FIRST REPORT TO CONGRESS
RESOURCE RECOVERY
_1
SOURCE REDUCTION
"W
*iit v
»J>jb
a^v
•» "~ *
-S4*i
^**««
-------
FIRST REPORT TO CONGRESS
RESOURCE RECOVERY
and
SOURCE REDUCTION
This is the third edition of the report (SW-118) prepared
by the OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS,
as required by Section 205 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended,
and was delivered February 22, 1973, to the President and the Congress.
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
1974
-------
FOREWORD
Section 205 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (Public Law 89-272) as
amended requires the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to under-
take an investigation and study of resource recovery. This document, which
represents EPA's Report to the President and the Congress, summarizes the
Agency's investigations to date and reports on the manner in which the congres-
sional mandate is being performed.
The findings of this report are based on a number of contractual efforts
and analyses by the Agency staff performed since the passage of the Resource
Recovery Act. Extremely valuable assistance in these investigations has been
provided by the Council on Environmental Quality.
The report is organized into a summary, four major sections, and two
appendixes. The first section discusses the problem to which resource recovery is
the potential solution. Next, key findings related to resource recovery are pre-
sented. A section outlining major options follows. The report concludes with a
discussion of EPA's program activities in resource recovery.
The appendix presents summaries of information about the status of
resource recovery, according to material categories and lists existing resource
recovery facilities.
Although there have been minor editorial revisions, this publication is
essentially the same as that delivered to the Congress. A number of typographi-
cal errors that appeared in the first printing have been corrected, the references
have been restyled, and the report has been typeset in a conventional style to
improve its readability.
-ARSEN J. DARNAY
Deputy Assistant Administrator
for Solid Waste Management
m
-------
CONTENTS
page
SUMMARY tx
1. THE PROBLEM 1
2. KEY FINDINGS 5
3. MAJOR OPTIONS 17
4. PROGRAM ACTIVITIES .21
APPENDIX
Recycling of Specific Wastes 29
Paper 29
Ferrous Metals 36
Nonferrous Metals 42
Glass 51
Plastics 52
Textiles . . ; 54
Resource Recovery Installations 57
REFERENCES 59
LIST OF FIGURES
1. Disposal Costs For Municipally-Owned
Resource Recovery Systems . 14
2. A Plan for Resource Recovery and
Source Reduction .22
3. Resource Recovery Policy Options 23
4. Source Reduction Policy Options 24
5. Resource Recovery and Source
Reduction Policy Options 25
A-l. Paper Trends 30
A-2. Importance of Wood Pulp
and Paper Stock in Paper 33
A-3. Domestic Raw Steel Production
and Scrap Consumption . . . 37
A-4. Domestic Home and Purchased
Scrap Consumption 38
A-5. Aluminum and Aluminum Scrap
Consumption .43
A-6. Copper and Copper Scrap
Consumption 44
-------
page
A-7. Lead and Lead Scrap Consumption '. ... . . . .45
A-8- Zinc and Zinc Scrap Consumption 46
A-9- Waste Textile Utilization Flows 56
LIST OF TABLES
1. Recycling of Major Materials 3
2. Gullet-Dependent Environmental
Impacts for 1,000 Tons of Glass Containers 6
3. Environmental Impact Comparison
Low Grade Paper 7
4. Environmental Impacts from Bleached
Virgin Kraft Pulp and Deinked
and Bleached Wastepaper 8
5. Environmental Impact Comparison
for Steel Product 9
6. Cost Comparison for Glass 10
7. Comparative Economics of Paper
Manufactured from Recycled and
Virgin Materials 10
8. Summary of Recycling System
Economics 13
9. Quantity and Value of Recoverable
Resources in Mixed Waste 15
10. Sensitivity of System Economics to
Market Value of Recovered Resources 16
A-l. Wastepaper Recovery by Grade
and Source 31
A-2. Additional Wastepaper Recovery
Potential 32
A-3. Technical Limits for Recycled
Material from Paper and Paperboard 34
A-4. Comparative Economics of Paper
Manufacture from Recycled and Virgin
Material 35
A-5. U.S. Iron and Steel Scrap
Consumption 36
A-6. Steel Product Suitability for
Inclusion of Low Grade Scrap 41
A-7. Nonferrous Metals Recovered from
Prompt and Obsolete Sources 42
A-8. Sources of Obsolete Aluminum Scrap 47
A-9- Markets for Prompt and Obsolete
Aluminum Scrap 48
A-10. Sources of Obsolete Copper Scrap 48
A-l 1. Markets for Prompt and Obsolete
Copper Scrap 49
A-12. Sources of Obsolete Lead Scrap 49
-------
page
A-l3. Markets for Prompt and Obsolete
Lead Scrap . 50
A-14. Sources of Obsolete Zinc Scrap 50
A-l5. Markets for Prompt and Obsolete
Zinc Scrap 50
A-16. Total and Selected Major End
Use Markets for Consumption ,
of Plastics 53
A-l7. Resource Recovery Installations:
Municipal Solid Waste Composting Plants 57
A-18. Resource Recovery Installations:
Incinerators with Major Heat
Recovery Operations 58
VII
-------
SUMMARY
This report explores resource recovery as a meth-
od of solid waste management and resource con-
servation. Information gathered over the past several
years is summarized, and the many issues raised by
the complex subject of resource recovery are
discussed.
The emphasis of the report is on the recovery
of materials and energy from mixed municipal wastes
and other "postconsumer" wastes that are discarded
and accumulate outside normal waste collection
channels. Although they represent only 5 percent of
the total national solid waste load, these wastes tend
to have the most frequent, immediate, and apparent
impact because they occur in the Nation's urban
areas. More than 50 percent of the total waste load
comes from agriculture and is usually returned to the
soil. More than 40 percent of the total burden is
mining waste, which occurs in the hinterland.
Nearly all major materials are recovered to
some extent by recycling. Most recovered materials
result from industrial fabrication wastes. Post-
consumer wastes, waste paper, old automobiles are
also recovered to some extent; postconsumer
recycling has grown in an absolute sense. However,
the proportion of the Nation's material requirements
satisfied by recycled materials has either remained
constant or has declined in most instances.
The level of recycling depends almost entirely
on economics. Recycling takes place to the extent
that it is the most efficient use of resources. More
secondary or recycled materials would be used if
economic subsidies for "natural" or "virgin" mate-
rials were not provided. The economics of recycling
are also influenced by apparently inequitable freight
rates-both ocean and rail-which make the transpor-
tation of secondary materials relatively more costly
than the movement of virgin resources.
Sufficient technology has been developed to
extract materials and energy from mixed municipal
wastes. However, few full-scale recovery plants exist.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is funding
demonstrations of the most significant conceptual
alternatives.
The costs of recovery plants are estimated to be
relatively high, making recovery by technological
means attractive only in areas where high disposal
costs prevail and local markets for waste materials
exist. There is evidence that recovery by separate
collection is not only feasible but economically
attractive provided that the collection utilizes an
existing transport system and markets for the
collected materials exist.
Preliminary research and analysis indicate that
compared with virgin material extraction and pro-
cessing, resource recovery results in less atmospheric
emissions, waterbourne wastes, mining and solid
wastes, and energy consumption. There is substantial
disagreement among experts about the extent of such
differential effects over time, particularly as stronger
environmental constraints on use of both virgin and
secondary materials begin to narrow the current
differentials.
Recycling should become more economical
relative to other solid waste disposal options during
the next several years. Energy costs are rising, making
energy recovery more attractive and more
' economical. As pressures to bring about
environmentally sound waste disposal increase, dis-
posal costs will rise, and recovery will become a more
attractive alternative. Finally, to the extent that air
and water pollution control regulations are streng-
thened, the industrial incentives for using secondary
materials will improve. . .
Other incentives for recycling exist under
present Federal policies. The General Services
Administration does not purchase paper unless it con-
tains a specified proportion of recycled paper. The
military services are explor-iiTglprocurerrient policies
-------
to reduce waste quantities or to require the inclusion
of secondary materials. The Treasury Department has
determined that tax-exempt industrial revenue bonds
may be used to finance the construction of recycling
facilities built by private co'ncerns to recycle their
own wastes.
Additional Federal incentives for recycling are
not considered desirable at this time. Studies to date
indicate that the effectiveness of specific incentive
mechanisms that can be formulated is extremely
difficult to predict. New tax incentives may well
distort the economics of resource utilization much as
preferential treatment of virgin materials distorts
them today.
There is an obvious need to explore further, the
complex issues of material utilization in the'United
States in the context of total resource utilization.
Resource recovery is an important part, but only one
part, of the larger picture. Before additional Federal
policies are developed-aimed possibly at overcoming
institutional and market imperfections in some
areas-a better understanding of the complex material
and energy situation must be gained.
-------
FIRST REPORT TO CONGRESS ON
RESOURCE RECOVERY and SOURCE REDUCTION
1. THE PROBLEM
U.S. MATERIAL-USE PATTERN
Resource recovery in its various aspects must be
seen as part of a much larger economic structure—the
total material- and energy-use patterns of the Nation.
The recovery of waste materials today supplies only a
very small part of the total material and' energy
requirements 'of the U.S. population. Moreover,
although both population and material consumption
are increasing, the use of materials from waste sources
is declining relative to overall consumption.
In 1971, the U.S. economy used an estimated
5.8 billion tons of materials for its total activity,
equivalent to 28 tons for each man, woman, and
child. Of this total, approximately 10 percent came
from agriculture, forestry, fishing, and animal hus-
bandry (food and forest products); 34 percent was
represented by fuels; 55 percent came from the
mineral industries in the form of construction mate-
rials, metals, and other minerals.1
Material use is growing at a rate of 4 to 5 per-
cent yearly. Per capita consumption was 22 tons in
1965, 24.7 tons in 1968, and 28 tons in 1971.' Dur-
ing the same period, population grew at an annual
rate of 1.3 percent.
A high rate of material and energy consumption
means a high rate of waste generation. Approximately
10 to 15 percent of the annual input to the economy
accumulates as materials in use (in structures, plants,
equipment, etc.). The rest of the tonnage is used
consumptively, with residues discharged to the land,
water, and air, or is used to replace obsolete products
and structures, which in turn become waste.2
Nearly all the materials and energy required in
the United States come from virgin or natural
resources. The tonnage of fabrication and obsolete
wastes recycled is approximately 55 to 60 million
tons, equivalent to. less than.. 1 percent of total
mineral tonnage required by the Nation.3
If we disregard food and energy substances, the
estimated 1971 demand for nonfood, nonenergy
materials was 3.6 billion tons; waste recovery satisfied
1.5 to 1.7 percent of this total requirement.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF
MATERIAL USE
All forms of material use have environmental
consequences. Material resources must be extracted,
purified, upgraded, processed, and fabricated into
products; in addition, transport is necessary between
most of these steps. Solid, waterborne, and airborne
wastes are generated at every point and either enter
the environment or are removed during processing at
some expense.
The production of -1,000 tons of steel, for
instance, results in 2,800 tons of mine wastes, 121
tons of air pollutants, and 970 tons of solid wastes.4
Similar waste flows are associated with every material
flow, although the magnitude varies, depending on
the particular material. The sheer growth in per capita
material consumption indicates that more pollution
and waste is generated per capita today than was
generated in the past.
As will be discussed, reports at this time indi-
cate that the amount of air pollution, water pollu-
tion, and solid waste that results from production
systems using recycled wastes is lower than the
effluents from production systems relying on virgin
-------
RESOURCE RECOVERY
resources. Thus, any decrease in resource recovery
relative to total consumption means an increase in the
quantity of residuals generated.
SOLID WASTE GENERATION
Ever-increasing per capita material consumption
necessarily means that more solid waste is generated.
This is illustrated graphically by trends in packaging
consumption, because packaging is a short-lived pro-
duct that becomes waste immediately after use. Per
capita packaging consumption (in pounds per capita)
has been.increasing steadily as shown below:5
1958
404
1960
425
1962
450
1964
475
1966
525
1970
577
The situation in packaging is merely an illustra-
tion of the general phenomenon that arises because
the material consumption rate grows faster than
population.
The total quantity of waste generated in 1971
is estimated to have been 4.45 billion tons, up nearly
1 billion tons from 1967. The makeup of this waste is
shown below:
Sources of waste
Municipal
Industrial
Mineral9'1'0
Animal11'12
11.12
Crop
Total
Volume of waste
(Millions of tons)
230
140
1)700
1,740
640
4,450
•Municipal wastes include residential, commercial,
demolition, street and alley sweepings, and miscellaneous
(e.g., sludge disposal).
The 230-million-ton municipal waste load plus
that portion of industrial waste occurring in large
metropolitan areas constitute what is normally
referred to as the "solid waste problem" in popular
discussion.
One reason for the growing solid waste burden
is that resource recovery has declined relative to total
material consumption. A second reason is the sub-
stitution of material-intensive practices (practices that
result in consumptiori'of large amounts of raw mate-
rials) for practices that are less material demanding,
e.g., one-way containers for returnable bottles, paper
towels for cloth towels, and disposable one,-time-use
products of all sorts in the home, the office, the
hospital, etc., for products designed for reuse.
The resulting solid waste load is especially
burdensome in urban areas because of greater popu-
lation concentrations and because disposal in urban
areas. is particularly difficult. The urban population,
for example, has grown from 64 percent of the total
• population in 1950 to 74 percent in 1970, thereby
increasing the quantity of solid waste in urban areas
by a substantial percentage. Additionally, urban
populations generate more waste than nonurban
residents-approximately 20 percent more per capi-
ta.
13
Disposal in urban areas is an especially difficult
problem because waste disposal in the city is, at the
same time, an environmental, an economic, and a
political problem. Waste collection is labor intensive;
labor costs are rising rapidly; and the productivity of
most municipal waste collection systems is low. In
many urban areas, land suitable for waste disposal has
disappeared or is rapidly being used up. Movement of
the waste across the boundaries of the political juris-
diction where it is generated is difficult and, some-
times, impossible. When cities are required to move
their wastes over greater distances to dispose of them
or, alternatively, are forced to process them to
achieve volume reduction, the costs of waste manage-
ment are increased. To eliminate potential air and
water pollution from landfills and incinerators,
waste-processing facilities must be properly designed,
located, and operated, and they must include proper
pollution control devices. This degree of control is
technologically feasible but often costly, particularly
in the case of incineration.
Given these circumstances, many cities are
increasingly viewing resource recovery as both an
environmentally and an economically desirable
alternative to disposal. Unfortunately, this option is
most often not available because demand for mate-
rials from wastes is nonexistent or severely limited.
THE RECOVERY RATE
Nearly all major materials are recovered to
some extent by recycling.. The.recovery rate varies
-------
THE PROBLEM
from nearly 100 percent for solid lead (50 percent for
all lead),* 50 percent for copper, 31 percent for iron
and steel, and 19 percent for paper and board, to 4.7
percent for glass (Table 1). These percentages refer to
the proportion of total material consumption satis-
fied from both wastes recovered in fabrication steps
in industry and wastes recovered from obsolete
products like junk automobiles and old newspapers.
Consumption of major materials-iron and
steel, paper, nonferrous metals, glass; textiles, and
rubber-took place at a rate of 190 million tons in the
1967-68 period. During this period, the total
recycling tonnage of the same materials was 48
million tons, equivalent to 25 percent of consump-
tion of these materials.
Historical data in this aggregated form are not
available for all materials. For most materials- in
general, however, the portion of the total consump-
tion derived from waste sources.Has been declining.
Consumption of these waste materials has generally
not kept pace'with total consumption.
Paper waste consumption as a percent of total
fiber consumption has declined from" 23.1 percent in
1960 to 17.8 percent in 1969.14
Iron and steel scrap consumption as a percent
of total metallics consumption declined slightly over-
all fronr the 1959-63 to the 1964-68 period from
50.3 to 49.9 percent. Purchased scrap consumption,*
representing the recycling of fabrication and obsolete
wastes, has been losing gound: in the 1949-53 period
it was 44.9 percent of total scrap; in the 1964-68
period, 40.0 percent.15
*A substantial proportion of lead is used in gasoline as
an antiknock additive; this lead is dispersed and is unrecover-
able.
*ln the iron and steel industry, distinctions are made
between "home" scrap, a process waste in furnaces and mills;
"prompt" scrap, which occurs- m fabrication plants; and
"obsolete" scrap from discarded products or obsoleta
structures. "Purchased" scrap is the combination of the last
two categories.
TABLE 1 .
RECYCLING OF MAJOR MATERIALS IN 1967*
Material
Paper
Iron and steel
Aluminum
Copper
Lead
Zinc
Glass
Textiles
Rubber
Total
Total consumption
(million of tons)
53.110
105.900
4.009
2.913
1.261
1.592 .
12.820
5.672
3.943
191.220
Total recycled
(million of tons)
10.124
33.100
.733
1 .447
.625
.201
.600
.246
1,032
48.108
Recycling as percent
of consumption
19.0
31.2
18.3
49.7
49.6
12.6
4.7
• 4.3
26.2
25.2
'Source: Darnay, A., and W. E. Franklin. Salvage markets for materials in solid
wastes. Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972. p.xvii.
