2011-2020 Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program Industrial Profile Waste Sector


2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

2011-2020 Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program Sector Profile:

Waste Sector

Tableof Contents

WASTE SECTOR	2

Highlights	2

About this Sector	2

Who Reports?	3

Reported Emissions	5

Waste Sector: Emissions Trends, 2011 to 2020	12

MSW Landfill Details	17

Industrial Wastewater Treatment Details	19

Industrial Waste Landfill Details	19

Calculation Methods Available for Use	22

Emission Calculation Methodology from Stationary Fuel Combustion Units	22

Emission Calculation Methodologies for Process Emissions Sources	22

Data Verification and Analysis	25

Other Information	25

Glossary	26

1

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

WASTE SECTOR

All emissions presented here are as of8/7/2021 and exclude biogenic carbon dioxide (C02). All greenhouse gas
(GHG) emission data displayed in units of carbon dioxide equivalent (C02e) reflect the global warming potential
(GWP) valuesfrom Table A-lof 40 CFR98, which is generally based on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change's Fourth AssessmentReport(IPCCAR4).

Highlights

• The most prevalent greenhouse gas (GHG] emitted by the Waste Sector is methane (CH4],
and municipal solid waste (MSW] landfills are the largest emitter of CH4 in this sector.

• Reported emissions from the Waste Sector have decreased from 2011 to 2020. Emissions in
2020 were 8.2% lower than in 2 011. The decrease in emissions is primarily driven by MSW
landfills. Methodological changes to the emission calculation procedures for MSW landfills
were implemented in 2 013 and 2016, and are a primary factor in these reported emission
reductions.

• The three states with the most methane (CH4] emissions from MSW landfills (and across the
Waste Sector] are Texas, Florida, and California. The three states with the largest number of
MSW landfills are Texas, California, and Illinois.

• Seventy four percent of the MSW landfills that reported have landfill gas collection and
control systems (GCCSs], compared toless than 1% of industrial waste landfills.

Emissions from industrial waste landfills, industrial wastewater treatment, MSW, and solid waste
combustion were lower in 2 02 0 than in 2 011, though the decrease during this time frame was not
constant for any of these subsectors.

About this Sector

The Waste Sector comprises MSW landfills, industrial waste landfills, industrial wastewater
treatment systems, and solid waste combustion at waste-to-energy facilities.

• MSW landfills are landfills that dispose or have disposed of MSW. MSW includes, among
other components, solid-phase household, commercial/retail, and institutional wastes.
MSW landfills may also dispose of non-MSW wastes, including construction and demolition
debris and other inert materials. This subsector excludes dedicated industrial, hazardous
waste, and construction and demolition landfills. An MSW landfill comprises the landfill, the
landfill GCCS, and combustion devices that are used to control landfill gas emissions.

• Industrial waste landfills are landfills that accept or have accepted primarily industrial
wastes. This subsector excludes landfills that accept hazardous waste and those that receive
only construction and demolition or other inert wastes. An industrial waste landfill includes
the landfill, the landfill GCCS, and combustion devices that are used to control landfill gas
emissions. Less than 1% of facilities reporting under this Subpart have landfill GCCSs. The
organic composition of waste streams disposed of at industrial waste landfills tends to be
similar over time, leading to a relatively consistent emission rate, while the waste streams
at MSW landfills may fluctuate seasonally and/or annually.

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

• Industrial wastewater treatment systems comprise anaerobic lagoons, reactors, and
anaerobic sludge digesters at facilities that perform pulp and paper manufacturing, food
processing, ethanol production, and petroleum refining. This subsector does not include
anaerobic processes used to treat wastewater and wastewater treatmentsludge at other
industrial facilities. It also does not include emissions from municipal wastewater treatment
plants, separate treatment of sanitary wastewater at industrial facilities, oil and/or water
separators, or aerobic and anoxic treatment of industrial wastewater.

• Solid waste combustion at waste-to-energy facilities comprise combustors and
incinerators at facilities under North American Industry Classification System (NAICS] code
562213 that burn non-hazardous solid waste either to recover energy or to reduce the
volume of waste.

Who Reports?

For Reporting Year (RY] 2020,1,465 facilities in the Waste Sector reported emissions of 105.5
million metric tons (MMT] C02e. In 2 020, the Waste Sector represented 19.2% ofthe facilities
reporting direct emissions to the GreenhouseGas Reporting Program (GHGRP] and 1.6% oftotal
U.S. direct emissions.1 Table 1 includes details ofthe applicability of each source category, their
corresponding reporting schedules, and estimates ofthe percent of facilities and emissions covered
by the GHGRP.2 Table 2 showsthe number ofGHGRP reporters by source category and year.

1 Total U.S. GHG emissions for 2019 were 6,558 MMT CChe.as reported in the Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and
Sinks: 1990-2019. EPA 430-R-21-005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. April 14,2021. Available:
https://www.epa.gOv/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases.6456.7.

2 Note: Values in Table 1 do not change significantly fromyear toyear.so percentages in Table 1 are updated every five years.
Table 1 was lastupdated in2021.

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

Tablel: Waste Sector-Reporting Schedule and GHGRP Coverage by Subpart (2020)
Subpart Source Applicability First Reporting Estimated % of Industry

Category Year Emissions Covered

HH MSW Facilities that accepted waste 2010 91,5%a

Landfills after January 1,1980, and that
generate methane that is
equivalent to > 25,000 metric
tons CCtee/year

• Facilities that reported only 2010 78%b
under subpart C (Stationary
Fuel Combustion) and reported
NAICS code 562213 (Solid
Waste Combustors and
Incinerators)

• Such facilities that emit >

25,000 metric tons CChe/year.

