WASTE AS A RESOURCE FOR THE FUTURE
Recoverable
Resource
Audit
Han
-------
EPA Region 2
Goes Global with
U.N. Handbook
A practical handbook introducing the
concept of resource recovery is
now in the hands of almost 500 environ-
mental and public health officials in 43
countries around the world, thanks to
the efforts of Region 2 (New York, New
Jersey, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin
Islands). The Recoverable Resource
Audit Handbook was developed as part
of a technical assistance effort in sup-
port of the United Nations Environment
Programme's (UNEP's) "World Con-
ference of Local Governments for a
Sustainable Future," held at the United
Nations last September. The handbook,
which was developed to assist local
communities assess and implement al-
ternatives to current waste disposal
practices, was distributed to all UNEP
Congress participants.
This publication
describes the input and
output methodologies:
two approaches for
analyzing materials that
enter the MSW stream.
The core of this 28-page publication
is a step-by-step description of two
methodologies for analyzing the nature
and source of materials that enter the
municipal solid waste stream. The out-
put approach estimates wastes based
on manually sorting a representative
sample as it arrives at a management
site. With the input method, managers
must estimate amounts of potential
wastes at their origins. The handbook
also covers the solid waste manage-
ment hierarchy, including source reduc-
tion, recycling and composting, and
incineration and landfilling; and discus-
ses how managers can evaluate the
costs and benefits of resource recovery.
Single copies of the Recoverable
Resource Audit Handbook are available
by written request from Michael De-
Bonis, Assistant Director for Solid
Waste Management, U.S. EPA, Region
2, 26 Federal Plaza, New York, NY
10278.1
-------
WASTE AS A RESOURCE FOR THE FUTURE
Recoverable
Resource
Audit
Han
• • •it
k
O
O
LU
O
PRO^
o^x
' This handbook was
developed and designed by
A.T. Kearney, Inc., under contract
to Region II of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency for the World Congress
of Local Governments for a Sustainable Future
Global Cleanup
The Global Cleanup 1030 is used with permission from the United Nations Environment Prosramme
-------
WASTE AS A RESOURCE FOR THE FUTURE
TABLE of CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION • Page 1
CHAPTER 1 - Page 3
Concepts and Definitions
CHAPTER II - Page 6
Methodologies for Auditing
Recoverable Resources
CHAPTER III - Page 14
Economics of Resource
Recovery
CHAPTER IV - Page 20
Agenda for the Future
APPENDICES
A Glossary - Page 21
B Suggested Additional
Reading - Page 23
C Analyzing Survey
Results - Page 24
-------
-------
WASTE AS A RESOURCE FOR THE FUTURE
Introduction
As the quantity of solid waste increases world-
wide, so too must citizen and government con-
cern. This handbook was prepared by A.T.
Kearney, Inc. under contract to the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, for use at the World
Congress of Local Governments meeting held
September 5-8, 1990. Its purpose is to provide
practical assistance to local communities and to
foster public awareness and education with re-
gard to alternatives to current disposal practices.
The world has become a "throw away" society,
discarding waste materials with little thought as to
the impact the immense quantity of municipal solid
waste has on the environment. For the past twenty
years, however, there has been growing concern
about the adverse effects man has on the environ-
ment. This relatively new environmental con-
sciousness is not limited to highly industrialized
countries, but is gaining prominence in all coun-
tries throughout the world.
There is an American Indian expression: "The land
does not belong to us, we are merely borrowing it
from our grandchildren." It is our responsibility to
protect and preserve our natural resources for
future generations. If we want to sustain our
planet, we must take action now.
It is ludicrous to continue destroying forests in
order to produce paper when paper is easily
recycled. It makes no sense to bury in the ground
materials that can be repaired or reused. Techno-
logical advances allow plastics and glass to be
recycled and common sense tells us these items
can be reused numerous times. The use of valu-
able natural resources for energy generation can
be reduced by waste incineration.
Unfortunately, we know all too well that current
waste management practices are not always envi-
ronmentally sound or foolproof. We know that
landfills leak and that this can threaten ground
and surface waters. We know that methane gas is
generated in landfills and has the potential to
migrate below ground, posing a threat to popu-
lated areas. We know that incinerators emit acidic
gases which negatively impact air quality andean
result in acid rain. And, we know that if we want
to conserve our natural resources for future gen-
erations, we must now explore alternative waste
management technologies and methods.
The problem all of us now face is what to do about
the staggering volume of municipal solid waste
generated daily. If we want to control and inhibit
the rapid destruction of our natural resources, we
must adopt new attitudes and habits. We cannot
afford to ignore the municipal solid waste problem
in the hopes it will go away; it won't.
This handbook is designed as a tool to guide
communities toward developing strategies and
alternatives for municipal solid waste management
in the future. Its use will assist local governments
in their efforts to characterize waste streams in
order to identify those resources which are valu-
able commodities.
Every day we use and toss away items that have
reuse or recycling value. It makes good sense for
local communities to identify opportunities to
redirect recoverable resources from the waste
stream back into their economies. Discarded
materials previously considered waste can be
reused, recycled, repaired, composted, or incin-
erated for energy recovery. Initiating a program
that will encourage resource recovery will de-
crease the amount of "true waste," which ulti-
mately must be disposed in a landfill.
Establishing a successful community program
which will serve to protect and preserve our
planet requires a change in attitudes and mind-
set. The public must be made aware of the envi-
ronmental crisis we all face in the near future if we
do not begin now to change our waste manage-
ment practices. The time is here to reverse the
past damages and to inhibit recurrence. Local
leaders must take the lead to initiate public
education opportunities which focus on what
we are doing to our earth and introduce and
promote viable alternatives such as resource
recovery programs.
-------
m A S T E A 5 A R E SO URGE FOR THE F U T U R E
INCINERATE
(With Energy Recovery)
RECYCLE
-------
WASTE AS A RESOURCE FOR THE FUTURE
Chapter I - Concepts and
Definitions
The focus of this handbook is to introduce the
concept of resource recovery. The term "resource
recovery" is used here to include a number of
methods which will result in economic benefits
while conservins natural resources and protecting
the environment. Communities should think in
termsof a resource recovery hierarchy with source
reduction as the primary focus.
