DIAPER INDUSTRY WORKSHOP REPORT
by:
Science Applications International Corporation
Cincinnati, Ohio 45203
Contract No. 68-C8-0061
Project Officer
Mary Ann Curran
Pollution Prevention Research Branch
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
RISK REDUCTION ENGINEERING LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
-------
NOTICE
The information in this document has been funded by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency under Contract No. 68-C8-0061 to Science
Applications International Corporation. This document has been subjected to
the Agency's peer review and administrative review, and has been approved for
publication as a U.S. EPA document. Mention of trade names or commercial
products does not constitute an endorsement or recommendation for use.
ii
-------
FOREWORD
Today's rapidly developing and changing technologies and industrial
products and practices frequently carry with them the increased generation of
materials that, if improperly dealt with, can threaten both public health and
the environment. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is charged by
Congress with protecting the Nation's land, air and water resources. Under a
mandate of national environmental laws, the agency strives to formulate and
implement actions leading to a compatible balance between human activities and
the ability of natural systems to support and nurture life. These laws direct
the EPA to perform research to define our environmental problems, measure the
impacts and search for solutions.
The Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory is responsible for planning,
implementing and managing research, development and demonstration programs to
provide an authoritative, defensible engineering basis in support of the
policies, programs and regulations of the EPA with respect to drinking water,
wastewater, pesticides, toxic substances, solid and hazardous wastes, and
Superfund-related activities. This publication is one of the products of that
research and provides a vital communication link between the researcher and
the user community.
The Pollution Prevention Research Branch of the U.S. EPA's Risk
Reduction Engineering Laboratory plans and conducts a major portion of the
Agency's Pollution Prevention Programs. One significant segment of the
Branch's effort is the Clean Products Research Program. One component of this
program is to provide technology transfer for new ideas or methods to achieve
pollution prevention.
The purpose of this project, which was undertaken as part of the
Branch's technology transfer effort, was to conduct a 1-day workshop and
prepare a report on the diaper industry. Prime emphasis of the workshop was
to discuss the important Issues associated with the diaper industry and the
related research needs. The research needs identified in this report will be
considered for future research efforts by EPA; however, priorities within the
Agency will determine whether any projects are pursued.
E. Timothy Oppelt, Director
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
-------
ABSTRACT
This report is the product of a 1-day workshop on the diaper industry
that was sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Four topics
were covered during the workshop: public health and safety, recycling,
composting, and product life cycle analysis. The workshop was attended by
more than 30 representatives from industry; local, state, and federal
government agencies; academia; consulting firms; and waste handlers.
The primary objective of the workshop was to identify areas within the
diaper industry that need further research that will lead to minimizing the
negative effect that diapers have on the environment. Summaries of each of
the four topics as well as summaries of discussion comments and research needs
identified during the workshop are included in the report.
A large number of research ideas were generated during the workshop.
These ideas included determining the health risks associated with handling
diapers, developing methods for improving the recyclability of plastics used
in diapers, determining the economic viability of composting, and determining
where diaper-related life cycle analysis should begin and end. This report
can be used by both the private and the public sector to pursue such research.
This workshop was held as part of EPA's continuing effort to transfer
technical information to the public.
This report was submitted in fulfillment of contract no. 68-C8-0061 by
Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) under the sponsorship of
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. This report covers a period from
May 1990 to August 1990 and the work was completed as of January 1991.
-------
CONTENTS
Notice [[[ ii
Foreword [[[ i i i
Abstract [[[ i v
Figures [[[ vi i
Acknowl edgment [[[ vi i i
I . Introducti on .................................................. 1
A. Background .................................................. 1
B . Purpose and Scope ........................................... 1
II. Public Health and Safety ...................................... 3
A. Washington State Infectious Waste
Project Presentation ..................................... 3
B. Discussion Comments ......................................... 4
C. Summary of Research Needs ................................... 6
III. Recycl i ng [[[ 8
A. Seattle Diaper Reclamation Project .......................... 8
B. San Diego Recycling Project ................................. 1°
C. Discussion Comments ......................................... 12
D. Summary of Research Needs ................................... 13
IV. Composting [[[ 14
A. St. Cloud, MN Diaper Compost Project ........................ 14
B. Sumpter County, FL Compost Facility ......................... 14
C. Discussion Comments ......................................... I5
-------
Appendices:
A. Diaper Industry Workshop Attendees 22
B. Diaper Industry Workshop Agenda 25
vi
-------
FIGURES
dumber Page
1 Rabanco Diaper Reclaim Process 9
2 Process Flow Chart for San Diego
Recycling Project 11
vn
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This report was prepared under the direction of Mary Ann Curran and Anne
Robertson, Project Officers in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's
(EPA) Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio. This report is
based upon the much appreciated participation of the attendees at the Diaper
Industry Workshop. These attendees are as follows:
Joe Visalli
NY State Energy, Resource
Riley Kinman
University of Cincinnati
Beth Bower
Clean Cincinnati
Robert Case
Browning-Ferris Industries
Jack Shiffert
National Assoc. of Diaper Services
Mike Hall
Economy Linens
Anthony Montrone
A.D. Little, Inc.