•Acceptedwaste after January 2011 53%c

1, 1980, and

• Design capacity > 300,000
metric tons, and

• Located at a facility that emits
> 25,000 metric tons
CChe/year.

Facilities operating an 2010 31,25%d

anaerobic process to treat
industrial wastewater and/or
industrial wastewater treatment
sludge

0 Estimate of total industry emissions is from the Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-
2019. EPA 430-R-21-005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. April 14,2021. Available:

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks-1990-2019. Emissions were
estimated to be 99.4 MMT C02e (Table 7-3: CH4 Emissions from Landfills (page 7-6)).

b Estimate of total U.S. solid waste combustion emissions is from the Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
and Sinks: 1990-2019. EPA 430-R-21-005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. April 14,2021. Available:
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/nventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks-1990-2019. Emissions were
estimated to be 11.8 MMTCC>2e (Table 3-25: CO2, CH4, and N2O Emissions from the Incineration of Waste (page 3-
58)).

c Estimated size of industry emissions based on the industrial waste landfill emissions estimates from the Inventory
of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissionsand Sinks: 1990-2019. EPA 430-R-21-005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
April 14,2021. A vailable: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks-
1990-2019. These emission estimates are based on nationwide estimated amounts of annual waste generation and
are notf acility-specific emission estimates. (Table 7-3: CH4 Emissionsfrom Landfills (page 7-6)).
d Emissions covered by the GHGRP were calculated using the U.S. GHG Inventory values for industrial wastewater
(Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2019. EPA 430-R-21-005. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. April 14,2021. Available: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-
emissions-and-sinks-1990-2019) and RY2019 emissionsforSubpartII.

C Solid Waste
Combustion

TT Industrial
Waste
Landfills

II Industrial

Wastewater
Treatment

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

Table2: Waste Sector- Number of Reporters (2011-2020)a

Source Category

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Total Waste Sector

1,645

1,652

1,638

1,631

1,548

1,512

1,503

1,499

1,473

1,465

MSW Landfills

1,240

1,252

1,240

1,237

1,168

1,144

1,138

1,136

1,124

1,123

Solid Waste Combustion

Industrial Waste Landfills

176

178

174

171

169

168

166

Industrial Wastewater
Treatment

169

162

161

156

149

141

139

127

124

0 The total number of reporters may be less than the sum of the number of reporters in each individual source
category because some facilities contain more than one source category.

MSW landfills made up the majority ofWaste Sector reporters for all reporting years. The number
of reporters for MSW landfills decreased by 117 facilities between 2011 and 2020. This decrease is
a result of facilities that qualified to discontinue reporting (off-rampingfrom the program],3
Between 2011 and 2 020, the number of reporters for industrial wastewater treatment decreased
by 45. The number of reporters for industrial waste landfills had a net decrease often facilities from
2011 to 2020. The number of solid waste combustion facilities decreased by nine facilities from
2011 to2020.

Reported Emissions

Methane (CH4] is the primary GH G reported by MSW landfills, industrial waste landfills, and
industrial wastewater treatmentfacilities. Methane is generated by the anaerobic decomposition of
organic waste in landfills and in anaerobic wastewater treatment systems. Landfillgas typically
contains approximately 50% methane, 50% CO2, and less than 1% non-methane organic
compounds. Industrial wastewater treatment gas contains about 65 to 70% methane, 2 5 to 30%
CO2, and small amounts of N2, H2, and other gases. Figure 1 shows the breakdown of emissions by
subsector in RY 2 020.

3 See FAQ: When is a Facility Eligible to Stop Reporting? Available:
http://www.ccdsupportcom/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=243139271.

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

Figure 1:2020 Total Reported Emissions from Waste, by Subsector

Subsector

| Municipal Landfills 82.0 %

Solid Waste Combustion 8.8 %
| Industrial Waste Landfills 7.4 %

Industrial Wastewater Treatment 1.8 %

Biogenic CO2 emissions result primarily from the combustion of landfill gas, MSW, and other
biogenic fuels in reciprocating internal engines, municipal waste combustors, and other combustion
units.

Figures 2 through 6 show the location and range of emissions in the contiguous United States for
the entire Waste Sector (Figure 2] and each subsector individually (Figures 3 through 6], Sizes of
each circle correspond to a specified range of emissions in MT of C02e reported by that particular
facility. Many large industrial waste landfills are in southeastern states and along the coastline of
the Gulf of Mexico, which is also where numerous petroleum refineries, pulp and paper, and
chemical manufacturing facilities are located. Locations ofindustrial wastewater treatment
facilities are driven primarily by the location ofethanol facilities, which account for more than half
of all industrial wastewater treatment reporters and tend to be in the Midwest. Seventy-seven
percent of solid waste combustors are in the northeastern states and in Florida, and the remaining
facilities are in the Midwest and western states (Figure 6],

Readers can identify the largest emitting facilities by visiting the F acility Level I nformation on
Greenhouse Gases Tool (FLIGHT] website (https://ghgdata.epa.gov/ghgp/main.do#].

