons
(Tons)
331,962
(366,000)
490,687
(541,000)
733,650
(808,875)
860,176
(948,375)
63,671
(70,200)
2,480,146
(2,734,450)
Total Dry
Metric Tons
(Dry Tons)
868,543
(957,600)
744,284
(820,600)
3,408,053
(3,757,500)
3,278,873
(3,615,075)
705,102
(777,400)
9,004,855
(9,928,175)
Total Wet
Metric Tons
(Wet Tons)
1,737,086
(1,915,200)
1,488,568
(1,641,200)
6,816,106
(7,515,000)
6,557,746
(7,230,150)
1,410,204
(1,554,800)
18,009,710
(19,856,350)
*From American Pulpwood Association, American Paper Institute,
and Gorham International Inc.
- 49 -
-------
Ch
rH
m
O
O
H
EH
H
CO
O
cu
CO
H
a
3 H
O rd
CD co
G O
rd d,
H CO
rH -H
0) Q 10
U C
to LI O
•H O EH
S fn
_p
M TS CD
O G 3
EM rd
H to
rd OJ
-P co
0 p
EH
en *
3 *
O rH
CD rd
G co co
rd O G
H CX O
rH CO EH
CD -H
U Q U
en -H
•H M M
S 0 -P
EM CD
M S
O T3
h G -P
rd CD
i t~^t
I — 1 ^
rd en
-P (D
O en
EH P
0)
£ >i
3 CP co
CO Ll G
C CD O
O G EH
U W
-P
rH L| CD
rd O 3
-P &H
0
EH
T) en
CD G
e * o
3 * EH
C Oi U
0 Li -H
U CD Li
G -P
W 0)
-H S
rd Li
-P O -P
O Cn 0)
EH 3
O
O
rH
•N
LT>
rH
O
•>
rH
CD
CT>
U3
rx
O
CM
CTi
O
O
rH
»»
0
O
ON
, 1
r^
OO
•»
CD
rH
CO
O
o
00
CO
rH
CM
rH
in
LT>
O
O
o
CM
ro
CO
m
O
o
in
o
ro
ro
u~>
00
CO
r*
CTi
CM
O
*%
CO
O
o
LO
CM
oo
ro
O
in
oo
co
ro
o
CM
o
o
o
00
Ch
CM
en
o
ro
in
CM
* C
- P
C
3
O
G
C
P
O
o
H
CTv
•xf
ro
CM
ro
O
CO
rH
CM
O
CM
H
O
O
Ch
rH
O
00
O
O
O
r>-
oo
CM
rH
CO
U)
CTi
C
o
•H
DI
0)
OS
-P
CO
rd
(D
c~|
-P
M
O
£5
rH
rd
M
£, -P
-P C
LI CD
0 U
U
•H
-P
C
£ rtJ
-P H
3 -P
0 <
en
H
rd
LI
x: -P
-P G
3 a)
0 U
CO
rH
-P rd
co -p
0) O
& EH
u
G
H
H
rd
C
O
•H
-P
rd
G
LI
CD
-P
C
H
s
rd
"S
O
cJ3
"O
G
rd
«
CD
-P
3
-P
•H
-P
CO
C
H
L|
CD
a
rd
C
rd
U
•H
SH
CD
e
i
L| CD
CD -P
C en
W 3
£1
O O
CM O
CD Li
6 rd
3 CQ
co
G co
O CO
U CD
U
rH X
fd u
-P
o m
EH 0
*
- 50 -
-------
Bark use from nonpulp and paper industry sources is receiving
attention as an energy source. The Western region currently burns
more bark than is received directly with its roundwood supplies.
This results from the region's extensive use of residuals and the
integration of lumber and pulp and paper mills (total forest
product complexes). However, as is apparent from viewing the •
spillage and losses that occur in wood handling prior to debarking,
the Western region still does transport some material to disposal.
This quantity was not estimatable from available data and was
considered negligible for study purposes. Similar energy recovery
approaches are becoming increasingly popular in other regions with
several areas currently planning new facilities to incorporate
bark wastes from both sawmill and pulp mill operations.
For the national generation totals (Table 22), except in 1971
when regional quantities were compiled, a value of 53.2 kilograms
of bone dry bark per cubic meter of roundwood (425 pounds per
rough cord) was used to develop historic and projected values.
It is felt that this rate per unit of roundwood will remain nearly
constant through 1980. Minimum diameter sticks that can be
debarked in drum debarkers are 8.9 centimeters (3.5 inches).
Therefore more bark from smaller diameter sticks is being ruled
out. Since the same motions are required to harvest a small
diameter stick or a large diameter stick, it appears that harvest
cycles will be used which produce the most wood per stick at the
lowest cost. The trend to long log delivery to mills reflects a
different mode of harvest, but does not indicate much change in
solid waste generation. If anything, long log slashers at the
mill site are creating a sawdust waste that previously remained
in the woods.
The wood processing solid waste (Table 22) is listed as bark
to disposal in wet tons. The 1958 and 1963 values are based on
total roundwood usage. There is no historical data available to
identify the amount of bark burned at the disposal site or the
amount of peeled roundwood delivered to the mills. Each of these
two practices was in existence and obviously reduced the bark to
disposal values presented for the early years. The 1971 and 1975
values are based on industry data collected by API for its energy
study. The national trend is shown as increasing through 1975
and declining by 1980. The 1980 quantities of bark to disposal
reflect the increasing importance of bark as a fuel for steam and
power generation and the desire to conserve useful space at
disposal sites.
- 51 -
-------
New concepts and technologies employing whole tree logging,
chipping, and roughwood chip pulping are under investigation.
These would shift the bark to disposal as solid waste to some
other portion of the pulping process. In addition to these
potential processes, continued growth in residuals use for
pulping assures the industry a smaller bark disposal problem
in future years.
Power Generation Solid Waste
Power generation solid waste is primarily ash resulting from
the combustion of-coal in the industry's power boilers plus the
contribution from bark combustion (Table 7 ). Other fuels (oil
and natural gas) contribute only very small amounts of ash to
solid waste quantities. While oil and gas contain only minute
quantities of noncombustibles, these will add to the solid waste
load as air pollution emission controls are more strictly enforced,
Coal ash was calculated from Department of> Commerce coal usage
data for the pulp and paper industry and collected ash values
established by case studies and discussions with other coal
consuming mills.
Bark ash was calculated from previously cited API bark boiler
consumption statistics. A collected ash value of three percent
was used for all regions. Bark ash varies considerably based on
species, location, logging techniques, weather, storage, etc.
Thus, the chosen figure may not be reasonable for some specific
installations, but it represents a reasonable industry average.
Also, additional bark material that is actually combustible may
be escaping from boiler stacks due to barks peculiar combustion
characteristics. Again, improved air pollution facilities will
either provide for combustion of this material or it will be
added to the solid waste load.
No physical count of the number of mills utilizing each type
of fuel was conducted, but the total usage of fuel by region
(Table 8 ) indicates the strong regional variations in fuel types
used. An estimate of 1975 fuel consumption (Table 9 ) indicates
the predicted changes in industry fuel consumption patterns.
However, the influence of the existing energy crisis and fuel
shortages may influence these predicted fuel usage trends.
- 52 -
-------
co
£ C
co O
r
*^ •*
oo cn
m
CM rH
00 UO
CO O
r» r»
cn co
CO xf
co cn
— -
. — ,
!> CO
00 rH
^O [~-
•N v«
rH CO
u3 cn
ro oo
- —
CO rH
rH O
CM O
cn
un
rH
CM CO
[> ^
st1 cr«
r-- ko
CO rH
CM ro
r^ CM
o cn
co cn
CO
co O
< EH —
co
U G
X -H O
S-i M E~i
rd -p x^
CQ OJ
S
UD CM
xt O
CM LO
»< «
CM 00
rH rH
^-^
-P
G
(U £1
U co
SH <
OJ
ro.
OO
00
cn co
Cn rH
CM
cn
tn cn
I> i£>
Ch CO
r^ H
rO ^p
cn uj
LT) 00
cn CM
rH LO
<~n ro
CM rH
CM (D
r-- in
•xf cn
•sj1 LO
rH rH
ro
ro
U
G
H
G
O
•H
-P
fd
c
S-4
OJ
-p
G
H
c--
U
CQ
EH
cn
l
VI
<
Cd
CQ
Q
J
<;
o
u
0) CO
cn G
rd O
co EH —
p coco
>i U C 0
SH -H O H
Q ^ SH EH X
SH -P ^
rd 0)
CQ S
s
CO O
o cn
xt xj
*~s
-P
G
0)
TJ
0)
-P
U
u co o)
SH < rH
0) rH
^ o
u
CM
rH
OJ CO
CJi G
rd O
to B —
^3 com
u c o
•H O rH
H SH EH X
fd -p -^
O 0)
U S
--X
cn o
• •
o CM
co o
H 00
ft VS
H H
— /
-p
co
rd
0)
.C
-P
SH
O
rH rH
CTi rH
H CM
OO O
Ch CO
CO O
rH CM
{Q ^O
{Q CTi
CM OO
rH H
^o cn
{Q £~*
0 rH
H rH
x? Cn
CM rH
CO 00
^j in
co
.G G
co O
rn
Coal
Metric
(Tom
o o
1 — | xf
t> CM
rH ^D
H rH
*£> un
00 rH
rH 0
xf i — 1
in x?
oo cn
OO O
xf O
CO rH
O 00
ro OO
cn CM
OO OO
CM rH
O rH
rH rH
00 CM
rH rH
in r>-
Cn rH
cn oo
CM CM
rH cn
•xF cn
sf CO
CM CM
<& OO
^ CO
rH rH
in
O
rH
CM
CM
CM
cn
CO
i>
CM
cn
•xf 0
CO rH
O OO
OO OO
00 H
m UD
co r-
co cn
OO U3
cn i>
CM xf
rH 00
CM CM
rH CO
CO xf
OO CD
cn CM
CM xf
rH rH
rH
rd
M
£ -P
-P C
M OJ
0 U
&
O
•H
-P
C
£ rd
-P rH
3 -P
0 <
CO
rH
rd
H
£ -P
-P C
3 0)
0 U
cn
-p
co
(U
3
rH
rd
-P
O
H
SH
O
C
rd
(U
-p
^s
-p
•H
-U
01
G
H
QJ
a
fd
c
rd
u
•H
M
0)
01
o
M
(U
E
O
u
O
-P
G
0)
e
-p
M
fd
ex
0)
Q
o
i-l
-------
*
H
[>
w
c
O
EH —
en
Ur-<
>-i
X -H O
M M EH
fti 4->
«/1 1 ("Y"l
(I/ t ' /
S o
H
oo X
O ^
^ H
>X> O
H O
00 (T>
-
H ^
oo CM
03 CM
oo xt
oo un
U) •=*
CO I>
[> rH
cn •xf
i> m
H H
en m
IT) O
CM C\J
UD M
o cr\
oo -xf
rH 00
CM CM
H ^f
CO t>
•xf ol
U3 LO
cn o
H
rd
-P
Sr,
PM
3 3
U U
o o
rH fH
X X
H I>
^f CM
OO OO
CM
rH
O LO
O LO
LD cn
o oo
00 CO
0
H
LD OO
CM LO
O 00
H &
H 00
oo
CJ (Uoo
a o
H
00 X
O ^
H
X
--X
CT* O
. •
O CM
00 O
rH OO
r* «x
rH H
^s
CM rH
— U CQ
OO OO
rH O O
•H rH rH
O X X
!> H
CTi ^f
rH CM
CM
in
H
00
c-~
CM
LO"
^•^
•xf O
CO H
^ LO
O 00
OO OO
— '
00 rH
in ^o
CO I>
oo a\
cn iX)
cn o
CM •xf
rH 00
CM CM
^— "
rH CO
CO -xf
oo \b
CTi CM
CM "xf
rH rH
OO
00 CM
CM CM
IT) OO
OO
> — •*
00 CM
•xf CTi
00 IT)
rH rH
rH
C^S
CM H
CO CM
LT>
I>P
"sf i — I
ro CM
"3
* a In
. — 1
11
uo cj PQ
*
•^cn cn
o o
H H H
•H X X
O —
CM OO
LO IX)
oo oo
CM UD
•« *
•xf <£>
CM
- —
O CM
•xf
O H
OO CT\
H
^-^
^S
CTi iX>
r- oo
H CM
•xf '-D
CM
IX) oo
O LD
0 0
l> C
M 0)
0 U
£$
U
•H
4->
C
r; rrj
-P H
3 4J
0 <
CO
H
(d
^
x: 4->
4-J G
3 CU
0 U
1/1
4J
W
- Cl)
3
rH
rd
4J
O
EH
-------
> M
•O -P S K
(1) T-l
VJy' M 1
en U tj> 3
rd -H « ;*;
x: M.
Ul )' 1 1 *-\
-Pi — 1 *x>
M U 0 0
3 CU H H
CV.H X X
U —
C-x H
oo cr>
O iX)
IX) O
co m
rH -^
o oo
ID O
CM O
C- rH
00 IX)
•xT rH
xt CTi
I> O
Ch O
•xt xt
H -^
•xt O
O CM
0 O
CM in
O LT)
CM -^
en u^
0 rH
CTv LO
rH CTl
Ch O-
CM —
CO en
CO en
en o
ix> r-
rH 0
O CM
rH ~~-^
0) H
C 3 fd
Cu
MOO
Qj rH H
X X
co
cn
CM
o o
• •
cn t-~
00
H O iX) O
cn m cn H CM
oo CM r-
cn cn CM
d"
ro rH
rH 01
H O
O
ro
00
W -H
rJ -P
PQ C
< O
EH U
C
O
cu co
3 U G
PM -H O
M EH
t3 -P
— ^
CM
•
ro
O
•X)
X
CM
^->
rH
•
0
r~-
CO
•s
CM
>^^
CM
•
CM
xO
rH
v>
CO
, — 1
, — .
in
«
x^
CM
0
r
O
CM
• — •
CM CO
in O IS
H m -xt
m
CO CTi
m
00 O
•xf [->
rH O
in
-xf
-P
SH
O
a
0)
>t
CP
S-l
OJ
c
H
Oi
C
o
•H
tJi
CU
&
-P
CO
fd
0)
f.
4-1
^
O
2
rH
(d
M
x; -P
-P G
M
-------
cn
c
0
EH --x
w
Ur-"
XH
y. -H o
M M EH
fd -p
mf\ \<^c\
CLJCM
S o
H
m ^
O x_x
xj CO
H O
rH 0-
m in
C~» 1> •xt* CM
o ro CM cn
CM ixi i> in
ro !>. l> H
xj St* CO ^
ro CM
t> o
ro CO
•xt X)
CM CM
O rH
cn tn
•xt rH
ro ID
CM m
rH rH
0)
Cn
m
X
0)
c
o
-p
S h
3 D
W U U
fd
OU3 xO
0 O
j — i i — i
X X
cn X)
• •
•xf O
H LD
•xt ID
•N
xj
H
O X)
• «
tn co
CM O
in in
*• *«
ro ^ti
CM
rH
CM rH
t •
in rH
x? H
o en
r» n
H ^O
ro
ro o
CM
co
0 0
O l>
^D x?
o o
m CM CM CM
O l>
CM -^
rH O
co r-
oo o
CM
m
-p
c
o
u
en
U
i-3
CQ
<
EH
Cn
O
H
EH
a,
iyj
s
o
u
in
G
0
EH —
w
U{— <
>-»
rH -H O
fd M EH
O -P
U OJro
S 0
H
ro X
0 x-
H
X
^-^
ro CO
CM CM
CO 0
co cn
^^
^— x ^ '-x
cn Ln x> r- o o
ro iX) H H CO l>
rH IX) CM x^ IX> IT)
^r co H xj co cn
•s r. r. » ^_s
•xf ^t1 ro ro
x_^ x_^
^~,
in CM
Cn rH
ro LO
O ro
^ ^
ro ro
v^
s-^
cn CM
in cn
CM CO
ro in
*N rs
CM ro
rH rH
—
Q
W
EH
H
EH
S w
CM
* 3 ft
— U PQ
ro ro
H O O
•H rH rH
O X X
CO rH
• *
O O
<*£> •xt
CM ID
H IT)
•xF CM
O rH
ro cn
H
ro in
• ' •
CM UD
H O
rH [>•
0 CO
rH CO
in in
H cn
i> in
cn o
l> ro
rH rH
rH
10 ^
CO ro
O xt
O cn
rH X)
•• — '
X) W
* S rH
£!
- 3 CQ
in u
*
x^ro ro
O 0
rH H rH
•H X X
0 —
^~.
^f ro
• •
oo cn
rO LO
cn o
r* r»
x^ rH
CO
^
ix> CM
CTi
-sf
CTi CO
CM
O
s r«
O
ro
in tn
CO U)
o in
H o
H
in
O LD
H cn
rH CTl
CM O
ro ro
rH CO
C
O
•H
Cn
0)
C4
-P
0)
rd
OJ
x:
-P
M
O
H
rd
n
JG -P
-P C
M 0)
0 U
^
U
•H
-P
C
£ nJ
-P H
3 -P
0 <
CO
H
rd
M
x: -P
-P C
3 0)
0 U
m
-p
w
QJ
^
rH
fti
-P
O
EH
- 56 -
-------
>1 —
T3 -H S M
X) CO
CM O
(XI E--
™S
cn^
00 LO
LO rH
00 CTi
OO *~s
O r-
CO 1X1
0 .H
CO CM
H OO
S —
d) H
C 3 rd
rd U O
a,
Qoo oo
MOO
Qj rH rH
X X
^
rH cn
• •
H CM
CO
CM
V.X
.-v
0 I>
• •
00 CO
oo
o-
— /
o
00
CM m
CO rH CO
CO rH
LO OO
CM
IX)
ro
ro
w
ffl
(U
G
•H
-p
C
o
U
co
C
O
(U W
3 0 C
fn -H 0
M EH
d) dloO
QiS O
Cn H
Ooo x
DC 0 —
X
^^
LO O
• I
OO CO
^f ^
^^
cn o
O CM
H rH
•^
o <^J
o cn
00 CM
LO C^
X V,
CM CM
- — •
O
• •
I> C--
CM cn
iX> 00
rs •%
CM CM
t-^
CO "^
•sj* O
O rH
O CM
CM CM
st* i — 1
00 iX)
OO CM
LO rH
LO [-»
H rH
^t1 LO
O LO
O rH
cn en
cn o
rH
LO H
OO OO
rH 0
X) CO
O LO
LO LO
O
a
0)
en
S-l
C
o
•rH
cH
C1J
(U
x:
4-)
o
rH
rd
£ -p
4J C
M d)
O O
X
o
u
•H
4J
C
(d
H
4->
<
rH
rd
S-l
c", 4J
-P G
d ai
0 U
cn
4-1
co
0)
5
H
rd
±>
O
EH
0)
W
•H
>
(U
g
o
S-l
-------
The lack of information concerning bark boiler usage in the
1958, 1963, and 1967 time periods prevents reporting a specific
value for those periods (Table 22). The 1967 value is a reasonable
estimate based on Gorham knowledge of the industry practices at
that time. The coal ash values were derived from Department of
Commerce published industry data for coal consumption.
The future growth of bark ash quantities is quite certain as
there are economic benefits gained from bark boilers. A growth
of coal ash quantities is forecast for 1980 due to the vast coal
reserves in this country, the competition for oil and gas, and
the industry's power needs. Alternate sources of power are not
available and not likely to exist before 1980 which would shift
the industry away from coal use.
The lone problem associated with coal use is the sulfur
content of the fuel and its contribution to air emission loads.
Systems to curtail the surfur problem are under study but it is
premature to conclude that sulfur dioxide control systems for
1980 will lead to increased solid waste loads.
Personnel Activity Solid Waste
The generation rate for this solid waste source is about 0.227
kilograms (0.5 Ib) per employee per shift (Table 10). The total
industry employment for 1971 was calculated based on 1971 employment
as reported by the Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census in
their annual M26 report. With the industry averaging about five
and one-half days per employee per week, personnel activity solid
waste was calculated based on 52 five-day weeks per employee with
the half-day allowance being assumed to account for vacation time,
sick leave, and other lost time.
While this solid waste source represents a small portion of
the industry's total solid waste, it is generated at numerous
sources throughout the mill thus complicating collection procedures,
and it contains food scraps and garbage (putriscible material)
that require attention to prevent odors during storage and
leachate or pest problems at the disposal site. Thus, as a small
solid waste quantity, it contributes an unproportional share of
problems to the solid waste management system.
- 58 -
-------
TABLE 10
PERSONNEL ACTIVITY SOLID WASTE - 1971*
Region
Northeast
North Central
South Atlantic
South Central
West
National Total
Percent Of
Employees
17.6
19.1
24. 3
24.9
14.1
Average
Tons
3,207
3,488
4,440
4,542
2,565
Average
Metric Tons
2,909
3,164
4,027
4,120
2,326
100.0
18,242
16,546
*Frora Gorham International Inc.
- 59 -
-------
Little change is foreseen for this solid waste source, with
minor increases resulting from increased employment and possibly
slightly higher generation rates per employee. The national
trend has been nearly stagnant for several years and is projected
to show only a slight increase by 1980. Increased automation
plus increased equipment size and speed has enabled greater
production without significant personnel increase. The phasing
out of marginal production units with low productivity and generally
tight economic conditions have also led to personnel reductions
that directly affect this solid waste category.
Wastewater Treatment Solid Waste
Wastewater sludge generation was calculated from the industry's
total raw waste loads and reported levels of treatment. The raw
waste loads reported in the technical literature vary greatly with
different installations and operational conditions. For this
study, raw waste loads (total suspended solids and 6005) were
taken from a previous EPA study that presented standard raw
waste loads based on industry sampling( '. The wide variations
presented in raw waste load data carry directly through all
calculations and are reflected in the final sludge quantities.
To utilize the sludge data for additional calculations, Gorham
International Inc. recommends that the average value of minimum
and maximum numbers be used. This approach should provide results
as near as possible to the overall industry averages. While
discrepancies from the actual situation obviously exist with this
approach, it does provide a method to approximate solid waste
quantities and thus evaluate potential problem areas, alternative
management strategies, and overall economic impact.
Once the total raw waste loads were calculated, the reported
industry average discharge limits were deducted from total raw
waste loads to estimate the amount of material removed during
wastewater treatment processes.
For primary wastewater treatment, the estimated total
suspended solids discharge per ton of production capacity was
derived from various literature sources, discharge permit
applications, mill data, proposed effluent standards, and related
industry sources (Table 11). Based on Department of Commerce
- 60 -
-------
TABLE 11
ESTIMATED EFFLUENT DISCHARGES*
1958
1963
1967
1971
1975
1980
Total Suspended
Solids:
Kg/Metric Ton
Lb/Ton
BOD5:
Kg/Metric Ton
Lb/Ton
50 43 33
100 85 65
60 50 40
120 100 80
23 10 5
46 20 10
27 13 5
54 25 10
*Estimated From Variety of Industry Information Sources And Gorham
International Inc.
- 61 -
-------
production statistics and estimated capacities of 60,800,000 metric
tons (67,000,000 tons) in 1975 and 73,500,000 metric tons (81,000,000
tons) in 1980, the estimated annual industry discharges were
calculated (discharge per unit of production times production).
The difference between these estimated discharges and total raw
waste loads was then assumed to be the suspended solids removed
by the industry's primary wastewater treatment processes for each
time period. Previously presented sludge deposition estimates
(Table 2 ) were applied to these sludge generation numbers to
determine the amounts of primary sludge requiring handling in the
solid waste management system (Table 12 ). The regional data
breakdown presented for 1971 was calculated as being proportional
to the total regional wood pulp consumption in 1971.
TO obtain the total primary wastewater treatment solid waste,
sludge incineration ash was added to the dewatered sludge
transported to land disposal (Table 13 ). For clarity purposes,
these two solid waste categories are presented separately in the
1971 regional summary and in the national summary (Tables 21 & 22)
Secondary wastewater treatment generates less total weight
of sludge than primary treatment, but it is more difficult to
dewater and handle. As done with primary wastewater treatment,
the total industry raw waste loads were calculated based on
production statistics and estimates in conjunction with data on
raw waste loads. Similarly, wide data ranges carry through to
give wide ranges of secondary sludge quantities. If desiring to
carry out additional industry wide calculations the average of
minimum and maximum will provide the most realistic results.
The total raw waste loads were then reduced by a percentage
to reflect the BOD5 removed by primary treatment. The percentage
of total BOD^ removed was estimated to reflect the degree of
primary treatment at the time under consideration. Thirty-five
percent BOD5 removal by primary treatment was considered as a
maximum for the overall industry. This figure was increased from
fifteen percent in 1958, to twenty percent in 1963, to twenty-five
percent in 1969, and finally to the thirty-five percent level in
1971. The BOD5 remaining after this primary treatment reduction
is the BOD5 input to the industry's secondary treatment systems.
The difference between the above calculated BOD^ input to
secondary treatment and industry's BOD5 discharge (Table 11)
represents the BOD5 removed by secondary wastewater treatment
processes.
- 62 -
-------
u
•H
-P
C
frj
rH
_£
-P
3
O
to
*
*
£
i
•H
X
rd
S
*
*
g
^3
g
•rl
£
•H
00 CM
i£> O
in CM
oo LO
O LT>
tn m
O^ oo
t> t£>
CO CJ1
•^ CO
ro in
CM CM
O £> ro
IT) H
CM LT>
CM CO
•sT H
CO O
in r~-
CM CM
O CM
•^ co
•sf ^
r- CTi
rH CM
CM r-
OO CM
rH in
»* r^
CO CM
rH CM
O rH
rH rH
Ch CM
CO CO
co in
•=* 00
IT- CM
^ in
in co
oo co
o cr\
co m
oo o
& co
rH rH
r- H
OO CM
m CM
^o co
rH rH
00 O:
IT) CO
CM Hi
t> in
i> co
<£> OO
CO •v}1
OO ^£>
O O^i
CO CM
•xf in
r- CM
U3 <*
o o
^ t>
CM sf
CM CM
CQ
EH
<
W
&
EH
W
EH
-P
co
m
0)
-P
SH
O
a
*
*s
g
•rH
X
ro
grj
*
*
g
g
•rH
C
•H
s
r- ^t
IX) CTi
en in
OO ^
in u)
r-H
rH C--
rH CO
O 00
rH rH
00
LO
00
in in
o m
^ co
CO CM
OO MD
CM CM
(£> in
o oV
OO ^D
•-. ••
CM CO1
rH rH
(X) ^
O O
CT\ CM
CM 00
U3 00
CO <*
00 U3
CN rs
O CTi
CO CM
^f in
I> CM
U) ^
o o
CM <^
CM CM
TS
O
H
0)
Cn
T)
|3
H
CO
^K,
^
03
g
•H
^4
(ii
O
0)
atere
3
0)
n
0)
•d
•H
H
O
CO
*
*
*
0)
Cn
TJ
^
rH
CO
Cn Cn<; ?»i
CO
C
0
O
Cn
iti
i-1
T3
p
H
to
>
rd
g
•H
^1
DJ
C
o
•rl
-P
10
P
g
o
u
13
0
H
to
>i
M
(0
g
•H
i_l
DJ
TJ
(U
rH
rrj
OjJ
rO
n
T3
rj
<
0)
-P
co
ro
<:
i.)
ro
g
•rl
£_j
Oi
H
(0
-P
O
EH
- 63 -
-------
rH
rd
-P
O
rH
#
*
e
D
s
•H
X
rd
s
O xt
oo C^
xt 'X)
^ r.
IX) OO
I — i "xt
CM xt
•N •%
CM CM
*
*
e
E
•H
G
•rl
S
^-x
CM LO
rH rH
00 CO
oo cn
oo ro
0 rH
r, ^
rH rH
0 rH
cn LO
LO CM
r- r.
