DESIGN OF
NSU/VIER ©NMINERS
FOR
REUSE OR DISPOSX1L
-------
With the exception of the title page and a few minor changes in the preliminary pages,
this report is reproduced as received from the Battelle Memorial Institute.
The views expressed in these proceedings do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency nor does mention of commercial products constitute en-
dorsement or recommendation for use by the Federal Government.
-------
SW3P
Proceedings of the Solid Waste
Resources Conference on
DESIGN OF
CNSU/MER CNMINERS
FOR
REUSE OR DISPOSAL
May 12 and 13,1971
This publication (SW-3p) reporting on papers
presented at the seminar co-sponsored by
Battelle Memorial Institute -
Columbus Laboratories
and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
was compiled by George F. Sachsel.
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
1972
-------
An environmental protection publication in the solid waste management series (SW-3p)
published jointly by two components of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency — the
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs (Washington) and the National Environmental
Research Center (Cincinnati).
For sale by the Supeiintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price $1.75
-------
FOREWORD
One of the characteristics of an affluent society is the
exploitation of natural resources to produce and distribute to
most of its citizens an overwhelming diversity of products, most
of which eventually end up as solid waste. Because of a variety
of factors—most of them related to population growth, urbaniza-
tion, and affluence—the mere disposal of this solid waste, be it
by sanitary landfill or a combination of incineration and sani-
tary landfill, is becoming more costly.
The increasing diversity and complexity of the many com-
ponents of solid waste has posed problems not only in disposal
but in reclamation as well. This Solid Waste Resources Conference
attempted to address itself to the disposal and reclamation of a
segment of solid waste that has been growing more rapidly than
the rest—consumer containers, or packaging. Among the many
possible responses that might alleviate the impact of this seg-
ment is design of consumer containers to facilitate their reuse
or disposal. Several of the speakers at the conference addressed
themselves to this specific topic, ranging from the package de-
signer's viewpoint to research reports on "self-disposing" con-
tainers. Some questioned the concept from standpoints of
marketing demands or particular resources considered renewable.
All of the speakers addressed themselves to one or more aspects
of the reuse or disposal of packaging materials. The conference
was also characterized by a wide representation, both among the
speakers and the audience. Dialogue among members of industry
iii
-------
and commerce, academic institutions, Federal and local govern-
ment, private-citizen groups, and communications media yielded
some potential solutions and identified a number of problems.
The main achievements of the conference may well have
been that we developed an appreciation of the complexity of the
problems and of the need for a multidisciplinary attack in the
broadest sense—an attack calling for the efforts not only of
scientists and technologists but of members of almost all seg-
ments of society. It is the intent of the cosponsors to hold
similar solid waste resources conferences on selected topics
at approximately 2-year intervals in the belief that the inter-
action of many segments of society may be the best approach
for turning problems into opportunities.
—GEORGE F. SACHSEL
Technical Program Coordinator
Solid Waste Resources Conference
IV
-------
PREFACE
This volume is based on a symposium held May 12 and 13, 1971, in Columbus, Ohio.
Each of the four parts of these proceedings, corresponding to the sessions of the
symposium, brings together current knowledge and thinking in the disposal and
reclamation of consumer containers.
The symposium was sponsored by the division of research and development of the
solid waste management program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the
Battelle-Memorial Institute's Columbus Laboratories. The research function of the solid
waste program has since been assigned to EPA's National Environmental Research Center
in Cincinnati.
The concept of national environmental research centers brings to the total
environmental problem the combined technological expertise of laboratories that formerly
focused only on one particular aspect of the environment. The Center in Cincinnati, one of
three in the country, is presently organized into four major areas for research—air
pollution, water pollution, radiation, and solid waste.
There were many who contributed to the success of the symposium. To all of them
we are grateful and express our thanks.
Andrew W. Breidenbach
Co-Chairman, Solid Waste Resources Conference
December 1971
-------
SYMPOSIUM COMMITTEE
A. W. Breidenbach, Director, Division of Research and Co-Chairman
Development, Solid Waste Management Office,
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
C. A. demons, Chief, Reclamation Branch, Division of
Research and Development, Solid Waste Management
Office, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
L. W. Lefke, Deputy Director, Division of Research
and Development, Solid Waste Management Office,
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
C. J. Lyons, Manager, Department of Biology, Co-Chairman
Environment, and Chemistry, Battelle's
Columbus Laboratories
D. L. Morrison, Manager, Environmental Systems and
Processes Section, Department of Biology, Environ-
ment, and Chemistry, Battelle's Columbus
Laboratories
G. F. Sachsel, Director of Solid Waste Programs,
Environmental Systems and Processes Section,
Department of Biology, Environment, and
Chemistry, Battelle's Columbus Laboratories
SESSION CHAIRMEN
SESSION I - OVERVIEW
A. W. Breidenbach, Environmental Protection Agency
SESSION II - PLASTICS, COMPOSITES AND PAPER
J. H. Lindholm, Battelle's Columbus Laboratories
SESSION III - GLASS CONTAINERS
C. A. demons, Environmental Protection Agency
SESSION IV - METALLIC CONTAINERS
G. R. Smithson, Battelle's Columbus Laboratories
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
SESSION I - OVERVIEW
Packaging and Solid Waste Management 1
Hugh H. Connolly
Recycling — Status and Opportunities 16
M. J. Mighdoll
Packaging and Environmental Protection 30
Joseph M. Murtha
Packaging for Food Systems of the Future 49
Norman A. Vanasse
SESSION II - PLASTICS, COMPOSITES AND PAPER
Incentives for the Recycling and Reuse of Plastics 69
Jack Milgrom
Thermoplastics in Waste Recycling 94
K. L. Burgess
Polytrip®, the Returnable Plastic Milk Bottle System 109
Karl H. Emich
Reclamation of Plastic-Paper Composites 121
Safford W. McMyler
Paper Industry Plans 135
Judd H. Alexander
BANQUET
Keynote Address: Incentives for Reuse and Disposability .... 155
R. L. Lesher, National Center for Resource Recovery, Inc.
SESSION III - GLASS CONTAINERS
Design Trends in Glass Containers 171
Richard L. Cheney
Re-Using Scrap Glass 185
Ward R. Malisch, Delbert E. Day, and Bobby G. Wixson
Techniques for Self-Disposal 210
Samuel F. Hulbert
Composite Bottle Design and Disposal 231
Philip Williams
Separation of Glass From Municipal Refuse 244
J. H. Abrahams, Jr., and R. J. Ryder
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
Page No.
SESSION IV - METALLIC CONTAINERS
Ferrous Scrap Recycling and Steel Technology 263
William S. Story
Metallurgical Aspects of Reclaiming Container Scrap 271
H. V. Makar and H. S. Caldwell, Jr.
Recovery and Utilization of Aluminum From Solid Waste .... 295
R. F. Testin, G. F. Bourcier, and K. H. Dale
AUTHOR INDEX 317
LIST OF ATTENDEES 321
-------
SESSION I
OVERVIEW
Chairman:
A. W. Breidenbach, Director
Division of Research
Office of Solid Waste Management
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
-------
PACKAGING AND SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
Hugh H. Connolly
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs
Environmental Protection Agency
The growth of packaging in the United States has been
a phenomenal one. It began during the period of the industrial
revolution with the development of such items as the metal
can, the collapsible tube, and the folding carton. During
the period between 1900 and 1930, flexible packaging was
born through the introduction of such items of kraft paper,
cellophane, and aluminum foil. During the ensuing search
for development of new packaging materials, there began a
flood of packaged products that has never stopped growing in
volume or variety.
Along with this growth has come a great deal of
inventiveness, well documented by such achievements as the
flip-top box, the pull-ring can, the push-button aerosol,
the spray-on bandage, etc. There is no doubt that this is
truly the era of "convenience packaging." However, these
accomplishments in growth and inventiveness are also accompan-
ied by a sizeable growth in contribution to the solid waste
load.
For example, in 1966, 52 million tons of packaging
materials were produced and sold in the United States. Of
this massive tonnage—made up of many billions of individual
units, most of them weighing much less than a pound each—
about 90% entered the stream of solid wastes that had to be
disposed. This figure was well above the 1958 packaging
materials consumption of 35 million tons, and well below the
1
-------
expected 1976 consumption of 74 million tons.
Packaging is increasing in quantity much more rapidly
than population. Per capita consumption of packaging materials
was 404 pounds in 1958, 525 pounds in 1966, and is expected
to be 661 pounds by 1976. Many factors underlie this dramatic
increase, but chief among them is the continuing rise of self-
service merchandising, creating a growing need for packages
that sell the product without the help of a sales clerk.
This accounts for much of the quantitative increase. Qualita-
tive changes will be brought about by the need for improved
product differentiation by packaging methods, the rise of
many new food products which call for unique packaging, and
the vastly expanded choice in materials provided the package
designer by the advent of plastics and other relatively new
packaging materials.
These packaging materials are made principally
of paper, glass, metal, wood, and plastics, with the last-named
being the most recent contestant in the field and the fastest
growing. It is anticipated that by 1976, paper and board
will continue to dominate the packaging field with 57% of the
total on a tonnage basis. It is further estimated that glass
will have 18% of the total, metals 13%, wood 7%, and plastics
5%.
It is significant to note that, of the 360 million
tons of residential, commercial, and industrial solid wastes
-------
generated today, approximately 13% is discarded packaging
material. In a typical year, Americans throw away 48 billion
bottles, 4 million tons of plastics, and 30 million tons of
paper. The very strong relationship between packaging waste
and the peculiarly difficult problem of roadside littering
has been well established by several surveys.
Nearly all the States in our country have enacted
anti-litter laws which provide for both fines and imprison-
ment for the violator. However, these laws are very ineffec-
tive, for the violator is seldom apprehended. The ultimate
solution to the litter problem will come only with successful
educational programs designed to enlist public cooperation
and citizen pride.
Of packaging materials being consumed today, approx-
imately 50 million tons are being discarded as waste; only
about 10% are being returned for reuse or reprocessing into
new products. Collection and disposal of this tonnage is
costing the nation in excess of $450 million. Assuming no
increase in the unit costs of collection and disposal, which
is highly unlikely, expenditures toward this end for packag-
ing materials is expected to stand at nearly $600 million
in 1976.
It has become perfectly clear that steps must be
taken to mitigate the problems created by packaging materials
in waste management. Where it is feasible to do so, we must
3
-------
reduce the destruction of valuable natural resources from
which packages are made. In all cases, we must reduce the
technical difficulties involved in processing packaging wastes.
In a report* prepared for our Office by the Midwest
Research Institute, five potential mechanisms were discussed
as possible avenues to the mitigation of these problems.
These mechanisms are: (1) regulation, (2) taxes, (3) incen-
tive and subsidy programs, (4) educational efforts, and (5)
research and development. I would like to look briefly at
each of these in turn.
Regulation, as herein used, means any legislative
measure enforced by the executive arm of the government which
imposes some action on package materials producers, packagers
and/or users. Midwest Research Institute concluded that
regulation of packaging would be the most effective mechanism
to accomplish the objectives, though it may be a difficult
one to justify. Given the tremendously complex nature of
packaging, regulation, to be effective, would tend to embrace
all activities directly and indirectly concerned with packaging.
The costs of such a program appear to be potentially greater
than the benefits that may be expected.
Let's look at plastics, for example, which, in ad-
dition to their rapid growth, are permeating the entire pack-
aging field. Why not legislate against the use of plastics in
* The Role of Packaging in Solid Waste Management—1966-1976.
-------
any form of packaging materials? How would this affect us in
our daily lives? We could go back to buying milk in glass
bottles which would be returned to the store or be picked
up by the dairy which delivers to our doors, rather than have
the convenience of the plastic-impregnated paper cartons. We
could get along without the plastic bottles and tubes contain-
ing shampoos, hair dressings, toothpaste, cosmetic items,
medicinals, etc. that we use so many of, and go back to the
glass and metal containers that were previously used for this
purpose. It might be less convenient, and perhaps more costly,
but we could do it. We could dispense with plastic-impregnat-
ed paper for frozen goods, too, and either buy all such food
products in cans or, in the cases of fruits and vegetables, in
their fresh form when they are in season. There may be times
of the year when we couldn't eat the things we like, and we
may have to sacrifice a little taste quality here and there,
but we could make out. Meat packaging may have to go down
the drain, and the old-fashioned butcher may well be back in
style, but we could live with that. Many children's toys
would have to be done away with, or be made of more expensive
materials, but kids have too many toys anyway and could get
along with much less.
Everything I have suggested here says "go back"—go back
to the old ways of doing things. It means giving up those
many conveniences that have become so much a part of our way
of life—those things that have been made possible by the
5
-------
great advances in the technology of plastics production. Is
this what we want to do—to return to the technology of the
1930's? Is this the only alternative we have available? I
say emphatically no! The technology that produced these
conveniences can, I feel certain, likewise solve the environ-
mental problems caused by them. I believe we can, in this
case, "have our cake and eat it."
Under the heading of taxes, two types are discussed
—a use tax, imposed on all packages, and a deterrent type
tax selectively imposed on specific materials. A packaging
use tax would not directly result in reduction of package
material use, reduction of processing difficulty, or in
elimination of destruction of natural resources. It would,
however, create the economic wherewithal for the processing
of these wastes. Justification of a use tax would be easier
than justification of a deterrent tax. For maximum effective-
ness, however, a packaging use tax would call for extensive
administrative machinery.
Take, for example, the packaging tax recently pro-
posed by New York City's Environmental Protection Administra-
tion to be collected at the wholesale level on all types of
packaging materials. This would be a graduated tax based on
an evaluation of the difficulty of disposal of each major type
of material. Whereas glass bottles would be taxed at 1.3C per
unit, plastic bottles would be taxed at 2.0c per unit. Steel
cans and aluminum cans would be taxed at 0.5o per unit and
6
-------
0.250 per unit respectively. Other packaging materials made
of paper would be taxed at 2.3C per pound, and plastic packa-
ging would be taxed at 3.8c per pound. To me, this sounds
like an administrative nightmare.
A deterrent type tax would be limited in effective-
ness. Such a tax would of necessity be discriminatory since
it would be imposed selectively. A deterrent tax serves, in
effect, as a form of indirect regulation. Direct regulation
is probably more desirable.
Various forms of incentives have been used by the
Federal government for decades to achieve desired objectives.
Incentives, as herein used, would be any expenditures of tax
receipts made by the government, or use of the government's
purchasing power, to bring about changes in packaging mater-
ials use or reuse. Expenditures could be either direct (sub-
sidies, grants, price supports) or indirect (tax credits).
For example, the Federal Government, as one of the largest
purchasers and users of packaging materials, could formulate
regulations banning purchase of non-returnable beverage con-
tainers. Tariffs on certain imported materials might be
increased thus encouraging a switch to other materials. De-
pletion allowances for certain mineral resources might be
reduced, thus encouraging heavier reuse of these resources.
Any such potential incentives should be subjected to close
study and scrutiny before being put into effect. Blind action
could do more harm than good.
7
-------
Two contracts were recently awarded by our Office to
carryout some of the essential economic studies recommended.
The first is for a "Study of the Incentives for Plastic Re-
cycling and Reuse". Its objectives are to: (1) develop a
number of complete strategies to be applied to the total
system to improve recycling and reuse; (2) evaluate each
strategy from a systems approach, taking into consideration
the probability of success, administrative problems, legal
constraints, and economics; and (3) select the best strategy.
The second is for a "Study of the Incentives for
Tire Recycling and Reuse". Its objectives are basically the
same as those for the plastics contract. It is anticipated
that similar studies will be carried out relating to paper,
glass, metals, organics, etc., or studies might be more
specifically aimed at such items as junk automobiles, beverage
containers, etc. Having a detailed picture of the economic
situation before us, it will be much easier to make rational
recommendations regarding use of incentives and/or disincen-
tives.
Educational programs discussed by Midwest Research
Institute are directed at three groups—industry programs,
consumer education, and intra-government information programs.
Basic to all of these is the assumption that one of the con-
straints to action on the part of those involved is unfamil-
iarity with the problems created by packaging. Once the
problems are fully understood, voluntary action to mitigate
-------
them may be forthcoming. This assumption is certainly opti-
mistic but, to a degree, sound.
Educational programs aimed at both industry and con-
sumer groups ai.e being carried out by such organizations as
Keep America Beautiful, Glass Container Manufacturers Insti-
tute, National Educational Television Network, and others.
Our office is supporting educational efforts both through
extensive publication of its work and film documentation of
its more successful projects. We hope to expand these efforts
in the near future.
The research and development mechanism is certainly
a key factor in the reduction of difficulty in processing
waste packaging and in promoting reuse and recycle of packag-
ing materials. Three types of research and development are
possible: (1) research on materials and containers; (2)
research devoted to improving salvage and reuse; and (3) efforts
aimed at improving disposal technology.
Midwest Research Institute concluded that materials
research does not offer foreseeable near-term success, but if
sufficient resources are devoted to this area, perhaps the
picture can be changed. A few projects of this nature have,
hopefully, set the tone for future endeavors. We are all
aware of the two new plastic materials for beverage containers
known as "Lopac" and "Barex 210" which are being test-marketed
by Coca Cola Company and Pepsi-Cola Company, respectively, as
substitutes for polyvinyl chlorides. These, along with a third
9
-------
such material—XT polymer—offer similar characteristics with
regard to gas permeation resistance, transparency, inertness,
and rigidity for which acrylic plastics are noted, and suita-
ble for the same general uses.
Most of you are sware, too, of the work going on at
the University of Toronto in Canada and the University of
Ashton in Birmingham, England, with regard to development of
a biodegradable plastic. These efforts involve the use of
"sensitizer groups" in the polymer chain which have the prop-
erty of absorbing the ultraviolet light of the sun and using
this energy to break the polymer chain, thus causing brittle-
ness and susceptibility to attack by microorganisms. Though
these efforts may not yet be considered major break-throughs
in materials research, they are indications that progress is
being made.
In this same area of materials research, a Solid
Waste Management Office grant to Clemson University, South
Carolina, is supporting research to develop a one-way contain-
er made basically of a water-soluble glass that may be dis-
solved after the container is emptied. The Project Director,
Dr. Samuel Hulburt, will be discussing the details of this
project later in the conference.
The Solid Waste Management Office supports a number
of projects devoted to improving both salvage and reuse and
disposal technology. For instance, Stanford Research Insti-
tute was engaged to determine the technical feasibility of an
10
-------
air classification process to separate non-homogeneous dry
solid waste materials. A pilot air classifier has been con-
structed for separating five such materials. This unit
operates on the principle that a sufficient velocity of air
passing upward through the mixed wastes will achieve separation
as a function of particle size, configuration, and specific
gravity.
A wet pulverization system designed to reclaim fibre
from municipal refuse has been developed and is now under
demonstration on a pilot-scale system. In this system, the
incoming solid waste is dumped into a storage hopper from
which it is fed continuously into the hydrapulper where, through
a pulping action, it is forced through 1/2 inch holes. Heavy
inorganic materials are removed by a bucket elevator. The
pulped material passes through a liquid cyclone to separate
heavy materials such as dirt, glass, and small bits of metal.
The remaining organic material passes to a series of screens
which progressively concentrate the paper fibre. It is es-
timated that 200 tons of paper fibre, 80 tons of ferrous
metals, and 80 tons of glass cullet would be reclaimed from
each 1000 tons of solid wastes.
At Louisiana State University, a pilot plant has
been designed which is successfully turning cellulose (bagesse)
into single-cell protein. The development of the pilot plant
followed the discovery of LSU scientists of a microorganism
that breaks down waste cellulose into protein. Additional
11
-------
work is being conducted to refine processing techniques and
analyze the protein products for digestibility and nutritional
value.
It has been demonstrated that waste glass can be
used as an aggregate in bituminous mixtures for street mainte-
nance and paving. Glassphalt, the name given this mixture,
has the potential of solving urban glass waste disposal
problems. The Project Director, Dr. Ward Malisch, will be
discussing the details of this project later in the conference.
Where do we go from here? It is quite obvious to
me that the role of packaging, which has had such a meteoric
rise, is not about to decline. We are all fully aware of the
part played by packaging as both a marketing tool and a major
contributor to profitability. It is practically assured that
packaging is destined to play even a bigger and more impor-
tant role in the years ahead. There is fair evidence, for
instance, that automated supermarkets will become a reality
of the 1970's, with pallett loading stocking of shelves and
automated checkout. Packaging techniques will play a key role
in these developments if they are to succeed. Another area
likely for development is portion-packaging for single servings
in countless products, food and non-food, as more individuals
in the family lead their own busy lives and want no-fuss meals
on the run.
In view of this, then, what action must the Federal
Government take during the 1970's to eliminate future problems
12
-------
caused by packaging wastes/ There are many paths open to it,
some of which have been suggested in the form of legislation
introduced for consideration. It could restrict production
of certain packaging materials, ban no-return beverage contain-
ers, impose severe disposal taxes on all packaging materials,
etc. Or it could lead the way in assuring new developments
in packaging which will allow our continued use of these
materials at the desired levels without future injury to the
environment.
The recently enacted "Resource Recovery Act of 1970"
gives a good indication of the route the Federal Government
will take. This Act provides funds for extensive research
toward: uses and outlets for recovered wastes; modification
of product characteristics to enhance recycling; improved
collection, separation, and containerization; use of Federal
procurement to develop market demand for recovered resources;
incentives and disincentives to accelerate reclamation of
resources; effects of existing public policies upon the
recycling of materials; and the necessity of imposing disposal
charges on packaging, vehicles, and other manufactured goods.
The Act also provides funds for demonstrating resource
recovery systems, improvements in such systems, and related
technology. It is clear that the Federal Government expects
to find solutions to the problems by routes other than restric-
tive legislation against the source materials if at all pos-
sible.
13
-------
However, though we feel the Federal funding related
to problems of packaging waste may well yield beneficial
results, it is not enough. The industries that produce pack-
ages and packaging materials must shoulder part of the respon-
sibility for financing research to devise packages that are
compatible with recovery and disposal processes. We can no
longer tolerate the attitude taken by some that industry's
responsibility is solely that of providing consumer items to
the American public which are aesthetically pleasing, efficient,
durable, and at lowest possible cost, and that disposal of
these items after use is solely the responsibility of the user.
When new packaging products are developed, the developing in-
dustry must consider waste management problems in addition to
the items of durability, consumer appeal, and economy. For
products that are on the market today, methods for recovery,
reuse, and/or ready disposability must be devised.
We believe that it will not be necessary to make a
drastic change in our mode of living away from the trend of
convenience packaging and "throw-Away" habit. However, we
will have to look closely at packaging of various types to
determine if the materials used have sufficient present or
potential value as candidates for recycling processes. As
the earth's available resources dwindle, the acceptability of
convenience packaging may be governed by a different set of
priorities. Certainly, we must find the appropriate recycling
or disposal mechanism for each material.
14
-------
Hopefully, this conference will provide some of the
answers necessary to moving us along the correct path toward
our eventual goal.
15
-------
RECYCLING - STATUS AND OPPORTUNITIES
M. J. Mighdoll
National Association of Secondary Material Industries
Recycling—a word not even to be found in many
dictionaries and encyclopedias—has suddenly become a house-
hold term. Recycling—an age-old science of utilizing waste
materials—suddenly is "discovered". Recycling in just a
period of months, has been embraced by environmentalist and
industrialist, by politician and educator.
And well this might be the case. . . for recycling
is the most constructive response we have yet developed to
answer the challenge of environmental management... to cope
with the mounting piles of solid waste building in direct
proportion to our population growth and industrial produc-
tivity.
Today, I have been asked to speak on the present
status of recycling and its future opportunities . . . and
to specifically relate the present and the potential to
containers. Interestingly enough, the challenge of this
effort is not in describing the present status of recycling
or in projecting future opportunities for it. The challenge
lies in defining and undertaking the actions that will be
needed to close the gap between recycling concept and recycl-
ing reality.
I am sure that there are few in this room that need
to be reminded of the horrors of solid waste. There have been
enough doomsday pictures and literature, enough statistical
evidence that solid waste is indeed as fearsome a pollution
16
-------
menace as that related to air and water.
And if we accept the seriousness of the solid waste
problem—if we have studied that problem at all—we know that
containers—packaging of all types—represent one of the most
serious sources of solid waste. The soap box, the milk
carton, the shipping case, the soda bottle, the beer can,
the plastic bubble—we've seen them all in the pollution
pictures and analyzed in the statistical surveys of solid
waste. Yes, America, the discarded container is there . . .
it is solid waste enemy No. 1 ... it is a victim of our
own modern society ... it must be captured and controlled .
. . but how?
Are there many among us who would seriously suggest
we ban the can? That we abolish the container? That we
legislate the package into extinction?
No, if we are to be realistic—and if we desire to
deal effectively with the solid waste problem today and in
terms of the affluence and sophistication of our society, then
we must certainly accept a few critical facts.
We must accept the fact that solid waste, however
much we minimize its quantitative growth through organized
effort, cannot be planned out of existence. Solid waste will
always be produced as a corollary of industrial production
and life itself. It can, however, be qualitatively control-
led. Recyclability can be introduced as a public mandate;
industrial production need not be conditioned solely on
17
-------
marketability.
Secondly, we must accept the fact that solid waste
materials must be thought of in affirmative and constructive
terms, not negative ones. We must acknowledge that burning
and burying waste comes after efforts are made to utilize
it, not before. We must, in short, establish our priorities
correctly—and that would certainly seem to dictate a much
greater orientation to recycling, not disposal, activities
and incentives.
Thirdly, we must accept the fact that recycling
is not an act of magic. It holds no miraculous power that
transcends the laws of economics. We must, therefore, agree
that recycling, the utilization of solid waste, requires and
is entitled to the strongest and most comprehensive economic
support we can give it. In oversimplified terms, every ton of
solid waste that can be recycled is a ton of new raw material
recovered with a profit factor, not a ton of waste to be
disposed of at a substantial cost and with a resulting loss
of natural resource conservation.
Therefore, if we will accept these hard facts of
life, we can only come to one conclusion: that recycling as
a positive and primary response to the solid waste problem
must be given a new set of conditions. Recycling must be
encouraged through every economic, technological, legislative,
and psychological means at our command.
18
-------
This alone represents a reversal of priorities. Our
history unfortunately has been one that either ignored the
role of recycling or—even worse—permitted the construction
of economic roadblocks and disincentives to waste utilization.
Thus—as we take a look at the status of recycling,
we are truly looking at an amazing industrial phenomenon . . .
One that occurred on the dark side of this planet, such was
the lack of public or governmental concern, except for a few
wartime years . . . one that occurred purely as a result of
economic need, for there was no ecological urgency, no
national concern with dwindling natural resources throughout
the past decades.
Truly an amazing phenomenon . . . here is the
recycling industry today: supplying more copper and lead
each year than is mined from our country's soil . . . provid-
ing a third of the nation's aluminum, a fourth of its zinc,
a fifth of its paper.
For a number of decades, the secondary materials
industries in this country have been recycling metals, paper,
textiles, rubber, glass—hundreds of recoverable materials.
It all began with a scattering of small businesses, which
have since grown up in this century. They matured, develop-
ing highly complex techniques and sophisticated processes.
They invested in new technology and volume-oriented equipment,
expanded research facilities, found new market outlets. They
built a major industry, one which today operates at an $8
19
-------
billion level annually.
The recycling industry was there ... in those
"dark" years, when its contributions to the economy were
cloaked in anonymity . . . when it was not commercially
advisable to say "rag content" paper—so we had "cotton
fiber content" . . . when it was more discreet to say "wood
pulp substitute", not "waste paper".
The recycling industry was there ... in the un-
fortunate wartime years, when it led great national efforts
to reutilize materials in short supply. . . when it taught
new lessons in economics and technology to those who said
"it can't be done".
And here it is in 1971 . . . having not only
survived the hot-and-cold attitudes of an illusive public,
the cyclical now we need you-now we don't policies of
manufacturing industries, and the less than consistent policy-
making of Government.
Yes, here it is—alive and well in 1971—but now
challenged to perform a role of mountainous proportions, as
big as that very solid waste mountain we've had so dramati-
cally pictured for us.
But this present status of the recycling industry
—and the present conditions under which it operates—cannot
be expected to single-handedly win the new war on solid
waste. The "discovery" of recycling is one thing; under-
standing and effectively applying it to the whole solid waste
20
-------
spectrum is something else.
"Recycling" is such a simple word. But how com-
plex it is in terms of the economic-technological inter-
relationships it involves. How complex it is in terms of
consumer purchasing habits, in terms of the kind of legisla-
tive turn-arounds that are needed. If only one thing has
become obvious to those recently initiated into the world of
recycling, it is that "recycling" is not synonymous with
"collecting". They soon learned that recycling is directly
linked to our ability to utilize increased quantities of
recycled material in existing markets and a broader range of
products—and that this recycling expansion is itself linked
to a new set of conditions . . . some "new rules" in economics,
new technological developments, new thinking in government
circles, new attitudes on the part of the consuming and
waste-generating public.
There are no short cuts, no curative or preventive
pills. The answer to transcending from present status to
future opportunities lies in change . . . the kind of change
that will promote recycled materials use, not more virgin
supplies . . . that will favor use and reuse, not use and
discard . . . that will encourage a constructive public
response and thus initiate purchasing habits that will
trigger industrial action in the form of new raw materials
use policies.
-------
Since paper constitutes the largest single element
in solid waste, it represents a revealing case in point.
Let's look at waste paper—the tens of millions of tons of
it that are discarded each year—a large percentage of which,
perhaps half, comes from packaging . . . containers of all
types and sizes.
What has happened in this paper container field is
astounding—and it represents the best evidence for the
change that is essential to successful recycling of this solid
waste.
In the decade of the Sixties, the use of paper by
every one of us grew at an unprecedented rate. Led by the
packaging field, paper use by 1970 hit a peak of 500 pounds
per person a year. We thus reached a new peak in production
and a new low in recycling . . . because while we Americans
used 58 million tons of paper—the largest amount ever—we
recycled less than 20% of it ... in fact, almost down to
half the percentage rate for recycling during the 1940's,
when there was a much lower total volume of paper produced.
In short, we have been guilty of double jeopardy ... we
use at the highest rate in the world, and recycled at
proportionately the lowest.
What is even more revealing is the raw materials
use policies of the paper industry. In those same ten years
of the Sixties, the rate of virgin pulp use outpaced that of
waste paper at a 3 to 1 ratio. Where waste paper had
22
-------
supplied 26% of the total raw material furnish of the paper
and paperboard industry in 1960, it was down below 20% by 1970.
Look at the paperboard industry, where containers
are manufactured. This segment of the paper industry has
traditionally represented the largest single market for waste
paper, and especially the bulk grades found in municipal
waste. In I960, about 42% of all containerboard was made
from "combination board"—that made largely with recycled
fibers. By 1970, this important market had decreased to a
28% level. In other words, in the short space of ten years,
the largest single outlet for waste paper had shrunk by one-
third.
More production, greater use, larger waste generat-
ion—but less recycling. Certainly not a desirable situation;
certainly a recycling status in need of change.
Look at other fields involving containers. Look at
aluminum, where the production of aluminum cans increases
annually, with little regard for economically viable or
technically feasible recycling. Metallic containers—with
all the convenience of a design engineer's imagination can
create and a production line can produce. Marketability,
not recyclability, is the motivation—and so we have bimetal-
lic containers which defy effective reuse.
On and on could go the examples indicative of a
lack of concern with the recyclability of containers or the
use of their recycled elements in new products.
23
-------
And yet containers can be recycled. They can be a
new material resource, not a solid waste or litter problem.
Let's go back to our paperboard container example. Corrugated
containers and other paperboard cartons can be recycled
directly into new containers and packaging products. In
fact, a large percentage of municipal waste consists of such
containers. And, on the other hand, a large market exists
for new containers. The obvious question then is: why isn't
a larger percentage of these recyclable materials used as
new raw material furnished by the paperboard industry?
And that question, gentlemen, brings us to that
gap I spoke about at the beginning of this presentation.
That gap—the difference between the status of recycling
today and the potential it can have—must be the focus of
our attention. The ultimate success of recycling in
responding effectively to the solid waste problem is depen-
dent on the steps that are taken—not talked about—to permit
the recycling opportunities that are possible.
These opportunities we envisage can only become
reality with the changes to which I refer. We need changes—
some basic, and perhaps radical, changes in our thinking. We
need changes in psychological attitudes among consumers about
the value of products made with recycled materials . . .
changes in Government policies relating to purchasing speci-
fications that discriminate against recycled materials . . .
changes in industry attitudes regarding responsibilities in
24
-------
balancing recycled and primary materials usage . . . changes
in attitudes by well-intentioned citizens, who see in the
act of collection of waste materials the cure-all solution to
the solid waste problem . . . changes in tax laws that favor
primary resources industries and thus serve to impede the
economics for recycling.
Some of these positions are so ingrained that it
will take a concentrated effort to revise them. But we must—
for change is imperative if we are to translate our success
in utilizing industrially generated waste to successful
recycling of packaging products on a public level.
The urgency of removing biases and prejudices and
installing incentives is critical to successful recycling.
Isn't it surprising that the Federal Government—the largest
single generator and seller of waste materials—still pro-
hibits or limits the use of recycled materials in many of
the products it purchases? Doesn't it amaze you that we
demand solid waste collection and more recycling in our
cities—and then construct municipal regulations that remove
the companies equipped to do this from the urban community?
la it not incongruous that we consumers discard a box, a
package, a container—and yet do not direct our new purchase
power toward products that use these materials again?
For too long we have lived with a philosophy based
on limitless natural resources. Now we know better. New
concern—concern with both our environment and the limitations
25
-------
of land and trees—has bred some new thinking. We are now
experiencing the first positive steps to close that recycling
opportunity gap. The needed turn-around is now underway—
and it is already visible in the declared actions of Govern-
ment, the public, and industry.
It is visible in New York—where back in February
Mayor John V. Lindsay declared: "the deck is stacked against
the recycling industry. We must end it now. We intend to
redesign our entire purchasing system to include a preference
for recycled products". And in these last weeks, New York
City became the first to actually buy some of its products
with a required recycled materials content in their
specifications.
It is visible in Washington, where the General
Services Administration and other Federal procurement agencies
are responding to President Nixon's directive—a directive
that called for a "reversal of the trend".
It is visible in industry—where company after
company, sensing the will of the public—is orienting purchas-
ing policies to recycled materials.
It is this kind of action that will broaden the
markets for recycled materials and create the favorable
economic conditions that will in turn broaden the recycling
horizon for containers. It will also expand technological
development, because it is only with a favorable economic
26
-------
atmosphere that technical study and research effort will be
undertaken. And it is important that such research be initia-
ted; it will lead to greater adaptability of recycled raw
materials to a larger range of industrial products ... it
will bring about truths, instead of myths, relative to the
performance standards of products made with recycled materials.
Ahead are studies of this country's tax structure,
which presently encourages the harvesting of trees—at the
direct economic disadvantage of waste paper . . . which
presently makes it more profitable to use virgin wood pulp
rather than recycled containers.
Ahead are more comprehensive policies linking what
municipalities generate as solid waste and that which they
purchase as new raw materials and products . . . linking what
industries manufacture as products and that which can be
recycled . . . linking this country's future raw materials
policies with environmental and conservation realities.
Ahead is a new wave of public concern ... a public
response that will represent a demand factor as great as any
consumer reaction we have known. The public has been in an
informational vacuum: it has had a poor understanding of the
dimensions of the solid waste problem or the options open
to the public sector through recycling. My Association has
taken a leadership role—and I am pleased that we are now
being joined by Government, environmental, and other industry
27
-------
groups—to inform the public. In view of the social cost of
present solid waste management, and the added burden the
future portends, can there be any doubt that the public
deserves the facts? . . . and the opportunity to respond
through a recycling purchasing orientation?
Ahead lies stronger municipal and state action . . .
and here we must hope the logic, not hysteria, is in command.
We must exert efforts to evolve the kind of regulations which
will advance solid waste utilization, not impede it. Premature
packaging taxes or other so-called control devices must not
be hastily instituted as a guise for dealing with the solid
waste problem. Overnight solutions will not be found to
resolve the solid waste problem, and the penalty approach
cannot serve as the alternative to what is really required:
a program that establishes the economic and technical opportun-
ities for expanded recycling and assures the most effective
use of all the raw materials this nation possesses.
Yes, there are recycling opportunities. I believe
what we are witnessing now is but a scratching of the surface
for recycling's future. What we are experiencing now is an
awakening to the problem and a recognition of the needs.
We have found that the nation does care enough to
put action where before we had only rhetoric. With positive
action, such as I have described, recycling represents a great
potential and real promise. Today's discarded box can be
28
-------
tomorrow's container: recycling—economically and technically
sound recycling—will make it so.
29
-------
PACKAGING AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION*
Joseph M. Martha
Sandgren, Murtha, Lubliner Inc.
Some men like golf and fishing, but I find that my
hobby has become attending environmental conferences. I
became active in the field about a year ago when I went to
one that lasted three days and three nights, and when I
realized that you couldn't scratch the surface after three
days and three nights I started to go to shorter sessions. But
I have attended them from Paris to Portland, and I am afraid
that in attempting to solve our solid waste problem we may
be creating a larger one, for we have to add to it the com-
panion concerns of land, sea, natural resources, and cer-
tainly the tremendous problem of verbal pollution about
pollution.
In fact, if we could only harness the vocal energy that
has been spent on this subject, we may be able to clean up the
problem of solid waste over night. As Will Rogers said,
"all I know is what I read in the papers, " and from them I've
*Note: Instead of a formal speech, Mr. Murtha's subject was
treated as a slide presentation, and his remarks at
our conference and throughout this text were related
to a variety of visual materials which could not be
reproduced herein.
30
-------
been soaking up information like a sponge. I bring you no
technical expertise this morning. However, I have con-
fidence that industry and the government will, in time, re-
solve many of the problems that we're discussing. I would
just like to share with you some impressions that I have
gained, both as a consultant to consumer product companies
on packaging and from attending all these conferences.
Frankly, I am appalled at some of the irresponsible
remarks that are made by representatives of various groups
interested in the subject of solid waste disposal. I am a little
concerned that we are starting to see—for a subject as vital
as this to our National interests and our individual lives--
vested interests, pressure groups, and marketing competition
for attention which is creating a rather sad misconception with
the consumer. Certainly the packaging industry has been
buffeted on all sides by consumerism, which is against
packaging puffery, and by conservationists, who are against
packaging pollution and the irresponsible use of our raw
material supplies.