Wayne Turnberg
Washington State Oept. of Ecology
Jere Sellers
Franklin Associates
Lynda Wynn
U.S. EPA, OSW
Herb Pahren
Consulting Engineer
Ralph Bernstein
Solid Waste Management Dept.
Ray Durkee
Kimberly Clark Corporation
Carl Lehrberger
EAC Systems
Terry Tognietti
Veragon Corporation
Tim Sergeant
Gerber Childrenswear
Nancy Eddy
Procter & Gamble
Steven C. Howard
Amerecycle
Nancy Healy
Recomp
Gerry Sheehan
Weyerhaeuser
Garry Howell
U.S. EPA, RREL
Lynnann Hitchens
U.S. EPA
vin
-------
Jeff Tryens Oohn Convery
Center for Policy Alternatives U.S. EPA, RREL
Harry Freeman Mary Ann Curran
U.S. EPA, RREL U.S. EPA, RREL
Maggie Leshen Marilyn Wade
U.S. EPA, Region I U.S. EPA, Region I
Anne Robertson Clyde Dial
U.S. EPA, RREL SAIC
George Wahl James S. Bridges
SAIC U.S. EPA, RREL
This report was prepared for the Pollution Prevention Research Branch of
the EPA's Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory as part of the Clean Products
Research Program by Clyde Dial and George Uahl of SAIC, under EPA Contract No.
68-C8-0061, Work Assignment No. 1-14.
ix
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Background
The Pollution Prevention Research Branch of the U.S. EPA's Risk Reduction
Engineering Laboratory (RREL) plans and conducts a major portion of the
Agency's Pollution Prevention Research Programs. One significant segment of
the Branch's effort is the Clean Products Research Program (CPRP). One
component of this program is to provide technology transfer for new ideas or
methods to achieve pollution prevention. A one-day workshop was held July 31,
1990 to discuss four important issues related to the diaper industry: public
health and safety, recycling, composting, and product life cycle analysis.
EPA personnel, diaper manufacturers, trade association representatives,
municipal solid waste (MSW) disposers/reclaimers, and researchers participated
in the workshop. A list of attendees is provided in Appendix A.
B. Purpose and Scope
The prime emphasis of the workshop was to discuss the important issues
related to the diaper industry and related research needs. In order to
encourage exchange of ideas and information and to avoid confrontation, the
relative benefits of disposable versus reusable diapers were not addressed in
this workshop.
The workshop was divided into four segments, one for each of the major
issues, where topics of specific interest to achieving pollution prevention
within the diaper industry were reviewed and discussed. For each of the
workshop segments, presentations were followed by a general discussion among
workshop participants.
The agenda for the workshop is presented in Appendix B. The workshop
opened with statements from the Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory who
1
-------
welcomed attendees, described the pollution prevention programs and their
importance, and outlined objectives of the workshop. Presentations and
discussion of the four workshop topics took place during the remainder of the
workshop.
This report is organized into separate sections for each of the four major
topics covered in the workshop. The first portion of each section summarizes
the presentations made at the beginning of that workshop segment. The summary
is followed by a listing of significant points or issues identified during the
discussion period, and a listing of pollution prevention research needs
related to that topic. These research needs are limited to the knowledge of
the participants at the workshop and are not meant to be comprehensive. In
addition, some of the issues discussed in this report may have already been
researched, but the workshop participants were unaware of the research.
-------
II. PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY
A. Washington State Infectious Waste Project Presentation
(Wayne L. lumberg)
In response to concerns about medical wastes washing ashore, the State of
Washington's legislature ordered a study to assess the risk of human
infectious disease acquired during the course of solid waste disposal.w The
report found that human wastes, which may contain human pathogens, were
entering the solid waste stream by many routes, including disposable diapers.
The report stated that human feces and urine found on disposable diapers often
contain human pathogens, and that these pathogens can survive and be
transmitted to humans coming into contact with them. Nevertheless, disposable
diapers do not meet the EPA criteria of an infectious waste unless the diaper
wearer is being isolated to protect others from specific highly communicable
diseases.[2]
Actual spread of infection requires all of the following: a source or
reservoir of pathogenic microorganisms, a susceptible host, a pathway or mode
of transmission to the host, an infective dose of pathogen capable of
overwhelming the host's defenses, and a means for the pathogen to enter the
host. Proper hygiene and safety practices, along with education, will
significantly reduce waste workers contact with infectious agents.
