SW-526
STATUS OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN THE UNITED STATES
Address (SW-526) by
SHELDON MEYERS
Deputy Assistant Administrator
for Solid Waste Management Programs
Delivered to the
Second International Congress
of the
International Solid Waste Association,
Padua, Italy, June 24, 1976
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
1976
-------
It is a privilege to take part in the second international congress
of the International Solid Wastes Association, and to have this opportunity
to discuss the status of solid waste management in the United States.
Beginning with a land rich in resources followed by a long period of
general self-sufficiency, the United States has evolved into a highly
industrialized, technologically-oriented society in its 200 years of
existence as a nation. Historically, we have extracted, processed, and
consumed resources as if the supplies were endless and have discarded
the residual "wastes" into the air and water and onto the land as if the
environment's capacity for absorbing them were endless. Also, we gave
little thought to the long-term consequences of our traditional attitudes
until the beginning of this decade, when, along with most of the rest of
the world, we finally awoke to the alarming fact that continued environ-
mental short-sightedness and misuse of industrial technology could
condemn our country and, indeed, this planet, to certain disaster.
With the awakening came widespread public concern and protest about
environmental degradation which, in this decade, has produced truly
meaningful changes in our attitudes, habits, and institutions. Growing
concern about the pollution of air and water in the last decade led, at.
the dawn of this one, to a much broader environmental awareness, which
both produced, and is symbolized by, the National Environmental Policy
-------
2
Act. This unique law marked the beginning of the end of 194 years of
frontier philosophy by setting forth the remarkable notion that man
and nature must exist in productive harmony.
Since concern about pollution of air and water preceded the
awakening, it is not surprising that one of the earliest and most
tangible benefits of it was a strengthening of air, water, and ocean
pollution control at all levels of government in the United States. Con-
cern about misuse of the third environmental medium, the land—illustrated
by the indiscriminate dumping of industrial, municipal, agricultural, and
other wastes—lagged behind and is just now beginning to receive serious
public attention in our society. Ironically, the progress we are making
in air, water, and ocean pollution control efforts is one of the important
reasons why the undesirable consequences of land disposal are beginning
to be noticed. We are finding that more and more of the discards that we
once dumped freely into the air or water or ocean are now being placed on
the land in ways which too often allow them to find their way back again
into surface or ground waters, or into the air or ocean.
We are just now on the threshold of accepting the fact that the
manner in which a society treats its land and manages its solid waste is
a fundamental environmental problem, just as air and water pollution
control are, with far-reaching public health, economic, and social impli-
cations, and with an important bearing on the essential integrity of
ecological systems upon which we depend for life itself. We are begin-
ning to acknowledge that it is environmental folly to continue to dispose
-------
3
of solid waste irresponsibly, and economic folly to continue to consign
valuable resources to the trash heap while the world's supplies of natural
resources continue to dwindle.
We are on the threshold of a new era—an era in which the economic
and environmental folly that has too often characterized our handling of
solid wastes until now, must give way to an emerging economic and environ-
mental imperative for responsible solid waste management. The status of
solid waste management in the United States today, therefore, can best
be described as "in transition."
In 1971, American agriculture produced 2 1/2 billion tons of plant
and animal wastes, most of which were burned or dumped or flushed into
the water. Timber processing in 1971 produced a half billion tons of
waste; most of that was burned. Mining produced a billion tons of slag
and tailings, and most of those wastes were left piled atop the land.
Of particular concern to municipalities is the collection and dis-
posal of residential and commercial solid wastes. This is currently
carried out at a total annual cost of about $3.5 billion. The costs are
expected to increase substantially over the next five to ten years. In
1974, it cost an average of $26 to collect, process, and landfill a ton
of municipal solid waste. It is expected that this cost will rise to
$50 a ton by 1985. Per capita waste generation for 1973 was estimated at
3.5 pounds per day, compared with 3.3 pounds in 1971. Of these wastes,
packaging accounts for 35 percent of the tonnage. Between 1958 and 1976,
consumption of packaging, 90 percent of which is disposed of, will have
-------
4
increased an estimated 63 percent. Projections to 1985 indicate that
wastes disposed of will amount to some 30 million tons above the 1973
figure of 135 million—even if the tonnages of waste recovered for
recycling or use as fuel are increased fourfold over 1975 levels.
In total, our local governments have to cope with some 135 million
tons of municipal solid wastes a year, or more than 1,200 pounds per
person per year of paper, glass, metals, plastics, food wastes, and other
discards from our homes and businesses.
