Prepublication issue for EPA libraries
       and State Solid Waste Management Agencies
                  BASE LINE FORECASTS

                          OF

            RESOURCE RECOVERY, 1972 TO 1990


                     Final Report
    This report (SW-107c) on work performed under
Federal  solid waste management contract no. 68-01-0793
            to MIDWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE
    and is reproduced as received from contractor
   Copies of this report will be available from the
        National Technical Information Service
             U.S.  Department of Commerce
            Springfield, Virginia  22151
         U.S.  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                         1975

-------
This report has been reviewed by the Resource Recovery Division, OSWMP,
EPA, and approved for publication.  .Approval does not signify that the
contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Environmental
Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or commercial
products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use/

An environmental protection publication (SW-107c) in solid waste
management series.

-------
                                 PREFACE
          The study was carried out under EPA Contract 68-01-0793 as MRI
Project No. 3736-D, "Resource Recovery Forecasts to 1990."  The basic
objective of the study was to develop forecasts of recovery of materials
common to municipal solid waste for the 1972 to 1990 period.  These mate-
rials are:  ferrous metals, glass, aluminum, plastic, rubber and paper.
In addition, a similar recovery forecast was developed for mixed municipal
waste.  The principal resource recovery options identified as the most
viable were materials recycling and energy/fuel recovery.  The forecasts
were made under the contractual "given" that specific federal legislation
would not occur to stimulate or discourage recycling.

          In general, we found that resource recovery from municipal waste
is likely to be significant in the years ahead.  Because the study took
place in a period of unusually dynamic change in energy supply and natural
resource use, we were unable to evaluate fully the impact of these rapid
changes on our long-range forecasts.  However, we believe that our fore-
casts will prove to be conservative for resource recovery when the implica-
tions of the energy and resource supply "crisis" are fully understood.

          The project was under the general direction of Mr. Gary R. Nuss,
Manager, Economics and Management Science Division.  Mr. William E. Franklin,
Manager, Resource and Environmental Economics Programs, was project leader
and a principal analyst.  Other analysts on the study were Mr. David Hahlen,
Mr. William Park, Mr. Michael Urie and Mr. James Cross.

          The EPA project officer was Mr.  Michael Loube, who provided valuable
guidance and direction to the research team.
Approved for:

MIDWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Gary R. Nuss.
Economics and Management Science Division
                                   iii

-------
                            TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter I - Introduction 	    1

     Purpose of Study	    2
     Research Objectives and Scope 	    2

          Basic Assumptions of the Study	    3
          Report Organization	    4

Chapter II - Overview of Resource Recovery Forecasts to 1990 ....    6

     Overview of Study Findings	    6
     Resources Recovered from Mixed Municipal Solid Wastes 	    7

Chapter III - Resource Recovery from Municipal Solid Waste 	   17

     Forecasting Resource Recovery from Mixed Municipal Wastes ...   17
     Basic Resource Recovery Economics 	   18

          The Economics of Sanitary Landfill for Disposal. ......   18
          The Economics of Resource Recovery 	   19
          The Economics of Disposal Versus Resource Recovery ....   24
          How Land Values for Disposal Sites were Determined ....   26

     Economically Recoverable Solid Wastes 	   32

          Energy Values and Land Costs	   32
          Where Resource Recovery Will Be Economically Feasible. .  .   34

     Quantity of Solid Wastes Processed for Resource Recovery. ...   46

          Solid Wastes Processed for Resource Recovery 	   46
          Number of Resource Recovery Systems in Operation 	   53

Chapter IV - General Approach and Methodology for Analysis of Seven
               Materials in Solid Wastes 	   62

     Introduction	   62
     General Methodology and Approach	  .   62
     Basic Economic and Population Data	   64
     General Observations on Materials Recovery	   64

-------
                        TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)


                                                                      Page

 Chapter  V -  Recovery  Forecasts  for Glass Containers  to 1990.  	  67

      Summary	  67
      Introduction	68
      Glass Container  Demand by  Market,  1962 to 1990	70

          Trends of Container Demand  	  	  70
          Trends in Container Weight  	  	  73

      Waste Generation  from Glass Containers.  . 	  78
      Waste Glass Container Generation by Source.  .	.  .  78

          Glass Containers in Household, Commercial and Industrial
             Waste.	78
                                                          \
          Glass Containers in Litter  .	83

      Glass Containers  Recoverable from Waste  	  86
     Glass Container Recycling  Forecasts, 1972 to 1990	87

          Current Recycling Practices and Separate Collection	87
          Recovery of  Glass Containers from Mixed Municipal Waste.  .  .  89
          Recovery Forecasts for Glass Containers. ..........  91

Chapter VI - Recovery  Forecasts for Ferrous Metals to 1990 	  96

     Summary	96
     Recovery of Ferrous Metal  Cans and Miscellaneous Metal Waste.  .  .  97

          Introduction	97
          Metal Can Demand by Market, 1962 to 1990	98
          Metal Can Demand by Type of Metal	  . 101

     Steel Consumption in Cans	106
     Ferrous Metal Waste Generation by Source.	 108

          Waste Generation - Steel Cans.	 108
          Steel Cans  in Litter	110

     Non-Can Ferrous  Metal in. Municipal Waste.	 Ill
     Total Ferrous Metal Waste Generation,  1972 to 1990	112
                                    vi

-------
                       TABIJE OF CONTENTS (continued)
     Ferrous Metal Recoverable from Municipal Waste	113
     Ferrous Metal Recycling Forecasts,  1972 to 1990	 113

          Current Steel Can Recycling Practices	113
          Recovery of Ferrous Metals for Recycling from Mixed
            Municipal Wastes	  115

     Recycling Options for Steel Recovered  from Mixed  Waste	117

          Conclusions	1'20

     Recovery Forecasts for Ferrous Metals  	  121
     Recovery Forecasts for Steel in Major  Appliances  to 1990	124

          Production, Use  and Discard Cycles for Appliances	124
          Appliance Steel  Recycling Forecasts,  1972 to 1990	132

Chapter  VII  - Recovery Forecasts for Aluminum to 1990	135

     Summary	135
     Introduction	136
     Aluminum Packaging Demand by Market, 1962  to 1990 ........  137

          Introduction 	  137
          Aluminum Cans	  .  .	137
          Foil Packaging	140
          Waste Generation from Aluminum Packaging 	  140
          Aluminum Packaging Waste Generation by Source	140
          Aluminum Packaging Waste Recoverable  	  142

     Aluminum in Consumer  Durable Products  	  142

          Appliance Aluminum Waste by Source 	  145
          Recoverability of Aluminum in  Appliances 	  146
          Aluminum Recoverable from Municipal Waste	146

     Recovery Forecasts for Aluminum, 1972  to 1990	147

          Recovery from Mixed Waste at Centralized Processing  Systems.  147
          Recovery of Aluminum Via Other Methods 	  147

                                   vii

-------
                                       NTr.  '(continued) .'
                                                                       Page

Chapter VIII  -  Recovery Forecasts for Plastics to 1990  .......   151
                          1 'V      ,''''"•                      •     .
     Summary  ......  ... .  .  .  . . . .. ..... . .....  .  .   151
     Introduction.  ...  .  .  .  ...  .  -,••-• • - • . .....  . • .  ...   15.3
     Plastic  Packaging  Resin Demand,  1965 to 1990.  .  .  .  ...  .  .  .   154

          General Trends  in Packaging Plastics Demand to  1990.  .  .  .   154
          Resin Use  by  Type of Resin ..... .....  .  .....   155
          Resin Demand  by £nd Use.'.., . ... .......  .....   157

     Plastic  Waste Generation from Packaging and Nonpackaging
       Sources  ..........  ............  .....   159

          Introduction  .  .....  ...... ........  ...   159

     Waste Generation from  Plastic  Packaging ............   160

          Plastic Packaging Waste Generation by Source  .......   160

     Plastic  Packaging  Recoverable  from Waste. ......  .  .  .  .  .   162
     Plastics Recovery  Forecast.';, 1972 to 1990 .....  ......   164

          Plastic Packaging Recovery,' 197?. .............   164
          Recovery of Plastics from Municipal Waste, 1972-1990  .  .  .   165
          Recovery Forecast for Plastics, 1972 to 1990  .......   167

Cha.pr.er IX -  Ror.overy Forecasts for Rubber Tires to 1990  ......   169

     Summary  .....  ............. ..........   169
     Introduction. .....  ,.  ......;  ......  ......   170
     Rubber Tire Demand by  Market '!,  1962 to 1990 .....  ......   171
          Forecast of Tota   Tire  Demand to. 1990. . . ...  .  .  .  .  .   171
          xirc COM fit ruction  Trends ...... . ..........   171
          Waste Generation from Discarded Tires. ..........   175

     Ti.re Waste Getierar.ion by  Source .  ...............   179

          T .!,:•:« Waste in ^Hous:2h\cid.,\';1piiiiperr.;lar/J.nst;itut'ion3i and
            Industrial Wastes ,i .  ..'.....  ... . .  . .  ,  .  .  .  .   179

-------
                       TABU: OF. CONTENTS  (concluded)


                                                                      Page

          Tire Wastes in Litter	180
          Tire Recoverable from Waste	i80

Chapter X - Resource Recovery  for Paper to 1990	184

     Introduction and Overview	185

          Forecasts of Paper Demand	187
          Forecast Results 	 189
          Waste Paper Generation  	 192
          Calculating Waste Paper Generation Rates  .  .  	 195
          Waste Paper Generated by Source.	204
          Waste Paper Recycling in the Paper Industry	211
          The Recoverability of Waste Paper for Recycling	217
          Summary of the Impact of Recycling on Solid Waste	224
          Other Resource Recovery Options and Recovery  Mechanisms  for
            Paper to 1990	229
          Recovery of the Heat Content of Waste Paper	230
          Summary of Waste Paper Recovery Via All Options	231

Appendix A - An Overview of Trends in the Use of Packaging Containers
               for Beverages,  Food, and Other Products	 233

Appendix B - Trends in the Demand for Ferrous Scrap in  Iron and Steel
               Production	294

Appendix C - An Overview of Aluminum Industry Production and Scrap
               Usage Characteristics, 1960 to 1990	301
                                                                         ;
Appendix D - Analysis of Packaging Plastic Resin Demand by End Use  .  . 309

Appendix E - Background Data for Paper Recovery Forecasts,  1972-1990 . 327

Appendix F - References and Sources	366
                                    IX

-------
                              CHAPTER I
                             INTRODUCTION
          We are a materials-using nation, and our economy, with its huge
industrial base, clearly reflects this fact.  To feed this "materials
economy," natural resources of the nation (and world) are extracted from
the earth, processed and refined, and converted into useful products.  Any
product put into use serves a value or intended function to the user.  How-
ever, all products also lose their usefulness over time (a .few seconds to a
span of decades) and then become discards or solid waste.

          The quantity of solid wastes generated is  linked directly to the
total use of materials in economic activity and the  rate at which they are
discarded as waste.  The only ways to reduce the amount of solid waste dis-
posal without reducing the rate of use or reuse of materials are to:
(1) extend the life of the products we use, and/or (2) usefully recover for
recycling or other purposes waste materials that would otherwise be disposed
of in dumps, landfills and incinerators.

          Resource recovery is a viable alternative  to waste disposal.  In
1973 the strains of increasing demand on the natural resource base improved
the economic potential of resource recovery.  Commercial resource recovery
projects previously "years away" are now in the design stage.  Large scale
resource recovery units will be in operation by 1975 or 1^)76, and more will
follow.

         . This study was done in a period of unusual pressure on resource
supply and industrial capacity to produce materials  from virgin resources.
In fact, in 1973 the prices of secondary materials were the highest they
had ever been and supplies in some cases fell below  short-term demand.
Likewise, export demand was contributing to the scarcity of raw materials
supplies in the U.S.A.  At the same time resource recovery seemed to have
suddenly "come of age," as several significant commercial projects were
announced during the study period.  Added to this was an "energy crisis"
which seemed to burst upon the nation suddenly, although ample evidence of
this phenomenon was available years ago.  Conservation, a word often used in
reference to environmental groups and other groups seeking to preserve wilder-
ness areas, became a-broad concern, not only of the  industry, but of the public
and of government as well.

          A realistic assessment of the future of resource recovery from
municipal waste is the subject of this report—to establish "base line"
forecasts of resource recovery for the period 1972 to 1990.

-------
                            PURPOSE OF STUDY
          This study was designed by the Office of Solid Waste Management
Programs of the Environmental Protection Agency to serve as a background
document for resource recovery forecasts for the period 1972 to 1990.  The
purpose of the research was to establish "base line" data for resource re-
covery which is a counterpart to solid waste generation.

          Once base line forecasts are established for  industrial resource
recovery requirements and solid waste recovery potential, then there is a
basis for- testing various alternatives that might alter the pattern of
resource recovery — to stimulate resource recovery from municipal waste and
thus reduce solid waste disposal requirements.
                      RESEARCH OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE
          The objectives of this research work were  to develop  to  1990 a
supply and demand analysis of resource  recovery  from municipal  solid waste.
The objectives  included a forecast of:   (1) the  quantity of municipal waste
generated; (2)  the recovery of resources from mixed  municipal wastes; (3)
the recovery of specific manufactured materials  commonly found  in  solid wastes;
(4) the total recoverable quantity of each of the seven waste materials;
(5) the source  of waste generated categorized as:  residential, commercial/
institutional and industrial waste.  The materials included in  the study
are:  glass, ferrous metals, aluminum,  plastics, paper and rubber.
                    o

          A number of related steps were required to develop basic data to
meet the primary objectives of the study.  First, an  analysis  of municipal
solid waste trends were considered from the standpoint  of:   waste  gen-
eration, composition,  and resource recovery potential to  1990.   Included
in this analysis was the recovery of materials  for recycling and energy
conversion.  Second, the major recovery modes were considered:   centralized
waste processing facilities, transfer station separation, separate collec-
tion centers and source separation of materials .(including present scrap
industry operations).   Forecasts of actual resource recovery were  developed
to 1990 with the principal emphasis,on centralized waste processing units.
to recover energy and materials.

          Third, each of the specific materials  was  considered  separately
and in detail for a recovery profile to  1990.  This  included analysis of
each of the materials for forecasts of  total demand  for finished products;
generation rates of waste for each; availability of  these materials from

-------
residential, commercial/institutional, and industrial sources; analysis of
waste generation rates in selected geographic and population units; present
recovery and forecast demand for recycled materials.  The resource recovery
forecasts developed were then reconciled to produce a common forecast of
resource recovery to 1990.

,          Specific attention was given to major products or processes within
each materials group that constitute the most significant component of muni-
cipal wastes; e.g.,  glass containers,  plastics packaging, and metal cans.   Paper
for all uses was covered completely.   Market factors that might affect the
forecasts were also considered, such as trends in the use of materials and con-
tainers, packaging practices, intermaterial competition and other factors.
Basic Assumptions of the Study

          There was one contractual "given" for the study—the base line
forecasts were to be developed assuming there would be no federal legisla-
tion to stimulate resource recovery to 1990.  In other words, the objective
of the study was to develop a "base line" forecast of what resource recovery
would actually be in 1990 as a consequence of forces at work outside the
federal establishment.  However, pollution control regulations or other
federal actions were included, including those that might impact resource
recovery in the future. (Presumably the effect of any proposed federal
initiative to stimulate resource recovery could be tested against the base
line data.) .                                                 '

          The evidence for the observations th;it follow is not yet solid
enough to document thoroughly.  Thus it was necessary to make some broad
judgmental assumptions based on our current understanding of some rather
fundamental forces at work in economics, resource utilization and environ-
mental quality improvement.

          First, we assumed that the effects of the "energy  crisis" and re-
source supply shortage are principally of short-range duration (2-4 years)
and that there will be an adequate supply of raw materials without inter-
ruption of basic demand trends for products.  At the same time it appears
likely that recycling of materials from solid waste will become more
prevalent to meet supply requirements.  We have also assumed that the
"energy crisis" is more likely to manifest itself as an inducement to re-
source recovery than to a basic change in demand patterns for plastic
products, rubber, and textiles which'are derived largely from hydrocarbons.
In other words, a "flow-through" concept in which hydrocarbons are used
first as a manufactured product,  (e.g.,  plastic), with  recovery of  the hydro-
carbon energy value after discard,, is the more  likely pattern to  1990.   How-
ever, process energy conservation may also  encourage  recycling practices
whenever significant energy savings can  be  demonstrated  in using  recycled
material as opposed to virgin materials.

-------
          In addition we havxe assumed ..that the general economy will continue
to have significant real growth,averaging in the range of 4 percent per year
over a long period.and that population,growth.will increase from 212 million
in 1973 to 261 million in 1990, as .found in the Bureau of the  Census,  Series
P-2, No. 476, published in February 1972.

          Within the solid waste sector  itself, we have assumed, on the basis
of conclusions from other work, that resource recovery l^.as been demonstrated
to be feasible under certain circumstances and that major metropolitan areas
will consider it a viable alternative to traditional disposal in the years
ahead.  Also, we assumed that regional  resource recovery  planning and  imple-
mentation now under way will proceed.

          Much of the basic data in this study  presume that  the  nation is
now entering an era in which we will be more resource conscious, but in
which the historic patterns'of demand will maintain their overall  trends.
The  makeup of the raw materials that meet demand, howe.ver, could  shift
toward resource recovery on a gradual but steady basis, and units  of govern-
ment will enter the raw materials  supply business  (including  energy) via
solid waste recovery processing alternatives.
Report Organization

          The balance of this report is organized around the identifiable
materials groups.  Chapter II summarizes the forecasts of resource recovery
for mixed municipal wastes including the recovery of materials discussed in
lat^r chapters.  Next, Chapter III addresses the potential for centralized
processing of mixed municipal wastes and energy recovery from the organic
fraction.

          Chapter IV is a short introduction to the specific materials
studied  in detail.  It gives  the purpose of the material-by-material
forecasts and other general introduction to the analyses of specific in-
dustrial requirements for recycled materials.

          Chapters V through X cover the demand forecasts for materials
found in solid waste that were studied separately.  There is a chapter
each on:  ferrous metals, aluminum, glass, plastics, rubber and paper.
Each .chapter develops the demand forecast for the industry to 1990; the
generation of solid waste; the source of solid waste; the quantity of solid
waste that appears to be recoverable; and our forecast of resource recovery
for that particular material as recycling or other recovery alternatives
such as energy.  Included is the manner in which recovery from iwaste will
take place—centralized waste processing, collection centers, source
separation, etc.

                                    4

-------
          Finally there is a series of appendices that give back-up detail
for several subjects of interest.  Appendix A is the back-up detail for
packaging materials and configurations where intermaterials competition
takes place, i.e., steel, aluminum, glass and plastics.  Particular em-
phasis is given to beverage and food packaging because the two together
make up most of the packaging materials requirements for the materials
cited above.                                                          :

          Appendix B is a discussion of the trends in steel scrap usage.
Appendix C is a special section on trends in the use of scrap in the
aluminum industry to 1990.  Appendix D is an analysis of plastic resin
demand by end use providing back-up detail to. Chapter VIII.  Appendix K
contains back-up analysis and detail on the paper Chapter  (X).  References
and data sources are given in bibliographic form in Appendix F.

-------
                                CHAPTER II
           OVERVIEW OF RESOURCE RECOVERY FORECASTS TO 1990
                       OVERVIEW OF STUDY FINDINGS


         I By 1990, 40 metropolitan areas in the United Stares will be
         /—•—v
operating 60 centralized resource recovery plants, processing about 49 million
tons of mixed municipal solid wastes annuallyj  These plants are expected
to recover:  2.8 million tons of ferrous metal; 0.4 million tons of aluminum;
0.6 million tons of glass; 0.5 million tons of paper; and 486 x 10^ Btu of
energy for use in power generation during 1990.  The wastes processed by
these resource recovery operations will represent approximately 25 percent
of the 200 million tons of mixed municipal solid wastes expected to be
generated that year.

          The centralized large resource recovery systems in 1990 will be
concentrated primarily along the East and West Coasts and in the North Central
states.  However, virtually every state with a city of SMSA having a population
base in excess of 300,000 will likely have at least one large resource recovery
system in operation.
          In addition to resources recovered through central processing
facilities, there will be additional recovery from municipal wastes at dis-
posal sites and other collection points.^ This recovery will take place via
source separation/collection; collection centers; separation at transfer
stations and separation at disposal sites..  The quantities recovered via
noncentralized modes from municipal wastes are forecast to be:  0.3 million
tons of ferrous metals, including appliances; 0.15 million tons of aluminum;
0.25 million tons of glass; and 2.0 million tons of paper recovered in con-
junction with solid waste collection.

         ]These two combined major recovery modes will result in a total
         !	,                            .                      I O
recoveryjiTfrom 200 million tons of waste generated, of 486 x 10   Btu of
energy; 3.1 million tons of ferrous metal; 0.5 million tons of aluminum;
0.85 million tons of glass, and 2.5 million tons of paper recovered in con-
junction with solid waste.)
        !                ^
          The chief impetus for resource recovery will come primarily from
two directions:  (1) the increasing cost of disposal by sanitary landfill,
brought about by rapidly rising land and operating costs and a scarcity
of suitable landfill sites that can be purchased and developed; and (2) the
decreasing net cost of solid waste processing in energy-recovery systems,
a result of the increasing cost of conventional fuels and the comparable
increase's in the value of recovered energy.  Materials recovery will add
impetus to this basic trend.

-------
          RESOURCES RECOVERED FROM MIXED MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTES'
          In recovery systems recovering organic materials for fuel or.
energy uses, ferrous metals are easily removed and sold as scrap, and this
magnetic separation process is an integral part of any resource recovery
system.  Additionally, aluminum is expected to be recovered in view of  its
high scrap value, and by 1985 essentially all aluminum will be processed
for recovery from mixed wastes that are also being processed for use as ,
fuel.  The separation of ferrous and nonferrous metals from the organic
portion of the solid waste stream leaves glass, which has a relatively
low unit value, but nevertheless can be a worthwhile commodity when a
suitable local market exists, especially in the form of a glass container
manufacturing plant.  Paper will also be removed, but generally prior to
entering a centralized waste-processing facility.

          Typical mixed municipal solid wastes in 1975 will contain at
"median" waste generation rates of 140 million tons, 11.5 percent glass by
weight; 8.5 percent ferrous metal; and 1.4 percent nonferrous metal, chiefly
aluminum.  The .combustible portion of the waste (paper, plastics, rubber,
textiles, yard waste, garbage, etc.) has an energy value of about 5,000 Btu
per pound (4,500 on the basis of raw refuse).  By 1990, the percent content
of these recoverable materials will have changed, based upon the changes  in
total waste generated and the MRI forecasts of the quantity of metal and
glass in total demand.  For example, by 1990 our estimates are as follows:
ferrous metal, 8.2 percent; nonferrous metal, 1.5 percent; and glass, 8.4
percent:  The percentages of inorganic materials will decrease while the-
organic materials, especially plastics and- textiles, will increase.  The 'pro-
portion of paper in waste will decrease slightly.  We have assumed that
the Btu content of raw municipal waste will increase over time — from 9 x
Btu/ton in 1972 to 9.3 x 106 in 1980; 9.6 x 106 in 1985;  and 10.0 x 106 in
1990.

          A 1,000 ton per day (300,000 ton per year) resource recovery .
plant will have the following recovery potential annually:
Material            1972      1975   .  1980     1985     1990

Ferrous metal
  (tons)            21,675   21,675   21,165   21,675   20,910
Nonferrous
  metal (tons)       1,365    1,560    1,755    2,145    2,340.
Glass (tons)        19,695   20,475   20,085   18,135   16,380
Combustibles       .221.700  219.900  220.800  222.600  225.900
  (energy)
Total Recoverable  264,435  263,610  263,805  264,555  265,530
  Nonrecoverable    35,565   36,390   36,195   35,455   34,470

-------
These values were calculated based on the average composition of the waste
for each base year less an unrecoverable residue that would '>e a yield loss
or ash.  The recovery efficiency for each material is given in the summary
tables that follow.  The high recovery potential for organics is based upon
processing for fuel or energy products; otherwise the only recoverable mate-
rial in organics is paper.

          Tables 1 through 7 summarize the quantities of these five re-
sources expected to be recovered in various years over the 1972-1990 period.

          The data in these tables were derived from MRI's estimates of
the number of waste-processing facilities that would be in operation each
5-year period  for the recovery of energy from mixed waste  and. from the
recovery of materials for recycling via centralized waste processing and
other recovery modes such as collection centers and separation at transfer
stations.  The values for the inorganic materials recovered are developed
in later sections of the report  and are only summarized here.
                     I
          Table 1 summarizes projected recovery in centralized waste pro-
cessing facilities.  Here it is assumed that the amount of each material
"available" is based upon the national rate of waste generation developed
in each materials chapter, i.e., the demand for the material adjusted to
the amount entering the waste stream in any given year.

          The recovery rate for ferrous metals, aluminum and glass is based
on MRI estimates of mechanical recovery efficiency of separation techniques
and on the marketability of any material.  For example, ferrous metals are
considered to be recoverable at 85 percent mechanical efficiency and market-
able from all locations.  Aluminum recovery technology is assumed to he
viable by 1985 with an estimated recovery efficiency of 65 percent.  Aluminum
is fully marketable where recovered.  Glass is recovered only where glass
container plants are nearby, and color sorted at a recovery efficiency of
70 percent by 1990.  Energy is recovered at ,its full content which means
that the entire organic fraction is utilized as fuel; this is expressed
the same way as fosril fuel equivalent,, i.e., before any heat losses in
the energy conversion use itself.

          In Table 2 the inorganic materials recovered from other wastes
not centrally processed are summarized.  This is recovery from transfer
stations, from collection centers and via source separation/collection
techniques in the solid waste management system itself.  Most of these
show a limit of 250,000 tons which represents the practical limits of these
separation options and the fact that more solid waste goes through central
processing systems each year.

-------
                                           TABLE 1
              SUMMARY OF RESOURCES RECOVERED FROM MIXED MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTES
AT CENTRAL
(In 1
Category
Total solid =waste -generated
Total solid waste processed
7, solid waste processed
Resources available/recovered
in waste processed:
Energy 1012 Btu - available
Energy 10^2 Btu - recovered
Glass available
Glass recovered
Ferrous metal available
Ferrous metal recovered
Aluminum available
Aluminum recovered
Paper available
Paper recovered
PROCESSING
,000 tons
1972
130,000
Neg.
Neg.
- .
Neg.
Neg.
o-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
PLANTS. 1972
and 1012 Btu)
1975
140,000
2,100
1-5

18.9
18.9
220
10
150
127
18
"." ,. 1
650
Neg.
TO 1990

1980
160,000
6,600
4.1

61.4
61.4
680
100
465
395
62
12
2,100
50

1985
180,000
24,000
13.3
-
230.4
230.4
2,230
350
1,705
1,450
250
165
7,650
200

1990
200,000 :
48,600
24.3

486.0
486.0
4,080
600
3,315
2,815
560
365
16,350
500
Neg. = Negligible
Source:   Midwest Research Institute

-------
                                           TABLE 2



                 SUMMARY OF RESOURCES RECOVERED FROM MIXED MUNICIPAL SOLID-
WASTES NOT

Category
Total solid waste generated
Total solid waste not centrally
processed
Resources available/recovered
in waste not processed
Glass available
Glass recovered
Ferrous metal available
Ferrous metal recovered
Aluminum available
Aluminum recovered
Paper available
Paper recovered
CENTRALLY
(In 1.
1972
130,000

130,000


13,200
275
11,100
70
900
27
41,500
50
PROCESSED. 1972
000 tons)
1975
140,000

137,900


14,280
265
11,550
158
1,182
50
41,450
300
TO 1990

1980
160,000

153,400


15,720
275
12,535
195
1,438
93
48,450
600


1985
180,000

156,000


14,370
250
13,445
265
1,650
115
49,650
1,000


1990
200,000

151,400


12,820
250
13,085
320
1,740
145
50,800
2,000
Source:  Midwest Research Institute

-------
                                 TABLE 3
                SUMMARY OF RESOURCES RECOVERED FROM MIXED
                  MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTES. 1972 TO 1990
                  (In 1,000 tons 1012 Btu and percent)
           Category..

Energy - 1012 Btu
Recovery - 7» of available

Glass recovery
Recovery - 70 of available

Ferrous metals recovery
Recovery - °L of available

Aluminum recovery
Recovery - °/a of available

              a/
Paper recovery-
Recovery - 7» of available
1972
1975
1980
Source:  Midwest Research Institute
a/  "Energy recovery from paper included under Energy.
1985
1990
Neg.
Neg.
275
2.8
70
0.6
27
3.0
50
0.1
18.9
1.5
275
1.8
285
2.4
51
4.2
300
0.7
61.4
4.1
375.
2.3
590
4.5
105 .
7.0
650
1.3
230.4
13.3
600
3.6
1,715
11.3
280
14.7
1,200
2.1
486.0
24.3,
85.0
5.0
3,135.;
19.1
'. 51°
22.2.
2,500
: 3.7
                                   11

-------
                                           TABLE 4
                      SUMMARY OF GLASS PROCESS-ING/RECOVERY^FOR MIXED
MUNICIPAL WASTE
(In
Category
Total solid waste generated
Glass available
% glass of total waste
Total waste processed (central
facilities)
Glass content
Glass processed for recovery
Resource recovered - glass
Resource not recovered - glass
Total waste not centrally
processed
Glass content
Glass recovered
Glass not recovered-
Total resource recovery - glass
Percent recovery of total - glas
1,000 tons
1972
130,000
13,200
10.1
. 0
0
0
0
0
130,000
13,200
275
12,925
275
3S 2.8
. 1972 TO 1990
and percent)
1975
140,000
14,500 .
10.5
2,100
220
20
10
175
137,900
14,280
265
14,025
275
1.8

1980
160,000
16,400
10.3
6,600
680
170
100
455
153,400
15,720
275
16,025
375
2.3

1985
180,000
16,600
9.3
24,000
2,230
540
350
1,350
156,000
14,370
250
16,000
600
3.6

1990
200,000
16,900
8.4
48,600
4,080
.860
600
2,315
151,400
12,820
250
16,050
850
5.0
Source:  Midwest Research Institute
a/  Includes glass from central processing facilities not recovered.

-------
                                      TABLE 5
                  SUMMARY OF FERROUS METALS PROCESSING/RECOVERY FOR
MIXED MUNICIPAL WASTE. 1972 TO
Cln
Category
Total solid waste generated
Ferrous metal available—
7<> ferrous metal of total waste
Total waste processed (central
facilities)
Ferrous metal content— ' _
Ferrous metal recovered at
0.85 yield
Ferrous metal not recovered
Total waste not centrally
processed
Ferrous metal content-
Ferrous metal recovered
Ferrous metal not recovered—'
Total resource recovery -
ferrous metal
Percent recovery of total -
ferrous metal
1,000 tons
1972
130,000
11,100
8.5

Neg.
0

0
0
130,000

11,100
70
11,030

70

0.6
and percent)
1975
140,000
11,700
8.5

2,100
150

127
23
137,900

11,550
158
-11,415

285

2.4
1990

1980
160,000
13,100
8.3

6,600
465

395
70
153,400

12,535
195
12,510

590

4.5


1985
180,000
15,200
8.5

24,000
1,705

1,450
255
156,000

13,495
265
13,485

1,715

11.3


1990
200,000
16,400
8.2

48,600
3,315

2,815
500
151,400

13,085
320
13,265

3,135

19.1
Source:  Midwest Research Institute
aj  Includes ferrous metal in appliances.
b_/  Excludes ferrous metal in appliances.
£/  Includes ferrous metal in appliances.
d/  Includes ferrous metal not  recovered  from central  processing  facilities.

-------
                                      TABLE 6
                   SUMMARY OF ALUMINUM PROCESSING/RECOVERY FOR
MIXED MUNICIPAL WASTE, 1972 TO
(In
Category
Total solid waste generated
a/
Aluminum available— :
7o aluminum of total waste
Total waste processed (central
facilities)
Aluminum content
Aluminum processed for recovery
Aluminum recovered at 65% yield
Aluminum not recovered
Total waste not centrally
processed
Aluminum content
Aluminum recovered
Aluminum not recovered—'
Total resource recovery -
aluminum
Percent recovery of total -
aluminum
1,000 tons
1972
130,000
900
0.7

Neg.
0
0
0
0

130,000
900
27
873

27

3.0
and percent)
1975
140,000
1,200
0.9

2,100
18
2
1
17

137,900
1,182
50
1,149

51

4.2
1990

1980
160,000
-1,500
0.9

6,600
62
20
12
50

153,400
1,438
93
1,395

105

7.0


1985
180,000
1,900
1.0

24,000
250
250
165
85

156,000.
1,650
115
1,620

280
.
14.7


1990
200,000
2,300
1.2

48,600
560
560
365
195

151,400
1,740
145
1,790

510

22.2
Source:  Midwest Research Institute
a/  Aluminum packaging and aluminum in appliances.
b/  Includes aluminum not recovered from central processing facilities.

-------
                                      TABLE 7

                     SUMMARY OF PAPER PROCESSING/RECOVERY FOR
. MIXED MUNICIPAL WASTES, 1972 TO 1990
(In
Category
Total solid waste generated
Paper available^/
% paper of total waste
Total waste processed (central
facilities)
Paper content
Processed for fiber recovery
Paper recovered at 0.50 yield
Paper recovered as energy
Paper not recovered
Total waste not centrally
processed
Paper content
Paper recovered
Resource not recovered -
paper-
Total resource recovery -
paper fiber
Total resource recovery -
energy

Total paper recovery-
Percent recovery of total
paper
1,000 tons and percent)
1972 1975
130,000 140,000
41,550 42,100
32.0 30.1
-
Neg. 2,100
0 650
0 Neg.
0 0
0 650
0 0

130,000 137,900
41,500 41,450
50 300

41,500 41,150

50 300

Neg. 650

50 950

0.1 2.2

1980
160,000
50,550
31.6

6,600
2,100
100
50
2,000
50

153,400
48,450
600

47,900

650

2,000 -
\
2,650

5.2

1985
180,000
57,300
31.8

24,000
7,650
400
200
7,250
200

156,000
49,650
1,000

48,850

1,200

7,250

8,450

14.7

1990
200,000
67,150
33.6

48,600
16,350
1,000
500
15,350
500

151,400
50,800
2,000

49,300

2,500

15,350

17,850

26.6.
Source:  Midwest Kesearc!'. Institute
a/  Includes only waste paper reaching waste collection, processing or  disposal  facilities.
b_/  Includes oaper not recovered from central processing facilities.

-------
           The  grand  totals  for resource recovery are then given in Table 3,
which  are  simply  the values  in the previous two tables added together.  It
shows  that  total  resource recovery from municipal waste in 1990 is forecast
to be  437 x 10^  Btu of energy; 3.1 million tons of ferrous metal; 0.5
million tons of aluminum; and 0.85 million tons of glass.  In addition,
there  will be  2.5 million tons of paper recovered directly from municipal
waste  systems.

          Tables 4 through 6 give the composite recovery values for each
of the inorganic materials--ferrous metals, aluminum and glass.  These
data were also partly given  in Tables 1 through 3.  Table 7 summarizes paper
recovery.

          The values given in each table are presented in summary form only.
The data on which these values were developed are related to the recovery
potential of centralized waste processing facilities and the demand/recover-
ability/marketability characteristics of each material as developed in de-
tail in the succeeding chapters.
                                    16

-------
                               CHAPTER III

               RESOURCE RECOVERY FROM MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE


       .FORECASTING RESOURCE RECOVERY FROM MIXED MUNICIPAL WASTES
          This chapter explores the fundamental economic considerations
involved in analyzing the relative desirability of resource recovery;
identifies the quantity and location of economically recoverable wastes;
estimates the quantity of wastes that will actually be processed for
recovery; and translates these results into the specific resources recovered.

          The sanitary landfill is presently, in most parts of the United
States, the lowest cost environmentally acceptable means of disposal for
mixed municipal solid wastes.  In areas where suitable landfill sites are
either unavailable or prohibitive in cost, incineration is the most common
alternative.

          However, in locations where incineration offers an economical
or necessary alternative to landfill, some form of resource recovery is
almost sure to prove superior to both.  Recovery of the organic fraction
of the mixed solid waste stream for use as a supplemental fuel for utility
boilers offers distinct economic advantages over conventional incineration
for disp9sal.

          In the  18-year period from  1972 to 1990, most municipalities
will have to find new places to dispose of their wastes because existing
dumps will be closed, landfills  will become full and existing incinerators
will become inadequate or require major renovation.  Thus, disposal choices
will be forced upon nearly every governmental unit in this period.  Will the
choice be resource recovery or conventional disposal?

          MRI's analysis indicates that in the long term, economics is the
key factor which will determine whether disposal or recovery will be pursued.
The most important element of cost in solid waste disposal by landfill is the
cost of land acquisition, and the annual charges associated with the capital
tied up in  land.  For resource recovery systems utilizing the combustible
portion of  the wastes as a coal or petroleum supplementing fuel source, the
most important economic factor is the value of the recovered fuel.

          Thus, when the sanitary landfill is compared with an energy recovery
system, low land prices favor the .sanitary landfill, while high energy values
favor the fuel recovery concept.
                                    17

-------
           Certainly the direction, if not the magnitude, of land prict~
 and energy .values in all parts of the United States is clearly up; both of
 these established trends favor resource recovery, with the final economics
 depending on local price levels and growth rates in these -two i:ems.

           In this study, the cost of disposal by sanitary landfill has been
 related to different land purchase prices.  Similarly, the net costs (or
 net income) of disposal associated with an energy recovery system have been
 related to different recovered energy values.  Combining these two relation-
 ships establishes a "break-even" point between the two concepts, based on
"locally prevailing land costs and energy values.  The "break-even" land
 price can be calculated as a function of energy values,  or the "break-even"
 energy values as a function of land costs.

           Energy values and farm real estate prices were compiled on a state-
 by-state basis,  and projections were made at  5-year  intervals   through 1990
 for each state.   (Note  that farm land values represent an absolute minimum
 coot for purchased property since most landfills would be close enough to
 metropolitan areas where land values would normally be higher  than farm land
 values.)  The estimated values were then inserted in the break-even equations
 to  establish the most  feasible disposal alternative at each point in time.
 Following this procedure,  the approximate year in which  resource recovery
 would become economically  feasible in each state (if at  all) was determined.
 Then, the major metropolitan areas within the various states—those suffi-
 ciently large to generate  the required quantities of mixed solid wastes to
 support a full-scale resource recovery operation—were delineated, and esti-
 mates were made  of the  number of resource recovery plants in each state and
 the quantities of the  different resources to be recovered.

           The following sections in Chapter  II describe  the analysis procedures
 in  some detail,  and present the resulting estimates of the potential for resource
 recovery in the  United  States through 1990.
                    BASIC  RESOURCE  RECOVERY  ECONOMICS
The Economics  of  Sanitary  Landfill  for  Disposal

          KRI  estimates  that  the  variable  costs  (i.e.,  out of pocket  costs)
associated with disposal by sanitary  landfill  average about $2.35  per ton
for a  1,000  ton per day  (300,000  ton  per year) operation; the balance  of
disposal cost  is  directly  attributable  to  the  investment  in land,  and amounts
                                    18

-------
to approximately" 6 percent of the total capital tied up in land.  This
assumes that, on termination of the landfill project, the land value will
be at least equal to its original cost, and that only interest and carry-
ing costs are charged against the land account.*

          Figure 1 shows the relationship between net solid waste disposal
costs and the cost per acre for land disposal sites.  This relationship
has been developed from the cost data presented in Table 8 and can be ex-
pressed mathematically as follows:
                          CSLF = 2.35 + 0.96 L
where CSLF is the cost per ton of disposal via sanitary landfill and L
is the cost of the landfill site, in thousands of dollars per acre.  The
assumptions are made that approximately twice as much land will be acquired
as will actually be devoted to landfill, and that the landfill site will
accommodate some 5,000 tons of mixed refuse per acre over a 20-year period.
The $2.35, as stated before, represents all costs exclusive of the carrying
charges on the land.  The second factor is the equation--0.96 L--which is simply
the number of acres required to^handle 300,000 tons per year of waste for
20 years (2,400), times a multiplier (2) to reflect total acquisition costs
in excess of raw farm land prices times a 6 percent carrying charge times
the base land cost (L) in dollars per acre, divided by the annual quantity
of wastes to be disposed (300,000 tons):  2,400 x 2.0 L x 0.06/300,000 =
0.00096L (where L is in dollars/acre)  or 0.96L (with L in $l,000/acre).

          Most communities in the U.S. will require additional disposal sites
in the 1972 to 1990 period as old landfills are closed out, incinerators
become obsolete and as metropolitan areas expand in size.
The Economics of Resource Recovery

          Since the sanitary landfill is generally the lowest cost (in
dollars) solid waste disposal method, alternatives are normally sought only
when suitable landfill sites are prohibitively expensive or unavailable. In
such a situation, incineration for disposal has been the usual choice for
disposal.
   Municipalities seldom account for capital tied up in land in the "tra-
     ditional" business economics approach.  Capital expenditures are
     usually handled separately, accounted for separately, and the cost of
     owning capital assets is seldom charged against the total cost of
     operation of a disposal site.  Nonetheless,the costs are real and are
     becoming recognized as such in local governments.

                                   19

-------
 c
 o
1/1
o
(J
o


Q
    8.00
    7.00  -
   6.00  -
   5.00  -
   4.00  -
   3.00 -
   2.00 -
    1.00 -
                  1000       2000        3000       4000        5000


                  LAND COST FOR DISPOSAL  SITES ($/Acfe)
             Figure  1  - Relationship Between Net Solid Waste

                         Disposal Costs and Land Cost
                                    20

-------
                                     TABLE 8
               COMPARATIVE ECONOMICS OF SOLID WASTE  DISPOSAL BY
  Fixed Investment
Recoverable
  Land     ,
  Working Capital
    Total
Total Capital
 Requirement
  Fixed Costs
Capital Charges
  Land at 6%/annum
  Other Charges
    Total

Total Annual Cost
LANDFILL AND RECOVERY AS ENERGY
00 ton/day, 300,000 ton/year
operation,
Energy (Fuel)
Recovery
($)
ments
'estment 1,315,000
lent 9,300,000
restment
450,000
:al 300,000
750,000
11,365,000
: Operation
:ing Costs 1,200,000
180,000
i
mum 27,000
: 1,203,000
1,230,000
ist 2,610,000
ired Resources
. (20,000
1.00) 240,000
(2.7 x
: SO.50/106) 1.350,000
Value 1,590,000
System
($/Ton)




4.00
0.60
0.09
4.01
4.10
8.70


0.80
4.50
5.30
20-year life
Sanitary
(Land Cost =
($)
200,000
950.000
4,800,000
125,000
4,925,000
6,075,000

505,000
40,000
288,000
160,000
448,000
993,000



0

Landfill
$l,000/acre)
=($/Ton)




1.68
0.13
0.96
0.53
1.49
3.30



0
Net Operating Cost
1,020,000
3.40
993,000
3.30
Source:  Midwest Research Institute.
                                        21

-------
           However,  if  in  a  given  area  incineration  is an acceptable alterna-
 tive  to  the  sanitary landfill,  additional economics can usually be achieved
 by practicing  some  form of  resource  recovery.  Probably the mosf-  logical
 approach  in  these cases is  to recover  the heat generated by burning the
 solid  wastes,  in conjunction with the  recovery of certain  inorganics which
 will not  burn  and should  be removed  prior to  combustion anyway.

           Today, the most viable  resource recovery  technique  for  mixed
 municipal  waste appears to  be some combination of energy j:nd  materials
 recovery.  At present,  resource  recovery1-systems will likely experience
 a  net  operating cost;  its "profits"  will be derived by a reduced  operating
 cost over  the  alternate disposal  option  such  as incineration  or landfill.
 (In the future, resource values  could rise enough so an actual profit is
 made.)

           The  total cost  of operating  a  1,000 ton per day  system  designed
 to  recover the energy  in  the organics  by combustion of mixed  solid wastes
 is  estimated at $8.70  per ton,  of which  direct operating costs account
 for $4.00  and  the balance consists of  fixed costs and capital-related
 charges  (Table 8).  Ferrous metals are removable via magnetic separation,
 reducing  the net disposal cost  to $7.90  per ton at a value of $12.00 per  ton
 for ferrous  scrap.  The value of  the energy or organic materials  such as
 paper  recovered, then,  will be  the primary determinant of  the ultimate net
 solid  waste  disposal cost.

          The  simplest  and  lowest net  cost resource recovery  technique
 today  is converting mixed waste to a fuel.  A 1,000 ton per day,  300,000
 ton per year operation  will be able  to produce some 2.7 x  10" gtu of
energy (at 4,500 Btu per  pound of  raw  refuse) in the form of a fuel suit-
able for use by utility plants in  electric power generation.  The value
of  this solid waste derived fuel will  depend  on the availability  and cost
of  conventional fossil  fuels (especially coal) in the local area.  To be
conservative and to take  account  of  risk and  capital investment required
by  the user, this value should be  expected to be somewhat  less than the
cost of conventional fossil fuels, averaging  perhaps 20 percent less;
 in  some areas, it coul^ be  worth  more, but some discount from the fossil
 fuel equivalent is to be  expected.

           Figure 2 shows  the relationship between net disposal costs via
 energy (fuel)  and ferrous metals  recovery, and the value of the fuel thus
 recovered.

          This relationship, developed from the costs shown in Table 1,
 can be expressed as
                             CER = 7.90 - 9 E

                                   22

-------
8.00
           0.10     0.20     0.30     0.40    0.50     0.60     0.70
                   VALUE OF RECOVERED ENERGY ($/ 106BTU)
         Figure 2 - Net Waste Disposal Cost Vs. Value of Energy
                                 23

-------
where i;|.-|<  i .•:;  i hi/  iH-f. ilisposi.il  cost  per  Lou ol  mixed waste processed lor
use as  hie I ,  .'niil  !•'.  is  the  value  of  t.lu:  energy  thus recovered,  expressed  •
in clolLir;: per million  Hl:u.-v   'Hit'  $7.90 is the net disposal cost per ton
exc 1ml i MI>,  enen.',v  credits  (Table  I);  the 9  K represents  energy  credits on
tin- recovery  "i 9 million  Htu/ton  of waste processed,  at E dollars per
mi I I i on !H u .                                                                ^

           Figure  /.  shows that  the  net disposal costs approach  zero at a fuel
value ol" about: £0.90 per million 15tn.   The actual  fuel  costs per utilities
Lri some parts «f  i:he USA are alreatly Ln excess of  $0.50 per million Btu.
Thus,  the .yiahi ii.ty of  euergy  recovery  seems to he firm when alternative
tli.sposa' costs are  considered.
The Economics o!:' Disposal  Versus  Resource  Recovery

          The. comparative  costs associated with  solid  waste disposal by
sanitary  Landfill and  in an  energy  recovery system are summarized in Table 8-.

          Since total 'actual disposal  costs via  sanitary landfill depend
mainly on the cost of  land till sites and  the chief variable affecting net
operating; costs in a resource recovery system is the value of the recovered
energy, these, two important variables--land cost and energy value — can be
equated to describe a break-even situation.   Other associated costs are rela-
tive and do not affect a decision to dispose or  re.cover waste to the extent
these two factors do.  Land cost  and energy value have been equated  for a '-
 break-even  situation  in Figure 3,  which  indicates equivalent costs  for any
combination ..of the two variables.   For example,  the net solid waste  disposal
cost via resource (fuel) recovery with the recovered energy valued at $0.40/
10" Btu, is .equivalent to  the cost,  of .disposal by sanitary landfill  when'land
costs $2,000 per acre..

          The appropriate  equations for relating land  costs and energy values
at the break-even point are as follows:
                               L  -  5.78 -  9.38 E

                               E  =  0.62 -  0.11 L
*  We do not preclude the recovery of other resources  besides  energy from
     the organic fraction of waste.  In some  situations  the  recovery of
     paper may be viable,for example.  However,  there  is  no  other  recovery
     option today that is so broadly applicable  and also  recovers  value
     from the entire organic fraction of waste.  Thus, energy  represents
     maximum recovery of organics and minimum residue  to  be  disposed of.

                                   24

-------
   0.70
   0.60
 ?  0.50
o
2
LU
O
LU
   0.40
cm
LU
>  0.30

U
   0.20
   0.10
                                RESOURCE RECOVERY
                                MORE ECONOMICAL
                 DISPOSAL BY
                 SANITARY LANDFILL
                 MORE ECONOMICAL
       0         1000        2000       3000       4000
               LAND COST FOR DISPOSAL SITES ($/ACRE)
                                                             5000
    Figure  3 - Equivalence Between Land Cost and Energy Value
                              25

-------
where, as betore, L is the land cost  for a disposal site  ($1, )00 per acre)
and E is the value of energy recovered as fuel  (dollars/10" Btu).

          Figure 3 provides a quick reference for determining the most
economical alternative for handling solid wastes in a given area.  If
energy is valued at over $0.60/10" Btu, for example, a resource  recovery
operation is probably justified regardless of land costs.  And where land
costs are relatively high—say in the $3,000 per acre ai.d over category--
resource recovery should probably be  considered even when conventional  fuels
are available locally at $0.30/106 Btu or less.
How Land Values for Disposal Sites Were Determined

          Farm real estate values in the United States (in 1973) averaged
$247 per acre, ranging from less than $100 per acre in South Dakota, Mon-
tana, Arizona, Nevada, Wyoming and New Mexico, to more than $1,000 per
acre in Rhode Island, Connecticut and New Jersey.

          For the U;S. as a whole, agricultural land values have risen an
average of 6.9 percent annually over the past decade, and are expected to
continue at a comparable rate for some time.  :Land value growth rates over
the past 10 years have ranged from less than 5 percent annually (in California
and South Dakota) to nearly 13 percent annually (in Georgia and Nevada),
with the most rapidly rising land prices experienced in the northeastern
parts of the United States.
                                                               }
          Future land costs are not easily predictable, and recent increases
have far exceeded' the historical growth in farmland prices.  The rapid increases
in land values can be attributed both to financial speculation and to higher
prices for farm commodities.  For the purposes of this analysis, however, the
growth rates established over the past  10 years  have been used as the basis
for projections from 1973 through 1990.

          Assuming the historical rates to continue, farmland will cost
more than $10,000 per acre in New Jersey by 1990, while it will still be
available for under $200 per acre in New Mexico and Wyoming.  Under the
same trends in value for the U.S., farmland values will grow from their
present $247 per acre to $394 in 1980; to $550 in 1985; and to $768 per
acre in 1990.  Figure 4 shows the expected increases in the national
averages.

          The increase in land costs will result in much higher costs for
acquiring sanitary landfill sites, and subsequently in much higher costs
of solid waste disposal by this means.  Since land costs are highest in
the most densely populated areas where solid waste generation is also
highest, this gives a double-barreled effect toward favoring resource
recovery.

                                   26

-------
   800
   700
 3  600
LU

LU
o
   500
   400
   300
   200
    100
      1970

                                    1
1975
1980

YEAR

1985
1990
     Figure 4 - Trend in Average Farm Real Estate Value,  1970-1990
                                  27

-------
           In general, an.,ove.rall.-prlce level for land can be estimated
 based on two types of locational factors:

           1.  Population density, and

           2.  Location of a land site with renpect to population centers.

           Figure 5 shows 1973 farm real estate values (in dollars per acre)
 plotted against population density on a state-average basis; Table 9 sum-
 marizes the data from which Figure 5 is plotted.  A state with a population
 density of 100 persons per square mile, for example, would be expected to
 have  farm real estate values falling in the $350 to $400 per acre range,
 while a state having a population density  of 50 persons  per square mile
 would average about $100 per acre less for agricultural  land; and doubling
 the population density (to 200 people per  square mile) would mean that
 farmland  values would be around $550 per acre.

           Said in another way, where people locate tends to bring greater
 value to  nearby farmland.   On a statewide  average basis, the value of land
 used  for  agricultural purposes can be estimated as follows:

                                            0.53
                                  380
where V  is  the  average  land  value  in dollars  per acre  and D is  the  state's
population  density  in people per  square  mile.

          In many areas where resource recovery  appears  uneconomical  on  a
statewide average basis,  there may be a  number of locations within  the
state that  offer attractive  possibilities.  To identify  specific  locations
for resource recovery would  require that resource values and land values
be closely  examined for the  particular cities under  consideration.

          Realistic estimates of land value are  hard to  establish.  Land
prices fluctuate widely, year to year, area to area, and  even season  to
season.  Location determines  land  use, and land  use determines  land value.
          The other locational factor is somewhat more specific, relating
          > to its distance
chip is shown in Figure 6.
land value to its distance from a major population center.  This relation-
*  These data were based on actual'market values of land in 1972 in the
     Kansas City metropolitan area.'
                                 "  28

-------
         2000
ho
VO
      ~ 1000
      LLJ
      cn.
          500
          200
      -   100
          50
                                               10                                 100

                                                POPULATION DENSITY (PEOPLE/SQ .Ml. )
1000
                           Figure 5 - Farm Real Estate Values.Vs.  Population Density

-------
                                                TABLE  9
                    FARM REAL ESTATE VALUES AND POPULATION DENSITIES BY  STATES  (1973)


Segion and State
New England
Maine
New Hampshire
Vermont
Massachusetts
Rhode Island
Connecticut
Middle Atlantic
New York
New Jersey
Pennsylvania
South Atlantic
Delaware
Maryland
Virginia
West Virginia
North Carolina
South Carolina
Georgia
Florida
West North Central
Minnesota
Iowa
Missouri
North Dakota
South Dakota
Nebraska
Kansas
Land
Cost
(S/Acre)^

235
368
328
799
1,036
1,316

390
1,599
518

663
888
404
208
483
375
340
423

275
482
289
111
97
195
203
a/ Doane ' s Agricultural Report,
Population
Density
(People/Sq. Mi.).

33
86
50
748
928
655

390
997
265

291
421
122
72
107
88
82
135

50
51
69
9
9
20
28
Vol. 36, No. 32-6
                                                                            Land
                                                                            Cost
                                                                          ($/Acre)l/
Region and State      	

East South Central
  Kentucky           333
  Tennessee          363
  Alabama            274
  Mississippi        269

West South Central
  Arkansas           321
  Louisiana          411
  Oklahoma           225
  Texas              194
East North Central
- Ohio
" Indiana
Illinois.;
Michigan
Wisconsin
Mountain
Montana
Idaho
Wyoming
New Mexico
Arizona
Utah
Nevada
Colorado
Pacific
Washington
Oregon
California

507
512
590
433
336

76
234
54
53
93
124
87
138

262
204
496
  Populat ion
    Density
(People/Sq. Mi._)_]>/
                                                                                              83
                                                                                              98
                                                                                              69
                                                                                              47
                                                                                               38
                                                                                               84
                                                                                               39
                                                                                               45
                                                                                              267
                                                                                              148
                                                                                              205
                                                                                              162
                                                                                              84
                                                                                                5
                                                                                              .9
                                                                                                4
                                                                                              " 9
                                                                                               17
                                                                                               14
                                                                                                5
                                                                                              22
                                                                                               54
                                                                                               23
                                                                                              136
b/ MRI calculation's based on  1970 Census Data.

-------
   500.0
   200.0
   100.0 —
x   50.0 -
Q
z
UJ
u
Q
Z
    20.0 ~
    10.0
NOTE: 1.0 = Prevailing agricultural farm land value
                                II     I      I
                DISTANCE  FROM POPULATION CENTER (MILES)
        Figure 6 - Empirical Index of Land Price  Vs.

                     Distance from Population Center
                             31

-------
           Here.,  it .can be seen..that ;l-and costs  decrease  as  distance  from
 a population center  increases.   At a 50-mile  distance,  land prices reflect
 their value  for  primarily agricultural  use.   Closer,  they begin to include
 other,  higher value  uses, or at least the speculative possibility of future
 high-value use.   Figure 6 relates land  values at various distances between
 rural and urban  (or  suburban) land uses to the  average  value of raw  farmland.

           As shown in Figure 6, land that is  25 miles from  the population
 center  will  be priced about 4.5 times as high as raw farmland (land  price
 index approximately  or equal to 4.5).  Moving into within 10 .miles raises
 the  land price index to nearly 20.

           This points out the problem a municipality faces  in seeking a suit-
 able landfill site.   If farm real estate is valued at $300  per acre, it may
 still cost the city  from $2,000 to $6,000 per acre for  a landfill site
 within  10 to 20  miles, and it is unlikely that  anything suitable could be
 found within 30  miles for less than $1,000 per  acre.,

           The cost of operating a remote landfill  facility  is generally
 higher  than  for  a close-in site,  even considering  the lower cost land.   The
 added expense of maintaining a  transfer station and transporting wastes over,
 say,  a  100-mile  distance, usually will  offset any  savings in land acquisition
 costs.

           As  land values  rise,  pushing  up the costs of  disposal by landfill,
 more and  more areas  will  find resource  recovery economically attractive,
 with the  degree  of attractiveness depending on  the net  costs associated with
 the  particular resource recovery systems under  consideration.
                  ECONOMICALLY  RECOVERABLE  SOLID WASTES
Energy Values  and  Land  Costs

          While  increasing  land costs  will  raise  the  total  cost  of  solid
waste disposal by  landfill, rising  energy values  will reduce  the net cost of
solid waste  disposal  in energy recovery  systems.

          All  three conventional fossil fuels—coal, oil and natural gas--
will become increasingly expensive, as shown in Figure 7, making  the energy
recoverable from solid wastes more valuable.
                                    32

-------
 co
•o
 o

 >

 I—
 1/1
 o
 (J

 O
 LU
 z
 LU



 i
 LU
     1.00
     0.90 -
     0.80 -
     0.70 -
0.60  -
0.50  -
0.40  -
     0.30 -
     0.20 -
     0.10 -
       0
        1960
               1965
1970
1975

YEAR
1980
1985
1990
                Figure  7  -  Average Energy Cost of Fossil Fuels,  1960-1990
        Source:  Midwest  Research  Institute  based  on published fuel values.


                                             33

-------
          Natural gas costs are expected to Increase at a rate of 6 percent
annually  through 1990;  fuel oil, at 5 percent annually; and coal at 3.5
percent annual rate.  This will cause many electric utilities to shift in
favor of  coal over  fuel oil and natural gas, which will also encourage the
utilization of solid waste derived fuel.  Nuclear energy will be used to a
greater extent in many  areas, but is unlikely to displace existing fuel
sources by 1990.

          The average as-burned cost of conventional fuels used by steam^-
electric  generating plants in the United States presently ranges from about
$0.20/106 Btu where low cost coal is locally available, to $0.50/106 Btu or
more in some of the northern states which rely heavily on fuels brought in
from distant sources.   New plants using Wyoming coal will experience a cost
of about  $0.50/106  Btu.  By 1990, the cheapest conventional fuel (usually
coal) will cost up  to $1.00/10** Btu, and will seldom be available for less
than $0.50/10  Btu.  Rising energy costs, coupled with  increasing  land  costs
(for disposal sites), will push many states  into the "Resource  Recovery More
Economical" range in the next few years (Figure 3).

          The present and projected land costs and energy values for the
various states are summarized in Table 10, in which the energy value shown
represents 80 percent of the estimated cost of conventional fossil fuels.
These data are plotted  in Figures 8 through 16 to show their effects in
each state.
Where Resource Recovery Will Be Economically Feasible

          When land costs and energy .values are considered together  for a
particular location, the economics of waste disposal versus resource re-
covery can be established.  The results of such an analysis on a state-by-
state level, under two different assumptions, are given  (Figures 17  and 18).

          In one case (Figure 17), it was assumed that the energy recovered
from solid wastes has a value equal to the cost of conventional fossil
fuels, while in the other case (Figure 18), the recovered energy value is
calculated at 20 percent less than other locally available fuels.  The
shaded areas in each figure indicate the years by which  resource recovery
will become economically feasible in the different states under these as-
sumptions, based on the relationships between projected  land and energy
costs.

        .  It., is. believed that the more conservative approach (Figure 18,
where the recovered energy value equals 80 percent of the prevailing fuel
cost) is the most realistic.
                                    34

-------
                                              TABLE 10
          ESTIMATED AVERAGE FARM LAND COSTS AND AVERAGE ENERGY VALUES BY STATE (1973-1990)
New England
  Maine
  New Ham
  Vermont
  New York
  New Jersey
  Delaware
  Maryland
  Virginia
  West Vi
  North C
  South C
  Georgia
  Florida
(In
dollars per
1973
Land
Cost
I State ($/Acre)
id
235
•shire 368
328
isetts 799
iland 1,036
.cut 1,316
.antic
: 390
;ey 1,599
rania 518
intic
j 663
1 888
i 404
rginia 208
irolina 483
irolina 375
340
423
Energy
Value
(C/106 Btu)
30.2
32.2
40.3
32.6
32.9
32.2
36.0
35.4
27.4
35.4
33.9
30.9
21.2
31.1
31.0
31.8
30.9
acre and
cents per million Btu)
1980
Land
Cost
($/Acre)
441
690
615
1,499
1,943
2,468
690
3,491
984
1,079
1,832
711
403
771
686
775
636
Energy
Value
(c/106 Btu)
42.4
42.2
51.3
44.2
45.5
43.1
48.6
47.7
35.2
46.4
43.3
39.3
27.0
39.6
41.5
41.0
43.. 5 .
1985
Land
Cost
($/Acre)
700
1,080
970
2,350
3,050
3,900
1,050
6 , 100
1,550
1,550
3,100
1,060
650
1,080
1,050
1,400.
850

Energy
Value
(C/106 Btu)
55.8
51.8
61.8
55.2
57.8
53.8
57.7
56.6
41.6
54.2
52.2
47.4
32.6
47.8
50.4
49,5
48.4
                                                                                                   1990
Land
Cost
($/Acre)
1,082
1,695
1,511
3,680
4,771
6,061
1,561
10,650
2,461
2,162
5,155
1,592
1,035
1,502
1,623
2,518
1,139
Energy
Value
(c/106 Btu)
69.1
61.4
72.4
66.2
70.1
64.5
66.8
65.4
48.0
61.9
61.0
55.4
38.1
55.8
59.3
58.0
53 . 3

-------
                                              TABLE 10 (Continued)
OJ
o\
Land
Cost
($/Acre)
333
363
274
269
321
411
225
194
Energy
Value
(C/106 Btu)
19.4
21.4
25.2
23.6
23.6
18.8
17.5
18.9
Land
Cost
($/Acre)
511
• 614
498
473
583
682
371
320
Energy
Value
(C/106 Btu)
24.6
27.6
32.2
35.4
35.5
28.2
26.3
28.4
Land
Cost
($/Acre)
700
900
760
710
900
980
530
455
Energy
Value
(C/106 Btu)
29.7
33.2
38.8
43.1
49.5
39.4
36.8
39.7
Land
Cost
($/Acre)
941
1,301
1,167
1,060
1,368
1,405
757
653
Energy
Value
(C/106 Btu
34.7
38.8
45.4
50.7
1 63.5
50.6
47.2
50.9
1973


Region and State
East South Central
-Kentucky
, Tennessee
Alabama
Mississippi
West South Central
Arkansas
. Louisiana
Oklahoma
Texas
East North Central
Ohio
Indiana
Illinois
Michigan
. Wisconsin
West North Central
Minnesota
Iowa
Missouri
North Dakota
South Dakota
Nebraska
Kansas
Land
Cost
($/Acre)

333
363
274
269

321
411
225
194

507
512
590
433
336

275
482
289
111
97
195
203
Energy
Value
(C/106 Btu)

19.4
21.4
25.2
23.6

23.6
18.8
17.5
18.9

25.4
24.5
26.8
32.8
34.1

30.3
27.5
24.0
15.7
29.6
27.0
22.2
                                                       1980
1985
1990
507
512
590
433
336
275
482
289
111
97
195
203
25.4
24.5
26.8
32.8
34.1
30.3
27.5
24.0
15.7
29.6
27.0
22.2
798
790
864
682
587
403
764
512
166
132
309
301
32.3
•31.2
34.8
41.8
44.0
40.6
37.8
31.6
19.9
40.3
38.6
32.9
1,100
1,070
1,130
950
870
530
1,050
780
220
165
430
400
39.0
37.6
41.7
50.3
53.1
51.1
46.1
37.7
24.0
48.6
50.2
41.4
1,527
1,470
1,490
1,304
1,303
694
1,475
1,157
294
205
597
529
45.5
43.9
48.6
58.9
62.2
61.6
54.3
43.8
28.2
5V. 7
61.6
50.0

-------
                            TABLE  10 (Concluded)
               1973
1980
1985
1990


Region and State
Mountain
Montana
Idaho
Wyoming
New Mexico
Arizona
Utah
Nevada
Colorado
Pacific
Washington
Oregon
California
Sources: Doane's
Land
Cost
($/Acre)

76
234
54
53
93
124
87
138

262
204
496
Agricultural
Energy
Value
(C/106 Btu)

21.4
21.1
21.2
18.6
27.0
20.7
33.4
23.0

35.4
33.2
29.3
Report, Vo
Land
Cost
($/Acre)
124
376
86
87
171
213
203
212
394
390
610
Energy
Value
(c/106 Btu)
27.8
27.8
27.0
26.4
39.8
28.5
47.0
31.0
49.8
49.9
43.6
36, -No. 32-6, August 10,
1 in Steam-Electric Plant
Land
Cost
($/Acre)
175
530
120
122
260
310
340
275
530
620
710
1973.
Factors
Energy
Value
(C/106 Btu)
33.5
32.6
32.6
27.7
43.9
32 . 6
52.2
37.4
65.5
69.7
60.3
(Land cost fo
, National Co
Land
Cost
($/Acre)
248
739
165
176
409
459
684
390
706
984
820
Energy
Value
(C/106 Btu)
39.2
42.9
38.1
28.9
48.0
36.6
57.4
43.8
. 81.2
89.4
77.0
                                                                                973.)   Based
                                                     ant Factors.  National  Coal  Association,
1973.   Midwest Research Institute (1980,  1985,  1990).

-------
 oo
O
 o
v

 E>
 0)
0.70


0.60


0.50


0.40


0.30


0.20


0.10
              /
     Me.
     T7
                      N.H.
X
                                   9 Mass.
                     .«
                      X1


                      , A-
         Ct.  ^-
                         X
                '^x
Key:  o 1975
     o 1980

     A 1985
     ® 1990
                         *">»
                                J	I
       0      1000     2000     3000

                     Land Cost ($/Acre)
                                    4000
      Figure 8 - Energy Values Vs. Land Cost in the

                 New England States, 1972-1990
                                     5000
    0.70


 ^ 0.60
 s

J5 0.50
 o

 S 0.40
 v
 — 0 30
 o U'JU

 oJ 0.20
 0)
    0.10 -


      0
                 xeN.Y.
                                          N.J.
       Key:  o 1975
            a 1980
            A 1985
            9 1990
    0      1000      2000     3000     4000

                  Land Cost ($/Acre)



  Figure 9  - Energy Values.Vs. Land  Cost in the

            Middle Atlantic States, 1972-1990
                                               5000
                          38

-------
   0.70
   0.60
   0.50

-------
    0.70




 ^ 0.60

 D



J5  0.50
 o


 ^ 0.40

 v


 ~5  0.30




 ? 0.20
 o>
 c
 uu

    0.10




       0
                  Wise.
               /,«Mich.
                 1000     2000      3000


                         Land Cost ($/Acre)
                                         4000
 5000
       Figure 11 - Energy Value Vs. Land Cost in the   0


                   East North Central States, 1972-1990
    0.70
    0.60
4°  °-50
 o

 > 0.40



 -s  0.30
 >
 0)


 LU
0.20




0.10




   0
                1000      2000     3000


                        Land Cost ($/Acre)
                                        4000
5000
       Figure 12 - Energy Value Vs. Land Cost in the


                   East South Central States, 1972-1990
                               40

-------
S3
 O
 0)
 _D

 O
  X
  O)

  V
  C
0.70


0.60


0.50


0.40

0.30.


0.20


0.10


   0
Okla./^/  >

-  :/// /
    'A/  /
                 1000      2000-    3000      4000

                         Land Cost ($/Acre)
                                                   5000
      Figure 13 -  Energy Values Vs.  Land Cost: in the
                  West South Central States,  1972-1990
     0.70


 ^  0.60
 D

 ^°  0.50
 o

 <>  0.40
  0)

 -5  0.30
 >

  ?  0.20
  o>
  C '
 LU
     0.10

        0
          D  Key:   01975
          '  '
                     a 1980
                     A 1985
                     • ,1.990
                1000      2000     3000      4000

                         Land Cost ($/Acre)  '
                                                   5000
     Figure  14  -  Energy Values  Vs.  Land Cost in the

                  West  North Central States,  1972-1990
                               41

-------
   0.70
   0.60
                                              Nev.
   0.50
D
I—
CO
                 /
   0.40
                /!/Mon*./
                I  f    ^  y
                                 Utah
        _    /

 o

 x
UJ
   0.30
                        X
   0.20
            fl//
           lit °/
          OP  Q     O

          ON.M.
                              k
   0.10
      0
           Key:  o 1975

                 a 1980

                 A 1985

                 • 1990

              I      I
                          I	I
                                                                        OVe'y
                                I	-I
        0
                  200
. 400         600         800


       Land Cost ($/Acre)
1000        1200
              Figure 15 - Energy Values Vs.  Land Cost  in the

                            Mountain States, 1972-1990
                                       42

-------
     0.90
 CO

•o
 o
 ^

 
 V
                1000
 2000      3000


Land Cost ($/Acre)
4000
                                                       5000
 Figure  16  - Energy  Values  Vs.  Land Cost in the

                Pacific  States,  1972-1990
                        43

-------
 1000 TPD Resource Recovery System
  Economically  Feasible by
              1975
              1980
              1985
              1990
Assuming Recovered Energy Value
 Equals Average Fuel  Cost
Figure 17 - States Where  Resource Recovery Becomes Economically Feasible,  1975-1990
                (Energy Value of Waste  at  100 Percent of Fossil  Fuel)

-------
   1000 TPD Resource Recovery System
     Economically Feasible by
                11975
                 1980
                 1985
                 1990
   Assuming Recovered Energy Value
     Equals 80 Percent of Average Fuel Cost

Figure  18 -  States Where Resource Recovery Becomes  Economically Feasible,  1975-1990
                (Energy Value  of Waste at  80 Percent  of Fossil  Fuel)

-------
 Here,  it can be seen  that  one  state  (New Jersey)  can justify  resource re-
 covery on purely economic  grounds  by 1975;  resource recovery  will become
 feasible in three more  states  (Rhode Island,  Connecticut and  Maryland) by
 1980;  an additional eight  states will  find  the  concept attractive by 1985;
 and 13 more states by 1990.  Even  in Washington and Oregon where hydro-
 power  is used extensively,  increases in  energy  production will require the
 development of additional  conventional and  nuclear energy plants, with fos-
 sil fuels (chiefly coal) still expected  to  dominate.

        1   Thus,  by 1990, 25  states will  be  justified in supporting resource
 recovery systems on their  own  merits.  This does  not take into account the
 states  where specific population centers  may  support resource recovery sys-
 tems even though the  statewide averages  calculated here are  too low to
 "qualify" the state itself.  Thus, these  calculations should  be viewed as
 very conservative.
        QUANTITY OF SOLID WASTES PROCESSED FOR RESOURCE RECOVERY
Solid' Wastes Processed for Resource Recovery

          The  total quantity of solid wastes actually processed for resource
recovery depends on a number of factors in addition to those previously dis-
cussed.  Economic feasibility by itself does not, of course, mean that a
project will be undertaken.  New systems will be installed only when the
necessity arises, and existing solid waste management plans and operations
may carry many years beyond the theoretically indicated point of economic
feasibility.  Existing landfill sites may, for example, be entirely ade-
quate for another 10 years or more before new disposal-planning decisions
need to be made.  In addition, local political and social attitudes may lead
to some areas rejecting resource recovery while others will work out dif-
ficult interjurisdictional problems.

          The total amount of mixed municipal solid waste generated is sub-
ject to some uncertainty.  A detailed summary of solid waste generation by
quantity and composition is given for the 1971 to 1990 period (Table 11).
The basis of these solid waste generation values is a calculated forecast
tonnage based on two key sources:  EPA's estimate of mixed municipal waste
generation and composition for the year 1971; and updating of this data by
MRI using forecasts developed in the course of this study and other estimates.

          The approach was to develop independently a material-by-material
(or component-by-component) forecast of waste generation on the basis of de-
tailed analysis in other chapters of this report.  For those components of
solid waste not included in this study, we made estimates of future use.

                                     46

-------
                                                                      TABLE  11
                                       MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE GENERATION  BY MATERIAL  CATEGORY,  1971 TO  1990
1971
Waste Component
Paper
Glass - containers
other
Total Glass
Ferrous - cans and small items
bulky appliances
other
Total Ferrous
Nonferrous - packaging Al
other Al
Nonferrous - other
Total Nonferrous
Plastics
Rubber/Leather
Textiles
Wood
Sub Total - Manufactured
Products
Food Wastes
Yard Wastes
Misc. Inorganics
Total Solid Haste
Total Organics - as generated
Total Inorganics
Nominal Value
Value at 27, compound growth
Value at 37= compound growth
Value at 3.57, compound growth
Tons
39.
11.
1.
12.
8.
1.
0.
10.
0.
0.
0.
1.
4.
3.
1.
4.
77.

22.
24.
I.
125.
99.
25.
125
-
-
•

1
1
0
1
9
7
1
7
6
2
4
2
2
3
,8
6
0

0
1
9
0
1-
9




Percent
31.3
8.9
0.8
9.7
7. 1
1.3
0. 1
8.5
0.5
0.2
0.3
1.0
3.4
2.6
1.4
3.7
61.6

17.6
19.3
1.5
100.0
79.3
20.7




(In Million
1972
Tons
41.5
12.2
1.0
13.2
9.3
1.7
0. 1
11. 1
0.7
0.2
0.4
1.3
4.5
3.4
1.9
4.7
81.6

22.2
24.6
2.0
130.4
102.8
27.6
130
128
129
129
Percent
31
9
0
10
7
1
0
8
0
0
0
1
3
2
1
3
62

17
18
1
100
73
21




.8
.3
.8
.1
.1
.3
. 1
.5
.5
.2
.3
.0
.5
.6
.5
.6
.6

.0
.9
.5
.0
.9
. 1




Tons and Percent)
1975
Tons
42.1
13.4
l.l
14.5
9.9
1.7
0.1
11.7
1.0
0.2
0.4
1.6
5.7
3.7
2.1
5. 1
86.5

23.0
26.3
2. 1
137.9
108.0
29.9
140
135
141 '
143
Perce
30.
9.
0.
10.
7.
1.
0.
8.
0.
0.
0.
1.
4.
2.
1.
3.
62.

16.
19.
1.
100.
78.
21.




nt
6
7
8
5
2
2
I
5
7
1
3
I
1
7
5
7
7

7
,1
5
0
3
,7




1980
Tons
50.6
15. 1
1.3
16.4
11. 1
1.9
0.1
13. 1
1.3
0.2
0.5
2.0
8.4
4.3
2.4
5.7
102.9

24.5
29.3
2.5
159.2
125.2
34.0
160
149
163
170
Percent
31.8
9.5
0.8
10.3
7.0
1.2
0. 1
8.3
0.8
0. 1
0.3
1.2
5.3
2.7
1.5
3.6
64. 7

15.4
18.4
1.6
100.1
78.6
21.5




Ton;
57
15
I
16
12
2
0
15
1
0
0
2
11
5
2
6
117

26
32
• 2
178
141
37
180
165
189
202
1985

.3
. 1
.5
.6
.5
.5
.2
.2
.6
.3
.6
.5
.0
.0
.9
.5
.0

.2
.7
.9
.8
.6
.2




Percent
32.0
8.5
0.8
9.3
7.0
1.4
0. 1
8.5
0.9
0.2
0.3
1.4
6.2
2.8
1.6
3.6
65.4

14.7
18.3
1.6
100.0
79.2
20.8




1990
Tons
67.2
15.2
1. 7
16.9
13.5
2. 7
0.2
16.4
2.0
0.3
0.7
3.0
13.2
5.8
3.5
7.4
133.4

27.7
36.4
3.3
200.8
161.2
• 39.6
200
182
219
~
PC- re., n:
33.5
7.6
0.6
8.4
6. 7
1.4
0. 1
8.2
1.0
0.2
0.3
1.5
6.6
2.9
1.7
3.7
66.5

13.8
18.1
1.6
100.0
80.3
19.7




Sources:   "Resource Recovery and Source Reduction," Second Report to Congress, I'. =. Environment:-] Protection Agency,  1974  p.3  •::.
            Midwest Research Institute, 1972 to 1990.  See Table  11  (Continued)  for  the  basis  o£  the  calculations.
                                                                                                                                  v? S'•-'.-->  1971  Data.

-------
                          TABLE 11 (Continued)

    BASIS  FOR  CALCULATION  OF WASTE GENERATION/COMPOSITION.  1972  to  1990

           The calculation basis  or data  source  for  extending waste compo-
 sition  and generation was derived from each waste component as  follows.

           Paper:  The basis was  the  calculated  paper available  in  solid
 waste before  recovery within  the solid waste  management  system, which is
 the  estimated actual paper discarded into  solid waste  systems each year
 (data from Table  119).

           Glass:  The basis was  the  calculated  net  discard for  glass con-
 tainers from  Table 35.  For noncontainer glass, we  used  the EPA base data
 for  1971  of 1.0 million tons  and estimated 1.0  million tons for 1972; 1.1
 for  1975;  1.3 for 1980; 1.5 for  1985; and  1.7 million  tons for  1990.

           Ferrous Metal:   The  basis  was  the calculated net discard for
 metal cans  plus other ferrous  metal  objects in  mixed waste, to which house-
 hold appliance metal was  added.   The basis for  the  mixed ferrous metal is
 the  forecast  net tonnage  discard each year (Table 49).   Household  appliance
 discard was based on MRI  data  in Table 56.  A miscellaneous category for
 furniture,  etc., was derived  from EPA estimates and carried at 0.1 million
 tons, per  year to 1985, then raised to 0.2 million tons.

           Nonferrous Metals:   The basis  for packaging metal came from Table
 63.  To this  was added 0.1 million tons per year for nonpackaging  aluminum.
 Also, we  added 0.1 million tons  for  aluminum  in appliances in 1972-1980;
 then 0.3  million tons in  1985  and  1990.  The other  types of nonferrous
 metals were based on EPA  data  for  1971, to which we added 0.1 million tons
 in 1980,  1985, and 1990.

           Plastics:   The  basis was the net waste discard for packaging
 plastics  plus other plastics  in  mixed municipal waste from Table 77.  To
 this we added 0.2 million  tons for plastics in  appliances and furniture,
based on  the  EPA data for  1971.

          Rubber/Leather:   The basis used was that  rubber tires are 75 per-
 cent of total rubber going into  municipal waste.  All discarded rubber tires
 are shown  in mixed municipal waste plus one-half of all other waste rubber
products  go directly into municipal waste (e.g., footwear, mechanical goods).
Leather (e.g., shoes) is  the balance of the tonnage in this category.  We
 used EPA  data for 1971 as  the base tonnage and extended it at 3 percent
 growth rate to 1990.
                                    48

-------
                           TABLE  11  (Concluded)

          Textiles:  The basis used was the EPA data for 1971, extended at
3.5 percent compound growth rate to 1990.

          Wood:  The basis used was the EPA data for 1971, extended at 2.5
percent compound growth rate to 1990.

          Food Waste Generation:   The calculation basis was related directly
to forecast population increase (percentage).  No allowance was made for a
rise or decline in the percentage of food disposal by home garbage grinding,
home composting, the pattern of food consumption habits, etc.  The data on
population were taken from Table 21 in direct ratio to the base year of
1971.

          Yard Waste Generation:   The basis used was the EPA data for 1971,
which was extended at an average growth rate of 2.2 percent per year, or
about twice the rate of population increase.  No adjustment was made for:
new and total household formations; type and market share of dwelling units;
air pollution regulations on open burning; home composting; size and types
of yards subject to waste pickup compared to 1972.  These latter factors
will influence yard waste generation rates but no data were available to
form a calculation basis.

          Other Inorganics:  The base year 1971 data are EPA's estimates
which we extended at an average growth rate of 3 percent per year to 1990.
This was our estimate of the overall increase in discard of unidentified
inorganics—dirt, stones, brick,  ceramics, various small, items, etc.
                                    49

-------
 The basis for our waste generation forecasts are detailed in Table 11.  The
 actual mixed municipal waste generation will rise from 120 million tons in
 1972, to 200 million tons in 1990, or a rate of increase of about 2.5 per-
 cent per year.  The range of quantities in 1990 would be 180 million tons
 at 2 percent growth, to 240 million tons at 3.5 percent annual growth (Table
'11).          ,     .  .     .                '    ' "'••   ' '        " , '  .   ....  -  , p

       /^ In general, a metropolitan area population of more than 300,000
 people is required to support a 1,000 ton per day resource recovery opera-
 tion.  To estimate the prevalence of resource recovery, the metropolitan
 areas having populations in excess of 300,000, in the states where resource
 recovery was believed to be economically feasible for a given year, were
 tabulated and the appropriate number and size of the recovery systems were
 estimated.  It was assumed that plants would be installed initially in
 capacities of 1,000 to 5,000 tons per day, and that increased solid waste
 generation in the area could be accommodated by adding shifts or days to
 the plant operating schedule.