Source reduction can be achieved through public
education programs which encourage a change in
attitudes and more importantly, daily habits. For
example, using string bags to carry groceries rather
than paper or plastic will result in a reduction in the
overall volume of waste that must be managed.
Local officials can also work with industry to re-
duce waste generation through innovative design
and manufacturing methods. A decrease in the
quantity of waste generated will alleviate the
problem of how to handle the waste once it is
generated.
Obviously, not all waste will be eliminated or
reduced by innovative technology or by public
efforts. The question then becomes what to do
with the waste that is generated. How can it be
handled in a manner which protects the environ-
ment and offers economic benefits? Once source
reduction is achieved, the next level in the hierar-
chy is recycling. Recycling decreases the depend-
ency on raw materials and contributes to the
reduction of the quantity of waste in the waste
stream.
Composting is the next level in the hierarchy. Yard
and nonanimal food waste can be used to inhibit
soil erosion and as fertilizer for agriculture. As
communities work down the hierarchy, they even-
tually will have waste that can be incinerated. In-
cineration can be looked at as a method to not
only reduce the overall volume of waste but also as
a way to recover valuable energy. Once all the
above methods have been exhausted, the end
waste or "true waste" must be disposed of in a
landfill. However, implementing the methods in
the hierarchy will greatly reduce the quantity of
waste that goes into a landfill.
If we think of waste in terms of a resource for the
future, we will succeed in recovery of valuable
commodities which will provide economic bene-
fits as well as contributing to the preservation of
our natural resources.
Municipal solid waste encompasses a broad range
of waste materials and includes everything from
food waste to paper to wood to refrigerators. The
municipal solid waste stream includes discarded
materials generated by residences, commercial es-
tablishments, and institutions. The aggregate of
these wastes is called municipal solid waste. In
general, wastes which are considered hazardous
to human health or the environment should be ex-
cluded from the waste stream characterization.
These hazardous wastes should be addressed as a
separate waste stream and are not covered in this
handbook.
There are multiple alternative methods of dealing
with municipal solid wastes once they have been
discarded. Most of us are familiar with recycling
aluminum cans and paper. But did you know that
plastics can be recycled, reused or incinerated for
energy recovery? Most household items can be
repaired or stripped of parts to repairsimilar items.
A A
-------
VVA S f E A S A R E SOUR C E F O R T H E FUTURE
Two excellent alternatives to landfilling are com-
posting and incineration. These both reduce
volume, and incineration can be viewed as an
opportunity to recover energy. Of course, incin-
erators should be properly equipped with pollu-
tion control devices which decrease harmful
emissions.
Rethinking our current waste management meth-
ods can result in a positive impact on the environ-
ment. One of the positive effects recycling can
have on the environment is that it reduces or
avoids pollution by reusing materials which can
be substituted for raw materials. In addition, a
resource recovery program allows recycled mate-
rials to become progressively more cost effective
as the need for costly virgin materials decreases.
The benefits derived from using discarded materi-
als as recoverable resources range from a savings
in waste handling costs including transportation
and tipping fees to a reduction in the overall
quantity of wastes that must be disposed of in
landfills. Each community will have different
benefits depending on its location, economy, and
available resources committed to the program.
The benefits achieved by communities will also
depend on the types and quantities of waste
generated. Once the desired benefits have been
targeted, a recovery program designed to achieve
those benefits can be implemented.
Developing a resource recovery program is a
complex process that takes long-term planning.
There are a number of components involved
that require consideration prior to reaching the
decision to implement a program. A multi-phase
approach will enable decision makers to review a
number of options which will provide the neces-
sary information for making responsible and
appropriate decisions. The preliminary step in the
decision-making process should be an assess-
ment of the feasibility of a resource recovery
program. This important step allows a community
to avoid the economic and environmental conse-
quences of committing to costly or inappropri-
ate alternatives to current waste management
methods.
After assessing the feasibility of undertaking a
resource recovery program, the next phase is to
distinguish between "true waste" and "recover-
able" materials.
"True waste" refers to materials that have served
their original purpose and from which all bypro-
ducts and recyclables have been extracted so that
wastes are no longer of any use to us and cannot
be eliminated or recovered. True wastes must ul-
timately be landfilled or incinerated to reduce
their volume prior to landfilling.
"Recoverable" materials are those items for which
there remains some ecomomic value. Recoverable
items can be reused, repaired, recycled, com-
posted, or converted to energy by incineration.
-------
WASTE AS A RESOURCE FOR THE FUTURE
An important phase in developing a resource
recovery strategy is to identify waste generation
sources. To determine what the ultimate dispos-
tion of a waste will be, communities must under-
stand the process from which the waste is gener-
ated. This information will prove essential in
characterizing the waste stream and the waste
stream's components and quantities. The types
and quantities of municipal solid waste generated
will direct decision makers to an effective recovery
alternative.
Characterizing the waste stream will provide valu-
able information in terms of resource recovery
options that will best serve a community's needs,
as well as to identify those components of the
stream that are recoverable, i.e., can be recycled,
reused, repaired, composted, or incinerated for
energy recovery.
The analysis described in this handbook should
be used to identify the composition of the present
waste stream and may be useful in forecasting
future waste generation rates and types. The meth-
odologies presented here are intended to serve as
guidance for local government officials as they
begin the process of determining the best waste
management methods for their communities.
Definitions
Compost Decomposed orsanic materials such as yard
waste and nonanimal food waste. Composting is controlled
biological decomposition of organic wastes under aerobic
conditions.
Incineration Burning materials at extreme temperatures
for the purpose of volume reduction and/or energy recovery.
Municipal Solid Waste Waste generated in residences
(homes and apartment buildings), commercial facilities
(stores, offices), and institutions (hospitals, schools). Gener-
ally classified as nonhazardous waste.
Organic Waste - Waste derived from chemical compounds
primarily composed of carbon in combination with other
elements. Examples of organic waste include paper, wood,
food wastes, and yard waste.
Recoverable Resources - Materials which have served their
original purpose but which can be recycled, reused, re-
paired, composted, or incinerated for energy recovery to
be used for additional or the same purposes as originally
intended.