And the load is growing. It has almost doubled in the past 20 years,
and we estimate that it will reach 165 million tons a year by 1985.
Most of this municipal waste ends up on the land. There are some
18,500 known land disposal sites in the United States. Some masquerade
as sanitary landfills, but fewer than 6,000 of them meet State regula-
tions. And there are unknown numbers of open dumps.
Moreover, recent investigation gives us good reason to question
whether the sanitary landfill which does comply with current standards
of good practice is really good enough. We are now intensifying study
to determine whether we are adequately protecting our qroundwater
supplies from potential leachate damage. In one important sense,
we are just beginning to explore the frontier of what is meant by the
term "adequate" land disposal of municipal, hazardous, and all other
wastes.
Almost half of our cities estimate that they will run out of known
and available municipal waste disposal sites within a few years. Our 48
-------
5
largest cities now spend nearly half of their environmental budgets on
solid waste collection and disposal.
In addition to the mounting waste loads, other important factors
figure in this extremely difficult problem. Citizens have put up
increasing resistance to having disposal sites established near their
neighborhoods, which is understandable, since many sites that have been
called sanitary landfills are really little more than open dumps. The
general scarcity and rising costs of undeveloped tracts of land near cities
and the requirements for environmentally sound site selection that states
are now beginning to impose are other constraints that must be considered.
Moreover, there is little incentive to curb municipal waste growth.
The various costs of disposal are borne by taxpayers and are not included
in the costs of the products that make up the waste stream. Those who
produce and those who consume products, therefore, do not receive the
cost signals that would serve as incentives to curtail unnecessary con-
tributions to the waste stream.
Neither are we properly handling the 260 million dry tons of solid
waste generated each year by industry in the United States. These are
of particular concern to the States and to the Federal Government.
Unlike residential and commercial solid wastes, industrial residuals are
generally disposed of by the waste generators themselves rather than by
municipalities. The level of interest in industrial wastes has not been
high historically, but has risen sharply in this decade. Studies con-
ducted in the last three years indicate that hazardous wastes, which are
-------
6
generated mainly by industry and which require special procedures in
handling, storage, transport, processing, and disposal, have health and
environmental impacts far greater than our past or prevailing practices
would suggest. It is estimated that from 10 to 15 percent of the approxi-
mately 260 million dry tons of waste that industry generates each year
contains hazardous substances, such as toxic metals and organic solvents,
in sufficient concentration to be potentially hazardous to public health
if disposed of improperly. At present, only about 4 percent of hazardous
waste is treated before disposal on the land; another 4 percent is recyclei
The expected future trend in hazardous waste generation is of even
greater concern: studies point to a 56-percent increase during the next
decade. A major factor is the progressive implementation of air and water
pollution control laws, ocean dumping bans, and cancellation of certain
pesticides. The significance of this factor is illustrated by EPA
estimates of the combined total waste and the pollution control resi-
dual fraction for four major industries (inorganic chemicals, paper,
steel, and nonferrous smelting/refining) in 1971, 1977, and 1983. The
total waste will increase by 70 percent in 1977, and by 100 percent in
1983. Pollution control residuals account for about 75 percent of the
total waste in these industries. While not all industries will have this
degree of waste growth, the trend is unmistakable.
Added to these waste problems are some seven million tons of sludge
generated by our municipal sewage treatment olants each year. And that
amount is growing, too, as more and more communities are building new
wastewater treatment facilities.
-------
7
In sum, we estimate that about 90 percent of municipal and industrial
solid wastes are disposed of on the land in environmentally questionable
ways. The results are potential public health problems; groundwater
contamination by leachate; surface water pollution by runoff; air pollu-
tion from open burning, evaporation, sublimation, and wind erosion; fires
and explosions at dumps; and needless risk to ecological systems.
Many land disposal sites are leaching heavy metals, biological con-
taminants, and other pollutants into the groundwater, on which we are
becoming increasingly dependent for drinking water. EPA studies show
that thousands of acres of landfills containing municipal and industrial
solid wastes are major potential sources of groundwater contamination,
and that industrial storage and disposal lagoons, pits, and basins are
leaking millions of gallons of potentially hazardous substances into the
groundwater each year.