           A number of different possible situations were considered, to
 estimate a realistic range of values.  These variables included, for 1975,
 1980, 1985, and 1990:

           1.  Three estimates of solid waste generation (low, median and
 high), and
     f                                                                  •• '
         *.'"•.
           2.  Three estimates of the percentage of solid wastes processed
 for resource recovery (low, median and high).                               ,

           Additionally, probabilities were assigned to each combination of
 variables.  A probability of 0.5 was arbitrarily assigned to the median esti-
 mate in each case, and probabilities of 0.25 were given the high and low
 estimates.  The resulting 36 outcomes (nine for each of 4 years), and their
 estimated probability of occurrence were tabulated, quartile ranges were
 defined, and the median and "most likely" estimates were identified.*

           The estimated total amount of solid wastes processed for resource
 recovery is summarized in Table 12 for the 4 years in question, and these
 estimates are plotted, along with the total amount of solid waste generated,
 in Figure 19.
 */ This technique was used to show that there is a range of uncertainty
      here — the quantity of solid waste actually generated is not precisely
      known and the rate at which  resource  recovery systems will be installed
      is highly uncertain.
                                     50

-------
                                                          TABLE 12

                         RANGE  OF VALUES  FOR QUANTITY OF MIXED WASTES CENTRALLY PROCESSED
                                    FOR  RESOURCE RECOVERY (MILLIONS  OF TONS PER YEAR)

























(p = 0.25)
Low
Estimate
1975:135
1980:150
1985
1990

:165
:180
















































Quantity
Processed
for Recovery

(p = 0.25)
Low
Estimate
1975
1980
1985
1990
1.3
3.1
10.3
18.6







(p = 0.50) (p = 0
Median
Estimate
1975
1980
1985
: 2.0
: 6.1
:20.9
1990:40.5
High
Estimate
1975: 2.9
1980: 13.4
1985:39.9
1990: 73.5
.25)








(p = 0
Low
Estimate
1975
1980
1985
1990
: 1.3
: 3.4
: 11.8
22.3


Total
Solid Waste
Generated
























(p = 0.50)
Median
Estimate
1975:140
1980:160
1985:180
1990:200








Quantity
Processed
for Recovery

.25)















(p = 0.50)
Median
Estimate
1975: 2.1
1980: 6.6
1985:24.0
1990:48.6




































(p = 0.
High
Estimate
1975
1980
1985
3.0
14.6
45.9
1990:88.1


























(p. = 0.
Low
Estimate
1975:
1980:
1985:
1990:
1.4
3.7
13.5
26.8







(p = 0.25)
High
Estimate
1975
1980
1985
1990

:143 .
:170
:200
:240







Quantity
Processed
for Recovery

25)


(p = 0.50) (p = 0.25)
Median
Es tima te
1975
1980
1985
1990
2.2
7.2
27.4
58.4
High
Estimate
1975: 3.1
1980: 16.0
1985: 52.3
1990:105.9
(p = 0.0625)    (p = 0.125)    (p = 0.0625)
(p = 0.125)
(p  = 0.25)     (p = 0.125)
(p = 0.0625)   (p = 0.125)    (p = 0.0625)
 Source:   Midwest Research Institute.

-------
    500
   200
    100
z
o
    50
-  20


13




Q
LU

X


%  10
o
                 Totol Amount Generated
                1975
1980
                                            YEAR
                                                             Total Amount  Processed

                                                             for Resource Recovery
1985
1990
    Figure 19  -  Solid Waste Generation  and Resource Recovery  Ranges,

                                      1975-1990
                                        52

-------
          By 1990, the USA could be processing between 18.6 million tons of
solid waste in centralized resource recovery systems and 105.9 million tons.
This range bounds the calculated low and high estimates.  The most likely
resource recovery profile, i.e., the one with a probability of 0.25 of
occurring, indicates that 48.6 million tons of solid waste will be processed
for recovery in 1990 in centralized resource recovery facilities.
Number of Resource Recovery Systems in Operation

          The quantity of solid waste processed for resource recovery (as
given in the preceding section) will come principally from large municipal-
ities in certain geographic areas.  Not all areas where resource recovery
is economically feasible will install systems, and not all systems that
are installed will be economically feasible.  The estimated number of muni-
cipalities having resource recovery systems in operation at specified points
in time was estimated (Table 13).  Three estimates are given for each year:
a minimum, maximum, and "most likely."
                                TABLE 13

         ESTIMATED NUMBER OF METROPOLITAN AREAS ACTUALLY HAVING
    RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITIES UNDER THREE CONDITIONS, 1975 TO 1990
 Year

 '1975
 1980
 1985
 1990
                 Minimum
                 Estimate
Period
3
3
11
8
Total
3
6
17
25
"Most Likely"
  Estimate
Period
4
5
14
17
Total
4
9
23
40
Maximum
Estimate
                      Period   Total
                         4
                        14
                        25
                        22
          4
         18
         43
         65
  Source:  Midwest Research Institute.


          The "most likely" category incorporates the calculated base esti-
mate for total solid waste generation (Table 11); a recovered energy value
of 80 percent of prevailing local fuel costs; and the "most likely" esti-
mate for adoption of the resource recovery concept (Table 13).   These are
the parameters that MRI believes represent the best estimate of what will
actually occur.
                                     53

-------
           The  resulting  "most  likely"  estimate  shown  in Table  13 indicates
 that,  by  1990,  40  metropolitan areas will have  resource recovery systems
 in  operation.   (Note:  We  refer to metropolitan areas at  this  j.oint as
 opposed to the  total number  of systems in those areas.)

           The  total number of  recovery plants expected to be operating in
 these  metropolitan areas were then estimated  (Table  14).  We estimate  that
 five plants will be built  and  in operation in 1975; another seven will be
 installed  during the 1975-1980 period;  20 between 1980 and 1985; and  28
 the following  5 years.   This gives a total of 60 resource recovery plants
 in  operation by 1990, processing 48.6  million tons  of mixed municipal solid
 wastes annually, for an  average of 800,000 tons per year per plant or
 2,670  tons per  day per plant based on  300 days  per  year operation.
                                TABLE  14

         ESTIMATED NUMBER OF RESOURCE  RECOVERY PLANTS IN ACTUAL
            OPERATION UNDER THREE CONDITIONS. 1975 TO 1990

                  Minimum           Most  Likely            Maximum
                  Estimate             Estimate             Estimate
Year           Period    Total      Period    Total     Period    Total

1975              4         4           5         56        6
1980              4         8           7        12         15       21
1985              12        20          20        32         30       51
1990              15        35          28        60         40       91
Source:  Midwest Research  Institute.
          The central processing plants to be actually built and on-stream
in or by a given year cannot be specifically identified, but they can be
expected to come principally from the metropolitan areas listed in Tables
15 and 16.  It must be emphasized that resource recovery may be attractive
in large metropolitan areas located in all states, because of local condi-
tions related either to the availability and cost of landfill sites and/or
conventional fuels.

          The MRI estimates of the maximum number of central waste proces-
sing plants that are possible to be installed in the period 1975 to 1990
is given for the "most likely" waste generation rates and the "economically
feasible" states and'SMSA's for resoufce--.recovery identified in Table 15.
                   ^•^  •     /      ^ f    }
This tabulation is a summary of the SMSAxcharacteristics detailed in Table 15.

                                    54

-------
                                                        TABLE 15
                                  SMSA'S OF'.300.OOP POPULATION OR GREATER IN STATES WHERE
Year
1980
1985
RESOURCE RECOVERY IS "ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE." 1975 TO 1990



State
New Jersey




Connecticut




Maryland

Rhode Island

Vermont
New Hampshire
Massachusetts



New York







Georgia
Delaware
Washington

Oregon
California






SMSA
Jersey City
*Newark
Paterson-Cllfton-
Passaic
Trenton
*Bridgeport
Hartford
New Haven •
Spring field- Chlcopee-
Holyoke
*Baltlmore
*Washingtcm
Providence- Pawtucket-
Warvlck
...
--
*Boston
Spring field- Chicopee-
Holyoke
Worcester
*Albany-Schenectady-
Troy
Blnghamton
Buffalo
*New York
*Rochester
Syracuse
Utica-Rome
Atlanta
Wilmington
Seattle-Everett
Tacoma
*Portland
Anaheim-Santa Ana-
Garden Grove
Bakersfleld
Fresno
Maximum Number of Kennlblu Central Pnio-nn Inn
1970 Resource Recovery Plant n by SI/..;
Population 1,000 2,000 3,000 4.000 !>,000
(000) Tons/Day Tona/Day Tons/Day Tons/Day Tuna/Dii
609 1
1,857 2

1,359 1
304 1
389 1
664 1
356 1

530 1
2,071 1 1
2,86.1 1 1

914 I 2
--
--
2,754 . 11

530 1
344 1

721 1
303 1
1,349 1
11,529 1 5
883 1
636 1
340 1 .
1,390 1
499 1
1,422 1
411 1
1,009 1
1,420 1

329 1
413 1
Los Angeles-Long Beach 7,032 1 4








Oxnard-Ventura
Sacramento
San Bernardino-
Riverside-Ontario
*San Diego
San Francisco-
Oakland
San Jose
376 1
801 1

1,143 1
1,358 • i

3,110 2
1,065 I
                                                      55

-------
                                                    TABLE 15(Concluded)
                                                                  - Maximum Number  of  Feasible  Central  Processing


Year State
1985 South Carolina
i

1990 Arkansas

Louisiana
Wisconsin
Michigan



Illinois

North Carolina


Ohio






Nebraska
Minnesota
Iowa

Pennsylvania








Virginia

Nevada
Maine
Florida






SMSA
Charleston
Columbia
Greenville
Little Rock-
N. Little Rock
New Orleans
Milwaukee
*Detroit
Flint
Grand Rapids
Lansing
*Chicago
Peoria
Charlotte
Greensboro-Winston-
Salem-Hlgh Point
*Akron
Canton
*Cleveland
Columbus
Dayton '
Toledo
Youngs town-Warren
Omaha
Minneapolls-St. Paul
Davenport-Rock Island-
Moline
Allentown-Bethlehem-
Easton
. Harrisburg
Lancaster
*Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Wllkes-Barre-
Hazleton
York
Nor f o Ik-Portsmou th
Richmond
--
--'
Fort Lauderdale-
Hollywood
Jacksonville
Miami
Orlando
1970
Population
(000)
304
323
300

323
1.046
1.404
4,200
497
539
378
6,979
342
409

604
679
372
2,064
916
850
693
536
541
1,814

363

544
411
320
4,818
2,401

342
330
681
518
--
--

620
529
1,268
428
Resource Recovery Plants by Size
1.000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000
. Tone /Day Tons/Day Tons /Day Tons/Day Tons/Da'
1
1
1

1
1 2
' 1
1 2
1
1
1
1 4
1
1

' . 1
1
1
..11
1
1
1 . •
1
1
2

1

1
1
1
1 3
2

1
1
1
1



1
1
1
1
                           Tampa-St. Petersburg   1,013
*  Resource recovery systems are currently under development in the city or SMSA.
Source:  Bureau of Census 1970 Population Estimates; Midwest Research Institute.
                                                        56

-------
          The next calculation was an extension of the data in Table 17;
the quantity of waste that would be processed if all of the systems were
actually built in the years indicated and. operated as given (Table 18).
By 1990, it is possible that 90.9 million tons would be processed annually,
or nearly half of the total waste generated.  Thus, the potential for
resource recovery is quite high (although our forecasts of what will actu-
ally occur are more conservative).
 i
          We have only indicated in Tables 17 and 18 the recovery processing
that is economically feasible in selected states.  Because of the fact  that
farmland values are the lowest common denominator for land disposal sites,
it is to be expected that a much higher land value would be contemplated
at sites closer to metropolitan areas.

          Because of the fact that our land value estimates are very con-
servative, it is to be expected that resource recovery will be feasible in
many metropolitan areas that face a waste processing decision.  Thus, it
follows that the plants built in any one year will not necessarily corres-
pond to the states in which economic feasibility is demonstrated by our
forecasting technique.  The plants could be located anywhere the basic
criteria are met.  Thus, the SMSA's listed in Table 16 are also potential
locations for resource recovery facilities  (In fact, some already exist,
e.g., St. Louis.)

          Recognizing (1) that not all areas where resource recovery is
economically feasible will adopt the concept; (2) that some areas will
install resource recovery facilities that are not economically feasible;
and (3) that many economically feasible resource recovery locations will
lie outside the states identified as feasible, estimates have been made
of the number and characteristics of the central processing plants that
will actually be installed.  The processing plant characteristics are
summarized in Table 19, while the tonnages involved are presented in
Table 20.  (See also Tables 13 and 14 for the "most likely" columns that
are the basis for ihe data in Tables 19 and 20.)

          Thus,  while we estimate that five plants will be in operation by
1975, this does not mean they will be in New Jersey, the one state that
shows economic  feasibility by that date.  Instead, we believe the first
five plants will be in St. Louis,  Missouri; Chicago, Illinois; Ames, Iowa;
Nashville, Tennessee;  and Baltimore, Maryland.  Others are being planned
or have been announced.
                                    57

-------
                                TABLE 16

   ADDITIONAL SMSA'S OF 300.000 POPULATION OR GREATER IN STATES.WHERE
                 RESOURCE RECOVERY POTENTIAL IS LIMITED*
Colorado
Indiana

Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Missouri

New Mexico
Oklahoma

Tennessee
Texas
Utah
  SMSA

  Birmingham
  Mobile
  Phoenix
  Tucson
  Denver
  Gary-Hamraond-E. Chicago
  Indianapolis
  Wichita
  Louisville
  New Orleans
  Kansas City
**St. Louis,
  Albuquerque
  Oklahoma City
  Tulsa
  Chattanooga
**Knoxville
**Memphis
**Nashvilla
  Beaumont-Port Arthur-Orange
  Dallas
  El Paso
  Ft. Worth
  Houston
 *San Antonio
  Salt Lake City
   1970
Population
  (OOP)

    739
    377
    968
    352
  1,228
    633
  1,110
    389
    827
  1,046
  1,254
  2,363
    316
    641
    477
    305
    400
    770
    541
    316
  1,556
    359
    762
  1,985
    864
    558
** Resource Recovery Systems are currently under development  or  active
     consideration.
*  These are states not included in Figure 18 for statewide economic
     feasibility for resource recovery.
Source:   Midwest Research Institite.
                                  58

-------
                                    TABLE  17
         CHARACTERISTICS  OF  CENTRAL  PROCESSING PLANTS  IN STATES AND SMSA's
Year

1975
1980
1985
1990

NO: of
States
1
3
10
... 15
WHERE

No. of
SMSA's
4
7
28
35
RESOURCE RECOVERY IS ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE^/
No,
1 , 000
Tons/Day
1
2
12
13
. of Central Processing Plants
2,000
Tons/Day
1
2
2
11
3,000
Tons/Day
2
4
6
10
4,000
Tons/Day
1
2
5
5
by Size
5,000
Tons/Day
0
1
14
10

Total
Plants
5
11
39
49
Total   29
74
28
16
22
13
25
104
a/  Assumes "most likely" parameters and includes only SMSA's of 300,000 people
      or more in states where resource recovery becomes economically feasible
      (Table 15 and excludes SMSA's in Table 16).
Source:  Midwest Research Institute.
                                     TABLE 18
                WASTE PROCESSING POTENTIAL IN STATES WHERE RESOURCE
                         RECOVERY IS ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE^/

                  Quantity  of Waste  Throughput  in Central  Processing
                             Plants  by  Size  (Tons/Year)

Year
1975
1980
1985;
1990
1,000
Tons /Day
300,000
600,000
3,600,000
3,900,000



1
1
6
2,000
Tons /Day
600,000
,200,000
,200,000
,600,000


1
3
5
9
3,000
Tons /Day
,800,000
,600,000
,400,000
,000,000


1
2
6
6
4,000
Tons /Day
,200,000
,400,000
,000,000
,000,000



1
21
15
5,000
Tons /Day
0
,500,000
,000,000
,000,000


3
9
37
40

Total
,900; 000
,300,000
,200,000
,500,000
Total 8,400,000   9,600,000   19,800,000   15,600,000  37,500,000 90,900,000
a/  Assumes "most likely" parameters and includes only SMSA's of 300,000 people
      or more in states where resource recovery becomes economically feasible
      (Table 15).
Source:   Midwest Research Institute, based on Table 17.
                                       59

-------
                                 TABLE 19

CHARACTERISTICS OF CENTRAL PROCESSING PLANTS.  NEWLY INSTALLED.  1975-199Q3/
 Year

 1975
 1980
 1985
 1990
No. of
SMSAs

  4
  5
 14
 17
                           No. of Plants by Size
 Total   40
 1,000
Tons/Day

   3
   2
   6
  _7

  18
 2,000
Tons/Day

   2
   2
   2
  _5

  11
 3,000
Tons/Day

    0
    3
    5
   _6

   14
 4,000
Tons/Day

    0
    0
    2
    3
 5,000
Tons/Day

    0
    0
    5
   _7

   12
Total No.
of Plants

    5
    7
   20
   28

   60
 Source:   Midwest Research Institute.
 a/  Includes plants in SMSA's both in and outside  of  states  in  which  re-
       source recovery will become economically feasible  by  1990 (Tables
       15 and 16).
                                 TABLE 20

     TOTAL MIXED SOLID WASTE CENTRALLY PROCESSED FOR RESOURCE  RECOVERY.
                           BY YEAR,  1975  TO 1990
                            (In thousand  tons)

Year
1975
1980
1985
1990
Plants
Installed
5
7
20
28
                                              Quantity of Waste
                                                  Processed—'
                        Total
                        Plants
                        In Use

                           5
                          12
                          32
                          60
 a/   Based  on  "most  likely"  estimated  number of plants, operating at daily
       capacity  300  days  per year  (Table  19).
 Source:  Midwest  Research Institute.
Year
2,100
4,500
17,400
24,600
Total
2,100
6,600
24,000
48,600
                                  60

-------
          By 1990, we believe the geographic pattern of plant installation
will conform more closely to the forecast model we have used, if some allow-
ance is made for "exception" metropolitan areas in states that do not become
"eligible,for resource recovery under our base criteria."  Local conditions,
including the economic, political and social climate of an area, will lead
to some deviations from our general model, and this is fully recognized as
a factor.  For example, St. Louis, Missouri, and Nashville, Tennessee, are
already well along in the development of recovery facilities.  Thus,  other
sites may develop recovery systems, even if the state itself does not meet
the base criteria of our forecast.
                                    61

-------
                               CHAPTER IV

            GENERAL APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY FOR ANALYSIS OF
                     SEVEN MATERIALS IN SOLID WASTES      .
                              INTRODUCTION
          Much of the detail of this report is devoted to development of
forecasts of recovery for the major materials included in the study.
In three of these materials, there is significant recycling now from post-
consumer waste--ferrous metals, aluminum, and paper.  In two, there is
limited recycling of post-consumer waste—glass and rubber.  Plastics
recovery (post-consumer waste) for recycling is not practiced in signifi-
cant quantity.

          Each of the materials is covered in a separate chapter follow-
ing this one.  The objective of each material discussion is to arrive at
a forecast of resource recovery for the 1972 to 1990 period for that ma-
terial, focusing on recovery from the solid waste stream.
                    GENERAL METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH
          The forecasts of resource recovery have been developed using a
common methodology and sequence of analysis tasks for each material.

          First, a forecast of material demand and production was made to
1990 for the industry in question, e.g., paper.  This included the details
of selected segments of the industry that were of particular interest in
this study such as packaging uses.  In effect this was a market analysis
and forecast, which established the basis on which solid waste and resource
recovery profiles could be developed.  (The specific products detailed for
each material are given in the chapters, e.g., glass containers.)

          Second, we developed a profile of waste generation for each mate-
rial based on demand and the use characteristics of the end products.  There
was a time element assigned to waste generation rates based on the product
life cycle.  For example, newspapers and most packaging become waste almost
as produced, i.e., on a very short life cycle.  Other items such as appli-
ances may not appear in the waste stream for years.  These factors were
taken into account.  In addition, products that are unrecoverable or fail
to enter  into the municipal waste stream were accounted for, including uses

                                     62

-------
in which a product leaves the municipal waste cycle or is unidentifiable
again, e.g., roofing felts (which come into demolition wastes) or auto panel
hard-board (which is part of auto hulks); or toilet paper which is disposed of
in sewage systems.  The result of this step was the development of a waste
profile based on:  product life cycle; disappearance or diversion from      ,
municipal waste; and time/rate of generation.  We determined only net waste
generation, i.e., that withdrawn from the waste stream for recycling is not
shown as waste material handled within solid waste systems for disposal.

          Third, the municipal waste generation was determined by source:
residential, commercial/institutional, and industrial.  For the most part,
we determined this by judgment and selected reference to published data.
Most products are household waste because so much of the study emphasis
was on packaging and other consumer products.  However, an allocation was
made to each source.

          Fourth, we determined what portion of the waste generated is
potentially recoverable for recycling, reuse or useful conversion.  Our
basic premise was that any waste in an SMSA was "accessible" to recovery
from an economic, geographic, and quantity standpoint.  In general, about
70 percent of waste generated falls in this category. Over and above that
allowance must be made for actual collection and mechanical efficiency if
recovery is to be realistically  assessed.  A broad generalization is that
70 percent efficiency is realistic, which means that from a recovery potential
standpoint, about 50 percent of waste generated nationally could be recovered
(0.70 of quantity x 0.70 efficiency).

          Fifth, we made a forecast of actual resource recovery based upon
our best estimates of the recycling requirements of the various industries
and the extent to which waste recovery options would provide the material
from municipal waste.  The recovery modes included "traditional" secondary
materials recovery procedures; source separation; consumer collection centers;
transfer station separation; and centralized waste processing facilities.  The
recovery profile forecast for each material was developed to 1990, including
the quantity recovered for its energy content.

          In the case of the materials chapters that follow, only the "most
likely" recovery forecasts are included.  However, as indicated in Chapter
III, we did make an estimate of the range over which resource recovery could
apply from 1975 to 1990.  The recovery profile for each material would vary
proportionately to that range, which is based upon solid waste processed
through resource recovery systems.

          Finally, incorporated within each of these material and recovery
forecasts are the effects of some variables that could influence the recovery
profiles (upward or downward).  The consideration of special factors is a
part of any forecast and these considerations were incorporated implicitly
  t
                                    63

-------
or explicitly.   Specific  factors  that were  considered  included:  demand
for products  compared to  natural  resource availability or  resources; end
use trends  in various markets; environmental standards; trends  in energy
availability; waste disposal and  processing cost trends; public attitudes
toward resource  use, recycling and solid waste.  An example of an assumption
is that state legislation on beverage containers (e.g., Oregon, Vermont)
would extend to  five or six  states in the future.  We believe th»y would be
low population areas and  the effect of state legislation on the total demand
forecasts would  be minimal even though laws may eliminate  all but returnable
containers  in those few states.

          By contrast, if we have missed the intermaterials competition effects
or the. impact of the energy crisis, our forecasts of demand for materials could
be high, and for any material (e.g., aluminum, plastics) could differ consider-
ably from what we forecast.  Likewise, the resource recovery pattern could
differ  considerably as well, if major developments override our basic judgments
for each material.  However, we point these factors out only to call attention
to the fact that any forecast must be considered in the light of the conditions
on which it is based.  We believe that the forecasts developed in this repor.t
are a realistic  assessment of the future.
                   BASIC ECONOMIC AND POPULATION DATA
          The demand and use of products commonly relates to such basic
factors as "real" GNP, disposable income, population and other economic
indicators.  The basic data used in this report as background for some
of the forecasts of demand and recovery is given in Table 21.  These basic
economic data were derived from various sources (government, industry, pri-
vate) and are not MRI forecasts.  However, the forecasts in the other chap-
ters of the report utilize this information where appropriate to develop
our own forecasts.

          The chapters which follow detail the materials individually.
The following three cover the inorganics-rglass, ferrous metals, and aluminum.
The subsequent three cover the organics--plastics, rubber and paper.
               GENERAL OBSERVATIONS ON MATERIALS RECOVERY
          The materials included in this study will be utilized in two recov-
ery options in the future—recycling or energy recovery.  The inorganics are
suited best for recycling applications — ferrous metals, aluminum and glass.
Of these, ferrous metals and aluminum should have little problem being recycled

                                    64

-------
                                                                         TABLE ^1
                                                            BASIC ECONOMIC INDICATORS. 1960-1990
GNP (Billion Real Dollars)a/

GNP (Billion Current Dollars)

Per Capita Income (Real) a/

Population (In millions)

Disposable,Personal Income
  Billion (Real) Dollarsa/
CMP (Billion Real Dollars)a/

GNP (Billion Current Dollars)

Per Capita Income (Real)a/

Population (In millions)

Disposable Personal Income
  Billion (Real Dollars)*/
1960
661.8
503.7
2,437.0
180.6
440.2
1971
998.7
1,046.8
3,442.0
207.0
712.5
1961
676.1
520.1
2,472.0
183.6
453.8
1972
1.055.0
1.147.0
3,500.0
209.0
534.0
1962
719.3
560.3
2,549.0
186.5
475.3
1973
l.lll.O
1.248.0
3,701.0
211.5
785.0
1963
746.9
590.5
2,609.0
189.1
493.4
1975
1.209.0
1,427.0
3.806.0
216.5
830.0
1964
786.0
632.3
2,753.0
191.8
527.9
1980
1,474.0
1.970.0
4.288.0
230.8
1.015.0
1965
834.0
684.9
2,899.0
194.2
562.9
1985
1,764.0
2.685.0
4.750.0
246.2
1,225.0
1966 1967 1968 1969
887.0 914.2 957.0 980.4
749.9 793.9 864.2 929.1
3,024.0 3,111.0 3,219.0 3,281.0
196.4 198.6 200.6 202.5
593.9 617.9 645.7 664.5
1990
2.054.0
3.285.0
5.171.0
260.7
1,440.0
1970
974.!
. 974.1
3,358.0
204.8
687.8






a/  Base Year 1957.
Sources:  Bureau of the Census, Series p-25. No 476, February 1972, Projection  Series  D
          Predlcasts, Inc., Issue No. 48. July 28, 1972.

-------
 in  whatever quantity  they  can be recovered.   Both can  be  recovered  in  central-
 ized processing facilities or in collection/separation centers.   However,  the
 technology  of aluminum recovery has not  yet  been demonstrated  on a  commercial
 basis.   The recipient industries (steel  and  aluminum)  will  be  capable  of
 accommodating increased recycling,  and will  very likely encourage it.

          Glass recycling  will depend  heavily on locational  factors  and the
 technological capability to produce color  sorted materials   Since  the basic
 raw materials for  glass are in adequate  supply,  the  technology of recovery
 is  unproven,  and container plants are  not  near every large  population
 center, the  recycling  of glass will  not move  ahead as rapidly as  will the
 other inorganic materials  (metals).

          Of  the organics,  recycling appears to  be viable only for paper.
 Paper can best  be  recovered  for recycling  via source separation,  and by
 collection  within  solid waste management systems.  However, some paper will also
 be  recovered  for recycling from centralized  recovery facilities.  That
 which cannot  be recovered  for recycling  can  be processed  for its  energy
 content.

          The other organic  materials  in mixed waste are  suitable for
 energy  recovery options of various  kinds.  Most  plastics, textiles and
 rubber  are  derived from hydrocarbon sources  giving them a high energy  con-
 tent  per pound.  In addition,  there are  difficulties in recycling plastics,
 rubber  and  synthetic  textiles,  although  rubber tires could enter  a reuse
 mode  if retreading returns  to favor for  private  automobiles.

            The  greatest uncertainty in the MRI forecasts  is  the  effect
 that  energy conservation practices  will  have on  recycling and  resource
 recovery.   Energy conservation  practices directed  at fossil  fuels could
 have  several  effects  as  they relate  to our specific  recovery forecasts for
 each  material:   (1) Reduce  the  total demand  for  some materials:  (2) Shift
 demand  to less  energy  intensive  products—in which case plastics, synthe-
 tic textiles, and aluminum would not reach the demand  levels we  forecast;
 (3) Stimulate recycling/reuse because  of internal  industry process energy
 savings for some materials;  and  (4)  Stimulate  energy recovery  via substi-
 tution of solid  waste  for  fossil fuels in  power  generation'and industrial
 processes.  It  is likely that all four of  these  factors will occur to  some
 extent.

          Of  these, we  believe  that  the current energy  supply shortage  in
 the U.S.A. will  tend  to  stimulate recycling  and  reuse  and lead to more ra-
pid development  of energy recovery  from  solid waste.   Thus, if  anything,
 our resource  recovery  forecasts  could  prove  to be  conservative.
                                    .66

-------
                                CHAPTER V

             RECOVERY FORECASTS FOR GLASS CONTAINERS TO 1990


                                 SUMMARY
          The demand for all glass containers will increase at the rate of
2.6 percent per year between 1972 and 1980, after which time, total demand
will essentially level out to 1990.  The growth of the nonreturnable bever-
age container is nearing full maturity.  Therefore, growth in this product
group will slow.  Glass will lose market share to plastic and metal con-
tainers.

          The total tonnage of glass container waste generated will rise
from 12.2 million tons in 1972, to 15.1 million tons in 1980, and 15.2
million tons in 1990.  This is equivalent to 38.7 billion units in 1972
and 43.3 billion units in 1980.  Of the total tonnage, 8.4 million tons
were generated in SMSA's in 1972, 10.7 million tons in 1980, and 11.0
million tons will be generated in SMSA's in 1990.

          On a source basis (1972) about 10 million tons or 82 percent of
waste glass containers are generated in households; 2 million tons are
generated in commercial and institutional establishments, and 0.2 million
tons are generated in industrial plants.  This relationship will not
change significantly over time.

          Other glass waste amounting to 1.0 million tons in 1972 brought
total glass in municipal solid waste to 13.2 million tons in 1972; by 1990,
other glass waste will be 1.7 million tons and total glass waste 16.9
million tons.  Noncontainer glass consists of window glass, drinking ware
and miscellaneous uses of glass, e.g., laboratory glass.

          We estimate that only SMSA's have the population base and density
to sustain significant glass recovery operations.  Recycling of glass back
into containers will be the most predominant use of recovered glass.   How-
ever, several factors lead us to conclude that the recovery of glass con-
tainers from waste will be modest and develop slowly.  These are:   the
technology and economics of glass recovery from mixed municipal waste are
still experimental; the logistics of transportation will influence recovery
since many SMSA's are remote from glass container plants.; there is an
abundance of soda ash and sand, the basic raw materials; the specifications
for color sorted cullet are likely to be difficult to achieve; the mechani-
cal efficiency of recovery technology is relatively low at present.
                                   67

-------
          Nevertheless, we believe glass container cullet will be rec.^ered
via  three mechanisms:  voluntary citizen collection; commercial cullet
dealers; glass recovery processing systems associated with mixed waste
processing for resource recovery.  Of these, voluntary collections will
become somewhat more important; cullet dealer operations will all but
disappear; and recovery of .glass from central processing systems will
begin about 1980.                                ,

          The MRI forecasts of recovery.are summarized for the 1972 to 1990
period in Table 22.  Total recovery for recycling will rise from 275,000
tons in 1972 to 850,000 tons in 1990.

          The recovery of waste glass (principally containers) for recycling
will rise from 275,000 tons in 1972 to 850,000 tons in 1990; or from 3.3
percent to 7.7 percent of total waste glass generation.  After 1980, the
primary recovery technique will be mechanical separation of glass from
mixed waste in association with large centralized recovery operations.
Most of the glass recovered will be recycled into containers although a
small amount will be utilized in other products  such as glass wool and
terrazzo tile.
                              INTRODUCTION
          Glass containers are one of the oldest packages for containing
liquids and solids.  Glass is nonporous, transparent, chemically inert,
impermeable to oxygen and carbon dioxide and can be cast and shaped into
many forms and sizes.  Because it is impermeable, it does not retain odors
and can be cleaned and reused.  These properties have made it a desirable
container for packaging a wide variety of foods and beverages such as soft
drinks, beer, wine and distilled spirits.  Drugs, Pharmaceuticals, toilet-
ries, and cosmetic products are also packaged in glass containers, along
with numerous household and industrial chemical items..  These uses re-
presented a market for 38.7 billion new containers in 1972.

          It is estimated that refillable glass containers for soft drinks,
beer and milk were filled 32.4 billion times during 1972, bringing the
total to 71.1 billion containers shipped to the marketplace during the year,
                                   68

-------
                                                    TABLE 22
                                  SUMMARY OF WASTE GLASS RECOVERY. 1972 TO 1990
v£>


Year
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990
Total
Glass
Waste
Generated
13,200
14,500
16,400
16,600
16,900
(In Thousand Tons)
Amount

Glass
Container
12,220
13,440
15,110
15,110
15,200
Amount
Processed for
a/
Recovery—
0
20
170
540
860
Recovered
Mechanical
System5-/
0
10
100
350
600
Amount
Recovered
via Separate
Collection£/
275
265
275
250
250


Total
Recovery
275
275
375
600
850


Percent
Recovery
2.8
1.8
2.3
3.6
5.0
      Source:  Midwest Research Institute.
      a/  Only that which is processed in a glass recovery subsystem; the total glass in waste processed will
            be higher (see Table 4).
      b_/  About 90 percent of the glass is container glass.
      £/  Nearly all of this is considered to be container glass.

-------
               GLASS  CONTAINER;DEMAND  BY  MARKET..  1962 TO  1990
 Trends  in Container  Deniand
           Glass  container  demand  increased  at 4.4 percent per year,  from
 1962  to  1972,, or  from 25.05 billion  units  to the  present  level of  38.7
 billion  units (Table 23).   This growth was  quite smooth  during  the  first
 half  of  the  decade  but  has been eratic in recent years partly as  a  result
 of  the effects of a strike in  1968  and of changing patterns  in  the  soft
 drink markets.   Glass containers  accounted  for 6.75 million  tons  of  ma-
 terial in  1962 and  had  nearly  doubled by  1972 to 12.22 million  tons for a
 growth rate  of 6.1  percent per year.  By  1980 it appears that glass  con-
 tainer demand will  have reached full maturity at 43.4 billion units  and
 15.1  million tons.

           Nonreturnable soft drink,  and beer containers were  responsible
 for almost all of the 13.6 billion  increase in glass container  demand
 between  1962 and 1972 (Table 24).   Nonreturnable soft drink  containers
 account  for  61 percent  of  this total as they increased from  480 million to
 8.76  billion during this period.  Almost  all of  the growth occurred  between
 1965  and 1970, when  the  single-trip  container became a commercially  accepted
 product.   Since  1970, growth in total volume packaged has slowed considerably
 as  the markets for  glass one-trip containers approach saturation.  Unit
 growth has slowed more  as  the  32-ounce and  larger containers replace smaller
 sizes.

                                TABLE 24

           NET CHANGE IN GLASS  CONTAINER SHIPMENTS, 1962  TO 1980
Liquor
Wine
Food
(In

:ainer Type
. (returnable)
: (nonreturntble)
rnable)
eturnable)



.nd Health
and Cosmetics
and Chemical
billion containers)
Period
1962-1972
(0.15)
8.28
(0.10)
4.17
0.68
0.62
1.85
(0.28)
,: (0.71)
(0.75)

Period
1972-1980
(0.15)
2.44
(0.03)
1.51
0.56
0.43
0.48
(0.24)
(0.34)
(0.11)
     Total
13.61
4.75
Source:   1962-1972,  U.S.  Department  of Commerce;  1962-1972, Liquor and
           Wine  -  MRI  estimate;  19J2-198Q. MRI estimate.
                                   70

-------
                                                     TABLE 23
                             GLASS CONTAINER DEMAND BY UNITS AND TONNAGE. 1962-1990
Soft Drink - Returnable
Soft Drink - Nonreturnable
Beer - Returnable
Beer - Nonreturnable
Liquor^/
                        	1962	   	1972	    	1975          	1980	    	1990	
                         Units     Tons     Units     Tons      Units     Tons      Units     Tons      Units    .Tons
                        Billion!/  (OOO)c/ Billionl/  (000)£/  Billion!/  (000)£/  Billion3./  (QOO)C/  Billion^/ (000)£/
Food
Drug and Pharmaceutical
Toiletries and Cosmetics
Household and Chemical

    Total Domestic

          Export

    Total
    Growth rate
      7»/year
1.60
0.48
0.35
3.42
1.72
0.75
10.07
3.25
2.05
1.36
774.9
177.4
121.4
784.0
737.0
373.9
2,313.3
745.4
467.0
313.8
1.45
8.76
0.25
7.59
2.40
1.37
11.92
2.97
1.34
0.61
802.9
3,315.7
75.8
1,815.7
1,120.8
828.2
3,017.7
755.0
333.8
154.0
1.30
9.90
0.22
8.28
2.66
1.53
12.21
2.88
1.12
0.50
772
3,953
70
2,070
1,293
983
3,180
750
292.
130
1.30
11.20
0.22
9.10
3.16
1.80
12.40
2.73
1.00
0.50
722
4,666
72
2,338
1,591
1,218
3,358
739
271
135
1.30
11.20
0.22
9.10
3.16
2.10
12.40
2.60
0.70
0.53
722
4,666
72
2,338
1,591
1,421
3,358
704
190
143
          25.05  6,749.1

           0.28
          25.33
           38.66

            0.25

           38.91
          12,219.6
40.60

 0.25

40.85
13,443
15,110
1962-1972
1972-1980
1980-1990
Units
  4.4
  1.5
  0
Tons
 6.1
 2.6
 0
Source:   a/  U.S.  Department of Commerce, 1962-1972.
         b/  Domestic production for U.S. imports.
         c/  Midwest Research Institute estimates based upon average weights reported by Glass Container
               Manufacturers Institute, Midwest Research Institute estimates, 1975-1990.

-------
           The  acceptance  of  the  single-trip  beer  bottle  began  much  earlier
 and  demand increased  from 3.42 billion  containers .in  196"2  to 7.^9 billion
 in 1972.   This 4.17 billion  unit increase  accounted for  31  percent  of  the
 total  increase in  demand  for glass  containers.  Growth was  steady during
 the  early  part of  the decade, but has  slowed  since 1970 as  the  potential
 for  replacement of the  round-trip container  reaches completion.  It is not
 difficult  to see why glass container  manufacturers have  pursued  the non-
 returnable beer and soft  drink markets--all  of  the other end uses grew
 modestly or declined  in the  1962 to 1972 period as plastics, steel  and
 aluminum packages  displaced  some user of glass.

           Food,  liquor, and  wine containers  increased modestly during  the
 period.  Food  is a very stable but  large market for glass  containers.
 Container  use  increased from 10.07  billion in 1962 to 11.92 billion in
 1972, which is  about equivalent to population growth.  Increasing personal
 disposable income  has stimulated the  growth  for wine and liquor as  con-
 tainer use increased from 2.47 billion  units in 1962 to  3-77 billion in
 1972.

           All  other uses  declined during this period.  Returnable beer
 and  soft drink containers were replaced by the one-trip  glass  container
 and  metal  can.   The use of plastic  and  metal containers  (including  aerosols)
 have caused a  decline in  household  and  industrial chemical, toiletry and
 cosmetic,  and  drug and  pharmaceutical containers.  Demand  for  glass con-
 tainers in these markets  has  decreased  26.2 percent from 6.67  billion con-
 tainers in 1962  to 4.92 billion  in  1972.

           The  future markets  for glass  containers will be  similar to past
markets with nonreturnable soft  drink and  beer containers accounting for
most of the growth.  However, this  growth  will be at a much slower  rate
because the substitution  for  the returnable container is reaching its
maximum market penetration.   Further, the  trend to large sized soft drink
containers, coupled with  a slowing  of soft drink  demand, will  reduce the
need for additional new containers.

           One-way  beer  containers will  increase from 7.59 billion in 1972
 to 9.10 billion  in 1980, at which time we expect demand to level out.
Correspondingly, one-way  soft drink containers will increase from 8.76
billion to 11.20 billion during  the same period.  Beyond 1980,  the all-
plastic beverage container will  become commercial and will  capture  most^, if
not all, of the growth that would  have gone to glass containers.  Demand in
1990 will be at  the same  level as 1980.

          Glass, food,  liquor and wine containers will increase slowly,
but plastic containers will capture more of the food market.  Food  containers
will increase  from 11.92 billion in 1972 to 12.40 billion in 1980.    Liquor
                              \

                                    72

-------
and wine will grow at a  faster  rate as the population shifts to a greater
percentage  in the "drinking age."  Demand will  increase from 3.77 billion
containers  in 1972 to 4.96 billion in 1980.

          Returnable beer and soft drink containers should end their decline
by 1975, as  the one-way container approaches its maximum market share.  De-
.mand  in 1980 will be 1.52 billion containers.

          Household and  industrial chemicals, toiletry and cosmetics, and
drug  and pharmaceutical  containers will continue to decline from 4.92 bil-
lion  in 1972 to 4.23 billion in 1980, as plastic containers continue to cap-
ture  markets as the result of the installation of plastic blow molding
equipment in plants packaging these products.

          This slowdown  in the  growth of beverage markets, coupled with
continuing  replacement by plastic containers, will result in a growth rate
of 1.5 percent per year  through 1980, when 43.41 billion glass containers
will  be used.  Beyond 1980, the development of the commercial plastic bev-
erage container will cause demand for glass containers to remain at about
the 1980 level.  Thus, 1990 use will be 43.31 billion containers.

          About 250 million containers were exported in 1972.  Exports have
varied little during the past decade and are projected to remain at this
level in the future.

          Imports in 1972 were valued at about $9,500,000 and consisted of
perfume bottles and other small containers.  Quantity estimates are not
available, but it is assumed that it is probably about 100-150 million con-
tainers.  This is a small amount in relation to all containers produced
and is not  considered a  significant factor in solid waste generation.  The
import of products in glass containers (e.g., whiskey) is an unknown and
could not be determined.

          Figure 20 shows the market shares by type of containers in 1962-
1980.  The  shares in 1990 will be essentially the same as 1980.
Trends in Container Weight

          Although the growth of glass containers has been 4.4 percent per
year during the past decade, the average size of the containers has been
increasing, resulting in a faster growth for container weight.  The average
weight of a container in 1962 was 8.6 ounces.  This average has steadily
increased to 10.1 ounces in 1972.  This resulted in the production of 6.75
million tons of glass containers in 1962, which increased at a rate of 6.1
percent per year to 12.22 million tons in 1972.

                                   73

-------
                                    -R Beer 1.4
                                                         -R Beer 0.6
        •House & Ind 5.4

 R   - Returnable
 NR - Nonreturnable
 Numbers are percent.
               & Ind 1.6
     Toilet & Cos 3.5  .
                use & Ind 1.1
           -Toilet & Coj 2.3
                      1962
                  25.05 Billion


 Source:  U. S . Deportment of Commerce 1962-1972
'  .      MRI Estimates (Wine and Liquor) 1962-1972
        MRl Estimates 1980
    1972
38.66 Billion
   1980
43.41 Billion
                       Figure  20  -  Glass  Containers  Percent  by  End  Uses  (Units),  1962-1980

-------
          Although nearly all containers have been getting larger, much of
the growth in weight has been in the nonreturnable soft drink container
which has increased its share of the total container market from 1.9 per-
cent in 1962 to 22.7 percent in 1972.  Since the average weight of a
nonreturnable soft drink container is greater than the average for all
containers, it becomes a major factor in increasing the total weight of
.all containers.  On a weight basis, it represented 27.1 percent of the 1972
tonnage (Table 23).

          The nonreturnable soft drink container has been increasing in
average weight as a result of consumer demand for the 32- and 48-ounce sizes.
This has been a recent development which was stimulated by commercializa-
tion of the resealable screw top cap.  Initially the single-trip container
was marketed in larger sizes.  As its popularity increased,, it was introduced
in smaller containers.  The average weight steadily decreased to a low of
9.6 ounces per container in 1967.  The weight has increased rapidly in the  .
past 3 years,, reaching a level of 12.1 ounces in 1972, as more of the large
sized containers are purchased by the consumer.

          Food containers, which represent 24.7 percent of the weight of
all glass containers, have also been increasing in average weight.  Much
of this increased average weight is a result of a decline in baby food jar
production (i.e., a light, small container).

          The weight of containers is forecast to increase through 1980,
when the average container will weigh 11.1 ounces and then, the average
weight will remain at this level from 1980 to 1990.  Soft drink containers
will continue to cause the average weight to increase as their share of
the glass market expands to 25.8 percent by 1980 (Figure 21).  Large con-
tainers are expected to increase from 14.6 percent of the 1973 soft drink
market to 23.6 percent by 1975 at the expense of smaller containers.—'
This would be expected to cause a rapid increase in weight.   However, it
will be dampened by the acceptance of plastic covered glass containers
which weigh less than a comparable glass container.  Average weight will
increase to 13.3 ounces per container by 1980.

          Food containers will also increase in average weight as the
recent decline in the birth rate further reduces the demand for the small
baby food containers.

          The resulting increase in average weight, along with increased
demand for containers, will generate a growth rate of 2.6 percent per year
from 12.22 million tons in 1972 to 15.11 million tons in 1980, where it will
remain essentially constant through 1990 (Figure 22).
                                  75

-------
NONRETURNABLE (1)
    SOFT DRINKS
ALL CONTAINERS  (2)
14


12




. 1°
c
'o
0
U
£ 8
£
u
c
0
•s
.*-
.? 6
0)
a>
0)
o
5

^£
4




2
/\


i
_ i

_


—

_

-



-






-
,' ' '

-

-
-


1 C
i . >
£j
5«i
Si:
%i
1
ft:
»•••
*•*«
#*•*
::::
|:
*?*"
*•*•
•*»*
•••I
• •*
•:
1
i:
•v
•X
*•*•
X;
'f?
1
X;
•:•:
*•*•






































?.6
.;.;.
;•.*•:
'•*•
•:•:;
^»*o'
*•*«'
*•**'
1
:ii
:•:•
iiii.;








































S.9
>!•!
•:%
'•***
* * •
X-
»i
P
!*•*•
;::::
P
i-i:
'•:•:
>:•:
!*•*•
!*•*•
*•*
•::i
|

1
'*•*•
'*•**







1





























0 1
fj

>:f;
*o •'
•* *
*• *l
:•: J
II

•: :'
II
;:•;
X:
F
>:: i:
•: :•
:•: :•
•:• •
:•: :•
!•* :
•:• •
'»• •

':• *
!*: :
iii
'•* *
i*: :


































1.1
•*:•*:

'•'.',
1

i
i
m
H;:
'•*•*
!•••!
i
X*
:*x*
!
'••J?


*•*•*
i*i*f
'*••*!
;:-i-
1
>:•*•
>i'i
1
•:•:
   1962  1967  1972  1980
   1962  1967  1972  1980
 Source:  (1)  Glass Container Manufacturers Institute 1962-1972
             MRIEstimates 1980
         (2)  MRI Estimates

 Figure  21  -  Average Glass Container Weights, 1962 to 1980
                              76

-------
                                                           -R Beer 0.6
                                        R Beer  1.8
                                           NR  Soft Drink
                                           2.6
     -House & Ind 4.7
R  - Re'urnable
NR - Nonreturnable
Numbers ere Descent.
                                                                                                          R Beer 0.5
                                                 Drugs & Pharm-
                                                 6.2
      LHouse & Ind 1.2
    Toilet & Cos 2.7
Drugs & Phorm—'     I   '—House
                                                                                                           4.9
        & Ind 0.9
Toilet & Cos 1 .8
                     1962
                 6,749.000 Tons

Source: Glass Container Manufacturers Institute Average Vv'eioht 1962-1972
       MSI Estirrate 1980
     1972
12.220.000 Tons
               1980
           15.110.000 Tons
               Figure  22  -  Glass  Containers  Percent  of  End Uses  By Weight,  1962-1980

-------
                 WASTE GENERATION FROM GLASS CONTAINERS
          Glass containers are used primarily to package consumer products.
They are manufactured; shipped to a packager, filled and shipped to a
retailer.  The consumer purchases the container, uses the product, and, with
the exception of the returnable container, discards it along with other
household waste.  This is all assumed to occur within 1 year and in many,
if not most cases, is less than 1 month after purchase.

          A certain portion of returnable containers are broken, lost or
discarded each year.  This quantity is approximately equal to the annual
production of returnable containers.

          It is possible that some products will be in inventory at the
producer or consumer level for more than a year and that some containers
may be diverted for decorative or other use .around the home.  The net
addition each year is probably very small in relation to the total amount
of containers produced so we have not assumed that it is a factor in glass
container waste generation.

          The above factors are considered to be insignificant in relation
to the total glass containers discarded and we have assumed that 100 percent
of the containers appear in the solid waste stream essentially as they are
manufactured or purchased.  This results in a total glass container waste
generation of 12.22 million tons in 1972, which will increase to 15.11 mil-
lion tons by 1980, and remain at that level through 1990.
               WASTE GLASS CONTAINER GENERATION BY SOURCE
Glass Containers in Household, Commercial and Industrial Waste

          Glass containers will appear as waste from households and apartments
as a result of their use by the consumer; from commercial and institutional
establishments as a result of over-the-counter sales and direct purchases
by institutions; and from industrial establishments primarily from beverage
vending machines, containers for research laboratory chemicals and general
industrial maintenance chemicals.  Table 25 shows the estimated waste gener-
ation by each of these categories.  The results show that 81.8 percent of
the glass containers appear as household wastes; 16.4 percent from commercial
and institutional establishments and 1.8 percent from industrial sources.
These ratios will vary depending upon the market for the material contained
in the glass.
                                    78

-------
                                TABLE 25

            WASTE GLASS CONTAINER GENERATION. BY SOURCE. 1972
                       (In thousand tons and percent)
Soft Drinks
Beer
Liquor
Wine    i
Food
Drug and
  Pharmaceutical
Toiletry and
  Cosmetic
Household and
  Industrial
  Chemical

     Total
                        Household
Tons
(OOP)
3,295
1,608
616
455
2,867
718
301

Percent
80
85
55
55
95
95
90
  138
9,998
90

81.9
                    Commercial and
                    Institutional
                   Tons
                   (000)   Percent
                     618
                     283
                     505
                     373
                     151

                      37

                      33
2,008
                   15
                   15
                   45
                   45
                    5
                   10
                                Industrial
                                                                  Percent
                    206
16.3
  8

214
5	

1.8
Source:  Midwest Research Institute estimates.
          Soft drinks:  It is estimated that 80 percent of the soft drink
glass containers that are disposed each year appear as household waste, 15
percent appear in waste from commercial and institutional establishments,
and the balance from industrial facilities.  These figures are supported
by a recent American Canx£.' study shown in Table 26 which shows the amount
of soft drinks consumed in the home, through vending machines and in service
establishments.  Since the homeowner only purchases packaged soft drinks,1
we have assumed that the 33.7 billion units used in the home in 1970 are
packaged drinks and equal to 77 percent of the 43.6 billion total packaged
drinks.  This share consumed in the, home has been getting larger and has
increased from 68 percent in 1960.  It is likely to have increased further
to about 80 percent in 1973.

          Another survey of vending products estimates that 5.7 billion
bottles were vended in 1972 and that total will rise to 6.8 billion by
1980.il/
                                    79

-------
                                                       TABLE 26
00
O
Trend  to  Packaging
   Packaged
   Nonpackaged
   Total

End-use Markets
   Home
   Vending
   Service
  Total

Low Calorie Trend
  Regular
  Low Calorie
  Total
1955
Units
Billion
19.7
4.7
24.4
13.0
4.0
7.4
24.4
24.3
0.1
24.4

Percent
80.5
19.5
100.0
53 .2
16.4
30.4
100.0
99.5
0.5
100.0
_ 	 — «^ji vnm% j.?jj iu iy/u
1960 196S
Units
Billion
23.5
4.8
28.3
16.1
4.9
7.3
28.3
27.8
0.5
28.3

Percent
83.0
17.0
100.0
56.9
17.3
25.8
100.0
98.0
2.0
100.0
Units
Billion
32.1
5.2
37,3
24.0
6.8
6.5
1773
32.8
4.5 -
37.3


86.0
14.0
100.0
64.3
18.2
17.5
100 . 0
88.0
12.0
100.0
1970
Units
Billion
43.6
9.1
52.7
33.7
9.6
9.4
52.7
47.4
5.3
52.7

Percent
82.7
17.3
100.0
64.0
18.2
17.8
100.0
90.0
10.0
100.0
       Source:  American Can Company  (Reference 95).

-------
          We assumed  the use of returnable containers was allocated  in
.the  same proportion as  the nonreturnable beverage containers  in households
because no other data were availalbe.  Vending accounted for  17.5 percent
of all packaged soft  drinks in 1972.  All of the vended products are used '
in commercial, institutional or industrial markets.  Restaurants arid in.-
stitutional food service organizations also purchased packaged drinks-,for
direct sale or use by occupants.  These purchases, plus the vended volume,
.would increase the use.  of containers  in these markets to 20 percent  of'the
total.
                                                                      j
          Although data on industrial consumption of bottled  soft drinks
are  not available, it  is estimated at  5 percent of the total primarily as
vended products.  The remaining 15 percent was commercial and institutional
use  of containers.
      I
          Householders  use of glass soft drink containers is  forecast" to
stabilize at 80 percent of soft drink containers with the average size  in
home use increasing.  Part of the reason for the percentage decline  over
time in households is attributed to increasing use of nonreturnable  glass
in vending machines.

          Beer:  A study of packaged beer by American Can Company^/ showed
an increasing trend toward consumption of beer in the home.   Table 27 shows
that packaged beer consumed in the home increased from 60 percent of all
beer consumed in 1958 to 67 percent in 1967.  As a percentage of all pack-
aged beer,- it increased from 75 percent to ..80 percent during  this period.
These data restated to  reflect consumption'on a volume basis  are shown  in  :
Table 28.

          The on-premise markets which include taverns, restaurants, and
other commercial establishments that are permitted to sell beer,are  largely
a market for returnable glass containers.  However, about 680 million non-
returnable containers (12 percent of all nonreturnable beer bottles  used in
1967) were used on-premise.  We estimated that nonreturnables increased
to 1.0 billion units  in on-premise establishments in 1972, equivalent to .
13.2 percent of all beer nonreturnables.  If returnables discarded in these
establishments are added to the above, the total glass waste generation in
on-premise establishments is approximately 15 percent. The balance is gen-
erated in households.  This basis was used to extend the allocation of
beer containers (by household and commercial) to other years.

          Liquor:  According to the Distilled Spirits Institute, 58 per-
cent of liquor (by volume) is sold for private consumption and the balance
is sold through commercial establishments.  Commercial establishments use
primarily 1/5-gallon  containers and the homeowner buys the larger sizes,
the  ratio on a container weight basis is more likely 55 percent household

                                   81          .

-------
                                 TABLE  27
                 BEER CONSUMPTION BY MARKET. 1949 TO 1967
                                      1949
                             1958
                              1967.
     On  Premise
      Draught             .:
      Packaged

     Off Premise
      Canned
      Nonreturnable bottled
      Returnable bottled

     Total  Sales
55%
30
25
45%
9
2
34
40%
20
20
60%
28
5
27
33%
.16
17
67%
35 .
14
18
               100%
                100%
               100%
    Source:.  American Can Company. —
                                  95/
                               TABLE  28
         BEER  CONSUMPTION  BY MARKET AND CONTAINER TYPE,  1967
Metal Cans
Bottled (Nonreturnable) 17.0
Bottled (Returnable)
Draught
Total
107.0
                                Million Barrels
71.8
35.2
                                        Billion
                                       Containers
Total
41.2
e)17.0
31.4
17.4
Off Premise
37.5
15.0
19.3
--
On Premise
3.7
2.0
12.1
17.4
(On PreraiseJ
1.24
0.68
4.00
--
5.92
Source:  Midwest Research Institute based on Table 27.
                                   82

-------
 and  45  percent  commercial  and  institutional.  No  significant  ratio  changes
 were forecast  for  the  future.

           Wine:  Wine  usage  was  assumed  to  be consumed  similar  to  liquor
 with 45 percent being  sold in  restaurants and other  eating.establishments
 and  the balance being  consumed in  the  home.  This ratio should  change  in
 the  future to  a greater  share  used in  the home  because  of  the rapid growth
 of the  lightly  carbonated  "pop wines."  By  1980, the  ratio will .be  60 per-
 cent in the home and 40  percent  in commercial establishments.

           Food:  It is estimated that  95 percent  of  the food  containers are
 used in households with  the  balance in commercial and  institutional establish-
 ments.   Commercial establishments  purchase  food in larger  sizes  that are
 usually packaged in metal  cans or  drums, thus a high percentage  of  glass
 food containers are sold to  householders.   Condiments such as catsup and
 sauces  used directly in  restaurants are  packed  in glass.  No  change is
 anticipated in  this ratio  in the future.

           Toiletries and cosmetics,  medicinal and health, household and
 industrial  chemicals:  These items  are predominantly consumer products
 that  are used in the home.   Medicinal  and health  products are also  used in
 hospitals  and medical  dispensaries, while cosmetics and  toiletries are used
 in beauty parlors and other commercial  establishments, or are used and disr1'
 posed of by  .people living and working in institutions  or commercial faci-
 lities.  Household and industrial  chemical products  are used  for cleaning! .
 buildings  and offices,  and  to contain chemicals  used  in  industrial facilities.
 No change  is anticipated in  these markets that  would alter the ratios given
 in Table 25.
Glass Containers in Litter

          Some glass containers are discarded to become litter along road-
sides, in parks and on beaches.  Numerous litter surveys have been conducted
by groups throughout the country and most of these have identified the bev-
erage container as the glass component of the litter.  One comprehensive
study of litter was published by Research Triangle Institute.^i/  This
study estimated that 596 million glass beverage containers were littered
in 1969:  This is equivalent to 3.9 percent of all glass beverage containers
produced that year and 1.6 percent of all glass containers produced.  The
writers admit the study has limitations since there are no comparable his-
torical data to identify trends.  It also covered only interstate and
primary highways, and excluded parks, beaches and recreational areas.
                                    83

-------
          Assuming  tin1,  findings arc  reasonable and that about half of the1
 litter  is collected by  maintenance crews,  then approximately 2 percent of
 all  glass beverage  containers are unrecovered each year.  This would re-
 sult in a net  litter  component of 120,000  tons of glass in  1972.

          With  increased public awareness  of litter and laws being enacted
 in states that  tax beverage, containers, it is likely that the litter com-
 ponent will decline over the next 2  decades or at least remain at the
 current level.  Thus, we assumed that 2 percent of all beverage containers
 produced each year will remain on the ground as uncoilectc-d  1.itter.  This will
 result  in 156,000 tons  per year of litter  in the waste stream by 1980.
 All  of  this glass container litter will be diverted from household waste
 since it is the result  of consumer purchases and the net waste discards
 from households will  be reduced as shown in Table 29.
                                TABLE 29

             HOUSEHOLD WASTE GENERATION OF GLASS CONTAINERS
                            (In Thousand Tons)
   Category           1972       1975        1980        1985        1990

Total Household      9,998      10,956      12,223      12,223      12,223

Litter                 120         136         156         156         156

Net Discarded
  From Homes         9,878      10,820      12,069      12,069      12,069
Source:  Midwest Research Institute.

          Future glass container waste generation will continue to be mostly
from households.  Household waste generation will decrease slightly from
81.6 percent in 1972 to 80.7 percent in 1980, as nonreturnable containers
come into more widespread use in commercial establishments (as a percent
of total containers).  Total waste generated from households will increase
from 9.88 million tons in 1972 to 12.07 million tons in 1980 and 1990 as
shown in Table 30.
                                   84

-------
OO
Ln
                                                     TABLE 30


                              GLASS CONTAINER WASTE GENERATION BY SOURCE.  1972-19901/
1972 1975
Tons Tons
(000) Percent (000) Percent
Households 9,878 81.6 10,820 81.3
Commercial and
Institutional 2,008 16.6 2,245 16.9
Industrial 214 1.8 242 1.8
Total 12,100 100.0 13,307 100.0
1980 1985 1990
Tons Tons Tons
(000) Percent (000) Percent (000) Percent
12,069 80.7 12,069 80.7 12,069 80.7

2,611 17.5 2,611 17.5 2,611 17.5
276 1.8 276 1.8 276 1.8
14,954 100.0 14,954 100.0 14,954 100.0
       _!/  With  Litter  deducted from the' totals.
       Source:   Midwest Research Institute.

-------
                 GLASS CONTAINERS RECOVERABLE FROM WASTE
          The quantity of glass containers recoverable from waste was
determined by assuming that only  the population within Standard Metropolitan
Statistical Areas (SMSA's) as defined by the Bureau of Census would be large
enough to sustain glass recovery  from waste.  In 1972, 68.6 percent of the
total population of the United States resided in SMSA' s ..is.'  This percent
has been increasing as more areas are added to the SMSA and the population
continues to locate in urban areas.  The National Planning Association
projects SMSA population to increase to 70.5 percent by 1980, and assuming
that trend continues, it should be 71.7 percent by 1990.*

          We have assumed that 68.6 percent of the household waste is
potentially available for collection and resource recovery, i.e., that
amount that occurs within SMSA's. Commercial, institutional and industrial
waste is estimated using employment in metropolitan areas.  The percentage
of commercial and institutional employees in SMSA's was '73.6 percent in
1970, and the percentage of agriculture, mining and manufacturing employment
in SMSA's was 64.3 percent.  Assuming that waste generation is.proportional
to employment, these ratios were used to develop the potential waste recovery
in these areas.  We also assumed  that these percentages will increase in
proportion to the total population in the SMSA.  A summary of these percent-
ages are shown below in Table 31.  Using the Table 31 ratios, the projected
waste generation within the SMSA  from 1972-1990 was calculated  (Table 32).
                                TABLE 31

          WASTE GENERATION IN SMSA'S AS A PERCENT OF ALL WASTE


    Source            1970       1972       1975       1980       1990

Household             68.2       68.6       69.3       70.5       72.7
Commercial and
  Institutional       73.6       74.0       74.8       76.1       78.4
Industrial            64.3       64.7       65.4       66.5       68.5
Source:  Midwest Research Institute based on National Planning Association;
           U.S. Bureau of Census .- Industry of Employed Persons by Metro-
           politan and Nonmetropolitan Residence, 1970.
    Note however, that while urbanization is continuing, the growth of
      suburbs has been rapid while central cities have declined.  Whether
      the trend will continue is not known.  However, the population con-
      centration in urban areas will likely continue in the future.

                                   86

-------
                                TABLE 32

       GLASS.CONTAINER WASTE GENERATION IN SMSA'S. 1972 TO 1990
                                                                     1990

                                                                   . 8,770

                                                                    2,045
                                                                      185

Total                8,390      9,335     , 10,680      10,850      11,000

Source
Household
Commercial and
Institutional
Industrial

1972
6,775

1,480
135
(In Thousand
1975
7,498

1,679
158
Tons)
1980
8,509

1,987
184

1985
8,645

2,020
185
Source:  Midwest Research Institute
            GLASS CONTAINER RECYCLING FORECASTS, 1972 TO 1990
Current Recycling Practices and Separate Collection

          Glass recycling has always_been practiced by the glass industry
since a certain percentage of waste glass added to the glass furnace im-
proves the operating efficiency through reduced fuel consumption and improved
melting time.  Normally, cullet (waste glass) use is 10-20 percent of the
glass batch.  Cullet is usually available from off-specification bottles
rejected from.the bottle forming machines and from other scrap within the
glass plant. Multiplant companies will often ship from a plant that produces
excess cullet to one that is dificient.  Some purchases may be from external
sources.  These may be from bottling plants or from cullet dealers.  It is
estimated that about 100,000 tons of cullet were purchased from sources out-
side of glass plants in 1972.

          The ideal material is the in-plant scrap, since it is of known
quality, is color sorted, and is free of dirt, organics and metal contaminants.
The best source of purchased cullet is beverage bottling plants since the
cullet is color sorted and of generally good quality.  Most of the purchased
cullet is .broken containers from bottling operations or rejects from re-
turnable bottle washing operations.  Glass container manufacturers may pur-
chase the cullet directly from the bottler and return it to the glass plant
in drums or other containers on the same truck that delivered the glass
bottles; or they will purchase from cullet dealers that buy from the bottlers.

          This latter source of cullet is declining as bottling operations
increase their efficiency and process fewer returnable containers.   Cullet

                                    87

-------
 dealers  are  a  declining  source  of  glass because of  the high cost of labor
 and  the  rarity of  good quality  cullet.  Many  resort  to hand sorting the
 colors which is extremely  expensive.  There were  less than 20 dealers in
 1971, and they  have declined  in  number further since  then.—'

          A  second source  of purchased cullet is  public volunteer collection.
 This  source  resulted  in  the  collection of  close to  700 million containers
                                              Q O /    '
 in 1972,  equivalent to 175,000  tons of glass.—   This program was begun  '
 in recent years and has  been a  cooperative effort of the members of the
 Glass/Containers Manufacturers  Institute who  have agreed io accept this
 glass at 90  plants.

          Because  cullet quality is the lowest of all sources of purchased
 glass, volunteer collection  programs are viewed as  an interim step to the
 recycling of glass from  municipal  waste.   The glass manufacturer needs the
material  color  sorted, reasonably  clean and free  of caps and neck rings.
 The housewife,  Boy Scout and any other concerned  citizen who collects the
 containers for  recycling in  the home or from  roadside cleanup projects
may allow occasional  metal cans, cups, paper, plastics,, rags or wood to be
 included  with  the.glass.  When  collection  from voluntary collection programs
was small, the  glass plants could cope with these  tramp materials.  When
 volunteer collection  is  substantial, mechanical clearing systems should
be used  at glass plants  to upgrade the quality of the incoming cullet.

          Owens  Illinois, whose Charlotte, Michigan, plant purchased over
42 million pounds  of  glass in 1972, found it necessary to develop a cullet
processing system  in  their facility.  The  system  is designed to handle
 22 tons  of cullet  per hour.  The cullet flows to  a bottle crusher before
being conveyed  to  three  vibrating  screens  which segregate the materials
by size.  The  facility also  includes a vacuum system to remove aluminum,
wood, paper, plastics and rags  and a magnet to remove iron.  If this system
 is successful,  the company may  install it  in  other plants.2£'  ..

          The  future  of  recycled glass from source  separation systems is
limited.  Sources  of  cullet  from dealers and  bottling plants are reduced
by the decline  in  returnable beverage and  milk containers.  Consumer col-
lection  systems  are limited  by  the degree  of  interest of consumer groups
 to collect and  return the containers to a  collection center.  There is
some evidence  that  this  source  is  leveling off now.  Collections in 1971
were nearly  the  same as  1972 at 691 and 692 million units respectively.
Some moderate growth  is  anticipated to 1980, but it will remain level beyond
this time as municipal resource recovery systems are developed and imple-
mented.    By  1975,  180,000 tons  per year will  be recovered from volunteer
collections.   This will  increase to 230,000 by 1980.  Purchased cullet is
expected  to decline to 80,000 tons by 1975 and 50,000 by 1980 (Table 33).
                                   88

-------
                                  TABLE 33
           GLASS CONTAINER WASTK AVAM.AKLI;: I.N SMSA'S, 1972 TO 1990
                             (In 'I'housand Tons)
                   1972

Waste Generated
  In SMSA's        8,390
Less volunteer
  collection
  175
Less cullet dealers  100
Net waste
8,115
             1975
             9,335
9,075
            1980
           10,680
             1985
            10,850
             1990
            11,000
                                                       >  250      \   250
10,400
10,600
10,750
Source:  Midwest Research Institute.
  Recovery of Glass Containers from Mixed Municipal Waste

            It is apparent that if any significant recycling of glass  is
  to be.achieved, it. must come from resource recovery systems  in major   .
  metropolitan areas.  A total of 8.1 million tons of glass containers  in
  1972 are available within the SMSA's and this will increase  to 10.4 mil-  -
  lion tons in, 1980.

            Glass from a resource system may be recycled by selling  it  as
  cullet for use by glass container manufacturers as a substitute  for  raw
  materials (soda ash and sand).  Recovered glass may also be  used as  a
  raw material in other products such as glass wool, terrazzo, bricks,  or
  road paving mixtures. ""   These latter uses do not require a  stringent
  specification glass except for terrazzo.

            The recovery of glass in any form is highly dependent  upon  the
  method used to dispose of the solid waste, since the glass fraction must he
  separated from the organic and other inorganic materials.  If mixed  sol. id
  waste is to be processed, it requires a system to first reduce the sizv of.
      Certain marketing difficulties exist here  too.  On  the one hand,  the
        amount of cullet generated  is  too low  to make much of  a contribution
        to road paving material requirements;  on the .other hand, the  other  '
        uses are very low volume and specialized in comparison to  the  tonnage
        of container cullet generation.
                                     89

-------
 the waste followed by separation to remove  the  organic  materials  and  magne-
 tic separation to  remove  the  ferrous metals.  Additional  separation  tech-
 niques  will  be necessary  to remove aluminum,  other  metals,  stones and pottery,
 before  a  good  quality glass container cullet  fraction can be  produced.

           Thus,  recovery  of glass  from mixed  municipal  waste  will be  part
 of  a  total recovery system which will use the organic fraction  as fuel  or
 will  separate  inorganics  for  recovery and recycling.  Recovery  of glass   ; •••*'"
 will  be an "add-on" feature,  since the waste  material could be  disposed  of
 in  a  landfill  rather  than separated to remove the glass.

           At the present  time, there are no  commercial systems in  operation
 to  recover glass from mixed municipal wastes.   Perhaps  the  closest system
 is  the Franklin, Ohio, Environmental Control  Complex.   This system .includes
 separation of  the  organic fraction,  consisting  primarily  of paper and plas-
 tics  which is  used  in the manufacture of roofing felt and separation  of
 magnetic  iron  for  sale to steel  companies.  An  experimental glass and
 aluminum  classification system is  now being operated at Franklin.

           The  Franklin, Ohio, plant consists of  a hydropulper  which reduces
 the waste  in particle size to less than 3/4 inch in a liquid  medium.
 The oversized  material is withdrawn from the  hydropulper  and  the  iron
 removed by magnetic separation.  The remaining  oversized  material which
 consists  of about  80  percent  glass, along with aluminum, iron, rock, por-
 celain and organics, is processed through an experimental  glass  recovery
 system.   The glass  recovery system consists of  a furnace  to burn  off  the
 remaining  organics^ an air classification system to remove the  aluminum,
 and an optical system to  separate  the  glass into amber, green,  and flint
 fractions.  It is anticipated  that this system  will produce a product
 good  enough to use  as  cullet  in  glass  container furnaces.  The  glass  is
 being shipped  to Owens Illinois  in Toledo,  Ohio, where  it will  be evaluated.

           The  glass recovery  of  this system is  estimated  at about 55  per-
 cent  of the glass  fraction in the  waste.  Since it  is still experimental,
 it is expected that the rate  of  recovery will increase as improvements
 are made  in the system.   An additional  25 percent of the  glass  is  lost as
 fines in  the fiber  recovery system.   An air classification system could
 increase  the recovery by  removing  the  glass from this fraction, but at the
present time,  this  is not  planned.

           There are other  systems  which could possibly recover  glass.
These are:  the Garrett Research .process, the CPU 400 energy  recovery pro-
 cess, and  the U.S.   Bureau  of Mines  Incinerated  Wastes recovery process.—'
The Garrett process is designed  to  recover  salable heating fuels, glass,
and magnetic metals.  The  waste  is  shredded and air classified  to remove
 the inorganic glass and metal  fractions.  The glass can be recovered  via

                                   90

-------
a froth flotation process as a v/ei-y  fine, highly pure noncolor sorted
glass.  A Garrett pyrolysis plant is under construction, ,in Southern
California that will have a glass recovery unit.

          The U.S.  Bureau of Mines Incinerator  Residue Recovery Process
is designed  to recover  iron, nonferrous metals  and glass from  incinerator
residues.  The system consists of a  series of screening and shredding
operations designed to  reduce the material by size and separate.  The
ferrous metals are  removed by magnetic separation and the glass is removed
by a high density magnetic separator which separates the colored  from  the
colorless glass.

          Dry recovery  systems have not been tested in commercial opera-
tion.  One difficulty of recovery of glass from dry recovery processes is
that in shredding dry refuse the glass shatters and produces nonuniform
 particles and "fines."  Recovery must then rely on a media separation
process and  recovery of glass in noncolor sorted form.  Until  this technology
advances, the recovery of color sorted glass from dry shredding will be
limited and  relatively  inefficient.

          We conclude that recovery of glass from municipal refuse is  not
commercial at the present time.  Although there are experimental  systems,
the quality  of the  glass which will come from these units can  only be  esti-
mated. However, the technology for producing a  recyclable glass fraction
is developing.  Glass recovery technology will  be tested in the next few
years and commercial glass recovery  systems should be available for re-
source recovery installations by the early 1980's.
Recovery Forecasts for Glass Containers

          The future of the recovery of glass will depend upon the quality
of the glass available from resource recovery systems and the economics
of recovery of various grades of glass.  The economics of recovery will
include not onlv the process, but also the transportation to the user
(which could be significant) and the price which the user is willing to
pay.

          The largest market for glass recovered from mixed municipal
waste would be as cullet for glass container manufacturing plants.  How-
ever, high quality material will be required since present standards require
color sorting into flint, amber, and green glass that is free from organics,
magnetic metals, refractory inorganics, and nonmagnetic metals.  A limited
amount of material which is being used in test batches has been available
from resource recovery systems.
                                   91

-------
           Because of  the  current  lack of waste glass  from resource re-
 covery  systems,  the glass companies have not been able  to evaluate the
 quality of cullet to  see  if it could be accepted in glass furnaces.  If
 a good quality cullet is available, they estimate they  can use at least
 30 percent cullet in  their furnace operation.  There  is als6 the possibil-
 ity  that the glass plants may add facilities to upgrade cullet at the
 manufacturing plant such as the experimental unit at  Owens Illinois'
 Charlotte, Michigan, plant.

          Markets may be developed for lower quality  glajs, but most of
 these have included experiments with higher quality cullet, available
 from manufacturing plants or from volunteer collection groups.  Develop-
ment of secondary glass product markets does not appear to be something
 that will  take place rapidly because of the specialized nature of the end
uses to which glass is adaptable.

          The economics of any glass recovery system  will be important.
Presently  and for the forseeable future, cullet must  compete with the raw
materials  of glass manufacture which are primarily soda ash and sand.
These are  readily available raw materials with known  deposits in the United
States of more than 100 years' supply (although there have been reported
shortages of soda ash recently.because of a shortage  of industrial capacity
to produce and ship this material).  The cost of these materials should
not  increase any faster than the wholesale price index for all commodity
materials.  Current estimates are that the glass container manufacturers
could pay about $20 per ton for a "specification" cullet.  The transporta-
tion costs which could be significant, must be subtracted from this figure.
The  cost of shipping the glass from Franklin, Ohio, to Toledo, Ohio, a
distance of about 200 miles, is estimated at $10 per  ton.  It is possible
that with  larger volume shipments, the rate would be reduced to about $7
per  ton.  Thus, if a glass plant is too far from the  resource recovery
center, the transportation costs could be a real economic barrier to using
 the  glass as cullet.  Glass plants are not uniformly  located in the USA;
thus in some regions, shipping costs would preclude recycling.

          Considering all these factors, forecasting  the amount of glass
that will be recycled in the future becomes largely a matter of judgment.
Although we have predicted the installation of 12 centralized resource
recovery systems by 1980, and 60 systems by 1990, it  is doubtful that all
of these will be recovering glass without some form of external economic
incentives.
                                  92

-------
          We have made our glass recovery forecasts based upon the
following judgments:

          1.  That technology now in the experimental and demonstration
stage will be commercialized to make waste glass available in a quality
that can be used as cullet by glass manufacturing plants.  It will be
color   sorted into flint, amber, and green fractions.  It will also be a
lower quality than cullet from internal operations.

          2.  Economic incentives will be provided to stimulate the use
of cullet by glass manufacturers or recovery systems will be subsidized
directly or indirectly by the recovery of other components of solid waste
in centralized waste recovery operations.  This is under the assumption
that soda ash will not be in short supply in the future.

    ;      3.  Glass recovery from mixed waste is dependent upon processing
of other components of the waste stream for recovery in central facilities.
In addition, only 30 percent of these facilities will be located within
economic shipping distance of glass container plants.  Thus, glass recovery
systems will be installed for about 30 percent of the total mixed waste
tonnage processed for recovery of all kinds (as summarized in Chapter II).
The mechanical efficiency of recovery systems will be:  0.55 in 1975;
0.60 in 1980; 0.65 in 1985; 0.70 in 1990.

          4.  Other uses for waste glass of a lower quality in secondary
products will be developed on a very limited basis in locations where glass
plants are remote and transportation would be prohibitive.

          The recovery of glass for recycling from mixed waste is summarized
in Table 34.  We estimate that four plants will have glass recovery systems
on-stream in 1980; 11 plants in 1985; 18 plants in 1990.  (Glass recovery
from mixed waste will pass from experimental and demonstration status after
1975, so we have estimated no commercial glass recovery system installed
by 1975.)  The total mixed waste processed for glass recovery will rise
from 1.6 million tons in 1980 to 10.2 million tons in 1990.  Based on the
glass content of mixed municipal waste and the mechanical efficiency of
glass recovery systems, we calculated that glass recovery will be 100,000
tons in 1980; 350,000 tons in 1985 and 600,000 tons in 1990.

          A summary of all glass waste recovery (overwhelmingly glass
containers) is shown in Table 35.  Only 1.8 percent of the total available
glass waste will be recovered in 1975; 2.3 percent in 1980 and 5.0 per-
cent in 1990.  On the basis of glass container waste generated in SMSA's
only, the recovery percentage will be:  1975, 2.9 percent; 1980, 3.5 per-
cent and 1990, 7.7 percent.  Our estimate of actual glass recovery is rela-
tively low, especially in comparison with some of the other materials
evaluated in this study.  However, on the basis of the above assumptions,
the reocvery forecasts appear to be realistic.

                                 93

-------
                                                                    TABLE 34
                                             GLASS RECOVERY FROM MIXED MUNICIPAL WASTE. 1972 TO 1990
(In Thousand Tons)

Year
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990

Total .Mixed
Waste Generated.
130,000.
140,000
160,000.
180,000
200,000.

Total
Glass Waste
(Generated
13,200
14,500
16,400
16,600
16,900

Total Glass
Container Waste
Generated
12,220
. 13,440
15,110
15,110
15,200

Percent
Of Glass
In Waste
10.1
10.5
10.3
9.3
8.4
Number of
Resource Recovery
Plants Recovering
Glass
none
none—
4
11
18
Total Mixed
Waste
Processed
For Glass
Recovery
none
neg.
1,650
5,800
10,200
Total
Glass
Available
In Processed
Waste
none
neg.
170
540
860


Recovery
Efficiency
0.55
0.60
0.65
0.70


Glass
Recoverv
--
. ioi'
100 .
350
600
I/  Except three demonstration units under EPA demonstration grants
Source:  Midwest Research Institute.

-------
                                TABLE 35

           SUMMARY OF GLASS CONTAINER RECYCLING. 1972 TO 1990
(In Thousand Tons)
Category
Total Waste Glass
genera tedi/
Glass Recovery:
Volunteer collection
Gullet dealers
.Waste recovery plants
Total
1972
13,220

175
100
--
275
1975
14,500

180 .
85
. 10
275
1980
16,400

225 1
50 f
100
375
• 1985
16,600

250
350
600
1990
16,900

250
600
850
Net Waste Glass            • ,
  Disposal               12,925    14,225    16,025    16,000    16,050

Percent Recovery for
  Recycle:'
  Of total                 . 2.8   .    1.8       2.3       3.6       5.0
  Of container glass
  generated in SMSA's       3.3       2.9       3.5       5.5       7.7
Source:  Midwest Research Institute.
I/  Includes noncontainer glass.
                                    95

-------
                               CHAPTER VI

              RECOVERY FORECASTS  FOR FERROUS METALS TO  1990


                                  SUMMARY
          Total ferrous metals in mixed municipal waste will increase from
11.1.. million tons in 1972 to  16.4 million tons in 1990.  Excluding bulky
wastes, 6.4 million tons were  generated in SMSA's in 1972 and 11.7 million
tons will be generated in SMSA's in 1990.

          The demand for steel cans will increase from 5.6 million tons
in 1972 to 6.1 million tons in 1990, indicating mature markets for most uses.
On a unit basis, this is 65.7  billion units in 1972 to 84.3 billion units
in 1990.  Beverage can growth  will be high, but will be predominantly in
aluminum and plastic, rather than steel.

          In addition, major  household appliances and other bulky items
accounted for another 1.8 million tons of ferrous metal waste in 1972 and
will rise to 2.9 million tons  in 1990.  Of  this, 1.2 million tons were
in SMSA's in 1972 and 1.9 million tons will occur in SMSA's in  1990.  On
a source basis, about one-third of all appliances are discarded  directly
from households, and the remainder are discarded from commercial establish-
ments.

          The recovery of ferrous metals in waste will be closely tied to
the installation of centralized waste processing facilities.  Ferrous
metals can be readily removed  and upgrading carried out to meet steel
scrap specifications.   In general, the recoverable steel scrap  in mixed
municipal waste can be recycled1 in steelmaking furnaces, scrap  exports,
or in copper precipitation, and iron foundries.   The "contamination"
levels from tin, lead and copper (in cans) would be too low to  inhibit
recovery and recycling per se  since the absolute amounts are relatively
small.  Technical limitations do not appear to be a significant factor in
recovery and recycling of ferrous metals.

          In addition to recovery of ferrous metals from large  centralized
resource recovery systems, there will be some recovery from separate
"front end" magnetic separation systems at landfills, transfer  stations and
the like.  Almost all steel scrap recovery will take place in SMSA's
because of the population density required to justify recovery  systems.

          MRI's forecasts of recovery of ferrous metals to 1990 are sum-
marized in Table 36.