In addition, of course, all levels of the industry have
some economic concerns and well they might. Can you imagine,
for example, what might happen if a major food manufacturer
31
-------
insisted that a given percentage of the packaging supplies
they send on to the consumer would have to be reclaimed
and recycled9 It could create chaos over night.
Consumer companies are concerned about other
things, too. What is the effect on brand loyalty as con-
sumers start to measure some of their own ecological
criteria for the package that they buy every day? We've
been reading in the press quite a bit about that subject. One
of our major clients had a bunch of young tigers, mostly
product managers, form a consumer protection committee
on their own with no authority, but to make recommendations.
They also requested top management to allow them to con-
stitute a package planning committee which would set
standards, ecological standards, for every package that
that huge corporation distributes through retail stores. So
there are reasons for concern, business reasons, and
economic reasons, as well as our own social reasons.
The dialogue is increasing in volume and intensity.
Industry and government are talking to each other, and they
also are doing a lot. It takes a great deal of time, as we
know. My first impression is that we are, however,
-------
ignoring the consumer. We're talking down to them quite a
bit.
If you analyze the packaging industry's advertising
over the past six months, and then if you attended a lot of
conferences, you might be astounded by the fact that there
isn't much consistency in what they are trying to tell the
consumer. This is also true about what their business
concerns are, as they look towards further government
activity at the Federal, State and local levels.
There has been virtually no research that I know of
done on the level of consumer concern. We did a great deal
of this in the '60's, when we were first promoting composite
packaging and convenience packaging. We tested the con-
sumer from every possible angle to find out where his levels
of concern for convenience and cost were, and where the
two axes would meet on the charts to indicate that he would
be willing to pay 40% more for a package if he got convenience.
But we don't know what the consumer is willing to do today
in terms of conservation concerns as they relate to packaging.
And that, basically, is what I would like to chat with you
briefly about.
33
-------
SYNPOSIS OF COMMENTS RE SLIDES
I am going to rely on some slides, from this point
on, because my business really is visual and I feel much
more comfortable in this medium rather than in the verbal
aspects of communication. The title assigned to me origi-
nally was 'Designing from Beginning to End1, but I am going
to change that. Actually what we're talking about this
morning is packaging and environmental protection and you
have here today a very knowledgeable group of specialists
who can give you all kinds of statistics and programs.
However, we are wondering will industry sell re-
cycling. We're also wondering how we're going to handle
the recycling if our cities are in extremely critical situations
with respect to finances, and how they can handle and dis-
tribute wastes. We are concerned in many ways about the
makeup of packaging.
I mentioned composite packaging a moment ago, and
how in our business and in packaging development and design
it became almost an expression of virtuosity in the 1960's
to be able to use 7 laminates and different types of material
in a package, because we were getting such tremendous
34
-------
technological breakthroughs in the packaging industry.
Nevertheless, we still had the consumer out there --
looking, watching, confused, hearing a great deal, seeing
a little, and he wanted in on the subject. So I want to talk
about communications planning to the consumer, which I
consider the missing link in environmental programs as
well as the subject of packaging pollution.
We are concerned with the areas of communications
planning as a company, just as we are with package design,
with marketing and research, and this is not a commercial.
I just wanted you to know that all of these tools have to be
put to work somewhere along the line, if we're going to find
out how much activism we can expect from the consumer
with respect to packaging.
Now, we all are potential victims of the ecology,
even those who act as designers and planners of aesthetic
environments. In fact, I'm reminded that you have a very
fine designer here in Columbus called Eugene Smith who,
five years ago, put together a film on "Ugly America". At
the same time we were working on another version of this
subject, and took it on tour around the country.
35
-------
At that time, we were thinking only about people,
and we didn't worry so much about soiid wastes. We were
primarily concerned about visual environment, the aesthetics,
the honky-tonk streets that we were creating in our munici-
palities, and our question was then, "Is business responsible
for bad designs?" Is it the businessman who says, "Don't
talk about aesthetics,I've got my eye on the bottom line, and
profitability is all I am concerned with".
Today, our corporations are much more interested
in their responsibilities with respect to ecological programs
and, specifically, they're concerned with their communi-
cations posture with all of their publics on the subject, and
we think we're going to see a great deal within the next year
of consumer product companies trying to reach the consumer
in their home with their concern about packaging and ecology.
I will have a little more to say on that specifically as we look
at more visuals, for package design and development cer-
tainly can contribute substantially to the challenge of solid
waste disposal.
If we had a packaging "explosion" in the '60's when
convenience packaging and composite packaging became the
36
-------
by-word, then maybe we should now be looking for a packaging
"implosion" where we go back and use our talents to simplify
our packaging and to simplify the materials that we use in
developing them. We are concerned with a great many
brands and these brands are being measured by the consumer,
and also being measured by research. Here, for example,
is a report by our research affiliate, the firm of Opatow
Associates, and I'll read it for you.. .. "complaints about how
packaging is raising prices have increased steadily in the
past three years". This is a report of this year. "Complaints
about storage and convenience seem to have decreased some-
what, or perhaps we're testing smaller packages. The
voluntary comments about the problems of disposal, either
in terms of bulk or in terms of environmental effects, have
increased to the point where specific questions must now be
included in many questionnaires to measure opinions related
to these subjects. "
Opatow Associates has been doing quite a bit of
research for major consumer brands and this is their
comment, and they specialize in packaging research, after
looking over six months of research reports. The report
37
-------
goes on to say. . . "There are already evidences of growing
consumer concern. At the same time, experts within the
packaging industry and in government at all levels are in
serious disagreement with respect to the methods for
attacking packaging pollution. This tends to confuse and
frustrate the consumer who wants to make a contribution.
In the final analysis, if it continues, it will probably
fractionate and dissipate programs which are already pro-
liferating from many sources and at many levels. "
You all know that consumer campaigns are increasing
very rapidly in which industries within the total packaging
industry are trying to express their concern about ecology
and, of course, they use it to further their marketing efforts.
In the '60's, raw material suppliers and packaging suppliers
were in fierce competition for the convenience package. We're
distressed if, in the final analysis, advertising will be used
to set up the same competition on so serious a subject as
ecology and packaging pollution. We are even starting to see,
and I counted six of them the past month, ecology symbols
and identification devices being used by individual industries,
and if these are proliferated it can only result in confusing
and frustrating the consumer.
38
-------
I have been challenged at a half dozen conferences
about quotations or facts I've cited from public sources on
paper fiber and the savings of trees, and I know that it is a
very complex subject. But when it suits some companies,
and I am not picking on St. Regis, believe me, because this
same type of advertising is used quite a bit in the paper in-
dustry now, they go all out to tell consumers about the savings
made possible by recycling. Yet, in conferences such as
this one, there is little agreement, particularly in terms of
the paper industry, that this accomplishes much with our
present reforestation methods.
The Resource Recovery Act of 1970 includes seven
major areas of activity, and I am sure most of you are familiar
with them. The Environmental Protection Agency in its Solid
Wastes Office is sponsoring a wide variety of long and short-
term studies to evaluate the most promising approaches to
these problems. These were spelled out at considerable
length at the National Packaging Show in Chicago last week.
But as far as we know, there is no research being done with
the consumer to develop effective communications programs,
so they can understand the problem better, and so they can
choose from their options in contributing towards cleaning
39
-------
up the solid wastes problem.
For example, what is the level of consumer concern
with respect to packaging pollution? How does it affect
brand loyalty? What kind of programs might channel these
concerns into constructive action? What kind of communi-
cations approach will best meet these concerns ?
We know that newspapers are (this slide happens to
be only for New York City, incidentally) the biggest problem
in our waste disposal systems, but we don't see anybody
doing anything to help the consumer get rid of them easily.
Even handling them is often terribly difficult, and we wonder
why self-liquidated premiums aren't offered so that people
can somehow just physically handle or segregate ten issues
of the New York Times. It's quite a job, if you've ever
tried it.
We think that a lot more will have to be done to make
it easier for the housewife and easier for her family to
segregate and start the recycling process. For if segregation
doesn't begin in the home, or maybe even in the retail dis-
tribution channels, local government agencies are left with
the massive problem of disposing of these materials and,
40
-------
from everything that I have heard, to build the kind of in-
cineration plants that we might need will probably take ten
years -- and perhaps more tax money than we have available.
It doesn't require an expert to go into any super-
market, any drugstore, and quickly go down the line and see
places where packaging material can be saved, and see places
where the problem of ultimate recycling by reclamation could
be simplified. But no matter what starting point you pick you
hurt somebody.
Consider, just for a moment, gift packaging of liquor.
How many of us would be willing to buy the bottle as it stands
on the shelf? 40% of the liquor sold in the U.S. is sold during
the holiday season, and we have contributed by developing
quite a few designs for holiday liquor packaging. And every
year it becomes more of a challenge to use more composite
materials, to use more aluminum, to use more ribbons,
even to put plastic symbols attached to the outside carton.
Just in this area alone there could be a tremendous savings
in packaging materials and a saving in solid wastes.
For ten years I've been kidded by the steel industry
because we once made a recommendation for rounded, square
cans rather than round cans. It would slow down the manu-
41
-------
facturing process slightly and require some mandrels, but
other than that, consider the fantastic saving in materials. . .
about 20% in the ends alone, because you don't cut away so
much waste as you do in a circle. . .about 18% less in corru-
gated cartons to contain the cans. . .about 12% saving in linear
shelf space in the supermarket which the retailer would like.
I am only using these figures as examples of all the areas
that a non-expert could look at in order to save materials,
because if you save package materials you reduce solid
wastes.
Five years ago I judged a packaging competition, and
we gave the grand award of the show to a Kroger orange
juice container in a poly-pouch. Since the orange concentrate
is a solid in a frozen form, it doesn't need the protection that
some of the other packages afforded. It was interesting to me
that this package, while apparently it was functional, econo-
mical, and everything else, was totally rejected by the
consumer in test markets. Think of the saving if we went
to concentrated syrups, or added our own water or soda in
the home; or to collapsible boxes, with all kinds of ways to
crease them and design them so that they can be more
easily compacted.
42
-------
We have found that in some of the research we've
been doing that one of the real problems is the sheer bulk
of packaging and the difficulty the consumer or the housewife
has in compacting them in order to cut down the bulk of the
solid waste that has to be carried out in trash. We have so
many packages today that are really multi-packs of indi-
vidual packages. Look at some of your soap packaging where
the soap is wrapped in aluminum foil, then put in a carton,
the carton is put together with 9 other cartons, then it is
wrapped in poly, and marketed as a deal in a multiple package.
The same is true of cereals. There are great opportunities
in these areas to cut down.
Some years ago in working in the flour and sugar
field, we found out that in flour over 80% of the housewives
put the flour in their own storage container in the home. Yet
we still have expensive flour containers, composites of
plastic, foil, and fiber, and the same thing very often in the
area of condiments and spices and herbs. These could also
be put into very inexpensive pouches which then could be
placed in the container in the home.
Do you remember the packages that the astronauts
used in their weightless trips? Actually, ten years ago the
43
-------
Quartermaster Corps in Chicago proved the feasibility of re-
torting process fruits and vegetables in plastic pouches rather
than in cans, so it is a long way from that to getting them into
the supermarket and understanding how to handle them. But
this is just an idea for babyfoods, because if the babyfoods
could be retorted in a mylar pouch then it also would cut down
tremendously on material's waste and cost, and it might also
make it much easier to dispense.
I said one of my major concerns is this question of
communicating to the consumer, and before that is the concern
about what will the consumer do if they get such a program''
Suppose that the consumer were shown how they could contrib-
ute to solid waste disposal in packaging. How much will they
actually do? I think that those are two of the most important
questions in a lot of the technical and very specific discussions
that we go through in this type of conference.
For example, suppose that we were able to flag a
product and identify the type of packaging material to the con-
sumer at the point of purchase. Then the consumer would
have the option of purchasing packages which would contribute
to the ecology. Suppose that we use, and this is very hypo-
thetical and quite schematic, a blue square for metal packaging
44
-------
and a green circle for glass and a red triangle for paperboard
containers, folding cartons, and so forth. And suppose that
standards were established so that the manufacturer would
be entitled to use these symbols if they met very minimum
standards such as a minimum amount of recycled materials
in the packaging, etc. Then the consumer could go to the
supermarket shelf and start to make up his or her mind about
how important the whole question of packaging and solid waste
is to them. They would have the option at that point to do
something about it.
Now suppose we went a step further and, of course,
the supermarket would have signs in the store indicating that
packages with these symbols on them did meet minimum
standards for recycling and reclamation, and here was the
program and this is what we would do about it. Then, instead
of one huge shopping bag, whether you buy 3 packs of gum or
20 packages of cereal, you are given three different sized
bags designed to deal with the volume of metal containers,
glass containers, and dry groceries, and each one of them is
coded so that at the checkout counter, as you came around,
the segregation process was already started.
45
-------
All this is a way of motivating and educating and
bringing this process up to a level of consciousness and
awareness where the consumer starts to carry out the cycle
himself, which would mean that, right here in the supermarket,
your metals would be separated from your glass and your dry
groceries and folding cartons would also be separated. Hope-
fully, this process would continue on into the home, which
might mean new designs for our trash containers, etc., but
we would segregate as the products were used and the packages
were discarded.
And then we would have to help in various other areas.
For example, why not offer as a self-liquidating premium a
can compressor, or compactor, at $1.98. I am not trying to
put Whirlpool out of business, but we would design the cans
with prestressed lines so that they would compact easily, and
a child could do it. This only calls for the same torque that
you might remember on the old-fashioned orange juice squeezers.
Suppose that instead of deposits on bottles we put a de-
posit on well-built, returnable, plastic carrying cases,
because one of the problems in getting the glass back is how
to carry it. After you would return the containers that you buy
the product in, the glass would be disposed of in suitable bins
46
-------
at the supermarket parking lot.
We also believe that, whether or not any communi-
cations system is set up, the companies who are marketing
the brands will have enough concern about the consumer's
reaction to the ecology that they will cooperate. And so at
the supermarket parking lot there would be disposal bins,
and this could be dramatized through signs on the road
signalling where disposal sites are set up. Maybe we could
even keep our beaches clean by having a similar system of
disposal bins providing for three different types of materials
at the food service areas and other key locations.
Well, some will say that any program regardless of
source builds an awareness of pollution problems and stimu-
lates consumer education activity. We hear this a lot, but
we think it's wrong. We think that a Tower-of-Babel approach
to such a serious subject makes an ultimate unified effort on
a national scale difficult if not impossible. The dangers are
that this kind of confusion and frustration can lead to arbitrary
legislation. It may also stimulate commercial exploitation of
environmental activities and this is already in evidence. And
it may delay worthwhile solutions coining out of competition
among elements of the packaging industry, which now tends
47
-------
to put the blame elsewhere and thus operate against the co-
ordinated national program.
In concluding, I have just these few points to leave
with you. First, that consumer research is necessary to
determine the levels of concern. Secondly, that a communi-
cations program industry-wide by the packaging industry
should be undertaken to educate and motivate the consumer.
Third, centralize and coordinate the consumer communi-
cations program nationally which might be done in EPA.
Fourth, an effective visual and verbal identification program
starts with basic principles and policies. Establish liaison
for the communications program with manufacturing and
distribution levels of the packaging industry to provide
leadership and encourage cooperation. Fifth, feed the
results of technical studies into the national communications
program to ensure most meaningful activities at the local
level. Sixth, and my last point, design and develop a program
based on consumer research to simplify and standardize
packaging using marketing criteria.
I am sorry that I ran to the full length of my time,
Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
# # #
48
-------
PACKAGING FOR FOOD SYSTEMS OF THE FUTURE
Norman A. Vanasse
General Foods Corporation
Good morning ladies and gentlemen.
It's a pleasure to be here today. I
appreciate this opportunity to speak and the chance
to participate in the Solid Waste Conference pro-
gram.
So far, we have heard from some distin-
guished representatives of industry and government.
In the next day-and-a-half I'm sure we'll hear
many equally stimulating and informative presenta-
tions .
This morning, I would like to talk about
the demands of Food Systems of the Future on Pack-
aging and their relation to effective solid waste
management.
We'll look at these packaging demands
from three points of view — that of the consumer,
the distributor and the ecologist. Following this,
I would like to review current thinking on interim
and long-range solution of the solid waste problem.
To begin, then, let's take a broad-brush
look at tomorrow's food consumer and her world.
The consumer of the 1970's and 1980's
49
-------
will by-and-large be the youngest, best educated
and most affluent in history.
By 1975 it is estimated that more than
17 million Americans will be college graduates.
And also by that year, more than half the popula-
tion 25 years and over will have high school
diplomas.
The time is soon approaching when more
than half the nation will be 30 years of age or
less. And this trend toward a more youthful soci-
ety is expected to continue.
Nearly half the women in the United
States between 18 and 65 are gainfully employed —
daily supplementing their household income.
The next two decades will see more con-
sumer discretionary income than ever before —
resulting both from growing affluence and increased
entry by the housewife into the job market.
Younger, richer and better educated —
tomorrow's food buyer will present a whole new ball
game for the food industry and the food packaging.
A major way in which these changes will
50
-------
Individuality will be still another
characteristic of tomorrow's food buyer. Put
another way, the housewife of the future will feel
an increasing need to accentuate herself as dis-
tinguished from others — to be an individual.
This individuality is expected to express
itself through increased consumer style and color
consciousness — leading to an acceptance and
demand for decorative, stylized packaging.
Both the products and packages she buys
will be expected to contribute to her sense of
individuality and self-actualization.
The meals and snacks tomorrow's housewife
serves the family and friends will be expected to
enhance her self image of individualism and
creativity.
Interacting with these consumer attitudes
will be what sociologists call a lower frustration
tolerance.
Put more simply, tomorrow's food buyer
will be much less patient with circumstances and
situations which frustrate her intentions.
53
-------
Convenience in terms of easy product
availability and variety will become increasingly
important to the consumer. Equally vital will be
product convenience in terms of easy preparation
and storage.
Tomorrow's wife and mother simply won't
have the time or inclination to engage in difficult
or time-consuming meal preparation.
And I think with productivity per man-
hour increasing everywhere else, the housewife is
correct in demanding equal freedom from drudgery.
So this is a brief look at tomorrow's
convenience food consumer.
Educated and affluent, she reflects the
permissiveness of a youth-oriented society.
Venturesome and individualistic, her attentions
have turned to the new and the different in order
to accomplish self-actualization.
And of primary concern to the food
industry and food packaging, she demands all these
gratifications through less effort and inconven-
ience than ever before.
54
-------
For us in the food industry, meeting the
demands and expectations of this future food buyer
will call for a number of shifts in emphasis.
As the tastes of both her and her family
grow more sophisticated, the demand for more
single-portion packaging will certainly arise.
Father may demand French-cut string beans with his
pot roast while brother and sister see southern-
style cream corn as the only acceptable companion.
One family member may have a pressing
social engagement at the dinner hour — demanding
an individual hot snack in place of the programmed
evening fare.
In fact, we see a definite trend away
from the traditional three square family meals and
toward more odd-hour snacks and eating on-the-run.
Our consumer and her family won't confine
their venturesomeness and other new attitudes to
eating. The whole life style will be one of
individualism.
This world of the future will also demand
much in the way of package aesthetics and product
55
-------
information.
Already, the need for attractive pack-
aging is making itself felt throughout the industry.
In the future, packaging aesthetics will play an
even greater role.
Of equal importance will be the informa-
tion provided on the package. Already, federal
state and local laws require detailed information
in many areas. Still further information — for
example, caloric and nutritional values — are
voluntarily provided.
In the future, the demand for package
information can only rise. Tomorrow's sophisticat-
ed consumer will want to know as much as possible
about her intended purchase.
What is it? — How will it look? — How
do I make it? — and is it good for us? — these
will all be prime buyer considerations, facts the
consumer will expect the package to supply.
To keep pace with the consumer's lowering
frustration tolerance, future packaging will have
to lend itself to more and more convenience.
56
-------
Easy open; easy close; easy storage;
easy disposal — all these factors will be prime
considerations in package design.
In some cases, the package will come to
play an even greater role in actual food consump-
tion than today. Eating utensils, for example,
may be an integral part of the package or even the
product itself. We will also see more packages
serving as the actual eating cup, bowl or plate.
This, then, is a look at the future
consumer and the packaging that will serve her.
Now, let's look at the food distribution
systems of the future and their impact on packaging.
A prime consideration in examining future
distribution trends are some rather dramatic pro-
jections for transportation costs.
Trucking costs are expected to rise
40 percent above the inflation index by 1981. Rail
costs, on the other hand, have a forecast increase
of 30 percent during the same time period.
To put it short and sweet, it's going to
cost a lot more to move anything anywhere in
57
-------
tomorrow's world.
What does this mean for the packager?
One trend will certainly be toward more
compact and lighter packages — even if a possible
rate base change from weight to volume should
occur.
How individual packages fit together into
cases and on pallets will also be a prime consider-
ation. Wasted space can only mean wasted money,
and more money than ever before.
Compact, light-weight and damage-free
packaging will be required as the competition for
store shelf space becomes more intense.
Today, the average grocery store carries
approximately 8,000 separate items. In the next
10 years, however, we estimate a 57 percent in-
crease in the number of dry grocery products alone.
With frozen foods and the like, we look for a 125
percent increase in individual products.
Excess bulk and difficult handling simply
will not be possible in this highly competitive
market situation. And packaging will be called
58
-------
upon to play an increasing role in their elimina-
tion.
One area of conflict between these
distribution trends and ecological concern is the
severe limitations placed on the concept of
returnable containers. As stores become more
crowded and transportation rates rise, the econom-
ics of returnables will become increasingly
prohibitive.
Turning to the ecologist and his view of
future packaging, I'm sure he must shudder at the
ramifications of much of what I've said so far.
Though certain aspects of this consumer
and food distribution world I've outlined lend
themselves to ecological concerns, many others
combine to paint an initially bleak picture in
terms of environmental protection.
By 1976, for example, it is estimated
that more than 73 million tons of packaging
materials will be used annually in the United
States — that's more than 661 pounds for each
man, woman and child.
59
-------
Going further, one expert has predicted
that this annual per capita level could reach 900
pounds by the dawn of the 21st Century.
Though we've all heard similar projec-
tions a hundred times, I never cease to be awed by
the magnitude of such figures.
From a purely ecological point of view,
it could be said that all packaging should be
reduced to a bare minimum. A purist in this field
could easily demand a return to the most basic in
packaging technique — promising doomsday as the
only alternative.
But to assume that housewives should buy
cereal in 20 pound bags or their beef by the side
is as absurd as to say that ecological considera-
tions should be totally ignored.
And I don't feel that sensible ecologists
see a return to a world devoid of convenience as
the answer, anyway. I think they see the solution
much as most of us do — as a balanced approach
combining the stronger points of each position.
Speaking for society, the ecologist
60
-------
makes it perfectly clear that a concentrated
environmental protection effort in all areas is the
mandate of the future.
He recognizes consumer demands in pack~
aging and other areas but warns that these very
buyers could be buried in the results of their own
quest for convenience.
A statement of the varying conflicts
among the future demands of the food consumer,
distributor and the ecologist is not a new theme
by any means.
It does, however, merit periodic
examination since it is fundamental to the dilemma
facing the food packaging industry and society as
a whole.
It is a realistic assumption that modern
food packaging helps allow many women the free time
to leave home and participate in environmental
protection activities.
The farm wife of 100 years ago felt
fortunate if able to attend even a monthly social
event. And even these were often devoted to food
61
-------
preparation — for example, corn husking.
But today's woman usually has a social
agenda rivaling a movie star — and often with a
family and a job to boot. And packaging — food
and otherwise — has made a major contribution to
this emancipation.
However, the very same housewife that
demands the ultimate in packaging convenience is —
either directly or as part of society -- demanding
effective and total solid waste control.
So the obvious question arises — can
society have all the convenience and other pack-
aging attributes demanded by its future course
while still progressing toward total environmental
protection?
Put another way — can the consumer and
society have their cake and eat it too?
To me, the answer is a definite YES.
I feel that the same technology that
produced our present and potential states of the
art in packaging can — through a systems approach
provide effective solid waste management.
62
-------
Through innovation, cooperation and
plain hard work, society can and will have all
that it desires in each area.
The dynamics of a free economy dictate
that the food industry strive to meet all consumer
demands — packaging and otherwise. Failure to do
so — regardless of how noble the reason — would
prove economic suicide.
Certainly, government could regulate
packaging to an extent where all consumer desires
and convenience went by the way side. But such
dangerous overreaction could cripple our free
market system beyond the point of no return.
We recognize that sensible legislators
and administrators seek to work within the param-
eters of the free enterprise system in order to
reach solutions.
Functioning in a free economy, we at
General Foods see our ultimate mission as that of
providing the consumer of tomorrow with all the
convenience, freshness, aesthetics and other
attributes she desires.
63
-------
With us — as I'm sure with most
companies — this is the name of the game.
But we also feel that this can and must
be accomplished hand-in-hand with a definite con-
tribution to the systems approach to solid waste
management I mentioned earlier.
No one point along the road from a
package's inception to its ultimate disposal can
be singled out as totally responsible for the solid
waste problem. Any workable solution must come
from an integrated effort at all points — each
engineered to facilitate the other.
This conference, incidentally, is typical
of the ways in which this solution will be found.
Only through meaningful communication and coopera-
tion can a systematized effort be formulated and
effected.
Effective communication to the public at
large is also vital. And today, public awareness
of the packaging industry's environmental concern
has never been greater.
Paramount in creating this increased
64
-------
public understanding have been several dramatic
reclamation efforts — each combining economic and
social incentives for container collection.
But I'm sure I speak for the entire
packaging industry in saying that in the long view,
such measures are at best a stop gap.
The ultimate solution — all authorities
agree — lies in mass recycling. For maximum
effectiveness, the only answer can be total
municipal recycling plants — plants able to sort
mixed garbage and retrieve useful materials and
energy without a pollution problem.
Time does not permit a discussion of the
economics and methods involved in such plants.
But the experts insist that such systems can be
operated — and operated at a profit.
All of us, I'm sure, recognize that this
network of recycling plants supported by a totally
sympathetic packaging technology won't spring out
of the blue tomorrow, next month or even next year.
Therefore, all of us — government and
industry — must also seek interim solutions in
65
-------
addition to long range ones.
To do otherwise would be like building
vertical takeoff airports while neglecting fixed
wing airports because someday jets might be
obsolete.
The food industry and its packaging
elements must act now to ease the load on current
incineration, landfill and other solid waste
disposal operations.
At present, this is being accomplished
in several ways — primarily through the reduction
of bulk, weight, and overall packaging excesses.
We are also constantly looking at new packaging
materials — materials which lend themselves to
compaction and pollution-free burning.
And, interestingly enough, we are finding
that many of these changes actually add to —
rather than detract from — consumer product
acceptance.
This development poses an interesting
question — one which we could all keep in mind as
this conference moves from the overview to the
66
-------
specifics of technological exchange.
The question is — where are the best
ways to mutually serve the best interests of the
consumer and the environment? Where, through
technology and innovation, can we give society the
best from all possible worlds.
In closing, let me again emphasize the
need for an integrated systems approach to effec-
tive solid waste management. The only solutions
will be those that account for all the variables —
consumer demand, distribution economics, techno-
logical capabilities and ecological necessity.
I hope my sketch of tomorrow's packaging
for tomorrow's foods has given you a further in-
sight into some of these variables.
I also hope I have shown how consumer
demand interacts in many varied ways with the
viewpoints of the distributor and the ecologist
toward packaging.
I feel the food industry is highly aware
of the need for corrective action on the solid
waste problem — both in the interim and over the
67
-------
long haul.
And not only are they aware of the
problem but have and will continue to make sig-
nificant contributions to its solution.
Thank you for your kind attention.
Again, let me say it has been both a pleasure and
an honor to speak here today.
Thank you.
68
-------
SESSION II
PLASTICS, COMPOSITES AND PAPER
Chairman:
J. H. Lindholm, Chief
Paper, Packaging and
Graphic Arts Economics
Columbus Laboratories
Battelle Memorial Institute
-------
-------
INCENTIVES FOR THE RECYCLING AND REUSE OF PLASTICS
Jack Milgrom
Arthur D. Little Inc.
We have just completed a study for the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency to explore incentives for the recycl-
ing and/or reuse of plastics. This is the first of the so-
called incentive studies that include not only the gathering
of information, but an attempt to find solutions.
But why select plastics for this study? Plastics
represents less than 2%, on the average, of the solid waste
stream. However, in addition to being very much in the
public's eye today, plastics belong to that category of mat-
erials whose physical properties are often degraded during
recycling, and essentially none is being recycled from the
consumer. On the other hand, materials such as metals, glass,
and paper are being recycled today, and the recycling of
these materials will no doubt increase; therefore, the con-
centration of plastics in solid wastes could become more sig-
nificant.
There were two aspects to this study: (1) to develop
a descriptive model of the plastics cycle, and during the
study we interviewed all segments of the plastic cycle from
resin producer to supermarket; and (2) to develop complete
strategies for promoting the recycling and reuse of plastics.
At present, we will present some of the information that we
gathered, but will withhold information related to overall
strategies until the government agency has fully reviewed our
recommendations. However, we have cautioned our client that
69
-------
in the development of strategies relating to plastic materials,
significant action cannot be taken unless the strategies in-
clude all competitive materials.
In carrying out this study, it was important to de-
fine certain terms that are used by the industry and develop
new ones. The words reuse and recycle, for example, are often
used interchangeably. Reuse indicates that the package is
used over again in its same form. The returnable bottle is an
excellent example. On the other hand, recycling implies that
the packaging material is reprocessed, which in the case of
plastics means remelted and reformed, either into its original
form as in primary recycling, or into another plastic form as
in secondary recycling. Thus, plastics can be pyrolyzed to
yield non-plastic materials such as oils, waxes, and greases.
Considering economic value, reuse offers the highest return,
and pyrolysis and energy conversion the lowest.
We have also developed a new term called NP or
nuisance plastics. These are the plastics of no value, and
they are usually found in the disposal area. A corrollary
term, SP or scrap plastics, is plastic that has potential
value. It is equal to SP (scrap plastic of value) + NP. In
other words, if the scrap plastic cannot be used, it becomes NP.
Because this study was limited to recycling, only
thermoplastics were considered. Thermoplastics can be melted
and reformed numerous times in contrast to thermosets that
only can be melted and formed once. As shown in Table 1,
70
-------
thermoplastics represent 80% of all plastics. Recycling coat-
ings and adhesives (not including extrusion coatings) is vir-
tually impossible. Thus, excluding these still leaves 75% of
all plastics as potentially recycleable material. Our study
has only included the "Big 5" thermoplastics, namely, high and
low density polyethylenes, polypropylene, polystyrene, and PVC.
These account for 89% of the potentially recycleable plastics.
Early in our study, we developed seven objectives or
criteria for assessing alternative strategies. These also
served to guide us in our information gathering phase. These
objectives are listed in Table 2. I would like to comment on
two of them. The first objective, which is the prime one, re-
fers to environmental damage. There are two aspects to this
damage—an economic aspect and an aesthetic one. One example
of economic damage is that caused by burning plastics in
facilities noc specifically designed for this operation. An-
other example, which is probably more significant, is caused
by the high bulk density of uncrushed rigid plastic containers.
This can cause difficulties in disposal from the garbage can
to the collector and ultimately in the final disposal area.
Assorted plastic packaging that is not compressed occupies as
much as 800 cu ft/ton, in contrast to the approximately 30 cu
ft/ton density of the completely compressed plastic material.
The aesthetic aspect is essentially a subjective
term, and the best example is litter. For example, consider
the following two plastic packaging items as litter—a piece
71
-------
of transparent plastic film and a large, opaque, rigid plastic
container. The latter is obviously the most visible and,
therefore, most people would consider it aesthetically dis-
pleasing. However, the same container sitting in one's back-
yard is considered less damaging to the environment than the
container along the roadside, which illustrates the importance
of the degree of exposure.
I would also like to comment on Objective No. 7.
Plastic packaging can be either mono- or multi-plastic, that
is based on more than one plastic material, and they also can
be composites. A composite is a product consisting of one or
more plastics together with a non-plastic substrate. As many
of you know, the technical problems of reprocessing multi-
plastics or composites makes this approach unattractive. Re-
processing or recycling requires the plastic to be homogeneous:
one plastic type with minimal contamination.
We mentioned earlier that plastics represent less
than 2% of the solid wastes. Accordingly, the technical and
economic problems of recovering these materials from the final
disposal site are overwhelming. This suggests that any attempt
to recover scrap plastic from the consumer of necessity would
have to be done by intercepting it before it reaches the final
disposal area. Therefore, collectability should be considered.
Again, let us consider plastic film and containers. Normally
the household consumer considers plastic film in the same way
as paper wrapping and discards it in the trash can. In con-
72
-------
trast, the rigid container is often set aside. It is easily
segregated from the household refuse, and in the past, contain-
ers were set aside for return to the store.
Let us now look at the entire plastics cycle shown
in Figure 1. The resin producer is responsible for determin-
ing the chemistry of the plastic product. The fabricator
takes the granulated or pelletized resin and transforms it
into a shaped article. The converter then uses the fabricated
items such as film to make, for example, plastic bags. Both
of these sectors are responsible for producing the end plastic
item. The manufacturer/packager segment, and in particular
the packager, is the major decision-maker in the packaging
cycle. He is the one who decides just what type of plastic
package he wishes to use for his product.
As one proceeds from resin producer to packager and
on to the consumer, one goes from the very large companies to
the smaller ones. Geographically, resin producers in the U.S.
are relatively concentrated, particularly along the Gulf Coast;
whereas, the wholesaler/retailer sector and obviously the
consumers are distributed according to population density.
Note by the dashed line that all segments of the
plastic cycle, including the consumer, generate NP. Thus,
there are two major sources of NP, that from the industrial
sector and that from the consumer. Some are not aware that
plastics today are being extensively recycled. For example,
as an integral part of their operation, fabricators usually
73
-------
recycle between 10 and 15% of their production. This amounts
to more than 1.5 billion Ibs. In addition, the resin produ-
cers sell SP that they themselves cannot use through the re-
processor segment. This is a small segment of the industry
today. Nevertheless, approximately 1 billion Ibs. of scrap
plastic went this route in 1970. The reprocessor purchases
scrap plastic and converts it to secondary resin.
We have prepared flow diagrams for each of the seg-
ments of the plastic cycle. That for the resin producer is
shown in Figure 2. The decision points are represented by
the triangles and are listed in Table 3. The pentagonal
symbol represents various categories of NP. In our report
we have prepared a rather complete catalogue of sources of NP
generated by the various segments in the plastic cycle. Note
that NP can be generated during every operation. This diagram
illustrates how scrap plastic can be removed in three different
ways: 0-) by recycling it in ones own facilities; (2) by sel-
ling it to a reprocessor; or (.3) by removing it as NP. Anoth-
er important aspect illustrated by this diagram is the produc-
tion of "offgrade" resin. If the resin producer does not meet
the specifications designated by his customer, or if he has
to dispose of transitional material produced as he changes
from grade to grade, the product is called virgin off-grade
resin, in contrast to virgin prime resin. Now if market con-
ditions are such that the resin, producer cannot sell all of
his products, he stores it and then sells it to the highest
74
-------
paying customer. In times of low demand he often sells this
surplus as offgrade material. This procedure provides the
resin prices. Incidentally, 1970 was a year where most of
these resins were produced in oversupply, and the resin
producer is currently attempting to use this safety-valve tech-
nique.
Now let us turn to the consumer's segment. The con-
sumer really does not consume most products, he merely uses
them for a certain period of time. This time corresponds to
the service life of a given product. Thus, a plastic product
in the hands of the consumer only becomes NP when it is of
little value to him.
A summary of the estimated service lives of differ-
ent plastic products is shown in Table A. The products listed
in Table 4-A are the most significant ones for this study.
Note that the production losses are included. The values
listed in Table 4 were used to estimate the volume of differ-
ent plastic products in the disposal area.
Let us next examine the types of NP in the disposal
area today and as we estimate to 1980 (see Figure 3). Not
surprisingly the major component is that derived from packag-
ing, corresponding to about 60% of all NP in the disposal area.
Accordingly, the development of strategies focused on these
two types of NP can solve the major problems of plastics in the
solid waste stream. Notice that housewares, which is the
third category, only represents about 6% of the total NP.
75
-------
Most other types of NP are present in small fractions and would
be difficult to recycle because many are present as composites.
The statistics used to prepare the graph in Figure
3 are shown in Table 5. Based on the Big 5 thermoplastics,
6.5 billion pounds of NP were estimated to be in the disposable
area in 1970. By 1980, we expect this to rise to 18.8 billion
pounds.
Packaging wastes, which are almost 4 billion pounds
today, will rise to approximately 10 billion pounds by 1980.
This represents a decrease in the percent packaging waste as
a percent of all plastics in the disposal area. Other plastic
items with long service lives, for example wire and cable, will
account for more and more of the NP during the coming decade;
and it is this factor which will reduce the percent packaging
waste. However, these estimates do not include the potential
increase in NP, if plastic beverage containers become a reality.
We do not believe that this will occur to any large extent be-
fore 1975, but by 1980 the penetration of the market could
yield as much as 2 billion pounds of NP, if recycling and re-
use does not become a viable solution. Thus, packaging
wastes in 1980 could be 12 billion pounds.
Table 6 shows the composition of NP according to the
type of plastics in the disposal area. Polyolefins which in-
cludes polyethylenes and polypropylenes, are the major type of
plastic in the disposal area today. It represents about 70%
of NP from all sources, but that from packaging accounts for
76
-------
82%. PVC from all sources of NP accounts for about 12%, while
that from packaging is only 6%.
Many are surprised to discover the large volume of
NP produced by industry, but wastes from each segment are cum-
ulative. Though the resin producer produces as little as 1%
NP, this is added to the larger waste generated by the fabri-
cating and converting operations. Table 7 shows the various
sources of industrial NP; fabrication and converting account
for the major portion, and are approximately 60%.