-------
RESOURCE RECOVERY
Rubber reclaiming is a declining activity both
absolutely and in relation to total rubber consump-
tion. In 1958, reclaim consumption was 19 percent of
total rubber consumption; in 1969,8.8 percent.16
The major nonferrous metals-aluminum,
copper, and lead-are reused at a composite rate of
about 35 percent of total consumption, and this
percentage has remained fairly constant over time.1 7
Historical data on other materials are not
readily available in aggregate form, but declining
recovery is generally the rule.
It is reasonable to assume that a secondary
material, one that has already been processed, should
be a more attractive raw material to industry than a
virgin material that must be extracted or harvested
and processed. The secondary material is already puri-
fied and concentrated. Scrap steel, for instance, is
nearly 100 percent steel, while the iron ore from
which it is made contains large proportions of silicate
materials, which must be removed.
The low recycling rate is the result of a number
of factors, among them the following:
(1) The delivery price of virgin raw materials to
the manufacturer is almost as low in many cases as
the cost of secondary materials, and virgin materials
are usually qualitatively superior to salvaged mate-
rials. Consequently, demand for secondary materials
is limited.
(2). Natural resources are abundant, and manu-
facturing industries have directed their operations
toward exploiting them. Plants are generally built
near the source of virgin materials (e.g., paper plants
near pulpwood supplies). Technology for utilizing
virgin materials has been perfected; because of
adverse economics similar technology 'to exploit
wastes has not been developed
(3) Natural resources occur in concentrated
form, whereas wastes occur in a dispersed manner.
Consequently, acquisition of wastes for recycling is
costly and is particularly sensitive to high transpor-
tation costs.
(4) Virgin materials, even in unprocessed form,
tend to be more homogeneous in composition than
waste materials, and sorting and upgrading mixed
wastes is costly.
(5) The advent of synthetic materials made
from hydrocarbons and their combination with
natural materials cause contamination of the latter,
thereby limiting their recovery. The synthetics them-
selves are virtually impossible to sort and recover
economically from mixed waste.
(6) There are artificial economic barriers that
favor the use of virgin materials over secondary mate-
rials. For example, depletion allowances, favorable
capital gains treatments, and apparently favorable
freight rates are available to processors of virgin mate-
rials but not to secondary material processors. Also,
producers presently do not have to internalize all the
costs of environmental pollution.
-------
2. KEY FINDINGS
The key findings of this report can be reduced
to four major points:
: (1) The use of recycled materials appears to
result in a reduction in atmospheric emissions, gene-
rated waste and energy consumption levels, when
compared with virgin material utilization.
(2) The recovery of materials from waste
depends largely on economics. The cost of manufac-
turing products from secondary materials is generally
as high or higher than that of manufacturing products
from virgin materials: consequently, only high-quality
and readily accessible waste materials can find a
market. Artificial economic advantages available to
users of virgin materials (e.g., depletion allowances,
capital gains treatments, and inability of the tradi-
tional market to internalize pollution and resource
depletion costs) appear to have been major contri-
butors to this economic situation.
•• • • (3) There has been .sufficient technology
developed to allow materials to be extracted from
mixed municipal wastes. However, the cost of extrac-
tion is high, making recovery processes attractive only
in areas where high disposal costs prevail and favor-
able local markets exist for the materials.
(4) Recovery of materials (as opposed to
energy) from' mixed municipal wastes, while concept-
ually the best alternative to disposal, cannot be
instituted on a.large scale without a substantial reduc-
tion in processing costs and/or Upgrading in quality
(which is simply unattainable given reasonable pro-
jection of technology) and/or a major reordering in
the relative prices of virgin and secondary materials,
so that secondary materials become economically
more attractive.
A more detailed discussion of each of these
findings follows:
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The environmental impacts of recycling are of
major importance. Studies conducted to date indicate
that resource recovery generally results in reduced
energy and material consumption and reduced effects
of air and water pollution.
Resource recovery has three major environ-
mental benefits: (1) recovery and reuse of a material
conserves the natural resources from which that mate-
rial is derived; (2) recycling of materials eliminates
disposal; thus, the negative environmental effects of
inadequately controlled solid waste disposal are
reduced; (3) substitution of waste materials for virgin
materials in the production system results in
decreased energy requirements and less air and water
effluents (based on studies of glass, paper, and ferrous
metals) and avoids other kinds of environmental
degradation, particularly in the extraction phase (e.g.,
strip mining). Data to substantiate these points are
presented next.
GJass '
Environmental impacts occur at every step of
glass manufacturing, from the mining of raw materials
to final waste disposal. Changes in the amount of
cullet (glass scrap) in the raw material batch 'are
responsible for significant changes in environmental
effects.
Comparing the environmental impact of glass
manufacturing using 15- and 60-percent cullet mixes,
it is clear that increased cullet usage results in reduced
quantities of residual discharge. Table 2 illustrates the
difference in impact for the two cullet mixes. A
60-percent cullet batch would result in over 50
-------
RESOURCE RECOVERY
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF GULLET-DEPENDENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
FOR 1,000 TONS OF GLASS CONTAINERS, BY IMPACT CATEGORY*
Environmental impact
Mining wastes
Atmospheric emissions
(all sources)
15%' •
Gullet
104 tons
13.9 tons
60%
Gullet
22 tons
13 tons
§10.9 tons
Change"*"
(%)
-79
-6.*
-22 §
Water consumption
(intake minus discharge)
Energy use
Virgin raw material
consumption
Net postconsumer
200,000 gal •
16,150 X 106 Btu
1,100 tons
1 ,000 tons
100,000 gal
16,750 X 106 Btu
15,175 X 106 Btu
500 tons
450 tons
-50
. 3*
-6§
-54
-5511
'Source: Midwest Research Institute. Economic studies in support of policy
formation on resource recovery. Unpublished report to the Council on Environ-
mental Quality, 1972.
^Negative number represents a decrease in that category resulting from in-
creased recycling.
^Calculated for the Black-Clawson wet recovery system for recovery of cullet
from municipal waste. .
§Calculated for the Bureau of Mines incinerator residue recovery system for
cullet recovery from municipal 'waste.
HBased primarily'on surveys conducted in 1967-1969.
percent less mining and postconsumer waste, 50
percent less water consumption, and up to 22 percent
less atmospheric emissions. The energy requirements
either increase by 3 percent or decrease by 6 percent,
depending on the recovery system used for obtaining
the cullet.
Paper
There are significant changes in environmental
impact when wastepaper is substituted for virgin
woodpulp in the production of paper products. Table
3 summarizes the environmental impacts resulting
from the manufacture of 1,000 tons of pulp from
recycled fiber rather than from virgin woodpulp. The
use of recycled fiber requires 61 percent less process
water and consumes 70 percent less energy.
Although deinking and bleaching may be
required to upgrade secondary fibers for high-quality
finished products, recycling still produces environ-
mental benefits in almost every category. Table 4,
which compares virgin pulp with recycled, deinked
pulp, indicates that 15 percent less water and 60
percent less energy are required and that 60 percent
less air pollutants are generated. However, waterborne
wastes increase significantly. The increase in solid
wastes generated in processing is more than offset by
the recovery of paper from municipal solid waste.
Ferrous Metals
There are also substantial differences in
environmental impact when recycled steel is utilized,
as opposed to steel produced from iron ore. A com-
parison of the impacts of producing 1,000 tons of
steel reinforcing bars from virgin ore and from scrap
indicates that 74 percent less energy and 41 percent
less water are used in the recycling case. In addition,
-------
KEY FINDINGS
TABLE 3
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT COMPARISON FOR 1,000 TONS OF LOW GRADE PAPER*
Environmental effect
Virgin material
use (oven-dry fiber)
Process water used
Energy consumption
Air pollution
effluents (trans-
portation, manufac-
turing, and har-
vest ing) t
Waterborne waste
discharged, BOD$
Waterborne wastes
discharged,
suspended solidst
Process solid
waste generated
Net postconsumer
waste generated
Unbleached
kraft pulp
(virgin)
Repulped
wastepaper
100%
1,000 tons
24 million
gal
17 X 109 Btu
42 tons.-,
10 million
gal
5X 109 Btu
11 tons
15 tons
8 tons
68 tons
850 tons §
9 tons
6 tons
42 tons
-250 tons 11
Change from
recycling (%) +
-100
-61
-70
-73
-44
-25
-39
-129
'Source: Midwest Research Institute. Economic studies in. support of policy
formation on resource recovery. Unpublished report to the Council on Environ-"
mental Quality, 1972. '
-(-Negative number represents a decrease in, that category resulting from recy-
cling.
^(Biological oxygen demand.) Based primarily on-surveys conducted in 1968-70.
§This assumes a 15 percent loss of fiber in papermaking and converting
operations.
HThis assumes that 1,100 tons of wastepaper are needed to produce 1,000
tons of pulp. Therefore, 850 - 1,100 = —250 represents the net reduction of post-
consumer waste.
air pollution effluents are reduced by 86 percent and
mining wastes, by 97 percent (Table 5).
The results presented in Tables 2 through 5
were-derived from surveys conducted from 1968 to
1970 and represent a situation of relatively uncon-
trolled pollution. As air and water pollution control
legislation and implementing regulations become
more effective, some of the costs of environmental
degradation' will. be internalized by industry. This
might result in improved environmental impacts of
virgin material utilization and might decrease the cost
advantage of virgin versus secondary materials. EPA is
performing further'analysis of this process, and the
attendant' costs and • results' will"' be presented in
subsequent reports to Congress. • ' :
The results presented indicate that in most
cases studied, the levels of atmospheric effluents,
waterborne wastes,' solid wastes, and energy and
water consumption are substantially lower for
resource recovery, as compared to virgin material
-------
RESOURCE RECOVERY
TABLE 4
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS RESULTING FROM THE MANUFACTURE O'F
1,000 TONS OF BLEACHED.VIRGIN KRAFT PULP AND EQUIVALENT .
MANUFACTURE FROM DEINKED AND BLEACHED WASTEPAPER*
Environmental effect
Virgin material
use (oven-dry fiber)
Process water used
Energy consumption
Air pollution effluents -• f ' ••
Virgin. fiber •
pulp
1,100 tons
•• '- 47 million
gal
23X109 Btu
49 tons •
Deinked
pulp
0
40 million
gal
9X 109 Btu
20 tons
• Change from
recycling (%) +
-100
-15
-60
-60
(transportation,
manufacturing, and
harvesting) $
Waterborne waste
discharged, BQDt
Waterborne wastes
discharged,
suspended solids .
Process solid waste
generated
Net postconsumer. •
waste disposal . ..
23 tons •:.
1 24 tons
112 tons
850 tons §
20 tons
77 tons
224 tons
-550 tons 11 •
.-•13..-;
222
100
-165 .
'Source: Midwest. Research Institute. Economic studies in support of policy
formation on resource recovery. Unpublished report to the Council on Environ-
mental Quality, 1972. > ' •• •-..!.' ••'•••'.
+Negative number represents a decrease in that category resulting from .
recycling. •
teased on surveys-conducted'in 1968-70.: •.''..' . .'
§This assumes a 15 percent-loss : of fiber in papermaking and converting .
operations.
HThis assumes that 1',400'-tons of wastepaper are needed to produce 1,000
. tpns'.of pulp. Therefore, 850 -_1,400;=.—550.represents the net reduction of post- ;•
consumer solid waste. ....
utilization. However, the'full environmental;.impact analysis .are needed to evaluate the overall-environ-'
of these results is difficult to assess completely-. mental-impact of the different mixes and locations of
Residuals and wastes produce different degrees of emissions due to increased levels of recycling.
environmental damage, depending both upon their • ; •" ••••" - •• •' ' ' • • '
composition and where they are released. Emissions - : ' ECONOMICS
in areas with high populations could affect .public • ' ••• • . • :•••• .-•
health :and welfare, whereas in-rural'
-------
KEY FINDINGS
TABLE 5
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT COMPARISON FOR 1,000 TONS OF STEEL PRODUCT*
Environmental effect
Virgin material use
Water use
Energy consumption
Air pollution
Effluents
Virgin material
use
2,278 tons
16.6 million
gal
23,347 X 106 Btu
121 tons
!
100% waste Change from
use recycling (%) +
250 tons
9.9 million
gal
6,089 X 106 Btu
1 7 tons
-90
-40
-74
-86
Water pollution
Consumer wastes
generated
Mining wastes
67.5 tons
967 tons
2£28 tons
16.5 tons
-60 tons
63 tons
-76
-105
-97
•Source: Midwest Research Institute. Economic studies in support of policy
formation on resource recovery. Unpublished report to the Council on Environmental
Quality, 1972.
+Negative number represents a decrease" in that category resulting from re-
cycling.
decline of resource recovery. All of these can be
translated into the factor of relatively high total costs
for waste recovery, compared with virgin material
processing. Secondary materials derived from munici-
pal waste have a higher cost to the material user in
almost every instance than do virgin materials.
Again glass, paper, and ferrous metals provide
illustrations.
Glass
Cost comparisons of glass manufacture from
either waste glass (cullet) or virgin raw materials
depend primarily on the delivered cost to the plant of
each.raw material. Glass can be made from cullet in
existing plants with only minor and inexpensive
changes in process. Production costs are essentially
the same with either raw material. Similarly, a new
plant designed to use cullet would be very similar to a
plant based on^virgin materials and would be no more
costly to construct. . .
Table 6 compares costs when virgin raw mate-
rials are .used with the costs of using cullet. The lower
end of the cullet price range reflects a transportation
distance of 25 miles or less. As distance from the glass
plant increases, the price obviously rises. Because
most recovered glass would need to move more than
25 miles, the.upper end of the range provides the best
estimate.
Glass manufacturers are not likely to make even
the minor process changes required to increase cullet
consumption in cases where the cost of using virgin
materials from well-established sources, with predic-
table supplies and prices, is equal to or less than that
of bringing in an unfamiliar, possibly contaminated
substitute.
' .•;• - . Paper •, ,.
The comparative economics of using supple-
mental .wastepaper in existing mills for manufacturing
certain paper products are shown in Table 7. These
-------
10
RESOURCE RECOVERY
TABLE 6
COST COMPARISON FOR GLASS*
Cost component
Raw materials delivered
Gullet delivered
Fusion loss
Virgin materials
($/ton)
15.48 •
0
2.95
Gullet
(waste glass)
($/ton)
0
17.77-22.77
0
Incremental handling costs
at glass plant
Total
0.50-1.00
18.43
18.27-23.77
•Source: Midwest Research Institute. Economic studies in support of policy
formation on resource recovery. Unpublished report to the Council on Environ-
mental Quality, 1972.
TABLE?
COMPARATIVE ECONOMICS OF PAPER MANUFACTURED
FROM RECYCLED AND VIRGIN MATERIALS*
Product
Baseline case
(recycled fiber
content) (%)
Baseline average
operating cost
($/ton)
Supplemental fiber
use (recycled fiber
content) (%)
Operating cost with
increased use of
recycled fiber
($/ton)
Net cost of
increased
recycled fiber
usage ($/ton)
„ . Printing/
Linerboard C™tin9 ^ Newsprint
medium
paper
0 15 0 0
78.50 79.50 80-120 125
25 40 100 100
82.25 82.00 100-150 98
3.75 2.50 20-30 27
•Source: Midwest Research Institute. Economic studies in support of policy
formation on resource recovery. Unpublished report to the Council on Environ-
mental Quality, 1972.
-------
KEY FINDINGS
11
examples are by no means exhaustive of the many
paper industry products, but these cases, which repre-
sent three products with different-economic charac-
teristics, support what would seem to be obvious
from the industry's current orientation. The cost
"penalty" for. increasing the use of paper stock is
$2.50 per ton for corrugating medium, $3.75 per ton
for linerboard (corrugating medium and linerboard
are the materials used to make corrugated boxes), and
$20 to $30 per ton for printing/writing paper. The
latter cost differential results from the substantial
upgrading of wastepaper that would be required to
produce a product of the high quality presently
required in the printing/writing grade of paper. The
cost of newsprint manufacture, however, is lowered
by using 100 percent recycled fiber (deinked news-
print). This has been the only major new market for
wastepaper in recent years.
The economics of constructing new mills based
on either virgin or secondary fibers also show why the
industry has preferred to build plants utilizing virgin
fiber. An analysis of folding boxboard (combination
board made from secondary fiber versus solid wood
pulpboard made from virgin pulp) found that the
return on investment for the virgin-based plant was
8.1 percent whereas that for a plant based on waste-
paper (combination board) was only 4.5 percent.
Under such circumstances, construction of new
combination board mills is highly unlikely.