                                  96

-------
                                TABLE 36

        SUMMARY OF FERROUS METAL RECOVERED.FROM MUNICIPAL WASTE
                             1972 TO 1990
                          (In thousand tons)

       Recovery From           1972     1975     1980     1985     1990

Volunteer collection,             .
  incinerator residue,
  magnetic separation   . .         68      153      180      205      220
Centralized recovery system        0      127      395    1,450    2,815
Appliance processing               2      	5       15       60      100

     Total                        70      285      590    1,715    3,135

Ferrous waste generated
  Total U.S.A.                11,100   11,700   13,100   15,200   16,400
:  SMSA's (nonbulky only)       7,585    8,110    9,220   11,495   13,600

Recovery-as a percent of
'  Total ferrous waste            0.6      2.4      4.5     11.3     19.1
  Ferrous waste in SMSA's        0.9      3.4      6.2     14.4     22.5
Source:  Midwest Research Institute forecasts.

          The recovery of ferrous metals from mixed municipal waste and
appliances for recycling of all types will rise from 70,000 tons in 1972
to 3.2 million tons in 1990.  This will be a rise from 0.6 percent of
available waste ferrous metal in 1972 to 19.1 percent in 1990.  After 1980,
recovery at centralized waste processing plants will dominate and will
account for 87 percent of total recovery by 1990.  Most of the recovered
metal will go to steel furnaces and blast furnaces.
   RECOVERY OF FERROUS METAL CANS AND MISCELLANEOUS METAL WASTE
Introduction

          In 1972, 76 billion metal (steel plus aluminum) cans were used.
The metal can was developed over 160 years ago and now finds its widest
use in packaging food and beverages.  Most perishable foodstuffs can be
stored in cans for long periods of time and still retain the basic color,
flavor and nutritional value of the fresh product.  These factors, along
with its low cost and resistance to damage, have been the reasons for its

                                   97

-------
 success.   The  "convenience"  of the  can,  combined  with  unbreakability,
 lightweight  and  easy-open tops,  has  also made  it a popular  container  for
 soft  drinks  and beer which have been  the fastest  growing  end uses  for  cans.
 In one  decade,beverage  cans  increased  from  22.3 percent of the  total can
 output  to  49 percent (on  a unit basis)."'                     -
Metal Can Demand by Market.  1962  to  1990

     1     The demand  for metal  cans  (steel plus aluminum)  has  been  increas-
ing at a rate of 4.7  percent per  year  since  1962 and  reached a level  of
76 billion units in 1972.  Demand for  cans will increase at 3.3  percent
per year through 1980,  to a  level of 98.8 billion units;   Beyond  1980,
growth will be at a relatively  modest  1.7 percent per year and demand for
117.1 billion metal cans will be  achieved in 1990 (Table 37).

                              .  TABLE  37

                        METAL CAN  DEMAND, 1962-1990
                (In millions of cans and thousand tons)
   End Use
           1972^
           1975k/
Metal (tons)
  Steel
  Aluminum-
     Total
5,993
6,246
5,805
  813

6,618
Sources:  a/  Can Manufacturers Institute
      ,    b_/  MRI estimates.
          */  Includes aluminum ends for cans.
           1980k/
7,249
           1990k/
Soft drinks
Beer
Food
Aerosols
General
packaging
Total
1,651
9,075
31,412
1,042

4,980
48,160
15,600
21,600
31,300
2,800

. 4,700
76,000
19,200
26,500
31,500
3,200

4,700
85,100
24,600
33,500
32,000
4,000

4,700
98,800
30,000
44,500
.33,000
4,900

4,700
117,100
8,015
                                  98

-------
          Nearly all of  the growth in recent years has been in soft drink
and beer  containers where ,metal cans are'increasing their share of these
markets at  the expense of returnable glass containers.  This growth rate
will  slow during the rest of  this decade as the decline in returnable
glass containers stabilizes, as plastic containers come onto the scene, and
as soft drink demand increases at a slower rate.  By 1980, beer ,-nd soft
drink cans  will amount to 58.8 percent of all metal cans (Figure  23).

          Soft drinks:   Demand for metal soft drink cans expanded rapidly
from  1.65 billion units  in 1962 to 15.6 billion units in 1972.  The pull-
tab can has been credited with the success and widespread consumer accept-
ance.  During this period, metal cans increased their share of the packaged
soft drink  market from 6 percent to 34 percent.

          Metal cans will continue to increase their share of the packaged
soft drink market, reaching 42 percent by 1980 before declining slightly to
41 percent  by 1990 as the all-plastic beverage containers capture much of
the growth  in the packaged soft drink market.  Demand for metal soft drink
cans will increase at 5.9 percent per year to a level of 24.6 billion cans
by 1980.  Beyond 1980 as the growth in soft drinks matures, cans will in-
crease at 2.3 percent per year to 30.0 billion in 1990 (Table 37).

          Beer:  Metal cans have been the preferred container for the beer
consumer.   Cans have increased from 37.1 percent of the packaged beer
market in 1962 to 58 percent in 1972.  Demand for metal cans increased at
9.0 percent per year during this period from 9.1 billion units in 1962 to
21.6 billion units in 1972.

          The consumer's preference for the lightweight "easy open" can
will continue as it increases its share of the beer market to 63.5 percent
in 1980 and 65.5 percent in 1990.  The growth rate will begin to slow as
the decline in the returnable glass container levels out.  Growth will be
at a rate of 5.6 percent per year to a level of 33.5 billion cans in 1980
and then at 3.1 percent per year to 44.5 billion in 1990 (Table 37).

          Food:  Food containers have been the largest single outlet for
metal cans.  There has been no growth in this market with 1962 demand of
3'1.2 billion containers almost the same as the 1972 demand of 31.4 billion
units.  Declining demand for canned fruits and juices, evaporated and con-
densed milk, lard,-shortening and coffee have been offset by increased
demand for baby foods and formula, vegetables, juices  and pet foods.  These
patterns  should continue in this stable market and demand will increase
slightly  to 32.0 billion cans in 1980 and 33.0 billion in 1990 (Table 37).

          Aerosols:  Aerosols have been a small but rapidly growing market
for metal cans.  They are widely used to package household cleaning and
polishing chemicals and personal care products such as hair sprays.

                                   99

-------
                    rAerosol 2.2%
r-Gen Pkg 6.2%
V       r Aerosol 3.7%
Gen Pkg 4.8%
      r Aerosol 4.0°,:
                     1962
                 48.2 Billion
          1972
      76.0 Billion
         1980
     98.8 Billion
Source:  Can Manufacturers Institute 1962
        MRI Estimates 1972-1980
                         Figure 23 - Metal  (Steel plus Aluminum) Cans Market Share  (Percent), 1962-1980

-------
 Demand has  grown at  10.5  percent  per  year  from  1.04 billion  containers  in
 1962 to 2.82 billion in 1972.

          A lack of  new product innovations,  coupled with  increasing mar-
 ket  saturation,  will reduce  the growth  to  4.4 percent per  year  to  1980
 when demand will be  4.0 billion containers.   Growth to  1990  will be 2 per-
 cent per year reaching  a  level of 4.9 billion units (Table 37).
',
          General packaging:  General packaging includes paint, oil, anti-
 freeze and  a host of miscellaneous can  markets.   Demand  in 1972 at 4.7
 billion containers is slightly less than the  1962 demand of  5.0 billion
 units.  Although miscellaneous uses have grown  during this period, they
 have been offset by  a decline  in  oil  and antifreeze cans and relatively
 little growth in paint  cans.  Oil cans  were replaced by  fiber-foil cans in
 1963 and 1964 and have  remained at that level.   Metal antifreeze cans are
 being replaced by plastic containers.

          Demand is  projected  to  remain at the  present  level of 4.7 billion
 units through 1990 as plastic  containers begin  to replace  paint cans and
 continue to replace  antifreeze containers  (Table 37).
Metal  Can .Demand  by  Type  of  Metal

          Technology:   Metal cans  have  been  in use  in  the United  States
for  over  160  years,.  but until recent years they were nearly  all manufactured
from tin-coated, cold-rolled  steel  called black plate.  This  can is  a  three-
piece  system  consisting of two ends and a body which are formed and soldered
with a lead-tin solder.   Many of the cans are enamel coated  to increase
their  resistance  to  corrosion.

          Until 1960,   the tin plated steel  can ruled  supreme in  the  can
industry.  There  were  some products, e.g., oil, which  were packaged in a
coated black  plate can.   These cans were developed  during World War II
when a shortage of tin developed.  These cans, which are caulked, are
limited to use  in markets where pressure or  vacuum  are absent and corrosion
is not a  problem.

          The development of the aluminum can and the  installation  of can
manufacturing equipment by beer companies spurred the  can manufacturers
and  steel companies  into  research  for new and lower cost methods  of produc-
ing  cans  from steel.   Working with the  steel industry, American Can and
Continental Can,  the two  largest can manufacturers, developed their own
processes using a new  tin-free  steel that was 15 to 20 percent lower  in
cost than tin plate.   This product was  essentially black plate steel  with
a chromium metal-chromium oxide treatment to render the surface chemically

                                   101

-------
inactive  long enough for an enamel coating to be applied.  American Can
chose to  commercialize a three-piece cemented side seam  (Miraseam^) and
Continental Can commercialized the three-piece can with  the welded side
              R
seam (Conoweld ).  Tin-free steel gained rapid acceptance in the beverage
industry  and now accounts  for 42 percent of steel beverage cans.  Ends
for food  cans and other canned .products,are .also produced from tin-free
steel which can be used in any market where an enameled  coating will be an
adequate  protective coating.         .

          The future of tin-free steel  is highly dependent upon American
Can Company and Continental Can Company since they are the only firms to
have commercialized the technology for  using tin-free steel in three-piece
can bodies.  Continental Can has publicly stated that all of their sol-
dered beverage can lines will be phased out within 5 years and American
could well do the same.i^'  None of the other can manufacturers have
chosen to license the technology of Continental or American.

          There are two recent developments which will bear upon the future
choice of can stock.  These are the development of the two-piece drawn and
ironed steel can and QAR Steel.                                   •  '    .
                                   1

          In their pursuit of lower costs, the can manufacturers are eval-
uating QAR (Quality as Rolled) steel.   This material is black plate that
has been  double-reduced, and annealed but not cleaned, lubricated, or
chrome-coated.  This material is lower  in cost than tin-free steel because
fewer processing steps are needed.  It must be enamel-coated soon after
manufacture since it does  not have the  corrosion protection of tin-free
steel.

          Another recent technological development is the two-piece drawn
and ironed steel can which, if successful, could compete with the aluminum
can.  This can will weigh  approximately 25 percent less  than a comparable
three-piece can and have the same features as the aluminum can.

          At the present time, it must be manufactured from electrolytic
tin plate.  The tin is claimed to provide lubricity during the ironing
step and  this increases the speed at which:the cans are manufactured.  Tin-
free steel can only be drawn to a length equal to its diameter or the
ironing step will break the chromium coating and allow metal corrosion to
take place.  Current research efforts are.directed at using black plate
or QAR steel and indications are that this technology could be commercial
by 1977.

          The two-piece drawn and ironed steel can are now commercial, but
the volume is small.  National Can and American Can have installed lines
to manufacture these cans and one of their initial customers was Schmidt's
brewery in Philadelphia.i^ii/
                                   .102

-------
           It  is  likely  that  the  drawn and  ironed steel can will be pushed
 by  the  smaller can  manufacturers  since they have not chosen  to license or
 commercialize the cemented or welded three-piece can.  Although American
 Can and Continental Can have constructed can lines to manufacture their
 three-piece proprietary systems, they are also building plants to produce
 two-piece      -^^-
          Markets :  The new developments in can manufacturing technology
 in  the past 5 years gives several options when additional canning capacity
 is  needed.  Essentially, fabrication choices will be between a two-piece
 can and a three-piece can.  Several types of metals and methods of manu-
 facture will also be available.  These choices are:

          *  Three-piece can  -

                - soldered electrolytic tin plate

                - welded tin-free, QAR or black plate steel

                - soldered tin-free, QAR or black plate steel

                - caulked black plate

          *  Two-piece drawn  and ironed can -

                - aluminum

                - electrolytic tin plate

                - black plate

          The ultimate choice made by canners will depend upon the competi-
 tive economics  in the particular markets for which the cans are being manu-
 factured.

          MRI's forecast of the present and future demand for cans by type
of metal shows  that aluminum and tin-free steel or black plate will become
 the predominant containers at the expense of tin plate.  (Table 38)  Tin
plate containers will decline from 48.3 billion units in 1972 to 38.3
billion in 1980.  Tin-free steel or black plate will nearly double during
this period to  32.4 billion units while aluminum will triple by 1980 to
28.1 billion units.                                        .

          Beverage:  Steel .cans used for beer accounted for 14.7 billion
containers in 1972 but will decline to 14.0 billion by 1980 (as aluminum
displaces steel on a percentage of total market).   The steel cans will be

                                   103

-------
 mostly  manufactured  from  tin-free or QAR steel with two-piece drawn and iron
 steel cans  becoming  a  factor by  1976.   Initially they will be manufactured
 from tin  plate, but developing.technology will permit use of QAR or black
 plate steel.

                                 TABLE  38

                     METAL CAN  DEMAND BY TYPE  OF  METAL
                             (Millions of Cans)

                     1962         1972        .  1975          1980         1990

Tin  Plate
Tin-Free  Steel
Black Plate
Aluminum Cans

     Total         48,162     76,000       85,100       98,800      117,100
46,662
--
1,500
: NA •••••
48,300
16,400
1,000.
10,300
43,600

23,600
17,900
38,300

32,400
28,100
28,700

45,600
42,800
Source:  Midwest Research  Institute.

          Aluminum receives some preference for beer cans because the "taste
threshold" for aluminum in the beer is higher than for iron.  The trend to
the two-piece cans will continue as the large breweries install their own
can manufacturing lines and the can manufacturers begin producing aluminum
cans to counter this move.

          Tin-free or QAR steel wiH continue to increase its share of the
soft drink markets as the three-piece soldered can lines are phased out.
There will be a trend to the two-piece drawn and ironed steel can as manu-
facturers develop this system to compete with the welded and cemented
three-piece cans of Continental Can and American Can.

          There is less incentive to use aluminum in soft drink cans since few
soft drink canners are large enough to install their own lines economically.
Thus, as we project to 1980, aluminum will increase its share of the bever-
age can market from 25 percent in 1972 to 42 percent in 1980, mostly in beer
cans.  Tin-free or QAR steel will increase from 42 percent to 47.5 percent
and tin plate will decline from 33 percent to 10.5 percent by 1980 and be
completely out of beverage markets by 1990 (Table 39).

          Food and general packaging:   Tin plate is the preferred metal
for the manufacture of food cans because the properties of tin help pre-
serve and protect the quality of many canned foods.  It is expected that
                                    104'

-------
 tin  plate will  continue  to be  the metal for most canned foods.  Many of
 the  canners have  their own can manufacturing plants producing the three-
 piece  soldered  cans and  will be unlikely to invest in new technology unless
 significant cost  savings are indicated.

                                TABLE 39

                  BEVERAGE CANS DEMAND BY TYPE OF METAL
                         (In billions of units)

 Type Can and Use          1972          1975      -   1980          199Q

 Beer:
  Aluminum Cans            6.9          12.5          19.5          31.0
  Steel Cans              14.7          14.0          14.0          13.5

     Total                21.6          26.5          33.5          44.5

 Soft Drink:
  Aluminum Cans            1.6           3.0           5.0
  Steel Cans              14.0          16.2          19.6

     Total                15.6          19.2          24.6          30.0
              STEEL BEVERAGE CAN DEMAND. BY TYPE OF METAL
                         (In billions of units)

 Type of Steel            1972          1975          1980          1990

Tin-Free Steel            15.6          20.8          27.0          37.5
Tin Plate Steel           13.1           9.4           6.6           —

     Total                28.7          30.2          33.6          37.5
Source:  Midwest Research Institute estimates.
          Aerosol containers have historically been tin plate because of
the strength needed for the high pressure contents.  Continental Can has
recently constructed a tin-free steel line to produce 3 million aerosol
cans a year.I2I/  It is expected that all of the aerosol growth will be
in tin-free or QAR steel.
                                   105

-------
            Other markets  such  as  aerosols and paint are relatively small
 and  not  expected  to  grow much.   It  is anticipated that current practices
 of using steel cans  will continue at about the same level.
                         STEEL CONSUMPTION IN CANS*
           The manufacture of cans produces scrap from cutting ar1 forming
 operations  (approximately 1 percent of input weight for the body of a
 three-piece beverage can).  There are no public data sources that accurately
 indicate the amount of metal consumed in the manufacture of steel cans.
 The American Iron and Steel Institute reports shipments of tin plate, black
 plate and tin-free steel for metal can manufacturing.  This does not re-
 flect changes in inventories at the can plants, which are significant, nor
 does it include imports which are purchased by can plants.  The Department
 of Commerce reports shipments of steel contained in the finished cans but
 does not include the amount of scrap which is generated.

           We have determined the amount of aluminum and steel required in
 can manufacturing by combining estimates for finished cans with estimated
 scrap rates.  This results in a metal "consumption" of 6 230,000 tons of
 steel and 575,000 tons of aluminum in 1972 (Table 40).  This  is the input
 metal required for the years designated.   Tin plate will be declining and
 tin-free or black plate steel will be increasing.  By 1980, tin-free steels
 will have increased to 35 percent of all steel from 19.5 percent in 1972.


                                 TABLE 40

                   CAN MANUFACTURE METAL INPUT QUANTITY
                          (In thousands of tons)

  Type of Metal          1972          1975          1980          1990

 Tin Plate               5,000         4,655         4,206         3,475

 Tin-Free Steel
                                       1,649         2,266         3,317
! Black Plate

   Total Steel           6,230         6,304         6,472         6,792

 Aluminum:   cans            350           613           938
 Aluminum:   ends            225           225           225

   Total All Metal        6,805         7,142         7,635         8,417
 Source:   Midwest Research Institute.
 *   For discussion of aluminum consumption in  cans,  See  Chapter  VII.
                                   106

-------
           Table 41  separates metal demand  into net metal  in  finished cans,
 ends and  fabricating scrap.  The  scrap  is  currently recycled through de-
 tinners for use as  steel  furnace  scrap  or  copper cementation, while the
 finished  cans eventually  become post-consumer solid waste.   The  total  steel
 in cans (output) will rise  from 5.59 million tons in 1972 to 6.11 million
 tons in 1990.

                                TABLE 41

      METAL IN FINISHED CANS AND  FABRICATION SCRAP FROM CAN  MAKING
                          (In thousands  of  tons)

                     1972            1975            1980          1990
                Cans &       .    Cans &         Cans &         Cans &
                Ends^/  Scrap^   Ends   Scrap   Ends   Scrap   Ends   Scraf

Tin Plate       4,473     527    4,159    496   3,755    451   3,093     382
Tin-Free Steel    930      90 \       Q          2,050    216   3,019
Black Plate       187      23 '   '
  Total Steel   5,590     640    5,659    645   5,805    667   6,112    680

Aluminum Cans
  and Ends        403     172      587    251     813    350   1.137    448

  Total all
    metals      5,993     812    6,246    896   6,618   1,017  7,249  1,128
a/  Total metal finished can at 10.3 percent scrap rate for steel cans and
      30 percent for aluminum.
b/  Scrap from can manufacture recycled to detinners or steel scrap dealers;
      aluminum to remelt operations.
Source:  Midwest Research Institute estimates.
          Tin-free steel, black plate. QAR:  An estimated 1.02 million tons
of tin-free steel and an additional 210,000 tons of black plate were used
to manufacture cans in 1972.  The tin-free steel finds its greatest use in
the manufacture of beverage cans in the Conoweld® and Miraseam® processes.
QAR steel, which is tin-free steel without the chrome coating, and black
plate steel are being evaluated for use in beverages.  We project that
tin-free steel with the chrome coating will begin to decline after 1975
as QAR becomes accepted for beverage manufacturing.  The two-piece drawn
and ironed steel can manufactured from black plate or QAR steel will be
commercial technology after 1975.  Prior to 1975, these cans will be made

                                    107

-------
of  tin plate, but the  industry will convert to black plate as the technology
is  developed.  Thus, by  1980  tinless plated steel will  increase  to 2.27
million  tons.

          Using  the scrap rates given  in Table 41, it was estimated that
net use  in cans  for tin-free  steel was 930,000 tons and for black plate.
187,000  tons in  1972.  This will  increase to 2.05 million tons of tin-free
steel by  1980 and 3.0  million tons in  1990 (Table 41).

          Tin plate:   Electrolytic tin plate estimated at 5 million tons
in  1972 will decline to  4.2 million tons by 1980.  Tin plate is  and will
continue  to be the largest volume steel used in can manufacturing.  Al-
though it will be completely out  of beverage' markets by 1990, it will re-
main as the preferred  metal for foods.  Scrap rates were estimated at 8
percent for beverage cans and 11 percent for all other uses.  Net tin
plate used in finished cans (exclusive of scrap) was estimated at 4.47
million tons in  1972 and will decline  to 3.1 million tons by 1990 (Table 41).
                FERROUS METAL WASTE GENERATION BY SOURCE
Waste Generation - Steel Cans

          Metal cans are used to package consumer, commercial, institutional
and industrial products.  They are manufactured, filled and shipped to a
retailer.  The consumer purchases the container, uses the product and dis-
cards it to the solid waste stream.  Almost all cans are discarded within
a year after manufacture, and in many cases, it may be immediately after
purchase or within a matter of days.

          It is possible that some food products, paint cans or other items
may be in inventory at the producer or consumer level or are diverted for
use as a general purpose container in the home for more than a year.  This
quantity is assumed to be small and the net withdrawal from the waste stream
each year would be insignificant so we have not considered it to be a factor
in waste generation.

          Assuming that 100 percent of the metal cans appear as solid waste
and litter within 1 year after they are purchased or manufactured, the re-
sulting waste generation will be 5.59 million tons of steel.  This is pro-
jected to increase to 6.11 million tons of steel by 1980.

          Steel cans w:'ll appear as waste from households  and apartments
as a result of their use by the consumer and from commercial and institutional
establishments as the result of over-the-counter sales of  beverages;  purchase

                                   108

-------
of  food by restaurants and institutions; vending machine use; and use of
oil cans by service stations.  industrial container waste:  are primarily.
cans from vending machines and industrial chemicals and cleaners.

          Waste generation for cans by source by various end uses was
estimated (Table 42).  About 83 percent of cans appeared as houseaold
waste, 16 percent were generated from commercial and institutional sources
and ,1 percent from industrial waste in 1972.

                              .  TABLE 42
               STEEL CANS. WASTE GENERATED BY SOURCE. 1972
                     (In  thousand tons and percent)
                                  Commercial/
                                Institutional       Industrial
               Tons   Percent   Tons   Percent   Tons   Percent
    Household
                                          Total
                                           Tons
Food
Beer
Soft Drink
Aerosol
General
Packaging
2,576
713
595
225

525
83
90
80
90

75
528
79
149
20

140
17
10
20
8

20
Total
4,634
82.9
916
16.4
 5

35.

40
2

_5

0.7
3,104
  792
  744
  250

  700

5,590
Source:  Midwest Research Institute,
          Food:  An estimated 17 percent of the canned goods for food
are used in commercial and institutional establishments which purchase
large size cans.  Although the trend to eating out continues to increase
its share of the food dollar (21.5 percent in 1972),iP-i/ much of this is
in fast food franchises that use fewer cans because of the narrow product
line.  Therefore, we do not anticipate any change in this ratio in the
future.

          Beer:  A study by American Can gives estimates that in 1967, 80
percent of the packaged beer (cans and bottles) was sold off-premise and
the balance on-premise through restaurants, taverns and other establishments
licensed to sell the product..21/ On-premise sales amounted to 1.2 billion
cans equivalent to 9 percent of all beer cans produced in that year and
while the total in 1958 was only 800 million cans, the ratio of beer cans
sold on-premise had declined from 10.4 percent.
                                   109

-------
           With the addition of the beer purchased  in cans  by  various  insti-
 tutions, we have estimated  that 10 percent of all beer is consumed  from cans
 in commercial  and  institutional 'establishments  and 90 percent consumed in
 the home.   This ratio  should not  change during  the next  2 decades with
 decreasing use at  institutions being  offset  by  some growth in taverns.

           Soft drinks:   It is estimated that 20 percent of the canned  soft
 drinks  are sold through  commercial establishments  and institutions.  A
  \
 recent  survey  indicated  that 2.8  billion soft drink cans were sold through
 vending machines in 1972.22.'  This is equivalent to 17.5 percent of all
 canned  soft drinks.  Additional sales of canned drinks which  are sold  over
 the counter by restaurants and taverns will  increase the volume through
 commercial and institutional establishments  to  20  percent  of  all soft  drinks
 in cans.   Most of  the  vended products in industrial plants are returnable
 glass and  very little  is in cans.

           It is projected  that soft drinks in cans sold through vending
 machines will  amount to  3.9 billion units in 1980  or 16 percent of the
 soft drink can market.—   The share  of cans in commercial and institutional
 establishments is  estimated at 19 percent in that  year.

           Aerosols:  Nearly all aerosols  are consumer  products.  We have
 estimated  this market  at 90 percent household,  8 percent commercial-insti-
 tutional and 2 percent industrial.  Personal product aerosols  are used  in
 beauty  parlors and  by  office workers.   Cleaning and  polishing  preparations
 are used to clean  institutions and  offices.   A  small amount of aerosols
 are classed as industrial  products  and  include  oils,  greases,  spray paints
 and cleaners.   There are no trends  in this area that would  change the
 ratios  for 1972 in  the future.

           General  packaging:   These products are estimated  at  75 percent
 household,  20  percent  commercial-institutional  and  5 percent  industrial.
 About 50 percent of  the  oil  and antifreeze cans are  sold through retail
 outlets to the consumer  and  the balance through gas  stations.  Paint cans
 are used largely by  consumers;  industrial firms purchase paint in larger
 sized pails.   This  ratio is  not anticipated  to  change.
Steel Cans in Litter

          Numerous litter surveys conducted by groups throughout the
country have identified the beverage container as the principal metal com-
ponent of litter.  The only comprehensive study concerning litter was
published by Research "'riangle Institute in 1972.—'  This study estimated
that 1,637 million cans were discarded as litter in 1969.  This is equiva-
lent to 2.5 percent of all metal cans produced and 5.7 percent of all

                                  110

-------
beverage cans.   Assuming that about 50 percent of  the  litter  is  recovered
by maintenance crews and other litter pickups, we  estimate  that  unrecovered
litter is about 3 percent of all beverage cans.  This  would result  in a
litter component of about 46,000 tons of steel in  1972.

          With increased public awareness of litter and  laws  being  enacted
which tax nonreturnable beverage containers, it is likely that the  litter
component will decline over the next  2  decades.   Assuming that 2  percent
of the beverage containers produced each year will remain on  the ground as
litter, this will result in a litter factor of 32,000  tons in 1975, 36,000
tons in 1980 and 40,000 tons in 1990.
                NON-CAN FERROUS METAL IN MUNICIPAL WASTE


          In addition to ferrous metal cans there are a variety of  other
ferrous metal products found in municipal waste.   This includes small
appliances, tools, nails, hardware,  wire, toys, paper clips,  etc. Thus,
the ferrous metal cans are almost always associated with other  metal pro-
ducts in waste.   An example of a representative compositional analysis  of
a magnetic waste fraction separated  from mixed waste is given in Table  43.

                                  TABLE 43

              MAGNETIC SEPARATION ANALYSIS FROM MIXED WASTE

 Classification                       Weight Percent            Ferrous Only

 Nonmetallies                               5
 Ferrous Materials (other than cans)       38                      40
 Can Metal                                 57                      60-/
   Iron               53.5
   Aluminum            1.7
   Lead                0.5
   Tin                  0.2
   Organic Coatings    1.1                	                    	

          Total    .                        100                     100
 a/  Ferrous metal is 94 percent of can metal.
 Source:   "Technology Review," May 1972, p. 40.
                                  Ill

-------
          Thus, can metal  in  solid waste  is presently about 60 percent of
 total  ferrous metals.  Because ferrous metal cans are forecast to grow
 very slowly  to 1990, we believe that  the  can fraction of total ferrous
 metals  in waste will decline  steadily because other ferrous metal products
 will have higher growth rates than cans.  As a consequence,,we have  fore-
 cast that non-can ferrous  metals will increase from 40 percent in 1972
 to 43 percent in 1975; to  48  percent  in 1980 and 55 percent 1990.
           TOTAL FERROUS METAL WASTE GENERATION. 1972 TO 1990
          Using the previous estimates of non-can wastes, we can calculate
the total ferrous metals in mixed municipal waste from our forecasts of
can demand.  This is incorporated in Table 44, which shows ferrous metals
in municipal waste from all sources.   v

                                TABLE 44

          FERROUS METAL IN MIXED MUNICIPAL WASTE. 1972 TO 1990
                           (In thousand tons)

    Source and Type          1972       1975        1980        1990

Cans:
  Households                 4,604      4,650       4,770       5,020
  Commercial/
    Institutional
  Industrial
916
5,560
3,705
935
40
5,625
4.245
958
42
5,770
5,315
1,OLO
45
6,075
7,425
Total cans

Other Ferrous Metal

Total Ferrous Metal          9,265      9,870      11,085      13,500

Litter (unrecovered)            30         32          36          40

Percent cans (excluding
  litter)                       60         57          52          45
Source:  Midwest Research Institute
                                   112

-------
              FERROUS  METAL RECOVERABLE FROM MUNICIPAL WASTE
           Ferrous  metal  recoverable  from municipal  waste  was  determined
 by assuming that the  population base and density  of SMSA's  was  the  minimum
 from which significant  recovery could be practiced.   The  basis  of recover-
 able tonnage was developed  in Chapter V.   Using the previously  calculated
 allocation of household,  commercial/institutional and industrial waste  to
 SMSA's,  the recoverable  ferrous metal was calculated.   In this  case,  non-
 can waste  was allocated  to  the waste sources  in the same  ratios as  can
 waste (see Table 45):

                                 TABLE 45

             FERROUS METAL WASTE GENERATION. SMSA'S  1972-1990
                                                                   1990

                                                                   9,815

                                                                   1,770
                                                                      65
(In thousand tons)
Waste Source
Household
Commercial and
Institutional
Industrial
1972
5,260

1,133
42
1975
5,655

1,225
45
1980
6,460

1,400
50
Total*/                 6,435         6,925          7,910          11,650
§_/  Excludes  litter.
Source:  Midwest Research  Institute.
             FERROUS METAL RECYCLING FORECASTS. 1972 TO 1990
Current Steel Can Recycling Practices

          The steel industry has always been the largest recycler of scrap
(on a tonnage basis) in the country, consuming close to 85 million tons of
scrap in 1972 for the manufacture of steel and foundry products.  However,
the source of the steel is 60 percent home scrap (scrap generated in the
mill), 16 percent purchased prompt  industrial scrap (steel purchased from
fabrication plants), and 24 percent obsolete scrap (scrap available from
obsolescence, e.g., equipment, automobiles, etc.).±2^.'
          The only other significant use for steel scrap outside of the
s'teel industry is for copper precipitation which consumes 510,000 tons
per year (principally can scrap and cans from solid waste).  Shipments of

                                  113

-------
steel for the manufacture of metal cans in 1972 was previously estimated
at 6.23 million tons of which an estimated 0.71 million tons (11.3 percent)
were recycled.  The greatest amount (0.64 million tons) was can p'.ant scrap
from the can manufacturing process.  This was recycled through dctinners
to the steel and copper industry after the tin was removed.  The balance
was from post-consumer waste recovery (Table 46).

                                  TABLE  46

                         STEEL CAN RECYCLING,  1972
                             (In Thousand Tons)

                           Post-Consumer Wastej*/    Can Plant Seraph/  Tjotal

Copper Precipitation
De tinning                            4f                   640            705
Steel Manufacture
Ferroalloys                                               	           	

Total                               68                     640            708
Source:  &/  Office of  Solid Waste  Management Programs,  EPA.
         b/  Midwest Research  Institute  estimates.

          In 1972, approximately 50,000  tons of post-consumer scrap was
shipped to the copper industry in the West (Montana, Utah, Arizona).  The
source of the scrap included incinerator residue from Chicago, Illinois, and
Amarillo, Texas; post-consumer cans collected from local scavengers and
private waste haulers located near shredding plants; and from selected
cities that recover steel by magnetic separation of their municipal solid
waste.  The copper industry requires that the scrap be shredded and have
a high surface to weight ratio.  Most of the post-consumer scrap is shredded
by Proler Steel in Houston, and Los Angeles By-Products Company in San Francisco,
California, who ship directly to the copper industry.

          Approximately 15,000 tons of post-consumer cans are recycled as
the result of voluntary collections.  These cans were used by the steel
mills (11,000 tons) and detinners (4,000 tons).^^'  This tonnage is equi-
valent to about 300 million beverage cans which is much less than the Ii2
billion aluminum cans collected in 1972.  The small amount of steel can
collection is a result of the economics.  Aluminum companies can pay $0.10
per pound or more for all aluminum cans while steel cans command less than
$0.01 per pound.*
   Recently the price has gone up to $0.15 per pound.
                                   114

-------
           The  recovery  of  steel  from post-consumer  steel cans  in  1972  is
assumed  to be  all  from  within  the  SMSA's since  it was  from  Incinerator
residue, volunteer collections,  and magnetic  separation plants.   The avail-
able  steel can waste  in these  areas in  1972 was 3.860  million  tons.  The
recovery of  68,000 tons results  in a recycling  rate of only  1.8 percent of
the available  steel can post-consumer waste in  1972.   This will leave  a
potential  for  resource  recovery  of 3.79 million tons.
 i'i

           It is  apparent that  if any significant recycling of  metal cans
is to be achieved, it  must  come from resource  recovery  systems  in  major
metropolitan areas.   Volunteer collections will be  limited to  concerned
environmental  groups  since  the hand segregation costs  far outweigh the
price received for the  steel cans,  and no growth beyond today's level of
recovery is projected for volunteer collections.
Recovery of Ferrous Metals  for Recycling From Mixed Municipal Wastes

          The recovery of steel cans and other ferrous metals from municipal
waste is dependent upon  the technology  to recover and upgrade the steel,
the economics of recovery,  the quality  of the recovered steel, and the
development of markets for  the steel.  An unresolved question concerning
ferrous metal recovery is whether the market will develop before the recovery
systems are established  or whether incentives will be needed to stimulate
new uses for the recovered  ferrous fraction.

          The technology for recovering ferrous metals from mixed municipal
wastes is well developed.  This can be  accomplished by magnetic separation
of shredded municipal waste or by incineration of the total refuse followed
by separation of the metal  fraction from the incinerated waste.  The first
system is most likely to be the favored technology.

          Magnetic separation:  The most promising method for recovery of
steel metal cans is magnetic separation of ferrous metal from shredded
municipal waste.  This technology has been proven to be successful and
there are several systems throughout the country recovering cans by this
method (e.g., St. Louis, Missouri; Houston, Texas; and Madison, Wisconsin).

          Recovery of the ferrous materials is a relatively simple opera-
tion.  Most of the processes are dry systems where the incoming solid waste
passes through a shredder, such as a hammermill, to reduce the material in
size.  The waste is then conveyed to a magnetic separator which removes
the ferrous fraction by  electromagnetism.   This fraction is a relatively
dirty material and must be upgraded through air classification, washing,
and possibly incineration to remove organic material and a secondary shred-
ding (or densification)  for changing to dust or steel fumes.  In St.  Louis,

                                  115

-------
the air classification step  takes place after shredding followed by magne-
tic separation and densi-f ication  (these steps produce a clean scrap).  Some
more  sophisticated processes plan to separate heavier ferrous f actions
from  the  light can fraction  so a relatively pure can metal will be obtained.

          Although most of the processes are dry, the Franklin, Ohio, ex-
perimental plant uses a wet  system.  The incoming waste is slurried in
a water system and reduced in size  in a hydropulper.  Future plans call
for removal of the heavier fraction from the hydropulper oefore magnetically
separating the lighter can fraction.

          . Ferrous metals can be recovered from municipal waste with exist-
ing technology.  Economics will probably be the limiting factors in the
future recovery of ferrous metal since shredding is the largest portion
of the cost of the recovery of the  ferrous fraction.  Thus, recovery of
ferrous metals from mixed wastes will not occur unless a municipality
decides to reduce their waste in size by shredding.  Shredding will be
practiced in communities where landfill capacity is limited or where re-
source recovery systems are  installed.  Once these decisions are made,
the cost  of magnetic separation is  incrementally very low.

          The recovery of ferrous metals is a simple, relatively low-
cost  operation once the decision has been made to shred the waste.  The
quality of the steel from simple magnetic separation is too low for use
in many markets without some method of upgrading.  However, with densifica-
tion  to improve quality, the steel may be used for copper cementation,
steel manufacture by addition to the blast, basic oxygen or electric steel
furnaces  or for ferroalloy and iron foundry production.

          Incinerator residue recovery:  The other method for recovering
metal cans is incinerator waste recovery presently being practiced in
Amarillo, Texas; Atlanta, Georgia; Chicago, Illinois; Melrose Park,
Illinois; Stickney, Illinois; and Tampa, Florida.±Q±'  The metal waste is
separated and shipped to commercial shredders for sale to,the copper in-
dustry or sold directly for use in ferroalloy production.

          The composition of incinerated waste will vary with temperatures
of the incinerator.  At temperatures from 1000°F to 1400°F, the characteris-
tics of ferrous material is only slightly altered.  Below 1400°, aluminum
may be oxidized, but generally is not melted and separated from the ferrous
fraction.^/  At temperatures of 1400°F to 2000°F, practically all the
aluminum  is melted off and/or oxidized.  Some tin is removed from the
tin plate by oxidation or alloying with other nonferrous metals, but most
of the tin is absorbed into the steel and cannot be removed after this
occurs. .Copper may also be absorbed into the steel.  If the temperature in
the incinerator reaches 3000°F, there is complete alloying of all the metals

                                  116

-------
present  and any glass  fuses  to  form a slag-like mixture over the molten
metal.   It is difficult  to process this slag further to r move any metals.

          Most of  the  nation's  waste incinerators operate below 2000°F and
the  typical residue  contains  1/2  to 1 percent copper and about a quarter of
a percent tin.  These  levels  are  too high for satisfactory use in the manu-
facture  of most steels.   Copper increases the hardness and the tin causes
problems during deep drawing  of the steel.

          Since the  material  cannot be detinned or readily used in steel
manufacture, its major outlet has been in copper precipitation where the
copper is not a problem;  in  fact  it adds value to the recovery process.
The  demand for incinerated scrap  is greater than the availability, west
of the Mississippi, but  most  incinerators are located east of the Mississippi,
beyond the economic  shipping  range of the western copper mills.  A small
amount of incinerator  waste  is  used in the production of ferroalloys.  How-
ever, only one company is known to be using it.i^'

          A demonstration grant for the Bureau of Mines Incinerator Residue
.Recovery Process has been established to construct a plant in Lowell,
Massachusetts, which will recover incinerated ferrous metals.—   This
system will use a  series of screens and shredders to segregate the metals
from glass, paper, and other  nonmetals before passing them through a magnetic
separator to remove  the  iron  fraction.  The plant is not yet in operation.

          It is doubtful  that incinerator residue will increase much in
importance, partly  because conventional incineration will not ue used on
a higher percent of waste than  it is now.  Incinerator residue is high in
copper and tin, which  limits  its use to copper precipitation and possibly
ferroalloy manufacture.  It is  also one of the highest cost municipal wa^te
processing options available  today and many incinerators are closing down
because  they cannot conform to  federal and state air pollution regulations.
The  future supply  of incinerator residue will be the limiting factor on its
use,  rather than the development of markets.
         RECYCLING OPTIONS FOR STEEL RECOVERED FROM MIXED WASTE*
          Copper precipitation:  The copper industry presently consumes
over 500,000 tons per year of light gauge ferrous scrap.  The current
market is supplied by 260,000 tons of detinned steel, 50,000 tons of post-
consumer can scrap; and 190,000 tons of other steel scrap.
 *  A discussion of trends in the demand for ferrous scrap in iron and steel
      production is included in Appendix A.


                                   117

-------
          Demand  is projected  to  increase  to over 900,000 tons per year by
the  early 1980's.—'*  Because of  the projected decline in  tin plate used
to manufacture metal cans, the can plant scrap available to det.,.nners will
decline in  the future.  Thus,  the additional 400,000-ton increase during
the  next decade will have to come  from recovered municipal waste or from
other steel sources.  The most logical source would be recovered can scrap
from municipal waste since this material has_ a broad surface area and a
low  density which is desired by the copper industry.  By the middle 1980's,
an additional 400,000-ton market  in copper precipitation will exist for
waste from municipal recovery  systems.

          Steel mills:  The largest potential market, for recovered steel
from municipal waste would be  as  scrap in  the steel industry—as a substi-
tute for iron ore in the blast furnace or  in the basic oxygen and electric
furnaces.  It is estimated that in 1972, 34 milliou tons of iron and steel
scrap were purchased by the steel industry for use in the manufacture of
steel.  If all post-consumer can  scrap available in the SMSA's in 1972
were recovered, it would only represent 11.4 percent of the scrap now used
by the industry.  Experiments  by  the steel industry have shown that the
fraction available from a single magnetic separation needs further pro-
cessing before it can be used  in  the steel mill.  The density is too low
and must be increased from 40  pounds per cubic foot to 75 pounds per cubic
foot,which can be done by a densifying shredder.

          At the present time,  none of the steel mills are using recovered
municipal can scrap on a continuous basis since it has not been available
in commercial quantities.  The St. Louis resource recovery plant ships
densified ferrous scrap to the Granite City Steel Company  (a division
of National Steel), where it is being used in the blast furnace.  (Milling
of the waste after magnetic separation increases the density of steel from
40 pounds per cubic foot to 75 pounds per cubic foot and separates an
aluminum-rich fraction which may be processed to recover aluminum.)  National
Steel is feeding different percentages of scrap metal to the basic oxygen
furnace to determine its impact on the finished steel.   At the time of this
report, no test results had been made public by the steel mill.

          The American Iron and Steel Institute Committee of Tin Mill Pro-
ducts Producers has stated that recycled cans could make up about 5 percent
of the scrap charge to the basic oxygen furnace.—   Since the scrap charge
represents about 30 percent of the total charge, this will be equivalent
to 1.5 percent of the total steel produced or a potential demand of 3 million
tons per year.  It is also possible to replace up to 5  percent of the iron
ore  in the blast furnace with  scrap steel cans.  However, as previously
   New techniques in copper precipitation are being tried which may eliminate
     the need for scrap steel also.

                                   118

-------
 stated, the recovery limits for cans are about 3.9 million tons, of which
 about 80 percent is tin plate.  Thus,  despite the period!; proclamations
 from the steel industry that tin "contamination" of steel could be a
 problem, it is doubtful if this is a real technical limitation to can
 recycling.  The remaining non-can steel, which is not tin plated, could
 be used without technical limitations.

           Ferroalloys:   Another potential market for ferrous scrap is for
 the production of ferroalloys.  Presently, Union Caibide at Sheffield,
.Alabama, is using incinerator scrap from Atlanta, Georgia, for producing
 f erroalloys.i^-   They  have used this  scrap for 10 percent of their iron
 requirements and found  that no problems exist.  Since this industry uses
 close to 500,000 tons per year of iron based ore, this represents a poten-
 tial market of 50,000 tons per year, if the 10 percent level is the limit.

           Foundries:    The foundry  industry uses approximately 8.4 million
 tons of iron scrap and  6.6 million tons of steel scrap per year.  This
 represents a significant potential for the use of recovered municipal
•metal scrap.  These foundries  are dispersed throughout the country ar.d
.should be within economic shipping distance of potential resource recovery
-systems.  Unfortunately, cast iron is  much more sensitive to certain alloy-
 ing elements than steel and so great care must be exercised in controlling
 impurities.  Experimental data on the  use of recycled can scrap in produc-
 tion of cast iron or  steel are not available.  The American Iron and Steel
 Institute has contracted with Professor John Wallace of Case Western Re-
 serve to conduct studies on the use of metal cans in gray and ductile
 foundry applications.   Atlas and Phoenix Foundry  in San Francisco have
 agreed to assist in this study by conducting production melting experiments.
 Although it is a possible market, it will remain speculative until experi-
 ments are completed.   In addition, foundry output is not a growth sector
 of the. ferrous metals industries.

           Detinning:   Steel cans could possibly be recycled by processing
 them through detinning  operations to remove the tin and lead.  This would
 produce a good j,iade  of scrap steel for recycling to the steel mills.
 Commercial detinners  process close to  700,000 tons of steel per year, re-
 moving the tin and selling the clean steel in the form of No. 1 bundles at
 the going price.  The tin is recovered and sold for about $4,000 per ton.iP-2/

           Detinners shred the material and remove the tin by addition of
 hot caustic soda and  sodium nitrite.  The chemical reaction forms sodium
 stannate which is removed and electrolyzed to recover tin.  The detinner
 is limited by the economics of the process and the price of steel and tin.
 The price of the steel  scrap is usually based on No.  1 scrap and the price
 of tin is fixed by the  imported tin price.  The detinning costs besides
 equipment and labor are primarily the  chemicals required to  remove the

                                   119

-------
 tin.   Ideally  the detinner would  like a  scrap  that has a good surface
 area  and  is high in  tin.  Impurities,-on  the material  increases  the cost
 of  the  chemicals and  separation o.f  the .tin becomes more difficult.

          One  of the  biggest problems limiting  the use of recovered cans
 is  the  aluminum lids, from beverage  cans.  Caustic soda attacks  aluminum
 preferentially to tin, producing  aluminum oxide which has no value.  It
 also  evolves hydrogen which can be  explosive if aluminum is present in
 high  concentrations.  Aluminum substantially increases the cost and makes
 the detinning.process less attractive.   If steel cans become available in
 larger  quantities, technology may be developed  so that the economics of
 detinning are  much more attractive.  At  the present time, it is  a marginal
 outlet  for recovered  steel cans,  especially post-consumer scrap.
Conclusions

          There are a number of conclusions that can be drawn concerning
the future o.f ferrous metal and steel can recycling:

          1.  The technology exists for recovering a relatively high quality
ferrous fraction from municipal waste recovery systems.  Conventional
shredding and magnetic separation equipment will produce a fraction contain-
ing approximately 90 percent iron.  Further processing such as low tempera-
ture incineration to remove organics, air separation to separate heavier
metals, secondary shredding to increase density and a final magnetic sepa-
ration to remove aluminum will produce a good grade of steel scrap.

          2.  Magnetic separation of iron from municipal wastes will be
practiced in municipalities that install a system for size reduction of
their wastes prior to incineration, energy recovery, materials recovery
or landfill.  Once the decision has been made to further process the waste,
magnetic separation can be added for a low incremental cost.  Additional
processing steps, e.g., air classification and densification to increase
the quality of the steel will increase these costs somewhat.

          3.  Additional upgrading will be necessary to penetrate potential
markets.  Copper precipitation could potentially use. an additional 400,000
tons per year during the next decade.  The recovered scrap will require
low temperature incineration to remove organics and nonmetallics after
magnetic separation.

          Additional shredding and densifying followed by a second magnetic
separation should remo\ .: aluminum and make the steel competitive with other
scrap for steel manufacture.  If 5 percent of the scrap charge could be
metal cans, a potential market of over 3 million.tons per year would develop.

                                   120

-------
           4.   Ferroalloy and  iron and steel   foundry markets are speculative
and  will require additional evaluations before they can  be considered  po-
tential markets.  Detinning of the waste   does npt appear to be economically
feasible under present conditions.  If the price ;pf tin  and No. 1  scrap
increase significantly (as scrap prices did' in 19,73), this .could be a poten-
tial market in the future.
1: K .'•!'?. t-.-'JlT •"••-*ii V-'* * -''^' ?T';J--. •'.'-i'; {•' •                 .       -

           5..   The recpyery of ferrpus metal  from municipal waste recovery
systems will  develop slowly and potential  markets will depend upon the
"* ;  ' ••.•a tv \  ' i  il-V: f. il.fi ,-iiv'Wi, ^ :!.;ji>T *; ;•,, = ;•»< -. -t '.  '.-..I' . ,..,,.-- I •: > r- 5 j j t!S--f .i"<  ljT
success of demonstration projects such as  St. Louis to determine the effect
the  cans will  have on steel manufacturing.   However, ferrpus metal recovery
is expected to keep pace with the installation of centralized resource re-
;.'! *r * .'• '••' '- ; - ':.'• 'H v11 •' • ' ," -: >•':•'<•  "-"''>'• \;l 6 ,J •' IT'?'.; •:-;;*•} :'"*?•''r'"•'I* r*','  ••.••-*>  • ';* • •-•^••""•j" •• >'» •   '•
Cfiyery systems.         .     '       '  '"' ''        "  '	'   .. '
                    RECOVERY FORECASTS FOR FERROUS METALS
           Ferrpus  metals will  be recovered  via four methods in the  future..
These are:  volunteer collections; incinerator residue  recovery; magnetic
separatipn at  transfer stations or "front end!:1 recovery systems; centralized
waste-processing  systems (usually for energy recovery).

           The  insfa1lation of  centralized waste-prpcessing systems  will
be  justified on the Ijasis of all recoyerable materials  but the determining
factor will be the use of the  organic fraction in waste for energy  recovery.
This  was discussed in Chapters II and lit.   For the most"part, once a
!.-•'.•: -  .«.:",.!  !• t ,.-•,...•- :i^<. .;.;•• 'Vv • •, tf' |- «,V ,r ;.-I ,*>?•"? •'-<•'    !'•'•••  • :-. •-•;• ••  ,(/••* * '•>-:••'••
centralized waste-processing system is installed then magnetic separation
'-.1--'- V?-rj .«• :C" i-'t'S'1"-'- ^^'L- -,V-.l,.; v:'i'J'1../ ''"' '''• '••• ^'J-™'1'1 -'-,\.. ''^'?.- V !i'-' *'lj ,'.'-T.-,:- r^' " /  -r --I"'* 'I'"-'"?'' V'";r-"-. •1^.'->" ^ a',^ li'"''^'''   '"  "'*' '' " '   '  "''"v '    •'"
absorbed by the steel industry and exports.   The waste  profile for  ferrous
• >-;l;.«;. ";.-<:VV !.:..' :,'W. .-•<,••'-•-'••;•  '•"  •'^'•'• \..'.- >»«-:• •:'•'v;'V-'•.-';',    .'" ' :- 'i,S>~ " •••  V* .'•/' •'-.•'.'    •.-'   .'. . .  •'..-.'
metals recovery is summarized  in Table 47.   Recovery will rise from 115,000
^'ilr/'-.u*.-i- J : *' : .-.'•'±":.\" ' ;" •'• '•• -" "-:i'>["•.";.- -f- •' L ". ' '  t •*  • • •"' "".• '-1 "T ~~ • ••'   -•,!-'r ,-'• s . - * «• .  ;  ;• .-.,-, *; ,,, ii- • • •;   .*'..-.•-
tons  in 1972 to 2.2 million tpns in 1990 at  a mechanical  recpyery effi-
ciency of 85 percent.^
.••,'-.•".:.;..-•.<  ,.J... •''.•' ?;••-•.:.•-••-••:=.-

           Recpyery of voluntary collection  centers will  not rise above
the 15,000 tons per year current fate.  There is little  incentive:'to' re-
cover steel cans  in comparison to aluminum  and waste paper.
 • • ••• •   rr--."-"-  -"-•>'•'."  >!! :• VJ-'-v;  - -.:'   ' •  i~ •-..••"ffj.•••:K.-  •  •   •   .: f ,.*j-

           Magnetic separation  at transfer stations, landfills and incinerr
atp.rs will account fpr some additional recpyery.   This.will require the
installation of "front end!1 systems utilizing  shredding/magnetic separation.
In addition, incinerator  residue systems may  yield up tp  50,000 to  80,000 .
tons  per year.   We estimate that  .1(4.facilities  will be  shredding and  recovering
*  MRI  estimates, tha,t  the mechanica;l efficiency  of; ferrpus metal systems  will
     b,e in the 'Order: of: ,&5, prercent  after, all upgrading steps  have 'taken place.
                                       121

-------
steel  in  1975; 18 by 1980; 21 by 185; and 23 by 1990.  Each will process
about  100,000 tons/year each of solid waste.  Thus, recovery will be based
upon ferrous metal content of the waste and recovery efficiency.  This
will result in recovery of 83,000 tons in 1975 (100,000 tons x 14 systems x
0.071  steel content x 0.85 recovery efficiency).  Recovery will be 105,000
tons in 1980; 125,000 tons in 1985; and 135,000 tons in 1990 (Table 4&).


                                TABLE 47

       RECOVERY OF FERROUS METALS IN CENTRALIZED PROCESSING SYSTEMS
                FROM MIXED MUNICIPAL WASTE, 1972 TO 1990
                           (In thousand tons)

        Category        1972      1975      1980      1985      1990

Total  solid waste gen-
  erated               130,000   140,000    160,000   180,000   200,000
Ferrous metal in mixed
  wasted/                9,265     9,870    11,075    1.2,500    13,500
Percent ferrous
  metal^                  7.1       7.1       6.9       6.9       6.8
Total  waste processed
  in centralized re-
  covery  systems       Neg.        2,100     6,600    24,000    48,600
Ferrous metal content  Neg.          150       415     1,705     3,315
Ferrous metal re-
  covery  at 0.85 re-
  covery  efficiency    Neg.          12.7       395     1,450    ,2,815
Number of recovery
  systems operating          0         5        12        32        60
§_/  Excludes ferrous metal in bulky appliances.
Source:  Midwest Research Institute.
                                   122

-------
                                TABLE 48

              SUMMARY OF FERROUS METAL RECOVERY FROM MIXED
                      MUNICIPAL WASTE. 1972 TO 1990
                     (In thousand tons and percent)

   Type of Recovery       1972      1975      1980      1985       1990

Volunteer collection       15        15        15          15         15
Incinerator residue        50(est.)  55        60          65         70
Magnetic separation         3(est.)  83       105         125        135
Centralized recovery
  systems                  _0       127       395
Total recovery             68       280       575
Steel cans only^/          47       165       305
Total recovery as a
  percent of:
    Total ferrous waste   0.7       2.8       5.2        13.2       22.5
    Ferrous waste in
      SMSA's              1.1       4.0       7.3        17.6       26.0
Source:  Midwest Research Institute
a/  Based on percentages in Table 44 applied to incinerator, magnetic, and
      centralized; volunteer considered to be 100 percent cans.
          In summary, total recovery of ferrous metals from municipal wastes
were 68,000 tons in 1972, and will rise to 575,000 tons in 1980; and 3.0
million tons in 1990.  This is 0.7 percent of ferrous metals generated in
1972, rising to 22.5 percent in 1990.  We do not distinguish steel can re-
covery from all ferrous metals.  However, can recovery will be proportional
to the percentage in ferrous waste or 60 percent in 1972, declining to 45
percent in 1990.

          These results show that ferrous metal net tonnage in post-con-
sumer waste will increase from 9.2 million tons in 1972 to 10.8 million
tons in 1985, after which it will decline slightly.

          We believe that markets will be developed readily for the fore-
cast quantities of recovered steel from municipal waste systems (3.0 mil-
lion tons in 1990).  The major markets will be scrap for use in steel
furnaces and export tonnage (either directly or "freeing up" other steel
scrap for export) with copper cementation accounting for about 0.4 million
tons of the total.  Thus, it can be seen that at this level of recycling
in 1990, the amount of steel scrap returning to the steel industry will be
                                    123

-------
well below  the capability of  the industry to absorb scrap of the quality
to  be  expected from resource  recovery systems.
        RECOVERY FORECASTS FOR STEEL IN MAJOR APPLIANCES TO 1990
 Production. Use and Discard Cycles for Appliances

          There are presently more than 350 million major appliances in
 use in U.S. households, including clothes dryers, washing machines, ranges,
 refrigerators, water heaters, room air conditioners, dehumidifiers, gar-
 bage disposers, and freezers.  Of these, the first five account for more
 than 75 percent of the total steel used in appliances.

          A high proportion of new appliance sales are as replacements for
 discarded appliances.  For all but clothes dryers, annual discards are
 presently averaging more than two-thirds of the annual new sales.  Future
 appliance discards, then, can be projected with reasonable accuracy largely
 on the basis of past appliance sales.  Table 49 shows the estimated ser-
 vice life associated with each of the five major r.ppliances, as developed
 from three independent sources:  Data published in Institute of Scrap Iron
 and Steel Report No. EPA-SW-45D-72, "Identification of Opportunities for
 Increased Recycling of Ferrous Solid Wastes;" an MRI survey of appliance
 owners, and; an analysis of appliance retirement histories from 1950 to
 1970, based on data published in the Statistical Abstract of the United
 States.

                                TABLE 49

               ESTIMATED SERVICE LIFE OF MAJOR APPLIANCES
                               (In years)

                                                                 Estimated
                        Service  Life  Until  Discard (Years)       Retirement
 Appliance               Low            High        Estimated        Rate

 Clothes Dryer             9             30            15             6.7
Washing Machine           8             16            10            10.0
Range                     18             20            20             5.0
 Refrigerator              13             20            17             5.9
Water Heater              8             13            10            10.0
Source:  Midwest Research  Institute.  Estimates based on ISIS data,  appliance
          owner survey,  and  appliance retirement histories.
                                    124

-------
           Projected sales and discards of new major appliances and the
'total  number of  each appliance expected to be in service o\/er the 1970 to
 1990 period are  summarized in Tables 50 through 54.  In developing these
 estimates,  the total number of appliances in use was projected based on
 historical data, and the number of discarded appliances were calculated
 by  assuming the  appropriate service life for each (as given in Table 49).
 For example, it  was assumed that all clothes dryers installed in 1970
 would  be discarded in  1985.

                                TABLE 50
       CLOTHES DRYERS IN SERVICE, SOLD AND DISCARDED, 1970 TO 1990



Year
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990

Number in
Service on
January 1
29.5
36.3
49.1
64.7
82.9
(In million units)
New Sales
During
Year
3.5
3.7
5.1
6.4
7.5

Number Retired
During
Year
1.3
1.3
2.1
3.0
3.7
Source:
                                                                      Number in
                                                                      Service on
                                                                     December 31

                                                                       31.7
                                                                       38.7
                                                                       52.1
                                                                       68.1
                                                                       86.7
Midwest Research Institute estimates based upon  ISIS  Report  EPA-SW-
  450-72 and Statistical Abstract of the U.S.
                                TABLE 51
      WASHING MACHINES IN SERVICE, SOLD AND DISCARDED, 1970 TO 1990



Ifiajc.
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990

Numbtr in
Service on
January 1
61.2
66.9
76.6
86.8
97.0
(In million units)
New Sales
During
Year
5.7
6.3
6.2
8.3
8.2

Number Retired
During
Year
3.8
4.4
4.1
6.3
6.2
                                                                      Number in
                                                                      Service on
                                                                     December 31

                                                                         63.1
                                                                         68.8
                                                                         78.7
                                                                         88.8
                                                                         99.0
Source:  Midwest Research  Institute  estimates  based upon ISIS Report
           EPA-SW-45D-72 and  Statistical  Abstract  of the U.S.
                                   125

-------
                                TABLE 52
           RANGES IN SERVICE, SOLD AND DISCARDED.  1970 TO  1990



Year
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990

Number in
Service on
January 1
65.5
70.1
78.0
87.1
97.0
(In million units)
New Sales
During
Year
4.9
5.5
5.1
6.2
6.5

Number Retired
During
Year
3.2
3.9
3.3
4.3
4.5
                                                                     Number  in
                                                                     •Service  on
                                                                    December 31

                                                                       67.0
                                                                       71.7
                                                                       79.8
                                                                       89.0
                                                                       99.0
Source:  Midwest Research Institute estimates based upon ISIS Report
           EPA-SW-45D-72 and Statistical Abstract of the U.S.
                                TABLE 53
       REFRIGERATORS IN SERVICE.  SOLD AND DISCARDED.  1970 TO 1990



Year
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990

Number in
Service on
January 1
65.4
70.0
78.0
87.1
97.0
(In million units)
New Sales
During
Year
5.7
4.7
5.9
7.1
7.2

Number Retired
During
Year
4.2
3.1
4.1
5.2
5.2
                                                                     Number  in
                                                                     Service on
                                                                    December 31

                                                                       66.9
                                                                       71.6
                                                                       79.8
                                                                       89.0
                                                                       99.0
Source:  Midwest Research Institute estimates based upon ISIS Report
           EOA-SW-45D-72 and Statistical Abstract of the U.S.
                                  126

-------
                                TABLE 54

       WATER HEATERS IN SERVICE. SOLD AND DISCARDED. 1970 TO 1990



Year
1972.
1975
1980
1985
1990

Number in
Service on
January 1
55.5
61.7
72.5
84.5
97.0
(In million
New Sales
During
Year
5.8
5.8
7.0
8.3
9.4
units)
Number Retired
During
Year
3.8
3.7
4.5
5.8
7.0

Number in
Service on
December 31
57.5
63.8
75.0
87.0
99.4
Source:  Midwest Research  Institute  estimates  based  upon  ISIS Report
           EPA-SW-45D-72 and  Statistical Abstract  of the  U.S.
          The methodology used in estimating the amount of steel available
in discarded major household appliances over the 1970-1990 period consisted
of eight steps, cs follows:

          1.  The five major appliances which comprise more than 75 percent
of total steel used in appliances were selected:  clothes dryers, washing
machines, ranges, refrigerators, and water heaters.

          2.  The average life of each appliance was estimated, based on:
(a) data published in ISIS Report No. EPA-SW-45D-72, "Identification of. v
Opportunities for Increased Recycling of Ferrous Solid Wastes;" (b) a sur-
vey of MRI staff personnel; and (c) an analysis of appliance retirement
histories from 1950-1970, based on data published in Statistical Abstract
of the U.S.

          3.  The steel content of each appliance was estimated, using
average appliance weights from the current Sears catalog and the average
steel content reported in the ISIS report cited previously.

          4.  Annual data on the number of appliances in service and ap-
pliance sales during the 1950-1970 period was compiled from the Statistical
Abstract of the U.S.

          5.  The number or appliances in service was projected by years
for the 1970-1990 period, based on household saturation rates and extra-
polations of 1950-1970 data.

                                   127

-------
           6.  The number of each type of appliance to be discarded by years
 was estimated, assuming that discards for a given year consist of those
 appliances installed X years previously, where X is the estimat jd appliance
 life.

           7.  The total quantity of discarded steel available in each of
 the five appliances was estimated from the number discarded and the steel
 content per appliance.

           8.  An additional 30 percent was included to allow for other
 appliances not considered separately (air conditioners, freezers, dish-
 washers, etc.).  This 30 percent was derived by estimate of the proportion
 of metal in the appliances not included in the calculations of steps one
 to seven.

           Waste generation from appliance discards:  The estimated weight
 and steel content of the five major appliances is shown in Table 55.  Ap-
 plying these factors to the number of units discarded (from Tables 50 through
 54) gives the total quantity of steel available in the discarded appliances,
 as shown in Table 56.  By 1990, there will be just over 2 million tons of
 steel discarded in the form of the five major appliances; adding 30 percent
 to this total to reflect the steel available in other major appliances
 gives a total of 2.7 million tons in 1990S nearly double the 1970 amount.

           Appliance waste generation by source:   Commercial counterparts
.of these household appliances have little effect on the overall discard pic-
 ture,  with the production of commercial units amounting to only about 5
 percent of the volume of household appliances.

           Appliances such as washers, dryers, stoves, etc., are used al-
 most exclusively in private homes.   When an appliance is retired from ser-
 vice by an owner, it follows one of four routes:   (1)  it is traded in on a
 new one and the old one is hauled to the retail  dealer's store for discard;
 (2) it is traded to a dealer who reconditions it and  sells it to someone
 else;  (3) it is discarded directly from the home;  and (4) it is donated to
 a  charitable group that sells it to someone else.   Those appliances used
 in commercial establishments follow the same disposal routes.   Thus, while
 the appliance is a household use items, they are  not predominantly discarded
 from the home (except where they have no trade-in value whatsoever or a
 dealer will not remove them because another used appliance is  purchased by
 the buyer).

           It is not known on a national  basis what the actual  discard cycle
 is.  We estimate that about 65 percent of the appliances are discarded from
 commercial/institutional establishments;  about 33  percent are  discarded
 from the home as a part of bulky trash pickup service;  and 2 percent are in

                                   128

-------
                                                   TABLE 55
                                       STEEL CONTENT OF MAJOR APPLIANCES
     Appliance

     Clothes  Dryer
     Washing  Machine
     Range
     Refrigerator
     Water  Heater
Number of
MoJelsi/

   17
   10
   26
   14
   25
(In pounds and percent^
Shipping Weight (lb)£/
Low
106
205
150
126
96
High
162
252
300
350
224
Average
142
229
218
289
151
)
Average
Appliance
Weight^/
128
206
196
260
136
                                                                                  Estimated
                                                                                    Steel
                                                                                   Content£/
91
83
89
80
80
          Average
           Steel
          Content
116
171
174
208
109
ro
      a/   Sears  Catalog,  Spring-Summer  1973.
      b_/   Estimated  at  90 percent of shipping weight.
      £/   "Identification of Opportunity   for Increased Recycling of Ferrous Solid Waste," Table IV-23, p.
            ISIS Report EPA-SW-45D-72.  No change in  steel content over time was estimated.
      Source:  Midwest  Research  Institute; Sears Roebuck Catalog, ISIS Report, EPA-SW-45D-72.
                                                                               110.

-------
                                              TABLE 56
                        STEEL AVAILABLE IN DISCARDED APPLIANCES.  1970 TO 1990
(In thousand tons)

Year
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990
Clothes
Dryers
75.4
75.4
121.8
174.0
214.6
Washing
Machines
324.9
376.2
350.6
538.7
530.1

Ranges
278.4
339.3
287.1
374.1
391.5

Refrigerators
436.8
322.4
426.4
540 . 8
540.8
Water
Heaters
207.1
201.7
245.3
316.1
381.5
Total, Five
Major
Appliance s—'
1,323
1,315
1,430
1,945
2,060
Total, All
Major
Appliances—/
1,720
1,710
1,860
2,530
2,680
a/  Totals rounded.
b_/  Includes room air conditioners, dehumidifiers,  disposers, freezers, and dishwashers at approximately
      30 percent of tonnage of five major appliances.
Source:   Midwest Research Institute calculations based on Tables 50 to 55.

-------
 industrial  establishments.  .On  the basis of steel content of discarded
 appliances,  the  source of  the type of waste is estimated _n Table 57.  As
 may  be  noted  here,  the point of discharge is not at all closely related to
 the  point of  use of the product as ..in cans or bottles.  Instead, the in-
 fluence of  the practice of  trade-in allowances and removal by retailers
 gives a discard  pattern unlike  the use pattern.  However, the effect may
 be beneficial to resource  recovery since there are relatively lr:.ge ac-
 cumulations of appliances  in one  location.  Thus, large loads could be
 hauled  to a recovery plant  or disposal site for processing.  Of course,
 municipalities handle bulky waste collection from residences, but their
 loads are not as uniform in steel content (e.g., furniture, rugs, wood,
 etc.) as an appliance store, although the situation is similar since there
 is usually a  common disposal site for bulky refuse.

                                TABLE 57
      STEEL CONTENT OF DISCARDED APPLIANCES BY SOURCE. 1.972 TO 1990
                            (In thousand tons)
Yeajr

1972
1975
1980
1985
1990
Total

1,720
1,710
1,860
2,530
2,680
Household

   570
   565
   615
   835
   885
 Commercial/
institutional

     1,115
     1,110
     1,210
     1,645
     1,740
Industrial

    35
    35
    35
    50
    55
Source:  Midwest Research  Institute  estimates.

          Steal recoverable from discarded appliances:  Appliances are
predominantly discarded by retail stores, second hand stores and charitable
organizations.  However, the concentration of tonnage must be sufficient
to justify recovery activity.  As in previous materials, we estimate that
only SMSA's will produce enough flow of these wastes to consider commercial
recovery activity.  The total recoverable appliance steel was calculated
en the basis of the methodology outlined in Chapter V, except that we used
only the war?te generation percentages in SMSA's for household population,
not for commercial/institutional (Table 58).  (The reason, of course,
is that households get rid of the appliances, and commercial organiza-
tions only haul them axray to repair or discard them.)  In addition to this,
the mechanical efficiency of recovery of shredded steel by magnetic separa-
tion is about 90 percent (slightly higher than for small pieces of steel
which can escape recovery as fine particles).
                                    131

-------
                                TABLE  58

         APPLIANCE  STEEL WASTE GENERATION  IN SMSA'S.  1972 TO 1990


Year
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990
(In
Total Steel
in Appliances
1,720
1,710
1,860
2,530
2 , 680
thousand tons)
Total Steel
in SMSA's
1,180
1,185
1,310
1,810
1,950

Recoverable
in SMSA1
1,060
1,065
1,180
1,630
1,755

Steel
si/





a/  At  90  percent  recovery efficiency.
Source:  Midwest Research Institute estimates.
Appliance Steel Recycling Forecasts, 1972 to 1990

          Very few major appliances are recovered for recycling of their
steel content, primarily for economic reasons.  After appliances have been
shredded and the ferrous metal separated, the salable steel, for  example,
in a 200-pound refrigerator is worth about. $2.00 at $24.00/ton scrap price.
The collection cost and processing cost is high in comparison to the value
of the steel for bulky waste—probably exceeding the value of the product.*
However, we know of no comprehensive evaluation of bulky waste recovery
in which the economics are developed in some detail.

          There are three ways in which appliance steel will be recovered
in the future.  They are:  (1) processing at large auto bulk shredding
operations; (2) processing (shredding) at transfer stations or other special
waste accumulation points; and (3) shredding in conjunction with centralized
waste processing facility.

          There is, toaay, some recovery of appliance scrap at auto shredders
but this is probably not over a few thousand tons per year.  The same is true
of recovery at transfer stations.  Because of the high cost of getting
bulky waste to widely dispersed processing facilities, most of it ends up
at land fills or junkyards and never is a part of the conventionally col-
lected municipal waste stream.
*  See, for example, "Salvage Markets for Materials in Solid Waste," op.cit. .
     p. 106.
                                   132

-------
          Nonetheless, as the large central processing systems are installed
and the auto shredders attempt to process more tonnage annually, a higher
proportion of discarded appliances should enter the resource recovery cycle.

          Our forecasts for appliance steel recovery are tied to the in-
.stallation of central waste processing facilities from 1975 to 1990.  The
forecasts are developed in Table 59.  The rate of processing of appliance
steel for recovery is roughly one-fourth that of the rate of processing of
mixed municipal waste.  Thus, by 1990, we forecast that 5.1 percent
of appliance steel will be recovered (from SMSA's) compared to about 25
percent of total mixed waste processed for other recovery.  The processing
rate could go much higher if the logistics problems and transportation to
shredding facilities becomes more favorable than today.

          This recovery will have little impact on total ferrous scrap
recycling.  The forecast recovery can be readily absorbed into steel scrap
recycling mills because the recovered material would be comparable in
quality to shredded auto bulks.  The decision to make investments in shred-
ding facilities will be tied partly to noneconomic factors such as shortage
of landfill space, but the logistics and processing costs are key para-
meters that will have to be worked out over time.

                                TABLE 59

        RECOVERY OF FERROUS METALS FROM APPLIANCES. 1972 TO 1990
                          (In thousand tons)

         Ferrous Metal                                   Percent of Mixed
         Recovery From     Recovery as a Percent of     Waste Processed in
Yeajr       Appliances      Total Generated   SMSA's     Central Facilities

                                 0.1          0.2             neg.
                                 0.2          0.4             1.5
                                 0.8          1.1             4.1
                                 2.4          3.3            13.3
                                 3.7          5.1            24.3
Source:  Midwest Research Institute estimates.
              The total ferrous metal recovered from all municipal waste
can be readily determined by adding the quantities recovered in Table 59
(for appliances) to the totals in Table 48 (for mixed waste).  In 1972
total ferrous metal recovery was 70,000 tons; in 1975 it will be 0.28
million tons; in 1980, 0.59 million tons; in 1985, 1.72 million tons; in
               i
                                    133
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990
2
5
15
60
100
(est.)





-------
1990, 3.15 million tons.  The summary table for this chapter was included
earlier as Table 36 which gives the recovery highlights for ferrous metals
from all municipal waste sources.
                                 134

-------
                               CHAPTER VII

                 RECOVERY FORECASTS FOR ALUMINUM TO 1990


                                 SUMMARY
          The quantity of aluminum in mixed municipal waste will increase
from 0.9 million tons in 1972 to 2.3 million tons in 1990.  Aluminum waste
is essentially equal to current demand for packaging plus aluminum in
durable goods discarded annually.

          The demand for aluminum packaging will increase at the rate of
6 percent per year between 1972 and 1990, from 0.7 million tons in 1972
to 2.0 million tons in 1990.  Aluminum in appliances discarded added another
62,000 tons of waste in 1972 and will double to 124,000 tons in 1990.  In
1990 the packaging aluminum will consist of 0.8 million tons foil and foil
containers; and 1.2 million tons will be cans and can ends.  Although the
one-trip aluminum beverage container will continue to grow rapidly and
partially displace glass and steel, aluminum beverage containers will begin
to lose market share to plastic containers after 1980.  The demand for    .  '
aluminum cans for all uses will grow from 10.3 billion units in 1972 to
42.8 billion units in 1990 (about 90 percent will be beer and soft drink).

          On a source basis, about 83 percent of aluminum packaging is dis-
carded from households, 16 percent from commercial/institutional establish-
ments, and 1 percent from industrial plants.  By contrast, appliances and
household items are sent to retail stores for discard and the source of
aluminum in large appliances discarded was estimated at one-third household
and two-thirds commercial/institutional.

          The amount of aluminum packaging discarded in SMSA's will rise
from 0.5 million tons in 1972 to 1.4 million tons in 1990.  With the ex-
pected mechanical efficiency of recovery systems about 0.9 million tons
would be recoverable in 1990.

          Aluminum recovered from municipal waste can be recycled by the
primary aluminum producers, but the alloy content of aluminum consumer
packaging in waste makes it desirable for recycling via secondary smelters.
Can collection programs will carry the brunt of the recovery methods until
about 1980.  This is because the technology and economics of mechanical
recovery systems is still unproven in use and it will be several years
be'fore commercial recovery systems are in place and proven.  Once mechanical
systems are avilable, can collection programs will give way to aluminum
processing at centralized units, landfills, or transfer stations.   Thus,
two recovery mechanisms will be in use--mechanical separation from mixed
waste and voluntary can collection, the former becoming important  about 1980.

                                   135

-------
          The MRI  forecasts of aluminum recovery are summarized for the
 1972  to  1990 period in Table 62.
                                TABLE 62
     SUMMARY OF ALUMINUM RECOVERY FROM MUNICIPAL WASTE. 1972 TO 1990
                            (In thousand tons)
Type of Recovery
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990
Volunteer can collection
Mechanical separation
Appliance processing

Total
 27
  0
 _0

 27
 50
  1
 _0

 51
80
24 .
1
80
198
2
80
425
5
105
 280
 510
Recovery as a percent of:
  Aluminum  waste generated     3.0      4.2      .7.0      14.7     22.2
  Aluminum in SMSA's            5.2      7.1     10.7      22.7     33.6
          The recovery of aluminum will rise from 27,000 tons in 1972 to
510,000 tons in 1990; or from 3.0 to 22.2 percent of the total waste aluminum
generation.  After  1980, mechanical separation will grow rapidly, especially
at central resource recovery facilities.  Most of the aluminum recovered
(over 90 percent) will go to primary aluminum producers; a small amount
could go into secondary smelting.  MRI's recovery forecasts are compara-
tively optimistic for aluminum; the metals contribution to municipal waste
is very lo^ but its value is very high ($200/ton or more).
                              INTRODUCTION
          The only nonferrous metal that occurs in significant quantities
in municipal waste is aluminum, principally because this metal has become
an important container and packaging material, used in cans, foil, trays,
etc., for a variety of applications.  Other waste aluminum products add
a small amount to municipal waste.

          Packaging activity in the United States has been growing at a
rapid rate over the past decade arid aluminum used in packaging is no excep-
tion.  Packaging accounted for 14 percent of aluminum production in 1972
and it is expected that this figure will increase to 20 percent of aluminum
production by 1990.  The principal growth sector will be aluminum cans for
beer and soft drinks.
                                   136

-------
            ALUMINUM PACKAGING DEMAND BY MARKET. 1962 TO 1990
 Introduction

          The most common uses for aluminum packaging are foil for lamina-
 tion, wrapping and semirigid trays, and sheet for cans and can ends for
 beverages and food.  Aluminum packaging for foil and semirigid container
 packages is well established and the trends continue to show that there
 will be an increased use of aluminum in foil products in the future.

          In recent years there has been a trend toward the increased use
 of aluminum foil type packaging for reasons other than containment or pro-
 tection.  Special service packaging has resulted in the need for a pack-
 age that will retain heat or cold for a period of time and still be strong
 enough to protect what it contains; aluminum fills this need.

          The growth in the use of aluminum as a packaging material has
 been quite high over the past 12 years.  The average annual growth rate
 between 1960 and 1972 was more than 16 percent, although the growth rate
 is not expected to be this high in the future.

          It is expected that environmental concerns and the "energy crisis"
 will tend to slow the growth in aluminum packaging some degree, but aluminum
 packaging is still expected to grow at approximately 6 percent per year.
Aluminum packaging will continue to be competitive with steel, .glass, plas-
 tics and paper.  In fact, it will likely displace steel and glass as it
has in recent years, especially in beverage containers; only plastic bever-
age containers will capture a share of beverage "one-way" packaging in pre-
 ference to aluminum.
Aluminum Cans*

          Aluminum cans came .into common use in 1963 and have had a rapid
and steady growth in demand.  The market penetration of aluminum reflects
several features of cans:  corrosion resistence; attractively sloped and
printed; light weight; versatility in size, slope and wall thickness;  no
metallic taste is transferred to "sensitive" products.

          The aluminum industry, developed the aluminum "easy open" and
pull-tab opener for beer cans in about 1960.  It was readily accepted and
by 1965, 70 percent of the beer cans had the aluminum pull-tab end.  It is
estimated that 95 percent of the present beer cans have aluminum tops.
   The details of competitive aspects of demand for aluminum cans are covered
     in Chapter VI and Appendix A and are not repeated here.

                                   137

-------
           Unit Demand:   The success of aluminum beer  packaging  also  spurred
 the development of the  two-piece "drawn and  ironed" aluminum can.  This
 can is manufactured, from thin aluminum, producing a can  weighing about  half
 that of a steel can.  It requires less metal since it is  drawn  from  a  round,
 blank of metal and stretched (ironed)  to the desired  length.  This two-piece
 can does not  have  a side seam and can  be lithographed on  the entire  ex-
 terior of its body, providing a more attractive package for  consumer eye
 appeal.   Growth was rapid during the latter  years of  the  1960 decade and  ,
 by  1972, aluminum cans had captured 32  percent of the  beer can market with
 6.9 billion two-piece drawn and -iron aluminum cans.

           The total demand for aluminum cans was 10.3 billion units  in 1972
 and will rise to 42.8 billion units in 1990  (Table 63); most of these  will
 be  beverage containers.
                                TABLE  63

                    ALUMINUM CAN DEMAND.  1972 TO 1990   . .
                  (In millions of cans  and thousand  tons)

  Category          1972        1975         1980        1985        1990

Units:
Beer
Soft Drinks
Other types
6,900
1,600
1,800
12,500
3,000
2.40U
19,500
5,000
3,600
25,000
5,500
4,700
31,000
6,000
5,800
Total Cans         10,300      17,900      28,100      35,200     42,800

Tonnage:

Input total
  Cans                350         613         938
  Ends                225         225         225

Total                 575         838

Scrap                 172         251
Net Usage             403         587         813         980      1,137
Source:  Midwest Research Institute.
                                   138

-------
          Packaged beer is and will continue to be the largest market for
aluminum.  Demand for an estimated 6'. 9 billion aluminum cans in 1972 will
increase to 19.5 billion in 1980 when they will have captured 58 percent
of the beer can market  and growing to 31.0 billion units in 1990.

          At present, only 10 percent of the soft drink cans are aluminum,
with the balance made from steel.  The demand for aluminum cans will increase
from 1.6 billion units in 1972 to 5.0 billion by 1980, equivalent to 20 per-
cent of the soft drink can market.  By 1990, a modest growth rate will have
brought aluminum cans in soft drinks to a level of 6.0 billion units.

          After 1980, aluminum cans are expected to give up market share
to plastic beverage containers, although the growth in number of cans and
tonnage used will increase steadily to 1990.

          Aluminum cans have penetrated some end uses besides beverages
(5 ounce single service easy-open cans for puddings, meat, and fruit).
Although rapid growth was predicted for those markets only about 1.5 billion
were used in 1972.  Growth of aluminum will be steady reaching 3.0 billion
containers by 1980, and 5.0 billion by 1990.

          In addition, a small number of aluminum containers are used to pack-
age aerosols.  These are generally limited to small containers because of
their higher costs.  Because they are two-piece cans, they have greater
design flexibility than steel three-piece cans.  Extimated at 10 percent
of the aerosol can market in 1972, aluminum is expected to increase its
share to 15 percent by 1980.

          Tonnage Demand:   The Aluminum Association reports shipments of
aluminum sheet for containers and packaging.  Industry sources believe their
statistics to be a reliable estimate of aluminum consumed in can manufactur-
ing.  However, these statistics do not document the amount shipped in fin-
ished cans, only the quantity of input metal to cans.  Aluminum can stock
results in 28 to 30 percent scrap for a two-piece drawn and ironed can.*
The scrap is sent back to remelt furnaces and never really leaves the pro-
duction cycle.