The total amount of industrial NP is about 1 billion
pounds. The major plastics in industrial NP are LDPE and PVC,
as shown in Table 8. The relatively large concentration of
PVC is more difficult to process and reprocess than the other
major thermoplastics. We do not forsee any major changes in
the composition of industrial wastes during this decade.
Looking at packaging NP from the consumer sector, according
to form, almost 90 weight percent of all packaging is mono-
plastic (see Table 9). Thus, most of this packaging is po-
tentially recycleable. Though the rigid containers account
for approximately 40 weight percent of all plastic packaging
wastes, on a volume basis rigid containers are the major type
of plastic packaging wastes. Looking ahead to 1980, we do not
see any major changes in the composition of packaging wastes
by form. Although the production of composite and multi-
plastic film will increase, rigid mono-plastic containers will
still account for the major portion of packaging wastes on a
77
-------
volume basis.
Because plastic bottles are potentially the most
easily collectable and, therefore, recycleable wastes, let us
examine the type of bottles in the disposal area today and
in this decade, as shown in Table 10. Most plastic bottles to-
day are fabricated from one plastic—high density polyethylene.
They accounted for 84% of all plastic bottles in the disposal
area in 1970 and this percentage could rise to 88% by 1980.
Fortunately, only two major grades of high-density polyethy-
lene are used for bottles today. Thus, if one could collect
bottles such as those used for milk, bleach, and detergents,
collection and separation could go hand in hand. The plastic
bottle, therefore, which can be considered the most damaging
to the environment, as explained earlier, is fortunately the
most collectable and potentially the most recycleable.
In conclusion, let us examine the major impediments
to recycling plastics. The key one is economics. Secondary
resins compete with off-grade virgin resins. Ten years ago, in
1961, the difference in price between these two for a typical
film application was 3c/lb. Today it is virtually zero, or
certainly no more than 1C. Thus, instead of narrowing the
gap, our strategies have been aimed at widening the gap between
these competitive materials.
Another important impediment is the political one.
As all of you know, governments often work at cross purposes.
For example, many government specifications insist upon the
78
-------
use of virgin material, instead of developing specifications
based on performance. To give another interesting example, we
have noted that the U. S. State Department in their AID pro-
gram has removed secondary plastics from their approved list.
Thus, foreign manufacturers are unable to receive favorable
financing from the US on purchase of these secondary materials.
Incidentally, these items were only removed during 1970.
Another impediment is the psychological one. The
general usage of the terms virgin and secondary material sug-
gest to the consumer that the secondary product is inferior.
This a common impediment whether the product is a plastic or a
textile.
Finally, and certainly not last, is the technical
impediments. As mentioned earlier, plastics must be homogen-
eously one material, free of foreign contamination. Otherwise,
they are not easily recycled.
Looking at plastic wastes as a resource, we believe
that some plastic containers are reuseable, for a number are
being reused in the packaging of milk today. Others are
potentially recycleable, and we believe that schemes can be
developed to promote their easy collection.
79
-------
TABLE 1. PLASTICS PRODUCTION—1969
Type
All plastics
Thermoplastics
Thermosets
Thermoplastic coatings
Pounds
(Billion)
18.7
14.9
3.7
0.8
% of
Total
Plastics
100
80
20
4
Big 5 thermoplastics , ^
(excluding coatings) 12.5 67
Thermoplastics
(excluding coatings) 14.1 75
(a) Source: U. S. Tariff Commission
(b) HDPE, LDPE, Polypropylene, Polystyrene, PVC. Extrusion
coatings are included in this category.
80
-------
TABLE 2.
1. Minimize environmental damage.
2. Maximize pound-volume of troublesome
nuisance plastics (HP) recycled and/
or reused as a percentage of total
plastic production.
3. Minimize pound-volume yield of trou-
blesome nuisance plastics as a
percentage of total plastics pro-
duction.
4. Minimize the sum cost of achieving
Objectives No. 1, 2, and 3.
5. Minimize economic disruption.
6. Minimize disposal costs consistent
with the objective of minimizing
environmental damage.
7. Maximize the recycleability of
plastics with regard to their
ease of collection and their ease
or reprocessing.
81
-------
TABLE 3. DECISIONS
1. Additives Required?
2. Colorants Required?
3. Within Specifications?
4. Sell to Fabricator?
5. Can Waste Plastic be Recycled in Own
Facilities?
6. Can Waste Plastic by Sold to Reprocessor?
7. Sell to Compounder?
82
-------
TABLE 4. ELAPSED TIME FOR PLASTIC PRODUCTS
TO REACH DISPOSAL AREA
Estimated
Product Life (Years)
A. Elapsed Time 0-5 Years
Production Loss^ 0
Packaging 1
Novelties 1
Photographic Film 1
Disposables (Dinnerware, hospital goods) 1
Construction Film 2
Footware 2
Apparel 4
Household Goods 5
Toys 5
Jewelry 5
B. Elapsed Time 6-10 Years
Sporting Goods (Recreation, boats) 7
Automotive 10
Phonograph Records 10
Luggage 10
Appliances 10
Furniture 10
Cameras 10
C. Elapsed Time 11-30 Years
Wire and Cable 15
Business Machines 15
Miscellaneous Electrical Equipment 15
Hardware 15
Instruments 15
Magnetic Tape 15
Construction 25
(a) During production, compounding, fabrication, and convert-
ing the resin and manufacturing the plastic items
83
-------
TABLE 5. NUISANCE PLASTICS IN THE DISPOSAL
Type of
Product
1970
Million
Ib wt %
1975
Million
Ib wt %
1980
Million
Ib wt %
Packaging
Footwear
Records
C and A Film
(b)
Industrial Wastes
Toys
Transportation
Appliances
Furniture
Wire and Cable
Novelties,
Disposables
Others{C>
Housewares
Construction
3925
90
95
130
1000
310
90
100
60
40
100
120
425
50
60.1
1.4
1.4
2.0
15.3
4.7
1.4
1.5
0.9
0.6
1.5
1.8
6.5
0.8
6445
140
140
195
1830
555
250
230
170
95
200
230
885
100
56.2 10,170
1.2 190
1.2 205
1.7 285
15.9
4.8
2.2
2.0
1.5
0.8
1.7
2.0
7.7
0.9
3,050
945
470
440
355
480
400
430
1,270
150
54.0
1.0
1.1
1.5
16.2
5.0
2.5
2.3
1.9
2.5
2.1
2.3
6.7
0.8
TOTAL
6535
11465
18,840
(a) Source: A. D. Little
(b) Construction and Agriculture
(c) Includes business machines, instruments, luggage, sporting
goods, apparel.
84
-------
TABLE 6. PLASTICS IN THE DISPOSAL AREA IN
1970 ACCORDING TO TYPE OF PLASTICS
(a)
From Packaging From all
Million Million
Type of Plastics Ib wt % Ib
Polyolefins 3240 82.6 4231
Styrene polymers 445 11.3 1006
PVC 240 6.1 775
TOTAL 3925 5992
Sources
wt %
70.6
16.8
12.6
(a) Source: A. D. Little
(b) Includes cups, refuse and household bags
(c) Does not include business machine, instruments, luggage,
sporting goods, novelties, disposables, construction
85
-------
TABLE 7
SOURCES OF INDUSTRIAL NP
(1970) (a;>
Operation
Polymerization
Compounding/ Reprocess ing
Fabrication
Converting
Other (b)
Million
Ib
200
100
310
260
130
wt %
20.0
10.0
31.0
26.0
13.0
TOTAL 1000
(a) Source: A. D. Little
(b) Wastes generated in distributing products from
manufacturer/packager to consumer.
86
-------
^^
a
s~*
P-I
c/l
oo pq
W to
i—l --d" o co r^-
m i— I iH eg
CN o CN r*- co a>
CTN •<]• i — 1 P^- CN] -i
i &j
a.
o o
K J CM c/^ PL, H
OJ
tH
4-J
4-1
•H
,-]
Q
<^
a)
o
^4
d
o
a)
87
-------
TABLE 9. TYPES OF PLASTIC PACKAGING
Type of
Physical
form
Film
Film
Rigid
Rigid
Packaging
Composition
Monoplastic
Polyplastic
Monoplastic
Composite
Consumption
(Billion
pounds)
1.84
.31
1.54
wt %
46.8
7.9
39.2
0.24 6.1
-------
TABLE 10. PLASTIC BOTTLES IN THE DISPOSAL
Type of Million Million Million
Plastic Ib wt % Ib wt % wt
HDPE 524 84.0 920 87.0 1409 87.9
LDPE 32 5.1 35 3.2 40 2.5
Polypropylene 10 1.6 12 1.1 15 0.9
PVD 58 9.3 92 8.7 140 8.7
TOTAL 624 1059 1604
(a) Source: A. D. Little
-------
V)
_QJ
O
Q)
cc
\
c
o
\
O)
l-
3
c
o
X
X
in
O
Q.
w
_I
CJ
u
(—I
H
\
\
\
O
M
[K
\
o
C)
.0
o
\
(J
o
(U "D
tr p
90
-------
©
-------
Novelties, disposables
Appliances
Transportation
Wire and cable
Others
Construction
Records
Footwear
Construction and
Agriculture film
Furniture
Industrial NP
— —
Packaging
1970
1980
FIGURE 3. PLASTICS IN THE DISPOSAL AREA
(Source: A. D. Little)
92
-------
W
H
en
O
<
P-.
jo spunod uoi||ig
93
-------
THERMOPLASTICS IN WASTE RECYCLING
K. L. Burgess
The Dow Chemical Company
Plastics are a diverse group of mate-
rials, and each product family offers unique
properties that enable it to fulfil certain market
needs. Essentially all plastics are derived from
petroleum, and are carbonaceous matter. In recycle
we can consider plastics to be either hydrocarbons,
with energy values, or engineered molecules with
reusable physical properties.
A thermoplastic material, by definition,
is one that softens and flows when heated. This
means that thermoplastics can be recycled
repeatedly. The fact that polyethylene, poly-
styrene, and polyvinyl chloride are "reworkable"
has been long understood in the plastics industry.
Plastics fabricators rework their scrap with little
concern that a significant percentage of the poly-
mer is subjected to multiple passes through the
fabrication process.
Since it is well established that thermo-
plastics are easily reworkable, it is pertinent to
ask the question, "Why do we have a plastics waste
recycle problem?" The answer is a complex descrip-
tion of technical, distribution, marketing,
emotional and consumer problems. One way to look
at these problems is to compare the nature of the
scrap plastic found in the fabricators plant to the
94
-------
plastic solid waste as generated by the consumer.
The fabricator has his waste located at
the fabrication site; avoiding costly collection or
freight. He has a fairly constant supply in terms
of both quality and quantity and since a trip
through the extruder will not significantly change
the prime product, the scrap is easily mixed with
prime material with no change in process or article
properties. He has control of the handling of the
waste to insure that it is clean and that different
plastics are not mixed. His scrap is the same
specific type, grade, and color of material as the
prime material he is using.
The major key to the fabricator reuse of
scrap is the fact that different polymers are
scrupulously kept separate. In general, plastics
do not mix with each other to form useful alloys.
For example, polystyrene in polyethylene or in
polyvinyl chloride will result in a two phase
system that will have properties less than the
properties of the individual components. This is
true of almost all mixtures of the major plastic
materials. Since any material will obviously be
sold on the basis of the property balance for a
given market, heterogenous blends of scrap gener-
ally have less value than the components parts.
95
-------
It is also obvious that the final product must have
properties to fit some application or it will have
no value at all.
Thermoplastic property values can be
recovered from the scrap essentially in two ways.
The first requires isolation of a pure plastic
component. The second requires finding a "compati-
bilizer" that will improve the properties of an
article made from mixed plastics.
The Dow Chemical Company has been
involved in reclaimation projects involving both
isolation and modification. One utilized pure
polyethylene which went from fabricator to consumer
and back to recycle without dilution with the other
polymers. The second project is a research program
to develop a compatibi1izer for plastic mixtures.
Thus, we have some experience in both of the
preferred choices for solution to the problem.
In order to isolate a pure plastic
component from collected solid wastes, we would
first have to separate plastics from the other
wastes, then further separate the collected plastic
into the individual types and grades. This would
involve very significant costs. Therefore, if
possible, it is more desirable to keep the material
from getting into the waste streams in the first
96
-------
pi ace.
The Golden Arrow Dairy experiment in San
Diego has received considerable attention and is an
example of avoiding the solid waste stream. The
dairy and its Vice-President, Don Calori, deserve a
considerable vote of thanks from the Plastics Indus-
try for engaging in the breakthrough experiment and
sharing their experience with us. The Dow Chemical
Company has not contributed directly to this
project, but as a resin supplier to the dairy we
have been involved in discussions on equipment,
methods and markets for recycled or reclaimed
plastic.
Golden Arrow markets milk in disposable
HOPE containers. They observed the ecology concern
of their customers and decided to do something
about it. A project was set up to have the used
bottles picked up by the regular delivery man and
returned to the dairy. A significant volume of a
single type and grade of plastic was available at
one point with very little cost incurred in the
collection. A grinder was installed to reduce the
bottles to a saleable and shippable flake and a
market was found for the flake. This sounds very
simple but no part of the project has really been
that easy. A relatively large percentage of the
97
-------
home delivery bottles are returned but 5% of the
returns are contaminated in such a way that they
cannot be recycled. This means that each bottle
has to be inspected before being ground and the
added labor cost is significant. Some contamina-
tion occurs even with this inspection. Another
restriction is that the bulk density of the flake
is not high, so it cannot be shipped large dis-
tances without added freight cost. Cartons for the
flake do not present a problem in this situation
but they could add cost if the grinder did not have
readily available used containers.
A market for the ground PE has proven to
be the largest obstacle. It was determined because
of health laws that recycle could not go back into
milk bottles or other food packages. The earliest,
and most publicized market, was a plastic drainage
tile. Government specifications required virgin
polymer for that use so the outlet was temporarily
lost although the cost and properties were attrac-
tive. The dairy has found other customers but
their path has not been easy. This is probably to
be expected in a real breakthrough project but I
think we have learned a few things.
This type of recycle is a waste manage-
ment problem. Going from the consumer to the
98
-------
collector without contamination is not easy and
finding uses for the scrap, even though the proper-
ties are good, will be very dependent on economics.
Virgin plastics are relatively inexpensive.
Rehandling, container, shipping and marketing costs
can easily put the price of scrap at a level that
is unattractive relative to virgin material. These
problems can be solved but since some of them are
local in nature, it will take good management and
good marketing on the part of local distributors.
Technical problems, such as quality control, are
inversely proportional to the degree of consumer
interest in making such a program work. The other
problems such as government regulations and custo-
mer trust can be worked out with time and con-
scientious effort.
Since pure plastic components are not
readily available, development of compatibilizing
agents is desirable. Last October at the Society
of Plastics Engineers Regional Technical Conference
in New Jersey, J. N. Schramm of The Dow Chemical
Company, reported on the use of chlorinated poly-
ethylene as a compatibi1izer for mixed plastic
scrap. This development is unique because, as
stated earlier, plastics do not normally mix to
give useful products. The scientific reasons for
99
-------
incompatibility of plastics and why an experimental
approach is necessary are worth some explanation.
The mixing of liquids, which is one way of describ-
ing amorphous polymers, has been well studied for
small molecules. Solubility can readily be defined
with the usual free energy formula:
AF = AH-TAS
If the free energy of mixing is favorable, the
materials are soluble. The same is true of large
molecules but all of the emperical rules that we
have built up for small molecule mixing fail for
polymers. The entropy change for small molecules
is small and fairly constant, therefore the
enthalpy (useable heat content) determines the
solubility and all of our rules are built around
this simplification of the free energy equation.
With large molecules, the entropy change is signi-
ficant and variable, therefore the simplified
solubility rules do not hold. Like dissolving like,
solubility parameter, and the cliches of solution
technology are worthless. The limited study of the
solubility of large molecular solutes in large
molecule solvents has proven these facts but has
not systematically demonstrated a set of entropy
rules similar to the common enthalpy rules.
100
-------
If solid materials are mutually insol-
uble, they can still be combined to give useful
products if they can be made to adhere. Laminates
and aggregates are well known as heterogenous
materials that are useful as long as the phases
have some degree of intermolecular bonding; adhe-
sion. The major polymers, polystyrene, poly-
ethylene and polyvinyl chloride do not have
capabilities for hydrogen bonding and they have
very limited polarity, therefore very small Van der
Waal forces. Because of these molecular limits,
they demonstrate very low adhesion and do not form
useful laminates without special treatment or
special compatibilizers.
Schramm's report at the RETEC noted that
chlorinated polyethylene (CPE) has the unique
property of mixing with most polymers and the
capability of "gluing" together a composite made of
the polymers found in the normal waste stream.
Table 1 illustrates the properties obtained from
such a blend. Note that the tensile impact in-
creases significantly even though the tensile
strength does not. This is exactly what would be
expected from increasing the interphase adhesion
of a heterogenous mass. The scrap used in these
experiments has the composition noted in Table 2.
101
-------
Other data obtained by using mixtures of pure
polymers are shown in Table 3 and 4.
Significant quantities of CPE must be
used and properties are going to vary with the
nature of the scrap. Within certain limits, the
end product properties can be varied by the inclu-
sion of some virgin product. The end use of such a
product will have to depend on local marketing
possibilities and local scrap composition. It is
doubtful if a centralized research effort can give
more than general guidelines as to uses. The final
success of a program to utilize scrap by this
method will again depend on the ability of local
distributors and formulators to solve local prob-
lems. Tile, plastic pallets, certain toys and many
other applications are possible outlets.
Other methods of recycle are being
investigated and discussed. Many of these recog-
nize the difficulty of increasing the value of
scrap and tend to utilize it as something other
than a thermoplastic. One company has made a light
weight concrete that is said to have good proper-
ties. Compressed building blocks are said to be
feasible when the right combination of plastic
scrap is mixed with other waste. A form of recycle
that must not be omitted is the use of plastic
102
-------
waste as a fuel. Petroleum is the starting raw
material for all of the major polymers and the
chemical changes that we perform do not greatly re-
duce the BTU content. PVC does have a lower BTU/lb.
than does petroleum but based on carbon content all
of the major polymers are nearly equivalent to the
fuel from which they were derived.
In summary, I think that several points
should be repeated. Waste thermoplastic articles
can be recycled into a second generation of
fabricated articles. This can be accomplished by
reprocessing a single type of polymer, or by
compatibi1izing the mixed plastic from the waste
stream. The problems associated with the recycle
of a single type of polymer are primarily waste
management and marketing. Technology problems
still exist before compatibilized blends can be
perfected but again marketing is a real obstacle
in this approach to recycle. Plastics do have
recycle value as fuels or fillers although such
recycle does not take advantage of the physical
properties built into the polymer molecule. Some
of the recycle problems have been identified and
solutions, or at least leads to solutions, have
been found.
Why do we have a plastic waste recycle
103
-------
problem? We know that recycle is technically
feasible. In the past the economics and the quan-
tity of plastics in the waste stream have not
warranted the development of methods for collec-
tion, separation, distribution or marketing. The
programs described in this discussion indicate that
the economic climate may now be right for the
beginning of a new phase in the plastics story, but
this must be proven "case by case" at the local
1 eve! .
K. L. Burgess
4/21/71
104
-------
TABLE 1
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF ACTUAL PLASTICS SCRAP
WITH INCREASING LEVELS OF CPE 42/2/4
COMPRESSION MOLDED SAMPLES
>* c,
^
100% Scrap 11 1450 0
Plastic Mix
15% CPE/85% 11.7 1715 0.45
Scrap Plastic
Mi x
17.5% CPE/ 12.7 1690 0.54
82.5% Scrap
Plastic Mix
20% CPE/80% 15.7 1715 0.76
Scrap Plastic
Mix
22.5% CPE/ 17.7 1712 1.5
77.5% Scrap
Plastic Mix
25% CPE/75% 20 1600 1 .6
Scrap Plastic
Mix
27.5% CPE/ 22 1600 2.83
72.5% Scrap
Plastic Mix
105
-------
TABLE 2
COMPOSITION OF SCRAP PLASTIC*
LDPE approximately 44%
HOPE approximately 19%
Polystyrene approximately 31%
PVC-ABS-PP approximately 6%
*Plastics in total were less than 4% of the waste,
106
-------
TABLE 3
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SIMULATED SCRAP
TJ 'X
^> 'V.
r ^ c,
Mixture A 0 0 10% 1960
Plus 15% CPE 0 0 15% 1790
Plus 33% CPE 2.6 0 50% 1500
Plus 50% CPE 10.7 925 415% 964
Mixture A = LDPE/HDPE/PVC/PS (25% each]
107
-------
TABLE 4
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SIMULATED SCRAP
£?
•v \
Mixture B 0 0 60% 1650
Plus 15% CPE 2.29 0 98% 1530
Plus 33% CPE 6.08 0 115% 1100
Plus 50% CPE 14.1 862 278% 940
Mixture B = 50% LDPE/25% HDPE/12.5% PMC & PS
108
-------
POLYTRIP®, THE RETURNABLE PLASTIC MILK BOTTLE SYSTEM
Karl H. Emich
U. S. Industrial Chemicals Company
We in this country as well as a good
deal of the world are faced with the fact that
pollution of air, water, and land has reached
proportions that are enormous. The demand for
correction is justified, but some impatient voices
want a change over night without realizing what
gigantic problems must be solved to achieve this
goal. A number of these problems require the
development of new technologies before they can be
successfully attacked.
Hand in hand with these problems goes the
the one we are concerned with at this conference:
the disposal of solid waste. One portion thereof
deals with waste created by the food packaging
industry. Competition and the intent to focus the
customer's attention on the package as a selling
point have created a multitude of packaging shapes
and forms from a wide variety of materials.
The effective, yet efficient disposal of
solid waste generated in the U. S. has become a
social and economic problem. While we are only at
the beginning of this battle it seems that a number
of methods offer possibilities to help bring about
a satisfactory solution.
I would like to present to you one
solution that U. S. Industrial Chemicals Company,
109
-------
a division of National Distillers and Chemicals
Corp., has to offer in the realm of liquid milk
packaging. It is known under the trade name of
Polytrip ® Systems and consists of the returnable
polyethylene milk container and an inspection
device, a volatile organic contaminant detector.
In 196l and 1962 several dairies exper-
imented with single trip plastic gallon milk con-
tainers to test public acceptance. These early
tests showed encouraging results and dairies
expanded their efforts to commercial status. In
1963 there were just 4 dairies packaging milk in
plastic, by 1964 there were 65; in 1965 - 135; 1966
over 500; and by 196? over 700 dairies throughout
the country were using plastic milk bottles.^
The polyethylene bottle has a number of
advantages over its competitors, the glass bottle
and the polyethylene extrusion coated paper con-
tainer :
it is light weight;
it is tougher and less breakable;
its translucency gives milk a rich,
creamy appearance;
it has excellent appearance; and, it can
be designed in many appealing shapes.
110
-------
In 1966 there appeared in the dairy
market a new development which offered the dairy
operator the advantages of plastic containers
combined with cost efficiencies exceeding those of
the glass bottle. This was the returnable poly-
ethylene milk bottle system.
The basic problem previously prohibiting
the use of the plastic bottle on a returnable basis
was its tendency to absorb hydrocarbon contaminants.
If the consumer had been using this bottle for the
storage of hydrocarbon based chemicals, no dairy
washer could remove the so Induced contamination
from the container. The consumption of milk
packaged in contaminated containers could produce
health problems. Since dairies could not predict
the customer's reuse of the returnable bottle before
its return for refilling, there was an evident need
for a device that was able to detect hydrocarbon
contaminants, such as those contained in gasoline,
kerosine, paint thinner, etc.
The successful development of the detec-
tor was the result of a long and carefully
researched project which started in early 1963 in
Spokane, Washington. It was tested by the City of
Spokane Health Department, the U. S. Public Health
Service (USPHS) and Washington State University.
Ill
-------
Only when these groups were satisfied that the
detector provided an effective safeguard against
such contaminants did the USPHS judge that the
system met applicable provisions of the Public
Health Service Grade "A" Pasteurized Milk Ordinance.
Further development of this instrument
was necessary to keep pace with the steadily in-
creasing bottling rates in the dairies. While the
first instruments were only capable of testing 20
bottles per minute, the present detectors can
handle about 130 bottles per minute.
The detector is located between the
bottle washer and the filler directly over the
conveyor line. As a bottle passes underneath, a
sample of air is taken from it. A flame ionization
detection system determines the total amount of
hydrocarbons present in the sample. If the analysis
shows a contaminant level which is of public health
significance, a punch mechanism is actuated which
renders the bottle unuseable.
The needed hydrogen for the flame is
produced inside the detector cabinet. A built-in
test mechanism allows checking of the proper sensi-
tivity level at any time. Interlocks are provided
to shut the bottle washer or the conveyor line down
should the instrument malfunction. U.S.I, maintains
112
-------
a complete service organization throughout the
United States to prevent costly downtime in the
dairies and to install newly purchased units.
The Polytrip ® returnable plastic milk
bottle is blow molded of high density polyethylene
and is especially designed for reuse. At about 170
grams for gallon bottles and 126 grams for half
gallons, the strong walls and sturdy construction
eliminate container collapses at the filling line
and let them stand up for more than 100 trips. Half
gallon and one gallon sizes with blown or Glass
Container Manufacturer's Institute (GCMI) finishes
are now available to the industry.
The Polytrip ® bottle is annealed to
insure that it does remain constant in volume after
repeated washes in the dairy.
The type of resin used for the returnable
container must meet Pood and Drug Administration
(PDA) requirements in the Federal Register, Subpart
P, Section 121.2501 for food packaging applications.
Furthermore it must meet the 1965 recommendations of
the USPHS for single service and multiuse milk con-
tainers, as stated in the Grade "A" Pasteurized Milk
Ordinance. As for the milk bottle, some states
require approval of the Department of Health and the
Department of Agriculture. Most accept the findings
113
-------
of the USPHS regional office in their area. Some
require approval of even small local and municipal
boards of health in addition to the state agencies.
There are no known requirements for milk bottle
resins as stipulated by the National Bureau of
Standards (NBS).
Milk volume in linear polyethylene
bottles can qualify as a prepackaged commodity which
meets the requirements in Handbook 67 of NBS.
Only polyethylene resins of high density
are suitable for use as fluid milk containers.
Presently used resins have 90-95% crystallinity and
0.965 g/cm3 density to maximize rigidity, surface
hardness, permeation resistance, and surface
friction resistance. Bottles with these properties
withstand easily over 100 trips from dairy to cus-
tomer and back.
To the dairy the advantages of this
system are significant. The returnable polyethylene
containers are practically unbreakable, which when
compared with glass, greatly reduces production
down-time and delivery losses. No breakage means
a safer, cleaner, filling operation for the dairies.
Easier handling and stacking in the plant result
from the lighter weight of the bottle when compared
with the other returnable container - glass.
114
-------
Distribution by truck becomes more economical be-
cause of the light weight. Up to 20% more milk in
polyethylene containers can be placed on a truck
when compared with its main competitor glass.
Prom experience we have found that in
places where the returnable milk bottle was intro-
duced it was very well received by the consumers.
The majority of dairies experienced an increase in
volume output, in a number of instances very signif-
icant ones up to 100?.
And now let us take a closer look at how
the returnable plastic milk bottle fits into ecolog-
ical viewpoints. Compared with glass containers,
the polyethylene returnable container outperforms
it in the number of trips about 5 to 1. All other
forms of containers, be it plastic or paper, are of
the single trip variety and do not help to reduce
the amount of solid waste. According to Public
Health Service (PHS) publication 1855, packaging
materials on a tonnage basis will increase at a rate
of 3.6? annually in the 1966 to 1976 period. Ex-
pressed in pounds this means a change from 103-^
billion pounds in 1966 to 1^7.0 billion pounds in
1976.^2) These gigantic figures give an idea what
is in store for us in the future.
115
-------
One obvious way to reduce waste is the
reduction of the quantity of packaging wastes gen-
erated. Reuse of the package is one way to achieve
this goal. If we assume only 100 trips for the
polyethylene returnable milk bottle we have 100
disposable bottles for each 1 polyethylene reusable
container, or about 4-5 glass bottles for the same
one polyethylene multitrip bottle. This shows a
drastic reduction of waste generated.
But sooner or later the fact becomes
clear that even these long lived containers must be
disposed of. They then become a part of the plastic
waste disposal problem. Recognizing this problem
the Society of the Plastics Industry has undertaken
two tasks:
1. an effort to help find solutions to
solid waste problems, particularly the
safe and efficient disposal of
plastics, and,
2. a program of information and education
on the role of plastics in solid
waste.(3)
Our present methods of disposal need
revisions or replacements by more efficient and
appealing systems. Added consideration must be
given to the fact that we need to recover more and
116
-------
more of the valuable raw materials to prevent the
rapid depletion of our natural resources.
Open dumping, landfill, composting, and
incineration are still the prevailing methods of
disposing of solid wastes. Here is a quick look at
them:
Open Dumping. This is still the most
widely used method of waste disposal. More than
3/4 of all municipal refuse is discarded in dumps.
This method has numerous drawbacks and its use is
increasingly being banned.
Sanitary Landfill. This method has more
positive features and, if properly done, is an
excellent way of disposing waste. Polyethylene is
well suited for this method because it does not
decompose. However, desirable sites for landfill
are becoming very scarce. Only about 10$ of the
country's refuse is disposed of in this way.
Composting. Although composting is an-
other feasible method of disposal, in practice, it
was found that only a very small market for com-
posting is available with limited growth prospects.
At present, only 1% of refuse goes into composts.
Incineration. Although not ideal, incin-
eration is a practical means of disposing of many
types of solid waste. Efficient incineration can
117
-------
result in a volume reduction of 12 to 1. Until
better methods of disposing of solid waste are
found, incineration seems to be the logical process.
The reason tnat incineration has a bad name is, and
I quote from the September 1970 Position Paper by
The Society of the Plastics Industry: "because
most incinerators are obsolete and inefficient,
providing poor reduction of refuse and polluting the
air. There are only about 300 municipal inciner-
ators in the country and 75% of them are inadequate
by Bureau of Solid Waste Management standards."*-^'
Again and again voices have been heard
protesting incineration of plastics because of the
poisonous gases produced during this process. The
truth is that emissions from burning polyethylene
are no more and in many cases less toxic than those
from other burning organic materials.
It would be ideal if polyethylene could
be recycled. This way waste would be eliminated
and raw materials could be saved. In reality re-
cycling today Is far from being feasible. Therefore
we have to resort to the known methods of disposal
mentioned earlier.
118
-------
In the meantime we should try to find
useful means for the disposition of plastic waste.
In Europe, polyethylene waste is used to generate
power. The Btu content is about the same as coal
or three times the solid waste average. Addition
of polyethylene to garbage aids the combustion in
incinerators.
We are only at the beginning in the
development of really effective methods of solids
waste management. With our growing population we
will be faced with increasing amounts of solid waste
while on the other hand drastic changes are indi-
cated to counteract the rapid depletion of some of
our natural resources. It cannot be left to one
group or another to take action, but industry,
science, and government must work together to find
solutions for the pending solid waste problems as
well as for the preservation of our resources.
REFERENCES
Technical Papers
(1) Eder, Peter, "Plastic Containers, The
Challenge," presented at American
Management Association, Dairy Packaging
Seminar, Chicago, Illinois (May 1967).
(3) The Society of The Plastics Industry,
Inc., "The Plastics Industry And Solid
Waste Management", Position Paper,
(September 1970), p. 5.
(4) Ibid, pp. 7-8.
119
-------
Books
(2) Darnay, A. J. Jr., and Franklin, W. E.,
The Role of Packaging In Solid Waste
Management 1966 to 1976. Public Health
Service Publication No. 1855, Washington
D. C., U. S. Government Printing Office
1969, p. 99.
120
-------
RECLAMATION OF PLASTIC-PAPER COMPOSITES
Safford W. McMyler
Riverside Paper Corporation
INTRODUCTION
The Riverside Paper Corporation in
Appleton, Wisconsin, has for the past twelve years
successfully operated a plant which removes ad-
hesives, wax and plastic coatings from paper and
paper board in order to recover the wood pulp fi-
ber for use in the manufacture of fine papers in
its paper mill.
This was commenced and continued so that
the company, which had no captive source of manu-
factured wood pulp, could, through the substitu-
tion of these fibers reclaimed from waste, main-
tain a competitive position with those fine paper
manufacturers which have integrated paper/pulp
mills.
The economics of this process are proven
to our satisfaction. A savings, which ranges be-
tween 15 and 30% below the commercial market price
of pulp, has been realized for a number of years.
This savings recognizes all of the processes re-
quired to produce fiber matching the characteris-
tics of virgin fiber - the initial chemical proc-
ess which I am here to describe, plus the cleaning
and bleaching processes necessary for the high
121
-------
grades of business and school papers we manufac-
ture .
But what has now become equally impor-
tant as the economic benefits is the ecological
benefits: There are some plastic film removal
methods employed in recovering waste fiber - the
mechanical or wet systems - which result in seri-
ous solid waste disposal or stream pollution prob-
lems; whereas our method is, in effect, a dry-
cleaning process producing wood pulp fiber, essen-
tially 1OO% free of the undesirable contaminant
which is disposed of by utilization as fuel in our
boiler. The reclaimed fibers are completely un-
impaired in physical properties.
The original patent on this process was
issued under U.S. Patent No. 3,058,871 on October
16, 1962.
Recent technical improvements in this
process, known as the Polysolv Process, are cover-
ed by a patent application Serial No. 17,892 which
was issued on March 9, 1970.
In Summary: This is a revolutionary
method of waste fiber preparation by a non-pollu-
ting process.
122
-------
Advantages of the Polysolv Process
1. It is a dry furnish process and the re-
covered fiber is in the same form as it
entered the reactor.
2. The treatment of the waste paper and
board at high temperature softens any
wet strength resins present resulting in
more efficient pulping of the reclaimed
fiber .
3. The process is 100% efficient in remov-
ing polyethylene and wax coatings, and
polyvinylacetate and other similar ad-
hesives .
4. It is a closed system and there are no
problems of air or stream pollution.
5. The exotic coatings can be mixed without
discri mination .
6. On printed waste, if the ink is on the
coating, solvent extraction dissolves
the coating and simultaneously removes
the ink leaving the reclaimed fiber es-
sentially ink free.
7. Tests show no strength loss between sol-
vent extracted and non-extracted fiber.
123
-------
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Basically, this simple, solvent extrac-
tion process can be described as consisting of
three phases:
Dissolving
Solvent recovery, and
Removal and utilization of the reclaimed
contaminants.
The chemical processing equipment for
the existing plant occupies about 4000 square feet
on four floor levels.
The waste is delivered to our plant by
rail in bales weighing approximately 1500 Ibs.
Phase I - Dissolving - The Rotary Re-
actor is loaded with coated unused milk cartons,
converter cuttings, or shredded large sheets. The
reactor is then closed and the extraction cycles
are carried out in three (3) stages using trich-
lorethylene, a common degreasing solvent.
The first extraction stage is made with
the "dirtiest" solvent, i.e. solvent already used
twice. The second extraction stage with solvent
used once. The third extraction stage with clean
solvent. After each stage, the solvent is simply
124
-------
syphoned out of the reactor; therefore, the ex-
traction efficiency is rather low. During the
charge, the solvent is instantaneously heated, in
a heat exchanger, up to 240°F (boiling point of
trichlorethylene is 188°F). In the reactor, the
o
temperature drops to the neighborhood of 19O-205 F.
The vapor phase of the superheated solvent main-
tains an operating pressure in the reactor of ap-
proximately 15 psig. No steam is added to the re-
actor at this stage, but only to the solvent heat
exchanger. After the last extraction, the solvent
is syphoned to the semi-clean tank as thoroughly
as possible. Steam is then fed to the reactor to
strip the residual solvent from the fibers. This
operation is carried out at 8-9 pounds in the re-
actor with available superheated steam and re-
quires 6O to 9O minutes according to the amount
of trichlorethylene remaining in the reactor. When
the pressure in the reactor starts to drop, there
is no more recoverable solvent. The steam supply
is shut off and a. light vacuum is applied to the
reactor. All the solvent vapors from this final
stripping operation are recovered in a separate
water cooled condenser; the mixture of solvent
and condensed steam is fed to a water separator.
The clean solvent is pumped to the clean solvent
125
-------
tank. The burnish, now solvent and poly-free and
only slightly moist because of the steam stripping
operation, is dumped to subsequent equipment.
Phase II - Solvent Recovery - The dirty
solvent recovered in the first stage of Phase I is
fed batchwide to a conventional still with natural
circulation heat exchanger, operating at 200-220°F
and 6-9 pounds pressure. The vapors of solvent
are condensed in a water cooled condenser with the
condensation creating a vacuum of approximately
2-5 inches. The system is also provided with a
refrigerated after-condenser and finisher still.
The residual plastic which tends to remain as a
sticky and jelly-like mass at the bottom of the
still, is kept in a fluid condition with the in-
troduction of No. 2 fuel oil making it easy to
handle or pump.
Phase III - Disposal - After completion
of the distillation in the finishing still, the
removed wax or poly and fuel oil are dumped into
a tank for incineration or injection into a plant
boiler to reclaim the heat value of the fuel oil-
poly mixture.
Figure I, is the entire process flow
diagram.
The production capacity of this plant is
126
-------
now 12 to 14 tons per day of waste processed. We
have long considered this capacity as hardly more
than pilot sized. Last year, having analyzed the
condition of the existing plant (then 12 years in
use), the potential for expanded sources of raw
material, and the economic return expected on an
expanded capacity, we decided that the investment
for a 50 ton per day capacity plant should be made
as quickly as possible. This would satisfy all
our needs for waste fiber in our existing paper
products.
Subsequent to this decision such a plant
became available, and it was purchased and dis-
mantled and is being reinstalled at our mill in
Appleton. Startup of this facility is scheduled,
for July 1, 1971.
With this startup, Riverside paper Cor-
poration will have completed the steps from exper-
imental process, through successful pilot plant
operation (at a rate of 14 tons per day for the
past 3 years of continuous operation) to commer-
cial plant production. It will provide 5O% of the
fibers required for our paper mill's total pro-
duc tion .
