MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE IN
THE UNITED STATES
-------
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Solid Waste (5306P)
EPA530-R-06-011
October 2006
www.epa.gov
-------
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE IN
THE UNITED STATES:
2005 FACTS AND FIGURES
Table of Contents
Chapter Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
OVERVIEW 1
WHAT IS INCLUDED IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE? 4
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE IN PERSPECTIVE 5
Trends Over Time 5
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE IN 2005 5
Materials in MSW 5
Products in MSW 7
RESIDENTIAL AND COMERCIAL SOURCES OF MSW 11
MANAGEMENT OF MSW 11
Overview 11
Source Reduction 12
Recycling 13
Combustion with Energy Recovery 13
Disposal 13
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 15
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY 16
INTRODUCTION 16
BACKGROUND 16
The Solid Waste Management Hierarchy 16
Overview of the Methodology 17
HOW THIS REPORT CAN BE USED 19
CHARACTERIZATION OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE: IN PERSPECTIVE 22
in
-------
The Two Methodologies for Characterizing MSW: Site-Specific Versus Materials
Flow 22
Municipal Solid Waste Defined in Greater Detail 23
Other Subtitle D Wastes 25
Materials and Products Not Included in These Estimates 27
OVERVIEW OF THIS REPORT 27
CHAPTER 1 - REFERENCES 28
CHAPTER 2 - CHARACTERIZATION OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE BY
WEIGHT 31
INTRODUCTION 31
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE: CHARACTERIZED BY MATERIAL TYPE 32
Paper and Paperboard 36
Glass 40
Aluminum 46
Other Nonferrous Metals 47
Plastics 47
Other Materials 52
Wood 54
Food Scraps 55
Yard Trimmings 56
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes 57
Summary of Materials in Municipal Solid Waste 58
PRODUCTS IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE 62
Durable Goods 63
Nondurable Goods 73
Containers and Packaging 81
Summary of Products in Municipal Solid Waste 91
SUMMARY 95
MSW Generation 95
MSW Recovery 96
Long Term Trends 97
IV
-------
CHAPTER 2-REFERENCES 99
CHAPTER 3 - MANAGEMENT OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE 120
INTRODUCTION 120
SOURCE REDUCTION 121
Source Reduction Through Redesign 123
Modifying Practices to Reduce Materials Use 124
Reuse of Products and Packages 125
Management of Organic Materials 127
Measuring Source Reduction 127
RECOVERY FOR RECYCLING (INCLUDING COMPOSTING) 128
Recyclables Collection 128
Recyclables Processing 133
COMBUSTION WITH ENERGY RECOVERY 137
RESIDUES FROM WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES 139
LANDFILLS 140
SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL AND CURRENT MSW MANAGEMENT 141
CHAPTER 3 - REFERENCES 144
APPENDIX A - MATERIALS FLOW METHODOLOGY 149
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION 149
CONVERTING SCRAP 149
ADJUSTMENTS FOR IMPORTS/EXPORTS 149
DIVERSION 150
ADJUSTMENTS FOR PRODUCT LIFETIME 150
RECOVERY 150
DISCARDS 151
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE GENERATION RECOVERY, AND DISCARDS 151
-------
List of Tables
Table Page
ES-1 Generation, Materials Recovery, Composting, Combustion with Energy
Recovery, and Discards of Municipal Solid Waste, 1960 - 2005 (In Millions
of Tons) 2
ES-2 Generation, Materials Recovery, Composting, Combustion with Energy
Recovery, and Discards of Municipal Solid Waste, 1960 - 2005 (In Percent
of Total Generation) 2
ES-3 Generation, Materials Recovery, Composting, Combustion with Energy
Recovery, and Discards of Municipal Solid Waste, 1960 - 2005 (In Pounds
Per Person Per Day) 3
ES-4 Generation and Recovery of Materials in MSW, 2005 7
ES-5 Generation and Recovery of Products in MSW by Material, 2005 9
ES-6 Generation, Materials Recovery, Combustion, and Discards of Municipal Solid
Waste, 1960-2005 (In Millions of Tons) 14
ES-7 Generation, Materials Recovery, Combustion, and Discards of Municipal Solid
Waste, 1960-2005 (In Percent of Total Generation) 14
Materials in the Municipal Solid Waste Stream, 1960 to 2005
1 Generated 33
2 Recovery 34
3 Discarded 35
Products in Municipal Solid Waste, 2005
4 Paper and Paperboard 37
5 Glass 41
6 Metal 44
7 Plastics 49
8 Rubber and Leather 53
VI
-------
Categories of Products in the Municipal Solid Waste Stream, 1960 to 2005
9 Generated 64
10 Recovery 65
11 Discarded 66
Products in MSWwith Detail on Durable Goods, 1960 to 2005
12 Generated 68
13 Recovery 69
14 Discarded 70
Products in MSWwith Detail on Nondurable Goods, 1960 to 2005
15 Generated 75
16 Recovery 76
17 Discarded 77
Products in MSWwith Detail on Containers and Packaging, 1960 to 2005
18 Generated (by weight) 83
19 Generated (by percent) 84
20 Recovery (by weight) 85
21 Recovery (by percent) 86
22 Discarded (by weight) 87
23 Discarded (by percent) 88
Management of Municipal Solid Waste
24 Selected Examples of Source Reduction Practices 124
25 Number and Population Served by Curbside Recyclables Collection
Programs, 2005 130
26 Materials Recovery Facilities, 2005 134
27 Municipal Waste-to-Energy Projects, 2005 139
28 Landfill Facilities, 2005 141
29 Generation, Materials Recovery, Composting, Combustion, and Discards
of Municipal Solid Waste, 1960 to 2005 143
Vll
-------
List of Figures
Figure Page
ES-1 MSW Generation Rates from 1960 to 2005 3
ES-2 MSW Recycling Rates from 1960 to 2005 4
ES-3 2005 Total MSW Generation - 246 Million Tons 6
ES-4 Products Generated in MSW - 2005 8
ES-5 Number of Landfills in the U.S. 1988-2005 14
ES-6 Management of MSW in the U.S.-2005 15
1 Municipal Solid Waste in the Universe of Subtitle D Wastes 25
1-A Definition of Terms 26
Materials Generated and Recovered in Municipal Solid Waste
2 Paper and Paperboard Products Generated in MSW, 2005 36
3 Paper and Paperboard Generation and Recovery, 1960 to 2005 38
4 Glass Products Generated in MSW, 2005 41
5 Glass Generation and Recovery, 1960 to 2005 42
6 Metal Products Generated in MSW, 2005 45
7 Metals Generation and Recovery, 1960 to 2005 45
8 Plastics Products Generated in MSW, 2005 48
9 Plastics Generation and Recovery, 1960 to 2005 52
10 Generation of Materials in MSW, 1960 to 2005 58
11 Recovery and Discards of MSW, 1960 to 2005 59
12 Materials Recovery, 2005 60
13 Materials Generated and Discarded in MSW, 2005 61
Products Generated and Recovered in Municipal Solid Waste
14 Generation of Products in MSW, 1960 to 2005 92
Vlll
-------
15 Nondurable Goods Generated and Discarded in MSW, 2005 93
16 Containers and Packaging Generated and Discarded in MSW, 2005 94
Management of Municipal Solid Waste
17 Diagram of Solid Waste Management 122
18 Population Served by Curbside Recycling, 2005 131
19 States With Bottle Deposit Rules 133
20 Estimated MRF Throughput, 2005 135
21 Mixed Waste Processing Estimated Capacity, 2005 136
22 MSW Composting Capacity, 2005 137
23 Yard Trimmings Composting Programs, 2005 138
24 Municipal Waste-to-Energy Capacity, 2005 140
25 Number of Landfills in the U.S., 2005 142
26 Municipal Solid Waste Management, 1960 to 2005 144
Materials Flow Methodology
A-l Material Flows Methodology for Estimating Generation of Products and
Materials in MSW 153
A-2 Material Flows Methodology for Estimating Discards of Products and
Materials in MSW 154
IX
-------
Executive Summary
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
IN THE UNITED STATES: 2005 FACTS AND FIGURES
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
OVERVIEW
This report describes the national municipal solid waste (MSW) stream based on data
collected for 1960 through 2005. The historical perspective is useful for establishing trends in
types of MSW generated and in the ways it is managed. In this Executive Summary, we briefly
describe the methodology used to characterize MSW in the United States and provide the latest
facts and figures on MSW generation, recycling, and disposal.
In the United States, we generated approximately 245.7 million tons of MSW in 2005—a
decrease of 1.6 million tons from 2004. Excluding composting, the amount of MSW recycled
increased to 58.4 million tons, an increase of 1.2 million tons from 2004. This is a 2 percent
increase in the tons recycled. The tons recovered for composting rose slightly to 20.6 million
tons in 2005, up from 20.5 million tons in 2004. The recovery rate for recycling (including
composting) was 32.1 percent in 2005, up from 31.4 percent in 2004.l (See Tables ES-1 and ES-
2 and Figures ES-1 and ES-2.)
MSW generation in 2005 declined to 4.54 pounds per person per day. This is a decrease
of 1.5 percent from 2004 to 2005. The recycling rate in 2005 was 1.46 pounds per person per
day. Discards sent to a landfill after recycling declined to 2.46 pounds per person per day in
2005 (Table ES-3).
1 Data shown for 2000 through 2004 have been adjusted to reflect the latest revisions and, therefore, may differ
from the same measure reported previously.
1
-------
Executive Summary
Table ES-1
GENERATION, MATERIALS RECOVERY, COMPOSTING,
COMBUSTION WITH ENERGY RECOVERY, AND DISCARDS OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE,
1960 - 2005
(in millions of tons)
Activity
Generation
Recovery for recycling
Recovery for composting*
Total materials recovery
Combustion with energy
recoveryf
Discards to landfill, other
disposal}
1960
88.1
5.6
Neg.
5.6
0.0
82.5
1970
121.1
8.0
Neg.
8.0
0.4
112.7
1980
151.6
14.5
Neg.
14.5
2.7
134.4
1990
205.2
29.0
4.2
33.2
29.7
142.3
2000
237.6
52.7
16.5
69.1
33.7
134.8
2003
240.4
55.8
19.1
74.9
33.7
131.9
2004
247.3
57.2
20.5
77.7
34.1
135.5
2005
245.7
58.4
20.6
79.0
33.4
133.3
* Composting of yard trimmings, food scraps and other MSW organic material.
Does not include backyard composting.
f Includes combustion of MS W in mass burn or refuse-derived fuel form, and combustion with energy
recovery of source separated materials in MSW (e.g., wood pallets and tire-derived fuel).
J Discards after recovery minus combustion with energy recovery. Discards include combustion without energy recovery.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Table ES-2
GENERATION, MATERIALS RECOVERY, COMPOSTING,
COMBUSTION WITH ENERGY RECOVERY, AND DISCARDS OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE,
1960 - 2005
(in percent of total generation)
Activity
Generation
Recovery for recycling
Recovery for composting*
r Total materials recovery
Combustion with energy
recoveryf
Discards to landfill, other
disposal^
1960
100.0%
6.4%
Neg.
6.4%
0.0%
93.6%
1970
100.0%
6.6%
Neg.
6.6%
0.3%
93.1%
1980
100.0%
9.6%
Neg.
9.6%
1.8%
88.6%
1990
100.0%
14.2%
2.0%
16.2%
14.5%
69.3%
2000
100.0%
22.2%
6.9%
29.1%
14.2%
56.7%
2003
100.0%
23.2%
7.9%
31.1%
14.0%
54.9%
2004
100.0%
23.1%
8.3%
31.4%
13.8%
54.8%
2005
100.0%
23.8%
8.4%
32.1%
13.6%
54.3%
* Composting of yard trimmings, food scraps and other MSW organic material.
Does not include backyard composting.
f Includes combustion of MSW in mass burn or refuse-derived fuel form, and combustion with energy
recovery of source separated materials in MSW (e.g., wood pallets and tire-derived fuel).
J Discards after recovery minus combustion with energy recovery. Discards include combustion without energy recovery.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
-------
Executive Summary
Table ES-3
GENERATION, MATERIALS RECOVERY, COMPOSTING
COMBUSTION WITH ENERGY RECOVERY, AND DISCARDS OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE,
1960 - 2005
(in pounds per person per day)
Activity
Generation
Recovery for recycling
Recovery for composting*
Total materials recovery
Combustion with energy
recoveryf
Discards to landfill, other
disposal J
Population (millions)
1960
2.68
0.17
Neg.
0.17
0.00
2.51
179.979
1970
3.25
0.22
Neg.
0.22
0.01
3.02
203.984
1980
3.66
0.35
Neg.
0.35
0.07
3.24
227.255
1990
4.50
0.64
0.09
0.73
0.65
3.12
249.907
2000
4.63
1.03
0.32
1.35
0.66
2.62
281.422
2003
4.53
1.05
0.36
1.41
0.63
2.49
290.850
2004
4.61
1.07
0.38
1.45
0.64
2.52
293.660
2005
4.54
1.08
0.38
1.46
0.62
2.46
296.410
* Composting of yard trimmings, food scraps and other MSW organic material.
Does not include backyard composting.
*f Includes combustion of MSW in mass burn or refuse-derived fuel form, and combustion with energy
recovery of source separated materials in MSW (e.g., wood pallets and tire-derived fuel).
J Discards after recovery minus combustion with energy recovery. Discards include combustion without energy recovery.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Figure ES-1: MSW Generation Rates,
300 oo T 19.60.to.20.Q5 _1000
250.00 - •
S 200.00 - •
ra 100.00--
50.00 - •
0.00
- - 8.00
- • 6.00
- • 4.00
• • 2.00
0.00
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
A Total MSW generation H Per capita generation
2000
2005
-------
Executive Summary
80.0-r
Figure ES-2: MSW Recycling Rates,
1960 to 2005
79.0
-r 50.0%
• • 40.0%
- • 30.0%
• • 20.0%
• • 10.0%
0.0%
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
A Total MSW recycling H Percent recycling
2000
2005
The state of the economy has a strong impact on consumption and waste generation.
Waste generation continued to increase through the 1990s as economic growth continued to be
strong. Between 2000 and 2005, total growth in waste generation slowed. On a per capita basis,
2005 waste generation at 4.54 pounds per person per day is only slightly higher than the 1990
rate of 4.50 pounds per person per day.
WHAT IS INCLUDED IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE?
MSW—otherwise known as trash or garbage—consists of everyday items such as
product packaging, grass clippings, furniture, clothing, bottles, food scraps, newspapers,
appliances, and batteries. Not included are materials that also may be disposed in landfills but
are not generally considered MSW, such as construction and demolition debris, municipal
wastewater treatment sludges, and non-hazardous industrial wastes.
-------
Executive Summary
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE IN PERSPECTIVE
Trends Over Time
Over the last few decades, the generation, recycling, and disposal of MSW have changed
substantially (see Tables ES-1, ES-2, and ES-3 and Figures ES-1 and ES-2). MSW generation
has continued to increase from 1960, when it was 88 million tons. The generation rate in 1960
was just 2.7 pounds per person per day; it grew to 3.7 pounds per person per day in 1980;
reached 4.5 pounds per person per day in 1990; increased to 4.6 pounds per person per day in
2000; and returned to about 4.5 pounds per person per day in 2005.
Over time, recycling rates have increased from 10 percent of MSW generated in 1980 to
16 percent in 1990, to 29 percent in 2000, and to 32 percent in 2005. Disposal of waste to a
landfill has decreased from 89 percent of the amount generated in 1980 to 54 percent of MSW in
2005.
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE IN 2005
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) uses two methods to analyze the 245.7
million tons of MSW generated in 2005. The first is by material (paper and paperboard, yard
trimmings, food scraps, plastics, metals, glass, wood, rubber, leather and textiles, and other); the
second is by several major product categories. The product-based categories are containers and
packaging; nondurable goods (e.g., newspapers); durable goods (e.g., appliances); food scraps;
and other materials.
Materials in MSW
A breakdown, by weight, of the MSW materials generated in 2005 is provided in Figure
ES-3. Paper and paperboard made up the largest component of MSW generated (34 percent), and
yard trimmings were the second-largest component (13 percent). Glass, metals, plastics, wood,
and food scraps each constituted between 5 and 12 percent of the total MSW generated. Rubber,
-------
Executive Summary
leather, and textiles combined made up about 7 percent of MSW, while other miscellaneous
wastes made up approximately 3 percent of the MSW generated in 2005.
A portion of each material category in MSW was recycled or composted in 2005. The
highest rates of recovery were achieved with yard trimmings, paper and paperboard products,
and metal products. About 62 percent (19.9 million tons) of yard trimmings was recovered for
composting in 2005. This represents nearly a five-fold increase since 1990. Fifty percent (42.0
million tons) of paper and paperboard was recovered for recycling in 2005. Recycling these
organic materials alone diverted more than 25 percent of municipal solid waste from landfills
and combustion facilities. In addition, about 6.9 million tons, or about 37 percent, of metals were
recovered for recycling. Recycling rates for all materials categories in 2005 are listed in Table
ES-4.
Figure ES-3: 2005 Total MSW Generation - 246 Million Tons
(Before Recycling)
[Paper and paperboard 34.2%|
-------
Executive Summary
Table ES-4
GENERATION AND RECOVERY OF MATERIALS IN MSW, 2005
(in millons of tons and percent of generation of each material)
Includes waste from residential, commercial, and institutional sources.
* Includes lead from lead-acid batteries.
** Includes recovery of other MSW organics for composting.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Material
Paper and paperboard
Glass
Metals
Steel
Aluminum
Other nonferrous metals*
Total metals
Plastics
Rubber and leather
Textiles
Wood
Other materials
Total Materials in Products
Other wastes
Food, other**
Yard trimmings
Miscellaneous inorganic wastes
Total Other Wastes
TOTAL MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
Weight
Generated
84.0
12.8
Weight
Recovered
42.0
2.76
Recovery As
a Percent
of Generation
50.0%
21.6%
13.8
3.21
1.74
18.7
28.9
6.70
11.1
13.9
4.57
180.7
4.93
0.69
1.26
6.88
1.65
0.96
1.70
1.31
1.17
58.4
35.8%
21.5%
72.4%
36.8%
5.7%
14.3%
15.3%
9.4%
25.6%
32.3%
29.2
32.1
3.69
65.0
245.7
0.69
19.9
Neg.
20.6
79.0
2.4%
61.9%
Neg.
31.6%
32.1%
Products in MSW
The breakdown, by weight, of product categories generated in 2005 is shown in Figure
ES-4. Containers and packaging comprised the largest portion of products generated, at 31
percent (76.7 million tons) of total MSW generation. Nondurable goods were the second-largest
fraction, at 26 percent (63.7 million tons). The third-largest category of products is durable
goods, which made up 16 percent (40.3 million tons) of total MSW generation.
-------
Executive Summary
Figure ES-4: Products Generated in MSW, 2005
(Total Weight = 246 million tons)
The generation and recovery of the product categories in MSW in 2005 are shown in
Table ES-5. This table shows that recovery of containers and packaging was the highest of the
three product categories—39.8 percent of containers and packaging generated in 2005 were
recovered for recycling. About 45 percent of all aluminum cans was recovered (36.3 percent of
all aluminum packaging, including foil), while 63.3 percent of steel packaging (mostly cans) was
recovered. Paper and paperboard containers and packaging were recovered at a rate of 58.8
percent; corrugated containers accounted for most of that amount.
Approximately 25 percent of glass containers was recovered, while about 15 percent of
wood packaging (mostly wood pallets removed from service) was recovered for recycling. More
than 9 percent of plastic containers and packaging were recovered—mostly soft drink, milk, and
water bottles.
-------
Executive Summary
Table ES-5
GENERATION AND RECOVERY OF PRODUCTS IN MSW
BY MATERIAL, 2005
(in millons of tons and percent of generation of each product)
Products
Durable Goods
Steel
Aluminum
Other non-ferrous metals*
Total metals
Glass
Plastics
Rubber and leather
Wood
Textiles
Other materials
Total durable goods
Nondurable Goods
Paper and paperboard
Plastics
Rubber and leather
Textiles
Other materials
Total nondurable goods
Containers and Packaging
Steel
Aluminum
Total metals
Glass
Paper and paperboard
Plastics
Wood
Other materials
Total containers and packaging
Other Wastes
Food, other**
Yard trimmings
Miscellaneous inorganic wastes
Total other wastes
TOTAL MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
Weight
Generated
Weight
Recovered
Recovery as
a Percent
of Generation
11.4
1.08
1.74
14.2
1.83
8.71
5.68
5.37
3.02
1.45
40.3
3.43
Neg.
1.26
4.69
Neg.
0.37
0.96
Neg.
0.28
1.17
7.47
30.1%
Neg.
72.4%
33.0%
Neg.
4.2%
16.9%
Neg.
9.3%
80.7%
18.5%
44.9
6.55
0.99
7.91
3.36
63.7
19.0
Neg.
Neg.
1.42
Neg.
20.5
42.4%
Neg.
Neg.
18.0%
Neg.
32.1%
2.37
1.90
4.27
10.9
39.0
13.7
8.56
0.24
76.7
1.50
0.69
2.19
2.76
22.9
1.28
1.31
Neg.
30.5
63.3%
36.3%
51.3%
25.3%
58.8%
9.4%
15.3%
Neg.
39.8%
29.2
32.1
3.69
65.0
245.7
0.69
19.9
Neg.
20.6
79.0
2.4%
61.9%
Neg.
31.6%
32.1%
Includes waste from residential, commercial, and institutional sources.
* Includes lead from lead-acid batteries.
** Includes recovery of other MSW organics for composting.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
-------
Executive Summary
Overall recovery of nondurable goods was at 32.1 percent in 2005. Most of this recovery
comes from paper products such as newspapers and high-grade office papers (e.g., white papers).
Newspapers constituted the largest portion of this recovery, with 88.9 percent of newspapers
generated being recovered for recycling. An estimated 62.6 percent of high-grade office papers
and 38.5 percent of magazines was recovered in 2005. Newspaper, high-grade office paper, and
magazine recovery increased in percentage between 2004 and 2005.
Recovery percentage of "Other Commercial Printing" stayed about the same at 10.4
percent. The other paper products in the nondurable goods category increased slightly between
2004 and 2005, with Standard mail recovered at an estimated 35.8 percent, and directories at an
estimated 18.2 percent.
The nondurable goods category also includes clothing and other textile products—18
percent of these products were recovered for recycling or export in 2005.
Overall, durable goods were recovered at a rate of 18.5 percent in 2005. Nonferrous
metals other than aluminum had one of the highest recovery rates, at 72.4 percent, due to the
high rate of lead recovery from lead-acid batteries. Recovery of steel in all durable goods was
30.1 percent, with high rates of recovery from appliances and other miscellaneous durable goods.
One of the products with a very high recovery rate was lead-acid batteries, recovered at a
rate of 98.8 percent in 2005. Other products with particularly high recovery rates were
newspapers (88.9 percent), corrugated boxes (71.5 percent), major appliances (67.0 percent),
steel packaging (63.3 percent), and aluminum cans (44.8 percent). About 35 percent of rubber
tires were recovered for recycling. (Other tires were retreaded, and shredded rubber tires were
made into tire-derived fuel.)
Standard mail was formerly called Third Class mail by the U.S. Postal Service.
10
-------
Executive Summary
RESIDENTIAL AND COMERCIAL SOURCES OF MSW
Sources of MSW, as characterized in this report, include both residential and commercial
locations. We estimated residential waste (including waste from multi-family dwellings) to be 55
to 65 percent of total MSW generation. Commercial waste (including waste from schools, some
industrial sites where packaging is generated, and businesses) constitutes between 35 and 45
percent of MSW. Local and regional factors, such as climate and level of commercial activity,
contribute to these variations.
MANAGEMENT OF MSW
Overview
EPA's integrated waste management hierarchy includes the following four components,
listed in order of preference:
• Source reduction (or waste prevention), including reuse of products and on-site
(or backyard) composting of yard trimmings
• Recycling, including off-site (or community) composting
• Combustion with energy recovery
• Disposal through landfilling or combustion without energy recovery.
Although we encourage the use of strategies that emphasize the top of the hierarchy
whenever possible, all four components remain important within an integrated waste
management system.
11
-------
Executive Summary
Source Reduction
When we first established our waste management hierarchy, we emphasized the
importance of reducing the amount of waste created, reusing whenever possible, and then
recycling whatever is left. When municipal solid waste is reduced and reused, this is called
"source reduction"—meaning the material never enters the waste stream.
Source reduction, also called waste prevention, includes the design, manufacture,
purchase, or use of materials, such as products and packaging, to reduce their amount or toxicity
before they enter the MSW management system. Examples of source reduction activities are:
• Designing products or packaging to reduce the quantity or the toxicity of the
materials used or make them easy to reuse.
• Reusing existing products or packaging, such as refillable bottles, reusable
pallets, and reconditioned barrels and drums.
• Lengthening the lives of products such as tires so fewer need to be produced and
therefore fewer need to be disposed of.
• Using packaging that reduces the amount of damage or spoilage to the product.
• Managing nonproduct organic wastes (e.g., food scraps, yard trimmings) through
onsite composting or other alternatives to disposal (e.g., leaving grass clippings
on the lawn).
As the nation has begun to realize the value of its resources, both financial and material,
efforts to reduce waste generation have increased.
12
-------
Executive Summary
Recycling
• Recycling (including community composting) recovered 32.1 percent (79 million
tons) of MSW in 2005.
• There were about 8,550 curbside recycling programs in the United States in 2005.
• About 3,470 yard trimmings composting programs were reported in 2005.
Combustion with Energy Recovery
An estimated 33.4 million tons (13.6 percent) of MSW was combusted with energy
recovery in 2005 (see Tables ES-1 and ES-2), slightly less than the 34.1 million tons estimated in
2004. Combustion with energy recovery increased from 2.7 million tons in 1980 to 29.7 million
tons in 1990. Since 1990, the quantity of MSW combusted with energy recovery has increased
slightly.
Disposal
During 2005, about 54.3 percent of MSW was landfilled, down somewhat from 54.8
percent in 2004. As shown in Figure ES-5, the number of MSW landfills decreased substantially
over the past 18 years, from nearly 8,000 in 1988 to 1,654 in 2005—while average landfill size
increased. At the national level, capacity does not appear to be a problem, although regional
dislocations sometimes occur.
13
-------
Executive Summary
The percentage of MSW landfilled decreased slightly from 2004 to 2005. Over
the long term, the tonnage of MSW landfilled in 1990 was 142.3 million tons (see
Table ES-1), but decreased to 134.8 million tons in 2000. The tonnage increased
to 135.5 million tons in 2004, then declined to 133.3 in 2005. The tonnage
landfilled results from an interaction among generation, recycling, and
combustion with energy recovery, which do not necessarily rise and fall at the
same time.
The net per capita discard rate (after materials recovery and combustion with
energy recovery) was 2.46 pounds per person per day, down from 3.12 pounds
per person per day in 1990, down from the 2.62 pounds per person per day in
2000 (Table ES-3).
Figure ES-5: Number of Landfills in the United States,
1988-2005
4,000 -
n -
7,924
7,379
6,326
581?
5
38
6
4
48
2
3,558
3
19
7 3,091
2,514
1-1 2>314 2216
1-1 1<967 1858 476?
data not I — I
available
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
14
-------
Executive Summary
MSW recovered for recycling (including composting), combusted with energy recovery,
and discarded in 2005 is shown in Figure ES-6. In 2005, 79.0 millions tons (32.1 percent) of
MSW were recycled, 33.4 million tons (13.6 percent) were combusted with energy recovery, and
133.3 million tons (54.3 percent) were landfilled or otherwise disposed. (Relatively small
amounts of this total undoubtedly were incinerated without energy recovery, littered, or illegally
dumped rather than landfilled.)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
This report and related additional data are available on the Internet at www.epa.gov/osw.
Figure ES-6: Management of MSW in the United States, 2005
15
-------
Chapter 1 Introduction and Methodology
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY
INTRODUCTION
This report is the most recent in a series of reports sponsored by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency to characterize municipal solid waste (MSW) in the United States. Together
with the previous reports, this report provides a historical database for a 45-year characterization
(by weight) of the materials and products in MSW.
Management of the nation's municipal solid waste (MSW) continues to be a high priority
for communities in the 21st century. The concept of integrated solid waste management—source
reduction of wastes before they enter the waste stream, recovery of generated wastes for
recycling (including composting), and environmentally sound disposal through combustion
facilities and landfills that meet current standards—is being used by communities as they plan
for the future.
This chapter provides background on integrated waste management and this year's
characterization report, followed by a brief overview of the methodology. Next is a section on
the variety of uses for the information in this report. Then, more detail on the methodology is
provided, followed by a description of the contents of the remainder of the report.
BACKGROUND
The Solid Waste Management Hierarchy
EPA's 1989 Agenda for Action endorsed the concept of integrated waste management,
by which municipal solid waste is reduced or managed through several different practices, which
can be tailored to fit a particular community's needs. The components of the hierarchy are:
16
-------
Chapter 1 Introduction and Methodology
• Source reduction (or waste prevention), including reuse of products and on-site
(or backyard) composting of yard trimmings.
• Recycling, including off-site (or community) composting.
• Combustion with energy recovery.
• Disposal through landfilling or combustion without energy recovery.
As done in previous versions of this report, combustion with energy recovery is shown as
discards in the Chapter 2 tables and figures.
Overview of the Methodology
Readers should note that this report characterizes the municipal solid waste stream of the
nation as a whole. Data in this report can be used at the national level. It can also be used to
address state, regional, and local situations, where more detailed data are not available or would
be too expensive to gather. More detail on uses for this information in this report for both
national and local uses is provided later in this chapter.
At the state or local level, recycling rates often are developed by counting and weighing
all the recyclables collected, and then aggregating these data to yield a state or local recycling
rate. At the national level, we use instead a materials flow methodology, which relies heavily on
a mass balance approach. Using data gathered from industry associations, key businesses, and
similar industry sources, and supported by government data from sources such as the Department
of Commerce and the U.S. Census Bureau, we estimate tons of materials and products generated,
recycled, or discarded. Other sources of data, such as waste characterizations and surveys
performed by governments, industry, or the press, supplement these data.
To estimate MSW generation, production data are adjusted by imports and exports from
the United States, where necessary. Allowances are made for the average lifespans of different
17
-------
Chapter 1 Introduction and Methodology
products. Information on amounts of disposed MSW managed by combustion comes from
industry sources as well. MSW not managed by recycling (including composting) or combustion
is assumed to be landfilled.
