METHODOLOGY FOR ESTIMATING MUNICIPAL SOLID
WASTE RECYCLING BENEFITS
NOVEMBER 2007

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE	3
THE LINK BETWEEN WASTE MANAGEMENT, CLIMATE CHANGE, AND
ENERGY	3
The MSW Characterization Report	4
The Waste Reduction Model	4
METHODOLOGY FOR DERIVING BENEFITS	4
Materials Crosswalk	6
Organics	6
Paper and Paperboard Products	6
Glass Products	7
Metal Products	7
Plastics in Products	7
Other Products	8
WARM Walk-Through	8
Baseline Scenario	8
Alternate Scenario	9
WARM Benefit Results	10
2

-------
PURPOSE
This "Methodology for Estimating Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Recycling Benefits" is
intended to provide a clear and complete explanation of the process used by EPA to develop
estimates of the benefits associated with municipal solid waste (MSW) recycling. This
methodology helps to serve as a crosswalk and explains how EPA's MSW characterization data
(as reported in "Municipal Solid Waste Generation, Recycling, and Disposal in the United States:
Facts and Figures for 2006" (Characterization Report))1, are input into the Waste Reduction
Model (WARM)2 in order to derive benefit estimates. Also, this methodology provides further
specifics regarding the Characterization Report and WARM, and helps to further document the
linkages that exist between waste management, and its potential contributions to climate change
and energy conservation.
THE LINK BETWEEN WASTE MANAGEMENT, CLIMATE CHANGE, AND ENERGY
The disposal of solid waste produces greenhouse gas emissions in a number of ways. First, the
anaerobic decomposition of waste in landfills produces methane, a greenhouse gas 21 times more
potent than carbon dioxide. Second, the incineration of waste also produces carbon dioxide as a
by-product. Additionally, in transportating waste for disposal, greenhouse gases are emitted due
to the combustion of fossil fuels. Finally, fossil fuels are also required for extracting and
processing the raw materials necessary to replace those materials that are being disposed with
new products.
Waste prevention and recycling—jointly referred to as waste reduction—help us better manage
the solid waste we generate. But preventing waste and recycling also are potent strategies for
reducing greenhouse gas emissions and conserving energy. Together, waste prevention and
recycling:
•	Reduces methane emissions from landfills. Waste prevention and recycling (including
composting) divert organic wastes from landfills, thereby reducing the methane released
when these materials decompose.
•	Reduces emissions from incinerators. Recycling and waste prevention allow some
materials to be diverted from incinerators and thus reduce greenhouse gas emissions from
the combustion of waste.
•	Reduces emissions from energy consumption. Recycling saves energy - because
manufacturing goods from recycled materials typically requires less energy than
producing goods from virgin materials. Waste prevention is even more effective at saving
energy - because when people reuse things or when products are made with less material
and/or greater durability, less energy is usually needed to extract, transport, and process
raw materials and to manufacture replacement products. What's more, when energy
demand decreases, fewer fossil fuels are burned and less carbon dioxide is emitted to the
atmosphere.
•	Increases storage of carbon in trees. Trees help absorb carbon dioxide from the
atmosphere and store it in wood, in a process called carbon sequestration. Waste
prevention and recycling of paper products allow more trees to remain unharvested,
where they can continue to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
1	The Municipal Solid Waste Generation, Recycling, and Disposal in the United States: Facts and Figures
for 2006 can be found on-line at http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/muncpl/msw99.htm
2	The WARM Model can be found on-line at
http://epa.gov/climatechange/wvcd/waste/SWMGHGreport.html.
3