We intend now to turn cur efforts toward
extending the utility of the process to other ma-
127
-------
terials and contaminants. Preliminary advanced
research has already offered encouraging results
on contaminants heretofore considered unassailable.
With the shutdown of our old small plant, which we
intend to leave intact, we will have a facility
available for full-scale trials on was te materials
which offer promise.
We are testing a program for collection
of the plastic-paper composites from large and
concentrated users such as schools and institu-
tions .
Today, with the high degree of interest
in recycling and environmental ecology being ex-
pressed by the public, government and industry, we
are encouraged by the attention being given to our
no pollution Polysolv Process.
HISTORY
A brief description of the background
and development of our patented process:
In the early 1950's, Riverside Paper
Corporation tried to use secondary fiber that was
generated in the manufacture of juice and milk
cartons. This fiber was white bleached board con-
taminated with polyvinylacetate (PVA), other similar
128
-------
adhesives, and also wax. The percentages of PVA
and adhesives ranged up to 2% by weight, and wax
up to 12%. All of this fiber was free from other
contaminants such as ink.
When this secondary fiber was repulped,
screened and used to make conventional writing
grades of paper, the PVA would show up as yellow
shiners in the sheet; the wax would cause ex-
cessive slip; and contaminant build-ups occured
on paper machine dryers causing excessive down-
time for clean-up. These repeated problems pro-
moted extensive laboratory work, followed by a re-
search program, which developed a solvent extrac-
tion process. This was followed by the construc-
tion in 1958 of a 24 ton per day operational plant.
After several years of successful opera-
tion, polyethylene slowly became a contaminant in
the secondary fiber. A second research effort was
conducted. This resulted in a modification of the
process and a rebuild of the existing plant to re-
move polyethylene.
DEVELOPMENT
Early laboratory trials at removing
these contaminants involved the use of caustic
129
-------
soda, wetting agents, soaps, de-inking formulas,
and solvents. These cooking formulations were
followed by a series of aqueous washings, screen-
ings, flotations and centrifugal cleanings, all
designed to wash out the waxes, and mechanically
remove the agglomerated particles of PVA and ad-
hesives. Although some of these trials were en-
couraging, when they were applied to large scale
production and the secondary fiber used in manu-
facturing paper, the same problems of yellow
shiners, excessive slip, and coating of the dryer
surfaces reappeared. As a result these investi-
gations were terminated.
In 1955, a review of patent literature
and published material encouraged the approach to-
ward continuous hydrocarbon solvent extraction.
With the use of a large laboratory extraction ap-
paratus, a series of trials was run evaluating
different solvents to remove the PVA and wax. All
of these extractions proved to be successful. This
prompted the construction of a pilot plant design-
ed to treat the waste paper board trimmings on a
continuous basis, since at this time batch pro-
cessing was thought to be uneconomical. The ini-
tial solvent (of several tried) was carbon tetra-
chloride, but because of deficiencies in the pilot
130
-------
plant, the solvent losses were high. This re-
sulted in high toxicity and undesirable economics.
Battelle Memorial Institute was then engaged to
investigate the idea and in October, 1956, their
studies concluded that "the solvent extraction of
waste paper probably would be feasible with com-
mercial equipment." The Riverside Pilot Plant was
then disassembled and transferred to Columbus,
Ohio for more intensive work. As a result of
Riverside's preliminary work and the studies by
Battelle, several conclusions were reached;
1. The Riverside process was both techni-
cally and economically feasible.
2. The process lent itself better to batch
than continuous operation.
3. Battelle's experiments developed a very
effective means of recovering the sol-
vent.
4. The waste contained several types of ad-
hesives such as PVA and in some cases
considerably more than had been realized.
As a result, it was decided that River-
side would build a new Pilot Plant in Apple ton
employing a batch process and the new recovery
phase. It was this pilot plant that prompted the
decision to proceed with design and construction
131
-------
of a 24-ton-per-day commercial solvent extraction
plant.
Upon start-up of this solvent extraction
plant, no major problems were encountered and the
plant's performance exceeded expectations. How-
ever, the availability of the small (ink-free)
carton punchings was not as expected. This forced
the plant to use printed milk cartons, set-up wax
cartons, and any other wax carton stock that was
available. These types of broke were not consid-
ered in the design of the plant, but with minor
adjustments, these were also reclaimed. This
created a new and unexpected problem -- disposing
of the tons of contaminated wax removed in the
process. This was resolved when a buyer was found
for the reclaimed wax.
After several years, polyethylene coated
pieces slowly began showing up in the baled waste
and concern was felt regarding the future avail-
ability of raw material. The Battelle Memorial
Institute was again consulted. Their research
report revealed that it was feasible to extract
polyethylene from board and paper under the proper
conditions, using the existing solvent, but that
the recovery of spent solvent and polyethylene
would have to be investigated in the full scale
132
-------
plant.
Therefore, another pilot plant was con-
structed. It confirmed the Battelle opinions.
The operating plant was then rebuilt and
upon start-up one glaring problem resulted: The
dissolved poly plugged the evaporator in the dis-
tillation process. This was not completely re-
solved until a later date, but was temporarily
solved by saving all wax waste and blending this
with poly coated waste in the extraction phase.
When the solvent was then reclaimed in the dis-
tillation process, the distillate or waste did not
plug the operation and recovery could be carried
out at lower temperatures. This was practiced
until waxed waste became increasingly scarce and
almost non-existent. It was then determined that
No. 2 fuel oil could be utilized as the catalyst.
The patent was modified to include this develop-
ment .
The plant capacity, when rebuilt for the
new operating conditions, was reduced to 12 to 14
tons per day. Even at this output, the very favor-
able economic advantages mentioned earlier are
enjoyed.
133
-------
-I
o
o
OOOt-HUJ±UJX?UJ|-O —
— M rO * in VON- CD O O — OJ K>
134
-------
PAPER INDUSTRY PLANS
Judd H. Alexander
American Can Company
In San Francisco, there is a solid
waste transfer station which serves the whole
peninsula. Standing near the head of the dumping
pit, a visitor can watch the wastes produced by
two million people being plowed toward the loading
chutes. An occasional can is visible in this vast
quantity of material, and bottles, orange peels,
and telephone poles. But, the overwhelming impres-
sion is of paper. The garbage is made of paper—
50% by weight and nearly 70% by bulk.
Yet, a conference of this nature devotes
half days to plastics, metals, and glass and a
half hour to paper containers. Does this suggest
the solution to the paper in our waste is near
at hand? There .is an obvious answer to the prob-
lem, so obvious that advice on the subject is
available from nearly every concerned club woman
and schoolboy: recycle, recycle the paper to
solve the solid waste problem; and, as a bonus,
every ton of recycled paper will save 17 trees.
That is a good, simple answer, but it may not be
adequate for this terribly complex problem.
135
-------
Before talking about designing contain-
ers for recycling or reuse, it might be well to
explore the potential, the limitations, and the
economics of recycled paper today.
But, first, one misconception should be
discussed. Recycling paper does not necessarily
"save trees." Save them for what—for rotting in
the forest? Trees die; and it makes sense to
crop them at the peak of their maturity and to
replace them with fresh growth. A young forest
will produce about triple the oxygen of a mature
forest. Do not think of pulpwood trees as the
spreading chestnut in front of the smithy, the
charter oak, or the graceful elms around the
village square. Pulpwood trees are grown as a
crop—some, in our Southeast, are harvested as
soon as 13 years after planting. Forest manage-
ment and tree genetics have increased the yields
so that, in spite of increased harvesting, our
nation is a net gainer on trees—the United States
grows more trees and more board feet of timber
each year than is cut.
136
-------
During World War II, we recycled 35%
of all our paper. By 1970, the amount recycled
had dropped to 19%. But, percentages can be
misleading, particularly when discussing a com-
modity whose usage is increasing rapidly. Note
these two facts:
1. In 1970, we recycled about 60% more paper
than we did in 1944.
2. If we increase the recycling percentages to
World War II levels by 1985, as suggested by
the National Academy of Sciences, we will still
have 60% more paper in our wastes then than
we have today.
Perhaps we have not done such a terrible
job in the past. Perhaps recycling is not the
whole answer in the future.
What happened since World War II to
cut that recycling percentage so drastically?
The answer lies in technology, consumer preference,
and economics—mostly economics.
The wastepaper markets have always
been subject to violent price swings. To meet
their growth requirements, the paper companies
137
-------
turned to virgin fiber as a more stable and
dependable supply source.
At the same time, the potential sources
for virgin fiber expanded considerably. We noted
that 19% of paper is made from recycled paper,
but another 26% is now made from other wastes
which were not utilized 25 years ago. I am think-
ing of sawdust, chips, slabs, and other lumber
mill waste which were formerly burned in the
wigwam burners so familiar in the West.
New pulping techniques brought in many
new species of trees as prime fiber sources:
aspen, cull hardwoods, and Southern pine. This
expanded the pulp source and created far better
timberland utilization and better markets for the
woodland farmers. New forest management tech-
niques expanded forest yields, particularly in
the South, by as much as sevenfold. Finally,
technology made tremendous increases in the speed
and the efficiency of paper and board machines
designed to run the dependable quality of virgin
fiber.
138
-------
Society has paid a price for this paper
explosion in overflowing garbage dumps, but society
has been a beneficiary, too. Paper has played
a key role in the packaging-distribution-self-
service revolution which has, in just one genera-
tion, dropped the relative price of food by one-
third to 17% of disposal income, quadrupled the
number of items available to the shopper's choice
in a supermarket, and cut by half the time spent
by homemakers in food preparation.
Improved paper packaging has also played
an important function in reducing urban wastes.
For example, some 238 million pounds of orange
juice is shipped into New York City annually.
But, because it is packaged, nearly 60% of the
orange in the form of peels and pulp is left
behind in rural Florida to be recycled into
animal feed. Frozen food packaging keeps the
50% of fresh foods—bones, innards, and stalks—
which become wastes out of our cities. Excello
claims that if all milk now packaged in paper
containers would go back to returnable glass
bottles, our total wastes would increase by
139
-------
30 million tons, including broken and discarded
bottles, bottle caps, detergents, gasoline, water,
and heating fuel.
In the meantime, wastepaper usage has
received a minimum of technological help. As
much as 90% of the cost of wastepaper is involved
in the collecting, sorting, and transporting of the
material. Highly labor intensive, collection
costs spiraled with wage increase and little
relief from mechanization. Traditional wastepaper
products began to lose markets to virgin materials
and to plastics. Technology is, finally, offering
some help to recycled materials. A new type of
paper machine—ultraformers—give better-quality
recycled products at much higher speeds.
Recycled fibers are, at present, used
for a relatively narrow line of products, and they
are collected from an equally narrow line of
products. An improvement in the economics of
collection and recycling, a change in political
and public attitudes on recycled products, and
the development of new products or markets are
essential to expanded use.
140
-------
The public concept for making all paper
from recycled paper remains unrealistic. First,
about 12% of paper production is unrecoverable.
It is in permanent use in building material or in
books, or it is lost in residential fireplaces or
in sewage systems (tissue). Second, paper is not
like metal. In recycling, it cannot be made "as
good as new." Each time paper is recycled, the
fibers become a little shorter and a little more
frayed, and the resulting paper product gets a
little weaker. In some products, where strength
is not a factor, recycled fiber can be used as a
substitute. In other products, some carton boards
for example, the weaker fiber must be compensated
for by additional bulk or caliper. This could
actually increase the waste from some products.
There are other limitations. Our com-
pany is a large manufacturer of food packaging.
We guarantee to our customers that paper products
which will come in direct contact with food will
contain no materials or substances which are not
approved by the Food and Drug Administration. We
do not believe we can fulfill this pledge when
141
-------
using paper fiber collected from unknown sources
or paper that has been contaminated with printing
ink or other unapproved FDA substances. This
applies particularly to cartons for milk, ice cream,
baked goods, etc. It does not apply to carrier
cartons in which the food is protected by a
pouch or innerwrap.
Cartons made from virgin fiber can be
produced in very low calipers while maintaining
the performance characteristics required by high-
speed packaging machines. For example, the familiar
TV dinner cartons are now made from low-density,
virgin paper board 13/1000's of an inch thick.
The minimum caliper for recycled fiber board may
be 16/1000's of an inch, and the increase in the
weight of the carton would be more than 30%.
Combination (recycled) paperboards can
do many jobs well. But, the economics, which
determine board grades consider performance as
well as original cost.
Corrugated shipping cartons are good
users of recycled fiber now—25%—and they have
prospects for expanded growth. However, new fiber
142
-------
must be added to the recycled material to retain
the strength. At the moment, it does not look
like they could exceed 40% reuse, and even that
would put a difficult economic burden on the
industry.
Perhaps the most difficult complexity
in a mandated increase of recycled fiber is the
social-economic problem. Let me illustrate it
this way:
My company, American Can, has a large
paper mill on the Tombigbee River in rural Choctaw
County, Alabama. We are the largest employer in
the county. We are the largest buyer of agricul-
tural product in the county (trees). All of the
wastepaper produced in the county would run that
mill for about three hours a year. If recycled
paper is to be a mandated requirement for tomor-
row' s paper products, this mill is in the wrong
place. Question: In a nation which already has
80% of its population concentrated on 2% of its
land, should we advocate a national policy which
tends to drive the paper mills off the Tombigbee
rivers and onto the Hackensack, the Chicago, and
143
-------
the Detroit? Are not sociological considerations
important, too?
Actually, you could build today a
wastepaper mill for substantially less money
than you build a forest pulp and paper mill. On
the other hand, almost all the mills built in the
last 20 years were virgin fiber mills. They
exist. They are not suited by location or equip-
ment for running wastepaper. They represent a
tremendous investment. They are economic only if
running near capacity. They are not portable.
Two thirds of all pulpwood is purchased outside
the paper industry, and these pulpwood producers
have a substantial investment, too.
The paper industry is making a substantial
capital commitment over the next five years to
better control equipment for water and air pollu-
tion. The additional demand for the special stock
handling and cleaning equipment required for
wastepaper use and the addition of new pollution-
control equipment for the special problems of
recycled paper would bring economic chaos to the
paper industry if handled on a crash basis. On
144
-------
the other hand, a gradual move to increased recy-
cling, stimulated economically, could be handled
by normal growth falling to new mills designed for
the new policy.
Incidentally, I mentioned the "special
pollution problems" of recycling. Since many
people suspect there would be no pollution poten-
tial with recycling, it might be well to give the
problem brief mention. Recycling often required
the removal of the ink which represents a disposal
problem. The average deinking plant loses about
25% of its input to waste. Second, the paper
itself decreases by about 10% with each recycling.
The lost material escapes as suspended solid in
the waste water and must be controlled. Recycled
mills produce substantially more suspended solids
than virgin fiber mills. Coated magazine stock,
such as is used for LIFE and LOOK, will give off
as much as 50 pounds of sludge (ink and clay)
for each 50 pounds of fiber recovered. That is
why the wastepaper dealers always sort out the
magazines from the newspaper bundles after they have
been collected from well-meaning citizens.
145
-------
So much for the production of waste-
paper products. Let us examine the collection of
these materials. Remember, collection cost
represents more than 90% of all costs for waste-
paper. The mill wants paper that is clean and
homogeneous. The collector wants maximum quan-
tities at each stop for efficiency. These two
requirements have limited most wastepaper to four
collection sources:
1. Scrap from carton plants, paper converters,
and printers.
2. Used corrugated boxes collected from indus-
trial plants and retail stores.
3. Newspapers from the publishers and from public
drives.
4. Writing paper waste from office buildings.
As the market for wastepaper expands,
the demand on these four sources will expand first.
Although almost all other paper products can be
recycled, it is impractical to collect them, clean
and in quantity by type, with present technology.
The Black Clawson concept and some long-range
work done by the Forest Products Laboratory in
146
-------
Madison, Wisconsin, can change this situation.
In the meantime, the potential for increased
collection from the four basic sources can support
the anticipated and desired growth in this market.
The economics of collection remain dif-
ficult. They can be illustrated by some studies
conducted by Garden State Paper Company, the
nation's largest manufacturer of recycled news-
print. They think their type of product will
never penetrate more than 10% to 15% of the news-
print market. First, an efficient mill size is
350 tons a day. They do not expect to get more
than 15% to 25% of the papers back from a city,
and with annual per capita consumption of news-
print at just under 100 pounds, there are relatively
few locations in the U. S. that could support a
mill with collections. Significantly, Garden
State's three mills are located near New York,
Chicago, and Los Angeles, our three largest cities.
Now, one point of promise on this is the experiment
being run in Madison, Wisconsin. There, through
the cooperation of the city government and the
citizens, 40% of the newspapers are being collected.
147
-------
It is a noble experiment. Still, it would take
a courageous businessman to build a $65 million
recycling mill on the hope that that rate of return
could be maintained or duplicated in other cities.
One of the stimuli to wastepaper use
always under consideration is a municipal subsidy.
Most cities pay more than $30 a ton to collect
and dispose of their waste. If the city would
subsidize paper scavengers $15 a ton to remove
paper be fore the city collected it, the economics
would favor the growth of recycling and reduce the
cost of the city's sanitation department.
There seems to be two problems here.
First, most cities already charge commercial
establishments for pickup and disposal so they
would be saving no money. Second, and more dif-
ficult, political leaders are reluctant to commit
themselves to a contract which could appear to be
aiding business at the expense of the taxpayer.
The public expects industry to pay for wastepaper,
not get paid for taking it away. This attitude
must change. A recognition of the present nega-
tive value of the waste is essential to support
148
-------
the economic incentives for recycling mostly all
products.
Now, with that rather lengthy preamble,
we are prepared to discuss designing paper con-
tainers for recycling and reuse. We have said
there is little potential for recycling hetero-
geneous contaminated materials collected in small
quantities. That eliminates most household
packaging. Let me come back to that in a minute.
Corrugated containers do have some
potential. Recyclers tell me they would like to
get rid of asphalt tape, wax linings, hot melts,
and pressure-sensitive materials. If the cases
were marked conspicuously when these contaminants
were used, the offending cartons could be sorted
out visually. The result would be better quality
in the recycled corrugated, but it would also mean
higher collection costs. First, there would be
more sorting. Second, the mills would refuse the
contaminated material so the scavengers would need
to find a second outlet. However, it is an idea
that should be explored further.
149
-------
Another possibility is to restrict the
use of contaminants on corrugated by law or penalty.
This is a more complex problem. The recycling
contaminants add utility and versatility to the
carton's original function. If you deny them this
flexibility, you decrease their ability to compete
with their competitors including wire bound
boxes, steel strapped containers, plastic shippers,
etc. Would this serve the objectives of better
solid waste management? Certainly, such a move
would require careful study.
Designing the rest of the containers
in the waste for recycling or reuse still has some
promising potential. We are facing a massive
change in our waste handling systems. Concepts
like Black Clawson call for the recovery of all
fiber. If the quality problems can be worked out,
this has potential for recycling or for a second
use. The fiber might be combined with water
soluble plastics to be compressed into building
blocks. This might work some places, but not
everywhere. The market for building blocks is
just not that strong.
150
-------
Some work has been done in converting the
wood sugar in paper fibers to a high protein
animal feed. It works in theory, but here, too,
a severe problem of contamination must be faced.
In the concept of redesigning for either
disposability or reuse, I want to caution against
sacrificing the original function of the package.
Paper containers are involved in extremely com-
petitive markets. If mandated recycled fibers
decrease the quality or performance or increase
the price of the paper container and the market
is lost to plastic or some other material, the
objectives of solid waste management and resource
utilization will not have been served.
Although overpackaging does exist, it
reaches nowhere near the proportions credited by public
opinion. Is an inner stack wrap for crackers
which prevents staling of the last portions over-
packaging? How about a foil-laminated overwrap
which prevents dry milk from absorbing moisture or
a blister card which allows small items to go self-
service without excessive pilferage? Is this over-
packaging? I think not, but much of the public
151
-------
perceives that it is.
In spite of the growth of packaging, there
is a natural "brake," too. Few packages are pur-
chased by consumers; they are bought by profes-
sional buyers. To keep their costs at a minimum,
they are constantly pushing their suppliers to
reduce caliper, density, and square inches. It
goes on all the time, and it is successful. In
the last 20 years, the familiar square half-
gallon ice cream carton has improved in product
protection, convenience, graphics, and machin-
ability. But, it now weighs 33% less, and in
spite of inflation, its price is lower, too.
Plastic-coated and foil-laminated con-
tainers may be more difficult to recycle. However,
they allow paper to replace glass, plastic, or
metal containers which may represent greater solid
waste challenges.
There is one more second use with great
potential for the paper in our wastes. I am think-
ing of energy, of course. The incinerators of
the future will be expected to be producers of
power as well as disposers of waste. Paper is an
152
-------
ideal energy source. It has a caloric value half
that of coal and one-third as great as fuel oil.
Unlike those fuels, however, paper is a replaceable
resource. It is a non-polluting fuel. Under
controlled incineration, its only by-products are
carbon dioxide and water vapor, both natural to
air. The plastic and wax coatings which now retard
the degradability of paper would enhance its value
as a fue1.
I am pleased to note that the Solid Waste
Office of the EPA has placed a major contract to
determine the relative value of resource recovery
in the form of energy instead of in physical prod-
ucts. This report is a necessary prerequisite to
decisions under consideration for paper recycling
and container design. Without that information,
such programs as the recently announced GSA pur-
chasing specifications are premature.
Paper recycling must grow, and collection
incentives offer the most promise. Gradual develop-
ment of supply and market will be more effective
than crash programs. Do not forget alternate use
and disposal. They will remain important to
153
-------
handling our paper wastes.
We do need a national program and a national
direction for solid waste handling. The EPA is
researching this long-term course now. The exis-
ting thrust of supply and demand laws will tend to
favor increased use of recycled fiber in the years
ahead. In the meantime, mandated programs by
public or government may be forcing industry into
the wrong course of action. The solid waste problem
has been building for 2,000 years. We have the
facility and the organization at the EPA to develop
proper solutions in the near future. I am hopeful
that environmental emotion will not force us into
intuitive programs when factual ones are so near
at hand.
Thank you.
154
-------
CONFERENCE BANQUET
Keynote Address by R. L. Lesher
National Center for Resource Recovery, Inc.
-------
-------
INCENTIVES FOR REUSE AND DISPOSABILITY
R. L. Lesher
National Center for Resource Recovery, Inc.
Good evening. I am delighted to be here
at this important conference. Sometimes I think I
must be one of the most fortunate men in the world.
In this age of apology when we sometimes cringe be-
fore the problems created by the very magnificence
of our achievements, when the white light of cor-
roding criticism almost blinds us to our opportun-
ities, I've had the chance to work on the side of
the future, time and again.
I was on the team that tapped our enor-
mous resources of imagination, technology and guts
to meet the greatest challenge mankind has ever
tackled. It took some years, and it took the whole-
hearted effort of government and industry along with
public support, but we landed Americans on the moon
and brought them safely home.
And now I'm on the team represented here
today — the team that will tap those same resources
to solve a problem that directly effects all of us.
The challenge of pollution has been called the
moral equivalent of war. Certainly, if we fail, our
fate — though slow in coming — will be worse
155
-------
degradation than victor ever imposed on loser in any
war in history. And the ultimate fruits of victory
are a prize more dazzling than any that can be won
by arms.
The problem of solid waste disposal has
been with us for a long, long time. The trash
heaps of prehistoric man mutely testify that even
in those uncomplicated times, it was daily concern.
The problem grew, along with the slow
growth of civilization. Then about the middle of
the last century, the industrial revolution quick-
ened the pace. Slow growth gave way to quantum
leaps, and ever since then, people, products and
problems have multiplied explosively. I won't re-
cite the shopworn statistics on the magnitude of the
problem, but I would like to emphasize that the
problem is largely a function of : (1) population
growth, (2) affluence, and (3) archaic municipal
solid waste collection and disposal practices.
While our economic system changed radical-
ly from an agricultural system to a highly efficient
industrialized society with an ever increasing level
156
-------
of productivity, that is — increasingly capital
intensive and decreasingly labor intensive, our
municipal solid waste practices, for the most part,
changed very little and still bear a striking re-
semblance to the practices in vogue hundreds of
years ago.
We have all been far too happily occupied
with using the products industry provides — to pay
more than sporadic attention to the problem of dis-
posal. But now, when it's becoming obvious that
these problems threaten to get out of hand, people
are getting frightened.
As usually happens when the alarm goes
off, the immediate peril has been exaggerated.
There's not denying that a tidal wave of trash
hangs over us, and it's a healthy sign that people
are taking note of it. The panic button has served
that purpose; now it's time for a good, clear look
at the problem. Fright doesn't make for clear
vision, and people — being human— are saying and
doing some foolish things. However, our clear look
shows that the same industrial revolution that
157
-------
helped to balloon the problem to these proportions
provides the technology for managing it. The af-
fluence that contributes greatly to the problem
will enable us, as a Nation, to solve the problem.
This is one of the world1s crises that can be
solved. We can harness that tidal wave, and make
it work for us.
The most heartening thing I discovered
when I joined this effort was the quality — and
quantity — of both manpower and mindpower already
engaged.
Technology is the key to the solution and
technology is pre-eminently the creation and the
tool of industry. Industry does in fact deserve a
share of blame for pollution, but it is ready to
take the lead in controlling it. It is also able.
With the example of the moon landing before us, I
would hesitate to say what U.S. industry is NOT
able to do when resources are available. NASA con-
ducted the moon program, and NASA is a government
agency, but everyone at NASA realized that twenty
thousand industrial contractors built the invisible
158
-------
bridge across space that took them there.
"The National Center for Solid Waste Dis-
posal, Inc. is a non-profit corporation recently
established by 13 industries and American labor.
The Center is a different and unique kind of response
to the solid waste challenge.
The Center1s 30 member Board reads like a
Who's Who is American industry and labor.
There are three points I would like to
make with regard to our Board. First, the board
members represent their industry rather than just
their own company. In the case of labor, Mr. Abel
and Mr. Minton represent all of American labor
joining together to help solve the solid waste prob-
lem.
Second, this problem has the attention of
Top Management. These board members — although
very busy — all come to our meetings and actively
support, finanacially and organizationally, the ef-
forts of the National Center.
Third, the industries represented in the
National Center at the present time are representa-
tive of those here today — they are for the most
159
-------
part either producers or users of packaging.
The Center1s purpose is to "put it all
together" to coordinate the work of industry and
labor to work with government agencies at all levels
within a total systems approach.
What spurred the organizers was the need
for a permanent center, national in scope, where
all of industry who work with problems of solid
waste can pool their experience, expertise, research
money and research findings — and where each can
draw from the pool what he needs.
The basic objective of the National Center
is to mobilize industrial effort on a nationwide
scale to achieve lasting solutions to the problems
of municipal solid waste disposal, litter control,
and conservation of natural resources.
The program of the National Center will
have four main elements — 1.) Research, and, at the
outset, our emphasis will be on the economics of
new systems. The technology is rapidly emerging.
The main gaps, at the moment, are economic gaps,
markets for by-products. 2.) Analysis, which will be
160
-------
largely demographic analysis, data gathering of the
nature of the problem, 3) hardware demonstrations
and applications, and 4) a public awareness program.
This will not be a public relations program of win-
dow dressing. It will be an active, imaginative,
and factual education program about the nature of
the problem and the nature of the solution.
Now lest you think I have strayed too far
from the assigned topic — let me come back to it.
The topic of "incentives for Reuse and Disposability"
— That certainly raises some questions, doesn't
it? Almost a contradiction of terms. But let's
put this in perspective.
Today, we heard cited the Midwest Research
Institute Study on "The Role of Packaging in Solid
Waste Management 1966 to 1976." That study started
all this, but everyone is overlooking some key re-
commendations of that report. Let me quote for you
a couple of important paragraphs from that study:
''Least fruitful, in our view, would be ef-
fort expended on changing the characteristics of
packaging materials. The primary reason for this is
161
-------
that exactly those characteristics which make it a
package difficult to handle in disposal are those
which make it desirable as a package. This is a way
of saying that any container which is easily dis-
posed of is a poor container; and while such a gen-
eralization could not be applied to all packages, it
is applicable to those packaging categories which
create difficulty in disposal.
"Most of the difficulties created by
packaging are due to inadequate technology or the
absence of technology in waste disposal.
"Materials research does not offer fore-
seeable near-term success. Research to improve the
technology of salvage, particularly development of
materials separation techniques, is cited as the
most promising activity of those discussed."
Basically — designing any product to be
good garbage strikes me as a highly questionable
approach.
Reuse of beverage and food containers
dwindled a long time ago. There are a number of
reasons for this. First, convenience. The second
162
-------
one which is implied is economy. But the third one,
which everyone ignores, is environmental. The two-
way containers have dropped out of sight, especially
in the food case, because of the health and hygenics
problems associated with taking them back through
a non-systems approach.
Well, let's look at our terms. Let's
understand the problem before we can solve it.
What do we mean by disposability? There is nothing
in our system today that can't be disposed of with
the existing practices in solid wastes from coast
to coast.
All of us have heard the statistics that
about 85% of our cities and towns are burning or
open dumping the waste of our society. So what do
you mean you con't get rid of it? You can. What
you are really asking is: how can you make those
products more compatible with solid waste management
systems which aren't in place yet? We'll have to
come back to that question.
As we meet here we can make some very im-
portant predictions of the future. Virtually all
163
-------
of the states of the Union have laws in the books
against open dumping and open burning. Dick
Vaughn's leadership at the Solid Waste Management
Office with Project 5000 is going to succeed in em-
barr^ssing those cities and towns into obeying those
laws and closing the dumps.
Now think for a moment what that does to
the state-of-the art of solid wastes management. It
forces them up both the technology curve and the
cost curve. And where do they go from there? The
first obvious answer is the sanitary landfill. Like
all of the subjects on this venue, you have pros
and cons about each of these technologies. I was
told that the City of Los Angeles does a pretty
good job in sanitary landfills, so I went out to
see what they do differently to get their cost
down and not have an environmental problem. The
city is running the lan'dfill system at about $1.00
a ton and because so much land is available, they
tell me that they will be doing it for the next 500
years. They have no problem with any product that
is in the solid waste stream. But Los Angeles' good
164
-------
fortune is unique. Theirs is not the answer for the
whole country, obviously.
Let us look at the advanced systems that
are here today - not tomorrow. They are not in place
and they are not in use - but they are here today.
We have much better technology than the caveman
technology that we're using. The Solid Waste Man-
agement Office has done an excellent job of doing
research in a broad-faced manner in all areas of
collection and disposal. You looked at the film
today and say some of the more promising of those
technologies. The fiber-recovery system that will
be going on-line here in Ohio at Franklin next
month is one technique that does, in fact, work.
The CPU-400 is another bright and promising system.
This is a Combustion Power Unit with front-end sep-
aration and energy conversion on the backend of the
system. Garbage is burned to power gas turbines to
produce electricity.
There are all sorts of experiments going
on in pyrolysis, some of which produce oil and
gases that can be economically consumed, thus re-
ducing the costs. T^e incinerator will be with us
165
-------
for a long time in certain municipal situations/gen-
erating steam or other energy as a by-product.
All of these systems, incidentally, will
have one thing in common: - on the front end of
that System, size reduction and resource recovery
and recycling of your minerals - thus helping to
solve many of the problems of resource conservation.
There will be grinding and air classification or
other such systems. These are technologies that
are here today, and while they are not perfect, they
will get better.
For a moment, let's turn from talk of ex-
ploitation from waste to exploration of space
and what I believe is a fitting analogy. In the
early 1960's there must have been a thousand pro-
posals for exploring the heavens and the planets.
But, when President Kennedy set the goal of sending
men to the moon within the decade, that set the pace
for the technology. NASA at that time had a very
vigorous, advanced research and development program,
which is still being carried on today. But when the
Apollo Mission was set, we had to take the state-of-
166
-------
the-art and fly it with that technology.
Today, the technology is here to solve the
solid waste problem. The missing gaps are largely
economic. One is the creation and sustaining of
the markets of the byproducts of that technology
and, the second gap is the financing of the system.
The National Center will be working very vigorously
in both of those areas. In a very short period of
time, over the next several years, the whole new
industry will spring out, populated by many compan-
ies that are already in or close to this industry
to solve this problem and to eventually, and I em-
phasize 'eventually', to make money doing it.
We at the National Center have just begun.
We put together our top management team and in the
very near future we will begin providing services.
One thing I am sure of is that tomorrow1s
systems will be radically different that the prac-
tices that we have today, and it would be a shame
to disrupt things that don't need disrupting and
cause needless changeover and then come back to that
system later on. I am confident that when we do
167
-------
these things, we will have a way to control any
volume of solid waste that is generated in this
country. I am very optimistic that we as a Nation
will solve this problems, and I am damned tired of
the doomsayers that seem to spring up all around
us.
Today, we have the carrot and the stick.
The stick is made up of those extrapolations that
show us what we must expect if we do fail. The
stick has us all concerned: the government, public
and industry, and that concern is our guarantee
that we will solve the problem.
The carrot is the wealth to be reclaimed
from that tidal wave of trash. Solid waste is what
we call it. The clearest threat to our environment
is the label pinned on the 250 million tons of
municipal waste by some other spokesman. But there
is one man working on a recycling plant for the
Bureau of Mines who has a different view of solid
waste. He is Max Spendlove and Max calls it "urban
ore." And he is right. Our tidal wave of trash can
just as truthfully be called our world's richest
168
-------
mine, one that possesses the fairytale capability
for replenishing itself. Everything useful,
everything solid that was ever used eventually
comes back to that mine.
The Center's ultimate goal, and I think
the goal of all of us, is to realize man's age-old
dream: the dream of a self-renewing horn-of-plenty,
a natural resource that can never be used up.
Thank you very much.
169
-------
-------
SESSION III
GLASS CONTAINERS
Chairman:
C. A. demons, Chief
Reclamation Branch
Division of Research and Development
Office of Solid Waste Management
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
-------
DESIGN TRENDS IN GLASS CONTAINERS
Richard L. Cheney
Glass Container Manufacturers Institute, Inc.
INTRODUCTION
A new dimension has been added to the
marketing of such household products as: foods,
beverages, drugs, cosmetics and household cleaners
and chemicals. It has to do with the impact on
our environment of the making, distributing and
discarding of the materials marketed, including
their packages.
It is within this context that I assume
you wish me to discuss "Design Trends in Glass
Containers."
I think we will all agree that the
primary purpose of a package is to protect and
preserve the contents; to hold the original fresh-
ness, goodness and strength within and to prevent
contamination from without. Thus we encounter a
basic contradiction in the aims of the packager
and of those charged with managing solid waste.
The packager wants a virtually indestructible,
impermeable material and the solid waste manager
171
-------
would like something that would disappear into
thin air as soon as its job is done. However,
these aims are not irreconcilable, at least as far
as glass containers are concerned, as those who
follow me on this morning's program and I, myself,
shall hope to demonstrate.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
What we are concerned with here is the
impact of our actions upon our environment. Max
Ways, in the February 1970 issue of Fortune Maga-
zine, puts it well in an article entitled, "How
to Think About the Environment." He says:
"Although environmental issues do
have a grave moral content, there's
little sense in the tendency to present
the case in the dominant art form of
a TV horse opera. This isn't really a
confrontation between 'the polluters'
and the good guys in the white hats."
and further on he states:
"The wastes that besmirch the land are
produced in the course of fulfilling
17Z
-------
"widespread human wants that are in the
main reasonable and defensible."
Surely modern packaging has done a superb
job of supplying legitimate human needs and wants.
I, for one, am convinced that the same
technology that has brought us the highest stand-
ard of living ever known,- if coupled with a
strong sense of individual responsibility,- can
solve our highly complex environmental pollution
problems.
They are highly complex and are not
susceptible to simplistic solutions, and time and
energy devoted to pursuing impractical, simplistic
solutions such as the suggestion to ban certain
useful packages, is worse than wasted, for it
postpones the practical solutions which must
eventually be embraced.
Our environment, like charity, begins at
home. The most intimate part of our environment
is, of course, the home and, here, modern packaging
has done much to improve our environment.
Packaging has provided "built-in maid
service," thus liberating women from many household
173
-------
chores and permitting over half of our country's
housewives to hold jobs outside the home by making
possible prepared foods of all kinds, applicator
packages, packages which reseal to preserve fresh-
ness, and disposable beverage containers which
need not be taken back to the store.
And packages have eliminated from house-
hold garbage pails a substantial quantity of
putrescible agricultural solid wastes, ranging
from orange peels and pulp, vegetable and meat
trimmings, and spoiled remains of unused fruits
and vegetables,- by making possible pre-processed
packaged foods, such as, bottled orange juice and
prepared and pre-cooked foods of all kinds.
And, in addition, packaging is, of
course, the automation factor in the distribution
of household products.
With rising labor costs, particularly at
the retail level, packaging changes and technology
have streamlined the distribution process.
Packaging thus permits streamlined,
sanitary, low-cost retail outlets, such as super-
markets , which can operate on a narrow profit
174
-------
margin and give the consumer more for his money.
At no time in history and in no other
country in the world does the average citizen
spend so small a portion of his total income for
food as he does in this country today.
Few realize that the average supermarket
operates on less than one percent profit on dollar
sales. This means that when a homemaker gives the
check-out boy a tip of 25 to take her $20.00
purchase of groceries to her parked car, the boy is
making more on the transaction than the owner of
the store and to a large extent modern packaging
makes this progress possible.
GLASS AS A PACKAGING MATERIAL
Now, specifically, as to "Design Trends
in Glass Containers," both as to their efficiency
as packages and their role in solid waste manage-
ment -- first, let's look at the properties of
glass which affect its use as a packaging material
from these two viewpoints.
Glass has several unique and impressive
qualities which have resulted in its extensive use
175
-------
as a packaging material. In the first place,
glass is made of highly abundant raw materials --
silica sand, limestone and soda ash. Sand accounts
for 73 per cent of the materials in container
glass. Thus, glass manufacturing is not a serious
drain on our natural resources. If properly
crushed in disposal processes, the glass fragments
return to the soil in virtually their original
state. And being inert, they do not leach, rust,
rot, mold, putrefy, cause disease or noxious gases,
nor pollute in any way.
Several recent studies reported in the
proceedings of the American Society of Civil
Engineers reveal that glass constitutes an average
of only about 6 per cent by weight of residential
solid waste, and an almost negligible per cent by
volume, if the glass is crushed in efficient land-
fill, incineration and composting operations.