In any estimation of MSW generation, it is important to define what is and is not included
in municipal solid waste. EPA includes those materials that historically have been handled in the
municipal solid waste stream-those materials from municipal sources, sent to municipal
landfills. In this report, MSW includes wastes such as product packaging, newspapers, office and
classroom papers, bottles and cans, boxes, wood pallets, food scraps, grass clippings, clothing,
furniture, appliances, automobile tires, consumer electronics, and batteries.
A common error in using this report is to assume that all nonhazardous wastes are
included. As shown later in this chapter, municipal solid waste as defined here does not include
construction and demolition debris, biosolids (sewage sludges), industrial process wastes, or a
number of other wastes that, in some cases, may go to a municipal waste landfill. These
materials, over time, have tended to be handled separately and are not included in the totals in
this report. EPA has addressed several of these materials separately, for instance, in Biosolids
Generation, Use, and Disposal in the United States, EPA530-R-99-009, September 1999, and
Characterization of Building-Related Construction and Demolition Debris in the United States,
EPA530-R-98-010, May 1998. Recycling (including composting) is encouraged for these
materials as well.
In addition, the source of municipal solid waste is important. EPA's figures include
municipal solid waste from homes, institutions such as schools and prisons, commercial sources
such as restaurants and small businesses, and occasional industrial sources. MSW does not
include wastes of other types or from other sources, including automobile bodies, municipal
sludges, combustion ash, and industrial process wastes that might also be disposed in municipal
waste landfills or combustion units.
18
-------
Chapter 1 Introduction and Methodology
HOW THIS REPORT CAN BE USED
Nationwide. The data in this report provide a nationwide picture of municipal solid
waste generation and management. The historical perspective is particularly useful in
establishing trends and highlighting the changes that have occurred over the years, both in types
of wastes generated and in the ways they are managed. This perspective on MSW and its
management is useful in assessing national solid waste management needs and policy. The
consistency in methodology and scope aids in the use of the document for reporting over time.
The report is, however, of equal or greater value as a solid waste management planning tool for
state and local governments and private firms.
Local or state level. At the local or state level, the data in this report can be used to
develop approximate (but quick) estimates of MSW generation in a defined area. That is, the
data on generation of MSW per person nationally may be used to estimate generation in a city or
other local area based on the population in that area. This can be of value when a "ballpark"
estimate of MSW generation in an area is needed. For example, communities may use such an
estimate to determine the potential viability of regional versus single community solid waste
management facilities. This information can help define solid waste management planning areas
and the planning needed in those areas. However, for communities making decisions where
knowledge of the amount and composition of MSW is crucial, (e.g., where a solid waste
management facility is being sited), local estimates of the waste stream should be made.
Another useful feature of this report for local planning is the information provided on
MSW trends. Changes over time in total MSW generation and the mix of MSW materials can
affect the need for and use of various waste management alternatives. Observing trends in MSW
generation can help in planning an integrated waste management system that includes facilities
sized and designed for years of service.
While the national average data are useful as a checkpoint against local MSW
characterization data, any differences between local and national data should be examined
carefully. There are many regional variations that require each community to examine its own
19
-------
Chapter 1 Introduction and Methodology
waste management needs. Such factors as local and regional availability of suitable landfill
space, proximity of markets for recovered materials, population density, commercial and
industrial activity, and climatic and groundwater variations all may motivate each community to
make its own plans.
Specific reasons for regional differences may include:
• Variations in climate and local waste management practices, which greatly
influence generation of yard trimmings. For instance, yard trimmings exhibit
strong seasonal variations in most regions of the country. Also, the level of
backyard composting in a region will affect generation of yard trimmings.
• Differences in the scope of waste streams. That is, a local landfill may be
receiving construction and demolition wastes in addition to MSW, but this report
addresses MSW only.
• Variance in the per capita generation of some products, such as newspapers and
telephone directories, depending upon the average size of the publications.
Typically, rural areas will generate less of these products on a per person basis
than urban areas.
• Level of commercial activity in a community. This will influence the generation
rate of some products, such as office paper, corrugated boxes, wood pallets, and
food scraps from restaurants.
• Variations in economic activity, which affect waste generation in both the
residential and the commercial sectors.
• Local and state regulations and practices. Deposit laws, bans on landfilling of
specific products, and variable rate pricing for waste collection are examples of
practices that can influence a local waste stream.
20
-------
Chapter 1 Introduction and Methodology
While caution should be used in applying the data in this report, for some areas, the
national breakdown of MSW by material may be the only such data available for use in
comparing and planning waste management alternatives. Planning a curbside recycling program,
for example, requires an estimate of household recyclables that may be recovered. If resources
are not available to adequately estimate these materials by other means, local planners may turn
to the national data. This is useful in areas that may have typical MSW generation or in areas
where appropriate adjustments in the data can be made to account for local conditions.
In summary, the data in this report can be used in local planning to:
• Develop approximate estimates of total MSW generation in an area.
• Check locally developed MSW data for accuracy and consistency.
• Account for trends in total MSW generation and the generation of individual
components.
• Help set goals and measure progress in source reduction and recycling (including
composting).
21
-------
Chapter 1 Introduction and Methodology
CHARACTERIZATION OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE: IN PERSPECTIVE
The Two Methodologies for Characterizing MSW: Site-Specific Versus Materials Flow
There are two basic approaches to estimating quantities of municipal solid waste at the
local, state, or national levels—site-specific and materials flow. This report is based on the
materials flow approach.
Site-specific studies. In the first methodology, which is site-specific, sampling, sorting,
and weighing the individual components of the waste stream could be used. This methodology is
useful in defining a local waste stream, especially if large numbers of samples are taken over
several seasons. Results of sampling also increase the body of knowledge about variations due to
climatic and seasonal changes, population density, regional differences, and the like. In addition,
quantities of MSW components such as food scraps and yard trimmings can only be estimated
through sampling and weighing studies.
A disadvantage of sampling studies based on a limited number of samples is that they
may be skewed and misleading if, for example, atypical circumstances were experienced during
the sampling. These circumstances could include an unusually wet or dry season, delivery of
some unusual wastes during the sampling period, or errors in the sampling methodology. Any
errors of this kind will be greatly magnified when a limited number of samples are taken to
represent a community's entire waste stream for a year. Magnification of errors could be even
more serious if a limited number of samples was relied upon for making the national estimates of
MSW. Also, extensive sampling would be prohibitively expensive for making the national
estimates. An additional disadvantage of sampling studies is that they do not provide information
about trends unless performed in a consistent manner over a long period of time.
Of course, at the state or local level, sampling may not be necessary—many states and
localities count all materials recovered for recycling, and many weigh all wastes being disposed
to generate state or local recycling rates from the "ground up." To use these figures at the
22
-------
Chapter 1 Introduction and Methodology
national level would require all states to perform these studies, and perform them in a consistent
manner conducive to developing a national summary, which so far has not been practical.
Materials flow. The second approach to quantifying and characterizing the municipal
solid waste stream-the methodology used for this report-utilizes a materials flow approach to
estimate the waste stream on a nationwide basis. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, EPA's Office
of Solid Waste and its predecessors at the Public Health Service sponsored work that began to
develop this methodology. This report represents the latest version of this database that has been
evolving for over 30 years.
The materials flow methodology is based on production data (by weight) for the materials
and products in the waste stream. To estimate generation data, specific adjustments are made to
the production data for each material and product category. Adjustments are made for imports
and exports and for diversions from MSW (e.g., for building materials made of plastic and
paperboard that become construction and demolition debris.) Adjustments are also made for the
lifetimes of products. Finally, food scraps, yard trimmings, and a small amount of miscellaneous
inorganic wastes are accounted for by compiling data from a variety of waste sampling studies.
One problem with the materials flow methodology is that product residues associated
with other items in MSW (usually containers) are not accounted for. These residues would
include, for example, food left in ajar, detergent left in a box or bottle, and dried paint in a can.
Some household hazardous wastes, (e.g., pesticide left in a can) are also included among these
product residues.
Municipal Solid Waste Defined in Greater Detail
As stated earlier, EPA includes those materials that historically have been handled in the
municipal solid waste stream-those materials from municipal sources, sent to municipal
landfills. In this report, MSW includes wastes such as product packaging, newspapers, office and
classroom paper, bottles and cans, boxes, wood pallets, food scraps, grass clippings, clothing,
furniture, appliances, automobile tires, consumer electronics, and batteries. For purposes of
23
-------
Chapter 1
Introduction and Methodology
analysis, these products and materials are often grouped in this report into the following
categories: durable goods, nondurable goods, containers and packaging, food scraps and yard
trimmings, and miscellaneous inorganic wastes.
Municipal solid wastes characterized in this report come from residential, commercial,
institutional, or industrial sources. Some examples of the types of MSW that come from each of
the broad categories of sources are:
Sources and Examples
Example Products
Residential (single-and multi-family homes) Newspapers, clothing, disposable tableware,
food packaging, cans and bottles, food scraps,
yard trimmings
Commercial (office buildings, retail and
wholesale establishments, restaurants)
Institutional (schools, libraries, hospitals,
prisons)
Corrugated boxes, food scraps, office papers,
disposable tableware, paper napkins, yard
trimmings
Cafeteria and restroom trash can wastes, office
papers, classroom wastes, yard trimmings
Industrial (packaging and administrative; not Corrugated boxes, plastic film, wood pallets,
process wastes) lunchroom wastes, office papers.
The materials flow methodology used in this report does not readily lend itself to the
quantification of wastes according to their sources. For example, corrugated boxes may be
unpacked and discarded from residences, commercial establishments such as grocery stores and
offices, institutions such as schools, or factories. Similarly, office papers are mostly generated in
offices, but they also are generated in residences and institutions. The methodology estimates
only the total quantity of products generated, not their places of disposal or recovery for
recycling.
24
-------
Chapter 1
Introduction and Methodology
Other Subtitle D Wastes
Some people assume that "municipal solid waste" must include everything that is
landfilled in Subtitle D landfills. (Subtitle D of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
deals with wastes other than the hazardous wastes covered under Subtitle C.) As shown in Figure
1, however, RCRA Subtitle D includes many kinds of wastes. It has been common practice to
landfill wastes such as municipal sludges, nonhazardous industrial wastes, residue from
automobile salvage operations, and construction and demolition debris along with MSW, but
these other kinds of wastes are not included in the estimates presented in this report.
Figure 1: Municipal Solid Waste in the Universe of Subtitle D Wastes
Subtitle D Wastes
The Subtitle D Waste included in this report is Municipal Solid Waste, which includes:
Containers and packaging such as soft drink bottles and corrugated boxes
Durable goods such as furniture and appliances
Nondurable goods such as newspapers, trash bags, and clothing
Other wastes such as food scraps and yard trimmings.
Subtitle D Wastes not included in this report are:
Municipal sludges Agricultural wastes
Industrial nonhazardous wastes Oil and gas wastes
Construction and demolition debris Mining wastes
25
-------
Chapter 1 Introduction and Methodology
Figure 1-A: Definition of Terms
The materials flow methodology produces an estimate of total municipal solid waste generation in
the United States, by material categories and by product categories.
The term generation as used in this report refers to the weight of materials and products as they enter
the waste management system from residential, commercial, institutional, and industrial sources and before
materials recovery or combustion takes place. Preconsumer (industrial) scrap is not included in the generation
estimates. Source reduction activities (e.g., backyard composting of yard trimmings) take place ahead of
generation.
Source reduction activities reduce the amount or toxicity of wastes before they enter the municipal
solid waste management system. Reuse is a source reduction activity involving the recovery or reapplication
of a package, used product, or material in a manner that retains its original form or identity. Reuse of
products such as refillable glass bottles, reusable plastic food storage containers, or refurbished wood pallets
is considered to be source reduction, not recycling.
Recovery of materials as estimated in this report includes products and yard trimmings removed
from the waste stream for the purpose of recycling (including composting). For recovered products, recovery
equals reported purchases of postconsumer recovered material (e.g., glass cullet, old newspapers) plus net
exports (if any) of the material. Thus, recovery of old corrugated containers (OCC) is the sum of OCC
purchases by paper mills plus net exports of OCC. If recovery as reported by a data source includes
converting or fabrication (preconsumer) scrap, the preconsumer scrap is not counted towards the recovery
estimates in this report. Imported secondary materials are also not counted in recovery estimates in this
report. For some materials, additional uses, such as glass used for highway construction or newspapers used
to make insulation, are added into the recovery totals.
Combustion of MSW with energy recovery, often called "waste-to-energy," is estimated in Chapter
3 of this report. Combustion of separated materials-wood and rubber from tires-is included in the estimates
of combustion with energy recovery in this report.
Discards include MSW remaining after recovery for recycling (including composting). These
discards presumably would be combusted without energy recovery or landfilled, although some MSW is
littered, stored or disposed onsite, or burned onsite, particularly in rural areas. No good estimates for these
other disposal practices are available, but the total amounts of MSW involved are presumed to be small.
26
-------
Chapter 1 Introduction and Methodology
Materials and Products Not Included in These Estimates
As noted earlier, other Subtitle D wastes (illustrated in Figure 1) are not included in these
estimates, even though some may be managed along with MSW (e.g., by combustion or
landfilling). Household hazardous wastes, while generated as MSW with other residential
wastes, are not identified separately in this report. Transportation parts and equipment (including
automobiles and trucks) are not included in the wastes characterized in this report.
Certain other materials associated with products in MSW are often not accounted for
because the appropriate data series have not yet been developed. These include, for example,
inks and other pigments and some additives associated with packaging materials. Considerable
additional research would be required to estimate these materials, which constitute a relatively
small percentage of the waste stream.
Some adjustments are made in this report to account for packaging of imported goods,
but there is little available documentation of these amounts.
OVERVIEW OF THIS REPORT
Following this introductory chapter, Chapter 2 presents the results of the municipal solid
waste characterization (by weight). Estimates of MSW generation, recovery, and discards are
presented in a series of tables, with discussion. Detailed tables and figures summarizing 2005
MSW generation, recovery, and discards of products in each material category are included.
In Chapter 3 of the report, estimates of 2005 MSW management by the various
alternatives are summarized. These include recovery for recycling (including composting),
combustion, and landfilling. Summaries of the infrastructure currently available for each waste
management alternative are also included in Chapter 3.
A brief discussion of the materials flow methodology for estimating generation,
recycling, and disposal is presented in Appendix A.
27
-------
Chapter 1 Introduction and Methodology
CHAPTER 1
REFERENCES
Darnay, A., and W.E. Franklin, The Role of Packaging in Solid Waste Management, 1966 to
1976. Public Health Service Publication No. 1855. U.S. Government Printing Office. 1969.
Franklin, W.E., and A. Darnay. The Role of Nonpackaging Paper in Solid Waste Management,
1966 to 1976. Public Health Service Publication No. 2040. U.S. Government Printing Office.
1971.
Darnay, A., and W.E. Franklin. Salvage Markets for Materials in Solid Wastes. Environmental
Protection Publication SW-29c. U.S. Government Printing Office. 1972.
Franklin, W.E., et al. Base Line Forecasts of Resource Recovery 1972 to 1990. Midwest
Research Institute for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. March 1975.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste Management Programs. Second
Report to Congress: Resource Recovery and Source Reduction (SW-122). 1974.
Smith, F.L., Jr. A Solid Waste Estimation Procedure: Material Flows Approach. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (SW-147). May 1975.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste Management Programs. Third
Report to Congress: Resource Recovery and Source Reduction (SW-161). 1975.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste Management Programs. Fourth
Report to Congress: Resource Recovery and Waste Reduction (SW-600). 1977.
Franklin Associates, Ltd. Post-consumer Solid Waste and Resource Recovery Baseline. Prepared
for the Resource Conservation Committee. May 16, 1979.
28
-------
Chapter 1 Introduction and Methodology
Franklin Associates, Ltd. Post-consumer Solid Waste and Resource Recovery Baseline: Working
Papers. Prepared for the Resource Conservation Committee. May 16, 1979.
Resource Conservation Committee. Choices for Conservation: Final Report to the President and
Congress (SW-779). July 1979.
Franklin Associates, Ltd. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States, 1960
to 2000. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. July 11, 1986.
Franklin Associates, Ltd. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States, 1960
to 2000 (Update 1988). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. March 30, 1988.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States: 1990 Update. (EPA/SW-90-042). June 1990.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States: 1992 Update. (EPA/530-R-92-019). July 1992.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States: 1994 Update. EPA/530-R-94-042. November 1994.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States: 1995 Update. EPA/530-R-945-001. March 1996.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States: 1996 Update. EPA/530-R-97-015. June 1997.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States: 1997 Update. EPA/530-R-98-007. May 1998.
29
-------
Chapter 1 Introduction and Methodology
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States: 1998 Update. EPA/530-R-99-021. September 1999.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Municipal Solid Waste Generation, Recycling and
Disposal in the United States: Facts and Figures for 1998. EPA/530-F-00-024. April 2000.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Municipal Solid Waste in The United States: 1999 Facts
and Figures. EPA/530-R-01-014. July 2001.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Municipal Solid Waste in The United States: 2000 Facts
and Figures. EPA/530-R-02-001. June 2002.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Municipal Solid Waste in The United States: 2001 Facts
and Figures. EPA/530-R-03-011. October 2003.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Municipal Solid Waste Task Force, Office of Solid
Waste. The Solid Waste Dilemma: An Agenda for Action. February 1989.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste. Subtitle D Study Phase I Report
(EPA/530-SW-054). October 1986.
30
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
CHAPTER 2
CHARACTERIZATION OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE BY WEIGHT
INTRODUCTION
The tables and figures in this chapter present the results of the update of EPA's municipal
solid waste characterization report through 2005. The data presented also incorporate some
revisions to previously reported data for 2003 and, in some instances, to data for earlier years.
The revisions are generally due to revisions and improvements in the data available from data
sources used in developing this report.
This chapter discusses how much municipal solid waste (MSW) is generated, recovered,
and disposed. First, an overview presents this information for the most recent years, and for
selected years back to 1960. This information is summarized in Tables 1 to 3 and Figures 10 to
13. Then, throughout the remainder of the chapter, MSW is characterized in more detail.
Findings are presented in two basic ways: the first portion of the chapter presents data by
material type. Some material types of most use to planners (paper and paperboard, glass, metals,
plastics, and rubber and leather) are presented in detail in Tables 4 to 8 and Figures 2 to 9, while
data on other materials also is summarized in Figures 12 and 13.
The second portion of the chapter presents data by product type. This information is
presented in Tables 9 to 23 and Figures 14 to 16. Products are classified into durable goods (e.g.,
appliances, furniture, tires); nondurable goods (e.g., newspapers, office-type papers, trash bags,
clothing); and containers and packaging (e.g., bottles, cans, corrugated boxes). A fourth major
category includes other wastes—yard trimmings, food scraps, and miscellaneous inorganic
wastes. These wastes are not manufactured products, but to provide complete information in
each table, they are included in both the product and the material tables.
31
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
This chapter provides data on generation, recovery, and discards of MSW. (See Chapter 1
for definitions of these terms.) Recovery, in this report, means that the materials have been
removed from the municipal solid waste stream. Recovery of materials in products means that
the materials are reported to have been purchased by an end user or have been exported from the
United States. For yard trimmings, recovery includes estimates of the trimmings delivered to a
composting facility (not backyard composting). Under these definitions, residues from a
materials recovery facility (MRF) or other waste processing facility are counted as generation
(and, of course, discards), since they are not purchased by an end user. Residues from an end
user facility (e.g., sludges from a paper deinking mill) are considered to be industrial process
wastes that are no longer part of the municipal solid waste stream.
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE: CHARACTERIZED BY MATERIAL TYPE
Generation, recovery, and discards of materials in MSW, by weight and by percentage of
generation and discards, are summarized in Tables 1 through 3. Figures 10 and 11 (later in this
chapter) illustrate this data over time. A snapshot, by material, for 2005 is provided in Figures 12
and 13. In the following sections, each material is discussed in detail.
32
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 1
MATERIALS GENERATED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 2005
(In thousands of tons and percent of total generation)
Materials
Paper and Paperboard
Glass
Metals
Ferrous
Aluminum
Other Nonferrous
Total Metals
Plastics
Rubber and Leather
Textiles
Wood
Other **
Total Materials in Products
Other Wastes
Food Scraps
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MS W Generated - Weight
Materials
Paper and Paperboard
Glass
Metals
Ferrous
Aluminum
Other Nonferrous
Total Metals
Plastics
Rubber and Leather
Textiles
Wood
Other **
Total Materials in Products
Other Wastes
Food Scraps
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MS W Generated - %
Thousands of Tons
1960
29,990
6,720
10,300
340
180
10,820
390
1,840
1,760
3,030
70
54,620
12,200
20,000
1,300
33,500
88,120
1970
44,310
12,740
12,360
800
670
13,830
2,900
2,970
2,040
3,720
770
83,280
12,800
23,200
1,780
37,780
121,060
1980
55,160
15,130
12,620
1,730
1,160
15,510
6,830
4,200
2,530
7,010
2,520
108,890
13,000
27,500
2,250
42,750
151,640
1990
72,730
13,100
12,640
2,810
1,100
16,550
17,130
5,790
5,810
12,210
3,190
146,510
20,800
35,000
2,900
58,700
205,210
2000
87,740
12,620
13,530
3,150
1,560
18,240
25,340
6,530
9,440
13,020
4,190
177,120
26,480
30,530
3,500
60,510
237,630
2003
83,030
12,340
13,980
3,200
1,590
18,770
27,620
6,820
10,590
13,610
4,320
177,100
28,180
31,470
3,620
63,270
240,370
2004
86,360
12,680
13,990
3,210
1,660
18,860
29,160
6,700
10,820
13,780
4,450
182,810
29,070
31,770
3,650
64,490
247,300
2005
83,950
12,750
13,770
3,210
1,740
18,720
28,910
6,700
11,140
13,930
4,570
180,670
29,230
32,070
3,690
64,990
245,660
Percent of Total Generation
1960
34.0%
7.6%
11.7%
0.4%
0.2%
12.3%
0.4%
2.1%
2.0%
3.4%
0.1%
62.0%
13.8%
22.7%
1 .5%
38.0%
100.0%
1970
36.6%
10.5%
10.2%
0.7%
0.6%
11.4%
2.4%
2.5%
1.7%
3.1%
0.6%
68.8%
10.6%
19.2%
1 .5%
31 .2%
100.0%
1980
36.4%
10.0%
8.3%
1.1%
0.8%
10.2%
4.5%
2.8%
1.7%
4.6%
1.7%
71 .8%
8.6%
18.1%
1 .5%
28.2%
100.0%
1990
35.4%
6.4%
6.2%
1 .4%
0.5%
8.1%
8.3%
2.8%
2.8%
6.0%
1 .6%
71 .4%
10.1%
17.1%
1 .4%
28.6%
100.0%
2000
36.9%
5.3%
5.7%
1 .3%
0.7%
7.7%
10.7%
2.7%
4.0%
5.5%
1 .8%
74.5%
11.1%
12.8%
1 .5%
25.5%
100.0%
2003
34.5%
5.1%
5.8%
1 .3%
0.7%
7.8%
1 1 .5%
2.8%
4.4%
5.7%
1 .8%
73.7%
11.7%
13.1%
1 .5%
26.3%
100.0%
2004
34.9%
5.1%
5.7%
1 .3%
0.7%
7.6%
1 1 .8%
2.7%
4.4%
5.6%
1 .8%
73.9%
1 1 .8%
12.8%
1 .5%
26.1%
100.0%
2005
34.2%
5.2%
5.6%
1 .3%
0.7%
7.6%
1 1 .8%
2.7%
4.5%
5.7%
1 .9%
73.5%
1 1 .9%
13.1%
1 .5%
26.5%
100.0%
Generation before materials recovery or combustion. Does not include construction & demolition debris, industrial
process wastes, or certain other wastes.
Includes electrolytes in batteries and fluff pulp, feces, and urine in disposable diapers.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
33
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 2
RECOVERY* OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, 1960 TO 2005
(In thousands of tons and percent of generation of each material)
Materials
Paper and Paperboard
Glass
Metals
Ferrous
Aluminum
Other Nonferrous
Total Metals
Plastics
Rubber and Leather
Textiles
Wood
Other **
Total Materials in Products
Other Wastes
Food Scraps
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Recovered - Weight
Materials
Paper and Paperboard
Glass
Metals
Ferrous
Aluminum
Other Nonferrous
Total Metals
Plastics
Rubber and Leather
Textiles
Wood
Other **
Total Materials in Products
Other Wastes
Food, Other"
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Recovered - %
Thousands of Tons
1960
5,080
100
50
Neg.
Neg.
50
Neg.
330
50
Neg.
Neg.
5,610
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
5,610
1970
6,770
160
150
10
320
480
Neg.
250
60
Neg.
300
8,020
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
8,020
1980
1 1 ,740
750
370
310
540
7,220
20
130
160
Neg.
500
1 4,520
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
1 4,520
1990
20,230
2,630
2,230
1,010
730
3,970
370
370
660
130
680
29,040
Neg.
4,200
Neg.
4,200
33,240
2000
37,560
2,880
4,610
860
1,060
6,530
1,350
820
1,290
1,240
980
52,650
680
15,770
Neg.
16,450
69,100
2003
39,980
2,650
5,090
690
1,060
6,840
1,400
1,100
1,520
1,280
980
55,750
750
18,330
Neg.
19,080
74,830
2004
40,710
2,730
5,100
710
1,200
7,010
1,600
1,030
1,710
1,290
1,110
57,190
660
19,810
Neg.
20,470
77,660
2005
41 ,970
2,760
4,930
690
1,260
6,880
1,650
960
1,700
1,310
1,170
58,400
690
19,860
Neg.
20,550
78,950
Percent of Generation of Each Material
1960
16.9%
1.5%
0.5%
Neg.
Neg.
0.5%
Neg.
17.9%
2.8%
Neg.
Neg.
10.3%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
6.4%
1970
15.3%
1.3%
1.2%
1.3%
47.8%
3.5%
Neg.
8.4%
2.9%
Neg.
39.0%
9.6%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
6.6%
1980
21 .3%
5.0%
2.9%
17.9%
46.6%
7.9%
0.3%
3.1%
6.3%
Neg.
19.8%
13.3%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
9.6%
1990
27.8%
20.1%
17.6%
35.9%
66.4%
24.0%
2.2%
6.4%
1 1 .4%
1.1%
21 .3%
19.8%
Neg.
12.0%
Neg.
7.2%
16.2%
2000
42.8%
22.8%
34.1%
27.3%
67.9%
35.8%
5.3%
12.6%
13.7%
9.5%
23.4%
29.7%
2.6%
51 .7%
Neg.
27.2%
29.1%
2003
48.2%
21 .5%
36.4%
21 .6%
66.7%
36.4%
5.1%
16.1%
14.4%
9.4%
22.7%
31 .5%
2.7%
58.2%
Neg.
30.2%
31.1%
2004
47.1%
21 .5%
36.5%
22.1%
72.3%
37.2%
5.5%
15.4%
15.8%
9.4%
24.9%
31 .3%
2.3%
62.4%
Neg.
31 .7%
31 .4%
2005
50.0%
21 .6%
35.8%
21 .5%
72.4%
36.8%
5.7%
1 4.3%
1 5.3%
9.4%
25.6%
32.3%
2.4%
61 .9%
Neg.
31 .6%
32.1%
Recovery of postconsumer wastes; does not include converting/fabrication scrap.
Recovery of electrolytes in batteries; probably not recycled.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Includes recovery of paper for composting.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
34
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 3
MATERIALS DISCARDED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 2005
(In thousands of tons and percent of total discards)
Materials
Paper and Paperboard
Glass
Metals
Ferrous
Aluminum
Other Nonferrous
Total Metals
Plastics
Rubber and Leather
Textiles
Wood
Other **
Total Materials in Products
Other Wastes
Food Scraps
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Discarded - Weight
Materials
Paper and Paperboard
Glass
Metals
Ferrous
Aluminum
Other Nonferrous
Total Metals
Plastics
Rubber and Leather
Textiles
Wood
Other **
Total Materials in Products
Other Wastes
Food Scraps
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Discarded - %
Thousands of Tons
1960
24,910
6,620
10,250
340
180
70,770
390
1,510
1,710
3,030
70
49,010
12,200
20,000
1,300
33,500
82,510
1970
37,540
12,580
12,210
790
350
73,350
2,900
2,720
1,980
3,720
470
75,260
12,800
23,200
1,780
37,780
113,040
1980
43,420
14,380
12,250
1,420
620
74,290
6,810
4,070
2,370
7,010
2,020
94,370
13,000
27,500
2,250
42,750
137,120
1990
52,500
10,470
10,410
1,800
370
72,580
16,760
5,420
5,150
12,080
2,510
117,470
20,800
30,800
2,900
54,500
1 71 ,970
2000
50,180
9,740
8,920
2,290
500
77,770
23,990
5,710
8,150
1 1 ,780
3,210
124,470
25,800
14,760
3,500
44,060
168,530
2003
43,050
9,690
8,890
2,510
530
77,930
26,220
5,720
9,070
12,330
3,340
121,350
27,430
13,140
3,620
44,190
165,540
2004
45,650
9,950
8,890
2,500
460
77,850
27,560
5,670
9,110
12,490
3,340
125,620
28,410
1 1 ,960
3,650
44,020
169,640
2005
41 ,980
9,990
8,840
2,520
480
77,840
27,260
5,740
9,440
12,620
3,400
122,270
28,540
12,210
3,690
44,440
166,710
Percent of Total Discards
1960
30.2%
8.0%
12.4%
0.4%
0.2%
73.7%
0.5%
1.8%
2.1%
3.7%
0.1%
59.4%
14.8%
24.2%
1.6%
40.6%
100.0%
1970
33.2%
11.1%
10.8%
0.7%
0.3%
11.8%
2.6%
2.4%
1.8%
3.3%
0.4%
66.6%
1 1 .3%
20.5%
1.6%
33.4%
1 00.0%
1980
31 .7%
10.5%
8.9%
1.0%
0.5%
10.4%
5.0%
3.0%
1.7%
5.1%
1.5%
68.8%
9.5%
20.1%
1.6%
31 .2%
100.0%
1990
30.5%
6.1%
6.1%
1.0%
0.2%
7.3%
9.7%
3.2%
3.0%
7.0%
1.5%
68.3%
12.1%
17.9%
1.7%
31 .7%
100.0%
2000
29.8%
5.8%
5.3%
1.4%
0.3%
6.9%
1 4.2%
3.4%
4.8%
7.0%
1.9%
73.9%
1 5.3%
8.8%
2.1%
26.1%
100.0%
2003
26.0%
5.9%
5.4%
1.5%
0.3%
7.2%
15.8%
3.5%
5.5%
7.4%
2.0%
73.3%
16.6%
7.9%
2.2%
26.7%
100.0%
2004
26.9%
5.9%
5.2%
1.5%
0.3%
7.0%
16.2%
3.3%
5.4%
7.4%
2.0%
74.1%
1 6.7%
7.1%
2.2%
25.9%
100.0%
2005
25.2%
6.0%
5.3%
1.5%
0.3%
7.7%
16.4%
3.4%
5.7%
7.6%
2.0%
73.3%
17.1%
7.3%
2.2%
26.7%
100.0%
Discards after materials and compost recovery. In this table, discards include combustion with energy recovery.