-------
DESCRIPTION OF DATA AND MODEL USED
The following two key information sources were used by EPA; first, as a basis for identifying the
quantities of MSW being recycled, and secondly, for assessing the benefits that could be ascribed
to these recycling achievements.
The MSW Characterization Report
The Environmental Protection Agency has collected and reported data on the generation
and disposal of waste in the United States for more than 30 years. We use the
information to measure the success of municipal solid waste (MSW) reduction and
recycling programs across the country.
The Waste Reduction Model
WARM is an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) model that covers 34 types of
materials and five waste management options: source reduction, recycling, combustion,
composting, and landfilling. WARM accounts for upstream energy and carbon
emissions, transportation distances to disposal and recycling facilities, carbon
sequestration, and utility offsets that result from landfill gas collection and combustion.
WARM assesses four main stages of product life-cycles, all of which provide
opportunities for GHG and energy emissions and/or offsets. These stages are: raw
material acquisition, manufacturing, recycling, and waste management.
In 2006, the U.S. recycled 32.5 percent (or 81.8 million tons) of its waste, up from 31.9 percent in
2005. This resulted in 49.7 million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MTCE) saved, or the
emissions equivalent of taking 39.4 million cars off the road for one year. In addition, 1.3
quadrillion BTUs of energy were saved, which is enough energy to power 13 percent of U.S.
residences for one year.
METHODOLOGY FOR DERIVING BENEFITS
The benefits of MSW recycling were calculated using WARM. As noted above, generating these
benefit estimates requires inputting data on MSW recycling into WARM. However for some
materials, the Characterization Report and WARM do not have identical categories. More
specifically, WARM contains fewer material categories than are listed in the Characterization
Report. While some categories are highly similar and correct placement of the data into WARM
is readily apparent, for modeling purposes it was necessary to establish standard assumptions to
facilitate this process for certain specific materials. The following section explains the
methodology and assumptions used by EPA to determine the GHG and energy benefits of the
U.S. national 32.5 percent recycling rate based on 2006 data. Inputting data into WARM and
running the model involves two major steps as summarized here.
Step one involves using the Characterization Report to identify the materials to be used as inputs
to WARM. The Characterization Report Data Tables3 list the MSW materials that can be input
into WARM. Table 1 below provides a general crosswalk of the material categories in the MSW
Characterization Report, as compared to the categories that are available within the WARM
model. A more detailed discussion of this process for specific materials has been organized
3 The 2006 MSW Characterization Data Tables are located at http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-
hw/muncpl/ms w9 9. htm
4

-------
below in the following section, grouped according to their respective material category and
associated table numbers from the MSW Characterization Report.
Step two involves using WARM to distinguish between a baseline and alternate scenario. This
requires decisions such as determining the amount landfilled or combusted in the baseline
scenario and recycled or source reduced in the alternate scenario. The methodology EPA used to
determine national recycling benefits is discussed in the WARM walk-through section below.
Table 1. Crosswalk between Material Categories in
the MSW Characterization Report and WARM
MSW Characterization Report
WARM
Table4
Material Category
Material Category
Table 2
Textiles
Carpet
Table 2
Wood
Dimensional Lumber
Table 2
Food Scraps
Food Scraps
Table 2
Yard Trimmings
Yard Trimmings
Table 4
Total Newspapers
Newspaper
Table 4
Books
Textbooks
Table 4
Magazines
Magazines/third-class mail
Table 4
Office-type papers
Office paper
Table 4
Telephone Directories
Phonebooks
Table 4
Standard Mail
Magazines/third-class mail
Table 4
Other Commercial Printing
Mixed Paper, office
Table 4
Corrugated Boxes
Corrugated Cardboard
Table 4
Folding Cartons
Mixed Paper, residential
Table 4
Bags and Sacks
Mixed Paper, residential
Table 5
Total Glass
Glass
Table 6
Ferrous Metals
Steel Cans
Table 6
Lead
Mixed Metals
Table 6
Total Steel Packaging
Steel Cans
Table 6
Total Aluminum Packaging
Aluminum Cans
Table 7
PET
PET
Table 7
HDPE
HDPE
Table 7
LDPE/LLDPE
LDPE
Table 7
PP
Mixed Plastics
Table 7
PS
Mixed Plastics
Table 7
Other resins
Mixed Plastics
Table 8
Rubber in Tires
Tires
4 The tables can be found on-line in the MSW Characterization Report Data Tables at
http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/muncpl/msw99.htm
5

-------
Materials Crosswalk
Organics
Table 2 of the Characterization Report Data Tables provides details regarding the recovery of
food scraps and yard trimmings. Both categories are represented in the tables and WARM under
the same name.
Table 2. Organics Crosswalk
WARM Material
Characterization Report Material
Generated
(000 tons)
Recovered
(000 tons)
Food Scraps
Food Scraps
31,250
680
Yard Trimmings
Yard Trimmings
32,400
20,100
Paper and Paperboard Products
Table 4 of the Characterization Report Data Tables provides details regarding the paper and
paperboard categories. The category "total newspaper" is listed as a combination of "newsprint"
and "groundwood inserts". To calculate the benefits of these materials, they are all classified as
"newspaper". WARM's category "textbooks" is used to measure the benefits of the material the
Characterization Report refers to as "books". "Telephone directories" in the Characterization
Report and "phonebooks" in WARM are assumed to be the same items. Similarly, "corrugated
boxes" in the Characterization Report and "corrugated cardboard" in WARM are assumed to
refer to exactly the same material. The category "mixed paper, office" is used as a proxy in
WARM for the "other commercial printing" category. "Standard mail" and "magazines" from
Table 4 of the Characterization Report are grouped together for measurement in WARM's
"magazines/third-class mail" category, while "folding cartons" and "bags and sacks" are added
together in WARM's "mixed paper, residential" category.
Table 3. Paper and Paperboard Crosswalk
WARM Material
Characterization Report Material
Generated
(000 tons)
Recovered
(000 tons)
Corrugated Cardboard
Corrugated Boxes
31,430
22,630
Magazines/Third-class mail
Magazines and Standard Mail
8,460
3,320
Newspaper
Total Newspaper
12,360
10,870
Office Paper
Office-type Papers
6,320
4,150
Phonebooks
Telephone Directories
680
130
Textbooks
Books
1,130
290
Mixed paper (residential)
Folding Cartons and Bags and Sacks
6,910
1,230
Mixed paper (offices)
Other Commercial Printing
6,630
1,400
6