OO
rH IX)
LO LO
x^
^^
LO CO
LO rH
LO rH
cn~xt~
OO UD
CM CM
^^
0)
w
pa
<
CD
G
•H
-P
G
O
U
#
E
•H
G
•H
H
rd
M
-p
G
CD
U
-P
P
O
to
*
*
E
^5
6
•rl
X
rd
S
*
E
r-3
E
•H
C
•H
C^ H
rH CO
on a\
CN *N
00 CTi
O 00
oo on
CO 'xf
O LO
CO LO
OO 00
sj LO
H rH
LO CM
t> LO
LO OO
C— 00
O CTi
ro c~~
LO r^
OO CTi
LO 00
ro on
LO 00
CT> CTi
O <£>
LO CO
OO OO
O CO
O xt
ro O
LD CO
rH H
00
CO
CTi CM
CM "xf
rH rH
CTi CO
OO LO
O <£>
LO rH
cn
»^ r
•xt CM
LO
oo cn
U3 LO
O (X>
o
oo cn
cn oo
00
oo c-
•xf O
[> ro
O O
O CO
v\ *•
U) -xT
co cn
rH cn
o LO
cn LO
•xf CM
co LO
LO cn
oo oo
00 CO
•xt* cn
rH LO
CM OO
O xt
CO
rH rH
O rH
U) OO
rH CTi
xt CO
OO CO
LO LO
cn
cn
cn xt
•xt I>
CM CM
IX) LO
O rH
cn oo
•^ r\
H rH
O 00
O rH
rH IX)
r> oo
cn CM
cn to
xt LO
0
EH
CD
Cn
P
H
CO
>1 V)
SH G
rd O
E 0
•H Cr>
M rd
CU J
O
EH
CD
Cn
P
rH
CO
>1
^
rd
E
•H
i-l
CM
G
O
•H
-P
to
p
,£J
E
O
U
CU
t_l
CD
-P
rd
5
CD
Q
CU
cn
p
rH
CO
!>i
iq
rd
e
•r!
M
CM
T3
•H
rH
O
CO
co
<
T3
CD
rH
•o
G
rd
E CD
-P
13 co
G rd
< 3:
*
#
#
CD
Cn
•a
p
rH
CO
>
rd
E
•H
^_l
cu
rH
rd
-P
O
EH
dustry Sources
G
H
&_j
CD
-P
0
G
rd
«-
v
U
G
H
rH
rd
G
O
•H
-P
rd
G
iq
CD
-P
G
H
E
rd
c i
C 0
~
CD
u
CD
p
O
U
4H
0
-P
G
CD
E
-P
i_i
rd
a
CD
Q
»~
H
LO
<£
U
^
~
-------
ro
PQ
H
I
U
Q
H
J
O
EH
3
U
S
EH
PS
EH
Pi
U
EH
EH
en
u
•H
-P
C
rd
rH
-P
^
"*i
x:
-p
3
O
in
*
*
E
3
E
•H
X
rd
S
*
*
e
•H
c
•H
s
H
-p
10
rd
0)
.C
-P
U
O
3
«
*
£
r-\
^J
E
•H
X
rd
S
*
*
E
3
E
•H
C
•H
S
•xf rH
CO O
l> ID
in o-
CM CM
O CM
xf CO
O CTi
H CM
H H
rH
rd
M
-P
C
(U
U
£
-p
M
O
S
*
*
E
E
•H
X
rd
S
s~^
0 rH
00 CM
X) X)
•* r.
in CM
X) co
H H
•— '
*
*
E
3
E
•rH
G
•H
S
' *
co o
in co
CM rH
*s •<
O LO
O 00
v_^»
xi in
o en
ro X)
•v •>
CM CO
O O
CTi CM
CM 00
CO CM
kQ O
LT> CM
ro LT>
O LO
in in
•vt1 CM
i> ^r
CM CM
vs r
rH LO
ro ix>
ro ro
00 O
H en
X) 00
CM 00
CM CM
CM 00
H O
»•* V
CO -xt1
LD IX)
CM ro
if) O
00 CO
LD CM
LT> ro
!>- 00
O "sf
co x)
CO (Ti
•xf 00
ro in
CM CM
O U5
CM •xf
ro xt
CM 00
IT) CO
CO TO
H ro
rH U)
CA 00
r. •*
IX) O
cr> -vT
•xt LT)
0 0
rH (£>
in ro
•^ O
IT) [-•
rH rH
in o
[> xt
[> LT)
H in
oo tn
CM CM
CO CM
[> O
CM cn
x> co
CM CM
CM CM
H r-
in co
r. v
oo oo
00 X)
oo o
xi co
•xt< 00
CO CM
OO (£:
r* «>
CM CM
o
00
CO X)
r- co
O "xf
IT) rH
CM in
CM OO
rH rH
IT- 0
O X)
uo &
•sf rH
X) O
00 xt
00 LT>
CM 00
O rH
o m
in m
00 X)
rH xf
•xi* OO
•% r*
oo r-
oo in
CM CM
rH in
H 00
rH X)
in in
•^s
O 0
ro CM
O 0-
*H **
CM H
en H
H CM
X) m
in o
•N »*
cn co
co en
01
en
rd
a,
-p
X
0)
c
o
TJ
-------
•0
CD
3
G
•H
4-)
G
O
EH U
CJ
^
m
#
#
g
3
E
•rH
X
rd
2
^
H in
in rH
cn xO
** •*
<^ CM
in s?
co cn
x_^
#
*
E
3
E
•rH
G
•H
a
^-x
m in
l> xO
r^ xO
»* n
co cn
cn oo
OO xt
*
*
s
3
E
•rH
X
rd
S
. — -
CO fx-
•xf 0
r^ oo
PN »>
0 0
cn H
rH CM
- —
*
*
E
3
E
•H
C
•rH
s
--x
rH ^T
r>- cn
cn o
», IN
CO CO
co cn
^_s
*
*
E
3
S
•H
X
rd
s
^-x
<£> H
i> cn
•xf 00
•S «N
•xf CO
CO O
rH CM
— '
*
*
E
3
E
•H
G
•H
g
,-x
in co
^f ^
0 CO
rs r*
xO xt
oo cn
^_^
T3
•H
rH
O O
co EH
CO 4->
< £
0i
T3 -rl — -
CD CD rH
H 3 rd
•0 CO
G >i O
rd SH a
m Q co
v^ -rH
(D Q
0i CD
T3 4-) T3
3 CO G
rH rd rd
CO 3 (-4
O CD
EH 0i
T)
-0 3
CD rH
4J CO
M
O C
a CD
cn ^
G 3
rd
SH H
EH rd
co
SH O
(D a
4J CO
rd -H
3 P
^-x
CO O
O OO
cn CM
•N •>
cn m
o co
r^ co
•* *i
H rH
,~,
x^ m
in xt
00 00
•\ r*
•xf 0
UD CM
in co
•t •*
CM CM
* — .
CO O
in cn
in oo
•N •>
i> cn
cn r~-
[> CO
•^
^-x
co in
CM cn
oo cn
»•» »»
xO CO
(T1 rH
rH 00
» •»
rH rH
^-x
[> -xt1
Cn rH
^r xO
•» .,
rH O
CO CM
00 •xf
— -
^-x
in H
•xf CM
CM cn
*. ^
CM O
O oo
m xO
— ••
^-s
ro CO
<=t CO
Cn rH
»» »,
[> ^O
C-- cn
H rH
--x
•xf CM
rH CO
cn CM
«. •>
^0 'xf
xQ cn
CM CM
~~s
*~s
rH CM
in co
cn c~x
w* #»
co xD
xO O
OO •x?
— -
^,
O- OO
CM l>
•xf rH
f\ »N
oo o
in rH
in ^
—
'-x
H xQ
cn oo
O L^
f\ D
CM cn
l> 00
rH rH
^-x
xO ^f
OO O
rH ^D
». «
00 CO (D
> SH o -H f>
< O EH Q <
C
0
•H
-P
U
3
T3
1)
* K
*
* -P
A £
^-^
CO
rH xO
in in
x^
^^
CM cn
rH 1X1
CM xt
*s *v
xO
CM CM
—
^-x
xt l>
CO O
CM x^
•s «s
o in
CM xf
CM OO
rv v«
rH rH
^x
cn cn
O xO
in oo
n r^
CO 00
- —
^-x
^ 0
m cn
i> i>~
r. r.
in ^
l> OO
in xO
— -
^~x
i> in
00 O
xO CO
r. r-
H rH
•^s
, — ,
rH f-
m co
in o
». ^
CO xO
xO cn
CM CM
•^
,
CO ^O
xt r^
cn CM
v« n
CM xt
rH H
x_^
. — ,
in a\
1>
- —
^^
o cn
^f in
O xO
•s r.
xO xO
— /
^x
(£> OO
1> xD
H CM
•s vs
^ rH
^o cn
CM CM
*^s
SH
--x Q)
CO 4->
SH rd (D
O 34-)
4J 0) CO
rd 4-J rd
M co 3
CD rd
G 3 T3
•H -rl
U >irH
c SH O '--
H rd co 4-1
& £1
cn
CD
U
SH
3
0
IT>
><
SH
4->
CO
3
•0
G
H
SH
0)
.C
4->
O
T3
C
<
».
•
U
G
H
rH
rd
C
O
•rH
4-1
rd
C
M
CD
4-)
G
H
e,
rd
£:
SH
0
O
rs
CD
U
in
(U
E
O
U
MH
0
4->
G
(D
E
4->
SH
rd
a
CD
Q
•>
H
cn
<
U
s
*•
o
xO
CD
0i
rd
Cu
CD
CD
CO
x^
in
G
0
•H
4-)
rd
rH
3
U
rH
rd
U
SH
O
PM
CD
01
rd
SH
CD
>
<
CD
co
p
1
rd
4J
rd
Q
T3
rd
O
J
CD
4-)
CO
rd
3
3
rd
&
e
o
SH
&4
4-)
rH
3
co
CD
^x
>1
SH
Q
1
SH
•H
<
H
rd
co
O
a
CO
•H
Q
O
EH
T3
CD
4->
SH
0
a
co
C
rd
SH
EH
4J
£
01
•rH
CD
3
rH
rd
3
4-)
U
<
cn
<
-0
0)
co
cn
CD
SH
a
X
cn0i(D -H4J01
EH (U CD
>i O SH 3
CQ EH EH —
&l
U
E
0
SH
h
*
CO
0
0i
G
rd
cd
*
#
4-1
£
01
•rH
(D
3
*
#
*
.—x
cn
C
o
EH
CO
G
0
EH
U
•H
SH
4-)
CD
s
G
•H
T3
x:
01
•H
CD
3
rH
rH
<
- 66 -
-------
Based on total BOD5 removal by the industry's prevalent
methods, actual solids generation will approximate 0.1 kilogram
per kilogram (0.2 Ib per Ib) of BOD5 removed.
With current industry secondary wastewater treatment practices
(primarily lagoon facilities), most mills do not provide secondary
clarification equipment to remove this solid material. Only those
mills with activated sludge and modifications of activated sludge
concentrate this solid matter so that it must b_e either continuously
or periodically removed. Among those installations that do
collect this sludge, the most prevalent disposal method is sludge
lagoons where further natural dewatering is attempted. However,
dewatering of secondary sludge combined with primary sludge is
being accomplished to provide a sludge suitable for incineration.
The quantity of secondary wastewater treatment sludge entering
the solid waste system has historically been so small that it was
considered negligible up to 1975 even though small quantities were
being handled in 1971. The potential secondary sludge values are
significant particularly when considering the difficulty
encountered handling the material. When reviewing the dry solids
potential for 1971 (Table 14), it should be considered that
reaching a solids content of twenty percent for this material is
difficult. Thus, the weight of water that could require
transportation to disposal is a major consideration when choosing
solid waste management alternatives. For 1975 calculations it
was assumed that ten percent of the total potential secondary
sludge solids would be dewatered for land disposal while twenty
percent was assumed for 1980. No secondary wastewater treatment
sludge ash figures were presented because of the minor contribution
it is expected to make.
The wastewater treatment solid waste source is the industry's
second largest and is increasing as liquid effluent requirements
become more stringent. Primary sludge has shown a steady increase
and secondary sludge will rapidly increase between now and 1980
(Table 22). With these national trends, wastewater treatment
sludges will surpass wood yard solid wastes as the largest single
source by 1980. Future efforts to decrease internal solids losses
may help lessen the growth of wastewater treatment sludge quantities,
but a steady increase is unavoidable.
- 67 -
-------
TABLE 14
SECONDARY WASTEWATER TREATMENT SLUDGE SOLIDS - 1971*
Region
Northeast
North Central
South Atlantic
South Central
West
Total
Minimum* *
Metric Tons
1,248
1,248
2,645
2,784
1,388
9,313
Tons
1,376
1,376
2,916
3,070
1,530
10,268
Maximum*
Metric Tons
27,842
27,842
59,009
62,126
30,959
207,778
*
Tons
30,697
30,697
65,060
68,496
34,133
229,083
*From EPA, NCASI, And Gorham International Inc., and Various
Industry Sources
*Ranges Result From Raw Waste Load Data - Use Average For
Calculations (See Page 60)
- 68 -
-------
Manufacturing Services Solid Waste
This industry wide solid waste generation source varies
depending on what internal services are provided, but it averages
between 1.5 and 3.0 kilograms per metric ton (3 to 6 Ib per ton)
of final production. Other factors that influence total quantities
are the extent of mill programs to eliminate wasteful practices,
the method of wrapping and shipping the final product, the number
and type of service shops operated, and other individual mill
conditions.
The amount of manufacturing service waste collected each
year (Tables 15 & 22) increases proportional to production. The
forecast is for continued increases. As the cost of solid waste
management increases due to greater cost at the disposal site and
longer hauling distances, the solid waste from manufacturing
services should receive greater scrutiny for resource recovery.
Salvage, fiber potential, or fuel value should be considered as
alternatives. The ease of segregation early in the collection
cycle will be an asset in handling this solid waste source.
However, even if resource recovery is accomplished at this source,
the total volume reduction will not be large enough to cause much
impact, if any, on the industry's total solid waste load.
Wastepaper Reclamation
Fluctuations in solid waste generation rates for this category
occur with different wastepaper grades, sources, and processing
operations. An average ratio of 91 kilograms (100 Ib) of final
product per 106 kilograms (117 Ib) of wastepaper utilized presents
a reasonable solid waste generation rate for all wastepaper
operations except deinking.
For the deinking grades, about 127 kilograms (140 Ibs) of
wastepaper are required to produce 91 kilograms (100 Ibs) of
product.
Solid waste generated by mills utilizing wastepaper (Table 16)
is concentrated in the Northeast and North Central regions with
lesser contributions from each of the other three regions. This
regional pattern exists for deinking mill solid waste as well as
for all other wastepaper mills which represent the major production
and waste quantities.
- 69 -
-------
TABLE 15
MANUFACTURING SERVICES SOLID WASTE - 1971*
Region
Northeast
North Central
South Atlantic
South Central
West
National Total
Minimum
Tons
14,525
15,797
20,115
20,580
11,620
82,637
Minimum
Metric Tons
13,174
14,328
18,244
18,666
10,539
74,951
Maximum
Tons
33,891
36,860
46,935
48,020
27,114
192,820
Maximum
Metric Tons
30,739
33,432
42,570
43,554
24,592
174,887
*From Gorham International Inc.
- 70 -
-------
TABLE 16
WASTEPAPER RECLAMATION SOLID WASTE - 1971*
Deinking
Minimum Maximum
Region
Metric
Tons
76
116
5
5
13
217
,979
,254
,656
,027
,825
,741
Tons
69
105
5
4
12
197
,820
,442
,130
,559
,539
,490
Tons
85
128
6
5
15
241
,428
,857
,286
,714
,429
,714
Metr
1C
Tons
77
116
5
5
13
219
,483
,873
,701
,183
,994
,234
Northeast
North Central
South Atlantic
South Central
West
National Subtotal
All Other Wastepaper Processing
Northeast 520,101 471,732 576,982 523,323
North Central 532,085 482,601 590,350 535,447
South Atlantic 140,931 127,824 156,342 141,802
South Central 125,272 113,622 138,905 125,987
West 168,733 153,041 187,145 169,741
National Subtotal 1,487,122 1,348,820 1,649,724 1,496,300
National Total 1,704,863 1,546,310 1,891,438 1,715,534
*From Department of Commerce, Institute of Paper Chemistry, and
Gorham International Inc.
- 71 -
-------
The minimum and maximum quantities identified for each region
in 1971 do not reflect generation rate differences as found in
most other solid waste categories. Rather, the minimum was
obtained by applying solid waste generation factors to Department
of Commerce statistics, while maximum values resulted from
utilization of Institute of Paper Chemistry industry survey
statistics.
The national trend is increasing in tonnage each year in
line with the increase in collection and reuse of wastepapers.
The long term outlook is for an acceleration of this form of
fiber collection. One factor that will affect growth beyond a
certain point for this solid waste area is the export market for
wastepaper. When a ton of repulped wastepaper yields more fiber
than a ton of woodchips and the cost factors are correct, export
demands will siphon away part of this solid waste source. Another
unknown factor is the impact of government incentives' to increase
wastepaper reuse. Government incentive and impact studies are
in progress and will not be reported on for some time. These
could play a major role in increasing or decreasing activities
in the wastepaper processing business.
Chemical Pulping Solid Waste
For U. S. kraft mills this source of solid waste averages
between 15 and 20 kilograms per metric ton (30 to 40 Ibs per ton)
of pulp production. In sulfite pulp mills with recovery, solid
waste generation averages about 5 kilograms per metric ton (10
Ibs per ton) of pulp production. In some cases, portions of these
solid wastes are deposited into the wastewater system for removal
rather than segregated for separate collection.
The chemical pulping industry also utilizes a large amount
of dissolved solids for heat value by combusting them in the
recovery furnace. The recent API energy survey reported total
1971 U. S. consumption of spent liguor solids in recovery furnaces
as 45,148,375 metric tons (49,777,700 tons). This combustion
represents processing and recovery of materials that would
otherwise be wasted and require some other type of collection
and disposal, and would eliminate present pulping operations on
an economic basis.
- 72 -
-------
Regionally, this solid waste is concentrated in the regions
with the greatest pulp production (Table 17). For the sulfate
sector, the South Atlantic and South Central regions generate
the greatest solid waste quantities. For the sulfite sector,
the West region has the greatest generation with the combined
Northeast and North Central about equaling the West region. The
South Atlantic and South Central regions contribute no significant
- -. T
solid waste to the sulfite tota-i.
The national trend for kraft pulping waste is increasing as
most of the new pulping installations are of the kraft type.
The sulfite solid waste trend has been decreasing in recent
years and the trend is expected to continue as more and more
mills shut down operations rather than install waste treatment
facilities for small production tonnages.
The long term outlook regarding chemical pulping is unsettled
at present. There is considerable activity aimed at nonsulfur
based processes. However, it is almost a certainty that if any
successful change occurs before 1980 it will have to operate in
existing equipment and will have little effect on solid waste
quantities.
Groundwogd Pulping Solid Waste
Based on wood and operating conditions, this solid waste
source for groundwood operations varies from 2.5 to 5 kilograms
per metric ton (5 to 10 Ibs per ton) of groundwood pulp production.
The largest quantity is generated in the South Central
region followed by the Northeast, West, South Atlantic, and North
Central regions (Table J 8) .
The national trend has shown a small increase up to 1971,
but this should plateau with the introduction of refiner groundwood,
and no new stone groundwood processes being built.
-------
TABLE 17
CHEMICAL PULPING SOLID WASTE - 1971*
Sulfate
Minimum
Region Tons
Northeast 22,601
North Central 13,935
South Atlantic 177,968
South Central 163,703
West 68,171
Total Sulf ate 446,378
Region
Northeast
North Central
South Atlantic
South Central
West
Total Sulfite
Metric
Tons
20,499
12,639
161,417
148,479
61,831
404,865
Sulfite
Tons
2,297
2,894
3,218
1,338
9,113
18,860
Maximum
Tons
30,136
18,580
237,290
218,271
90,894
595,171
Average
Metric
Tons
2,083
2,625
2,919
1,214
8,265
17,106
Metric
Tons
27,333
16,852
215,222
197,972
82,441
539,820
*From Department of Commerce and Gorham International Inc,
- 74 -
-------
TABLE 18
GROUNDWOOD PULPING SOLID WASTE - 1971*
Minimum
Maximum
Region
Northeast
North Central
South Atlantic
South Central
West
National Total
Tons
2,689
1,344
1,472
3,691
1,959
11,155
Metric
Tons
2,439
1,219
1,335
3,348
1,777
10,118
Tons
5,378
2,687
2,944
7,383
3,918
22,310
Metric
Tons
4,878
2,437
2,670
6,696
3,554
20,235
*From Department of Commerce and Gorham International Inc.
- 75 -
-------
Residuals Handling Solid Waste
Normal losses occurring during residuals handling vary
depending on unloading methods, storage and conveyance methods,
degree of screening, and other local considerations. Most
operations will fall between 0.44 to 0.48 kilograms per cubic
meter (3.5 to 7.0 Ibs per cord) of residuals used.
With the high percentage of residuals used as raw material,
the West is considerably higher in this category than any other
region. The other regions follow in the order of South Central,
South Atlantic, North Central, Northeast (Table 19). As wood
supplies become tighter and increased wood utilization is
practiced, this solid waste source will most likely increase in
all regions. However, the tight wood supply may also lead to
utilization of any wood chunks that are currently removed as
solid waste. Despite such improvements, the increased use of
residuals is expected to keep this solid waste quantity on the
rise.
Specialty Paper Products Manufacturing Solid Waste
Solid waste from this source normally results from the addition
of materials to obtain desired product characteristics. No
specific industry data is available to determine precisely what
quantity of material exists in this solid waste category. The
difficulty of estimating is compounded by the fact that what one
mill treats as solid waste another mill may reuse or sell as
wastepaper. This discrepancy results in the quantities required
to make repulping and cleaning economically feasible and the
proximity of specialty products manufacturing facilities to
wastepaper mills capable of using their waste type. To approximate
the total solid waste in this category (Table 20), solid waste
generation rates and production data for specific grades were
estimated. The regional distribution was based on the approximate
regional production of specialty paper grades. These grades
often employ protected technology and are limited to a small
number of manufacturing facilities. Thus, none of the production
data obtained for specific grades is presented. The primary
products that contribute to the nonpulpable broke making up
specialty product solid waste are glassine, zinc oxide coated
office copy papers, solvent coated papers, high wet strength
papers (bumper stickers, map paper, outdoor advertisement papers,
etc.), plastic coated paperboard, parchment, and special industrial
packaging papers.
- 76 -
-------
TABLE 19
RESIDUALS HANDLING SOLID WASTE - 1971*
Minimum
Maximum
Region
Northeast
North Central
South Atlantic
South Central
West
National Total
Tons
1,573
1,008
7,411
7,455
16,849
34,296
Metric
Tons
1,427
914
6,722
6,762
15,282
31,107
Tons
3,146
2,016
14,822
14,910
33,698
68,592
Metric
Tons
2,853
1,829
'13,444
13,523
30,564
62,213
From American Pulpwood Association and Gorham International Inc.
- 77 -
-------
TABLE 20
SPECIALTY PAPER PRODUCTION SOLID WASTE - 1971
Solid Waste**
Region
Northeast
North Central
South Atlantic
South Central
West
National Total
Percent of Specialty
Product Output
40
40
5
5
10
100
Tons
52,186
52,186
6,523
6,523
13,047
130,465
Metric
Tons
47,333
47,333
5,916
5,916
11,834
118,332
*From Gorham International Inc.
:*This Solid Waste Includes Only That From Paper Mills Manufacturing
Specialty Products (Does Not Include Associated Pulp Mill Solid
Waste)
- 78 -
-------
The national trend for this solid waste is increasing
annually. However, this source exists only because of a number
of products that are sold to consumers or industrial and business
customers. For this reason, the long term outlook for this solid
waste source is not definite. The constant introduction of new
products brings with it the possibility of repulping the new item
and eliminating the old waste source. While the present trend
for solid waste from specialty products manufacture is growing,
there is no certainty that it will continue. A shift to
incineration for power generation or evaluation of other resource
recovery activities could reduce the total amount of waste from
this source.
Summary
The total solid waste generation determined for 1971 (Table
21 ) indicates that the magnitude of the total problem does vary
regionally. The most noticeable pattern is the small total for
the Western region. The high residuals usage and high degree of
bark consumption for power cause this pattern. The actual total
may be slightly higher than indicated due to some mills not
burning one hundred percent of their own bark, but the region's
high bark consumption would make any increase small compared to
the total solid waste load. The South Central and South Atlantic
regions lead the U. S. in solid waste generation. This position
results from their leading production position. The North Central
and Northeast regions occupy a position between the above high
and low regions.
The national totals (Table 22) for all solid waste sources
reflect an increasing tendency for the time period analyzed. The
individual sources exhibit varying behavior depending on industry
growth rate, employment, economics, and legislative requirements.
In some instances, the generation rate per unit of production is
constant, while the disposal method changes with time. In other
cases the generation rate per unit of production may be changing
due to process modifications and improvements.
Overall the solid waste quantity to disposal per unit of
production exhibits a downward trend (Table 23 )• This indicates
that the paper industry is optimizing its raw materials use and
is attempting to further refine the integrated forest products
complex concept.
- 79 -
-------
E
£
.p
O
H
E
E
H
C
S
E
£
X
fl
&
4->
OJ
3
D
E
C
S
E
~
<0 X
14 t
QJ
U
3 E
O 3
H
C
s
3
-th Atlanti
jm Maxir
O £
E
e
H
^ S
C
(U
U
S H
S
+1 5
O
£ ^
J „
O CM
Ji O
Oi O
CO -f
o o
Ol O
. .
Z 2
* *
r- o
O CO
•X> CO
r- o
O CO
H> CO
O -sT
co in
O\ O
fM
in o
f" O
- -
O f*1
r-t O
in o
•q1 X)
_T> CO
-H O
m co
VCJO
>O O
01 0
U i
H -i
Jci u]
JLl 4.
^ 3£ H H ^ 5S ^^ 35^ ^ ^ ?3 sl
(M^ -HOI ^OCM Ojin >DCM rt r~- O — ( o fM i/icoHio COJ^ r^-D rvt ui — i fi
r^u-j ^co infM f^oi Oi^r OI-KD T r- co — < co <*i — i co -H — * — t 1-1 " ffl
^S SPI s~ R," "i? ?;s "5 s^ ~5 ss ^s ss 5^ ss
^ "t^ ~ ^ "" "^ "~"fMC^ oiM^rco COH ryln ^)^M^
HH 0,0, - H= H.H ^_
(^ ^D TO CM T m o CM cn men S CM com CM CM en CM ^ J ? co ai ^n ^ S
iniDiq'iD^r-q' LHCMCMCM "q-^j •^-q-in .— in --• ^- H— t -^ o r--
«-' O n — • Lnm^ -ji ^I^CMCM _ ^o
mro r-co ^^- „ -
" • oo -H o -^ ^^rcMi/-> ru^ ^Hicoai Tcno>fAj m^r ^ ^ o^ui "r>'-av-
r- ^ ^Oin STCO -HI~I CM rvj CMO r-ir-r-o CMOU^T r-i> oi^D r-iv0 01^"
r-co -H(^ -HT O1CO incO 'TCO COCOTC^ COin'JJCO ^H) GOO r^~( r--m
inin^-IP-,-^ ^(-r^cv, ro xD '^COinO H)COCMfM fMCM -.CM [-fM mjJ
cooi trui -~- -HrHinin ^- -^ rvj in
invD^r^mn Mun^^, v, m m^cMCM (M^fMCM ^ ^ _, I-CM cn.i
^^0001^ 01^^,^ 0,^ ^«^CM ^2,-^P COS ^2 ^G ^^
n^ooc^P -« M v, 'D ^m ^,mcMM o-,^^^ oiS i- m n^ n ^
-^ O -i "•: 01 i
> C H
^ a; - j ri T; a
"j ^ 6 Z -t j c
i, t. t M"i M Dj Q.E.VO ura~t "o c 3 o j>
J 0 ' J y fO -MH OJfOC HM-iiH C. I T) M-ii-JH
s o rj i-i H o M .an; ifl it Q < i:ui 1/1 MJ DO 10 OJ
-j '.j u. ci, j i a, i!;-/] jz at •-- — u--- •— O", O;L_J s f-i c-«
- 80 -
-------
E
n>
E
|
£
!