Even to the scientist, glass is still
somewhat of a mystery. Although regarded as a
solid, physicists say it is actually a super-
cooled liquid, which is why it can so easily be
blown into bottles. It is transparent, although
176
-------
made of opaque raw materials and, in its pristine
state, it is one of the strongest materials known
to man. Glass fibres have been drawn which have a
tensile strength of over 300,000 Ibs. per square
inch,- much stronger than the strongest steel.
As a packaging material, it is chemically
inert, so that it cannot react with, nor add any-
thing to, or take anything away from its contents.
It is absolutely impermeable to gases or moisture,
transparent, non-porous, sanitary and odorless and
may be formed in an infinite variety of shapes,
sizes and colors. No other packaging material can
say as much.
Incidentally, that great strength of
glass is a big factor in the plans of a noted
scientist who is planning to package people in
glass! Dr. William B. McLean, known as "the Navy's
handyman" (he invented the side-winder missile) is
designing a 56 inch glass sphere (called a
"bathysphere") in which two men will descend deeper
in the ocean than man has ever gone before.
Dr. McLean points out that not only is
glass transparent, so that they will be able to
177
-------
see in all directions, but (and I quote him), "It
is not theoretically possible to make a metal
vehicle that can stand the ocean's pressure with-
out being far too heavy. The big advantage of
glass, beyond visibility, is that glass is lighter
than any metal and about 5 or 6 times as strong
as steel."
Now Dr. McLean's container will operate
under heavy external pressure, which puts the
whole glass structure under compressive stress.
Ordinary glass containers are subjected in normal
handling and, as a result of internal pressure
from carbonic gas (such as in soft drinks) or
propellants (such as in aerosols), to forces
which result in tensile stress, and if a bottle
fails, it does so when its tensile strength at
some point is exceeded.
Today in glass bottles we are utilizing
only about one percent of the theoretical tensile
strength of glass exhibited by the glass fibre.
When we learn to lift this only to five percent,
we shall be able to make glass bottles and jars
much lighter (that is, with much less glass in
178
-------
them) than today, and much stronger. This will
not only make it a more desirable package to the
consumer and save on shipping weight, but it will
obviously reduce the weight of waste glass in the
solid waste stream when it is discarded, substan-
tially reduce the amount of protection required
in the corrugated shipping container,- thereby
reducing that load on solid waste.
You will hear later this morning of new
developments in lighter glass containers and
research is well along on a process of chemical
tempering which will put the surfaces of the con-
tainers under compressive stress and so result in
the lighter containers I have described. We hope
to see a breakthrough in this area soon. One of
the beauties of this development will be that such
containers when broken in disposal will fall into
harmless granules about the size of rock salt.
Meanwhile, research and development has
already brought about a reduction in weight of
some 30 percent in glass containers over the past
20 years. One factor in this progress has been a
marked advance in the techniques for surface
179
-------
treatments which have resulted in substantial
progress in protecting and preserving the pristine
strength of the surfaces of beer and soft drink
bottles which have to withstand the internal pres-
sures of carbonation. Much of this research has
been conducted jointly through GCMI.
The other outstanding characteristic of
glass, its chemical inertness, which guarantees
complete compatibility with its contents and
virtually unlimited shelf life unless the contents
breaks down of itself, was recently dramatically
demonstrated by an incident reported in the New
York Times.
In 1968 an English lord discovered in
his wine cellar three glass bottles of Canary
Island wine, bottled in 1740. He and his son
sampled this 227 year-old wine and found it to be
delicious. They put one bottle away for a future
family occasion and a London autioneer sold the
third for them at a fancy price. That is real
shelf life and, of course, could be equalled by no
other modern packaging material!
180
-------
This brought to mind another incident
when, in 1954, 18 bottles of beer were washed
ashore on the Kentish coast of England, after
spending 250 years under the sea in a wrecked
ship. They were intact, with their contents, and
neither the corrosive sea water nor its crushing
pressure had violated their integrity as a package.
The beer was potable, but had definitely not im-
proved with age.
One further example of the efficiency of
glass as a package was cited in the April 9, 1971
issue of Research Institute of America's bulletin.
A graduate student at University of Maryland has
found that nitroglycerine tablets, used by heart
disease sufferers, may lose up to 30% of their
potency within six months in one type of package
made of a material other than glass, up to 72%
in another, and up to 907» in a third; while they
lost only 57o of their potency in glass bottles
over that period, either with glass stoppers or
tight screw-on caps.
181
-------
THE ROLE OF GLASS IN SOLID WASTE
I cite these examples to show that glass
as a packaging material has such important advan-
tages to the consumer that it would, for example,
be a very serious mistake to recommend substituting
some biodegradable material for it in the hope
(which is open to question) of decreasing our solid
waste problems. You will, however, hear later in
the morning of research directed toward the possi-
ble use of a different type of glass itself, which
has unusual disposal characteristics.
Finally, glass is one of the most easily
recycled of all the materials found in solid waste
and we have already uncovered markets for all of
the waste glass that could be generated in this
country. We are supporting research to develop
systems for automatically separating it from
municipal solid waste so that it can be re-used
for these purposes. You will hear more of this
later in the morning.
182
-------
SUMMARY
In summary, as I have pointed out:
1. The use of glass containers conserves limited
raw materials.
2. They benefit our home environment and are
essential to our present mode and standard of
living.
3. The properties of glass which make it an
excellent container material also make it a
beneficial factor in all accepted waste dis-
posal systems.
4. Glass containers constitute only 67o of muni-
cipal solid waste by weight and, when crushed,
less than half that by volume.
5. Through research and development we are moving
toward lighter weight glass containers which
will benefit the consumer and further reduce
the solid waste load.
6. Glass containers represent one of the most
easily recycled and re-used of all the ele-
ments of municipal solid waste and present
reclamation programs and research are directed
183
-------
6. Cont'd.
towards maximum use of waste glass as a
secondary material.
184
-------
RE-USING SCRAP GLASS
Ward R. Malisch, Delbert E. Day, and Bobby G. Wixson
University of Missoun-Rolla
INTRODUCTION
The use of waste glass as aggregate in as-
phaltic concrete has been under study at the Univer-
sity of Missouri-Rolla for nearly two years under a
grant from the Solid Waste Office of the Environmen-
tal Protection Agency. Since containers constitute
over 75 percent of the waste glass present in muni-
cipal refuse, the properties of waste glass would
depend, to a large extent, upon the properties of
containers. Thus, changes in composition and design
of consumer containers might be expected to be of
concern. The degree to which this potential for
waste glass reuse is influenced by container design,
is discussed in this paper.
PROPERTIES OF GLASS-ASPHALT MIXTURES
Aggregates which are normally used in as-
phaltic mixtures may vary from porous to nearly non-
porous materials with rough to smooth surface text-
ures. Angular materials such as crushed stone have
been used as well as rounded gravels and river
sands. Generally, particles which are nearly equi-
dimensional are preferred to flat and/or elongated
particles. A range in sizes from up to 1 1/2-in.
particles graded down through sand and dust sized
185
-------
materials is generally used if a dense mass is de-
sired but the maximum sized particle used will vary
with the source of supply and the thickness of the
pavement layer to be placed.
Waste glass particles can be characterized
as nearly non-porous, smooth surfaced and angular
with a preponderance of flat particles in sizes re-
tained on a No. 4 sieve. The non-porous nature of
glass is advantageous in that lower drier tempera-
tures are required in plant mixes since only surface
moisture must be expelled. However, the low poros-
ity and smooth surface texture combined result in
less internal friction in the asphaltic mixture and
thus a lower strength or stability. The large num-
ber of flat particles in the larger sizes is not un-
expected since an average bottle wall thickness is
approximately 0.11 in. and particles with any dimen-
sion greater than 3 times this value would be classi-
fied as flat and/or elongated. While excessive num-
bers of flat or elongated particles are undesirable,
due to lower densities and strengths obtained when
using them, research currently being conducted has
indicated that by changing the particle size grada-
tion, denser mixes can be achieved with flat and
elongated particles. It is necessary to have a
graded mixture of glass particles in order to obtain
186
-------
adequate density and strength.
Asphaltic mixtures satisfying standard de-
sign criteria have been designed using penetration
grade asphalts and aggregates composed entirely of
glass . While the stability of these mixtures is
somewhat lower than stabilities obtained using
crushed conventional aggregates, values greater than
the minimum required stability for medium traffic
categories have been obtained. In field installa-
tions using a mixture of glass and conventional ag-
gregates, stabilities have been considerably higher
( 2 )
than those obtained with all-glass aggregates
These stabilities have met the requirements for
heavy traffic categories suggested by The Asphalt
Institute(3).
Resistance to loss of adhesion between as-
phalt and glass in the presence of water is poor if
no additives are used to improve adhesion. However,
the addition of hydrated lime in an amount equal to
one percent by weight of the aggregate resulted in
very much improved adhesion so that specimens which
had been soaked in water at 140F for 24- hours re-
(4 )
tained 100 percent of the dry strength
Skid resistance and tire wear on glass ag-
gregate surfaces have not yet been fully evaluated.
In Fig. 1, the surface texture of a patch containing
187
-------
Fig. 1 Glass-asphalt surface containing 94.5%
glass 4 months after placement
Fig. 2 Glass-asphalt surface containing 94
glass 17 months after placement
188
-------
94.5 percent crushed glass and 5.5 percent asphalt
is illustrated. The picture was taken 4 months af-
ter placement. It should be noted that the larger
flat glass particles lie flat in the pavement sur-
face with no jagged edges protruding. Fig. 2 shows
the same surface 17 months after placement. Since
hydrated lime was not used in this mixture there
has been considerable ravelling of the surface, but
note again that there is no indication of potential
tire cutting edges appearing. A similar surface
texture has been observed in field installations
using glass particles up to 3/4-in. in size, and
thus we feel that there is little danger of actual
cutting of the tires due to exposed glass edges.
Whether or not glass aggregates contribute
to an increased rate of abrasion for tires can not
be answered yet. Schallamach states that rate of
abrasion of typical tread compounds on tracks with
different surface characteristics can vary by a
large factor but it is not so much size as shape of
track asperities which determines severity of wear.
This would seem to indicate that the more angular
glass particles would result in greater wear than
rounded or semi-rounded aggregates. However, re-
search has shown that wear also occurs on smooth
surfaces due to fatigue of the rubber. According to
189
-------
Schallamach, tire surface temperature is the basic
parameter from which practical tire wear ratings
can be derived, and while the possibility must be
left open that road surface affects ratings, it is
still expected that tire surface temperature governs
wear ratings on any given road, irrespective of its
characteristics. A laboratory apparatus for assess-
ing tire wear on varying surfaces is currently under
construction since it appears that the only method
for obtaining a quantitative comparison of wear on
surfaces with conventional and glass aggregates is
by direct testing.
Skid resistance tests have been conducted
on several of the field installations of glass-
asphalt mixtures using the British Portable Tester
and the ASTM two wheel skid trailer. The results
obtained to date indicate primarily the initial
skid resistance, and the effect of traffic upon
these skid resistance values has not been fully
evaluated. However, initial skid values obtained
have been acceptable. The results of these initial
determinations are given in Table 1.
One property of glass-asphalt mixtures
which has been noted by contractors placing the
material in field installations is a slower cooling
rate. Hot mixed asphaltic concrete is generally
190
-------
rH
W
CQ
<^
EH
Pi
Q H
H CQ
X XI
GO D
S3
CO it- CO
CO LO LO
IT]
P
00
S3
0
M
EH
j
<£
EH
GO
^
H
P
,J
H
H
PH
EH
<£j
ffi
PH
00
CD
p^
0
00
EH
GO
H
H
P
1 (
X
GO
EH W
00 W
H ft
H GO
ft ft ft
e e e
0 O O
CN CM HT
P
EH 0
00 K
H EH
EH H
S
^ ^ ^ H/- ^ H^
EH P- EH P- EH c—
00 CM 00 CM 00 CM
< W < H < H
CD
Q
W H
H EH
< GO
P W
EH
CO
^ 0 H
CO t^- [~^
1 — 1 \ '^
^\ CD CM
0 v^
rH CO
P
H
J
H i 1
H <
<£ EH
P GO
S3
H
O
CD O t~^
CO !>- ^
•v. ^^ CD
Hf CD CM
-^ CM \
o-^o
rH CO iH
CD
LO
1
1
0)
CO ,Q fn
•H nS CU
+J +-• 4-1
•H !H CO
!H O CU
CQ PH EH
0
o
\
CM
rH
\
[^
CD
L-^
\
O
rH
-^
r~
X
GO
J
H
EH
H
M
PH
0
00
EH
J
^)
00
H
Pi
S
O
H
EH
<£
O CO
0 -H
P O O
C-rl
•H fl
H O
j — 1
H «
1 O
CO T3
q cu
CU r-t
3 0
0 EH
•
o
o
IT]
CD T3
co nj
(ft p3
i — I fT]
CD O
C «
O O
•H -H
C fi
•H Cl5
S +J
0 C
P 0
.
ft fd
rl -H
o c
0 , CO
-p -H
•H S,
CO
CL) r.
W nj
> H
•H rH
C 0
D Pi
ft
ID
CU
-H
rl
0)
o
o
•a
rfl
ft
6
T3
CU
-M
O
P
•a
q
o
o
+J
co
CU
EH
191
-------
delivered to the job site at temperatures ranging
from 250F to 30QF. It is then necessary to complete
compaction before the asphalt viscosity increase
due to cooling progresses to the point that further
compaction is impossible. During cold weather ex-
cessive cooling is a problem which can result in
high void contents and premature deterioration due
to inadequate compaction. Since several contractors
commented on the apparent slower cooling rate for
glass-asphalt mixtures, several laboratory tests
were conducted to compare these mixtures with con-
ventional asphaltic concretes. Companion specimens
were fabricated using conventional crushed limestone
and river sand for one set and glass aggregates for
the other. Properties of the mixtures are shown in
Tables 2 and 3. They were compacted in standard
Marshall molds in which the metal base plate had
been replaced by a plywood plate of the same dimen-
sions. A groove in the base plate contained a
chromel-alumel thermocouple for measuring tempera-
ture. Each of the two specimens was compacted using
50 blows of the standard hammer on one side only.
They were then placed in an oven at 120C for 24
hours to stabilize temperatures, before placing
them in a cold room at OC. The specimens remained
in the compaction mold while temperature readings
192
-------
GO
W
M
O
D
EH
GO
O
53
M
p-J
O
0
O
PS
O
CM [A_,
M GO
>J W
CQ H
EH U
W
CD
O
PH
O
^
O
M
EH
<£
O
PS
C9
O
M
EH
i—]
<£
5c
DH
GO W
53
O
0
EH
J
<£*
p-J
P-.
00
J
O
!2;
o
i — i
H
<
O
<
K
U
CD
53
M
W
GO
<£
DH
o\°
tJ-I
N]
M
GO
W
W
H
GO
-H
rH
IT!
p(
LO CO
rd
OC^i — ICQCDOOC^OCD , — 1
OCOC-QJ-OOOIrHp-H bj)
pH
c
M
X •
•H 13
g 0)
ra
H 3
rt)
& a
o T)
•H Z
C -H
0) to
C T)
O
O CO
CO
G T)
W)
1) TD
LO pH CD
r3[^! IfjocrjcOt^OLO -H CO
OCOtDJ-COCMrHrH MH3
1 — 1 P-)
i— 1 O
IT)
0) LO
•a
O it)
a)
T3 Ei
0) -H
to H
3
(U CD
C I '
O H)
^ -P fn
"3 CO 13
^ Q) >,
° o g f:
O3 CD O O O -H
HrCOH^LOHCM rHo\°
Z - O
\^OOOOOOO CUH
1 I ' -i-, ^i, ^ ^ ^, ^ ^ r£_,
to •>
D X
£-1 "H
0 6
193
-------
W
PQ
o
1 — I
EH
5;
K
D-,
GO W
< EH
H
^ Pi
O
o
CN
EH
GO
W
EH
rH
EH
GO
H
H
Cxj
EH
GO
EH
J
<5^
UH
0-!
GO
<
CD
W
EH
EH
GO
W
EH
en
t-
>H
H
Pi
W
PL,
O
Pi
FU
en
•O
•H
O
O
CO
r-
LD
dP
0)
bu
bfl
bO
0)
C
•H
s
c
•H
•rH
O
00
CD
hD
•H
•H
C
T)
(D
-P
O
0)
a
e
o
o
o
H
-P
C
cu
•p
c
o
o
-p
PH
cn
194
-------
were taken at time intervals varying from one to
fifteen minutes.
Results of two such tests are shown in
Figs. 3 and 4-. In test one, air contents of the
compacted specimens were almost identical while in
test two, the glass-asphalt mixture had a higher
air content. However, in both these tests, the
temperature of glass-asphalt mixtures was consis-
tently higher than the conventional mixture very
soon after cooling had begun. More study is needed
in order to confirm this behavior and to evaluate
its practical significance, but if the higher heat
retention is confirmed, extension of the paving
season in colder climates would be possible.
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
In a paper concerning economic factors of
mineral waste utilization, Vogely divides wastes
into three groups based upon their economic value
and the social cost inherent in their generation
and existence. The first category includes wastes
which have a value, such as iron mine rejects with
a substantial percentage of iron but not immediate-
ly marketable because of technological and economic
problems. Vogely also includes in this category
wastes which have no significance from the point of
view of the materials which they contain but are
195
-------
UJ
K-
i
0)
UJ
X
<
z
o
I-
z
ui
z
o
o
o
UJ <
2 X
S3
3 o
o u.
o o
° UJ
<
cr
o
o
o
o
196
-------
LJ
Ul
X
z
o
UJ
1 <
I!
o en
o <
o -i
o
UJ
i-
<
cr
o
o
o
197
-------
important for their structural characteristics in
that they could be used as aggregates.
The second category includes wastes which
are worthless but which generate spillover costs to
the rest of society in the form of health and safe-
ty hazards, retarded land development or destroyed
aesthetic values. Finally, there are those wastes
which are worthless but exist in such small volume
and are so remote from population centers that they
do not generate any social costs.
Until recently, waste glass from munici-
pal refuse was included in the second category, be-
ing viewed only as a worthless material to be dis-
posed of. However, in the past two years, the value
of this waste component has been recognized and
several possible means for reusing waste glass have
been suggested. The possibilities include use in
making more bottles, as an aggregate for road pav-
ing, and as a raw material for glass bricks, fiber-
glass, or other high silica building materials. In
choosing among these possible uses, a market allo-
cation problem is evident. According to Vogely,
the issue is whether or not the market place ade-
quately measures the potential value as a source of
minerals (cullet) against a current value in a use
(aggregate) which destroys that value. It would
198
-------
appear that the choice will hinge upon several
factors.
If we assume that a separation facility
for municipal refuse is installed to produce metal-
lic (both ferrous and non-ferrous), paper, plastic
and glass fractions, the economic feasibility of
using the glass as an aggregate will depend upon
the amount of further processing necessary in order
to make glass suitable for use as an aggregate, the
cost of conventional aggregates in the area, and
the volume the waste glass fraction produced annual-
ly. The most desirable situation would be one in
which the glass emanating from a separation facility
could be used as an aggregate with no further crush-
ing, screening or washing operation. Assuming that
ten percent by weight of the refuse processed was
glass and that this glass could be used to replace
aggregate costing $2.00 per ton, the glass component
would generate an income of $.20 per ton of raw
refuse processed. In the Black Clawson hydrasposal/
fiberclaim system, separation costs for a 1000 ton
per day unit are estimated at $7.50 per ton of raw
C 8 )
refuse processed . The $.20 per ton revenue gen-
erated by the glass thus represents a small percent-
age of the separation cost. However, in this par-
ticular system, revenues realized through the sale
199
-------
of recovered fibers are expected to bear the brunt
of separation costs as it is estimated that reclaim-
ed paper worth $5.00 can be recovered from each ton
of raw refuse. Credits to offset part of the re-
maining $2.50 would be expected from the sale of
ferrous metals, aluminum and glass.
Samples of the glass fraction produced by
the hydrasposal system have been analyzed to deter-
mine the particle size gradation and amount of con-
taminants present. Results of the sieve analysis
are shown in Table 4. Based upon a visual and mag-
netic separation, roughly 15 percent of this frac-
tion consisted of non-glass materials such as alu-
minum labels, ferrous metals, plastics and rubber.
The gradation indicates the material to be too
coarse for use by itself in glasphalt. However, by
blending it with a sand or rock dust the gradation
could be improved enough to make it usable without
the further cost of crushing or screening. The ef-
fect of the 15 percent impurities is presently being
studied, but no conclusions can be drawn as yet.
If crushing, screening or washing were
required to make the glass fraction suitable for use
as an aggregate, the glass fraction would not con-
tribute as much toward offsetting separation costs.
Due to the need for purchasing specialized equipment,
200
-------
W
m
EH
O
o
CD
CM
C
•H
o
co
201
-------
it would be necessary to process some minimum vol-
ume of glass in order to reach a break-even point.
The minimum volume necessary would be dependent upon
processing costs , including equipment, and upon the
cost of aggregate to be replaced by glass. From the
( 2 )
results of a preliminary economic analysis in
which it was assumed that crushing and screening
equipment were purchased for the processing opera-
tions and conventional aggregates cost $2.00 per
ton, a break-even point of roughly 30,000 tons of
glass annually can be estimated. At volume below
this figure, the cost of processing the glass for
use in glass-asphalt mixtures would exceed the sav-
ings as a result of reduced use of conventional ag-
gregates. The only justification for using the ma-
terial as aggregate under these conditions would be
a case in which disposing of the waste glass in a
landfill would be more costly than using it as an
aggregate. It might also be argued, in accord with
Vogely's point, that with further processing such
as removal of nearly all contaminants and color sep-
aration, the glass could better be used as cullet.
The choice to be made, in this case, would depend
upon other factors such as the cos.t of cleaning and
color separation, costs for transporting the cullet
to the nearest bottle factory, and the amount of
202
-------
glass which could be disposed of in this manner.
In summary, if glass from a separation
facility is used as an aggregate, and no futher pro-
cessing is required, the maximum contribution to-
ward offsetting separation costs would be made, but
this amount would represent only a modest percent-
age of the separations costs that are currently pro-
jected. If crushing and screening of the glass are
required, the contribution toward offsetting separa-
tion costs is diminished and a minimum volume must
be produced annually in order to balance the addi-
tional processing costs. These estimates are based
upon prevailing aggregate prices and projected costs
for separating refuse in a facility which is cur-
rently under construction. The economic feasibili-
ty of this approach would be enhanced by higher ag-
gregate prices, for instance, if it were found that
the thermal properties of glass-asphalt mixtures
justified a premium price for the aggregate.
IMPACT OF DESIGN CHANGES IN GLASS CONTAINERS
( 9 )
According to Darnay and Franklin sever-
al changes in glass container design might be anti-
cipated within the next decade. Lighter containers
produced using thinner walls and stronger glass are
expected since the higher weight of glass containers
is considered to be one of their major disadvantages.
203
-------
Glass-plastic containers of exceptionally light
weight are also being developed . Advances in
glass technology have resulted in more colors being
available and decoration by fusing enamel onto the
glass surface directly. More novel color-shape com-
binations are also expected to appear. Easy-open
closures in the form of twist-off caps have already
been introduced, with the twist-off caps leaving a
slender ring of aluminum around the neck of the
bottle.
Changes in color, shape, or decorating
method will have no effect upon the potential use of
waste glass as an aggregate in asphaltic mixtures.
Only an alteration of the glass surface texture
would influence the mechanical properties of asphal-
tic mixtures and, since the smooth surface texture
of glasses currently being used represents the worst
possible condition for high internal friction and
strength in the mixture, any changes in surface tex-
ture caused by decorative technique would probably
be beneficial.
Thinner walled containers will result in
more flat and elongated particles being present in
the larger size fractions of crushed glass. The ef-
fect of these particles would be to decrease density
and strength of the glass-asphalt mixture
204
-------
However, there is some evidence that these effects
can be mitigated through alteration of the glass
gradation used. A commonly accepted means for cal-
culating a so-called maximum density gradation for
granular materials is the Fuller formula:
P = 100 (d/D)n
where
P = percent passing a sieve having
an opening of d inches
D = maximum size of aggregate
n = a coefficient related to
physical properties of the
aggregate
(12 )
Goode and Lufsey have suggested that
for maximum density, n be taken as 0.45. However,
(13)
it has also been suggested that, depending upon
the shape of aggregate particles, the coefficient
producing maximum density may vary. In laboratory
studies aimed at establishing an optimum gradation
for crushed glass, the density of various gradations
of glass beads and crushed bottle glass indicated
that for the equidimensional, rounded beads the 0.4-5
coefficient did produce maximum density but that for
crushed bottle glass, a coefficient of 0.375 was
necessary for maximum density. These results are
shown in Fig 5 and it should be noted that in all
cases the glass beads gave higher densities. Thus,
it appears that while increased flat particles do
205
-------
BULK UNIT WEIGHT vs. GRADATION COEFFICIENT.n
FOR
GLASS SPHERES AND CRUSHED BOTTLE GLASS
O O GLASS SPHERES
A a BOTTLE GLASS
144
140
O
0. 136
X
e>
ID
132
128
CD
124
.35 .4 .45 .5 .55
COEFFICIENT, n
FIG.5 UNIT WEIGHT OF GLASS SPHERES AND BOTTLE
GLASS
206
-------
cause a loss in density, changes in the gradation
used can minimize this loss. Tests are currently
being conducted on asphalt specimens utilizing the
varying gradations to determine strength values us-
ing the optimum density gradation.
The effect upon glass-asphalt mixtures of
contaminants such as aluminum rings , bottle caps,
and plastic residues from composite containers have
not yet been fully investigated. Research sponsor-
ed by the Glass Container Manufacturers Institute
is currently underway at the University of Missouri-
Rolla to assess the effect of several contaminants
upon the properties of glass-asphalt mixtures and
results to date have indicated that up to 1.5 per-
cent aluminum by weight of the glass aggregate used
has no adverse effect upon strength or void charac-
teristics of the mixture. The effects of plastics
have not yet been evaluated.
CONCLUSIONS
In summary, changes in container design
which might be expected to occur over the next ten
years should have little effect upon the suitability
of waste glass for use as an aggregate in asphaltic
concrete. The major barriers to effective utiliza-
tion of the glass in this manner are economic ones
which are related to the costs of separation and
207
-------
the costs of any further processing of the glass
which is necessary after separation.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This investigation is supported by Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency Grant No. USPH 5 R01
EC329-02 and by a grant from the Glass Container
Manufacturers Institute.
Skid resistance data on glasphalt field
installations were furnished by Ohio Department of
Highways, California Division of Highways and the
Ontario Department of Highways.
Samples of glass recovered from the hydra-
sposal fiberclaim system for refuse separation were
furnished by the Black-Clawson Company.
Thomas Keith and John Doyle, Research
Assistants in Civil Engineering, at the University
of Missouri-Rolla, aided in obtaining laboratory
data concerning thermal properties and effects of
flat and elongated particles in waste glass mixtures.
REFERENCES
(1) Malisch, Ward R., Day, Delbert E., and Wixson,
Bobby G., "Use of Domestic Waste Glass as
Aggregate in Bituminous Concrete," Highway
Research Record, (307) 1-10, (1970).
(2) Malisch, Ward R., Day, D.E., and Wixson, B.G.,
"Use of Salvaged Waste Glass in Bituminous
Paving," paper presented at special symposium
on Technology for the Future to Control Indus-
trial and Urban Wastes, Rolla, Mo., (Feb. 1971)
208
-------
(3) Mix Design Methods for Asphalt Concrete,
Third Edition,The AsphaltInstitute,College
Park, Maryland (October 1969) p. 39.
(4) Foster, Charles, W., "Use of Waste Glass as
Asphaltic Concrete Aggregate," Masters Thesis,
University of Missouri-Rolla, Rolla, Missouri,
(1970) , p. 29.
(5) Schallamach, A., "Recent Advances in Knowledge
of Rubber Friction and Tire Wear," Rubber
Chemistry and Technology, U_l (209), 221-241
(1968).
(6) Vogely, William A., "The Economic Factors of
Mineral Waste Utilization," In Proceedings of
the First Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium,
Chicago, Illinois (March 1968).
(7) Abrahams, John H., "Utilization of Waste Con-
tainer Glass," Waste Age, I (4)
(July-August 1970).
(8) Marsh, Paul, Private Communication, April 1971.
(9) Darney, Arsen, and Franklin, William E., "The
Role of Packaging in Solid Waste Management
1966 to 1976," Public Health Service Publica-
tion No. 1855, Washington, 1969, p. 34-35,
131.
(10) Owens-Illinois, Annual Report, 1969, p. 20.
(11) Bituminous Materials in Road Construction,
First Edition,Her Majesty'sStationery Office,
London, England (1962), p. 13.
(12) Goode, J.F. and Lufsey, L.A., "A New Graphical
Chart for Evaluating Aggregate Gradations,"
Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists
Proceedings, _31_, 177-180, (1962).
(13) Smith, M.R. and Kidd, G.M., "Concrete Techno-
logy and Aggregate Production for St. Lawrence
Seaway," American Concrete Institute Journal,
56 (11), 361-376, (November 1959).
209
-------
TECHNIQUES FOR SELF-DISPOSAL
Samuel F. Hulbert
Clemson University
INTRODUCTION
Improperly discarded containers such as glass
bottles or metal cans are not only unpleasing litter, but also
provide homes or water receptacles for common disease carriers
such as rodents or mosquitoes. Furthermore, broken bottles
and sharp-edged metal containers are a major hazard in streets,
playgrounds, and parks. Unlike some types of metal contain-
ers, which will eventually corrode and disintegrate, glass
objects and fragments will last indefinitely. With rising
costs of pickup and disposal of litter and trash, it has
become increasingly difficult to dispose of about 26 billion
glass containers per year, which are manufactured in this
country.
Since littering cannot be stopped completely, it has
been suggested to construct packaging containers from degrad-
able compositions. Biodegradable materials have not yet been
developed or fully accepted. Alternatively, it has been
considered to utilize water soluble container structures,
which will dispose of themselves upon prolonged contact with
surface water. Compositions are well known for producing
water soluble glasses that would be inexpensive and suffi-
ciently strong to contain the pressure within bottles of car-
bonated beverages. However, effective ways must yet be found
to establish a suitable barrier between the water soluble
structure material and the contents of the container. The
210
-------
container as a whole must eventually be economical and dur-
able, and the barrier formulation must effectively prevent any
appreciable permeation of contaminants into the contents of
the container. Furthermore, the coating must also be able to
withstand on a short term basis any heat treatments that are
required for sterilization procedures prior to filling the
containers.
DISSOLVABLE GLASSES FOR CONTAINER UTILIZATION
It is well known that glasses prepared from the
silicates of alkali metals are water soluble. Among these
the sodium silicate compositions are least expensive,
although somewhat higher in inherent cost than ordinary
soda-lime glasses. The difference in cost may be compensated
for to some extent by savings in fuel costs that arise
from the attainment of melt viscosities suitable for manu-
facturing at lower temperature with soda glass, as compared
to conventional glass formulations. These insights into
manufacturing problems have been gained by collaboration
with investigators of the Anchor-Hocking Corporation, who have
actually pressure-molded some glassware from soda glass as
a demonstration project. Most of such work was performed
with a glass composition of 35%Na2O65%Si02, at which com-
position the dissolution of glassware objects in water at
room temperature would require several weeks. Samples of
the soda glass have under some conditions exhibited higher
211
-------
flexural strength (28,000 psi under four-point loading)
compared to ordinary soda-lime glass (about 10,000 psi under
the same test conditions). These findings can be attributed
to interactions with moisture at the surface of the soda
glass, and surface cracks will become blunted effectively
with the more reactive glass composition.
Actual dissolution of soda glass is likely to form
a slimy precipitate of silica gel, along with some sodium
hydroxide. The latter product is likely to react with carbon
dioxide from air or from decaying organic matter; or other-
wise the base may react with widely occurring acidic compo-
nents of the soil or with acidic solutions that reportedly
leach out from landfill material. Dissolution of our glass
composition is slow, and under agitation at 25 G it has been
— 5 2
determined to proceed at about 3.0 x 10 g/min per cm of
surface (see Fig. 1). A steady dissolution rate has been
observed if carbon dioxide is excluded carefully from the
solution. Less careful experimentation can readily come up
with unsteady dissolution rates due to accumulation of some
surface layers that form and flake off intermittantly.
Presumably, any dissolved carbon dioxide will contribute to
such layer formation.
APPLICATION OF POLYMERIC BARRIER COATINGS
The utilization of soluble glass for container
structures depends significantly on our ability to develop
212
-------
0)
ixi 0)
-p
3
C
•rH
in g
-H
(uidd) q.usuia;tDUi
uinjpos
FIGURE 1. ACCUMULATION OF SODIUM IONS IN 200 CC OF AGITATED
WATER AT 25°C, DUE TO DISSOLUTION OF A 3MM DIAMETER ROD OF
SODA GLASS, AT I INCH IMMERSION.
213
-------
coatings that will act as barriers between the glass and the
contained aqueous phase. Application of coatings will
enhance container cost, but if a polymeric material is used,
some shatterproofing may be attained. Someday the consumer
may be required to pay for such shatterproofing anyway, but
the cost of applying polymer coatings from solution is not
anticipated to be excessive.
Rather special requirements must be met by the
polymer coating in order that long-term contact with aqueous
media and short-term heat exposure will be tolerated. During
application the glass surface must be wetted by the polymer
reliably, and very good adhesion must persist during all
stages of actual use. Even though some moisture will be able
to permeate the coating, the generated osmotic pressure must
not be capable of prying the coating membrane away from the
solid substrate. The tendency for this latter effect to take
place has been encountered with several coatings of inadequate
composition (see Fig. 2).
In efforts to attach a polymer coating firmly onto
the sodium silicate surface, a priming coat of polyvinyl
hydrogen phthalate has been employed. This polymer can be
applied at one mil thickness by dip-coating from solution,
with methyl ethyl ketone as solvent. The polymer is only
sparingly soluble in water, and it does not even dissolve
readily in sodium hydroxide solution. Adjacent to the soda
214
-------
.FIGURE 2. TYPICAL BALLOONING EFFECT, DUE TO LIQUID ACCUMULA-
TION BETWEEN SODA GLASS AND A DEFORMABLE COATING.
FIGURE 3. TYPICAL ASSEMBLY UTILIZING A FIREPOLISHED GLASS ROD
TO CARRY A COATING SYSTEM AND A PROTECTING HANDLE.
215
-------
glass structure and In the dried state, the polymer offers
functional groups for establishing strong dipole-dipole
interactions with the glass surface.
A second dip-coating process has so far been
employed to apply a durable barrier coating of a different
composition. As yet we do not know of any suitable barrier
coating that will also prime the glass surface effectively.
However, several different polymer compositions have been
found to be suitable as the top coating. Thus Saran-type
polymer can be seated firmly on top of the priming coat, or
a methacrylate lacquer can be employed as the barrier film.
Most experience has been gained with the latter type of
polymer, i.e. with a 50-50 copolymer (approximately) of
methyl methacrylate and butyl methacrylate, equipped with
some free carboxyl groups. The lacquer composition was
supplied in solution with a mixed solvent of toluene and
isopropanol by the DuPont Company under the tradename
"Elvacite 6014." Other lacquer formulations from this
acrylate family of products have also been tried, but they
were found to be less adequate in our testing procedures.
A great deal of testing work was done with fire-
polished rod pieces of soda glass. The rods served as pieces
of material to carry the subcoat and topcoat compositions and
as a convenient handle as well. After application of the
polymer coatings in separate dipping and drying cycles, the
216
-------
uncoated rod section was covered by rubber tubing (see
Fig. 3) for protection against moisture during subsequent
partial immersion in thermostated aqueous solutions. The
immersion tests were performed in order to evaluate quanti-
tatively the rate of sodium permeation across the coating,
along a measured area of the coating composite, under steady
agitation at controlled temperatures. At various time
intervals, aliquot samples of test solutions were withdrawn
from the reservoir of known volume, and sodium concentrations
therein were eventually determined by atomic absorption
determinations, using a Perkin-Elmer apparatus (Model 403).
Each coated rod specimen was used in several series of
experiments, which finally revealed the temperature depend-
ence of the sodium permeation process.
The sensitive analytical equipment enabled a
determination of the slow permeation rates for the hydrated
sodium ions (see Fig. 4). Subsequently, the temperature
dependence of the permeation rates were summarized in an
Arrhenius plot (see Fig. 5). A discontinuity in this plot
appears at 60±1 C, which is interpreted as the glass
transition in the barrier coating. Below this temperature
the glassy state prevails in the coating, and an activation
energy of 35 kcal/mol has been calculated for the permeation
process. Experimental data obtained with acidic (pH=2.7),
neutral or basic solutions (pH=10.7) are in agreement on this
217
-------
218
-------
0°
o'
in
U
O
o-
CJ
O
o -
o
o
r-t
n
o
o
I
o
rH
I
"«
M
D
JJ
o rfl
o M
o
o
0)
EH
in
CN
(N
I
CTl
r
o
01
(N
' o
o
m
I
n
I
FIGURE 5. ARRHENIUS PLOTS SHOWING SODIUM PERMEATION RATE
ACROSS THE COATING SYSTEMS AS A FUNCTION OF TEMPERATURE AND
SOLUTION pH. IN ALKALINE MEDIA AT HIGH TEMPERATURES THE
PERMEATION RATES ARE NOT REPRODUCIBLE DUE TO DETERIORATION OF
THE COATING.
219
-------
value for the activation energy. In the higher temperature
range it was found that the alkaline medium was effective in
damaging the coating system, and the activation energy for
the coating in the rubbery state could not be determined with
any comparable certainty. However, no great loss is incurred,
since no end use applications in this temperature range are
to be contemplated.
The low temperature data from the Arrhenius plot
are suitable for extrapolation into the temperature range of
actual use for the coating system, i.e. to room temperature
and below. According to experience with many polymer
systems, one does not expect to encounter any further dis-
continuities in the curve at temperatures below the glass
transition. Rather one would expect linearity to prevail
on this plot, in conformity with the fundamentals of per-
meation kinetics. Finally, one can calculate that our best
o
estimate of the permeation rate at 25 C would contribute
-5 2
5.5 x 10 g glass/year per cm of surface, under steady
agitation. This permeation process would only introduce a
few parts per million of sodium into the container contents
in the course of an anticipated shelf life of a year.