Does not include construction & demolition debris, industrial process wastes, or certain other wastes.
Includes electrolytes in batteries and fluff pulp, feces, and urine in disposable diapers.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
35
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Paper and Paperboard
Collectively, the many products made of paper and paperboard2 materials comprise the
largest component of MSW. The paper and paperboard materials category includes products
such as office papers, newspapers, corrugated boxes, milk cartons, tissue paper, and paper plates
and cups (Figure 2 and Table 4).
Total generation of paper and paperboard in MSW has grown from 30 million tons in
1960 to 84 million tons in 2005 (Table 1). As a percentage of total MSW generation, paper
represented 34 percent in 1960 (Table 1). The percentage has varied over time, but is estimated
to be 34.2 percent of total MSW generation in 2005. As Figure 3 illustrates, paper generation
declined in 1996, peaked at about 88 million tons in 1999, and declined to 84 million tons in
2005.
Figure 2. Paper and paperboard products generated in MSW, 2005
Corrugated boxes
Newspapers
Commercial printing
Office papers
Standard Mail
Folding and milk cartons
Other papers
Tissue paper and towels
Magazines
Other packaging
Bags and sacks
Books
Paper plates and cups
Directories
C
1
cn
a
a
a
a
E
1
1
HI
11
1
I
0 1
5 2
million tons
0 2
5 3
HI I
0 35
36
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 4
PAPER AND PAPERBOARD PRODUCTS IN MSW, 2005
(In thousands of tons and percent of generation)
Generation Recovery
(Thousand (Thousand
Product Category tons) tons)
Nondurable Goods
Newspapers
Newsprint 9,790 8,730
Groundwood inserts 2,260 1,980
Total Newspapers 12,050 10,710
Books 1,120 260
Magazines 2,520 970
Office Papers* 6,580 4,120
Telephone Directories 660 120
Standard Mail** 5,830 2,090
Other Commercial Printing 7,340 760
Tissue Paper and Towels 3,430 Neg.
Paper Plates and Cups 970 Neg.
Other Nonpackaging Paper*** 4,410 Neg.
Total Paper and Paperboard
Nondurable Goods 44,910 19,030
Containers and Packaging
Corrugated Boxes 30,930 22,100
Milk Cartons 420 Neg.
Folding Cartons 4,970 590
Other Paperboard Packaging 150 Neg.
Bags and Sacks 1,190 250
Other Paper Packaging 1,370 Neg.
Total Paper and Paperboard
Containers and Packaging 39,030 22,940
Total Paper and Paperboard 83,940 41,970
* High-grade papers such as copy paper and printer paper.
** Formerly called Third Class Mail by the U.S. Postal Service.
*** Includes tissue in disposable diapers, paper in games and novelties, cards
(Percent of
generation)
89.2%
87.6%
88.9%
23.2%
38.5%
62.6%
18.2%
35.8%
10.4%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
42.4%
71.5%
Neg.
11.9%
Neg.
21.0%
Neg.
58.8%
50.0%
, etc.
Discards
(Thousand
tons)
1,060
280
1,340
860
1,550
2,460
540
3,740
6,580
3,430
970
4,410
25,880
8,830
420
4,380
150
940
1,370
16,090
41,970
Table 4 does not include 10,000 tons of paper used in durable goods (Table 1).
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
The term "cardboard" is often used for products made of paperboard (boxboard and containerboard), but this
inexact term is not used in the paper industry.
37
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
The sensitivity of paper products to economic conditions can be observed in Figure 3.
The tonnage of paper generated in 1975—a severe recession year—was actually less than the
tonnage in 1970. Similar but less pronounced declines in paper generation can be seen in other
recession years.
The wide variety of products that comprise the paper and paperboard materials total is
illustrated in Table 4 and Figure 2. In this report, these products are classified as nondurable
goods or as containers and packaging, with nondurable goods being the larger category.
100
90
10
Figure 3. Paper and paperboard generation and recovery, 1960 to 2005
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
38
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Generation. Estimates of paper and paperboard generation are based on statistics
published by the American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA). These statistics include data
on new supply (production plus net imports) of the various paper and paperboard grades that go
into the products found in MSW. The AF&PA new supply statistics are adjusted to deduct
converting scrap, which is generated when sheets or rolls of paper or paperboard are cut to make
products such as envelopes or boxes. Converting scrap rates vary from product to product; the
rates used in this report were developed as part of a 1992 report for the Recycling Advisory
Council, with a few more revisions as new data became available. Various deductions also are
made to account for products diverted out of municipal solid waste, such as gypsum wallboard
facings (classified as construction and demolition debris) or toilet tissue (which goes to
wastewater treatment plants).
Recovery. Estimates of recovery of paper and paperboard products for recycling are
based on annual reports of recovery published by AF&PA. The AF&PA reports include recovery
of paper and paperboard purchased by U.S. paper mills, plus exports of recovered paper, plus a
relatively small amount estimated to have been used in other products such as insulation and
animal bedding. Recovery as reported by AF&PA includes both preconsumer and postconsumer
paper.
To estimate recovery of postconsumer paper products for this EPA report, estimates of
recovery of converting scrap are deducted from the total recovery amounts reported by AF&PA.
In earlier versions of this EPA report, a simplifying assumption that all converting scrap is
recovered was made. For more recent updates, various converting scrap recovery rates ranging
from 70 percent to 98 percent were applied to the estimates for 1990 through 2005. The
converting scrap recovery rates were developed for a 1992 report for the Recycling Advisory
Council. Because recovered converting scrap is deducted, the paper recovery rates presented in
this report are always lower than the total recovery rates published by AF&PA.
39
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
When recovered paper is repulped, and often deinked, at a recycling paper mill,
considerable amounts of sludge are generated in amounts varying from 5 percent to 35 percent of
the paper feedstock. Since these sludges are generated at an industrial site, they are considered to
be industrial process waste, not municipal solid waste; therefore they have been removed from
the municipal waste stream.
Recovery of paper and paperboard for recycling is at the highest rate overall compared to
most other materials in MSW. As Table 4 shows, 71.5 percent of all corrugated boxes were
recovered for recycling in 2005; this is up from 67.3 percent in 2000. Newspapers were
recovered at a rate of 88.9 percent, and high grade office papers at 62.6 percent, with lesser
percentages of other papers being recovered also. Approximately 42 million tons of
postconsumer paper were recovered in 2005—50 percent of total paper and paperboard
generation. This is up from 42.8 percent in 2000.
Discards After Recovery. After recovery of paper and paperboard for recycling,
discards were 42 million tons in 2005, or 25.2 percent of total MSW discards.
Glass
Glass is found in MSW primarily in the form of containers (Table 5 and Figures 4 and 5),
but also in durable goods like furniture, appliances, and consumer electronics. In the container
category, glass is found in beer and soft drink bottles, wine and liquor bottles, and bottles and
jars for food, cosmetics, and other products. More detail on these products is included in the later
section on products in MSW.
40
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 5
GLASS PRODUCTS IN MSW, 2005
(In thousands of tons and percent of generation)
Generation
Recovery
Discards
Product Category
Durable Goods*
Containers and Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Bottles
Wine and Liquor Bottles
Food and Other Bottles and Jars
Total Glass Containers
Total Glass
(Thousand (Thousand (Percent of (Thousand
tons) tons) generation) tons)
1,830 Neg. Neg. 1,830
7,150 2,190 30.6% 4,960
1,640 250 15.2% 1,390
2,130 320 15.0% 1,810
10,920 2,760 25.3% 8,160
12,750 2,760 21.6% 9,990
Glass as a component of appliances, furniture, consumer electronics, etc.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
Figure 4. Glass products generated in MSW, 2005
Beer & soft drink bottles*
Food, other bottles & jars
Durable goods
Wine & liquor bottles
* Includes ca
rbonated drinks
and non-carbona
ted water, teas,
and flavored drin
ks.
345
million tons
41
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Figure 5. Glass generation and recovery, 1960 to 2005
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
Generation. Glass accounted for 6.7 million tons of MSW in 1960, or 7.6 percent of total
generation. Generation of glass continued to grow over the next two decades, but then glass
containers were widely displaced by other materials, principally aluminum and plastics. Thus the
tonnage of glass in MSW declined in the 1980s, from approximately 15.1 million tons in 1980 to
13.1 million tons in 1990. Beginning about 1987, however, the decline in generation of glass
containers slowed (Figure 5), and glass generation in 2005 was 12.8 million tons. During the
1990s glass generation varied from 12.0 to 13.6 million tons per year. Glass was 10 percent of
MSW generation in 1980, declining to 5.2 percent in 2005.
Recovery. Most recovered glass containers (bottles) are used to make new glass
containers, but a portion goes to other uses such as fiberglass insulation, aggregate, and glasphalt
for highway construction. Until 1998, the Glass Packaging Institute published estimates of glass
bottle recovery annually. Since this data source is no longer available, industry sources were
contacted for recovery data. Recovery of glass bottles was estimated at 2.8 million tons in 2005,
down slightly from an estimated 2.9 million tons in 2000.
42
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Discards After Recovery. Recovery for recycling lowered discards of glass to 10 million
tons in 2005 (6.0 percent of total MSW discards).
Ferrous Metals
By weight, ferrous metals (iron and steel) are the largest category of metals in MSW
(Table 6 and Figure 6). The largest quantities of ferrous metals in MSW are found in durable
goods such as appliances, furniture, and tires. Containers and packaging are the other source of
ferrous metals in MSW. Large quantities of ferrous metals are found in construction materials
and in transportation parts and products such as automobiles, locomotives, and ships, but these
are not counted as MSW in this report.
Total generation and recovery of all metals in MSW from 1960 to 2005 are shown in
Figure 7.
Generation. Approximately 10.3 million tons of ferrous metals were generated in 1960.
Like glass, the tonnages grew during the 1960s, but began to drop as lighter materials like
aluminum and plastics replaced steel in many applications. Since 1970, generation of ferrous
metals has varied between about 12.4 million tons in 1970 to 13.8 million tons in 2005. The
percentage of ferrous metals generation in MSW has declined from 11.7 percent in 1960 to 5.6
percent in 2005.
43
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 6
METAL PRODUCTS IN MSW, 2005
(In thousands of tons and percent of generation)
Product Category
Durable Goods
Ferrous metals*
Aluminum**
Leadf
Other nonferrous metals}
Total Metals in Durable Goods
Generation
(Thousand
tons)
11,400
1,080
1,280
460
Recovery
(Thousand
tons)
(Percent of
generation)
14,220
Discards
(Thousand
tons)
7,970
1,080
20
460
9,530
Nondurable Goods
Aluminum 230
Neg.
Neg.
230
Containers and Packaging
Steel
*
**
t
%
Food and other cans 2,130
Other steel packaging 240
Total Steel Packaging 2,370
Aluminum
Beer and soft drink cans 1,450
Food and other cans 50
Foil and closures 400
Total Aluminum Packaging 1,900
Total Metals in
Containers and Packaging 4,270
Total Metals 18,720
Ferrous 13,770
Aluminum 3,210
Other nonferrous 1,740
1,340
160
1,500
650
Neg.
40
690
2,190
6,880
4,930
690
1,260
62.9%
66.7%
63.3%
44.8%
Neg.
10.0%
36.3%
51.3%
36.8%
35.8%
21.5%
72.4%
790
80
870
800
50
360
1,210
2,080
11,840
8,840
2,520
480
Ferrous metals (iron and steel) in appliances, furniture, tires, and miscellaneous durables.
Aluminum in appliances, furniture, and miscellaneous durables.
Lead in lead-acid batteries.
Other nonferrous metals in appliances and miscellaneous durables.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
44
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Figure 6. Metal products generated in MSW, 2005
D Ferrous metals DAluminum D Other nonferrous
Nondurables
Packaging
Durables
20 -r-
10
12
million tons
Figure 7. Metals generation and recovery, 1960 to 2005
14 16
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
45
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Recovery. The renewed emphasis on recovery and recycling in recent years has included
ferrous metals. Based on data from the Steel Recycling Institute, recovery of ferrous metals from
appliances ("white goods") was estimated at a rate of 90 percent in 2005. Overall recovery of
ferrous metals from durable goods (large and small appliances, furniture, and tires) was
estimated to be 30 percent (3.4 million tons) in 2005 (Table 6).
Steel food cans and other cans were estimated to be recovered at a rate of 62.9 percent
(1.3 million tons) in 2005. Approximately 160,000 tons of other steel packaging, mostly steel
barrels and drums, were estimated to have been recovered for recycling in 2005.
Discards After Recovery. In 2005, discards of ferrous metals after recovery were 8.8
million tons, or 5.3 percent of total discards.
Aluminum
The largest source of aluminum in MSW is aluminum cans and other packaging (Table 6
and Figure 6). Other sources of aluminum are found in durable and nondurable goods.
Generation. In 2005, 1.9 million tons of aluminum were generated as containers and
packaging, while approximately 1.3 million tons were found in durable and nondurable goods.
The total-3.2 million tons-was 1.3 percent of total MSW generation in 2005. Aluminum
generation was only 340,000 tons (0.4 percent of MSW generation) in 1960.
Recovery. Aluminum beverage containers were recovered at a rate of 44.8 percent of
generation (0.7 million tons) in 2005, and 36.3 percent of all aluminum in containers and
packaging was recovered for recycling in 2005.
Discards After Recovery. In 2005, about 2.5 million tons of aluminum were discarded
in MSW after recovery, which was 1.5 percent of total MSW discards.
46
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Other Nonferrous Metals
Other nonferrous metals (e.g., lead, copper, zinc) are found in durable products such as
appliances, consumer electronics, etc. Lead in lead-acid batteries is the most prevalent
nonferrous metal (other than aluminum) in MSW. Note that only lead-acid batteries from
passenger cars, trucks, and motorcycles are included. Lead-acid batteries used in large
equipment or industrial applications are not included.
Generation. Generation of other nonferrous metals in MSW totaled 1.7 million tons in
2005. Lead in batteries accounted for 1.3 million tons of this amount. Generation of these metals
has increased slowly, up from 180,000 tons in 1960. As a percentage of total generation,
nonferrous metals have never exceeded one percent.
Recovery. Recovery of the other nonferrous metals was 1.3 million tons in 2005, with
most of this being lead recovered from batteries. It was estimated that 99 percent of battery lead
was recovered in 2005.
Discards After Recovery. In 2005, 480,000 tons of nonferrous metals were discarded in
MSW. Percentages of total discards remained less than one percent over the entire period.
Plastics
Plastics are a rapidly growing segment of MSW. While plastics are found in all major
MSW categories, the containers and packaging category has the most plastic tonnage (Figure 8
and Table 7).
47
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Figure 8. Plastics products generated in MSW, 2005
Durable goods
Nondurable goods
Bags, sacks and wraps
Other packaging
Other containers
Soft drink, milk, and water
containers
34567
million tons
9 10
In durable goods, plastics are found in appliances, furniture, casings of lead-acid
batteries, and other products. (Note that plastics in transportation products generally are not
included in this report.) As shown in Table 7, a wide range of resin types is found in durable
goods. While some detail is provided in Table 7 for resins in durable goods, there are hundreds
of different resin formulations used in appliances, carpets, and other durable goods; a complete
listing is beyond the scope of this report.
48
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 7
PLASTICS IN PRODUCTS IN MSW, 2005
(In thousands of tons, and percent of generation by resin)
Product Category
Durable Goods
PET
HOPE
PVC
LDPE/LLDPE
PP
PS
Other resins
Total Plastics in Durable Goods
Generation Recovery
(Thousand (Thousand
tons) tons)
480
650
510
770
1,370
730
4,200
(Percent
of Gen.)
Discards
(Thousand
tons)
8,710
370
4.2%
8,340
Nondurable Goods
Plastic Plates and Cups
LDPE/LLDPE
PS
Subtotal Plastic Plates and Cups
Trash Bags
HOPE
LDPE/LLDPE
Subtotal Trash Bags
All other nondurables*
PET
HOPE
PVC
LDPE/LLDPE
PP
PS
Other resins
Subtotal All Other Nondurables
20
910
930
280
780
1,060
240
430
660
1,630
900
600
100
Neg
20
910
930
280
780
1,060
240
430
660
1,630
900
600
100
4,560
4,560
Total Plastics in Nondurable Goods, by resin
PET
HOPE
PVC
LDPE/LLDPE
PP
PS
Other resins
Total Plastics in Nondurable Goods
240
710
660
2,430
900
1,510
100
240
710
660
2,430
900
1,510
100
6,550 Neg.
Neg.
6,550
Plastic Containers & Packaging
Soft drink bottles
PET
850
290
34.1%
560
Milk and water bottles
HOPE
800
230
570
HOPE = High density polyethylene
LDPE = Low density polyethylene PP = Polypropylene
LLDPE = Linear low density polyethylene
All other nondurables include plastics in disposable diapers, clothing, footwear, etc.
: Other plastic packaging includes coatings, closures, caps, trays, shapes, etc.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
49
PET = Polyethylene terephthalate PS = Polystyrene
PVC = Polyvinyl chloride
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 7 (continued)
PLASTICS IN PRODUCTS IN MSW, 2005
(In thousands of tons
Product Category
Plastic Containers & Packaging, cont.
Other plastic containers
PET
HOPE
PVC
LDPE/LLDPE
PP
PS
Other resins
Subtotal Other Containers
Bags, sacks, & wraps
HOPE
PVC
LDPE/LLDPE
PP
PS
Other resins
Subtotal Bags, Sacks, & Wraps
Other Plastics Packaging**
PET
HOPE
PVC
LDPE/LLDPE
PP
PS
Other resins
Subtotal Other Packaging
Total Plastics in Containers & Packaging, by
PET
HOPE
PVC
LDPE/LLDPE
PP
PS
Other resins
Total Plastics in Cont. & Packaging
Total Plastics in MSW, by resin
PET
HOPE
PVC
LDPE/LLDPE
PP
PS
Other resins
Total Plastics in MSW
, and percent of generation by resin)
Generation
(Thousand
tons)
1,040
1,410
90
40
80
0
450
3,110
790
70
2,680
710
0
200
4,450
250
1,530
310
530
940
350
530
4,440
resin
2,140
4,530
470
3,250
1,730
350
1,180
13,650
2,860
5,890
1,640
6,450
4,000
2,590
5,480
28,910
Recovery
(Thousand (Percent
tons) of Gen.)
210
230
440 14.1%
40
190
230 5.2%
40
20
10
20
90 2.0%
540
520
190
10
20
1,280 9.4%
540
520
190
10
390
1,650 5.7%
Discards
(Thousand
tons)
830
1,180
90
40
80
0
450
2,670
750
70
2,490
710
0
200
4,220
210
1,510
310
530
930
350
510
4,350
1,600
4,010
470
3,060
1,720
350
1,160
12,370
2,320
5,370
1,640
6,260
3,990
2,590
5,090
27,260
HDPE = High density polyethylene PET = Polyethylene terephthalate PS = Polystyrene
LDPE = Low density polyethylene PP = Polypropylene PVC = Polyvinyl chloride
LLDPE = Linear low density polyethylene
All other nondurables include plastics in disposable diapers, clothing, footwear, etc.
Other plastic packaging includes coatings, closures, caps, trays, shapes, etc.
Some detail of recovery by resin omitted due to lack of data.
This table understates the recovery of plastics due to the dispersed nature of plastics recycling activities.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
50
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Plastics are found in such nondurable products as disposable diapers, trash bags, cups,
eating utensils, sporting and recreational equipment, medical devices, and household items such
as shower curtains. The plastic food service items are generally made of clear or foamed
polystyrene, while trash bags are made of high-density polyethylene (HDPE) or low-density
polyethylene (LDPE). A wide variety of other resins are used in other nondurable goods.
Plastic resins are also used in a variety of container and packaging products such as
polyethylene terephthalate (PET) soft drink bottles, high-density polyethylene (HDPE) bottles
for milk and water, and a wide variety of other resin types used in other plastic containers, bags,
sacks, wraps, and lids.
Generation. Production data on plastics resin use in products are taken from the
American Plastics Council's annual resin reports. The basic data are adjusted for product service
life, fabrication losses, and net imports of plastic products to derive generation of plastics in the
various products in MSW.
Plastics made up an estimated 390,000 tons of MSW generation in 1960. The quantity
has increased relatively steadily to 28.9 million tons in 2005 (Figure 9). As a percentage of
MSW generation, plastics were less than one percent in 1960, increasing to 11.8 percent in 2005.
Recovery for Recycling. While overall recovery of plastics for recycling is relatively
small-1.7 million tons, or 5.7 percent of plastics generation in 2005 (Table 7)-recovery of some
plastic containers is more significant. PET soft drink bottles were recovered at a rate of 34.1
percent in 2005. Recovery of high-density polyethylene milk and water bottles was estimated at
about 28.8 percent in 2005. Significant recovery of plastics from lead-acid battery casings and
from some other containers was also reported. The primary source of data on plastics recovery is
an annual survey conducted for the American Plastics Council.
Discards After Recovery. Discards of plastics in MSW after recovery were 27.3 million
tons, or 16.4 percent of total MSW discards in 2005.
51
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Figure 9. Plastics generation and recovery, 1960 to 2005
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Other Materials
Rubber and Leather. The predominant source of rubber in MSW is rubber tires from
automobiles and trucks (Table 8). Other sources of rubber and leather include clothing and
footwear and other miscellaneous durable and nondurable products. These other sources are
quite diverse, including such items as gaskets on appliances, furniture, and hot water bottles, for
example.
Generation. Generation of rubber and leather in MSW has shown slow growth over the
years, increasing from 1.8 million tons in 1960 to 6.7 million tons in 2005. One reason for the
relatively slow rate of growth is that tires have been made smaller and longer-wearing than in
earlier years.
As a percentage of total MSW generation, rubber and leather has been about 3 percent for
many years.
52
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Recovery for Recycling. The only recovery for recycling identified in this category is
rubber from tires, and that was estimated to be 960,000 tons in 2005. This is 34.8 percent of
rubber in tires in 2005. (Table 8). (This recovery estimate does not include tires retreaded or
energy recovery from tires.) Overall, 14.3 percent of rubber and leather in MSW was recovered
in 2005.
Table 8
RUBBER AND LEATHER PRODUCTS IN MSW, 2005
(In thousands of tons and percent of generation)
Generation
(Thousand
Product Category tons)
Durable Goods
Rubber in Tires* 2,760
Other Durables** 2,920
Total Rubber & Leather
Durable Goods
Nondurable Goods
Clothing and Footwear
Other Nondurables
Total Rubber & Leather
Nondurable Goods
Containers and Packaging
Total Rubber & Leather
5,680
700
290
990
30
6,700
Recovery
(Thousand
tons)
960
Neg.
960
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
960
(Percent of
generation)
34.8%
Neg.
16.9%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
14.3%
Discards
(Thousand
tons)
1,800
2,920
4,720
700
290
990
30
5,740
* Automobile and truck tires. Does not include other materials in tires.
** Includes carpets and rugs and other miscellaneous durables.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
Discards After Recovery. Discards of rubber and leather after recovery were 5.7 million
tons in 2005 (3.4 percent of total discards).
53
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Textiles. Textiles in MSW are found mainly in discarded clothing, although other
sources were identified to be furniture, carpets, tires, footwear, and other nondurable goods such
as sheets and towels.
Generation. An estimated 11.1 million tons of textiles were generated in 2005 (4.5
percent of total MSW generation).
Recovery for Recycling and Discards. Significant amounts of textiles are recovered for
reuse. However, the reused garments and wiper rags re-enter the waste stream eventually, so this
is considered a diversion rather than recovery for recycling and, therefore, not included in the
recovery for recycling estimates. Since data on elapsed time from recovery of textiles for reuse
to final discard is limited, it was assumed that reused textiles re-enter the waste stream the same
year that they are first discarded. It was estimated that 15.3 percent of textiles in clothing and
items such as sheets and pillowcases was recovered for export or reprocessing in 2005 (1.7
million tons) leaving discards of 9.4 million tons of textiles in 2005.
Wood
The sources of wood in MSW include furniture, other durable goods (e.g., cabinets for
electronic equipment), wood packaging (crates, pallets), and some other miscellaneous products.
Generation and recovery data for wood pallets comes from the Center for Forest Products
Marketing and Management (Virginia Polytechnic Institute).
Generation. Generation of wood in MSW was 13.9 million tons in 2005 (5.7 percent of
total MSW generation).
Recovery for Recycling and Discards. Wood pallet recovery for recycling (usually by
chipping for uses such as mulch or bedding material, but excluding wood combusted as fuel) was
estimated at 1.3 million tons in 2005.
54
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Accounting for pallet reuse and recovery for recycling, wood discards were 12.6 million
tons in 2005, or 7.6 percent of total MSW discards.
Other products. Generation of "other products" waste is mainly associated with
disposable diapers, which are discussed under Products in Municipal Solid Waste. The only
other significant sources of materials in this category are the electrolytes and other materials
associated with lead-acid batteries that are not classified as plastics or nonferrous metal.
Food Scraps
Food scraps included here consist of uneaten food and food preparation wastes from
residences, commercial establishments such as grocery stores and sit-down and fast food
restaurants, institutional sources such as school cafeterias, and industrial sources such as factory
lunchrooms. Food waste generated during the preparation and packaging of food products is
considered industrial waste and therefore not included in MSW food scrap estimates.
Generation. No production data are available for food scraps. Food scraps from
residential and commercial sources were estimated using data from sampling studies in various
parts of the country in combination with demographic data on population, grocery store sales,
restaurant sales, numbers of employees, and numbers of prisoners and students in institutions.
Generation of food scraps was estimated to be 29.2 million tons in 2005 (11.9 percent of total
generation).
Recovery for Composting and Discards. Beginning in 1994 for this series of reports, a
significant amount of food scraps composting from commercial sources was identified. As the
data source (a survey published by BioCycle magazine) has improved, it has become apparent
that some other composted materials (e.g., industrial food processing wastes) have been included
with food scraps classified as MSW in the past. For the 2005 estimate, food scrap composting
data were obtained from primary sources including state solid waste officials, large-scale
municipal and commercial composting facilities, and large generators (e.g., supermarkets and
restaurants).
55
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Additional data on MSW food scrap composting operations resulted in an estimate of
370,000 tons food scraps composted in 2005.
Another BioCycle survey yielded an estimate of approximately 320,000 tons of MSW
composted. The total-690,000 tons of food scraps and other organic materials composted in
2005-is shown in the recovery tables.
Yard Trimmings
Yard trimmings3 include grass, leaves, and tree and brush trimmings from residential,
institutional, and commercial sources.
Generation. In earlier versions of this report, generation of yard trimmings was
estimated using sampling studies and population data. While in past years generation of yard
trimmings had been increasing steadily as population and residential housing grew (i.e., constant
generation on a per capita basis), in the 1990s local and state governments started enacting
legislation that discouraged yard trimmings disposal in landfills.
Legislation affecting yard trimmings disposal in landfills was tabulated, using published
sources. In 1992, 11 states and the District of Columbia-accounting for more than 28 percent of
the nation's population-had legislation in effect that bans or discourages yard trimmings disposal
in landfills. The tabulation of current legislation shows 21 states and the District of Columbia,
representing about 50 percent of the nation's population, has legislation affecting disposal of
yard trimmings. This has led to an increase in backyard composting and the use of mulching
mowers to allow grass trimmings to remain in place.
3 Although limited data are available on the composition of yard trimmings, it is estimated that the average
composition by weight is about 50 percent grass, 25 percent brush, and 25 percent leaves. These are "ballpark"
numbers that will vary widely according to climate and region of the country.
56
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Using these facts, it was estimated that yard trimmings generation has declined since
1990. In the absence of significant new legislation, yard trimmings generation has been
increasing slightly in recent years (i.e., increasing as natural population and residential dwelling
units increase). An estimated 32.1 million tons of yard trimmings were generated in MSW in
2005.
Recovery for Composting and Discards. Recovery for composting of yard trimmings
was estimated using information from state composting programs, which estimated tonnages
composted or mulched in 2005. This information resulted in an estimate of 19.9 million tons of
yard trimmings removed for composting or mulching in 2005-a significant increase over the
2000 estimate.
It should be noted that the estimated 19.9 million tons recovered for composting in 2005
does not include yard trimmings recovered for direct landspreading disposal. It also should be
noted that these recovery estimates do not account for backyard composting by individuals and
practices such as less bagging of grass clippings. These are source reduction activities taking
place onsite, while the yard trimmings recovery estimates are based on material sent off-site.
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
This relatively small category of MSW is derived from sampling studies. It is not well
defined and often shows up in sampling reports as "fines" or "other." It includes soil, bits of
concrete, stones, and the like.
Generation, Recovery, and Discards. This category contributed an estimated 3.7
million tons of MSW in 2005. No recovery of these products was identified; discards are the
same as generation.
57
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Summary of Materials in Municipal Solid Waste
Generation. Changing quantities and composition of municipal solid waste generation
are illustrated in Figure 10. Generation of MSW has grown relatively steadily, from 88.1 million
tons in 1960 to 247.3 million tons in 2004. It decreased slightly to 245.7 million tons in 2005.
Over the years paper and paperboard has been the dominant material category generated
in MSW, accounting for 34.2 percent of generation in 2005. Yard trimmings, the second largest
material component of MSW (13.1 percent of MSW generation) has declined as a percentage of
MSW due to state and local legislated landfill bans and increased emphasis on backyard
composting and other source reduction measures such as the use of mulching mowers.