Recycle - Reusing materials that still have useful physical or
chemical properties which, after having served their original
purpose, can replace raw materials.
Repair - Restoring discarded materials to a usable condition.
Reuse - Use of a product more than once.
Source Reduction - Reduction in waste generation at the
source due to design, manufacture, and reuse of materials so
as to minimize the quantity of waste produced.
Source Separation - Segregation of specific materials at the
point of generation for separate collection.
True Waste - Wastes that have served their original purpose
and from which all byproducts and recyclables have been
extracted.
Waste Stream - The total flow of municipal solid waste from
residences, businesses, and institutions, that must be re-
cycled, incinerated, or landfilled.
Waste to Energy-The process of converting waste to energy
through incineration of processed or raw refuse to produce
steam and generate energy.
-------
FOR THE FUTURE
Chapter IS - Methodologies for
Auditing Recoverable Resources
Establishing a resource recovery program within a
community or local jurisdiction requires a signifi-
cant amount of analysis of the nature and source of
materials thatenterthe waste stream. The first, and
perhaps the most important step in this process is
to characterize the waste stream generated by
the community.
There are a number of methodologies in use today
that help to accomplish this. Decision makers
need to find the most simple and effective of these
to determine the optimal waste management meth-
ods for their communities. The methodologies
proposed below are among the most widely used
and are recommended because they produce
reliable data and are easy to implement.
No single method will be applicable to all jurisdic-
tions. Differences in climate, culture, geography,
population density, etc., make it necessary for the
decision maker to adjust the methods presented
here to his or her own particular community. Each
research effort should be uniquely compatible
with the local environment.
All methodologies take one of two basic ap-
proaches to estimating the municipal solid waste
(MSW) stream. The output method involves sam-
pling, sorting, and weighing individual compo-
nents of a representative sample. This yields an
accurate view of the local waste stream and
includes components like yard and food wastes
that are difficult to measure using other methods.
Output Methodology for Estimating
Annual Weight of Recoverable Resource Types
Municipal Solid Waste
(MSW)
Weigh Samples of Recoverable Resource Types and Assign Percentages/Total MSW
Determine Annual Weight of Recoverable Resource Types
1 I III 4 I I I
T
Figure 1
-------
WASTE AS A RESOURCE FOR THE FUTURE
The second approach is based on input. This
approach uses a materials flow methodology that
measures the production and utilization of mate-
rials and products that will eventually be placed
into the waste stream.
The Output Approach
Weight-based Method
The most direct and frequently used method for
estimating the amounts of wastes that are poten-
tially valuable, is to manually sort a representative
sample of MSW as it arrives at the disposal site.
Based on measurements of several samples, the
mean composition of the MSW can be estimated
on an annual basis.
This approach is most commonly used because, in
its simplest form (as presented in Figure 1), the
methodology is relatively inexpensive to carry out
and yields a high degree of accuracy. Further re-
finements of the data can be made by subjecting
the findings to statistical analysis.(See Appendix C)
Equipment needed
1. Labeled containers for the storage and meas-
urement of waste component samples. Contain-
ers should be waterproof to protect the samples
from rain and also retain any water content that
naturally occurs in the waste.
2. A mechanical or electronic weigh scale with a
capacity of at least 200 kg, and a precision of at
least 0.1 kg.
3. Heavy-duty tarps, shovels, rakes, push brooms,
magnets, a sorting table, and a first aid kit will be
needed, as well as appropriate personel safety
equipment such as leather gloves, hardhats, safety
glasses, and boots.
Precautions
The MSW sample will contain sharp objects such as
glass, razor blades, hypodermic needles, etc.
Sampling personnel should be made aware of the
injuries these can cause, supplied with proper
protective clothing, and instructed in safe sorting
practices. Sampling personnel should be instructed
to stay clear of dumping operations and to sort
MSW by brushing through the sample in a spread-
ing motion instead of thrusting their hands into the
sample piles.
Procedures
1. Separate the sample.
O Choose a clean, flat, level area for the sorting
and weighing operation.
O Position and level the scale, then calibrate it.
D Weigh all empty storage containers and mark
them with their weights.
O Choose a rubbish truck that is representative
of the average size vehicle that is expected to
dump wastes over the period of investigation.
Have its contents dumped onto the prepared
surface.
O Separate the rubbish into the following five
waste resource categories:
Waste Recovery Hierarchy
Waste
Resource
Category
Reuse/Repair
Recycle
Compost
Incinerate for
Enersy Recovery
True Wastes
Examples of
Material Classes
Used household appliances,
building materials,
used oil, bottles
Paper, glassware, metal
yard and non-animal food wastes
Wastes not recoverable by
other means, organic wastes
MSW with no further
resource value including
energy resource value
Figure 2
O Within each waste resource category, separate
the sample into material class group: paper, plas-
tic, glass, metal, etc. (See Form 1)
O Each material class group must then be further
separated into recoverable resource types ac-
cording to their value. Paper can be separated by
recoverable resource types, (glossy, brown, office
stock,newspaper,corregated board,etc.). Bottles
also have differing uses and values depending on
-------
A S A RE SOU R C E F O R THE F U T U RE
their original characteristics. Brown, green and
clear glass all have unique resource values and
need to be separated.
O Sorting should continue until particle sizes of 1.0
centimeter or smaller are left. Wherever possible,
the remaining sample should also be sorted. If
wastes cannot be separated into categories they
should be placed in the "true waste" category.
2. Weigh the samples.
O Once the waste samples have been separated,
each recoverable resource sample must be
weighed. Form 1 should be used to aid in this
data gathering and computation task. The net
weight of the sample (column C) is determined
by subtracting the weight of the container in
column B from the total sample weight measured
(column A).
D The total weight of all waste samples is deter-
mined by adding all of the individual sample weights
in column C. This should be entered in Box E of
Form 1.
O Divide each entry in column C by the total in
Box E. This will yield a percentage value for each
recoverable resource type and should be entered
into column D on Form 1 and column A on Form 2,
3. Determine the amount of annual Municipal Solid
Waste.