** .,:;••
Ferrous Metals '•
The costs to an integrated steel producer of
using scrap versus ore are difficult to determine. The
steel industry does not maintain, or at least does not
report, such figures. Estimates have been made, how-
ever, which indicate that the cost of using high-grade
scrap is higher than the cost of using ore.18
The point of equivalency of scrap and ore in
fee??
the production process is the point where either hot
molten, pig iron or melted scrap is used to charge a
basic oxygen furnace. The total cost of scrap at this
point was estimated to be $44.00 per ton, including
$33.50 purchase price of the scrap, $6.00 melting
cost, $3.50 for scrap handling, and $1.00 for
increased refractory wear caused by scrap usage. The
cost of molten pig iron (which competes directly with
scrap) was estimated at $37.50 per ton, including
$28.50 for the ore and associated raw materials and
$9.00 for melting cost. Thus, the cost of scrap ready
for charging a basic oxygen furnace is about $6.50
per ton greater than that of the hot metal derived
from ore at the same point. Thus, without a reduc-
tion in scrap cost of at least $6.00 to $7.00 per ton, it
is unlikely that the utilization of scrap by existing
steel mills in basic oxygen furnace steel production
will substantially increase.
Nonintegrated steel mills using electric furnaces
(which operate on a virtually 100-percent scrap
charge), of course, find the use of scrap economical.
These scattered mills are usually located near metro-
politan areas, and transport cost of scrap is not a
major expense.
The above cases illustrate the fundamental
economic barriers to the increased utilization of
secondary materials. The economics of recovery
today result in the recovery of all waste materials that
are of high quality and that can be obtained from
reasonably concentrated sources. Extraction of mate-
rials from solid waste is limited both by the relatively
low quality of such wastes, due to contamination and
admixture with foreign materials, and by the rela-
tively greater effort required to acquire such mate-
rials.
ECONOMIC DISINCENTIVES
A part of the. cost differential between secon-
dary and virgin raw materials is, in fact, artificially
created by public policy actions. Virgin materials
enjoy depletion allowances and other subsidies such
as favorable capital gains treatments. For example,
because of the 15-percent depletion allowance on iron
ore, the ore producer could lower his selling price by
13.5 percent without reducing his profit margin.
Publicly controlled freight rates appear to discrimi-
nate against the movement of scrap materials. To a
large extent, virgin material prices do not reflect the
full costs of environmerftal degradation that the mate-
rials create. Furthermore, the fuels required for the
energy to extract and process the virgin materials-
which are high energy consumers-are also subsidized
by depletion allowances.
-------
12
RESOURCRRECOVERY
.,. Environmental regulations will tend to inter-
nalize pollution costs and may partiajly close the
relative cost gap between use of .virgin^ and recycled
materials. However, the overall timing and impact of
these measures is difficult to predict. Under the
present market conditions, pollution regulations may
in some cases work to the detriment of recycling. For
example, in the paper industry, many combination
board mills (the.major users of.secondary paper) are
_already economically marginal operations and will
find it difficult to absorb, additional, pollution control
expenditures. Also, many types of environmental
degradation resulting from virgin material use (e.g.,
strip mining) are not currently subject,to .controls.
RESOURCE RECOVERY TECHNOLOGY
Technology to process mixed municipal wastes
for recovering materials, commodities, and energy has
been, and is being, developed by private industry,
generally without Federal support.
EPA's resource recovery demonstration pro-
gram, carried out.under Section 208 of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act, is designed to demonstrate the
major technologies that have been developed in areas
where both economic and market conditions for
successful demonstration can be found.
The major technical options being considered
are the following: (1) material separation into salable
components; (2) composting of waste and production
of soil modifiers; (3) waste heat recovery in conven-
tional incineration; (4) waste heat, recovery in high-
temperature incineration; (5) direct firing of prepared
waste as fuel; (6) pyrolysis of waste to generate steam
or gaseous, liquid, or solid fuel. Of these options, a
number have already been or are now being demon-
strated.
Wet-material separation employing a system
developed by the Black-Clawson Company has been
demonstrated at Franklin, Ohio, with EPA support.
Metals, glass, and salable pulp are separated after
shredding.
A number of composting plants have been built
and have been operated successfully from a technical
point of view (See Appendix). The majority have
failed, however, because markets for the compost
products did not materialize. The rather high cost of
producing .compost is not sufficiently offset by
income from its sale.
Waste heat recovery in conventional incinera-
tion has been demonstrated both here and abroad;
this is also a well-known practice (See Appendix).
• • ' • -it- • • '''•
Direct firing of prepared waste as fuel, is now
being demonstrated in St. Louis, Missouri. Waste is
shredded; ferrous metals are removed by a magnet;
and the remaining waste, including nonferrous metals
and broken glass, is introduced into a utility boiler
where it is burned with coal to generate steam for the
utility's turbines.
< Partial separation of. incinerator residues, i.e.,
the extraction of steel cans by magnets, has been
demonstrated at a number of locations.
Major technical options or variants that have
not yet been demonstrated include the following.
Total incinerator residue separation, as
developed by the Bureau of Mines, recovers glass,
nonferrous metals, and some fractions of the minerals
in residues, in addition to iron and steel. A pilot plant
has been operated by the Bureau of Mines.
Dry mechanical waste separation components,
such as shredders, magnets, grinders, and conveyors,
are commercially available. An air separator that
performs a gross division of wastes into combustible
and noncombustible fractions has been employed as
part of an EPA contract with Combustion Power
Equipment Company in Los Angeles, California.
Material separators have been widely used in other
industries such as mining and agriculture: To date, the
application of these technologies to solid waste
separation has not been fully exploited by industry
because secure markets for output products do not
exist.
Waste heat recovery techniques using high-
temperature incinerators have been developed; all of
these incinerators operate in a similar manner.
Pyrolysis systems have been developed by high-
technology companies (Monsanto, Hercules, Garrett,
Union Carbide). Like high-temperature incinerators,
these are also very similar in operation. They can be
designed to yield outputs of fuel gas, oil, and char, or
they can be utilized directly to generate steam.
Economic data on the investment costs,
operating costs, and revenues of major resource
-------
KEY FINDINGS
13
recovery system options have been developed by Mid-
west Research Institute under contract with EPA and
the Council on Environmental Quality. All of the
major systems examined show a net cost of opera-
tion: revenues are not sufficient to cover all operating
costs. In a municipally owned plant with an input
capacity of 1,000 tons per day, net costs will range
from a low of $2.70 per ton for fuel recovery by
direct waste firing to a high of $8.97 per ton for
incineration with electrical generation (Table 8).
Whereas the costs indicate that resource recovery by
processing is not a profitable venture, in those com-
munities where disposal costs are high, the lower cost
resource recovery options offer a means of reducing
disposal costs.
Figure 1 shows that recovery system economics
improve with size. These data are based on current
prices for secondary materials (Table 9). The results
show that recovery by processing could be attractive
in large cities generating large quantities of waste if
the increased quantities of recovered materials do not
drive secondary material prices down. Table 10 shows
the sensitivity of system economics to the market
price of recovered materials. It can be seen that if
higher prices are obtained, which may be the case if
incentives for use of secondary materials are insti-
tuted, system economics are significantly improved.
Using the case of material recovery as an example, a
50-percent increase in prices results in a reduction of
net costs from $4.77 per ton to $2.56 per ton. A
TABLE 8
SUMMARY OF RECYCLING SYSTEM ECONOMICS"4"
System concept
Material
recovery
Residue recovery
Primary
type of
recovery
Material
Material
Capital
investment
(thousands of
dollars)
11,568
10,676
Total annual
cost
(thousands of
dollars)
2,759
2,689
Resource
value
(thousands of
dollars)
1.328
535
Net annual
cost
(thousands of
dollars)
1,431
2,154
Net cost
per input
ton ($)•
4.77
7.18
after incineration
Incineration and Energy
steam recovery
Incineration and Energy
electrical
generation
Pyrolysis Energy
Composting Energy
(material/
energy)
Fuel use Energy
(supplementary)
Incineration
Disposal
11,607
17,717
12,334
17,100
7,577
9,299
3,116
3392
3,287
2,987
1,731
2,303
1,000
1,200
1,661
1,103
920
2,116
2,692
1,626
1,884
881
2,303
7.05
8.97
5.42
6.28
2.70
7.68
•Source: Midwest Research Institute. Resource recovery from mixed municipal solid wastes. Unpublished data,
1972.
+Based on municipally owned, 1,000-ton per day plant with a 20-year economic life, operating 300,days per
year, and interest at 5 percent.
-------
14
RESOURCE RECOVERY
14.00
12.00
10.00
2
O
<2 8.00
-------
'KEY FINDINGS'
15
TABLE 9
QUANTITY AND VALUE OF RECOVERABLE RESOURCES
IN MIXED WASTE *+
Resource
Paper
Glass
Ferrous
metalsH
Nonferrous
metals
Yield *
(%)
45
70
90
67
Recovered
quantity
available§
45,000 tons
16,800 tons
20,400 tons
1,200 tons
Estimated unit
Value FOB plant
($/unit)
15.00
10.00
12.00
200.00
Total annual
revenues
($)
675,000
168,000
244,000
240,000
Oil
Fuel (as a
coal sub-
stitute)
Steam
Electric
energy
Humus
100 1 ,440,000 MBtu
100 2,700,000 MBtu
100 2,000,000 M Ib
100 200,000,000 kW-hr
75,000 tons
.70
.25
.50
.006
6.00
1,008,000
675,000
1 ,000,000
1 ,200,000
450,000
"Source: Midwest Research Institute. Resource recovery from mixed municipal
solid wastes. Unpublished data, 1972.
+Not all of these values are additive. For example, if paper is reclaimed as
fiber, it cannot also be recovered as oil or fuel.
$Yield equals the percent of the material or energy in the waste that can
actually be recovered. In general, losses and technical limitations make this Mess than
100 percent. .
§Assumes a 1,000-ton/day plant operating 300 days/year or 300,000 tons of
waste. Also assumes recovery rates based on technology assessment of available systems.
..HThis assumes recovery from mixed waste. If recovery is from incinerator
residue, the value is assumed to drop to $10/ton, and only 12,700 tons are recover-
able.
material price decrease of the same amount would
raise net costs to $6.98.
The costs presented in Tables 8 and 10 suggest
that source recovery, is a more economical option
than incineration. The fact that there is no apparent
move to install resource recovery systems is partially
explained by the fact that the markets for recovered
commodities are uncertain. Cities are unable to
obtain purchase contracts with local buyers of waste
materials at fixed prices. The failure rate of compost
plants, due to lack of markets, has solidified feelings
of market uncertainty. Finally, traditional municipal
reluctance to undertake large-scale capital
investment-particularly where there is an element of
risk-and other institutional problems have also con-
tributed to the failure to move to resource recovery
systems.
In summary, technology is, in most cases,
available for implementing resource recovery through
the processing of mixed municipal wastes. The tech-
nical processing route is costly, but in some of the
technical options, costs approximate those of other
means of disposal. Although technological improve-
ments would result in some cost reductions, techno-
-------
16
RESOURCE RECOVERY
TABLE 10
SENSITIVITY OF SYSTEM ECONOMICS TO MARKET VALUE
OF RECOVERED RESOURCES*
System concept
Material recovery
Incineration and
residue recovery
Incineration and
steam recovery
selling
150
percent
2.56
6.29
5.39
Net cost based on
prices as a percent
100
percent
' 4.77
7.18
7.05
resource
of base value
50
percent
6.98
8.08
8.72
($/ton)
No
resource value
recovered
9.20
8.96
10.38
Incineration and
electrical generation
6.98
8.97
10.98
12.98
Pyrolysis
Composting
Fuel recovery
2.65
4.44
1.17
5.42
1
6.28
2.70
8.18
8.12
4.24
10.96
9.95
' 5.77
•Source: Midwest Research Institute. Resource recovery from mixed municipal
solid wastes. Unpublished data, 1972.
logy is not likely to improve dramatically the market-
ability of products. If incentives for secondary mate-
rial consumption were instituted and if improved
prices for waste-based commodities were established,
further technology development by the private sector
could be expected. .
RECOVERY FROM MIXED MUNICIPAL WASTE
To recover materials from mixed municipal
waste, economics must be favorable at two key
points. The municipality must find the cost of
resource recovery competitive with disposal. Second,
the user of the materials from these systems must
find the cost of these secondary materials competitive
with virgin material substitutes. Recovery of materials
from mixed municipal waste requires processing. With
the exception of some 20 very large cities, disposal
costs of most communities are lower ($2 and $3 per
ton) than the resource recovery alternative. As
shown, recovery processing costs tend to exceed
revenues from the sale of products, and the resulting
net cost is higher in most places than current disposal
costs.
Even in areas where disposal costs are already
high-in excess of $5 per ton-resource recovery is
limited because no markets can be guaranteed for
recovery plant outputs at the tonnage levels at which
they can be produced.
From the standpoint of the municipality, then,
two changes that would bring about larger scale
recovery of mixed municipal waste are higher prices
for recovery plant outputs or, alternatively, reduced
recovery plant production costs and, second, an
increase in demand for waste-based raw materials.
These requirements, however, are somewhat at
odds with the requirements of the user who must
purchase the outputs of such plants. As has been
shown, the economics of virgin material use are
already more favorable than the economics of secon-
dary material use. Lower waste prices are needed to
change this situation. To insure a demand for secon-
dary materials, either they must decrease in price or
their use must.be subsidized.
-------
3. MAJOR OPTIONS
EPA's studies have progressed to the point that.
the major available options for bringing about an
increased rate of resource recovery—where such
action can be justified on environmental and conser-
vation grounds-are generally identifiable. The
fundamental requirement is to create a situation in
which users of industrial materials substitute
secondary materials for virgin materials to the extent
that this results in more efficient use of resources.
This situation could be brought about by three types
of activities: (1) actions to inhibit the use of virgin
materials; (2) actions to create a demand for secon-
dary materials; (3) actions to create a supply of
secondary materials of such quality and at such a
price that they would appropriately satisfy the new
demand.
Inhibitory mechanisms, aimed at restricting the
consumption of virgin materials, would normally take
the form of disincentives or regulatory actions.
Actions to create demand or supply would normally
require the provision of positive incentives. An
analysis of each of the major options follows.
. INHIBITION OF VIRGIN MATERIAL USE
If the supplies of virgin materials available to
industry were denied or restricted, the cost of the
remaining available portion would rise as a conse-
quence of continuing demand. In relation to
secondary materials, then/ virgin materials would
become more expensive, and more secondary mate-
rials would be Used. Similarly, if the costs of virgin
materials were artifically raised (by taxation, removal
of depletion allowances, capital gains treatment, or
other means), the same consequence would result. .
The desirability of major intervention into
irgin material use to increase recycling is question-
ble on the grounds that a very large material tonnage
(5.8 billion tons) may have to be affected to increase
a small portion (55 to 60 million tons).
Several "natural" events are likely to cause the
cost of virgin materials to rise without any form of
government intervention. These events include (1)
tighter pollution control regulations and enforce-
ment, resulting in higher pollution-control costs; (2)
increasing energy costs, which will proportionately
affect virgin materials more because they are more
energy intensive than secondary materials; (3) deple-
tion of high-quality domestic reserves and the need to
exploit lean ore deposits of high-quality or to import
raw materials across greater distances; (4) potentially
adverse foreign trade policies. The timing and impact
of these market correctives are difficult to predict but
are expected to be significant.
"Artificial" intervention is possible through
instituting taxes on virgin materials and/or removing
or modifying the favorable tax treatment of virgin
materials and energy substances, regulating virgin
materials available from Federal land, denying
markets to virgin materials through Federal procure-
ment policies, changing transportation costs through
Federal regulation of rail and ocean freight rates,
changing federally mandated labeling regulations,
and, at the extreme, instituting national materials
standards that would limit the use of major virgin
materials to some percentile below that now com-
mon.
The costs, benefits, and probable effectiveness
of each major action listed above are being analyzed.
Based on initial findings, EPA sees justification for
more aggressive Federal procurement policies to limit
the use of virgin materials in products (with all the
implied consequences of such a leadership posture),
actions to remove freight rate disparities that appear
to favor virgin materials, and removal of labeling
regulations that discourage consumer purchasing of
products that contain "waste" materials.
17
-------
18
RESOURCE RECOVERY
An example of Federal procurement changes
already exists. The changes introduced in 76 paper
product specifications by the General Services
Administration, under orders from the President, are
already having some impact on paper and board
production. Intensification of such actions is certain
to have beneficial impacts on resource recovery.
Fiscal measures (e.g., taxes to discourage virgin
use) could be addressed to the artificial economic
benefits that now favor virgin material use. Such
measures, however, would have a variety of other
.impacts as well, which- are being evaluated to deter-
mine whether fiscal measures to inhibit the use of
virgin materials are cost effective. In light of a series
of natural events-esp'ecially rising energy costs-that
will increase virgin material costs, fiscal intervention
may appear neither necessary nor desirable.
Regulatory actions are viable alternatives for
increasing resource recovery but relative to virgin
material resource use, such actions need further
evaluation to determine their side effects, which may
be adverse.