250
200 -
150 -
100 -
Figure 10. Generation of materials in MSW, 1960 to 2005
* "All Other"' includes primarily wood, rubber and leather, and textiles
DAN Other*
HYard
BFood
D Plastics
D Metals
B Glass
BPaper
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
58
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Metals account for 7.6 percent of MSW generation and have remained fairly constant as a
source of MSW since 1990. Glass increased until the 1980s, decreasing somewhat in the 1990s.
Glass generation was 12.8 million tons in 2005, 5.2 percent of generation. Food scraps have
increased in terms of MSW tonnage (11.9 percent of generation in 2005). Plastics have
increasingly been used in a variety of products and thus have been a rapidly growing component
of MSW. In terms of tonnage contributed they ranked fourth in 2005 (behind paper, yard
trimmings, and food scraps), and account for 11.8 percent of MSW generation.
Recovery and Discards. The effect of recovery on MSW discards is illustrated in Figure
11. Recovery of materials for recycling and composting grew at a rather slow pace from 1960 to
the 1980s, increasing only from 6.4 percent of generation in 1960 to 9.6 percent in 1980.
Renewed interest in recycling (including composting) as waste management alternatives came
about in the late 1980s, and the recovery rate in 1990 was estimated to be 16.2 percent of
generation, increasing to 32.1 percent in 2005.
250
200 -
150 -
100 -
Figure 11. Recovery and discards of materials in MSW, 1960 to 2005
Discards including
combustion with
energy recovery
Generation minus recovery = discards
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
59
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Estimated recovery of materials (including composting) is shown in Figure 12. In 2005,
recovery of paper and paperboard dominated materials recovery at 54 percent of total tonnage
recovered, while yard trimmings contributed 25 percent of total recovery. Recovery of other
materials, while generally increasing, contributes much less tonnage, reflecting in part the
relatively smaller amounts of materials generated in those categories.
Figure 12. Materials recovery,* 2005
All other
Plastics
2%
Metals
9%
Yard trimmings
25%
Paper & paperboard
54%
* In percent by weight of total recovery
Figure 13 illustrates the effect of recovery of materials for recycling, including
composting, on the composition of MSW discards. For example, paper and paperboard products
were 34 percent of MSW generated in 2005, but after recovery, paper and paperboard products
were 26 percent of discards. Materials that have little or no recovery exhibit a larger percentage
of MSW discards compared to generation.
60
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Figure 13. Materials generated and discarded*
in municipal solid waste, 2005
(In percent of total generation and discards)
Other wastes
16%
Yard trimmings
13%
Food wastes
12%
Paper & paperboard
34%
Plastics
12%
Metals
8%
Generation
Other wastes
21%
Yard trimmings
7%
Food wastes
17%
-~__
Plastics
16%
Discards*
'Discards in this figure include combustion with energy recovery.
Paper & paperboard
26%
Metals
7%
61
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
The Chapter 2 section above gave a breakdown of municipal solid waste by material. It
described how the 245.7 million tons of MSW were generated, recycled (including composted)
and disposed of. The following section breaks out the same 245.7 million tons of MSW by
product.
PRODUCTS IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
The purpose of this section is to show how the products that make up municipal solid
waste are generated, recycled (including composted) and discarded. For the analysis, products
are divided into three basic categories: durable goods, nondurable goods, and containers and
packaging. These three categories generally follow the definitions of the U.S. Department of
Commerce, one of EPA's data sources. By these definitions, durable goods, (e.g., appliances) are
those that last 3 years or more, while nondurable goods (e.g., newspapers and trash bags) last
less than 3 years. For this report, containers and packaging are assumed to be discarded the same
year the products they contain are purchased.
The following 15 tables (Tables 9 through 23) show generation, recycling (including
composting) and discards of municipal solid waste in the three categories-durable goods,
nondurable goods, and containers and packaging. Within these three categories, products are
listed by type-for instance, carpets and rugs, office paper, or aluminum cans. The material the
product is made of may be stated as well (for instance, glass beverage containers or steel cans),
or may be obvious (for instance, magazines are made of paper.) Some products, such as tires and
appliances, are made of several different material types.
At the bottom of each of these 15 tables (Tables 9 through 23) there is a section titled
"Other Wastes." This contains information on food scraps, yard trimmings, and miscellaneous
inorganic wastes. These wastes are not products that can be estimated through the materials flow
methodology, but they are estimated by other means, as described earlier.
62
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Within Tables 9 through 23, the first three tables-Tables 9 through 11-serve as an index
to the other tables. Table 9 shows what tables to consult for detailed information on generation;
Table 10 shows what tables to consult for detailed information on recovery; and Table 11 does
the same for detailed information on discards. The tables on generation all have the same
"bottom line"-245.7 million tons in 2005-with detail provided in different categories-durable
goods, nondurable goods, or containers and packaging. For Table 10 and related tables, the
"bottom line" is MSW is recovered-79 million tons; and for Table 11 and related tables, the
"bottom line" is MSW discarded-166.7 million tons.
Durable Goods
Durable goods generally are defined as products having a lifetime of three years or more,
although there are some exceptions. In this report, durable goods include large and small
appliances, furniture and furnishings, carpets and rugs, rubber tires, lead-acid automotive
batteries, consumer electronics, and other miscellaneous durable goods (e.g., luggage, sporting
goods, miscellaneous household goods) (see Tables 12 through 14). These products are often
called "oversize and bulky" in municipal solid waste management practice, and they are
generally handled in a somewhat different manner than other components of MSW. That is, they
are often picked up separately, and may not be mixed with other MSW at the landfill, combustor,
or other waste management facility. Durable goods are made up of a wide variety of materials. In
order of tonnage in MSW in 2005, these include: ferrous metals, plastics, rubber and leather,
wood, textiles, glass, other nonferrous metals (e.g., lead, copper), and aluminum.
Generation of durable goods in MSW totaled 40.3 million tons in 2005 (16.4 percent of
total MSW generation). After recovery for recycling, 32.8 million tons of durable goods
remained as discards in 2005.
63
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 9
CATEGORIES OF PRODUCTS GENERATED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 2005
(In thousands of tons and percent of total generation)
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 12)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 15)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 18)
Total Product** Wastes
Other Wastes
Food Scraps
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MS W Generated - Weight
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 12)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 15)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 19)
Total Product** Wastes
Other Wastes
Food Scraps
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MS W Generated - %
Thousands of Tons
1960
9,920
17,330
27,370
54,620
12,200
20,000
1,300
33,500
88,120
1970
14,660
25,060
43,560
83,280
12,800
23,200
1,780
37,780
121,060
1980
21,800
34,420
52,670
108,890
13,000
27,500
2,250
42,750
151,640
1990
29,810
52,170
64,530
146,510
20,800
35,000
2,900
58,700
205,210
2000
36,980
64,120
76,020
177,120
26,480
30,530
3,500
60,510
237,630
2003
39,440
62,300
75,360
177,100
28,180
31,470
3,620
63,270
240,370
2004
39,850
64,410
78,550
182,810
29,070
31,770
3,650
64,490
247,300
2005
40,280
63,720
76,670
180,670
29,230
32,070
3,690
64,990
245,660
Percent of Total Generation
1960
1 1 .3%
19.7%
31.1%
62.0%
13.8%
22.7%
1 .5%
38.0%
100.0%
1970
12.1%
20.7%
36.0%
68.8%
10.6%
19.2%
1 .5%
31 .2%
100.0%
1980
14.4%
22.7%
34.7%
71 .8%
8.6%
18.1%
1 .5%
28.2%
100.0%
1990
14.5%
25.4%
31 .4%
71 .4%
10.1%
17.1%
1 .4%
28.6%
100.0%
2000
15.6%
27.0%
32.0%
74.5%
11.1%
12.8%
1 .5%
25.5%
100.0%
2003
16.4%
25.9%
31 .4%
73.7%
11.7%
13.1%
1 .5%
26.3%
100.0%
2004
16.1%
26.0%
31 .8%
73.9%
1 1 .8%
12.8%
1 .5%
26.1%
100.0%
2005
16.4%
25.9%
31 .2%
73.5%
1 1 .9%
13.1%
1 .5%
26.5%
100.0%
Generation before materials recovery or combustion. Does not include construction & demolition debris, industrial
process wastes, or certain other wastes.
' Other than food products.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
64
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 10
RECOVERY* OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, 1960 TO 2005
(In thousands of tons and percent of generation of each category)
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 13)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 16)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 20)
Total Product** Wastes
Other Wastes
Food, Other"
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Recovered - Weight
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 13)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 16)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 21)
Total Product** Wastes
Other Wastes
Food, Other"
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Recovered - %
Thousands of Tons
1960
350
2,390
2,870
5,610
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
5,610
1970
940
3,730
3,350
8,020
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
8,020
1980
1,360
4,670
8,490
14,520
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
14,520
1990
3,460
8,800
16,780
29,040
Neg.
4,200
Neg.
4,200
33,240
2000
6,350
17,560
28,740
52,650
680
15,770
Neg.
16,450
69,100
2003
7,160
19,290
29,300
55,750
750
18,330
Neg.
19,080
74,830
2004
7,440
19,960
29,790
57,190
660
19,810
Neg.
20,470
77,660
2005
7,470
20,450
30,480
58,400
690
19,860
Neg.
20,550
78,950
Percent of Generation of Each Category
1960
3.5%
13.8%
10.5%
10.3%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
6.4%
1970
6.4%
14.9%
7.7%
9.6%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
6.6%
1980
6.2%
13.6%
16.1%
13.3%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
9.6%
1990
1 1 .6%
16.9%
26.0%
19.8%
Neg.
12.0%
Neg.
7.2%
16.2%
2000
17.2%
27.4%
37.8%
29.7%
2.6%
51.7%
Neg.
27.2%
29.1%
2003 2004
18.2%
31 .0%
38.9%
31 .5%
2.7%
58.2%
Neg.
30.2%
31.1%
18.7%
31 .0%
37.9%
31 .3%
2.3%
62.4%
Neg.
31.7%
31 .4%
2005
18.5%
32.1%
39.8%
32.3%
2.4%
61 .9%
Neg.
31 .6%
32.1%
* Recovery of postconsumer wastes; does not include converting/fabrication scrap.
** Other than food products.
A Includes recovery of paper for composting.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
65
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 11
CATEGORIES OF PRODUCTS DISCARDED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 2005
(In thousands of tons and percent of total discards)
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 14)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 17)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 22)
Total Product** Wastes
Other Wastes
Food Wastes
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Discarded - Weight
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 14)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 17)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 23)
Total Product** Wastes
Other Wastes
Food Scraps
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Discarded - %
Thousands of Tons
1960
9,570
14,940
24,500
49,010
12,200
20,000
1,300
33,500
82,510
1970
13,720
21,330
40,210
75,260
12,800
23,200
1,780
37,780
113,040
1980
20,440
29,750
44,180
94,370
13,000
27,500
2,250
42,750
137,120
1990
26,350
43,370
47,750
117,470
20,800
30,800
2,900
54,500
171,970
2000
30,630
46,560
47,280
124,470
25,800
14,760
3,500
44,060
168,530
2003
32,280
43,010
46,060
121,350
27,430
13,140
3,620
44,190
165,540
2004
32,410
44,450
48,760
125,620
28,410
1 1 ,960
3,650
44,020
169,640
2005
32,810
43,270
46,190
122,270
28,540
12,210
3,690
44,440
166,710
Percent of Total Discards
1960
1 1 .6%
18.1%
29.7%
59.4%
14.8%
24.2%
1 .6%
40.6%
100.0%
1970
12.1%
18.9%
35.6%
66.6%
1 1 .3%
20.5%
1 .6%
33.4%
100.0%
1980
14.9%
21.7%
32.2%
68.8%
9.5%
20.1%
1.6%
31 .2%
100.0%
1990
15.3%
25.2%
27.8%
68.3%
12.1%
17.9%
1.7%
31.7%
100.0%
2000
18.2%
27.6%
28.1%
73.9%
15.3%
8.8%
2.1%
26.1%
100.0%
2003
19.5%
26.0%
27.8%
73.3%
16.6%
7.9%
2.2%
26.7%
100.0%
2004
19.1%
26.2%
28.7%
74.1%
16.7%
7.1%
2.2%
25.9%
100.0%
2005
19.7%
26.0%
27.7%
73.3%
17.1%
7.3%
2.2%
26.7%
100.0%
* Discards after materials and compost recovery. In this table, discards include combustion with energy recovery.
Does not include construction & demolition debris, industrial process wastes, or certain other wastes.
** Other than food products.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
Major Appliances. Major appliances in MSW include refrigerators, washing machines,
water heaters, etc. They are often called "white goods" in the trade. Data on unit production of
appliances are taken from Appliance Manufacturer Market Profile. The unit data are converted
to weight using various conversion factors developed over the years, plus data on the materials
66
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
composition of the appliances. Adjustments are also made for the estimated lifetimes of the
appliances, which range up to 20 years.
Generation of major appliances has increased very slowly over the years, and in fact was
about constant for the past 5 years. In 2005, generation was 3.6 million tons, or 1.5 percent of
total MSW generation. In general, appliances have increased in quantity but not in average
weight over the years. Ferrous metals (steel and iron) are the predominant materials in major
appliances, but other metals, plastics, glass, and other materials are also present.
Data on recovery of ferrous metals from major appliances are taken from a survey
conducted by the Steel Recycling Institute. Recovery of ferrous metals from shredded appliances
was estimated to be 2.4 million tons in 2005, leaving 1.2 million tons of appliances to be
discarded.
Small Appliances. This category includes items such as toasters, hair dryers, electric
coffee pots, and the like. Information on shipments of small appliances was obtained from
Department of Commerce data. Information on weights and materials composition of discarded
small appliances was obtained through interviews. It was estimated that 0.9 million tons of small
appliances were generated in 2005. A small amount of ferrous metals in small appliances is
recovered through magnetic separation.
Furniture and Furnishings. Data on sales of furniture and furnishings are provided by
the Department of Commerce in dollars. These data are converted to tons using factors
developed for this study over the years. Adjustments are made for imports and exports, and
adjustments are made for the lifetimes of the furniture.
Generation of furniture and furnishings in MSW has increased from 2.2 million tons in
1960 to 8.8 million tons in 2005 (3.6 percent of total MSW). No significant recovery of materials
from furniture was identified. Wood is the largest material category in furniture, with ferrous
metals second. Plastics, glass, and other materials are also found in furniture.
67
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 12
PRODUCTS GENERATED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 2005
(WITH DETAIL ON DURABLE GOODS)
(In thousands of tons and percent of total generation)
Products
Thousands of Tons
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2003
2004
2005
Durable Goods
Major Appliances
Small Appliances**
Furniture and Furnishings
Carpets and Rugs**
Rubber Tires
Batteries, lead acid
Miscellaneous Durables
Selected Consumer Electronics***
Other Miscellaneous Durables
Total Miscellaneous Durables
Total Durable Goods
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 15)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 18)
Total Product Wastes}
Other Wastes
Food Scraps
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Generated - Weight
Products
1,630
2,150
1,120
Neg.
5,020
9,920
17,330
27,370
54,620
12,200
20,000
1,300
33,500
88,120
2,170
2,830
1,890
820
6,950
14,660
25,060
43,560
83,280
12,800
23,200
1,780
37,780
121,060
2,950
4,760
2,720
1,490
9,880
21 ,800
34,420
52,670
108,890
13,000
27,500
2,250
42,750
151,640
3,310
460
6,790
1,660
3,610
1,510
12,470
29,810
52,170
64,530
146,510
20,800
35,000
2,900
58,700
205,210
3,640
900
7,990
2,570
4,930
2,280
2,160
12,510
14,670
36,980
64,120
76,020
177,120
26,480
30,530
3,500
60,510
237,630
3,480
920
8,500
2,860
4,770
2,290
2,270
14,350
16,620
39,440
62,300
75,360
177,100
28,180
31,470
3,620
63,270
240,370
3,570
900
8,640
2,930
4,470
2,430
2,440
14,470
16,910
39,850
64,410
78,550
182,810
29,070
31 ,770
3,650
64,490
247,300
3,610
920
8,770
2,980
4,300
2,570
2,630
14,500
17,130
40,280
63,720
76,670
180,670
29,230
32,070
3,690
64,990
245,660
Percent of Total Generation
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2003
2004
2005
Durable Goods
Major Appliances
Small Appliances**
Furniture and Furnishings
Carpets and Rugs**
Rubber Tires
Batteries, Lead-Acid
Miscellaneous Durables
Selected Consumer Electronics***
Other Miscellaneous Durables
Total Miscellaneous Durables
Total Durable Goods
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 15)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 19)
Total Product Wastes}
Other Wastes
Food Scraps
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Generated - %
1.8%
2.4%
1 .3%
Neg.
5.7%
1 1 .3%
19.7%
31.1%
62.0%
13.8%
22.7%
1.5%
38.0%
100.0%
1.8%
2.3%
1.6%
0.7%
5.7%
12.1%
20.7%
36.0%
68.8%
10.6%
19.2%
1.5%
31.2%
100.0%
1 .9%
3.1%
1.8%
1 .0%
6.5%
14.4%
22.7%
34.7%
71 .8%
8.6%
18.1%
1 .5%
28.2%
100.0%
1.6%
0.2%
3.3%
0.8%
1 .8%
0.7%
6.1%
14.5%
25.4%
31.4%
71.4%
10.1%
17.1%
1.4%
28.6%
100.0%
1 .5%
0.4%
3.4%
1.1%
2.1%
1 .0%
0.9%
5.3%
6.2%
15.6%
27.0%
32.0%
74.5%
11.1%
12.8%
1 .5%
25.5%
100.0%
1.4%
0.4%
3.5%
1.2%
2.0%
1.0%
0.9%
6.0%
6.9%
16.4%
25.9%
31.4%
73.7%
11.7%
13.1%
1.5%
26.3%
100.0%
1 .4%
0.4%
3.5%
1 .2%
1 .8%
1 .0%
1 .0%
5.9%
6.8%
16.1%
26.0%
31 .8%
73.9%
11.8%
12.8%
1 .5%
26.1%
100.0%
1.5%
0.4%
3.6%
1.2%
1.8%
1.0%
1.1%
5.9%
7.0%
16.4%
25.9%
31.2%
73.5%
11.9%
13.1%
1.5%
26.5%
100.0%
* Generation before materials recovery or combustion. Does not include construction & demolition debris, industrial process
wastes, or certain other wastes. Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
** Not estimated separately prior to 1990. *** Not estimated separately prior to 1999. Preliminary data; may undergo
t Other than food products. revision.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
68
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 13
RECOVERY* OF PRODUCTS IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, 1960 TO 2005
(WITH DETAIL ON DURABLE GOODS)
(In thousands of tons and percent of generation of each product)
Products
Thousands of Tons
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2003
2004
2005
Durable Goods
Major Appliances
Small Appliances**
Furniture and Furnishings
Carpets and Rugs**
Rubber Tires
Batteries, lead acid
Miscellaneous Durables
Selected Consumer Electronics***
Other Miscellaneous Durables
Total Miscellaneous Durables
Total Durable Goods
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 16)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 20)
Total Product Wastes}
Other Wastes
Food Scraps
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Recovered - Weight
Products
10
Neg.
330
Neg.
10
350
2,390
2,870
5,610
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
5,610
50
Neg.
250
620
20
940
3,730
3,350
8,020
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
8,020
130
Neg.
150
1,040
40
1,360
4,670
8,490
14,520
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
14,520
1,070
10
Neg.
Neg.
440
1,470
470
3,460
8,800
16,780
29,040
Neg.
4,200
Neg.
4,200
33,240
2,000
20
Neg.
30
1,290
2,130
190
690
880
6,350
17,560
28,740
52,650
680
15,770
Neg.
16,450
69,100
2,320
20
Neg.
40
1,700
2,130
290
660
950
7,160
19,290
29,300
55,750
750
18,330
Neg.
19,080
74,830
2,390
10
Neg.
60
1,600
2,410
310
660
970
7,440
19,960
29,790
57,190
660
19,810
Neg.
20,470
77,660
2,420
10
Neg.
60
1,490
2,540
330
620
950
7,470
20,450
30,480
58,400
690
19,860
Neg.
20,550
78,950
Percent of Generation of Each Product
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2003
2004
2005
Durable Goods
Major Appliances
Small Appliances**
Furniture and Furnishings
Carpets and Rugs**
Rubber Tires
Batteries, Lead-Acid
Miscellaneous Durables
Selected Consumer Electronics***
Other Miscellaneous Durables
Total Miscellaneous Durables
Total Durable Goods
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 16)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 21)
Total Product Wastes}
Other Wastes
Food Scraps
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Recovered - %
0.6%
Neg.
29.5%
Neg.
0.2%
3.5%
13.8%
10.5%
10.3%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
6.4%
2.3%
Neg.
13.2%
75.6%
0.3%
6.4%
14.9%
7.7%
9.6%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
6.6%
4.4%
Neg.
5.5%
69.8%
0.4%
6.2%
13.6%
16.1%
13.3%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
9.6%
32.3%
2.2%
Neg.
Neg.
12.2%
97.4%
3.8%
1 1 .6%
16.9%
26.0%
19.8%
Neg.
12.0%
Neg.
7.2%
16.2%
54.9%
2.2%
Neg.
1 .2%
26.2%
93.4%
8.8%
5.5%
6.0%
17.2%
27.4%
37.8%
29.7%
2.6%
51.7%
Neg.
27.2%
29.1%
66.7%
2.2%
Neg.
1.4%
35.6%
93.0%
12.8%
4.6%
5.7%
18.2%
31.0%
38.9%
31.5%
2.7%
58.2%
Neg.
30.2%
31.1%
66.9%
1.1%
Neg.
2.0%
35.8%
99.2%
12.7%
4.6%
5.7%
18.7%
31 .0%
37.9%
31 .3%
2.3%
62.4%
Neg.
31.7%
31 .4%
67.0%
1.1%
Neg.
2.0%
34.7%
98.8%
12.5%
4.3%
5.5%
18.5%
32.1%
39.8%
32.3%
2.4%
61 .9%
Neg.
31 .6%
32.1%
* Recovery of postconsumer wastes; does not include converting/fabrication scrap.
** Not estimated separately prior to 1990. *** Not estimated separately prior to 1999.
t Other than food products.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent. Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
69
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 14
PRODUCTS DISCARDED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 2005
(WITH DETAIL ON DURABLE GOODS)
(In thousands of tons and percent of total discards)
Products
Thousands of Tons
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2003
2004
Durable Goods
Major Appliances
Small Appliances**
Furniture and Furnishings
Carpets and Rugs**
Rubber Tires
Batteries, lead acid
Miscellaneous Durables
Selected Consumer Electronics***
Other Miscellaneous Durables
Total Miscellaneous Durables
Total Durable Goods
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 17)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 22)
Total Product Wastes}
Other Wastes
Food Scraps
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Discarded - Weight
Products
1,620
2,150
790
Neg.
5,010
9,570
14,940
24,500
49,010
12,200
20,000
1,300
33,500
82,510
2,120
2,830
1,640
200
6,930
13,720
21,330
40,210
75,260
12,800
23,200
1,780
37,780
113,040
2,820
4,760
2,570
450
9,840
20,440
29,750
44,180
94,370
13,000
27,500
2,250
42,750
137,120
2,240
450
6,790
1,660
3,170
40
12,000
26,350
43,370
47,750
117,470
20,800
30,800
2,900
54,500
171,970
1,640
880
7,990
2,540
3,640
150
1,970
1 1 ,820
13,790
30,630
46,560
47,280
124,470
25,800
14,760
3,500
44,060
168,530
1,160
900
8,500
2,820
3,070
160
1,980
13,690
15,670
32,280
43,010
46,060
121,350
27,430
13,140
3,620
44,190
165,540
1,180
890
8,640
2,870
2,870
20
2,130
13,810
15,940
32,410
44,450
48,760
125,620
28,410
11,960
3,650
44,020
169,640
2005
1,190
910
8,770
2,920
2,810
30
2,300
13,880
16,180
32,810
43,270
46,190
122,270
28,540
12,210
3,690
44,440
166,710
Percent of Total Discards
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2003
2004
2005
Durable Goods
Major Appliances
Small Appliances**
Furniture and Furnishings
Carpets and Rugs**
Rubber Tires
Batteries, Lead-Acid
Miscellaneous Durables
Selected Consumer Electronics***
Other Miscellaneous Durables
Total Miscellaneous Durables
Total Durable Goods
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 17)
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 23)
Total Product Wastes}
Other Wastes
Food Scraps
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Discarded - %
2.0%
2.6%
1.0%
Neg.
6.1%
1 1 .6%
18.1%
29.7%
59.4%
14.8%
24.2%
1.6%
40.6%
100.0%
1.9%
2.5%
1.5%
0.2%
6.1%
12.1%
18.9%
35.6%
66.6%
11.3%
20.5%
1.6%
33.4%
100.0%
2.1%
3.5%
1.9%
0.3%
7.2%
14.9%
21.7%
32.2%
68.8%
9.5%
20.1%
1.6%
31.2%
100.0%
1 .3%
0.3%
3.9%
1 .0%
1 .8%
0.0%
7.0%
15.3%
25.2%
27.8%
68.3%
12.1%
17.9%
1.7%
31 .7%
100.0%
1 .0%
0.5%
4.7%
1.5%
2.2%
0.1%
1.2%
6.9%
8.2%
18.2%
27.6%
28.1%
73.9%
15.3%
8.8%
2.1%
26.1%
100.0%
0.7%
0.5%
5.1%
1.7%
1 .9%
0.1%
1 .2%
8.2%
9.5%
19.5%
26.0%
27.8%
73.3%
16.6%
7.9%
2.2%
26.7%
100.0%
0.7%
0.5%
5.1%
1.7%
1.7%
0.0%
1 .3%
8.0%
9.4%
19.1%
26.2%
28.7%
74.1%
16.7%
7.1%
2.2%
25.9%
100.0%
0.7%
0.5%
5.3%
1 .8%
1 .7%
0.0%
1 .4%
8.2%
9.7%
19.7%
26.0%
27.7%
73.3%
17.1%
7.3%
2.2%
26.7%
100.0%
* Discards after materials and compost recovery. In this table, discards include combustion with energy recovery.
Does not include construction & demolition debris, industrial process wastes, or certain other wastes.
** Not estimated separately prior to 1990. *** Not estimated separately prior to 1999. Preliminary data; may undergo
t Other than food products. revision.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent. Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
70
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Carpets and Rugs. An industry publication, Carpet and Rug Industrial Review,
publishes data on carpet sales in square yards. These data are converted to tons using various
factors developed for this report. In recent years, carpet sales from the Department of Commerce
Current Industrial Report Carpet and Rug series have been used. An estimated 3.0 million tons
of carpets and rugs were generated in MSW in 2005, which was 1.2 percent of total generation.
A small amount of recycling of carpet fiber was identified-estimated to be about 2.0
percent of generation in 2005.
Vehicle Tires. The methodology for estimating generation of rubber tires for
automobiles and trucks is based on data on replacement tires purchased and vehicles deregistered
as reported by the U. S. Department of Commerce. It is assumed that for each replacement tire
purchased, a used tire enters the waste management system, and that tires on deregistered
vehicles also enter the waste management system. Retreaded tires are treated as a diversion out
of the waste stream; they are assumed to re-enter the waste stream after two years of use.
The quantities of tires in units are converted to weight and materials composition using
factors developed for this series of reports. In addition to rubber, tires include relatively small
amounts of textiles and ferrous metals. Generation of rubber tires increased from 1.1 million tons
in 1960 to 4.3 million tons in 2005 (1.8 percent of total MSW). In recent years, the generation of
rubber tires has been declining.
Data on recovery of tires are based on data from the Scrap Tire Management Council4.
The rubber recovery percentage has been increasing in recent years. In 2005, an estimated 34.7
percent of the weight of tires generated was recovered for recycling, leaving 2.8 million tons to
be discarded. (Tires going to combustion facilities as fuel are included in the combustion
estimates in Chapter 3.)
The 2005 recovery data are preliminary and may be revised in future publications of this report.
71
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Lead-Acid Batteries. The methodology for estimating generation of lead-acid batteries
is similar to the methodology for rubber tires as described above. An estimated 2.6 million tons
of lead-acid batteries from automobiles, trucks, and motorcycles were generated in MSW in
2005 (one percent of total generation).
The Battery Council International provided data on recovery of batteries. Recovery of
batteries for recycling has fluctuated between 60 percent 99 percent; recovery has increased
since 1980 as a growing number of communities have restricted batteries from disposal at
landfills or combustion facilities. In 2005, 98.8 percent of the lead in these batteries was
estimated to be recovered for recycling as well as substantial quantities of the polypropylene
battery casings. Discards after recycling of these batteries were 30,000 tons in 2005. (Some
electrolytes and other materials in batteries are removed from the municipal solid waste stream
along with recovered lead and polypropylene; these materials are counted as "recovered" along
with the recyclable materials.)
Miscellaneous Durable Goods. Miscellaneous durable goods include consumer
electronics such as television sets, videocassette recorders, and personal computers; luggage;
sporting equipment; and the like. An estimated 17.1 million tons of these goods were generated
in 2005, amounting to 7.0 percent of MSW generated.
As in recent previous updates of this report, generation of selected consumer electronic
products was estimated as a subset of miscellaneous durable goods. In 2005, an estimated 2.6
million tons of these goods were generated. Of this, approximately 330,000 tons of selected
consumer electronics were recovered for recycling. Selected consumer electronics include
products such as TVs, VCRs, DVD players, video cameras, stereo systems, telephones, and
computer equipment.
The miscellaneous durable goods category, as a whole, includes ferrous metals as well as
plastics, glass, rubber, wood, and other metals. An estimated 620,000 tons of ferrous metals were
estimated to have been recovered from this category through pre-combustion and post-
combustion magnetic separation at MSW combustion facilities in 2005, bringing total recovery
72
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
from this category to 950,000 tons. Discards of miscellaneous durable goods were 16.2 million
tons in 2005.
Nondurable Goods
The Department of Commerce defines nondurable goods as those having a lifetime of
less than three years, and this definition was followed for this report to the extent possible.
Products made of paper and paperboard comprise the largest portion of nondurable
goods. Other nondurable products include paper and plastic plates, cups, and other disposable
food service products; disposable diapers; clothing and footwear; linens; and other miscellaneous
products. (See Tables 15 through 17.)
Generation of nondurable goods in MSW was 63.7 million tons in 2005 (25.9 percent of
total generation). Recovery of paper products in this category is quite significant, resulting in
20.5 million tons of nondurable goods recovered in 2005 (32.1 percent of nondurables
generation). This means that 43.3 million tons of nondurable goods were discarded in 2005 (26.0
percent of total MSW discards).