The Arrhenius plot can be employed in correlating
our accelerated immersion tests to the long term permeation
phenomena at room temperature. At elevated temperatures it
was possible to speed up the permeation process to the point
Z20
-------
where atomic absorption measurements can detect a reliable
rate. However, such accelerated testing is only informative
if testing is performed at temperatures below the attain-
ment of the rubbery state within the coating.
The described polymer coating systems stand up
well under accelerated testing. No tendency has been
detected for the coating to blush or craze, and a continuous
coating has no tendency to come loose from its solid
substrate. The actual long-term durability of the coating
system is presently under investigation.
SURFACE MODIFICATION OF SODA GLASS USING INORGANIC REACTANTS
Various approaches have been employed to alter
the surface of soluble glass by reaction with inorganic
salts. Such procedures can potentially attain insolubility
of surface layers without producing conspicuous changes of
appearance or gloss with the glass objects. Any broken
object of the desired structure would be almost completely
soluble, without leaving any polymer residue. But shatter-
proofing may not be accomplished as readily as by application
of a polymeric coating.
Some efforts are under way to modify the glass
surface by ion exchange, i.e. by immersion into aqueous salt
solutions that contain ions other than sodium. Various salts
have been employed, and it seems that the sodium ions can
readily leave the glass surface, and other metal ions can
Z21
-------
then be substituted into the surface structure. These
processes have succeeded in positioning into the glass
structure ions of the following metals: magnesium, calcium,
zinc, copper, tin, and nickel. These metal ions seem to
form layers of silicates that are insoluble, and rates of
sodium permeation across the formed layers have been found
to be decreased substantially. However, no completely
satisfactory surface insolubilization has been attained so
far by the exclusive use of this ion exchange technique.
At the present time it appears to be particularly
promising to perform ion exchange with cuprous chloride
solution and then - after drying - to follow up with a
surface "dealkalization" step. The latter procedure involves
deposition of a strong acid, such as S0~ or SO in gaseous
form. The procedure is sure to neutralize any alkali that
may reside on the glass surface, but it may conceivably
involve a change in oxidation state of the metal ions which
became positioned at the surface by the ion exchange pro-
cedure. The latter mechanism may enable the cuprous ion to
become a complexing agent in the oxidized state; and a
complexed, insolubilized layer can thus be established at the
surface as a barrier between glass and any aqueous phase
brought into contact with it. The dissolution of soluble
glass across this barrier will produce a basic solution, and
phenolphthalein indicator can then be used to demonstrate
222
-------
the effectiveness of the barrier preparation. Such testing
has shown qualitatively how the untreated glass material
allows the basicity in solution to increase, while no color
change in the indicator comes about with samples of the
surface-treated glass. Testing methods of a more quanti-
tative nature are being employed currently as an aid to the
development of effective surface treatment methods.
INORGANIC COATINGS APPLIED BY VAPOR DEPOSITION
Other research methods have aimed to lay down in-
organic barrier coatings on top of the soluble glass by
exposing the latter to suitable vapor streams. The procedure
is carried out with a special apparatus (see Fig. 6) that
allows a decomposable liquid to be introduced into an inert
gas sweep, and finally the vapor is decomposed in a heated
zone around the object to be coated. If liquid tetraiso-
propyl titanate is used as the vapor, one can thus deposit
a thin coating of titanium dioxide. Alternatively, one can
employ ethyl orthosilicate or ethyl triethoxy silane in
this procedure to yield a coating of SiO^.
Since the glass must be heated during the coating
application, it is difficult to obtain the coating in an
unstrained state (see Fig. 7); for the expansion coefficients
of the glass and the coating do not match precisely. Other
difficulties with the process arise because the vapors may
deposit films of different thickness at various locations,
223
-------
CO
o
UJ
CO
CO
UJ
ir
Q.
2
o
o
^ \r
UJ
FIGURE 6. SCHEMATIC OF THE CHEMICAL VAPOR DEPOSITION
APPARATUS.
224
-------
FIGURE 7. PHOTOMICROGRAPH SHOWING RESIDUAL STRESSES IN A TiO
DEPOSIT. COATING WAS PREPARED BY BUBBLING N AT 212°F FOR
15 MINUTES AT 8 cfh. DEPOSITION AT 4 INCH DISTANCE, AT 780°F.
VERTICAL WIDTH OF DIAGRAM CORRESPONDS TO ABOUT 250 MICRONS.
225
-------
and orientation of the sample with respect to the vapor
stream was found to be very critical. Nevertheless, the
deposition rate was found to be linear with vapor concentra-
tion (see Fig. 8) and essentially linear with respect to
deposition temperature increases (see Fig. 9).
The deposition process is affected by many variables
such as sample orientation, sample distance from the nozzle,
sweep rates and vapor concentration within the sweep, sample
temperature, etc. In particular, it has been noted that
TiO coatings turn out to be crystalline above a process
temperature of 630 F, and below this limit an amorphous
coating will be obtained (see Figs. 10, 11). The crystalline
films are inferior, since the grain boundaries are potential-
ly sites at which mass transfer can take place, when the
coated structure is brought into contact with an aqueous
medium. Small samples bearing amorphous films have been
found to be quite acceptable in simulated end use, but no
detailed investigations have been performed yet with glass
objects that resemble actual containers.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This work was supported by a research grant from
the Environmental Control Administration of the U. S. Public
Health Service.
226
-------
o
ID
a.
CL
o
t-
<
- o
o
o
h-
z
t-
o
UJ
*
U)
(VI
aiva
FIGURE 8. TiO DEPOSITION RATE AS A FUNCTION OF REACTANT
VAPOR CONCENTRATION. DEPOSITION FOR 15 MIN. AT 780°F, USING
CARRIER GAS FLOW OF 8 cfh. IMPINGEMENT DISTANCE WAS 4 INCHES.
227
-------
o
8
LL
o
Ul
cc
UJ
ui
z
o
o
0.
UJ
o
o
o
o
o
NOIllSOd3Q
FIGURE 9. TiO DEPOSITION RATE AS A FUNCTION OF DEPOSITION
TEMPERATURE. DEPOSITION AT 4 INCH DISTANCE FOR 60 MIN. AT
10 cfh SWEEP RATE.
228
-------
rV"" •:'* ,v' U*v~"
w & t •_• ;-. > 3
J ? i'v c,* «< - • ' •-
, r- ., / .- -•,"-
".> -. • V"/ ^jS u -. -t
- , ' -tv.-j '' £>*JC , ty ph-1 *" '
^ '^ ''' . — .''•-':• > A ' -4^ V**-^-, ^
f-'.v * ' :".P - '-, , ^ri>y *** r-v r '-'- *-».•»
u -c^> - o ' ^ V.. »-. * w. ,Ci>
*- «. C' '£»:. .W, . .»-,, ,1,1
' <;;;.-. 4iXX-%- ^,*- •"!>•" «//.-•' v - v
V.l\f*%^> * //.» 'r( r,_4- :y >",/'{/-"-.,.'••
FIGURE 10. PHOTOMICROGRAPHS OF TYPICAL SECONDARY STRUCTURE
IN CRYSTALLINE Ti02 DEPOSITS. (A) DENDRITES, (B) CROSSES.
VERTICAL WIDTH OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS CORRESPONDS TO ABOUT 250
MICRONS.
2Z9
-------
FIGURE 11. PHOTOMICROGRAPH OF SURFACE TOPOGRAPHY ON TYPICAL
AMORPHOUS TiO FILM. THE COATING HAD BEEN CRACKED INTENTIONAL-
LY TO SHOW DETAIL. VERTICAL SIZE OF PHOTOMICROGRAPH
CORRESPONDS TO ABOUT 350 MICRONS.
230
-------
COMPOSITE BOTTLE DESIGN AND DISPOSAL
Philip Williams
Owens-Illinois, Inc.
The glass container industry has made packages for
many different industries from small perfume bottles to five
gallon water jugs. The inherent flexibility of our manufac-
turing process has allowed us to make many distinctive and
unique items. Our business, like most others, has changed
over the years, especially in those end uses that are most
important to us. New competitive containers and outside
forces, such as legislative, have created dramatic shifts in
our business. The prohibition era, of course, affected our
beer and liquor ware business drastically. More recently the
switch to plastic packaging has virtually eliminated bleach
bottles and liquid detergent bottles from our sales. Ours is
an ever changing business and our marketing and research
people try to focus on where our business is going and what
the new needs will be.
In the middle 1960s, any evaluation of the future
of the glass industry resulted in the conclusion that the
growth areas of beer and soft drink packaging were going to
be really exceptional. We, therefore, made an evaluation of
our present flexible manufacturing process to determine
whether it was going to be able to keep up with this growing
demand. At that time, the inputs of the environmentalists
were relatively low key. We decided to design and develop a
231
-------
new standardized package to meet the growing demands of the
beverage industry. The result of this Advanced Systems De-
velopment group was the GCP or glass composite package.
As our development emerged, we factored in the re-
cycling concept. We will cover the recycling of the GCP
package in greater detail later on but let us say that we do
not see any major problem in fitting it into our glass re-
cycling programs.
We are also going to discuss a new glass composite
package that was announced only April 20, called Plasti-
Shield. This package has been developed within the last
eighteen months and from the very beginning the environmental
aspects have been important inputs on our design. I will
discuss it later in some detail so that you can be familiar
with its attributes. Therefore, we would like to use these
two new packages as examples of how package design can be
melded with constraints such as disposal.
The GCP (glass composite package) is an important
part of a total system that Owens-Illinois is developing to
supply the growing needs of the beer and beverage industries.
We intend to supply soft drink and beer customers a totally
new_package, designed specifically for them, for 10 to 16
ounces of their product to compete with the standardized can.
GCP consists of a lightweight glass globe seated in a plastic
232
-------
base which can be colored and preprinted. The glass walls
are thin and the design provides a widemouth drinking lip,
plus convenience closure. The GCP utilizes basic low cost
but recyclable raw materials, glass and high density poly-
ethylene, in a very sophisticated way. (The glass globe is
an ideal pressure vessel and will both contain and preserve
the product and its flavor. The plastic base acts as a
coaster and provides protection and identification.)
The choice of polyethylene as the base material
resulted from a complete screening of all possibl3 plastic
and metal materials. The rigidity of the high density poly-
ethylene to support the plastic base was essential to the
concept, but the fact that it is also a nontoxic material
when incinerated was also important. The design of the glass
globe, which is a nearly perfect pressure vessel (both the
products have internal pressure requirements) allowed us to
reduce the glass weight dramatically. For example, on a 10
ounce package, the glass weight is approximately 2-3/8 ounces
compared with a minimum of 7 ounces on soft drink packages.
We have indicated the function of the plastic base earlier
and we feel it definitely enhances the durability of the
package.
As the second part of the system, we have developed
a totally new manufacturing process. It consists of a ribbon
glass machine and five auxiliary machines. Attributes of the
233
-------
new process are high speed, good efficiency, consistent qual-
ity, and low labor content.
Early in our development, it was apparent that we
needed the third component of the system - a packaging line
to match the efficiencies of can lines and preserve the total
economics of glass packaging. We, therefore, set out to de-
velop a customer packaging line for handling glass at high
speeds and efficiencies.
In taking the total systems approach, one must of
course be aware of the disposal of the package too. We are
developing answers to the disposal of the GCP as well.
During the past three years, we have conducted a
number of marketing research concept tests to evaluate all
variables of the GCP concept. The key finding of all the
marketing research, we feel, is that almost without exception
among beer and soft drink users, the GCP package produces a
favorable response. There are many apparent consumer bene-
fits. For example, the consumer likes the wide mouth because
GCP is easy to drink from and they perceive the plastic base
as a "coaster" that will prevent moisture rings from forming
under the bottle.
An important part of our development program is to
continually test the package performance in all of its as-
pects - technical and consumer particularly. Careful screen-
234
-------
ing and testing is the only way to prevent putting a product
on the market that has serious flaws.
We are at a point in our development where we must
take another important step. This summer we will put the 10
ounce GCP, containing cola products, into the consumer's home
and have it used in real life conditions. Providing there
are no major problems encountered, we plan to move promptly
into selected stores in certain markets for longer term test-
ing later this summer.
At the present time, our pilot production and de-
velopment center in Toledo is still in the development and
refining stage. Barring any unforeseen difficulties, we hope
to be commercial late in 1973- Once we have proven the rib-
bon process for beer and beverage containers, we will begin
to investigate other potential uses such as fruit juices,
premixed cocktails, infant formula, etc.
Now I would like to detail for you the Plasti-
Shield package which we mentioned earlier. This package is
made on our conventional forming equipment but is lighter in
weight due to its design, (like GCP it is a pressure vessel
basically) and has a foamed polystyrene jacket shrunk onto it.
This package will be offered commercially to our customers in
September of 1971 and is currently in in-home placement and
market testing with three major soft drink companies. The
plastic sleeve or jacket allows us to substantially reduce
235
-------
the weight of the glass packages in the 16 ounce and family
sizes. For example, the quart soft drink package has over 7
ounces less glass than standard quart nonreturnable glass
containers. Weight reductions in the smaller sizes are sig-
nificant but not as great. The choices of plastic materials
that will shrink and adhere to the glass envelope are many
but again we have tried to choose materials that are both
functional and yet not inherently a major disposal problem.
The foamed polystyrene protects the glass from abuse and
makes this weight reduction possible, therefore, we are deal-
ing with a package that has substantially less solid waste
problems.
When commercialized, considerably less multiwrap
materials will be required and inner packaging on family
sizes can be eliminated thus cutting down the packaging ma-
terials required to market each gallon of soft drinks or bar-
rel of beer. By adding the polystyrene to the package, we
have raised some of the same questions in your minds, I am
sure, that exist with the polyethylene base on the GCP con-
tainer. We feel that the answers to the disposal of both
these packages are quite similar and that they are just as
recyclable as conventional glass containers. We will go into
this reasoning in just a moment but first we would like to
touch on the litter and solid waste aspects that we feel are
applicable to the glass container industry as a whole.
236
-------
We are dealing with convenience packages for beer
and soft drinks which are high on the list for legislative
action. There are "both litter and solid waste ramifications
and being new and highly publicized containers, our profile
will be high as we approach commercialization. Let's first
put the problems in perspective.
The present distribution systems for beverages have
been established by both industries at a significant invest-
ment with the objective to get products to the consumer at
the lowest possible cost. These systems are now based pri-
marily on convenience packages. For example, approximately
75 percent of packaged beer is in convenience containers and
50 percent of soft drinks; and these figures are continuing
to grow. It can be factually documented that convenience
packaging has directly contributed to the substantial growth
of both the beer and soft drink industries. More people are
enjoying them because they are easier to buy and use.
Any interference in the natural flow of these sys-
tems will lower the efficiency and increase the costs to the
consumer. The lack of understanding by the general public of
these distribution systems and the concern by the public about
the environment have resulted in increasing pressure for leg-
islation to ban convenience packages.
Even though their products represent only a very
small percentage of litter and solid waste, the beer and
237
-------
beverage industries are being singled out as exceptional prob-
lems. Because roadside litter is a visible, irritating form
of consumer-generated pollution, the problems surrounding its
existence are obviously more publicly discussed.
We are convinced that the ultimate solution to the
litter problem is through public education like KAB's programs
starting with our children in the very lowest grades. We re-
peat that education, coupled with enforcement of realistic
laws against littering and provision of adequate disposal and
collection facilities represents the only practical solution
to the litter problem.
We believe that the ultimate solution to our solid
waste problem must be the salvage and reuse of much of what is
now deemed waste. Actually, we make a value judgment by the
name we assign to our discarded materials. We call them solid
waste. It seems to us that we must turn this around and call
them solid assets or resources that can be reused. The con-
servation of raw materials demands salvage, and long range ef-
ficient management calls for the reuse or recycling of many of
the components of waste. We are convinced that salvage and
reuse will materially reduce pollution and conserve our finite
resources.
The recyclability of glass containers has been well
established. There is nothing new or novel about reusing
glass containers, as cullet has been an important raw material
238
-------
in glass manufacturing for hundreds of years. This group,
here today, certainly is aware of the work that is going into
devising methods of allowing us to obtain glass waste. This
is the major problem today, not what to do with it after we
get it. In our thinking, primary recycling is getting our
glass materials back into our hands so that we can make anoth-
er glass container with it. Secondary recycling is devising
other uses for the recycled material and, here again, I am
sure most of you are aware of the programs in this area such
as described by Dr. Ward Malisch from the University of
Missouri at Holla.
The separation of glass from the waste cycle can be
accomplished at a number of points in the disposal system. We
see consumer separation and reclamation as now being practiced
at the over one hundred centers sponsored by the GCMI as one
possible route, but in our long range thinking we believe
systems which can separate mixed collected garbage, such as
Black Clawson's Hydrasposal system or the Bureau of Mines
project to be the real answer. We are convinced that since
we have such a recyclable material, practical and economic
methods are being devised to assure the reuse of glass over
and over again.
Now, how do the two packages fit into the environ-
ment? We feel that the possibilities for recycling both of
these packages are very similar so we will deal with them to-
239
-------
gether except where there are obvious differences.
First, let's consider primary recycling. We have
made a number of tests on the technical feasibility of melt-
ing the entire package - glass and plastic - in our furnaces.
It appears from these tests that we can use up to 10 percent
of this product in our flint melts without discoloration and
up to 50 percent in our amber melts. Both polyethylene and
polystyrene will burn off at our melting temperatures with the
resultant dispersal of COg and water into the atmosphere. We
feel it is unlikely that we would get large quantities of
either package back in the early stages of development, so the
percentages mentioned would seldom be reached as cullet. How-
ever, should our collection system change so that large quan-
tities of either package were accumulated, separation of the
glass and plastic materials would then be undertaken. Crush-
ing and floatation very simply separate the two materials. We
plan to use this process in our own plants on off-ware as a
matter of course.
In secondary recycling of the packages, we are talk-
ing about end uses which could combine the glass and plastic
materials into useful products. To develop good economics, it
is essential that you require only a crude sort of the package
from other solid waste materials - that is, there does not
have to be a high degree of efficiency in the sorting system,
and there can be room for error. By developing the right end
240
-------
uses, the reuse application might permit the complete range of
glass colors to be lumped together, as well as all thermoplas-
tics. This would make segregation much simpler and practical.
It would be highly desirable if, for example, conventional
glass containers, GCP, and plastic bottles could be included
as a segregated commodity in the collection system. A corol-
lary of this first consideration is that the materials one
makes from the recycled packages should not have highly de-
manding technical specifications as to colors, physical prop-
erties, etc. To make useful products that fill high volume
needs, the end product must have good utility, but appearance
should not, if possible, be of great import. This does not
mean that the product could not be made to satisfy utilitarian
needs, but what we do mean is that products that rely on a
close control of color, texture, or sophisticated physical
properties should not be considered.
We have experimented with ground up GCP packages,
extruding into a molded glass-plastic material. The kinds of
products we visualize being made from this glass-plastic com-
bination must necessarily be high volume uses, therefore, we
are considering such products as tier sheets for our pallet
loads, cap sheets, possibly pallets themselves, and reshipper
trays and cases. Being able to utilize this recycled material
in our delivery system to our customers could be of definite
economic advantage to all of us. Other high volume needs are
being investigated too.
241
-------
If we visualize the manufacture of this composite
material at one of our GCP facilities, we could work any un-
balance in glass-to-plastic ratio quite easily if we kept, for
example, our own scrap segregated by glass and plastic frac-
tions so that either ratio could be corrected in our mixing
operation. The separation of the polystyrene sleeve from the
Plasti-Shield package is even easier than with GCP. The poly-
styrene sleeve material could be reprocessed into products
that are basically nonfood use intended. This is already be-
ing accomplished today in the development of coffee cup lids
which are an "ecology buff" in color and made from recycled
material. The polyethylene base originally designed for GCP
package must be made from virgin material. We are examining
very closely another design concept for the base which is a
direct result of our endeavor to fit the package into the re-
cycling system. This new design, which I am going to explain
to you, is really only in the feasibility stage but I felt it
was important enough to brief you on it today.
We visualize the possibility of utilizing a poly-
styrene sleeve similar to the one used on the Plasti-Shield
package. I think you can visualize that simply wrapping the
sleeve around the GCP globe would make a very unstable package.
We are testing, at this time, a concept of seating the globe
in a doughnut made from recycled glass-plastic materials and
then shrinking the sleeve around it. Here is what the package
might look like. This doughnut support base is made from ex-
242
-------
truded glass-plastic recycled materials. It is too early to
determine the complete economic and technical feasibility of
this concept but we did want to share it with you today.
While the separation from mixed garbage of the re-
cyclable materials is, of course, the ultimate answer, we are
going to have to live with less than perfect solutions for
sometime to come in many urban waste disposal systems. The
combined glass-plastic waste of GCP and Plasti-Shield can be
disposed of in incineration or land fill with no particularly
obnoxious results.
It is clearly apparent to us from discussions with
our major customers that the litter and solid waste problems
are of critical importance to GCP and Plasti-Shield. To have
successful projects and to really provide our customers with a
total systems approach, we must have satisfactory answers to
these problems.
I have covered a lot of material in this period al-
lotted to me and we have not been able to go into all the
ramifications of these two packages in as great detail as I
would wish. However, I think it is apparent that the design
of both of these new packages has been affected by the new
environmental emphasis and we hope that you will agree that
these two products can make some real contributions to this
problem.
243
-------
SEPARATION OF GLASS FROM MUNICIPAL REFUSE
R. J. Ryder, Brockway Glass Company, Inc.
J. H. Abrahams, Jr., Glass Container Manufacturers Institute, Inc.
INTRODUCTION
Environmental pollution—and its control—has been
a concern of the glass container industry for many years. As
long ago as 1953, before the problems of litter and solid
waste generally were recognized as threats to the quality of
life in our environment, the Glass Container Manufacturers
Institute and its member companies were instrumental in the
founding of Keep America Beautiful, Inc., the national litter
prevention organization. Since that time, the glass container
industry has continued to furnish significant financial and
service support to KAB for its various education and litter
law enforcement programs. Four years ago GCMI broadened its
environment-oriented activities by establishing an Environ-
mental Pollution Control Program in order to seek solutions
to problems related to solid waste management and air and
water pollution. We believe we were one of the first in-
dustries in America tu organize programs of solid waste
management and litter prevention on an industry-wide basis.
Today's discussion, however, will deal only with the
role of glass containers in solid waste and the pertinent pro-
grams and research currently being sponsored by the glass
container industry. Recent studies show that glass constitutes
244
-------
an average of about six and one-half per cent by weight of
municipal solid waste. Of this, about five per cent comes
from container glass. In fact, according to a study by the
Midwest Research Institute, all packaging accounts for only
about 13 per cent of total municipal (residential and commer-
-------
working to reduce or eliminate such problems as may exist.
It is important to understand that utlimately a discarded
glass container can meet only one of three possible fates:
-------
SEPARATION AND RECYCLING
Recent studies have shown that there are potential
uses for every bit of waste container glass available in the
country now or in the foreseeable future. As a first step in
the direction of total salvage and reuse of waste container
glass, the nation's glass container manufacturers are conduct-
ing an industry-wide reclamation and recycling program.
Today GCMI member companies are operating a net-
work of nearly 100 bottle reclamation centers in some 25 states.
Since the program was inaugurated on an industry-wide basis
on June 30, 1970, many tons of glass containers have been
salvaged from solid waste and litter. These salvaged bottles,
now being reclaimed at a rate of close to one-half billion a
year, are being recycled back into the bottle-making process.
Reports by member companies indicated that crushed
waste glass, called cullet, can provide 30 per cent or more
of the industry's raw material requirements. Our bottle re-
clamation program is able to supply only a small portion of
this amount. Therefore, in order to obtain salvaged glass in
greater quantities, GCMI is cooperating with various research
organizations and federal, state and local government agencies
to develop efficient, low-cost, highly automated systems for
separating the components of raw refuse.
247
-------
One example is at Stanford Research Institute,
where GCMI and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency spon-
sored investigation of a process known as the Zig-Zag Air
Classification System which utilizes forced air currents to
separate refuse materials into its components. To date a
major separation of paper and plastics from heavier matter
has been achieved. Samples containing between 75 per cent
and 90 per cent glass have been obtained readily from the
heavier fractions. Further separation, however, becomes more
difficult because of the similarity of densities of materials
in the heavier fractions. More work is needed to test the
efficiency of separating waste glass for metals, but the out-
look for this research appears promising.
The industry is working also with various organiza-
tions to further refine glass from these preliminary pro-
cesses for recycling in glass furnaces. To this end GCMI is
supporting studies at the Sortex Company at Lowell, Michigan
to optimize the means of optically sorting the glass that has
been reclaimed from solid waste into its various colors. On
a pilot basis this research is producing color-sorted glass of
a quality that can be recycled by our industry. When perfect-
ed, it will enable glass container manufacturers to consume
large tonnages of salvaged glass.
248
-------
Further, we have been following and working
closely with the U.S. Bureau of Mines on its development of
a process utilizing standard ore dressing methods to separate
usable materials from incinerator residue and high-intensity
magnetic forces to sort glass by color. The Bureau estimates
that after the salvage of metals the separation of clear or
flint glass costs only an additional 77 cents a ton, using
figures for its 250 tons-a-day plant. From a practical
standpoint, the potential benefits are enormous. Sorted by
color and refined, glass from incinerator residue could be
used as cullet to make new bottles or used in secondary pro-
ducts .
Also, a number of solid waste management systems
are presently in various stages of development by private in-
dustry. Some, in fact, need only the opportunity of a full-
scale demonstration in a typical community to prove their
worth. One such development, which will be discussed in more
detail later in this presentation, is a unique wet system
capable of crushing and separating paper pulp, metals and
glass from other materials at a reported cost of approximately
$3.60 per ton of raw refuse after allowing for pulp and
ferrous metals salvage. This includes operating costs and
249
-------
amortization in a plant designed to handle 500 tons of waste
a day. This system is being constructed at Franklin, Ohio
by the Black Clawson Company with the assistance of a demon-
stration grant from the Solid Waste Management Office of the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
SECONDARY MATERIALS
Ue define secondary materials as those products
other than new glass containers that are made from waste
glass. GCMI's research on secondary materials has been
directed largely toward determining those products which can
incorporate waste container glass which is not sufficiently
refined to be used in glass manufacturing furnaces. Generally
speaking, these secondary products are in the nature of con-
struction materials where the glass must compete with relat-
ively cheap raw materials.
For example, GCMI and the Environmental Protection
Agency for several years have supported studies at the
University of Missouri at Rolla which show that glass frag-
ments may be substituted for stone aggregate in glasphalt,
one of the better known potential secondary products. But the
cost of stone aggregate averages around $2 to $4 a ton. In
this case it would not be practical from an economic stand-
point to pay processing costs in excess of $5 or $6 a ton
250
-------
for the waste glass alone. However, the cost for processing
the refuse mix must be distributed proportionally among all
of the salvageable components. This approach must be con-
sidered for both the Black Clawson system at Franklin, Ohio
as well as for the U.S. Bureau of Mines incinerator residue
reclamation system at Edmonston, Maryland.
Intitial calculations indicate that glasphalt
alone could use up all the waste container glass available in
municipal waste systems now and in the forseeable future.
Estimates for waste container glass in refuse today range
between 10 and 15 million tons annually, whereas the amount
of stone aggregate used in asphalt approaches third of a
billion tons annually. If waste glass were to be substituted
for even three or four per cent of the aggregate, all the
glass still would be utilized.
Furthermore, GCMI is funding a study at the
University of Missouri at Rolla which will evaluate the amount
of foreign material which could be tolerated in glasphalt.
If a certain amount of metals and organic materials could be
tolerated, then less processing of municipal wastes from
proposed mechanical separation systems would be needed and
the costs reduced.
251
-------
Another well known secondary product utilizing
waste glass is the brick made from glass-enriched incinerator
residue. In the U.S. Bureau of Mines process of removing
metals for recovery, a mixture containing some 98 per cent
glass is left over. This product can be used directly for
making bricks using various binders, such as 10 to 30 per
cent of regular brick clay. In general, regular brick making
equipment can be used.
In addition to these products, GCMI and its mem-
ber companies have been conducting studies of some 10 other
secondary products which are made from waste container glass.
In one process bricks using waste container glass
can be made by using high pressure and cement, and certain
chemicals such as those developed by the T-A Materials Com-
pany. These bricks can be made to such close tolerance that
a paste material can be used instead of standard mortar.
With this system various shapes of bricks and blocks can be
designed.
Blocks and bricks -- even large panels -- can be
made by a variety of other processes. Studies with GCMI
support are being conducted by the Colorado school of Mines
Research Institute to use waste container glass as the bind-
ing medium for panels 4 feet by 16 feet and up to 4 inches
252
-------
thick. The composition is 6 per cent clay, 13 per cent to
94 per cent glass and 0 per cent to 81 per cent rubble,
yielding a bulk density of 130 pounds to 140 pounds per cubic
foot depending upon the proportions used. The crushing
strength was found to be as high as 12,000 pounds a square
inch. Panels containing the higher glass ratio can be polish-
ed for decorative effect.
Stanford University is conducting studies using
glass and silica with cement and other materials to make an
expandpd or porous material for insulated wall panels.
Furthermore, glass wool insulation can be manu-
factured using up to 50 per cent waste glass. This is being
done by the U.S. Bureau of Mines using glass recovered from
incinerated residue and by at least one commerical manufacturer.
The Bureau is also making such other products as glass beads
and lightweight aggregate from glass rich incinerated wastes.
In the case of the bricks, blocks, and wall panels,
each use could easily absorb the waste container glass in a
municipality. Preliminary studies show that many of these
products using waste glass could compete with standard con-
struction materials if separation systems were utilized and
markets developed.
253
-------
In California, standard 5/8-inch terrazzo flooring
has been developed which itilizes reclaimed glass in place
of marble chips. In addition to the regular flooring thick-
ness, a second type, also using waste glass but featuring a
new matrix, has been created by the American Cement Technical
Center. By incorporating small amounts of a polymer substance
into the product mix, the company has been able to produce a
terrazzo finished to a 1/4-inch thickness with two or three
times the flexible strength of normal terrazzo. This new
product provides a significant weight saving which can be a
major factor in high-rise buildings.
UASTE DISPOSAL METHODS
As we have already indicated, glass containers
contribute only a small portion of the solid waste mix. How-
ever, if glass is properly ground for disposal in sanitary
landfills it returns to the soil in almost its original form
and the volume is reduced substantially.
The Institute has sponsored independent studies
to determine the degree to which glass containers constitute
a solid waste problem. These studies have indicated that
waste container glass, when properly handled, is not a pro-
blem in present municipal disposal systems.
254
-------
In solid waste landfills, for example, Drexel
University determined that glass does not contribute to any
physical problems or chemical pollution. When crushed or
ground, glass mixed with the soil becomes a permanent and
firm fill which will not settle or erode. In addition, there
is virtually no leaching from the glass to cause pollution
of ground and stream waters.
Similarly, and despite widespread views to the con-
trary, glass has not been found to be a significant problem
in incineration. Glass containers generally break into frag-
ments due to the heat blast in incinerators. Many of these
fragments help aerate from the batch and thus enhance com-
bustion, while other fragments fall through the grates.
According to data collected in a recently com-
pleted national opinion survey of municipal, county and solid
waste management offifials, glass containers were found to be
among the least difficult of all packaging materials to handle
in refuse collection operations. This study was conducted by
the Resources Management Corporation of Bethesda, Maryland,
in order to determine directly from officials responsible for
solid waste collection their views on the role of packaging
materials, particularly glass containers.
255
-------
Among other things, the study found that almost 70
per cent of the officials believe that no packaging material
is damaging to collection equipment. Only two per cent of
the respondents felt that glass containers would harm such
equipment and only 8.1 per cent considered them difficult to
handle, Further, the waste management officials indicated
that glass containers are the least troublesome of all
packaging materials in landfills and incinerator operations,
falling behind steel, plastic and corrugated containers.
However, in general the refuse systems in most
municipalities are inadequate and antiquated. Only recently
have municipalities begun to look beyond the garbage man
and truck concept of refuse collection. The labor intensive
collection systems, in fact, account for 75 to 80 per cent of
refuse costs. It is hoped that Federal funds may be provided
under the Resources Recovery Act of 1970 to finance projects
which will upgrade significantly collection and disposal
systems.
LONG-RANGE SOLUTION
Consumer demand has established a market for con-
venience packaging, and part of the convenience of using such
packages is the fact that they can be discarded. The refuse
256
-------
mix must be separated, but we cannot necessarily expect the
nation's housewives to do this job.
The nation's glass container manufacturers are
convinced that the Jong-range solution to the presence of
glass in solid waste can be found in the separation sytems
and markets for waste glass which are currently being developed.
These systems are designed to deparate the various salvage-
able components of refuse, and glass is but one of these.
The enriched, mixed colored glass is a by-product left after
other materials are separated,and thus it starts with a zero
value, or even a negative value since disposal in a landfill
could cost several dollars a ton.
As we have seen, two potential markets are develop-
ing for this glass mixture. One is the use of waste glass as
cullet in the bottle-making process; the other is its use in
various secondary products. By using materials handling
methods, glass fragments 1/4 to 3/4 inches across can be
freed of contaminants and color sorted for remelting and re-
forming into containers. Less refined or smaller sized frag-
ments are usable in secondary products also. As indicated
earlier, the U.S. Brueau of Mines id developing a system using
commercial equipment which is capable of separating sand-
sized particles by color.
257
-------
Today there are perhaps three major approaches
to separation. These are wet separation, dry separation,
and separation after incineration or pyrolysis. The glass
container industry is working closely in the development of
several of these systems in order to evaluate the quality
of waste container glass produced and the potential markets.
Systems using one or more of these basic systems are nearing
the stage of practical demonstration.
One of the best known systems is the Hydrasposal
method developed by the Black Clawson Company of Middletown,
Ohio. A prototype of this wet spearation system is being
constructed at Franklin, Ohio. When fully installed, this
plant will be one of the most complete systems in the country
for processing the waste products of our society. The
Hydrasposal and Fiherd aim systems, manufactured by Black
Clawson, are designed to handle nearly all normal municipal
residue except bulky items. Coordinated with this is a mod-
ern sewage disposal plant to be built soon by the Miami (Ohio)
Conservancy District which will serve Franklin and the sur-
rounding area as well and will process contaminated waste
water from the solid waste plant.
The Black Clawson demonstration plant is being
designed to handle 50 tons of refuse in an 8-hour day, with
258
-------
a salvage potential over 50 per cent of the total tonnage.
The process will first crush the refuse into a liquid slurry
small enough to pass a 3/4 or 1 inch diameter opening.
Heavy materials settle out, and ferrous metals are removed
magnetically. Inorganic materials are then removed in a
liquid cyclone, which leaves a residue of heavy materials
consisting of 80 per cent glass and nonferrous metals. The
light organic portion is reduced into discreet fibers with
contaminants screened out.
The glass container industry is interested in the
heavy portion containing the 80 per cent glass and has de-
signed a system to refine the glass fraction into a material
usable in glass manufacturing furnaces. As such, the glass
must be clean, uncontaminated, free of metals, and sorted
by color.
The glass subsystem has been designed by GCMI
and by the Sortex Company to receive this glass-rich mix-
ture from the Hydrasposal and remove all contaminants before
or during color sorting. A prototype of this subsystem is
planned for installation at Franklin, Ohio with the funds
to be provided by the Federal Environmental Protection
Agency and GCMI. Several research methods for removing
contaminants will be used, including washing, screening,
259
-------
air optical separation. The initial steps will be to:
1. Receive the mixture and remove strong magnetics.
2. Size to separate the glass into the fractions
larger than 1/4 inch and smaller than 3/4 inch.
3. Dry before further processing.
The glass fragments larger than 1/4 inch will be
processed further in preparation for color sorting with the
Sortex machine, and the smaller samples either removed from
the system for use in secondary products, or passed through
an air classifier in preparation for an experimental high
tension electrostatic separator to remove the clear glass.
In preparation for the Sortex separator, the large
fragments (1/4 inch to 3/4 inch) will be subjected to a
cyclone air classifier and a zig-zag classifier. These two
separation systems will be in service for this experimental
subsystem, but the most efficient of the two systems probably
would be used in a second generation subsystem. The Sortex
optical sorter scans each fragment as it passes through a
filtered beam of light and sorts the clear glass from colored
glass and contaminants. A second pass of the rejects would
then sort the greens from the remaining mixture, until all
economically salvageable glass fragments are removed.
The glass subsystem is an experimental unit de-
Z60
-------
signed to determine the effectiveness of various separation
systems for glass. It is anticipated that the subsystem,
with proper modifications, could be adapted to one or more
of the several mechanical separation systems being developed.
CONCLUSION
These, then, are some of the steps that have been
taken by the glass container industry to help alleviate its
contribution to the nation's growing solid waste problem.
The utlimate goal toward which we are working is the eventual
separation and salvage of usable waste components and their
return to industry for recycling.
Hopefully, future generations will see a nation-
wide network of refuse processing stations, perhaps designed
along the order of the Franklin, Ohio pilot project, where
municipalities, or even utilities, will separate wastes
mechanically and automatically and subsequently sell the re-
cyclable materials to manufacturers or refiners. Such systems,
we believe, will result in the much needed conservation of
our natural resources and reduce pollution from solid waste.
261
-------
-------
SESSION IV
METALLIC CONTAINERS
Chairman:
G. R. Smithson, Chief
Waste Control and Process Technology
Columbus Laboratories
Battelle Memorial Institute
-------
-------
FERROUS SCRAP RECYCLING AND STEEL TECHNOLOGY
Wilham S. Story
Institute of Scrap Iron and Steel, Inc.
I am here today representing the ferrous scrap
recycling industry. And while members of the Institute of
Scrap Iron and Steel also handle non-ferrous metals, my
remarks are confined to ferritic materials with emphasis on
the tin can—whether all steel or with an aluminum top.