          An estimated 575,000 tons of aluminum sheet input was used in
1972 to manufacture 403,000 tons of cans (Table 63).  Approximately 85
percent of this metal was used for all aluminum beverage cans and for steel
beverage can ends.  The balance went into food products such as snack,
seafood, etc. and in oil can ends.  Growth in the beverage market will more
than double metal consumption to 1.16 million tons input by 1980, which will
*  Source:  Reynolds Metals Company estimate.
                                  139

-------
 result in 813,000 tons of finished cans.   Ends  for steel  cans  are projected
 to remain at the current level of 225,000 tons  because of the  development
 of an "easy-open" steel end combined with the slower  growth rate  for  steel
 cans.  Actual consumption of aluminum in  the  finished can is estimated at
 403,000 tons in 1972 at a scrap rate of 30 percent.   By 1990, there will be
 1.14 million tons of aluminum in cans.

           It is expected that efforts to  reduce the use of one-way beverage
 containers will be successful in some of  the more  environmentally conscious
 states,  e.g., Oregon,  Vermont, and a few  others, but it is not  expected that
 total demand will be significantly affected by  anything short  of  national
 legislation restricting the use of aluminum packaging materials.   We  did
 not  consider federal legislation in our forecast.
 Foil  Packaging

          The net  output  of  semirigid  and  nonrigid aluminum  foil packaging
 will  increase from 291,000' tons  in  1972  to 830,000 tons  in 1990  (Table  64).
 At  the  same  time aluminum cans and  ends  will  increase  from 403,000  tons
 output  in 1972  to  1.14  million tons output in 1990.
Waste Generation From Aluminum  Packaging

          Most aluminum packaging  is used by  the consumer and disposed of
almost as purchased.  The main  reason  for this  is  that aluminum packaging
is principally to contain a  food product that will be consumed within days
or months of purchase, even  if  it  is a  frozen variety.  It  is fairly cer-r
tain that the package will be disposed  of within a year after purchase.
In some cases (as decorative itemsX the consumer will withhold the used
container from the waste stream for one reason  or another.  However, aluminum
cans and foil type containers are  usually disposed of immediately after use,
and retention practices of consumers are not  significant enough to warrant
special consideration.
Aluminum Packaging Waste Generation by Source

          Most aluminum packaging material contains products used in the
home, and a majority of aluminum packaging waste will come out of the
household.  Aluminum cans and foil are used for similar application—in
home or retail food packaging that goes to the home for use.  The basis
for allocating aluminum packaging waste by source was the same as that used
for steel (see Chapter VI, section on waste generation by source).  The
distribution of waste is 83 percent household; 16 percent commercial/ in-
stitutional and 1 percent industrial (Table 65).

                                  140

-------
                                                 TABLE 64
                             ALUMINUM METAL DEMAND IN PACKAGING, 1960 TO 1990
                                            (In Thousand Tons)
                   Aluminum Foil Use In
            Semi Rigid
Year      Foil Containers

1960           27
1965           40
1970           63

1972           71
1975           95
1980          115
1985          150
1990          220
 Nonrigid
Aluminum Foil

    87
   125
   202

   220
   290
   400
   510
   610
Input Metal for
 Aluminum Cans
   and Ends

     25
     94
    352
291
385
515
660
830
575
838
1,163
1,400
1,625
 Aluminum in
Finished Cans
   and Endsj*/

     18
     66
    246

    403
    587
    813
    980
  1,13.7
 Total Aluminum
Demand in Finished
    Products]?/

      132
      231
      511
                                         694
                                         972
                                        ,328
                                        ,640
                                                                                           1,967
&l  Adjusted at a scrap rate of 30 percent.
b/  Note:  These data do not correspond to Aluminum Statistical Review published annually by the Aluminum
      Association.  This source reports shipments of metal as input for containers and packaging.  The
      values given above have been adjusted for fabrication scrap (called "run around scrap" in the industry)
      and represents shipments of finished products.
Source:   Marketing Guide to the Packaging Industries,  1972 Charles H.  Kline,Inc.; Midwest Research Institute.

-------
                                TABLE 65

              ALUMINUM PACKAGING WASTE BY SOURCE. 1972-1990
                            (In thousand tons)
Year
Total Aluminum
 Contained in
   Packaging
                                  Distribution by Source of Discard
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990
694
972
1,328
1,694
1,967
Household

   576
   807
 1,102
 1,362
 1,632
 Commercial-
Institutional

    HI
    155
    213
    262
    315
Industrial

     7
    10
    13
    16
    20
Source:  Midwest Research Institute estimates.
          Litter:  As previously estimated* we have assumed a 2 percent
litter factor for the beverage container portion of aluminum packaging.*
This amounts to 8,000 tons in 1972; 11,000 in 1975; 15,000 in 1980; 19,600
in 1985; and 22,000 in 1990.
Aluminum Packaging Waste Recoverable
                                               /.
          The values for recoverable aluminum packaging waste were calculated
by taking the amount of aluminum that is generated in the SMSA's (approxi-
mately 68 percent of total waste based on population in 1972) and applying,
the SMSA population ratio and commercial/institutional ratios of Table 31.
If all of this material were processed for recovery, the mechanical recovery
efficiency would further reduce recoverable waste (Table 69).  We estimate
that recovery systems for aluminum will be about 65 percent efficient.  Thus,
of total aluminum packaging waste generatedjabout 44 to 48 percent is ul-
timately recoverable for recycling.
                  ALUMINUM IN CONSUMER DURABLE PRODUCTS
          This market sector, consisting of refrigerators, air conditioners,
ranges, dishwashers, washers and the like, contribute a significant amount
of aluminum as well as other metals to the waste stream.  However, aluminum
*  See Chapter V.
                                  142

-------
 recovery  from these products is virtually nonexistent because of the pro-
 cessing required  to recover the aluminum from discarded appliances.
                                TABLE 66

             RECOVERABLE ALUMINUM PACKAGING WASTE. 1972-1990
                             (Thousand tons)

          Packaging Waste       Packaging            Amount Recoverable
             Entering         Waste  Generated              By
Year       Waste  Streamg/         in  SMSA's           Mechanical Systems

1972         "  686                 473                     305
1975           961                 668                     435
1980         1,312                 920                     600
1985         1,621                1,150                     750
1990         1,945                1,430                     930
a/  Less litter not recovered.
Source:  Midwest Research Institute estimates.
          At the present time, there are an estimated 300 million major
appliances in use in the United States.  They are being discarded at a
rate of approximately 15 million units a year and this figure is expected
to rise to 22 million units by 1980.*

          The aluminum potentially available can be calculated by multiply-
ing the aluminum in each appliance by the number of appliances retired each
year.  The amount of aluminum in various appliances varies from 2 to 15
pounds per unit (Table 67).  The number of appliances that will be discarded
annually was partially developed in Chapter VI and summarized here with room
air conditioners and dishwashers added (Table 68).  The total discards multi-
plied by the average amount of aluminum in each type of appliance gives a
value for the aluminum that would be available from discarded appliances
(Table 69).

          These estimates give a general indication of how much aluminum
might be available for recovery should technology overcome processing
handicaps now preventing efficient separation of metals from various appliances.
*  See Chapter VI.


                                    143

-------
                                TABLE 67

                ALUMINUM USAGE  IN  SELECTED APPLIANCES, 1970
                           (In  pounds per unit)

                                          Amount of Aluminum
                                        Contained in Appliance
	Appliance	              	(pounds)	

 Room Air Conditioners                           10
 Ranges                                           2
 Refrigerators                                    9        ,
 Dishwashers                                      2
 Washers                                         15
 Dryers                                           4
 Source:   National  Industrial  Pollution Control Council,  The Disposal
            of Major  appliances.  1971,  pp.  18-19.
                                TABLE 68

                 ANNUAL APPLIANCE DISCARDS. 1972 TO 1990

Appliance
(In
1972
Room Air Conditioners 1.6
Ranges
Refrigerators
Dishwashers
Washers
Dryers
3.2
4.2
0.7
3.8
1.3
Total Discards 14.8
Source: National
Major
Industrial
Appliances,
millions of units)
1975 1980
3.0 5.9
3.9 3.3
3.1 4.1
1.3 2.1
4.4 4.1
1.3 2.1
17.0 21.6
Polltuion Control Council
1971, pp. 18-19; Midwest

1985
7.0
4.3
5.2
3.0
6.3
3.0
28.8
, The Disposal of
Research Instituti
                                                                         1990

                                                                          8.1
                                                                          4.5
                                                                          5.2
                                                                          3.2
                                                                          6.2
                                                                          3.7

                                                                         30.9
            (Chapter VI).
                                   144

-------
                                 TABLE 69

       .  POTENTIAL ALUMINUM AVAILABLE IN APPLIANCES.  1972 TO 1990
                            (In thousand tons)

      Appliance          1972        1975        1980        1985        1990
,i                ;  •
"Room Air conditioners     8          15          30           35          40
 Ranges                    34345
 Refrigerators            19          14          18           23          23
 Dishwashers               1           12            3           3
 Washers                  28          33          31           47          46
 Dryers                  	3         	3         	4         	6         	7

i         Total            62          70          88          118         124
 Source:   Midwest Research Institute estimates.
'Appliance Aluminum Waste by Source
           Estimates were made to give waste generation by source for appli-
 ances.   As estimated in Chapter VI, the predominant majority are discarded
 from commercial establishments because that is where appliances go after
 retirement (as trade-ins).   We allocated 33 percent to household and 67
 percent to commercial/institutional (Table 70).   Our estimate of the tonnage
 available in SMSA's is also given in Table 70.
                                 TABLE 70

           ALUMINUM WASTE IN APPLIANCES BY SOURCE.  1972 TO 1990
                            (In thousand tons)

         Total Aluminum                    Commercial-                     Available
 Year      Generated        Household     Institutional     Industrial-'    in SMSA's

 1972         62                19              43               neg           42
 1975         70                23              47               neg           48
 1980         88                29              59               neg           61
 1985        118                39              79               neg           83
 1990        124                41              83               neg           90
 a/   Less  than 1  percent.
 Source:   Midwest Research Institute  estimates,
                                    145

-------
  Recoverabillty  of Aluminum  in Appliances

           At  present,the  only techniques  for  recovering metals  from  dis-
  carded  appliances are  isolated  incidences of  secondary materials dealers
  and  auto  shredders  that "breakdown" appliances by  labor intensive  techniques.
  The  processing  required to  separate the metals is  labor intensive  and expen-
  sive.   Most of  this potential aluminum is lost.  Should the  technology be
  developed to  efficiently  separate metals  in appliances for processing^recov-
  ery  of  aluminum and other metals could take place.  Technology  of  this type
  is likely to  have to be tied to shredding and magnetic removal  of  ferrous
  fractions followed  by  an  aluminum magnet; heavy media separation of  other
  mineral dressing techniques.
 Aluminum Recoverable From Municipal Waste

           Estimates of  total waste generation from aluminum packaging and
 in appliances can now be given.  MRI's forecast of total waste generation
 and waste available in  SMSA's  is given in Table 71.
                                 TABLE 71                      .

            SUMMARY OF ALUMINUM WASTE GENERATION. 1972 TO 1990
                            (In Thousand Tons)

Source of Waste         1972        1975        1980        1985        1990

Packaging                686         961
Appliances                62          70

     Total               748       1,031       1,400       1,739       2,069

Packaging - SMSA's       473         668         920
Appliances - SMSA's       42          48          61

     Total SMSA's        515         716         981       1,233       1,520
Source:   Midwest Research Institute.
                                   146

-------
              RECOVERY FORECASTS FOR ALUMINUM, 1972 TO 1990*
Recovery From Mixed Waste at Centralized Processing Systems

          The increasing consumption of aluminum, the lack of djmestic
reserves, and the energy expenditure required for virgin aluminum production
lead to the conclusion that aluminum recovery fron municipal waste for re-
cycling will be pursued actively in the future.** Aluminum is the most valuable
single constituent of significant tonnage in municipal solid waste, and its
scrap value of $200 per ton (or more) makes it an attractive material to
separate from municipal waste.  However, there are not yet any commercial
separation techniques for separating aluminum from mixed wastes.

          Based upon our estimates of municipal solid waste generation,
aluminum packaging constituted about 0.5 percent of the waste in 1972
(assuming no removal of aluminum in collection centers).  It will rise to
1.0 percent by 1990.  At these concentrations (20 pounds per ton of waste),
a ton of waste contains $2.00 worth of aluminum at $200 per ton.  As cen-
tralized waste processing units are installed, the recovery of aluminum
will be an "add on" process.  Whenever technology becomes available, it will
be attractive to recover the aluminum because of its high value.

          Recovery techniques are under development that would separate
highly concentrated nonferrous metals fractions.   Dense media separation
and an electromagnetic separation process appear to hold the most promise
at present.  We believe that efficient recovery technology t-hould be avail-
able by 1980 and then aluminum will be recovered from centralized waste pro-
cessing facilities along with other inorganics such.as steel.  On this basis
we have estimated aluminum recovery from central waste processing facilities
to be 1,000 tons in 1975 and rising to 365,000 tons in 1990.  It will be
1985 before these systems are fully equipped to recover aluminum.
Recovery of Aluminum Via Other Methods

          Presently, aluminum can recovery is virtually the exclusive forte
of the primary metals producers and beverage makers, e.g., Alcoa, Reynolds,
Kaiser, Coors, etc., who operate consumer collection centers.  The present
recovery (1972) of beverage cans is about 15 percent or 27,000 tons of the
total metal used in beverage cans.  The recovery of aluminum cans at col-
lection centers has increased rapidly under the efforts of the aluminum
and beverage industries.
*  Trends in scrap use for the entire aluminum industry are given in Ap-
     pendix B.
** Alternately, the use of aluminum packaging might decline if recycling
     does not take place.
                                 147

-------
          However, recovery from can collection will not grow as rapidly
in the future.  MRI estimates that collection centers would reach a limit
of 140 to 150,000 tons of cans recovered per year by 1990, if p:-st trends
continued.  In actuality, our estimates are that can collection programs
will peak at 80,000 tons per year as mechanical .separation at central pro-
cessing facilities and transfer stations come on-stream after 1980.  To
accomplish even this goal will require that separately collected cans in-
crease by three fold over 1972.

          As mechanical recovery becomes available, it will be installed
at centralized waste processing sites.  By 1980, only 10,000 tons will be
recovered from central waste processing systems, but by 1990, 365,000 tons
will be recovered at central waste processing systems (Table 72).
                                TABLE 72

          .RECOVERY OF ALUMINUM FROM MIXED MUNICIPAL WASTE AT
             CENTRALIZED PROCESSING SYSTEMS. 1972 TO 1990
                           (In thousand tons)

Category	         1972        1975        1980        1985        1990
Total Waste
Aluminum in
Generated
WasteS/
130,
000
900
140
1
,000
,200
160
1
,000
,500
180
1
,000
,900
200
2
,000
,300
Percent Aluminum              0.7        0.9         0.9         1.0        1.2

Total Waste Processed in
  Centralized Recovery
  Systems                  neg.      2,100       6,600      24,000     48,600
Aluminum Content           neg.         18          62         250        560
Aluminum Recovery at
  .65 Recovery efficiency
  (1985-1990)              neg.          1          12         165        365
a/  Prior to any type of recovery at the source or other points.  Includes
      all aluminum in mixed waste, including appliances, packaging and non-
      packaging uses of aluminum in Table 11.  (Note that the total aluminum
      waste is greater than that of packaging and appliances alone.)
          Recovery of aluminum from mixed waste is not even technically demon-
strated on a commercial scale yet, and probably will not be until 1975.  When
recovery does become feasible around 1980Jsome separation will take place at
transfer stations, landfills and incinerators using mechanical systems.  Based
                                  148

-------
on our recovery estimate's Cor ferrous metals, by 1980 "front end" type systems
operating at transfer stations and landfills will recover an e.-it I inn led 12,000
                        -,'"',                                    1
tons of aluminum from mixed waste.  This is the amount of aluminum in about
2.2 million tons of mixed waste.  By 1985, a total of 33,000 tons will be
recovered and by 1990 there will be 60,000 tons recovered.  This means that
about 12 million tons of waste will be processed for aluminum recovery
(Table 73), outside of voluntary and large central processing systems.

          We expect the recovery systems to be justified on their own merits
with or without recovery of paper, steel, glass or other recyclable materials.
The technology would be much the same as used in centralized waste.processing
units except that there would be no recovery of energy from the organic
fraction of waste--i.e., aluminum magnets or mineral dressing techniques
applied to previously shredded and concentrated inorganic fractions of waste.

          there will be some recovery from appliances in conjunction with
shredding and special appliance processing.  However, the aluminum content
of appliances is not attractive to recover because of the logistics of
appliance collection and processing and the relative difficulty of removal
of the metal by mechanical means.  By 1980, 1,000 tons might be recovered
from appliances; by 1985, 2,000 tons; by 1990, 5,000 tons recovered.

          The preceding figures, it is obvious, do not indicate a rapidly
stepped up program of aluminum recovery in the near future.   Actual alumi-
num recovery from the municipal waste stream is expected to be under 5
percent in 1975, but will be 14.7 percent of total recovery by 1985,  and
22.2 percent by 1990.  This translates to 51,000 tons in 1975 and 510,000
tons in 1990 (Table 73).  It should be noted that our recovery forecasts
for aluminum should be considered "optimistic" in comparison to some of
the other materials.

   '       These figures are, of course, somewhat speculative, since the art
of recovering aluminum from municipal waste is in its infancy and the appear-
ance of new technology, which could significantly raise the amount of
aluminum being recycled, is unproven.  Nonetheless, the combined pressures
of the "energy crisis," the inherent value of the metal for recycling, and
favorable resource  recovery economics will all encourgae additional recovery
for recycling.
                                    149

-------
                                 TABLE  73

      SUMMARY OF ALUMINUM RECOVERY FROM MUNICIPAL WASTE. 1972 TO 1990
                      (In Thousand Tons and Percent)
Type of Recovery            1972

Volunteer can collection     27
Mixed waste processing        0
Centralized recovery
  systems                     0
Appliance processing        	0
     Total Recovery          27
Total recovery as a
  percent of:
   Aluminum waste generated   3.0
   Aluminum waste in SMSA's   5.2
1975

 50
  0

  1
	0
 51
  4.2
  7.1
1980

 80
 12

 12
  1
105
  7.0
 10.7
1985

 80
 33

165
  2
280
 •14.7
 22.7
1990

 80
 60

365
	5
510
 22.2
 33.6
Source:   Midwest Research Institute.
                                  150

-------
                               CHAPTER VIII

                  RECOVERY FORECASTS FOR PLASTICS TO 1990


                                  SUMMARY
           The quantity of plastics in mixed municipal waste will increase
 from 4.5 million tons in 1972 to 13.2 million tons in 1990.  Plastic waste
 is essentially equal to final product demand and consists principally of
 packaging plastics.  The demand for plastics in all types of packaging
. applications will increase at a rate of 6.4 percent per year between 1972
 and 1990.  Plastic packaging use will increase from 3.0 million tons in
• 1972 to 8.9 million tons in 1990.  Almost all uses,including film and blow
 molded containers, will become much more important at the expense of con-
 ventional materials--glass, metals and paper.  The plastic beverage con-
, tainer will become a large factor in plastic demand after 1980.

           On a source basis about 84 percent of plastic  waste is generated
 in households; 10 percent in commercial/institutional and 6 percent in in-
 dustrial locations.  There will be a trend to a lower percentage in house-
 hold waste by 1990, about 78 percent of the total.  By 1990, this will
 mean 6.9 million tons of plastics wastes will be coming out of household
 and about 11 million tons each will be generated by commercial and institu-
 tional establishments.

           The plastics content of mixed waste will increase from 3.5 per-
 cent of total waste in 1972 to 6.6 percent in 1990.

           Looking at the recovery base (SMSA's) there will be 10 million tons
 of plastic potentially available for resource recovery in 1990.  Recycling
 of post-consumer plastics will not become a significant recovery option in
 the period to 1990.  However, plastics in mixed waste will provide a very
 good source of Btu potential for energy recovery options.

           We have forecast the installation of a significant number of
 centralized waste processing facilities for energy (fuel) recovery (Chapter
 III).   The forecasts for plastic recovery and energy use are summarized in
 Table 74.

           The recovery of plastics from municipal waste in the form of fuel
 or energy will rise from essentially zero in 1972 to 3.2 million tons in
 1990 (24.3 percent of the total plastics waste generation).  This quantity
 will yield 96.3 x 10^ Btu of energy'in 1990 from resource recovery systems.
 The increasing use of plastics will also serve to "upgrade" the Btu content

                                   151

-------
                                                 TABLE  74
                                SUMMARY OF PLASTICS RECOVERY.  1972 TO  1990
(In Thousand Tons)
Amount
Year
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990
Total Plastics
Waste Available
4,500
5,700
8,400
11,000
13,200
Total Plastics
in SMSA's
3,100
3,970
5,925
7,900
9,615
Processed
for Recovery
0
85
350
1,470
3,210
Recovery
in Energy
106 Btu
0
2,550
10,500
44,100
96,300
Recovery
as a percent
Total
0
1.5
4.2
13.4
24.3
SMSA's
0
2.1
5.9
18.6
33.3
Source:   Midwest Research Institute

-------
 of mixed waste because plastics .(derived  from petroleum feedstocks) have
 a much higher Btu  content  than paper,  food or yard wastes at an average
 of 15,000  Btu per  pound  of plastic.
                               INTRODUCTION
           Plastic  resins  are widely used  in  the mauafacture of a variety
of  containers,  caps  and closures,  film, coatings, and "disposable"  items.
Plastics have achieved most of  their growth  since World War II.  The continual
reduction  of costs associated with increased volume; improved technology  for
fabricating and forming plastics;  and  low cost petrochemical raw materials*
made  them  competitive with the  traditional packaging materials such as paper,
metal cans and  glass containers.

           Packaging  uses  accounted for 23.7 percent of the 11.8 million  tons
of  plastics produced in 1972 or 2.8 million  tons.  Packaging accounts for
half of all polyethylene  produced, 21.8 percent of the polystyrene  and lesser
amounts of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and polypropylene '(Table 75).   Non-
packaging  plastics go into a multitude of products — from  records, raincoats,
garden hose to  appliances, autoparts,  construction products etc.
                                TABLE 75

    PLASTIC RESINS INPUT QUANTITY FOR ALL USES AND PACKAGING.  1972£/
                            (In thousand tons)
Resin

Polyethylene,LD           2,610
Polyethylene,HD           1,195
Polystyrene               1,840
Polypropylene               865
Polyvinyl/chloride (PVC)  2,120
All Others                3,170

Total                    11,800
Packaging
Percent of PackaKing
  2,796
       23.7
af  This is resin use which is nearly the same as finished goods output.
Source:  U.S. Tariff Commission and Midwest Research Institute estimates.
   At least prior to 1973 when petroleum prices were low in relation to other
     natural resources.
                                  153

-------
               PLASTIC PACKAGING  RESIN DEMAND.  1965  TO  1990
 General  Trends  in  Packaging Plastics  Demand  to  1990

           Plastic  packaging materials plus cellophane*  demand  grew at  a
 rate  of  14.5  percent  per  year between 1965 and  1972.  Demand has  increased
 during this period from 1.14 million  tons per year to 2.96  million tons  per
 year  (Table 76).   Low density polyethylene (which is used extensively  as
 a  film)  is the  largest volume resin with 1.4 million tons consumed in  1972.
                                 TABLE  76
           PACKAGING  PLASTICS  DEMAND  BY TYPE OF RESIN.  1972-1990
                            (In  thousand  tons)
Reain
 1965
Polyethylene LD     465
Polyethylene HD     150
Polystyrene         212
Polyvinyl Chloride   35
Polypropylene        30
Cellophane          200
All Other            50
Total

Growth Rate
  Percent Per
  Year	

1965-1972
1972-1980
1980-1990
1,142
 PE-LD
 1972
2,959
PE-HD
  1975
 3,695
      1980
PS
PVC
     5,300
PP
        1985
       7,100
Total
17.0
6.3
5.8
20.7
9.4
4.7
9.5
10.0
4.8
24.3
7.6
4.6
21.8
14.8
6.8
14.6
7.6
5.7
           1990
1,398
558
401
160
119
163
160
M^M^W^H
1,713
747
527
206
178
145
179
2,275
1,150
864
288
358
125
240
3,100
1,500
1,120
360
520
100
400
3,930
1,825
1,380
450
690
75
550
          8,900
Source:  Midwest Research Institute Forecasts; 1965 and 1972 based on "Modern
           Packaging" statistical reports for January 1966 and 1973.
   Cellophane is not .a plastic,but it is included with packaging plastics
     because it is a common packaging material commonly associated with
     plastic films.
                                   154

-------
          The demand  for plastics in packaging will not increase as rapidly
 in  the  future as  it has in  the past, because:  (1) many markets are maturing
 which were developed  in the past decadetand  (2) a dramatic trend to higher
 energy  costs.  Although plastics should retain their current cost competi-
 tiveness with paper,  aluminum, glass and steel packaging materials, marginally
 profitable markets will be  less actively pursued in the future by plastic
 makers.

          Resin demand will increase at 7.6 percent per year from 1972  to a
 level of 5.3 million  tons in 1980.  Beyond 1980 demand will increase at 5.7
 percent'per year  reaching a level of 8.9 million tons in 1990  (Table 76).
Resin Use by Type of Resin

          Low density polyethylene:  Low density polyethylene is  the  largest
volume packaging resin representing 47.3 percent of all packaging in  1972.
It is used principally as a  film for wraps and bags and as a coating  for
paperboard.  Trash bags^hich are a recent development, represent the  largest
single use for  low density film with an estimated consumption of  250,000
tons of resin in 1972.  Food wrap and bags, garment bags, consumer goods
wraps and pallet wrap represent other large film uses.  These end uses
represented a demand for 1.07 million tons of film in 1972.

          Approximately 225,000 tons of low density polyethylene were  used
to coat paperboard, paper and foil in 1972.  Approximately half of this was
used to coat paperboard milk cartons.  Future demand for coatings will be
reduced as the  plastic milk container displaces in part the coated milk
carton.

          The consumption of low density polyethylene will grow to a  level
of 2.3 million  tons in 1980 from 1.4 million tons in 1972.  Much of the
growth will come from shrink films for pallet wrap, beverage packs, and
from trash bags.

'          High density polyethylene:   High density polyethylene is used
primarily for blow molding rigid containers used to package food and con-
sumer products.   It is also used for injection molding beverage cases, pal-
lets, jars and  lids, and thermoforming food containers and medical packages.

          High density polyethylene for packaging has grown at a rate of
20.7 percent per year since 1965 to a level of 558,000 tons in 1972.   Future
growth is projected at 9.4 percent per year to 1980 when consumption will
be 1.15 million tons.  Blow molded containers for milk, medicinal and health,
and other containers, plus molded beverage cartons and pallets will continue.
                                   155

-------
By  1990,  1.83 million  tons of  HD polyethylene  resins will be consumed
in  packaging uses.

          Polystyrene:  Polystyrene has grown  at a  slower rate  in packaging
than other resins. Demand since 1965 has been  increasing at 9.5 percent
per year, reaching a volume of  401,000  tons  in  1972.  Polystyrene is nearly
all injection molded--into a wide variety of boxes, trays, cups and lids,
or  thermoformed  into meat trays, thin-walled containers and single service
dinnerware.  Expandable foams  are molded into  cups, boxtj, trays and pack-
aging inserts or stamped into  meat trays, egg  cartons and other food pack-
ages.

          Polystyrene  demand is projected to increase at 10 percent per
year to  1980, when 864,000 tons of resin will be consumed.  Growth in exist-
ing uses  and the development of institutional  markets for single service
dinnerware will  account for most of the increase.  By 1990,1.38 million tons
of  polystyrene will be consumed for packaging  and "disposables."

          Polyvinyl chloride (PVC):  Packaging represents only  7.5 percent
of  the total demand for PVC.   PVC film is used as a wrap for fresh meat and
produce  and as a shrink film for carton wraps.  It is also formed into clear
rigid containers for food and  consumer products where oil and oxygen resis-
tance is  desired.  PVC sheet is used for blister packaging of consumer items
to  provide visibility  for consumer products.

          Consumption  of PVC for packaging  reached  160,000 tons in 1972
and is projected to increase at 7.6 percent per year to 1980 when demand   "
will be  288,000  tons.  Growth  will occur in most packaging end  uses except
rigid containers.  Growth will be limited there because of high cost and
potential health questions raised by FDA officials for food and beverage
containers.

          Polypropylene:  Approximately 119,000 tons of polypropylene were
consumed  for packaging applications in 1972.   Its largest use is as a pack-
aging film that  competes with  polyethylene  and cellophane for food, textiles
and a host of other markets.   Injection molded hinged lid containers are
made from polypropylene as are plastic straws.

          Demand for polypropylene resin will  increase at 14.8  percent per
year to a level of 358,000 tons by 1980,with most of the growth coming from
film markets.  The relative cost difference between polyethylene and poly-
propylene is expected  to narrow in the future  so that this growth rate can
be obtained.
                                  156

-------
          Cellophane:  Cellophane,which is a cellulosic material used as
filn^is used to package baked goods, meat, tobacco, cookies and a wide
variety of  foods.  Demand has been declining as it is gradually replaced
by plastic  films.  Consumption of 160,000 tons in 1972 is projected to
decline to  75,000 tons by 1990.  If other plastics (PVC) cannot be used
in food applications, the cellophane usage may not decline as much.  However,
other resins may be developed to replace any markets lost in the short run
so that cellophane should decline in consumption by 1990.

          Other resins:   A variety of other resins account for the remaining
160,000 tons of packaging materials.  Thermosetting resins for caps and
closures, vinyl acetate for coatings, cellulosics for blister packaging,
specialty film resins, and the newly developed barrier resins for rigid
containers  are included.  Demand will begin to increase rapidly during the
latter part of the decade as the barrier resins penetrate the soft drink
market.  Consumption of the "miscellaneous" resins will increas to 240,000
tons in 1980 and 550,000 tons by 1990.
Resin Demand by End Use*

          Film resins used to manufacture bags and wraps represent 48 per-
cent of all resins consumed in packaging markets and will retain this pro-
portion through 1980.  Blow molded containers and miscellaneous thermoformed
and injection molded products are the other inajor end uses.  These uses and
trends in demand are shown in Table 77 and discussed below.
                                TABLE 77

          PLASTIC PACKAGING RESIN DEMAND BY END USE. 1972-1990
                           (In thousand tons)

                                                                      1972-1990
End Use Category          1972     1975     1980     1985     1990   Growth Rate
  (

Film        -             1,416     1,800   2,555    3,380    4,200
Miscellaneous Packaging    641       825   1,350    1,960    2,565
Blow Molded Containers     458       610     920    1,270    1,620
Coatings                   349       350     350      360      375
Closures and Caps           95       110     125      130      140

Total                    2,959     3,695   5,300    7,100    8,900       6.4


Source:  "Modern Packaging," January 1973; Midwest Research Institute Forecasts
*  A more detailed analysis of plastic resin demand by end use and resin source
     is given in Appendix D.
                                  157

-------
           Film:  About  792,000  tons  of  plastic  resin were used  in  film and
 flexible  packaging  in  1972.   By 1990,the  demand will grow  to 4.2  million
 tons,  or  530  percent of 1972  use.  LD polyethylene accounts for about three-
 fourths of this  demand.   The  growth  markets have been:   food product pack-
 aging^.g., baked goods and fresh produce; shrink wrap  for pallets; trash
 bags and  miscellaneous  packaging.  While  resin use for  film will  increase
 several fold  by  1990, cellophane film will decline.

           Miscellaneous packaging:   In  1972.a total of  641,000 tons of re-'
 sin was used  to  produce miscellaneous packaging products.  These  are generally
 products  formed  by  thermoforming and injection molding--caps,  tubes, boxes,,
 trays, cartons,  jars, tubs, pads, and blister packs.  By 1990, we have fore-
 cast a total  demand in  this category of 2.5 million tons or four  times the
 1972 demand.  In this group)polystyrene accounts for over one-half of the
 resin demand; polythylene accounts for  another one-third of the resin used.
 Impressive growth rates  are forecast--8 percent per year between  1972 and
 1990,  the  highest of the five end use categories in plastic packaging.

           Blow molded containers:  About  458,000 tons of plastic  resin was
 used in producing 6.73  billion  containers in 1972.  By  1990,output is ex-
 pected to  be  24.5 billion containers or 360 percent of  1972 output.  In
 terms of  resin of all types,there will be 1.6 million tons demand for blow
 molded containers in 1990.  Beverages,  toiletries and cosmetics, and medical
 and health products will account .for over 5 billion containers each or 15.7
 billion units.   Most of  the tonnage will be HD polyethylene (1.2 million
 tons), despite the  fact  that barrier resins will be used to make beverage
 containers.

           Coatings:  Plastic coatings are used oh paper products  such as
multiwalled shipping sacks, paperboard milk cartons (the largest  single
use), on  film, and on foil.  In total, there were 350,000 tons used in 1972.
Growth is  not expected  to be significant.  The primary reason is  that
 this is a  mature market, and also the expectation that polyethylene coated
milk cartons will partially be  displaced  by plastic milk containers.  By 1990,
we forecast demand of 375,000 tons of resins for coatings.

           Closures and  caps:  Plastics accounts for about 14 percent (13
billion units) of the total market for closures and caps produced annually.
Most plastic caps and closures  are used on glass and plastic containers.
Both thermoplastic and  thermosetting plastics are used for caps and closures.
Total demand will increase modestly in the future and will be at 140,000
 tons in 1990Jwhich translates to a 1972 to 1990 growth rate of 2 percent
per year.

           As shown in Table 77, the demand for all plastics in packaging
will increase from 3.0 million  tons in 1972 to 8.9 million tons in 1990

                                   158

-------
or 300 percent of 1972 demand.  This is a- growth rate of 6.4 percent over
the  18-year period.  Thus, while the "conventional" steel and glass materials
used for packaging will increase slowly over this period, the petroleum
derived plastics will continue to make inroads into packaging applications.*
This increase in plastics use in packaging will be true even in the face
of energy shortages now being experienced.
    PLASTIC WASTE GENERATION FROM PACKAGING AND NONPACKAGING SOURCES
Introduction

          Plastic packaging materials are used in a wide variety of consumer
and industrial markets.  We have assumed that essentially all packaging
materials enter the waste stream within 1 year after they are manufactured or
produced,since by their nature,they are manufactured and sold as "disposable"
items.  Although some items such as containers are used around the home for
storage, decoration or other purposes, the quantity is believed to be minor
in relation to all plastics waste.

          It should be noted that although packaging wastes account for
the major portion of plastic waste generation, housewares, toys and other
disposable items account for a substantial portion.  A study by Arthur D. Little,
"Incentives for Recycling and Resue of Plastics,"^2'  showed that 71 percent
of the plastic consumer waste consists of packaging materials in 1970.  They
predict that this will decline to 67.5 percent in 1975 and 65 percent in 1980.
Assuming that the decline in the percentage of packaging is constant through-
out the period, this would result in the 1972 plastic waste generation b^ing
composed of 69.5 percent packaging.  Consequently, total plastic waste gen-
eration in municipal waste was 4.25 million ton:; in 1972 (Table 78).  We
have assumed that between 1980 and 1990, the ratio will have reversed and
returned slowly to 69 percent packaging wastes and the balance nonpackaging.
In addition, thera is another 250,000 tons estimated plastics waste generated
in discarded appliances, furniture and similar bulky items.  In total then,
plastic waste generation would be 4.5 million tons in 1972,increasing to
13.2 million tons in 1990 (in municipal solid waste).

          Litter:   According to a survey of roadside litter conducted by
Research Triangle Institute—', there were 650 million plastic items littered
during 1969.  Although this is a large number of items, there is no estimate
of the weight of the plastic in the litter. ' We have assumed that it is
less than 1 percent of all plastic packaging and will remain at that low
level, although the use of plastic beverage containers after 1980 could
lead to a significant increase in bittered plastic items.
*  Aluminum packaging will also increase in use rapidly in this period.

                                  159

-------
                                TABLE 78

        PLASTIC WASTE GENERATION  IN MUNICIPAL WASTE. 1972 TO  1990
                            (In thousand tons)

Type of Plastic Waste     1972      1_975_      1980       1985       ]J?90

Packaging
Nonpackaging
Other

Total                     4,500     5,700     8,400     11,000     13,200
2,959
1,291
,-.....250
3,693
1,757
250
5,300
2,850
250
7,100
3,650
250
8,900
4,050
• 250
Source:  Midwest Research Institute.
                 WASTE GENERATION FROM PLASTIC PACKAGING
Plastic Packaging Waste Generation by Source

          Plastic packaging materials will appear as waste from households
and apartments as a result of their use by the consumer; from commercial
and institutional establishments as the result of purchases by individuals
and organizations; and from industrial sources as the result of products
for general industrial maintenance, waste bag liners and pallet wrap.

          An estimated 2.47 million tons of plastic packaging waste was
generated from households in 1972.  This is equivalent to 83.6 percent of
all plastic packaging waste.  Commercial and institutional waste amounted
to 286,000 tons (916 percent) while industrial waste generated was 202,000
tons (6.8 percent) (Table 79).

          Film:  Approximately 80 percent of the packaging film appears as
household waste with the balance divided equally between commercial-
institutional and industrial waste.  Household wastes include discarded
food wraps and bags, garment bags, trash bags and various consumer products
wrapped in film or packed in bags.  Commercial-institutional uses include the
above items along with waste pallet wrap and trimmings from film used to
package consumer items (e.g., supermarkets).  Industrial wastes include
liners in discarded shipping bags, pallet wrap, other industrial wraps and
wastes from trimming and cutting film for packaging.
                                  160

-------
                                TABLE 79

          PLASTICS PACKAGING WASTE GENERATION BY SOURCE. 1972
                            (In thousand tons)

                                   Commercial &
Plastic End Use      Household     Institutional      Industrial      Iota]
                  Tons   Percent  Tons   Percent   T?ns   Percent      Tons

Film              1,132      80     142      10      142      10    .   1,416
Miscellaneous
  Packaging        545      85      64      10       32       5         641
Blow Molded
  Containers       412      90      23       5-23       5         458
Coatings           297      85      52      15       --      --         349
Closures and
  Caps           	85.      90     	5     	5        5     	5       	95_

Total            2,471      83.6   286       9.6    202       6.8     2,959
Source:  Midwest Research Institute estimates.
          Because of the rapid growth of pallet wrap and industrial ship-
ping bags, a greater percentage of waste will come from industrial firms
in the future.  By 1990, industrial uses of plastic will- lead to generation
of 15 percent of all film waste.  Household film waste will decline to 75
percent of the total.

          Miscellaneous packaging:  Miscellaneous packaging wastes are pre-
dominantly household wastes (85 percent of the total).   Commercial-
institutional wastes account for 10 percent with the balance appearing as
industrial waste.   Household wastes include discarded food containers, boxes,
trays, foamed cups, single service dinnerware and foamed packaging inserts.
Commercial-institutional wastes include the above items, along with beverage
cases and pallets.  Industrial wastes are mostly foamed packaging, dis-
carded pallets and a small quantity of food containers.

          Because of the predicted rapid growth for institutional and  single
service dinnerware, the commercial-institutional waste  will increase  to 20
percent of the total by 1990, while household waste will decline to 75 per-
cent of the total.
                                  161

-------
           Blow molded  containers:   Blow molded  containers are used  to pack-
age a wide variety of  consumer  items.  We estimate  that  their waste dis-
posal patterns are the  same  as  glass, containers because  their uses  are much
the same as glass, e^'g.,  topackage  food products and beverages.  Household
waste accounts   for  90  percent  of  the  containers and the balance  is divided
between commercial-institutional and industrial wastes.  Household  chemicals
and cleaners, toiletry  and cosmetic products, milk  containers, medicinal .
and health products, and  food containers represent  household waste.  A
portion of these containers  are also discarded at commercial and  institu-
tional facilities by employees  and residents.  About 4 percent of the con-
tainers are filled with industrial products such as oils, cleaners and
chemicals.

          Household  and commercial-institutional wastes from discarded blow
molded plastic containers will  increase more rapidly than industrial wastes
in the future because of  the development of the all-plastic beverage containei

           Coatings: • Coated  paperboard> paper and foil wastes are estimated
at 85 percent household and  15  percent commercial-institutional waste.,
Coated milk cartons  account  for half of the. use of  coatings.  No change is
anticipated in this  ratio in the future.

          Closures and  caps:  Closures and caps parallel blow molded con-
tainer use where 90 percent  appear as household waste with the balance
divided among  commercial-institutional and industrial wastes.  No develop-
ments are  anticipated that will change this ratio in the future.

          The results show that future waste generation from commercial-
institutional and industrial sources will become a greater percentage of
all plastics packaging  wastes (Table 80)*.
                 PLASTIC PACKAGING RECOVERABLE FROM WASTE
          Plastics packaging waste recovery estimates were developed by
assuming that the population within standard metropolitan statistical areas
(SMSA's would be large enough to economically support recovery). No separate
collection of plastics is likely to occur.
   Our in-depth study excluded nonpackaging and other plastic  wastes.   We
     can only estimate that discard patterns for these plastic products
     follow a similar pattern to that of plastics packaging wastes as de-
     scribed. However, we have no firm basis for this estimate.
                                  162

-------
                                                 TABLE 80
                         PLASTICS PACKAGING WASTE GENERATION BY SOURCE. 1972-1990
(In thousand tons)
Waste Source
Household
Commercial and
Institutional
Industrial
1972
Tons Percent
2,471 83.6
286 9.6
202 6.8

Tons
3,040
373
280
1975
Percent
82.3
10.1
7.6

Tons
4,267
573
460
1980
Percent
80.5
10.8
8.7

Tons
5,610
810
680
1985
Percent
79.0
11.4
9.6

Tons
6,910
1,060
930
1990
Percent
77.7
11.9
10.4
Total
2,959   100.0
3,693   100.0    5,300    100.0     7,100   100.0     8,900   100.0
Source:  Midwest Research Institute

-------
          Using  the  ratios developed  in Chapter V  for allocating household,
 commercial/institutional and  industrial waste to SMSA's, the waste genera-
 tion derived  is  shown in Table 81.
                                TABLE 81

             PLASTIC WASTE GENERATION IN SMSA's. 1972-1990


                                                                   1990

                                                                   5,020


                                                                     830

                                                                     635
(In thousand tons)
Plastic Waste Source
Household (packaging)
Commercial /Institu-
tional (packaging)
Industrial (packaging)
Total Packaging
Nonpackaging plastic
Other plastic
Total All Sources
1972
1,700
210
130
2,040
890
170
3,100
1975
2,110
280
185
2,575
1,220
175
3,970
1980
3,000
440
300
3,740
2,010
175
5,925
1985
4,020
620
460
5,100
2,620
180
7,900
Source:  Midwest Research Institute.
                                                                   6,485

                                                                   2,950

                                                                     180
               .PLASTICS RECOVERY FORECASTS. 1972 TO 199Q
Plastic Packaging Recovery, 1972

          In-plant recycling of plastics has been practiced by the industry
from its inception.  Approximately 1.2 billion pounds of scrap plastic from
manufacturing, fabricating and converting were recycled in 1972.80/

          Scrap plastic is available from all phases of the manufacturing
cycle.  Scrap may be generated from resin manufacture, compounding, fabrica-
tion, and converting.  The scrap generated may be as low as less than 1 per-
cent of the virgin resin to as high as 50 percent, depending upon the process
and product manufactured.  Scrap may be in the form of off-grade resin,
                                   164

-------
trimmings, strands or  large chunks.  The resin is usually reground and com-
bined with virgin resins, or  fabricated into products whi"h can tolerate a
wider range of performance properties.  The scrap may be used by the manu-
facturer or sold to an  independent compounder or re.proceasor who often
will remove contaminants from the scrap before reselling to fabricators.

          However, recycling of post-consumer plastic waste has been in-
significant.  Attempts  have been made to recycle plastic containers such
as milk bottles and other blow molded containers.  A few dairies have been
collecting containers  from their home delivery routes and regrinding them
for sale to reprocessors and fabricators.  Most have found this no better
than a break-even proposition since they have experienced a relatively low
return of the containers from their routes.

          Seajay, Inc., of New Shrewsbury, New Jersey, has established a
volunteer recycling center.1047  Plastic bottles are delivered to this plant
where they are hand sorted and reground.  The plastic waste is sold to a
molder who mixed it with virgin resins for blow molding into a variety of
products.

          With the exception of the industrial recycling of scrap plastics,
no other recycling efforts of any significance are conducted at the present
time.  Volunteer collection systems are negligible today and are not pro-
jected to become a factor in the' future because of the low value of the
plastic waste and the  fact that plastics must be separated by resin type
before they can be considered for significant reuse by the reprocessor.
Thus, if plastics from  consumer waste are to be recycled, they must come
from resource recovery  systems in major metropolitan areas.
Recovery of Plastics from Municipal Waste. 1972-1990

          There are no commercial systems in existence that are recovering
plastics from mixed municipal refuse.  It is also doubtful that an econom-
ically viable system will be developed in the next decade.  The technology
of most resource recovery systems .consists of shredding the incoming waste
followed by air classification to remove the inorganic wastes, glass and
magnetic separation to remove ferrous metals, nonferrous metals for eventual
recovery.  The remaining (organic) fraction consisting of paper, plastics
and other fibrous materials would have to be further processed to separate
the plastics from the paper.  Even if a fraction rich in plastics were
separated from the paper, only limited recycling uses exist for mixed post-
consumer waste plastics.  The plastic fraction would contain a wide variety
of polymers which would be extremely difficult to distinguish for separation.
                                  165

-------
          Attempts have been made  to manufacture products  !:rom mixed plas-
 tics.  They usually,  result, in  items with poor physical properties  that  are
 porous and. brittle.  A recent  Dow  Chemical patent uses chlorii ated poly-
 ethylenes  to blend with mixed  resins to attempt to  improve  the physical
 properties.—'  Through evaluation, they found that  these  resins could
 have application  for manufacturing tiles, pallets,  toys, and  construction
 materials.  This  was a very limited study and the process  it  examined is
 not yet commercial.

          Research is being conducted on methods for separating plastics
 from mixed municipal waste.  The Bureau of Mines has established a resource
 recovery system to recover  metals, glass, paper, plastics,  aluminum, copper
 and zinc.83/  .This process  begins  with a coarse shredding,  followed by
 removal of the iron  by magnetic separation and air classification  to separate
 the light  fraction from glass  and  large nonferrouc metals.  The light fractions
 are shredded further and again air classified to separate  the remaining metals,
 fine glass, plastics, rags, putrescible material, heavy paper and cardboard
 from the lighter  paper and  plastic fraction.  The heavy fraction is further
 classified to remove plastics  and  putrescibles and to separate the heavier
materials into a  fine glass product and metal composite.  The light fraction
 from each of the  air classifiers is combined and /treated in another separa-
 tor to yield a composite product of various plastics and mixed papers.

          The Black  Clawson system in Franklin, Ohio, could possibly recover
plastics.  This system, .previously discussed, uses a hydropulper to reduce
 the material size in.a liquid  system.  The slurry which contains paper,
 textiles, leather, plastics, and other fibers, passes through a primary
 fiber selector to remove the long  fine fibers which are dewatered, baled
and shipped to a  roofing mill.  The rejected material is fed to a secondary
 fiber selector to remove the intermediate -length fibers which are dewatored,
and baled.  The remaining fraction contains mostly textiles, leather, plastics
and some paper fibers.  Black-Clawson claims that additional screening of
 this fraction could  remove  the very fine fibers and some organic residue
 to produce a highly  enriched plastic waste fraction which could be further
 separated to remove  the plastics.  However, they do not have any plans at
the present time  to  separate the plastics which are being burned in a fluid
bed incinerator.

          Although research and development will continue on methods for
separating plastic waste from mixed municipal waste, we do not believe that
plastics will be  recovered for their materials value from resource recovery
systems before 1990.   Technology and economics would dictate that they would
have to be part of a system that would recover paper, glass and  ferrous
metals.  The cost of recovery would far outweigh any potential income from
the recovered material.  Even if plastics were recovered, it is  doubtful
that markets would exist because of the low quality and wide variety of
plastics in the waste.
                                  166

-------
Recovery Forecast for Plastics. 1972 to 1990

          The most likely method of recycling plastic wastes will be through
energy recovery systems where the fraction consisting of paper, plastics,
garbage, yard wastes, leather and other organics is burned to recover the
heat value.

1          Most plastics have a heat value equivalent, to a high grade of
fuel oil, since they are themselves derivatives of hydrocarbons.  Poly-
ethylene has a heat potential of 18,000 Btu per pound and PVC has a heat
potential value of 9,500 Btu per pound.  This high heat value tends to raise
the Btu value of the total waste fraction, improving its burn-ability and
use as a energy source in resource recovery.

          In the foreseeable future, energy recovery (see Chapter III) is
the most viable option for post-consumer plastic waste.  There may be limited
recycling of post-consumer plastics, but for the most part,, we do not feel
that recovery of plastics in this manner will develop.

          We have assumed that energy recovery from plastics will be a part
of the forecast of centralized recovery systems to be installed.  Thus,
the plastics will be processed for their heat value in proportion to total
occurrence in municipal waste.  Our forecasts for recovery are in Table 82.
The plastics content of waste will rise from 3.5 percent in 1972 to 6.6
percent in 1990.  The amount of plastics processed through central energy
recovery systems will rise from none in 1972 to 3.2 million tons in 1990;
this is 96.3 x 10^ Btu "higher heating value" content recovery in 1990
(i.e., without adjustment for thermal efficiency or losses).

          Resource recovery will have little effect upon the solid waste
load from plastics.   The rapid growth in the use of plastics will cause the
net plastic waste disposal (generation minus recovery)  to increase from
4.5 million tons in 1972 to 8.4 million tons in 1980 and 10.5 million tons
in 1990.  Thus, the growth of tonnage will be slowed, but not stopped, by
resource recoverv installations.  On an SMSA basis, the net disposal will
rise from 2.9 million tons in 1972 to 5.4 million tons  in 1980 and 7.5 mil-
lion tons in 1990 (Table 82).

          By 1990, 24.3 percent of the total plastic waste generation will
be recovered for its energy content (33.3 percent of that generated in
SMSA's).  Thus, while recycling of plastics appears to  have dim prospec.ts,
the recovery of the energy content will be significant.
                                   167

-------
                                   TABLE  82

           PLASTICS  RECOVERY  FROM MIXED MUNICIPAL WASTE.  1972 TO  1990
                              (In thousand tons)
                                                   Year
          Category                 1972      1975      1980      1985      1990

Total Mixed Waste Generated     130,000   140,000  160,000  180,000  200,000

Plastics  Available  in Munici-
  pal Waste                       4,500     5,700     8,400   11,000   13,200

Percent Plastic  in  Waste           3.5      4.1      5.3      6.2      6.6

Number of Resource  Recovery
  Plants  Recovering Energy      None          5       12       32       60

Total Mixed Waste Processed in
  Central Facilities            None       2,100     6,600   24,000   48,600

Total Plastics in Processed
  Waste                         None         85      350     1,470     3,210

Recovery-106 Btu (at 30 x 106
  Btu/TonS/)                    Neg.       2,550   10,500   44,100   96,300

Plastics Available  in SMSA's      3,100     3,970     5,925     7,900     9,615

Plastics Recovery (as energy) as
  a percent of:
    Total Plastic waste              0     1.5      4.2      13.4      24.3
    Plastic Waste in SMSA's          0     2.1      5.9      18.6      33.3
a/  The Btu value and recovery percentage is based on 100 percent of the Btu
      content (higher heating value) and not the heat (as work) actually de-
      livered considering thermal efficiency.
Source:  Midwest Research Institute.
                                     168

-------
                               CHAPTER IX

               RECOVERY FORECASTS FOR RUBBER TIRES TO 199(.


                                 SUMMARY
          The demand for rubber tires of all types will increase from 230
million units in 1972 to 375 million units in 1990.  This includes original
equipment as well as replacement tires.  In 1972, about 122.5 million tires
were discarded which is about 1.6 million tons of tire waste; by 1990, there
will be 223 million tires discarded or 3.1 million tons of waste.  These
are the net discards after allowance for retreading, reclaiming and tire
splitting.

          There will be, over time, a general increase in the strength and
quality of passenger car tires, as a result of use of new fibers, increasing
use of radial tires and stiffer safety standards.  If raw materials come
into short supply, there may be, in addition, a return to more extensive
.retreading of auto tires just as truck and bas tires are handled today.

          Although most tires sold are for private passenger cars, they do
not show up in household waste as discards.  Instead, almost all of the
tires are traded in to wholesale and retail dealers.  We estimate about 95
percent of all tires are discarded as commercial/institution waste--!.5 mil-
lion tons in 1972, and 3.0 million tons in 1990.

          Of the total 1.6 million tons of tire waste discarded in 1972,
about 1.2 million tons will be available in SMSA's.  By 1990, there will be
2.4 million tons available in. SMSA's compared to 3.1 million tons total
waste generated.

          Only two recovery activities will be significant by 1990 as far
as the use of rubber tires is concerned—retreading and energy recovery.
Retreading will begin to rise in importance again after 1980.

          .The development of pyrolysis furnaces to handle whole tires econo-
mically (and without air emission problems) will lead to significant energy
recovery from tires, principally for process steam.  Tires contain the heat
value of a high grade coal, 25 million Btu per ton.  We forecast that in 1985,
22,000 tons of tires will be processed for energy recovery, generating 0.6 x
109 Btu; by 1990, 400,000 tons of tires will be processed for 10 x 10^ Btu.
On a percentage basis, this is 12.9 percent of all waste tires in 1990 and
16.5 percent of that generated in SMSA's. For the most part, the energy re-
covery will take place in special recovery furnaces rather than as a integral

                                   169

-------
part of centralized resource recovery systems.  However, if a low cost
mechanical shredding system comes into use, tires may be aggressively sought
as an energy source, because of their high Btu content.  In fact, there are
some indications our forecasts of tire recovery could be very conservative.
                              INTRODUCTION

          In 1972, tires made up 65 percent of the total rubber demand in
the USA; rubber mechanical goods were 17.5 percent; other uses were 17.5
percent  (see Table 83).  Of these products, the ones of significance in
municipal waste are:  tires, footwear, and foam.  The balance is largely
associated with industrial, farming, and transportation.  Total new rubber
demand in 1972 was 3.0 million tons.
                                TABLE 83

            DEMAND FOR NEW RUBBER BY END USE CATEGORY. 1972
                     (In Thousand Tons and Percent)

            End Use Category            Quantity       Percent
            Tires and Tire Products
            Mechanical Goods
            Other Rubber Products
            Footwear
            Latex Foam Products
            Wire/Cable
              Totals                     3,030-         100.0
            Source:  Rubber Manufacturers Association.
          The use of rubber in tires has run close to 65 percent of total
rubber demand for several years.  This relationship is likely to continue,
even with the trend toward longer life tires.
                                   170

-------
                RUBBER TIRE DEMAND  BY MARKET.  1962 TO  1990
Forecast of Total Tire Demand  to  1990

          Demand for  tires has  increased steadily over  the past  1(  years.
The outlook is for a  steady but small annual increase in  tire demand  through
1990.  Passenger car, truck and bus tire shipments i~t 1962 were  approxi-
mately 130 million units.  This figure increased to approximately  213 mil-
lion units in 1972 (or about one  tire per person per year for the  USA).'

          The annual  demand for tires is determined by  the number  of cars,
trucks, and buses that will be  in service during the period in question and
the mileage driven.   By 1990, approximately 190 million vehicles will be in
service, up from approximately  120 million cars, trucks, and buses  now re-
gistered.  With this  predicted growth in vehicle registration, there will
be an increased demand for tires  in direct proportion to the increasing
number of vehicles registered.

          Considering this indicator, industry experts  predict passenger
car tire shipments in 1990 will be 320 million units compared to  196 mil-
lion units shipped in 1972.  Truck and bus tire shipments will be  55 mil-
lion units in 1990, up from 34  million units shipped in 1972  (Table 84 and
Figure 26).

          These forecasts were made under the following assumptions:  None
of the EPA proposals banning automobiles from metropolitan str°ets will
become law; the current shortage of motor fuel will not continue over a
long period of time and motor fuel will be available at a price  that
does not depress travel significantly*; the automobile will remain  the
primary source of transportation  through 1990; the radial tire will not
be used con more than 50 percent of .new cars and will not exceed 40  percent
of the replacement tire market.
Tire Construction Trends

          There are now three principal tire construction types—the bias
ply, the bias belted and the radial tire.  What their use trends will be in
the late 1970's and the decade of the 1980's is not yet determined.

          Many rubber industry experts consider the radial tire too expen-
sive to outsell the bias belted tire.  The reason given for this is that
drivers in the United States do not need a tire of the radial's capabilities
   Or power plants, auto design and other energy conservation design param-
     eters will lead to reduced demand for motor fuel relative to "normal
     growth" in total vehicle registration.

                                     171

-------
                                                    TABLE  84
                                    TIRE  SHIPMENTS  BY VEHICLE  TYPE.  1962  -  1990
to
(In Million Units)
Year
1962
1964
1968
1971
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990


OEi/
37
41
49
49
54
58
66
73
80
.5
.9
.9
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
Passenter Car
Tire Shipments
Replacements
78,4
79
121
136
142
175
195
215
240
.0
.1
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0


Total
115.
120.
171.
185.
196.
233.
261.
288.
320.
9
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


op/
4.5
5.
8,
10.
13.
15.
17.
19.
20.
5
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
Truck and Bus
Tire
Replacement
10.6
12.
16.
18.
21.
25.
30.
32.
35.
1
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
Shipments
Total
15.1
17 . 6
24.8
28 3
34,0
40.0
47.0
51.0
55.0
    a/   Original  Equipment
    Source:   Rubber Manufacturers  Association (1962-1971);  Midwest Research Institute forecasts.

-------
OJ
           1000
            500
         ^  100
         c
             50
             101	L.
             1960
                                                                                           Car, Truck, and  Bus Tires
                                                                                           Retread Production
                                                                           II   111    i   J
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
                             Figure 26  - New Tire  Shipments and  Retread Tire  Production,  1962-1990

-------
just to drive the family car to the store or to work, and therefore, will
not pay the higher price of the radial.  Instead, consumers will likely
prefer bias belted tires.  MRI, based on literature sources, has projected
the bias ply tire to all but disappear by 1990; the bias belted tire to hold
about 60 percent of the business and radial tires to have about 40 percent
of the total tire market (Table 85).
                                TABLE 85

  PASSENGER CAR TIRE MARKET SHARE BY TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION. 1972 - 1990


Year
1972


1975


1980


1985


1990


(In

Type Construction
Bias Ply
Bias Belted
Radial
Bias Ply
Bias Belted
Radial
Bias Ply
Bias Belted
Radial
Bias Ply
Bias Belted
Radial
Bias Ply
.Bias Belted
Radial
percent)
Original
Equipment
16
78
6
10
59
31
5
60
35
2
60
38
--
60
40


Replacement
52
41
7
46
33
21
30
45
25
15
55
30
10
60
30
Source:  Rubber Manufacturers Association, 1972, Midwest Research Institute,
           1975 to 1990.
          In addition to the trend to radial and bias belted tires,  the
type of tire cord used in tire construction is likely to change in the
future.  The cord is one of the key components of a tire that determines
its structural integrity and durability.
                                   174

-------
           Tire  cord  requirements will change over time as indicated in
 Figure  27.   The present  profile shows nylon with 46.5 percent of the total,
 polyester  28 percent and rayon 19 percent.  By 1975, it is expected that
 glass,  rayon and nylon fibers will have declined in use while polyester will
 rise  to one-third  and steel will have increased to 8 percent of the tire
 cord  market.  Under  these trends, by the early part of the 1980's, rayon
 and nylon  cord  will  be completely replaced by other fibers except in the
 case  of a  few specialty  tires; polyester will be about one-fourth; steel,
 one-fourth;  and new  synthetic fibers will gain about one-fifth of _he  total
 cord  market.  Steel  cord is now displacing glass fiber as a tire cord
 material.  Glass fiber will likely take a lower share of the market but not
 disappear.   Also,  polyester will continue to hold a large share of the ori-
 ginal equipment market until 1975, according to industry sources.  Rayon
 and nylon,which have been in use as tire cord for years, are expected  to
decline in importance beginning by 1974 or 1975,  and by early in the next
decade, will have been displaced completely by polyester, steel and other
new fibers.

          With  the new stronger tire cords and especially the stronger,
 safer tire carcasses starting to appear in mass-produced quantities on the
 market,  it is possible that tire retreading could be rejuvenated.  This
 may lead to  extending the life of tires via a retreading cycle similar to
 that  used  commonly for trucks and business.  This could become a viable
 alternative  to  disposal  of passenger car tires, although retreading as a
 common  practice must be  considered speculative at this time.
Waste Generation  from  Discarded Tires

          The  forecast increase in  the number of  tires  to  be  used  is  of
special  concern because of  the difficulty of disposing  of  discarded  tires.
In  landfills,  tires  cannot  be effectively compacted  and even  when  buried,
tend to  work their way to the surface over a period  of  years.   In  addition,
tires use a large volume of landfill space.  Tires cannot  be  handled  ef-
ficiently in conventional incinerators.

          One  method of disposing of discarded  tires is shredding, splitting
or  otherwise reducing  the volume of the  tire.   However,  these types  of oper-
ations are  few in number and high cost;  shredding is used  only in  a  very  few
locations in the  country.   One special furnace  to pyrolize old tires  has
been built  in  Jackson, Michigan; the unit will  produce  steam  for plant use,
but the  operating history is too short to determine  whether this resource
recovery approach is commercially viable.  Another experimental plant is
scheduled to be built  in the Denver area.
                                    175

-------
•vl
O\
         Glass Fiber
           6.6%
                      1972
Glass  Fiber—^
  5.5%      \
                                                             1975
       SOURCE: Rubber Manufacturers Association (1972)
                                                                                                     1985
                        Figure 27  -  Tire Construction by Tire Cord Type,(1972,  1975, 1985).

-------
           Calculating  the  total waste  generated  from  tire discards  is  rela-
 tively  straightforward.   The  number of  tires entering  the waste  stream
 should  equal  the number  of replacement tires purchased  in a given year,
 less  tires  recapped and  reclaimed  for  other uses.

           Three  types  of tire  recovery take place  that  reduce  the total
 discard of old  tires — retreading,  tire splitting,  and rubber reclaiming.
 These are  operations that  have been in decline for many years.  The  trend
 in tire retreading is  given in Table 86.   In 1972, the  retreading rate for
 passenger  car tires was  22 percent of  new  replacements  and truck  and bus
 tire  retreading was 45  percent of new  replacements.
                                TABLE 86

                      TIRE RETREADING,  1963  -  1972
                          (In millions of units)

Year           Passenger  Car Tires           Truck and Bus           Total

1963                   36.3                       7.5                43.8
1965                   36.0                       7.6                43.6
1967                   34.5                       9.3                43.8
1969                   36.5                      10.0                37.5
1971                   31.8                      10.7                42.5
1972§/                 31.2                       9.5                40.7
a/ Based on 6 months' data
Source:  Rubber Manufacturers Association.
          The declining rate of retreading in passenger car tires is expected
to continue until 1980; after this, we have forecast an increase in retread-
ing, although not a dramatic one  (Table 87).  If a severe shortage of hydro-
carbon feed stocks develops for synthetic rubber, the rate of retreading
could rise dramatically.

          The net waste generation of tires was also calculated.  In total,
122.5 million units are estimated to have been discarded in 1972 or 1.8
million tons; by 1990, the net discard rate will be risen to 223 million
units and 3.4 million tons.  From these figures, the amount of reclaimed
rubber and rubber splitting use must also be deducted.

          The reclaimed rubber industry, which converts used rubber products
into reuseable materials, has experienced a production decline since 1963.

                                   177

-------
oo
                                                      TABLE 87
                                  WASTE GENERATION FROM TIRE DISCARD,  1972 TO 1990



(In Million
Units and Million Tons)
Passenger Car Tires
Year
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990


Year
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990
Replacements
141
175
_ 195
215
240


Net Discards
122.5
159.0
184.5
201.0
223.0
Retreads
31
31
30
35
40


Quantity
1.8
2.4
2.8
3.1
3.4
Net Discard
111
144
165
180
200
Total

Adjustment^'
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.3
Quant ityj*/ Replacements
1.4 21
1.8 25
2.1 30
2.3 32
2.5 35

Discarded
Net Quantity
1.6
2.2
2.6
2.8
3.1

Truck and Bus Tires
Retreads Net Discard Quantity^/
9.5 11.5 0.4
10.0 15.0 0.6
10.5 19.5 0.7
11.0 21.0 0.8
12.0 23.0 . 0.9








     al  At 25 pounds per tire total weight of rubber, cord etc., in tire.
     b/  At 75 pounds per tire total weight of rubber, cord etc., in tire.
     £/  Rubber reclaim and tire splitting rubber recovery.
     Source:  Midwest Research Institute estimates.

-------
Reclaimed rubber consumption as a percent of total new rubber has declined from
approximately 15 percent in 1963 to 10 percent in 1968 and 7 percent in 1972.
We estimate that reclaimed rubber production will level off between 4 percent
and 5 percent of new rubber through the 1972-1990 period.

          The tire splitting industry is the only rubber waste user pre-
dicting a possible increase in production.  However, today there are only
three companies in business and tire splitters do not process enough rubber
waste to be considered a significant waste processer when the total tire
waste rate is considered.  Estimates are that these three companies process
only 1 percent of the total number of discarded tires and thus, do not
significantly reduce rubber tire waste.*

          Based on these estimates, we have further reduced net waste gen-
eration, by an estimated 200,000 tons per year in 1972 to 300,000 tons in
1990 (Table 87).

          Overall, therefore, it is estimated that in 1972 approximately
1..6 million tons of tires entered the waste stream for disposal; by 1990,
this total will have risen to 3.1 million tons (Table 87).
                     TIRE WASTE GENERATION BY SOURCE
Tire Waste in Household. Commercial/Institutional and Industrial Wastes

          Approximately 80 percent of the total vehicles on the road are
considered noncommercial.**  This percentage has remained stable over the
past few years.

         j However, because of the nature of the tire business, almost all
replacement tires are sold via wholesale and retail stores and this is
where the waste tires accumulate.  Therefore, those that do not find their
way to rubber reclaimers or tire splitters end up as waste in the commercial
sector.  For these reasons, we have placed almost all tire discard tonnage
in the commercial/institutional waste stream, even though their useful life
is served out in other places.  We estimate that 4 percent of tire discards •
are in the industrial sector and less than 1 percent discarded from house-
holds.  The discard profile by waste source is given in Table 88.
*  "Rubber Reuse and Solid Waste Management," Environmental Protection
     Agency, 1972.
** Source:  Automobile Manufacturers Association.
                                    179

-------
                                 TABLE 88
               TIRE  WASTE  GENERATION BY SOURCE,  1972 TO 1990



Year
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990

Tire
Waste
Generated
1,600
2,200
2,600
2,800
3,100
(In thousand
Household
Waste
Generation
10
10
15
15
15
tons)
Commercial/
Institutional
Waste Generation
1,525
2,100
2,480
2,670
2,960
                                                                 Industrial
                                                                  Waste
                                                                 Generation

                                                                     65
                                                                     90
                                                                    105
                                                                    115
                                                                    125
Source:  Midwest  Research  Institute.
Tire Wastes  in  Litter

          We have  no  firm estimates  for  tires  found  as  uncollected litter.
It  is known  that  tires  are thrown  along  road sides,  into  water  bodies,  dis-
carded  in camp  grounds  and on private  property;  additionally,, tires in uncol-
lected   abandoned  vehicles could be  considered as  litter.   We have arbitarily
estimated that  litter would claim  about  1/2 percent  of  the  net  tire waste
generated.   This would  be 8,000 tons in  1972,  rising to 13,000  tons in 1980 and
15,000  tons  in  1990.  Since these  are  speculative  numbers,  we present them merely
to  acknowledge  the existence of uncollected tires  as litter.
Tires Recoverable From Waste
          Today  tires are virtually worthless for any form of  recovery  if
they are not already acceptable as retreads or for reclaimed rubber.  Some
are used for offshore i'eef building in fishing areas.  Others  are ground
up for use in rubberized asphalt compounds.  However, for the most part, tires
entering the waste stream have no economic value.

          To calculate recoverability, we  limit  the prospective collection
system to SMSA's as we did for other waste materials.  The quantity of
waste generation in SMSA's was calculated  from the ratio of commercial/
institutional wastes given in Table 89.

          Tires and other tire products are collected and accumulated mainly
by retail tire stores, gasoline stations and other similar retail outlets.

                                   180

-------
                                                    TABLE  89
                SUMMARY OF  ENERGY RECOVERY FORECAST  FOR  TIRES  IN MUNICIPAL WASTE.  1962  to  1990
00
(In thousand tons and percent)

Year
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990

Total
Generated
1,600
2,200
2,600
2,800
3,100
Energy
Content
109 Btu
40
55
65
70
78

Generated
in SMSA's
1,185
1,645
1,980
2,160
2,430
Energy
Content
109 Btu
30
41
50
54
61

Processed for
Energy Recovery
None
22
100
200
400
Energy Recovery
Recovery Percent
109 Btu Total
0 0
6.0 1.0
2.5 3.8
5.4 7.1
10.0 12.9
as a
of
SMSA's
0
1.3
5.0
9.3
16.5
     Source:  Midwest Research Institute estimates.

-------
Few tires are actually placed In the waste stream by the consumer.  This
practice normally results in tire accumulations at convenient pick-up points
and then they are taken to a dump in large amounts.

          From this, it can be assumed most used tires  that have  been replaced
can be easily collected for reuse and do not have to be separated from other
residential waste as is the case with most materials.  We have estimated that
95 percent of all discarded tires in SMSA's are available for collection and
recovery.

          In 1972, a total of 1.2 million tons of tires as waste  were
generated in SMSA's; by 1990, this  total will rise to 2.4 million tons  (Table
89).  Estimating that 95 percent of this could actually be delivered to a
recovery site, the potential recovery of tires as waste would be  1.1 million
tons in 1972 and 2.3 million tons in 1990.
Trends in Rubber Tire Recovery

          The use of rubber  tires  for retreading, reclaiming and  tire split-
ting has been discussed previously.  These  fractions have been shown as a
net deduction from  total  tire discards.  Whether retreading might regain
more popularity for passenger car  tires is  now questionable.  With  today's
technology, safe retreads can be manufactured, but tire companies must re-
vive the retread in consumer tire  markets — including quality and  per-
formance specifications.  At the present time, a turn by the tire companies
to this idea does not seem to be forthcoming, although a shortage of raw  •
materials could set the practice back "in vogue" quickly.

          In the past several years, there  have been several new  techniques
developed that could possibly solve some of the present problems  involved
in processing used tires.

          Using old tires to construct artificial reefs has been suggested
in response to the growing popularity of sport fishing off the Gulf and
Eastern coasts.  The L. ain problem with this approach is that water action
must be fairly weak or the reef cannot be. constructed in the proper method.
Also, there are no extensive data  as to the costs and benefits that are
Involved in using these reefs as fish spawning points.
                                •
          Another possible way to dispose of shredded tires is by mixing
the ground rubber with asphalt as a binder.  It is reported that rubber
reduces the tendency of asphalt to "bleed"  and, in turn, cause a  skidding
hazard.  However, at present, the cost of adding rubber to roads  is very
high in most cases.  This cost could be incurred by many states and cities
if it is shown that this procedure reduces  the need for road maintenance.
At present, New York and Arizona are conducting experiments in this area.

                                   182

-------
          However, the most viable recovery option is the energy value of
 I                                                                     , i
tires, converted in pyrolysis furnaces for the generation of process steam.
Goodyear has a Lucas (English) furnace in operation at Jackson,  Michigan,
to pyrolize tire carcasses and generate steam.  However, no operating data
are yet available on the process.  The technology and economics  ate unknowns
but appear promising.   We estimate that by 1990 perhaps 13 percent or 400,000
tons of old tires will be processed for energy recovery in two types of instal-
lations—those in conjunction with centralized waste nrocessing  units and those
designed to serve industrial plants with process steam.  However, our estimates
cannot be derived from a firm base at this point in time, except from the fact
that tires are hydrocarbon-based and represent a very attractive energy source
given a reliable, low cost conversion technology.  Our projections for tire
recovery in energy installations is summarized in Table 90.  Although other
recovery options could arise, we believe recovering the energy content of
discarded tires will be the most viable even if increased retreading does
become a significant factor also.

          The heat content of tires is 12,500 Btu/pound or 25 million Btu/
ton;* this is equivalent to coal.  In fact, tires have a higher Btu content
than the low sulfur Wyoming coal now being purchased in quantity by utilities.

          The potential energy recovery from waste rubber tires  generated
in SMSA's is also given in Table 89.  The actual recovery will be modest
amounting to 0.6 x 109 Btu in 1975 and 10 x Ifl9 Btu by 1990.  This is 12.9
percent of total tire waste in 1990 and 16.5 percent of that generated in
SMSA's.  For the most part, this recovery will take place via special pyrolysis
units and will produce process steam for a resource recovery plant or local
industrial use.
* ."Rubber Industry and the Environment" Rubber World. December 1973, pages
     53-54.

                                   183

-------
                                 CHAPTER X
                   RESOURCE RECOVERY FOR PAPER TO 1990
                        INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW

           Paper is the major component of solid waste,  and has several
 recovery options that will be pursued in the future.   Paper will increase
 in importance as a recycled material; as an export to fiber short countries;
 and as an organic it has fuel value for energy recovery options.  It is
 also usable as a fiber source for other products.

           The demand for paper  products is  forecast to  increase  steadily
 to  1990,  which means an, increasing  rate of  waste generation.   However,
 recycling of  paper will  also increase substantially in  the  future,  and
 the  advent of energy recovery on  a  large scale  as  forecast  in  Chapter  II
 will mean useful recovery of a  significant  portion of that  paper not re-
 covered  for recycling purposes.

           Our forecasts  show that 1973 was  the  "tarnaround" year for re-
 source recovery of paper.   The  rate of paper  recycling  increased in 1973
 after  three decades of relative decline,  and  recycling  likely  will  continue
 to  rise  in the years to  follow.   However, the rate of growth of  recycling
 will flatten  as the industry begins to expand its  virgin  fiber processing
 capability more rapidly  in the  late 1970's.   Further, the  forecast  recycling
 rate is below the  potential  rate  if more favorable economic conditions pre-
 ferentially encourage  investment in recycling  facilities.

           The  overview of our forecasts  for the  period  1972 to 1990 is
 given in  Table 90.   We have  forecast an increase in demand  from  64.4 million
 tons in  1972  to 109.2 million tons  in 1990.   At  the same  time, recycling
 of waste  paper will  increase from 12.9 million  tons in  1972 to 27.1  million
 tons in  1990.   This  means  an increase in the  rate  of  recycling in the paper
 industry  from  20.1  percent  in 1972  to 24.8 percent in 1990.  In  addition,
 net  exports of waste  paper and  use  of paper in other products  is  expected
 to draw another 1.9  million  tons  from the waste  stream  in  1990.   Above this,
 solid waste-based  energy  recovery systems will utilize  15.3 million  tons
of paper  by 1990,  compared  to virtually none  in  1972  (Figure 28).

           Thus,  the  total  useful  recovery of  paper will stand  at  44.4 million
 tons in 1990, compared to  13.6 million tons  in 1972, a 226 percent increase.
This recovery  rate  will be 40.6 percent  of.demand  and 47.4  percent of waste
paper generated.
                                    184

-------
                                    TABLE 90

           SUMMARY OF RESOURCE RECOVERY FORECASTS FOR PAPER. 1972-1990
(In thousand tons)
Category
Total USA Paper Demand
Total Waste Paper Generation
Source of Waste Paper —
Household
Commercial /Institutional
Industrial
Waste Paper Recovery:^.'
For Recycling by Paper
Industry
For Use in Molded Pulp
Products
Other Uses (est.)
Net Exports
Total Fiber Recovery
Recovered via Energy/Fuel
Options
Total Recovery
Net Paper Waste Disposal
Percent Recovery of Demand
1972
64,400
55,050

25,000
24,300
5,750


12,932

200
90
328
13,550

Neg.
13,550
41,500
21.0
1975
66,490
56,950

25,500
25,450
6,000


13,960

200
90
900
15,150

650
15,800
41,150
23.8
1980
79,360
68,950

30,000
31,650
7,300


17,610

250
90
1,100
19,050

2,000
21,050
47,900
26.5
1985
93,565
79,950

33,650
37,750
8,550


22,215

250
85
1,300
23,850

7,250
31,100
48,850
33.2
1990
109,240
93,650

38,300
45,350
10,000


27 •, 090.

250
110
1,550
29,000

15,350
44,350
49,300
40.6
Percent Recovery of Waste
  Paper Generated               24.6      27.7      30.5      38.9      47.4

Percent Disposal of Paper
  Waste Generated               75.4      72.3      69.5      61.1      52.6
a/  Includes that recovered within solid waste management systems by source
      and mechanical separation.
Source:  Midwest Research Institute.
                                      185

-------
            120,000
            100.000
                                                                                                                                        Totol  USA Poper
                                                                                                                                          Demond
                                                                                                                                      xTotol Wosfe Poper
                                                                                                                                       <•   Generation
00
            80.000
O
t—
8
            60,0001
           40.000f
           20. 000[
                                                                                                           x-<  .W;--^
' •' ;W^^ ^ w;^^$>
 •,'-.'-.\V-.X\\\\\\\' Net Waste Paper Di>posal\
                                                                                                                                                Paper
                                                                                                                              ,
                                                                                                                             \'. ner?yr^-Total for Recycling
                                                                                                                                   "'  '
                                                                                                                   XRecovery via Recycling../
                                                                                                                       ^ ^ ,• ^ '.•,'.•- \ •
                                                                                                                    .'.,•'•.-' ..•' •' y -.  . '. •  •.
                  I960
                                     1965
                                                                           YEAR
                                                                                                                 1985
                                                                                                                                     1990
                                          Figure 28  - Summary of  Resource Recovery Forecasts
                                                            for  Paper,  1972-1990

-------
          The actual disposal of waste paper via landfill and incineration
will rise from 41.5 million tons in 1972 to 49.3 million t ms in 1990;
However, by 1980 the quantities of waste paper going into disposal systems
(as opposed to recovery systems) will have nearly leveled out in spite of
a continued increase in demand for paper products.  Thus the effect of
paper recovery techniques on the nation's waste stream will be significant,
in the absence of direct legislative intervention at the federal level,
even though the true potential of recovery would be significantly higher.
Forecasts of Paper Demand

          The consumption" or demand ""'for paper has been reasonably pre-
dictable over a long period of time.  Of course, the fortunes of selected
grades of paper have prospered and waned as specific end uses and inter-
materials competition have changed the demand patterns-  Nonetheless, the
nation's use of paper has grown (and declined) in concert with the growth
(and decline) of real GNP.

          There are literally thousands of paper products made,but they
can be classified generally into a few broad categories:  communications,
packaging, personal products, industrial products and other.   The communi-
cation papers encompass most paper grades—newsprint, printing paper, "book"
paper and "fine" paper.  Most packaging grades are paperboard:  linerboard,
corrugating medium, folding boxboard, but also include wrapping and sack
paper.

          Personal products come mainly in the form of tissue--towels,
napkins, toilet paper and the like.  Industrial products include panel-
board for furniture and autos, roofing felts, construction paper (gypsum
liner),  hard pressed board; tube, can and drum and others.
    Usually defined as:  production + imports - exports.
    Demand is used as a synonym to consumption.  It is assumed that demand
      will be equaled by supply and that there is no gap between demand
      and actual consumption.

                                   187

-------
          MRI has detailed the market aspects of paper demand in several
previous studies.*  These detailed data are not discussed or "reinvented1
here, but are presented as the basic data required in this study.
          The forecast of demand is the key statistic around which the
related materials factors revolve.  The demand (or consumption) sets the
requirements for raw materials which in turn determines to what extent
virgin and recycled paper may be used.

          Each paper grade follows its own demand pattern and MRI's fore-
casts are based on the demand for the various grades of paper.  In turn,
that demand pattern is set by requirements for the finished products that
the paper is converted to—corrugated boxes, newspapers and the like.

          Also "consumption" leads to the inevitable discard of the product
as waste.  The nature of the product and its end use largely determine where
it will be discarded, in what form and how.  For example, corrugated boxes
are discarded where the contents are emptied, usually a retail store, ware-
house, or industrial plant.  By contrast, toilet paper "disappears" from
the municipal waste stream because it is discarded into sewer systems.
*  The previous studies by Midwest Research Institute that are used as sub-
     stantive background for this chapter are:

          "Paper Recycling--The Art of the Possible  1970-1985," The Solid
            Waste Council of the  Paper Industry, March 1973, American
            Paper,1 Institute, Inc., XX, 181 pp.

          "Salvage Markets for Materials  in Solid Waste," U.S. Environmental
            Protection Agency, No. SW-29C, U.S. Government Printing office,
            Washington, D.C., 1972, XXI,  187  pp.

          "The  Role  of Nonpackaging Paper in  Solid Waste Management,  1966
            to  1976," Public Health Service Publication No. 2040, Washington,
            U.S. Government Printing Office,  1971, X, 76 pp.

          "The  Role  of Packaging  in Solid Waste Management, 1966 to 1976,"
            Public Health Service Publication No. 1855, U.S. Government
            Printing Office, 1971, X, 205 pp.
                                   188

-------
          Thus, the forecasts of demand set the stage for determining
how much of what kinds of paper products end up as waste paper and where.
In turn, these data can be used to determine how much of wh it kinds of
waste paper are recoverable and where it might be used for recycling or
other recovery practices such as combustion of paper in mixed waste to re-
cover the heat content.