O The most accurate way to do this, is to sample
every truck that enters the disposal site; but of
course, this would be unreasonable. Therefore,
the total MSW amount must be estimated.
The estimation technique should take into ac-
count variations in:
• Types of collection vehicles
8 Capacity of collection vehicles
» Average utilization of truck capacity
• Frequency of dumping
Output methodologies have one weakness in
common. They all rely on estimates of annual MSW
amounts based on a few discrete samples. As a
result, a reliable knowledge of the community's
Calculation of Annual Weight
Of Municipal Solid Waste
Total Net Weight for 1 week collection period:
Spring - kg.
Summer _ kg.
Fall _ kg.
Winter
Total Sum
Averase net weisht per week
(Total - 4)
kg.
kg.
x 52 weeks/yr.
MSW Total Annual Weight
Figure 3
waste generating and collection practices is
essential. This type of information should be as-
sessed through careful determination of:
• Frequency of waste collection
• Average size of waste load
• Seasonal fluctuation of waste types
• Number of waste haulers or individuals
using the facilities
• Differences between MSW and industrial
(hazardous and nonhazardous)waste at
the site
The best way to estimate the annual weight of
municipal solid waste is to average several week-
long net weights taken over the course of one
year. This can be a basis for calculation of Total
Annual MSW (Figure 3).
This test should be repeated several times in order
to improve the accuracy and statistical significance
of the initial test results. Preferably, this should be
done overthe course of a twelve-month period to
-------
WASTE AS A RESOURCE FOR THE FUTURE
FORM1
Waste Composition Survey Form
Waste Resource
Category
Reuse/
Repair
Recycle
Compost
Incinerate
with energy
recovery
True Waste
Total
Material
Class
Bottles/
Containers
Construction
Materials
Household
Appliances
Paper
Plastic
Glass
Metals
Yard Waste
Non-animal
Food Waste
Waste not
recoverable by
other means
Organic Waste
Recoverable Resource Sample
Type
Office Paper
Newspaper
Corrugated
Cardboard
Clear
Brown
Green
Aluminum Cans
Ferrous
Non-Ferrous
Total
A Weight
Container
B Weight
Net
C Weight
E
Percent
D of Total
100%
-------
WASTE A S A RESOURCE FOR THE FUTURE
FORM 2
^•^:fte$$tir£&;RecWfery Revenue Calculation Form
Waste Resource
Category
Reuse/
Repair
Recycle
Compost
Incinerate
with Energy
Recovery
True Waste
Total
Material
Class
Bottles/
Containers
Construction
Materials
Household
Appliances
Paper
Plastic
Glass
Metals
Yard Waste
Non-animal
Food Waste
Waste not
recoverable by
other means
Organic Waste
Recoverable Resource
Type
Office Paper
Newspaper
Corrugated
Cardboard
Clear
Brown
Green
Aluminum Cans
Ferrous
Non-Ferrous
Percent of
A Total
100%
Annual
B Weight
E
Average
C Price/ Kg.
Annual
D Revenues
F
-------
WASTE AS A RESOURCE FOR THE FUTURE
MSW
COMPOITION
correct for discrete events and seasonal variation
in product usage and their associated wastes. This
will ensure that the above factors of variability are
taken into account and that the estimation of
annual MSW will be achieved in the simplest and
most cost-effective manner.
After the test data has been expanded into esti-
mates of annualized amounts, the decision maker
will have a basic idea of the amounts and types of
discards that can be converted into valuable re-
sources.
4. Estimate annual weight of recoverable
resource types.
O The annual amounts of available and recover-
able resources can be determined by multiplying
the percentage composition factors in column A
of Form 2 by the total weight of annual municipal
waste(Figure 3). Enter the results in column B of
Form 2.
Knowing the total amount of each recoverable
material will help local decision makers begin to
target those resource recovery programs that offer
the most achievable and attractive returns to the
community. Of course, the estimates provided
by this or any other procedure will not remain
static. Sociological forces continually change the
makeup of the MSW stream. Some estimate of
growth patterns for the recoverable resource types
must be taken into account when considering
long-term goals and investments.
The output model is a relatively accurate and
fairly straightforward methodology under av-
erage conditions. However, conditions are not
always "average" and statistical significance is an
important requirement for what will ultimately be
the basis forthe planning and design of solid waste
facilities and of resource recovery programs.
The reliability of the output methodology de-
pends on the accurate measurementof the sample
collection amounts and frequencies. No assur-
ance of complete accuracy can be made when test
data depends upon a limited number of samples.
The data could be misleading if, for example,
certain atypical circumstances occurred on the
test date. An example of this might be the delivery
of some unusual wastes during the sampling pe-
riod or the occurrence of errors in the sampling
methodology. Errors caused by such events
would be greatly magnified if that data were used
to estimate the total MSW for the year. It is neces-
sary to take as many samples as are allowed by
the budgetary constraints of the initial study.
-------
A S A R E SOURCE F.6 R T H E F U T U R E
Volume-based Method
Solid waste and recoverable resources are usually
characterized on the basis of their weishts be-
cause that is also the measure used when it is
bousht and sold in the waste industry.
Measurement of MSW by volume is also of impor-
tance because many studies are underway to
measure reduction in waste volume, as well as
weight, due to waste minimization practices. One
of the major reasons for the difficulties we are
faced with today is the accelerating decrease in
available landfill space. Measurements of recover-
able resources on a volume basis are therefore
beneficial if landfill space is an issue of importance
for a particular community.
Volume estimates of MSW and the recoverable
resources contained within it are much more diffi-
cult to conduct than weight estimates. A kilogram
of paper weighs the same whether it is neatly baled
or crumpled into irregular shapes; but the two
storage methods represents vast volume differ-
ences. While paper generally occupies the same
proportion by volume as by weight, plastics oc-
cupy more than twice the volume as their weight.
Using a volume-based methodology in the estima-
tion of recoverable resources in a waste stream is
difficult because of the inevitability of uneven
compaction among the wastes. Averages are diffi-
cult to obtain, therefore the calculation of annual
amounts would be based on suspect data.