Paper and Paperboard Products. Generation, recovery, and discards of paper and
paperboard products in nondurable goods are summarized in Tables 15 through 17. A summary
for 2005 was shown earlier in Table 4. Generation of paper and paperboard nondurable products
declined from 47.8 million tons in 2000 to 44.9 million tons in 2005. Each of the paper and
paperboard product categories in nondurable goods is discussed briefly below.
• Newspapers are by far the largest single component of the nondurable goods
category, at 12.1 million tons generated in 2005 (4.9 percent of total MSW). In
2005, an estimated 88.9 percent of newspapers generated were recovered for
recycling, leaving 1.3 million tons discarded. Estimates of newspaper generation
are broken down into newsprint (the majority of the weight of the newspapers)
73
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
and groundwood5 inserts (primarily advertising) that are a significant portion of
the total weight of newspapers. This breakdown is shown in Table 4.
Books amounted to approximately 1.1 million tons, or 0.5 percent of total MSW
generation, in 2005. Recovery of books is not well documented, but it was
estimated that approximately 260,000 tons of books were recovered in 2005.
Books are made of both groundwood and chemical pulp.
Magazines accounted for an estimated 2.5 million tons, or 1.0 percent of total
MSW generation, in 2005. Like books, recovery of magazines is not well
documented. It was estimated that 970,000 tons of magazines were recovered in
2005. Magazines are predominately made of coated groundwood, but some
uncoated groundwood and chemical pulps are also used.
Many different kinds of papers are generated in offices. For this report, office-
type paper estimates include the high grade papers such as copier paper, computer
printout, stationery, etc. Generation of these office papers was 6.6 million tons, or
2.7 percent of total MSW generation in 2005. These papers are almost entirely
made of uncoated chemical pulp, although some amounts of groundwood are also
used. It should be noted that some of these office-type papers are generated at
locations other than offices, including homes and institutions such as schools.
Also, other kinds of papers (e.g., newspapers, magazines, and packaging) are
generated in offices, but are accounted for in other categories. An estimated 4.1
million tons of office-type papers were recovered in 2005.
Groundwood papers, like newsprint, are made primarily from pulp prepared by a mechanical process. The
nature of the pulp (groundwood vs. chemical) affects the potential uses for the recovered paper.
74
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 15
PRODUCTS GENERATED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 2005
(WITH DETAIL ON NONDURABLE GOODS)
(In thousands of tons and percent of total generation)
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 12)
Thousands of Tons
1960
9,920
1970
14,660
1980
21,800
1990
29,810
2000
36,980
2003
39,440
2004
39,850
2005
40,280
Nondurable Goods
Newspapers
Books and Magazines
Books**
Magazines**
Office-Type Papers
Directories**
Standard Mail***
Other Commercial Printing
Tissue Paper and Towels
Paper Plates and Cups
Plastic Plates and Cupsf
Trash Bags**
Disposable Diapers
Other Nonpackaging Paper
Clothing and Footwear
Towels, Sheets and Pillowcases**
Other Miscellaneous Nondurables
Total Nondurable Goods
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 18)
Total Product Wastes}
Other Wastes
Total MSW Generated - Weight
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 12)
7,110
1,920
1,520
1,260
1,090
270
Neg.
2,700
1,360
100
17,330
27,370
54,620
33,500
88,120
9,510
2,470
2,650
2,130
2,080
420
350
3,630
1,620
200
25,060
43,560
83,280
37,780
121,060
1 1 ,050
3,390
4,000
3,120
2,300
630
190
1,930
4,230
2,170
1,410
34,420
52,670
108,890
42,750
151,640
13,430
970
2,830
6,410
610
3,820
4,460
2,960
650
650
780
2,700
3,840
4,010
710
3,340
52,170
64,530
146,510
58,700
205,210
14,790
1,240
2,230
7,420
680
5,570
7,380
3,220
960
870
850
3,340
4,250
6,470
820
4,030
64,120
76,020
177,120
60,510
237,630
12,550
1,030
2,270
7,140
640
5,410
6,950
3,250
970
730
1,020
3,470
4,180
7,370
940
4,380
62,300
75,360
177,100
63,270
240,370
12,370
1,270
2,470
7,040
640
5,570
7,680
3,220
1,090
970
1,090
3,530
4,550
7,640
940
4,340
64,410
78,550
182,810
64,490
247,300
12,050
1,120
2,520
6,580
660
5,830
7,340
3,430
970
930
1,060
3,600
4,350
8,080
950
4,250
63,720
76,670
180,670
64,990
245,660
Percent of Total Generation
1960
11.3%
1970
12.1%
1980
14.4%
1990
14.5%
2000
15.6%
Nondurable Goods
Newspapers
Books and Magazines
Books**
Magazines**
Office-Type Papers***
Directories**
Standard Mail§
Other Commercial Printing
Tissue Paper and Towels
Paper Plates and Cups
Plastic Plates and Cupsf
Trash Bags**
Disposable Diapers
Other Nonpackaging Paper
Clothing and Footwear
Towels, Sheets and Pillowcases**
Other Miscellaneous Nondurables
Total Nondurables
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 19)
Total Product Wastes}
Other Wastes
Total MSW Generated - %
8.1%
2.2%
1.7%
1.4%
1.2%
0.3%
Neg.
3.1%
1.5%
0.1%
19.7%
31.1%
62.0%
38.0%
100.0%
7.9%
2.0%
2.2%
1 .8%
1.7%
0.3%
0.3%
3.0%
1 .3%
0.2%
20.7%
36.0%
68.8%
31 .2%
100.0%
7.3%
2.2%
2.6%
2.1%
1.5%
0.4%
0.1%
1 .3%
2.8%
1 .4%
0.9%
22.7%
34.7%
71 .8%
28.2%
100.0%
6.5%
0.5%
1.4%
3.1%
0.3%
1.9%
2.2%
1.4%
0.3%
0.3%
0.4%
1.3%
1.9%
2.0%
0.3%
1.6%
25.4%
31.4%
71.4%
28.6%
100.0%
6.2%
0.5%
0.9%
3.1%
0.3%
2.3%
3.1%
1 .4%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
1.4%
1 .8%
2.7%
0.3%
1.7%
27.0%
32.0%
74.5%
25.5%
100.0%
2003
16.4%
2004
16.1%
2005
16.4%
5.2%
0.4%
0.9%
3.0%
0.3%
2.3%
2.9%
1 .4%
0.4%
0.3%
0.4%
1.4%
1 .7%
3.1%
0.4%
1.8%
25.9%
31.4%
73.7%
26.3%
100.0%
5.0%
0.5%
1.0%
2.8%
0.3%
2.3%
3.1%
1 .3%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
1.4%
1 .8%
3.1%
0.4%
1.8%
26.0%
31.8%
73.9%
26.1%
100.0%
4.9%
0.5%
1 .0%
2.7%
0.3%
2.4%
3.0%
1 .4%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
1 .5%
1 .8%
3.3%
0.4%
1 .7%
25.9%
31 .2%
73.5%
26.5%
100.0%
* Generation before materials recovery or combustion. Does not include construction & demolition debris, industrial
process wastes, or certain other wastes. Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
** Not estimated separately prior to 1990.
*** High-grade paper such as printer paper; generated in both commercial and residential sources.
§ Not estimated separately prior to 1990. Formerly called Third Class Mail and Standard (A) Mail by the U.S. Postal Service.
t Not estimated separately prior to 1980.
j Other than food products.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
75
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 16
RECOVERY* OF PRODUCTS IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, 1960 TO 2005
(WITH DETAIL ON NONDURABLE GOODS)
(In thousands of tons and percent of generation of each product)
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 13)
Thousands of Tons
1960
350
1970
940
1980
1,360
1990
3,460
2000
6,350
2003
7,160
2004
7,440
2005
7,470
Nondurable Goods
Newspapers
Books and Magazines
Books**
Magazines**
Office-Type Papers
Directories**
Standard Mail***
Other Commercial Printing
Tissue Paper and Towels
Paper Plates and Cups
Plastic Plates and Cupsf
Trash Bags**
Disposable Diapers
Other Nonpackaging Paper
Clothing and Footwear
Towels, Sheets and Pillowcases**
Other Miscellaneous Nondurables
Total Nondurable Goods
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 20)
Total Product Wastes!
Other Wastes
Total MSW Recovered - Weight
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 13)
1,820
100
250
130
Neg.
Neg.
40
50
Neg.
2,390
2,870
5,610
Neg.
5,610
2,250
260
710
340
Neg.
Neg.
110
60
Neg.
3,730
3,350
8,020
Neg.
8,020
3,020
280
870
350
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
150
Neg.
4,670
8,490
14,520
Neg.
14,520
5,110
100
300
1,700
40
200
700
Neg.
Neg.
10
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
520
120
Neg.
8,800
16,780
29,040
4,200
33,240
8,720
240
710
4,090
120
1,830
810
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
900
140
Neg.
17,560
28,740
52,650
16,450
69,100
10,410
190
750
3,990
100
1,750
900
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
1,040
160
Neg.
19,290
29,300
55,750
19,080
74,830
10,440
250
890
4,200
100
1,830
840
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
1,250
160
Neg.
19,960
29,790
57,190
20,470
77,660
10,710
260
970
4,120
120
2,090
760
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
1,250
170
Neg.
20,450
30,480
58,400
20,550
78,950
Percent of Generation of Each Product
1960
3.5%
1970
6.4%
1980
6.2%
1990
11.6%
2000
17.2%
2003
18.2%
2004
18.7%
2005
18.5%
Nondurable Goods
Newspapers
Books and Magazines
Books**
Magazines**
Office-Type Papers***
Directories**
Standard Mail§
Other Commercial Printing
Tissue Paper and Towels
Paper Plates and Cups
Plastic Plates and Cupsf
Trash Bags**
Disposable Diapers
Other Nonpackaging Paper
Clothing and Footwear
Towels, Sheets and Pillowcases**
Other Miscellaneous Nondurables
Total Nondurables
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 21)
Total Product Wastes}
Other Wastes
Total MSW Recovered - %
25.6%
5.2%
16.4%
10.3%
Neg.
Neg.
1 .5%
Neg.
Neg.
13.8%
10.5%
10.3%
Neg.
6.4%
23.7%
10.5%
26.8%
16.0%
Neg.
Neg.
3.0%
Neg.
Neg.
14.9%
7.7%
9.6%
Neg.
6.6%
27.3%
8.3%
21.8%
11.2%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
13.6%
16.1%
13.3%
Neg.
9.6%
38.0%
10.3%
10.6%
26.5%
6.6%
5.2%
15.7%
Neg.
Neg.
1.5%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
13.0%
16.9%
Neg.
16.9%
26.0%
19.8%
7.2%
16.2%
59.0%
19.4%
31.8%
55.1%
17.6%
32.9%
11.0%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
13.9%
17.1%
Neg.
27.4%
37.8%
29.7%
27.2%
29.1%
82.9%
18.4%
33.0%
55.9%
15.6%
32.3%
12.9%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
14.1%
17.0%
Neg.
31.0%
38.9%
31.5%
30.2%
31.1%
84.4%
19.7%
36.0%
59.7%
15.6%
32.9%
10.9%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
16.4%
17.0%
Neg.
31.0%
37.9%
31.3%
31.7%
31.4%
88.9%
23.2%
38.5%
62.6%
18.2%
35.8%
10.4%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
15.5%
17.9%
Neg.
32.1%
39.8%
32.3%
31 .6%
32.1%
* Recovery of postconsumer wastes; does not include converting/fabrication scrap.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
** Not estimated separately prior to 1990.
*** High-grade paper such as printer paper; generated in both commercial and residential sources.
§ Not estimated separately prior to 1990. Formerly called Third Class Mail and Standard (A) Mail by the U.S. Postal Service.
t Not estimated separately prior to 1980.
j Other than food products.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
76
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 17
PRODUCTS DISCARDED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 2005
(WITH DETAIL ON NONDURABLE GOODS)
(In thousands of tons and percent of total discards)
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 14)
Nondurable Goods
Newspapers
Books and Magazines
Books**
Magazines**
Office-Type Papers
Directories**
Standard Mail***
Other Commercial Printing
Tissue Paper and Towels
Paper Plates and Cups
Plastic Plates and Cupsf
Trash Bags**
Disposable Diapers
Other Nonpackaging Paper
Clothing and Footwear
Towels, Sheets and Pillowcases**
Other Miscellaneous Nondurables
Total Nondurable Goods
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 22)
Total Product Wastes}
Other Wastes
Total MSW Discarded - Weight
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 14)
Nondurable Goods
Newspapers
Books and Magazines
Books**
Magazines**
Office-Type Papers***
Directories**
Standard Mail§
Other Commercial Printing
Tissue Paper and Towels
Paper Plates and Cups
Plastic Plates and Cupsf
Trash Bags**
Disposable Diapers
Other Nonpackaging Paper
Clothing and Footwear
Towels, Sheets and Pillowcases**
Other Miscellaneous Nondurables
Total Nondurables
Containers and Packaging
(Detail in Table 23)
Total Product Wastes}
Other Wastes
Total MSW Discarded - %
Thousands of Tons
1960
9,570
1970
13,720
1980
20,440
1990
26,350
2000
30,630
2003
32,280
2004
32,410
2005
32,810
5,290
1,820
1,270
1,130
1,090
270
Neg.
2,660
1,310
100
14,940
24,500
49,010
33,500
82,510
7,260
2,210
1,940
1,790
2,080
420
350
3,520
1,560
200
21 ,330
40,210
75,260
37,780
113,040
8,030
3,110
3,130
2,770
2,300
630
190
1,930
4,230
2,020
1,410
29,750
44,180
94,370
42,750
137,120
8,320
870
2,530
4,710
570
3,620
3,760
2,960
650
640
780
2,700
3,840
3,490
590
3,340
43,370
47,750
117,470
54,500
171,970
6,070
1,000
1,520
3,330
560
3,740
6,570
3,220
960
870
850
3,340
4,250
5,570
680
4,030
46,560
47,280
124,470
44,060
168,530
2,140
840
1,520
3,150
540
3,660
6,050
3,250
970
730
1,020
3,470
4,180
6,330
780
4,380
43,010
46,060
121,350
44,190
165,540
1,930
1,020
1,580
2,840
540
3,740
6,840
3,220
1,090
970
1,090
3,530
4,550
6,390
780
4,340
44,450
48,760
125,620
44,020
169,640
1,340
860
1,550
2,460
540
3,740
6,580
3,430
970
930
1,060
3,600
4,350
6,830
780
4,250
43,270
46,190
122,270
44,440
166,710
Percent of Total Discards
1960
11.6%
1970
12.1%
1980
14.9%
1990
15.3%
2000
18.2%
2003
19.5%
2004
19.1%
2005
19.7%
6.4%
2.2%
1 .5%
1.4%
1 .3%
0.3%
Neg.
3.2%
1.6%
0.1%
18.1%
29.7%
59.4%
40.6%
100.0%
6.4%
2.0%
1.7%
1 .6%
1 .8%
0.4%
0.3%
3.1%
1 .4%
0.2%
18.9%
35.6%
66.6%
33.4%
100.0%
5.9%
2.3%
2.3%
2.0%
1.7%
0.5%
0.1%
1.4%
3.1%
1.5%
1.7%
21.7%
32.2%
68.8%
31.2%
100.0%
4.8%
0.5%
1 .5%
2.7%
0.3%
2.1%
2.2%
1 .7%
0.4%
0.4%
0.5%
1.6%
2.2%
2.0%
0.3%
1.9%
25.2%
27.8%
68.3%
31.7%
100.0%
3.6%
0.6%
0.9%
2.0%
0.3%
2.2%
3.9%
1 .9%
0.6%
0.5%
0.5%
2.0%
2.5%
3.3%
0.4%
2.4%
27.6%
28.1%
73.9%
26.1%
100.0%
1.3%
0.5%
0.9%
1.9%
0.3%
2.2%
3.7%
2.0%
0.6%
0.4%
0.6%
2.1%
2.5%
3.8%
0.5%
2.6%
26.0%
27.8%
73.3%
26.7%
100.0%
1.1%
0.6%
0.9%
1.7%
0.3%
2.2%
4.0%
1 .9%
0.6%
0.6%
0.6%
2.1%
2.7%
3.8%
0.5%
2.6%
26.2%
28.7%
74.1%
25.9%
100.0%
0.8%
0.5%
0.9%
1 .5%
0.3%
2.2%
3.9%
2.1%
0.6%
0.6%
0.6%
2.2%
2.6%
4.1%
0.5%
2.5%
26.0%
27.7%
73.3%
26.7%
100.0%
* Discards after materials and compost recovery. In this table, discards include combustion with energy recovery.
Does not include construction & demolition debris, industrial process wastes, or certain other wastes.
** Not estimated separately prior to 1990.
*** High-grade paper such as printer paper; generated in both commercial and residential sources.
§ Not estimated separately prior to 1990. Formerly called Third Class Mail and Standard (A) Mail by the U.S. Postal Service.
t Not estimated separately prior to 1980.
j Other than food products.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent. Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
77
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Directories were estimated to generate 660,000 tons (0.3 percent of total MSW) in
2005. These directories are made of groundwood. It was estimated that 120,000
tons of directories were recovered in 2005.
Standard mail6 includes catalogs and other direct bulk mailings; these amounted
to an estimated 5.8 million tons, or 2.4 percent of MSW generation, in 2005. Both
groundwood and chemical pulps are used in these mailings. It was estimated that
2.1 million tons were recovered in 2005. The U.S. Postal Service has
implemented a program to increase recovery of bulk mail, and many curbside
collection programs also include mail.
Other commercial printing includes a wide range of paper items, including
brochures, reports, menus, and invitations. Both groundwood and chemical pulps
are used in these varied items. Generation was estimated at 7.3 million tons, or 3
percent of MSW generation, in 2005, with recovery estimated at 0.8 million tons.
Tissue paper and towels generation includes facial and sanitary tissues and table
napkins, but not bathroom tissue, which is nearly all diverted from MSW into the
wastewater treatment system. Tissue paper and towels (not including bathroom
tissue) amounted to 3.4 million tons (1.4 percent of total MSW generation) in
2005. No significant recovery of tissue products for recycling was identified,
although there is some composting of these items.
Paper plates and cups include paper plates, cups, bowls, and other food service
products used in homes, in commercial establishments like restaurants, and in
institutional settings such as schools. Generation of these products was estimated
at 1.0 million tons (0.4 percent of total MSW generation) in 2005. No significant
recovery for recycling of these products was identified.
Standard mail was formerly called Third Class mail and Standard (A) mail by the U.S. Postal Service.
78
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
• Other nonpackaging papers-including posters, photographic papers, cards, and
games-accounted for 4.4 million tons (1.8 percent of total MSW generation) in
2005. No significant recovery for recycling of these papers was identified.
Overall, generation of paper and paperboard products in nondurable goods was 44.9
million tons in 2005 (Table 4). While newspapers were recovered at the highest rate, other paper
products, such as books, magazines, and office papers, also were recovered for recycling, and the
overall recovery rate for paper in nondurables was 42.4 percent in 2005. Thus 25.9 million tons
of paper in nondurables were discarded in 2005.
Plastic Plates and Cups. This category includes plastic plates, cups, glasses, dishes and
bowls, hinged containers, and other containers used in food service at home, in restaurants and
other commercial establishments, and in institutional settings such as schools. These items are
made primarily of polystyrene resin. An estimated 930,000 tons of these products were generated
in 2005, or 0.4 percent of total MSW (see Table 15). No significant recovery for recycling was
identified in 2005.
Trash Bags. This category includes plastic trash bags made of high-density polyethylene
and low-density polyethylene for both indoor and outdoor use. Generation of plastic trash bags
amounted to 1.1 million tons in 2005 (0.4 percent of MSW generation). No significant recovery
for recycling was identified.
Disposable Diapers. This category includes estimates of both infant diapers and adult
incontinence products. Generation was estimated using data on sales of the products along with
information on average weights and composition. An estimated 3.6 million tons of disposable
diapers were generated in 2005, or 1.5 percent of total MSW generation. (This tonnage includes
an adjustment for the urine and feces contained within the discarded diapers.) The materials
79
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
portion of the diapers includes wood pulp, plastics (including the super-absorbent materials now
present in most diapers), and tissue paper.
No significant recycling or composting of disposable diapers was identified in 2005.
Clothing and Footwear. Generation of clothing and footwear was estimated to be 8.1
million tons in 2005 (3.3 percent of total MSW). Textiles, rubber, and leather are major materials
components of this category, with some plastics present as well. Generation estimates for these
products are based on sales data from the Department of Commerce along with data on average
weights for each type of products included. Adjustments are made for net imports of these
products based on Department of Commerce data.
The Council for Textile Recycling has reported on recovery of textiles for exports,
reprocessing, and reuse. Based on their data, it was estimated that 1.3 million tons of textiles in
clothing were recovered for export or recycling in 2005. (Reuse is not counted as recycling and
is included in the estimates in Chapter 3.)
Towels, Sheets, and Pillowcases. An estimated 950,000 tons of towels, sheets, and
pillowcases were generated in 2005. Generation was estimated using a methodology similar to
that for clothing. An estimated 170,000 tons of these textiles were recovered for export or
recycling in 2005.
Other Miscellaneous Nondurables. Generation of other miscellaneous nondurables was
estimated to be 4.3 million tons in 2005 (1.7 percent of MSW). The primary material component
of miscellaneous nondurables is plastics, although some aluminum, rubber, and textiles also are
present. Typical products in miscellaneous nondurables include shower curtains and other
household items, disposable medical supplies, novelty items, and the like.
Generation of plastic products in miscellaneous nondurables is taken from resin sales
data published annually by the American Plastics Council. Generation of other materials in these
nondurable products is estimated based on information in past reports in this series.
80
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Containers and Packaging
Containers and packaging make up a major portion of MSW, amounting to 76.7 million
tons of generation in 2005 (31.2 percent of total generation). Generation in this category has
remained fairly consistent in recent years. Paper and paperboard packaging generation declined
by 1.4 million tons between 2000 and 2003, increasing in 2004 and declining again in 2005.
There were small declines in generation of glass bottles and steel packaging, while aluminum
packaging held steady. Plastics packaging generation showed an increase, and wood packaging
(pallets) also increased. Generation, recovery, and discards of containers and packaging are
shown in detail in Tables 18 through 23.
There is substantial recovery of many container and packaging products, especially
corrugated containers. In 2005, 39.8 percent of containers and packaging generated was
recovered for recycling. Because of this recovery, containers and packaging comprised 27.7
percent of total MSW discards in 2005.
Containers and packaging in MSW are made of several materials: paper and paperboard,
glass, steel, aluminum, plastics, wood, and small amounts of other materials. Material categories
are discussed separately below.
Glass Containers. Glass containers include beer and soft drink bottles (which include
carbonated drinks and non-carbonated waters, teas, and flavored drinks containing not more than
10 percent fruit juice), wine and liquor bottles, and bottles and jars for food, cosmetics, and other
products. Generation of glass containers is estimated using Department of Commerce data.
Adjustments are made for imports and exports of both empty glass containers and containers
holding products, e.g., imported beer.
Generation of these glass containers was 10.9 million tons in 2005, or 4.4 percent of
MSW generation (Tables 18 and 19). This is less tonnage than was generated in 2000.
81
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
An estimated 2.8 million tons of glass containers were recovered for recycling, or 25.3
percent of generation, in 2005. Glass container discards were 8.2 million tons in 2005, or 4.9
percent of total MSW discards.
Steel Containers and Packaging. Steel food and other cans, and other steel packaging
(e.g., strapping and steel barrels and drums), totaled 2.4 million tons in 2005 (1.0 percent of total
MSW generation), with most of that amount being cans for food products (Tables 18 and 19).
Generation estimates are based on data supplied by the Steel Recycling Institute (SRI), the
Reusable Industrial Packaging Association, and the Can Manufacturers Institute (CMI).
Estimates include adjustments for net imports.
The Steel Recycling Institute (SRI) provided recovery data for steel containers and
packaging. An estimated 1.5 million tons of steel packaging were recovered in 2005, or 63.3
percent of generation. The SRI estimates include recovery from residential sources; pre-
combustion and post-combustion magnetic separation of steel cans and other ferrous products at
MSW combustion facilities; and recycling of drums and barrels not suitable for reconditioning.
Aluminum Containers and Packaging. Aluminum containers and packaging include
beer and soft drink cans (including all carbonated and non-carbonated soft drinks, tea, tonic,
waters, and juice beverages), other cans, and foil and closures. Aluminum can generation has
been estimated based on can shipments data from the Can Manufacturers Institute and can
weight data from the Aluminum Association, while data on other aluminum packaging is based
on Department of Commerce data.
82
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 18
PRODUCTS GENERATED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 2005
(WITH DETAIL ON CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING)
(In thousands of tons)
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 12)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 15)
Thousands of Tons
1960
9,920
17,330
1970
14,660
25,060
1980
21,800
34,420
1990
29,810
52,170
2000
36,980
64,120
2003
39,440
62,300
2004
39,850
64,410
2005
40,280
63,720
Containers and Packaging
Glass Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Bottles
Wine and Liquor Bottles
Food and Other Bottles & Jars
Total Glass Packaging
Steel Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Food and Other Cans
Other Steel Packaging
Total Steel Packaging
Aluminum Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Other Cans
Foil and Closures
Total Aluminum Packaging
Papers Paperboard Pkg
Corrugated Boxes
Milk Cartons**
Folding Cartons**
Other Paperboard Packaging
Bags and Sacks**
Wrapping Papers**
Other Paper Packaging
Total Paper & Board Pkg
Plastics Packaging
Soft Drink Bottles**
Milk Bottles**
Other Containers
Bags and Sacks**
Wraps**
Other Plastics Packaging
Total Plastics Packaging
Wood Packaging
Other Misc. Packaging
Total Containers & Pkg
Total Product Wastes}
Other Wastes
Food Scraps
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Generated - Weight
1,400
1,080
3,710
6,190
640
3,760
260
4,660
Neg.
Neg.
170
170
7,330
3,840
2,940
14,110
60
60
120
2,000
120
27,370
54,620
12,200
20,000
1,300
33,500
88,120
5,580
1,900
4,440
11,920
1,570
3,540
270
5,380
100
60
410
570
12,760
4,830
3,810
21 ,400
910
1,180
2,090
2,070
130
43,560
83,280
12,800
23,200
1,780
37,780
121,060
6,740
2,450
4,780
13,970
520
2,850
240
3,610
850
40
380
1,270
17,080
790
3,820
230
3,380
200
850
26,350
260
230
890
390
840
790
3,400
3,940
130
52,670
108,890
13,000
27,500
2,250
42,750
151,640
5,640
2,030
4,160
1 1 ,830
150
2,540
200
2,890
1,550
20
330
1,900
24,010
510
4,300
290
2,440
110
1,020
32,680
430
530
1,430
940
1,530
2,040
6,900
8,180
150
64,530
146,510
20,800
35,000
2,900
58,700
205,210
5,710
1,910
3,420
11,040
Neg.
2,630
240
2,870
1,520
50
380
1,950
30,210
550
5,820
200
1,490
Neg.
1,670
39,940
830
690
2,630
1,650
2,550
3,510
11,860
8,120
240
76,020
177,120
26,480
30,530
3,500
60,510
237,630
6,840
1,580
2,150
10,570
Neg.
2,600
240
2,840
1,480
50
380
1,910
29,710
450
5,560
180
1,240
Neg.
1,440
38,580
870
720
2,980
1,630
2,750
3,930
12,880
8,330
250
75,360
177,100
28,180
31 ,470
3,620
63,270
240,370
7,010
1,570
2,280
10,860
Neg.
2,450
240
2,690
1,480
50
390
1,920
31 ,490
470
5,540
170
1,270
Neg.
1,460
40,400
850
800
3,150
1,810
2,940
4,410
13,960
8,430
290
78,550
182,810
29,070
31,770
3,650
64,490
247,300
7,150
1,640
2,130
10,920
Neg.
2,130
240
2,370
1,450
50
400
1,900
30,930
420
4,970
150
1,190
Neg.
1,370
39,030
850
800
3,110
1,640
2,810
4,440
13,650
8,520
280
76,670
180,670
29,230
32,070
3,690
64,990
245,660
* Generation before materials recovery or combustion.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
** Not estimated separately priorto 1980. Paper wraps not reported separately after 1996.
t Other than food products.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
83
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 19
PRODUCTS GENERATED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 2005
(WITH DETAIL ON CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING)
(In percent of total generation)
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 12)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 15)
Percent of Total Generation
1960
1 1 .3%
19.7%
1970
12.1%
20.7%
1980
14.4%
22.7%
1990
14.5%
25.4%
2000
1 5.6%
27.0%
2003
16.4%
25.9%
2004
16.1%
26.0%
2005
16.4%
25.9%
Containers and Packaging
Glass Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Bottles
Wine and Liquor Bottles
Food and Other Bottles & Jars
Total Glass Packaging
Steel Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Food and Other Cans
Other Steel Packaging
Total Steel Packaging
Aluminum Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Other Cans
Foil and Closures
Total Aluminum Packaging
Paper & Paperboard Pkg
Corrugated Boxes
Milk Cartons**
Folding Cartons**
Other Paperboard Packaging
Bags and Sacks**
Wrapping Papers**
Other Paper Packaging
Total Paper & Board Pkg
Plastics Packaging
Soft Drink Bottles**
Milk Bottles**
Other Containers
Bags and Sacks**
Wraps**
Other Plastics Packaging
Total Plastics Packaging
Wood Packaging
Other Misc. Packaging
Total Containers & Pkg
Total Product Wastes}
Other Wastes
Food Scraps
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Generated - %
1.6%
1.2%
4.2%
7.0%
0.7%
4.3%
0.3%
5.3%
Neg.
Neg.
0.2%
0.2%
8.3%
4.4%
3.3%
16.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
2.3%
0.1%
31.1%
62.0%
13.8%
22.7%
1.5%
38.0%
100.0%
4.6%
1.6%
3.7%
9.8%
1.3%
2.9%
0.2%
4.4%
0.1%
Neg.
0.3%
0.5%
10.5%
4.0%
3.1%
17.7%
0.8%
1.0%
1.7%
1.7%
0.1%
36.0%
68.8%
10.6%
19.2%
1.5%
31 .2%
100.0%
4.4%
1.6%
3.2%
9.2%
0.3%
1.9%
0.2%
2.4%
0.6%
Neg.