  "       The grade-by-grade forecasts and total demand forecasts were
developed on the basis of several data sources.  MRI relied heavily on
industrial sources for general trends as well as specific grade categories.
In addition, industry associations were also consulted.  Much of the fore-
cast was developed to 1985 in a previous study."'   However, a significant
effort was made to update the demand forecasts, and to reflect the long-
term effects of the 1973 "boom" in demand and subsequent 1974 decline as
economic recession came to the economy.  The forecasts were developed
independently and cannot be attributed to specific outside sources.
Forecast Results

          The total demand for paper in the United States has paralleled
real GNP quite closely in the past, and this general  correlation will be
valid for some years to come.  However, the paper industry is a mature
industry and the rate of growth of paper demand will be declining in the
1975 to 1990 period.  Many competitive material displacements that took place
in the 1960's are now nearly complete (e.g., paper for wood) while plastics
and metals continue to make some inroads in packaging and other products.
Some end uses for paper have reached their growth limits (e.g., setup boxes);
new uses for paper will stimulate further growth in selected grade groups,
e.g., printing and fine paper for expanding communications uses, and contain-
erboard for packaging applications.

          The paper industry's production will increase at an annual rate
of 2.9 percent from 1973 to 1990; consumption will also increase at an
annual rate of 2.9 percent (Table 91).  Total industry production will in-
crease from 59.3 million tons in 1972 to .102.8 million tons in 1990.  At
the same time, paper and paperboard consumption in the U.S. will grow from
64.4 million tons to 109.2 million tons, an increase of 70 percent over the
18-year .period.

          The forecasts were built up on a grade-by-grade basis.  However,
the forecast growth rates for the period 1973 to 1990 appear to be low com-
pared to the base period of 1963 to 1973.  'There are several reasons for
this.   First, the year 1973 was a boom year in the industry and this introduces
 *   "Paper Kocycling-the Art of the Possible 1970-1985," op.cit.


                                    189

-------
                                                                                       1A.SU. 91
                                                                PAPER DEMAND AND PRODUCTION BY CHALE.  IV63  Tl 1990
Grade and category
Paper
Newsprint Production
Net Imports
Total Demand
Groundwood Printing
Coated Book Paper
Uncoated Book Paper
Writing Papers
Bristols
Packaging and Ind. Conv. (unbl.)
Other Packaging and Ind. Conv.
Special Industrial Paper
Tissue
Total Demand^
Paperboard
Liner board --total
Recycled
Solid Wood Pulp
Corrugating Medium—total
Recycled
Solid Wood Pulp
Container Chipboard (recycled)
Other Containerboard
Recycled
Solid Wood Pulp
Total Containerboard
Recycled
Solid Wood Pulp
Folding Boxboard --tota 1
Recycled
Solid Wood Pulp
Setup Boxboard--recycled
Milk Carton and Food Service--
solid
Other Boxboard-- total
Recyc led
Solid Wood Pulp
Total Boxboard
Recycled
Solid Wood Pulp
Total Paperboard
Total Domestic Demand
Wet Machine Board
Insulating and Hard Pressed Board
Total Other
Crand Total—All Crades
1963 1964

2,213 2,249
5.295 5.837
7,508 8,086
974 1.055
2.374 2.584
1.897 1,962
1,928 2,047
753 780
3.158 3,239
1,063 1,080
262 289
2.563 2.721
22,418 23,729

6,414 6,908
677 693
5,737 6,215
2,962 3,165
675 718
2,287 2,447
263 269
1,827 2,191
907 929
920 1.262
11,465 12,533
2,507 2,595
8,958 9,938
3,636 3,752
2,562 2,594
1,074 :.158
527 534

1,255 1.295
1,711 1,840
1.312 1,403
399 437
7,126 7, '431
4,493 4,612
2.635 2,809
18,594 19,954
329 1,098
17,765 18.856
139 153
1 4A S 15^7
2.255 :,454
3,542 4,;34
44,025 46.7JJ
Note: Paperbnard grades are adjusted for export? but
1965

2.180
6.238
8,418
1,134
2,778
2,111
2,261
871
3.316
1,147
304
2.862
25,160

7,481
750
6,731
3,438
800
2,638
280
2,336
935
1,401
13,535
2,748
10,787
3,889
3,659
1.221
547

1,384
1,985
1,494
491
7,796
4.764
3.012
21,332
1. 1 76
20,154
150
1 567
j.555
4.272
"°-3t'D
.- :>r p
1966

2,347
6.892
9,239
1,287
3,052
2,370
2,512
924
3,417
1.145
332
3.082
27.314

8,347
767
7,580
3,800
890
2,910
313
2,451
920
1,531
14,910
2,866
12.044
4,040
2,732
1,308
560

1,476
2,192
1,617
575
" 8,268
4,987
3,261
23,179
1 ,295
21,884
149
1 486
2,396
4,031
53.229
ports.
aperboar
1967

2,599
6,509
9,108
1,306
3,040
2.316
2.477
982
3,371
1,175
332
3.195
27,257

8,215
498
7,718
3,743
761
2,982
290
2.511
908
1.603
14,760
2,436
12,324
4,021
2,660
1,361
496

1,456
2,087
1.558
529
8,060
4,781
3.279
22.819
1,470
21.349
147
1 ,498
2,407
4,052
5J.658
This has
d does n
1968

2,956
6,333
9,289
1,316
.3,077
2.614
2,680
1.009
3,629
1,233
370
3.376
28.532

9,044
407
8,636
4,062
691
3,371
283
3,001
1,066
1.935
16.389
2,427
13,962
4,218
2,730
1,488
520

1,596
2,18!
1,617
564
8,515
4,916
3.599
24.904
1 ,957
22,947
162
1 , 564
2,631
4,557
5b,036
Mn thou
1969

3,252
6.663
9.915
1.405
3,279
2,691
2,920
1,047
3,712
1,287
389
3.556
30,161

9.692
347
9,345
4,395
778
3,617
309
3,437
1,163
2.274
17,833
2,561
15,262
4,262
2,629
1,633
499

1,665
2,118
1,584
534
8,543
4,751
3.792
26,376
2,084
24.292
153
1 , 592
3,000
4.745
59. !9S
sand tons)
1970 1971

3,345
6.491
9.836
1.442
3,203
2,707
2,861
998
3,696
1.247
. 371
3,746
30,053

9,403
270
9.133
4,264
859
3,405
297
3,245
1,074
2.271
17.309
2.474
14,835
4,080
2,473
1,607
467

i.693
1.335
!,523
312
8,074
4,506
3,568
25,383
2,163
23,220
144
\ , 590
2.628
4,562
57. S3.,

3.321
6.715
10,036
1,337
3,179
2,873
2,903
977
3,711
1.263
386
3,665
30,478

9,531
282
9,249
4.520
940
3,580
303
3,664
1,238
2.426
18,017
2,732
15,285
4,139
2,408
1,731
448

1,646
1,786
1,526
260
8,020
4.424
3.596
26,037
2.443
23,594
140
1 , 862
3.366
5,366
,,,
1972

3.451
6.955
10,40«i
1,439
3,470
3,098
3,246
1.062
3.908
1,322
441
4.005
32.343

10,856
279
10.576
4,846
972
3.874
316
3.892
1,348
2.544
19.911
2,893
17,018
4,440
2.477
1,963
455

1,656
2,040
1,680
360
8.591
4.645
3.946
28.503
2.370
26,133
146
1 , 954
3. 7?0
5.SSO
(v.. ?f
the effect or showing slightly higher Ci
nt natch KUIV.-UI ot iVnpcs data: htivovo ; .
1973

3,413
7.313
10,726
1.560
3.766
3,185
3.689
1,134
4,025
1,319
478
3,933
33,748

11,346
2S9
11,067
5,255
1,128
4,127
317
3,678
1,386
2.292
20,606
3.110
17,496
4.705
2,521
2,184
465

1,595
2.201
1,757
414
S.965
4,744
4,191
29,572
27,327
134
4,373
6,047
e>7.i::
TSU~pt i.
1975

3,200
7.230
10.430
1.570
3,835
3,300
3,810
1.105
4,110
1.315
500
3.960
33,935

11,145
355
10,790
5,130
1,120
4,010
275
3.575
1,328
2.247
20,120
3,070
17,050
4.450
2,308
2,142
400

1,570
2,130
1.700
430
f ,550
4,400
4,150
26,670
2.200
26,470
135
1 , 800
4, 150
6,055
66,490
•n than
'••. :nor
1980

3,900
6.000
11,900
1,820
4.660
4.010
4,640
1,340
4,650
1.470
640
4.590
39,720

14,100
920
13.180
6,500
1.750
4.750
350
4.650
1.750
2.900
25,600
4,770
20,830
4,950
2,330
2,620
440

1,760
2,350
1,830
520
9,500
4,600
4,900
35,100
2,680
32,420
140
2 ,030
5.050
7,220
'9,360
ac tua 1 ,
o ha? be
1985

4.700
8,600
13.300
2,080
5.670.
4,760
5.650
1,590
5,260
1,640
780
5.270
45.000

17,600
1,760
15,840
8,100
2,600
5,500
400
5,800
2,200
3.600
31,900
6.960
24.940
5,500
2.480
3.020
440

1,960
2 , 600
1,980
620
10,500
4,9^0
5.600
42,400
3,250
39,150
145
2 , 2 70
6.000
8,415
93,565
Put only
en Cir-pat


5.500
9,400
14.900.'
2,350
6,720
5,640
6,700
1,840
5,950
1,830
930
5.940
52,600

21,900
2,200
19,700
10,080
3,330
6,750
450
6,800
2,680
4.120
39,230
8,660
30,570
6,070
2,740
3,330
440

2, 160
2.850
2. 130
720
11,520
5,310
6.210
50,750
3.960
46,790
150
2 550
6.950
9,650
109. .'-3
a bou t 10
-ar-i : itv
1963-lVi

4.5
3.2
3.6
4.8
4.7
5.3
6.8
4.2
2.5
2.2
6.2
4.4
4. 1

5.8
8.9
6.8
5.8
5.3
6.1
2.3
7.5
4.3
9.5
6.0
2.2
6.9
2.6
0.0
7.4
0.0

} .4
2 . 5
3.1
0.4
:.3
0.6
4.6
4.6
10.4
-•-
0.0
2.4
6.1
4.6
4 . j

^.rv-th -ate
: ,, .-1990

3.0
1 .5
2. 1
2.4
3.8
3.4
3.6
3.0
2.3
2.1
4.0
2.5
2.2

4.0
13.0
3.5
3.9
6.6
2.9
2.1
3.7
3.9
3.5
3.8
6.2
3.2
1.5
0.5
2.5
0.0

1.8
1 .6
1.1
3.-
: .5
0.7
2.2
3.3
3.-
3.2
0.7
2 .0

;.s
""

on total  production within  0.:- rJ  Past: *>,*ai J .  i-*- . " .\^?r ica:»  Paper In^t Ltut*1,  Ui 1 \  1 °":- .  p .  70  • J.i; ,1 I\M

-------
a "peak" into,a key year for growth into calculations for the. base periods.
This has the  effect of showing a "high" growth rate for the period pre-
ceding 1973 and a "low" growth rate for the period 1973 to 1990.  Second,
we have shown declining production for 1974 and 1975 before resumption of
"normal" growth rates, to reflect an economic slowdown.  Third, we bive
shown a declining rate of growth for most grades of paper beyond 1980.
The forecasts in terms of tonnage are consistent with Tong-term trends and
the outlook for paper demand on a grade-by-grade basis.

          In  the paper category, the highest growth rates forecast are for
books, writing, bristols and special industrial papers (3.0 to 4.0 percent
per year) while the lowest rates are in groundwood printing paper, news-
print, packaging and tissue at 2.1 per count to 2.4 percent per year.  In
paperboard, the most impressive gains will be made in the containerboard
uses--3.8 percent per year, while many types of paperboard that traditionally
use high waste paper bontent will decline or grow only at a low rate--
setup boxboard, gypsum liner, folding boxboard, and tube, can, and drum
paper-board.  However, the recycled types of containerboard (linerboard
and corrugating medium will grow at rates well in excess of other recycled
grades and of the virgin fiber types as recycling establishes something of
a unique growth pattern in these grades (Table 91).  The use of hard-pressed
board will grow significantly--3.2 percent per year—as new end uses open
up in building products and related uses.

          With this wide range in demand patterns, the makeup of the grade
categories will lead to changes in the availability of some important end
use products.   This means that raw materials options and waste utilization
options will  change somewhat in the future.  For example, containerboard
(domestic use) will be 29.7 percent of total consumption in 1990, compared
to 24.9 percent in 1972.   Result:  relatively more demand for unbleached
fiber for use in corrugated containers -and increased availability of con-
tainers that  are discarded.  Thus, while absolute tonnage will increase in
all categories, the makeup of the grade profile will change,  too.  In turn,
the composition of the paper component of the waste stream will also change
over time.
   V
          It  should be obvious from the forecasts that those products that
constitute the greatest percentage of demand also create the greatest
amount of solid waste and also the greatest opportunity for recovery for
recycling.

          The demand profile given dictates in what grades the paper in-
dustry must increase its producing capacity, since 1972 and 197.3 saw the
industry running nearly "flat out" with little new capacity scheduled for
completion in the next 2 years.  The raw materials options are thus "open"
in the sense  that both virgin and recycled fibers can be chosen to increase


                                    191

-------
the industry's output in the near future.  Probably only in World War II
did such a comparable condition previously exist in the paper industry.  And,
as has been shown in the summary data for this chapter, the n ;overy of
waste paper for recycling purposes will likely increase rapidly in the fu-
ture, more rapidly than total demand for paper products will increase.

          Total paper demand (consumption) is related to real GNP and popu-
lation growth.  Working from published forecasts of population and real
GNP (in 1958 prices), we related total paper demand to these basic growth
indicators (Table 92).  Total paper demand will increase from 617 pounds
per capita in 1972 to 840 pounds per capita in 1990, an increase of 36 per-
cent in 18 years; this compares to about a 60 percent increase in the 18
years prior to 1972  (Table 92, Figure 31).  Likewise, related to GNP,
paper demand will decline from 81S400 tons per billion dollars real GNP
in 1972 to 75,300 tons per billion dollars real GNP in 1990.  This relation-
ship has ranged from 76,000 to 81,000 tons (seldom above) since 1947.  The
decline forecast reflects the fact that service sectors of the economy
will grow more important relative to manufactured products in the next  2
decades.  The same data are also given for the paper and paperboard sectors
of paper demand (Table 92).
Waste Paper Generation

          Relating Waste Paper Generation to Total Demand:  Our orientation
in this study was to characterize the mixed municipal waste stream.  Thus,
we have viewed waste paper from that perspective and constructed a profile
of waste paper generation on the basis of its impact on municipal solid
waste.  Of course, the quantity of paper generated as waste relates directly
to total consumption of paper.

          By their nature, paper products are not designed for permanence--
they are designed to do a job and to be discarded or recycled through the
manufacturing process.  In practice, some paper products do have a per-
manence and long-term value--books, filing records, construction products
and the like.

          For the most part, however, waste paper is created as rapidly
as it is produced, purchased and used as a product.  In some cases, the
life of the paper product is probably much shorter than the time it took
to deliver it to the customer.  The newspaper is a classic example.  Usually
there is a several months lag between the time that a pulpwood tree is
harvested and the daily newspaper imprints it and sells it.  The reader
discards the paper within minutes and the "value" in the product (to nearly
every reader) lasts no more than 24 hours because it is replaced by yet
another edition.  Instant waste!  It is then either collected for recycling
                                     192

-------
                                                                                     TABLE 92
                                                    PAPER CONSUMPTION RELATIONSHIPS TO POPULATION AND GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT



Year
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1975^
1980
1985
1990


Population
(000)
144,126
146,631
149,188
152,271
154,878
157,553
160,184
163,026
165,931
168,903
171,984
174,882
177,830
180,667
183,672
186,504
.189,197
191,833
194,237
196,485
198,629
200,619
202,677
204,879
207,045
208,842
210,400
215,000
230,000
244,000
260,000
Gross Nac'l.
Product In
1958 Prices
(Real- CNP)
(5 Billion)
309.9
323.7
244.1
355.3
383.4
395.1
412.8
407.0
438.0
466.1
452.5
447.3
475. 9_
487.7
497.2
529.8
551.0
481.1
617.8
658.1
675.2
706.6
725.6
722.5
745.9
790.7
837.4
860.0
1,040.0
1,250.0
1,450.0
(Pounds per capita and
All Grades
Total Consumption
thousand tons per S billion GNP)
Paper Paperboard
Total Consumption Total Consumption
000 Tons Per
Tons
COOP)
24,749
26.0C3
26,695
29,012
30,561
29,017
31,360
31,379
34,619
36,496
35,268
35,119
38,725
39,138
40,312
42,216
43,715
46,384
49,102
52 , 680
51,945
55,664
58,915
57,940
59,563
64,385
67,240
66,490
79,360
93,565
109,240

Lbs/Capita
343.4
355.9
331.0
381.1
394.6
368.3
391.6
385.0
418.5
432.2
410.1
401.6
435.5
433.3
439.0
452.7
462.1
483.6
505.6
536.2
522.8 .
554.9
581.4
565.6
575.3
616.6
639.2 "
618.5
690.1
766.9
840.3
$ Billion
Real GNP
79.9 -
80.6
76.2
81.7
79.7
78.4
76.0
77.1
79.3
81.8
77.9
78.5
81.4
80.3
81.1
79.7
79.3
79.8
79.5
80.0
76.9
78.8
81.2
80.2
79.9
81.4
80.3
77.3
76.3
74.9
75.3
Tons
(OOP)
13,167
14,062
13,645
15,333
16.310
15,620
16,232
16,360
17,698
19,306
18,475
18,103
20,118
20,546
20,955
21,770
22,418
23,729
25,160
27,314
27,257
28,532
30,161
30,054
30,478
32.343
33,748
33,935
39,720
46,000
52,800

Lbs/Captta
182.7
191.8
182.9
202.2
211.3
198.9
203.4
201.5 '
214.1
229.5
215.8
208.0
: 226.3
227.4
228.2
233.5
237.0
247.4
259.1
278.0
274.4
284.4
297.6
293.4
294.4
309.7
320.8
315.6
258.4
377.0
406.2
000 Tons Per
? Billion
Real GNP
42.5
43.4
42.1
43.2
42.5
30.5
39.3
40.2
40.4
43.4
40.8
4P.5
42.3
42.1
42.2
41.1
40.7
40.8
40.7
41.5
40.1
40.4
41.6 "
41.6
40.9
40.9
40.3
39.5
38.2
36.8
36.4

Tons
(OOP)
9.1PP
9,299
8,942
10,868
11,449
10,654
12,229
11,970
13,582
13,928
13,728
13,790
15,021
15,150
15,892
16,816
17,455
18,522
19,670'
21,336
20,635
22,575
24,009
23,325
23,711
26,163
27,445
26,470
32,420
39,150
46,790


Lbs/Capita
126.3
126.8
119.9
143.3
148.3
135.7
153.2
147.4
164.4
165.7
160.4
158.5
168.9
167.7
173.0
180.3
184.5
193.1
202 . 5
217.2
207.8
225.0
236.9
227.7
229.0
250.6
260.9
246.2
281.9
320.9
360.0
000 Tons Per
S Billion
Real CNP
29.4
28.7
27.6
30.6
29.9
27.0
29.6
29.4
31.0
31.2
30.3
30.8
31.6
- 31.1
32.0
31.7
31.7
31.9
31.8
32.4
30.6
32.0
33.1
32.3
31.8
33.0
32.8
30.8
31.2
31.3
32.3
Construction Paper and Paperbo
Total Consumption

Tons
(OOP)
2,333
2,579
1,979
2,647
2,652
2.6P4
2, 744
2,914
3,260
3,116
2,928
3.104
3,439
3,266
3,310
3,485
3,702
3,980
4,122
3,881
3,905
4,396
4,592
4,418
5,228
5,734
5,912
5,950
7,220
8,415
9,650


Lbs/Capita
32.4
35.2
26.5
34.9
34.4
33.2
34.4
35.9
39.4
37.1
34.2
35.7
38.7
36 -.2
36.0
37.4
39.1
41.5
42.4
39.5
39.3
43.8
45.3
43.1
50.5
43.9
ft 56.2
ii.3
62.8
69.0
74.2
000 Tons
S Billio
Real CN
7.5
8.0
6.1
7.5
6.9
6.6
6.7
7.2
7.4
7.0
6.5
6.9
7.2
6.7
6.7
6.6
6.7
6.9
6.7
5.9
5.8
6.2
6.3
6.)
6.0
7.2
7. I

6.9
6.?
6. r
£/  Preliminary
Source:  "Statistics of Paper and Paperboard  1974,"  American  Paper  Institute,  1974.
Midwest Research  Institute  forecasts.

-------
    900
    800
     700
 5
z
o
     500
    400
     300
     90
         J	I
•A/	'	V
I    60
         19J7 ic  4'  iO  .-!
-\-
                                                                                                             '	^\,	
                                                                                                                 'V-
                                                                                                                     1790
                           Figure 31 - Paper Consumption in Pounds per Capita

                                    and 1,000 Tons per  $ Billion  of GNP

-------
or disposed of  in a solid waste management system (after some storage
period by  the consumer).

           Consumption of paper products has increased dramatically as a
consequence of  economic activity and the convenience of one-time use pro-
duct  substitution  ("disposables")  for  "reusable" products  (e.g., paper
towels instead  of cloth towels).   Markets for many paper products have
developed  along these lines:

           1.  Products  that have a short useful life;
           2.  Products  that have a  single time use, and cannot be reused;
           3.  Products  for which there is a continuous and growing need;
           4.  Products  that are "convenient" to use because of their
                "disposable" or "throw away", characteristics; and
           5.  Products  that incorporate more material per unit of use.

           Thus, the growth areas of the 1960's were:  tissue products,
e.g., double-ply toilet tissue to  displace single-ply; paper toweling to
replace cloth napkins, etc.; paper  cups, plates, etc.; communications
papers (all types) and packaging papers, all of which meet some or all of
the "market objectives" set out above.  This is why economic growth trans-
lated into increased demand for paper products, and.will continue to do  so
in the years ahead.  Paper products are key elements in the nation's econ-
omy, and economic growth means increasing paper demand (i.e., tons).

           This  leads to solid waste generation in proportion to total con-
sumption.  In addition, from 1945  to 1973, a period of 27 years, the rate
of recycling of paper declined.  Consequently, proportionately more virgin
fiber was  utilized and proportionately less waste paper was withdrawn from
the waste  stream.  Thus, there was  in this 30-year period greater solid
waste disposal  than the total increase in consumption would have indicated.
Calculating Waste Paper Generation Rates

          Not all paper that is manufactured and used ends up "instantly"
in the municipal waste stream.  For this reason, we calculated current
waste paper generation as it relates to municipal solid waste.  There are
several factors that determine whether the paper product will enter the
municipal waste stream essentially as produced and used by the purchaser.
They are:

          1.  Lifetime of the product.  A product "inventoried" or in use
for more than 1 year will not affect the waste stream until later--books,
business records, appliances, shoeboard, etc.
                                    195

-------
           This  affects  the  total waste  generation  in a  given  year when  total
 consumption  is  growing.   Thus,  if  a  product  has  a  lifetime  of 5  years,  then
 purchased  in 1970 will  be discarded  in  1975.   In the meantime, total  con-
 sumption of  that product  will  likely increase  and  it will appear in  1975
 that we do not  discard  as much  as  we consume.   It  is the time delay and
 increased  output that causes this  (e.g.,  1975's  output  will go into use
 while  1970"s output will  come  into the  waste stream).   The  time  delay effects
 of  product use  were put  into our calculations.

           2.  End use of  the product  that  leads  to discard  into  another
 media  or waste  stream.   (This category  we  refer  to as "diverted"  from the
 waste  stream.)

           Not all paper products retain their  original  form or are dis-
 carded into  the municipal waste stream.  The principal  examples  are:
 toilet paper which enters sewage systems;  cigarette  paper which  is burned
 in  use and a number of  products that  lose  their  identity as paper and are
 not discarded to municipal  waste in  a conventional manner.  Also  included:
 gypsum wallboard and roofing felts (demolition waste),  auto panelboard,
 funiture panels, shoe board and the  like.  We  account for this category
 to  realistically assess the potentially recoverable  paper that remains in
 the municipal waste stream, in a form identifiable as paper.  That is, paper
 incorporated into other products becomes   identified with them rather then
 as  a paper discard.

           Given these two categories, we first determined what reduction
 of  waste generation would occur in any  given year as a  ratio  of  total con-
 sumption for that year.   These ratios were based partly on our own judgment
 and partly on the basis of  related measures that could be applied.  The
 methodology  and derivation of most of these factors  were detailed in a
 previous MRI study. —'  However, the basis of calculation for  each grade
 is  set out in Appendix E.

           The calculation of gross municipal waste paper generation is
 given for  selected years  from 1965 to 1990 (Tables 93-99).I/  Of course,
 the starting point for each grade of paper is total  demand.    From that we
 initially  deducted a converting scrap that might occur  in that grade  (based
 on  known or  estimated scrap rates, e.g., newsprint was about 3 percent
 based on scrap  generation rates reported to the American Newspapers Publishers
 Association.  This resulted in "net" consumption, i.e.,  that part going out
 as  finished  product.
II  "The Role of Nonpackaging Paper in Solid Waste Management,  1966-1976,"
      op. cit.  See pages 51-63.  Also see Appendix E for details.
27  Table 95 gives a complete detail of all calculations for 1972 while
      the other tables in this source were developed on the same basis,
      but the calculation detail was omitted.

                                    196

-------
                                                        TABLE  93
                               PROFILE OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE GENERATION OF PAPER.  1965
VO



Paper Grade Category
Newsprint
Printing Paper
Fine Paper
Ind. Conv. Pkg.
Tissue
Total Paper
Containerboard
Other Containerboard
Folding Boxboard
Set-up Boxboard
Milk and Food Service
Other Folding Boxboard
Total Paperboard
Wet Machine and Construction
.Paper
Insulating and Hard Pressed
Board
Total Construction


Total
Demand
8,400
6,000
3,150
4,750
2,850
25,150
11,200
1,350
3,900
550
1,400
1,750
20,150

1,700

2,550
4,250
(In thousand
Less
Converting
Scrap
350
600
250
250
150
1,600
1 , 2 50
100
700
50
150
.200
2,450

150

200
350
tons)

Net
Demand
8,050
5,300
2,900
4,500
2,700
23,450
9,950
1,250
3,200
500
1..250
1,550
17,700

1,550

2,350
3,900

Diverted or
Delayed Entry
To Solid Waste
100
600
400
100
1,050
2,250
200
600
50
--
__ .
250
1,100

1,400

2,100
3,500

Entering
Municipal
Waste
7,950
4,700
2,500
4,400
1,650
21,200
9,750
650
3,150
500
1,250
1,300
16,600

150

250
400


Gross Waste
Discard
8,300
5,400
2,750
4,650
1,800
22,900
11,000
750
3,850
550
1,400
1,500
19,050

300

450
750
            Grand Totals
            Ratio to Total Demand
49,550

 1.000
4,500

0.091
45,050

 0.909
6,850

0.138
38,200

 0.771
42,700

 0.862
       Note:   Values were  rounded to the nearest 50,000 tons in these calculations,
       Source:   Midwest  Research Institute.

-------
                                                        TABLE  94
                               PROFILE OF MUNICIPAL  SOLID WASTE  GENERATION OF PAPER,  1970
co



Paper Grade Category
Newsprint
Printing Paper
Fine Paper
Ind. Conv. Pkg.
Tissue
Total Paper
Containerboard
Other Containerboard
Folding Boxboard
Set-up Boxboard
Milk and Food Service
Other Folding Boxboard
Total Paperboard
Wet Machine and Construction
Paper
Insulating and Hard Pressed
Board
Total Construction


Total
Demand
9,850
7,350
3,850
5,300
3,750
30,100
13,950
1,550
4,100
450
1,700
1,500
23,250.

1,700

2,850
4,550
(In thousand
Less
Converting
Scrap
400
900
600
250
200
2,350
1,550
100
1,050
50
200
150
3,100

150

200
350
tons)

Net
Demand
9,450
6,450
3,250
5,050
3,550
27,750
12,400
1,450
3,050
400
1,500
1,350
20,150

1,550

2,650
4,200
•
Diverted or
Delayed Entry
To Solid Waste
100
700
400
100
1,350
2,650
250
700
50
0
0
200
1,200

1,400

2,400
3,800

Entering
Municipal
Waste
9,350
5,750
2,850
4,950
2,200
25,100
12,150
750
3,000
400
1,500
1,150
18,950

150

250
400


Gross Waste
Discard
9,750
6,650
3,450
5,200
2,400
27,450
13,700
850
4,050
450
1,700
1,300
22,050

300

450
750
            Grand Totals
            Ratio to Total Demand
57,900

 1.000
5,800

0.100
52,100

 0.900
7,650

0.132
44,450

 0.768
50,250

 0.888
       Note:  Values were rounded to the nearest 50,000 tons in these calculations.
       Source:  Midwest Research Institute.

-------
                                                                      TABLE  95
                                             PROFILE OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE  GENERATION OF PAPER,  1972
       Paper Grade Category

Newsprint
Printing Paper
Fine Paper
Ind. Conv.  Pkg.
Tissue
     Total Paper

Containerboard
Other Containerboard
Folding Boxboard
Set-up Boxboard
Milk and Food Service
Other Folding Boxboard
     Total Paperboard

Wet Machine and Construction
  Paper
Insulating and Hard Pressed
  Board
     Total Construction

     Grand Totals

     Ratio  to total demand
(In thousand tons)

Total
Demand
.10,400
8,000
4,300
5,700
4,000
32,400
16,000
2,000
4,450
450
1 , 650
1,550
26,100
2, 100
3,800
5,900
64,400

1,000
less
Converting
Scrap
400
950
350
300
200
2,200
1,750
150
.800
50
200
150
3,100
150
300
450
5,750

0.089

Net
Demand
10,000
7,050
3,950
5,400
3,800
30,200
14,250
1,850
3,650
400
1,450
1,400
23,000
1,950
3,500
5,450
58,650

0.911
Diverted or
Delayed Entry
To Solid Waste
100
800
500
100
1,450
2,950
300
950
50
--
--
200
1,500
1,750
3,150
4,900
9,350

0.145
Entering
Municipal
Waste
9,900
6,250
3,450
5,300
2,350
27,250
13,950
900
3,600
400
1,450
1,200
21,500
200
350
550
49,300

0.765

Cross Waste
Discard
10,300
7,200
3,800
5,600
2,550
29,450
15,700
1,050
4,400
450
1,650
1,350
24,600
350
650
1,000
55,050

0.855

Ratio For
Diverted/Delayed
0.01
0.11
0.13
0.02
0.38
--
0.02
0.50
0.02
0.02
. 0.01
0.15
—
0.90
0.90
--
0.16-X
0 . U5^

Ratio "or
Entry To
Municipal Waste
0 . 99
0.55
0 . E •
0.96"
0.62
--
0.96
0.50
0.98
0.93
0.99
0.65

0.10
0.10
--
O.S4-7
O.SSS^


Scrap Katio
To De-and
0.04
0. 12
0.0& *
0.03
0.05
-
0. 11
0.07
0.18
0.10
0.12
0.10
~ -
0.08
0.08
--

0.089^'

a/  Calculated frora inidivdual grade totals to net demand.
b_/  Calculated as the ratio to total demand.
Note:  Values were rounded to the nearest 50,000 tons  in  these  calculations.
Source:  Midwest Research Institute.

-------
                                                       TABLE 96
                              PROFILE OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE GENERATION OF PAPER.  1975
o
o



Paper Grade Category
Newsprint
Printing Paper
..Fine Paper
Ind. Conv. Pkg.
Tissue
' Total Paper
Containerboard
Other Containerboard
Folding Boxboard
Set-up Boxboard
Milk and Food Service
Other Folding Boxboard
v Total Paperboard
Wet Machine and Construction
Paper
Insulating and Hard Pressed
Board
Total Construction


Total
Demand
10,550
8,700
4,900
5,950
3,950
34,050
16,550
1,800
4,450
400
1,550
1,700
26,450

1,950

4,150
6,100
(In thousand
Less
Converting
Scrap
400
1,050
400
300
200
2,350
1,800
150
800
50
200
150
3,150

150

350
500
tons)

Net
• Demand
10,150
7,650
4,500
5,650
3,750
31,700
14,750
1,650
3,650
350
1,350
1,550
23,300

1,800

3,800
5,600
•
Diverted or
Delayed Entry
To Solid Waste
100
850
600
100
1,450
3,100
300
800
50
—
150
250
1,550

1,600

3,400
5,000

Entering
Municipal
Waste
10,450
6,800
3,900
5,550
2,300
29,000
14,450
850
3,600
350
1,200
1,300
21,750

200

400
600


Gross Waste
Discard
10,450
7,850
4,300
5,850
2,500
30,950 .
16,250
1,000
4,400
400
1,400
1,450
24,900

350

750
1,100
           Grand Totals
           Ratio to Total Demand
66,600




 1.000
6,000




0.090
60,600




 0.910
9,650




0.145
50,950




 0.765
56,950




 0.855
      Note:   Values were rounded to the nea-rest 50,000 tons in these calculations.


      Source:   Midwest Research Institute.

-------
                                                 TABLE  97
                        PROFILE OF MUNICIPAL  SOLID WASTE  GENERATION  OF  PAPER. 1980
(In thousand tons)
Less

Paper Grade Category
Newsprint
Printing Paper
Fine Paper
Ind. Conv. Pkg.
Tissue
Total Paper
Containerboard
Other Containerboard
Folding Boxboard
Set-up Boxboard
Milk and Food Service
Other Folding Boxboard
Total Paperboard
Wet Machine and Construction
Paper
Insulating and Hard Pressed
Board
Total Construction
Grand Totals
Ratio to Total Demand
Total
Demand
11,900
10,500
6,000
6,850
4,600
39,850.
20,950
2,400
4,950 .
450
1,750
1,900
32,400

. 2,150

5,050
7,200
79,350
1.000
Converting Net
Scrap
500
1,25.0
500
350
250.
2 , 8 50
2 , 3.00.
200
900
50
200
200
3,850

200

400
600
7,300.
0.092
Demand
1 1 , 400
9,250
5,500
6,400
4,350
36,900
18,650
2., 2 00.
4,050
400
1,550
1,700
28,550

1,950 -

4,650
6,600
72,050
0.908
Diverted or
Delayed Entry
To Solid Waste
100
1,000
700
150
1 , 650
3,600
400
100
100
0
0 .
250
850

1,750

4,200
5,950
10,400
0.131
Entering
Municipal
Waste
11,300
8,250
4,800
6,250
2,700
33,300
18,250
2,100
3,950
400
1,550
1,450
27,700

200

450
650
61,650
0.777

Gross Waste
Discard
11,800
9,500
5,300
6,600
2,950
36,150
20,550
2,300
4,850
450
1,750
1,650
31,550

400

850
1,250
68,950
0.869
Note:  Values were rounded to the nearest 50,000 tons in these calculations.
Source:  Midwest Research Institute.

-------
                                                         TABLE 98
                               PROFILE OF MUNICIPAL  SOLID WASTE  GENERATION OF PAPER. 1985
NJ
o
ro
       Paper Grade Category

.Newsprint  .
Printing Paper
Fine Paper
Ind. Conv. Pkg.
Tissue
     Total Paper

Containerboard
Other Containerboard
Folding Boxboard
Set-up Boxboard
Milk and Food Service
Other Folding Boxboard
     Total Paperboard

Wet Machine and Construction
  Paper
Insulating and Hard Pressed
  Board
     Total Construction

     Grand Totals

     Ratio to Total Demand
(In thousand tons)

Total
;ory Demand
13,300
12,500
7,250
7,700
5,250
46,000
26,100
3,050
5,500
450
1,950
2,100
39,150
tion
2,400
6,000
8,400
93,550
nd 1.000
Less
Converting
Scrap
550
1,500
600
400
250
3,300
2,850
200
1,000
50
250
200
4,550
200
500
700
8,550
0.091

Net
Demand
12,750
11,000
6,650
7,300
5,000
42,700
23,250
2,850
4,500
400
' 1,700
:,900
34,600
2,200
5,500
7,700
85,000
O.°08
Diverted or
Delayed Entry
To Solid Waste
150
1,200
900
150
1,900
4,300
500
1,450
. 100
0
0
300
2,350
2,000
4,950
6,950
, 13,600
0.145
Entering
Municipal
Waste
12,600
9,800
5,750
7,150
3,100
38,400
22,750
1,400
4,400
400
1,700
1,600
32,250
200
550
750
71,400
.0.763

Gross Waste
Discard
13,150
11,3'QO
6,350
7,550
3,350
41,700
25,600
1,600
5,400
450
1,950
1,800
36,800
400
1,050
1,450
79,950
0.854
       Note:  Values were rounded to the nearest 50,000 tons in these calculations.
       Source:  Midwest Research Institute.

-------
                                                         TABLE 99
N>
o
u>
         Paper Grade Category

 Newsprint
 Printing Paper
 Fine Paper
 Ind. Conv. Pkg.
 Tissue
      Total Paper

 Containerboard
 Other Containerboard
 Folding  Boxboard
 Set-up Boxboard
Milk  and Food  Service
Other Folding  Boxboard
     Total Paperboard

Wet Machine and Construction
  Paper
Insulating and Hard Pressed
  Board
     Total  Construction

     Grand  Totals

     Ratio  to  Total  Demand

Total
;y_ Demand
14,900
14,7.00
8,550
8,700
5,950
52,800
32,450
3,500
6,050
450
2,150
2,200
46,800
2,700
6,950
9,650
109,250
1,000
(In thousand
Less
Converting
Scrap
600
1,750
700
450
300
3,800
3,600
250
1,100
50
250
200
5,450
200
550
750
10,000
0.092
tons)
Net
Demand
14,300
12,950
7,850
8,250
5,650
49,000
28,850
3,250
4, -950
400
1,900
2,000
41,350
2,500
6.400
8,900
99,250
0.908
LUIN ur rAftK, iyyi
Diverted or
Delayed Entry
To Solid Waste
150
1,450
1,000
200
2,150
4,950
600
1,650
100
0
0
300
2,650
2,250
5,750
8,000
15,600
0.143
)
Entering
Municipal
Waste
14,150
11,500
6,850
8,050
3,500
44,050
28,250
1,600
4,850
400
1,900
1,700
38,700
250
650
900
83,650
0.770

Gross Waste
14,750
13,250
7,550
8,500
47,850
31,850
1 850
5,950
450
2 150
1 900
44,150
450
1.200
.1,650
93,650
0.860
     Note:  Values were rounded to  the nearest  50,000  tons  in these calculations
     Source:  Midwest Research Institute.                            calculations.

-------
          For printing and writing paper, the amount diverted is about 12
percent, which is primarily a reflection of the fact that books and office
records are retained for long periods and some may be retained nearly per-
manently.  By contrast, newspapers and packaging papers have very low rates
of delay in discard because they have little permanent value.  Tissue is
considered a high loss category because a large proportion is toilet tis-
sue and is used and discarded outside municipal solid waste systems.

          In paperboard, the packaging grades enter waste essentially as
produced and used.  The "other containerboard" category contains gypsum
linerboard and industrial  products such as panelboard.  For this reason,
about 50 percent of this category diverts from municipal waste.  Similarly,
the construction grades go into "permanent" structures for periods of 15
to 50 years after which they show up in special waste streams outside of
"normal" municipal waste.

          The total waste generation (including converting scrap) is about
85 percent of total consumption for 1972.  By 1990, the percent entering
municipal waste will have increased incrementally to about 86 percent of
consumption.  We emphasize that these values at this point are gross waste
generation figures and have not yet been adjusted for waste paper removed
from the waste stream for recycling or other uses.  The calculation of net
waste entering disposal systems follows in a later step.
Waste Paper Generated by Source

          Once the gross generation of waste paper is calculated,  it is
possible to allocate waste generation by source, a procedure which is as
much judgmental as it is based on good source data.  Our approach was to
allocate waste paper to residential and nonresidential (i.e., commercial/
institutional and industrial) on the basis of end use.

          In this case, the allocation of waste source was also based on
previous MRI work and details developed for each grade in Appendix E.*
The allocations were first made for the base year of 1972 and then to 1975
to 1990 on the basis of the same ratios developed for earlier years.  The
results are given in Tables 100 to 104 for the years 1972 to 1990.  Once
again, these calculations allocate gross waste generation including con-
verting scrap and have not at this point made allowance for removal from
the waste stream for recycling.
*   "Salvage Markets for Materials in Solid Waste," op.cit.' (Chapter IV);
      and "The Components of Solid Waste," 14 pp. 1968, see pages 10-14.
      Proprietary study by Midwest Research Institute.
                                  204

-------
                                 TABLE  100

                   WASTE  PAPER GENERATED BY SOURCE.  1972
                             (In  thousand tons)
        Grade

Newsprint
Printing Paper
Fine Paper
Industrial Coverting
  and Packaging
Tissue

  Total Paper

Containerboard
Other Containerboard
Folding Boxboard
Setup Boxboard
Milk and Food Service
Other Boxboard

  Total Paperboard

Construction
Insulating

  Total Construction
Gross Waste                             Converting
 Discarded   Household^'  Nonhousehold     Scrap
10,300
7,200
3,800
5,600
2.550
8,900
3,750
700
3,450
1,650
1,000
2,500
2,750
1,850
700
400
950
350
300
200
  29,450
  24,600

     350
     650

   1,000
18,450
 6,300

   100
   150

   250
 8,800
15,200

   100
   200

   300
2,200
15,700
1,050
4,400
450
1,650
1,350
1,000
450
2,900
' 350
1,000
600
12,950
450
700
50
450
600
1,750
150
' 800
50
200
150
3,100

  150
  300

  450
55,050
1.000
25,000
0.454
24,300
0.441
5,750
0.105
Grand Total

Ratio to Total
sj  Calculations for household and nonhousehold waste were based upon the
      discard patterns for each grade after adjustment for converting scrap
      from gross waste generated.
Source:   Midwest Research Institute.
                                     205

-------
                                 TABLE  101

                   WASTE PAPER GENERATED BY SOURCE. 1975
        Grade

Newsprint
Printing Paper
Fine Paper
Industrial Converting
  and Packaging
Tissue

  Total Paper

Containerboard
Other Containerboard
Folding Boxboard
Setup Boxboard
Milk and Food Service
Other Folding Boxboard

  Total Paperboard

Construction
Insulating and Hard
  Pressed

  Total Construction
Grand Total

Ratio to Total
(In
Gross Waste
Discarded
10,450
7,850
4,300
ng
5,850
2,500
30,950
16,250
d 1,000
4,400
400
ce 1,400
ard 1,450
24,900
350
750
n 1,100
56,950
1.000
thousand tons)
Household^/
9,050
4,100
800
3,600
1,600
19,150
1,000
400
2,900
300
850
650
6,100
100
150
250
25,500
0.448

Nonhousehcld
1,000
2,700
3,100
1,950
700
9,450
13,450
450
700
50
350
650
15,650
100
250
350
25,450
0.447

Converting
Scrap
400
1,050
400
300
200
2,350
1,800
150
800
50
200
150
3,150
150
350
500
6,000
0.105
a/  Calculations were based upon  the discard patterns for each grade after
      adjustment for converting scrap  from gross waste generated.
Source:  Midwest Research Institute.
                                    206

-------
                                 TABLE 102

                   WASTE PAPER GENERATED BY SOURCE.  1980
(In thousand tons)
Gross Waste
Discarded
11,800
9,500
5,300
ng
6,600
2,950
36,150
20,550
d 2,300
4,850
450
ce 1,750
ard 1,650
31,550
400
850
n 1,250
Household^/
10,200
4,950
950
4,050
1,900
22,050
1,300
1,050
3,150
350
1,100
700
7,650
100
200
300
Nonhousehold
1,100
3,300
3,850
2,200
800
11,250
16,950
1,050
800
50
450
750
20,050
100
250
350
Converting
Scrap
500
1,250
500
. 350
250
2,850
2,300
200
900
50
200
200
3,850
200
400
600
       Grade

Newsprint
Printing Paper
Fine Paper
Industrial Converting
  and Packaging
Tissue

  Total Paper

Containerboard
Other Containerboard
Folding Boxboard
Setup Boxboard
Milk and Food Service
Other Folding Boxboard

  Total Paperboard

Construction
Insulating and Hard
  Pressed

  Total Construction
Grand Total              68,950       30,000        31,650        7,300

Ratio to Total            1.000        0.435         0.459        0.106

a/  Calculations were based upon the discard patterns for each grade after
      adjustment for converting scrap from gross waste generated.
Source:  Midwest Research Institute.
                                    207

-------
                                 TABLE 103

                   WASTE PAPER GENERATED BY SOURCE. 1985
                              (In Thousand Tons)
                       Gross Waste                             Converting
                                             a /              -a /
        Grade           Discarded   Household—   Nonhousehold—    Scrap

Newsprint                13,150       11,350         1,250          550
Printing Paper           11,300        5,900         3,900        1,500
Fine Paper                6,350        1,150         4,600          600
Industrial Converting
  and Packaging           7,550        4,650         2,500          400
Tissue                    3.350        2.150           950          250

  Total Paper            41,700       25,200        13,200        3,300

Containerboard           25,600        1,600        21,150        2,850
Other Containerboard      1,600          700           700          200
Folding Boxboard      .    5,400        3,500           900        1,000
Setup Boxboard              450          350            50           50
Milk and Fold Service     1,950        1,200           500          250
Other Folding Boxboard    1.800          800           800          200

  Total Paperboard       36,800        8,150        24,100        4,550

Construction                400          100           100          200
Insulating                1.050          200           350          500

  Total Construction      1,450          300           450          700
Grand Total              79,950       33,650        37,750        8,550

Ratio to Total            1.000        0.421         0.472        0.107
a_/  Calculations were based upon the discard patterns for each grade after
      adjustment for converting scrap from gross waste generated.
Source:  Midwest Research Institute.
                                     208

-------
14,750
13,250
7,550
8,500
3,800
12,750
6,900
. 1,350
5,250
2,450
1,400
4,600
5,500
2,800
1.050
600
1,750
700
450
300
                                 TABLE 104

                   WASTE PAPER GENERATED BY SOURCE. 1990
                              (In thousand tons)
                       Gross Waste                             Converting
                                             a /
        Grade       ;    Discarded   Household—   Nonbousehold     Scrap

Newsprint
Printing Paper
Fine Paper
Industrial Converting
  and Packaging
Tissue

  Total Paper            47,850       28,700        15,350        3,800

Containerboard           31,850        2,000        26,250        3,600
Other Containerboard      1,850          800           800          250
Boxboard                  5,950        3,900           950        1,100
Setup Boxboard     .         450          350            50           50
Milk and Food Service     2,150        1,350           550          250
Other Boxboard            1.900          850           850          200

  Total Paperboard       44,150        9,250        29,450        5,450

Construction                450          100           150          200
Insulating and Hard
  Pressed                 1,200          250           400          550

  Total Construction      1,650          350           550          750
Grand Total

Ratio to Total
93,650
1.000
38,300
0.409
45,350
0.484
10,000
0.107
a/  Calculations were based upon the discard patterns for each grade after
      adjustment for converting scrap from gross waste generated.
Source:   Midwest Research Institute.
                                     209

-------
          The allocation to the basic generation sources follows the pro-
duct to its ultimate destination in use and finally in discard.  Thus,
newspapers largely going to individual homes (as opposed to commercial
papers such as the Wall Street Journal) show up as household waste. Print-
ing paper is used in offices and general business,but the bulk of printing
paper tonnage goes into the home as books, magazines, direct mail aJver-
tising, and other printed material.  By contrast, fine paper is largely
a business paper category since it includes stationery , computer print-
out, forms and the like.  Industrial converting and packaging is split
almost evenly between homes (e.g., grocery sacks, wrapping paper) and
business  (bags, and "industrial" grades) paper.  Tissue, as a personal use
produc^ is consumed largely in the home as towels, napkins, toilet and
facial tissue; in the business sector^it is used in the same manner except
for small amounts of packaging tissue.  Overall, about 45 percent of paper
products  showed up in households in 1972; 44 percent  is in the nonhousehold
sector; and 10 percent as converting scrap, created when rolls of paper
are transformed into finished products.

          In the paperboard group, the sources of waste generation reverse.
Containerboard (i.e., corrugated containers) is a commercial product; we
estimate only 6 percent gets into the home while 11 percent is converting
scrap and 83 percent is discard in the nonhousehold sector.  However, it
is .worthy of note that about one-third of the latter  tonnage goes to
industrial plants such as assembly plants (e.g., autos,  appliances, TV,
etc.) while the remaining two-thirds goes to wholesale and retail stores
(e.g., supermarkets, drug and department stores).  Boxboard is largely a
packaging material that goes into the home containing consumer products
(e.g., food).  Likewise, milk and food service is predominately bleached
paperboard used to package consumer food products, (e.g., milk, frozen food,
etc.) The final grouping in paperboard is split between the two major
generation sources.  (Note that construction products have been previously
shown in the "diverted" category^)  The final ratios  (for 1972) are 26
percent paperboard in the home, 62 percent in commercial/institutional
(most of which is corrugated boxes) and 12 percent converting scrap.

          The construction category affects both household and nonhouse-
hold waste sources.  In total, then, for 1972, the composite waste sources
.are:  household, 45 percent; nonhousehold, 44 percent; and converting scrap
11 percent (Table 100 for 1972).

          Each grade classification was extended on largely the same basis
to 1990.  The total gross waste paper generation increases from 55.0
million tons in 1972 to 93.7 million tons in 1990.  The household sector
will have declined to 41 percent in 1990; nonhousehold increasing to 48
percent and converting scrap remains at 11 percent (Table 104).  This
shift is largely the result of containerboard consumption increasing more
                                   210

-------
 rapidly than other grades.   Details for intermediate  years  is  given in
 Tables 101 to 104 for 1975, 1980, 1985 and 1990.

           The distribution  of gross waste  paper generation  by  source is
 now estimated.   The next step is to determine the recovery  and recycling
 demand for waste paper and  various grades  as  a preliminary  to  forecasting
 how and what removal from the waste stream will take  place  in  the  future.
 Waste Paper Recycling in the Paper Industry

           Historically,  the paper industry has  always  been a large consumer
 of waste paper for raw materials and has  increased  its tonnage use of
.waste paper steadily to the point that in 1972  about  13 million tons were
 used for recycling in the paper industry.  However, over the last 27 years
 the rate of recycling has dec lined--from  34.6 percent  in 1945  to 20.1 per-
 cent in  1972.*

           At the end of 1972,  the paper industry stood poised  on a "new"
 raw materials use threshold.  The industry could follow history to lower
 rates of recycling for a few more years or a "turnaround" could occur in
 which recycled fiber began a comeback as  a source of  raw materials.   Evi-
 dence could be compiled to support either outcome.**

           In the early 1970's, conditions in the raw  materials supply
 situation were changing rapidly.  External forces were at work on the in-
 dustry in the form of government, and public pressure  and even customer
 pressure to "recycle."  At the same  time, the industry  was entering the
 greatest raw materials and capacity  squeeze it  had'  experienced since World
 War II.   Major companies that  had never recycled significant quantities
 of waste paper were quietly installing incremental  capacity to recycle
 old corrugated containers and  old newspapers (both  post-consumer waste
 goods).   Other long-time recyclers were increasing  output to meet booming
 paper demand.  In the meantime, virgin fiber supplies  were not so readily
 available^as weather, labor shortages and high  prices  combined to restrict
 growth in supply;  most companies were operating at  full pulp capacity too.

           As the.whole industry turned to waste paper  to fill  increasing
 demand,  exports  of waste paper also  rose  by more than  100 percent over 1972.
 *  For  the  latter  calculation American  Paper  Institute data were used.
       U.S. Bureau of  Census  data  for  1972 would give  a recycling rate  of
       17.5 percent  but  MRI considers.the API as more  comprehensive  and
       complete  data source today  on waste paper recycling.
**  See  "Paper  Recycling, the Art of  the Possible,  1970 to  1985," op.  cit.
                                    211

-------
A severe waste paper supply shortage developed and prices of waste paper
doubled in a matter of months.  Nonetheless, the industry h.'d plans to use
1 million tons more waste paper in 1973 over 1972 (a good year) and exports
added another 0.3 million tons increase in demand.  In all, the total de-
mand for waste paper, including net exports, was 13.5 million tons in 1972
and 14.9 million tons in 1973, up 1.4 million tons or 10 percent.  Never
before had the industry experienced a demand increase for waste paper of
1 million tons in 1 year.

          In addition, new capacity to utilize waste paper was committed
by the industry and coming on-stream in 1974 and 1975.  In fact, the Ameri-
can Paper Institute annual capacity survey forecast the use of 15.8 million
tons of waste paper in domestic mills by 1975,*  and MRI estimates net
exports of 0.9 million tons for a total demand for 16.7 million tons, up
nearly another 2 million tons in 2 years.  However, demand suddenly col-
lapsed in  late  1974, and it appears that about 2 years will elapse before
the recycling recurrence will resume with strength.

          The paper industry's recycling rate showed a "turnaround" in
1973--from 20.4 percent in 1972 to 21.3 percent in 1973; in 1975, the rate
of recycling will be at the 1973 level.  Then a period of uncertainty de-
velops.  If the industry brings on substantial new virgin fiber processing
capacity, the recycling rate will remain flat or decline slightly until  the
early 1980's.  However, we believe it is more likely that companies will
combine recycling capability with virgin fiber capacity, especially for
the use of old corrugated containers (in linerboard and corrugating medium);
also newsprint deinking to make newsprint should expand substantially in
the future.  This will mean years of pressure on the industry to recover
higher percentages of the key waste paper grades.  At the same time, net
exports of waste paper will likely continue strong in the face of a world-
wide tight virgin fiber supply situation.

          Under this scenario, and the fact that our previous forecast of
a turnaround appears to have been "confirmed} **we developed a forecast
of waste paper demcnd in the paper industry from 1973 to 1990, by major
grade category (Table 105).  This forecast shows that recovery of waste
paper from the gross waste generated will.climb from 14.3.million tons
in 1973 to 27.3 million tons in 1990, an increase of 91 percent in ll years;.
In addition, we estimate that net exports will rise from 0.6 million tons
in 1973 to 1.6 million tons in 1990 (Table 106).  With an additional usage
of 0.4 million tons in other recycling applications, the total demand for
waste paper will be 32.5 million tons in 1990 (Refer to Table 90).
*.  "API Capacity 1972-1975, Paper, Paperboard, Wood Pulp," American Paper
      Institute, 1973.
**  "Paper Recycling, the Art of the Possible, 1970-1985," op. cit.
                                212

-------
                                              TABLE  105
                         ESTIMATED USAGE OF WASTE PAPER FOR RECYCLING IN THE
Waste Paper Grade

Mixed Grades

News—post-consumer
News—converting?.'

     Total

Corrugated—post-consumer
Corrugated—cuttings—'

     Total

Deinking Grades and
  Pulp Substitutes

     Grand Total

Paper Demand

Recycling Rate
PAPER INDUSTRY BY MAJOR GRADE CATEGORY, 1972-1990
(In thousand tons)
1970
2,639
1,825
410
2,235
2,528
1.552
4,080
liPiZ
12,021
57,835
20.8
1971
2,776
1,754
420
2,174
2,700
1.577
4,277
1,097
12,324
59,440
20.7
1972
3,054
1,880
437
2,317
2,960
1.762
4,722
3jm
13,230
64,356
20.4
1973
3,251
2,129
450
2,579
3,430
1.861
5,291
3^198,
14,317
67,122
21.3
1975
3,215
2,110
440
2,550
3,410
1.820
5,230
3,165
14,160
66,490
21.3
1980
3,670
2,535
500
3,035
5,100
2.305
7,405
1^750
17,860
79,360
22.5
1985
4,185
2,995
550
3,545
7,425
2,870
10,295
' 4^440
22,465
93,565
24.0
1990
4,510
3,375
625
4,000
10,095
3,565
13,650
5±L80_
27,340
109,240
25.0
a/  Based upon calculated printing scrap recovery of 2.8 percent of newsprint demand plus overissue
      news at 1.4 percent of newsprint demand.
b/  Based upon 11.0 percent of containerboard mill production (domestic use); calculated from McClenahar
      data for cuttings 1969, 1970.

-------
                                  TABLE  106

               WASTE  PAPER  IMPORTS  AND  EXPORTS.  1960  TO 1990
                            (In thousand tons)
Year

1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1_97_3_ _
1974 est,'
1975
1980
1985
1990
Exports

  153
  206
  209
  230
  272
  292
  246
  262
  253
  289
  408
  419
  415
  683
1,307
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,650
Imports

  NA
  NA
  NA
  NA
  87
 108
 113
  86
  93
  88
  67
  68
  88
  87
  87
 100
 100
 100
 100
Net Exports

    .153
    206
    209
    230
    185
    184
    133
    176
    160
    201
    341
    351
    327
    596
  1,220
    900
  1,100
  1,300
  1,550
Source:  "Statistics of Paper and Paperboard 1974,"  American Paper Institute,
           1974; forecast by Midwest Research Institute.
                                     214

-------
          The grades  that will contribute most to  the  increase  in recycling
are old newspapers and corrugated containers.  As  indicated  in  Table  l.'>5,
the demand  for old newspapers  (as opposed to converting scrap)  will increase
from 2.1 million  tons in 1973  to 3.4 million tons  in 1990, an increase
of  62  percent.  Old corrugated container demand  will go from  3.4 million
tons in 1973 to 10.1 million tons in 1990, or 197  percent.   However,  both
of these increases are less than would be possible if  external  actions  stim-
ulate the industry.  Overall the forecast recycling rates led to an un-
spectacular resurgence of recycling in the paper industry.

          The details of this  forecast are developed in a different way
in a summary table for 1973 and. 1985^ which combines paper production  in
the USA by  grade  with the forecast of waste paper  use  in each paper grade
detailed by the waste paper grade (e.g., news, corrugated etc.) itself
(Table 107).  What this table  shows and our analysis confirms is that most
grades that have  used waste paper will continue to  do  sot but only a few
will show significant increases in the rate of recycling—relating once
again the key role that news and corrugated will play.

          Overall, we have calculated a recycling  rate of 24 percent  in
1985 (22.5  million tons of waste paper use) versus  21.3 percent in 1973
(14.3 million tons).  Analysis of this table shows where increased re-
cycling will take place, and where it will not (a  significant factor  in
itself).

          The most notable increases will take place in:

          *  newsprint

          *  tissue

          *  kraft linerboard

          *  recycled linerboard

          *  recycled corrugating material

          * "other" containerboard              ,

          However, the long-term historic uses of waste paper—combination
boxboard (holding boxboard, set up boxbpard, and other boxboard)--will
continue to be in relative decline in the years ahead.   Nothing in recent
statistics  and industry activities would indicate  that recycled boxboard
will recover and become more important vis-a-vis its competition (bleached
and unbleached kraft paperboard) in the years ahead.*
    More  detailed  development  of  the  recycling  forecasts  is given  in
      Appendix  E for newsprint, linerboard,  corrugating medium, and box-
      board.

                                    215

-------
                                                                      WASTE PAPER USAGE AMD DISTRIBUTION  IN TH£  PAPER IXDL'STRY Bt PAPER GRADE  AKD TYPE OF t.'.'.'.rE PAPER.  1973  AND 1-185
NJ

Grade Category Demand Paper Use Paper Use
Pa pe r - - Dema nd
Newsprint— production 3,413 14.0 490
Nevaprlnt-'-net imports 7,313
Printing, Writing and Related 13,334 7.0 938
Unbleached Kraft and Ind. Conv. 4,025')
Special Ind. and Other 1,79'J '5 263
Tissue 3,933 30.0 1.179
Total Paperi' 33,748 8.5 2,870
Paperboard - - Product ion
Containerboard--aolid wood pulp
Linerboard 11,067 -- 449
Corrugating Medium 4,127 20.6 849
• Other Contalnerboard-' 2,392 -- £' -- -'
Total Contalnerboard 17,496 7.4 1,298
Boxboard — solid wood pulp 4,191' neg.
Recycled Paperboardi'
Linerboard 289 108.0 310
Corrugating Medium 1,128 80.0 902
Chip and Flllerboard 307 115.0 353
Other Contalnerboard^ 1,386 107.0 1,480
Folding Boxboard 2,522 115.0 2,900
Set-up Boxboard 465 115.0 535
Other Folding Boxboard-' 1,788 116.0 2.080
Total Recycled Paperboard 7,885 109.0 . 8,560
Production 29,572 33.0 9,858
Paperboard Adj. for
Exports—Demand 27,327
Other Paper and Paperboard --Demand
Wet Machine/Board 1341 g() & ^ 5?]
Construction Paper l,840j '
Insulating and Hard-Pressed
Board 4,073
Total Other 6,047 26.3 1,591-''
Molded Pulp and Fiber Pipe -- £'
Grand Totals 69,367
Adj . for Paperboard
Export—Demand 67,122 21.3 14,319
a/ The calculation procedure was as follows: The total production
1973-1976: Paper, Paperboard, Woodpulp." The distribution of
Pulp .Subs
Mixed
7
7
44
47
98
196


50
77
—
127
--

25
14
100
329
820
151
570
2,009
2,136



919


--
919



3.251
News
483
483
-.
14
98
595


1
19
--
20
__

0
8
79
337
. 650
120
443
1,637
1,657



327


--
327



2,579
Corrugated Deinking Production

--
—
15
125
140


355
747
--
1,102
—

273
875
107
611
879
162
907
3,814
4,916



235


--
235



5,291

"--
893
187
858
1,938


44
7
--
51
—

12
5
67
203
551
102
160
1,100
1,151



:09


-.
109



3.198
4.700
8,600
19,750
5,2601
2.420J
5.270
46,000


15,840
5,500
3.600
24,940
5,600

1,760
2,600
400
2,200
2,480
440
1.980
11,860
42,400

39,150

145
2,270

6.000
8,415

96,815

93,565


Paper Paper Use
22.0
--
7.5
5.7
35.4
21.1


13.3
20.0
neg.
12.9
neg.

108.0
80.0
115.0
107.0
115.0
115.0
116.0
105.0
37.0



65.0
71.0

-
20.0
--


24.0
1,030
—
1,480
440
1.900
4,850


2,110
1,100
neg.
3,210
neg.

1,900
2,080
460
2,355
2,850
505
2.300
12,450
15.660



95
1,610

--
1,705
250


22,465

Mixed
30
--
150
90 v
170
440


200
70
..
270
__

150
40
130
520
800
146
630
2,410
2,680



75
985

.-
1.060
5


4.185

News
1,000
—
..
20
190
1,210


0
15
__
15
_.

--
10
100
54O
625
110
490
1,875
1,890



0
280

..
280
165


3,545

Corrugated

--
—
45
260
305


1,810
1,005
.-
2,815
_.

1,675
2,020
140
965
885
160
1.005
6,850
9,665



10
310

..
320
5


10,295
Pulp Subs
Delnklng

.
1.33O
285
1.280
2.895


100
10
--
110
	

75
10
90
330
540
95
175
1.315
1.425



10
35

--
45
75


4,4-40
and waste paper use came from API "Statistics of Paper and Paperboard. 1974" and "Capacity,
waste paper by paperboard grade for the recycled paperboard category was derived from
McClenahan, "Consumption of Paper Stock by United States' Mills in 1969,
Paperboard." However, "other Folding Boxboard" was used to ba
b/ Franklin Associates calculated usage of wa=te paper in terms o.
the "Other Containerboard" grades (kraftl. but this use could
c/ "Other Containerboard" consists of: tube, can and drum— Il~; gy
solid woodpulp type and 37% recycled paperboard grades.
d/ "Other Boxboard" consists of: tube, can and drum — 33'.; exports
paperboard grades.


lance the
linerboard
and 1970
." This source
total recycled paperboard
product!
on for domestic
gave the
grades
use; In
basis for columns 2 through
for total waste
ac tua 1 1 ty , some
paper usage,
waste paper
7 In "Recycled
I.e.,
is also
the waste
used in






not be calculated.
psum wal Iboard — 27°'.

— 17?.; all
•



,; linerboard export -• ?i">".


other vises, 50".. The breakdown









,; all other 12'.;

The breakdown Is


is about 20' solid wood pulp and 80









about 637.

', recycled






















-------
          Thus, our present  forecast of recycling is not as optimistic
 as  it was 2 years ago.x  However, these two forecasts differ  in one key
 respect--our earlier  forecast assumed that outside focus, e.g  , federal
 intervention,would bring about  rapid increases  in recycling; Lhe present
 forecast relies wholly  on recent trends within  the industry—which ad-
 mittedly are much more  favorable to recycling than 2 years ago, but are
 going to bring gradual,rather than rapid, change to the raw materials
 patterns of the paper industry.

          Because corrugated containers represent the "best" post-consumer
 waste paper grade (along with newspapers), we developed more detail on the
 trend in recovery of old corrugated (Table 108).  A predictable ratio of
 clippings will be recovered, based on tonnage processed through box-making
 plants.  The use of old corrugated containers will increase from 3.4
 million tons in 1973  to 10.1 million tons in 1990.  Overall, the recovery
 of  corrugated will increase from 5.3 million tons in 1973 to 13.6 million
 tons in 1990, up 156 percent.   If this occurs as forecast, then corrugated
 recovery will represent 50 percent of all waste paper recovered for re-
 cycling in the paper  industry in 1990 compared  to 37 percent in 1973-
Also, this level of corrugated  recovery will mean a recovery rate of 42.1
percent of domestic containerboard consumption  in 1990, compared to 31.3
percent in 1973 (Table  108).  Thus, the recovery techniques of necessity
will have to become more sophisticated and efficient.

          A recycling profile of the total paper industry for a 50-year
 span, from 1940 to 1990, shows history repeating itself in a sense (Table
 109, Figure 32).   The rate of recycling is forecast to bottom out at 20.4
percent in 1972 and rise to 25.0 percent by 1990.   In 1954, the recycling
rate was 25.0 percent, so that reversal to "equivalent points" will take
40 years, of which 22 are in decline and 18 are in rising rates of recycling.
The Recoverability of Waste Paper for Recycling

          To determine the forecast role that recycling will play in paper
recovery by 1990, we also determined the amount of waste paper that could
reasonably be removed from the waste stream.  This calculation followed a
detailed step wise procedure, including a breakdown of the general secondary
waste paper grade classification.  The base year for this calculation was
1985.  Each major paper product category is classified into five broad grades:
mixed, news, corrugated, deinking (bleached) and pulp substitutes.   These
designations are those commonly used to classify waste paper into recycling
grades.
   "Paper Recycling—the Art of the Possible, 1970-1985," op. cit.
                                      217

-------
                                                                TABLE 108

                                           COMPARATIVE  RECYCLING OF CONTAINERBOARD.  1969-1990

Year
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1975
£ I960
1985
1990
Total
Waste Paper
Used— Domestic
11,969
12,021
12,323
13,132
14,318
14,160
17,860
22,465
27,340
U.S.A.
Recycling
Rate- '/,
20.3
20.7
20.7
20.4
21.3
21.3
22.5
24.0
25.0
Total
Container
Recycled
4,415
4,080
4,277
4,722
5,291
5,230
7,405
10,295
13,650

Container % of
Waste Paper
36.9
33.9
34.7
36.0
37.0
36.9
41.5
45.8
49.9
Container
Increase
% Over 1969
_ _
-8
-3
+7
+20
+18
+68
+133
+209

Container
Clippings-'
1,559
1,552
1,578
1,762
1,862
1,820
2,305
2,871
3,567

Post -Consumer
Containers
2,856
2,528
2,528
2,960
3,429
3,410
5,100
7,424
10,083

Containerboard
Production—
14,396
13,964
13,964
16,019
16,928
16,550
20,950
26,100
32,430
Containe
Recovery
Rate- \
30.7
29.2
29.8
29.5
31.3
31.6
35.3
39.4
42.1
a/  Domestic use linerboard, corrugating medium,  container chipboard.
t>/  Actual for 1969 and 1970 based upon IPC data;  calculated at 117. Containerboard, 1971 to 1990 based on 1969-1970 actual.
Source:  American Paper Institute data, Institute  of Paper Chemistry; Midwest Research Institute estimates (1975-1985).

-------
                                   TABLE  109
              PAPER RECYCLING  IN  THE  PAPER  INDUSTRY.  1940  TO 1990


Year
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1975
1980
1985
1990

Waste
Paper//
4,668
6,075
5,495
6,368
6,859
6,800
7,278
8,009
7,585
6,600
7,956
9,070
7,881
8,531
7,857
9,041 .
8,836
8,493 ''•
8,67i
9,414
9,031
9,018
9,075
9,613
9,843
10,231
10,564
9,888
10,222
10,939
10,059
10,997
11,269





(In t
Waste
Paper^/





























11,969
12,021
12,323
13,132
14,318
14,160
17,860
22,465
27,340
housand tons)
Paper
Consumption
16,757
20,421
19,780
19,437
19,445
19,665
22,510
24,749
26,083
24,695
29,012
30,561
29,017
31,360
31,379
34,719
36,495
35,270
35,119 .
38,725
39,138
40,312
42,216
43,715
46,384
. 49,102
52 , 680
51,945
55,664
58,915
57,940
59,557
64,386
67,240
66,490
79,360
93,565
109,240

Percent Percent
Recycle!/ Recycle-/
27.9
29.7
27.8
32.8
35.3
34.6
32.3
32.4
29.1
26.7
27.4
29.7
27.2
27.2
25.0
26.0
24.2
24.1
24.7
24.3
23.1
22.4
21.5
22.0
21.2
20.8
20.1
19.0
18.4
18.6 20.3
18.3 20.7
18.5 20.7
17.5 - 20.4
21.3
21.3
22.5
24.0
. 25.0
a/  U.S. Bureau of Census data.
t>/  American Paper Institute data 1969-73; MRI 1975-1990.  Includes waste paper in
      molded pulp, pipe, etc.
Source:  "Statistics of Paper and Paperboard 1974,"  American Paper Institute,
           1974.  (1940-1973); Midwest Research Institute Forecasts.
                                       219

-------
          The breakdown by grade follows historical patterns of paper
consumption and use.  No attempt was made to determine potential waste
paper grade precisely, rather the total available waste was classified
into one value.  The calculated distribution for 1972 is given in Table
110.  One step was to determine recoverability of these products as
waste paper grades by source converting,, household and nonhousehold   This
was done as follows (Table 110).  Total waste available was grouped by
paper grade;converting scrap was then displayed along vith household and
nonhousehold waste generated.  Then an estimate of the recovery potential
for each grade by source was made.  Converting scrap as calculated pre-
viously is largely recovered for recycling purposes.  The remaining "net"
waste paper is post-consumer waste and can be recovered in varying .degrees,
e.g., newspapers from homes are 55 percent recoverable; corrugated con-
tainers from businesses 60 percent recoverable."

          The next calculation was the determination of the amount of
post-consumer waste that is recoverable and  by difference what is unre-
coverable.  The SMSA was considered a geographically "acceptable" poten-
tial source in which waste paper could be recovered economically, i.e.,
with a population concentration and density conducive to commercial re-
covery operations.  About 70 percent of the U.S. population is in SMSA's
and a larger proportion of waste paper is generated in SMSA's as reflected
in per capita paper consumption figures.  We estimated that up to 80
percent of post-consumer waste paper products would occur in SMSA's.  If in
general, 60 percent of a grade is recoverable in SMSA's and 20 percent
outside is recoverable, we have an estimate (0.80 x 0.60 + 0.20 x 0.20 = 52
percent).  We used this general approach for key bulk grades li\r°. news
and corrugated.  However, we had to apply more general estimates to the
other products which should be treated only as approximations (Table 110).

          The next step was to determine what proportion will actually be
recovered, based on our previous forecasts.   This again was a judgment
based on the paper industry's use of selected waste paper grades on a
historical and forecast basis..  Actual recovery (total fiber uses) was
   A careful study of Table 110 will show that these are our best esti-
     mates and vary from a low of 10 percent to a high of 60 percent for
     postconsumer waste depending upon the nature of the product and
     whether it occurs in households or nonhousehold locations.
                                    221

-------
TABLE 110




Grade Classification
Newsprint
Converting Scrap
Household Waste
Nonhousehold Waste
Printing Paper
Converting Scrap
Household Waste
Nonhousehold Waste
to
j^ Fine Paper
hO
Converting Scrap
Household Waste
Nonhousehold Waste
Industrial Converting and
Packaging Paper
Converting Scrap
Household Waste
Nonhousehold Waste
Tissue
Converting Scrap
Household Waste
Nonhousehold Waste
Total Paper
Converting Scrap
Household Waste
Nonhousehold Waste
Containerboard
Converting Scrap
Household Waste
Nonhousehold Waste


(i)
Total
Available
13.150
550
11.350
1,250
U.300
1,500
5,900
3.900
6.350

600
1,150
4,600

7.550
400
4,650
2,500
3.350
250
2.150
950
&i , ?nn
3.300
25,200
13,200
25.600
2.870
1,600
21,130

(2)
Recovery .
Potential
(Ratio)
0.535
1.00
.55
.15
0.32
0.95
0.20
0.25
0.31

1.00
0.20
0.25

OJ2
0.95
0.30
0.25
0.18
0.95
0.10
0.15
QU7
0.97
0.37
0.23
0.61
L.OO
0.10
0.60
(In
(3)
Total
Recovery
Potential
7.000
550
6,250
200
3.580
1.425
1,180
975
1.980

600
230
1.150

2.405
380
1,400
625
605
240
215
150
15.570
3,195
9,275
3,100
15.700
2,870
1M
12,670
thousand tons and ratio)


(4)
Unrecoverable
6.150
0
5,100
1.050
7.720
75
4.720
2,925
4.370

0
920
3,450

5.145
20
3,250
1,875
2.745
10
1.935
800
26.130
105
15,925
10,100.
9.900
0
1,440
8,460

(5)
Actual
Recovery
4.760
550
4.110
100
2.325
1.425
150
750
1.640

600
90
950

980
380
150
450
290
240
0
50
9.995
3,195
4,600
2,300
1 1 , 38J>
2,870
35
8,480
(6)
Potential
Recovery
(3) •- (5)
68%
100
66
50
65.
100
13
77
83

100
39
83

4J.
100
11
72
*i
100
0
33
64
100
50
74
73
100
22
67
Distribution of Recovery


(7) (8) (9)
Mixed News Container
890 3.770
500
890 3.170
100
900
400
100
400
tso


50
100

480
80
150
250
&•


50
2.470 3.770
480 500
1,190 3.170
800 100
460 10.925
2,870
10 25
450 8.030
by Grade and Source


(10)
Pulp Subs
50
50


68Q
525

155
900

550

350

450
300

150
202
200


2.280
1.625
0
655
615





(11)
Detoking
1°

50

245

50
195
590

50
40
500

50


50
40_
40


1.475
590
. 140
745
20




-------
                                                                                                       TABLE 110 (Concluded)
                                                           ESTIMATED WASTE PAPER RECOVERY POTENTIAL AM) FORECAST OF ACTUAL RECOVERY FOR ALL FIBER USES. 1985
ro
to
  Folding Boxboard and Setup
    Boxboard

    Converting Scrap
    Household Waste
    Nonhousehold Waste

  Milk and Food Service

    Converting Scrap
    Household Waste
    Nonhousehold Waste

  Other Container-board and
    Boxboard

    Converting Scrap
    Household Waste
    Nonhousehold Waste

Total Paperboard

    Converting Scrap
    Household Waste
    Nonhousehold Waste

  Construction, Insulating and
    Hand Dressed Board

    Converting Scarp
    Household Waste
    Nonhousehold Waste
                         Grand Total  - All Grades

                           Converting Scrap
                           Household Waste
                           Nonhousehold Waste
(concluded)
5.850
1.050
3,850
950
1.950
250
1,200
500
3^00
400
1,500
1,500
36.800
4,550
8,150
24,100
1_.45Q
700
300
450
79.950
8,570
33,650
37,730
0.33
0.90
0.20
0.20
0.30
1.00
0.20 .
0.20
0.28
0.90
0.20
0.20
0.52
0.97
0.18
0.55
0.54
0.90
0.20
0.20
0.44
0.96
0.32
0.44
1.905
.945
770
190
590
250
240
100
960
360
300
300
19.155
4,425
1,470
13,260
780
630
60
90
35.505
8,250
10,805
16,450
3.945
105
3,080
760
1.360
0
960
400
2.440
40
1,200
1.200
17.645
145
6,680
10,820
670
70
240
360
44.445
320
22,845
21,280.
995
945
10
40
310
250
10
50
515
360
10
145
13.205
4,425
65
8,715
650
630
0
20
23.850
8,250
4,565
11,035
52
100
1
21
11
100
4
50
5A
100
3
48
69
100
4
66
«
100
0
22
62
100
42
67
995
945
10
40
22
10
10
170
60
10
100
1.645
1,005
40
600
320
300
20
4.435 3.770
1,785 500
1,230 3,170
1,420 100


270
250
20
345
300
45
10.925 ,615
2,870 550
25 0
8,030 65
300
300
10.925 3.195
2,870 2,475
25 0
8,030 720
                                                                                                                                                                                     20
                                                                                                                                                                                     20
                                                                                                                                                                                    0
                                                                                                                                                                                    0
                                                                                                                                                                                     20
                                                                                                                                                                                     30

                                                                                                                                                                                     30
                                                                                                                                                           1.525

                                                                                                                                                             620
                                                                                                                                                             140
                                                                                                                                                             765
                          Source:
                                 Includes  paper  recovered  for  recycling,  for molded  pulp  products,  for other uses,  and for net exports.   Fiber recovery in solid waste management  systems
                                   of  1,200,000  tons  is  Included;  recovery  for  energy  is  excluded.   Exports are calculated using the same grade structure anJ percentages as.domestic use,
                                   since no  documentation  of export  grade structure  is  available.   The year 1985 was selected as the base year to make the deta iled- calculations.   However.
                                   the detalfe presented  here are estimates only  and should-not  be  construed as more  l.ian approximations;  this is particularly true of source and detailed
                                   grade recovery 'data.  While this  represents  estimates,' the  summary results appear to be generally valid and representative based upon the forecasts  =£de
                                   which preceded  these  estimates  and  calculations.
                                   Midwest Research Institute.

-------
then distributed on a grade-by-grade basis by source.  The result was a
highly detailed approximate,  of waste paper recovery in 1985 to meet the
recycling, modeled pulp, and export demand earlier forecast.  (We believe
this distribution is usable in summary form, but should not be applied on
a detailed basis because focal data was virtually nonexistent).

          Once the 1985 calculation was complete, the same procedure
was carried out on_an aggregated basis for 1972 (Tabl° 111); 1975 (Table
112); 1980 (Table 113); 1990 (Table 114).   The impact of post-consumer
waste recovery from the home and businesses b.ecomes apparent if 1972 and
1990 are .contrasted:   recovery of all  grades  (mainly news)  for  house-
holds was 2.9 million tons in  1972 and will be 5.0 million tons in 1990.
For nonhousehold sources, the recovery was 5.2 million tons in 1972 and
rose to 14.3 million tons in 199.0  (all grades but old corrugated containers
are a key factor).
Summary of the Impact of Recycling on Solid Waste

          Likewise, the residual waste — that which has no fiber recovery
value was then calculated.  Excluding resource recovery facilities that
convert paper to an energy product (but including fiber recovery from
solid waste management system), the net waste in resource recovery systems
or processed for disposal was calculated.  This value is 41.5 million
tons in 1972,rising to 64.6 million tons in 1990, an increase of 56 per-
cent or 23.1 million tons.  At the same time, the waste paper generated
is 55.0 million tons in 1972 rising to 93.6 million tons in 1990 an in-
crease of 70 percent and 38.6 million tons.  Thus, withdrawal of fiber
as recycling or export material will lighten but not lower the direct
burden on the solid waste management system.  The trend is favorable^ut
the rate is lower than it might be under other circumstances.  Increased
paper recovery rates will impact favorably on the solid waste rate of
growth,but the tonnage will continue to increase steadily with increasing
consumption.

          However, paper can also be utilized for other resource recovery
options although recycling (including exports) is the most viable recovery
option at the present time.  To a lesser extent, other recovery options
might reduce the amount of net waste paper disposed of by conventional
disposal techniques--landfill and by incineration.
                                   224

-------
                                                             TABLE 111
                      ESTIMATED WASTE PAPER RECOVERY POTENTIAL AND ACTUAL RECOVERY FOR ALL FIBER USES.  1972
        Category

Total - Paper

  Converttrig Scrap -
  Household Waste
  Nonhousehold Waste

Total - Paperboard

  Converting Scrap  ,
  Household Waste-'•; '
  Nonhousehold Waste

Total - Construction, Etc.

  Converting Scrap.-'
  Household :Waste^-   •'
  Nonhousehold Waste

Total - All Categories

  Converting .-Scrap :;.
  Household>Wasteo   ;
  Nonhousehold Waste
Note:
(In thousand tons and percent)
Distribution of Recovery by Grade and
Total Percent Recovery Actual
Available Recoverable Potential Recovery
29.450 37. 10.985 6.620
2,200
18,450
8,800
24.600
3,100
6,300
15,200
Etc. 1.000
450
250
300
3 55.050
5,750
25,000
24,300
recovered for
97
37
23
51
97
18
55
52
90
20
20
44
97
32
43
recycling in
2,135
6,825
2,025
12.505
3,010
1,135
8,360
515
405
50
60
24.005
5,550
8,010
10,445
the paper
2,135
2,895
1,59.0
6.510
2,887
30
3,593
420
405
0 -
15
13.550
5,427
2,925
5,198
industry for
Mixed
1.755
298
887
570
1.180
715
30
435
220
205
15-
3.155
-1,218
•v.?.-' 917
1 , 020
use in
Source
Pulp Total
News Container Subs Deinking Unrecovered
2.385 1.545
: 437 1,050
1,918 0
- 30 495
4.880 425
1,762 385
0
3,118 40
195
195
2.385 4.880 2.165
•''437 •'.1,762 1,630
1,918 0 0
.30- 3,118 535
molded pulp products, for
935
350
90
495
25
25
5
5
965
380
' 90
495
other.'.
22.830
65
15,555
7,210;
18.090
213
6,270
11,607
580
45
250
41.500
323
22,075
19,102
uses ''and net
Source:
exports'-..  Fiber recovered "'in-Solid Waste Management'Systems of'50,'000 tons is included; recovery.: for energy is ex-
cluded.  Exports are claculat'ed at the'.same' grade •stru6ture-;and percentages as.domes tic,.use •since, no uocumentatiori
of export grade structure is available.  This  table was constructed arid calculate'd ::f'roiri>'de tailed  data''developed for
1985, and adjusted to 1972.
Midwest Research Institute.