DEMAND CREATION
EPA's investigations to date lead to the conclu-
sion that positive economic incentives may be
desirable to arrest the relative decline of material
recovery and to increase the proportion of total
national material needs satisfied by waste-based raw
materials.
There is evidence that energy recovery from
mixed municipal waste will become a very real option
to both private- and public-sector waste management
organizations without incentives of any sort and that
limited materials recovery-steel, aluminum,. and
glass-will accompany such energy recovery activities.
The most efficient incentive for material
recovery would be one that results in new industrial
demands for secondary materials, such .as some .form
of tax incentive or subsidy payment to users of secon-
dary materials. If an incentive results in a "demand
pull" by industry, such demand will automatically
result in changes in the way wastes are stored, col-
lected, and processed. The key to increased recovery
is the waste-commodity buyer rather than the com-
modity supplier. Only if the buyer finds waste mate-
rials a more economical alternative than virgin
materials will greater quantities be utilized. Incentives
provided directly to the buyer are most likely to have
the most dramatic effect on his actions.
Demand-creation incentives can take a variety
of forms. The particular form that the incentive takes
is important from the administrative and legal points
of view. Also, different types of incentives have dif-
ferent efficiencies (cost-effectiveness). Regardless of
mechanism used, the important point is that the
material producer (steel mill, papermill, glass plant,
etc.) should find himself in a situation where the use
of secondary material is to his economic advantage.
Potentially, several types of incentive measures
satisfy this criterion: investment tax credits for using
secondary materials, subsidy payments or'bounties,
subsidy of plant and equipment for processing or
using secondary materials, etc. If the incentive is
made available directly to the material consumer, a
demand for waste materials will result.
Functionally, the incentive must be high
enough so that at the point of material consumption,
the cost of the secondary material to the buyer is at
least the same, i.e., in the same quality range, as the
cost of the virgin material. Investigations are
underway to identify the level of necessary incen-
tives. As shown in a previous section, it appears that
the incentive required to "equalize" the costs of
virgin and secondary materials would range from
$2.50 to $30.00 per ton of material recovered. These
values are based on a limited number of comparisons
and should be viewed as somewhat tentative. It is
estimated that an'across-the-board incentive sufficient
for a substantial increases in resource recovery would
range from $3 to $5 per ton of material recovered. A
subsidy of this magnitude should be largely offset by
savings in disposal cost because recycled materials
would be removed from the waste stream and, thus,
would not incur the cost of landfill or incineration. In
addition, there would be important environmental
benefits from increased recycling.
SUPPLY CREATION
Incentives for demand creation are viewed as
sufficient inducement to bring • about resource
recovery at an accelerated rate. -Such incentives, if
-------
MAJOR OPTIONS
19
appropriately designed, should spur private and
public investment in resource recovery plants and
systems that would deliver to industry the types and
quantities of secondary materials it might demand.
As incentives bring about consumer demand for
increased quantities of secondary materials, the
demand will reverberate down the chain of suppliers
and will bring about some changes in supply patterns.
It is likely, for example, that increased "skimming,"
or removal from wastes .before discard, of accessible
wastes, such as newspapers, corrugated boxes, and
office papers, would occur at municipal and commer-
cial sources and that such recovery would take place
at lower overall costs than technological sorting.
Most of the solid waste materials that would be-
demanded by industry now pass through the hands of
municipal solid waste management organizations that
collect waste in mixed forms.. To sell all proportions
of waste now collected, these organizations face two
alternatives: to collect waste fractions separately or
to process mixed wastes into separate fractions.
Both, alternatives have drawbacks. Separate
collection of different waste fractions, while once
widely practiced, has virtually disappeared. Combined
waste collection, using the more efficient compactor
truck, has. become standard in residential, institu-
tional, and commercial waste collection practice.
Reinstituting separate collection would require
changes in practices and equipment., ..
The processing option is.capital intensive. The
economics of processing require large plant sizes to
take advantage of economics of scale. For the
economics to be attractive, plant sizes of 1,000 tons
per day of input or higher are'required. There are few
communities with such high generation rates.
If demand incentives result in higher secondary
material prices^ public and private waste management
organizations would be able to justify the processing
of municipal wastes for recovery in lieu of processing
for disposal. Higher prices for waste-based com-
modities will also permit the use of smaller capacity
plants; the higher prices will compensate for the
higher processing costs of small plants.
In smaller communities, where recovery by
processing is not likely to be economical, providing
supplies via separate collections is a possibility. The
separate collection option, which was once practiced
extensively, will require technical, institutional, and
social changes to become a part of today's society. At
this point, enough knowledge has been gained to see
that citizen enthusiasm for resource recovery, as
expressed in the thousands of neighborhood recycling
centers, holds the potential for new and innovative
options for solid waste collection. Furthermore, the
successful experience of Madison, Wisconsin-where
city crews collect newspapers separated from other
wastes by the citizenry-indicates that alternatives to
large-scale recovery plants do indeed exist.
Such approaches to supply creation are still
being analyzed as part of EPA's resource recovery
studies program.
OTHER OPTIONS
In addition to action programs that would have
a direct impact on resource recovery, a number of
related activities are also under consideration whose
consequences would be to attack the • broader
problem of "excessive material consumption" in the
United States, rather than one aspect of that
problem, low resource recovery rates.
Source reduction proposals are usually aimed at
a particular product, such as beverage containers, or a
class of products like packaging or appliances.
Source reduction options fall into four cate-
gories: (1) bans or other disincentives applied to a
product or class of products; (2) setting of perfor-
' mance ' standards that will result in longer lived
products, whereby more "use" or "service" is
obtained from a given quantity of materials than is
the case if rapid obsolescence is promoted; (3)
substitution of production processes with low waste
yields for waste-intensive processes, for instance, dry
papermaking in place of wet pulping* (4) substitution
pf products with low material requirements for those
with high material requirements, for instance, elec-
tronic calculators for 'the more material-intensive
mechanical calculators or substitution of electronic
communications media for media that require paper.
EPA's' investigation of source reduction
concepts is currently aimed at packaging and other
disposables, products that are particularly significant
in their contribution to solid waste quantities and
-------
20
RESOURCE RECOVERY
whose consumption has been growing rapidly. An
EPA study is underway to examine alternate taxing
and regulatory measures for reducing the quantities
of packaging materials consumed.
Such measures might be successful in either
reducing consumption of packaging and other dispos-
ables; stimulating designs of more recyclable pack-
aging or products; or providing funds for defraying
the litter cleanup, collection, and disposal costs
presently associated with these materials. The secon-
dary effects of these measures, such as economic
dislocations and employment disruptions, are also
being examined.
Of the various major options available for
increasing the rate of recovery, intensified Federal
procurement of waste-based products and further
exploration of positive demand incentives appear
most desirable in the long term, accompanied by
activities to bring into line freight rates of virgin and
secondary materials. More information is needed
about the necessity for and the effects, fairness, and
workability of both source reduction and resource
recovery incentive concepts before such measures are
implemented.
Demand creation would be achieved most
efficiently by the direct route of rewarding the waste
consumer for using secondary materials. Incentives
for demand creation, if properly designed, may bring
about resource recovery at an accelerated rate and
would probably spur private and public investment in
resource recovery plants and systems to supply secon-
dary materials., Certain changes in supply patterns
may emerge that will result in the circumvention of
the recovery plants by some waste materials.
"Skimming" of accessible wastes like, newspapers,
corrugated, boxes, and office papers is such a change.
For smaller communities where recovery by
processing is not likely to be economical, provision of
supplies via separate collection is a potential solution.
Actions aimed at removing certain artificial
.barriers are under serious, consideration by EPA,
especially Federal procurement policies to increase
the use of secondary materials in products and
actions to remove freight rate disparities that appear
to favor virgin materials.
Taxes and regulations to reduce the consump-
tion of certain product categories, such as packaging,
and thereby reduce the load on the solid waste stream
are presently under investigation. Stimulation of
more recyclable package designs and provision of
funds for litter cleanup are secondary benefits of such
actions.
-------
4. PROGRAM ACTIVITIES
The foregoing presentation and preliminary
conclusion, as well as the data, information, and
discussions of ..specific materials included in the
Appendix, are based on EPA resource recovery
program activities, carried out both by in-house staff .
efforts and contract research in support of the inter-
nal analysis.
An overview of the basic plan for carrying out
the congressional mandate is shown in Figure 2. The
problem is defined in terms of the adverse environ-
mental effects of material processing and disposal and
efficiency of resource utilization. The broad solutions
identified for the problem are increased resource
recovery and source reduction activities. A number of
policy options available to achieve the solution are
shown. Next, specific program activities to implement
the policy option are shown arranged into "primary"
and "secondary" priority categories. Finally, an
evaluation procedure, by 'which specific action
programs will be selected for recommendation, is out-
lined.
Figure 3 shows the various alternatives available
for reaching the objective of increased waste utiliza-
tion; Figure 4 illustrates the alternatives available to
obtain the objective of source reduction; Figure 5
illustrates the points in the material cycle where the
various action program alternatives would have their
impacts.
For purposes of discussion, EPA's program
efforts can be classified into three types of activities:
(1) background studies that provide for under-
standing the subject of resource recovery in its many
facets; (2) studies to formulate and analyze action
programs; (3) studies to evaluate the impacts and
effectiveness of action programs that appear to have
merit. In what follows, the various past, ongoing, and
projected activities of EPA will be discussed under
these headings.
BACKGROUND STUDIES
Background investigations' include data collec-
tion, survey, and information classification to
establish the status and trends of recycling and to
identify problems, barriers, and opportunities for
increased waste use. A number of background investi-
gations have been completed to date and are nearing
publication. The following is a list of completed
studies:
(1) An analysis of Federal programs affecting solid
waste management and recycling, SCS Engi-
neers, 1971.
(2) Catalog of resource recovery systems for mixed
municipal waste, Midwest Research Institute
and Council on Environmental Quality > 1971.
(3) Identification of opportunities for increased
recycling of ferrous solid waste, Battelle
Memorial Institute and Institute of Secondary
Iron and Steel, 1971.
(4) Recovery and utilization of municipal 'solid
wastes, Battelle Memorial Institute, 1971.
(5). Salvage markets for commodities entering the
solid waste stream-an economic study, Mid-
west Research Institute, 1971.
(6) Studies to identify opportunities for increased
solid waste utilization (Studies completed for
aluminum, lead, copper, zinc, nickel, stainless
steel, precious metals, paper, and textiles),
Battelle Memorial Institute and National
Association of Secondary Materials Industries,
1971.
Review of this information is underway; data
and information gaps have been identified, and
the need for further background investigations
has been established.
21
-------
PROBLEM
DEFINITION
SOLUTION
DEFINITION
IDENTIFICATION
OF POLICY
OPTIONS
PRIORITY OF
POLICY OPTIONS
AND PROGRAM
ACTIVITIES
EVALUATION
PROCEDURE
• Environmental
effects of material
processing and
disposal
• Efficiency of
resource utiliza-
tion
• Resource recovery
• Source reduction
• Resource recovery
Inhibit virgin
material use ,
Create demand for
waste materials
Create reliable
supply of waste
material
• Source reduction
Product design
Process efficiency
• Disposal regulation
• Primary
Demand creation
through incentives
Source separation
and diversion
Waste generation
and disposal
disincentives
• Secondary
Virgin and waste
material regulation
Grants and loans
R&D for waste
uses, system design,
and product design
i Goals ;
Baseline projec-
tion
Wastes recovered
or reduced
Resources saved
Environmental impacts
Savings
Implementation
requirements
Other
Figure 2. Overview of a p.lan for resource recovery and source reduction.
73
m
C/3
O
C
PI
o
O
w
-------
PROGRAM ACTIVITIES
23
OBJECTIVE: TO INCREASE UTILIZATION OF WASTE
INHIBIT THE USE OF VIRGIN MATERIALS
PROMOTE THE USE OF WASTE MATERIALS
Regulate virgin
material supply
\
Create economic disincentives
for virgin
material use
CREATE A RELIABLE SUPPLY
OF WASTE MATERIALS
CREATE A DEMAND
FOR WASTE MATERIALS
Discourage virgin
material use
Regulate virgin material use
Create economic
incentive for the use
of waste materials
Encourage use of waste
materials
Regulate waste material use
V
Develop new uses
for waste
materials
Guarantee purchase
of waste materials
OBTAINING WASTE MATERIALS
COLLECTION OF
SOURCE-SEPARATED MATERIALS
UPGRADING WASTE MATERIALS
\
Create disincentive for
or regulate disposal
DIVERSION OF MATERIALS EXTRACTION OF MATERIALS
BEFORE ENTERING WASTE FROM WASTE
T
Create economic
incentive for source
separation
Regulate source separation
Create incentive for collection I Create economic incentive
of source-separated materials I for waste upgrading systems
Create disincentive for
or regulate disposal
UPGRADING PRODUCTS THAT PRODUCE WASTE
Carry out R&D for
resource recovery system
Create economic incentive
for resource recovery systems
Regulate
product design
Create economic incentive
for produce redesign
Encourage source separation
Encourage new product
design
Carry out R&D
for new product design
Figure 3. Resource recovery policy options.
-------
OBJECTIVE: TO DECREASE GENERATION OF WASTES
Subsidize more efficient
material utilization processes
CHANGE PRODUCTS THAT BECOME WASTES
Encourage new
product decision
Create economic disincentive
for or regulate disposal
Carry out R&D for
new product design
Regulate product
design
Create incentive
for product redesign
Figure 4. Source reduction policy option
B
I
r>
n
n
8
-------
• Regulate virgin
I material supply
• Subsidize more
I efficient material
I processes
• Encourage new product design
• Regulate product design
• Carry out R&D for new product design
• Create incentive for product redesign
Create economic disincentive for virgin material use
• Create economic incentive for waste material use
• Regulate virgin material and waste material use
f Develop new uses for waste material
• Guarantee purchase of
I waste material
VIRGIN
MATERIAL
ACQUISITION
MATERIAL
VIRGIN
MATERIAL
PROCESSING
MATERIAL
WASTE
WASTE
•a
§
O
B
en
PRODUCTION
PRODUCT
CONSUMPTION
WASTE
WASTE
-• WASTE
'MATERIAL
.PROCESSING
MATERIAL
WASTE
MATERIAL
ACQUISITION
• Subsidize waste
material processing
• Create disincentive
If or or regulate
disposal
DISPOSAL
• Carry out R&D for resource
recovery systems
• Create incentive for collection of
source-separated materials
• Create economic incentive for
resource recovery systems •
• Encourage, require, or create an economic
incentive for source separation
Figure 5. Application of resource recovery and source reduction policy options.
-------
26
RESOURCE' RECOVERY
Baseline
To assess an incentive mechanism designed to
increase waste recovery, it is first necessary to project
the amount of future recycling likely to occur in the
absence of the proposed incentive. Factors that could
influence this baseline are (1) rising municipal
disposal costs; (2) environmental legislation; (3)
recovery technology development; (4) rising energy
prices; (5) change in labor productivity; (6) private
sector and local government actions. An investigation
is being performed to forecast this baseline in the
absence of Federal activity.
Recycling Possibilities
It is also important to estimate the practical
upper limits on recovery, to assess the effectiveness of
proposed recycling measures. It is not feasible to
recover all solid waste generated. The amount avail-
able for recycling is determined by factors such as (1)
losses in processing, collection, and handling; (2)
amounts generated in remote areas; (3) self-disposal
activities; (4) materials dispersed in trace quantities;
(5) materials concealed or mixed in products. The
practical limits on recycling are being projected to
serve as a guide for evaluating recycling activities.
Freight Rates
Transport rates may have an unfavorable effect
on the prices of secondary materials as compared to
virgin materials. However, differences that exist may
be justified by cost to the carrier. An investigation of
the basis and structure of transport rates is being
.performed in an attempt to (1) compare actual
freight rates for secondary and primary materials; (2)
compare carrier costs of shipping and factors
affecting this cost; (3) establish the effect of rates on
the relative prices of virgin and waste materials.
Source Separation and Collection
To analyze incentives and policies that promote
increased recycling, the reliability and costs of obtain-
ing wastes from different sources must be known.
There are three source separation techniques cur-
rently employed to collect wastes segregated at
households or business establishments: (1) com-
munity recycling centers; (2) separate collections (by
volunteer organizations, municipal or private collec-
tors, and secondary material dealers); (3)'separation
of wastes during regular household collections. An
example of the latter type of operation exists in
Madison, Wisconsin, where segregated newspapers are
collected with other household wastes and.placed in a
separate bin hung below the collection vehicle.
To provide the background information needed
to evaluate these techniques, studies will be carried .
out to assess (1) consumer attitudes to source separa-
tion techniques; (2) costs involved in collecting segre-
gated materials and transporting them to users; (3)
amounts of material that can feasibly be recycled
through these channels
FORMULATION OF ACTION PROGRAMS
Work in this area involves identifying and
formulating means of increasing recycling through
demand creation, supply creation, and inhibiting
virgin material use. The following list contains studies •
of incentive alternatives that have been completed
but are not released:
(1) An Analysis of the Abandoned Automobile Pro-..
blem, Booz-Allen Hamilton, 1972. ...