0.3%
0.8%
1 1 .3%
0.5%
2.5%
0.2%
2.2%
0.1%
0.6%
17.4%
0.2%
0.2%
0.6%
0.3%
0.6%
0.5%
2.2%
2.6%
0.1%
34.7%
71 .8%
8.6%
18.1%
1.5%
28.2%
100.0%
2.7%
1.0%
2.0%
5.8%
0.1%
1.2%
0.1%
1.4%
0.8%
Neg.
0.2%
0.9%
1 1 .7%
0.2%
2.1%
0.1%
1.2%
0.1%
0.5%
15.9%
0.2%
0.3%
0.7%
0.5%
0.7%
1.0%
3.4%
4.0%
0.1%
31 .4%
71 .4%
10.1%
17.1%
1.4%
28.6%
100.0%
2.4%
0.8%
1.4%
4.6%
Neg.
1.1%
0.1%
1.2%
0.6%
Neg.
0.2%
0.8%
1 2.7%
0.2%
2.4%
0.1%
0.6%
Neg.
0.7%
1 6.8%
0.3%
0.3%
1.1%
0.7%
1.1%
1.5%
5.0%
3.4%
0.1%
32.0%
74.5%
11.1%
12.8%
1.5%
25.5%
100.0%
2.8%
0.7%
0.9%
4.4%
Neg.
1.1%
0.1%
1.2%
0.6%
Neg.
0.2%
0.8%
12.4%
0.2%
2.3%
0.1%
0.5%
Neg.
0.6%
16.1%
0.4%
0.3%
1.2%
0.7%
1.1%
1.6%
5.4%
3.5%
0.1%
31 .4%
73.7%
1 1 .7%
13.1%
1.5%
26.3%
100.0%
2.8%
0.6%
0.9%
4.4%
Neg.
1.0%
0.1%
1.1%
0.6%
Neg.
0.2%
0.8%
1 2.7%
0.2%
2.2%
0.1%
0.5%
Neg.
0.6%
16.3%
0.3%
0.3%
1.3%
0.7%
1.2%
1.8%
5.6%
3.4%
0.1%
31 .8%
73.9%
1 1 .8%
1 2.8%
1.5%
26.1%
100.0%
2.9%
0.7%
0.9%
4.4%
Neg.
0.9%
0.1%
1.0%
0.6%
Neg.
0.2%
0.8%
12.6%
0.2%
2.0%
0.1%
0.5%
Neg.
0.6%
15.9%
0.3%
0.3%
1.3%
0.7%
1.1%
1.8%
5.6%
3.5%
0.1%
31 .2%
73.5%
1 1 .9%
13.1%
1.5%
26.5%
100.0%
* Generation before materials recovery or combustion.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
** Not estimated separately prior to 1980. Paper wraps not reported separately after 1996.
t Other than food products.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
84
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 20
RECOVERY* OF PRODUCTS IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, 1960 TO 2005
(WITH DETAIL ON CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING)
(In thousands of tons)
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 13)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 16)
Thousands of Tons
1960
350
2,390
1970
940
3,730
1980
1,360
4,670
1990
3,460
8,800
2000
6,350
17,560
2003
7,160
19,290
2004
7,440
19,960
2005
7,470
20,450
Containers and Packaging
Glass Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Bottles
Wine and Liquor Bottles
Food and Other Bottles & Jars
Total Glass Packaging
Steel Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Food and Other Cans
Other Steel Packaging
Total Steel Packaging
Aluminum Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Other Cans
Foil and Closures
Total Aluminum Pkg
Paper & Paperboard Pkg
Corrugated Boxes
Milk Cartons**
Folding Cartons**
Other Paperboard Packaging
Bags and Sacks**
Wrapping Papers**
Other Paper Packaging
Total Paper & Board Pkg
Plastics Packaging
Soft Drink Bottles**
Milk Bottles**
Other Containers
Bags and Sacks**
Wraps**
Other Plastics Packaging
Total Plastics Packaging
Wood Packaging
Other Misc. Packaging
Total Containers & Pkg
Total Product Wastes?
Other Wastes
Food Scraps
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Recovered - Weight
90
10
Neg.
100
10
20
Neg.
30
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
2,520
220
2,740
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
2,870
5,610
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
5,610
140
10
Neg.
150
20
60
Neg.
80
10
Neg.
Neg.
10
2,760
350
3,110
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
3,350
8,020
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
8,020
730
20
Neg.
750
50
150
Neg.
200
310
Neg.
Neg.
320
6,390
Neg.
520
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
300
7,210
10
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
10
Neg.
Neg.
8,490
14,520
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
14,520
1,890
210
520
2,620
40
590
60
690
990
Neg.
20
1,010
1 1 ,530
Neg.
340
Neg.
200
Neg.
Neg.
12,070
140
20
20
30
30
20
260
130
Neg.
16,780
29,040
Neg.
4,200
Neg.
4,200
33,240
1,530
430
920
2,880
Neg.
1,530
160
1,690
830
Neg.
30
860
20,330
Neg.
410
Neg.
300
Neg.
Neg.
21 ,040
290
210
260
10
170
90
1,030
1,240
Neg.
28,740
52,650
680
15,770
Neg.
16,450
69,100
2,090
240
320
2,650
Neg.
1,560
160
1,720
650
Neg.
40
690
21,180
Neg.
450
Neg.
260
Neg.
Neg.
21,890
280
230
290
10
170
90
1,070
1,280
Neg.
29,300
55,750
750
18,330
Neg.
19,080
74,830
2,150
240
340
2,730
Neg.
1,500
160
1,660
670
Neg.
40
710
21 ,440
Neg.
450
Neg.
270
Neg.
Neg.
22,160
290
230
440
10
180
90
1,240
1,290
Neg.
29,790
57,190
660
19,810
Neg.
20,470
77,660
2,190
250
320
2,760
Neg.
1,340
160
1,500
650
Neg.
40
690
22,100
Neg.
590
Neg.
250
Neg.
Neg.
22,940
290
230
440
10
220
90
1,280
1,310
Neg.
30,480
58,400
690
19,860
Neg.
20,550
78,950
* Recovery of postconsumer wastes; does not include converting/fabrication scrap.
** Not estimated separately prior to 1980. Paper wraps not reported separately after 1996.
t Other than food products.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
85
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 21
RECOVERY* OF PRODUCTS IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, 1960 TO 2005
(WITH DETAIL ON CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING)
(In percent of generation of each product)
Percent of Generation of Each Product
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 13)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 16)
1960
3.5%
13.8%
1970
6.4%
14.9%
1980
6.2%
13.6%
1990
1 1 .6%
1 6.9%
2000
17.2%
27.4%
2003
18.2%
31 .0%
2004
18.7%
31 .0%
2005
1 8.5%
32.1%
Containers and Packaging
Glass Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Bottles
Wine and Liquor Bottles
Food and Other Bottles & Jars
Total Glass Packaging
Steel Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Food and Other Cans
Other Steel Packaging
Total Steel Packaging
Aluminum Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Other Cans
Foil and Closures
Total Aluminum Pkg
Paper & Paperboard Pkg
Corrugated Boxes
Milk Cartons**
Folding Cartons**
Other Paperboard Packaging
Bags and Sacks**
Wrapping Papers**
Other Paper Packaging
Total Paper & Board Pkg
Plastics Packaging
Soft Drink Bottles**
Milk Bottles**
Other Containers
Bags and Sacks**
Wraps**
Other Plastics Packaging
Total Plastics Packaging
Wood Packaging
Other Misc. Packaging
Total Containers & Pkg
Total Product I/Vastest
Other Wastes
Food Scraps
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Recovered - %
6.4%
Neg.
Neg.
1.6%
1.6%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
34.4%
7.5%
19.4%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
10.5%
10.3%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
6.4%
2.5%
Neg.
Neg.
1.3%
1.3%
1.7%
Neg.
1.5%
10.0%
Neg.
Neg.
1.8%
21 .6%
9.2%
14.5%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
7.7%
9.6%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
6.6%
10.8%
Neg.
Neg.
5.4%
9.6%
5.3%
Neg.
5.5%
36.5%
Neg.
Neg.
25.2%
37.4%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
35.3%
27.4%
3.8%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
16.1%
13.3%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
9.6%
33.5%
10.3%
12.5%
22.1%
26.7%
23.2%
30.0%
23.9%
63.9%
Neg.
6.1%
53.2%
48.0%
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
36.9%
32.6%
3.8%
1.4%
3.2%
2.0%
1.0%
3.8%
1.6%
Neg.
26.0%
1 9.8%
Neg.
12.0%
Neg.
7.2%
1 6.2%
26.8%
22.5%
26.9%
26.1%
Neg.
58.2%
66.7%
58.9%
54.6%
Neg.
7.9%
44.1%
67.3%
Neg.
7.0%
Neg.
20.1%
Neg.
52.7%
34.9%
30.4%
9.9%
0.6%
6.7%
2.6%
8.7%
15.3%
Neg.
37.8%
29.7%
2.6%
51 .7%
Neg.
27.2%
29.1%
30.6%
15.2%
14.9%
25.1%
Neg.
60.0%
66.7%
60.6%
43.9%
Neg.
10.5%
36.1%
71 .3%
Neg.
8.1%
Neg.
21 .0%
Neg.
56.7%
32.2%
31 .9%
9.7%
0.6%
6.2%
2.3%
8.3%
15.4%
Neg.
38.9%
31 .5%
2.7%
58.2%
Neg.
30.2%
31.1%
30.7%
15.3%
14.9%
25.1%
Neg.
61 .2%
66.7%
61 .7%
45.3%
Neg.
10.3%
37.0%
68.1%
Neg.
8.1%
Neg.
21 .3%
Neg.
54.9%
34.1%
28.8%
14.0%
0.6%
6.1%
2.0%
8.9%
15.3%
Neg.
37.9%
31 .3%
2.3%
62.4%
Neg.
31 .7%
31 .4%
30.6%
15.2%
15.0%
25.3%
Neg.
62.9%
66.7%
63.3%
44.8%
Neg.
10.0%
36.3%
71 .5%
Neg.
1 1 .9%
Neg.
21 .0%
Neg.
58.8%
34.1%
28.8%
14.1%
0.6%
7.8%
2.0%
9.4%
15.4%
Neg.
39.8%
32.3%
2.4%
61 .9%
Neg.
31 .6%
32.1%
* Recovery of postconsumer wastes; does not include converting/fabrication scrap.
** Not estimated separately prior to 1980. Paper wraps not reported separately after 1996.
t Other than food products.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
86
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 22
PRODUCTS DISCARDED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 2005
(WITH DETAIL ON CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING)
(In thousands of tons)
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 14)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 17)
Thousands of Tons
1960
9,570
14,940
1970
13,720
21 ,330
1980
20,440
29,750
1990
26,350
43,370
2000
30,630
46,560
2003
32,280
43,010"
2004
32,410
44,450
2005
32,810
43,270
Containers and Packaging
Glass Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Bottles
Wine and Liquor Bottles
Food and Other Bottles & Jars
Total Glass Packaging
Steel Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Food and Other Cans
Other Steel Packaging
Total Steel Packaging
Aluminum Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Other Cans
Foil and Closures
Total Aluminum Pkg
Papers Paperboard Pkg
Corrugated Boxes
Milk Cartons**
Folding Cartons**
Other Paperboard Packaging
Bags and Sacks**
Wrapping Papers**
Other Paper Packaging
Total Paper & Board Pkg
Plastics Packaging
Soft Drink Bottles**
Milk Bottles**
Other Containers
Bags and Sacks**
Wraps**
Other Plastics Packaging
Total Plastics Packaging
Wood Packaging
Other Misc. Packaging
Total Containers & Pkg
Total Product Wastesf
Other Wastes
Food Scraps
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Discarded - Weight
1,310
1,070
3,710
6,090
630
3,740
260
4,630
Neg.
Neg.
170
170
4,810
3,840
2,720
1 1 ,370
60
60
120
2,000
120
24,500
49,010
12,200
20,000
1,300
33,500
82,510
5,440
1,890
4,440
11,770
1,550
3,480
270
5,300
90
60
410
560
10,000
4,830
3,460
18,290
910
1,180
2,090
2,070
130
40,210
75,260
12,800
23,200
1,780
37,780
113,040
6,010
2,430
4,780
13,220
470
2,700
240
3,410
540
40
380
950
10,690
790
3,300
230
3,380
200
550
19,140
250
230
890
390
840
790
3,390
3,940
130
44,180
94,370
13,000
27,500
2,250
42,750
137,120
3,750
1,820
3,640
9,210
110
1,950
140
2,200
560
20
310
890
12,480
510
3,960
290
2,240
110
1,020
20,610
290
510
1,410
910
1,500
2,020
6,640
8,050
150
47,750
117,470
20,800
30,800
2,900
54,500
171,970
4,180
1,480
2,500
8,160
Neg.
1,100
80
1,180
690
50
350
1,090
9,880
550
5,410
200
1,190
Neg.
1,670
18,900
540
480
2,370
1,640
2,380
3,420
10,830
6,880
240
47,280
124,470
25,800
14,760
3,500
44,060
168,530
4,750
1,340
1,830
7,920
Neg.
1,040
80
1,120
830
50
340
1,220
8,530
450
5,110
180
980
Neg.
1,440
16,690
590
490
2,690
1,620
2,580
3,840
11,810
7,050
250
46,060
121,350
27,430
13,140
3,620
44,190
165,540
4,860
1,330
1,940
8,130
Neg.
950
80
1,030
810
50
350
1,210
10,050
470
5,090
170
1,000
Neg.
1,460
18,240
560
570
2,710
1,800
2,760
4,320
12,720
7,140
290
48,760
125,620
28,410
11,960
3,650
44,020
169,640
4,960
1,390
1,810
8,160
Neg.
790
80
870
800
50
360
1,210
8,830
420
4,380
150
940
Neg.
1,370
16,090
560
570
2,670
1,630
2,590
4,350
12,370
7,210
280
46,190
122,270
28,540
12,210
3,690
44,440
166,710
* Discards after materials and compost recovery. In this table, discards include combustion with energy recovery.
Does not include construction & demolition debris, industrial process wastes, or certain other wastes.
** Not estimated separately prior to 1980. Paper wraps not reported separately after 1996.
t Other than food products.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent. Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
87
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Table 23
PRODUCTS DISCARDED* IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE STREAM, 1960 TO 2005
(WITH DETAIL ON CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING)
(In percent of total discards)
Products
Durable Goods
(Detail in Table 14)
Nondurable Goods
(Detail in Table 17)
Percent of Total Discards
1960
1 1 .6%
18.1%
1970
12.1%
18.9%
1980
14.9%
21 .7%
1990
15.3%
25.2%
2000
18.2%
27.6%
2003
19.5%
26.0%
2004
19.1%
26.2%
Containers and Packaging
Glass Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Bottles
Wine and Liquor Bottles
Food and Other Bottles & Jars
Total Glass Packaging
Steel Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Food and Other Cans
Other Steel Packaging
Total Steel Packaging
Aluminum Packaging
Beer and Soft Drink Cans
Other Cans
Foil and Closures
Total Aluminum Pkg
Paper & Paperboard Pkg
Corrugated Boxes
Milk Cartons**
Folding Cartons**
Other Paperboard Packaging
Bags and Sacks**
Wrapping Papers**
Other Paper Packaging
Total Paper & Board Pkg
Plastics Packaging
Soft Drink Bottles**
Milk Bottles**
Other Containers
Bags and Sacks**
Wraps**
Other Plastics Packaging
Total Plastics Packaging
Wood Packaging
Other Misc. Packaging
Total Containers & Pkg
Total Product I/Vastest
Other Wastes
Food Scraps
Yard Trimmings
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes
Total Other Wastes
Total MSW Discarded - %
1.6%
1.3%
4.5%
7.4%
0.8%
4.5%
0.3%
5.6%
Neg.
Neg.
0.2%
0.2%
5.8%
4.7%
3.3%
13.8%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
2.4%
0.1%
29.7%
59.4%
14.8%
24.2%
1.6%
40.6%
100.0%
4.8%
1.7%
3.9%
10.4%
1.4%
3.1%
0.2%
4.7%
0.1%
Neg.
0.4%
0.5%
8.8%
4.3%
3.1%
16.2%
0.8%
1.0%
1.8%
1.8%
0.1%
35.6%
66.6%
1 1 .3%
20.5%
1.6%
33.4%
100.0%
4.4%
1.8%
3.5%
9.6%
0.3%
2.0%
0.2%
2.5%
0.4%
Neg.
0.3%
0.7%
7.8%
0.6%
2.4%
0.2%
2.5%
0.1%
0.4%
14.0%
0.2%
0.2%
0.6%
0.3%
0.6%
0.6%
2.5%
2.9%
0.1%
32.2%
68.8%
9.5%
20.1%
1.6%
31 .2%
100.0%
2.2%
1.1%
2.1%
5.4%
0.1%
1.1%
0.1%
1.3%
0.3%
Neg.
0.2%
0.5%
7.3%
0.3%
2.3%
0.2%
1.3%
0.1%
0.6%
12.0%
0.2%
0.3%
0.8%
0.5%
0.9%
1.2%
3.9%
4.7%
0.1%
27.8%
68.3%
12.1%
17.9%
1.7%
31 .7%
100.0%
2.5%
0.9%
1.5%
4.8%
Neg.
0.7%
0.0%
0.7%
0.4%
Neg.
0.2%
0.6%
5.9%
0.3%
3.2%
0.1%
0.7%
Neg.
1.0%
1 1 .2%
0.3%
0.3%
1.4%
1.0%
1.4%
2.0%
6.4%
4.1%
0.1%
28.1%
73.9%
15.3%
8.8%
2.1%
26.1%
1 00.0%
2.9%
0.8%
1.1%
4.8%
Neg.
0.6%
0.0%
0.7%
0.5%
Neg.
0.2%
0.7%
5.2%
0.3%
3.1%
0.1%
0.6%
Neg.
0.9%
10.1%
0.4%
0.3%
1.6%
1.0%
1.6%
2.3%
7.1%
4.3%
0.2%
27.8%
73.3%
16.6%
7.9%
2.2%
26.7%
100.0%
2.9%
0.8%
1.1%
4.8%
Neg.
0.6%
0.0%
0.6%
0.5%
Neg.
0.2%
0.7%
5.9%
0.3%
3.0%
0.1%
0.6%
Neg.
0.9%
10.8%
0.3%
0.3%
1.6%
1.1%
1.6%
2.5%
7.5%
4.2%
0.2%
28.7%
74.1%
16.7%
7.1%
2.2%
25.9%
100.0%
2005
19.7%
26.0%
3.0%
0.8%
1.1%
4.9%
Neg.
0.5%
0.0%
0.5%
0.5%
Neg.
0.2%
0.7%
5.3%
0.3%
2.6%
0.1%
0.6%
Neg.
0.8%
9.7%
0.3%
0.3%
1.6%
1.0%
1.6%
2.6%
7.4%
4.3%
0.2%
27.7%
73.3%
17.1%
7.3%
2.2%
26.7%
100.0%
* Discards after materials and compost recovery. In this table, discards include combustion with energy recovery.
Does not include construction & demolition debris, industrial process wastes, or certain other wastes.
** Not estimated separately prior to 1980. Paper wraps not reported separately after 1996.
t Other than food products.
Neg. = Less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent. Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
In 1996, the Can Manufacturers Institute began publishing data on consumption of
beverages in cans. The consumption data are adjusted for imports and exports of beverages in
cans, and therefore are more accurate for generation calculations than shipments alone. Total
aluminum container and packaging generation in 2005 was 1.9 million tons, or 0.8 percent of
total MSW generation.
Aluminum can recovery data are published by the Aluminum Association; this recovery
number includes imported used beverage cans (UBC). The imported UBC are subtracted from
the tonnage of UBC reported by the Aluminum Association to have been melted by U.S. end-
users and recovered for export. Thus, the aluminum can recovery rate reported here is somewhat
less than that published by the Aluminum Association.
Recovery of aluminum beverage cans in 2005 was 0.7 million tons, or 44.8 percent of
generation. Recovery of all aluminum packaging was estimated to be 36.3 percent of total
generation in 2005. After recovery for recycling, 1.2 million tons of aluminum packaging were
discarded in 2005.
Paper and Paperboard Containers and Packaging. Corrugated boxes are the largest
single product category of MSW at 30.9 million tons generated, or 12.6 percent of total
generation, in 2005. Corrugated boxes also represent the largest single category of product
recovery, at 22.1 million tons of recovery in 2005 (71.5 percent of boxes generated were
recovered). After recovery, 8.8 million tons of corrugated boxes were discarded, or 5.3 percent
of MSW discards in 2005.)
Other paper and paperboard packaging in MSW includes milk cartons, folding boxes
(e.g., cereal boxes, frozen food boxes, some department store boxes), bags and sacks, wrapping
papers, and other paper and paperboard packaging (primarily set-up boxes such as shoe boxes).
Overall, paper and paperboard containers and packaging totaled 39.0 million tons of MSW
generation in 2005, or 15.9 percent of total generation.
89
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Sing
While recovery of corrugated boxes is by far the largest component of paper packagi
recovery, smaller amounts of other paper packaging products are recovered (estimated at
840,000 tons in 2005). The overall recovery rate for paper and paperboard packaging in 2005
was 58.8 percent. Other paper packaging such as folding boxes and sacks is mostly recovered as
mixed papers.
Plastic Containers and Packaging. Many different plastic resins are used to make a
variety of packaging products. Some of these include polyethylene terephthalate (PET) soft drink
bottles, high-density polyethylene (HDPE) milk and water jugs, film products (including bags
and sacks) made of low-density polyethylene (LDPE), and other containers and other packaging
(including coatings, closures, etc.) made of polyvinyl chloride, polystyrene, polypropylene, and
other resins. Estimates of generation of plastic containers and packaging are based on data on
resin sales by end use published annually by the American Plastics Council's annual plastics
resin survey.
Plastic containers and packaging have exhibited rapid growth in MSW, with generation
increasing from 120,000 tons in 1960 (0.1 percent of generation) to 13.7 million tons in 2005
(5.6 percent of MSW generation). (Note: plastic packaging as a category in this report does not
include single-service plates and cups and trash bags, which are classified as nondurable goods.)
Estimates of recovery of plastic products are based on data published annually by the
American Plastics Council supplemented with additional industry data. Plastic soft drink bottles
were estimated to have been recovered at a 34.1 percent rate in 2005 (290,000 tons). Recovery of
plastic milk and water bottles was estimated to have been 230,000 tons, or 28.8 percent of
generation. Overall, recovery of plastic containers and packaging was estimated to be 1.3 million
tons, or 9.4 percent in 2005. Discards of plastic packaging thus were 12.4 million tons in 2005,
or 7.4 percent of total MSW generation.
90
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Wood Packaging. Wood packaging includes wood crates and pallets (mostly pallets).
Data on production of wood packaging is from the National Wood Pallet and Container
Association, and more recently, the USDA Forest Service Southern Research Station and
Virginia Polytechnic Institute. In 2005, 8.5 million tons of wood pallets and other wood
packaging were estimated to have been generated, or 3.5 percent of total MSW generation.
Wood pallet recovery for recycling (usually by chipping for uses such as mulch or
bedding material, but excluding wood combusted as fuel) was estimated at 1.3 million tons in
2005.
Accounting for pallet reuse and recovery for recycling, wood packaging discards were
7.2 million tons in 2005, or 4.3 percent of total MSW discards.
Other Packaging. Estimates are included for some other miscellaneous packaging such
as bags made of textiles, small amounts of leather, and the like. These latter quantities are not
well documented; it was estimated that 280,000 tons were generated in 2005.
Summary of Products in Municipal Solid Waste
The materials composition of municipal solid waste generation by product category is
illustrated in Figure 14. This figure shows graphically that generation of durable goods has
increased very gradually over the years. Nondurable goods and containers and packaging have
accounted for the large increases in MSW generation.
The materials composition of nondurable goods in 2005 is shown in Figure 15. Paper and
paperboard made up 71 percent of nondurables in MSW generation, with plastics contributing 10
percent, and textiles 12 percent. Other materials contributed lesser percentages. After recovery
for recycling, paper and paperboard were 60 percent of nondurable discards, with plastics being
15 percent, and textiles 15 percent.
91
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
The materials composition of containers and packaging in MSW in 2005 is shown in
Figure 16. By weight, paper and paperboard products made up 51 percent of containers and
packaging generation; plastics accounted for 18 percent. Glass was 14 percent, wood was 11
percent, and metals were 6 percent.
The percentage of materials discards from containers and packaging is affected by
recovery for recycling. After recovery for recycling, paper and paperboard dropped to 34 percent
of discards. Glass containers accounted for 18 percent of discards of containers and packaging,
plastics were 27 percent, wood was 16 percent, and metals were 5 percent.
Figure 14. Generation of products in MSW, 1960 to 2005
Yard Trimmings^^ Food scraps
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
92
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Figure 15. Nondurable goods generated and discarded*
in municipal solid waste, 2005
(In percent of total generation and discards)
Textiles
12%
Rubber & leather
2%
Plastics
10%
Paper & paperboard
71%
Generation
Textiles
15%
Rubber & leather
2%
Plastics
15%
Paper & paperboard
60%
Discards*
'Discards in this figure include combustion with energy recovery.
93
-------
Chapter 2
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Figure 16. Containers and packaging generated and discarded*
in municipal solid waste, 2005
(In percent of total generation and discards)
Wood, other
11%
Plastics
18%
Metals
6%
Paper & paperboard
51%
Glass
14%
Generation
Wood, other
16%
Plastics
27%
Paper & paperboard
34%
Metals
5%
Glass
18%
Discards*
'Discards in this figure include combustion with energy recovery.
94
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
SUMMARY
The data presented in this chapter can be summarized by the following observations:
MSW Generation
• Total generation of municipal solid waste in 2005 was 245.7 million tons, which
was 1.6 million tons less than in 2004, when 247.3 million tons were generated.
This compares to 1990, when total generation of MSW was 205.2 million tons.
• Paper and paperboard products made up the largest percentage of all the materials
in MSW, at 34.2 percent of total generation. Generation of paper and paperboard
products declined from 87.7 million tons in 2000 to 84.0 million tons in 2005.
Generation of newspapers has been declining since 1990, and this trend is
expected to continue, partly due to decreased page size (source reduction), but
also due to increased use of electronic communication of news. Generation of
office-type (high grade) papers also has been in decline, due at least partially to
increased use of electronic transmission of reports, etc. Paper and paperboard
products have ranged between 34 and 35 percent of generation since 2003.
• Yard trimmings comprised the second largest material category, estimated at 32.1
million tons, or 13.1 percent of total generation, in 2005. This compares to 35.0
million tons (17.1 percent of total generation) in 1990. This decline is largely due
to state legislation discouraging yard trimmings disposal in landfills, including
source reduction measures such as backyard composting and leaving grass
trimmings on the yard.
95
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Plastic products generation in 2005 was 28.9 million tons, or 11.8 percent of
generation. This was a decrease of 250,000 tons from 2004 to 2005. This decrease
in plastics generation came from the containers and packaging category. Plastics
generation has grown from 8.3 percent in 1990 to 11.8 percent in 2005.
MSW Recovery
Recovery of materials in MSW increased from 69.1 million tons in 2000 (29.1
percent of total generation) to 79.0 million tons in 2005 (32.1 percent of
generation).
Recovery of products and other wastes in MSW increased by 1.3 million tons
from 2004 to 2005. Recovery of paper and paperboard products, the largest
component of recovery, increased from 47.1 percent in 2004 to 50.0 percent in
2005.
The increase in recovery of paper and paperboard products over the longer term
has been due to increases in recovery, over time, from all categories: newspapers,
books, magazines, office papers, directories, Standard mail (advertisements,
circulars, etc.), and other commercial printing. Between 2004 and 2005, the key
categories showing increases in recovery were newspapers, mail, and corrugated
boxes.
Tonnage of newspapers recovered increased by 270,000 tons between 2004 and
2005; percentage recovered increased from 84.4 percent to 88.9 percent. As
generation of newspapers declines, this raises a question as to whether much
increase in tonnage of newspapers recovered can be achieved.
96
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
• Containers and packaging recovery increased from 29.8 million tons in 2004 to
30.5 million tons in 2005; percentage recovery increased from 37.9 percent to
39.8 percent. Nondurable goods recovery increased from 20.0 million tons in
2004 to 20.5 million tons in 2005; percentage recovery increased from 31.0
percent to 32.1 percent.
• Measured by tonnage, the most recovered products and materials in 2005 were
corrugated boxes (22.1 million tons), yard trimmings (19.9 million tons),
newspapers (10.7 million tons), high grade office papers (4.1 million tons), glass
containers (2.8 million tons), steel from large appliances (2.4 million tons), rubber
tires (1.5 million tons), Standard mail (2.1 million tons), and wood packaging (1.3
million tons). Collectively, these products accounted for about 85 percent of total
MSW recovery in 2005.
• Measured by percentage of generation, products with the highest recovery rates in
2005 were lead-acid batteries (98.8 percent), steel in major appliances (90.0
percent), newspapers (88.9 percent), corrugated boxes (71.5 percent), steel
packaging (63.3 percent), office-type papers (62.6 percent), yard trimmings (61.9
percent), aluminum cans (44.8 percent), magazines (38.5 percent), Standard mail
(35.8 percent), and PET soft drink bottles (34.1 percent).
Long Term Trends
• Generation of MSW has increased (except in recession years), from 88.1 million
tons in 1960 to 247.3 million tons in 2004. It decreased somewhat, to 245.7
million tons in 2005.
• Generation of paper and paperboard, the largest material component of MSW,
fluctuates from year to year, but has decreased from 87.7 million tons in 2000 to
84.0 million tons in 2005. Generation of yard trimmings, the second largest
97
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
component, has increased since 2000. Generation of other material categories also
fluctuates from year to year, but overall MSW generation has increased each year
since 2000, except for 2005, which saw a decline from 2004 to 2005, primarily
due to the decline in paper and paperboard generation between 2004 and 2005.
• In percentage of total MSW generation, recovery for recycling (including
composting) did not exceed 15 percent until 1990. Growth in the recovery rate to
current levels (32.1 percent) reflects a rapid increase in the infrastructure for
recovery over the last decade.
• Recovery (as a percentage of generation) of most materials in MSW has increased
dramatically over the last 35 years. Some examples:
1970 1980 1990 2000 2005
Paper and paperboard 15% 21% 28% 43% 50%
Glass 1% 5% 20% 23% 22%
Metals 4% 8% 24% 36% 37%
Plastics Neg. <1% 2% 5% 6%
Yard trimmings Neg. Neg. 12% 52% 62%
Rubber in tires 13% 6% 12% 26% 35%
Lead-acid batteries 76% 70% 97% 93% 99%
Neg. = less than 5,000 tons or 0.05 percent.