As a result, no specific methodology is presented
in this handbook for volume-based MSW charac-
terization. This type of methodology may be the
subject of subsequent handbooks to be issued by
the International Secretariate for Local Environme-
nal Initiatives (ISLEI).
The Input Approach
The second general approach to characterizing
the waste stream is the input or "materials flow"
approach. This methodology traces the flow of
materials from production, through consumption,
to disposal. By determining potential wastes at
their origins, this approach estimates all municipal
solid wastes before they are discarded.
U
-------
WASTE AS A RESOURCE FOR THE FUTURE
Historical production and consumption rates are
translated into waste generation estimates using
the flowchart in Figure 4. The flowchart takes into
account the lifetimes of materials and products,
recycling rates, and the effects of imports and
exports. This approach requires significant under-
standing of:
production of products
consumption of those products
community demographics
domestic & foreign trade data
percentage of wastes from each type of
product that may fall into the MSW stream
This approach has the advantage of being able
to estimate discards in situations where there is
either no centralized collection system or where
the system in place is only partially utilized. This is
often the case in rural communities where many
people use informal sites for their disposal needs.
A disadvantage of this approach is that it is a large
technical undertaking and requires a considerable
resource allocation. It is also difficult to ensure
that all applicable waste categories have been
considered.
Even though both labor and data intensive, the
input method serves as a good check on the
results of the output method. No additional infor-
mation regarding the input method is provided in
this handbook. Documents providing a detailed
discussion of this methodology are listed in
Appendix B, "Suggested Additional Reading."
Materials Ftow Methodology for
Estimating Generation of Products and
Materials in Municipal Solid Waste
Domestic Production
of
Materials Products
Imports of
Materials/Products
Conversion/
Fabrication
Exports of
Materials/Products
Division of
Materials/Products
Municipal Solid
Waste Generation
Source: Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste
In the United States: 1990 Update, EPA.
Figure 4
-------
W AS * E A S A R E S O U R C E F O R T H E F U T U R E
Chapter ill - Economics of
Resource Recovery
Assessment of Benefits
There are many considerations when evaluating a
recycling program and usually, economic consid-
erations are foremost. Besides these, there are a
multitude of qualitative aspects that, more often
than not, are the factors that eventually make or
break a recycling program. In this chapter, we will
look at some of these benefits, both monetary and
non-monetary, and then discuss guidelines for de-
termining the costs of creating and operating a
resource recovery program.
A general measurement of the value of a program
is the Net Economic Impact (NEI). The NEI is the
best measure of the viability of a resource recovery
program and is made up of a balance of revenues
and costs.
+ Revenues from recoverable resources
+ Avoided cost of MSW collection
+ Avoided cost of MSW disposal
Cost of collection of recoverables
Cost of sortins recoverable resources
Revenues From Recoverable Resources
Gross revenues of resources recovered from the
waste stream can be simply estimated.
1. Determine unit prices of sorted recoverable
resource types. Contact local buyers of the re-
sources and request information on current prices
which are based on the weights estimated in Chap-
ter II. Enter these unit prices onto column C of
Form 2.
2. Calculate annual revenues from each resource
type (column D) by multiplying recoverable re-
source annual weight (column B) by the average
price per kilogram found in column C.
Avoided Cost of MSWCollection/Disposal
When recoverable resources are removed from a
community's waste stream by a recycling program,
there is less MSW to collect and dispose. When this
occurs, the community's MSW collection can be
restructured to realize cost savings from the avoided
MSW collection and disposal.
If not already known, the cost per tonne for
collection and disposal of MSW withouta resource
recovery program can be estimated through an
audit process carried out by using Form 3.
Costs of Resource Recovery
Recycling programs based on voluntary source
separation and delivery to collection sites usually
earn a small profit. The costs of collection and
sorting are minimal and are offset by the sale of the
recovered resources. Such voluntary source sepa-
ration programs have been small in scope, too
small to make much of a difference in the growing
volume of MSW in the community.
Research has shown that if the entire MSW stream
is subjected to centralized sorting, a significant
portion of resources will be recovered. However,
the total costs for collecting and sorting in such an
operation usually exceed the revenues from the
recovered materials. This will probably always be
the case and as a result, we must accept that there
-------
WASTE AS A RESOURCE FOR THE FUTURE
FORM 3
ANNUAL SOLID WASTE COSTS WITHOUT RECYCLING
1. ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS
Estimate hours spent on program by anyone (mayor, administrator,
Public Works Director, clerical), multiply by salary plus benefits rate
on an hourly basis for the hours spent on the program. Add the
salary and benefits of anyone working exclusively on program.
II. LABOR COSTS
Collection and Delivery
A. Driver (wage/hr. x hrs./year)
B. Helpers (wage/hr. x hrs./year x number of helpers)
C. Benefits (yearly wage of driver +
helpers x appropriate percent)
TOTAL LABOR COST (A + B + C)
III. EQUIPMENT CAPITAL COST
Vehicle purchase price (if new)
A. Capital cost spread over 5 yrs.
B. Annual finance charges (if applicable)
C. Additional vehicle(s)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT CAPITAL COST (A + B + C)
IV. EQUIPMENT OPERATING COSTS
A. Fuel (collection)
(Days/year x km./day x price/liter
divided by km./liter)
B. Fuel (delivery to landfill)
(km. roundtrip to landfill x number of trips to
landfill/collection day x number of
collection days/year x price/liter
divided by km./liter)
C. Maintenance, tires, repairs
(include percent of mechanic's wages
and benefits for work on vehicle)
D. Insurance, licenses, etc.
TOTAL EQUIPMENT OPERATING COSTS
(A + B + C + D)
V. DISPOSAL COSTS
Landfill tipping fees
VI. ANNUAL PROGRAM COST SUMMARY
Administrative cost
Total labor cost
Total equipment capital cost
Total equipment operating cost
Landfill tipping fees
TOTAL SOLID WASTE COSTS (I + II + III + IV + V)
Source: Office of Recycling, Hew Jersey Dept. of Environmental Protection, Steps in Organizing a Municipal Recycling Program, 1988
-------
W AS •% E A S A RE SO U R C E F O R T H E F U I U R E
will be a net cost for the level of MSW resource
recovery that is viewed as desirable.