The presence of pathogens in the solid waste stream has caused concerns
about the migration of microorganisms from landfills. Viruses may be
Inactivated because of high temperature (140° F) typically associated with the
initial aerobic environment in municipal solid waste landfills. The presence
of microorganism stressors such as pesticides, drugs and heavy metals often
found 1n landfills may also contribute to inactivatlon of viruses. One study
which examined landfill leachate for the presence of viruses identified
-------
viruses at only 1 of 22 sites, and that site was described as not properly
maintained or operated. Although viruses and bacteria may survive in a
landfill, their migration from a properly operated landfill is unlikely.
Their movement in the soil is dependent upon many factors, such as soil
texture/composition, soil moisture, salt concentrations, pH, climate, nutrient
availability, and antagonisms. Another deterrent to migration may be the
adsorption properties of the fill material.
It can be concluded from the Washington State Report that human pathogens
are routinely introduced into the waste stream from residential as well as
medical waste stream sources and that these pathogens travel with the waste to
municipal solid waste landfills. Once in a properly operated landfill,
pathogens are not likely to migrate, and may become inactive. No evidence of
human infectious disease from infectious agents present in municipal solid
waste landfills or the waste stream was identified based on the literature
search conducted for the report.
B. Discussion Comments
The discussions on public health and safety focused on the spread and
survivability of pathogens in the wastestream. These discussions are
summarized as follows:
• Participants noted that pathogens in landfills represent a risk and
questioned how much of that risk is associated with pathogens from
disposable diapers. Some participants suggested that the fraction of
pathogens In landfills from disposable diapers needs to be determined so
that their relative risk can be assessed. Other participants questioned
the feasibility of doing such a study. Participants also noted that
animal wastes and sewage sludge are examples of other significant
sources of pathogens which should be examined. The bacteriological
contribution of various categories of solid waste has been quantified by
£PA;[' however* the report is not comprehensive.
-------
• The potential for disease from inhalation of airborne pathogens from
reusable diaper pails and waste containers for disposable diapers needs
to be investigated. The head space of pails or bags may contain aerosol
mist which could be released. The ability of diaper bags to resist
puncture is important to the health of those handling the bags. Another
concern is the use of biodegradable plastics. These bags are weaker
and, therefore, cause greater potential risk to waste handlers.
• While reusable diapers do not enter the solid waste stream, the
survivability of pathogens is a potential concern for the handler and
the user. Contact at central processing facilities is minimized by the
use of personal protective equipment, Including protective clothing,
gloves and face masks. Studies are now being conducted using magnetic
indicators on the diapers to conduct in-bag counting and thus reduce
handling of soiled diapers. No instances of illness from soiled
reusable diapers have been reported. This lack of established illness
may be due to the elevated temperatures and chlorine bleach used by
diaper services. In Europe, enzymes are being used in the wash process
to eliminate diaper bacteria. It was speculated that control of diaper
bacteria is more difficult during home laundering because of the
limitations of the equipment; however, there have been no reports of
disease from laundered diapers.
• Concern existed about landfills in close proximity to aquifers. A
recent finding of fecal collform in test wells at an improperly operated
landfill was noted. It was suggested that the EPA establish minimum
criteria for landfills allowed to accept disposable diaper waste.
• The occurrence and survivability of pathogens in solid waste and their
potential to cause disease in recycling, composting, and incineration
operations should be considered. Hand-sorting in these operations
requires proper ventilation and personal protective equipment such as
protective clothing, gloves and face masks. Recycling and composting
require Increased handling during their operation, while mass burn
Incineration needs little or no additional handling.
Other discussion about considerations for future reports on human
infectious disease associated with municipal solid waste included:
• Literature searches should include studies conducted in foreign
countries. One participant noted that 40% of sanitation workers In
India have lung disease.
• Future studies on waste worker health and safety need to Include the
threat of infectious disease from collecting, transporting and
-------
processing solid waste. The American Federation of State and County
Workers is a potential source for acquiring data on worker health. One
participant noted that only 25% of sanitation workers are trained in
handling infectious waste.
C. Summary of Research Needs
Human exposure considerations as they relate to the diaper industry must be
further examined. These studies will result in better understanding of the
human exposure aspects of handling and processing soiled diapers, thereby
addressing concern for these issues and providing ways to control such
exposure. Examples of creditable information that should be obtained and
distributed are as follows:
• A study of occupational infection risk to waste workers and the source
of that risk using serologic markers for hepatitis B and other
appropriate pathogens is needed. This study should identify risks due
to activities associated with collection, handling and processing of
waste materials for pollution prevention purposes. The study should
include the "total" handling system of various solid waste disposal
methods from both a health and safety standpoint.