(2) An Analysis of the Beverage Container Problem,
with Recommendations for Government Policy,
Research Triangle Institute, 1972.
(3) The Economics of the Plastics Industry, Arthur D.
Little, 1972.
(4) Strategies to Increase Recovery of Resources from
Combustible Solid Wastes, International
Research and Technology, 1972.
(5) Incentives for Tire Recycling and Reuse, Interna-
tional Research and Technology.
The studies are.presently under internal review,
and where appropriate, recommendations will be
forthcoming. The contract reports will be avail-'
able for public distribution'when'the review is .
complete.
Program plans being developed for incentive
. and regulatory measures will be analyzed and evalu-
ated in the next year. Economic incentives include (1)
-------
PROGRAM ACTIVITIES
27
recycling tax credit or subsidy for the use of post-
consumer waste; (2) investment credit or subsidy for
recovery equipment; (3) virgin material tax to
increase cost of virgin material use; (4) waste genera-
tion tax to reduce the amount of waste produced;.(5)
government procurement to create a demand for
waste materials; (6) depletion allowance adjustment
to increase costs of virgin materials. Regulatory
measures include (1) transport rate adjustment to
equalize freight rates; (2) material standards speci-
fying waste use in certain products; (3) virgin
resource control on Federal lands; (4) regulation of
waste and virgin material imports and exports.
EVALUATION ,
Evaluation of the programs for economic
incentives and regulatory measures consists of deter-
mining (1) wastes recycled; (2) resources conserved;
(3) environmental impacts; (4) costs and savings; (5)
implementation requirements; (6) other impacts such
as employment, foreign trade, 'and industrial disloca-
tion.
Work in this area involves, first, developing a
methodology for performing the evaluation of the
different aspects and, second, applying the methodo-
logy to the specific incentive and regulatory
measures. Environmental impact analysis for paper,
ferrous metals, and glass has been started (Economic
and Environmental Analysis; studies completed for
paper, ferrous metals, and glass/ Midwest Research
Institute and Council on Environmental Quality,
1971) and a preliminary cost-effectiveness study has
been performed for one type of incentive, the
recycling tax credit (Preliminary Report on a FederaJ
Tax Credit Incentive for'Recycling Post Consumer
Waste Materials, Resource Planning Associates, 1972).
As will be discussed, additional work is required
in the areas of predicting waste recycling and of
estimating resource requirements and environmental
impacts. The costs and savings follow directly from
these measures. The implementation requirements
and other impacts must be evaluated on an individual
basis for each particular incentive or regulatory
mechanism.
Predicted Recycling
To predict the amount of waste material that
would be recycled as a result of 'an incentive or
regulation, it is necessary to estimate the elasticity of
supply and demand as they affect prices for wastes
and competitive virgin materials. This requires an
analysis of historical price-quantity data; financial
analyses to determine the effect on profit, return, and
investment decisions; and an analysis of material
processing costs. Work aimed at recycling through the
major waste-using industries, such as wastepaper,
scrap steel, and glass, is underway.
Environmental Impacts and Resource Consumption
Work in this area involves laying out the entire
.waste material use system from acquisition to
disposal. At each stage of the system, the air and
water pollution produced are calculated along with
the energy, water, and materials consumed. Compari-
sons are made with and without recycling, and the
net environmental impact is determined. The work
completed for paper, ferrous metals, and glass will be
expanded to include calculation of the cost savings of
pollution abatement due to recycling. Similar
analyses will be carried out for aluminum, rubber,
textiles, and plastics.
In summary, evaluating regulatory mechanisms
and incentives involves (1) determining the effective-
ness of the proposed measures; (2) comparing this to
the recycling baseline and practical upper limit; (3)
estimating costs and benefits; (4) making an informed
judgment as to the value of the measure.
The program activities described are aimed at
providing the information necessary to formulate
meaningful resource recovery policy. In the last half
of the fiscal year ending June 30, 1973, recommenda-
tions will be made for measures to accomplish the
goal of increased resource recovery on an environ-
mentally, economically, and socially sound basis.
These measures will be described in the Second
Annual Report to Congress.
-------
APPENDIX
Recycling of Specific Wastes
PAPER
Status and Trends
Paper is one of the major manufactured mate-
rials consumed in the United States and the largest
single component-35 to 45 percent by weight-of
collected municipal waste. In 1969, the Nation
consumed 58.5 million tons of paper, and by 1980,
this is projected to increase to about 85.0 million
tons (Figure A-l). Paper, paperboard, and construc-
tion paper and board are the three major paper
categories and accounted for 51.5, 40.8, and 7.7
percent, respectively, of the 1969 paper consump-
tion.
Only 17.8 percent (10.4 million tons) of the
paper consumed in 1969 was recovered for recycling,
compared with 23.1 percent in 1960 and 27.4
percent in 1950.14 Most of the remainder was
discarded as waste (put in landfills or dumps, incin-
erated, or littered), and a portion was diverted,
obscured, or retained in other products. Trends in
disposal and recycling (Figure A-l) show that the
proportion of paper recycled after consumption has
been steadily decreasing. This downward trend in
recovery ratio, coupled with an increase in consump-
tion, has resulted in an accelerated rate of wastepaper
disposal. Between 1956 and 1967, wastepaper
disposal increased nearly 60 percent, from 22 million
tons per year to 35 million tons per year.19
Sources of Waste
Wastepaper can be classified into four major
grades: mixed, news, corrugated, and high grades,
accounting for 27.4, 19.8, 32.6, and 20.2 percent,
respectively, of the wastepaper recovered in 1967.
This wastepaper comes from residential, commercial,
and conversion sources, which account for 16.6, 43.6,
and 39.8 percent, respectively, of the 1967 paper
recovery. Table A-l shows the relationships between
the waste grades and sources. The recovery pattern of
paper wastes follows directly from the characteristics
of each wastepaper source.
Wastepaper generated in conversion operations,
where paper and board are made into consumer
products, is almost totally recovered. It is easily
accessible and generally uncontaminated, and almost
half of such waste consists of desirable high grades.
This waste is often baled onsite by the converter and
never enters the waste stream.
At the opposite extreme, paper waste from
residential sources is widely dispersed and highly
contaminated with adhesives, coatings, and other
materials in the waste stream that are costly and
difficult for papermills to remove. Thus, almost none
of the mixed paper in residential waste is recovered.
,The only paper recovered in significant quan-
tities from residential waste is old news. Recovered
newspapers are separated from other waste by home-
owners and are usually collected by charitable organi-
zations. Some municipalities have begun experi-
menting with collecting newspapers along with the
regular refuse collection by placing them in special
racks on the collection vehicles. This offers promise
for increasing the recovery of old newspapers for
residences.
Commercial waste consists largely of business
.papers, mail, and packaging materials, especially
corrugated boxes, and is usually concentrated at
commercial/retail centers. It is obviously more acces-
sible and desirable than mixed papers from residential
sources but generally less so than conversion wastes.
Corrugated boxes comprise about 52 percent of the
commercial wastepaper recovered. They are usually
baled or at least kept separate from other waste by
the store or office. Significant quantities of mixed
papers are also recovered, because they often occur at
29
-------
30
RESOURCE RECOVERY
100
80
60
40
20
1955
1960
1965 1970
YEAR
1975
1980
Figure A-1. Paper trends: consumption, disposal, and recycling.*
'Source: Darnay, 'A., and W. E. Franklin. Salvage markets for materials in solid
wastes. Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972. Ch.IV.
-------
PAPER
31
TABLE A-l
WASTEPAPER RECOVERY BY GRADE AND SOURCE IN 1967*
(thousands of tons)
Grade
Mixed
News
Corrugated
High grades
Total
Percent of all wastepaper
recovery
Residential
70
1,610
—
—
1,680
16.6
Commercial
1,860
50
2,300
200
4,410
43.6
Converting
850
345
998
1,841
4,034
39.8
Total
2,780
2,005
3,298
2,041
10,124
100.0
"Source: Darnay, A., and W. E. Franklin, Salvage markets for materials in solid
wastes. Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972. p.45-23.
Note: Net exports add another 176,000 tons derived from converting operations.
commercial establishments in high concentrations
with few contaminants.
Additional quantities of waste are potentially
recoverable from residential and commercial sources.
Based on Midwest Research Institute (MRI)
estimates, in 1967 there were 35:2 million tons of
paper discarded as waste but. not recovered: 6.3
million tons were newspapers; 8.6 million tons were
corrugated; and 20.3 million tons were all other
types.20 Of course, not all of this waste is potentially
recoverable. A portion of the waste is discarded in
rural or remote locations and will never be practi-
cably recoverable. A portion is lost in Utter or is
'burned, and a portion would be unusable for
technical reasons. The MRI study estimated that the
recoverable volume is most likely 10.2 million tons,
or 29 percent of the presently unrecovered paper
waste (Table A-2). Recovery of this additional
amount would have meant an increase in recycling of
over 100 percent in 1967.
Approximately half of the additional
recoverable tonnage is made up of newspapers and
corrugated board, two grades already recovered in
substantial quantities. The recycling of these wastes
can be facilitated by creating a demand for materials
so that they will be collected before being discarded.
Prior separation and separate collection of these
wastes holds the possibility of a relatively quick and
efficient means of increasing the recycling of substan-
tial quantities of wastes.
The remainder of the tonnage that is poten-
tially recoverable is mixed paper, which would
require further processing before recycling.
A promising technology for recovery of paper
from mixed residential waste has now been
developed, however. This is the wet pulping process
developed by the Black-Clawson Company that is
being demonstrated in an Environmental Protection
Agency project in Franklin, Ohio. In this process,
about 400 pounds of paper fiber is recovered from
each ton of mixed waste input. Ferrous metals and
glass are also recovered during processing. The
economic feasibility of large-scale plants of this type
looks promising.
Markets
From a waste-utilization point of view, the
paper industry is made up of an integrated segment
that primarily uses woodpulp and an independent
segment that primarily uses wastepaper (called paper-
stock by the industry). Most recycling takes place in
the independent sector. Major products made from
paperstock-and these are major products of the
-------
32
RESOURCE RECOVERY
TABLE A-2
ADDITIONAL WASTEPAPER RECOVERY POTENTIAL FROM
SQL ID WASTE IN 1967*
(million of tons)
1
Newspapers
Corrugated
All other
Total
•
Unrecovered and
discarded
as waste
6.3
8.6
20.3
35.2
I
Most likely
recoverable
2.2
3,0
5.0
10.2
Recoverable as a
% of presently
unrecovered
paper waste
35.0
35.0
24.6
29.0
*Source: Darnay, A., and W. E. Franklin. Salvage markets for materials in solid
wastes. Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972. p.45-24.
independent segment-include combination board
(e.g., cereal, detergent, and shoe boxes), deinked
newspapers, and construction paper.
Figure A-2 shows the consumption of wood-
pulp and paperstock in the three major product
grades of the paper industry: paper, paperboard, and
construction paper and board. Paperboard accounts
for 79.4 percent of paperstock consumption; paper
for 13.4 percent; and construction paper, for 7.2
percent of the total paperstock consumed. Thus,
paper recycling is closely tied to trends in combi-
nation board consumption.
Combination board production has grown at a
substantially slower rate than that of its direct com-
petitor, solid wood pulpboard, which is made almost
en'tirely from virgin pulp. From 1959 to 1969, total
paperboard production increased by 65 percent; solid
wood pulpboard, by 112 percent; and combination
board, by only 5 percent.2! Herein lies the major
reason for the decrease in the wastepaper recycling
ratio.
There has been only one major new market for
wastepaper in recent years, the deinking of old news-
papers to make newsprint. Newspaper deinking is a
very promising market for old news, and increased
newspaper recycling will be' influenced strongly by
this market.
Issues and Problems
There are many interrelated factors that have
contributed to the decline in the percentage of paper
recycled; however, the two primary direct causes are
the lack of new markets and the declining share in the
combination board market.
It is technically feasible to substitute paper-
stock for woodpulp in many paper products (Table
A-3); however, this is not practiced extensively
because of economic factors and the present high
reliance of the dominant integrated industry on virgin
pulp. Key items that discourage use of wastepaper are
discussed in the following paragraphs.
Logistics. Paper must be collected from diverse
sources, transported to a processor, and then trans-
ported to a consuming mill. Combination board mills
are usually within reasonable distances of wastepaper
sources, but the integrated mills are generally located
in the South or West, near forests, but far from cities,
where waste is generated. Thus, the high costs of
collection and transportation work to the detriment
of paper recycling.
Contaminants. Contaminants in wastepaper
have affected recycling economics unfavorably, and
they have also influenced industry orientation.
Separation of wastepaper by grade and removal of
-------
PAPER
33
Woodpulp and Paperstock Relative to Major Grades Produced 1967
Total Paper
93.4 6.6
92.5
Newsprint
7.5
Communications
94.9 5.1
Packaging/Converting
95.0 5.0
87.6
Tissue
12.4
Total Paperboard Total Construction
66.6 33.4 . 72.5 27.5
Unbleached Kraft ,
100.0 Neg.
85.1 . Semichemical 14.9
• 100.0
Bleached
Neg.
Combination Board
7.0 93.0
Construction Paper
55.2 44.8
Hard Board; Board
Legend
1:'::':'::'::'::::::1 Woodpulp
\ I Paperstock
Newsprint 1.9
Percentage Distribution of Paperstock by End Uses
Paper 13.4
in
c
o
S
'E.
E
E
. o
in
CM
Ol
c
O)
o
03
CL
O)
CO
CD
to
i-
in
Tt
emica
-C
Q
(D
Q.
ion
Board
0.7-4
Figure A-2. Relative importance of woodpulp and paperstock in paper, 1967.*
Note: Other .fibrous materials were excluded; expressed in percent of total
woodpulp and paperstock. Based on MR I estimates.
"''Small percentage of paperstock used but cannot be verified'in statistics.
•• 'Source: Darnay, A., and W. E. Franklin. Salvage markets for materials in solid
wastes. Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972. p.45-2.
-------
34
RESOURCE RECOVERY
TABLE A-3
TECHNICAL LIMITS FOR RECYCLED MATERIAL FROM
PAPER AND PAPERBOARD*
Material
Recycle limits (% paperstock)'
Paperboard:
Unbleached kraft
Semichemical pulp
Bleached kraft
Combination board
Paper:
Newsprint
Office, communications
Publishing, printing,
converting
10-25
100
5-15
90-100
100
10-80
10-80
'Source: Midwest Research Institute. Economic studies in support of policy
formation on resource recovery. Unpublished report to the Council on Environmental
Quality, 1972.
contaminants are labor intensive and thus costly.
Prices. Waste paper prices have a history of
wide fluctuation due to the relative rigidity of
supplies and the marginal costs of acquiring new
supplies in periods of upswinging demand.
Technology. Improvements in woodpulping
technology have enabled the paper industry to tap
abundant virgin raw materials at increasingly lower
costs.
Integration. Most papermills own their own
forests, and most paper equipment installed since
1945 has been woodpulp based and located close to
these virgin raw materials. The mills are designed as
continuous operations starting with wood, going into
pulp, and ending with the finished product. Through
this integration, papermills have also been able to
exercise control over the supply and price of their
raw materials.
Tax Treatments. The cost of virgin woodpulp
can be kept down significantly by two tax treat-
ments: a cost depletion allowance (credit against
income taxes, based on timber owner's invested
capital in a forest and percentage of reserves sold) and
a capital gains allowance (profit from sales of timber
treated as a capital gain if the timber has been owned
for more than 6 months).
Economics
Most of the above problems have a negative
effect on the economics of wastepaper use. If one
examines the economics of using wastepaper in the
manufacture of certain paper and board products, it
is obvious that increasing the amount of paperstock
in these products increases the cost of manufacturing
them.
-------
PAPER
35
Table A-4 shows the comparative economics of
using supplemental wastepaper in existing papermills
for certain products. These examples are by no means
exhaustive of the many paper industry products, but
these cases support what would seem to be obvious
from the current industry orientation. The cost
penalty for increasing the use of paperstock is $2.50
per ton for corrugating medium, $3.75 per ton for
linerboard (these are the materials used to make
corrugated boxes), and $20 to $30 per ton for
printing/writing paper. The latter cost differential is
the result of the substantial upgrading of wastepaper
that would be required to produce a product of the
present high standards. The cost of newsprint manu-
facture, however, is lowered by using 100 percent
recycled fiber (deinked newsprint). This has been the
only major new market for wastepaper in recent
years.