6

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

Figure 2: Waste Sector Emissions by Range and Location (2020)

GHGRP, 2020

Waste Sector Emissions (Metric Tons C02e)

0	1,000,000

%	750,000

•	500,000

•	250,000

•	0

7

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

Figure 3: MSW Landfill Subsector Emissions by Range and Location (2020)

GHGRP, 2020

MSW Landfill Subsector Emissions (Metric Tons C02e )

0	1,000,000

%	750,000

#	500,000

#	250,000

8

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

Figure 4: Solid Waste Combustion Subsector Emissions by Range and Location
(2020)

GHGRP, 2020

Solid Waste Combustion Subsector Emissions (Metric Tons C02e)

% 400,000

%	300,000

#	200,000

•	100,000

9

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

Figure 5: Industrial Waste Landfill Subsector Emissions by Range and Location
(2020)

o

%

•







•

•









o

cm

m

o

• •

%

O

o

• f'

O

J o



# •

• n °r

C°°c

o

±°Jk> •

© • c#

•	o°

~ 
-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

Figure 6: Industrial Wastewater Treatment Subsector Emissions by Range and
Location (2020)

s

*5°



o

•»°°f

o

o

•



O
O

f°



op

cy

\#t° a

Q 0 ~ J

_ ,© aT°-

^ ° '°otW| o
• | «

9 ^

• °

• • O °

qLj ° 9°0

o

GHGRP, 2020

Industrial Wastewater Treatment Subsector Emissions (Metric Tons C02e )

•	120,000

•	90,000

•	60,000

•	30,000

•	0

11

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

Waste Sector: Emissions Trends, 2011 to 2020

The waste sector consists of municipal solids waste (MSW] landfills, industrial waste landfills, solid
waste combustion, and industrial wastewater treatment. Total emissions reported to the
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program by the waste sector decreased from 114.9 MMT C02e in 2 011
to 105.5 MMT CC>2ein 2020 (8.2 percent]. The decrease in emissions is likely due to the notable
drop in emissions from MSW landfills.

Over 80 percent of emissions from the waste sector come from municipal solid waste (MSW]
landfills. Reported emissions from MSW landfills decreased from 94 MMT C02e in 2 011 to 86 MMT
CChe in 2 02 0 (7.9 percent]. The decrease in reported emissions is due to changes to the rule Re-
calculating methane emissions from MSW landfills. Starting in reporting year 2013, MSW landfills
are allowed to assume that a higher percentage of methane generatedby the landfill is oxidized to
CO2 as it passes through the landfill soil cover, resulting in lower reported methane emissions.
Landfills are provided two equations for calculating methane emissions and are given the choice of
which results to report. Landfills choosing to report the lower of the two estimates is likely
contributing to lower reported emissions. In 2020, annual reported waste disposal as well as
annual emissions from MSW landfills decreased by 5 percent and 4.2 percent, respectively. Since
2011, waste disposal had been slightly increasing year to year.

In addition to MSW landfills, reported emissions also decreased from the other waste subsectors.
Emissions reported by industrial waste landfills decreased 12.7 percent between 2011 and 2020
while emissions reported by solid waste combustors decreased 2.9 percent during this time, and
wastewater treatment facilities dropped 24.2 percent.

Table3: Waste Sector- Emissions by Subsector (2011-2020)ab

Source Category

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Total Waste Sector

114.9

115.0

111.3

111.9

110.3

107.5

105.6

108.3

109.6

105.5

MSW Landfills

93.8

94.4

91.2

90.8

89.6

86.8

86.3

88.6

90.2

86.5

Solid Waste Combustion

9.6

9.8

10.0

9.9

10.1

10.2

9.2

9.5

9.2

9.3

Industrial Waste Landfills

8.9

8.7

8.0

8.5

8.5

8.6

8.1

8.2

8.1

7.8

Industrial Wastewater
Treatment

2.6

2.1

2.2

2.6

2.1

2.0

1.9

2.0

2.1

1.9

0 Biogenic emissions ofC02 are not included in the C02e emissions in this table. As landfill gas recovered from MSW
landfills and industrial waste landfillsis considered biogenic, C02 emissions from the combustion of landfill gas are
notincluded in the C02e emissionsin thistable. Biogenic C02 emissions from the combustion ofthebiogenic
fraction of MSW are also notincludedin the C02e emissions in this table.
b Totals may not sum due to independent rounding.

Table4: Waste Sector - BiogenicCO2 Emissions (2011-2020)a

Waste Sector

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Total biogenic CO2 emissions

18.8

18.5

18.2

17.8

17.6

17.5

17.7

17.8

17.7

17.3

MSW Landfills

4.1

4.1

3.9

3.8

3.9

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.2

4.0

Solid Waste Combustion

14.7

14.4

14.3

14.0

13.7

13.5

13.7

13.7

13.5

13.3

0 Totals may not sum due to independent rounding.

12

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

Figure 7: Direct Emissions by State from the Waste Sector (2020)a

Texas
Florida
California
Georgia
Ohio
Alabama
North Carolina
Michigan
Virginia
New York
Illinois-
Pennsylvania
Indiana
Louisiana •
Tennessee
Kentucky
Oklahoma
Minnesota
Arkansas
South Carolina
New Jersey
Massachusetts
Maryland
Wisconsin
Washington
Missouri
Mississippi
Iowa
Colorado
Arizona
Kansas
Oregon
Nebraska
Connecticut-| I
West Virginia
Utah
New Mexico
North Dakota
Idaho
Hawaii
Puerto Rico
New Hampshire
Nevada
Delaware
Alaska
South Dakota
Montana

Maine -|
Wyoming -|
Vermont
Rhode Island
Guam ¦ I

Subsector

| MSW Landfills

Solid Waste Combustion
| Industrial Waste Landfills
I Industrial Wastewater Treatment

5.0	7.5

Million Metric Tons C02e

Table 5 shows the emissions by GHG emitted. Table 6 breaks down emissions by Waste Sector
processes and fuel combustion.