-------
Glass Products
Table 5 of the Characterization Report Data Tables provides details regarding the glass category.
The category "total glass" is listed as a combination of glass in durable goods and glass
containers and packaging. This total amount from Table 5 is used in WARM's "glass" category
to calculate benefits.
Table 4. Glass Crosswalk
WARM Material
Characterization Report Material
Generated
(000 tons)
Recovered
(000 tons)
Glass
Total Glass
13,200
2,880
Metal Products
Table 6 of the Characterization Report Data Tables provides details regarding the metals
category. "Ferrous metals" are classified in the WARM category "steel cans" based on Exhibit 8-
1 of "Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases: A Life-Cycle Assessment of Emissions
and Sinks." Lead does not have a matching category in WARM, and is thus classified as "mixed
metals." "Total steel packaging" is categorized as "steel cans" and "total aluminum packaging"
is classified as "aluminum cans" in the WARM.
Table 5. Metal Crosswalk
WARM Material
Characterization Report Material
Generated
(000 tons)
Recovered
(000 tons)
Aluminum Cans
Total Aluminum Packaging
1,940
690
Steel cans
Total Steel Packaging and Ferrous Metals
14,220
5,080
Mixed Metals
Lead
1,190
1,180
Plastics in Products
Table 7 in the Characterization Report Data Tables provides detail regarding the plastics
category. The "PET," "HDPE," and "LDPE/LLDPE" categories all have matching categories in
WARM, and thus are classified appropriately. The "Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse
Gases: A Life-Cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks" states in Exhibit 8-1 that the emissions
and energy use related to plastics such as "PP" (polypropylene), "PS" (polystyrene) and "other
resins" should be measured using "mixed plastics" in WARM.
7

-------
Table 6. Plastics Crosswalk
WARM Material
Characterization Report Material
Generated
(000 tons)
Recovered
(000 tons)
PET
PET
6,040
580
HDPE
HDPE
6,560
280
LDPE
LDPE/LLDPE
3,060
620
Mixed Plastics
Other Resins, PP, PS
12,160
560
Other Products
Table 2 in the Characterization Report Data Tables provides detail regarding the categories of
both wood and textiles. The Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases: A Life-Cycle
Assessment of Emissions and Sinks", states in Exhibit 8-1 that "wood" should be measured as
"dimensional lumber' in WARM, and that "textiles" should be classified as "carpet." "Rubber in
tires", which can be found in Table 8 of the Data Tables, is classified as "tires" in WARM.
Table 7. Other Materials Crosswalk
WARM Material
Characterization Report Material
Generated
(000 tons)
Recovered
(000 tons)
Carpet
Textiles
11,840
1,810
Dimensional Lumber
Wood
13,930
1,310
Tires
Rubber in Tires
2,490
870
WARM Walk-Through
WARM differentiates between two different scenarios: baseline and alternate. Normally, the
baseline scenario refers to the current or 'business as normal' situation and the alternate scenario
depicts the change in waste management that is to be modeled to quantify benefits. WARM also
allows the user to change certain criteria, such as distances to different management facilities or
information on landfill gas recovery. EPA uses the national averages to develop its national
benefits estimates. Please note if these criteria are changed, the numbers may not correspond to
EPA's numbers.
8

-------
Baseline Scenario
For the purposes of this exercise, EPA assumed that 87.5 percent of the recovered material was
landfilled and 12.5 percent was combusted with energy recovery for the baseline scenario5. EPA
only modeled the amount of material recycled (not generated), as stated by the Characterization
Report, since the benefits numbers generated relate specifically to the benefits of recycling the
material. Table 8 presents the actual numbers EPA plugged into WARM for the baseline.
Table 8. Snapshot of Baseline Scenario


Tons





Baseline
Source
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Material
Generation
Reduced
Recycled
Landfilled
Combusted
Composted
Aluminum Cans
690,000