• A study of the captured aerosols found in the void spaces of closed
receptacles (ie. plastic trash bags) containing soiled diapers and their
impact on humans during handling and collection of these containers by
reusable diaper services is needed. Human exposure to these aerosols
during the laundering of reusable diapers should be evaluated. Exposure
assessments during collection of disposable diapers and their handling
during recycling or composting are needed.
• An epidemiological study to determine any health risk associated with
recycling or composting practices of solid waste should be conducted.
Additional public health and safety research not related directly to human
exposure should:
• Examine the survivability of pathogens in the reusable diaper wash
process.
« Evaluate different biocides used for sanitizing reusable diapers.
-------
• Define quantitatively, the sources of microorganisms which enter the
waste stream, including human and animal wastes.
• Determine the need for biological testing of landfills to monitor human
pathogens.
• Study the macro effects of combining sewage sludge with the municipal
solid wastestream.
-------
III. RECYCLING
A. Seattle Diaper Reclamation Project (Nancy Eddy)
A 3-month pilot project to separate and recycle the components of
disposable diapers was started in June of 1990 in Seattle, Washington. This
effort was initiated to determine the technical and economic feasibility of
reclaiming disposable diapers. The project is a cooperative effort between
Procter & Gamble, a disposable diaper manufacturer; the Seattle Solid Waste
Utility; a local diaper service for pickup and delivery; and Rabanco, a solid
waste recycling firm.
The batch process begins with bags of soiled disposable diapers conveyed to
a hydrapulper where they are sanitized with sodium hypochlorite. The plastic
and pulp components are then separated. After the waste is removed and the
gel separated, the water is sent to a series of tanks and recycled. Fibers
are screened, rinsed and eventually bailed. Co-mingled plastics are recovered
from the hydrapulper. A diagram of the Rabanco Diaper Reclaim process is
shown in Figure 1.
The pulp's value is estimated at $400-$450/ton. The sale of the co-
mingled plastic at $0.02/lb would cover the cost of transporting it to the
market. Although reclaimed absorbent gelling material is not currently very
marketable, It 1s hoped that the gelling material can be used as an
agricultural additive to improve moisture retention.
The projected activities for the Seattle project have been identified.
They Include determining the potential market for reclaimed pulp, plastic and
gel materials. The Seattle Solid Waste Utility will complete an economic
evaluation which will be verified by an independent consulting firm. If the
process is deemed economically feasible, the project will be turned over to
Rabanco for continuous processing of disposable diapers.
8
-------
FIGURE 1. Rabanco Diaper Reclaim Process
-------
B. San Diego Recycling Project (Gerry Sheehan)
Weyerhaeuser tried to design a recycling process that was economically
feasible, not sensitive to market fluctuations, not capital intensive, and did
not require a major change of current consumer habits. The five companies
involved in the project were Weyerhaeuser, a disposable diaper manufacturer;
Babyland, a diaper service; Cirrus Corporation, a recycling equipment
supplier; Fiber Resources, a pulp processor; and Western Gold Thermoplastics,
a plastic processor.
The process is shown in the flow chart shown in Figure 2. The sanitizing
and separation processes are carried out in a standard commercial washer. The
heat of the wash water is sufficient to separate the plastic from the pulp.
The only capital investments were the pumps, screens and washer.
The project did reveal some drawbacks in reclaiming disposable diapers.
The recovered pulp was contaminated with absorbent gel material. The process
resulted in high water usage. The project used only diapers supplied through
a diaper service and did not involve diapers sold through the retail market.
Delivery and pickup of diapers are a significant cost. The small scale of the
project was also a problem since large quantities of pulp could not be readily
produced. This caused the pulp to mildew while it awaited shipment for
further processing. An over-supply of virgin pulp also made pulp processors
reluctant to purchase reclaimed pulp.
Weyerhaeuser has identified important issues for future efforts. They
include proving that their reclaimed pulp's purity is not impaired because of
gel contamination. The pulp will be tested for composting. They are
exploring low-cost methods for extracting gel. Ways of including disposable
diapers from the retail trade in the collection program need to be
investigated.
10
-------
FIGURE 2. Process Flow Chart for San Diego Recycling Project
8ABYLAND SELLS THE DIAPERS TO THE
CONSUMER AND DELIVERS THE PRODUCT
TO THE HOME.
THE FOLLOWING WEEK, BABYLANO PICKS
UP THE USED DIAPERS AND DELIVERS
NEW ONES.