13

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

Table 5: Waste Sector-Emissions by GHG (MMTC02e)a

Waste Sector

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Number of Facilities

1,645

1,652

1,638

1,631

1,547

1,512

1,502

1,499

1,473

1,465

Total Emissions

114.9

115.0

111.3

111.9

110.3

107.5

105.6

108.3

109.6

105.5

Carbon Dioxide

MSW Landfills

1.0

1.0

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.4

1.5

1.4

1.5

Solid Waste Combustion

9.1

9.3

9.4

9.4

9.6

9.7

8.7

9.0

8.8

8.8

Methane

MSW Landfills

92.8

93.4

90.0

89.6

88.3

85.3

84.9

87.1

88.8

84.9

Solid Waste Combustion

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

Industrial Waste
Landfills

8.9

8.7

8.0

8.5

8.5

8.6

8.1

8.2

8.1

7.8

Industrial Wastewater
Treatment

2.6

2.1

2.2

2.6

2.1

2.0

1.9

2.0

2.1

1.9

Nitrous Oxide

MSW Landfills'3

<0.05

<0.05

<0.05

<0.05

<0.05

<0.05

<0.05

<0.05

<0.05

<0.05

Solid Waste Combustion

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.3

0 Totals may not sum due to independent rounding.

b Emissions shown for CO2 and N2O result from the combustion of fossil fuels and the non-biogenic portion ofMSW
that is combusted.

14

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

Table 6: Waste Sector - Emissions from Waste Sector Processes and Fuel
Combustionabc

Waste Sector

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

MSW Landfills

93.8

94.4

91.2

90.8

89.6

86.8

86.3

88.6

90.2

86.5

Fuel combustion

1.1

1.0

1.2

1.2

1.3

1.5

1.4

1.5

1.4

1.6

Waste Sector processes

92.7

93.3

90.0

89.6

88.3

85.3

84.9

87.1

88.8

84.9

Solid Waste combustion

9.6

9.8

10.0

9.9

10.1

10.2

9.2

9.5

9.2

9.3

Fuel combustion

9.6

9.8

10.0

9.9

10.1

10.2

9.2

9.5

9.2

9.3

Industrial Waste Landfills

8.9

8.7

8.0

8.5

8.5

8.6

8.1

8.2

8.1

7.8

Waste sector processes

8.9

8.7

8.0

8.5

8.5

8.6

8.1

8.2

8.1

7.8

Industrial Wastewater Treatment

2.6

2.1

2.2

2.6

2.1

2.0

1.9

2.0

2.1

1.9

Waste Sector processes

2.6

2.1

2.2

2.6

2.1

2.0

1.9

2.0

2.1

1.9

0 These values representtotal emissions reported to the GHGRP in these industry sectors. Additional emissions may
occurat facilities that have not reported (e.g., those belowthe reporting threshold).

b Totals may not sum due to independent rounding. Emission values presented may differ slightly from other
publicly available GHGRP data due to minor differences in the calculation methodology.
c Emissions from fuel combustion are defined here as emissions reported underSubpartC.

Figure 8 shows the average emissions per reporter from the waste subsectorscompared with
average emissions from all GHGRP reporters. Figure 9 and Table 7 show the percentage and
number of reporters within each emission range, respectively.

Figure 8: Average Emissions per Reporter from the Waste Sector (2020)

MSW Landfills

Solid Waste Combustion

Industrial Waste Landfills

Industrial Wastewater Treatment 0.02

All GHGRP (Direct Emitters Only)

0.1	0.2	0.3	0.4

2020 Emissions (Million Metric Tons C02e)

15

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

Figure 9: Percentage of Facilities in the Waste Sector at Various Emissions Ranges
(2020)

0 - 0.025 0.025 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1	0.1 - 0.25	0.25 - 1	> 1

2020 Emissions Range (million metric tons C02e)

Table 7: Waste Sector - Number of Facilities by Emissions Range in MMT C02e
f2020)a	

Waste Sector

0-0.025

0.025 - 0.05

0.05 - 0.1

0.1 - 0.25

0.25 -1

> 1

MSW Landfills

250

278

341

209

44

1

Solid Waste Combustion

2

7

13

26

11

0

Industrial Waste Landfills

78

38

25

24

1

0

Industrial Wastewater Treatment

96

17

7

4

0

0

0 Within this table, the total number offacilities shown in the Total Waste Sector row represents the number of
uniquefacilities. The totals in this row may not equal the sum of the rows below due to facilities reporting under
multiple industry types.

16

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

MSW Landfill Details

Table 8 shows the characteristics of MSW landfills in 2020, and Table 9 shows emissions by type of
MSW landfill.

Table 8: Characteristics of MSW Landfills in 2011-2020

Operational Characteristic

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Number of reporting
facilities

1,240

1,252

1,240

1,237

1,168

1,144

1,138

1,136

1,124

1,123

Number of open landfills

958

964

968

969

945

939

941

943

941

939

Number of closed landfills

282

288

272

268

223

205

197

193

183

184

Number of landfills with gas
collection

914

926

926

923

864

849

846

848

830

835

Number of landfills without gas
collection

326

326

314

314

304

295

292

288

294

288

Facilities are requiredtoreportunder SubpartHH if their methane generation value meets or
exceeds 25,000 MT of C02e. However, these facilities can cease reporting iftheir emissions are
under 25,000 MT C02e for five consecutive years, or under 15,000 MT C02e for three consecutive
years.