-------
                                                         TABLE 112

                 ESTIMATED WASTE  PAPER  RECOVERY  POTENTIAL AND ACTUAL RECOVERY  FOR ALL FIBER USES.  1975
                                            (In thousand tons and percent)
       Category

Total Paper

  Converting Scrap
  Household Waste
  Nonhousehold Waste

Total Paperboard

  Converting Scrap
  Household Waste
  Nonhousehold Waste

Total Construction, Etc.

  Converting Scrap
  Household Waste
  Nonhousehold Waste

Total All Categories

  Converting Scrap
  Household Waste
  Nonhousehold Waste
                              Total       Percent
                           Available  Recoverable
                                                                       Distribution of Recovery by Grade and  Source
                                                    Recovery
                              2,350
                             19,150
                              9,450

                             24.900

                              3,150
                              6,100
                             15,650

                              1.100

                                500
                                250
                                350

                             56.950

                              6,000
                             25,500
                             25,450
II

97
37
23
97
18
55

52.

90
20
20

44

96
32
43
11.540

 2,280
 7,085
 2,175
 3,055
 1,100
 8.610

  570

  450
   50
   70

24.875

 5,785
 8,235
10,855
Actual
Recovery
7.340
2,280
3.270
1.790
7.315
2.925
25
4,365
495
450
0
45
15.150
5,655
3.295
6,200

Mixed News Container
1.915 2.J25
300 440
925 2.255
690 30
1.275 5.590
700 1,820
25 0
550 3,770
250
210
0
40
3.440 2.725 5.590
1,210 440 1,820
950 2,255 0
1,280 30 3,770
Pulp
Subs
1.690
1,140
0
550
445
400
0
45
215
210
0
5
2.305
1,750
0 .
555

Deinktng
1.055
400
90
565
5
5


30
30


1.090
435
90
565
Total
Unrecovered
23.610
70
15,880
7.660
17.585
225
6,075
11,285
605
50
250
305
41.800
345
22,205
19,250
Note:   Includes paper recovery for recycling in the paper industry,  for use in molded ; pulp products, for other uses, and
         net exports.  Fiber recovery in solid waste management  systems of 300,000 tons is included;  recovery for energy is
         excluded.   Exports are calculated at the same grade  structure and percentages as domestic use since no documental:ior
         on grade structure is available.   This table was constructed  and  calculated from detailed data developed for 1985,
         and adjusted to 1975.
Source:   Midwest Research Institute.

-------
                                                             TABLE 113
                     ESTIMATED WASTE PAPER RECOVERY POTENTIAL AND ACTUAL RECOVERY FOR ALL FIBER USES. 1980
NJ
K5
-vl
(In thousand tons and percent)
Distribution of Recovery by Grade & Source
Total
Available
36,150
jp 2,850
j 22,050
aste 11,250
31.550
ap 3,850
2 7,650
aste .20,050
3ri 1.250
ip 600
2 300
aste 350
f'ies 68.950 .
ap 7,30.0 '..
2 30,000
aste 31,650
Percent Recovery Actual
Recoverable Potential Recovery
1Z.
97
. 37
23
51
97
18
55
54
90
20
20
44
96
32
43
13.515
2,765
8,160
2,590
16.140
3,735
1,375
11,030
670
540
60
70 .
30.235.
7,040 :
9,505
13,690
8.595
2,765
3,860
1,970
9.895
3,660
60
6,175
560 ;
540 .
0
20
19.050
6,965
3,920
8,165
Pulp
Mixed News .Container Subs Deinking Unrecovered
2.175 3.240
365 500
1,050 2,690
760 . 50
1.450
...870
50
530
.280
260
0
.20
3 . 905 3.240
1,495 : 500
1,100 2,690
1,310.' -.' 50
1.930
1,400
0
530
7.905 520 -
2,305 485
10 0
5,590 35
260
.260
7.905 2.710
2,305 2,145-
10 0
5,590 565
1 . 250
500
120
630
1°.
0
0
20
20
20
. 1.290 - ;
520 -
120
650 -•'
27.555
85
18-; 190
9,280
21.655 .
190 '
7,590
13,875
690
60
300
330
49.900
335
26,080
' 2:;485
       Category

Total Paper
  Converting Scrap
  Household Waste
~~\ Nonhousehold Waste

Total Paperboard

  Converting Scrap
  Household Waste
  Nonhousehold Waste

Total Construction

  Converting Scrap
  Household. Waste
  Nonhousehold Waste

Total All  Categories

  Converting Scrap
  Household Waste
  Nonhousehold ..Waste

Note:  Includes paper recovered  for  recycling  in  the  paper  industry,  for  use  in  molded  pulp  products,  for other usas, and net
         exports.  Fiber  recovered in  solid waste  management  systems  of 650,000  tons  is included;  recovery for energy is ex-
         cluded.  Exports are calculated using'the same  grade structure and percentages as domestic  use since no documentation
         on grade structure  is available.  This taole was constructed and calculated  from detailed data 'developed for 1985, and.
         adjusted to 1980.                               ,
Source:  Midwest Research Institute,

-------
                                                              TABLE  114

                       ESTIMATED WASTE PAPER RECOVERY POTENTIAL AND ACTUAL RECOVERY FOR ALL FIBER USES.  1990
                                                  (In thousand tons and percent)
to
r-o
00
                                                                         Distribution of Recovery by Grade & Source

                              Total      Percent    Recovery    Actual                            Pulp                Total
       Category             Available  Recoverable  Potential   Recovery  Mixed  News   Container  Subs   Delnking  Unrecovered

Total Paper                  47.850        J7        17.825

  Converting Scrap            3,800        97         3,685
  Household Waste            28,700        37        10,620
  Nonhousehold Waste         15,350        23         3,520

Total Paperboard             44.150        52        23.150

  Converting Scrap            5,450        97         5,285
  Household Waste             9,250        18         1,665
  Nonhousehold Waste         29,450        55        16,200

Total Construction            1.650        5_2_           855

  Converting Scrap              750        90           675
  Household Waste               350        20            70
  Nonhousehold Waste            550        20           110

Total All Categories         93.650        45_        41.840

  Converting Scrap           10,000        96         9,645
  Household Waste            38,300        32        12,355
  Nonhousehold Waste         45,350        44        19,840

Note:  Includes paper recovered for recycling in the paper industry, for use in molded pulp products, for other uses and  net
         exports.  Fiber recovered in solid waste management systems of 2,500,000 tons is included; recovery for energy  is
         excluded.  Exports are calculated at the same grade structure and percentages as domestic use since no documentation
         of export grade structure  is available.  This table was constructed and calculated from detailed data  developed for
         1985  and adjusted  to 1990.
Source:  Midwest  Research Institute.
11.315
3,685
4,965
2,665
16.995
5,285
70
11,640
690
675
0
15
29.000
9,645
5.035
14,320
2.645 7.625
540 625
1,265 3,500
840 3,500
1.775
1,100
35
640
345
330

15
4.785 4.235
1,990 625
1,300 3,500
1,495 110
2.700
1,850
0
850
14.470 725
3,565 620
35 0
10,870 105
315
315


14.470 3.740
3,565 2,785
35 0
. 10,870 955
1.715
650
200
865
25.


25
30
30


1.770
680
200
890
36.535
115
23,735
12,685
27.155
165
9,180
17,810
960
75
350
535
64.650
355
33,265
31,030

-------
Other Resource  Recovery  Options  and Recovery Mechanisms  for  Paper  to  1990

          The most viable  resource recovery options  for  waste  paper or
uses of  recovered paper  are:

           (1)   Recycling in  the  paper  industry  (in  linerboard,  newsprint,
                 etc.); '         '

           (2)   Recycling in  other fiber  products  (molded pulp,  insulation,
                 pipe, etc.);

           (3)   Recycling outside the U.S.--exports ;

           (4)   Recovery  of the heat content of  paper (fuel,  conversion  to
                 energy);

           In addition, the recovery mechanisms  that  apply are  as  follows:

           (1)   "Traditional" source separation  for  recycling:

                (a)   at industrial paper  converting  plants;

                (b)   at wholesale, retail,  industrial plants; and

                (c)   via  "newspaper" drives .

           (2)   Collection  and recovery within solid  waste management
                 systems:

                (a)   municipal/private  collection programs of news  and/or
                      old  corrugated via householder separation from waste;

                (b)   deposit  at special collection centers;

                (c)   mechanical or hand separation at transfer  stations  or
                      disposal sites; and

                (d)   mechanical separation of fibers  from mixed  waste
                      streams at comprehensive  central waste processing
                      facilities.

          By far the most  important recovery use is  recycling  of. waste
paper in the paper industry  and'export.   And, the most important mechanism
of recovery for these uses is "traditional" source separation  programs.
We estimate that all paper grades (except a small amount  of  old corrugated
and old newspapers)  is recovered via traditional source  separation.   Very
little recovery is directly  associated with a solid  waste  management
system.                        ...  .        •
                                   229

-------
          However,  in  the  future,"piggy back"  collection programs  for
newspapers and old  corrugated will  get much  greater  attention.  Already
about  100 communities  in the U.S. have curbside newspaper  collection pro-
grams  under .way.  Paper companies committed  to recycling of  newspapers will
have to increasingly seek  their waste paper  via community  solid waste
management systems--both voluntary  and ordinance  required  programs.x   These
are viable options  and MRI believes  they will  spread  rapidly across the
nation as the demand for old newspapers and  corrugated containers  increases
faster than the  traditional recovery techniques can  supply them.   The actual
tonnage recovered' via  this technique in 1972 is not  known.   However, we
estimate that by  1975,  a total of  300,000 tons will be recovered via home
separation and curbside collection.  By 1990,  this amount  could increase
to 2 million tons or about 7 percent of waste paper  recovered  for  all re-
cycling purposes.

          In addition, by  1990^mechanical separation  systems (such as wet
pulping and/or dry  mechanical processing) will account for another 500,000
tons fiber recovery.   In.all then,  2.5 million tons  of waste paper will be
recovered within  solid waste management systems for  recycling  (out of a
total  of 29.0 million  tons).  In  fact, our estimates  may even  look
very modest for  this recovery mechanism in the future,even though  recovery
                                                         &y?
directly from municipal waste streams is quite low today.
Recovery of the Heat Content of Waste Paper

          As outlined in Chapter II, central processing of mixed waste to
recover the energy content of the organic fraction of waste will become
very important in the future.  Even with the removal of waste paper from
the waste stream for recyclingja large quantity of waste paper will remain.
Recovery of the Btu content of this paper (8,000 Btu per pound on a dry basis
will be highly significant.  We believe the preferred recovery option will
be to process mixed waste for use as a fuel in coal and oil-fired utility
boilers.  However, pyrolysis of the waste stream is also viable for producing
a synthetic liquid fuel or gas and will also be practiced commercially after
1978.
*   See for example "Solid Waste Report," October 29, 1973, page 219, in
      which a program involving 118 communities in New Jersey will be in-
      corporated in home-separated  and curbside collection of newspapers
      in cooperation with Garden State Paper Company, a major deinker of
      old news to produce newsprint.
**  We stand firm on. this estimate even though many municipal recovery
      programs are in a shambles today following the recycling recession
      that hit in late 1974.  This "glut" of supply will eventually dry up
      and the long-term trend to recovery will resume.
                                    230

-------
      The amount of waste processed.through central waste processing
systems was determined  in Chapter II.  It remains only to determine how
much of that organic  fraction  is paper.  Since we have assumed all recovery
for recycling takes place preferentially to using the waste as fuel, the
calculation was straightforward, relating to the waste paper content in
the average municipal solid waste stream.
Summary of Waste Paper Recovery Via All Options

      An overall summary.of waste paper recovery as it relates to  the
municipal waste stream is given for the period 1972 to 1990 in Table 115.
This table shows that the tonnage of waste paper available in solid waste
rises from 41.6 million  tons in 1972 to 67.2 million tons in 1990.  This
translates to 32.0 percent of total municipal waste generation in  1972,
increasing slightly to 33.6 percent of waste generated in L990.   (However,
it declines slightly in  the other years by comparison.)

      The total municipal waste processed in central waste proces.-jing
facilities will increase from 2.1 million tons in 1975 to 48.6.million  Cons
in 1990.  Assuming the waste paper content to be proportional' to  that cal-
culated, the paper available for recovery processing in central facilities
will increase from 0.6 million tons in 1975 to 16.7 million tons  in 1990.

      Of this amount, most will be processed for its heat (energy), value,
and the amount of waste paper processed for energy will be 15.4 million
tons in 1990.  Almost all mechanical separation will occur in SMSA's,
which might or might not have central waste recovery processing.

      In all, the total useful recovery of waste paper from within solid
waste management systems will be 0.95 million tons in 1975 and will in-
crease to 17.9 million tons in 1990.  If the energy recovery tonnage .is
added to the total recycled tonnage in 1990, then 44.3 million tons of  93.7
million tons of waste paper generated will be usefully recovered  (or 47
percent).  This is a large increase over 1972,in which 13.6 million tons
were recovered from 55.1 million tons generated, or 25 percent (see Table
90 also).

      In summary then, the burden of waste paper going to ulLi'iUtc solid
waste disposal sites will increase from 41.5 million tons in 1972  to 49.3
million tons in 1990, or a modest 19 percent.  In the meantime, total waste
paper recovery will rise by 22.8 percent and total paper consumption will
rise by 70.6 percent in the same period.  Thus., the advent of recycling
rejuvenation and energy recovery will mean that the burden o'f waste paper
oh disposal systems will grow in tonnage,but decline appreciably  in total
impact compared to the potential,should resource recovery not take place.
                                    231

-------
                                   TABLE 115

                      SUMMARY OF PAPER PROGESSING/RECOVERY
FOR MIXED
MUNICIPAL
WASTE, 1972 TO
1990




(In Thousand Tons)
Category
Total Solid Waste Generated^/
Total Waste Paper Generated
Waste Paper Recovered Outside
SWM Systems^'
1972
130,000
55,050
13,500
Paper Available in Solid Waste£/41,550
Percent Paper in Solid Waste
Solid Waste Processed in
Central Facilities
Paper Content
Paper Recovered
via Separation (50%
efficiency)
via Energy Recovery
Paper Not Recovered
Total Waste Not Processed
in Central Facilities
Paper Content
Paper Recovered (via
separation)
Paper Not Recovered^/
Total Paper Recovered6./
via Separation?.'
via Energy Recovery6'
Total Recovery - Paper6/
Percent Recovered of Available
in Solid Waste i
32.0
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
130,000
41,500
50
41,500
50
Neg.
50
0.1
1975
140,000
56,950
14,850
42,100
30.1
2,100
650
Neg.
650
0
137,900
41 ,430
300
41,150
300
650
950
2.2
1980
160,000
68,
18,
50,
31
6,
2,
2,
153,
4ti,

47,
2,
2,

950
400
550
.6
600
100
50
000
50
400
450
600
900
650
000
650
5.2
1985
180
79
22
57
,000
,950
,650
,300
31.8
24
7
7
.155
49
1
48
1
7
8

,000
,650
200
,250
200
,000
,650
,000
,850
,200
,250
,450
14.7
1990
200,
93,
26,
67,
33
48,
16,
15,
151,
50,
2,
49,
2,
15,
17,
000
650
500
150
.6
600
350
500
350
500
400
800
000
300
500
350
850
26.6
aV  Nominal Value from calculations in Chapter II.
b_/  That recovered outside solid waste management systems via other separation
      techniques.
£/  Quantity of waste paper introduced into the municipal waste system for collection/
      recovery/disposal.
d/  Includes paper not recovered from central processing systems.
e/  That recovered from within solid waste management systems in metropolitan areas.
Source:  Midwest Research Institute.              (

                                        232

-------
                       APPENDIX A

AN OVERVIEW OF TRENDS IN THE USE OF PACKAGING CONTAINERS
         FOR BEVERAGES, FOOD. AND OTHER PRODUCTS
                            233

-------
                              INTRODUCTION
          The purpose of this appendix is to give the background data on
major packaging end uses where there is considerable intermaterials com-
petition.  It is from this analysis that the forecasts for specific mate-
rials (e.g., glass) used in beverage containers, food packaging and other
uses were derived.   The analysis which follows gives the detailed basis upon
which our forecasts in previous chapters for glass containers, steel cans,
aluminum cans and plastic containers were made.
                           BEVERAGE CONTAINERS
Soft Drink Containers

          Soft drinks are one type of beverage which also include beer,
distilled spirits and wine.  All beverages accounted for 55.7 billion new
containers and 86.5 billion filled containers in 1972, of which 25.8 bil-
lion new containers and 48.2 billion fillings were soft drinks.

          The soft drink industry has been the most rapidly growing of all
beverage markets.  Soft drinks are predominately carbonated nonalcoholic
beverages which are marketed .to the consumer in glass containers or metal
cans as well as dispensed from.vending machines and fountains by mixing a
syrup with water and carbonating.  Consumption of soft drinks grew at a
rate of 7.8 percent per year during the past decade.

          Soft drinks are mixed and packaged by franchise dealers who pur-
chase the syrup from manufacturers, such as Coca Cola, Pepsi Cola, Royal
Crown, Seven-Up, and Dr. Pepper.  The dealers bottle or can the soft drinks
and distribute to diverse outlets within their franchised area.  There are
also a number of private label canners that package for larger supermarket
chains.

          Soft Drink Demand:*  Increased soft drink consumption was specta-
cular in the 1960's, a time when the age group under 24 years was expanding
rapidily.  Soft drink marketers used advertising, new packaging and ag-
gressive marketing techniques in developing the markets, concentrating on
the under 24-year population segment which has the highest per capita con-
sumption of soft drinks (Table A-l).   With the rise in per capita dis-
posable income, the rapid growth of fast food restaurants and drive-ins,
   Whenever reference is made to "cases of 8-ounce equivalent," this measure
     is designed to put beverage packaged on one common size of container.
     In actuality, there are a variety of sizes and the 8~ounce equivalent
     basis should not be used as the basis for calculating actual use (number)
     of any given configuration (e.g., cans).

                                    234

-------
 introduction of a wide variety of  flavors and  low-calorie beverag^ and
 consumer preferences  to  favor soft drinks, the  level of demand  for  soft
/drinks  reached 3.54 billion  cases  (of 8-ounce  equivalent bottles)  of  soft
 drinks  in  1972.  This demand is more than double  the demand  in 1962  (Table
 A-2).   Consumption increased during  this period from 213 containers  (8-
 fluid ounces equivalent)  per capita  in  1962  to a  level of 406  containers
 in  1972.
                                TABLE A^
          SOFT DRINK PER CAPITA CONSUMPTION BY AGE GROUP.  1972
                                        Soft Drink  Sales
  Age

 1 - 12
13 - 17
18 - 24
25 - 44
45 and over

  Total
Billion
Units'
13.2
6.2
8.2
15.2
9.9
Percent
25.0
11.8
15.5
28.3
18.9
12-Ounce Units
Per Capita
x 250
319
366
315
162
52.7
100.0
259
ji/  12-ounce equivalent units
Source:  American Can Company,  1972.
          There  is  strong  evidence  that  this growth rate will not be main-
tained  in the  future.  The principal conditions  that stimulated growth  in
the past--an increasing  rate of consumption and  a large increase in the
population under 24 years  of age--no longer exist (Table A-3) .  The under
24 population  is projected to  increase in number only 5.8 percent between
1970 and 1980,  compared to  16.8 percent between 1960 and 1970.  Thus, most
of the  growth  in demand  from this age group will have to come from increas-
ing per capita consumption, which will be more difficult to achieve. Be-
cause of the changing population mix,we  are projecting that soft drink
demand will slow from its  past 7.8  percent per year rate to 5 percent per
year through 1975, and 4.1  percent from 1975 to 1980.  The growth rate will
continue to slow to about  2.9 percent from 1980  to 1990, as shown in Figure
A-l.  Even with  the reduced growth  rates forecast, the slower population
growth  will cause per capita consumption to increase to a level of 636, 8-
ounce equivalent containers by 1990 (Table A-2).
                                   235

-------
                                TABI£ A-2

             ANNUAL CONSUMPTION OF SOFT DRINKS 1950 TO 1990
Year

1950
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990
(In equivalent cases and
Total Cases
192 oz.*
1,001,751,474
1,476,544,000
1,524,236,000
1,667,514,000
: 1,. 800, 915, 000
1,948,590,000
2,104,282,000
2,352,587,000
2,470,452,000
2,777,035,000
2,913,110,000
3,096,635,000
3,353,615,000
3,541,417,000
4,100,000,000
5,020,000,000
5,940,000,000
6,860,000,000
containers per capita)
Per Capita
8-oz Containers
158.0
192.0
198.3
213.4
227.4
242.9
259.1
287.0
298.1
331.6
344.4
362.8
388.1
406.4
457.0
527.0
584.0
636.0
                    AVERAGE ANNUAL GROWTH RATE (%)

              Period                             Cases

              1950-1960                          4.0
              1960-1970                          7.7
              1962-1967                          8.2
              1967-1972                          7.5
              1972-1975                          5.0
              1975-19CO             '             4.1
              1980-1990                          2.9
*  Sales expressed in cases of 24, 8-ounce containers.
Source:  National Soft Drink Association, 1950-1972.  MRI estimates 1972-
           1990.
                                    236

-------
                                TABLE A-3
                  U.S. POPULATION BY AGE. 1960 TO 1990
Age Group

Under 20
20 - 24
25 - 34
35 - 44
45 - 54
55 and Over

  Total
(In thousands)
1960 1970
69,085 76,979
10,803 16,372
22,823 24,909
24,072 23,072
20,624 23,203
31,919 38,632

1975
76,485
19,404
31,114
22,7kl
23,563
42,037
                                                             1980

                                                           77,735
                                                           21,067
                                                           36,962
                                                           25,370
                                                           22,406
                                                           45.134
                                1990

                               89,435
                               17,823
                               41,791
                               36,902
                               24,617
                               48,125
                         179,326    203,167    215,324-   228,676    258,693
                    Percent Change in Age Groups
Age Group

Under 20
20 - 24
25 - 34
   - 44
   - 54
35
45
55 and Over
  Total
                        1960-1970  1970-1975 1975-1980   1980-1990
11.4
51.6
9.1
(4.2)
1-2.5
21.0
(0.6)
18.5
24.9
(1.5)
1.6
8.8
1.6
8.6
18.8
11.7
(5.2)
7.4
15.1
(18.2)
13.0
45.4
9.9
6.6
                          13.3
6.0
6.2
13.1
Source:  U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census 1960-1970,
           Projections - 1975-1990--Series D.
                                    237

-------
ho
CO
00
 CO
O
             10,000
             9,000
             8,000
             7,000
             6,000
 *  5,000
 OJ
..S  4,000
          g  3,000
          o

          u  2,000
          c

          ~\
     ,000
      900
      800
      700
      600
      500
          U-l
          O
          C
          O
               400
               300
               200
                100
                                                                                                               Total
                                                                                                                       Packaged
                                                                                                               Bulk
                                                                                                                  Per Capita  Cases
                                                                   J	L
                                                                                  J	I
                 1960
                          1965
1970
1975
1980
                                                                                                  i   '    '    '    i    i    '   '   i
1985
                                                         1990
                             Figure  A-l  -  Soft  Drink Shipments and Per  Capita Consumption

-------
          There are two distinct segments of the soft drink industry com-
monly referred to as the "package" and ."bulk" markets.  Package marki;ts  in-
clude all soft drinks sold in metal cans and glass container!?', .wh I.le lm,lk
includes premixed and postmixed soft drinks sold through vending machines
and fountain dispensers where the concentrated syrup is mixed and carbonated
at the time of useV'.The package market is the chief outlet for soft drinks.
However, the. bulk market has grown 'at a faster rate (although from a much
smaller'base).   Table  A-4 and Figure A.-l show the historical, and projected;
demand for packaged and bulk soft drinks.  Bulk soft drinks increased frpm ;,
slightly over 1 percent of the market in 1963 to 19.4 percent in 1972.  They;;
will continue to increase their share of this market, but at a slower rate;},v
reaching a 21 percent share by 1980 and 22:4 percent by 1990.  Thus, ::the>;-.
package market will grow at slightly less than the overall soft drink mar-
ket.  Demand at 2.85 billion equivalent cases in 1972 will increase at a
rate of 4.8 percent per year through 1975; at 3.9 percent from 1975 to 1980
when it will reach a volume of 3.96 billion cases.  The more rapid growth
of the bulk market will be a result of the increasing trend of eating out
and the popularity of vending machines in commercial and industrial estab-
lishments.
                                TABLE A-4
                    ANNUAL CONSUMPTION OF SOFT DRINKS
                     BY MARKET SEGMENT. 1960 TO 1990
                      (Thousands of.192-ounce cases)
Year
   (
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990
  Total

1,476,544
1,524,236
1,667,514
1,800,915
1,948,590
2,104,282
2,352,587
2,470,452
2,777,035
2,913,110
3,096,635
3,353,615
3,541,417
4,100,000.
5,020,000
5,940,000
6,860,000
 Packaged

    N/A
    N/A
    N/A
 1,615,000
 1,715,000
 1,933,000
 2,023,000
 2,043,000
 2,347,000
 2,409,000
'2,521,000
 2,716,000
 2,850,000
 3,280,000
 3,960,000
•4,640,000
 5,320,000
    Bulk

    N/A
    N/A
    N/A
  186,000
  234,000
  271,000
  330,000
  427,000
  430,000
  504,000
 : 575,000
  637,000
  690,000
  820,000
1,060,000
1,300,000
1,540,000
  Per Capita
8roz Containers

     192
     198
     213 .
     227
     243   '
     259
     287
     298
     331
     344
     362
     388
     406
     457
     527
     584
     636
Source:  National Soft Drink Association 1960-1972, MRI estimates 1972-1990.
                                  239

-------
           Soft  Drink  Containers:   The  bottler, and  subsequently,  the con-
 sumer, has a wide  choice  of  sizes  and  types  of containers.  Originally,
 most  soft  drinks were packaged  in  returnable glass  containers.  The sizes
 were  small, ranging from  6-  to  10-fluid ounces volume.  The consumer paid
 a deposit  on the container and  returned it for redemption of his  deposit.
 The empty  bottles  were  returned to the bottler who  washed and reused them
 from  15  to 20 or more times  before they were lost,  broken or discarded.
 After World War II, the nonreturnable  glass  container and the metal can
 were  introduced as commercial packages, but  grew slowly until the 1960's
 when  they  became popular  with consumers;  the soft drink packages  used
 marketing  concepts based  on  "convenience" and "easy disposability" of one-
 trip  containers.

           Returnable  bottles, which accounted for 92 percent of the volume
 as recently as  1963,  began to lose their  share of the market.  By  1972, re-
 turnable bottles represented only  38.5 percent of the volume of packaged
 soft  drinks.  Metal cans  increased during the same  period from 6  percent
 to 34 percent, and one-way bottles  from 2 percent to 27.5 percent  (Figure
 A-2).* Because of  the rapid  growth of  packaged soft drinks, the total
 volume packaged in returnable bottles  did not begin declining until 1966.

           Metal cans  will continue to  increase their share of the packaged
 market through 1980, when  they reach 41.6 percent of the 3.96 billion cases
 consumed.  During  this same  period, the one-way glass container will in-
 crease its share to 29.3  percent and the returnable container will continue
 its decline to a 29.1 percent share.   With the introduction of the plastic
 container by 1980, metal  and glass containers will have their respective
market shares reduced.  By 1990, metal cans will be 41 percent; one-way
glass, 23.6 percent; returnable glass,  23.2 percent;  and plastic bottles, 12.2
 percent (Figure A-3).

          Since the volume of soft drink consumption will be increasing
during this period, the total of equivalent cases for each of the containers
with  the exception of returnable glass will continue to increase.   The ab-
 solute decline in value packaged in round-trip containers will end by 1975
and increase slightly through 1990 (Figure A-4).

          Container Selections:   The choice of containers available in the
 future will be affected by a number of recent developments.   The major
 factor has been the acceptance of  the large resealable glass container.
These containers are being made available in 24-,  32-, 48- and 64-ounce sizes
and are estimated to have captured 14.6 percent of the 1973 market for pack-
aged drinks, from only 4.7 percent in 1965.   Projections indicate  that'they
could reach 23.6 percent of the 1975 market.—'
   Data given in this section is on the basis of equivalent 8-ounce con-
     tainers which is not the same as the actual as-packaged container pro-
     file.  Thus, this data does not correspond directly to Table A-5
     presented later.
                                   240

-------
 Metal Can
     6
One Way
Bottle 2.0%
           Round  Trip
           Bottle  92%
             1963  ;

      1,615,000,000 CasesSL/
                           Round Trip
                           Bottle 67.0%
                              1967  '    ..

                      2,043,000,000 Cases  °/
                                                                                            One Way
                                                                                            Bottle
                                                                                            27.5%
      Round Trip
      Bottle 38.5%
        1972

2,850,000,000  Cases -/
a/ Based on equivalent 8-ounce containers,  not on an as-packaged basis.

SOURCE:  Glass Container Manufacturers Institue
                 Figure A-2  -  Soft Drink Packaging Market  Share,  by Container, 1963-1972

-------
NJ
•F*
K>
                        One Way
                        Bottle
                        27.5%
                  Round Trip
                  Bottle 38.5%
                   1972

           2,850,000,000 Cases "V
             One Way
             Bottle
             29.3%
          Round Trip
          Bottle
          29.1%
        1980

3,960,000,000 Cases £.
       Round Trip
       Bottle 23.2%
        1990

5,320,000,000 Cases  -/
      a/ Based on equivalent 8-ounce containers, not on an as-packaged basis,
      SOURCE: MRI  Estimates
                     Figure  A-3 - Soft Drink  Packaging Market Share,  by  Container, 1972-1990

-------
NO
•P-
                10,000
                9,000
                8,000
                7,000
                6,000
                5,000

                4,000

                3,000
               c  2,000
               o . .
s 1,000
J   900
    800
    700
    600
    500

    400

 . ; 300


    200
                   100
                                                        Total      	






                                                        Metal Cans  '__ ,



                                                        One Way Glass

                                                        Round Trip Glass
                                                                                                                             X"
                                                                                                                 Plastic  x'
                                                                                                                      X
                                                                                                                    X
                                                                                                                  X
                                                                                                          X
                                                                                                            X
                                                                                                              x
                                                                                                                x
                                                                                                       X
                                                                                                x
                                                                                                  x
                                                                                                   X
                    1960
                        1965
                                        1	"	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	I	*   1   I   II!   !    I    I    I
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
                                 Figure  A-4 - 'Soft.Drink Consumption,  By Container, 1963-1990
                                                  (Millions.of 24-8.-Ounce Cases).

-------
           This  development  has  eliminated  a large  segment  of the  "take  home"
 market  from the metal  can which is  not  available in  sizes  greater than  16
 ounces.   The resealable  closure feature, combined  with  the economics  of the
 larger  sizes, has  made glass the desired container for  larger sizes.

           The  12-ounce can  is the predominant  metal  container with a  small
 share  in 16-ounce  sizes.  It has been reported that  a 32-ounce resealable
 can is  being tested.   However,  the  present state of  technology and economics
 do not  indicate that  it  will be commercial within  this  decade. Cans  will be
 the chief container in markets  where  the beverage  will  be  consumed immediately
 after  opening.

           A second development  has  been the plastic  coated and laminated
 glass  containers which are  designed to  reduce  breakage  and weight.  Owens-
 Illinois has introduced  "Plasti-Shield," a nonreturnable glass container
 with a  jacket of foamed  polystyrene around the exterior of the bottle.   It
 not only reduces breakage, but allows  the use of a  lighter  weight  container.
 A  quart  Plasti-Shield  container weighs  14.5 ounces compared to 21.5 ounces
                              Q O /
 for a  standard  nonreturnable.—

           Other glass  container manufacturers  are  developing more resistant
 glasses.   Thatcher has "Shatter Guard,"which is a  glass container with  a
 tight  fitting outer envelope of a proprietary  plastic copolymer that  offers
 improved safety and a  21  percent reduction in  weight.   Indian Head, Anchor
 Hocking  and Brockway  Glass  have also  developed or  are marketing similar con-
 tainers.—

           It is the opinion of  many experts within the  industry that  these
 containers are  an  interim step  to the development  of the all-plastic  blow
 molded containers, and that  plastic-coated  containers will  reach no more
 than 10  percent of the market.   We  believe this to be a reasonable estimate.

          The third development which is receiving wide interest  is the all-
 plastic container.   Until the recent  availability  of nitrile resins,  there
were no commercial  plastics  that were clear, nearly  impermeable to moisture,
 oxygen and carbon dioxide transmission,  and had  the desired  strength to permit
molding  into a  soft drink container.  Vistron Division of Sohio began ex-
 ploring high nitrile polymers in  the mid 1960's and undertook  their commer-
 cial development.   Other  firms  announced similar developments, so  that today
 there are  numerous  "barrier"  resins being  test marketed for  soft  drinks.
 Others besides  Vistron's "Barex"  include Monsanto's "Lopac," and E. I.
 DuPont's MR-16.  Both  Barex  and Lopac soft  drink containers have been tested
                                                                      qo /
 in  selected markets and have received good  acceptance by the consumer.Zi'
                                  244

-------
           Although  the  barrier  resins have been  tested and  found  to be de-
 sirable  to the  consumer,  there  is  no commercial  use of plastic  soft drink
 containers today, even  though they are being.test marketed  extensively.*
 The major  limitation,, is -the  cost  to the bottler.  At  the present  price
 level, plastic  does  not provide enough advantage in lighter weight and trans-
 portation  savings to be used in significant volumes.  The amount  jf resin
 in the container can be reduced only so far with current technology before
 "creep"  or expansion of the  container is experienced  and it is  at the mini-
 mun level  today.  Since the  resins are relatively new and plastics have
 historically  declined in  price  as  volume increases, future  prices should
 make  them  more  competitive with glass containers.  We anticipate  that
 these containers will begin  to  appear commercially in 1975, but not become
 significant before  1980.  By 1990, we anticipate 5 billion  plastic'con-
 tainers  will  be used in soft drink packaging.

           There is  also a possibility that composite  resins which are in
 the early  stages of  development could become  competitive with nitrile resins
 in the next decade.   Several resin manufacturers are  exploring  this route
 to the development  of a soft drink container.

           Metal Cans:   xhe metal can, although in use for many  years, did
 not seriously challenge the  glass  container until the 1960's when franchised
 bottlers began  to install canning  lines to compete with contract  canners
 (who  package  "private label" soft  drinks for.the large supermarket chains).'
 The development of  the  easy-open aluminum top also stimulated consumer de-
 mand  for the  can.

           As  recently as  1956,  only 300 million  cans  were being used to
 package  soft  drinks  and accounted  for about 1 percent of all packaged soft
 drinks.  By 1963, over  2  billion cans were used, and by 1972,  demand had
 grown to 15.6 billion units  (Table A-5).  Growth since 1968 has averaged
 16.5  percent  per year, but has been slowing since 1970.          ,    -

          Metal cans will continue to increase their share  of  the  package
market although at a  slower  rate.   Growth to 1975 will be at 7.2 percent
per year when volume will be 19.2 billion units.  Beyond 1975, growth  will
be at 5.1 percent per year, reaching a level of 24.6 billion cans  in  1980
equivalent to 42 percent  of  the soft drink market.   By 1990,30 billion cans
will be  used  as growth  slows to 2.3 percent per year.
*• Coca-Cola authorized use of Monsanto's Lopac beginning January 1974.
                                  245

-------
                                   TABLE A-5

                  SOFT DRINK CONTAINER SHIPMENTS. 1960 TO 1990
                            (Billions of containers)
  Year

  1960
  1961
  1962
  1963
  1964
  1965
  1966
  1967
  1968
  1969
  1970
 1971
 1972
 1975
 1980
 1985
 1990
                    One-way    Round
       Metal Cans-'Bottles-/Trip Bottles£/Total
                           (Total Fillings)
           0.81      0.25
           1.23      0.40
           1.65      0.48
           2.05      0.56      29.63       32.24
           2.80      0.63      30.95       34.38
           3.84      1.01 .     32.91       37.76
           5.63      1.98      30.46       38.07
           7.30      3.59      29.15       40.04
         10.03       4.64      26.46       41.13
         11.76       6.45       24.58       42,79
         13.10       8.34       23.56      45.00
         14.11      8.34      24.85      47.30
         15.60      8.76      23.83      48.19
         19.20      9.93      20.6       49.73
         24.60     11.23      18.0       53.83
         27.50     11.15      18.0       56.65
         30.00     11.00      18.0       62.00
 Returnable^/
Bottles Shipped

     1.41
     1.34
       57
       77
       91
       91
     1.92
       91
       75
       64
    1.72
    1.38
    1.45
    1.30
    1.50
    1.30
    1.30
Source:
a./  Can Manufactures Institute 1960-1971, MRI estimates 1972-1990.
b/  U.S. Department of Commerce 1960-1971. MRI estimates 1972-1990.
£/  U.S. Department of Commerce, "Closures for Containers," 1960-1971;
      Midwest Research Institute f>«jtimates, 19.72-1990.
                                     246

-------
          There has  not been noticeable  trend away  from  the  standard  12-
ounce container which has been  the most  popular unit and  should continue
to be the preferred  size because  the  contents can usually be consumed be-
fore losing carbonation.  Sixteen-ounce  cans are the only other significant
size available to consumers and represents only a small portion of  the mar-
ket.  It is projected to increase slowly at the expense of the 12-ounce
container during the next decade.  Unless a resealable container is developed,
cans will be  limited to the 16-ounce  and under sizes
.1                    •                                            .
          Glass Containers:  The market  for glass containers is shared by
the returnable and nonreturnable units.  The returnable container is  still
the predominant unit with 23.8 billion filled in 1972.  Since this  container
is reused on  average 10 to 15*  times, the actual production  represents only
replacement bottles  and initial sales of introductory sizes.  Actual  ship-
ments in 1972 amounted to 1.44 billion containers.

          The popularity of the metal can and the nonreturnable glass con-
tainer have eroded the demand for returnable containers.   Shipments in-
creased each year until 1966, when 1.92 billion units were produced and
30.46 billion were filled.   Since then,  both the replacement and the total
fills have declined.

          Most of the growth of the one-way glass container occurred  be
tween 1965 and 1970,  when shipments rose from 1.01 billion units to 8.34
billion units.  Growth in the past 3 years has been modest, reaching 8.76
billion in 1972.

          This rapid growth followed by  the sudden slowdown is in part a
result of the changing average size of the containers.   The one-way bottles
were initially introduced as large containers.   As they achieved greater
acceptance from consumers,  the smaller sizes were introduced and the average
volume per container declined from 18.8  ounces in 1964 to 14.1 ounces in
1967.   With the introduction of the larger 16- and 32-ounce nonreturnable
containers, the average volume has again increased,  reaching a level of
17.35 ounces in 1972.  The  trend to larger average size is projected to
continue, reaching 18.5 ounces in 1975 and 20 ounces in 1980.

    I      The returnable container has remained the  preferred unit for the
6-to 12-oiince vending machine markets.   Its volume has been relatively con-
stant during the  past decade, varying from 8.9 to 10.6 ounces.—   However,
there has been a significant change in the.size mix for nonvended sales.
   The subject of average trippage is a matter of considerable debate.,  We
     could not determine the actual trippage being experienced today.  It
     is probably at least 12 trips for soft drinks, but varies over the nation
     from 5 to 20 trips and above.  However, these estimates are based on
     discussions, not documentation.
                                  247

-------
The percentage of 6- to 9-ounce containers has declined significantly in
favor of the larger 16-and 32-ounce resealable returnable (Table A-6).   In-
dications are that this  trend will continue and the average volume per  con-
tainer is increasing in  returnable containers.
                                TABLE A-6

      MARKET SHARE BY CONTAINER SIZE FOR SOFT DRINKS.  1967 AND 1972
                              (In percent)

                                      	 Percent
       Container (ounces)

         6-9
        10-12^
          16
          24 and over

            Total                    100.0                   100.0
1967
18.6
60.9
15.2
6.2
1972
8.6
58.4
20.4
12.6
a_/  Metal cans and glass containers.  All others are predominantly glass,
Source:  National Soft Drink Association.
          The development of the resealable feature and the promotion of
the returnable bottle as the"ecological"container should begin to slow the
decline in returnable containers.  Similarly, the possibility of deposits
on nonreturnable units will cause conversion back to returnable bottles in
some states.  Although Oregon and Vermont are the only states that have
enacted this kind of law, it is possible that other states will consider
similar laws which would cause a conversion to returnable units.*  As -Table
A-5 shows, we are projecting a slight decline in returnable beverage containers
through 1975 to a level of 1.3 billion units per year.  There will also be
a slow down in the growth of the nonreturnable beverage containers from its
previous rapid rate.  Total demand should increase about 4.3 percent per
year through 1975, to a level of 9.9 billion units, and then increase at
2-1/2 percent per year to 11.2 billion units in 1980.  Beyond 1980, with the
introduction of the all plastic container, the total demand for nonreturnable
and returnable containers will remain at the 1980 level.
*  E.g., South Dakota.
                                  248

-------
Beer Containers

          The brewing industry is one of the oldest in the United States,
dating back to the early 17th .Century..  It was not until  1840, when  lager
beer was introduced, that the manufacture of malt beverages became a major
industry in this country.  The lager beer which is a light, mild beer was
readily accepted by the American public as being more palatable than the
heavier dark beers and is today the predominant beer, produced in this
country.  Beer is marketed to consumers in glass containers and metal cans
or as draught in kegs and barrels.. The latter is predominantly consumed-
in taverns and other establishments where beer is permitted to be served.-
Draught beer has declined from 48.3 percent of the total  production  in  1940
to 13.3 percent in 1972.

          The total fillings of packaged beer (cans and bottles) was 2:3-.2,
billion units in 1962, and rose to 37.4 billion units in  1972.  By 1990,-
the total packaged fillings of beer will be 62 million units.

          In.contrast to soft drinks, which are packaged-by franchise dealers,
beer is packaged at the brewery in much larger volume than corresponding.';
soft drink plants.   These plants continue to get larger as the brewing  indus-
try becomes more concentrated.  The number of breweries has declined from
611 in 1940, to 158 in 1969.2i/

          Beer Consumption:   The growth rate of beer consumption.has been
erratic throughout its history in the United States.   After increasing
steadily during the early part of the century, consumption dropped rapidly
with the advent of prohibition.  When this law was repealed, production did
not reach the preprohibition level until the Second World War.  Demand  ;
increased from 55 million barrels i.n 1941, to 85 million  barrels in  1946, and
it remained at this level until the early 1960's.  Growth again resumed,
and demand from 1962 to 1972 increased at a rate of 3.7 percent per year.
It has expanded more rapidly in recent years, growing at 4.3 percent per
year between 1967 and 1972, when demand reached 1-31.9 million! barrels     .
(Table A-7).
                                  249

-------
                               TABLE A-7
                      BEER CONSUMPTION.  1962-1990


Year
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990
Growth
Percent/Year
1962-1967
1967-1972
1972-1975
1975-1980
1980-1990
(In
Total
Consumption
91.2
93.8
98.6
100.4
104.3
106.9
111.4
116.3
121.6
127.4
131.9
148.3
178.4
204.8
226.2

Total
3.2
4.3
4.0
3.6
2.4
million barrels)

Packaged
Barrels Percent
74.1
76.3
80.7
82.6
86.5
89.6
94.0
99.0
104.4
109.9
114.2
130.3
159.4
184.8
205.2
•
Packaged
3.9
5.1
4.5
4.1
2.5
81.3
81.4
81.8
82.3
83.0
83.7
84.4
85.1
85.9
86.4
86.7
87.8
89.3
90.2
90.7







                                                         	Draught	
                                                         Barrels    Percent
                                                           17.1
                                                           17.5
                                                           17.9
                                                           17.8
                                                           17.8
                                                           17.3
                                                           17.4
                                                           17.3
                                                           17.2
                                                           17.5
                                                           17.7
                                                           18.0
                                                           19.0
                                                           20.0
                                                           21.0
18.7
18.6
18.2
17.7
17.0
16.3
15.6
14.9
14.1
13.6
13.3
12.
10.
 9.8
 9.3
,2
,7
                                                              Draught

                                                                0.2
                                                                0.4
                                                                0.5
                                                                1.1
                                                                1.0
Source:   U.S. Brewers Association, 1962-1972; MRI estimate, 1972-1990,
                                   250

-------
          Studies have shown that the highest percentage or beer drinkers
are found among people under age 30 and the highest per capita volume in-
take of beer occurs among those age 30 to 44.^2.'  Table A-8 shows the present
and projected population growth by age segment for the years 20 to 44 from
1960 to 1990.  The large number of babies born after World War II became
young adults of beer drinking age during the middle 1960's and caused the
resurgent growth in beer consumption.  This population group will continue
to increase faster than the total population through 1.980, and then slow
between 1980 and 1990.  Assuming that past trends will continue and that
this group will be the greatest per capita consumers of beer, we project
demand to grow at 4 percent per year through 1977, and then grow at a de-
creasing rate through 1990.  Total consumption of beer which amounted to
131.9 million barrels in 1972, should rise to 178.4 million barrels in 1980
and 226.2 million barrels by 1990 (Table A-7).  Packaged beer will parallel
this growth, increasing from 114.2 million barrels in 1972 to 159.4 million.
barrels in 1980, and 205.2 million barrels in 1990 (Figure A-5).  Draught
beer, which has not grown in the past decade, will increase slightly during
the period of this forecast.

          Beer Containers:  Originally, beer was packaged only in^returnu.'1 Le
glass containers, mainly in 12-ounce bottles.  The metal can was introduced
in 1935, and has demonstrated its popularity by becoming the largest volume
container in the packaged beer market.  Since 1962, metal cans have increased
from 37.1 percent to 58 percent of all packaged beer . (Table A-9, .Figure A-6').
Can volume during the same period increased from 9.1 billion to 21.6 billion
units for a growth rate of 9.1 percent per year.

          The nonreturnable glass container was introduced during the Second
World War primarily for overseas shipment and was used to compete with the
metal can for the "convenience" market after the war.   Growth was slow,
reaching only a 6 percent penetration of packaged sales by 1959.  In that
year, the glass container manufacturers redesigned the bottle and lowered
its cost to compete with the can.  This did much to stimulate the growth
of the one-way gl-ss container and it increased from 3.4 billion units and
14 percent of the packaged market in 1962, to 7.6 billion units and 24 per-
cent of the packaged market in 1972.  This is equivalent to a growth rate
of 8.4 percent per year for the period; total beer demand since 1967 has
increased at 5.8 percent per year.
                                   251

-------
                                 TABLE A-8
                          U.S. POPULATION BY AGE
                                (Thousands)
Age Group
Total
  1960
57,698
  1970        1975
64,353
73,239
              1980
83,399
              1990
20-24
25-34
35-44
10,803
22,823
24,072
16,372
24,909
23,072
19,404
31,114
22,721
21,067
36,962
25,370
17,823
41,791
36,902
95,516
                              PERCENT CHANGE
Age Group
 1960-1970
   1970-1975
     1975-1980
       1980-1990
20-24
25-34
35-44
51.6
9.1
(4.2)
18.5
24.9
(1.5)
8.6
18.8
11.7
(18.2)
13.0
45.4
Total
    11.5
      13.8
        13.9
          14.5
Source:  U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, 1960-1970;
           Projections--1975-1990, Series D.
                                  252

-------
to
Ol
u>
            1,000
              900
              800
              700

              600

              500

              400


              300
              200
£   100
jj   90
    80
    70

    60

    50

    40


    30
              20
               10
                                                                                                            Total
                                                                                                           Metal Cans
                                                                                                           One Way Glass
                                                                                                                     _« — — —"'
                                                                                                           Round Trip Glass
               1960
                       1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
                                   Figure A-5  -  Beer  Consumption By Container,  1963-1990

                                                    •'(Million, Barrels)

-------
                                TABLE A-9




            PACKAGED BEER CONSUMPTION BY  PACKAGE TYPE.  1962-1990
(In million barrels)

Year
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990

Total
74.1
76.3
80.6
82.6
86.5
89.5
94.0
99.0
104.4
109.9
114.2
130.3
159.4
194.8
205.2
Metal
Barrels
27.5
29.6
32.9
34.5
38.9
41.6
46.3
50.4
55.3
58.7
66.2
80.3
101.3
119.0
134.5
Cans
Percent
37.1
38.8
40.8
41.7
45.0
46.5
49.2
51.0
53.0
53.4
58.0
61.6
63.5
64.5
65.5
One -Way
Barrels
10.3
11.7
13.2
14.2
15.2
17.5
18.0,
20.8
22.0
25.8
27.4
31.8
39.9
47.6
52.5
Glass
Percent
14.0
15.3
16.4
17.2
17.6
19.5
19.2
21.0
21.0
23.5
24.0
24.4
,25.1
25.6
25.6
Round -Trip Glass
Barrels
36.3
35.0
34.5
33.9
32.4
30.4
29.7
27.8
27.1
25.4
20.6 .
18.2
18.2
18.2
18.2
Percent
48.9
45.9
42.8
41.1
37.4
34.0
31.6
28.0
26.0
23.1
18.0
14.0
11.4
9.9
8.9
Growth
Percent/Year
1962-1967
1967-1972
1972-1975
1975-1980
1980-1990
Total
3.2
4.3
4.0
3.6
2.4
Metal Cans
8.6
9.8
6.7
4.7
3.1
One-Way Glass





11.2
9.4
5.9
4.6
2.8
Round-trip Glass





(3.5)
(8.1)
(4.1)
0.0
0.0
Source:   U.S. Brewers Association, 1962-1972.  MRI estimate 1975-1990.
                                 254

-------
N>
Ul
                               Round Trip.
                               Glass 48.9%
                            1962

                      74,100,000 Barrels
       1972

114,200,000 Barrels
         SOURCE: U.S.  Brewers Association  1962- 1972
                           Figure A-6 -_ Packaged Beer  Container Market Shares^,  1962-1972 :.

-------
          The growth  of  the metal can and single trip glass container has
been at  the expense of the returnable bottle.  Its share of the market has
steadily declined  from 48.9 percent in 1962, to 18 percent in 1972.  Total
bottles  filled, which was estimated at 11.5 billion units in 1962, have
declined to 8.3 billion  in 1972.' Because of the high trippage* on returnable!
beer bottles, the  annual replacement production only amounted to 245 million
containers in 1972, a decline  from 353 million in 1962.

          As contrasted  to the soft drink container, there has been no
noticeable change in size during  the past decade.  The 12-ounce container is
the most popular unit in bottles and metal cans, and accounts for approximately
70 percent of the  total  packaged beer.  There has been some increase in de-
mand for the larger sizes such as the 32-ounce glass quart and the 16-ounce
can and glass container, which accounts for most of the remaining 30 percent
of the package market.

          A small  percentage is  also available in 8-, 11-, and 15-ounce
cans and bottles,  but their volume is small.  The plastic container, which
is predicted to penetrate the  soft drink market by 1980, is not expected to
become a factor in the beer market.  Beer must be pasteurized at 150°F and
most barrier resins begin to soften at this temperature.  There are some
plastic containers under test by selected brewers, but we do not envision
they will be a factor during this decade.

          Metal cans are projected to continue to increase their share of
the packaged beer market, althoughat a slower rate during the next 2 decades.
From a share of 58 percent of  the packaged beer market, cans will increase
to 63.5 percent by 1980,  and 65.5 percent by 1990 (Figure A-7).  Since we
do not project any increase in the average size of the can during this
period, demand will reach 33.5 billion units in 1980, and 44.5 billion in
1990 (Figure A-8).  This is equivalent to a growth of 5.6 percent per year
through 1980, which will slow to 3.1 percent per year through 1990 (Table A-10).

          Nonreturnable glass containers, which now account for 24 percent
of the package market, will increase slowly to 25.1 percent by 1980, and 25.6
percent by 1990.  The average size of these containers is projected to in-
crease slowly as the trend to larger sizes continues because of the advantage
of the resealable cap.  Thus, the demand for 7.6 billion containers in 1972
will increase to 8.3 billion in 1975 and 9.1 billion by 1980.  This is
equivalent to a growth of 2.2 percent per year through 1980.
   We estimate average trippage of at least 18 trips for beer.  However,
     we have no solid documentation and the average trippage is a combina-
     tion of on-premise and carry-out beer containers.
                                   256

-------
                  One Way
                  Glass 24.0%
                     Round Trip
                     Glass
                     18.0%
             1972

      114,200,000  Barrels
           One Way
           Glass 25.1%
       1980

159,400,000 Barrels
           One Way
           Glass 25.6%
       1990

205,200,000  Barrels
SOURCE:  U.S. Brewers  Association  1972
          MRI Estimates  1980; 1990
                     Figure A-7 - Packaged Beer Container Market Share, 1972-1990

-------
to
Ul
CO
            100.0
             90.0
             80.0
             70.0
             60.0
             50.0
             40.0

             30.0
          7- 20.0
           o
           c
10.0
 9.0
 8.0
 7.0
 6.0
 5.0
 4.0

 3.0


 2.0
              l.Ol
               1960
                                                                                                  Total
                                                                                                  Metal  Cans
                                                                                                               One Way Glass
                                                                                                               Round Trip Glass

                     1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
                                  Figure A-8 - Beer Container Shipments,  1963-1990

-------
                               TABLE A-10
                    BEER  CONTAINER  SHIIMENTS.  1962-1990
                          (Billions  of  containers)
                                  ,, Round-Trip Glass
                                  	'   m_j	i Ti • 1 1 • _ _  P /
                                                                   Round-Trip
Year    Metal Cans^/ One-Way Glass-   Total Fillings£/   Total   Replacement Glass^
                                            b/
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990
9.1
9.8
10.9
11.5
13.0
13.8
15.3
16.7
19.0
19.6
21.5
26.6
33.5
40.5
44.5
  Growth
Percent/Year

1962-1972
1967-1972
1972-1980
1980-1990
                           3.4
                           3.9
                           4.4
                           4.7
                           5.0
                           5.8
                           6.0
                           6.9
                           7.2
                           7.4
                           7.6
                           8.3
                           9.1
                          10.0
                          10.5
                     Metal Cans

                        9.0
                        9.2
                        5.6
                        3.1
                                           10.9
                                           11.4 >
                                           10.7
                                           11.1
                                           10.8
                                           11.0
                                           10.9
                                           11.4
                                            9.6-
                                           10.0
                                            8.3
                                            7.4
                                            7.1
                                            7.1
                                            7.1
One-Way Glass

    8.4
    5.8
    2.2
    1.5
                    23.4
                    25.1
                    26.0
                    27.3
                    28.8
                    30.6
                    32.2
                    35.0
                    35.8
                    37.0
                    37.4
                    42.3
                    49.7
                    57.6
                    62.1
               0.35
               0.39
               0.42
               0.50'
              : 0.58
               0.62
               0.48
               0.48
               0.34
               0.27
               0.25
               0.22
               0.22
               0.22
               0.22
Round Trip Replacement

    (3.4)
   (19.9)
     1.7
     0.0
Sources:   aj  Can Manufacturers Institute,  1962-1972;  MRI estimates,  1972-1990.
          b/  U.S. Department of Commerce,  1962-1972;  MRI estimates,  1972-1990.
          £/  U.S. Department of Commerce,  "Closures for containers," 1962-1971;
                Midwest Research Institute  estimates,  1972-1990.
                                  259

-------
          Round-trip glass containers should continue to decline through 1990,
 at which  point they are projected to stabilize at about 7.1 billion fills per
 year.  Total production of round-trip glass containers for replacement, which
 was  245 million units in  1972, should decline to 216 million units by 1975,
 and  remain at that level  through 1990.
 Distilled Spirits Containers

          Distilled spirits are an important segment of the beverage market.
 Products classed as distilled spirits include whiskey, gin, vodka, rum,
 brandy, cordials and liqueurs.  Consumption of these products amounted to
 389 million wine gallons*  in 1972, and has grown at a rate of 4.3 percent
 per year during the past decade.

          Bourbon and blended whiskey are the largest selling distilled spirits,
 accounting for 37.5 percent of the 1972 market.  Demand for these products has
 been static during the last decade due to the consumers' increasing demand for
 imported Scotch and Canadian whiskeys which now amount to 23.1 percent of the
 market. Rising disposable  income, increased leisure time and the increased per-
 centage of population in the 25 to 35 age bracket have been stimulants to the
 growth in demand for distilled spirits.  These factors will generate a 4.5
 percent per year growth in demand during the rest of the decade, to a level of
 550 million gallons by 1980 (Table A-ll). Per capita consumption will increase
 from 1.86 gallons in 1972, to 2.40 gallons in 1980.

          Sales of distilled spirits are strictly controlled by the federal
 government.  Shipments are nearly all in glass containers which vary in size
 from less than 1/2 pint to as large as 1 gallon.  The most popular sizes are
 the 4/5-quart .and quart containers.  Shipments by container size are shown
 in Table A-12 for the years 1961, 1966 and 1971.  There has been a trend
 toward the quart and ha If-galIon  containers which have had the greatest
 growth during the past decade.  Containers holding a quart or greater have
.increased their market share from 24.5 percent of the volume in 1961 to 44
 percent in 1971.  The trend toward the larger sizes should continue as the
 per capita consumption of  distilled spirits increases.  Table A-13 shows the
 number of containers by size during the same period.  Total container ship-
 ments increased from 1.677 billion in 1961 to 2.298 billion in 1972.  Because
 of increasing container size, the number of containers grew at a rate of
 3.3 percent per year during this  period which  is less than the 4.3 percent
 volume growth.  Assuming that this trend toward larger sizes will continue
 at the same rate, the growth for containers is projected at 3.5 percent per
 year through 1980, when they will reach a level of 3.16 billion units.
*  Wine gallon  is a term used by the Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Division,
     Internal Revenue Service, U.S.  Treasury  Department,  for  measurement  of
     distilled  spirits volume.  It  is equivalent to (1) U.S. gallon (231
     cubic inches).
                                    260

-------
                                : TABLE A-11

                 , DISTILLE!) SPIRITS .CONSUMPTION. 1960 TO J980 "

                 Equivalent
Year
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990


Wine Gallons
(millions)
234.7
241.5
253.7
259.0
275.9
293.0
307.8
323.5
344.1
361.7
371.1
381.1
389.0
444.0
550.0
650.0
770.0
Growth -
Gallons
1961-1972 4.3.
1972-1980 4.5
1980-1990 3.5
Consumption
Per Capita
1.31
1.32
1.37
, . 1.37
1.44
1.52
1.58
. 1.64.
1.73
1.80
1.82
1.85
1.86
2.06
2.40
2.70
3.00 -
Percent Per Year
Containers
3.3
3.5
2.5
                                                          Glass  Containers
                                                             .(billions)
                                                               1.68
                                                               1.72
                                                               1.78
                                                               1.86
                                                               1.96
                                                               2.08
                                                               2.16
                                                               2.27
                                                               2.42
                                                               2.42
                                                               2.30
                                                               2.40
                                                               2.66
                                                               3.16
                                                               3.50
                                                               4.00
Source:   Distilled Spirits Institute, 1960-1972; MRI estimate, 1972-1980,
                                  261

-------
                                TABLE A-12
             DISTILLED SPIRITS VOLUME BY CONTAINER SIZE. 1961 TO 1971
                   (In thousand wine gallons equivalent)


Size Container
1/2 Pint
3/4-1 Pint
3/4-4/5 Quart
1 Quart
1/2 Gallon
1 Gallon


1961
30,033
43,119
104,062
56,628
2,713
103


1966
36,325
48,770
121,923
91,050
10,127
245


1971
38,032
47,507
120,219
126,275
35,363
481
Percent
Increase
1961-1971
26.6
10.2
15.5
123.0
1,203.0
367.0
     Total
242,548
308,440
367,879
51.5
Source:  Distilled Spirits Industry.
                               TABLE A-13
         DISTILLED SPIRITS CONTAINER DEMAND BY SIZE.  1961 TO 1971
(In thousand units)

Size Container
1/2 Pint
3/4-1 Pint
3/4-4/5 Quart
1 Quart
1/2 Gallon
1 Gallon
Total

1961
547,171
352,985
544,908
226,512
5,427
103
1,677,106

1966
682,497
405,564
610,376
364,202
20,254
245
2,083,138

1971
721,836
398,038
602,396
505,104
70,726
481
2,298,581
Increase
1961-1971
174,665
45,053
47,488
278,592
65,299
378
621,475
Source:  Distilled Spirits Industry.
                                 262

-------
           Imported distilled  spirits are mostly Scotch and Canadian whiskey.
 Their  share  of  the market during  1971 represented 26.2 percent of the total
 consumption--an increase from 16.5 percent in 1962.  About 70 percent of
 these  spirits are imported  in bottles,,..although increasing quantities of
 bulk Scotch  'and Canadian whiskeys are being bottled in the United States.
 Bottled  imported spirits amounted to 13.3 percent of all" bottled shipments
 in  1961, and increased  to 17.6 percent in 1971.  The trend toward bulk im-
 ports  should continue and foreign Bottled spirits will level off at about
 20  percent of the market by 1980.

          Although glass has  been the sole container for this market, PVC
 bottles have been test  marketed for replacement of the larger container sizes.
 Until  this year,it was  expected that these bottles would be.approved and that
 they would be accepted  in the  larger container sizes.  Recent tests indicated
 to  the FDA that  the alcohol was reacting.with the resin in the container, and
 FDA has  suspended the use of  these bottles until further testing and evalua-
 tion is  conducted.  It  is impossible to determine, at this time, whether they
will eventually be approved;  therefore, we are assuming that glass will remain
 the sole container until improved resins are developed for this market.
 These  resins will most  likely be  the nitrile or composites and will not be
 commercial before 1980.  Beyond 1980, we have assumed that the plastic con- , &
 tainer will  be  accepted and absorb all the growth in this market.  Glass
 containers will  increase to 3.0 billion units by 1980jand remain at this
 level  (Figure A-9).
Wine Containers

          Wine is a  product of  fermented juice of grapes or other fruit.  It
may include the addition of sugar, grape concentrate,.herbs or alcohol.  Wines
are usually classified  into table wine, dessert wine, vermouth, sparkling
wines and "pop wine."   The latter are  lightly carbonated wines which are
heavily advertised to the youth' segment of the market.  Table wine is the
most popular brand with dessert  wine a  distant second;  The pop wines have
had the fastest growth, increasing from 16.1 million gallons in 1970, to
46.3 million gallons in 1972  (Table A-14).

          Prior to 1966, wine grew steadily at 2 to 3 percent per year.  The
increasingly affluent American  public  suddenly became aware of wine as a '
table drink and demand  increased at over 10 percent per year to a volume of
337 million gallons  in  1972.  This rate of growth is not expected to be main-,
tained since the supply is limited by  the amount of.grapes harvested.
Demand will grow at  a more moderate rate of 4.6 percent per year through
1980 to 485 million  gallons (Table A-15).
                                    263

-------
 10,000
c-
o
                                                                                    Total...


                                                                             — "" ~"  Glass
                                                                             Domestic Glass
  1,000
                                                                                           /•
    100
                                                  I
      1960
1965
1970
 1975


YEAR
1980
1985
1990
          Figure A-9  -  Distilled Spirits  Consumption  by Container,  1961-1990

-------
                                TABLE A-14;

                     WINE DEMAND BY TYPE:.'.-1970 TO  1972
                         (In million wine gallons)

                      .  1970	           1971                  1972
                Produc-               Produc-               Produr-
Type Wine        tion   Import  Total  tion   Import  Total  .tion   Import  Total

fable Wine
Dessert Wine
Vermouth
Other still wine
  Less than 14%
  More than 14%
Sparkling Wine

  Total
112.7
71.3
5.1
. 16.1
11.7
20.4
237.3
20.7
2.4
5.1
—
--
1.8
30.0
133.4
73.7
10.2
16.1
11.7
22.2
267.4
130.1
71.0
4.9
29.3
11.6
22.1
269.1
26.0
2.9
5.4
—
--
1.9
36.2
156.2
73.9
10.3
29.3
11.6
24.0
305.2
136.3
70.0
5.1
46.3
11.8
20.4
289.9
37.5
2.7-.,
4.9 •
—
—
2.0
47.0 '
.173.8
: 72.7
10.1
46.3
11.8
22.3
'337.0
Source:  The Wine Institute.
                                 265

-------
Year

1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990
                                 'TABLE A-15

                          WINE CONSUMPTION. 1962-1980
              Glass Containers (Millions)
Domestic a/
710
750
780
780
770
820
830
970
1,030
1,150
1,230
1,360
1,590
1,650
1,750
Import
37
39
46
46
51
53
60
71
89
107
140
170
210
250
300
Total
747
789
826
826
821
873
890
1,041
1,119
1,257
1,370
1,530
1,800
1,900
2,050
                      Wine  Consumption
                                                                      b/
                    (Millions  of Gallons) -

                             163
                             171
                             180
                             183
                             187
                             197
                             213
                             235
                             267
                             305
                             337
                             387
                             485
                            570
                            680
       1962-1972
       1972-1980
        1980-1990
                          Growth Rate - Percent per Year
                      Total Containers     Wine Consumption
6.2
3.5
3.0
7.5
4.6
3.5
 Source:  £/ Glass Container Manufacturers Institute, 1962-1972; MRI
               estimates, 1972-1980.
          b/ The Wine Institute, 1962-1972; MRI estimate, 1972-1980.
                                  266

-------
          All wine marketed in the United States is packaged in glass con-
tainers.  Glass is desired because it provides a good barrier to oxygen and
carbon dioxide; offers a shelf life of more than 1 year;  and is approved
by the FDA.  It also provides product visibility and can be hot-filled and
pasteurized when bottling.  Domestic shipments of glass containers for wine
amounted to 1.23 billion units in 1972.  This does not represent all glass
containers for wine since imports are important.  There are no statistics
available on the amount of imported wine bottled in the United States com-
pared to that bottled in foreign countries.  We assumed that the same ratio
of foreign to domestic bottling applies to wine, as it does to distilled
spirits, where 70 percent of the imports are bottled in foreign lands.
Forty-seven million gallons of wine, equivalent to 14 percent of domestic
consumption, were imported in 1972.  This resulted in an additional 140
million containers, bringing the total use of glass wine bottles to 1.37
billion units.

          There is a trend toward increasing container size as evidenced
by the increasing average container weight.  This will continue, and
overall growth in containers will be 3.5 percent per year through 1980,
when 1.80 billion containers will be used for wine (Figure A-10).

          Glass containers have been the only consumer package for wine in
the United States.  However, PVC containers have been used to a large extent
in Europe since the 1960's.  Their shelf life is much less than glass con-
tainers and oxygen permeability is a problems.  However,  the demand for wine
in Europe is much greater than in the United States and the turnover is
quite rapid, so shelf life is not a ireal problem in Europe.

          There are no indications of a trend toward a plastic container
in the United States.  Current research efforts on barrier resins should
yield an acceptable product by 1980 that will meet the requirements of the
industry and the FDA.  It is possible that plastic containers may be im-
ported into the United States from European wineries.  However, a recent
plan by a French wine producing conglomerate to market a  rose red table
wine in 48-ounce PVC bottles in the United States was halted by the FDA
because of possible health hazards.  Because of this action and the lack of
other satisfactory resins, it will be 1980 before plastic containers be-'
come commercial for wine.      ;
                                  267

-------
N)
ON
00
g
        id
       O
        c
        O
       _
        C
        C


        O
       -H
       S
          10,000
           9,000
           8.000
           7,000
           6.000

           5,000

           4,000

           3,000
    2,000
1,000
  900
  800
  700
  600
  500

  400

  300


  200
              100
                                                                   Container Demand

                                                                   (Million of Units)
                                                                                                     Total Glass


                                                                                                     Domestic Glass
                                                                       Wine Consumption

                                                                       (Million Gallons)
                           -I	1	1   i
                                              -I	L	I   i
               I960
                          1965
                                          1970
1975
1980
1985
                                                          1990
                               Figure A-10  -  Wine Consumption  and  Container Demand,  1963-1990

-------
                            THE  FOOD  INDUSTRY
           Food  is  the  nation's  largest  industry with  consumer  expenditures
 of $124.4  billion  in  1972.   This  is  equivalent to  15.7 percent of  all per-.
 sonal  consumption  expenditures.   Although  food expenditures have  increased
 from $70.1 billion in  1960,  its share of the personal disposable  income.  .
 has declined  from  20 percent in that year  to the present  level.   Because
 of inflation  and changing  consumer preferences, per capita consumption  of
 food has risen  more slowly.   The  per capita consumption index  for  all
 foods  has  increased from 96.4 in  1960 to 103.7 in  1972, representing a  real
 growth of  about 1.85 percent per  year in the actual weight of  food consumed.
 Food  Consumption

          The  above  figures  include  all  fresh and  processed  foods  which  are
 nearly  all  contained in  some  form  of rigid,  flexible  or  filmed  package.   A
 wide  variety of processed  foods  are  packaged  in  metal cans and  glass  con-
 tainers, although  plastic containers  are  beginning  to  appear  in  this market
 to a  limited extent.   Nearly  half  of these  containers are for canned  foods
 such  as  soups, vegetables,  fruits, fruit  juices, and  vegetable  juices.   Other
 smalleTjbut significant^markets  include  pet  foods, baby  food, canned  meat
 and fish, condensed  and  evaporated milk,  coffee  and tea, salad  dressings,
 pickles, vegetable oils, peanut  butter,  syrup and  vinegar.   These  items
 represented a  market  for 44.0 billion  rigid  containers in 1972.

          Processed  foods  have not shown  much growth  because of changing
 consumer preference  toward more  convenience  foods  and other  forms  of  pro-
 cessed  foods which reduce  the amount of  time  the average housewife spends
 in the kitchen.   Per capita consumption  of  some  of the major products  is
 shown in Table A-16.   During  the period  from  1960  to  1972, per  capita  con-
 sumption of condensed  and  evaporated milk,  lard  and coffee have  declined
 significantly.  Canned fruits have been  relatively stable,while  canned
 vegetables and juices  have had moderate  growth.  The  decline in  condensed
 and evaporated milk  is a result  of increasing preference for dry milk  solids
 in institutions and'at the consumer  level.  The  decline  in lard  is attributed
 to. the reduced amount  of lard available  from hog processing  plants and to
 consumer preference  for vegetable  shortenings.   Coffee consumption has
 declined because  of  consumer  preference  for  the  sweeter  carbonated beverages.

          The  growth  of  food  products  packaged in  containers should continue
 at slightly under 1  percent per year.  A 'projection of consumer  spending  for
 various grocery products to 1980 is  shown in Table A-17.  Canned and  jarred
 foodSjWhich account  for most  of  the  products packaged  in rigid  containers,
areexpected to increase from  $12.7 billion  to $16.5 billion  by  1980.  Growth,

                                    269

-------
                               TABLE A-16

          PER  CAPITA CONSUMPTION OF  SELECTED  FOODS.  1950 TO  1972
Pounds Per Capita
ood 1950
sh ' 4.9
and
ted Milk 20.1
12.6
uit 21.6
1960
4.0

13.7
7.6
22.6
1965
4.4

10.6
6.4
23.5
1967
4.4

9.0
5.4
22.6
1970
4.4

7.1
4.7
23.3
1971
4-3

6.8
4.3
21.9
1972


6.2
3.8
21.6
Type of Food

Canned Fish
Lard
Canned Fruit
Canned Fruit
  Juices             13.5   13.0   10.9   11.7   14.2   15.4   15.6
Canned Vegetables    41.2   43.4   46.9   49.0   51.1   51.2   51.9
Coffee               16.1   15.8   14.9   14.8   13.8   13.3   13.9
Source:  "National Food  Situation," Economic Research Service, USDA;
           National Canner's Association.
                               TABLE A-17

          CONSUMER SPENDING FOR GROCERY PRODUCTS. 1960 TO  1980
Dry stuffs
Bakery,  fresh
Other  foods

     Total
Nonfoods
(In billion dollars)
itegory I960
i, poultry $14.8
1 jarred 9.4
i 5.5
:resh 4.4
rrigerated 6. 1
•esh 3.5
Is 4.1
$47.5
)ds including ice cream 3. 1
L Foods $50.6
9.0
L Grocery $59.6

1970
$20.4
12.7
7.1
5.7
8.7
5.1
7.1
$66.8
5.0
$71.8
13.9
$85.7

1980
$25.6
16.5
9.2
7.2
11.3
6.1
9.3
$85.2
9.5
$94.7
19.1
$113.8
Source: Eastern Frosted Foods; Quick Frozen Foods.

                                   270

-------
f
which averaged 3 percent per year between 1960 and 1970, is projected at a
rate of 2.6 percent between 1970 and 1980.  The real rate of growth between
1960 and 1970 was 1.25 percent per year adjusted for inflation.  Assuming
the same rate of inflation during the next decade, the real, growth would
average 0.85 percent per year.  Thus, a growth less than 1 percent per year
during the next decade for food products packaged in metal cans, glass con-
tainers, and plastic bottles is realistic.
Food Processing
                                                        I-
          Most foods are preserved by heat sterilization or pasteurization
to kill or inactivate harmful bacteria.  The heat treatment is usually
conducted in the  filled and closed containers, with a temperature in excess
of 230°F and the  finished product is normally under a high vacuum.  Products
such as vegetables, baby foods, poultry, meat, fish and soups, which have
a pH of 4.5 or greater, are canned by this method.  Acid foods: such as fruits,
tomato products and juices are processed in the container at a lower tem-
perature of 185-190°F, and at a vacuum of about 10 inches of mercuiy.  Fruit
juices and drinks are given a high temperature treatment and then v/ara or
cold filled.  Therefore, the package must have the following characteristics:
it should have an excellent barrier to oxygen; it should be chemically and
physically inert  so that no flavor changes are in evidence; it must have a
hermetic seal; it must be able to withstand processing conditions of high
temperatures and  pressure or vacuum.

          Metal cans and glass have satisfactorily met these challenges and
can also provide  a shelf life of a year or longer.  Glass containers have
the added feature of allowing product visibility for merchandising appeal,
but they are also breakable.
Food Containers

          Glass containers and metal cans each have their own distinctive
markets and there has been competition between them in only a few products.
Metal cans are used for canning fruits, vegetables and their juices, evapo-
rated milk, meats, poultry, fish, lard, soups and pet foods.  Glass con-
tainers are used when product visibility or a resealable feature is desired.
Salad dressings, horseradish, pickles, peanut butter, syrup, vinegar,
jellies, catsup and baby foods are in this category.  Some, fruits and
vegetables are packed in glass, but this is predominantly a can market.
Soluble coffee and tea are packed in glass containers and vacuum packed
coffee is packaged in metal containers.
                                   271

-------
          Because of their unique properties, glass and metal cans have
dominated this market.  Its potential of 44 billion units represents a
lucrative market for the development of a plastic container which would
have the added advantages of being nonbreakable and light weight.  However,
the severe requirements of high temperature, pressure or vacuum packaging,
low oxygen permeability, and visibility prevent most of the existing resins
from competing in this market.                                      .     .

          Recent developments of improved resins that meet some of the less
severe requirements indicate that plastics may begin to penetrate this
market in greater depth.  PVC and polypropylene bottles are being used to
package vinegar, syrup, mustard, vegetable oils and liquid margarines.  The
nitrile barrier resins have shown promise and are being evaluated in selected
markets.

          It is not expected, that the PVC container will become a factor
because of its high cost and potential problem of migration of the resin
from the container into the product as experienced in the liquor container.
Polypropylene containers will achieve a good growth because of their ability
to be hot filled.  These containers will compete with glass where clarity
and a resealable feature are desired.
Food Container Demand

          The demand for food containers has increased slightly during the
past decade from 41.5 billion units in 1962, to 43.9 billion in 1972.  Because
of significant variations in the seasonal canning of fruits and vegetables,
demand was as low as 39.6 billion in 1963, and as high as 44.4 billion in
1970.  Average growth during this period was less than 1 percent per year
(Table A-18).

          Demand for food containers is projected to increase at 0.5 per-
cent per year through 1980, to reach a level of 46.1 billion units.  Most
of the growth will be absorbed by plastic containers, as improved resins
are developed to compete in additional markets (Figure A-11).

          Metal cans:  Metal cans make up close to 75 percent of this
market and are used to contain a wide variety of foods.  Demand in 1972
at 31.3 billion units was nearly the same as the 1962 use of 31.4 billion
cans.  Because of seasonal variations in food corps, the can demand varied
from a low of 29.3 billion in 1965, to a high of 32.0 billion in 1970.
                                    272

-------
                                 TABLE A-18
                    FOOD CONTAINER SHIPMENTS.  1962 TO 1990
(In millions of units)
Year
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990
'.

1962-1972
1972-1980
1980-1990
Glass-7
10,068
10,072
10,507
11,023
10,788
11,872
11,183
11,901
12,080
11,783
11,920
12,210
12,400
12,400
12,400

Glass
1.7
0.5
0.0
, • /
Metal Cans-
31,412
29,428
30,339
29,291
29,998
29,787,
30,816
30,811
32,000
31,400
31,300
31,500
32,000
32,500
33,000
Growth Rate
Metal Cans
0.0
0.4
0.4
Aerosol—
•"__
70.0
71.5
89.7
69.6
100.5
85.9
88.3
90.3
85.6
100.0
120.0
150.0
180.0
200.0
Percent Per
Aerosol
4.0
5.2
3.0
Plastic-7

21.9
50.8
56.9
174.8
99.4
121.0
202.1
278.2
458.1
600.0
1,000.0
1,500.0
2,000.0
2,500.0
Year
Plastic

12.1
5.4
Tota 1
41,480
. ; 39,592
40,952
40,488
40,933
41,847
42,223
43,001
44,438
43,724
43,900
44,830
46,050
47,080
48 , 100

Total
0.6
0.5
0.4
a/  U.S. Department of Commerce, "Containers and Packaging",  1962-1972;
      MRI estimates, 1972-1990.
b/  Can Manufacturers Institute, 1962-1972;  MRI estimates,  1972-1990.
                                  273

-------
100,000
 90,000
 80,000
 70,000
 60,000
 50.000

 40,000

 30,000



 20,000
 10,000
  9,000
  8,000
  7,000
  6,000

  5,000

  •4,000

  3.000
  2,000
  1,000
    900
    800
    700
    600

    500

    400

    300
    200


Total


Metal Cans
                                                            Glass Containers
                                                            Plastic
    1001   i  i  I   i  i  I   i  i  I   I  I  i   i  I  i   i  i  i   i  i   i  i  i   i  i  i   i  i  i
     1960        1965        1970       1975         1980       1985        1990
              Figure A-ll  -  Food Container Shipments, 1961-1990


                                      274

-------
          Although the total use of cans has been constant, the composition
of the market has changed as shown   (Table A-19).  Only pet foods and baby
food have shown any growth pattern, while fruit and fruit juices, evaporated
and condensed milk, lard and shortening and coffee have declined appreciably.
                               TABLE A-19

              CANNED FOOD SHIPMENTS. BY TYPE. 1962 TO 1972
                            (In million units)
                             Millions of Cans       	Increase	
Type oi' Food	1962        1972       Millions      Percent

Fruit and Fruit Juices     7,384        5,788        (1,596).     .(21.6).
Vegetables and Juices      8,176        9,200         1,024        12.5
Evaporated-Condensed Milk  2,196        1,420   .       (776)      (35.3)
Other Dairy Products         242          203           (41)      (16.9)
Meat and Poultry           1,393        1,733           340        24.4
Fish and Seafoods          1,813        1,661          (152)       (8.4)
Lard and Shortening          413          302          (111)      (26.8)
Baby Food and Formulas       509          860           351        69.0
All Other Food & Soups     6,016        5,740          (276)       (4.6)
Coffee                     1,054          839          (215)      (20.4)
Pet Food                   2.216        3.567         1.351        60.9

      Total               31,412       31,313          (99)        (0.3)
Sources:  Can Manufacturers Institute; U.S. Department of Commerce,
            "Containers and Packaging."
          This changing product mix will continue through 1980 and demand
will increase only at a rate of 0.4 percent per year to a level of 32.0
billion cans by 1°80, and 33.0 billion by 1990.  The average size should
not change, with a trend to the larger "family sizes" in some fruits and
vegetables offset by the development of pull-top, 5-ounce, single service
cans for puddings and specialty foods.

  h        Aerosol food containers, which never developed into the markets
projected for them, amount to about 100 million units per year and should
increase to 150 million by 1980.
                                   275

-------
          Glass containers:  Glass containers amount to 25 percent of. the  food
market and have increased  from 10.1 billion units in 1962, to 11.9 billion
in 1972,, for a growth rate  of 1.7 percent per year.  There is no available
published information on the number of containers for each food category.
It is estimated that the largest volume markets are baby foods, salad
dressings, pickles, jellies and jams, ketchup and meat sauces.

          Demand for glass containers is projected to increase at 0.5 per-
cent per year,, to reach a level of 12.4 billion units by 1980, and remain at
this level.  Much of the growth that would have occurred during this period
will be achieved by plastic containers which have already penetrated the
syrup, vinegar and cooking oil markets where large containers are used.

          Plastic containers;  Plastic containers amounted to 600 million
units in 1972.  About 300 million were polyethylene beverage containers
used 'for noncarbonated soft drinks and juices.  The balance include PVC
and polypropylene used for packaging vinegar, syrup, vegetable oils, and
liquid margarines.