The economics of constructing new mills based
on either virgin or secondary fibers also supports
industry's trend toward the use of more virgin fiber at
the expense of secondary fiber. An analysis of folding
boxboard (combination board made from secondary
fiber versus solid wood pulpboard made from virgin
pulp) found that the return on investment from a
virgin-based plant was 8.1 percent, whereas that from
a plant based on wastepaper (combination board) was
only 4.5 percent.22 Under such circumstances, invest-
ments in new combination board mills are very
unlikely. The reason for the shift in recent years of
boxboard manufacture from combination board mills
to virgin-based mills is obvious.
TABLE A4
COMPARATIVE ECONOMICS OF PAPER MANUFACTURE
FROM RECYCLED AND VIRGIN MATERIALS*
Product
Linerboard
Corrugating
medium
Printing/writing
paper
News-
print
Baseline case
(recycled fiber
content) (%)
Baseline average
operating cost
($/ton)
Supplemental fiber ..
use (recycled fiber
content) (%)
Operating cost with
increased use of
recycled fiber ($/ton)
Net cost of increased
recycled fiber usage
($/ton)
, 0
78.50
25
82.25
3.75
15
79.50
40
82.00
2.50
80-120
100
100-150
20-30
125
100
98
27
*Source: Midwest Research Institute. Economic studies in support of policy
formation on resource recovery. Unpublished report to the Council on Environmental
Quality, 1972.
-------
36
RESOURCE RECOVERY
FERROUS METALS
Status and Trends
Ferrous solid waste, primarily in the form of
food and beverage containers and discarded consumer
appliances, constitutes 7 to 8 percent of collected
municipal solid waste and totaled roughly 14 million
tons in 1970. However, a much more sizable amount
of used and discarded ferrous products (an estimated
38 to 54 million tons) is generated annually and
appears on our landscape in such visible forms as
abandoned automobiles, discarded farm implements,
out-of-service rail cars, construction and demolition
waste, and other steel products.2 3 >24
In 1967, American industry consumed about
85.4 million tons of iron and steel scrap, and 7.6
million tons were exported (Table A-5). The domestic
scrap consumption represented about 65 percent of
the raw steel production (Figure A-3). Fifty million
tons of this domestic scrap consumption was "home"
scrap that was generated in the ironmaking and steel-
making process and was fed back into the furnaces.
Excluding home scrap and exports, 35 million tons of
scrap, or about 20 percent of the iron and steel
consumption, was recycled in 1967.
For the past 25 years, scrap as a percent of
total metallic input to steelmaking has remained
essentially constant. However, the amount of this
scrap that is purchased by the steel industry
TABLE A-5
U.S. IRON AND STEEL SCRAP CONSUMPTION IN 1967*
Type
Amount (millions of short tons)
Domestic scrap consumption:
Home scrap
Purchased scrap:
Prompt
Obsolete
Exports
Total
50.2
13.6
21.4
7.6
93.0
'Source: Darnay, A., and W. E. Franklin. Salvage
markets for materials in solid wastes. Washington, U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1972. p.49 and 58-11.
(originating from outside the steel plant) has been
decreasing slightly, while that generated within the
steel mills has increased. As shown in Figure A-4,
purchased scrap as a percent of total scrap input to
steelmaking has decreased from 44.9 percent for the
period 1949-53 to 40.0 percent for 1964-68. In
absolute terms, while total steel production increased
35 percent over the period 1950-69 and total scrap
consumption increased 30 percent, purchased scrap
increased only 8 percent.
Sources of Waste
There are two basic types of iron and steel
scrap: home and-purchased scrap. Home scrap, the
ferrous waste product generated during iron and steel
production, includes ingot croppings, sheet trim-
mings, and foundry gates and risers. Because it is
generated in the steel mill, the scrap is of known
composition and purity, and the total amount
generated is normally consumed. Home scrap repre-
sented 60 percent of the domestic scrap consumption
in!967.25
Purchased scrap is further classified as
"prompt" or "obsolete." "Prompt" industrial scrap is
generated by metalworking firms in their fabrication
of products. Standard procedures have been
developed for the recycling of prompt scrap, and it
never really enters the.waste stream. At least 90
percent of the available prompt scrap is estimated to
be recycled. The scrap is desirable because of its
known composition, condition, and freedom from
contaminants. In addition, it is considered a reliable
material source because the quantities available are
predictable and because recycling channels have been
established. Prompt scrap represented about 16
percent of the domestic scrap consumption in
1967.23
"Obsolete" scrap comes from discarded iron
and steel products. Major sources are structural steel
from building demolitions, ships, railroad equipment,
and abandoned motor vehicles. Ferrous solid waste,
of course, occurs in many other forms, such as foodi
and beverage cans and home appliances, which are
not generally recovered because of logistics, contami-
nation, or other factors. Obsolete scrap represented
-------
FERROUS METALS
37
150
100
c/j
O
I-
oc
O
I
oo
CO
O
50
Raw Steel
Production
Total Scrap
Consumption
Purchased Scrap
Consumption
1955
1960
1965
1970
YEAR
Figure A-3. Domestic raw steel production and scrap consumption.*
•Source: Darnay, A., and W. E. Franklin. Salvage markets for materials in solid wastes.
Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972. p.58-1 and 58-11.
-------
60
a.
5
ID
tn
O
O
Q.
<
cc
O
tn
50
40
O
DC
HI
a.
30
HOME SCRAP
PURCHASED SCRAP
20
1945
1950
1955
1960
1965
YEAR
Figure A-4. Domestic home and purchased scrap consumption.
*Source: Darnay, A., and W. E. Franklin. Salvage markets for materials in solid
waste. Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972. p.58-11.
JO
in
CO
O
»:.
o-
w
»
PI
o
o
PI
-------
FERROUS METALS
39
about 25 percent of the domestic scrap consumption
in 1967.15
Not all of the steel consumed flows immedi-
ately into the waste stream and is available as scrap.
Considerable portions go into semipermanent use
(buildings, machinery, etc.) and enter the waste
stream years later. It is estimated that the 21.4
million tons of obsolete scrap purchased or exported
in 1967 was 43 to 56 percent of that available in the
solid waste stream. Taking into account scrap located
in remote locations and probably not recoverable as
well as scrap disposed by individuals, it is estimated
that roughly another 24 to 39 million tons of ferrous
scrap could feasibly have been recovered in 1967.2 3
Markets
The major markets for iron and steel scrap are
the domestic steel industry, the domestic foundry
industry, and exports. In 1969, the percent of total
scrap consumption by each was 73.8, 17.5, and 8.7,
respectively.2 6 However, in terms of purchased scrap,
both prompt and obsolete, foundries and exports
weigh more heavily. For the steel industry, about 35
percent of scrap consumed is purchased, whereas
foundries purchase about 60 percent of their scrap
consumption, and exports are, of course, purchased
scrap.
The American steel industry is composed of
approximately 110 companies; of these, 21 are fully
integrated (coke ovens, blast furnaces, and
steelmaking furnaces); 9 operate mostly blast
and 80 operate only steelmaking furnaces, with
electric steelmaking predominating. These 80
companies currently produce less than 10 percent of
the Nation's steel output, but they are a significant
outlet for ferrous solid waste.
The type of furnace used in steelmaking has a
direct bearing on scrap usage. Three types of furnaces
are used: open hearth, which uses an approximately
45-percent scrap charge; basic oxygen, 30-percent
scrap charge; and electric, 100-percent scrap. (These
charges are based on standard operating conditions,
which take into account both technological and
economic factors.) Basic trends have included (1) the
decline of the open hearth from 87 percent of steel
production in 1960 to 50 percent in 1968; (2) rapid
rise of basic oxygen furnaces from 3.3 percent of
production in 1960 to 37.1 percent in 1968; (3)
moderate growth of electric furnace steel production,
8.4 percent in 1960 to 12.7 percent in 1968. To date,
declines in scrap requirements from decreased open
hearth steelmaking have been balanced by increased
scrap needs from rising electric furnace production.
In the foundry industry, scrap already accounts
for about 85 percent of the metallic input, and
product specifications dictate that pig iron be a
portion of the charge in some cases. The cupola
furnace, which uses an 84-percent scrap charge,
dominates; it comprises about 90 percent of the
furnaces. Electric furnaces, which make up most of
the remainder and which use scrap 100 percent, have
been making inroads, however. The potential for
increased scrap consumption by foundries is limited,
but factors such as the increasing trend toward
replacing cupola facilities with electric furnaces,
geographic dispersion of foundries to put them closer
to scrap sources, and a growth rate in excess of
domestic steel production indicate that use of scrap
by foundries should at least hold its own and may
increase slightly. However, foundries do not have
potential as major markets for increased scrap
consumption.
Exports are a significant market for iron and
steel scrap, constituting 24 percent of total purchased
steel in 1970. Exports are particularly important for
the movement of obsolete scrap, because a large
portion of the exports are from obsolete sources.
Japan is the largest consumer of export scrap, taking
48.8 percent of the market in 1970.
Copper precipitation is the major market for
steel can scrap at present, but it is quite limited. Only
about 300,000 to 400,000 tons of old steel cans and
canmaking wastes—a small percentage of the
estimated 5 million tons of cans produced each
year—are consumed annually by this market.2 7
Issues and Problems
Differential Tax Treatment. Iron ore enjoys a
15-percent depletion allowance; in addition, iron ore
producers are allowed to use certain capital costs as
current deductions. Both of these policies reduce tax
liability and, thus, the price at which the ore must be
-------
40
RESOURCE RECOVERY
sold to maintain a given profit level. For example,
the 15-percent depletion allowance permits a'
13.5-percent decrease in the selling price without
reducing the profit to the producer. The percentage
depletion allowance continues as long as income is
derived from the property, which is usually long after
the capital investment in the property has been
recovered. Thus, iron ore producers enjoy a major tax
subsidy that is not available for secondary material
processors.
Steel Industry Structure. The integrated
portion of the steel industry is iron ore oriented and
has a significant investment in ore-processing equip-
ment. The integrated steel manufacturers generally
own virgin raw material sources and are able to
exercise control over supply and price. Uncertainties
in scrap price and availability are inconsistent with
the .steel industry's practices of long-range planning
and long:term commitments to equipment and raw
materials.
Scrap Quality. Rigid steel production specifi-
cations require that scrap be processed to remove
contaminants and impurities. Home and prompt scrap
are from known sources and are generally higher in
quality than obsolete scrap, with the exception of
certain obsolete scrap such as rail, ship, and structural
scrap. Cans present a special problem because of their
contamination with tramp elements-aluminum from
tops, lead from the seams, and tin. For example, lead
can be harmful to furnace refractories, and too much
tin causes undesirable properties in finished steel.
Thus, except in periods of peak demand or hot metal
shortages, the availability and low cost of higher
'quality raw materials tend to reduce the steelmaker's
incentive to use the lower quality portion of obsolete
scrap.
Changing Ironmaking and Steelmaking
Technology.. The replacement of open hearth
furnaces by basic oxygen furnaces has tended to
reduce scrap requirements. However, the increased
usage of electric furnaces has kept total scrap
consumption roughly constant overall. Future scrap
consumption is tied closely to continued increases in
electric furnace melting. Investment decisions depend
on the comparative returns on investment from
various types of furnaces. The return on investment
from an electric furnace that uses 100 percent scrap
obviously is strongly influenced by scrap prices. . '
The technical feasibility of. using increasing
proportions of scrap in other Steelmaking furnaces
has been demonstrated. The basic oxygen furnace
charge, for example, can be increased by preheating
the scrap, but because this entails additional costs, it
can only be justified if scrap cost decreases .relative to
ore cost.
Logistics. As with most materials present in
solid waste, logistics is a significant deterrent to the
recycling of ferrous scrap. Collection and transport
from diverse sources is costly. Recycling of large
appliances, steel cans, and other ferrous materials in
mixed municipal waste is strongly inhibited by high
transport costs, relative to scrap value.
Lpw Growth Rate of Consuming
Industries. The domestic iron and steel industries are
not growing as rapidly as the rest of the American
economy, primarily because of increased imports;
replacement of steel by other materials; and increased
use of lighter, high-strength steels. Over the past
decade, while the United States economy has grown
at an annual rate of over 5 percent, iron and steel
production has grown at an annual rate of about 3
percent.
Economics
'Most of the issues add up to an unfavorable
economic picture for scrap use in the steel industry,
though their individual impact is difficult to measure.
The total costs to an integrated steel producer of
using steel as opposed to ore in a basic oxygen
furnace were estimated by the Midwest Research
Institute in a study for the Council on Environmental
Quality.4 The comparative costs are difficult to deter-
mine because the steel industry does not maintain, or
at least does not report, such figures. Estimates, have
been made, however, which indicate that the cost of
using scrap is slightly higher than the cost ,of using
ore.
The chosen point of equivalency in the produc-
tion process was the point where either hot molten
pig iron or melted scrap could be used to charge a
basic oxygen furnace. The total cost of scrap at this
point was estimated to be $44.00 per ton, including
$33.50 purchased price of the scrap, $6.00 melting
cost, $3.50 for scrap handling, and $1.00 for
increased refractory wear caused by scrap usage.
-------
FERROUS METALS
41
Molten pig iron cost was estimated at $37.50 per ton,
including $28.50 for the ore and associated raw mate-
rials and $9.00 for melting cost. Thus, the cost of
scrap ready for charging to a basic oxygen furnace is
about $6.50, greater than the cost of hot metal
derived from ore at the same point.
The mill operator may actually perceive an even
higher relative cost of scrap usage because there will
be a tendency for him to associate a loss with letting
ore reduction facilities already in place sit idle. The
mill operator will also associate a cost-in this case, a
real one—with the possibility that end products made
from scrap may be rejected because they do not meet
product specifications.
Thus, without a reduction in scrap cost of at
least $6.00 to $7.00 per ton, it is unlikely that the
utilization of scrap in basic oxygen furnaces by
existing steel mills will increase.
Usage Considerations
- the reluctance of the integrated steel industry
to risk contamination in situations where specifi-
cations are demanding is understandable. However,
for the small electric furnace operator serving the
crude steel reinforcing bar and not participating in
specification steel at all, there is no particular quality
problem.
Table A-6 shows how well various steel pro-
ducts are suited for the input of lower grades of
scrap, and it shows their tonnage figures and percen-
tages of total output in 1970. Reinforcing bars and
hot-rolled light shapes can be produced from miscella-
neous waste scrap, with no significant sacrifice in
properties. In plants producing a considerable variety
of products, including high-specification items, low
grade scrap would be unattractive even at low prices;
the trend is to produce steel furnace output that can
meet a wide range of product specifications, and low
grade scrap could result in lower quality home scrap.
. The total market for reinforcing bars and light-
shape raw materials, would be sufficient to handle the
gatherable supply of low grade ferrous scrap if all
these products were produced by electric minimills.
There is, in.fact, a reasonably good fit between the
ferrous solid waste problem and the minimill require-
ments-in price, materials, and geography. However,
the large integrated steel producers also have a share
in the reinforcing bar and shape markets, and as
stated above, they are reluctant to use the lower scrap
grades. . . ,
TABLE A-6
STEEL PRODUCT. SUITABILITY FOR INCLUSION OF LOW GRADE SCRAP"
Product
1970 net
tons shipped
(millions)
Percent
of 1970 '
shipments
Suitability of
low grade scrap
as ingredient '
Reinforcing bars • 4.891 5.4 Excellent
Selected hot-rolled light shapes 6.076 6.7 Excellent
Selected wire rods 1.607 . 1.8 . Very good
Selected rail accessories ' .440 .5 Very good
Selected plates 7.777 8.6 Good
Oil country goods
Heavy structural shapes
Steel piling
Hot-rolled strips
Hot-rolled sheet
All other products
Total
1.307
5.566
.495
1.293
12.319
49.027
90.798
1.4
6.1
.5
1.4
13.6
54.0
100.0
Fair.
Fair
Fair
Marginal
Marginal
Generally unsuitable
-
*Source: Midwest Research Institute. Economic. studies in support of policy
formation on resource recovery. Unpublished report to the Council on Environmental
Quality, 1972.
-------
42
RESOURCE RECOVERY
NONFERROUS METALS
In 1969, a total of 10.5 million tons of alumi-
num, copper, lead, and zinc were consumed in the
United States, and 3.2 million tons were recycled, an
average of 30 percent of consumption. Figures A-5
through A-8 show consumption and amount of these
materials recycled from 1960 to 1969. For 1969,
recycling as a percent of consumption for each was
23 percent for aluminum, 46 percent for copper, 44
percent for lead, 10 percent for zinc,28
Approximately 24 percent of the aluminum
and only about 4 percent of all the other major non-
ferrous metals consumed occur in municipal waste.
These four metals constitute less than 1 percent, or
roughly 1.2 million tons, of the municipal solid waste
collected in 1968. Aluminum accounted for 83
percent of this total.2 9
Sources and Markets
Table A-7 shows the amounts of each of the
nonferrous metals recovered from prompt and obso-
lete sources. Copper and lead recovery from obsolete
sources is a very important part of recovery, whereas
for aluminum and zinc, little of the recovered scrap
comes from obsolete sources. In all cases, virtually all.
of the available prompt scrap from industrial fabri-
cation is recovered. Recovery of the metals from
obsolete sources is directly related to the form in
which the scrap occurs and to its location. Thus, large
quantities of lead are recovered from wornout bat-
teries returned to dealers by consumers. Obsolete
zinc, which is widely scattered and usually appears in
small quantities and in combination with other mate-
rials, is largely unrecbvered.