This net cost may not be great if, as shown above,
cost savings outside of the recycling operation are
taken into account. Reduced costs for conven-
tional collection, landfilling, and incineration all
provide economic gains that should be consid-
ered. The NEI takes these cost savings into account
as revenues. The two cost categories in the NEI
equation are the cost of collection of recoverables
and the cost of sorting recoverable resources.
Just as each sampling methodology must be
applied to consider local conditions, so must the
estimation of the costs of resource recovery pro-
grams. A wide variety of environmental condi-
tions exist such as differences in land use, demo-
graphics, labor costs, proximity of industry, etc.,
that make every assessment unique. Forms Sand
4 are provided to help estimate the community-
specific factors affecting the cost of resource
recovery programs.
Cost of Collection of Recoverables
The cost of collection of recoverables is similar to
those associated with MSW collection. The cost
per tonne for collection of recoverables can also
be estimated through an audit process carried out
using Form 3.
Cost of Sorting Recoverable Resources
The cost for sorting and processing recoverable
resources is highly dependent on the process and
equipment used and the composition and condi-
tion of the waste stream. The design of a recover-
REGIONAL MULTI-MATERIAL RECYCLING PROGRAM
TO CURBSIDE
CONTAINER
GLASS & BOTTLES
PLASTICS
NEWSPAPERS &
MAGAZINES
COMPOST
DISCARDS
INTERMEDIATE
PROCESSING CENTER
ELECTRICAL
POWER/HEAT
ALUMINUM TIN & GLASS NEWS- PLASTICS
BALED STEEL 3 COLORS PAPER
CRUSHED
INCINERATOR WITH ENERQV RECOVERY
NEW NEW
ALUMINUM TIN &
STEEL
NEW NEW
PAPER PLASTIC
PRODUCTS
-------
WASTE AS A RESOURCE FOR THE FUTURE
WSSSf
able resource separation program involves bal-
ancing the costs of capital and labor to arrive at the
most efficient process possible.
More developed countries justify mechanized
sorting processes because of their large volumes of
waste and the high cost of labor. Most existing
multi-material resource recovery installations are
located in Europe and are operated by the Bezner
process. This process uses mechanical equipment
to separate glass containers, steel and aluminum
cans, and plastics into discrete streams.
Where manual labor is comparatively inexpensive,
hand sorting can be a viable option. On an 8-hour
average, a hand sorter can separate 30 to 60 con-
tainers per minute. This method is most efficient
when a dry mixture of recyclables (without food
and yard wastes) is collected at the curbside and
processed at the facility.
If the capacity and types of labor and capital
equipment needed for the application are known,
an estimate for such an operation can be made by
using Form 4.
MSW sorting is one of the major cost factors
involved in resource recovery operations. This
cost can be minimized through the cooperation of
the local population when they presort discards
for pickup outside their homes. Experience in the
U.S. and Japan has shown that the most cost
effective alternative is a combination of source
separation and mechanized sorting. This is the cur-
rent objective of communities around the world
who are trying to integrate recycling into the social
behavior of their citizens.
Non-Monetary Returns
Any analysis of the economics of recycling must
consider more than the expected direct revenues
and costs of a resource recovery program. If the
analysis was limited to the comparison of costs to
expected revenues (where costs usually outstrip
revenues) there would be few recycling projects in
operation today.
Attention should also be paid to the less obvious
indirectandnon-monetarycostsandbenefits. The
collection and disposal costs that are avoided by
lower volumes of MSW and the benefits to the
environment all result from the diversion of MSW
to recycling. These are often important factors in
assessing the desirability of an investment in a
recycling program. Issues that affect the decision-
making process can be as indirectand qualitative
as the benefit seen from the reduced need to
exploit natural resources or the potential costs
of air pollution and ground water contamination.
In many cases, governments have seen fit to subsi-
dize resource recovery operations. These subsi-
dies have made recycled raw materials much more
cost competitive than virgin materials and have
fueled greater demand for them. The subsidies
benefit all parties in different ways. The manufac-
turer can profitably develop new products made
with recycled materials and the government helps
to develop a new industry while protecting its
natural resources.
Thus, non-monetary returns or benefits can be
major factors in a recycling cost/benefit analysis
and should be fully considered in the solid waste
management decision-making process.
-------
R E S O U R C E F O R T H E F U T U R E
FORM 4
ANN UAL SO LID WASTE COSTS WITH RECYCLING
I. ANNUAL SOLID WASTE COSTS WITHOUT RECYCLING
(See Form 3)
II. ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS
A. Estimate hours spent on program by anyone (mayor,
administrator, Public Works Director, clerical) who is normally
employed in non-recycling activity, multiply by salary plus benefits
rate on an hourly basis for the hours spent on the program and add
the salary and benefits of others working exclusively on program.
B. Promotional Costs
Estimate costs of advertising, public
education
TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS (A + B)
III. LABOR COSTS
A. Collection and delivery to market/processing facility
Driver (wage/hr. x hrs./year)
Helpers (wage/hr. x hrs./year x number of helpers)
Benefits (yearly wage of driver +
helpers x appropriate percent)
B. Processing
Laborer (wage/hr. x hrs./year x
number of laborers)
Benefits (yearly wage of driver +
helpers x appropriate percent)
TOTAL LABOR COST (A + B)
IV. EQUIPMENT CAPITAL COST
(If not used exclusively for recycling activities, estimate
the percent of the time used for recycling. Multiply cost
by this percent to obtain the portion of the cost assigned
to the recycling program.)
A. Vehicle purchase price (if new)
Capital cost spread over 5 yrs.
Finance charges (if applicable)
Additional vehicle(s)
B. Cost of additional equipment
Processing equipment, storage bins, ect.