>
E
E
-H
1
S
X
(0
E
P
|
•-H
E
E
i
X
fO
E
E
£
£
|
H
X
S
.
E
E
n
C
E
E
H
X
m
, E
T
r\
E
«
C
H
E
0)
M >
*J l-i
3: 0
c
rH i
rH tO
O U
o o o o
O O O O
o o o o
0*5 £o(
c,V
§o o o
o o o
O O O O
S3 SS
CM CTi CM CM
r- r-
o o o o
00 00
o o o o
r-TcT m"**"
CO in co o
<3\ O
Q O O O
o o o o
co in co o
Ch O
rH UI CM tO
O CM f- J">
CO H T m
O O -H rH
CTSO
CTl O CN. rH
o CM r^ in
CM (*1 ^ CJi
CO rH ^ m
00 rH rH
Ct\ Q
o o o o
o o o o
o o o o
^°, °£
O Oi v-
CTi CTi
o o o o
o o o o
o o o o
VO O O O*
O CTi ^
Ch Cft
0 0
o o
O 0 • "
CM o -Z.K
^O \Tl
GoV
0 0
o o
O O • •
O "31 U U
T
ur-.
o o
o o
o o • •
-1 CO VJ tO
f- -T
rH
a
Qi i/l
Q
-a x:
o
.* l/l ii
tJ UI 1C
04 < CQ
OOOO OOOO 00 00 OOOO OOOO 00 00 OOOO
OOOO OOOO 00 00 OOOO OOOO 00 00 OOOO
oooo oooo oo oo oooo oooo oo ^ o_ .^^i.^
ffTaT too H"H" O".H" cool aic^ r-cor-c^ o^r-in OJH -j ^ ^?^r°
ncoHCM in^oofM coo cn-H a>>»ico^ •*rH-t-H (Mm cuo\ ^^.^^
™~ "2 ~ ~v ~ ~ ~~ s;;j
g§ g§ si si si si si si si si si §§ §§ |§
OOOO OOOO OO OO OOOO OOOCJ^ _„ ^.^. %..-»
oCaC co"o rtV> ^HCM OimcOiD inrH-HrH rHrH vr^j- _j n r-
^•ID -^ rfr-rHrH (Mf! rHrH '-l^i^)^ in^O •— ~-' ^ -H— i _ i.
•_-•-' ^- — *"* J^I
OOOO OOOO 00 00 OOOO OOOO 00 00 OOOO
00 OO 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
OOOO OOOO 00 00 0000 0000^ 0_0_ 0_0_ 00 0_0^
co" in" [-" crT oT 10" rrT ^~ ,H" CM" ro" m" •*" n" o" r-" •*" oT i-" aT W r-" '*)•-' in 01 o o
ON ^2 Srn2^ SS ^^3 CM^cjirH SS^- ^- ^2 !HH £5
fMrvj^rin ^rM t^rM
oooo oooo oo oo oSoo oooo 00 oo oooo
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
OOOO OOOO OO OO OOOO OOOO OO OO OOI-JO
Ojmr-cn mrr^QCM 1^0 cc^ coin kOOJ ^HC^ ^H fxi ^iS uJo ^n Mito CM" ^
5S SS SS S3 . . S3 3S 3S SS SS "J2 2S SS S3
ss *3 sS s~ §" ?s sS si 1! 5™ ss "s 2° "s
rHrH^rH H-H ^ in
CJOOO OOOO OO OOOO OOOO OO OO OOOO
OOOO OOOO OO OOOO OOOO OO OO OOOO
OO OO OO OO • • OO OO OO OO OO OO OO OO OO
rHiArHH M^rHrH ZS5 '^''kD COOl-H^ flCOCMCM HrH iniD CTiO-J-n
•H-HOJCM -H-H ^-tD
oooo oooo oo oooo oooo oo oo oooo
oooo oooo oo oooo oooo oo oo oooo
OOOO OOOO •" OO OOOO OOOO OO OO OOOO
ouir^Crt rMCMinin uu no ocorMto COCMQCM 010 CO-H r-r-r-vo
"3-Ln— t>CO ^- -HrHCSirOf^m^. ^, ^ MC\J^D
rH-H ~ rHH ^
oooo oooo oo oooo oooo oo oo oooo
OOOO OOOO OO OOOO OOOO OO OO OOOO
oooo oooo *• oo oooo oooo oo oo oooo
int^- -•* OrH ^HrH -^,-lrHrM T<^ rf ^ ^/ ^^ ^CMtH
rH-HiHrH rHH r<1^j
OOOO OOOO OO OOOO OOOO OO OO OOOO
OOOO OOOO OO OOOO OOOO OO OO OOOO
OOOO OOOO » • OO OOOO OOOO OO OO OOOO
intD^CO COiU-HrH [Old ^TO-i trrvjcOcri o^ncOo OJ^i mr- ^ -^ ,UT
in r- ^ ryfNj ^, ~<^^f-jiMro.^ -^ *_. rvj iy
rH rH ^ ,-H "«J (-
oooo oooo oo oooo oooo oo oo oooo
OOOO OOOO OO OOOO OOOO OO OO OOOO
OOOO OOOO •• 00 OOOO OOOO 00 00 OOCJO
rH rH rH rH OH
oooo oo oo oooo oooo oo oo oooo
oooo oo oo oooo oooo o,j oo oooo
OOOO O O • • «• OO OOOO OOOO OO OO OOOO
CO-HvDCO r-it-UU IJU ^D r-.r^tNirH r-.rHu-.vI> ^ t- C^O X>^C^-H
:-:- - - - -:-:- - - ^
0
i'ow'S^w c? a,
•HfH<<1J< H 4J
H a, '-- D -D -~- TJ n
u-DOJ-o-Hfljc: (0 c1 "
•
-------
TABLE 23
NATIONAL SOLID WASTE QUANTITIES TO DISPOSAL*
Year Minimum Maximum
1958 349 365
(698) (730)
1963 345 371
(690) (742)
1967 311 346
(622) (692)
19.71 287 324
(574) (647)
1975 288 335
(576) (670)
1980 254 306
(508) (612)
*From Gorham International Inc.
All Weight Expressed In Kilogram Per Metric Ton Of Production
(Lbs Per Ton Of Production)
- 82 -
-------
CHAPTER VII
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ECONOMICS
The pulp and paper industry's costs to manage solid waste
have never been determined on an overall basis. Various segments
have been investigated, but many costs are simply accepted by
the industry with no real knowledge of their absolute amounts.
Often the costs are fragmented and are absorbed by various mill
functions with no connection to the waste management system.
For example, the solid waste management costs associated with
ash from the boilers may be hidden within the operating budget
for the power plant. While this practice is not wrong, it does
lead to a lack of knowledge relative to overall solid waste
management costs.
Based on case study data, supplier's data, and available
literature, the total solid waste management costs per ton of
solid waste material handled have been estimated for the industry's
total solid waste management effort (Table 24). The unit costs
for collection, processing, and disposal vary from mill to mill
depending upon specific solid waste volumes, practices,
characteristics, etc., but the presented averages for the industry
are representative of total operations. Considering all labor
and equipment inputs, the 1971 solid waste management cost
approximated $4.26 per metric ton ($3.86 per ton) of solid waste
transported to disposal.
This total cost estimate is based on standard cost development
considering all phases of the solid waste management operations.
While being higher than costs previously estimated for the pulp
and paper industry solid waste management activities, this cost
is economical compared to residential systems and to systems
utilized by most other major industries. The 1971 annual cost
(Table 25) indicates this industry's total expenditure for
solid waste management activities.
- 83 -
-------
TABLE 24
AVERAGE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT COSTS'
Solid Waste Activity $/Ton
Internal Collection
Labor $0.75
Equipment 0.08
Subtotal
External Collection
Labor $1,16
Equipment 1. 57
Subtotal
Disposal
Labor $0.14
Equipment 0.16
Subtotal
TOTAL
Average Cost
$/Metric
Ton
$0.83
2.73
0.30
$3.86
$0.83
0.09
$1.28
1. 73
$0.15
0.18
$0.92
3.01
0. 33
$4.26
*From Case Study Data -and Gorham International Inc.
- 84 -r
-------
in
CM
U
J
CQ
cn
rH
co
EH
to
O
U
U
S
CJ
EH
CO
O
to
u
•H
-P
C
03
rH
-p
r;
i-t
_>
O
to
rH
03
i_4
co -p
C G
O "
U)
X)
•s
CM
&l
O
O
o
CM
[•—
00
*\
CM
**
O
O
o
CM
xf
IX)
»>
rH
4ft
0
0
o
in
00
xf
•»
rH
C
o
•H
-P
U
0)
rH
rH
O
u
rH
rd M
C 0
^-t &
0) rd
-P I-H
C
H
O
O
0
xQ~
o
xf
0
o
o
r-1
X)
ro
0
O
0
in
CO
CM
o
0
o
ro
in
CM
o
o
0
in
t>
H
0
o
o
co
in
rH
-p
G
CD
g
a
•H
3
CT1
u
o
o
o
xT
H
CM
„
xf
4ft
o
0
o
oo~
xf
[^
r.
00
o
o
o
CM
in
cn
r*
CM
4ft
o
o
o
in
CM
U3
•\
CM
4ft
0
o
o
r-T
rH
co
•s
rH
4ft
o
o
o
OO
xf
^o
r.
rH
rH
fd
-p
o
-p
A
3
CO
G
o
•H
-p
u
cu
H
H
o
u
H
rd
G
M
0)
-p
X
u
o
o
0
00*
cn
CO
r.
LO
*ft
o
o
0
o
00
CM
*>
*>
0
o
o
^D
CM
rH
»x
^f
4ft
o
0
o
cn
IX)
r.
00
^
o
o
0
oT
OO
LO
•N
CM
4ft
o
o
o
t^
cn
CM
~
CM
^
o
A
rd
^
o
o
0
m
r>.
cn
•>
o
o
o
o
cn
c^
o
•^
o
o
o
xf
00
in
»s
m
o
0
o
X)
'X)
cn
*
xf
o
o
o
r-
00
xf
^
OO
o
o
o
CO
o
rH
r.
00
-p
c
01
g
a
•H
3
ty
w
o
0
o
CO
X)
00
r.
00
rH
4f>
o
0
o
cn
o
00
•N
CM
rH
o
o
0
o
rH
r*-
V*
cn
4ft
o
0
0
in
00
X)
n
CO
«
o
o
o
X)
o~
cn
~
in
4f)
o
o
o
m
0
•xf
n
in
H
fd
-p
o
-p
&
3
to
O 0
O O
O 0
rH 00
rH rH
r- co
4ft
O 0
O 0
o o
rH rH
00 CM
^O C~~
*
0 0
0 0
0 0
co cn
cn
xf in
4ft
O 0
O 0
0 0
00 X)
xf 0
xf in
«*
O 0
O 0
O 0
{Q O
o m
00 00
4ft
o o
o o
o o
c~~ r^
l> rH
Oxl 00
4ft
H
rd
ID
O
a
co
•rl
Q
0
O
0
xf
CM
in
»
rH
4ft
O
0
o
CM
in
00
•N
rH
o
o
0
[>
X)
o
rt
rH
4ft
O
O
o
cn
xf
cn
w»
o
o
0
X)
in
U3
4ft
o
o
o
xf
cn
in
<*
H
rd
-P
O
-P
£}
3
to
O
0
O
CO
o
iX>
*.
cn
rH
4ft
O
O
o
xf
o
xf
•«
rH
0
O
o
cn
CM
0
•s
ro
rH
4ft
0
O
O
cn
o
CM
•s
CM
, — j
4ft
O
O
0
cn
xf
xf
»«
CO
4ft
0
o
o
CM
xf
**D
»
r-
i-J
<)
EH
O
H
Cn
rd
a,
-P
X
CU
2
C
O
T3
CD
3
G
•H
-P
C
O
- 85 -
-------
in Q)
CM 3
G
W -H
J -P
CQ C
X
rH X>
t>- CM
ro xt
~ *
ro H
rH
•W}
0
O
o
»>
t-~
CTi
[~~-
«s
"xt
H
•w}
0
•H
-P
03
^ §
S
•H
C
•H
S
O O
0 0
O O
CO xt
xt (£>
CO CM
*. *,
rH rH
H
O
0
O
CM
rH
rH
vs
ro
rH
S
3
E
•H
X
03
S
-P
0 0
o o
0 O
•« X
rH [^
O O
O rH
•N
rH
•fcr)
o
0
o
«
00
o
rH
#«.
rH
•W}
co w
G 0)
0 ^
•H
O1 E
OJ 3
pc; g
•rl
G
•H
S
O O
0 0
O O
•» ..
CTv xt
00 0
{O
w
o
O
0
•>
ro
(~D
[-^
±P>
E
3
E
•rH
ft rS
oj 03
-P
C
0 0
o o
0 0
•s n
rH ro
in in
CM xt
"
*A
o
0
o
•S
"xf
0
|>.
"
ft
0)
U
r;
-P E
3 3
0 E
en -H
G
•H
S
0 O
0 O
0 O
•S *
0 00
CM rH
cr\ xt
•»
ro
0
o
o
"
00
ro
rO
r.
•xf
o o
o o
o o
rH O
00 CTi
X) O
O CM
rt #•
U) 00
O
0
o
CO
O
O
o
a\
CM
ro
O
O
o
ro
^O
ro
O
O
O
•S
Ch
O
LO
•S
CM
O
O
O
•xf
•xf
f*
LO
0
O
0
CM
0 0
O O
O O
X) ro
CT\ in
•xf 00
CM CM
0 0
O O
0 0
CM r^
rH CM
CM m
CM CM
o o
0 0
o o
[> \t
CO rH
rH CM
<*
O 0
o o
0 0
CT\ F»
CM xt
rH rH
w
0
O
0
CTi
ro
ICi
O
O
O
a\
ro
*#
o
0
o
rH
o
<*
o
o
o
CM
w
o
0
o
H
CO
CO
o
o
o
o
CO
0
o
0
o
CM
LT>
H
in
0
0
o
CO
•xf
in
ro
o o
0 O
O 0
•xTr-T
en o
r- en
<*
0 0
o o
0 0
CM (£>
ro ro
[> 00
•o
c
03
lection
rH
o
u
rH
o3
c
s_i
0)
-p
c
H
-p
c
(D
E
M 0,
O -H
Q 3
03 tr
J CJ
rH
fd
-P
O
-P
Q
3
en
lection
H
o
U
rH
03
G
S_j
0)
-p
X
u
-p
G
(U
E
M a
O -H
Q ;3
03 O1
J W
rH
03
-P
0
-P
n
3
tn
rH
03
to
O
Pi
CO
•H
Q
-P
C
(U
E
M Pi
O -H
Q 3
03 C71
J U
H
03
-P
O
-P
£)
3
en
o
-P
03
Q
-a
3
-P
(U
co
03
U
O
U
t,
*
- 86 -
-------
This comparatively low cost structure results from a small
number of generation points with high generation rates. These
concentrated generation points lead to minimal internal collection
activity except for janitorial type labor to transport solid
waste to outside collection points. While external collection
costs benefit from concentrated generation, this activity accounts
for about 70 percent of the industry's total solid waste management
costs. Again, this is not a wide variation from the rule of thumb
indicating that 80 percent of all solid waste management costs
result from collection activities. In fact, when internal
collection is included, the total collection activity is about
90 percent of the industry's total costs.
Disposal costs represent only a small percentage of total
cost (about 8 percent). This is reflected in the general
condition of the industry's disposal sites that require substantial
improvement to qualify as sanitary landfills.
Another method of assessing the industry's total solid waste
management costs is relative to total production. On this basis
each metric ton of final product represented a solid waste
management cost of from $1.22 to $1.38 ($1.11 to $1.25 per ton)
in 1971.
Resource Recovery Economics
In addition to the material handled as solid waste in the
pulp and paper industry, considerable effort is expended to recover
some value from materials that have served their primary function
or have been separated from usable raw materials. The major
sources of material from which some value is recovered are bark,
salvageable metals, and off-specification product that is returned
to the process stream.
The combustion of bark for its energy value represents both
a volume reduction process to reduce solid waste quantities and
a resource recovery operation to utilize the bark's energy value.
The total bark consumed for energy purposes in 1971 was 9,648,122
wet metric tons (10,637,900 wet tons). The total salvageable
metals sold to secondary materials dealers from pulp and paper
industry operations is difficult to estimate because of fluctuations
in equipment modifications, structural replacements, and other
demolition type activities that generate salvageable materials.
- 87 -
-------
Some sources such as machine shops, refiner plates, etc. are
generated quite constantly, but details can at best be only a
rough estimate based on case study data. From this source, we
estimate that 91,165 metric tons (100,510 tons) of material were
salvaged in 1971. The value of this material is equally difficult
to estimate because of the mixture of metals reclaimed plus the
regional and time variations in unit prices on the secondary
materials market. The amount of fiber returned to the process
stream represents another area with little quantitative data
available. All broke generated on-machine is normally fed
directly to pulpers that then recombine with the incoming stock
stream. This flow of materials fluctuates drastically depending
on operational problems, startups, etc. However, the industry
uses an average of 10 to 20 percent recycled broke in the paper
machine furnish.
Assigning economic values to these recovered materials is
at best an approximation since the standard cost accounting systems
used in the industry do not normally provide accessible information
relative to these cost categories. Also, each mill's internal
system and unit costs vary substantially thus providing different
total values for resource recovery activities. Thus, the
economics of these areas will be examined by citing hypothetical
examples and then expanding these to estimate total industry cost
and savings related to these resource recovery activities.
Bark Combustion. The use of bark as a fuel source has been
previously described as a prevalent industry solid waste volume
reduction and energy recovery process. Assuming that a pulp and
paper mill is going to produce its own steam and electrical power,
the incremental cost associated with bark burning is the cost of
preparing the bark to be fed to the boiler and the cost of the
material handling equipment. This normally includes size reduction
equipment plus conveying, storage, and feeding equipment. Three
1972 examples (Table 27) indicate the economics associated with
providing bark burning capabilities at large pulp and paper mill
complexes. The annual depreciation cost has been based on straight
line depreciation for a 20-year life. With the maintenance
required to keep the size reduction equipment and conveyance
system operating, a yearly maintenance expense equal to ten percent
of the total capital cost has been assumed. The labor cost for
these systems have been considered negligible because of their
nearly automatic operation. Primary labor is provided by woodroom
and boiler crews that would be required regardless of the fuel
- 88
-------
TABLE 26
MILL DATA FOR BARK COMBUSTION EXAMPLES
Bark Consumption
(Annual )
Metric Tons
Tons
Regional Location
South South
Central Atlantic
Mill A Mill B
82,000 63,000
90,000 70,000
Northeast
Mill C
91,000
100,000
*From Mill Industry Representatives
- 89 -
-------
O
O
o
o
CM
o
o
CM
o o
o o
o o
«N •<
o o
U3 CM
O
O
O
O
00
rH
O
O
O
•sf
r~-
oo
*f>
o
0
o
0
U3
^
•fc/}
CTi "^
cTi U~>
• •
•sf -st
CQ
O
O
O
O
O
o o
o o
o o
ir> o
^
V}
0
O
0
m
CM
U3
•fee
o
uo
CM
rH CM
00 >£>
O
in
o
o
o
00
00
0
o
0
00
CM
0
O
O
rH
O
UO
o
tn
CM
t>
CM
CO
o
00
uo in
-P
LO
O
u
rH
rd
-P
•H
a,
rd
U
rH
rd
-p
O
H
-P
CO
O
U
H
rd
3
C
G
<
n ( 20 yr straight-line
0
•H
-p
rd
•r\
U
(U
M
a
0)
p
(10% of capital)
(U
o
G
rd
G
(U
-P
C
•H
rd
S
H
rd
-P
O
EH
redits
u
-p
U3
O
U
rH
rd
3
C
C
<
Management Credit
01
-p
LO
rd
•3.
13
•H
rH
O
LO
Cost Credit
rH
0)
3
fa
M
01
£
-p
o
rH
rd
-P
O
EH
s (Total Credits Minus
Cost)
en
C H
•H rd
> 3
rd C
CO G
<
rH
rd H
3 ro
C -4J
C O
< EH
to
en
C
•H
>
rd
LO
-P
•H
C
D
Ton Of Bark Consumed
u
•H
M
-p
OJ
s
M
0)
QJ
Bark Consumed
MH
0
G
O
EH
M
0>
Oj
-p
fd
-P
G
0)
co
a,
0)
•a
G
T5
C
ra
rH
(ti
G
O
•H
-P
01
-P
c
e
rd
O
e
o
-------
source and cannot be considered incremental costs. Also, maintenance
labor for greasing, oiling, repairs, etc. is considered to be part
of the maintenance cost. Thus, the total annual incremental cost
has been assumed to equal depreciation plus maintenance for the
bark preparation, handling, storage, and feeding equipment. To
offset the expense of processing the bark as a fuel, a cost saving
results from not having to dispose of the bark waste as solid
waste. Using the average industry cost per ton of solid waste
to disposal and the difference between bark burned and bark ash
to disposal, this annual cost savings was calculated.
An additional cost saving results from less primary fuel use
to produce the power or steam consumed. Based on the BTU content,
wet bark yields about 40 percent as much energy as does an
equivalent weight of coal. Based on this assumption and a coal
value of $7.17 per metric ton ($6.50 per ton) the fuel cost
savings were calculated.
By applying the result of the above examples to the total
bark consumed in 1971, a cost savings resulting from bark
combustion (Table 28) was calculated. This analysis indicates
the favorable economics associated with energy recovery from this
solid waste source. Also, from the data presented, individual
mills can determine (see Table 26 for mill data) how their bark
combustion operation compares with these examples that represent
relatively modern efficient facilities.
The 1971 industry saving from bark combustion was estimated
in the neighborhood of 46 to 56 million dollars or approximately
$1.00 per metric ton of total paper and paperboard production.
Secondary Materials Sales. The sale of secondary materials
is predominantly scrap iron by weight, but due to high unit value
such items as stainless steel, bronze, and other metals contribute
significantly to total sales. With individual mill quantities
varying substantially, five sample mills (representing 3% of
industry production) were chosen to illustrate the variations
that routinely occur in secondary materials sales even without
sales resulting from large scale demolition or alteration projects
(Table 29). By using this five mill sample as a basis for an
industry projection, the total value for secondary materials sales
is estimated to be $4,482,400 based on 85,260 metric tons (94,000
tons) of ferrous scrap and 5,905 metric tons (6,510 tons) of
other scrap materials. This economic approximation was based on
an average value of $20 per ton for ferrous scrap and $0.20 per
pound for all other scrap material. These prices are subject to
both local and time variations, but represent reasonable averages.
— 91 —
-------
TABLE 28
BARK COMBUSTION ECONOMICS - 1971*
Metric Ton
Basis Ton Basis
Bark Consumption 9,648,122 10,637,900
Savings - Minimum
($/Unit Weight) $4.87 $4.41
(Annual Total) $46,900,000 $46,900,000
Savings - Maximum
($/Unit Weight) $5.85 $5.30
(Annual Total) $56,400,000 $56,400,000
*From Gorham International Inc,
-------
CTi
CM
W
J
CQ
<
EH
*
CM
O
O>
rH
1
to
U
J
0,
§
X
u
to
u
J
<;
to
to
hJ
H
OH
W
EH
5j
>H
OH
<
Q
S
O
U
u
to
0>
p
H
rd
>
-d
C
(15
>
S-l
0
CJ
OJ
4-1
cd
U
0)
in
to
PQ
c
o
•H
4J
U
r— i
3
-o
O
M
a.
H
m
3
c
c
<
en
H
rd
•H
M
0)
4J
rd
S
a
rd
M
U
to
M
0)
x;
4J
o
Q
rd
S-l
U
to
en
D
O
M
f
V
OJ
CT
UH
W
a
O
EH
U
•H u]
M fi
4J O
01 EH
s:
T3
OJ
4-> 0
rd 3
g H
•H rd
4J >
W
tlH
s
0
EH
U
•rl W
M £
4J O
0) EH
S
r7-^
T-)
(U
4-> CD
rd 3
£-• j
E rH
•H rd
4J >
W
w
co
C
O
EH
U
•H U]
M C
4J C
(U EH
S
000
o o o
o o o
l> U3 ^f
C^ CD O
oo CM OO
O O O
O O O
000
*N
00 H OT
l> IT) OO
CM rH OO
000
000
i> c_r> o
CT\ rH C-
H
w
i_n un o
oo cr\ m
*$ CO
O LD O
^P 00 l>
^ 1>
o
o
0
o>
o
•^
o
o
o
•^
rH
l>
ro
O
O
CM
in
00
00
co
0
CO
o
0
LD
CO
rH
LT)
CM
o\
o
•xf
co
o
0
o
en
o
rn
1
0
o
o
r
O
CO
CM
O
O
U5
rH
rH
CTi
CM
U)
CM
O
0
•^
O
rH
O
CM
in
o
0
•sP
o
o
0
LT>
CO
l£l
•~
rH
O
O
0
••*
00
CM
LO
rH
O
O
ID
cn
O
•w
cr\
in
•w
in
[>
CO
•^
CM
in
o
<£>
•-
CM
in
0)
U
O
4J
cn
3
"O
H
cd
•
O
c
H
H
rd
C
.3
(U
4-1
fO
o
o
e
o
•H
Si
- 93 -
-------
Based on total annual industry production, secondary materials
sales account for a return to the mill of slightly less than ten
cents per metric ton of total production. If some estimate of
salvage by employees plus that from major renovations, equipment
dismantlings, etc. could be made, the net return would probably
increase to ten cents per metric ton of total production.
The cost associated with the material salvage program was
estimated to equal the cost that would have been incurred to
transport the same material to solid waste disposal sites. Thus,
no credits or costs were assumed to be incurred by the salvage
programs.
Fiber Reclamation. Fiber reclamation from the paper manufacturing
operations represents an essential saving to the industry. Broke
recovery systems are incorporated into nearly all production units
and an average of 10 to 20 percent recycled broke is used in the
paper machine furnishes. For illustrative and calculation purposes,
a broke recovery rate equal to 15 percent of total production was
chosen. The value of this recovered pulp varies within each mill
depending on operational procedures, processes in use, accounting
systems, and many other variables. However, for this analysis, the
value was considered to be equal to market pulp to obtain a comparable
base. Also, if this fiber source was removed, the additional input
would have to be supplied from outside sources (market pulp) or by
increased pulping capacity. An individual mill can determine internal
broke recovery value by using their percent broke in the furnish and
internal mill production costs per unit weight of pulp. The cost
saving resulting from broke recovery (Table 30) results from the
market value of the fiber recovered plus the solid waste management
credit obtained from not having to collect and transport the material
to disposal sites.
Because the capital cost of broke recovery is an integral
portion of paper machine construction and capital cost, no cost
segregation can be attempted. However, if no broke recovery was
practiced, additional capital costs would be incurred to provide
handling facilities for market pulp or additional on-site pulp mill
production. Thus, it was assumed that regardless of fiber sources,
capital costs would not result in any significant incremental costs
for broke recovery systems. While many mills employ personnel to
operate broke pulpers, many other mills have eliminated this labor
cost by automating their broke recovery systems. Coupled with the
fact that labor would be involved regardless of the fiber source,
no incremental costs for broke recovery labor were included.