Operational Characteristics

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Total Emissions

93.8

94.4

91.2

90.8

89.6

86.8

86.3

88.6

90.2

86.5

Total emissions for closed landfills

9.3

9.3

8.5

8.4

7.7

6.8

5.7

5.3

5.1

4.9

Total emissions for open landfills

84.5

85.1

82.6

82.4

81.9

80.0

80.6

83.3

85.1

81.5

Em i ssi ons for I andfi 11 s wi thout gas
collection

23.6

23.5

22.0

21.7

21.6

21.1

20.3

20.7

21.3

21.2

Emissions for landfills with gas
collection

70.2

70.9

69.2

69.2

68.0

65.6

66.0

67.9

69.0

65.3

0 Totals may not sum due to independent rounding.

F igure 10 displays total methane emissions (in MMT C Che] and the operational status of the landfill
(i.e., open and closed] in 2 02 0, grouped by the decade the landfill first accepted waste. The Waste
Sector is unique because emissions in the current RY are heavily impacted by the quantity of waste
already in place at the landfills and the age of that waste (i.e., the year, or decade in this case, that
the waste was first disposed of in the landfill], F igure 11 shows that most emissions in the current
RY result from landfills that first accepted waste between the 1970s and 1990s, and are still open in
2020. The largest number of reporting landfills first opened and started accepting waste in the
1970s. More than 300 of these landfills still accept waste in 202 0, which explains why the 1970s era
landfills contributedthe most to current methane emissions.

17

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

Figure 10: MSWLandfill Emissions (2020)

Landfill Status in 2020

| Open Landfills
Closed Landfills

1900 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980

Decade Landfill First Accepted Waste

1990

2000

2010

18

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

Industrial Wastewater Treatment Details

Tables 10 shows details of the industrial wastewater subsector. Table 10 shows facility counts and
emissions by NAICS codes. Tables 13 and 14 show additional details on the industrial waste
landfills subsector.

Table 10: Major NAICS Codes and Emissions for Industrial Wastewater Treatment in
2020

Major NAICS Code

Industry

Facility
Count

Facility
Percent

Emissions
(MMTCChe)

Emissions
Percent

3114

Fruits and vegetables

14



11.0%

0.2

8.0%

3116, 112340

Meat and poultry

60



48.0%

1.5

79.0%

221112, 311221, 311222,
312120, 312140, 325193,
325199

Ethanol

37



30.0%

<0.05

1.0%

322110, 322121, 322130

Pulp and paper

11



9.0%

0.2

12.0%

311512

Creamery Butter
Manufacturing

1



1.0%

<0.05

0.0%

311224

Soybean and Other
Oilseed Processing

1



1.0%

<0.05

0.0%

Total

-

124



100%

1.94

100%

Industrial Waste Landfill Details











Table 11 shows the characteristics ofindustrial waste landfills and Table 12 shows emissions by
type of industrial waste landfills.

Table 11: Characteristics ofindustrial Waste Landfills in 2011-2020



Data

2011 2012

2013 :

2014

2015

2016 2017 2018

2019 2020

Number of reporting facilities 176 176

176

178

174

171 171 169

168 166

Number of open landfills

144 142

140

143

141

140 139 136

139 135

Number of closed landfills

32 34

36

35

33

31 32 33

29 31

Number of landfills with gas
collection

2 2

2

2

1

1 1 1

1 1

Number of landfills without gas 174 174
collection

174

176

173

170 170 168

167 165

19

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

Table 12: Methane Emissions for Industrial Waste Landfills in 2011-2020 (MMT
CChe")3	

Data

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Total Emissions

8.9

8.7

8.0

8.5

8.5

8.6

8.1

8.2

8.1

7.8

Total emissions for closed landfills

0.8

0.7

0.7

0.6

0.6

0.5

0.6

0.6

0.5

0.5

Total emissions for open landfills

8.1

8.0

7.4

7.9

7.9

8.0

7.5

7.6

7.6

7.3

Total emissions for landfills without
gas collection

8.5

8.3

7.6

8.0

8.2

8.3

7.9

7.9

8.1

7.7

Total emissions for landfills with gas
collection

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.5

0.3

0.3

0.2

0.2

0.0

0.0

0 Totals may not sum due to independent rounding.

Figure 11: Industrial Waste Landfill Emissions (2020)

3.0

1910 1920 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Decade Landfill First Accepted Waste

Figure 11 displays total methane emissions (in MMT C02e] and the operational status of industrial
waste landfills in 2 0 2 0 (i.e., open and closed] by the decade the landfill first accepted waste. The
majority of 2020 emissions result from landfills thatfirst accepted waste between the 1960s and
1980s, and are still open in 202 0. There are significantly more open landfills than closed landfills
contributing to total emissions in the current RY. F orty-seven of the landfills that opened in the
1960s were still accepting waste in 2 02 0, which is why emissions from landfills that opened in that
decade are higher than in other decades.

20

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

Table 13 showstotal emissions in the industrial wastelandfill subsector and the number of
facilities (unique and combined] groupedby major NAICS code.

Table 13: Major NAICS Code Groups Represented by Reporting Industrial Waste
Landfills [2 02 0]a	

Major

NAICS Code

Combined

Unique

Percent of

Emissions

Percent of

NAICS
Code

Description

Facility
Count3

Facility
Count

Total
Facilities

(MMT C02e)b

Total
Emissions

212

Mining (except oil
and gas)

1

1

0.6%

<0.05

0.2%

221

Utilities

8

7

4.1%

0.2

2.4%

311

Food manufacturing

11

11

6.4%

0.7

9.0%

321

Wood product
manufacturing

4

2

1.2%

<0.05

0.1%

322

Paper

manufacturing

119

89

51.5%

4.2

54.6%

324

Petroleum and coal













products

4

4

2.3%

<0.05

0.6%



manufacturing











325

Chemical
manufacturing

29

19

11.0%

0.5

6.9%

327

Nonmetallic mineral













product

1

1

0.6%

NA

NA%



manufacturing











331

Primary metal
manufacturing

19

19

11.0%

0.6

7.6%

332

Fabricated metal













product

2

2

1.2%

<0.05

<0.05%



manufacturing











531

Real Estate

2

2

1.2%

<0.05

0.6%

562

Waste management
and remediation
services

17

16

9.3%

1.4

18.1%

Total

-

217

166

100%

7.75

100%

0 Facilities may report multiple NAICS codes basedon operations conducted attheirfacilities. The counts presented
in this column include all facilities that reported the relevant NAICS code as a primary, secondary, oradditional
NAICS code.

b The data presented in this column representthe total emissions for facilities that reported the relevant NAICS
code as their primary code so as not to double-count emissions. This column does not sum emissions from facilities
that reported their respective NAICS codes as secondary oradditional.