Our concerns are compounded by the fact that subsurface migration of
pollutants is generally an extremely slow process. Thus, we may not yet
know the long-term public health, economic, and ecological consequences
of the huge quantities of municipal and industrial solid wastes we have
dumped upon the land in past decades.
Ironically, in spite of greatly increased environmental concern, we
are currently recycling a lower percentage of our resources than ever
before in history. The United States annually consumes over 200 million
tons of major metals, paper, glass, rubber, and textiles. It has been
estimated that about three-fourths of the total comes from virgin
-------
8
resources; the remaining quarter is obtained from resource recovery
operations. Virtually all of the recovered materials are derived from
discards of industrial processing and manufacturing activities rather
than from post-consumer waste from the municipal solid waste stream.
The mixed municipal wastes from our larger urban areas now pose an
environmental problem, but they could be made to generate 830 trillion
BTU's of energy—the equivalent of 400 thousand barrels of oil per day,
which is a third of the initial output of the trans-Alaskan pipeline.
Seven percent of our iron, 8 percent of the aluminum, 5 percent of the
copper, 3 percent of the lead, 19 percent of the tin, and 14 percent of
the paper consumed each year could be supplied from what is now waste.
And these are simply the obvious potentials, based on the recovery of
mixed residential and commercial wastes. Recovery of materials or energy
values from industrial sludges that now go to disposal, from crop and
animal wastes, and from timber residues could easily triple the potential.
Studies indicate that the failure to control the amounts of waste
produced in the first place and to recover resources that have become
wastes have far-reaching environmental consequences. The benefits of
curtailing the production of wastes in the first place are perhaps as
obvious as they are far-reaching. However, even the recovery of resources
that have become wastes produces benefits much more consequential than
most people realize. When two production systems are compared—one using
virgin materials and the other, secondary materials--the system using
secondary material causes less air and water pollution, generates less
-------
9
solid waste, and consumes less energy.
EPA's role in dealing with solid waste management derives from the
Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1965. This Act authorized the creation
of a modest program of technical assistance to States, local governments,
and interstate agencies for the planning and development of solid waste
management programs, and to promote national research programs to find
better methods of controlling, processing, recovering, and recycling
wastes and disposing of residues. In the early years of implementation
of the Act, major emphasis was placed on improving collection and disposal
of the municipal solid waste stream.
In 1970, this Act was amended by the Resource Recovery Act, which
stressed the need to advance resource recovery in solid waste manage-
ment and directed that studies be made, with requirements for reporting
back to Congress, to determine the best means for recovering materials
and energy from solid waste and reducing waste at its sources, and to
recommend public policies, including economic incentives, that would
encourage the reclamation and recycling of solid wastes. It required,
also, a comprehensive report on the hazardous waste problem in the
United States and recommendations for action.
The three interrelated issues which are receiving renewed atten-
tion today are: first, how to curtail the adverse effects on the
environment and public health of the improper disposal of wastes on the
land; second, how to bring about as quickly as possible the recovery of
energy and materials from wastes, which requires that we overcome
-------
10
deeply-rooted institutional barriers which, despite strong public
interest, continue to inhibit the recovery of materials and energy;
third, the issue of waste reduction—that it to say, the question of how
to reduce unnecessary materials consumption in the first place, and how
to avoid materials and products which may cause irreparable harm to the
environment.
These problems are not likely to be susceptible to solution within
the framework of existing environmental legislation. Effective solid waste
management requires a clear emphasis on the interrelationship between
resource use and pollution control problems, as well as a clear recognition
of the fact that the land is one of the three environmental media susceptible
to overburdens of pollution and capable of transferring pollution, in
turn, to the other media--air and water.
There seems to be little question that the first issue, land dis-
posal, calls for a regulatory approach, to bring state, local, and
federal enforcement efforts to bear on industrial and other sources of
harmful residuals. Disagreements on approaches exist among the public,
environmentalists, industry, and government, and can be expected; but
the need for controlling the random disposition of wastes on the land
is not seriously questioned and is just as real as the need to keep them
out of the water and out of the air.
A principal thrust of EPA's solid waste management strategy has
been to assist States in preparing to assume the primary regulatory role
in land disposal and to become the primary catalyst and facilitating
-------
11
agent to bring about increased resource recovery.
The second issue—the recovery of materials and energy from the
waste stream--has great popular appeal.
Materials recovery is achieved by either mechanical or separate
collection approaches. Separate collection systems potentially have
much wider application than mechanical systems, because they do not
require intensive capital investment, are not dependent on economy of
scale, and generally allow more flexibility.