- 94 -
-------
W
c
o
-p
U
•H
WW
c c
o o
-p -p
o
•H
r*-l jl..[
4J 4->
o> CD
e e
u
•H
SH
-P
(U
e
c
o
-p
u
SH
4-1
0)
g
O
4J
U
•rH
H-)
CU
e
SH
CD
CO
O
U
•H
0)
a
o
U
•H
^
4J
0)
SH
(U
a
C*-.
rH
O
00
i-D
ON
ON
"
rH
00
00
rv
0
ON
in
CO
["-
co
in
in
CO
CO
l~--
rH
CO
CO
ro
^
rH
W
X
0
0
0
00
n
o~\
o
ro
O
CM
CM
^
ON
IX)
in
OO
rH
CO
•vf
O
U
rd CD
co Qi
rd
O
CD
G
•H
.G
U
rd
S
rH
rd
-P
O
EH
w
G
O
4J
CD
SH
01
>
O
U
(U
Pi
SH
CU
ft
•H
rd
4J
o
EH
C
O
4J
SH
(U
in o
OO ro
O rH
CM
CM
^
ON X
0
0
O
«^T
C-D
00
en
UD
CM
OJ
rd
rd
4->
O
-P
to
G
O
in
rn
0
rv
CM
CM
o
oC
4J
•H
T3
CD
s^
cj
rH
rd
w
o
Q.
w
•rH
Q
0)
4J
w
rd
S
-o
•H
rH
0
0
4J
SH
CU
0,
|J3 O
CO O
. O
ro
w r^
CM
in
X i>
00
rH
4-) (D
W 4J
0 O
U 4J
X3
rH P
r^ LO
ON
rH
O
0
0
rv
H
ON
ro
,_7
O
00
rH
*Pt
W
rji
C
•H
^>
rd
CO
SH'
CU
^
O
U
CD
K
SH
CD
XJ
•H
CM
H
rd
4_)
0
EH
O
c
H
o
•rH
4J
ro
C
SH
(U
4-)
G
H
SH
o
o
e
o
SH
- 95 -
-------
This analysis assumes that actual sold production is equivalent
to 85 percent of the total tonnage produced with the remainder
returned to the paper machine furnish via the broke recovery systems.
The total cost savings of $1,301,391,000 represents an
equivalent saving of $26.09 per metric ton ($23.62 per ton) of total
paper and paperboard production. Based on these calculations, it
is obvious why broke recovery is considered an integral and required
operation in the papermaking field.
Resource Recovery Economics Summary. Cost savings from the
pulp and paper industry's resource recovery activities routinely
provide the companies with an improved overall economic picture.
It is also evident that the industry has undertaken resource recovery
activities that do not represent marginal economic projects.
With the current emphasis on improved environmental quality,
fuel shortages and raw material utilization, it is expected that
resource recovery activities will expand. Such an expansion also
means that resource recovery alternatives with lesser economic
returns will be considered feasible because of their favorable
impact on other effluent treatment processes and on the industry's
and the firm's public image.
- 96 -
-------
CHAPTER VIII
ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION IMPACT ON SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
Solid waste management practices in the pulp and paper
industry, as well as in other industrial and public sectors,
have to date been the least influenced by the past few years'
increased emphasis on environmental control. However, actual
solid waste management legislation plus the actions taken to
satisfy air and water pollution control legislation are having
an increasing effect on solid waste management activities.
This chapter will briefly summarize the trends in environmental
legislation and then present the possible impact of these trends
on the pulp and paper industries' solid waste management
practices.
Present Legislation and Trends
Federal Legislation. Current federal legislation with
potential for a significant impact on solid waste management
centers on air and water legislation. No actual regulatory
legislation exists for solid waste as a separate pollution
source.
Federal water legislation had its start with the River and
Harbor Act of 1886 that was modified to become the now famous
River and Harbor Act of 1899. Significant water legislation was
not enacted again until 1948 when the original Federal Water
Pollution Control Act was passed. Since that time the following
legislation has expanded federal water pollution activity and
established the program as it now exists:
Water Pollution Control Act Amendment of 1956
Water Quality Act of 1965
Clean Water Restoration Act of 1966
Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970
Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendment of 1972
- 97 -
-------
The 1972 amendments basically set the thrust of water
pollution control efforts to limiting the amount of pollutants
that can be discharged from specific point sources. The current
schedule calls for EPA to publish regulations to identify the
best practicable control technology for the pulp and paper
industry as an industrial category (issuance is currently in
progress). All mills must meet these regulations by July 1,
1977. Also, EPA shall identify the best available technology
for preventing and reducing pollution. Responsibility includes
identifying technology that would achieve' the elimination of
pollutant discharges. Standards resulting from the above
activities must be met by industrial plants by July 1, 1983.
The zero discharge goal of 1985 is a goal and is not required
under the law. The result of the above investigations will
determine to what degree various pollution sources must approach
zero discharge.
In addition to establishing effluent limitations and
acceptable technology, EPA has ultimate responsibility for the
water quality standards, effluent discharge permits, new source
performance standards, ocean dumping activities, and control of
toxic pollutants. Effluent discharge permit programs are being
administered by the EPA regional offices. These permits are
required for all point sources of discharge.
Overall, the federal water pollution program is now established
to provide for increasingly stringent effluent limitations and
improved national water quality. Little additional legislation
is foreseen unless basic philosophies change or specific segments
of the current law prove unworkable.
The principal impact on the industry's solid waste management
will be the problems associated with properly managing the
solid material that must be removed from the liquid effluent.
While leachates do not generally qualify as a point source, they
will undoubtedly receive additional attention as other liquid
effluents become better controlled and less of a pollution problem.
Air pollution efforts on the federal level began with the
Air Pollution Act of 1955. The following legislation has expanded
activity to its present level:
Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Act of 1965
Air Quality Act of 1967
Clean Air Act of 1970
- 98 -
-------
The 1970 legislation authorized national, uniform quality
standards based on geographical regions. Primary standards are
set at levels to prevent people from experiencing illness.
Secondary standards are designed to protect public welfare and
to prevent damage to animals, plants, and property. To achieve
these standards, EPA has approval authority over state established
implementation plans and their enforcement.
Additionally, EPA has authority to control new stationary
sources of air pollution and hazardous air pollutants plus
automobile emission standards and specific enforcement activities.
Basically, federal legislation is designed to provide a framework
for state control activity. Future legislative activity is
foreseen to amplify unclear areas of the present legislation and
to extend program activity.
Primary impact on pulp and paper industry solid waste
management programs will be how to manage the additional pollutants
removed as solid waste.
Federal solid waste management activity commenced with the
enactment of the Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1965. That original
legislation was amended in the Amendment of 1968 and by the
Resource Recovery Act of 1970. Besides research, demonstrations,
and technical assistance, EPA's solid waste program publishes
guidelines for solid waste recovery, collection, separation, and
disposal systems. The guidelines will serve as recommendations
to state and local governments. Unlike air and water legislation,
solid waste management legislation provides no overseeing of state
programs by federal officials.
Current emphasis at the federal level is on proper management
techniques for hazardous and toxic solid waste. Future legislation
is expected to expand program emphasis in areas such as hazardous
materials, resource recovery, collection, processing, etc.
With present and proposed legislation, the paper industry
should feel no direct impact from the federal level except for
any possibly hazardous or toxic solid waste. With no readily
identifiable quantities of toxic or hazardous materials, no
management problems are foreseen in this area. Thus, the principal
impact of hazardous waste legislation will be making appropriate
filings and providing required background data to satisfy regulatory
requirements. Indirect impact will come from state and local
authorities who may be following recommended EPA guidelines.
- 99 -
-------
Federal legislation as presently enacted and as expected
for the future will require that increasing pollutant quantities
be removed from liquid and gaseous effluent streams. This,
coupled with requirements for improved solid waste disposal
site operations to satisfy air and water pollution limitations,
presents the major impact on the industry's solid waste management
practices.
State and Local Legislation. Legislation at the state and
local level is designed primarily to meet federal guidelines
and to provide specific requirements that must be met by effluent
discharges within each state.
Water pollution legislation as applied to the pulp and paper
industry is taking the form of establishing effluent limitations
based on federal guidelines. New recommended levels are currently
being published by EPA. While some states may impose effluent
limitations more restrictive than the guidelines, the tendency
is to accept guideline levels. This results in nearly standard
required effluent discharge requirements throughout the nation.
Most states are also involved in effluent discharge permit
programs. Local legislation with impact on the industry is
negligible. Local legislation is designed to facilitate proper
installation and operation of sewer lines, joint treatment plants,
etc. and does not generally establish specific discharge levels.
The 1972 federal effluent limitation guidelines have been the
basic industry standards, but are being modified by the new best
practicable treatment guidelines (Tables 31 & 32). Effluent
limitations for the 1983 and 1985 deadlines cannot be estimated
at this rime, but process changes, internal water reuse, and
external treatment will most likely be required to meet more
stringent standards.
Air pollution legislation at the state level is designed to
provide ambient air quality capable of meeting EPA established
ambient standards. The primary standards that apply to the pulp
and paper industry are those limiting generation of sulfur
compounds. Regulations limiting both sulfur dioxide (SC^) and
total reduced sulfur compounds (TRS) may require additional
material to be removed from the industry's gaseous effluents.
However, the TRS limitations result primarily from chemical
recovery operations associated with chemical pulp mills, and any
- 100 -
-------
-p
u
d P
o 13
H o
\ SH
O
O O O O
IT)
O O
rH rH
o o o
O O CO
CM CM
o o o o
LO
CM ro
rH
o o o o
• • • •
ro C^- ^ (JD
d
O -P
EH O
P
U 13
•H O
SH SH
-P QJ
(U
cno
LD o o o
• • • •
CM ro un in
o o
• •
o o
H rH
o in o
• • •
in "xt1 t*D
CM
LO LO O O
• • t •
rH CO CM rO
-p
u
d ^
O 13
EH O
\ SH
O
o o o o
• • I •
m m at H
o o o
• t t
in o <*
ro U) H
in in o o
• • • •
CM -sf O ro
o o o o
t t • •
CM ^Q ro CO
rH
ro
PQ
H
a
o -P
EH U
p
o 13
•H o
SH SH
-P Oi
(U
s
\4H
CnO
in in in in
CM
in
LD O O
t • t
i> o r-
H 00
ro ro O
• • •
rH CM IT)
in
o o LO o
• • • •
rH rO rH <^
CM
[>
CTi
rH
(U
ction Process '
p
13
O
SH
CL,
CD
EH
-o
4n
CnO
d
•H CD
ft SH
H P
p -p
Qj U
rd
-P MH
MH p
rd d
SH fd
t4 §1
er and Linerboard
nd Unbleached Grades
rades
ft rd O
rd -P
QJ d 13 13
•H 0) CD
CD SH x: x:
CQ ft U U
SH W rd rd
rd 5 CD CD
O CD rH rH
U 3 PQ PQ
CD
EH
d
tP ••
d MH
•HO
rH CD
P SH
pL| P
-P
CD U
-P rO
•H MH
MH p
H d
P rd
co S
rH
Oi
Dl
•H
£>
H
SH O
CD n
ft w
rd -H
D-i P
fite Semi-Chemical:
H
•3
CO
H
rd
SH
0)
3
• •
13
O
O
13
3
O
SH
O
T)
CD
X^ 13
U CD
rd x:
CD U
H rd
X! CD
d H
p PQ
rH
rH
•H
s
Dl
d
•H
^H
d
•H
CD
P
(No Deinking) :
13
SH
rd
O
SH
CD
ft
rd
cu
acture
ased Pulp):
MH XI
P U
d £-i
rd P
SH 6
CD O
ft SH
rd fa
o, ^
illed)
illed)
fa fa
^ cS^.
CO CO
0) V A CD
w ^^ v"^ p
SH CD ^i tfi
rd d o w
O -H 0 -rl
U fa CQ EH
U
CD
0
•H
-P
U
QJ
-P
O
H
rd
-P
O
i-l
•H
!>
dj
W
E
O
fa
*
- 101 -
-------
CO
T3
•r)
rH
O
CO
-d
CD
T3
G
CD
a,
en
P
en
CD
tJ>
rO
S_)
CD
J>
Ci
0 -P
EH U
P
O U
-H O
&-] M
-P ft
(D
£2
U3
•
^
(no
O
t
o
o
o
•
in
O
H
LO
ro
LO
LO
LO
•
CM
r-
rt)
0)
CM
n
W
CQ
co
W
H *
U Cd
Q EH
H CO
D D
O Q
EH H
S W
EH ft
U ft
CQ ft
H ft
EH
U W
-P
U
G P
CD O T3
Cn EH O
CD
X) ft
O
•sP
Q
O
CQ
rO
P
O
ro
E
i
•H
X
C
O 4->
EH U
U 13
•H 0
^— 1 r— I
-P ft
CD
S
CM
t
CM
in
in
CM
LT)
•
O
LO
CM
LO
LO
o
•
ro
LO
t
CM
LO
CM
o
t
LO
LO
•
CM
tnO
Cn
P
O
(U
w
w
H
W
0)
CD
•H
rH
rH
<
I
os
EH O
CO fa
U
CQ
^
O
_jj
u
CD
CO
|>
SH
-P
w
^3
Tj
(^
H
-P
MH
rO
M
rj^-J
CD
x;
u
(0
CD
rH
iQ
G
;=>
rH
(0
-p
p
d)
CD
W
rO
CQ
e
P
•H
'O
o
CO
rH
(0
u
•r)
g
CD
r;
U
1
•rH
6
CD
CO
CD
-p
•H
i|_i
r—1
P
CO
rH
rO
^
4J
P
CD
£2
CD
in
rO
CQ
rO
•H
G
O
^
<
rH
fO
U
•H
E
CD
r;
U
1
•H
g
CD
CO
CD
-P
•H
i|_l
,— (
P
CO
rH
ro
^i
-P
p
CD
^j
1
-P
4H
rO
M
*~o
CD
_r]
U
(0
CD
rH
fi
c
ID
rH
rO
U
•H
g
0
f.
U
1
•H
g
CD
CO
CD
-P
•H
HH
H
P
CO
*-*
^
S_l
CD
>
O
u
CD
DH
in
in
O
M
U
^
SH
CD
a,
rO
a,
CD
-p
en
rO
g
O
fa
-a
(0
o
ft
CD
P,
(0
ft
-a
G
-------
material recovered from the pulping area and recovery stacks will
be returned to the recovery process for combustion in the recovery
boiler. Thus, increased solid waste generation is unlikely to
result from increased air pollution controls on chemical pulping
and recovery operations. However, SC^ and particulate regulations
applied to power and steam generating facilities will have an
impact on the pulp and paper industry. These regulations vary
locally depending on what discharge levels are allowable while
maintaining federal ambient standards. Two types of regulations
are commonly used for S0p« First, the allowable percentage of
sulfur in the fuel supply is used to control sulfur input. Second,
the allowable pounds of SO- per million Btu's is used as an
effluent standard. Actual local regulations are generally
limited to the outlawing of open burning and do not apply to
effluent discharges which are left to the state authorities.
Solid waste management legislation is a combination of state
and local regulations depending on specific governmental structures,
customs, etc.
In response to individual letters sent to state solid waste
management agencies, 19 responded explaining their industrial
solid waste management programs in varying degrees of detail.
Of the 19 respondents, 14 indicated that state legislation and/or
rules and regulations are currently effective (mid-1973). The
actual degree of enforcement was not indicated in most cases, but
from general comments it was concluded that approximately one-half
(7) were actively issuing permits and monitoring sites while the
other half (7) were still involved in developing an active program
for implementation. Two other states stated that they were
conducting surveys and proposing legislation while three respondents
did not mention their legislative or regulatory status.
The state solid waste agencies responding were tending toward
requiring operating permits for all solid waste disposal sites
with permit issuance based primarily on site operational
characteristics. In areas with strong county government the
county officials may retain responsibility for issuing permits
to maintain proper solid waste disposal site operations. Also,
local regulations may impose restrictions on solid waste storage
or transportation particularly as related to public nuisances
and health oriented problems.
- 103 -
-------
Overall, state and local legislation appears designed to
meet federally established goals, to satisfy federal recommendations,
and to prevent state and local nuisance conditions. Based on our
sample response and overall environmental concern, state and local
legislation is expected to require licensing and monitoring of
nearly all industrial solid waste disposal sites by 1980.
Legislative Impact On Solid Waste Categories
The impact of environmental legislation on the pulp and
paper industry's solid waste generation will be most directly
felt by the additional material that will require handling in
the solid waste systems. Actual solid waste characteristics will
be affected as additional classes of pollutants require removal
from the air and water. For example, color removal processes for
kraft mill effluents may generate sludges that will be different
from normal primary and secondary wastewater treatment plant
sludge. Possibly the most significant new solid wastes will be
those resulting from air pollution systems designed to remove
sulfur oxides from power plant gases.
Wastewater Treatment Solid Waste. Sor established environmental
legislation programs, the effect on solid waste management quantities
was considered when future solid waste generation quantities were
projected (Chapter VI). Both primary and secondary wastewater
treatment sludge will show a continual rise through 1980. This
increase will result primarily from increasing production and
from the application of increasingly stringent effluent limitations.
Suspended solids in the industry's effluent were approximately 23
kilograms p'-:r metric ton (46 Ib per ton) of production in 1971.
Estimates for 1980 based on tentative effluent limitations indicate
that total industry effluent will average approximately 5 kilograms
per metric ton (10 Ib per ton) of production. This expected
effluent discharge reduction will increase the wet sludge entering
the solid waste management systems (@ 33% solids) for disposal by
2.2 to 3.4 million metric tons (2.4 to 3.7 million tons). Actual
performance will depend upon what process modifications and
internal measures are taken to reduce effluent losses as well
as what effluent treatment advances are implemented. As effluent
discharges are reduced, the quantity of solid material removed
from the effluent stream becomes an increasing problem. Strict
legislation will force private efforts designed to maximize raw
material usage while decreasing effluent discharges. The primary
sludge characteristics will change because smaller particles will
be removed from the wastewater. Also, with better internal fiber
retention, sludge fiber content will decrease.
- 104 -
-------
Industry BODg discharges are expected to decrease from the
1971 level of 27 kilograms per metric ton (54 Ib per ton) of
capacity to 3 kilograms per metric ton (6 Ib per ton) of production
in 1980. Based on estimated disposal practices, this will result
in an additional 1.2 to 2.1 million metric tons (1.3 to 2.3
million tons) of wet sludge requiring disposal via the industry's
solid waste management systems. This amount is assuming that
the secondary sludge is dewatered with primary sludge and reaches
a 33 percent solids level. It is expected that some installations
will achieve a lower solids content thus requiring that more
water be transported to disposal.
Application of more stringent environmental restrictions
(groundwater contamination, flooding danger, effluent restrictions,
etc.) will increase the cost of sludge lagooning, thus increasing
the economic feasibility of dewatering system installations.
Wood Yard Solid Waste. The only significant impact on wood
yard solid wastes will be an increased pressure to increase
utilization of bark wastes for fuel or other uses. Land disposal
of these organic solid wastes can lead to leachate problems while
reuse provides an economic advantage that acts as an incentive
to undertake bark recovery projects. Additionally, bark and wood
wastes are low in sulfur and may be used to lessen sulfur compound
emissions from steam and power boilers. Thus, environmental
regulations are one of the forces pushing for increased utilization
of wood yard solid waste.
Air Pollution Control Solid Waste. Solid waste from air
pollution control equipment is currently represented by the ash
resulting primarily from coal and bark combustion. Most industry
power and steam generation units are equipped with particulate
collection equipment. Dry and wet collection systems are used
to collect both the bottom ash and the flyash for land disposal.
The total particulate values for the industry's coal usage were
considered in establishing the national generation trends.
Removal of sulfur oxides resulting from sulfur containing
fuels is an area currently open to much conjecture. Even at
federal hearings to assess air pollution timetables, the availability
of technology to meet sulfur oxide standards was subject to much
conflicting testimony. The final resolution satisfactory to all
- 105 -
-------
parties could not be achieved even with major inputs from many
participants. Currently, if all pulp and paper industry power
plants can obtain low sulfur fuels to meet sulfur oxide limitations
no increase in solid waste from desulfurization systems will
result. However, the final report of the Sulfur Oxide Control
Technology Assessment Panel (SOCTAP) predicts a shortage of low
sulfur fuel by 1975(14'.
Realistically, the pulp and paper industry's commitment to
sulfur oxide removal from stack gases appears to be a long term
concern. Current priority for sulfur oxide control is being
given to the power generating industry rather than to smaller
private industry power plants. However, several factors appear
to limit the expansion of flue gas desulfurization practices even
in the power utility industry. The availability of professional
manpower to engineer and design such systems is limited. The
utility companies have essentially no chemical process industry
talent to apply to this problem while vendors and engineering
consultants have only limited numbers of people trained for such
efforts. Also, skilled construction personnel are in increasing
demand for other environmental control projects (domestic and
industrial wastewater treatment facilities) and will be the
limiting factor for construction projects in many areas throughout
the 70's. Coupled with all these factors, the manufacturers of
flue gas desulfurization equipment have limited production
capacity and are not expected to be able to expand rapidly enough
to satisfy the power utility companies if full scale flue gas
desulfurization is undertaken. Thus, the possibility of finding
qualified suppliers for the small pulp and paper industry power
boilers becomes remote at best. Also, the largest pulp and paper
industry complexes are located in nonurban areas that have a
lesser sulfur oxide pollution problem than many high density
urban areas. Thus, if insurmountable circumstances delay
installation of flue gas desulfurization technology, this industry
would be a likely candidate for temporary relaxed implementation
schedules.
At the present time, four basic flue gas desulfurization
technologies can be considered for full scale use within the next
five years. First, wet lime/limestone systems involve scrubbing
with limestone or lime slurries. Several specific processes are
of this basic type and employ different feeding end cycle techniques
- 106 -
-------
to achieve desulfurization. These approaches normally generate
large amounts' of CaSOs and CaSO^ sludges that require ponding or
dewatering for land disposal. Second, magnesium oxide scrubbing
is much like lime scrubbing except that spent salts are regenerated
to produce a stream of 15-20 percent SO2 for sulfuric acid
manufacture and magnesium oxide for reuse. A necessary precaution
is that high flyash removal levels must be maintained prior to
magnesium oxide scrubbing to protect the recycle stream from
flyash contamination. Third, a modified version of the contact
^2^04 Process operates by passing the flue gas through a fixed
catalyst bed where S02 is converted to 303 that is absorbed in
recirculated ^304 in an absorption tower. This process also
requires high particulate removal efficiency to prevent plugging
of the catalyst bed. Fourth, sodium base scrubbing is used with
regeneration. The gas is absorbed into a combination sodium
sulfite, bisulfite, and sulfate. The system is subject to
contaminants and requires a bleed line to maintain system balance.
Final products can be processed to liquid S02, sulfur, or
sulfuric acid. Many other techniques are in various stages of
development (total exceeds 50) and some will undoubtedly proceed
to commercial usage. Sludge from these processes will require
careful disposal procedures to prevent the leaching of chemical
components to ground or surface water supplies. While the
compounds present are not hazardous materials, changes in acidity
plus excessive nutrient enrichment can cause localized pollution
problems. Disposal will require that the site be designed to
prevent leachate contamination of nearby waters. Also, land
areas receiving large quantities of this semisolid sludge will
have essentially no value for future uses unless a program of
intermediate and final cover or of soil and sludge mixing is
practiced.
Based on the current uncertainty in the entire flue gas
desulfurization area, the potential solid waste volumes are
difficult to determine. Also, with the many potentially
applicable technologies, no degree of certainty can be established
relative to the technologies that may be most economical in
commercial use. To indicate the potential magnitude of the
desulfurization process solid waste, the recent SOCTAP report
presented the comparative quantities of ash and potential sulfur
products from coal fired boilers controlled with flue gas
desulfurization systems. These calculations indicate the
potential solid waste generation from the most developed
desulfurization systems currently available. Also indicated is
- 107 -
-------
the quantity of possible saleable product that could be a disposal
problem if insufficient market demand exists to use available
by-product supplies. If this information is applied to only
the pulp and paper industry's coal burning operations, a large
new additional solid waste source rapidly develops (Table 33)
This estimate* indicates the potential order of magnitude for
this type solid waste resulting from air pollution control and
fuel supply requirements.
While it is expected that flue gas desulfurization will be
'demonstrated before 1980 in the pulp and paper industry, it is
doubtful that significant solid waste from such processes will
be generated by that time. However,, it does remain a serious
potential solid waste situation and merits attention, both from
solid waste management and potential resource recovery aspects.
From chemical recovery process operations, most material
collected by air pollution control equipment can be either
introduced into the recovery furnaces or elsewhere in the chemical
recovery system. This includes both particulates and the
odorous compounds. Generally the mercaptans, hydrogen sulfide,
and other odorous gases are introduced to the lime kiln or a
separate burner for complete combustion. Alternately, sulfur
compounds can be stabilized so they will stay in the recovery
cycle and not be discharged to the atmosphere. New mills use
noncontact evaporators that eliminate contact between the liquor
and flue gas. .'Based on the current approaches to recovery system
air pollution abatement, increased solid waste from this source
will not represent a management problem. The only impact will be
improved chemical utilization as air losses are decreased via
improved gaseous effluent treatment.
All Other Solid Waste Categories. The other solid waste
categories will be affected only indirectly and to lesser degrees
by environmental legislation. The solid waste generation ranges
previously presented will not show significant changes through
1980.
The only changes that will result will be those caused by a
slow general shift in overall corporate attitudes toward more
efficient raw materials utilization and recovery. For example,
the solid waste associated with residuals handling will become a
- 108 -
-------
TABLE 33,
ESTIMATED QUANTITIES OF ASH AND SULFUR PRODUCTS
FOR PULP AND PAPER INDUSTRY COAL FIRED BOILERS
IF EQUIPPED WITH FLUE GAS DESULFURIZATION SYSTEMS*
Yearly Production
Metric Tons/Yr
(Tons/Yr)
Approximate Storage
Volume For 20 Yrs
Hectare/Meters
(Acre/Ft)
Coal Ash , Dry
Limestone Sludge, Dry
50% CaS03 1 H20
9% CaS04 2 H20
33% CaC03 Unreacted
Total
Lime Sludge, Dry
76% CaS03 % H20
12% CaSO 2 HO
•X. £.
12% CaO (Ca(OH)2
Total
Sulfur
(90% Overall Recovery)
Sulfuric Acid
(95%)
1,533,000
(1,690,000)
1,460,300
(1,610,000)
215,400
(237,500)
839,000
(925,000)
2,514,700
(2,772,500)
1,460,300
(1,610,000)
213,200
(235,100)
235,800
(260,000)
1,909,300
(2,105, 100)
403,600
(445,000)
1,258,500
(1,387,500)
2,040
(16,500)
6,990
(56,600)
5,360
(43,400)
390
(3,150)
1,430
(11,600)
(Continued On Next Page)
- 109 -
-------
TABLE 33
(Continued)
Assumptions:
Coal - 3.5% Sulfur; 12% Ash; 2,816,000 Tons Coal/Yr
For 1,000 MWe Capacity; Coal Usage 0.88 Lbs/
Kwh; Production Time - 6,400 Hrs/Yr
Total
MWe - 1971 Pulp & Paper Industry Coal Consumption
= 14,265,000 Ton; 14,265,000 Tons Coal/
2,816,000 Tons Coal/MWe = 5 MWe Equivalents
*Based On Calculations From Sulfur Oxide Control Technology
Assessment Panel's Final Report
- 110 -
-------
larger quantity because of increased wood residuals usage. As
this total quantity grows, the industry may well undertake
activities aimed toward recovering this fiber loss. Similarly,
losses in other production areas will be investigated to determine
if either primary or secondary uses are feasible alternatives to
disposal.
Legislative Impact On Solid Waste Management Systems
The increased emphasis on environmental activities and
resulting changes in solid waste generation will have definite
effects on the pulp and paper industry's solid waste management
systems.
Impact on Technology. The solid waste management technology
currently utilized in the pulp and paper industry is basically
the same as that used in municipal and commercial solid waste
management activities. While techniques vary to satisfy specific
requirements, very little proprietary or unique solid waste
technology is practiced within the industry. Except for additional
resource recovery practices, there seems to be little predictable
alteration from this pattern in the future.