The majority of industrial facilities that reportemissions under the industrial waste landfill
subsector have dedicated onsite landfills. These landfills are presumed to only accept waste
generated by that particular facility. Some industrial waste landfills are not associated with any
particular industrial sector (i.e., NAICS code 562], and these facilities accept mixed industrial waste
from various industries.

21

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

Paper manufacturing facilities contributed the majority of industrial waste landfill emissions in
2020 (4.23 MMT CCheor 54.6%]. Waste managementand remediation services facilities (1.4 MMT
CC>2e or 18%] and Food manufacturingsector facilities (0.69 MMT C02e or 8.9%] comprise the next
largest shares.

Calculation Methods Available for Use

F acilities in the Waste Sector emit methane from the decomposition of organic matter in wastes and
emit CO2, methane, and nitrous oxide from the combustion of solid wastes, captured methane, and
other fuels.

Emission Calculation Methodology from Stationary Fuel Combustion
Units

F or MS W and industrial waste landfills, emissions from the combustion of any collected biogas are
included with emissions for the landfill facility if the landfill is not co-located with a process in
another industry sector that is covered by the reporting rule (e.g., a petroleum refinery or pulp and
paper facility], Ifthe landfill is co-located, then the combustion emissions are included with the
emissions from the co-located industry sector. For industrial wastewater, combustion emissions
are included with the emissions from the pulp and paper, ethanol manufacturing, food processing,
or petroleum refining industry sector, as appropriate. The calculation methodology for stationary
fuel combustion sources (Subpart C] is explained here.

Emission Calculation Methodologies for Process Emissions Sources

MSW Landfill Emission Calculation Methodology Because there is no internationally agreed-
upon and cost-effective approach to directly measure the amountof CH4 emitted from landfills, the
emission estimation methodology uses a combination of gas measurements, models, and
calculations. The calculation procedure for MSW landfills depends on whether the landfill has an
active landfill GCCS.

•	Landfills without a GCCS. MSW landfills without an active landfill GCCS must calculate CH4
generation using a first-order decay model for CH4 generation in the landfill (Equation HH-
lof the rule, which is based on the 2006IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas
Inventories, Volume 5], Equation HH-1 uses the quantities and types ofwastes disposed in
the landfill, a default or measured CH4 fraction in the landfill gas, and other characteristics
of the landfill as model inputs. The CH4 generation is corrected using Equation HH -5 to
account for CH4 that oxidizes (and therefore is not emitted] as it passes through the landfill
cover material.

•	Landfills with anactive GCCS. MSW landfills with an active GCCS must calculate emissions
using Equations HH-6 and HH-8ofthe rule, and specify which method they consider most
accurate for their facility. FLIGHT displays emissions from both methods butuses the
facility-specified value to calculate total emissions from the MSW landfills subsector. Ifthe
facility does not specify which equation to use, FLIGHT uses the higher value.

•	EquationHH-6 estimates emissions using the modeled CH4 generation rate (EquationHH-1,
described above] minus the measured amountof CH4 recovered and destroyed. CH4

22

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

generated in excess ofthe measured CH4 recovery is corrected to account for CH4 oxidation
in the landfill cover material.

• Equation HH-8 estimates emissions based on the measured quantity of methane recovered
for destruction and an estimated landfill gas collection efficiency, which varies by type of
landfill cover material used. This equation back-calculates the quantity ofuncollected gas,
which is then corrected to account for methane oxidation in the landfill cover material.
Emissions from the gas collected and intended for destruction are estimatedbased on the
CH4 destruction efficiency ofthe combustion device.

The values resulting from Equations HH-6 and HH-8 may vary significantly, depending on the
characteristics ofthe landfill. For example, the amount of recovered methane can vary by year, and
the landfill gas collection efficiency will change yearly for open landfills. The collection efficiency
will change yearly because it is estimated using an area-weighted approach thatis dependent on
the surface area of each stage of cover (daily, intermediate, or final]. While Equation HH-8
incorporates more site-specific information, it might not provide the most accurate GH G emission
estimate for every landfill due to the many variables that affect landfill GHG emissions.

Until 2013, all landfills were required to use a methane oxidation fraction of 0.10 in their methane
emission equations. In 2 013, a rule change allowed for the use of different default methane
oxidation fractions each year if the facility opted to calculate its landfill methane flux using the
provided methodology. A defaultvalue ofO.10 mustbe used ifthe facility chooses not to calculate
landfill methane flux. The results ofthe methane flux calculations, combined with the extentof soil
cover at the landfill, direct the reporter to the appropriate oxidation fraction to use. The methane
oxidation fraction values available for use are 0.0,0.10,0.25, and 0.35. Using a higher oxidation
fraction value results in lower methane emissions than when a lower oxidation fraction value is
used.

B eginning in 2 013, facilities were required to report the oxidation fraction used for each relevant
emission equation. Table 17 shows the oxidation fraction value used in each equation.
Approximately 42% of facilities without a GCCS used the higher oxidation fractions of 0.2 5 or 0.35,
and 3% used a value of zero. A larger percentage of facilities with landfill gas collection (51-71%]
used the higher oxidation values (25-35%], while approximately 1% used a value of zero.

23

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

Table 14: MSW Landfills - Methane Oxidation Fraction Values Used by MSW Landfills
f2020]a	

Without GCCS

With GCCS

HH-5

HH-5a

HH-6

HH-7b

HH-8



, .



