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

-------