TOTAL EQUIPMENT CAPITAL COST (A + B)
Source: Office of Recycling, New Jersey Dept of Environmental Protection, Steps in Onan/zlni a Municipal Recycling Program. 1988
-------
WASTE AS A RE SO URGE FORT H E F U T U R E
FORM 4 cont'd
ANNUAL SOLID V/ASTE COSTS WITH RECYCLING
V. EQUIPMENT OPERATING COSTS
A. Fuel (collection)
(Days/year x km./day x price/liter
divided by km./liter)
B. Fuel (delivery to market)
(km. roundtrip to market x number of trips to
landfill/collection day x number of
collection days/year x price/liter
divided by km./liter)
C. Maintenance, tires, repairs
(include percent of mechanic's wases
and benefits for work on vehicle)
D. Insurance, licenses, etc.
TOTAL EQUIPMENT OPERATING COSTS
(A + B + C + D)
VI. PROGRAM COST SUMMARY
Administrative cost
Total labor cost
Total equipment capital cost
Total equipment operating cost
Landfill tipping fees
TOTAL SOLID WASTE COSTS (I + II + III + IV + V)
VII. REVENUES
A. Government subsidies or private sector grants
B. Disposal savings (if applicable)
C. Revenue from sale of material
TOTAL REVENUE (A + B + C)
VIII. ACTUAL PROGRAM COST (VI minus VII)
-------
F 6 R T HE F U T U R E
Chapter IV - Agenda for the Future
The information provided in this handbook can be
used to assess the viability of a resource recovery
program in any community. It is important that we
understand that resource recovery programs will
provide insurance against man's indiscriminate
abuse of the environment and our natural re-
sources. Only then will this planet remain intact for
future generations. Protecting sustainable re-
sources should be our first concern; however,
there are economic benefits associated with im-
plementation of a program of this nature. In the
long run, it is more cost effective to reuse or
recycle than it is to produce from virgin materials.
The information presented here is meant to evoke
thought and initiate the program development
process. How does a community move forward
with a resource recovery program? An excellent
next step is to gather further information which
directly relates to an individual community. This
exercise will provide information necessary to de-
termine if a resource recovery program makes
sense and is economically feasible. More informa-
tion about community resources and assistance
programs may be available from both national
and other local government officials.
Another avenue to explore is surveying local busi-
nesses to determine the ir willingness to participate
in a program that either encourages waste reduc-
tion at the generator level or attempts to recover
materials. Public attitudes and perceptions also
must be considered. To successfully implement a
recoverable resources program, the public must
be educated as to the reasons why the program is
important and why its success rests on their vol-
untary action.
After adequate data has been gathered to make
informed and responsible decisions, a community
can begin planning a program suited to its needs
based on type and quantity of waste generated.
As we move into the twenty-first century, we must
all work together to promote conservation of
our natural resources. This handbook should be
treated as an introductory document. There are
a number of additional available resources which
go beyond the concepts presented here. Commu-
nities interested in resource recovery should seek
them out.
In addition to identifying other resources, citizens
must make an effort to reduce the volume of
waste generated and develop personal habits and
attitudes that foster source reduction and conser-
vation of natural resources. Government and pri-
vate industry must work together to develop new
technologies and processes that reduce waste
generation. They must also promote the use of
materials and packaging that are more readily
recyclable.
A successful resource recovery program requires
both public and private participation. If we all
make the effort to look at our waste management
practices and identify areas where resources can
be recovered, we will make real progress toward
protecting and preserving our valuable natural re-
sources.
-------
WASTE AS A RESOURCE FOR THE FUTURE
Appendix A
Glossary
Biodesradable - A breakdown of materials by
microorganisms into simple, stable compounds
such as carbon dioxide and water. Most organic
wastes—food, paper—are biodegradable.
Bulky Waste Large items—furniture, auto parts,
construction debris, trees, etc., —which cannot
be handled by standard municipal solid waste
handling procedures.
Buy Back Program - A program where individuals
receive payment for recyclables.
Characterization The composition of a waste
stream as represented by a breakdown of munici-
pal solid waste into specific components (eg.,
glass, plastic, paper).
Co-composting - Composting of two or more di-
verse waste streams.
Combustible Materials which are capable of re-
acting with oxygen to produce heat and a visible
flame.
Commercial Waste - Waste materials originating in
commercial establishments such as offices, stores,
and theaters.
Commingled Materials - The mixing of a variety of
recyclable materials in one container.
Compost - Decomposed organic materials such as
yard waste and nonanimal food waste. Composting
is controlled biological decomposition of organic
wastes under aerobic conditions.
Cullet - Clean, color-sorted crushed glass recycled
to make new glass products.
Energy Recovery-The process of converting waste
to energy through incineration of processed or
raw refuse to produce steam.
Ferrous Metals - Materials derived from or pertain-
ing to iron which can be separated from a waste
stream using magnets.
Food Waste - Municipal solid waste derived from
processing either animal or vegetable foods.
Garbage Spoiled or waste food that is thrown
away, generally defined as wet food waste.
Green Waste A combination of nonanimal food
and yard waste collected and composted to-
gether.
HDPE High density polyethylene, a plastic resin
used to make plastic milk and soda containers.
Humus - Organic materials resulting from decay of
plant or animal matter.
Incineration Burning materials at extreme tem-
peratures for the purpose of volume reduction
and/or energy recovery.
Institutional Waste Waste materials which origi-
nate atschools, hospitals, prisons, research institu-
tions, and other public buildings.
Landfill A site for the controlled burial of solid
waste according to applicable governmental rules
and regulations.
Magnetic Separation - A method using large mag-
nets to remove ferrous metals from a waste stream.
Municipal Solid Waste Wastes generated in resi-
dences (homes and apartment buildings), com-
mercial facilities (stores, offices), and institutions
(hospitals, schools). Generally classified as non-
hazardous waste.
Organic Waste Waste derived from chemical
compounds primarily composed of carbon in
combination with other elements. Examples of
organic wastes include paper, wood, food wastes,
and yard waste.
Photodegradable Wastes which decompose if
left exposed to ultraviolet rays.
-------
^ S ^ ft E S
-------
WASTE AS A RESOURCE FOR THE FUTURE
Appendix B
Suggested Additional Reading
Chertow, Marian, Garbage Solutions: A Public Official's Guide to Recycling and Alter-
native Solid Waste Management Technologies, 1989, National Resource
Recovery Association, The United States Conference of Mayors, 1620 Eye Street, N.W.,
Washinston, D.C. 20006. Tel: (202)293-7330.