          Growth of plastic containers will be steady, but not rapid, due
to the severe requirements of the food industry.  Demand should reach a
level of 750 million by 1980, and then could increase more rapidly beyond
1980 if a good barrier resin with the strength and high temperature resist-
ance is developed.
Fluid Milk Packaging

          Fluid milk, although part of the food industry, is a distinct
entity as it relates to containers.  Fluid milk consumption has been de-
clining slowly from 53.3 billion pounds in 1962, to 51.8 pounds in 1972.
Consequently, per capita consumption has declined--from 285 pounds in  1962
to 252 pounds in 1972.  Relatively little change is seen in the trend  of
milk consumption during che next  2  decades as per capita consumption
continues to decline because of consumer preference for sweeter carbonated
drinks, and other beverages.

          Milk packaging .has been affected by consumer demands for larger
size containers and the trend toward purchases at supermarkets, rather  than
through home delivery.  Wholesale milk sales have increased from 72 per-
cent of the total in 1964,, to 85 percent in 1971 (Table A-20).   Indications
are that this trend will continue toward a larger percentage of milk being
purchased through wholesale markets.  Historically, home delivered purchases
have been in returnable glass containers, and milk sold through supermarkets
(wholesale) was predominantly in paper containers.  However, home delivery
now is commonly in paperboard, plastic or glass.
                                   276

-------
                               TABLE A--'20
        FLUID MILK DISTRIBUTION BY MARKET SEGMENT. 1964 AND 1971
                           (Percent by volume)
                                                Percent
        Market  Segment               1964                       1971

        Wholesale                    72                           85

        Retail         ,      '  -       28                           15

                  Total              100                          100
        Source:   Dairy Situation, USDA, November 1972.

                FLUID MILK DISTRIBUTION BY  CONTAINER  SIZE.  1964 AND  1971
                                  (Percent  by volume)

                                     	 Percent
        Size Unit

        Gallon
        Half Gallon
        .Quart
        Pint
        Half Pint
        Other
        Bulk                          	                    	

                  Total               100                     100
1964
16
53
13
2
10
1
5
1971
29
43
10
2
11
. 1
4
        Source:  Dairy Situation, USDA, November 1972.
          Average package sizes are increasing as indicated in Table A-21.
Gallon containers, which accounted for 16 percent of total milk in 1964,,
increased to 29 percent in 1971, primarily at the expense of the half gallon
units.
                                   277

-------
                                TABLE A-21

                 FLUID MILK DISTRIBUTION BY CONTAINER TYPE
                           (Percent by volume)
                                    1964        1971        1980

              Paper                  64.0        78.4        21.0
              Glass                  30.0         6.6
              Bulk Can                3.0         0.4
              Plastic Bag in Box      3.0         4.0
              Plastic Container      	^.        10.7

                      Total         100.0       100.0       100.0
               Source:  Dairy Situation, 1964-1971, USDA, November 1972;
                          1980 estimate Hoover Ball and Bearing Company,
                          'Vlilk Packaging Trends in the Dairy Industry;"
                          The Wall Street Transcript, April 9, 1973".
           The most significant changes have occurred in the type of con-
 tainer as shown in Table A-22.  Glass containers, which accounted for 30
 percent of sales in 1964, declined rapidly to 6.6 percent in 1971.  Paper,
 which was 64 percent in 1964, increased its share to 78.4 percent during
 the same period.  However, the most rapid development has been the plastic
 blow molded polyethylene container, which accounted for nearly 11 percent
 in 1971, from its initial marketing in 1964.
                                TABLE A-22

          COMPARATIVE COST OF RAW MATERIALS FOR MILK CONTAINERS
                           (In $ per thousand)
                                                         Plastic
Container Size              Paper         Plastic        Weight
                                   I
Half Pint            .    $ 7.19/M        $ 2.42/M         8 grams
Half Gallon               24.38/M         12.13/M        40 grams
One Gallon                .48.08/M         24.26/M        80 grams
Source: "Milk Packaging Trends in The Dairy Industry,"The Wall Street
           Transcript, April 9, 1973.
                                    278

-------
          More recently, a plastic returnable milk container has been test
marketed in the U.S.A;  It reportedly will make up to 50 trips.  Should this
container gain in acceptance, it could completely change o; r forecasts given
in Table A-21 beca'use the1 one-way container market could decline appreciably.

          A number of factors have accounted for the growth of the one-way.
polyethylene container.  The development of blow molding equipment, which can
be installed in the milk plant, the trend to larger sized gallon containers,
the increasing size of dairy plants, and the decreasing cost of polyethylene
resins have all contributed to this growth.  Most of the growth has come at
the expense of the returnable glass container, which should be replaced com-
pletely by polyethylene by 1980.  More significantly, polyethylene containers
are reported to be competitive with paper containers.  In fact, the compara-
tive cost of plastic and paper for various sized containers indicates plastics
are lower cost, assuming a 13-1/2 cents per pound cost of resin (Table A-22).
At this price, raw material costs for plastic are nearly half the cost of
paper.  Even with additional costs for closures that will vary from $1.80
to $8.00 per thousand, and the cost of labor and amortization of the equip-
ment, the total costs are favorable to polyethylene containers.

          It is possible that this relative cost difference will not change
during the next  2 decades and that polyethylene containers will continue,
to increase their share of this market.  Estimates, as shown in the Table
A-21, indicate that by 1980 plastic containers will have 75 percent.of the
market with the balance being paper containers.  However, we must raise
serious question whether this forecast will hold up in the wake of the "energy
crisis" and moves by the paperboard producers to preserve this market.

      :    It should also be noted that about 4 percent of the market con-
sists of plastic-bag-in-a-box containers for larger 5-10 quart sizes.   The
development of this container for the home refrigerator never achieved a
large commercial success and its share has been relatively consistent during
this period.  With the trend toward smaller families and a decreasing per
capita consumption, we do not envision that this share will Increase during
the next  2  decades.
                   HOUSEHOLD AND INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS
          A wide variety of household and industrial chemicals are used by
consumers; institutions,^ and industrial firms.  Major consumer products are
liquid detergents, bleach, insecticides, room deodorants, polishes and
waxes, starch, ammonia, window cleaners, disinfectants, inks and dry clean-
ing spot removers.  Industrial chemicals include a wide variety of com-
mercial and research chemicals such as acids, dyes, reagents and solvents
used In various industrial and institutional establishments.
                                    279

-------
          This was originally a glass container market since the inertness
of glass made it a desirable container for products which were corrosive
or toxic.  However, glass is breakable and the hazardous nature of many of
these products made it an ideal market for the introduction of blow molded
plastic containers.  It also was the first volume market for blow molded
containers.

          Liquid detergents and bleach were the first consumer markets to
convert, and today, are nearly all packaged in plastic containers.  These
products represent 55 percent of all plastic containers used for household
and industrial chemicals.

          After penetration into these markets, other cleaning preparations
such as fabric softeners, starch, floor wax, ammonia, and the dry powdered
cleaning products such as bowl cleaners and drain cleaners, were converted
to plastics.  Plastic containers have now captured most of the glass con-
tainer markets where product compatibility does not present a problem.
Current conversions include window cleaners, where a clear plastic is de-
sired,, and insecticides, where product compatibility is not a problem.

          Industrial chemical containers amount to about 10 percent of the
household chemical containers and include a wide variety of chemicals and
industrial detergents used by industrial and commercial firms.  Many of
these are large, reusable containers found in .research and testing labora-
tories.

          Metal aerosol containers have become a significant factor in the
consumer convenience markets.  They are used for insecticides, room deodor-
ants, cleaners, waxes, polishes and starches.  The methodsof use of these
products make them ideal for aerosol systems and they have been readily
accepted by the consumer.

          The historical and projected growth of household and industrial
chemical containers is shown in Table A-23..  Demand has increased at 4.5
percent per year since 1963, the first year in which plastic container
shipments were reported by the Department of Commerce.  This growth rate
was more rapid during the early part of the decade, and since 1967, has been
growing at 3 percent per year.  Container use has grown from 3.0 billion
units in 1963, to 4.24 billion units in 1972.

          The future growth rate of household and industrial chemical con-
tainers will approach population growth because of the lack of new product
innovation and the saturation of most existing markets.  Demand should grow
at 1.9 percent per year between 1972 and 1980, and decrease to a rate of
1.7 percent per year through 1990.  Correspondingly, container use will
reach 5.01 billion units in 1980, and 5.9 billion in 1990 (Figure A-12).
                                  280

-------
                               TABLE A-23
  HOUSEHOLD AND INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS CONTAINER SHIPMENTS, 1962 TO 1990

Year
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966 :
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1975
1980'
1985
1990
•
Growth Rate
%/year
1963-1972
1972-1980
1980-1990

Glass
1,358
li-278
1,061
991
837
816
624
648
615
562
608
500
500
500
500
Glass


(8.6)
(2.5)
0
(In millions of
Plastic
*
1,389
1,618 . %
1,773
2,049
2,175
2,380
2,508
2,714 "
2,737
2,850
3,150
3,450
3,800
4,150
Plastic
-

8.3
2.4
2.0
containers)
Aerosol
232
296
466
571
622
670
664
70 1
728
732
830
895
1,060
1,170
1,285
Aerosol


10.5
2.5
' 2.0

Total
*
2,963
3 , 145
3,335
3:,508
3,661
3,669
3,857
4,057
4,032
4,290
4,545
5,010
5,470
5,935
Total-


4.5
1.9
1.7
*  Not reported.
Source:  U.S. Department of Commerce, "Containers and Packaging," 1962-1972.
           Midwest Research Institute estimates,  1972-1990.
                                   281

-------
r-o
oo
               10,000
               9.000
               8,000
               7,000
               6,000

               5,000

               4.000
               3,000
             .2 2,000
             I 1.000
             c   900
             u   800
                 700
                 600

                 500

                 400

                 300
                 200
                 100
1	r
                         i	1	r
                                                              1	1	r
                                                           Total
                                                                                                               Plastic
                                                                                                               Aerosol
                                                           Glass
                                                                              ill    ill
                                                                                                       i    i    i   i    i
                  1960               1965               1970               1975               1980                1985


                         Figure A-12 - Household  and  Industrial Chemical  Container  Shipments,  1963-1990
                                                                           199C

-------
          Plastic containers have grown at a rate of 8.3 percent since
1963.  This rate of growth has'been decreasing, and during the last 5 years
was at 5.5 percent per-year. ! Consumption reached 2.84 billion units in
1972, equivalent to two-thirds of the household and industrial chemical
market.  Plastic containers have about reached their limit of penetration
into the glass market, and with the exception of the conversion of window
cleaning products, selected insecticides, and scouring powder demand will
slow to a level slightly above population growth.  G-pwth will .be at 3.5
percent per year to 1975, and 2 percent per year through 1990.  This will
generate a demand for 3.45 billion containers in 1980 and 4.15 billion in
1990.

          Aerosol containers grew rapidly during the early part of the .
decade because of product innovations.  Since 1962, when 232 million units
were filled, the growth has averaged 10.5 percent per-year, reaching a level
of 830 million in 1972.  Growth has been slowing and during the last 5 years
averaged 4.6 percent per year.  A lack of new product innovations and market
saturation will limit future growth to 2.5 percent per year through 1980.
Demand will reach 1.06 billion units in 1980, and 1.29 billion by 1990.

          Glass containers reached their highest volume in 1959, when 1.92
billion units were filled.  Since that, time, they have declined steadily to
a. level of 600; million units in 1972.  Most of-the shift in markets to
plastic and aerosol containers has been completed, and a slight decline to
500 million units is projected by 1975, where it will remain through 1990.
Products such as furniture polish, dry cleaning spot removers, naptha
based insecticides and disinfectants, are still contained in glass.  Hydro-
carbon'based plastics will not contain naptha based chemicals, and .with
other- products that are sensitive to light or have strong solvent char-
acteristics, should continue to be packaged in glass.
                        TOTLFTRTKS AND COSMETICS
          Toiletries and cosmetics include a wide variety of personal care
products.  It is a highly stylized and rapidly changing market where pack-
aging is very important to the sale of the product.  Products are heavily
advertised and many are aimed at the youth market.  The packages are crea-
tively designed in colors and molded shapes so that they are easily
recognizable by the consumer.

          The toiletry and cosmetic market has been a haven for new product
development.  Originally, most cosmetics were packaged in glass or. metal
containers.  The development of the aerosol and blow molded plastic con- .
tainers has allowed the packager a wide degree of freedom in package design.
                                    283

-------
          Hair sprays, deodorants, antiperspirants,  shaving  lotion, cologne
 and  perfumes are  popular  in  aerosol  spray  form.  Sun tan oil,  shampoos, hnir
 colors,  lotions,  dry powders, and baby oils are popular in plastic containers.
 Men's  shaving lotion, nail polish, cold cream, make-up, perfume and colognes
 are  popular in glass containers.

          Toiletries and  cosmetics that are packaged in aerosol containers
 and  shown in Table A-24 are  mostly personal care products.   Hair care prod-
 ucts,  deodorants, and antiperspirants are  the most popular items, amounting
 to 68  percent of  all personal aerosol products.  The balance is made up of
 shaving  lathers,  colognes, perfumes, medicinal, and  pharmaceutical products.
 Growth of aerosols was most  rapid during the early decade, increasing at 17
 percent  per year  from 1963 to 1970.  The growth rate has slowed as the
 markets  matured, and during the  last  5 years grew at  a more modest rate of
 7.5  percent per year.  With  existing products reaching maturity and the lack
 of significant new product developments,, demand should grow at  4.9 percent
 per  year through  1980 and decline to 2.5 percent per year inte through
 This would generate demand for  2.1 billion units in  1980 and 2.7 billion
 in 1990.
                               TABLE A-24

          AEROSOL PERSONAL CARE PRODUCTS BY TYPE. 1971 TO  1973
                           (In million units)

Type  Product                        1971          1972           1973.2/

Shaving Lathers                      159           162            166
Hair Care Products                   451           480            490
Medicinals and Pharmaceuticals        56            60             64
Colognes and Perfumes                134           140            147
Deodorants and Antiperspirants       468           505            520
Others                             	76         	90            105

     Total                         1,344         1,437          1,492
 a/ Forecast.
Source:  E. I. du Pont Company.
          Plastic container usage in toiletries and cosmetics has grown
rapidly during the last decade from 416 million units in 1963 to 1.38
billion in 1972.  Much of this growth has been at the expense of glass
containers, which have been replaced by plastic in hair colors, lotions,
baby oils, shampoos, and selected perfumes.  The growth of plastic con-
tainers was quite rapid between 1963 and 1969.  Since 1969, growth has
                                   284

-------
been  erratic, declining  from  that year's peak of 1.40 billion units to 1.12
billion  units in  1970 and  i'971, before  increasing again to 1.3'  billion
units  in 1972.  This may be due to inaccurate reporting since many firms
have  installed blow molding equipment to manufacture their own containers
and may  not be reporting their production.  Plastic containers are expected
to continue their in-roads into glass markets as well as develop new markets
in the ever changing cosmetic business.  Growth is projected at 12.4 per-
cent per year from 1972  to 1980.  Beyond 1980, growth wij.1 begin to slow
to a  rate of 5 percent through 1990.  Plastic containers should reach a
level of 2.1 billion units in 1975, and  increase to 3.5 billion units in 1980.
     ' .                                  '/
          Glass container  shipments which reached their peak in 1966, with
a volume of 2.3 billion  units,, have declined sharply to a Level of 1.3 bil-
lion units in 1972.  Glass has lost much of the larger container market,
but still maintains a preferred position in shaving lotions, nail, polish,
cold cream, make-up, perfume  and cologne, and numerous cream and gel prod-
ucts  packaged in opal jars.  With the exception of nail polish, there is
little problem of product compatibility; therefore, these markets are vul-
nerable  to further penetration by plastic containers.  It is anticipated
that demand for glass containers will continue to decline to a level 1.1
billion  units in 1975, and 1 billion units by 1980.

          The growth rate for rigid toiletry and cosmetic containers was
rapid during the early I9601s, but has been erratic since 1967.  The overall
growth rate between 1963 and 1972 was 3.8 percent per year, increasing from
2.97 billion units in 1963 to 4.17 billion in 1972.  Total containers have
probably  grown at a faster pace since injection molded plastics, which are
used in many small containers, are not  reported separately and are not in-
cluded in production statistics.  These containers have replaced numerous
glass containers.

          Demand for all containers is  projected to increase at 6.0 percent
per year  through 1980, and 3.3 percent from 1980 to 1990.  This will result
in a market for 6.37 billion containers in 1980 (Table A-25 and Figure A-13).
                        DRUGS AND PHARMACEUTICALS
          A wide variety of medicinal and health products are packaged in
containers.  Aspirin, cold tablets, cough syrups, vitamin concentrates,
antacids, mouth washes, milk of magnesia, mineral oils and prescription
drugs are packaged in over 4 billion plastic, glass, and metal containers
each year.
                                   285

-------
                                 TABLE A-25

           TOILETRY  AND COSMETIC  CONTAINER SHIPMENTS,  1962 TO  1990
                       (In millions  of containers)
 Year
Glass
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990

Growth Rate
%/year
1963-1972
1972-1980
1980-1990
. 2,045
2,026
2,106
2,194
2,299
2,291
1,841
1,817
1,673
1,284
1,336
1,120
.1,000
850
700
Glass


(4.8)
(3.7)
(3.6)
                             Aerosols
                                530
                                607
                                906
                                891
                              1,000
                              1,174
                              1,288
                              1,380
                              1,344
                              1,437
                              1,660
                              2,100
                              2,380
                              2,700

                             Aerosols
                               15.6
                                4.9
                                2.5
                               Plastic
                                  416
                                  525
                                  579
                                  784
                                  962
                                1,128
                                1,401
                                1,120
                                1,136
                                1,375
                                2,100
                                3,500
                                4,460
                                5,700

                               Plastic
                                 14.5
                                 12.4
                                 5.0
                                                            Total
2,972
3,238
3,679
3,974
4,253
4,143
4,506
4,173
3,736
4,148
4,880
6,600
7,690
9,100

Total
 3.8
 6.0
 3.3
Source:  U. S. Department of Commerce, "Containers and Packaging," 1962-1972,
         MRI estimates 1972-1990
                                   286

-------
00
  10,000
   9,000
  " 8,000
   7,000
   6,000
   5,.000

   4,000

«J  3,000
at
             «  2,000
             e
    ,000
     900
     800
     700
     600

     500

     400

     300
                  200
                  100
                   I960
                                                                                                                   Toto!______ -
                                                                                                                   Plastic  _-^-^—
                                                                                                                   Aerosol
                                                                                                             . ^	Glass
                                                                                 I    t   j    i
                                                                                                                   i    i	i
                         1965

                    Figure A-13
       1970       .        1975              .  1980

Toiletry and  Cosmetic  Containers, 1963-1990
1985

-------
          Glass  containers have dominated this market because they meet the
 requirements of  the  industry for a container that will protect the product
 against  light, oxygen and water vapor  transmission, have FDA approval, be
 inert  to the contents, and in many cases, offer visibility to the product.

          Plastic containers have successfully challenged glass in numerous
 products such as aspirin, mouth washes,  vitamins, antacids, alcohol, nasal
 sprays,  and petroleum jelly.  Most of  the plastic containers are blow molded,
 although an increasing number of polystyrene containers are produced by
 injection and other  molding methods.

          Glass  container shipments in 1972 amounted to 2.97 billion units,
 a decline from the peak  1966 year when 3.42 billion were shipped.  The
 increasing penetration of plastic containers will cause a further decline
 to 2.73  billion units by 1980.  Glass  containers are still favored for
 cough  syrup, milk of magnesia, selected  vitamins and biologicals (Table A-26
 and Figure A-14).

          Plastic blow molded containers have grown.from a level of 142
 million  units in 1963,, to 1 billion in  1972.  Most of this growth has
 occurred since 1970,  when numerous conversions were made to plastics.
 Blow molded containers are projected to  increase rapidly during the next
 decade because of the trend to blow molding by the major drug firms.  The
 equipment for these  containers is being  installed and will be producing in
 the near future.  Demand for plastic containers is projected to grow 14.2
 percent  per year to  2.9  billion units  by 1980.

          It should  be noted that the  number of plastic containers is
 larger than the above figures, which represent only blow molded containers
 reported  by the Department of Commerce.  Numerous other plastics manu-
 factured by other methods are competing  for these markets.   There are no
available statistics by end use of these containers, but, although significant
 in terms of numbers,  they are small in  terms ofiresin consumption.
                            GENERAL PACKAGING
          General packaging includes all other metal cans, aerosols and
metal containers not included in previous sections.  These categories con-
s»ist of automotive and marine products such as oil, antifreeze, and aerosol
products; coatings and finishes, which are primarily consumer paints and
other coatings; and a wide variety of miscellaneous products.
                                   288

-------
                                TABLE A-26

        DRUG AND  PHARMACEUTICAL CONTAINER SHIPMENTS.  1962 TO  1990
                          (In millions of containers)
 Year

 1962
 1963
 1964
 1965
 1966
 1967
 1968
 1969
 1970
 1971
 1972
 1975
 1980
 1985
 1990,
Glass

3,253
3,108
3,188
3,393
3,428
3,254
2,896
3,355
3,259
2,697
2,971
2,880
2,730
2,670
2,600
Plastic
  142
  143
  265
  299
  327
  337
  401
  742
  892
 ,000
 ,500
2,900
3,800
5,000
1,
1,
                 Aerosol
 38
 28
 35
 37
 41
 40
 46
 49
 43
 50
 60
 75
 90
100
                                  Total
3,288
3,359
3,693
3,764
3,622
3,263
3,802
4,050
3,632
4,021
4,440
5,630
6,550
7,600
Growth Rate    Glass

1963-1972      (0.5)
1972-1980      (1.0)
1980-1990      (0.5)
               Plastic

                24.2
                14.2
                 5.6
                  Aerosol

                    3.1
                    5.2
                    3.2
                                  Total

                                   2.5
                                   4.3
                                   3.0
Source:  U. S. Department of Commerce, "Containers and Packaging," 1962^1972.
         MRI Estimates 1972-1990.
                                    289

-------
  10,000
   9.000
   8.000
   7,000
   6,000
   5,000

   4.000

   3,000
.1  2,000
.E  1.000
|   900
    800
    700
    600
u
    500

    400

    300


    200
     100
               i   i	i
                                                                            i    I    i   i
                                                                                                   Total
                                                                                                   Plastic
                                                                                                   Glass
      1960
                        1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
                   Figure A-14  - Drug and  Pharmaceutical Container  Shipments,  1963-1990

-------
 Automotive and Marine

           An estimated 1.14 billion, containers were^used in 1972  for auto-
 mobile and marine-oilsj  antifreeze;," and aerosol automotive products such
 as deicers, waxes and polishes (Table A-27).

           The market for motor oil cans has changed significantly.   Initially^
 it was a standard tin plate container, but by 1960,aluminum cans began to
 achieve a major penetration.   However,  by 1963 and 1964 the lower cost
 composite fiber foil containers were introduced,and today are the major
 container in this market.  The demand for the steel metal can in 1972 is
 about the same as 1964 when most of the conversion was complete.

           About 20 million plastic containers are used for motor oil and
 their demand has been constant since 1964.

           We do not anticipate any growth for motor oil metal or plastic
 containers, and 1980 demand will be similar  to the 1972 demand.

           Antifreeze has essentially been a metal can market until recently,
 when  the plastic container rapidly replaced, the can in numerous brands.
 This  has been particularly strong in retail stores, where over half of the
 antifreeze is marketed.   Metal can demand declined 25 percent in 1972 over
 1971, to an estimated 85  million units, while plastic containers  increased
 to 70 million.   This trend should continue  as metal cans are continually
 replaced.                               .  '•.'•     '  "•••••-".-'".

           Aerosol  automotive  specialties  amounted to  75 million units in
 1972,  and  consist  of windshield deicers, waxes,  polishes and cleaners. -     :
 Growth  will  increase the number to 100  million units  by 1975, and  150
 million by 1980.
Coatings and Finishes
                                     s
          Containers for coatings and  finishes  include metal paint  cans
and aerosol spray paint cans.  These containers amounted  to 901 million
units in 1972, an increase of 132 million units since 1962  (Table A-28).

          The steel paint can in gallons, quarts and' pints has been the
industry accepted container for many years.  Growth has been steady and
very little innovation has taken place.  Plastic containers have been
recently introduced in the markets, but are still under evaluation.  Various
systems are being tested to provide an easy-open lid that can be resealed.
                                    291

-------
                              TABLE A-27

     AUTOMOTIVE AND MARINE CONTAINER SHIPMENTS BY TYPE.  1962  TO  1980

Type of Container
Metal oil cans
Metal antifreeze cans
Plastic containers
Aerosol containers

Total
(In million
1962
1,576
138
20
. 20
1,754

unitsj
1972
875
85
100
75
1,135


1975
850
75
125
100
1,150

                                                                        1980

                                                                         850

                                                                          50

                                                                         150

                                                                         150
                                                                       1,200
Source:  Can Manufacturers Institute,  1962-1972.
         U.S. Department of Commerce,  "Containers  and  Packaging,"  1962-1972.
         Midwest Research Institute estimates,  1972-1980.
                              TABLE A-28

             METAL PAINT CAN SHIPMENTS BY TYPE.  1962-1980

Type of Container
Metal paint cans—
b/
Aerosol paints-
Total
(In million
1962
6,44

104
769
units)
1972
646

255
901

198$
700

400
1,100
a/  Can Manufacturers Institute,  1962-1972.
W  U.S. Department of Commerce,  "Containers  and  Packaging,"  1962-1972,
c/  Midwest Research Institute.
                                  292

-------
          Aerosol paints have had a modest growth.  These products arc
available in sizes ranging from 6 to 20 ounces.  They are primarily used
for touch up and for applying clear protective coatings and varnishes.

          Consumption should increase to 1.1 billion units by  1980, as
demand continues to increase.  Beyond 1980, plastic containers will become
accepted and partially replace steel cans.  However, total growth will in-
crease only modestly during this period.
Miscellaneous Metal Cans

          Approximately 3.15 billion metal cans were used in 1972 for a
myriad of packaging uses.  Medicinal and health products, household and
industrial chemicals, tobacco products, turpentine, shoe polish, and a
wide variety of consumer products are some examples.  Demand for these
containers has been static during the past decade and is not expected to
grow in the future.
                                   293

-------
                            APPENDIX B





TRENDS IN THE DEMAND FOR FERROUS SCRAP IN IRON AND STEEL PRODUCTION
                                294

-------
 Introduction

           Scrap  consumed  in  the  production of  raw  steel has averaged
 about 50 percent of  total  steel  production .over  the past  20 years.  Scrap
 produced in  the  steelmaking  process  ("home scrap"), however, provides  the
 main source  of scrap, with the percentage of scrap purchased from outjide
 markets  declining.   Increased demand  for ferrous scrap created by increas-
 ing  steel production have  been largely met by  the proportionately larger
 quantity of  home scrap  generated.  Thus, outside purchases of old scrap
 have remained at about  the same  level.  Figure B-l shows  generally how
 the  industry's scrap requirements are met.

           The future role  of scrap in steelmaking will be tied closely
 to technological  developments.   The types of scrap used in iron and steel-
 making vary  considerably with the type of furnace used, operating practice,
 scrap quality and price, the iron or steel product,' and past practice.
 The  proportion of the charge,consisting of scrap for the  open hearth,  basic
 oxygen,  and  electric furnaces,is 40-45 percent, 30 percent, and 98 percent,
 respectively, and has not  changed significantly over the past 10 years.
 The  principal factors governing  scrap usage are related to operating prac-
 tices and  the size,  shape, bulk  density,, and impurities present in the
 scrap.   Obsolescent  scrap  occurs in many physical and chemical conditions
 and  presents the greatest  problems in scrap quality.  Processing (shredding,
 separation,  compaction, etc.) is required to obtain usable forms of scrap.

          Blast  furnace:   In typical blast furnace practice in the U.S.,
 the  scrap consumed is about  5 percent of the pig iron produced.  Research
 in this  area could probably result in larger scrap charges.
     i

          Open-hearth (OH) steelmaking:   Open-hearth steelmaking in the-U.S.
 currently accounts for about 35 percent of the total steel production.  An
 intrinsic feature of the open-hearth furnace is its versatility in raw mate-
 rials, permitting scrap usage in any amount from zero to nearly 100 percent;
 typically, it has been about 45 percent.  However,  the higher efficiency
 and production rate  of the basic oxygen furnace has caused a steady decline
 in open-hearth steelmaking .which is expected to continue..   For this reason,
 scrap recycling in open-hearth furnaces  will decline in the future.

          Basic oxygen furnace (EOF) steelmaking:  BOF steelmaking in the
U.S.  currently accounts for about 50 percent of the total  steel production.
The BOF process is less versatile than open-hearth  steelmaking and is
 limited by current industry practice and economics  to scrap charges of about
 30 percent.  This is because no external fuels  are  used and heat is ob-
 tained by the rapid, exothermic oxidation by oxygen blowing of carbon,
 silicon,  and manganese in the pig iron.   The heat balance  is the major
 scrap'limitation, since only the excess  heat over that required to bring

                                  295

-------
Labor
Energy
Capital
Other
                  Raw
                  Materials
                     1
Primary
Metals
               Metal
               Shapes
                               Purchased
Scrap
         Home
               Scrap Market
         Scrap

Fabrication
etal

Industrial
                     1
              Scrap
                  Consumer
             Discarded
             Products
            Obsolescent
                                                       Waste Scrap
                                 Scrap
                   Mixed
                   Solid
                   Waste
         Waste  for
         Disposal
                           Waste for Recovery
                                Resource
                                Recovery
                                System
                        Waste for
                        Reduction
                                     Incinerator
                                Residue
                   Sanitary
                   Landfill
               Waste for  Disposal
                                            Residue
                                            Recovery
       Figure B-l - Flow of Primary Metal and  Scrap for Ferrous  Metals

                                      296

-------
 the steel  to the tapping  temperature  is  used  to melt  the  scrap.  Scrap also
.tends to extend the charge-to-tap  time and  thereby  reduces pr< duction rates.
 Various  schemes of preheating  scrap or supplying external supplies of heat
 have been,and continue  to be,investigated in  an effort  to increase scrap
 charges  in the basic oxygen  furnace.

    '*      Electric furnace steelmaking:  The  electric furnace  currently
 produces about 15  percent of the total U.S. steel production.  This process
 uses an  average of 98 percent  scrap in the  charge.  Potential  increases  in
 productivity and reductions  in the cost  of  electric furnace  steel could  re-.
 suit from  continuing research  efforts in continuous charging of prereduced
 iron ore,  preheating of scrap,  and higher power furnaces.  An  increase ,in
 the production of  electric-furnace steel would increase scrap  usage.

          Q-BOP steelmaking:   1973 marks the  second year  of  commercial use
 of  the bottom oxygen blowing process  (called  Q-BOP by United States Steel
 Corporation)  of steelmaking.   Current existing and  scheduled worldwide
 capacity is  17.3 million  tons.   The potential of the process  is still
 being debated in the industry,  but it has been estimated  that  very rapid
 growth potential exists for  a  worldwide  capacity of over 400 million tons
 of  Q-BOP steel  by  1980.   The process is  an  improvement over  the EOF in raw
materials versatility,  and can  accept maximum scrap charges  in the range
45-60 percent.   Success of the  Q-BOP process  could  thus increase scrap
usage dramatically.

          Nuclear-powered  steelmaking:   Another development  having long-
 range potential  for  ferrous  scrap is nuclear-powered direct-reducuion steel-
making.  The  Engineering  Research Association of Nuclear Steelmaking,
 representing  13  Japanese  companies and institutions, have announced plans
 to  construct  a  $26 million experimental  steelmaking plant which will utilize
                        "I O /
nuclear  energy by  1978. —   The nuclear  process is a direct-reduction pro-
 cess  and would  eliminate  the need for coking  coal, blast  furnaces, and
other conventional  steelmaking  equipment.   Presumably, such  a  process
would result  in  an overall reduction in  the energy required  to make steel,
as well  as, be able  f-•>  accept  larger scrap  charges.

          Estimated  scrap consumption:   The estimated amount and source of
 ferrous  scrap  consumed  in the production of raw steel over the 1975-1990
period is summarized  in Table B-l.  The  projections of purchased scrap
consumption are  based on  the s crap requirements and capabilities of the
various metallurgical processes expected to be in operation  at various
points in time.
                                   297

-------
                               TABLE B-l

          ESTIMATED RAW STEEL PRODUCTION BY PROCESS. 1975-1990
                          (In millions of tons)

                Open           Basic          Electric
Year           Hearth         Oxygen           Furnace           Total

1970              48             63             20               131
1972              35             75             24               134
1975              25             85             32               142
1980              17            102             36               155
1985               9            118             43               170
1990               7            130             48               185
Source:  Midwest Research Institute estimates.
          In projecting scrap consumption over the 1975-1990 period, the
following methodology was employed.

          1.  Total steel production was projected for the 1975-1990 period
by extrapolating production and consumption data from 1950 to 1970, and
incorporating published estimates.

          2.  The projected steel production was then broken down by years
among the three major production processes:  open-hearth, basic oxygen,
and electric furnace.

          3.  Total scrap consumption was estimated by years, assuming
scrap input to be 45 percent of total open-hearth steel production, 33
percent for the basic oxygen process, rising to 36 percent by 1990, and
100 percent for electric furnaces.

          4.  The scrap produced internally ("home scrap") was estimated,
based on the continuation of historical trends established over the past
decade, which saw the scrap produced grow from 33.5 percent in 1960 to
1970"s 35.3 percent level.  This proportion is expected to be at 35.5 per-
cent in 1980 and to 36.0 percent by 1990, reflecting more in-plant custom
fabrication.
                          /
          5.  The demand for purchased scrap was calculated as the difference
between total scrap requirements (from Step 3) and internally-produced scrap
(step 4). The results are summarized in Table B-2.
                                    298

-------
                               -TABLE B-2

       FERROUS SCRAP DEMAND IN RAW STEEL PRODUCTION. 1960 TO 1990
                           (In millions of tons)
        Total Raw Steel
Home Scrap
 Produced
Year
1960
1965
1970
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990
Source :
Production
99.3
131.5
131.5
133.1
142.0
155.0
169.0
184.0
Quantity
33.3
46.7
46.4
47.3
49.7
55.0
60.5
66.2
Percent
33.5
35.5
35.3
35.5
35.0
35.5
35.8
36.0
Annual Statistical Report, Americai
Total U.S.'A.
Scrap Demand
 Purchased Scrap
Quantity  Percent  Quantity   Percent
                                                 18.8
                                                 23.1
                                                 22.9
                                                 22.8
                                                 22.1
                                                 23.4
                                                 27.9
                                                 31.8
                            19.0
                            17.6
                            17.4
                            17.2
                            15.6
                            15.1
                            16.5
                            17.3
 52.1
 69.8
 69.3
 70.1
 71.8
 78.4
 88.4
 98.0
                                52.5
                                53.1
                                52.7
                                52.7
                                50.6
                                50.6
                                52.3
                                53.3
           by Midwest Research Institute.
          As shown in Table B-2, the domestic market for purchased scrap
will decline to 22.1 million tons in 1975, then begin to rise again and
will be at 31.8 million tons by 1990.  These projections are based on the
technical requirements (ratios) of the three principal steelmaking processes
and production forecasts.  The remainder of ferrous scrap demand comes from
two sources:   foundries  and exports.

           Foundry requirements are 100 percent scrap5but total demand .for
 foundry products has not risen significantly for some time.  However, cer-
tain "low spec"  foundry products could accept low-grade steel scrap from
municipal waste which would free higher grades for steel furnaces.  Despite
this potentital, we s-2 very little movement this way; the steel industry
will absorb most of the ferrous metal recovered from municipal waste.

          Export tonnage has ranged between 7 and 11 million tons annually>
which is a large percentage of purchased scrap demand for domestic uses.
(In fact, strong export demand and some decline in prompt steel scrap pro-
duction from auto plants in 1973 led to skyrocketing prices for steel scrap.)
Based on the trends, export demand will rise to 16 million tons by 1990
(but it is highly volatile and could go higher or lower).  Nonetheless,
with worldwide  demand for steel rising, we can only conclude that exports
of scrap will rise and domestic demand will rise too.
                                    299

-------
           The principal  conclusion from our  analysis  of steel  scrap  demand
1 trends in steel  furnaces in this section is  that  the  relatively modest re-
 covery of ferrous  scrap  from municipal  waste we have  forecast  can be readily
 absorbed into the  principal ferrous metal cycle--steel  furnaces.   Exports,
 copper precipitation,  and  foundries  are also potential outlets for  recovered
 scrap and we see no demand limitation for any scrap recovery from municipal
 waste--appliance metal or mixed  ferrous fractions with  a high  metal  can
 content.
                                    300

-------
                  APPENDIX C
AN OVERVIEW OF ALUMINUM INDUSTRY PRODUCTION AND
   SCRAP USAGE CHARACTERISTICS, 1960 to 1990
                      301

-------
                    ALUMINUM INDUSTRY CHARACTERISTICS
Introduction

          The aluminum industry is made up of (1) integrated primary pro-
ducers and fabricators who convert bauxite into fabricated aluminum products;
(2) nonintegrated aluminum producers who rely on scrap and primary and sec-
ondary aluminum ingot purchased on the open market; and (3) secondary smelters
who convert scrap aluminum into secondary ingot.

          The chief users of aluminum scrap are secondary smelters who use
approximately 67 percent of the total scrap}followed by integrated producers
(19 percent) and other producers who use 14 percent.  Integrated producers
generally obtain the scrap they consume from internal sources and customer
scrap; smelters and nonintegrated producers buy scrap.  Nearly 90 percent
of secondary ingot produced by secondary smelters is consumed by noninte-
grated foundries.—
          The aluminum industry reports scrap consumption in terms of "new
scrap," "old scrap" and "sweated pig."  New scrap comes in roughly three
forms:  borings and turnings, clippings, and slag from aluminum fabrication
and converting plants.  Borings and clippings result from machining operations,
while clippings and slag are by-products of various melting operations that
are part of the smelting and refining processes.

          Old scrap, by comparison, is obtained from obsolete products that
contain aluminum and is recovered by aluminum scrap dealers.  Most of this
type of scrap is still not, however, recovered from municipal waste streams.
In almost all cases, this type of scrap is recovered from objects that are
easily recoverable such as obsolete airplanes, boats, building products, and
other sources.  However, scrap dealers do not recover aluminum cans in signifi-
cant quantity, although consumer collection centers for aluminum cans are common,

          Sweated pig is a somewhat different category.  This is the aluminum
that is separated from iron and steel when mixed scrap is heated in ovens in
which the aluminum is "sweated" from the higher melting temperature ferrous
metal.
Aluminum Supply and Demand Trends

          Production and consumption of aluminum increased at a high growth
 rate in the past.   In 1961,  less than 2 million tons of primary metal  were

                                   302

-------
produced and slightly over 2.3 million .tons were consumed.   In 1970,  by com-
parison, almost 4 million tons of primary aluminum were produced and  more
than 5 million tons were consumed.*

          The aluminum industry is now successfully marketing a broader range
of products made of aluminum, and it is expected that there  will be a  growing
demand for aluminum in the years to come.

          The automobile industry, in order to produce lighter, more  effi-
cient cars is turning to aluminum engines, bumpers and bumper hinges  to
make a lighter automobile.  The Vega now has an aluminum engine block and
aluminum bumper system, and other automobile manufacturers  are evaluating
the benefits that a  lightweight  engine would afford.  If auto makers con-
tinue turning toward aluminum engine blocks and other lightweight  parts,
it would result in a large demand increase in the aluminum industry.

          Other industries are also utilizing aluminum for  its  lightweight
and strength characteristics for applications that have advantages in a
variety of products.  Construction and packaging products are designed with
aluminum where a lightweight metal is needed.

          Since most sectors of the aluminum industry have  an optimistic
demand outlook, the possibility that reserves of aluminum ore will be de-
pleted was considered to see what effect they would have on MRI's basic
demand forecasts.

          'A report on solid waste and litter prepared by the Warton
School of Finance and Commerce of the University of Pennsylvania gives the
following dates at which it is expected that known world reserves of  alum-
inum ore will be depleted:                          *

          The year 2125 - Assuming the 1965 rate of consumption, no allow-
                            ance for increased population;  reserves of ore
                            are limited to mineable grades; no submerged
                            bodies of ore are found.

          The year 2030 - Assuming a 2.5 percent, per year increase over
                            the 1965 rate of consumption; no allowance for
                            increased population; reserves  of ore are limited
  :                          to current mineable grades; no submerged  bodies of
                            ore are found.
*  Source:  Aluminum Statistical Review. 1972.
                                    303

-------
The Whartori School report also stated the following:

              "Prospects for the supply of aluminum are excellent
          to at least the year 2000.  On the other hand, domestic
          reserves of aluminum are not adequate to meet the pro-
          jected demand.  Thus, it must be expected that the alumi-
          num produced in the U.S. will represent an ever smaller
          percentage of total U.S. consumption, increasing our de-
          pendence on overseas suppliers."

          Taking these facts into consideration, we estimate that the alum-
inum industry's growth rate in the U.S. will slow in the 1972 to 1990 period,
compared to the 1960 to 1972 levels.  This is not to say that there will be
no growth in the industry, but instead there will be a leveling off of
primary metal demand accompanied by a significant increase in the use of
secondary aluminum.
              i
          The basis of our demand forecasts are:  (1) a predicted continued
gain in GNP; (2) the stepped-up use of aluminum by the automobile industry,
and the construction industry; (3) the growing use of mobile homes; and
(4) a continued growth of the use of aluminum in packaging.  MRI estimates
that future primary aluminum production will increase at a rate between 4
and 5 percent per year over the 1972 to 1990 period.

          This means that from the base of 4.1 million tons of primary alumi-
num produced in 1972, primary aluminum production will grow to 9.1 million
tons by 1990 (Table C-l and Figure C-l).

          The same growth rate will also apply to total U.S. demand which
is forecast to increase from 5.7 million tons in 1972, to 12.1 million
tons by 1990 (Table C-l and Figure C-l).  Some detail of these forecasts
follow.
Aluminum Scrap Use

          The trends in scrap use for the industry are summarized in Table
C-2.  Here it can be seen that as an industry the recovery of "new scrap,"
i.e., fabrication scrap,is by far the most important.  Next  in  importance
is the recovery of obsolete scrap ("old  scrap")  by secondary  materials  dealers
who accounted for 255,000 tons of old scrap recovery in 1972; this will
rise to 800,000 tons in 1990.  At the same time, new scrap recovery will
rise from 873,000 tons in 1972 to 2.0 millions tons in 1990.
                                     304

-------
                               TABLE C-l
            PRIMARY ALUMINUM PRODUCTION SCRAP RECOVERY AND
                   . U.S. CONSUMPTION.  1960 to 1990
                          (In thousand tons)
Year   Primary Production
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972

1975
1980
1985
1990
2,014.5
1,903.7
2,117.9
2,312.5
2,552.7
2,754.5
2,968.3
3,269.2
3,255.0
3,793.0
3,976.1
3,925.2
4,122.4

4,900.0
6,000.0
7,500.0
9,100.0
Net Imports

  -112.3
    90.7
   168.5
   227.6
   159.8
   313.2
   359.9
   186.9
   432.5
    30.9
  -132.0
   358.8
   474.2

    V
    y
    b/
    b/
 Aluminum
  Scra^
 Recovery

  438.0
  485.0
  582.0
  654.0
  707.0
  829.0
  887.0
  878.0
  997.0
1,150.0
1,000.0
1,050.0
1,173.1

1,401.0
2,005.0
2,630.0
3,300.0
Consumption

   2,152.6
   2,385.7
   2,900.0
   3,243.8
   3,482.6
   2,989.8
   4,562.3
   4,169.0
   4,738.3
   5,109.0
   4,600.0
   5,074.0
   5,775.8

   6,301.0
   8,005.0
  10,130.0
  12,400.0
&l  Note:  Figures may not equal total due to adjustments in government
             stockpiles and in industry inventories.
_b/  Not Forecast
Source:  U. S. Department of Commerce Business and Defense Service
            Administration.. Containers and•Packaging, 20(1):9 April 1967.
            Modern Packaging. Encyclopedia, William C. Simms, ed., Vol. 40,
            No. 13A New York, McGrawHill, Inc., September 1967, 879 p.
            The Aluminum Association Aluminum Statistical Review - 1972
            New York, July 1973.  Forecasts by Midwest Research Institute.
                                    305

-------
10,000,000
 1,000,000
                                                                                                  Consumption   __ — *1
                                                                                                  Production
-J	1	1	1	1	I	l    i   i    i   i    i
                                                     -I	1	J	I    I   I   i   i    i   i
       I960
              1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
!990
                  Figure C-l  -  Primary Aluminum Production and  U.S. Consumption

-------
                                         TABLE C-2
                  ALUMINUM INDUSTRY SCRAP RECOVERY AND SCRAP CONSUMPTION.  1960-1990






(jj
o
••J



Year
1960
1965
1970
1972
1975
1980
1985
1990
Total
Metal
Recovery
From Scrap
438
829
1,000
1,155
1,401
2,005
2,630
3,300
(In thousand tons)

From
New Scrap
343
624
803
873
1 , 000
1,400
1,700
2,000

From
Old Scrap
95
205
193
255
350
500
650
790
From
Municipal
Waste

__
4
27
51
105
280
510

Scrap ,
Consumption ~"
523
970
1', 167;
1,260
1,500
2,110
2,735
3,515
a/ Includes aluminum scrap before recovery of .the net metallic content of aluminum, which upon reduction
     is scrap recovery in Table B-l.
Source:  Aluminum Association Annual Statistical Review - 1972; Reynolds Metals Company; Forecasts by
           MRI.

-------
          The principal  significance  of  the  recovery  of aluminum  from
municipal waste  is  that  it  is  the  integrated primary  metals producers who
purchase and consume  this metal  (as opposed  to  secondary  smelters and
foundries).  Beverage  cans>  for example,recycle  directly back  into can sheet.
As recovery of aluminum  from municipal waste increases, the primary metals
makers are likely to  continue  to utilize essentially  all  of this  source.
In a sense then, a  completely  new  secondary  metals market is  springing  up--
one that is being sought by  traditional  scrap metals dealers^but which
produces alloy metal favorable for use by primary smelters.
                                     308

-------
                     APPENDIX D





ANALYSIS OF PACKAGING PLASTIC RESIN DEMAND BY END USE
                          309

-------
                              INTRODUCTION
          There are five major end use categories in plastics packaging--
film, blow molded containers, coatings, closures and caps, and miscellane-
ous packaging.  Film and miscellaneous packaging constitute the highest
quantity end uses in terms of tonnage.  Film accounted for 1.4 million tons
or 48 percent of total packaging resin in 1972; miscellaneous packaging
(thermoformed and injection molded packages) for 0.64 million ton or 21.6
of total packaging resins in 1972.  Blow molded containers were in third
place in 1972 at 0.46 million ton,followed by coatings at 0.35 million ton.

          In the sections that follow, an analysis of trends in each end
use area is made.
                         BLOW MOLDED CONTAINERS
End Uses for Blow Molded Containers

          Plastics are a relatively new material for the production of con-
tainers.  Their light weight, safety, des-ign versatility and attractive
appearance generated a market demand for an estimated 6.73 billion containers
in 1972 and demand for 458,000 tons of plastic resin.

          Blow molded containers have been replacing glass containers for
packaging household chemicals, toiletries and cosmetics and medicinal and
health products.  They have just begun to penetrate the food industry and
are being test marketed for soft drinks.

          The household chemical market is saturated, and little growth is
projected.  Medicinal, health, toiletry and cosmetic markets are growing
rapidly as many firms install "in-house" blow molding equipment.  Food
markets will develop slowly because of the severe processing requirements
for packaging food products.  The soft drink container manufactured from
barrier resins will begin to reach significant commercial volume by 1980,
and grow rapidly to 5.0 billion containers by 1990, assuming that "restric-
tive" federal legislation does not inhibit the entry of plastics into bev-
erage containers.  Resin demand for containers is projected to increase at
9.1 percent per year, reaching a consumption of 920,000 tons by 1980.

          Initially introduced as a "squeeze bottle" for spray deodorants
and nasal sprays in 1947, plastic containers did not achieve a significant
market penetration until the acceptance of the blow molded polyethylene
bottle for bleach during the late 1950" s.  Growth increased steadily to 1.0

                                    310

-------
 billion  containers  in  1960,as  plastic bottles  became  accepted  for  packaging
 liquid detergents,  abrasive cleaners and other cleaning  compounds.   The  de-
 velopment  of  the  clear plastic bottle in 1965, and blow molding equipment for
 "in  house" molding, added  to the growth  of  plastics.   Toiletries, cosmetics,
 medicinal  and health products, and milk  markets all developed rapidly during
 the  past decade to  reach  the current level  (Table D-l).
                                TABLE D-l

                     PLASTIC BLOW MOLDED CONTAINERS
                            (In million units)

                                              Quantity-No Units
                   End Use                   1963^          1972-/

          Household  Chemicals                1,351           2,600
          Industrial Chemicals                 38             250
          Toiletries and Cosmetics            416           1,380
          Medicinal  and Health                142           1,000
          Food                                 22             300
          Milk                                 .--             800
          Beverage                             --             300
          All Other                            20   '         100
               Total                         1,989          6,730
a/  U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Domestic Commerce, "Containers
      and Packaging," Volume 25, No. 3, {October  1972), p.  18.
b_/  Midwest Research Institute estimates.
          Household and industrial containers:  Approximately 2.85 billion
plastic containers were used in 1972 to package household and industrial chem-
icals and specialties.  This market now accounts for 41.5 percent of all
plastic containers.  Nearly all liquid detergents, bleach, ammonia, and
powdered cleaners are packaged in plastic containers.  Fabric softeners,
starch and floor waxes are packaged in both plastic containers and aerosol
metal cans.

          Although demand has doubled since 1963, the rate of growth has
been slowing since most of the^conversions from glass containers have been
completed.  Selected insecticides and scouring powder conversions to plastic
will generate a growth rate of 3.5 percent per year to a level of 3.15 bil-
lion containers in 1975.  Beyond 1975,  growth will slow to a rate of 2 per-
cent per year reaching a level of 3.45 billion units by 1980.
                                      311

-------
          Plastic .containers are- also used "for agricultural, industrial and
 institutional chemicals arid cleaning products.  Many of  these arc  larger
 containers  that are reused in  industrial and  institutional  chemical  lab-
 oratories .                                                              ,    -

          Toiletries and cosmetics:  Toiletries and cosmetic products were
 packaged in 1.48 billion plastic containers in 1972.  Plastic containers
 offer  light weight and resistance  to breakage.  Since package design is
 very important in creating an  image of  the product, the  flexibility  of de-
 signing the container in unique shapes  available in clear or colored con-
 tainers has helped establish plastics in consumer markets.  Hair shampoos
 and colors, lotions, powders,  suntan oil, creams and baby oils are packaged
 in plastic  containers.

          The growth was quite rapid during the past decade,increasing from
 416 million units in 1963 to 1.40  billion in  1969.  Growth  has been  erratic
 since  then, declining to 1.12 billion in 1970 before increasing to 1.38
 billion in  1972.

          Plastic containers have  achieved much of their recent growth at
 the expense of glass containers.   Many  firms  are indtalling their own equip-
ment to blow mold containers and growth is projected at  15.2 percent per
year to 1975, and 10 percent per year from 1975 to 1980.  Beyond 1980, growth
will slow to 5 percent per year as the market becomes saturated.  Demand
will reach  2.1 billion units in 1975 and 3.5 billion in  1980.

          Medicinal and health:  Medicinal and health products are being
 converted to plastics packages from glass at  a slower rate  than household
and toiletry products.  A wide variety of products such  as  aspirin,  mouth
washes, vitamins, antacids, alcohol, nasal sprays, and cremes are. packaged
 in plastics.  The impermeability of glass is  still a benefit in many pro-
ducts and it is still the dominant packaging material.

          Plastic containers increased  from 142 million  in  1963 to 1.0 bil-
 lion in 1972,and should increase at 14.2 percent per year to 2.9 billion
by 1980,as  more drug firms install molding equipment to manufacture  their
own containers.    .                                             ...

          Food and Beverage:   Food and beverages represent  the largest
potential market for plastic containers since over 130 billion containers
 are used each year in these markets.  Food products alone represent  a
potential for 44 billion plastic containers a year.

          Plastics have.-made a small penetration in the  food industry with
 300 million containers used in 1972 to package, syrup, liquid margarine,
 vegetable oils, mustard, mayonnaise, and vinegar.  The development of the.

                                    312

-------
new nitrile barrier resins should begin to open new markets for plastics in
uses where moisture and oxygen transmission problems have prevented existing
plastics from being accepted.

          Demand will increase gradually to 500 million units in 1975,and
750 million by 1980.  As the new barrier resins become accepted bfyond 1980,
demand will increase to .1.5 billion by 1990.
 t,
          One of the fastest growing markets has been the containers used
for packaging fluid milk.  Initially introduced prior to 1963, demand
rapidly increased to 800 million units, equivalent to 15 percent of the
current milk packaging market.  This growth was promoted through the con-
tinuing reduction of prices of polyethylene resins and the installation of
blow molding equipment in the dairy plant.   This has caused a rapid decline
in the use of the glass container.  Demand is projected to increase rapidly
to 2.2 billion containers in 1980,as plastics almost completely replace glass,
and also make large inroads into paper containers. .

          The largest potential use for plastic containers is to package
part of the 86.5 billion units of beer and soft drink .sold in containers.
Plastic resin producers have been working to develop a resin for this market
that would be clear, nearly impermeable to moisture, oxygen, and carbon
dioxide transmission and still be economical and have the necessary strength
when molded into a soft drink container.  The nitrile "barrier" resins,
which are under development and have been test marketed in soft drinks,show
the greatest promise of penetrating this market.  They should be fully
developed and commercial by the end of the decade.  Demand for plastic
beverage containers will increase to 600 million by 1975, and 1.0 billion
by 1980.  As the barrier resins become commercial, plastic beverage con-
tainer demand will increase rapidly to 5.0 billion by 1990.

          Currently, about 300 million units are used to package a variety
of juices and noncarbonated beverages.  These are primarily polyethylene
containers.

          Miscellaneous containers:  Other uses for plastic containers in-
clude automotive products such as antifreeze, deicers and lubricants.  De-
mand was 100 million units in 1972, and should increase slowly to 150 million
by 1980.         .

          Plastic container use will continue to grow rapidly--from 6.73
billion units in 1972 to 9.2 billion units in 1975; 14.0 billion in 1980,
and 24.6 billion in 1990 (Table D-2).
                                    313

-------
                                 TABLE D-2

    DEMAND FOR BLOW MOLDED  PLASTIC  CONTAINERS  BY  END  USE,  1972  TO  1990

End Use Category
Household Chemicals
Industrial Chemicals
Toiletries and Cosmetics
Medicinal and Health
Food
Milk
Beverage
All Other
(In million
1972
2,600
250
1,380
1,000
300
800
300
100
units)
1975
2,850
300
2,100
1,500
500
1,200
600
120

1980
3,100
350
3,500
2,900
750
2,200
1,000
150

1990
3,700
450
5,700
5,000
1,500
3,000
5,000
200
Total                          6,730       9,170      13,950      24,550
Source:  U.S. Department of Commerce BDSA; "Containers and Packaging,"
            1972.  Midwest Research Institute Forecasts.
Resin Consumption  for  Blow Molded Containers

          The blow molded container was originally developed  from  low den-
sity polyethylene  which  is soft and flexible.  However,  the rigidity and
stiffness of high  density polyethylene,along with its low cost,made it  the
choice for over 80 percent of the plastic containers manufactured  in 1972.
Low density polyethylene has been in  limited use in the  drug,  cosmetic
and food markets where a flexible container is desired.  The  bellows type
container for dessert  topping is an example.

          Although polyethylene was rapidly accepted for household chemicals.
toiletries and cosmetics and some medicinal and health products, it has not
penetrated the food markets because of its lack of clarity and poor resist-
ance to gas and water  vapor transmission.

          The clear PVC bottle was developed in 1965 for use  in products
where clarity was  desired.  They also had resistance to  oil and oxygen
and good rigidity.  Numerous nonfood uses developed and  although projections
for rapid penetration  of the food market were common, its COSL limited  its
use.  PVC received another setback recently when the FDA challenged its use
for liquor containers, after laboratory tests revealed residues in the
packaged liquor.

          Polypropylene resins have the greatest potential use for packaging
various food products.  It is competitive with PVC where clarity is desired

                                     314

-------
and can be filled at temperatures up to 190°F.  Polypropylene will have a
higher unit yield per pound of resin because of il:s low density and will.
cost less than PVC.  Current demand is about 15 million pounds of resin
and increasing rapidly.  It is being used to package syrup and sugar based
refrigerated fruit drinks.

          Other resins used for blow molding include polystyrene, nitrile,
and XT acrylics.  Polystyrene has clarity and can be injection molded into
decorative containers for nonhygroscopic powders and solids.  The XT acrylics
have clarity, excellent oil resistance, and can be hot filled.  These are multi-
polymers that also have good oxygen barrier properties.  The nitrile resins
are a recent development and have excellent barrier resistance to oxygen,
carbon dioxide and moisture transmission.  Its clarity and the above proper-
ties have made it a leading contender  for soft drink markets.

          High density polyethylene will continue to be the preferred resin
for most containers where clarity, strength, and barrier properties are not
required.  PVC is not expected to grow because of its higher cost and prob-
lems in the food industry.  Polypropylene will increase its penetration  in
the food area because it offers clarity and can be filled at higher tempera-
tures.  The greatest growth will occur to the resin which is developed for
the soft drink container.  The current nitrile resins are the leading con-
tenders ,but newer composites may be developed that will be competitive with
the nitriles.

          The demand for all plastic resins used in blow molded containers
increased from 97,000 tons, in 1963 to 459,000 tons in 1972.  Demand will
nearly double to 920,000 tons in 1980, and to 1,620,000 tons in 1990 (Table
D-3).     .             -
                               TABLE D-3

               RESIN CONSUMPTION IN BLOW MOLDED CONTAINERS
                           (In thousand tons)

Type of resin           1963      1972      1975      1980      1990

Polyethylene HD           87       385       520       783     1,195
Polyethylene LD           10        23        30        50       100
Polyvinyl Chloride         1        35        35        35        35
All Other     .          	^      	15      	25      	52       290

Total                     97       458       610       920     1,620
Source:  Midwest Research Institute estimates based on literature and  indus-
           try sources.
                                    315

-------
           FLEXIBLE PACKAGING. FILM. CONVERTED WRAPS AND BAGS
End Uses  for Flexible Plastic Packaging

          Flexible plastics account  for  the greatest volume of resins u';ed
in packaging.  These items are manufactured from plastic film and sheet
into numerous forms of protective packaging wraps, pouches and bags..

          Converted wraps:  Wraps are formed by machine around a product
from a roll of flexible plastic.  The wraps may cover the product alone,such
as a bread wrap, or may be an overwrap which covers folding cartons for deco-
rative or promotional purposes.  It  may  also be used to bundle a group of
packages  such as multipack soft drinks,  or as a shrink palletizing wrap
for industrial uses.

          Preformed Bags:  Preformed bags are manufactured in a variety of
shapes.   Some common uses are boil-in-bag pouches for frozen vegetables,
bread, paper goods, toys, housewares, hosiery, candy, fresh meats and snack
food.  Most preformed plastic bags have  welded sides and may have a bottom
seam or gusset; they can be made with or without a lip.

          Film:  Most of the plastic film is used to manufacture bags and
wraps for food and consumer products.  Food packaging accounts for 25 per-
cent of the film where it is used to package and wrap meat, produce and
baked goods.  This end use is growing at 7 percent per year and will con-
tinue at  this rate through 1980.

          Nonfood items packaged in  plastic film include garment bags, in-
dustrial  liners and bags, soft goods, shrink pallet wrap and trash bags.
Trash bags are now the biggest single use for film,and have grown from an
introductory product 5 years ago to  a market demand of 250,000 tons per
year of resin.  This end use will continue to grow,although not as rapidly
as in the past.  Some cities and private waste haulers have "institutionalized"
demand for garbage sacks by requiring their use for pickup from households.

          One possible new growth market for plastic film is the poly-
ethylene grocery sack, which is being test marketed against the kraft paper
sack.  A moderate growth is projected, although some sources feel it will
grow rapidly.  Other industry experts feel it has no significant future in
competition with paper sacks and will never gain popularity with consumers.

          Flexible films and bags manufactured from plastics compete with
paper and aluminum.   In many cases,combinations of these materials are
used in the form of laminates.   The plastic materials have been increasing
their share of this market and are now the largest volume of the three.
                                    316

-------
Sales of  these products  for 1960 and 1972 indicate the rate at which plastics
have increased their  share of the market (Table D-4).
                                TABLE D-4

   DEMAND FOR FLEXIBLE PACKAGING MATERIALS IN PACKAGING. 1960 AND 1972
                         (In millions of dollars)

                                           1960                1972
Packaging Category                   Amount   Percent    Amount   Percent

Paper                                 $352      42.3      $492      27.9
Cellophane                             277      33.3       250      14.2
Polyethylene    ,                       140      16.8       770      43.7
Other Plastics                                 ,            170       9.6
Metal Foil                              63       7.6      	82       4.6

Total                                 $832     100.0    $1,764     100.0
Source:  Modern Plastics Encylcopedia, 1972.
          Plastic materials have increased  their  share  of  this  market from
16.8 percent in 1960 to 54.6 percent in 1972.  They have essentially cap-
tured most of the growth in flexible packaging materials.

          Resin consumption for flexible packaging uses:  It is estimated
that 1.4 million tons of plastics and cellophane were used in 1972 for
flexible packaging.  The largest single resin in use is low density poly-
ethylene, because it is the lowest cost transparent packaging material,
has outstanding chemical and barrier properties,  and in many applications
can compete with paper economically.  It is estimated that 1.1 million
tons of LD polyethylene were used for packaging in 1972.  Other films in-
clude cellophane, polyvinyl chloride and polypropylene (Table D-5).
                                   317

-------
                                TABLE D-5

          FLEXIBLE PACKAGING RESIN DEMAND BY TYPE. 1968 TO 1980
                            (In  thousand tons)
Type of Resin

Polyethylene LD
Polyethylene HD
Cellophane
Polyvinyl Chloride
Polypropylene
Others

Total
1968
 792
 1972

1,067
   24
  163
   67
   50
   45

1,416
1975
                                                       1,800
 1980

1,870
   75
  125
  150
  125
  110

2,555
Source:  Modern Plastics. 1968-1972; MRI estimates, 1975-1980.
          The demand for all films has nearly doubled since 1968, and a
significant amount of the growth has come from the polyethylene trash bag.
Other film uses such as pallet wrap, garment bags, and rack and counter
films have also grown rapidly.

          Flexible films are projected to increase at 7.5 percent per year
from 1.4 million tons in 1972 to 2.6 million tons by 1980, as trash bags,
grocery bags and pallet wrap markets continue to develop (Table D-5).
Low Density Polyethylene

          As indicated in Table D-5, low density polyethylene is the most
popular resin used for packaging wraps and bags.  It is commonly used to
wrap produce, meat, poultry and baked goods.  It also finds application
as bags for dry cleaned garments, industrial bags and liners, household
wrap, pallet wrap and trash bags.  Estimated LD polyethylene resin consump-
tion by end use is also given (Table D-6).

          Demand for LD polyethylene is expected to continue to increase
at 8 percent per year to reach 1.9 million tons by 1980.  The greatest
growth will be in shrink packaging primarily for industrial pallet wrap and
consumer beverages.  Food uses will continue to grow as new applications
are developed and cellophane is replaced.

          High density polyethylene:  High density polyethylene has had only
limited use as a packaging film.  About 24,000 tons of HD polyethylene were
                                   318

-------
 consumed  in  1972,  primarily  for  packaging  snack  foods  and  for wraps  to
•cover carpets  during  their shipment  from the mills.
                                 TABLE  D-6
  LOW DENSITY  POLYETHYLENE  CONSUMPTION  IN  FILM APPLICATIONS.  1968  -  1980
(In thousand tons)
Market Category
Food
Baked Goods
Candy
Frozen Food
Meat and Poultry
Produce
Miscellaneous Food
Total Food:
Nonfood and Bags
Garment Bags
Industrial Liners and Bags
Rack and Counter
Soft Goods
Household Wrap and Bags
Shrink Pallet Wrap
Trash Bags
Miscellaneous Packaging
Total Nonfood
Total LDPE
1968

63
7
15
15
85
30
215

37
55
25
35
40
--
--
70
262
477
1972

100
15
23
19
113
30
300

60
57
66
59
30
55
250
190
767
1,067
1975

135
20
35
25
130
37
382

70
60
80
80
30
75
350
235
980
1,362
1980

180
30
50
35
170
55
520

80
70
100
100
30
175
450
345
1,350
1,870
 Source:  Modern Plastics.  1968-1972; MRI  estimates,  1975-1980.
          The future growth for HDPE will depend upon the rate of replace-
ment of paper for grocery bags.  Currently, it is limited to specialty paper
markets such as nontarnish and lint-free tissue paper, florist wrap, deli-
catessen wrap and other selected wax paper markets.
                                    319

-------
          Perhaps the most promising new.endure for HDPE is the grocery
bag.  Although problems exist  in  fabricating polyethylene in existing
                                                                          9 7 /
equipment, at least 250 million bags per year are being used by IGA Foods.—
If 20 percent of this market were to convert to HDPE, it could mean an ad-4
ditional 90,000 tons of resin  per year.  Its success will depend upon the
future costs of paper relative to HDPE.  Presently, paper is still the lowest
cost product.  HDPE should continue to slowly penetrate this market.reach-
ing a level of 75,000 tons by  1980.

          Polyvinyl chloride:  PVC packaging films are estimated at 67,000
tons per year.  Its most popular market is wrapping for fresh meats and
produce.  PVC is increasingly  being used as a shrink film for carton wraps
where good visibility,combined with strength, are desired.

          PVC has been widely  accepted for meat packaging because it is
soft, resiliant and nonfogging.  It also permits oxygen transmission which
maintains the color of the meat to make it more appealing to customers.
PVC is expected to continue its growth .reaching 100,000 tons by 1975,nnd
150,000 cons by 1980.  However, FDA officials have expressed concern about
potential  migration of chemical compounds into meat and the use of PVC
could be restricted for meat packaging.

          Polypropylene:  Polypropylene film amounted to 50,000 tons of
resin in 1972, primarily in food packaging.

          Polypropylene film competes with polyethylene or cellophane.depend-
ing upon the manufacturing process.  The cast film competes with polyethylene,
while the oriented film competes with cellophane.   Most of the current markets
are for the oriented film where it is most often used as a lamination with
cellophane, glassine, polyethylene, paper or aluminum foil.

          Much of the growth in use of polypropylene film will come at the
expense of cellophane and paper.  The tobacco industry, which represents
about 22,000 tons of cellophane,is expected to be completely converted to
polypropylene by 1978.  Other  potential developing markets include baked
goods, candy and meats.

          The future for polypropylene looks bright as its relative cost to
polyethylene begins to narrow.  Estimates of demand as high as 420,000 tons
by 1980 have been projected; and if this demand develops, most of the
volume would be at the expense of polyethylene.  MRI estimates 224,000 tons
use by 1980 as a realistic forecast for polypropylene.

          Other resins:  Other resins include polystyrene, nylon,  polyvinyl-
dene chloride, and coextrusions.   Of all of these the latter is showing the
greatest growth.  This is a new technology where two or more different films
                                    320

-------
 are extruded together to form a composite film.   These films combine the
 attractive properties of both resins to solve specific packaging problems.
 An example is the use of coextruded LD and HD polyethylene for snack foods.
 Demand for these resins amounted to 45,000 tons  in 1972,and should increase
 to 110,000 tons by 1980.

           Cellophane is the second largest volume packaging film next Co,
ulow density polyethylene.   Demand has been declining as the polyolefins
 have replaced it in many food markets.   Consumption in 1966 of 197,000 tons
 has declined to 160,000 tons in 1972,and will continue to drop to 125,000
 tons by 1980.

           Most of the decline in the use of cellopuau  has been in leaked
 goods and meat where the plastic films have made their greatest penetration.
 Cigarette film has declined slightly and will decline further as polypro-
 pylene replace it (Table D-7).
                                 TABLE D-7.

                 CELLOPHANE DEMAND BY END USE,  1966 - 1980
                            (In thousand tons)

End Use                    1966           1972           1975           1980

Baked Goods                 39             24              20            15
Meat                        30             7               55
Tobacco                     30             26              15             0
Snacks and Cookies          30             41              45            45
Candy                       15             16              15            15
Other Foods                 33             30              30            30
Nonfoods                    20             16            _15            15

                           197            160            145            125
Source:   Modern  Packaging Encyclopedia .(1966  and 1972),  Midwest Research
            Institute  (1975 and  1980).

           Cellophane  will continue  to  be  used in numerous  applications.
It  is  now nearly all  coated or  laminated  for  moisture  proofness and heat
sealing.   Saran-copolymer coated  cellophane is used  for  cigarettes,and
laminations have been developed for cookies and other  foods.
                                    321

-------
                    MISCELLANEOUS PLASTICS-PACKAGING
          A wide variety of miscellaneous packaging and disposable  items
are manufactured from plastic  resins and sheet by  thermoforming and  injec-
tion molding.  Products such as disposable cups and tumblers; collapsible.
tubes; molded boxes to package cosmetics, jewelry  and hardware; meat  trays;
egg cartons; jars and tubs for food products; foamed shipping pads;  pallets
and beverage cartons; and blister packaging are included in  this category.

          These uses accounted for 641,000 tons of resins  in 1972,with poly-
styrene accounting for 55 percent of the total (Table D-8).
                               TABLE D-8

               THERMOFORMED AND INJECTION MOLDED PLASTICS
                   DEMAND BY RESIN TYPE, 1968 TO 1980
                           (In thousand tons)

Type of Resin             1968          1972          1975          1980

Polystyrene                250           370           470
Polyethylene HD           f              110           145
Polyethylene LD           I               72            95
Polyvinyl Chloride        ]               40            50
Polypropylene             (_               36            50
Cellulose                  	8            13            15

      Total                315           641           825         1,348
Source:  Modern Plastics. 1968-1972; MRI estimates, 1975-1980
          Growth of these products has been quite rapid in  the past  few
years, with resin consumption more than doubling since 1968.  The growth
is projected to increase at 9.2 percent per year through 1980^0 1.3 million
tons  because of the continued growth of existing markets and the develop-
ment  of new uses.

          Polystyrene:  Polystyrene is the 1,-irgest volume resin used  :n
miscellaneous packaging since it is available in a wide range of properties.

          The two major types of polystyrene used in packaging are general
purpose or crystal resins and impact resins.  General purpose polystyrene

                                   322

-------
 la  transparent, has a good surface gloss and optical clarity, but is brittle.
 Impact polystyrene is a rubber modified polymer with good energy absorption
 properties.

           These resins are injection molded into boxes,  trays,  tubs, cups,
 lids  and  vials,or extruded into  sheet  and  thermofortned  into meat  trays,
 thin  walled  opaque containers and single service dinnerware.

           Polystyrene is also available as an expandable foam which is
 manufactured by heating polymer  beads with a blowing agent to produce
 cellular  beads,which have excellent heat resistance.  The beads are molded
 into  cups, boxes, trays and packaging  inserts,or are formed into boards
 which are cut or stamped into trays and other packaging  forms.  It is also
 made  into a. foamed sheet and thermoformed  into meat trays, egg  cartons and
 other food packages.  It is estimated  the  180,000 tons of foamed poly-
 styrene were used in packaging in 1972.

           Polystyrene has been growing at 10.3 percent per year since 1968,
 and should reach a volume of 788,000 tons by 1980.  This is equivalent to
 a growth  of  6.7 percent per year.  Demand  for single service dinnerware
will  account for much of this growth.

           Polyethylene:  Polyethylene  is the next largest resin with 110,000
 tons  of high density and 72,000  tons of low density being consumed in 1972.
Products  include jars, tubs and  boxes and squeeze tubes.  Polyethylene
 lacks the clarity of polystyrene,but is more resistant to chemical attack
 and impact,  has better barrier properties and stands up well at low tempera-
 tures.

           All of the low density polyethylene and about  two-thirds of the
high density polyethylene is used to manufacture injection molded containers.
Major uses include beverage cases, pallets, snap-on reclosure lids for canned
foods and  coffee, squeeze tubes, vials, and a wide variety of other containers
 for foods  and drugs.

          About 30,000 tons per year of high density polyethylene is thermo-
formed into  food containers,  medical packages and blister packaging for
numerous  consumer products.

'•         The other resins used  for miscellaneous plastics packaging
include polyvinyl chloride, polypropylene and cellulosic.s.   PVC finds its
greatest use in blister packaging, where the sheet is formed on cardboard
or other backing to provide visibility for consumer products.
i

           Polypropylene is used  to manufacture drinking straws and hinged
•lid boxes where the hinge is an  integral part of the container.  Cellulosic.s
 find  their greatest use in fabrication of vials and in blister packages.
                                    323

-------
                            PLASTIC COATINGS
          Approximately 350,000 tons of resin were used in 1972 to coat
polymer films, paper, paperboard, foil and cellophane.  These thin coat-
ings give the substrate moisture resistance, heat scalability, process-
ability and resistance to oil and grease penetration at a cost less than
other forms of packaging '.
                                                                             ',

          Low density polyethylene dominates this market with 225,000  tons
consumed in 1972.  It is one of the cheapest polymeric coatings that pro-
vides the desired properties.  LD polyethylene is used extensively in  coating
milk cartons and other applications (Table D-9).
                                TABLE D-9

   LOW DENSITY POLYETHYLENE EXTRUSION COATINGS BY END USE, 1966 - 1972
                           (In .thousand tons)

               End Use Category         1966          1972

               Paper
                Multiwalls               9.2           7.5
                All Other               24.0          34.0
                    Total Paper         33.2          41.5

               Paperboard
                Milk Cartons            74.8         114.0
                All Other               12.9          21.0
                    Total Paperboard    87.7         135.0

               Films                    16.0          18.5

               Foil
                Food                     7.6          18.0
                Nonfood               '   7.0          11.0
                    Total Foil          14.6          39.0

               Total Coatings          151.5         224.0
Source:  Modern Packaging Encyclopedia.
                                    324

-------
          The  only  other  resins which.have achieved significant use  in coal-
 ings  are  the ethylene  vinyl  acetate copolymers,with a'volume of 35,000 tons
 in  1972.  These  copolymers are  tougher,  softer, more  flexible and  less heat
 resistant than LDPE.   They are  applied as an extrusion coating or  used as
 wax additives  in hot melt coatings.

          Other  resins include PVC, HOPE, polyvinyl acetate, cellulose
nitrate and polyesters which are used for coating metal cans, glass con-
 tainers, cellophane and other containers.

          Coatings  are not projected to  grow because of replacement of the
 milk  carton by the  blow molded  polyethylene containers.  Current demand of
 114,000 tons of  LDPE for milk cartons could decline to as low as 37,500 tons
 by  1980.  This loss will be  offset by growth in existing markets and new
 markets.  One  of the newer uses is the coating of glass containers to re-
 duce  breakage.   Although  these  are thin  films, there are a large number
 of  beverage containers which can be coated.

          Demand in 1980  should be about.350,000 tons of plastic "resins.
A tabulation by  type of resin is shown in Table D-10.
                               TABLE D-10

         COATING RESIN CONSUMPTION BY TYPE OF RESIN, 1968 - 1980
                             (In Thousand.Tons)
              Type of Resin            1968          1972          1980

              Polyethylene LD           (              224           180
              Polyethylene HD          \              18      '      40
              Ethylene Vinyl Acetate     20            35            60
              Polyvinyl Chloride         10             9            10
              Others                   	45         	44          	60

                  Total                '265           348           350
Source:  Midwest  Research  Institute.

Caps and Closures

          Closures and caps for sealing and closing rigid glass, metal and
plastic containers amount to 90 billion units per year.  Of this, plastic
caps and closures were 12.9 billion units, requiring 95,000 tons of resin.
Plastics have been growing at 4.2 percent per year since 1963.  Most of  these
caps or closures are used on glass and plastic containers.  The future growth
of plastic containers will cause demand for closures and caps to increase
to 23 billion units by 1980, requiring 126,000 tons of resins.

                                      325

-------
          There has been a constant upgrading of closures which are now
designed with dispensing units which include snip-off tops, push-pull
sprays, turrets, spouts, daubers, applicators, pumps and measured dose
dispensers.  The flexibility of plastics has permitted the development of
these devices,and will continue to allow plastics to capture markets from
metal closures.

          Closures and caps are made from numerous resins both thermosetting
and thermoplastics.  About 18 percent are the thermosetting resins such as
                                                                           ." ,< t
phenolics and urea formaldehyde.  Because they are rigid, they have limited
design capability.  Their excellent dimensional stability and outstanding
chemical resistance make them desirable for many drug, pharmaceutical  and
chemical containers.  Overall growth has been negative, and future use will
be limited to those markets where the above properties are desired.  About
17,500 tons of resin were used in 1972jand this will decline to 15,000 tons
by 1980.

          Thermoplastic caps and closures are made primarily from high den-
sity polyethylene and from polypropylene.  Polystyrene, low density poly-
ethylene and polyvinyl chloride are used to a lesser extent.  Freedom of
design and the ability to mold complex shapes will result in all of the
future growth in closures and caps in thermoplastics.  Demand for 87,000
tons of resin in 1972 will increase to 111,000 tons by 1980 (Table D-ll).
                               TABLE D-ll

    RESIN DEMAND FOR CAPS AND CLOSURES. BY TYPE OF RESIN. 1972 10 1980
                           (In million pounds)

            Type of Resin                 1972            1980

            Thermoplastics
              Polyethylene HD             22.5
              Polyethylene LD             9.5
              Polypropylene               22.5
              Polyvinyl  Chloride          9.0
              Polystyrene                 23.5
                 Total                    87.0

            Thermosets
              Phenolics                   10.0            8.0
              Urea Formaldehyde           7.5            7.0
                 Total                    17.5            15.0

                 Total All Resins         94.5           126.0
Spurce:  Modern Plastics, 1972; MRI estimate,  1980.

                                  326

-------
            APPENDIX E

BACKGROUND DATA FOR PAPER RECOVERY
        FORECASTS.  1972-1990  .
                  327

-------
              RAW MATERIALS PROFILE FOR THE PAPER INDUSTRY

          It is significant to note that the return of recycling will be
accompanied by a general decline in the importance of virgin fiber derived
from the  forest as roundwood  (trees cut to be used as pulpwood) and from
residues  (which are derived from forests or wood product manufacturing
operations).

          All three major sources of fiber used as raw materials in domes-
tic paper mills will increase from 1972 to 1990 as total demand for paper
products  increases (Table E-l, Figure E-l).  However, by 1990 the profile
of raw materials will shift significantly  to recycled and "reclaimed"
fiber:   roundwood, 42.4 percent; wood residues, 31.5 percent; waste paper,
25.1 percent (Table E-2, Figure E-2).  This is compared to:  roundwood,
49.8 percent; wood residue 27.3 percent; waste paper, 21.4 percent in 1972.
Wood residues use might increase even more than indicated if the trend to
using smaller and smaller trees to produce dimension lumber continues
strongly.  In a sense, the whole paper industry derives about one-half its
fiber from "secondary sources" in the "hierachy" of fibrous raw materials
allocation in the paper industry.  To the extent these fibers come from
waste paper, they represent a net removal from total paper waste generation.
          DEMAND FORECAST FOR RECYCLED NEWSPRINT. 1973 TO 1985
Introduction

          We have forecast that news use in recycled newsprint will increase
from 490,000 tons in 1973 to 1,030,000 tons in 1985.  This is a 110 percent
increase in recycling and will represent 22 percent of domestic newsprint
production in 1985, compared to 14.4 percent in 1973.

          The original three mills of Garden State Paper Company remain as
the only self-standing recycling newsprint mills in the USA.  However, two
of these mills have been greatly expanded in capacity (Pomona, California,
and Garfield, New Jersey), the latter mill having just added an estimated
80,000 tons per year capacity.  In addition, Southwest Forest Industries
have a news deinking plant under construction at Snowflake, Arizona, for
supplemental furnish for groundwood pulp.  Various other companies are
reported to be considering construction of new mills (some of which have
been reported in the trade press and some of which have not).