Future environmental legislation is not foreseen to have any
effect upon collection and storage practices internal to the
industry's mills. The primary concerns will be good housekeeping
practices and protecting against inadvertent spillage of solid
waste materials into liquid effluent drains or other areas that
could lead to environmental degradation. Outside storage and
collection practices will be affected principally in areas where
solid waste quantities are increased. These areas tend to be
point sources (wastewater treatment plants, boilers, etc.) and
the application of more efficient materials handling equipment
will be the primary improvement to ease collection and storage
difficulties.
Areas that generate general trash and paper wastes (offices,
storerooms, warehouses, etc.) will tend to increase the use of
stationary compaction equipment to reduce bulkiness and collection
frequency. This approach will enable the existing collection
equipment to handle increased solid waste quantities with
existing manpower.
- Ill -
-------
As solid waste quantities increase and the regulations
governing disposal become stricter, increased solid waste
processing will be introduced. The primary emphasis will be on
methods to recover value from the solid waste while reducing the
weight and volume to be handled. The increasing use of shredders
and hog fuel boilers will be the principal expansion area. With
most large solid waste sources consisting of materials that are
largely combustible and recognizing the industry's power and
steam demands, this trend will be the one explored in the greatest
depth. Also, recovery of all possible fiber currently entering
the waste stream will receive concentrated attention.
The area most affected by environmental legislation will be
the industry's disposal sites. The present proliferation of
open dumps will require extensive effort to meet state and local
regulations currently in various forms of development. When
sanitary landfill criteria are applied to industrial disposal
sites, additional personnel and equipment plus design and
planning will be required.
Sanitary landfill planning and design standards will eliminate
many existing disposal sites because of groundwater considerations,
high flood risks, soil requirements, lack of cover material, etc.
Thus the impact of environmental legislation will act directly
upon disposal site operations plus, in some cases, .add to the
hauling costs. These pressures will increase the attractiveness
of previously marginal processing and resource recovery activities.
Overall, little new technology is foreseen except for possible
novel resource recovery operations. Most improvements will result
from applying available technology and improved management
techniques.
Impact On Economics. The economic impact of environmental
legislation will be concentrated in two different sources. First,
the management of increasing sludge and sludge ash quantities
will add collection and disposal costs. At 1971 rates, this
additional annual solid waste management cost will range from
$7.2 million to $12 million in 1975 and from $15 million to $23.9
million in 1980 (Table 34). Depending upon inflation rates,
these costs could be higher at that time. Also, the industry
will be expending proportionally more money to remove this
material from the wastewater and to prepare it for the solid
waste stream. Second, the cost of disposal operations will
increase dramatically as regulations force industrial disposal
sites to meet sanitary landfill criteria. It is expected that
by 1980, nearly all this industry's solid waste disposal sites
will be required to meet state criteria to obtain an operating
permit.
- 112 -
-------
•xP
00
u
hJ
m
*
co
EH
co
O
U
CO
o
Oi
co
H
Q
Q
g
H
J
Q
S
Q
3
CO
Q
U
to
Pi
H
O
CO
en
H
OJ
en
-d
3
H
*
«
g
3
e
•H
X
re
a
o
o
o
•»
<£>
CO
00
•»
00
*
*
g
3
g
G
•H
a
o
0
o
•»
en
o
CM
•s
CM
O
O
O
•»
ro
oo
p-
V*
00
^
*~ -
o
o
o
r*
in
00
*xP
»»
CM
~~^
fd
g *
•H *
0. 3
g
•H
X
a
in
' O
0
o
•xp"
co
o
~
CM
en
*
*
g
3
g
•H
C
•H
a
o
o
o
[X,
un
CO
•xP
VI
H
CM CO
x? 00
CM CO
xf 00
IX) ^D
CM CO
• t
xt 00
O
o
o
o
o
r-t
o
o
o
o
o
xf
en
o
o
o
o
o
in
0
en
rH
M
0)
>
O
>i
-P
•H
-P
G
(d
3
a
H
td
G
O
•H
-P
•H
T3
TJ
<
W
G
0
EH
O
•H
M
-P
01
a
^ N,
CO
C
o
EH
•~-s
in
-P
w
O
u
H
l>
cn
H
C
O
EH
U
•H
H
-P
(U
a
\
•w
^^
G
O
EH
\
•W
—
H
l>
(Ti
rH
M
0)
>
o
+J
CO
O (U
O -P
rd
H o;
fd
G H
O !>•
•H a\
-P H
•H
T3 ®
-o
<
w
(U
^-»
^D ^O
CM CO
• •
xt OO
x-'
O
o
o
•rs
O
o
en
CO
3
H
CO
cr>
S-t
0)
>
o
-p
•H
-P
O O
o o
o o
•s **
CTi ^
•sf TO
H H
O O
O O
O O
CM
H
O
H
O O
o o
o o
•* •%
CM D-
o o
o o
o o
*s 9*
CM if)
ro ro
(£}
CM
•
•xP
•f}
^-s
(J3
CO
t
ro
v>
-^
O
o
o
•>
o
o
{D
•W
cu
rd
Oj
-p
X
0)
2
G
0
'-x
{D {Q
CM CO
• •
•xP OO
O
o
o
•*
o
o
•xP
3
c
•H
-P
G
O
U
CM CO
• •
xt ro
<*£> ID
CM CO
xj* 00
o
o
o
•N
o
o
CM
O
O
O
*
O
G
a
rH
fd
c
o
•rl
-P
•H
-a
TJ
-------
o
CO
*
*
E
3
£
•H
X
fd
s
o
0
o
••
CO
CO
o
-..
CM
o
,o
o
V*
CM
O
00
».
CM
•^
M
rd
q
O
U
0>
en
c
W -H
vJ -P
BQ C
< O
EH U
CTv
H
E
•H
X
rd
a
*
*
E
£,
•H
q
•H
£
o o
o o
o o
CM (S)
oo oo
'•£> U)
CM CO
• •
CM 00
00 • •
OO •x}1 OO
r, <.£} 4-f)
H ^
O
O
O
•>
0
o
o
•»
IT)
rH
•W
0
o
0
H
CTi
>£>
O
O
o ^>
CM CM CO
ID . .
c-» ^t oo
•^
o
o
o
o
o
o
CM
H
O
o
o
o
o
CM
H
0\
H
M
0)
O
^1
-p
•H
-P
q
rd
3
a
H
rd
q
o
•H
-p
•H
TJ
-a
"3!
03
q
o
EH
O -^
•H W
M q
-P 0
0) EH
gj —
-P
03
O
U
H
r^
cn
H
q
o
EH
O
•H *^*>t
M C
-P O
0) EH
S \
\ ^
•^ — '
H
!>•
0)
^
O
-p
w
O
U
r-i
rd
q
O 0)
•H 4->
-P rd
•H Pi
T3
T3 rH
CTi
rH. rH
rd
-p @
o
EH
U
q
H
td
q
o
•H
O
O
e
o
W
q
o
•H
-P
rd
rH
D
U
rH
rd
U
O
&4
QJ
D^
rd
H
(U
rd
-p
rd
P
fd
o
0)
-p
w
rd
3
rd
Pi
-P
rd
q
M
01
-P PM
q
H -P
O
w
0)
03
0)
tn
q
rd
P4 Pi
* *
*
-------
Disposal costs averaged about $0.33 per metric ton ($0.30
per ton) of solid waste in 1971. It is expected that by 1980,
this cost will reach at least $1.65 per metric ton ($1.50 per
ton). This will result in a total industry cost of from $26.1
million to $31.8 million greater than the total 1971 disposal
cost (Table 35 ). An additional increase in transportation
costs will result as disposal sites become more distant from
the mill sites. These more remote disposal sites will result
both from land shortages and from environmental restrictions
on new disposal sites.
With increasing costs from several sources plus increased
quantities in some solid waste categories, the pulp and paper
industry will increase efforts to obtain at least some return
from these solid waste materials. Emphasis will focus on
recovery of materials for new by-products, internal use of raw
materials, and reclamation of energy from combustible materials,
Thus, the industry will be searching for currently unknown
credits to offset increasing solid waste management costs,
some of which result directly from environmental legislation.
- 115 -
-------
o
CO
•I
X
rti
O O
o o
o o
ro CO
CM -s)1
CM CM
in o
(XI LO
o
o
o
rt
o
o
H
C-
CO
*
o
00
§
e
•H
G
•H
s
o o
o o
o o
ID IT)
•% «v
CO O
rH CM
in o
o
o
o
r*
o
o
CO
o
n
in
CO
EH
t/5
O
U
O
cu
CO
H
Q
Q
a;
u
^
H
e
3i
g,
§
cl
•Hi
o o
O O
o o
** IS
O CO
O CM
rH CO
O O
O O
o o
*t **
CT> CO
CM CTi
ro i>
•N *\
•^ LO
ro O
oo ro
• •
O O
ro O
ro rO
• •
O O
o
o
o
o
o
CO
LT)
o
o
o
o
o
-P
CO
0) O
-P CU
to w
rd -H
5 Q
T) O
•H EH
rH
0 >,
C/) -P
•H
rH -P
fd G
-P rd
0 3
EH 0
01
C
O
EH
U
•H
M
-P
(U
S
CO
G
O
EH
-P
10
O
U
H
rd
CO
O
a
10
•H
Q
G
0
EH
U
•d
M
-P C
w
O
U
rH
rd
CO
0
a
CO
•H
Q
rH
fd
-P
O
EH
U
G
H
rH
rd
G
O
•H
-P
fd
G
M
0)
-P
G
H
,C
M
O
e
o
- 116 -
-------
CHAPTER IX
TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT
The major solid waste management technology used by the pulp
and paper industry does not include any sophisticated processes
or methods that have resulted from specialty development efforts
except for internal resource recovery. This entire disposal
field has been treated as a "necessary evil" that must be handled
to maintain operations and has not received major efforts aimed
at improving the state of-the-art. Thus, the question of new
advances or improvements has not been a concern and will not
until management realizes that further cost saving (profit
increasing) actions are possible in the solid waste management
field.
The current technology and practices have been previously
described (Chapter V) and will represent the base upon which
future technology can be built. Potential improvements and
alternatives for existing practices will be presented in this
chapter.
Collection and Storage
Solid waste collection and storage in the pulp and paper
industry is divided into activities internal to the mill buildings
(equivalent to homeowners activities) and activities external to
the mill buildings (equivalent to the public or private solid
waste collection agency).
Activities internal to the mill result primarily from the
smaller generation sources such as personnel activity and
manufacturing services while most major sources are predominantly
point sources that require either individual collection systems
or mechanically handled containers.
Current internal activities usually employ janitorial type
personnel to transport solid waste from individual small container
locations to larger outside storage containers for pick up and
transportation to disposal. The use of 208 liter (55 gallon
drums) salvaged from mill operations plus the use of broke carts
to transport solid waste often represents a false economy.
Depending on mill layout, solid waste quantities, and labor rates,
the use of a small compaction vehicle with an operator may be
more economical than a crew of waste handlers working as manual
laborers.
- 117 -
-------
Several equipment alternatives exist to meet individual mill
» circumstances. If solid waste is already transported to stationary
compactors, a scooter type vehicle with a dump hopper or with a
train of containers may efficiently collect internal solid waste.
Standard outside haul-away containers equipped with casters can
be used for internal collection and placed on docks or in designated
outside storage areas for pick up by a normal compaction vehicle.
Other compactor collection units that can be used in relatively
crowded areas include trailer compactors and pick-up mounted units
that could be used either for transfer situations or for direct
haul to disposal sites. Use of this type unit coupled with
lighter and easier to handle solid waste containers can increase
collection efficiency for small point waste sources both internal
and external to the mill buildings. Based on solid waste volumes
and scattered generation points, any type of automated collection
(pneumatic or slurry) would normally be an uneconomical alternative.
Cost savings could also be realized by improved collection
scheduling. Except for point sources having specific collection
vehicles, most mill collection equipment simply patrols the mill
property for collection points needing collection. Based on a
background study to accurately define solid waste generation rates
and collection requirements, routine collection schedules could
be established to minimize collection labor and to allow maximum
equipment utilization.
For areas with larger generation rates, the industry could
take steps to increase the collection and storage efficiency.
Presently the best collection and storage operations are associated
with bark wastes that are to be combusted to recover the energy
value. Automatic conveyor systems, pneumatic pipelines, and
storage bins are used to provide a continual bark flow to the
boilers. Gravity fuel hoppers have often been used for storage
and feeding purposes, but the most successful systems now employ
"Atlas" bins for bark storage and feed. These units are shaped
like an inverted cone with stored material being removed by a
chain of bucket conveyors drawn around the base of the stored
material (see Figure 9, page 30). The buckets are pulled in a
manner such that they continually follow the perimeter of the pile
and provide a uniform feed rate to the boilers with minimum
fluctuations. Increased usage of this system is becoming evident
in the industry and usage will continue to rise as new bark
handling systems are installed.
- 118 -
-------
Pneumatic collection of sawdust from long log slashers has
also been demonstrated in the pulp and paper industry and will
find more applications as long log usage continues to increase.
This material represents a good fuel and presents no problems in
a bark burning system.
The use of separate collection vehicles for individual major
solid waste sources is widely practiced in the pulp and paper
industry. While in some instances this may be the most economical
practice, the multi-purpose vehicle that can handle several types
of large bulk containers would reduce total costs in many instances.
Depending on actual solid waste quantities, haul distance, etc.,
one or more truck units can service several containers collecting
one solid waste type or a variety of solid waste types. Also,
containers can be obtained to handle liquids and other materials
thereby making it a desirable vehicle for all mill operations.
Converto, a division of Golay and Company manufactures a hoist
system and containers of this type (Figures 9 & 10). Also, the large
capacity roll-off roll-on and tilt frame units such as manufactured
by Mid Equipment Inc., Dempster Brothers Inc., Heil, and other
refuse equipment manufacturers can be used to collect multiple
solid waste sources. Particularly for wastewater treatment plant
sludges, boiler ash and chemical pulping solid wastes, the
multiple container hauling units represent an available, but
mainly unused equipment scheme for the pulp and paper industry.
Additionally, the same unit can handle containers in use with
stationary compactors for personnel, manufacturing services, and
other compactable solid wastes.
The above container systems are not to be confused with the
systems that the industry presently uses extensively. The present
systems employ small containers (normally up to 7.6 cubic meters
- 10 cubic yards) while the above units can employ up to 17 cubic
meter (22 cubic yard) containers. The use of one driver servicing
several containers provides cost savings in both equipment and
labor categories plus providing more extensive equipment capabilities
for all material handling operations.
Solid waste generated from the industry's wastepaper processing
sector normally undergoes manual transfer from generation points
to outside containers. Some larger wastepaper operations utilize
conveyor systems, but wheeled carts -of various types are used for
temporary storage and transportation to other storage and collection
points. Mechanical conveyor systems represent the only feasible
alternative to today's predominant methods because of the solid
- 119 -
-------
FIGURE 9
CONVERTA1NER HOIST SPECIFICATIONS'
189'
LENGTH OF
1301/4"
DECK
'Dimensions marked with
asterisk will vary with
truck chassis. Those
shown are for a 38"
height.
V
X TRUCK FRAME
941/2"
105V2"
39"-43"*
Model
Loading cap'y
Wgt. of hoist
Cyl. size
120-H-15
15,000#
6700#
7" x 45"
120-H-2d
20,000#
7200#
8" *. 45"
120-H-26
26,000#
750G#
9" x. 45"
Width Overall
Width Inside Of Arms
Width Outside Of Arms
Width Of Leek
Cab To Trunnion Center (Tandem Axle)
Cab To Axle (Single Axle)
Cab To End Of Frame
Centimeters
242.6
190.5
228.6
165.1
304.8
350.5
447.0
Inches
95.
75.
90.
65.
120.
138.
176.0
Container Capacity
6-17
Cubic Meters
8-22
Cabic Yards
120 -
-------
o
H
U
OJ
D
o
H
fa
u
c
H
c
m
Q4
§
u
C
rd
rt)
H
O
O
O
C
O
•H
W
•H
>
•H
Q
O
-P
M
-------
waste characteristics. This waste contains a high percentage of
metals, glass, and other dense material that makes slurry or
pneumatic collection difficult and expensive. Thus, either
conveyor systems or small scooter units to haul containers are
best suited for collecting war>tepaper processing solid waste.
Overall, solid waste collection and storage in the pulp and
paper industry consist of bulk materials handling situations
rather than collection of numerous small point sources. Thus,
all efforts to deposit solid waste directly into collection
units (detachable containers) and to reduce total vehicle numbers,
manpower requirements, and front-end loader type pickups will
lead to greater efficiency.
Processing
Solid waste processing in the pulp and paper industry is
limited to a small number of waste generation points and does
not represent technological depth or innovation. Only the basic
processing schemes used for a long time period have been adopted
by the industry for solid waste processing.
Compaction. Only a limited number of stationary compaction
units are used in the U. S. pulp and paper industry. These are
primarily for personnel, office, manufacturing services, and
other miscellaneous bulky solid wastes. The major solid waste
sources (bark, sludge, ash, etc.) are not readily compactable
and no volume reduction can be obtained by using compaction
equipment.
Future compaction equipment use in the industry is not foreseen
as a major growth area. Only in mills where integrated solid
waste management is undertaken and in specialty product mills
where large quantities of nonpulpable broke are generated will
compaction units prove feasible. If a limited number of collection
vehicles handling various container types are employed, compaction
equipment may decrease collection frequency for miscellaneous solid
waste sources sufficiently to warrant installation.
As a general rule, compaction equipment will experience
limited usage in the pulp and paper industry primarily because of
the noncompressible nature of major solid waste sources.
- 122 -
-------
Size Reduction. As with compaction equipment, size reduction
equipment for solid waste processing has received limited
application because the major solid wastes do not lend themselves
to this type of processing. The primary use to date has been
to reduce the bark particle size to improve combustion operations.
To a lesser extent, it has been used to prepare other solid waste
for combustion in hog fuel boilers.
The prevalent size reduction unit has been the hammermill
type which consists of hammers rotating about either a horizontal
or vertical axis with reduced particle size material exiting
through desired size grate openings. No significant advantage
exists to stimulate size reduction of additional pulp and paper
industry solid waste categories. Increased usage will result as
mills attempt to use a larger percentage of the combustible
solid waste as a fuel source.
Thermal Reduction. The use of heat to reduce the solid waste
volume and to reclaim valuable energy represents this industry's
most significant solid waste processing operation. Incineration
simply to reduce solid waste volume was used extensively in the
form of pit or trench incinerators and teepee burners to process
combustible solid waste materials such as bark, pallets,
miscellaneous trash, etc. However, air pollution considerations
have nearly eliminated these practices at the present time.
Current thermal reduction methods focus on power and steam
boilers to utilize the fuel value of combustible solid waste,
particularly bark. Previous information has indicated that
nearly ten million metric tons (over 10 million tons) of wet
bark were burned in 1971, thus indicating the popularity of this
approach to bark disposal. With pressures to reduce all waste
streams and to conserve fuel supplies, solid waste use as a fuel
is going to receive additional attention. The latest innovations
in the pulp and paper industry relative to incineration are the
application of techniques previously demonstrated for other
applications. For example, fluidized bed combustion (Figure 11)
has been used for chemical recovery applications in the pulp and
paper industry, but has only recently been used to process solid
waste including bark, wood debris, and wastewater treatment plant
sludge at Great Lakes Paper Company Ltd. in Thunder Bay, Ontario,
Canada. However, rather than use a waste heat boiler, this system
produces hot water for woodroom showers from the scrubbing system
thus freeing previously used steam for other purposes. Future designs
will utilize various techniques to efficiently recover the
available energy. This process has the advantage of accepting wet
- 123 -
-------
FIGURE 11
COPELAND FLUIDIZED BED PROCESS APPLIED
TO SOLID WASTE COMBUSTION
BAK M HOOD KBIIS
UA»ttlJOSE
»IHIIMS« • unnwum
sumuf
FUEL
- 124 -
-------
sludge (25 - 28% solids) and wet bark both direct from the debarking
drums and from bark piles that have accumulated on mill property.
While existing furnace designs can accept high moisture solids;
dewatering , drying with flue gases, or supplementary fuel are
needed for successful operation. These activities add expense
and require energy for operation, while the fluidized bed process
can burn fuels with up to 70 percent water without supplementary
fuel or pretreatment. While the Great Lakes system has not
generated any long term economics, the labor (1.3 man-days per
day) and maintenance are expected to be low and a $300 per day
credit is given for steam savings. This 160 metric ton (180 ton)
unit was constructed in 1972 for about $1,000,000^ 15) . Thus,
this combustion process has many potential applications to
efficiently utilize the energy value of combustible solid wastes
with less limitations than conventional waste heat systems.
Sludge incineration alone with heat recovered only for sludge
drying purposes is utilized in the industry, but does not appear
to produce a solution as economical as do more complete energy
recovery systems. Rietz Manufacturing Company produces one variety
of this system (Figure 12) and has units operating in several
industry mills.
Bark boilers are now being recognized as wood refuse fired
boilers and three major factors are affecting today's design.
First, boiler size is increasing to accommodate the larger waste
volumes being used for fuel. Second, fuel patterns are changing
with the use of combination firing increasing. Third, air
pollution requirements are making more efficient combustion with
lower particulate emissions necessary.
Basic furnace types such as dutch-oven with grates or
refractory bottoms, moving flat grate, inclined grate, and
suspension-fired are commonly used for bark combustion' )
Pulp and paper industry technology handbooks and reference
sources discuss bark combustion and furnace design in detail.
However, several general features important to all bark or waste
wood burning units are^ ):
Minimum labor to handle fuel and ash.
Handling, control, and feeding equipment to deliver the
correct fuel type and mixture
p.352-356.
- 125 -
-------
W
O
H
*
s
EH
t/3
o
H
Pi
W
S3
H
H
O
Q
3
CO
- 126 -
-------
Control and supply of overfire air
Adequate furnace volume and height
Heating surfaces designed for easy cleaning, shedding
of build-up, and free of baffles
Tubular air heater where economically justified
selected for desired efficiency
System for particulate collection and other applicable
air pollution control
System for handling collected particulate matter and
other pollutants
Mills not currently utilizing bark and wood wastes for their
fuel value will investigate such usage in the future. With the
limitations increasing that govern land disposal of solid waste,
alternate uses for bark will become more attractive for all mills.
Only small mills that cannot economically justify the capital
expenditure will continue to use land disposal for all their wood
processing solid waste.
Mills currently using bark boilers will undertake programs
to maximize bark consumption. Wood yard solid waste that is
generated prior to debarking operations, long log slasher sawdust,
and other miscellaneous generation points can be utilized in
existing boilers if a collection and feeding system can be provided,
Improvements at many mills will occur in the bark utilization
area. Also, efforts will continue to determine alternate uses
for bark and to evaluate the effect of whole tree chipping thus
eliminating bark removal as a necessary process. Other efforts
will focus on technology to separate bark from chips resulting
from whole tree chipping or to produce pulp without removing the
bark. While the implementation of any of these industry changes
cannot be predicted at this time, they would alter the manner in
which bark is currently collected and transported to combustion
points, as well as possibly altering combustion techniques.
Bark boilers of conventional design plus fluidized bed
combustion units will provide solid waste volume reduction and
energy recovery functions to an increasing segment of the industry
by 1980. Actual choice of combustion systems will depend upon
local conditions, fuel supplies, compatibility with existing
equipment, and related variables. Such decisions are generally
based on the comparative economics of the systems that can meet
- 127 -
-------
technological requirements. Despite additional air pollution
restrictions; improved designs, better operational controls, and
more efficient air pollution control equipment will allow increased
utilization of such units for solid waste management functions.
Resource Recovery. Other than internal process measures to
reduce raw materials losses, resource recovery activities have
centered on energy recovery from bark wastes which was just
discussed under thermal reduction processing. With large power
and steam requirements, the industry has seen the advantages of
recovering value from its largest solid waste source. While
economically attractive for many mills, the savings per unit
weight of recovered solid waste will decrease as mills expend
more effort to recover a larger percentage of the wood processing
solid wastes.
The other routine resource recovery practice within the
industry is the sale of salvaged secondary materials. This
practice has a small economic return, but does relieve the mill
of much unwanted material while providing the small return.
Little effort is expended to make these operations more efficient.
At most, some mills have one or two men who reclaim items usable
internally and categorize material for external sale. The need
for more extensive efforts cannot be economically justified.
The industry's fastest growing solid waste category also
holds the greatest unutilized resource recovery potential. Several
possibilities exist to provide more satisfactory (from both
environmental and economical viewpoints) management of primary
wastewater sludge than current land disposal and lagooning practices,
Some sludges may be usable in secondary fiber mills as a low value
furnish for che inner plys of multi-ply paperboard or for other
low grade products such as roofing felt, peat pots, molded products,
etc. Economic transportation distances will be a critical
variable relative to such uses but basic feasibility studies
should be undertaken to determine the required conditions for
such uses. Also, combination systems using sludge, wastepaper,
and resins show the potential of producing either salable products
or products for internal use such as pallets, skids, etc.
( 8 )
A recent EPA study plus private company efforts indicate
that land disposal of primary wastewater treatment plant sludge
as a soil conditioner may be feasible. It was also shown to be
usable for hydromulch application either alone or in combination
with bark. Recovery of filler pigment from coated paper mill
sludges was evaluated by S. D. Warren Company, a Division of Scott
Paper and found to be technologically feasible but not economical.
It is expected that changes in the industry's raw materials supply
and demand plus environmental costs will gradually provide greater
implementation of these and other sludge utilization concepts.
- 128 -
-------
The use of bark wastes for mulch or for production of salable
products has been investigated, but primarily by the lumber indus-
try^* '. Mulch and bark compost are both sold commercially, but
market potential is limited for such products. The use of bark
as a feedlot litter material has been demonstrated, but this
only passes the disposal problem from the pulp and paper industry
to the feedlot operation. The forest products industry is
currently using bark to produce structural products and has plans
to extract both wax and chemicals on a commercial level( ).
While most of this bark utilization effort has been fostered by
the lumber processing industry, similar approaches are applicable
to the pulp and paper industry.
Resource recovery opportunities for the smaller solid waste
generation points have not received any attention and will not
unless a direct sale of such material or simple recovery system
is presented to the industry. This approach has been fostered
by their small contribution to the total solid waste generation
quantity. Principal efforts will focus on methods to combine
combustible solid wastes with other hog fuel sources to recover
the energy value. Sources of these wastes include manufacturing
services, personnel activity, groundwood shives, residuals losses,
and other miscellaneous solid waste sources.
Overall, the industry has and will continue to focus external
resource recovery activities on energy reclamation. The one area
with sufficient cost saving and profit potential to possibly change
this focus is primary wastewater treatment sludge. The diversity
of sludge characteristics and large sludge quantities should
exhibit significant product possibilities to encourage industry
leaders to evaluate the technical and economic feasibility of
sludge utilization alternatives.
Disposal
The pulp and paper industry's solid waste disposal operations
represent the most lax aspect of most individual mill systems.
Nearly all mills operate land disposal sites that occupy the
nearest available land. Little initial design or operational
plans were normally included and most sites receive intermittent
cover at best. Thus, the present industry disposal methods will
soon be forced out of existence to be replaced by more costly
land disposal systems (Chapter VIII).
- 129 -
-------
With most large integrated mills located in nonurban areas,
the use of properly designed and operated sanitary landfills
will become the predominant disposal method at a cost much greater
than that expended at present. Smaller, nonintegrated mills in
more urban areas will increase the use of commercial solid waste
contractors with the solid waste being transported to either
public or private disposal sites. For these mills who (1) use
market pulp (no bark or pulping solid waste); (2) use purchased
power (no coal ash); and (3) utilize joint public/industrial
wastewater treatment facilities (no wastewater treatment sludge);
the magnitude of their solid waste problem becomes much easier
to control.
While other solid waste management practices do not always
provide the best or most efficient service, the disposal operations
are the only class of activities that are generally inadequate.
However, it is expected that when disposal facility upgrading is
forced, the industry will review their overall solid waste
management systems to determine what total cost savings may be
realized.