The aluminum can recycling programs of alumi-
num producers and soft drink producers have been
the most visible efforts to reclaim aluminum from
municipal waste. In 1970, these programs resulted in
the removal of about 2,875 tons of aluminum from
the solid waste stream. This was 1.3 percent of the
quantity of aluminum cans reaching the market.30
The feasibility of these programs depends on
the continued voluntary delivery of aluminum cans to
the centers at no more than $200 per ton. Thus far,
this price has proved to be sufficient incentive to
persuade individuals, Boy Scout groups, and others to
collect cans and bring them to the centers. One of the
major aluminum manufacturers participating in the
recycling program has estimated that the quantity of
aluminum cans ultimately recoverable by this method
will be between 5 and 30 percent of that reaching the
market.
TABLE A-7
AMOUNT OF NONFERROUS METALS RECOVERED FROM PROMPT AND
OBSOLETE SOURCES IN 1969V ,
Amount recycled
Material Source (thousands of tons)
Aluminum
Copper
Lead
Zinc
Obsolete
Prompt
Obsolete
Prompt
Obsolete
Prompt
.Obsolete
Prompt
175
855
657
832
497
88
41
141
*Source: Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus Laboratories/A study to identify
opportunities for increased solid waste utilization. Book 2. v.2. Environmental Protection
Agency, 1972. (Distributed by National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va.
as PB 212 730.)
-------
NONFERROUS METALS
43
5.0
4.0
I
t
o
w
c
o
3.0
2.0
1.0
Aluminum Consumption
Aluminum Scrap Consumption
(excluding home scrap)
1960
1965
1970
YEAR
Figure A-5. Aluminum and aluminum scrap consumption.*
'Source: Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus Laboratories. A study to identify
opportunities for increased solid waste utilization. Book 1. v.2. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1972. (Distributed by National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, Va. as PB 212 729.)
-------
44
o
t
o
-C
V)
c
o
RESOURCE RECOVERY
Copper Consumption
Copper Scrap Consumption
(excluding home scrap)
1960 1965
YEAR
Figure A-6. Copper and copper scrap consumption.*
1970
'Source: Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus Laboratories. A study to identify
opportunities for increased solid waste utilization. Book 2. v.3. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1972. (Distributed by National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, Va. as PB 212 730.)
-------
NONFERROUS METALS
45
1.4
1.2
c
o
.
in
c
o
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
Lead Consumption
Lead Scrap Consumption
(excluding home scrap)
1960
1965
1970
YEAR
Figure A-7. Lead and lead scrap consumption.*
•Source: Battelle Memorial Institute,'Columbus Laboratories. A study to identify
opportunities for increased solid waste utilization. Book 2. v.4. U.S. Environmental •
Protection Agency, 1972. (Distributed by National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, Va. as PB 212 730.) '
-------
46
RESOURCE RECOVERY
2.0
. 1.6
c
o
o
c.
v>
c
o
1.2
0.8
0.4
Zinc Consumption
Zinc Scrap Consumption
(excluding home scrap)
1960
1965
1970
YEAR
Figure A-8. Zinc and zinc scrap consumption.
'Source: Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus. Laboratories. A study to identify
opportunities for increased solid waste utilization. Book 2. v.4. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 1972. (Distributed by National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va. as
PB 212 730.)
-------
NONFERROUS METALS
47
The major sources and markets for recycled
aluminum, copper, lead, and zinc, in terms of product
type, are shown in Tables A-8 to A-15.
Issues and Problems
Nonferrous metals are high-value materials for
which a steady demand exists. Compared to paper,
steel, glass, textiles, and plastics, the costs of collec-
ting, transporting, and processing nonferrous metal
scrap are not as high a percentage of its value. In
addition, costs of refining virgin nonferrous metals
are high. Because handling nonferrous scrap does not
increase costs inordinately, the scrap is considerably
cheaper than virgin material. Thus, the scrap moves
freely.
Probably the major reason that more non-
ferrous scrap is not recycled is the form and location
in which it occurs. Most of the nonferrous scrap that
is easily accessible is recycled. However, there are
certain types of scrap that are too contaminated and
too widely scattered to allow economical recovery,
despite the high value of the materials (dealers buying
prices range from $60 to $920 per ton). For example,
copper in cartridge brass and .lead in ammunition are
usually widely scattered over the countryside. Zinc is
usually used as an alloying agent and. coating and thus
is extremely difficult to separate. Aluminum
occurring in consumer durables, transportation
vehicles, and construction is often only a small part
of the product, thus much of it is never recovered.
Aluminum used in packaging and ending up in the
municipal waste stream cannot be economically
recovered at present. It could only be feasibly
separated as part of a large reclamation system where
other materials that constituted a higher percentage
of the waste are also recovered.
An interesting perplexity of nonferrous metal
recycling is that for some of the metals-copper is a
good example-the scrap dealers perceive that they
are pulling in about all that is available. Their
estimate of the recycling ratio would be much higher
than the actual.
TABLE. A-8
SOURCES OF OBSOLETE ALUMINUM SCRAP IN 1969*
Source
Building and
construction
Transportation
Consumer durables
Electrical
Machinery and equipment
Containers and
packaging
Other
Total
Estimated available
for recycling
(thousands of tons)
.71.0
329.0
197.0
7.0
61.0
486.0
183.0'
1 ,334.0
Estimated amount
recycled
(thousands of tons)
9.0
100.0
25.0
6.5
15.0
2.0
. 17.5
175.0
Percent
recycled
13.0 .
30.0
13.0
93.0
25.0
.4
9.2
13.1
*Source: Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus Laboratories. A' study to identify
opportunities for increased solid.waste utilization. Book 2. v.4. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1972. (Distributed by National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, Va. as PB 212 730.) ...
-------
48 RESOURCE RECOVERY
TABLE A-9
MARKETS FOR PROMPT AND OBSOLETE ALUMINUM SCRAP IN 1969*
. Use
Casting alloys
Wrought aluminum products
Exports
Total
Scrap
consumption
(thousands of tons)
741
255
77
1,073
Percent
69
24
7
100
'Source: Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus Laboratories. A study to identify
. opportunities for increased solid waste utilization. Book 2. v.2. U.S. Environmen-
tal Protection Agency, 1972, (Distributed by National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, Va. as PB 212 730;)
TABLE A-10 . .
SOURCES OF OBSOLETE COPPER SCRAP IN 1969*
Source
Electrical wire and
copper tube
Magnet wire
Cartridge brass
Automotive radiators
Railroad car boxes
Oth'er brass, cast
and wrought
Alloying additives
Miscellaneous
Total
Estimated available
for recycling
(thousands of tons)
471.0
158.0
112.1
53.0
22.6
703.3
96.9
6.1
1 ,623.2
Estimated amount
recycled
(thousands of tons)
319.4
13.5
35.4
48.5
20.0
213.9
0
6.1
656.8
Percent
recycled
68
9
31
91
88
30
0
100
40
'Source: Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus Laboratories. A study to identify
opportunities for increased solid waste utilization. Book 2. v.2. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1972. (Distributed by National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, Va. as PB 212 730.)
-------
NONIfERROUS METALS 49
TABLE A-ll
MARKETS FOR PROMPT AND OBSOLETE COPPER SCRAP IN 1969'
Scrap
consumption
Use (thousands of tons) Percent
Wire and cable 292 20
Brass mill products 701 47
Brass/bronze foundries 369 25
Other 127 8
Tots, 1'489 100'
•Source: Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus Laboratories. A study to identify
opportunities for increased solid waste utilization. Book 2. v.3. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1972. (Distributed by National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, Va. as PB 212 730.)
TABLEA-12
SOURCES OF OBSOLETE LEAD SCRAP IN 1969*
Source
Batteries
Cable sheathing
Solder
Bearing metal
Type metal
Ammunition
Other
Total
Estimated available
for recycling
(thousands of tons)
485
130
65
33
29
80
100
922
Estimated amount
recycled
(thousands of tons)
350
32
9
10
29
5
62
497
Percent
recycled
72
25
14
30
100
6
62
54
'Source: Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus Laboratories. A study to identify
opportunities for increased solid waste utilization. Book 2. v.4. iU.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1972. (Distributed by National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, Va. as PB 212 730.)
^271,000 tons of lead used in tetraethyl lead for gasoline and 125,000 tons of lead
used in oxides and chemicals are not included because there is no possibility for its recovery.
-------
50 RESOURCE RECOVERY
TABLEA-13
MARKETS FOR PROMPT AND OBSOLETE LEAD SCRAP IN 1969*
Use
Type '
Tetrae'thyl lead
Batteries
Solder' :
Cable
Bearings
Other
Total
Scrap
consumption
(thousands of tons)
28
75
400
31
19
13
19
585
Percent
4!8
12.8
68.4
5.3
3.2
2.2
3.2
99.9
'Source: Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus Laboratories. A study to identify
opportunities for increased solid waste utilization. Book 2. v.2, U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1972. (Distributed by National Technical Information Service,
Springfield; Va. as PB 212 730.)'
. , , • TABLE A-14
' SOURCES OF OBSOLETE ZINC SCRAP IN 1969*
Source
Zinc base alloys
Old galvanized
Oxides and chemicals
Other
Total
Estimated available
for recycling
(thousands of tons)
353
390
190
. 1 30
1,063
Estimated amount
recycled
(thousands of tons)
33
0
0
8
41 ,
Percent
recycled
9
0
0
6
3.9
'Source: Battelie Memorial Institute, Columbus Laboratories, A study to identify
opportunities for increased solid waste utilization. Book 2. v.2. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1972. (Distributed by National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, Va. as PB 212 730.)
•• ' ' TABLE A-15
MARKETS FOR PROMPT AND OBSOLETE ZINC SCRAP IN 1969*
Use .
Slab zinc • .'
Zinc dust . .
Alloys
Oxides and chemicals
Total ' . •
Scrap
consumption
(thousands of tons)
' 76
34
27
45
182
Percent
41.7
18.8
14.8
24.7
100.0
"Source:.Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus Laboratories. A study to identify
opportunities for increased solid waste utilization. Book 2. v.5. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1972. (Distributed by National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, Va. as PB 212 730.)
-------
51
GLASS
Status and Trends
In 1967 the glass manufacturing industry
produced 12.8 million tons of glass. This production
was divided among the three major segments of the
industry: containers, flat glass, and pressed and blown
glass. Containers, the most significant segment,
accounted for 8.9 million tons, whereas flat glass
accounted for 2.1 million tons and blown glass for
only 1.8 million tons.
By weight, glass constitutes only 6 to 8 percent
of municipal solid waste. There is virtually no
recovery of glass from mixed waste, but a small
amount of glass is recycled through voluntary collec-
tion centers and cullet dealers. Compared to other
materials, glass is among the lowest in recycling
ratios, or about 4.5 percent of consumption, when
home scrap (scrap generated in the glass manufac-
turer's plant) is excluded. Of a total of 12.8 million
tons of glass produced in 1967, purchased cullet
consumption was approximately 580,000 tons.3'
Sources and Markets
Only a minute portion of glass waste (almost
exclusively flat glass) is associated with industrial
sources. Thus, municipal waste is the main potential
source for old glass for recycling. In 1968, there were
about 11.6 million tons of glass in municipal solid
waste.
The best sources of quality cullet have been
declining. Clear glass milk bottles and returnable glass
containers rejected from bottle-washing operation-
major sources of cullet in the past-are gradually
disappearing. Sorting, collection, and delivery costs
have risen, principally because these operations are
highly labor intensive. Plants have not been main-
tained and equipment has not been purchased
because of the limited capital of the few dealers still
in operation. As the quality and availability of
purchased cullet have deteriorated, its use in the glass
industry has also declined.
The glass container segment of the industry,
which accounts for over 70 percent of the total glass
tonnage output, purchased only about 100,000 tons
of cullet, or 1 percent of its raw material consump-
tion in 1967. This is significantly lower than in the
other two segments of the industry, largely because
of increased utilization of in-plant cullet. Flat glass
producers purchased 10 percent, or 244,000 tons;
and pressed and blown glass producers, 12 percent, or
256,000 tons.32
In addition to the use of purchased cullet in
glass furnaces, there are several alternatives for cullet
utilization. The most widely publicized alternative is
in "glasphalt," a road-surfacing material in which
cullet replaces part of the asphalt aggregate. Initial
testing results at the University of Missouri indicate
that glasphalt is equal to or superior to conventional
asphalt. However, cullet would have to compete
economically with asphalt aggregate, which ranges in
price from $1.50 to $5.00 per ton when delivered to
the asphalt plant. Present cullet prices are signifi-
cantly higher than this amount.
Other proposed uses for cullet include construc-
tion materials, such as glass-cement blocks, and
cullet-terrazzo. Experiments to determine the feasibi-
lity of cullet utilization in these products are cur-
rently underway. ' .
Issues and Problems
The glass industry has certain characteristics
•that make high levels of waste recycling much more
favorable than in other industries. First, the manufac-
ture of glass containers is essentially a one-step
process, starting with raw materials and ending with
the finished product. Second, cullet can be substi-
tuted for virgin raw materials in large percentages,
provided that the cullet meets minimum specifi-
cations of color, cleanliness, and purity. From a
technology standpoint, glass manufacture from 100
percent cullet appears possible.
There are, however, two problem areas:
comparative economics and the recovery of cullet
from mixed waste. With respect to economics, the
cost of virgin raw materials averages $15.48 per ton
batch, as compared to a range of from $16.00 to
$22.50 per ton batch of cullet; both include freight
charges to the plant. Processing cost differentials are
-------
52
RESOURCE RECOVERY
not significant. The conversion of an existing plant to
using increased quantities of purchased cullet would
cost from $50,000 to $100,000, depending upon the
plant; but the changeover could be accommodated
within a framework of normal periodic plant
improvements. A new plant designed to use cullet
would be no more costly than a new plant designed
for virgin materials.4
The recovery of large quantities of cullet from
municipal waste is dependent on the development of
a technical process for separating and upgrading the
cullet. However, the possibility of source separation
of glass containers in the home for separate collec-
tions is an alternative that cannot be eliminated.
Neither traditional cullet dealers nor voluntary citizen
delivery of glass to recycling centers is likely to
increase the cullet flow by more than a few percent.
Mechanical separation methods for removing
glass from other components of municipal waste are
still under development. One promising system that
combines density classification and optical color
sorting -is currently being tested at Franklin, Ohio;
other methods, including one developed by the
Bureau of Mines, are not yet ready for a compre-
hensive test.
Until the technology 'is further developed,
utilization of purchased cullet on a large scale does
not appear possible. Further, because glass is only a
small percent of solid waste, complete glass recovery
from mixed waste is not likely to occur until full-
scale recovery centers concerned with all major
materials are set up.
Unless source separation of glass containers is
found to be feasible, utilization of'purchased cullet
on a large scale appears to.be closely tied to develop-
ment of full-scale municipal resource recovery
centers. The glass coming out of such systems will not
be attractive to the glass industry on a cost basis,
however, unless economic incentives are provided.
. PLASTICS
Status and Trends
Plastics are becoming an increasingly important
material in our society, and their growth continues at
an'impressive rate. From 1960 to 1970, plastics
consumption increased 'at an average annual rate of
11.8 percent and totaled 8.5 million tons in 1969. By
1980, consumption is expected to reach 19 million
tons.33 '
Today plastics account for only about 2
percent by weight of municipal solid waste and,' by
1980, will average about 3 percent. Very little plastic
scrap is recycled other than that reused within the
manufacturing plant in which it is generated. This,
however, is a fairly significant quantity. Plastics fabri-
cators, for example, consumed an-amount'of internal
scrap equal to about 1.5 million tons'in 1970'.34 There
is essentially no recovery of plastic waste from
obsolete products.
'The plastics reprocessor is the recycling channel
for all industrial plastics recycled outside originating
plants. About 500,000 tons of waste plastics were
handled by reprocessors in 1970. Of the plastics
recycled through reprocessors', about 55 percent came
from resin producers; 30 percent, from fabricators;
and 15 percent,'from converters.35 '36
There are two types of plastics, thermoplastics
and thermosetting plastics: The thermosetts, 20
percent of plastics consumption, cannot be softened
and reshaped through heating and, thus, are not
recyclable. In'addition, most of the plastics used as
coatings and adhesives are impossible to 'recycle.
'Thus, about 75 percent of the plastics consumed are
potentially recyclable. ......