Public concern with the quality of our environment
and the conservation of our natural resources strikes a fav-
orable chord with members of the metal recycling industry,
especially as it applies to scrap iron and steel. For
years, we have been commenting on the need to better utilize
our resources, through conservation by recycling, but only
now are the words falling on receptive and eager ears, and
only now are we seeing action taken which will serve, over
the long run, to recycle as much of our ferritic metallics
as possible.
As I am sure you are aware, our industry has been
responsible for recycling millions of tons of iron and steel
scrap annually to steel mills and foundries. However, be-
cause of changing technology in steelmaking, the volume we
have recycled to steel mills has not kept pace with the rate
of discard of items made from steel and iron. Had we con-
tinued the high level of recycling which we obtained during
World War II, for example, this nation today would have no
major metallic solid waste problem. But we have not, and as
a result, we do have a problem. And while this is primarily
263
-------
a container program, let me cite some data for you on the
overall iron and steel scrap picture in order to bring the
matter into somewhat better focus.
If we are to go back to 1956, we find that in that
year, the domestic steel industry produced 115 million tons
of raw steel, and in the course of this, plus foundry produc-
tion, our industry shipped 37 million tons of scrap. In 1970,
the domestic steel industry produced 131 million tons of
raw steel, and purchased scrap sold by the scrap industry
amounted to 40 million tons, an increase of only 3 million
tons versus a 16 million ton rise in raw steel output.
In the intervening time, our throw-away society has come
into full bloom. It reached its nadir with people literally
throwing away their automobiles by abandoning them on city
streets, in country lanes, or along our highways. Tin cans
are a modest problem in relation to cars.
Most of the impact of the decline in scrap demand
in relation to basic steel production has been felt in the
consumer goods area—as exemplified by the old car, which is
so obvious, but to a lesser degree by other consumer hard
goods, such as refrigerators, stoves, washing machines and
the like.
In its drive to make use of this available raw
material, our recycling industry in the past 10 years has
developed the automobile shredder, an expensive system of
264
-------
hammer mills, magnetic separators, conveyors, furnaces,
along with accompanying ail , dust, and water systems.
Large systems cost upward of $6 million, when accompanied by
non-ferrous metal separation devices. Smaller systems now
start at $600,000. There are close to 80 such systems in
operation today, and there will, in all likelihood, by 100
by this time next year.
Within the context of today's program, tbe
automobile shredder stems from the tin can shredder, develon-
ed in the Thirties for providing shredded tin cans for the
copper industry in the West. Tin can shredding started in
Los Angeles, and, during World War II spread to Houston,
and then to other locations.
Shredded tin cans are used in large-scale copper
leaching operations in the West. The method used goes
back to Rio Tinto in Spain in the mid-seventeen hundreds.
Nearly 13 percent of the total copper production in the
Western States in 1965 was obtained from the precipitation
of copper from leach liquors by using metallic scrap iron.
Virtually all of the copper leaching operations in
the United States use shredded tin cans. We estimate that
about 350,000-400,000 tons of this material is consumed
annually. Copper companies are also experimenting with
shredded automobile scrap, sponge iron, and pre-reduced
iron pellets.
265
-------
A member company of my association has told me that
the problem with tin cans West of the Mississippi is not get-
ting rid of the cans, but rather of finding enough tin cans
at an economic price to meet the needs of the copper industry.
Copper producers, I am sure, would not be experimenting with
other iron sources if it were possible to lay down shredded
tin cans at a price and in the volume they require. But the
leaching process is growing in scope, and we can expect
steadily increasing demands for tin can scrap from this area
providing they can be economically furnished. But, as you
can readily understand, the volume of tin cans consumed by
this method is modest when compared to the volume of tin cans
arising annually in all parts of the United States.
The major factor other than demand which inhibits
greater volume movement of cans from the large populated
areas of the Eastern United States, to the copper-leaching
operations of the West, is, of course, transportation costs.
A number of years ago, one of our Southern members was
actually forced to shut down a tin can recovery operation
because of the unwillingness of the railroads to provide rates
which would make it economically possible to move the cans
to the consuming point.
For the purists, use of tin cans in leaching does
not represent the ultimate in recycling, since the iron goes
into solution with sulfur, but it does represent a viable and
growing method of moving at least a portion of the tin cans
266
-------
which are discarded annually.
Bat we are really dealing with a much greater prob-
lem— the upwards of five million tons of steel used annually
in ttie production of containers, and the fact that much of
this is not recycled now, but more is likely to be recycled
in the future.
During World War II, cans from city incinerators,
when baled, went to steelmakers, mostly for use in blast
furnaces. But in the years since, this has dwindled to
virtually nothing.
Also during World War II, large tonnages of
suitably prepared used tin cans were detinned, resulting in
the recycling of large quantities of both steel and tin. The
function of detinning, and the practice of del:inning is well
known, but in the post-war years, the economics have not been
right for detinning ot much other than prime material, consis-
ting of can industry production scrap and rejects, as well as
steel industry rejects, and scrap left from other manufactur-
ing operations where tinplate has been used.
It has only been in relatively recent months that
the canmaking industry, in protection of its markets against
the onslaught cf environmentalists who want to ban the can
or the one way container, has instructed detinning subsidiaries
it may own to start taking in general run tin cans for proces-
sing. This is, however, a modest contribution to the solution
-------
of the overall problem, and, I would venture to guess, not an
easy one for the detinners on the basis of economics and
their productive processes.
More importantly, as most of you are probably
aware, the can industry has now offered the facilities of all
can plants throughout the nation as collection centers for
cans of any type, whether they be food cans, beverage cans or
aerosol cans.
This is predicated on the willingness of our
industry to bale the cans and on the willingness of the steel
industry to accept the baled material from the metal recycl-
ing industry.
Cans in volume have not been acceptable to the
steel industry because of the tin coating and also because of
the lead solders. I am sure Mr. Makar will be dealing with
the reasons in his paper. But just so long as the steel
industry is unwilling or unable to accept can scrap, then our
industry is unable to handle it on a recycling basis.
However, tin plate makers within the steel industry
have been as concerned for their tin plate markets as the can
industry has been about its markets. Research, as you prob-
ably know has been conducted at several of the principal
companies. National Steel has melted baled tin cans in its
basic oxygen furnace; United States Steel has run cans through
its blast furnace in the ironmaking department; and
Bethlehem Steel has handled the electric furnace application.
268
-------
With the completion of this work, each of these companies has
agreed to work with the can industry and our own industry in
taking back baled tin cans. Republic Steel will also take
back cans, and some smaller companies are interested. The
American Iron and Steel Institute is currently working on a
specification for baled tin cans which will meet the needs of
its members, and which will also be applicable for the metal
recycling industry.
A market at $20 a ton is modest, especially when
the cost of transportation to the consuming point is con-
sidered, coupled with the cost of baling. In Washington,
recently, members of our industry met with a can company
official to discuss the possibility of setting up a recycling
program for the Washington area. Freight rates to the princi-
pal consumer, in this case, Bethlehem Steel, are $4 a ton.
Baling costs are about $8-10 a ton. If cans are collected at
sites which the ordinary citizen can readily reach, such as
supermarkets, the cost of containers, their placement, and
their pick-up will eat up the rest of the $20 figure, accord-
ing to my people. Nevertheless, we believe wholeheartedly
in the need for such a program in the Nation's Capital, and
will be holding more discussions about implementing this
initial meeting.
Over the longer-term, the growth of the so-called
"tin-less" can will alleviate some of the metallurgical
269
-------
problems, just as the development of thinnei coatings of
tin have made it easier for steel producers to accept cans
back at this time. Further, if canmakers move to methods
whereby solders are eliminated, the very serious lead problem
can be progressively reduced. Research on all-steel tops
is well on its way. These factors obviously will aid in
tan can recycling. In my estimation, they are extremely
important if we are to be able to recycle all the cans which
are now beginning to be removed from the trash as it arrives
at sanitary landfills and other disposal areas.
Despite breakthroughs which have been occurring,
and the promise of further changes in the near-future, we
still have a long way to go in this matter of recycling cans.
One thing I can assure you—our own industry has all the
available equipment needed to meet the need. If every can
produced in the nation annually were ultimately recycled,
our industry would have no need to install any new equipment
whatsoever, except to perhaps replace balers which were worn
out in baling cans. We have the tools, and we have the
knowledge. We know how to make a profit in handling tin cans,
providing we have tonnage markets and a workable price
level. But the key word is MARKETS. Thanks to the steel
industry, these markets are now developing
270
-------
METALLURGICAL ASPECTS OF RECLAIMING CONTAINER SCRAP
H V Makai and H. S. Caldweii, Ji
U. S. Bureau of Minos
INTRODUCTION
Municipal refuse generated annually in the United
States is estimated at 200 million tons. The metal values
of the container scrap contained therein represent a substan-
tial resource potential , but are irretrievably lost to dumps
and landfill areas by current disposal methods. Based on
studies by the Bureau of Mines and others, ferrous cans re-
present about 4.5 percent of the total refuse, or 9 million
tons annually. Nonferrous metal content in the refuse is
estimated at about 1 million tons. Approximately one-half
of this is from aluminum packaging.
These materials do not pose a particularly severe
disposal problem when compared to the total refuse generated,
but once buried, they do represent an important loss of min-
eral resources and should not be ignored. The ferrous cans,
for example, have an estimated value of 10 dollars per ton,
representing an annual potential of $90 million. If upgraded
to pig iron with a specified analysis, the value would be k$
to 70 dollars per ton for an annual potential of 405 to 630
million dollars. Based on 200 dollars per ton for aluminum
can scrap, the aluminum packaging scrap in refuse has a
271
-------
potential annual value of 100 million dollars. This value
would be substantially greater in the form of secondary
aluminum ingot.
In spite of the potential value, ferrous and alum-
inum container scrap are not readily acceptable for recycling
by their respective industries. One major deterrent is the
metallurgical contamination caused by other metallic elements
associated with these scrap materials. This paper considers
some of these metallurgical aspects and describes research
efforts by the Bureau of Mines to develop effective methods
for refining and utilizing container scrap.
FERROUS CAN SCRAP
Metallurgically, the ferrous can scrap is unat-
tractive because of copper and tin contamination. Both are
undesirable in steelmaking, consequently there is little or
no demand for the scrap. Current market value of the scrap
is estimated at $10 per ton. Other elements, such as lead
and sulfur, may also reach undesirable levels. Typical
concentration ranges for these elements in can scrap are
shown in table 1. Desirable maximum levels for these ele-
ments are also shown for comparison.
272
-------
TABLE 1. - Composition of Ferrous Can Scrap
Compared to Desired Analysis
Concentration, wt. percent
Cu Sn Pb S
Can Scrap 0.2-0.5 0.1-0.4 0.06-0.15 0.014-0.042
Desirable .10 .06 .02 .05
Emphasis in Bureau research is on development of
processes to remove and recover copper from the scrap. In-
vestigations also include removal of the other undesirable
contaminants. The current status of some of these studies
are described in the following sections of this paper.
Refining Molten Ferrous Scrap
Current studies at the Bureau of Mines College
Park Metallurgy Research Center are directed at removal and
recovery of copper by pyrometallurgica1 techniques. The
process includes use of sodium sulfate (^250^) which reduces
to sodium sulfide (Na2$) . Copper removal is achieved by the
formation of a copper sulfide which dissolves in sodium
sulfide. Tests are conducted in induction melting furnaces
with capacities ranging from a few pounds to approximately
100 pounds. Figure 1 shows a typical test in which molten
sodium sulfide slag is being added to a bath of molten iron.
273
-------
FIGURE 1, - Molten Sodium Sulfide Slag Addition to Bath
of Molten !ron
Prev i ous Research
Earlier studies at College Park defined an empiri-
cal relationship between copper removal and amount of sodium
sulfate added. This relationship is illustrated in figure 2.
These tests included high-carbon synthetic irons with cop-
per concentrations up to about 1.6 percent, and actual cupola-
melted auto scrap with approximately 0.^*5 percent copper.
Final copper concentrations ranged down to 0.076 percent.
Subsequent tests showed that copper levels less than
0.002 percent could be achieved if sufficient sodium sulfate
were added. Based on tnis earlier work, it was estimated
that the equivalent of about 800 pounds of sodium sulfate
274
-------
0 10 20 30 40
SODIUM SULFATE ADDED, percent of metal weight
FIGURE 2. - Copper Removal vs Amount of Sodium Sulfate
Added (Surface Additions)
per ton of iron treated would refine typical scrap contain-
ing about 0.40 percent copper to an acceptable level of 0.10
or less. Significant improvements in extraction efficiencies
were believed possible and additional studies were undertaken.
These are briefly described below.
Lance Injection
Sulfate additions during the early studies were
made as a powder onto the molten iron surface. This resulted
in a vigorous action on the surface of the iron bath causing
some of the powder to be ejected from the furnace crucible.
A lance injection system is currently being developed to over-
come the inherent inefficiency of surface additions by
275
-------
providing controlled additions below the molten iron sur-
face. The controlled agitation also provides an increased
slag-metal interfacial area.
Initial lance injection tests on molten can scrap
containing 0.35 percent copper showed considerable improve-
ments over surface additions. Copper levels down to 0.06
percent were achieved. The results summarized in table 2
show the decrease in copper concentration as the amount of
Na2SO/j injected is increased.
TABLE 2. - Copper Removal by Lance Injection
Copper N32S01, added,
Copper, wt. pet removal , pet pet of Metal Charge
Series A 0.35
.20 42.9 9.7
.13 62.9 19.4
.09 7^.3 29.1
.06 82.9 38.8
Series B 0.35
.28 20.0 1.4
.23 34.3 7.8
.17 51.4 13.8
.13 62.9 19.8
.11 68.6 24.0
Test conditions: 1300° C - 10 g Na2SO//min.
Approximately 1000 g Iron
charge (3-7-4.5 percent
carbon).
This and the earlier data for surface additions were applied
to a generalized equation expressed as:
Y = 100 [l-exp(-kX)],
276
-------
where Y = copper removed, percent
X = sodium sulfate added, percent of
metal charge
k = a constant
Average k values were calculated for both sets of data and
used in the above expression to obtain separate curves for
lance injection and surface additions, shown in figure 3.
c
0)
o
0)
a
a
LJ
o
5
UJ
(E
a:
UJ
a.
a.
o
o
100
80
60
40
20
Lance injection
y = IOO(l-e--0507x)
Surface addition
y = IOO(l-e-°323x)
10
20
30
40
50
SODIUM SULFATE ADDED, percent of metal weight
FIGURE 3- - Copper Removal vs Amount of Sodium Sulfate
Added. (Lance Injection vs Surface Additions)
277
-------
This preliminary comparison shows that copper removal by
lance injection requires approximately 35 percent less
Na2SOi, than by surface additions.
Slag Modification
Adjustments in the composition of the sodium sulfide
slag are also being studied to determine if different slag
compositions can achieve effective copper removal with smaller
slag additions. Use of ferrous sulfide (FeS) in sodium sul-
fide slags has been found particularly effective in improv-
ing copper removal. Rate tests on molten iron with approxi-
mately 1 percent copper were run using sodium sulfide with
10-, 20-, and ^O-percent additions of ferrous sulfide. The
test results, when compared to similar tests using only
sodium sulfide on the molten iron, showed increased copper
extraction with increased ferrous sulfide content. This
data is summarized below in table 3.
TABLE 3. - Coppe.r Removal with FeS Additions
to the Slag
1005
10%
2Q%
40%
I Na2S
FeSla)
FeS (a)
FeS (a)
(a)
Initial
1.13
1 .20
1.27
1.11
balance = Na~S
Fi nal
.55
.44
.45
• 31
56
63
65
72
Test Conditions: 1300° C, approximately 1000 g
iron (3.1-5.2 percent carbon),
slag added in molten form (200 g
total).
278
-------
Slag analyses indicated that use of ferrous sulfide also had
a beneficial effect on iron recovery. Iron content of the
final slags were 6.97, 10.2, and 15.6 percent for the 10-, 20-,
and 40-percent ferrous sulfide additions, respectively. The
initial iron concentrations were 5.42, 10.2, and 22.5 percent,
respectively. In similar runs where the initial slags were
all sodium sulfide, final iron concentrations in the slag
ranged from 6 to 14 percent. The iron in these latter slags
came from the iron bath whereas, in the slags with FeS, most
or all the iron came from the FeS.
Spent Slag Recycling
The principal objective in the approaches des-
cribed above has been to reduce the quantity of refining
slag required to effectively remove copper. Another approach
currently under study is the treatment of waste slag from
the refining process to generate fresh sodium sulfate. The
principle behind this approach involves oxidation of sodium
sulfide in the slag to sodium sulfate. Impurity metal sul-
fides dissolved in the sodium sulfide are insoluble in sod-
ium sulfate and should separate into a concentrated sulfide
layer. The technical feasibility of this approach was first
demonstrated by lancing molten sodium sulfide with oxygen to
convert it to sodium sulfate. Subsequent tests included sod-
ium sulfide containing dissolved copper, tin, manganese, and
iron sulfides. Lancing the molten sulfide mixture at 1200° C
279
-------
with oxygen produced a sodium sulfate top layer and a con-
centrated metal sulfide bottom layer. An illustration of
the separation achieved is shown in figure k.
FIGURE 4. - Sodium Sulfate
(top layer) and Metal Sul-
fide Concentrate (bottom)
after Oxygen Lancing of
Molten Sulfide Mixture.
The amount of oxygen used during the conversion process was
close to the stoichiometric amount indicated by the sulfide
to sulfate reaction. Analyses of the original sulfide and
the resultant layers were as follows (in weight percent):
TABLE *». - Metal Content of Slag Products -
Synthetic Slag
Cu
Original Sulfide 5.50
Sulfate Layer .02
Bottom Layer 23.5
Sn
2TPT
<.01
3.87
Similar tests were then performed on actual waste slag from
previous iron-refining experiments. Total copper, manganese,
and iron in the sodium sulfate product was less than 0.1 per-
cent. Analyses of the waste slag and resulting layers are
shown (in weight percent) in table 5.
280
-------
TABLE 5. - Metal Content of Slag Products -
Actual Slag
Waste Slag
Sulfate Layer
Bottom Layer
Cu
2.91
.01
4.80
Mn
2.70
.01
4.81
Copper Recovery
Exploratory tests have been conducted to deter-
mine feasibility of recovering copper from the waste slag.
During one test, a sample of cuprous sulfide (Cu2S) under a
layer of molten sodium sulfate was treated with ferrous can
scrap. This produced a small copper button and small copper
beads throughout the solidified melt. A similar test con-
ducted on cuprous sulfide without sodium sulfate produced a
substantial copper button, representing 78 percent of the
total copper available. Figure 5 shows the copper button
obtained, analyzing 90.4 percent copper and 7.6 percent iron.
FIGURE 5. - Copper Metal
Obtained by Treating Sul-
fide Concentrate With Iron
Scrap. (90.4% Cu and 1 .(>%
Fe).
281
-------
The overall process concept is thus one of iron re-
fining, slag recycling, and copper recovery to produce market-
able products and by-products for recycling.
It is important to note here that in the studies
to date using sodium sulfate, copper removals have been
achieved without sulfur pick-up in the iron. In fact, sul-
fur removals generally accompany the copper removals. For
example, can scrap containing 0.03-0.04 percent initial
sulfur contained only 0.01-0.02 percent sulfur after lance
injection with sodium sulfate.
Miscellaneous Research
A number of other related ferrous scrap research
projects have also been conducted or sponsored by the Bureau
of Mines. Some of these are briefly described in the follow-
i ng paragraphs .
Increased Use of Ferrous Scrap in Electric Furnace Steelmaking
Studies are in progress at the Albany Metallurgy
Research Center to develop continuous charging procedures for
electric furnace Steelmaking to permit wider use of secondary
ferrous materials at lower operating costs. Compared to con-
ventional batch practice, tests with continuous charging
showed:
(l) approximately 50 percent reduction in heat
t imes;
(2) about 20 percent reduction in energy consump-
tion;
282
-------
(3) reduction of residual elements to final con-
centrations acceptable for most steel products.
Basing their opinions on results to date, Bureau
engineers believe that ferrous can scrap, as well as prepared
automobile scrap and large appliance scrap, would be accepta-
ble charge materials.
Destructive Oxidation of Ferrous Scrap
A possible solution to the ferrous scrap problem
is destructive oxidation at elevated temperatures to produce
an iron oxide product and clean scrap products suitable for
steelmaking. The Bureau has been conducting such research in
its 36-foot rotary kiln at Twin Cities.
Early tests were performed on sheared auto scrap at
1100° C. Seventy percent oxidation was achieved on incinera-
ted as well as unburned scrap charges. Light gage material
yields a single kiln product consisting of iron oxide. Heav-
ier scrap charges can be removed as a usable product or re-
cycled through the kiln. The destructive oxidation treatment
has been shown to be applicable to tin cans as well as turn-
ings and borings, auto scrap, and appliance scrap.
Foundry Pig Iron From Ferrous Scrap
Production of commercially acceptable foundry iron
from low-grade ferrous scrap is currently under study at the
Bureau's Metallurgy Research Center in Twin Cities, Minnesota.
This foundry research is being conducted in an 18-inch, basic-
lined cupola. The objective is to determine mixtures and
283
-------
processing variables to make commercially acceptable foundry
iron from low-grade scrap iron at commercially attractive
costs.
During preliminary testing iron was produced from
various materials including select auto bundles, cleaned
cans, and kiln processed auto scrap. Detailed results of
these tests are shown in table 6.
TABLE 6. - Operating Data From Hot Blast
Cupola Melting
Charge, Ibs/ton hot metal
Scrap
Coke
Limestone
Spar
Ferros i 1 i con
Metal analysis, wt . pet
C
Si
S
Mn
Cu
Ni
Slag Basicity
CaO + MgO
Si02 + A120
Metal Recovery, percent
Bundles (a
2243
425
121
27
41
3.13
.27
.18
.16
.12
.05
.79
89.1
Cleaned
) cans
2339
404
106
29
32
3.8?
.42
.21
.14
.06
.06
.63
85.5
Processed
auto
scrap (b)
2146
331
78
26
29
3.00
.15
.24
.11
.14
.12
.47
93.2
(a) Approx. 6 X 6 X 12 inches.
(b) Equal weight of +2-and -2- inch kiln processed scrap
product.
Copper contents of the melted products were low, particularly
for the product from can scrap which was 0.06 percent. This
copper level would be considered acceptable for virtually all
appl ications.
Z84
-------
Use of Ferrous Scrap as a Reductant
A large portion of our domestic iron ore reserves
contain iron in the form of nonmagnetic minerals such as
hematite. Being nonmagnetic, these ores do not lend them-
selves to magnetic separation normally used for concentrating
many low-grade ores. Bureau engineers at the Twin Cities
Research Center have been developing a scrap iron-ore roast
process that converts nonmagnetic iron minerals to magnetite,
permitting subsequent concentration by magnetic separation.
During the process, a mixture of ore and scrap is processed
through a rotary kiln at 1000° C. Results have shown that
thin-gage auto scrap, tin cans, borings, and turnings are
the most effective scrap feed. Heavier ferrous scrap may
not completely oxidize in the kiln, although it can be col-
lected and used as high-quality melting stock for electric
furnace steelmaking. Other secondary commodities which have
been effectively used in magnetizing roasts include appliance
and household scrap, and municipal refuse.
Results of tests on municipal refuse and auto scrap
are summarized below in table 7.
TABLE 7- - Ferrous Scrap as Ore Reductant
Analysis of Ore Con- Iron Recovery,
centrate, wt. percent Percent
Scrap Fe Cu
Municipal Refuse 67.5 0.08 90.7
Auto (sheared, unburned) 67.3 0.02 91.2
Auto (ripped) bk.k 0.03 93.6
285
-------
Copper and Tin Removal by a Leach and Roast Process
Leaching of shredded ferrous can fractions in an
ammoniacal ammonium carbonate solution has shown that final
copper levels of 0.06 to 0.08 percent can be achieved. Re-
sidual tin levels of O.O'* to 0.06 percent can be attained by
roasting the ferrous can scrap with chlorides in the presence
of an oxidizing agent, followed by a wash and second roast
under reducing conditions.
Utilization of Ferrous Urban Wastes
Bureau-sponsored research is being conducted at the
University of Wisconsin to investigate the metallurgical
effects of contaminants such as copper, tin, and nickel in
ferrous metal reclaimed from urban refuse. Physical and chem-
ical tests are being performed on ferrous castings produced
by standard foundry procedures to determine tolerance levels
for the contaminating metals.
Basic Studies on Iron-Copper Alloys
Bureau-sponsored research is also being conducted
at Pennsylvania State University. The object of these
studies is to obtain basic thermodynamic data on copper in
iron-copper alloys at elevated temperatures. Such data will
aid in the development of effective processes for copper
removal from ferrous scrap.
Non-Cracking, Copper-Containing Steels
Scaling characteristics of copper-containing steels
are being investigated at the Bureau's Albany Research Center
286
-------
to determine if special additions, such as silicon and alum-
inum, can reduce or prevent ingot cracking attributed to the
presence of copper. If successful, such an approach could
permit wider use of copper-bearing scrap in stee Imak i ng.
NON FERROUS SCRAP
Research in the Bureau of Mines is particularly
oriented to instances where salvaged materials may comprise
a large percentage of the total supply of a commodity. In
this instance the commodity is the nonferrous metal fraction
of refuse and the salvaged materials are aluminum, zinc, cop-
per, lead, tin, and magnesium. Many of these metals, parti-
cularly aluminum, are present as a result of disposal and
collection of metal containers. The reclamation and reuse of
these materials is of primary concern to all of us interested
in meeting rapidly increasing metal production needs and
conserving the diminishing mineral resources.
Part of the current research concerns the urgent
need for better methods to rapidly identify metals and alloys
in the nation's scrap yards. Where it can be applied, segre-
gation is the most economical form of refining. This would
be particularly desirable in retrieving aluminum containers
from municipal wastes. The composition of aluminum cans is
known, and once segregated from other wastes, they are rapidly
reprocessed.
Research is being conducted to develop rapid and
accurate identification methods to minimize costly errors in
287
-------
sorting, thereby reducing the quantity of scrap being dis-
carded or processed inefficiently because of its uncertain
composition. Rapid separation methods based on color reflec-
tance, spot testing with chemicals, electrical conductivity,
X-ray, and other excitation methods are being explored. In-
vestigation of methods of identifying aluminum alloys resulted
in the development of simplified and improved chemical spot
tests for the alloying elements: copper, manganese, zinc, and
magnesium. Procedures also include a test for differentiating
between the magnesium and magnesium-silicon alloys of aluminum
and between magnesium base alloys and aluminum base alloys.
The materials required for making chemical spot tests
for copper, manganese, zinc, and magnesium were assembled in
kit form in a 4-inch by 6-inch carrying case as shown in
figure 6. Electrographic sampling and pretreated papers are
FIGURE 6. - Chemical Spot-Test Kit for Identification of
Aluminum Alloy Scrap.
288
-------
used in the tests. A few drops of electrolyte are applied to
a piece of filter paper which has been previously treated
with the indicator. A sample is dissolved electrolytically
by placing the wetted filter paper between the alloy and
sampling probe. The alloy is connected to the positive side
of a battery. An adequate sample is obtained, and identifica-
tion is made in approximately 15 seconds.
Research involving pyrometa1lurgica1 techniques pre-
sently comprise the major part of our nonferrous metal refin-
ing investigations. To date we have dealt only with the non-
ferrous metal recovered by the Bureau of Mines process for
recycling and recovering metal and mineral value from munici-
pal incinerator residues. The aluminum and other nonferrous
containers and packaging materials melt during incineration.
This nonferrous fraction is separated from ferrous and non-
metallic material and becomes a part of a complex mixture of
metals and alloys of varying compositions. The Bureau is
presently erecting a demonstration plant facility for the pro-
cessing of raw refuse. In this case aluminum cans and con-
tainers would be readily recoverable for immediate re-smelting
and re-use.
Typical compositions of the nonferrous metal col-
lected from incinerator residues and remelted to form a homo-
geneous alloy are shown in table 8. Metal yield by remelting
ranged from 80 to 90 percent using a commercial grade alumin-
um smelting flux. Due to the high amount of zinc present,
289
-------
TABLE 8. - Composition of Nonferrous Metal From
Metal
Al umi num
Zinc
Copper
Lead
Tin
1 ron
S i 1 i con
#1
69.5
23.0
1.3
4.2
0.4
0.7
0.2
1 ncinerator
1 nci nerator
#2
69.2
10.8
15.0
2.0
0.2
2.1
-
Residue
#3
80.0
14.2
1.7
1.8
-
1 .0
1.6
this type of mixture could not be recycled in large quantities
in the present secondary smelting operations. It is therefore
necessary to up-grade the metal mixture by additional separa-
tions of major constituents. Two techniques presently under
investigation are heavy media separation (sink-float) and
vacuum distillation.
Heavy Media Separation
Samples of +4 mesh and -4+20 mesh of mixed non-
ferrous metals from processed incinerator residue were separa-
ted at the Tuscaloosa Metallurgy Research Laboratory at speci-
fic gravities of 2.75 and 2.95 using liquid tetrabromoethane.
The sink-float fractions were then returned to the College
Park Metallurgy Research Center where they were smelted to
produce metal ingots for analysis. Weight percentages of
the sink and float products and analysis after smelting are
summarized in table 9.
The results in table 9 show that excellent separa-
tions into aluminum-rich and copper-rich products were achie-
ved. Metal recovered from smelted floats contained 96 to 98
290
-------
TABLE 9. - Results of Heavy Liquid Separation of
f^ixed
Nonfer rous
Metals
From 1
RCI nera-
tor Res i due
We igh t ,
Product
2.75 sp
+4 mesh
+4 mesh
-4+20 f
-4+20 s
2.95 sp
+4 mesh
+4 mesh
-4+20 f
-4+20 s
percent
•g-
float
s i nk
loat
ink
•9-
float
s i nk
loat
i nk
52
47.
49.
50,
61.
38.
53.
46,
.2
.8
.6
.4
.5
.5
,4
,6
Al
96.
^
98,
u.
96
! ,
97.
,0
,4
.0
.3
.0
,7
,0
,86
Analys i s , percent
Zn
34
34
41
36
.5
.3
. 17
.3
.16
, 1
.25
.5
Cu
54.
49.
47,
49.
,57
.8
,16
,6
.33
,2
27
2
Pb
.2
2,7
. 1
3.6
.1
3.7
.2
10.0
Sn
.036
.35
.027
1 .06
.034
-34
.058
1.06
percent aluminum and metal from sinks was a copper-brass mix-
ture with small amounts of aluminum, lead, tin, and iron.
Sinks from 2.95 specific gravity separations have signifi-
cantly lower aluminum contents than sinks from the 2.75
specific gravity separations. These results are highly en-
couraging in that separation into a high quality aluminum
product and a copper-rich product, Qualitatively approaching
the composition of radiator scrap, has been achieved with the
inexpensive technique of heavy liquid separation. Tetrabro-
moethane was used in these initial tests, but as indicated by
previous experience, similar separations can be achieved with
heavy media suspension, such as ferrosilicon in water.
Vacuum Pi st!1lat ion
Research in vacuum distillation has been highly
successful in refining many kinds of aluminum and zinc base
291
-------
scrap. The Bureau spent several years during the early 1960's
in developing low cost retort-distillation systems for treat-
ing up to 3500 pounds of scrap per retort charge. Figure 7
shows the unit during operation. Figure 8 shows the deposi-
tion of zinc in the condenser during a test with zinc die-
cast scrap.
FIGURE 7. - Retort-Distillation System During Refining
Operation on Zinc Die-Cast Scrap.
This type of unit was designed for operation at
850° and 50-micron pressure and would be suitable for re-
moving and recovering zinc and magnesium from nonferrous metal
refuse fraction.
292
-------
Smelting and vacuum distillation results are sum-
marized by presenting a typical test of heavy and light metal
fractions obtained by jigging. Jigging produces similar
products to those obtained by heavy liquid separation, except
for the higher percentage of aluminum in the heavy metal
fraction. The light metal fraction was found to contain
approximately 88 percent metal lies and 12 percent nonmeta11ics.
FIGURE 8. - Zinc Deposition in Opened Condenser of Retort-
Di st i11 at ion System
Smelting with or without a flux for either fraction produced
a metal recovery of approximately 80 percent of the available
metallic in the sample. Smelting temperature for the light
fraction was 750° C for the heavy fraction 900° C. After
293
-------
smelting, metal from each fraction was vacuum distilled at
750" C for 120 minutes. Analytical results are presented as
weight percent in table 10.
TABLE 10. - Analysis of Nonferrous Fractions After
A 1 urn i n urn
Copper
1 ron
Nickel
Lead
Tin
Z i nc
Magnes ium
Manganese
Light
Smel ted
96+
0.30
0.66
-
0.05
0.03
0.63
0.59
0.35
Smel t i ng and
Metal Fraction
Di st i 1 1 at ion
98+
0.38
0.66
-
0.11
0.01
0.004
0.04
0.33
Vacuum
Heavy
Smelted
26.9
32.1
0.68
0.48
2.60
1.22
33.0
-
-
Di st i 1 lat ion
Metal Fraction
Di st i 1 lat ion
40.0
56.0
1 .06
0.71
1.30
1.76
0.20
-
-
Distillation condensates were remelted and analyzed. Major
constituents in the light metal fraction was zinc and magnes-
ium. The condensate from both the heavy metal fraction and
light fraction analyzed better than 99 percent zinc.
Although every research endeavor being carried out
by the Bureau on container scrap and solid waste reclamation
has not been covered in this paper, it should suffice to
point out that a serious and energetic program is being
undertaken. It is also hoped that the Bureau of Mines Re-
search effort will help to identify the opportunities and
provide the data for solving some of our container reuse and
di sposal problems .
294
-------
RECOVERY AND UTILIZATION OF ALUMINUM FROM SOLID WASTE
R. F. Teslin, G. F. Bourcier, and K. H. Dale
Rcvriolds Metals Company
The author of the phrase, "Solid Waste
can be likened to an Urban Ore," will probably
remain unknown, bat the relevancv of that single
statement is becoming more apparent every day. For
those in industry who have undertaken the task of
providing a steady stream of raw materials to the
American economy, this resource, if properly
handled, may someday be a reliable (and renewable)
source of supply.
This paper discusses Reynolds Metals
Company's programs regarding the recovery and
reutilization of aluminum from solid waste.
Reynolds Metals has a history of recvcling
consumer products dating back to 1957 when programs
were initiated to recover the ail-aluminum motor oil
can. The inherent value of scrap aluminum reflected
in the open market scrap price is 40 percent of the
composite selling price of mill products compared to
only 23 percent of the composite mill product selling
price foi scrau steel, another commonly used metal.
It is this value that provides the obvious incentive
for reclamation.
Reynolds interest in reclamation of
aluminum and other valuable materials from municipal
refuse is directed towaids both the development of
this resource as a new source of supp.lv and helping
:> 9 -A
-------
to solve the industry's "share," if such a statement
can be made, of the Nation's solid waste and litter
problems. It is further believed that the value of
the scrap aluminum may provide some of the economic
incentives to process, for recycling, the entire
municipal refuse stream. The ever increasing amount
of aluminum used in the consumer sector, and
eventually discarded, makes the American garbage can
an important (and increasing) source of metal that
is virtually expropriation proof. Included in the
daily billion pounds of refuse generated in American
homes today are approximately 5 million pounds of
aluminum, as well as some 70 million pounds of steel,
2 million pounds of copper, 1/2 million pounds of
zinc, and lesser amounts of other metals. The
aluminum currently lost in this refuse heap amounts
to about 20 percent of the total reduction capacity
of this country, and the ferrous fraction amounts to
about 10 percent of the country's production.
In order to pursue the Companv's aluminum
recovery goals, Reynolds pioneered the reclamation
of all-aluminum beverage cans through a network of
can reclamation facilities that are open to the
general public and pay cash for aluminum cans and
other used aluminum household scrap (such as foil
and TV dinner trays).
296
-------
Realizing that some of the population would
be unable, or unwilling, to bring aluminum household
type scrap to reclamation centers, the Company is
now pursuing a homeowner separation program on a
pilot basis. This program is designed to go where
the aluminum is and to determine what is necessary
to extract the valuable aluminum scrap from the
waste stream at the last place it is easily
identifiable, separable, and relatively simple to
handle.
The third phase of the operation to
recover aluminum from the solid waste stream is
pointed at recovering the aluminum after it has been
converted into "urban ore" by householder discard,
followed by refuse collection and disposal operations.
Several research efforts are currently being
undertaken by Reynolds personnel. It is planned
that these independent research projects complement
or supplement, but not duplicate, past or ongoing
research at government, university, and private
levels.
Planning is also being undertaken relative
to what products can be produced from aluminum and
other valuable materials recovered from these various
approaches to resource recovery. The amount of metal
recovered, the degree of contamination, and the
297
-------
potential markets for the recycled nio
-------
In 1968, a Can Reclamation Center was
begun in Los Angeles (Figure 1), with cans redeemed
for cash. The cash pavment was foand to be the
strongest incentive to turn in cans and other used
aluminum household scrap and is the current system
used by Reynolds. The rate of payment is IOC per
pound or $200 per ton, roughly equivalent to 1/2$
per all-aluminum beverage can. Revnolds now has
Can Reclamation Centers in San Francisco, Los Angeles,
Phoenix, Houston, Miami, Tampa, Jacksonville, Newark,
and the Bronx and Brooklyn, New York. In addition,
we have a Mobile Can Reclamation Center now in
operation in the Pacific Northwest. This is a
complete reclamation center, mounted on a semi-
trailer and is scheduled into various communities
on a regular basis. A fleet of these mobile units
is now being constructed.
At our centers, aluminum is received,
magnetically separated, paid for, and shredded. It
is then sent in carload lots to one of the Company's
smelting plants in Alabama or Virginia.
Complementing the Reynolds permanent and
mobile can reclamation facilities, a number of the
Nation's largest brewers and soft drink bottlers are
coooerating with our program by providing locations
where aluminum cans may be redeemed for cash. As
299
-------
c
G)
ra
a)
rH
CD
60
O
01
T3
r-l
O
01
Pi
w
I
300
-------
of this date, over 400 of these satellite collection
depots are now operating in over 20 states.