The technology required for sanitary landfill design and
operation is not sophisticated or difficult to implement. It
has been published by the EPA^18' and simply requires proper
planning, operation, and a systematic approach plus a management
conviction to meet the required performance level.
While sludge lagooning will remain prominent in the industry
for sludge disposal, its relative use will decrease in the future.
Lack of available inexpensive land will be the primary initial
cause, but application of stringent environmental restrictions
(groundwater contamination, flooding danger, effluent restrictions,
etc.) will increase the cost of sludge lagooning. Also some mills
have found that lagoon life is not as great as predicted thus
requiring expensive dredging and land disposal or new lagoon
construction. These factors will divert the industry toward
increasing use of dewatering technology thereby transferring
primary sludge to the solid waste management system. As the total
quantity of dewatered sludge requiring land disposal increases,
the use of sludge incineration and sludge combustion in hog fuel
burners will increase to reduce the materials handling problem.
Thus, while the percent of total primary sludge dewatered increases,
the percent undergoing combustion will also rise. However, because
of increasing production and effluent treatment, all final sludge
disposal methods (lagooning, landfill, and combustion) will show
total quantity increases. However, the percent of total sludge
to disposal will be rising for combustion, falling for lagooning,
and remaining nearly constant for landfill. Estimated quantities
undergoing each type of disposal were estimated for 1975 and 1980
(Table 36).
- 130 -
-------
X
r-i <6
£ S
O
o o
00
in ro
co m
in eft
ro ro
O O
o o
o o
CO
o©
oo
00
ON
in m
oo
o o
o o
CO
CM i
o o
00
rH U)
in in
o o
o o
o o
CM CNJ
o o
o o
o o
CM f\J
o o
o o
o o
•sj* O
O H
r-
cn
o o
o o
o o
ro
in
CTi
o o
o o
o o
co oo
CTi H
H CM
o o
o o
o o
in rH
ro in
rH CM
rH H
o o
o o
o o
in <&
^* >"H
l£> CTl
CM CM
o o
o o
o o
0)
0)
(0
D
I
id
V) IT)
•p a
•rl Id
(1) O
C >iCU
H U -P
Q W
H rd
id W S
O
•H -O
-P 0)
id v>
o
M
rH I
in i
o
CO
en
cr>
M CD
0)
4J
C X
H U -P
rH
g w 3
.C.C
O -H
O 0) W
S (U
e en
0 H C
M rH rd
&H < «
* * *
* •
-------
Disposal of sewage and. water treatment sludge are two areas
that also interface with solid waste management. Sewage sludge
represents a minimal contribution, but is included with wastewater
treatment sludge when jointly treated. However, because of
possible bacterial contamination, the industry normally separates
sanitary sewers for inclusion in municipal systems, septic tank
disposal, or small package treatment plants. Water treatment
sludge is often returned to a watercourse, but current legislation
will require that these effluents enter wastewater treatment
facilities. This will add a small amount to total sludge, but
will not materially affect total quantities or characteristics.
One point that is in the industry's favor is the general lack
of hazardous or toxic components in its solid waste. The use of
PCB's has been eliminated with current sources found infrequently
in wastepaper supplies coming from prior production. Also, the
FDA has established limits for PCB's in paperboard used in the
food industry and the decreasing quantities should rapidly be
eliminated from wastepaper sources. Also, mercury from chlor-
alkali plants and mercury slimicides have been essentially
eliminated by changes in industry practices away from these process
uses. Thus, hazardous and toxic components in the industry's
solid waste do not constitute a serious problem.
Technological Alternatives
Pulp and paper industry solid waste management systems
approximate municipal situations very well. The historical
development has led to a diffuse system that has not resulted
from planned activity or from systematic approaches. The day to
day routine has expanded in a helter-skelter fashion simply to
remove accumulated solid waste to the nearest available land.
Unlike the municipalities, who have been offered demonstration
grants and technical assistance, the pulp and paper companies have
had no incentive to improve existing systems. Because of centralized
generation points and short haul distances, the costs per unit
weight have not reached the levels of municipal solid waste
management. Thus, with environmental pressures focused on
industrial air and water pollution, minimum attention has been
given to solid waste problems.
- 132 -
-------
Except for disposal operations, the technology in use is not
inadequate from any point of view except that in most instances
it does not provide the optimum service. Thus, as has been shown
for municipal operations, a thorough study of the individual
solid waste management system can be very effective in providing
improved service without cost increases. Taking a relatively
modern integrated pulp and paper mill complex producing about 900
metric tons (1,000 tons) per day, improved collection plus
satisfactory sanitary landfill disposal could be provided for
nearly the same cost as today's conventional system. In fact,
if ample storage facilities were made available, total costs for
the improved system could be made lower than for conventional
systems. While only a hypothetical example, this illustration
points out the type of potential possible by simply attempting
to maximize equipment and labor utilization. For the system
described above, it is estimated that 300 to 500 metric tons (270
to 450 tons) per day could be handled depending on local conditions
(haul distances, mill layout, etc.).
To provide the cost savings indicated while at the same time
upgrading disposal operations, a mill would have to carefully
establish operating schedules and criteria. The following
discussion presents the type of changes required to implement
an improved solid waste management system (Table 37).
Internally, the three laborers estimated for the conventional
system would be replaced by a laborer/driver who would use a
scooter with a truck dump body (depending on space, a pick-up or
trailer compaction unit might be used). Miscellaneous solid waste
would be transported to a stationary compactor and salvageable
material would be deposited in separate removable containers.
External collection would shift from several trucks working
primarily on the day shift to one unit capable of handling all
the containers and working two or three shifts per day. Power
generation ash would be deposited into a removable container
continuously or from the ash storage hopper if one were available
from the previous system. Similarly dewatered sludge transported
to land disposal would be deposited either directly into a
container or into a pile for subsequent container loading. A
one-half time front end loader would still be used to pick up
miscellaneous solid wastes plus possible sludge loading from a
storage pile.
- 133 -
-------
Disposal operations would change from receiving minimal
unplanned attention to having a bulldozer operating at the site
during the entire time solid waste is being deposited. This
attention coupled with proper design should provide an acceptable
sanitary landfill.
The projected costs for this improved operation provide for
nearly full time collection and disposal operations (three eight
hour shifts per day for five days per week). Under current
practices, operations generally consist of basically day shift
wbrk with only emergency situations attended to during other
time. Therefore, if ash silos and sludge stockpiling are
acceptable, it is estimated that operating one less shift per day
would be feasible under normal circumstances. This type operation
would decrease operating costs by about $67,000 resulting in
nearly a $50,000 cost saving over the conventional system.
This illustration points out that while it is predicted that
the pulp and paper industry will spend an increasing dollar
amount to improve disposal operations, the potential exists to
offset this expense by improving other system aspects.
Overall, the pulp and paper industry can provide more efficient
solid waste services by adapting available collection and handling
procedures and equipment available from municipal and commercial
sectors. It is unlikely that the industry will undertake any
efforts to develop new solid waste management technology. However,
major efforts will be undertaken to apply available technology
to solid waste management problems. The primary activities will
deal with meeting state imposed disposal standards, increasing
fiber and energy recovery, and developing new uses for solid waste
components (particularly primary wastewater sludge). Energy
recovery economics from bark wastes were presented earlier and
indicated sufficient economic incentives to warrant capital
expenditures. Resource recovery activities related to sludge are
in an infant stage and no realistic economics can be presented
at this time. However, as sludge quantities increase, industry
officials should expend considerable effort developing the
possible alternatives.
Basically, solid waste technology is expected to follow past
trends with technological actions taken when prompted by
regulatory powers or favorable economics.
- 134 -
-------
TABLE 37
CONVENTIONAL VS IMPROVED SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
(900 Metric Ton/1,000 Ton Daily Production Capacity)
Conventional System
Labor Cost
Internal
3 Laborers (2,080 hrs x $4.50/hr x 3 men) $ 28,080
External
1 Ash Truck Driver (2,080 hrs x $5.50/hr) $ 11,440
1 Container Hauling Truck Driver (2,080
hrs x $5.50/hr) 11,440
2 Sludge Truck Drivers (2,080 hrs x $5.50/
hr x 2) 22,880
.5 Dump Truck Driver (1,040 hrs x $5.50/hr) 5,720
.5 Front-End Loader Driver (1,040 hrs x
$5.50/hr) 5,720
Total Labor Cost $ 85,280
Equipment Cost
Internal
No Allowance Made For Drums & Broke Carts $ 0
External
1 Ash Truck (2,080 hrs x $12.75/hr) $ 26,520
1 Container Hauling Truck (2,080 hrs x
$12.75/hr) 26,520
2 Sludge Trucks (2,080 hrs x $12.75/hr x 2) 53,040
.5 Dump Truck (1,040 hrs x $12.75/hr) 13,260
.5 Front-End Loader (1,040 hrs x $7.50/hr) 7,800
Container Depreciation ($20,000/10 yr life) 2,000
$129,140
Total Cost $214,420
(C .•nt:.u^od On Next Pace)
-------
TABLE 37
(Continued)
Improved System
Labor Cost
Internal
1 Laborer/Driver (2,080 hrs x $5.50/hr) $ 11S440
External
3 Container Hauling Unit Drivers (2,080
hrs x $6.00/hr x 3) 37,440
.5 Front End Loader Driver (1,040 hrs x
$5.50/hr) 5,720
Disposal
3 Bulldozer Operators (2,000 hrs x $6.00/
hr x 3) 37,440
Total Labor Cost $ 92,040
Equipment Cost
Internal
1 Scoocer With Trash Dump Body (2,080
hrs x $1.00/hr) $ 2,080
New Standard Trash Containers Depreciation
($5,000/10 yr life) 500
External
1 Large Container Hauling Unit (3 shifts
x 2,080 hrs x $12.75/hr) 79,560
.5 Front-End Loader (1,040 hrs x $7.50/hr) 7,800
Compacter ($10,000/10 yr life) 1,000
Containers ($32,000/10 yr life) 3,200
Disposal
1 Bulldozer (3 shifts x 2,080 hrs x $7.50/hr) 46,800
$140,940
Total Cost $232,980
*From Gorham International Inc.
- 136 -
-------
Potential Impact Of New Industry Technology
As in all industrial situations, process improvements and
modifications are continuously sought by the pulp and paper
industry to produce a better product or to minimize total operating
costs. While these changes cannot be predicted with any degree
of certainty, several potential technology shifts could have an
impact on the industry's solid waste management systems.
With fiber supply, environmental, and economic pressures,
mills have looked to relaxing bark tolerance levels for kraft
pulping. A recent study by the Department of Agriculture's Forest
Products Laboratory( 19) indicated that, considering capital and
operating cost for a new mill, roughwood pulping is more economical
than providing debarking operations plus helping extend our wood
supply. While bark boiler operation would not be required, only
minor reductions in solid waste to disposal would result from
this process alteration. Instead of being removed by a debarking
system and going to the bark boiler, this bark will go to the
digester and be removed with the black liquor for combustion in
the recovery furnace. However, bark wastes that are knocked off
from roundwood in the wood yard prior to chipping will still
remain as solid wastes. This is the major portion of the bark
that currently goes to disposal sites in mills with bark recovery
and combustion systems. Thus, while resource recovery techniques
would undergo considerable change, total solid waste to disposal
would follow basically the same declining pattern as predicted
for conventional debarking and bark burning.
Efforts are also being made to provide economical methods
of removing contaminants from the wood yard bark to enable use
in conventional bark boilers without excessive erosion and
operating problems . If economic methods to clean up this
bark waste become available, total bark to solid waste could be
greatly reduced, particularly if energy shortages continue to
exist.
Pulping systems designed to reduce air and water pollution
problems are a subject of great interest to the industry. However,
with the minimal solid waste generated directly from pulping
operations, only wastewater treatment plant sludge reductions
would be significant to the solid waste management systems.
Similarly, oxygen bleaching or other new bleaching techniques
would not be expected to greatly affect solid waste management
operations.
- 137 -
-------
The wastewater treatment area does hold another potential
solid waste problem. Proposed federal guidelines for 1983 call
for extensive color removal from the industry's liquid effluent.
While only a limited number of mills currently practice color
removal, much speculation exists regarding what technologies will
provide the most economically feasible solution. While sludge
generation can be a factor in color removal process, the
industry will look most favorably upon systems that enable
combustion of by-products or subsequent reuse. Lime systems
that enable raw material recovery and systems that enable energy
recovery from removed contaminants represent the two major
classes of color removal systems from a solid waste management
viewpoint. Thus, while some installations will generate currently
unknown sludge quantities, installation of full scale color
removal processes will focus on those approaches not limited by
high sludge generation rates and costly disposal operations. A
good review of color removal techniques from the worldwide pulp
and paper industry has been compiled in a recent publication( 20),
While process improvements and changes will undoubtedly occur
over the next decade, the impact on solid waste management is
expected to be minimal. Because major changes require large
capital expenditures, they will normally be applied only to new
mill installations until they are thoroughly tested and proven.
Thus while individual mills may experience specific new solid
waste management problems, no significant overall industry impact
is expected.
- 138 -
-------
CHAPTER X
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Solid waste management in the pulp and paper industry, like
most other industrial and municipal situations, has been trad-
itionally treated like the unwanted stepchild. The primary concern
has been to maintain normal production operations without being
hindered by solid waste problems. Thus, the industry has simply
expended funds adequate to remove solid waste from generation
points to the closest possible available land with little or no
attention given to the adequacy of operation. Only economically
attractive resource recovery opportunities have received overall
industry support.
As a result of the above general approach to solid waste
management, nearly all of the from 14.3 to 16.2 million metric
tons (15.8 to 17.8 million tons) of pulp and paper industry
generated solid waste in 1971 received inadequate disposal. While
industry costs averaged $4.26 per metric ton ($3.86 per ton) of
solid waste, inefficient collection and handling operations
predominate in this industry. Generally, no single department
or individual has complete authority or responsibility for solid
waste management activities. Many times operating departments
have at least partial responsibility for their own solid waste
collection, transportation, or other aspect with no clear management
or operational program in existence. Another common practice is
to assign solid waste management responsibilities to the yard or
maintenance crew who have no technical background or capabilities
to undertake organization of a more efficient solid waste management
system.
Despite the lack of overall concern with solid waste management,
the industry has decreased solid waste generation per unit of
production by increasing raw material utilization and adopting
internal resource recovery practices where favorable economic
advantages were apparent. The previously cited energy recovery
from bark combustion plus fiber recovery from liquid effluents
have helped to increase overall industry productivity. However,
total solid waste quantities have risen from a minimum of 9.8
million metric tons (10.8 million tons) in 1958 to the 1971 minimum
level of 14.3 million metric tons (15.8 million tons). Estimated
minimum solid waste generation for 1980 is 18.6 million metric
tons (20.6 million tons). Thus, as state regulations force
improved disposal site operations, the economic impact of managing
such large solid waste volumes will encourage the industry to
look more closely at upgrading existing solid waste management
practices.
- 139 -
-------
With a relatively few major solid waste types, the industry
has limited possibilities to pursue in improving solid waste
management. To decrease solid waste generation rates, improvements
in process efficiency can be maximized. This is a continual
evaluation problem, but the industry does attempt to minimize
spillage losses and to increase process productivity. For
example, in the chemical recovery area, solid waste generation
may be minimized by providing the best possible operating
conditions. This enables maximum conversion of recovery furnace
smelt to usable cooking liquor with only inerts exiting as solid
waste.
Outside the major process areas, energy recovery from
combustible solid waste represents a prime target for resource
recovery. The industry utilizes large amounts of power with most
being generated internally. Thus power generating facilities
exist and utilization of solid waste as fuel reduces the solid
waste volume and lowers external fuel costs. This practice is
currently widespread within the industry, but additional emphasis
will be placed on miscellaneous solid waste categories (personnel,
manufacturing services, etc.) to reclaim available energy value.
Once the usable categories have been exhausted, the industry
must either provide disposal facilities or find by-product markets
and uses for the remaining solid waste. Land disposal facilities
will be a necessity for most industry installations, but by-product
sales exhibit potential to reduce total solid waste quantities.
Particularly in the primary wastewater treatment sludge category,
the pulp and paper industry possesses a unique solid waste. Major
efforts should be undertaken to develop products made from this
fibrous sludge alone or in combination with other components.
Structural products, low-grade construction paper, molded products,
soil conditioners, etc. represent possible outlets that will
minimize solid waste disposal problems.
Once all usable materials have been removed, the use of improved
management methods can provide the most economical solid waste
operations. While the pulp and paper industry is very unlikely
to be innovative in basic solid waste management technology,
they can make use of available equipment to provide the best
possible service. Existing container hauling vehicles with low
capacities can be replaced with vehicles capable of transporting
a variety of containers suited to specific waste materials. Labor
intensive collection practices and inefficient operations (manual
internal collection, front-end loader and dump truck collection,
etc.) can be replaced by more automated and mechanical approaches.
Two and three shift utilization of expensive capital equipment
can help provide the most economical use of available resources.
- 140 -
-------
Sanitary landfill operation will become prevalent within the
industry and will require additional design efforts, equipment,
and labor. However, if the approach taken is to improve overall
system operations, the additional costs should be absorbed by
savings in the storage and collection activities.
Overall, the pulp and paper industry does not have any toxic,
hazardous, or extremely difficult to handle solid waste. The
primary problem is the large solid waste quantity that represents
a bulk materials handling problem. As in other environmental
areas, no automatic solution exists. Each individual mill requires
a tailored system to best satisfy specific needs. Thus, while
the industry as a whole should pursue resource recovery opportunities
and improved solid waste management techniques, each mill must
undertake efforts to understand and solve its own internal
problems.
- 141 -
-------
REFERENCES
1. MacDonald, R. G., and J. N. Franklin, eds. Pulp and paper
manufacture. 2d ed. New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company,
[1969-70]. 3 v.
2. Casey, J. P. Pulp and paper; chemistry and chemical technology.
2d ed., rev. and enl. New York, Interscience Publishers,
1960-61. 3v.
3. Franklin, W. E. Paper recycling—the art of the possible,
1970-1985. New York, American Paper Institute, 1973. 181 p.
4. Harkin, J. M., and J. W. Rowe. Bark and its possible uses.
Madison, Wisconsin, U. S. Department of Agriculture Forest
Products Laboratory, 1971. 56 p.
5. Hanson, A. Barken som miljo problem. [Bark as an environmental
problem.] Svensk Papperstidning, 75(22);912-914, Dec. 15, 1972.
6. Abernathy, R. F., M. J. Peterson, and F. H. Gibson. Major ash
constituents in U. S. coals. U. S. Bureau of Mines Report of
Investigations 7240. Washington, U. S. Bureau of Mines, 1969. 9 p.
7. Capp, J. P., and J. D. Spencer. Fly ash utilization; a summary
of applications and technology. Bureau of Mines Information
Circular 8483. Washington, U. S. Government Printing Office,
1970. 72 p.
8. Aspitarte, T. R., A. S. Rosenfeld, B. C. Smale, and H. R. Amberg.
Methods for pulp and paper mill sludge utilization and disposal.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, May 1973. 139 p.
(Distributed by National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, Va., as PB 222 254.)
9. Andersland, O. B., and J. M. Paloorthekkathil. Consolidation of
high ash pulp and paper mill sludges. Lansing, Mich., National
Council of Air and Stream Improvement, 1972. 100 p.
10. Hendrickson, E. R., J. E. Roberson, and J. B. Koogler. Control of
atmospheric emmissions in the wood pulping industry. Gainesville,
Florida and Greenville, S. C., Environmental Engineering Inc.
and J. E. Sirrine Company, Mar. 15, 1970. 3 v. (Distributed by
National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va., as
PB 190 351.)
11. Allan, L., E. K. Kaufman, and J. Underwood. Paper profits;
pollution in the pulp and paper industry. New York, Council
on Economic Priorities, 1971. 62 p., app.
- 142 -
-------
12. Slinn, R. J. Sources and utilization of energy in the U. S.
pulp and paper industry. New York, American Paper Institute,
1973. 17 p.
13. Gehm, H. State-of-the-art review of pulp and paper waste treatment.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Apr. 1973. (Distributed
by National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va.,
as PB 221 434.)
14. Sulfur Oxide Control Technology Assessment Panel. Projected
utilization of stack gas cleaning systems by steam-electric
plants. Washington, Federal Interagency Committee Evaluation
of State Air Implementation Plans, April, 1973. 93 p.
(Distributed by National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, Va., as PB 221 356.)
15. Limerick, J. M. Copeland system for burning bark, debris and
sludge starts up at Great Lakes. Pulp and Paper Magazine
of Canada, 73(1); 46, 48, 51, Jan. 1972.
16. Brooks, R. R. Trends in wood refuse-fired boiler design. Heat
Engineering, 46(1);8-11, Jan.-Feb. 1973.
17. Currier, R. A., and M. L. Laver. Utilization of bark waste.
Corvallis, Ore., Oregon State University Department of Forest
Products, July, 1973. 185 p. (Distributed by National
Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va., as PB 221 876.)
18. Brunner, D. R., and D. J. Keller. Sanitary landfill design and
operation. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1971. 59 p.
(Distributed by National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, Va., as PB 227 565.)
19. Auchter, R. J. , and R. A. Horn. Economics of kraft pulping of
unbarked wood. Paper Trade Journal, 157(26):38-39,
June 25, 1973
20. Advanced pollution abatement technology in the pulp and paper
industry. Paris, Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and
Development, 1972. 223 p.
- 143 -
-------
APPENDIX A
CASE STUDY SUMMARY
To provide an in depth look at solid waste management practices
in several different industry sectors, five case studies were
undertaken. The five studies were selected to be a primary data
source for major industry sectors. Industry segments were chosen
to represent the largest possible percentage of totai industry
output (Table 1).
•*
TABLE 1
CASE STUDY CATEGORIES*
Case Study Category
(A) Bleached Kraft Pulp,
Paper, & Paperboard
Pulp
Production
Metric Tons
(Tons)
10,453,492
(11,525,350)
3,206,182**
(3,534,930**)
(B) Wastepaper Board &
NSSC Pulp & Paperboard
(C) Coated & Uncoated
Printing & Converting
Paper
(D) Groundwood & Bleached
Sulfite Pulp & Paper 5,632,111
(6,209,604)
(E) Unbleached Kraft Pulp
& Paperboard 14,792,367
(16,309,115)
Total Production Repre-
sented By Case Studies
Total Production In
Industry
Percent Of Industry
Production Represented
By Case Studies
34,084,152
(37,578,999)
39,846,941
(43,932,681)
85.5%
*From Department of Commerce Data - 1971
**NSSC Pulp Only
- 1 -
- 144 -
Paper
Production
Metric Tons
(Tons)
3,316,684
(3,656,763)
8,181,662
(9,020,576)
4,088,563
(4,507,787)
15,586,909
(17,185,126)
21,620,920
(23,837,840)
72.1%
Paperboard
Production
Metric Tons
(Tons)
3,175,012
(3,500,565)
7,023,923
(7,744,127)
10,829,978
(11,940,439)
21,028,913
(23,185,131)
23,691,291
(26,120,498)
88.8%
-------
The original case study concept was to use them to verify
information obtained from the literature review. Based on the
lack of firm information and data in the technical literature,
the case study approach was altered to develop as much hard
data as possible. The case study plan involved pre-visit study of
the mill's operation, a one to two man-week on-site data
gathering phase, and a post visit data evaluation and report
writing period (Table 2).
TABLE 2
CASE STUDY PLAN*
Pre-Visit
The following activities were conducted prior to visiting
the case study site:
1. Review engineering drawings
2. Produce schematic flow diagrams
3. Become familiar with processes and equipment
4. Locate principal solid waste generation points
On-Site
The following activities were conducted at the case study
site:
1. Meet responsible personnel
2. Tour physical plant
3. Arrange to weigh all waste hauling units for tare
weights
4. Establish details for weighing all trucks hauling
solid waste of any type to processing or disposal
areas (will include notation of waste type, plus
possible samples to determine density and moisture
content) (not conducted at every site)
5. Measure size of all storage containers (also number
of containers)
6. Document and photograph solid waste storage, handling,
processing, and disposal operations on and off the
site
- 2 -
- 145 -
-------
TABLE 2
(Continued)
7. Document recycling operations and possibilities
for same
Interview mill personnel
A.
B.
C.
D.
overall program,
Environmental Director:
equipment in operation
Production Manager: average daily outputs,
yields, raw materials, internally recycled
materials
Wood Yard Superintendent: volume of wood
handled, wood room losses, bark handling
procedures, equipment, and personnel
Maintenance Superintendent or other person
responsible for trash removal: methods used,
approximate volumes or weights, equipment
and personnel, obsolete equipment, boiler
ash and air pollution control equipment
waste, office and cafeteria wastes, wires
and felts (possibly boiler plant superin-
tendent also)
Purchasing Agent: raw materials, nondurable
goods purchased, types of containers in
which material is purchased, quantity of
felts, wires, pallets, flow of goods
Administrative Offices: official responsible
for waste handling system
Post Visit
The following activities were conducted subsequent to
visiting the case study site:
1. Develop approximate input-output chart
2. Describe solid waste handling, processing, and
disposal methods and equipment
3. Discuss variables affecting waste generation rates
- 3 -
- 146 -
-------
TABLE 2
(Continued)
4. Provide written case study to participating
company
5. Discuss with participating companies the relation
of their system to others studied
it
These case studies represent one portion of the overall
effort to achieve several contract objectives, all aimed at
providing up-to-date information on solid waste management
practices and alternatives in the pulp and paper industry.
*From Gorham International Inc.
- 4 -
- 147
-------
This chapter presents a brief description and discussion
of each case study mill and their respective solid waste
management activities.
Case Study Mill Descriptions
Each case study mill will be identified by the letter that
corresponds to the case study category (Table 1). These letters
will be used to identify the mills throughout this chapter.
Case Study Mill "A" is situated in the Southern United
States and produces bleached kraft pulp, paperboard, and
converted paper products. The daily mill output exceeds 815
metric tons (900 tons) per day. The mill site is slightly
larger than 445 hectares (1,100 acres) and is bordered by a
navigable river which provides the mill's water supply.
Both hardwood and softwood pulp are manufactured, employing
six batch digesters, a Kamyr continuous digester, and a recently
installed Bauer continuous digester. Wood supplies for the
pulping operation consist of hardwood and softwood logs,
purchased chips, plus sawdust and shavings obtained as sawmill
refuse. The mill uses a pulp dryer to generate a small amount
of market pulp, mostly for use in other company mills.
Electrical energy for the mill is produced by two steam
turbine driven generators, and the remaining requirement is
purchased from a local power company. The mill's seven boilers
can provide 680,000 kilograms (1,500,000 Ibs) of steam per hour.
Water usage is 170,325 cubic meters (45,000,000 gallons) per
day, with most of it being returned to the river after receiving
primary and secondary treatment. This wastewater treatment
includes clarification and over 60 hectares (150 acres) of
aeration and holding lagoons.
In addition to the pulp dryer, the mill operates four
tissue machines and two paperboard machines. The paperboard is
shipped in rolls to converting operations within the company,
while the tissue is converted on site into table napkins,
bathroom tissue, and towels.
About 1,500 people are employed by the company at this
operation to produce more than 815 metric tons (900 tons) of
bleached pulp and 815 metric tons (900 tons) of paperboard and
paper per day.
- 5 -
- 148 -
-------
Case Study Mill "B" is located in the Midwestern United
States and produces NSSC pulp, combination paperboard, and
corrugating medium. The daily mill output averages over 635
metric tons (700 tons) per day. The mill site is adjacent to
a large navigable river. However, its water supply is obtained
from wells to minimize water treatment requirements that would
be necessitated by the river's high salt and solids content.
The NSSC pulp is manufactured from purchased chips using
a continuous digester of two tube design. The remaining fiber
supply is obtained from purchased wastepaper which is separated
into four stock systems. The mill operates two Beloit cylinder
machines and two Fourdrinier machines.