Department of Environmental Resources Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Estimating
Composition and Quantities of Solid Waste Generation, Gershman, Brickner and Brat-
ton, Inc.
Engineering/Environmental/Management Consultants, Estimates of the Volume of MSW
and Selected Components in Trash Cans and Landfills, February, 1990.
Industry and Environment Quarterly Journal of UNEP.
Institute for Local Self-Reliance, Garbage in Europe: Technologies, Economics, and
Trends, May 1988.
Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Solid Waste Stream Assessment Guidebook,
June 1986.
Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development, Household Waste;
Separate Collecting and Recycling, July 1983, ISBN 9264123873.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Decision-Makers Guide to Solid Waste
Management, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, EPA/530-SW-89-072,
November 1989.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, A Solid Waste Estimation Procedure: Material
Flows Approach, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, EPA/530/SW-47,
May 1975.
U.S. Office of Technology Assessment, Facing America's Trash: What Next for
Municipal Solid Waste. OTA-0-424, U.S. Government Printing Office, October 1989.
Virginia Department of Waste Management, Comprehensive Municipal Recycling: A
Collection Program Planning Guide. April 1990.
Westchester County Association Incorporated, Business Recycling Manual, Inform Inc.,
and Recourse Systems, Inc., 1989.
World Bank Technical Paper Number 36, Integrated Resource Recovery-Aquaculture: A
Component of Low Cost Sanitation Technology.
World Bank Technical Paper Number 37, Municipal Waste Processing in Europe:
A Status Report on Selected Materials and Energy Recovery Projects.
-------
WA S T E
R E SO U R C E F O R T H E F U f U R E
Appendix C
Analyzing Survey Resuits
C.I General
In this appendix, a basic statistical approach is presented which will help the interested
reader to further refine the data collected during the field sampling test. Procedures are
presented with example calculation that demonstrate how to treat daily and weekly data
in order to arrive at a statistically significant value for the weight of MSW collected over a
year long period.
The mean (x) and standard deviation (s) of the density or weight measurements are com-
puted, for each day and for each full week of data using the following formulae:
X, = mean =
s, = estimated standard
deviation =
s = 1 week standard deviation =
Where:
Z= the sum of...
x. = sinsle measurement on day i
x = mean of measurements on day i
xt = 1 week mean
s. = estimated standard deviation of
measurement on day 1
st = estimated standard deviation of
all measurements during
week
n. = sample size on day i
i = number of sampling days in week
n = sample size
Confidence intervals are then computed as follows: x" ± 1.645 s
(n)1*
where s, x and n can represent daily or weekly figures. The mean and confidence levels are then
multiplied by the population consisting of total truck count for a load-weight estimate or total truck
volume for a load density estimate. The resulting confidence interval should approximate the pre-
scribed precision level.
Source: Solid Waste Stream Assessment Guidebook, Mlch/san Dept of Natural Resources, June 1986
-------
WASTE AS A RESOURCE FOR THE FUTURE
C.2. Example
Exhibits B-1 and B-2 contain a summary of quantity and composition data obtained from an example
waste stream assessment. The associated mean and standard deviation are calculated as follows:
Daily Calculations:
Quantity -
I xm = sum of column E (Exhibit B-1)
m = 79.25 tonnes
n = total number of trucks weighed
= 10
x = 79.25 = 7.93 tonnes
Xx2 = square each weight in column E and sum the squares
= 641.45
s =
641.45-(79.25)"
"lO"
10- 1
1/2
= 1.22
Thus, a 90% chance exists that the actual value of the mean payload for Monday lies within the range of
x±1.645_s_ where 1.645 (1.22) = 0.64 tonnes or 7.29 tonnes < x< 8.57 tonnes
(n)1* Tl6~
Similar calculations are performed for the remaining days of the weight survey:
Weekly calculations;
Weekly calculations are performed as follows:
(10x7.93) + (10x9.05) + (9x8.23) + (6x7.12) + (12x10.00) + (7x7.53)
= 460.84 tonnes
In, = 54
xt = 8.53 tonnes
Hn,-Ds," =
79.43
-i) = (10-1)+ (10-1)+ (9-1)+ (6-1)+ (12-1)+ (7-1)
49
S, = 1.62 tons
Thus, a 90% chance exists that the mean payload for the week lies within the range of 6.91 tons to
10.15 tons.
-------
WAS IE AS 1 A R E S O U R C E FOR THE F U T U R E
EXHIBIT C-1
A
Day
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
ANNOTATED
B
No. of
Trucks
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
x t= 10
*w=9
Xm-6
x f=12
xs = 7
SUMMARY OF
C
Nominal
Capacity
(m3)
30
25
20
45
30
30
35
40
30
25
QUANTITY SURVEY RESULTS
D
Payload
(kg.)
15,000
14,500
10,000
18,400
1 6,200
16,800
17,700
17,900
16,900
15,100
E
Weight
(tonnes)
7.50
7.25
5.00
9.20
8.10
8.40
8.85
8.95
8.45
7.55
Lxm = 79.25
x t = 90.50
st= 1.01
xw = 82.30
S =1.47
W
x ^ = 71.20
5,,= 1.12
x (= 100.30
Sf= 1.27
x s = 75.30
S =1.61
5
-------
WASTE AS A RESOURCE FOR THE FUTURE
A composition sampling procedure using 4 weeks of data •
If several weeks of data are collected, the mean for each week can be used to derive a weekly
value for the year. This, multiplied by 52, would be the annual weight of municipal solid waste.
Exhibit B-2 contains the data from four week-long sort samples and the related total
mean and standard deviation. Thus a 90% chance exists that the mean paper content
lies between 40.0 percent and 56.4 percent of the total waste weight.
EXHIBIT C-2
SUMMARY OF COMPOSITION SURVEY
Example:
Paper
Glass
Metal
Plastics
Textiles
Organics
Inorganics
Other
Total
Season
Spring Summer Fall Winter
51.7 40.2 40.2 60.8
100% 100% 100% 100%
Total Mean Standard Deviation
Xx5 (Zx)Vn s
192.9 48.23 9602 9303 9.98
-------
A S A R E S O U R C E FOR T H E F U T U R E
Notes:
------- |