604,000
86,000
NA
Steel Cans
5,080,000


4,445,000
635,000
NA
Copper Wire





NA
Glass
2,880,000


2,520,000
360,000
NA
HDPE
580,000


507,500
72,500
NA
LDPE
280,000


245,000
35,000
NA
PET
620,000


542,500
77,500
NA
Corrugated Cardboard
22,630,000


19,801,000
2,829,000
NA
Magazines/Third-class Mail
3,320,000


2,905,000
415,000
NA
Newspaper
10,870,000


9,511,000
1,359,000
NA
Office Paper
4,150,000


3,631,000
519,000
NA
Phonebooks
130,000


114,000
16,000
NA
Textbooks
290,000


254,000
36,000
NA
Dimensional Lumber
1,310,000


1,146,000
164,000
NA
Medium-density Fiberboard





NA
Food Scraps
680,000
NA
NA
595,000
85,000

Yard Trimmings
20,100,000
NA
NA
17,587,500
2,512,500

Grass

NA
NA



Leaves

NA
NA



Branches

NA
NA



Mixed Paper (general)

NA



NA
Mixed Paper (primarily residential)
1,230,000
NA

1,076,000
154,000
NA
Mixed Paper (primarily from offices)
1,400,000
NA

1,225,000
175,000
NA
Mixed Metals
1,180,000
NA

1,032,500
147,500
NA
Mixed Plastics
560,000
NA

490,000
70,000
NA
Mixed Recyclables

NA



NA
Mixed Organics

NA
NA



Mixed MSW

NA
NA


NA
Carpet
1,810,000


1,584,000
226,000
NA
Personal Computers





NA
Clay Bricks Alternate Scenario


NA


NA
Concrete

NA



NA
Fly Ash

NA



NA
Tires
870,000


761,000
109,000
NA
5 2006 MSW Characterization Report Data Tables, Table 29.
9

-------
The alternate scenario assumes that all materials from the baseline are recycled. Table 9 provides
a snapshot of this alternative assessment, as modeled by WARM.
Table 9. Snapshot of Alternative Scenario

Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Material
Generated
Recycled
Landfilled
Combusted
Composted
Aluminum Cans
690,000
690,000


NA
Steel Cans
5,080,000
5,080,000


NA
Copper Wire




NA
Glass
2,880,000
2,880,000


NA
HDPE
580,000
580,000


NA
LDPE
280,000
280,000


NA
PET
620,000
620,000


NA
Corrugated Cardboard
22,630,000
22,630,000


NA
Magazines/Third-class Mail
3,320,000
3,320,000


NA
Newspaper
10,870,000
10,870,000


NA
Office Paper
4,150,000
4,150,000


NA
Phonebooks
130,000
130,000


NA
Textbooks
290,000
290,000


NA
Dimensional Lumber
1,310,000
1,310,000


NA
Medium-density Fiberboard




NA
Food Scraps
680,000
NA


680,000
Yard Trimmings
20,100,000
NA


20,100,000
Grass

NA



Leaves

NA



Branches

NA



Mixed Paper (general)




NA
Mixed Paper (primarily residential)
1,230,000
1,230,000


NA
Mixed Paper (primarily from offices)
1,400,000
1,400,000


NA
Mixed Metals
1,180,000
1,180,000


NA
Mixed Plastics
560,000
560,000


NA
Mixed Recyclables




NA
Mixed Organics

NA



Mixed MSW

NA


NA
Carpet
1,810,000
1,810,000


NA
Personal Computers




NA
Clay Bricks

NA

NA
NA
Concrete



NA
NA
Fly Ash



NA
NA
Tires
870,000
870,000


NA
10

-------
WARM Benefit Results
WARM generates benefits numbers once the baseline and alternate scenarios are complete.
These benefits estimates are generated in either metric tons of carbon equivalent (MTCE), metric
tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTC02E), or British thermal units (BTU). In addition,
WARM calculates other conversions, such as the number of cars of the road or the number of
households' annual energy consumption. Further conversions of these units can be estimated
using the Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculators at http://www .usctcgateway. gov/tool/.
Using WARM as described above, EPA has estimated the total GHG Emission Reductions and
Energy Savings associated with the national MSW recycling rate of 32.5% (or 82 million tons)
achieved by the U.S. in 2006, as provided below in Table 10.
Table 10. WARM Benefit Results
Benefits
Conversions
49.7 million MTCE
39.4 million cars off the road
182.2 million MTC02E
39.4 million cars off the road
1,288 trillion BTU
6.8 million households annual energy consumption
222.1 million barrels of oil
10.3 billion gallons of gas
11

-------