          At the same time, domestic newsprint capacity is scheduled to in-
crease by 328,000 tons per year between 1973 and 1977 to 3,925,000 tons


                                    328

-------
                                       TABLE E-l
              FIBROUS RAW MATERIALS USED  IN  PAPER AND  PAPERBOAR7"  MANUFACTURE
(In thousand tons)
Total
Year Roundwood—
1950
1951.
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960 :
1961
1962 :
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973 J/_
1975
1980
1985
1990
15,518
16,673
16,076
17,376
17,470
19,737
20,699
19,764
19,335
21,131
21,331
20,973
21,678
22,514
23,905
.25,369
26,879
25,794
28,705
30,415
30,710
29,844
30,526
_30,490
29,620
34,010
39,510
46,370
Wood
Residue
991
1,064
1 , ?. } 0
1,308
1,519
1,716
2,300
2,695
3,148
4,025
4,369
5,710
6,921
7,706
8,182
8,638
10,043
11,200
12,598
13,285
12,482
14,304
16,800
18,372
19,015
2^,130
29,210
34,280
Waste
Paper
7,956
9,071
7,881
8,531
7,857
9,041
8,836
8,493
8,671
9,414
9,032
9,018
9,075.
9,613
9,843
10,231
10,564
9,888
10,222k/
11,969£/
12,021
12,323
13,132
14,319
14,160
17,860
22,465
27,340
Other
Fibers
1,439
1,457
1,211
1,255
1,200
1,340
1,551
1,105
1,003
979
971
894
963
1,285
929
879
980
836
905
878
: 828
875
892
964
1,000
1,000
1,000
1 , 000
Fibrous
Material.1:
25,904
28,265
26,378
28,469
28,045
31,835
33,386
32,058
32,157
35,549
35,703
36,595
38,636
41,117
42,860
45,116
48,466
47,718
52,430
56,547
56,041
57,346
61,350
64,145
63,795
77,000
92,185
108,990
Total
Production
24,375
26,047
24,418
26,605
26,876
30,178
31,441
30,666
30,823
34,014
34,444
35,749
37,541
39,230
41,703
44,080
47,113
46,926
51,245
54,187
53,516
55,086
59,457
61,833
61,460
74,040
88,215
103,800
Ratio Fiber
To Production
1.063
1.085
1.080
1.070
1.043
1.055
1.062
1.045
'! .O-'-'1
L 0*4 "*
I. • L/ ~ .•' /
1.024
1.029
1.048
1.028
1.024
1.029
1.017
1.023
1.044
i.047
1.041
1.032
1.037
1.038
1.040
1.045
1.050
a/  Based on American Pulpwood Association data; 1950 to 1959 are estimates  by
      Midwest Research Institute; 1972 to 1975 American Paper Institute;  1980-1990 MRI.
b_/  Last Year for use of Bureau of Census data for waste paper.
£/  American Paper Institute data 1969 to 1975; excludes molded pulp and  exports.
d_/  Preliminary.
Source:  "Wood Pulp Statistics--35th Edition,"  Pulp Division, American Paper Institute,
           November 1971; "The Statistics of Paper, 1973,"  American Paper Institute;
           American Pulpwood-Association.  Midwest Research Institute.

                                          329

-------
u>
OJ
o
            LU
Z
LU
         107^  V   ioan  V
1965
1980
                                                                                            v   Too
1985  v   1990
                                                             YEAR
                                         Figure E.-l - Percentage  of Fibrous Raw Materials Used in

                                                         Paper and Paperboard Manufacture

-------
                                    TABLE E-2
        FIBROUS RAW MATERIALS USED IN PAPER AND PAPERBOARD MANUFACTURE
(Percentage)
Year RoundwoodfL'
1950 59.9
1951 59.0
1952 60.9
1953 61.0
1954 62.3
19555 62.0
1956 62.0
1957 61.6.
1958 60.1
1959 59.4
1960 59.8
1961 ' 57.3
1962 ' 56.1
1963 54.8
1964 55.8
1965 56.2
1966 55.5
1967 54.1
1968 54.8
1969 53.7
1970 54.8
1971 52.0
1972 49.8
1973^/ 47.6
1975 46.4
1980 44.2
1985 42.8
1990 42.4
Wood Residue-'
3.8
3.8
4.6
4.6
5.4
5.4
6.9
8.4
9.8
11.3
12.2
: 15.6;
17.9
18.7
.19.1
19.2
. 20.7
23.5
24.0
23.5
22.3
25.0
27.3
28.6
. 29.8
31.3
31.7
31.5
Waste Paper
30.7
32.1
29.9
30.0
28.0
28.4
26.5
26.5
27.0
26.5
25.3
24.6
23.5
23.4
23.0
22 . 9 ,
21.8
20.7
19.5^
21.2£/
21.5
21.5
21.4
22.3
22.2
23.2
24.4
25.1
a/. Based on American Pulpwood Association data;
MRI; 1972 to
b/ Last year for
c/ American Paper
d/ Preliminary.
1975, American Paper. Institute
use of Bureau of
Institute data,

Other Fibers
5.6
5.1
,4.6
4.4
4.3
4.2
4.6
3.5
3.1
2.8
2.7
2.5
2.5
3.1
2.2
2.0
2.0
1.9
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.7
1.5
1.6
1.3
1.1
Total Fibers
100.0
100.0
100.0
ioo.o
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100,0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
1.0 100.0
1950-1959 are estimated by
; 1980-1990, MRI.

Census data for waste paper.
1969 to 1975.





Source:   Calculated by Midwest Research  Institute.
                                       331

-------
  J.OOOr


  >,000-
   53,000


   49


   45,000


   41,000


   37,000


   33,000


Z  29,000
    0
      1950
                                                                                                     Roundwood
                                                                                         xx       V/ood Residue
                                                                                                x Waste  Paper
1,000|-  , .   . -
                       1955
                                 1960
                                                  1965           1970
                                                        YEAR
                                                                                                           1990
                      Figure E-2 - Fibrous Raw Materials Used  in  Paper and'Paperboard  Manufacture

-------
per year  (9 percent);  these figures include recycled news.*  On a compara-
tive basis, the use of news in deinked newsprint will rise by 47,000 tons
per year between 1973  and 1976, or 10 percent.
Methodology and Demand Forecasts

          Our approach to the newsprint demand forecasts was straight
forward.  The initial step was to make a forecast of total newsprint de-
mand (including imports) to 1985, based on historical trends and recent
patterns of demand.  Although many newspaper publishers are switching to
28-pound paper, this transition should be complete in the next few years.
The historic demand increase was ^at a rate of 3.6 percent from 1963 to
1973; 1974 and 1975 demand is expected to be down slightly from 1973's
historic high.  The rate of demand increase is forecast to be 2.3 percent
between 1975 and 1985, putting total USA demand at 13,530 COY..; ia  °i:(5  :om
pared to 10,530 tons in 1975 (Table E-3);

          The next step was to determine what proportion of total demand
will be satisfied by domestic mills.  Domestic production has varied between
32 and  34 percent of demand since 1970, and is expected to decline to about
30 percent by 1975.  Then it will increase to 32.7 percent in 1980 and 35.3
percent in 1985, returning to somewhat above the level of the early 1970's
(the long-term trend is, for domestic production to increase more rapidly
than imports).         .      .              '                   .     .;

          Based on these forecast production ratios, the domestic production
will be 4,700,000 tons in 1985, compared to 3,413,000 in 1973, up .l,287,uuO
tons or 38 percent (See Table''E-3 and Figure E-3)..                   •'
Forecast for Recycled Newsprint                                   .

          The third step of the procedure was to develop a forecast1 for'
recycled newsprint as a portion of domestic production.  On a historical
basis, the use of waste, paper (news) in newsprint has grown from 11.4 per-
cent in 1969 to 14.4 in 1973 and 16.6 in 1975 (based on the API fiber use
data and our production forecast).  Based on the trends taking place, we
have forecast that waste paper use in news will.be 22 percent of domestic
production in 1985 (Figure E-3).      .     .  .             .        '.'
*• "Capacity 1973-1976;; Paper, Paperboard, Wood Pulp," API, 1974.
                                    333

-------
                                                         TABLE E-?
                             NEWSPRINT  DEMAND.  PRODUCTION AND RECYCLING FORECAST.  1963 TO IS35
(In 1,000 Tons and Percent)
Waste Paper


Year
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973

Total
Demand
7,508
8,086
8,418
9,239
9,108
9,289
9,915
9,836
10,036
10,406
10,726

Net
Imports
5,295
5,837
6,238
6,892
6,509
6,333
6,663
6,491
6,715
6,955
7,313
•
Domestic
Production
2,213
2,249
2,180
2,347
2,599
2,956
3,252
3,345
3,321
3,451
3,413
Use in
Production
High Actual Low
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
372
371
393
427
490
Waste Paper — Percent
To Demand
High Actual Low
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
3.8
3.8
3.9
4.1
4.6
To Production
High Actual Low
N'A
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
11.4
11.1
11.8
12.4
14.4
   1975     10,530

   1980     11,900

   1985     13,300

Difference
1973-1985    2,574
7,230

8,000

8,600


1,287
3,200

3,900

4,700


1,287
                                                          537
                 5.1
                               16.6
                                                   860
                                                 1,500
                                                 1,010
  750
1,030
  540
 7.2

11.3


 6.7
6.3

7.7


3.1
22.0

31.9


17.5
19.2

22.0


 7.6
Note:  The forecast increase in use of waste paper in nexc-sprint is 540,000 tons between 1973 and 1985.  This is
         equivalent to five new deinking mills of 110,000 tons.per year input capacity.
Source:  "Statistics of Paper and Paperboard, 1974," API; "Capacity Surveys," API;  Forecasts by Midwest Research Institut

-------
o
I—

z
o
z
o
I—
u
o
a:
a.
                                                    Production


                                                                                       Recyced to Total
                                                                                                           (High-
                                                          **&
                                                     	_-o-»'
                                                            .^^'
                                                                •£&^-'*
                                                                                          Recycled  (Low ^

                                                                                             forecast)
j	i     ii	i
                               ©-

                               j
                                                                                                                 .42
                                                                                                                 .38
                                                            Z
                                                            O
                                                         34 f=
                                                                                                                    Q

                                                                                                                    O
                                                                                                                 30
                                                                                                                 .26
                                                                                                             O
                                                                                                                     u
                                                                                                                  22
                                                                                                             O
                                                                                                             t—
                                                                                                             <
   1963      1965
                          1970
1975
YEAR
1980
1985
                                                                                                                  18
                                                                                                                  14
                                                                                                                 .10
                      Figure E-3  - Domestic Newsprint Production,  1963  to 1985

-------
          An  alternate  forecast  of  news  recycling was also made  to which
deinked  news  would  capture  about 80 percent of  the  increase  in domestic
production  between  1973  and 1985.   This  would put waste paper use .in news-
print  at 31.9 percent of'domestic production in 1985.  This, then, is the
high recycling  forecast.
Analysis oi-' Kecyclinp,  Forecast

          The  recycling  of  news  into newsprint will be at  least  1,030,000  ..
tons  in 1985,  compared to 490,000  tons  in  1973. *  Thus, our  low forecast .
is  fpr a doubling production  of  recycled news while total  production in-
creases by only  38 percent.   This  forecast was examined to see how reason-
able  it was in light of  the history and outlook  for newsprint production
in  domestic mills.

          The  total increase  in  domestic production is 1,300,000 tons in
12  years; of this, 540,000  tons  (41.5 percent) would be recycled news.
The 540,000 tons increase in  the use of recycled newsprint would be equi-
valent to five new deinking mills  of 110,000 tons  per year input and
100,000 tons per, year production.

          Under  the more optimistic recycling forecast, the increase in
domestic production remains at 1,300,000 tons in 12 years; of this, 1,010,000
tons  (or 78 percent) would be recycled news.  The  1 million ton  increase in
the use of recycled newsprint would be equivalent to 9.2 new deinking mills
of  110,000 tons per year input and 100,000 tons per year production.

          In light of the trend to recycled newsprint in domestic mills,
we believe this range to be a reasonable forecast.   However, it does mean
preferential expansion and construction of recycling capacity vis-a-vis
historical ratios of recycled versus virgin fiber newsprint.  On  the other
hand,  several  factors lend support to the forecast that five to nine new
recycling mills could be built in the next 10 years (one every 1  to 2 years).

          *  There are at least 15 major metropolitan areas that would
             support a recycling mill of 100,000 TPY.

          *  The unrecovered  supply and recoverability of news is adequate
             to supply these mills.
   Note that this is input tonnage and not deinked newsprint production,
     which would be about 90 percent of input tonnage to allow for yield
     losses of waste paper.
                                    336

-------
          *  The long-term price of news is still in the range of $25 to
             $35 per ton ("super sorted").

          *  The capital requirements are rising, but less tha.  for new
             virgin fiber capacity (per ton of capacity).

          *  Pollution control requirements are manageable by self-treatment
             or municipal sewage charges.

          *  Newspapers continue to express interest in purchase of recycled
             newsprint; recycling is favorably viewed.

          *  Several paper producers are making or have made mill feasibility
             studies.

          *  The price of newsprint continues to rise.

          The major uncertainties are:   r^'urn on investment of private
capital; availability of investment funds; the uncertainties and costs of
pollution control requirements; the marketability of the product (ability
to tie down contracts).

          On balance, we believe the forecast range for recycled newsprint
is reasonable.  We believe that the most probable case  is that the capacity
equivalent of seven new mills will be added in the next 10 years.
                  RECYCLING IN LINERBOARD. 1973 TO 1985
Overview

          LinerL-oard is the predominant grade of paperboard.  There are two
types of linerboard--kraft liner and recycled liner.  The former is at least
80 percent virgin, fiber; recycled linerboard is generally all recycled fiber,
but may contain up to 80 percent virgin pulp.  Recycling in linerboard has
only recently become significant as waste paper use in kraft linerboard has
increased as well as recycled linerboard after years of decline.

          The use of waste paper (principally old corrugated containers) in
linerboard will increase from 759,000 tons in 1973 to 4.01 million tons in
1985, or up over 400 percent in 12 years (Table E-4, Figure E-4).   This in-
crease will be split between supplemental furnish (2.1 million tons in 1985)
and recycled paperboard (1.9 million tons in 1985).  At this point, waste
paper input will constitute 22.8 percent of linerboard production, up from
only 6.7 percent in 1973.             >

                                     337

-------
                                                                    TABLE E-4

(1)
Year .
1963
1964
£ 1965
oo 1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972 .
1973
1974(p)
1975
1980
1985

(2)
Total
6,414
6,908
7,481
8,347
8,216
9,044
9,692
9,403
9,531
10,857
11,356
11,146
11,145
14,100
17,600

(3)
Kraft Liner
5,737
6,215
6,731
7,580
7,718
8,637
9,345
9,133
9,249
10,578
11,067
10,791
10,790
13,180
15,840
(4)
Percent
Waste Paper
in Kraft
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.6
3.0
2.5
2.7
4.0
5.3
6.2
8.5
12.0
(5)
Recycled
Linerboard
677
693
750
767
498
407
347
- 270
282
279
289
356
355
920
1,760
(In 1,000
(6)
Percent
Recycled
To
Total Liner
10.6 "
10.0
10.0
9.2
6.1
4.5
3.6'
2.9
3.0
2.6
2.5
3.2
3.2
6.5
10.0
tons and percent)
(7)
Calculated Waste Paper Use —
In Kraft Liner

Total
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
259
285
235
291
449
594
688
1,650
2,110

Mixed
NA
NA.
NA
NA
NA
NA
22
48
15
41
50
60
70
150
200

News
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
0
0
0
1
0
0.
0
0

Container
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA .
NA
210
162
149
213
355
475
550
1,420
1,810
High
Grades
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA .
27
67
71
37
44
59
68
80
100
                                                                                                                                        (8)
                                                                                                                          Calculated Waste Paper Use-
                                                                                                                               In Recycled Liner

Total
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
436
292
305
300
310
385
383
995
1,900

Mixed
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
36
23
24
24
25
31
31
80
150

News
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
0
0
0
0
0
C
0
0

Container
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
382
257
268
264
273
339
337
875
1,675
High
Grades
NA
NA
NA
KA
NA
NA
17
12
13
12
12
15
15
40
75
Sources
(P)
    Columns 2, 3, 5 from "Statistics of Paper and Paperboard,  1974;" American Paper Institute,  1974,  p.  6,
      Forecasts by Midwest  Research Institute.
    Column 7 from Institute of Paper Chemistry (1969); API  Capacity Surveys  (1970-1975);
      Midwest Research Institute,  1980-1985.
    Column 8 from Institute of Paper Chemistry (1969); API  Capacity Surveys  (1970-1975);
      Midwest Research Institute,  1980-1985.
    Note that grade of waste paper is calculated  as  8 percent  mixed, 88 percent  container  and
      4 percent high grades.
Preliminary.

-------
u>
                18
                16
                14
             Z 12
             O
             Z
             O
                10
             Z
             O  8
             t~
             u
             Z)
             O
             O
                                                                         .X
                                                                   X    ,
                                                                                                        X
                           Ratio
Total Production


       """"-D	
  Kraft Linerboard
                                                    Ratio Waste Paper

                                                    Use  in Kraft  Liner^
\

                                                                 X
                                                                                              •Ratio, Recycled to Total
                       I	1
                                                               Recycled Linerboard Production-
                                                                                        	2—»	
                 1963      1965
        1970
                                1975

                                YEAR
1980
1985
                                                                                          .12
                                                                                                                                       <

                                                                                                                                       O
                                                                                          .10
                                                                                          .08
                                                                                          .06
                                                                                                                                   .04
                                                                                                                                   .02
                                                                                              u

                                                                                              u
                                                                                              O
                                                                                              i
                                    Figure E-4  - Linerboard  Production,  Domestic Use, and

                                                     Waste Paper,  1963  to  1985

-------
          Total output of linerboard will increase from 11.4 million tons
in 1973, to  L7.6 million tons in 1985, or 54 percent.  In this increase,
3.25 million tons of waste paper will be used, or about one-half of the in-
crease in demand for linerboard.  Thus, this forecast is for a rather signi-
ficant shift to the use of recycled fiber in linerboard compared to historical
trends.
Demand and Recycling Forecasts

          The outlook for linerboard demand was developed from historic
trends for domestic use.  The demand was then split between kraft linerboard
and recycled linerboard, based upon our best estimate of raw materials
availability and usage.

          Recycled linerboard has been in decline for years (Table E-4,
Figure E-4).  However, there has been new capacity added to make recycled
linerboard, e.g., Crown Zellerbach's mill at Antioch, California, and the
demand trend is forecast to reverse based upon the fact that mill economics
are more  favorable and mill sites for new linerboard mills are very  limited
today.  We have forecast that recycled linerboard demand will rise from
356,000 tons in 1974 to 1.76 million tons in 1985.  This increase in demand
is equivalent to 10 mills of 400 tons per day each (or 140,000 tons per year)
output.

          The demand for kraft linerboard will also increase significantly—
from 11.1 million tons in 1973 to 15.8 million tons in 1985.  The use of
waste paper as supplemental furnish in kraft linerboard took on significance
in 1973, when usage of waste paper increased to 450,000 tons from 290,000
tons the previous year.  API capacity surveys show that by 1976 waste paper
use will be up to 860,000 tons in kraft paperboard.  By 1985, we forecast
that waste paper use will be 12 percent of linerboard production, as compared
to 4 percent in 1973.  The basis of this forecast is that many mills can
justify incremental expansions of 150 to 200 tons per day, which are economically
attractive; the limitations of new kraft mill sites is also an important factor
in this forecast.

          The increase in annual use of supplemental furnish waste paper
in kraft  linerboard is 1.66 million tons between 1973 and 1985; this in-
crease is equivalent to 31 mills adding 150 tons-per-day (53,000 tons per
year) repulping installations.  About one-third of this increase will take
place between 1973 and 1977, according to API capacity surveys.
                                   340

-------
          Linerboard is a pivotal grade in future recycling in the USA.
The forecasts presented above are relatively optimistic; details of the
forecasts show that the dominant source of waste paper is old corrugated
containers  (Table E-4).  Both incremental and new mill capacity additions
must aggregate about 50 percent to recycling in the next decade to reach
this level of recycling.
              RECYCLING IN CORRUGATING MEDIUM, 1973 TO 1985
Overview
  i
          Corrugating medium is produced in proportion to linerboard (domes-
tic use) for use as the  fluting material in boxes. There are two types of
corrugating medium made--semichemical medium and recycled medium.  The former
is at least 75 percent virgin fiber; recycled medium is generally all recycled
fiber, but may be up to  75 percent virgin pulp (which is seldom in prac-
tice).  Recycling in corrugating medium has been practiced for decades and,
recently, recycled medium has begun to become more important after a period
of relative decline in the late 1960's.                                 .

          The use of waste paper (principally box plant cuttings in semi-
chemical and old corrugated containers in recycled medium) will increase
from 1.75 million tons in 1973 to 3.18 million tons in 1985 (Table E-5,
Figure E-5).  This increase in waste paper use of 82 percent is heavily weighted
toward recycled medium which will increase in production from 1.1 million tons
in 1973 to 2.6 million tons in 1985, or 1.5 million tons.  By contrast, .semi-
chemical medium, which uses about 20 percent waste paper, will increase from
4.1 million tons in 1973 to 5.5 million tons in 1985, or 1.4 million tons.
While the increase in production of each type is almost evenly split, the
proportion of recycled medium will increase substantially over the next de-
cade--from 21.5 percent of total production to 32 percent in 1985.

          Total output of corrugating medium will increase from 5.25 million
tons in 1973 to 8.1 million tons in 1985, up 54 percent.  Of this increase,
over 50 percent will be recycled medium.


Demand and Recycling Forecasts

          The outlook for corrugating medium demand was developed from his-
toric trends .and tied directly to the use of linerboard.  The total demand
was then split between semichemical medium and recycled medium, based upon
our best estimate of fiber availability and economics of medium production.

                                   341

-------
                                                              TABLE E-5
                                               CORRUGATING MEDIUM PRODUCTION.  1963 TO  1985
        Production
                  (3)         (4)
(1)
Year
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
(p)1974
1975
1980 .
1985
(2)
Total
2,962
3,165
3,438
3,800
3,743
4,062
4,395
4,264
4,520
4,846
5,255
5,131
5,130
6,500
8,100
Semi Chemical
Medium
2,287
2,447
2,638
2,910
2,982
3,371
3,617
3,405
3,580
3,874
4,127
4,011
4,010
4,750
5,500
Recycled
Medium
675
718
800
890
761
691 .
778
859
940
972
1,128
1,120
1,120
1,750
2,600
(5)
Percent
Recycled
of Total
22.8
22.7
23.3
23.4
20.3
17.0
17.7
20.2
20.8
20.1
21.5
21.8
21.8
27.0
32.0
(In 1,000 Tons and Percent)
(6)
Waste Paper Use--Semichemical

Total
• NA
NA
NA
NA
NA.
NA
672
754
714
774
849
800
800
950
1,100

Mixed
NA
NA
•NA
NA
NA
NA
46
42
47
82
77
72
70
70
70

News
NA •'
NA " ;
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
28
14 . .
27
19
16
15
15
15

Container
NA
NA .
NA
NA
NA
NA :
622
622
589
608
747
705
710
855
1,005
Migu
: Grades
NA
NA
.NA
NA
. NA
.NA
• 4
62
64
57
7
7
5
10
10
Waste Paper Use — Recycled Medium

Total
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
663
687
752 •
778
902
896
896
1,400
2,080

Mixed
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
12
11
12
12
14
14
14
22
40

News
NA
NA.
NA
NA
NA
•NA
7
7-
8
7
8
8
8
10
10

Container
NA
NA
NA
' • NA
NA
NA
641
666
729
754
• 875
869
869
1,358
2,020
High
Grades
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
3
3
3
3
5
5
5
10
10
Source:   Columns 2,  3,4  from Statistics  of  Paper  and  Paperboard,  1974,  API,  1974,  p.  6;  Forecasts
           by Midwest  Research Institute.
         Column 6 from IPC (1969);  API  Capacity  Surveys  (1970-1975);  Midwest  Research  Institute,  1980-1985.
         Column 7 from IPC (1969);  remainer  calculated on basis  of 1969  data.
(p)  = Preliminary.                                                                    •

-------
•p-
U)
                9r
                                             Ratio,  Recycled to Total Production
                                                      Semi Chemical Medium Production
                                                              ®__e -- ©

                                                       .— ®  |   J


                                                       Medium - Production
0

1963      1965
                                                                                                  i     i    i
                                                                      1975

                                                                     YEAR
1980
        1970




Figure E-5  -  Corrugating Medium Production,  1963  to 1985
1985
                                                                                                                              0.30
                                                                                                                              0.20 P-
                                       o
                                       LLJ
                                       _l

                                       u


                                       u
                                       LU
                                       QC
                                                                                                                              0.10

-------
           Recycled  lirierboard has held about. 20 percent of total medium pro-
 duction  for  several years.. . However,  the economics"of recycled medium are
 generally  favorable and  several mills have converted from semichemical medium
 in  recent  years;  also, new capacity  to produce recycled medium is under con-
 struction  (e.g.,  Inland  Container's  new mill in Indiana).  The increase in
 demand for recycled medium forecast  is 1.48 million tons per year between
 1973  and 1985.  This  is.  equivalent to 12 mills of 350 tons per day output
 (122,000 tons per year).   Note  that  recycled medium is not exclusively made
 from  waste paper  (Table  E-5).

           Semichemical medium dominates as far as tonnage is concerned--
 accounting for about  80  percent of total medium demand.  Semichemical medium
 uses  about 15 to  20 percent waste paper (usually box plant cuttings) routinely.
.Our demand forecast for  recycling has been extended at 20 percent of output
 of  semichemical medium.   By 1985, semichemical medium will be at 68 percent
 of  total medium production, compared to 78 percent in 1973.  The increased
 output of  semichemical medium is 1.4 million tons, equivalent to 10 new mills
 of 400 tons  per day (140,000 tons per year) output.

           Corrugating medium is a key grade for recycling of old corrugated
 containers.  Although our forecasts  are relatively optimistic for recycling,
 the waste  paper should be available  at competitive prices.  The aggregate
 new demand will be  slightly over one-half in recycled product between 1973
 and 1985 to  reach the forecast  level of recycling.
   FORECAST OF RECYCLING  IN OTHER CONTAINERBOARD GRADES,  1973 TO  1985
Overview

          Containerboard grades of paper consist of linerboard, corrugating
medium, chip and  fillerboard and  "other grades," principally tube, can, and
drum;* panelboard; exports of  linerboard, medium, etc.; and gypsum wall board.
In the "other" category, ^bout 1  million tons per year is gypsum wall board,
and 1.8 million tons per year  is  exported (mostly linerboard).  This classi-
fication  follows  the American  Paper  Institute Paperboard Division statistical
series.                                       .   .

          These grades are rather diverse in nature, with exported grades
(linerboard) principally virgin fiber, and gypsum wall board plus tube, can
and drum, principally recycled fiber.  Thus, the two major types separate
into a good approximation of waste paper use, with recycled grades taking
essentially all recycled fiber.
   Only about 380,000  tons per year of tube, can and drum are produced in
      the  containerboard category.

                                   344

-------
          Total demand will  increase  from 3.68 million tons in 1973 to 5.8
million  tons  in 1985.  Of  this  latter, 3.6 million tons will be in the vir-
gin  fiber products group,  and 2.2 million tons will be recycled (Table E-6,
Figure E-6).  Since growth trends indicate that the two types are on similar
growth patterns,  the recycled grades  will remain at about 38 percent of total
production.
Demand and Recycling Forecasts

          The trend in use of gypsum wall board and tube, can and drum
paperboard favor recycled fiber products since gypsum wall board is a re-
cycled fiber product, and tube, can and drum is trending toward recycled
grades.  To calculate the waste paper use, we assumed that the virgin fiber
grades would use a minimal amount of waste, and that the recycled grades
would require the waste paper documented by McClenahan for 1969 in gypsum
linerboard--107 percent waste paper of production and the use of mixed, 22
percent; news, 23 percent; corrugated, 41 percent; and high grades, 14 per-
cent.

          On this basis, the forecast of recycling was a straightforward
calculation—after total demand was forecast for each type, the use of waste
paper was calculated.  Waste paper use will rise from 1.48 million tons in
1973, to 2.35 million tons in 1985, or nearly 1 million tons increase (Table
E-6).
             FORECAST OF RECYCLING IN BOXBOARD. 1973 TO 1985
Overview

          The history of boxboard production (all types) is that recycled
grades have maintained total production, but all of the growth in output has
gone to virgin fiber products.  Thus, the recycling ratio has declined steadily
since 1963, and showed no indication of reversing even in the "boom" years of
1973 and 1974.

          Overall demand for boxboard is forecast to increase from 8.96 million
tons in 1973 to 10.5 million tons in 1985, or a relatively modest 17 percent
(Table E-7, Figure E-7).  The virgin fiber boxboard production will take most
of the increase—about 1.4 million tons; by contrast,  recycled fiber products
will increase a modest 0.2 million tons.  The overall  recycled boxboard per-
centage will decline from 51.5 in 1974 to 46.7 in 1985.   Most of this decline
takes place in folding boxboard.
                                    345

-------
                                                                TABLE  E-6
o


Year
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1980
1985


Total

1,827
2,191
2,336
2,451
2,511
3,001
3,437
3,345
3,664
3 , 892
3,678
3,577
3,575
4,650
5,800


Virgin Fiber

920
1,262
1,401
1,531
1,603
1,935
2,274
2,271
2,426
2,544
2,292
2,248
2,247
2,900
3,600
(In 1

Recycled
907
929
935
920
908
1,066
1,163
1,074
1,238
1,348
1,386
1.3295/
1,328
1,750
2,200
.,000 Tons and
Recycled
Percent
of Total

49.6
42.4
40.0
37.5
36.1
35.5
33.8
32.1
33.7
34.6
. 37.7
37.1
37.1
37.6
37.9
Percent)

Total
970
995
1,000
985
970
1,140
1,245 .
1,150
1,325
1,440
1,480
1,420
1,420
1,875
2,355
?OJ • TU I9H

5

Estimated Waste
Mixed NPUQ

215
220
220
215
215
250
275
255
290
315
329
310
310
415
520
	
220
230
230
225
225
260
285
265
305
336
337
325
325
425
540


Paper Use
Container
400
410
410
405 .
400
470
510
470
545
590
611
580
580
770
965


High Grades
135
135
140
140
130
160
175
160
185
205
203 •
205
205
265
330

-------
"* /
Z 6

O
t—


Z

o
z

O 4

i—
u
D
0

O
Qi

                         x/'
                   Total Production
                           Virgin Fiber


                             Products—-
                                               Ratio, Recycled to Total
                                                                                        — "


                                              -° ---------- "° ----
                                               —A-
                   Recycled Products
    .»	a   >-
     I    i    I	I	I	I	I	L
                                         i    i    i    i    i    '	1	1	1	1	L
                                                                                                 1.50
                                                                                                  .45



                                                                                                     _i
                                                                                                     <


                                                                                                     O
                                                                                                     i—


                                                                                                  .40 O
                                 u

                                 u
                                                                                                  .35
                                                                                                       O

                                                                                                       s
                                                                                                  L30
                                                                                                  .25
!  63     1965
                              1970
 1975

:YEAR
1980
1985
                    Figure  E-6  -  All  Other Containerboard Production, 1963 to 1985

-------
U)
•IS
00
  1963    7,128
  1964    7,421
  1965    7,796
  1966    8,368
.  1967    8,060
  1968    8,515.
  1969    8,543
  1970   8,074
  1971   8,020
  1972   8,591
 1973   8,965
 1974   8,563(p)
.1975   8,550

 1980   9,500

 1985   10,500
                           (3)
                      Virgin Fiber

                         2,635
                         2,
                         3
                         3,
                         3
  ,809
  ,013
 3,281
 3,279
 3,599
 3,792
  ,568
  ,596
 3,946
 4,191
 4,152
 4,150

4,900

5,600
                                                      TABLE E-7

                                          BOXBOARD  PRODUCTION
(In 1,000 tons and percent)
(4)
Recycled
Boxboard
4,493
4,612
. 4,784
4,987
4,781
4,916
. 4,751
4,506 .
4,424
4,645
4,744
4,411
4,400
4,600
4,900
(5)
Percent
Recycled
63.0
62.1
61.4
60.3
59.3
57.7
55.6
._.' .55.8
55.2
54.1
53.3
51.5
51.5
48.4
46.7
(6)
Total
5,167
5,304
5,502
5,735
5,498
5,653
5,464
5,182
5,088
5,342
5,456
5,070
5,060
5,290
5,635
Estimated Waste Paoer Use
(7) -
Mixed
1,462
1,500
1,557
1,623
1,556
1,600
1,546
1,467
1,440
1,512
1,544
1,435
1,432
1,495
1,595
(8)
News
1,157
1,188
1,232
1,285
1,232
1,266
1,224
1,161
1,140
1,197
1,222
1,135
1,133
1,185
1,262
(9)
1,566
1,607
1,667
1,738
1,666
1,713
1,656
1,570
1,542
1,619
1,653
1,535
. 1,533
1,605
1,708
(10)
982
1,009
1,046
1,089.
-. 1,044!
1,074'
1,038
984' •-'
966;
1,014
1,037
965
962
1,005
1,070
      Sources:  Columns 2 to 4, "Statistics of Paper and Paperboard, 1974," API, 1974, P. 7; Midwest Research Institute
                  1975-1985.

                Columns 6 to 10 calculated based upon:  "Consumption of Paper Stock by United States Mills-in
                  1969 and 1970," by W.  S. McClennehan Institute of Paper Chemistry,  Tables V and VII.
                Note:   Waste paper use based upon 115  percent  of production and 28.3  percent mixed, 22.4 per-
                  cent news,  30.3 percent  container,  19.0 percent high grades.

-------
   0.7
 o 0.6
_w
 o
 o
 V
   0.5
   0.4
           10
Z  6
O
h—
U
Z>
Q

O  5
a:  J
a.
            1963      1965

                                        v—
    Total  Production
                                            \.
                                         Ratio: Recycled/Total
V
Recycled Boxboard Production    '"••o...

                                      ........... .

                                                                                                ig«.
                                           Virgin  Fiber Boxboard Production
                                                                                                 I     1     I
        1970
                                                             1975
1980
198,'
                                                                 YEAR
                                                 Figure  E-7  - Boxboard Production,  1963-1985

-------
           A few recycled boxboard categories 8uch as tube, can and drum
 paperboard (included in "other boxboard") are showing significant increases
 in the use of recycled fiber.  However, these increases are masked by rela-
 tive declines in the major boxboard categories, especially in folding box-
 board,

           Boxboard has little overlap in the mixing of virgin and recycled.
 fibers in specific grades--in other words, a product is usually made of one
 or the other.  Thus, once a demand forecast has been developed, it is rela-
 tively simple to calculate waste paper use in recycled grades.

           The basis for the waste paper calculation was the waste paper use
 data developed by McClenahan for 1969 (see Table E-7 for the details).   The
 requirements for waste paper will rise from 5.45 million tons in 1973 to 5.63
 million tons in 1985.   Thus, without a major shift in trend away from the
 use of virgin fiber products, boxboard products will be a stable to very
 modest growth area for recycling.

           The distribution of boxboard by type is given for 1980 and 1985 in
 Table E-8.  As shown,  the growth potential in recycled types (set up, folding,
 and other) is quite modest.

                                 TABLE E-8

                BOXBOARD PRODUCTION BY TYPE, 1980 AND 1985
                             (in thousand tons)

                Total       Folding              .  Milk and
                Boxboard    Boxboard     Set Up     Food         All Other

1980 Total       9,500        4,950        440       1,760        2,350

  Recycled       4,600        2,330        440           0       .1,830
  Solid          4,900        2,620          0       1,760          520

1985 Total      10,500        5,500        440       1,960        2,600

  Recycled       4,900        2,480        440           0        1,980
  Solid          5,600        3,020          0       1,960          620
Source:  Midwest Research Institute forecasts.
                                     350

-------
         FORECAST OF RECYCLING.IN FOLDING BOXBOARD. 1973 TO 1985
Overview

          About one-half of all boxboard produced is folding boxboard.  Thus,
the trend in recycling in folding boxboard influences the trend for the
broader category.  The actual tonnage output of recycled folding boxboard has
declined slightly in recent years, and all growth in demand has gone to the
virgin fiber type boxboard.  Thus, the percentage of recycled has declined
rapidly — from 70.5 percent in 1963 to 51.9 percent in 1974 (Table E-9).

          This decline has dampened the outlook for recycling in boxboard
because most of the relative growth in recycling in other types of boxboard
(e.g., tube, can and drum) is more than offset by the decline in importance
of recycled folding boxboard.

          Folding boxboard mills tend to be .ae older cyclinder machine oper-
ations that compete principally for "custom" packaging and heavier weights
of boxboard.  In addition, the virgin fiber type has captured much of food
packaging and high volume uses.  There is also substantial new capacity on
the way (about 700,000 tons per year net gain) in both bleached and unbleached
paperboard; this will favor the continued use of virgin fiber products in
the next decade.

          For these reasons, it is difficult to build a case for a resurgence
of recycling in the folding boxboard grades.  Our forecast reflects a slowing
o,f the decline rate, but not a flattening out of the ratio over time, (Figure
E-8, Table E-9).  The crossover point (i.e., where production of virgin and
recycled are the same) will occur in 1976 or 1977.  Since the use of waste
paper is tied direct^ to the fortunes of recycled folding boxboard, it fol-
lows that under these conditions the demand for waste paper in the folding
boxboard grades will stabilize, but not increase significantly.

 ,'j        Our forecast is that waste paper demand will be essentially the
same in 1985 as in 1973 (Table E-9).  Thus, the relatively pessimistic out-
look for recycling in one of the traditional recycling grades of boxboard
leads to an overall recycling rate in boxboard that is stable, but not grow-
                                    351

-------
         .70i
         ,65
                                   \.
         \
                                             io: Recycled/Tofal
        .60
u>
     p
     o
     u
     ID
    Qi
    O
    Qi
               O
               c
               o
.55k  2

       O
       i—
       u

       Q
       O

.501-  £
                                         Total  Production
                                     X
          Recycled Fiber Type Production-


Virgin  Fiber Type Production
                                                                        o

                                                                       "A
       .45
                                                                     ..o-
                                                                                              • •o
       .40L
                                                                           1975
                                                                      YEAR
                                                                                                   1980
                                             Figure E-8- Folding  Boxboard Production, 1963-1985
                                                                                                                           198.

-------
                                                      TABLE E-9
                                     FOLDING BOXBOARD PRODUCTION.  1963 TO 1985
UJ
Ul
(in 1,000 tons and percent)

(1)
Year
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975

(2)
Total
3,636
3,752
3,880
4,040
4,021
4,218
4,262
4,080
4,139
4,440
4,705
4,449(P)
4,450
(3)
Virgin
Fiber
1,074
1,159
1,221
1,308
1,361
1,488
1,633
1,607
1,732
1,963
2,184
2,141
2,142

(4)
Recycled
2,562
2,594
2,659
2,732
2,660
2,730
2,629
2,473
2,408
2,477
2,522
2,308
2,308
(5)
Percent
Recycled
70.5
69.1
68.5
67.6
66.2
64.7
61.7
60.6
58.2
55.8
53.6
51.9
51.9
Estimated Waste Paper Use
(6)
Total
2,946
2,983
3,058
3,142
3,059
3,140
3,023
2,844
2,769
2,849
2,900
2,655
2,655
(7)
Mixed
834
844
865
889
886
889
856
805
784
806
820
750
750
(8)
News
660
668
685
704
685
703
677
637
620
638
650
595
595
(9)
Container
893
904
927
952
927
951
916
862
839
863
880
805
804
(10)
High Grades
559
567
581
597
581
597
574
540
526
542
550
505
505
      1980   4,950      2,620
      1985   5,500      3,020
2,330
2,480
47.0
45.0
2,680    758      600
2,852    807      640
812
864
510
541
      Sources:  Columns 2 to 4,  "Statistics of Paper and Paperboard,  1974,"  API,  1974,  p.  17; Midwest  Research Institute,
                  forecasts 1975-1985.
                Column 6 to 10 calculated based upon:   "Consumption of Paper Stock  by United States Mills in
                  1969 and 1970," by W.  S.  McClennehan Institute of Paper  Chemistry,  Tables  V and VII.
                Note:   Waste paper use based upon 115  percent of recycled  grades  production  and 28.3 percent mixed, 22.4
                  percent news,  30.3 percent container,  19.0 percent  high  grades.

-------
               WASTI'  PAPER  KhlCOVERY  BY Gll/VDK,  1972  TO  1990
          The basis  of waste  paper  use  is  derived  from:   (1)  basic  paper
product demand by  type;  (2) the  potential  for  recycling  in  each  major  grade
(e.g.,  linerboard);  and  (3) the  actual  forecast  of recycling  in  each grade.
Once  (3) above is  established, it is  also  necessary to look at the  grade
structure of waste paper for  each recycling application.

          .The principal  reference for determining  the amount  and grade dis-
tribution of waste paper for  each recycling application  was the  McCle'nahan
work  referenced  frequently  in this  study  (for  1969).  In addition,  it  was
possible to obtain the same data in a .less detailed, but useful  way, .from
the API capacity surveys covering waste paper  use  for the years.1970 through
1973.   In particular, the latter sources were  useful where  waste paper is
used  in predominantly virgin  fiber  products, e.g.,  kraft paperboard.   For
the myriad of recycled paperboard grades,  we relied on the  McClenahan  data.
for., detail because only  the total waste paper  use  by grade  is given for
recycled paperboard  by API  statistics.  Nonetheless, these  two sources
werje  the basis of  developing  the detailed  grade  structures  for waste paper
in Table 107 and this appendix.  -

          The distribution of waste paper  use  by waste grade  in  each paper
grade was calculated from the McClenahan data.   The results are  given  in
Table E-10.

          Likewise,  the  summary  of  usage of waste  paper  by  grade was developed
in a  similar manner  and  is given for  the years 1970 to 1990 in Table E-ll.  '

          Finally, when  all uses of waste  paper, including  exports, are con-r
sidered, the total demand for waste paper  by major  grade  category was  deter-
mined (Table E-12).  These data  simply add to  recycling  the anticipated exports
(distributed to the  same  grades  as  domestic recycling) of waste  paper  for the
years 1972 to 1990.
                                    354

-------
                                                                                                Table E-10


                                                                      DISTRIBUTION OF WASTE PAPER USE BY GRADE BY  PAPER CRAPE.  1969
LO
<_n
Ln
Total Total Waste
End Use Category Production Paper Use
Pa per board -' ' '
Conblnaclon boxboard
and chipboard - 4299 2963
Recycled llncrboard 402 436
Re-cycled medium 939 663
Llnerboard/boxboard
(kraft) 12913 259
Semtchemlcal medium 3547 672
Tube, can and drum 733 646
' Gypsum llnerboard 847 903
Total paperboard5 26069 8583
Other Paper and Paper-
Board
Construction • 1603 1134
Wet machine board 148 96
Paper
Printing, vrltlng and
related 14A99 850
Packaging and Industrial
conveyance 5078 131
Special Industrial 443 34
Tissue 3575 962
Total Paper 23595 1977
Ratio of Percent Percent Percent Percent Pulp Percent
Waste Paper Mixed News of Container . Pulp Substitute Dein'ning
To Product Mixed of Total News Total Container of Total Substitutes of Total Delnklnx of TotJ i

115 1402 28.3 1113 22.4. 1506- 30.3 . 739 14.9 203 4.1
108 36 8.3 -- -- 382 87.6 17 3.9 1 0.2
71 12 1.8 7 1.0. 641 96.7 .1 0.2 2- 0.3
2 22 8.5 -- -- 210 81. 1 27 10.4 -- .
19 46 6.8 --' -- 622 92.6 4 0.6
88 106 16.4 116 18.0 349 54.0 71 11.0 4 0.6
107 201 22.2 .206 22.8 373 41.3 .118 13.1 5 0.6
33 1830 21.3 1445 . 16.8 4100 47.8 . 988 11.5 220 2.6

71 695 61.3 198 17.5 217 19.1 . 24 2.1 —
65 77 80.2 -- -- 9 9.4 10 10.4

6 . -- --- 372 43.8 8 0:9 250 29.4 . 220 25.9
3 3 2.3 3 2.3 15 11.5 90 68.7 20 15.3
8 • 41 2.9 -- -- 23 67.6 10 29.4
27 2 0.2 38 -- 62 -- 513 -- 347
8 6 0.3 413 2J.9 85 4-.3 876 44.3 597 30 2
                  a/  Detail on  food board  and miscellaneous  omitted .                .
                  Sc-.:rcc:   "Consur.pt Ion  of  Paper  Stock  by United States Mills In 1969 and 1970", Wi S. McC'.ennehan.  Tables V. VI, VII, and VIII.

-------
                                                       TABLE  E-H
                                  ESTIMATED USAGE
Co
Wn
 Waste Paper Grade

 Mixed Grades

 News—-post-consumer
 News—converting!!'

      Total

 Corrugated—post-consumer
 Corrugated—cuttings—'

      Total

 Deinking Grades and
  Pulp Substitutes

     Grand Total

Paper Demand

Recycling Rate
PAPER INDUSTRY
BY MAJOR
mim run. KtLlYCLiNG IN THE
GRADE CATEGORY lQ79_ioQ(Y-
(In Thousand Tons)
1970^
2,639
1,825
410
2,235
2,528
1.552
4,080
3.067
12,021
57,835
20.8
1971
2,776
1,754
420
2,174
2,700
1,577
4,277
3,097
12,323
59,440
20.7
1972
3,054
1,880
437
2,317
2,960
1.762
4,722
3,037
13,132
6.4,356
20.4
1973
3,251
2,129
450
2,579
3,430
1.861
5,291
3,198
14,318
67,122
21.3
' ' *- J- J J \J
1975^
3,215
2,110
440
2,550
3,410
1.820
5,230
3,165
14,160
66,490
2-1 . 3

1980
. 3,670
2,535 .
500
3,035
5,100
2,305
7,405
3,750
17,860
79,360
22.5

1 Q8S
-i- s o _;
4,185
2,985
560
3,545
7,425
2.870
10,295
4,440
22,465
93,565
24.0

1 1 QO A
iyyu
4,510
3,375
625
4 , 000
10,095
3,565
13,650
5,180
27.3AQ
109,240
25.0
       a/  Based upon calculated printing scrap recovery of 2.8 percent of  newsprint  demand  plus  overissue
             news at 1.4 percent of newsprint demand.
       b/  Based upon 11.0 percent of containerboard mill production . (domestic use);  calculated from  McClor.ahan
             data for cuttings 1969, 1970.

-------
LO
                                                                                                    TABLE E-12
                                                                             CALCULATION OP MASTE PAPER RECOVERY BV CRAPE. 1972-1990
(In thousand tons and percent)
1972 1975 1980 1985 1990
Recycling
Grade Category OnlyS/
Mixed 3,054
News 2,317
Container 4,722
Pulp Subs 2,100
Delnklng • 937
Total 13.132
Total Recycling Total Recycling Total Recycling Total Recycling ' Total
Percent Recovery^./ Only"/ Percent RecoveryS/ Only*/ Percent Recovery— ' OnlyS./ Percent Recovery Jt/ OnlyS/ Percent Recovery
23.3 3,155 3,215 22.7 3,440 3,670 20.5 3,905 4,185 18.6 4,435 4,510 16.5 4,785
17.6 2,385 2,550 18.6 2,725 3,035 17.0 3,240 3,545 15.8 3.770 4.000 14.6 4.235
36.0 4,880 5.230 36.9 5,590 7,405 41.5 7.905 10,295 45.8 10.925 13.650 49.9 14.470
16.0 2,165 2,150 15.2 2,305 2,540 14.2 2,710 3,000 13.4 3.195 3.525 12.9 3.74O
7.1 955 1.015 7.2 1,090 1.210 6.8 1.290 1.440 6.4 1.525 1.655 6.1 1.770
100.0 13,550 14,160 100.0 15,150 17,860 100.0 19.050 22,465 100.0 23,850 27.340. 100.0 29.000
              I/  Recycling in the paper Industry (fiber use).
              W  Recovery of fiber for all uses including net exports.  Recovery by grade based on same percentage as for recycling in the paper industry.
              Source:  Midwest Research Institute.

-------
   BASIS FOR CALCULATION OF END USES, CONVERTING SCRAP. PAPER DISCARD
              PATTERNS AND SOURCE OF WASTE PAPER GENERATION
          The following data are the basis on which the calculations of
Tables 93 to 99 and Tables 100 to 104 in Chapter 10 were developed.
Newsprint:

          1.  About 7 percent goes into non newspaper uses such as publish-
ing; the balance is used in newspapers.

          2.  Converting scrap is estimated oh the following basis:
Seventy-five percent of consumption is in large newspapers experiencing
about 2.7 percent scrap rate.
            I                          •
          Twenty-five percent of consumption is in small newspapers or
publishing experiencing about 8 percent scrap rate.

               0.75 x 0.027 + 0.25 x 0.08 = 0~.04

          Twenty-five percent of demand is estimated to be overissue news-
paper; about 1.5 percent is recovered for recycling based on McClenahan
data for 1969/1970.

          3.  The characteristics of newsprint entry into solid waste is
estimated as follows:   (See also "Nonpackaging Paper" Tables 26 and 34, and
page 56.*)

          0.5 percent is lost or diverted to uses that do not enter waste.

          0,5 percent of current consumption is retained in files or held
long enough to show a delay in entry to waste compared to current demand.
Thus, 1.0 percent is diverted/delayed, and 99.0 percent of current consump-
tion quantity enters municipal waste.

          4.  Household is estimated at 90 percent of net demand; 10 per-
cent is estimated as commercial/industrial waste, e.g., commercial newspapers
and printing (Wall Street Journal, etc.).   There was no documented basis
for this split.  Discard patterns will differ from city to city, e.g., where
street sales of paper are high, discard in commerical waste will be higher;
however, most newspapers are discarded from the home.
    The Role of Nonpackaging Paper in Solid Waste Management, 1966 to 1976,
      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Solid Waste Management Office,
      Publication SW 26c (1971)
                                   358

-------
 Printing  Papers:

          1.  The principal uses for printing paper are:  catalogs and
 directories, magazines, books, commercial printing, and converted paper
 products, with commercial printing and magazines the dominant categories.
 Some of these products have a retention value, but most printed products
 except certain types of books are discarded within a few years of manufac-
 ture at the most; some books are removed more or less permanently Jrom the
 waste stream, going into permanent retention.

          2.  Converting scrap in printing operations usually amounts to
 15  to 18 percent for magazines, periodicals, catalogs, etc.  We used 12
 percent as the basic converting scrap factor, thus making allowance for
 lower scrap rates in other types of printing paper.

          3.  The characteristics of printing paper is estimated as follows:
 (See also "Nonpackaging Paper" Tables 27 and 34, and pages 56 and 58).  About
 30  percent of books go into more or less permanent storage, but less than
 5 percent of the other printing grades are permanently retained.  There is
 some delay of entry into the waste stream because of retention of materials
 for 1 to 5 years.  Overall, the ratio of current consumption entering the
 waste stream in any 1 year is about 0.89.

          4.  A majority of printed materials end up in the home--as catalogs
 and directories, e.g., mail order and telephone books; as magazines, as
 books; as direct mail advertising and other printed materials.  However, the
 same end uses apply to nonhpusehold.  Overall, we estimated that 60 percent
 of  the total is household waste and 40 percent is npnhousehold (commercial/
 industrial).  Because of the diversity of uses, no firm basis could be de-
 veloped for making the split.
Fine Papers:

          1.  The principal uses of fine paper are writing paper, reproduc-
tion paper, and other communication types of paper.  Writing paper makes
up,over 50 percent of the total office uses.

          2.  Converting scrap ranges from an estimated 5 percent to 12
percent, depending on the converted product, e.g., business forms and in-
house reproduction have a higher scrap rate than stationary converting.
Overall, an average of 8 percent scrap rate was used.

          3.  Certain types of paper have a permanent retention value,  e.g.,
bristols used for library cards, some types of records.  For the most part,
permanent retention is less than 10 percent.  Many types of fine paper  are
retained from 2 to 10 years before discard.  The combined effect of permanent
retention and delayed discard  led  to a ratio of 0.87 of annual tonnage to
be discarded.  (See also "Nonpackaging Paper," Tables 28 and 34, and page
58).
                                 359

-------
          4.  The fine paper grades are generally business type papers — forms,
stationery, computer printout, etc.  We estimate that 80 percent ends up in
nonhouaehold and 20 percent in homes.
Industrial Converting and Packaging Paper:

          1.  These grades consist primarily of wrapping paper, shipping
sacks and grocery bag paper, and other converting paper, e.g., file folders,
plus industrial paper, e.g., filter paper.  Thus, the product characteristics
are such that a short life span for the .product is to be expected with
discard essentially "as used".  Some industrial paper goes into cable, gas-
kets, insulation and the like, which "disappears" as a paper product from
the paper waste stream.

          2.  Because the 'greatest tonnage is in high volume convertingi
we estimate the scrap rates to be 2 percent to 10 percent, with the average
about 5 percent.

          3.  Some special use grades are diverted into other types of waste
and some delay in discard occurs.  However, we estimate that about 98 per-
cent of current tonnage ends up being discarded rather promptly.

          4.  The packaging grades of paper are split between household and
nonhousehold.  The largest quantities go into bag and sack paper and wrap-
ping paper (retail stores packaging products to carry to the home); and
shipping sack and other uses which are largely nonhousehold uses.  Overall,
we estimate 65 percent is household and 35 percent is nonhousehold.'
Tissue:

          1.  The principal uses for tissue are:  toilet paper, facial
tissue, towels, napkins, wipers, and wrapping tissue.  Of these, toilet
tissue constitutes about 35 percent, which "disappears" from the solid waste
stream into sewer systems.  Some other tissue is disposed of in nonconven-
tional manners too, such as burning or sewer.

          2.  There were no real guideline data available for estimating
converting scrap rates for tissue.  We estimate the conversion scrap to
fall between 3 and 8 percent; 5 percent was used.

          3.  Almost all tissue products are used once and then discarded;
that is the nature of the products.  Thus we believe that tissue enters
the waste stream essentially as produced.  Toilet tissue is discarded into
sewer systems.  The discard profile was estimated as 0.62 with 0.35 being
"diverted" toilet paper and 0.03 being other "diverted" discard.
                                  360

-------
           4.   Tissue  products  are personal use products associatea with
human  activities.   Thus,  a  function of waste generation is where  the  per-
sons are  when  the  products  are used.  Facial tissue  is largely a  home use
item—about 80 percent we estimate.  Napkins are used for eating—about 67
percent  in home and 33 percent nonhousehold.  Paper  towels are probably
about  80  percent a household item.  Wipers are a nonhousehold product used
in  commercial/industrial  applications.  Based on a calculation by end uses
for 1972,  a split  of  70 percent household and 30 percent nonhousehold was
used.
Containerboard:

           1.  About  95 percent of  linerboard, medium and chipboard  is used
to make  shipping  containers  for a  multitude of products and purposes.  While
some products can go into a  long inventory cycle, the containerboard has
generally  served  its purpose  in a  matter of weeks or months and is  discarded.

           2.  The conversion  scrap rates varies  for containerboard  from
perhaps  5  percent to 15 percent, depending upon  the configuration of f.he
box.  The  average is probably about 8 to 9 percent.  However, we have used
11 percent scrap  rate because this can be documented in the McClenahani'
references wherein containerboard  cuttings reported to be used in recycling
were equal to 10.8 to 11.1 percent of containerboard production for 1969
and 1970.   While  some other materials, e.g., bag wastes are probably re-
ported as  corrugated cuttings, this is still a sound basis on which to
relate scrap production for  this category.

           3.  Containerboard enters the waste stream as produced and we
estimate a nominal 0.02 is diverted from waste; 0.98 is discarded to solid
waste in the year produced and used.

           4.  Containerboard products, i.e., corrugated shipping containers
are discarded where  the product is unpacked.  For the most part, this is in
commercial and  industrial establishments.  Based upon the Fibre Box Associa-
tion's "Classification of Shipments by End Use, 1970-1973," (page 24, "Fibre
Box Industry Annual  Report, 1973")  it was estimated that 68 percent of
containers are discarded in commercial establishments (retail stores, ware-
houses, etc.) and  32  percent in. .industrial plants (auto assembly plants,
electronics plants,  etc.).  Some boxes reach households via mail order
purchases  and are  retrieved by the residents.  We estimate no more  than 10
percent of the boxes  in the commercial category do so.   Thus, the final
allocation was:   household, 7 percent; commercial, 61 percent; and  industrial,
,32 percent (93 percent nonhousehold).

.!/  Op. Cit.
                                  361

-------
Other Containerboard:

          1.  The principal products are gypsum wallboard (about 1 million
tons per year), tube, can and drum (about 400,000 tons per year); the ba-
lance is panelboard and other containerboard type paper.

          2.  The conversion scrap rate is unknown, and the products are
diverse in nature.  We estimate scrap rates are in the order of 5 to 10
percent; we have used 7 percent.

          3.  About 1/2 the tonnage goes into construction products (gypsum.
wallboard) and durable goods (panelboard).  This is diverted from the mixed
municipal waste stream in discard.  We estimate about 10 percent enters
the municipal waste stream in identifiable form; the remainder is in con-
struction debris, junked autos, appliances and the like.  The other 1/2
of the category is in uses that become discards rapidly (e.g., tube, can,
drum) and here we estimate only 10 percent is diverted to other uses and
90 percent discarded to municipal waste streams.  The calculation for muni-
cipal waste is:  Discard = .50 x  .10 + .50 x .90 = .50.  Thus, .50 is
diverted.

          4.  Other containerboard discard patterns could not be accuarately
assessed.  We estimated 50 percent household and 50 percent nonhousehold
discard.
Folding Boxboard:

          1.  The principal use is folding cartons for a multitude of pro-
ducts; some is used in various other uses that are only vaguely documented
by paper industry sponsors, e.g., game boards.

          2.  Conversion scrap has been estimated for years by the Paper-
board Packaging Council at 19 percent of carton input tonnage.  We estimate
a scrap rate for noncarton uses of 10 to 15 percent.  The composite scrap
rate is estimated at 16 percent, based upon McClenahan—  data for use of
boxboard cuttings in 1969/1970, compared to boxboard production in those
years.

          3.  Boxboard is discarded as produced and used; some inventory of
product takes place, but this is minor.  We estimate that a  nominal  2  percent
is diverted and 98 percent is discarded to the municipal waste stream.
_!/  Op. Cit.


                                  362

-------
          4.  Folding, boxbpard is used principally for cartons and tlms
is predominantly a retail ,sales package; most of it is discarded in ihe
home where the contents are used.  Thus, we estimate that 80 percent is
household and 20 percent is nonhousehold.
Setup Boxboard:

          This is used for heavy weight boxes, e.g., shoes, candy, hosiery,
etc.  Its profile is similar to folding boxboard.  We estimate 10 percent
scrap and 98 percent discard to municipal waste.

          Setup boxboard is used almost exclusively in retail sales packages.
We estimate 90 percent is discarded from the home and 10 percent in non-
household locations.
Milk and Food Service:

          1.  The principal uses are milk cartons, food cartons, food cups,
plates, and miscellaneous uses of which nonpacking is about 100,000 tons
per year.

          2.  The.conversion scrap rate is estimated in the range of 10 to
15 .percent.  This scrap is solid bleached sulfate and serves as pulp sub-
stitute grade.  We used 12 percent.
   i

          3.  All of these products are short life products and discarded
promptly.  Thus, we estimate essentially 100 percent discard to waste.

          4.  Milk and food service is predominantly food packaging and,
thus, is discarded where the contents are emptied—at home or food service
locations.  On the basis that 70 percent of meals are eaten at home and
30 percent away, we split the discard between household and nonhousehold.
Other Boxboard:

          1.  This category consists of tube, can and drum paperboard (made
in boxboard mills) about 700,000 tons per year; and miscellaneous uses of
up to 1 million tons per year.  Many of the latter uses are heavyweight
products, e.g., publishers book, cardboard, nonbending board,  etc.)

          2.  The conversion scrap rate is estimated to range  from 5 to
15 percent, but no data base is known; we used 10 percent because this is
an average for converting type operations.


                                  363

-------
          3.  Tube can and drum paperboard is used and discarded even though
some industrial drums are returnable and reused several times.  Some of the
miscellaneous uses go into industrial or consumer products, e.g., books,
that have a permanent retention value.  The category is too diverse to make
more than an estimate:  15 percent diverted from the paper waste stream;
85 percent entry municipal solid waste systems.

          4.  Other boxboard is classified into miscellaneous uses that
cannot be accurately assessed from a solid waste standpoint.  We estimated
50 percent household and 50 percent nonhousehold.
Wet Machine Board and Construction Paper:

          1.  These products are used for shoe board, book bindings, and
construction paper such as roofing felts.  Thus, a high percentage is diverted
from the identifiable mixed waste stream and shows up as a part of construc-
tion debris, "leather" shoes, and the like.

          2.  Conversion scrap is probably 5 to 15 percent, depending on
the product.  We used 8 percent.

          3.  The diverted category is estimated at 90 percent of the total
demand; that entering mixed waste as an identifiable paper product is thus
10 percent.  (See also "Nonpackaging Paper," Tables 32 and 34 and page 60).

          4.  Construction paper is a minor cateogory and the waste discard
was classified as 50 percent household and 50 percent nonhousehold (most of
which is related to construction activity).  There is no published basis on
which to make a split.
Insulating and Hard Pressed Board:

          1.  These products are used for building construction and in
industrial and consum-.t products, e.g., applicances, furniture, autos,
panels, etc.  About half of this goes into buildings, but the other appli-
cations are growing more rapidly in use.  Many times there are wood wastes
(sawdust) mixed with an epoxy.

          2.  Conversion scrap is probably 5 to 15 percent, depending upon
the specific product being made.  We used 8 percent.

          3.  The diverted category is estimated at 90 percent of total
demand because these products are viewed in solid waste as part of special
waste categories, e.g., construction debris, appliances, etc.  That entering

                                  364

-------
municipal waste in an identifiable form is estimated at 10 percent.  (See
also "Nonpackaging Paper," Tables 32 and 34, and page 60.)

          4.  Insulating and hard pressed board is a minor category in
which waste discard was classified as 40 percent household and 60 percent
nonhousehold.  There is no published basis on which to make a split.
                                   365

-------
      APPENDIX F





REFERENCES AND SOURCES
           366

-------
 1.  "Factsy" Institute of Scrap Iron and Steel, Inc., Yearbook 1970.*

 2.  "A National Study of Roadside,Litter--Summary," Keep America Beautiful,
       Inc., October 1969.

 3.  "Towards, a National Materials Policy, Basic Data and Issues," an interim
       report, The National Commission on Materials Policy, April 1972.

 4.  "Marketing Guide to the Packaging Industries-IMG9," Charles H.  Kline
       and Company, Inc., 1972.'                   \

 5.  "Plastics-Prospects and Problems," Chemical Marketing Research Associa-
       tion, Pittsburgh Meeting, February 13-15, 1967.

 6.  "Review and Forecast," The Chemical Marketing Research Association,
       New York meeting, May 5-7, 1971.

 7.  "Review and Forecast," The Chemical Marketing Research Association,
       33rd Annual Meeting, May 8-10, 1973.

 8.  "Plastics Today and Tomorrow," Commercial Development Association,
       November 1971.

 9.  "Canned Food Pack Statistics 1971-1972," National Canners Association,
       July 1972.                                     .

10.  "Oregon Report," Soft Drinks. March 1973, p. 29.

11.  "The Family Size Market—How Big Can it Get," Soft Drinks. February
       1972, p.  26.

12.  "Sales Survey of the Soft Drink Industry," National Soft Drink Associa-
       tion 1969, 1971, and 1972.

13.  "1970--SDI's Review of a Year of Growth and Developments," Soft Drink
       Industry, December 31, 1970.

14.  "A Study of the Soft Drink Industry 1965-1970," Corplan Associates.

15.  "Soft Drinks 16th Annual Survey," Soft Drinks. December 1972.

16.  "Stronger and/or Coated Bottles in Development," Soft Drinks. May   .  ,
       1973, p.  14:             ,  '    '

17.  "LOPAC:  The Real and Living,"  Chemical Week. October 24, 1973, p. 13.
* References not verified by EPA.
                                     367

-------
18.  "The Carbonated Beverage Industry-1975 Forecasts," American Can Company.

19.  "Predicts 1,000 Fewer Plants—5 Billion Case Volume," Soft Drinks.
       January 1973, p. 28.

20.  "Predicts 70 percent1 of Nonreturnable Sales in Big Bottles," Soft
       Drinks. 1972, p. 18.
         !
21.  "Soft Drink Industry Outlook," presentation by Margro F. Re'p'port,
       Beverage and Cosmetics Analyst," E.F. Hutton and Company, Inc. To
       Houston Society of Financial Analysts,  April 25, 1973, Wall Street
       Transcript, June 4, 1973.

22.  "The Glass Container Industry:  A Review of the Past 10 years,"
       American Glass Review. January 1972, p. 9.

23.  "Clearing the Shelves for all Plastic Soda and Beer Bottles," Modern
       Packaging." October 1973, p. 22.

24.  "The Bigger They Come, the Harder They Sell," Modern Packaging.
       August 1973, p. 24.

25.  "Rigid^Plastics are Just Warming Up to Foods," Modern Packaging.
       August 1972, p. 24.                                               .

26.  "Materials and Containers for Today's Market," Food Engineering,
       March 1973, p. 12.

27.  "Enter the Flat Bottomed HOPE Grocery Sack," Modern Packaging.

28.  "Consumer Packaging," Chemical and Engineering News. April 12, 1973,
       p. 20.

29.  "In-roads for HDPE Milk Containers." Modern Packaging. April 1973,
       p. 12.

30.  "One-Way Milk Jug Shapes Up as Top Market for HDPE," Modern Plastics.
       April 1973, p. 20.

31.  "Plastics Into Bottles Blowing Up a Storm," Chemical Marketing Reporter.
       January 1, 1973, p. 7.

32.  "Milk Bottles:  Healthy New Market for Polyethylene," Chemical Week.
       June 14, 1972, p. 27.
                                     368

-------
33.  "Sturdy Toys Help to Strengthen Polystyrene Sales," Chemical'Week.
       November 29, 1972, p.. 17.

34.  "Will PVC's 1973 Crunch Became a Glut in 1975," Modern Plastics.
       January 1973, p. 66.

35.  "PVC's Perils of Pauline:  Environmental Goblin is Replaced by Toxicity
       Dragon," Modern Plastics. July 1973, p. 16.

36. . "Hot Market for Hot Melts," Chemical Engineering. April 2, 1973, p. 30.

37.  "What's What in Bottle Resins," Modern Plastics, September 1973, p. 14.

38.  "Metal, Glass and Plastic Containers," Paine Webber, Jackson and Curtis,
       Inc., The Wall Street Transcript, August 6, 1973, p. 34,039.

39.  "Get Set for Another Rough and Tumble Record - Smashing Year," Modern
       Packaging. January 1973, p. 22.

40.  "In Converting Its Economics That is Pushing Innovation," Modern Packaging.
       May 1973, p. 49.

41.  "Composite Packaging Films:  Interest is High, Action is Spotty,"
       Modern Plastics. May 1973, p. 52.

42.  "The Outlook for PP Packaging Film:  Perhaps Better," Modern Plastics,
       •May 1973, p. 56.

43.  "Bigger Market for LDPE .Shopping Bags," Modern Plastics, June 1973, p. 12.

44.  "Film Use Will Double," Modern Packaging. August  1972, p. 8.

45.  "HDPE - Old .Film Learns New Tricks, Works at Low Cost," Modern Packaging.
       May 1973, p. 36.

46.  "There's Room for HOPE in the Paper Business," Plastics World. May 1973,
       p. 46.

47.  "U.S. Container and Packaging Materials Production:  1960-1972,"
       Modern Packaging Encyclopedia and Planning Guide 1972-1973, p. 43.

48.  "Thermoformed Resin Volume in 1972 Hit 1 Billion Pounds Rising 30 Per-
       cent Over 1971," Chemical Market Reporter, p. 7.
                                    369

-------
49.  "If You Think P.S. is a Commodity, Look Again,"  Modern Plastics.
       March 1972, p. 41.

50.  "Polymer Output Swells," Chemical Week. October 3,  1973,  p.  19.

51.  "In Metal Cans or Plastic the Lids Off for Paint,"  Modern Packaging.

52.  "Watch Thermoforms Pick up Speed," Modern Packaging. March 1973,  p.  29.

53.  "Second Lap  for Aerosols in Plastics," Modern Packaging.  September 1972,
       P. 45.

54.  "Containers  and Packaging," U.S. Department of Commerce,  October 1972.

55.  "Plastic  Bottles  - A Growth Study," Containers and Packaging. October
        1970, p. 8.

56.  "1971  Annual Statistical Review,"  Distilled Spirits  Industry.
 57.  "Hiram Walker - Gooderham and Worts,"  Speech by Clifford Hatch,
        President to the Vancouver Society of Financial  Analysts, June  28,
        1973, Wall Street Transcript. July 16, 1973,  p.  33,820.

 58.  "French Wine - In Plastic Bottles," Plastics World.  November  1972,
        p. 14.

 59.  "Chemical Technology Key to Better Wines," Chemical  and Engineering
        News. July 2, 1973, p. 14.

 60.  "Beauty Chemicals:  Cosmetics "Packaging," Chemical Market;
        June 11, 1973, p. 45.

 61.  Annual Report, "Metal Cans Shipment 1969, 1971," Can Manufacturers
        Institute.

 62.  "The Impact of Lower Cost Substrates on Can Making - Howard Cannon,"
        American Institute of Chemical Engineers, Sixty Ninth National
        Meeting, May 16-19, 1971.

 63.  "Devaluation  Hikes Tin Plate  and TFS Tabs." Modern Packaging.  June;
        1972, p. 31.

 64.  "It Looks Like Another Banner Year.for Aerosols," Modern Packaging.
        August  1973, p. 5.

 65.  "Steel Products Manual,"  Tin Mill  Products, American Iron and Steel
        Institute,  July 1968.

                                      370

-------
66.  "A-Z of the Tinplate Can," Tin International, January 1973, p. 7.

67.  "Who's Who in Profits," Robert S. Hatfield, Continental Can Company,
       Wall Street Transcript. June 25, 1973.

68.  "Copper Industry Uses Much Scrap Iron," Environmental Science and
       Technology. February 1973, p. 100.

69.  "Cans," Modern Packaging. April 1971, p. 24.                         . .

70.  "The Future for Tinplate in the U.S.," R. Thomas Willsbn Conference
       On Tin Consumption, London:  March 13-17, 1972.

71.  "Statistics for 1972," Modern Plastics. January 1973, p. 54.

72.  "U.S. Industrial Outlook 1973," Containers and Packaging, p. 41.

73.  "Can We Recycle Cans?"  Howard S. Cannon, Technology Review. May 1972,
       p. 40.

74.  "Steel Industry Spurs Recycling of Tin Cans and Junked Autos,"
       John P. Roche, Catalyst. Vol. II, No. 4, p. 23.

75.  "Used Steel Cans Being Recycled by the Millions," Soft Drinks.
     i  February 1972, p. 55.

76.  Progress Report on Recycling, "Magnetic Separation of Steel Cans,"
       a key to solid waste management, American Iron and Steel Institute.

77.  "Use of Plastics:   A Growing Problem in Solid Waste Disposal?"
       Niren L. Nogda and Lyndon R.  Babcock, Jr., Compost Science,  March-
       April 1973, p. 26.

78.  "Eliminating or Disposing of Industrial Solid Wastes," Rudy G. Novak,
     .. Chemical Engineering. October 5, 1970, p. 78.

79.  "Waste Processing Complex Emphasizes Recycling,". William Herbert,
       Wesley A.  Flowers, Public Works. June 1971, p.  78-81.

80.  "Incentives  for Recycling and Reuse of Plastics," Arthur D.  Little, Inc.,
       prepared for Environmental Protection Agency,  1972.  Distributed by
       National Technical Information Service,  U.S. Department of Commerce,
       PB 214-045.

81.  "The Beverage Container Problem - Analysis and Recommendations,"
       Research Triangle Institute prepared for Environmental Protection
       Agency, September 1972,  distributed by National Technical  Information
     ,  Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, PB 213-341.


                                        371

-------
82.  "The Role of Plastics in Resource Recovery," Midwest Research Institute,
       May 23, 1973, prepared for Manufacturing Chemists Association.

83.  "Resource Recovery" - The State of Technology prepared for the Council
       on Environmental Quality by Midwest Research Institute.

84.  "Salvage Markets for Materials in Solid Waste," Midwest Research
       Institute, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1972.

85.  "The Role of Packaging in Solid Waste Management 1966 to 1976,"
       Midwest-Research Institute, prepared for the Bureau of Solid Waste
       Management, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

86.  "The Plastics Industry in the year 2000," prepared for the Society of
       Plastics Industry, Inc., and the Society of Plastics Engineers by
       Stanford Research Institute, R. L. Glauz, Jr., A. G. Kridl, R. H. Schwoar,
       and S. L. Soder, April 1973.

87.  "Outlook, We Have to Care 1973," Owens Illinois, January 1973.

88.  "Resource Recovery Processes for Mixed Municipal Solid Wastes," Part II,
       Catalogue of Processes, Midwest Research Institute Project No. 3634-D,
       December 18, 1972, prepared for Council on Environmental Quality.

89.  U.S. Department of Commerce, Current Industrial Reports, Metal Cans,
       M34D, 1961-1973.

90.  U.S. Department of Commerce, Current Industrial Reports, Glass Containers,
       M32G, 1961-1973.

91.  "Behind the 32 Ounce Resealable Returnable Boom," Soft Drinks. July 1973,
       p. 29.

92.  "Plasti-Shield Containers Conserve Material, Lessen Load on Solid
       Waste Disposal System" Outlook, Owens Illinois, 1973,  p. 6.

93.  "Barrier Bottles are on the March, But Slowly," Modern Plastics.
       February 1973, p. 62.

94.  "The Brewing Industry in the United States," Brewers Almanac. 1970.

95.  "A History of Packaged Beer and Its Market in the United States,"
       American Can Company, 1969.
                                     372

-------
 96.   "Carbonated Beverages  in the  United  States,"  American  Can  Company.

 97.   "Vending is More Than  a Hungry Slot — Its Packages  That Work,"
        Modern Packaging.  September 1972,  p.  31.

 98.   National Planning Association, "Metropolitan  Growth Pattern^  for the
        Coming Decade," Report No.  70 R-2, December 1970.

 99.   "Charlotte Plant Installs Prototype  Model of  Systems to Clean-Up Con-
        sumer Gullet," Outlook, Owens Illinois, p.  9.

100.   Continental Can Company Remarks by Robert Hatfield, Chief  Executive
        Officer to the New York Security Analyst, June 19, 1973, Wall Street
        Transcript. July 9,  1973, p. 33,736.

101.   "Steel Brings New Competition to Drawn  and Iron  Beverage Can  Market,"
        Modern Packaging.  June 1972, p.  28.

102.   "National Food Situation," U.S. Department of Agriculture, May 1973.

103.   Steel Can Study Prepared for  the Resource Recovery Division Office
        of Solid Waste Management  Programs, U.S.  Environmental Protection
        Agency, June 1973.

104.   "Recycling is Economical and  Feasible," Plastics World, March 1973.

105.   "The Statistics of Paper," American  Paper Institute, 1972, p. 40.

106.   Arella, D. G., "Black  Clawson's Presentation  to  O.S.W.M.P. or. the
        Concept of Wet Processing  Solid  Wastes," United  States Environmental
        Protection Agency, Form 1320-6 (Rev.  6-72)  August 10, 1973.

107.   "A Round Table Discussion on  the Newly  Emerged Solid Waste Agglomerates,"
        Waste Age. Volume 4, No. 4, pp.  10-14, 16,  24, 28, 30, 68-73, 77-78,
        July-August 1973.

108.   Battelle, Columbus Laboratories, Columbus,  Ohio, Study to  Identify
        Opportunities for Increased Solid  Waste Utilization—Paper. Volume
        VIII, XIX, p. 154.

109.   Beltrami, E. J. and C. N. Ehler, "Paper Residuals  Management  in Offices,"
        Office of Research and Development, U.S.  Environmental Protection
        Agency, Washington,  D.C.,  July 1973,  p. 104.

110.   Bureau of the Census,  Current Industrial Report  Series M26A (70)-13.
        Pulp, Paper, and Board:  1970, Washington,  D.C.  1972, p. 24.
                                     373

-------
111.  Bureau of the Census, Current Industrial Report Series M26A (71)-13,
        Pulp, Paper, and Board:  1971, Washington, D.C., 1972, p. "4.

112.  Midwest Research Institute, "Salvage Markets for Materials in
        Solid Waste," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, No. SW-29C,
        U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1972, Volume XXI,
        p. 187.

113.  Douglas, J. H., "Smokey's Other Problems," Science News. 104:138-140,
        September 1, 1973.

114.  Environmental Protection Agency - Solid Waste Disposal, "Proposed
        Guidelines for Thermal Processing and Land Disposal of Solid Wastes,"
        Federal Register. 38(81), Part II, April 27, 1973.

115.  EnviroPlan, Inc., College Park, Maryland, "States Role in the Recovery,
        Reuse and Recycling of Materials," National Commission on Materials
        Policy, December 1972, p. 33.

116.  Midwest Research Institute, "The Role of Nonp^-kaging Paper in Solid
        Waste Management, 1966 to 1976," Public Health Service Publication
        No. 2040, Washington, U.S.  Government Printing Office, 1971, Volume
        X, p. 76.

117.  Midwest Research Institute, "Paper Recycling--The Art of the Possible
        1970-1985," The Solid Waste Council of the Paper Industry,  March 1973,
        American Paper Institute, Inc., Volume XX, p. 181.

118.  Midwest Research Institute, "The Components of Solid Waste," Proprietary
        report, December  1968, Volume  III, p.  14.

119.  Hahl, E. D., Ed., "A Discussion:   Government Incentives and Disincen-
        tives to Reclamation of Waste Paper," Council on the Environment of
        New York City, March 1973,  Volume VII, p.  235.

120.  International Research and Technology Corporation,  "Problems  and
        Opportunities in Management of Combustible Solid Waste," National
        Environmental Research Center,  Environmental Protection Agency,
        Contract No.  68-03-0060,  October 1972, Volume XVI, p. 509.

121.  Joseph E.  Atchison Consultants, Inc., Waste Paper Recycling,  "A
        Comprehensive Study on Utilization of Waste Paper, Its Role in
        Solid Waste Management, and Prospects for Increased Waste Paper
        Recycling Rates in the Future," New York,  New York, December 1972,
        p. 417.
                                      374

-------
 122.   Lamdrie, J. F., and J. H. Klungness, U. S. Forest Products Laboratory,
        "Effective Dry Methods of Separating Thermoplastic Films from W.-iste
        Papers," U.S. Forest Service Research Paper FPL200, Madison, U.S.
        .Department of Agriculture, 1973, p. 9.

 123.   MacKay, Shields Economics, Inc., New York, Industry Operating Coets:
        Typical Kraft Board Mill (1965-1975).  Personal Communication,
        W. G. Copeland to W. E. Franklin, Midwest Research Institute, June 1973.
       i
 124.  ,McClenahan, W. S., "Consumption of Paper Stock by United States Mills,
        1968 and 1970," Institute of Paper Chemistry, Appleton, Wisconsin.

]/25.  Mighdoll, M. J., "Recycling, Perspective and Prospective," Paperboard
        Packaging. Chicago, Illinois, Vol. 58, No. 8, August 1973, pp. 37-39.

 126.  Nagda, N. L., and L. R. Babcock, Jr., University of Illinois, Chicago,
        Illinois, "Use of Plastics:  A Growing Problem in Solid Waste Dis-
        posal?" Compost Science. Spring 1973, pp. 26-29.

 127.  National Academy of Sciences/National Academy of Engineering, Washington,
        D.C., Man, Materials, and Environment. National Commission on Materials
        Policy, Library of Congress Catalog Number:  73-5849.

 128.  National Center for Resource Recovery, Inc., Washington, D.C., Fact
        Sheet, "Federal Government Role in Solid Waste Management," August 1973.

 129.  National Center for Resource Recovery, Inc., Washington, D.C., Fact
        Sheet. "Ferrous Metals," May 1973.

 130.  National Center for Resource Recovery, Inc., Washington, D.C., Fact
        Sheet. "Plastics," August 1973.

 131.  The National Center for Resource Recovery, Inc., Washington, D.C.,
        Fact Sheet. "Shredders," April 1973.

 132.  The National Center for Resource Recovery, Inc., Washington, D.C.,
      .  Fact Sheet. "Voluntary Separation of Refuse," August 1973.

 133.  National League of Cities United States Conference of Mayors, Washing-
      ;  ton, D.C., Cities and Nation's Disposal Crisis—a Report of the National
        League of Cities and the U.S. Conference of Mayors Solid Waste Manage-
        ment Task Forece, prepared under grant S-802248 with the Office of
        Solid Waste Management Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
      .  March 1973, Volume VII, p.  46.
                                      375

-------
134.  "Overview of U.S. Trends in Waste Paper Supply and Demand," report to
        Browning Ferris Industries, Inc., Arthur D. Little, Volume V, p. 60.
                                 i               ,                         .
135.  "Paper and Paperboard - Part I," Arthur D. Little, Inc., Volume IV, I,
        p. 96.

136.  .Udell, J. G., Ph.D., "Future Newsprint Demand 1970-1980, An Economic
        Analysis of Consumption Trends with Projections for the Next Decade,
        American Newspaper Publishers Association, January 1S71, p. 42.

137.  Rich, S. U., Ph.D., "What Will Happen to Paper and Board Demand in
        the Next 25 Years?" Paper Trade Journal. Vol. 157,. No. 28, July 9,  1973,\
        pp. 27-29.                                        ,                      X

138.  Ruf, J.  A., "Chemical Engineering Progress," Environmental Protection
        Agency, New York, "Resource Recovery in Perspective," 69(9), September
        1973,  pp. 21-35.

139.  Scudder, R. B., "Of Waste Paper, Virgin Timber and Environment,"
        Federal Office California Legislature, Letter to the Editors.

140.  Sverdrup and Parcell and Associates, Engineer and Architects, "Recycling
        Solid  Wastes...the Outlook for the Metropolitan St. Louis Region,"
        November 1972, Volume V, p. 100.

141.  The National Commission on Materials Policy, "Material Needs and the
        Environment Today and Tomorrow,"  (pursuant to Section 201 of Title
        II of  Public Law 91-512), U.S. Government  Printing Office, Washington
        D.C.,  June 27, 1973.

142.  White, Maria, "Environmental Awareness," Arkansas Game and Fish.
        Vol. 5,  No. 4,.  Little Rock, Arkansas, Spring 1973, p. 24.

143.  Wilson,  A.W., Senior Editor, Pulp and Paper, "Pulp Price History Reveals
        Lesson for Today's Traders," Pulp and Paper. Vol. 47, No. ,9, August
        1973,  pp. 50-51.
  ya!222
                                     376

-------