Steam for the paper machines is obtained from boilers which
are adapted to burn coal, oil, or gas. Flyash from the pulverized
coal fired boilers is collected by precipitation and sluiced to
a dewatering pond.
Water for the mill receives treatment to remove iron with
water usage averaging 32,930 cubic meters (8.7 million gallons)
per day. The liquid effluent discharge goes to a primary
clarifier with the underflow passing to a sludge holding pond.
Nearly 700 people are employed by the company at this
location to produce more than 635 metric tons (700 tons) of
product per day.
Case Study Mill "C" is situated in the Midwestern United
States and produces bleached kraft pulp and various uncoated and
coated paper grades. The daily mill output exceeds 726 metric
tons (800 tons) of pulp and paper products. The mill site is
142 hectares (350 acres) with a creek flowing through the property.
Hardwood pulp is manufactured using eight batch digesters.
Wood supplies consist of purchased long logs, roundwood, and
chips obtained from nearby facilities. A small amount of market
pulp is produced and sent to other company owned mills. The
mill purchases softwood pulp to meet its requirements.
- 6 -
- 149 -
-------
The mill operates two recovery furnaces and three power
boilers on pulverized coal plus a small gas-oil package unit
for its steam and power requirements. Water usage amounts to
more than 132,475 cubic meters (35,000,000 gallons) per day.
The mill effluent, after receiving primary and secondary
treatment, is discharged to the creek.
Eleven paper machines, all Fourdriniers, manufacture the
paper and coating raw stock converted on site. Uncoated grades
are finished and shipped in rolls or sheets. Coated grades are
also shipped as rolls or sheets. The output includes book paper,
duplicator, mimeo, ledger, register bond, and offset grades.
Coated printing and specialty printing papers are produced on the
mill's off machine coaters.
About 2,400 people are employed by the company at this
location to produce more than 454 metric tons (500 tons) of
bleached pulp and 726 metric tons (800 tons) of paper per day.
Case Study Mill "D" is located in the Northeastern United
States and produces both groundwood and sulfite pulp to use in
the manufacture of various uncoated and coated paper grades. The
daily mill output exceeds 1,000 metric tons (1,100 tons) of pulp
and paper products. The mill site is several hundred acres in
size and is served by a river of substantial flow.
Sulfite pulp is produced using eight batch digesters and the
output is used partially on site, with a portion used at another
company location. Groundwood pulp is manufactured from four foot
softwood sticks. Refiner groundwood is produced from purchased
poplar chips using disc refiners. Wood supplies consist of
purchased roundwood, long logs, and chips.
The mill operates one recovery furnace for the magnesium
bisulfite pulping process and four oil fired power boilers.
Additional power is generated by hydro equipment. Water usage
amounts of 416,350 cubic meters per day (110,000,000 gallons
per day) excluding water used for power generation. About 98,430
cubic meters per day (26,000,000 gallons) of mill process water
receive primary wastewater treatment.
- 7 -
- 150 -
-------
Eleven paper machines are used on site to produce uncoated
papers and basestock for coating. These machines are all
Fourdriniers except for one twin wire machine. A four-vat
cylinder machine is used to produce wrapper paper. Grades
produced at this location are newsprint, uncoated groundwood
printing, and coated groundwood printing papers. The coated
products are processed on off machine equipment.
About 1,800 people are employed by the company at this site
to produce more than 1,000 metric tons (1,100 tons) of pulp and
"paper per day.
Case Study Mill "E" is located in the Southern United States
and produces unbleached kraft pulp and linerboard. The daily
mill output exceeds 800 metric tons (880 tons) of paper. The
mill site is several hundred hectares in size and borders a
small river which receives the treated mill process water.
Softwood pulp is manufactured using nine batch digesters.
Wood supplies consist of long logs, roundwood, and purchased
chips.
The mill operates three boilers burning oil, gas, or bark
and three recovery furnaces to meet its steam and power requirements,
Two steam turbines are used for the power generation. Water usage
amounts to 43,000 cubic meters per day (11.5 million gallons) and
is obtained from wells. The mill process water passes through a
primary clarifier and a series of lagoons and holding ponds before
discharge to the river.
Two Fourdrinier paper machines manufacture linerboard which
is slit into rolls and shipped to other locations for converting.
About 500 people are employed by the company at this location
to produce more than 800 metric tons (880 tons) of unbleached
kraft pulp and a corresponding amount of linerboard per day.
To provide a better picture of each case study mills
manufacturing process, simplified schematic flow diagrams are
presented (Figures 1 thru 5). These diagrams illustrate the
normal flow of materials and discharge points for process losses.
- 151 -
-------
4J
i
^
Q
Q.
rH
3
04
.
,
0
(U i-l
-P fO
in tn
(0 O
_^s a
X CO
-O-H
•HQ
0 0
OJ
to
4J
CU
4J
(0
-p
m
Q
-p
(U
W
rd
u
•o
nfl
nd
-P
(0
Q
g
o
- 152 -
-------
0
u
(D
-P
rtl
Q
-a
CO
OJ
co
tO
u
-p
(0
p
E
O
Sq
PM
*
-------
O
-------
-------
co
M
,'
•H «^_
<-H<
e
u
rH
o fd
EH CO
•~_
/
rH
fd
U
•rH
e
CD
f^
U
—
>
over
u
d)
<*
-?
\-
c
t
•r
J
x
i
i
/^
Q?
I/
rd
CD
SH
<
T
CO
rH
ro
U
•H
e
0)
,C
O
[J
uo Cu H
M O >H
P H Q
Cn EH P
•HUB
&H H) CO
O U
C£ CO
CU <
U
- 156 -
to
rH
ra
u
•H
g
(U
,c
u
CO
(U
c
•iH
x:
u
-p
u
O
!-l
Cu
(U
CO
-------
Solid Waste Generation
As described in the solid waste generation sections, several
major activities comprise the pulp and paper industry's major
solid waste generation sources. Each case study mill generated
total solid waste quantities in line with the unit operations
employed by that industry sector. Total quantities for each
mill (Table 3) indicate the principal solid waste generation
points for case study mills. All weights presented are wet weight
Or actual weight transported to the disposal site or reuse area.
Table 3 presents quantity data for all solid waste sources even
though they may not presently be handled by the existing solid
waste management system. For example, as explained elsewhere in
the report, lagooned sludge and flyash lagooning were not
considered as solid waste management operations for the purposes
of this study.
Solid waste generation rate comparisons between mills are
generally misleading because of the different solid waste and
production characteristics and practices. Total generation per
ton of production does present an interesting comparison among
mills (Table 4). The major factors contributing to the overall
solid waste generation rates are the wood yard solid waste
handling procedures, wastewater treatment sludge handling system,
and boiler fuel ash content. Additionally, the raw materials
used, processing variations, and product line all contribute
to variations in actual solid waste types and quantities.
Material Balances
To illustrate the magnitude of total solids lost in each case
study mill's manufacturing operations, an approximate material
balance for each mill's 1972 operation was constructed (Tables 5
thru 9). This time period was chosen to provide assessment over
a sufficient length of time to minimize short term fluctuations.
The production flows and material losses were developed based on
the best possible information resulting from case study data, mill
records, and Gorham International Inc. estimates.
- 14 -
- 157 -
-------
OO
W
^
CQ
<
EH
*
*
CM
r-
en
H
O
H
I
W
w
EH
CO
Q
H
H^
O
CO
co
G
O
£ CO
MUG
£ -H 0
c i r i
M tH
-P x-x
0)
S
co
G
O
EH •"—
£ CO
Q U G
£ -H O
M EH
-P •—-
CU
s
co
G
O
EH '-
£ 10
y u G
M EH
[ 1 X_X
0)
s
co
G
O
r i ., — .
tH
£ CO
PQ U G
£ -.-I 0
M EH
-P x-x
01
a
co
G
O
EH '-
£ CO
< U C
£ -H O
M EH
-H ' —
CU
S
x-x
x-x cin
C5> x.^
r-- c\j 'H o i> CM cx> in
co in in CM ix> moo t-x co 2 S
H in H H in in
*xf x^< >^s ^^
N '
X-X x^ x-x
H "xt OO O O F-
(D CO inCMCMrH x-x x-x
oco ix>i>cncM coco
•> ». — ». •« — ' x_x
t? O CM 00
^o co x_x
H H
x_^
X-X IX)
IX) x-v
x^ ^-X x-x x-^ -. --^
ooooixiocoo cMin cno
xOooocnmo CMUJ CMOO
!>-oO[rx.CMOOiXl x^x^ iX>CM
•xfOOxtCTiCMCM OOin
oo oo xj< xt •^ H CM
^ --; H H
* —
^
X~X | ( s~^ CM s~^ OO X-X -xt
HX^ CMx-xOOx^ >xt~^
xOin OxDOH moococo
txii>- t>ooLnco xtcnooo
inix> inix>cM'xt cTicMHoo
^»> ^.sr, >N>N».n
OCM CMCMCMinocTi
CM CM x^ CM OJ CM CM
^ -^ . —
s-~* s~* ^^ ^-^ , .
in r- cno xico •<<< <<
•xtcn coco xOCM HCM OCM ss 22:
nnnnn*. . r.r.
•xCxOcnrHinu) CMCM
CM CM r4 CM -^ *~s
^~s *~^>
s-^
OO O
o
H O
co en
V
*~*
co in
xj< in
< OH
S_
•> ••
H H
~ —
f ^
s~~. in
in ^-^
o en o
in i> o CM
CM CM iH H
- — -^f
oo en
CM 00
en en
00 00
•*$ in
'
^—^
r~~ H
cr> CM
r- oo
». »«
m oo
r- en
r-{ r-i
•^*
-~~>
r-i 00
OO CM
er> H
uTi^
eri H
r-i CM
' '
in xf
o t>
00 00
•N ^
OO r-i
C- 00
v —
^^
CM 00
' 00 00
H cn
r, r.
CM [>
m in
**_s
CU
u
S_j
3
O
CO
CU
-p
co
rd
3
TJ
•H
H
0
CO
e
o
o
OH
T3
O
O
3
08
-a
JL_|
rd
JH
13
O
O
3
co
i_i
0)
r- 1
•i-l
O
CQ
>i
S_j
CU
^
o
u
CU
ll
G
0
^
e
CU
-p
i/j
i>i
CO
;>i
^
CU
j>
O
u
01
C4
CO
e
0)
-p
CO
^>X|
CO
en
c
•r-l
a
H
3
CU
CU
U]
3
4_l
01
t— I
rd
S-i
CU
G
0>
O
CU
Cn
-o
3
,_{
to
-p
c
CU
E
-p
rd
0)
^i
EH
S-l
0)
-P
rd
3
M
CU
-P CU
rd en
3 0
0) 3
-P H
CO CO
rd
3 -P
G
>i OJ
M £
rd -P
E rd
•H 0)
M M
CU EH
Cn
c
•H
co
co
CU
u
o
S_j
CU
s_i
0)
a
rd
a
CU
-P
co
rd
3
,— {
rd
C
M
(U
-P
X
H
O
EH
0)
-P
CO
rd H
3
O
O
CU
i-l
G
O
12
O
EH
0)
-P
co
rd
|g
T)
•H
H
O H
CO rd
co
H O
rd a
-P co
O -H
EH Q
- 158 -
-------
5
U
5
CO
C
O
EH • — *
to
0 C
•H 0
Ji C_|
CD
^->
O CO
00 CM
r- oo
•s »*
oo r-
co en
to
C
O
EH '~>
to
0 C
•H O
M EH
x-^.
CM en
OO «xF
(X> co
n x
H 00
CM CM
en o
en m
•xj< in
oo CM
H H
Cn O
H
CT) CO
CNJ r-.
CM oo
en oo
oo en
~~^
^-x
CM r-
\n H
H ro
00 CM
n ur>
H H
0 H
0*> &
un oo
CM a\
CM CM
^^
^~N
l> CM
<* 00
00 VD
co oo
cr> CM
H CM
(0
-P
X
c
o
•H
-P
C
O
u
10
C
O
EH —
r to
U U C
= -H 0
M EH
_p ^,
cu
&
r->
CM 00
oO ^}<
C-- CM
•s *t
*3* IX)
H H
— /
r4 "xt* 00 ^ Ln LO
CM C^» 00 CM t~~ O
oo H oo en i> en
CO CT>
O CM
CM CM
i£> CM
t^ en
en
m oo
H IX)
CM CM
•o
W C
t-q -H
PQ 4J
EH O
O
w
C
O
u q
•H o
i-i EH
-P —
o o
O H
H --C
O O
O H
LT) O
o oo
00
CO
C
O
EH —
<; u c
= -H o
^ EH
QJ
oo en
o H
en i
CO
(X)
en oo
00 00
ix> o
»•» r
en i>
U3 CO
H U3
CM 1X>
oo in
CM xt
CM CM
CO
u
^
^
o
to
(U
-P
to
fd
^£
T3
•H
H
O
to
1
C
o
•H
-P
a
*
CO «
C *
O to
U M
CU
M -H
fd O
CQ CQ
(0
CD
10
D
s_i
cu
x;
-P
o
0
EH
ry
M
rd
CQ
-d
H
O
co
to
H
fd
•H
j,_l
0)
-P
rd
S
T3
CD
fd
H
rd
co
r£j
H
O
CO
i^
(U
a
rd
a
(U
-P
CO
rd
Is
d)
-P
to
rd
15 *
*
'd *
•H *
H T3
O CU
CO S-l
cu
I-I >
rd O
-P U
O CD
EH o;
CU
-P
to
rd *
Is *
£
•d *
•H C
H O
O -H
CO -P
rd
H M
rd 0)
-P C
O CU
EH O
- 159 -
-------
n
u
PQ
<
EH
13
Oi
3
G
•H
-P
C
O
U
03
0)
-P
O
C
-P
O
o
CM
Flyash From Air Pollution Control Devices
ij
0)
G
O
O
Oi
rd
i_l
03
0)
•d
3
H
U
G
H
•-I
ic Tons (240 Tons) To Air Curtain Destructor
H
-P
0)
S
CO
r-j
CM
03
0)
13
3
1— I
u
c
H
CM
03
rd
^
H
fa
x:
-P
•H
Is
13
0)
G
O
O
Oi
rd
i-J
ro
03
G
O
O
Cn
rd
J
0)
cn
•d
3
H
to
O
EH
^
er Food Waste
r|
_p
O
13
C
<£
rd
•H
M
0)
-P
Oi
MH
rd
U
IT)
r- )
rd
03
O
0,
•H
Q
13
G
rd
J
O
EH
•""^
V£>
-P
C
rd
rH
Oj
X2
U
r— )
3
S
O
EH
•^""^
!>•
Started In 1973 With Sludge Incinerator In Use
-p
c
01
e
rd
0)
M
EH
;>i
M
rd
e
•H
s_i
Qt
•*^*x
CO
03
Oi
H
CM
O
e
o
CM
C
O
CU
-P
•H
M
O
O
EH
C
•H
O
O
-P
•H
$_l
O
03
01
13
3
r-I
U
c
H
'""^
(Ti
ed In Wet Weight (Weight Actually Handled)
03
C/3
0)
i_l
a
X
W
03
-p
x:
•H
0)
J5
H
H
<
rd
-P
rd
Q
!>i
13
3
-P
03
CD
03
rd
U
e
0
X-|
EM
*
tal Bark To Boilers Minus Ash - Ash Included In
Solid Waste)
o
EH M
^ CU
H
03 -H
03 O
o pq
I_J]
>i
G S-|
O 0)
•H >
-P O
03 U
3 0)
rQ M
e G
o o
U 'S
*
*
Broke Because Of Extreme Variations In
id Data
H
13 rd
0) >
M
01 IH
> 0
0
U >i
0) -P
(X -H
r-1
03 -H
01 ,q
13 rd
3 H
H -H
U rd
X >
U KtJ
*
*
*
0)
rH
rd
H
•H
rd
;>
<£
-P
O
^j
1
|C^
s
- 160 -
-------
TABLE 4
TOTAL SOLID WASTE TO DISPOSAL*
Kg Per Bone-Dry Metric Ton of Production
Mil_l (Lb Per Bone-Dry Ton of Production)
A 181
(361)
B 136
(271)
C 755
(1,510)
D 498
(995)
E 502
(1,003)
*From Case Study Data
- 18 •
- 161
-------
-P c >*
30-^.
DL.EH W
-P C
3 U O
O -H H
M —
-4-1
CU
s
*
CM
Ch
rH
I
U =
o <
& =
CM in
CM ro
H H
CM xf r-- oo
ro O O CM
kQ O O 00
ro
CTi 00 xt 00
CO O ^D O
H CM CM O
[> CO
co oo
rH CM
ro CO
O !>
t> 00
"d
i_i
rd
JH
T3
O
0
35
0)
CO
3
LI_I
0)
Pi
co
rH
rd
3
T3
•H
co
0)
PC;
CU
CO
3
L|_)
CU
Pi
T3
^_l
rd
!>H
rfj
O
O
35
CO
£_l
CU
•ri
q_i
••H
M
rd
rH
U
(U
e
^5
rH
Pn
i> in o o en co
ro O CM 1> CO O
(£> CO CM ro rH CM
rH rH rH CM
x- rH rH
cTi CM un CM
in m u) o
i£> r~-
ro
CM
O CM
CM CM
H
O
EH
CO
CU
rH
•H
O
pq
r*
i_4
rd
pq
X! XI
co co
< <
^ rH
H rd
rd O
pq U
co
S-l
0)
c
•H
rH
U
rH
rd
O
U
•o
3
2
CU
l>
•H
Pi
U
rd
-P
LO
rH
fd
4J
O
in
pq H
S
pq
EH
H Q
« P
U EH
EH co
S W
co
W O l>-isD SfO U3O
rHH HrH LT)rH O'xf C^xt
OCM [>iX> -xfO rom •vfrH
HLT) COO\ LDiX) CMCM U3I>
in H o CO
LO CO rH xf
(Ti C-J xt ro
O O CO CM
CTi O ro xf
i — 1 ^-^
•v
O 10
O -P rji
3 co C
T3 3 -H co
n .y 73 r* Pi
3 SH 3 rd -H
0 rd rd XI XI
PC; pq co co cj
H
cr> un
ro O
rH
rd
-P
O
EH
r .
H
Q
•o
•^
s
i^(
CU
j>
•rH
Pi
1
-P
•H
M-
O
xt rH xt xt CO LD
rH IX) CM IT) rO rH
ro CTi rH CO xt 00
ID U3 fx [^ rO xt
^ — - H rH
rH
rd
-P
O
EH
TJ CU
SH E
rd 3
^^ r~i
Pn
T3
O Cn
O O
S t-3
- 162 -
-------
Q
-P
25
Oi
C
•H
a
rH
3
ft
-P
4H
rd
j_i
!SM
co in c^
CM co CM oo
00 O
rH CM
tfl
c
(U (A
OJ rH
5-t rd
U O
tn -H
Jj c
0) >i CU
-P U X!
W O U
QJ -P
Cn en cri
•H C
Q C -H
3 a
Q O H
08 S-i 3
S CQ ft
00 1>
O in
CM CO
rH CM
rH rH
H
rd
-P
O
£-i
^
Q
^y.
M
0)
f>
O
u
OJ
Pi
H
rd
U
•H
e
cu
XI
u
OOO inc\l OOO C^iX) rOOO ^fCM CTi O\ 1>CO
rjsco u)co c^-o ooi rd -H -H
rH -rH 3 -H M EH rJ <
en ^ S H£< -P C •
ESSEUCUCUio
•H -H -H -rH 01 g M -H
i-lJh-liJDcJenCPS
0 0
cr> t>
o
t_J
M
Q
rH
CU
3
fa
"O in co in
CM <3< CM ^J
"M CO CM CO
D O CX> O
H CO rH CO
H rH H rH
•^_-« s — s
H
rd
-P
o
EH
H
rd
o
U
>
t J
H
Q
w
rH
Ft)
U
•H
e
QJ
x:
U
00 IT) t> H IX) ^F
iX> O ro Oi
^ rH CM tj 1X> LD
LD CT> rH (X> H
co co in in rH CM
en
G
{J> -H
C ^
Cn -H rd
c x: e
•H U SH
ft rd 0)
rH CD Ci
3 rH rd
ft CQ a.
H O
CO CTi
CO CM
(X) C--
O rH
H H
H
rd
-P
O
EH
>
Q
0)
C
•rH
x;
u
rd
S
M
CU
a
rd
ft
CO CM CO CO O O
l> t> H >Xl O
00 CTi CTi O CM ^
^-^ H CM CM
CD
X.
O
CU M
^ CQ
O
^ DI a
CQ C H
•H 3
0) -P ft
C SH
•H CU T3
x: > o
00 CO
<* (D
0 ^
•xf ^
rH
rd
-P
O
EH
- 163 -
-------
< I
M
Q
-P
C
rd
rH
Q<
£
U
rd
01
rH
CQ
H CM
CO CM
l> LD
in ^
CO O\
t/]
rH
fd
U
•H
e
0)
r;
u
-P
c
(U
a
H CM
ro CM
P- in
un <=f
co a\
rH
rd
_p
0
EH
>
Q
rH
rH
•H
S
M
0)
CL
rd
Oi
n o <^ o
(Ft m CF* m
<& t? <& -3?
y^aTuTcn
CM CM CM CM
rH
rd
-P
W O
0) EH
U3
W
O
r-l(
iH
(U
3
(U
to
>
S-l
Q
(U
tfl
U3
O
J
c
0
•H
-P
to
3
Q
e
o
u
U3 O ^ 1> O <£)
O t1! rH iX) CO ro
(Ms}1 CO C~- CM >Xi
O CO U3 IT- ! rH U
M fd rd
rd O rH
CQ (J CQ
O co
0 ro
ro CO
LO LD
CTv rO
CO •vf
H
rd
-P
0
EH
w
CQ
EH
0)
C
-P
C
O
u
-------
LD oo CM CM
CM oo o\ oo
Ch in oo -^
HOO en
cr> oo oo c?i
CO H IT) IT)
CM oo ^
eo
oo
o
oo CM
» v
in
oo
ro co
c
o
•H
-P
U
3
O
H
•H
O
CD
3
c
-H
-P
•< C
EH O
U
w
^
CQ
CM CTi
CO CM
H 00
»s **
CO CM
rH -H
CTi O
EH
O
EH
Q
O
U
C
H
td
c
o
•H
-P
nJ
c
M
(U
-P
c
H
o
o
-P
td
a
•H
s
rd
-P
P
-a
3
-P
OJ
10
rd
U
O
i-l
- 165 -
-------
-P C >H
3 O \
tn
c
3 U O
O -rl EH
M ~—'
-P
0)
*
CM
O
CT>
H
u pq
J>1
in
pr
-p
(D
13
rH CT> rH CT\
CM 00 CM CO
U3 CO <£) CO
rs r. r, r.
rH LT> rH LD
^ —
rH
rd
-P
tn
c
•rH
a
rH
3
ft.
U
CO
s
O
EH
tn
in
o
j
i_i
(D
3
CD
CO
^>1
M
Q
00 00 <£> O
O 00 OO LO
rH 00 rH rH
•s r. .
r- CTi
CM CM
a
CD
$_j
CM
y
U
O
-P
CO
^
0)
a
a
CD
-p
in
rd
S
w
-p
u
(D
•r— ,
CD
PH
•_-
(D
-p CO
in in
rd O
3: J
T3 M
•r| CD
H 3
O CD
CO CO
^ CO
^ oO
CM O
r> .,
l> O
CM OO
rH
rd
4->
O
EH
!>i
M
Q
CM t> CTi O
O CM O CM
C--
J O
o
M CD
CD M
3 G
CD O
CO ^
rH 1>
i — 1 ^
CO O
n w
1 — I *^
C\J CM
H
rd
-P
O
H
W
pq
EH
pq H
< ^
H O
Pd P
W EH
EH co
S W
CO
w <;
EH U
H
X
O
PS
cxj
0,
>H
co M
G >H
O \
tn
-P
3 EH
a c
c u o
H -H £H
-P
CD
S
( .
M
Q
-P
CD
3;
;>
rH
O
a
CO
i_l
CD
Q
•H
CM
CM CTi rH LT) LD O
i^D CO OO U) 'd1 00
IX) rH CO O CM IX)
CM 00 |> ^> ^ ^
O rH [> (Tl --^
rH H rH rH
LT) CTl ^-D OO
O -3? rH CM
rH U) CM 00
^ ^ «x »>
rH CO .HO
0 00 CTi rH
rH H rH CM
^_j
OJ
a
rd
a
M CU CD
a -P x.
•H W O
,£ rd Vj
U S pq
00 CTi
•^f oo
CO H
CM OO
H
rd
-P
O
EH
>
Q
tn
rH
rd
U
•rl
E
CD
£
U
•sfO CMH OoO OrH
LOO COOO OH COrH
or~- ^tn COrH cM^f
i£) O CM -sf H H
H H H H ^
01
G Oi
•H C
a -H
rH 0> ^
3 G rd Cji
ft. -H g C
^ i-| -rH.
U G CD -P
co -ri a fd
co CD rd O
•z Q cm
O oo
OO 00
H
rd
-P
O
EH
- 166
-------
1 ,
M
Q
4J
QJ
S
10
i-l
QJ
r—J
•H
O
CQ
S_l
QJ
3
O
Dj
rH 00 me— i£> ID CMC— ^00
or- i£> en COCM ino oo
r— CT* co {D c^o ^ vo *sf **o in
CM CM C- • ' rQC^'vl'CM
^^ rH H in
r- 1 rd n iJ o
•H >i O EH
4n H -H C
*O fa 03 O
C — ' tn -H
rd -H 4->
j x: e w
•— 10 W 3
rd ^3
iC ^i ^4 G
« -H -H O
< fa <; u
Q
4-1
QJ
5
C
O
•H
_p
U
3
•o
o
^_J
Cti
t— in r- in
r- H c- H
u) r- i£> c-
^f r— "st c—
CM -sf CM ^f
CM CM CM CM
CJi O
00 <&
in n
». r.
rH U?
CM CM
H
rd
4->
O
EH
£_|
rd
0
M
0)
Q,
rd
Oi
c^r^
in ch
CTi H
CJi O
00 -sJ1
^j^ LO
,_3
*^r
^
O
EH
Q
•3
a\
H H
oo
o o
in
» ••
CM
CTi
(ti
-P
O
H
QJ
o
U
CTl l>
in cy>
Ch H
r» «\
en o
co -vf
•xt* in
EH
O
EH
Q
U
c
H
cd
c
o
•H
4-1
rd
c
M
0)
4-)
C
H
rd
O
O
C
rd
rd
4->
rd
Q
rd
4->
rd
P
4J
Q)
Ul
rd
U
O
O
- 167 -
-------
-P
3
>H
"^.^^
W M
G >H
O X.
-P
3
O
U O
•H EH
i-j — •
-P
0)
*
CM
U =
O U
>1
Q
-P
0)
3!
TD
rd
I>H
T3
0
O
23
rH CM O O
H rH in CM
JTi oo oo O
00 si1 iX> 00
^ rH rH
rH -vf 00 OO
CM r*- ix) oo
OO H t> 00
•s ». r. r,
GO CTi ^f CO
v_^ OO OO
•* — *
0 0
EH EH 0)
-P
-P -P -P -H
-H C -H en
Sn fd i-\
0 rH O rH
cu fd
o3 03 co
£ O
^ U rM Dj
L) rH Sq CO
rd 3 rd -rH
CQ S PQ O
rH CTi
(X) oo
CM OO
O CM
CM CM
rH
(d
-P
o
EH
>
i-i
Q
-P
0)
^
CO
i_j
(U
rH
•H
0
ffl
OOOO CTiO CMr- I>-O
rHCO (X)00 rHCO OO
LTJCM C^CO l> CO ^ LT)
OCO t>-O rHrH OCM
*-* CM OO — ' CM CM
-
CM U3
O LD
•> •»
un ixi
rH H
CO
c
o
•H
CO
co co
.£ 45 M -H
co w CD e
<: •< ^ u
c
-P >i -H M
0) M rH -H
3 Q U <
J--..I f^^.