In 1970, the Aluminum Can Reclamation
Program brought in over 4 million pounds of aluminum,
equivalent to about 80 million cans, and paid out
over $400,000 to individuals and to organized groups
such as the Boy Scouts. The volume of metal
collected by this program is continuing to increase.
In the month of March, 1971, Revnolds Can
Reclamation activities passed the one million pounds
per month milestone (equivalent to 20 million cans
per month) with our Los Angeles Center alone
collecting over 200,000 pounds of aluminum cans. It
should also be pointed out that the Aluminum Can
Reclamation Program, as it is now constituted, is an
economically viable system.
Householder Separation Programs
In order to recover a larger percentage of
aluminum consumer scrap, while the research efforts
pointed at total recycling of municipal refuse are
in progress, an interim approach was decided on.
This approach deals with a homeowner separation
program in two selected geographic areas. These
programs are being conducted in cooperation with two
private refuse management companies. The purpose of
301
-------
the program is to determine if homeowners will, with
suitable incentives, separate and save the clean,
all-aluminum household type scrap they normally
generate.
One of these locations, a City in Florida,
is ideally suited for such a homeowner separation
program. The present method of refuse collection
utilizes appropriately identified plastic bags, which
are purchased by the homeowner from agents of the
refuse collection and disposal company for 40* each.
These agents are grocers, filling stations, and so
forth. The price of these bags includes bag cost
and collection and disposal costs. The homeowner
sets out his refuse on collection days and after
collection no garbage cans remain at the curb to
mar the beauty of the area.
Reynolds is providing 10,000 plastic bags
to the refuse company, which, in turn, will give them
to two separate groups of 500 homeowners each. One
group will receive one free refuse collection bag and
10 of the aluminum salvage bags; the other group will
be given two free refuse collection bags with 10 of
the aluminum salvage bags.
Each week, for a period of 10 weeks, the
homeowners will set out a plastic bag containing the
past week's accumulation of aluminum cans and other
302
-------
clean household type aluminum "scrap. Processing of
the scrap aluminum collected will be done at our
Miami Can Reclamation Center. Later, if volumes
permit, the material will be shredded and sent
directly to one of our smelting plants.
From this program we hope to get answers
concerning the future of this type of recycling
effort and the incentives necessary to sustain and
expand it.
The other homeowner separation program,
in California, will involve a number of independent
refuse collectors working through their trade
association. These collectors will be given a total
of 25,000 plastic bags for distribution to their
customers. Tentatively, the plan is for the
homeowners to fill the bags with clean household type
scrap and be compensated by the collector for the
amount of aluminum turned in. The aluminum collected
by the refuse companies will be periodically loaded
into packer trucks and transported to our San
Francisco Can Reclamation Center.
Both of these programs will be underway in
the next few weeks. Upon completion, we will analyze
the results of these pilot programs to determine
their practicality for the long-term.
303
-------
Research Programs on the Separation of Aluminum
and Other Non-Ferrous Metals from Refuse
In this section some of the in-house
research programs now being conducted by Reynolds
are discussed.
Reynolds has had a pyrolysis, or
destructive distillation capability, for the last
dozen years. The current operation is located at
the Bellwood Smelting Plant and is designed to
recover aluminum from paper-mounted foil. This
material is first shredded, then charged into a
furnace with a controlled temperature and
atmosphere. As the material is processed in the
furnace, the paper and adhesives are carbonized in
a low oxygen environment and aluminum oxidation is
minimized. The residue from this furnace is
discharged into a hammermill, where the carbon is
physically separated from the aluminum. The bulk
of the carbon is removed by air classification and
any carbon residue left on the aluminum is burned
off in a kiln. At this point, the aluminum
recovered is suitable for any of several reuse
options, depending on the current order requirements,
Because of this experience background,
much of Reynolds in-house research on separation of
304
-------
aluminum from mixed refuse is based on the assumption
that thermal processes—incineration or pyrolysis
will be employed prior to aluminum separation.
To this end, separation and evaluation
studies are being conducted on metal obtained from
the U. S. Bureau of Mines pilot incinerator ash
recovery system, located at the University of
Maryland, College Park, Maryland. The Bureau of
Mines system magnetically separates the magnetic
ferrous materials from Washington, D. C. Sanitation
Department incinerator ash. The non-magnetic ferrous
(some types of stainless steel) and non-ferrous
metals are concentrated in two screen sizes
(-1 1/4" + 20 mesh) and (-20 + 40 mesh). Samples
of these two material sizes were obtained from the
Bureau of Mines for further separation work. (This
as-received material was approximately 50 - 70
percent aluminum.) This material was separated into
heavy and light fractions using dense media
techniques. Of the (-1 1/4" + 20 mesh) material,
67 percent was lighter than 3.0 gm/cc, and 33
percent heavier (aluminum density = 2.7 gm/cc).
For the (-20 + 40 mesh) material, 57 percent was
lighter than 3.0 gm/cc and 43 percent heavier.
In both of these samples, small amounts
of magnetic ferrous material was found in the part
305
-------
that was heavier than 3.0 gm/cc. In practice
magnetic separation would be used to remove this
iron. Samples from both screen fractions, lighter
than 3.0 gm/cc were melted under a (NaCl 50%,
KC1 45%, Cryolite 5%) molten salt flux at 1500°F.
Recovery of metal from the (-1 1/4" + 20 mesh)
fraction was 74.7 percent, assaying 96 percent
aluminum, and recovery from the (-20 + 40 mesh)
material was 57 percent, assaying 97 percent
aluminum. Combining these figures shows a net
recovery of 48 percent aluminum in the (-1 1/4" +
20 mesh) fraction, and 36 percent recovered aluminum
in the (-20 + 40 mesh) fraction. Bureau of Mines
personnel report that the larger size fraction
represents 75 percent and the smaller fraction 25
percent of the non-ferrous residue which totals
about 2.8 percent of the initial ash load.
Combining these figures shows a net aluminum
recovery of 45 percent of the non-ferrous portion
of the incinerator ash. When the other elements,
alloyed with the aluminum, are included, the total
aluminum alloy metal uncovered increases to 46.7
percent of the non-ferrous portion.
Another project being conducted in parallel
with the previous one is an investigation of
techniques to recover aluminum and other valuable
306
-------
materials from the char resulting from pyrolysis
of municipal refuse. The current samples of char
under investigation are from Monsanto's "Landguard"
pilot plant in St. Louis. The aluminum content of
municipal refuse in St. Louis is relatively low due
to an almost complete absence of aluminum beverage
cans in that area. Therefore, Reynolds supplied
samples of household type aluminum scrap, to be
added to raw municipal refuse on a controlled basis,
in order to bring the aluminum up to percentages
anticipated in high aluminum can use areas
(~3 percent) and provide for a better yardstick to
measure metal loss and evaluate subsequent aluminum
recovery techniques.
The pyrolysis operation was conducted at
a temperature of 1000 - 1500 F, based on exhaust
temperatures from the pyrolysis unit, The char was
water quenched as supplied to Reynolds, with a water
content of 40 percent.
Initial separation experiments, lust
completed, were conducted as follows:
A. Magnetic separation to remove iron
B. Wet screen to (+ and - 7 mesh) fractions
1. Ball mill the (+7 mesh) material
to separate the carbon and glass
307
-------
2. Rod mill the (-7 mesh) material
to flatten the metal and separate
the carbon and glass
3. Use dense media to separate the
ball and rod mill outputs into
fractions heavier and lighter
than 3.0 gm/cc
4. Dry all material
5. Char analysis, dry, is based on
combining similar materials from
both dense media separations and
is:
Ferrous (magnetic) - 38%
Aluminum with a small
amount of glass - 3.5%
Glass - 2.2%
Other non-ferrous - 0.6%
Balance of char, ash, fines,
glass - 55.7%
C. An independent lab analysis of the char,
ash, fines, and glass fraction shows it
to be 13 percent carbon. These figures
are tentative, of course, and will be
verified over a larger group of samples.
However, these are given to provide
approximate figures.
308
-------
Reynolds is also considering an
investigation into the use of an applied field,
such as a magnetic field, to be used in conjunction
with ferromagnetic particles such as ferrosilicon,
magnetite, and so forth, as a variable density dense
media separation system.
This research work, in general, has been
conducted under the following qualitative guidelines:
1. Much of the past work conducted on
refuse recycling has concerned itself
with reuse of large bulk items, such
as paper or in the manufacture of
compost. This approach can
alleviate a solid waste disposal
problem, but can result in the
anomaly of generating a marginally
saleable end product.
2. The recovery of less bulky, but
potentially more valuable solid
waste items, such as ferrous and
non-ferrous metals has been
neglected.
3. The reclamation of minor weight
percentage fractions of refuse must
be preceded by salvage, conversion,
or destruction of the major bulk
309
-------
items in refuse.
4. The removal of the major bulk items
in refuse, by whatever means, should
be compatible with the eventual
recovery of the minor volume and/or
weight constituents having a high
potential salvage value.
5. Since most metals in municipal refuse
are in an uncombined state, it is
best to utilize as many of the
physical characteristics of the
individual metals as possible in
separation and to conduct recovery
operation in such a manner as to
preclude oxidation or alloying.
On the basis of these guidelines and work
done so far, a flow chart of a projected pilot scale
total recycling processing system has been developed.
This approach, it is believed, can maximize the
recovery of theindividual, valuable, low volume
constituents while providing substantial volume and
weight reduction of the major constituents. The
flow chart shown in (Figure 2) outlines the basic
system requirements.
310
-------
FIGURE 2 SOLID WASTE RECYCLING PILOT PLANT
MIXED MUNICIPAL
REFUSE
SHREDDER
0 CHAR COOLER
ROD MILL
^ PYROLYSIS UNIT
®
CONCENTRATE
1
(T) MAGNETIC
SEPARATOR
NON MAGNETICS
©
4 MESH SCREEN
I
(6AJ MAGNETIC
SEPARATOR
y4 MESH SCREEN
-4+20 ME5H
CHAR,GLASS,
NON FERROUS
©
20 MESH SCREEN
ROD MILL
©
I
20 MESH
CHAR, GLASS,
NON FERROUS
AIR CLASS IF IER
3S MESH SCREEN
|CH»
CHAR STORASC
ft) DENSE MEDIA
SEPARATION
1 T
(ty HIGH INTENSITY
MAGNETIC SEPARATOR
ALUMINUM OTHER NON FERROUS
TO COPPER, ZINC
ELECTROREFINING
CLEAR
GLASS
COLORED TO CHAR
GLASS PROCESSING
311
-------
Product Potential of Recycled Aluminum
In parallel with work on one or more
techniques to separate the valuable materials from
raw municipal refuse, incinerator ash, or pyrolysis
char, work is ongoing to utilize the recovered
materials in the new products. Obviously, there is
a tradeoff involved here. There is no technical
reason to preclude recovery of 99 percent pure or
99.9 percent pure aluminum, for example. Presumably,
such refinement could be carried out to the extent
that the recovered metal would be virtually unlimited
it its use wherever aluminum can be normally employed.
At each decreasing level of purity, a smaller
spectrum of products is possible, but the overall
recovery cost is lower. Hence, at Reynolds, new
product investigations are being conducted as a
function of the purity of the recovered metal so that
cost/benefit determinations can be made for the
recovered product.
There are many conventional uses for many
of the materials recovered from municipal refuse.
These range from glass cullet being converted into
children's marbles, spun glass insulation, and the
newly developed "Glasphalt" paving material, up to
precious metals recovered from incinerator ash.
312
-------
For example, selenium is a metal that is sometimes
recovered from the ashes of coal burning power
stations, since the selenium bearing ores are
sometimes mixed in veins of coal. Selenium is used
in applications from semi-conductors to dandruff
remover shampoo.
There are many current, rather conventional
uses for aluminum recovered from our can recycling
programs. Foremost among these is the remelting of
shredded cans received from the public through our
can reclamation centers. This remelted metal is
cast directly into new ingots which can then be
rolled into new can making material. The energy
required to remelt aluminum scrap is so low relative
to some of the other commonly used packaging
materials, that often after two or three recyclings
of an aluminum can, the cumulative energy content of
aluminum cans becomes the lowest of major can
making materials, irrespective of their recyclability.
In addition to new cans, products such as
highway culverts, residential siding, industrial
siding and roofdeck, gutters and downspouts, lawn
furniture, and countless other products can be made
directly from recycling aluminum cans. In general,
the aluminum cans and used household scrap brought
back through the can reclamation program can be used
313
-------
wherever it is needed in our product mix. Because
of the relatively high manganese content in the
3004 alloy can body stock, the ideal use for this
recovered material is back into can making.
While our experience with aluminum
recycled from municipal refuse is limited at this
time, we know what aluminum alloys go into the
various products that are usually found in the
refuse heap. Products that potentially can be made
from such recovered aluminum are many if not all of
the products that can be made from recycled aluminum
cans. We also feel that aluminum for automobile
radiators, aluminum engines, pistons, and so forth,
could be produced, with some addition of other
alloying elements. Products such as steel deoxidizers,
explosive intensifiers, thermite additives, plastic
fillers, and so forth, could be produced with
aluminum recovered from municipal refuse. The list
could go on indefinitely with verv few products that
could not be made from this aluminum.
There may also be new, unconventional uses
for the metallic components, as well as some of the
other materials recoverable from municipal refuse.
For example, we may be able to cast
recovered aluminum into a billet and extrude it into
structural members for housing construction. Iron,
314
-------
magnesium, silicon, zinc and copper could well be
standard "contaminants" in aluminum recovered from
refuse and would add strength to the final product.
In cold climates, today's aluminum joist conducts
the cold from an exterior wall to an interior wall
and causes condensation at that point. The affected
surfaces of these extrusions might even be coated
with other reclaimed material such as pulverized
glass, using recovered thermoplastics to bond the
glass to the aluminum and give a thermal break at
these critical surfaces.
Summary
The purpose of this paper has been to
present a brief progress report on Reynolds Metals
Company's activities on reclaiming aluminum from
solid waste and developing uses for this material.
The Company's Aluminum Can Reclamation
Program is now reclaiming over one million pounds
per month of aluminum cans and other used aluminum
consumer products. This scrap material is ideally
suited for making new aluminum cans and can readily
be used within the Company's product mix.
Pilot scale householder separation programs
for aluminum will be underway shortly to explore the
feasibility of this approach as a means of
315
-------
supplementing the ongoing reclamation program.
Preliminary results from laboratory scale
studies have developed processes by which relatively
pure aluminum can be extracted from incinerator ash
and pyrolysis char. A new Reynolds Product
Development Division program now underway indicates
that there may be a broad spectrum of new aluminum-
based products that can be made from alloy
combinations obtainable from municipal refuse.
Based upon the laboratory work to date,
flow charts have been developed for a pilot-scale
complete processing system for refuse.
Reynolds Metals Company is committed to
the concept of recycling as an approach that will
open up new sources of material supply and
simultaneously provide long-term solutions to the
Nation's solid waste problems. The Company's multi-
front approach to this challenging problem area will
continue and expand in the years ahead.
REFERENCES
(1) Spendlove, M. J., Sullivan, P. M.,
and Stanczyk, M. H., "Solid Waste
Report", U. S. Department of Interior -
Bureau of Mines, undated report.
316
-------
AUTHOR INDEX
Page No.
ABRAHAMS, J. H., Jr. 244
Manager, Environmental Pollution Control Programs
Glass Container Manufacturers Institute, Inc.
330 Madison Avenue
New York, New York 10017
ALEXANDER, Judd H. 135
Vice President, Corporate Environmental Affairs
American Can Company
American Lane
Greenwich, Connecticut 06830
BOURCIER, G. F. 295
Reynolds Metals Company
Richmond, Virginia 23218
BURGESS, K. L. 94
Plastics Department
The Dow Chemical Company
2040 Dow Center
Midland, Michigan 48640
CALDWELL, H. S., Jr. 271
College P.ark Metallurgy Research Center
U. S. Bureau of Mines
College Park, Maryland 20740
CHENEY, Richard L. 171
President, Glass Container Manufacturers Institute, Inc.
330 Madison Avenue
New York, New York 10017
CONNOLLY, Hugh H. 1
Deputy Commissioner
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs
Environmental Protection Agency
Rockville, Maryland 20750
DALE, K. H. 295
Reynolds Metals Company
Richmond, Virginia 23218
DAY, Delbert E. 185
University of Missouri—Rolla
Rolla, Missouri 65401
317
-------
AUTHOR INDEX
(Continued)
Page No.
EMICH, Karl H. 109
Manager Technical Services
U. S. Industrial Chemicals Company
Polytrip Systems
Tuscola, Illinois 61953
HULBERT, Samuel F. 210
Associate Dean for Engineering Research and
Interdisciplinary Programs
Clemson University
Clemson, South Carolina 29631
LESHER, R. L. 155
President, National Center for Resource Recovery, Inc.
1625 I Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20006
MAKAR, H. V. 271
Supervisory Metallurgist
College Park Metallurgy Research Center
U. S. Bureau of Mines
College Park, Maryland 20740
MALISCH, Ward R. 185
University of Missouri—Rolla
Rolla, Missouri 65401
McMYLER, Safford W. 69
Vice President — Manufacturing
Riverside Paper Company
800 S. La we Street
Appleton, Wisconsin 54911
MIGHDOLL, M. J. 16
Executive Vice President
National Association of Secondary Material Industries Inc.
330 Madison Avenue
New York, New York 10017
MILGRAM, Jack 69
Arthur D. Little, Inc.
15 Acorn Park
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02140
318
-------
AUTHOR INDEX
(Continued)
Page No.
MURTHA, Joseph M. 30
President
Sandgren, Murtha, Lubliner Inc.
866 Third Avenue
New York, New York 10022
RYDER, R. J. 244
Director of Research and Development
Brockway Glass Company Inc.
Brockway, Pennsylvania 15824
STORY, William S. 263
Executive Vice President
Institute of Scrap Iron and Steel, Inc.
1729 H Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20006
TESTIN, R. F. 295
Director, Environmental Planning
Reynolds Metals Company
Richmond, Virginia 23218
VANASSE, Norman A 49
Manager of Corporate Packaging
General Foods Corporation
250 North Street
White Plains, New York 10602
WILLIAMS, Philip 231
Marketing Manager
Glass Compsite Pack Operation
Glass Container Division
Owens-Illinois Inc
333 East Front Street
Perrysburg, Ohio 43551
319
-------
-------
LIST OF ATTENDEES
John H. Abrahams, Jr.
Brockway Glass Co. Inc.
Brockway, Pennsylvania
N. P. Adriano
S. C. Johnson & Son, Inc.
1525 Howe Street
Racine, Wisconsin 53403
Judd H. Alexander
American Can Company
American Lane
Greenwich, Connecticut 06830
Robert M. Alverson
New Holland Division
Sperry Rand Corporation
New Holland, Pennsylvania 17557
Carl A. Arenander
Malcolm Pirme, Inc.
18 Park PI. , P. O. Box 36
Paramus, New Jersey 07652
Don Arnold
Chesebrough-Pond's Inc.
485 Lexington Avenue
New York, New York 10017
C, J. Arnsbarger
Anchor Hocking Corporation
109 N. Broad Street
Lancaster, Ohio 43130
Robert S. Arvans
Union Carbide Corporation
One Cory Road
Mornstown, New Jersey 07960
William H. Austin & Associates
186 South Main Street
Cheshire, Connecticut 06410
Thomas M. Bacon
General Services Administration
FSS-FMSX
Washington, D. C. 20406
Marilyn Barnes
Secretary
Battelle-Columbus
Ernest Barth
W. Va. Unv.
Box 20, 505 Burroughs Street
Morgantown, West Virginia 26505
Ernest A. Bortis
Battelle-Columbus
Donald Berman
Waste Systems Management-
Allegheny County
404 Allegheny Bldg. -429 Forbes Avenue
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219
Glen Bishop
Wisconsin-Dept, of Natural Resources
1115 Rutledge Street
Madison, Wisconsin 53706
P. T. Bishop
S. C. Johnson &c Son, Inc.
1525 Howe Street
Racine, Wisconsin 53403
Jane Black
Secretary
Battelle-Columbus
Robert N. Black
URS Research Co.
155 Bovet Road
San Mateo, California
Kenneth A. Blaine
Chase Bag Company
Mill & Cleveland Streets
Chagrin Falls, Ohio 44022
James R. Bonnington
Chrysler Corporation
P. O. Box 2866
Detroit, Michigan 48231
321
-------
A, "W". Breidenbach
Division of Research & Development
Solid Waste Mgt. Office
Environmental Protection Agency
Rockville, Maryland
W. Keith Buechel
Weyerhaeuser Co,
Tacoma, Washington 98401
Dr. K. L. Burgess
The Dow Chemical Company
2040 Dow Center
Midland, Michigan 48640
James J, Burke
Drexel University
32nd & Chestnut
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104
M. W. Burlis
Sherwood Medical Industries Inc.
183 1 Olive Street
St. Louis, Mis souri 63103
H, S. Caldwell
U. S. Bureau of Mines
College Park, Maryland
James V. Calhoun
Anchor Hocking Corporation
109 N. Broad Street
Lancaster, Ohio 43130
George Carlson
T, J. Lipton, Inc.
800 Sylvan Ave.
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey 07632
C. W. Castle
The Procter & Gamble Company
Spring Grove and June Streets
Cincinnati, Ohio 45217
Richard L, Cheney
Glass Container Manufacturers Inst.
330 Madison Avenue
New York, New York 10017
Michael J. Chun
Univ. of Hawaii
1890 E-W Rd. , Moore 402?
Honolulu, Hawaii 96822
J. A. Ciszewski
Jos. Schlitz Brewing Company
235 West Galena Street
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53 21 2
Robert T. Clark
International Paper Co.
220 E. 42nd Street
New York, New York 10017
Clarence A. demons
Environmental Protection Agency
5555 Ridge Avenue
Cincinnati, Ohio 45213
Dr. R. Clendinmng
Union Carbide Corporation
River Road
Bound Brook, New Jersey 08805
Anthony R. Colella
Syracus University Research
Corporation
1075 Comstock Avenue
Syracuse, New York 13210
Hugh H. Connolly
Solid Waste Management Office, EPA
5600 Fishers Lane
Rockville, Maryland 20852
Bill Coppins
Battelie-Columbus
Grant W. Cheney
The Dow Chemical Company
2040 Dow Center
Midland, Michigan 48640
James M. Costello
Monsanto
800 N. Lindburgh Blvd.
St. Louis, Mis souri 63166
322
-------
Dr. John P. Cummings
Owens Illinois
1700 N. Westwood
Toledo, Ohio 43607
George Dankocsik
Saint-Glair Koppers Co.
Frankfurt Rd.
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15061
Robert G. Deitrich
Department of Public Works ~
City of Baltimore
600 Municipal Office Building
Baltimore, Maryland 21202
C. M. Demse, Jr.
Bethlehem Steel Corporation
701 E. Third Street
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18016
Victor A. Denslow
Amoco Chemicals Corp.
130 E. Randolph
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Ernest H. Duval
The Gillette Company,
Toiletries Division
Gillette Park
Boston, Massachusetts 02106
Mr. C. Soutt^r Edgar
International Paper Company
220 East 42nd Street
New York, New York 10017
E. Burley Edwards
Techs Inc.
504 Third Ave. W.
Warren, Pennsylvania 16365
M. D. Eisele
Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp.
300 Lakeside Drive
Oakland, California 94604
Dr. Michael J. Eltel
Clemson University
Clemson, South Carolina 29631
Karl H. Emich
U. S. Industrial Chem, Co.
101 S. Carico Street
Tuscola. Illinois 61953
Paul J. Emrick
Brockway Glass Company, Inc.
McCullough Avenue
Brockway, Pennsylvania 15824
Richard Engdahl
BCL
Michael M. Epstein
BCL
C. C. Fain
Clemson University
Olin Hall
Clemson. South Carolina 29631
R. L Feddersen
Hercules Inc.
900 Market Street
Wilmington, Delaware 19803
Bruce A. Fletcher
V/est Virginia University
2876 University Avenue
Morgantown, West Virginia
William L Fox
American Can Company
433 N. Northwest Hwy
Barnngton, Illinois 60010
Geoffrey Frohnsdorff
The Gillette Company Research
Institute
1413 Research Blvd.
K.ockville, Maryland 20850
323
-------
William Fulkerson
ORNL-NSF Environmental Program
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
P. O. Box X
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830
FrankB. Glanotti, III
Allen & Hoshall
2430 Poplar
Memphis, Tenneessee 38112
Dr. Hugh W. Gray
E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co.
1007 Market Street
Wilmington, Delaware 19898
Philip J. Griffin
Corning Packaging Company
Riverside
Corning, New York 14830
Paul J. Gripshover
Battelle Memorial Institute
505 King Avenue
Columbus, Ohio 43201
Robert E. Grisemer
Continental Can Company, Inc.
150 So. Wacker Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60606
Morgan W. Guenther
United States Brewers Assn. Inc.
1750 K Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C. 20006
Donald Haase
Mobil Chemical Company
100 North Street
Canandaigua, New York 14424
Dr. D. Joseph Hagerty
University of Louisville
Belknap Campus
Louisville, Kentucky 40208
John Hallowell
Battelle-C olumbu s
John P. Hansen
Ohio Wesleyan University
S. Sandusky Street
Delaware, Ohio 43015
William M. Harrington, Jr.
Whitman, Requardt and Associates
1304 St. Paul Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21202
H. M. Hatmaker
Mead Packaging
1040 W. Marietta Street NW
Atlanta, Georgia 30318
Walter Hedden
Battelle-Columbus
N. F. Henage
Diamond National Corp.
3091 W. Galbraith Rd.
Cincinnati, Ohio 45239
A J. Herbet
Olinkraft Inc.
P. O. Box 488
West Monroe, Louisiana 71291
L. L. Hinshaw
Battelle-Columbus
William J. Hogan
Stapling Machines Co.
21 Pine Street
Ilockaway, New Jersey 07866
Frank L, Holland
The Coca Cola Export Corp.
Atlanta, Georgia 30301
George J. Howick
Equity Research Associates, Inc.
52 Wall Street
New York, New York 10005
Carroll T. Hughes, Jr.
Waste Combustion Corporation
P. O. Box 6295
Richmond, Virginia 23230
324
-------
Dr. Samuel F. Hulbert
Clemson University
Clemson, South Carolina
David L. Hull
Ohio Wesleyan University
Delaware, Ohio 43015
Mr, Joseph W. Hunt
Northwest Georgia Regional Health
Advisory Council, Inc.
1503 Turner McCall Blvd.
Rome, Georgia 30161
(Miss) Ruth Hupprich
Colgate-Palrnolive Company
300 Park Avenue
New York, New York 10022
Robert C. Hurbanis
North American Van Lines
World Headquarters
Ft. Wayne, Indiana 46805
David N. Immendorf, P. E.
Gilbert Associates Inc.
525 Lancaster Avenue
Reading, Pennsylvania 19603
Wafik H. Iskander
W. Va, University
W. Va. University —
Engineering Building
Morgantown, West Virginia 26506
Rose Jackson
Battelle-Columbus
T. Z. Jenkins
Owens-Illinois
Toledo, Ohio 43601
James W.Jensen
U. S. Bureau of Mines
P. O. Box 280
Rolla, Missouri 65401
Jean Johnson
Battelle -Columbus
Herb Johnston
Battelle-Columbus
Richard J. Karas
American Can Co.
433 N. Northwest Hwy.
Bar ring ton, Illinois 60010
Cameron Keim
Gerber Prod. Co.
Fremont, Michigan 49412
John R, Kettle
Adolph Coors Company
1280 W. 47th Avenue
Denver, Colorado 80211
Emory Kincaid
Aladdin Synergetics Inc.
703 Murfreesboro Road
Nashville, Tennessee 37210
E. D. Kttzke
S. C. Johnson & Son, Inc.
1525 Howe Street
Racine, Wisconsin 53403
Carol E. Knapp (Miss)
Environmental Science &
Technology Magazine
1155 16th Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C. 20036
R. C. Koehn
General Mills } Inc. ,
James Ford Bell Technical Center
9000 Plymouth Avenue North
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55427
Marcos S. Kostolich
Gulf Environmental Systems Company
P. O. Box 185
Chagrin. Falls, Ohio 44022
Kwoh H, Hu
U. S. Army Natick Laboratories
Natick, Massachusetts 01760
325
-------
Donald Kyser
Minn. Pollution Control Agency
717 Delaware Street S. E.
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440
David P. LaFave
Mead Packaging
1040 W. Marietta
Atlanta, Georgia 30302
Clyde Lamar
Excello Corp.
Detroit, Michigan 48232
Rauno A. Lampj (Dr. )
U. S. Army Natick Laboratories
Kansas Street
Natick, Massachusetts 01760
Edward P. Larizza
Pepsi-Cola Company
Anderson Hill Road
Building 6/Floor 1
Purchase, New York 10577
Ronald E. Layne
Reynolds Metals Company
Grottoes, Virginia 24441
Louis W. Lefke
Solid Waste Management Office, EPA
55^5 Ridge Avenue
Cincinnati, Ohio 45213
Dr. Bichard J. Lesher
National Center for Resource
Recovery, Inc.
1211 Connecticut Avenue - Suite 800
Washington, D. C. 20036
John H. Lindholm
Battelie-Columbus
Stephen A. Lingle
Office of Solid Waste Programs
P. O. Box 597
Cincinnati, Ohio 45201
Aileen Lubin
WTTG-TV Metromedia - Chanel 5
5151 Wisconsin Avenue N.W.
Washington, D. C. 20016
C. J. Lyons
Battelle Columbus Laboratories
505 King Avenue
Columbus, Ohio 43201
Bruce E. MacNab
Jeffrey Gallon Inc.
100 East Broad Street
Columbus, Ohio 43215
Mr. H. V. Makar
U S. Bureau of Mines
College Park, Maryland
Walter R. Malby
Aluminum Co. of America
1501 Alcoa Bldg
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219
Dr Ward R. Malisch
University of Missouri — Rolla
Civil Engr. Bldg.
Rolla, Missouri 65401
Duane W. Marshall
Nat'l Council for Air & Stream
Improvement
Western Michigan University
Kalamazoo, Michigan 49001
Chris Martelli
Trash, Inc.
Monterey, California
Lee Martelli
Trash, Inc.
Monterey, California
Karl D. Matthews
Reading Company
12th & Market Streets
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107
326
-------
Roger May
O. S. U. / Franklin Inst.
Colunibus-Philadelphia
Tim McGee
Pa. Department of environmental
Resources
2102 Princeton Avenue
Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011
Saltord W. MeM-yler
Riverside Paper Corp.
800 S. Lawe Street
Apple ton, Wisconsin 549 11
Dr. John G. Meitner
Consultant, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
120 East Creek Drive
Menlo Park, California 94025
Roger L. Merrill
Battelle's Columbus Laboratories
505 King Avenue
Columbus, Ohio 43201
M. J. Mighdoll
National Association of Secondary-
Material Industries, Inc.
330 Madison Avenue
New York, New York 10017
J. G. Miles
Procter k GambJe Company
6300 Center Hill Road
Cincinnati, Ohio 45224
Dr. Jack Milgrom
Arthur D. Little, Inc.
1 5 Acorn Park
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02140
Miss Sheila Minnitt
Glass Container Council of Canada
67 Yonge St. , Ste. 501
Toronto 215 Ontario, Canada
J. A. Minns
Owens-Illinois
Toledo, Ohio 43601
Mrs. Rodger MitcheJl
League of Women Voters of Ohio
HarJan L Moore
City oi Indpls.
2422 City-County Bldg.
Indianapolis, Indiana
Reuben T Morgan
Standards fk Quality Control,
Federal Supply Service, GSA
CrystdJ Mall Bldg 4
Washington, D. C. 2040o
Dr. D. L. Morrison
Battelle Columbus Laboratories
505 King Avenue
Columbus, Ohio 43201
Joseph M. Murtha
Sandgren & Murtha, Inc.
86b Third Avenue
New York, New York 10022
"W. E. Nelson
Career Research Foundation
Tuskcgee Institute
Alabama 36088
Willard L. Newman
Genera] Electric Company
Bldg 69 ~ Room 151, 1 River RoAd
Schnectady, New York 12305
Lou Nowacki
Battelle- Columbus
Ralph Oakley
Lewis-Howe
3 19 S. 4th Street
St. Louis, Missouri 63102
Anthony O'Donohue
City of Toronto
100 Queen St. W. , City Hall
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Donald Q. O'Brien
Warner-Lambert Company
201 Tabor Road
Morrib Flams, New Jersey 07950
327
-------
James B. Ogden
US Army Material Command
Installations & Services Agency
AMCIS-RI-IC
Rock Island, Illinois 61301
Edward J. Ostrowski
National Steel Corporation
Research Center
Weirton, West Virginia 26062
W. A. Patterson
Converted Plastics Group,
W. R. Grace &c Company
P. O. Box 464
Duncan, South Carolina 29334
R. O. Peterson
S. C. Johnson & Son, Inc.
1525 Howe Street
Racine, Wisconsin 53403
William H. Pfeifer
Battelle Memorial Institute
505 King Avenue
Columbus, Ohio 43201
Harold A. Pilar
W, Va. University
Engineering Building
Morgantown, West Virginia 26506
Mort Present
Sanitas Services of Indiana, Inc.
3200 W. Bertha Street
Indianapolis, Indiana 46222
Bill Pope
Battelle-Columbus
Thomas G. Prioleau, Jr.
Lever Brothers Company
390 Park Avenue
New York, New York 10022
J. B. Rasmus sen
S. C. Johnson & Son, Inc.
1525 Howe Street
Racine, Wisconsin 53403
George S. Rennie
Continental Can of Canada
475 Commissioners Street
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Richard Reynolds
CIBA-GEIGY Corporation
Ardsley, New York 10502
Marvin T. Rhodes
West Virginia University
1 10 Ellen Lane
Morgantown, West Virginia 26505
Arthur H. Richardson
E. S. &A, Robinson (Canada) Ltd
69 Laird Drive
Toronto 17, Canada
Linda Ross
Battelle-Columbus
R. J. Ryder
Brockway Glass Company, Inc.
Brockway, Pennsylvania 1 5824
George F. Sachsel
Battelle Columbus Laboratories
505 King Avenue
Columbus, Ohio 43201
Julian Scheer
National Center for Resource
Recovery, Inc.
1211 Conn Avenue, N. W.
Washington, D. C. 20036
S. A. Schilling
Battelle-Columbus
Chas. W Schneiderhan
Mobil Oil Corp.
150 E. 42nd Street
New York, New York 10017
Frank J. Sellinger
Anheuser-Busch, Inc.
721 Pestalozzi Street
St. Louis, Missouri 63118
328
-------
S. R. Shrivastava
W. C. Larsen, P.E.
Consulting Engineers
44 Saginaw Drive
Rochester, New York 14623
Lawrence H. Skromme
Sperry Rand
New Holland, Pennsylvania
George M. Smart
Central States Can Co.
700 16th Street, S.E.
Massillon, Ohio 44646
H. C. Bowen Smith
Goldman, Sachs & Co.
55 Broad Street
New York, New York 10004
Joe Smith
Corco Inc.
6950 Worthington-Galena Rd.
Columbus, Ohio 43085
G. Ray Smiths on, Jr.
Battelle-Columbus
Dr. Curtis M. Snow
Monsanto Enviro-Chem System, Inc.
800 N. Lindbergh Boulevard
St. Louis, Missouri 63166
M. Jack Snyder
Battelle Columbus Laboratories
John L. Splendore
Metcalf &i Eddy Engineers, Inc.
Statler Office Building
Boston, Massachusetts 02116
R. Lee Steiner
Drexel University
32nd & Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104
George F. Stewart
University of California
Food Science & Technology
Davis, California 95616
H. Stewart
Cumberland Engineering Co.
P. O. Box 6065
Providence, Rhode Island 02904
P. B Stickney
Battelle-Columbus
E. Joseph Stillwell
Battelle -Columbus
William S. Story
Institute of Scrap Iron & Steel
1729 H. Street N. W.
Washington, D. C. 20006
Dick Stitt
National Solid Waste Mgt. Assoc.
1145 19th Street N. W.
Washington, D. C. 20036
Mrs. John B. Swern
League of Women Voters of Ohio
3440 Olentangy River Road
Columbus, Ohio
Masaru Tanaka
Dept. of Civil Eng., Wayne State U.
667 Merrick
Detroit, Michigan 48202
Ann Tasseff
Environment Reporter
1231 25th St. N. W.
Washington, D. C. 20007
Bert Taylor
DairyPak,
5971 Olentangy River Road
Worthington, Ohio 43085
Dr. Robert F. Testm
Reynolds Metals Company
6601 West Broad Street
Richmond, Virginia 23261
Narayan Thadam
Westinghouse Electric Corporation
7670 Old Springhouse Road
McLean, Virginia 22101
329
-------
David L. Thar
Container Corp. of America
1204 E 12th Street
Wilmington, Delaware I9&02
L. M. Tupman
General Electric Company
Appliance Park, Pildg. 35, Room 133
Louisville, Kentuck/ 40225
Norman A. Vanasse
General Foods Corporation
250 North Street
White Plains, New York 10625
Ted Venti
Amway Corporation
7575 E. Fulton Road
Ada, Michigan 49301
Roberto Tong Villaneuva
Westresco, Inc.
809 Collins Avenue
Marysville, Ohio 43030
Gordon Von Doersteri
Boise Cascade Composite Can Division
13300 Interstate Drive
Hazelwoocl, Missouri b3042
William K Wilson
National Bureau of Standards
Washington, D. C. 20234
David H. Wiitsee
Atlanta Region Metropolitan
Planning Commission
900 Glenn Building
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Mr John C. Wirth, Jr
Avon Products, Inc.
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, New York 10020
Charles M Woodcock
General Foods Corp.
275 Cliff Street
Battle Creek, Michigan 49016
Joe W. Ray
Battelle- Columbus
Duane Yother s
Battelle-Columbus
James A. Waters
Vistron/Standard Oil (Ohio1)
1608 Midland Bldg
Cleveland, Ohio 44145
Mr. Gerry R. Wehrmann
The Coca-Cola Export Corporation
Coral Gables, Florida
Jarnes A.Weissburg
Advisor-Group for Recycling in Pa,
4835 Girard Road
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15227
Philip Williams
Owens-Illinois, Inc
P. O, Box 1035
Toledo, Ohio 43601
------- |