98
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
CHAPTER 2
REFERENCES
GENERAL
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Municipal Solid Waste Generation, Recycling, and
Disposal in the United States: Facts and Figures for 2003. EPA530-F-05-003. April 2005.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Municipal Solid Waste in The United States: 2001 Facts
and Figures. EPA/530-R-03-011. October 2003.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Municipal Solid Waste in The United States: 2000 Facts
and Figures. EPA/530-R-02-001. June 2002.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Municipal Solid Waste in The United States: 1999 Facts
and Figures. EPA/530-R-01-014. July 2001.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States: 1997 Update. EPA/530-R-98-007. May 1998.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States: 1996 Update. EPA/530-R-97-015. June 1997.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States: 1995 Update. EPA/530-R-96-001. November 1995.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States: 1994 Update. EPA/530-R-94-042. November 1994.
99
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States: 1992 Update. EPA/53O-R-92-019. July 1992.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States: 1990 Update. EPA/530-SW-90-042. June 1991.
Franklin, M.A. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States, 1960 to 2000
(Update 1988). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/530-SW-88-033. NTIS PB88-
232780/WEP. March 1988.
Franklin, M.A. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States, 1960 to 2000.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. KEPT-15-3490-00. NTIS PB87-178323AVEP. July
1986.
ALUMINUM CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING
The Aluminum Association. Aluminum Statistical Review. Various years.
The Aluminum Association, www.aluminum.org.
Can Manufacturers Institute. Can Shipments Report. Various years.
Personal Communication with a representative of the Can Manufacturers Institute. February
2006.
Resource Recycling's Container Recycling Update. Various issues.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. "Closures for
Containers." MQ34H. Various years.
100
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Merchandise Trade (7602.00.0030 -
Aluminum Used Beverage Container Scrap SEC 9100).
CARPETS AND RUGS
Carpet America Recovery Effort (CARE). Annual Report. Various years.
www. carpetrecovery. org.
The Carpet and Rug Institute. Carpet & Rug Industry Review. Various years.
The Carpet and Rug Institute. Sustainability Report 2000. 2001.
Modern Plastics. "Resin Statistics." January issue. Various years.
Personal communication with a representative of the Carpet and Rug Institute. July 2002.
Rauch Associates, Inc. The Ranch Guide to the U.S. Adhesives and Sealants Industry. ISBN O-
932157-05-X.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. "Carpets and
Rugs." MA22Q. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. "Carpets and
Rugs." MA314Q. Various years.
DISPOSABLE DIAPERS
Franklin Associates, Ltd. Confidential industry sources.
Kimberly-Clark. Annual Report. Various years.
101
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Ninner, N.R., A.M. Sterling, and A.R. Liss. Female Incontinence. 1980.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
National Center for Health Statistics.
FOOD SCRAPS
California Integrated Waste Management Board. "Waste Disposal Rates for Business Types."
www.ciwmb.ca.gov/.
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. Garbage Gazette. Jan/Feb, 2002.
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. Identifying, Quantifying, and Mapping
Food Residuals from Connecticut Businesses and Institutions. Draper/Lennon, Inc. September,
2001.
Farrell, Molly. Evaluating Residential Organics Collection Pilot. BioCycle. March 2001.
Food Manufacturers Institute. "Reducing Waste Disposal Costs: How to Evaluate the Benefits of
Composting in the Supermarket Industry." Composting Workbook. 1994.
Goldstein, Nora. "National Trends in Food Residuals Composting Part I." BioCycle. July 1997.
Goldstein, Nora and Dave Block. "Nationwide Inventory of Food Residuals Composting Part II."
BioCycle. August 1997.
Goldstein, Nora, Jim Glenn, and Kevin Gray. "Nationwide Overview of Food Residuals
Composting." BioCycle. August 1998.
Grocery Committee on Solid Waste. Composting Task Force Report. October 24, 1991.
102
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Hinshaw, Jane, and Ivan Braun. "Targeting Commercial Businesses for Recycling." Resource
Recycling. November 1991.
Kunzler, Conni, and Molly Farrell. "Food Service Composting Projects Update." BioCycle. May
1996.
Kunzler, Conni, and Rebecca Roe. "Food Service Composting Projects on the Rise." BioCycle.
April 1995.
Luboff, Christine, and Karen May. "Measuring Generation of Food Residuals." July 1995.
Marion, James, New York State Department of Corrections. Presentation at the BioCycle
conference. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 1994.
Newell, Ty, Elizabeth Markstahler, and Matthew Snyder. "Commercial Food Waste from
Restaurants and Grocery Stores." Resource Recycling. February 1993.
Savage, George M. "The History and Utility of Waste Characterization Studies." MSW
Management. May/June 1994.
Shanklin, Carol W. Targeting the Food Service Sector. BioCycle. April 2001.
Tucker, Marvin. Examining Collection of all Residential Organics. Resource Recycling.
November 2001.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. "Estimating and Addressing America's Food Losses."
Economic Research Service, www.econ.ag.gov/. July 1997.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. "Food Consumption, Prices, and Expenditures, 1996."
Economic Research Service. Judith Jones Putnam. April 1996.
103
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. "Combined Annual and Revised Monthly
Retail Trade." Current Business Reports. BR/95-RV.
U.S. EPA. "Quantification of Food Residual Composted - 2004 and 2005." Summary report.
Nora Goldstein, JG Press. October 2006.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. "Monthly Retail Trade." Current
Business Reports. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Population Reports. Various
years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of the United States.
Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce. "Trends and Forecasts: Retail Sales." U.S. Industrial Outlook
1994.
Walsh, Patrick, Wayne Pferdehirt, and Phil O'Leary. "Collection of Recyclables from
Multifamily Housing and Businesses." Waste Age. April 1993.
FURNITURE AND FURNISHINGS
Smith, F.L. A Solid Waste Estimation Procedure: Material Flows Approach. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. EPA/530-SW-147. May 1974.
Spendlove, MJ. "A Profile of the Nonferrous Secondary Metals Industry." U.S. Bureau of
Mines. Proceedings of the Second Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium. 1970.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Economic Census of Manufactures and
Annual Survey of Manufactures. Various years.
104
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. "Average
Weight and Width of Broadwoven Fabrics (Gray)." MC-22T. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. "Office
Furniture." MA-25H. Various years.
GLASS CONTAINERS
Bingham, T.H., et al. An Evaluation of the Effectiveness and Cost of Regulatory and Fiscal
Policy Instruments on Product Packaging. Research Triangle Institute for the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste Management. March 1974.
Brewers Almanac. Various years.
Egan, Katherine. "Glass Recycling Rate Drops Seven Percent in 1997." Waste Age's Recycling
Times. June 1, 1998.
Franklin Associates, Ltd. Post-consumer Solid Waste and Resource Recovery Baseline. Prepared
for the Resource Conservation Committee. May 16, 1979.
Franklin, W.E., et al. Base Line Forecasts of Resource Recovery, 1972 to 1990. Midwest
Research Institute for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste
Management Programs. March 1975.
Glass Packaging Institute. Annual Report. Various years.
Personal communication with Kevin Dietly of Northbridge Environmental Management
Consultants. May 2006.
Personal communication with a representative of Strategic Materials. 2000.
105
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Resource Recycling, Container Recycling Update. Various issues.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. "Glass
Containers." M32G. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. National Trade Data Bank. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Exports, Schedule B Commodity by Country - Domestic
Merchandise. FT 447. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Imports for Consumption. FT 247. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Imports of Merchandise for Consumption. FT 110 and FT
125. Various years.
LEAD-ACID BATTERIES
American Automobile Manufacturers Association. AAMA Motor Vehicle Facts and Figures.
Various years.
Battery Council International. Industry Statistics. Various years.
Battery Council International. National Recycling Rate Study. Various years.
Franklin Associates, Ltd. Characterization of Products Containing Lead and Cadmium in
Municipal Solid Waste in the United States, 1970 to 2000. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. EPA/530-SW-89-015A. NTIS PB89-151039/WEP. January 1989.
Motorcycle Industry Council, Inc. Motorcycle Statistical Annual. Various years.
106
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
National Petroleum News. Market Facts. Various years.
Personal communication with a representative of R. L. Polk & Company.
Rubber Manufacturers Association. Scrap Tire Markets. July 2004. www.rma.org.
Teck Cominco Market Research. The Lead Market, www.teckcominco.com.
U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Table 4-54. www.bts.gov/publications/
national_transportation_statistics/2005/html/table_04_54.html.
U. S. Department of Commerce. Statistical Abstract of the United States. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Imports By Commodity. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Industrial Outlook "Metals" Various years.
Ward Communications, Inc. Ward's Motor Vehicle Facts & Figures. 2001.
MAJOR APPLIANCES
American Iron and Steel Institute Annual Statistical Report. Various years.
Appliance Magazine. Corcoran Communications. September 1983.
Appliance Manufacturer. Annual Industry Marketing Guide, March issue of various years.
Appliance Manufacturer. Market Profile. Various years.
Appliance Recycling Information Center. INFOBulletin #1, #2, and #7. July 2001.
107
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers. Trends and Forecasts. 1971 to 1988.
Best Buy website, www.bestbuy.com.
Electrical Merchandising. January 1951.
Gas Appliance Manufacturers Association. Statistical Highlights. Various years.
Maytag Corporation, www.amana.com.
National Industrial Pollution Control Council. The Disposal of Major Appliances. June 1971.
Personal communication with a representative of Amana, Inc. November 1991.
Personal communication with a representative of Steel Recycling Institute. August 1997.
Rheem Manufacturing Company, www.rheem.com.
Sears, Roebuck and Co. Spring and Fall Retail Catalogs and website www.sears.com. Various
years.
Steel Recycling Institute, www.recycle-steel.org.
Target Brands, Inc. www.target.com.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Census of Manufactures. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. "Major
Household Appliances." MA36F. Various years.
108
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of the United States.
Various years.
PAPER AND PAPERBOARD
American Forest & Paper Association, Paper Recycling Group. Annual Statistical Summary
Waste Paper Utilization. Various years.
American Forest & Paper Association. Statistics of Paper, Paperboard & Wood Pulp. Various
years.
American Forest & Paper Association. Paper, Paperboard, Pulp Capacity and Fiber
Consumption. Various years.
American Forest & Paper Association. Monthly Statistical Report. Various issues.
Mies, Will, Editor. Pulp & Paper Global Fact & Price Book, 2005. Paperloop, Inc. 2005.
Franklin Associates, Ltd. Evaluation of Proposed New Recycled Paper Standards and
Definitions. Special Task Force on Standards and Definitions, Recycled Paper Committee,
Recycling Advisory Council. January 27, 1992.
U.S. Postal Service. Annual Report of the Postmaster General. Various years.
Yellow Pages Publishers Association. Yellow Pages Publishers Environmental Network:
Progress Report for the Year 1996. March 1997.
PLASTICS
Alliance of Foam Packaging Recyclers. 2004 EPS Recycling Report, www.epspackaging.org.
109
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
American Plastics Council, Inc. "Production and Sales & Captive Use of Thermosetting &
Thermoplastic Resins." Various years.
Modern Plastics. Resin Statistics. January and February issues. Various years.
National Association of PET Container Resources (NAPCOR). "Report on Post Consumer PET
Container Recycling Activity." Various years.
Plastics Recycling Update. January 2004.
R.W. Beck and Associates. "Postconsumer Plastics Recycling Rate Study." American Plastics
Council. Various years.
Schedler, Mke.. "A PET Bottle Recycling Status Report." Resource Recycling. February 2006.
U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Industrial Outlook. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce. Value of Product Shipments. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce. International Trade Statistics. Various years.
RUBBER
American Automobile Manufacturers Association. AAMA Motor Vehicle Facts and Figures.
Various years.
Franklin Associates, Ltd. Markets for Scrap Tires. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
EPA/530-SW-90-07A. October 1991.
International Tire and Rubber Association, Inc. formerly American Retreader's Association, Inc.
Louisville, Kentucky.
110
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
International Tire and Rubber Association, Inc. The Tire Retreading/Repair Journal. April 1997.
McRee, Robert E. "Recap - Recapture: Incineration of Rubber for Energy Recovery" Presented
at the Joint NTDRA/RMA International Symposium. Washington, DC. October 22, 1982.
National Petroleum News Market Facts. Mid-June issue. Various years.
Personal communication with a representative of RL Polk Company. 2000.
Personal communication with the Scrap Tire Management Council. September 1996.
Retreader 's Journal. April 1987.
Rubber Manufacturers Association. Passenger Replacement Shipments To Set Record In 2005.
December 7, 2005.
Rubber Manufacturers Association. U.S. Scrap Tire Markets 2003 Edition. July 2004.
Rubber Manufacturers Association, www.rma.org/scraptires/characteristics.html.
www.rma.org/scraptires/facts figures.html.
Scrap Tire Management Council. 1994 Scrap Tire Use/Disposal Study. Results published in
Scrap Tire News. March 1995.
Scrap Tire Management Council. Scrap Tire Use/Disposal Study 1996 Update. April 1997.
U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Motor Vehicles Scrapped. Table 4-54. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Census of Manufactures. Industry series
30A-30. Various years.
Ill
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. "Rubber
Mechanical Goods." MA30C. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. "Rubber:
Production, Shipments, and Stocks." MA30A. various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of the United States.
various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. U.S. Imports for Consumption. FT 247.
Table 1. various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Industrial Outlook. "Plastics and Rubber." Also earlier
editions. Various years.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Markets for Scrap Tires. EPA/530-SW-90-074A.
October 1991.
Wards. Motor Vehicle Facts & Figures. Various years.
STEEL CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING
American Iron and Steel Institute. Annual Statistical Report. Various years.
Can Manufacturers Institute. Can Shipments Report. Various years.
Personal communication with a representative of the Association of Container Reconditioning.
June 1994.
112
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Personal communication with a representative of the Reusable Industrial Packaging Association.
September 2004.
Personal communications with representatives of the Steel Recycling Institute. Various years.
Resource Recycling. Container Recycling Report. Various issues.
Smith, F.L. A Solid Waste Estimation Procedure: Material Flows Approach. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. EPA/530-SW-147. May 1974.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. "Closures for
Containers." MQ34H. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. "Steel Barrels
and Drums." MA34K, MA332K. Various years.
TEXTILES AND FOOTWEAR
Council for Textile Recycling. Textile Recycling Fact Sheet. Various years.
J.C. Penney's Catalog. 1990 and 2000.
National Association of Hosiery Manufacturers. Fact Sheet. Various years.
Riggle, David. "Tapping Textile Recycling." BioCycle. February 1992.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. "Apparel."
MA23A, MA23E, MA23G, MQ315A, MQ315D. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. "Bed and
Bath Furnishings." MQ314X. Various years.
113
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. "Sheets,
Towels and Pillowcases." MQ23X. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. MA31A,
MQ31A, MA23E, MA23G, and MA23A. Various years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. International Trade Data Bank. Various
years.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of the United States.
Various years.
Spiegel Catalog. Fall/winter 1997.
WOOD PACKAGING
Araman, Phillip, and Robert Bush. "An Update on the Pallet Industry." Brooks Forest Products
Center, Virginia Polytechnic Institute. Release pending.
Araman, Phillip, and Robert Bush. "Use of New Wood Pallets, Containers is Stagnant to
Declining." Pallet Enterprise. September 1997.
Clarke, John W., Marshall S. White, and Philip A. Araman. "Comparative Performance of New,
Repaired, and Remanufactured 48- by 40-inch GMA-style Wood Pallets". Forest Products
Journal. December 2005.
Eshbach, Ovid, Ed. Handbook of Engineering Fundamentals. Second Edition. John Wiley &
Sons, Inc.
Hardwood Market Report. February 28, 1998.
114
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Personal communication with representative of the National Wooden Pallet and Container
Association. September 1996.
Personal communication with representative of the U.S. Forestry Service Laboratory, Princeton,
WV. December 1991.
Personal communication with representative of U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service,
Forest Products Laboratory. December 1991.
Personal communication with representative of Virginia Polytechnic Institute. December 1991
and October 2002.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory. Wood Used in U.S.
Manufacturing Industries, 1977. December 1983.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Southern Research Center and Brooks Forest
Products Center, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, www.srs4702.forprod.vt.edu/pallets/new.asp.
U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Industrial Outlook. "Wood Products." Various years.
YARD TRIMMINGS
California Integrated Waste Management Board. "Waste Disposal and Diversion Findings for
Selected Industry Groups." Cascadia Consulting Group. June 2006.
California Integrated Waste Management Board. "Detailed Characterization of Commercial Self-
Haul and Drop-box Waste" Cascadia Consulting Group. June 2006.
California Integrated Waste Management Board. "Statewide Waste Characterization Study."
Cascadia Consulting Group. December 2004.
115
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
California Integrated Waste Management Board. "Second Assessment of California's Compost-
and Mulch-Producing Infrastructure." May 2004.
Composting Council Research and Education Foundation. "1995 Compost Capacity Survey."
James Butler and Associates. October 1996.
Composting Council. Fact Sheet. "Yard Waste Legislation: Disposal Bans and Similar Bills as of
July, 1993."July 1993.
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. "State Solid Waste Management Plan."
Appendix D: "Current Waste Diversion Practices, Preliminary Draft." RW Beck. 2006.
Delaware Solid Waste Authority. "Analysis of the Impact of a Yard Waste Ban on Landfill
Quantities and Household Costs." DSM Environmental Services, Inc. September 15, 2004.
Florida Department of Environmental Protection. "Solid Waste Management in Florida." 1998.
Florida Department of Environmental Protection. WasteCalc solid waste model. Franklin
Associates, Ltd. subcontractor to TIA. Background model worksheet. Analysis of state and
county sampling data. 2000.
Franklin Associates, Ltd. The Role of Recycling in Integrated Solid Waste Management to the
Year 2000. Appendix J and Appendix K. Keep America Beautiful, Inc. September 1994.
Franklin Associates, Ltd. Survey of Selected State Officials. Various years.
Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG. Survey of Selected State Officials. Various years.
Glenn, Jim. "The State of Garbage in America Part I." BioCycle. April 1998.
116
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Goldstein, Nora. "The State of Garbage in America." BioCycle. December 2002.
Goldstein, Nora. "The State of Garbage in America Part II." BioCycle. November 2000.
Goldstein, Nora and Jim Glenn. "The State of Garbage in America Part I." BioCycle. April 1997.
Goldstein, Nora and Jim Glenn. "The State of Garbage in America Part II." BioCycle. May 1997.
Georgia Department of Community Affairs. "Georgia Statewide Waste Characterization Study."
RW Beck. June 2005.
Iowa Department of Natural Resources. Waste Management Assistance Division. "Iowa Solid
Waste Characterization Study." RW Beck. October 1998.
Kansas Department of Health and Environment. "State of Kansas Waste Characterization
Study." Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc. March 2003.
King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks. Solid Waste Division. "Waste
Monitoring Program. 2002/2003 Comprehensive Waste Stream Characterization and Transfer
Station Customer Surveys - Final Report." Cascadia Consulting Group, Inc. April 2004.
King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks. Solid Waste Division. "2003 Annual
Report Blueprint for the Future." September 2003
Massachusetts DEP Residential Organic Waste Management Study. October 1999. Research
Internati onal/C ambri dge.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Solid Waste Management Coordinating Board, Office of
Environmental Assistance. "Statewide MSW Composition Study." RW Beck. March 2000.
New Jersey Department of Environment. "Draft Statewide Solid Waste Management Plan 2005."
117
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
New Mexico Environment Department Solid Waste Bureau. 2004 and 2005 Landfill Summary
Report. Received May 2006.
Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Recycling & Litter Prevention. "What's In
Our Garbage?: Ohio's Waste Characterization Study Executive Summary." Engineering
Solutions & Design, Inc. 2005.
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. "2004 Oregon Material Recovery and Waste
Generation Report." March 2006.
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. "2002 Oregon Solid Waste Characterization and
Composition." Sky Valley Associates. 2002.
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection. "Statewide Waste Composition Study."
RW Beck. April 2003.
Raymond Communications. "State Recycling Laws Update." Various years.
Rhode Island Resource Recovery Corporation, Rhode Island Department of Environmental
Management. "Rhode Island Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan May 24, 2005
Draft."
San Francisco Department of the Environment. "Waste Characterization Study". Environmental
Science Associates (ESA). August 2005.
Savage, George M. "The History and Utility of Waste Characterization Studies." MSW
Management. May/June 1994.
Simmons, Phil, et al. "The State of Garbage in America." BioCycle. April 2006.
118
-------
Chapter 2 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste by Weight
Steuteville, Robert. "The State of Garbage in America, Part I." BioCycle. April 1995.
Steuteville, Robert. "The State of Garbage in America, Part II." BioCycle. May 1995.
Steuteville, Robert. "The State of Garbage in America, Part II." BioCycle. May 1996.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Region 7 MSW Generation, Recycling (including
Composting), and Disposal." Eastern Research Group, Inc. September 2005.
Wake County, N.C. Solid Waste Management. "Wake County Waste Characterization Study."
RW Beck. April 1999.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. "Wisconsin Statewide Waste Characterization
Study." Cascadia Consulting Group, Inc. May 2003.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 2000 annual recycling data. Staff document.
119
-------
Chapter 3 Management of Municipal Solid Waste
CHAPTER 3
MANAGEMENT OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
INTRODUCTION
EPA's tiered integrated waste management strategy includes the following components:
1. Source reduction (or waste prevention), including reuse of products and on-site
(or backyard) composting of yard trimmings.
2. Recycling, including off-site (or community) composting.
3. Combustion with energy recovery.
4. Disposal through landfilling or combustion without energy recovery.
The four components are put into context in Figure 17.
This chapter addresses the major activities within an integrated waste management
system: source reduction, recycling (including composting), combustion with energy recovery,
and disposal. Source reduction activities have the effect of reducing MSW generation, while
other management alternatives deal with MSW once it is generated.
120
-------
Chapter 3
Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Figure 17. Diagram of solid waste management
Changes in Changes in
package purchasing
design habits
t t
1 1
Generation
of waste for
management
Changes in
industrial
practices
t,
I
Backyard Increased Other
composting, reuse
grasscycling
1
changes in
Recovery for
recycling (including
composting)
1 ^
|
Combustion
with energy
use patterns recovery
|
SOURCE REDUCTION
1
1
Landfill/Other
disposal
WASTE REDUCTION
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
Estimates of the historical recovery of materials for recycling, including yard trimmings
for composting, are presented in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 discusses the current MSW management
infrastructure. Current solid waste collection, processing, combustion with energy recovery, and
disposal programs and facilities are highlighted with tables and figures. It also presents estimates
for quantities of waste landfilled, which are obtained by subtracting the amounts recovered for
recycling (including composting) and the amounts combusted with energy recovery from total
MSW generation.
SOURCE REDUCTION
During the past 45 years, the amount of waste each person creates has doubled from 2.7
to 4.54 pounds per day. The most effective way to stop this trend is by preventing waste from
being generated in the first place.
Source reduction is gaining more attention as an important solid waste management
option. Source reduction, often called "waste prevention," is defined by EPA as "any change in
121
-------
Chapter 3 Management of Municipal Solid Waste
the design, manufacturing, purchase, or use of materials or products (including packaging) to
reduce their amount or toxicity before they become municipal solid waste. Prevention also refers
to the reuse of products or materials." Thus, source reduction activities affect the waste stream
before the point of generation. In this report, MSW is considered to have been generated if it is
placed at curbside or in a receptacle such as a dumpster for pickup, or if it is taken by the
generator to another site for recycling (including composting) or disposal.
Source reduction encompasses a very broad range of activities by private citizens,
communities, commercial establishments, institutional agencies, and manufacturers and
distributors. Examples of source reduction actions (Table 24) include:
• Redesigning products or packages so as to reduce the quantity of materials or the
toxicity of the materials used, by substituting lighter materials for heavier ones
and lengthening the life of products to postpone disposal.
• Using packaging that reduces the amount of damage or spoilage to the product.
• Reducing amounts of products or packages used through modification of current
practices by processors and consumers.
• Reusing products or packages already manufactured.
• Managing non-product organic wastes (food scraps, yard trimmings) through
backyard composting or other on-site alternatives to disposal.
122
-------
Chapter 3
Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Source Reduction Through Redesign
Since source reduction of products and packages can save money by reducing materials
and energy costs, manufacturers and packaging designers have been pursuing these activities for
many years. Combined with other source reduction measures, redesign can have a significant
effect on material use and eventual discards. Design for source reduction can take several
approaches.
Table 24
SELECTED EXAMPLES OF SOURCE REDUCTION PRACTICES
Source Reduction Practice
MSW Product Categories
Durable
Goods
Nondurable
Goods
Containers &
Packaging
Organics
Redesign
Materials reduction
Materials substitution
Lengthen life
• Downgauge metals in
appliances
• Use of composites
in appliances and
electronic circuitry
• High mileage tires
• Electronic components
reduce moving parts
• Paperless purchase
orders
• Regular servicing
• Look at warranties
• Extend warranties
• Concentrates
• Cereal in bags
• Coffee brick
• Multi-use products
• Design for secondary
uses
• Xeriscaping
Consumer Practices
• Purchase long lived
products
• Repair
• Duplexing
• Sharing
• Reduce unwanted
mail
• Purchasing:
products in bulk,
concentrates
Reuse
By design
Secondary
• Modular design
• Borrow or rent for
temporary use
• Give to charity
• Buy or sell at
garage sales
• Envelopes
• Clothing
• Waste paper
scratch pads
• Reusable pallets
• Returnable secondary
packaging
• Loosefill
• Grocery sacks
• Dairy containers
• Glass and plastic jars
Reduce/Eliminate Toxins
•EhmmatePCBs
• Soy ink, waterbased
• Waterbased solvents
• Reduce mercury
• Replace lead foil on
wine bottles
Reduce Organics
Food scraps
Yard trimmings
• Backyard composting
• Vermi-composting
• Backyard composting
• Grasscycling
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
123
-------
Chapter 3 Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Materials substitution can make a product or package lighter. For example, there has
been a continuous trend of substitution of lighter materials such as plastics and aluminum for
materials such as glass and steel. The substitution also may involve a flexible package instead of
a rigid package. A product or package can be redesigned to reduce weight or volume. Toxic
materials in products or packaging can be replaced with non-toxic substitutes. Considerable
efforts have been made in this area in the past few years.
Lengthening product life delays the time when the product enters the municipal waste
stream. The responsibility for lengthening product life lies partly with manufacturers and partly
with consumers. Manufacturers can design products to last longer and be easier to repair. Since
some of these design modifications may make products more expensive, at least initially,
manufacturers must be willing to invest in new product development, and consumers must
demand the products and be willing to pay for them to make the goal work. Consumers and
manufacturers also must be willing to care for and repair products.
Modifying Practices to Reduce Materials Use
Businesses and individuals often can modify their current practices to reduce the amounts
of waste generated. In a business office, electronic mail can replace printed memoranda and data.
Reports can be copied on both sides of the paper (duplexed). Modifying practices can be
combined with other source reduction measures to reduce generation and limit material use.
Individuals and businesses can request removal from mailing lists to reduce the amount
of mail received and discarded. When practical, products can be purchased in large sizes or in
bulk to minimize the amount of packaging per unit of product. Concentrated products also can
reduce packaging requirements.
124
-------
Chapter 3 Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Reuse of Products and Packages
Similar to lengthening product life, reuse of products and packaging delays the time
when the items must finally be discarded as waste. When a product is reused, presumably
purchase and use of a new product is delayed, although this may not always be true.
Many of the products characterized for this report are reused in sizable quantities (e.g.,
furniture, wood pallets, and clothing). The recovery of products and materials for recycling
(including composting) as characterized in Chapter 2 does not include reuse of products, but
reuse is discussed in this section.
Durable Goods. There is a long tradition of reuse of durable goods such as large and
small appliances, furniture, and carpets. Often this is done informally as individuals pass on used
goods to family members and friends. Other durable goods are donated to charitable
organizations for resale or use by needy families. Some communities and other organizations
have facilitated exchange programs for citizens, and there are for-profit retail stores that deal in
used furniture, appliances, and carpets. Individuals resell other goods at garage sales, flea
markets, and the like. Borrowing and sharing items like tools can also reduce the number of
products ultimately discarded. There is generally a lack of data on the volume of durable goods
reused in the United States, and what the ultimate effect on MSW generation might be.
Nondurable Goods. While nondurable goods by their very nature are designed for short-
term use and disposal, there is considerable reuse of some items classified as nondurable. In
particular, footwear, clothing, and other textile goods often are reused. Much of the reuse is
accomplished through the same types of channels as those described above for durable goods.
That is, private individuals, charitable organizations, and retail outlets (consignment shops) all
facilitate reuse of discarded clothing and footwear. In addition, considerable amounts of textiles
are reused as wiping cloths before being discarded.
Another often-cited waste prevention measure is the use of washable plates, cups,
napkins, towels, diapers, and other such products, instead of the disposable variety. (This will
125
-------
Chapter 3 Management of Municipal Solid Waste
reduce solid waste but will have other environmental effects, such as increased water and energy
use.) Other reusable items are available, for example: reusable air filters, reusable coffee filters,
and reconditioned printer cartridges.
Containers and Packaging. Containers and packaging can be reused in two ways: they
can be used again for their original purpose, or they can be used in other ways.
Glass bottles are a prime example of reuse of a container for its original purpose.
Refillable glass beer and soft drink bottles can be collected, washed, and refilled for use again.
Some years ago large numbers of refillable glass soft drink bottles were used, but single-use
glass bottles, plastic bottles, and aluminum cans have largely replaced these. Considerable
numbers of beer bottles are collected for refilling, often by restaurants and taverns, where the
bottles can easily be collected and returned by the distributor. The Glass Packaging Institute
estimates that refillable glass bottles achieve a rate of eight trips (refillings) per bottle.
Another example in this category is the use of refurbished wood pallets for shipping
palletized goods. It is estimated that over 10 million tons of wood pallets were refurbished and
returned to service in 2005. It is also common practice to recondition steel drums and barrels for
reuse.
Many other containers and packages can be recycled, but are not often reused, although
this practice can achieve a notable source reduction in packaging. As an example, some grocery
stores will allow customers to reuse grocery sacks, perhaps allowing a refund for each sack
brought back for reuse. Also, many parcel shippers will take back plastic packaging "peanuts"
for reuse.