To what extent separation by the householder and separate collection
can be an active and viable form of resource recovery is not known. Most
of those who are currently promoting resource recovery of municipal solid
waste strongly favor technological approaches applied after the wastes
have been homogenized and deposited at a recovery/disposal site. More-
over, those officially responsible for municipal collection and disposal
are not, in general, inclined to "experiment" with separate collection
initiatives, because of the past history of unstable markets, waning
citizen interest, and abandoned systems. This does not necessarily mean
that such approaches will not work, particularly since the citizen today
may be more positively motivated than was true in decades past. Newsprint,
which is easy to collect separately as an uncontaminated waste, is
currently the sole exception to this general attitude about separate
collection.
EPA has identified over 60 major metropolitan areas where mechanical
energy/materials recovery seems feasible. These areas account for about
-------
12
180,000 tons of solid waste a day, 66 million tons annually, or more
than half of the municipal waste stream.
About 7 percent of the energy and materials available from municipal
waste is being recovered today. Dry fuel production and steam recovery
incinerators have been demonstrated and are actually being employed in a
few cities. Energy recovery by dry or wet shredded fuel production, as
steam or electricity, and as pyrolytic gas and oil, should all become
viable, demonstrated technical in the not too distant future. Mechanical
materials recovery systems are somewhere between the demonstration and
the operational phases.
There is growing evidence that utilities and private fuel users are
beginning to view solid waste as an attractive fuel. High materials
and energy prices, along with demands for environmentally sound disposal
practices, will no doubt require municipalities to place more attention on
resource recovery as it becomes more economically competitive with dis-
posal .
In 1971, only two cities had source separation programs. There were
no State resource recovery programs. Only two federally-funded projects
were under way to demonstrate resource recovery technology. No city was
committed to a large-scale resource recovery facility. Private industry
was not marketing large-scale resource recovery systems and had barely
begun to design or test such systems.
Today, a number of federal and private industry demonstration
projects are under way. More than 30 major companies are promoting
-------
13
resource recovery systems. Nineteen large-scale resource recovery opera-
tions are planned by local governments working with private industry.
Over 40 other cities are considering similar projects. Some 135 cities
are conducting source separation programs, and 12 States are planning or
regulating resource recovery programs.
Moreover, bills introduced in the past few years leave little doubt
that Congress is seeking ways of increasing the incentives for munici-
palities and industries to engage in widespread post-consumer resource
recovery operations.
Nevertheless, resource recovery must grow in a national soil and
climate which, historically, has favored in countless ways the use of
virgin materials and the random production and disposal of wastes.
Attention is just beginning to be focused on the inhibitions to resource
recovery which are inherent in our tax structure, depletion allowances,
transportation rates, and national public attitudes.
The third area of emphasis--waste reduction—is one which touches
most directly at the heart of the environmental issue. The furor it
has caused has focused mostly on packaging, but this may be deceptive,
for the issue touches on a central question which has very disturbing
implications for those who hold the view that high energy/materials use
and high consumption are necessarily the hallmark of a technologically
advanced society. Behind the packaging and the returnable versus the
nonreturnable beverage container arguments lie more serious issues con-
cerning, for example, long-lived tires, more durable appliances, smaller
-------
14
cars, more renovation and less demolition, and could involve the redesign
of many thousands of products to make them require less energy, use less
material, and last longer.
Those who contend that the marketplace will automatically take care
of such questions say that the rising cost of materials, energy, and
waste management will inevitably lead to increased resource conservation,
to more efficient materials use throughout the economy. A dispassionate
appraisal of our country's historical record in the use of technology
and resources, however, does not offer assurance that market signals
will necessarily result in socially optimal uses of material and energy
resources and environmental protection. The producers of products have
never had to take into account the social and environmental costs of
land disposal associated with their operations.
When waste reduction is discussed, one is inevitably led to the
subject of packaging. Packaging activity in the United States has grown
at a very rapid rate over recent decades. Shipments of containers and
packaging were valued at $19.7 billion in 1971, an increase of 5 percent
since 1970, and an increase of 82 percent since 1960.
The growth of packaging consumption has led to increased consump-
tion of raw materials and energy, and an increased rate of generation
of solid waste. In 1971, packaging accounted for approximately 47 percent
of all paper production, 14 percent of aluminum production, 75 percent
of glass production, more than 8 percent of steel production, and
approximately 29 percent of plastic production. At that time, energy
-------
15
used for production of packaging materials represented an estimated 5
percent of total U.S. industrial energy consumption.