0 O
ix> tn
r- oo
in ix>
rH
fd
-P
o
EH
u
m
EH
CQ H
< >H
H Q
Pi p
U EH
EH LQ
S W
CO
EH U
H
:<
o
OS
C >H
-P O \
3 EH w
pt c
COO
H -H EH
-P
0)
r .
M
Q
-P
0)
^g
O
o
^5
CO CO LT) CM CM LD
^f in oo o •xp oo
O
CO O OO ^ CM OO
rH CM rH rH ^
C^^* C^** r~S "v^
•sf en U3 o
[> O CS^i CTi
»N ^ ^ •-
ui r-~ o oo
O OO LTl CM
-------
>-
( .
S-l
Q
>
08 M
fii
VU
Cn >
C O
•H U
a C iq 3
(U H M rd D1
SH -H -H O4 -H
Q « <— i-q
0 CTi
cr> i>
LD
^ CM
0 CO
^-^
rH
rd
-P
O
EH
>
( .
H
Q
Cn
C
•H
£1
U
fd
,
3.
4-*
M-l '-
U '
13
•rH
3 -
D1 "
•rH
h-3
S «
rH 00
CM LD
in rH
in en
ro oo
rH
rd
-P
0
EH
•o
C~- OJ
3
w c
.J -H
EH O
U
>
SH
Q
CM 1> LD 00 l> LD
00 LD LD -sf O O
00 CM C\J in LD CM
»* »s »\ «s »s n
00 O CM <^ OO OO
H CM CM CM CT» O
• — - rH
^s
w
rH
rd
U
•H
E
^f 00
00 v#
rH H
rH
rd
-P
o
EH
>
M
Q
-P
QJ
*^f
^
CO
(U
C
•H
£3
U
rd
S
M
OJ
a
rd
Oj
CTi 00
H rH
1> O
»s •«
l> LD
CO <3\
LD CTi
un in
<* -^
r* rs
r*^ r-^.
L ^- L^
cy> o
rH
a
H
3
CU
-P
(U
^
M
rd
S
CTv 00
rH rH
O O
r> r<
[> LD
00 CTi
rH
fd
-p
o
•En
- 169 -
-------
CO CO
CO l>
rH CM
V* *k
o in
in in
in i>
en en
en o
-P
QJ
oo m
x? in
o H
•* r*
H rH
ol
C
•rH.
-P
rd
o
U
0)
&
-P
c
(U
4n
W
•H
3
OH
•H
O
EH
OJ
X CD
O -P
S-) -H
CQ co
rH fd
£} 03
rd O
01 a
3 03
C -H
£ Q
X) O xt O
C<~> (£><£> IT)
i> r- co H
•*•"••»•>
Cn H O CO
H CM t> C-x
~
in m
C- 0
l> CTi
r. x
O CM
CM CM
rH
rd
03 -P
< 0
EH
T3 t|
H (U
o a
03 rd
a
0) 0)
,* -P
O 03
S-i rd
PQ 3
>
in
Q
03
0)
03
1/3
O
J
C
O
•H
-P
03
3
ft
O
O
f~- cn •xt ^f
o xT o en
UD rH XT' <^
CO U) 00 CO
tx> en en o
CM CM rH
M
^ 0
M 3
rd tf
CQ -H
i-q
o3
>;
rH U
rd rd
0 H
U CQ
H CO
H x?
O U5
l> xt
U3 0
CO ^t
1 "
H
rd
-P
O
EH
'^
Q
-P
0)
5
q
o
•H
-P
U
3
T3
0
M
ft
co i> mo
in kD CM U)
CO CM O CO
C-~ CO CO xt
xt !> H rH
CM CM ^
co en H in
en -^ r-- in
co <~o xt en
*s r« r\ VH
o i> xt in
U3 CO H H
CM CM -^
a
H
3
A)
-P
M OJ
(U Ai
a M
rd rrj
ft S
CO 0
C^ CM
00 UD
O C^
U3 00
CM CM
H
fd
-P
0
EH
(£) CO
CM CO
rH 0
l> CO
00 O
00 Cfr
^
<
EH
0
EH
Q
%*
<|
cd
o
-a
l> 0)
3
w c
J -H
CO -P
<: c
EH O
U
- 170 -
ixi co
CM CO
H O
c* r\
r- co
co o-
co en
.-I
<--'.,
tr<
( _i
E-f
-------
W '-v
-P C S-f
O >H
-P w
DUG
O -H O
M EH
-P-'
0)
CO
w
J
CQ
<
EH
*
CM
H
I
W =
O P
s =
5 ^
< J
PQ H
H P
cd D
W EH
EH co
en
w <:
EH U
H
X
O
K
>
^
p
-p
/I I
s
T3
M
rd
>H
•d
O
O
5
rH 00 r-jro 00 sX> Cn O
•sf s}< oo <^
CM CM CM CM U) ID CT> CM
•s *% *« •« s_x •» V
CM (X> CM CO O
COCM oo CM CM in i> co
•3< m -xi1 in CM ro co <^
00 & CO iX> H rH in (X>
r- co r- QO ^ --^
-p
O O W
EH EH 3
T3
T) T3 3
(!) 0) 05 -P
ft H CO -H
S H 3 H H
3 H (d H M O
Oi -H E -H 0)
4H HH XI CM
ro "^
O sf
m n
oj o
CO CTi
rH
fO
-p
o
EH
>.
S-l
p
tfl
^
0)
^H
•H
O
PQ
00 H 00 H
CM t£> CM >X>
ro ro ro rn
— —
rH
fd
4J
o
EH
JC
n
<
,y
M
id
m
( I
M
P
M
>H
X. -P
CO --^ QJ
C ^ |S
-P 0 JH
3 EH x.
ft co
cue
H -H O
M EH
"a! ^
s
T3
O
O
Jg
co o o m CM o
en oo H m HO
en oo r- oo m oo
CM -xj* en ^ en
H H i£> t> 00 00
^ - — in in
^o o o o
r.
in oo en oo
CM CM oo in
<— H H
•v— -
CO
ft
•H co
x: ft -a
U -H O
£ 0
SH U 3
rd T3
H • C
a 5 3
o • o
ft CO Pi
o m
CM CO
CM st1
0 O
H 00
^ — •"
1 — 1
rd
-p
o
EH
r ,
M
P
CO
H
rd
U
•r|
g
0)
ff.
U
H in m en U3 ^i1
in in H o >x> ix>
CM rH in C~~- t^
in r- oo ix> co oo
H H OO OO -xf in
co rd
0) -P
c o
•H EH
c*,
U cn
fd c
Cn S 'H
C -P
•H M rd
ft (DO
H ftU
3 rd
ft ft oJJ
- 171 -
-------
>
Q
-P
01
ts
CTi O l>» O i*Q CM
CO xt CM MD CO 00
O\ CM OO CO rH xt
CM CO CO •=t
x-' rH H
xf O
LO CM
U5 t~-
X_x
M
tji
C
•H
a
rH
3
Ot
E
•d QJ
O -P
O to
3 >i
TD CO
q
3
o
M
o
QJ
5
QJ
CO
E
to -H
u fd
QJ H
OJ U
M QJ
O (£
CO 00
QJ M
rH P> QJ
H -H &
^ <~| .rH
PQ CO fa
CM CM
O CO
xt O
^ 00
-H rH
H
rd
-P
O
EH
>i
n
U3
CTs
CO
CO
DI
G
•rH
a
rH
3 E
Oi QJ
-p
QJ to
-P >•
•H CO
14-1
rH
|3
CO
to
M
0)
-P
-P
0
C
x;
in
l£> xt CM IT)
OO l> O H O CO
to n
CO in
rH rH
O rH
H rH
CTi <
CTi ul
rH rH
tn
G
•H
rH
•H
fd
M
EH
co
G
0
•H
to
•H
e
w
s^i
•H
<
>s
M
>
O
U
QJ
^4
C
O
^,
03
G
O
•H
to
•H
E
w
S_j
•H
i
Sq
QJ
>
O
U
QJ
K
-P
C
QJ
U
13
H
rd
-P
o
EH
CO
•d
QJ
ffl -p
< C
EH O
U
>
Q
-P
QJ
13
to
QJ
G
•H
x;
u
fd
a
i_i
QJ
a
rd
CL|
cri [> H in co in
xt O CO LT> xt CM
O CM CM CM l> 00
H CO
CM CM
CO CO xO rH U) 03
cri co xt r~~ o~\ c~~
co kD CM CM r-~ co
»> ». -.^ — *
CM xt
CM CM
4n
rd
i_i
^ to -P
QJ m
T3 -H fd
CM 00
O CM
CM -xt*
CM CM
H
rd
-P
O
EH
>
P
-P
QJ
t3
^ X
in CTI
H O
CTi O
H
CO CO
[> (^
o^ o
r^
H
~
Cr
r
•H
a
•H
s:
CO
a
rd
M
T^j
QJ
10
rd
X!
U
^
3
cu
tn cTi
H O
o\ o
rH
H
rd
-P
O
EH
- 172 -
-------
( .
H
Q
C
•H
4-1
fd
o
U
08
H
H
•rH
g]
S-l
CD
a
rd
CM
oo o o r--
IX) O iX) oo
H O 00 O
oo en ix> co
•*-* H H
H
H
•H 4J
U j £*
•O 0)
C 3
rd H
i "] 4-j
4n
O W
H
T3
0) -H
1^ '-X
o cj*
S-l -H
m hj
00 l>
CM OO
in o
CM CM
H
rd
4J
O
e .
M
Q
(A
0)
W
IQ
O
iJ)
C
O
•H
-^>
W
3
Q
g
o
U
oo ^ ^J O
m oo HO
CM ix> en ^
H H CM CM
H H CO O
-^ H CM
^_l
o
3
a1
•H
i_3
v;
M T3
fd Q)
pa o;
l>^
IX) CO
H 0
^ ^t
cr> H
H CM
r— |
rd
4-)
O
EH
>
Q
G
O
•H
-P
U
3
T3
O
^i
CM
roS COH LD'^
CO CM CO U3 OO
U) H in 00 CM ^
t~* in in ^ CM CM
(X) cr> co cr> --^
CM CM -~s
x:
•H
^
a tfl
H W
3 0
CM i-q
4-) i-|
LI 0) O
-
j
rd
Q
'O
3
4J
to
U
E
O
-------
-PCM
3 O ^
-P W
DUG
O -H O
M EH
4J -v--'
0
s
#
CM
H
I
W
O
Q
-P
0)
^g
T5
s^
rd
>H
T3
O
O
Jg
CM ^ OO ^J1
in CM co o
CM rH O UD
• co o in m
H CM v^
•^ co
o <<
in CM
». »,
U) 0
OO H tti
"d -P
0 -H
O M
5 O
in co
OO CM
00 t>
oo in
CM CXI
rH
rd
-P
O
EH
t i
M
Q
W
t_l
0)
rH
•H
o
m
M
0)
3
O
04
rH O 00 CO ^ 00
m en oo oo oo o
oo ^j< in in co o
rH rH rH CM
rH
rd
-P
O
EH
c^
Ul
H
3 EH \
C, O C
H -H O
^ EH
-P ~—'
OJ
>
Q
-P
53
"O
O
O
en o ^o r^ • — i si1 ^o i — i
HI-H o-co coor~o
i>-cn oooo -x^ixiincn
HCM COLO cocnooi>
o^ U)r^ OrHf^oo
^* -si* ^-- rH rH LD kO
CO O CM en CM
co in ix) o (O en
o co oo in H m
CO CO H rH CM CM
H
rd
-p
o
EH
r(3
0
O
3
t) W
G Ai &
3 i-l -H
O (d .C
a CQ U
>-
i-l
Q
tn
rH
rd
U
•H
H
(U
.c
o
rHoo CMI> ino cocn
CMC1- >vDO ^PC— C^ rH
U3c\i oor-^ Hin CMCO
men oooo ^i*^ inin
oo oo — • — —
T3
•H
U CJi
< c
•H
H ,X
CP -H rd
C O E
•H SH
Q, rH ([) (L)
rH rH CU £
3 rd rd -iH
Dn EH CU ^
us en
o to
^ oo
CO oo:
^ in
rH
rd
-P
0
EH
-------
t.
H
Q
M
0)
£>
O
U
(U
oi
H
td
u
•H
E
a)
JC
u
U3 CM HO ^ CT\ CM C~-
{Q \Q U3O OO^J* U") LO
00 CM 00 LO ^ i-l -~-
rO <^ H H U3 C*--'
X)
C
w o >;
a Oj u
E rd
io d M -p
M J o en
CD d
X C CJ* G
(d H -H H
rH -H ^ -lH
rrt Vy^ k^
fy
0) (U U (1J
E E rd E
•H -H rH -rl
J J CQ ij
O ro LO CFi 00 O
00 00 O stf <^ o
CTl rH 00 00 LO LD
H CM -31 f- 00 CM
^-s CM CM OO -vj1
H
y fd
U -P
rd O
-P EH
en
|>!
i_4
0)
^ ^i
O 0)
U 3
V 0)
Pi en
i ,
H
Q
H
i— |
•H
s
s^
(U
rd
a,
rO ^t* cO ^f
•-1 CM H CM
°ICX.aIr7,
l> 00 C^ 00
rH
rd
-P
w O
OJ H
LO
03
O
j
j^i
Q)
|§
CD
en
a\
w
<
EH
c
-rl
-p
c
O
U
- 175 -
-------
>
P
en
0)
u3
in
O
(-H-
c
o
•H
-P
W
3
e
o
u
IX) rH CM ^
IT) CO O -vf
r— 1 LD LO "31
CO C-- CO t>
^ ^f ro in
v-' CM CM
^
O
3
CT1
•H
i_j
r^
^ U
M ui
rd H
cq CQ
co LO
LO CM
tX) O
<£j IP)
l> O
CM CO
H
td
-P
o
EH
( ,
M
Q
-P
(U
5
c
o
•H
-P
U
3
T3
0
S_l
0,
CM in CM o
CO ro nH CO
i> a\ (Ti CM
rH CM {Q *$
HH ^o cn
— ^ CM CM
0 CO
CTi O
». «>
O (?*
CO 0
CM CO
T3
S-l
H (d
•H O
O £)
<^
H 0)
rH C
td -H
EH J
^f LO
•xj1 i — I
U3 CM
CO [>
r~ o
CM CO
s — ^
H
td
-P
o
EH
CM O
CO t>
CTi CM
U) rH
CM CTl
^S
i-H
<£
EH
O
EH
Q
£2
U
C
H
H
fd
c
o
c
M
0)
-P
G
o
•d
id
4-1
rd
Q
EH
O
EH
Q
K
(U
-P
fti
Q
-P
CO
(U
03
td
U
e
o
- 176 -
-------
The air losses and waterborne losses from each mill are
handled by different treatment methods and represent approximate
values for final discharges. Without an in depth study of sewer
flows and existing wastewater treatment operations, discussion
of specific raw waste loads and final effluent characteristics
would not be appropriate. The solids losses indicated as sewer
losses included suspended solids, dissolved organic solids, and
dissolved inorganic solids. This study did not attempt to
distinguish between these losses or to assess the effluent quality
resulting from existing treatment processes.
Overall, these material balances present information to
illustrate the quantities of material handled in typical pulp and
paper industry operations and to point out where typical solids
losses occur.
Solid Waste Management Systems
Each case study mill operated an internal solid waste
management system to remove solid waste from generation points to
disposal areas. While many similarities exisred each mill's
system had unique characteristics. This section will present a
brief discussion of each mill's solid waste management operational
procedures.
Case Study Mill "A". The solid waste management system at
this mill is operated entirely by mill personnel and is confined
to on-site operations, except for the transport of cafeteria
solid waste to a county disposal site. The general solid waste
collection system consists of a "Heil Huge Haul" container system.
Roll-on-roll-off containers varying in size i^rom 6.1 to 30.6 cubic
meters (8 to 40 cubic yards) are used to collect solid waste from
mill premises. Solid waste is transferred from internal generation
points to these containers by the janitorial staff. At the
shipping dock where both shipping and converting solid waste are
deposited, a stationery compactor is used to obtain volume reduction,
The container carrying truck is also used to carry the cafeteria
solid waste to the county disposal site. Containers are in use
to transport scrap metal from the shop and used drums to the
salvage area.
- 34 -
- 177 -
-------
To collect larger solid waste sources, a front-end loader
and dump truck combination is employed. These pick ups occur at
the sawdust digester, recovery area, flume water clarifiers,
residuals storage area, and for the general wood yard cleanup.
These trucks also collect miscellaneous litter drums placed on
mill premises. An additional truck is used to transfer ashes
from the ash hopper to the disposal site.
The disposal site is located on mill property and receives
all solid waste except from the cafeteria. Material is dumped
from the edge of the fill over the side embankments. No definite
plan is followed and much exposed corrugated is visible on the
side slopes. Also, standing water exists at the base of the
side slopes in several locations.
This mill operates a salvage yard to reclaim material
(primarily metals) for internal reuse and sale. Additionally,
major efforts are undertaken to recycle paper machine and
converting operation broke to the process. Bark from the
debarking drums is processed through bark hogs, is stored in an
"Atlas" bin, and is burned for its fuel value.
Case Study Mill "B". This mill's solid waste management
system consists of both company operated and contracted portions.
The company operated portion consists of a "Dempster Dumpster"
type of container system used to transport process solid waste
to the company's disposal site. Dump trucks are also used to
transport material to the air curtain destructor used for volume
reduction of nonpulpable broke and bulky combustibles (pallets,
fiber drums, etc.)
Movement of solid waste from generation points to containers
is generally performed by the production personnel responsible
for the waste generation activity or by continuous conveyors.
Dump trucks and front-end loaders are also used to transport dry
ashes and ashes from the flyash lagoon. Because it is an
industrial disposal site, the state authorizes ashes to be used
as cover material. Filled land is then used for wastepaper
inventory space and other yard activities. Because of the high
percentage of inert materials (wastepaper contamination) little
blowing litter or other unsightly conditions were visible at the
disposal site.
- 35 -
- 178 -
-------
The contractor system uses containers to collect all personnel
waste that contains cafeteria and lunch area solid waste. This
material is transported to a licensed sanitary landfill external
to mill property.
This mill's resource recovery activities are limited to a
salvage yard plus efforts to maximize fiber utilization and
eliminate solids losses in mill sewers and through the wastewater
treatment plant.
Case Study Mill "C". This solid waste management system is
entirely internal except for the cafeteria that has a private
contract for food wastes and a contract to assist in hauling
miscellaneous solid wastes. The company operated "Dempster
Dumpster" type container system collects general refuse transferred
to the outside containers by janitors and production personnel.
A dump truck is used to transport ashes, recovery area solid waste,
wood yard debris, and miscellaneous material to the disposal site.
Part of the ash is collected dry in an ash silo while part is
transported by water to a small settling basin with settled
material removed by a crane. All the above solid waste is
transported to a company owned disposal site where final earth
cover is planned. A separate disposal site is utilized for
primary wastewater treatment sludge with the sludge deposited and
periodically spread to obtain maximum natural dewatering. Both
disposal sites exhibited no objectionable odors or other noticeable
aesthetic problems.
This mill employs major resource recovery activities including
burning of some bark as fuel, supplying bark to a mulch plant,
selling difficult to reuse broke in the wastepaper market,
operating a salvage yard, and more recently, supplying bark to a
feedlot as bedding material.
Case Study Mill "D". Operated entirely by mill personnel and
internal to the mill property, the basic collection methods consist
of a "Dempster Dumpster" container system and dump trucks.
Containers are used for miscellaneous solid waste plus specific
wastes from relatively small generation sources. During 1972,
the transportation of bark to the disposal site was changed from
a continuous pipeline to truck transportation. This step was
taken as the mill changes over to dry debarking with subsequent
combustion of large portions of the waste bark. Dump trucks are
also used to transport primary sludge incinerator residue, wood
yard debris, slasher sawdust, and paper mill and coating area
wastepaper and trash.
- 36 -
- 179 -
-------
Disposal site operations are difficult to control and manage
with the large bark quantities currently entering the site.
However, the new bark burning system should materially improve
disposal site operations.
Current resource recovery operations are focused on the
bark burning system. Additional attention is being addressed
to making interconnections to maximize overall yield from the
three pulping systems. Also, a typical salvage yard represents
a resource recovery activity.
Case Study Mill "E". Similar to other mills, a mill operated
"Dempster Dumpster" type removable container system transports
solid waste to the mill's private disposal site. Mill janitors
transport solid waste from internal storage to the removable
containers. Also, a dump truck and front-end loader transport
miscellaneous solid waste and wood yard debris to disposal.
The mill cafeteria is operated by a private contractor who
arranges for his own solid waste disposal off mill premises.
The mill disposal site is characterized by random dumping
spots and no working plan. However, because of its remote
shielded location, no nuisance conditions appear to exist.
Resource recovery operations consist primarily of bark burning
with construction underway to enable more complete use of wood
yard solid waste and slasher sawdust as fuel. Also, a salvage
yard operation enables recovery and sale of reusable materials.
Economic Considerations
The major economic considerations for the case study mills
resulted from the external collection system (container systems
and dump trucks). Internal collection and disposal represented
less costs and generally involved fewer people.
The cost per ton of material to disposal (Table 10) and per
unit of production (Table 11) provide interesting comparisons
from company to company. The presented costs include all the
costs associated with the solid waste management operations
except for resource recovery costs. Because so much of the resource
recovery efforts are fully integrated with the production function,
- 37 -
- 180 -
-------
only'portions of the required data were accessible. Thus, no
comparisons were included in this case study summary. The basic
differences resulted from the volumes and types of solid waste
handled, the number of point sources, and the complexity of the
operations. Overall, these mills provide reasonable solid waste
management service at much lower costs than most municipal or
other industrial solid waste management operations.
- 38 -
- 181 -
-------
*
CM
G rH
O rd
EH co
\ O O
-P EH G
io co
O -H
O Q
CO t^ LT>
•xt CO rH
• • •
H O O
•W , .'
O
LO
•
CM
f>
O H
•H rd
14 CO
-P O
CM rH CO
Cft CTi x^
•xt rAJ
+A
IX)
[-^
H
OO
00
<=fl
v£> O LO O
O
-H
o
H
w
G
O
EH
•v.
-P
CO
O
O
U
•H
jq
_U
at
a
-p
o
u
H
rd
co
0 O
EH a
10
•H
Q
rH
rd
co
O
c a
O co
EH -rl
p
O
EH
CO
O
U
H
rd
-P
O
EH
CM ro LO O
«sf "xt1 rtj CO rH
• • 3 • •
rH l>- O
4-^ & -09
f^ IX) CTi O
CO LO ro o
CM O •< ^ CO
CT> CM rH LO
X) 00 LO
ro ^
•W t/=) -fa^
C C G
00 0
•H -H -H
-p 4J — . -p
U U M U
a) CD o o>
rH H ft rH
H r-| 0) rH
O O J O
U U — O
rH rH H rH EH H
rd rd rd rd £3 rd
G C tn -P W G
M M 0 0 S M
PS D QJ a-P Qj (U
O -P -P W ,Q H -P
PQ C X H 3 D G
< H U Q LO CT H
J W
- 182
LO LO
t> O
t •
rH rH
*f>
•3! LO
CTi O
• ,
H CM
&
ro o~
iX> r^
cn oo
O iX
0 C
rH H
*fl
||O
Ir
II '
||CTi
lifer)
HO
II [-»
II '
o
Hi — 1
Ih^
CM
c~~
rH
CO
LO
LO
> tft
G -P
O C
•H (U
4J g
u a
CD -H
H Z
rH C
s
r >H
O & ^
U Cn —
C
-------
£
Q
£
H
rH
•H
s
q
o
EH
x.
4->
03
O
U
0
•H
M
-P
(U
S
V.
4->
CO
O
(J
rH
rd
CO
0 O
EH a
CO
•H
Q
rH
rd
CO
O
c a
O CO
EH -H
Q
O
EH
-P
CO
O
U
rH
rd
-P
O
EH
oo oo ^j1
[> rH CM
• • •
O rH O
O
H
•
s
co
H
CM
(U
Cn
03
cu
4J
X
OJ
c
o
(U
3
C
•H
-P
C
O
U
O OJ
H d
c
W -H
h^ +J
OQ G
< O
EH U
c
o
EH
\
-P
LO
O
U
U
•d
SH
= -P
U 1)
s S
\
H -P
H W
•H O
S U
H
rd
CO
O O
EH Cu
co
•H
Q
rH
rd
co
O
G ft
O co
EH -H
Q
O
EH
-P
co
O
U
rH
rd
-P
O
EH
o
ID
•
O
•W
sf
r-
•
0
*&
CO
CM
rH
•t
in
^
rH
*A
G
O
•d
-P
U
0)
H
rH
O
U
H
rd
C
in
K CD
O 4-1
CQ G
5 H
i>
ID
•
O
"*
o-
•
o
U)
rH
cn
uo
•sf
H
C
o
•d
-P
U
0)
H
H
O
U
H
rd
G
M
0)
-P
X
w
n
o
•
o
oo
O
o
00
0
CM
CD
H
rd
CO
O
cu
co
•H
Q <
i>
00
9
H
w
H
in
H
w
r~~
<*
CM
[>
cn
CM
V)
• —
M
O
Q.
rd
^
— '
H
rd
P
O
P
Q
3
/I
O
O
o
•w
o
o
o
*ft
0
LO
CM
*f*
G
0
•H
-P
U
(D
H
H
O
U
EH H
*£, rd
W G
& M
a, .
a\
rH
CO
rH
ft!
C/3
O
cx
CO
•d
Q
cn
o
0
o
H
0
•»\
M
*S
CM
Sf
CM
CTi
rH
-P
C
CD
g
a,
•H
3
tr
U
•o
QJ
CO
rd
OJ
J
CM
LO
H
fe9
CO
CD
H
w»
H
W S
- <
CL|
H Z
rd o
P U
O
P i-l
£i <;
D EH
/i O
EH
lien
00
CM
Icn
H
1 '
h
i
14^
n"
00
00
CO
[>
CM
(£)
•^
to
•z,
o
H
EH
<
(£
U
QJ
O
-------
Cost/Ton
To
Disposal
ID CM CM
CM ro o
OHO
o
H sP
CM O
• •
H O
IT)
CM
J
w
c
H
r-|
•H
s
U H
•H rd
-P O
LO roli>
CM <3< O t>
• • • •
0 H 0 H
f/) W
O
o
ro
H
O
H
W
J
PQ
0)
3
C
-H
-P
C
< O
EH U
-P
co
O
U
,_!
rd
-P
O
EH
ro
CO
r~^
CM
H
•W
O ro
ro CM
^D H
ro H
iX)
U)
ro
in
[xT
C--
w
in o
U) O
ro 00
•* r
CX) H
in
LD
H
O
ro
O
CQ
^
Collection
H
rd
C
l_)
(U
-p
c
H
Collection
H
rd
c
]L|
0)
X
U
H
rd
CO
O
(Labor)
H
rd
-4-1
O
a-p
•H 3
Q
t/l
EH
3
U
g
H
ID
a
u
Collection
H
rd
G
V_l
-P
X
w
H
rd
en
O
a
to
•H
Q
(Equipment
H
rd
-P
O
-P
%
CO
g
O.
s
o
u
«j
o
EH
U3
3
O
H
EH
3
u
04
o
C
O
•H
-P
U
(U
H
H
O
U
OJ
^->
X
w
M
O
rd
-P
rd
P
H -a
rd 3
C -P
CM
to
rd
U
E
O
s-i
fr.
*
- 184 -
-------
TABLE 11
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT COSTS
ON PRODUCTION BASIS*
$/Bone Dry Metric $/Bone Dry Ton
Mill Ton Of Production Of Production
-'A $1.93 $1.75
B 0.65 0.63
C 2.41 2.18
D 2.28 2.07
E 0.52 0.47
*From Case Study Data
GPO 883-864
- 42
- 185
1
------- |