AT THE BABYLAND FACIUTY. THE SOILED
DIAPERS ARE SHREDDED AND PUT IN A
STANDARD COMMERCIAL WASHING MACHINE.
AFTER WASHING. THE PULP IS FLUSHED
FROM THE WASHER INTO A HOLDING BIN.
THE PULP IS PUMPED AS A SLURRY FROM
ONE END OF THE BIN AND EMPTIED BACK
INTO THE OTHER END.
THE RECYCLED PLASTIC
IS MADE INTO LOW GRADE
MIXED PLASTIC PRODUCTS
SUCH AS NURSERY FLATS.
BALLPOINT PEN CARTRIDGES
AND TAPE CASSETTES.
DURING THIS CIRCULATION. THE PULP
IS RINSED WITH NORMAL RINSE WATER
FROM THE LAUNDRY'S OPERATION.
AFTER ABOUT FIVE RINSES. THE
CLEANED PULP IS PUMPED INTO A
STAINLESS STEEL BIN WHERE IT IS
DRAINED AND STORED FOR PICK-UP
BY FIBER RESOURCES.
THE RECYCLED PULP IS SOLO TO A PULP
MILL IN LOS ANGELES WHERE IT IS
MADE INTO CORRUGATED AND KRAFT
PAPER AS WELL AS OTHER NON-FOOD
PACKAGING.
11
-------
C. Discussion Comments
Discussions pointed out a number of issues related to difficulties
associated with using recycled materials. These issues are:
• The presence of residual gelling material in pulp can cause flaws in the
paper produced.
• Co-mingling of polyethylene and polypropylene reduces the value and
marketability for plastic reclaimed from disposable diapers.
• Pulp and plastic cannot be recycled repeatedly. Each recycling of pulp
and paper has a deteriorating effect on the quality of the material.
• Because of current negative public perception, reclaimed pulp is not
being used again for many products including disposable diapers.
• The presence of biodegradable plastic can hamper the market value of
reclaimed, co-mingled plastic. Agents added to biodegradable plastics,
e.g. cornstarch, also cause the plastic to be weaker.
• Distance from a pulp buyer would significantly affect economic
viability.
• Collection may not be economical especially in more rural areas.
Other issues related to recycling which were discussed included:
• Care has to be taken to insure that recycled materials do not contain
pathogens.
• The greatest cost for the Seattle project was for separate collection of
diapers.
• Manufacturers may risk loss of market share if their product requires a
change in consumer habits.
• Recycling projects have to prove economic feasibility before private
industry will make any kind of national or large-scale effort to recycle
diapers or any other product.
• Government efforts could enhance markets for recycled materials if
current procurement practices/regulations are changed to increase the
use of recycled materials. This would improve the economic feasibility
12
-------
of recycling disposable diapers.
• Disposable diaper manufacturers are looking at other possible changes to
make their product more amenable to alternative disposal options.
• A new generation of bioreacting landfills may reduce the need for
recycling.
• Not all of the material reclaimed from recycling programs and sent to
markets find their way into new and useful products. A portion of the
recycled material is rejected and discarded.
D. Summary of Research Needs
Research related to improving the quality of recycled diaper material
should:
• Determine the impact of contamination by gelling material on pulp
quality.
• Explore low-cost methods for extracting gelling material.
• Find methods to efficiently separate different types of plastics.
• Develop catalysts which enhance the properties of co-mingled plastics.
• Study the feasibility of reducing the diversity of plastic for diaper
liners, bags, adhesive strips, and elastics.
• Evaluate the impact of different collection and separation methods on
the cost of recycling and consumer acceptance.
• Conduct material balances to determine how much reclaimed pulp and paper
is actually returned to the market and not discarded as process waste.
• Determine the energy requirement for reclamation.
• Collaborative efforts among the U.S. EPA, the Department of Commerce,
the Food and Drug Administration, and the General Services
Administration should examine which government actions can selectively
"promote" use of reclaimed materials.
13
-------
IV. COMPOSTING
A. St. Cloud, Minnesota Diaper Compost Project (Nancy Healy)
The project at St. Cloud, Minnesota was initiated to demonstrate the
viability of composting disposable diapers. The project, which examined the
quality of the compost produced from disposable diapers, was conducted from
October 9, 1989 to December 21, 1989 at an existing St. Cloud composting
facility. The participants were Procter & Gamble Company, a manufacturer of
disposable diapers; Recomp, Inc., a vendor of MSW handling equipment; and
Supercycle, a recycling company.
In order to magnify the effects of disposable diapers, the percentage of
disposable diapers entering the composter was increased from approximately 2%
to 7.6% of the municipal solid waste feed. Diapers were picked up curbside in
St. Paul, Minnesota and driven 90 miles to the St. Cloud facility. The waste
was sorted and digested for three days in a three-chamber, aerobic, rotary
drum composter. The process did not involve any shredding or hammer milling.