Post-consumer solid waste resulting from the discard of packaging
material was estimated at between 40 and 50 million tons in 1971.
Packaging was thus estimated to be betw.een 30 and 40 percent of municipal
solid waste, based on the EPA estimate of 125 million tons of municipal
solid waste in 1971.
None of the above is intended to imply that packaging per se is an
evil. The passing of the picturesque and unsanitary packaging practices
of the past is hardly an occasion for mourning, and the materials, tech-
niques, and practices of yesterday could not possibly suffice in our
society of today. Moreover, some of our current packaging practices do
curtail significantly other potential components of the municipal waste
stream. What is needed is a clearer definition of what comprises
undesirable packaging, agreement to curtail its use, and renewed efforts
to employ packaging materials, whenever feasible, which avoid excessive
energy and materials use, coupled with vastly extended and improved
resource recovery programs throughout the country.
The leading edge of the packaging controvery has to do with the
returnable versus the nonreturnable beverage container. For many years,
those who advocated use of the returnable beverage container based their
case primarily on the litter problem, and those who felt differently
countered by offering litter-control programs of one kind or another and
by pointing out that littering in general was a personal problem that
-------
16
could be overcome only through public education. But in recent years,
as the Environmental Protection Agency finished the resource recovery
reports that were called for in the 1970 Resource Recovery Act and the
energy shortage hit home, the emphasis has shifted. When energy and
materials consumption and attendant environmental damage are taken into
account, the efficacy of the nonreturnable beverage container should be
reevaluated.
Historically, throughout the economy, the environmental, public
health, and direct dollar costs of the disposal of wastes have affected
only very slightly, if at all, the extraction, manufacturing, and dis-
tribution decisions of those sectors of the economy which produce the
products which account for the size and nature of various waste streams.
While no single piece of legislation and no single agency of government
can or should be expected to control all the technical, sociological,
and economic variables which influence the size, nature, and disposition
of the waste stream, sensible and timely changes in the direction of
more intelligent resource use/disposal'decisions will occur because of
the body of knowledge and the assistance and demonstration activities
which have evolved from passage of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
(P.L. 89-272) of 1965.
Since even a doubling of current projections of resource recovery
plant installations by 1985 would still leave over 70 percent of the
municipal solid waste stream unrecovered—or 145 million tons destined
for disposal—it is clear that waste reduction alternatives should be
-------
17
given serious consideration. Local public agencies, whose solid waste
management expenditures dwarf those of the State and federal levels, have
virtually no influence over the types and quantities of wastes produced.
We can no longer close our eyes to the fact that the producer of what
ultimately becomes waste bases his decisions on the costs that he
directly experiences, not on the costs incurred by those who must dis-
pose of the wastes.
As we learned in our efforts to control air and water pollution,
the solid waste management problem is national—indeed, international--
in scope.
Federal law has so far limited the federal role to research into
solid waste problems; to encouraging proper collection and disposal prac-
tices; to providing technical information; to providing modest federal
grants to promote the development of State solid waste management plans;
to providing modest federal grants to demonstrate new resource recovery
technology; and to studying the hazardous waste problem and suggesting
ways to cope with it.
Under our existing legislative authority, and with a budget of
$15.6 million this year, we in EPA are expanding our knowledge of the
total environmental consequences of our traditional mining, manufacturing,
marketing, and distribution practices as they relate to the use of
resources and to air, water, and land pollution. We are evaluating ways
of encouraging voluntary waste reduction in the manufacture and distri-
bution of products. We are monitoring resource recovery projects and
-------
18
providing technical assistance to ensure the development of appropriate
technology and workable institutional and financial arrangements for
maximum recovery and reuse of resources from solid waste.
We are helping to finance several projects to demonstrate new
technology in the recovery of energy and materials from waste. Federal
assumption of part of the costs reduces the risks to State and local
governments of investing in expensive and unproven technology. One
project uses shredded waste as a partial substitute for coal as fuel to
generate electricity. Another project recovers metals, color-sorted
glass, and paper fiber from municipal refuse and then incinerates the
residues along with sludge from an adjacent sewage treatment plant.
Another will produce a marketable oil-like fuel and recover metals and
glass from solid waste. Another project will produce aggregate for
street paving and steam for heating and cooling from solid waste.