, .



, .



, .



, .



Oxidation Factor Default Value

=3

o

%

=3

o

%

=3

o

%

=3

o

%

=3

o

%



O



O



O



O



O



0

7

2.4%

14

1.7%

14

1.7%

14

1.7%

14

1.7%

0.1

151

52.4%

364

43.6%

220

26.3%

313

37.5%

187

22.4%

0.25

121

42%

444

53.2%

458

54.9%

451

54%

381

45.6%

0.35

9

3.1%

13

1.6%

143

17.1%

57

6.8%

253

30.3%

Total

288

100%

835

100%

835

100%

835

100%

835

100%

0 Totals may not sum due to independent rounding.

b Landfills with GCCSs must report landfill gas generation using both Equations HH-5 and HH-7, in addition to
calculating emissions using both Equations HH-6 and HH-8.

Table 15 presents the number offacilities with a GCCS and the calculation method used (either
Equation HH-6 or HH-8] for each RY. Facilities mayuse the equation they feel is most appropriate
based on their facility operations. Facilities are not required to use the same equation across RYs,
but most facilities did use the same equation for multiple years. Most facilities used Equation HH-8
for all five reporting years. Equation HH-8 is based on the measured quantity of recovered methane,
while Equation HH -6 is based on the amount of modeled methane generation.

Table 15: MSW Landfills - Use of Equation HH-6 versus HH-8 by RY



2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Facilities with a GCCS

926

926

923

864

849

846

848

830

835

Facilities that used Equation HH-6

271

274

285

274

270

265

282

259

246

Facilities that used Equation HH-8

640

650

633

583

578

579

566

571

589

Industrial Wastewater Treatment Calculation Methodology The calculation procedure of
industrial wastewater treatmentdepends on whether biogas is recovered from the anaerobic
reactor (s] or lagoon(s] operating at the facility. All anaerobic sludge digesters are assumed to
recover biogas. The methodology for sludge digesters does not include calculatingCH4 generation
using chemical oxygen demand (COD] or the five-day biochemical oxygen demand (B 0D5], because
it is assumed that all generated methane is recovered.

•	No biogas recovery. All facilities with anaerobic reactors or lagoons calculate emissions
using measurements ofthe volume of wastewater, measurements ofthe average weekly
concentration of either COD or B0D5, and a default methane conversion factor. All methane
generated during the process is emitted (Equation 11-3],

•	With biogas recovery. All facilities with anaerobic reactors, lagoons, or sludge digesters
that recover biogas calculate emissions using measurements ofthe flow of recovered
biogas; methane concentration, temperature, pressure, and moisture; and default values for
biogas collection efficiency and methane destruction efficiency. Equation II-4 determines
the amount of methane recovered in the process and Equation 11 -5 uses the collection
efficiency to estimate the amount of methane that leaks out of equipment. Equation 11-6

24

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

determines total methane emissions by summing methane leakage and methane not
destroyed in the destruction device.

Solid waste combustion facilities must report under Subpart C, and the reporter generally must use
one of four calculation methodologies (tiers] to calculate CO2 emissions depending on fuel type and
unit size. The calculation methodologies for Subpart C are explained in more detail here. Units that
are not subj ect to Subpart D but are required by states to monitor emissions according to Part 7 5
can report CO2 emissions under SubpartC using Part 75 calculation methods and monitoring data
that they already collect under Part 75 (e.g., heat input and fuel use]. Methane and nitrous oxide
mass emissions are also required to be reported for fuels that are included in Table C-2 of Part 9 8
and are calculated using either an estimated or measured fuel quantity, default or measured HHV,
and default emission factors.

Data Verification and Analysis

As a part of the reporting and verification process, EPA evaluates annual GH G reports with
electronic checks and staff review as needed. EPA contacts facilities regarding potential substantive
errors and facilities resubmit reports as errors are identified. Additional information on EPA's
verification process is available here.

Other Information

EPA's Landfill Methane Outreach Program (LMOP] is a voluntary assistance program thatpromotes
the reduction of CH4 emissions from landfills by encouraging the recovery and beneficial use of
landfill gas as an energy resource. By joining LMOP, companies, state agencies, organizations,
landfill operators, and communities gain access to a vast network of industry experts and
practitioners, as well as various technical and marketing resources thatcan help with landfill gas
energy project development LMOP maintains a list of candidate landfills where available data
indicate that installing a landfill gas-to-energy proj ect is likely to provide financial benefits. LMOP
defines a candidate landfill as one that is accepting waste or has been closed for five years or less;
has at least one million tons of waste; and does not have an operational, under-construction,or
planned landfill gas-to-energy proj ect.

EPA's U.S. Greenhouse Gas Inventory (hereafter referred to as the Inventory] estimates total U.S.
GHG emissions from Waste Sector sources. National-level emissions presented in the Inventory
report differ from the total emissions reported to the GHGRP for several reasons:

•	The Inventory accounts for emissions from all facilities in a given sector. The GHGRP, on the
other hand, includes only those facilities that meet the reporting thresholds. The coverage
and the emissions methodologies differ betweenthe two programs (see Table 3 for
estimated coverage across the Waste Sector],

•	The Inventory estimates for MSW landfills are a combination oftop-down and bottom-up
estimates for certain years in the Inventory time series, representingnational emissions
that are intended to be inclusive of all facilities within a given sector. The 1990-2017
Inventory for MSW landfills incorporated directly reported CH4 emissions from facilities

25

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

reporting to the GHGRP (for years 2 010 to 2 017], with a scale-up factor to account for
emissions from MSW landfills that do not meet GH GRP's reportingthreshold.4

•	The Inventory estimate for industrial waste landfill emissions includes only the pulp and
paper and food and beverage sector facilities, whereas subpart TT of the GHGRP covers
many more industries. Due to a lack of industrial waste disposal data for all facilities within
each industrial sector, the inventory uses proxy data (i.e., annual production data multiplied
by a disposal factor] to estimate the amount of waste disposed ofby the pulp and paper and
food and beverage sectors. The GHGRP uses a bottom-up calculation approach and requires
facilities to report the amount of waste disposed.