Many ingenious reuses for containers and packaging are possible in the home. People
reuse boxes, bags, jars, jugs, and cans for many purposes around the house. There are no reliable
estimates as to how these specific activities affect the waste stream.
126
-------
Chapter 3 Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Management of Organic Materials
Food scraps and yard trimmings combined made up about 25 percent of MSW generation
in 2005, so source reduction measures aimed at these products can have an important effect on
waste generation. Composting is the usual methodology for recovering these organic materials.
As defined in this report, composting of organic materials after they are taken to a central
composting facility is a recycling activity. Estimates for these off-site composting activities are
included in this chapter.
There are several types of source reduction that take place at the point of generation (e.g.,
the yard of a home or business). The backyard composting of yard trimmings and certain food
discards is a growing source reduction practice. There also is a trend toward leaving grass
clippings on lawns, often through the use of mulching mowers. Other actions contributing to
reduced organics disposal are: establishment of variable fees for collection of wastes (also
known as unit-based pricing or Pay-As-You-Throw), which encourage residents to reduce the
amount of wastes set out; improved technology (mulching mowers); xeriscaping (landscaping
with plants that use minimal water and generate minimal waste); and certain legislation such as
bans on disposal of yard trimmings in landfills.
Part of the impetus for source reduction and recycling of yard trimmings is the large
number of state regulations discouraging landfilling or other disposal of yard trimmings. The
Composting Council and other sources reported that in 1992, 12 states (amounting to over 28
percent of the nation's population) had in effect legislation affecting management of yard
trimmings. In 2005, 21 states (amounting to about 50 percent of the nation's population) had
legislation discouraging the disposal of yard trimmings.
Measuring Source Reduction
Although source reduction has been an increasingly important aspect of municipal solid
waste programs since the late 1980s, the goal of actually measuring how much source reduction
has taken place—how much waste prevention there has been—has proved elusive. Early
127
-------
Chapter 3 Management of Municipal Solid Waste
attempts by localities and states often consisted of measuring a single waste stream in a single
community. In time, additional research enabled proxy, or estimated values, to be developed for
specific waste streams, to use on a state-wide or national level. EPA's Source Reduction
Program Potential Manual and planning packet, published in 1997 (EPA530-E-97-001)
provides an example of this approach. Unlike recycling, where there are actual materials to
weigh all through the process, measuring source reduction means trying to measure something
that no longer exists.
The November 1999 National Source Reduction Characterization Report for Municipal
Solid Waste in the United States (EPA 530-R-99-034) provides additional information including
an explanation of a methodology that has been used to generate source reduction estimates.
RECOVERY FOR RECYCLING (INCLUDING COMPOSTING)
Recyclables Collection
Before recyclable materials can be processed and recycled into new products, they must
be collected. Most residential recycling involves curbside recyclables collection, drop-off
programs, buy-back operations, and/or container deposit systems. Collection of recyclables from
commercial establishments is usually separate from residential recyclables collection programs.
Curbside Recyclables Collection. In 2005, more than 8,500 curbside recyclables
collection programs were reported in the United States. As shown in Table 25 and Figure 18, the
extent of residential curbside recycling programs varies tremendously by geographic region, with
the most extensive curbside collection occurring in the Northeast.
128
-------
Chapter 3 Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Curbside collection programs typically require residents to do at least some sorting of the
recyclable materials put at the curb. In recent years, however, there has been a trend toward
single-stream curbside collections programs, in which no sorting is required of the residents.
These programs require that the materials be taken to a materials recovery facility (MRF) for
processing.
Table 25
NUMBER AND POPULATION SERVED BY
CURBSIDE RECYCLABLES COLLECTION PROGRAMS, 2005
Number of Population Population Served
Region
NORTHEAST
SOUTH
MIDWEST
WEST
Total
Percent of Total U.S.
Programs
3,288
797
3,742
723
8,550
Population
(in thousands)
54,582
105,994
65,694
65,467
241,372
(in thousands)
43,061
24,144
27,928
43,892
139,026
Percent*
79%
23%
43%
67%
58%
48%
* Percent of population served by curbside programs was calculated using
population of states reporting data.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2006, BioCycle April 2006, California Integrated Waste
Management Board, Illinois Recycling Association.
129
-------
Chapter 3
Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Figure 18. Population served by curbside recycling, 2005
on .
80 -
yn -
£=
ira 60
Q_
cn
0
0
£ 40 -
Q_
on -
m -
Source: U.S.
Association.
NORTHEAST SOUTH MIDWEST
Census Bureau, BioCycle April 2006, California Integrated Waste Management Board, Illionois Recycling
WEST
In 2005, nearly one-half (48 percent) of the U.S. population, or 139 million persons, had
access to curbside recyclables collection programs. The Northeast region had the largest
population served - 43 million persons. In the Northeast about 79 percent of the population had
access to curbside recyclables collection, while in the West 67 percent of the population had
access to curbside recycling. The largest numbers of programs were located in the Northeast and
Midwest regions of the country.
Drop-off Centers. Drop-off centers typically collect residential materials, although some
accept materials from businesses. They are found in locations such as grocery stores, sheltered
workshops, charitable organizations, city-sponsored sites, and apartment complexes. Types of
materials collected vary greatly; however, drop-off centers can usually accept a greater variety of
materials than a curbside collection program.
130
-------
Chapter 3 Management of Municipal Solid Waste
It is difficult to quantify drop-off centers in the United States. It is estimated that there
were 12,694 programs in 1997, according to aBioCycle survey. In some areas, particularly those
with sparse population, drop-off centers may be the only option for collection of recyclable
materials. In other areas, they supplement other collection methods.
Buy-Back Centers. A buy-back center is typically a commercial operation that pays
individuals for recovered materials. This could include scrap metal dealers, aluminum can
centers, waste haulers, or paper dealers. Materials are collected by individuals, small businesses,
and charitable organizations.
Deposit Systems. Ten states have container deposit systems: Connecticut, Delaware,
Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, Oregon, and Vermont (Figure 19).
In these programs, the consumer pays a deposit on beverage containers at the point of purchase,
which is redeemed on return of the empty containers. In addition, California has a similar system
where containers can be redeemed, but the consumer pays no deposit.
Deposit systems generally target beverage containers (primarily beer and soft drink),
which account for less than 6 percent of total MSW generation. It is estimated that about 35
percent of all recovery of beverage containers comes from the traditional deposit states
mentioned above, and an additional 20 percent of recovered beverage containers comes from
California. (Note: These recovery estimates reflect not only containers redeemed by consumers
for deposit, but also containers recovered through existing curbside and drop-off recycling
programs. Containers recovered through these programs eventually are credited to the distributor
and counted towards the redemption rate.)
131
-------
Chapter 3
Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Figure 19. States With Bottle Deposit Rules
Commercial Recyclables Collection. The largest quantity of recovered materials comes
from the commercial sector. Old corrugated containers (OCC) and office papers are widely
collected from commercial establishments. Grocery stores and other retail outlets that require
corrugated packaging are part of an infrastructure that brings in the most recovered material.
OCC is often baled at the retail outlet and picked up by a paper dealer.
Office paper (e.g., white, mixed color, computer paper, etc.) is part of another
commercial recyclables collection infrastructure. Depending on the quantities generated,
businesses (e.g., banks, institutions, schools, printing operations, etc.) can sort materials and
have them picked up by a paper dealer, or self deliver the materials to the recycler. It should be
noted that commercial operations also make recycling available for materials other than paper.
Multi-family residence recycling could be classified as either residential or commercial
recyclables collection. Multi-family refuse is usually handled as a commercial account by waste
haulers. These commercial waste haulers may handle recycling at multi-family dwellings
(typically five or more units) as well.
132
-------
Chapter 3 Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Recyclables Processing
Processing recyclable materials is performed at materials recovery facilities (MRFs),
mixed waste processing facilities, and mixed waste composting facilities. Some materials are
sorted at the curb and require less attention. Other materials are sorted into categories at the curb,
such as a paper category and a container category, with additional sorting at a facility (MRF).
There is a more recent trend towards MRFs that can sort recyclable materials that are picked up
unsorted (single-stream recycling). Mixed waste can also be processed to pull out recyclable and
compostable materials.
Materials Recovery Facilities. Materials recovery facilities vary widely across the
United States, depending on the incoming materials and the technology and labor used to sort the
materials. In 2005, 504 MRFs were operating in the United States, with an estimated total daily
throughput of 50,000 tons per day (Table 26). The most extensive recyclables processing
throughput occurs in the Northeast and West (Figure 20).
Table 26
MATERIALS RECOVERY FACILITIES, 2005
Estimated
Throughput
Region
NORTHEAST
SOUTH
MIDWEST
WEST
U.S. Total
Number
133
147
119
105
504
(tpd)
15,450
10,165
10,210
14,354
50,180
Throughput estimated at 70% of capacity.
Source: Governmental Advisory Associates, Inc.
133
-------
Chapter 3
Management of Municipal Solid Waste
300
250
200
S. 150
P 100
50
Figure 20. Estimated MRF Throughput, 2005
(tons per day per million persons)
Northeast South Midwest
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Governmental Advisory Associates, Inc.
West
Many MRFs are considered low technology, meaning the materials are predominantly
sorted manually. MRFs classified as high technology sort recyclables using eddy currents,
magnetic pulleys, optical sensors, and air classifiers. As MRFs change and grow, many low
technology MRFs add high tech features. However, high technology MRFs usually include
manual sorting, reducing the distinction between high and low technology MRFs.
Mixed Waste Processing. Mixed waste processing facilities are less common than
conventional MRFs, but there are several facilities in operation in the United States, as shown in
Figure 21. Mixed waste processing facilities receive solid waste, which is then loaded on
conveyors. Using both mechanical and manual (high and low technology) sorting, recyclable
materials are removed for further processing. In 2005, there were reported 46 mixed waste
processing facilities in the U.S., handling about 25,000 tons of waste per day. The Western
region has the largest concentration of these processing facilities.
134
-------
Chapter 3
Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Mixed Waste Composting. Mixed waste composting starts with unsorted MSW. Large
items are removed, as well as ferrous and other metals, depending on the type of operation.
Mixed waste composting takes advantage of the high percentage of organic components of
MSW, such as paper, food scraps and yard trimmings, wood, and other materials. In 2005, there
were 14 mixed waste composting facilities, one less than was reported in 2000.
Nationally, mixed waste composting facilities handled about 1,200 tons per day in 2005,
up from 1,100 tons per day in 2000. In 2005, the highest processing capacity per million persons
was found in the South and Midwest, as shown in Figure 22.
Figure 21. Mixed Waste Processing Estimated Capacity, 2005
(tons per day per million persons)
250
200
I 150
'E
100
50
Northeast South Midwest
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Governmental Advisory Associates, Inc.
West
135
-------
Chapter 3
Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Figure 22. MSW Composting Capacity, 2005
(Capacity in tons per day per million persons)
£7
o
0 C
Q. D
£=
£ 5
ill
t4
CD
O
CD 3
Northeast South
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 6/oCyc/e December 2005.
Midwest
West
Yard Trimmings Composting. Yard trimmings composting is much more prevalent
than mixed waste composting. On-site management of yard trimmings (back yard composting) is
discussed later in this chapter, and is classified as source reduction, not recycling. In 2005, 3,474
yard trimmings composting programs were reported. In 2005, about 80 percent of these
programs were in the Northeast and Midwest regions, as shown in Figure 23. Based on 19.9
million tons of yard trimmings recovered for composting in the United States (Table 2, Chapter
2), yard trimmings composting facilities handled approximately 54,500 tons per day in 2005.
136
-------
Chapter 3
Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Figure 23. Yard Trimmings Composting Programs, 2005
(In number of programs)
1 Ann -
1 9nn -
£
°> 1 nnn .
Q_
"5
J3
E
c finn -
9nn -
n -
Northeast South
Source: BioCycle April 2006.
Midwest
West
COMBUSTION WITH ENERGY RECOVERY
Most of the municipal solid waste combustion currently practiced in this country
incorporates recovery of an energy product (generally steam or electricity). The resulting energy
reduces the amount needed from other sources, and the sale of the energy helps to offset the cost
of operating the facility. In past years, it was common to burn municipal solid waste in
incinerators solely as a volume reduction practice; energy recovery became more prevalent in the
1980s.
Total U.S. MSW combustion with energy recovery, referred to as waste-to-energy
(WTE) combustion, had a 2005 design capacity of 98,765 tons per day. There were 88 WTE
facilities in 2005 (Table 27), down from 102 in 2000. In tons of capacity per million persons, the
Northeast region had the most MSW combustion capacity in 2005 (Figure 24).
137
-------
Chapter 3 Management of Municipal Solid Waste
In addition to facilities combusting mixed MSW (processed or unprocessed), there is a
small but growing amount of combustion of source-separated MSW. In particular, rubber tires
have been used as fuel in cement kilns, utility boilers, pulp and paper mills, industrial boilers,
and dedicated scrap tire-to-energy facilities. In addition, there is combustion of wood wastes and
some paper and plastic wastes, usually in boilers that already burn some other type of solid fuel.
For this report, it was estimated that about 2.8 million tons of MSW were combusted in this
manner in 2005, with tires contributing a majority of the total.
Table 27
MUNICIPAL WASTE-TO-ENERGY PROJECTS, 2005
Design
Number Capacity
Region Operational (tpd)
NORTHEAST 39 44,561
SOUTH 26 38,359
MIDWEST 17 11,535
WEST 6 4,310
U.S. Total* 88 98,765
* Projects on hold or inactive were not included.
Facilities in Hawaii and Alaska not included.
WTE includes mass burn, modular, and refuse-derived
fuel-combustion facilities.
Facilities shown in the 2004 directory were assumed to be
operational in 2005.
Source: "The IWSA Directory of Waste-To-Energy Plants."
Integrated Waste Services Association, 2004.
In most cases the facilities have a stated daily capacity, but they normally operate at less
than capacity over the course of a year. It was assumed for this report that throughput over a year
of operation is 85 percent of rated capacity. In 2005 the total throughput of MSW through all
combustion facilities with energy recovery was estimated at 33.4 million tons, or 13.6 percent of
MSW generation.
138
-------
Chapter 3
Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Figure 24. Municipal Waste-to-Energy Capacity, 2005
(Capacity in tons per million persons)
900
800
„ 700
O
I 600
£=
g
o 400
CD
| 300
To
100
00
Northeast South Midwest
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Integrated Waste Services Association 2004.
West
RESIDUES FROM WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES
Whenever municipal wastes are processed, residues will remain. For the purposes of this
report, it is assumed that most of these residues are landfilled. Materials processing facilities
(MRFs) and compost facilities generate some residues when processing various recovered
materials. These residues include materials that are unacceptable to end users (e.g., broken glass,
wet newspapers), other contaminants (e.g., products made of plastic resins that are not wanted by
the end user), or dirt. While residue generation varies widely, 5 to 10 percent is probably typical
for a MRF. Residues from a MRF or compost facility are generally landfilled. Since the recovery
estimates in this report are based on recovered materials purchased by end users rather than
materials entering a processing facility, the residues are counted with other disposed materials.
When municipal solid waste is combusted, a residue (usually called ash) is left behind.
Years ago this ash was commonly disposed of along with municipal solid waste, but combustor
139
-------
Chapter 3 Management of Municipal Solid Waste
ash is not counted as MSW in this report because it generally is managed separately7. (There are
a number of efforts underway to reuse ash.) As a general "rule of thumb," MSW combustor ash
amounts to about 25 percent (by weight) of unprocessed MSW input. This percentage will vary
from facility to facility depending upon the types of waste input and the efficiency and
configuration of the facility.
LANDFILLS
In 2005, there were 1,654 municipal solid waste landfills reported in the contiguous
United States.
Table 28 and Figure 25 show the number of landfills in each region. The Southeast and
West had the largest number of landfills. Thirty-five percent of the landfills are located in the
Southeast, 31 percent in the West, and 26 percent in the Midwest. Only 8 percent are located in
the Northeast.
Table 28
LANDFILL FACILITIES, 2005
Region
NORTHEAST
SOUTH
MIDWEST
WEST
U.S. Total *
Number of
Landfills *
133
581
425
515
1,654
* Excludes landfills in Alaska and Hawaii.
Facilities shown for 2004 were assumed
to be operational in 2005.
Source: BioCycle April 2006.
7 Note that many combustion facilities do magnetic separation of residues to recover ferrous metals, e.g., steel
cans and steel in other miscellaneous durable goods. This recovered steel is included in the total recovery of
ferrous metals in MSW reported in Chapter 2.
140
-------
Chapter 3
Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Figure 25. Number of Landfills in the U.S., 2005
J/5
iE
•a
_
O>
.a
E
800
600
400
200
Northeast
South
Midwest
West
Source: BioCycle April 2006.
SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL AND CURRENT MSW MANAGEMENT
This summary provides some perspective on historical and current municipal solid waste
management practices in the United States. The results are summarized in Table 29 and Figure
26.
141
-------
Chapter 3
Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Table 29
GENERATION, MATERIALS RECOVERY, COMPOSTING, COMBUSTION,
AND DISCARDS OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, 1960 TO 2005
(In thousands of tons and percent of total generation)
Thousands of Tons
Generation
Recovery for recycling
Recovery for composting*
Total Materials Recovery
Combustion with
energy recovery**
Discards to landfill,
other disposalf
1960
88,120
5,610
5,610
0
82,510
1970
121,060
8,020
8,020
400
112,640
1980
151,640
14,520
14,520
2,700
134,420
1990
205,210
29,040
4,200
33,240
29,700
142,270
2000
237,630
52,650
16,450
69,100
33,730
134,800
2003
240,370
55,750
19,080
74,830
33,650
131,890
2004
247,300
57,190
20,470
77,660
34,130
135,510
2005
245,660
58,400
20,550
78,950
33,400
133,310
Pounds per Person per Day
Generation
Recovery for recycling
Recovery for composting*
Total Materials Recovery
Combustion with
energy recovery**
Discards to landfill,
other disposalf
Population (thousands)
1960
2.68
0.17
Neg.
0.17
0.00
2.51
179,979
1970
3.25
0.22
Neg.
0.22
0.01
3.02
203,984
1980
3.66
0.35
Neg.
0.35
0.07
3.24
227,255
1990
4.50
0.64
0.09
0.73
0.65
3.12
249,907
2000
4.63
1.03
0.32
1.35
0.66
2.62
281,422
2003
4.53
1.05
0.36
1.41
0.63
2.48
290,850
2004
4.61
1.07
0.38
1.45
0.64
2.52
293,660
2005
4.54
1.08
0.38
1.46
0.62
2.46
296,410
Percent of Total Generation
Generation
Recovery for recycling
Recovery for composting*
Total Materials Recovery
Combustion with
energy recovery**
Discards to landfill,
other disposalf
1960
100.0%
6.4%
6.4%
0.0%
93.6%
1970
100.0%
6.6%
6.6%
0.3%
93.1%
1980
100.0%
9.6%
9.6%
1.8%
88.6%
1990
100.0%
14.2%
2.0%
16.2%
14.5%
69.3%
2000
100.0%
22.2%
6.9%
29.1%
14.2%
56.7%
2003
100.0%
23.2%
7.9%
31.1%
14.0%
54.9%
2004
100.0%
23.1%
8.3%
31.4%
13.8%
54.8%
2005
100.0%
23.8%
8.4%
32.1%
13.6%
54.3%
* Composting of yard trimmings, food scraps and other MSW organic material. Does not include backyard composting.
** Includes combustion of MSW in mass burn or refuse-derived fuel form, and combustion with energy recovery
of source separated materials in MSW (e.g., wood pallets and tire-derived fuel).
t Discards after recovery minus combustion with energy recovery. Discards include combustion without energy recovery.
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
142
-------
Chapter 3
Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Figure 26. Municipal solid waste management, 1960 to 2005
300
250
200 -
(A
C
o
1 150
100 -
50 -
Recovery of the composting
component of recycling
Landfill, other disposal
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Source: Franklin Associates, A Division of ERG
Historically, municipal solid waste generation has grown steadily (from 88 million tons
in 1960 to 246 million tons at present). In the 1960s and early 1970s a large percentage of MSW
was burned, with little recovery for recycling. Landfill disposal typically consisted of open
dumping, often accompanied with open burning of the waste for volume reduction. Through the
mid-1980s, incineration declined considerably and landfills became difficult to site, and waste
generation continued to increase. Materials recovery rates increased very slowly in this time
period, and the burden on the nation's landfills grew dramatically. As Figure 26 shows, discards
of MSW to landfill or other disposal apparently peaked in 1990, then began to decline as
materials recovery and combustion with energy recovery increased.
Recovery has increased steadily. Combustion with energy recovery, as a percentage of
generation, has been declining (13.6 percent of generation in 2005). MSW discards to landfills
rose to about 135.5 million tons in 2004, and then declined to 133.3 million tons in 2005. As a
percentage of total MSW generation, discards to landfills or other disposal has consistently
decreased-from 89 percent of generation in 1980 to 54.3 percent in 2005.
143
-------
Chapter 3 Management of Municipal Solid Waste
CHAPTER 3
REFERENCES
GENERAL
Franklin Associates, Ltd. Solid Waste Management at the Crossroads. December 1997.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of the United States. Various years.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Municipal Solid Waste Task Force, Office of Solid
Waste. The Solid Waste Dilemma: An Agenda for Action. February 1989.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States: 1990 Update. EPA/530-SW-90-042. June 1991.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States: 1992 Update. EPA/530-R-92-019. July 1992.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States: 1994 Update. EPA/530-R-94-042. November 1994.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States: 1995 Update. EPA/530-R-945-001. March 1996.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States: 1996 Update. EPA/530-R-97-015. June 1997.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States: 1997 Update. EPA/530-R-98-007. May 1998.
144
-------
Chapter 3 Management of Municipal Solid Waste
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1999 Facts
and Figures. EPA/53 0-R-01-014. July 2001.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 2000 Facts
and Figures. EPA/530-R-02-001. June 2002.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Municipal Solid Waste in The United States: 2001 Facts
and Figures. EPA/530-R-03-011. October 2003.
SOURCE REDUCTION
Congress of the United States, Office of Technology Assessment. Green Products by Design:
Choices for a Cleaner Environment. OTA-E-541. October 1992.
Council on Packaging in the Environment. "COPE Backgrounder: Source Reduction." March
1995.
Franklin Associates, Ltd. Materials Technology: Packaging Design and the Environment.
Congress of the United States, Office of Technology Assessment. April 1991.
Franklin Associates, Ltd. The Role of Recycling in Integrated Solid Waste Management to the
Year 2000. Keep America Beautiful, Inc. 1994.
Rattray, Tom. "Source Reduction—An Endangered Species?" Resource Recycling. November
1990.
Raymond Communications Inc. State Recycling Laws Update Year-End Edition 1998.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The Consumer's Handbook for Reducing Solid Waste.
EPA/530-K-92-003. August 1992.
145
-------
Chapter 3 Management of Municipal Solid Waste
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Waste Wise: Second Year Progress Report. EPA/530-R-
96-016. September 1996.
RECOVERY FOR RECYCLING AND COMPOSTING
Block, Dave, and Nora Goldstein. "Solid Waste Composting Trends in the U.S." BioCycle.
November 2000.
Glenn, Jim. "The State of Garbage in America." BioCycle. April 1998.
Glenn, Jim. "MSW Composting in the United States." BioCycle. November 1997.
Glenn, Jim. "The State of Garbage in America." BioCycle. April 1998.
Goldstein, Nora, and Celeste Madtes. "The State of Garbage in America." BioCycle. November
2000.
Goldstein, Nora. "The State of Garbage in America." BioCycle. December 2001.
Governmental Advisory Associates. The Materials Recycling and Processing Industry in the
United States: 1995-96 Yearbook, Atlas, and Directory. 1995.
Governmental Advisory Associates. 7997 Update to the Materials Recycling and Processing
Industry in the United States. 1997.
Governmental Advisory Associates. Communications with Franklin Associates. 1998, 2002.
Governmental Advisory Associates. Custom report. 2006.
Kreith, Frank. Handbook of Solid Waste Management. McGraw-Hill, Inc. 1994.
146
-------
Chapter 3 Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Personal communication with California Integrated Waste Management staff. August 2006.
Personal communication with a representative of the Illinois Recycling Association. August
2006.
Simmons, Phil, et al. "The State of Garbage in America." BioCycle. April 2006.
The Composting Council. "MSW Composting Facilities." Fall 1995.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of the United States.
Various years.
COMBUSTION WITH ENERGY RECOVERY
"1991-1992 Energy-From-Waste Report." Solid Waste & Power. HCI Publications. October
1991, December 1990.
Integrated Waste Services Association. "High Court Rules Ash Not Exempt from Subtitle C
Regulation." Update. Summer 1994.
Integrated Waste Services Association. The 1WSA Directory of Waste-to-Energy Plants. Various
years.
Kiser, Jonathan V.L. "A Comprehensive Report on the Status of Municipal Waste Combustion."
Waste Age. November 1990.
Kiser, Jonathan V.L. "Municipal Waste Combustion in North America: 1992 Update." Waste
Age. November 1992.
Kiser, Jonathan V.L. "The 1992 Municipal Waste Combustion Guide." National Solid Wastes
Management Association. February 1992.
147
-------
Chapter 3 Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Kiser, Jonathan V.L. "The IWSA Municipal Waste Combustion Directory: 1993." Integrated
Waste Services Association. February 1994.
Kiser, Jonathan V.L., and John Menapace. "The 1995 IWSA Municipal Waste Combustion
Directory of United States Facilities." Integrated Waste Services Association. March 1995.
Kiser, Jonathan V.L., and John Menapace. "The 1996 IWSA Municipal Waste Combustion
Directory of United States Facilities." Integrated Waste Services Association. March 1996.
Rigo, Greg and Maria Zannes. "The 1997-1998 IWSA Waste-to-Energy Director of United
States Facilities." Integrated Waste Services Association. November 1997.
Levy, Steven J. Municipal Waste Combustion Inventory. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Solid Waste, Municipal & Industrial Solid Waste Division. November 22, 1991.
National Solid Wastes Management Association. "The 1992 Municipal Waste Combustion
Guide." Waste Age. November 1992.
"The 1991 Municipal Waste Combustion Guide." Waste Age. November 1991.
148
-------
Appendix A Materials Flow Methodology
APPENDIX A
MATERIALS FLOW METHODOLOGY
The materials flow methodology is illustrated in Figures A-l and A-2. The crucial first
step is making estimates of the generation of the materials and products in MSW (Figure A-l).
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION
Data on domestic production of materials and products were compiled using published
data series. U.S. Department of Commerce sources were used where available, but in several
instances more detailed information on production of goods by end use is available from industry
associations. The goal is to obtain a consistent historical data series for each product and/or
material.
CONVERTING SCRAP
The domestic production numbers were then adjusted for converting or fabrication scrap
generated in the production processes. Examples of these kinds of scrap would be clippings from
plants that make boxes from paperboard, glass scrap (cullet) generated in a glass bottle plant, or
plastic scrap from a fabricator of plastic consumer products. This scrap typically has a high value
because it is clean and readily identifiable, and it is almost always recovered and recycled within
the industry that generated it. Thus, recovered converting/fabrication scrap is not counted as part
of the postconsumer recovery of waste.
ADJUSTMENTS FOR IMPORTS/EXPORTS
In some instances imports and exports of products are a significant part of MSW, and
adjustments were made to account for this.
149
-------
Appendix A Materials Flow Methodology
DIVERSION
Various adjustments were made to account for diversions from MSW. Some consumer
products are permanently diverted from the municipal waste stream because of the way they are
used. For example, some paperboard is used in building materials, which are not counted as
MSW. Another example of diversion is toilet tissue, which is disposed in sewer systems rather
than becoming MSW.
In other instances, products are temporarily diverted from the municipal waste stream.
For example, textiles reused as rags are assumed to enter the waste stream the same year the
textiles are initially discarded.
ADJUSTMENTS FOR PRODUCT LIFETIME
Some products (e.g., newspapers and packaging) normally have a very short lifetime;
these products are assumed to be discarded in the same year they are produced. In other
instances (e.g., furniture and appliances), products have relatively long lifetimes. Data on
average product lifetimes are used to adjust the data series to account for this.
RECOVERY
Data on recovery of materials and products for recycling are compiled using industry
data adjusted, when appropriate, with U.S. Department of Commerce import/export data.
Recovery estimates of yard trimmings or food scraps for composting are developed from data
provided by state officials.
150
-------
Appendix A Materials Flow Methodology
DISCARDS
Mathematically, discards equal that portion of generation remaining after recovery for
recycling and composting. Discards can be disposed through combustion with or without energy
recovery or landfilling. The amount of MSW consumed at combustion facilities with energy
recovery is estimated, and the difference between total discards and the amount sent to
combustion for energy recovery is assumed to be landfilled or combusted without energy
recovery. (This assumption is not quite accurate, as some MSW is littered or disposed on-site,
e.g., by backyard burning. These amounts are believed to be a small fraction of total discards.)
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE GENERATION, RECOVERY, AND DISCARDS
The result of these estimates and calculations is a material-by-material and product-by-
product estimate of MSW generation, recovery, and discards.
151
-------
Appendix A
Materials Flow Methodology
Domestic Production
of
Materials/Products
Imports
of
Materials/Products
Conversion/
fabricating
Scrap
Exports
of
Materials/Products
Diversion
of
Materials/Products
Permanent
Diversion
Municipal
Solid Waste
Generation
Temporary
Diversion
Figure A-1. Material flows methodology for estimating
generation of products and materials in municipal solid waste.
152
-------
Appendix A
Materials Flow Methodology
MSW
Generation
f
Recovery
for
Recycling
Recovery
for
Composting
T
Discards
after
Recycling
and
Composting
\
Recovery for
Combustion
with
Energy
Recovery
1
Recovery for
Combustion
without
Energy Recovery
Discards
to Landfill
and
Other
Disposal
Figure A-2. Material flows methodology for estimating
discards of products and materials in municipal solid waste.
153
-------
-------
•otection Agency
DL
5
"c
CD
E
C
o
'>
iS
GO
J>
s
CO
T3
_CD
'E
D
S
CD"
c
^
^
^
>
w"
c
CD
Q-
o
o
CM
„,
m
o
CO
ID
o
CD
^Ef"
o
CM
O
Q
c£
o
"ra
c
kz
to
to
CD
C
"co
Z3
m
Official
o
o
CO
{/}
CD
D
_0)
13
CL
e
15
CD
0.
------- |