Material over IV1 in diameter was screened out before being sent outside for
curing. Once the compost was cured, analytical data were obtained and
agricultural studies were begun.
At the time of this workshop, the study was being finalized. A final
report is expected in the fall of 1990. The compost produced did not appear
to differ from normal compost produced at the St. Cloud facility. Although
the plastic backsheets were not compostable, they were easily removed from the
process by the U" screens.
B. Sumpter County, Florida Compost Facility (Steve Howard)
A composting facility was constructed in Sumpter County, Florida to extend
14
-------
the life of the county's current landfill. The facility was designed and is
operated by Amerecycle. Since Sumpter County is mostly rural, curbside
recycling was not considered. All municipal solid waste is delivered to one
processing facility. The municipal solid waste has to pass through various
pre-processing steps before being composted. These include segregation of
household hazardous waste, shredding, magnetic separation, metal detection,
hand-sorting, moisture addition, and additional shredding. The waste exits
with a particle size ranging from one to three inches and is moved to open-
air windrows. Aeration and inoculation with microorganisms are used to
promote composting. To date, the facility has not been involved in a
comprehensive diaper study. Nevertheless, no operational problems have been
encountered from disposable diapers routinely processed at the facility.
C. Discussion Comments
Discussions specific to composting included:
• The practice of using hand-sorting stations requires prudent safety and
health considerations such as using protective clothing, gloves and face
masks to minimize contact with infectious agents present in municipal
solid waste.
• Composting of municipal solid waste may be affected if the proposed
regulation to allow low-level radioactive waste into the MSW is enacted.
• The Sumpter County facility is willing and available to participate in
research projects involving composting.
• Hazardous/illegal wastes especially from larger metropolitan areas could
be a problem in composting.
Other discussions which were more general in nature included:
• Attention should be given to the order of priorities for
handling/managing wastes. Source reduction first; then recycling,
reuse, and composting; then waste to energy; and finally, landfill ing as
a last resort.
15
-------
• When studying waste options, local geographic and demographic
considerations should be taken into account (i.e., rural-vs-urban
waste).
D. Summary of Research Needs
Further research in composting should do the following:
• Conduct a systems study comparing composting to landfill ing.
• Compare sewage sludge composting vs. MSW composting.
• Perform pilot studies on the separation of diaper materials.
• Examine how trace impurities (like gel material) affect the quality of
compost material.
• Determine the economic viability of composting.
Other research not directly related to composting should:
• Compare aerobic-vs-anaerobic degradation in a controlled landfill with
an outlet provided to collect methane.
• Conduct feasibility studies on the development and use of a flushable
diaper.
16
-------
V. PRODUCT LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS
A. General Overview of Life Cycle Analysis (Jere Sellers)
A life cycle is sometimes referred to as a resource and environmental
profile analysis (REPA). It provides one piece of a decision-making process.
The first true life cycle study was done for Coca Cola in 1969. Coca Cola
wanted to compare and evaluate different packaging options in order to predict
a change in its emphasis from bottles to cans or visa versa. Since then, a
fast growing trend to do life cycle studies has developed. Franklin
Associates is currently doing a life cycle analysis on various diaper products
for the American Paper Institute. This report is being finalized and may be
available in August 1990. Data Resources, Inc. is performing a life cycle
analysis for the reusable diaper industry. This report will be available in
Mid-October 1990.
When doing a life cycle study to examine environmental aspects for any
product there are multi-media factors such as energy use, natural resource
use, air quality, water quality, and land quality that must be considered.
Comparison of products within a life cycle analysis must be fair and unbiased.
B. Arthur D. Little Report (Anthony Montrone)
Arthur D. Little's life cycle analysis on diapers was used to study
disposable versus reusable diapers. It compared health, environmental and
economical aspects of both diaper types. Data representing real world
conditions were used whenever possible. For instance, A.D. Little surveyed
some of its employees (about 1,600 people) on their diapering practices. A.D.
Little made several assumptions, such as their decision to ignore the impact
of harvesting trees or growing cotton. Sensitivity studies showed that the
impact of such factors as the energy used by wastewater treatment plants could
be ignored without affecting the final results. The overall environmental
17
-------
conclusion was that both diapering systems have negative impacts. Disposable
diaper manufacture and use generates more municipal solid waste as compared to
reusable diapers. Reusable diapers result in more energy and water usage and
higher levels of total air and water pollution.w
C. Discussion Comments
Discussion centered on questions of how to conduct life cycle analysis.