Another will extract metals and glass and then produce supplemental
boiler fuel from municipal solid waste, industrial waste, and sewage
sludge.
In addition to these "high technology" demonstration projects,
whose financial soundness is dependent in part on the production of
energy, we are also supporting source separation demonstration projects
to spur the recovery of materials from the municipal waste stream. With
the help of EPA grants, two communities are now determining to what
extent the public will cooperate and separate municipal solid wastes at
the source—in their homes. If these tests are successful--and prelimi-
nary reports indicate they will be—this could represent a significant
-------
19
step forward. It will show that mechanical and "high technology" separa-
tion of mixed solid wastes, which requires a large capital investment, and
large amounts of energy, is not the only useful approach. Separation at
the source of paper, corrugated, glass, aluminum and steel cans, and
food wastes could greatly improve the economics of materials recovery in
metropolitan areas. In addition, for thousands of small communities,
source separation may be the only feasible way to recover resources and
lower disposal costs.
EPA is also continuing to support research and to develop new knowlege
on the public health and environmental effects of land disposal. We
are working with local and State governments to improve solid waste
collection practices. We are providing technical assistance and a flow
of information to local and State governments to speed the application of
sound waste management practices.
We are encouraging State solid waste management agencies to take
a stronger role in protecting the land and a more responsible role in
managing solid wastes. I am pleased to report that the number of people
employed by State government solid waste management programs has risen
from ten to over 650 in the last ten years.
And there are other encouraging signs of new awareness of the
seriousness of the solid waste problem in our State governments:
Forty-five States now require a permit or license for land disposal;
20 States have special regulations for at least some hazardous wastes; 9
States have grant or loan programs for resource recovery; and 15 States
-------
20
hope to have operating energy recovery systems by 1980.
We are also continuing to call attention to existing federal policies
which directly or indirectly favor the use of virgin materials. We are
challenging freight rates that discriminate against the transport of
secondary materials. We are pressing for modifications in federal pro-
curement regulations to specify the use of recycled materials whenever
and wherever feasible.
We are continuing to improve our understanding of the scope of the
hazardous waste problem. We are furthering our knowledge of the quantity,
composition, and sources of these wastes. We are identifying and
assessing safe treatment and disposal methods; developing criteria for
proper processing and disposal; and investigating the health and environ-
mental effects of improper hazardous waste management. And we are pro-
viding much needed information on the state of the art of hazardous waste
management technology to industry and to State and local governments.
Rising fuel costs, rising costs of land for disposal, and indiscri-
minate use of energy and materials inherent in our prevailing solid waste
management systems, and, most important of all, rising public awareness
of these interrelated issues have led to a new level of interest in both
the legislative and executive branches of our government.
In both the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United
States Congress, the committees primarily responsible for solid waste
management have drafted major new bills intended to help our society cope
with solid waste management as it is increasingly perceived today--a
-------
21
problem that is concerned with the interrelated issues of resource
use and the disposal of waste of all varieties on the land. Within the
Executive Branch of government, the same issues are being considered.
At some point in the future, as all the various segments of our society
who have opinions on one or another aspect of the problem let their views
be known, the nature of the legislative base will emerge.
Let me conclude by summarizing briefly some of the major legislative
issues that are currently being debated in the U.S.
Under consideration are proposals:
- To ensure the regulation of all land disposal, including hazardous
wastes and municipal wastes, by State governments operating under federal
guidelines.
- To make federal funds available to state and local governments to
plan and implement resource and energy recovery systems.
- To encourage, through financial and other means, regional solid
waste management planning.
- To enhance EPA's capacity to provide solid waste management techni-
cal assistance and information to state and local government.
- To broaden the information base on energy and materials recovery,
on waste reduction options, and on the environmental and health effects
of improper disposal practices.
- To internalize the cost of solid waste management in various ways,
including the possible use of disposal charges and tax credits.
- To study and report on ways of reducing solid waste generation.
-------
22
- To investigate management practices and costs affecting solid wastes
While I certainly cannot predict when or precisely through which
legislative means the United States will move to focus a level of
attention on the land commensurate with that it has focused on air and
water, I am convinced that we are now moving in the proper direction.
It is a direction that Russell Train, Administrator of EPA, pointed to
when he said recently, "We must act now to save the land from becoming
the sink of last resort for pollutants that we are finally and firmly
insisting shall no longer be placed in the air and the water."
MO 1313R
SW-526
------- |