•	The I nventory estimate for industrial wastewater treatment includes aerobic ponds with
anaerobic portions, but under the GHGRP, only emissions from strictly anaerobic processes
are required to be reported.

•	The Inventory does not capture emissions from wastewater sludge digesters or CH4
recovered from anaerobic treatmentprocesses, whilethe GHGRP does.

Glossary

Anaerobic process refers to a procedure in which organic matter in wastewater, wastewater
treatment sludge, or other material is degraded by micro-organisms in the absence of oxygen,
resulting in the generation ofCC>2 and CH4. This source category consists of the following: anaerobic
reactors, anaerobic lagoons, anaerobic sludge digesters, and biogas destruction devices (e.g.,
burners, boilers, turbines, flares, or other devices] (40 CFR Part98.350],

Biogenic CO2 emissions means carbon dioxide released from the combustion or decomposition of
biologically based materials other than fossil fuels.

Continuous emission monitoring system or CEMS means the total equipmentrequired to sample,
analyze, measure, and provide, by means of readings recorded at least once every 15 minutes, a
permanent record of gas concentrations, pollutantemission rates, or gas volumetric flow rates from
stationary sources (40 CFRPart98.6],

Ethanol production means an operation that produces ethanol from the fermentation of sugar,
starch, grain, or cellulosic biomass feedstocks; or the production of ethanol synthetically from
petrochemical feedstocks, such as ethylene or other chemicals.

FLIGHT refers toEPA's GHG data publication tool, named the Facility Level Information on
Greenhouse Gases Tool (https://ghgdata.epa.g0v/ghgp/main.d0#].

Food processing means an operation used to manufacture or process meat, poultry, fruits, and/or
vegetables as defined under NAICS 3116 (Meat Product Manufacturing] or NAICS 3114 (Fruit and
Vegetable Preserving and Specialty Food Manufacturing], For information on NAICS codes, see
http://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/.

GCCS means a landfill's gas collection and control system.

4 Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2017. EPA 430-R-19-001. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
April 14,2021. Available: https://www.epa.gOv/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases.6456.7.

26

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

GHGRP means EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (40 CFR Part 98],

GHGRP vs. GHG Inventory: EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP] collects and
disseminates annual GHGdata from individual facilities and suppliers across the U.S. economy. EPA
also develops the annual Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks (GHG Inventory] to
tracktotal national emissions of GHGs to meet U.S. government commitments to the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change. The GHGRP and Inventory datasets are complementary
however, there are also important differences in the data and approach. For more information,
please see https://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/greenhouse-gas-reporting-program-and-
usinventory-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks.

IPCC AR4 refers to the Fourth Assessment Reportby the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution ofWorking Group I to the
Fourth Assessment Reportofthe Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team,
Pachauri, R.K. and A. Reisinger. (eds.]] .IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 2 007. The AR4 values also can be
found in the current version of Table A-1 in Subpart A of 40 CFRPart98.

Industrial wastewater means water containing wastes from an industrial process. Industrial
wastewater includes water thatcomes into direct contact with or results from the storage,
production, or use of any raw material, intermediate product, finished product, by-product, or
waste product. Examples of industrial wastewater include, butare not limited to, paper mill white
water, wastewater from equipment cleaning, wastewater from air pollution control devices, rinse
water, contaminated stormwater, and contaminated cooling water.

Industrial waste landfill means any landfill other than a MSW landfill, a Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA] Subtitle C hazardous waste landfill, or a Toxic Substances Control Act
hazardous waste landfill, in which industrial solid waste, such as RCRA Subtitle D wastes
(nonhazardous industrial solid waste, defined in §2 57.2 of this chapter], commercial solid wastes,
or conditionally exempt small quantity generator wastes, is placed. An industrial waste landfill
includes all disposal areas at the facility.

Industrial wastewater treatment sludge means solid or semi-solid material resultingfrom the
treatment of industrial wastewater, including butnotlimitedto, biosolids, screenings, grit, scum,
and settled solids.

Landfill Methane Outreach Program or LMOP is a voluntary assistance program run by EPA to
help reduce CH4 emissions from landfills by encouraging the recovery and beneficial use oflandfill
gas as an energy resource (http://www.epa.gov/lmop/],

MT means metric tons.

MMT means million metric tons.

Municipal solid waste landfill, as defined by the GHGRP, means an entire disposal facility in a
contiguous geographical space where household waste is placed in or on land. An MSW landfill may
also receive other types of RCRA Subtitle D wastes (40 CFR 257.2] such as commercial solid waste,
nonhazardous sludge, conditionally exempt small quantity generator waste, and industrial solid
waste. Portions of an MSW landfill maybe separated by access roads, public roadways, or other
public right-of-ways. An MSW landfill maybe publicly or privately owned (40 CFR Part 98.6],

27

-------
2011-2020 GHGRP Sector Profile

Waste

NAICS means the N orth American I ndustiy Classification System, the standard used by federal
statistical agencies to classify business establishments into industrial categories for collecting and
publishing statistical data relatedto the U.S. economy.

Wastewater treatment systems are the collection of all processes that treat or remove pollutants
and contaminants, such as soluble organic matter, suspended solids, pathogenic organisms, and
chemicals from wastewater prior to its reuse or discharge from the facility.

28

-------