Specific points or assumptions that were used in the analysis, such as methods
for determining weighted averages or ratios used, were also discussed. Some
assumptions used in the A. D. Little report were questioned such as the
decision to assume 1.9 cloth diapers per change and the ratio of 90% of cloth
diapers are laundered at home while 10% are provided by diaper services.
Another issue raised during this discussion addressed the impacts that
would occur on the solid waste treatment path and wastewater treatment path in
the event of a substantial shift from public use of disposable diapers to
cloth diapers requiring laundering.
D. Summary of Research Needs
Research needs related to life cycle analysis centered on the need to
provide guidance on approaches to conducting these analyses and their use.
Further life cycle studies should do the following:
• Identify which variables cause significant impact on final results for
all diaper-related life cycle analyses.
• Determine where diaper-related life cycle analysis should begin and end.
• Use life cycle analysis to find target areas that should be changed to
reduce the environmental impacts of both single-use and reusable
diapers.
18
-------
VI. CONCLUSION
The workshop focused on four important issues related to the diaper
industry: public health and safety, recycling, composting and product life
cycle analysis techniques. It appeared that a majority of the participants
felt that the health and safety issues related to diapers currently receive
more public scrutiny than is warranted. It was concluded that there is
probably no significant public health and safety problems related specifically
to diaper handling, recycling or disposal in properly operated and constructed
landfills. However, because diaper disposal is a highly visible issue to the
public, more definitive health and safety studies should be conducted on the
handling and processing of diapers. This would enable public health officials
to clearly define any health and safety issues related to diaper handling and
to dispel unwarranted fears about health problems associated with diapers.
The issues related to recycling and composting of diaper materials focused
on the economics required to make these technologies viable. The consensus of
the participants was that the major issues related to recycling, beyond making
it economically feasible, were the quality of the product and the acceptance
of recycled materials in the marketplace.
In the product life cycle analysis discussion, it was concluded that these
techniques are an excellent way to identify aspects of a product's life cycle
that can be targeted for further study. Such studies would focus on ways to
increase the length of product life, the reuse of product materials, or ways
of producing the product that result in less waste.
Many research needs were identified during the course of this workshop.
Further investigation into these research issues by both the private sector
19
-------
and the public sector will lead to opportunities to lessen the adverse
environmental impacts of diapers and to improve the health and safety of those
who come into contact with diapers. Initiation of research projects in this
area by EPA is contingent on the priorities of the Agency.
20
-------
VII. REFERENCES
1. Turnberg, W. L. Human Infection Risks Associated with Infectious Disease
Agents in the Wastestream: A Literature Review, Chapters I and II. In:
Washington State Infectious Waste Project - Report to the Legislature,
Attachment I, Washington State Department of Ecology, Qlympia, Washington,
December 1989.
2. Standards for the Tracking and Management of Medical Waste; Interim Final
Rule and Request for Comments. Federal Register, March 24, 1989;
54(56):12326-12395.
3. Pahren H. Microorganisms in Municipal Solid Waste and Public Health
Implications, CRC Critical Review in Environmental Control, Vol. 17, Issue
3, pp. 187-228, 1987.
4. Arthur D. Little, Inc. Disposable Versus Reusable Diapers: Health,
Environmental and Economic Comparisons, Report to Procter and Gamble,
Reference 64190, March 16, 1990, Sec. I, pp. 1-11.
21
-------
APPENDIX A
DIAPER INDUSTRY WORKSHOP ATTENDEES
July 31, 1990
Joe Visalli
NY State Energy, Resource, and
Development Authority
2 Rockefeller Plaza
Albany, NY 12223
(518) 465-6251
Ralph Bernstein
Solid Waste Management Dept.
Montgomery County Building
Dayton, OH 45422
(513) 225-6145
Riley Kinman
University of Cincinnati
Dept. of Civil & Env. Engineering
Location 71
Cincinnati, OH 45221
(513) 556-3694
Ray Durkee
Kimberly Clark Corp.
2100 Winchester Rd.
Neenah, WI 54956
(414) 721-5390
Beth Bower
Clean Cincinnati
3320 Mill Creek Rd.
Cincinnati, OH 45223
(513) 352-6319
Carl Lehrberger
EAC Systems
79 N. Pearl St.
Albany, NY 12207
(518) 434-1227
Robert Case
BFI
11563 Hosteller Rd.
Cincinnati, OH 45241
(513) 771-4200
Terry Tognietti
Veragon Corp.