Sources and Markets "
Table A-16 shows the major markets for plas-
tics. Packaging and construction are by far the'most
significant, accounting for 20 and 25 percent, respec-
-------
PLASTICS
53
TABLE A-16
TOTAL AND SELECTED MAJOR END USE MARKETS FOR
CONSUMPTION OF PLASTICS, 1967 TO 1969*
(thousands of tons)
Market
Agriculture ,
Appliances
Construction
Electrical
Furniture
Housewares
Packaging
Toys
Transportation
Total consumption
1967
75+
198
1,070 •
396
250+
313
1,121 +
208
109
6,550
1968
. 85
•238
1,215
452
273
373
1,508
243
334
7,558
1969
95
234
1,327
567
328
. 425
1,729
' 269
536
8,535
•Source: Darnay, A., and W. E. Franklin. Salvage markets for materials in solid
wastes. Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972. p.88-5.
lively, of consumption in 1970. Plastics from
.packaging account for about 60 percent by weight of
the plastics in the solid waste stream; much of the
other plastic consumed is "held up" in permanent
and semipermanent end uses. Although some of the
waste generated in the various stages of .plastics
production is recycled, the portion that is not makes
up about 15 percent .of the plastics in the waste
stream. Thus, packaging and industrial waste account
for 75 percent of plastic waste.3 7
As a general rule,, scrap plastic has to be used in
an end application having wider specification require-
ments than the product yielding the scrap. The
primary markets for scrap plastic include such items
as hose, weather stripping, toys, cheap housewares,
pipe, and similar applications. These are areas where
(1) plastic-properties and performance are not para-
mount; (2) relatively noncritical processes are used,
such as compression molding or heavy extrusion; (3)
the cost of plastic resin is a high proportion of total
product cost.
Plastics also have potential as a fuel supplement
for generating energy because of their high Btu value
of 11,500 Btu per pound. (The Btu content of
paper is about 8,000 Btu per pound and that of coal
is about 12,000 Btu per pound. This is particularly
appealing for the recovery of plastics, or value from
plastics, in municipal waste, where plastics are hard to
separate from other materials.
Issues and ProWems
Technology. There is a fundamental difference
between the nature of plastics recycling and that of
metals, paper, glass, and other materials. Metals
production, for example, begins with an impure ore
that is progressively concentrated, smelted,,refined,
and freed from impurities. Plastics production, on the
-------
54
RESOURCE RECOVERY
other hand, begins with a high-purity virgin polymer
to which various additives, colorants, and reinforce-
ments are added. Thus, in the metals industries, there
is a background of technology designed to purify and
upgrade ores and concentrates. Such technology can
also be applied to the upgrading of scrap. In the plas-
tics industry, where the basic raw material is progres-
sively "contaminated" in production, little techno-
logy has been developed that can be applied to purify
waste plastics.
Compatibility. The principal difficulty in.
recycling plastics is that different polymers
(polyethylene, polyvinyl chloride, etc.) are not com-
patible with each other and must be separated, a very
difficult and costly task.
Economics. The continually decreasing cost of
basic plastic materials has made scrap plastic less
competitive with its main competitor, off-grade virgin
resin. For example, since 1961, the price of low-
density polyethylene has decreased from 24 to 13
cents per pound. Scrap plastic, which is restricted by
rising labor and distribution costs, did not drop as
rapidly; the price of the scrap is now only about 1
cent per pound under the off-grade resin price, versus
about 3 cents in 1961.
Logistics. This problem, which is common to
recycling of all materials, is important to plastics
recycling. The extremely low density of plastics
makes transportation very costly.
Separation. Separation of plastics from other
waste is extremely difficult, making recovery of
plastics from municipal waste almost impossible
unless the plastics can be diverted from the waste
stream and kept separate.
TEXTILES
Status and Trends
The U.S. textile industry consumed approxi-
mately 5 million tons of textile fiber in 1970, an
increase since 1960 of 61.5 percent. Far more signifi-
cant for textile recycling was the change in the type
of fiber consumed, with a major shift occurring from
use of natural to manmade fibers. In 1960, natural
fibers constituted 69 percent of fiber consumption;
manmade fibers, 31 percent. In 1970, the figures
were 39 percent for natural fibers and 61 percent for
manmade. By 1980, the ratio of natural to manmade
fibers is expected to be 25 to 75. The implications of
this change will be discussed.38
In 1970, an estimated 0.8 million tons of waste
textiles were processed by waste textile dealers and
sold (recycled) to various markets.3 9 In addition, an
undetermined amount of used clothing that poten-
tially would enter the waste stream was collected by
social welfare agencies and redistributed.
There are not sufficient historical data available
to show trends in textile recycling. However, it is
known that secondary textile consumption in many
traditional markets has been declining and that other
markets, such as the important wiping cloth market,
have been growing at a slower rate than total textile
consumption. Thus, it is almost certain that the rate
of textile recovery (waste recovered versus textile
consumption) has been declining.
Textiles represent only a small portion of
municipal solid waste. In 1968, textiles in collected
municipal solid waste totaled 1.2 million tons, or 0.6
percent of the total. Most of the textile consumption
that does not appear in the municipal waste stream is
either collected by social welfare agencies, disposed
of, sent to secondary textile dealers by industry, or is
being accumulated in households.
Sources and Markets
Figure A-9 represents the major sources and
markets for textile waste. The mill waste is the home
scrap of the textile industry; the manufacturing
waste, the prompt portion, and consumer discards,
the obsolete.
In contrast to most of the other materials
discussed in this report, the home scrap (mill waste) is
not reused within the generating plant, but instead,
-------
TEXTILES
55
passes through the secondary textile dealers. Mill
waste accounted for about one-third of the material
handled by waste textile dealers in 1970.
Waste from fabrication (prompt) is a consider-
ably less important source of recycled textile waste
than is the case with many other materials. It has
been estimated that waste recovered from fabrication
is only about 60 percent of that generated.40 Fabri-
cation waste accounted for an estimated 20 percent
of the waste handled by waste textile dealers in 1970.
Obsolete waste accounted for the remaining 45
percent of recycled textile waste. This waste is
provided mostly by social welfare agencies and
institutions such as Goodwill Industries from items
deemed unsuitable for reuse as clothing.
Issues and Problems
The increasing trend toward the use of cotton-
polyester and wool-polyester blends probably
represents the major problem of textile recycling of
the 1970's. These blends are not only generally
unusable as wastes in themselves, but they also tend
to become mixed with other, usable waste textiles
and thereby reduce the economic value of the total
waste supply. This has caused problems, particularly
in the three major markets for cotton waste: rag
paper, vulcanized fiber, and wiping cloths.
In the case of the first two markets, contami-
nation of cotton is limited to a maximum of 1 to 2
percent. Thus, increase in blends means greater
control by the textile processors, resulting in
increased cost. It also greatly reduced the usable yield
from used textiles.
Fiber blends have essentially the same effect on
the wiping cloth business. Wipers are less sensitive to
small percentages of polyester fiber, but fiber blends
with over 50 percent polyester do not have satis-
factory absorption characteristics. (Garments with
polyester/cotton blends of 50/50 and 65/35 are
extremely common.) The present percent of such
blends in mixed rag bundles is unknown, but the
increased replacement of manmade fibers by
synthetics is testimony that they are likely to
increase, thereby reducing usable yields.
Another major problem of textile recycling is
that used textiles are losing ground in many tradi-
tional markets. Wool markets are one of the most
serious problems, due mainly to the Wool Labeling
Act (the effect has been psychological one, on
consumers who perceive that virgin wool is cleaner or
purer) and increased competition from secondary
wool from foreign sources. Also, virgin-based mate-
rials are replacing used textiles in some markets. The
incentive for using secondary textiles as paddings,
filler, etc., has traditionally been their low cost. Now,
development of virgin-based products such as
urethane foams at competitive prices has resulted in
decreasing used textile markets.
-------
GENERATORS:
Fiber Producers and
Textile Mills
Manufacturers
Apparel
Home
Furnishings
Industrial
Products
Miscel-
laneous
Consumers Used
Discards
SECONDARY MATERIAL
INDUSTRY:
Cotton Mill Waste
and
Fiber Blends
WASTE TEXTILE DEALER
(Broker, Sorter, Processor)
Cotton Mill Waste
and
Cotton Rags
Cotton Rags
and
Cotton-Rich Blends
Paper Mills
and
Vulcanized Fiber
Synthetic
(Nylon, Rayon
etc.)
Reprocessed
and
Used Wool
200 million Ib
200 million Ib
450 mi/lion Ib
100 million Ib
150 million Ib
200 million Ib
Figure A-9. Waste textile utilization flows."
"Source: Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus Laboratories. A study to identify opportunities for
increased solid waste utilization. Book 3. v.9. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1972. (Distributed by
National Technical information Service, Springfield, Va. as PB 212 731.)
§
m
•ya
m
o
O
w
-------
INSTALLATIONS. . -1."
57
Resource Recovery Installations
TABLE A-17
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE COMPOSTING PLANTS IN THE UNITED STATES IN 1969*
Location
Altoona,
Pennsylvania
Boulder,
Colorado
Gainesville,
Florida
Houston,
Texas
Houston,
Texas
Johnson City,
Tennessee
Largo,
Florida
Mobile,
Alabama
Norman,
Oklahoma
Phoenix,
Arizona
Sacramento County,
California
San Fernando,
California
San Juan,
Puerto Rico
Springfield,
Massachusetts
St. Petersburg,
Florida
Williamston,
Michigan
Wilmington,
Ohio
Company
Altoona FAM, Inc.
Harry Gorby
Gainesville Municipal
Waste Conversion
Authority
Metropolitan Waste
Conversion Corporation
United Compost
Services, Inc.
U.S. Public Health
Service and
Tennessee Valley
Authority
Peninsular Organics,
Inc. •
City of Mobile
International
Disposal Corporation
Arizona Biochemical
Company
Dano of America, Inc.
International
Disposal Corporation
Fairfield
Engineering Company
Springfield Organic
Fertilizer Company
Westinghouse Corporation
City of Williamston
Good Riddance, Inc.
Capacity Type Opening
Process (tons/day) waste date
Fairfield- 45
Hardy
Windrow 100
Metrowaste 1 50
conversion
Metrowaste 360
conversion
Snell 300
Windrow 52
Metrowaste 50
conversion
Windrow 300
Naturizer 35
Dano 300
Dano 40
Naturizer 70
Fairfield- 150
Hardy
Frazer- 20
Eweson
Naturizer 105
Riker 4
Windrow 20
*Source:' Breidenbach, A. W. Composting of municipal solid
Garbage, paper
Mixed refuse
Mixed refuse,
digested sludge
Mixed refuse, raw
sludge
Mixed refuse
Mixed refuse, raw
sludge
Mixed refuse,
digested sludge
Mixed refuse,
digested sludge
Mixed refuse
Mixed refuse
Mixed refuse
Mixed refuse
Mixed refuse
Garbage
Mixed refuse
Garbage, raw
sludge, corn cobs
Mixed refuse
wastes in the United
1951
1965
1968
1966
1966
1967
1963
1966
1959
1963
1956
1963
1969
1954
1966
1955
1963
Status
Operating
Operating
intermittently
Operating
Operating
Closed (1966)
Operating
Closed (1967)
Operating
intermittently
Closed (1964)
Closed (1965)
Closed (1963)
Closed (1964)
Operating
Closed (1962)
Operating
intermittently
Closed (1962)
Closed (1965)
States. Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1971.
-------
58 ' RESOURCE RECOVERY
TABLE A-18
RESOURCE RECOVERY INSTALLATIONS: INCINERATORS WITH MAJOR HEAT
RECOVERY OPERATIONS*
Location
Atlanta, Georgia
Boston, Massachusetts
Braintree, Massachusetts
Chicago, Illinois
(Northwest)
Chicago, Illinois
(Southwest)
Hempstead, New York
(Merrick)
Hempstead, New York
(Oceanside)
Miami, Florida
Norfolk, Virginia
(U.S. Naval Station)
Oyster Bay, New York
Providence, Rhode Island
Type of installation
Volund
Refractory
Waterwall
Waterwall
Refractory
Refractory
Refractory
Refractory
Waterwall
Refractory
Refractory
Design refuse
capacity
(tons per day)
700
240
1,600
1,200
600
900
360
"Source: Systems study of air pollution from municipal incineration, 3 v. Cambridge,
Arthur D. Little, Inc., Mar. 1970. 920 p. (Distributed by National Technical Information
Service, Springfield, Va., as PB 192 378 to PB 192 380.)
-------
REFERENCES
1. Ayres, R. U., and A. V. Kneese. Environmental pollution. In Resource recovery act of
1969. Pt.2. Hearings before the Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution of the
Committee on Public Works, U.S. Senate, 91st Cong., 1st sess., S.2005, Serial No.
91-13. Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1969.p.821.
2. Ayres and Kneese, Environmental pollution, p.819. •
3. Darnay, A., and W. E. Franklin. Salvage markets for materials in solid wastes. Washing-
ton, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972. 187 p.
4. Midwest Research Institute. Economic studies in support of policy formation on
resource recovery. Unpublished report to the Council on Environmental Quality,
1972.
5. Darnay, A., and W. E. Franklin. The role of packaging in solid waste management,
1966 to 1976. Public Health Service Publication No. 1855. Washington, U.S. Gov-
ernment Printing Office, 1969. p.105.
6. EPA extrapolation based on data for 1967 from Black, R. J., A. J. Munich, A. J. Klee,
H. L. Hickman, Jr., and R. D. Vaughan. The national solid wastes survey; an interim
report. Cincinnati. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1968. p.13.
7. EPA extrapolation based on census data from U.S. Bureau of the Census, Statistical
abstract of the United States, 1971. 92d ed. Washington, U.S. Government Printing
Office. 1,008 p.
8. EPA extrapolation based on data for 1965 from Combustion Engineering, Inc.
Technical-economic study of solid waste disposal needs and practices. Public Health
Service Publication No. 1886. Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1969.
. 705 p.'
9. EPA extrapolation based on data from 1965 from Air pollution-1969. Hearing before
the Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution of the Committee on Public Works,
U.S. Senate, 91st Cong., 1st sess., Oct. 27, 1969. Washington, U.S. Government
Printing Office, 1970. 244 p.
10. EPA extrapolation based on U.S. Bureau of Mines estimates, 1972.
11. EPA extrapolation based on data for 1966 from Air pollution-1969.
12. EPA extrapolation based on Agricultural handbook, 1971,
13, Black, Muhich, Klee, Hickman, and Vaughan, The national solid wastes survey; an
interim report, p.13.
14, Darnay and Franklin, Salvage markets, p.35 and 45-7.
59
-------
60 RESOURCE RECOVERY
15. Darnay and Franklin, Salvage markets, p.58-11.
16. Darnay and Franklin, Salvage markets, p.81.
17. Darnay and Franklin, Salvage markets, p.64-5.
18. Midwest Research Institute. Resource recovery from mixed municipal solid wastes.
Unpublished data, 1972.
19. Darnay and Franklin, Salvage markets, p.45-13 and 45-14.
20. Darnay and Franklin, Salvage markets, p.45-24.
21. Darnay and Franklin, Salvage markets, p.35.
22. Resource Planning Associates. Preliminary report on a Federal tax incentive for recy-
cling post-consumer waste materials. Unpublished data, 1972.
23. Darnay and Franklin, Salvage markets, p.49.
24. Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus Laboratories. Identification of opportunities for
increased recycling of ferrous solid waste. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
1973. p.116, (Distributed by National Technical Information Service, Springfield,
Va.,asPB213577.)
25. Darnay and Franklin, Salvage markets, p.58-2.
26. Battelle Memorial Institute, Identification of opportunities for increased recycling,
p.118.
27. Battelle Memorial Institute, Identification of opportunities for increased recycling,
p.167.
28. Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus Laboratories. A study to identify opportunities
for increased solid waste.utilization. Book 2. v.2-5. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 1972. (Distributed by National Technical Information Service, Springfield,
Va.,asPB212 730.)
29. Darnay and Franklin, Salvage markets, p.59.
30. Battelle Memorial Institute, A study to identify opportunities, Book 2.
31. Darnay and Franklin, Salvage markets, p.65.
32. Darnay and Franklin, Salvage markets, p.66-67.
33. Darnay and Franklin, Salvage markets, p.82, 83, and 88-5.
34. Milgrom, J., Arthur D. Little, Inc. Incentives for recycling and reuse of plastics. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1972. p.3-18. (Distributed by National Technical
Information Service, Springfield, Va., as PB 214 045.)
35. Milgrom, Incentives for recycling, p.3-15.
-------
REFERENCES 6!
36. Personal Communication. J. Milgrom, Arthur D. Little, Inc., to Steven A. Lingle,
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs, 1972.
37. Milgrom, Incentives for recycling, p.3-57.
38. Battelle Memorial Institute, A study to identify opportunities, Book 3, v.9, p.10.
39. Battelle Memorial Institute, A study to identify opportunities, Book 3, v.9, p.16.
40. Battelle Memorial Institute, A study to identify opportunities, Book 3, v.9, p.26.
MO820R fiU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1974 546-316/276 1-3
------- |