1415 West Loop North
Houston, TX 77055
(713) 682-6848
Jack Shiffert
National Assoc. of Diaper Services
2017 Walnut St.
Philadelphia, PA 19103
(215) 569-3650
Tim Sergeant
Product Development Manager
Gerber Childrenswear
P.O. Box 3010
Greenville, SC 29602
(803) 240-2840
22
-------
Mike Hall
Economy Linens
80 Mead Street
Dayton, OH 45402
(513) 222-4625
Nancy Eddy
Procter & Gamble
Winton Hill Tech. Center
Paper Building
6100 Center Hill Road
Cincinnati, OH 45224
(513) 634-5417
Anthony Montrone
A. D. Little, Inc.
Environmental, Health, and Safety
Practice
Acorn Park
Cambridge, MA 02140-2390
(617) 864-5770
Steven C. Howard
Amerecycle
P.O. Box 338
Sumpterville, FL 33585
(904) 568-0666
Wayne Turnberg
Washington State Dept. of Ecology
4350 150th Ave. NE
Redmond, WA 98052
(206) 867-7030
Nancy Healey
Recomp
1720 South Bellaire St.
Suite 701
Denver, CO 80222
(303) 753-0945
Jere Sellers
Franklin Associates
4121 W. 83rd St., Suite 108
Prairie Village, KS 66208
(913) 649-2225
Gerry Sheehan
Weyerhaeuser
Kent Technical Center 20232
72nd Ave. South
Kent, WA 98032
(206) 924-4514
Lynda Wynn
U.S. EPA
OSW (OS-301)
401 M. Street, S,
Washington, O.C.
(202) 475-7700
W.
20460
Garry Howell
U.S. EPA
RREL (MS-466)
26 W. Martin Luther King Dr.
Cincinnati, OH 45268
(513) 569-7756
23
-------
Herb Pahren
Consulting Engineer
5995 Center Hill
Cincinnati, OH 45224
(513) 569-7871
Lynnann Hitchens
U.S. EPA
5995 Center Hill
Cincinnati, OH 45224
(513) 569-7672
Jeff Tryens
Center for Policy Alternatives
2000 Florida Ave., N.W.
Suite 400
Washington, D.C. 20009
(202) 387-6030
John Convery
U.S. EPA
RREL (MS-235)
26 W. Martin Luther King Dr.
Cincinnati, OH 45268
(513) 569-7896
Harry Freeman
U.S. EPA
RREL (MS-466)
26 W. Martin Luther King Dr.
Cincinnati, OH 45268
(513) 569-7529
Mary Ann Curran
U.S. EPA
RREL (MS-466)
26 W. Martin Luther King Dr.
Cincinnati, OH 45268
(513) 569-7837
Maggie Leshen
U.S. EPA
Region I (MC-HECAN6)
JFK Federal Building
Room 2203
Boston, MA 02203
(617) 573-9660
Marilyn Wade
U.S. EPA
Region I (MC-HECAN6)
JFK Federal Building
Room 2203
Boston, MA 02203
(617) 573-5723
Anne Robertson
U.S. EPA
RREL (MS-466)
26 W. Martin Luther King Dr.
Cincinnati, OH 45268
(513) 569-7658
Clyde Dial
SAIC
635 W. 7th St.
Suite 403
Cincinnati, OH 45203
(513) 723-2600
George Wahl
SAIC
635 W. 7th St.
Suite 403
Cincinnati, OH 45203
(513) 723-2607
James S. Bridges
U.S. EPA
RREL (MS-466)
26 W. Martin Luther King Dr.
Cincinnati, OH 45268
(513) 569-7683
-------
APPENDIX B
DIAPER INDUSTRY WORKSHOP
AGENDA
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ANDREW BREIDENBACH ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER
ROOM 120/126
CINCINNATI, OH
JULY 31, 1990
8:30 WELCOME AND OPENING REMARKS
John Convery
Deputy Director, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Harry M. Freeman
Chief, Pollution Prevention Research Branch, WMDDRD
8:45 INTRODUCTION
Purpose and Scope
Mary Ann Curran, EPA, RREL
9:15 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY
Landfill Impact (15 minutes)
Wayne Turnberg, Washington State Dept. of Ecology
General Discussion (45 minutes)
10:15 BREAK
25
-------
10:30 RECYCLING
Seattle Project (15 minutes)
Nancy Eddy, Procter and Gamble
San Diego Project (15 minutes)
Gerry Sheehan, Wyerhaeuser
General Discussion (60 minutes)
12:00 LUNCH
1:15 COMPOSTING
St. Cloud Project (15 minutes)
Nancy Healey, Recomp
Sumpter County, Florida Project (15 minutes)
Steven Howard, Amerecycle
General Discussion (60 minutes)
2:45 BREAK
3:00 PRODUCT LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS
Jere Sellers, Franklin Associates (15 minutes)
Anthony Montrone, A.D. Little (15 minutes)
General Discussion (60 minutes)
4:30 WRAP-UP/CONCLUSIONS
4:45 END
26
------- |